ADVERTISEMENT

The Big 12 still needs to expand

S

SupEERman

Sophomore
Sep 7, 2007
238
0
16
Take Cincinnati in as a full member in all sports. Move to a 20 game home & home basketball conference schedule.

Take UConn, BYU, Boise State, UCF & USF as football only members.

UConn can put their other sports in the A10.

USF & UCF can put their other sports in the Atlantic Sun.

Boise can put its other sports in the WCC like BYU.

It is far from sexy, and nobody dreams of adding those schools, and adding them as anything but football only is geographic suicide (aside from Cincy).

We need to have a bigger footprint than just 5 states.

We need more teams for viability, and those are the best options available.

It opens the B12 up to several top 50 TV markets (Hartford-New Haven, Cincinnati, Tampa, Orlando, Salt Lake City).

Ohio and Florida are strong recruiting beds.

The Big 12 wants to be involved with some Florida bowl games. Adding Florida teams makes us more appealing to Florida bowls.

It also ensure all schools will have a reasonably close travel partner in football.

I know no one else will agree with this idea, but I believe it is the best option available.

This post was edited on 4/28 8:23 AM by SupEERman
 
imo, best options for the B12 and wvu are cin and uconn. missed the boat on my favorites which where lou and rutgers.




Preferences


§
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
-
=
Backspace

Tab
q
w
e
r
t
y
u
i
o
p
[
]


Return


capslock
a
s
d
f
g
h
j
k
l
;
'
\

shift
`
z
x
c
v
b
n
m
,
.
/
shift



English




Deutsch


Espanol


Francais


Italiano


Portugues


Русский

alt

alt




Preferences
 
The problem with UConn in all sports is that their travel burden would be even worse that ours. If the eventual goal is for there to be 4-5 main conferences with 16-20 teams each, in as many large markets as possible for football, then where does one draw the line? At what point does it just become ridiculous?

DIVISION A
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Kansas State
Kansas
Iowa State

DIVISION B
Texas
Texas Tech
TCU
Baylor

DIVISION C
BYU
Boise State
UNLV
Colorado State

DIVISION D
WVU
Cincy
UConn
USF
UCF
 
That would be idiotic. Cut revenue for 2 mediocre programs. No thanks. The Big 12 is staying at 10 (with Texas & Oklahoma before all the ACC jackasses come in & say either are leaving - if the ACC GOR holds teams there, then the same would be true for the Big 12) for the next 10-12 years. Might as well get used to it.
 
If we can't bring in teams that elevate the value of the conference then there is no reason to expand. Unless you can get teams at the level of FSU, Clemson, and Miami then you are just watering down the conference.
 
Originally posted by WVUBean:
If we can't bring in teams that elevate the value of the conference then there is no reason to expand. Unless you can get teams at the level of FSU, Clemson, and Miami then you are just watering down the conference.
Click to expand...
More people need to grasp this. There is no one left for the Big 12 to grab at the moment.
 
Originally posted by WVUBean:
If we can't bring in teams that elevate the value of the conference then there is no reason to expand. Unless you can get teams at the level of FSU, Clemson, and Miami then you are just watering down the conference.






More people need to grasp this. There is no one left for the Big 12 to grab at the moment.



I agree with that completely and I think that the Big 12 may have it right by staying at ten teams. I have posted before that roughly 15-20 years ago the WAC tried the 16 team superconference thing and it failed. This may have been because the conference lacked strong programs or it could have been because it was too difficult to administer the league and schedule events for 16 members. Go back to the 1950s and the old Southern Conference with 20+ members - it fractured into the ACC, SE, and Southern Conference. There were too many schools with too diverse interests. If "superconferences" form, I would not be shocked to see some (if not all of them) fracture into smaller conferences within a decade. Then the landscape would look like it did in the early 1970s and there would still be lots of TV money for schools. And the big winners would be the fans.
This post was edited on 5/6 3:12 PM by Mr.Hyde
 
Originally posted by Woody in Helvetia:
I share you belief that the Big 12 needs to expand - but only to get it back to the proper name = 12 teams.
Cincy & ??????
Click to expand...
Absolutey not on Cincy. Once again, what's the point in adding a mediocre program & also lose money in the process? That would be ridiculous. The ONLY move for expansion for the Big 12 would be adding a program like Florida State. And that isn't going to happen now. Might as well stay at 10 & hope that the Big 12 sets up a scheduling alliance with the ACC.
 
the Big10 added teams to bolster their Big10 network by adding the NY/NJ and DC areas. The Big12 does not have a network and Cincy isn't going to make networks like ESPN and FOX pony up any more money. So, the result will be the X amount of dollars the conference is bringing in right now will be divided by 11-12 teams instead of 10 teams.

Conservatively let's say that each team gets $20 million per year now, so $200 pot. Adding two teams that add no value mean that each team will now split that $200 twelve ways. That's $16.7 million. Do you think all 10 teams in the Big12 want to add two teams bad enough to give up $3.3 million a year?
 
Originally posted by WVUBean:
the Big10 added teams to bolster their Big10 network by adding the NY/NJ and DC areas. The Big12 does not have a network and Cincy isn't going to make networks like ESPN and FOX pony up any more money. So, the result will be the X amount of dollars the conference is bringing in right now will be divided by 11-12 teams instead of 10 teams.

Conservatively let's say that each team gets $20 million per year now, so $200 pot. Adding two teams that add no value mean that each team will now split that $200 twelve ways. That's $16.7 million. Do you think all 10 teams in the Big12 want to add two teams bad enough to give up $3.3 million a year?
Click to expand...

Exactly. The B1G expansion model & the Big 12 expansion model are not alike. With the B1G network, that conference adds teams for their TV market because they can move into that market's footprint & make more money. There is no such network in the Big 12 and as you explained well, conference teams would stand to lose a LOT of money by adding a program like Cincy.
 
Probably too late now. Either stay at 10 or we go with leftovers


after the ACC picks the Big 12 apart....Bowlesby got played like a Bitc..
 
Re: Probably too late now. Either stay at 10 or we go with leftovers



Originally posted by MountainBill:

after the ACC picks the Big 12 apart....Bowlesby got played like a Bitc..
Click to expand...
LOL...The charter members of the Big XII just received their annual payout of 22 million per team and WV and TCU received a half share per their four year phase in agreement of 11 million (still better than five times what they were paid prior). In three years these schools will be earning equal shares with the rest of the charter members. The ACC isn't a pimple on the ass of the Big XII. By the way....Big XII schools made more money per school than even the SEC this year.

The poster that mentioned only adding schools that add value has it right. I agree that it would be nice to get back to twelve and have our conference championship back, but only if the teams that are brought in bring revenue and competition to the table. The poors don't eat at the rich mans table.
 
Re: Probably too late now. Either stay at 10 or we go with leftovers


Originally posted by MountainBill:

after the ACC picks the Big 12 apart....Bowlesby got played like a Bitc..
Click to expand...
Why would the ACC take football teams?

The ACC is a basketball conference. They raided the Big East for basketball schools as they were kicking their butts in basketball market. Get a clue.
 
Originally posted by SupEERman:
Take Cincinnati in as a full member in all sports. Move to a 20 game home & home basketball conference schedule.

Take UConn, BYU, Boise State, UCF & USF as football only members.

UConn can put their other sports in the A10.

USF & UCF can put their other sports in the Atlantic Sun.

Boise can put its other sports in the WCC like BYU.

It is far from sexy, and nobody dreams of adding those schools, and adding them as anything but football only is geographic suicide (aside from Cincy).

We need to have a bigger footprint than just 5 states.

We need more teams for viability, and those are the best options available.

It opens the B12 up to several top 50 TV markets (Hartford-New Haven, Cincinnati, Tampa, Orlando, Salt Lake City).

Ohio and Florida are strong recruiting beds.

The Big 12 wants to be involved with some Florida bowl games. Adding Florida teams makes us more appealing to Florida bowls.

It also ensure all schools will have a reasonably close travel partner in football.

I know no one else will agree with this idea, but I believe it is the best option available.

This post was edited on 4/28 8:23 AM by SupEERman
Click to expand...
Cincinnati adds nothing. they are the bottom of Ohio States oil scum. They would bring nothing to the table to even make good gravy. Uconn, who. This is not worth the addition. What would they bring a win for Kansas in football. Get real. Profits would dry up. USF and UCF are the buttocks of FSU and Florida and would forever be the shadows of their big brothers. Fox TV would laugh. Boise can stay where they are with all sports. If they were important, they would be in Big 12 already. BYU see Boise. Plus BYU does not play on Sunday.

If and when the Big 12 decides to expand Fox TV sports and ESPN will decide who will add the value and who will not. Then that team will be voted on and contracts drawn up. Be patient, until then 10 makes huge money.
 
The Big 12 has pro rata increases built into its tv contracts.

This means if they added Cincinnati and another school they would get the same average permyear for those schools that the existing members get. $20 million per year average over the length ofmthe contracts. No BIG 12 schools would lose any money from tv.

NCAA credits would eventually improve if you added a UConn and Cincy to the mix so any temporary dilution would be made up in a couple of years plus the schools in the league only get $2 mil per school as it is.

If another school or two were added it might be possible to pick up another bowl or two for additional revenues there each year, that would become a wash more or less unless the schools never made bowls then you dilute the bowl money a bit.

Any bowl or NCAA revenue losses per team would likely be offset completely by the payout from a league championship game.

The real reason for not expanding isnt losing money, its because just as theyve told us, league schools dont want to stop playing each other every year in order to play the schools that seem the option at this point.

Does WVU want to give up Texas or Oklahoma each year to play UCF or Cincinnati? Not likely.
 
Originally posted by Buckaineer:
The Big 12 has pro rata increases built into its tv contracts.

This means if they added Cincinnati and another school they would get the same average permyear for those schools that the existing members get. $20 million per year average over the length ofmthe contracts. No BIG 12 schools would lose any money from tv.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's accurate at all. The Big 12 schools would most certainly lose money if they added schools that didn't bring in enough revenue on their own to make up the difference.
This post was edited on 7/24 11:27 AM by bobhertzel'ssweatpants
 
It is written into the BIG 12 contracts according to commissioner Bowlsby. Pro Rata increases for expansion. So bowls and NCAA money would be split more but then the league would get that back for a championship game.

The issue is schools dont want to stop playing OU and Texas and/ or some of the other schools each year in order to play Cincy or BYU or someone.
 
Originally posted by Buckaineer:
It is written into the BIG 12 contracts according to commissioner Bowlsby. Pro Rata increases for expansion. So bowls and NCAA money would be split more but then the league would get that back for a championship game.

The issue is schools dont want to stop playing OU and Texas and/ or some of the other schools each year in order to play Cincy or BYU or someone.
Click to expand...

Link. The last time I read something about that it was contingent upon who they added.
 
--much of the misinformation about all of this came from message board posters--:

excerpt:

I
haven't seen the physical TV contract the Big 12 just signed with Fox
and ABC/ESPN for $2.6 billion over 13 years, but does it give you the
flexibility to renegotiate for more money if you were to expand at some
point?

Yes. It certainly accomodates that. It also
references departures. That's just good business on our part, and good
business on the part of Fox and ESPN.

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/55478/part -2-big-12-commish-bob-bowlsby-qa

or this-which describes that the BIG 12 wants MORE than just pro rata increases, because at just pro rata there would be more distribution of bowl money and NCAA money--which may or may not be made up depending on teams added i.e. if you added a bowl team might get more bowl money to offset, or a good bb school they might be in the NCAA tourney and add to the pie that way--or by the addition of a championship game:

excerpt:


"We have to be constantly vigilant and we are," Bowlsby
stated. "Not withstanding the fact that it would be great to have a travel
partner and geographic partner for West Virginia, we need to make sure we are
making the right decisions on expansion."



Bowlsby continues to stand his ground that the league is
very comfortable where it is with 10 members. The ACC recently added Notre
Dame, Pitt and Syracuse. The Big Ten got bigger with the additions of Rutgers
and Maryland. But the Big 12 likes its configuration right now and does not
plan to grow unless it will clearly help from both a financial and competitive
standpoint.



"We need to have expansion candidates that bring real value
in excess of pro rata," Bowlsby stated. "We are distributing the largest amount
of money to our members on a member by member basis of anybody in college
athletics. I don't think we want to dilute that distribution by adding members
that don't bring real value."


http://www.wvillustrated.com/story/21650890/big-12-commissioner-discusses-wvu-travel-expansion[/URL]






This post was edited on 8/1 8:49 AM by Buckaineer
 
Agree. Need to expand but not unless it is 2 teams that help. Don't expand just to expand and water it down
 
Originally posted by Buckaineer:
--much of the misinformation about all of this came from message board posters--:

excerpt:

I
haven't seen the physical TV contract the Big 12 just signed with Fox
and ABC/ESPN for $2.6 billion over 13 years, but does it give you the
flexibility to renegotiate for more money if you were to expand at some
point?

Yes. It certainly accomodates that. It also
references departures. That's just good business on our part, and good
business on the part of Fox and ESPN.

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/55478/part -2-big-12-commish-bob-bowlsby-qa

or this-which describes that the BIG 12 wants MORE than just pro rata increases, because at just pro rata there would be more distribution of bowl money and NCAA money--which may or may not be made up depending on teams added i.e. if you added a bowl team might get more bowl money to offset, or a good bb school they might be in the NCAA tourney and add to the pie that way--or by the addition of a championship game:

excerpt:



"We have to be constantly vigilant and we are," Bowlsby
stated. "Not withstanding the fact that it would be great to have a travel
partner and geographic partner for West Virginia, we need to make sure we are
making the right decisions on expansion."





Bowlsby continues to stand his ground that the league is
very comfortable where it is with 10 members. The ACC recently added Notre
Dame, Pitt and Syracuse. The Big Ten got bigger with the additions of Rutgers
and Maryland. But the Big 12 likes its configuration right now and does not
plan to grow unless it will clearly help from both a financial and competitive
standpoint.





"We need to have expansion candidates that bring real value
in excess of pro rata," Bowlsby stated. "We are distributing the largest amount
of money to our members on a member by member basis of anybody in college
athletics. I don't think we want to dilute that distribution by adding members
that don't bring real value."




http://www.wvillustrated.com/story/21650890/big-12-commissioner-discusses-wvu-travel-expansion[/URL]






This post was edited on 8/1 8:49 AM by Buckaineer
Click to expand...
None of that says that no matter who they add they would make more money or wouldn't lose money. In fact that supports the claim that if you don't add a program that adds value, the schools would stand to lose money.
 
Even if you got equal pay for two members that didn't move the needle on their own (say Cincinnati and UConn) you're still dividing the bowl revenue by 12 instead of 10.

It has to be a team that brings something of value to the table, period.

Of the available options, considering the ACC seems secure now, I only see BYU as an option, and then only as a football only option.

BYU does nothing for West Virginia though. Cincinnati would be, perhaps, palatable as the 12th member if the 11th was a slam dunk, but I think they brin more value as a whole than just as a football school, which would leave us at 11 in basketball...
 
It would be close for an addition like Cincinnati or UConn. Cincy usually plays in a bowl--good chance that would continue. That probably means an extra bowl spot for the league (pretty sure other leagues can't meet all bowl commitments each year) the BIG 12 would get another spot somewhere which would somewhat offset bowl revenues spreading.

Both are usually in the NCAA's and would eventually add dividends there as well to the BIG 12.

The conference would probably add a CCG which could add a million or so to each schools coffers.

They don't plan to add anyone unless it becomes necessary (they realize that making the playoffs is more likely with a CCG or more teams). If it does become necessary then they've got to add someone and the money should remain the same at least with a UC, and/or UConn type addition .

If it was the preferred situation though those schools would be done already. More of an "if additions are a must" type situation.
 
Originally posted by Buckaineer:
It would be close for an addition like Cincinnati or UConn. Cincy usually plays in a bowl--good chance that would continue. That probably means an extra bowl spot for the league (pretty sure other leagues can't meet all bowl commitments each year) the BIG 12 would get another spot somewhere which would somewhat offset bowl revenues spreading.

Both are usually in the NCAA's and would eventually add dividends there as well to the BIG 12.

The conference would probably add a CCG which could add a million or so to each schools coffers.

They don't plan to add anyone unless it becomes necessary (they realize that making the playoffs is more likely with a CCG or more teams). If it does become necessary then they've got to add someone and the money should remain the same at least with a UC, and/or UConn type addition .

If it was the preferred situation though those schools would be done already. More of an "if additions are a must" type situation.
Click to expand...
If it comes down to adding a school like Cincy, I don't see Texas sticking around. They'll be headed for the B1G or PAC 12. Which would eventually lead to the Big 12 being the AAC West.
 
The BIG 12 is involved in two GOR's. It has a buyout fee as well. Texas has a 20 year deal for the LHN that can't be rolled into another conferences media deals.

Even Texas isn't leaving the hundreds of millions behind that would take--and neither of those conference could make any money off of UT's media rights or televise their games.

Texas makes more money than anyone in the Big Ten, or PAC 12 or SEC--anyone in college football--as a member of the BIG 12. If UC and another were added because it would benefit the league going into the playoffs, UT isn't going to leave the conference anymore than having a bunch of lightweight teams in the Big Ten is going to make Ohio State leave for another conference.
 
NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!

As it is right now WVU gets to play every Big 12 member on a yearly basis. Not like Pitt and some of the other ACC schools that only get to play some of the ACC's big boys once every three or four years. Why run the risk not being able to play teams like Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, etc, every year to play UConn or UCF instead? These schools you mention aren't going to bring more money to the table. If they did they would have already been added. Hell Louisville would have been added when they tried to hornswoggle WVU for Big 12 membership. The only reason they were added to the ACC was because Maryland left and the ACC required another team for their TV contract. Not that I don't consider Louisville a good program but they weren't going to be added to the ACC otherwise.

Lets just enjoy what we have for the time being. Adding UCF, Cincy, UConn, etc isn't going to save the Big 12 or any other conference if the winds of expansion coming knocking. Losing money will which is exactly what would happen if you add the mentioned programs.
 
Right now there are two things going against the BIG 12

First, there is a lack of exposure. ESPN covers the SEC, now the ACC (FSU/Clemson), and Ohio State and Oregon (oh and Johnny Manziel of course).

They virtually ignore the BIG 12.

Fox seems more like the national enquirer than a legitimate sports news co. They are all over Manziel--not so much promoting the BIG 12 like ESPN does with the SEC and ACC.

The BIG 12 needs more large markets to get more viewers for BIG 12 telecasts. It needs more press from more markets.

With the opening week meltdown of Iowa State and Kansas State and nearly WVU-- the BIG 12 is going to need some additional teams to guarantee more teams with lots of wins. It isn't going to be good enough to have a lot of teams in the middle if four conferences have a team or two up high in the top ten.
 
No to Cincy....they missed the boat on Louisville....that would have been the right partner.
 
BYU doesn't compete in any sports on Sundays, so they're out of the mix. The Big 12 blew it when they didn't go after Louisville and Cincy. They thought the conference was too good for the Cardinals and Bearcats, and now they regret it.
This post was edited on 9/29 1:21 AM by SpartanEER
 
BYU will never join the Big 12 because they don't compete on Sundays. The Big 12 does, so you can forget the Cougars.
 
If the Big12 can get TWO big time members,then it`s a no brainer....But Cincy is not big time...Louisville is better then Cincy,and I`m not that crazy about Louisville...But to add 2 teams, just to make it a 12 team league,instead of 10 is crazy...The Big 10 has how many schools ??? So I guess they should get rid of any school over the #10...Hey,we can get Nebraska back...Not that they have been a power of late...But they still have the name !!![/B]
 
Get back to 12 teams with the additions of BYU and Cinci. They both will provide quality markets and quality teams. Move to an 8 game schedule with a championship game. Do not separate into divisions instead use scheduling pods. Play the two other teams in your pod and two teams in every other pod. The two teams with the best conference records meet in the champ game.

East Pod: WVU, Cinci, ISU
North Pod: KU, KSU, BYU
Central Pod: Texas, OU, OK St (Need to make sure we retain the RRR and bedlam)
South Pod: Tech, Baylor, TCU

Cinci & BYU are really the only two realistic options for expansion. It is not ideal to be that far spread apart, but it is manageable. BYU & Cinci would bot love to be in the Big 12. Teams are good enough that they should not hurt SOS.

Money from champ game will help keep payouts up. I think the networks would be OK with the markets added with these additions.
 
At least get back to 12 teams. If I were the conference commissioner I would go after Cincy and Arkansas.
 
Originally posted by sosoblue:
At least get back to 12 teams. If I were the conference commissioner I would go after Cincy and Arkansas.
Click to expand...
If you are going to get Arkansas, why settle for Cinci... why not just grab LSU?
 
If the Big 12 is worried about revenue, the add BYU and UCF tomorrow. Both BYU and UCF bring large followings, good markets (UCF brings a growing market with virtually no competition), outstanding facilities, and stable programs. But I doubt if revenue is a concept the Big 12 is concerned when it comes to expansion unless ESPN, FOX, or CBS offers a good contract for a championship game.
 
The ACC is not going to get any team in the Big12

Let alone pick it apart. As long as Texas and OU are happy, (and why wouldn't they be?) the Big12 isn't losing anyone. WVU is the only team that would have even a dim interest in joining the ACC, and I think that would be insanity. If they took us, they would have to take another, probably Cincy or Uconn. Shades of the Big East, they even have Notre Dame lurking in the background. Just like the old days. No thanks. I'd rather stay at 10.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Keenan Cummings

WVU Release Mountaineers to Open Big 12 Play at Home Against BYU

Replies
8
Views
392
The Blue Lot
GoWVU
G
Keenan Cummings

WVU Release Mountaineers to Open Big 12 Play at Home Against BYU

Replies
0
Views
126
Mountaineer Message Board
Keenan Cummings
Keenan Cummings
Vernon

Big 12 Baseball Preseason Poll

Replies
2
Views
254
Mountaineer Message Board
WVUALLEN
WVUALLEN
Vernon

Big 12 Baseball Preseason Poll

Replies
5
Views
523
The Blue Lot
MoTownWV
MoTownWV
Pospecteer

Inside the college football ‘Super League,’ one powerful group’s idea to fix a ‘dead’ system

Replies
18
Views
1K
The Blue Lot
matics
M
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back