Realignment talk not going away

[closetohumping 17455]

8 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

Its not really a "threat to blue bloods" conversation, its threat to those battling for third.  Would they want to get rid of the increased exposure that Mizzou and Arky could take back that they're currently losing now for being middling programs in their divisions.

Actually, you're probably right.  After Texas and ou (ok, we can rightfully reverse that), I'd imagine Mizzou and Arky have as much to sell as any other school in this conference.  I'll give the Texas schools a proximity advantage but is there anything else that would compel a kid to goto Baylor vs Arkansas?

[ButtFumble 5180]

CFP expansion lessens the chance for conference expansion unless it is with an existing P5 and that is highly doubtful

simple math the Big 12 gets $40 million two out of three years for The Sugar Bowl and the Big 12 gets $50 million every year for the football playoffs and being a P5 conference that dumped their bowl into the playoffs so that is $230 million every three years or $76.7 million per year or $7.67 million per Big 12 member

I am not sure if The Sugar Bowl deal scales or not, but i believe the CFP has increased a little bit since the start.......the G5 conferences split $90 million between the five of them and that goes to conferences not teams

Say the CFP expands and that results in the P5 taking a larger share of the new money still and lets say that results in $65 million every year instead of $50 so now you are looking at $65 million every year and $40 million two out of every three years or $275 million or $91.7 million on average so $9.17 million on average every year for a Big 12 member

new members to the Big 12 bring ZERO dollars to contribute to that and they bring ZERO dollars to contribute to any of the other Big 12 bowls that pay enough money to turn a profit for the conference after the expense of sending the team

so with CFP expansion new members instead of needing to find a way to cover their TV money from the conference media contract and $7.67 million they now need to find a way to do that and cover $9.17 million so about $1.5 million more and that does not include other major bowl money, NCAA tournament credits (where the Big 12 does well and where a new member would probably just bumping any existing member from making the tournaments instead of being an additional member in the tournament ect.)

So CFP expansion makes it that much more expensive to add a new member and that much more cost prohibitive in terms of finding a new member that overcomes all of the additional conference money that comes besides the TV contract

['stache 21825]

11 hours ago, closetohumping said:

Actually, you're probably right.  After Texas and ou (ok, we can rightfully reverse that), I'd imagine Mizzou and Arky have as much to sell as any other school in this conference.  I'll give the Texas schools a proximity advantage but is there anything else that would compel a kid to goto Baylor vs Arkansas?

A desire to rape people without repercussion?

[SwanderedTalent 5761]

22 hours ago, Thiefery said:

In a time when we are going through a pandemic.. the money is everything.  

Everybody lost money during the shutdown. It was a one-year blip. Saying "our losses weren't as bad as they would have been had we not made this stupid and illogical realignment move" completely sidesteps the question of whether the moves were better for the schools or not. That it might-- might-- have had a temporary ancillary benefit is like defending chasing an inside straight because you hit it once.

[n64ra 1086]

22 hours ago, 'stache said:

I'm okay with 12, but this comment makes no sense to me.

 

I think it really makes most conference championship games pointless. In our league in particular, you gotta think that the top two teams would already have a spot in a 12 team playoff, especially if its TX v OU. I mean even ISU was a top 10 team last year entering the CCG and would have almost certainly made the 12 team field even losing to OU, and an OU loss probably wouldn't even drop them in seeding. The only real "play-in" scenario would be in other leagues if one of the divisions is weak and the division winner is like 7-5 or something, then yeah they could play their way in with a win.

I really wish they could find a way to make the conference championship games essentially the first round of a national playoff. The five P5 champs plus the three highest ranked G-5 champs. Make ND eligible for the ACC title game, or fuck them, I don't really care, and am sick of them always coming up as an impediment to a playoff system that relies on conference championships. Same goes for BYU, find a conference, or GTFO. 

You answered your own question. The conference title game becomes a play in for the team from a poor division. Every conference has that possibility except the Big 12 with the #1 vs #2 game. There it just hurts.

[Thiefery 5015]

23 minutes ago, n64ra said:

You answered your own question. The conference title game becomes a play in for the team from a poor division. Every conference has that possibility except the Big 12 with the #1 vs #2 game. There it just hurts.

Yep, if the Big12 aims to land 2 schools into an expanded CFP which is being speculated..  They need to go back to 2 divisions and possibly dropping the 9th conference game.  Maybe they fill that slot with a P4 opponent.

[ButtFumble 5180]

1 hour ago, Thiefery said:

Yep, if the Big12 aims to land 2 schools into an expanded CFP which is being speculated..  They need to go back to 2 divisions and possibly dropping the 9th conference game.  Maybe they fill that slot with a P4 opponent.

the Big 12 going to divisions and not dropping the 9th conference game would be the dumbest thing on earth

because declaring divisions requires the division winners meet in the CCG.......the Big 12 with 10 teams and keeping 9 conference games could easily end up with a team that is 7-5 or some shit like that as the division winner in one half of the CCG while a much better team is left out

sadly the Big 12 was actually stupid enough to consider divisions with 9 conference games when they were first allowed to have the CCG......the dumb fucks making the decision thought that somehow "division winners" might mean something

the Big 12 does not make smart decisions they are stuck in a time when "winning the conference" meant something and they do not seem to understand how the playoffs work or what it takes to actually make the playoffs 

[Thiefery 5015]

13 hours ago, ButtFumble said:

the Big 12 going to divisions and not dropping the 9th conference game would be the dumbest thing on earth

because declaring divisions requires the division winners meet in the CCG.......the Big 12 with 10 teams and keeping 9 conference games could easily end up with a team that is 7-5 or some shit like that as the division winner in one half of the CCG while a much better team is left out

sadly the Big 12 was actually stupid enough to consider divisions with 9 conference games when they were first allowed to have the CCG......the dumb fucks making the decision thought that somehow "division winners" might mean something

the Big 12 does not make smart decisions they are stuck in a time when "winning the conference" meant something and they do not seem to understand how the playoffs work or what it takes to actually make the playoffs 

i was thinking that if we had another scenario from a couple years ago when Baylor had one loss coming into the Big 12 championship game, they would qualify as an at large team (since they would be in the same division as ou)

[ButtFumble 5180]

2 minutes ago, Thiefery said:

i was thinking that if we had another scenario from a couple years ago when Baylor had one loss coming into the Big 12 championship game, they would qualify as an at large team (since they would be in the same division as ou)

yea I suppose that could happen I did not look at it that way since until now the CCG was to pair the two best teams no matter what to get the best chance to get one in

but I see your point if you have two teams in the same division and one is 12-0 and the other is 11-1 with only a loss to the 12-0 team instead pf pairing them up you pair the 12-0 team with something from the other division (8-5, 9-4 or whatever), expect them to win and be 13-0 and then you also still have a 11-1 team as well

that does make for an interesting discussion when you look at it like that......I think the reality for the Big 12 overall and the long term stability is to play fewer conference games and beat up on each other less and try and beat teams OOC more.....sadly the way things work for the Big 12 since the playoffs is the 12-0 team would probably lose to a 7-5 team and be the one to barely make the playoffs or the 11-1 team would get in with a low seating and have to play the extra game and it would get all fucked up with injuries or "has tired" from too many games

but you do make a very good point that is something to consider......probably to the detriment of doing the smart thing and playing fewer conference games

[Thiefery 5015]

7 minutes ago, ButtFumble said:

yea I suppose that could happen I did not look at it that way since until now the CCG was to pair the two best teams no matter what to get the best chance to get one in

but I see your point if you have two teams in the same division and one is 12-0 and the other is 11-1 with only a loss to the 12-0 team instead pf pairing them up you pair the 12-0 team with something from the other division (8-5, 9-4 or whatever), expect them to win and be 13-0 and then you also still have a 11-1 team as well

that does make for an interesting discussion when you look at it like that......I think the reality for the Big 12 overall and the long term stability is to play fewer conference games and beat up on each other less and try and beat teams OOC more.....sadly the way things work for the Big 12 since the playoffs is the 12-0 team would probably lose to a 7-5 team and be the one to barely make the playoffs or the 11-1 team would get in with a low seating and have to play the extra game and it would get all fucked up with injuries or "has tired" from too many games

but you do make a very good point that is something to consider......probably to the detriment of doing the smart thing and playing fewer conference games

I mean for the health of the conference.. you want to get atleast two schools into a 12 school playoff. 

[ButtFumble 5180]

14 minutes ago, Thiefery said:

I mean for the health of the conference.. you want to get atleast two schools into a 12 school playoff. 

I gagree 100% and what you stated above has a possibility of making that happen, but I feel no matter what playing fewer conference games has the greater chance of making that happen....and by necessity even one less conference games (vs two less that I feel is even better) means the Big 12 has to have divisions

my concern if the Big 12 does the dumb and moves to divisions with 9 conference games still and that relies on a lot of luck instead of going to even 1 less conference game that helps a good bit or the much smarter 2 less conference games that would make the Big 12 about equal with other conferences in terms of % chances of positive things happening

[Hurtlocker 2213]

9 hours ago, ButtFumble said:

I gagree 100% and what you stated above has a possibility of making that happen, but I feel no matter what playing fewer conference games has the greater chance of making that happen....and by necessity even one less conference games (vs two less that I feel is even better) means the Big 12 has to have divisions

my concern if the Big 12 does the dumb and moves to divisions with 9 conference games still and that relies on a lot of luck instead of going to even 1 less conference game that helps a good bit or the much smarter 2 less conference games that would make the Big 12 about equal with other conferences in terms of % chances of positive things happening

As much as I'd say the 8 route does work for better records, I think that ship has sailed.   It seems to only be working for the SEC, who has numerous schools holding a title in the past two decades, and people are starting to catch on.  Connolly has been roasting Clemson for their schedules this year and they open against Georgia.   Also, those extra conference games are the reason why the SEC is paid $45m and the B1G is $53m.  

Additionally, one of the main reasons they didn't expand was every non-Texas team gets two games a year in the state.  That may keep the status quo more than anything else.

 

Edited June 10, 2021 by Hurtlocker
added some flair!

[n64ra 1086]

20 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

 

That's exactly what the conference wants. Why increase the odds of your best team losing?

Edited June 10, 2021 by n64ra

['stache 21825]

On 5/26/2021 at 4:52 AM, kopp0e said:

Let me know when most leagues start making deals, 4 years before a contract is up...

At this rate B1G is 2 years overdue (kidding) I think XII should look at expansion now...

I thought I heard on the radio that OU is really angry that their game against Nebraska was set for 11am, and they've been complaining for years about being placed at 11am, because that is the national game for the BIG 12. I get that complaint, it's BS that the best game of the week gets the shitty timeslot, and it hurts local businesses that rely on drunk people spending the day in town. The radio guys also said that SEC is moving away from CBS and they suggested that the Big 12 approach CBS about taking the 2:30 spot for national games. It's the only place I heard this conversation.

[Thiefery 5015]

1 minute ago, 'stache said:

I thought I heard on the radio that OU is really angry that their game against Nebraska was set for 11am, and they've been complaining for years about being placed at 11am, because that is the national game for the BIG 12. I get that complaint, it's BS that the best game of the week gets the shitty timeslot, and it hurts local businesses that rely on drunk people spending the day in town. The radio guys also said that SEC is moving away from CBS and they suggested that the Big 12 approach CBS about taking the 2:30 spot for national games. It's the only place I heard this conversation.

Funny thing is that there best landing spot would probably be in the BiG...which places their best games at noon too lol

@ButtFumble went into depth about taking a loss on the next contract to get on the CBS package because they will not be paying a lot for 1st tier rights.  But the thinking is more people will see Big12 conference games and hopefully by the next contract, the conference would command a bigger price tag.

[Hurtlocker 2213]

1 hour ago, Thiefery said:

Funny thing is that there best landing spot would probably be in the BiG...which places their best games at noon too lol

@ButtFumble went into depth about taking a loss on the next contract to get on the CBS package because they will not be paying a lot for 1st tier rights.  But the thinking is more people will see Big12 conference games and hopefully by the next contract, the conference would command a bigger price tag.

Yeah I mentioned that too, the SEC gave up money to get exposure and it worked out great.   They'll want to fill that spot, but they don't want to fill it with 15 games with every team from the SEC getting a shot.  They actually want about 12 games so they can show golf tournaments at the beginning of the year, which puts the Big 12 in a great spot to take that 3:30 eastern timing.

As for this game, Fox got the pick and they've been marketing the Big Noon slot that they use a lot with the Big Ten.  Sucks because there are not any other good afternoon games on, but part of this bouncing order of picked games

[Machinator 32099]

 

[ButtFumble 5180]

6 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

As much as I'd say the 8 route does work for better records, I think that ship has sailed.   It seems to only be working for the SEC, who has numerous schools holding a title in the past two decades, and people are starting to catch on.  Connolly has been roasting Clemson for their schedules this year and they open against Georgia.   Also, those extra conference games are the reason why the SEC is paid $45m and the B1G is $53m.  

Additionally, one of the main reasons they didn't expand was every non-Texas team gets two games a year in the state.  That may keep the status quo more than anything else.

 

 

I get what you are saying, but what is the real reason that schedule sucks?

well it is because most of those ACC teams on that schedule suck.....yes sure South Carolina sucks and has for a while and there is the D1-AA and UConn

but if you swapped in 9 Big 12 teams in that schedule with South Carolina the team that is out a lot of people  would say it sucks and you better win every game to have a shot at the playoffs at all

if you swapped in 9 Big 12 games and kept SC and got rid of GA people would really say it sucks......but the reason they would be saying that is mostly because of the Big 12 teams

or the opposite people say the SEC SEC SEC is "so tough".....because most of their teams beat a load of dog shit before conference play and game the rankings with a late season D1-AA and then repeat the next year

it is a long term process not a one year process and teams like Texas and OU and teams that are doing well in the Big 12 right now like ISU are going to have to constantly adjust their schedules to make sure people cannot make those "totally sucks" claims and same with TCU if they get rolling again or especially Baylor

but if you can get the conference to a point where few if any teams are 2-10 (even if they are beating dog shit) and the worst teams are 6-6 and at least playing in a bowl game or 7-5 then you move past that issue Clemson is facing

there is a reason the ACC makes the lowest P5 money right now and even less than the PAC 12 this last time and part of that is because they went in way too long with ESPN and part is because they got chumped on the conference network and part is because they have a lot of teams that "are just happy to be there", but they are not the Big 10 with several teams that people can claim "are always in the hunt" even if they have not been "in the hunt for 20 years"

and with the 8 vs 9 conference games again it goes back to the SEC SEC SEC vs everyone else debate......you can either sell your whole conference or you can sell a few top teams and the SEC SEC SEC is about to be the highest paid for the sell your whole conference model while the PAC 12 and ACC are moving further down the payment ladder selling 2 or 3 teams and the Big 12 is barely holding their own

the Big 10 admitted it was a mistake to go to 9 conference games from about season 1 of doing it and that us because they realized they have a hell of a lot of "just glad to be here" and as those teams take their extra ass whipping each season in a conference game it is harder to sell the whole conference

and yes I know the ACC is still 8 conference games, but they are also a hell of a lot of "just glad to be here" and now "coaching for the kids"

people can say what they want about the Big 12, but there is not a team in the Big 12 including Kansas that is "just glad to be here" as far as winning, but the conference sets things up that makes it hard for individual teams to get shit done

The Big 12 needs to take control and the media dollars will follow and if they don't well doing the same the media dollars will definitely not follow and "just glad to be here" might not even be a reality

[Machinator 32099]

FCB

Spoiler

I’ve long said we’ll have an expansion of the College Football Playoff before we have any more meaningful realignment of Power Five schools jumping conferences.

The word is now out that the 10 FBS commissioners and Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick will consider a proposal of expanding the CFP to 12 teams when they meet next week.

An industry source told Horns247 such a proposal could double or possibly triple the current $7.2 billion that ESPN is paying for the CFP.

That kind of increase in payout would likely further diminish the possibility of schools jumping from one Power Five league to another - simply because there would be enough money to go around.

The proposal, put forth by a working group that included Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby, calls for the bracket to include the six highest-ranked conference champions and the six remaining highest-ranked teams as determined by the CFP selection committee.

Under the proposal, the four highest-ranked conference champions would be the top four seeds and receive a first-round bye. Teams seeded 5-12 would play each other in first-round games played on the home field of the higher-ranked team. The quarterfinals and semifinals would be played in bowl games. The national championship game would also be a neutral site game.

Nothing has been decided at this point, and the 10 FBS commissioners and Swarbrick could end up devising/backing a completely different format. But the push for expanding the College Football Playoff is on. And the likelihood of any more meaningful realignment involving the Power Five is fading.

 

[kopp0e 1135]

12 hours ago, 'stache said:

I thought I heard on the radio that OU is really angry that their game against Nebraska was set for 11am, and they've been complaining for years about being placed at 11am, because that is the national game for the BIG 12. I get that complaint, it's BS that the best game of the week gets the shitty timeslot, and it hurts local businesses that rely on drunk people spending the day in town. The radio guys also said that SEC is moving away from CBS and they suggested that the Big 12 approach CBS about taking the 2:30 spot for national games. It's the only place I heard this conversation.

Yep , on the dirt board it was all the talk for a week or so... XII needs to see if it can swoop in and get the "primetime" 2:30pm slot...
That would work well for the league long term, now with the idea of an expanded CFP to 12, more focus needed on XII 3rd tier net..?

[notre dame joe 190]

On 6/8/2021 at 12:55 PM, 'stache said:

I mean, just add ND to one of the ACC divisions, have them play everyone in that division, and they have 5 extra games to do whatever they want with (USC, Navy, Michigan, etc). As long as they play everyone in one division, there can't be any unfairness with the end result. Have them switch divisions every year or two if you want them to play everybody. They are already treated like special snowflakes within the ACC, just make it official. I'm not even all that against BYU joining a Big 12 North division if we can bring along a strong 12th, I'm just not seeing a very good candidate (Boise doesn't count, I'd rather give Colorado State a chance, and that would be a pretty big stretch). 

you think we have it easy now?  Just wait for our playoff berth any season we can avoid finishing 13th.

[BigHornedLurker 1954]

9 hours ago, Machinator said:

FCB

  Hide contents

I’ve long said we’ll have an expansion of the College Football Playoff before we have any more meaningful realignment of Power Five schools jumping conferences.

The word is now out that the 10 FBS commissioners and Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick will consider a proposal of expanding the CFP to 12 teams when they meet next week.

An industry source told Horns247 such a proposal could double or possibly triple the current $7.2 billion that ESPN is paying for the CFP.

That kind of increase in payout would likely further diminish the possibility of schools jumping from one Power Five league to another - simply because there would be enough money to go around.

The proposal, put forth by a working group that included Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby, calls for the bracket to include the six highest-ranked conference champions and the six remaining highest-ranked teams as determined by the CFP selection committee.

Under the proposal, the four highest-ranked conference champions would be the top four seeds and receive a first-round bye. Teams seeded 5-12 would play each other in first-round games played on the home field of the higher-ranked team. The quarterfinals and semifinals would be played in bowl games. The national championship game would also be a neutral site game.

Nothing has been decided at this point, and the 10 FBS commissioners and Swarbrick could end up devising/backing a completely different format. But the push for expanding the College Football Playoff is on. And the likelihood of any more meaningful realignment involving the Power Five is fading.

 

Not that we can trust FCB but this notion of bowl tieins for the playoffs is the same common sense proposal many of us in this thread have brought up. 

I've been fervently against byes, but if this is the direction this seems like a reasonable way to accomplish making the (top) bowls important, making sure every team has a shot at the title, and adding weight to conference championships. 

Lets get it done. 

[kopp0e 1135]

It's just a "tomato/ toma' to" kind of realignment/ NCAA/ stipend/ NIL, situation (or however that goes)...?

 

[notre dame joe 190]

6 hours ago, kopp0e said:

It's just a "tomato/ toma' to" kind of realignment/ NCAA/ stipend/ NIL, situation (or however that goes)...?

 

If an employee gets disabled on the job then his employer+insurance co is on the hook for the rest of that worker's life.

[ButtFumble 5180]

48 minutes ago, notre dame joe said:

If an employee gets disabled on the job then his employer+insurance co is on the hook for the rest of that worker's life.

the real concern for universities needs to be the behavior of their "employees" especially towards other students

pretty much any accusation by any non-athlete student (or any other student athlete for that matter) will have to be treated just like it is if it was from any other employee

failure to do so will result in a ton of lawsuits from past and present employees that feel they were treated differently

they are going to have to deal with what "on the job" and "off the job" means and behaviors related to that as well

a lot of athletes are going to be getting "fired" left and right and a lot of universities that try different ways to avoid that are going to be getting sued left and right

ultimately I hope all of the P5 moves towards the Ivy League model and in the time it takes to do that I would imagine a lot of football programs might get dropped or drop down to D1-AA

there is going to be a lot of push back on student fees and academic subsidies I don't imagine that places like UH will be happy when their students find out they have been paying $48 million per year for athletics and now those athletes want paid part of the "profits"

I would imagine a number of universities will also take the chance to start paying "players" in other sports and trying to dominate them be it soccer (mens and womens), mens BB, womens BB, lacrosse or similar sports and they might just ditch football all together to focus on those sports

the end result of this will be a lot less C and D students getting into college and having next to no opportunity to do much of anything else

[Ace000087 18]

On 6/8/2021 at 3:05 PM, Al_4_ISU said:

If everyone is getting into the playoffs I'd have no issue with BYU and Colorado State being in the league.

Personally, I think even the Big 12 payouts are probably bordering on "law of diminishing returns" kind of cash and fans bragging about how much money their school makes while their team sucks is the dumbest flex I've ever seen in sports.

I wouldn't mind BYU or CSU either.  I like WVU, but they really belong in the ACC.  If that happened the other options get interesting for 12 in that scenario.  

[Valmy77 13251]

The ACC doesn't want WVU and we don't want BYU or CSU.

I say let's keep it the way it is.

[LTbear 4171]

I like it as is. Wouldn't mind BYU (football only) + Cincinnati. Dream scenario would be to get Arkansas IMO, but 99.99% won't happen. 

[Poolflood 845]

Need to expand and not 100% sure I care who are the additional teams.  

SEC has shown the way.  Two Mississippi teams with a state population of 3 million?!

Thread seems to be focusing on TV market share but it's gotta focus on perception.  More OOC cream puff wins means more wins for conference which leads to higher ranking which leads to more entrants to championship series which leads to more money.  May take short term hit but it's better long play.

I'll take BYU and fucking cougar high.

Would love to poach pac12 teams or Nebraska or even better Arkansas but don't see it happening.

Expand or get left in the dust.

[Thiefery 5015]

think you go after Tulane for the south division..  And try (TRY) to get Arkansas/Colorado/Nebraska back in the North Division

South -UT, Tech, bu, TCU, TU, WV

North- ou, OSU, KU, KSU, ISU, nu/CO/Ark

[LTbear 4171]

39 minutes ago, Thiefery said:

think you go after Tulane for the south division..  And try (TRY) to get Arkansas/Colorado/Nebraska back in the North Division

South -UT, Tech, bu, TCU, TU, WV

North- ou, OSU, KU, KSU, ISU, nu/CO/Ark

Arky to the south, WVU north. 

[kopp0e 1135]

2 hours ago, Poolflood said:

Need to expand and not 100% sure I care who are the additional teams.  

SEC has shown the way.  Two Mississippi teams with a state population of 3 million?!

Thread seems to be focusing on TV market share but it's gotta focus on perception.  More OOC cream puff wins means more wins for conference which leads to higher ranking which leads to more entrants to championship series which leads to more money.  May take short term hit but it's better long play.

I'll take BYU and fucking cougar high.

Would love to poach pac12 teams or Nebraska or even better Arkansas but don't see it happening.

Expand or get left in the dust.

I don't know how probable this might be, it could just be for clicks, but its far more than most speculation now...
 

If USC was getting an indy 3rd tier deal similar to UT and OU may at least give a reformed league a "look-into"...
As to realignment I've bigger things to worry of, like when will Oklahoma City get an In-N-Out Burger [kidding]...

[ButtFumble 5180]

3 hours ago, Poolflood said:

Need to expand and not 100% sure I care who are the additional teams.  

SEC has shown the way.  Two Mississippi teams with a state population of 3 million?!

Thread seems to be focusing on TV market share but it's gotta focus on perception.  More OOC cream puff wins means more wins for conference which leads to higher ranking which leads to more entrants to championship series which leads to more money.  May take short term hit but it's better long play.

I'll take BYU and fucking cougar high.

Would love to poach pac12 teams or Nebraska or even better Arkansas but don't see it happening.

Expand or get left in the dust.

how does expansion help especially with the likes of UH.....UH is a near .500 team over the last 30 years or so.....they have been ranked 2 times in the last 30 seasons....they bring low fan support, a massive academic side subsidy, no new market, and an interest in trying to get into the Big 12 and bring up shit from the SWC and trying to tell everyone else in the Big 12 that they will "stand up to UT for them" and if UT ever wanted to move down the road they would try and drag state politics into it.....fuck them

and the Big 12 can get more OOC games by playing fewer conference games they do not need to expand to do that especially with G5 teams that bring nothing of substance or value

[Valmy77 13251]

3 hours ago, Poolflood said:

Need to expand and not 100% sure I care who are the additional teams.  

SEC has shown the way.  Two Mississippi teams with a state population of 3 million?!

Thread seems to be focusing on TV market share but it's gotta focus on perception.  More OOC cream puff wins means more wins for conference which leads to higher ranking which leads to more entrants to championship series which leads to more money.  May take short term hit but it's better long play.

I'll take BYU and fucking cougar high.

Would love to poach pac12 teams or Nebraska or even better Arkansas but don't see it happening.

Expand or get left in the dust.

This is entirely backwards. Expand and get left in the dust. The size of our league is what enables our per school payouts to be competitive with other leagues.

[Poolflood 845]

16 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

This is entirely backwards. Expand and get left in the dust. The size of our league is what enables our per school payouts to be competitive with other leagues.

Until the secsecsec has 3 teams in the playoff.  Why.  Cause shit schedule.  Who brings more?  Ms st.  or uh?  It's a long term play.  Putting 3 teams in the playoffs is the goal.  Every other year secsecsec is gonna put three.  Every other year we're going to get 2.  

[kopp0e 1135]

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..?

[TrashMaster G 17581]

On 7/3/2021 at 5:16 PM, ButtFumble said:

how does expansion help especially with the likes of UH.....UH is a near .500 team over the last 30 years or so.....they have been ranked 2 times in the last 30 seasons....they bring low fan support, a massive academic side subsidy, no new market, and an interest in trying to get into the Big 12 and bring up shit from the SWC and trying to tell everyone else in the Big 12 that they will "stand up to UT for them" and if UT ever wanted to move down the road they would try and drag state politics into it.....fuck them

100%

[Reese Bennett 3615]

Ugh. The University of Virginia is a public university and is the flagship university of the state of Virginia. It's called a Public Ivy for a reason.

It is not private. 

Being founded by Thomas Jefferson, it certainly is not a church school either.

They've also recently won national championships in basketball and baseball.

Edited July 6, 2021 by Reese Bennett

[Native Texas 44]

On 7/3/2021 at 5:16 PM, ButtFumble said:

how does expansion help especially with the likes of UH.....UH is a near .500 team over the last 30 years or so.....they have been ranked 2 times in the last 30 seasons....they bring low fan support, a massive academic side subsidy, no new market, and an interest in trying to get into the Big 12 and bring up shit from the SWC and trying to tell everyone else in the Big 12 that they will "stand up to UT for them" and if UT ever wanted to move down the road they would try and drag state politics into it.....fuck them

and the Big 12 can get more OOC games by playing fewer conference games they do not need to expand to do that especially with G5 teams that bring nothing of substance or value

Why oh why is their need for this worthless conference.  It falls exactly like the Emmert NCAA.  No value to Texas.  We need no OU like we have needed no A&M.

Walk this trash heap!  Midwestern prop up and water boys of the old SWC.  Looking at you Baylor and Tech.  
 

ACC plus USC, and OU if the take being dumped well..
 

let’s make that generational change

Grow a pair.

Be Texas!

[Valmy77 13251]

36 minutes ago, Native Texas said:

Why oh why is their need for this worthless conference.  It falls exactly like the Emmert NCAA.  No value to Texas.  We need no OU like we have needed no A&M.

Walk this trash heap!  Midwestern prop up and water boys of the old SWC.  Looking at you Baylor and Tech.  
 

ACC plus USC, and OU if the take being dumped well..
 

let’s make that generational change

Grow a pair.

Be Texas!

Ok how is the conference worthless? It gives us everything we need to be successful. How is the ACC plus USC and OU better? It seems like a bloated mess to me and filled with plenty of schools that carry less water than our current conference members. And we will likely earn less money. And get what? A big bloated mess of a conference?

It is trash because you don't like Tech and Baylor? Ok. Spend time in the ACC and there will be schools you hate there as well.

Edited July 6, 2021 by Valmy77

[Hurtlocker 2213]

27 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

Spend time in the ACC and there will be schools you hate there as well.

And have to send all sports teams a bunch more miles to get to.  Half the Big 12 is within 500 miles of Austin.   The closest ACC team is just under 900 and the furthest is nearly 2,000.  

Also it doesn't matter any more.   Get in the top 12 and you play all the brands, every year.

@Valmy77 has it right, there is zero benefit to expand at the moment, unless some unreal change occurs where a major player, like USC, wants to dance with you.  

[Native Texas 44]

26 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

Ok how is the conference worthless? It gives us everything we need to be successful. How is the ACC plus USC and OU better? It seems like a bloated mess to me and filled with plenty of schools that carry less water than our current conference members. And we will likely earn less money. And get what? A big bloated mess of a conference?

It is trash because you don't like Tech and Baylor? Ok. Spend time in the ACC and there will be schools you hate there as well.

It’s trash because you’re fighting for your own area verses outside schools coming in.     Academics are mostly non existent in our little politically cobbled together universe.  We carry that burden.  Thank you Bob Bullock and Ann Richards.

Oh and leave the land thieves to cheat there way to another conference title.  Truly historical in cheating.  The local politics in Norman and the NCAA connections say enough.  Anyone know where the Big Red Sports files are?  Overnight poof disappear!

Naw this was always a bad more for Texas.

 

Be Texas!

[Native Texas 44]

7 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

And have to send all sports teams a bunch more miles to get to.  Half the Big 12 is within 500 miles of Austin.   The closest ACC team is just under 900 and the furthest is nearly 2,000.  

Also it doesn't matter any more.   Get in the top 12 and you play all the brands, every year.

@Valmy77 has it right, there is zero benefit to expand at the moment, unless some unreal change occurs where a major player, like USC, wants to dance with you.  

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!  

[Native Texas 44]

On 7/3/2021 at 3:46 PM, Thiefery said:

think you go after Tulane for the south division..  And try (TRY) to get Arkansas/Colorado/Nebraska back in the North Division

South -UT, Tech, bu, TCU, TU, WV

North- ou, OSU, KU, KSU, ISU, nu/CO/Ark

No no no!  Why oh why do you aspire to create a different version of the lil 12 BS?

shitty conference biased to schools, officiating, and balance of what we provide verses propping up Bullock, Richards, Land Thief’s, and the like!

 

Independent or ACC for academics.  The EST won’t hurt us either!!

[Herpa Derpa 6126]

Versus, their, proof, Notre, towards, versus, Thieves. 
 

Go to school!

Grow a brain!

[ButtFumble 5180]

19 minutes ago, Herpa Derpa said:

Versus, their, proof, Notre, towards, versus, Thieves. 
 

Go to school!

Grow a brain!

it seems like he did......at aggy

[closetohumping 17455]

2 hours ago, Native Texas said:

No no no!  Why oh why do you aspire to create a different version of the lil 12 BS?

shitty conference biased to schools, officiating, and balance of what we provide verses propping up Bullock, Richards, Land Thief’s, and the like!

 

Independent or ACC for academics.  The EST won’t hurt us either!!

Sec.   takes away aggys only advantage over us

[David Dennison 18940]

59 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

Sec.   takes away aggys only advantage over us

Yes, please.

[LTbear 4171]

1 hour ago, ButtFumble said:

it seems like he did......at aggy

Ya I'm pretty sure that's a troll 

[utee94 15835]

1 hour ago, closetohumping said:

Sec.   takes away aggys only advantage over us

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