gatormarc

I wanted to edit above but ran out of time. I don't think we're really disagreeing here. I'm just pointing out that Ubben was right in that the Big12 outside of OUT has almost done the impossible of having the lesser programs grab a random 5 star or two over the years.

I think we're discussing different points here. I'm referring to bullet's comment that the article is stupid because only 8 programs or so get anyone. I was pointing out that the only conference where that is the case is the Big 12. Every other conference is less extreme with relation to 5 stars (not blue chips, not draft picks). You seem to be agreeing with me because you recognize more than just 8 or so programs, but also the rest of the B1G/SEC.

Does this mean we've all accepted the facts of the discussion since you've moved on to hypotheticals?

There are no exceptions to fit the narrative. The fact is outside of OUT, only one 1 5 star has gone to a Big 12 school in that timeframe (1.5 if we want to give Houston partial credit) No other conference has that bad of a gap. Period. The next closest would be the ACC because only 4 (4.5 with Notre Dame) programs have pulled in 5 stars in the years I looked at. Now the clear argument against that is that Blue Chip ratio may be a more important stat to look at especially thanks to the transfer portal, but that's different than dismissing the 5 star gap.

And here I thought we were talking about Ubben's article about how no one besides OUT was pulling in 5 stars in the Big 12.

But that's not correct. If you look back more than one season, you see several non-top programs that have grabbed a 5 star or two. I looked back through 2015 (since that's all 247 is showing right now) and these arguably non-top programs all signed at least 1 5 star: Kentucky, South Carolina, Ole Miss, Miss St, Iowa, Maryland, Northwestern, Purdue, North Carolina, Stanford, Cal During that time, I only found 1 non-OUT Big12 school that signed a 5 star. Baylor - 2015 2 if you count Houston in 2016. Yes, you are correct in that the power programs are mopping up most of the 5 stars, but it ignores his larger point that the ratio was among the worst of the major conferences in the Big 12. Compared to the SEC where Vanderbilt is the only SEC program that didn't sign a 5 star in the 9 classes I looked at.

But 1 year of data is significantly different than 11 years of data. Seems odd to dismiss his 11 years collection based on 1 class. That said, I think a better judge is blue chip ratio rather than just 5 stars.

That doesn't look right. There are usually 30-40 5 stars per year, not total over an 11 year period. Are you looking at just the 2023 recruiting class?

Florida sponsored FSU for SEC member ship in 1959, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1968, 1969, and 1970. They also sponsored Miami several of those years as well. It hit a brick wall because most of the SEC members had no desire to expand. Even after Georgia Tech and Tulane left, the SEC was at 10 teams, which was larger than all the other conferences and the SEC played a much smaller conference schedule. Tennessee was pushing Memphis State at the 12th and it wasn't an attractive combination. FSU continued to make their case in the 70s and 80s but the SEC actually voted to change its constitution in 1971 to limit membership to 10 members "permanently" shutting the doors to expansion. There was no blocking FSU those decades because the SEC wouldn't even consider expansion until Kramer basically figured out that they could apply some Division III rules to Division 1 and expand to 12 to get a conference championship game. I understand that Florida sponsored FSU and Miami for the 1992 expansion to 12 teams. https://www.nolefan.org/summary/fsu_sec.html

I'm actually not sure where that came from. UF has sponsored FSU a bunch of times over the decades.

I think South Carolina got the nod after FSU said no. I don't know if they were looking 1 East/1 West or if they were just working down the list (and we could have had Arky/Texas).

Solid source. When I think of two schools that have their fingers on the pulse of midwest athletics and how it will be impacted by west coast athletics, I think Maryland and Rutgers.

He's not talking about competing. He's talking about gaining entry. OK... I was reading it as the "haves" being Ohio State, Penn State, etc. since he's talking about brand power right in that same statement. Northwesern is not a "have" if you are talking brand power as he's talking about improving by staying in the PacX Northwestern is a "have" in that they are in P2 as he's also talking about getting an invitation to the BigY So both of us appear to be right since he's defined it both ways.

I think he's suggesting that they could be better able to compete once they join the B10 if they wait. Yes, there are a ton of flaws with that thought process but there is a distinction.

I think they try to re-balance it every year. I know UF has played against most of the conference. I think Texas/Tennessee may be a recency bias thing since they have played the last 2 seasons. Kansas/Kentucky has happened a lot though, for sure. Do you mean all 3/4 OOC games for each team are locked into a partner conference? If yes to the above, then yes. If you mean a locked in P5 opponent, this is a great example as this only works if it's an additional game on top of the existing rivalries. Which is hard to force as it would be an uneven requirement. While I think UF-FSU, UGA-GT, and USC-Clem is safe, I could see Kentucky saying that "<random ACC team> fills the Louisville gap" which is a net loss most years. If it was a one or two season thing, maybe. If it became a yearly challenge, then I would think you would have to incorporate the existing rivalries in which would mean most of the value of the deal already exists and is it worth it? Plus, this is all blue skying here and would be tough to do short term -- which is when the ACC/ESPN would need it for stability. If we go to 9 conference games, UF is already going to have to cut an OOC game in 2024, 2025, 2026. Then again, UF is playing 2 ACC teams each those years, so I guess it could just be rolled in which is great but it doesn't help improve ACC stability more than it is today and it doesn't bring ESPN extra money.

For a moment, I had a thought that it might be in ESPN's best interest to encourage new SEC-ACC matchups since they'd get paid on both ends of the deal, but they've already got Clemson and FSU locked in to an SEC OOC game and they are by far the biggest 2 draws. And Florida already has series with Miami and NCState coming up.

True. I guess the challenge is that even with something like a P5 opponent requirement, someone will still try to game it, by scheduling Duke or getting a release to play Independent UConn instead.

Florida-FSU?

Maybe it's just me but I personally have thought that being regular season champ was more important than tournament champ. Goes for Baseball too since those tournaments are such tossups with weather delays.

They have very little to no buffer. They didn't even have they money they promised Sanders. The AD admitted in December that they were still working on how to actually pay him. https://news.yahoo.com/deion-sanders-offered-29-5m-215627349.html

It's all relative too. Attendance wise, Kentucky is in the "bottom half" of the SEC but it would probably be top 3 in the PAC/ACC/new Big 12.

I think you take what's in front of you.

I'm sure you'll see it some if some guys are already hurt and healing they'll sit but it's still a big deal to win the conference and seeding could make a big difference. I wonder if NIL deals are worded such that playing in those games would give a bonus similarly to how coaches' contracts are written.

Stoops is super defensive about his accomplishments. Last summer he was taking shots at South Carolina's Shane Beamer for making a video lip-syncing to Soulja Boy because it's apparently not possible to be a successful coach unless you have no personality. https://www.wltx.com/article/sports/throwing-shade-mark-stoops-shane-beamer/101-dbc13bfe-d95a-417c-88bb-a33b97e25e7e South Carolina did beat Kentucky a couple months later in Lexington.