The Conference Expansion Arms Race Is (Basically) Over
The Big Ten Conference has announced that they are basically capping their league at twelve members. This is more than a bit anticlimactic for all of the people putting forward the "4 Super-Conferences" theory, but a relief for those of us who kind of like playing teams from the middle of America during the conference seasons of our various sports. With the Big Ten -- and, in all likelihood, the Pac 12, as they're going to have to adjust to their new look for awhile -- out of the conference expansion game, where does that leave the Big 12? What about the Big East?
As the only two BCS conferences with less than 12 members, the Big East and the Big 12 (ironic, right?), may experience some pressure to expand to that seemingly magic number. The pressure on the Big East is far greater, given their recent run of terrible BCS qualifiers, and they've taken a first step toward ameliorating that deficiency (in the short run, anyway) by adding TCU in all sports. Their situation is much more complicated than that of the Big 12, however, given the unwieldy (and nearly unmanageable) nature of the basketball side of their league. Once TCU joins, the basketball side of their conference will be at 17 (!!!) teams, leaving two basic options: (1) Cut one basketball-only school (see ya, DePaul), and convince Villanova to move up to FBS football, leaving them with 16 basketball teams, and 10 football teams; or (2) Cut two basketball-only school (goodbye, DePaul and Seton Hall), convince Villanova and Georgetown (the only other FCS football school in the conference) to move up to FBS football, and add Memphis, UCF or maybe East Carolina in all sports. This would leave them with 16 basketball teams, and 12 football teams.
After the jump, we'll take a look at what the Big 12's options are going forward.
In reality, the Big 12's position is more semantically awkward than it is financially awkward. The way I see it, the main problem the league faces for the next few years is all the jokes about being the league who has less teams than their name. But at some point, this issue will be addressed. What will that look like? First, I don't see the powers-that-Beebe (see what I did there?) doing much on this front until the television contracts get closer to the end (around 2015, I believe). I anticipate the league will get truly serious about expanding back to 12 teams in about 3 or 4 years, depending on the aforementioned expiry of the television contracts. Once that occurs, I think there will be only five or six teams on the "short list" to be added to the conference. Below, I will take a brief look at each team I think might be targeted for expansion, and the reasons why I think these teams make sense. I will look at each as a "two-pack", since that is how they will have to come in to the conference. (Think about it as how the Pac 10 added CU and Utah.)
1. Notre Dame and Memphis: Notre Dame brings a national brand, football tradition, and a decent basketball team most seasons as well. Their national footprint as far as their alumni and fans go can not be overstated. This two-pack would be the ultimate coup, and would -- at least in my opinion -- solidify the conference's future for as long as it will matter to any of us. Memphis brings no football credibility (at least currently), but is in an interesting (read: not tiny) market, and has a solid basketball tradition. Both ND and Memphis would fit nicely in a reconstructed North Division.
2. Arizona and Arizona State: This would be a coup not too far behind landing ND. While the schools are a bit outside the traditional footprint of the Big 12, they'd slide into a reconstituted South Division, with Oklahoma and Oklahoma State joining the North. Both teams aren't awful in football, and Arizona has a great basketball tradition. Where this helps the most, though, is in opening the Phoenix market, and in hurting the Pac 12. (And you know that we all want to see Larry Scott experience the proverbial pain of losing two of his original Pac 10 teams to the league he tried to destroy!)
3. BYU and Air Force Academy: I think this is the least-attractive of my three scenarios, but it's not without it's advantages. The two would settle nicely into a reformed North Division, and BYU does have something of a national brand. Air Force opens up the Colorado television market again, as BYU does for Utah (and Mormons everywhere). And wouldn't those Baptists versus Mormons crossover games be fun!
Looking forward, I think that in ten years, we're going to see a Big 12 that is truly "12" again, along with a Big East that is either 10 or 12. Of the two conferences, the most likely to implode (in my view, anyway) is the Big East. They have far more issues to deal with, both logistically (on the basketball and non-revenue generating sports side) and competitively (on the football side) going forward than the Big 12 does. If they actually do implode, then all bets will be off, and there might just end up being a race to see who can get to 16 teams the fastest by absorbing the best of the explosions leftovers between the Big Ten, ACC, Big 12, and SEC. One way or the other, the next ten years are going to be exciting times to be a college sports fan!
133 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Louisville might be viable.
They’ve got a pretty good gig in the Big East, though, so I’m not sure we’d be able to get them.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 2:11 AM CST up reply actions
I can't imagine any scenario where Boise State gets an invite from the Big 12.
They bring absolutely nothing to the table television-wise, and are WAY outside the Big 12 footprint, with Manhattan and Lubbock being the “closest” to them at 1250+ miles. The Broncos have a nice story going, but their only hope for BCS membership, in my view, is if the Big 12 swipes the two Arizona schools from the Pac 12, and Larry Scott gets desperate. Or, if the Big East can’t figure anything else out, and COMPLETELY caves geographically.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 2:10 AM CST up reply actions
I just imagined one
This is a long shot, I know, but hear me out.
There was a story i read a while ago (can’t remember who wrote it or what site it was on) that mentioned how often Boise State was on ESPN and how ESPN was pushing them alot harder than TCU.
I can imagine a situation where bringing in Boise State makes ESPN offer more money if they really like Boise State (if that is a true analysis and I’m not sure what would make BSU so attractive to ESPN).
Forward into Battle
by ChrisP Wildcat on Dec 7, 2010 8:33 AM CST up reply actions
They "liked" Boise because Boise was willing to move their games to Friday to give ESPN programming.
They wouldn’t be doing that in the Big 12, and their state brings very few eyeballs to the TV discussion. I also think a lot of the BSU “love” was simply because they REALLY didn’t like TCU for some reason. Not sure why, but their announcers were dropping hate-bombs on the Frogs quite a bit lately.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 7, 2010 10:09 AM CST up reply actions
They really didn't like TCU
because they couldn’t broadcast any TCU games.
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
Oh, that's right! I forgot about the whole MWC/Versus thing.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 7, 2010 1:18 PM CST up reply actions
That explains some of it
I mean, they are obviously willing to push BSU, so I’m wondering if the simple fact that they are good at football would be able to reel in some network execs. Remember, the media people can be more willing to take long-shot risks than other businesses. And you know, considering a lot of the ‘games’ that ESPN broadcasts I wouldn’t really consider to bring a lot of eyeballs, but they still get broadcast. I’d have to imagine BSU is better than those. That does all come down to what day of the week they play, though.
Of course, now that BSU went and lost to Nevada they might not care for it anymore anyways.
Also, KSU was on TWO Thursday night games on ESPN, so I’m sure they would be able to get some Friday night games.
So, you have to admit, that aspect in and of itself would present a scenario for them being added, no matter how long of a shot you think they are. Just because something is highly unlikely does not mean it won’t happen, and that was just a certain way it could be presented that it would make sense.
And yes, that article I referenced specifically mentioned that ESPNs love of BSU was a counterpoint to TCU, since they couldn’t broadcast any TCU games but had like 5 or 6 BSU games to promote.
Forward into Battle
by ChrisP Wildcat on Dec 7, 2010 2:02 PM CST up reply actions
The actual likely scenario for the Big East
Is going to 18 basketball schools and retaining one repeat game (WV-Pitt, Syracuse-Nova, Seton Hall-Rutgers, Cincinnati-Louisville, Georgetown-St John’s, Marquette-Notre Dame, TCU-Providence, USF-UCF if Central Florida is the 18th team).
Georgetown to FBS will not happen, not now, not ever. Gotta understand, they only play football now as it is in a non-scholarship conference, and of the teams in the Patriot League for football they’re quite possibly the most adamant about that status. None of the original Catholic schools will ever be disinvited, either. DePaul, maybe, but I think it’s far more likely that all the Catholic schools would split from the football schools. (Indeed, the only thing that’s kept this from happening already is the NCAA rules regarding autobids and the question of who retains the league identity. Once the football schools have been together long enough to make those autobid rules irrelevant, we may see some action on that front, but whichever faction retains the “Big East” brand might have to pony up some serious funds.)
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
Thanks for the insight on the lower-level football and Catholic schools.
Do you think that the Catholic schools actually would stand ANY chance of retaining the league brand and history, given their lack of big-time football programs? Also, I didn’t realize that G’town was non-scholarship, and doesn’t 18 teams for basketball just seem kind of, you know, huge?!? I guess not much more so than 17, but still, has there ever BEEN a conference that large in college athletics at any level?
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 8:53 AM CST up reply actions
As far as I know, 17 ties the record.
I think, when it comes to going to 18 (or even 19), the Big East is actually in a position where the response would be “Well, what the hell, why not?” They’re already not playing a double-round robin, with each team currently playing three repeat games each season. When you get to that point, does having 19 teams and playing a straight-up single round robin seem that crazy? You get UCF, Villanova, and someone else in there and all of a sudden you’ve got a 12-team football league too.
Georgetown’s only non-scholarship for football, just to clarify.
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
Adamant? Not Really...
Georgetown has never publicly advocated or opposed football scholarships. Absent a revenue stream in I-AA football, being non-scholarship is an economic reality, not a philosophical line in the sand.
Hmm.
They sure seemed to be drawing a line in the sand when Fordham wanted the Patty to allow scholarships and it looked like the conference was pretty much split on the matter. What I saw coming from that quarter sounded a lot more philosophical than financial. But I’ll presume you’re more in tune and take your word for it.
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
(Of course, as soon as I hit post I remembered another factor which you'll agree with.)
There is no way in hell, short of a massive (and by massive I mean nine-figure) cash infusion, that Georgetown can provide an FBS-quality football facility. Unless they play at RFK or something.
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
Other - I think all of the conferences except the Big East stay as-is for a while - mayble for the foreseeable future.
I don’t think the Big XII wants any of the schools mentioned except Notre Dame – and I don’t think they get Notre Dame.
At some point, they're going to need to get back to 12.
Maybe not during this TV cycle, but sometime before the NEXT one, I’d think. If you don’t think they’d want to add any of these “except Notre Dame”, who do you think the 12th school would be, that would also bring something to the table, TV market-wise?
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 8:55 AM CST up reply actions
Conference championship game revenues, better TV contracts, more market penetration, etc.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 10:23 AM CST up reply actions
I don't see any of those teams (besides Notre Dame) proving enough of any of those factors to justify splitting the pie 12 ways.
AZ/AZ State do, for sure.
The Phoeniz market is NOT small.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 11:46 AM CST up reply actions
it is like the Denver market
big but lots of transplants that do NOT care about the local college team except when their team is playing local college team.
The time for calm and rational discourse is past, now is the time for senseless bickering -Anonymous the Younger
by Anon_the_younger on Dec 6, 2010 12:15 PM CST up reply actions
For the eleventy-bajillionth time
This does. Not. Matter. One. Bit.
The Big Ten Network, the .mtn, all of these networks… they do not make their money on advertising dollars, they do not make their money based on how many people are watching. They make their money on carriage fees, which get charged one of two ways: either they get X cents for every single customer the carrier has, or they get X cents for every customer the carrier has who subscribes to whatever extended package the network is on.
As a result, there is only one thing that matters when it comes to what a team brings financially in today’s environment: market size. It does not matter if only 200,000 people in the entire state of Arizona care about Arizona and/or Arizona State football, because the cable providers in Arizona would not risk pissing off their customer base by not carrying a theoretical Big 12 Network.
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
I just don't see it happening. I don't think the Big XII cares that much about getting to 12 teams.
Arizona is pretty far away from the rest of the conference without CU. They would be clear outliers.
I think it's like 600 miles or so from Lubbock to AZ State, but whatever.
I don’t think mileage would keep the conference from making a move like that.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 1:03 PM CST up reply actions
750, but year. Every other school is over 1000 miles away.
I just don’t see it making sense for either the Arizona schools or the Big XII. Maybe some day, if the current Big XII format turns out to be a dud.
The big thing is that Tucson and Phoenix have easily accessible airports from campus.
I’ve been to both. Air travel in the Big 12 wouldn’t be bad at all.
Well, maybe to Ames and Columbia, but you can fly from Phoenix to Dallas to Manhattan (same with Tucson) fairly easily. KU and KSU are taken care of there. You’d probably have to fly to KC and bus it to Ames or Mizzou, or fly to OKC and bus it to Stillwater, but other than that, I think a lot of it is probably doable.
It can’t be any worse than trying to get to Pullman, Corvallis, Boulder, etc. on average.
Bring on the Cats
"Without getting into specifics, my exit involves a McFlurry machine and a video tape of risque commercials from overseas." -- Jack Donaghy
I was looking at the distance as more of a Big XII thing.
As for Arizona, I always thought of that state more of a California Jr. sort of thing than anything else, at least recently. Most of the state seems to be made up of CA transplants. I just don’t see them moving away from California.
Agreed. It's a long shot. But I think the Pac-12 just weakened themselves by adding two subpar teams.
This does hurt long-term revenue generation. Neither of those two teams really bring enough to the table to overcome to /+2 division that will take place on all revenue sharing going forward.
Bring on the Cats
"Without getting into specifics, my exit involves a McFlurry machine and a video tape of risque commercials from overseas." -- Jack Donaghy
Larry Scott put it all on red, and it landed on black.
Neither of those two teams really bringenoughanything to the table…
Fixed that for you, Pan. ;)
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 1:31 PM CST up reply actions
You are correct. I probably shouldn't have attempted to be kind...
Bring on the Cats
"Without getting into specifics, my exit involves a McFlurry machine and a video tape of risque commercials from overseas." -- Jack Donaghy
I'm not convinced that AZ and ASU bring much more than Colorado and Utah.
Utah and Colorado compbined have more people than Arizona. None of these teams have been particularly good at football historically.
And if either of those schools brings in their entire state's TV eyeballs that would make some kind of difference.
But they don’t. And it’s not close. Colorado splits up the state with CSU and AFA. Utah splits it with BYU and Utah State.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 1:51 PM CST up reply actions
It matters
if you don’t launch a Big XII network and rely on game-by-game TV deals. Texas has no interest in a Big XII Network, exemplified by them launching their own network after the expansion debacle cooled down.
Forward into Battle
by ChrisP Wildcat on Dec 7, 2010 8:04 AM CST up reply actions
Yes, well
Texas is shooting themselves in the foot with that, because there’s really no leverage whatsoever for them to “force” carriage of their network anywhere outside of Texas. Yes, there are a lot of Texas Exes around the country, but not enough to reach the required critical mass in most markets to force the local carrier to cave into their demands.
DirectTV and Dish, maybe. Not the locals.
I think we’ll see a Big 12 network eventually, once Texas realizes their error.
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
maybe
Don’t count on a Texan to see reason.
Forward into Battle
by ChrisP Wildcat on Dec 7, 2010 10:53 AM CST up reply actions
There are roughly 10,000,000 households in Texas
Cable has a 67% penetration rate. 50 cents per household = $3,350,000/year.
The Big ten is rumored to get $.69 per customer…so that brings it to $4,623,000/year.
Why do they need to look outside of Texas?
Take A Look
The Regional Airport that serves Columbia & Jeff City is certainly capable of accepting any size commercial aircraft that might be chartered and you can obtain flights through both Atlanta and Dallas so you can probably obtain flights through other hubs as well.
If I'd known I was going to live this long, I'd have taken better care of myself.
Not Sure
Where you have been Pan, but Ames is 25 mi from the Des Moines airport. Yes, Virginia, there is an airport in Iowa. Hope you have an opportunity to take a geography course in the next year or two. Tongue in cheek of course. Trying not to be caustic here.
If I'd known I was going to live this long, I'd have taken better care of myself.
Meh. Never flown into Des Moines. Don't care to check either. They may as well be in Siberia.
Bring on the Cats
"Without getting into specifics, my exit involves a McFlurry machine and a video tape of risque commercials from overseas." -- Jack Donaghy
Pan:
Ames is 40-45 minutes from Des Moines. They do have a commercial airport there with jet service. They are not located in Amish country. No one has to endure a 2 hour 45 min bus ride from KC to get there.
Fayetteville to Lubbock
564 miles…Fayetteville to College Station, 503 miles…Fayetteville to Ames, 463 miles. And they get smaller from there.
Texas Tech spent decades in the same conference with the Arizona schools, FYI.
Your point’s valid in regard to everyone else, though.
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
Thought I heard
during all the crazy talk all the time during the year that has been—-
Cant a conference petition the NCAA for a champ game if they dont have the 12 schools?
No I dont have a link or anything, just seems like I remember hearing that somewhere…
but wouldn't
the Big TelevEN have already done this so they could play the “super awesome championship game”?
I always thought the Big TelevEN was resisting expansion so they could avoid playing a championship game, because of all of the negatives that come with it (one more game for potential injury, one more opportunity for a loss, potential miss out on second BCS berth for conference, etc.)
That wouldn't make a lot of sense
Nothing says you have to have a championship game if you have 12 teams, so resisting expansion to avoid it is like turning down sex because you don’t want to get married.
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
LIke I said
I’m not even sure thats correct… Its something that I thought I heard some talking head say and I figured if I threw it out here someone smarter then myself would know something about it.
Other- ND and Ark
I’ve mentioned this before I don’t think ND is that far of a streach. Their tv contract expires right about the time the big 12’s does. With Texas as the model for being a part of a conference and having it’s own tv channel, we would be the likely choice. I think ND could get more money by joining a league. If I were NBC or espn I would pay more to see ND play the big 12 than their current schedule. Also, how much longer do you think the BCS is going to give ND a free pass? They’ve been too mediocre for too long.
In the end, the only way ND moves anywhere is money. If the b12 make a play they’re going to need private money to sweeten the pot. Enter Jerry Jones. To get Jones involved, that means bringing in Ark, which isn’t a bad thing.
Do you think Jerry would spend that much cash, just to see his alma mater in the Big 12?
Maybe so, but I think that’s the ONLY way Arkansas is invited, as they bring little else to the table, other than geographical proximity. No new markets, no really expanded footprint — I’m just not so sure about the whole Arkansas thing, but I guess we’ll see.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 9:00 AM CST up reply actions
Jerry might get involved without Ark
Just because he wants the Big 12 to go back to a championship game so he can have them play in Jerry World.
Or he might not care about that, who knows. I don’t.
Forward into Battle
by ChrisP Wildcat on Dec 6, 2010 9:35 AM CST up reply actions
You're selling Arkansas short as a market.
The Fayetteville area doesn’t strike people as large because none of the individual cities in the metro area are particularly populous; Fayetteville itself is only about 80K.
But when you put them all together, it’s over a half a million people, and the sixth-fastest growing metro in the country. Plus Little Rock’s almost a million. AND… if you get Arkansas, as a state, you also get a piece of Memphis, just like the Big Ten has a presence in St. Louis.
If it could be swung, somehow, Arkansas and BYU would be very, very interesting.
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
I think another reason I don't like Arkansas as a target,
is that I can’t imagine a scenario where they would have any real impetus to leave the SEC. Isn’t the money there WAY better than what the Big 12 could offer?
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 10:43 AM CST up reply actions
Which brings us right back to Black Cats' comment.
Infinite loop!
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
Well, true, except that the "money" he was referring to was to sweeten the pot for ND not Arkansas.
But your point (and his) certainly has merit. I think a guy like ol’ T. Boone might be willing to pony up some of the private money as well, though, since his alma mater kind of needs the Big 12 to stay together, now that even a Pac 16 scenario might leave them out.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 11:02 AM CST up reply actions
Yes the initial money would be for ND
Jerry would spend to get the B12 back to 12. From just the Championship Game: Cowboy Stadium holds 80,000 (100,000 with standing room) so an average ticket of $100 means $8-10million every year off one game plus concessions.
The other side of the coin is, what would our TV contract look like with ND and Ark (or anyone else really but if Jerry is involved Ark is coming)? There is a real chance that our money would be equal or better than the SEC. Ark has never really liked the SEC (from what I hear) so if they can make a lateral or better move, they would.
I hadn't hear that they don't really like the SEC.
Do you have a link for that, or are you going more by just things you’ve heard over the years? Either way, it’s interesting, and changes the calculus a bit on my proposals above, that’s for sure.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 11:48 AM CST up reply actions
I think I remember an article or two when the whole expansion thing was going down
But it’s more of a thing I’ve heard over the years. Knowing quite a few Razorbacks and lots of folks who live there now, they don’t really like the SEC. They feel like outsiders and never liked the idea in 91 and don’t now.
I don’t know if the school admins feel the same way, but at least six of their large donors do…well seven if you include Jerry Jones, but I don’t know him personally…yet.
Okay, here you go
The Arkansas rumors began shortly after the “dissolution of the Big-12” hoopla ended. You have to figure that Arkansas would be back in more natural ground, with natural rivals (see: Texas) in the Big-12, plus the potential for new rivals (Oklahoma). They also might be a tad more competitive in the Big-12 than the SEC. I think Arkansas is a natural addition that brings some football cache back to the conference that has been lost with Nebraska. It also has more persons (i.e., more “eyeballs”, cable subscribers) than Nebraska, so it nets out the loss of the Cornhuskers. But as ArkieCat points out below, maybe the popular choice is to remain in the SEC, and in terms of name-brand you cannot blame them. But I still think they are a more natural fit in the Big-12.
I think the sentiment
Is really split about 50/50 amongst Hawg fans, but probably side more towards the SEC side. And since we’re talking about a 5 yr time frame IMO before the big 12 makes any moves, we’ll have to keep an eye on how sucessful they are within the SEC. If they win 1 title in that conference and keep up 10-2 seasons like they had this year, good luck big 12! I chatted it up with a UNT band dad in Denton prior to the game and he told me he was actually and Arkansas grad. So of course I asked him about it. I could tell it was really a 50/50 proposition. About the only leverage we really have is like he said “renewing the old rivalries”. I think we should hope for no better than a 9-win season from the Razorbacks in that time, and no nat’l champions out of the big12 in that same time frame…then they might think “why not?”
Point is for me, I don’t think they’re a sure ‘no’. They’re for sure still on the board. I like the ilogic about a sliver of the Memphis market coming in with Arkansas as well. I can’t wait to read the link above.
oh and...
hoping Jerry Jones IS on board would be crucial too. What if Boone Pickens was speaking out in June about making sure OSU moved to the Pac-10 over last summer? You better bet fans would change their minds knowing that he’s so financially crucial to their athletic department. I gotta think Jones would have somewhat of the same affect.
Part of my point below
is that there are a lot more people contributing to Arkansas with deep pockets than just good old JJ. I had no idea how much old money was still around this state until I got here. JJ might not be the only one pulling the Hogs by the snout.
If I'd known I was going to live this long, I'd have taken better care of myself.
yea, Old Money
gets more and more common the further E you go that far South, so I don’t doubt it one bit!
It’s not so much the money though, as the public face. Name the next biggest donor at Arkansas and I’ll have no idea who that is chances are, just like no one outside of KSU sports knows who Russ Briggs is. I’m just saying, if Jones speaks, people listen. If T. Boone was a quiet gent, I doubt I’d know who he is. I personally like listening to that guy talk. Point is JJ, probably has the eyes and ears fo tons of more razorbacks, even those who may have never went there but are just fans.
Now if one of the old money folks, was on some sort of board: gameover. And I’m sure there’s a pretty good chance there are multiple old money folks in important places among the university.
There are two Waltons that are huge Razorbacks
One went there, one just love ’em. They have kids that went there. From a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy, etc…they miss the Southwest Con. fwiw.
Yeah, but my point is, they like the B12.
If JJ and some of the Waltons decide there is opportunity in the B12, we’ll be welcoming them with open arms…but for our sake, ND needs to come at the same time.
So looks like
We have three names to know where to focus campaign efforts towards. Sounds more hopeful than what meets the eye.
Since I Now Live In Arkanesia
I can tell you that the power structure in the state would fight any move out of the SEC. They see themselves as being strong players in the SEC now, even though they’ve only impacted the SEC a couple of times in FB and almost no time in BB since the early and mid 90’s.
Arkansas has a much wider reach in terms of fans than you realize. For some reason, people across the country relate to this state. I’ve learned that while traveling, when people learn you are from Arkansas they seem to have some idea how the Hogs are doing in FB or BB. Now I wasn’t aware until I moved here and eventually researched some things just to find out how the financial structure, etc., was put together but the UofA has a lot of clout academically as well. The University does not seem well endowed, but the Univ Foundation is well heeled and so is the athletic foundation. They know where the old hogs live and which ones have deep pockets (like JJ).
My personal preference would still be Louisville. I just think that from both a FB and BB viewpoint both, they bring more to the table. Arkanesia and Lu’Ville would be a good pick but I don’t think we’ll ever see the Hogs in this market (pun intended).
I still think there is a good chance that the Big Easty disintegrates on its own. I can’t help but think that with the entrance of TCU, it might give the real FB schools in that conference a chance to pack up and start a new one. Take the current FB schools, drop UConn, put in TCU and drag a couple of MAC or CUSA schools over such as Ohio and SMU and you’ve got a pretty good football conference that would maintain the AQ and shed the rest of the BB only schools that drag them down.
If I'd known I was going to live this long, I'd have taken better care of myself.
The "BB only schools" would fight like hell to keep the Big East brand, though.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 12:16 PM CST up reply actions
And They Could Have It
If the FB schools split off, I don’t think they would need or probably even want to keep the BE moniker since almost none of them would really be “East” anymore. It’s a BB conference with a BB name in a BB area. How the hell they ever got an AQ given them is beyond me.
If I'd known I was going to live this long, I'd have taken better care of myself.
One of the issues regarding the brand, however,
is a bit of legalese: if the football schools left the “Big East” and formed a new conference, would the BCS be legally required to grant that new conference the Big East’s former autobid?
Magic 8-Ball says Answer Hazy.
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
From what I heard during last summer's meltdown, no.
People I know who are fairly well-connected into these types of things told me that KSU, KU, ISU, Mizzou, and Baylor would have had to make certain they kept all legal rights to the name, the brand, and everything else, had we wished to keep the autobid, invite TCU, Utah, and BYU and retain the AQ, for at least a few years.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 3:59 PM CST up reply actions
I know that conferences have to have at least 6 teams in common to keep their autobid to the NCAA tourney.
Although with KU and KSU, that would not have been a problem for basketball (they would likely get at large bids until they got another auto bid).
Hmm... I hadn't heard that.
Do you have a link to the bylaw that states that, or whatever? I don’t doubt it’s the case, I’d just never heard that before, so I was wanting to see where it said that. I was thinking that the C-USA lost like half their teams or something several years back.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 6:19 PM CST up reply actions
I think CUSA only lost 4 of their 12 members to the Big East (and added the four Texas schools from the WAC). Apparently it's going away anyway:
That’s because of legislation making its way through the system that would eliminate the continuance-of-membership clause, which requires leagues to have at least six continuing members to receive automatic berths to NCAA championships.
Again, the WAC would have only five continuing members without Hawaii. But Benson is confident the legislation will be adopted in January.
Thanks for the link.
I think that kind of legislation would allow too many shenanigans, if a bloc of teams couldn’t get their way in a league. Good that it’s going away.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 6:38 PM CST up reply actions
The only way ND works (or is mildly interested) is by flaunting the media rights advantage...
You’d have to make a very, very significant deal with the devil to make ND want to join this conference.
First of all, Notre Dame home games stay on NBC. Those would never be a part of the rights package we submit to Fox and ESPN. But, even then, Fox or ESPN/ABC getting the rights to broadcast 5-6 ND away games every year is probably enough to overcome the split difference and make it worth it. Texas/ND on NBC, OU/ND on NBC, etc. would be gigantic ratings draws on either network. From a TV money perspective, you could probably guarantee ND a $20 million cut (like OU/UT/A&M) AND they can still get their $9 million a year from NBC. From a TV money perspective, ND has the potential to make WAY, WAY, WAY more guaranteed money here than they do anywhere else, and that includes whatever they would have gotten from the Big Ten. So that’s the one major benefit and talking point you can use to get your foot in the door. Also, it would be a home in the best men’s and women’s basketball conferences in the country (sorry, Big East) and a solid conference where all of their non-revenue sports could compete with Texas, OU, Missouri, etc.
However, there are big downsides to dropping independence. I know that ND has long standing rivalries with USC, Michigan, Mich. St., etc., so prying them away from that for games against KU, KSU, Iowa State and Missouri (since ND would most likely be in the North) will most likely not be too appealing to the ND faithful. Also, there is a major risk there for NBC to be not as interested in paying them boatloads of money for those games because ND/KSU is not as sexy as ND/Michigan St. Granted, it may be better than ND/UConn or ND/Service Academy, but overall, I think there would be less marquee games every year to sell to NBC. You would just hope the consistent level of competition would be enough to overcome what they lose, but who knows?
The other big downside is that ND has some sweeeeeeeet deals for bowl games. If they’re 10-2, they go to the BCS. What other NCAA team has that arrangement? And no matter what bowl they go to, they get to keep all of the revenue; there is no sharing there. Should Brian Kelly, or any other coach, get them rolling again, and that’s big money every single year. Per the best numbers I can find, each Big 12 team will average about $2.7 million from shared bowl revenue that goes to all 12 teams. This year, they’re going to get $1.9 million from the Sun Bowl, so in this case, it would behoove them to join a conference. However, should they go to the BCS, that’s a net loss of nearly $14 million because they don’t share that money with anyone. So they’re taking a gamble; use their lax BCS requirements and profit enormously, or take less bowl money every year. However, should they qualify for the BCS, it’s freaking mana from heaven. That’s a decent risk.
In my opinion, the only way we’re getting Notre Dame is if you do two things:
1) Let them continue to sell their media rights to NBC for all home games and keep that revenue
2) Let them keep all of their bowl revenue. The Big 12 splits their bowl revenue eleven ways and ND feasts or famines like they do now. I believe that would be a fair arrangement.
That way, the only remaining hurdle is how ND uses their non-con to schedule Michigan, MSU, Purdue, USC, etc. Otherwise, it’s doable. It’s not ideal, but it’s doable.
Bring on the Cats
"Without getting into specifics, my exit involves a McFlurry machine and a video tape of risque commercials from overseas." -- Jack Donaghy
The only thing is, it's hard to believe that ND will be given the same sweet deal they have now by the BCS.
I’d think that they might start just being lumped in with the other non-AQs at some point, wouldn’t they?
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 12:50 PM CST up reply actions
Probably not. However, I came across something...
If this is right, a lot of my arguments for a “sweetheart” ND deal do not really exist, and inclusion in the Big 12 would be wildly profitable for Notre Dame.
So, assuming NBC would be willing to keep their TV deal, from a financial standpoint, there is a significant chance we could get ND to listen because it would make bowl season, on average, more profitable for them, plus they actually may have a better shot at the BCS if they can dominate a weak North.
Add BYU and ND to the North, and there’s no reason they probably wouldn’t go to the Big 12 CCG at least 50% of the time.
I think there’s something worth pitching there if we can sell them how this could be better than independence.
Bring on the Cats
"Without getting into specifics, my exit involves a McFlurry machine and a video tape of risque commercials from overseas." -- Jack Donaghy
Hint...this will be the topic of a future podcast...
Since TB and I are in love with this topic to no end. I’ll try to summarize my thoughts in as few words as possible…
I voted “Other” because I strongly believe one of the two major conferences west of the Mississippi (Big 12 & Pac 10) will sit at ten unless some game changer (i.e. Notre Dame wants to join) occurs because there simply aren’t any schools left that can overcome the ‘split difference’ in terms of revenue out there. Otherwise, we’d still be the Big 12 next year.
Let’s say that the next TV contract would average $150 million per year (for the sake of math; I don’t have hard numbers to estimate). Texas, OU, and A&M will take their shares, but everyone else will take another cut after that. Let’s say that after the cut, seven schools share 90 million in profits. I believe OSU and Tech take a 15 million minimum, or something like that, so we’re down to 60 million for five schools. That amounts to 12 million in TV revenue per year for the rest of us.
Now, after you subtract the guarantees and average out what the remaining “Tier 3” schools get after their cut, any new school that enters the conference must be worth, at a minimum, $12 million per year in a TV contract. Some of that would be offset by the addition of a CCG, but by and large, you’re still looking at these new schools getting you into a new market that is worth at least $10-12 million in net revenue for you every single year. Now, can Boise do that? No. Can BYU do that on their own? No. What schools are left in non-AQ conferences west of the Mississippi (or somewhat close in the Big East) that can command that much TV revenue on their own?
The answer is zero.
The best option out there is to get one of the fastest growing areas in the country with two major media markets to join your conference: Arizona. Let’s say that after the Pac-10 renegotiates their deal and realizes that Colorado and Utah are probably net losses when calculating the ‘split difference’ (as the Big 12 actually IMPROVED financially after it was learned they were going to leave since their following was so pitiful), the two Arizona schools may be convinced to switch if we can prove we’re a better deal for them. Geographically, they make sense as a part of a new South division (OU and OSU can come North), and they are really the only option to bring the number of TVs we need to the table. Even then, they are a long shot.
I know a lot of people out there are adamant about Arkansas, and I agree that they would be a great addition. However…I never suggest poking a bear with a stick, and I never suggest trying to take a school from the SEC. The second we go after Arkansas, they’re going after A&M with the full-court press, and even though I don’t think A&M brings all that much to the table, I don’t want to upset this strange balance that those Texas schools have with one another. It’s simply best to leave well enough alone. Unless the SEC is totally cool with it, and they will only go after someone from the ACC, we’re best just to leave well enough alone.
I could care less about poaching from the Pac-12. Larry Scott sucks at life, and taking the Arizona schools would be sweet, sweet revenge for putting us into the position we were in this last summer. I’d love nothing more than to jettison CU and NU for the Arizona schools. That is such a huge net gain that it would have all been worth it.
Should that happen, though, the Pac-10 would go back to their normal round-robin format. Their university presidents would NEVER accept Boise and BYU. Boise was a junior college just a few decades ago, and BYU is a religious institution. Unless they really feel like the Air Force academy and New Mexico are solid adds (and they aren’t), they’d go back to ten from here to eternity.
Bring on the Cats
"Without getting into specifics, my exit involves a McFlurry machine and a video tape of risque commercials from overseas." -- Jack Donaghy
by Panjandrum on Dec 6, 2010 11:43 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
??
“two major conferences west of the Mississippi (Big 12 & Pac 10) will sit at ten "
Other than that, I totally agree, particularly with your thoughts on Arkansas.
Fire Chris Cosh!
You missed the "one of the" before the part you quote.
I think Pan means that — because of the dearth of viable expansion candidates — either the Pac 10 or the Big 12 will be forced to stay at 10.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 11:53 AM CST up reply actions
If we brought in Arkansas
I don’t think aTm would care as much about going to the SEC.
Forward into Battle
by ChrisP Wildcat on Dec 6, 2010 12:03 PM CST up reply actions
That is a big if, though
Forward into Battle
by ChrisP Wildcat on Dec 6, 2010 12:03 PM CST up reply actions
Some people resort to all kinds of things to avoid being the little brother!
Look at NU running away because they can’t beat Texas.
(Blah blah blah NU wanted a commitment to the conference from UT blah blah blah. Go away, enjoy playing a bowl game no one will watch, and don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.)
Fire Chris Cosh!
A&M's justification for going to the SEC is illogical...
They would get more money, now, but the way for A&M to become (and stay) relevant is winning. If they believe they have a better chance at winning in a division that contains Alabama, Auburn, and LSU, and cross divisional games with Florida, Tennessee, South Carolina, Georgia, etc. well, more power to them.
And I hear the recruiting talking point of, “Well, we can offer Texas kids a chance of staying home and playing in the SEC.” That’s fine and dandy, but that’s still not going to help you out-recruit Texas. The chasm between those two schools is so wide, there’s no bridge you can build that will overcome the fact that Texas is, was, and always will be Texas, and you’ll always be #2 in the hearts and minds of Texas kids.
That said, the SEC would love to get a media presence in the state of Texas, and A&M is their best shot since UT will never slum it, academically, with the SEC. Also, the amount of control UT wants to exert wouldn’t go over well in that conference. They can’t push Florida and Bama around the way they do everyone else here.
So, really, it behooves the SEC to take A&M, but A&M won’t gain anything other than a little more cash in the short term and a chance of getting out of Texas’ shadow. But that’s pointless because they’re not going 9-3 in the SEC. Not now, not tomorrow, and not ever. That’s a whole different animal, and they would get eaten alive and die on the vine.
Bring on the Cats
"Without getting into specifics, my exit involves a McFlurry machine and a video tape of risque commercials from overseas." -- Jack Donaghy
But A&M would do it in a heartbeat because they have "little-brother" syndrome, and I want to make sure that I'm clear on that.
Bring on the Cats
"Without getting into specifics, my exit involves a McFlurry machine and a video tape of risque commercials from overseas." -- Jack Donaghy
Not That I Care That Much
But to say that Texas would be “slumming it academically” with Vanderbilt ranked 14th, Texas ranked 47th, Florida ranked 49th and nobody else in the top 50 from either conference, I’m not sure there’s an argument there. When you dig into the underlying data used to make up these “rankings”, I’m not sure it means all that much anyhow. What will mean the most to Texas is how does it help them stack up on the field of athletics. Otherwise, they would have already joined Stanford, USC, UCLA, Oregon and Cal for the academic standing they bring to the table.
If I'd known I was going to live this long, I'd have taken better care of myself.
That is their stance. It's what prevented them from joining the SEC after the SWC disbanded.
Bring on the Cats
"Without getting into specifics, my exit involves a McFlurry machine and a video tape of risque commercials from overseas." -- Jack Donaghy
Great point, PJ
Even though I like the idea of Arkansas joining the Big-12, it would have to be of their own volition (they reached out to the Big-12, not the other way around) and even then it doesn’t make much sense to challenge the SEC.
Now as far as the Pac-10 is concerned, fire away. And if any of the schools in the Big-10 made sense – and they don’t – I’d love to go after that filthy, despicable and grossly overrated (both in football and academics) conference. However, Beebe doesn’t have the stones to challenge his odious mentor, Greasy Jim Delaney.
I’d actually suggest – barring a look at a chronically underachieving (on the football field) Memphis program – snatching both Louisville and Cincinnati if the move was to the east. But then that would smack at the Big Least, and while I have no respect for the Big Least as a football conference, it still should be viewed as somewhat of an ally after this entire realignment mess of the past summer.
In terms of points west, it would be great to give that troll Larry Scott his just desserts, but if Arizona/ASU is a no-go, then BYU and New Mexico might be options. But for New Mexico at least, it doesn’t move the dial even if Albuquerque is a decent sized market. Colorado State might be another option, as would Air Force (whose games might be broadcast on the Armed Forces Network – not sure).
Of course the Big-12 could really think broadly and creatively and try to snag some teams outside its zone, like Maryland and West Virginia, but that’s stretching the map too far for what the university presidents might like.
Over? I hope so
I wish that New Mexico had more people and any kind of football program. You know UNM and NMSU would fall all over themselves to get into the Big XII, and I think I would like to have them with us. Too bad they have 800,000 fewer people than KS.
How about UTEP? Tulsa’s tiny. Missouri only has one school (still, MSU put up 450 yards!). Colorado State is a mess. Air Force would be fantastic (I would love to do a road trip out there) , but they add nothing but a rather nice name.
10 it is.
Fire Chris Cosh!
I don't really agree with those that are saying AFA adds nothing.
They may not have the $12mil that Pan estimates would be necessary to keep the pie level, but they DO offer some penetration back into Colorado markets, don’t they?
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 11:55 AM CST reply actions
And national following based on service
My dad isn’t much of a football guy in general, but he lives for Army-Navy (being a retired Navy guy).
I don’t have any experience with AF guys, but I would imagine there is something similar to that, where the school has a larger following than just the graduates.
Forward into Battle
by ChrisP Wildcat on Dec 6, 2010 12:00 PM CST up reply actions
That assumes anyone in Colorado cares much about a school with alumni from all over, not a majority from one place like CU and CSU
I like the service academies because of what they represent, not because they’re in a particular place. Being from KS, I’m not the best judge, but I don’t think NY or Maryland or Colorado inhabitants care more about their “local” service academy because of where they are than they would about the other service academy.
Notre Dame, Stanford and the Ivies are the only other schools that are comparable in that they’re nationwide universities, not local, but only ND and Stanford compete in D1A and they have long histories of success and many more alumni than the service academies. KSU students and fans primarily come from Kansas, Texas fans from Texas, Nebraska fans from pool of sludge (usually located in the state of Nebraska) etc. Air Force fans come from all over, but there aren’t many of them.
Fire Chris Cosh!
Think Back
To when you were a kid a lived to watch football (at least I did) on Saturday. I always wanted to watch Air Force (and to a lesser extent Army & Navy) because of their traditions being tied to the services and because I always wanted to root for the guys who represented me. I knew this guy or that guy that had gotten a free ride to an academy, so there was a reason for being interested. I don’t that that’s changed a lot. Any of them bring a wide reaching fan base. No money, for sure, but a fan base.
If I'd known I was going to live this long, I'd have taken better care of myself.
which could translate to money
for the forward-minded thinker.
Forward into Battle
by ChrisP Wildcat on Dec 6, 2010 12:11 PM CST up reply actions
I don't understand much of the appeal to the State of Colorado
Think about it. Denver’s not too much bigger than KC, Colorado Springs about the size of Wichita and Fort Collins about the size of Topeka. Denver has the most professional sports teams per capita, which is why Denver’s not that great of a market to get a hold of (bad to lose) as it pertains to college sports. I have to think Air Force at best shares an equal amount of tv sets in that state as CSU and CU. But the interest of the average sports fan is divided among the Rockies, Avalanche, Broncos, Nuggets and Rapids, and college sports.
Again, AFA being a service academy wouldn’t be bad because of it’s nat’l following (whatever degree that is), but I don’t think it compares at all to hooking a state with decent population with no pro sports like Arkansas, which fills a 76,000 seat stadium on a regular basis. But even for a service academy, in no matter which way of relevance you slice it (just in general as an armed force) I don’t think it’s the average American’s first thought, or average Sports fan’s first thought when you say “service Academy”. I have to think they’re 3rd in line amongst the three service academies.
AAAARGH.
I have to think Air Force at best shares an equal amount of tv sets in that state as CSU and CU.
Does. NOT. MATTER.
Look, let’s say you live in Wichita. Pretend that KSU and KU negotiate their own television deals. We both tell the cable company in Wichita “you can carry our network for 65 cents per subscriber.” It does not matter what percentage of Wichita residents are KU fans or KSU fans; both schools are going to get 100% of Wichita. It’s the same thing when you’re talking about a conference’s footprint. You add Air Force, you get 100% of every market in Colorado, because no cable company in Colorado except perhaps Boulder and Fort Collins is going to refuse to carry your hypothetical network.
Sorry, guys, I hate beating everyone up with this, but it’s a misconception that drives me absolutely crazy. Every post discussion conference expansion should start with this as a disclaimer, I swear.
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
I guess it's hard to get people to understand
that they’re paying for the 296 channels that they don’t ever watch just as much as they’re paying for the 37 that they do watch. Lifetime Movie Channel gets exactly as much of my money as they get of Granny Goodwife’s down the street.
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
Which is why the Capitalist in my wants a la carte cable.
Bring on the Cats
"Without getting into specifics, my exit involves a McFlurry machine and a video tape of risque commercials from overseas." -- Jack Donaghy
Except you don't
because then they’d bone you for about $5 a channel, which is great if you only watch five channels ever. My cable bill, on the other hand, would suddenly be about $500.
Plus, if everything was a la carte, about 300 channels would disappear overnight because nobody would actively subscribe to them. And channels like Versus, or CBS College Sports, or… umm… the Big 12 Network would never get off the ground.
But, yeah, in a perfect world we’d just pay for what we want.
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
Then good. Bring on Air Force and New Mexico and we'll have a great road trip destination!
Fire Chris Cosh!
Having said all that, let's be sure we understand
that the fanbase in question has to be large enough to provide a credible threat of an uprising against the carrier. Deciding to go after the Louisiana market by inviting ULM probably wouldn’t work out very well.
My new blog: Those Other Guys. Critiques welcome.
No I get that concept...
From a point ESPN is included in most satelite/cable package, but as is the case currently FSN is not. So you have to have people who want to pay the extra for the extra channels (which I know some people do it for movies as well)…and if the Big12 ever decides to start a separate network, same thing…I get the concept, I do but if not that many people in Colorado show interest in a certain product, Colorado cable/satelite providers start dropping stations from included packages and such.
And where’s the extra encouragement to continue to carry games (like Versus) if they aren’t getting the ratings/interest? How do you expand a brand throughout cable, not just on 2 channels FSN/ESPN.
Ah, thanks for the reminder, sorry about that.
Grad school has encroached a bit for me, leading to fewer long posts like this one, and the “Greatest” series that I started. I still need to put together our BOTC fantasy basketball draft post, but after that, I will probably return to either the RB post or a follow-up to the post about possible replacements for Cosh — maybe both, since I’ll have a bit more time before school starts back up in mid-January.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 12:21 PM CST up reply actions
how do you tell when a conference is telling the truth?
Big 10 circa 2010 spring: “we aren’t going to expand soon, we are going to wait a bit.”
Big 10 circa 2010 summer: ’we think UNL brings a bunch to our conference."
Big 10 circa 2010 fall: “we are done expanding, for now.”
The time for calm and rational discourse is past, now is the time for senseless bickering -Anonymous the Younger
by Anon_the_younger on Dec 6, 2010 12:24 PM CST reply actions
I'm pretty sure the Big 10 made it CRYSTAL clear in late 2009 that they were going to expand.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 6, 2010 12:29 PM CST up reply actions
never said they weren't ... just they said their time period was 18 months.
The time for calm and rational discourse is past, now is the time for senseless bickering -Anonymous the Younger
by Anon_the_younger on Dec 6, 2010 1:09 PM CST up reply actions
The Big-12 "ultimatum" and outside sources
telling Nebraska that college football as they knew it was “doomed” accelerated the Big-10/UNL marriage. This was the “Super Conference” bull$#it that people “in the know” (TV consultants, media pundits) were selling to gullible types last winter/spring. There was a long article about it in the Omaha World Herald back in September, I believe, which I cannot locate right now. Of course there were myriad other reasons for Nebraska’s departure as well, but this is what is being sold as the reason for the expedited Big-10 expansion timetable.
I never really bought into the superconferences
Just because no one could really point to one source…sounded too much like a conjured up idea amongst someone in the media. Just didn’t carry too much street cred to me.
You didn't buy into it because you are smart
That concept was phantasmic from the get-go.
I put it on the same plane
As the Bill Snyder is only coming back to pick up the momentum a little bit to then hand over to a HCIW. I think the media phathomed that up just about the same way the Superconferences did.
Well, Snyder did say
that he was back to ‘steady the waters’. You can take that to mean whatever you want.
Forward into Battle
by ChrisP Wildcat on Dec 7, 2010 1:18 PM CST up reply actions
put the last nail in the mid-major coffin
If the Big 12 added BYU and Boise State, it would be the last of the major mid-majors unaffiliated with a BCS conference. If the Big 12 did that it would sink the mid-majors into a decades long oblivion. They should do it for the greater good.
by Gary Charles Benson on Dec 7, 2010 11:03 AM CST reply actions
Seems like there are still doubters about the Big-12 out there, K.Scott
Some who just don’t see the conference surviving. Why, I don’t know, but they shall continue to persist with this meme. Others, however, agree with you that the conference should go back to 12. And then you have Nebraska, whose fans “”http://newsok.com/ou-bulletin-board/article/3520757" >feel thrilled to be leaving the Big-12". Of course they do: now they can play in a conference they might actually win.
Kevin Sherrington isn't the sharpest tool in the shed.
He IS a tool, just not the sharpest one. I lived in DFW for over six years, and he writes things that he knows will get people up-in-arms, offers little by way of actual reasoning to support it, and sits back to enjoy the show. I mean, he doesn’t point to anything solid at all to support his prediction of the Big 12’s demise. He just calls it an “SWC redux” and leaves it at that. The SWC had TONS of issues that the Big 12 isn’t currently facing. To rehash those would take an entire post in itself, and would be quite uninteresting to most KSU fans. Anyways, suffice to say that a Sherrington article on most issues is to be taken with less than a grain of salt.
Also, I should note that I’m not advocating an immediate move back to 12. I think the conference should let a few years play out first, and then look at expanding again once the TV contracts near their end.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 7, 2010 1:34 PM CST up reply actions
I think you MORE than a grain of salt
The single grain is to help make it taste better than it is, so you would want more grains the worse the original taste.
It is obvious that the Big XII will wait at least a few years before expanding because it is already too late for next year and probably the year after that.
I think they should make the expansion sooner rather than later, though.
Forward into Battle
by ChrisP Wildcat on Dec 7, 2010 2:08 PM CST up reply actions
I agree 100%
And feel the same way about expansion. Take our time and make some smart assessments – provided the Pac-10 and Big-10 don’t suddenly decide to try and raid the conference again.
I also had to laugh at some mention on the A&M site that the Aggies will determine whether the Big-12 lives or dies.
The SWC also had the Big 8 around wanting to expand/merge.
There isn’t really another conference that makes that much sense for the most powerful teams in the Big XII to go to.
Exactly.
And Sherrington just seems like one of the most incredibly ill-informed people that I’ve seen writing on this subject yet.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 7, 2010 5:07 PM CST up reply actions
There are more reasons than money to bring TCU to the Big XII
The Onion offers some good insight into why the Big East would want TCU, aside from their on-field football product.
It appears the Big East has been suffering from a lack of hot girls ever since Boston College left, and they would like some access to the (supposedly) endless supply of hot Texas cowgirls.
Forward into Battle
by ChrisP Wildcat on Dec 7, 2010 2:28 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
+1
For bringing The Onion into a conference expansion discussion, you win 5 internet points. Congratulations! :)
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Dec 7, 2010 3:15 PM CST up reply actions
Let me throw something else to you
When the Pac 10- went after the Big 6, they were looking to bring Texas more into the fold. How about the Big 12 bringing California into the Big 12. If your overall goal is TV markets why not San Diego State and Fresno State. San Diego is a huge TV Market, Fresno, if you include all the minor communities around it (Stockton, Modesto, Visalia & Bakersfield) you have a Top 10 TV Market.
Then you also break into the 2nd biggest Recruiting Market – California, now you have access to California recruits their families can see them play in Cali once a year, your teams only have to travel to california once a year.
Lastly, you will probably beat up on these teams for at least the first 5 years while they are trying to build up to your level, padding your Win Loss records. They will do anything to join your conference by paying a hefty fee and maybe taking a smaller part of the shared revenue.
It could really be a Win-Win for theConference.
We should look Eastbound and Down... Litterally
I will start by admitting I don’t know much about this particular subject. I stumbled across this forum and have learned quite a bit from the read, so I thank you all for this. My question would be why not look to the “other” best state for high school football. Florida is a terrific market for football, with great rivalries. It just so happens there is a young school with a very promising program located smack in the middle. UCF would undoutbedly bring a large amount of media. (I would reference the post about the whole state paying whether they watch UCF specifically or not.) OU already has a rivalry with Miami, and UCF would play in-state games yearly as well I would assume. This means Big 12 competition every year in Florida. It also means that kids all across the south could look either way to find a chance to play in the Big 12. That coupled with a move on Ark (which I like the idea of) would bring in a large amount of fans, rivalries, and money. Personally I doubt Ark wants to leave the SEC, as they do have an impact every year, even if they don’t have a great record. Just look at how many times they have upset LSU alone. On the other hand there is alot of love/hate between Ark/OU and Ark/UT and with the program on their uprise those rivalries could equal if not surpass anything they get out of the SEC. Move OSU and Ark to the North and leave OU with UCF in the south and the Big 12 has literally invaded all off the Souteast. New rivalries and more out of conference play with the big boys strengthens not only the Big 12 but the ACC, the Big East, and the SEC. I think this is win-win for the money makers and the players alike. I wouldn’t have the numbers, but I can only assume UCF would benefit from leaving the Conf USA and joining us financially, and definitely would benefit competetively. Honestly, and no disrespect to these teams, UCF is as good as, if not better than, 7 teams already in the Big 12. I also really do like the idea of ND if Ark is unavailabe, but I’m not as convinced they would want to join. What say you men of greater knowledge than I?
I think it is a good idea
But apparently I give too much credit to non-AQ schools.
My only problem is geography. I don’t really like the idea of making us a national conference, I like the regional emphasis and wish the other conferences would stay that way as well.
Forward into Battle
by ChrisP Wildcat on Jan 4, 2011 9:54 AM CST up reply actions

by 











