There is still no need for a geographic bridge.

I would think the Texahoma schools should be divided up if BYU, UC, UConn or so came in. Why should Texas And Oklahoma stay close to home hours from each other and the rest flying all over the country side. Talk about an unfair advantage.

(05-18-2014 05:25 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  I would think the Texahoma schools should be divided up if BYU, UC, UConn or so came in. Why should Texas And Oklahoma stay close to home hours from each other and the rest flying all over the country side. Talk about an unfair advantage.

That's why I've long wondered if its would be for the Big12 to go to 14 than to 12 ... assuming the four are in the East, that would make five in the East already ~ the newbies and WVU, likely Iowa State, and then a seventh. If TCU could be prevailed on to go East (they might if there is one or two Florida schools), that would leave the Kansas's with the Okies and UTexas.

(05-18-2014 04:37 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  There is still no need for a geographic bridge.

As far as a traveling companion for WVU, its more "nice to have" than "have to have" territory ... I've seen lots of people since the Big12 took its present form speculate on moves on the theory that the Big12 "has to" have the bridge, only to have their prediction fail.

So ISU, Kansas & KSU & maybe TCU are gonna agree to be seprate from Tex & Okla schools
I don,t think so, which neccesates 18, which works for LHN & TV markets

(05-18-2014 09:29 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  You guys got it all wrong. West Virginia doesn't need a bridge - they are the bridge. UCONN to the Big 12...coming soon....

Heads up, you spelled "UConn and ECU to the Big 12" wrong.

(05-19-2014 05:41 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  So ISU, Kansas & KSU & maybe TCU are gonna agree to be seprate from Tex & Okla schools
I don,t think so, which neccesates 18, which works for LHN & TV markets

How? I don't think that many (if any) conference football (and possibly basketball) games are making the LHN, so that argument goes out the window (unless I'm wrong). Beyond that, BYU aside, all the schools with large fan bases are either already in the Big XII or not interested in being in the Big XII. That fact then throws the general TV argument out he window.

All said and done, WVU did pursue the Big12 knowing the outcome could mean the very situation They face. And They seem comfortable with it. Thats all that really matters now.

(05-15-2014 10:13 PM)Groo Wrote:  The Big 12 is fine at 10 ty.

As long as Texas and OU are happy, I don't see any expansion in the short term. However, if Texas and/or OU leave, the rest of the Big 12 will collapse.

Whether that means the Big 12 (now 8 or 9) asks BYU, UC, etc. to join or the American or other G5 conference merges with the Big 12 is anyboy's guess.

The bottom line: the Big 12 is really the Big 2 - and everybody else.

(05-15-2014 11:57 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  The B12 is a big boy football conference.

To compete in the B12 you've got to be able to pull your weight in football generate enough TV eyeballs so that your school's inclusion generates a minimum of $2M for the current 10 members. Only a few None of the AAC programs can truely do that.

FTFY

(05-19-2014 02:36 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 11:57 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  To compete in the B12 you've got to be able to pull your weight in football generate enough TV eyeballs so that your school's inclusion generates a minimum of $2M for the current 10 members. Only a few None of the AAC programs can truely do that.

FTFY

Yeah, the simple math suggests that none of the AAC members are #11 candidates, since if the AAC had a school that brought that kind of business on its own, the AAC would be making more money than they are.

Which is why the live Big12 expansion options that involve the AAC are "maybe if there is a compelling #11" and "maybe down the road if one or two of you build your media value".

The BigXii, due to issues with forming balanced divisions, is simply inherently unstable beyond ten members. The reduction to a stable 10 member format is similar to what happened when the another divisionally imbalanced conference, the Wac, collapsed and reformed the MWC as a round robin formatted conference. I think any addition by the BigXii will just spark another round of defections to bring the total back to 10.

The Big XII is not expanding. Sorry to be the guy that has to tell you.

(05-19-2014 05:32 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  The BigXii, due to issues with forming balanced divisions, is simply inherently unstable beyond ten members. The reduction to a stable 10 member format is similar to what happened when the another divisionally imbalanced conference, the Wac, collapsed and reformed the MWC as a round robin formatted conference. I think any addition by the BigXii will just spark another round of defections to bring the total back to 10.

Yes, to summarize, the Big12 will stand pat at 10 because its just like the WAC which in overexpanding led to the Mountain West, a conference which stood pat at ten members.

... wait, what? Is that the right analogy?

Youre academics are bad enough, dont need Memphis and UC to drag it down even more.

(05-19-2014 08:30 PM)slowknight Wrote:  Youre academics are bad enough, dont need Memphis and UC to drag it down even more.

^^^^

The irony

(05-19-2014 05:32 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  The BigXii, due to issues with forming balanced divisions, is simply inherently unstable beyond ten members. The reduction to a stable 10 member format is similar to what happened when the another divisionally imbalanced conference, the Wac, collapsed and reformed the MWC as a round robin formatted conference. I think any addition by the BigXii will just spark another round of defections to bring the total back to 10.

100% correct.

(05-19-2014 05:32 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  The BigXii, due to issues with forming balanced divisions, is simply inherently unstable beyond ten members. The reduction to a stable 10 member format is similar to what happened when the another divisionally imbalanced conference, the Wac, collapsed and reformed the MWC as a round robin formatted conference. I think any addition by the BigXii will just spark another round of defections to bring the total back to 10.

I disagree with this.

1- A 9 game schedule to copy the PAC (Texas schools in opposite divisions play each other like the CA schools do) could work it out.

2- If CCG's are deregulated just give everyone 3-5 rivals and rotate the rest of the schedule.

For instance if we hypothetically added BYU and Cincy:
Texas plays the following annually:
OU
Tech
BU
TCU
OSU
Rotates the other 6 in the remaining 3 spots

TCU gets:
UT
Baylor
Tech
BYU
KU
Rotate the other 6

You can protect rivalries and work out reasonable timetables to see every member.

(05-19-2014 08:30 PM)slowknight Wrote:  Youre academics are bad enough, dont need Memphis and UC to drag it down even more.

And the Rutgers FB and BB programs will add SOOOO much to the B1G!

in another thread, talks about cable fee's for NYC area. accurrcey might be off.
crazy money is being talked about Rutgers [10 million people in NJ & being in NYC backyard]

Conn, NY[Buffalo] & Mass have 30 million & also in NYC backyard.
now your going to tell me Tex, LHN & ESPN are not interested.
they have access to the same data

(05-20-2014 11:59 PM)templefootballfan Wrote:  in another thread, talks about cable fee's for NYC area. accurrcey might be off.
crazy money is being talked about Rutgers [10 million people in NJ & being in NYC backyard]

Conn, NY[Buffalo] & Mass have 30 million & also in NYC backyard.
now your going to tell me Tex, LHN & ESPN are not interested.
they have access to the same data

1- Texas's Network is UT content. There isn't going to be enough demand for a school that is over 2,000 miles away to force cable companies in NYC, Connecticut, or Massachusetts to pay up at the level needed to make the kind of money you are thinking.

This isn't something where the cable company just forks over money because you add someone in a market. Demand has to force their hand.

2- Buffalo is no where close to what you assume. No offense but without adequate demand there is NO WAY a cable company is going to pass cost onto consumers and give a premium for a conference network that merely happens to have a school located in a particular city. Acting like Buffalo would get a league network serious leverage is not realistic. Their entire athletic department struggles to get 1 million dollars in annual ticket sales in all sports and I am supposed to believe that they are going to force cable companies to pay more than that?

3- Temple's financial situation isn't healthy and sluggish ticket sales are often cited. The numbers (like Pitt's) aren't publicly reported but the frequent articles about it and the low attendance numbers (hovering around 20k) all but confirms it.

Just being IN a big market isn't enough even if the LHN and the Big 12 tier 3 contracts were structured differently.