BYU is a great program for sure and I definately don't want me hesitation to having them join the big 12 indicate any lack of respect. Good fans and good tradition and a lot to be proud of.Originally Posted by x97
|
|
BYU is a great program for sure and I definately don't want me hesitation to having them join the big 12 indicate any lack of respect. Good fans and good tradition and a lot to be proud of.
The economics of a sixty-four team, four conference structure. I personally believe that the ACC, B1G, SEC and PAC will be the only members of a 64 team arrangement --- a sixty-four team big-boy league.
I'm thinking that's the pretty picture, but it's not shaking out so cleanly. I'm starting to think 5 conferences...with 12-16 teams. When they do the play off, they'll take the top 4 of 5 conference winners.
If they beat Pitt that year and go to the NC in 07, White may have won the Heisman and they would have been in the NC game too. It would have been hard to keep and undefeated QB with good numbers out of it even if the winner that year was Tim Tebow on a 5 loss team.So, it's an odd thing to say WV won't ever approach winning an NC. And it's odd to say they'll never approach a Heisman either, since their current QB will be on every preseason list this fall.
That still doesn't answer the question. The Big 12 conference owns the tier 1 and 2 rights to all the schools for 6 years. You said we'd be leaving in 3. Nobody will take a Big 12 school unless they know they can bring their TV rights with them. I've yet hear one person describe a logical way out of the 6 year grant of rights deal.
5 conferences seems logical this point with the Big East dropping out. However, if the ACC can't figure out it's TV contract issues, they're going to be in trouble. Even if all the teams stay there, they'll fall behind other major football conferences due to lack of ability to keep up.
It would depend on the language in the contract/agreement. Just how binding is the grant? I would ****ume, fairly binding to get other schools some reassurances to join the Big12. But the public doesn't know for sure. Most contracts/agreement have "out" clauses of some kind. But who knows what those are or how easy/hard it is to have that "out" happen.
We also don't know 100% for sure if that agreement was ever finalized. Last we know it was "making the rounds" of the Universities, and it's ****umed that it was finalized, and everyone signed.
Regarding your last bit, I was with you on the point we don't even know it was all signed until I read the link you provided a while back. I seemed that everyone involved was acting as though it was signed and binding so I think we can ****ume that's the case.
Regarding the first bit, that's why I keep asking how we're going to get out of it everytime someone acts like the Big 12 failure in less than 6 years is a foregone conclusion. I am sure there are 'outs' under certain circumstances but I haven't heard of any and have to believe that whatever these circumstances are must be fairly remote considering TCU and WV would have been better off in the Big East if OU and Texas still had a chance to bolt. The only way out that I've heard anyone suggest so far is for a vote to disband the conference... which doesn't add up as likely when you take the whole picture into account.
It is a shame that no sports reporters worth their salt haven't gotten a copy of the grant of rights contract. That should be a simple open records request for any of the public universities' that granted their rights. Maybe the reason is that no formal document exists? Very odd for no details to have surfaced.
With regard to big-time realignment (shake the foundations type stuff)...check this out:
http://www.statesman.com/sports/coll...s-2184957.html
1. Two years left on BCS tv contract -- In 2014, everything will be different
2. Money and viewership is down -- current format/business model is not working
3. Sweet sixteen, elite eight, final four and championship? -- how will bowls function in this arrangement? Elite eight or final four?
4. Final four after bowls? I don't see that happening -- they must "front-load" playoffs with conference championship type structures.
1. The last time the contract was going to expire, ESPN jumped in and gave it more time.
2. People are sick of the BCS and the ratings show
3. Keeping the bowls system is a huge anchor for moving forward. The bowl system is just getting in the way.
4. 8 conferences is the way to go. 8 champs in the playoff.
I too would be very interested in seeing the language of the grant of rights document. I doubt it would be a matter of it not existing though. After all, if that were the case, if a media person asked for it, wouldn't they have to say it didn't exist or provide it? If they said it didn't exist, we'd have quite a news event for those of us still following realignment.
with 8 conference winners (or the top eight teams that get in the playoff, maybe the 4 or 5 big conference winners and the next best 3 or 4) there is still room for bowl games for the other eligible teams that don't make the playoff. there are other tourneys in college bball other than the one for the national championship. those bowls can be a reward for doing well, but not winning the conference.
They have a national championship and a heisman trophy.
They also have a worldwide following of cultists that launder money into the university.
which was each once, and happened 28 and 22 years ago.
just because they have a worldwide following doesn't mean that they give two ****s about football
Neither TCU nor West Virginia can sell out their Mid Major sized stadiums.
They bring **** to the table. Nobody gives a **** about them in return.
BYU has history at least.
I think all three options are deplorable, but hold BYU up to be slightly better **** than TCU and West Virginia.
If BYU joined the Big 12 right now they'd rank 3rd in the conference in attendance (behind OU and UT). BYU has 18 top 25 finishes since 1977 including five in the last 6 years. BYU's record the last 6 seasons is a ****ulative 60-18 which ranks them in the top 7 winningest programs over that time. BYU was also rated by ESPN as one of the 25 most prestigious programs in the history of college football. If BYU doesn't give "two ****s" about football then basically the rest of the Big 12, save OU and UT need to just shut their programs down right now. No one else in the Big 12 comes close to BYU in fan following, attendance, or tradition.
3 users like x97's post: boomhorn., Redhawk, SCV Sooner
Sadly too many OU fans compare other programs to the one they know most, which is OU. Compared to OU, about 100 schools should shut down their football programs.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextr...543&rss_lnk=92
OU and OSU open to expansion Joe C get to "whatever # works"
I was just going to post this. No real news here, and very noncommittal. Seems the marching orders are to not say anything, which is smart with these complex negotiations. They are about "whatever" man.
They are happy with 10, but would be happy with more too....you know whatever.
This from the stupid file, from OSU's Holder:
"If we do add a number, especially in football, I'd like to see us continue to play everyone in the league," said Holder. "I really liked that element of our league this year. I liked that every team played every other team. "I realize that could shrink the number of non-conference games we have. However, I'm fine with that."
The Money Quote was from OU's Joe C:
"It is easy to add slices to the pie," said OU athletic director Joe Castiglione. "It is harder to grow the pie."
Article mentions several options for the Big 12 including staying at 10, going to 11 with just adding Louisville, going to 12 adding Louisville and Cincinnati or BYU, or going beyond to 14 like the ACC and SEC or even 16 teams, but not naming any schools.
These two statements are a paradox.
Agreed. Most of the posters on this board would not want the league to admit programs like KU or Texas Tech, based on their resumes, if they applied for membership.
KU would be fine because of their Top 5 basketball program.
Tech is terrible and has no place in a major conference. They have only had success under one coach, and that says enough about both the coach and the program.
Who would get to stay, if everyone league member had to reapply? OU, Texas, KU.....
OU, UT, A&M, Nebraska, OSU, KU, and Colorado. These are the tradition and money schools. (OSU just very recently entered the money school criteria).
Everyone else is just filler.
Losing A&M, Nebraska, and Colorado is a huge blow that cannot be repaired with more filler schools like TCU and West Virginia. We have enough filler as it is.
2 users like The's post: boomhorn., DelMarSooner
Exactly. You simply cannot replace Nebraska, Colorado, and A&M. The pie is harder to grow because there are no quality teams available and it will not be possible to lure quality programs to the Big 12 that currently have homes in the B1G, SEC, PAC and ACC. The only targets are Big East schools and BYU and that is the definition of filler.
The Big 12 is unsustainable over the long-run for reasons that have been disgusted ad nauseum within this thread.
But, but, but NOTRE DAME will save us! Right?
There's a greater likelihood of a Bird of Paradise flying out of my **** in the next five minutes than there is of Notre Dame joining the Big 12.
Last edited by DelMarSooner; 02-21-2012 at 08:03 PM.
2 users like DelMarSooner's post: Al F***n Swearingen, keefsmangledfingers
Pretty much. I actually would include WVU and TCU to that list, as being the 4th and 5th most valuable members to the league. But thats the problem with the Big 12. A bunch of mid-major caliber programs that have been grandfathered into a BCS conference, instead of earning a spot through titles or population coverage.
Here's a kick **** core of a conference: UT, OU, NU, A&M, KU, Mizzou, CU. Covers TX, Denver, St. Louis, KC, and two national tradition rich programs in NU and OU.
Add in WVU and TCU for the hell of it. That's 9 teams. Then you can bring in Louisville, BYU, and South Florida, for a 12 team league that has geographic continuity from Salt Lake City to the outskirts of DC, 3 TX teams, 1 FL team, plus the good ole Big Red rivalry. That conference has very high earnings, for all schools. Potential cable network would be more valuable than any other conference. It would stay together. We're not talking about a super conference with five programs with multiple titles, we're just talking about maximizing the value of the conference as a whole, retaining the core elements of the Big 8/Big 12, without any unrealistic rocking of the boat (Notre Dame, raiding the ACC, Arkansas, ect).
No conference slot is wasted on redundant geographic coverage (one of the reasons why the Big 12 failed...not capable of making the same amount of money that conferences with more efficient membership allotment have been, are, and will be capable of making). Every school, except maybe TCU, brings some market to the conference that would not exist if it was not a member. Can't say that about the current Big 12, which has freeloaders like KSU, OSU, Baylor, and to a certain extent, Tech and ISU.
The only program that has left that isn't replaceable is Nebraska - but FSU would do it if those rumors are true.
Otherwise, you guys are vastly overvaluing Colorado, Missouri, and aggy.
CU has horrible facilities and such a small athletic budget that they have the bare minimum number of sports to qualify for D1. They don't have a legitimate donor base, their average attendance for football, their last year in the Big 12, was well under 50K. BYU is an upgrade from Colorado by almost every measure. More fans. Better in-game attendance. Relatively equal history.
Missouri's biggest ****et was in the supposed TV sets they brought to the Big 12. They were above average in basketball and football, but never won anything. We have a 50 year sample size to make that ****essment. If you consider that they didn't take the KC market with them when they left, and that Louisville would add 4 million plus TV sets in Kentucky/Southern Indiana (and maybe Ohio) to our TV footprint, I consider that trade a wash. Louisville out-earns Missouri in athletics revenue, with a bigger budget (and has done that from the Big East). Louisville is a basketball blue blood - something Mizzou is not.
When aggy left, we lost a huge alumni base. We didn't lose TV sets, though. East Texans aren't going to stop watching Big 12 football. (aggy cares as much about "tu" as they do A&M and will continue to watch on TV.) West Virginia adds new TV sets (whole state, plus spills over into Pennsylvania, Ohio, Virginia, and Maryland), more and better history in both football and basketball, and almost as much weirdness. WVU is also Top 15 in merchandise sales in the entire country. Standing alone, A&M for WVU is not an equal trade. But when you factor in the overlap issues re: Texas TV market, then I think it equals out.
If the Big 12 adds UL and BYU to get to 12, it's in very good shape as a conference going forward. If the league somehow lures Clemson and FSU into the fold, then it has significantly upgraded over the original 12.
4 users like Camel at Sea's post: boomhorn., MeMyself&Me, Redhawk, StatGeek
I agree with this
It's a very slim chance that FSU joins the Big 12, and even then, they do not replace Nebraska. FSU won two titles in 6 years, Nebraska has two eras of greatness. FSU wasn't as good as NU in the 90s (2 vs. 3 titles, FSU's sole era of greatness), and doesn't have the titles from the late 60/70s that NU has. But most importantly, there is no real history in an NU/FSU trade. We played NU for decades, and the OU/NU game was relevant, up until the last Big 12 title game. There is no replacement for that. None. Maybe, MAYBE, Miami vs. OU can come close to that, but NU/OU was special and rare, and the powers that be did nothing to try and protect it and preserve it. West Virginia vs. OU, Louisville vs. OU, BYU vs. OU, will never replace OU vs. NU.
I can agree that BYU may be better than CU. West Virginia over A&M. But we have a relationship with CU, with Mizzou. They are border states. We have played those programs for decades, sometimes for conference titles. When two programs are a wash, the better program for OU is the one that is a traditional conference rival and from a border state. As I said, BYU makes a good addition to the Big 12...with CU in tow. It makes sense. But this geographic gap and shirking of decades of Big 8 games is despicable.Otherwise, you guys are vastly overvaluing Colorado, Missouri, and aggy.
Louisville is not a fair trade for Missouri. Kentucky is a divided state of 4.3 million, with two universities competing for eyeballs, Missouri is a unified state of 6.1 million, with only one university. Louisville is more relevant in b-ball than Mizzou, but b-ball sucks in general. They have no more of a foothold in Ohio than Missouri does in Illinois, or LSU in Texas. If the Big 12 had a cable network, it would make more money from the University of Missouri's presence in the conference than Louisville University's presence.
But we're not trading A&M for West Virginia, we're trading A&M for TCU. TCU does not have the viewership that A&M does, and losing A&M to the SEC essentially concedes everything southeast of College Station--ie, the Houston area--to the SEC. LSU had already made moves into Houston popularity wise the past few years, Arkansas has always had a resonance in TX, now the SEC has flanked Houston with TX's second most relevant university. It would have made more sense for the Big 12 to bring in Houston than TCU. The state of TX is now a divided state, when it comes to BCS conferences. The big bad SEC, with their 6 straight national titles, has a foothold in our own backyard.When aggy left, we lost a huge alumni base. We didn't lose TV sets, though. East Texans aren't going to stop watching Big 12 football. (aggy cares as much about "tu" as they do A&M and will continue to watch on TV.) West Virginia adds new TV sets (whole state, plus spills over into Pennsylvania, Ohio, Virginia, and Maryland), more and better history in both football and basketball, and almost as much weirdness. WVU is also Top 15 in merchandise sales in the entire country. Standing alone, A&M for WVU is not an equal trade. But when you factor in the overlap issues re: Texas TV market, then I think it equals out.
And if the SEC does put together their own cable network, everyone in TX will be forced to subscribe to it--likely before everyone is forced to subscribe to the Longhorn network (if that ever happens). A&M has a cultural long reach in TX, due to their satellite campuses.
The Big 12 lost BCS conference coverage monopolies: of the state of TX, of the state of Colorado, of the state of Missouri, of the state of Nebraska, monopolies of those states, and our response is trying to take half of Utah via BYU (shared with the PAC 12), half of Kentucky via Louisville (shared with the SEC), all of Ft. Worth, and all of West Virginia. There is no way that is a reasonable trade off, and in the long term, the numbers will bear this out.
The only salvation of the Big 12 is a raid of the ACC.
I wouldn't necessarily agree that A&M fans would still follow the Big 12 just to root against Texas. I didn't give a **** about SWC football when OU and UT were in separate conferences, and I don't think A&M fans would be that much different. If anything, you could say the same thing about UT, that UT fans are now going to start tuning TX tv sets (thus ratings and money) to SEC games just to troll A&M. In fact, I would guarantee the latter is more likely, because UT is more invested in seeing A&M fail in the new SEC than A&M would be in seeing UT fail in the new Big 12.
6 users like Master Pandemonium's post: boomhorn., DelMarSooner, LetsgoSooners82, MinnesotaSooner, The, UO fan
Spot on.The Big 12 lost BCS conference coverage monopolies: of the state of TX, of the state of Colorado, of the state of Missouri, of the state of Nebraska, monopolies of those states, and our response is trying to take half of Utah via BYU (shared with the PAC 12), half of Kentucky via Louisville (shared with the SEC), all of Ft. Worth, and all of West Virginia. There is no way that is a reasonable trade off, and in the long term, the numbers will bear this out.
The Big 12 in its current form is an unsustainable business model. Even if BYU and Louisville are added, the Big 12 will vastly trail the SEC, B1G, PAC and ACC in network earning power.
****uming both hold together that long, the Big 12 will be ahead of the ACC in network earning power at least until 2026 (when ACC contract runs out)
The following users like this post: lash
State populations is only a portion of the equation. The other part, and the bigger part, is "Actual Audience" or who actually watches a team. It's why Nebraska, with low population was valuable to the Big 10.
I would argue that the loss of Colorado wasn't that big of a deal over all to the Big 12. Missouri, A&M + Colorado as far as TV audience nationally isn't that different then TCU, West Virginia, BYU, and Louisville. Yes Nebraska was the irreplaceable one.
This is correct. Timing favors the B12's next TV deal.
It's the major reason why the ACC raid is even plausible.
No thanks. 8 conference champs, seed them and drop the tailgates for 2 weeks on the higher seeds campus. The way you describe is going to brings voters, bias, politicking and ESPN into the fold to influence who those next 3 or 4 teams are. Win your conference and you are in. Dont win your conference, you can go to a bowl game. What we need to move towards is a system that doesnt use polls or voters. Thats whats holding college football back along with the bowl system.
What are the odds of raiding 4-6 ACC teams? Get FSU/Clemson to start and add Ga. Tech & NC State (get out of the UNC/Duke shadow) for a Piedmont pod. Then go for VA Tech, UVA & Maryland to add to WVU. If you still need teams then get Rutgers, Louisville, or UConn (only w/ Rutgers). Put Iowa State in the east and you have 2 -8 team east/west divisions.
OU/NU died when the Big 8 died. That was a long, long time ago now. The Big 12 never had that rivalry. Just a glimpse of it from the rear-view mirror. But FSU has a heck of a lot better chance at being competitive over the next 20 years than the Huskers do. The OU/NU rivalry was built on a 17 year stretch (approx 1970-1987) that could absolutely be recreated with Miami or FSU. We just need to have a long stretch of dominance at the same time one of those schools has a long stretch of dominance. And it's far more likely that one of those Florida schools plays good football for a 2 decade stretch than Nebraska. Sad, but true.
Basically this argument is "no possible additions to the Big 12 would be satisfactory in my eyes." Okay. Why do you even visit the realignment thread?
Missouri is unified... except for the KC Chiefs, KC Royals, St. Louis Cardinals, St. Louis Rams, and St. Louis Blues. The vast majority of the state of Missouri lives on its borders. Those are pro towns where Mizzou is maybe 3rd on the sports radar. Maybe. KC is arguably a Jayhawk city. Louisville would get us on TV sets in the entire state of Kentucky, even if a lot of those TV sets are owned by UK fans. We'd also be on TV sets in southern Indiana, and maybe even in Southern Ohio. TV sets = a wash, if not a win. Either way, the Kansas City is a big portion of Missouri's potential TV value and that value is still in the Big 12. We keep that, in addition to adding Kentucky and southern Indiana? Win.
There are a bunch of Texas grads living in Houston who beg to differ that Houston is now an SEC city. And to the extend the SEC has more of a foothold, A&M sucking in the SEC will do more to stop that than adding Houston so that they can suck as a Big 12 team. If 10 years from now, the Cougars have a new stadium with any fan base whatsoever, I'll buy UH. Until then, I want to see them win CUSA occasionally. TCU has been to two BCS games and won a Rose Bowl. Good TCU > Crappy Houston
We are trading CU, NU, A&M, and Mizzou for WVU, TCU, and maybe BYU and Louisville. I pointed out the head to head comparisons to demonstrate that the Big 12 arguably upgraded in at least 3 of those trades. NU >>> TCU. I bet TCU wins another BCS bowl game before Nebraska does, though.
I agree with this. It's the same principle that makes FSU much more valuable to the Big 12 than it would be to the SEC. But I don't think the SEC network being carried in Houston hurts the Big 12's TV deal.
BCS conference "coverage monopolies" - there's nothing intrinsically valuable about that. And for that matter, "coverage monopolies" netted the Big 12 crappy TV deals. If coverage monopolies were great, the SEC would be trying to add FSU and Clemson. What the league had is the ability (if we had a conference network - which we don't) to charge a premium in those states for carrying the Big 12 Network. This is a moot argument b/c our Tier 3 model isn't a conference network model. But thinking prospectively, we wouldn't charge any less for a hypothetical Big 12 Network today in Texas than we would have with A&M - provided Texas were on that network. The SEC Network extending into Texas doesn't change that. We would still have high demand for carriage in Kansas City and western Missouri, even without Mizzou. Because of Louisville, the Big 12 Network would be picked up throughout Kentucky and southern Indiana. Louisville doesn't give the league leverage in Kentucky for carriage negotiations the way UK would, but we'd be on in the entire state. Let Louisville win the Big 12 even one time and see where prices might go. West Virginia would put the "Big 12 Network" on TV sets in WV, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Maryland, and Ohio. The whole state of West Virginia... and Pittsburgh would be a high demand city, b/c of the large alum base throughout.
Cable companies and satellite providers aren't going to ask any Texans whether they are Aggies. They're going to measure demand for the network and charge accordingly. UT, Tech, TCU, and Baylor, their fans and their alums, would make demand in Texas very high - we don't need A&M for that. Providers would carry the Big 12 Network in the state of Kentucky - and charge accordingly - if Louisville created that demand. Initially the demand wouldn't be high in Eastern Kentucky, but it would probably be carried. UL's pull in southern Indiana would more than likely offset lower initial pricing in Eastern Kentucky.
If by salvation, you mean "better than the place of honor that the original Big 12 never held in real life," then I agree with you. But I also think that an ACC raid could happen. We have a strong league that will probably be able to offer FSU and Clemson significantly more money per year than the ACC.
Well, you might be right about this, but I think it's going to take a long time to play out. A&M's entire culture is built around an inferiority complex to Texas. Texas' entire culture is arguably built around a superiority complex over A&M. That won't change for either overnight. I also think Texas will watch SEC games at a higher rate to watch little brother fail. If more people are watching more football, then the TV revenue pie grows and everyone wins. Revenue isn't a fixed sum.
Last edited by Camel at Sea; 02-21-2012 at 10:43 PM.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong on the #'s here, but this is how I'm understanding this.....
The B12 TV revenues currently break down as follows.
T1 -- $6M/school ($60M total) --- ABC/ESPN
T2 -- $9M/school ($90M total) --- FX
T3 -- whatever you kill
Each school is currently making roughly $15M/year from our T-1 and T-2 rights.
So, our second-most valuable product (T2-FX) is earning us 150% more than our most valuable product (T1-ABC/ESPN).
The B12's current T1 deal (ABC/ESPN) is ancient. It's the most undervalued contract in all of CFB. So it's reasonable to project the B12's updated T1 contract will likely be twice as valuable as our current T2 (FX) contract --- whether we renegotiate early with Disney or take it to the open market and let one their competitors have a shot at it.
It wouldn't seem like the Mouse to let a football-crazy conference in the CTZ slip through his fingers....especially when the CFB is smokin hot.
So, the new T1 deal will probably be in the ballpark of $180+M/year. And it could be more than that considering the red-hot CFB tv market.
So....after the upcoming negotiations:
T1- $18M
T2- $9M
$27M/year per year....for T1 and T2.
Now, throw in the revenue from OU's upcoming T3 deal with FSN....and now we're talkin' $30M+/Year for OU from our TV revenue alone.
Conservatively.
So OU is looking at doubling our TV $ in the B12 within the next couple years. And so are the other B12 programs.
And that's all ****uming we stick with the ten-team model.
So even if the ACC raid does not happen, in a few years West Virginia and TCU will be making $10+M more in TV revenue than FSU and Clemson. Over the course of a decade, WVU and TCU will out-earn FSU and Clemson by over $100M in TV revenue.
This is why leaders at Clemson and FSU would be guilty of negligence if they didn't at least listen to what the B12 has to say. The ACC is locked in for 15 years at around $15M/Year. And their recent additions of Pitt/Syracuse barely moved the needle.
Time is the B12's ally and the ACC's enemy.
Isn't that about right?
The following users like this post: BoulderSooner
Not very high actually.
North Carolina and Duke aren't leaving...and they control NCstate (one board of regents) With those 3, Wake Forest will stay as well (they are the ACC version of Baylor anyways). With Duke and North Carolina, Ga. Tech will stay for the "academic prestige" (which I get in the B1G and the PAC as they share research $) With those Virginia will stay for the basketball, which will keep Va. Tech in (too many strings were pulled to get Va Tech INTO the ACC). Syracuse and Boston College are too far of outliers to have any real huge interest in the Big 12, and vice-versa as they wanted to be in a conference together.
Those that could leave conceivably:
FSU, Clemson, Miami, Maryland, Pitt
Well, your numbers on the new Tier one Deal maybe a little high especialy at the front end of the deal. But the rest is about right.
The real kicker is the Tier 3 portion. Pooled into a Conference Network with the likes of Clemson and FSU....we could be talking some serious money there, beyond the typical $3-5 million or so many schools make currently on their own
There were reports last September that the Big 10 was pursuing Maryland. I think if the Terps went anywhere, it would be the to the Big 10 rather than the Big 12. Maryland and Rutgers are both AAU schools in major media markets, and I could see them being #13 and #14 for the Big 10. I could also see the Big 10 making a play at Virginia, but I am not sure they'd be willing to break from the Carolina Quad, unless the conference were really breaking apart around them first.
i agree with getting rid of the polls. but should the wac champion get a shot at the national championship over a second place big12 team? thats all i'm looking at. and if coaches vote, there will be a lot of schools from the same conference getting, so that doesn't work.
Yes, the WAC champ should. The second place B12 school had its chance to win the B12. Win your conference and you are in. I dont want to have any voting. People cant vote on what they dont see and its a fact the coaches/harris poll voters dont watch the games. You know what they do? They tune in to ESPN. Who are ESPN talking about? The conference they have the biggest contract with. I hate OKst as much as I hate the KKK, but they got screwed this year. ESPN got everyone to focus on the one loss instead of their many quality wins. The rich pricks know it too. Thats why they are now looking to make serious changes. They know it was BS last year, otherwise you would be hearing "the system worked".
As far as conference expansion goes, we only need to get two more teams. If we could get a Clemson/FSU to join us, that would be so great. They arent big time basketball schools so leaving the ACC for better football would be right up their alley. It would be hard to entice a GAtech or NCst because they are more about basketball than football. VAtech may want to move since they are pro-football school too. If I had to ask for my dream four, it would be CLEM/FSU/VAtech/Nevada(gotta go west sometime). That would make the B12 one nasty conference.
OU
OSU
texas
TT
TCU
BU
Kst
KU
CLEM
FSU
VAT
WVU
NEV
IAst
May not happen, but certainly worth a look. That would be a mean conference right there. The conference would get more visiblity across the country. If you want to move to 16 teams, invite Fresno State and SDSU from out west. You could divide it up in east and west divisions or four pod systems if you wish.
West - SDSU, NEV, FRESNO, TT, OSU, OU, KU, TX EAST - KST, IAst, TCU, BU, CLEM, FSU, WVU, VAT
or
North - IAst, KU, Kst, VAT, WVU, NEV, OU, OSU SOUTH - FSU, TX, TT, BU, CLEM, SDSU, FRST, TCU
or
POD1 - SDSU, NEV, TT, FRST POD2 KU, Kst, IAst, OKst POD3 OU, TX, TCU, BU (eww, nasty), POD4 CLEM, FSU, VAT, WVU(dang, even nastier)
Would be some mean football played right there. Play a two game OOC, have a conference bye week meaning everyone takes a bye at week at the same time, and a 9 game conference schedule and a title game.
Last edited by bruthaman; 02-22-2012 at 07:14 AM.
One thing to keep in mind is that if the ACC gets broken up, Maryland might not be so high on the B1G list of expansion targets - and that's ****uming the B1G even wants to expand further. I could see the Big Ten offering UNC, NCSU, Duke and Virginia to join the conference as a four-team pod. Then again, you could possibly swap out NCSU w/ Maryland in that pod, and NCSU and Va Tech could go the SEC.
IF the ACC truly looks like it will crumble, I think the B1G and the SEC would certainly be players in taking some of the choicer schools. If both want to expand of course.
However, I don't see the ACC totally collapsing, nor do I see the B1G expanding (so long as Notre Dame is an independent). The SEC, would love North Carolina and Duke, but not sure those 2 want the white trash rift-raff of the SEC......even for millions of dollars of more money.
I'd see NC and Duke joining the Big East before the SEC.
well, I'm sure that was a humor comment, but I agree that Duke and UNC want no part of the SEC. I think they (the ACC) would take a few more from the Big Least, that fit their model like UConn, Rutgers depending how many they needed to get back to 12 teams and being a cute little basketball first, football 2nd, conference with high academic standards.
I think if the Big 12 does actually grab FSU and Clemson, the ACC will fall apart fast. It will shake the foundation of what people see as a stable conference and expose it as a house of cards and put the remaining schools in a very uneasy position. Schools that were once thought to be set on staying will be much more open to moving to another conference, particularly when you factor that the ACC will be making even less money as a whole going forward. This will likely get the SEC and Big 10 involved. I definitely see the SEC taking 2 and the Big 10 taking at least 1. Then the Big 12 will have easy pickens for what's left and given the three conferences seem to primarily want different schools, it works even better. If it all happens in one season, the ACC members leaving can vote to dissolve and forgo any exit penalties.
Depends on how it shakes out. I'd like to see us take at least four from the ACC (FSU, Clemson, GaTech, and VaTech, and Miami if we can't get one of these or want to go to 15 and wait for the ****ing Notre Dame). It'd be a cripple fight between the Big East and ACC at that point, with the SEC and Big 10 lurking as well.
Although some might think of georgia tech as an afterhtought in all of this, I think they might actually be on of the key componants. The only football schools that FSU really cares about playing in the ACC are Clemson, Georgia Tech, and Miami. The team that Miami really cares about playing is FSU. The teams that Clemson really care about playing are FSU and Georgia Tech. You could possibly throw in North Carolina.
Georgia Tech likes to be ****ociated with good academic schools (Duke, UNC, UVA, etc.) as does Miami (this is one of the reasons they really wanted to join the ACC). So if Georgia Tech's only football rivals in the ACC (Clemson and FSU) along with another good to great academic school in Miami plan on leaving for the Big XII, Georgia Tech would be pressured pretty hard from donors, fans, etc. to go as well. This would allow Georgia Tech to cling to rivalries and not lose too much on the academic side of things. Throw in the fact that the ACC has been moving north during the past couple expansions (Pitt, Syracuse, BC) this might be enticing for these schools. Especially, if the money is right.
And if something like this would happen, a Big XII - SEC series could be huge!
G Tech - UGA
Clemson - South Carolina
FSU - Florida
Texas - TAMU
Kansas - Mizzou
OU - Arkansas?
I think most of you kind of get the picture. This would allow rivalries to be maintained by the 4 new teams and get the Big XII some killer television rights (UM-FSU, GTech - Clemson, Clemson-FSU, etc)
Last edited by MAcFroggy; 02-22-2012 at 12:07 PM.
The following users like this post: MinnesotaSooner
Posting Permissions
