I think Texas A&M is SEC-bound, either next year or (more likely) 2013; the question now is, who will join the Aggies?

Mike Slive would prefer an eastern partner, but it's not as easy as you would think. Florida, Georgia and South Carolina have united as a bloc to prevent the SEC from taking in a member in a state where it's already represented, so Clemson, Florida State and Georgia Tech are probably not candidates. The SEC wouldn't mind having a North Carolina member, but UNC doesn't really fit culturally; N.C. State might be persuaded, but it would be difficult under current conditions. Virginia Tech would seem to be ideal for the SEC (certainly more so than UVa), and while Tech and UVa aren't as tied at the hip as many think, Tech (at least publicly) has stated it's not interested. That might leave West Virginia (a one-time member of the Southern Conference) as the leading eastern candidate, though I sense Slive would take WVU only as a last resort.

To me, the most sensible scenario from an academic/athletic/research viewpoint, keeping in mind that different conferences have different goals and needs, would be this as we move toward the inevitable "super-conference" era:

* Slive and Big Ten counterpart Jim Delany work jointly to take the ACC members that best suit their needs. (The ACC is vulnerable because its football brand is negligible, and that was before Miami's recent problems were made public.) The Big Ten takes in Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina and Duke -- four solid universities in academics and research (AAU members) and overall athletics (all four ranked in the top 17 in 2010-11) that boost the Big Ten's footprint in a fast-growing area and, with the addition of schools that have won five of the last 11 NCAA men's basketball titles, make the Big Ten the nation's premier hoops conference. At the same time, the SEC adds Virginia Tech and N.C. State, giving it a foothold in Virginia and North Carolina. Now the SEC needs a second western member alongside A&M, and selects...

* Missouri, which may prefer the Big Ten, but will take whatever it's offered rather than stay in an unstable league. This effectively signals the end of the Big 12 in its current form. The Pac-12 becomes the Pac-16 by adding Oklahoma, Okie State, Texas Tech and Texas (which works with ESPN to assimilate its Longhorn Network into the Pac counterpart). The original Pac-8 members become a "Coastal" division; the four above plus Arizona State, Arizona, Colorado and Utah become a "Continental" division.

What of the remnants?

* The six remaining ACC members (including Clemson, Georgia Tech, FSU and Miami, which have been effectively isolated by the Big Ten-SEC joint raid, something that would appeal to Slive) form a reconstituted, 12-member ACC with six Big East football members -- Connecticut, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, South Florida, Syracuse and WVU.

* The three remaining Big East members -- Cincinnati, Louisville and Texas Christian -- head west to a reconstituted Big 12 that also features Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas and Kansas State along with a few BCS newcomers: Boise State, Brigham Young, Houston, Memphis and either Nevada or UNLV.

* Notre Dame remains independent, as is its wont. The Big East ceases to exist as a football conference and focuses on its other sports, notably basketball.

Everyone above (73 in all) gets BCS status; no current member is tossed out of the coalition.

Boise State's year, anyone?

(goirish)

Boise State's year, anyone?

Well, obviously they have to beat Georgia to have any shot at all, and unless they manage to do that convincingly it will still be the longest of long shots. Georgia's much improved and has a relatively soft schedule (for an SEC member, anyway) - they could very well wind up in the SEC title game without a true marquee win.

-- MWE

YAY! I know the pre-season rankings are always a bit out there, but the A&M (Does no one remember them getting destroyed in their bowl game?) and Okie St. rankings are stupid. 8 & 9? Ridiculous.

Well, obviously they have to beat Georgia to have any shot at all, and unless they manage to do that convincingly it will still be the longest of long shots.

I'm really looking forward to this game, I'm not sure what to expect. On the one hand, I'd love to see a non-BCS team beat an SEC team in SEC country. On the other hand, I like Mark Richt and don't really want to see him get fired.

Anyone think LSU can beat Oregon with their back up QB?

This years early season looks a heck of a lot more exciting than last year's snooze fest. I don't think there were any interesting games week one last year, this year there are 3 games I am pumped to see (USF-ND being the other one) and a host of other games I will enjoy seeing/keeping an eye on.

I think LSU's ranking is a little crazy. They're a very good team, but that schedule is a death march.

Why should the schedule affect a team's preseason ranking?

I fully hope and expect to see an NFL thread this season.

Why should the schedule affect a team's preseason ranking?

I've always viewed preseason polls as "our best guess as to where these teams will wind up." I can't see LSU losing fewer than three games this season, and I doubt they'll win the SEC West. That won't make for a top-five finish. Doesn't mean they won't be one of the five best teams in an objective sense, but that's not how polls work.

I've always viewed preseason polls as "our best guess as to where these teams will wind up." I can't see LSU losing fewer than three games this season, and I doubt they'll win the SEC West. That won't make for a top-five finish. Doesn't mean they won't be one of the five best teams in an objective sense, but that's not how polls work.

Do you think the electorate sees any distinction between these two things? It would be essentially admitting that they are unable to properly gauge the quality of the football teams.

To me, the most sensible scenario from an academic/athletic/research viewpoint, keeping in mind that different conferences have different goals and needs, would be this as we move toward the inevitable "super-conference" era:

TerpNats, the more I've been watching the conferences realign, the more I'm convinced that a "follow the money" approach accounts for 95% of what will happen next (with state politics making up the remaining 5%).

To that end, I can see A&M being financially viable for the SEC (adds Texas to the footprint, etc.), and I can see the Pac 12 being interested in the TX/OK schools for much the same reason.

But I just can't see the B1G chasing the ACC basketball schools. Maryland makes *some* sense in that you would add a couple metro areas to the footprint, but I've never gotten the impression that either city is a college sports town, especially in the fall, which drives the money.

I think the B1G has just three viable targets left: Notre Dame, Texas, and possibly one or more of Syracuse/UConn/Rutgers if the research showed that you could pull in NYC.

These are certainly some of the lowest expectations I've ever seen for a Florida Gators season. Might be the first time in recent memory that Gator fans would be OK with 8-5. October will be positively brutal.

Finally, a sports thread I can really sink my teeth into! Husker fan here (woo Frazier!), excited about the move to the Big 10 (since I just moved to Michigan), currently planning on attending my first NU home game (vs. Mich State) -- my family wasn't the go-to-the-game type, and also NU at Michigan, if we can get tickets.

Nebraska grad as well and I have my N at UW tix, that's going to be a lot of fun. I still am preparing for another season of offensive incompetence at times. Don't see how Nebraska avoids 2-3 losses.

Re: LSU, Jarrett Lee (the backup QB, now starting) as a Fr. threw 7 (SEVEN!) pick sixes for LSU. I hope to God he's improved in that department.

TerpNats, the more I've been watching the conferences realign, the more I'm convinced that a "follow the money" approach accounts for 95% of what will happen next (with state politics making up the remaining 5%).

The difference is that with the CIC, following the money in the Big Ten goes beyond sports. Notre Dame is unattainable, not so much because of money but because football independence is a raison d'etre for the school; I have a feeling ND would forego the BCS were it forced to join a conference. Texas looks out for Texas first and foremost, a philosophy that runs counter to the Big Ten's. UT might be able to work its network into the Pac framework, but not the Big Ten's. The ACC bloc I mentioned are four schools that are in a booming region (Capitol Hill to the Research Triangle) that the Big Ten can fall back on in case the Rust Belt continues to falter. They can provide millions and millions of research dollars to the conference, money that dwarfs athletic revenue, plus their athletic programs complement the Big Ten's. Rutgers might be in that league for research (but not sports), and neither Connecticut nor Syracuse qualifies from a research perspective -- and both Baltimore and D.C. are far more attuned to college sports than NYC is.

Well, you may be right on research money...that's well out of my range of vision. My understanding is that each school is pulling $20-25M/yr just from the Big Ten Network alone. Then ESPN money, etc. An additional school doesn't add a conference championship like UNL did, so it would have to be a large marginal gain for a new school to be considered (i.e. at least $250M/yr), especially since the conference can't rip up its existing TV contract.

If a research school can bring that kind of scratch in (again, I have no idea), then you're probably right. Out of my ignorance: why would one school's research money benefit another school in the same conference?

At least at the level where I teach (a Southland Conference school about to join the much-reshuffled WAC), there are no non-athletic considerations involved in what conference we play in. Research doesn't matter, academics don't matter, teaching doesn't matter. Things may be different in the true major conferences, and I'd love to hear how and why, but for minor and "mid-major" conferences, such stuff is nonexistent.

I fully hope and expect to see an NFL thread this season.

if there is an interest in this, i would strongly suggest separating them out by week, instead of by month, as has been the guideline for the NBA thread.




as for the college football, the situation at penn state is not promising. the QB situation is a complete ###########, and i'm not sure the university has any succession plan for when paterno finally kicks. there's a lot of talent in the program, but i really have no confidence in the coaching staff's ability to develop most any of it.


as for temple, the new coach doesn't seem to be near as good a talent as golden was. and it's really not a good sign that he was lobbying for the syracuse job before the ink was dry on his temple contract.

LSU is a little bit overrated, they are talented and they won 11 games last season with crappy QB play but I just don't see it this season (Part of it is perception, they won 5 games last by a touchdown or less and seem to pull out the Tennessee, Florida, and Alabama wins out of their ass).

Alabama is my team. They should have a nasty defense, they get most of their tough games at home. The QB situation is the big thing to watch seeing that we haven't even named a starter yet.

as for the college football, the situation at penn state is not promising. the QB situation is a complete ###########, and i'm not sure the university has any succession plan for when paterno finally kicks. there's a lot of talent in the program, but i really have no confidence in the coaching staff's ability to develop most any of it.

Pennsylvania is still fertile recruiting ground and PSU loses a lot of players from its own back yard to ND and the rest of the B1G. It may be difficult for the program the day Paterno steps down but there is plenty to work with.

Any guesses on the number of wins for Texas?

Hey Pops, you or any of your brothers coming here for the ND game on 10/1?

Texas..lets see their non-conference is Rice, BYU, and at UCLA. All three should be winnable, though BYU and UCLA will be tough (and UCLA won in Texas last season). I think they go 5-4 in conference play and win their three non-conference games: 8-4 (though 7-5 or 9-3 wouldn't surprise me either).

Hey Pops, you or any of your brothers coming here for the ND game on 10/1?

I haven't talked to anybody else about it but I hadn't planned on it, no.

Some preseason picks for conference champions:
ACC Atlantic: Florida State
ACC Coastal: um Virginia Tech
ACC overall: Florida State

Big East: West Virginia

Big Ten(12) Legends: Michigan State
Big Ten Leaders: Wisconsin
Big Ten Overall: Michigan State

Big Twelve: Oklahoma

PAC 12-North: Stanford
PAC 12-South: USC, but Arizona State gets to represent
PAC-12 overall: Stanford

SEC East: South Carolina
SEC West: Alabama
SEC Overall: Alabama

CUSA East: Southern Miss
CUSA West: Houston
CUSA Overall: Southern Miss

Mountain West: Boise State

WAC: Nevada

Sun Belt: Troy

Preseason picks ...

ACC Atlantic - Florida State
ACC Coastal - Virginia Tech
ACC - Florida State

Big East - West Virginia

B1G Legends - Nebraska
B1G Leaders - Wisconsin
B1G - Nebraska

Big 12 - OU

Pac-12 North - Oregon
Pac-12 South - USC (Arizona State)
Pac-12 - Oregon

SEC East - South Carolina
SEC West - Alabama
SEC - Alabama

CUSA East - Southern Miss
CUSA West - SMU
CUSA - Southern Miss

Mountain West - Boise

WAC - Nevada

Sun Belt - Troy

BCS Title Game - Alabama over Boise State

Rose Bowl - Oregon over Nebraska

Sugar Bowl - South Carolina over Texas A&M

Orange Bowl - Florida State over West Virginia

Fiesta Bowl - Oklahoma over Wisconsin

I was looking forward to a night of drinking and flipping back and forth between Oregon-LSU and Boise State-Georgia, and then I realized Saturday is my anniversary. So there's that.

I am really not looking forward to the super-conferences. I don't get Texas A&M coming to the SEC (oh wow, we get another Mississippi State!)...and it sounds like Virginia Tech will be hard to take we might have to settle for West Virginia...just not a fan....

I am really not looking forward to the super-conferences. I don't get Texas A&M coming to the SEC (oh wow, we get another Mississippi State!)...and it sounds like Virginia Tech will be hard to take we might have to settle for West Virginia...just not a fan....

Actually, does A&M become the second-best academic institution in the SEC?

That might leave West Virginia (a one-time member of the Southern Conference) as the leading eastern candidate, though I sense Slive would take WVU only as a last resort.

My take on realignment as a WVU fan.

Personally, from a competition standpoint, the SEC and WVU is a decent fit. WVU would be able to hold it's own in football, and have great success in basketball forming a semi-natural rivalry with UK. (not that Slive or anyone outside of Kentucky or Tennessee cares about that). WVU already recruits in the South, esp FL, and has traveled and played well in SEC territory in the past (close losses at Auburn and LSU in the past 4 years). To most it would make sense, until you realize just how pitiful the WVU TV market is. Now VT's market is not great, but while I was there I noticed they had a semi-strong regional appeal from NoVA down to the Triangle.

I'm not sure what 1(3) school(s) the SEC will take to balance out the A&M addition, but I'd be willing to bet a large sum of money WVU is not one of them.

Re: LSU, Jarrett Lee (the backup QB, now starting) as a Fr. threw 7 (SEVEN!) pick sixes for LSU. I hope to God he's improved in that department.

He's still probably better than Jefferson, though Jefferson does strike me as the type to take a huge step forward in his senior year.

I don't get Texas A&M coming to the SEC (oh wow, we get another Mississippi State!)

I've seen this sentiment a lot in the past month. I can see how one would think this, but it is certainly not at all accurate to lump TAM in with Miss State. Texas AM is in league with Auburn or a poor man's Tennessee as far as program caliber goes. In college football measuring program caliber isn't a "what have you done lately" game, instead the entire history is relevant as is the current passion of a given fan base. Program wins almost always regress towards the passion of the fan base. Fan base and fan intensity, not wins, leads college football programs to greatness. This is kind of the opposite of most pro sports. TAM has a very solid, but certainly not superb, history to go along with what is a superb fan base with nearly endless passion and deep pockets.

This is a big money athletic program, make no mistake. Now that Michigan, Florida State and Nebraska have seen tough times over the past decade, every historic power in college football has seen a rough patch over the last 25 years. For some programs this rough stretch was longer than others, Texas and USC had lengthy periods in the wilderness. Texas AM, seemingly has had one of the longest stretches in the wilderness, sure they are not a superb program, but they are sure as hell no Miss St.

There is every reason to expect Texas AM (sooner or later) will be able to put together an extended run that would take them as high as national championship contenders, something that will never happen to Miss State. The finances, facilities, fan base, access to talent and overall program passion are all there for TAM, this seems to be a good move for both parties, the SEC could do a lot worse.

Some preseason picks for conference champions:
ACC Atlantic: Florida State
ACC Coastal: um Virginia Tech
ACC overall: Florida State

Big East: West Virginia

Big Ten(12) Legends: Michigan State
Big Ten Leaders: Wisconsin
Big Ten Overall: Michigan State

Big Twelve: Oklahoma

PAC 12-North: Stanford
PAC 12-South: USC, but Arizona State gets to represent
PAC-12 overall: Stanford

SEC East: South Carolina
SEC West: Alabama
SEC Overall: Alabama

CUSA East: Southern Miss
CUSA West: Houston
CUSA Overall: Southern Miss

Mountain West: Boise State

WAC: Nevada

Sun Belt: Troy

The MAC is shaking its head and muttering.

My picks:

ACC Atlantic - Florida State
ACC Coastal - Virginia Tech
ACC - Virginia Tech

Big East - Pittsburgh

B1G Legends - Nebraska
B1G Leaders - Wisconsin
B1G - Wisconsin

Big 12 - Oklahoma

Pac-12 North - Oregon
Pac-12 South - Utah
Pac-12 - Oregon

SEC East - South Carolina
SEC West - Alabama
SEC - Alabama

CUSA East - Southern Miss
CUSA West - Tulsa
CUSA - Tulsa

Mountain West - Boise State

WAC - Fresno State

MAC East - Miami
MAC West - Northern Illinois
MAC - Northern Illinois

Sun Belt - Florida International

BCS Title Game - Oregon over Oklahoma
Rose Bowl - Boise State over Wisconsin
Sugar Bowl - Alabama over Nebraska
Orange Bowl - Virginia Tech over Pittsburgh
Fiesta Bowl - Oklahoma over Florida State

Oregon and Boise run the table, USC loses games they shouldn't because Lane Kiffin is terrible, South Carolina wins the SEC East by default, the SEC West powerhouses all knock each other out of the BCS Title race, the Big East is still a homogenized bunch of good-but-not-that-good, and Nevada comes back to earth sans Kaepernick and Taua.

Oh, also...I know this sounds odd since I just picked Oregon to go 14-0, but (as a Duck fan) I'm a lot less confident in this year's team than I was in last year's team. They're a popular pick to win it all this year, and that makes sense with all the talent they have coming back. A huge, huge, can't-possibly-overstate-it key for UO is the offensive line, most of which is new this year. If Thomas doesn't have time to make his reads, he could have Walter Payton, Jim Brown, Jerry Rice, and Randy Moss out there with him and the offense is going to sputter. The O-Line has to play well or they're completely screwed. When your entire game is read based and you can't make your reads because you're getting blown up in the trenches, you look like...well, like they looked for much of the Auburn game last year.

Oh, also...I know this sounds odd since I just picked Oregon to go 14-0, but (as a Duck fan) I'm a lot less confident in this year's team than I was in last year's team. They're a popular pick to win it all this year, and that makes sense with all the talent they have coming back. A huge, huge, can't-possibly-overstate-it key for UO is the offensive line, most of which is new this year.

You're right, that does seems really odd. All good offenses, but especially those spread-zone-rushing teams, need a good-to-great line to be successful. Seems like a big problem in trying to go undefeated.

I think they're either going to run the table or be a fringe Top-25 team. I'm bullish on the new-look O Line because Kelly gave these guys a bunch of playing time in blowouts last year (with an eye on 2011), but it could go south in a hurry. I'm also not thrilled about the lack of depth at QB. Thomas is the perfect quarterback for this offense, but there's not much behind him if he gets broken. Dennis Dixon's senior year is a pretty good comp.

The schedule's such that they're not going to lose more than 3-4 games barring disaster, but OTOH, I guess 3-4 losses is a disaster in Eugene these days.

Why isn't Louisville more of an SEC candidate? Would UK block that? They seem like an up and coming sports program in many sports, have newer facilities and already has a traditional rival.

With A&M bolting, UT will do everything it can to keep the Big 12 together - they have too much invested in this Longhorn Network, and no one else will let them have their own network. If they have to cobble together the old SWC schools to create a farce conference, they'll do it. I can't see anyone else bolting unless Mizzou gets an offer from the Big Ten, which seems unlikely at this point. Oklahoma wants to stay in the Big 12 - bolting for the Pac Ten is only an option if the conference indeed does dissolve, as there isn't much enthusiasm for having half their games played at 10pm local time. My guess is the Big 12 invites three more schools - some combo of Pitt, BYU, Louisville, Memphis, TCU, SMU, or Houston. I don't think the "Super-conference" scenario ever comes to fruition. These mega-conferences will soon grow out of favor as coaches complain it is too difficult to win conference championships, fans complain that rivalries are lost, and schools complain they have to split conference money with too many other schools.

I think a 16 team ACC would be great with a north and south division..

NORTH
Boston College
Syracuse
UConn
Rutgers
Maryland
Virginia
Virginia Tech
West Virginia

SOUTH
North Carolina
NC State
Clemson
Wake Forest
Duke
Georgia Tech
Florida State
Miami

I would assume Pitt to the Big 10 in this scenario, though perhaps WV gets snapped up by the SEC and Pitt ends up in the ACC.

That "ACC North" would finally be the eastern football conference we've always wanted, minus Penn State unfortunately...

I'm sort of surprised you went with Rutgers instead of Pitt. NYC media market, I assume?

Could TCU really bolt to the Big 12 before the ink is dry on their Big East contract?

Hey, I just realized Nebraska is coming to The Big House this year! It really is a no-brainer for Nebraska to be in the Big 10. It just feels right...

Rutgers seems like an enticing peach to the conferences. I know some Big 10 coaches (notably Joe Pa) really wanted them. You get your product on in the NY and NJ markets, regardless of whether anyone cares about Rutgers or not (and plenty of people do, and more would if they had a really successful run again like 2007).

Wouldn't the SEC wan't UNC or NC State? That seems to be their biggest untapped market...

That "ACC North" would finally be the eastern football conference we've always wanted, minus Penn State unfortunately...

My thoughts as well. As an added bonus, Uconn, Syracuse and WVU's basketball programs would be added to an already strong ACC.

Could TCU really bolt to the Big 12 before the ink is dry on their Big East contract?

The grumblings around here is that's a given, quickly followed by the ACC/SEC/B10 expanding to steal some combo of WVU, Pitt, Rutgers, etc.

Wouldn't the SEC wan't UNC or NC State? That seems to be their biggest untapped market...

To me it would seem UNC isn't going anywhere without Duke, because of both athletic rivalries and academic research partnerships. I don't think NC State is as tied to the hip, but it would probably be in their best interest to stay in a conference with the other Carolina schools.

I don't think there is that much enthusiasm in the Big 12 for TCU to be honest. I think they feel that they already have the Texas markets wrapped up with UT, and TCU is pretty far down on the radar in the DFW area, so TCU doesn't bring much to the table except a good team, which may actually be a negative since the southern half of the conference is so loaded. I think they'd take TCU if they got bypassed by a bunch of other schools, but I would guess their first choice would be to expand the conference footprint geographically.

Why isn't Louisville more of an SEC candidate?

It won't add to the TV footprint. I think the super conference talk is mostly being driven by the idea of having a coast to coast television channel available on basic cable in every US home.

Could TCU really bolt to the Big 12 before the ink is dry on their Big East contract?

I think there is real potential that the football vs. non-football Big East issue is going to split the conference. Since football is the biggest revenue sport I'm sure there is plenty of tension regarding how that money is split up. Right now I think it's only being held together by the fact that football is a bit down in the Big East over the past 5-10 years. If a few programs rise to prominence and the Big East becomes comparable to, say, the ACC then it may become too imbalanced to maintain. This is pure speculation, of course, but if I'm UConn and I have to pay over a portion of my football money to schools like Marquette and Notre Dame then I'm not happy. On the flip side, if I'm a non-football school like Georgetown I'm unhappy if I am getting $0 from television revenues that are partly supported by the fact that my presence in the Big East grows their viewership footprint in my area. This has to be a difficult or impossible balance to strike for everybody involved.

Yes, I was little bit over the top with my comparison of Texas A&M to Mississippi State...I still don't like the idea of super-conferences.

I honestly didn't have a MAC prediction because I couldn't tell you who is good or not in that conference.


I am going to call this "upset" right now: West Virginia over LSU.

UNC doesn't really have the "football-first" mindset to fit into the SEC, not to mention the academic perception (or, should I say lack of it). NCSU might make a better SEC target, as it seems more attuned to football than the folks in Chapel Hill. (Ironic, in a sense, since because State was at one time such small potatoes in football -- its on-campus stadium barely seated 20,000, and thus it almost always played UNC or Duke on the road -- it decided to cast its lot with basketball, hiring an Indiana high school coach named Everett Case. He brought a lot of Indiana prep stars to State and was arguably the catalyst behind college hoops mania in North Carolina, as UNC, Wake and Duke played catch-up.)

Also, reports out of Roanoke this weekend say Tech officials may be responsive to an SEC offer; if it joined, it would have instant rivalries with Tennessee (only a few hours away on I-81) and to a lesser extent Kentucky. (See #1.) As long as Tech and UVa retained athletic relations -- which they had for several decades before the Gobblers were in the ACC -- it would present no problem for state politicians. Miami's recent problems, which could result in hefty sanctions, only further damage the ACC's already muddled football rep, and some in Blacksburg may fear the stigma could ultimately weaken Tech's program.

TCU is pretty far down on the radar in the DFW area

TCU is insanely popular in Fort Worth right now, but I take your point. Ft. Worth, just by itself, is not the largest of markets, and TCU support has a lot of competition after you get outside the city limits.