Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*
I heard that the MWC, MAC, C-USA and what was left of the WAC would form a sub division of Div. IA and play for a chance for the last spot in the playoff.
Drop the bottom ten from a Big 12/ACC merger to get to 14 teams and this conference blows any other conference out of the water in football.
These numbers are since the BCS was created.
01 Oklahoma......... 0.782
02 Texas............ 0.777
03 Virginia Tech.... 0.755
04 Texas Christian.. 0.754
05 Miami (Florida).. 0.695
06 Florida State.... 0.694
07 West Virginia.... 0.663
08 Louisville....... 0.652
09 Kansas State..... 0.640
10 Texas Tech....... 0.630
11 Georgia Tech..... 0.622
12 Clemson.......... 0.608
13 Boston College... 0.601
14 Oklahoma State... 0.587
01 Big 12........... 0.676
02 SEC.............. 0.582
03 Pac 12........... 0.550
04 Big Ten.......... 0.521
Here's a clue for ya, merge the conferences...line the top ten of the SEC against the top of the B12ACC....SEC wins 7/10 at least.
Other than Alabama, I'm not convinced the gap is all that wide between SEC and everyone else. And even Bama was lucky to make the title game the last two years.
Let the SEC play nine conference games like the Pac 12 and Big 12 and see how awesome they are without padding their records with automatic wins. Alabama plays Florida and Vanderbilt and maybe wins both of those games, maybe not. A&M plays Georgia, S Carolina and Vanderbilt and probably loses two of those games. Johnny Football doesn't win the Heisman trophy or get to stomp Oklahoma in the Cotton Bowl. Georgia probably splits with A&M and LSU. LSU probably beats Georgia and Vanderbilt. Florida possibly beats Alabama and who knows who plays in the CCG. Maybe Florida/Alabama rematch. Vanderbilt loses to Alabama and A&M and doesn't finish in the top 25.
Let the Big 12 play eight conference games and K-State possibly goes undefeated in the regular season and plays a one loss Oklahoma team in CCG with the winner getting a shot at ND in the NCG. Texas finishes 9-3, oSu 8-4, Baylor 9-3, TCU, TT and WVU 8-4 with all eight teams in the top 25 and probably two teams in a BCS bowl. See how easy it is to pad your schedule to make yourself look awesome. The top seven in the SEC got to beat up on the other seven bottom feeders and their usual FCS opponents. The Big 12 only had two bottom feeders and a handful of FCS opponents to beat up on and were forced to beat up on each other.
It would help our image if Oklahoma and Texas would win the NCG when they get there though.
That's short sighted
OU Texas and FSU are just as strong as Bama LSU and Florida over any significant length of time. If you're taking about matching up 2012 teams sure the SEC would win most. Match up 2000-2003 teams and the Big 14 would win more than half. OU, Texas and others outside the SEC wont be down forever and Bama wont be up forever.
If something happens with FSU and GT to Big 10, I still don,t see Clemson, Miami, VT and Louisville going any where, could still make a good 14 team conference.
2- They are the #1 football draw in Virginia and the SEC is going to start a network where getting monthly carriage fees from networks will be financially beneficial. VT fits perfectly in that model. Getting at least 50-90 cents per cable subscriber (on the cable provider) per month in Virginia is not going to be passed up if the Hokies want in.
3- They are a cultural fit
4- Add recruiting grounds
They would be VERY attractive to the SEC.
Now FSU and GT aren't being invited due to the network (not beneficial to double down in existing footprint states) and the fact that SEC schools tend to blackball in-state rivals from joining.
What would the other pairings be?
What happens if the B1G expands and then the ACC stabilizes? I tend to agree with Frank the Tank's theory that the Big 12 and ACC are opposites in that the ACC is a group of schools that like their conference but hate their TV deal while the Big 12 is a group of schools that like their TV deal but hate their conference. Let's say the B1G adds UVA and one more ACC team, the ACC is then able to somehow stabilize and get a grant of rights, leaving the SEC stuck at 14 and the XII stuck at 10. What happens? Do the Big 12 schools get nervous again and start looking for new homes? Does the SEC and PAC start looking at the Big 12 for new real estate opportunities? The GOR won't mean anything if 8/10 can find a safe haven. I say the Big 12 is in real trouble if this scenario unfolds.
Slive won't try to poach the ACC like Delany did. But you can be sure he'd leave the welcome mat out for any of those 5 schools should they care to pay him a visit.
So...the idea that the ACC could become stable with the right loss of teams is something I wonder about too. I think the SEC is the key as much if not more so than the B1G on the Big 12's chances to land ACC schools
I appreciate the responses. I posted this same question on the WVU board and was accused of trolling and all that nonsense. Big mistake on my part. I agree that losing UVA is not the deathknell of the ACC. Everyone thought A&M would be the piece of the big 12 that would cause it to tumble. We all were wrong. A couple of mid level ACC schools going to the B1G seems like a blow, but not deadly.
1- Replacing GT and UVA with Cincy and UConn
2- The TV deal getting slashed due to lost inventory and loss of quality (more on the GT side here)
I could easily see them look around if that happens.
Your conference has a winning percentage that is 97.68% of the theoretical maximum. To get that in real life, your conference would have to win 68.369 out of the 70 OOC/Bowl games it plays every year. Are you saying that those teams have a combined 97.68 winning percentage in OOC and bowl games since the inception of the BCS?
Or, like I said, when you take 14 teams from 2 conferences and combine their results, the conference is not bound by the given that each conference game has a winner and a loser. Most of the losses are suffered by teams that didn't make the cut which does wonders for the conference winning percentage. You don't see how that is a problem?
Something that will be interesting to watch with regards to expansion, is if and when the B1G (or whoever moves first), expand to sixteen only or move beyond sixteen. There is quite a bit of whisperings from high sources that the B1G actually may expand to 18-20. If that is the case, I don't see either the ACC or Big 12 surviving, and we'll be left with three 18-20 team super conferences --- B1G, SEC, and PAC.
If conferences only expand to sixteen, then it looks like the ACC will be the loser. Money isn't there and ESPN doesn't want another conference network in virtually the same footprint as the ESPN-backed SEC Network. Only way ACC is saved is if ESPN decides they can't lose multiple schools to the B1G, and they dramatically increase the ACC media contract.
However, if expansion goes beyond sixteeen, I see both ACC and Big 12 dying. The B1G and SEC cutting up the ACC, and then a merger of Big 12 and Pac. I'm beginning to think that the 18-20 team model will be the one that will win out.
We need to do something, the Current Big XII is just weak tea. We have OU and UT and.... nobody else. You even saw UT's recruiting take a hit this year in the state of Texas.... Honestly what kid will look at our schedule and say "Wow, I get to play Iowa State, Kansas and K-State as well as 5 other nobody teams...." or "Wow, I can play against LSU, Bama, Florida and Georgia" By staying with Texas in this crap conference we have hamstrung ourselves in recruiting for the foreseeable future.
Sept. 14......... *at Texas A&M............................ College Station, Texas
Sept. 21......... Colorado State............................. Bryant-Denny Stadium
Sept. 28......... *Ole Miss..................................... Bryant-Denny Stadium
Oct. 5............ Georgia State............................... Bryant-Denny Stadium
Oct. 12.......... *at Kentucky............................... Lexington, Ky.
Oct. 19.......... *Arkansas.................................... Bryant-Denny Stadium
Oct. 26.......... *Tennessee.................................. Bryant-Denny Stadium
Nov. 9........... *LSU.............................................. Bryant-Denny Stadium
Nov. 16......... *at Mississippi State................. Starkville, Miss.
Nov. 23......... Chattanooga................................. Bryant-Denny Stadium
Nov. 30......... *at Auburn................................... Auburn, Ala.
You think the quality of opponent drives players to Bama?
I'm going to say players like to win, and there is a shit-ton of local talent.
How many of these teams were in he top 25 at the end of the year?
Conference perception has a lot more to do with individual member brands than it has to do with a product on the field. Once you've established a brand, it's still fun for other teams to see your helmet, even when you're down. Kids still get excited about playing Tennessee and Auburn, even if both programs are down.
The Big 12 has two brands. OU and Texas. If we're going to stay at ten teams, he league needs to stop playing musical chairs at the top and establish another brand. Creating a good brand isn't impossible. Oregon has done it over the last decade. They were a junk program prior to the 90's. Stanford's football brand was mediocre and trending to horrible until about five years ago. They key at both places is that they've won consistently and they've won big games.
In the Big 12, you get a different contender every year. Both OSU and K-State have blown a national title shot in each of the last two years. Baylor had a Heisman winner, but hasn't really contended for even a conference title. TCU won the Rose Bowl in 2010. West Virginia has three great BCS bowl wins, but can't ever seem to be a national contender in consecutive seasons. Tech had a Top 5 team for part of 2008. KU had a Top 5 team in 2007. We just need a third team to step up for several consecutive seasons and grow into an exciting game on the schedule.
So the ACC, SEC, and B1G are all at 14. Let's say the B1G and SEC both poach the ACC for 4 teams (UVA and Ga Tech to the B1G, UNC and Duke to the SEC), that leaves 10 teams for the ACC. The Big 12 and ACC can then form a 20 team conference of the remaining teams, form 5 pods with only minimal controversy (UT/OU/OSU/Baylor/Tech "SW" pod, TCU/KU/KSU/ISU/Louisville "Central" pod, WVU/Pitt/BC/Syracuse/Va Tech "North" pod, Miami/FSU/Clemson/Wake/NCState "SE" pod), and move along our merry way, with a large geographic swath to build a conference network and earn a whole lot of money, plus some new faces to create excitement. The SW and SE pods may be a bit top heavy, but since its a rotational informal division alignment, it would only come up with the SW and SE pods play each other in schedule. Play 9 conference games plus a title game. Liberated from playing deadweight every year, trading playing the same 9 teams every year for playing the same 4 teams every year, and cycling in an interesting alotment of programs for the other 5 conference games.
It is not in OU or Texas' best interest to "develop" another team. We both have a great formula for getting into the title hunt, we just need to win more games.
Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*
Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*
With the way OOC and Conference strength have been trending, I would say that if every conference produced an undefeated champ, order would be:
Big 12/Big 10 (a toss up here)
More realignment fuel...what is truly driving realignment:
Fox to unveil sports channels for ad buys in challenge to ESPN:
The main offerings will include Major League baseball, college football, NASCAR races, professional soccer, and ultimate fighting, the person said.
The two new channels are expected to begin broadcasting games in August and would expand its offerings in 2014, the person said.
News Corp's new offerings will likely lose money in the early years, according to analysts, which mirrors the company's money-losing launches over the years of its Fox News and Fox Business channels.
Things that will only hasten the death of cable/satellite television. Advertisers love sports as they are one of the only things that everyone but extremely cheap BYU fans will watch live. That drives major television contracts which then allow the networks to ask for higher carriage fees which are then passed along to the consumer. Another $5 network on all but the most basic of television plans is not what a consumer base that largely doesn't watch sports (more people don't watch sports than do) and is already weary from seeing their bills rise largely due to the rising costs of sports networks wants or needs. If something like $15 of your bill is due to sports networks you don't watch, why wouldn't you consider unplugging and using the money you save to subscribe to alternative sources which will provide you access to your favorite shows while likely still saving you money?