NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards

Discussions by Conference:
 
NCAA Map
  It is currently Thu Apr 19, 2018 8:18 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  [ 5933 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 389, 390, 391, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 9:36 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:33 am
Posts: 730
Location: Fiskville, Texas
hendu1976fl wrote:
Lot of good thoughts. I agree with you on ease of travel consideration. Proximity is one of those things that makes a conference a conference. Although, I do think the whole reason for expansion is football, so that should probably be a consideration. Historical performance of Rice, Tulane, SMU and Memphis. Other than the largest cheating scandal in the history of the NCAA (SMU) you would have to be a historian to say any of those teams have history. I think academics would be something you use to rule somebody out.

The WVU isolation issue must be addressed, that is why I think Cincy makes the most sense. Also, they would be able to recruit without further diluting your own product. If the Big 12 did expand, I would think they need to bring in schools that can add to the conference without taking from it. Most of the schools you mention already recruit the state of Texas, with the exception of Cincy and maybe Memphis. I think Tulane recruits Texas and I know Navy does because they petitioned the AAC to be in the West for that reason.

In regards to not being athletically ready, how long did it take TCU to get athletically ready? 3 seasons. If you add schools from P5 recruiting states (TX, CA, OH, FL, PA) they can get real good very fast, IMO.


I will answer/comment on some of Hendu's thoughts:

Proximity makes a conference.....I couldn't agree more.

The whole reason for expansion is fb.....agreed, but since none of the Go5 schools are consistently strong or even play a strong schedule....it is a tough call on who is better. That is why other factors must be considered to separate the candidates.

When I say 'history'.....I am referring to a schools SoS over their history, their history of secondary sport success and their history of playing P5 schools in all sports. It makes much more sense to add a school that has played the toughest competition and loses 5 out of every 10 games....than, to add a school who plays much lower level of competition and loses 4 out of 10 games. Who these schools have played 'historically' is super important. Take for example Navy....Navy's top 7 schools played 'all time' and # of games: Army 117, Notre Dame 91, Air Force 50, Pitt 40, Duke 40, Penn St 38, Virginia 38(followed by BC, Syracuse and Georgia Tech). That is high quality and very tough historic schedule over a 117 years. Schools like Navy would help the Big12 create a better conference with an emphasis on tradition and quality.

Academics will both rule schools out...and rule schools in. AAU is important to the few remaining AAU schools in the B12. As it should be...to keep up with the B1G, ACC and Pac12.

The WVU isolation issue must be addressed......I agree 100%. If, we are just talking fb....Navy would be my choice. If, we are talking about All Sports.....then, Cincy would be the choice, because I don't think Navy wants to leave the Patriot League. I would be happy with either situation or both schools at the same time to get back to 12 total for fb.

I think Tulane recruits Texas.....I don't think that is accurate. I looked at Tulanes roster last season...and they only had a handful of players from Texas. Many of their kids came from all over the country. Louisiana is a great state to add....for recruiting and proximity. Plus, Tulane is the best education in the whole of the Gulf states....and they are AAU.

TCU.....Up till the 1990's TCU played a P5 style schedule. Since then...I believe they performed very will in the WAC and MWC. They were ready when they entered the conference. It did take them a season or two for it to show....but, IIRC...they won right away in baseball and went deep in the NCAA tourney since then. Not to mention....they have continually upgraded their facilities for years.

_________________
Fan of:
State of Texas
Southwest Conference
Big XII


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2017 10:23 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:01 pm
Posts: 200
mozilla wrote:
hendu1976fl wrote:
Lot of good thoughts. I agree with you on ease of travel consideration. Proximity is one of those things that makes a conference a conference. Although, I do think the whole reason for expansion is football, so that should probably be a consideration. Historical performance of Rice, Tulane, SMU and Memphis. Other than the largest cheating scandal in the history of the NCAA (SMU) you would have to be a historian to say any of those teams have history. I think academics would be something you use to rule somebody out.

The WVU isolation issue must be addressed, that is why I think Cincy makes the most sense. Also, they would be able to recruit without further diluting your own product. If the Big 12 did expand, I would think they need to bring in schools that can add to the conference without taking from it. Most of the schools you mention already recruit the state of Texas, with the exception of Cincy and maybe Memphis. I think Tulane recruits Texas and I know Navy does because they petitioned the AAC to be in the West for that reason.

In regards to not being athletically ready, how long did it take TCU to get athletically ready? 3 seasons. If you add schools from P5 recruiting states (TX, CA, OH, FL, PA) they can get real good very fast, IMO.


I will answer/comment on some of Hendu's thoughts:

Proximity makes a conference.....I couldn't agree more.

The whole reason for expansion is fb.....agreed, but since none of the Go5 schools are consistently strong or even play a strong schedule....it is a tough call on who is better. That is why other factors must be considered to separate the candidates.

When I say 'history'.....I am referring to a schools SoS over their history, their history of secondary sport success and their history of playing P5 schools in all sports. It makes much more sense to add a school that has played the toughest competition and loses 5 out of every 10 games....than, to add a school who plays much lower level of competition and loses 4 out of 10 games. Who these schools have played 'historically' is super important. Take for example Navy....Navy's top 7 schools played 'all time' and # of games: Army 117, Notre Dame 91, Air Force 50, Pitt 40, Duke 40, Penn St 38, Virginia 38(followed by BC, Syracuse and Georgia Tech). That is high quality and very tough historic schedule over a 117 years. Schools like Navy would help the Big12 create a better conference with an emphasis on tradition and quality.

Academics will both rule schools out...and rule schools in. AAU is important to the few remaining AAU schools in the B12. As it should be...to keep up with the B1G, ACC and Pac12.

The WVU isolation issue must be addressed......I agree 100%. If, we are just talking fb....Navy would be my choice. If, we are talking about All Sports.....then, Cincy would be the choice, because I don't think Navy wants to leave the Patriot League. I would be happy with either situation or both schools at the same time to get back to 12 total for fb.

I think Tulane recruits Texas.....I don't think that is accurate. I looked at Tulanes roster last season...and they only had a handful of players from Texas. Many of their kids came from all over the country. Louisiana is a great state to add....for recruiting and proximity. Plus, Tulane is the best education in the whole of the Gulf states....and they are AAU.

TCU.....Up till the 1990's TCU played a P5 style schedule. Since then...I believe they performed very will in the WAC and MWC. They were ready when they entered the conference. It did take them a season or two for it to show....but, IIRC...they won right away in baseball and went deep in the NCAA tourney since then. Not to mention....they have continually upgraded their facilities for years.


History is an interesting discussion point. How do you examine history? All time history, like say back in 1940, when none of the current players/administrators were born yet. How about comparable history? comparing UCF to Rice, Tulane, SMU and Cincy in the current time frame is not fair to those programs. While on the same footing (being in the same conference) UCF has won more than they have lost to those schools. 6-2 against Tulane, 7-1 against SMU, 3-1 against Rice, and 2-1 against Cincy (also we have 3 conference championships to their 1 since joining their conference 5 years ago). I would venture to say that UCF will be favored against Cincy next year. Over the few years that a newbie like UCF has played at the FBS level, they have managed to beat Bama and Penn State on the road, Baylor in a bowl game, BC and NC State. In regards to the history of the Naval academy, does FSU compare to them with respect to who they have played? If so, only barely. Also, why would you use Duke and Virginia to illustrate your point about playing top level competition? I get they are in power leagues, but c'mon, you got to be able to find better examples than that when they have been playing in the top division for almost 100 years loner than UCF has been playing. Also, cudos to many of the aforementioned for being around when the game was invented.

In your response to JPSmack (who I don't think is a UCF homer, just a college football fan) you mentioned that the Big 12 should not consider any Florida school unless it is FSU. Lets take a look at this through the eyes of history. Let us say the year is 1979 and the Big 12 is in its current alignment of schools. Using your criteria would it have been better to add Arkansas or FSU? Using your criteria: geographic proximity, history, etc.. wouldn't the pick in 1979 have been Arkansas? Looking back I would say that would have been a mistake.

Again, I completely agree with you on geographic proximity. Adding one or both of the Florida schools would create outliers. But they could be outliers with benefits.

As far as USF is concerned, no they don't draw much. Even when they are good, they have very little fan interest.

While I do argue for UCF and even USF (God that leaves a terrible taste in my mouth) for inclusion in the Big 12, my main concern is that some of the better G5 programs like BYU, Cincy, Houston, Boise State and Memphis and the Florida duo will get left out based on the current direction college football seems to be heading. BYU getting left out just seems ridiculous, given their history.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 11, 2017 9:51 am 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:33 am
Posts: 730
Location: Fiskville, Texas
Again, there are major problems preventing the Florida duo from getting a sniff from the Big12.
# 1. Connections - who ya' know and associate with.
# 2. Academics - AAU or highly ranked University.
# 3. Proximity - a school that doesn't aggravate already stretched travel budgets.
# 4. Secondary sports - highly ranked sports that aren't fb.

How does the duo overcome these issues when there are schools that have check marks in ALL of those categories?

Rice, Tulane, SMU, UofH, Cincy, Navy....even New Mexico, (unrealistically? - Arkansas, Missouri) have more check marks than the duo from Florida. Memphis(even though I wouldn't really want them) has more check marks than the duo from Fla.

I just don't see how the schools from Fla are going to overcome their current deficits??
Really, I wish the Florida schools the best of luck...but, there has to be a better solution for them than to have to travel to Big12 facilities.

_________________
Fan of:
State of Texas
Southwest Conference
Big XII


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 11, 2017 10:55 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:25 pm
Posts: 2260
Here's the question.... Have Texas and Oklahoma made up their minds that they are going elsewhere when this GoR expires ? That MAY be the case.
One possible explanation as to why they decided against expanding the Big XII last year, is that doing so may have been heading down the road toward an extension of the GoR, which they did NOT want.

If you believe that may be the case (I'm not saying for certain that this is true, only a theory), you could wind up with a Big XII consisting of 8 schools minus Texas, minus Oklahoma. At that point, is the conference any more attractive to other schools or to broadcasters than the AAC or MWC ? I would say no. You are left with a group of mid-western schools in small TV markets and pair of religious schools in Texas. At that point, you may have those remaining Big XII schools scrambling for stability.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 11, 2017 11:26 am 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:33 am
Posts: 730
Location: Fiskville, Texas
As a resident of the state of Texas since 1980, and having attended both Texas Tech and Texas....I don't see a time where Texas stops playing the other state of Texas schools. Period! It won't happen.

The UofO? I couldn't say what they will do?? Almost all of UO's players come from the state of Texas....they may run into the same problem Arkansas had after leaving the SWC. Their access to Texas recruits will totally dry up. Which doesn't seem like too smart of a move.

One other thing is for certain....Texas will continue to play UO every year whether in conference or out.

side note:
To see what has happened to aTm's schedule is sad. They used to play almost every game against schools in the state of Texas. Now, they are lucky to play 1 game each season against an in-state rival...and those games now are against UTSA, UTEP or Rice. I don't think that UT will do the same thing to their fans.

_________________
Fan of:
State of Texas
Southwest Conference
Big XII


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 11:32 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:25 pm
Posts: 2260
Can't argue with your facts.
But just about everywhere in D-1, college administrators have chosen MONEY over fans / rivalries.

aTm is not suffering financially. Yeah, many of their fans preferred playing Texas schools over SEC, but Texas A&M is filling the seats, and the SEC money is NOT disappointing to them.
Arkansas is constructing some new edifice in the one end zone as an "expansion".

When Texas signed up for the Longhorn Network, they jumped at a financial windfall. Surely, they knew this would prevent the possibility of a Big XII Network that would benefit all schools in the conference, but when some doof at ESPN is throwing that much money at UT, can you blame them ?

So I think all things equal, schools would choose to play their local rivals, but the big measure of "football success" to the college administration is PROFITABILITY.
The powers that be at A&M (different from the fans) are quite happy with the move to the SEC.

The TV money is moving toward the P5, because they are relevant. The G5 gets paid a pittance to play on Wednesday nights. CUSA saw their TV money slashed to a fraction of what it had been, because CUSA is not relevant to the CFP. Look at the AAC. UCF was 12-0. They were not evaluated fairly in terms of rankings, the committee doing the rankings only looks at P5 schools - they seem to enjoy keeping the G5 IRrelevant.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 12:07 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:33 am
Posts: 730
Location: Fiskville, Texas
tute79 wrote:
Can't argue with your facts.
But just about everywhere in D-1, college administrators have chosen MONEY over fans / rivalries.

aTm is not suffering financially. Yeah, many of their fans preferred playing Texas schools over SEC, but Texas A&M is filling the seats, and the SEC money is NOT disappointing to them.
Arkansas is constructing some new edifice in the one end zone as an "expansion".

When Texas signed up for the Longhorn Network, they jumped at a financial windfall. Surely, they knew this would prevent the possibility of a Big XII Network that would benefit all schools in the conference, but when some doof at ESPN is throwing that much money at UT, can you blame them ?

So I think all things equal, schools would choose to play their local rivals, but the big measure of "football success" to the college administration is PROFITABILITY.
The powers that be at A&M (different from the fans) are quite happy with the move to the SEC.

The TV money is moving toward the P5, because they are relevant. The G5 gets paid a pittance to play on Wednesday nights. CUSA saw their TV money slashed to a fraction of what it had been, because CUSA is not relevant to the CFP. Look at the AAC. UCF was 12-0. They were not evaluated fairly in terms of rankings, the committee doing the rankings only looks at P5 schools - they seem to enjoy keeping the G5 IRrelevant.



I agree with just about everything you wrote.

However, just about all P5 schools are very profitable. I am certain that there are exceptions but, the majority make quite a bit of money, already. And let's not forget how much money a school makes when they sell out their home games.

When the opportunity to have a network(now called the LHN) was originally started...it was a network for both aTm and UT. aTm got their panties in a wad, which they are prone to do....and backed out. Leaving just UT as the sole beneficiary of the windfall.

aTm is a unique situation and fan base. They are hard to understand sometimes but, I am glad for them that they have found their own way and can quit blaming UT for all their problems. I actually like the B12 without aTm. The conference hasn't had a ton of bitching and complaining and everyone seems to be getting along with each other better than they have in many years. As much as I have loved to hate aTm since my freshman year at Texas Tech.....I like the conference without them much better now.
There is no doubt that aTm fills their stadium just about every game...and they have a thriving tailgate and post game festivities. My nephew is there finishing up the first semester of his jr year....and loves it. I do however feel sad for him that he can't enjoy 'hating' the other Texas schools like we did when I was back in college. The only away game he has a chance to attend is the Arkansas game played in Dallas(neutral site...no chance of seeing another campus). Where...back when I was in college we almost always went to away games...visiting the other Texas schools. And it was a blast! We would catch up with our high school friends that went to that school, talk trash, party and meet new co-eds.

_________________
Fan of:
State of Texas
Southwest Conference
Big XII


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 9:40 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:01 pm
Posts: 200
mozilla wrote:
Again, there are major problems preventing the Florida duo from getting a sniff from the Big12.
# 1. Connections - who ya' know and associate with.
# 2. Academics - AAU or highly ranked University.
# 3. Proximity - a school that doesn't aggravate already stretched travel budgets.
# 4. Secondary sports - highly ranked sports that aren't fb.

How does the duo overcome these issues when there are schools that have check marks in ALL of those categories?

Rice, Tulane, SMU, UofH, Cincy, Navy....even New Mexico, (unrealistically? - Arkansas, Missouri) have more check marks than the duo from Florida. Memphis(even though I wouldn't really want them) has more check marks than the duo from Fla.

I just don't see how the schools from Fla are going to overcome their current deficits??
Really, I wish the Florida schools the best of luck...but, there has to be a better solution for them than to have to travel to Big12 facilities.


Point #1 I certainly can't disagree with.
Point #2, both the Florida schools are relatively young schools and are improving in that area. AAU, nope. But give them time.
Point #3, don't Texans and Oklahomans already travel to Florida- Disney? Bring the kids and make a long weekend of it.
Point #4, UCF women's soccer is pretty good, UCF baseball has gotten into the tournament, never done much. Bit of a sore subject, high school baseball is very good down here, no reason not to be better than we have been. We've put some money into upgrading their facilities over the past few years. USF women's hoops is pretty good, and UCF isn't terrible, but when you have UConn in your league, good luck. Honestly, I don't know too awful much about USF, other than I don't care for the location of their campus, not the best neighborhood.

As far as traveling to Big 12 facilities/locations, we already travel and have very little TV money to build with. Pennsylvania and Connecticut might not be in the Big 12, but they are about the same distance. Adding Wichita State puts us in Kansas for everything but football. Currently and even going back to our CUSA days we traveled to Texas to play SMU, Houston, Rice and UTEP.

How do the Florida schools overcome these deficits? Simple: just keep winning and win big. Stay in the top 25 and like you said, improve in other sports. Baseball needs to start getting to super regionals. Not getting embarrassed by Auburn would certainly help.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:08 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:01 pm
Posts: 200
tute79 wrote:
Here's the question.... Have Texas and Oklahoma made up their minds that they are going elsewhere when this GoR expires ? That MAY be the case.
One possible explanation as to why they decided against expanding the Big XII last year, is that doing so may have been heading down the road toward an extension of the GoR, which they did NOT want.

If you believe that may be the case (I'm not saying for certain that this is true, only a theory), you could wind up with a Big XII consisting of 8 schools minus Texas, minus Oklahoma. At that point, is the conference any more attractive to other schools or to broadcasters than the AAC or MWC ? I would say no. You are left with a group of mid-western schools in small TV markets and pair of religious schools in Texas. At that point, you may have those remaining Big XII schools scrambling for stability.


I fell like I have been saying this same thing for quite some time. If you are one of the 8 school presidents who might get left behind, shouldn't you be trying to make the conference stronger in the event the schools do leave? Adding eyeballs in states that have large tv viewership might help lessen the blow should they leave. That being said, nobody you could add would replace OU and UT in terms of TV viewership. But if you could solve the BYU (I know I may be stepping into it, that sort of got ugly last year on here) no Sunday thing, they would be a good add. Cincy is already close to the conference, plus they wouldn't recruit the state of Texas.

For the long term health of the league, they need to bring in a school or two that doesn't dilute the product. Adding SMU and or Houston only hurts Tech, Baylor, and TCU (probably the rest of the conference too). Cincy won't be stealing many kids out of Texas. BYU might take a few, but certainly not as many SMU/Houston. Obviously the Florida schools wouldn't recruit very many Texas kids, we got plenty down here. Cincy and the Florida school(s) help WVU in terms of recruiting. Cincy might help Iowa State as well.

If UT and OU do leave, wouldn't the Big 12 be in better shape if they could add a few schools and let them develop before the defections? I don't know if UT will ever leave, but I think it is 50/50 on OU.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:39 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:33 am
Posts: 730
Location: Fiskville, Texas
The tv model is ever changing these days. Unlike what it was 10 years ago...the internet will continue to reshape how people watch college sports. TV viewership and tv money could dry up or move a totally different direction. Why not concentrate on filling the stadium with fans? Fans that can actually travel en' mass by driving a short distance. If that were the case...schools wouldn't have to depend on some outside decision maker to tell them what to do and how to do it. Full stadiums equals direct money for each and every school in the conference.

BYU has the same location problem that the Florida schools have. Adding them would only put another outlier on the schedule. Not really the optimal situation. Navy would be a much better choice.

BYU is not AAU, though they have a well ranked school educationally.

And in my opinion....BYU isn't really as great as everyone likes to think. Their fan base and fan support is excellent I will admit. But, they really haven't proven to me that they are the world beaters that BYU fans like to think they are. BYU has a history of playing weak competition...essentially they have the same historic schedule as a Colorado St or New Mexico....and both those schools are much closer to the core of the conference.

The issues that came up last year....and BYU's reluctance to be a team player in any conference they have been in...worries me a bit. The last thing the Big12 needs is another school that makes problems for the whole conference. The other schools that were easily disgruntled are gone. No need to add another one to replace them. BYU should work towards getting into the PAC12...that is where they fit the best. If the PAC has no desire to add them for some reason....then that reason could easily be adopted by the Big12.

You mentioned the other Texas schools....those schools already recruit the state of Texas...so, they wouldn't hurt Big12 recruiting. All their rosters are already full of Texas kids.
I don't think any of the B12 schools have trouble recruiting....barring Kansas maybe.

_________________
Fan of:
State of Texas
Southwest Conference
Big XII


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 11:14 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:01 pm
Posts: 200
mozilla wrote:
The tv model is ever changing these days. Unlike what it was 10 years ago...the internet will continue to reshape how people watch college sports. TV viewership and tv money could dry up or move a totally different direction. Why not concentrate on filling the stadium with fans? Fans that can actually travel en' mass by driving a short distance. If that were the case...schools wouldn't have to depend on some outside decision maker to tell them what to do and how to do it. Full stadiums equals direct money for each and every school in the conference.

BYU has the same location problem that the Florida schools have. Adding them would only put another outlier on the schedule. Not really the optimal situation. Navy would be a much better choice.

BYU is not AAU, though they have a well ranked school educationally.

And in my opinion....BYU isn't really as great as everyone likes to think. Their fan base and fan support is excellent I will admit. But, they really haven't proven to me that they are the world beaters that BYU fans like to think they are. BYU has a history of playing weak competition...essentially they have the same historic schedule as a Colorado St or New Mexico....and both those schools are much closer to the core of the conference.

The issues that came up last year....and BYU's reluctance to be a team player in any conference they have been in...worries me a bit. The last thing the Big12 needs is another school that makes problems for the whole conference. The other schools that were easily disgruntled are gone. No need to add another one to replace them. BYU should work towards getting into the PAC12...that is where they fit the best. If the PAC has no desire to add them for some reason....then that reason could easily be adopted by the Big12.

You mentioned the other Texas schools....those schools already recruit the state of Texas...so, they wouldn't hurt Big12 recruiting. All their rosters are already full of Texas kids.
I don't think any of the B12 schools have trouble recruiting....barring Kansas maybe.


Agreed on the TV issues. No idea where that is heading and what that will look like when its time to renegotiate.

My point about SMU, Houston and even Rice is that they are like UCF and USF. UCF/USF are not going to be able to land the majority of the kids recruited by FSU/UF/Miami. Because we are not in a P5 conference, it is tough to get those kids to seriously look at our school. Same thing goes for UH/SMU/Rice vs TCU/Baylor/TTU/UT. However, if SMU and Houston are in the Big 12, they will get some of the kids that would have gone to TCU/Baylor/TTU and certainly some of the out of state Big 12 schools.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2017 12:28 am 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:33 am
Posts: 730
Location: Fiskville, Texas
hendu1976fl wrote:
mozilla wrote:
The tv model is ever changing these days. Unlike what it was 10 years ago...the internet will continue to reshape how people watch college sports. TV viewership and tv money could dry up or move a totally different direction. Why not concentrate on filling the stadium with fans? Fans that can actually travel en' mass by driving a short distance. If that were the case...schools wouldn't have to depend on some outside decision maker to tell them what to do and how to do it. Full stadiums equals direct money for each and every school in the conference.

BYU has the same location problem that the Florida schools have. Adding them would only put another outlier on the schedule. Not really the optimal situation. Navy would be a much better choice.

BYU is not AAU, though they have a well ranked school educationally.

And in my opinion....BYU isn't really as great as everyone likes to think. Their fan base and fan support is excellent I will admit. But, they really haven't proven to me that they are the world beaters that BYU fans like to think they are. BYU has a history of playing weak competition...essentially they have the same historic schedule as a Colorado St or New Mexico....and both those schools are much closer to the core of the conference.

The issues that came up last year....and BYU's reluctance to be a team player in any conference they have been in...worries me a bit. The last thing the Big12 needs is another school that makes problems for the whole conference. The other schools that were easily disgruntled are gone. No need to add another one to replace them. BYU should work towards getting into the PAC12...that is where they fit the best. If the PAC has no desire to add them for some reason....then that reason could easily be adopted by the Big12.

You mentioned the other Texas schools....those schools already recruit the state of Texas...so, they wouldn't hurt Big12 recruiting. All their rosters are already full of Texas kids.
I don't think any of the B12 schools have trouble recruiting....barring Kansas maybe.


Agreed on the TV issues. No idea where that is heading and what that will look like when its time to renegotiate.

My point about SMU, Houston and even Rice is that they are like UCF and USF. UCF/USF are not going to be able to land the majority of the kids recruited by FSU/UF/Miami. Because we are not in a P5 conference, it is tough to get those kids to seriously look at our school. Same thing goes for UH/SMU/Rice vs TCU/Baylor/TTU/UT. However, if SMU and Houston are in the Big 12, they will get some of the kids that would have gone to TCU/Baylor/TTU and certainly some of the out of state Big 12 schools.


I guess I see the recruiting just a bit differently.
Instead of UofH, SMU, and Rice stealing from TCU, Baylor, Texas and Tech.....I feel they would keep some of the kids from going to K St, KU, Iowa St and WVU. UO has as good a lock on Texas kids as anyone. OSU might lose a few kids to the new comers.

Recruiting just isn't that big a problem. There are plenty of quality players around the country. It's not like schools are hurting for bodies. I would put recruiting down on the list of needs for NCAA fb and the Big 12.
Even UofH got a 5 star recruit a year or two ago.
You also have to remember....that Texas has a whole second and third teir of fb schools that have quite a few good players....unlike many other states. Some of the recruits would come from UTSA, Texas St, UTEP, N. Texas; Sam Houston, SFA, Lamar, Abilene Christian, Houston Baptist, and others. If you pull the best 4 players off the second and third tier schools....that is plenty of recruits to spread around.

_________________
Fan of:
State of Texas
Southwest Conference
Big XII


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2017 3:39 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:21 pm
Posts: 1050
mozilla wrote:
3. Your theory that you add a teams future is adsurd.
Is that how Maryland and Rutgers got into the B1G? No.
Is that how Colorado got into the Pac12? No.
Is that why BYU is still without a conference? No.
You just want your school in the Big12 so badly that you are willing to overlook the obvious reasons schools get invited to a new or better conference.

The Big12 has many schools to choose from....and none of them should be from Florida unless their name is Florida State.


But it IS why those schools got into their new conferences. The Big Ten made their decision not on the past strength of football at Maryland or Rutgers, but future revenue from having the DC/NY markets putting BTN on basic cable.

Also, I just want my school in the Big XII so badly?? I really don't think St. Bonaventure is getting that invite. THAT'S my school. I'm not a UCF guy at all. I just see a massive campus/student body, a commitment to new facilities, the infrastructure in place to be a power, a large TV market and in one of the most fertile recruiting states.


We all know there's a difference between BCS schools and non-BCS schools. And UCF and UConn are BCS schools playing sports in non-BCS conferences right now.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2017 3:46 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 3369
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Nice to see conversations on future Big 12 expansion. The following schools were not eliminate from last years discussion on expansion and most likely would be the top target of group of five schools if the conference decided to expand without power five options: Tulane, SMU, Houston, UConn, South Fla, UCF, Cincinnati, Air Force, Colorado State, BYU. Boise State, San Diego State, Memphis, Temple, Northern Illinois, East Carolina were all eliminated from the list before the Big 12 dropped the option to expand.

Interesting ESPN is buying up the FOX regional networks with the exception of FS1 and national FOX which include Big Ten and Pac 12 non tier 3 sports. This could be interesting because ESPN could help launch the Big 12 digital network and keep out of the hands of Amazon and other networks considering getting in digital college sports business. This may have been part of the agreement to not expand the Big 12 and require ESPN to pay pro rata and wait until ESPN were in a position to start up the Big 12 Digital Network branded by ESPN.

My guess is the Big 12 would only expand if the football championship game became an issue with rematches and/or ESPN agreed on the need for more teams to support the digital startup network for the Big 12.

Based on this year, the CCG did not hurt the league with Oklahoma gaining one of the four playoff spots. Unless the digital network would support additional members with added revenue for ESPN, the Big 12 would most likely remain in its current alignment.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2017 4:20 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:33 am
Posts: 730
Location: Fiskville, Texas
JPSchmack wrote:
mozilla wrote:
3. Your theory that you add a teams future is adsurd.
Is that how Maryland and Rutgers got into the B1G? No.
Is that how Colorado got into the Pac12? No.
Is that why BYU is still without a conference? No.
You just want your school in the Big12 so badly that you are willing to overlook the obvious reasons schools get invited to a new or better conference.

The Big12 has many schools to choose from....and none of them should be from Florida unless their name is Florida State.


But it IS why those schools got into their new conferences. The Big Ten made their decision not on the past strength of football at Maryland or Rutgers, but future revenue from having the DC/NY markets putting BTN on basic cable.

Also, I just want my school in the Big XII so badly?? I really don't think St. Bonaventure is getting that invite. THAT'S my school. I'm not a UCF guy at all. I just see a massive campus/student body, a commitment to new facilities, the infrastructure in place to be a power, a large TV market and in one of the most fertile recruiting states.


We all know there's a difference between BCS schools and non-BCS schools. And UCF and UConn are BCS schools playing sports in non-BCS conferences right now.


Sorry JP. The term 'your school' was not meant to mean the school you attended or support....but, the school you are referring to...in this discussion.

_________________
Fan of:
State of Texas
Southwest Conference
Big XII


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5933 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 389, 390, 391, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


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