(12-08-2014 08:54 AM)bullitt_60 Wrote:  Hopefully the NCAA will pull their head out of their ass and reduce the number of teams required for a CCG to 10 and we can put an end to this ridiculous conference realignment.

Not going to happen, now way the conferences that had to go to 12 will reward B12. The P5 Re-alignment will be over after the last two teams are picked. Easiest solution is B12 take BYU and Boise football only. MWC picks off AAC west team, AAC picks of CUSA west team and CUSA stays at 12. Granted the AAC east teams would be pissed because they have been relegated to permanent G5 status.

(12-08-2014 09:14 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 08:54 AM)bullitt_60 Wrote:  Hopefully the NCAA will pull their head out of their ass and reduce the number of teams required for a CCG to 10 and we can put an end to this ridiculous conference realignment.

Not going to happen, now way the conferences that had to go to 12 will reward B12. The P5 Re-alignment will be over after the last two teams are picked. Easiest solution is B12 take BYU and Boise football only. MWC picks off AAC west team, AAC picks of CUSA west team and CUSA stays at 12. Granted the AAC east teams would be pissed because they have been relegated to permanent G5 status.

If they go West JMO they would go Colorado State and BYU...it would get the Big XII back into Denver.

(12-08-2014 09:14 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 08:54 AM)bullitt_60 Wrote:  Hopefully the NCAA will pull their head out of their ass and reduce the number of teams required for a CCG to 10 and we can put an end to this ridiculous conference realignment.

Not going to happen, now way the conferences that had to go to 12 will reward B12. The P5 Re-alignment will be over after the last two teams are picked. Easiest solution is B12 take BYU and Boise football only. MWC picks off AAC west team, AAC picks of CUSA west team and CUSA stays at 12. Granted the AAC east teams would be pissed because they have been relegated to permanent G5 status.

The MW sans Boise State wouldn't be able to pick off any AAC team. The MW would go after UTEP or Rice if they had to.

(12-08-2014 08:12 AM)pablowow Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 07:27 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 05:47 AM)tnzazz Wrote:  Why do you keep saying Boise has a national following? I don't know anyone who follows them. I never see Boise gear and I live in a city full of transplants.

They do have a national following ... dozens of media types scattered around the country that want a Cinderella story and don't want to bother finding out about a new team when they write it.

More seriously, the reason the old Big East wanted them seemed to be that the old Big East in its "Big East of Reno" configuration was going to have footholds in a lot of markets of quite substantial size, and a lot of people in those markets that never deliberately turned the dial to watch a game by the local school. Demographics and potential market size was not what they were short of, so much as reasons to get excited about Big East football in those big potential markets. So Boise State met a need.

Its not clear that the Big 12 has the same needs as the old Big East. They seem to be at saturation in most of the bigger markets in Big12 country, and are facing new competition for recruits in their main Texas recruiting grounds ... they do have more of a demographic problem, and its not clear that Boise State would help out a conference with a demographic problem.

Quote: Btw, Tulane could EASILY be the surprise pick.

Memphis and Tulane being in SEC country is a HUGE plus for Big12.

Tulane would definitely be a surprise pick, because it would be so difficult to understand a pick that provided so little benefit to the Big12.

Think Rutgers.
Tulane represents New Orleans and Louisiana recruiting every year. Also part of the 100 yrs football club. Which p-5 is partial to. Also gives louisiana it's 2nd p-5 school which will pay dividends quickly in tulane recruiting. The talent and product will rise immediately. Tulane also is by far the favorite travel destination for any big 12 team. Our attendance will average 40,000 plus immediately. (With the 15,000) expansion.

The only school in that conference that would want us would be Texas (southern, AAU, politically liberal, "academic peer" nonsense). Baylor may also be OK with it as well.

...but Tulane would have about 6-7 "no" votes across the league. Also keep in mind our AD isn't cutthroat enough - and that could be a turn-off to any power league.

Tulane is an interesting consideration, but I don't think they'll take my alma mater is in this round of action. Tulane is a speculative move - and the Big XII don't think about potential.

(12-08-2014 09:14 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 08:54 AM)bullitt_60 Wrote:  Hopefully the NCAA will pull their head out of their ass and reduce the number of teams required for a CCG to 10 and we can put an end to this ridiculous conference realignment.

Not going to happen, now way the conferences that had to go to 12 will reward B12. The P5 Re-alignment will be over after the last two teams are picked. Easiest solution is B12 take BYU and Boise football only. MWC picks off AAC west team, AAC picks of CUSA west team and CUSA stays at 12. Granted the AAC east teams would be pissed because they have been relegated to permanent G5 status.

It will never happen but the NCAA needs to take the power away from the conferences. There is no leadership - In fact it needs to be a dictatorship, but that's another thread.

What do you mean by 'reward'? You mean the reward wasn't other conferences pillaging the Big 12 so that they can't have a CCG due to a stupid NCAA rule?

(12-08-2014 02:51 AM)Bearband36 Wrote:  I think people might be surprised at the amount of national draw CSU could have if put on a bigger stage. I mean, there are alumni EVERYWHERE.

And I am not trying to rag on Boise because I think what they have done in the last 30 years is nothing short of amazing, but if we assume boise controls 100% of Idaho (as in everyone avidly watches boise) CSU would only have to control 30% of Colorado to have an equal share.

Again, nothing against boise, I think if they were in a bigger state they would be in a P5, regardless of lack of academics, real or perceived

Also I looked up the enrollment of UCF.... Holly cow! Is that just one campus? Is there a large online program?

No there is the main campus and 10 regional campus. There is another 10k campus being built in downtown orlando. 18% of the student population lives on the main campus or housing owned by Ucf. 425 k living alum in 10 years. Over 1 million in 30.

Fwiw our tv numbers are better than many p5s to include the gators on weekends. Boise is having trouble filling a 35k seat stadium. Orlando metro has over 2.3 million. The whole state of Idaho is 1.6 million and I think that's what will hold them back. I can't find bowlsbys quote but he did mention in an interview within the past year that the b12 would look east if they expand. I don't think byu will bend and it will be cincy and Ucf if and when it happens. Population density alone says go east.

(12-08-2014 08:12 AM)pablowow Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 07:27 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Tulane would surprise pick, because it would be so difficult to understand a pick that provided so little benefit to the Big12.

Think Rutgers.

You mean to say, think main state flagship public university in a top 10 FB recruiting state without a major P5 presence in place? Including a roughly 20% slice of a top 5 metro area?

OK, I'm thinking Rutgers. The thing is, I'm not seeing a lot in common with Tulane other than the lackluster recent FB history, which was not one of Rutger's selling points.

(12-08-2014 09:58 AM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 02:51 AM)Bearband36 Wrote:  I think people might be surprised at the amount of national draw CSU could have if put on a bigger stage. I mean, there are alumni EVERYWHERE.

And I am not trying to rag on Boise because I think what they have done in the last 30 years is nothing short of amazing, but if we assume boise controls 100% of Idaho (as in everyone avidly watches boise) CSU would only have to control 30% of Colorado to have an equal share.

Again, nothing against boise, I think if they were in a bigger state they would be in a P5, regardless of lack of academics, real or perceived

Also I looked up the enrollment of UCF.... Holly cow! Is that just one campus? Is there a large online program?

No there is the main campus and 10 regional campus. There is another 10k campus being built in downtown orlando. 18% of the student population lives on the main campus or housing owned by Ucf. 425 k living alum in 10 years. Over 1 million in 30.

Average incoming freshman has a 3.9 GPA and 1860 SAT. We accept roughly 48% of applicants and is considered highly selective. It is not a paper mill and has the most applicants in the state of fl

(12-08-2014 10:04 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 08:12 AM)pablowow Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 07:27 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Tulane would surprise pick, because it would be so difficult to understand a pick that provided so little benefit to the Big12.

Think Rutgers.

You mean to say, think main state flagship public university in a top 10 FB recruiting state without a major P5 presence in place? Including a roughly 20% slice of a top 5 metro area?

OK, I'm thinking Rutgers. The thing is, I'm not seeing a lot in common with Tulane other than the lackluster recent FB history, which was not one of Rutger's selling points.

Great point on state U flagship point.

I meant everything else. (Market, geography, academics, tradition)

Big 12 is NOT the same structure as BIG/ or SEC. (State U model)
It is half second school in state and private.

Also AAU is important.

The TV execs will have give the Big 12 direction.

When looking at who the Big XII could add, I would look first to eliminate those who are unlikely (at best) to be considered. I would drop any G5 school from Texas, since there are already four in the conference, any school with an athletic budget smaller than $40 million and any school with an enrollment south of 10,000. That would eliminate SMU, Houston, Tulane, Colorado State, New Mexico State, East Carolina, Fresno State and Wyoming.

IMO, that leaves the following schools under consideration:
UConn
Cincinnati
New Mexico
UCF
USF
Boise State
San Diego State
Memphis
and believe it or not, UNLV

If you eliminate San Diego State, UConn, Boise and UNLV for distance or academic reasons, you are left with only Cincinnati, New Mexico., Memphis and the two Florida schools. I think they would only take one Florida school, so USF drops out. So there you have it, the Big XII gets an early open of its TV contract, adds Cincinnati, Memphis, New Mexico and UCF and becomes the Big 14. Easy.

Until Texas become independent.

(12-08-2014 10:09 AM)pablowow Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 10:04 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 08:12 AM)pablowow Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 07:27 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Tulane would surprise pick, because it would be so difficult to understand a pick that provided so little benefit to the Big12.

Think Rutgers.

You mean to say, think main state flagship public university in a top 10 FB recruiting state without a major P5 presence in place? Including a roughly 20% slice of a top 5 metro area?

OK, I'm thinking Rutgers. The thing is, I'm not seeing a lot in common with Tulane other than the lackluster recent FB history, which was not one of Rutger's selling points.

Great point on state U flagship point.

I meant everything else. (Market, geography, academics, tradition)

Big 12 is NOT the same structure as BIG/ or SEC. (State U model)
It is half second school in state and private.

Also AAU is important.

AAU is irrelevant. The same goes for "flagship" status. What matters is how one schools affects the academics, athletics, and finances of the other school in the conference that it's trying to enter.

Sure big flagship schools are more likely to have a positive financial impact and having them on the schedule makes it easier to recruit in many instances. Similarly, few AAU schools are really terrible (although there are a couple which are pushing it), so marketing to their students/fans is probably not an awful idea, but both AAU and flagship status in and of themselves are irrelevant. AAU status was just a random marketing point that the B1G used to have to give the illusion of being more prestigious than they really were, and flagship status is much of the same.

If you have a ton of fans (TU doesn't) and/or exist in an area that will reconnect member schools with their alumni (TU is mixed), are located in an area with a ton of high-quality recruits (TU is), and you have a smart fan base that could be swayed into going to other schools in your conference (TU does), then you are an attractive option. However, those factors are not equal. The first one is by far the biggest, and that's where TU is very weak. Fix that problem and you will get an invite.

(12-08-2014 10:37 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  When looking at who the Big XII could add, I would look first to eliminate those who are unlikely (at best) to be considered. I would drop any G5 school from Texas, since there are already four in the conference, any school with an athletic budget smaller than $40 million and any school with an enrollment south of 10,000. That would eliminate SMU, Houston, Tulane, Colorado State, New Mexico State, East Carolina, Fresno State and Wyoming.

IMO, that leaves the following schools under consideration:
UConn
Cincinnati
New Mexico
UCF
USF
Boise State
San Diego State
Memphis
and believe it or not, UNLV

If you eliminate San Diego State, UConn, Boise and UNLV for distance or academic reasons, you are left with only Cincinnati, New Mexico., Memphis and the two Florida schools. I think they would only take one Florida school, so USF drops out. So there you have it, the Big XII gets an early open of its TV contract, adds Cincinnati, Memphis, New Mexico and UCF and becomes the Big 14. Easy.

Until Texas become independent.

Houston or Rice's only shot would be if the Big 12 is worried about SEC incursions in Houston. LSU played Wisconsin in Houston this year.

(12-08-2014 10:44 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 10:09 AM)pablowow Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 10:04 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 08:12 AM)pablowow Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 07:27 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Tulane would surprise pick, because it would be so difficult to understand a pick that provided so little benefit to the Big12.

Think Rutgers.

You mean to say, think main state flagship public university in a top 10 FB recruiting state without a major P5 presence in place? Including a roughly 20% slice of a top 5 metro area?

OK, I'm thinking Rutgers. The thing is, I'm not seeing a lot in common with Tulane other than the lackluster recent FB history, which was not one of Rutger's selling points.

Great point on state U flagship point.

I meant everything else. (Market, geography, academics, tradition)

Big 12 is NOT the same structure as BIG/ or SEC. (State U model)
It is half second school in state and private.

Also AAU is important.

AAU is irrelevant. The same goes for "flagship" status. What matters is how one schools affects the academics, athletics, and finances of the other school in the conference that it's trying to enter.

Sure big flagship schools are more likely to have a positive financial impact and having them on the schedule makes it easier to recruit in many instances. Similarly, few AAU schools are really terrible (although there are a couple which are pushing it), so marketing to their students/fans is probably not an awful idea, but both AAU and flagship status in and of themselves are irrelevant. AAU status was just a random marketing point that the B1G used to have to give the illusion of being more prestigious than they really were, and flagship status is much of the same.

If you have a ton of fans (TU doesn't), and are located in an area with a ton of high-quality recruits (TU is), and you have a smart fan base that could be swayed into going to other schools in your conference (TU does), then you are an attractive option. However, those factors are not equal. The first one is by far the biggest, and that's where TU is very weak. Fix that problem and you will get an invite.

Out of the 65 P5 schools, only TCU is not considered very high research. Only Louisville, FSU, Arizona St. and Texas Tech of the public schools don't fall into the classical definition of flagships. And Texas Tech is the only one of that group that isn't the clear #2 school in a state where there is only 1 classical flagship.

(12-08-2014 10:49 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 10:44 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 10:09 AM)pablowow Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 10:04 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 08:12 AM)pablowow Wrote:  Think Rutgers.

You mean to say, think main state flagship public university in a top 10 FB recruiting state without a major P5 presence in place? Including a roughly 20% slice of a top 5 metro area?

OK, I'm thinking Rutgers. The thing is, I'm not seeing a lot in common with Tulane other than the lackluster recent FB history, which was not one of Rutger's selling points.

Great point on state U flagship point.

I meant everything else. (Market, geography, academics, tradition)

Big 12 is NOT the same structure as BIG/ or SEC. (State U model)
It is half second school in state and private.

Also AAU is important.

AAU is irrelevant. The same goes for "flagship" status. What matters is how one schools affects the academics, athletics, and finances of the other school in the conference that it's trying to enter.

Sure big flagship schools are more likely to have a positive financial impact and having them on the schedule makes it easier to recruit in many instances. Similarly, few AAU schools are really terrible (although there are a couple which are pushing it), so marketing to their students/fans is probably not an awful idea, but both AAU and flagship status in and of themselves are irrelevant. AAU status was just a random marketing point that the B1G used to have to give the illusion of being more prestigious than they really were, and flagship status is much of the same.

If you have a ton of fans (TU doesn't), and are located in an area with a ton of high-quality recruits (TU is), and you have a smart fan base that could be swayed into going to other schools in your conference (TU does), then you are an attractive option. However, those factors are not equal. The first one is by far the biggest, and that's where TU is very weak. Fix that problem and you will get an invite.

Out of the 65 P5 schools, only TCU is not considered very high research. Only Louisville, FSU, Arizona St. and Texas Tech of the public schools don't fall into the classical definition of flagships. And Texas Tech is the only one of that group that isn't the clear #2 school in a state where there is only 1 classical flagship.

Your bar for "very high research" is low, and there are a number of private schools that you are ignoring. Furthermore, there are a ton of public schools that are flagship schools that aren't P5.

When assessing any Big XII expansion option, how important do you think local politics really is? I mention this as certain schools such as UConn answer to NO ONE while others have 2-3 other state schools that are higher up on the food chain.

That is an important factor when you consider state-side funding and access to valuable resources. We could be entering a situation in which states have to slash budgets, and we all know that the budgets of ____ State University or University of _____ will not be slashed like the budgets of the other schools will. Do the P5 want "destination schools" in that regard?

(12-08-2014 10:57 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  When assessing any Big XII expansion option, how important do you think local politics really is? I mention this as certain schools such as UConn answer to NO ONE while others have 2-3 other state schools that are higher up on the food chain.

That is an important factor when you consider state-side funding and access to valuable resources. We could be entering a situation in which states have to slash budgets, and we all know that the budgets of ____ State University or University of _____ will not be slashed like the budgets of the other schools will. Do the P5 want "destination schools" in that regard?

I would doubt that it matters very much. As a budget item, state support usually isn't all that high. UC is at 17%, with 83% coming from students and fundraising.

(12-07-2014 07:29 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 01:21 PM)FonzKnight Wrote:  I'm still trying to figure out why Memphis would even be on the list. They just had their first winning season in six years and beat nobody to do it?

You mean the same teams UCF beat to get to the same record? Memphis scored 47 more points than UCF, while facing a superior OOC schedule, and only allowed 2 more points than UCF. Memphis had more total, pass, and rush yards than UCF. And UCF's defense is only slightly better statistically than Memphis'. Both Memphis and UCF were superb at kicking this season, but Memphis was better at punting.

Statistically speaking, Memphis likely beats UCF head-to-head in a close game. Statistically we have Memphis beating UCF on the offensive side and special teams side. While only being slightly behind on the defensive side.

Here is a statistic for you head to head UCF 9-0 over memphis.