Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Scott & Wes Frog Fan Forum' started by NYC Horned Frog, Mar 4, 2020.
So a 10-team round robin with a CCG is better?
Yes. The SEC isn't what it is because of the 14 team structure, it's because it's comprised of mostly large state schools in the most football crazy part of the country. They could have 8 teams, 10 teams or 20 teams and they'd still be in fine shape as long as Alabama, LSU, Tennessee, Auburn, Florida and Georgia are involved.
Absolutely. What is the goal here? Round robins is the best arrangement there is, every conference team plays one another every year. In basketball they play twice a year, once at home and once on the road. Makes perfect sense and you don't get all the stupid "natural rival" situations where schedules are always unbalanced.
The quest for a spot in the CFP isn't worth scrapping everything else that is good.
have no idea what is the best model other than a conference comprised of schools who have some ties between each other, wiling to spend to be competitive, and draw eyeballs.
my biggest concern is that there is no one entity driving these changes whose interest is acting in the best interest of the game and not selling product.
As much as many of us would like to see Baylor (spit) float down the Brazos and sink in the Gulf Of Mexico, it ain't gonna happen. Things will really start to heat up come September or next year, because switches take negotiations and bowl games must be considered ($$$).
Just a reminder...The Big XII already has the naming rights for the Big 16. Do it Bowlsby!
There were a lot of comments at the bottom of the article suggesting that this conference expansion was the moment to also eject Baylor from the conference for their past sins before the Big 16 starts to roll. Who would the conference want if they were to take 7 teams instead of the six mentioned in the article? Stanford or Colorado I would assume.
You're right about one thing: They're a floater fer sure...
Let's work this proposal through.
This could mean a lot of travel for TCU if this goes to divisions.
North: OU, OSU, Washington, Oregon, WVU, KU, KSU, ISU
South: UT, TCU, Tech, BU, USC, UCLA, Arizona, ASU <-- That's a hell of a division.
East: OU, OSU, KU, KSU, ISU, WVU, Baylor, TCU <--- Way easier for TCU student athlete travel
West: UT, Tech, USC, UCLA, Arizona, ASU, Oregon, Washington
East/West divisions makes the most sense to me. Regular trips to Austin has to be appealing to West Coast schools if they were to make a move. This would also help them minimize perhaps less desirable trips for the former Pac schools to Ames, Waco, and all the way east to Morgantown.
Also... no permanent crossovers unless both schools wants it. Say OU vs UT. The "permanent" crossover SEC rivalry of Texas A&M vs South Carolina is a joke and should have never happened.
Wouldn't it make more sense to target some ACC schools? Due to the number they have, picking up two of those gives them a good financial setting and puts comp close to WVU. (of course, would need to get rid of the short horn channel and get a true Big 12 network. The money teams are making off the ACC and SEC and Big10 and Pac networks seems like a healthy chunk of changes)
So what happens to Cal, Stanford, Utah, and Colorado? Not to mention Washington St and Oregon St.
This is NEVER going to happen. There is a much better chance that a 16-team league is formed with TCU not being part of it than one is formed and the schools mentioned above are all left in conference wilderness.
No matter what happens, they shouldn't worry about catering to West Virginia because I think the Big 12 basically renting them. In an ideal world, WVU doesn't belong in the Big 12 and I think eventually they'll find another home. Nothing against WVU.
From information that I found on the internet, I learned that WVU has or had an awful academic reputation in their part of the country, primarily because it is under political pressure to admit virtually anyone that has a diploma from a State of West Virginia high school.
And some of those public schools give their kids a diploma after 12 years, whether the kids have made it all the way through McGuffy's Reader or not.
While that might have been true decades if not generations ago, I doubt it's true today. Nevertheless, supposedly both the ACC and the B1G have told WVU "no, never" for that reason.
Otherwise, I would think natural rivals like Pitt and VaTech (both of which have high academic standards, or so I have read) would want WVU on their schedules and in their conference.
I suppose that always leaves the SEC, but I suspect that that conference is full. I read that on the interwebz, too.
Once again. Go East not West. No 10 PM kickoffs please. And don't say we negotiate no night games. The networks make that decision and they don't care...except for putting anyone but the SEC and B10 at a disadvantage. We had that with the WAC and MWC...awful!
I personally kind of enjoyed the late night kickoffs, but I understand your point. Not exactly the best time of day to be playing if maximizing eyeballs is the goal.
Sorry this got so long. TLDNR version: TCU should quietly, but aggressively, try to get into the ACC. Otherwise, we risk getting left out of the future Power Conference model.
LeagueCityFrog et al,
What are the dynamics between the Pac's same-state schools? Would Oregon and Washington (the states) allow Oregon St. and Washington St. to be left out of any realignment, let alone separated from their sibling school? Also, would the Pac schools willingly drop Utah and Colorado in exchange for TCU and Baylor? I just don't see that happening.
However, if the ACC wants to get into Texas, then they could take either Baylor or TCU, and make Notre Dame a permanent member. In all honestly, both TCU and Baylor would fit perfectly in the ACC. But the ACC really only has one spot, because of Notre Dame.
At the end of the day, it seems like we are moving toward the 4x16 model, meaning there will be 64 Power Conference schools. It's like reverse plate tectonics. If you zoom out far enough, you can see Pangaea is re-forming.
Here's the scary thing, though. There are currently 64 Power 5 schools, plus Notre Dame..which makes 65 schools but only 64 spots. Somebody will end up getting squeezed out, and it is in TCU's best interest to position ourselves for stability now.
Think about it. No current SEC or ACC members are going to be pushed out, despite schools like Wake Forest and Northwestern bringing nothing to those conferences (besides academics). They are permanent fixtures, and those two conferences are built on solid ground. Nobody is leaving the ACC or SEC for the Big 12, even a new-and-improved one. The same can be said for the B1G. Although their newest members are worthless, they aren't going to kick any of them out, and none are poachable.
Do the math. The SEC and B1G both have two spots. The ACC has one spot.
That leaves the Big 12 and the Pac-12 members (22 schools) vying for 21 spots (16 in the new conference, plus 5 between the SEC-ACC-B1G). And that's if the B1G, ACC or SEC don't get stupid and go adding schools like UCF, Houston, etc. If that happens before any realignment, then TCU is definitely screwed (hypothetically).
So I ask you: Of the current Big 12 and Pac-12 schools, which one gets left out? In the hypothetical move to a 4x16 model, somebody isn't going to make it. Objectively, it would have to be either Baylor, TCU, West Virginia, Iowa State, Colorado, or Utah. None of those schools have any cover (or state partners) in the fight for survival.
I think West Virginia, Utah, Iowa State and Colorado make it in. So it really comes down to Baylor vs. TCU.
Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, USC, Stanford, UCLA, Cal, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
+Kansas State, +West Virginia
+Notre Dame, +Baylor or TCU
The ACC could just as easily tag UCF or Houston, or some other school...Navy, for example...instead of Baylor or TCU. This is why I think TCU is vulnerable. Again, this is all hypothetical based on the 4x64 model. It might never come to fruition, but it sure does feel like that's where this is all headed. I don't think TCU should be passive here. Not saying we are being passive, but it's just hard not to look back at the demise of the SWC and remember how we were left in the dark, in the blistering cold.
Personally, I think we should be cozying up to the ACC every chance we get. TCU would do well to move there proactively, even if it means leaving our natural and geographic rivals behind. I'd rather have the long term security of the ACC and not roll the dice with the new Big 16. NONE of the current Big 12 schools will be looking out for TCU. And trying to convince the Pac-12 that a relatively small "religious sounding" private school is good fit, especially in the current political and cultural environment, is an exceedingly tough sales pitch.
I don't know if the ACC could take us proactively, but it sure wouldn't hurt to ask. Despite Baylor's flaws, they are looking like an equally (if not more) attractive option for the ACC. Having the foresight to build a relationship with the ACC now could pay dividends later. Being passive about it accomplishes nothing, and possibly seals TCU's fate.
I'll take a 10 pm kickoff over an 11 am kickoff. Most wont agree, but I hate the 11 am time slot.
I'm not saying this is what SHOULD happen just that it CAN be worked out. I don't think any of these decisions are being made with the greater good in mind.
Screw it, why not just have a snake draft?
Team A: 1) Bama
Team B: 1) Ohio State
Team C: 1) Texas
Team D: 1) Notre Dame
Team E: 1) USC
Team E: 2) Oregon
Team D: 2) Michigan
Team C: 2) Oklahoma
Team B: 2) Clemson
Team A: 2) LSU
Team A: 3) UGA
Team B: 3) Penn State
Team C: 3) Texas a&m
Team D: 3) Florida
Team E: 3) Auburn
Team E: 4) Florida State
Team D: 4) Wisconsin
Team C: 4) Michigan State
Team B: 4) South Carolina
Team A: 4) Tennessee
And so on.
I've asked around campus when I'm up there and from everything I've heard TCU is in this to win it. Per the TCU peeps I've talked to there are 5 things TCU has going for it and or need to do.
#1 Investment that's been made into our sports and campus facilities/ national brand for TV eye balls / DFW market are all appealing.
#2 Academics, the Medical School, and the TCU vibe.
#3 TCU's relationship with OU and ADJD's relationship with CDC. Supposedly, from what I was told, CDC would look out for TCU despite what others have posted here in this forum.
#4 West Coast kids that now inundate TCU.
#5 All TCU needs to do is win at football and nothing else really matters. Gary and TCU Football are a national brand, so is Schloss and TCU Baseball for that matter, and all Coach P needs to do is score more points and win. Conferences want a winner. GP can continue to provide that.
Couple of things,
Only reason to expand is to get the Big 12 into divisions to GET AWAY from the round robin. Every team playing every other team every year maximizes the number of losses. Make it easier so every good team doesn't have to play every other good team. More good teams at the end of the season. Take two teams to get to 12 or merge the two leagues for 22, I don't care. Colorado and Utah would be just fine.
Second, I don't see anything magical about 64 teams, or Notre Dame. Notre Dame can stay independent or join one of the existing conferences. There can be a conference with 17 teams. I don't think they're a threat to TCU. Just my opinion.