Why is 16 the magic number?

[Vowelguy]

All realignment discussions focus on 16 being the desired conference size of the future. Why?

Anything above 12 is an ungangly mess. It becomes less a 'conference' than an amalgamation of teams under the same banner. A 16-team FB conference basically amounts to two 8-team divisions with virtually no cross-division contact.

I understand the argument is that more teams are needed to provide content for emerging TV networks. If that's the case, then why not 18? 20? 30? I don't see how 16 has been settled on as *the* number for conference membership.

 

[coachcap]

Don't you know the Boneyard rules? Expansion discussions are only for Tuesday or Wednesday, to get you through to the weekend. Sunday's are strictly reserved for basking in the joy of a Husky victory, or the wailing & gnashing of teeth after a UConn loss. Sarcasm off.

 

[junglehusky]

Because 16 is equal to 2 to the 4th power.

 

[RS9999X]

Why 16? Conferences can add teams but they can't subtract them. It's the nature of the league offices. The BE represents all 17 schools equally. It doesn't represent the 12 most profitable teams or represent some antiquated and misguided ideal of a 12-team FootBall-only conference -- a concept many helmet heads struggle with. Adding teams is easy. Getting rid of them without lawsuits is much harder.
Here's some other reasons

1) The Big East proved scheduling arrangements (posing as regional conferences) are the future.

2) It improves the quality of the game. 9-game conference BCS schedules are coming.

3) It further alienates the FCS and non-BCS from the money pool. With the 9-game schedules, a soft OOC schedule will be 1 Regional FCS team as an August tune up structured as a non-reciprocating home revenue game,;1 home and away non-BCS FBS team as an act of BCS 'charity'; and 1 BCS Team for Strength of Schedule purposes and TV matchups .

4) When done the BCS will be at most 84 teams (five 16-team conferences and 4 independents) and effectively disenfranchise the bottom 1/3 of the FBS from the media and BCS money pools.
'
5) 16-teams can cross time zones and still perserve a regional aspect. The Big Sprawl excepted. That's my nomination for the BE's new conference name. Or just 'The Sprawl'. There's one BiG too many now.

 

[Vowelguy]

Why 16? Conferences can add teams but they can't subtract them. It's the nature of the league offices. The BE represents all 17 schools equally. It doesn't represent the 12 most profitable teams or represent some antiquated and misguided ideal of a 12-team FootBall-only conference -- a concept many helmet heads struggle with. Adding teams is easy. Getting rid of them without lawsuits is much harder.
Here's some other reasons

1) The Big East proved scheduling arrangements (posing as regional conferences) are the future.

2) It improves the quality of the game. 9-game conference BCS schedules are coming.

3) It further alienates the FCS and non-BCS from the money pool. With the 9-game schedules, a soft OOC schedule will be 1 Regional FCS team as an August tune up structured as a non-reciprocating home revenue game,;1 home and away non-BCS FBS team as an act of BCS 'charity'; and 1 BCS Team for Strength of Schedule purposes and TV matchups .

4) When done the BCS will be at most 84 teams (five 16-team conferences and 4 independents) and effectively disenfranchise the bottom 1/3 of the FBS from the media and BCS money pools.
'
5) 16-teams can cross time zones and still perserve a regional aspect. The Big Sprawl excepted. That's my nomination for the BE's new conference name. Or just 'The Sprawl'. There's one BiG too many now.

First, I wasnt talking about the Big East specifically, but all the other conferences that supposedly are going to increase to 16.
Second, since when are schools interested in improving the quality of the game? Everyone wants a healthy does of chump teams sitting around.
Third, I don't see how the rest of your arguments don't apply to 14 or 18 teams.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Why 16? Conferences can add teams but they can't subtract them. It's the nature of the league offices. The BE represents all 17 schools equally. It doesn't represent the 12 most profitable teams or represent some antiquated and misguided ideal of a 12-team FootBall-only conference -- a concept many helmet heads struggle with. Adding teams is easy. Getting rid of them without lawsuits is much harder.
Here's some other reasons

1) The Big East proved scheduling arrangements (posing as regional conferences) are the future.

2) It improves the quality of the game. 9-game conference BCS schedules are coming.

3) It further alienates the FCS and non-BCS from the money pool. With the 9-game schedules, a soft OOC schedule will be 1 Regional FCS team as an August tune up structured as a non-reciprocating home revenue game,;1 home and away non-BCS FBS team as an act of BCS 'charity'; and 1 BCS Team for Strength of Schedule purposes and TV matchups .

4) When done the BCS will be at most 84 teams (five 16-team conferences and 4 independents) and effectively disenfranchise the bottom 1/3 of the FBS from the media and BCS money pools.
'
5) 16-teams can cross time zones and still perserve a regional aspect. The Big Sprawl excepted. That's my nomination for the BE's new conference name. Or just 'The Sprawl'. There's one BiG too many now.

All of this is a giant loser in court, which is exactly where it will end up if the conferences go to 16 teams.

University Presidents will only go to 16 as a last resort. they do not want to surrender that much control to a third party.

 

[businesslawyer]

We don't know that 16 is a magic number. No conference has said 16 is better than 12 but absolutely no more than 16. I think writers are just assuming that.

 

[RS9999X]

The 16 goes back to the BiG expansion comments followed up by Scott and the PAC-12 expansion and the success of the BE in non-football sports.

Personally I think 10 football teams and 9-game schedules make more sense than 16 football