Realignment talk not going away

[closetohumping 17439]

14 minutes ago, utee94 said:

I don't believe we'll ever switch conferences.  But if we did, this is the only one that would happen.

 

 

Imagine a schedule with Bama, LSU, ou, aggy, Auburn, one of Uga or UF?  Yes please.

[utee94 15812]

22 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

Imagine a schedule with Bama, LSU, ou, aggy, Auburn, one of Uga or UF?  Yes please.

I don't think it would work out that way.

I think they'd have to move Alabama and Auburn to the SEC-East to accommodate Texas and OU, and I could see them moving Mizzou over to the SEC-West as well.  

So we'd play ousux, ags, pig, LSU, Missouri, Ole Miss, and Miss State every year. We'd play the SEC-East schools even less frequently than the ags currently do, so it would be quite rare to face off against Alabama, Florida, Georgia, or Auburn.  

I'm one of the ones that would like to renew the rivalries with both ags and pigs, so I'm cool with that, but when considering the reality of the moves that would need to occur in expanding from 14 to 16, then the setup doesn't look nearly as compelling as it does if you just ignore the likely realities.

In short, 16-team conferences suck ass, and this scenario demonstrates why it's pretty unlikely we'd ever make the move.  But it's still interesting to think about.

 

Edited July 6, 2021 by utee94

[closetohumping 17439]

13 minutes ago, utee94 said:

I don't think it would work out that way.

I think they'd have to move Alabama and Auburn to the SEC-East to accommodate Texas and OU, and I could see them moving Mizzou over to the SEC-West as well.  

So we'd play ousux, ags, pig, LSU, Missouri, Ole Miss, and Miss State every year. We'd play the SEC-East schools even less frequently than the ags currently do, so it would be quite rare to face off against Alabama, Florida, Georgia, or Auburn.  

I'm one of the ones that would like to renew the rivalries with both ags and pigs, so I'm cool with that, but when considering the reality of the moves that would need to occur in expanding from 14 to 16, then the setup doesn't look nearly as compelling as it does if you just ignore the likely realities.

In short, 16-team conferences suck ass, and this scenario demonstrates why it's pretty unlikely we'd ever make the move.  But it's still interesting to think about.

 

Ok, so annuals vs LSU, aggy, ou, pigs and the two Mississippi teams? I'd still take that.  That's 4 can't miss games regardless of record.  How many do we have now?

[utee94 15812]

3 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

Ok, so annuals vs LSU, aggy, ou, pigs and the two Mississippi teams? I'd still take that.  That's 4 can't miss games regardless of record.  How many do we have now?

Uh, just the one.

I'm with you, I'd be delighted seeing those 4 games on the schedule every year.

Like I said, since I'm one of the ones that values the traditional rivalries with the ags and pigs, I'd be happy to see it.  It seems pretty unlikely to me, but I also believe you should never say never.

 

 

[closetohumping 17439]

2 minutes ago, utee94 said:

Uh, just the one.

I'm with you, I'd be delighted seeing those 4 games on the schedule every year.

Like I said, since I'm one of the ones that values the traditional rivalries with the ags and pigs, I'd be happy to see it.  It seems pretty unlikely to me, but I also believe you should never say never.

 

 

With expanded playoffs it deosn't need to happen unless we just wanta better tv deal.

[TrashMaster G 17551]

6 hours ago, closetohumping said:

Sec.   takes away aggys only advantage over us

But they are aggy, which negates any percieved advantage from SEC membership. 

[Hurtlocker 2212]

21 hours ago, Native Texas said:

Doesn’t seem to bother Norte Dame.  Which btw makes a better model for Texas. We are a real academic institution.  We face real compliance.  Which train wreck would you like to debate?  Kansas basketball?  Baylor rape or Baylor murder?  TCU competing with OU for most criminals in a given year!

 

Go independent!

Grow a pair!  

As much as I think USC and Texas could go Indy with ND, I'm just not sure what the full on benefit is and ND isn't technically independent.   They've had all sports but football in at least two conferences now and going to join their old Big East brethren in the expanded ACC cost them 5 football games.    The ACC, mind you, that had had a lack of compliance over issues at UNC, Louisville, FSU, and Miami.

So completely with you on if you're going to do something different go east over west and/or go indy (which is the only move that saves the LHN), but I still don't think the benefit exists to do that like it once did.  20 years ago NDs TV deal had them as the only school consistently on TV, now every school in the P5 is. Additionally, in that new environment, Texas makes the same or more for their broadcasts than all the big schools in any conference.   You also had a much harder path to the championship game, now the top two teams in Big 12 basically get a shot.    Championships matter far more than the regular season.

If money isn't really improving, and the old glossier profile of being independent isn't as sparkly, and the opportunities to play for championships became more abundant, what is the reason to move?   To just play a different set of train wrecks, only further away? 

[Al_4_ISU 12458]

1 hour ago, Hurtlocker said:

As much as I think USC and Texas could go Indy with ND, I'm just not sure what the full on benefit is and ND isn't technically independent.   They've had all sports but football in at least two conferences now and going to join their old Big East brethren in the expanded ACC cost them 5 football games.    The ACC, mind you, that had had a lack of compliance over issues at UNC, Louisville, FSU, and Miami.

So completely with you on if you're going to do something different go east over west and/or go indy (which is the only move that saves the LHN), but I still don't think the benefit exists to do that like it once did.  20 years ago NDs TV deal had them as the only school consistently on TV, now every school in the P5 is. Additionally, in that new environment, Texas makes the same or more for their broadcasts than all the big schools in any conference.   You also had a much harder path to the championship game, now the top two teams in Big 12 basically get a shot.    Championships matter far more than the regular season.

If money isn't really improving, and the old glossier profile of being independent isn't as sparkly, and the opportunities to play for championships became more abundant, what is the reason to move?   To just play a different set of train wrecks, only further away? 

This seems to be the exact desire of anyone that wants to leave the Big 12.  That's all you would do, whether you're Texas or OU.  

Nobody thinks they're going to be Nebraska, but what school has improved their position in the world by leaving the Big 12?  Aggy is the closest, and they haven't really done anything schools like Iowa State and Kansas State haven't done by staying here.

3 of the 4 defectors have clearly damaged their programs by leaving.  1 is basically treading the same water.  Those who don't learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.

[Native Texas 44]

6 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

As much as I think USC and Texas could go Indy with ND, I'm just not sure what the full on benefit is and ND isn't technically independent.   They've had all sports but football in at least two conferences now and going to join their old Big East brethren in the expanded ACC cost them 5 football games.    The ACC, mind you, that had had a lack of compliance over issues at UNC, Louisville, FSU, and Miami.

So completely with you on if you're going to do something different go east over west and/or go indy (which is the only move that saves the LHN), but I still don't think the benefit exists to do that like it once did.  20 years ago NDs TV deal had them as the only school consistently on TV, now every school in the P5 is. Additionally, in that new environment, Texas makes the same or more for their broadcasts than all the big schools in any conference.   You also had a much harder path to the championship game, now the top two teams in Big 12 basically get a shot.    Championships matter far more than the regular season.

If money isn't really improving, and the old glossier profile of being independent isn't as sparkly, and the opportunities to play for championships became more abundant, what is the reason to move?   To just play a different set of train wrecks, only further away? 

Certainly a solid response and well thought out.  The only item I could address would be who ends up being affected if Texas leaves.  I believe Texas will be Texas in any conference.  Why carry the load and uplift the "little" 12. Those who are left behind will suffer the A&M fate, but only worse. 

Good discussion...  In the end "We Are Texas!"  

[Native Texas 44]

On 7/4/2021 at 4:48 AM, kopp0e said:

Someone over on the dirt site posted an article that is supposedly of UT wanting to leave XII..? And ranked a "tier system" for all schools...

Iowa State/ Kansas/ Oklahoma/ Oklahoma State/ Texas/ TCU/ Texas Tech/ Colorado/ Utah/ Arizona/ Arizona State/ USC/ Oregon/ Washington = 14...
That's 9 AAU brands, not counting if merged league could add one of (or both) UCLA &/ or California too, giving double-digit AAU schools & rivalries...

---
 

Originally posted by OU48A View Post

This is not wrong from the perspective of UT.... Clearly not all Texas people are happy with this Big 12.

https://www.burntorangenation.com/20...ger-conference

Declarative statement: Texas needs to be in a new, or different, athletic conference.



What would be ideal? What’s the goal? Who from the current Big 12 2 needs to stay . . . could stay . . . might have to stay to keep the league roster at a decent size . . . who needs to go? What schools would be the best targets for a larger, or a retooled, Big 12?

This is written from a SOLELY Texas perspective. The future for Baylor or Iowa State is a topic for somebody in Waco or Ames.

I would hope our athletic director and our administration have been working on this issue for several years.

If not, they’re probably not going to position us any better than we currently are. Which is, I suppose, OK when/if/BIG IF we get the football program somewhere close to what it was the first decade of this century.

Second declarative statement: I don’t think where we are is acceptable.

Simply put: We need a conference with a larger footprint. I’ll describe footprint as a geographic reach or spread that takes in as many Tier 1 and Tier 2 schools as possible (read on); a conference that covers as many states/regions as possible.

For excellence at this model, look at the revamped B1G and SEC, though the former has some flaws along with many excellent aspects. I’ll do a conference breakdown in a separate story in a day or two.

I approach this "Texas’ place in the near the future" with the belief that we can do better. That we have the clout, we have money, we have (hopefully) the leadership and foresight to make it happen.

We pretty much had what you’d want for the 15-year period ending in 2010. I believe the Big XII, or a new conference we help start, NEEDS Texas.

Yes, we need conference brethren. But they need us (and Oklahoma) more than we need them. A package deal of Texas and Oklahoma, just the two, would make every conference in the country snap to attention and light up the phone lines. We are the IT factor.

As Reggie Jackson famously said, "We are the straw that stirs the drink." We should not accept, or support, conference members, or prospective members, that have a smaller reach, fewer resources, than we do – simply because it makes sense on the map.

We can do this because we can deliver significant as in massive dollars and lots of TV viewers and plenty of fans who will travel anywhere, given program success and the right conference membership. Much more on this in my overview of the Big 12.

There will be several parts to this prospectus. I’ll offer opinions, which I back up (maybe not very well). There will be potential solutions, several, which will come at the end.

Declarative statement No. 3: The current conference does not serve our needs.

Neither did the Southwest Conference . . . not as the college game became more national, and more and bigger markets and fan followings and potential television viewers became critically important.

The original Big 12 served us well. It fit what I’ll call the "right template" as to quality and makeup of member institutions. It was geographically coherent.

The breakup of the original Big 12 has left us competing (not well, much of the time; that’s a coaching issue) with a shallow, hollow league with too few heavy hitters to attract the kind of TV package – and thus, the recruiting clout and multiple major bowl chances each year – that the University of Texas can, and should, demand.

part 2

• https://www.burntorangenation.com/20...ower-5-schools
  
  I wrote yesterday about the need for Texas to find new partners in a new conference – or, new members in a revamped Big 12. Need, as in why stay in a conference with schools that are in smaller states, that have smaller budgets, and that rely on Texas and Oklahoma to retain their Power 5 status?
  
  Today, I look the 65 schools that constitute Power 5. I’ll do this by placing schools in tiers, from strongest to weakest: State or public schools first, followed by the private/church schools.
  
  The best thing a conference can have – speaking from a football point of view, but it can include other sports – is what I call PRIMARY STATE universities. This is the top, the elite of the elite athletic programs, especially football, in larger states. Or schools that have large student enrollment and ample booster backing and the kind of facilities that can/should produce regular Top 10 to 15 finishes.
  
  There are around a dozen of these PRIMARY STATE schools: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, LSU, Penn State, Michigan, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas and, I suppose, Washington and Oregon. This is Tier 1. California is its own little (well, too big) world. No easy fit from the Golden State in this tier.
  
  Tier 2 is major public universities, many in mid-size states, some in larger states that are not the PRIMARY STATE university. (Texas A&M readers are not going to like this designation.) This group consists of Tennessee, Texas A&M, Missouri, Auburn, Colorado, UCLA, Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan State, Florida State, Miami, Clemson, North Carolina and Louisville. Clemson is Tier 1 – but it hasn’t been in the past and it might regress once the current head coach leaves; South Carolina is not a large state and not every coach will recruit like Dabo Swinney does. Wisconsin has been Tier 1 for close to 15 years, but it wasn’t for a long time and it’s easy to see where it could fall down a rung, or two, as has happened to Nebraska, Tennessee, Arkansas.
  
  Tennessee belongs in Tier 1 – it has the size and backing but has made a series of dreadful coaching and administrative decisions and is decidedly a rung below the big four (six, with Texas A&M and Auburn) in the SEC.
  
  Tier 3 is a smaller/less-financed version of Tier 2. Mostly smaller states: One or both of the Arizona schools fit here, one or both of the Mississippi schools, Utah, Arkansas, Nebraska, Minnesota, Indiana, Kentucky, South Carolina, Virginia Tech, Pittsburgh, North Carolina State, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, West Virginia. You could argue Virginia Tech belongs higher; it’s the largest public school in its state, but it’s almost in West Virginia geographically, and has displayed – in recent seasons – a significant slip from the excellence of the previous two decades.
  
  Tier 4 is Tier 3 on a smaller level . . . Oregon State, Washington State, Cal-Berkeley, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Maryland, Purdue, Rutgers, Illinois. It’s important to look at where a school CURRENTLY IS, and what it’s likely to be over the next decade. Not what’s happened in the past. K-State was Tier 2 until recently, probably ceilings at Tier 3 unless the 50-year-old version of Bill Snyder resurfaces.
  
  Private/Church – Notre Dame and USC are on the Tier 1 level . . . Stanford might be – it clearly is when the school’s entire sports program is considered – but I’m putting the Cardinal in Tier 2 . . . Baylor, TCU, Boston College, Virginia, Northwestern, Syracuse are Tier 3, though the Orange are trying hard for Tier 4 . . . Georgia Tech, Duke, Wake Forest, Vanderbilt are Tier 4. You could put the first two of these higher; Duke belongs in Tier 3 as long as Mike Krzyzewski is running the basketball program. Some of these have had stretches where they were Tier 3.
  
  Brigham Young is classed as a Group of 5 member; they’re a football independent I would rank below Stanford and pretty close to Northwestern or UVa. BYU is close to Tier 3 status except that its football schedule is weak enough (largely Group of 5 teams) that it’s not considered Power-5.
  
  The placement is arbitrary. The right coach could take a Nebraska or Louisville close to Tier 1. The wrong coach could take an Oregon or a Texas to Tier 3. (Don’t say it; I was already thinking it . . .)

---
I personally have no issues [as I've said before] of Oklahoma looking to be in a larger footprint (along with UT)...
In doing so together as to hold the most logic, but to think an expansion/ merger isn't an option would be false...

Tier 1
SEC - Alabama, Florida, Georgia, LSU,
ACC - Clemson, Notre Dame
B1G - Penn State, Michigan, Ohio State, Wisconsin
XVI - Oklahoma, Texas, Washington, Oregon, USC

Tier 2
SEC - Tennessee, Texas A&M, Missouri, Auburn,
ACC - Florida State, Miami, North Carolina, Louisville
B1G - Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan State,
XVI - Colorado, UCLA, Stanford

Tier 3
SEC - Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Arkansas, Kentucky, South Carolina,
ACC - Virginia Tech, Pittsburgh, North Carolina State, West Virginia, Boston College, Virginia, Syracuse
B1G - Nebraska, Minnesota, Indiana, Northwestern,
XVI - Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, TCU

Tier 4
SEC - Vanderbilt
ACC - Georgia Tech, Duke, Wake Forest, Duke
B1G - Maryland, Purdue, Rutgers, Illinois
XVI - California, Kansas, Iowa State

Note, that Nebraska, 1 decade after the move, by this opinion, has the Cornhuskers as "Tier 3" take it as such..?
Again, the "XVI" stacks up well as an option for OU & UT, as logistically, Great Lakes west is 999 miles for UT...

Now, keep in mind, that article is subjectively based on opinion, as well as teams rated, meh XII needs growth...
And growth UCF/ USF is not the same as [potentially] Oklahoma & Texas weilding power to raid USC/ Oregon...

---
My thoughts are this stuff's still somewhat fluid especially if we may be looking at an impending market correction before the 2025 GoR...

Keep in mind this proposed alignment would pay 14 members $65 million each/ and a 16 member setup would still pay $57 million (before a 3rd tier)...
 

That's before discuss of 3rd tier backed by Disney streamed on ESPN+, can place 1st & 2nd tier games on ABC/ ESPN/ ESPN2... *Split tier 1 on CBS..?

Oklahoma ever gets left by Texas and the NCAA loses power (opps!) their shit is done.  Should have been shot several times across multiple decades.  The reality is OU has been covered by the Midwest politics of NCAA for the entirety of its existence.  David Boren is done, Barry Switzer is done, and visibility into the Cleveland County justice system is not far behind.  Choke on it OU! NIL is the nail in your coffin.  There never was Sooner Magic just a corrupt system hiding the reality of a 3rd rate school with a large group of political connections.  

Hey where is the records from "Big Red Sports".  Lost in the move....   Big 12 was all over that one...  Bahahaha  

[Native Texas 44]

On 7/3/2021 at 4:26 PM, LTbear said:

Arky to the south, WVU north. 

 

[Native Texas 44]

If you're going to give leverage again why the hell would you invite back in another team who's only purpose in life would be to beat Texas.  

[Valmy77 13226]

21 minutes ago, Native Texas said:

If you're going to give leverage again why the hell would you invite back in another team who's only purpose in life would be to beat Texas.  

Yeah I don't think Arkansas is really the kind of name we need to make adding another school financially make sense anyway.

But maybe that is my own blind hatred for all things piggy. Maybe they are sitting on piles of Walmart gold.

[TexasBeta 1261]

Personally, I would love to see Arkansas back as well as Nebraska. Colorado and Iowa would be great as well to make 14. Doubt Iowa would leave and the others.. who knows. I loved beating Arkansas and Nebraska. Probably not in my lifetime. 

[TrashMaster G 17551]

13 minutes ago, TexasBeta said:

Personally, I would love to see Arkansas back as well as Nebraska. Colorado and Iowa would be great as well to make 14. Doubt Iowa would leave and the others.. who knows. I loved beating Arkansas and Nebraska. Probably not in my lifetime. 

Take Arky, Neb and Colo and give Baylor the boot.  Perfect.

[TexasBeta 1261]

3 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

Take Arky, Neb and Colo and give Baylor the boot.  Perfect.

That will work as well. Take Iowa and give WV the boot as well. or Missouri and give WV walking papers. I just don't get them in the conference. 

 

Edited July 7, 2021 by TexasBeta

[trza-hawk 269]

The potential collaboration between the CFL and the XFL has been taken off the table. God knows what they could have done with conflicting schedules, different numbers of players on the field, the rouge, and those dinky stadiums in Canada. How could they have merged or had something like those Conference Challenges in College Basketball?

 

 

[TrashMaster G 17551]

2 hours ago, TexasBeta said:

That will work as well. Take Iowa and give WV the boot as well. or Missouri and give WV walking papers. I just don't get them in the conference. 

WV is an odd geographic fit, but I like them.  I'd boot TCU first, cuz fuck the cockroaches.

[camel at sea 589]

8 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

This seems to be the exact desire of anyone that wants to leave the Big 12.  That's all you would do, whether you're Texas or OU.  

Nobody thinks they're going to be Nebraska, but what school has improved their position in the world by leaving the Big 12?  Aggy is the closest, and they haven't really done anything schools like Iowa State and Kansas State haven't done by staying here.

3 of the 4 defectors have clearly damaged their programs by leaving.  1 is basically treading the same water.  Those who don't learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.

Eh, I think A&M is clearly better off (fan support, money, national perception, etc.) even if the results are similar.  They never have their self-delusions challenged by anyone in-state anymore, either.

The other three though definitely hurt themselves.  Nebraska fans pretty openly hate the Big Ten.  Mizzou fans don't show up for football or basketball as well as they did during the last few years of their Big 12 days.  Colorado was already trending down ten years ago but it has gotten worse AND they're making less money.

If I were CFB czar, I'd move NU, Arky, and Mizzou to the Big 12.  I'd park WVU in the SEC b/c I think the 'eers playing Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia, etc. would be fun to watch on TV.  Something like this would be fun for the Big 12:

N:  OU, OSU, KU, KSU, ISU, NU
S:   UT, TTU, MU, TCU, BU, Arky 

That's better for fan interest, it's better for TV (lots of god potential Tier 1 inventory there), it doesn't subtract from Olympic sports, and the travel is easy for everyone.

[kopp0e 1135]

On 7/7/2021 at 3:31 PM, Native Texas said:

Oklahoma ever gets left by Texas and the NCAA loses power (opps!) their shit is done.  Should have been shot several times across multiple decades.  The reality is OU has been covered by the Midwest politics of NCAA for the entirety of its existence.  David Boren is done, Barry Switzer is done, and visibility into the Cleveland County justice system is not far behind.  Choke on it OU! NIL is the nail in your coffin.  There never was Sooner Magic just a corrupt system hiding the reality of a 3rd rate school with a large group of political connections.  

Hey where is the records from "Big Red Sports".  Lost in the move....   Big 12 was all over that one...  Bahahaha  

Well, I see we have the "multiverse of madness" in effect here as some fellow poster from dirt has come to proclaim UT should in fact, go ACC...
The issue you bring up about Cleveland county is quite specific, that tells me you could be from Norman, likely wanting OU & Kansas in B1G too...

---

Originally posted by kopp0e View Post

According to the data you posted yourself (follow me here) USC has better tv ratings than does Nebraska over the season...
If I am wrong, just prove it by showing entire season as in 2019/ 2018/ 2017, to the best of my memory, has USC as better...

You should care if UT fans are interested in the drivel you post of "UT to ACC" agenda otherwise why post it here at all sir..?
So what reason do you have to "sell your agenda" on Oklahoma website, about Texas to ACC, when Texas isn't interested..?

---

Having Oklahoma & Texas move to SEC [along with Kansas & Texas Tech @18] is a far better bargain than being in a far-flung ACC + A&M in SEC...
That logistically doesn't sound good as Oklahoma & Texas luring the top brands out west, getting Colorado back/ raiding Oregon/ USC/ Utah too...

Anyway, glad you came over to the dark side, I think the ACC needs to worry how to fix revenues that are now stuck in a catfight with PAC for last...

[Native Texas 44]

On 7/7/2021 at 7:47 PM, camel at sea said:

Eh, I think A&M is clearly better off (fan support, money, national perception, etc.) even if the results are similar.  They never have their self-delusions challenged by anyone in-state anymore, either.

The other three though definitely hurt themselves.  Nebraska fans pretty openly hate the Big Ten.  Mizzou fans don't show up for football or basketball as well as they did during the last few years of their Big 12 days.  Colorado was already trending down ten years ago but it has gotten worse AND they're making less money.

If I were CFB czar, I'd move NU, Arky, and Mizzou to the Big 12.  I'd park WVU in the SEC b/c I think the 'eers playing Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia, etc. would be fun to watch on TV.  Something like this would be fun for the Big 12:

N:  OU, OSU, KU, KSU, ISU, NU
S:   UT, TTU, MU, TCU, BU, Arky 

That's better for fan interest, it's better for TV (lots of god potential Tier 1 inventory there), it doesn't subtract from Olympic sports, and the travel is easy for everyone.

Texas needs some balls.  We lost those when Deloss left.  Go independent.  How quick could Texas find 9 teams to play annually or 11 to rotate in 2 different schools ever other year!

dead accurate on the politics of the Big12.

A price should be paid and new era started!

[Treefidy 1463]

On 7/6/2021 at 4:23 PM, utee94 said:

I don't think it would work out that way.

I think they'd have to move Alabama and Auburn to the SEC-East to accommodate Texas and OU, and I could see them moving Mizzou over to the SEC-West as well.  

So we'd play ousux, ags, pig, LSU, Missouri, Ole Miss, and Miss State every year. We'd play the SEC-East schools even less frequently than the ags currently do, so it would be quite rare to face off against Alabama, Florida, Georgia, or Auburn.  

I'm one of the ones that would like to renew the rivalries with both ags and pigs, so I'm cool with that, but when considering the reality of the moves that would need to occur in expanding from 14 to 16, then the setup doesn't look nearly as compelling as it does if you just ignore the likely realities.

In short, 16-team conferences suck ass, and this scenario demonstrates why it's pretty unlikely we'd ever make the move.  But it's still interesting to think about.

 

The foist s of UT/OU to the SEC make it less like a 16 team conference and more like 2 adjacent 8 team conferences.  In the most logical geographic split there’s no rivalry games that need to be preserved, LSU being the only SEC original that doesn’t have an old rivalry game.  
 

the tougher thing would be trying to get the SEC to add conference game(s) so there could be more cross conference play.  
 

we know butt hurt aggy would vote against us joining, might not get votes from LSU or Miss schools as they would see the realignment writing on the wall and might not like that?

Would think we would alternate the Miss schools on home/away along with the 2? Cross division games.  So the worst possible season would include vandy/USCe and we end up with a home schedule of MSU, Mizzery, pig, Vandy and 2-3 OOC games.

Best case could be something like LSU, aggy, Ole miss, Bama at home plus 2-3 OOC.  
 

I’ll take that all day over any other option, including independent.  Dome is not as dominant as they once were, and they are in the ACC for the most part.   I dont think we could make it as an independent without it being some kind of weird UT/USC independent partnership pairing.  

[Win5002 2]

Your probably not going to need separate divisions in a year or two anyway.  You can have one set of standings and lock in 3-4 rivals and rotate around the rest of the league. 

Also, depending on the size of the league if it is deregulated you don't have to play the other teams the same frequency.  You could play some 2 out of 3 years, some 1 out of two years and some 2 out of 6 years.  In a 16 or 18 team league this makes a lot of sense.

[utee94 15812]

Holy crap that sounds horrible.

Good thing Texas isn't going to do something stupid like join a 16 or 18 team league.

 

[Valmy77 13226]

10 hours ago, Native Texas said:

Texas needs some balls.  We lost those when Deloss left.  Go independent.  How quick could Texas find 9 teams to play annually or 11 to rotate in 2 different schools ever other year!

dead accurate on the politics of the Big12.

A price should be paid and new era started!

Why though? And what are our other sports supposed to do? There is zero reason to go independent and tons of reasons to not go. If that were not the case we would still have tons of independent schools but we don't and that is for a reason.

I don't get this post. You quote a post about how all the schools that left have either ended up doing worse or staying the same and then say that this was dead accurate and...um...we need to also hurt ourselves by making a stupid move?

No. Everything is set up here for us to succeed. Doing something that numerous other schools realized didn't work and stopped doing, being independent, serves no purpose and would solve no problems and would probably create a bunch where none were before.

 

[notre dame joe 187]

On 7/12/2021 at 7:13 AM, Native Texas said:

Texas needs some balls.  We lost those when Deloss left.  Go independent.  How quick could Texas find 9 teams to play annually or 11 to rotate in 2 different schools ever other year!

dead accurate on the politics of the Big12.

A price should be paid and new era started!

U need an agreeable conference in which to park the other sports..

Which is basically what UT has now.  The only thing you have to do is shed your 9th conference game and/or CCG rematch.

[jdhorn92 1545]

On 7/7/2021 at 3:13 PM, Native Texas said:

Certainly a solid response and well thought out.  The only item I could address would be who ends up being affected if Texas leaves.  I believe Texas will be Texas in any conference.  Why carry the load and uplift the "little" 12. Those who are left behind will suffer the A&M fate, but only worse. 

Good discussion...  In the end "We Are Texas!"  

Dude please lose the "We are Texas shit"....that's the type of self promoting, entitled bs, soft, dont need to earn it bullshit we need to distance from.  You ever hear Bama say "We're Bama"?  Of course you don't, b/c they walk around with rings and titles  and let the play on the field dictate their reputation.

The "We are the Jones" and "We're Texas" is fucking old ass harry highschool bull shit.  Please stop.

 

You know when someone realizes We're Texas ?  When their kid gets a 34 on act, takes honors classes and gets the td letter from Austin. That's when they find out.  We don't need to walk around telling everyone .

Edited July 13, 2021 by jdhorn92

[Big Frog II 511]

With the expansion of the CFP around the corner, the smart thing to do is for the Big 12 to remain together and set up conference play to make the easiest path to get the most Big 12 teams in the playoffs.  If it's 8 conference games a year, do that.  If it's 8 conference games and no Big 12 championship game, do that.  We do not need to make Big 12 conference play into the Bataan Death March.

[The Grassy Nole 43]

Not sure why Texas or OU would want to leave the Big XII when they are in better position to remain kings of their domain.  If I was the Big XII I would push Nebraska and Arkansas to join the conference.  I am sure both school will display hubris on being in a "better" conference; however both know in their hearts that they belong in the Big XII due to historic rivalries, geographical fit, and most importantly having a better chance to actually make the playoffs.  

[Hurtlocker 2212]

20 hours ago, The Grassy Nole said:

Not sure why Texas or OU would want to leave the Big XII when they are in better position to remain kings of their domain.  If I was the Big XII I would push Nebraska and Arkansas to join the conference.  I am sure both school will display hubris on being in a "better" conference; however both know in their hearts that they belong in the Big XII due to historic rivalries, geographical fit, and most importantly having a better chance to actually make the playoffs.  

Fun fact, Cinci has more wins in the 2000s than Nebraska or Arkansas.   That downward skid they've been on has been rough.

Edited July 18, 2021 by Hurtlocker

[utee94 15812]

22 hours ago, The Grassy Nole said:

Not sure why Texas or OU would want to leave the Big XII when they are in better position to remain kings of their domain.  If I was the Big XII I would push Nebraska and Arkansas to join the conference.  I am sure both school will display hubris on being in a "better" conference; however both know in their hearts that they belong in the Big XII due to historic rivalries, geographical fit, and most importantly having a better chance to actually make the playoffs.  

I don't think Nebraska or Arkansas would have any better chance at the playoffs than they do now.  They'd just be losing to Iowa State and Baylor instead of Alabama and ... well... whoever Nebraska plays in the B1G.

[The Grassy Nole 43]

2 hours ago, utee94 said:

I don't think Nebraska or Arkansas would have any better chance at the playoffs than they do now.  They'd just be losing to Iowa State and Baylor instead of Alabama and ... well... whoever Nebraska plays in the B1G.

I agree that the Big XII would be harder opponent wise for Nebraska; however I believe Nebraska recruiting would more than likely improve in the Big XII due to having greater exposure within the State of Texas.  Arkansas would have an easier schedule due to being out of the SEC West.  Either team will be in a premier league so a 10-2 Arky/ Nebbers would probably have a much higher probability in a hypothetical Big XII vs their current homes with an expanded playoffs.

[Horn80 6118]

Throughly enjoy watching the Nebraska and Arky shitshows since leaving B12.   It’s good for them.

[notre dame joe 187]

On 7/17/2021 at 12:10 PM, The Grassy Nole said:

Not sure why Texas or OU would want to leave the Big XII when they are in better position to remain kings of their domain.  If I was the Big XII I would push Nebraska and Arkansas to join the conference.  I am sure both school will display hubris on being in a "better" conference; however both know in their hearts that they belong in the Big XII due to historic rivalries, geographical fit, and most importantly having a better chance to actually make the playoffs.  

 

3 hours ago, utee94 said:

I don't think Nebraska or Arkansas would have any better chance at the playoffs than they do now.  They'd just be losing to Iowa State and Baylor instead of Alabama and ... well... whoever Nebraska plays in the B1G.

Hard to say on the schedule.  OU/UT = anOSU/PSU.  But ask Ohio State what it's like to play Wiscy and @Iowa on a regular basis.  That may be the reason ND scheduled the Badgers at neutralish sites, Lambeau and Soldier Field.

 

But it's easy to say with the money.  Has any school not named Notre Dame voluntarily taken a pay cut for a better conference culture fit?  And when we turned down the BUG in the late 90s, there was not a crystal clear contractual 8-digit sum in play.

[Al_4_ISU 12458]

Ohio State routinely beats the piss out of Iowa, and I’m usually here for it

[The Grassy Nole 43]

5 minutes ago, notre dame joe said:

 

Hard to say on the schedule.  OU/UT = anOSU/PSU.  But ask Ohio State what it's like to play Wiscy and @Iowa on a regular basis.  That may be the reason ND scheduled the Badgers at neutralish sites, Lambeau and Soldier Field.

 

But it's easy to say with the money.  Has any school not named Notre Dame voluntarily taken a pay cut for a better conference culture fit?  And when we turned down the BUG in the late 90s, there was not a crystal clear contractual 8-digit sum in play.

The only case I can think of is South Carolina leaving the ACC to go independent due to North Carolina Hubris, or Chicago leaving the Big.

[notre dame joe 187]

51 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Ohio State routinely beats the piss out of Iowa, and I’m usually here for it

Without looking I'd guess the Hawkeyes have more wins over anOSU than Michigan, lately. 

48 minutes ago, The Grassy Nole said:

The only case I can think of is South Carolina leaving the ACC to go independent due to North Carolina Hubris, or Chicago leaving the Big.

I wonder about the contract value of an exclusive right to the field telegraph .

[Al_4_ISU 12458]

1 hour ago, notre dame joe said:

Without looking I'd guess the Hawkeyes have more wins over anOSU than Michigan, lately. 

I wonder about the contract value of an exclusive right to the field telegraph .

 

1 hour ago, notre dame joe said:

Without looking I'd guess the Hawkeyes have more wins over anOSU than Michigan, lately. 

I wonder about the contract value of an exclusive right to the field telegraph .

Well, yeah.  1 > 0.

[TrashMaster G 17551]

3 hours ago, Horn80 said:

Throughly enjoy watching the Nebraska and Arky shitshows since leaving B12.   It’s good for them.

[camel at sea 589]

21 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

 

Hard to say on the schedule.  OU/UT = anOSU/PSU.  But ask Ohio State what it's like to play Wiscy and @Iowa on a regular basis.  That may be the reason ND scheduled the Badgers at neutralish sites, Lambeau and Soldier Field.

 

But it's easy to say with the money.  Has any school not named Notre Dame voluntarily taken a pay cut for a better conference culture fit?  And when we turned down the BUG in the late 90s, there was not a crystal clear contractual 8-digit sum in play.

In the last 15 or so years, Wisconsin/Iowa isn't really any different than Frogs/Pokes.  

[notre dame joe 187]

11 hours ago, camel at sea said:

In the last 15 or so years, Wisconsin/Iowa isn't really any different than Frogs/Pokes.  

I bet if you ran the numbers you would find the two conferences are basically equal and the rest are pretty close.  I'd say the only outliers in terms of making the playoff are a non-Bama SECw team (hard) and Clemson (easy).

[Al_4_ISU 12458]

6 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

I bet if you ran the numbers you would find the two conferences are basically equal and the rest are pretty close.  I'd say the only outliers in terms of making the playoff are a non-Bama SECw team (hard) and Clemson (easy).

Exactly.

It seems pretty clear to me that the Big 10 and Big 12 are very similar in terms of strength, as is the SECe.  The SEC west is tougher than either, and the Pac 12 and ACC (sans Clemson) early clearly worse.

Power conference strength goes about like this:

SECw

Big 10e

Big 12

SECe

Big 10w

ACC/Pac 12

[Valmy77 13226]

On 7/17/2021 at 2:10 PM, The Grassy Nole said:

Not sure why Texas or OU would want to leave the Big XII when they are in better position to remain kings of their domain.  If I was the Big XII I would push Nebraska and Arkansas to join the conference.  I am sure both school will display hubris on being in a "better" conference; however both know in their hearts that they belong in the Big XII due to historic rivalries, geographical fit, and most importantly having a better chance to actually make the playoffs.  

They won't join us. But other P5 schools are the only expansion I hope the Big 12 considers.

Unless somebody comes in with a lot of value best to keep the status quo.

[Valmy77 13226]

On 7/18/2021 at 4:01 PM, Horn80 said:

Throughly enjoy watching the Nebraska and Arky shitshows since leaving B12.   It’s good for them.

[Hurtlocker 2212]

1 hour ago, Valmy77 said:

They won't join us. But other P5 schools are the only expansion I hope the Big 12 considers.

Unless somebody comes in with a lot of value best to keep the status quo.

['stache 21802]

I suspect that in about 10 years when players' rights continue to be an issue some of the lower revenue P-5 teams will be ready to move down. I think realignment will take off again around that time. And hopefully someone will wake the fuck up and tell Baylor they aren't allowed to have sports anymore.

[Hurtlocker 2212]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

I suspect that in about 10 years when players' rights continue to be an issue some of the lower revenue P-5 teams will be ready to move down. I think realignment will take off again around that time. And hopefully someone will wake the fuck up and tell Baylor they aren't allowed to have sports anymore.

Yeah this is going to be interesting.   There is a battle per school between investment in a sport (and MBB to a lesser degree and its also much cheaper) that provides a giant PR opportunity for the school at large, which increases applications/attendance/etc far outside the investment, but kind of only if successful - e.g. the Flutie Factor.   Spending it and not having success is a major drain on finances.   I don't see any schools in the Big12/Big Ten/SEC even considering such a move and only a handful of possibilities between the ACC/Pac12 (Wake/BC/WSU/OrgSt - that's all I can think of).  When getting into the AAC and lower though, their could be a mass exodus from FBS to FCS.

What I'm really curious about is how it will affect the P5 over the next 5 years or so.   Clearly bag men are now legal, so that's not really an advantage, it already occurred.   But just how many players at each school and/or sport will be able to capitalize on it.    Instead of consolidating power to a few, will it even the odds more if being the BMOC in a non-Blue Blood pays out the same or more with less competition than the blue bloods?   Will that help the second and third tier schools gain better talent as 4*s looking to get more exposure choose open opportunities over piling onto crowded talent classes?

The next big jump in institutional investment may not be TVs in lockers, it may be who can help you maximize athlete's NIL business acumen from day one of stepping on campus

[utee94 15812]

4 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

Yeah this is going to be interesting.   There is a battle per school between investment in a sport (and MBB to a lesser degree and its also much cheaper) that provides a giant PR opportunity for the school at large, which increases applications/attendance/etc far outside the investment, but kind of only if successful - e.g. the Flutie Factor.   Spending it and not having success is a major drain on finances.   I don't see any schools in the Big12/Big Ten/SEC even considering such a move and only a handful of possibilities between the ACC/Pac12 (Wake/BC/WSU/OrgSt - that's all I can think of).  When getting into the AAC and lower though, their could be a mass exodus from FBS to FCS.

What I'm really curious about is how it will affect the P5 over the next 5 years or so.   Clearly bag men are now legal, so that's not really an advantage, it already occurred.   But just how many players at each school and/or sport will be able to capitalize on it.    Instead of consolidating power to a few, will it even the odds more if being the BMOC in a non-Blue Blood pays out the same or more with less competition than the blue bloods?   Will that help the second and third tier schools gain better talent as 4*s looking to get more exposure choose open opportunities over piling onto crowded talent classes?

The next big jump in institutional investment may not be TVs in lockers, it may be who can help you maximize athlete's NIL business acumen from day one of stepping on campus

I absolutely believe this is going to become a major factor in the near future.

As for "which schools will benefit?"

I think we're going to see maybe some unexpected schools increase their capabilities to attract and retain talent. Schools with significant financial resources in boosters and corporate sponsorship, but that had previously refused to get as far into the bagman muck, as other schools that are less financially advantaged.  I could think specifically of schools like Ole Miss and Auburn that have been openly buying players for years, suffering because now the playing field has been leveled.  And schools like, maybe Vanderbilt, that have some financial resources but haven't been quite as willing to "play ball" now being able to benefit from their financial backing in ways they wouldn't consider, before.

 

[Hurtlocker 2212]

7 minutes ago, utee94 said:

I absolutely believe this is going to become a major factor in the near future.

As for "which schools will benefit?"

I think we're going to see maybe some unexpected schools increase their capabilities to attract and retain talent. Schools with significant financial resources in boosters and corporate sponsorship, but that had previously refused to get as far into the bagman muck, as other schools that are less financially advantaged.  I could think specifically of schools like Ole Miss and Auburn that have been openly buying players for years, suffering because now the playing field has been leveled.  And schools like, maybe Vanderbilt, that have some financial resources but haven't been quite as willing to "play ball" now being able to benefit from their financial backing in ways they wouldn't consider, before.

 

Yeah in the "adapt or die" world, some unexpected results will come from who can leverage it or not.   Hard to put a finger on where that unexpected will be at the moment.

[oldhorn2 430]

with this "new world" idea of recruiting.....along with the wide open and easy portal transfers I wonder if teams are suddenly going to lose super stars to other schools that can ....uh...."offer them better opportunities" to increase their brand so to speak?

What if USC had been able to offer VY a movie deal? You can not blame a kid for following the money.