Fan Nation
Forums
Forum list
Search forums
Rules & Policies
Podcast
Mobile App
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Shop
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forum list
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Horned Frog Athletics
Scott & Wes Frog Fan Forum
Anyone subscribe to The Athletic? (Realignment article)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Gehörnter Frosch" data-source="post: 2835592" data-attributes="member: 79"><p>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.</p><p></p><p>LeagueCityFrog <em>et al</em>,</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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 <em>Pangaea</em> is re-forming.</p><p></p><p>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 <strong><em>now</em></strong>. </p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>Do the math. The SEC and B1G both have two spots. The ACC has one spot.</p><p></p><p>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).</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>I think West Virginia, Utah, Iowa State and Colorado make it in. So it really comes down to Baylor vs. TCU.</p><p></p><p><strong>Big 16</strong></p><p>Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, USC, Stanford, UCLA, Cal, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State</p><p></p><p><strong>B1G</strong></p><p>+Colorado, +Kansas</p><p></p><p><strong>SEC</strong></p><p>+Kansas State, +West Virginia</p><p></p><p><strong>ACC</strong></p><p>+Notre Dame, +Baylor or TCU</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Gehörnter Frosch, post: 2835592, member: 79"] 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 [I]et al[/I], 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 [I]Pangaea[/I] 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 [B][I]now[/I][/B]. 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. [B]Big 16[/B] Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, USC, Stanford, UCLA, Cal, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State [B]B1G[/B] +Colorado, +Kansas [B]SEC[/B] +Kansas State, +West Virginia [B]ACC[/B] +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. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Which team did TCU defeat in the College Football Playoffs?
Post reply
Forums
Horned Frog Athletics
Scott & Wes Frog Fan Forum
Anyone subscribe to The Athletic? (Realignment article)
Top