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

Here are a couple tidbits from Mark Schlabach's ESPN article that speaks to his forecast of conference realignment and resultant "trickle down" impacts. Of course, no mention of FCS.

1. Widespread realignment
The Big Ten is exploring the possibility of adding a 12th team, and I'm betting it will be Missouri before the 2011 season. With 12 teams, the Big Ten can split into two divisions and stage a conference championship game. Who can't wait to flock to Detroit or Minneapolis in early December?

With Missouri leaving, the Big 12 will add TCU to its lineup of schools. Not to be left out, the Pac-10 will add Boise State and Utah, giving it 12 teams and a moneymaking championship game. The Big East will react by adding Memphis, East Carolina, Central Florida and Temple.

2. There will be a BCS plus-one
With Boise State, TCU and Utah joining BCS conferences, there will be less outrage from the football conferences that don't receive automatic BCS bowl bids. But with every BCS conference staging its own championship game, the BCS will finally adopt a plus-one model. The winner of two BCS bowl games will play in a BCS National Championship Game a week later.

15. BCS at-large bids will get scarce
Before it loses TCU and Utah, the Mountain West will qualify for automatic BCS status in 2012, which guarantees its champion will play in one of the four lucrative BCS bowl games. The addition of the MWC will leave only one at-large bid for BCS bowl games. After losing a couple of schools to Big 12 and Pac-10 expansion, the MWC will replace them with teams like Fresno State, Hawaii or Nevada.

I can't say much for the guy's credibility, but one cannot dismiss the influence ESPN has on BCS. He tries both provocative and humor in the article.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/s ... id=4846268

It'll definitely be interesting to see what happens.

1) Pac 10 will not take Boise - they don't fit the academic profile.
2) If the Pac 10 expands, it will be from the list of: Utah, Colorado, Texas, Texas A&M (only if Texas comes along).
3) Don't discount Texas to the Big 10
4) If Missouri joins the Big 10, look for the Big 12 to add Arkansas.
5) Who would the SEC take to replace Arkansas? No clue
6) MWC will add Boise

dbackjon wrote:1) Pac 10 will not take Boise - they don't fit the academic profile.
2) If the Pac 10 expands, it will be from the list of: Utah, Colorado, Texas, Texas A&M (only if Texas comes along).
3) Don't discount Texas to the Big 10
4) If Missouri joins the Big 10, look for the Big 12 to add Arkansas.
5) Who would the SEC take to replace Arkansas? No clue
6) MWC will add Boise

There is no way in heck that Arkansas leaves the SEC.

ATL wrote:

dbackjon wrote:1) Pac 10 will not take Boise - they don't fit the academic profile.
2) If the Pac 10 expands, it will be from the list of: Utah, Colorado, Texas, Texas A&M (only if Texas comes along).
3) Don't discount Texas to the Big 10
4) If Missouri joins the Big 10, look for the Big 12 to add Arkansas.
5) Who would the SEC take to replace Arkansas? No clue
6) MWC will add Boise

There is no way in heck that Arkansas leaves the SEC.

Disagree - Arkansas is much more aligned with Texas, Oklahoma. IF they had a chance to join back up, they would jump at the chance.

dbackjon wrote: 4) If Missouri joins the Big 10, look for the Big 12 to add Arkansas.
5) Who would the SEC take to replace Arkansas? No clue

If I were rearranging the FBS conferences in the South I'd do it like this, I think:

Arkansas to Big XII, Georgia Tech to SEC, South Carolina to ACC... that's where those schools have always belonged... never understood why they're where they are.

Also, I'd probably move Vandy to the ACC.

That leaves a lot of holes in the SEC... not exactly sure who'd I'd fill them with. Florida State and Miami, maybe?

Skjellyfetti wrote:

dbackjon wrote: 4) If Missouri joins the Big 10, look for the Big 12 to add Arkansas.
5) Who would the SEC take to replace Arkansas? No clue

If I were rearranging the FBS conferences in the South I'd do it like this, I think:

Arkansas to Big XII, Georgia Tech to SEC, South Carolina to ACC... that's where those schools have always belonged... never understood why they're where they are.

Also, I'd probably move Vandy to the ACC.

That leaves a lot of holes in the SEC... not exactly sure who'd I'd fill them with. Florida State and Miami, maybe?

Nashville is too SEC - Vandy won't leave them. Plus, the SEC needs them to bring the GPA up.

Would UGA want GT in the same conference? They already play each other.

dbackjon wrote: Nashville is too SEC - Vandy won't leave them. Plus, the SEC needs them to bring the GPA up.

Would UGA want GT in the same conference? They already play each other.

Hardy har har.


Don't know if it would be UGA who doesn't want GT in the conference so much as other schools (plus, if we picked up GT, we could dump Vandy as Tech could support the status quo pertaining to GPA). As you mentioned, UGA already plays them every year and I would assume with SK's realignment, GT would go into the SEC East with UGA. The rivalry is already there, heated up last year when GT came into Sanford and pulled an amazing comeback against the Dawgs... in the Rain... the Saturday after Thanksgiving... I was there... but I ducked out early to go watch the Dukes in the FCS playoffs.


As for Arkansas, they do have history with TX and OK, but in a weaker division... granted some of the teams they used to play have moved up too so I wouldn't be surprised if they left. Agree with USC, they've always seemed like an ACC program with Clempson in the neighborhood too...if USC moved to the ACC, it would seem logical to move GT to the SEC... OR if USC and Arkansas both jumped ship, perhaps get rid of the East/West and just keep the 10 team conference? Then we won't have to hear people like AZ complaining about how we don't play everyone in the conference.

GT/UGA and Clemson/USC in the same conference should happen. Makes too much sense.

Now if a spot opens up in the ACC, you can bet that East Carolina will sell their soul for a spot. I don't think they would get in though.

I'm not sure Boise will get an invite to any conference other than the MWC. They don't even play baseball and none of their other sports are particularly good. It's going to take more than two good years for them to move up.

It's not just about rivals for Arkansas, Georgia Tech, and South Carolina. It's their history with those conferences. Arkansas was in the Southwestern Conference (precursor to Big XII) for 80 years or so before joining SEC in early 90's (not sure why they did this).

Pwns wrote:I'm not sure Boise will get an invite to any conference other than the MWC. They don't even play baseball and none of their other sports are particularly good. It's going to take more than two good years for them to move up.

2002 - 12-1
2003 - 13-1
2004 - 11-1
2005 - 9-4
2006 - 13-0 (including the famous Oklahoma game)
2007 - 10-3
2008 - 12-1
2009 - 14-0 (including victories over Oregon and TCU)

89-11 since 2002. I think they've met your requirement.

Boise lost to TCU in '08.

Still, their football team isn't enough to get them into a power conference.

Skjellyfetti wrote:Boise lost to TCU in '08.

Still, their football team isn't enough to get them into a power conference.

My bad...edited to correct. And I agree with Jon anyway....Pac-10 additions will most likely be Utah/BYU.

Boise goes to the MWC IMHO, Griz move up to the WAC, dominate THAT conference within the first few years, and then we have to listen to the "move-uppers" on egriz bitch because we're not in a BCS conference and about how we should move "up" to the Pac-10 or MWC.

The old SWC broke apart mainly because Arkansas wanted out and left. I doubt they'd want to go back

CatMom wrote:The old SWC broke apart mainly because Arkansas wanted out and left. I doubt they'd want to go back

Arkansas's AD has been trying to get them in the Big XII for the past couple of years. They want to go back.

The Patriot League will go to full scholarship and embark on a major capital campaign to expand their stadiums by 50%, as well as expand to two divisions with the Ivy League making up it's own division, and the current PL adding Villanova when the CAA imploded, for the full 16 team league. Yeah, mon, this sheeeet is really gooooood stuff!

As an inhabitant of south carolina i must say that a) sc is too confortable in the sec does not want to go to the acc and b) clemson doesnt want to go sec b/c their fans are dumb enough to think they're in a better conference

As others have said I find it hard to think the Pac-10 would expand. They don’t need to as they are already juiced into the BCS. IF they were to expand, I would think BYU would be at the top of the list. IF they went this route, I would think they would take Utah as well to get to twelve. That would bring in a large metropolitan area (SLC) market, bring in a heated and well known rivalry as well as keep a geographical balance in the conference (2 schools in AZ, WA, UT, OR, and 4 CA).

I think the MWC would add BSU, Nevada, and if TCU stays put, another Texas school (Houston or SMU?). For a while I though Fresno State would be a candidate but the MWC already has a CA school (SDSU) with state budget problems, why would they want another?

Who knows what will happen to the WAC when the MWC raids their relevant teams?

I don't see BYU as a viable Pac 10 candidate in the near future for the following reasons:

1) No-Sundays creates scheduling issues that the Pac 10 doesn't want to deal with
2) California Presidents would be lynched by the liberal mob for adding the prime sponsor of Prop H8
3) BYU is not a strong graduate school - which is very important to the University Presidents

Interesting take Jon. I would have to assume the added revenue to the conference president via a Pac-10 (Pac-12 if this happens?) championship would shut them up. When was the last time moral convictions have trumped the almighty dollar?

SDHornet wrote:Interesting take Jon. I would have to assume the added revenue to the conference president via a Pac-10 (Pac-12 if this happens?) championship would shut them up. When was the last time moral convictions have trumped the almighty dollar?

They can just add Utah and Colorado - two schools that fit the rest of the Pac-10

"The Big East will react by adding Memphis, East Carolina, Central Florida and Temple." Well if something like this happens, it obviously means that the Big East will have split into two conferences, the current football playing members, and the non football playing + ND members. This will end up affecting other conferences like the A10 and CAA I am sure. Maybe UR, UD, XU and SLU all leave the A10 for the new basketball focused big east. After those 4 leave, and Temple bolts for the football focused former big east, the CAA and A10 will duke it out for members, with maybe schools switching leagues (UMass, UNCC and URI to CAA, Hofstra, Drexel and Northeastern to the A10)

There's going to be a huge domino effect, for sure, that's significantly going to alter college football's landscape. Missouri doesn't seem like a Big10 fit, to me, but it's very possible. Boise, I doubt, will be heading to the Pac10.. their academics aren't quite up to snuff, IMO. College football in 2012 is going to be interesting. I'm guessing the WAC is going to be raided before that time, and Montana will be the first team in line to fill the spots.

youngterrier wrote:As an inhabitant of south carolina i must say that a) sc is too confortable in the sec does not want to go to the acc and b) clemson doesnt want to go sec b/c their fans are dumb enough to think they're in a better conference

I couldn't agree more. South Carolina will never leave the SEC, nor will it ever go back to the ACC. They didn;t agree with the politics of the ACC the first time, what makes anyone think that they would now. The ACC has not changed, except in size. SC loves being in the SEC too much to go anywhere.