Skip to content

Power 5 realignment

College Football Forum
46 6 3.1k
  • They will pick one off from the ACC.

    @wargograw said:

    They will pick one off from the ACC.

    Why? You already said that Fla. would veto FSU. That SC would veto Clemson.

    I think the only one that might make the jump is NC St. How about you? They may not like playing third fiddle to Duke/NC...in basketball at least. I don't think NC St. feels the same about their role in football versus those other two.

  • Right. Won't be FSU or Clemson. One of the NC schools and/or one of the Virginia schools.

  • Right. Won't be FSU or Clemson. One of the NC schools and/or one of the Virginia schools.

    @wargograw said:

    Right. Won't be FSU or Clemson. One of the NC schools and/or one of the Virginia schools.

    I doubt it would be Virginia....but it could be Va A&M (Tech). They have kind of actually moved all over. From the Southern to the Big East to the ACC they have been somewhat nomadic. If they saw more prestige and more money, sure, they might jump.

    (but...as noted, the ACC dominated the SEC this past year.....so it could be argued that they would be making a lateral move at best in terms of overall football competition)

  • Virginia would probably stick its nose up at SEC academics. VT is fine. Better cultural fit anyway. At least that's what I've heard.

    Yes they should make a 30-50 year decision based on the results of 1 year....

  • I don't think anyone believes the ACC will be even with the SEC any time soon

  • I don't think anyone believes the ACC will be even with the SEC any time soon

    @mld-woody said:

    I don't think anyone believes the ACC will be even with the SEC any time soon

    Last year they weren't even....they were better. In terms of head to head matchups. (so....maybe you are right.....just not in the way you thought you were right.)

  • Virginia would probably stick its nose up at SEC academics. VT is fine. Better cultural fit anyway. At least that's what I've heard.

    Yes they should make a 30-50 year decision based on the results of 1 year....

    @wargograw said:

    Virginia would probably stick its nose up at SEC academics. VT is fine. Better cultural fit anyway. At least that's what I've heard.

    Yes they should make a 30-50 year decision based on the results of 1 year....

    OK, what does that mean "better cultural fit". Though I kinda think I know what you need to explain that one to me needs further explanation.

  • @mld-woody said:

    I don't think anyone believes the ACC will be even with the SEC any time soon

    Last year they weren't even....they were better. In terms of head to head matchups. (so....maybe you are right.....just not in the way you thought you were right.)

    @the-gipper said:

    Last year they weren't even....they were better. In terms of head to head matchups. (so....maybe you are right.....just not in the way you thought you were right.)

    One year does not make a trend. Go top to bottom across the conferences, the ACC is not currently better.

  • @the-gipper said:

    Last year they weren't even....they were better. In terms of head to head matchups. (so....maybe you are right.....just not in the way you thought you were right.)

    One year does not make a trend. Go top to bottom across the conferences, the ACC is not currently better.

    @mld-woody said:

    One year does not make a trend. Go top to bottom across the conferences, the ACC is not currently better.

    The bottom of the SEC is as bad as any other conference on a regular basis. Some years, their top is better.

  • Our top is deeper. Our middle is better. Come on Gip, you're better than that Bob Stoops "Kentucky sucks, ergo the SEC sucks" logic.

    Va Tech is just rowdier, less pretentious, a little more rural, etc. But that's just what I've heard. I don't actually know.

  • I was there for a pool tournament in college. Cool campus.

  • Our top is deeper. Our middle is better. Come on Gip, you're better than that Bob Stoops "Kentucky sucks, ergo the SEC sucks" logic.

    Va Tech is just rowdier, less pretentious, a little more rural, etc. But that's just what I've heard. I don't actually know.

    @wargograw said:

    Our top is deeper.

    Apparently not.

    Our middle is better.

    Which teams do you consider the "middle" of each conf.?

    Come on Gip, you're better than that Bob Stoops "Kentucky sucks, ergo the SEC sucks" logic.

    Kentucky/Vandy...and usually Ole Miss and Miss St. They had their once in a generation decent seasons last year.

    Va Tech is just rowdier, less pretentious, a little more rural, etc. But that's just what I've heard. I don't actually know.

    Not as highly regarded academically.

  • @wargograw said:

    Our top is deeper.

    Apparently not.

    Our middle is better.

    Which teams do you consider the "middle" of each conf.?

    Come on Gip, you're better than that Bob Stoops "Kentucky sucks, ergo the SEC sucks" logic.

    Kentucky/Vandy...and usually Ole Miss and Miss St. They had their once in a generation decent seasons last year.

    Va Tech is just rowdier, less pretentious, a little more rural, etc. But that's just what I've heard. I don't actually know.

    Not as highly regarded academically.

    @the-gipper said:

    @wargograw said:

    Our top is deeper.

    Apparently not.

    Our middle is better.

    Which teams do you consider the "middle" of each conf.?

    Come on Gip, you're better than that Bob Stoops "Kentucky sucks, ergo the SEC sucks" logic.

    Kentucky/Vandy...and usually Ole Miss and Miss St. They had their once in a generation decent seasons last year.

    Va Tech is just rowdier, less pretentious, a little more rural, etc. But that's just what I've heard. I don't actually know.

    Not as highly regarded academically.

    I'll explore the tiers of each conference later. That sounds interesting.

    So given the fact that you're using only the last year of interconference game data to determine the "best" conference, I take it you've been adamantly calling the SEC the best since 07?

    Or maybe since the SEC actually has a losing record against the Big East since 98, the latter is the best conference?

    Yeah the academics are part of it.

  • I may have done this before, but here is one take on how the Power 5 conferences could/should realign.

    Realign may be the wrong word, for for this I have pretty much left the 5 conferences alone with their current roster. I have only actually shifted one single team between the P5. (WEST by God) What I am doing essentially is having each conference expand to 16 teams each by adding to each conference some somewhat geographically compatible schools to them. By that I mean essentially having each conference move into surrounding territory. This is done by: A. Emaculating the American Conference and B. Partially emasculating the Mountain West Conference. Here is the proposed lineup:

    Big Ten:

    Illinois

    Indiana

    Iowa

    Wisconsin

    Minnesota

    Nebraska

    Michigan

    Purdue

    Michigan St.

    Ohio St.

    Penn St.

    Maryland

    Rutgers

    Northwestern

    add: West Virginia transfer in from B12, and Connecticut

    ACC:

    Boston College

    Clemson

    Duke

    North Carolina

    Wake Forest

    NC ST.

    Florida St.

    Ga. Tech

    Louisville

    Miami

    Pitt

    Syracuse

    Virginia

    Va. Tech

    add: Cincinnati, Memphis

    SEC:

    Alabama

    Arkansas

    Auburn

    Florida

    Georgia

    Kentucky

    LSU

    Ole Miss

    Mississippi St.

    Missouri

    South Carolina

    Tennessee

    Texas A&M

    Vanderbilt

    Add: East Carolina, Tulsa

    Pac 12:

    Arizona

    Arizona St.

    USC

    UCLA

    Stanford

    Cal

    Oregon

    Oregon St.

    Washington

    Washington St.

    Utah

    Colorado

    add: Hawaii, Boise St. New Mexico, Nevada

    Big 12:

    Iowa St.

    Kansas

    Kansas St.

    Oklahoma

    OK St.

    Texas

    TCU

    Texas Tech

    Baylor

    add: Houston, SMU, Colorado St., Wyoming, Arkansas St. New Mexico St., Tulane

    Here is my reasoning for some of the moves....most of which involve the expansion of the conferences into markets in surrounding states:

    West Va.: With Ohio/PA/Maryland surrounding it, and it being basically in the middle of what is now Big Ten country, it seemed a natural shift.

    Connecticut: This solidifies the Big Ten in its eastern expansion and allows it to surround the New York City market...now having Rutgers in the nearby west of NYC and UConn in the nearby east....and it gives it a foothold in New England

    Cincinnati and Memphis in the ACC. Reunites these "city teams" with former compadres Louisville and Pitt. Plus it gives the ACC an incursion into Big Ten country with Cinci, and provides it with an additional incursion into SEC country with a team in either the #1 or 2 market in Tennessee.

    East Carolina and Tulsa in the SEC. Similar reasons to the above. Puts the SEC into neighboring states NC and OK, Tulsa being #2 OK market. And while EC is not in the NC population centers, quite frankly....its football program is probably as strong or stronger than any of the other schools in that state. (and we are dealing with this realignment as a football....not basketball matter)

    Hawaii, Boise, New Mexico, Nevada into the Pac 12. Primarily, this is done to fill the 16 slots with the main schools in the western states that fill in the P12 map. Since they have Utah and Colorado in there now....put the teams in from the other most westerly states. (If you wanted to go with UNLV rather than Nevada...that would be OK...UNLV in larger market)

    Houston, SMU, Colorado St., Wyoming, Arkansas St. New Mex. St., Tulane. in the Big 12: Again market expansion and consolidation, plus with Houston and SMU it is bringing former affiliated schools back into the fold. I know some of these teams are "smaller programs", but these additions puts this conference into the Houston and New Orleans markets...plus into Ark, NM and Colorado to compete with SEC and P12 schools there. But, yes, it would be an upgrade for a lot of these schools.

    @the-gipper said:

    I may have done this before, but here is one take on how the Power 5 conferences could/should realign.

    Realign may be the wrong word, for for this I have pretty much left the 5 conferences alone with their current roster. I have only actually shifted one single team between the P5. (WEST by God) What I am doing essentially is having each conference expand to 16 teams each by adding to each conference some somewhat geographically compatible schools to them. By that I mean essentially having each conference move into surrounding territory. This is done by: A. Emaculating the American Conference and B. Partially emasculating the Mountain West Conference. Here is the proposed lineup:

    Big Ten:

    Illinois

    Indiana

    Iowa

    Wisconsin

    Minnesota

    Nebraska

    Michigan

    Purdue

    Michigan St.

    Ohio St.

    Penn St.

    Maryland

    Rutgers

    Northwestern

    add: West Virginia transfer in from B12, and Connecticut

    ACC:

    Boston College

    Clemson

    Duke

    North Carolina

    Wake Forest

    NC ST.

    Florida St.

    Ga. Tech

    Louisville

    Miami

    Pitt

    Syracuse

    Virginia

    Va. Tech

    add: Cincinnati, Memphis

    SEC:

    Alabama

    Arkansas

    Auburn

    Florida

    Georgia

    Kentucky

    LSU

    Ole Miss

    Mississippi St.

    Missouri

    South Carolina

    Tennessee

    Texas A&M

    Vanderbilt

    Add: East Carolina, Tulsa

    Pac 12:

    Arizona

    Arizona St.

    USC

    UCLA

    Stanford

    Cal

    Oregon

    Oregon St.

    Washington

    Washington St.

    Utah

    Colorado

    add: Hawaii, Boise St. New Mexico, Nevada

    Big 12:

    Iowa St.

    Kansas

    Kansas St.

    Oklahoma

    OK St.

    Texas

    TCU

    Texas Tech

    Baylor

    add: Houston, SMU, Colorado St., Wyoming, Arkansas St. New Mexico St., Tulane

    Here is my reasoning for some of the moves....most of which involve the expansion of the conferences into markets in surrounding states:

    West Va.: With Ohio/PA/Maryland surrounding it, and it being basically in the middle of what is now Big Ten country, it seemed a natural shift.

    Connecticut: This solidifies the Big Ten in its eastern expansion and allows it to surround the New York City market...now having Rutgers in the nearby west of NYC and UConn in the nearby east....and it gives it a foothold in New England

    Cincinnati and Memphis in the ACC. Reunites these "city teams" with former compadres Louisville and Pitt. Plus it gives the ACC an incursion into Big Ten country with Cinci, and provides it with an additional incursion into SEC country with a team in either the #1 or 2 market in Tennessee.

    East Carolina and Tulsa in the SEC. Similar reasons to the above. Puts the SEC into neighboring states NC and OK, Tulsa being #2 OK market. And while EC is not in the NC population centers, quite frankly....its football program is probably as strong or stronger than any of the other schools in that state. (and we are dealing with this realignment as a football....not basketball matter)

    Hawaii, Boise, New Mexico, Nevada into the Pac 12. Primarily, this is done to fill the 16 slots with the main schools in the western states that fill in the P12 map. Since they have Utah and Colorado in there now....put the teams in from the other most westerly states. (If you wanted to go with UNLV rather than Nevada...that would be OK...UNLV in larger market)

    Houston, SMU, Colorado St., Wyoming, Arkansas St. New Mex. St., Tulane. in the Big 12: Again market expansion and consolidation, plus with Houston and SMU it is bringing former affiliated schools back into the fold. I know some of these teams are "smaller programs", but these additions puts this conference into the Houston and New Orleans markets...plus into Ark, NM and Colorado to compete with SEC and P12 schools there. But, yes, it would be an upgrade for a lot of these schools.

    I revisited this again to see how I liked it.....I still do. What are the alternatives?

    The way I see it, you probably need a distinction somehow betwee "High Majors" and Mid or Low majors.

    There are right now 62 teams competing in the "Power5" conferences. My proposal would put 80 teams into the P5 schools.....which would then constitute therefore the "High Majors". That would leave 48 of the current 128 FBS schools on the outside looking in.

    Of course, they should be out there. The MAC/Sun Belt schools should not gripe about being excluded. But some on the fringe may gripe...and may have a point. This would mainly be remnants of the ConfUSA, the American Conf. and the Mountain West.

    I think an absolute cap needs to be placed on the number of FBS schools. Right now with the Appalachian State's and the Old Dominions wanting to be FBS....that's enough. OK, put the number at 130....then put at least a 10 year moratorium on FBS status.

    By that time, perhaps they will have tweeked the playoff system to make it 8 games.

  • Again time to revisit this thread, what with Big 12 expansion.

    I think I still like my way of thinking. Though maybe I think that the Big Ten could get both UConn and Boston College. W.Va and Cinci to switch to the ACC...then the Big 12 would need 5 teams, not 4. They could do that.