Quinn -

I thought the same thing myself. CUSA could have been more pro-active and invited the BE FB teams (assuming they would bring the "AQ" along wiht them).
I think maybe Craig Thompson (on behal fof CUSA and MWC (once hey decided to merge, but before BE made their expansion official) offered this.

Evidently Marinatto must have sold the various FB schools that the Aq wsn't necessarily transferrable, and if the schools tried to transfer it from the BE to CUSA (or MWCUSA),
that would open things up to review if the "new" BCS conference was legitimate, and the various school presidents may have been afraid of how that would've turned out.

Yet now it appears that the AQ will be gone anyway, so the point is moot, yet we are left with the monstrosity that Marinatto has created.

How can the BE FB league now be "un-done" to not look like a hideous abortion ?
Split off BB schools. They can merge with Xavier/ Dayton / Butler / SLU.

Boise St./SDSU use the excuse of lost AQ to say "no thanks" and return to MWC.
Army comes aboard for FB only (to mirror Navy) - may never happen, since it seems Army is fearful of inability to compete.
This gives:
FB East = Army *, Navy", UConn, Rutgers, Temple, Cincy,
FB West = Louisville, Memphis, UCF, USF, SMU, Houston

We know that Louisville, UConn, and Rutgers could potentially depart.
For replacements, give all-sports invitations to ECU, UMass, and Marshall
(CUSA can them re-stock by raiding Sun-Belt).

Yes, a few of these teams may not be ever TV exec's dream, but it'd be stable, somewhat EASTERN, and have close to the best teams avilable
east of the Mississippi that are not within the 5 Power Confernces.

I like your CUSA plan as an option too.

BYU and L'Ville in all likely hood are going to end up in the B-12.

CUSA remains in tact and picks up Rutgers, USF, Cinn, and UConn - Good FB conference - great BB conference with the addition of UConn and Cinn joining Memphis in the league.

MWC stays in tact - Boise, SDSU, Nevada, UNLV, N Mex, Hawaii, Air Force, Col. St, Wyoming, Fresno, + 2 if they want to get to 12 and a Championship Game. Great FB and BB.

BE BB only's stay in tact with ND and drop to deserving A-10 status after having so much at stake and continuing to bungle it with round ball, think small FB, and a three headed monster agenda mentality (BB only's, FB schools, and ND). Continued Providence small time thinking / leadership has failed this conference. The conference continued to hand the Commissioners job done to Providence people instead of going out to get big time expansion and TV contract thinkers and leaders the way the other BCS Power Conferences did over the years.

Temple stays in the MAC with UMass moving up to stay at 14 for FB 12 for other sports. IF Temple and UMass would enter for all sports down the road they would help to strengthen this conference over all for BB and east coast exposure for TV contracts.

Navy, Army, and ND remain independent in FB with their other sports remaining in the BE and Patriot Leagues where they can remain competitive for BB and Olympic Sports.

With all of the transition the WAC is the only conference left on life support. If two FB schools are taken for the MWC, the remaining FB schools can join the Sunbelt or go independent playing Army and Navy routinely until something else shakes out in the future. The WAC if it survives with Denver and Seattle becomes a BB and Olympic Sports Conference with homes for the left out Western Independents for FB and which ever other BB / Olympic Sport schools they can land. That or go the way of the SWC in to oblivion.

_________________
SOUTH CAROLINA GAMECOCKS - SEC
RUTGERS SCARLET KNIGHTS - BIG EAST / AMERICAN ATHLETIC CONFERENCE / BIG TEN

I am in total agreement the Big 12 should jump on taking UConn and Rutgers, Louisville, and BYU to get to 14.

All four schools are probably the best options left out there not currently in one of the five power conferences. This is assuming the TV networks would like this idea as well.

With the Pac 12 and Big Ten alliance almost creating a new super conference between the two with the new scheduling alliance, the Big 12 needs to become the same super sized as the SEC and ACC and match the same number of schools.

East

WVU
Louisville
Rutgers
UConn
Iowa State
Kansas State
Kansas

West

Texas
Texas Tech
Baylor
TCU
BYU
Oklahoma State
Oklahoma

The West Division would almost always be the dominate football division with the East Division making up by playing better basketball.

Football championship game in Texas Stadium with a most likely West home type team would create a lot of buzz.

To make up for the home field advantage in football championship games for WEST Division schools and since Kansas City Missouri is really not a true Big 12 market any longer, Big 12 basketball could move east to say NYC and Brooklyn’s new basketball arena to pick up eastern exposure.

The new Big 12/14 would look pretty super to me in this format.

If I am not mistaken, the Big 12 has naming rights to the Big 14 and Big 16 names.

Hey! Stop being logical! C-USA would much rather sit back and be picked apart then have to join the MWC in some alliance that probably won't work long term. And they'll probably wait so long to do that, the Big East will take a couple more of their schools after a UL, UConn, and/or Rutgers leave and then the remainders will have to go to the Sun Belt (ok that's not happening but you see my point).

End the BCS/AQ and the BE will really have to sort out its own mess. Somebody relieve UCONN and Rutgers of the BE; and the rest of former C-USA schools, FB onlies from the MWC, FB only Navy, and Temple, can bicker with Catholic school BB onlies, and Notre Dame, and enough beyond enough; thus split-up that should have been done more than a decade ago.

When NE all-sports schools did not form a conference with Penn State many years ago, it is proven to have been a costly mistake. Poor vision and biased and late reactionary leadership has plagued this conference. Missed opportunities.

A very good point to remind folks about. Such seems to beg for an external, thorough, and well-publicized audit and have BE Presidents explain it to their constituents.

Just looking at everything, the most logical (for me) move would be the following:

UConn & Rutgers to the ACC
Louisville & Cincinnati to the Big12
Navy stays independent
USF, UCF, Memphis back to C-USA who invites La. Tech and one of UTSA, North Texas, and UT-A

Houston, SMU, Boise St, San Diego State form their own conference and try to convince BYU to join.
East: Houston, SMU, Tulsa, New Mexico, Air Force, Colorado State
West: Boise State, BYU, UNLV, Nevada, Fresno St, San Diego State

Hawaii & Wyoming to the WAC

They're adding one against each other. Not a big deal. The Pac12-Big Ten played four games against each other in both MBB and FB this past season.

_________________
1897-1898 | 1900-06 | 1926-27 | 1929-30 | 1939 | 1942

I thought in the future, every PAC school would play a B1G school. Meaning the PAC and B1G would play 9 conference games plus 1 B1G/PAC game leaving only 2 other spots for out of conference games. Will Michigan, MSU, and Purdue continue to want Notre Dame as 1 of those 2 non-conference games? Would USC and Stanford? If you played your conference schedule, then added lets say an Oregon or Ohio State to your schedule, would you also want to add Notre Dame to your schedule. I know Notre dame has been pretty mediocre later but have you noticed how much their recruiting has improved under Brian kelly?

Also consider, most big time programs want 7 home football games, if those 10 games are split home and home, you would assume the 2 other games would need to be home games to meet budget needs. Notre Dame is going to want home and home series with Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, USC and Stanford. To continue those rivalries with Notre Dame, those schools would only get 7 home game every other year.

It could be a big deal.

Like Seanbo, I thought future BIG-Pac 12 schedules would feature one game for each team against the other conference. But that won't take place fully until 2017.

The Big Ten and Pac 12 schools have always played OOC games with member schools on a very frequent basis and some of that has to do with Rose Bowl tie ins for both leagues.

The interesting thing with the new alliance is that is managed at the conference levels and not at the individual schools. It not intended to be a full blown super conference, however, it not just a group of schools agreeing to play each other either.

This will allow both leagues to expand or decrease the alliance of schedule games by having both leagues working together depending on the needs of each league anytime they choose in the future to modify this format.

If you take the recent movement of formal Big East member West Virginia to the Big 12, WVU needed to free up OOC games to allow more Big 12 conference games and needed to drop the home and home series with both Florida State and Michigan State.

Granted the Michigan State series had more time to adjust future scheduled compared with WVU dropping Florida State this year to allow a quick exodus from the Big East, the Big Ten school did not have the same issues replacing WVU with other good OOC leagues. The school simple replaced WVU home and home with Oregon as part of the Big Ten/Pac 12 alliance.

Depending on which direction the BCS takes with plus one and four possible team playoff for college football, this alliance between the Pac 12 and Big Ten will only become more stronger and beneficial to both leagues in the future.

SOS has and will continue to be a major factor in reaching the BCS championship game. I see SOS becoming more important than ever if the BCS adopts a plus one of four team playoff replacing the current 10 BCS bowl bids.

There are three most likely possible options or directions the BCS will take.

Option 1: If only four conference champions are allowed and selected for plus one, Notre Dame playing future Big Ten and Pac 12 schools will be a non issue as Notre Dame will have to join some league and will have less game to schedule as well. Regardless if its Big East, ACC, Big 12, or Big Ten, Notre Dame will be playing a most likely 8 or 9 game conference schedule and will not have room for the current 5 or 6 combination of Big Ten/Pac 12 schools each year available for its schedule.

Option 2: If the BCS somehow provides a compromise and allows one at large plus one bid and three conference champions as part of the requirement, the alliance of Pac 12 and Big Ten continues to be important to ensure both leagues have very good OOC schedules to ensure better odds of reaching one of the four spots. If Notre Dame is allowed to remain independent by keeping one of the plus one bids as at large, the Big Ten/Pac 12 alliance could be expanded to include Notre Dame since the school plays current members from both leagues on a regular basis. I see this option as very tough to get pushed through because both the Big Ten and Pac 12 do not want to see two SEC team in the four team plus one playoff each year. I agree with this issue as well. With only four projected opening there should only be one representative allowed from each major college league.

Option 3: The BCS goes away and bowls revert back to the old method of selecting teams and the polls select the champion of college football after all the bowls have completed. This option has a very good chance of becoming reality if Option 2 is not acceptable to the Pac 12 and Big Ten and Option 1 is not acceptable to a leagues such as the SEC which believes they should get multiple bids each year based on SOS.

If we revert back to option 3, the alliance is just as important as ever to ensure both Pac 12 and Big Ten schools have a very good chance of being voted number 1 by the AP polls.

What does this mean?************************************************************

Unless Notre Dame is impacted by option 1 above and decides to join the Big Ten, I do not see the Pac 12 or Big Ten expanding with more than 12 schools which is the point I was trying to make about the benefits of the alliance. The alliance takes care of the needs to expand into other markets and/or provide flexible schedules for all sports and most importantly does not require more mouths to feed in the process.

Before anyone brings up the benefits of the Big Ten network having more markets, the Big Ten would be at 16 members right now. No conference did their homework any better that the Big Ten last year. The SEC hastily jumped into 14 by having Texas A&M dropped into its lap. Time will tell if the SEC can make that much better revenue with 14 compared to what is was already making in the very strong 12 member league. If SEC is thinking SEC network benefits of having 14 schools, then maybe the conference should have consulted the Big Ten since that conference decided it was best to remain with 12 schools. In addition, Missouri was not the 12 school added to the Big Ten.

The same holds true for the ACC and do not see the ACC expanded to 15 or 16 if Notre Dame is not one of those schools and would be allowed to continue to play independent and be eligible for BCS Plus one bowls. If the ACC is only managing to get 2 million increase per school by taking on Pitt and Syracuse, what are the odds a combination of Rutgers and UConn could improve on those projections without Notre Dame in the mix.

I am just not convince the Big 12 needs or wants to go back to 12 schools. 10 schools really work best for conference schedules in both major revenue sports of basketball and football.

Most likely Rutgers, UConn, and Louisville are stuck in the reconfigured Big East for the foreseeable future and will have to hope one of those members or a new Big East member such as Boise State can elevate the league similar to how WVU and Louisville performed after the last ACC raid. This is a tall order and probably more difficult the second time around or the Big East will probably end up no better in football compared to Conf USA or MWC.

It is part of the reason the remaining Big East schools are so desperate to get out. The issue is there is just not anyplace to go other than wishful thinking scenarios.

I agree with Lash: status quo for the ACC, Big 10, Pac12 and SEC for maybe 5 years. I thought the Big 12 would be likely to go to 12 within 2 years, but there seems to be a big hangup over divisional alignment out there.

If the Big 12 accepts the latest TV contract which will put the conference at or near the Pac 12 range plus or minus a couple million dollars, the Big 12 Tier 2 rights will be signed over until 2025. Unless Notre Dame somehow takes up an interest in the Big 12, I am not sure this conference will have any reason to expand beyond 10 until the TV contract extension runs out in 2025.

I can’t see BYU and Louisville creating enough stir to generate an estimated additional 38 million each year in TV revenue which is what it would basically take to break even for each Big 12 school to vote on expansion and not lose any revenue in the process. Why expand just to break even. The contract would have to increase to 48 million each year just to allow each of the 10 schools an increase of one million dollars which is not really that much in today’s revenue streams. If you want to catch the Pac 12 which would be some benefit as well to expand then it would take 62 million to allow 2 million additional per Big 12 school.

For some reason, the ACC contact was so, it appeared to be easy to justify a new or renegotiated contract that would add 2 million per school and cover the cost of sharing with Pitt and Syracuse which by expansion allowed the ACC the ability to renegotiate the contact. This basically will put the ACC in the same neighborhood as the other power conferences.

Unless the Big East can pull off a major TV deal next summer to justify the cost, we may never see Boise State and SDSU play a game in the Big East. Without AQ benefits, money is going to be the only reason a Boise State and SDSU school will agree to join a conference that will require major cost for travel. It is one thing to make ACC or Big 12 revenue to cover travel cost for teams not in the general footprint, it is another if you are just above non BCS leagues in revenue generating ability.

The Big East has major task ahead to negotiate a TV contract that is worthy of keeping a far reaching group of football schools together that no longer have benefits of AQ to justify the cost.

It's going to be one game for the Pac-12 vs Big Ten in football (and basketball probably).

But the nine-game schedule is expected to go by the wayside. So it will be 8 Conference, 1 Alliance, 3 other non-conference. Not really anything different than what one-third of the league had done last year.

_________________
1897-1898 | 1900-06 | 1926-27 | 1929-30 | 1939 | 1942

Agree, doubt we shall see more expansion bombshells from among the SEC, ACC, P10, and BiG anytime soon. The B12 may depending on sentiment flow. While a TV contract is active, it certainly can be modified in mid-stream, particularly if both parties agree and find certain expansion mutually beneficial. WVU is already speculating that some closer rivals would be nice for the future. There are plenty of pickings available for the major conferences; the problem is very few of them have real appeal. For example, Northern Illinois looks reasonable geographically, but the B12 would see too many deficiences with this kind of choice.
The B12 had to go a long way (distance) to add a successful WVU, who had in the recent past been passed over by BiG, ACC, and SEC expansions.

Louisville and/or BYU may or may not hook-up with the B12 in the next couple of years or so. It's hard to visualize, currently, better, available, and willing choices. How the northern tier of the B12 is to develop, and whether re-newing the CCG is deemed worth it and how much money will be put on the table for it, are obviously on-going discussions for the conference.

As to the BE, and looking at their planned fb members for their future structure, I get the impression the BE is expecting to lose at least one more all-sports member for the very near future.