CFN 2014 Scenario

by **Stallion** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 1:12 pm

this is the type of scenario where I doubt we'd be BCS but it could be somewhat beneficial to SMU. I could see something like this happening if Texas goes independent but the Big East seems untenable as projected. I kind of think Air Force and Colrado St end up together be it MWC or new Big 12 in this scenario. Heck TCU might want this Big 12 rather than that weakened Big East. Wouldn't the ACC go bigger than 12 and just put Big East out of business by adding West Virginia and I don't know Pitt. In fact wouldn't West Virgina go to ACC before ECU?

http://cfn.scout.com/2/1095334.html

by **goldenstang** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 1:26 pm

I was just about to post this. This would be a step up for us but not a huge one. I could see that Big 12 getting the BCS bid until the BCS deal is redone and then not again after.

by **Stallion** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 1:29 pm

Wait they have Pitt in two conferences-not likely. The Big East would probably expire and TCU heads back to Texas

by **RGV Pony** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 1:30 pm

Stallion wrote:Wait they have Pitt in two conferences-not likely. The Big East would probably expire and TCU heads back to Texas

Memphis would go in one of those Pitt slots

by **Water Pony** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 1:55 pm

I believe Big Ten will move again, taking Missouri, before SEC does. The bigger question is whether college BCS FB goes to Super Conferences of 16? I don't think the PAC 12 is highly motivated to expand, especially since UT and their TLN is a non-starter. So, perhaps we will still have 5 or 6 larger conferences vs. the original 4 that was assumed. So PAC12 could stay at 12 while Big Ten and SEC going to 14 or 16. That leaves the ACC, Big XII and Big East with their own decisions, raid either other and/or pick off the a few CUSA and MWC schools.

Possible BCS numbers: 4X12 plus 2x16 = 80 BCS schools and 4 independents: ND, BYU, Army and Navy (84). If UT goes independent, then fewer BCS conferences and schools.

PAC12 = 12
SEC = 16
Big Ten = 16
BigXII = 12
Big East = 12
ACC = 12

by **Charleston Pony** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 2:55 pm

I agree the Big 10 might react to the SEC's move to 14 by adding two, and Missou is a natural. I would guess Pitt or Syracuse on the other side for Big 10 expansion, but would not rule out West Virginia.

West Virginia, Pitt and Syracuse would be backfill candidates for ACC if Va Tech goes SEC. South Florida might be logical replacement for FSU if the leave. If ACC also goes to 14, they might just look to a USF/UCF combo to keep Florida markets, although they will become secondary to SEC

If all the BCS conferences grow, can the Big XII hold together as a 9 member group???

by **Water Pony** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 3:04 pm

If 14 becomes a magic and maximum number of schools suggested by MrSEC site, the math may look different and help Big XII survive only the loss of A&M and MO to SEC and Big 10 specifically, plus one extra in each conference.

Six BCS conference will choice 12 or 14 members (SEC and Big 10 may be the only ones at 14). Then the number of BCS schools could range from 80 to 88, including ND, BYU, Army and Navy. The higher the number the better our odds to join BCS, i.e. Big XII.

by **Charleston Pony** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 3:07 pm

I like the idea of 14 member conferences but at what point do the Big 10 and Big XII get renamed?

by **Water Pony** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 3:17 pm

Big10 is already at 12 (so going to 14 still won't change the brand). As for Big XII, perhaps they can return to 12? 12 or 14 are the two membership level options, if we are to avoid the 16 team super conferences and the likelihood of fewer BCS conferences.

by **SMU 86** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 3:36 pm

Chip Brown says that Big 12 may not be interested in UH.

http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1251362

by **Water Pony** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 3:44 pm

SMU 86 wrote:Chip Brown says that Big 12 may not be interested in UH.

http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1251362

The major point of the article is Missouri denying discussions with SEC. Watch the Big 10 move on Missouri and FSU jumping to the SEC.

If Big XII needs to replace A&M and MO, do you add only one school or pick up 2,3 or 4, assuming UT stays?

by **NickSMU17** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 3:46 pm

Pretty sure big ten has no interest in muzzu

I was told muzzy has been extremely aggressive in looking for a conf since they found out big 10 didn't want the last year.

by **Water Pony** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 3:51 pm

That was true last year, when they added traditional power, Nebraska instead, which was a brillant move. This year, the Big10 would be more motivated to keep SEC out of St. Louis and Kansas City and remain after the SEC, a power conference.

by **PonyKai** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 4:44 pm

SMU 86 wrote:Chip Brown says that Big 12 may not be interested in UH.

http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1251362

I still feel like the less we hear about SMU, the better. I know that runs completely counter to common sense...and maybe I'm losing my grip on reality, but that's how I feel. If something were afoot, I just feel like we serfs in cyber land wouldn't be on top of the (potential) move (if any).

Didn't we allegedly turn down an MWC invite, or allegedly inform them we weren't interested in jumping prior to any formal invitation? If true, there was no ink, no press, no rumor mongering websites, save our little home here, but it happened. That of course is if it actually happened.

by **Eddie P** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 5:32 pm

STL,

The relevant question is whether any decent conference sees value in adding SMU. if you can take a hard, honest look at the answer to that question, it will answer your susequent question on what SMU is doing in this latest round.

I also liked your post earlier this week regarding how decisions are made at a university. Simpliatically, you arent terribly far off. unilateral power to make decision doesnt exist at SMU. Always amused to see people think that is the case when they blame Turner/Copeland/Orsini etc etc.