(06-17-2014 02:21 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 02:10 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  And remember, if the XII and ACC get their CCG deregulation proposal passed, the need to add two to get a CCG goes away. The XII would be able to hold a CCG without divisions or the need for 12 teams. They might even be able to decide to hold one only if needed.

If they continue to play a full round robin conference schedule, a championship game would never be needed. If two teams are tied, there will always have been a head to head winner, and if more than two are tied, a one game CCG won't be enough to break the tie.

True, but what if the winner of the head-to-head ends up ranked lower than the loser? They could decide that a 13th game might be needed to help boost their chances at getting into the semifinals.

(06-17-2014 12:51 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 11:54 AM)westwolf Wrote:  Isn't Schad the ESPN reporter who swore that TexHoma to the Pac 12 was a done deal?[/b]

Well everybody thought it was a done deal. Former Longhorns coach Mack Brown is quoted saying he went to sleep knowing the Pac-16 was a done deal only to find out in the morning the Big XII was saved.

Only Chip Brown said otherwise.

Texas should go indy in football and park the rest of their sports in the Pac like ND did with the ACC. Agree to play 5 or 6 games in football and keep their own TV deal. The playoffs should expand to 8 teams with the Conference Champions from the 4 remaining power conferences getting auto-bids. 1 spot reserved for the G5 and 3 at-large which would give Texas and ND their access.

1 team from the G5 would have to move into the new P4 to make the numbers work.

Either this or separate the sport of football from conference affiliation and create a criteria for schools to be able to participate that would separate the wheat from the chaff.


Use something like this:


http://www.nbcnews.com/business/careers/...cks-n79871


There is no shame in competing at a lower level of football. It would be a win-win. I think most schools could compete in every other sport.

(06-17-2014 12:53 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 12:02 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 12:01 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  You know how to fix all this for your school? Just win baby!!!!!

After all it worked for Boise State.

Damn solid point. It's markets and support, not winning.

No, you need all three components but if you do win, you are toast!

(06-17-2014 02:36 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Texas should go indy in football and park the rest of their sports in the Pac like ND did with the ACC.

That's actually not that far-fetched. If that happened, I'm curious as to what people think the fallout would be. My bet would be Oklahoma to the SEC along with one of Kansas/WVU.
If SEC takes WVU, the BigXii backfills and expands to 16 with Western schools (BYU, UNM, CSU, Boise, UNLV, SDSU, Fresno).
If the SEC takes Kansas, the BigXii backfills and expands with Eastern Schools (Cinci, UCF, USF, Memphis, ECU, UCONN, Houston).

That actually feels pretty stable with the PAC set at 12+1, the SEC set at 16, the BigXII set at 16, and the B1G/ACC in a stalemate at 14/14+1 waiting for the B1G to poach two schools to resolve to a B1G16/ACC12+ND.

(06-17-2014 03:19 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 02:36 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Texas should go indy in football and park the rest of their sports in the Pac like ND did with the ACC.

That's actually not that far-fetched. If that happened, I'm curious as to what people think the fallout would be. My bet would be Oklahoma to the SEC along with one of Kansas/WVU.
If SEC takes WVU, the BigXii backfills and expands to 16 with Western schools (BYU, UNM, CSU, Boise, UNLV, SDSU, Fresno).
If the SEC takes Kansas, the BigXii backfills and expands with Eastern Schools (Cinci, UCF, USF, Memphis, ECU, UCONN, Houston).

That actually feels pretty stable with the PAC set at 12+1, the SEC set at 16, the BigXII set at 16, and the B1G/ACC in a stalemate at 14/14+1 waiting for the B1G to poach two schools to resolve to a B1G16/ACC12+ND.

Once Texas goes indy. break up the Big 12 and ALL the conferences however is best to maximize $. 16 in each conference and ND and Texas as indy with 1 G5 school moving up to make the numbers work.

(06-17-2014 10:51 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 10:43 AM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(06-16-2014 11:37 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(06-16-2014 10:54 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(06-16-2014 10:31 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

On ESPN's College Football Live show today...topic of Big 12 expansion came up and ESPN's Joe Schad said these would be his top 2 teams for Big 12 additions:

Cincinnati
UCF

Schad predicts that after the new P5 Committee invites teams for the Final Four from SEC, ACC, Big Ten and Pac-12 because ALL of them have conf championship football games...Big 12 will be left out most years, hence their need to get to 12 teams...in 2 new TV markets.

Dude makes a lot of sense.

I live in Morgantown, WV... I have some connections to the Athletic Department at WVU and I follow the news out of WVU pretty closely.

I don't think the Big XII will expand. If they do expand, I do NOT think one of the schools will be the University of Cincinnati. The one school that seems to have some rumbling is UCF, but that is at least five years of sustained success away.

The B12 investigated UC. It is NOT happening. Period, end of story. If it were going to happen, it would have happened already.

But like I said at the top... The Big XII is not going to expand. They are in the same boat as the old Big East was, unable to poach any teams from another "Power" conference and with no teams below them that make any sense. And, at the invitation of any other "Power" conference, their teams will bolt without any hesitation. The B12 is dead-fricking-meat, and the members of that conference know it.

I agree with you Jerry on the B12 not adding anyone... I also believe however, this league (AAC) has more programs who can help elevate the B12 in many ways.

Hell, the B12 would be better of if they could some how kick Baylor/Waco and Tortilla tech/Lubbock out and invite 4-6 AAC bigger market programs and call it a day, IMHO.

The b12 will expand eventually. This could be because of attrition because of added value or potentially votes as the balance of power lies within the b1g etc. Its a matter of how fast they can convince their partners to give up the dollars. Another wild card is some of the private schools drop out. Nobody was moving until this goes through especially with the law suit. The look in is 2017 and I expect real discussions to start in 2016.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

wow there are a lot of crack smokers posting on the forum today

you really think that TCU climbed all the way up from being in the WAC to get back into a power conference and spent 150 million + on their stajium so they could drop out of the Big 12

you really think that Baylor is spending 250 million on a stajium so they can drop out of the Big 12

they might as well shut down the universities if they do that because they will not have a financial supporter or donor left or an alumni that would claim them

and what "look in" are you talking about?

I am talking about the look in the b12 has in 2017. You should know that about your conference as it is a chance to up the dollars. You are also assuming I meant the b12s private schools. If wake duke etc are forced to drop the gor would be voided and the teams would be free to roam the country. Nowhere in my post did I say it was Ucf that would be added. I still think Ucf might slide in depending on the value assigned by fox and espn. We don't know what their plan is. We are all assuming at this point that tv is driving the bus. We also know five schools including Ucf submitted financials etc last November for review by the b12. I would assume you know that Ucf has spent 100s of millions on its facilities as well. My point is the last round happened before the p5 split and nothing will happen until it's sorted out. Try not to be so high and mighty and exchange your ideas with some respect and you might learn something.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(06-16-2014 11:06 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(06-16-2014 10:54 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  The Big XII is not going to expand. They are in the same boat as the old Big East was, unable to poach any teams from another "Power" conference and with no teams below them that make any sense. And, at the invitation of any other "Power" conference, their teams will bolt without any hesitation. The B12 is dead-fricking-meat, and the members of that conference know it.

The Big <12 of today has some HUGE advantages (relatively speaking) compared to the old Big East of 2004-2012. Namely, the presence of two absolutely indisputable A-list national name-brand football programs in OU and UT. Big East never had anything like that.

Big <12 will be a player for as long as both of those two programs are willing to remain a part of it.

The "as long as they want to be a part of it" statements are pretty silly at this point. Obviously it has been a few years at least since they explored moving elsewhere, and that was only because some other schools like Colorado and Nebraska were moving on and a couple of others were considering it. Once it became evident that the conference could in fact remain together they haven't blinked or waivered from their commitment to the Big 12. It's like saying as long as Ohio State wants to stay in the Big Ten or as long as Alabama and Auburn want to remain in the SEC. None of them have any intention of going anywhere else.

The weakest conference is always the one facing extinction.

That's the Big12.

Still, that may not hold true since Texas wants a private conference and the lesser schools will hang on no matter what to Texas.

(06-17-2014 04:47 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The weakest conference is always the one facing extinction.

That's the Big12.

Still, that may not hold true since Texas wants a private conference and the lesser schools will hang on no matter what to Texas.

Someone said that the board is on crack today.

The Big 12 is one of the strongest conferences there is. Having more schools doesn't make a conference stronger, having quality schools, athletic programs and contracts does. The Big 12 has all.

They might expand one day, but they don't need to expand.

Other than the SEC they've had more top four finishes than anyone through the BCS, and there isn't any indication that is going to change.

(06-17-2014 02:36 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Texas should go indy in football and park the rest of their sports in the Pac like ND did with the ACC. Agree to play 5 or 6 games in football and keep their own TV deal. The playoffs should expand to 8 teams with the Conference Champions from the 4 remaining power conferences getting auto-bids. 1 spot reserved for the G5 and 3 at-large which would give Texas and ND their access.

1 team from the G5 would have to move into the new P4 to make the numbers work.

Either this or separate the sport of football from conference affiliation and create a criteria for schools to be able to participate that would separate the wheat from the chaff.


Use something like this:


http://www.nbcnews.com/business/careers/...cks-n79871


There is no shame in competing at a lower level of football. It would be a win-win. I think most schools could compete in every other sport.

I'm sorry but we have thrown wayyy too much investment into playing at the highest level to go away quietly. Part of the reason for doing this is to build the brand for the university which helps on all kinds of metrics. You can't just say I am going to minimize your return on investment so just be happy where you are. Less exposure would effectively increase the cost. The bottom line is the g5 would fight it as would their congressional reps. There is already a bill being put to the floor regarding controlling cfb and wresting control from the NCAA. There are levers the g5 can pull. Warning shots are already being fired. The response to Mr Slives comments are an example. Many of the p5 are closer to the g5 then the TXs of the world. There isn't even unity among the P5


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(06-17-2014 04:47 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The weakest conference is always the one facing extinction.

That's the Big12.

Still, that may not hold true since Texas wants a private conference and the lesser schools will hang on no matter what to Texas.

As long as tx retains a bigger piece of the pie and a voting block this is true


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(06-17-2014 04:57 PM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 04:47 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The weakest conference is always the one facing extinction.

That's the Big12.

Still, that may not hold true since Texas wants a private conference and the lesser schools will hang on no matter what to Texas.

Someone said that the board is on crack today.

The Big 12 is one of the strongest conferences there is. Having more schools doesn't make a conference stronger, having quality schools, athletic programs and contracts does. The Big 12 has all.

They might expand one day, but they don't need to expand.

Other than the SEC they've had more top four finishes than anyone through the BCS, and there isn't any indication that is going to change.

Look, the Big 12 is a fine conference as long as Texas and Oklahoma stay put, but this statement is ridiculous. The Big 12 is the weakest of the P5 and it's not close. I don't think they'll be breaking up or expanding, but anyone can see the Big 12 has nowhere to go but down.

BYU and Cincy are by far the two best choices should the Big Texas ever expand.

(06-17-2014 05:58 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 04:57 PM)Tbringer Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 04:47 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  The weakest conference is always the one facing extinction.

That's the Big12.

Still, that may not hold true since Texas wants a private conference and the lesser schools will hang on no matter what to Texas.

Someone said that the board is on crack today.

The Big 12 is one of the strongest conferences there is. Having more schools doesn't make a conference stronger, having quality schools, athletic programs and contracts does. The Big 12 has all.

They might expand one day, but they don't need to expand.

Other than the SEC they've had more top four finishes than anyone through the BCS, and there isn't any indication that is going to change.

Look, the Big 12 is a fine conference as long as Texas and Oklahoma stay put, but this statement is ridiculous. The Big 12 is the weakest of the P5 and it's not close. I don't think they'll be breaking up or expanding, but anyone can see the Big 12 has nowhere to go but down.

Yet Cincy would literally beg to be in the Big 12 even it meant not having UT/OU. The rest of the Big 12 still brings more than the aac does.

(06-17-2014 06:08 PM)rednblackattack Wrote:  BYU and Cincy are by far the two best choices should the Big Texas ever expand.

School Presidents and our TV partners don't agree and ultimately that is the only thing that matters.

(06-17-2014 04:08 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 03:19 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 02:36 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Texas should go indy in football and park the rest of their sports in the Pac like ND did with the ACC.

That's actually not that far-fetched. If that happened, I'm curious as to what people think the fallout would be. My bet would be Oklahoma to the SEC along with one of Kansas/WVU.
If SEC takes WVU, the BigXii backfills and expands to 16 with Western schools (BYU, UNM, CSU, Boise, UNLV, SDSU, Fresno).
If the SEC takes Kansas, the BigXii backfills and expands with Eastern Schools (Cinci, UCF, USF, Memphis, ECU, UCONN, Houston).

That actually feels pretty stable with the PAC set at 12+1, the SEC set at 16, the BigXII set at 16, and the B1G/ACC in a stalemate at 14/14+1 waiting for the B1G to poach two schools to resolve to a B1G16/ACC12+ND.

Once Texas goes indy. break up the Big 12 and ALL the conferences however is best to maximize $. 16 in each conference and ND and Texas as indy with 1 G5 school moving up to make the numbers work.

If Texas does this, it will be with the ACC not the PAC. Already been spoken about. Likely Texas would get a 6 game contract in football with the ACC. They would take the one extra game that Notre Dame was offered and turned down in order to probably get the ACC to take two other Texas schools and allow Texas to have protected rivalry games with them. Notre Dame was offered that with Pitt and one other ACC school, I forget which one it was, but they turned it down in order to keep the 5 game contract instead of moving to six games.

(06-17-2014 07:08 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 04:08 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 03:19 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 02:36 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Texas should go indy in football and park the rest of their sports in the Pac like ND did with the ACC.

That's actually not that far-fetched. If that happened, I'm curious as to what people think the fallout would be. My bet would be Oklahoma to the SEC along with one of Kansas/WVU.
If SEC takes WVU, the BigXii backfills and expands to 16 with Western schools (BYU, UNM, CSU, Boise, UNLV, SDSU, Fresno).
If the SEC takes Kansas, the BigXii backfills and expands with Eastern Schools (Cinci, UCF, USF, Memphis, ECU, UCONN, Houston).

That actually feels pretty stable with the PAC set at 12+1, the SEC set at 16, the BigXII set at 16, and the B1G/ACC in a stalemate at 14/14+1 waiting for the B1G to poach two schools to resolve to a B1G16/ACC12+ND.

Once Texas goes indy. break up the Big 12 and ALL the conferences however is best to maximize $. 16 in each conference and ND and Texas as indy with 1 G5 school moving up to make the numbers work.

If Texas does this, it will be with the ACC not the PAC. Already been spoken about. Likely Texas would get a 6 game contract in football with the ACC. They would take the one extra game that Notre Dame was offered and turned down in order to probably get the ACC to take two other Texas schools and allow Texas to have protected rivalry games with them. Notre Dame was offered that with Pitt and one other ACC school, I forget which one it was, but they turned it down in order to keep the 5 game contract instead of moving to six games.

BC

(06-17-2014 07:08 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 04:08 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 03:19 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 02:36 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Texas should go indy in football and park the rest of their sports in the Pac like ND did with the ACC.

That's actually not that far-fetched. If that happened, I'm curious as to what people think the fallout would be. My bet would be Oklahoma to the SEC along with one of Kansas/WVU.
If SEC takes WVU, the BigXii backfills and expands to 16 with Western schools (BYU, UNM, CSU, Boise, UNLV, SDSU, Fresno).
If the SEC takes Kansas, the BigXii backfills and expands with Eastern Schools (Cinci, UCF, USF, Memphis, ECU, UCONN, Houston).

That actually feels pretty stable with the PAC set at 12+1, the SEC set at 16, the BigXII set at 16, and the B1G/ACC in a stalemate at 14/14+1 waiting for the B1G to poach two schools to resolve to a B1G16/ACC12+ND.

Once Texas goes indy. break up the Big 12 and ALL the conferences however is best to maximize $. 16 in each conference and ND and Texas as indy with 1 G5 school moving up to make the numbers work.

If Texas does this, it will be with the ACC not the PAC. Already been spoken about. Likely Texas would get a 6 game contract in football with the ACC. They would take the one extra game that Notre Dame was offered and turned down in order to probably get the ACC to take two other Texas schools and allow Texas to have protected rivalry games with them. Notre Dame was offered that with Pitt and one other ACC school, I forget which one it was, but they turned it down in order to keep the 5 game contract instead of moving to six games.

It would have been BC.

This would seem to cut against the theory held by some that ND's administrators have a ("wink, wink") side deal with the ACC for eventual full football membership.

What better way to start down the slippery slope of a full eight game schedule than to offer to revive two old annual games for "only" one more ACC game commitment?

That would be a perfect "stealth" move to fool those stubborn, short sighted ND alumni and fans and placate their nostalgia with the renewed annual Pitt and BC games.

Instead, it seems more that ND is very willing to sacrifice its old annual opponents (Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, Pitt, BC) in order to secure its independence and hold the line at five ACC games, and no more than five, for as long as one can see the future.

(06-17-2014 07:56 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 07:08 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 04:08 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 03:19 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  

(06-17-2014 02:36 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Texas should go indy in football and park the rest of their sports in the Pac like ND did with the ACC.

That's actually not that far-fetched. If that happened, I'm curious as to what people think the fallout would be. My bet would be Oklahoma to the SEC along with one of Kansas/WVU.
If SEC takes WVU, the BigXii backfills and expands to 16 with Western schools (BYU, UNM, CSU, Boise, UNLV, SDSU, Fresno).
If the SEC takes Kansas, the BigXii backfills and expands with Eastern Schools (Cinci, UCF, USF, Memphis, ECU, UCONN, Houston).

That actually feels pretty stable with the PAC set at 12+1, the SEC set at 16, the BigXII set at 16, and the B1G/ACC in a stalemate at 14/14+1 waiting for the B1G to poach two schools to resolve to a B1G16/ACC12+ND.

Once Texas goes indy. break up the Big 12 and ALL the conferences however is best to maximize $. 16 in each conference and ND and Texas as indy with 1 G5 school moving up to make the numbers work.

If Texas does this, it will be with the ACC not the PAC. Already been spoken about. Likely Texas would get a 6 game contract in football with the ACC. They would take the one extra game that Notre Dame was offered and turned down in order to probably get the ACC to take two other Texas schools and allow Texas to have protected rivalry games with them. Notre Dame was offered that with Pitt and one other ACC school, I forget which one it was, but they turned it down in order to keep the 5 game contract instead of moving to six games.

It would have been BC.

This would seem to cut against the theory held by some that ND's administrators have a ("wink, wink") side deal with the ACC for eventual full football membership.

What better way to start down the slippery slope of a full eight game schedule than to offer to revive two old annual games for "only" one more ACC game commitment?

That would be a perfect "stealth" move to fool those stubborn, short sighted ND alumni and fans and placate their nostalgia with the renewed annual Pitt and BC games.

Instead, it seems more that ND is very willing to sacrifice its old annual opponents (Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, Pitt, BC) in order to secure its independence and hold the line at five ACC games, and no more than five, for as long as one can see the future.

Whew! I sure am glad about that.....I wouldn't want those guys as full members in my conference.