The 14 team super conference idea probably got started from the SEC original idea of adding TX and TAM (or maybe TTU instead of TAM?). When the TX legislature killed that idea the SEC went with AR and SC. Some people probably never gave up on the TX angle. IMHO the SEC will NOT expand unless: 1. The NCAA makes them. (You would see a law suit if the NCAA tried.) or 2. They can get a major market that will increase the money per school. TX and TAM or TX and TTU could do that. I cannot think of any other schools that would.

Can you imagine what the college FB landscape would be like if the SEC had gotten TX and TAM instead of AR and SC? Would the BIG 8 have expanded? If so; with whom? Interesting.

FBfan
P.S. If a school did drop out of the SEC, IMHO the line would be long to get in.

Other than Notre Dame, there's only one team that makes sense for the Big Ten - and it's not the usual suspects of Mizzou and Pitt. Syracuse is the only one that would add the complete package of competitiveness on the field and market value off the field. My complete thoughts are here:

http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2006/03/05/big-ten-from-eleven-to-twelve

This one is really possible. The NCAA actually enforces the 15K attendance rule. This would destroy (or send to 1AA) the SBC, gut if not outright destroy the WAC, and probably gut the MAC. C-USA would probably lose a member or two. I would see the remnants of the SBC joining the MAC, but I am not sure what would happen to the surviving WAC schools.

Thoughts?

FBfan

Call me crazy, but I see Conference USA taking WKU in the near future. I heard some Topper fans talk about this before, but I dismissed it as "wishful thinking." However, I'm beginning to think that this isn't the far-fetched idea I thought it was in the past. If WKU can upgrade and expand its stadium, it could wind up in C-USA, possibly replacing East Carolina, which really sticks out like a sore thumb in C-USA anyway. WKU would actually geographically unite all the teams in C-USA again, and would help travel for all the East Division teams, including Marshall. If Louisiana Tech gets in Conference USA, I am fairly certain that they would be in the West Division. Who they would replace is beyond me.

There were also 'rumors' publised in a newspaper that if the ACC did not take VT that the SEC was 'considering' VT and WVu for 14 members. I am not sure how true they were but it the article was from August, 1999. Again, I don't know whether the money would be there for this but VT and WVu are SEC like schools. It would give the SEC inroads into the ferile recruiting areas of NC, VA, and DC. It would also make another ACC area an SEC/ACC split area just like Florida, Georgia, SC. The ACC would only have 'NC' and 'parts of NE' to call their own.




Yeah.. there are many different scenerios that you could come up with if certain expansions or scenerios did or didn't happen.

1) PSU to BE and BE becomes all sports
2) FSU to SEC when SEC considered expansion in 1990
3) Colorado and Texas to Pac10
4) Texas and PSU to Big10
5) Texas and TA&M to SEC
6) Miami and FSU to ACC
7) WAC-16 stays together
8) ND joins Big10 with PSU
9) SU instead of VT to ACC in 2003

I am sure others can think of more........

Further thoughts on the 15K attendance rule.

Wbyeagers thoughts on the "What would happen if...lost 14 members" thread seems to be accurate. However, there is room for dreamers to come up with new ideas.

The most logical way to enforce the attendance rule, IMHO, would be to have a three year rolling average. This way a school could have a bad year with worrying about it. Unfortunately, a really bad year could kill a program.

I cannot think of any reason why Vandy would leave the SEC, unless they dropped FB and most of their non-revenue sports. Can anyone think of a logical reason for the BCS cellar dwellers to leave their conferences, or for the BB schools like Duke and UKy to pull out and form a BB oriented all sports conference? I cannot see a NCAA rule that would rotate teams into and out of conferences being passed.

FBfan

I am going to try to answer my own question.

For there to be a major shake up in D-1A, conditions need to change. I have already mentioned the possibility of a court case. The other would be a rule change in the NCAA that went further than anyone thought about. For example: What would happen is the plan to do away with the differences between D-1A and D-1AA was, ever so slightly, mishandled? My scenario follows.

The NCAA votes to do away with the distinction between D-1A and D-1AA. To keep a real difference, the NCAA votes that schools must offer 1 scholarship for womens sports for each FB and/or BB scholarship. Also, the AD cannot run a deficit for more that 2 consecutive years. Conferences would set rules on minimum and maximum FB scholarships.

This would sound like keeping everything as is, but might tempt some current 1A schools to decrease the number of FB scholarships in order to cut cost. BB heavy schools might want to lower the minimum number of scholarships to 60... or less. Some current D1A conferences would start to look like they were 1AA, and some schools might change conferences to save money.

This scenario would also likely have payout changes from the BCS, and the playoff rules for the current 1AA schools could have an interesting effect.

FBfan