Quote:A topic of conversation that seems to exist in every conference meeting is that of expansion, something that the Big 12 would currently need to consider if the decision to add a title game were to be made without a change in legislation.

Lyons has been a part of those discussions and believes that if the right fit is there, it should be considered, but addition for the sake of addition would not benefit the league.

“There's a presidential committee that's kind of looking at that as well, but as athletic directors, we try to look at the bigger picture of what actual teams and partners we could bring in that would add value to the conference and that's still being explored,” Lyons said.

“I'm in favor of expansion if it's the right two teams to bring in,” he continued. “Obviously for us, it would be nice to have more of an eastern partner, but at the same time, I want to make sure it's the right partner and from a revenue standpoint it doesn't impact us negatively as well by bringing additional partners in.”

(05-29-2015 09:34 AM)lew240z Wrote:  I'd bet that all conferences have such a committee or at least discuss expansion and targets at conference meetings. It is in each conference's best interest to constantly evaluate how expansion would impact the conference, and which schools would be the best additions and, if they are available and at what price.

(05-29-2015 09:47 AM)stever20 Wrote:  yeah, and the timing is very interesting- you would think if they want to expand, they would do so in the next 4-5 weeks- before July 1- to get things done sooner.

June could get pretty interesting- not just with the Big 12, but then any corresponding moves. 1 thing interesting about this- it's happening after June 1, so if AAC gets raided, corresponding raid on CUSA, with corresponding raid on SBC- Sun Belt couldn't call anyone up that would be able to count in 2016-17 as FBS.

(05-29-2015 09:51 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(05-29-2015 09:47 AM)stever20 Wrote:  yeah, and the timing is very interesting- you would think if they want to expand, they would do so in the next 4-5 weeks- before July 1- to get things done sooner.

June could get pretty interesting- not just with the Big 12, but then any corresponding moves. 1 thing interesting about this- it's happening after June 1, so if AAC gets raided, corresponding raid on CUSA, with corresponding raid on SBC- Sun Belt couldn't call anyone up that would be able to count in 2016-17 as FBS.

UMass in a marriage of convenience (they're struggling to fill the football schedule past this season and might take any port in a storm). Theoretically Army, but that ain't happening.

(05-29-2015 09:56 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(05-29-2015 09:51 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(05-29-2015 09:47 AM)stever20 Wrote:  yeah, and the timing is very interesting- you would think if they want to expand, they would do so in the next 4-5 weeks- before July 1- to get things done sooner.

June could get pretty interesting- not just with the Big 12, but then any corresponding moves. 1 thing interesting about this- it's happening after June 1, so if AAC gets raided, corresponding raid on CUSA, with corresponding raid on SBC- Sun Belt couldn't call anyone up that would be able to count in 2016-17 as FBS.

UMass in a marriage of convenience (they're struggling to fill the football schedule past this season and might take any port in a storm). Theoretically Army, but that ain't happening.

yep- and that shows how something could go crazy quickly...

12 gets Cincy and Memphis
AAC grabs UMass and someone from CUSA
CUSA is set then at 12....

But then A10 makes a move to replace UMass. The neat and tidy thing would be them picking up UAB.

2 things that could go crazy-
1- if AAC doesn't pick up UMass, but rather 2 from CUSA
or 2- if A10 doesn't pick up UAB, but rather someone else

if 1 of those 2 things happen- we get a whole lot more moves.

(05-29-2015 10:22 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  The AAC should stay at 10 if they take 2, but I think BYU would be one of the adds.

(05-29-2015 10:22 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  The AAC should stay at 10 if they take 2, but I think BYU would be one of the adds.

(05-29-2015 09:34 AM)lew240z Wrote:  I'd bet that all conferences have such a committee or at least discuss expansion and targets at conference meetings. It is in each conference's best interest to constantly evaluate how expansion would impact the conference, and which schools would be the best additions and, if they are available and at what price.

(05-29-2015 09:34 AM)lew240z Wrote:  I'd bet that all conferences have such a committee or at least discuss expansion and targets at conference meetings. It is in each conference's best interest to constantly evaluate how expansion would impact the conference, and which schools would be the best additions and, if they are available and at what price.

(05-29-2015 11:08 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(05-29-2015 09:34 AM)lew240z Wrote:  I'd bet that all conferences have such a committee or at least discuss expansion and targets at conference meetings. It is in each conference's best interest to constantly evaluate how expansion would impact the conference, and which schools would be the best additions and, if they are available and at what price.

That's right.

Almost every college AD has a list of head coaches he'd want to go after if his current coach suddenly departed. The fact that Alabama's AD has a list doesn't mean that Saban is leaving tomorrow or next year or anytime in the next 10 years, it just means he wants to be ready in case something unexpected happens. The list is only relevant if Saban does leave unexpectedly.

But, if we did see that hypothetical list of Alabama candidates, we'd talk about it endlessly here, even though the chances are very low that Saban would leave anytime soon. And the same is true about a hypothetical list of Big 12 candidates.

(05-29-2015 11:38 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(05-29-2015 11:08 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(05-29-2015 09:34 AM)lew240z Wrote:  I'd bet that all conferences have such a committee or at least discuss expansion and targets at conference meetings. It is in each conference's best interest to constantly evaluate how expansion would impact the conference, and which schools would be the best additions and, if they are available and at what price.

That's right.

Almost every college AD has a list of head coaches he'd want to go after if his current coach suddenly departed. The fact that Alabama's AD has a list doesn't mean that Saban is leaving tomorrow or next year or anytime in the next 10 years, it just means he wants to be ready in case something unexpected happens. The list is only relevant if Saban does leave unexpectedly.

But, if we did see that hypothetical list of Alabama candidates, we'd talk about it endlessly here, even though the chances are very low that Saban would leave anytime soon. And the same is true about a hypothetical list of Big 12 candidates.

Yeah, it's called "planning." Had a full-time faculty member die unexpectedly two years ago. How it was handled became a running joke of sorts in the office. "That's too bad" was immediately followed by "who covers their classes," and then calling replacements and subs. Telling their colleagues one of their own passed was the preface for the real reason the calls were made: covering the classes.

This isn't some secret cabal. There are probably twenty-one people who only really matter that can discuss things in the Big XII: Bowlsby, the ten presidents, and their ADs, and really, it's only ten who get to really decide the big things with a commissioner being a mouthpiece. Ten people discussing any number of items, and these are the presidents of universities? Follow the rabbit hole of how time is budgeted, where athletics factor into that, and where conference expansion is thereafter, and I'm going to bet that while the committee exists, what it really does on the topic, it isn't much. I'd wager "the work" is mostly an email thread with a ton of replies and forwards. Some big secret, if true, you know?

(05-29-2015 11:49 AM)BewareThePhog Wrote:  Emails would provide documentation that could eventually prove messy. "The work" may more likely be discreet conversations over cocktails. Besides, that's a win-win - even if nothing else productive occurs, the cocktails still get consumed.

But I fully agree with the notion that everyone involved is likely putting in some time and due diligence on the subject - both the schools and conference office on the behalf of the conference, as well as individual schools working internally to review the situation in terms of their own individual interests.

(05-29-2015 09:47 AM)stever20 Wrote:  yeah, and the timing is very interesting- you would think if they want to expand, they would do so in the next 4-5 weeks- before July 1- to get things done sooner.

June could get pretty interesting- not just with the Big 12, but then any corresponding moves. 1 thing interesting about this- it's happening after June 1, so if AAC gets raided, corresponding raid on CUSA, with corresponding raid on SBC- Sun Belt couldn't call anyone up that would be able to count in 2016-17 as FBS.

(05-29-2015 01:55 PM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  Our favorite sharply dressed star wars character chimes in:
B12 flip-flopped on having conf title game with 10 teams because 4 will be added for 2016: UCF, Cinci, UConn, BYU (fball only)

Claims it's a "VERY inside source"... maybe his ass?