If we are looking West, I'd prefer UNLV over BYU. At the very least we get a fun away game out of it. Who wants to tailgate with Morons in a dry town?
Big 12... Lots of sports radio chatter here in Utah
- Thread starter CE4WVU
- Start date
unlv over byu? No way. Byu is light years better option. The ND of Mormons. They have a national/worldwide following, their own TV network, football stadium seats 75k, strong in several sports like basketball and football, provide the Salt Lake City/Provo markets, and a very strong tradition. They are a no brainer.
Yeah, and Las Vegas has every other possible thing I actually care about.
I'm just a fan. I want an attractive product. Give me a reason to spend money and there's a good chance I will. Tailgating with morons? No thanks. I'll save my dollars for the sexy B12 destinations like Waco, Lubbock, Manhattan, or Ames.
I love the idea of having byu in the big 12. The big 12 is starting to act like the big east. Remember times when 'rumors' Miami was gonna leave years before they did? And everyone bitching about only 8 schools in the big east because we needed 10 like the big 10? The big 12 laid an egg by not adding Louisville to make 11. Now byu wants on board, and we could've had 12. They keep playing grab ass and byu is going to be gone to the pac 12 along with a couple big 12 schools. I say just add byu now, go to 11 and worry about number 12 later
this is a good point in the endless but interesting discussion of expansion.
people talk destinations & markets nevermind most of the present road venues leave a lot to be desired.
adding Lawrence, Kan & Norman, Okla aren't exactly a thriving, sprawling metropolis either.
road games at UMD still give promixity to DC. Austin is cool. San Antonio nearby. TCU is near Dallas.
before in the Big East, esp for bball, it was short of nothing. DePaul (Chicago), St Johns (NYC), Big East tourney (NYC), Rutgers (NYC), G'Town (DC), Villanova (Philly), Temple (Philly), USF (Tampa), Miami, Boston College, Cincinnati, Marquette (Milwaukee), dare I say Pittsburgh. catch a game in a city/immediate area with fun to be had.
Very unlikely. Pac12 universities are the most liberal in academia.
Let me preface my comments with, I live in FL now and have a son at UCF. BUT, my middle son is attending WVU next year. I see the Big 12 staying out of the west, BYU in particular. Beyond being an outlier like us, they can't play sports on Sundays. It doesn't seem like a big deal, but it really messes with every other sport but football. Beyond just "messing" w scheduling, athletes missing classes, and travel expenses(extra hotel days), it most importantly messes with money from TV.
While UCF is not in the best interests of WVU with recruiting(adding another P5 option for FL guys to stay in state), it is in the best interests of the conference. UCF matches better w big state schools(can you believe 60,000 students?). The football program is already better than 2 conf schools, and I hate to say, but they would get in the top 4 within 3 years with the better recruiting and the number of players in FL. On campus facilities are all new and fantastic, and the football stadium, only 45k, but it was built to expand easily, already have drawings for 75k.
I would love for B12 to steal an FSU first, but conf can't ignore the FL market. TVs and athletes.
My wish list is 1 FSU, 2 Nebraska, 3 Louisville, and 4 UCF. But from a realities POV, UCF is 1.
While UCF is not in the best interests of WVU with recruiting(adding another P5 option for FL guys to stay in state), it is in the best interests of the conference. UCF matches better w big state schools(can you believe 60,000 students?). The football program is already better than 2 conf schools, and I hate to say, but they would get in the top 4 within 3 years with the better recruiting and the number of players in FL. On campus facilities are all new and fantastic, and the football stadium, only 45k, but it was built to expand easily, already have drawings for 75k.
I would love for B12 to steal an FSU first, but conf can't ignore the FL market. TVs and athletes.
My wish list is 1 FSU, 2 Nebraska, 3 Louisville, and 4 UCF. But from a realities POV, UCF is 1.
Agree, BYU is the Best Option still available. They are a mini Notre Dame in the extensive, national religious following sense. Throw in Colorado State and we are golden.
There are around 1.5 million people here in the SLC/Provo area alone. That is from as far north as Brigham City, all the way down the I-15 corridor past Provo to Salem. Now, I am not including other towns such as Logan NE of the metro since that is where Utah State resides. This metro area growing and they will have close to 3 million here in Utah, by the time the GOR expires.
Now, I am not big Mormon/LDS guy myself, but BYU as an option should at least be considered... The only thing they cannot give up, which might blow their chances of consideration for Big 12 expansion, is not playing any sports on Sunday's.
It could be worse. If they were SDAU (Seven Day Adventist University) they wouldn't be able to play on Saturdays!
We do not play football on Sunday and right now there are no men's basketball games on Sunday. They would have to work around it in Women's Basketball and the minor sports - but I do not see that as a problem.
Just as a postscript -- for amusement purposes only -- but I visited Vegas a couple of weeks ago. Our shuttle driver between the airport and Fremont Street came across as being THE expert on all things Las Vegas (which explains why he drives a shuttle). He said UNLV is destined to become a powerhouse in college football.
His reasoning? Tony Sanchez, a very successful high school coach at Bishop Gorman, is now coaching the Runnin' Rebels.
"You heard it first here," he said.
And you've heard it second here. Nothing like getting the inside skinny.
His reasoning? Tony Sanchez, a very successful high school coach at Bishop Gorman, is now coaching the Runnin' Rebels.
"You heard it first here," he said.
And you've heard it second here. Nothing like getting the inside skinny.
Not exactly. The benefit other leagues get from the CCG isn't just playing a "respectable" team. Typically, the CCG opponent is a ranked team. Not always, but usually. Right offhand, I think all the CCG opponents this year were in the Top 15. Adding BYU wouldn't really solve that problem. BYU is pretty good, but they aren't a perennial Top 25 team. As I've pointed out, one problem TCU and Baylor had this year was that they had fewer wins over ranked teams than the other schools. BYU wouldn't have really helped out had the been on the schedule this year. (And of course that still wouldn't have solved the co-champion problem either.)
The other point is, BYU is hard up for opponents. They need as many big-name opponents as they can get. You could probably get BYU to play half the Big 12 teams every year OOC. Realistically, not just BSing. I'd just do that, and not have to add them full time and have to split the money an extra way.
If a Big 12 team used the extra game to schedule another cupcake, then they just don't get it in the first place.
Sagarin's vs. Top 30 including bowl/playoff games.
tOSU 4-0
TCU 3-1
Bama 8-2
Oregon 5-1
Baylor 3-1
FSU 4-1
The only outlier here is tOSU. In fact, tOSU was 2-0 against the top 30 before the playoffs started. Baylor 3-0 and TCU 2-1.
This is also something I've pointed out. Sagarin is not a factor. The committee doesn't consider any of Sagarin's statistics. The committee considers its own ranking as the standard. It also uses its own strength of schedule formula, not Sagarin's or anyone else's. Alabama had 5 wins over teams that finished ranked in the committee poll. Florida St, Oregon, and Ohio St each had 3. Baylor and TCU had 2 each. I understand where you are coming from, but again you have to realize, these other rankings and statistics don't matter. The only ones that matter are the ones the committee uses.
The Big 12 isn't expanding so the "who" isn't even worth speculating about. The Big 12 can have a championship game in 2016 and even though it will be a rematch, any real or perceived conference disadvantage can be eliminated. Many of the so called conference championships games from other power conferences are rematches - so no problem.
A bigger conference means that you can't play every member every year. Why would fans want to give up games against Texas or Oklahoma in some years in order play BYU or Memphis. Just check out Pitt's schedule and their games involving the two highest profile ACC teams - FSU and Clemson. Over the next 10 years Pitt only plays FSU one time on the road, and Pitt only plays Clemson two times (one home game and one away game).
Contrast Pitt's schedule to WVU's schedule during the same time period where we will play Texas 10 times and Oklahoma 10 times. And half of these 20 games will be played in Morgantown. This is the real reason why the majority of Big 12 members don't want to expand.
A bigger conference means that you can't play every member every year. Why would fans want to give up games against Texas or Oklahoma in some years in order play BYU or Memphis. Just check out Pitt's schedule and their games involving the two highest profile ACC teams - FSU and Clemson. Over the next 10 years Pitt only plays FSU one time on the road, and Pitt only plays Clemson two times (one home game and one away game).
Contrast Pitt's schedule to WVU's schedule during the same time period where we will play Texas 10 times and Oklahoma 10 times. And half of these 20 games will be played in Morgantown. This is the real reason why the majority of Big 12 members don't want to expand.
Last edited:
Kind of weird.......you're stating it as a fact that the Big 12 isn't expanding.. ....yet they recently formed an expansion committee.
The Big East had an expansion committee for most of it's existence and never managed to get bigger than 8 football schools which I believe was the minimal number allowed to even have a conference. Go figure.
First of all I consider a championship game with 10 team conference and a total round robin schedule and no divisions as one of the lamest ideas that anyone has come up with.
As for games with Texas and Oklahoma - A 12 team conference playing 9 conference games and having Texas and Oklahoma in different divisions would give you 20 games vs Oklahoma(my choice) and 12 games vs Texas in 20 years and I am fine with that. I feel that conference has to have a bigger footprint and need to invade the footprints of the SEC and Big 10 with additions east of the Mississippi River.
I don't think that Oklahoma would want to be in different division than Texas. They want to play every year in the Red River Rivalry plus Oklahoma gets a lot of players from Texas and wants to play Texas schools as much as possible. I do believe that WVU because of our location would not be in the premier division with Texas and Oklahoma.
I don't see how a rematch championship game in the Big 12 would be any worse than a rematch championship game from another power conference and it happens all the time. You could almost guarantee that the matchup would be between the conference's best two teams and that isn't the case in the other conferences. And if that extra game is needed to help get a Big 12 school into the college playoffs then The Big 12 has a simple and easy solution. The game would even generate more money for the conference.
I really don't see how adding one of the non-power conference schools does anything for the Big 12. All this talk about footprints, traveling partners, invading and defending seems ridiculous to me.
Last edited:
I never wrote that an expansion committee meant that adding teams was inevitable......but you did write that the Big 12 wasn't going to add teams (as if it was a fact).
Seems like waste of time, effort, and money having such a committee if the conference isn't open to the idea.....
You certainly implied that the formation of an expansion committee meant that the conference was expanding.
At this time, the Big 12 isn't expanding and that is a fact.
http://www.ncaa.com/news/football/a...oking-expansion-commissioner-bob-bowlsby-says
I personally think BYU and Colorado State/or Boise State are the viable choices. Adding 2 schools will decrease payout as whoever is added with byu will not add value. At this point, as we learned in the big east, this is about survival. The problem is this is about money. No way Oklahoma and Texas agree to take less money when they know they can leave for the Pac 12 and sec at any moment. And they know their membership holds the big 12 together.
Last edited:
1 - Oklahoma and Texas will be in different divisions but will be permanent crossover rivals. Then you would play 3 of the other 5 teams in the other division. Thus you would not play 2 schools each year.
2 - I am not positive but I do not remember a rematch in the SEC Championship game. There may have been some but not many. There were very few of them in the B12 and not many in the ACC. The only conference that has had plenty of them is the P12.
3 - If any team ever goes 9-0 in conference play - it would be quite a downer to play a team that you already beat in the Championship game.
Woody, just for the record on the conference title game rematch issue I am posting the numbers below. The years in parentheses are the seasons when it would've been possible for that league to have a title game and, thus, a potential rematch. I am listing only what are now the Power-5 conferences. The smaller leagues have had several rematches each as well.
SEC (1992-2014) = 23 seasons, 6 rematches
The most recent was Auburn defeating South Carolina a second time in 2010. Five of the six rematches here resulted in a sweep.
Big 12 (1996-2010) = 15 seasons, 6 rematches
The most recent was Oklahoma denying Missouri a spot in the national championship game with a sweep on that fateful Saturday in 2007. Four of the six rematches were sweeps.
ACC (2005-2014) = 10 seasons, 4 rematches
The most recent was Clemson sweeping Virginia Tech in 2011 en route to their Orange Bowl date with WVU. Two of the four rematches were sweeps.
Pac-12 (2011-2014) = 4 seasons, 3 rematches
Of course last year's was the famous split with Oregon avenging its earlier defeat at the hands of Arizona. However, two of the three rematches have been sweeps.
Big Ten (2011-2014) = 4 seasons, 2 rematches
The most recent saw Wisconsin earn a split with Nebraska in 2012. Both rematches have been splits in this league.
SEC (1992-2014) = 23 seasons, 6 rematches
The most recent was Auburn defeating South Carolina a second time in 2010. Five of the six rematches here resulted in a sweep.
Big 12 (1996-2010) = 15 seasons, 6 rematches
The most recent was Oklahoma denying Missouri a spot in the national championship game with a sweep on that fateful Saturday in 2007. Four of the six rematches were sweeps.
ACC (2005-2014) = 10 seasons, 4 rematches
The most recent was Clemson sweeping Virginia Tech in 2011 en route to their Orange Bowl date with WVU. Two of the four rematches were sweeps.
Pac-12 (2011-2014) = 4 seasons, 3 rematches
Of course last year's was the famous split with Oregon avenging its earlier defeat at the hands of Arizona. However, two of the three rematches have been sweeps.
Big Ten (2011-2014) = 4 seasons, 2 rematches
The most recent saw Wisconsin earn a split with Nebraska in 2012. Both rematches have been splits in this league.
Expanding the conference and placing Texas & Oklahoma in separate divisions opens up another can of worms, and I am not sure OU would be at all in favor of the separation. Regardless how the the divisions are arranged, games against the conference's perennial powers will be scarified with expansion and to me that is a real downer.
And since three of the other power conferences have 14 members are you still at a so called "psychological disadvantage"? Does the Big 12 need to add 4 more schools and what does that do to scheduling?
IMO the easiest and likely solution at this time is to add a championship game between the two best teams to be played at the stadium of the school with the best conference record ( head-to-head tie-breaker ). And you only do that if the advantage of playing an extra game against a quality opponent becomes a significant factor in determining who gets in the college playoffs. Every year there is likely to be one or two other power conferences with a rematch game so I don't see that as an issue.
For a 14 team conference it spreads out the scheduling a little. 6 division games plus 1 permanent crossover(for OU that would be Texas) and then the 2 more from the other division(2 games vs the other 6 over a period of 6 years). I do not like 14 but it works as long as you play 9 conference games - which is becoming the standard.
Oklahoma and Texas will play every year no matter what form the conference takes. And they will not be in the same division. The will be a permanent cross over game.
And hopefully no one is suggesting that OU and OSU be in separate divisions. Will OSU and T. Boone Pickens be happy not playing Texas every year if they are not in Texas' division?
I think it is now fantastic that either Texas or Oklahoma are on WVU's home schedule every year.
For who? Texas? Oklahoma? Everybody? Would like to see the diagram for each team after a divisional scheme like you are proposing. I would rather stay at 10 I think but it would be interesting to see how a divisional composition would keep the equality of the schedule as it is now and keep the Texas/Oklahoma crowd happy. Whomever gets Kansas as a division member has an easier schedule but also the SOS gets dinged too. Iowa State is much better than Kansas year in and year out.
OK - here is a rough guess.
Tex - OU
TT - OSU
Bay- TCU
KSU -WVU
Kansas - ISU
BYU- Cincy
Power shifts with time and coaches - 30 years ago Kansas -KSU would have been a nice match. In fact you could change the last 3 to be
KSU - Kan
Cincy-WVU
ISU-BYU
And remember that with a 9 game conference schedule you are just going to miss two teams a year - and I would rotate them every year not in series of home and home(or two year stretches)
So Texas plays divisional members TT, Baylor,KSU, Kansas and BYU plus permanent crossover OU. That is only 6 games, how do you do the other 3? Rotate them among the 5 teams we don't play every year so that every 3 years we skip one team out of the 5? Are you also saying that the permanent crossover for WVU is KSU , for Kansas its ISU etc? It that what you meant? I think KSU would be a great permanent crossover team for WVU. Not sure what other teams would prefer as their PC. My hope is that 4 out of five years the BIG12 has a team in the final 4 AND it keeps a 10 team conference.
You are right on all of you assumptions - For Texas - the would not play OSU and TCU in year one, TCU and WVU in year 2, WVU and ISU in year 3, ISU and Cincy in year 4 and Cincy and OSU in year 5. Thus playing each of them 3 times in 5 years.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
A friend said he heard yesterday at the Spring game that............- Latest: WVUtotheBig12
-
-
