The big 12 has no cable network like the big 10, the PAC-12, and soon to be SEC.
For those conferences, expansion is all about moving into larger TV markets to sell their network to cable companies.
With the Longhorn Network (and I am not trashing it) that effectively prevents the Big 12 from ever having a conference-wide network.
Texas would be a major draw for a Big 12 Network. Not having their sports featured would be a blow to the financial feasibility of such a network.
Without such a network, there isn't much incentive for the Big 12 to expand. There is no need to go after large market teams. The conference has to rely solely on what networks are willing to pay out, and adding just to add waters down the product and makes matchups between marquee programs fewer and farther between.
Now there could be a deal struck where the conference goes to a set up like the P12, where there are deals with the major networks, then a home-base conference network, and then of course the regional networks. With this model, Texas could keep its channel and maybe Texas Tech, Baylor and TCU develop a regional network that they share.
I don't know if it is still in the works, but I heard that Oklahoma was planning its own network as well. Let them do it. And have Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State and Iowa State pair up to have their own regional channel.
Now this is where expansion comes into play...
I think the Big 10 is money hungry like none other. I don't think they stop at 14, nor 16 members. I think they go to 18, and do so in order to get the Duke-UNC rivalry within their conference. They also take UVA and Georgia Tech. Those 4 states bring nearly 28 million viewers to the Big 10 footprint.
The SEC will stop at 16, however, unless the opportunity in about 15 years presents itself to grab Oklahoma. For now though, as everybody expects, the SEC will grab VT & NC State to get to 16.
Now for the Big 12.
FSU, Miami & Clemson are brought on board. These three teams would create a shared regional network.
So is three of the following four: Louisville, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, or Boston College.
My guess is it would be UL, BC & Pitt. These three programs, along with WVU could create a regional network.
On top of the regional networks, there would also be a patent conference network like the P12 has.
The divisions or pods COULD be set up a number of different ways.
POD 1
Texas
Texas Tech
Baylor
TCU
POD 2
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Kansas
Kansas State
POD 3
Iowa State
WVU
Pitt
BC
POD 4
FSU
UL
Miami
Clemson
Each year, each pod will play the 3 members of its pod, plus it will face off against all for members of one of the other pods, and each year the pod matchups would rotate. The pod matchups would give 7 conference games per season. For an eighth game, an inter-pod match up would be an annual designated rivalry, like Texas/Oklahoma. In years where they naturally face off in pods, another team would be substituted.
YEAR 1:
Pod 1 plays Pod 4
Pod 2 plays Pod 3
YEAR 2
Pod 1 plays Pod 2
Pod 3 plays Pod 4
YEAR 3
Pod 1 plays Pod 3
Pod 4 plays Pod 2
ETC...
They continue to rotate each following year, home and away. Every 6 years each school in the conference has a home and away with each member of the conference.
Instead of Divisions for determining a championship, the two conference teams with the best conference records determines who meets in the conference title game. In the event of a tie, the team with the best overall record wins the tie breaker. If there is still a tie, the team with the highest rank wins the tie breaker.
That set up prevents a scenario like the ACC has this year where you have 2 ten win teams in one division yet only one makes the title game to face a 6-6 GT team from the other division. The two best teams go to the championship game.
If the pod set up isn't favorable, then a zipper alignment of divisions could be a possibility.
RED DIVISION
Texas
Baylor
Oklahoma State
Kansas
WVU
Louisville
BC
Miami
BLACK DIVISION
FSU
Clemson
Pitt
Iowa State
TCU
Texas Tech
Kansas State
Oklahoma
You still have designated matchups between divisions. I doubt there is much support for the zipper alignment though.
For those conferences, expansion is all about moving into larger TV markets to sell their network to cable companies.
With the Longhorn Network (and I am not trashing it) that effectively prevents the Big 12 from ever having a conference-wide network.
Texas would be a major draw for a Big 12 Network. Not having their sports featured would be a blow to the financial feasibility of such a network.
Without such a network, there isn't much incentive for the Big 12 to expand. There is no need to go after large market teams. The conference has to rely solely on what networks are willing to pay out, and adding just to add waters down the product and makes matchups between marquee programs fewer and farther between.
Now there could be a deal struck where the conference goes to a set up like the P12, where there are deals with the major networks, then a home-base conference network, and then of course the regional networks. With this model, Texas could keep its channel and maybe Texas Tech, Baylor and TCU develop a regional network that they share.
I don't know if it is still in the works, but I heard that Oklahoma was planning its own network as well. Let them do it. And have Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State and Iowa State pair up to have their own regional channel.
Now this is where expansion comes into play...
I think the Big 10 is money hungry like none other. I don't think they stop at 14, nor 16 members. I think they go to 18, and do so in order to get the Duke-UNC rivalry within their conference. They also take UVA and Georgia Tech. Those 4 states bring nearly 28 million viewers to the Big 10 footprint.
The SEC will stop at 16, however, unless the opportunity in about 15 years presents itself to grab Oklahoma. For now though, as everybody expects, the SEC will grab VT & NC State to get to 16.
Now for the Big 12.
FSU, Miami & Clemson are brought on board. These three teams would create a shared regional network.
So is three of the following four: Louisville, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, or Boston College.
My guess is it would be UL, BC & Pitt. These three programs, along with WVU could create a regional network.
On top of the regional networks, there would also be a patent conference network like the P12 has.
The divisions or pods COULD be set up a number of different ways.
POD 1
Texas
Texas Tech
Baylor
TCU
POD 2
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Kansas
Kansas State
POD 3
Iowa State
WVU
Pitt
BC
POD 4
FSU
UL
Miami
Clemson
Each year, each pod will play the 3 members of its pod, plus it will face off against all for members of one of the other pods, and each year the pod matchups would rotate. The pod matchups would give 7 conference games per season. For an eighth game, an inter-pod match up would be an annual designated rivalry, like Texas/Oklahoma. In years where they naturally face off in pods, another team would be substituted.
YEAR 1:
Pod 1 plays Pod 4
Pod 2 plays Pod 3
YEAR 2
Pod 1 plays Pod 2
Pod 3 plays Pod 4
YEAR 3
Pod 1 plays Pod 3
Pod 4 plays Pod 2
ETC...
They continue to rotate each following year, home and away. Every 6 years each school in the conference has a home and away with each member of the conference.
Instead of Divisions for determining a championship, the two conference teams with the best conference records determines who meets in the conference title game. In the event of a tie, the team with the best overall record wins the tie breaker. If there is still a tie, the team with the highest rank wins the tie breaker.
That set up prevents a scenario like the ACC has this year where you have 2 ten win teams in one division yet only one makes the title game to face a 6-6 GT team from the other division. The two best teams go to the championship game.
If the pod set up isn't favorable, then a zipper alignment of divisions could be a possibility.
RED DIVISION
Texas
Baylor
Oklahoma State
Kansas
WVU
Louisville
BC
Miami
BLACK DIVISION
FSU
Clemson
Pitt
Iowa State
TCU
Texas Tech
Kansas State
Oklahoma
You still have designated matchups between divisions. I doubt there is much support for the zipper alignment though.
