Expansion

[Winter Tim]

The only way to exapand.... and see Ok and UT "almost" every year.... is 10-game conference schedule. You'd play the other 5 in your division... and 5 of the 6 from the other division. You'd only give up getting to play Texas or OU once every 6 years.

That said, it would less non-conf games to schedule games of regional interest (Penn St, Va Tech, MD, NC State, Tenn, etc.).

 

[skygusty]

I hate it. We play Oklahoma and Texas every year, one home one away. We also have several other schools that are of our caliber, making the regular season worthwhile. That will be taken from us with any expansion, and won't be matched. It will end up a watered down schedule.

My feelings exactly. Those in favor of expansion seem to think it is mostly about adding tv sets and future contracts and revenue streams. I'd love to be a fly on the wall when Boren and Gee and Starr are talking about this. If Oklahoma wins the NC I bet it becomes A LOT less urgent to expand. Just making the playoffs has removed much of the urgency. Texas needs to get that program out of mediocrity and perform at the level that is commensurate with their resources. If the Big12 can make the playoff 3 times in five years and one of those times win the NC all would be good.

 

[skygusty]

The only way to exapand.... and see Ok and UT "almost" every year.... is 10-game conference schedule. You'd play the other 5 in your division... and 5 of the 6 from the other division. You'd only give up getting to play Texas or OU once every 6 years.

That said, it would less non-conf games to schedule games of regional interest (Penn St, Va Tech, MD, NC State, Tenn, etc.).

Just a quick look at schedules in other conferences indicates that most only play 8 conference games per year and then pad their schedules with lower level teams. The ones who play a CCG play 9 conference foes. Why would we do any different? Why would Oklahoma want to play WVU or Iowa State when they could schedule a much smaller school to (likely) pad their stats? That seems to be one of the main advantages to expansion and divisions, easier schedule overall but you still have to get past the CCG.

 

[Buckaineer]

how has it been debunked? Lol

Oklahoma's president debunked the "expansion will cost existing school's money" myth and so did the conference commissioner. The TV contract does not stay the same if teams are added, the new schools get pro rata shares. OU's president went on to say that the other money (bowl, NCAA, etc. does not necessarily go down if the right schools and markets are added--and he wasn't talking about P5 schools). An added championship game alone is going to add at least $2million per school including the new schools and the CCG alone could make up for any losses. New bowl games can make up more or add. Good basketball programs. more NCAA revenue for everyone.

the money situation has been debunked.

 

[Buckaineer]

I hate it. We play Oklahoma and Texas every year, one home one away. We also have several other schools that are of our caliber, making the regular season worthwhile. That will be taken from us with any expansion, and won't be matched. It will end up a watered down schedule.

WVU isn't going to give up playing both OU and Texas every year. In an expansion they may not play both every year, it could be one of them every other year, or back to back and then off two seasons, and the other one home-home every year. Sometimes WVU would play say a Cincinnati or UConn rather than Iowa State or Kansas and have both Texas and OU on the schedule.

In the year you don't have a major school from the in conference schedule, book a home game with a power from another conference.

 

[Buckaineer]

Just a quick look at schedules in other conferences indicates that most only play 8 conference games per year and then pad their schedules with lower level teams. The ones who play a CCG play 9 conference foes. Why would we do any different? Why would Oklahoma want to play WVU or Iowa State when they could schedule a much smaller school to (likely) pad their stats? That seems to be one of the main advantages to expansion and divisions, easier schedule overall but you still have to get past the CCG.

By contract the BIG 12 plays 9 conference games. The Pac 12 plays 9 conference games and has a CCG and starting next season the Big Ten will play 9 conference games and have a CCG. The BIG 12 can't give up the 9 game schedule (and that helps schools meet more often in an expanded league anyway), but they will need to add a CCG or those other conferences continue to have an advantage. Two years and running shows that the BIG 12 will get docked each and every year for NOT having a CCG. As Bowlsby said the only question is whether they are ok living with that disadvantage or not, there's no question it IS a disadvantage that affects the future success of the conference.

 

[TarHeelEer]

WVU isn't going to give up playing both OU and Texas every year. In an expansion they may not play both every year, it could be one of them every other year, or back to back and then off two seasons, and the other one home-home every year. Sometimes WVU would play say a Cincinnati or UConn rather than Iowa State or Kansas and have both Texas and OU on the schedule.

In the year you don't have a major school from the in conference schedule, book a home game with a power from another conference.

Neither will be in our division, because they will play one another each year, and Baylor, And OSU, and TT. We'll be in the other division, and only get those every so often, depending how many cross division games we play. That doesn't work for me.

 

[Buckaineer]

Neither will be in our division, because they will play one another each year, and Baylor, And OSU, and TT. We'll be in the other division, and only get those every so often, depending how many cross division games we play. That doesn't work for me.

There is never going to be a division in the BIG 12 with Texas, Oklahoma, TT, OSU and Baylor. Texas and OU will play one another cross division every year or possibly in division, and the conference will have balanced divisions. WVU will play either Texas or OU every year. If Texas and OU end in the same division then WVU may end up also in that division (if expansion occurs).

Besides, fans haven't attended the Texas game all that well anyway. Oklahoma yes, Texas not so much. The UT game obviously isn't that important to WVU fans to have every other year.

 

[Orlaco]

This (the loss of TVmoney) has been debunked endless times...at least with our current contract (regarding TV revenue).

how has it been debunked? Lol

Save your laughter for David Boren...the current president of the Sooners. Under six months ago....

"Boren also pointed out that the Big 12's television deal will stay the same proportionally if the conference expands. In other words, each school would continue to get the same amount of money annually should the Big 12 add two more schools due to the pro rata clause in the contract"

....but yea...maybe you know more than him.

 

[skygusty]

By contract the BIG 12 plays 9 conference games. The Pac 12 plays 9 conference games and has a CCG and starting next season the Big Ten will play 9 conference games and have a CCG. The BIG 12 can't give up the 9 game schedule (and that helps schools meet more often in an expanded league anyway), but they will need to add a CCG or those other conferences continue to have an advantage. Two years and running shows that the BIG 12 will get docked each and every year for NOT having a CCG. As Bowlsby said the only question is whether they are ok living with that disadvantage or not, there's no question it IS a disadvantage that affects the future success of the conference.

I'll give you the disadvantage, but this year proves it can be overcome. Expansion only levels the number of "data points". The league will be bigger but improved? Questionable. Perception is still a problem in the selection process. Oklahoma got in with one loss, but to a really bad Texas team. Would TCU or Baylor have made it in with 1 loss to Texas? I doubt it. This problem will still remain even if there are 5 conference champions with identical records. In a field that included Ohio State, TCU, Alabama, Florida State and Stanford with undefeated seasons who do you think gets left out? There are still only 4 slots for 5 major conferences. I really hate giving up the round robin and a really nice home and home basketball arrangement so that we can bring in teams like Cincinnati or Memphis or UCONN or BYU. I hope that committee thinks long and hard before they expand. I wish more people would agitate for an 8 team playoff rather than lobby to force the Big12 to take teams it really doesn't want.

 

[Buckaineer]

I'll give you the disadvantage, but this year proves it can be overcome. Expansion only levels the number of "data points". The league will be bigger but improved? Questionable. Perception is still a problem in the selection process. Oklahoma got in with one loss, but to a really bad Texas team. Would TCU or Baylor have made it in with 1 loss to Texas? I doubt it. This problem will still remain even if there are 5 conference champions with identical records. In a field that included Ohio State, TCU, Alabama, Florida State and Stanford with undefeated seasons who do you think gets left out? There are still only 4 slots for 5 major conferences. I really hate giving up the round robin and a really nice home and home basketball arrangement so that we can bring in teams like Cincinnati or Memphis or UCONN or BYU. I hope that committee thinks long and hard before they expand. I wish more people would agitate for an 8 team playoff rather than lobby to force the Big12 to take teams it really doesn't want.

The only thing this year proves is that the BIG 12 will be dropped every year due to not playing a CCG. Every year the BIG 12 has to hope someone slips up so their champ can get in without the game. No one else has that problem except Notre Dame, who could also take the BIG 12 champ out and nearly did this year.

The BIG 12 has to deal with its issues. They can't just sit back and rest on their laurels because one year enough teams lost to get a team in the # four slot. There AREN'T any P5 schools available and schools like Cincinnati have proven to be consistently good against good to very good competition. Not really sure what the concern is?
FSU doesn't seem too concerned playing the Pitts, VT's, Virginia's, Duke's, Wake Forest's etc.
Ohio State isn't worried about playing Minnesota, Purdue, Northwestern, Illinois, Indiana, Rutgers or Maryland or other programs like a down Michigan or PSU or usually Iowa.
To pretend its the end of the world because one game per year is against some new team that will finish in the middle of the conference at least probably doesn't make sense.
Needs of the conference like new markets, new fans, new recruiting territory and being on an even plane with everyone else can't be ignored. In 2024 a new tv contract will come up and without expansion its going to be harder to keep up with the joneses.

 

[skygusty]

The only thing this year proves is that the BIG 12 will be dropped every year due to not playing a CCG. Every year the BIG 12 has to hope someone slips up so their champ can get in without the game. No one else has that problem except Notre Dame, who could also take the BIG 12 champ out and nearly did this year.

The BIG 12 has to deal with its issues. They can't just sit back and rest on their laurels because one year enough teams lost to get a team in the # four slot. There AREN'T any P5 schools available and schools like Cincinnati have proven to be consistently good against good to very good competition. Not really sure what the concern is?
FSU doesn't seem too concerned playing the Pitts, VT's, Virginia's, Duke's, Wake Forest's etc.
Ohio State isn't worried about playing Minnesota, Purdue, Northwestern, Illinois, Indiana, Rutgers or Maryland or other programs like a down Michigan or PSU or usually Iowa.
To pretend its the end of the world because one game per year is against some new team that will finish in the middle of the conference at least probably doesn't make sense.
Needs of the conference like new markets, new fans, new recruiting territory and being on an even plane with everyone else can't be ignored. In 2024 a new tv contract will come up and without expansion its going to be harder to keep up with the joneses.

So why do you think only half of the schools are currently in favor of expansion? I know and they know that there are no P5 teams to choose from. I think Cincinnati could be a middle of the pack team. Maybe the issue is really the 12th team, BYU and Houston would bring some potential but issues too. Personally I'd rather see them add 2 teams in the east if they have to do it but that second team is probably a matter of a lot of debate in their meetings. UCONN is probably the better school and a state school in a densely populated part of the country but probably a perpetual doormat in football. USF would add eyeballs and recruiting territory but they aren't going to excite anyone either. Maybe they can't get a quorum on who to add because all the alternatives stink in some way to them too. I guess I would assess who adds the most in terms of a future TV contract, hold my nose, and invite them. I don't think it improves our chances much of getting left out of the 4 team playoff as much as people want to think though.

 

[ColoradoMountaineer]

I'll give you the disadvantage, but this year proves it can be overcome. Expansion only levels the number of "data points". The league will be bigger but improved? Questionable. Perception is still a problem in the selection process. Oklahoma got in with one loss, but to a really bad Texas team. Would TCU or Baylor have made it in with 1 loss to Texas? I doubt it. This problem will still remain even if there are 5 conference champions with identical records. In a field that included Ohio State, TCU, Alabama, Florida State and Stanford with undefeated seasons who do you think gets left out? There are still only 4 slots for 5 major conferences. I really hate giving up the round robin and a really nice home and home basketball arrangement so that we can bring in teams like Cincinnati or Memphis or UCONN or BYU. I hope that committee thinks long and hard before they expand. I wish more people would agitate for an 8 team playoff rather than lobby to force the Big12 to take teams it really doesn't want.

I think you make good points. what i don't understand if Tcu and Baylor would have played in a Big 12 championship game would the committee have choose them over a Blue blood high television appeal Ohio State team? I doubt it the Big 12 would have still been left out. If Texas and Oklahoma are 1 loss and in the mix they have a good shot due to there name recognition if Notre Dame would have jumped Oklahoma what championship game Did ND win? Its all television money and what the network big wigs want.

 

[Buckaineer]

So why do you think only half of the schools are currently in favor of expansion? I know and they know that there are no P5 teams to choose from. I think Cincinnati could be a middle of the pack team. Maybe the issue is really the 12th team, BYU and Houston would bring some potential but issues too. Personally I'd rather see them add 2 teams in the east if they have to do it but that second team is probably a matter of a lot of debate in their meetings. UCONN is probably the better school and a state school in a densely populated part of the country but probably a perpetual doormat in football. USF would add eyeballs and recruiting territory but they aren't going to excite anyone either. Maybe they can't get a quorum on who to add because all the alternatives stink in some way to them too. I guess I would assess who adds the most in terms of a future TV contract, hold my nose, and invite them. I don't think it improves our chances much of getting left out of the 4 team playoff as much as people want to think though.

Some members--wouldn't say half but two or three are against expansion because they are having a difficult time with the thought of adding schools that are from some place else than what they are used to. There is an elitist mentality and some still haven't accepted that other schools left a few years ago and that P5 schools aren't available now. These schools thought Notre Dame would jump at the chance to join them--they are a bit detached from reality. They want state flagship institutions rather than city name school--one reason UConn is coming up so much.

No state institutions available exist near WVU or in between WVU and the rest.

Further, there is some backwards thinking in the conference. They had some trouble with a CCG in the past where schools knocked each other out of a championship a few times. So some thought they would be advantaged by NOT playing that game-but the reverse has proved true and they are having a hard time accepting that.

There is a problem-along with the selection of actual school--of geographic proximity. It costs lots of money to travel and no one wants to add to their travel budget. Travel also makes winning more difficult--probably travel fatigue related. TCUs HC recently spoke about not wanting the added travel expansion would bring. Really, there aren't any "close" schools for everyone, just schools that bridge the conference over to WVU, but they may not be ideal in other ways.

There's likely a concern from some over the round robin going away. No one wants to give up playing UT and OU or other big money/attendance games and the divisional/conference alignment weighs heavily in thoughts of expansion. Schools like Kansas, TCU, K State and Iowa State just gained the ability to play UT and OU each year and don't want to give that up. OU and UT undoubtedly like playing certain programs each year as well.

A primary factor in adding schools is timing--they have to know where other conferences media rights are going so they may best package their own group of schools and media rights to be at the forefront. Timing is an important factor in the decision--but time is running out. There are several G5 schools that would meet the needed criteria for the BIG 12--the January deregulation vote will help determine many things.

 

[Buckaineer]

I think you make good points. what i don't understand if Tcu and Baylor would have played in a Big 12 championship game would the committee have choose them over a Blue blood high television appeal Ohio State team? I doubt it the Big 12 would have still been left out. If Texas and Oklahoma are 1 loss and in the mix they have a good shot due to there name recognition if Notre Dame would have jumped Oklahoma what championship game Did ND win? Its all television money and what the network big wigs want.

The committee would not have been able to justify a BIG 12 school that had played so many top ten schools and beaten a top ten school in a 13th game being left out. They may have wanted Ohio State--but Ohio State's sos and record wouldn't have compared, making their selection nearly impossible over TCU or Baylor. Without a 13th game though, the committee drummed up an excuse that Ohio State's 13th game and "convincing" win made their leap over TCU and Baylor justifiable.

 

[Buckaineer]

Update from Barry Tramel from the Oklahoman in a UConn blog. UConn high on the list:

excerpt:
Any expansion would not see a change for the Big 12 by the time the 2016 season rolls around, but Tramel did say we could definitely see a 12-team Big 12 by 2017, which is the largest the conference would consider.


“I don’t see any way they go to fourteen,” he said. “They actually like the conciseness of ten, but the way politics are right now in college athletics, the ten does not work very well in terms of football.”


Although full sign-off hasn’t occurred from all members to proceed with expansion, the conference is close. What occurred again this year in the final CFP rankings, may have pushed the Big 12 over the edge.

http://thisisuconncountry.com/blog/

 

[Charleston Mountie]

I'll give you the disadvantage, but this year proves it can be overcome. Expansion only levels the number of "data points". The league will be bigger but improved? Questionable. Perception is still a problem in the selection process. Oklahoma got in with one loss, but to a really bad Texas team. Would TCU or Baylor have made it in with 1 loss to Texas? I doubt it. This problem will still remain even if there are 5 conference champions with identical records. In a field that included Ohio State, TCU, Alabama, Florida State and Stanford with undefeated seasons who do you think gets left out? There are still only 4 slots for 5 major conferences. I really hate giving up the round robin and a really nice home and home basketball arrangement so that we can bring in teams like Cincinnati or Memphis or UCONN or BYU. I hope that committee thinks long and hard before they expand. I wish more people would agitate for an 8 team playoff rather than lobby to force the Big12 to take teams it really doesn't want.

You are mixing two different things together here.

Every conference has 1 or 2 Blue Chips and those guys get the benefit of the doubt when it comes to some things in the post season and in rankings during the season. Texas and Oklahoma are the Big 12s Blue Chips. Nothing is going to change for a long time. A school like WVU/TCU/Baylor/KSU would need a ten year dynastic run to get into the elite level respect.

All a new team or teams need to be is no worse than Kansas and preferably Iowa State. Neither schools are powerhouses in football but are something to be reckoned with in basketball. Cincinnati fits that bill nicely and Cincinnati can be a decent football program.

Personally I dislike talk of BYU because of their restrictions on scheduling non-football games. They play nothing on Sunday and if I recall, they do not travel on Sunday. That is a headache of sorts and of course they are further west and the Big-12 has to move east. The TVs are east, not west.

I know they get almost no attention, but South Miss used to be a giant killer and might be worth a look. I see no reason to go into Florida. Likewise, I do not think any more schools will come out of Texas.

I still believe the SEC is going to prey upon the ACC and if they don't the Big Ten is waiting in the wings. If that happens, there be schools bailing from a collapsing Big East 2. Bringing 2 schools like Cincinnati and Southern Miss would get us to 12 and we might grab 4 from a dying ACC in the future.

 

[skygusty]

Some members--wouldn't say half but two or three are against expansion because they are having a difficult time with the thought of adding schools that are from some place else than what they are used to. There is an elitist mentality and some still haven't accepted that other schools left a few years ago and that P5 schools aren't available now. These schools thought Notre Dame would jump at the chance to join them--they are a bit detached from reality. They want state flagship institutions rather than city name school--one reason UConn is coming up so much.

No state institutions available exist near WVU or in between WVU and the rest.

Further, there is some backwards thinking in the conference. They had some trouble with a CCG in the past where schools knocked each other out of a championship a few times. So some thought they would be advantaged by NOT playing that game-but the reverse has proved true and they are having a hard time accepting that.

There is a problem-along with the selection of actual school--of geographic proximity. It costs lots of money to travel and no one wants to add to their travel budget. Travel also makes winning more difficult--probably travel fatigue related. TCUs HC recently spoke about not wanting the added travel expansion would bring. Really, there aren't any "close" schools for everyone, just schools that bridge the conference over to WVU, but they may not be ideal in other ways.

There's likely a concern from some over the round robin going away. No one wants to give up playing UT and OU or other big money/attendance games and the divisional/conference alignment weighs heavily in thoughts of expansion. Schools like Kansas, TCU, K State and Iowa State just gained the ability to play UT and OU each year and don't want to give that up. OU and UT undoubtedly like playing certain programs each year as well.

A primary factor in adding schools is timing--they have to know where other conferences media rights are going so they may best package their own group of schools and media rights to be at the forefront. Timing is an important factor in the decision--but time is running out. There are several G5 schools that would meet the needed criteria for the BIG 12--the January deregulation vote will help determine many things.

Does the vote have to be unanimous or is there some percentage for a vote to expand? Too bad Memphis lost their coach. Them and Cincinnati would be good geographic bridges, good basketball. Memphis would probably struggle for a long while in football. Does Southern Mississippi bring any kind of TV area? Lots of eyeballs and recruits in Florida. Might as well throw East Carolina into the mix too and get a team in the heart of ACC country.

 

[ColoradoMountaineer]

The committee would not have been able to justify a BIG 12 school that had played so many top ten schools and beaten a top ten school in a 13th game being left out. They may have wanted Ohio State--but Ohio State's sos and record wouldn't have compared, making their selection nearly impossible over TCU or Baylor. Without a 13th game though, the committee drummed up an excuse that Ohio State's 13th game and "convincing" win made their leap over TCU and Baylor justifiable.

The network executives wanted Ohio state and that's who they got like it are not its about money and TV ratings and Ohio state brings more to the table than TCU and Baylor its a fact of life deal with it. The comittie is not going to bite the hand that feeds it

 

[Buckaineer]

The ACC doesn't have a chance to be vulnerable until 2027 at the earliest. That's well over a decade from now. the Big Ten is going to get a new contract in 2017--one likely to be the last big jump in pay due to significant drops in cable subscribers. No one else will have contracts up until 2024 (Pac 12). The Big Ten won't have any reason to expand within seven years.

The only significant expansion likely to occur for a long time will be coming from the BIG 12

The network executives wanted Ohio state and that's who they got like it are not its about money and TV ratings and Ohio state brings more to the table than TCU and Baylor its a fact of life deal with it. The comittie is not going to bite the hand that feeds it

People are watching. The committee has to have reasoning for what it does. They aren't going to just prop up Ohio State for no reason. The Big Ten did its part by having Wisconsin take a major dive in the B10 CCG last year (which the UW coach obviously didn't care for since he bolted for a lesser program unannounced to even his AD the following week). The committee used the fact the BIG 12 didn't have a 13th game against a quality opponent to drop TCU down 3 spots and hold Baylor behind Ohio State. They needed reasoning for their actions.

Had TCU and Baylor rematched this would not have been possible. Baylor wins, they beat another top ten team giving them 3 for the season (Ohio State played only then top ten MSU all season and lost to unranked VT at home) --Wisconsin wasnt a top ten team. They could not have "saved face" leapfrogging Ohio State over a Baylor with a better loss and many more better wins -including in the final game. Likewise, TCU only had a loss to a top five program on the road--no way (desire by tv or not) could they justify dropping TCU from 3rd with a 13th game win over top five Baylor behind Ohio State--especially considering the game against a common opponent had TCU beating Minnesota by a much higher margin than the Buckeyes.

The 13th game gave them cover, just as it did this year, to drop BIG 12 programs down--but luckily this year Stanford and Notre Dame both lost twice.

 

[Buckaineer]

Does the vote have to be unanimous or is there some percentage for a vote to expand? Too bad Memphis lost their coach. Them and Cincinnati would be good geographic bridges, good basketball. Memphis would probably struggle for a long while in football. Does Southern Mississippi bring any kind of TV area? Lots of eyeballs and recruits in Florida. Might as well throw East Carolina into the mix too and get a team in the heart of ACC country.

Believe there has to be a majority for expansion to occur but not sure about that. Its a serious matter so they probably want a unanimous vote.

Speaking of Memphis and schools like that--it is a shame. Inaction causes things like Louisville to the ACC, and Memphis great coach to the ACC. Programs that could work are left too long to fend for themselves and then can be eliminated or diminished.

The BIG 12 has certain standards which is why schools like UConn, BYU and Cincinnati are considered on a higher level than a Memphis. Its about more than just a couple of football seasons results. The school itself is important as far as academic standing and reputation.

The BIG 12 isn't going to consider schools like Southern Miss or ECU. Getting a team "in the heart of ACC country" is not important to the leaders of the BIG 12, nor should it be. That's a meaningless criteria.

 

[Charleston Mountie]

The ACC doesn't have a chance to be vulnerable until 2027 at the earliest. That's well over a decade from now. the Big Ten is going to get a new contract in 2017--one likely to be the last big jump in pay due to significant drops in cable subscribers. No one else will have contracts up until 2024 (Pac 12). The Big Ten won't have any reason to expand within seven years.

The only significant expansion likely to occur for a long time will be coming from the BIG 12


People are watching. The committee has to have reasoning for what it does. They aren't going to just prop up Ohio State for no reason. The Big Ten did its part by having Wisconsin take a major dive in the B10 CCG last year (which the UW coach obviously didn't care for since he bolted for a lesser program unannounced to even his AD the following week). The committee used the fact the BIG 12 didn't have a 13th game against a quality opponent to drop TCU down 3 spots and hold Baylor behind Ohio State. They needed reasoning for their actions.

Had TCU and Baylor rematched this would not have been possible. Baylor wins, they beat another top ten team giving them 3 for the season (Ohio State played only then top ten MSU all season and lost to unranked VT at home) --Wisconsin wasnt a top ten team. They could not have "saved face" leapfrogging Ohio State over a Baylor with a better loss and many more better wins -including in the final game. Likewise, TCU only had a loss to a top five program on the road--no way (desire by tv or not) could they justify dropping TCU from 3rd with a 13th game win over top five Baylor behind Ohio State--especially considering the game against a common opponent had TCU beating Minnesota by a much higher margin than the Buckeyes.

The 13th game gave them cover, just as it did this year, to drop BIG 12 programs down--but luckily this year Stanford and Notre Dame both lost twice.

If there is anything to be learned from past expansion, there is nothing to be sure of. While I readily agree that the GORs in place for the ACC and the Big-12 are sturdy documents that are nothing more than added complications if a conference like the Big Ten or SEC wanted an ACC school and that school wanted that poaching conference. To believe otherwise is a bit like sticking one's head in the sand. Would it be messy and complicated? Yes. But it would also be possible.

Money is like crack to conferences and in the last 20 years they have seen their athletic departments turn into money machines. But there is no new avenue for revenue to be had without something major. Cable deals are dead, because cable is dying and with it what seemed like ESPN's bottomless bag of money. The only way now to increase money is to change the mix of the conference and the SEC and Big Ten both have a shortage of teams to get to 16. Both have raided the Big-12 for what they wanted and that only leaves the ACC.

Unfortunately for the ACC, they are the poor children now and there revenues are well in 5th place and the difference between them and the other 4 is growing. Worse there is not going to be an ACCN. Schools like conference are all about counting the money these days and those schools in the ACC can stand by so long and watch their SEC and Big Ten peers grow fatter for so long.

A GOR is simply a complication, a tough one I will grant you but it is not iron clad either.

 

[Charleston Mountie]

Believe there has to be a majority for expansion to occur but not sure about that. Its a serious matter so they probably want a unanimous vote.

Speaking of Memphis and schools like that--it is a shame. Inaction causes things like Louisville to the ACC, and Memphis great coach to the ACC. Programs that could work are left too long to fend for themselves and then can be eliminated or diminished.

The BIG 12 has certain standards which is why schools like UConn, BYU and Cincinnati are considered on a higher level than a Memphis. Its about more than just a couple of football seasons results. The school itself is important as far as academic standing and reputation.

The BIG 12 isn't going to consider schools like Southern Miss or ECU. Getting a team "in the heart of ACC country" is not important to the leaders of the BIG 12, nor should it be. That's a meaningless criteria.

Academics have nothing to do with a sports affiliation. A school can be academically tied to any number of schools not in its athletic conference. People mix the two like they have anything to do with each other.

You certainly seem to speak with authority on what the BIG 12 will and will not od. Do you have some inside information? The fact that they want to expand and have to expand means that many schools are in the mix. I seriously doubt if they are doing more than looking at each school on its own merits regardless if it is in ACC Country or not. I do not think that comes into the criteria. Why is Southern Miss not a good candidate? I have no particular love for them but you seem to have some inside knowledge on why they are a bad fit. Do tell.

 

[EEReverent]

 

[Buckaineer]

If there is anything to be learned from past expansion, there is nothing to be sure of. While I readily agree that the GORs in place for the ACC and the Big-12 are sturdy documents that are nothing more than added complications if a conference like the Big Ten or SEC wanted an ACC school and that school wanted that poaching conference. To believe otherwise is a bit like sticking one's head in the sand. Would it be messy and complicated? Yes. But it would also be possible.

Money is like crack to conferences and in the last 20 years they have seen their athletic departments turn into money machines. But there is no new avenue for revenue to be had without something major. Cable deals are dead, because cable is dying and with it what seemed like ESPN's bottomless bag of money. The only way now to increase money is to change the mix of the conference and the SEC and Big Ten both have a shortage of teams to get to 16. Both have raided the Big-12 for what they wanted and that only leaves the ACC.

Unfortunately for the ACC, they are the poor children now and there revenues are well in 5th place and the difference between them and the other 4 is growing. Worse there is not going to be an ACCN. Schools like conference are all about counting the money these days and those schools in the ACC can stand by so long and watch their SEC and Big Ten peers grow fatter for so long.

A GOR is simply a complication, a tough one I will grant you but it is not iron clad either.

Money is what is important to most. The problem with your thoughts on GORs is that money (and time) would be needed to get someone to leave a GOR-if they desired to leave their conference.

The facts are that the Big Ten has put out its best guess assumption on what it will get for its new tv contracts. That money is NOT enough money to keep existing members whole and to buy anyone in the ACC, Pac 12, BIG 12 or anywhere else out of a grant of rights agreement--which is not the easily breakable contract that the internet has dreamed up. Its also not enough to get a school to buy out of their conference just for departure fees (remember Maryland paid over $30 million and they didn't vote for the increase). Conferences own the media rights and will be paid the media rights. Sure someone could go into an expensive legal fight to try and get out of one if they really wanted to--but in the meantime they won't be paid for their media rights.

In fact virtually every conference has wording in their bylaws that you won't receive anything once you officially leave a conference--and as Maryland found out that holds up in a court of law to the tune of tens of millions of dollars.

So, a school trying to leave will be without revenues for years, and paying court costs. The conference they try to move to won't make anything trying to put them on tv and could actually incur lawsuits themselves if they tried to and weaken any case. They would also destroy their own grant of rights. Networks are not going to get involved in breaking a legal contract tied in with their conference agreements which would then jeopardize those conference television contracts (in other words, if you are the ACC and ESPN aids the SEC or Big Ten in raiding you, then doesn't honor your tv contract paying you media rights for a school that left? You can then turn around and legally claim that ESPN has voided your television agreement and you are free and clear to move to another network and make a contract with them).



To believe otherwise is living in fantasy. No one is trying to get out of a grant of rights, and no one is trying to break a grant of rights.

 

[Buckaineer]

Academics have nothing to do with a sports affiliation. A school can be academically tied to any number of schools not in its athletic conference. People mix the two like they have anything to do with each other.

You certainly seem to speak with authority on what the BIG 12 will and will not od. Do you have some inside information? The fact that they want to expand and have to expand means that many schools are in the mix. I seriously doubt if they are doing more than looking at each school on its own merits regardless if it is in ACC Country or not. I do not think that comes into the criteria. Why is Southern Miss not a good candidate? I have no particular love for them but you seem to have some inside knowledge on why they are a bad fit. Do tell.

The Big Ten doesn't accept non AAU members. Therefore to claim academics has nothing to do with college conference affiliation is more than a bit naive. The ACC has pretended that academics were important and the new SEC commissioner also recently referenced academic credentials being important to future expansion desires.

Fans don't want there to be a connection, but for the most part (see Louisville-an act of desperation on the ACCs part) there is.

I've followed the ins and outs of expansion for quite awhile and all the information I pass along is publicly available. Many leaders in the conference have spoken out about the desires for expansion directly, or informed media spokesmen about it.

Southern Miss is not a good candidate because of many things. They have relatively 0 national brand. They are in a very small market which doesn't appeal to tv executives. They aren't particularly good in any sport-although they at times have had success at the lower levels of college football. Academically the school doesn't rate well. They don't have a particularly large fan following. Nearby air transportation may be an issue. There are lots of criteria the BIG 12 is interested in for expansion and I can't think of many if any points Southern Miss hits.

 

[skygusty]

Believe there has to be a majority for expansion to occur but not sure about that. Its a serious matter so they probably want a unanimous vote.

Speaking of Memphis and schools like that--it is a shame. Inaction causes things like Louisville to the ACC, and Memphis great coach to the ACC. Programs that could work are left too long to fend for themselves and then can be eliminated or diminished.

The BIG 12 has certain standards which is why schools like UConn, BYU and Cincinnati are considered on a higher level than a Memphis. Its about more than just a couple of football seasons results. The school itself is important as far as academic standing and reputation.

The BIG 12 isn't going to consider schools like Southern Miss or ECU. Getting a team "in the heart of ACC country" is not important to the leaders of the BIG 12, nor should it be. That's a meaningless criteria.

I bring up ECU with tongue partly in cheek although NC has a growing population, we have some history with them, their fanbase is pretty good, and back in the day, they could play some pretty good football. Mostly I threw them out there because people are seriously putting forth teams like Tulane and Southern Miss. Hey, I appreciate the information and the back and forth. I have moved from being dead set against expansion to being able to imagine living with it if they put Texas and Oklahoma in different divisions - designate reasonable permament crossover matchups and we still only have to play 9 conference games. I don't want 10 conference games unless all the other conferences have to do the same. Really don't want another team from out west and I appreciate that the Big12 is looking eastward out of consideration for WVU (and the tv sets in the east). I will be watching to see how it all shakes out.

 

[Buckaineer]

I bring up ECU with tongue partly in cheek although NC has a growing population, we have some history with them, their fanbase is pretty good, and back in the day, they could play some pretty good football. Mostly I threw them out there because people are seriously putting forth teams like Tulane and Southern Miss. Hey, I appreciate the information and the back and forth. I have moved from being dead set against expansion to being able to imagine living with it if they put Texas and Oklahoma in different divisions - designate reasonable permament crossover matchups and we still only have to play 9 conference games. I don't want 10 conference games unless all the other conferences have to do the same. Really don't want another team from out west and I appreciate that the Big12 is looking eastward out of consideration for WVU (and the tv sets in the east). I will be watching to see how it all shakes out.

No one in the conference is bringing up Southern Miss or ECU so its not really an issue.

Contractually the BIG 12 plays 9 conference games. Since the Pac 12 and Big Ten (soon) will do the same, the BIG 12 isn't likely to change that.

There could be a division with OU and UT in it but its highly doubtful. The conference and networks will want balanced divisions and really what would be bigger than a potential OU -Texas BIG 12 CCG anyway-even if a rematch. Confident WVU will play one of those schools every year and some years will still get both (although, again, Texas has not been one of the most attended games in Morgantown for some reason. It doesn't seem to be that important to WVU fans.)

The situation seems to be that if the deregulation passes, expansion might be held off a bit longer, but many in the media have stated their belief that its just a matter of time, but not happening immediately which we already know.

 

[ColoradoMountaineer]

The ACC doesn't have a chance to be vulnerable until 2027 at the earliest. That's well over a decade from now. the Big Ten is going to get a new contract in 2017--one likely to be the last big jump in pay due to significant drops in cable subscribers. No one else will have contracts up until 2024 (Pac 12). The Big Ten won't have any reason to expand within seven years.

The only significant expansion likely to occur for a long time will be coming from the BIG 12


People are watching. The committee has to have reasoning for what it does. They aren't going to just prop up Ohio State for no reason. The Big Ten did its part by having Wisconsin take a major dive in the B10 CCG last year (which the UW coach obviously didn't care for since he bolted for a lesser program unannounced to even his AD the following week). The committee used the fact the BIG 12 didn't have a 13th game against a quality opponent to drop TCU down 3 spots and hold Baylor behind Ohio State. They needed reasoning for their actions.

Had TCU and Baylor rematched this would not have been possible. Baylor wins, they beat another top ten team giving them 3 for the season (Ohio State played only then top ten MSU all season and lost to unranked VT at home) --Wisconsin wasnt a top ten team. They could not have "saved face" leapfrogging Ohio State over a Baylor with a better loss and many more better wins -including in the final game. Likewise, TCU only had a loss to a top five program on the road--no way (desire by tv or not) could they justify dropping TCU from 3rd with a 13th game win over top five Baylor behind Ohio State--especially considering the game against a common opponent had TCU beating Minnesota by a much higher margin than the Buckeyes.

The 13th game gave them cover, just as it did this year, to drop BIG 12 programs down--but luckily this year Stanford and Notre Dame both lost twice.

The committee would just have made some other Excuse Espn wanted Ohio State and that's what they got and Baylor and TCU did not play a strong enough schedule as you say the committee judges for itself how tough a schedule a team plays and they where right about the Big 12 being overrated. When it comes to expansion the Biggest threat will come from the pac 12 they tried to raid the big12 conference to grow to 16 in 2010 and don't be surprised if they try to finish the job when the GOR expires

 

[Buckaineer]

The committee would just have made some other Excuse Espn wanted Ohio State and that's what they got and Baylor and TCU did not play a strong enough schedule as you say the committee judges for itself how tough a schedule a team plays and they where right about the Big 12 being overrated. When it comes to expansion the Biggest threat will come from the pac 12 they tried to raid the big12 conference to grow to 16 in 2010 and don't be surprised if they try to finish the job when the GOR expires

The committee would have been out of excuses.

Baylor and TCU both played better schedules than Ohio state--but neither had a 13th game against a quality opponent. Claiming the BIG 12 was "overated" when TCU destroyed an Ole Miss that ran through the SEC and was in the running for the MNC most of the season, and MSU needed a couple of miracle comebacks to eke out a win over Baylor, shows you don't know anything about the BIG 12 but are here to troll.

The Pac 12 pays out less than the BIG 12 and will through the end of their contracts. No one in the BIG 12 is interested in going to the Pac 12--they weren't then and they won't be in the future. It is possible the BIG 12 might go after some of the lower paid Pac schools once that conferences GOR is up--the southern Cal or Arizona schools are the only western teams that really make sense.

 

[ColoradoMountaineer]

The committee would have been out of excuses.

Baylor and TCU both played better schedules than Ohio state--but neither had a 13th game against a quality opponent. Claiming the BIG 12 was "overated" when TCU destroyed an Ole Miss that ran through the SEC and was in the running for the MNC most of the season, and MSU needed a couple of miracle comebacks to eke out a win over Baylor, shows you don't know anything about the BIG 12 but are here to troll.

The Pac 12 pays out less than the BIG 12 and will through the end of their contracts. No one in the BIG 12 is interested in going to the Pac 12--they weren't then and they won't be in the future. It is possible the BIG 12 might go after some of the lower paid Pac schools once that conferences GOR is up--the southern Cal or Arizona schools are the only western teams that really make sense.

Money talks you should know this by now. You think the committee would pass up on Notre dame if they had a chance. They don't play in a conference championship game. you have allot to learn about the ways of the world

 

[Mountaineer Steve]

Steve won't work that way. Will be forced into two five team divisions if it even comes to pass. Does not guarantee winner getting into playoff (have to win there btw to get to NCG.) Second meeting game...dumb.

That only happens if the BIG10 rule is passed instead of the open deregulation rule that the BIG12 and ACC wa nt to have. The PAC, ACC, and BIG12 would pass deregulation without the BIG10 rule of forcing division play. I think it comes down to how the SEC votes. If open Deregulation does not pass I see the BIG12 expanding as soon as possible.

 

[Charleston Mountie]

The Big Ten doesn't accept non AAU members. Therefore to claim academics has nothing to do with college conference affiliation is more than a bit naive. The ACC has pretended that academics were important and the new SEC commissioner also recently referenced academic credentials being important to future expansion desires.

Fans don't want there to be a connection, but for the most part (see Louisville-an act of desperation on the ACCs part) there is.

I've followed the ins and outs of expansion for quite awhile and all the information I pass along is publicly available. Many leaders in the conference have spoken out about the desires for expansion directly, or informed media spokesmen about it.

Southern Miss is not a good candidate because of many things. They have relatively 0 national brand. They are in a very small market which doesn't appeal to tv executives. They aren't particularly good in any sport-although they at times have had success at the lower levels of college football. Academically the school doesn't rate well. They don't have a particularly large fan following. Nearby air transportation may be an issue. There are lots of criteria the BIG 12 is interested in for expansion and I can't think of many if any points Southern Miss hits.

Nebraska is not an AAU school. Granted, it was when it began talks with the Big Ten in leaving the Big 12. By the time the move was made, the AAU had already signaled it would remove Nebraska from the AAU for failure to maintain standards. The Big Ten knew this before they invited Nebraska to join the conference.

Notre Dame is not an AAU and the Big Ten has courted them publicly at least 3 times in the last 30 years.

But the final word on academics for the Big Ten is from Jim Delany's quote in 2010:

"It's very important," Delany said. "AAU membership is an important part of who we are. It was an important part of who we are [when the Big Ten added] Penn State, and it's an important aspect of what makes an institution a research institution, an undergraduate school, a school that serves the public at a high level."
Asked if AAU membership was mandatory for expansion candidates, Delany said, "We're not there. I'm not going to qualify or disqualify, but it's a very important factor."

Conferences do take the academic pedigree into account when they are trying to sell a prospect to all of the voters or to exclude a school that otherwise has everything they want but also has some flaw that they deem unforgivable. WVU certainly knows the latter aspect in its dealings with the ACC.

To think academics wiled some sort of veto power in an athletic association is unsupportable. At best such things are tools to bribe or exclude a prospect.

Again the issues you have Southern Miss comes down to "they are not sexy" to you. That is not good enough. There is no practical reason they are not good enough, you just don't like them. In my dislike for BYU is stated why - they don't play in Sunday. That matters to a conference, especially one spread across 2/3s of the nation when travel must take place outside of class schedules if possible.

Southern Miss has no such negatives. Airport? Morgantown has no airport of viable worth. teams fly into Pittsburgh and bus down. The distance between Morgantown and Pitt is 82 miles; Hattiesburg to Jackson is 90 miles and Hattiesburg to Mobile is 96 miles. WVU seems to do just fine with no airport in the Big 12.

 

[Charleston Mountie]

Money is what is important to most. The problem with your thoughts on GORs is that money (and time) would be needed to get someone to leave a GOR-if they desired to leave their conference.

The facts are that the Big Ten has put out its best guess assumption on what it will get for its new tv contracts. That money is NOT enough money to keep existing members whole and to buy anyone in the ACC, Pac 12, BIG 12 or anywhere else out of a grant of rights agreement--which is not the easily breakable contract that the internet has dreamed up. Its also not enough to get a school to buy out of their conference just for departure fees (remember Maryland paid over $30 million and they didn't vote for the increase). Conferences own the media rights and will be paid the media rights. Sure someone could go into an expensive legal fight to try and get out of one if they really wanted to--but in the meantime they won't be paid for their media rights.

In fact virtually every conference has wording in their bylaws that you won't receive anything once you officially leave a conference--and as Maryland found out that holds up in a court of law to the tune of tens of millions of dollars.

So, a school trying to leave will be without revenues for years, and paying court costs. The conference they try to move to won't make anything trying to put them on tv and could actually incur lawsuits themselves if they tried to and weaken any case. They would also destroy their own grant of rights. Networks are not going to get involved in breaking a legal contract tied in with their conference agreements which would then jeopardize those conference television contracts (in other words, if you are the ACC and ESPN aids the SEC or Big Ten in raiding you, then doesn't honor your tv contract paying you media rights for a school that left? You can then turn around and legally claim that ESPN has voided your television agreement and you are free and clear to move to another network and make a contract with them).



To believe otherwise is living in fantasy. No one is trying to get out of a grant of rights, and no one is trying to break a grant of rights.

Believing the current statements by any conference on expansion is a bit, well, unwise is perhaps the best way I can put that. The ACC was doing nothing until they announced they had been. Virginia Tech was staying until the moment they left. Boston College was literally on TV saying they were staying while signing on the dotted line with the ACC.

Contracts are hard to break and some harder than others, but if everyone involved wants to break it except the person getting left behind, then it is just a matter of money and dealing. A GOR is supposed to sound iron clad but it is no more solid than the locks on your front door. The only people the front door keeps are the honest ones, the ones that want in will get in. Contracts work like that too.

 

[Buckaineer]

Money talks you should know this by now. You think the committee would pass up on Notre dame if they had a chance. They don't play in a conference championship game. you have allot to learn about the ways of the world

They wanted Notre Dame and had to pass on them this year. They can't do whatever they or networks want--they have to have "cover" to do something that doesn't add up. The BIG 12 not having a 13th game gives them cover. The media understands this. The BIG 12 understands this. You need to learn this and stop with the myths.

 

[ColoradoMountaineer]

They wanted Notre Dame and had to pass on them this year. They can't do whatever they or networks want--they have to have "cover" to do something that doesn't add up. The BIG 12 not having a 13th game gives them cover. The media understands this. The BIG 12 understands this. You need to learn this and stop with the myths.

Dude you need to get a clue and stop being naive. Its all about the pay day and tv ratings which a blue blood team brings like it are not if the Big 12 had a championship game there would still be one power five conference that wouldn't get a berth and the conference champion that would get left out would be the least sexiest

 

[Buckaineer]

Nebraska is not an AAU school. Granted, it was when it began talks with the Big Ten in leaving the Big 12. By the time the move was made, the AAU had already signaled it would remove Nebraska from the AAU for failure to maintain standards. The Big Ten knew this before they invited Nebraska to join the conference.

Notre Dame is not an AAU and the Big Ten has courted them publicly at least 3 times in the last 30 years.

But the final word on academics for the Big Ten is from Jim Delany's quote in 2010:

"It's very important," Delany said. "AAU membership is an important part of who we are. It was an important part of who we are [when the Big Ten added] Penn State, and it's an important aspect of what makes an institution a research institution, an undergraduate school, a school that serves the public at a high level."
Asked if AAU membership was mandatory for expansion candidates, Delany said, "We're not there. I'm not going to qualify or disqualify, but it's a very important factor."

Conferences do take the academic pedigree into account when they are trying to sell a prospect to all of the voters or to exclude a school that otherwise has everything they want but also has some flaw that they deem unforgivable. WVU certainly knows the latter aspect in its dealings with the ACC.

To think academics wiled some sort of veto power in an athletic association is unsupportable. At best such things are tools to bribe or exclude a prospect.

Again the issues you have Southern Miss comes down to "they are not sexy" to you. That is not good enough. There is no practical reason they are not good enough, you just don't like them. In my dislike for BYU is stated why - they don't play in Sunday. That matters to a conference, especially one spread across 2/3s of the nation when travel must take place outside of class schedules if possible.

Southern Miss has no such negatives. Airport? Morgantown has no airport of viable worth. teams fly into Pittsburgh and bus down. The distance between Morgantown and Pitt is 82 miles; Hattiesburg to Jackson is 90 miles and Hattiesburg to Mobile is 96 miles. WVU seems to do just fine with no airport in the Big 12.

Nebraska was an AAU school when they joined the Big Ten and were dropped afterwards from AAU status. Still, multiple Big Ten schools were very upset with the addition due to their academic standing.

Notre Dame has very high academic standing and everyone wants them in their conference except maybe the SEC.

Your statement from Delaney illustrates academic standing IS important to conferences and nothing more or less. Several conference commissioners and school leaders have commented directly on academics in expansion considerations. Its important to SCHOOLS and SCHOOLS make up these conferences after all--not just athletics teams.

According to Oliver Luck who directly talked with the ACC--they never showed any interest in WVU. It never got to any point of academics and any reports of that were simply internet b.s..

As to Southern Miss? If you want to believe a conference like the BIG 12 will consider a school like Southern Miss-have at it. They won't, I listed several reasons why. It doesn't matter what I personally like or dislike, the conference has made statements about what they need in expansion candidates and schools such as Southern Miss are not in the conversation. To try and compare WVU to Southern Miss just lets me know you don't understand major college football. WVU is a major school. Southern Miss is a midmajor. There's a huge difference. BTW Morgantown has an airport, Clarksburg/Bridgeport, WV has a larger airport within a half hour of campus where WVU and some of the opposition fly and Pittsburgh International is a bit over an hour away. But again it doesn't matter because WVU is a major program that tv networks desired whereas Southern Miss doesn't have the same cred.

 

[Pitt4Life34]

Why the endless personal insults ?

....they add no validity to your opinions and only encourage the person/people you're directing your reply toward to be defensive and close-minded.

Right on sweetheart!!! You go girl! We good?

 

[Buckaineer]

Dude you need to get a clue and stop being naive. Its all about the pay day and tv ratings which a blue blood team brings like it are not if the Big 12 had a championship game there would still be one power five conference that wouldn't get a berth and the conference champion that would get left out would be the least sexiest

You are the one that is naive. They don't just put whoever they want in there, they must be able to at least pretend to justify it as they did with Ohio State last season. Without a CCG game--no way was Ohio State in that playoff.
With a CCG no way were TCU or Baylor left out.
The BIG 12 understands they are at a disadvantage--so should you. The only question now is are they willing to live with that disadvantage.

 

[spreadoption]

After watching today's game, I'd say add two teams that might be able to win a playoff game instead of losing by 20.