Yep - People never think ahead, such as "getting 5 DUI's might not be good for my future", or "I'm completely smashed, maybe I shouldn't drive tonight".
Big 12 is in the catbird seat here
- Thread starter LSUTigersRoar
- Start date
Yep - People never think ahead, such as "getting 5 DUI's might not be good for my future", or "I'm completely smashed, maybe I shouldn't drive tonight".
Please read the article before commenting.
http://mweb.cbssports.com/ncaaf/wri...ssible-for-big-12-to-hold-football-title-game
There is going to be more money with expansion. The conference will get at least pro rata for the new schools. A CCG will be added that will increase everyone's payout from the conference. The new schools will contribute NCAA revenues to the distribution. Its very possible a new bowl will be added in 2019. Certain schools will likely bring new sponsorship revenue to BIG 12 schools. Its also very possible that the league will gain revenues from expansion--as Oklahoma's president stated, they've identified several schools that would be "additive".
With tier 3 rights including the LHN, the BIG 12 will go through a process like the other conferences have. Some have expiration dates within the timetable and some would have to be bought back over the remainder of time, depending on when specifically its desired to start a network. Expansion must happen in order for their to be a BIG 12 network--and as Boren states all of these issues must be addressed at the same time.
The Pac 12 has had some rematches, but they aren't guaranteed to and neither would the BIG 12 be. When the BIG 12 had 12 schools they didn't always have rematches. The ACC and SEC didn't always have rematches either. With three leagues at 14 schools they for certain aren't always going to have rematches and that is what the BIG 12 is going to be competing with for one of four slots each year.
As to summation--we don't both know if their will be votes for expansion once the candidates and the facts about them are presented and the conference has an open discussion about the future and where they are going to be standing. So far that hasn't happened. Bowlsby has closed the door on any discussion and that's exactly why Boren has once again pushed it to the forefront. The issues must be addressed and will be in early February.
and this:
The vote by the council passed 7-2. The Pac-12 didn't vote but later said it supported the change.
Bowlsby said the ACC and AAC voted against the compromise proposal on Wednesday, but an NCAA spokesperson said the commissioner misspoke as the SEC was the conference besides the AAC to vote against the proposal.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/14564702/rule-change-allows-big-12-hold-title-game
This is why I stated what I did, because the original articles stated that it was the ACC and SEC. New information has brought to light that the SEC rather than the ACC voted against it.
So far, the most likely candidates don't seem to have much sizzle. BYU and Cinn or Memphis. Just not that much sizzle and there is no quarentee that ther will be a pro rata increase in revenue for those markets. B12 already has Texas so Houston doesn't add much. The Utah market is not that big. I just don't see that anything will happen until the new tV contract negotiating starts up.
Pro rata shares at minimum are written into the BIG 12s contracts. That means yes, they will get at least pro rata shares, but Oklahoma's president stated that the conference and its media consultant's have identified several candidates that will be additive to the conference.
I will beleive it when I see it. So far, there's not much there there. If I were to guess, Cinn might add enough to only lose a little for each team. I'm just not sure that Utah would bring much. Too bad we couldn't get Nebraska and Missouri back into the fold.
I see you're using that lame reply in multiple threads toward multiple posters.
...while at the same time being more like him than any other person.
that weird guy with all the LIF stuff and personal attacks got banned. i'm just hoping vernon goes on a tear and picks off a few more of the board jerks
true. but i'm disliked because i want to change the direction of the football program... so it's actually a point of pride for me. i never do personal attacks and i treat this like a message board, not a war zone --- i'm actually kinda unique
The last time I was upset was around fourth grade when Encyclopedia Brown solved a mystery before me.
...other than that I'm good to go.
...other than that I'm good to go.
Let Me add one curious statement that the LSU poster said - He said that wanted to keep playing Auburn and Florida and some other SEC teams - That is a totally inaccurate statement. Auburn is in their division so they play them every season. And Florida is their permanent crossover team. So with that basic piece of info I think he is a troll and has no clue what he is talking about. Actually LSU is unhappy that Florida is their permanent crossover game. The feel it is much tougher than Ole Miss vs Vandy and Miss St vs Ky.
We could end up unhappy with how the divisions are constructed too. The BIG12 has given no assurances that the divisions will be equitable and fair. We don't know whether they will choose to expand or not, or even who they could all agree on adding. All we have are speculations about who would be added, how divisions would be constructed and how permanent crossovers would be paired. I figure the divisions would favor Texas and Oklahoma.
I think what you say makes a whole lot of sense. If the Big XII continues having success with its formula war is to say that other conferences will not attempt to jettison a few teams and return to the round robin format with a championship game--ala Big XII? Maybe the success of the Big XII is the catalyst to real and logical reorganization built around regionalization. If the Big 10. ACC, and SEC were to relieve themselves of specific excess baggage the reformation of a powerful, eastern regional conference could become a reality and include wVU. I like where we are and enjoy hearing commentary that the others who considered themselves so brilliant and forward thinking might be coming to the realization that they have created some monsters that need to be exterminated and buried.Maybe we Mountaineers should have faith and confidence that WE were the ones who really have done it right and wait for the others to, not only recognize those facts but have the courage to actually act upon them and return conferences to a greater degree of sanity than we have suffered with for the last several years.
Dream On - the other conferences are not going to be getting smaller. It is a nice theory but it is not happening.
Wac tried 16 teams and fell apart, after a few years. While I do not think Big 10, SEC, PAC 12 or ACC will go smaller, I do think soon TV money will get less and less as people lose interest because the great games are no longer played. College Football has turned into greedy money and TV sets and does not the consider the fan views. Money is driving this whole College Football playoffs, while I consider college football a great sport something has to give here. SEC, Big 10 , Acc, Pac12 all have 14 teams but does that really mean better? In terms of money may be but when you do the math money is not that high when divided 14 ways. That is why I really think The Big 12 will be better with ten teams than 12 why do it? I admire the Big 12 for sticking with what they wanted and got it. Sometimes in this crazy world of sports someone has to show others another way to think Way to go Big 12 hats off to you
No, you are incorrect. The only two conference that voted against the proposal was the ACC and the AAC. Yes the ACC was a huge proponent of the original proposal until the BIG gave that conference a big FU, with amendment that only allows conference with less than 10 schools to hold a CCG without divisions. I think it gives you an idea of what the BIG is looking for long term if they plan on expanding.
http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/se...-option-to-have-conference-championship-game/
This erroneous information has been corrected more than once.
Is there some particular relevance to who voted for it and who voted against it? The important thing is that under Bowlsby's leadership it was passed. They now have the option of playing a 10 team CCG with a guaranteed rematch but also getting an additional "data point". It is hard to imagine that they would have gone to the trouble of seeking the amendment without any intention of using it but I suppose anything is possible. They could well continue on for a year or two without either initiating a CCG or expanding. They have the option of employing the CCG at any time they wish. They will also have the option of expanding later if that is the conference desire. All will be made clear after they meet in February and try to work out their differences. Hopefully both Texas and Oklahoma are happy with whatever is decided.
Bowlsby himself stated that they may not use it. Actually what the BIG 12 proposed was having the conferences have the ability to determine their own champion. They wanted to be able to have divisions or not regardless of size and pick whoever they wanted to play for a CCG. They settled for a round robin 10 team CCG with guaranteed rematch of top two teams. Again Bowlsby already stated they may not choose to do that and several in the conference such as WVU's president have commented that playing a 10 team CCG under a round robin makes no sense.
Latest posts
-
GAME THREAD Weekend Baseball Series Thread - WVU vs Queens- Latest: bobhertzel'ssweatpants
-
-
