Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

I read a column several years ago which opined that UNC would never leave the ACC for the B1G because of an aversion to leave its hoops rivalry with Duke. That has to be the best BB rivalry there is and now I doubt the B1G would touch UNC because of the shenanigans with the NCAA. (Yeah, I know the NCAA wussed out did nothing about it but the bad pub isn't something the B1G would want to touch.) KANSAS just makes way too much sense for the B1G. AAU, top notch hoops, just an hour and a half from KC in an area not now in the B1G's footprint, etc. Given the academic prestige that would bring to the state, I see no way the Kansas legislature would balk about KU leaving KSU behind.

Your football-only idea is something akin to what I've also read bandied about. That is to say a national super-conference at the forefront of which would be U$C and ND. I'm not sure they could get any SEC schools on board but OU and UT would probably queue up yesterday if they could keep their Olys in the B12 as USC would with the P12. Same for Florida State and Clemson which I doubt have all that much loyalty to the ACC. Toss in Stanford - which like USC has more $$ than God and wouldn't have to concern itself with the California legislature - and you'd only need another one or two schools to complete the puzzle and put together a football conference so powerful its champion would warrant a CFP autobid.

KS legislature like NV's legislature.......NV won't stand in the way of one school getting to the promised land & KS won't risk having both schools regulated to second tier if one can get in the B10

The UNC vs Duke rivalry is unique in that it's an oldy goldy and both schools are within 20 mins (or less drive) from each other - Factor NC St in that also as all three are right there in the Research Triangle - Though the beauty of BB is that it's much easier to keep and schedule  home & home rivalries where in FB it's every other year 

USC & ND maintain their annual game in FB outside of conference ties.............and we saw one of the old great rivalries come crashing down when at first the Big8 went to B12 divisions and ended when Nebraska left for the Big10 - which the B12 probably helped Nebraska make that decision with diluting the Neb vs OU annual thanksgiving weekend game to a once every few years game.

I don't know.........there's a lot of ways things could break in the coming years or not move at all...........TV $$ is in flux, so who knows.............but it could also blow completely up into an entire new thing we've never seen before - at one time the NAIA & NIT were just as big as the NCAA.............so a new world order wouldn't surprise me 

The potential for $$ is always mind altering and if TV comes to the table with an "idea" I could see it happening 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

BFD. SDSU is very close to being Carnegie 1 also and our academics have been rated better and better over the last two decades whereas theirs have been stagnant.

BTW, ABA accredited Cal Western Law School in SD is in financial trouble. Heard anything about your beloved UCSD coming to the rescue or is Tritonland just too wedded to rocket scientist stuff like physics? (I've been eyeing Cal Western as a possible addition to SDSU for a while since the two schools had long had a joint JD-MBA program.)

 

 I'm taking a skeptical wait and see approach with UCSD.  Their rocket scientist stuff is fine, the question is are they willing to relent on their requirements a bit to entice any 3* hoops recruit?  Not convinced their administration has what it takes to build up a top-125 D1 hoops program.

I'd almost rather have San Jose back than bring in those Bakersfield bird brains.  Gotta give them props though, they played the game well.  Nobody wanted them and they still found a way :OT:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Pac 12 isn't expanding without Texas.  I agree that the Longhorn Network is a good deal for Texas but I think it's not a great deal for ESPN.  Obviously the future of that network would be up in the air when Texas get's its grant of rights back in June 2025.  Remember, the Big 12 has the rights and made the deal for the LHN on Texas' behalf which is the source of so much friction in the conference.

The only piece that could cause a move to 16 would be Texas to the SEC, along with Oklahoma.  Yes, they played well but Texas is the only reason the SEC would go to 16.  I don't agree that Oklahoma + Oklahoma State is worth splitting the pay two more ways to the SEC.

Kansas + Missouri is the only additions that I could imagine would move the needle.  Mizzou would go to Big Ten in a hot second and I have no idea where they fall within the AAU but unless they split up their institution to separate the Medical school (ala Nebraska) they aren't leaving the AAU.  Far more private universities leave the AAU and Nebraska was so notable because it was voted out.  Syracuse, Catholic University of America and Clark left voluntarily when the threat of removal came up.  The Nebraska legislature didn't care and did what was best for the Medical school and the university in Lincoln. 

It's possible the Pac 12 could expand when our rights expire in 2023 but I don't think that's likely.  Hopefully we don't have a long term dip below one of the top three overall on the field leagues in FBS over the upcoming years because if we repeat this season's bowl performance our new tv deal won't be an improvement.

In 2025 there's a bunch of Big 12 scenarios.  Everyone who thinks that any MW Mountain or American West university could join is right if the Big 12 expands by 4 teams.  If the Big 12 expands by 5 or 6, then SDSU, Fresno State, UNLV, UCF and USF become options because of the further distance requiring a pair.  I can't see UCF and USF joining at the same time as SDSU/ (UNLV/Fresno) so the Big 12 would be faced with a one pair of the other pair choice and then fill in the middle with the rest.

Also, BYU probably could get in to a diminished Big 12 because Baylor and TCU will have more influence.  Tulane too will have a good chance because it's an AAU school in an urban area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Bruininthebay said:

The Pac 12 isn't expanding without Texas.  I agree that the Longhorn Network is a good deal for Texas but I think it's not a great deal for ESPN.  Obviously the future of that network would be up in the air when Texas get's its grant of rights deal.  Remember, the Big 12 has the rights and made the deal for the LHN on Texas' behalf which is the source of so much friction in the conference.

The only piece that could cause a move to 16 would be Texas to the SEC, along with Oklahoma.  Yes, they played well but Texas is the only reason the SEC would go to 16.  I don't agree that Oklahoma + Oklahoma State is worth splitting the pay two more ways to the SEC.

Kansas + Missouri is the only additions that I could imagine would move the needle.  Mizzou would go to Big Ten in a hot second and I have no idea where they fall within the AAU but unless they split up their institution to separate the Medical school (ala Nebraska) they aren't leaving the AAU.  Far more private universities leave the AAU and Nebraska was so notable because it was voted out.  Syracuse, Catholic University of America and Clark left voluntarily when the threat of removal came up.  The Nebraska legislature didn't care and did what was best for the Medical school and the university in Lincoln. 

It's possible the Pac 12 could expand when our rights expire in 2023 but I don't think that's likely.  Hopefully we don't have a long term dip below one of the top three overall on the field leagues in FBS over the upcoming years because if we repeat this season's bowl performance our new tv deal won't be an improvement.

In 2025 there's a bunch of Big 12 scenarios.  Everyone who thinks that any MW Mountain or American West university could join is right if the Big 12 expands by 4 teams.  If the Big 12 expands by 5 or 6, then SDSU, Fresno State, UNLV, UCF and USF become options because of the further distance requiring a pair.  I can't see UCF and USF joining at the same time as SDSU/ (UNLV/Fresno) so the Big 12 would be faced with a one pair of the other pair choice and then fill in the middle with the rest.

Also, BYU probably could get in to a diminished Big 12 because Baylor and TCU will have more influence.  Tulane too will have a good chance because it's an AAU school in an urban area.

Agree about the PAC-12........there's not much value out there to add unless they can get Texas & at least another solid B12 program - Think a Texas / OU combo 

If the B12 is torn apart and has say ISU, KSU, Baylor, OSU  etc left , that group would be strong enough to tear apart the best of the MWC & AAC to form a new Big12 or new named conference 

Tulane was the one add that finished off the Big East during it's attempt to stay a power conference..........it was one thing to span the continent to add Boise St & San Diego St, that was maybe tolerable to the BE membership..........but when Aresco suddenly added Tulane, that was the moment that Syracuse & others started looking for outs and then the BE collapsed 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

Convert, have you checked academics for Up-the-Wazzu and The Beav?

This topic has already been hashed out a lot in the past. It doesn't matter if all the P12 schools meet their new requirements or not. The prez's want any future members to meet a higher requirement. They can demand anything they want, and they are. 

kat.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, UNLV2001 said:

If TV & $$ drive future alignments............how long will conferences stick with old academic standards? 

if TV $$ really fall and or TV says do this (xxx) or forget a big TV contract, will conferences cave and do the "take it or leave it" deal TV might offer? The old major conferences were formed in the early 1900's and things were different then when "student athletes" was really a thing.........but since the coming of massive TV $$ in the 1980's (think rise of ESPN, then regional sports channels) the dynamics have changed......athletes in the $$ sports leave early and often, transfer, etc............for FB & BB the dynamic has changed from a student playing a sport and maybe being good enough to be a professional to where college FB & BB are basically NFL & NBA minor leagues where those programs bring in huge dollars.

The WAC in 1996 & then the MWC in 1999 were conferences that made moves purely for $$ with zero regard to academics - reality is that these conferences don't exist for academic purity or standards anymore, they are money making machines due to their sports programs & everyone knows it 

There is no other bizarre conf like the P12. So what happens in other conferences doesn't matter. It's really quite simple. They claim to be principled on academics, and throwing crazy money at them to add a school they see as sub-par won't happen. If a school makes them happy academically and passes inspection, and if the school passes their social/political standards, then the money matters. But they claim they won't sell out on academics, and I don't see evidence to question that claim. 

kat.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, jdgaucho said:

Hey Convert, if Cal's president says the Pac-12's goal is "to be the best academic conference in the country, period. Athletics is a distant 2nd in importance when dealing with membership," then why are these guys not joining?

  http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/pressrelease/division1

UC San Diego is a Carnegie 1 and AAU institution. They fit the profile better than anyone not named Texas so they should be a shoe-in.  Yet they're not going to the Pac.  So it does come down to athletics.

I never said it wasn't about athletics. An applicant has to pass the academic and athletic test. But the academic part is far more important to them and it's the tougher hurdle to jump. They understand the popularity, politics and money that elite athletics bring. They're not stupid. Otherwise UC Davis would've been in the PAC-12 a long time ago. But academics are their 1st love and obsession, and they're snobs about it. But that's what makes the conference different from all the others, unfortunately. The best hope for some schools to get in the PAC is for these guys to die off and then hope there's a positive shift in culture. 

kat.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Nevada Convert said:

I never said it wasn't about athletics. An applicant has to pass the academic and athletic test. But the academic part is far more important to them and it's the tougher hurdle to jump. They understand the popularity, politics and money that elite athletics bring. They're not stupid. Otherwise UC Davis would've been in the PAC-12 a long time ago. But academics are their 1st love and obsession, and they're snobs about it. But that's what makes the conference different from all the others, unfortunately. The best hope for some schools to get in the PAC is when these guys die off and there's a shift in culture. 

I think the B1G is far more concerned with academic requirements than the PAC.  Yes, the PAC has the academic block (Cali schools + UW) that would block any truly unworthy applicant, but they did take Utah with no AAU membership.  Nebraska's invitation, even when they still had AAU membership, was pretty controversial and opposed by a few schools.  Also, the B1G has an actual organized consortium that helps coordinate and collaborate on research.  

SteelCityBlue

November 24th, 2018 at 9:10 PM ^

I'm looking forward to a new head coach who isn't a cud-chewing autistic retard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, UNLV2001 said:

Agree about the PAC-12........there's not much value out there to add unless they can get Texas & at least another solid B12 program - Think a Texas / OU combo If the B12 is torn apart and has say ISU, KSU, Baylor, OSU  etc left , that group would be strong enough to tear apart the best of the MWC & AAC to form a new Big12 or new named conference 

Agreed. Even if the leftovers also don't include KU, their athletics budgets and ability to retain the Big 12 brand would allow those 7 schools to poach from the AAC and the MWC and not vice versa as some here believe. I would assume they would first look to add just 3-5 replacement members but you never know what kind of a TV offer might entice them to go beyond a 12-team league.

And BTW, folks here can denigrate BYU all they want but particularly if that school continues to have its current level of support from ESPN, that along with its millions of Mormon followers nationwide is going to make it the first school contacted by the B12 leftovers - who by virtue of the continued membership of Baylor have shown they don't give a rat's sphincter about religious fundamentalism.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, alum93 said:

My guess from the last big conference realignment was the next step would be 4x16 for P5, with the B12 being absorbed.  With 130 FBS teams, this leaves 66 or so, depending on who stays FBS and who moves up like Liberty, at the G5 level.  16 teams gives each conference 2 - 8 team divisions.  The 66 G5 teams leaves room for 6 conferences of 10 to 12 team combinations.  P5 has its own championship playoffs as does G5 and teams continue to play each other during the regular season and other bowl games.  

A great idea in theory, but tougher to accomplish.  Pac 12 needs 4, Big 10 and SEC need 2 and the ACC needs 1 or 2.  Try to divide them up, keeping in mind that everybody wants UT (except maybe the SEC), WV has already been rejected by the ACC and SEC, and the Pac 12 doesnt like church schools and has a faction of schools that's only interested in big time academic schools.  Good luck.

21 hours ago, UNLV2001 said:

TCU is where they are based on one run of winning from 1999 to 2009 - nothing more got TCU invited to the B12........the Ft Worth market was already the B12. 

 

Not true, but I'm not going to argue the minutae.  That winning led to many other things that played in TCU's favor.   And there was a lot of things behind that winning, too.  And a lot of them were a gamble.  It paid off for TCU, it didnt pay off for several other schools doing similar things.  Sometimes just being in the right place at the right time helps, but so does having 2 TV networks vouching for you.  The Big 12 didnt HAVE to replace A&M with TCU.

In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

Agreed. Even if the leftovers also don't include KU, their athletics budgets and ability to retain the Big 12 brand would allow those 7 schools to poach from the AAC and the MWC and not vice versa as some here believe. I would assume they would first look to add just 3-5 replacement members but you never know what kind of a TV offer might entice them to go beyond a 12-team league.

And BTW, folks here can denigrate BYU all they want but particularly if that school continues to have its current level of support from ESPN, that along with its millions of Mormon followers nationwide is going to make it the first school contacted by the B12 leftovers - who by virtue of the continued membership of Baylor have shown they don't give a rat's sphincter about religious fundamentalism.

BYU would have to get a serious look for any new membership lineup for a new B12.........BYU is too strong to be left out of a new B12 that will be desperate for legitimacy 

Then it's poach the best options from the MWC & AAC to form new conference that spans the continent as the need to be or seem legit will be top priority and not geography - Think San Diego St to Central Florida - Basically it'd be the BE 2.0 attempting to maintain some status 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, UNLV2001 said:

BYU would have to get a serious look for any new membership lineup for a new B12.........BYU is too strong to be left out of a new B12 that will be desperate for legitimacy 

Then it's poach the best options from the MWC & AAC to form new conference that spans the continent as the need to be or seem legit will be top priority and not geography - Think San Diego St to Central Florida - Basically it'd be the BE 2.0 attempting to maintain some status 

If you're essentially saying that BOR conference would emphasize longitude, I agree. If UConn ends up in a realigned ACC as I think couild happen, other than Boise and Philly (Temple), Provo and Ft. Collins would be the farthest north of locations that might make sense for such a conference. Of course, by the time push comes to shove, Temple football will have again become so awful as to make the Owls a longshot.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Victor Maitlin said:

I think the B1G is far more concerned with academic requirements than the PAC.  Yes, the PAC has the academic block (Cali schools + UW) that would block any truly unworthy applicant, but they did take Utah with no AAU membership.  Nebraska's invitation, even when they still had AAU membership, was pretty controversial and opposed by a few schools.  Also, the B1G has an actual organized consortium that helps coordinate and collaborate on research.  

The B1G announced in December 2009 their intent to expand.  On June 11th 2010 Nebraska's Board of Regents voted in favor of applying for B1G membership and within a matter of hours the B1G's board of presidents and chancellors reported that Nebraskas membership was voted on unanimously to become the 12th conference member.  There was no controvery or opposition.  Nebraska is in the top 20 in fanbase size in the country and when it joined the B1G had the 6th largest fanbase of the 11 teams it joined.  The AAU voted on Nebraskas continued inclusion in 2000 but at that time didn't have the votes to expel.  Every single B1G school knew that Nebraskas continuing AAU membership, of which they had been a member of for 101 years was in peril but they all voted unanimously to accept Nebraska into the B1G.  The B1G wanted Nebraska and they would have added them with or without AAU membership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of expansion I did not know this. ESPN claiming Georgia Tech declined invite to Big Ten when Rutgers was selected.

"Not only does Atlanta sit at the geographic heart of the SEC and the ACC, two of the conferences that make up the Power 5, but five years ago, when the Big Ten expanded to 14 teams, the league didn't take Rutgers until it had been turned down by Georgia Tech."

How Atlanta became the capital of college football

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember Andy Katz being interviewed when it was known the B1G was considering expansion. He said that not only was GA Tech under consideration, so was Vanderbilt. In combination with Rutgers then being chosen along with Maryland it confirmed what that conference's priorities were: (1a) and (1b): academics (AAU) and location (proximity to a major city not in the B1G's geographical footprint) and (3) athletic success.

Transpose academics and athletics and you have the SEC's priorities. The other three P5s seem to be somewhere between those polarized positions. As an example, the P12's brand is Conference of Champions so having a well-rounded athletics program as opposed to being a one-trick pony matters a lot to that conference.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

West Virginia is just as good a 16th member of the SEC as Oklahoma if Texas wants to go to the SEC and not take the Sooners.  While it isn't traditionally "the South" because of the Civil War history, recent history makes it SEC country as much as Missouri although Missouri's allegiance is more in dispute during the Civl War.  The SEC is slightly imbalanced because Georgia, South Carolina and Florida are an odd number so if you add West Virginia to the East then adding Texas to the West doesn't require more realignment like adding Oklahoma would.

The red river rivalry could easily be an annual out of conference game; it's just one game.  Oklahoma is overrated and not a Pac 12 candidate without Texas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Texas is never headed to the SEC.  Ignoring LHN for a moment, the SEC isnt all that interested because they already have the access they need to the state (which is why you'll never see Clemson and FSU move there either), and A&M would throw the hissy fit of all time if the subject even came up.  Everybody else would love UT, but the SEC not as much.  And if the SEC does consider expansion again (and due to the growth of the SECN, they're not), they would WANT to realign because having Missouri in the East is both stupid and a pain in the ass.  Which is why their primary targets would be in the ACC - which is not accessible for the foreseeable future due to the ACC's extended GOR.

In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There isn't a P5 conference in the country that wouldn't add Texas.  Ditto for Notre Dame.   I still wouldn't rule out P12 if things start moving fast again years down the road.  If they do leave the B12,  front runners would have to be the richest conferences, BiG and SEC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, just for purposes of discussion, explain how adding Texas adds 40 million a year to the SEC bottom line.  Because that's what it would take just for the SEC to break even.  Not to mention added a 2nd school that would also need to add 40 million in incremental revenue.

Make that 50 million - because that's what UT pocketed last year.  And UT aint taking a pay cut to go nowhere.  Not when they just hired a new AD who's forte (and primary job) is to make it rain.

That's the 'problem' I mentioned earlier.  The Big 10 and SEC have reached a point where adding schools doesnt really add to the bottom line enough to cover the splitting the pie further.  a Big 10/UT marriage might, because Texas isnt in BTN's footprint.  But UT brings little to SECN because of A&M.  Some extra inventory, which helps, but zero in terms of increased subscription revenue.  Maybe they could squeeze some extra money in a renegotiation with ESPN (a company looking to get more efficient, not more profligate, with their money).  And LHN stands in the way in both cases.

 

No one was disputing ND, but they are tied to the ACC.  The ACC aint expanding until/unless ND makes a final move on football.  And ND is now contractually obligated to join the ACC in football if they join anybody.  Which, as always, doesnt appear to be in the offing.

 

So we're back to the Big 12 and Pac 12.  UT makes 15 million a year from a now-profitable LHN.  Pac 12 schools collectively got 30 million from P12N.  Stalemate.

 

In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UT is the P5 version of BYU in being a special needs university. The SEC makes so much money and going forward will continue to make so much money that it doesn't need to deal with that shit. Although many disagree, I don't see the B1G ever taking UT for that same reason. Ultimately I think it's most likely that Bevo becomes to the B12 what ND is to the ACC.

I was going to say I could still see the P12 taking Texas. However, I didn't want to make our contingent of Utes have to again assure us that their new conference is making so much money hand over fist that it isn't ever going to expand again under any circumstances in any of our lifetimes.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...