NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards

Discussions by Conference:
 
NCAA Map
  It is currently Tue Jun 28, 2016 3:29 pm

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4830 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 318, 319, 320, 321, 322
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Jun 17, 2016 6:22 pm 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 1:35 pm
Posts: 7
fighting muskie wrote:
poyman wrote:
@fighting muskie

Of the four that you mentioned (TCU, WVU, Cincy, and Louisville) to replace the four schools that left the Big 12 (Nebraska, A&M, Missouri, and Colorado) I would have only agreed on one of those four and that being Louisville... I wouldn't have taken TCU for the same reason that the Conference shouldn't take Houston (it cannibalizes the viewership and the Recruiting Grounds)... I wouldn't have taken Cincy because their FB program isn't Big 12 level and their facilities are substandard in comparison to the rest of the conference... And, I wouldn't have taken WVU because they are simply too far North and East. Their programs are solid and their facilities are decent but the pain isn't worth the gain. The Big 12 will always a be a 3rd level viewer choice in the NE to the ACC and the B1G.... Louisville and BYU were and are today the better choices... If I needed two more teams (like they do today), I would be trying to be poach teams that will have eyeballs following them (i.e. maybe Air Force and Utah due to the fact that they are rabid rivals of BYU, or the two Arizona schools).


Remember that the Big 12 had just lost A&M so adding TCU was just replacing a Texas school with a Texas school. Cincy, Louisville, and WVU accounted for every Big East BCS representative from 2005-2012 save a really awful 2010 UConn team. At the time this seemed like a no brainer to me--Big East football was dying; the Big 12 needed BCS calibre teams and the Big East had 6 and was not in great shape. As a package deal that trio could have brought great rivalries and some new territory. WVU had the most history, Cincy the best market, and Louisville brought a balance of both. the geography issues are solved when you bring the three in together--L'ville and Cincy function as a land bridge and WVU no longer seems so distant.

If we are going to turn back the clock to when A&M and Missouri announced their departures what would you have done differently?


I believe the TV contract renegotiated in 2010, after Nebraska and Colorado left, was for 10 teams, concentrating the same $amount that was going to the 12, so they were waiting to ride that out before looking at further expansion. This kept the Big 12 from and Big East from combining for football only in a super conference while the Big East was trying to hold onto 6th AQ position of the BCS through expansion that only resulted in what became the AAC of the now G5.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 2:37 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 3110
Location: Phoenix Arizona
It appears the issue on the Big 12 desire to expand has always been finding that 12th school that everyone can agree on to acquire the necessary votes. BYU is no brainer as the 11th school

There are 10 college Presidents out there that can do something exceptional and extraordinary using college or sports in general to bring a positive impact to an area that is having so much hurt and sadness this past week.

The Olympics have always brought groups with different ideologies together because sports can unite people.

UCF has always been a good expansion candidate for the Big 12 and would be higher in consideration if the school had not performed so badly last year in football.

The Big 12 ideas of having divisions or rotating schools into difference divisions each year with 10 schools and round robing is just a bad idea.

Something that would not be putting round holes in square pegs and actually bring something the Big 12 needs and ESPN owned Disney home city could actually support would be expanding with UCF and BYU.

The Big 12 could prove that bringing a diverse city and home town University along with a predominate religious University could prove the world can get along together and not always hate and use sports to bridge the gap with our differences.

The Big Ten contract this week with ESPN obviously proves there is no cash flow with live sports and the Big 12 needs to expand with 12 schools requiring the 500 million dollars Disney owned ESPN and ABC would have to pay over the life of the Big 12 contract through 2025.

How important would it be for the Big 12 to pick a school for expansion that would have a lot of the funding going back into the Disney market that has been so devastated this week and bring a positive impact that only sports can sometimes bring different ideology of people together for peace that sometime only sports can accomplish. The Big 12 can do something that sometimes only the Olympics can accomplish and create such a win/win situation for some many purposes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 25, 2016 7:53 pm 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 1:31 am
Posts: 24
The Big 12 Continues to Choose Mediocrity. Why? Because the Big 12 continues to rebuff expansion. The general consensus of these ostriches, I mean Member Presidents, is that they believe they have a better product and a larger piece of revenue pie if the League stays at 10 teams. I, on the other hand, do not think that that position is well thought out and I am surprised that the NCAAF Playoff Selection Committee, along with other P5 Conference Commissioners, ADs, Coaches and Fans have not demanded that they add more teams.

The B1G, SEC and the ACC each have 14 members in their respective conferences while the PAC12 has 12 members. How is it fair that a Conference with only 10 members in it get a playoff slot while a PAC 12 Champion does not? The other 4 conferences have an average of 14 teams (if you round to the nearest number). The Big 12 Conference has 40% less members than the other P5 Conferences. Shouldn’t a Champion of a Conference with 40% more members always have preference? When they don’t have preference then there needs to be major groaning and protests from the P5 Conferences whose champion has to beat out 40% more teams to claim the Championship.

It’s really too bad that Stanford didn’t beat Northwestern in the first game of the 2015 season or that they didn’t beat Oregon… It’s also too bad that ND didn’t beat Stanford. Had any of these three situations gone the other way Oklahoma doesn’t make the playoffs and the Big 12 gets shut out for two years in a row. Had that happened College Football and the integrity of the 4 team Playoff System would stand on stronger ground today.

Imagine if a Division in MLB or the NFL had 40% fewer teams in a division. How long do you think that it would be before the Owners, GMs, Coaches, and Fans of the teams outside of that Division would go ballistic over how unfair it was that the champion of that Division with 40% fewer teams got equal footing with the Champions in their Divisions in the Playoffs (along with the additional revenue that comes with being selected for a spot in the playoffs). Perhaps the reason that the ACC, SEC and B1G haven’t been crusading on this issue is because they believe that they are being given preferential treatment today when compared to the Big 12… I don’t know… I doubt that Stanford and ND are too happy about the Big 12 configuration however.
I for one think that the Big 12 should be penalized every year in every sport when the selection for playoff spots take place unless and until they increase the number of members in their conference to 14. There are some decent choices out there… The P5 needs to make the SWC (I mean the Big 12) act and act now… invite 4 members to begin in the 2017 season before July 1… If not, suffer the consequences and Be treated like the other G5 schools.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 26, 2016 10:50 pm 
Offline
Junior
Junior

Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:01 pm
Posts: 134
poyman wrote:
The Big 12 Continues to Choose Mediocrity. Why? Because the Big 12 continues to rebuff expansion. The general consensus of these ostriches, I mean Member Presidents, is that they believe they have a better product and a larger piece of revenue pie if the League stays at 10 teams. I, on the other hand, do not think that that position is well thought out and I am surprised that the NCAAF Playoff Selection Committee, along with other P5 Conference Commissioners, ADs, Coaches and Fans have not demanded that they add more teams.

The B1G, SEC and the ACC each have 14 members in their respective conferences while the PAC12 has 12 members. How is it fair that a Conference with only 10 members in it get a playoff slot while a PAC 12 Champion does not? The other 4 conferences have an average of 14 teams (if you round to the nearest number). The Big 12 Conference has 40% less members than the other P5 Conferences. Shouldn’t a Champion of a Conference with 40% more members always have preference? When they don’t have preference then there needs to be major groaning and protests from the P5 Conferences whose champion has to beat out 40% more teams to claim the Championship.

It’s really too bad that Stanford didn’t beat Northwestern in the first game of the 2015 season or that they didn’t beat Oregon… It’s also too bad that ND didn’t beat Stanford. Had any of these three situations gone the other way Oklahoma doesn’t make the playoffs and the Big 12 gets shut out for two years in a row. Had that happened College Football and the integrity of the 4 team Playoff System would stand on stronger ground today.

Imagine if a Division in MLB or the NFL had 40% fewer teams in a division. How long do you think that it would be before the Owners, GMs, Coaches, and Fans of the teams outside of that Division would go ballistic over how unfair it was that the champion of that Division with 40% fewer teams got equal footing with the Champions in their Divisions in the Playoffs (along with the additional revenue that comes with being selected for a spot in the playoffs). Perhaps the reason that the ACC, SEC and B1G haven’t been crusading on this issue is because they believe that they are being given preferential treatment today when compared to the Big 12… I don’t know… I doubt that Stanford and ND are too happy about the Big 12 configuration however.
I for one think that the Big 12 should be penalized every year in every sport when the selection for playoff spots take place unless and until they increase the number of members in their conference to 14. There are some decent choices out there… The P5 needs to make the SWC (I mean the Big 12) act and act now… invite 4 members to begin in the 2017 season before July 1… If not, suffer the consequences and Be treated like the other G5 schools.


Poyman, I know this is going to shock you, but I agree with almost everything you said. If Stanford beats NW, they would have been in. Plain and simple. The Big 12 would have been left out again. Without a doubt, the Big 12 would be expanding. That being said, they still might decide to expand in the next year or two. I believe that in time TCU, Iowa State, Baylor and Kansas State will realize, if they haven't already, that they will all be left behind in a scenario where the there is a Power 4. The best thing those schools can do is try to make the Big 12 a viable option should Texas and OU leave. To me, Cincy and BYU make the most sense as options 1 and 2 if they are looking at the best options available. If they are looking only at eastward expansion, I think Cincy and UCF are the top two candidates. However, again I am going to shock you, I think BYU and Cincy are the best two options available. After that, I also like UCF, Temple and Boise. The only question I have of the last three is Boise. It's hard for a school with little local talent to continue to be successful over the long haul.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2016 9:42 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2013 8:24 pm
Posts: 160
Location: Richmond, VA
If it wasn't for WVU would Cincinnati even be on most list?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2016 3:15 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 3110
Location: Phoenix Arizona
ESPN and FOX are paying the Big Ten a combination of 240 million a year by FOX and 190 a million per year ESPN for a total of 430 million dollars starting next year. This translates into roughly 30+ million dollars per 14 Big Ten schools starting next year for Tier 1 rights for the next six years.

It is interesting the Big 12 will get 30 million dollars this year for 10 schools which keep the Big 12 in the same tier 1 estimates as the Big Ten. Coincidence that FOX and ESPN are paying the same per school for both leagues.

This is very important point for the Big 12 and why expansion will most likely not happen. The Big 12 needs to make up ground in other areas of revenue to compensate for the BTN and SECN.

A championship game with 10 schools will bring in more shares per school compared to 12 (estimated 2 to 3 million per 10 schools). Bowl revenue, NCAA basketball shares, college football championship revenue will be shared with 10 schools compared to 12.

This type of decision will keep the Big 12 in the ball park of the SEC and Big Ten in total revenue and will above the Pac 12 and ACC.

So unless the round robin, nine game conference football schedule, and rematch CCG proves to be an issue with reaching the four team playoff in the next couple years, there is no reason financially for the Big 12 to expand.

Get used to two five team divisions in the Big 12 for the next couple years.

The only issue that probably needs to be worked out is if the divisions will be permanent schools or change every year based on previous years performance in football.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2016 4:42 pm 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 1:31 am
Posts: 24
I like the Big 12 but I wouldn't walk across the street to watch any of the teams play each other a second time in a CCG. Furthermore, if the Selection Committee treats the Big 12 the same as they would treat a Champion from one of the other four P5 Conferences (who have to beat out 40% more teams to be their League's Champion) I submit that they will make a mockery of the 4 Team Playoff Scheme and I believe the other four Conferences will finally start to take issue with the Big 12 Alignment.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2016 5:21 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 8033
Repost of Kansas City Star article reporting that the Big 12 distributed about $304 million in "total" conference revenue to it's ten members for 2015-2016.This would include other revenues besides the conference tv money(Does not include so-called tier 3 tv money).Link at http://www.kansascity.com/sports/colleg ... 08612.html


Edited


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2016 6:50 pm 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 3:11 pm
Posts: 1
I know I don't speak for most in Cincinnati, but I wish UC would remove itself from consideration for inclusion to the Big 12. Maybe at the least give them a deadline to decide. I dislike seeing this great school get treated the way it has.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2016 7:04 pm 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 1:35 pm
Posts: 7
There just so many options for the Big XII with both positive and negative aspects it would be hard keep it beyond 16 schools let alone 12-14.

This is the first time I have seen Temple mentioned! They won the AAC East last year on top of beating Penn St. and battling ND in a close loss. The academics are on par w/current members, they have a strong basketball tradition and although located in a different region (w/ a different culture?), they aren't far from West VA, in the largest market outside of the P5. The only ?s are whether/not West VA would see them cutting into recruiting OH, PA and the northeast, and if the ACC is going to invite them for what would be a better geographic fit.

I like the idea of USF, coming off a rebound season with less of a basketball history and academic rating as Temple, but a larger enrollment, FL location and more recent football success (and some from back in the day if you recall Tampa Univ!). The state legislature would probably require that both UCF and USF join.
Even Tulane would bring a new market, recruiting area and a Vandy/Northwestern type of academic prestige to the conference w/some athletic history (but little recent success).

All this w/o even looking west, where Colorado St. seems to offer the best academic rating, new (& old) market and recruiting area, next to BYU. CSU seems a lot more interested but together they would make a good package addition to the conference. It's looks even better if you include Boise St., although the market and academics drop off, they have drawn national attention w/success in football o/the past decade, recruiting CA well, which they may still be able do if they have neighbors in a P5 conference and schedule PAC12 opponents.

I have to include the CA States before wrapping this up and narrowing it down to less than 10 schools. Diego and Fresno have shown "Boise St." like success before and after the Broncos run. The Aztecs, may be the strongest program now outside of the P5. Fresno St. put this region on the map of major college football just before Boise St.
See may point?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2016 11:19 pm 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 1:31 am
Posts: 24
@freaked for college

I think that you might have misread the article... The only money that was excluded from the $304M that will be distributed is the "Third Tier Broadcasting Rights", which are sold by the schools individually is the amount that was not included... That amount is $3M a year for roughly for about 8 of the 10 schools, $6M for OU, and $15M for UT (thanks to the LHN and ESPN agreement).

That's a 20% increase over last year but I would much prefer both the SEC and the B1G.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2016 2:01 am 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:33 am
Posts: 661
Location: Fiskville, Texas
Poyman,
thanks for your interest in the Big 12.
But, your points are a bit skewed.

1. You seem to compare apples to oranges quite often. The NFL and MLB work their whole league out of a central office...and everyone plays by the same rules. While, the NCAA allows conferences to decide their own fate and bring in members of their own choosing. So, totally different deals here.

2. You seem to make some great issue that the Big 12 has fewer schools and that they should be punished for that fact. While you totally ignore that the Big 12 plays more conference games than any other conference in fb. Which makes your whole point mute. 'Sure, lets punish the conference that plays themselves more often......Great idea!'. The SEC plays 8 of 14 which equates to 64%(when including the team itself). The Big 12 plays 9 of 10 which is 100%(when including the team itself).

3. You make it seem the Big 12 is accepting some sort of mediocrity by not expanding...but, if the Presidents don't feel comfortable with the pool of schools available....then, where do you get off telling them they are wrong. Are you some sort of college football guru? Do you know more than a school President or Ad's?

4. You base some of your argument on....Who beat Who over 1 season. And how that might affect the playoffs. Well basing an argument on something that is a total variable...seems a bit weak to base a whole theory on. Random chance isn't worthy of forming conference bonds that could last decades. One team can beat another on any given Saturday....don't make too much of it. Things could change quite quickly for any team.

5. What's with calling the Big 12 the SWC? Are you trying to compliment or insult? ...There are more schools in the Big 12 from the Big 8 than there are SWC schools....so, either you just flopped on that one...or, you are just trying to upset or insult members of this conference. Either way...not too cool.

This conference has the right to add members as it sees fit. If they feel like some schools aren't worthy.....they are probably right. No one in the Big 12 wants UCF, USF, ECU, UConn, BYU, Boise or Memphis. UofH doesn't seem to have a good enough relationship with its old buddies to get back in the fold......So, who is left? Cincy and no one. So they might as well stand pat...rather than add schools that might be flight risks or just don't have enough juice to add to the conference. Why you would even concern yourself with their opinion is quite elusive. The Presidents have better info than any of us.

The evidence is clear. There aren't any ABSOLUTE choices in the area that the conference wants to look(which is east). So, please....take a chill pill and relax. Things will be fine...and will proceed at the pace the conference is happy with(minus UO). The presidents know what they are doing. They will find an answer in their own time.

The landscape of college football changes so quickly....from year to year. Why rush into some horrible additions just to appease some blow-hards that freak out at the drop of a dime.

Lastly,
for those that keep voicing that UofTexas is controlling and stalling everything just to go Indy or look out for themselves.
That's totally off base and retarded.

Why would anyone or anything give up controlling three other universities just to drop them and go it alone? If UT controlled Tech, TCU and Baylor(which I don't agree with).....it wouldn't make any sense to give that up just to go it alone. UT would keep them and force them to do their bidding and share nothing. At this time....all the Texas schools are making a ton more money than they used to. Everyone seem quite content...barring internal problems that every University has from time to time.

The second part of that argument goes like this.....People from Texas don't lay down for anyone...including other Texans. So, if any of y'all really believe UT owned the other schools....I dare you to say that to any single person in the hierarchy of any of those three universities...and see just how many seconds it takes for you to see blood flying out of your nose. Seriously, that type of BS don't fly here in the Lone Star State. No one lays down for anyone, ever. It's offensive here to say that to someone.

Seriously, UT barely has any relationship with the north: KU, KSU, ISU, WVU. And UO and OSU haven't been in the SWC for a long, long while. So, how is it that UT is controlling everyone??? UT could quickly be out voted 9-1, if, they were in the wrong on any subject.
And how is it that the old North couldn't find consensus when Nebraska, Colorado and Missouri where there? ...And now, the North hardly ever seems to fully agree with what UO wants.
There is something weird going on there with that deal. The old Big 8 seems quite divided in thought and function. If you took the old North(old Big 8) as a group....UT wouldn't stand a chance on any subject. So, how did UT run anyone off? The answer is....They didn't.

_________________
Fan of:
State of Texas
Southwest Conference
Big XII


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2016 10:31 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 3110
Location: Phoenix Arizona
I agree with Mozilla comments. In fact the 10 Athletic Directors of the Big 12 unanimously favored keeping 10 schools and round robin play.

Timing is everything in expansion and the Pac 12 would be the Pac 10 if the league could have played a championship game with 10 schools and continue round robin football. All the California schools want to play each other ever year. I would say several power five leagues would like to shed a few pounds and get rid of a couple schools to make scheduling more easy.

The AD may have not been in favor of expansion, however, the Presidents that actually make the decisions on expansion have not ruled out expansion.

Back to Mozilla point, the Big 12 Presidents have data we are not necessarily aware and could provide more insight on why a decision has not been reached yet to make a statement one way or the other on expansion.

“The data for a championship game was absolutely compelling, and the data for expansion is going to require some further thought,” Boren said. “There’s doubt expansion gives us marginal financial gain, but you have to weight that against impact. Our fans want to see our teams play great teams. They don’t want to see them play mediocre or less(er) teams.”

This comment made by Boren is very interesting because the data could shed more information on which schools would be a better fit for the Big 12 if the league actually decided to expand.

What are the impacts he is referring too? This data would be so fun to analyze and get a better view of what the Presidents are contemplating on expansion decisions.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2016 11:39 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 1308
Location: Columbus, OH
Big 12 backwardness has everything to do with Texas. Don't give me this line about how the Big 12 model is inherently better because they play a full round robin. The Big 12 champ emerges as the best school out of 10. 3 of the 4 other conference champs are the best from a group of 14! That's 40% more teams and until 2017 they don't have to play a title game. On top of that, factor in that in the 14 member leagues the Big Ten and SEC the schools have equitable revenue sharing and are taking in for more money and can afford better facilities and attract better players and coaches. The Big 12 model is skewed in favor of its big name, big dollar programs and Texas has far more resources than everyone else. The others only placate Texas because if Texas leaves then the Big 12 power conference.


This is essentially the equivalent of reorganizing Major League Baseball and putting the New York Yankees in a division with AAA Pawtucket Red Sox, Syracuse Chiefs, Rochester Red Wings, and Buffalo Bisons but not have any revenue sharing and letting the Yankees make their own media deal. Meanwhile all the other divisions have 7 real MLB teams with MLB budgets. The Yankees then play a bunch of games against mediocre, low budget competition all year and then in October declaring that the Yankees deserve to be a playoff team because they have a great winning percentage.

In the Big 12 model the poor schools are going to continue to get poorer and put weaker and weaker products on the football field.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2016 11:58 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 3110
Location: Phoenix Arizona
fighting muskie wrote:
Big 12 backwardness has everything to do with Texas. Don't give me this line about how the Big 12 model is inherently better because they play a full round robin. The Big 12 champ emerges as the best school out of 10. 3 of the 4 other conference champs are the best from a group of 14! That's 40% more teams and until 2017 they don't have to play a title game. On top of that, factor in that in the 14 member leagues the Big Ten and SEC the schools have equitable revenue sharing and are taking in for more money and can afford better facilities and attract better players and coaches. The Big 12 model is skewed in favor of its big name, big dollar programs and Texas has far more resources than everyone else. The others only placate Texas because if Texas leaves then the Big 12 power conference.


This is essentially the equivalent of reorganizing Major League Baseball and putting the New York Yankees in a division with AAA Pawtucket Red Sox, Syracuse Chiefs, Rochester Red Wings, and Buffalo Bisons but not have any revenue sharing and letting the Yankees make their own media deal. Meanwhile all the other divisions have 7 real MLB teams with MLB budgets. The Yankees then play a bunch of games against mediocre, low budget competition all year and then in October declaring that the Yankees deserve to be a playoff team because they have a great winning percentage.

In the Big 12 model the poor schools are going to continue to get poorer and put weaker and weaker products on the football field.

Fighting muskie, some of you fans are starting to appear like sour grapes.

The Big 12 just announced each school will receive 30 million plus for tier 1 rights keeping the league the same as the mighty Big Ten and better yet over the ACC and Pac 12.

Granted the Big 12 was the first league that discussed a conference wide network long before the BTN idea surfaced. It was Nebraska as one of the Big 12 schools that did not want it and latter did and is now the Big Ten problem. Nebraska fans are paying a huge price for those decisions and for the revenue from the BTN and losing many 100 year rivalries chasing something they should have supported in the first place.

The Big 12 is doing something right by business standards as many of you desperately want your school in this league.

Everyone needs to calm down because the Big 12 Presidents are the ones that have to make a decision on expansion and not just Texas.

The data provided to the Presidents has got all the information those folks need to make an accurate decision on expansion and it has nothing to do with the University of Texas stopping any thing.

My guess is the Big 12 Presidents understand they need 12 schools for perception reasons and just need to determine which two schools are the best choice. The data most likely has geographical comparisons, football and basketball SOS comparisons, TV ratings projections, and future division alignment comparisons.

Until the Big 12 President announce this summer that expansion is off the table this year, everyone including fans of schools wanting in the Big 12 should just calm down and have a little patience.

This is sign of strength in the Big 12 and not weakness in not having to rush into anything.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4830 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 318, 319, 320, 321, 322

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 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