Realignment talk - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Realignment talk (/thread-1883.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Realignment talk (/thread-1883.html)
Realignment talk - fullmetal - 08-31-2011
It's another nice, feel-good article about Stanford's ability to win without committing major NCAA violations (you'd think the whole time was doing several wind sprints across the DMZ the way college football is portrayed).
Also, a tidbit at the end from the non-Pac-11 thoughts (because only 11 teams are eligible for the postseason this year):
Quote:Not a Pac-11 thought, but is it me or is Texas A&M seriously overestimating its value? And do they really hate Texas that much so that they are willing to get their tails kicked in the SEC, instead of being pretty competitive in the Big 12? I just dont understand the Aggies endgame here
All my Aggie friends are extremely confident about their chances in the SEC and being very dismissive of an 'inferior' Big 12. Well, with their top two WRs not at 100% right now, I hope their running game is prepared for prepared defenses.
Re: Bootleg: Solution to some of NCAA's image problems may reside at Stanford - yvonne - 08-31-2011
New Ford ad:
Buy Chevy.
No realignment talk? - yvonne - 09-01-2011
I'm a little surprised that no one has brought up the realignment issue since A&M made its secession from the Big XII official yesterday. It will almost certainly spark adding another team to the SEC, although the Big Ten existed for a long time with an odd number of members, so it's not definite. Will the SEC choose only one additional new member, or three? Will the Big XII merge with another conference, add additional teams, or dissolve? Will the Pac-12 make any changes?
Here's Ted Miller's take:
http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/24879/boomer-sooner-scott-to-hook-em-a-pac-16
Re: No realignment talk? - Canalejas - 09-01-2011
Can the SEC realistically stay at 13 the way the BigTen existed with 11? Not if they want to keep their Conference Championship Game, I think.Â
NCAA Division I bylaw 17.9.5.2 ©: A conference championship game between division champions of a member conference of 12 or more institutions that is divided into two divisions (of six or more institutions each), each of which conducts round-robin, regular-season competition among the members of that division.
Is there a way for 2 divisions with different numbers of members to each play a round robin and also a matching number of cross-divisional games?Â
I suppose that not all members have to play the same number of conference games. Or they could ask for an exemption from the rule until they line up a 14th school. Is this what the MAC does? Don't they have 13 teams?Â
Anyway, it all seems awfully messy. Much more so than what the BigTen went through with its 11 teams for so long. For that reason alone I think the SEC has to be anxious to find team #14.
Re: No realignment talk? - fullmetal - 09-01-2011
Florida State and Missouri have been mentioned as possible #14ers. I don't think A&M is as good as the Aggies think they are.Â
Re: No realignment talk? - Kathy - 09-01-2011
Missouri has not been invited to the SEC party -- of course, neither has A&M. The letter sent to Dan Beebe yesterday simply informed the Big 12 Conference (as per formal procedure) that A&M "will submit an application to join another athletic conference" and IF the application is accepted the Aggies will leave the Big 12 next July.
After Mizzou's embarrassing rejection from the Big 10 talk last year, I imagine everyone is playing their cards closer to their vests this year. The MU chancellor is chairman of the board at the Big 12 (but he lies a lot, so I don't believe much of what he says).
Schools on the Big 12 wish list are:
BYU
Pittsburgh
SMU
Arkansas
Notre Dame
Problems with all of them -- BYU just signed an eight-year TV deal with ESPN as an independent and issued a neutral statement that indicates neither interest nor dismissal of the Big 12. The football coach says he's happy where the school is right now.
Pittsburgh is too far away from the rest of the conference schools.
SMU would get more out of the conference alignment than the conference would.
Arkansas is not likely to leave the money of the SEC for an unstable Big 12.
Notre Dame is even more unlikely to give up its independent status in football & isn't it in the Big East for other sports?
There's talk of yanking TCU away before it begins Big East play, but the Horned Frogs are weak in sports other than football (ditto for SMU).
Re: No realignment talk? - oman - 09-01-2011
Ted Miller is basically writing what most Texas fans would see as a dream scenario.
It's almost as if Texas had this weird destructive method of getting the network, blowing the big12 up, and then going to the Pac12 and perhaps giving some consessions on the Network.Â
Most of the Aggies I have spoken with a pretty realistic about their chances in the SEC. Wanting to get out of the shadow of Big Brother is the biggest plus they see in this. The downside is having some early disasterous years and becoming a Miss State or a Kentucky in football. But they have crap loads of money, so I think it will work out well for them.
All kind of stressful. Texas is just a wonderful companions team to root in conjuction with Stanford but they need to quit farting around with all this bidness stuff and just concentrate on getting some on the field results, no matter who they play.
Re: Bootleg: Solution to some of NCAA's image problems may reside at Stanford - Rando - 09-01-2011
I say add Oklahoma, Ok St, Texas, and A&M for the Pac-16.
Re: Realignment talk - washingtonismoney - 09-01-2011
On one hand, 16 is convenient...old Pac-8 in one division, the newcomers in the other. On the other hand, once you get past Texas and Oklahoma, the rest of the expansion options define "MEH."
Re: Realignment talk - terry - 09-01-2011
(09-01-2011, 08:41 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:On one hand, 16 is convenient...old Pac-8 in one division, the newcomers in the other. On the other hand, once you get past Texas and Oklahoma, the rest of the expansion options define "MEH."
Utah and Colorado are "meh," but that didn't stop our new commissioner from inviting them to join the conference.
Re: Realignment talk - washingtonismoney - 09-01-2011
Well, at least they fit culturally into the rest of the conference. A school like, say, Oklahoma State brings neither excellence into nor fit with the rest of the conference.
Re: Realignment talk - Leftcoast - 09-01-2011
Hmmmhhhh ..... I wouldn't mind playing Texas A&M or Missouri once every three years.Â
I'd say they deserve better than "Meh". I'd reserve that for Sac St, SDSU, and (if it weren't for my family ties) San Jose St. /Lefty
Re: Realignment talk - Rando - 09-02-2011
Oklahoma State is consistently better than a lot of the Pac-10 schools including Oregon St, UCLA, Cal, Washington, Washington State. They might not always be better than those schools but at the worst they perform at about the same level, which is competitive.
SDSU, SJSU, Wash State, UNLV, Idaho, etc are true meh schools.
If Oklahoma and Texas were in our conference, the Pac 16 would be as good as the SEC. In my opinion.
Re: Realignment talk - Kathy - 09-02-2011
(09-01-2011, 09:41 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Well, at least they fit culturally into the rest of the conference. A school like, say, Oklahoma State brings neither excellence into nor fit with the rest of the conference.
Oklahoma State is No. 4 on the list of schools with national championships (after UCLA, Stanford & U$C). One Voldemort Trophy winner. Granted, 34 of those 50 NCs are in wrestling, but the Cowboys do well in many sports. The facilities are awesome, thanks to T. Boone Pickens.
Okie State's "cultural" fit would be no different than, say, Washington State or Oregon State. Not sure how you are defining excellence in this case.
(09-01-2011, 09:53 PM)Leftcoast link Wrote:Hmmmhhhh ..... I wouldn't mind playing Texas A&M or Missouri once every three years.Â
Lefty ... That would make my head explode! No need to strain family ties with that type of schedule. ;)
Re: Realignment talk - pefloresjr - 09-02-2011
It sounds like this super conference stuff really is possible in the very near future. I guess it would be good for the conference in terms of money, but I don't really think it is all that good for Stanford. Despite our current status in the rarified air of a pre-season top 10 ranking, historically we are not one of the conference elite in football. We have short spurts of good/great teams and if things break right for us and/or if the elite teams are having down years, we can get our Rose Bowl or other BCS bowl. Our recruiting might improve with greater exposure, but we already recruit nationally and I don't think that extra money for facilities etc. will help us as much as it will help others. We recruit based on the university and academic excellence with solid football, not facilities or pure football cred.Â
I like the look of the Western Pac-8 part of the Pac-16, but if Stanford has things go right and wins the Western division, it would still have to beat the best out of the Central that includes Texas, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State (among others). The odds of all of those programs having down years or of Stanford getting the breaks to fall our way against them in the same year that we get those breaks against SC and the West are not very high. I know I should be confident and seek to be the best by beating the best, but I know from many years of experience following Stanford that we will have plenty of down years. It just feels like our chances of getting through a larger gauntlet of elite programs most years is pretty low. Maybe a 16 team conference will end the traditional Rose Bowl affiliation and we'll just have to face the future and fondly recall the good old days. It does make logical sense to go to a playoff system where all teams would have to face progressively better teams so let's get that Rose Bowl or National Championship this year and let the future take care of itself.Â
Cheers,
Pete F.
Re: Realignment talk - fullmetal - 09-02-2011
That's one of the reasons why the Big 12, as it is now, is desirable for both Texas and OU. They have one major team to beat (with the exception of occasional party-crasher Texas Tech), and they have an instant shot at being in the national championship.
Re: Realignment talk - terry - 09-02-2011
Oklahoma State has a decent overall sports program by Big 12 standards, but in our conference, they would be a below-average program. Yes, they've won a lot of NCAA championships, but 44 of their 50 titles were in wrestling and men's golf. In the last three Directors' Cups, Oklahoma St. finished 35th, 33rd, and 32nd. In each of those years, there were 8 Pac 10 schools in the top 30, so Oklahoma St. would have placed 9th among teams in our conference.
Re: Realignment talk - 82lsju - 09-02-2011
Oklahoma to decide on leaving or staying in the Big 12 in the next 3 weeks
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ap-t25-oklahoma-realignment
Re: Realignment talk - Kathy - 09-04-2011
Yet another obituary for the Big 12 ... OU may be the catalyst this week, but everyone blames the t-sips.
The Big 12 receives its last rites
http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2011/sep/03/big-12-receives-its-last-rites/?tigerextra
Quote:But, in the end, the greed of Texas or everyone elses jealousy of Texas, depending on how much burnt orange is in your closet was too divisive for a conference that didnt have rules in place to protect the fish bowl from a piranha.
Re: Realignment talk - oman - 09-04-2011
Don't discount the part about Missouri wanting to be part of the Big10 all along.
Yes, and everyone with a chip on their shoulder blames Texas. Nebraska was the only one that seemed to be upfront about it.
Saw some of the ATM-SMU game. ATM just seemed to be throwing down that Mississippi State vibe. I think they will fit right in somewhere between MSU and Arkansas, no?
....
So does the weird unwieldiness of the current NorCal/SoCal "play every year" caveat to the North and South regular season schedules actually make it more likely that a Pac16 East West division happens?