Easy, FSA. A troll is someone intentionally trying to sabotage. I don't think that is the case with Peter. Peter, FSA makes some good points, but yes, you're right, it has been too harsh. The reason is two fold: there are always trolls who are trying to just ruin a good thing and we need to do what is needed to keep the forums free from them. And then there is the logic factor. We try to keep the forums realistic. It might be great for Tulane to return to the SEC...but it's not ever going to happen. So it's a point best served for the "Dream Conferences for Fun" thread. That thread exists for posts that fall outside the reality of why conferences realign. There have been many changes since even 2003. Conferences at the top seek brands to replace departing schools...which is why only hot-name TCU (also located in Dallas/Ft. Worth where so many B12 alumni live, perhaps more than any other city) as well as their on-field performance and national brand recognition: TCU, like Boise St. is a national brand (which might drop now that they aren't big fish in a small pond anymore). WVU, a national brand with northeast market penetration (I know this from all the students there from PA, NJ, NY, CT I met over the years visiting my own friends there)...a logical addition to a top conference like the Big 12.
For the Big East, they lost their 3 big fish, so for them, it was about finding solid-to-good programs like Houston, UCF and a June Jones led SMU...which also provided SOME market penetration for the new TV contract. Memphis was brought in solely for their market and basketball to replace the losses of Syracue and Pitt. Temple for a northeast football presence in Philly. SDSU as grease to get Boise St and Boise St. because along with TCU, they are the top non-BCS gets.
So when it comes to posting, it's best to remain as close to reality as possible. Qualifiers like "It would be great is the ____ conference would consider _____ instead of the same old moves of adding powerhouses like _____". Or "In the perfect world, the _______conference would consider ______, but they won't because the system doesn't work that way".
It's a big difference than passing dreams along as realities.
As for UNLV, FSA, you also need to remember that when it comes to the Big East, there is no set logic anymore. They added SDSU for football-only, despite the on-field success of the program being next to nothing. They were brought in because to get Boise St., they needed more schools in the west...and the top choices, BYU and Air Force rejected the BE for FB/all-sports options. So looking at SDSU being added, and regardless of what the UNLV president had so say what seems like years ago in the realignment world, UNLV is not a stretch by and means. Memphis was just added for football, despite the fact that they likely would have joined for basketball only. But Memphis is a bridge for the football conference to connect the two FL schools to the two TX schools. Do you really think that if the revamped BCs system is a 4 team system with conferences sharing that bid money, that UNLV would still turn down a FB only invite if there is a chance that Boise St. could slip in every few years as the #3 or #4 school if they go undefeated? Especially when UNLV can go back to the Big West and join SDSU, making the Big West a potentially better conference than the MWC for basketball? Of course not. Admins change their opinions and often, they try to build themselves up (and their programs) by rejecting things in public only because they know they won't get the opportunity. UNLV wasn't #3 on the list after BYU and Air Force. But the Big East only wanted 1 school in the region at the time...and SDSU was high on the list...despite having less football success. So the point is simple: for the Big East, the logic is so out there with what they are doing, that one can never rule out any school from a lesser conference. And since the Big East is making it's moves more about market ACCESS versus penetration, gaining access into SoCal via SDSU and Las Vegas via UNLV could be something that fits their TV negotiation model better than say, adding New Mexico, Fresno St., Nevada, etc. For the Big East, the logic is not as set as for the Power 5. I mean, remember, we're discussing UNLV vs Fresno St. for a Big EAST spot. So traditional logic is out the window with the BE.
I don't want any responses. Just thought to oneself.
FSA, cut Peter some general slack.
Peter, just remember there is some logic to how things play out, so the more you understand the TV negotiations, roles of academics, market penetration vs. just being in a market, they easier it is to follow all the conference realignment madness.
It's that simple and everyone is happy!
You're hanging on the UNLV thing. It's the part where he says he's never wrong, that made me throw sh*t back in his face. They settled for Memphis football because they have good basketball. What do you get w/ UNLV fb? Nothing. Might as well take SJSU football if you want a big market. USC is Vegas' team, if you've been there enough you know it is. You said yourself that if you took Fresno's actual market, they'd be up around the top 10, covering most of the San Joaquin Valley. AFA is still easiest most logical pick and Navy joining the West and Temple moving east seems to be a tip we are headed there. I will give you that if UNLV has a couple of SDSU type seasons before the BE invites 14, then sure if AFA says no again(I don't think they will) UNLV could be picked.
I know I'm a pain in the a$$.