ADVERTISEMENT

Realignment 2022

jdubb66

MI Hall of Famer
Feb 10, 2009
4,837
3,281
113
Fake News. And now this. Bowlsby wasting no time in going after pac remnants.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MinerFan79
Utah, Cal, Stanford, Colorado, Washington st., Oregon st., SDSU, Boise St.? New PAC?
 
We've all wanted to be in the MWC forever, but here's what it might look like after the chips fall. Not very impressive if you ask me. Not that we're in a great situation now though. I think at best it'd be a marginal step up, but at least we'd have old rivalries and it'd make better geographical sense.

Boise St, SDSU, UNLV, Fresno St. probably leaving to make a new watered down Pac 10 with Washington St Oregon st and whoever gets left behind. That would leave

San Jose St. , Nevada, Wyoming, (CSU if they don't go Pac 10 or Big 12) UNM, Air Force, (Hawaii Football) and I guess add UTEP, NMSU and maybe La Tech?
 
  • Like
Reactions: utep-piggy
We've all wanted to be in the MWC forever, but here's what it might look like after the chips fall. Not very impressive if you ask me. Not that we're in a great situation now though. I think at best it'd be a marginal step up, but at least we'd have old rivalries and it'd make better geographical sense.

Boise St, SDSU, UNLV, Fresno St. probably leaving to make a new watered down Pac 10 with Washington St Oregon st and whoever gets left behind. That would leave

San Jose St. , Nevada, Wyoming, (CSU if they don't go Pac 10 or Big 12) UNM, Air Force, (Hawaii Football) and I guess add UTEP, NMSU and maybe La Tech?
Under this scenario I could see Colorado St and Air Force going to the AAC.
 
Under this scenario I could see Colorado St and Air Force going to the AAC.
Very True, which would make MWC take more from the CUSA or FCS to fill up the rest. So if that happens it'd be an even more watered down MWC that Utep would finally have a shot to be in, Meh 😏
 
UCLA in the same conference as Buttgers.

This is lunacy.
Exactly 💯 Honestly still don't understand how Rutgers is still in the Power 5 and about to be the Power 1, but whatever. This is just ridiculous and needs to be stopped somehow or it's just gonna just be two conferences in the playoffs every year and tor Conferences I'm the final 4 and I for one am not down for that BS!
 
For those that are “upset” about this, you need to understand why. It’s money and it’s always money. Rutgers was added to the Big 10 because of money. They added a big media market and put the B10 Network on some of the biggest cable providers in the world. They suck at football, but it doesn’t matter because they make the Big 10 money. They also provide “access” to NJ area recruits and students.

Adding UCLA and USC will increase all Big 10 schools money big time. So whatever they’re paying extra in flights, they’re making a lot more via media deals.

Why is there no outrage from UTEP fans about traveling to West Virginia and Florida since we joined CUSA? Is there that much difference between flying to those destinations than LA to Big 10 schools? Nope. Only difference is Big 10 is making 1000x whatever CUSA “makes”. Flights to NJ would kill UTEP, but it’s pocket change to UCLA and USC.
 
Right now, PAC and Big 12 are looking to poach from each other. Which is the stronger conference right now without USC, UCLA and Oklahoma, Texas? If you're Stanford, Arizona or ASU, where would you rather be?
 
For those that are “upset” about this, you need to understand why. It’s money and it’s always money. Rutgers was added to the Big 10 because of money. They added a big media market and put the B10 Network on some of the biggest cable providers in the world. They suck at football, but it doesn’t matter because they make the Big 10 money. They also provide “access” to NJ area recruits and students.

Adding UCLA and USC will increase all Big 10 schools money big time. So whatever they’re paying extra in flights, they’re making a lot more via media deals.

Why is there no outrage from UTEP fans about traveling to West Virginia and Florida since we joined CUSA? Is there that much difference between flying to those destinations than LA to Big 10 schools? Nope. Only difference is Big 10 is making 1000x whatever CUSA “makes”. Flights to NJ would kill UTEP, but it’s pocket change to UCLA and USC.

I love how now there are P5 schools that are feeling "left out". G5 schools have been left out for a while. Anyone that didn't see this coming, isn't paying attention. Not all P5 schools are equals and those that are below par are now feeling like second class citizens and not the princesses they thought they were. Welcome to the party pal.
 
Right now, PAC and Big 12 are looking to poach from each other. Which is the stronger conference right now without USC, UCLA and Oklahoma, Texas? If you're Stanford, Arizona or ASU, where would you rather be?

Just speculating, of course, but if I'm Stanford I probably want to stay in the PAC12. Arizona and Arizona State, however, might be looking east right about now. It's really a crying shame that the Arizona schools won't ever be open to a mountain time zone based conference that could include Utah and Colorado along with remnants of the MWC.
 
We've all wanted to be in the MWC forever, but here's what it might look like after the chips fall. Not very impressive if you ask me. Not that we're in a great situation now though. I think at best it'd be a marginal step up, but at least we'd have old rivalries and it'd make better geographical sense.

Boise St, SDSU, UNLV, Fresno St. probably leaving to make a new watered down Pac 10 with Washington St Oregon st and whoever gets left behind. That would leave

San Jose St. , Nevada, Wyoming, (CSU if they don't go Pac 10 or Big 12) UNM, Air Force, (Hawaii Football) and I guess add UTEP, NMSU and maybe La Tech?
Super conference is aligning. Changes within the next five years to let D1 (FBS) and their respective state governments that have jurisdictional control sort their finances and budgets, maybe? SEC, B10, ACC and PAC 12 super conference is forming (Big XII out side looking in, possibly?). I really do think the NCAA will ease into this so as too not have angry mob situations, especially for alumni in state governments sitting on state governmental appropriation committee's who threaten with power of the purse if their beloved school is left out.
 
ND brings so much to the table as compered to BYU. As much as I despise the golden homers they have a strong national following and will be part of and in any power move the next few years.

I do see BYU now going full hooker mode, standing on the street corner in a red light district with their hypocritical smirk staring at the PAC12, "Hey honey, how do I look now baby?"

We can all thank SCOTUS for this happening, and I don't mean that in a bad way because their reasoning is (judicially) sound. Their ruling opened up the door and the wave is crashing in on the mid majors like a Tsunami.
 
UTEP admin is gonna take the wait and see approach. They are useless and don't gave the financial support anyway.

I think the NCAA will likely no longer be involved on college football within a few years.

I wonder how that would affect Title IX. Without football, it would create problems.
 
I wonder how that would affect Title IX. Without football, it would create problems.
If the schools are still offering scholarships for football, even if the governing body is no longer the NCAA, they'll still have to balance those with scholarship opportunities for women. Title IX is a Federal law, not an NCAA law.
 
So the landscape of college athletics will now be
Pro Division
D1
D2
D3
NAIA
Juco D1
Juco D2
Juco D3
 
Just wait, the Christofascists on the Supreme Court will rule it unconstitutional.
If the "Christofascists" were activist judges like the liberal judges, they would have fabricated some pretense (like an "emanation" from a "penumbra") to ban abortion. But that's not what they did. They looked at the text of the Constitution, saw that it was silent on the issue (either pro- or against), so they sent it back to the states where the people of the states will elect representatives to their legislatures (the branch of government that, as we are taught in elementary civics, is responsible for making laws) who will set abortion policy consistent with the prevailing values of the people of their state.

Similarly with the EPA ruling, the EPA being an agency of the executive branch, which (as we learn in elementary civics) is not the branch of government responsible for making laws, the EPA is only empowered to set policy as delegated by laws that have been passed by Congress (the legislative branch which, as we are taught in elementary civics, is the branch of government responsible for making laws). The Supreme Court looked at the text of the relevant laws, and did not see where Congress had delegated powers to the EPA that the EPA was trying to assume for itself.

There is a good-faith, consistent philosophy at work.
 
291106112_10221163697473925_5633687617800832086_n.jpg

This map feels like someone went crazy with the NCAA footbal video game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: minerfan_14
If the "Christofascists" were activist judges like the liberal judges, they would have fabricated some pretense (like an "emanation" from a "penumbra") to ban abortion. But that's not what they did. They looked at the text of the Constitution, saw that it was silent on the issue (either pro- or against), so they sent it back to the states where the people of the states will elect representatives to their legislatures (the branch of government that, as we are taught in elementary civics, is responsible for making laws) who will set abortion policy consistent with the prevailing values of the people of their state.

Similarly with the EPA ruling, the EPA being an agency of the executive branch, which (as we learn in elementary civics) is not the branch of government responsible for making laws, the EPA is only empowered to set policy as delegated by laws that have been passed by Congress (the legislative branch which, as we are taught in elementary civics, is the branch of government responsible for making laws). The Supreme Court looked at the text of the relevant laws, and did not see where Congress had delegated powers to the EPA that the EPA was trying to assume for itself.

There is a good-faith, consistent philosophy at work.
Is abortion banned in 13 states now? Yes? No?
 
  • Like
Reactions: JeeberD
Each state decides for itself. If it is banned in 13 states, then I guess it's not banned in 37 states, if the math works out.
So those women in those 13 states have fewer healthcare rights than in the other 37. Is that right? Fair? Just? Slavery of a different kind.
 
So those women in those 13 states have fewer healthcare rights than in the other 37. Is that right? Fair? Just? Slavery of a different kind.
Isn't half of the voting populace in those states comprised of women? They are enfranchised to change the law in their state if they so choose. They can do this because of the 19th Amendment, which guarantees their right to vote, so they have equal say in electing their government.

I can't find which amendment guarantees the right to abortion. When exactly did it happen?
 
Isn't half of the voting populace in those states comprised of women? They are enfranchised to change the law in their state if they so choose. They can do this because of the 19th Amendment, which guarantees their right to vote, so they have equal say in electing their government.

I can't find which amendment guarantees the right to abortion. When exactly did it happen?
Try the 14th amendment on for size you self-righteous prick.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vegasminer
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT