NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Mon Sep 22, 2014 7:16 am

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:11 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2686
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Bullet, I see no difference in 12 or 16 members as both are basically two conference in one. Anytime you need a playin or championship game for a college football conference, you have two conferences in one.

Love the fact that the 12 team regular season is going to cause issue with conferences that hastily expanded to 12 such as new ACC and Conf USA. Maybe the southern ACC football schools should have listened to the northern smart basketball schools that resisted expansion and got the ACC into law suites and much bad publicity over the last two years.

ACC in its hast to try a catch the SEC, may have "screwed the poch" by ruining a perfectly great 9 team basketball conference. If the BCS does not survive will expansion prove its worth down the road? Will be interesting to see if expansion hurts ACC basketball similiar to how expansion hurt the orginial 9 team Big East once forced to expand due to football.

I always thought the ACC should have expanded to 10 and took only Miami and be done with it. Time will tell which option was better.

SEC and Big 12 are somewhat excused as they expanded before a 12 game regular season was considered.

The Pac 10 and MWC get great marks for being patient and not following expansion to 12.

The Big 10 can thank Notre Dame stubbornness for keeping the conference out of the 12 team championship game situation that will conflict with 12 regular season game.

Big East can thank the basketball schools for ensuring the conference did not expand behond 10 teams. Not sure the football schools would have expanded behond 10 teams if a split had occured in the first place.

There is no way a championship game can make the money that a 12 regular season game for each of 11 Big 10 members. Additionally the coaches do not have to face injury and other issues that a championship game would add once a 12 game regular season is approved.

This alone will most likely keep the Big 10, Pac 10, and Big East from expanding to 12 to stage a now useless championship game.

Back to BCS --------

For the most part the Big 10/Pac 10 have basically pulled out of the BCS with the seperate Rose Bowl TV deal.

So my guess on what the BCS officials are implying is there will be 5 or 7 conferences with both scenerios including the MWC with auto bid.

5 BCS conference scenerio: ACC, SEC, Big 12, BE, MWC
This scenerio would probably use the Orange, Sugar, and Fiesta with one at large team. If this scenerio takes place there will most likely not be a plus one or championship game as the Big 10 and Pac 10 will force the system back to AP and Coached polls selecting the national college football champion. Maybe not a bad compromise without a playoff and all the issues with the current BCS system. Remember the idea is to let markets determine which teams and conferences play and align for TV purposes in the bowls. Since the winner of this series would not really be champion by having the Big 10 and Pac 10 out, the other conferences would have no legal grounds to complain. Each of those schools would be considered for championship by using the AP or coaches poll similar to pre BCS days.

7 BCS conference scenerio: ACC, SEC, Big 12, BE, MWC, with Big 10 and Pac 10 remaining in the mix. Remains with the status quo of using the current four BCS bowls.

Should get very interesting in the next couple of years with 12 team regular football season and constant issues with how BCS selects teams.








Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:59 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 10:57 pm
Posts: 1289
Location: Portland! (and about time!)
Lash, are you advocating 12s or aren't you?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 18, 2005 1:10 pm 
The 2002-2003 (12-game) seasons featured conference championship games. Also, in 2003, Kansas State played in the BCA Classic, the Big XII Championship, and the Fiesta Bowl. In 1996, Brigham Young played in the Pigskin Classic, the WAC Championship, and at Hawaii...


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 18, 2005 4:06 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2686
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Pounder, a decisive yes for 7 12 team conferences as a solution for the BCS conferences if there is a solution. I just dont think there are any controls in college football to ensure balanced alignment.

In comparison to the NFL that moved Seattle to the NFL West division for balance and wisely moved the Cardinals from the east to the west divisions to help with travel, fan interest and TV interest, college football has no such controls.

You basically have six entities all looking out for themselves and trying to work together to get the best TV contract for football BCS bowls compared to the NFL that has many entites, yet looks out for all in TV negotations and alignment.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 18, 2005 9:13 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon May 05, 2003 10:30 am
Posts: 1370
Location: Baltimore, MD
In order, the best numbers of teams per conference are:

9, 12, 8, 10, 11

The guiding principle is that no team should be allowed to claim a conference championship without having beaten any other team with as good a record. That cannot happen in a 9, 8 or 12 team conference. It could in a 10 team setup and is more likely in an 11. In fact it occurred a few years ago in the BigTeneleven when Ohio St & Iowa tied at 8-0.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 18, 2005 11:43 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 8:08 pm
Posts: 979
<<In order, the best numbers of teams per conference are:

9, 12, 8, 10, 11>>

Any odd number gives you scheduling problems, more so in basketball than football, but it does cause some in football. 9 leads to an easily scheduled round robin, but it still has lots of drawbacks.


<<Bullet, I see no difference in 12 or 16 members as both are basically two conference in one. Anytime you need a playin or championship game for a college football conference, you have two conferences in one. >>

In a 16 team football conference you play the teams in the other division at home once in 16 years. In 12 team conferences you play the other division every other year and at home once in 4 years. It is still one conference.
The same applies to other sports as well. With 16 it is 2 conferences as there is very little interdivision play.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 18, 2005 11:47 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 8:08 pm
Posts: 979
Lash,

The Big 10 and the SEC are the only conferences that MIGHT make as much money with a 12th home game as they would with a championship game. Even then, the championship game is probably worth more than 12 home games. In any event, the 12th game is irrelevant to the championship game. We have already had 12 game seasons with championship games. And as has been pointed out, there have been preseason games and games in Hawaii extending the season.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 11:38 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2686
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Bullet, are you using that fuzzy math theory again? just kidding!

Lets take a look at a championship game versis a 12 team regular season game.

Using the Big East which has an average home attendance of say 35,000 which I think is probably low and being conservative with estimates. An average home ticket goes for 25 dollars again being concervative as some schools charge more for tickets.

8 BE teams x 35,0000 avg att x 25 $ per ticket = $7,000,000 that will be projected figures for 12 game

Since the TV star ACC is only getting a projected 5 million for its championship game, I will be concervative and assume the BE would not be able to make any more for championship game and most likley less than ACC.

5 million shared average by 8 teams = $625,000

12 game x 35,000 x $25 ticket...........= $875,000

difference of 250,000 dollars per team with 12 regular season game over shared revenue for a football championship game

ACC, Pac 10, Big 12 all have average attendance above Big East, each of the 6 BCS conferences would make more with a 12 team regular season game over a championship game.








Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 11:51 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 10:57 pm
Posts: 1289
Location: Portland! (and about time!)
If the ACC is only getting 5 mil for a championship game, then it's official: conference championship games are overrated. Way overrated on this board.

That's part of the reason I'm against 12.

Playing everyone in your conference every year has added value in increasing the rivalries. Somehow, I don't think the Big 10 will go to that with the 12-game schedule. Reason- schools are able to charge more per ticket when they have a big OOC game, and it's harder to do that when you restrict the number of OOC games. My pro/rel scenario increases the value of "league" games, but I'll assume the mantle of the real world here and say that's not happening anytime soon.

In reality, 9 or 10 is best in a 12-game schedule.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 11:57 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2686
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Bullet, part 2 and see previous post.

Keep in mind the BE would actually need 12 members to share the 5 million dollar TV championship game and the figures reflect much more money made from 12 regular season game over football championship games.

My point being made in previous post was referring to conference that has not yet expanded to 12 to play a championship game. Miami and Oklahoma coaches are on record as favoring replacing the championship game with the 12 regular season game or using the championship game as the 12th game. Cant have it both ways and more money can be made on 12 regular season game and this will drive the approval.

I think the 12 regular season game will prevent the Big 10, Pac 10, and Big East from expanding due to issues of extended season as coaches will not want both if they dont already have to deal with it.

In fact the Big 12 may decide to not play the championship game once a 12 regular season game is approved. Not sure how you would be able to pick the conference champion or specifically the BCS representative.

If a BCS commmittee someday gets to decide the BCS teams, it would not matter as the committee could pick from both division champions or simply take both to play in the BCS bowls.

12 regular season schedule may eventually make a conference football championship game obsolute. This is expecially true for any conference that has an average attendance worth being considered big time football.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 12:17 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2686
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Pounder, just for record I agree with you on 9 or 10 team conference. My slogan "Pac 10 is Perfect". The Big East Football conference will most likely never grow behond 10 teams.

The issue is the SEC and ACC let the horse out of the gate and it is more easy to shut the gate in the first place as opposed to getting the horse back behind the fence.

Maybe if there were more openings in the BCS you could take each of the 6 division winners to play in the BCS. Only issue, why would the Pac 10 and Big 10 agree to allow the SEC, ACC, Big 12 to always get 2 bids each?

This is why college football is in such a mess created by the BCS which promoted 12 team conferences in the first place.

An easier solution would be to have all conferences expand to equal numbers for balance than drop members.

Now the Big 10 could easily work a deal with the Big East to allow Penn State to play football in the Big East and continue with the academic forum alignment. Factor in Notre Dame and the Big East would become a perfect 10, the Big 10 would revert back to a perfect 10, matching the smart Pac 10 which has wisely remained a perfect 10.

We all know the folks running college football are not necessarily smart nor perfect. Greedy is a better classification. The Big East is not excused as the greed of the Big East is the reason Penn State is in the Big 10 in the first place. So we have at least two missed opportunities for perfect 10 member conferences. The ACC jumped over the cliff to catch the SEC and could have been a perfect 10 by taking only Miami. Wow, how nice would that have been and the conference could have continued with round robin basketball. What a concept of having 10 member conference. Too bad money was used as a factor.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2005 12:34 am 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 8:08 pm
Posts: 979
<<We all know the folks running college football are not necessarily smart nor perfect. Greedy is a better classification.>>

I'll go along with that.

<<12 game x 35,000 x $25 ticket...........= $875,000>>

I remember reading one of these recent articles that Michigan made around $1,000,000 on a home game (maybe someone else remembers it and can verify that figure). I guarantee the BE schools make nothing approaching that. 12 X $1,000,000 is better than the championship game, but not by a whole lot. I believe the SEC and Big 12 are in the 7-9 million range. I don't remember seeing anything on the ACC. That's why I said only the SEC and Big 10 would be close.

As for your $875,000 you don't include concessions which raise that. But you also don't include the cost of operating the stadium on game day. You don't include the guarantee which will run $300,000-$400,000 for the visiting team (yes it really is that high). That's why Michigan can sell 110,000 tickets and clear $1,000,000, not $2,750,000 (at $25/ticket) or $4,400,000 (at $40/ticket).

But you are missing the whole point. It is not either a 12th game or a championship game. It is an extra 12th game. I guarantee the Big 12 will not drop their championship game. There is very little sentiment for that. These conferences will maximize revenue. For 12 team conferences that means 12 games AND a championship game.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2005 2:57 pm 
I also happen to think 10 team conferences are the optimum.

9 isn't bad for football, but an even number works better from a scheduling standpoint in most other sports.

However, with 12 games as the new standard, 10-team conferences should require that all members play all other 9 teams in their conference.

Having two 8-0 teams at the end of a season, who didn't play each other seems rather stupid. Unless you just don't care about the concept of determining a champion.

I think most posters here agree that the 11 in the Big 10 is a goofy number. My guess is that they jumped at the chance to grab Penn State, and thought that Notre Dame would be a slam dunk for #12. I also assume that Notre Dame has a standing offer, and the conference would love to go to 12, but they won't say so publicly, since there is no strong interest in anyone other than Notre Dame.

12, 14, 16 really amounts to 2 conferences (for football, anyway, with 6-, 7- or 8-team divisions). That is not bad, necessarily, since the ACC, B12, SEC format does require that you play everyone within your division (conference). But some conference officials reflecting now, realize that the expansion to 12 may put a strong candidate for the National Championship at risk, when they face a tough opponent in the conference championship game (someone that they perhaps beat during the regular season).

I think the ACC would have been better with adding just Miami, and not screwing with geography with the ridiculous addition of BC. But Swofford probably thought 12 was the future, since the SEC and Big 12 had gone that route.

It seems unfair to create a playoff bracket that treats the champions of 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12-team conferences equally. Clearly the champ of the 12-team conference has to jump through more hoops.

If you like the numbers 8, 9, or 10, then maybe the 12-team conferences can get there by growing to 16, 18, or 20, and then treating each 8, 9 or 10 team division as a conference. Then each division is on equal footing with the BE(8), MWC (9), or PAC (10).

But nobody in college football seems to have any kind of vision or take a leadership position, so with every conference moving in different directions, it will continue to stay as a ridiculous mess.

I'd love to see a final solution of X conferences, each having Y teams (no independents), feed into a tournament bracket. I'd also like to see some adjustments made, so that BC (ACC), Penn State (B11), South Florida (BE), Marshall, ECU & UTEP (CUSA), TCU (MWC), Louisiana Tech (WAC), and Denver (SBC) didn't defy geography.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2005 3:32 pm 

Quote:
I also happen to think 10 team conferences are the optimum.

9 isn't bad for football, but an even number works better from a scheduling standpoint in most other sports.

However, with 12 games as the new standard, 10-team conferences should require that all members play all other 9 teams in their conference.

Having two 8-0 teams at the end of a season, who didn't play each other seems rather stupid. Unless you just don't care about the concept of determining a champion.

I think most posters here agree that the 11 in the Big 10 is a goofy number. My guess is that they jumped at the chance to grab Penn State, and thought that Notre Dame would be a slam dunk for #12. I also assume that Notre Dame has a standing offer, and the conference would love to go to 12, but they won't say so publicly, since there is no strong interest in anyone other than Notre Dame.

12, 14, 16 really amounts to 2 conferences (for football, anyway, with 6-, 7- or 8-team divisions). That is not bad, necessarily, since the ACC, B12, SEC format does require that you play everyone within your division (conference). But some conference officials reflecting now, realize that the expansion to 12 may put a strong candidate for the National Championship at risk, when they face a tough opponent in the conference championship game (someone that they perhaps beat during the regular season).

I think the ACC would have been better with adding just Miami, and not screwing with geography with the ridiculous addition of BC. But Swofford probably thought 12 was the future, since the SEC and Big 12 had gone that route.

It seems unfair to create a playoff bracket that treats the champions of 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12-team conferences equally. Clearly the champ of the 12-team conference has to jump through more hoops.

If you like the numbers 8, 9, or 10, then maybe the 12-team conferences can get there by growing to 16, 18, or 20, and then treating each 8, 9 or 10 team division as a conference. Then each division is on equal footing with the BE(8), MWC (9), or PAC (10).

But nobody in college football seems to have any kind of vision or take a leadership position, so with every conference moving in different directions, it will continue to stay as a ridiculous mess.

I'd love to see a final solution of X conferences, each having Y teams (no independents), feed into a tournament bracket. I'd also like to see some adjustments made, so that BC (ACC), Penn State (B11), South Florida (BE), Marshall, ECU & UTEP (CUSA), TCU (MWC), Louisiana Tech (WAC), and Denver (SBC) didn't defy geography.


Dave - excellent post - I have been generally thinking the same for a long time - why in the world someone with some authority and respect cannot get all the conferences together to make numbers and geographic sense is beyond me - a little leadership would go a long way - I totally agree with your geography problem - a Florida school in the Big East and a Massachusetts school in the ACC - Louisiana Tech in the WAC - it's a jumbled mess and we could do better - thanks for sharing your thoughts - Arkansan


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2005 6:53 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2686
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Dave and The Underhog, agreed and good discussions.

Also agree with Bullet, the SEC, ACC cant go back and will most likely have a championship game and a 12 regular season game for each member school. They will just have to live with the schedule issues.

The only problem is we dont what to hear the whining from the coaches on unfairness of having to play an extra game or 13th game to get the BCS bid. Those conferences are getting paid for it.

With the 12th regular season game upon us, the only way the orginial post of having 12 7 conferences could get any traction is Notre Dame.

The Big 10 can make more money remaining with 11 teams and getting an occasional BCS at large bid. Factor in the 12 regular season game and only Notre Dame could really improve the money for the Big 10. ND may possibly bring another network or 20 million to the Big 10 making a championship game worth the effort. Syracuse, Pitt, Rutgers, Missouri will not be able to do it and so only Notre Dame could make expansion of Big 10 worth the effort. At least on paper.

The Pac 10 has often commented the conference will not expand unless the Big 10 expands. Not sure if accurate but has been reported.

Notre Dame movement would then free up Big East football schools to make a move. MWC would most likely follow in expansion.

Would this be good for the Big East football schools expanding to 12 with very deep southern schools?

Dave you have made some good arguments for 10 team conferences.

If the BCS folds and it is a possiblity, would 12 team conferences be of any value? AP Poll dropping out was a major blow and most of the AP writters have a big influence on all of us everyday with sports news regardless if the poll is part of the BCS. Would you care if you were the Big 10 or Pac 10 on getting national championship recognition as football champion in the AP verses new BCS? They already get the money with the Rose TV bowl deal.

What if another bowl could make up the revenue of the occasional BCS at large bid?

Maybe adding UMass and Delaware to bring the number of schools to 10 for Big East and have the champion play in the future Big Apple may be the best long term plan if the BCS does not survive.

If enough revenue could be generated in the Big Apple, the 2nd place team of the Big 10 may be convinced to play the Big East champion or Notre Dame in NYC.

NYC could be just as fun as Orlando the current destination of the second place Big 10 unless amusement parks are your primary interest.

If NYC can come up with a TV network and 15 million, no reason the Big Apple can not be top tier with or without the BCS.










Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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:  
 

 

cron




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