Taking inspiration from FiniteMan's proposal in the state of Texas thread, I'll give my best shot to do a realignment in the best interest of the northern states (despite the fact that status quo might be in our best interest):

Let's start with a major conference that has northern and southern states and a conference that has been proposed before to be split: the Big XII.

The Big XII North division breaks off to form its own conference, call it the Big North Conference. They look east and add 4 from the Big Ten:

Big North Conference:
Colorado
Illinois
Iowa
Iowa State
Kansas
Kansas State
Minnesota
Missouri
Nebraska
Wisconsin

All 10 top-125 academic schools according to US News and World Report. Why would Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota leave the Big Ten for a conference with smaller markets? These four schools could potentially dominate the Big North, instead of staying in the shadows of Michigan and Ohio State in the Big Ten (despite the fact that Illinois went to the Rose Bowl this year). TV markets are one thing, but competing in big games gives direct exposure to the university.

The Big Ten gets to expand to the east, and forms a top academic conference in the major eastern markets, and a mix of public and private.

Big Ten West:
Northwestern
Notre Dame
Purdue
Indiana
Michigan
Michigan State

Big Ten East:
Ohio State
Pittsburgh
Penn State
Syracuse
Rutgers
Boston College

Despite having 12 members they keep the name Big Ten for historical reasons (and to annoy everyone who says they can't count).

RAMIFICATIONS:
The Big 12 South needs to replenish their ranks. Not enough schools to form FiniteMan's Top 10 conference, so the 6 schools of the former Big 12 adds four mountain schools and becomes the Central Conference.

Central Conference:
Baylor
BYU
Colorado State
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
Texas A&M
Texas Tech
Utah

The ACC needs a replacement for BC, so they tap South Florida and realign their own divisions.

ACC North:
Maryland
Virginia
Virginia Tech
North Carolina
North Carolina State
Duke

ACC South:
Wake Forest
Georgia Tech
Clemson
Florida State
Miami
South Florida

The Big East regroups with second and third-tier schools:

Big East:
Buffalo
Cincinnati
Connecticut
Louisville
Marshall
Memphis
Miami (Ohio)
Ohio
Temple
West Virginia

The SEC and Pac-10 stand pat with their current membership. The western schools all realign again under the WAC umbrella

WAC West:
Hawaii
Fresno State
San Jose State
San Diego State
UNLV
Nevada

WAC East:
Idaho
Boise State
Air Force
Wyoming
Utah State
New Mexico State

The current C-USA West breaks off to form the new Southwest Conference and adds TCU, North Texas, LA Tech, and three FCS callups:

Southwest West:
UTEP
UT-San Antonio
Texas State
TCU
SMU
North Texas

Southwest East:
Tulsa
Tulane
La Tech
Lamar
Houston
Rice

The MAC adds one to replace the departing four and gets rid of divisions:

Akron
Ball State
Bowling Green
Toledo
Kent State
Northern Illinois
Central Michigan
Eastern Michigan
Western Michigan
Western Kentucky

And everyone else joins the C-USA:

C-USA West:
Arkansas State
UAB
UL-Lafayette
UL-Monroe
South Alabama
Southern Miss

C-USA East:
Central Florida
East Carolina
Florida Atlantic
Florida International
Middle Tennessee
Troy

SUMMARY:
ACC: 12
Big East: 10
Big North: 10
Big Ten: 12
Central: 10
C-USA: 12
Independent: 2
MAC: 10
PAC-10: 10
SEC: 12
Southwest: 12
WAC: 12

Total: 124

*Lamar, Texas State and UT-San Antonio promoted from FCS (this is supposed to be in the best interest of the northern states but somehow ends up promoting three Texas schools!)

Not bad....
I think Houston and TCU would be a better fit in the Central instead of BYU and Utah.

Greatness! This was a terrific read! As you stated in your opening paragraph the status quo probably is in the nothern schools best interest in terms of conference leadership, but not money.




The only scenario that would have the Colorado and Missou going with the Northern schools would be if they can draw enough markets from incoming schools to offset the huge loss of Texas and academically giving them a similar esteem bump. Your scenario really doesn't fail either criteria too badly.

Academically and financially, I can't see anyone leaving the big 10 though. Athletically and in terms of conference control though, I am sure a small part of the movers and shakers at the B10 schools you mentioned have considered it. Moves are not always deeply thought out and well considered. Sometimes the people at the top are influenced by emotion and make the wrong call. Sometimes the fringe thinkers run the school.

I still can't see it happening, but as scenarios go it isn't a bad one if we are talking in very vague terms of a Big XII North breakaway. This would have to be spurred by anger at the Big 10. Perhaps the commisioner overstepping again? Perhaps Ohio St., Michigan, and Penn St. exerting what might be seen as unfair influence on the financial dispersments or doing something the other schools find harshly objectionable?

For this scenario to work, there has to be a spur for the Big 10 4 to break away from much more financially lucrative Big 10 and that currently doesn't seem to exist --- as far as I can see.




I think this is not likely. ND rejects the Big 10 as is, they won't want in after the Big 10 takes a PR hit of that magnitude. Additionally, I think the Pac 10 would encourage them to go 10 again. In this scenario, (granting total loyalty in the ranks of your Big North ---that Missou would not immediately bolt for the Big 10), I would think:

Big Ten:
Northwestern
Purdue
Indiana
Michigan
Michigan State
Ohio State
Pittsburgh
Penn State
Syracuse
Rutgers

That makes the Big 10 footprint every important school (athletically AND Academically important) from NY to Chicago.




Honestly, I don't know what UT would do if a conference bolted on THEM. It would generate a ton of anger and I think you would see a VERY HOT UT & A&M come out of it. How would that effect the outcome?

The assumption is with the Big XII South still intact, Baylor and Tech would probably still have enough legislative clout to hold that together as the basis of a conference. In that scenario, Arkansas gets more money from the SEC and the conference is an academically lesser conference, so they won't bolt. Stuck with Baylor, the conference would be open to privates. I think Baylor would champion TCU to give the privates more legislative clout in Texas, but UT would successfully block that. Utah and BYU would be likely adds. CSU would be added to bridge them and because they offer the Denver Market. UT would want to punish Colorado and would probably insist on it. I think UT would block any new poor academic or athletic Texas school though. I don't see any way the conference isn't called the SWC at that point. 9 Teams would be ideal for scheduling.

SWC:
BYU
Utah
Colorado State
Baylor
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
Texas A&M
Texas Tech

That is assuming UT and A&M alums are not pissed though. I think they would be totally pissed. They were not that mad at the end of the SWC. This would be the second time that (In their opinion) crap schools and small privates killed their desires to be in a top tier conference. That could give rise to an over the top money grab.

I could see UT approaching A&M and OU about raiding the SEC. They could make a compelling arguement that lesser schools have hurt them and could use that to escape tech and OSU. If they cut a deal with Baylor to bring them along, bailing on Tech and the Big XII south would sail through the state legislature. If nothing else, Baylor has proven they are the BC of the south. They will cut a deal at a moment's notice.

UT, OU, Baylor, and A&M is a salty block. They could walk into the SEC and say, "break away from the Missisippi schools and you get the Texas and Oklahoma Markets". It would also make a ton of financial sense to grab Virginia and VT for all of the Virginia markets and DC.

Southern Conference
UT
OU
A&M
Baylor
Arkansas
LSU
Vandy
Kentucky

Tenn
Auburn
Alabama
Georgia
Florida
South Carolina
Virginia
Virginia Tech





If virginia and VT were raided and the Big East elite were gone, I could see the ACC seriously considering dropping BC for a more regionally sensible 9 team conference or replacing them with WV, but ultimately deciding build on the staus quo and to go for growth adding WV, UCONN, USF, and UCF.

ACC
North
WV
UCONN
Maryland
North Carolina
Duke
Wake Forest
North Carolina State

South
BC
Georgia Tech
Clemson
Florida State
Miami
UCF
USF




I think the Big East basketball teams would pull the plug on the big east football conference. I don't think they would want to maintain voting balance with a bunch of strangers. Louisville would want put together a new Eastern Conference that would be based on media markets, louisville friendliness, and mature athletic programs, not academics, but would be up against the 6/5 rule. I think this would drive a split of CUSA, with USF gone, the west would break away, effectivley taking the automatic bid. IMO Memphis and UAB would go with them. Louisville would have to raid the MAC or Sunbelt for the remaining conference members or coax App State or UMass up.

Eastern
Cincinnati
Louisville
Temple (FB only)
Marshall
East Carolina
Southern Miss
Troy
FIU
App State




If BYU, Utah, and CSU were raided, it seems very reasonable.




If the Texas schools went west, who knows if CUSA changes much besides ECU moving on and someone replacing them.

If they go east, The MWC exists. I think CUSA West would breakaway and would become the SWC.

SWC classic:
UTEP
TCU
SMU
Houston
Rice
Texas Tech

Southwest new:
Tulsa
OSU
Tulane
North Texas
Memphis
UAB


I think in this scenario, the MAC would continue relatively unmolested and the Sunbelt would continue to gently coax members up from FCS, like UTSA and Texas State.




Well, what's good for Texas...lol!

Seriously though, UTSA moving up is good for Texas. Texas State moving up is not good or bad, but could go either way. Sam Houston argueably might have legit FBS aspirations, but Lamar has no place in FBS. I recognize they drew 25K back in the day when they played at the top level, but they are a small public with no media market. It will be hell for them to ever get above sunbelt level and they may have problems getting into the sunbelt at all. They SHOULD be playing FCS though. They need to push FCS like they would push FBS and really sell it to the locals. Play a national schedule in FCS. Build a 30K stadium. Play App State OOC. Play Delaware. Play Montana. Play Northern Iowa. Play UMASS. Play NDSU. (Well financially you couldn't do them all, but try to get 2 big names FCS each year.)Play some low level local sunbelt schools.

I think your geography is a little rusty. A half a million people call SETX home, I wouldn't call that a small market. Plus there is 5 million people 45 minute drive to the west. Many of Lamar students call Houston home. Football is sacred in SETX. Many are still angry at the idiots at Lamar who dropped the football and is dying to have it back. SELA started its FCS football program 3 years ago with $5 million. Lamar football funds has surpassed $30 million and still counting. Billy Tubbs has something big cooking.

The state of Louisiana has about 4.5 million people. Louisiana has 2 FBS schools, 1 Private FBS schools and 4 FCS schools. Houston and the Beaumont area combine for 6 million people. Yet 1 FBS, 1 private FBS, 1 FCS... Lamar will fill that void.

I get the feeling I may have upset you as a Lamar fan. I meant no disrespect to Lamar. I do hope they play football because I think the university needs football to maintain enrollment, but I am not sold on their FBS potential.

There is not much of a void in Houston. Houston is a seperate DMA with 2.050 TV households. Houston has an NFL team which soaks up the general public's football entertainment revenue. This is why Houston and Rice's attendance has been in the toilet for the last 30-40 years. Houston has FBS UH & Rice, and FCS Sam Houston State. It is also not far from UT or A&M and provides them and Baylor a number of their better players. The other players go all over the country.

Lamar is in the Beaumont DMA which only has 162,000 TV households. It is very debateable whether they would be considered TV "relevant" in the Houston DMA. If they would be, they, as a small public with a small and not especially wealthy alumni base, MIGHT be interesting to the sunbelt. If TV execs don't think they could pull healthy numbers in Houston, the Sunbelt would probably not be interested. On the potitive side they are probably outside of the Texan's NFL killzone and are in a football enthusatic area, so they might have pretty reasonable attendance for a small school. But what would they draw? 12K? 17K? 20K? 25?

I feel for the fans at Lamar, but the whole situation regarding the momentum to move up to FBS is frankly a little disturbing to watch. What happens if Lamar jumps to FBS and the Sunbelt declines to admit them? Will they be able to draw schools to their stadium for the 6 home games each year? What will attendance be like? Past attendance is not a gurantee of future attendance. Most of the fans who amounted to Lamar's 25K attnedance years have probably died, lost interest in going to football games, have adopted other teams, or have moved away. What if they jump to FBS and it is a financial disater? The school might fire Tubbs and pull the plug of football again, or drop to FCS. How will the fanbase feel if the school was FBS and drops to FCS? I have to think there would be a good amount of protest/non-attendance. I worry that a jump to FBS by a school that perhaps is not a good candiate at that level might lead to no football at all.

I like Billy Tubbs and I hope that he is right to steer the university to take this course of action. It hits me like a "gut feel" by him and a bit off despiration by the university. Following instinct over conventional wisdom worked for Troy, who went to FBS after the independent report they put together told them not to jump to FBS, but I really wonder how things would go for Lamar.

The safe move is to present the fans and the university with a 10 year plan. Build a 30K stadium. Play FCS for 10 years. If the community fills say 22K or more seats for the next 10 years the unversity will jump to FBS. That way if it doesn't work, the school will be a cash cow FCS school, using the gate to build great facilities. If it does work, the University would be primed to move up and would be one of the top candidates in FCS in the interim.

You feel for Lamar, you worried for Lamar, you like Billy Tubbs, you hope he steer them right, what if this happens, what if that happens, oh my. You're the one sounding like someone worried. It was reported that Billy Tubbs said I-A, not me, and the Sunbelt was not the conference he mentioned. I believe Billy's words over yours everytime, unless you know more than Billy Tuibbs. And for your information, I know you were phishing, I went to school on the West coast.

One question, using your logic.


How did Monroe get in the Sunbelt?

Louisiana has 5 FBS schools by my counting:

LSU (SEC)
LaTech (WAC)
Tulane (C-USA)
ULaLa (Lafayette) (Sunbelt)
ULa Monroe (Sunbelt)

U of New Orleans is in the SunBelt, but has no football program.

How did Monroe get into the Sunbelt ? You have to go back to 2003 / 2004 or so...
The ACC raided the BE, the BE raided C-USA, C-USA raided the MAC & WAC, the WAC raided the western SunBelt schools (except for Denver).

The SunBelt wanted to get back to 8 football members and 12 members (not including Denver, who is projected to eventually leave). Monroe had a foot in the door. They were members of the Southland (FCS, I-AA back then), however they played FBS (I-A back then) football in the Sun-Belt. The SunBelt had the right to boot Monroe, since they were only an associate member. They offered membership to La Tech. La Tech felt that staying in the WAC left them better positioned to move toward their preferred destination (C-USA), even though geographically LaTech is really isolated in the WAC. So LaTech said no to the SunBelt.
So the SunBelt then offered full membership to Monroe, and they accepted, and moved their remaining sports from the Southland into the Sunbelt.

The reason my only call-ups in this scenario were Texas St, UTSA, and Lamar was that they seem to be the only schools with solid rumors that they actually were moving up. These schools were of minimal importance to the rest of the scenario (no offense to them). I have no personal interest in Lamar. In another thread it says there will be a student vote at Lamar at the end of the month; maybe by then we will have a more concrete idea about their future plans.

Looking at the map, College Station is roughly the same distance from Houston as Beaumont. Wouldn't Texas A&M count as part of Houston's market?

You are correct about Monroe and I missed a school. My point was questioning finiteman logic in that the Sunbelt would refuse Lamar because the market was too small. The Beaumont-Port Arthur area is much bigger than the Monroe area. Lamar is a bigger school than La-Monroe. Something is wrong with finiteman logic or something is wrong with the universe.

I agree with you. UTSA has very little community support and student support for its athletics. Last night basketball Attendance: 1,087. However I think the potential is there for UTSA to be another South Florida.

Texas st, same as UTSA but with a much smaller market that prefers UT sports over Texas st. It'll be much harder for them.

Lamar is a different situation. Lamar played I-A football. However unlike Lamar's conference rivals in La-tech, UNT, and ULL, Lamar followed the Southland into I-AA. Fan support dried up and the program was dropped. I think Lamar goal is to, at the minimum, get back to where they were. You don't need $30 million to start a FCS team.

I would say yes and no. Texas A&M covers all of Texas, UH and Lamar would be more regional.

The old Southwest Conference breakup is part of collegiate sports history.

Texas, Texas A&M, and Texas Tech, are not going back to a conference arrangement involving types such as TCU, Rice, and probably Houston. They were bonded with Baylor, due to political influence, when they collectively joined members of the former Big 8.

Texas, A&M, & Tech, will insist on conference association with major flagship institutions from neighboring/regional/contiguous states and assure BCS standing. Only the Big 12 (their south division home), SEC, and potentially the PAC 10, can realistically offer such accommodation with modest membership changes, which is quite unlikely.

Any idea of a revised format of the old Southwest Conference could emerge. It's foundation exists with the current western division of C-USA. Schools such as LA Tech, N. Texas, and TCU, could figure into the mix.

I wasn't all that concerned with your origination point, I simply thought I had offended a Lamar fan, because most fans of conference realignment in general don't look at a 9K enrollment public school in a tiny market that hasn't played football for over 15 years and get excited about its FBS future. You on the other hand seem very stoked.

As far as Billy Tubbs goes, I am a fan. I simply don't see what he sees. A school that size could be deeply injured if this doesn't work out.

I think Lamar needs football to grow enrollment. They are currently on a slow bleed. I am not convinced an immediate jump to FBS is wise. I would rather see them renew their rivalries with SHSU and SFA, grow their enrollment, and in 10-20 years all three jump to the sunbelt or their own FBS conference when all 3 schools have enrollments in the 12-18K range.




Tute answered this question already. I would only add that in lower conferences the type of school you add can be controlled by how despirate your immediate situation is. Idaho (which I have great feelings of warmth towards) is a great example of this twice over. (They are a small to medium sized public, but also happen to be the state flagship with statewide support, meaning a strong arguement can be made that they are TV relevant in all of the state's markets.) The sun belt --- a southeastern conference --- needed football playing members despirately so they added Idaho, even though their TV markets would be borderline irrelevant in the SB. The WAC, stung by defections, needed football playing members to survive, so they added Idaho, even with it's stadium problem.

The school a conference admits when it is at 7 football members is entirely different for what it looks for when it has 8 or 9. When you are at 7, you are trying to retian conference viability. When you are at 8-9, you are weighing the good of expansion vs. status quo.

I happen to think there are a number of schools in the region who are actually good candidates for FBS (20K+ enrollment, good media market, limited pro competition locally) who would jump if there was a sensible, well-managed conference home awaiting them.

Very fair. Working on what universities publically are leaning towards is the best way to roll these things out. I really enjoyed your post.