Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[werdnamanhill]

Rank these choices:

Colorado
Arizona
ASU
Utah
-------
Pitt
Syracuse
VaTech
NCState
Boston College
Louisville
------
UConn

I'd still take Colorado in my top 4 B12 adds but it's not a slam dunk. I didn't include the schools that will get a serious look from Big10/SEC or that the B12 would probably pass on.

1. Colorado
2. Arizona
3. Pitt
4. NC State
5. Utah
6. VTech
7. ASU
8. Louisville
9. UConn
10. Syracuse
11. BC

1-4 are instant takes
5-9 are backup plans
10-11 do absolutely nothing for me

 

[HFCS]

If AZ leaves, there’s no reason to offer anyone else other than OU and UW. The PAC is dead. Grab the best 4 and let the rest figure out a restructured MWC. Utah and ASU were fine if OuW went to the Big10. But they’re not needed any longer.

We could even stop with AZ/Colorado and wait a few years to see if Washington and Oregon are permanently hard rejected.

I'm done with having schools that are on a waiting list for this Big Ten/SEC monster.

AZ, Colorado
then
Pitt, other ACC leftovers that fit
then
Washington, Oregon if they come excited to permanently join

 

[Remo Gaggi]

I hate Nebraska too but they’re definitely not rotting… fat paychecks and they’re still in one of the easiest conferences with plenty of crap teams to beat up on whenever they start to have a pulse again

Let their arrogant lard-ass fan base wither on the vine.

 

[SCNCY]

NOT TRYING TO CAVE, but apart from the relevancy of "feelings" on cultural alignment and debating its relevance...

Doesn't California have very real law(s) that are meant to discourage, or at least prohibit public money being used by California public universities that wish to travel for competition in states that have laws they find particularly objectionable?

(States with laws, for better or worse, like some you might find in TX, OK, IA, KS, FL, WV etc...now or in the forseeable future?)

I think Athletics get around that because they are funded by private sources such as ticket sales, private donations, media dollars, sponsorships, etc. Public funding would be funding from taxpayers from the state, which funds university operations, professors, etc. So the later would be applicable to those travel rules, not the former.

 

[TXCyclones]

1,000 pages

lets go.

CF long-haulers, whats the longest thread we've ever had?

Ironically, I think it was the prior realignment Megasaurus thread...

 

[Triggermv]

 

[Cyclonepride]

Uconn is NOT a "fringe blueblood."
That is the midwestern bias/perspective coming in, which is why we need Uconn and the NE market.

Uconn has won more national titles since 1999 (5) than Kansas, KY, Duke, and UNC.

Calling Uconn a fringe blueblood is akin to calling Bama a fringe blueblood in football.

True, in basketball. Their football program is what makes the combination fringe

 

[Triggermv]

The Pac and Pac journalists right now....

 

[1UNI2ISU]

NOT TRYING TO CAVE, but apart from the relevancy of "feelings" on cultural alignment and debating its relevance...

Doesn't California have very real law(s) that are meant to discourage, or at least prohibit public money being used by California public universities that wish to travel for competition in states that have laws they find particularly objectionable?

(States with laws, for better or worse, like some you might find in TX, OK, IA, KS, FL, WV etc...now or in the forseeable future?)

I believe they get around that by saying that the travel money comes from private donations and TV money and isn't actually state dollars.

 

[CycloneDaddy]

How can you expand when you dont have a tv deal after this year?

No way Im letting Kliavkoff handle anything after the **** ahow the Pac12 has been.

 

[CoachHines3]

again, if im SDSU im so pissed lol

 

[Triggermv]

 

[RezClone]

Yes. However, the law applies to state funds, and AD budgets aren't funded (entirely) by the state. If the ADs are partially funded by the school/state, the workaround is to earmark media money, ticket, merch or donations for "travel expenses." Problem solved.

I'm aware of that, but common sense would tell me the unavoidable cumulative effect of conference membership for all sports vs. much more avoidable/workabld non-conference and post-season "one-offs", if you will, would likely muddy the waters there.

(Granted, I know nothing of the particulars apart from what we both just stated.)

 

[Triggermv]

 

[Nolaeer]

1. Colorado
2. Arizona
3. Pitt
4. NC State
5. Utah
6. VTech
7. ASU
8. Louisville
9. UConn
10. Syracuse
11. BC

1-4 are instant takes
5-9 are backup plans
10-11 do absolutely nothing for me

Again, a lot of Midwest bias. From a TV value perspective"
1. VT
2. NC State
3. Pitt
4. Az
5. colo.
6. ASU



7-11
11. BC no way
10. Cuse no way

VT and NC state may be takes for the SEC. those states are HUGE.
9. louisville
8. Utah

 

[Gunnerclone]

These ******* people:

 

[Gunnerclone]

Time to “trade up” again for the PAC 12!

 

[Triggermv]

These ******* people:

Dude, they still haven't "decided if they are going shopping yet over there in the Big 12"

 

[mj4cy]

BY has a lot of JP in him...absolutely loving this. ISU fans aren't used to this...who knows what the future holds but damn.

 

[ClonerJams]

These ******* people:

They'll 100% try to talk themselves into thinking adding Nevada is better than Colorado