Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

A very interesting article regarding the SEC and expansion...

http://blog.al.com/kevin-scarbinsky/201 ... g_ten.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is all based on if the Big 10 expands as well. I knew there were talks about conference expansion/realignment but I wasn't sure how realistic it really was but supposedly, it's only gotten louder.

It also sounds like the Big 12 and Big East are the two conferences that need to worry the most. Any thoughts?

Can the SEC really get any bigger?

I don't like the 16 team conferences - too damn big.

I agree that 16-team conferences are too big. There is already a 16-team conference and thats the Big East in Basketball and people already think thats too many teams. I can see the Big 10 maybe expanding to 12, maybe 14 to make it even and divide into two divisions of 7 teams but 16? A 16-team football conference?!

futureodualum11 wrote:I agree that 16-team conferences are too big. There is already a 16-team conference and thats the Big East in Basketball and people already think thats too many teams. I can see the Big 10 maybe expanding to 12, maybe 14 to make it even and divide into two divisions of 7 teams but 16? A 16-team football conference?!

With a 16 team football conference, assuming you still only played 8 conference games, you'd play 8 of the other 15 teams - how is that a conference?

exactly, thats what I thought as well. You can look at the SEC who already does this...they play 5 division opponents then 1-2 other opponents from the other division but like you said if conferences expand to 16 that means they don't play 7 other teams within their own conference.

dbackjon wrote:

futureodualum11 wrote:I agree that 16-team conferences are too big. There is already a 16-team conference and thats the Big East in Basketball and people already think thats too many teams. I can see the Big 10 maybe expanding to 12, maybe 14 to make it even and divide into two divisions of 7 teams but 16? A 16-team football conference?!

With a 16 team football conference, assuming you still only played 8 conference games, you'd play 8 of the other 15 teams - how is that a conference?

That's actually the point. It becomes 2 "conferences" under a single umbrella. The focus becomes on the other 7 teams in an 8 team setup. And at the end of the year, you compete against the best of the other division. It's no different than say the NFL with the AFC and NFC.

I actually look at a move to 16 as a way to combat the issues that the 12 team conferences have faced where there is less emphasis on the divisional competition. The Pac-10 has a good thing at 10 teams with 9 conference football games. But once you get past 10, you lose that.

dbackjon wrote:With a 16 team football conference, assuming you still only played 8 conference games, you'd play 8 of the other 15 teams - how is that a conference?

It's not. It's a conglomerate.

89Hen wrote:

dbackjon wrote:With a 16 team football conference, assuming you still only played 8 conference games, you'd play 8 of the other 15 teams - how is that a conference?

It's not. It's a conglomerate.

Or an "Association".

AZGrizFan wrote:Or an "Association".

[youtube][/youtube]

Still amazes me that the NCAA has no control over this. The Super Conferences are getting out of control and the NCAA could tell them to cool it. If the Big 6 want to break away - since the BCS bowels are non NCAA sanctioned anyway they could threaten them with exclusion from March Madness and play a little hardball.

putter wrote:Still amazes me that the NCAA has no control over this. The Super Conferences are getting out of control and the NCAA could tell them to cool it. If the Big 6 want to break away - since the BCS bowels are non NCAA sanctioned anyway they could threaten them with exclusion from March Madness and play a little hardball.

Well, since the BCS schools represent some 60 schools they are a pretty big voting bloc. In addition, they probably bring in 90% of the money that the NCAA gets, so they are a very influential voting bloc. The NCAA is at the mercy of the schools that make up the NCAA, so it's not like it's an independent entity.

And the NCAA would be committing suicide by trying to exclude the BCS schools from March Madness - there wouldn't be a March Madness without them. Sure, the underdogs and the little schools create a lot of interest and excitement, but viewership would nosedive without the big name schools being in there, and without viewership, there is no money and March Madness would fade away.

The BCS conferences hold way too much sway - the NCAA needs them more than they need the NCAA.

putter wrote:Still amazes me that the NCAA has no control over this. The Super Conferences are getting out of control and the NCAA could tell them to cool it. If the Big 6 want to break away - since the BCS bowels are non NCAA sanctioned anyway they could threaten them with exclusion from March Madness and play a little hardball.

Riddle me this...Why do these conferences NEED the NCAA???

FBS football does not play for an NCAA-sanctioned championship...if they get large enough, why not just walk away from the NCAA, at least in football...

I'm not in favor of that...but I could see it happening...

Col Hogan wrote:

putter wrote:Still amazes me that the NCAA has no control over this. The Super Conferences are getting out of control and the NCAA could tell them to cool it. If the Big 6 want to break away - since the BCS bowels are non NCAA sanctioned anyway they could threaten them with exclusion from March Madness and play a little hardball.

Riddle me this...Why do these conferences NEED the NCAA???

FBS football does not play for an NCAA-sanctioned championship...if they get large enough, why not just walk away from the NCAA, at least in football...

I'm not in favor of that...but I could see it happening...

I doubt university presidents would allow this to happen - never get Big 10 and Pac 10 to go along with it.

dbackjon wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:
Riddle me this...Why do these conferences NEED the NCAA???

FBS football does not play for an NCAA-sanctioned championship...if they get large enough, why not just walk away from the NCAA, at least in football...

I'm not in favor of that...but I could see it happening...

I doubt university presidents would allow this to happen - never get Big 10 and Pac 10 to go along with it.

They would if they were forced to (i.e. the NCAA tried to step in and stop the Big 10 from expanding for instance). The presidents in the Big 10 could still cling to academic principles in a non-NCAA setting if they really had to.

Of course, the big loser in the NCAA trying to dictate to the BCS conferences what they can and cannot do would be the NCAA and all the non-BCS conferences, so that's why the NCAA isn't going to make a peep about any of this.

dbackjon wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:
Riddle me this...Why do these conferences NEED the NCAA???

FBS football does not play for an NCAA-sanctioned championship...if they get large enough, why not just walk away from the NCAA, at least in football...

I'm not in favor of that...but I could see it happening...

I doubt university presidents would allow this to happen - never get Big 10 and Pac 10 to go along with it.

Put enough money into the deal, and they will fold (I'll wager)...

I hope you are correct, but.....

AZGrizFan wrote:

89Hen wrote: It's not. It's a conglomerate.

Or an "Association".

I will say that i would really like to see Army and Navy join the Big East Conference. The military academies have alot of tradition, have been around much longer then most of the BCS schools and both i think would be very competitive in that conference since Navy has been very good the past couple of years and army improved drastically under Rich Ellerson. They deserve to be apart of a BCS conference. Also if the Big East wanted they could either add Notre Dame or possibly 2 FCS teams (Delaware and JMU would be good fits)

Well lets hope they stop at 14 and don't have the nuts to go to 16 w/o ND. It will probably be a monkey see monkey do. B10 goes to 14, then the SEC does. ACC might(if they could work the #s so they don't lose money by adding) goes to 14. Pac10 to 12 at least. Big 12, 14?

If 16 is the number, they could do pods like the WAC did where they are grouped into 4 and they rotate every year. It would be 2, 8 team div., but 4 would leave for the other after a year. I hated it and I prefer if they HAD to go to 16 just keep 2 of 8 with 9 conf. games 7 div 2 crossover.

In D-II there are 4 conf. w/16, 1 with 15. 3 of the 14 member conferences are looking at adding 2 schools, while the WVIAC is looking for 1. They usually do a 10 conf w/ 1 ooc. Of those conf. only the PSAC has 16 for fb. LSC has 15.If the NSIC & GLIAC add 2 they would have 16 for fb. GLIAC will lose Indianapolis in 2012. These D-II # include they changes w/ UIW joining the LSC and Salem International leaving the WVIAC. Not that any of you know or care about any of these schools. The point is D-II does it to save money.

Col Hogan wrote:

putter wrote:Still amazes me that the NCAA has no control over this. The Super Conferences are getting out of control and the NCAA could tell them to cool it. If the Big 6 want to break away - since the BCS bowels are non NCAA sanctioned anyway they could threaten them with exclusion from March Madness and play a little hardball.

Riddle me this...Why do these conferences NEED the NCAA???

FBS football does not play for an NCAA-sanctioned championship...if they get large enough, why not just walk away from the NCAA, at least in football...

I'm not in favor of that...but I could see it happening...

I saw this article about how the new NCAA president is in favor of a playoff system for FBS, and it had me wondering about what kind of an effect having an FBS playoff would have. Would it cause the FCS and FBS to merge - and play a playoff just like they do in basketball? Would it give the NCAA control of its on schools?

http://blogs.ajc.com/jeff-schultz-blog/ ... president/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Numbers don't lie. Citing the latest figures available in late 2009, the ESPN report revealed these annual TV revenues:

Big Ten: $242 million
SEC : $205 million
Big 12: $78 million
ACC : $67 million
Pac-10: $58 million
Big East: $33 million

Revenue shared per Big Ten school - $22 million per
Revenue shared per Big 12 school - $8 million per (Texas @ $10 mil, Nebraska @ $9.1 mil & Missouri @ $8.4 mil)

The Big 10 Network has been a gold mine for the conference so look at what TV markets they want the most, and second look at what Universities show up on the top 50 research institutions. Missouri wraps up the St Louis TV market (21st largest TV) and cracks the Kansas City market (32nd). And Pitt strengthens the Pittsburgh market (23rd).

If Colorado goes to the PAC10 and the Big 12 starts to crack, Nebraska & Texas also fits the Big Ten mold. In the East also look at Syracuse. Rumored Rutgers is fantasy since they don't deliver the NYC TV market. And Notre Dame needs to beg to get in as long as Delany is the commish.

Added to Big Ten - Pitt & Mizzou. Outside shots - Syracuse & Nebraska. No way - Notre Dame & Rutgers. The elephant in the room - Texas.

Anyone remember the Southwest Conference? It could come back if the Big 12 crumbles.

yes I remember the SWC, this time it wouldn't have Texas or Texas A&M. I also remember the much lesser known American South and East Coast Conference.

PS 5-7 can go to a bowl game now. Fuckin Lame! There should be a movement where all top athletes only go to FCS schools because the BCS and 35 bowl games is retarded. Suh woulda went to UNI Sam Bradford at Stephen F.Austin