NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards

Discussions by Conference:
 
NCAA Map
  It is currently Thu Aug 25, 2016 1:33 pm

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5400 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 356, 357, 358, 359, 360
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 11:44 am 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 9:04 pm
Posts: 525
louisvillecard01 wrote:
fighting muskie wrote:
Huan wrote:
What is the gain to loss analysis for Texas to leave the big xii for the ACC?


Texas would gain a massive pile of cash but one that would soon dissipate when Texas is unable to to put together a desirable schedule as an independent. I could see Oklahoma and the Texas Big 12 schools joining A&M in their scheduling boycott.


Huan, Muskie:

I suppose since I posted the earlier comments about the "Texas to the ACC" chatter, I'll provide a link:


http://louisvillesportslive.net/how-can ... dame-deal/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;"


The ACC added a bunch of former Big East schools, including Louisville fortunately, with several of them, such as Pitt and BC, having long-term ties to Notre Dame in football and other sports. Notre Dame was a non-fb BE member themselves. Therefore, Notre Dame had major ACC internal support to garner the deal they received from the ACC. On the other hand, Texas has no deep relationships within the ACC, and such a move would be seen as one of convenience, projecting a temporary impression at that, to fit primarily the wishes of Texas. Texas is much better off sticking with the regional rivals they have in the Big 12 and keep their controversial LHN intact until it expires or gets incorporated. Texas' leverage elsewhere would be quite limited in this regard.
Even with the new ACC network, all it still has received from Notre Dame is an extended agreement that 'if Notre Dame joins a conference for fb, it'll be the ACC'. Notre Dame has no intention of joining any fb conference unless they are basically forced to do so. The ACC has enabled Notre Dame to go 'on and on' as an independent in fb. I don't like any conference agreeing to allow a member to hold back a sport, particularly fb, when the school has the means and the competitive level to provide full commitment.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 10:08 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 3242
Location: Phoenix Arizona
There was an interesting rumor from a CBS reporter the Big 12 may add 3 schools. My first reaction this is just another crazy rumor until you look into what type of benefits this would accomplish.

BYU as a football only member is what the Big 12 wants from BYU. Football only membership usually indicates the conference does not value the school or its policy. In the case of BYU this makes sense. If you take BYU as football only, which school becomes the other football only school? Navy? Boise State?

What if the Big 12 is considering taking on a basketball only school to balance out football only for BYU. http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... basketball

UConn recently has made comments the school is considering moving its basketball program back to the new Big East and play football somewhere else.

What if this is a move to get UConn primary sports into a power league and allow football to play at FCS.

Now the Big 12 only need one school for all sports to balance out football schedules with 12 schools and basketball with 12 schools.

Less say for now Cincinnati is the front runner for all sports membership.

fb North: WVU, Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, BYU

fb South: Texas, TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Big 12 basketball league and Olympic sports

Baylor
Cincinnati
Connecticut
Iowa State
Kansas
Kansas State
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
TCU
Texas
Texas Tech
West Virginia

Big 12 has keep all of its basketball and Olympic sports in the eastern and central time zones with more geographical benefits taking the top basketball school not in a power league

Bib 12 has keep the issues of BYU internal policy out of the league with football only members and adding the best football school not in a power league.

Maybe 3 is good company for the Big 12 and this rumor could have substance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 11:22 am 
Offline
Junior
Junior

Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 1:31 am
Posts: 106
lash wrote:
I do ever see a situation with Texas in the ACC.

UConn may not be an option for the ACC if they do not make the Big 12 and join the Big East. Their football program will most likely drop to FCS or drop football all together.

If the Big 12 makes the right moves, WVU will never be in the ACC regardless if the ACC someday changed its stand on this school.

Temple would really be a good school for the ACC if the school get its on campus stadium.

If the Big !2 decides to not expand that is good for WVU because they get Texas or Oklahoma every other year for home games.

Otherwise Cincinnati will be admitted as one of the 12 schools which takes a way the outlier issues for WVU

WVU culturally fits the Big 12. Other than thee old Eastern All Sport league proposed by Joe Paternio of Penn State, WVU is a better fit in the Big 12 over the ACC.

I get the filling the Big 12 may eventually get its act together and make some logical decision on the building back the north divisi

I just do not see BYU getting into the Big 12 with all the issues that occurred at Baylor. BYU could bring a different set of issues. I do not understand why any school north of Texas would want Houston. Factor in TCU and Baylor as Houston taking away their recruiting benefits and why would Houston get the support needed for Big 12 membership.

I could see the following North division of the Big 12 very soon.

WVU, Cincinnati, Memphis or EIU, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State,

Northern Illinois brings the third largest market in the USA and fits snuggly into the Big 12. The school has played in a BCS bowl with Florida State.

With some commitments to build an expanded stadium, this school could sneak into the Big 12 with support of WVU, Iowa State, and Cincinnati.

Chicago is a great city for recruiting especially basketball.

I am softly predicting the Big 12 will expand with Cincinnati and either NIU or Memphis.


********************************

The reason you don' see BYU in is because you don't understand .... Or refuse to understand... BYU's situation is substantially different that Baylor's... Not even close to being related... Anyone who spends 5 minutes studying the two situations knows it... So that begs the question as to why you refuse to see it... And I think that anyone who reads your posts quickly understands why you don't see it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 11:25 am 
Offline
Junior
Junior

Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 1:31 am
Posts: 106
BYU as a football only member is what the Big 12 wants from BYU. Football only membership usually indicates the conference does not value the school or its policy. In the case of BYU this makes sense. If you take BYU as football only, which school becomes the other football only school? Navy? Boise State?

********

Wrong again.... Both the Big 12 and BYU are on record saying that they would prefer an "all in" situation... If it's not all in then I'm guessing that it won't happen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 11:27 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 1403
louisvillecard01 wrote:
louisvillecard01 wrote:
fighting muskie wrote:
Huan wrote:
What is the gain to loss analysis for Texas to leave the big xii for the ACC?


Texas would gain a massive pile of cash but one that would soon dissipate when Texas is unable to to put together a desirable schedule as an independent. I could see Oklahoma and the Texas Big 12 schools joining A&M in their scheduling boycott.


Huan, Muskie:

I suppose since I posted the earlier comments about the "Texas to the ACC" chatter, I'll provide a link:


http://louisvillesportslive.net/how-can ... dame-deal/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;"


The ACC added a bunch of former Big East schools, including Louisville fortunately, with several of them, such as Pitt and BC, having long-term ties to Notre Dame in football and other sports. Notre Dame was a non-fb BE member themselves. Therefore, Notre Dame had major ACC internal support to garner the deal they received from the ACC. On the other hand, Texas has no deep relationships within the ACC, and such a move would be seen as one of convenience, projecting a temporary impression at that, to fit primarily the wishes of Texas. Texas is much better off sticking with the regional rivals they have in the Big 12 and keep their controversial LHN intact until it expires or gets incorporated. Texas' leverage elsewhere would be quite limited in this regard.
Even with the new ACC network, all it still has received from Notre Dame is an extended agreement that 'if Notre Dame joins a conference for fb, it'll be the ACC'. Notre Dame has no intention of joining any fb conference unless they are basically forced to do so. The ACC has enabled Notre Dame to go 'on and on' as an independent in fb. I don't like any conference agreeing to allow a member to hold back a sport, particularly fb, when the school has the means and the competitive level to provide full commitment.


In theory, it can go a couple of ways. Some old mates are desired, while others had to face a fight, or be completely turned away. For every BC and Syracuse, there's a UConn and WVU. And, it's not like Notre Dame makes people happy across the conference. A reason why some of those Big East schools left was because of the favorable politics toward ND that others couldn't get.

New blood isn't a bad thing, like Louisville...or Texas. Louisville had support from schools like Clemson and FSU, and only FSU had some history with UL back in the indie days. It didn't hurt that basketball was as good a product as UConn, but while UConn had good support from many in the conference, the lack of a football pulse and BC's animosities opened the door for a new type of member.

Notre Dame brought more money to the table and the ability to renegotiate. Texas in the same capacity will have the same effect. So, even if there are some against it, I suspect the positives of the move will weigh more than the negatives (although, I'm not a fan of ND's favored status, and they've already exposed their ways while in the conference, so, caveat emptor).

In all, it doesn't really change much. Big XII is the fifth strongest P5, and ACC is the fourth. Considering #5 is hanging on by a thread, #4 doing silly things isn't out of the realm of possibility.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 11:54 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 3242
Location: Phoenix Arizona
poyman wrote:
BYU as a football only member is what the Big 12 wants from BYU. Football only membership usually indicates the conference does not value the school or its policy. In the case of BYU this makes sense. If you take BYU as football only, which school becomes the other football only school? Navy? Boise State?

********

Wrong again.... Both the Big 12 and BYU are on record saying that they would prefer an "all in" situation... If it's not all in then I'm guessing that it won't happen.

poyman, believe or not I am actually trying to help BYU situation in the Big 12. If you listen which is very important, the Big 12 president Iowa state stated recently if the Big 12 starts to consider BYU seriously, the Honor code policy will come into play. Bob Bowlsby has stated many times in public and if you listen carefully, the Big 12 is open to football only schools.

The formal BYU AD recently stated he thought the religious issues of BYU will come up if the BYU wants to get into a power league.

The religious issue at BYU is not going to go away quietly in the night and discrimination in sports is very frond on right now starting with profession sports all the way to high school levels.

Football only membership may be the only option BYU has to gaining membership into the Big 12. You may have to take or leave it. It would be your choice.

There is a reason or smoke screen that Bowlsby is reviewing all these schools to possibly buy time to get schools acceptance of their fans for sport only situations including UConn.

BYU needs the Big 12, it not the other way around and the sooner you learn this issue, the better chance you will not be disappointed when the Big 12 expansion process is completed.

So no I am not wrong on Big 12 taking on football only membership unless you do not believe anything the commissioner is stating.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 3:50 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1769
The Bishin Cutter wrote:
In all, it doesn't really change much. Big XII is the fifth strongest P5, and ACC is the fourth. Considering #5 is hanging on by a thread, #4 doing silly things isn't out of the realm of possibility.

The Bishin Cutter, I'd be interested in seeing the real monetary figures for the ACC Network for the long-haul. What the ACC did receive is extended durability, and they appear very happy with it. They can sell basketball pretty good, and they have 5 or 6 schools that can deliver the meat and potatoes in football with the right match-ups.
With the PAC12 still having network issues with Directv, do you think they may be slipping to #4? If that ACC money is really on the mark, one may begin to wonder.

...............

Poyman w/Lash, I don't see the Big 12 making a "football only" offer to BYU based on objections to the BYU honor code. If there is any kind of formal relationship, such would not be tied to degrees of acceptance by sport. The idea that it would not be a problem for football, but would be a matter of non-acceptance policy with all the other BYU sports, doesn't make sense. The honor code is an institutional policy, not a specific sports policy, and would need to be discussed as such between the Big 12 and BYU. Either the Big 12 accepts BYU with their honor code, as is, or they don't----and the Big 12 makes the all or nothing call if they invite BYU to be a member. Is there room for compromise, or language modification, as to the policy? We'll see.

On the other hand, I could see the "no Sunday play" policy as a point of serious discussion. That is separate from the honor code factor. While the policy may not impact football, unless playing late Saturday night with potentials for storm and travel delays, how games in other sports would be impacted would be a point of consideration. I don't know the count in various sports that the Big 12 has usually been playing on Sunday, but I know it is not particularly uncommon. The question would be on the flexibility of all parties being able to resolve potential conflicts beforehand when it involves BYU. BYU's distance from most of the Big 12 does make traveling a bit more of an acute issue. Some of the other candidates mentioned, have even bigger travel issues, but perhaps are open to Sunday as needed, knowing that other options get narrowed when lower-profile sports match-ups have to be scheduled.

These comments are not a case "for" or "against" BYU, but they will be (or have already been) part of the points of discussion between the Big 12 and BYU to determine if they'll be dancing together.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 4:10 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 3242
Location: Phoenix Arizona
sec03 wrote:
The Bishin Cutter wrote:
In all, it doesn't really change much. Big XII is the fifth strongest P5, and ACC is the fourth. Considering #5 is hanging on by a thread, #4 doing silly things isn't out of the realm of possibility.

The Bishin Cutter, I'd be interested in seeing the real monetary figures for the ACC Network for the long-haul. What the ACC did receive is extended durability, and they appear very happy with it. They can sell basketball pretty good, and they have 5 or 6 schools that can deliver the meat and potatoes in football with the right match-ups.
With the PAC12 still having network issues with Directv, do you think they may be slipping to #4? If that ACC money is really on the mark, one may begin to wonder.

...............

Poyman w/Lash, I don't see the Big 12 making a "football only" offer to BYU based on objections to the BYU honor code. If there is any kind of formal relationship, such would not be tied to degrees of acceptance by sport. The idea that it would not be a problem for football, but would be a matter of non-acceptance policy with all the other BYU sports, doesn't make sense. The honor code is an institutional policy, not a specific sports policy, and would need to be discussed as such between the Big 12 and BYU.

On the other hand, I could see the "no Sunday play" policy as a point of serious discussion. That is separate from the honor code factor. While the policy may not impact football, unless playing late Saturday night with potentials for storm and travel delays, how games in other sports would be impacted would be a point of consideration. I don't know the count in various sports that the Big 12 has usually been playing on Sunday, but I know it is not particularly uncommon. The question would be on the flexibility of all parties being able to resolve potential conflicts beforehand when it involves BYU. BYU's distance from most of the Big 12 does make traveling a bit more of an acute issue. Some of the other candidates mentioned, have even bigger travel issues, but perhaps are open to Sunday as needed.

These comments are not a case "for" or "against" BYU, but they will be (or have already been) part of the points of discussion between the Big 12 and BYU to determine if they'll be dancing together.

Sorry Sec03, we will have to agree to disagree.

Living with the Big East for many years with football only members, those football only members were never considered part of the political structure of the league. Those schools only got to vote on issue that impacted football only and never got to vote on general issues or social issues that impact the league.

This arrangement would work well for BYU since football is the schools biggest concern on being in a power league.

BYU honor code situation would not impact the Big 12 with BYU football only because the school would not get to vote on issues impacting the general governance of the league.

I see a major compromise with BYU as football only member and believe the LGBT community would have less issue with BYU not having voting rights in the Big 12.

UConn on the other hand would provide a compromise of the other side of the token with being a liberal school and good in basketball and Olympic sports.

I am liking the idea more than ever of taking BYU as football only, UConn for all sports exception of football, and 12 for all sports which could be Cincinnati, Memphis, or a political move with the University of Houston.

The networks would like this arrangement and they get great basketball school without the baggage of a lesser football school and get a great football school without the baggage of political issues that come with the honor code and discrimination.

The networks only have to pay pro rate for two schools while getting the top football school and basketball school without needing 14 members.

I am going out on limb and believe this is what is taking the time up for Big 12 expansion to provide UConn time to convince its fan base this is a smart move.

In 2026 when the Big 12 tier 1 contracts are up for renewal, the league could revaluate if UConn and BYU need to continue in current status or move to full membership.

Its is a win/win situation for everyone involved including UCONN, BYU, Big 12, Fox, and ESPN>


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 5:25 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 8114
CSNBBS MB thread discussing unconfirmed reports regarding current Big 12 expansion vote tallies for specific schools at http://csnbbs.com/thread-788215.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 5:46 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 3242
Location: Phoenix Arizona
freaked4collegefb wrote:
CSNBBS MB thread discussing unconfirmed reports regarding current Big 12 expansion vote tallies for specific schools at http://csnbbs.com/thread-788215.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Most people that I talk to on Big 12 believe its Cincinnati and Houston so this site just help promote that on voting. It is why UConn is considering leaving the AAC.

How do you split up the schools.

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

North: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Cincinnati

One permanent cross over game per division

Texas/Oklahoma
Texas Tech/Oklahoma State
Kansas/Baylor
Kansas State/TCU
Houston/Iowa State
WVU/Cincinnati


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 3:48 am 
Online
Junior
Junior

Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 2:27 pm
Posts: 103
zzzzz


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 9:03 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 1403
sec03 wrote:
The Bishin Cutter wrote:
In all, it doesn't really change much. Big XII is the fifth strongest P5, and ACC is the fourth. Considering #5 is hanging on by a thread, #4 doing silly things isn't out of the realm of possibility.

The Bishin Cutter, I'd be interested in seeing the real monetary figures for the ACC Network for the long-haul. What the ACC did receive is extended durability, and they appear very happy with it. They can sell basketball pretty good, and they have 5 or 6 schools that can deliver the meat and potatoes in football with the right match-ups.
With the PAC12 still having network issues with Directv, do you think they may be slipping to #4? If that ACC money is really on the mark, one may begin to wonder.


I think it's the Big Ten and SEC way out in front, PAC far behind them, and a little distance between them and the ACC, with the Big XII not terribly far behind that. Two conferences are doing this well, the PAC should be doing well, and the others are stuck in these gimmicks and schemes.

I just don't see the PAC's issues as being the kind that could lead to defection or other issues (yet). They are stubborn and need to see their errors for what they are, but, I suspect they can make some good fixes if they come to grips. B1G-PAC was a swing and a miss, but you might see some expansion out that way in time. They are said to be close to some sponsorship of other sports, and that might add some content and value to their media deals. They're starting to readjust some of the content control issues with their media deals, so while the network may not pay well for some time, there are other avenues for some to profit.

But, really, expansion will reset things for them. You just have to get them out there to agree to some schools and how to approach scheduling. Easier said then done, sure, but when you can turn down Oklahoma and Oklahoma State, I think your candidate pool is more significant than the ACC's, who's just seeing AAC fare.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 10:39 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 3242
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Less reset today and review the continued saga of Big 12 expansion.

If the ACC conference is not taking a stand or having an issue with North Carolina controversial bathroom discrimination bill that impacts four ACC power schools in that state, should we really assume the Big 12 will have an issue with BYU?

These power conference care about one thing and one thing only money.

Since BYU meets all three expansion criteria of academics, athletics, TV markets, you got to add BYU back in if they can get 8 votes.

BYU is setup with contracts in current football schedules that could option out and be in the Big 12 next year.

We have talked over and over about the benefits of adding 2 or four schools, yet adding only 1 school keeps getting lost in the conversations.

If the objective is to go back to an 8 game conference schedule to improve the chances of making the four team playoff, 11 schools will complete that objective. Using the old Big Ten schedule with 11 schools and 8 game schedule would benefit no divisions and picking the top two teams to play in the CCG.

11 schools would provide the required football tv inventory for an 8 game conference schedule replacing round robin 9 game schedule with 10 schools.

8 game conference schedule would allow BYU and WVU to schedule four and not three OOC regional game which appears to be an easy option with the ACC considering requiring 2 power schools in future OOC.

So why does the Big 12 need 12 or 14 schools?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 10:52 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1769
lash wrote:
Less reset today and review the continued saga of Big 12 expansion.

If the ACC conference is not taking a stand or having an issue with North Carolina controversial bathroom discrimination bill that impacts four ACC power schools in that state, should we really assume the Big 12 will have an issue with BYU?



Apples and oranges, and again you are presenting misinformation.

http://www.myajc.com/news/sports/colleg ... m-b/nrMkp/

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/north-carol ... spellings/

https://www.campuspride.org/north-carol ... ir-campus/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 12:12 pm 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2015 6:47 am
Posts: 23
lash wrote:
Less reset today and review the continued saga of Big 12 expansion.

If the ACC conference is not taking a stand or having an issue with North Carolina controversial bathroom discrimination bill that impacts four ACC power schools in that state, should we really assume the Big 12 will have an issue with BYU?

These power conference care about one thing and one thing only money.

Since BYU meets all three expansion criteria of academics, athletics, TV markets, you got to add BYU back in if they can get 8 votes.

BYU is setup with contracts in current football schedules that could option out and be in the Big 12 next year.

We have talked over and over about the benefits of adding 2 or four schools, yet adding only 1 school keeps getting lost in the conversations.

If the objective is to go back to an 8 game conference schedule to improve the chances of making the four team playoff, 11 schools will complete that objective. Using the old Big Ten schedule with 11 schools and 8 game schedule would benefit no divisions and picking the top two teams to play in the CCG.

11 schools would provide the required football tv inventory for an 8 game conference schedule replacing round robin 9 game schedule with 10 schools.

8 game conference schedule would allow BYU and WVU to schedule four and not three OOC regional game which appears to be an easy option with the ACC considering requiring 2 power schools in future OOC.

So why does the Big 12 need 12 or 14 schools?


Did NC, Duke, NC St and Wake propose or support the legislation? If not, I wouldn't compare a state bill with a university policy.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5400 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 356, 357, 358, 359, 360

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Mesa Lejos and 3 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