Ponyfans Response to Realignment

smupony94 · Post by **smupony94** » Sun Oct 23, 2011 3:52 pm

I vote for no more realignment threads.

smupony94 · Post by **smupony94** » Sun Oct 23, 2011 3:57 pm

Come on over to [deleted]

LHS81 · Post by **LHS81** » Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:10 pm

At this point, I don't care. I just want Missery to quit holding their {Gary Fatterson} in their hand and get the relocation ball rolling.

Charleston Pony · Post by **Charleston Pony** » Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:21 pm

If only West Virginia leaves, I'm all in favor of the Big East, but who replaces WV? Either ECU or Memphis for all sports or Temple for football only? Temple would leave 16 bball schools which might work out well, and western division football would include Boise, AFA, SMU, Houston, Cincy & Louisville with eastern division UConn, Rutgers, Temple, Navy, UCF & USF

Bball could play 4 member pods to build/maintain rivalries. Play everyone in the conference once and play your pod mates home/home for 18 conference games

Pods: SMU, Houston, Cincy, Louisville
Depaul, Marquette, Notre Dame, St Johns
UConn, Rutgers, Providence, Seton Hall
Nova, G'town, USF, UCF

Stallion · Post by **Stallion** » Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:21 pm

Cox as usual doesn't understand what this deal is really about. The Big East is losing whatever schools the Big 12 (or ACC) want. SMU knew that when they got the tentative invitation. There is no decision to make as shown by the fact that everyone says you go to the Big East if they lose West Virginia. Duh. The real question is whether SMU goes to the Big East if:

The Big East loses West Virginia, Louisville AND Cincy (or at least 2)
Boise says No
Air Force says No
Navy says No

These scenarios and combinations thereof are the real prospects that should even remotely concern SMU and I even believe SMU would go to the Big East even if ALL (or most) those things happened.

Charleston Pony · Post by **Charleston Pony** » Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:33 pm

Stallion wrote:Cox as usual doesn't understand what this deal is really about. The Big East is losing whatever schools the Big 12 wants. SMU knew that when they got the tentative invitation. There is no decision to make as shown by the fact that everyone says you go to the Big East if they lose West Virginia. Duh. The real question is whether SMU goes to the Big East if:

The Big East loses West Virginia, Louisville AND Cincy (or at least 2)
Boise says No
Air Force says No
Navy says No

These scenarios and combinations thereof are the real prospects that should even remotely concern SMU and I even believe SMU would go to the Big East even if ALL those things happened.

If all those things happen, SMU & Houston have to decide between the MWC (which might gain BCS status with Boise) or a reconstituted Big east that probably would not qualify and would likely include:

UConn, Rutgers, USF, UCF, ECU, Memphis, SMU, Houston

This would make 8 football and 16 bball schools and Big east bball schools would not be happy.

I think if West Virginia, Louisville and Cincy are all poached, that hybrid league of Big East, CUSA and MWC lobbying for AQ status might become viable. We could even see a reborn SWC if it comes down to 3-4 regional groups with a "play-in" for an AQ bid. Can you imagine four 9 member regional conferences with 2 game play-in?

03Mustang · Post by **03Mustang** » Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:39 pm

Stallion wrote:Cox as usual doesn't understand what this deal is really about. The Big East is losing whatever schools the Big 12 (or ACC) want. SMU knew that when they got the tentative invitation. There is no decision to make as shown by the fact that everyone says you go to the Big East if they lose West Virginia. Duh. The real question is whether SMU goes to the Big East if:

The Big East loses West Virginia, Louisville AND Cincy (or at least 2)
Boise says No
Air Force says No
Navy says No

These scenarios and combinations thereof are the real prospects that should even remotely concern SMU and I even believe SMU would go to the Big East even if ALL (or most) those things happened.

Good synopsis, but do you agree with that move? I think it's one that has to be made as it's pretty clear that C-USA is never going to be anything more than it is today. Do you see the AQ status going away, or do you think that stays almost no matter what (due to politics or whatever else)?

mrydel · Post by **mrydel** » Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:46 pm

Look at the TV markets in the northeast. Couple that with Dallas/Houston/Orlando and add in a military academy or two and do you really believe there will not be a way found to keep a BE conference in the BCS. You do not need to follow the money, just get to where the money is.

smupony94 · Post by **smupony94** » Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:48 pm

I agree with Mrydel

Charleston Pony · Post by **Charleston Pony** » Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:53 pm

I'm sure West Virginia would rather stay in the Big east, but they also don't want to give up that AQ status and the money that comes with it. I' would guess their 1st and 2nd choices would be SEC or ACC as those conferences look solid

mrydel · Post by **mrydel** » Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:56 pm

So you really believe the BCS powers will blow off the New York, Philly, et al TV markets? They will change the rules anyway they need to.

Charleston Pony · Post by **Charleston Pony** » Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:59 pm

mrydel wrote:So you really believe the BCS powers will blow off the New York, Philly, et al TV markets? They will change the rules anyway they need to.

I hope you are right but I think the northeast is more into NFL and college hoops than football. UConn, BC, Syracuse, Rutgers, etc...are not "all that" in football.

Charleston Pony · Post by **Charleston Pony** » Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:03 pm

collectively the Big East has has enough pull to get in under the original rules...but the BE needs WV and Cincy (who both had BCS games and top 15 finishes) to maintain that status without Boise. They were obviously concerned enough to invite TCU...that's how all of this started.

mrydel · Post by **mrydel** » Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:10 pm

I am just saying that rules can be changed. They have already changed them once on number of conference members.

GiddyUp · Post by **GiddyUp** » Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:25 pm

Not going to worry about at all until it happens