Big 12 expansion gets a boost today.
- Thread starter Rootmaster
- Start date
I didn't say big money for the teams, except what is good for ESPN and FoxSports is good for the Big 12 in the long run. I wasn't at the meetings, I'm simply trying to make it easier for board readers to learn in one spot what several reputable people's reactions were who were there. I think Lyons was right when he said he is in favor of what is best for the conference, not necessarily WVU. Since the Mountaineers will receive between $25 and $30 million this year for being in the Big 12 it's probably a good idea.
You said:
That was what I was responding to. Making the playoffs only get you $6 million, which is only $600k per team. In financial terms, that's not significant enough for any moves.
It remains to be seen if this is good for ESPN and Fox. You are starting from the premise that it is. I have serious doubts that this is accurate, especially given what Dennis Dodd just reported.
I have to take issue with your characterization. Your interpretation is not backed up by what I have read. The reaction that I have seen so far is that the only real benefit to expansion is increasing the playoff chances. The reporting so far is that there isn't a significant financial benefit. When you suggest that Texas would be willing to do this simply to put UC and UCF "in their place," I have to disagree that you are just trying to simplify this issue for other posters. That's an extremely speculative interpretation of the situation, and in all honesty, it's not realistic.
That is your opinion and I respect that. I believe the goal of any competitive team in a power 5 conference is to make the playoffs and hopefully the NC game. The Big 12 is currently at a statistically significant disadvantage compared to larger conferences that play only eight conference games and have a CCG. That is reason enough to make changes to the current setup to even the odds.
Based upon reactions and information from the links I provided, that is not simply my opinion. That was pretty much the consensus of those at the meetings.
I don't think it makes sense to expand to 12 teams, particularly by pulling in two teams from the American or Mt West. Why don't they simply expend the effort to expand the playoff field to 8? Of course, then it will all be over fighting to get two teams into the field.
For those of you who believe UT controls the votes of both TT and TCU, consider this: The current setup of the Big 12 cost TCU a chance at the playoffs in 2014. Studies have now shown that TCU's odds of making the playoffs are much better with the recommended changes. They may admire and appreciate the Longhorns but that sort of relationship only goes so far.
Do you really think they are going to willingly miss the playoffs again to be the Longhorns' lapdog? I don't.
Do you really think they are going to willingly miss the playoffs again to be the Longhorns' lapdog? I don't.
Thanks for the links-good info and missed the video of Dodd--very different take that what you get reading his article(s)
The video is in the second link where Dodd is interviewed outside the meeting place. It takes a minute to load. try this one also: http://www.cbssports.com/video/player/collegefootball/679595075924/0/cincinnati-ucf-candidates-for-big-12-expansion
The reactions you have mentioned are only for the playoffs. We haven't seen the reactions regarding revenue.
I disagree with your opinion. The odds of the playoffs alone aren't reason enough to make changes. First, it still hasn't been explained if the changes will actually even the odds. Make them better, yes. Even them? We don't know. I'd also point out that some of the odds can be increased by simply having a CCG. The 10-15% figure you mentioned includes a CCG, along with expansion. Since we have a figure on the CCG itself, we can say that expansion increases the odds roughly 5-10%. I think that figure is not going to be as persuasive to some schools (i.e. Texas) as you believe.
Argue with him instead:
West Virginia athletic director Shane Lyons, on the Big 12 and potential expansion: "Conference expansion is always on a conference's mind. It's just, is it a front-burner issue or is it a back-burner issue? I think right now, obviously, (it's) a front-burner issue (in the Big 12). So we have to make a decision one way or another, then move on. To keep meeting and talking about it and meeting and talking about it is not really doing any of us any good. Once we get all the information, let's make a decision and go with the decision."
And him:
Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby on conference's discussion about expanding to 12 teams. "If we do nothing, we will be substantially behind a decade from now," he said, adding there have been "frank discussions" about falling behind Big Ten and SEC financially, noting "trend lines start to diverge." Doesn't mean expansion is imminent, but it must be seriously considered. "You only do nothing if you have your eyes open to what implications are," he said.
My link to the Dennis Dodd video does not work
Look, my post early this morning included none of my opinions. It was simply a summary of information coming from those who were present at the meetings or interviewed those involved in the studies. It's your choice whether to believe them or not.
Here is Dodd's link--and I"ve written out the EXACT quote--this isn't michaelwalkerbr's "opinion" it is documented, carefully analyzed fact that the conference will use to determine its future plans:
Here is the link
Big 12 leaves spring meetings with a purpose: Live up to its name
His exact quote (in VIDEO):
DODD: "I think the bigger number is that they were told that if they stay status quo-uh- they'd have a 62% chance in any given year of getting into the playoff and I asked one of the researchers, that's fine but how does that compare to the other leagues? and he said that's a clear disadvantage, it's clear now that they have to expand".
And I haven't said anything to the contrary. I perfectly believe that the research said the Big 12's chances are 62% as it stands, and I perfectly believe that this is currently less than the other leagues.
The other poster said that expanding would pull the Big 12 even, in terms of percentage with the other conferences. We haven't seen the percentages for the other leagues, so we don't know if expansion pulls the Big 12 even. Taking the high-end estimate, that would put the Big 12 at 77%. Is that the same for the other conferences? Are they higher or lower? No one has indicated that.
The other poster has also been saying things that are 100% opinion. For example, he says that if expanding improves the percentage of making the playoffs, then that alone makes expansion worth it. That's an opinion. We don't know if the Big 12 schools actually believe that. We don't know if the Big 12 schools would think it's worth expanding if the odds of making the playoffs go up 10%. Maybe, maybe not, but this is an opinion, not a fact.
He also implied that it would benefit ESPN and Fox if the Big 12 expanded. Is that a fact? No, it's an opinion. It may well be that expansion benefits ESPN and Fox, but at this point we don't know. An argument can certainly be made that it doesn't.
He also said that expansion would benefit Texas, specifically because it would improve attendance. Again, this is an opinion. We don't have any data or evidence to support this.
On top of all that, we still don't know if expansion is going to bring in much, if any, more money. The report that Dennis Dodd said financial gains would be minimal. Is that for certain? No. However, it's also not certain that expansion would bring financial gains. At this point it's opinion, which has been my point.
I am the other poster and you know nothing about intellectual debate. You take any opportunity to argue with anyone you can by basically saying prove it. Well, guess what, one of the primary purposes of this board is to express your opinions. My opinions are based on reasonable facts and conclusions. You are the most irritating and least knowledgeable troll on here.
The companies hired by the Big 12 made the conclusions I am echoing. You are a stereotype southern redneck with a lot of challenging but no substantive arguments to support your views.You give Clemson as well as ACC fans a bad name. The only way I will discuss anything with you in the future is face to face. We're both in South Carolina, right? You say, "On top of all that, we still don't know..." Who is 'we'? Do you pretend to speak for the multitude of WVU and Big 12 fans on this board with your asinine statements? A thousand or more may disagree with you being their self appointed spokesperson and your smart ass remarks.
Thank you. There is nothing ambivalent about his remarks. The handwriting is on the proverbial wall but Mr. Clemson fan can't seem to read it.
You are the one making personal insults, not me. That's not having an intellectual debate.
The companies hired by the Big 12 have not made the conclusions you are echoing. Nothing has been released indicating how this would benefit the Big 12 financially. Your own link, the Dennis Dodd report, indicates that there would be little financial gain from expansion. In yet another link you've posted, Bob Bowlsby indicates that finances are a huge concern for the Big 12. Ok, well if finances are a huge concern, and if expansion doesn't help the finances, then are the schools going to vote for that? That's a serious question that has to be answered. That's not me trolling, and that's not me making smart ass remarks. It's a legitimate issue for discussion. You just sidestepped it when I brought it up, and then start attacking me personally for challenging your conclusions.
If you want to meet face to face to discuss this, I'm perfectly willing to accommodate you.
You tell me.
Oh, and by the way, is this what you call an "intellectual discussion?"
About time, I learned long ago that only an idiot argues with a moron. The sooner more here realize what this guy is all about, the quicker he will go away - never feed the troll.
You'll have to do better than that, PaperTiger. I'm not going to drive an hour and forty five minutes for a two minute 'debate'. You are the aggressor attacking everyone else's information, opinions, conclusions and rationale for no reason except to aggravate people. You come to me.
LMFAO!
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
:boxing:TBI several years ago, Skim. I can't feel fear. So now are you wanting in on this little soir'ee? You'll need a dance partner. There are a few here to choose from that need it.
He is terrified the BIG 12 will expand and progress even further ahead of his conference. No matter the fact, he claims its not just to troll apparently. Must not be able to get on Clemson boards as much time as he spends on this one.
Hopefully no one is foolish enough to believe any of the b.s. he constantly spews because none of it is accurate and its all just to put down WVU and the BIG 12 with nonsense.
LMFAO!
TBI several years ago, Skim. I can't feel fear. So now are you wanting in on this little soir'ee? You'll need a dance partner. There are a few here to choose from that need it.
Oh no...I don't want anything (more) to do with it. I'm a coward.
Plus, I have the ability to know how moronic it looks when people make such challenges.......
Who said anything about fighting? Maybe it's simply a physical challenge and the loser never posts here again. Either way you win, right?
You seem to find plenty of time to post on multiple forums.... ...I mean look at all the posts here and this isn't even the spot you frequent the most often.....
Buck! Skim is stalking you. He even knows where you post most often, sounds like undercover IRS or CIA to me. Watch him, Buck he is a thoroughly dangerous man! Seriously, Skim, that's a little out there! You really know what boards Buck frequents?
Words have gender, people have sex, unless you are trying to say you are sex male but are feeling a bit fancy at the moment.
Dude, you got a beard! If you're a chick you must be one of those that uses the other bathroom at Target.
You said name the time and place. I named a time and place. I don't live anywhere near York, Lancaster, or Chester Counties. I really don't live anywhere Spartanburg either, but it's closer.
I'm also not being an aggressor or attacking anyone. I simply pointed out problems with some of your conclusions. You still haven't been able to address those logically. You just started insulting me, and challenging me to meet you face to face. This in the very same post where you criticized me for not being able to have an intellectual debate. I'll let the irony wash over you.
You are the one who wants to meet face to face, so do it. I told you where I'll be. WestGate Mall, Spartanburg, tomorrow 6pm. You call someone out, then complain that it's too far to go, and then accuse me of being a "paper tiger?" I'll again let the irony wash over you.
You seem to be anxious, come a little closer little boy. A mall is too public. I think it's time to go private messaging before we both get kicked off here. Whatever happens the loser leaves the board forever, fair enough?
Maybe you two can work this out in a private stall in a men's restroom at any given truck stop.
Skim, in the words of Hank Hill, "Don't make me come over there and kick your ass!" Shut-up, Boomhauer, I'm busy here.
