Looks like no Big12 expansion

[Low Mountains Drifter]

I'd be 100% for expansion if we could poach Power 5 teams. I just don't see that as a possibility at this time. In the future, who knows what might occur.

Could a couple of erstwhile Big 12 teams eventually decide the grass isn't greener? Stranger things have happened. I'd welcome A&M, Missouri, Colorado, Nebraska in a heartbeat, but the mid-majors currently available really do nothing to improve the quality of competition, the stability or the finances of the league.

The Big 12 would not weather the defection of OU or UT any better just because Cincinnati and/or Memphis, UConn. Temple, Houston, UCF, USY, BYU....... were in the league.

The moment one of the big 2 were to decide to leave everyone else with an option would do likewise and if the conference survived at all it would be the same conference in name only.

OU and UT, if they ever agree, can literally dictate what the conference does. As we know OU is in favor and UT isn't, or it would happen, the rest of the schools just have to wait it out.

 

[Buckaineer]

@Buckineer, I'm not saying not too expand just aim a little higher then a UCONN or Cincinnati.

with who? There is no one available "higher than UConn or Cincinnati".

Not sure why its so difficult to understand this. SEC--making money and winning championships--no one is leaving. Big Ten--making money, solidly in the playoffs and about to get a new lucrative contract-no one is leaving. Pac 12-out west, everyone's content there--and they have a grant of rights through 2024--no ones leaving. ACC? In the championships, grant of rights through 2027--no ones leaving. So again, there are schools available and schools not available.

The BIG 12 in the meantime has to take care of itself because its in competition -war really-with other conferences. Those conferences don't have a problem with ripping the BIG 12 to pieces if it benefits them, and if BIG 12 schools aren't happy once the BIG 12 tv contract and grant of rights is up, then problems very well may arise. And that is NOT good for WVU.

 

[Buckaineer]

I'd be 100% for expansion if we could poach Power 5 teams.

Guess what, there are 0 P5 teams available and there won't be any available for the BIG 12. In the meantime there are real issues to address. Championship game, tv network and expansion. Oklahoma and perhaps others require those things to happen or they are not content with the BIG 12 conference.

Not sure you understand what that can mean.

 

[Buckaineer]

how about a contingency championship game . I there is an undefeated conference team NO game if there are two teams with one or two losses then have the playoff. Although a bit convoluted a game could be planned tentatively and if need implemented Before anyone says it cant be done IT CAN thats why sucessful corporations businesses govt hae contingencies plans

Stadiums, hotels, travel, tickets, food, drinks, workers, tv, etc.---all of these things have to be arranged, contracted and paid for-you can't just do a game at the spur of the moment.

 

[BoremanEer]

Brigham Young and Colorado State, with CSU's new stadium and opening a large state to the media, would be good additions. No school east of the Mississippi River right now is attractive overall, especially since it is apparent Texas and Oklahoma run things in the Big XII and are both west of the Mississippi River.

 

[Low Mountains Drifter]

In the VERY NEXT SENTENCE I wrote I don't see that as a possibility at this time!

Neither you nor I know what will happen in the future beyond, that Texas an OU are and always will be top dogs. As I said, when they agree the rest of us will follow whether we like it or not. When they do not agree (as is the present situation) what you say works both ways. If OU is unhappy because it doesn't get something it wants, then yes it has the option to bolt. By the same token, UT can't be forced to do something it does not want because it has THE SAME OPTION.

 

[Buckaineer]

In the VERY NEXT SENTENCE I wrote I don't see that as a possibility at this time!

Neither you nor I know what will happen in the future beyond, that Texas an OU are and always will be top dogs. As I said, when they agree the rest of us will follow whether we like it or not. When they do not agree (as is the present situation) what you say works both ways. If OU is unhappy because it doesn't get something it wants, then yes it has the option to bolt. By the same token, UT can't be forced to do something it does not want because it has THE SAME OPTION.

Texas hasn't said they are discontent with the BIG 12 or will "bolt" if they don't get something. Oklahoma on the other hand has made it 100% clear the status quo is unnacceptable. That's a problem and that's why OU is brought up.

As to the other stuff it just doesn't make any sense to keep making statements like "I'd be ok with it if there were someone worth adding" when there are schools worth adding and the ones you want aren't ever going to come.

Some of the leaders in the conference are stuck in the same mindset.

 

[Mountaineer Steve]

this is the worse case scenario for wvu. will have to win them all to get into the hunt. one loss and things get dicey. better find a hc who can get it done or here comes years of baseball stadium bowl games. damn.

What are you talking about. With the round robin and now the 13th data point, a 1 loss BIG12 team is as likely to make the playoffs as a 1 loss SEC team. The ACC is really the only conference that has to worry about 1 loss teams not making it.

 

[Mountaineer Steve]

It will be very interesting to see how the $$ PER TEAM works out this year with the Big 12 represented in the 4-team playoff. It could be a wake-up call to the other (diluted) Power 5 conferences if we end up ahead of them. I really think we might.

If that happens (and happens consistently for a few years) we would be able to attract 2 teams from existing power 5 schools that bring a lot to the table. How about if we pick up Nebraska and Penn State while the Big ten decides whether they want to take Memphis and Cincinnati to replace them. Crazy? Maybe, but money talks.

Lgm!

Not to mention that the TV rights for CCG is expected to be between 25 and 30 million per year. More revenue to be split between just 10 teams.

 

[Low Mountains Drifter]

"Texas hasn't said they are discontent with the BIG 12 or will "bolt" if they don't get something. Oklahoma on the other hand has made it 100% clear the status quo is unnacceptable. That's a problem and that's why OU is brought up."

It doesn't take much thinking to grasp that if both OU and UT opposed the status quo, then the status would change.

 

[Mountaineer Steve]

Wouldn't Kansas City be the best location? That's where the basketball tournament is. After thinking about it no need for divisions just take two best conference records and call it a day. If there is any kind of tie just use committee rankings to determine teams.

I would expect it to be played at AT&T (Jerry Jones) stadium. This is just another revenue generator.

 

[Mountaineer Steve]

I'm with ya... ...people need to understand expansion would be an investment and shouldn't expect increased revenue instantly. Everybody says we should consider it when our GOR is up... ...but that's exactly when we may lose a team or two.

Invest now... ...not when you need the results from the investment tomorrow.

The problem with the BIG12 is its dysfunctionality has kept it from thinking long term. Instead of doing what is best for the League, teams like TexA$$ have always done what they think is best for them. They don't get the fact that the stronger the BIG12 is the Stronger they are.
Just look at the SEC as an example

 

[Mountaineer Steve]

With or without expansion, the round robin is probably going away. The commissioner spoke about going to an eight game conference schedule to avoid a rematch in a CCG just the other day. Playing a CCG with 10 teams that already played each other just doesn't make any sense.

That was only if they were forced to split into division. Since that is no longer the case they won't be splitting into divisions.

 

[Low Mountains Drifter]

The problem with the BIG12 is its dysfunctionality has kept it from thinking long term. Instead of doing what is best for the League, teams like TexA$$ have always done what they think is best for them. They don't get the fact that the stronger the BIG12 is the Stronger they are.
Just look at the SEC as an example

That may be true, but it doesn't alter the reality that Texas has virtual "veto power" and, as it has demonstrated, will use it as it pleases.

In such a situation, the default is the status quo, regardless of what OU thinks. OU can force the issue with a "we'll bolt" ultimatum and it could come to that, but the other 8 of us are really just interested bystanders.

 

[skygusty]

Its too bad Boren is the only member of the Big12 with intelligence. If the ADs, Presidents and coaches of all the other teams would only read this message board the answer would be obvious. I bet they collectively haven't thought deeply about this at all or ever talked about it. There could not be any complications or considerations that make expansion difficult and contentious that we aren't privy too. Don't know why that what is obvious to a handful of WVU fans isn't obvious to them. They are probably just dumb and mired in the past. Yeah, that's it. Well, a few more pages on the subject ought to turn them around.

 

[Leave No Doubt WVU]

We are struggling to finish in the top half of the Big12 in football and our genius fans are only interested in expanding if we can add 2 elite programs to the conference. Maybe it would be better if 2 schools with resources closer to our level were added.

 

[Papillion]

If other conferences didn't have a championship game then arguments about the BIG 12 not playing one because of "risks" might be valid. Considering the BIG 12 conference petitioned for and received (although not like they wanted) the ability to play a CCG its pretty clear that even they have moved beyond the failed idea that it doesn't matter. The BIG 12 is at a disadvantage, there's no getting away from that.

The Big 12 is not at a disadvantage for crying out loud. You're so hell bent on this expansion thing you can't see past your nose. You and others can rant on how much OU dropped in the polls, etc, etc, but the FACT is OU got in and a conf. with a CCG did not. Enough already. With 5 teams for 4 spots this is going to go on every year. And it will get to the point where they will probably feel compelled to expand the playoffs but not to 8 but actually 6 would be perfect. Just give the top 2 a bye. The more teams added to what some fans want means more games, more travel and more EXPENSE. You can't keep taking from people. There's a limit and certain factions and entities in this country, like sporting events, are going to learn the hard way sooner or later. 6 teams covers it all with no one complaining.

Plus, I think many are missing the point about what the real issue is and that is the fact that there is a committee that picks these teams instead of a real comprehensive ranking system that is desperately needed. .

What makes no sense is schools across the country pouring tens of millions of dollars into their programs and all we have is largely a subjective way to get ranked high instead of taking numbers and statistics and using them based solely on what a team has done on the field. You have 128 D1 schools but only 60-plus coaches voting. Why? They all should vote and add in an equal number of writers voting-one from each college town. Add in the computer polls along with a point scale system and we would have the most accurate ranking system without any agendas and no excuses by fans.

This is one big solution to the problem but the other point that people are missing is that those other conferences need a CCG because they don't play a round robin. People are looking at it the wrong way. The Big 12 should actually get points for all in the conf playing everyone. The Big 12 played each other in complete fashion and shouldn't be penalized for not playing a 13th game when they don't need it-the other conferences do, which should be there problem, not just an advantage. What if MSU wasn't near the top 4 and beat Iowa, then no one from the Big 10 would have gotten in. We can play that what-if game all day.

Those other conferences are the ones that wanted this mega conf crap now they can wallow in their mess because in the long run I don't think it's going to pan out. The intimacy is evaporating quickly from a setup like that. But the Big 12 still has it.

The Big 12 should play it smarter and turn the tables on the mega conf act by stating that "we" play a round robin and we don't need a CCG. "It's none of your business." And that's the way it should be instead of feeling forced to add schools like Cincy who haven't done much of anything since their existence so why do people think they would after joining a much tougher conf? Unless a school adds something they would be draining it.

 

[Buckaineer]

The only tables that will turn are change. The conference WVU is in as it is has existed for a total of about five seasons now. To pretend that change in a five year old entity is the end is simply stupid. To pretend the rest of the world is going to change for that conference or that the conference's leaders can continue to bury their heads in the sand is even more so.

Oklahomas president has now laid down the situation clearly for those burying their heads in the sand. Other conferences are very interested in his school- conferences doing better than the BIG 12, and in order for that interest to not be returned- major and immediate change is necessary so that no longer will the BIG 12 be looking up at anyone.

Immediate expansion, tv network for all the conference and a championship game must happen.

It may be hard for some to understand that there are forces outside the BIG 12 working night and day to rip it apart and that if it gets ripped apart WVU is going to find itself more than likely somewhere it doesn't want to be.

There's not going to be some stand against all the other powers, no one is going to change the system that is for the BIG 12, the BIG 12 is going to change or the BIG 12 is going to cease to exist.

So it's time for those railing ignorantly against expansion, if you support WVU, to stop trying to tear down your own school and do what you can to get things rolling in the direction best for the school and the conference.

 

[Pitt4Life34]

Personally IF the Big12 had a chance at getting 2 teams from a P5 conference my two would be Arkansas and Pitt. Notre Dame would be the best scenario and if the Big12 could get Notre Dame I don't think I would care who the second team would be. Bottom line this pretty much kills Big12 expansion for a very long time. So much for the Big12 helping WVU with taking eastern schools.

None of those three are realistically gonna hapen. No team will ever leave SEC or Big10. Pitt is a classic ACC team and ND is ND. Only chance for a P5 team is when GOR is out in 7-10 year. It won't happen then either. At least not to a unique Big12. Also, going to half the Big12 schools to play sports is not very appealing. ACC will always survive because it has the entire eastern coast and all of the population. Losing a FSU or VT isn't going to eliminate it's status imo.

 

[Buckaineer]

None of those three are realistically gonna hapen. No team will ever leave SEC or Big10. Pitt is a classic ACC team and ND is ND. Only chance for a P5 team is when GOR is out in 7-10 year. It won't happen then either. At least not to a unique Big12. Also, going to half the Big12 schools to play sports is not very appealing. ACC will always survive because it has the entire eastern coast and all of the population. Losing a FSU or VT isn't going to eliminate it's status imo.

If the ACC loses FSU it's going to have a major impact on that conference- it would probably tear it apart. But unfortunately FSU is under a long term grant of rights through 2027. No one is looking to fight that court battle to destroy a grant of rights because it would ruin their own.

 

[ColoradoMountaineer]

The big 12 isn't expanding anytime soon. The only candidates available are table scraps

 

[Rootmaster]

Table scraps? How many more national championships in basketball (men or women's) has WVU won than Connecticut? How much better was our football program in the Big East than Cincinnati? And, BYU, yeah their athletic history doesn't hold a candle to us right? Folks need to stop thinking with their ego gene and see for long term stability the BIg 12 (12-2=10) has to expand to survive and prosper in the long run.

 

[Buckaineer]

The big 12 isn't expanding anytime soon. The only candidates available are table scraps

OU's president on existing expansion candidates:

A: “Well, I’d like to see us add two more teams, and we’ve been doing a lot of thinking about that, which teams fit, which teams are additive to our conference — and I mean schools that have very strong athletic programs as well as very strong academic programs, that fit our profile. And there are several schools potentially around the country that would be additive. You don’t want to just add schools for the sake of adding schools. So they need to be — put it this way: they need to be the right schools......

Q: So let’s get that conversation started now: If the Big 12 does expand, which two schools would you start with and why?
A: “Well, I don’t want to start naming schools, because we have private discussions about that. But there are definitely more than two schools that would be additive. We’ve done enough national study to know that. I’d rather not. I don’t think it’d be appropriate for me to name schools as one president. We have been, as a group, looking at expansion, discussing expansion, and we have had outside consultants helping us look at what schools are the possible best fit. So there are more than two out there that could be a good fit. There may be six or seven, and we could pick from that group the right two. We have to be very careful. We don’t want to go out and get Okefenokee A&M or something just to have a name. Just any old school, just go get anybody to have 12.

So we have to really carefully decide which are the best ones, and we’ll look at the fan base, we’ll look at the size of their programs, we’ll look at the academics of the institutions. We’ll look at them comprehensively as to which is the best fit. And also we’ll consider geography to a certain degree......

Q: As a man who knows the law, how strong are these Grant of Rights agreements?

A: Uhh, well, I think that’s really interesting. … I think it’s probably not — I think it’s strong enough that most schools that have given away their grants of rights … I think most of them will be reluctant to test the strength of that legally. So I think we have to zero in that would be additive to the conference where there’s not a grant of rights problem.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/blogs/spo...cle_d5e9b844-5fa0-5f4c-98f6-357abd37e19e.html

so, once again, you would be WRONG about there not being anyone but table scraps.

 

[Low Mountains Drifter]

Why does it have to expand to survive? As I see it, the league is fine as long as OU and Texas stay and obviously has a problem if they don't.

What is the basis for thinking that adding any mid-majors to the current league increases the likelihood UT or OU will not leave? What about the addition of lesser programs would make the Big 12 more attractive relative to another P5 conference than it would be as is?

For the rest of us, what's the huge difference between adding teams to replace UT/OU if it comes to that and already having them in the league if it does happen? In either case a league without those 2 is not a strong league.

 

[Rootmaster]

WVU needs to survive and prosper as a "top tier" program. The cost of operations, the cost of facilities (including upgrades), the publicity value to the University as a whole, and as a recruitment tool for students and faculty. Obviously it covers fan egos as well. lol. That said...twelve institutions gives the league a better chance to continue as a "top tier" league if defections do occur, and thus gives WVU the same athletic/security status. If the time ever comes that any one (or two) institution(s) leaves and expansion has not happened, then it will be scramble time and that is not good. There is strength in numbers. Proof? Nebraska, Colorado, Missouri and Texas AM fled the Big 12, but there was still a core of eight and a seat at the table for TCU and WVU. The league survived...that time. The Big 12 needs to get to 12 with best candidates, build national, not just midwest, market penetration and get on with it. It is the best scenario for WVU going forward. It is much better to plug the hole in the boat before you sail than to wait for the water to rush in because you didn't.

 

[TexasforevEER]

If the Big 12 calls ole Warez..................he will sure tell them what schools to take and what schools not to take for expansion. Let's rob Clem(p)son from the ACC and Texas A&M from the SEC........just for starters! All you have to do to get these schools is show them the money.

 

[Buckaineer]

The BIG 12 needs to expand because its at a disadvantage to larger conferences. It has a smaller footprint by far than the other conferences, it doesn't have the ability to create a conference network that doesn't just promote and display athletics, but also promotes the schools and programs at the schools --if you've ever watched the SECn or the BTN. Conference networks generate huge sums of money for member schools and will help all the BIG 12 schools be on a more even financial plane going forward. Right now some make very little on tier 3 rights and the per school conference payout is nice, but not enough to keep pace as other leagues grow their finances.

The conference needs more positive press from a larger portion of the nation. You get that with familiarity which the conference doesn't have in many areas right now. It needs more fans watching and caring from a larger portion of the country. It needs a larger political voice so its not ever playing second fiddle to other conferences. It needs to be able to maintain a financial status on par with the other conferences not just now, but long after the grant of rights in the current contracts have been renewed. It needs for its teams to be in the best spot possible to make the playoffs and have success in and OOC and that means strong coaching and great recruits.

These things aren't possible just sitting back and watching everyone else be proactive. You have to make them happen and expansion gives the conference the best chance to be succesful whereas staying at 10 leaves everyone vulnerable.

Schools like OU want the conference to be all that it can be--Boren said so himself-he doesn't want to take Oklahoma somewhere else, but if the conference won't be a strong one when it can, then he might very well do that. Texas doesn't have to go to another conference to be succesful either. Adding what some call "mid majors" has nothing to do with whether these schools can be succesful when there are muliple schools out there that are competitive at a high level and can help everyone generate higher revenues and gain other things as well. Some just need to think of schools and athletic programs as that--not "mid major" or some other derogatory term. Multiple "G5" schools beat "P5" every year so its just a matter of labels someone slapped on to be able to look down or hold back other programs. Remove the labels and you just may get a TCU-as good as any program at any level.

As for WVU playing schools--if the conference is succesful, WVU will be playing Texas and OU and everyone else. Its not as though schools are going to be added and WVU will replace UT and OU with those two schools and never play the conference traditional powers again. They'll probably still play one every season and the other every other season--or two on, two off or something of that nature. In the year you don't get a big name conference foe, play a big name OOC opponent.

 

[topdecktiger]

The BIG 12 needs to expand because its at a disadvantage to larger conferences. It has a smaller footprint by far than the other conferences, it doesn't have the ability to create a conference network that doesn't just promote and display athletics, but also promotes the schools and programs at the schools --if you've ever watched the SECn or the BTN. Conference networks generate huge sums of money for member schools and will help all the BIG 12 schools be on a more even financial plane going forward. Right now some make very little on tier 3 rights and the per school conference payout is nice, but not enough to keep pace as other leagues grow their finances.

The conference needs more positive press from a larger portion of the nation. You get that with familiarity which the conference doesn't have in many areas right now. It needs more fans watching and caring from a larger portion of the country. It needs a larger political voice so its not ever playing second fiddle to other conferences. It needs to be able to maintain a financial status on par with the other conferences not just now, but long after the grant of rights in the current contracts have been renewed. It needs for its teams to be in the best spot possible to make the playoffs and have success in and OOC and that means strong coaching and great recruits.

These things aren't possible just sitting back and watching everyone else be proactive. You have to make them happen and expansion gives the conference the best chance to be succesful whereas staying at 10 leaves everyone vulnerable.

Schools like OU want the conference to be all that it can be--Boren said so himself-he doesn't want to take Oklahoma somewhere else, but if the conference won't be a strong one when it can, then he might very well do that. Texas doesn't have to go to another conference to be succesful either. Adding what some call "mid majors" has nothing to do with whether these schools can be succesful when there are muliple schools out there that are competitive at a high level and can help everyone generate higher revenues and gain other things as well. Some just need to think of schools and athletic programs as that--not "mid major" or some other derogatory term. Multiple "G5" schools beat "P5" every year so its just a matter of labels someone slapped on to be able to look down or hold back other programs. Remove the labels and you just may get a TCU-as good as any program at any level.

As for WVU playing schools--if the conference is succesful, WVU will be playing Texas and OU and everyone else. Its not as though schools are going to be added and WVU will replace UT and OU with those two schools and never play the conference traditional powers again. They'll probably still play one every season and the other every other season--or two on, two off or something of that nature. In the year you don't get a big name conference foe, play a big name OOC opponent.

When you say the Big 12 needs to be proactive, adding teams like Cincinnati or BYU isn't really proactive, compared to what the other conferences did. The SEC got exactly what they wanted with Missouri and A&M. The Big Ten got exactly what it wanted with Rutgers and Maryland. The schools in question don't really fit that role. None of them have a good market share, or a real successful history. The comparison to TCU isn't really accurate, because TCU had been winning ~10 games a year for over a decade before joining the Big 12. The only G5 team that can match that is Boise St.

The problem is the same as it's been all along. New teams aren't going to increase the payouts. That's the core problem.

 

[Buckaineer]

When you say the Big 12 needs to be proactive, adding teams like Cincinnati or BYU isn't really proactive, compared to what the other conferences did. The SEC got exactly what they wanted with Missouri and A&M. The Big Ten got exactly what it wanted with Rutgers and Maryland. The schools in question don't really fit that role. None of them have a good market share, or a real successful history. The comparison to TCU isn't really accurate, because TCU had been winning ~10 games a year for over a decade before joining the Big 12. The only G5 team that can match that is Boise St.

The problem is the same as it's been all along. New teams aren't going to increase the payouts. That's the core problem.

Yes, adding teams like Cincinnati or BYU IS proactive. Not much difference there than adding Pitt, SU or Louisville or adding Rutgers or Maryland either. Except that they may be better on the football field than most of those.

The SEC lucked out that Johnny Manziel was at Texas A&M. Other than that they got a foot into the state of Texas and a program in the west (Mizzou) that is stuck playing in the east division. CBS didn't see any value add there at all and if it werent for ESPN desiring to create an SECn there really isn't much to either add any different than anyone else's adds. Neither A&M or Mizzou had accomplished much athletically for years when the SEC took them in.

I'm going to guess that in reality you have 0 idea what Cincinnati or BYU's "market share" is--but for some reason you think you can go around making claims about what they don't do. Both of those schools and others have some tradition, have had good success on the field and in other sports. I'll go ahead and trust that the BIG 12's consultants and the composition committee understands well what those schools and others (Boren mentions 6-7 schools that would be additive) can bring.

The BIG 12 already has Oklahoma, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma State, Kansas State has had some shining moments as well, WVU is getting better again and Texas won't be down for long. The idea that they would need to add some power when no one else did is just silly.

 

[ColoradoMountaineer]

OU's president on existing expansion candidates:

A: “Well, I’d like to see us add two more teams, and we’ve been doing a lot of thinking about that, which teams fit, which teams are additive to our conference — and I mean schools that have very strong athletic programs as well as very strong academic programs, that fit our profile. And there are several schools potentially around the country that would be additive. You don’t want to just add schools for the sake of adding schools. So they need to be — put it this way: they need to be the right schools......

Q: So let’s get that conversation started now: If the Big 12 does expand, which two schools would you start with and why?
A: “Well, I don’t want to start naming schools, because we have private discussions about that. But there are definitely more than two schools that would be additive. We’ve done enough national study to know that. I’d rather not. I don’t think it’d be appropriate for me to name schools as one president. We have been, as a group, looking at expansion, discussing expansion, and we have had outside consultants helping us look at what schools are the possible best fit. So there are more than two out there that could be a good fit. There may be six or seven, and we could pick from that group the right two. We have to be very careful. We don’t want to go out and get Okefenokee A&M or something just to have a name. Just any old school, just go get anybody to have 12.

So we have to really carefully decide which are the best ones, and we’ll look at the fan base, we’ll look at the size of their programs, we’ll look at the academics of the institutions. We’ll look at them comprehensively as to which is the best fit. And also we’ll consider geography to a certain degree......

Q: As a man who knows the law, how strong are these Grant of Rights agreements?

A: Uhh, well, I think that’s really interesting. … I think it’s probably not — I think it’s strong enough that most schools that have given away their grants of rights … I think most of them will be reluctant to test the strength of that legally. So I think we have to zero in that would be additive to the conference where there’s not a grant of rights problem.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/blogs/spo...cle_d5e9b844-5fa0-5f4c-98f6-357abd37e19e.html

so, once again, you would be WRONG about there not being anyone but table scraps.

If that was truly the case they probably would have already expanded

 

[TexasforevEER]

If that was truly the case they probably would have already expanded

KoolAide...............I am going to make contact with folks in the Big 12 (the shiny shoes) and let them know about Florida State and Texas A&M being ready to make the move. We agree on this one?

 

[ColoradoMountaineer]

KoolAide...............I am going to make contact with folks in the Big 12 (the shiny shoes) and let them know about Florida State and Texas A&M being ready to make the move. We agree on this one?

Well in case you forgot Texas am left the big 12 and they wouldn't leave the sec in a million years

 

[TexasforevEER]

Well in case you forgot Texas am left the big 12 and they wouldn't leave the sec in a million years

Yes.........I know but believe ole Warez has the pull to get them back. How about both Colorado and CSU to the Big 12? Can you make this happen? You got the pull!

 

[Rootmaster]

How 'bout University of Chicago (they were in the Big 10 once...long time ago), Fordham in New York City (could play in Central Park), Villanova in Philadelphia (hey could help dominate the urban markets),and Georgetown for Washington and Baltimore! Hey bet they would all come on board for an extra $100,000!

 

[ColoradoMountaineer]

Yes.........I know but believe ole Warez has the pull to get them back. How about both Colorado and CSU to the Big 12? Can you make this happen? You got the pull!

I am setting might sights bigger i say we go about an get Alabama and Ohio state?

 

[Buckaineer]

If that was truly the case they probably would have already expanded

Not really. Some still aren't desiring to do that. Some like the round robin. Who plays who is always an issue as are divisions. There's been lots of misinformation about revenues as well.

Some haven't wanted a CCG because if they get in one they might lose it.

 

[Papillion]

The only tables that will turn are change. The conference WVU is in as it is has existed for a total of about five seasons now. To pretend that change in a five year old entity is the end is simply stupid. To pretend the rest of the world is going to change for that conference or that the conference's leaders can continue to bury their heads in the sand is even more so.

Oklahomas president has now laid down the situation clearly for those burying their heads in the sand. Other conferences are very interested in his school- conferences doing better than the BIG 12, and in order for that interest to not be returned- major and immediate change is necessary so that no longer will the BIG 12 be looking up at anyone.

Immediate expansion, tv network for all the conference and a championship game must happen.

It may be hard for some to understand that there are forces outside the BIG 12 working night and day to rip it apart and that if it gets ripped apart WVU is going to find itself more than likely somewhere it doesn't want to be.

There's not going to be some stand against all the other powers, no one is going to change the system that is for the BIG 12, the BIG 12 is going to change or the BIG 12 is going to cease to exist.

So it's time for those railing ignorantly against expansion, if you support WVU, to stop trying to tear down your own school and do what you can to get things rolling in the direction best for the school and the conference.

I'm not sure this was in response to my post but if it was you didn't respond to not one of my points. Not one. You sound like a freakin robot with an agenda for crying out loud.

The question is, what makes you so right? What can you prove? The answer is NOTHING. I made some good points that you completely ignored.

What you're doing is fear mongering. Downplaying Missouri and A&M and jacking up Cincy and BYU? Who do you think you're fooling? Maybe BYU can be put on the same level as Mizzou but the fact is, I don't think the Big 12 has any desire to expand west or further within the state of Texas.

It's called patience and Louisville is the team that they need. Who knows what could happen even before the GOR's are up. Who would have thought the Big 10 did what they did in their last move.

If the committee expands the playoffs to 6 teams your argument is moot. If the ranking system would go in the direction I suggested, your argument is moot. And Cincinnati is not going to do anything for this conference and it's not the conference's responsibility to prop up their program as in, "once you get here I'm sure you'll get better." Bull$hit.

What you're suggesting is exactly what the OU guy does not want and that is to expand for the sake of expanding. That won't work for sure and could lead to the Big 12's demise like the Big East adding Marquette and DePaul was really the beginning of the end. They didn't have to do that, regardless of how good or mediocre those programs are/were.

 

[topdecktiger]

Yes, adding teams like Cincinnati or BYU IS proactive. Not much difference there than adding Pitt, SU or Louisville or adding Rutgers or Maryland either. Except that they may be better on the football field than most of those.

The SEC lucked out that Johnny Manziel was at Texas A&M. Other than that they got a foot into the state of Texas and a program in the west (Mizzou) that is stuck playing in the east division. CBS didn't see any value add there at all and if it werent for ESPN desiring to create an SECn there really isn't much to either add any different than anyone else's adds. Neither A&M or Mizzou had accomplished much athletically for years when the SEC took them in.

I'm going to guess that in reality you have 0 idea what Cincinnati or BYU's "market share" is--but for some reason you think you can go around making claims about what they don't do. Both of those schools and others have some tradition, have had good success on the field and in other sports. I'll go ahead and trust that the BIG 12's consultants and the composition committee understands well what those schools and others (Boren mentions 6-7 schools that would be additive) can bring.

The BIG 12 already has Oklahoma, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma State, Kansas State has had some shining moments as well, WVU is getting better again and Texas won't be down for long. The idea that they would need to add some power when no one else did is just silly.

It's a lot different than adding those other teams. The name of the game now is markets and TV contracts. "Tradition" isn't really that big of an issue. Rutgers and Maryland were taken by the Big Ten for one reason only--money. Both schools brought in big TV markets for the conference. Rutgers is the only FBS school in New Jersey. (Plus their proximity to New York City doesn't hurt.) Maryland is the only P5 team in the state. That's why those teams deliver their respective markets. Cincinnati doesn't deliver their market. Ohio St owns that market, by far. BYU would be decent, but that's still only one market.

I'll also trust the comments Bowlsby and Boren made during the summer. Both of them said the payouts from the TV contract stay flat, even with expansion. Plus, Bowlsby said the other revenue goes down because it gets split extra ways. Boren's comment about 6-7 other schools being "additive" hasn't addressed the specifics Bowlsby laid out.

That's the entire problem. Adding more teams doesn't bring in extra money. That's the only reason the other leagues expanded, was for extra money, which they got. Nothing has been revealed that indicated the Big 12 is going to get extra money, due to their TV contract.

 

[Buckaineer]

It's a lot different than adding those other teams. The name of the game now is markets and TV contracts. "Tradition" isn't really that big of an issue. Rutgers and Maryland were taken by the Big Ten for one reason only--money. Both schools brought in big TV markets for the conference. Rutgers is the only FBS school in New Jersey. (Plus their proximity to New York City doesn't hurt.) Maryland is the only P5 team in the state. That's why those teams deliver their respective markets. Cincinnati doesn't deliver their market. Ohio St owns that market, by far. BYU would be decent, but that's still only one market.

I'll also trust the comments Bowlsby and Boren made during the summer. Both of them said the payouts from the TV contract stay flat, even with expansion. Plus, Bowlsby said the other revenue goes down because it gets split extra ways. Boren's comment about 6-7 other schools being "additive" hasn't addressed the specifics Bowlsby laid out.

That's the entire problem. Adding more teams doesn't bring in extra money. That's the only reason the other leagues expanded, was for extra money, which they got. Nothing has been revealed that indicated the Big 12 is going to get extra money, due to their TV contract.

You claim "Cincinnati doesn't deliver their market". Based on what. You've not provided a shred of evidence yet you keep stating things like this emphatically. You need to go back and read some of the interviews and articles posted. Boren states clearly that the BIG 12's expansion committee and consultants have evaluated multiple schools and found 6 or 7 that will be additive. These are all schools not within grants of rights agreements.

If you go back and read Boren's comments from last year he also discussed this when he initially brought up wanting to expand. He stated then that if the right schools were chosen expansion could be additive rather than subtract, and now he has told us they've identified schools that this is true for. Bowlsby btw never said there were no schools available that wouldn't be additive, he has stated there aren't many, and things like any schools added would have to bring something to the table. Bowlsby further stated that if the conference expanded that while the tv contract remains the same that doesn't address other money that would need to be split further--but he never said there isn't anyone available that would bridge that gap. A CCG of $25-$35 million takes care of the split of other monies, NCAA credentials add, new bowls add--there's probably markets that can be added that would deliver a boost.

Adding schools does add money to the BIG 12 if the tv networks pay them for the adds as they have done for other conferences and that is likely. Adding schools also expands the footprint and doing that allows for a conference network which is going to also boost league revenues.

Nothing has been revealed because the conference hasn't expanded and negotiated for more money--what, you thought they were going to lay everything out for you step by step? You won't ever know the exact money until you see tax returns and even then its just one year. Conferences keep those things close to the vest.

The BIG 12 has decisions to make and votes to take--but there are schools available that will add to the conference straight from the president of one of the top schools and a member of the expansion committee. Sorry but you don't know more about it than him.

 

[Charleston Mountie]

It's a lot different than adding those other teams. The name of the game now is markets and TV contracts. "Tradition" isn't really that big of an issue. Rutgers and Maryland were taken by the Big Ten for one reason only--money. Both schools brought in big TV markets for the conference. Rutgers is the only FBS school in New Jersey. (Plus their proximity to New York City doesn't hurt.) Maryland is the only P5 team in the state. That's why those teams deliver their respective markets. Cincinnati doesn't deliver their market. Ohio St owns that market, by far. BYU would be decent, but that's still only one market.

I'll also trust the comments Bowlsby and Boren made during the summer. Both of them said the payouts from the TV contract stay flat, even with expansion. Plus, Bowlsby said the other revenue goes down because it gets split extra ways. Boren's comment about 6-7 other schools being "additive" hasn't addressed the specifics Bowlsby laid out.

That's the entire problem. Adding more teams doesn't bring in extra money. That's the only reason the other leagues expanded, was for extra money, which they got. Nothing has been revealed that indicated the Big 12 is going to get extra money, due to their TV contract.

You are again in error - at least you are consistent. The Big-12 will get the same per school if it adds two school as it will if does not. This has been proven already. The Big-12 will then add money from th CCG. Adding ANY does no reduce any current members pay out.

WHY ARE YOU HERE? This is not your board