*** Conference Apocalypse Part 2 ***

[Spade1000]

FSU, Clemson , Miami, Maryland/VT Is absolute best scenario. VT and the Terps are interchangeably, though it comes down to VT having more TV panache` and tradition (Hey aTm , Eat a ****! you have been Replaced). First conference to offer MD a deal gets them, I would be willing to wager. So your spinner is FSU and whether or not Miami is a requirement or not. I really feel that if we decide to go with an ACC raid - Clemson jumps on board at first oppertunity, so you have them try and arrange a travel partner in VT or MD, while we actually go after Miami.

[The]

Now that would make sense. IF the Big 12 lands Clemson and FSU, other ACC schools will be looking for better options as well. And Miami may be a requirement for FSU anyway. Vtech may be more interested in the SEC but Maryland or Georgia Tech may be available to take their place and if not, there's always Louisville. That's how I see Louisville, a decent school that will always be available to round it out if necessary.

Louisville is that homely girl in AP Algebra that you know crushes on you and dreams of you taking her to the prom one day.

Right now, the Big XII is the stud guy that just went through a terrible breakup, and has already hit the easy chicks on the rebound.

We should be looking for hot chicks with prospects now. Not silly little girls that draw unicorns and "Mrs. Louisville BigXII" on the inside cover of their Trapper Keepers.

[Redhawk]

Hey Redhawk, you're making some noise:

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=159&f=4582&t=8931332

And which of you is SoonerLawer29?

yea! (I guess)

For what it's worth, and I guess I didn't write it clear enough....Tulane is not #1 choice. Just that they are on the list and higher then many might think at first blush.

Here's the entire conversation I had:
Me: Give me something on Conference Realignment. Any news that's interesting?
Friend/Source: "Tulane. They are a serious prospect in some circles. Tulane would go over well with some University Presidents."
Me: "TULANE?"
Friend/Source: "Many are concerned the Big12 just lost 4 AAU schools, and adding Tulane would appease those, plus they are regional, and it gets the Big 12 in SEC country. They might be ahead of Louisville for some."
Me: "Tulane and Maryland would look good with Clemson and FSU" (trying to get a reaction on Clemson and FSU)
Friend/Source: "That would be a solid well-rounded conference"

There....read into it what you will.

I know BYU is off the table.

[Spade1000]

A possible ACC strategy board would look something like this in MY mind (heh) :

Clemson : Mizzou like flirting, wants out at any cost. No political tag alongs. Easy money.

FSU : Tradition. Big national fan base . Prestige. Lots of TV sets in Florida. Possible political Tag-along in Miami...

Miami : Much Like FSU. National Brand. Championships. Florida TV sets. FSU possible Political Tag-along....

Maryland : Lots of TV's in the DMV. Needs money like a crack fiend. No Tag along. Marginal history. Sleeping Giant in football, Great hoops.

Virginia Tech : National Brand. Crazy military school (Eat a **** aTm). Virginia + DMV Tv sets. UVA possible political Tag-along.

UVA???????

[MeMyself&Me]

Louisville is that homely girl in AP Algebra that you know crushes on you and dreams of you taking her to the prom one day.

Right now, the Big XII is the stud guy that just went through a terrible breakup, and has already hit the easy chicks on the rebound.

We should be looking for hot chicks with prospects now. Not silly little girls that draw unicorns and "Mrs. Louisville BigXII" on the inside cover of their Trapper Keepers.

So, if it came down that the only way to get Clemson and FSU, we had to add Miami but no other ACC schools were interested, you would rather go to 13 or you rather stay at 10? I ask this cause your post makes it sound like you don't want Louisville under any circumstance. I'm of the stance that Louisville is OK in either of two scenarios:

1) To round out to an even number if necessary to get quality programs like the example I gave.

2) If it is apparent that NO great additions will be coming at all (like if the ACC signed a GOR) then Louisville is OK as a means to get back to having a CCG when pared with another simply OK school. (Tulane is not a simply OK school imo)

I agree with the homely girl analogy but homely is not the same as ugly. Louisville is homely. Tulane is ugly. So is Cincy (seems to be paired with Louisville a lot).

[SpankyNek]

Tulane would be better than Louisville or Cincy in the above scenario. Tulane would be, hands down, the best academic school in the league, and would get better in football as time goes on with the new stadium and league prestige. Will they ever get the same recruits as LSU? No. But they could excel with the increase of conference prestige much like Stanford did when SC started having success. They are a potential osu type football program that adds significant academic credentials and research money.

[Camel at Sea]

Tulane would be better than Louisville or Cincy in the above scenario. Tulane would be, hands down, the best academic school in the league, and would get better in football as time goes on with the new stadium and league prestige. Will they ever get the same recruits as LSU? No. But they could excel with the increase of conference prestige much like Stanford did when SC started having success. They are a potential osu type football program that adds significant academic credentials and research money.

Tulane would be to the Big 12 as Vanderbilt is to the SEC. Great school in a cool city, with small attendance and little chance of ever winning anything. But if the Big 12 had already added FSU, Miami, and Clemson, I could be persuaded that Tulane is preferable to Louisville if the league needed to round out at 14.

[Redhawk]

Tulane would be to the Big 12 as Vanderbilt is to the SEC. Great school in a cool city, with small attendance and little chance of ever winning anything. But if the Big 12 had already added FSU, Miami, and Clemson, I could be persuaded that Tulane is preferable to Louisville if the league needed to round out at 14.

Well, last fall I heard someone say "we needed our own Stanford" but Vanderbilt would be a better analogy. That's why Tulane would be ahead of Cincinnati, and possibly Louisville.

Don't ask me why I haven't heard of Rutgers for the Big 12, but I haven't. I would have ****umed they would actually be the top of the "Non-ACC, Not-BYU" schools list.

[Camel at Sea]

Well, last fall I heard someone say "we needed our own Stanford" but Vanderbilt would be a better analogy. That's why Tulane would be ahead of Cincinnati, and possibly Louisville.

Don't ask me why I haven't heard of Rutgers for the Big 12, but I haven't. I would have ****umed they would actually be the top of the "Non-ACC, Not-BYU" schools list.

Dean Blevins was talking up Rutgers a lot last fall. If they aren't being mentioned at all anymore, it could be that they are either ACC or Big 10 bound.

[Redhawk]

Dean Blevins was talking up Rutgers a lot last fall. If they aren't being mentioned at all anymore, it could be that they are either ACC or Big 10 bound.

From my guy, I'd chalk it up more to a total lockdown to info on Realignment. "we are happy with the current set up of 10...yada, yada" (which doesn't mean they aren't happy with 10, I think OU is actually pleased with 10)

[SpankyNek]

Tulane would be to the Big 12 as Vanderbilt is to the SEC. Great school in a cool city, with small attendance and little chance of ever winning anything.

This has become Miami as well.

[Redhawk]

This has become Miami as well.

and Miami's academics aren't as good as Tulane's.

[MadMex]

Miami would be a great discount buy IMO... They'll be back to "normality" sooner or later... using the word normality lightly. They've never really been normal but, they have consistantly brought a quality product to the football field over the past 30 years or so... ALSO: would give the Big12 a stranglehold on the Florida market with Miami and Florida State.

[MeMyself&Me]

Dosh is saying that a tournament payout would be $600m to $1.5b.

http://espn.go.com/blog/playbook/dol...big-moneymaker

FWIW, that poster that gave the payout model that I quoted two pages back used $300m as an example for his figures. Said $400m more likely, and later posted that it had been hinted that $600m or more was likely 2 or 3 years down the road.

[MeMyself&Me]

I'll cruise other fan's boards cause I find realignment discussion so entertaining, but I've still yet to actually register for a non-OU fan board. While perusing the FSU boards, I notice a common theme. They use the OU-FSU game from last season as a barometer for all that is great and what they want in their home
stadium as a regularity. They talk about it in the same gusto that OU fans talk about the '08 Tech game.

Can you imagine the most exhilarating game you've ever seen in Norman being a loss? ACC games must suck! Anyway, glad OU can help some see the light and win at the same time.

[MeMyself&Me]

I'll cruise other fan's boards cause I find realignment discussion so entertaining, but I've still yet to actually register for a non-OU fan board. While perusing the FSU boards, I notice a common theme. They use the OU-FSU game from last season as a barometer for all that is great and what they want in their home
stadium as a regularity. They talk about it in the same gusto that OU fans talk about the '08 Tech game.

Can you imagine the most exhilarating game you've ever seen in Norman being a loss? ACC games must suck! Anyway, glad OU can help some see the light and win at the same time.

[Beltdancer]

I look for the SEC to go to 16 rather quickly if the FSU and Clemson to Big 12 talk gets serious. VT and UNC are logical choices for the SEC.

[MadMex]

I look for the SEC to go to 16 rather quickly if the FSU and Clemson to Big 12 talk gets serious. VT and UNC are logical choices for the SEC.

The common perception of most is that the Tar Heels aren't going anywhere without Duke and Virginia Tech is tied to Virginia... not saying that these things can't change (SEE: Texas - Texas A&M / West Virginia - Pitt / Kansas - Missouri) I would be suprised to see North Carolina leave the ACC. Not as much Virginia Tech so long as they get to bring Virginia with them.

[Redhawk]

The common perception of most is that the Tar Heels aren't going anywhere without Duke and Virginia Tech is tied to Virginia... not saying that these things can't change (SEE: Texas - Texas A&M / West Virginia - Pitt / Kansas - Missouri) I would be suprised to see North Carolina leave the ACC. Not as much Virginia Tech so long as they get to bring Virginia with them.

And if you believe the rumors Virginia Tech turned the SEC down just last fall. Which means they might be able to break away from Virginia who pulled strings to get Tech INTO the ACC....

There is a core in the ACC that are committed to each other. NC/Duke/Wake Forest...and NC rules NC state by having the same board...Virginia may control V.Tech, and Ga. Tech so far has been committed to the NC/Duke group. That's a core if they hold together, could reform with some Big East left overs (already have Pitt, BC, Syracuse, add Uconn, Louisville, Rutgers, USF, etc) to stay a solid basketball conference.

North Carolina isn't leaving Duke that I can see and Duke isn't joining the SEC for academic reasons. I don't see Virginia Tech leaving Virginia, and I don't see Virginia joining the SEC either for academic reasons. Ga. Tech only leaves for the B1G.

Even IF the Big 12 were to add Fl. State, Clemson and Maryland...and maybe Miami as a group, I don't think that necessarily means the SEC or the B1G expands into ACC territory.

[MeMyself&Me]

More from MHver3. I'll just post a link cause it's a thread where he has a few posts that add to the understanding of what he's saying:

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=159&f=4582&t=8941861

Aside from the fact that this about about the most disgusting looking tournament format I could imagine, the new post season would widen the gap between the Big 12 and the ACC. For one, the ACC would rarely qualify for the tournament (once in the last ten years). But second there would be no more AQs for BCS conference champs BUT there are qualifying standards for the 'consolation' BCS bowls. As such, the ACC wouldn't have made many 'consolation' BCS bowls over the last ten years either (without going back and looking, I'm thinking once or twice). In other words, they would be relegated to about where MWC was over the last 10 years... closest of the non-majors but so, so far behind.

[usaosooner]

UTSA jumping from WAC to CUSA..

http://espn.go.com/college-football/...conference-usa

Texas-San Antonio is poised to join Conference USA just one year after accepting an invitation to the WAC.

The University of Texas System Board of Regents has scheduled a vote on the move for Wednesday. The meeting agenda states that C-USA officials approached UTSA in March and that the school will incur no exit fee for leaving the WAC.

UT System Chancellor Francisco Cigarroa has recommended that the board approve the move.

Conference USA is planning to merge with the Mountain West, creating a league with as many as 24 teams across five time zones.

UTSA was scheduled to officially join the WAC this year. But three WAC schools have declared their intentions to leave since UTSA accepted its invitation, which would leave the WAC with just four football schools.

[Al F***n Swearingen]

I can't believe we are talking about Tulane seriously. Tulane. A year ago we all agreed they were a joke.

[SoonerLibertarian]

Wasn't Tulane trying to go to DII a few years back? No, not D1A actually going down to DII

[pbr street gang]

You guys still grasping at straws trying to make the new big 12 better? Zero chance that any ACC school jumps. So you have UL BYU and the others. Nothing has changed. Enjoy the circle jerk with West By God Virginny and their delusional fan base. I would be looking more at the non conference schedule for strength of schedule and interesting games. The conference schedule can be summed up in one word....dull.

[SpankyNek]

You guys still grasping at straws trying to make the new big 12 better? Zero chance that any ACC school jumps. So you have UL BYU and the others. Nothing has changed. Enjoy the circle jerk with West By God Virginny and their delusional fan base. I would be looking more at the non conference schedule for strength of schedule and interesting games. The conference schedule can be summed up in one word....dull.

OU will have a top 5 SOS...again.

[Redhawk]

The latest rumors from MHver3 have gone over the top for me. What he is posting as "insider information" is too detailed for anyone to know. I know some Big 12 officials and some Big 12 University Presidents and AD's have talked to other University Presidents and AD's. But he's listing out specific demands. The only way he would know this is if he were a University President and AD. I don't think even if he were a secretary listening in on the phone calls he would know some of the things he's saying he "knows".

Damn it.....I got pulled in again.

[Redhawk]

I can't believe we are talking about Tulane seriously. Tulane. A year ago we all agreed they were a joke.

yes, yes we did. BUT.....for some their AAU status, and new stadium, and also market the Big 12 isn't in....has them on the back up list.

[MeMyself&Me]

The latest rumors from MHver3 have gone over the top for me. What he is posting as "insider information" is too detailed for anyone to know. I know some Big 12 officials and some Big 12 University Presidents and AD's have talked to other University Presidents and AD's. But he's listing out specific demands. The only way he would know this is if he were a University President and AD. I don't think even if he were a secretary listening in on the phone calls he would know some of the things he's saying he "knows".

Damn it.....I got pulled in again.

Just got done reading his latest thread and I'm starting to agree with you. He can be a very convincing poster but the stuff he's posting... let's put it this way...

I can believe someone getting a bit of info and posting it cause I tend to think people will hear little bits of info here and there. But he seems to have the whole story. If he just posted ONE of his posts, I'd say 'WOW'! But he's got a 'WOW' post every single day. It's making it hard to believe.

The one thing that has me still listening was when he was talking about tournament payouts, he mentioned $400m/year for the first year or two and that it would pay at least $600m/year after that. Nearly a week later, Dosh had an article on ESPN.com that said the tournament would likely be worth $600m to $1.5b. Where did he get that from? I hadn't seen it posted or reported anywhere prior.

Actually, it reminds be a bit of Chip Brown back in 2010.

[Redhawk]

Just got done reading his latest thread and I'm starting to agree with you. He can be a very convincing poster but the stuff he's posting... let's put it this way...

I can believe someone getting a bit of info and posting it cause I tend to think people will hear little bits of info here and there. But he seems to have the whole story. If he just posted ONE of his posts, I'd say 'WOW'! But he's got a 'WOW' post every single day. It's making it hard to believe.

The one thing that has me still listening was when he was talking about tournament payouts, he mentioned $400m/year for the first year or two and that it would pay at least $600m/year after that. Nearly a week later, Dosh had an article on ESPN.com that said the tournament would likely be worth $600m to $1.5b. Where did he get that from? I hadn't seen it posted or reported anywhere prior.

Actually, it reminds be a bit of Chip Brown back in 2010.

It could be done as a very educated guess. TV contracts in the past always were higher when they were signed then when they were discussed.

I know a few Regents for OU. I know a couple of media types connected to OU. They don't know the stuff this guy is posting. Boren or Castiglione might....and even then I don't think even they are that much in front lines of the negotiations.

And even if they did...it's like talking to the Government about UFO's.

[DarrellS011]

OU will have a top 5 SOS...again.

Sagarin had the whole conference ranked in the top 13 in schedule strength last year (mine was pretty close).

1 Kansas
2 Iowa State
3 oSu
4 Texas A&M
5 Texas
6 Oklahoma
8 K-State
10 Baylor
11 Texas Tech
13 Missouri

TCU and West Virginia had weak schedules but that will change when they play in the Big 12 because the Big 12 is at least the 2nd best conference in college football. The Big 12 is tied with the SEC with teams in the top four since the BCS began.

[MeMyself&Me]

It could be done as a very educated guess. TV contracts in the past always were higher when they were signed then when they were discussed.

I know a few Regents for OU. I know a couple of media types connected to OU. They don't know the stuff this guy is posting. Boren or Castiglione might....and even then I don't think even they are that much in front lines of the negotiations.

And even if they did...it's like talking to the Government about UFO's.

BTW, glad to see you posting over there. I still haven't bothered to register but am enjoying the discussions.

[BoulderSooner]

utah st and san jose st to the MN west .. http://espn.go.com/college-sports/st...cording-report

[Redhawk]

utah st and san jose st to the MN west .. http://espn.go.com/college-sports/st...cording-report

This is actually interesting to me. I've seen internet speculation type articles suggesting that San Diego St, and Boise St, could rejoin the MWC, along with BYU possibly and tearing up their current TV deals (they could start a new conference potentially) and could potentially make near the same money as joining the Big Least, but in a conference at least on their side of the Mississippi river. To give a seat to USU and SJSU now I'm not sure it means anything. MWC can't sit back and wait for members, they need bodies....but at a certain point they could get TOO many if those 3 rejoin.

If the MWC added SDSU, BYU and BSU back to their fold to me they would be ahead of the Big East in my mind in pecking order of conferences.

[Soonerpsycho]

FSU to the Big 12?

SIAP

[MeMyself&Me]

FSU to the Big 12?

SIAP

Yeah, that's the thread Redhawk and I were talking about a few posts up. It's not so much that what that single first post states can't be true. It's more about the fact he's got one of those "WOW" posts every day with too much detail. At some point, you got to say "really?". Later in that same thread he says that Miami is asking to bring along Boston College. Sooo, if you follow what he's been saying... Clemson will join if FSU will. FSU will join Miami will (wants GT as well). Miami will join if BC will.

Since its believable the Big 12 would say "no" regarding BC, the whole deal falls through and we hear nothing of it (regardless of whether it actually happened or not) and he can say "I was right but the situation was fluid and the Big 12 just didn't want BC."

All that said, he did post some info regarding the post season tournament model that was being favored before the media started saying it. He was either right on or very close in a lot of details that the media started reporting AFTER he made the post. Including the total payout expected and the anchored bowl layout instead of campus sights among some other minor details. Because of that, I'm still listening to him but the dose of salt I take with his posts is getting larger each day.

[The]

Yeah, that's the thread Redhawk and I were talking about a few posts up. It's not so much that what that single first post states can't be true. It's more about the fact he's got one of those "WOW" posts every day with too much detail. At some point, you got to say "really?". Later in that same thread he says that Miami is asking to bring along Boston College. Sooo, if you follow what he's been saying... Clemson will join if FSU will. FSU will join if GT and Miami will (wants GT as well). Miami will join if BC will.

Since the Big 12 would say "no" regarding BC, the whole deal falls through and we hear nothing of it and he can say "I was right but the situation was fluid and the Big 12 just didn't want BC."

All that said, he did post some info regarding the post season tournament model that was being favored before the media started saying it. He was either right on or very close in a lot of details that the media started reporting AFTER he made the post. Including the total payout expected and the anchored bowl layout instead of campus sights among some other minor details. Because of that, I'm still listening to him but the dose of salt I take with his posts is getting larger each day.

He sounds like he's trolling. The Hillbillies are all fired up about joining the Big XII, and they'll eat up whatever slop someone throws out there. Tomorrow will be "Hey guys, I've been sitting on this for a while, but NOTRE DAME is coming with us!".

It's cheap entertainment and it strokes their ego.

[MeMyself&Me]

It's cheap entertainment

I definitely agree with that part.

[Redhawk]

I definitely agree with that part.

Me too

[lash]

I guess if there's an actual snow ball's chance of all that happening, we'll just have to hold our nose with Miami.


I might rather stay at 10.

[x97]

You guys still grasping at straws trying to make the new big 12 better? Zero chance that any ACC school jumps. So you have UL BYU and the others. Nothing has changed. Enjoy the circle jerk with West By God Virginny and their delusional fan base. I would be looking more at the non conference schedule for strength of schedule and interesting games. The conference schedule can be summed up in one word....dull.

Ouch. Reality can be painful at times.

[silverwheels]

...and he's back. Still hoping that BYU will beg the Big 12 for an invite?

[lash]

pbr is gonna be crushed when five ranked B12 opponents show up on our schedule this fall.



x97 is just gonna be crushed for all of life.

[MeMyself&Me]

BYU is not coming to the Big 12. How 'bout them apples!

[MeMyself&Me]

More fodder. This is from a poster I've been following. I'd characterize what I've seen from him as a skeptical listener and certainly has that Texas fan arrogance. This is the first time I've seen him post info.

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=159&f=4582&t=8957203

As I have mentioned before, I have no big time sources but I have a good friend who does know important people inside the Texas athletics department.

He emailed me some info that is encouraging but different from what we are hearing from other folks around here.

First off, Texas & OU REALLY don't want to go beyond 12 teams. He emphasized this is a HUGE deal to both of those schools. I sent him an email asking why (how the revenue is split, perhaps?) but he has yet to reply.

Folks at Texas feel very confident that FSU and Clemson are coming to the Big12. In fact, it is expected to be a fait accompli by the end of June. They will play football in the Big12 in 2013.

How the conference will be structured and having protected rivalry games between divisions is a huge part of all of this. One Division is gong to be Texas, Tech, Baylor, TCU, OU and OSU. The other Will be ISU, KSU, Kansas, WVU, Clemson and FSU. He mentioned 3 protected rivalry games across the divisions: Texas & FSU, Clemson & OU and WVU & TCU. These games will happen every year. I am ****uming the other teams will have annual rivalry games across division but they were not mentioned.

The only thing I'm not crazy about is the protected rivalries. In a 12 team league, I just don't see it as necessary or good for one. FSU could play OU or Texas every year and Clemson could play Texas or OU every year. Same with WV. That said, if you're going to have a protected 'rivalries' with schools that have no history as rivals, I think you need to base it on giving programs not in recruiting areas games with teams in recruiting areas first (for league balance) and marque matchups second. I don't see anything Texas would gain from an annual game with FSU and nothing FSU would gain from an annual game with Texas. Neither schools is going to be recruiting the other state that much at all. Instead, Clemson or WV should be having an annual game with Texas and OU or OSU should be having an annual game with FSU. Good marque matchups with cross recruiting potential.

I know why it won't happen that way though. Texas wants the biggest matchup for themselves and what Texas wants...

[The]

More fodder. This is from a poster I've been following. I'd characterize what I've seen from him as a skeptical listener and certainly has that Texas fan arrogance. This is the first time I've seen him post info.

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=159&f=4582&t=8957203



The only thing I'm not crazy about is the protected rivalries. In a 12 team league, I just don't see it as necessary or good for one. FSU could play OU or Texas every year and Clemson could play Texas or OU every year. Same with WV. That said, if you're going to have a protected 'rivalries' with schools that have no history as rivals, I think you need to base it on giving programs not in recruiting areas games with teams in recruiting areas first (for league balance) and marque matchups second. I don't see anything Texas would gain from an annual game with FSU and nothing FSU would gain from an annual game with Texas. Neither schools is going to be recruiting the other state that much at all. Instead, Clemson or WV should be having an annual game with Texas and OU or OSU should be having an annual game with FSU. Good marque matchups with cross recruiting potential.

I know why it won't happen that way though. Texas wants the biggest matchup for themselves and what Texas wants...

I like the idea of a permanent x-division opponent. If we had done that with Nebraska, things may have turned out differently.

And I hope Texas gets K State.

[MeMyself&Me]

And I hope Texas gets K State.

LOL, I'd like that too but I KNOW that's not going to happen. FWIW, even the resident 'nole fan over there is questioning the FSU/Texas part.

Protected x-divisional rivalries makes sense to me when you actually have important rivals in different divisions. OU/Nebraska is a good example. However, the down side it that it guarantees the participants a harder road to a conference championship. You have to weigh the balance of what's important. In this lineup, there would be no important traditional rivals to protect. Instead, it's all about making sure there are marquee matchups for the network which I understand. However, you're going to have the marquee matchups anyway cause you will play every team 2 on and 2 off. ****uming there are at least 2 marquee teams in each division, you get those matchups every year if you split them on the rotation.

If there are no important rivalries and you want to 'protect' new ones, this makes more sense to me:

OU/FSU
Texas/WV
OSU/Clemson
TCU/KSU
Tech/Kansas
Baylor/ISU

The last two really doesn't matter in that scenario so they could be swapped. Also, Clemson could insist on an annual matchup with either OU or Texas a condition of joining so this might be fore feasible:

OU/FSU
Texas/Clemson
TCU/WV
OSU/KSU
Tech/ISU
Baylor/Kansas

[Redhawk]

Cross protected rivalries really work the best in a 14 team set up not a 12 team set up. I'm hoping "the friend" just forgot to mention 2 additional teams coming to the Big 12.

[MeMyself&Me]

Cross protected rivalries really work the best in a 14 team set up not a 12 team set up. I'm hoping "the friend" just forgot to mention 2 additional teams coming to the Big 12.

I agree with both parts. Guaranteeing cross divisional rivals to keep the marquee games played every year starts to make sense at 14. I still think you want to focus on having the cross 'rivals' as matching up non-recruiting territory teams with teams in recruiting territory teams as much as possible which means you don't put Texas and FSU as cross rivals.

As far as going to 12 vs 14 though, I can see taking Clemson and FSU now with the promise of getting 2 more later. A school like Georgia Tech may be desired by the Big 12 and FSU/Clemson but schools like Georgia Tech may not be willing enough at the moment. Once they, and their fans, see what the ACC is going to look like without without FSU and Clemson, they're going to be more approachable and Big 12 and FSU/Clemson officials are going to know this.

Additionally, there have definitely been some 'insiders' saying expansion to 12 teams for 2013 and further expansion to 14 teams for 2014. However it's usually been Clemson/somebody in 2013 and FSU/somebody in 2014 in their examples and ****umptions. Some of this 'talk' might be blurred and blended ideas between a 12 school step and a 14 school destination.

[pbr street gang]

pbr is gonna be crushed when five ranked B12 opponents show up on our schedule this fall.



x97 is just gonna be crushed for all of life.

No I wont be crushed. This is not about this year or next year. It's about 5 and 10 years from now. Replacing Nebraska, CU, A+M and Mizzou with TCU, WVA...probably BYU and UL...maybe Tulane is a joke. I cannot fathom how you guys think this is good for the program. No ACC school is coming. You can make book on that.

[Redhawk]

I agree with both parts. Guaranteeing cross divisional rivals to keep the marquee games played every year starts to make sense at 14. I still think you want to focus on having the cross 'rivals' as matching up non-recruiting territory teams with teams in recruiting territory teams as much as possible which means you don't put Texas and FSU as cross rivals.

As far as going to 12 vs 14 though, I can see taking Clemson and FSU now with the promise of getting 2 more later. A school like Georgia Tech may be desired by the Big 12 and FSU/Clemson but schools like Georgia Tech may not be willing enough at the moment. Once they, and their fans, see what the ACC is going to look like without without FSU and Clemson, they're going to be more approachable and Big 12 and FSU/Clemson officials are going to know this.

Additionally, there have definitely been some 'insiders' saying expansion to 12 teams for 2013 and further expansion to 14 teams for 2014. However it's usually been Clemson/somebody in 2013 and FSU/somebody in 2014 in their examples and ****umptions. Some of this 'talk' might be blurred and blended ideas between a 12 school step and a 14 school destination.

That makes sense. If you get FSU/Clemson first...then the next 2 can be more flexible..you got the big guns. It also makes the other ACC schools reassess their position. GT as your example may not want to move now. But their world will be different with out FSU and Clemson.

I personally hope the other 2 are Maryland and Georgia Tech. They are both AAU schools in large media centers, and very close to existing schools in the Big 12 (counting Clemson in that)