NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Tue Sep 30, 2014 6:57 pm

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3162 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179 ... 211  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jul 22, 2013 8:18 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 1096
Yeah, when it's roughly 200-300 miles between the closest eastern schools, it's not really all that beneficial travel-wise. Even for intrastate members, like Marshall could be, it's still a bit too small and too far away for it to be worth it. But I think WVU would hot-shot Marshall anyway. I don't think WVU wants them anywhere near Morgantown's running buddies. WV is a small state...WVU is the flagship, thus, it gets the preferential treatment and will remind Marshall of that.

The distance factor is why I don't like UConn's predicament in anything other than the ACC or Big Ten. They are just way too far from everything and will need so much a subsidy or big conference media payout that the matter will eventually shrink their athletic program.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 23, 2013 3:19 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 1096
The new Big XII logo.

Yeah, yeah, looks like FAU...

No way they stay at 10. Almost pulls off that Big Ten-11 thing. BYU just around the corner?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 23, 2013 4:07 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 12:26 pm
Posts: 399
Certainly is a possibilty.

However,it will likely be football only.

Also BYU will demand lots of conditions.

Could be like ND with the ACC except relates to football.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 23, 2013 5:31 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 693
Location: Columbus, OH
I kinda like the new logo. I still think the Sunbelt, MAC, and Pac 12's are better but it is better than the Big Ten, SEC, MWC, and ACC logos. I won't even comment on the American logo--that thing is just hideous.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 23, 2013 9:01 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 703
Location: Louisville, KY
Could the Big 12 look at St. Louis to offset a football-only BYU? The Big East appears to have passed on them, at least initially. It gets the Big 12 back in Missouri and gives Iowa State a more natural travel partner. The league already has Baylor and TCU so another private school wouldn't be an issue.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 23, 2013 9:52 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm
Posts: 1449
wbyeager wrote:
Could the Big 12 look at St. Louis to offset a football-only BYU? The Big East appears to have passed on them, at least initially. It gets the Big 12 back in Missouri and gives Iowa State a more natural travel partner. The league already has Baylor and TCU so another private school wouldn't be an issue.


No need, while everyone may not like the round robin football, most of the Big 12 likes getting home and homes in basketball.

If they took BYU they'd obviously need another fb only to get to 12 as that is the only reason they'd take BYU in the first place. The only schools that makes sense would be Boise and even with their popularity I don't think that's a pill the Big 12 is willing to swallow especially when you consider that WVU is already complaining about travel, and while 1 trip to the Mnt Time Zone isn't that big of a deal, the perception would only get worse.

If they expand it'll be with two Central/Eastern members, Rice/Houston (not both), Tulane, Memphis, Cincy, UConn, USF, UCF but none of those really make the conference want to expand.

(If you ask me I'd rather drop WVU and take Rice, Tulane, and Memphis to have a nice geographic conference while adding 3 nice major cities to the Big 12's roster, two more AAU schools, plus a good basketball program and a great baseball program however they all suck at football so it would never happen)

North - Iowa St, Kansas, K State, Oklahoma, OK State, Memphis
South - Texas, TX Tech, Baylor, TCU, Rice, Tulane

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:08 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 1096
Another look at the logo.

No attempt at hiding the 12.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2013 9:43 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2687
Location: Phoenix Arizona
The Bishin Cutter wrote:
Another look at the logo.

No attempt at hiding the 12.

My first observation to the new Big 12 logo was how clearly the number 10 appears with the down and up errors as the one and the two IIs of the roman numeral form the zero.

It appears the Big 12 clearly flatted out the Big 12 roman numeral to make or form a 10.

The Big East used the technique for making the Big look like a 16 and the Big Ten new Big appeared to be an attempt at creating a 16 as the G making up a number 6 and highlighting the B as a different color of black and the 16 as blue.

Regardless if this was the actual attempt, it would be a very cleaver message the Big 12 plans to remain at 10 for a very long time.

Sorry guys I just do not see the Big 12 expanding for the next decade and possibly never.

My thoughts are the only excitement that may occur for the major conferences in the future would be a break from the NCAA. If that were to take place we could see some possible NFL type alignment of divisions among the most likely five power conference that would most likely be part of any split from the NCAA.

Otherwise, sit back and enjoy the current formats of the major five conferences for the next decade. This a lifetime in conference alignment with most having GORs.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2013 12:07 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 1096
lash wrote:
My first observation to the new Big 12 logo was how clearly the number 10 appears with the down and up errors as the one and the two IIs of the roman numeral form the zero.

It appears the Big 12 clearly flatted out the Big 12 roman numeral to make or form a 10.

The Big East used the technique for making the Big look like a 16 and the Big Ten new Big appeared to be an attempt at creating a 16 as the G making up a number 6 and highlighting the B as a different color of black and the 16 as blue.


The arrows at the "X" is all well and good...but that part on the bottom, where it literally says "Big 12;" that was what drew my comment. Granted, it's still technically a WiP (finalized by next year).

It's a shame they couldn't shed two more schools and go back to being the Big 8.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2013 4:36 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 693
Location: Columbus, OH
We've talked on here before about how the Big 12 will only hold together as long as Texas and Oklahoma are happy. But what would happen if Oklahoma became disenchanted and tired of Longhorn arrogance? Texas gets a much better deal from the special arrangement made last year that kept the Big 12 together. Texas got the Longhorn Network but what did the Sooners get? Sure they get more money for appearances on national television but Texas gets that too. Texas is making a fortune off of the LHN but Oklahoma can't turn their Tier 3 rights into that kind of money--the state of Oklahoma doesn't have enough households to make a Sooner Network viable and that deal made last year strictly forbade the creation of a Big 12 Network per Texas's wishes.

With the start of the new SEC Network and their equal revenue sharing plan the Sooners could make far more money in the SEC. I would have to think that the SEC would want the Sooners if the Sooners wanted in. The only hurtles to clear would be breaking free of the political baggage of Oklahoma St and nullifying the Big 12 GoR.

What would Texas do then? Would they continue to play king of the Big 12 mountain or would the rest of the league be too weak for them to stay? What would that fall out look like?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2013 9:45 pm 
Offline
Junior
Junior

Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 11:51 am
Posts: 102
fighting muskie wrote:
We've talked on here before about how the Big 12 will only hold together as long as Texas and Oklahoma are happy. But what would happen if Oklahoma became disenchanted and tired of Longhorn arrogance? Texas gets a much better deal from the special arrangement made last year that kept the Big 12 together. Texas got the Longhorn Network but what did the Sooners get? Sure they get more money for appearances on national television but Texas gets that too. Texas is making a fortune off of the LHN but Oklahoma can't turn their Tier 3 rights into that kind of money--the state of Oklahoma doesn't have enough households to make a Sooner Network viable and that deal made last year strictly forbade the creation of a Big 12 Network per Texas's wishes.

With the start of the new SEC Network and their equal revenue sharing plan the Sooners could make far more money in the SEC. I would have to think that the SEC would want the Sooners if the Sooners wanted in. The only hurtles to clear would be breaking free of the political baggage of Oklahoma St and nullifying the Big 12 GoR.

What would Texas do then? Would they continue to play king of the Big 12 mountain or would the rest of the league be too weak for them to stay? What would that fall out look like?

IF (and it is a REALLY BIG IF) OU actually wanted into the SEC and could separate from OSU (good luck on THAT happening) then the SEC has to come up with #16. Who would fit the bill? kU has never had strong enough football historically (only 8 conference championships and 12 all-time bowl appearances) and the Chickenhawks only really care about basketball. FSU, GA Tech and Clemson have same state issues. UNC/NC State are ACC locked (and have the same GOR problem as OU).
But the question was about UT...UT I think would make the remaining Big 12 schools try to cower at their "power" now. But that might also create a backlash like A&M had when the LHN was announced. The other schools would have to make a decision, cow tow to UT or tell the 'Horns to go to Hell and either get in line with the other league members or get booted from the league. I think by that point, ISU, kU, KSU, OSU, BU, TCU, and TTU would have the gumption to get other members like them (see Colorado State, New Mexico U, Wyoming, Houston, and/or maybe South Dakota State) and allow WVU to find a new home if they want. I know that the current members of the Old Big 8 plus some of the Old SWC members are really tired of UT "ruling the roost" and might just have it in them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:08 am 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 693
Location: Columbus, OH
mizzoufan1 wrote:
fighting muskie wrote:
We've talked on here before about how the Big 12 will only hold together as long as Texas and Oklahoma are happy. But what would happen if Oklahoma became disenchanted and tired of Longhorn arrogance? Texas gets a much better deal from the special arrangement made last year that kept the Big 12 together. Texas got the Longhorn Network but what did the Sooners get? Sure they get more money for appearances on national television but Texas gets that too. Texas is making a fortune off of the LHN but Oklahoma can't turn their Tier 3 rights into that kind of money--the state of Oklahoma doesn't have enough households to make a Sooner Network viable and that deal made last year strictly forbade the creation of a Big 12 Network per Texas's wishes.

With the start of the new SEC Network and their equal revenue sharing plan the Sooners could make far more money in the SEC. I would have to think that the SEC would want the Sooners if the Sooners wanted in. The only hurtles to clear would be breaking free of the political baggage of Oklahoma St and nullifying the Big 12 GoR.

What would Texas do then? Would they continue to play king of the Big 12 mountain or would the rest of the league be too weak for them to stay? What would that fall out look like?

IF (and it is a REALLY BIG IF) OU actually wanted into the SEC and could separate from OSU (good luck on THAT happening) then the SEC has to come up with #16. Who would fit the bill? kU has never had strong enough football historically (only 8 conference championships and 12 all-time bowl appearances) and the Chickenhawks only really care about basketball. FSU, GA Tech and Clemson have same state issues. UNC/NC State are ACC locked (and have the same GOR problem as OU).
But the question was about UT...UT I think would make the remaining Big 12 schools try to cower at their "power" now. But that might also create a backlash like A&M had when the LHN was announced. The other schools would have to make a decision, cow tow to UT or tell the 'Horns to go to Hell and either get in line with the other league members or get booted from the league. I think by that point, ISU, kU, KSU, OSU, BU, TCU, and TTU would have the gumption to get other members like them (see Colorado State, New Mexico U, Wyoming, Houston, and/or maybe South Dakota State) and allow WVU to find a new home if they want. I know that the current members of the Old Big 8 plus some of the Old SWC members are really tired of UT "ruling the roost" and might just have it in them.


If the SEC was able to attract Oklahoma and Texas balked at the idea of coming with them then Florida St would be the logical addition. Sure it duplicates a market but their removal from the ACC would severely weaken the conference and could pave the way for the Big Ten and SEC to dismantle the conference.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 11:12 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2687
Location: Phoenix Arizona
The Bishin Cutter wrote:
lash wrote:
My first observation to the new Big 12 logo was how clearly the number 10 appears with the down and up errors as the one and the two IIs of the roman numeral form the zero.

It appears the Big 12 clearly flatted out the Big 12 roman numeral to make or form a 10.

The Big East used the technique for making the Big look like a 16 and the Big Ten new Big appeared to be an attempt at creating a 16 as the G making up a number 6 and highlighting the B as a different color of black and the 16 as blue.


The arrows at the "X" is all well and good...but that part on the bottom, where it literally says "Big 12;" that was what drew my comment. Granted, it's still technically a WiP (finalized by next year).

It's a shame they couldn't shed two more schools and go back to being the Big 8.

The point I was trying to make is the Big 12 name will not be on the ribbon as the old logo across the roman numeral number 12 and the Big 12 that was at the bottom is not the logo that will appear on athletic venues.

The Big 12 is clearly deemphasizing the number 12.

Also the arrows pointing both ways to the X in the new logo can be used in dynamic type advertising type videos that can emphases the current 10 members with the roman numeral X while keeping the brand name of the Big 12 as well as the official or legal name of the league.

To your point on wishing they could go back to the 8 and be the Big 8, that same wish could hold true for many leagues especially the ACC that would like to have 8 or 9 schools again that works best for a basketball orientated league..

Many folks in Pac 12 wanted to go back to the Pac 8 and not necessarily the other way around moving to the Pac 12 which basically carry more mouths to feed.

What the heck do we have to show for our progress in the Pac 12 as the TV revenue would have been the same per share with 10 as 12.

Having 12 schools in the Pac 12 has ruined double round robin basketball , round robin football, while creating a very boring and mostly repeated conference football championship game.

I for one do not believe the Pac 12 is better after expansion and likewise wish the league could return back to 10 members. I am thankful the Pac 12 never became the Pac 16 and forced the Arizona schools into a Southwest conference as the old Pac 8 would have emerged in the Pac 16 as a rebirth and primarily benefitting the west coast schools.

Bigger has already proven to be not necessarily better for 12 team leagues and we have just started to observe this issues with 14 member football leagues. The 15 member ACC is ridiculous and would be far better returning back to an 8 or 9 member league.

So yes, most leagues would probably like to return to a smaller and more manageable number.

The Big 12 was just smarter compared to most other leagues by keeping restraints on size.

If the Big 12 really wants 12 members, please take back Colorado and newbie Utah as a travel partner. We Pac fans would be forever grateful.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 11:42 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm
Posts: 1449
mizzoufan1 wrote:
fighting muskie wrote:
We've talked on here before about how the Big 12 will only hold together as long as Texas and Oklahoma are happy. But what would happen if Oklahoma became disenchanted and tired of Longhorn arrogance? Texas gets a much better deal from the special arrangement made last year that kept the Big 12 together. Texas got the Longhorn Network but what did the Sooners get? Sure they get more money for appearances on national television but Texas gets that too. Texas is making a fortune off of the LHN but Oklahoma can't turn their Tier 3 rights into that kind of money--the state of Oklahoma doesn't have enough households to make a Sooner Network viable and that deal made last year strictly forbade the creation of a Big 12 Network per Texas's wishes.

With the start of the new SEC Network and their equal revenue sharing plan the Sooners could make far more money in the SEC. I would have to think that the SEC would want the Sooners if the Sooners wanted in. The only hurtles to clear would be breaking free of the political baggage of Oklahoma St and nullifying the Big 12 GoR.

What would Texas do then? Would they continue to play king of the Big 12 mountain or would the rest of the league be too weak for them to stay? What would that fall out look like?

IF (and it is a REALLY BIG IF) OU actually wanted into the SEC and could separate from OSU (good luck on THAT happening) then the SEC has to come up with #16. Who would fit the bill? kU has never had strong enough football historically (only 8 conference championships and 12 all-time bowl appearances) and the Chickenhawks only really care about basketball. FSU, GA Tech and Clemson have same state issues. UNC/NC State are ACC locked (and have the same GOR problem as OU).
But the question was about UT...UT I think would make the remaining Big 12 schools try to cower at their "power" now. But that might also create a backlash like A&M had when the LHN was announced. The other schools would have to make a decision, cow tow to UT or tell the 'Horns to go to Hell and either get in line with the other league members or get booted from the league. I think by that point, ISU, kU, KSU, OSU, BU, TCU, and TTU would have the gumption to get other members like them (see Colorado State, New Mexico U, Wyoming, Houston, and/or maybe South Dakota State) and allow WVU to find a new home if they want. I know that the current members of the Old Big 8 plus some of the Old SWC members are really tired of UT "ruling the roost" and might just have it in them.

People love to demonize greedy greedy Texas, but let's look at the facts...again.

Texas and Oklahoma (and Nebraska/A&M FWIW) all made more than 20 million a year in the last TV deal which was partially unequal revenue sharing based on TV appearances. Iowa St, Baylor and K State all made less than 10 million a year while Oklahoma St, Texas Tech and Kansas (+ Mizzou/Colorado) bounced around in between those 10-20 depending on the year.

Now with the equal distribution sharing on 1st/2nd tier rights Iowa St, Baylor, and K State all make more than 20 million a year (~23 I think) which is the same as Texas and OU who should honestly be making over 30, and NTM that WVU was making less than 10 million inthe Big East and TCU was making less than 5 in the MWC and both will soon also be making 20+ too. And with Nebraska, A&M, Mizzou, and Colorado even Oklahoma St, Texas Tech and Kansas are making more money too.

For 3rd party rights sure hate Texas for getting a good deal but every other schools in the conference has now also sold their 3rd party rights for 1-3 million a year to FOX and Kansas also has a similar 2 million dollar deal setup with ESPN.

So Texas gave up over 10 million a year and all it wanted was its third party rights which the conference wasn't doing anything with since the conference network was voted down by a majority vote (i.e. not just Texas). So at the end of the day Texas is basically making the slightly more money (~5mil which goes to the University and not the Athletic Dept BTW) than they were before the equal distribution and everyone else in the conference is making more...except Oklahoma.

So if any school other than OU in the Big 12 complains about the money aspect they really have no room to talk since they all made more money (including Texas) while Oklahoma should be making ~35mil but is barely topping 25mil a year.

The 3rd party rights are in the Big12 bi-laws and require a unanimous vote to change (which was how they got Texas to sign the GOR) so nothings going to change, OU like Texas signed it too and is also stuck until 2025 when the GOR expires. Unfortunately OU is attached to OSU and noone wants them (PAC12 said no, Big Ten vetos their academics, and the SEC only want high quality schools like OU/TX/FSU/VT/UNC) so they are stuck. Even if they made a conference network the distribution from that would equal ~3 million a year per member which is the amount amount OU is getting currently, it would help the Iowa St, Baylor, K St's and only punish Texas (which I guess is everyone's goal) for doing a better job a managing their 3rd party rights like everyone agreed.

But hey let's say they turn the LHN into the Big 12 Network and split the money evenly...what's next? Should Texas also not be able to get federal more grant money than OU, or should we only be able to recruit 3 star recruits like Kansas does, withdrawl from the AAU because its not fair to Texas Tech, or fly to every conference event and circle around for hours so that everyone has the same travel time as WVU? Give me a break, people that hate Texas will always find another reason, just like there will always be some other reason why life isn't fair.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 11:50 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 1096
lash wrote:
The Big 12 was just smarter compared to most other leagues by keeping restraints on size.


What does it say when everyone else abandons round-robin? What does it say when Missouri, who could have gotten its yearly games with Oklahoma restored (as well yearly games with Texas) bolted for a conference with more teams on the basis of stability?

The only thing the Big XII is doing wisely is not indulging in the ruin of the former Big East football members. They aren't swooping in for the likes of Cincinnati, UConn, and USF.

If the Big XII was smart about their ten, they'd have passed on TCU and pushed the footprint. Eight in three states is not smart.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3162 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179 ... 211  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:  
 

 




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








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

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

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