(05-16-2015 04:25 PM)RaiderRed Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 03:36 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 01:17 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Diluting your brand is a bad thing.

At this point in time there just isn't anybody that doesn't dilute the Big12 to a dangerous extent.

Texas and OU gain nothing by adding the likes of Memphis, Cincy, or Houston to their annual schedule.

There's no use trying to convince anybody of reality. They're ignoring reality in favor of fantasy.

I get that they want their respective schools to be valued more but it has been said many times, no one adds value to the Big 12.

No matter how many times you go to a bowl or make the NCAA Tourney it simply doesn't convince anyone that you are valuable.

We bring value. Tx has no incentive to change. Adding schools limits their options after the contract is over. I would be fine in the AAC if we actually had a path to the championship. It's bs and certainly undercuts everyone's value.

(05-16-2015 05:02 PM)RaiderRed Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 04:54 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  not many ad value to the B12...including Iowa State, Texas Tech, Kstate, KU, and most of the B12


welcome to the truth you coat tail riders

can we stop pretending the B12 is anything more than Texas and OU...because it's not


#truthhurts

G5 fans can continue to believe they add value but REALITY and COMMON SENSE say they DO NOT. IIRC, Big 12 schools make more on Tier 3 rights than G5 conference full TV deals.

Now, you can look at down on Tech, Iowa St, Kansas etc but the fact remains we are more valuable than G5 schools.

#yesindeedTRUTHHURTS when you are on the outside looking in.

That logic is idiotic.

(05-18-2015 07:27 AM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 05:02 PM)RaiderRed Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 04:54 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  not many ad value to the B12...including Iowa State, Texas Tech, Kstate, KU, and most of the B12


welcome to the truth you coat tail riders

can we stop pretending the B12 is anything more than Texas and OU...because it's not


#truthhurts

G5 fans can continue to believe they add value but REALITY and COMMON SENSE say they DO NOT. IIRC, Big 12 schools make more on Tier 3 rights than G5 conference full TV deals.

Now, you can look at down on Tech, Iowa St, Kansas etc but the fact remains we are more valuable than G5 schools.

#yesindeedTRUTHHURTS when you are on the outside looking in.

That logic is idiotic.

As long as the current TV deals are in place, there won't be any movement. And expecting to be attractive to a power conference after just a few years of success is kind of ludicrous too.

Look at Louisville, Utah, and TCU, the latest schools to become power conference schools. All of 'em had a decade of sustained success before they were even looked at as expansion candidates. Although in Louisville's case, the Big East's desperation helped. But the Cards were ready for the jump in competition.

UCF may be as well. So may a select few other schools. But they need to prove that consistently until the next TV contract comes up for negotiation, and the schools that do will be attractive and financially sound candidates. Power conference membership isn't something that's a right for every school, simply because they want it so desperately. It's something that has to be earned, and a couple of years of success isn't what I call earning it. A decade of more of sustained success will get you on the table as a possible candidate. But that's still no guarantee. There's a little more to it than just that.

If the Big 12 gets shut out again due to in large part not having a CCG, may see movement very quickly. Don't think the other p5 conferences are going to give the Big 12 a get out of jail free card by any stretch of the imagination.

(05-18-2015 10:24 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Look at Louisville, Utah, and TCU, the latest schools to become power conference schools. All of 'em had a decade of sustained success before they were even looked at as expansion candidates.

Sustained football success, and it's also interesting that all three of those built their recent football success under at least two different head coaches. That's not absolutely necessary, but it's a good sign that the program's success is durable and won't go away just because the first successful head coach has moved on.

(05-18-2015 10:43 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(05-18-2015 10:24 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Look at Louisville, Utah, and TCU, the latest schools to become power conference schools. All of 'em had a decade of sustained success before they were even looked at as expansion candidates.

Sustained football success, and it's also interesting that all three of those built their recent football success under at least two different head coaches. That's not absolutely necessary, but it's a good sign that the program's success is durable and won't go away just because the first successful head coach has moved on.

You forgot Rutgers in that latest of latest schools... they didn't have sustained success but they should have the "It was for cable TV contracts only" tag.

The Big 12 isn't expanding. BYU would be the logical choice but they have a TV network already and I don't think they want to deal with another LHN. UConn would be the next candidate but they are geographically a horrible match and their football program is currently awful. Cincinnati certainly would be a good fit but I can't see them coming into the league without another partner and none of the other partners seem to add that much, the two Florida schools (USF is currently as awful as UConn without the rabid basketball fan base and success in that sport and UCF, certainly a top team the past couple of years, doesn't have the tradition is also geographically far and I don't think it's such a strong fan base, but I could be wrong - they could be the sleeping giant that "rutgers" is on so many threads... maybe) and Memphis.. they were good last year... it was one year. Why not take South Florida for their one good year in the early 2000s or UConn the year they beat South Carolina and Notre Dame in football a decade ago. Makes no sense. ECU has the football drive by adds nothing marketwise and is a geographical disaster like UConn.

So nothing is going to happen. And if it does, it's Cincy and BYU. Sorry.

(05-18-2015 10:59 AM)jskwrite Wrote:  BYU would be the logical choice but they have a TV network already and I don't think they want to deal with another LHN.

BYU TV is not another LHN. It's a 24/7 channel for LDS church programming and "family" entertainment programming produced and/or approved by the church. BYU sports take up only a small portion of the airtime.

(05-18-2015 10:59 AM)jskwrite Wrote:  You forgot Rutgers in that latest of latest schools... they didn't have sustained success but they should have the "It was for cable TV contracts only" tag.

Louisville, TCU, and Utah are the only three programs now in a P5 conference that were not in a BCS conference when the BCS was first formed (1998).

If you included all of the former Big East programs now in a P5 conference, you would have to add not only Rutgers to the list, but also Miami, Virginia Tech, Boston College, West Virginia, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse. (In other words, all of the original Big East FB programs other than Temple.)

(05-18-2015 10:59 AM)jskwrite Wrote:  

(05-18-2015 10:43 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(05-18-2015 10:24 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Look at Louisville, Utah, and TCU, the latest schools to become power conference schools. All of 'em had a decade of sustained success before they were even looked at as expansion candidates.

Sustained football success, and it's also interesting that all three of those built their recent football success under at least two different head coaches. That's not absolutely necessary, but it's a good sign that the program's success is durable and won't go away just because the first successful head coach has moved on.

You forgot Rutgers in that latest of latest schools... they didn't have sustained success but they should have the "It was for cable TV contracts only" tag.

Rutgers move to the B1G is recent. But Rutgers has been playing football at the highest level since they started playing football. They have long standing rivalries with Penn State, Maryland, WVU, Pitt, Syracuse, and all the other major eastern independents.

It's not like they just decided to move up. They've always been there. So I didn't forget anything. You simply have to readjust your preconceptions.

(05-18-2015 10:43 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(05-18-2015 10:24 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Look at Louisville, Utah, and TCU, the latest schools to become power conference schools. All of 'em had a decade of sustained success before they were even looked at as expansion candidates.

Sustained football success, and it's also interesting that all three of those built their recent football success under at least two different head coaches. That's not absolutely necessary, but it's a good sign that the program's success is durable and won't go away just because the first successful head coach has moved on.

Louisville had a few years of being bad after Petrino left for the NFL. They had a good couple of seasons the past couple of years. There are schools that had winning records for more than 1o years not in a P5 conference. Some of the schools had bad years since they lost their head coaches.

(05-18-2015 10:24 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-18-2015 07:27 AM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 05:02 PM)RaiderRed Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 04:54 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  not many ad value to the B12...including Iowa State, Texas Tech, Kstate, KU, and most of the B12


welcome to the truth you coat tail riders

can we stop pretending the B12 is anything more than Texas and OU...because it's not


#truthhurts

G5 fans can continue to believe they add value but REALITY and COMMON SENSE say they DO NOT. IIRC, Big 12 schools make more on Tier 3 rights than G5 conference full TV deals.

Now, you can look at down on Tech, Iowa St, Kansas etc but the fact remains we are more valuable than G5 schools.

#yesindeedTRUTHHURTS when you are on the outside looking in.

That logic is idiotic.

As long as the current TV deals are in place, there won't be any movement. And expecting to be attractive to a power conference after just a few years of success is kind of ludicrous too.

Look at Louisville, Utah, and TCU, the latest schools to become power conference schools. All of 'em had a decade of sustained success before they were even looked at as expansion candidates. Although in Louisville's case, the Big East's desperation helped. But the Cards were ready for the jump in competition.

UCF may be as well. So may a select few other schools. But they need to prove that consistently until the next TV contract comes up for negotiation, and the schools that do will be attractive and financially sound candidates. Power conference membership isn't something that's a right for every school, simply because they want it so desperately. It's something that has to be earned, and a couple of years of success isn't what I call earning it. A decade of more of sustained success will get you on the table as a possible candidate. But that's still no guarantee. There's a little more to it than just that.

We have over a decade or more of sustained. We have succeeded at every level. Even before we moved up. When we were Indy we were successful. The only time we weren't was the 3 years in the Mac and then we moved to cusa and never looked back. In the last 10 years we had an almost 70% win percentage spanning two conferences. We beat a few p5s along the way. Even the mighty Alabama. Btw it's 71% over the last 5 and 58 going all the way back to d3. Nobody is asking for a handout. Quite frankly it's not even the money. The problem I have is we have reached the critical mass that we can field teams any given year that win but we are hampered by not having championship access.

(05-18-2015 10:59 AM)jskwrite Wrote:  

(05-18-2015 10:43 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(05-18-2015 10:24 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Look at Louisville, Utah, and TCU, the latest schools to become power conference schools. All of 'em had a decade of sustained success before they were even looked at as expansion candidates.

Sustained football success, and it's also interesting that all three of those built their recent football success under at least two different head coaches. That's not absolutely necessary, but it's a good sign that the program's success is durable and won't go away just because the first successful head coach has moved on.

You forgot Rutgers in that latest of latest schools... they didn't have sustained success but they should have the "It was for cable TV contracts only" tag.

The Big 12 isn't expanding. BYU would be the logical choice but they have a TV network already and I don't think they want to deal with another LHN. UConn would be the next candidate but they are geographically a horrible match and their football program is currently awful. Cincinnati certainly would be a good fit but I can't see them coming into the league without another partner and none of the other partners seem to add that much, the two Florida schools (USF is currently as awful as UConn without the rabid basketball fan base and success in that sport and UCF, certainly a top team the past couple of years, doesn't have the tradition is also geographically far and I don't think it's such a strong fan base, but I could be wrong - they could be the sleeping giant that "rutgers" is on so many threads... maybe) and Memphis.. they were good last year... it was one year. Why not take South Florida for their one good year in the early 2000s or UConn the year they beat South Carolina and Notre Dame in football a decade ago. Makes no sense. ECU has the football drive by adds nothing marketwise and is a geographical disaster like UConn.

So nothing is going to happen. And if it does, it's Cincy and BYU. Sorry.

Our fanbase is pretty strong and is stable. We don't have large swings and our core is just continuing to grow. Our season ticket numbers have been on the rise for years. We draw well on tv and in person despite some of the conf brethren you mentioned. If you look at the metrics we lead in every category outside of bball. We were doing well until the sanctions hit.

(05-18-2015 06:09 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(05-18-2015 10:24 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-18-2015 07:27 AM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 05:02 PM)RaiderRed Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 04:54 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  not many ad value to the B12...including Iowa State, Texas Tech, Kstate, KU, and most of the B12


welcome to the truth you coat tail riders

can we stop pretending the B12 is anything more than Texas and OU...because it's not


#truthhurts

G5 fans can continue to believe they add value but REALITY and COMMON SENSE say they DO NOT. IIRC, Big 12 schools make more on Tier 3 rights than G5 conference full TV deals.

Now, you can look at down on Tech, Iowa St, Kansas etc but the fact remains we are more valuable than G5 schools.

#yesindeedTRUTHHURTS when you are on the outside looking in.

That logic is idiotic.

As long as the current TV deals are in place, there won't be any movement. And expecting to be attractive to a power conference after just a few years of success is kind of ludicrous too.

Look at Louisville, Utah, and TCU, the latest schools to become power conference schools. All of 'em had a decade of sustained success before they were even looked at as expansion candidates. Although in Louisville's case, the Big East's desperation helped. But the Cards were ready for the jump in competition.

UCF may be as well. So may a select few other schools. But they need to prove that consistently until the next TV contract comes up for negotiation, and the schools that do will be attractive and financially sound candidates. Power conference membership isn't something that's a right for every school, simply because they want it so desperately. It's something that has to be earned, and a couple of years of success isn't what I call earning it. A decade of more of sustained success will get you on the table as a possible candidate. But that's still no guarantee. There's a little more to it than just that.

We have over a decade or more of sustained. We have succeeded at every level. Even before we moved up. When we were Indy we were successful. The only time we weren't was the 3 years in the Mac and then we moved to cusa and never looked back. In the last 10 years we had an almost 70% win percentage spanning two conferences. We beat a few p5s along the way. Even the mighty Alabama. Btw it's 71% over the last 5 and 58 going all the way back to d3. Nobody is asking for a handout. Quite frankly it's not even the money. The problem I have is we have reached the critical mass that we can field teams any given year that win but we are hampered by not having championship access.

You act like I have some say in the matter.

(05-19-2015 01:30 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-18-2015 06:09 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(05-18-2015 10:24 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-18-2015 07:27 AM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(05-16-2015 05:02 PM)RaiderRed Wrote:  G5 fans can continue to believe they add value but REALITY and COMMON SENSE say they DO NOT. IIRC, Big 12 schools make more on Tier 3 rights than G5 conference full TV deals.

Now, you can look at down on Tech, Iowa St, Kansas etc but the fact remains we are more valuable than G5 schools.

#yesindeedTRUTHHURTS when you are on the outside looking in.

That logic is idiotic.

As long as the current TV deals are in place, there won't be any movement. And expecting to be attractive to a power conference after just a few years of success is kind of ludicrous too.

Look at Louisville, Utah, and TCU, the latest schools to become power conference schools. All of 'em had a decade of sustained success before they were even looked at as expansion candidates. Although in Louisville's case, the Big East's desperation helped. But the Cards were ready for the jump in competition.

UCF may be as well. So may a select few other schools. But they need to prove that consistently until the next TV contract comes up for negotiation, and the schools that do will be attractive and financially sound candidates. Power conference membership isn't something that's a right for every school, simply because they want it so desperately. It's something that has to be earned, and a couple of years of success isn't what I call earning it. A decade of more of sustained success will get you on the table as a possible candidate. But that's still no guarantee. There's a little more to it than just that.

We have over a decade or more of sustained. We have succeeded at every level. Even before we moved up. When we were Indy we were successful. The only time we weren't was the 3 years in the Mac and then we moved to cusa and never looked back. In the last 10 years we had an almost 70% win percentage spanning two conferences. We beat a few p5s along the way. Even the mighty Alabama. Btw it's 71% over the last 5 and 58 going all the way back to d3. Nobody is asking for a handout. Quite frankly it's not even the money. The problem I have is we have reached the critical mass that we can field teams any given year that win but we are hampered by not having championship access.

You act like I have some say in the matter.

I understand. I am just responding to your comment that's all

(05-19-2015 02:56 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(05-19-2015 01:30 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-18-2015 06:09 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(05-18-2015 10:24 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-18-2015 07:27 AM)Knightbengal Wrote:  That logic is idiotic.

As long as the current TV deals are in place, there won't be any movement. And expecting to be attractive to a power conference after just a few years of success is kind of ludicrous too.

Look at Louisville, Utah, and TCU, the latest schools to become power conference schools. All of 'em had a decade of sustained success before they were even looked at as expansion candidates. Although in Louisville's case, the Big East's desperation helped. But the Cards were ready for the jump in competition.

UCF may be as well. So may a select few other schools. But they need to prove that consistently until the next TV contract comes up for negotiation, and the schools that do will be attractive and financially sound candidates. Power conference membership isn't something that's a right for every school, simply because they want it so desperately. It's something that has to be earned, and a couple of years of success isn't what I call earning it. A decade of more of sustained success will get you on the table as a possible candidate. But that's still no guarantee. There's a little more to it than just that.

We have over a decade or more of sustained. We have succeeded at every level. Even before we moved up. When we were Indy we were successful. The only time we weren't was the 3 years in the Mac and then we moved to cusa and never looked back. In the last 10 years we had an almost 70% win percentage spanning two conferences. We beat a few p5s along the way. Even the mighty Alabama. Btw it's 71% over the last 5 and 58 going all the way back to d3. Nobody is asking for a handout. Quite frankly it's not even the money. The problem I have is we have reached the critical mass that we can field teams any given year that win but we are hampered by not having championship access.

You act like I have some say in the matter.

I understand. I am just responding to your comment that's all

Well, in response to your claims, just compare UCF's success to TCU's for a decade prior to their entry into the B12. You'll see if little bit of difference there.

UCF is on the right path. But they're not quite there yet.