Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[alarson]

How does that work?

By all accounts USC and UCLA were totally in charge of Pac 10 expansion/lack of expansion until the very last minute they bolted. Texas/OU probably the same calling the shots for what B12 did until the minute they left.

USC\UCLA were working under a different structure. Plus there was no GOR to worry about, they timed their departure with the end of their current media deal. FSU (and others) would have no issue leaving in the mid 2030s when their current deal ends.

ACC based their GOR on what the big 12 did I believe, and iirc UT\OU were shut out of many of these meetings once they announced their departure.

 

[1UNI2ISU]

How is the ACC opening up to expansion without a window for FSU/Clemson to run out? Which schools are voting to admit them against FSU/Clemson/UNC/UVA wishes?

There must be something that allows them to do it otherwise they wouldn't be discussing it.

The last rumor was the FSU/Clemson/UNC/NC State were against it. I'm guessing they got NC State to flip.

 

[SolterraCyclone]

Two of those teams are now P4, one is totally irrelevant, and Tulane beat USC with some of its top players sitting out. My point is in a playoff with no one sitting out and everyone trying those G5 schools aren’t going to do anything but lose. I’m fine with G5 getting in if they put together a perfect season and beat multiple P4 teams but there need to be some major qualifiers

Yeah but they weren’t at the time (and Wisconsin, OU, and I’d even argue USC last year, were definitely trying). The team names are irrelevant anyways. Ignore the names and focus on the fact that these were G5 teams beating would-be playoff P5 squads had there been a playoff at the time.

Would they lose more often than not, of course. But to say the best G5 is incapable of winning a playoff game is not true.

 

[HFCS]

Yeah but they weren’t at the time (and Wisconsin, OU, and I’d even argue USC last year, were definitely trying). The team names are irrelevant anyways. Ignore the names and focus on the fact that these were G5 teams beating would-be playoff P5 squads had there been a playoff at the time.

Would they lose more often than not, of course. But to say the best G5 is incapable of winning a playoff game is not true.

I'd have voted G5 Utah outright national champion once and easily put them in a 4 team playoff another year, let alone a 12 team playoff where the first round matchup isn't with a top 4 team. I'd have seeded them 1 and 3 in a 12 team playoffs those years, they were bye worthy.

 

[SolterraCyclone]

I'd have voted G5 Utah outright national champion once and easily put them in a 4 team playoff another year, let alone a 12 team playoff where the first round matchup isn't with a top 4 team. I'd have seeded them 1 and 3 in a 12 team playoffs those years, they were bye worthy.

Oh jeez! Yes, how could I forget about that team. And obviously G5 Cincinnati would have been favored in a playoff game 2 years ago. Hell I remember Fresno State beating a Colorado team that would finish #3 in the BCS in 2001

 

[HFCS]

Oh jeez! Yes, how could I forget about that team. And obviously G5 Cincinnati would have been favored in a playoff game 2 years ago. Hell I remember Fresno State beating a Colorado team that would finish #3 in the BCS in 2001

If they truly try to make it "P2" and they leave the Big 12 with so many decent programs in Texas I have a feeling the Big 12 will always have some teams like this that are legit top 5 or top 10 teams. The only hope is the money-first conferences still allow real games to be played instead of just declaring themselves winner via media contract.

 

[Clonehomer]

Because at the time of the initial deal they just wanted to get the playoff expanded. The dynamics have changed dramatically since then and the P2 never wanted the G5 autobid in the first place. Now that the power is consolidated zero chance they want to give a G5 school the opportunity with all the additional mouths to feed.

Cutting out the G5 does nothing to increase long term health as almost no one cares about the G5 teams. You guys already promoted the 4 best and frankly no G5 school has the talent to win a playoff game. Also what legal action? No one cares about the G5 schools, most are just trying everything possible to keep the doors open not trying to compete in football.

Senators dealing with tax laws care about G5 schools in their states.

 

[06_CY]

Two of those teams are now P4, one is totally irrelevant, and Tulane beat USC with some of its top players sitting out. My point is in a playoff with no one sitting out and everyone trying those G5 schools aren’t going to do anything but lose. I’m fine with G5 getting in if they put together a perfect season and beat multiple P4 teams but there need to be some major qualifiers

Will G5 teams even be playing multiple P4 teams year to have a chance at beating them?

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Will G5 teams even be playing multiple P4 teams year to have a chance at beating them?

Many do because those checks help fund the athletic dept

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Senators dealing with tax laws care about G5 schools in their states.

Yeah no they don’t, they care about their alma mater at best, if they did they wouldn’t be cutting funding to higher learning across all their states.

 

[LonelyCyKC]

A few thoughts:
I find it funny that so many seem to trust the poll voters to pick the top 12 or so teams for the playoffs. Where are these voters from? Probably SEC and B1G cities, or are they from Alaska or are they old fat guys drinking beer watching ESPN. The only true way to pick the teams for the playoff is by wins and losses. If this means that a 11- 1 Air Force team makes the cut and an 8 - 4 SEC team doesn't. so be it.

 

[Cloniac2]

My point is in a playoff with no one sitting out and everyone trying those G5 schools aren’t going to do anything but lose.

You are so right! No doubt they would lose like 38-0!

 

[cyIclSoneU]

Are the Cal, Stanford, and SMU additions to the ACC good, bad, or indifferent for the Big 12? You can make a case for all of the responses.

I think it materially lowers the chances of the endgame being 3 conferences of 22 schools, or something. Even if the ACC gets poached, it will likely be beefy enough to survive. And we may be in a situation where the networks decided which one that they want to survive.

It may even be advantageous at that time for the ACC to be down to 10 or 12 schools with the Big 12 at 16. The networks may decide their best move is shifting the 6 most valuable Big 12 schools into the conference that has room for them. Even if it’s still weighed down by Boston College and Wake Forest, it likely has good brands like Pitt, Louisville, and maybe even NC State and Virginia Tech.

Who knows!

 

[LonelyCyKC]

A second thought:
I think that the only way two super conferences of 20 each take over will be if certain gambling laws are changed, and Las Vegas takes over as sponsor. Pay all of the players NIL equally (Gambling companies stand to make a lot of money out of this and can support the NIL). Games and tournaments will be restricted to among the 40 teams. Still show the University connections to keep the original fans. Vegas would create their own multi-channel broadcast network and provide on-line gambling for financing.

The left out teams can stay with NCAA and operate as they have been. The only thing that will happen is that the name teams will have departed to the Vegas Leagues.

Think it can't happen? Money talks and walks. "Watch this space."

 

[FriendlySpartan]

You are so right! No doubt they would lose like 38-0!

Perfect response, gotta give you the win there. My teams are 0-3 in the playoff with 2 horrific losses

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Are the Cal, Stanford, and SMU additions to the ACC good, bad, or indifferent for the Big 12? You can make a case for all of the responses.

I think it materially lowers the chances of the endgame being 3 conferences of 22 schools, or something. Even if the ACC gets poached, it will likely be beefy enough to survive. And we may be in a situation where the networks decided which one that they want to survive.

It may even be advantageous at that time for the ACC to be down to 10 or 12 schools with the Big 12 at 16. The networks may decide their best move is shifting the 6 most valuable Big 12 schools into the conference that has room for them. Even if it’s still weighed down by Boston College and Wake Forest, it likely has good brands like Pitt, Louisville, and maybe even NC State and Virginia Tech.

Who knows!

Calling Louisville and Tech good brands is a bit of a stretch. Personally I think the Big12 has an edge with the parity in the conference. Everyone knows the ACC is just Clemson.

 

[isucy86]

A few thoughts:
I find it funny that so many seem to trust the poll voters to pick the top 12 or so teams for the playoffs. Where are these voters from? Probably SEC and B1G cities, or are they from Alaska or are they old fat guys drinking beer watching ESPN. The only true way to pick the teams for the playoff is by wins and losses. If this means that a 11- 1 Air Force team makes the cut and an 8 - 4 SEC team doesn't. so be it.

I don't think anyone is saying a poll like AP should be used. But a computerized ranking system using set criteria. That way there are no surprises or brand bias by a selection committee.

To blanketly say an 11-1 Air Force team is better than 8-4 SEC team would ignore what happens on the field.

• What if Air Force's 1 loss was to that 8-4 SEC team?
• What if Air Force had 0 wins over Top 25 teams?
• What if all 4 of the SEC team's losses were close games to Top 10 teams?

I agree my scenario is unlikely. But record shouldn't be the sole basis for selecting the 12 teams. SOS, head to head wins, quality road wins, # of Power Conference games, etc can all be incorporated in a computer poll.

With a 12 team playoff the reality is there will be 2 or 3 loss teams fighting to make the playoffs. So the CFP Committee is going to need criteria to justify selection of one team among many with the same record.

Just look at historical CFP polls.

 

[StLouisClone]

Are the Cal, Stanford, and SMU additions to the ACC good, bad, or indifferent for the Big 12? You can make a case for all of the responses.

I think it materially lowers the chances of the endgame being 3 conferences of 22 schools, or something. Even if the ACC gets poached, it will likely be beefy enough to survive. And we may be in a situation where the networks decided which one that they want to survive.

It may even be advantageous at that time for the ACC to be down to 10 or 12 schools with the Big 12 at 16. The networks may decide their best move is shifting the 6 most valuable Big 12 schools into the conference that has room for them. Even if it’s still weighed down by Boston College and Wake Forest, it likely has good brands like Pitt, Louisville, and maybe even NC State and Virginia Tech.

Who knows!

B12 will hopefully be locked into a new long term deal before the ACC contract/GOR expires. But you're right, it will come down to what the networks want.

 

[enisthemenace]

Interesting read. Even more interesting visuals:

 

[CyCrazy]

A few thoughts:
I find it funny that so many seem to trust the poll voters to pick the top 12 or so teams for the playoffs. Where are these voters from? Probably SEC and B1G cities, or are they from Alaska or are they old fat guys drinking beer watching ESPN. The only true way to pick the teams for the playoff is by wins and losses. If this means that a 11- 1 Air Force team makes the cut and an 8 - 4 SEC team doesn't. so be it.

You are so stupid.