Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
Author Message
1845 Bear Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,161
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation: 187
I Root For: Baylor
Location:
Post: #41
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
(04-29-2015 09:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 09:45 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  The percentages are my guesses only. I make no claims otherwise. That's just how I see things based on the evidence presented.

He1nousOne, if your scenarios emerge, it will make this board very interesting and more than fun than it's been. I just don't see the evidence for them though. The only conferences pushing CCG de-regulation so far have been the Big 12 and ACC and the set-ups they want have been mostly shown (Big 12 wanting a championship game with 10; ACC wanting to end round robin in division play or other tweaks). Meanwhile, every move so far has suggested this is done in bits and pieces with no grand plan and every move has shown conferences have amazing resilience (the Big East lost almost every member, but legally continues on as the American to this day). We've also seen most the big players happy with the current set-up including Texas and we've seen the networks essentially up Big 12 pay when they weren't required to just to keep the Big 12 around when the PAC-10 was threatening.

If we see news reports from the media suggesting your scenarios are coming about I'll switch sides, but I've seen nothing to suggest that to me at this point. If you're right in the end, I'll gladly concede and congratulate you.

You are absolutely right about there not being much evidence. That is purposefully done.

Just because it's just the ACC and big 12 talking about deregulation, that doesn't mean the other conferences don't care about it or that they will just go ahead and throw a life preserver to the big 12 so that the big 12 can continue to operate under different rules than the other four.

Just because you see single events happening in "bits and pieces", that doesn't mean there isn't any planning going on behind the scenes. No planning generally means failure in the professional world.

I don't see Texas as being happy with the current situation, not at all.

If the big 12 GoR was absolutely about keeping the big 12 around for the long haul then why such a short time period for the GoR? The Big Ten's BTN GoR is of a much longer time period.

I am fine with folks needing to follow the hand outs that media pundits hand out after they have received their hand outs but as I have said before...I am not a herd animal and I don't prefer hand outs.

I know I come off as brash and rude, that is purposeful. I know you don't take it personally.

Simple answer on GOR length that I have seen posted a long time-

The Big 12 and B1G are tied to tv contracts due to legal consideration neccessary for the arrangement of the GOR. The B1G's is tied to the BTN which was this risky as heck venture in 2006 and FOX wanted assurance nobody'd bail over X number of years incase it went south.

The Big 12's is simply tied to the league tv deal which simply isn't running nearly as long or with that manner of risk.
04-29-2015 09:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #42
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
(04-29-2015 09:59 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 09:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 09:45 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  The percentages are my guesses only. I make no claims otherwise. That's just how I see things based on the evidence presented.

He1nousOne, if your scenarios emerge, it will make this board very interesting and more than fun than it's been. I just don't see the evidence for them though. The only conferences pushing CCG de-regulation so far have been the Big 12 and ACC and the set-ups they want have been mostly shown (Big 12 wanting a championship game with 10; ACC wanting to end round robin in division play or other tweaks). Meanwhile, every move so far has suggested this is done in bits and pieces with no grand plan and every move has shown conferences have amazing resilience (the Big East lost almost every member, but legally continues on as the American to this day). We've also seen most the big players happy with the current set-up including Texas and we've seen the networks essentially up Big 12 pay when they weren't required to just to keep the Big 12 around when the PAC-10 was threatening.

If we see news reports from the media suggesting your scenarios are coming about I'll switch sides, but I've seen nothing to suggest that to me at this point. If you're right in the end, I'll gladly concede and congratulate you.

You are absolutely right about there not being much evidence. That is purposefully done.

Just because it's just the ACC and big 12 talking about deregulation, that doesn't mean the other conferences don't care about it or that they will just go ahead and throw a life preserver to the big 12 so that the big 12 can continue to operate under different rules than the other four.

Just because you see single events happening in "bits and pieces", that doesn't mean there isn't any planning going on behind the scenes. No planning generally means failure in the professional world.

I don't see Texas as being happy with the current situation, not at all.

If the big 12 GoR was absolutely about keeping the big 12 around for the long haul then why such a short time period for the GoR? The Big Ten's BTN GoR is of a much longer time period.

I am fine with folks needing to follow the hand outs that media pundits hand out after they have received their hand outs but as I have said before...I am not a herd animal and I don't prefer hand outs.

I know I come off as brash and rude, that is purposeful. I know you don't take it personally.

Simple answer on GOR length that I have seen posted a long time-

The Big 12 and B1G are tied to tv contracts due to legal consideration neccessary for the arrangement of the GOR. The B1G's is tied to the BTN which was this risky as heck venture in 2006 and FOX wanted assurance nobody'd bail over X number of years incase it went south.

The Big 12's is simply tied to the league tv deal which simply isn't running nearly as long or with that manner of risk.

Do you deny that if Texas isn't interested in continuing the GoR when this iteration ceases, that many of the current big 12 schools would be quite fearful about being left behind without a life raft?
04-29-2015 10:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
omniorange Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,144
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:

Donators
Post: #43
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
(04-29-2015 09:53 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 09:50 PM)omniorange Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 09:45 PM)Dasville Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 09:41 PM)omniorange Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 07:20 PM)TerryD Wrote:  "Swarbrick said that until Notre Dame is in the playoff conversation, he can't evaluate it.

"I'd like to be in the position to have to worry about that," he quipped.

"It's not that there's a 13th game," he said. "It's always going to be against a really good opponent. It's the conference championship game. It's not the aggregate number, it's who you're playing. There are going to be years where a team looks like they're going to get in and gets upset in their conference championship game and they don't get in. Did the 13th game help them? No. I'm not saying that's a reason to do it or not do it, I'm just saying one year's worth of experience with this system is way too small to draw any conclusions about how it will play out over time."

Which is why I like Jack Swarbrick. He understands that one year's worth of data is not a reason to get your panties in a wad.

Cheers,
Neil



Brett McMurphy @McMurphyESPN
· 2h 2 hours ago
Bill Hancock on @CFBPlayoff: "We need to emphasis more the importance of the conference championships"

Which they already did in the 1st year of the CFP. And luckily it worked out in every instance. But if Arizona had pulled the upset over Oregon and/or Georgia Tech had pulled the upset over FSU, then TCU and/or Baylor would likely have been in the playoffs, despite not having a CCG.

If I'm the AD at Notre Dame, I'm definitely taking a wait and see attitude on this. There truly is no better stance for him to take.

Cheers,
Neil

This, nothing to panic about, just more monitoring the landscape. Jack has said a few times if it's necessary to have a C.C. on the resume to make the playoff we will rethink independence. But no need for that now, nothing has changed yet. Heck first we actually have to be good enough to make it. lol

True on the latter part. But I don't necessarily see Swarbrick as just laying back and "monitoring the landscape" per se. I don't think you do either. I think he was very pro-active in the last two rounds of expansion keeping a tight relationship with Texas in the 2010 B1G expansion and then again in 2011-12 with ACC expansion.

He reportedly committed to the ACC in such a way as to make it clear that IF the time ever comes that ND does join a conference for football that will be the ACC (assuming no major upheaval to that conference).

Now it's also true that he didn't have much to lose in that regard because the likelihood of ND as an institution ever coming to that decision is low. But that and the 5-game scheduling commitment to include all ACC members shows me he was actively involved in the process.

After Jurich, Swarbrick is the best AD, imho. Although there are probably some in the West that are as good, I just don't necessarily know about them as well being an eastern sports fan.

Cheers,
Neil
04-29-2015 10:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
1845 Bear Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,161
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation: 187
I Root For: Baylor
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
(04-29-2015 10:04 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 09:59 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 09:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 09:45 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  The percentages are my guesses only. I make no claims otherwise. That's just how I see things based on the evidence presented.

He1nousOne, if your scenarios emerge, it will make this board very interesting and more than fun than it's been. I just don't see the evidence for them though. The only conferences pushing CCG de-regulation so far have been the Big 12 and ACC and the set-ups they want have been mostly shown (Big 12 wanting a championship game with 10; ACC wanting to end round robin in division play or other tweaks). Meanwhile, every move so far has suggested this is done in bits and pieces with no grand plan and every move has shown conferences have amazing resilience (the Big East lost almost every member, but legally continues on as the American to this day). We've also seen most the big players happy with the current set-up including Texas and we've seen the networks essentially up Big 12 pay when they weren't required to just to keep the Big 12 around when the PAC-10 was threatening.

If we see news reports from the media suggesting your scenarios are coming about I'll switch sides, but I've seen nothing to suggest that to me at this point. If you're right in the end, I'll gladly concede and congratulate you.

You are absolutely right about there not being much evidence. That is purposefully done.

Just because it's just the ACC and big 12 talking about deregulation, that doesn't mean the other conferences don't care about it or that they will just go ahead and throw a life preserver to the big 12 so that the big 12 can continue to operate under different rules than the other four.

Just because you see single events happening in "bits and pieces", that doesn't mean there isn't any planning going on behind the scenes. No planning generally means failure in the professional world.

I don't see Texas as being happy with the current situation, not at all.

If the big 12 GoR was absolutely about keeping the big 12 around for the long haul then why such a short time period for the GoR? The Big Ten's BTN GoR is of a much longer time period.

I am fine with folks needing to follow the hand outs that media pundits hand out after they have received their hand outs but as I have said before...I am not a herd animal and I don't prefer hand outs.

I know I come off as brash and rude, that is purposeful. I know you don't take it personally.

Simple answer on GOR length that I have seen posted a long time-

The Big 12 and B1G are tied to tv contracts due to legal consideration neccessary for the arrangement of the GOR. The B1G's is tied to the BTN which was this risky as heck venture in 2006 and FOX wanted assurance nobody'd bail over X number of years incase it went south.

The Big 12's is simply tied to the league tv deal which simply isn't running nearly as long or with that manner of risk.

Do you deny that if Texas isn't interested in continuing the GoR when this iteration ceases, that many of the current big 12 schools would be quite fearful about being left behind without a life raft?

That is immaterial to our discussion about GOR length but I will humor you with your going off on a tangent. If the main brands in ANY league look around you see schools react and the Big 12 is no different. The length of the GOR is tied to the length of the tv deals due to legal issues involving the need for consideration to prevent having issues with the validity of the deal. No consideration = no GOR possible.
04-29-2015 10:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #45
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
(04-29-2015 10:12 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 10:04 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 09:59 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 09:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 09:45 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  The percentages are my guesses only. I make no claims otherwise. That's just how I see things based on the evidence presented.

He1nousOne, if your scenarios emerge, it will make this board very interesting and more than fun than it's been. I just don't see the evidence for them though. The only conferences pushing CCG de-regulation so far have been the Big 12 and ACC and the set-ups they want have been mostly shown (Big 12 wanting a championship game with 10; ACC wanting to end round robin in division play or other tweaks). Meanwhile, every move so far has suggested this is done in bits and pieces with no grand plan and every move has shown conferences have amazing resilience (the Big East lost almost every member, but legally continues on as the American to this day). We've also seen most the big players happy with the current set-up including Texas and we've seen the networks essentially up Big 12 pay when they weren't required to just to keep the Big 12 around when the PAC-10 was threatening.

If we see news reports from the media suggesting your scenarios are coming about I'll switch sides, but I've seen nothing to suggest that to me at this point. If you're right in the end, I'll gladly concede and congratulate you.

You are absolutely right about there not being much evidence. That is purposefully done.

Just because it's just the ACC and big 12 talking about deregulation, that doesn't mean the other conferences don't care about it or that they will just go ahead and throw a life preserver to the big 12 so that the big 12 can continue to operate under different rules than the other four.

Just because you see single events happening in "bits and pieces", that doesn't mean there isn't any planning going on behind the scenes. No planning generally means failure in the professional world.

I don't see Texas as being happy with the current situation, not at all.

If the big 12 GoR was absolutely about keeping the big 12 around for the long haul then why such a short time period for the GoR? The Big Ten's BTN GoR is of a much longer time period.

I am fine with folks needing to follow the hand outs that media pundits hand out after they have received their hand outs but as I have said before...I am not a herd animal and I don't prefer hand outs.

I know I come off as brash and rude, that is purposeful. I know you don't take it personally.

Simple answer on GOR length that I have seen posted a long time-

The Big 12 and B1G are tied to tv contracts due to legal consideration neccessary for the arrangement of the GOR. The B1G's is tied to the BTN which was this risky as heck venture in 2006 and FOX wanted assurance nobody'd bail over X number of years incase it went south.

The Big 12's is simply tied to the league tv deal which simply isn't running nearly as long or with that manner of risk.

Do you deny that if Texas isn't interested in continuing the GoR when this iteration ceases, that many of the current big 12 schools would be quite fearful about being left behind without a life raft?

That is immaterial to our discussion about GOR length but I will humor you with your going off on a tangent. If the main brands in ANY league look around you see schools react and the Big 12 is no different. The length of the GOR is tied to the length of the tv deals due to legal issues involving the need for consideration to prevent having issues with the validity of the deal. No consideration = no GOR possible.

It absolutely is material to the discussion, you just don't like that it is due to your Baylor leanings. I completely understand and appreciate that. If the GoR was longer then the fear about Texas's leanings would be much less.

You can say that such would be the case in any conference but no other conference has lost four major brands.....except The Big East of course. So the comparison of the big 12 to the other Majors is more immaterial to the discussion than me bringing up big 12 school's fearing Texas unhappiness with the current situation.
(This post was last modified: 04-29-2015 10:27 PM by He1nousOne.)
04-29-2015 10:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ohio1317 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,675
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 358
I Root For: Ohio State
Location:
Post: #46
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
(04-29-2015 09:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You are absolutely right about there not being much evidence. That is purposefully done.

Just because it's just the ACC and big 12 talking about deregulation, that doesn't mean the other conferences don't care about it or that they will just go ahead and throw a life preserver to the big 12 so that the big 12 can continue to operate under different rules than the other four.

It doesn't mean the others aren't talking about it, but you don't get major structural changes anywhere close to happening without it getting out to the media. Those take major posturing, back and forth, and the powers-that-be use the media to their advantage in those. Maybe you get CCGs changes at some point for semi-finals, but when serious negotiations start on that, we'll definitely hear about it. Think about the CFP discussions.

This isn't an issue of the Big 12 vs. the 4. The Big 12 could have a CCG next year if they expand. That might not be ideal, but if it's a make or break situation, they can probably even do so without it being too revenue negative (add football onlys and a CCG which pays most the cost of the additions). There is nothing for the other 4 in forcing that to happen though so why wouldn't they vote for it. It's bad business to make one person you work with regularly angry with nothing in it for you.

Additionally, they all operate on different set-ups. The PAC-12 has a championship with 12 while the other 3 have one with 14. The ACC and SEC by with only 8 conference games while the Big Ten and PAC-12 do 9.

(04-29-2015 09:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Just because you see single events happening in "bits and pieces", that doesn't mean there isn't any planning going on behind the scenes. No planning generally means failure in the professional world.

I'll argue the reverse. Yes there is planning at the conference level, but any attempt to put all the various moves into one central grand plan is ignoring that these are hundreds moves by hundreds of parties (conferences, networks, schools, athletic/academic groups, etc) and all these plans change as circumstances do.

The Big Ten is certainly looking at it's exposure in various areas and considering if they can increase it and what are the risks of trying it. Knowing they can't undue expansion though will make them reluctant to take too many risks though (same applies for other conferences). The PAC-10 had a grand plan of becoming the PAC-16. The plan failed and the new plan was a large western conference and thus they rejected Oklahoma/Oklahoma State a year later.

Beyond this, there is planning, but there is no planning between conferences on raids. If you have two parties agreeing to jointly go after a third with the intent on destroying it, you have major legal problems.



(04-29-2015 09:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I don't see Texas as being happy with the current situation, not at all.

They had every chance to leave and go elsewhere. Any conference would have made room for them, but they choose the Big 12. New leaders might have different ideas, but the time they'll be approached is after the GoRs get closer to expiring.

(04-29-2015 09:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  If the big 12 GoR was absolutely about keeping the big 12 around for the long haul then why such a short time period for the GoR? The Big Ten's BTN GoR is of a much longer time period.

I'm actually not arguing over the over haul (although don't think the conference is doomed either). If a major conference looses most it's members in the next decade, it will be the Big 12. They did all sign the agreement though and it wasn't that long ago. Very little has changed since then. Given it another 6-7 years and maybe things will be different, but right now things are little changed from when they all signed the agreement.


(04-29-2015 09:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I am fine with folks needing to follow the hand outs that media pundits hand out after they have received their hand outs but as I have said before...I am not a herd animal and I don't prefer hand outs.

I know I come off as brash and rude, that is purposeful. I know you don't take it personally.

Don't mistake disagreeing as taking media pundit handouts. They are taken with a healthy grain of salt, but also not ignored in evidence either. The most knowledgeable of us on these boards are actually a lot better at discerning the truth from the crap than most the sports media and have called out the false stuff when we see it. Examples: 1. There was a time not so long ago when the media was looking for four 16 team conferences. Most of us here knew things didn't work out like that in the real world as the conferences all acted independently and 16 was not ideal for all of them given available choices. 2. There's been a ton of reports of conference movement that no one who understood the process would think was real. The Big Ten wasn't going to take a Pitt team in a city they already had major coverage. The Big East stood zero chance of taking Boston College and Maryland from the ACC.
(This post was last modified: 04-29-2015 10:38 PM by ohio1317.)
04-29-2015 10:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #47
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
I am going to make a general response to your post Ohio1317. I don't want to get into a back and forth of cutting up posts. Between two people it is effective but when a quote train builds up with those kind of posts, it becomes rather difficult for others to follow and that is why I am here.

So, my first point in response is rather simple. Compartmentalization makes much possible when it comes to secret planning, I know this personally. We saw with Maryland the effectiveness of an NDA. Now, you could argue that such is just a situation with Maryland but there were many parties involved in that and the situation was effectively compartmentalized.

In the current situation, it would be compartmentalized to mainly the Commissioners. The Presidents, and maybe the AD's, could be privy to non-detailed private discussions with the Commissioners but even they would want to be able to claim ignorance of what is going on. That is why these Commissioners get paid so much.

During the failure of the PAC's very public attempt to land the Texoma-4, DeLoss Dodds publicly spoke to a Chamber of Commerce about how Texas had very detailed discussions with The ACC about going there should Oklahoma leave for The PAC. What can we learn from the PAC's blunder? Well, we know that no other conference would ever make the massive mistake of making that kind of an attempt out in the public eye. That is why we saw the Maryland situation go down as it did. Hell, we didn't even hear anything come out of Rutgers. No one brings that up though. Compartmentalization and NDA's are the way business happens now because of the effectiveness of handling business this way. That is how major corporations handle business.

The "Media" no longer pushes for information beyond the point when the masters of information get angry with their methods. Those that play ball get the juicy parts personally handed to them for release on their own social media methods. It isn't as hard to put together something like this in this day and age. It would have been much, much harder back in the days of actual investigative journalism.
04-29-2015 10:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Knightbengal Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,664
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 55
I Root For: UCF
Location:
Post: #48
Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
Personally I think it's a combo of the conferences and their media partners. The wild card is the b10 as they aren't reliant on a network to maintain the carriage of their network. I see this as a consolidation of properties due to the rising costs of live content. It's a way to control costs and pick and choose your brands. Espn sheltered it's properties in the acc relatively cheaply as opposed to keeping the big east around and brands that it didn't care as much about. The acc was all about saving bball. Fox needs content for fs1. I think they overpay for the b12 tier 1 rights and keep it in place. I also think tx finally allows the lhn to turn into a b12 network. Now that fox has bought into the market and espn has picked out it's brands it allows the tv partners to pay more to each individual school so everyone is happy.
04-29-2015 11:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #49
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
(04-29-2015 09:45 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  We've also seen most the big players happy with the current set-up including Texas and we've seen the networks essentially up Big 12 pay when they weren't required to just to keep the Big 12 around when the PAC-10 was threatening.

This is a really good point. The TV networks, by all indications, don't want the number of top conferences reduced. They paid the Big 12 a lot of money in 2010, and paid Texas another $15 million a year on top of that, to keep the number at 5 instead of 4. If a break up happens on its own, the TV guys will roll with it, I'm sure, but they're not going to offer extra money as an incentive to make it happen and they might again offer more money to make it not happen. None of the other P5 conferences want to break up the Big 12, or help break it up, unless they get Texas for themselves, but Texas isn't going to move to a new conference if they get only the same amount of money everyone else gets. They want more than Washington State or Minnesota or Vanderbilt and they know their market value warrants it. No conference is going to break that impasse unless they shift to unequal revenue sharing.
04-29-2015 11:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
shere khan Offline
Southerner
*

Posts: 60,503
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 7458
I Root For: Tulane
Location: Teh transfer portal
Post: #50
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
(04-29-2015 07:22 PM)TerryD Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 07:18 PM)USFRamenu Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 07:12 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  I would predict a 12-0 or 11-1 ND being left out of the playoffs for 13-0 and 12-1 P5 teams would probably be the final move for ND to move into a conference.

I predict that Notre Dame and the Irish would join with a group of Scotts and raid a northern English town before that happened. 07-coffee3


Sign me up for that. As one who holds Irish citizenship and one who fell in love with Scotland after several visits, that works for me.

That is one "conference" that makes sense to me......

I will help form the Ulster Scots team, those are my direct line people.
04-30-2015 12:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,873
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 892
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #51
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
(04-29-2015 07:42 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Another word, it you do not hold a CCG, you are screwed. It looks like the other three P5 conferences will be voting against the deregulation of the CCG. So, Big 12 and Notre Dame will be left out of the 4 playoff spots. Big 12 needs to add 2 to 6 schools and Notre Dame must join a conference to be eligible.


I think that the calculus is the same for ND as it was in 2012: Go undefeated.

I am ok with that.
04-30-2015 08:15 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
USFRamenu Away
Enthusiast
*

Posts: 1,650
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 53
I Root For: South Florida
Location: South Florida
Post: #52
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
(04-29-2015 08:41 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You are right, I missed your point because I wouldn't have thought of something like that which doesn't make any sense. The big 12 won't be split just between The Big Ten and The PAC.

Fox isn't the only Network involved in the big 12's GoR. They are the network that has the most to lose in the situation where the conference is dissolved.

I see, I thought that Fox owned 51% of the PAC network. It's the B1G network instead. My mistake. 03-shhhh
(This post was last modified: 04-30-2015 10:07 AM by USFRamenu.)
04-30-2015 10:06 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,287
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #53
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
(04-29-2015 07:00 PM)Dasville Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 06:45 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  Brett McMurphy @McMurphyESPN · 1m 1 minute ago
Big 12’s Bob Bowlsby: “What we heard is if we don’t go to a championship game we’re at a disadvantage"
4 retweets 1 favorite
Reply Retweet4 Favorite1 Follow
More
Brett McMurphy @McMurphyESPN · 5m 5 minutes ago
Bob Bowlsby “I surmise a move in that direction (toward having future Big 12 title game)”
10 retweets 3 favorites
Reply Retweet10 Favorite3 Follow
More
Brett McMurphy @McMurphyESPN · 6m 6 minutes ago
Bob Bowlsby said Jeff Long indicated “13 (games) better than 12.” If Big 12 at disadvantage Big 12 would look to add future title game


What about this one:

Quote:
Brett McMurphy @McMurphyESPN
· 2h 2 hours ago
Bill Hancock on @CFBPlayoff: "We need to emphasis more the importance of the conference championships"

And yet TCU was ranked ahead of FSU and OSU when they had played 11 and the other two had played 12.
04-30-2015 10:10 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
USFRamenu Away
Enthusiast
*

Posts: 1,650
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 53
I Root For: South Florida
Location: South Florida
Post: #54
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
Could this have some impact on all the rest of this.

PAC 12 Blowing up Revenue Model.
04-30-2015 10:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,287
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #55
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
(04-29-2015 09:45 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  The percentages are my guesses only. I make no claims otherwise. That's just how I see things based on the evidence presented.

He1nousOne, if your scenarios emerge, it will make this board very interesting and more than fun than it's been. I just don't see the evidence for them though. The only conferences pushing CCG de-regulation so far have been the Big 12 and ACC and the set-ups they want have been mostly shown (Big 12 wanting a championship game with 10; ACC wanting to end round robin in division play or other tweaks). Meanwhile, every move so far has suggested this is done in bits and pieces with no grand plan and every move has shown conferences have amazing resilience (the Big East lost almost every member, but legally continues on as the American to this day). We've also seen most the big players happy with the current set-up including Texas and we've seen the networks essentially up Big 12 pay when they weren't required to just to keep the Big 12 around when the PAC-10 was threatening.

If we see news reports from the media suggesting your scenarios are coming about I'll switch sides, but I've seen nothing to suggest that to me at this point. If you're right in the end, I'll gladly concede and congratulate you.

And the ACC is the only conference with silly divisional splits. Maybe if they set it up geographically, they wouldn't have the issue.
04-30-2015 10:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,287
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #56
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
(04-30-2015 10:12 AM)USFRamenu Wrote:  Could this have some impact on all the rest of this.

PAC 12 Blowing up Revenue Model.

This would tie teams more tightly to conferences.
04-30-2015 10:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
USFRamenu Away
Enthusiast
*

Posts: 1,650
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 53
I Root For: South Florida
Location: South Florida
Post: #57
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
(04-30-2015 10:21 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(04-30-2015 10:12 AM)USFRamenu Wrote:  Could this have some impact on all the rest of this.

PAC 12 Blowing up Revenue Model.

This would tie teams more tightly to conferences.

What I meant is the PAC's need for a higher revenue base would lean heavily towards acquiring new markets. Thus expansion for the PAC and lets face facts; The largest pool of expansion candidates for the PAC is in Texas.. 07-coffee3
(This post was last modified: 04-30-2015 10:52 AM by USFRamenu.)
04-30-2015 10:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bitcruncher Offline
pepperoni roll psycho...
*

Posts: 61,859
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 526
I Root For: West Virginia
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post: #58
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
(04-30-2015 08:15 AM)TerryD Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 07:42 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Another word, it you do not hold a CCG, you are screwed. It looks like the other three P5 conferences will be voting against the deregulation of the CCG. So, Big 12 and Notre Dame will be left out of the 4 playoff spots. Big 12 needs to add 2 to 6 schools and Notre Dame must join a conference to be eligible.
I think that the calculus is the same for ND as it was in 2012: Go undefeated.

I am ok with that.
As long as there are only 4 playoff spots, that's going to be the requirement for a lot of schools' entry into the playoff, especially those with weak OOC schedules.
04-30-2015 05:21 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TexanMark Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 25,637
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 1326
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: St. Augustine, FL
Post: #59
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
(04-30-2015 10:14 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 09:45 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  The percentages are my guesses only. I make no claims otherwise. That's just how I see things based on the evidence presented.

He1nousOne, if your scenarios emerge, it will make this board very interesting and more than fun than it's been. I just don't see the evidence for them though. The only conferences pushing CCG de-regulation so far have been the Big 12 and ACC and the set-ups they want have been mostly shown (Big 12 wanting a championship game with 10; ACC wanting to end round robin in division play or other tweaks). Meanwhile, every move so far has suggested this is done in bits and pieces with no grand plan and every move has shown conferences have amazing resilience (the Big East lost almost every member, but legally continues on as the American to this day). We've also seen most the big players happy with the current set-up including Texas and we've seen the networks essentially up Big 12 pay when they weren't required to just to keep the Big 12 around when the PAC-10 was threatening.

If we see news reports from the media suggesting your scenarios are coming about I'll switch sides, but I've seen nothing to suggest that to me at this point. If you're right in the end, I'll gladly concede and congratulate you.

And the ACC is the only conference with silly divisional splits. Maybe if they set it up geographically, they wouldn't have the issue.

Missouri sez hi.
04-30-2015 05:59 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,287
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #60
RE: Real tweets about Title game and maybe expansion
(04-30-2015 05:59 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  
(04-30-2015 10:14 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(04-29-2015 09:45 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  The percentages are my guesses only. I make no claims otherwise. That's just how I see things based on the evidence presented.

He1nousOne, if your scenarios emerge, it will make this board very interesting and more than fun than it's been. I just don't see the evidence for them though. The only conferences pushing CCG de-regulation so far have been the Big 12 and ACC and the set-ups they want have been mostly shown (Big 12 wanting a championship game with 10; ACC wanting to end round robin in division play or other tweaks). Meanwhile, every move so far has suggested this is done in bits and pieces with no grand plan and every move has shown conferences have amazing resilience (the Big East lost almost every member, but legally continues on as the American to this day). We've also seen most the big players happy with the current set-up including Texas and we've seen the networks essentially up Big 12 pay when they weren't required to just to keep the Big 12 around when the PAC-10 was threatening.

If we see news reports from the media suggesting your scenarios are coming about I'll switch sides, but I've seen nothing to suggest that to me at this point. If you're right in the end, I'll gladly concede and congratulate you.

And the ACC is the only conference with silly divisional splits. Maybe if they set it up geographically, they wouldn't have the issue.

Missouri sez hi.

SEC is split northeast/southwest. Its not intertwined like the ACC where even heavy fans can't remember who is in which division.
04-30-2015 07:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.