Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It wouldn't be any kind of stretch compared to other sports.
In this system the average team is playing 12 regular season games, and maybe a bowl game. The Conference champs (16 teams) play another game which would be an 13th game like a bowl. Remember a 10 team conference wouldn't need a conference championship game. From the 1st round in the playoffs, only 8 teams play 14 game, only 4 play 15 games, and only 2 play 16 games.
Throw in that the conferences are based on geography and not money markets, means that teams will spend less time on the road. The additional 30 some teams would be the top teir of the FCS teams.
Conferences might look like this:
North East Division--- Uconn, BC, Syracuse, Penn State, Rutgers, Umass, ect....
Mid Atlantic Div.--- Maryland, WVU, VT, VA, Liberty, Temple, ect...
South East Div.--- Clemson, UNC, SC, Florida, FA&M, FIU,
South Div.--- LSU, Bama, Tulane, Troy, Miss., ect...
Ohio Valley Div.--- Louisville, Indiana, Cincy, KY,ect...
Mississippi Valley Div.---Missouri, LSU, Ark, Miss ST, ULM, ULL, ect...
Note that all of theses teams could fit in different divisions with different teams, but its kinda hard to think of 160 schools and what division would be best.
The Sooners in the "Texas" division? Since OU is the program with the most tradition/prestige in the conference, I think it would be more likely for Tejas to be in the OKLAHOMA division.
The Sooners in the "Texas" division? Since OU is the program with the most tradition/prestige in the conference, I think it would be more likely for Tejas to be in the OKLAHOMA division.
Ya had Arkansas in the SWC, which was basically just an all Texas conference.
OK. I've suggested this one before, but it's appropriate here to do so again. Yes, the Big Ten is a brand name, one that is important for the identity of the conference. The "Ten" has long ceased to be a number.
So why not keep the name, so to speak, but tweak it. You know, by just adding one letter:
The Big Tent
the big tent was the largest enclosure in the old circus days. But the term took on other meanings. In politics, the two parties (less so then they are today, but what they once were) were considered to be "big tent":
since there were (are) only two major political parties, each has to draw many disparent parts of the electorate under one umbrella. They have a wide and varied base.
Which is exactly what the Big Ten has today. What could be more "big tent" than having Rutgers and Nebraska in the same league.
When one says "Big Tent", it sounds very, very much like "Big Ten", that "t" sound at the end of the second word not that distinct unless one goes way out of the way to emphasize it.
So the Big Tent would be a way of eating your cake and keeping it as well. No longer woud you have the absurdity of an 11, 12, 14, and no doubt 16 team conference with a "10" in its name, but the new name sounds so much like the old, it works well.
Who knows, the logo itself may mimic the old Big Ten logo with the "11" for Penn State in an arrangement something like this:
Why change the name of the Big 12, when it will eventually have 12 teams again?
There is also no real need to change the name of the Big Ten either, what would you call it without making it sound ridiculous?
Reality is that geography no longer matters when it comes to conference expansion in college football. In the early to mid 20th century geography, when it came to creating conferences, played a bigger role because getting around the region, or across the country was more difficult.
Why change the name of the Big 12, when it will eventually have 12 teams again?
There is also no real need to change the name of the Big Ten either, what would you call it without making it sound ridiculous?
Reality is that geography no longer matters when it comes to conference expansion in college football. In the early to mid 20th century geography, when it came to creating conferences, played a bigger role because getting around the region, or across the country was more difficult.
I'll agree with you, Bham, travel is no longer prohibitive as it once was (although I suspect with rising air fare prices and all energy going up, that may well not be the case). but seriously....how many fans are going to make that cross country trip.
But distance aside, I find the expansion of footprints (Maryland to Nebraska, West Virginia to Texas, Colorado to Sanford, Miami to Boston College) is awful. It ruins the game. The fun thing was to play close by rivals, schools you actually assocaited with, ones with which you had real rivalries.
Why give that up....just for tv revenue. how absurd. It's like pro football, nothing collegiate about it.
Why on earth would Michigan want to give up a game with Wisconsin or Northwestern for a game with Maryland or Rutgers. And while road trips to the New York (Rutgers) and DC (Maryland) markets might be enticing, they may not be worth the cost of a weekend visit, one where you definitely won't be tailgating. Madison (Wisconsin) and Chicago (Northwestern) offer much better alternatives....plus the tradition of them being long time rivals.
I'll agree with you, Bham, travel is no longer prohibitive as it once was (although I suspect with rising air fare prices and all energy going up, that may well not be the case). but seriously....how many fans are going to make that cross country trip.
But distance aside, I find the expansion of footprints (Maryland to Nebraska, West Virginia to Texas, Colorado to Sanford, Miami to Boston College) is awful. It ruins the game. The fun thing was to play close by rivals, schools you actually assocaited with, ones with which you had real rivalries.
Why give that up....just for tv revenue. how absurd. It's like pro football, nothing collegiate about it.
Why on earth would Michigan want to give up a game with Wisconsin or Northwestern for a game with Maryland or Rutgers. And while road trips to the New York (Rutgers) and DC (Maryland) markets might be enticing, they may not be worth the cost of a weekend visit, one where you definitely won't be tailgating. Madison (Wisconsin) and Chicago (Northwestern) offer much better alternatives....plus the tradition of them being long time rivals.
I would think fanbases like Bama, Nebraska, Michigan, Texas, USC, Notre Dame, Tennessee, etc. travel really well no matter where the game is.
You make a better point for smaller fanbases, like Miss St, Northwestern, Michigan St, Georgia Tech, etc.
Rivarly games change with the times, Bama-UT isnt as big of a deal now, as it was 10-20 yrs ago, or like Bama-LSU wasnt as big 20 yrs ago, than it is today. In the Big Ten, maybe Penn St/MD becomes a new rivarly game, or Northwestern/Rutgers..never know.
I would think fanbases like Bama, Nebraska, Michigan, Texas, USC, Notre Dame, Tennessee, etc. travel really well no matter where the game is.
You make a better point for smaller fanbases, like Miss St, Northwestern, Michigan St, Georgia Tech, etc.
Rivarly games change with the times, Bama-UT isnt as big of a deal now, as it was 10-20 yrs ago, or like Bama-LSU wasnt as big 20 yrs ago, than it is today. In the Big Ten, maybe Penn St/MD becomes a new rivarly game, or Northwestern/Rutgers..never know.
maybe. but if we get to a point it is all about those schools like Bama, Nebrska, Michigan, Texas, USC, ND, Tenn, etc., you may lose the rest. if college football gets hyper focused on just the super powers, the game will collapse.
btw, Northwestern actually does travel well. you should see how many seats they sell for bowl games.
maybe. but if we get to a point it is all about those schools like Bama, Nebrska, Michigan, Texas, USC, ND, Tenn, etc., you may lose the rest. if college football gets hyper focused on just the super powers, the game will collapse.
btw, Northwestern actually does travel well. you should see how many seats they sell for bowl games.
I disagree, there will always be room in the college football game for LA-Monroe, James Madison, Alabama State, Eastern Michigan, etc. Only because there is always the possiblity that ones of these team can and sometimes do beat Bama, OU, Michigan, FSU, etc. If they lose, they still get that 500,000 to one million dollar check.
It wouldn't be any kind of stretch compared to other sports.
In this system the average team is playing 12 regular season games, and maybe a bowl game. The Conference champs (16 teams) play another game which would be an 13th game like a bowl. Remember a 10 team conference wouldn't need a conference championship game. From the 1st round in the playoffs, only 8 teams play 14 game, only 4 play 15 games, and only 2 play 16 games.
Throw in that the conferences are based on geography and not money markets, means that teams will spend less time on the road. The additional 30 some teams would be the top teir of the FCS teams.
Conferences might look like this:
North East Division--- Uconn, BC, Syracuse, Penn State, Rutgers, Umass, ect....
Mid Atlantic Div.--- Maryland, WVU, VT, VA, Liberty, Temple, ect...
South East Div.--- Clemson, UNC, SC, Florida, FA&M, FIU,
South Div.--- LSU, Bama, Tulane, Troy, Miss., ect...
Ohio Valley Div.--- Louisville, Indiana, Cincy, KY,ect...
Mississippi Valley Div.---Missouri, LSU, Ark, Miss ST, ULM, ULL, ect...
Note that all of theses teams could fit in different divisions with different teams, but its kinda hard to think of 160 schools and what division would be best.
Those are some unbalanced divisions, with many being cupcakes and others being tough. If you are going to copy the NFL model does geography even matter?
At the very least WVU would dominate that division.
Those are some unbalanced divisions, with many being cupcakes and others being tough. If you are going to copy the NFL model does geography even matter?
At the very least WVU would dominate that division.
Those divisons were examples of what it might look like, not actually well thought out equal divisions.
The NFL has no choice in geography, because there is only 32 teams
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Since OU is the program with the most tradition/prestige in the conference, I think it would be more likely for Tejas to be in the OKLAHOMA division.
