Conference Re-Alignment?

[bobbyake]

With apologies to The Smiths, how soon is 1963?

What I mean to say is that they'll announce the continuance of the Rose Bowl game, but with similar rules to the Big12 v SEC game. i believe they're going to shut out teams from other conferences from participating in their bowl games.

ACC will have the Big East, which means the teams leaving the Big East for the ACC didn't really benefit much. Notre Dame is the biggest loser out of all of this.

[lance99]

What I mean to say is that they'll announce the continuance of the Rose Bowl game, but with similar rules to the Big12 v SEC game. i believe they're going to shut out teams from other conferences from participating in their bowl games.

ACC will have the Big East, which means the teams leaving the Big East for the ACC didn't really benefit much. Notre Dame is the biggest loser out of all of this.

ND will have to think really hard about staying independent. Their hand will be forced.

[GP1]

But the bigger story is that the bigger fish are creatively maneuvering to ensure that no matter how the BCS is changed, the conferences at the top of the food chain will stay there and the little fish will have even less opportunity to break through. This is all about creating a bigger gap between the four strongest college football conferences and the rest of the pack to lock up the newly created four national championship playoff positions before a game has been played. This is all about reducing the possibility of a Boise State growing bigger and emerging from a smaller school of fish to snatch food out of the mouths of the big fish.

I totally agree it is creative on the part of the top 4 conferences, but not something unexpected. However, I don't see the Boise States of the world as their target. I see what's happening as a natural evolution of college football. The top four conferences could try to wait to see what the other do, be we all know the reality is those conferences will never be able to catch up for many reasons. I don't blame the top four for doing their own thing. They have earned it. Now is the time to strike and that's what they are doing.

The Boise States of the world were always nice underedog stories. There will continue to be underdogs, but they will be schools like Mississippi State, Vandy, Northwestern, Purdue, Kansas, Oregon State, etc. There are plenty of small fishs in the top four conferences to create some underdog excitement. These teams don't compete very well in their conferences and this gives them a chance to do something great for their schools if they can somehow win their conferences. The truth is, it is more impressive when a school like Vandy wins their conference than when a Boise State wins their conference and wins a BCS game.

Are the smaller conferences victims in this scenario? In some ways, yes...They are victims of their own inability to find any direction or traction in the current world of college athletics.

Personally, I see this as one more step towards nonbcs schools having their own division. Ready or not, it's coming. The real question is, what are we going to do about it? Are we going to take charge of our own direction or are we just going to sit back and try to clean up the mess when all is said and done?

[Zipmeister]

He obviously meant Syracuse. Unless you don't follow college football at all, it's pretty easy to understand. And GP1 is spot on, the ACC is going to regret taking Syracuse over West Virginia, and hiding behind academics as the reason for doing so.

I had not heard about Syracuse, and couldn't figure out what team other than West Virginia would be WVU . Thanks for the update.

[zippy5]

Everything I've read has the ACC as the destination for ND if they were to ever join a conference. I think if that happened, it would turn into a Big 5 landscape. The Big East would be 100% dead.

[bobbyake]

Everything I've read has the ACC as the destination for ND if they were to ever join a conference. I think if that happened, it would turn into a Big 5 landscape. The Big East would be 100% dead.

I disagree. Who will the ACC's top team play if they don't make it to the 4 team tournament? According to the new arrangement between the Big12 and SEC, it wont be a top team from those conferences. Big10 and Pac12 are going to do the same thing leaving the ACC with the Big East.

[xu9697]

This B12 vs. SEC Bowl and what it does to ACC and College Football in general is getting somewhat overblown. Granted, if FSU leaves...yeah, that might change things. But there are still going to be 5-6 big bowl games that "matter". And, if the hybrid model is used for the "Final 4", an ACC team can still get there. What would be a BIGGER blow to the ACC is if the B12 and SEC did as Pac12 and Big Ten have done and have a REGULAR SEASON arrangement. If that happens, ACC and BE might really be scrambling for OOC regular season games that matter.

4 Super Conferenes. Yeah, I get that it is very possible. But we still might get to a point where we have 5-6 conferences of 12-14 teams and those are the big players. We are close to that now and the transition MIGHT slow down. Of course, if FSU does jump ship...

[zippy5]

There are still big bowls. 1998 was the last time the Big XII and SEC didn't have a team in the top 4. It's gonna be the SEC #3 team vs the Big XII #2 most years. Not exactly the be all end all of bowls. So the ACC doesn't have a "fixed" opponent every year, but their champ is still in the Orange bowl every year. This one extra bowl isn't going to be their demise. I could see the argument that this is the start of these 4 conferences eventually breaking away (which I still don't agree with, but it could be argued), but to say this extra game is the nail in the ACC's coffin isn't right.

[johnnyzip84]

While there's no denying we are edging ever so much closer to the 4 "mega-conferences", I still believe there are complications that might hold the final push off for the foreseeable future. The last 5-10% of a project is always the most difficult. I've brought some of these issues up before, so excuse me for repeating.

I'm not going to argue that football is not driving these changes. But I will propose that it's not driving them 100%. I'd venture to guess that, on average, these decisions are weighted something more along the lines of 80% football and 20% basketball/remaining sports. For historic reasons, the ACC is probably going to weight hoops a little higher and this is where they may have shot themselves in the foot from a BCS 2.0 viewpoint. I still believe that in the end it is going to be extremely difficult to classify a school like Duke, for instance. They have absolutely no business being in one of the 4 football "mega-conferences" (if it ever comes down to that), but will their tradition rich men's hoops be enough for one of the "mega-conferences" to accommodate them? Where does men's basketball fit in these decisions in general? Will the "mega-conferences" only sponsor football? What about the "minor" sports? These are just some of the sticky issues that might take a very long time to resolve if we ever wind up with 4 clearly distinct "mega-conferences".

[K92]

While there's no denying we are edging ever so much closer to the 4 "mega-conferences", I still believe there are complications that might hold the final push off for the foreseeable future. The last 5-10% of a project is always the most difficult. I've brought some of these issues up before, so excuse me for repeating.

I'm not going to argue that football is not driving these changes. But I will propose that it's not driving them 100%. I'd venture to guess that, on average, these decisions are weighted something more along the lines of 80% football and 20% basketball/remaining sports. For historic reasons, the ACC is probably going to weight hoops a little higher and this is where they may have shot themselves in the foot from a BCS 2.0 viewpoint. I still believe that in the end it is going to be extremely difficult to classify a school like Duke, for instance. They have absolutely no business being in one of the 4 football "mega-conferences" (if it ever comes down to that), but will their tradition rich men's hoops be enough for one of the "mega-conferences" to accommodate them? Where does men's basketball fit in these decisions in general? Will the "mega-conferences" only sponsor football? What about the "minor" sports? These are just some of the sticky issues that might take a very long time to resolve if we ever wind up with 4 clearly distinct "mega-conferences".

Right on, Johnny. You know it was just about a year ago when it looked like the Big XII was in a perilous position with the rumor that Oklahoma, OK State, Texas & TTech were headed for the PAC. If that had happened, most pundits were speculating that Kansas and their storied BB program would be left out of a BCS conference. (I figured the Big East would have invited them if it came down to that, but whatever.) Now that the Big XII has solidified its situation, attention has turned to the ACC. The football schools in that conference can get a better payday in the SEC, XII, or B1G. If the ACC is raided, it's not looking too good for tobacco road. They are now have something to worry about like Kansas did. Same would be said for schools like Indiana & Kentucky if their conferences were unstable. Interesting stuff.

[johnnyzip84]

Right on, Johnny. You know it was just about a year ago when it looked like the Big XII was in a perilous position with the rumor that Oklahoma, OK State, Texas & TTech were headed for the PAC. If that had happened, most pundits were speculating that Kansas and their storied BB program would be left out of a BCS conference. (I figured the Big East would have invited them if it came down to that, but whatever.) Now that the Big XII has solidified its situation, attention has turned to the ACC. The football schools in that conference can get a better payday in the SEC, XII, or B1G. If the ACC is raided, it's not looking too good for tobacco road. They are now have something to worry about like Kansas did. Same would be said for schools like Indiana & Kentucky if their conferences were unstable. Interesting stuff.

It is interesting stuff, and every time I try to envision a simple, brute-force solution, it’s difficult. For instance, let’s investigate what I’ll call the “BCS ultimate power play”. In this scenario, the 4 BCS mega-conferences split away entirely and decided to pay ALL of their scholarship athletes in the revenue sports. They leave the traditional basketball powers out of the equation entirely, betting that over the years the money their football programs generate will produce a BCS hoops regular season and tournament that will surpass the NCAA in terms of quality (since they can afford to pay more money for potential recruits). Let’s assume it works to perfection. Even in this idealized situation, what will happen to these 4 conferences over the years, once they’ve established unquestioned supremacy? Does their membership ever change? Once you’re in, are you in for the life of the university? And we still haven’t addressed the so-called minor sports. I know these are unnerving times for athletic programs like UA, but I’m definitely intrigued by what’s been happening even if it’s just out of morbid fascination. Hold on tight, the roller coaster is going up another hill

[lance99]

It is interesting stuff, and every time I try to envision a simple, brute-force solution, it’s difficult. For instance, let’s investigate what I’ll call the “BCS ultimate power play”. In this scenario, the 4 BCS mega-conferences split away entirely and decided to pay ALL of their scholarship athletes in the revenue sports. They leave the traditional basketball powers out of the equation entirely, betting that over the years the money their football programs generate will produce a BCS hoops regular season and tournament that will surpass the NCAA in terms of quality (since they can afford to pay more money for potential recruits). Let’s assume it works to perfection. Even in this idealized situation, what will happen to these 4 conferences over the years, once they’ve established unquestioned supremacy? Does their membership ever change? Once you’re in, are you in for the life of the university? And we still haven’t addressed the so-called minor sports. I know these are unnerving times for athletic programs like UA, but I’m definitely intrigued by what’s been happening even if it’s just out of morbid fascination. Hold on tight, the roller coaster is going up another hill

Even if they split off, there is one huge hoop to jump through if they want to pay everyone.

[xu9697]

If the Big 12 nabs Florida State and Louisville (both rumored), is there necessarily another huge raid?

Big 12 would be at 12 teams (and a championship game)

Big Ten @ 12

Pac 12 @ 12

SEC @ 14

ACC goes and gets Cincy, Rutgers or UConn (maybe all 3, but for this argument sake let's say Rutgers). So ACC is back @ 14. ACC is weaker, but still some cache there with VaTech, Clemson and Miami and future chances still with Pitt, SU and maybe a couple of others.

BE goes after East Carolina and Southern Miss (or something like that). Obviously...weak conference

Big Ten seems unlikely to move past 12 and raid the Big 12 now that they are on solid ground. Big Ten seems reluctant to go East and grab a UConn, and no way is Cincinnati getting into the Big Ten.

SEC OVERALL might have wanted Clemson and FSU..but they seemed to defer to S. Carolina and Florida and hang with those schools' wishes of not grabbing from in-state. Also seems that now that SEC and Big 12 are "friends", they are not grabbing more Big 12 teams.

Pac12= maybe they go fishing again. But if they really wanted a Boise, that time is now. Again..the raid of the Big 12 is not happening. BYU? Possibly.

A couple years ago it seemed likely that we might have the 4 16-team megaconferences. But the way in which the conferences are playing out makes me think it is LESS likely than it was 2 years ago.

ND is the last big piece that could shake things up. And, really, they have 8+ "conference" games already against high profile programs= USC, Michigan, Stanford, Pitt, Purdue, MSU, etc. I just don't see any of that changing. All of those schools WANT TO PLAY ND. I don't see them joining a conference for that reason.

[K92]

Even if they split off, there is one huge hoop to jump through if they want to pay everyone.

That is true. Only a handful of schools (I would guess about a dozen) could afford to pay all their athletes. So, if "pay for play" happens, non-revenue generating schools from the power conferences would have to be subsidized, operate at an even deeper level of red, or not pay, which would create an even wider split between the haves and the have-nots. Everything revolves around the bluebloods maintaining their supreme position.

[K-Roo]

all interesting stuff.. but where does that leave the Zips???

Looks to me like it's on the outside looking in.

Various boards have been slamming the Zips recent record as though we have sucked since the move.. to 1A.

So I did some research today.

Not sure this helps or hurts the cause:

The truth is, the Zips are 105-140-3 in Division I.. and that includes the 2-22 the last 2 yrs... back that out and we are almost .500 103-118-3. Not as bad as one might be led to believe. Zips Overall Record

The NCAA site shows overall including all divisions 486-471-36 (.508)

NCAA Site

This site says 487-496-37... NCAA Most Wins

The problem is perception -- and as a Communication Major, I can confirm that perception is reality.. and recent history has not been good... most fans are too young to remember when the Zips were decent to average.

this makes me feel a little better .. not in Top 25 Worst Ever.. Bleacher Report -- so whatever.... 25 Worst Ever... Note who is Number 1!!!!! and this Overall Worst Winning %

[scottditzen]

Strange coincidence that THREE schools on this list are nicknamed "Owls.

all interesting stuff.. but where does that leave the Zips???

Looks to me like it's on the outside looking in.

Various boards have been slamming the Zips recent record as though we have sucked since the move.. to 1A.

So I did some research today.

Not sure this helps or hurts the cause:

The truth is, the Zips are 105-140-3 in Division I.. and that includes the 2-22 the last 2 yrs... back that out and we are almost .500 103-118-3. Not as bad as one might be led to believe. Zips Overall Record

The NCAA site shows overall including all divisions 486-471-36 (.508)

NCAA Site

This site says 487-496-37... NCAA Most Wins

The problem is perception -- and as a Communication Major, I can confirm that perception is reality.. and recent history has not been good... most fans are too young to remember when the Zips were decent to average.

this makes me feel a little better .. not in Top 25 Worst Ever.. Bleacher Report -- so whatever.... 25 Worst Ever... Note who is Number 1!!!!! and this Overall Worst Winning %

[K-Roo]

And then there is this.. SB Nation -- so take it for what it's worth -- nothing...

Zips are #107.. Marshall even lower!! (115)

What's Your College Football Teams Realignment Ranking?

[wadszip]

all interesting stuff.. but where does that leave the Zips???

Looks to me like it's on the outside looking in.

Various boards have been slamming the Zips recent record as though we have sucked since the move.. to 1A.

So I did some research today.

Not sure this helps or hurts the cause:

The truth is, the Zips are 105-140-3 in Division I.. and that includes the 2-22 the last 2 yrs... back that out and we are almost .500 103-118-3. Not as bad as one might be led to believe. Zips Overall Record

The NCAA site shows overall including all divisions 486-471-36 (.508)

NCAA Site

This site says 487-496-37... NCAA Most Wins

The problem is perception -- and as a Communication Major, I can confirm that perception is reality.. and recent history has not been good... most fans are too young to remember when the Zips were decent to average.

this makes me feel a little better .. not in Top 25 Worst Ever.. Bleacher Report -- so whatever.... 25 Worst Ever... Note who is Number 1!!!!! and this Overall Worst Winning %

I believe I alluded to this earlier in this thread (guess I'll have to go back and search) but Akron's football history is definitely not as bad as the last two years have made it seem. In fact, when compared to Ohio University (a school that is suddenly considered a MAC "power") Akron has been better for much of its DI existence. People forget how awful the Bobcats were pre-Solich, and at the same time how mediocre Akron was pre-Ianello (now we're just plain bad).

However, that Ohio is suddenly some sort of up-and-coming program bodes well for Akron (leaving all the conference realignment talk out for a second) because the Zips may have very well found their version of Frank Solich in Terry Bowden. If Solich can take arguably one of the five worst Division I football programs and make it a MAC title contender, imagine what Bowden can do with Akron, a school that is in a bigger market, has a much nicer stadium and has a 10 times the local talent base. Unfortunately, we are now one of the five worst, but Akron has some advantages that Ohio didn't offer Solich at the time he took the OU job.

Back to the conference realignment talk, none of the recent developments surprise me. It's been a foregone conclusion that the power conferences were/are going to eventually make a power play and the days of four power conferences are inevitable. Though I'm a little surprised that it suddenly seems like the Big 12, and not the ACC, is going to be No. 4, though that may be more a testament to how bad former Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe was. Still, none of this changes anything for Akron. The Zips aren't going to be included in the title picture in the MAC, just like they won't be included in CUSA or the Big East, and they aren't joining any of the four powers. But that doesn't mean that there won't be a TV market for those schools left behind. If anything, it will be status quo in terms of TV payouts, with the MAC still lagging behind CUSA or whatever happens to the Big East (or ACC if doomsday arrives for that league and Clemson and FSU bolt for the Big 12 ... among others scurrying into the Big 4), because none of those conferences (outside of the Big East or ACC in theory) had a shot at title to begin with, and companies (ESPN) were still paying for the rights to broadcast those games.

So in short, regardless of how the national title game gets sorted out, it's still in the best interest of The University of Akron, to align itself with best league money-wise that it can. In no scenario is that the MAC, especially if you take basketball into account.

[scottditzen]

SDSU president 'optimistic' about Big East

San Diego State President Elliot Hirshman said he's "very optimistic" about moving his football program to the Big East Conference next year despite lingering questions about the league's money and membership.

.......

In an interview with UT San Diego, President Hirshman said that even if the Big East’s new TV deal falls short of projections, the Big East still is likely to be much more lucrative than SDSU’s current TV deal in the Mountain West.

Meanwhile, SDSU can’t afford to turn down even a nickel of new revenue.

More state budget cuts are looming, forcing the athletic department to find new revenue sources to keep up. That’s a big reason why the Big East is “absolutely” important for SDSU, Hirshman said.

........

--The money issue. SDSU football decided to move to Big East primarily because of a huge projected increase in TV revenue. The Aztecs expect to increase their annual TV revenue from about $1.2 million in the Mountain West to at least $6.4 million in the Big East, based on estimates from SDSU’s TV consultants. But what if those estimates are wrong and the real number comes in far lower?

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/may/30...about-big-east/

[jupitertoo]

I believe I alluded to this earlier in this thread (guess I'll have to go back and search) but Akron's football history is definitely not as bad as the last two years have made it seem. In fact, when compared to Ohio University (a school that is suddenly considered a MAC "power") Akron has been better for much of its DI existence. People forget how awful the Bobcats were pre-Solich, and at the same time how mediocre Akron was pre-Ianello (now we're just plain bad).

However, that Ohio is suddenly some sort of up-and-coming program bodes well for Akron (leaving all the conference realignment talk out for a second) because the Zips may have very well found their version of Frank Solich in Terry Bowden. If Solich can take arguably one of the five worst Division I football programs and make it a MAC title contender, imagine what Bowden can do with Akron, a school that is in a bigger market, has a much nicer stadium and has a 10 times the local talent base. Unfortunately, we are now one of the five worst, but Akron has some advantages that Ohio didn't offer Solich at the time he took the OU job.

Back to the conference realignment talk, none of the recent developments surprise me. It's been a foregone conclusion that the power conferences were/are going to eventually make a power play and the days of four power conferences are inevitable. Though I'm a little surprised that it suddenly seems like the Big 12, and not the ACC, is going to be No. 4, though that may be more a testament to how bad former Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe was. Still, none of this changes anything for Akron. The Zips aren't going to be included in the title picture in the MAC, just like they won't be included in CUSA or the Big East, and they aren't joining any of the four powers. But that doesn't mean that there won't be a TV market for those schools left behind. If anything, it will be status quo in terms of TV payouts, with the MAC still lagging behind CUSA or whatever happens to the Big East (or ACC if doomsday arrives for that league and Clemson and FSU bolt for the Big 12 ... among others scurrying into the Big 4), because none of those conferences (outside of the Big East or ACC in theory) had a shot at title to begin with, and companies (ESPN) were still paying for the rights to broadcast those games.

So in short, regardless of how the national title game gets sorted out, it's still in the best interest of The University of Akron, to align itself with best league money-wise that it can. In no scenario is that the MAC, especially if you take basketball into account.

Your theory is based on an assumption that "local talent" wants to stay local rather than go away to college. True, SE Ohio doesn't have a strong talent base at the high school level, but Solich and co. recruit NE Ohio, etc. just as hard as Akron does. (Solich grew up in Cleveland.) Miami and BG are located in less fertile areas yet have traditionally been football powers in the MAC. To give you some more background on Ohio's turnaround, the fact is that the school did not invest in football until Solich came to Athens. Jim Grobe was successful in Athens in the early 1990s (beat Lee Owens a couple of times in four years) but did so on a shoestring budget. Since Solich has come in, the school has invested heavily in football and has a larger football budget than Akron. It is a small market, but Ohio consistently outdraws Akron in football and basketball. Ohio is also building an indoor practice facility this year. One area where Ohio, and Miami for that matter, are at a disadvantage is in their enrollment requirements. They will not sign Prop 48s and will not take chances on kids who have questionable backgrounds.

[Dave in Green]

@scottditzen, thanks for posting the SDSU comments about the importance of TV revenue. That reminds me that I wanted to focus in on a comment made earlier in this thread by @wadszip:

..... 1. Big TV markets (even if a school can't carry that market at this time ... see Houston, Central Florida) ... Akron is in the No. 18 Cleveland-Akron market, which is now the largest in the country without a BCS football school. .....

I think it's really important to acknowledge the significance of UA being in the largest TV market in the country currently without a BCS (major conference) school. On the Big East's website, they make a big point in the section About The Big East to state the following:

BIG EAST institutions reside in nine of the nation's top 35 largest media markets, including New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., Tampa, Pittsburgh, Hartford, Cincinnati and Milwaukee. With its newest members, BIG EAST markets contain almost one-fourth of all television households in the U.S. When Texas Christian University joins the conference in the 2012-13 academic year, the conference will have a footprint in 30 percent of the nation's television households.

Obviously the TCU statement needs to be revised. But the point is that TV audience is a critical issue to college conferences because it can help generate badly needed income. Other conference websites also make mention of their TV markets.

The key point to remember is that the Cleveland-Akron TV market is an important asset for UA to play in gaining admission to a more prestigious conference than the MAC. UA needs to leverage this to its advantage.

[scottditzen]

No worries Dave!

I think there are some real parallels to be drawn between SDSU and Akron. For one, SDSU does not enjoy rabid support within their television market. The perceived value of their program is based on potential.

[GP1]

They will not sign Prop 48s and will not take chances on kids who have questionable backgrounds.

They may not sign Prop 48, but they have a lot of JUCO players on their team. Kids that end up at D-1A schools from a JUCO, for the most part, had grade problems. Not Prop 48, but close enough.

No kids with questionable backgrounds? Not a single one in all that time? Are you sure?

What Solich does that works great is to use his network of coaches to find players who slip through the cracks of BCS level schools. They are out there if you know where to find a coach at a BCS school kind enough to recommendone to you. The QB from last year was a good example of that. He had a bad knee his JR year of HS and Oklahoma looked past him because he was too much of a risk and they believed they could get equal talent without the knee injury. Solich took the risk and they won the MAC. This is the type of risk we need to be taking. I don't know of Solich does things the "right way", but he sure does do them the smart way.

Lastly, can we all stop talking about local recruiting bases. If we want to be a good team, out recruiting base needs to be all of Ohio, Michigan and western PA. Grab a few really good ones from outside of that area and you can have a good MAC team.

[Dave in Green]

All of Ohio, Michigan and western PA is precisely the recruiting area that Coach Bowden told the audience at Breakfast with the Bowdens that he is focusing on for recruits, along with Florida for players with speed. From everything I know about Coach Bowden, he should be at least as good in recruiting as Solich, if not better. The Bowden family has a network of coaches they've worked with that's probably bigger and more far-reaching than the one Solich has.

[ZachTheZip]

Official statement from Conference USA saying that they are still expanding.

Continue to Explore Future Membership Growth

The conference announced in May that it had entered into membership agreements with six institutions to join eight current members, beginning with the 2013-14 season. The Board agreed to continue its review of further expansion opportunities.