(11-02-2013 10:51 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 09:53 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 12:49 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 12:32 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 12:26 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Nope.

I'm gonna have to agree with He1nous on this one. A GoR is a deterrent in that it would be an extra step in the negotiating process, but in reality it's not stopping anyone from moving.

In the future, the other conference TV deals will be thrown in the face of the Big XII. Something to the tune of...why should you be getting anywhere near the money of the B1G and SEC? They won't, and departure to greener pastures will be forthcoming. Just count the marquee football schools in the SEC, B1G, PAC, and the ACC for that matter vs the Big XII... that's where the TV money comes from. Marquee match ups. Let's count those in the Big XII. Texas vs OU, and maybe OU vs OSU. Now add up the SEC, PAC and the B1G. It's pretty obvious.

Its pretty obvious the Big 12 has as many of those marquee matchups per capita as anyone but the SEC. And that is reflected in the TV ratings.

How about marquee schools in each conference. Add those up and see what you get, and, in the Big XII, please stop right after UT and OU...
The list for the other conferences is too long for this thread. I am not bashing other good programs in the Big XII, but who gets up on Saturday morning and says "hey...what channel is OSU,ISU,TT,TCU, and Kansas on today?"

OSU, ISU, TT, TCU, and Kansas fans, and fans of the schools playing them that day. That should be obvious...

(11-02-2013 10:55 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 10:51 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 09:53 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 12:49 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 12:32 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  I'm gonna have to agree with He1nous on this one. A GoR is a deterrent in that it would be an extra step in the negotiating process, but in reality it's not stopping anyone from moving.

In the future, the other conference TV deals will be thrown in the face of the Big XII. Something to the tune of...why should you be getting anywhere near the money of the B1G and SEC? They won't, and departure to greener pastures will be forthcoming. Just count the marquee football schools in the SEC, B1G, PAC, and the ACC for that matter vs the Big XII... that's where the TV money comes from. Marquee match ups. Let's count those in the Big XII. Texas vs OU, and maybe OU vs OSU. Now add up the SEC, PAC and the B1G. It's pretty obvious.

Its pretty obvious the Big 12 has as many of those marquee matchups per capita as anyone but the SEC. And that is reflected in the TV ratings.

How about marquee schools in each conference. Add those up and see what you get, and, in the Big XII, please stop right after UT and OU...
The list for the other conferences is too long for this thread. I am not bashing other good programs in the Big XII, but who gets up on Saturday morning and says "hey...what channel is OSU,ISU,TT,TCU, and Kansas on today?"

OSU, ISU, TT, TCU, and Kansas fans, and fans of the schools playing them that day. That should be obvious...

Exactly. Not the nation. By the way Bit... I would like to say that the only other Big XII school that I believe has a national identity is WVU, so I should have said three instead of two.

(11-02-2013 10:51 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 09:53 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 12:49 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 12:32 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 12:26 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Nope.

I'm gonna have to agree with He1nous on this one. A GoR is a deterrent in that it would be an extra step in the negotiating process, but in reality it's not stopping anyone from moving.

In the future, the other conference TV deals will be thrown in the face of the Big XII. Something to the tune of...why should you be getting anywhere near the money of the B1G and SEC? They won't, and departure to greener pastures will be forthcoming. Just count the marquee football schools in the SEC, B1G, PAC, and the ACC for that matter vs the Big XII... that's where the TV money comes from. Marquee match ups. Let's count those in the Big XII. Texas vs OU, and maybe OU vs OSU. Now add up the SEC, PAC and the B1G. It's pretty obvious.

Its pretty obvious the Big 12 has as many of those marquee matchups per capita as anyone but the SEC. And that is reflected in the TV ratings.

How about marquee schools in each conference. Add those up and see what you get, and, in the Big XII, please stop right after UT and OU...
The list for the other conferences is too long for this thread. I am not bashing other good programs in the Big XII, but who gets up on Saturday morning and says "hey...what channel is OSU,ISU,TT,TCU, and Kansas on today?"

Who gets up and say, "hey...what channel is Missouri on?" Noone but Missouri fans. And its hard to find. Or Minnesota or Michigan St. or Illinois Or WSU or Arizona or Arizona St. or anyone in the ACC other than Miami, FSU, Clemson and VT?

If you are going to use a narrow definition of marquee, the Pac 12 has one team-USC. Big 12, SEC, ACC have 2 and Big 10 has 4. With a little broader definition, like top 30 or so, the SEC has a bunch. Big 12 is comparable to the rest on a % basis.

(11-02-2013 11:13 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 10:51 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 09:53 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 12:49 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 12:32 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  I'm gonna have to agree with He1nous on this one. A GoR is a deterrent in that it would be an extra step in the negotiating process, but in reality it's not stopping anyone from moving.

In the future, the other conference TV deals will be thrown in the face of the Big XII. Something to the tune of...why should you be getting anywhere near the money of the B1G and SEC? They won't, and departure to greener pastures will be forthcoming. Just count the marquee football schools in the SEC, B1G, PAC, and the ACC for that matter vs the Big XII... that's where the TV money comes from. Marquee match ups. Let's count those in the Big XII. Texas vs OU, and maybe OU vs OSU. Now add up the SEC, PAC and the B1G. It's pretty obvious.

Its pretty obvious the Big 12 has as many of those marquee matchups per capita as anyone but the SEC. And that is reflected in the TV ratings.

How about marquee schools in each conference. Add those up and see what you get, and, in the Big XII, please stop right after UT and OU...
The list for the other conferences is too long for this thread. I am not bashing other good programs in the Big XII, but who gets up on Saturday morning and says "hey...what channel is OSU,ISU,TT,TCU, and Kansas on today?"

Who gets up and say, "hey...what channel is Missouri on?" Noone but Missouri fans. And its hard to find. Or Minnesota or Michigan St. or Illinois Or WSU or Arizona or Arizona St. or anyone in the ACC other than Miami, FSU, Clemson and VT?

If you are going to use a narrow definition of marquee, the Pac 12 has one team-USC. Big 12, SEC, ACC have 2 and Big 10 has 4. With a little broader definition, like top 30 or so, the SEC has a bunch. Big 12 is comparable to the rest on a % basis.

People like to bash the Big 12 w/o any facts to back it up. So try this article. Its a Cleveland paper showing how well Ohio St. has done since they came back from their pre-Tressel slump, 2002 to present. In other words, it is designed to put Ohio St. in the best possible light. Its not done by Big 12 fans.
http://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/ind...boise.html
Winning % in that time frame:
4 OU
6 Texas
7 TCU
13 WVU
18 Texas Tech
21 Oklahoma St.
6 of the top 21. Note former members were 26 Nebraska, 29 Missouri, 49 Texas A&M, 99 Colorado
AP Poll points in that time frame:

4 OU
6 Texas
13 TCU
21 WVU
26 Kansas St.
28 Oklahoma St.
30 Texas Tech
7 out of 10 are top 30. Former members were 29 Missouri, 30 (T) A&M, 39 Nebraska, 64 Colorado

Of the top 30 (including A&M tied) based on 2014 membership
Big 12 7/10 70%
SEC 8/14 57%
Big 10 5/14 36%
ACC 5/14 36%
Pac 12 4/12 33%
Other 2/61 3%

I like it, bullet...

(11-02-2013 11:13 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 10:51 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 09:53 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 12:49 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 12:32 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  I'm gonna have to agree with He1nous on this one. A GoR is a deterrent in that it would be an extra step in the negotiating process, but in reality it's not stopping anyone from moving.

In the future, the other conference TV deals will be thrown in the face of the Big XII. Something to the tune of...why should you be getting anywhere near the money of the B1G and SEC? They won't, and departure to greener pastures will be forthcoming. Just count the marquee football schools in the SEC, B1G, PAC, and the ACC for that matter vs the Big XII... that's where the TV money comes from. Marquee match ups. Let's count those in the Big XII. Texas vs OU, and maybe OU vs OSU. Now add up the SEC, PAC and the B1G. It's pretty obvious.

Its pretty obvious the Big 12 has as many of those marquee matchups per capita as anyone but the SEC. And that is reflected in the TV ratings.

How about marquee schools in each conference. Add those up and see what you get, and, in the Big XII, please stop right after UT and OU...
The list for the other conferences is too long for this thread. I am not bashing other good programs in the Big XII, but who gets up on Saturday morning and says "hey...what channel is OSU,ISU,TT,TCU, and Kansas on today?"

Who gets up and say, "hey...what channel is Missouri on?" Noone but Missouri fans. And its hard to find. Or Minnesota or Michigan St. or Illinois Or WSU or Arizona or Arizona St. or anyone in the ACC other than Miami, FSU, Clemson and VT?

If you are going to use a narrow definition of marquee, the Pac 12 has one team-USC. Big 12, SEC, ACC have 2 and Big 10 has 4. With a little broader definition, like top 30 or so, the SEC has a bunch. Big 12 is comparable to the rest on a % basis.

We are on ESPN prime time tonight, as a matter of fact. Not hard to find Missouri since we joined the SEC. Seriously, I have never bragged about or stated that Missouri is a national brand. It is not... just like most of the Big XII schools. If they want to stay at ten and huddle up and wait for smaller future TV contracts that is their business, but their payouts are not going to keep up with the likes of the B1G, SEC, or PAC 12. The fact that Missouri and Tennessee play on ESPN at 6PM tonite speaks volumes for those non marquee SEC schools.

(11-02-2013 09:35 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  All of your expansion scenarios depend upon breaking a GoR, or assuming the income from TV contracts continuing to increase. But what happens when the bottom falls out on our economy? It's coming...

The Great Recession is about as an acute crisis as our economy can go through these days. There is too much money in the world economic system for value to dissipate.

However I would get used to zero growth. For anyone who has a good job right now this is about the best the economy is going to get with record low interest rates.

(11-02-2013 11:32 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 11:13 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 10:51 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 09:53 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 12:49 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  In the future, the other conference TV deals will be thrown in the face of the Big XII. Something to the tune of...why should you be getting anywhere near the money of the B1G and SEC? They won't, and departure to greener pastures will be forthcoming. Just count the marquee football schools in the SEC, B1G, PAC, and the ACC for that matter vs the Big XII... that's where the TV money comes from. Marquee match ups. Let's count those in the Big XII. Texas vs OU, and maybe OU vs OSU. Now add up the SEC, PAC and the B1G. It's pretty obvious.

Its pretty obvious the Big 12 has as many of those marquee matchups per capita as anyone but the SEC. And that is reflected in the TV ratings.

How about marquee schools in each conference. Add those up and see what you get, and, in the Big XII, please stop right after UT and OU...
The list for the other conferences is too long for this thread. I am not bashing other good programs in the Big XII, but who gets up on Saturday morning and says "hey...what channel is OSU,ISU,TT,TCU, and Kansas on today?"

Who gets up and say, "hey...what channel is Missouri on?" Noone but Missouri fans. And its hard to find. Or Minnesota or Michigan St. or Illinois Or WSU or Arizona or Arizona St. or anyone in the ACC other than Miami, FSU, Clemson and VT?

If you are going to use a narrow definition of marquee, the Pac 12 has one team-USC. Big 12, SEC, ACC have 2 and Big 10 has 4. With a little broader definition, like top 30 or so, the SEC has a bunch. Big 12 is comparable to the rest on a % basis.

People like to bash the Big 12 w/o any facts to back it up. So try this article. Its a Cleveland paper showing how well Ohio St. has done since they came back from their pre-Tressel slump, 2002 to present. In other words, it is designed to put Ohio St. in the best possible light. Its not done by Big 12 fans.
http://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/ind...boise.html
Winning % in that time frame:
4 OU
6 Texas
7 TCU
13 WVU
18 Texas Tech
21 Oklahoma St.
6 of the top 21. Note former members were 26 Nebraska, 29 Missouri, 49 Texas A&M, 99 Colorado
AP Poll points in that time frame:

4 OU
6 Texas
13 TCU
21 WVU
26 Kansas St.
28 Oklahoma St.
30 Texas Tech
7 out of 10 are top 30. Former members were 29 Missouri, 30 (T) A&M, 39 Nebraska, 64 Colorado

Of the top 30 (including A&M tied) based on 2014 membership
Big 12 7/10 70%
SEC 8/14 57%
Big 10 5/14 36%
ACC 5/14 36%
Pac 12 4/12 33%
Other 2/61 3%

Was not discussing on field performance here. Discussing teams that are making the conference tons of money because folks watch them.

(11-02-2013 01:46 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 11:32 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 11:13 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 10:51 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 09:53 AM)bullet Wrote:  Its pretty obvious the Big 12 has as many of those marquee matchups per capita as anyone but the SEC. And that is reflected in the TV ratings.

How about marquee schools in each conference. Add those up and see what you get, and, in the Big XII, please stop right after UT and OU...
The list for the other conferences is too long for this thread. I am not bashing other good programs in the Big XII, but who gets up on Saturday morning and says "hey...what channel is OSU,ISU,TT,TCU, and Kansas on today?"

Who gets up and say, "hey...what channel is Missouri on?" Noone but Missouri fans. And its hard to find. Or Minnesota or Michigan St. or Illinois Or WSU or Arizona or Arizona St. or anyone in the ACC other than Miami, FSU, Clemson and VT?

If you are going to use a narrow definition of marquee, the Pac 12 has one team-USC. Big 12, SEC, ACC have 2 and Big 10 has 4. With a little broader definition, like top 30 or so, the SEC has a bunch. Big 12 is comparable to the rest on a % basis.

People like to bash the Big 12 w/o any facts to back it up. So try this article. Its a Cleveland paper showing how well Ohio St. has done since they came back from their pre-Tressel slump, 2002 to present. In other words, it is designed to put Ohio St. in the best possible light. Its not done by Big 12 fans.
http://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/ind...boise.html
Winning % in that time frame:
4 OU
6 Texas
7 TCU
13 WVU
18 Texas Tech
21 Oklahoma St.
6 of the top 21. Note former members were 26 Nebraska, 29 Missouri, 49 Texas A&M, 99 Colorado
AP Poll points in that time frame:

4 OU
6 Texas
13 TCU
21 WVU
26 Kansas St.
28 Oklahoma St.
30 Texas Tech
7 out of 10 are top 30. Former members were 29 Missouri, 30 (T) A&M, 39 Nebraska, 64 Colorado

Of the top 30 (including A&M tied) based on 2014 membership
Big 12 7/10 70%
SEC 8/14 57%
Big 10 5/14 36%
ACC 5/14 36%
Pac 12 4/12 33%
Other 2/61 3%

Was not discussing on field performance here. Discussing teams that are making the conference tons of money because folks watch them.

Big 12 makes tons of money. It will make comparable money to everyone else through the end of this contract. And since its ratings are comparable or better than anyone but the SEC, they will make comparable money in the next one.

Someone else did an analysis. If the Big 10 more than doubles their contract in 2017 and nearly triples the amount they are making on the BTN to $200 million and the SEC bumps their $150 million ESPN contract to $195 million and makes $150 million a year on the SEC Network, they will make almost exactly the same per team as the Big 12. Anything that says the Big 12 won't be competitive financially over the next 10 years is just a fiction. Beyond that, no one knows what will happen with conference networks. And $ will be based on ratings and the Big 12 is doing just fine. Only the SEC is significantly better.

(11-01-2013 06:41 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(11-01-2013 06:21 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(11-01-2013 04:50 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(11-01-2013 04:47 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(11-01-2013 02:45 PM)TyBull Wrote:  BYU has scheduling issues. They will NEVER play any game from any sport on any SUNDAY! That is a major issue with the Big 12 (or for that matter any conference) hence they are an independent.......

I think that BYU stays independent..... ala ND

Nah...the Big12 has never made an issue of the no Sunday play....Actually whenever does the Big12 play conference games on Sunday.

Basketball/Baseball

Basketball? When? I do not recall any.

Baseball conference games? when? Maybe the tournament but that would be BYU's problem.

Certainly I have never read nor heard where the Big12 said it was a problem with them.

The conference championship game in basketball is on Sunday. Has been for quite some time.

Sorry but....No it is not on Sunday! I know it is hard to keep with all of this, but it is always wise to check the facts before contradicting someone.

(11-02-2013 10:51 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  How about marquee schools in each conference. Add those up and see what you get, and, in the Big XII, please stop right after UT and OU...
The list for the other conferences is too long for this thread.

It is? Let's see how many blue-chip, big brand name football schools each conference has. And by blue-chip I mean of course traditional powers of longstanding brand-name value, not a school that has been hot the last five or so years:

ACC ..... FSU, Miami
Big 12 ... Oklahoma, Texas
B1G .... Nebraska, Penn State, Michigan, Ohio State
PAC .... USC
SEC ..... LSU, Auburn, Alabama, Florida, Tennessee, Georgia

So the SEC has six and the B1G has four, which explains why these are the two most valuable and powerful conferences. But after that, the Big 12 fits in just fine. In fact, it is in better position than the PAC, which only has USC, and also the ACC, because FSU and Miami are more nouveaux-riche programs, relatively new entrants to the blue-chip club, whereas Texas and Oklahoma are original members of that club.

In short, the Big 12 is just fine in the marquee category, which is why the SEC chose them over the ACC as their Sugar partner, why TV networks have showered them with money, why bowls have signed them to good tie-ins, etc.

(11-01-2013 07:02 PM)Wedge Wrote:  I have always thought the no-Sunday rule is less of an obstacle than everyone makes it out to be. The reason conferences make a big deal of it, IMO, is just the principle of revising conference schedules to accommodate one school.

Only a few conferences still finish their conference basketball tournament on selection Sunday. Most have their final on Saturday (or earlier).

Baseball can be accommodated the same way the MWC did -- instead of Friday-Saturday-Sunday scheduling for conference baseball series, play the series vs. BYU on Thursday-Friday-Saturday (or, if the home team prefers, a single game on Friday and a doubleheader on Saturday).

If a conference really wanted BYU to join, that would be only a minor inconvenience.

It's a bigger inconvenience for other schools' student athletes than it looks. The demands that come with telling your student athletes that Saturday evenings and Sundays are these formless wildcard days because depending on one school, could mean the difference of missing two or three days of classes instead of one or two? That's unfair. I wouldn't want that for my student athletes unless I knew I was getting something fair in return.

Maybe they know how to work with that kind of schedule out in Provo, but that's seriously one big pain in the butt for everyone else. Baseball, especially. BYU's "issues" can be dealt with in a bus league. As these conferences push the geographical limits of viability, stretching over multiple time-zones, concessions have to be made somewhere. From how it sounds, the Cougars aren't budging an inch. It's their loss, frankly.

As for someone else's comment about filling the gaps of these former flagship members, WVU definitely filled for one of them. The travel really slugged them one in the gut, but it was a good cover. The ones out there remaining aren't very big, or fielding good football, or don't have long histories at the D1A level.

(11-01-2013 02:53 PM)mpurdy22 Wrote:  Big 12 has enough schools in TX. I think U.C. and Memphis would be great additions to the league.

Iowa State
Cincinnati
Kansas
Kansas St
Memphis
West Virginia

Oklahoma
Oklahoma St
Baylor
T. Tech
TCU
Texas

Yep, have to agree with you. GREAT post!

(11-02-2013 04:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 10:51 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  How about marquee schools in each conference. Add those up and see what you get, and, in the Big XII, please stop right after UT and OU...
The list for the other conferences is too long for this thread.

It is? Let's see how many blue-chip, big brand name football schools each conference has. And by blue-chip I mean of course traditional powers of longstanding brand-name value, not a school that has been hot the last five or so years:

ACC ..... FSU, Miami
Big 12 ... Oklahoma, Texas
B1G .... Nebraska, Penn State, Michigan, Ohio State
PAC .... USC
SEC ..... LSU, Auburn, Alabama, Florida, Tennessee, Georgia

So the SEC has six and the B1G has four, which explains why these are the two most valuable and powerful conferences. But after that, the Big 12 fits in just fine. In fact, it is in better position than the PAC, which only has USC, and also the ACC, because FSU and Miami are more nouveaux-riche programs, relatively new entrants to the blue-chip club, whereas Texas and Oklahoma are original members of that club.

In short, the Big 12 is just fine in the marquee category, which is why the SEC chose them over the ACC as their Sugar partner, why TV networks have showered them with money, why bowls have signed them to good tie-ins, etc.

If you do not count Oregon, UCLA, and Stanford in the PAC 12 I do not know what you are smoking. Tell me what games were on prime time last night... that's right. SEC and ACC.

(11-01-2013 11:35 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  When SMU, Houston, and TCU all either completed work, broke ground, or announced renovations...they prefaced a change in conference.

Tulane and their OCS? Big East/AAC.
FAU? CUSA.

Charlotte was going D1, but you knew the moment they announced their stadium plans it wasn't going to be for FCS. ODU upgraded their facility. Both will be CUSA members next year. When JMU upgraded their facility, people suspected it was for a reason. Well, aren't they now fishing?

These massive projects don't happen without assurances they are leading to something.

The ones I'm watching are Rice, Colorado State, and Cincinnati. That's where money is being spent (or has been spent) without current movement. Maybe not all Big XII candidates, but those are three schools worth keeping tabs on.

Throw in Louisiana Ragin Cajuns in there as well, here is our Facilities Master Plan.

http://ragincajuns.com/sports/2013/3/26/...spx?id=570

(11-03-2013 10:54 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 04:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-02-2013 10:51 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  How about marquee schools in each conference. Add those up and see what you get, and, in the Big XII, please stop right after UT and OU...
The list for the other conferences is too long for this thread.

It is? Let's see how many blue-chip, big brand name football schools each conference has. And by blue-chip I mean of course traditional powers of longstanding brand-name value, not a school that has been hot the last five or so years:

ACC ..... FSU, Miami
Big 12 ... Oklahoma, Texas
B1G .... Nebraska, Penn State, Michigan, Ohio State
PAC .... USC
SEC ..... LSU, Auburn, Alabama, Florida, Tennessee, Georgia

So the SEC has six and the B1G has four, which explains why these are the two most valuable and powerful conferences. But after that, the Big 12 fits in just fine. In fact, it is in better position than the PAC, which only has USC, and also the ACC, because FSU and Miami are more nouveaux-riche programs, relatively new entrants to the blue-chip club, whereas Texas and Oklahoma are original members of that club.

In short, the Big 12 is just fine in the marquee category, which is why the SEC chose them over the ACC as their Sugar partner, why TV networks have showered them with money, why bowls have signed them to good tie-ins, etc.

If you do not count Oregon, UCLA, and Stanford in the PAC 12 I do not know what you are smoking. Tell me what games were on prime time last night... that's right. SEC and ACC.

Oklahoma St and Texas Tech were prime time as well on FOX

(11-01-2013 04:18 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(11-01-2013 03:44 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(11-01-2013 03:37 PM)bigredmachine Wrote:  Keep ignoring NIU, but realistically, NIU brings more to the Big 12 than Memphis, Cincinnati, Tulane or any of the other schools listed here. Granted, NIU needs facility upgrades, increased donor levels, etc., but being 60 miles from Chicago offers a HUGE TV market that should influence Big 12 expansion.

Based on your logic they B12 should invite Fordham (NYC) and Illinois-Chicago.

I think he makes a good logical set of arguments. Cincy's location is somewhat misleading unless you have been through the area or spent some time in the area. Cincy can carry the B12 flag in SW Ohio, Northern Ky and SW Indiana, and even though they will never be the top draw in those states, as long as they can maintain themselves as at least the 3rd draw for eyeballs, that's okay. Most college football fans watch multiple games over the course of the Thursday night to the end of Saturday night. Cincy also give the B12 a school that can play ACC school Louisville in a rivalry.

BYU is a no brainer. Every Mormon who cares for sports will watch them, same as every Catholic who watches football keeps an eye on the Irish. In addition to the Mormons that live in Utah, there are large clusters of them along the Wasatch and Front ranges in Idaho, Colorado, and New Mexico. BYU makes a good analogue to ND in the ACC.

Texas and BYU in the same conference requires massaging huge egos and to make the conference interesting to the outside world, I don't think you can have the Texahoma 6 as one division.

Tulane would indeed make a good 15th for the B12 if only for allowing the other league schools to visit New Orleans and it would step on some SEC toes. I suppose if you want a real project and some sort of presence back in a major metro you would look at Colorado State and Northern Illinois (they could use a name change - perhaps Illinois Tech).

Because building a 26,000 seat OCS is screaming Big XII.

(11-01-2013 11:02 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  Different max points assigned to factors that will probably be considered --- with a narrative explaining each. About 16 of the potential schools were graded.

HERE >>>

http://frankthetank.me/2013/10/30/the-bi...-all-over/

Good article and analysis by Frank. However, I have the following comments:

This should have been a three part article. The first addresses in detail the departures of four schools from the B12 and the two subsequent additions. The second part focuses on eastern expansion because the B12 ineptly added one eastern school. The third part could have focused on western expansion.

Frank makes the same mistake in the article that he warns his readers not to make: “Think like a university president and NOT like a sports fan.” How did Frank make this mistake? He grouped eastern and western schools together like many fans do. If additional eastern expansion is the primary goal of the B12, Memphis would have far more value than San Diego St. Therefore, two separate categories are needed to accurately evaluate each school mentioned in his article.

The Academies are not mentioned. The B12 actually tried to get Air Force to join if I'm not mistaken. The B12 realized that Air Force is a nationally followed program unlike some of the other western schools mentioned in Frank’s article. Consequently, how do you not evaluate an institution that was actually sought after? Moreover, if the B12 considered Air Force worth adding, Army and Navy are just as worthy when evaluating eastern expansion candidates in my opinion….

(11-05-2013 02:36 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(11-01-2013 11:02 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  Different max points assigned to factors that will probably be considered --- with a narrative explaining each. About 16 of the potential schools were graded.

HERE >>>

http://frankthetank.me/2013/10/30/the-bi...-all-over/

Good article and analysis by Frank. However, I have the following comments:

This should have been a three part article. The first addresses in detail the departures of four schools from the B12 and the two subsequent additions. The second part focuses on eastern expansion because the B12 ineptly added one eastern school. The third part could have focused on western expansion.

Frank makes the same mistake in the article that he warns his readers not to make: “Think like a university president and NOT like a sports fan.” How did Frank make this mistake? He grouped eastern and western schools together like many fans do. If additional eastern expansion is the primary goal of the B12, Memphis would have far more value than San Diego St. Therefore, two separate categories are needed to accurately evaluate each school mentioned in his article.

The Academies are not mentioned. The B12 actually tried to get Air Force to join if I'm not mistaken. The B12 realized that Air Force is a nationally followed program unlike some of the other western schools mentioned in Frank’s article. Consequently, how do you not evaluate an institution that was actually sought after? Moreover, if the B12 considered Air Force worth adding, Army and Navy are just as worthy when evaluating eastern expansion candidates in my opinion….

I agree two separate categories are needed. Look at a map. Cincy and BYU would not be added. BYU would be on an Island. You could add BYU and the AFA or Colorado State and be fine. So if BYU were added Colordao Sate and AFA rankings should go way up.

If Cincy wwere added, there are a lot of decent Eastern Options...UConn... or reach into florida for big TV maket and recruiting value. UCF or USF would do fine.

I really believe that Frank is one of the most knowledgeable, insightful, and best connected posters out there

But I believe he made a mistake in not including Fresno in his assessment.

The Bulldogs will average close to 40k this year and are located in a growing, good sized market and recruiting area.

Not to mention the Bulldog's programs on the field success.

Especially this year