XOVER
5000+ posts
03/17/12 06:51 PM
|
|
The Status of Realignment – March 2012
|
| |
I think right now the status of college conference realignment is like a horse race. There are two horses in this particular race, which are the Big 12 and the ACC. Unlike traditional "fair and square" races, however, there is a “Manipulator” in this race. That would be ESPN.
The winner of the race will win various prizes. Financial lucre. Stability. Prestige. Beyond these prizes, however, the winning conference will position itself to win the biggest prize of all: Notre Dame. Which also happens to be, not coincidentally, the Manipulator's end goal: Notre Dame and its vast television market.
Right now, Notre Dame has 3 viable choices when the day comes – and it will come – when Notre Dame joins a conference. There is the B1G. The ACC. And the Big 12.
For those who are certain Notre Dame will join the B1G, you can stop reading right now and move to another thread because your work here is done. For those who understand that a large group of Notre Dame people absolutely detest the B1G, based on valid historical reasons, money be damned, read on.
When the Big 12 and ACC left the starting gate, the Manipulator aided the ACC in two critical ways: (a) Syracuse and Pittsburgh, and (b) Texas.
The Manipulator, coveting control of Notre Dame’s television rights from NBC, directed the ACC to add Syracuse and Pittsburgh, as bait to lure Notre Dame. Furthermore, when Oklahoma’s Boren decided to take OU to the PAC this past fall, the Manipulator saw that Texas became exasperated, and seized the opportunity to stack the deck against the Big 12 by putting Texas and the ACC together, hoping a deal would be struck, which would virtually guarantee Notre Dame's riches to ESPN. Thus, with this tremendous jump out of the gate, aided by the Manipulator, causing the Big 12 to stumble, the ACC threatened to run away with the race before it reached the first turn.
Notre Dame has many goals it wants a conference to deliver before it would ever even consider joining. There’s associating with academic prestige. There’s connecting with its eastern fanbase. There’s protecting its recruiting grounds in the northeastern corridor, especially in New York City. And, of course, money is a factor.
The ACC listened to ESPN and added Syracuse and Pittsburgh, both of which have long-term future sports connections with Notre Dame. Connecticut ended its association with Notre Dame because Notre Dame wanted to play games in New York City, and Connecticut felt that was unfair. So, at ESPN’s bidding, the ACC passed over Connecticut in favor of Syracuse, which had replaced Connecticut on Notre Dame's schedule. (Never cross off Notre Dame from your athletics schedule.)
But then it happened. The ACC stopped listening to the Manipulator.
The ACC failed and refused to find a way to add Texas. When Texas comes knocking on your door, with his buddy ESPN, who also happens to be your boss, you always say, "come in". In 2010, Texas’ dalliance with the PAC was real and almost happened. In 2012, Texas’ dalliance with the PAC was a mere subterfuge, and part of ESPN's attempt to leverage the ACC into taking Texas. But it didn’t work. The ACC passed on one of the few diamond schools: Texas. And that decision may have sealed the ACC’s fate.
The ACC passing on Texas allowed the Big 12 to catch up to the ACC in the back-stretch. Then, with input from ESPN, the Big 12 added West Virginia, opening up all manner of opportunity in the east, and the Big 12 suddenly bolted a length ahead of the ACC as the race headed into the far turn.
Without Texas, there is now only one way for the ACC to win the race: The ACC must add Notre Dame immediately. Not 10 years from now. Not 5 years from now. Right now. And that appears to be problematical.
The Manipulator would be thrilled if Notre Dame joined the ACC right now. No problem for ESPN. The Manipulator does not care how it winds up with Notre Dame's television rights – it only knows it covets them. ESPN owns the ACC’s total package of TV rights, including Tiers 1, 2, and 3. And if Notre Dame was forced to join a conference right now, there is a significant chance they would choose the ACC, thus providing Notre Dame's television rights to ESPN. Yes, Notre Dame would be very unhappy losing its Tier 3 rights, true, but the ACC does fulfill all the rest of Notre Dame’s conference goals that we discussed above.
But the reality is that Notre Dame is not forced to join a conference today. Notre Dame has not yet abandoned its designs on setting up its own network. And Texas, by all accounts, is giving Notre Dame as much “advice” as possible about television networks, Tier 3, and “what is in Notre Dame’s best interests.”
At the same time, the ACC has discovered, to its horror, that it cannot command the same level of TV contract that the Big 12 can command. Syracuse and Pittsburgh might be decent northeastern bait to lure Notre Dame (if Notre Dame was hard-pressed today, which it isn't), but Syracuse and Pittsburgh do not move the needle very much for purposes of the ACC's television contract. Texas would have moved the needle, but ACC hubris killed that deal.
And so, by ignoring the Manipulator, by failing to add Texas, now the ACC is approaching dire straits, losing ground in the final turn. The Manipulator has now turned away from the ACC and is aiding the Big 12 and its most important client: Texas and its LHN (which ESPN owns lock, stock, and barrel). The Manipulator has turned away from the ACC because ESPN now sees the Big 12 as the most likely path to it eventually obtaining Notre Dame's massive television rights, which is the Manipulator's "precious".
The ACC must hope against hope that there is no automatic escalator clause in the new Big 12 contract that will raise the total payout by $2.05M per school, based on the added conference championship game. The ACC must pray there is no list of designated schools, the addition of which automatically increases the Tier 1 contract payout. The ACC must hope there is no “opt out” clause that will allow the Big 12 out of the contract to take it to the open market if Big 12 expands to 12 (or further) – of course giving ESPN the right of first refusal on any new contract. The ACC is falling dangerously behind the lead horse.
It’s bad enough that the new ACC contract will pay each school less than $15M per year, but it may be fatal to the ACC when the new Big 12 deal will pay $19.2M per year, not including Tier 3, plus if there’s an "automatic escalator" with “opt out” clause? That means trouble in paradise.
The ACC simply miscalculated. By refusing Texas, the ACC failed to take into account, first, money, second, ESPN, and third, the degree of endemic dissatisfaction among the ACC’s football-first schools over league priorities. Swofford is looking more and more like a very poor jockey. Leadership is important.
With its new $19.2M contract, complete with bells and whistles and escalators and opt out clauses, the Manipulator has now equipped the Big 12 with the ammunition to show Florida State, Miami, and Clemson the cold, hard dollars signed, sealed, and delivered. And if you could make less than $15M per year with one league versus $25M or more with another league, which league would you choose? Especially if, like Florida State, you’re running in the red? Especially if you can bring several of your regional friends with you? And if only one team leaves the ACC, what does that say about ACC stability? If you’re Notre Dame, and it looks like the ACC might lose some schools, wouldn’t you wait to see what happens? The home stretch is approaching.
And so here we are. The ACC is falling further and further behind the Big 12 in the race for survival. Not to mention the SEC. The finish line is in sight.
If Florida State, Clemson, and Miami merge with the Big 12 that would give the Big 12 a significant southeastern, seaboard presence, which ought to satisfy Notre Dame's needs in the southeast. More broadly, however, the ACC would be effectively smashed as an attractive league for Notre Dame, both now and in the future. Race over. Winner Big 12.
Not including Notre Dame, there would still be two slots left for two schools in the northeastern corridor (Rutgers? Maryland? Pittsburgh? Boston College?). Or one school in the northeastern corridor plus some other school with national potential (BYU?). Or perhaps another nice regional school (Georgia Tech? Virginia Tech? Louisville?).
Thus does the ACC become an afterthought, leaving Notre Dame with only two realistic options going into the future: The Big 12 and the B1G.
I like the Big 12’s chances in that matchup under these circumstances.
And so does ESPN.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
03/17/12 08:58 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Notre Dame must never feel like they're being forced into conference affiliation, and there's a window right now where they don't have to make that decision. I agree with you X that that's going to be fatal for the ACC.
A lot of people argue that history will keep Florida State, Miami, and Clemson from making the jump. Florida State and Miami haven't been in the ACC that long to have that much history with that conference, and the athletic director at Clemson has strong ties to the Big XII. All three of those schools are "football-first" schools in a basketball-first conference where the real power resides along Tobacco Road. It's safe to say that all three ACC schools, and perhaps Georgia Tech and Maryland as well, are doing their due diligence right now, studying conference deals and payout projections, while waiting to see who the new Big XII commissioner will be.
The new commissioner will be crucial to this. If he is pro-expansion, has strong ties to the media, especially ESPN, and if he can bring a sense of peace and cooperation to the Big XII, it will be just a matter of a short time before the conference goes to fourteen teams, probably right now adding Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and Louisville, and goes back to having a lucrative conference championship game.
IF that happens, and I agree with you X that it could likely happen before the end of this year, the Big XII will be in very good shape WHEN Notre Dame opts to join a conference.
I am curious to hear if anyone else has heard anything further about efforts to lure Notre Dame's non-football sports to the Big XII. I think that's a big deal in the pursuit of the Irish as well.
I'm imagining a new Big XII lineup in no more than a couple of years that looks like this:
Big XII East
West Virginia
Florida State
Miami
Clemson
Louisville
Kansas
Kansas State
Big XII West
UT
OU
Oklahoma State
Tech
Baylor
TCU
Iowa State
If, down the road, Notre Dame wants to come aboard, add them and BYU, Notre Dame to the East and BYU to the West.
I understand that this isn't your daddy's Big XII and the geography is skewed a bit, but I don't think that will matter so much, and the tradeoff is you get a conference that is strong on both sides, unlike the old Big XII, where the north didn't hold up its' end of the deal.
I still think when realignment totally shakes out, the power conferences will be the B1G, the Big XII, the SEC, the PAC 12, and a watered-down ACC that's pulled in any reasonable teams out of what's left of the Big (L)east to go with what's left of the ACC. They'll still be a powerhouse basketball league, and relevant, at best, in football, which is about where the ACC is right now. I do think ultimately the SEC will go to sixteen teams by taking Va. Tech and one more, probably UNC, from the ACC. I don't see either the B1G or PAC 12 taking anyone else unless Notre Dame comes into play, and in any event, I don't see the Irish headed to either of those conferences.
Thoughts?
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Edited by coolhorn (03/19/12 07:13 AM)
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
03/18/12 09:02 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
coolhorn: It's seems like everytime DeLoss Dodds makes a public appearance wherein he's asked about expansion, he mentions Notre Dame. For example, here Dodds is quoted about Notre Dame out in Lufkin back on February 4. I do think Dodds is making a concerted effort with respect to Notre Dame, as is, currently, the ACC, as they must.
The schools that are rumored to be considering jumping as a "package" are Florida State, Clemson, and Miami.
In fact, there was supposed to have been an "unofficial" meeting between FSU and Big 12 reps as recently as around March 1 or so. One of the complaints FSU mentions in discussions with unofficial Big 12 reps is the ACC's seemingly intentional efforts to make football success difficult for the non-North Carolina schools. For example, FSU especially wants a bye week prior to playing Florida, or at least an OOC cupcake opponent. But they always seem to get a conference game. They complain about always getting stuck with a Thursday away game, never a Thursday home game. They complain about the ACC having tied up their Tier 3 rights for so long (2023), so money is an issue. Remember, FSU is running in the red.
And now as an overarching issue it has become clear to the ACC football schools that, short of joining Notre Dame, they are consigned to forever making less money than the other 3 big leagues. And not a little bit less, either, which would be tolerable, if rankling -- we're talking about a gap of more than $10M per year once Tier 3 is completely accounted for (at least with respect to the Big 12 and, more importantly, the SEC). The ACC made an absolutely critical error in failing to join Texas when it had the chance -- a move that FSU strongly favored, BTW.
To say that Florida State, Miami, and Clemson are unhappy in the ACC would be correct. But would they actually change conferences? Clemson is very interested, and might make a change even if no other ACC school follows them. OTOH, Clemson really wants a regional partner; namely, FSU, so Clemson becomes even more likely if another ACC school joins them. Miami is very interested, too, but only within the context of joining with FSU, and under no other conditions. Miami wants FSU, but doesn't move, for example, with Clemson without FSU. As for FSU, they insist upon Miami.
It kind of boils down to FSU. FSU is warm to the idea, not as hot as Clemson or Miami, but they are getting warmer.
As you suggest, a big key is who is named as Big 12 Conference Commissioner. Because of the disdain with which the ACC trio holds for Swofford, they will make no final decision until they see who the Big 12 chooses as its Commissioner. They don't want to jump from one league where there's a non-cooperative Commissioner into another league where there's a non-cooperative Commissioner. So, who the commissioner is, and what he stands for is very important to the ACC trio.
The leaking of this new Big 12 contract , which is rumored to contain provisions specifically for expansion, will keep the griddle hot until a new Commissioner is named. Personally, I think we should draft Oliver Luck even if he doesn't want the job.
As for the teams, I hope we "merge" (the politically correct term for the ACC schools) Florida State, Miami, and Clemson. I doubt Notre Dame comes at once so you need to add at least one more to get to 14. We need to save #15 for Notre Dame for the day. There's a plethora of schools that could get the final two slots (#14 and #16): BYU (without game forfeiture, otherwise no), Maryland, Rutgers, Pittsburgh, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, North Carolina State, Louisville, Boston College (and that's my order of preference). There has been some form of unofficial (or official) contact with all of these schools, with degrees of interest varying from "thanks, but no thanks", to, "huh, let me think about it some more", to, "here's my application" (BYU and Louisville). Actually, I would be remiss if I didn't mention Arkansas, too, but folks, please, Arkansas ain't commin'. So who knows for the last two?
As a final thought; remember: The ACC gambit may cave, crumble, and fail. Think about how close Texas and the other four came to joining the PAC in 2010, but it failed, literally, just before the official announcement. The more schools that are involved, the greater the chance for failure. If the ACC plan fails, there's always "Plan B", which is BYU and Louisville, at least as of right now.
BTW, coolhorn, just a matter of information: Do you know it's not "Big XII"? Check out the box in the top, right-hand corner. Isn't that a hoot? This was pointed out to me on another thread, and I thought it was hilarious. Instructions straight from the league office! Can you imagine? Obviously I am easily amused.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
03/18/12 10:56 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I don't claim to be any kind of insider. I don't have an "asset" and no "big cigars" talk to me. That being said, and as Bob Dylan wrote, "You don't have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows".
The Big XII (I still prefer it that way.) can't sit at ten teams too long. They could go to twelve tomorrow...Louisville and BYU have been in play for a while and both have indicated they'd love a spot in the Big XII. However, I agree that UT WANTS Notre Dame as a partner, and recognizes for that to happen, the Irish need some traveling partners and a presence on the east coast. That's why I think the issue needs to be settled with the ACC teams before Louisville and BYU come into play. That's also why I think the next expansion will be to fourteen teams, not twelve, and Notre Dame won't be one of the four new teams added. I also think Dodds understands that, and has a good long range plan to attract the Irish to the Big XII.
It's too early to rule out any teams for realignment right now, but I have a hunch FSU, Miami, Clemson, and Louisville are in the lead, to use the racing parlance from the OP in this thread. BYU and Notre Dame are the independents right now, and neither HAS to make any decisions immediately regarding conference affiliation.
This whole realignment of the Big XII is going to require patience, but perhaps not too much patience. It's also going to require people to get over the idea of a conference that feels like a "regional" conference, as the old Big XII did. Those days are gone.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Edited by coolhorn (03/18/12 10:58 AM)
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
03/18/12 03:24 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
coolhorn: You don't have to be an insider. You just have to search out the so-called insiders, cull them, and evaluate the information.
When you get a ticket for "illegal Big 12 trademark confusion" from Big 12 headquarters, give me a shout and I'll try to fix it for you. I warn you now that may require you to write "Big 12" on a chalkboard 100 times.
I really don't see the Big 12 moving on BYU or Louisville prior to playing out the ACC gambit. And that won't be over until a new Commissioner is named. Those football ACC schools are damned afraid of losing their edge to the SEC, given the paltry contract renegotiation ESPN is offering due to the additions of Syracuse and Pittsburgh. The ACC trio is undoubtedly thinking hard, hoping a miracle happens to help them out of their dilemma.
So, I think Louisville and BYU are on ice for awhile. Well, at least Louisville is on ice. BYU might be added tomorrow if they have an epiphany and decide to play nice with others. I personally doubt they ever drop their demand for Sunday game forfeiture, but we'll see. BYU would be a great addition, geographic outlier status notwithstanding. Put'um in the group with Texas -- I love trips to the Rocky Mountains. I just don't like game forfeiture. I doubt the league does either.
Yup, Notre Dame continues to be the key. And even if Notre Dame goes nowhere short-term, doesn't it make sense to set up your conference so that it is attractive long-term? The Domers love playing Florida State and Miami, and they love recruiting Florida. And Clemson keeps ND close to Georgia and North Carolina, which the Domers also love to recruit.
As for patience, most likely the next big signpost is the hiring of the new Commissioner, and that deadline is July 1. As for the ACC trio, I wouldn't expect to see decisions one way or the other until the July and August time-frame. If nothing happens by late August, it may be onto Plan B.
The thing is, a 16-team conference does not have to feel all impersonal if it's broken up into regional pods of four where the pods play a different pod every year. In this configuration, you can have 3 pod games per year with your very closest regional partners, a protected rivalry game every year with another team, plus a second protected rivalry game (played every 2 out of 3 years). That's 5 conference games that are stable through the years. This configuration also gives you 8 conference games per year, leaving 4 OOC games per year. A freshman enters school and before the end of his junior year, his school has played every other team in the league at least once. You really can have your cake and eat it, too, in a 16-team league, correctly configured.
Post Extras:
|
RDV-1992
25+ posts
03/18/12 04:23 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
This is an interesting take.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
03/18/12 08:22 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
X, we basically agree on the template for Big XII expansion. The only thing where we might differ is Louisville vis-a-vis BYU. I think the 'Ville is more in play right now than BYU, and here's why.
Louisville has no problem playing Sunday games, while I'm not sure the Morman church will allow BYU any latitude on that issue. That issue is going to be important to the Big XII, and ESPN going forward.
Louisville has a little bit better-rounded athletic program than BYU, largely because of their long term basketball success. Louisville also has the advantage of being in a larger tv market, AND that market is on the east side of SEC territory. That's important for more than one reason.
Louisville's location not only makes them a good traveling partner for West Virginia, but their location also makes them a good traveling partner for FSU, Clemson, and Miami if those three decide to head to the Big XII.
Louisville's location also makes them attractive to Notre Dame when the Irish start looking toward conference affiliation.
BYU is not an unattractive target for the Big XII, but AFTER the next round of moves, ONLY if Notre Dame is looking toward the Big XII, and I would expect BYU would only get one chance to change their minds about Sunday play. Otherwise, probably in this order, Maryland, Georgia Tech, and maybe Virginia or Va. Tech (If interested) will be looked at as the 16th team in the Big XII.
I think BYU's being considered, but right now, I don't think they hold the edge over Louisville.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
03/18/12 09:57 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
coolhorn: Yea, you could be right.
Truth is, I don't think BYU ever joins the Big 12. I do find BYU fascinating from a marketing pov. BYU has a national television following -- it is not merely limited to Provo or even to Utah. Due to its national following, BYU also has massive cross-marketing potential. Not surprisingly, BYU also draws very well at 60,265, for number 26 in the nation.
But do I really think they'll become Big 12 members? I do not think BYU will give up on some core points, so this exercise with BYU is merely academic, and I will stop now. No, I don't think BYU ever joins the Big 12.
If we merge Florida State, Miami, and Clemson, then we need to get real picky, real quick. That's why Louisville is further down my list.
For any school, their value to a conference is three-fold: (a) TV revenue, (b) post-season revenue, and (c) cross-marketing (which is indirect TV revenue).
Louisville carries their DMA, and that's a plus, but their DMA is limited -- it is the 49th biggest market. Outside their DMA -- the greater Louisville area -- people don't tune into Louisville. Outside greater Louisville, people are either watching SEC ball or they're watching B1G ball. Not even fans of the BE tune into Louisville games like you and I might tune into, say, Kansas State v. Texas Tech. Have you ever watched a regular season Louisville game? That's because they're rarely nationally televised.
Louisville will hit post-season play from time-to-time, but how much can we really consistently count on them to make a bowl game in a very tough Big 12? Furthermore, Louisville fans haven't typically tuned into other Big East games. You will get little cross-marketing with Louisville. Might that change in the Big 12? Maybe. But there's no historical reason to believe it will change. Louisville's gameday draw is nothing fantastic, either, coming in at 48,538, which is 46th in the nation.
Louisville also lacks any real intangibles. They don't command any area beyond their immediate metropolitan area. They are not a traditional football power. They don't move the needle in attracting Notre Dame (I disagree with you on this point for several reasons).
OTOH, Louisville does play excellent basketball, they have new and really nice facilities, with very good endowment. Correct geography, too, as you point out.
Overall, though, Louisville is far from a sure-fire winner IMO, especially if the ACC can be breached and additional schools are available.
If the ACC trio join, I would focus more on the northeastern corridor and ACC schools like Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Maryland, Pittsburgh, North Carolina State, or even Rutgers.
Having said all this, I wouldn't be surprised at all if Louisville joins the conference. It definitely could happen. I suspect that if Louisville joins, however, it will be out of necessity to balance a more important addition.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
03/19/12 07:10 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I think Virginia, Va. Tech, and Georgia Tech all three are more attractive candidates for the Big 12 than Louisville. I think Maryland is an equally attractive candidate.
I compared Louisville to BYU, and by that comparison, Louisville, I think, would have the inside track to one of the next four slots in the Big 12.
I've seen nothing to indicate that Virginia or Va. Tech are interested in leaving the ACC. I've seen some talk that Maryland and Georgia Tech might be interested. Pitt might make an interesting alternative, but I have to wonder how ready they'd be to move again after just getting into the ACC. Boston College's two attractions are their history with Notre Dame, and their location in Boston. I don't see them happening.
Notre Dame's interest in Louisville would have nothing to do with the school itself, and everything to do with their location. The Irish would love to have a game or two every year in SEC/ACC territory, and the 'Ville fits that description. Louisville would be more attractive in the Big 12 than the Big (L)east, even if they aren't a yearly title contender.
I'm not pushing for Louisville to the Big 12...I think there might be better options. I just think that when all is said and done, the Cards will be in the Big 12.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
majorwhiteapples
5000+ posts
03/19/12 07:44 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I am so tired of the BYU does not play on Sunday crap. How many Texas Longhorn games do you watch on Sundays? The ones that are not replays? I don't see any issue with that whatsoever. I only know of one Texas football game on a Sunday night, I am sure we will never do that again.
Basketball, I don't remember too many Sunday games. Track meets? Swim Meets? Baseball, what is wrong with starting the series on Thursday, or having a double header on Saturday?
Post Extras:
|
notanative
2500+ posts
03/19/12 08:03 AM
|
|
In reply to:
...while I'm not sure the Morman church will allow BYU any latitude on that issue [Sunday games].
Maybe in return we can ban the aggy band and fans from behind their bench when they play at Kyle Field. Oh!!! Wait!!! 
In reply to:
Baseball, what is wrong with starting the series on Thursday, or having a double header on Saturday?
Don't we already do that to accommodate Easter and maybe Mother's Day? Would not be a stretch.
It doesn't take all kinds; it's just that there are all kinds.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
03/19/12 10:04 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I really don't care if BYU does or doesn't play on Sunday, and I'd have no problem with them being added to the Big 12. I think BYU brings a lot to the table, and they'd be a natural fit to the west side of a newly-expanded Big 12. I just think the conference is going to look in a different direction when it gets to the point of offering slots. I'm not saying BYU won't be a Big 12 member...they're just not as likely as some other teams out there.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
Santafe
1000+ posts
03/19/12 07:43 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Xover, the one thing I'm most happy about is the idea of a ten-member conference without a championship game is pretty much a dead issue. With these developments, we are clearly headed toward a 12-16 team conference, maybe not this year, but certainly in the near future. It is very hard for the Big 12 to defend the concept of not having a championship game when TV revenue is the driving force and the PAC 12, Big Ten, SEC, and ACC have conference championships.
Hopefully, if we make the right choice for commissioner, we can land Florida State and Clemson. I do think Miami would be very likely to join if Florida State and Clemson were to join.
I'm still not thrilled with Louisville, but I can see why the Big 12 is interested in a potential offer.
This conference has come a long way in two years. Can you imagine what A&M would think if the Big 12 were to land Notre Dame, BYU, Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and Georgia Tech?
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
03/19/12 09:41 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I can't speak for anyone else, but personally, I could care less what a team we used to play, one that's totally irrelevant, thinks about the Big 12, now, or once it's loaded with new members.
Nothing's in ink yet, but get used to the idea of at least a fourteen team Big 12 in no more than two years, and probably sooner. If the conference does go to fourteen, there's a really good chance that a year or two later it'll be at sixteen, and will be no worse than one of the two most powerful conferences around.
Quite a big improvement from a few months ago, when everybody was ready to pull the plug on the Big 12. As for the farm school, let them enjoy the prison lovin' they're about to get in their new neighborhood. Showtime will probably do a series on aggy in the SEC and call it "Jailbait".
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Edited by coolhorn (03/19/12 09:42 PM)
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
03/20/12 07:23 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
BYU folks are not shy about telling you they will forfeit Sunday games. And BYU forfeitures do happen. BYU forfeited a NC game in some off-women's sport as recently as 2010. They've forfeited College World Series games in the past. A green light to forfeit games does bug the dog out of me.
I might have been a little rough on Louisville in my post upthread. Say we merge FSU, Miami, and Clemson. We need 1 to get to 14.
Do you go all out to try to turn Georgia Tech to finish off a southeastern group? (Answer: Yes)
Or do you add 1 further north to give WVU some regional partner, and, hopefully, to entice ND? That would mean evaluating Louisville, Maryland, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, and Virginia Tech.
I think Virginia Tech would be the best add, but even if the ACC is breached, isn't VPI likely to stay with VA in the ACC unless the B1G comes for VA, allowing VPI to the SEC? Scratch off the Hokies.
Personally, after VPI, I would go for Rutgers, totally on potential, but I'm in the vast minority here. Scratch off RU.
Really, doesn't that mean it will boil down to Louisville, Maryland, and Pittsburgh?
Any of those schools are great for WVU, but Pitt and Maryland are probably "best" for WVU. Let's look at these schools:
Pittsburgh Panthers: 28,823 students / $2.54B endowment
Pittsburgh Greater Metropolitan Area = 2,447,393
Silver's TV viewers = 831,496 (37th)
Brewer's Valuations = $44M (47th)
Stadium = 59,000 / 52,165 (Off Campus: Three Rivers Stadium)
Bowls since 1990 = 11 (BCS = 0)
AP Top 20 since 1990 = 1
NC = 9 (Last 1976)
Heisman Trophy = 1 (Tony Dorsett)
ACC Championships since 1990 = 0
Current NFL = 23
All-Time Record = 677-490-42 (.577)
AAU
Maryland Terrapins: 37,641 students / $672M endowment
Baltimore Washington Metropolitan Area = 8,924,087
Silver's TV viewers = 474,059 (58th)
Brewer's Valuations = $14.99M (58th)
Stadium = 54,000 / 42,355 (Campus: Capital One Field at Byrd Stadium)
Bowls since 1990 = 8 (BCS = 0)
AP Top 20 since 1990 = 4
NC = 2 (Last 1953)
ACC Championships since 1990 = 1
Heisman Trophy = 0
Current NFL = ?
All-Time Record = 611-535-43 (.532)
AAU
Louisville Cardinals: 19,843 students / $762M endowment
Louisville Metropolitan Area (Kentuckiana) = 1,177,883
Silver's TV viewers = 300,443 (73rd)
Brewer's Valuations = $30.4M (51st)
Stadium = 55,000 / 48,538 (Campus: Papa John's Cardinals Stadium)
Bowls since 1990 = 13 (BCS 1)
AP Top 20 since 1990 = 6
NC = 0
Conference Championships since 1990 = 5 (3 CUSA; 2 BE)
Heisman Trophy = 0
Current NFL = 16
All-Time Record = 455-438-17 (.509)
Not AAU
I listed Pittsburgh first because I think, overall, Pitt has the best numbers, especially among people who classify themselves as Pitt fans. However, Pitt's football success has come almost exclusively prior to 1982 (the Marino years). Still, Pitt has the best gameday draw of the three, and its AAU.
For pure football prowess, Louisville has had the better recent success, although it came in the CUSA/BE. Louisville's problem is its limited market and limited fanbase. Plus the UL fanbase is not great for cross-marketing (watching other league games that don't include the Cardinals).
Maryland has a happy placement in that huge metropolitan area that kind of makes your eyes pop out. Still, the Terps' fanbase is not the size you would hope to see in such a huge market, especially with the number of students Maryland graduates. Maryland has had more gridiron success in recent years than Pitt, but not as much as Louisville.
I think by looking at this information, you have to give greater thought to Pitt and Maryland over Louisville.
I would probably choose Maryland out of the 3 because of its greater potential. The criticism of my choice is that potential means you haven't done it yet. You can see why the Big 12 was targeting Pitt earlier.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
03/20/12 08:52 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I'll echo something Hayden Fry said after he got the University of Iowa head coaching job. Anytime you get the chance, you want to be head coach of a school that starts with "The University Of..."
Maryland, as the state's flagship university, has a solid basketball history, a football program with God-awful uniforms that has under-performed for years, and a world of potential. (Yep, Coach Royal said potential means you ain't done it yet.) They also have the advantage of sitting in large tv markets on the east coast.
Pitt's in a big enough tv market, and has won enough in football over their history to merit consideration...indeed, they might be the best choice for a fourteenth team when expansion rolls around. The problem is they just moved to the ACC, and may not want to go through the trouble and expense of another move so quickly.
Louisville's already been covered. They have some good points, mostly related to their location and their basketball program. They have some drawbacks that have been covered too.
Each of these three programs would have to seriously ramp up their football program if they were to be invited to join the Big 12. I'm no sure I have a pecking order, a list of favorites, among the three. I will say that the potential of Maryland intrigues me...with the right coaching hires, that program could take off.
I didn't include BYU in this discussion because, frankly, I think they rank below other candidates for inclusion in the Big 12, and I don't believe when all is said and done that they'll be in this conference.
I will say that all of this speculation sure makes the off-season more interesting. I am anxious to see who the new Big 12 commissioner will be. If the right choice is made, realignment won't be too far behind.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
HornSwoggler
500+ posts
03/21/12 09:58 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Many good points made above. I feel conferences are eventually going to 16 teams with the conferences being based on B1G, PAC, SEC, ACC, Big 12, Big East. I suspect the merged CUSA and MWC will be picked apart to fill out the main conferences. I have not thought through what will happen to the small remaining Div 1 conferences (Sunbelt, Southland, MAC, WAC). Maybe the CUSA/MWC and these others will form the 7th and 8th big conferences or they will split off from Div 1. In general, they can not compete on a regular basis with the big 6 conferences. I prefer geographic conferences but that seems to be a dead issue these days.
I thought I'd throw out my ordered preference:
GT - new large market, good academics, good traditions and sports history
FSU - new large market, good academics, good traditions and sports history
Clemson - new market, good traditions and sports history, not sure on academics
Pitt - good market, rival for WVU, good sports history, good academics
UNC - doubt they would leave ACC, good academics and sports history, good market to add, good rival for Clemson
UVA - doubt they would leave ACC without VT but would be great rivals for WVU and Pitt, if UNC declines, take both VT and UVA to reach 16.
Assuming UNC, UVa and VT are not possible, I would add USF, an up and coming state university in large market state that would provide natural rival for FSU.
This could provide conference exposure in Florida, Georgia, SC, PA, and possibly Va and NC - quite a swath of markets in east and southeast.
That scenario would leave one spot (after adding GT, FSU, Clemson, Pitt & USF) to woo ND with its obvious benefits. The caveat would be that ND agree to participate as an equal member with no special treatments. Personally, I have no great desire to have ND in our conference but admit it would be a plus for the conference.
In my perfect world, I would give up Iowa State to provide an 8th team to the eastern division of the revised Big 12. ISU would be picked up by another conference to get to 16.
Post Extras:
|
Speedway
1000+ posts
03/21/12 01:03 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
This is what I'm hoping for:
Texas
Texas Tech
TCU
Baylor
Oklahoma
Oklahoma St
Kansas
Kansas St
Florida St
Miami
Clemson
Georgia Tech
Notre Dame
West Virginia
Maryland
Iowa St
XOVER, how would a four pod schedule be applied to the above configuration keeping in mind TEXAS should play Oklahoma every year?
TEXAS - 41 USC - 38
Rose Bowl, January 4th, 2006, Pasadena, California
National Champions
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
03/21/12 04:40 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Speedway, I'm not the Xman, but I can answer your question about us playing the okies every year.
The Big 12 would be like the SEC in that a traditional, existing rivalry game such as the Red River Shootout will be preserved for the good of the conference on tv. Off the top of my head, in a proposed expanded Big 12, UT/OU would be joined by Florida State/Miami, Pitt/West Virginia. and maybe one or two more.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
blonthang
1000+ posts
03/21/12 05:36 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
In reply to:
I think Virginia Tech would be the best add, but even if the ACC is breached, isn't VPI likely to stay with VA in the ACC unless the B1G comes for VA, allowing VPI to the SEC? Scratch off the Hokies.
Institutionally, VPI is similar to aggy. They are an old "corps" school, a land-grant aggy school, and they've got a bunch of good old boys, tightly knit with each other.
Bringing them in would just be "aggy-lite" IMHO.
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
03/21/12 05:39 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
IMO, the best way to preserve the RRR is to put OU into the same pod with Texas, with 2 other Texas schools opposite the Kansas schools, especially with respect to the rivalry games. With Texas and OU in the same pod, Texas could preserve the RRR, also have a yearly rivalry game with ND (on Thanksgiving?), and also, say, invade Florida recruiting grounds.
However, that's neither Speedway's dream scenario, nor his request. Here’s an example of a Big 12 structured with either 16 or 20 schools based on Speedway's dream scenario:
• Primary protected rival (1st team listed in parenthesis): Play every year, rotating home-and-home.
• Secondary protected rival (2nd team listed in parenthesis): Play 2 out of 3 years, rotating home-and-home.
• 16 teams: 8 Conference games per year; 4 OOC games per year; (or 7/5 without cross-over games).
• 20 teams: 9 Conference games per year; 3 OOC games per year; (or 10/2 with cross-over games).
• Divisions change every year.
• In all configurations, each school plays every other school in the league no less than every 3 years, as follows:
Year 1:
Pod 1 & Pod 2 = Division A
Pod 3 & Pod 4 = Division B
Year 2:
Pod 1 & Pod 3 = Division A
Pod 2 & Pod 4 = Division B
Year 3:
Pod 1 & Pod 4 = Division A
Pod 2 & Pod 3 = Division B
Year 4: Cycle repeats (reverse home-and-home)
Southwest Pod 1 “Lone Star”:
Texas (Oklahoma; Notre Dame)
Texas Tech (Kansas; Iowa State)
Texas Christian (Oklahoma State; Miami)
Baylor (Kansas State; Georgia Tech)
Brigham Young (Louisville, Virginia Tech)
Other Possibilities: Tulane, Rice, Houston
Northwest Pod 2 “Plains”:
Oklahoma (Texas; Florida State)
Oklahoma State (Texas Christian; Clemson)
Kansas (Texas Tech; Maryland)
Kansas State (Baylor; West Virginia)
Louisville (Brigham Young, Rutgers)
Other Possibilities: Cincinnati
Southeast Pod 3 “Dixie”:
Florida State (Notre Dame; Oklahoma)
Miami (West Virginia; Texas Christian)
Clemson (Iowa State; Oklahoma State)
Georgia Tech (Maryland; Baylor)
Virginia Tech (Rutgers, Brigham Young)
Other Possibilities: North Carolina State, South Florida, East Carolina
Northeast Pod 4 “Yankee”:
Notre Dame (Florida State; Texas)
West Virginia (Miami; Kansas State)
Maryland (Georgia Tech; Kansas)
Iowa State (Clemson; Texas Tech)
Rutgers (Virginia Tech, Louisville)
Other Possibilities: Pittsburgh, Boston College, Connecticut
In all configurations, each school in the league plays every other school in the league no less than every 3 years. A student enters college as a freshman, and his school has played every team in the league after his junior year.
For a 16-team league, simply ignore the fifth team in each pod, which then provides 8 conference games per year, consisting of 3 annual pod games, 1 annual cross-over rivalry game, a 2nd cross-over rivalry game (played 2 out of 3 years), plus 4 OOC games per year. A 16-team league is probably the ideal size to attract Notre Dame, which desires a national footprint, yet requires several OOC games to play their most important rivals, including Southern California and Navy.
A monster 20-team league would likely require the elimination of any cross-over rivalry games, in which case the 20-team league would provide 9 conference games per year, consisting of 4 annual pod games, plus 3 OOC games per year. Retaining one cross-over rivalry game provides 10 conference games per year, consisting of 4 annual pod games, 1 annual cross-over rivalry game, a 2nd cross-over rivalry game (played 2 out of 3 years), but only 2 OOC games per year.
The composition of the divisions also changes each year, thus giving some of the less consistently great programs a better shot at the conference title when they do field a great team.
A large league also solves many scheduling problems because the league itself provides significant variety, yet there remains the ability to schedule a generally adequate number of OOC games, especially in a 16-team configuration.
These particular configurations ought to command millions of dollars per school per year with respect to Tier 1 and 2 revenue streams, plus Tier 3 on top of that.
Any version of this league is also ripe for an “SEC challenge” week, if the two leagues had any interest in that.
Hopefully all this reinforces the main point, which is to demonstrate the cohesion, flexibility, and value of a 16-team league, or even a 20-team league, creatively configured.
If the ACC is subject to poaching, about the only school which might be considered to be a “long-shot” is Notre Dame. Other reasonably available schools are also included for those who do not like my choices. Debate can be had with respect to which team “properly” aligns with which pod.
Post Extras:
|
HornSwoggler
500+ posts
03/21/12 06:24 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
The secondary rival aspect seems too manufactured to me. Why not just use two 8-team divisions with 2 games from "other" division each year. All "other" division teams are scheduled once each 4 years. This leaves 3 OOC games per year. Divison winners play in CCG. Traditional rivalries remain for Big 12 teams and similar rivals are available for "other" division teams (WVU, Pitt, FSU, GT, Clemson, Miami?, ND, VT, UVa, Louisville, Maryland?)
Sorry, Iowa State just does not fit well in east/west division or 4 pod arrangements, in my opinion. I'd sacrifice Baylor if jettisoning ISU is a no-go.
I guess I don't see a great benefit to the 4 pod setup. It seems to complicate scheduling more than it helps. Changing pod composition every few years does not set well with me.
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
03/21/12 08:38 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Two reasons, HornSwoggler.
#1: The divisional setup causes you to lose an OOC game. The divisional setup configured as you suggest yields 9 Conference + 3 OCC games. The pod setup yields either 7 Conference + 5 OOC games without any cross-over rivalry games, or, if you do employ a cross-over rivalry setup, the yield is 8 Conference + 4 OOC games. Note that the secondary rivalry game is not an additional feature of a 4-pod cross-over rivalry league, but rather, it is a consequence of it. In a pod system, you either have a cross-over rivalry system or you don't. Do you see what I'm saying?
#2: The divisional setup also cycles through the entire league every 4 years whereas a pod system cycles through the entire league every 3 years.
So, in the divisional setup, you lose one or two OOC games each year plus it takes longer to cycle through the league. Two big negatives.
Also note that the pod system with cross-over gives you, essentially, 5 rivalry games per year, which is the same number of rivalry games we had in the old Big 12.
The pod system, therefore, is, IMO, a better way to manage a much bigger league, but it functions very similarly to a 12-team league broken up into divisions, yet you command a much larger 16-team footprint, which, if the teams are selected carefully, is making you millions of dollars in additional revenue.
Post Extras:
|
HornSwoggler
500+ posts
03/22/12 10:05 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Thanks for the explanation, X.
I understand your reasoning now. I don't put the value on the 4th or 5th OOC game that you do. Of course, that feature may be required by some potential expansion candidates like ND.
The 9/3 setup is similar to what the Big 12 has now with 10 teams and seems fine to me. With the quality of the added teams and the rotating basis of scheduling, there will be plenty of variety and strength of schedule.
I hope we don't end up with multiple weak sister OOC games as training warmups for conference play like was done for years. I fear that 4 or 5 OOC games each year would result in exactly that. Few teams will want to schedule 3 or 4 strong OOC games.
The other aspect of the pod system I dislike is the "forced" rivalry. As you laid out in your example, some of your fixed rivalry games don't seem like historic rivalries to me. Maybe they are and I just don't realize it. Another impact of the fixed rivalry game is if your rival is a weaker team, your team then gets a competitive advantage every year over other conference teams outside the weak team's pod.
The rotating 2 year "rivalries" are the ones that seem manufactured just to make the 3 year rotation work. If the rotation period is critical, why not eliminate the rivalry games and play a 9/3 schedule where you play your own pod members (3) each year and 2 from each other pod on a rotating 2 year basis. True historic rivalries like Texas-OU would occur at least every 2 years with no special manipulation. In addition, an added meeting might occur in the CCG in any year. The 4th OOC game is given up but a simple scheduling system that is not manipulated results.
As with anything, setting priorities and compromise will be needed. It will be interesting to see if any of this comes to fruition.
Post Extras:
|
Speedway
1000+ posts
03/22/12 11:31 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
XOVER,
Thanks for the work, very enlightening. How would it work if there were two eight team conferences? You would play all seven teams in your conference. Then the eighth game would be a TBD "playoff game" between conferences with the home team being alternated.
Here is an example:
West Conference
1. TEXAS
2. Oklahoma
3. TCU
4. Oklahoma St
5. Kansas St
6. Baylor
7. Texas Tech
8. Kansas
East Conference
1. Florida St
2. Notre Dame
3. Miami
4. West Virginia
5. Georgia Tech
6. Clemson
7. Maryland
8. Iowa St
Eighth Conference Game
Texas @ Florida St
Notre Dame @ Oklahoma
TCU @ Miami
West Virginia @ Oklahoma St
Kansas St @ Georgia Tech
Clemson @ Baylor
Texas Tech @ Maryland
Iowa St @ Kansas
Then the team with the best conference record from each conference plays in the CCG.
That provides seven regular conference games every year and an unknown game until the eighth or ninth week of conference play.
About the only down side I see is it would not cycle through the whole conference systematically like the four pod system does. It would however make the eighth game a sort of playoff for the CCG. Also give the lower ranked teams a chance to win a sixth game every year and become “Bowl Eligible.” I think both are pretty cool and could command some more TV dollars.
What other downfalls do you see with this scenario? For instance, how to prevent a TEXAS vs Florida St or Oklahoma vs Notre Dame rematch in the CCG? Like if both #1s came in with a two game lead over the #2s in their conference; or a one game lead with a victory over the #2, then it would not matter if either #1 won or lost they would rematch in the CCG.
TEXAS - 41 USC - 38
Rose Bowl, January 4th, 2006, Pasadena, California
National Champions
Post Extras:
|
HornSwoggler
500+ posts
03/22/12 02:08 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
^^^^^^^
Travel planning issues for team and fans. What if some other BIG event is already scheduled at the home site.
Inability to build a gameplan as the season progresses to accommodate an unknown opponent.... more critical for high ranked teams.
Probably TV broadcast planning issues - last minute logistics.
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
03/22/12 04:05 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Speedway: I think HornSwoggler makes some good constructive criticisms of the "unknown game" scenario.
Beyond that, however, your proposal does not seem to make any provision for inter-divisional play at all. It's more like two different conferences where the best two teams will play at the end of the year, best I can tell.
And that's the danger of two divisions in bigger leagues: They tend to be unwieldy, impersonal leagues. That's exactly why I prefer a pod system for 16-team leagues -- to promote better league cohesion.
But everyone has his own opinion.
Post Extras:
|
Speedway
1000+ posts
03/22/12 08:37 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Yeah, you and HornSwoggler are right. Kind of defeats the purpose of having sixteen teams. Four pods is defintely the way to go. I was thinking the CCG was worth so much money to TV that extending that out a sort of playoff within the conference would be well received by TV, especially at the end of the season. Thanks for outlining the four pod system XOVER.
TEXAS - 41 USC - 38
Rose Bowl, January 4th, 2006, Pasadena, California
National Champions
Post Extras:
|
Dovey317
100+ posts
03/23/12 03:35 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
In reply to:
even if the ACC is breached, isn't VPI likely to stay with VA in the ACC unless the B1G comes for VA, allowing VPI to the SEC?
Gooooood Moooorning Vietnaaaaam!
Post Extras:
|
HornSwoggler
500+ posts
03/23/12 07:00 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
XOVER
I may have missed it but how are CCG participants determined in the pod format? Record, ranking, combination, 4 team playoff? I am assuming a CCG will be included.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
03/23/12 12:46 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I also like X's pod system, but for a somewhat different reason. The teams in the proposed expanded Big 12 are going to want some regular access to the two hottest recruiting beds, Texas and Florida. If there's not enough divisional crossover games (East teams don't play in Texas enough, west teams don't play in Florida enough) a big reason for the new teams to join up is being wasted.
Something else was touched on above...a big reason the old Big 12 blew up and could be raided was no real sense of ownership, membership, among member schools. The proposed new Big 12 needs EVERY member of the conference to feel like an important part of the conference. Regular games between teams from the divisions will be important in making every team feel a sense of ownership of the new Big 12. If this expansion happens, I don't want the new Big 12 to feel like just a conglomeration of teams with nothing in common. That's what the old Big 12 felt like.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
03/23/12 04:07 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
HornSwoggler: Sorry for the confusion. There are still two "divisions" in the league, but each "division" is comprised of 2 pods apiece. Also, the pods that comprise each "division" change every year as follows:
Year 1:
Pod 1 & Pod 2 = Division A
Pod 3 & Pod 4 = Division B
Year 2:
Pod 1 & Pod 3 = Division A
Pod 2 & Pod 4 = Division B
Year 3:
Pod 1 & Pod 4 = Division A
Pod 2 & Pod 3 = Division B
Year 4: Cycle repeats (reverse home-and-home)
At the end of each year, the winner of Division A plays the winner of Division B in a "Conference Championship Playoff Game".
Under current NCAA rules there can only be a 1-level playoff within a conference. If that rule changes, then you could have a 2-level playoff among pod winners, etc.
To me, annual changing divisions is a good potential feature of a pod league because it allows some of the less consistently great programs a better shot at the conference title when they do field a great team.
For better visualization, consider Speedway's league:
SW Pod 1 “Lone Star”: Texas, Texas Tech, Texas Christian, Baylor
NW Pod 2 “Plains”: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State
SE Pod 3 “Dixie”: Florida State, Miami, Clemson, Georgia Tech
NE Pod 4 “Yankee”: Notre Dame, West Virginia, Maryland, Iowa State
Post Extras:
|
Speedway
1000+ posts
03/23/12 05:09 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
XOVER,
By the way thanks for the effort telling us how the pods work. I have another question to ask.
Considering Notre Dame will not be joining a conference anytime soon, I suspect the Big 12 will move to fourteen teams for the time being. Leaving room for Notre Dame and a team they want to come with them.
Let’s say FSU, Miami, Clemson and Georgia Tech join the Big 12. How would the scheduling look for the fourteen team league.
West
TEXAS
Oklahoma
Oklahoma St
TCU
Texas Tech
Baylor
Iowa St
East
Florida St
Miami
Clemson
Georgia Tech
Kansas
Kansas St
West Virginia
Use these as crossover games every year
TEXAS vs Georgia Tech
Oklahoma vs Clemson
Oklahoma St vs Miami
TCU vs Florida St
Texas Tech vs Kansas St
Baylor vs Kansas
Iowa St vs West Virginia
TEXAS - 41 USC - 38
Rose Bowl, January 4th, 2006, Pasadena, California
National Champions
Post Extras:
|
HornSwoggler
500+ posts
03/23/12 05:31 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
OK, XOVER, I see now. When you mentioned earlier the changing of pods, I thought you meant changing which teams are in each pod as opposed to rearranging the pods (with permanent members) in the two divisions. I, too, like this feature to keep a fresh feeling every year with a different schedule. Also, it reduces the chance of a dominant division controlling the conference. It does seem to increase travel but not by much.
I still see the rival game as a difficult obstacle in that Texas gets OU every year while TCU might get KU every year (or WVU gets ISU), for example. Hard to justify forced unequal schedule difficulty.
I like simplicity and I am hardheaded.  I still prefer the 9/3 approach - each season you have 3 games in your own pod, 4 games from your division's other pod, 2 games from each of the two "other division" pods....& 3 OOC games. Divisional Pod pairing rotates on 3 year basis. In short, Texas would play each team in Pods 2, 3 & 4, two out of every three years.
An added thought, each team could (but it is not required to) schedule a "rival" game using an OOC game that would not impact conference standings. For example, during the one year in three that UT does not play OU as part of the conference schedule, they could play an OOC game against OU in order to keep that annual rivalry game intact. Just a thought!
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
03/23/12 05:33 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
In reply to:
How would the scheduling look for the fourteen team league. -- Speedway
14-team leagues are unbalanced. Two divisions are the default. They are scheduling nightmares. The SEC and ACC are going to hate them.
Of course, hopefully the Big 12 will help out the ACC by taking a few schools off their hands. 
Post Extras:
|
Rio Frio
1000+ posts
03/24/12 01:51 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Completely serious question here: Why would Clemson, Miami, & FL State ever join the Big 12?
Post Extras:
|
ViperHorn
2500+ posts
03/25/12 06:54 AM
|
|
In reply to:
Completely serious question here: Why would Clemson, Miami, & FL State ever join the Big 12?
Because they are football not basketball schools.
Remember - the ugliest girl in the class is still the ugliest girl in the class no matter how much money daddy has.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
03/27/12 08:01 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Florida State and Miami don't have a huge allegiance to the ACC...neither has been in that conference that long. The 'Noles, 'Canes, and Clemson are ALL football-first schools in a basketball-first conference, where the power resides along Tobacco Road. There's the thought at Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and to a degree, Georgia Tech that their football programs are being held back by ACC membership and other factors.
Now, the main reason those programs will seriously look at moving to the Big 12...MONEY. The Big 12 tier one and two contracts are better than the ACC's, and about to get a lot better. The Big 12 allows teams to keep their tier three rights, which the ACC doesn't...that's a whole 'nother income stream. Florida State's athletic program is operating in the red, and the programs at the other schools aren't that robust. Money talks, and you know what walks.
One other consideration...competition breeds excellence. If those programs make the jump to the Big 12, they're moving into a conference that includes UT, OU, OSU, West Virginia, TCU, perhaps even Notre Dame at some point, namely, solid football programs. The ACC just doesn't offer that level of competition to football-first schools.
I'd say all of the above are solid reasons why the ACC schools are interested in jumping to the Big 12...and that interest is more than just an internet rumor. Check out the fan boards of those schools.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
agssuk
500+ posts
03/28/12 06:23 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I nominate coolhorn to get the ball rolling on this. I expect to have this task completed NLT 07-01-2012.
All kidding aside, I would love for this to happen. The sooner the better. No pun intended.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
03/28/12 07:27 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
The funny thing is, I'm no insider. I have no "assets", no "big cigars", and I don't talk to coaches, players, or administrators at UT. I just pay attention to various things written in various places, and in some cases, things that aren't being denied. Bob Dylan said "You don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows."
The Big 12 can't afford, longterm, to sit at ten teams. The teams being mentioned for expansion, especially the ACC teams and potentially Notre Dame, are way too attractive to ignore. I know some are questioning how attractive Clemson is, but trust me, they are NOT aggy redux. They're also the likely first domino to fall after the Big 12 picks a new commissioner.
The only question is which school will be chosen as the complimentary 14th team when expansion happens. Even that won't be a question if Georgia Tech comes over with the other three. If not, I'm inclined to believe Louisville gets the offer.
I think all of this starts to happen before the end of the year, and maybe before the end of the summer if the Big 12 picks the right commissioner. In any event, I'm a lot more optimistic than I was that the Big 12 will be one of the big four conferences left standing after realignment is done.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Edited by coolhorn (03/28/12 07:29 AM)
Post Extras:
|
agssuk
500+ posts
03/28/12 03:27 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I'm not crazy 'bout Louisville. The others would be great. I wouldnt jump off a bridge if Louisville came in, as long as FSU came with them. TEXAS vs. FSU!!!! Gets the blood circulating dont it.. 
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
03/29/12 11:57 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I don't think anybody gets the warm fuzzies over the 'Ville, but they do bring a significant TV market, they'd make a great traveling partner for West Virginia, they're in the same time zone as the ACC schools, and they'd give the Big 12 even more of a presence in SEC country, with close access to B1G country as well. They also contribute a quality basketball program and an improving football product.
I've seen questions about how many posteriors they put in seats for football, but I can't help but think they'd attract better crowds if they're in a better conference. The Big 12 as it is now is a massive improvement over the Big (L)east.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
agssuk
500+ posts
03/29/12 12:45 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
^^^
Agree!!
Post Extras:
|
ViperHorn
2500+ posts
03/29/12 04:08 PM
|
|
In reply to:
but they do bring a significant TV market
50th just behind Austin for those who care.
Remember - the ugliest girl in the class is still the ugliest girl in the class no matter how much money daddy has.
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
03/29/12 05:34 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
If we could merge the ACC trio (Florida State, Miami, and Clemson), you would then need to give thought to ND in the future.
ND would prefer a prospective conference that contains one or more members located in the northeastern corridor, which spans from Washington DC through New York City to Boston. ND especially loves cultivating a presence in NYC for Olympic sports recruiting reasons.
If you want to set yourself up for tremendous media exposure, plus set yourself up for possibly attracting ND, you would try to add Maryland, Rutgers, or Boston College. The most desirable at #14 would be Maryland, IMO, for various reasons.
No, none of these northeastern schools are "sports powerhouses", that's for sure. But if you can add the ACC trio, you don't need another sports powerhouse. You suddenly have the luxury to consider TV viewers, both now and going into the long-term future.
Louisville gives you a basketball powerhouse, potentially above-average football, and a very small DMA compared to the DMA of Maryland, Rutgers, or Boston College. Plus, those 3 schools do entice ND, because of location, while Louisville simply does not.
Louisville may well become a part of the Big 12 someday. But you have to first wait and see what the ACC trio will do before you even consider adding Louisville. Louisville isn't going anywhere. There is no hurry on Louisville.
And if the ACC trio does come, I think the smart play is the "Northeastern Option" and not the "SEC Challenge Option", both in terms of lucre and in terms of baiting the Domers.
coolhorn and I disagree on this point.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
03/29/12 08:30 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I actually like Maryland, Georgia Tech, or Boston College as options for the 14th Big 12 member better than Louisville. Rutgers does little or nothing for me. I'm not pushing for Louisville...I just don't know how much interest Georgia Tech, Boston College, or Maryland have for moving to the Big 12. I actually think Pitt might be a good compromise choice for the 14th team...I just wonder if they'd be interested in another move after so recently being accepted into the ACC. I do agree with X that the alignment of Clemson, Florida State, and Miami have to happen first...I just think the Big 12 is going to have to have a fourth team ready when the big three are. I'm not sure which of the candidates will be that 14th team.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
03/30/12 02:57 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
coolhorn: We are a lot closer on the Louisville issue than I realized.
You like Maryland, Georgia Tech, and Boston College at #14 over Louisville. I like Maryland, Georgia Tech, and Rutgers at #14 over Louisville (if I could choose). I also agree that Pittsburgh could sneak in somewhere.
I really like the Northeastern Option. If Miami didn't want to come (and I don't think GT will), I would love to see: Florida State, Clemson, Maryland, Rutgers, and then, later, Notre Dame and Boston College.
Run this baby along the entire gamut of the northeastern corridor. Plant that Big 12 flag up the coast from Washington DC to Baltimore to Philadelphia to New York City to Boston.
Did you see those quotes from Oliver Luck on expansion today?: In reply to:
Expansion continues to be the number one topic in college sports. Numerous teams have already changed conferences and many more are scheduled to move in the near future. It does not yet appear that the great conference realignment is over. West Virginia may not be the last team to join the Big 12.
"There has been a lot of discussion about expansion," Luck stated. "I won't divulge the contents of those talks. But, I do think there is a high level of discussion amongst the various schools. There is discussion and we will see how it all plays out. I think there is a high level of interest in the part of the conference to look around and see what the other conferences are doing. It is easy to count the schools in the Pac-12 and the Big Ten, which is 12, and the SEC and ACC with 14. That is something that is front and center in the minds of Big 12 folks."
West Virginia's nearest Big 12 neighbor is Iowa State, which is more than 800 miles away. WVU would certainly be open to adding a school or two much closer to Morgantown.
"There are a lot of different objectives you want to accomplish if expansion is a way to go," Luck said. "Certainly from our perspective, one would be having a neighbor that is not as far away as our nearest Big 12 opponent right now. Having a more geographic neighbor is important and having the other nine schools in the Big 12 recognize that. They certainly realize the importance of having Oklahoma and Oklahoma State right next door. The two Kansas schools are in close proximity. I think that is something that would be on the table if we get to that point."
The Big 12 was previously viewed as unstable. Oklahoma and Texas were considering changing conferences. The Big 12 lost Missouri and Texas A&M to the SEC and promptly responded by adding TCU and West Virginia. The conference looked to become even more stable by dealing with its television rights.
"The discussions on the TV side are going toward the possibility of doing a 13-year granting of rights," Luck said. "They have done a six-year deal, so that would be adding seven more years to it. For those who don't understand what a granting of right is, it simply means that you are turning over your most valuable asset, your television rights, to the conference. That is the biggest way to assure security and stability."
I sure would like to see Oliver Luck named Big 12 Commissioner. If not Luck, then Jack Swarbrick.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
03/30/12 07:53 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Luck is seriously being considered for Big 12 commissioner. He has ties to Texas and the southwest, and is considered an up and comer in college football circles. It wouldn't surprise me at all if he's chosen this summer.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
agssuk
500+ posts
04/05/12 11:02 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Why wait?? Call an emergency meeting and get this settled now. Then, full speed ahead.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
04/07/12 03:23 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I really don't want the conference to move too quickly on a new commissioner, unless the leading candidate is an obvious slam dunk.
This is an incredibly important hire. The conference is in infinitely better shape now than it was just a few months ago. However, its' survival still isn't assured. The Big XII MUST expand, and MUST bring in the right teams in expanding. A ten team conference with no championship game will NOT hold up long term against the PAC, B1G, and SEC.
The three ACC teams currently interested in the Big XII would represent a significant upgrade, especially if one more attractive team can be found to add to the mix. It also has to be kept in mind that conference moves must also be made with an eye toward ultimately attracting Notre Dame. What we're talking about is a pretty delicate balancing act.
The new commissioner HAS to be pro-expansion, needs significant media savvy, must be expert at dealing in smoke-filled rooms, and must convince ALL current members of the conference to play nice with each other for the long term good of the conference. The new commissioner's gonna have to have the skills to hit the ground running with all of these issues, and be able to address current issues while planning for the future. Sounds like quite a lot on his, or her plate, doesn't it? It will be imperative for the new commissioner to have the unqualified support of all ten current conference members.
The Big XII COULD become a preeminent athletic conference, or an afterthought still. I happen to think the person who heads the conference going forward as commissioner is going to strongly determine which way the Big XII goes. I don't really want that person being hired without being properly vetted, and guaranteed to be the best possible commissioner candidate out there. The decision is just too important.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
TheContractor
500+ posts
05/08/12 07:48 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Xover, this is one of the best summaries I have read. Thanks and great job!!
Coolhorn, you make some great points!!
What do you think of the new big 12 commish?
Is this a correct assumption as of what we know right now?
A)new Bcs deal that will allow ND to get special circumstances and if so ND will remain Independent(in football at least and might join a conference for other sports) and then allow Fsu/Clemson to leave Acc.
1)for the Big 12.
2)Sec could say well if Acc is breaking down why dont we just take Fsu and assuming the next logical choice would be VT(but you can place a couple if other Acc teams as #2).
B)new Bcs deal that doesnt give ND a special clause and forces ND to join a conference. ND could choose btw the 2 most likely destinations, Acc and Big 12.
1)if ND chooses Big 12, then many other programs will want to come to Big 12 to make it 12, 14 or 16 teams.
2)If ND chooses Acc, they become stable and Fsu/Clemson dont leave and Big 12 stays at 10 teams. I dont see Lousiville + 1 other team likely unless its a big program.
Is this a fair assumption? If so, I don't really like either of the #2 options.
Personally I think the teams will come from the east or Byu will be out, Louisville is still an option. Every conf has team that usually wont make bowl games and arnt very good. But I agree, there are better fish out there.
I do love the idea of 16 team league with 4 teams per pod.
Can/would VT split from Virgina? They are a football school in a basketball conf but ties like Ou and Ok st might prevent the split.
With the pitt, Louisville and Maryland discussion. I like Maryland bc of Tv sets (but it must be written in the contract that they can not wear those horrible uniforms) and then Pitt(great for Wvu and ND).
If I could just choose, It would clearly be GT. Great Sec city and academics(not that I ever see academics mattering) and also a great and easy flight to Atl for all fans to travel to.
Speedway’s 4 pods are a dream!
Texas Texas Tech TCU Baylor
Oklahoma Oklahoma St Kansas Kansas St
Florida St Miami Clemson Georgia Tech
Notre Dame West Virginia Maryland Iowa St
You cant have Tx and Ou in the same pod bc it would make the other pod(from big 12) horribly weak and u are screwing one of the 3 other Texas teams.
Xover, great layout of a 16 team league. Everyone wins in that situation and all schools will get to go to the state of Texas very other year so it’s a win for them. And schools will get to go to the state of Florida frequently also.
Thanks!
HOOKEM, GOD BLESS, JAI HIND
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
05/09/12 08:13 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I think the Big XII expands, but in steps.
If FSU and Clemson are doable, and I think they are, they will be the first two new additions.
Everything done in Big XII expansion will be done with one eye on Notre Dame, and what it will take to make the Big XII their most attractive option. The Big XII also really needs to find one or two traveling partners for West Virginia. Louisville's an option, but not necessarily the best one. I think Pitt may come into play here, even though they've just jumped to the ACC. Georgia Tech's very attractive, IF they would have any interest in the Big XII. Miami is only attractive as a traveling partner to Fla. State. BYU has a big following, but also still has that ban on playing on Sunday. They also have the misfortune of being a western team. I think the Big XII is looking much more eastward. Maryland might bring east coast tv sets, but otherwise, doesn't do much for me.
Notre Dame? A lot depends on what replaces the BCS, and how Notre Dame fits in the equation. A lot also depends on how their sweetheart deal with NBC is handled. The two questions concerning the Irish...will they join a conference in football? If so, which conference offers them the best deal? One of Bowlsby's big jobs is to make sure the Big XII is the right answer to that second question.
There's still too many moving parts to say anything definitively about Big XII expansion. Bowlsby hasn't even moved into his new Dallas office yet. I can say it's nice that the Big XII is perhaps looking to get bigger. It was less than a year ago that the conference was looking more like road kill. I think Chuck Neinas deserves props for that change. 
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
horn4jc
1000+ posts
05/09/12 05:21 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I think this will be great for the conference to have a couple of good football schools. WVU, FSU, and Clemson in one division and OSU, OU, and Texas in another would make for great conference championship games.
Also, Big XII is much more football school friendly than the ACC.
You would also see match ups that pit players from 2 of the most talent rich states face off against each other. Make it happen!
Post Extras:
|
TheContractor
500+ posts
05/09/12 06:17 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
The new Acc deal came out today and $17 million/team, bit more than the $15mill but not much.
I feel the key to the break up of Acc is what side is Espn on, are they pro or against it.
I feel the Sec will do what it can to stop the Big 12 influx to Florida.
I feel if Fsu/Clemson come Miami will probably come along. I didnt like it at first but i am more ok with 2 teams from the state of Florida. teams from the other side of the conference get to go to the state twice as often. Also, if Miami comes they can be the partner with Fsu and Wvu can have Clemson. If it ever goes to 16 teams, that can be a pod.
HOOKEM, GOD BLESS, JAI HIND
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
05/09/12 06:47 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
It's way too soon to be discussing alignment of a proposed expanded Big XII. That being said, I kinda doubt the conference will ever go to pods. If six new teams eventually are brought in, I think there will be east and west divisions.
I don't disagree that Miami has recent history of success on their side, and a rising new coach in Al Golden. However, the 'Canes aren't a terrific draw in their hometown, and don't usually travel well. A change of scenery might change those things, but I think their best chance is to come in as a partner with FSU.
Clemson's not next door to West Virginia, but closer than any Big XII team right now. Louisville doesn't excite me, except for their basketball program, but Pitt would be a great traveling partner with West Virginia. They're solid in both football and basketball, and Pitt's tv market would definitely be a nice add for the Big XII. Pitt would also be an attractive potential conference member for Notre Dame.
All of this stuff is speculation right now, but based on what I'm seeing with the new ACC tv contract, it's not gonna sway FSU and Clemson from seriously looking into a jump to the Big XII. I wouldn't be surprised to see Georgia Tech also start looking into a move.
The ACC is a basketball-first conference, and that isn't gonna change. It doesn't set well with the football-first schools over there. The ACC's best long-term bet might be to work out some kind of merger with what's left of the Big East, since that's also primarily a basketball conference. In any event, I think the next several months are going to be very interesting around here.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
Santafe
1000+ posts
05/09/12 06:58 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I just don't see how the Big 12 can avoid making additional expansion moves this year. All the other major conferences now have a conference championship in football. I just can't see the Big 12 finishing the 2013 season without having a conference championship game. (No Big 12 member can make a valid argument for not having a football championship game when we all know money is the driver.)
I also think the Big 12 is headed toward at least a 14-team league, with all the new members coming from the east. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to see the Big 12 is first looking at the ACC for new members.
Let's extend invitations to Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Virginia Tech, and Maryland and see what happens. That's certainly a bombshell move, but nothing surprises me anymore.
Post Extras:
|
TheContractor
500+ posts
05/09/12 11:06 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: Santafe] |
| |
Big 12 does need to expand but not just any 2 or 4 or 6 teams. No Louisville now, maybe later and no Cincinnati.
HOOKEM, GOD BLESS, JAI HIND
Post Extras:
|
Santafe
1000+ posts
05/10/12 07:50 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Yes, I would hope Louisville is our last option.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
05/11/12 05:20 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Louisville is gonna be there for the taking down the road, IF the Big XII wants to go that route.
IF/WHEN the Big XII decides to get bigger, I'd expect Florida State and Clemson to get the first two offers. Yeah, I know the FSU AD today said the 'Noles are committed to the ACC. That's what you say when the time isn't right to get things out in public. Remember how committed Nebraska was to the Big XII, until they weren't? Mizzou last summer? Actually, agricultural is the only conference jumper I remember who made their wishes known ahead of time, and it made them look like imbeciles when the SEC didn't immediately offer 'em.
I think the Big XII could kick the tires on Georgia Tech and Pitt, and even Miami, before considering Louisville. BYU? I don't think that's happening.
Point of fact...I doubt there will be any kind of official word from Bob Bowlsby on expansion until late summer or early fall, at the earliest.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
jdelatorre
500+ posts
05/12/12 07:31 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Coolhorn great point about the AD's statements. I agree that rathervthan runbto louisville make sure that an attmpt is made to get FSU, Clemson, Miami, GT and Pitt. That combination offers geogrpahy with a SE pod a NE pod (sorry isu), rivalries (WV-Pitt, FSU-U, FSU-Clemson) TV match-ups ( Texas-FSU, Miami-ou), significant markets (miami, atl, pitt) and academics. Plus seems like that group would appeal to ND. Once the remining ACC tems grabbed Louisville, UConn and Rutgers +\- two other teams ND would need a new home. At the very least for non-fb.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
05/12/12 09:53 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I am suitably impressed with the hiring of Bob Bowlsby as the Big XII's new commissioner. He's a slam dunk, based on his performances as AD at Iowa and Stanford, and he has the media and marketing savvy I hoped the new commissioner would have.
My impression of Bowlsby is that he's a consensus-builder, and I think he favors expansion. Combine those two things, and I think he'll bring the conference together behind a thoughtful plan to get bigger.
It's NOT my impression of Bowlsby that he would settle on a school JUST for the sake of expansion. I think when the time is right, there will be discussions through back channels, and I wouldn't be surprised to see a couple of offers made, and accepted, by schools that right now are claiming to be happy where they're at.
I mentioned in a post on another site that timing is everything in realignment, and right now is NOT the right time for anyone in the Big XII front office to publicly talk about the subject. I would expect the conference to set a timetable of late summer to early fall to begin the first round of realignment moves. Bowlsby strikes me as someone who'll play his cards close to the vest until then.
The bottom line to this? I think the Big XII is in exactly the right hands to become a destination conference...make that THE destination conference, for realignment.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
jdelatorre
500+ posts
05/12/12 01:54 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
...and according to the Chairman of the FSU BOT the big xii is apparently looking more and more like a possible destination for the Seminoles.
what he said
Post Extras:
|
HornSwoggler
500+ posts
05/12/12 08:01 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I wonder if any of the other ACC football strongholds feel the same as the FSU Trustee. I hope so. I'd offer invitations to FSU, GT, Clemson and ACC-to-be Pitt right now! This would add 4 good football states to the B12 footprint and provide some regional opponents.
Then I would contact ND and see who they would like the B12 to invite in a package deal. Be it Maryland, Rutgers, BC, a B1G team, Navy, whoever.... And let ND know this is a last chance offer. When ND sees the ACC losing major teams, it will realize that they need to join the Big 12 or B1G.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
05/12/12 10:29 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I like the cut of your jib on this Big XII expansion business Swoggler...here's hoping folks in the Big XII office are thinking along the same lines.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
TheContractor
500+ posts
05/12/12 11:23 PM
|
|
I like and agree with what you are saying but 1) we cant offer to early and give Acc/Sec a chance to give them more options. We need to let the Acc meeting finish next week and also wait for the BCS to finalize the +1 or whatever format they decide to screw up this time.
2)i think 3/4 teams invited (when and hopefully if the time comes) will be Fsu/Clemson/Miami. I think getting to travel into the state of Florida twice the number of times will be big. I would hope the 4th would be GT but there could be a few options. I could see Pitt later on IF ND decides to join.
3)ND will not come to a conference unless it is forced to by the BCS format. If ND get special treatment as the always have, the best you can hope for is all sports other than football come to Big 12 and football agrees to play many Big 12 teams every year.
Patience, lets get ourselves ready to pitch the grand idea and make sure its a deal that those teams cant say no to!!
HOOKEM, GOD BLESS, JAI HIND
Post Extras:
|
HornSwoggler
500+ posts
05/13/12 06:40 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Patience? What is this patience thing you speak of?
Ok, we can wait until the ACC meeting is over but I would put a bug in some ears prior to it. Let whoever your ACC targets are know that a package offer is available. Maybe work out a 6 team deal including ND and put it on the table.
I don't feel that the B12 can outbid the SEC for individual teams at this time (say FSU or Clemson) but if a package deal is offered, the ACC defectors may go for it to essentially form their own division along with WV and ISU.
That would be a helluva a conference:
UT, OU, OSU, TT, BAY, KU, KSU, TCU
ISU, WV, FSU, CLEM, GT, ND, PITT, (MARYLAND, BC, RUTGERS OR MIAMI)
Note: I put Miami in there to appease some of y'all. It is not one of my favored choices.
Post Extras:
|
TheContractor
500+ posts
05/13/12 08:16 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
with or without Miami, that is the ideal Big 12 future i hope Bowlsby is aiming for. That conf would get Sec $ and "benefits"
and oh yeah bugs should have already gone out!
HOOKEM, GOD BLESS, JAI HIND
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
05/14/12 08:28 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I'm thinking a new Big XII east division that looks something like this would be great:
FSU
West Virginia
Clemson
KU
KSU
Pitt
One of Georgia Tech, Miami, Louisville (In that order)
From my lips to God's ear: The Irish
Hey, a man can dream!
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
TheContractor
500+ posts
05/14/12 08:41 AM
|
|
That means in the west you have:
Texas
Baylor
Tcu
TT
Ou
Ok St
Iowa St.
only 7 teams.
Kansas and KSt need to be in west and move Iowa St to other side.
otherwise, dream scenario.
HOOKEM, GOD BLESS, JAI HIND
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
05/14/12 11:32 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I should never do anything involving math that early in the morning. 
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
Santafe
1000+ posts
05/14/12 07:32 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
If the Big 12 wants to expand beyond ten teams for the 2013 season, they need to act fast if they are interested in the ACC. Any team exiting the ACC for the 2013 season must give the conference notice by August 15, 2012.
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
05/15/12 06:39 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Yea, that August 15 date is part of the ACC By-laws.
I tell ya, guys, I'm feeling pretty good about FSU right now. If FSU comes, then Clemson comes as well, IMO.
Question is: Is any other ACC ready to go in 2012? Possibly not. But then the ACC is still reeling from Haggard's comments from last Saturday.
Supposedly both FSU and Clemson have asked the ACC for the exact protocol to withdraw from the ACC.
Supposedly Pittsburgh has initiated contact with informal Big 12 representatives, and Georgia Tech has reinitiated contact with informal Big 12 representatives (which they had long ago broken off).
Supposedly Louisville is completely out of consideration for spots 11 though 14.
While August 15 is the drop-dead date for 2013 play, I think things may come to a head with FSU and Clemson in the next 2 to 6 weeks, possibly as early as the Big 12 Conference Meeting later this May, but more likely after the BCS playoff is finalized.
We'll see.
Post Extras:
|
TheContractor
500+ posts
05/15/12 07:51 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Wow, X! That’s a lot of good and I hope accurate info.
I too think that Fsu is the key. IF they decide to come, we play dominos.
I am glad Louisville is a last option or not an option.
Thanks for that!
HOOKEM, GOD BLESS, JAI HIND
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
05/15/12 09:46 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I tend to agree with X...I think FSU, Clemson, and Georgia Tech get in the Big XII IF they want to make the move, and I'll hedge a little on 14 and say its' either Pitt or Louisville. Pitt may get the first shot, with the 'Ville the fallback choice. I see the 'Ville replacing one of the others in the ACC, which becomes even more a basketball-first conference...if it stays around.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
jdelatorre
500+ posts
05/15/12 10:12 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
FSU, GTech, Clemson and Pitt would be great academic and geographic adds that would certainly boost contract dollars and leave two spots for Miami, VTech, Louisville or... ND. Despite Miami's impending NCAA incarceration, they would add to the football prestige, academics and match up great with FSU, OU, ND. Plus we would have at least several years to shock the U nation.
Post Extras:
|
TheContractor
500+ posts
05/15/12 10:14 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
A very informative article by one of the guys who have been on top of it for a few weeks. Brian knew his stuff last summer and appears to know a crap load about it now too.
The Link
HOOKEM, GOD BLESS, JAI HIND
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
05/15/12 10:58 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I think it was Brian Ethridge from whom the Pitt information is attributable.
The most interesting part of his latest article is that he says 10 schools are talking to the Big 12.
He also says various schools have conducted market research studies with respect to their Tier 3 television value.
The list goes Notre Dame first, followed by Florida State, Clemson, Georgia Tech, and Virginia Tech, with the other schools' rights, such as Louisville, BYU, Pitt, etc., being valued in the $4 million range. We don't know the values of the top 5.
One last thing: Ethridge claims Florida State and Clemson coaches have been told a possible move to the Big 12 was in progress so to be ready in recruiting.
Ethridge appears to have some legitimate sources, best I can tell.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
05/16/12 08:59 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
That is some very interesting stuff if he knows what he's talking about, and I'd take it you guys trust what he's saying. The part I like best is the teams that are actively looking at what their third tier rights would bring...that's an impressive set of schools. I seriously hope he's right about the instructions given to the FSU and Clemson coaches. I could see that move being made before the end of the summer. I've seen some tweets that Dodds is NOT averse to conference expansion if that's what the rest of the conference wants...and as long as the right schools are added. Oh, and yes, FSU and Clemson would both be considered "right" schools.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
Santafe
1000+ posts
05/16/12 06:31 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
According to Ethridge: "With 14 teams, expected payouts would be approximately $28 million per school, with another $2 million or so per team coming from a conference championship game. And remember, the schools also have their tier 3 rights - unlike the ACC. Another detail that came to light was that the new ACC contract was backloaded - with members not receiving the $17 million until 2021. The Big 12 deal had a greater rate of acceleration, with schools receiving the $20 million by 2015 - when the rumored ESPN contract would go into effect."
If true, how the hell can cash-starved Florida State say "no" to joining the Big 12 (especially when you add the projected income from Tier 3 rights)?
If FSU and Clemson agree to join within 4-6 weeks, I wouldn't be surprised to see two other ACC football-first universities jump ship as well. If we can get FSU and Clemson to jump ship quickly, one would think there would be heavy pressure for other football-first ACC members to join FSU and Clemson before the August 15, 2012 deadline.
Derrick Brooks Says Big 12 Has Approached Florida State
Edited by Santafe (05/16/12 06:48 PM)
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
05/16/12 07:04 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Supposedly Georgia Tech sent out informal feelers to the B1G, but the B1G pushed GT away, due to distance. Supposedly GT is now much more interested in the Big 12, realizing the good ship ACC is taking on water. Others say GT is as cold as ever toward the Big 12.
The schools to watch for the Big 12 may be Florida State, Clemson, Georgia Tech, and Pittsburgh.
Supposedly FSU has told Big 12 reps that FSU intends to apply for membership. Clemson's Big 12 application is supposed to be in Addison already (though I personally doubt this).
Swofford is in a corner and has to swing for the fence. So Swofford is going to back the "Conference Winners Only" option for the +1 in the June BCS meeting to try to force Notre Dame to choose a conference, which Swofford hopes is the ACC.
You've also got this quote today, attributable to Jim Delany: "Tectonic plates are still hot in college football." Meaning the B1G — professing happiness at 12 — is nonetheless monitoring other leagues.
Finally, information may become sparse for awhile because Swofford is suggesting that the ACC might file a lawsuit against the Big 12. It would be frivolous, but league thinking is to cool it for awhile, like Slive did last year for the SEC.
coolhorn: Ethridge's information fits with various other sources, so yea, I personally think the guy's legit.
Santa Fe: FSU won't be able to refuse the Big 12. No way. FSU will be doing the tomahawk chop in DKR-Mem in the near future. In fact, Jimbo Fisher is supposed to be strong for FSU to the Big 12.
Post Extras:
|
TheContractor
500+ posts
05/16/12 08:52 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Xover, i hear the same thing and i think we might have heard it from the same source.
GT might be preferred by Big 12 as #12 bc of Atl market and Academics. Doesnt mean a No to Clemson, but you need # 14. And like X said, Pitt might be that dance partner bc academics and bc of rival of ND.
The key is still Fsu.
HOOKEM, GOD BLESS, JAI HIND
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
05/16/12 09:55 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Just to jump into the speculation...both Clemson and G-Tech have played their cards close to the vest, and I'm not sure anybody knows for sure their intent concerning realignment.
However, if as several of us have heard, Clemson really is close to making the jump, while G-Tech apparently hasn't given any feedback, I don't think it would be smart of the Big XII to play the waiting game with a quality program like Clemson. My sense of things says you take Clemson, and work on G-Tech down the road a bit, Atlanta market or not.
I still feel like the Big XII will expand, to twelve teams this year, and take some time before seriously considering thirteen and fourteen, just to see how other moves shake out. I really don't think the SEC's gonna sit forever at fourteen teams, and the B1G might be getting a little nervous about some potential ACC target schools on the north side of that conference. I do NOT expect the SEC to suddenly decide to add FSU...I can't think of anything that would whiz off Florida, 'Bama, Auburn, and Georgia more than giving the 'Noles an SEC leg up in their prime recruiting area, and I'm pretty sure Mike Slive doesn't want to start any spit fights in the SEC.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
ViperHorn
2500+ posts
05/17/12 05:57 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
The ACC's football value was shown during the network negotiations. The result - not on the same level as the Big 12 and SEC. That places the "football" schools on notice that to remain in the ACC places them at a financial disadvantage to the non-ACC schools that they have to recruit against.
FSU and Miami are non-starters for the SEC as Florida will blackball them. Same for Clemson with South Carolina being the reason. GT would struggle in either the SEC or Big 12, but hey, Missouri struggled in the Big 12 and will be a doormat in the SEC with aggy.
Personally I feel FSU, Miami and Clemson would be more trouble than they are worth, but if the Big 12 truly has to expand they will be better than more Big East castoffs. Also, until the college football lords put their foot down and tell the Domers to either get in a conference for football or be out of any chance at the NC, the Domers are going to stay independent.
Remember - the ugliest girl in the class is still the ugliest girl in the class no matter how much money daddy has.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
05/17/12 06:17 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I agree on the Notre Dame point...they might explore some possibilities, and in fact, would be silly not to. However, until it's made clear that there's not gonna be a Notre Dame exception this time around, they will stay independent. If they do join a conference, no matter which one it is, their fans are gonna scream bloody murder and Jack Swarbrick knows that.
Miami is out of consideration. They're gonna downscale their athletics somewhat. The school Prez would like to never hear the terms "The U" or "Thug U" again. They're allegedly gonna concentrate on their academics.
I see zero problems with FSU or Clemson if they join the Big XII. Both are football first schools, and I would think they would relish the extra money they're making and consider themselves, like West Virginia does now, among peers. I think both will be happy campers in the Big XII.
I am curious who teams thirteen and fourteen will be. A lot of people think Georgia Tech, but they sure are staying quiet about this. I hear Louisville is all but a non-starter now, and that Pitt is becoming a good bet to be team number fourteen.
I think if the conference can add FSU, Clemson, G-Tech, and Pitt to what we already have, it will be a pretty salty conference that can hold its' own against anybody, including the sainted SEC.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
H-D Rider
2500+ posts
05/17/12 11:28 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Very interesting...
Take a listen to this... obviously what this guy says has to be taken with a grain of salt, but... most of the things that this guys says makes really good sense regarding the Big 12, FSU, Clemson, G-Tech... AND ND!
PodCast Interview...
27-25... SEC, SEC, SEC!
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
05/18/12 06:50 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I've been following the Dude's blog for a pretty good while, and I can say that he's right a lot more than he's not. He's plugged in to West Virginia somehow, and he's getting some good info from whoever his sources are. I don't completely buy into anything I see or hear on the internet, but this guy's percentage of being right is way up there.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
Santafe
1000+ posts
05/18/12 11:34 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I'd be shocked if the Big 12 doesn't announce two new members this year for the 2013 season. The big question is: will there be huge pressure to jump to fourteen for next season? If you supposedly have multiple schools interested in joining the Big 12, do you risk adding as many quality teams as you can now, or do you risk waiting and possibly lose them later once the stampede to super conferences mushrooms?
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
05/18/12 12:46 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I think if G-Tech and Pitt go all in on jumping to the Big XII, the conference goes to fourteen this year. If only three viable teams are out there this year, I think the conference goes to twelve, has a heart-to-heart with number thirteen telling them we want them, and we wait a year to see what plays out before adding two more. Just my thoughts, even if I don't have any assets or big cigars.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
TexasTower
1000+ posts
05/18/12 03:43 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Notre Dame is the driving force behind how many we take this year. If they make their decision on conference affiliation we very well could be at 16 next year.
I am assuming with the new Big XII/SEC bowl game that VaTech and one other ACC school are going to be scooped by the SEC and the SEC will be at 16 soon.
A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. - Einstein
Algebra Help
College Algebra
Post Extras:
|
Santafe
1000+ posts
05/18/12 03:51 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Yeah, I guess it would be hard to turn down Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, and Pittsburgh as a group (adding two more AAU members to the Big 12 would be a bonus).
Post Extras:
|
TexasTower
1000+ posts
05/18/12 04:33 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
My dream would be FSU, GT, ND, and Pitt to get to 14, with Clemson and Miami if we go 16.
I think the SEC scoops VT and UNC when the dust settles.
A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. - Einstein
Algebra Help
College Algebra
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
05/18/12 06:28 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
The ACC just became more isolated. Even Tarheel fans are concerned.
The announcement today that the Big 12 and SEC will play a "Championship Game" is further evidence of the identity of the four big conferences and the ACC isn't one of them.
The interesting thing is the the CG will be wholly owned by the Big 12 and SEC. Visions of the future.
Post Extras:
|
Santafe
1000+ posts
05/18/12 06:35 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
The announcement that the Big 12 and SEC Champs will play in a bowl game beginning in 2014 makes the Big 12 an even more lucrative destination for disgruntled football-first ACC members. (Can you imagine what the initial reaction was at the ACC headquarters when this news broke?)
Post Extras:
|
TexasTower
1000+ posts
05/19/12 11:00 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
It is very interesting too the timing of this announcement- directly after the ACC conference meetinng ended.
A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. - Einstein
Algebra Help
College Algebra
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
05/20/12 12:02 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Some say there's an unwritten agreement in this Big 12 / SEC arrangement, and that is that the Big 12 will back off trying to add Virginia Tech and one other school (widely believed to be NCSU).
Notre Dame talk is also heating up. Might the Domers join a conference? More specifically, might the Domers join the Big 12?
If ND did join the Big 12, then Big 12 thinking with respect to who to add (other than FSU, which is a shoo-in) could recalibrate.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
05/20/12 01:04 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
X...I think the Domers get to pick one traveling partner if they decide to join the Big XII. My best guess is that partner would be Pitt or B.C.
I agree that FSU is a take, no matter what, and I think Clemson and Georgia Tech, if they want to come, are too. That makes a potential five new members, leaving one more, and a ton of possibilities out there. Miami, I think, has taken themselves out of the running, and I'm not sure Louisville is even still on the list. More and more, because of TV markets and location, I'm thinking the Big XII looks at Maryland, if they don't go B1G, or UNC if they can be separated from Duke.
I'm interested in your thoughts X. Oh, by the way, I'm pretty much conceding Va Tech and NC State to the SEC and possibly Virginia to the B1G if Delaney gets serious about expanding his conference. Like I mentioned too, I think Maryland's in play for the B1G.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
05/20/12 01:23 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
The so-called "traveling partners" most associated with Notre Dame, according to my observations, are Pitt and BC. So we agree on this, coolhorn.
I guess I can understand Pitt as they are AAU, and ND has played them somewhere around 67 times. I understand BC due to religious heritage and location at the very northern end of the northeastern corridor.
But goodness gracious, what a couple of stinkers!
If the ND rumors are serious, I sure hope we can re-direct the Domers onto Georgia Tech, or Virginia, or Maryland. Even Rutgers is better than Pitt or BC, in my book.
We know that ND's non-football recruiting is heavily centered in the northeastern corridor. That would mean BC, Rutgers or Maryland. Possibly Virginia might be forced into that category as the Cavaliers have inroads into the DC market?
But the football schools and football recruits are in the south.
ND is a very welcome complication, however, and if ND wants either Pitt or BC, then welcome to the Big 12.
But what I'd try to sell to ND would be the following schools:
11. Notre Dame
12. Florida State
13. Georgia Tech
14. Clemson or Virginia
Then stop, or, if you go to 16, then focus on:
15. Virginia or North Carolina
16. North Carolina or Miami or Maryland
Miami would be up to ND, and then only if Shalala committed the Hurricane to remaining in big-time football.
My thought is that ND might entice schools like VA and NC into joining the Big 12 where without ND they would not consider the Big 12.
Personally, I prefer VA over VPI for the long-haul anyway, but mine is certainly the minority opinion. ND would probably love VA though.
Give me a lineup of Notre Dame, Florida State, North Carolina, Virginia, Georgia Tech, and Clemson, and you've got one helluva an eastern wing, IMO.
Post Extras:
|
TexasTower
1000+ posts
05/21/12 09:07 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Pitt brings much more than just good academics. They have several national championships, a Heisman trophy, and some of the games greatest players - Dan Marino, Tony Dorsett, Mike Dikta, Larry Fitzgerald, LeSean McCoy, etc.
They would be a great addition in a major market with incredible recruiting grounds. Plus, they are rivals with ND and WVU. The backyard brawl is a great college tradition we could have in our conference.
Pitt would be a great addition to the conference.
A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. - Einstein
Algebra Help
College Algebra
Post Extras:
|
IdahoanHorn
100+ posts
05/21/12 11:38 AM
|
|
Pitt would be a great adition, both basketball and football, they arnt a huge draw but if you could get ND onboard if pitt came along its a win win. then FSU and Clemson. In no way would i ad Miami atm who knows if they will have football after santions come. Georgia Tech would be a good regional fit if they were to make a east west division and if you added tech I believe a NC school. I believe Virginia would be out of the question as you already have the market with WV. I could see them adding BC for the reason that Boston is a good market and it would also be a regional fit with Pitt and ND. But ND is a huge if...
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
05/21/12 08:16 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
It's looking like Notre Dame may be done except for the signing of the contracts. HUGE occurrence for the Big 12 if true (and it sure looks to be true). Notre Dame partial at first, but "all in" in 2016? To the Big 12? Wow.
Now let's consider Pittsburgh in more detail.
First, it is true that Pitt has an excellent past. Pitt has one Heisman winner (1976 Tony Dorsett), and ranks 20th in all-time wins (678-493-41). Both are very nice positives.
Further, Pitt counts 9 NCs, which also suggests an excellent lineage. But the most recent NC was in 1976 in the magical Dorsett year with Jackie Sherrill. Before '76, Pitt's other NCs happened in the 1910s, 1920, and 1930s. That is truly ancient history when football was a different game.
Since 1990, Pitt has finished in the Top 25 only 3 times: 19-2002, 25-2004, 15-2009. Pitt has no Top 10 finishes since 1990. Pitt's modern football history is distinctly lackluster and totally unremarkable.
Pitt claims decent gameday attendance at 52,165 for 40th in 2012; however, Pitt pads attendence with free and discount tickets. You can literally buy a ticket on Stubhub on the 40 yard line for $1.00 just hours before gametime.
For you older guys, think about SMU attendance in the late 70s and early 80s with the Pony Express. SMU bused high school students into Cowboy Stadium to pad attendance. I know. I was at the games. This is how Pitt gets its gross attendance up, yet when you look at pictures of Pitt's crowd, there are huge gaping holes across the entire stadium. Google some pictures.
Pitt also has no stadium on campus, which is really a big negative for (lack of) college atmosphere. They play their games at the Steelers stadium, miles from campus, which simply compounds Pitt's attendance issues.
This past spring game, Pitt held its spring game at a high school stadium and drew, maybe, 750 diehard Panther fans to their spring game. Can you imagine 750 fans showing up for the Texas spring game?
Pitt has had some serious glory days. In the past.
I realize the Big 12 targeted Pitt last summer. Thank god they joined the ACC, where virtually all ACC fans openly admit Pitt was added for basketball, not football.
Finally, the Pitt MSA is pretty good: Pittsburgh-New Castle MSA = 2,359,746 (22nd). However, WVU draws equal television viewers, or more viewers, in the City of Pittsburgh than Pitt does. The schools are only 70 miles apart. There certainly is overlap in the Pittsburgh market due to WVU being in the league. In this sense Pitt is a financial drain on the Big 12 since WVU already covers the Pittsburgh market.
Look, if it takes Pitt to add Notre Dame, welcome Pitt Panthers. Personally, however, I hope we can re-direct ND onto some other school, like Georgia Tech.
Post Extras:
|
22 HORN
500+ posts
05/21/12 09:15 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
XOVER.....source on ND deal???
Post Extras:
|
TheContractor
500+ posts
05/21/12 10:41 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
X, very good points. If we go past 12, i think GT is a must. I know Fsu and Clemson cover that market but it is still a different state with some damn good players. GT is very easily accessible bc its a 20 min bus ride from airport. It has great academics, rivalry with ND. Presumibly, the networks will be able to charge a bit more bc even though there are a lot of Fsu/Clemson fans in Atl, they will be able to charge people in 3 different states(FL, SC, and GA). Though SEC is finding out Aggies and Mizzou are worth as much as the 2 schools thought they were.
I like what you are saying about Pitt. I would prefer Maryland bc that really gets both the DC and Baltimore markets. and I think Virginia would be a very good addition also. I would like Pitt over Louisville, who i hope Big 12 didnt make a promise to.
And, yeah, whats the ND news that you have?
HOOKEM, GOD BLESS, JAI HIND
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
05/22/12 06:12 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
X, what's the source(s) on Notre Dame? It is huge news, if true. Got a link?
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
Fire Tunnel
250+ posts
05/22/12 12:51 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Lots of links out there now. Means nothing really at this point.
But, this has been Deloss' baby from the beginning. ESPN and Deloss are working this one hard. Deloss won't retire until this issue with ND is resolved either way in the next 2-3 years.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
05/22/12 01:52 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
A quick question for X, or whoever...IF the Irish choose the Big XII, would they likely push for Pitt, or Georgia Tech, as a traveling partner? I ask because I have a hunch the B1G is gonna come into play for G-Tech. I know the folks over in Atlanta are talking to the Big XII now, something they weren't doing a month ago, but I hear they're really in love with the B1G if they have to leave the ACC. If the Big XII WITH ND as an incoming member offers, I'd think anybody would listen, and I'd love to see Georgia Tech added to the conference.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
05/22/12 04:54 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Sorry, no solid link. Mainly an amalgamation of various posts.
Well, for example, here's a link from the Dallas News: In reply to:
"[Sources say] Dodds is telling some in the Big 12 he thinks Notre Dame is seriously looking at the Big 12," Brown wrote. "Although, Dodds has told those same people it could take time for Notre Dame to join - like 2016 - after its current football contract with NBC is up."
Information regarding ND is coming from Austin radio, Swaim, FSU sources (Ingram Smith), WVU sources, Brian Ethridge, ND basketball coach Mike Brey, along with suggestions by Brown. The one I put most stock in is Smith.
It's not time to take the ND information to the main board, nor is it time for a new thread (IMO). But ND is definitely heating up.
Maybe I was a bit over-exuberant in my prior post, but I repeat: ND is definitely heating up. DeLoss may have done it.
The way it's supposed to work is ND comes in first for Olympic Sports only until their NBC contract expires in 2015. Then in 2016 ND is all in.
Word I hear is ND wants Pitt. I personally hope ND can be re-directed onto a different, more southern school.
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
06/05/12 07:26 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
There are three "expansion causing" schools out there.
Notre Dame. We all know this.
Florida State. We all know this.
North Carolina. If you didn't know this, now you do.
I no longer jump to the conclusion that UNC will automatically migrate to the B1G. UNC fans want the south; specifically, the SEC. But if UNC stays "difficult" and misses the boat with the SEC, I think there is an outside shot at UNC for the Big 12 in a year or two.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
06/06/12 10:15 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Two things are imminent...Bob Bowlsby taking over as Big XII commissioner, and the conferences meeting to decide the format for a four team championship playoff. I'll be happy for these two pieces of business to be concluded, because Big XII expansion is on hold until then.
Now that B1G commissioner Jim Delaney has come out on the side of the top four teams making the four team playoff, regardless of whether or not one or more is a conference champion, I expect that to be the format chosen. That format wouldn't automatically exclude Notre Dame, so I don't see the Irish to be in a rush to join any conference.
I look for the Big XII to expand by two teams, FSU, and one of Clemson or Georgia Tech. I think Tech might be the more attractive candidate, but I think Clemson is farther along in the process, and nobody knows for sure whether or not Tech is really interested in making a move.
That leads me to the conclusion that sometime before August 15th, FSU and Clemson will apply for membership, be accepted, and give the ACC notice that they're leaving. (...and all of a sudden, the Big XII will be happy with the TWELVE teams in the conference.)
By the way, I loved Bowlsby's quote from last week that he intends that the Big XII will be a very exclusive fraternity that a lot of teams want into, and very few get into. That's a great change of attitude from past years,
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
06/16/12 09:24 AM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
While many have warned that between June 15 into July there will likely be much disinformation and misinformation with respect to Big 12 expansion, I guess I have succumbed to it regardless of fair warning.
I no longer believe Clemson is in the picture with respect to 2012 Big 12 expansion. While the recent comments of CU's BoT Chairman, Wilkins, can be parsed into nothingness, I personally believe him when he says "Clemson is 1000% in the ACC". Hence, I think Clemson is out for the immediate future.
I now subscribe to the theory that the Big 12 is pursuing a deal so as to yield Florida State and a Notre Dame / Brigham Young hybrid.
My belief may wholly constitute a example of confirmation bias because I am much intrigued by Florida State and the hybrid. If the Big 12 can add the top 2 expansion candidates in the land -- Notre Dame and Florida State -- in a move to 12, I consider that to be a grand slam. Bring in BYU as a "free addition", and you're golden.
I hope it happens.
Post Extras:
|
BV Horn
100+ posts
06/16/12 08:00 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
Instead of preferences, opinions, myhths and legends, when will the facts be known about Big XII expansion, if any?
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
06/16/12 08:42 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
BV Horn: Lol.
The BCS playoff will be much solidified at the end of June. We may know something as early as the end of June.
August 15 is the date to notify the ACC if you won't be a conference member for 2013.
Those are your parameter dates. If movement is going to happen for the 2013 season, it will very likely happen in the next 6 weeks or so.
BTW, ND alumni and fans are now discussing a 6-game affiliation with the Big 12.
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
06/17/12 08:47 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
X if you're on the mark about ND considering some kind of six game tie in with the Big XII, then I can see adding only FSU. However, I'm not comfortable with putting any amount of eggs in the ND basket, so I think FSU needs one more traveling partner from the ACC, and I'm still convinced Clemson makes the most sense and would be interested if somebody like G-Tech or UNC isn't interested. I'd love for you to be right about ND, but I'm just not seeing it if the conferences do what I think they'll do and go with the four best teams for a playoff. That leaves a door open for an independent ND if they're ever good enough.
"Where is the church. Who took the steeple. Religion's in the hands of some crazy ass people." (The gospel according to Jimmy Buffett)
Post Extras:
|
SportsICT
500+ posts
06/19/12 04:29 PM
|
|
Re: The Status of Realignment – March 2012
[re: XOVER] |
| |
I think Xover is on to something IRT Notre Dame. Some of their fans think they will join the Big 12. I'm not sure how true that is but the linked article in very interesting.
LINK
Post Extras:
|
Mesohorny
5000+ posts
06/19/12 07:13 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
06/20/12 07:22 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
Mesohorny
5000+ posts
06/20/12 09:08 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
06/20/12 08:39 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
06/21/12 06:16 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
SeattleHorn
500+ posts
06/21/12 08:06 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
HornSwoggler
500+ posts
06/21/12 08:27 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
06/21/12 10:34 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
H-D Rider
2500+ posts
06/21/12 10:35 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
06/21/12 10:41 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
H-D Rider
2500+ posts
06/21/12 10:48 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
06/21/12 11:08 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
H-D Rider
2500+ posts
06/21/12 11:13 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
H-D Rider
2500+ posts
06/21/12 11:31 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
Mesohorny
5000+ posts
06/21/12 03:16 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
SportsICT
500+ posts
06/21/12 03:24 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
06/21/12 03:25 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
Mesohorny
5000+ posts
06/21/12 03:33 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
06/21/12 06:48 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
BV Horn
100+ posts
06/21/12 08:57 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
06/22/12 08:37 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
SportsICT
500+ posts
06/22/12 09:10 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
06/22/12 09:39 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
Mesohorny
5000+ posts
06/22/12 11:31 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
06/22/12 12:52 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
TexasTower
1000+ posts
06/22/12 06:19 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
06/23/12 11:04 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
TexasTower
1000+ posts
06/23/12 04:10 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
06/23/12 06:21 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
SportsICT
500+ posts
06/23/12 07:23 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
06/23/12 08:44 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
TexasTower
1000+ posts
06/24/12 08:20 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
06/24/12 08:46 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
fishy
250+ posts
06/25/12 07:29 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
06/25/12 09:11 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
notanative
2500+ posts
06/25/12 11:28 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
SportsICT
500+ posts
06/25/12 11:29 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
H-D Rider
2500+ posts
06/26/12 03:26 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
Mesohorny
5000+ posts
06/26/12 08:24 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
HornSwoggler
500+ posts
06/26/12 09:10 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
notanative
2500+ posts
06/27/12 08:29 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
MarylandHorn
500+ posts
06/27/12 10:45 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
IdahoanHorn
100+ posts
06/27/12 12:39 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
geezerhorn
1000+ posts
06/27/12 04:04 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
HornSwoggler
500+ posts
06/27/12 04:56 PM
|
|
Edited by HornSwoggler (06/27/12 04:59 PM)
Post Extras:
|
tamster
500+ posts
06/27/12 08:37 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
MarylandHorn
500+ posts
06/27/12 08:41 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
HornSwoggler
500+ posts
06/28/12 09:53 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
IdahoanHorn
100+ posts
06/28/12 10:05 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
H-D Rider
2500+ posts
06/28/12 04:17 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
HornSwoggler
500+ posts
06/28/12 05:16 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
IdahoanHorn
100+ posts
06/29/12 08:34 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
MarylandHorn
500+ posts
06/29/12 11:57 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
HornSwoggler
500+ posts
06/29/12 12:53 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
06/29/12 02:28 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
MarylandHorn
500+ posts
07/02/12 01:48 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
notanative
2500+ posts
07/02/12 02:31 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
HornSwoggler
500+ posts
07/02/12 04:15 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
jctex
100+ posts
07/06/12 10:33 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
HornsForever'93
1000+ posts
07/06/12 12:02 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
HornSwoggler
500+ posts
07/06/12 03:22 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
07/06/12 06:41 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
XOVER
5000+ posts
07/07/12 04:28 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
07/07/12 07:41 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
HornSwoggler
500+ posts
07/08/12 10:41 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
ViperHorn
2500+ posts
07/08/12 12:11 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
07/08/12 03:18 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
Fire Tunnel
250+ posts
07/08/12 03:27 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
HornSwoggler
500+ posts
07/08/12 05:26 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
coolhorn
2500+ posts
07/08/12 08:38 PM
|
|
Edited by coolhorn (07/08/12 08:39 PM)
Post Extras:
|
H-D Rider
2500+ posts
07/08/12 08:59 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
Bevo-Stevo
2500+ posts
07/10/12 06:53 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
IdahoanHorn
100+ posts
07/10/12 10:37 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
jctex
100+ posts
07/10/12 11:06 AM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
HornsForever'93
1000+ posts
07/10/12 12:01 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
dalhorn1
1000+ posts
07/10/12 12:46 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
dthree36
500+ posts
07/10/12 01:10 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
jctex
100+ posts
07/10/12 06:53 PM
|
|
Post Extras:
|
Shop the Co-op |
Email A Friend |
Contact Us
Pages in this thread: 
Rate thread
Print Thread
