Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[cyIclSoneU]

I think it'd be halirious if Utah leaves the Big 12 for the ACC, only for UNC, Clemson, and FSU to leave, thus crumbling the ACC. Only for the Big 12 to invite ACC teams except Utah; relegating them back to G5.

I am a little sad the Utah-ACC rumors weren't true because we won't get to see this happen.

*Utah to ACC
*FSU, UNC, Clemson, UVA etc. leave
*Big 12 has its pick of the remainders and adds NC State, Virginia Tech, Pitt, Louisville, maybe Duke and Syracuse

Utah, Oregon State, Wazzu, Boston College, Wake Forest, Georgia Tech form a misfits conference with, like, Memphis and San Diego State.

 

[Daserop]

This should put an end to that. Got a few clicks for small or declining journalists/media outlets though

They didn't deny anything.

 

[CascadeClone]

I always said the B10 west would be a lot of fun for us, with the furthest away game being closer than our closest in the B12. (I believe Purdue is just slightly further than Kansas, although possibly would have moved to the East if we were added) The rest are all closer than KU.

But now that is all out the window with massive conferences and no more B10 west.

That being said if we were all together still with the old Big 8 teams.....that is really still preferable. Regional rivalries with Mizzou and Nebby were great along with KU and KSU, but the regionality of the B1G west would have been pretty nice too.

You know who wants regional rivalries and closer opponents? Literally ALL the fans, esp those that buy tickets and have connections to their teams.

You know who doesn't? Media and money people. That's the list.

Such a crying shame.

 

[snowcraig2.0]

This should put an end to that. Got a few clicks for small or declining journalists/media outlets though

I'm guessing Yormark made a call there and said something along the lines of, 'if you ******* want out just lmk, I'll replace you with Wazzou in a heartbeat'.

 

[snowcraig2.0]

They didn't deny anything.

did you read the whole statement?

 

[GTO]

So sick of Utah already. They haven't even started in the conference and I've already had enough of them and their fans.

 

[Gonzo]

0, 1 or 2 results in some gut wrenching choices.

ISU has 0. We'll live.

Where it becomes absurd is teams pretending to have 3 to 5 rivals in one conference. Well that's called being in any historic conference.

They should cap it at two and Iowa's choice would be no big deal at all. Whomever they drop would have similar or less history to ISU and KSU not being protected.

Knowing what we know now, they should've capped it at 2, but told every school they have to have at least 1.

 

[DFWClone]

The ACC is a dead conference walking.

The second FSU, Clemson, Miami, etc. can figure out a way to leave, they’re going to.

Then it’ll be all about where the scraps end up.

 

[HFCS]

So sick of Utah already. They haven't even started in the conference and I've already had enough of them and their fans.

Go on their reddit or FB fan groups, the "Truck stop" thing is not losing momentum. They talk about "truck stop" and general disdain for Big 12 the way some fans on here talk about the disdain for Hawkeyes.

I'd have never dreamt it would be so easy to take BYU's side in that rivalry (I'd have though the exact opposite) but it turns out wanting to be part of the conference goes a long ways.

 

[SolterraCyclone]

They didn't deny anything.

They said it was completely fabricated. Exact quote.

I actually doubt there was any smoke to this at all. The people who Tweeted a.) didn’t even write a story for a legit (any) publication anlong with the Tweet and b.) aren’t reputable to begin with.

Also telling, no reputable realignment reporters (Thamel, McMurphy, Dellenger, whoever the Athletic is trotting out these days) said anything about it at all, other than to post Utah’s statement

 

[HFCS]

I am a little sad the Utah-ACC rumors weren't true because we won't get to see this happen.

*Utah to ACC
*FSU, UNC, Clemson, UVA etc. leave
*Big 12 has its pick of the remainders and adds NC State, Virginia Tech, Pitt, Louisville, maybe Duke and Syracuse

Utah, Oregon State, Wazzu, Boston College, Wake Forest, Georgia Tech form a misfits conference with, like, Memphis and San Diego State.

Yeah, if the Big 12 didn't want to expand past a certain number, there would be several schools on the table that add more than the second biggest fanbase in small market Utah.

Half of who you mentioned are clearly superior to UU when BYU is already in the fold, like no doubters. Plenty of the rest are a coin flip with Utah and Utah loses the tie because they are gigantic a-holes.

 

[HFCS]

They said it was completely fabricated. Exact quote.

I actually doubt there was any smoke to this at all. The people who Tweeted a.) didn’t even write a story for a legit (any) publication anlong with the Tweet and b.) aren’t reputable to begin with.

Also telling, no reputable realignment reporters (Thamel, McMurphy, Dellenger, whoever the Athletic is trotting out these days) said anything about it at all, other than to post Utah’s statement

Their fans pretty clearly preferred not only ACC but even the Mountain West during all of this. They are completely irrational.

ASU came off as just dangerously naive and aloof. UU is/was nuts.

 

[2speedy1]

I don't disagree in principle, but that's a lot easier said than done. If you say 1 is the magic number, what does Michigan do with tOSU and MSU? Force them to choose? If you say 2 is the magic number, what do you do with Rutgers, who barely can come up with 1 logical protected rival in Maryland? Or Penn St., who opted for 0 protected rivalries to avoid having to play tOSU every season? The spirit of the policy allowing each school to identify their rivals and if the feelings were mutual, establishing those rivalries I think was good. It just sucks that some schools used it in a way that doesn't align with that spirit, like Iowa having 3 (which is stupid and a way for Barta and KF to pad the schedule) and PSU having 0 when a PSU v. tOSU protected rivalry seemed obvious to everyone.

I think there could have been a happy medium. For the B1G they probably could have went with 2 for everyone. Possibly in the Big 12 too. But having 1 for sure seemed logical. At some point though having 3 while others have 0 seems ridiculous.

I get a few of them could seem manufactured like the Nebby/Iowa one has been, but I would think Rutgers/Maryland and something like Rutgers/Penn State could have been done. Mich/MSt and Mich/OSU. Etc etc.

My feeling is you give everyone the same or you give everyone none, at that point you have to weigh having a few "manufactured" rivalries Vs some Rivalries not being annual.

In reality the Iowa/Nebby rivalry should have been cut, its totally forced, and is kind of a joke, at least that would have brought them to 2.

 

[SolterraCyclone]

Their fans pretty clearly preferred not only ACC but even the Mountain West during all of this. They are completely irrational.

ASU came off as just dangerously naive and aloof. UU is/was nuts.

I’m sure they did prefer the ACC. All those schools did, until they saw the finances wouldn’t work and the ACC is on the precipice of collapse just like the P12. The PAC 12 and ACC were/are Big 12 fans circa 2008. They don’t see the train coming on the tracks

I’m sure there is still some truck stop commentary, but, at least on Twitter, around 90% of Utah fans were against going to the ACC now (in response to this “report”)

 

[2speedy1]

Go on their reddit or FB fan groups, the "Truck stop" thing is not losing momentum. They talk about "truck stop" and general disdain for Big 12 the way some fans on here talk about the disdain for Hawkeyes.

I'd have never dreamt it would be so easy to take BYU's side in that rivalry (I'd have though the exact opposite) but it turns out wanting to be part of the conference goes a long ways.

Any time you hear or see a Utah fan say something about the truck stop conference etc. Just give them this link. Remind them their **** stinks just like everyone else's.

Truck Stops In Utah

TruckMaster Fuel Finder™ truck stops for Utah (UT).

www.truckmaster.com

 

[CascadeClone]

Knowing what we know now, they should've capped it at 2, but told every school they have to have at least 1.

Who would you want for Iowa if it was just 2? Has to be Minny and Bucky right?

 

[HFCS]

Who would you want for Iowa if it was just 2? Has to be Minny and Bucky right?

I grew up an Iowa fan in western Iowa and I hated Nebraska infinitely worse than any big ten team even though Iowa didn’t play them. I barely realized there were any rivalries, just this other team I hated that the Hawkeyes didn’t play. Pretty sure it’s how my adult family felt too.

 

[Gonzo]

I think there could have been a happy medium. For the B1G they probably could have went with 2 for everyone. Possibly in the Big 12 too. But having 1 for sure seemed logical. At some point though having 3 while others have 0 seems ridiculous.

I get a few of them could seem manufactured like the Nebby/Iowa one has been, but I would think Rutgers/Maryland and something like Rutgers/Penn State could have been done. Mich/MSt and Mich/OSU. Etc etc.

My feeling is you give everyone the same or you give everyone none, at that point you have to weigh having a few "manufactured" rivalries Vs some Rivalries not being annual.

In reality the Iowa/Nebby rivalry should have been cut, its totally forced, and is kind of a joke, at least that would have brought them to 2.

I guess I don't understand the point of forcing everyone into the same number of protected rivalry games. Everyone is going to play the same number of conference games every year. And if you force 2 onto everyone, that's actually going to screw some programs over who might get stuck with 2 national powers on their schedule every year, while massively benefiting others who get 2 bottom dwellers. And how do you determine the rivalries? Does the conference just assign them? If I'm Michigan St. and am already going to have Michigan every year, I'm going to be pretty p*ssed if I also get forced into a "rivalry" game every year vs. tOSU.

Again, I think the fairest way would've been to let the schools choose their rivals with the mandate that they could have no more than 2 and no less than 1.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

I don't disagree in principle, but that's a lot easier said than done. If you say 1 is the magic number, what does Michigan do with tOSU and MSU? Force them to choose? If you say 2 is the magic number, what do you do with Rutgers, who barely can come up with 1 logical protected rival in Maryland? Or Penn St., who opted for 0 protected rivalries to avoid having to play tOSU every season? The spirit of the policy allowing each school to identify their rivals and if the feelings were mutual, establishing those rivalries I think was good. It just sucks that some schools used it in a way that doesn't align with that spirit, like Iowa having 3 (which is stupid and a way for Barta and KF to pad the schedule) and PSU having 0 when a PSU v. tOSU protected rivalry seemed obvious to everyone.

I actually don’t have a problem with the way the rivalries have been done. Both schools had to put the name on the list so it’s not just one side picking their “rival”. All three of Iowa’s rivals in this case have the potential to be good to great depending on the season.

I think people would have gotten more annoyed if there were three traditional door mats as protected rivals. Better this way then forced rivalries.

 

[Gonzo]

Who would you want for Iowa if it was just 2? Has to be Minny and Bucky right?

Yeah I'd lose Nebby. Obviously Floyd has to be an annual game, and aside from a few off years we've played Wisco every season dating back to the 1920s.