|
|
Could you imagine a world where aggies are insignificant? Where a&m is just another team that finishes in the middle of the pack in whatever conference they belong to? Oh, wait...that's reality. That IS the world we live in. Carry on ****er.Originally Posted by TeLeFaWx
2 users like OU812's post: eyeballjr, LetsgoSooners82
What does it say when a middle of the road SEC team beats the Big 12 Football Champs in the Cotton Bowl?
Wake up. Your alarm clock is going off.
The following users like this post: OU812
that pigs have flown
you do realize that this argument goes both ways right?
What does it say when a team that was a middle of the road team in the big 12 beat the possible national champions and sec champs?
3 users like SoonerBounce's post: atownsooner, DarrellS011, LetsgoSooners82
haha spot on ...
A&M isn't in the Big 12.
On but you were. And you were an average B12 team.
2 users like SoonerBounce's post: LetsgoSooners82, SCV Sooner
obviously you are not....b/c if you were, you would have more than two loses
The following users like this post: DarrellS011
Who exactly?
who knows.
probably OU, Kstate, Baylor
Since I don't give a **** about the SEC it wouldn't be very exciting to me.
3 users like RockFlagandEagle's post: LetsgoSooners82, nstinson, Redhawk
my favorite stat in this who is ****tier debate is that OU is 6-2 against the Top 30 and A&M is 1-2. Kinda hard to argue that A&M played anyone worth a **** and no less, won ... buttfuckers ...
That A&M is favored to win is baffling. I can't see their offense keeping pace.
RT @McMurphyESPN Boise State remaining in MWC & will not join Big East in 2013, sources told @espn
@McMurphyESPN: San Diego State now is not required to pay exit fee if it decides not to join Big East”
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/st...ce-sources-say
Boise State will remain a member of the Mountain West Conference and will not join the Big East in 2013, sources said Monday.
The Broncos' decision on Monday is the latest crippling blow to the Big East Conference, which has had 14 schools announce they were leaving the league in the past two years.
The Broncos will remain a Mountain West member in all sports instead of joining the Big East next year as a football-only member and the Big West in all other sports.
Even though Boise State never spent a day in the Big East, the Broncos still must pay a $10 million exit fee to the Big East. The Mountain West is expected to help pay that fee, sources said.
I thought Boise State would turn down the Big East in August when they were given an ultimatum. I was surprised that they didn't hold out until they found out what was going to happen to the Big East which everyone knew back then was going to fall apart.
RT @BSUDave: As part if staying in MW, Boise State will get to negotiate its own home game TV deal.
@murphsturph
Boise State will remain in Mountain West. League will guarantee the rights to Boise State home FB games that are sold as separate package.
They will be sold seperately, but nothing says that BSU gets to retain all the profits from said sale or that they actually own them. I ****ume this is the MWC trying to get around giving CBS the more valuable rights for pennies. If they can sell their 5-6 home games per year for $4-5 million (I hope BSU likes weeknight games on ESPN like they had back in the WAC), then the whole conference likely makes more than whatever slight increase CBS gives them.
Alabama.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2
As you settle into to your 6-6 future with no real rivalry game to speak of, I'm sure you dog walkers will go on for decades about that magical Alabama game... yup, you sure ****ed up Bama's season.
3 users like LASooner's post: atownsooner, lobster999, oorah_okie
Dude, quit hijacking the realignment thread. STFU and go away. If you want to talk ****, start your own thread and talk to yourself. Stop cluttering up this thread with your delusional bull****.
The only delusional bull**** we deal with in this thread is that which has been generated by lying West Virginians, right?
The following users like this post: SCV Sooner
Hey! There's delusional realignment BS, and there's delusional aggie BS. This thread is for delusional realignment BS.
I hate aTm as much as the next guy, but can we give this a rest already? All we heard last year was "Enjoy being a cellar dweller in the SEC". What did they do? Only had a really respectable year in the SEC, beat one of the NC game participants (something we couldn't do), and finished top 10 prior to bowl games.
Now we are turning to the "wait until next year, you will go to the cellar where you belong". aTm may not be a yearly top 10 team in the SEC, but with Sumlin and Manziel for the next 3 years I think its foolish to think they are going to turn into Ole Miss.
MWC actually came out and said that the Conference would retain the money for Boise's home games. They also said a school would get $300k per national TV game on the week days and $500k for national TV on Saturdays. Since Boise is one of the few to do this they would get extra. The MWC TV deal is only like $2 million per school as it is from CBS. So if the Conference can get $6 million from NBC for Boise's games that's $500,000 more per school
It will be very interesting to see how this works out. If when you add in the sale of BSU's tv rights the total rises to approximately $30 million for the conference total per year, paying out $500k per school per national TV appearance would have the potential to eat up quite a lot of that money. If the conference gets 1 weekday national game and 1 Saturday national game, that would be $1.6 million per week split among 4 teams. (I'm not sure why they would get a national tv game on Saturday, but CBS doesn't have that much college content, so they might be willing to give them a game) With a 14-week broadcasting window, as much as $22.4 million of that $30 million could be locked up to teams playing in national tv games. ****uming they then split the remaining $7.6 million, a team could get as little as $633K while another could theoretically get $6.6 million if they somehow got every game picked up for national t.v.
The devil is in the details but I thought the same thing. Is a game at Hawaii, say, Fresno St at Hawaii, on CBS College Sports at 10pm Central time on a Saturday night a "National Broadcast"? Is that a Million dollar game? or is the national TV fees ONLY for Boise St?
From Boise State's press release:
Boise State and other football teams in the Mountain West who appear on national television (ESPN, ESPN2, ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox) will be paid a bonus of $300,000 per game, with an additional $200,000 for a Saturday game.
The Internet is one day going to butt**** TV and all this realignment nonsense, just like it did the newspapers.
The following users like this post: The
What we're hearing out here is that the MWC might not accept SDSU back. That would suck for SDSU - they might be the only team without a chair when the music stops.
I know the MWC wants to pretend to play hard ball, but who are they going to add that adds anymore value than SDSU? San Diego is a big enough market.
The prospects are a lot grimmer for New Mexico State and Idaho. They both have to hope that the Sun Belt will take them back and I can't imagine why it would. Well, maybe it will take New Mexico State since they make some sense geographically and might be helpful for balancing divisions if they go back to 12, but Idaho just makes no sense unless they are dropped below the requisite number of teams and no one wants to move up to FBS.
BYU or Houston. But most likely they are going to make the SDSU AD kiss the ring on bended knee. He was pretty ****y when they left the MWC. Said SDSU was a "national school" going to a "national conference"
BYU will not join anything less than one of the big conferences. They're doing fine with independence.
Eh, they'll get over it. SDSU will be back in the MWC in a matter of weeks.
In any event, doesn't the Big East now need to replace Boise?
And if so, who will they target?
C-USA is about the only place to poach from. They won't **** with the MWC schools.
And they are already in Houston, so they might not want Rice.
UTEP is a possibility. Although maybe that is too far west.
Southern Miss has good football (usually) but is a NOTHING market. Same with Marshall.
I'd say Tulsa might just be in a battle with UAB for that spot. Thoughts?
We need something to talk about besides TexAggie smack and CoalAggie BS.
This is a couple days old, didn't see it posted.
http://collegesportsblog.dallasnews....eresting.html/
Then there is this - which is about 6 weeks old, but I liked it.Many players, coaches and school officials have expressed their pleasure with the new 10-team format of the Big 12, something that TCU and West Virginia helped the conference maintain this year. Kansas State head coach Bill Snyder was not one of them.
He hasn’t been shy about his preference for an old-fashioned 12-team Big 12 that decides its champion with a conference title game in December. In a Q&A with The Kansas City Star’s Kellis Robinett, Kansas State president Kirk Schulz alluded to the fact that the Big 12 may pursue further expansion.
“We are comfortable with 10 schools, but we are continuing to monitor the conference landscape so we can react quickly if we choose to,” Schulz told Robinett. “With a championship game, yes, you get to play one more time. But you also have one more time before the playoff is in place that you can close. If you have a championship game, you’ve still got another game to play. But right now the next game you have to play is a national semifinal. I think [having 10 teams] is actually going to put our conference in advantageous position… [The Big 12 expansion committee is] continuing to monitor the conference landscape. The Big East is still trying to figure out where they are going to go and what they are going to be. There could be some additional shifting. We will have to wait and see. It could be very interesting.”
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...-ucf-president
And now for some of my blather, just trying to get something kickstarted so I'll have something to read tomorrow afternoon.
The top 4 Texas schools are either in the Big 12 or SEC. And the top 4 Cali schools are all in the PAC-12. Where are the top 4 Florida schools? Think about the answer to that question.
And now think about how ESPN might view that 4th FLA property if the Big East continues to implode. What is the primary impediment to Big 12 expansion when it gets right down to it? ESPN money. FOX is game for new inventory. And how is that affected by a Big East that is quaking at the ground and may end up with 8 schools by the end of January?
There is a school in a top 15 TV market that has a program that is less than 20 years old. Largest school in FL. And it is the 4th best team in Florida. And that with Miami floundering and potentially heading south.
How might ESPN view that USF inventory as they fear it could be lost to some absolute b-rate league? And even if the Big 12 doesn't currently want USF, that's only because of the money USF would CURRENTLY bring. And in the Big 12, it isn't about new markets for cable subscribers, it is ALL about ESPN and FOX money. FOX gave us WVU. And I predict ESPN will soon give us USF...and maybe even UCF? ESPN is getting somewhat spanked by these recent moves. They are gonna try to force the Big 12 to be a life raft. Watch and see.
USF & UCF both kinda makes sense for the BIG XII.....hopefully land FSU, CLEMSON AND GA. TECH throw in Tulane in N.O. and we have a pretty strong southern present. (Orlando - Tampa - Atlanta - New Orleans great destination cities )
UCF / USF simply don't make sense for slots 11/12 as the B12 are paid for inventory vs eyeballs like the B10, and no way without BEVO TV going away does the B12 start the process of building a conference network.
I do think one would make sense if somehow the B12 pushed to 16 members. Agree with the writer they are good strategic long term projects.
That was really a significant part of my point. ESPN currently owns USF inventory.
If the Big East becomes such a degraded product, then they could lose that inventory.
UConn probably lands in the ACC. Perhaps Cincy too.
That leaves USF as basically the last old Big East team standing (Temple can always go back to the MAC). And there is potential value there w/USF.
The question is would ESPN attempt to save that inventory by trying to get the Big 12 to take them (via pro rata money)?
Or is it even worth it to ESPN?
I was just giving us something new to talk about in any case. I don't know how much I would believe it.
My whole thinking on the matter of Big 12 expansion over the next few years starts from the premise that the idea of poaching ACC schools is pure fantasy.
So, to me, it's either a matter of staying at 10, which I absolutely do not want, or trying to add two schools that add the most possible value, 5 10, 20 years from now, if not immediately today.
To me, that scenario is either a commitment West to California (BYU, SDSU, Fresno, maybe Boise) or Southeast to Florida (USF, UCF). I think if we went West, we'd almost have to go to 14 to have it make much sense. Whereas maybe adding those two FL schools is enough to stop at 12.
UCF doesn't excite me as much as USF. I really think they are gonna be a bigtime program by 2020/2025. Hell, I remember VPI/VA Tech when they were a complete afterthought and now they could get into any one of the major conferences. And really, it was only about 20 years ago, maybe 25, when they were a 'nothing' type school. USF is already 10 years or more into that process.
Think about it guys, the #4 football program in Florida. That's not something to scoff at.
I agree that getting an ACC school to the Big 12 is pure West Virginia Butt-hurt because they got turned down by the ACC bull-**** fantasy.
I also would like to see the Big 12 get back to 12, but with 2 that actually matter. And that I don't see. BYU would be the next on the available list of worth. After that it's pretty thin. USF and BYU? That doesn't make sense. New Mexico or Colorado St and BYU? Either makes geographical sense. Neither are Big 12 level football or any where close to it. I'm not sure either brings enough TV money to be worth it.
USF and UCF as a pair makes some sense......but for some reason, I like 10 better. I guess if 10 doesn't work, OU will be in the PAC or SEC eventually.
I don't see going to 14. I'm not sure #12 will pay for themselves, so adding 2 more just to make the map look right will mean less money.
oh, and **** Cincinnati. West Virginia is on an island. If they don't like it they can go back to the Big East or back to being an independent. **** 'em
In total agreement. I was never in favor of the Big 12 surviving, but if it must then Colorado St, BYU and even Boise St. is a better option than going east. I don't see a difference between those three, and Iowa State, Baylor, Tech, KSU ( still the most losing program in Div 1 ), Kansas..you get the picture. In terms of a football conference it's OU / Texas and everbody else, so if it must survive why not go west, and keep it uniform geographically. The better option for OU long term is the PAC, SEC or BIG.
I think ultimately it ends up being pretty simple:
1. Everything stays roughly the same.
2. The B10/SEC/B12 feasts off the ACC dropping major conferences from 5 to 4.
3. The super conferences truly emerge taking conferences to 20. In that OU has numerous options. Would bet on a PAC / B12 merge.
Outside of WVU fantasy stuff though think expansion will hold for a bit. If Maryland gets out of that ACC exit fee though...look out.
I read something a couple of days ago saying that the five major conferences would stay pretty much like they are now and that the other teams would form a new division that would get to fight for the other playoff bowl. They said that the MWC, WAC and some of the C-USA schools had been secretly discussing this for the last couple of years. This has always made the most sense to me. I can't see the major conferences picking up all these low quality mid majors just to get to 14, 16 or 20 teams like all the expansion freaks want. The mid majors know that they have no shot at getting a playoff spot the way it is now and the few that might get picked up by a major conference would just be bottom feeders in the major conferences with no chance at a playoff spot.
We have pretty much the same arguments now that we had 35 years ago when Div IAA was formed. The big boys didn't want the bottom feeders and Div IAA gave those schools a chance to play for their own championship. The plus for a new division here would be that the schools in that division would get to play for a spot in the new playoff system.
I've felt for a long time that college football would be better off if we spit the division into two groups and the major division only played one or two teams from the lower division and the lower division teams only played one or two teams from the major division. That would cut out all the FCS games that teams from the major conferences play every year to get automatic wins. Florida State (and a couple other BCS schools) played two FCS opponents this year. That would make the need for SOS which all the human voters ignore irrelevant since everyone would be playing the same type of schedule. Teams like 15th ranked Northern Illinois and an un-ranked Louisville team would have to battle it out for a playoff spot instead of guaranteeing both schools a spot over a top 10 BCS school and diluting the playoffs.
http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-foo...n-texas-oklaho
The Big Ten hasn't been taken seriously since 2006.
That season, Ohio State and Michigan entered the regular-season finale ranked No. 1 and No. 2. The Buckeyes beat the Wolverines and the two schools were close to a rematch in the BCS championship. But Florida went to the title game instead of Michigan to meet Ohio State, and the Buckeyes lost 41-14. The Wolverines, meanwhile, lost 32-18 to USC in the Rose Bowl.
The conference's reputation continues to take a beating in the aftermath, especially in bowls played on or after Jan. 1.
This year didn't help. Ohio State and Penn State were ineligible for the postseason, the conference sent a five-loss team to the Rose Bowl then went 1-4 on New Year's Day after losses by Michigan, Nebraska, Wisconsin and Purdue. Northwestern picked up the lone win.
Bowl results and previews for all 35 games
In other words, the hits keep coming. A closer look at the damage:
—An 11-23 record in bowl games played on or after Jan. 1 since '06.
—A 4-13 record on or after Jan. 1 the last three seasons, including a 3-7 mark against the SEC.
—A 4-9 record on the field in BCS games since '06, but Ohio State's win against Arkansas in the '11 Sugar Bowl was vacated.
—A 3-9 record in the Rose Bowl since the start of the BCS, including six losses in the last seven years.
There's a simple, lucrative, risky fix. Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany should make his most proactive move yet.
Add Oklahoma and Texas at all costs. That's a serious move.
WHY SHOULD THEY JOIN?
Oklahoma and Texas can't carry the Big 12 for long. There's no conference championship game. Northern Illinois edged the 10-win Sooners out of the BCS. That's why it's time to move on. Texas is 22-16 the last three seasons. Oklahoma, meanwhile, enters the Jan. 4 Cotton Bowl as an undercard to Texas A&M and Heisman Trophy winner Johnny Manziel.
This despite the fact Bob Stoops went 11-2 against the Aggies in the Big 12 from 1999-2011. It's amazing what that SEC detail does for a program.
That's why the Longhorns and Sooners need their own personal touch up. Unlike the Big Ten, they've held their own in bowl games. Since '06, Texas is 5-1 (1-1 in BCS games); Oklahoma is 3-3 (1-3 in BCS games). For what it's worth, the Longhorns and Sooners have as many Rose Bowl wins in the BCS era as the Big Ten.
FIX THE DIVISIONS
Of course, adding the Longhorns and Sooners would mean realignment to the Legends and Leaders divisions.
Legends Division: Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Northwestern, Illinois.
Moving Wisconsin over from the Leaders not only adds to the competition, it makes geographical sense. This division has a nostalgic Big Eight feel. Oklahoma-Nebraska becomes a relevant rivalry again.
Leaders Division: Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State, Indiana, Purdue, Rutgers, Maryland.
As of now, The Leaders is set up in a way that will allow Ohio State to dominate until Urban Meyer retires.
Why not move over the two schools Ohio loathes most? Putting the Wolverines in the Leaders ensures The Game never loses a shred of significance in the regular season.
If the Big Ten wants to force-feed the conference brand into the Washington, D.C. and New York markets, it's best to do that with the conference's yin and yang traveling to Maryland and Rutgers at least once a year every year.
THE PAYOFF
The Big Ten creates an intriguing conference championship. Imagine Texas or Oklahoma facing off against Michigan or Ohio State in Indianapolis. That means games like Texas' 38-37 win against Michigan in the '05 Rose Bowl and the Longhorns' dramatic 25-22 win against the Buckeyes at Ohio Stadium the following season.
The conference also creates a league that competes with the SEC long term. The Longhorns, Sooners and Buckeyes all rank in the top five in wins in the BCS era.
Michigan, Nebraska, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas and Wisconsin have combined for 33 BCS bowl appearances and 10 BCS championship games. Alabama, LSU, Florida, Georgia, Auburn and Tennessee have 24 BCS bowl appearances and 10 BCS championship games.
That's not quite enough to knock the SEC off its throne—the conference is 8-1 in the title game with Alabama going for a ninth championship this season. The Buckeyes, Cornhuskers, Longhorns and Sooners are 3-7 in BCS championship games. But it's a start.
The Big Ten also has to avoid another New Year's Day massacre to get respect, but adding Oklahoma and Texas offers the best chance to play for a national championship every season. That will help make up the large chunk of real estate lost to the SEC.
At the very least, the conference would be taken seriously again.
What does it say when OU's 56th best team in OU's history beats ATM's best team in ATM's history in the Cotton Bowl (yes, this is ATM's best team in history regardless of the record)? It says ATM still sucks as a football program is what it says.
So true, and it makes sense for OU and uterus. However, ut would have to give up their total control of the conference and OU couldn't bring along little brother. So, it's a pipe dream.
Posting Permissions
