re: Maryland approves move to Big TEN

I'm under the suspicion that this "Power Move" by the B1G is nothing more than a ruse to try and convince ND from going the ACC.

quote:

---

Yeah, if I'm the Big 12, I'm looking at raiding the ACC before they raid me. You're at 10 teams and could easily add Louisville (for WVU), FSU, and Clemson. Then you just need one more for 14 and you're choosing between Miami, GT, and maybe NC State.

This creates stability and adds a power (FSU) to compete with the Texas-OU big dogs. The SEC doesn't need another elite team. It needs a middle class. Programs like VT, UVA, UNC, and State would be perfect. The only reason you add OU is if you're pushing Auburn and Bama to the East and you need some balance with LSU in the West.

---

I don't think we're anywhere close to the 'end' of conference realignment.

I could easily foresee a time in which only four conferences remain; at that point, the "playoffs" would just be the four conference champions, or the 8 divisional champions (i.e. 'Bama, Georgia, B12S, B12N, Leaders / Legends, Pac-12S, Pac-12N, etc...)

Even though all of this nonsense ends up with Rutgers in a real conference - and the Big "10" is awesome, especially in regards to academics - it is nonsense.

Sporting tradition is pushed aside in favor of cold hard advertising revenue. Even as a fan of a school that advances as a result, it's a sad turn of events for college football, IMO.

quote:

---

I'm under the suspicion that this "Power Move" by the B1G is nothing more than a ruse to try and convince ND from going the ACC.

---

I don't know. Obviously we still like ND, but them moving over to the ACC might have been a final slap in the face to Delaney.

quote:

---

I don't think we're anywhere close to the 'end' of conference realignment.

I could easily foresee a time in which only four conferences remain; at that point, the "playoffs" would just be the four conference champions, or the 8 divisional champions (i.e. 'Bama, Georgia, B12S, B12N, Leaders / Legends, Pac-12S, Pac-12N, etc...)

Even though all of this nonsense ends up with Rutgers in a real conference - and the Big "10" is awesome, especially in regards to academics - it is nonsense.

Sporting tradition is pushed aside in favor of cold hard advertising revenue. Even as a fan of a school that advances as a result, it's a sad turn of events for college football, IMO

---

I was just coming to post something similar. Except, I want to see it happen. I'd love to see 4 big conferences of 16. I'd love for them to tell the NCAA and smaller schools goodbye. Let the 64 form a "new NCAA".

Essentially create a new class of college athletics. Having 119 teams or whatever is too many. This is my grand dream.

quote:

---

Let the 64 form a "new NCAA".

---

As long as Rutgers is in a real conference, I guess it could be worse.

I guess you would set up a playoff system where you had 16 team conferences; 8 in each division - and you'd end up with 8 divisional winners in the playoffs...

It could be worse, I guess. I can't imagine how frustrating the 2003 LSU / Oklahoma / USC thing was; I'd imagine the 2004 Auburn team had a legitimate gripe, as well.

Anything that eliminates that kind of junk would be fine by me.

I am really tired of this conference realignment business. It's a sad state of affairs...but I am pre-capitalism. So if this is the direction that the money is flying to, then so be it. But it's at the expense of some really good products. It's a shame that the media favors these national products instead of the really good regional ones. WVU/Pitt never registrered on the national richter scale, but it sure as hell meant a lot to the community. A&M and Texas...when was the last time that game was relevant? But it meant a lot to the people in the area. All of these products and more are being ruined in favor of seeing the powerhouses dook it out...and the smaller programs are just being led along being told it's good for them.

Part of me wishes that UVA goes Ivy League and dials down athletics. I'm fine with being an academics first school in an academics first conference. I really don't want to be associated with the Big10. I don't identify with them at all.

quote:

---

Essentially create a new class of college athletics

---

Agree totally - this needs to happen. College athletics is in an arms race that few of the 119 schools can really compete in. We need to separate haves from the have nots - 64 teams that can handle (if not win) the arms race and the rest that are satisfied with putting a slightly inferior product on the football field at least in return for getting out of the arms race.

Can it happen? Who knows.

quote:

---

Give me another example besides Bama and UT.

---

Notre Dame being independent

quote:

---

Notre Dame being independent

---

Notre Dame doesn't do this for the sake of tradition. It's all about the mighty $$$ and what their national fan base and alumni want to see. The reduction in flexibility to schedule nationally in lieu of regionally is much more than a slap in the face to tradition. It's a reduction in viewership and income.

quote:

---

It's all about the mighty $$$

---

you couldn't be more wrong.

They would make more money in the Big 10 than they do with their NBC contract.

quote:

---

what their national fan base and alumni want to see

---

Maybe, maybe not. Has there ever been a poll conducted to determine this or is it all speculation? I have a close family member in the employ of ND, and he would prefer ND join a conference. A casual perusal of their message boards seems to show heavy support for joining a conference. I admit, all that is just anecdotal, but it bears just as much weight as what you posted. i.e. none.

quote:

---

reduction in flexibility to schedule nationally in lieu of regionally is much more than a slap in the face to tradition. It's a reduction in viewership and income.

---

Viewership? Maybe.

Income? Wrong.