Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[cyIclSoneU]

I don’t think this happens until the next major realignment wave, but thinking about the 17-team ACC if they make that move and the 16-team Big 12, there’s something there if the B1G and SEC take their ball and decide to only play each other (or G5 cupcakes).

Some rivalry type matchups include:
West Virginia vs Pitt/Virginia Tech
Cincinnati vs Louisville
UCF vs Miami or Florida State
TCU vs SMU
Cal/Stanford vs Arizona/ASU/Utah

Baylor vs Wake Forest are two similar schools. Iowa State is also quite like Virginia Tech and NC State.

 

[LonelyCyKC]

Not intended as offensive, but why not incorporate Vegas odds as a piece of the selection criteria while you're at it? There's nothing like putting your money where your mouth is.

If you are going to use factors other than those on the field, and your true goal is to find out which is the best team, why not add Vegas odds to the other pile of polls, etc. that are already included.

At least the odds makers are putting their "money where their mouth is". They look at all factors that can affect the specific games, whereas the polls are often popularity contests combined with history (wins and losses).

The odds makers look at location, weather, injuries, coaching, date and time, matchup records, as they affect specific games, issues that the polls do not examine.

 

[Sigmapolis]

Per Thamel....

The SMU/Cal/Stanford to the ACC has new life. ESPN is willing to kick in some more money for Cal/Stanford and SMU is willing to go without any TV revenue for the first 7 years.

I think it gets done.

ACC-17 (plus Notre Dame)
Big Ten-18
SEC-16
Big 12-16

Oregon State/Wazzu keep the PAC name, keep the huge NCAA distributions coming their way and backfill with the AAC/MW.

Oregon State
Wazzu
Boise St
San Diego St
Colorado St
Fresno St
Air Force
UNLV
Hawaii
Tulane
Memphis
Rice
North Texas or UTSA
Navy (FB Only)
Wichita (BB Only)

17 + 1 + 18 + 16 + 16 + 2 (assuming you throw a life raft at OSU and WSU) = 70

70 / 7 conferences of 10 based on geography and tradition = too obvious to happen

 

[1UNI2ISU]

17 + 1 + 18 + 16 + 16 + 2 (assuming you throw a life raft at OSU and WSU) = 70

70 / 7 conferences of 10 based on geography and tradition = too obvious to happen

We can't expect university presidents to get to that level of thinking plus they might make 86 cents less per year in TV revenue and that's absolutely unacceptable.

 

[SCNCY]

17 + 1 + 18 + 16 + 16 + 2 (assuming you throw a life raft at OSU and WSU) = 70

70 / 7 conferences of 10 based on geography and tradition = too obvious to happen

If you did something like that, you'd have to make it so you don't really have conferences, but just divisions. All governed by the same office, thus leading to a single media deal for all members. So basically setting up similar to any major sports league.

 

[AuH2O]

That’s fair, Michigan’s recruiting is great this year but takes awhile to fully load up. I could see USC competing on the offensive side quickly.

I think there's an incredible gap between averaging top 3 classes vs. what Michigan has been doing. Per 247 I think 22-24 Michigan was 9th, 17th, and 8th. Comparing that to Alabama and Georgia, and you'd think the difference between Alabama and Michigan would be similar to the difference between Michigan and say a team consistently in the 15-30 range.

If you look at the actual player and class ratings, you see that the difference at the very top to even teams around that 8-15 range is huge. It gets a little hard to quantify because they show the per player avg but rank by total score. However, for example if you look at the player and class points/ratings for the 2023 class, the difference between Alabama and Michigan is in the same range as the difference between Michigan and bad ACC teams or even Sun Belt teams.

2022 and 2024 the differences are less pronounced, but still very large. The talent is incredibly concentrated at the very top.

So I think we can and just saw a season where Michigan was not as talented as Ohio State, but beat them and won the conference. Likewise, Ohio State was not as talented as Georgia across the board, but was able to be competitive. But you aggregate those two talent gaps, and the odds of Michigan being competitive with Georgia aren't very good, and the Michigan/TCU and TCU/Georgia games were pretty indicative.

So, I still think realistically right now Alabama and Georgia are on a different level talent-wise, and Ohio State is close enough that they can compete with some level of consistency. I think Michigan is more like those Riley Oklahoma teams. they were clearly good, very good talent, but a big enough consistent gap in incoming talent that it would take a pretty ideal case for them to beat Alabama or Georgia.

 

[qwerty]

This Austin TV reporter can't sit down due to the butthurt.

 

[CascadeClone]

If you did something like that, you'd have to make it so you don't really have conferences, but just divisions. All governed by the same office, thus leading to a single media deal for all members. So basically setting up similar to any major sports league.

That's the only way it could ever happen. But the TV people don't want to pay for all the "lesser" schools, and the teams conferences in the money now, aren't going to sacrifice that money and advantage to make it nice.
You pretty much need governmental intervention. Or further consolidation to a Premier league that bombs and they try to "go back to the future". I don't see how else it could happen.

 

[brett108]

If you are going to use factors other than those on the field, and your true goal is to find out which is the best team, why not add Vegas odds to the other pile of polls, etc. that are already included.

At least the odds makers are putting their "money where their mouth is". They look at all factors that can affect the specific games, whereas the polls are often popularity contests combined with history (wins and losses).

The odds makers look at location, weather, injuries, coaching, date and time, matchup records, as they affect specific games, issues that the polls do not examine.

Odds makers know their stuff. You have to in the gambling world now. I trust it more than the coaches poll.

 

[LonelyCyKC]

A radical and stupid question:

If conferences were limited to only sending the conference winner to the CFP, could this cause the B1G and SEC to split up so that more of their super teams could get into the playoffs (as the winners of their own conferences)?

As a result of the concentration of the "best teams" they are suffering losses and will no longer win their conferences on a regular basis.

Money and ESPN have been the driver of the conference realignment and quality concentration. Do you think that the OuT fans will be happy if they are no longer in the playoffs, whereas in the Big 12 they had a chance? Are the Nebraska fans happy about loosing in the B1G? What happens if Alabama can't win their conference and is not in the Playoff?

Now we know the real reason SEC and B1G wants their multi-loss teams in the playoff....It is to keep them happy.

 

[SCNCY]

That's the only way it could ever happen. But the TV people don't want to pay for all the "lesser" schools, and the teams conferences in the money now, aren't going to sacrifice that money and advantage to make it nice.
You pretty much need governmental intervention. Or further consolidation to a Premier league that bombs and they try to "go back to the future". I don't see how else it could happen.

True. I think the direction things are going, we will continue to see consolidation. Next step is the grabbing the worth while ACC schools. Then after that, once all the big and valuable brands are in two conferences, I think you will see a lot of talk of the big schools separating themselves from the small schools. Reason why I think this is because I don't think the media companies will be offering a significant amount more for the next media deal for each conference; but will pay for the conference. So if the big schools want to continue increasing their payout, they will trim the fat. This is probably happens in the media deals after the next ones expire in early 2030 for the Big10 and SEC.

Hopefully when that happens, the left over conferences and schools will band together as a single negotiating entity to sell their inventory. With smaller inventory in the P2 after they trim the fat, the media companies will need to play ball to fill their slots.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

I think there's an incredible gap between averaging top 3 classes vs. what Michigan has been doing. Per 247 I think 22-24 Michigan was 9th, 17th, and 8th. Comparing that to Alabama and Georgia, and you'd think the difference between Alabama and Michigan would be similar to the difference between Michigan and say a team consistently in the 15-30 range.

If you look at the actual player and class ratings, you see that the difference at the very top to even teams around that 8-15 range is huge. It gets a little hard to quantify because they show the per player avg but rank by total score. However, for example if you look at the player and class points/ratings for the 2023 class, the difference between Alabama and Michigan is in the same range as the difference between Michigan and bad ACC teams or even Sun Belt teams.

2022 and 2024 the differences are less pronounced, but still very large. The talent is incredibly concentrated at the very top.

So I think we can and just saw a season where Michigan was not as talented as Ohio State, but beat them and won the conference. Likewise, Ohio State was not as talented as Georgia across the board, but was able to be competitive. But you aggregate those two talent gaps, and the odds of Michigan being competitive with Georgia aren't very good, and the Michigan/TCU and TCU/Georgia games were pretty indicative.

So, I still think realistically right now Alabama and Georgia are on a different level talent-wise, and Ohio State is close enough that they can compete with some level of consistency. I think Michigan is more like those Riley Oklahoma teams. they were clearly good, very good talent, but a big enough consistent gap in incoming talent that it would take a pretty ideal case for them to beat Alabama or Georgia.

OSU can compete on the offensive side of the ball but under Day they have been slipping and they have some huge holes this year. It’s obv them or Michigan to win the big ten but I don’t expect either to make any noise in the playoff.

 

[HouClone]

Yeah, 2 years ago that they gazed into each other's eyes and saw trust - paraphrasing Jim Phillips.

 

[1UNI2ISU]

A radical and stupid question:

If conferences were limited to only sending the conference winner to the CFP, could this cause the B1G and SEC to split up so that more of their super teams could get into the playoffs (as the winners of their own conferences)?

As a result of the concentration of the "best teams" they are suffering losses and will no longer win their conferences on a regular basis.

Money and ESPN have been the driver of the conference realignment and quality concentration. Do you think that the OuT fans will be happy if they are no longer in the playoffs, whereas in the Big 12 they had a chance? Are the Nebraska fans happy about loosing in the B1G? What happens if Alabama can't win their conference and is not in the Playoff?

Now we know the real reason SEC and B1G wants their multi-loss teams in the playoff....It is to keep them happy.

In that scenario the TV payout is a fraction of what it's going to be. Networks want names and that's why we're getting 7 or 8 SEC/Big Ten teams every year aside from the fact they're going to be the two best football leagues by a fairly wide margin.

 

[Scruff]

Utah is already planning their exit.

 

[FerShizzle]

I see it as just the opposite. It makes me want to see the B10 implode and the PAC and ACC survive. The B10 was the hypocrite here by agreeing to this and then 1 year later raiding the PAC. The B10 just wanted this alliance so other conferences would not strengthen themselves further, then after things settled down a bit, they started picking teams off.

Not sure I want them to implode. But if OSU, Michigan, USC, and PSU left the conference to go independent and left the remainders to realize just how second tier they actually are, I would be ok with that.

 

[FerShizzle]

Utah is already planning their exit.

Really wish we hadn’t added ASU and Utah. Would rather have SDST and UConn.

 

[CycloneDaddy]

Utah is already planning their exit.

Should have left those ******* at the truckstop.

 

[Clonedogg]

Utah is already planning their exit.

Honestly I hope they come into the conference thinking they have some powerhouse of a program. Then we'll see how it goes after their first year in the league when they have to go into stadiums that are full and engaged. I don't think they will make it through the conf season without 2-3 loses.

 

[isucy86]

Sure. But that team with 4 losses has already proven that they shouldn’t be national champions if they’ve lost to 4 other teams in the playoffs already. This isn’t about who had a better season. This is about picking a national champion. So really it should be conference champs with a couple at large to account for close losses and uneven scheduling. But money is going to make this all about the names on the front of the jerseys rather than giving all teams a chance to win a national title.

So 8-4 SEC team can't be a Cinderella story that people embrace?

I understand your argument and would agree if the CFP Committee had created an 8 team playoff. But with 12 teams, it will be common for 3 loss teams to make the playoffs.

I am all for G5 schools having a path to the CFP, but competing for a national championship should have some criteria for excellence. So requiring teams to be ranked in Top 15 doesn't seem too restrictive.