CSNbbs

Full Version: Could the Big 12 expand anyway?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
It's an interesting thought and I wouldn't put it out of the question just yet.

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/...uld-narrow

I'm starting to believe some of these OU guys that say Boren is bound and determined to save the Big 12. Will that include a streaming-based conference network? If it does then do programs like BYU and Houston start to make a lot more sense?

I thought it was an interesting discussion being that we've been talking a lot about the changing models lately.
it's a darn shame that the big12 took WV, just because it makes it harder to take BYU. take WV away and BYU to the big12 is a no brainer. FWIW, I think they should go ahead and take BYU anyway.


(06-07-2016 03:54 AM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ]It's an interesting thought and I wouldn't put it out of the question just yet.

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/...uld-narrow

I'm starting to believe some of these OU guys that say Boren is bound and determined to save the Big 12. Will that include a streaming-based conference network? If it does then do programs like BYU and Houston start to make a lot more sense?

I thought it was an interesting discussion being that we've been talking a lot about the changing models lately.
(06-07-2016 07:51 AM)ren.hoek Wrote: [ -> ]it's a darn shame that the big12 took WV, just because it makes it harder to take BYU. take WV away and BYU to the big12 is a no brainer. FWIW, I think they should go ahead and take BYU anyway.


(06-07-2016 03:54 AM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ]It's an interesting thought and I wouldn't put it out of the question just yet.

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/...uld-narrow

I'm starting to believe some of these OU guys that say Boren is bound and determined to save the Big 12. Will that include a streaming-based conference network? If it does then do programs like BYU and Houston start to make a lot more sense?

I thought it was an interesting discussion being that we've been talking a lot about the changing models lately.

BYU should have been the replacement for Nebraska a long time ago. When Nebraska left the Big 12 lost a school in small state but that school had a large fan base and national following. BYU is similar to Nebraska and should have been the replacement.
This is who should have replaced each school:
Nebraska = BYU
Colorado = Colorado State (Keep the bridge to BYU and Colorado State can have equal size fan base as CU)
Texas A&M = Houston (Get back in Houston market)
Missouri = Memphis (SEC takes your school go back at them by taking a school in their market)

Adding two more schools for comfort:
Tulane and TCU to be at 14.
TCU is your Big 12 Dallas-Ft. Worth School
Tulane another AAU school for Texas and gets into New Orleans and another pay back punch to the SEC. Tulane could have built a stadium similar to TCU's or Baylor if they were in the Big 12 and having schools like Texas and Oklahoma coming to play every few years.

NORTH
BYU
Colorado State
Iowa State
Kansas
Kansas State
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State

SOUTH
Texas Tech
TCU
Baylor
Texas
Houston
Tulane
Memphis


But they didn't do this so know they are stuck with West Virginia way out there on the east coast.
They aren't going to expand. If they were going to do it they would have done it in 2011. There is nobody out there that would pack their stadiums, nobody out there that would bring more than the contractually guaranteed revenue, and nobody out there that meets their profile.

The addition of anyone will keep their top brands from having options. Texas might not care but Oklahoma and Kansas do.

I agree B.Y.U. would have been a better addition than WVU but BYU supposedly rejected initial overtures because of their private network. If so that issue was bit hypocritical for no other reason than the existence of the LHN.

There are dozens of threads on the CS&CR board discussing G5 realignment. We don't need them here. It's not happening. It's a fantasy. If anything, if we wait until the expiration of the GOR's before the next moves, the P5 will become a P4 and likely with fewer than 64 school.

There is a better chance that we move to a P alignment of 54 to 60 schools than there is that we stay at 64 or increase to 72.
(06-07-2016 09:29 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]They aren't going to expand. If they were going to do it they would have done it in 2011. There is nobody out there that would pack their stadiums, nobody out there that would bring more than the contractually guaranteed revenue, and nobody out there that meets their profile.

The addition of anyone will keep their top brands from having options. Texas might not care but Oklahoma and Kansas do.

I agree B.Y.U. would have been a better addition than WVU but BYU supposedly rejected initial overtures because of their private network. If so that issue was bit hypocritical for no other reason than the existence of the LHN.

There are dozens of threads on the CS&CR board discussing G5 realignment. We don't need them here. It's not happening. It's a fantasy. If anything, if we wait until the expiration of the GOR's before the next moves, the P5 will become a P4 and likely with fewer than 64 school.

There is a better chance that we move to a P alignment of 54 to 60 schools than there is that we stay at 64 or increase to 72.

I tend to agree. If schools 11 and 12 were out there, they would be in by now. Cincinnati would have left the Big East/American in a heartbeat when all their conference mates were bailing. The numbers just don't work.

Additionally the only AQ conference that was willing to take on projects was the Big East (Cincinnati, Temple, Rutgers, VT, BC, et. al.). The Big 12 doesn't have to do that.
(06-07-2016 10:37 AM)megadrone Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-07-2016 09:29 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]They aren't going to expand. If they were going to do it they would have done it in 2011. There is nobody out there that would pack their stadiums, nobody out there that would bring more than the contractually guaranteed revenue, and nobody out there that meets their profile.

The addition of anyone will keep their top brands from having options. Texas might not care but Oklahoma and Kansas do.

I agree B.Y.U. would have been a better addition than WVU but BYU supposedly rejected initial overtures because of their private network. If so that issue was bit hypocritical for no other reason than the existence of the LHN.

There are dozens of threads on the CS&CR board discussing G5 realignment. We don't need them here. It's not happening. It's a fantasy. If anything, if we wait until the expiration of the GOR's before the next moves, the P5 will become a P4 and likely with fewer than 64 school.

There is a better chance that we move to a P alignment of 54 to 60 schools than there is that we stay at 64 or increase to 72.

I tend to agree. If schools 11 and 12 were out there, they would be in by now. Cincinnati would have left the Big East/American in a heartbeat when all their conference mates were bailing. The numbers just don't work.

Additionally the only AQ conference that was willing to take on projects was the Big East (Cincinnati, Temple, Rutgers, VT, BC, et. al.). The Big 12 doesn't have to do that.

True. What I'm about to say is idealistic, not realistic, but the best thing for college football is to end this garbage as soon as possible. At first it was fascinating but now it has taken so long to play out that many people are being turned off by the continued stress over it.

Ideally I'd say let's all move to 18 and have 72 schools included or move to 18 and have 54 schools included. Either way we would have more balance and some balance makes for a better product.

The PAC really needs the exposure and the brands. Let Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State all head West to form a PAC 18.

The SEC can pick up Clemson, Florida State, Virginia/Virginia Tech, and North Carolina/N.C. State to get to 18.

The Big 10 can pick up Virginia/Virginia Tech, North Carolina/N.C.State, Georgia Tech, and Notre Dame (cause they'll have to go somewhere!) and we have a very nice and profitable 18 each divided into much more reasonable geographically concentric divisions.

The balance of that would be undeniably better than what we have now. FOX would have the majority rights in the Big 10, ESPN would have them in the ACC, and they could split them in the PAC.

The real problems comes in trying to place the lesser brands from the ACC / Big 12 and if you look at the revenue invested by their respective athletic departments versus those included above it becomes abundantly clear that they have invested less, but expect equal shares.

If we move forward with conferences at all we are going to need more cohesiveness grown by equal investments and equal returns. We can't have those who profit by association or the conferences themselves will come under enough strain that we could wind up every school for itself.

If we must go to 72 the best way to do it, and it is tough, would be to start with the parsing of the Big 12. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State move to the PAC. The SEC takes T.C.U. to get into DFW and then takes Kansas State (neither of which are even on our top 10 prospects list). The Big 10 takes Kansas and Iowa State (but only because they are both AAU as they are certainly not the high value targets for the Big 10). The ACC takes West Virginia and Baylor. Notre Dame goes all in and Connecticut makes it 18 for the ACC. The SEC and Big 10 now have to get creative. East Carolina gets a look in this scenario as they can average 60,000 plus in attendance, are steadily improving their academics, are adding a medical school, and are decent in all sports. We take Central Florida for exposure South in the Sunshine State. The Big 10 grows Buffalo and looks to take Colorado from the PAC. The PAC adds either Colorado State to keep the Denver market or they add either a Nevada or New Mexico school.

Now we all less profitably and efficiently stand at 18.

I like plan A a helluva lot more! How about you?
(06-07-2016 09:29 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]They aren't going to expand. If they were going to do it they would have done it in 2011. There is nobody out there that would pack their stadiums, nobody out there that would bring more than the contractually guaranteed revenue, and nobody out there that meets their profile.

The addition of anyone will keep their top brands from having options. Texas might not care but Oklahoma and Kansas do.

snip

So true. This is all posturing to make it look like people actually want to save the B12 IMO. Their aren't any financially compelling reasons to expand, only political and legal ones and even those concerns are middling at best.
(06-07-2016 11:31 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-07-2016 10:37 AM)megadrone Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-07-2016 09:29 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]They aren't going to expand. If they were going to do it they would have done it in 2011. There is nobody out there that would pack their stadiums, nobody out there that would bring more than the contractually guaranteed revenue, and nobody out there that meets their profile.

The addition of anyone will keep their top brands from having options. Texas might not care but Oklahoma and Kansas do.

I agree B.Y.U. would have been a better addition than WVU but BYU supposedly rejected initial overtures because of their private network. If so that issue was bit hypocritical for no other reason than the existence of the LHN.

There are dozens of threads on the CS&CR board discussing G5 realignment. We don't need them here. It's not happening. It's a fantasy. If anything, if we wait until the expiration of the GOR's before the next moves, the P5 will become a P4 and likely with fewer than 64 school.

There is a better chance that we move to a P alignment of 54 to 60 schools than there is that we stay at 64 or increase to 72.

I tend to agree. If schools 11 and 12 were out there, they would be in by now. Cincinnati would have left the Big East/American in a heartbeat when all their conference mates were bailing. The numbers just don't work.

Additionally the only AQ conference that was willing to take on projects was the Big East (Cincinnati, Temple, Rutgers, VT, BC, et. al.). The Big 12 doesn't have to do that.

True. What I'm about to say is idealistic, not realistic, but the best thing for college football is to end this garbage as soon as possible. At first it was fascinating but now it has taken so long to play out that many people are being turned off by the continued stress over it.

Ideally I'd say let's all move to 18 and have 72 schools included or move to 18 and have 54 schools included. Either way we would have more balance and some balance makes for a better product.

The PAC really needs the exposure and the brands. Let Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State all head West to form a PAC 18.

The SEC can pick up Clemson, Florida State, Virginia/Virginia Tech, and North Carolina/N.C. State to get to 18.

The Big 10 can pick up Virginia/Virginia Tech, North Carolina/N.C.State, Georgia Tech, and Notre Dame (cause they'll have to go somewhere!) and we have a very nice and profitable 18 each divided into much more reasonable geographically concentric divisions.

The balance of that would be undeniably better than what we have now. FOX would have the majority rights in the Big 10, ESPN would have them in the ACC, and they could split them in the PAC.

The real problems comes in trying to place the lesser brands from the ACC / Big 12 and if you look at the revenue invested by their respective athletic departments versus those included above it becomes abundantly clear that they have invested less, but expect equal shares.

If we move forward with conferences at all we are going to need more cohesiveness grown by equal investments and equal returns. We can't have those who profit by association or the conferences themselves will come under enough strain that we could wind up every school for itself.

If we must go to 72 the best way to do it, and it is tough, would be to start with the parsing of the Big 12. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State move to the PAC. The SEC takes T.C.U. to get into DFW and then takes Kansas State (neither of which are even on our top 10 prospects list). The Big 10 takes Kansas and Iowa State (but only because they are both AAU as they are certainly not the high value targets for the Big 10). The ACC takes West Virginia and Baylor. Notre Dame goes all in and Connecticut makes it 18 for the ACC. The SEC and Big 10 now have to get creative. East Carolina gets a look in this scenario as they can average 60,000 plus in attendance, are steadily improving their academics, are adding a medical school, and are decent in all sports. We take Central Florida for exposure South in the Sunshine State. The Big 10 grows Buffalo and looks to take Colorado from the PAC. The PAC adds either Colorado State to keep the Denver market or they add either a Nevada or New Mexico school.

Now we all less profitably and efficiently stand at 18.

I like plan A a helluva lot more! How about you?

FYI we have had a medical school since 1969. We also have a Dental School, everything in health care, an engineering school, a business, school and much more. Elizabeth City State University stole our Pharmaceutical but they have ran the program into the ground so expect us to pick that back up. Only thing we do not have is a law school, but do we really need more lawyers? We have 29,000 students currently and will have over 30,000 in the next few years.

USNews has us ranked at 194. I think the lowest in the SEC is Miss State at 161 and the lowest P5 is Louisville at 168. I think if we can move up to like 170's we have a chance for the SEC to take us. We will also need to build a new basketball arena (like Ole Miss), and add on to our stadium to get to 60,000+. We are already have one the best attendance for college baseball and that would only go up if we were in a better conference. I also think going by Carolina University would go along way. Would be hard for a P5 to leave out a school called Carolina University with 30,000+ students, average 50,000+ for football in the ninth most populated state and one of the largest public schools in that state with a US ranking in the 170s.

Tell me SEC fans if East Carolina University was this:
Carolina University
32,500 students
USN Ranking: 178
60,000 Capacity Football Stadium (with plans to go to 70,000)
Average 55,000+ a game in G5 Conference
Brand New 10,000 capacity basketball arena
Constant Regional Baseball Team with Top 20 attendance
Second large public school In the 9th most populated state who has proven to have tv views from Charlotte and Raleigh and is located in the 10th largest city in state of 100,000+ citizens.

Would that be good enough for the SEC?

Also Dowdy-Ficklen with new upper deck inspired by LSU new addition:

[Image: dowdyficklenstadiumexpansion.png]
(06-07-2016 02:31 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-07-2016 11:31 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-07-2016 10:37 AM)megadrone Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-07-2016 09:29 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]They aren't going to expand. If they were going to do it they would have done it in 2011. There is nobody out there that would pack their stadiums, nobody out there that would bring more than the contractually guaranteed revenue, and nobody out there that meets their profile.

The addition of anyone will keep their top brands from having options. Texas might not care but Oklahoma and Kansas do.

I agree B.Y.U. would have been a better addition than WVU but BYU supposedly rejected initial overtures because of their private network. If so that issue was bit hypocritical for no other reason than the existence of the LHN.

There are dozens of threads on the CS&CR board discussing G5 realignment. We don't need them here. It's not happening. It's a fantasy. If anything, if we wait until the expiration of the GOR's before the next moves, the P5 will become a P4 and likely with fewer than 64 school.

There is a better chance that we move to a P alignment of 54 to 60 schools than there is that we stay at 64 or increase to 72.

I tend to agree. If schools 11 and 12 were out there, they would be in by now. Cincinnati would have left the Big East/American in a heartbeat when all their conference mates were bailing. The numbers just don't work.

Additionally the only AQ conference that was willing to take on projects was the Big East (Cincinnati, Temple, Rutgers, VT, BC, et. al.). The Big 12 doesn't have to do that.

True. What I'm about to say is idealistic, not realistic, but the best thing for college football is to end this garbage as soon as possible. At first it was fascinating but now it has taken so long to play out that many people are being turned off by the continued stress over it.

Ideally I'd say let's all move to 18 and have 72 schools included or move to 18 and have 54 schools included. Either way we would have more balance and some balance makes for a better product.

The PAC really needs the exposure and the brands. Let Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State all head West to form a PAC 18.

The SEC can pick up Clemson, Florida State, Virginia/Virginia Tech, and North Carolina/N.C. State to get to 18.

The Big 10 can pick up Virginia/Virginia Tech, North Carolina/N.C.State, Georgia Tech, and Notre Dame (cause they'll have to go somewhere!) and we have a very nice and profitable 18 each divided into much more reasonable geographically concentric divisions.

The balance of that would be undeniably better than what we have now. FOX would have the majority rights in the Big 10, ESPN would have them in the ACC, and they could split them in the PAC.

The real problems comes in trying to place the lesser brands from the ACC / Big 12 and if you look at the revenue invested by their respective athletic departments versus those included above it becomes abundantly clear that they have invested less, but expect equal shares.

If we move forward with conferences at all we are going to need more cohesiveness grown by equal investments and equal returns. We can't have those who profit by association or the conferences themselves will come under enough strain that we could wind up every school for itself.

If we must go to 72 the best way to do it, and it is tough, would be to start with the parsing of the Big 12. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State move to the PAC. The SEC takes T.C.U. to get into DFW and then takes Kansas State (neither of which are even on our top 10 prospects list). The Big 10 takes Kansas and Iowa State (but only because they are both AAU as they are certainly not the high value targets for the Big 10). The ACC takes West Virginia and Baylor. Notre Dame goes all in and Connecticut makes it 18 for the ACC. The SEC and Big 10 now have to get creative. East Carolina gets a look in this scenario as they can average 60,000 plus in attendance, are steadily improving their academics, are adding a medical school, and are decent in all sports. We take Central Florida for exposure South in the Sunshine State. The Big 10 grows Buffalo and looks to take Colorado from the PAC. The PAC adds either Colorado State to keep the Denver market or they add either a Nevada or New Mexico school.

Now we all less profitably and efficiently stand at 18.

I like plan A a helluva lot more! How about you?

FYI we have had a medical school since 1969. We also have a Dental School, everything in health care, an engineering school, a business, school and much more. Elizabeth City State University stole our Pharmaceutical but they have ran the program into the ground so expect us to pick that back up. Only thing we do not have is a law school, but do we really need more lawyers? We have 29,000 students currently and will have over 30,000 in the next few years.

USNews has us ranked at 194. I think the lowest in the SEC is Miss State at 161 and the lowest P5 is Louisville at 168. I think if we can move up to like 170's we have a chance for the SEC to take us. We will also need to build a new basketball arena (like Ole Miss), and add on to our stadium to get to 60,000+. We are already have one the best attendance for college baseball and that would only go up if we were in a better conference. I also think going by Carolina University would go along way. Would be hard for a P5 to leave out a school called Carolina University with 30,000+ students, average 50,000+ for football in the ninth most populated state and one of the largest public schools in that state with a US ranking in the 170s.

Tell me SEC fans if East Carolina University was this:
Carolina University
32,500 students
USN Ranking: 178 (150)
60,000 Capacity Football Stadium (with plans to go to 78,000: SEC mean.)
Average 55,000+ a game in G5 Conference (average 72,000 Mizzou level)
Brand New 10,000 capacity basketball arena
Constant Regional Baseball Team with Top 20 attendance
Second large public school In the 9th most populated state who has proven to have tv views from Charlotte and Raleigh and is located in the 10th largest city in state of 100,000+ citizens.

Would that be good enough for the SEC?

Also Dowdy-Ficklen with new upper deck inspired by LSU new addition:

[Image: dowdyficklenstadiumexpansion.png]

A couple of points if I may.

I absolutely love East Carolina's spirit. If wanting too would get you in you would be in the SEC and I love that about your fans!

The numbers I gave are the true numbers you need to hit. You need to remember that if Mississippi State hadn't been a founding member they likely would not have been adopted. And, W.V.U. has twice been passed over for similar reasons.

But the real hurdle should you meet the metrics (and I think that is a question of when and not if) will be the BOR of North Carolina. I wonder just how much resistance that Tar Heel and Wolfpack alumni would have to seeing E.C.U. surpass them in athletics, and in the SEC it would only be a matter of time before it happened.

I was serious when I said that UCF and E.C.U. would be good P5 additions to the SEC. Both are going to grow into major universities. Both add markets that we really don't have right now. Through Florida we get most of Florida North of the Okeechobee. What we don't get is South of the Lake. Central Florida would give us the demographic we need.

Right now there is snobbery toward these additions. Forward thinking people would see otherwise. But almost all of academia is backward looking. They exist on what they have done and not what they are going to do.

But for us to even reach a scenario where this could happen E.C.U. and U.C.F. actually need the Big 12 to be parsed with the majority of brands headed to the PAC for this to happen. Eventually proponents of 54, or 64 school scenarios will find that they need more participants to keep the brand programs' fans happy. I think 72 could be a sweet spot but it depends on how we get there.

But again, my bet is that if E.C.U. were close to receiving a SEC bid that the B.O.R. would shoot it down. They are just those kinds of people.
(06-07-2016 04:35 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-07-2016 02:31 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-07-2016 11:31 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-07-2016 10:37 AM)megadrone Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-07-2016 09:29 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]They aren't going to expand. If they were going to do it they would have done it in 2011. There is nobody out there that would pack their stadiums, nobody out there that would bring more than the contractually guaranteed revenue, and nobody out there that meets their profile.

The addition of anyone will keep their top brands from having options. Texas might not care but Oklahoma and Kansas do.

I agree B.Y.U. would have been a better addition than WVU but BYU supposedly rejected initial overtures because of their private network. If so that issue was bit hypocritical for no other reason than the existence of the LHN.

There are dozens of threads on the CS&CR board discussing G5 realignment. We don't need them here. It's not happening. It's a fantasy. If anything, if we wait until the expiration of the GOR's before the next moves, the P5 will become a P4 and likely with fewer than 64 school.

There is a better chance that we move to a P alignment of 54 to 60 schools than there is that we stay at 64 or increase to 72.

I tend to agree. If schools 11 and 12 were out there, they would be in by now. Cincinnati would have left the Big East/American in a heartbeat when all their conference mates were bailing. The numbers just don't work.

Additionally the only AQ conference that was willing to take on projects was the Big East (Cincinnati, Temple, Rutgers, VT, BC, et. al.). The Big 12 doesn't have to do that.

True. What I'm about to say is idealistic, not realistic, but the best thing for college football is to end this garbage as soon as possible. At first it was fascinating but now it has taken so long to play out that many people are being turned off by the continued stress over it.

Ideally I'd say let's all move to 18 and have 72 schools included or move to 18 and have 54 schools included. Either way we would have more balance and some balance makes for a better product.

The PAC really needs the exposure and the brands. Let Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State all head West to form a PAC 18.

The SEC can pick up Clemson, Florida State, Virginia/Virginia Tech, and North Carolina/N.C. State to get to 18.

The Big 10 can pick up Virginia/Virginia Tech, North Carolina/N.C.State, Georgia Tech, and Notre Dame (cause they'll have to go somewhere!) and we have a very nice and profitable 18 each divided into much more reasonable geographically concentric divisions.

The balance of that would be undeniably better than what we have now. FOX would have the majority rights in the Big 10, ESPN would have them in the ACC, and they could split them in the PAC.

The real problems comes in trying to place the lesser brands from the ACC / Big 12 and if you look at the revenue invested by their respective athletic departments versus those included above it becomes abundantly clear that they have invested less, but expect equal shares.

If we move forward with conferences at all we are going to need more cohesiveness grown by equal investments and equal returns. We can't have those who profit by association or the conferences themselves will come under enough strain that we could wind up every school for itself.

If we must go to 72 the best way to do it, and it is tough, would be to start with the parsing of the Big 12. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State move to the PAC. The SEC takes T.C.U. to get into DFW and then takes Kansas State (neither of which are even on our top 10 prospects list). The Big 10 takes Kansas and Iowa State (but only because they are both AAU as they are certainly not the high value targets for the Big 10). The ACC takes West Virginia and Baylor. Notre Dame goes all in and Connecticut makes it 18 for the ACC. The SEC and Big 10 now have to get creative. East Carolina gets a look in this scenario as they can average 60,000 plus in attendance, are steadily improving their academics, are adding a medical school, and are decent in all sports. We take Central Florida for exposure South in the Sunshine State. The Big 10 grows Buffalo and looks to take Colorado from the PAC. The PAC adds either Colorado State to keep the Denver market or they add either a Nevada or New Mexico school.

Now we all less profitably and efficiently stand at 18.

I like plan A a helluva lot more! How about you?

FYI we have had a medical school since 1969. We also have a Dental School, everything in health care, an engineering school, a business, school and much more. Elizabeth City State University stole our Pharmaceutical but they have ran the program into the ground so expect us to pick that back up. Only thing we do not have is a law school, but do we really need more lawyers? We have 29,000 students currently and will have over 30,000 in the next few years.

USNews has us ranked at 194. I think the lowest in the SEC is Miss State at 161 and the lowest P5 is Louisville at 168. I think if we can move up to like 170's we have a chance for the SEC to take us. We will also need to build a new basketball arena (like Ole Miss), and add on to our stadium to get to 60,000+. We are already have one the best attendance for college baseball and that would only go up if we were in a better conference. I also think going by Carolina University would go along way. Would be hard for a P5 to leave out a school called Carolina University with 30,000+ students, average 50,000+ for football in the ninth most populated state and one of the largest public schools in that state with a US ranking in the 170s.

Tell me SEC fans if East Carolina University was this:
Carolina University
32,500 students
USN Ranking: 178 (150)
60,000 Capacity Football Stadium (with plans to go to 78,000: SEC mean.)
Average 55,000+ a game in G5 Conference (average 72,000 Mizzou level)
Brand New 10,000 capacity basketball arena
Constant Regional Baseball Team with Top 20 attendance
Second large public school In the 9th most populated state who has proven to have tv views from Charlotte and Raleigh and is located in the 10th largest city in state of 100,000+ citizens.

Would that be good enough for the SEC?

Also Dowdy-Ficklen with new upper deck inspired by LSU new addition:

[Image: dowdyficklenstadiumexpansion.png]

A couple of points if I may.

I absolutely love East Carolina's spirit. If wanting too would get you in you would be in the SEC and I love that about your fans!

The numbers I gave are the true numbers you need to hit. You need to remember that if Mississippi State hadn't been a founding member they likely would not have been adopted. And, W.V.U. has twice been passed over for similar reasons.

But the real hurdle should you meet the metrics (and I think that is a question of when and not if) will be the BOR of North Carolina. I wonder just how much resistance that Tar Heel and Wolfpack alumni would have to seeing E.C.U. surpass them in athletics, and in the SEC it would only be a matter of time before it happened.

I was serious when I said that UCF and E.C.U. would be good P5 additions to the SEC. Both are going to grow into major universities. Both add markets that we really don't have right now. Through Florida we get most of Florida North of the Okeechobee. What we don't get is South of the Lake. Central Florida would give us the demographic we need.

Right now there is snobbery toward these additions. Forward thinking people would see otherwise. But almost all of academia is backward looking. They exist on what they have done and not what they are going to do.

But for us to even reach a scenario where this could happen E.C.U. and U.C.F. actually need the Big 12 to be parsed with the majority of brands headed to the PAC for this to happen. Eventually proponents of 54, or 64 school scenarios will find that they need more participants to keep the brand programs' fans happy. I think 72 could be a sweet spot but it depends on how we get there.

But again, my bet is that if E.C.U. were close to receiving a SEC bid that the B.O.R. would shoot it down. They are just those kinds of people.

Board of Governors, JR.
(06-07-2016 04:39 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-07-2016 04:35 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-07-2016 02:31 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-07-2016 11:31 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-07-2016 10:37 AM)megadrone Wrote: [ -> ]I tend to agree. If schools 11 and 12 were out there, they would be in by now. Cincinnati would have left the Big East/American in a heartbeat when all their conference mates were bailing. The numbers just don't work.

Additionally the only AQ conference that was willing to take on projects was the Big East (Cincinnati, Temple, Rutgers, VT, BC, et. al.). The Big 12 doesn't have to do that.

True. What I'm about to say is idealistic, not realistic, but the best thing for college football is to end this garbage as soon as possible. At first it was fascinating but now it has taken so long to play out that many people are being turned off by the continued stress over it.

Ideally I'd say let's all move to 18 and have 72 schools included or move to 18 and have 54 schools included. Either way we would have more balance and some balance makes for a better product.

The PAC really needs the exposure and the brands. Let Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State all head West to form a PAC 18.

The SEC can pick up Clemson, Florida State, Virginia/Virginia Tech, and North Carolina/N.C. State to get to 18.

The Big 10 can pick up Virginia/Virginia Tech, North Carolina/N.C.State, Georgia Tech, and Notre Dame (cause they'll have to go somewhere!) and we have a very nice and profitable 18 each divided into much more reasonable geographically concentric divisions.

The balance of that would be undeniably better than what we have now. FOX would have the majority rights in the Big 10, ESPN would have them in the ACC, and they could split them in the PAC.

The real problems comes in trying to place the lesser brands from the ACC / Big 12 and if you look at the revenue invested by their respective athletic departments versus those included above it becomes abundantly clear that they have invested less, but expect equal shares.

If we move forward with conferences at all we are going to need more cohesiveness grown by equal investments and equal returns. We can't have those who profit by association or the conferences themselves will come under enough strain that we could wind up every school for itself.

If we must go to 72 the best way to do it, and it is tough, would be to start with the parsing of the Big 12. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State move to the PAC. The SEC takes T.C.U. to get into DFW and then takes Kansas State (neither of which are even on our top 10 prospects list). The Big 10 takes Kansas and Iowa State (but only because they are both AAU as they are certainly not the high value targets for the Big 10). The ACC takes West Virginia and Baylor. Notre Dame goes all in and Connecticut makes it 18 for the ACC. The SEC and Big 10 now have to get creative. East Carolina gets a look in this scenario as they can average 60,000 plus in attendance, are steadily improving their academics, are adding a medical school, and are decent in all sports. We take Central Florida for exposure South in the Sunshine State. The Big 10 grows Buffalo and looks to take Colorado from the PAC. The PAC adds either Colorado State to keep the Denver market or they add either a Nevada or New Mexico school.

Now we all less profitably and efficiently stand at 18.

I like plan A a helluva lot more! How about you?

FYI we have had a medical school since 1969. We also have a Dental School, everything in health care, an engineering school, a business, school and much more. Elizabeth City State University stole our Pharmaceutical but they have ran the program into the ground so expect us to pick that back up. Only thing we do not have is a law school, but do we really need more lawyers? We have 29,000 students currently and will have over 30,000 in the next few years.

USNews has us ranked at 194. I think the lowest in the SEC is Miss State at 161 and the lowest P5 is Louisville at 168. I think if we can move up to like 170's we have a chance for the SEC to take us. We will also need to build a new basketball arena (like Ole Miss), and add on to our stadium to get to 60,000+. We are already have one the best attendance for college baseball and that would only go up if we were in a better conference. I also think going by Carolina University would go along way. Would be hard for a P5 to leave out a school called Carolina University with 30,000+ students, average 50,000+ for football in the ninth most populated state and one of the largest public schools in that state with a US ranking in the 170s.

Tell me SEC fans if East Carolina University was this:
Carolina University
32,500 students
USN Ranking: 178 (150)
60,000 Capacity Football Stadium (with plans to go to 78,000: SEC mean.)
Average 55,000+ a game in G5 Conference (average 72,000 Mizzou level)
Brand New 10,000 capacity basketball arena
Constant Regional Baseball Team with Top 20 attendance
Second large public school In the 9th most populated state who has proven to have tv views from Charlotte and Raleigh and is located in the 10th largest city in state of 100,000+ citizens.

Would that be good enough for the SEC?

Also Dowdy-Ficklen with new upper deck inspired by LSU new addition:

[Image: dowdyficklenstadiumexpansion.png]

A couple of points if I may.

I absolutely love East Carolina's spirit. If wanting too would get you in you would be in the SEC and I love that about your fans!

The numbers I gave are the true numbers you need to hit. You need to remember that if Mississippi State hadn't been a founding member they likely would not have been adopted. And, W.V.U. has twice been passed over for similar reasons.

But the real hurdle should you meet the metrics (and I think that is a question of when and not if) will be the BOR of North Carolina. I wonder just how much resistance that Tar Heel and Wolfpack alumni would have to seeing E.C.U. surpass them in athletics, and in the SEC it would only be a matter of time before it happened.

I was serious when I said that UCF and E.C.U. would be good P5 additions to the SEC. Both are going to grow into major universities. Both add markets that we really don't have right now. Through Florida we get most of Florida North of the Okeechobee. What we don't get is South of the Lake. Central Florida would give us the demographic we need.

Right now there is snobbery toward these additions. Forward thinking people would see otherwise. But almost all of academia is backward looking. They exist on what they have done and not what they are going to do.

But for us to even reach a scenario where this could happen E.C.U. and U.C.F. actually need the Big 12 to be parsed with the majority of brands headed to the PAC for this to happen. Eventually proponents of 54, or 64 school scenarios will find that they need more participants to keep the brand programs' fans happy. I think 72 could be a sweet spot but it depends on how we get there.

But again, my bet is that if E.C.U. were close to receiving a SEC bid that the B.O.R. would shoot it down. They are just those kinds of people.

Board of Governors, JR.

Regents, Governors, Trustees, it all amounts to about the same thing. Semnatics, XLance.
(06-07-2016 02:31 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote: [ -> ]FYI we have had a medical school since 1969. We also have a Dental School, everything in health care, an engineering school, a business, school and much more. Elizabeth City State University stole our Pharmaceutical but they have ran the program into the ground so expect us to pick that back up. Only thing we do not have is a law school, but do we really need more lawyers? We have 29,000 students currently and will have over 30,000 in the next few years.

USNews has us ranked at 194. I think the lowest in the SEC is Miss State at 161 and the lowest P5 is Louisville at 168. I think if we can move up to like 170's we have a chance for the SEC to take us. We will also need to build a new basketball arena (like Ole Miss), and add on to our stadium to get to 60,000+. We are already have one the best attendance for college baseball and that would only go up if we were in a better conference. I also think going by Carolina University would go along way. Would be hard for a P5 to leave out a school called Carolina University with 30,000+ students, average 50,000+ for football in the ninth most populated state and one of the largest public schools in that state with a US ranking in the 170s.

Tell me SEC fans if East Carolina University was this:
Carolina University
32,500 students
USN Ranking: 178
60,000 Capacity Football Stadium (with plans to go to 70,000)
Average 55,000+ a game in G5 Conference
Brand New 10,000 capacity basketball arena
Constant Regional Baseball Team with Top 20 attendance
Second large public school In the 9th most populated state who has proven to have tv views from Charlotte and Raleigh and is located in the 10th largest city in state of 100,000+ citizens.

Would that be good enough for the SEC?

Also Dowdy-Ficklen with new upper deck inspired by LSU new addition:

As an investment, ECU hits all the metrics. The name isn't really an issue and while ivory tower types might scoff at the academic ranking, that isn't the a legit hangup either. The SEC is not in the investment phase like it was when SCAR was picked up. An immediate ROI needs to be demonstrated that would not only benefit the SEC, but ESPN as well. And IMO the WWL is the real hurdle, nearly on par with the NC Broad of Governors and for ultimately the same reasons.

ECU probably would be profitable within the SEC, but I think it would be at the expense of the Tobacco Road schools in the ACC. It's not in ESPN's best interest to willfully creating structural weaknesses in the ACC, especially not as the conference is turning to corner football wise. Moreover, if SEC branding is profitable in itself, then it would make more sense for the Mouse to just slide NCST over to the SEC rather than evaluating another brand in a state that is challenged supporting the current four.
"But again, my bet is that if E.C.U. were close to receiving a SEC bid that the B.O.R. would shoot it down. They are just those kinds of people".JR

http://www.northcarolina.edu/apps/bog/members.htm
"Those kinds of people" don't have these kinds of resumes.
I don't think we will see ECU in the SEC in the next 50 years.

It isn't rankings that are ECU's problem, as preciously posted, it's student demographics.
(06-07-2016 08:47 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ]"But again, my bet is that if E.C.U. were close to receiving a SEC bid that the B.O.R. would shoot it down. They are just those kinds of people".JR

http://www.northcarolina.edu/apps/bog/members.htm
"Those kinds of people" don't have these kinds of resumes.

They always assemble groups of gentlefolk with impeccable resumes when they want to screw someone over. Just look at the CFP committee. I was glad that Archie had the good sense to remove himself. He's not that kind. Those same people have permitted the excesses at U.N.C. in the name of basketball success.
(06-07-2016 08:47 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ]"But again, my bet is that if E.C.U. were close to receiving a SEC bid that the B.O.R. would shoot it down. They are just those kinds of people".JR

http://www.northcarolina.edu/apps/bog/members.htm
"Those kinds of people" don't have these kinds of resumes.

So you think the NC BOG would let ECU go to the SEC if they had an invite?
(06-07-2016 10:28 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think we will see ECU in the SEC in the next 50 years.

It isn't rankings that are ECU's problem, as preciously posted, it's student demographics.

What is wrong with our student demographics???

Our student base mostly consist of students from Eastern NC, Raleigh/Triangle, Triad, and Charlotte areas with a lot of out of state students from Virginia to Maryland (I-95 Corridor). Which is great for fans and tv viewers across the state since we draw from Charlotte, Raleigh, and Eastern NC plus Richmond, VA, Tidewater, and DC Metro area.

We are a urban/residential campus with all freshman having to live on campus their first year of school unless they are from Greenville or less than miles 30 from campus then you can get a special provision to live at home if you would like. We are not a commuter school all of our students live and around campus.

Is it our academic demographics? UNC Chapel Hill is a small school compared to other "flagship" public schools in other Southern States or Midwest States like Big Ten schools. East Carolina will have over 30,000 students soon we will be the public school for the state since the "flagship" wants to pretend it some ivy league liberal art private school instead of a public institution that is suppose to educate the mass population of the state like UGA, Bama, UT-K, UF, SC, etc. do We also have the East Carolina Honor Program that is allowing us to get some of the best students in the state to come to East Carolina.

So what is wrong with the demographics? If you have ever been to our campus it looks just like any other large public school in the South like UGA, Auburn, Bama, Ole Miss, LSU, same type of people.

Are you saying we have an unsuccessful alumni base? Which is also wrong with have several successful alumni in the CEO of BB&T, Founder of Golden Corral, Founder of WWE, Founder and former owner of Wilco-Hess (just got bought out by Speedway, and many more.

So not sure what that you meant by student demographics?
(06-07-2016 11:31 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-07-2016 10:37 AM)megadrone Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-07-2016 09:29 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]They aren't going to expand. If they were going to do it they would have done it in 2011. There is nobody out there that would pack their stadiums, nobody out there that would bring more than the contractually guaranteed revenue, and nobody out there that meets their profile.

The addition of anyone will keep their top brands from having options. Texas might not care but Oklahoma and Kansas do.

I agree B.Y.U. would have been a better addition than WVU but BYU supposedly rejected initial overtures because of their private network. If so that issue was bit hypocritical for no other reason than the existence of the LHN.

There are dozens of threads on the CS&CR board discussing G5 realignment. We don't need them here. It's not happening. It's a fantasy. If anything, if we wait until the expiration of the GOR's before the next moves, the P5 will become a P4 and likely with fewer than 64 school.

There is a better chance that we move to a P alignment of 54 to 60 schools than there is that we stay at 64 or increase to 72.

I tend to agree. If schools 11 and 12 were out there, they would be in by now. Cincinnati would have left the Big East/American in a heartbeat when all their conference mates were bailing. The numbers just don't work.

Additionally the only AQ conference that was willing to take on projects was the Big East (Cincinnati, Temple, Rutgers, VT, BC, et. al.). The Big 12 doesn't have to do that.

True. What I'm about to say is idealistic, not realistic, but the best thing for college football is to end this garbage as soon as possible. At first it was fascinating but now it has taken so long to play out that many people are being turned off by the continued stress over it.

Ideally I'd say let's all move to 18 and have 72 schools included or move to 18 and have 54 schools included. Either way we would have more balance and some balance makes for a better product.

The PAC really needs the exposure and the brands. Let Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State all head West to form a PAC 18.

The SEC can pick up Clemson, Florida State, Virginia/Virginia Tech, and North Carolina/N.C. State to get to 18.

The Big 10 can pick up Virginia/Virginia Tech, North Carolina/N.C.State, Georgia Tech, and Notre Dame (cause they'll have to go somewhere!) and we have a very nice and profitable 18 each divided into much more reasonable geographically concentric divisions.

The balance of that would be undeniably better than what we have now. FOX would have the majority rights in the Big 10, ESPN would have them in the ACC, and they could split them in the PAC.

The real problems comes in trying to place the lesser brands from the ACC / Big 12 and if you look at the revenue invested by their respective athletic departments versus those included above it becomes abundantly clear that they have invested less, but expect equal shares.

If we move forward with conferences at all we are going to need more cohesiveness grown by equal investments and equal returns. We can't have those who profit by association or the conferences themselves will come under enough strain that we could wind up every school for itself.

If we must go to 72 the best way to do it, and it is tough, would be to start with the parsing of the Big 12. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State move to the PAC. The SEC takes T.C.U. to get into DFW and then takes Kansas State (neither of which are even on our top 10 prospects list). The Big 10 takes Kansas and Iowa State (but only because they are both AAU as they are certainly not the high value targets for the Big 10). The ACC takes West Virginia and Baylor. Notre Dame goes all in and Connecticut makes it 18 for the ACC. The SEC and Big 10 now have to get creative. East Carolina gets a look in this scenario as they can average 60,000 plus in attendance, are steadily improving their academics, are adding a medical school, and are decent in all sports. We take Central Florida for exposure South in the Sunshine State. The Big 10 grows Buffalo and looks to take Colorado from the PAC. The PAC adds either Colorado State to keep the Denver market or they add either a Nevada or New Mexico school.

Now we all less profitably and efficiently stand at 18.

I like plan A a helluva lot more! How about you?

If the leagues would work together and wanted equitable 4 18 team leagues I think I have found the answer. Why would they? maybe the tv deals are negotiated as one? Everyone gives up something and hopefully gets some positive as well. There is a little transferring around of teams and some hard feelings need to be smoothed over but it will bring back a lot of great rivalries and like I said equalize the 4 leagues.

Besides the current 64 we add ND, BYU, UCONN, Cincy, Memphis, CSU, BSU & Houston

PAC
add: OU, Ok. St., Neb., KS, BYU, Boise St.

B1G:
subtract: Neb.
add: ND, VA or Pitt, Syr., UCONN, BC

SEC:
subtract: Arkansas, A&M & Vanderbilt
add: WVU, NC St. Va. Tech, Louisville, Memphis, ISU & KSU

Big 12/ACC:
Texas, Arkansas, A&M, TT, TCU, Baylor, Houston, Colorado St., NC, Duke, WF, Vandy, FSU, Miami, Ga. Tech, Clemson, Cincy, Va or Pitt(whoever B1G doesn't choose)
(06-07-2016 11:14 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-07-2016 08:47 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ]"But again, my bet is that if E.C.U. were close to receiving a SEC bid that the B.O.R. would shoot it down. They are just those kinds of people".JR

http://www.northcarolina.edu/apps/bog/members.htm
"Those kinds of people" don't have these kinds of resumes.

They always assemble groups of gentlefolk with impeccable resumes when they want to screw someone over. Just look at the CFP committee. I was glad that Archie had the good sense to remove himself. He's not that kind. Those same people have permitted the excesses at U.N.C. in the name of basketball success.

Several of those folks are East Carolina graduates.
(06-08-2016 12:29 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-07-2016 10:28 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think we will see ECU in the SEC in the next 50 years.

It isn't rankings that are ECU's problem, as preciously posted, it's student demographics.

What is wrong with our student demographics???

Our student base mostly consist of students from Eastern NC, Raleigh/Triangle, Triad, and Charlotte areas with a lot of out of state students from Virginia to Maryland (I-95 Corridor). Which is great for fans and tv viewers across the state since we draw from Charlotte, Raleigh, and Eastern NC plus Richmond, VA, Tidewater, and DC Metro area.

We are a urban/residential campus with all freshman having to live on campus their first year of school unless they are from Greenville or less than miles 30 from campus then you can get a special provision to live at home if you would like. We are not a commuter school all of our students live and around campus.

Is it our academic demographics? UNC Chapel Hill is a small school compared to other "flagship" public schools in other Southern States or Midwest States like Big Ten schools. East Carolina will have over 30,000 students soon we will be the public school for the state since the "flagship" wants to pretend it some ivy league liberal art private school instead of a public institution that is suppose to educate the mass population of the state like UGA, Bama, UT-K, UF, SC, etc. do We also have the East Carolina Honor Program that is allowing us to get some of the best students in the state to come to East Carolina.

So what is wrong with the demographics? If you have ever been to our campus it looks just like any other large public school in the South like UGA, Auburn, Bama, Ole Miss, LSU, same type of people.

Are you saying we have an unsuccessful alumni base? Which is also wrong with have several successful alumni in the CEO of BB&T, Founder of Golden Corral, Founder of WWE, Founder and former owner of Wilco-Hess (just got bought out by Speedway, and many more.

So not sure what that you meant by student demographics?

You can see the figures that have been posted previously.

It certainly is not meant to be a put-down, but it is factually impossible to argue that ECU looks much like any SEC school--at least from an academic standpoint, especially when you look at the type of kid that is attending.

ECU does not attract elite students, the kind that get a 30-36 or equivalent on an ACT. ECU has about 2% of its student population fall into that category. The weakest SEC school have about 8x that amount--Ole Miss and Miss St.. The stronger schools have 30-50% of their newly admitted students in that category.

Unfortunately for ECU, from that standpoint alone ECU looks a lot more like Georgia Southern/State, UL Monroe., and Troy than it does South Carolina, Tennessee, or LSU. Interestingly, it has nearly an identical demographic to UNA.

There is certainly time and room for improvement and seeing as that ECU has improved so dramatically elsewhere I see no reason why it would not improve there as well.

What it is probably most indicative of is the type of student that it tends to serve at this point, which tends to change over time.

I think that is probably the largest hurdle left in front of ECU, everything else you have mentioned is fantastic, from the stadium to fan support and on-field success.

The SEC has a bit of an academic insecurity, real or imagined, that probably impacts the analysis in a very particular way. It is one reason why many say WVU may be passed over, in spite of the fact they would be a great football addition.

04-cheers

For the record, UNC is almost entirely made up on in-state students. I believe there is a law that requires 85% of the students to come from N.C.. I wish that Alabama would do the same but that would mean the school would have 10-12k students, at best, and given Alabama's status as a poor state the student demographic would not be nearly as attractive. It would actually probably resemble UAB if that were to happen.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Reference URL's