Conference Realignment Thread v. 2016

[Bill Marsh]

Here is an interesting ancillary discussion on Big 12 Expansion. Assume they add Houston and any other - Cincy, BYU, UConn, it really doesn't matter for this discussion. First, you go to two 6 team divisions. You have 5 teams now in Texas. Do you keep them in the same division? If not, who goes North? Not a good option. Houston being the newbie gets outed from Texas? That would be a slap in the face to the Cougars who want to rule the state. But hey, the new guy gets no vote right?

OK Houston stays in the South, then who would be the 6th team in with the Texas boys? You aren't breaking up OU and OSU plus the league wouldn't want OU and UT in the same Division as that eliminates the UT - OU Big 12 Conference Championship game money maker. So do you break up KU and KSU? Hmm. Or do you pull Iowa State in. I'm sure that would not be very popular in Ames....all their division rivals in Texas. Certainly WVA and CIncy would have to stay together as 'travel partners'. UConn, nope. Way too far away from Texas for routine trips. I guess if BYU is selected, they might be a logical candidate to go South if they win the Big 12 lottery.

If you do send Houston North, which two do you bring into the South? Looks like KSU and KU?

There just isn't an obvious decision. Okay, you don't base your expansion decision on which team goes where, but it does bring up an interesting situation.

If Alabama and Auburn can be assigned to different divisions, then so can B12 schools in the same state. In football, there are only 5 games with opponents from within a division. So, there is plenty of opportunity to play an instate rival from the other division. And to guarantee that those rivals play every year, the conference can designate permanent rivals.

As you point out, Oklahoma and Texas will be in opposite divisions. That means OU will be in the North. And it means that OSU therefore goes to the Texas division with OU as a designated permanent rival.
division

[stever20]

Here is an interesting ancillary discussion on Big 12 Expansion. Assume they add Houston and any other - Cincy, BYU, UConn, it really doesn't matter for this discussion. First, you go to two 6 team divisions. You have 5 teams now in Texas. Do you keep them in the same division? If not, who goes North? Not a good option. Houston being the newbie gets outed from Texas? That would be a slap in the face to the Cougars who want to rule the state. But hey, the new guy gets no vote right?

OK Houston stays in the South, then who would be the 6th team in with the Texas boys? You aren't breaking up OU and OSU plus the league wouldn't want OU and UT in the same Division as that eliminates the UT - OU Big 12 Conference Championship game money maker. So do you break up KU and KSU? Hmm. Or do you pull Iowa State in. I'm sure that would not be very popular in Ames....all their division rivals in Texas. Certainly WVA and CIncy would have to stay together as 'travel partners'. UConn, nope. Way too far away from Texas for routine trips. I guess if BYU is selected, they might be a logical candidate to go South if they win the Big 12 lottery.

If you do send Houston North, which two do you bring into the South? Looks like KSU and KU?

There just isn't an obvious decision. Okay, you don't base your expansion decision on which team goes where, but it does bring up an interesting situation.

If Alabama and Auburn can be assigned to different divisions, then so can B12 schools in the same state. In football, there are only 5 games with opponents from within a division. So, there is plenty of opportunity to play an instate rival from the other division. And to guarantee that those rivals play every year, the conference can designate permanent rivals.

As you point out, Oklahoma and Texas will be in opposite divisions. That means OU will be in the North. And it means that OSU therefore goes to the Texas division with OU as a designated permanent rival.
division

Um, small problem, Alabama and Auburn are both in the same division.

[paulxu]

It does happen.
See UNC/NC State, Miami/Fla State.

[Fieldhouse Flyer]

SLU's New Billiken Mascot Is Still Really Weird - September 21, 2016

The St. Louis Billikens unveiled a new mascot and it’s not going over well - September 21, 2016

SLU president finds humor in Internet backlash toward new mascot - St. Louis Post-Dispatch - 1 hour ago

[stever20]

it looks like a morphed thing of the TCU mascot.

[muskienick]

SLU's New Billiken Mascot Is Still Really Weird - September 21, 2016

The St. Louis Billikens unveiled a new mascot and it’s not going over well - September 21, 2016

SLU president finds humor in Internet backlash toward new mascot - St. Louis Post-Dispatch - 1 hour ago

Boy! We really ARE in the off-season given posts like this one. Until SLU rebounds back to the level it enjoyed under Eddie Hickey and, to a lesser extent, Rick Majerus, they aren't even going to be in the discussion for a Conference upgrade, even with their fine facilities, media advantage, and geographical position. Perhaps Travis Ford can work some magic at the helm of the Bills, but he has never taken any team of his beyond the first weekend of the NCAA Tourney, and only once into the Round of 32! I always had a bit of a soft spot in my heart for SLU since its a Jesuit University and in a Midwestern "Beer City" like Cincinnati and Milwaukee (like my Muskies and Marquette). But even in the Rick Majerus years, they were never able to excite the fans to the extent that they drew more than 73% of capacity to the new building. If and when Big East expansion ever occurs, SLU may be a tough sell (and that might make things rosier for Filedhouse Flyer!).

[trephin]

I don't think the new Billiken is so awful but it did remind me of the TCU frog. Seriously, why does it seem like 99% of all anthropormorphic mascots are creepy or scary (particularly college mascots)?

[DudeAnon]

Boy! We really ARE in the off-season given posts like this one. Until SLU rebounds back to the level it enjoyed under Eddie Hickey and, to a lesser extent, Rick Majerus, they aren't even going to be in the discussion for a Conference upgrade, even with their fine facilities, media advantage, and geographical position. Perhaps Travis Ford can work some magic at the helm of the Bills, but he has never taken any team of his beyond the first weekend of the NCAA Tourney, and only once into the Round of 32! I always had a bit of a soft spot in my heart for SLU since its a Jesuit University and in a Midwestern "Beer City" like Cincinnati and Milwaukee (like my Muskies and Marquette). But even in the Rick Majerus years, they were never able to excite the fans to the extent that they drew more than 73% of capacity to the new building. If and when Big East expansion ever occurs, SLU may be a tough sell (and that might make things rosier for Filedhouse Flyer!).

Yea, SLU is the perfect fit on everything except basketball success. They are at least trying again by firing their god awful coach. But are far away from being good enough to prompt expansion.

[HoosierPal]

Here is this week's spin on the Big 12 expansion (or maybe not?) Does Boren now favor 'no expansion' . Also there are interesting comments on OU and UT bolting, and on what the 'Little 8' would do in a 4 x 16 scenario.

http://www.campusrush.com/big-12-expansion-oklahoma-sooners-texas-longhorns-david-boren-2018459914.html

[HoosierPal]

http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/big-12-expansion-losing-momentum-no-grant-of-rights-extension-ranking-candidates/

This week's edition of As the World Turns in the Big 12. Sounds like they are pumping the brakes BIG TIME on expansion. To me it looks like Texas and OKie will bail as soon as they can figure out an escape plan. The recent trend is to not pay full exit fees, so you never know. (Maryland paid $31.4M instead of $52.2M and Rutgers $11.5M instead of $15M.)