Why wouldn't Texhoma do better in the Pac-16? Having said that, I don't know whether Scott could get approval again; the Arizona and mountain schools are not keen on being removed (divisionally) from the Pacific schools.

Quinn,

Either side adding schools could makes things better for the current members, and might be the direction some of the additions want to go in… but ultimately, the Big XII or ACC adding is more slices to the revenue pie, and a "Best Of" compilation conference of schools like Texas, UNC, would be the ideal situation for the top half of each league.

The ACC's current issue is the lack of football prowess, while owning plenty of basketball power.
The Big XII's current issue is the lack of TV sets outside of Texas.

Adding Florida St, Clemson and the like to the Big XII adds TV sets, but they're sharing with small market Iowa, Kansas State, Texas Tech and have redundant TCU and Baylor.

Adding Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas to the ACC would bring two football powers and increase their status, but that's also 17/18 teams.

Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas joining UNC, Duke, Georgia Tech, Va Tech, Florida State and Clemson and even Pitt is win-win.
The Big XII schools are replacing their weaker football partners with big markets and good basketball.
The ACC schools are adding two power-house programs and replacing their weaker football partners with a bigger Texas market, two football powers and a basketball power.


Westwolf,

Joining the Pac-12/14/16 would be stability for TX/OK, as the Pac-12 ain't getting raided. It would also be an academic home run.

But the real TV money is in the Eastern Time Zone. There's 200 million people on the East Coast, 70 million in the Central, and 60 million in the Pacific/Mountain time zones.

ESPN's contract with the Pac-12 is basically JUST their national ABC football time slots. ESPN doesn't want to pay BCS prices for 9 pm to 2 am ET basketball time slots when they can give a fraction of that price to the WCC.

Texas & Oklahoma would be capping their TV revenues and limiting their exposure in the Pac-12.

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

All this talk is interesting but here are the facts.

The Big 12 has a tie into the Sugar Bowl with the SEC and also has favorable relationships with the Fiesta and Cotton bowl which may be picking at large teams in the future.

Meanwhile the ACC had to team up with ND to lock down a spot in the Orange Bowl or risk being left out in the cold.

The Big 12 has a grant of right that requires 6 schools to break and an exit fee (over 20 mil I think) so its highly unlikely any school is leaving.

Meanwhile the ACC only has a large exit fee that is going to be challenged in court.

To break the Big 12's GOR, a conference would have to take UT/TT OU/OSU KU/KSU (all pairs supposedly linked together at least politically or otherwise) since Iowa St and WVU are on an island and Baylor/TCU have little realignment interest w/i the Big 3. The Big Ten could go to 20 but doesn't want the 3 tag-a-longs and SEC could also go to 20 but the most likely conference to take all 6 and go to 18 is the PAC12 but all conferences have an issue with the LHN so unless they come to terms with it, it ain't happening. And why would anyone consider leaving the Big12 for the ACC that has worse bowls and a lower TV payout.

Depending on the ACC's exit fee outcome in court, it may start another frenzy like what we saw with the Big 12 after Nebraska left. IF the ACC's exit penalty stands, they'll be okay and most likely become the 4th power conference once the Big 12 GOR expires and the PAC12 expands w/ a successful LHN or w/o a failed LHN. But assuming it gets bumped down to a reasonable number we all assume we'll see a parting of the power schools. FSU/Clemson to Big12, VAtech/UNCorNCSU to SEC, UVA/UNCorGT to Big Ten.

Why at this point wouldn't the Big 12 re-expand with the best remaining in the ACC Pitt (for WVU and a former Big12 target) Duke (AAU get bball NC market) Miami (for the market and FSU who has to play both UF and the U every year) and the best leftover from the Big Ten/SEC raid (NCSU/GAtech) to get to 16.

At 16 they'd have the 8 Texas/Oklahoma/Kansas schools in the West and Iowa St/WVU/ACC schools in the East. This may cause some problems so I could see the Big 12 adding another 2 to create 2 9 teams division with Iowa St in the West by adding some combo of Syracuse/Lville/BC.

Of course if this all was to happen, I would expect the PAC12 may get nervous (seeing everyone at 16 or above) and may strike up a deal with the TX/OK/KS pairs sending us into another realignment frenzy possibly pushing everyone to 18 or even 20.

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...

If I was the Pac I'd call the Texahoma 4 now, then call the ACC and say look, to save you from getting picked apart we can add the texahoma 4 now only if you take Kansas, Kansas St. If you don't then when the B1G comes calling, followed by SEC and the B12 will pick the last 6.

Pac(16) adds UT, TT, OU, OSU
ACC(16) adds KU, KSU
B1G(16) adds UVa, GT
SEC(16) adds UNC, VT

ACC back fills WVU, TCU, Baylor, UConn

BE(14/16) adds ISU, Fresno St.*

_________________

WRANGLERS 153-55-1 CVFL CHAMPS '04 '05 '09 '12

NFL CHAMPS '29 '30 '31 '36 '39 '44 '61 '62 '65 '66 '67 '96 '10

BW/WAC/MWC CHAMPS '77 '82 '85 '88 '89 '91 '92 '93 '99 '12
['08 NCAA BASEBALL CHAMPS]

I'm going to say it: the Big 12 f'd up in bringing in TCU and WVU.

Didn't seem like a mistake when they did it, but I think they pulled the trigger too early.

Let's face it...the ACC might be in pretty good shape, that's for sure compared to the Forgotten 5 conferences.

But had the Big 12 waited a bit...and then Maryland left...and they had 4 open spots in the Big 12...you have to think that the Big 12 could have reached out to Florida St., Georgia Tech, Clemson and Miami and potentially scored in getting them. We know that it's really only Texas and Oklahoma, and OSU now as well that are the big draws in the Big 12, the money schools. But the Big 12 would have then had 7 strong schools.

Key though, it that while the Big 12 does well per school, more than any other conference right now due to only having 10 members...adding Florida St., Miami, GA Tech and Clemson MIGHT have been the type of additions that greatly improve the TV money.


But as we know, those ACC schools weren't going anywhere because there was no real Big Ten threat at the time.

There could be now as if the Big Ten expands to 16, ACC schools are the likely candidates.

But it's too late in the Big 12. Adding Florida St. and Miami might be good, but not as impacting as adding both as well as GA Tech and Clemson. But with TCU and WVU in already, that is 16 schools...and the saturation point for the TV money seems to be 10 schools.

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

Quinn, your premise appears to be that Texas might have had a reason to join the Pac-12 when the money is better back east.

Main issue: Pac-12 Network still isn't on DirecTV. That's something that might have been resolved by now, but there is an issue with this conference that will always be a limiting factor:

LA is Lakers country. The Bay: Raiders and Giants and 49ers (and maybe in that order). Washington: Seahawks. Arizona: maybe the Suns (though that's deteriorated, maybe the Cardinals since their Super Bowl appearance?). Oregon: possibly the Blazers... but if anyone is in the best position at this point in time to thwart their pro team, it's U of O. Colorado: treats their pro sports quite well. Utah: as a friend once put it, "there is no God but Karl Malone, and John Stockton is his prophet." Lurking behind the corner is a demographic poised for, get this, soccer (maybe not so much in Colorado).

I'm not so sure the Pac-12 will ever see all the money they claimed they'd get when the contract was announced a year ago.

"Quinn, certainly your argument is plausible. Both the B12 and the ACC made some regretable mistakes, looking at the results now.

The B12 let "power" become too narrowly concentrated from within, and enough contentiousness developed that resulted in departures. I can understand they would try to get back to at least ten for competitive and programming initiatives, which they did. TCU was being strong for the moment, and the thought of the conference being directly in the Ft. Worth/Dallas area and that they could off-set the A&M loss somewhat, played well into the decision, regardless of what the outcome may prove. WVU was a prominent "competitive addition", but geographically, isolated from the rest. But if WVU had been added, with at least a couple of "nearer" schools to follow, more coherence in the design could have been achieved. But the B12 refused to pursue recent opportunities with their conservative stance. Thus, WVU sticks out there as the best institutional "filler" possible.

The ACC was making aggressive as well as defensive moves. They were certainly taking actions. However, their expansion choices were focused on "profile fits" rather than beefing up fb and embracing a natural rival, namely WVU. The conference also needed to take seriously "all its voices", with its undertakings. The ND addition, w/o full fb, did show reprecusions from elsewhere, while the conference itself seemed all pleased about it. Replacing the departing Maryland with Louisville may not be particularly negative in itself; maybe even positive in a couple of aspects; but it proved the ACC was not so deeply bonded; and resulted in the B1G being a formidable east coast power player that could cost the ACC some of their future TV value. Now, the ACC has to be truly defensive in hopes of not losing further if additions among power conferences go further soon.

I think they hit the jackpot with WVU. Even though they don't crack any major northeastern markets, they do now have a great school that recruits into PA, OH, MD, and VA, which will serve as a pipeline for these other schools. And...who's going to change their mind on WVU? The ACC thinks them a clown college, and the SEC doesn't want them. Of the two, the ACC is more likely to change their mind, but is the ACC on pace to out-earn the Big XII with the addition of Notre Dame's ollies and loss of UMD?

TCU will be the mistake, although they have shown to out-recruit their larger flagship neighbors from time to time, and with TAMU opening Texas to the SEC, a school like TCU giving eastern schools a look-in was untenable. So, TCU served two purposes: it re-centralized the conference in Texahoma, and plugged up a potential pipeline.

Where this conference NEEDS to go in order to stay relevant is Florida and California. I know USF and SDSU aren't blue-ribbon material, but it puts the conference on both shores and opens the door to some much-needed exposure and recruiting territory. BYU and Cincy may be the better programs, but I don't see both of those happening.

TCU hasn't out-recruited any of their "flagship neighbors" if you mean for 1 or 2 recruits a year then fine but all in all they are far below Texas, A&M, and OU.

TCU just basically was the Big 12's way of staking claim to DFW. A&M will open some markets to the SEC but the only major market they can claim to split with the Big 12 is Houston which they only have control over with LSU. They have a share of DFW but a small one UT/OU/Tech/TCU/Baylor own that market completely.

The Big 12 schools (not Texas) were scared of expanding too far East or West, it was a fight to get WVU in the conference (both Texas/Tech wanted them) because they thought it was UT's way of showing Tech/OU/KU (need those 3 along with TT/OSU/KSU to break the GOR) how easy it was to travel in a larger conference like the PAC (The B1G only wants UT/OU/KU so I think that ship has sailed at least until 2025).

This sounds crazy but there's a bit of truth here. If the Big 12 starts talking about expanding a bit more and adding more ACC schools like the 4 southern fb schools and Pitt and they'll get used to the idea of flying all over and it won't make much of a difference if the planes are flying 1000 miles East or West. The PAC can step in before the expansion and offer to take the 6 best Big 12 members by selling a better TV deal and higher quality academic institutions for Texas and Kansas to associate with, and possible AAU membership to OU (not really selling anything to Tech/OSU/KSU they are just tag-a-longs).

Losing Iowa St/Baylor only hurts the ability to bus it to a few games and WVU swap for USC/OR/Stan/UCLA is more than fair. TCU hurts a bit more, good travel game for 4 of the 6, good market, good recruiting area, but they will still own that market, UT/OU will still play the RRR there and Tech will dump Baylor and start playing OSU there as they wanted to originally.

Now I'm not saying Texas wanted WVU so they could move to another conference in the future (they already could have done that) but the other schools like Baylor & Iowa St simply worried that it may be a future consequence of the move. If the Big 12 doesn't add any schools, I think Texas/OU/KU will eventually leave before 2025 when the GOR expires (already some restlessness coming out of Austin w/ A&M's SEC success and while its most about the team/coach it is spilling over into the LHN and conference realignment) but if they do I think they'll be stable until then (too hard to get a 60% vote at 12/14/16/18).

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...

How about Boise St, BYU, Colorado St, Air Force, Wyoming and New Mexico

_________________
The Bear may be dead but he still hates Tennessee. Roll Damn Tide

None of those teams bring in enough money to get an invitation. Actually, no team that might be available would bring the $30 million needed to add to the conference to get an invitation.

You missed the part where they wanted to add BYU and AFA but AFA said no because they didn't want to be a bottom feeder and hurt recruiting. BYU has the Sunday problem and wanted to have reruns on BYUtv so B12 went w/ WVU.

_________________

WRANGLERS 153-55-1 CVFL CHAMPS '04 '05 '09 '12

NFL CHAMPS '29 '30 '31 '36 '39 '44 '61 '62 '65 '66 '67 '96 '10

BW/WAC/MWC CHAMPS '77 '82 '85 '88 '89 '91 '92 '93 '99 '12
['08 NCAA BASEBALL CHAMPS]

The Big 12 is not expanding w/o ACC schools. The only exception may be BYU/BSU as a fb onlys to get to 12. While I'm not a fan of this is does make sense. Brings in 2 national programs and avoids Boise's trash academics and non fb sports, and BYU's Sunday issue (if only they can get around those replay rights).

Still I think 10 is fine, unless FSU/Clemson are 11/12.

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...

I'm talking about last year when you guys called AFA and BYU before you went w/ WVU.

_________________

WRANGLERS 153-55-1 CVFL CHAMPS '04 '05 '09 '12

NFL CHAMPS '29 '30 '31 '36 '39 '44 '61 '62 '65 '66 '67 '96 '10

BW/WAC/MWC CHAMPS '77 '82 '85 '88 '89 '91 '92 '93 '99 '12
['08 NCAA BASEBALL CHAMPS]

As in the current state that the Big 12 Conference is at, I was wondering if the Big 12 could plan to revive the division format if they can possibly find 2 more members. Here are some suggestions: SMU, Houston, UTEP and Rice, to at least re-live some rivalries of the defunct Southwest Conference with the Texas schools. Unfortunately, SMU and Houston have already planned to join the Big East Conference starting on the 2013-14 season. So I believe that Rice and UTEP are the right candidates to join the Big 12. And if it happens, the division format would consist of the following: West Virginia, Iowa State, the Kansas schools (Kansas and Kansas State), and the Oklahoma schools (Oklahoma and Oklahoma State) as the North Division; while all the Texas schools (Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, and either SMU/Rice; SMU/UTEP; SMU/Houston; Rice/UTEP; Rice/Houston or UTEP/Houston) as the South Division. Lemme hear your thoughts.

_________________
Florida State Seminole fan for life (mostly on football, basketball and baseball)!