GrayEagle

For some reason I wasn't able to see the slideshow beyond Clemson but I didn't see anything in the article that I disagreed with. This coming season is largely in the lap of Mike Nelson. Can he teach the talent that he has has to be effective? I still have my doubts. Does he have the talent to befin with? I think that it's good enough to win six or seven games if they can play anywhere near their potential. The line is undersized only with AK and Obi counted on for major roles. Four tackles are 300+ and the other two are around 290. The other defensive ends that should be counted on range from 245 to 285 and that's big enough if they have quickness and strength. Our offense has been good enough to win at least four games in each of Dodge's seasons. They have averaged 47th nationally the last three seasons with their worst being at #57. On the other hand, the defense has averaged #110 with last season being their best at 97. In 2008, they were dead last of the 120 teams. We should be fine in the other areas. There are question marks on special teams but I think that we have adequate talent I wish that we could have seen Gaines and Miller this spring and we might have a better feel for the adequacy of the defensive line this coming season. I'm thinking that they will be as advertised and we'll have a six or better win season. Hope springs eternal before the first game is played.

Memphis, Marshall and USM were victims of location. Those three can produce football attendance of 30,000; the others can't, although Middle might get close with that lineup and Troy should be solidly in the 20s. With Memphis, Temple and WKU in the same conference it could be a dogfight for the championship and tournament berth. Besides, Memphis basketball stock has fallen since Calipari left. I don't think that there's a world of love lost if you split Lafayette and Monroe. Besides, the question would be moot since ULM can't average 18/20 thousand while Louisiana can.

No, I couldn't get the edit feature to work properly after I discovered that the MAC had been left off. No team currently in the FBS is eliminated until they eliminate themselves. I chose attendance over budget, stadium, etc. because it's the easiest for an institution to control.

Okay, Flyer had his MEGA Conference idea that raised a few 'huhs' so I'll trot out my concept of the FBS based on ten 12-team conferences. This system would do little changing of the existing conferences. It would also tout a playoff system and each conference would have a conference championship game. To appease the current BCS, each of their conference runnersup would be playoff eligible for a period of ten years. While I propose that we start with 12-team conferences not all will be able to maintain that number. Why? Because I also propose a rolling average attendance of 18,000 to begin; advancing to 20,000 in five years. By rolling average I mean that if a team averages only 16,000 one year it must average 20,000 the following year or be dropped to Division 1AA. I've also tried to regionalize the conferences to reduce travel costs (except for existing 12 team BCS conferences). I would hope that every conference has a TV contract with a major network, ESPN, Fox, or maybe Turner or Cox. Or, that failing, the conference contracts their own network. Here are my ten conferences: PAC 12 Washington Washington State Oregon Oregon State California Stanford UCLA USC Arizona Arizona State Utah Brigham Young WESTERN/MOUNTAIN Hawaii San Jose State Fresno State San Diego State Boise State Idaho Utah State Nevada UNLV Wyoming Colorado State Air Force SOUTHWEST Tulsa New Mexico New Mexico State UTEP North Texas TCU SMU Houston Rice Louisiana Louisiana Tech Tulane BIG XII Iowa State Nebraska Kansas Kansas State Colorado Missouri Oklahoma Oklahoma State Texas Texas A&M Texas Tech Baylor BIG 10 Minnesota Iowa Wisconsin Northwestern Illinois Indiana Purdue Notre Dame Michigan Michigan State Ohio State Penn State BIG EAST Louisville Cincinnati Syracuse Army Connecticut Rutgers Pittsburgh West Virginia Navy East Carolina South Florida UCF ATLANTIC COAST Boston College Maryland Virginia Virginia Tech North Carolina North Carolina State Duke Wake Forest Clemson Georgia Florida State Miami SOUTHEASTERN Kentucky Vanderbilt Tennessee South Carolina Georgia Florida Alabama Auburn Mississippi Mississippi State LSU Arkansas SUN BELT Arkansas State Memphis Middle Tennessee Temple Marshall Western Kentucky ULM Southern Mississippi UAB Troy FAU FIU There can never be a system where everyone is satisfied but this seems the least contentious. There are several that got the shaft, so to speak. But, even their merits (save one or two) are less travel expenses, an easier path to conference championship and the fact that the teams that cannot comply with moderate standards will be weeded out.

"Population Shift Drives Big 10 Expansion Study." Well, of course it does.

CUSA may need a lot of options. While I like Tallgrass' lineup, I have serious doubts that all of those teams will be available when the dust clears. There are as many as four teams trying very hard to vacate themselves from CUSA. They now think that the conference is beneath them. If UCF and East Carolina, especially, are able to get in the ACC then the east is pretty well done for. Marshall could stay but I'm having doubts. They may have to take North Texas, Louisiana Tech, Louisiana and NMSU just to stay at 12. There could be no members east of Birmingham. It's funny to me that SMU simply cannot stand to mention our name in any expansion thread.

I suppose it hinges on the definition of "about to fall." Any expansion is not at the whim of a sommissioner or the athletic directors. They can only recommend. It's up to the presidents and chancellors to put any plan into action. Maybe cooler heads will prevail but I doubt it. This is either about Notre Dame or greed. To me it's a power play to force Notre Dame into the Big 10. I'm with them on that. There should be no independents in the FBS. Just because you have the most storied franchise in history shouldn't mean that you can ignore the rest of the members. If the want to be in the Big East...fine. Or in CUSA; that's okay too. (Someone joked that if they were in CUSA it would improve their strength of schedule if they turn down the Big 10). While I believe that everyone has the right to choose their conference; they should be in a conference. That includes Army and Navy. Mostly though, this seems to be a case of greed. How many marbles can I accumulate at the expense of those not in power? I can't believe that $22 million per member is not enough. They're now talking about doubling it. Where does it stop? How about just being the best while playing within the rules that everyone has to follow? The Association is powerless to do anything about it. Anyway, no domino will fall this week but I believe that the toppling will happen in the next few weeks if Delany can get the presidents to act.

The only thing that I gleaned from that was that they will stick together unless and until something better comes along. I think that CUSA is a fairly stable conference but since we don't know whether they'll stay at 12 or expand to 14 or 16 it's unnecessary to make a comment at this time. I think that East Carolina, UCF and Houston are the most likely to change conferences.

But, as long as we're in it we should do our best. We will finish either second or third depending on whether Troy can finish ahead of WKU. Right now, they are tied which means that WKU gets 4.5 points. That's enough to put them in second place by half a point. We need baseball.

I'm hoping that CUSA does extend an offer but I'm afraid that the WAC won't be a survivor either. Based on the wildest rumors that I've seen, the SBC would lose no more than four to realignment. That would leave six after South Alabama comes aboard. They could accept two or more from the FCS who would be glad to get their foot in the door.

Done. Thanks for the info.

SMU has always been the Dallas team. It's where they're located. Kate Hairopoulas is the beat writer for SMU. Did you expect North Texas to be picked over SMU? Would Brett Vito pick SMU over North Texas? I don't know how you say that North Texas is not a factor in the SBC. In the last five years of football, that would be true. Before that, four championship seasons. NT stands second in the Bubas Cup rankings but since we do not play baseball could fall to third. That's still significant in the Belt. In the same DMN Sunday paper, writer Chuck Carlton omitted both SMU and North Texas from expansion. I have no idea if he has an inside opinion or if it is just his own but I'd expect the latter, judging from some of the other choices that he made. Also, he gave no idea as to what happens to the teams that he did not list. We don't even know how many will be in the revised Big 10. If it's Notre Dame only then everything else could be as you were. Or, some conferences might try to position themselves for better TV deals and either add teams or make a coalition with other conferences. To say that North Texas is not a player in the DFW market is unconscionable. We have more alumni than any other university and far more potential. To balance that, both TCU and SMU have been major players where we have not. Heretofore, except for our time in the Missouri Valley Conference, we haven't acted as if we wanted higher aspirations. That has changed now. We can't undo the past but the future looks bright. Maybe we need to hire a Paul Tagliabue type to plead our cause.

I believe that Montana and Montana State are tied by their state legislature and Montana State can't meet the attendance requirements. The attendance requirement, rumored to be raised to 18,000, is likely why Idaho will not be included if the MWC is the surviving member of the merger. I don't know that any other SBC teams would be included but how could we turn down an eight team division of Wyoming, Colorado State, Air Force, New Mexico, New Mexico State, UTEP, and Tulsa which has been speculated? The western division would be Boise State, Fresno State, Nevada, UNLV, San Diego State, Hawaii, Utah State and San Jose State. Someone believes that Hawaii has initiated a student fee to pay transportation costs to the islands for conference members so that they can be included in realignment.

I know that Karl Benson has faced this multiple times but this time the hurtin' won't heal. IF things go as advertised then I believe that we will see the end of the WAC. It's almost foregone that Utah, BYU and TCU will move on up. But, before that happens all the MWC has to do is invite Boise State, Fresno State, Hawaii and Nevada. That would leave the WAC with only five teams and one of those is La Tech, which also has a good chance of moving to another conference. The MWC could then cherry-pick the remainder depending on how large a conference they want. They could add UTEP if they wanted. Hell, they might even consider North Texas if they want to go to 16. I hate to see this because the WAC has been around for nearly 50 years. Unfortunately, with the WAC and the MWC the same size, the Mountain West has the clout to expand if they beat the WAC to the punch. Personally, I think that they will.

Okay, I admit to being ignorant in more fields that cold fusion and cardiac surgery but someone needs to explain the need for the academic universities to stick together. If you're talking about AAU colleges, most of them have long established their lines for research dollar. True, the only Tier 1 universities in the SEC are Vanderbilt and Florida but several others have the capabilities if that became a priority. This is an athletics consortium, not academics, and it's all about money. The SEC could dominate from Texas to Florida with the likes of Florida, Georgia, Texas, Texas A&M, LSU, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Arkansas, and Oklahoma. That would more than match the Big 10 even if they get Notre Dame and Nebraska. If you think that the Big 10 is taking Rutgers because of their academics, think again. New Brunswick happens to sit in the largest media market...New York. A similar case could be made for Missouri, the only major player in the state. Nebraska football has been known nationwide for years. True, in Notre Dame they would get a top-notch academic institution but one that is the most storied in football as well. The Pac-10 has high academics but they are more about liberal politics and secularism. Otherwise, BYU has higher academics than several of their members but they don't fit the mold so they're out. Maybe academics do play a major role in some conferences but for the life of me I don't see why.

Louisiana has been struggling with this for years and it won't get any better until action is taken. As distasteful as it may seem they are eventually going to have to bite the bullet. My suggestion would be to create community college/junior college districts for those institutions scheduled for closing. The LSU branch at Eunice is the only such JC that I can recall. It wouldn't provide as much economic stimulus as they currently have but it could salvage something. There should be a state supported college in the Shreveport-Bossier City area where there are nearly 400,000 residents. The others could consolidate to Ruston and Lafayette primarily. They could bleed the emergency fund dry but then they would have only postponed the inevitable and voided themselves of chances of survival for some.

I buy your logic up to a point. But, let's say UT and A&M refuse the SEC or want to realign the Big 12 without a team in either DFW or Houston. What if the SEC should decide to add Houston and North Texas? Having games against the Alabamas, Floridas and LSUs that can be seen live in each market would have alumni crawling out of the woodwork if both schools became competitive (and I believe that they would be because they would be able to attract higher-rated recruits). Texas and A&M own the two large markets because they have no competition at their level. They do have a lot of alumni in both markets but not as large as UNT and Houston in their respective markets. If The University and TAMU decide to stay the course with the Big 12 it would behoove them to put a team in each market lest another (equal) conference does. TCU and Houston would be the logical choices.

Believe me, I'm not trying to stir the pot but just to point out the worthiness of NU being (supposedly) selected for Big 10 expansion. Mostly, I wanted to cite their academic figures. Of the 120 FBS universities, they rank 48th on SAT scores of incoming freshmen. Actually, they are tied with TCU, Auburn, and Syracuse and I don't recall anyone denouncing those programs academically. The median score of those four is 1175 (the oral was omitted in the study). Admittedly, that's only the incoming score. I haven't found any exiting scores or ratings but I wouldn't think that there would be a huge difference. None of the Big 10 area is a real recruiting hotbed. Ohio and Pennsylvania may be warm beds but most of the talent comes from elsewhere. Lastly, the Big Red travels as well as any team in the country. They are virtually the only game in the state and have a rabid following.

Harry, I can't begin to thank you for this board and all of the problems that you and your administrators have solved for me over the years. Have a great birthday and I hope that you have many, many more joyous occasions to celebrate.

Well, one thing that they bring is a national following, the tenth best franchise in NCAA football and attendance of 85,000 plus. That beats the snot out of most of the Big 10 schools. I don't know that they've been offered but I can understand why they would be.

Also in the Lone Star Conference with them from 1946 until (I believe) 1950. Houston has stated that it is not in their best interest to play North Texas at this time. By the way, their stadium has been updated and looks pretty nice.

Delaney is part genius; part mad dictator. With one fell swoop he has likely destroyed two conferences and drastically changed the landscape of the rest except for the MAC. If this scenario is true he will no doubt get all four and likely another from the Big East. I would expect that to be Pitt or Syracuse. Notre Dame will have to acquiesce because it would cost them $10M annually and their scheduling just became far easier than if they tried to remain an independent. Nebraska could get more bucks for their market size than any other realignment scenario. The key now becomes Texas and Texas A&M. They would need to add six more prestige members and they just aren't available. They could go east and join the SEC. If they did that, Oklahoma would definitely be asked and either Okie State or one of the ACC teams. Florida State or Clemson would be the most likely. I don't see them going west but it can't be ruled out at this point. If six leave the Big 12 then I look for Colorado to go to the Pac-10. The five that are left...Iowa State, Kansas, K-State, Texas Tech and Baylor would then possibly add eleven more to also become a 16-team conference. That could make it possible that North Texas could become a member, joining TCU and western CUSA members. The eastern half then takes Louisville, Cincinnati and the top Sun Belt members which would destroy yet another conference. After the Pac-10 does their expansion that will force a merger of the MWC and the WAC destroying a third conference. Worst than that, there will be some left out in the shuffle. That will force a number of independents or a drop to FCS. It's all about money. Next we may start paying student athletes. What a way to run a railway!

Anyone willing to bet the farm that this guy is anywhere near being right?

According to what I'm reading this is merely an alliance to acquire a lot more media dollars than each conference would alone. The two conferences contain seven of the top 16 markets which should be very attractive to a network. They actually have teams in all but DFW and Houston and the Big 12 could add TCU and Houston to assure that more than two live games would be played there. The network could then select the best two games each week reach more households than any other single conference which would be a boon for sponsors. They could still divide the much higher revenue on a participation formula with some teams maybe still only getting $5-7M but the top teams could get $25M or more....sort of a win/win situation. It could even mean that the Pac-10 might not have to add any teams. Number 28 San Diego and #31 Salt Lake City are the only other Top 40 markets not already having a team in or near without FBS competition. In addition, we are talking about the two largest states and both are important hotbeds for college football. As to demanding teams being removed; leave that to each conference. Get over yourself. UT has too much going for it to play a heavy in these negotiations. You receive enough revenue now to cut tuition substantially. Why be that greedy?

If you had the entire state of Texas that would only amount to less than 9 million TV sets (households). It is ridiculous to think that UT has 100% of the TV households in the entire state. The entire article is so full of flaws it defiles belief. For instance, he decries the addition of Florida State (Tallahassee/Jacksonville), Miami (Miami/Ft. Lauderdale), Georgia Tech (Atlanta) and Clemson (Greenville/Spartanburg). All but Tallahassee are Top 50 markets. There is no way to tell what percent of a market that any university can command.