NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards

Discussions by Conference:
 
NCAA Map
  It is currently Sun Dec 17, 2017 10:41 am

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping
College T-shirts at Fanatics.com

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5887 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 387, 388, 389, 390, 391, 392, 393  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2017 9:41 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2013 8:24 pm
Posts: 332
Location: Tulsa, OK
http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college ... sion-talks" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 24, 2017 12:26 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 3363
Location: Phoenix Arizona
46566 wrote:
lash wrote:
Should we never say never on Big 12 expansion? https://www.yahoo.com/sports/m/d101d884 ... rs-are.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This rumor could make sense as we are coming close to the end of the basketball season and every Big 12 AD and President will be in Kansas City for the men basketball tournament and most Big 12 officials will likewise be present at the NCAA men final four.

The last time the Presidents meet ended with the lack of getting the necessary majority of votes on which teams to invite. Maybe time has provided more thoughts on which teams would be preferred by all ten schools.

It would allow the Big 12 to provide plenty of notice to other leagues before the physical end of the year on July 1, 2017.

The men final four tournament would be a nice place to announce which team would finally make the cut should the league finally decide to expand. The homework has long sense been completed.

I guess this football and basketball season adds another bullet point for each of the teams. Though I doubt much has changed from earlier to today to make teams more attractive. At this point would expansion even net the conference more money? One of the talking points last time around was the increased revenue. I think it was like 50 million a school I think. Did the conference agree to not expand and remove that part of the contract for a bump In money now?

My take on Big 12 expansion talks that ended in November of last year had more to do with gaining agreement on particular schools with necessary votes and not so much with not wanting expansion to occur.

Its interesting there were never any official public statement on the Big 12 actually changing the contract and taking out the pro rata clause from the contracts with FOX and ESPN. Unless some media has actual documentation the clause were removed, the Big 12 most likely just took expansion off the table. None of the Big 12 schools reported any increase in additional revenue from the projected 30 million per school that was announced prior to the November meeting with the Big 12 Presidents in Dallas.

It is an assumption the pro rata clause continues to exist and the Big 12 can reopen expansion discussions any time in the future if they wish to do so.

The Big 12 football championship game that will resume next year is much more about money than adding to the 13 data point for the football championship committee. A lot has occurred with Ohio State making the playoff without having the 13 data point.

The Big 12 could simply take the football championship game back off the table based on the Ohio State situation last season, however, the revenue is just too good to pass up. The schedule of round robin is already causing issues with fans as Oklahoma and Oklahoma State game had to be scheduled from season ending to ovoid the possibility of a rematch the following week.

The correct solution for the Big 12 to play the football championship game has always been 12 minimum schools with six team divisions. This is precisely why the 13 data point was created by the SEC decades ago in design.

BYU which was presumably reported as the leading candidate last year may not have the same resistance this time around which basically killed the last expansion exercise and caused Oklahoma to back off pushing expansion.

If Texas AD is discussing expansion possibility which would probably indicate Houston would continue to be the priority for Texas, the Big 12 could rethink taking Houston and BYU to expand to 12 schools.

Assuming BYU could finally get the votes for the other 12th school, Oklahoma may rethink expansion.

If Texas and Oklahoma both get what they want out of expansion, there is a very good possibility the Big 12 could reopen expansion talks very soon. Basically there is nothing to stop the league from resuming expansion discussions.

East: Texas, Houston, TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech, West Virginia

West: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, K State, Kansas, BYU

Less face it the only reason to play a CCG in football is for revenue and having 12 schools minimum is a really must to work correctly for this type of system.



West:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 24, 2017 1:15 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 12:06 am
Posts: 234
lash wrote:
46566 wrote:
lash wrote:
Should we never say never on Big 12 expansion? https://www.yahoo.com/sports/m/d101d884 ... rs-are.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This rumor could make sense as we are coming close to the end of the basketball season and every Big 12 AD and President will be in Kansas City for the men basketball tournament and most Big 12 officials will likewise be present at the NCAA men final four.

The last time the Presidents meet ended with the lack of getting the necessary majority of votes on which teams to invite. Maybe time has provided more thoughts on which teams would be preferred by all ten schools.

It would allow the Big 12 to provide plenty of notice to other leagues before the physical end of the year on July 1, 2017.

The men final four tournament would be a nice place to announce which team would finally make the cut should the league finally decide to expand. The homework has long sense been completed.

I guess this football and basketball season adds another bullet point for each of the teams. Though I doubt much has changed from earlier to today to make teams more attractive. At this point would expansion even net the conference more money? One of the talking points last time around was the increased revenue. I think it was like 50 million a school I think. Did the conference agree to not expand and remove that part of the contract for a bump In money now?

My take on Big 12 expansion talks that ended in November of last year had more to do with gaining agreement on particular schools with necessary votes and not so much with not wanting expansion to occur.

Its interesting there were never any official public statement on the Big 12 actually changing the contract and taking out the pro rata clause from the contracts with FOX and ESPN. Unless some media has actual documentation the clause were removed, the Big 12 most likely just took expansion off the table. None of the Big 12 schools reported any increase in additional revenue from the projected 30 million per school that was announced prior to the November meeting with the Big 12 Presidents in Dallas.

It is an assumption the pro rata clause continues to exist and the Big 12 can reopen expansion discussions any time in the future if they wish to do so.

The Big 12 football championship game that will resume next year is much more about money than adding to the 13 data point for the football championship committee. A lot has occurred with Ohio State making the playoff without having the 13 data point.

The Big 12 could simply take the football championship game back off the table based on the Ohio State situation last season, however, the revenue is just too good to pass up. The schedule of round robin is already causing issues with fans as Oklahoma and Oklahoma State game had to be scheduled from season ending to ovoid the possibility of a rematch the following week.

The correct solution for the Big 12 to play the football championship game has always been 12 minimum schools with six team divisions. This is precisely why the 13 data point was created by the SEC decades ago in design.

BYU which was presumably reported as the leading candidate last year may not have the same resistance this time around which basically killed the last expansion exercise and caused Oklahoma to back off pushing expansion.

If Texas AD is discussing expansion possibility which would probably indicate Houston would continue to be the priority for Texas, the Big 12 could rethink taking Houston and BYU to expand to 12 schools.

Assuming BYU could finally get the votes for the other 12th school, Oklahoma may rethink expansion.

If Texas and Oklahoma both get what they want out of expansion, there is a very good possibility the Big 12 could reopen expansion talks very soon. Basically there is nothing to stop the league from resuming expansion discussions.

East: Texas, Houston, TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech, West Virginia

West: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, K State, Kansas, BYU

Less face it the only reason to play a CCG in football is for revenue and having 12 schools minimum is a really must to work correctly for this type of system.



West:

I wonder if Cincinnati basketball played themselves into consideration due to basketball. This year they would have been a good team in the conference for rpi purposes. Maybe it's because I want BYU to stay in the WCC but I don't see a full invitation working well for the conference. I also don't see the big 12 wanting a associate football member.
I wonder if the selling point would be the additional strength in basketball. Though i'd like to see Colorado state added. The only problem is a solid #14 school for the North division.
North: Cincinnati, West Virginia, Colorado State, Iowa state, Kansas, Kansas State
South: Texas, TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech, Houston, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

_________________
Fan of:
Sun Belt Conference
Summit League
Us National Soccer Team


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 24, 2017 12:54 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 3363
Location: Phoenix Arizona
46566 wrote:
lash wrote:
46566 wrote:
lash wrote:
Should we never say never on Big 12 expansion? https://www.yahoo.com/sports/m/d101d884 ... rs-are.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This rumor could make sense as we are coming close to the end of the basketball season and every Big 12 AD and President will be in Kansas City for the men basketball tournament and most Big 12 officials will likewise be present at the NCAA men final four.

The last time the Presidents meet ended with the lack of getting the necessary majority of votes on which teams to invite. Maybe time has provided more thoughts on which teams would be preferred by all ten schools.

It would allow the Big 12 to provide plenty of notice to other leagues before the physical end of the year on July 1, 2017.

The men final four tournament would be a nice place to announce which team would finally make the cut should the league finally decide to expand. The homework has long sense been completed.

I guess this football and basketball season adds another bullet point for each of the teams. Though I doubt much has changed from earlier to today to make teams more attractive. At this point would expansion even net the conference more money? One of the talking points last time around was the increased revenue. I think it was like 50 million a school I think. Did the conference agree to not expand and remove that part of the contract for a bump In money now?

My take on Big 12 expansion talks that ended in November of last year had more to do with gaining agreement on particular schools with necessary votes and not so much with not wanting expansion to occur.

Its interesting there were never any official public statement on the Big 12 actually changing the contract and taking out the pro rata clause from the contracts with FOX and ESPN. Unless some media has actual documentation the clause were removed, the Big 12 most likely just took expansion off the table. None of the Big 12 schools reported any increase in additional revenue from the projected 30 million per school that was announced prior to the November meeting with the Big 12 Presidents in Dallas.

It is an assumption the pro rata clause continues to exist and the Big 12 can reopen expansion discussions any time in the future if they wish to do so.

The Big 12 football championship game that will resume next year is much more about money than adding to the 13 data point for the football championship committee. A lot has occurred with Ohio State making the playoff without having the 13 data point.

The Big 12 could simply take the football championship game back off the table based on the Ohio State situation last season, however, the revenue is just too good to pass up. The schedule of round robin is already causing issues with fans as Oklahoma and Oklahoma State game had to be scheduled from season ending to ovoid the possibility of a rematch the following week.

The correct solution for the Big 12 to play the football championship game has always been 12 minimum schools with six team divisions. This is precisely why the 13 data point was created by the SEC decades ago in design.

BYU which was presumably reported as the leading candidate last year may not have the same resistance this time around which basically killed the last expansion exercise and caused Oklahoma to back off pushing expansion.

If Texas AD is discussing expansion possibility which would probably indicate Houston would continue to be the priority for Texas, the Big 12 could rethink taking Houston and BYU to expand to 12 schools.

Assuming BYU could finally get the votes for the other 12th school, Oklahoma may rethink expansion.

If Texas and Oklahoma both get what they want out of expansion, there is a very good possibility the Big 12 could reopen expansion talks very soon. Basically there is nothing to stop the league from resuming expansion discussions.

East: Texas, Houston, TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech, West Virginia

West: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, K State, Kansas, BYU

Less face it the only reason to play a CCG in football is for revenue and having 12 schools minimum is a really must to work correctly for this type of system.



West:

I wonder if Cincinnati basketball played themselves into consideration due to basketball. This year they would have been a good team in the conference for rpi purposes. Maybe it's because I want BYU to stay in the WCC but I don't see a full invitation working well for the conference. I also don't see the big 12 wanting a associate football member.
I wonder if the selling point would be the additional strength in basketball. Though i'd like to see Colorado state added. The only problem is a solid #14 school for the North division.
North: Cincinnati, West Virginia, Colorado State, Iowa state, Kansas, Kansas State
South: Texas, TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech, Houston, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

I would guess the same suspects that were leading candidates for expansion last year would not have changed and Cincinnati certainly would be at the top of any Big 12 expansion list.

With a few more months of time to analyze the current landscape, I would not at all be surprised that some Big 12 schools have reconsidered their position and are willing to compromise votes should expansion talks resume.

Baylor issues were a major concern last year during expansion and did not have a permanent President. The issues were very concerning for all Big 12 schools to ensure that Baylor could get institutional control over its sports programs. The Big 12 is holding revenue to ensure the same problems do not continue to occur at the school.

Expansion would actually help the Big 12 with Baylor and should the school not make its policy transparent could easy replace Baylor with another school and not compromise the current requirement of having a minimum of 10 schools for football inventory.

It would take two years to get schools added such as a Cincinnati and time for Baylor to ensure they have resolved the serous issue that occurred at this school or possibly expel the school without compliance and not impact the required inventory of football games required by FOX and ESPN.

The Big 12 has to be considerate of future TV negotiations that will occur close to 2024 and BYU football would help fortify future TV negotiations. Can BYU get the 8 votes this time if the Big 12 resume expansion talks?

If yes, then the 12 school would probably come down to Cincinnati and Houston if the league in fact expanded. Did Houston burn any bridges when Texas acquired their football coach? My guess is yes and this could open the door for Cincinnati.

By the way any school not in the five power leagues would jump at a the chance to join the Big 12 regardless of the hiccups that occurred last year with expansion exercises.

With ESPN continuing to spend money like a drunken sailor while losing cable subscribers at the same time should not impact the Big 12 concerns with using the pro rata clause which is probably still available to the Big 12. ESPN may look entirely different by 2024 when the Big 12 is up for new TV contracts.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:27 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 12:06 am
Posts: 234
lash wrote:
46566 wrote:
lash wrote:
46566 wrote:
lash wrote:
Should we never say never on Big 12 expansion? https://www.yahoo.com/sports/m/d101d884 ... rs-are.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This rumor could make sense as we are coming close to the end of the basketball season and every Big 12 AD and President will be in Kansas City for the men basketball tournament and most Big 12 officials will likewise be present at the NCAA men final four.

The last time the Presidents meet ended with the lack of getting the necessary majority of votes on which teams to invite. Maybe time has provided more thoughts on which teams would be preferred by all ten schools.

It would allow the Big 12 to provide plenty of notice to other leagues before the physical end of the year on July 1, 2017.

The men final four tournament would be a nice place to announce which team would finally make the cut should the league finally decide to expand. The homework has long sense been completed.

I guess this football and basketball season adds another bullet point for each of the teams. Though I doubt much has changed from earlier to today to make teams more attractive. At this point would expansion even net the conference more money? One of the talking points last time around was the increased revenue. I think it was like 50 million a school I think. Did the conference agree to not expand and remove that part of the contract for a bump In money now?

My take on Big 12 expansion talks that ended in November of last year had more to do with gaining agreement on particular schools with necessary votes and not so much with not wanting expansion to occur.

Its interesting there were never any official public statement on the Big 12 actually changing the contract and taking out the pro rata clause from the contracts with FOX and ESPN. Unless some media has actual documentation the clause were removed, the Big 12 most likely just took expansion off the table. None of the Big 12 schools reported any increase in additional revenue from the projected 30 million per school that was announced prior to the November meeting with the Big 12 Presidents in Dallas.

It is an assumption the pro rata clause continues to exist and the Big 12 can reopen expansion discussions any time in the future if they wish to do so.

The Big 12 football championship game that will resume next year is much more about money than adding to the 13 data point for the football championship committee. A lot has occurred with Ohio State making the playoff without having the 13 data point.

The Big 12 could simply take the football championship game back off the table based on the Ohio State situation last season, however, the revenue is just too good to pass up. The schedule of round robin is already causing issues with fans as Oklahoma and Oklahoma State game had to be scheduled from season ending to ovoid the possibility of a rematch the following week.

The correct solution for the Big 12 to play the football championship game has always been 12 minimum schools with six team divisions. This is precisely why the 13 data point was created by the SEC decades ago in design.

BYU which was presumably reported as the leading candidate last year may not have the same resistance this time around which basically killed the last expansion exercise and caused Oklahoma to back off pushing expansion.

If Texas AD is discussing expansion possibility which would probably indicate Houston would continue to be the priority for Texas, the Big 12 could rethink taking Houston and BYU to expand to 12 schools.

Assuming BYU could finally get the votes for the other 12th school, Oklahoma may rethink expansion.

If Texas and Oklahoma both get what they want out of expansion, there is a very good possibility the Big 12 could reopen expansion talks very soon. Basically there is nothing to stop the league from resuming expansion discussions.

East: Texas, Houston, TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech, West Virginia

West: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, K State, Kansas, BYU

Less face it the only reason to play a CCG in football is for revenue and having 12 schools minimum is a really must to work correctly for this type of system.



West:

I wonder if Cincinnati basketball played themselves into consideration due to basketball. This year they would have been a good team in the conference for rpi purposes. Maybe it's because I want BYU to stay in the WCC but I don't see a full invitation working well for the conference. I also don't see the big 12 wanting a associate football member.
I wonder if the selling point would be the additional strength in basketball. Though i'd like to see Colorado state added. The only problem is a solid #14 school for the North division.
North: Cincinnati, West Virginia, Colorado State, Iowa state, Kansas, Kansas State
South: Texas, TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech, Houston, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

I would guess the same suspects that were leading candidates for expansion last year would not have changed and Cincinnati certainly would be at the top of any Big 12 expansion list.

With a few more months of time to analyze the current landscape, I would not at all be surprised that some Big 12 schools have reconsidered their position and are willing to compromise votes should expansion talks resume.

Baylor issues were a major concern last year during expansion and did not have a permanent President. The issues were very concerning for all Big 12 schools to ensure that Baylor could get institutional control over its sports programs. The Big 12 is holding revenue to ensure the same problems do not continue to occur at the school.

Expansion would actually help the Big 12 with Baylor and should the school not make its policy transparent could easy replace Baylor with another school and not compromise the current requirement of having a minimum of 10 schools for football inventory.

It would take two years to get schools added such as a Cincinnati and time for Baylor to ensure they have resolved the serous issue that occurred at this school or possibly expel the school without compliance and not impact the required inventory of football games required by FOX and ESPN.

The Big 12 has to be considerate of future TV negotiations that will occur close to 2024 and BYU football would help fortify future TV negotiations. Can BYU get the 8 votes this time if the Big 12 resume expansion talks?

If yes, then the 12 school would probably come down to Cincinnati and Houston if the league in fact expanded. Did Houston burn any bridges when Texas acquired their football coach? My guess is yes and this could open the door for Cincinnati.

By the way any school not in the five power leagues would jump at a the chance to join the Big 12 regardless of the hiccups that occurred last year with expansion exercises.

With ESPN continuing to spend money like a drunken sailor while losing cable subscribers at the same time should not impact the Big 12 concerns with using the pro rata clause which is probably still available to the Big 12. ESPN may look entirely different by 2024 when the Big 12 is up for new TV contracts.

I'm actually kinda curious on the difference of the value of a Buy football invite and a all sports to another school. To me there is no value in just having a football invite. I would think that the number of teams being added effects BYU. Should they add only 2 teams I think a football only invite is likely. Should they expand by 4 then I personally think it's not likely.
I don't think football only invites are a long term solution to FBS conferences. I think both Navy and Hawaii are short term fixes to the AAC and MWC. I think the Big 12 may lean towards all sports invites. Purely for building up more games to offer under a new TV contract. BYU is a plus for football and a plus if they can work out the Sunday rule.

_________________
Fan of:
Sun Belt Conference
Summit League
Us National Soccer Team


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:50 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 3363
Location: Phoenix Arizona
46566 wrote:
lash wrote:
46566 wrote:
lash wrote:
46566 wrote:
lash wrote:
Should we never say never on Big 12 expansion? https://www.yahoo.com/sports/m/d101d884 ... rs-are.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This rumor could make sense as we are coming close to the end of the basketball season and every Big 12 AD and President will be in Kansas City for the men basketball tournament and most Big 12 officials will likewise be present at the NCAA men final four.

The last time the Presidents meet ended with the lack of getting the necessary majority of votes on which teams to invite. Maybe time has provided more thoughts on which teams would be preferred by all ten schools.

It would allow the Big 12 to provide plenty of notice to other leagues before the physical end of the year on July 1, 2017.

The men final four tournament would be a nice place to announce which team would finally make the cut should the league finally decide to expand. The homework has long sense been completed.

I guess this football and basketball season adds another bullet point for each of the teams. Though I doubt much has changed from earlier to today to make teams more attractive. At this point would expansion even net the conference more money? One of the talking points last time around was the increased revenue. I think it was like 50 million a school I think. Did the conference agree to not expand and remove that part of the contract for a bump In money now?

My take on Big 12 expansion talks that ended in November of last year had more to do with gaining agreement on particular schools with necessary votes and not so much with not wanting expansion to occur.

Its interesting there were never any official public statement on the Big 12 actually changing the contract and taking out the pro rata clause from the contracts with FOX and ESPN. Unless some media has actual documentation the clause were removed, the Big 12 most likely just took expansion off the table. None of the Big 12 schools reported any increase in additional revenue from the projected 30 million per school that was announced prior to the November meeting with the Big 12 Presidents in Dallas.

It is an assumption the pro rata clause continues to exist and the Big 12 can reopen expansion discussions any time in the future if they wish to do so.

The Big 12 football championship game that will resume next year is much more about money than adding to the 13 data point for the football championship committee. A lot has occurred with Ohio State making the playoff without having the 13 data point.

The Big 12 could simply take the football championship game back off the table based on the Ohio State situation last season, however, the revenue is just too good to pass up. The schedule of round robin is already causing issues with fans as Oklahoma and Oklahoma State game had to be scheduled from season ending to ovoid the possibility of a rematch the following week.

The correct solution for the Big 12 to play the football championship game has always been 12 minimum schools with six team divisions. This is precisely why the 13 data point was created by the SEC decades ago in design.

BYU which was presumably reported as the leading candidate last year may not have the same resistance this time around which basically killed the last expansion exercise and caused Oklahoma to back off pushing expansion.

If Texas AD is discussing expansion possibility which would probably indicate Houston would continue to be the priority for Texas, the Big 12 could rethink taking Houston and BYU to expand to 12 schools.

Assuming BYU could finally get the votes for the other 12th school, Oklahoma may rethink expansion.

If Texas and Oklahoma both get what they want out of expansion, there is a very good possibility the Big 12 could reopen expansion talks very soon. Basically there is nothing to stop the league from resuming expansion discussions.

East: Texas, Houston, TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech, West Virginia

West: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, K State, Kansas, BYU

Less face it the only reason to play a CCG in football is for revenue and having 12 schools minimum is a really must to work correctly for this type of system.



West:

I wonder if Cincinnati basketball played themselves into consideration due to basketball. This year they would have been a good team in the conference for rpi purposes. Maybe it's because I want BYU to stay in the WCC but I don't see a full invitation working well for the conference. I also don't see the big 12 wanting a associate football member.
I wonder if the selling point would be the additional strength in basketball. Though i'd like to see Colorado state added. The only problem is a solid #14 school for the North division.
North: Cincinnati, West Virginia, Colorado State, Iowa state, Kansas, Kansas State
South: Texas, TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech, Houston, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

I would guess the same suspects that were leading candidates for expansion last year would not have changed and Cincinnati certainly would be at the top of any Big 12 expansion list.

With a few more months of time to analyze the current landscape, I would not at all be surprised that some Big 12 schools have reconsidered their position and are willing to compromise votes should expansion talks resume.

Baylor issues were a major concern last year during expansion and did not have a permanent President. The issues were very concerning for all Big 12 schools to ensure that Baylor could get institutional control over its sports programs. The Big 12 is holding revenue to ensure the same problems do not continue to occur at the school.

Expansion would actually help the Big 12 with Baylor and should the school not make its policy transparent could easy replace Baylor with another school and not compromise the current requirement of having a minimum of 10 schools for football inventory.

It would take two years to get schools added such as a Cincinnati and time for Baylor to ensure they have resolved the serous issue that occurred at this school or possibly expel the school without compliance and not impact the required inventory of football games required by FOX and ESPN.

The Big 12 has to be considerate of future TV negotiations that will occur close to 2024 and BYU football would help fortify future TV negotiations. Can BYU get the 8 votes this time if the Big 12 resume expansion talks?

If yes, then the 12 school would probably come down to Cincinnati and Houston if the league in fact expanded. Did Houston burn any bridges when Texas acquired their football coach? My guess is yes and this could open the door for Cincinnati.

By the way any school not in the five power leagues would jump at a the chance to join the Big 12 regardless of the hiccups that occurred last year with expansion exercises.

With ESPN continuing to spend money like a drunken sailor while losing cable subscribers at the same time should not impact the Big 12 concerns with using the pro rata clause which is probably still available to the Big 12. ESPN may look entirely different by 2024 when the Big 12 is up for new TV contracts.

I'm actually kinda curious on the difference of the value of a Buy football invite and a all sports to another school. To me there is no value in just having a football invite. I would think that the number of teams being added effects BYU. Should they add only 2 teams I think a football only invite is likely. Should they expand by 4 then I personally think it's not likely.
I don't think football only invites are a long term solution to FBS conferences. I think both Navy and Hawaii are short term fixes to the AAC and MWC. I think the Big 12 may lean towards all sports invites. Purely for building up more games to offer under a new TV contract. BYU is a plus for football and a plus if they can work out the Sunday rule.

To me, associate members in any league should be based on the particular sport and if the league offers that sport as a championship. For example, men soccer is not played at all power leagues and some power schools join mid major leagues to play that sport in a conference type schedule. Similar to some mid major schools play wrestling and gymnastics in the Big 12 to make up the required number of schools to qualify as a NCAA sport for the Big 12. Football and basketball are not associate type sports and should be mandatory to play full conference schedules for both type of sports.

This is only a hutch, however, the Big 12 may have used the expansion process last year as a smoke screen to overshadow Baylor issues with the press. I firmly believe the cover up at Baylor was such a major concern to the Big 12, the league was very much considering expelling the school.

The tier 1 TV contacts require the Big 12 to have 10 members, and this could be the reason the Big 12 was considering BYU as a football only member to temporarily replace Baylor football immediately.

With apparently new transparency in the Baylor leadership at the top has eased some of the concerns, the league is holding back revenue which basically has the school on probation.

So maybe the Texas AD reference to expansion talks could have something to do with replacing Baylor if that school fails to bring the school back into Big 12 and NCAA standards with Title IX.

If the Big 12 replaced Baylor and wanted to remain with ten schools, there is a good chance Houston would or could acquire enough votes to replace Baylor and keep four Texas schools in the league.

Should the league need to expand and replace Baylor and wanted 12 schools may have been the reason the Big 12 had Houston, BYU, and Cincinnati as the top three candidates.

This of course in only speculation, however, something has to make sense out of the fiasco that occurred last year and the fact Texas AD bring up expansion again probably has a lot to do with Baylor.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 03, 2017 1:50 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:21 pm
Posts: 1043
lash wrote:

This is only a hutch, however, the Big 12 may have used the expansion process last year as a smoke screen to overshadow Baylor issues with the press. I firmly believe the cover up at Baylor was such a major concern to the Big 12, the league was very much considering expelling the school.


I can't imagine a conference kicking a member out like that...

Baylor got the closest thing to the death penalty since SMU over the MBB player's murder brought to light a number of violations and general scumbaggery. And they weren't kicked out of the Big XII for that.

BAYLOR, JOINING BIG XII TO TIME OF MURDER:
Men’s Basketball: 89-110
Football: 20-70

BETWEEN MURDER AND NCAA RULING:
Men’s Basketball: 17-40
Football: 8-14

LAST 10 YEARS:
Men’s Basketball: 243-110
Football: 75-52

If they didn’t throw an out-of-control Baylor out of the Big XII when they were BAD at sports, they probably aren’t throwing them out when they’re GOOD.

_________________
1897-1898 | 1900-06 | 1926-27 | 1929-30 | 1939 | 1942


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 03, 2017 6:02 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 3363
Location: Phoenix Arizona
JPSchmack wrote:
lash wrote:

This is only a hutch, however, the Big 12 may have used the expansion process last year as a smoke screen to overshadow Baylor issues with the press. I firmly believe the cover up at Baylor was such a major concern to the Big 12, the league was very much considering expelling the school.


I can't imagine a conference kicking a member out like that...

Baylor got the closest thing to the death penalty since SMU over the MBB player's murder brought to light a number of violations and general scumbaggery. And they weren't kicked out of the Big XII for that.

BAYLOR, JOINING BIG XII TO TIME OF MURDER:
Men’s Basketball: 89-110
Football: 20-70

BETWEEN MURDER AND NCAA RULING:
Men’s Basketball: 17-40
Football: 8-14

LAST 10 YEARS:
Men’s Basketball: 243-110
Football: 75-52

If they didn’t throw an out-of-control Baylor out of the Big XII when they were BAD at sports, they probably aren’t throwing them out when they’re GOOD.

JP, hey what's up! Well it about time for summer realignment rumors until football season starts.

I believe the Baylor situation with Title IX issues were far more serious compared to on the field performance. If on the field performance were the isues, there would be many power five school on the chopping block including Indiana, Wake Forest, Boston College, Oregon State, Kansas, Vanderbilt, Missouri just to name a few.

With that said a speaking of realignment rumors, collegesports/2017/05/01/paul-finebaum-think-oklahoma-wants-big-12-desperately Finebaum has come out with his SEC good ole boy bias with the SEC. Maybe Finebaum should be more concerned with the health of his employer compared to Oklahoma or any other school wanted to blow up the Big 12.

I do believe the Big 12 should have expanded with two additional schools. By now it is probably a good reason ESPN was pushing so hard for the Big 12 to remain with 10 schools, else Finebaum may have got cut as well.

The Big 12 could have expanded and just let the networks pay what the current rate of group of five schools until next renewal of contract are up in 2024.

By now everyone should know I am liberal and did not favor BYU expansion, however, the school along with UConn would have made a good solid move by the Big 12 for the next contract negotiations in five years down the road.

It may happen yet with Texas AD speaking of expansion for the Big 12, however, ESPN would probably not be part of the equation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2017 12:12 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 3363
Location: Phoenix Arizona
If I were Paul Finebaum, it may be a good idea to keep your mouth shut on Big 12 and Oklahoma rumors to the Big 12. https://sportsday.dallasnews.com/colleg ... rence-easy

As far as I can tell, the Big 12 never in public sighed off on taking out the pro rata clause in the contract. If for some reason the Big 12 decided to expand because Oklahoma were being considered for the SEC, the Big 12 could action the expansion plan to expand to protect its interest and cost ESPN a considerable amount money. ESPN would have to be approving any moves by Oklahoma to the SEC and the ESPN backed ESPN SECN.

Finebaum could find himself on the chopping block if ESPN had to make more concessions due to paying the Big 12 for expanding to 12 or worse yet 14 schools.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2017 2:28 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 3363
Location: Phoenix Arizona
lash wrote:
If I were Paul Finebaum, it may be a good idea to keep your mouth shut on Big 12 and Oklahoma rumors to the Big 12. https://sportsday.dallasnews.com/colleg ... rence-easy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As far as I can tell, the Big 12 never in public sighed off on taking out the pro rata clause in the contract. If for some reason the Big 12 decided to expand because Oklahoma were being considered for the SEC, the Big 12 could action the expansion plan to expand to protect its interest and cost ESPN a considerable amount money. ESPN would have to be approving any moves by Oklahoma to the SEC and the ESPN backed ESPN SECN.

Finebaum could find himself on the chopping block if ESPN had to make more concessions due to paying the Big 12 for expanding to 12 or worse yet 14 schools.

Some more thoughts since we are heading into the summer and need to discuss realignment rumors to keep our interest high in college sports.

If Oklahoma is unhappy the school is going to eventually leave regardless of the situation or steps the Big 12 needs to take. Remember the Texas AD commented during the end of basketball season expansion may be back on the agenda for the Big 12.

What if the Big 12 were to release the GOR for both Oklahoma and Oklahoma State to say join the SEC to sure up the SECN that ESPN most likely needs to beef up to make up for the many cable subscriber losses in the last year.

The Big 12 in return could add four new schools and kick in the pro rata clause for the two additional schools.

The remaining 8 Big 12 schools could pay the four new schools (two replacing the Oklahoma schools and two additional schools) 10 million per year and keep 40 million to share between the remaining 8 schools for the next few years and gradually allow the four schools to gain full payment by the end of the contract in 2024. This would provide the seven schools 35 plus million for just tier 1 and Texas would be making 50 million per year with 30 million plus 5 million extra tier 1 and 15 million for the LHN.

Less assume the schools that made the final cut are schools to continue to be in play for any future expansion.

The rumor Texas wanted to reform a SWC again could actually happen by taking Houston and SMU as replacements for the Oklahoma schools.

The north schools of Kansas, Kansas, Iowa State, and WVU could pick to the other two schools to make up the new north division. Cincinnati and either Air Force or Colorado State would probably be the preferred choice if those four schools got to make the selection.

The new Big 12 could be made up of the following in as little as two years by 2019.

South: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, SMU, Houston

North: Kansas State, Kansas, Colorado State/Air Force, Iowa State, Cincinnati, WVU

In 2024 if the Big 12 can not make up the revenue and Texas decide to leave, the league would be better positioned to make power moves by not waiting for both Oklahoma and Texas to leave at the same time.

Schools really need to be a league where the want to be and not forced by GOR.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2017 8:41 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:01 pm
Posts: 197
Even the NFL agrees, the Big 12 is no longer a P5 conference. More players were selected from the AAC (15) than from the Big 12 (14).

The Big 12 has 10 teams living off of Texas. No other P5 conference lives off just one state.

If we are going to be in a P4 world, there really isn't going to be much left of the Big 12. The SEC and the Big 10 and the Pac 12 will raid this conference. The real question is, does the conference want to stick together. If they stick together, there will not be a P4. However, if they stick together, they need new recruiting grounds to keep up. They need to get a foothold in at least two of Florida, Ohio, and California.

My loyalties are known on this board. But I grew up an OU fan. I want to see some form of the old Big 8 and SWC still alive. If they could add just a little talent from outside of the current footprint, they could get back to being one of the premiere leagues.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2017 11:54 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 3363
Location: Phoenix Arizona
hendu1976fl wrote:
Even the NFL agrees, the Big 12 is no longer a P5 conference. More players were selected from the AAC (15) than from the Big 12 (14).

The Big 12 has 10 teams living off of Texas. No other P5 conference lives off just one state.

If we are going to be in a P4 world, there really isn't going to be much left of the Big 12. The SEC and the Big 10 and the Pac 12 will raid this conference. The real question is, does the conference want to stick together. If they stick together, there will not be a P4. However, if they stick together, they need new recruiting grounds to keep up. They need to get a foothold in at least two of Florida, Ohio, and California.

My loyalties are known on this board. But I grew up an OU fan. I want to see some form of the old Big 8 and SWC still alive. If they could add just a little talent from outside of the current footprint, they could get back to being one of the premiere leagues.

hendu1976,
I am not quite sure there will be power type conferences in the next decade. ESPN is possibly not going to be around or able to operate in the current form this network has made TV deals in the past.

We as fans are going to be able to pick and choose which sports we see and that will favor the large schools such as Texas, Alabama, Ohio State, USC, Florida with very large fan bases.

If ESPN is not able to continue to pay the large fees, then the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac 12, and most defiantly the ACC will take a major hit in revenue that is shared by all the power schools in a particular league.

Remember the Big Ten only signed a short term deal with ESPN which obviously was feeling the impacts of ESPN ability to command long term deals.

The conference networks such as the BTN and SECN will probably have to try different approaches in how they provide their material and it will be interesting if fans are willing to pay the high fees for Olympic type sports. Conference networks really depend on growth by cable subscribers and not necessarily TV advertising. ESPN is a prime example of fans not wanting to pay for something they do not necessarily watch or want with customers bailing on the network.

The Big 12 spent a lot of money on consultancy firms last year which provided a great deal of input into how TV sports inventory will be provided to customers and a big reason the league did not expand or try to create a network.

The ACC exercised a contract clause with ESPN that would have required ESPN to pay 45 million dollars if no ACCN were created. It was like holding ESPN's feet to the fire.

The ACC will need for its fan base to embrace this new network and demand the service or ESPN will fall further into despair with yet another network that is not in demand and is having cable cord cuts.

With all that said, there will be a need for schools to be part of leagues for other reasons such as the Big Ten academic alliance and for scheduling purposes.

The bottom line is smaller schools or fan bases in power leagues will begin to take pay cuts or smaller shares of the financial pie in the future.

This could open the door for schools such as UCF and USF with very large enrollments to gain ground on schools currently in power leagues in the decade. This is assuming these enrollments are future fans willing to pay for sports inventory provided by those schools.

Be patient and see how the demand for TV sports inventory is provided in the next few years and your school may finally start to gain ground on schools that are just numbers in current power leagues.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 02, 2017 4:22 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 8796
Article out of Kansas City(previously posted in another thread) reporting that the Big 12 will distribute about $34.8 million per school for the 2016-2017 school year. Link at http://www.kansascity.com/sports/colleg ... 64774.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 9:26 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 8796
Four part series out of Dallas discussing the state of the Big 12 at https://sportsday.dallasnews.com/colleg ... orward?f=r

at https://sportsday.dallasnews.com/colleg ... -plummeted

at https://sportsday.dallasnews.com/colleg ... ey-saviors

and at https://sportsday.dallasnews.com/colleg ... ming-sides


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 29, 2017 5:48 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:01 pm
Posts: 197
lash wrote:
lash wrote:
If I were Paul Finebaum, it may be a good idea to keep your mouth shut on Big 12 and Oklahoma rumors to the Big 12. https://sportsday.dallasnews.com/colleg ... rence-easy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As far as I can tell, the Big 12 never in public sighed off on taking out the pro rata clause in the contract. If for some reason the Big 12 decided to expand because Oklahoma were being considered for the SEC, the Big 12 could action the expansion plan to expand to protect its interest and cost ESPN a considerable amount money. ESPN would have to be approving any moves by Oklahoma to the SEC and the ESPN backed ESPN SECN.

Finebaum could find himself on the chopping block if ESPN had to make more concessions due to paying the Big 12 for expanding to 12 or worse yet 14 schools.

Some more thoughts since we are heading into the summer and need to discuss realignment rumors to keep our interest high in college sports.

If Oklahoma is unhappy the school is going to eventually leave regardless of the situation or steps the Big 12 needs to take. Remember the Texas AD commented during the end of basketball season expansion may be back on the agenda for the Big 12.

What if the Big 12 were to release the GOR for both Oklahoma and Oklahoma State to say join the SEC to sure up the SECN that ESPN most likely needs to beef up to make up for the many cable subscriber losses in the last year.

The Big 12 in return could add four new schools and kick in the pro rata clause for the two additional schools.

The remaining 8 Big 12 schools could pay the four new schools (two replacing the Oklahoma schools and two additional schools) 10 million per year and keep 40 million to share between the remaining 8 schools for the next few years and gradually allow the four schools to gain full payment by the end of the contract in 2024. This would provide the seven schools 35 plus million for just tier 1 and Texas would be making 50 million per year with 30 million plus 5 million extra tier 1 and 15 million for the LHN.

Less assume the schools that made the final cut are schools to continue to be in play for any future expansion.

The rumor Texas wanted to reform a SWC again could actually happen by taking Houston and SMU as replacements for the Oklahoma schools.

The north schools of Kansas, Kansas, Iowa State, and WVU could pick to the other two schools to make up the new north division. Cincinnati and either Air Force or Colorado State would probably be the preferred choice if those four schools got to make the selection.

The new Big 12 could be made up of the following in as little as two years by 2019.

South: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, SMU, Houston

North: Kansas State, Kansas, Colorado State/Air Force, Iowa State, Cincinnati, WVU

In 2024 if the Big 12 can not make up the revenue and Texas decide to leave, the league would be better positioned to make power moves by not waiting for both Oklahoma and Texas to leave at the same time.

Schools really need to be a league where the want to be and not forced by GOR.


I agree with a lot of what you say. But in the end, if Texas and OU leave, we have entered the era of the P4. The only chance the remaining schools have of keeping a P5 structure is to bring schools in now and give them a chance to build up before OU and Texas leave. Of course which schools to add seems to be a sticking point and probably a big reason they didn't expand. I can hear the clock ticking, can the Presidents in Aimes, Waco, and Manhattan.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5887 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 387, 388, 389, 390, 391, 392, 393  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 












Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

NCAA Store - Food Travel Ideas

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group