If they go to a "Plus 1" now, you can forget about anyone in the NC game OTHER THAN the champs of the B1G, PAC, SEC, and Big XII.

The Rose Bowl and Champions Bowl will become the de facto semi-finals feeding the NC game. It's SO OBVIOUS !

Look for a big push for a "Plus 1" from those 4 conferences, as it will YEAR AFTER YEAR freeze out everyone else.
Everyone else at the next BCS meeting (around June 20th, I think) will be fighting this tooth and nail !

If they instead adopt a system of 2 neutral site semi-finals, and a neutral site final, seeded by a selection committee,
We will at least have some hope that an undefeated team from outside those 4 conferences will not sutomatically be ignored.

The big sticking point with the new playoff system is REVENUE DISTRIBUTION !
How do you come up with some formula to give every FBS conference (and independents) a cut of the proceeds ?
And if you are too generous, you will have an onslaught of FCS teams moving up FOR NO OTHER REASON than to cash in.

That's why they want a 10 year moratorium on FCS move ups. Otherwise that Liberty, Jax St., App St., Ga Southern to the WAC wouldn't even be thought of as an option. They'd just wait for a the dominoes to fall from BE/CUSA raids and get in the SBC, or for the SBC to wise up and go to 12 fb.

If it does end up a plus 1, then ND joins the B12 or B1G for all sports? How else would they ever get in? They'd have to be #1 to get a shot, even if they were #2. I could see the #3 team beating the #4 team in the Rose or Champs bowl and jump them, because they had to play the ACC or BE champ in the Orange Bowl.

_________________

WRANGLERS 153-55-1 CVFL CHAMPS '04 '05 '09 '12

NFL CHAMPS '29 '30 '31 '36 '39 '44 '61 '62 '65 '66 '67 '96 '10

BW/WAC/MWC CHAMPS '77 '82 '85 '88 '89 '91 '92 '93 '99 '12
['08 NCAA BASEBALL CHAMPS]

Random list I found today.

http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2 ... in/2257895

Notables:
61. Oregon St*
72. SDSU
74. Air Force
75. Houston
76. Fresno St
78. Washington St*
80. Tulsa
81. Boise St
84. Hawaii
86. New Mexico
91. UNLV

Nevada was down at 105, even below my Spartans...ouch. But worth noting is how high SDSU is. If they can have continued success, they would make a worthwhile addition in the future. For now, the Pac 12 is probably staying at 12 as there aren't any worthwhile schools to add. But if New Mexico and UNLV commit to football and their states grow the way they have been, they may be options one day.

I have been reviewing every kind of scenario if the Big 12 decides to expand and based on the various options to split up divisions, the only sensible type of expansion is go big or do not expand at all.

The Big 12 is very similar to how the Pac 10 wanted to expand to 16 to keep the original Pac 8 schools in the same division on the far west coast, it almost mirrors the same issues with the Big 12.

I am not sure TV would support expansion to 16 schools and retain 20 million estimated per school. If it could support 16 schools, why not just jump to 16 and be done with it.

West: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Oklahoma

East: Notre Dame/or Louisville, Iowas State, Pitt, WVU, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Miami Fla, Florida State

If Notre Dame wants to remain independent, then take Louisville to bridge the gap to Iowas State. I think Notre Dame may like this arrangement to have broad requiting benefits compared to be in a regional Big Ten super conference.

Pitt would be joined back in the same conference with arch rival WVU which would provide a solid 100 year plus rivalry in football. Travel benefits to play both schools in the same trip would be very solid for cost.

Miami and Florida State would be in the same league and finally in the same division and Miami could finally try to improve back to the old U standards in a real football league.

Georgia Tech would bridge the gap for Clemson to the Florida schools.

Every scenario with 12 or 14 schools just does not work well.

Why not go big or not expand at all especially if TV would justify the cost for this type of movement.

The option of going to 16 has been discussed before however requiring pods which I do not believe is practical or will be approved to stage a mini conference playoff.

If you expand to 16, you have to be prepared to for teams to like the 8 team divisions they will be located within. This scenario listed below just makes a lot of sense if TV would pay the cost.



West: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklhoma State, Oklahoma

East: Notre Dame/or Louisville, Iowas State, Pitt, WVU, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Miami Fla, Florida State

Am in SEC/ACC territory & have read a number local newpaper opinion/editorials & heard some radio talk on this B12 expansion stuff. I take a lot with a grain salt unless it comes from a direct & credible campus source willing to be quoted, or a mainstream media source such as a sports editor that has earned respect and does not go overboard with conjecture.

Here are some interesting tidbits viewed, heard, or implied (again, with a few grains of salt) from a mix of media & talk fans. Goes from the "ah hah" to the absurd.

...Swofford's public comments suggest he dismisses there will be disruption in the ACC
...Some fans view new leadership in the ACC is needed
...Complaints about long-tern ACC officiating; some view as incompetent and/or biased
...ACC's reaction to UNC ACADEMIC cheating scandal was near nonexistent; had it been elsewhere, they would have reacted more diligently
...Clemson keeps reiterating their commitment to the ACC; but of course saying they are monitoring the landscape;
...Clemson interest in the B12 is grossly overstated in chat, blogs, etc.
...Some Clemson fans see themselves as beyond the ACC, thus let's move; others say, where's the evidence? It could be worse
...The UNC/Duke role (& NC-4) in ACC dynamics does generate opinions; some pro, many con, and some misguided.
...Big stadiums & fans at FSU & Clemson lends itself to some thinking they exceed the rest of the ACC in appeal & belong with bigger fb
...There's a lot of defense as to why the ACC is better for Clemson; charter member, academics, close rivals, etc.; & B12 negatives are point out
...Clemson may be open to SEC overtures, but the B12 does not inspire
...Clemson is not married to FSU, except only through mutual ACC membership; so if FSU ends up elsewhere, it does not imply Clemson will do the same
...Little talk of GT; view they are content, largely, in the ACC
...FSU has been frustrated with the ACC over revenue, TV, and some other issues
...Some reports imply the ACC is annoyed with FSU (and Miami)
...Some convey (from within the ACC) let FSU, and Miami, go if the want; they don't fit the ACC anyway
...The ACC could easily replace 2 departures (among UCONN, Rutgers, etc.) if they desired
...The Notre Dame question remains
...Some questions though, if FSU and/or Miami leave, how it may impact per fb recruiting and the bowls situation (per Florida)
...Virginia Tech, by some, is increasingly being lumped with FSU, Miami, and Louisville as B12 prospects; and some in the ACC are not thrilled about them either
...The recent ACC TV deal is deemed not so bad as many have suggested; talk of the re-visit the issue schedule
...One sports editor conveyed near future "top outs" per more grand increases across the board for big conferences
...The new Champion bowl is a initial set-up, in part, to complement the point above
...There was talk of the SEC looking at 16 with schools such as UNC, NCSU, and UVA; but all "what if" & totally speculative by fan talk
...No plans for any further SEC expansion, but the conference has contingencies just in case they think they need to
...A lot of ACC defense about being practical with expansion, picking schools that fit academically & athletically, for "all their sports"
...Views extended that the ACC has done it right, while others (among big conferences) have lost sight over fb ruling everything
...Opinions the BE has looked ridiculous with their own expansion; does not seem the ACC wants a top 1 & 1 bowl arrangement with them per the Champions bowl model
...Certain writers will convey the B12 really has not even decided if they want to expand; talk driven by Internet/cyberspace.

Again, not my personal views necessarily, but a few notes from a mixture of voices of what is being said.

In paying close attention to outgoing Big 12 commissioner Neinas and incoming commissioner Bowlsby comments, I do believe the Big 12 is going to be very cautious with expansion.

The one constant we keep hearing is the Big 12 is happy with 10 football members and round robin football and the other is the Big 12 would consider Notre Dame in all sports and some football.

Since SEC commissioner Slive reinforced his preference for the four team playoff this past weekend over a plus one bowl, you got to believe they have the Big 12 agreement as well since both are in an alliance.

With a four team playoff format, adding Notre Dame into the mix adds one more ally to four team playoff argument.

Since most years the SEC and Big 12 champions are going to make the final four BCS playoff, Notre Dame could benefit in the Big 12 as a fall back team to play in the Champions Bowl if the Big 12 champion is in the four team playoff and Notre Dame does not make the BCS final four.

This would be a great incentive to Notre Dame to join as a partial member and not necessarily hurt the other Big 12 members by taking an spot in the new alliance bowl reserved for the Big 12 champion if that school does not make the BCS final four.

Notre Dame has always been in the Cotton Bowl mix as well over the years.

I see both the SEC and Big 12 retaining both the Sugar Bowl (most likely champions bowl site), and the Cotton bowl for highly ranked SEC and Big 12 schools that do make the BCS final four.

Notre Dame gets to keep its football rivals with Navy, Michigan, Purdue, USC, and commit to playing some Big 12 games which will not hurt with requiting the state of Texas and create interest with the new champions bowl alliance as well since Notre Dame would become eligible in certain situations for this highly ranked bowl outside of the BCS final four.

Notre Dame would then get to escape the floundering Big East and join a very good basketball league in the process that will include the likes of Kansas, Kansas State, WVU, Baylor, and Texas.

Notre Dame would also be included in one of the power conference and get to keep the indpendence status in football.

Since the Big 12 is the only conference that wants to retain and actually play round robin football, partial Notre Dame membership is an idea situation for this league.

I am comming around to the fact that Notre Dame may be the only target for Big 12 expansion.

There will be no ACC teams leaving for the Big 12 or the SEC - at least for a few years.

I'm not sure what happens to Florida State after this. It's going to make things tough in the ACC for some time, and who knows if this opens the door for them to start discussing other options (SEC). They are not in a good place, and even if a Clemson or Georgia Tech is in their corner, it's not the same as having some of the others, football-power or no.

If I'm the Big XII, and my tree-shaking isn't bringing down the good fruit, I'd be doing damage control like Dodds, too. Of course he would be happy with the ten he has: Louisville and Cincinnati give him nothing. Getting a decent #11, like BYU, still means a weak #12 if that pool isn't containing a Florida State or Clemson. And I don't think BYU is high on that overall list of demands, just the highest placed one that's receptive.

I think that if the conference does expand to twelve or more again, and among them isn't an ACC program, you're looking at the final act of the Big XII...a pitiful act to redraw the contract and set up another "temporary lull" in the contract window to allow some programs to escape.

What do you guys not get about the power of the Big 12. The conference is going to make several more million dollars per year over the ACC and very close to the same revenue as the Big 10, SEC, and Pac 12.

Money is power!

If I were a fan of the ACC, I would be more concerned with this fact and not so much if the Big 12 expands in the future..

Cincinnati and Louisville will be in the Big 12 about the same odds as the Big 12 expanding to 14 and takes Florida State and Clemson.

Expansion for the sake of expansion is a sign of weakness case in point when the ACC expanded with Pitt and Syracuse with fear of SEC going to 16. You only have to look at the current TV contact to prove my point.

Money is power and right now the ACC is slipping far behind the other four power conferences.

I always LOL when you ACC guys are always on the Big 12 thread and never on the ACC thread promoting the ACC

I smell fear!

You don't need to be a fan of another conference to call BS on the B12. The stink of their rumor-milling hits you on either coast.

It isn't to say the ACC is "fine." But they have inventory. With the exception of Notre Dame and Penn State, they now have the best part of college football in 90's and early 00's in the North Atlantic region. Maybe those Pitt-BC games won't win monster numbers, but it will dilute anything the Big XII thinks it can do around these parts.

I'll buy the B12 hype the moment they can secure a program from a Top 4 conference.

...And, got to look at the basics: if the Big 12 was in a position of power, wouldn't all this 2-4 ACC school to the Big 12 talk have happened then? When adding 4 schools would have meant 12 total schools. Instead, they had to goto the Big East with TCU and WVU...two schools the ACC had no interest in.

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

Absolutely. It's the most obvious factoid that drives my cynicism and skepticism on the Big XII-defection rumors. One day, Pitt was high on the list of B12 expansion candidates, now they are the ACC's biggest mistake?

Neinas was quoted recently about something I think exposes how little things have changed:



Loosely translated: us vs. them. OU vs. UT vs. the rest. Someone is saying one thing while another is saying (and doing) something else. Nothing has changed. Nothing.

I am not partial to any of the formal BCS leagues with the possible exception of the Pac 12, that is why my post can be objective on issues that have been facing the Big East and now many of those same issues impact the ACC.

I do not have vested interest one way or the other on how BCS conferences decide to align in the future.

You can choose to bury your head or try to understand how and why money is driving college sports including alignment decisions.

If you do not understand business you can’t understand how money or revenue is the measurement of any business success. College football and sports are big business. Money is power.

Just because Florida State and Clemson do not have an invitation does not mean either school has turned one down. It may be hard for some of you to understand, the Big 12 does not really need either school with new projected contacts. This would have been an entirely different situation last year if Florida State were in consideration for the offer that TCU and especially WVU received for the required number of 10 schools. There was a real need for the Big 12 to expand last year and 20 million dollar estimate per school per year was a very good one.

Articles like the one attached are must reads for anyone assuming the ACC is on the same playing field as the Big Ten, SEC, Pac 12 and the Big 12.
http://www.bringonthecats.com/2012/5/28 ... ing-post-1

And before anyone dismisses the fact the Big 12 may not be interested in expanding many believe otherwise including the USA today.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/ ... 55249830/1

While the Big 12 may not have to consider expansion, it does not mean they will not and the ACC is out of hot water.

What has been accomplished, if you call it accomplishment, is that FSU's frustration became public, and they let a threat, whether deliberate or not, become public. Then there was some retracting and damage control efforts while still having their discontent and ambitions/expectations hang out there. What it did expose, was some of the ACC's dirty laundry.

For a conference (B12) that just went through a major jolt, but has rebonded well in the PR/financial prospects dimension, and is still assessing its expansion future internally; to assume they will extract 2 to 4 members from a traditionally stable BCS level conference (ACC) to the far east that has only lost one member in near 60 years, would be a feat that exceeds the ramifications of most any prior conference realignment/expansion matter anywhere.

That said, the ACC better not fumble after hearing a wake-up call. They do need to address where their leadership is taking them, diversify internal power pockets, examine the effectiveness of their divisions, cut the holier than thou attitude, and come up with their own better bowl deals to maintain a decent seat at the table.

Back before they added WVU and TCU, they were unstable, now they have 13 years of GoR and $20MM figure, that would be more, w/ FSU and Clemson. ACC now knows they'll get $17MM. None of that was known when B12 had to add TCU/WVU.

I don't know what will happen, but it's a lot more complicated than you guys that say ACC is a lock to keep them.

_________________

WRANGLERS 153-55-1 CVFL CHAMPS '04 '05 '09 '12

NFL CHAMPS '29 '30 '31 '36 '39 '44 '61 '62 '65 '66 '67 '96 '10

BW/WAC/MWC CHAMPS '77 '82 '85 '88 '89 '91 '92 '93 '99 '12
['08 NCAA BASEBALL CHAMPS]