Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Big 12 action could be delayed
Author Message
Nebraskafan Offline
Banned

Posts: 1,342
Joined: Jul 2015
I Root For: Nebreaska
Location:
Post: #1
Big 12 action could be delayed
IMO, this is a clear indication that some schools are saying no thanks right now and want to play things out more, especially Texas.

Kirk Bohls

‎@kbohls

Bohls: Big 12 action could be delayed; Perrin era could be shortened http://www.mystatesman.com/news/spor...-era-co/nqmC5/
8:26 AM - 16 Mar 2016

Don’t be surprised if the Big 12 leaders do nothing concrete at their May-June meetings in Irving. They’ll consider the research data from two analytic firms, but it’s possible no serious action will happen on key issues such as a conference football championship game, expansion and a Big 12 television network until later in the summer. “I think that’s accurate,” Big 12 Commissioner Bob Bowlsby told me in Kansas City, Mo. “There could be some things that slow us down.” One could be the direction Texas wants to take. No one seems to have a good feel for the Longhorns’ stance, in part because the school has a new chancellor, president and athletic director. Any feel for Texas’ desires? “We’ve had conversations, but I’m not at liberty to characterize them.” Still betting the title game happens with the outcry for a 13th “data point.” One Big 12 AD told me he thinks the league should wait and get one more season and decide on a game next January. Three years is just a better sample size than two
03-16-2016 11:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,287
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #2
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
(03-16-2016 11:30 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  IMO, this is a clear indication that some schools are saying no thanks right now and want to play things out more, especially Texas.

Kirk Bohls

‎@kbohls

Bohls: Big 12 action could be delayed; Perrin era could be shortened http://www.mystatesman.com/news/spor...-era-co/nqmC5/
8:26 AM - 16 Mar 2016

Don’t be surprised if the Big 12 leaders do nothing concrete at their May-June meetings in Irving. They’ll consider the research data from two analytic firms, but it’s possible no serious action will happen on key issues such as a conference football championship game, expansion and a Big 12 television network until later in the summer. “I think that’s accurate,” Big 12 Commissioner Bob Bowlsby told me in Kansas City, Mo. “There could be some things that slow us down.” One could be the direction Texas wants to take. No one seems to have a good feel for the Longhorns’ stance, in part because the school has a new chancellor, president and athletic director. Any feel for Texas’ desires? “We’ve had conversations, but I’m not at liberty to characterize them.” Still betting the title game happens with the outcry for a 13th “data point.” One Big 12 AD told me he thinks the league should wait and get one more season and decide on a game next January. Three years is just a better sample size than two

It would seem unlikely they would get the data on one day and make all their decisions the next. Its quite logical that no decisions would be made until later in the summer. That's not a delay. That's just deliberation.
03-16-2016 11:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Pony94 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 25,650
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 1177
I Root For: SMU
Location: Bee Cave, TX
Post: #3
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
(03-16-2016 11:45 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-16-2016 11:30 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  IMO, this is a clear indication that some schools are saying no thanks right now and want to play things out more, especially Texas.

Kirk Bohls

‎@kbohls

Bohls: Big 12 action could be delayed; Perrin era could be shortened http://www.mystatesman.com/news/spor...-era-co/nqmC5/
8:26 AM - 16 Mar 2016

Don’t be surprised if the Big 12 leaders do nothing concrete at their May-June meetings in Irving. They’ll consider the research data from two analytic firms, but it’s possible no serious action will happen on key issues such as a conference football championship game, expansion and a Big 12 television network until later in the summer. “I think that’s accurate,” Big 12 Commissioner Bob Bowlsby told me in Kansas City, Mo. “There could be some things that slow us down.” One could be the direction Texas wants to take. No one seems to have a good feel for the Longhorns’ stance, in part because the school has a new chancellor, president and athletic director. Any feel for Texas’ desires? “We’ve had conversations, but I’m not at liberty to characterize them.” Still betting the title game happens with the outcry for a 13th “data point.” One Big 12 AD told me he thinks the league should wait and get one more season and decide on a game next January. Three years is just a better sample size than two

It would seem unlikely they would get the data on one day and make all their decisions the next. Its quite logical that no decisions would be made until later in the summer. That's not a delay. That's just deliberation.

That messes up the timelines for the AAC schools hoping to give notice by June 30th.
03-16-2016 11:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nebraskafan Offline
Banned

Posts: 1,342
Joined: Jul 2015
I Root For: Nebreaska
Location:
Post: #4
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
(03-16-2016 11:55 AM)Pony94 Wrote:  
(03-16-2016 11:45 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-16-2016 11:30 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  IMO, this is a clear indication that some schools are saying no thanks right now and want to play things out more, especially Texas.

Kirk Bohls

‎@kbohls

Bohls: Big 12 action could be delayed; Perrin era could be shortened http://www.mystatesman.com/news/spor...-era-co/nqmC5/
8:26 AM - 16 Mar 2016

Don’t be surprised if the Big 12 leaders do nothing concrete at their May-June meetings in Irving. They’ll consider the research data from two analytic firms, but it’s possible no serious action will happen on key issues such as a conference football championship game, expansion and a Big 12 television network until later in the summer. “I think that’s accurate,” Big 12 Commissioner Bob Bowlsby told me in Kansas City, Mo. “There could be some things that slow us down.” One could be the direction Texas wants to take. No one seems to have a good feel for the Longhorns’ stance, in part because the school has a new chancellor, president and athletic director. Any feel for Texas’ desires? “We’ve had conversations, but I’m not at liberty to characterize them.” Still betting the title game happens with the outcry for a 13th “data point.” One Big 12 AD told me he thinks the league should wait and get one more season and decide on a game next January. Three years is just a better sample size than two

It would seem unlikely they would get the data on one day and make all their decisions the next. Its quite logical that no decisions would be made until later in the summer. That's not a delay. That's just deliberation.

That messes up the timelines for the AAC schools hoping to give notice by June 30th.

Correct. Which means things are likely to settle down and the Big 12 will create a new data point with the current teams.

No expansion. Create conference title game and increase revenue that way.

Right now it comes off as some schools not wanting to expand and I can't blame them for that.
03-16-2016 12:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UConnHusky Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,803
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 184
I Root For: UConn/Celts/Red Sox/Pats
Location: Boston, MA
Post: #5
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
If the research data indicates that the Big 12 should expand, then they would be foolish to dilly-dally for a year. The Big 12 is banking on no more departures. That is foolish since nobody has a crystal ball and schools like OU and Kansas could bolt in a heartbeat if they want to get away from Texas. That would kill the Big 12. Also, the Big 12 is banking on schools like UConn and Cincy still being available. That is also foolish as the ACC could end up snapping them up (or the B1G could take UConn if they become AAU). BYU, Boise, Houston, and Memphis would still be available, but only BYU gives them the academic prowess and a high number of television sets that they do not have yet.

It will be fitting if they miss out on adding certain schools the way that they missed out on adding Louisville the last time around.

"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
(This post was last modified: 03-16-2016 12:29 PM by UConnHusky.)
03-16-2016 12:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,930
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #6
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
(03-16-2016 12:29 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  If the research data indicates that the Big 12 should expand, then they would be foolish to dilly-dally for a year. The Big 12 is banking on no more departures. That is foolish since nobody has a crystal ball and schools like OU and Kansas could bolt in a heartbeat if they want to get away from Texas. That would kill the Big 12. Also, the Big 12 is banking on schools like UConn and Cincy still being available. That is also foolish as the ACC could end up snapping them up (or the B1G could take UConn if they become AAU). BYU, Boise, Houston, and Memphis would still be available, but only BYU gives them the academic prowess and a high number of television sets that they do not have yet.

It will be fitting if they miss out on adding certain schools the way that they missed out on adding Louisville the last time around.

"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

1. none of the available teams will REMOTELY "save the Big 12" and IF OU and KU desire to and could "leave in a heart beat" without taking a massive financial hit none of the available teams will prevent that

2. the ACC is not "snapping anyone up"

3. the AAU adds members about once a decade of that and the last round of booting NU and SU leaving was something they are looking to avoid in the future and they have also made it clear they are not looking to grow much larger of at all

and the metrics of UConn are not close to the metrics of the past public school admitted to the AAU which was GaTech

4. if the Big 12 lost KU and OU they would not fall apart for sure.....there are PLENTY of teams that are available to be warm bodies so there is no need to add warm bodies out of the fear that teams might leave

that only serves to reduce the added income for teams in the conference from those leaving the conference when the teams that would be remaining could just as easily split exit fees smaller ways and offer lesser deals to any and all available teams

5. if the Big 12 was to lose OU and KU and The Sugar Bowl decided they no longer wanted any part of the Big 12 it is not as if the Big 12 would be able to add members now and retain that contract....The Sugar Bowl is going to exit that contract if they want out of it

and if the NCAA/Playoffs decide that the Big 12 is no longer worthy of $50 million they are not going to avoid that decision because the Big 12 added warm bodies and then watched OU and KU leave

and even IF the Big 12 could retain those contracts and payments with OU and KU leaving that will ONLY happen until the end of those contracts and after that they will be done for

so it would make more sense for the Big 12 to WAIT until teams leave (which is very unlikely to happen) and then make bad offers to available warm bodies and the remaining teams in the Big 12 make all the money they can while they still can and that is that when it is over they move on

the only contract that would be at risk AND saved by two warm bodies would be the media contract and it just needs warm bodies to replace the number of teams leaving

the Sugar Bowl and NCAA Playoff money is not going to stick around for the ACC 2.0 or MWC on Steroids they will be gone if they want to be gone and warm bodies NOW will not stop that
03-16-2016 01:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


UConnHusky Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,803
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 184
I Root For: UConn/Celts/Red Sox/Pats
Location: Boston, MA
Post: #7
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
(03-16-2016 01:03 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(03-16-2016 12:29 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  If the research data indicates that the Big 12 should expand, then they would be foolish to dilly-dally for a year. The Big 12 is banking on no more departures. That is foolish since nobody has a crystal ball and schools like OU and Kansas could bolt in a heartbeat if they want to get away from Texas. That would kill the Big 12. Also, the Big 12 is banking on schools like UConn and Cincy still being available. That is also foolish as the ACC could end up snapping them up (or the B1G could take UConn if they become AAU). BYU, Boise, Houston, and Memphis would still be available, but only BYU gives them the academic prowess and a high number of television sets that they do not have yet.

It will be fitting if they miss out on adding certain schools the way that they missed out on adding Louisville the last time around.

"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

1. none of the available teams will REMOTELY "save the Big 12" and IF OU and KU desire to and could "leave in a heart beat" without taking a massive financial hit none of the available teams will prevent that

2. the ACC is not "snapping anyone up"

3. the AAU adds members about once a decade of that and the last round of booting NU and SU leaving was something they are looking to avoid in the future and they have also made it clear they are not looking to grow much larger of at all

and the metrics of UConn are not close to the metrics of the past public school admitted to the AAU which was GaTech

4. if the Big 12 lost KU and OU they would not fall apart for sure.....there are PLENTY of teams that are available to be warm bodies so there is no need to add warm bodies out of the fear that teams might leave

that only serves to reduce the added income for teams in the conference from those leaving the conference when the teams that would be remaining could just as easily split exit fees smaller ways and offer lesser deals to any and all available teams

5. if the Big 12 was to lose OU and KU and The Sugar Bowl decided they no longer wanted any part of the Big 12 it is not as if the Big 12 would be able to add members now and retain that contract....The Sugar Bowl is going to exit that contract if they want out of it

and if the NCAA/Playoffs decide that the Big 12 is no longer worthy of $50 million they are not going to avoid that decision because the Big 12 added warm bodies and then watched OU and KU leave

and even IF the Big 12 could retain those contracts and payments with OU and KU leaving that will ONLY happen until the end of those contracts and after that they will be done for

so it would make more sense for the Big 12 to WAIT until teams leave (which is very unlikely to happen) and then make bad offers to available warm bodies and the remaining teams in the Big 12 make all the money they can while they still can and that is that when it is over they move on

the only contract that would be at risk AND saved by two warm bodies would be the media contract and it just needs warm bodies to replace the number of teams leaving

the Sugar Bowl and NCAA Playoff money is not going to stick around for the ACC 2.0 or MWC on Steroids they will be gone if they want to be gone and warm bodies NOW will not stop that

Everybody has an opinion and none of these points are actually based on data. In the end, all that matters is what the Big 12 decides, not you or I.

On point number 3, please provide the metrics of UConn vs Georgia Tech that you have reviewed. Thank you.
03-16-2016 01:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bearcat65 Online
All American
*

Posts: 4,689
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation: 356
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #8
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
(03-16-2016 01:03 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(03-16-2016 12:29 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  If the research data indicates that the Big 12 should expand, then they would be foolish to dilly-dally for a year. The Big 12 is banking on no more departures. That is foolish since nobody has a crystal ball and schools like OU and Kansas could bolt in a heartbeat if they want to get away from Texas. That would kill the Big 12. Also, the Big 12 is banking on schools like UConn and Cincy still being available. That is also foolish as the ACC could end up snapping them up (or the B1G could take UConn if they become AAU). BYU, Boise, Houston, and Memphis would still be available, but only BYU gives them the academic prowess and a high number of television sets that they do not have yet.

It will be fitting if they miss out on adding certain schools the way that they missed out on adding Louisville the last time around.

"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

1. none of the available teams will REMOTELY "save the Big 12" and IF OU and KU desire to and could "leave in a heart beat" without taking a massive financial hit none of the available teams will prevent that

2. the ACC is not "snapping anyone up"

3. the AAU adds members about once a decade of that and the last round of booting NU and SU leaving was something they are looking to avoid in the future and they have also made it clear they are not looking to grow much larger of at all

and the metrics of UConn are not close to the metrics of the past public school admitted to the AAU which was GaTech

4. if the Big 12 lost KU and OU they would not fall apart for sure.....there are PLENTY of teams that are available to be warm bodies so there is no need to add warm bodies out of the fear that teams might leave

that only serves to reduce the added income for teams in the conference from those leaving the conference when the teams that would be remaining could just as easily split exit fees smaller ways and offer lesser deals to any and all available teams

5. if the Big 12 was to lose OU and KU and The Sugar Bowl decided they no longer wanted any part of the Big 12 it is not as if the Big 12 would be able to add members now and retain that contract....The Sugar Bowl is going to exit that contract if they want out of it

and if the NCAA/Playoffs decide that the Big 12 is no longer worthy of $50 million they are not going to avoid that decision because the Big 12 added warm bodies and then watched OU and KU leave

and even IF the Big 12 could retain those contracts and payments with OU and KU leaving that will ONLY happen until the end of those contracts and after that they will be done for

so it would make more sense for the Big 12 to WAIT until teams leave (which is very unlikely to happen) and then make bad offers to available warm bodies and the remaining teams in the Big 12 make all the money they can while they still can and that is that when it is over they move on

the only contract that would be at risk AND saved by two warm bodies would be the media contract and it just needs warm bodies to replace the number of teams leaving

the Sugar Bowl and NCAA Playoff money is not going to stick around for the ACC 2.0 or MWC on Steroids they will be gone if they want to be gone and warm bodies NOW will not stop that

If it is just Oklahoma and Kansas no one will need to save the Big12. As long as Texas is part of the Big 12 the Big 12 will be P5.
03-16-2016 01:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OKIcat Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,617
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 185
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:
Post: #9
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
(03-16-2016 01:27 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  
(03-16-2016 01:03 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(03-16-2016 12:29 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  If the research data indicates that the Big 12 should expand, then they would be foolish to dilly-dally for a year. The Big 12 is banking on no more departures. That is foolish since nobody has a crystal ball and schools like OU and Kansas could bolt in a heartbeat if they want to get away from Texas. That would kill the Big 12. Also, the Big 12 is banking on schools like UConn and Cincy still being available. That is also foolish as the ACC could end up snapping them up (or the B1G could take UConn if they become AAU). BYU, Boise, Houston, and Memphis would still be available, but only BYU gives them the academic prowess and a high number of television sets that they do not have yet.

It will be fitting if they miss out on adding certain schools the way that they missed out on adding Louisville the last time around.

"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

1. none of the available teams will REMOTELY "save the Big 12" and IF OU and KU desire to and could "leave in a heart beat" without taking a massive financial hit none of the available teams will prevent that

2. the ACC is not "snapping anyone up"

3. the AAU adds members about once a decade of that and the last round of booting NU and SU leaving was something they are looking to avoid in the future and they have also made it clear they are not looking to grow much larger of at all

and the metrics of UConn are not close to the metrics of the past public school admitted to the AAU which was GaTech

4. if the Big 12 lost KU and OU they would not fall apart for sure.....there are PLENTY of teams that are available to be warm bodies so there is no need to add warm bodies out of the fear that teams might leave

that only serves to reduce the added income for teams in the conference from those leaving the conference when the teams that would be remaining could just as easily split exit fees smaller ways and offer lesser deals to any and all available teams

5. if the Big 12 was to lose OU and KU and The Sugar Bowl decided they no longer wanted any part of the Big 12 it is not as if the Big 12 would be able to add members now and retain that contract....The Sugar Bowl is going to exit that contract if they want out of it

and if the NCAA/Playoffs decide that the Big 12 is no longer worthy of $50 million they are not going to avoid that decision because the Big 12 added warm bodies and then watched OU and KU leave

and even IF the Big 12 could retain those contracts and payments with OU and KU leaving that will ONLY happen until the end of those contracts and after that they will be done for

so it would make more sense for the Big 12 to WAIT until teams leave (which is very unlikely to happen) and then make bad offers to available warm bodies and the remaining teams in the Big 12 make all the money they can while they still can and that is that when it is over they move on

the only contract that would be at risk AND saved by two warm bodies would be the media contract and it just needs warm bodies to replace the number of teams leaving

the Sugar Bowl and NCAA Playoff money is not going to stick around for the ACC 2.0 or MWC on Steroids they will be gone if they want to be gone and warm bodies NOW will not stop that

Everybody has an opinion and none of these points are actually based on data. In the end, all that matters is what the Big 12 decides, not you or I.

On point number 3, please provide the metrics of UConn vs Georgia Tech that you have reviewed. Thank you.

As I recall, Cincy and UCONN have many metrics that meet or exceed those of some current AAU members. AAU is an academicians' country club; there is no measurable tipping point to gaining entry.
03-16-2016 01:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,720
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 1773
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #10
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
I can understand if the Big 12 can't come to a consensus on expansion. I've been pretty open that the Big 12 should expand, but I get that it's not necessarily a "no-brainer" decision.

The conference championship game, on the other hand, is a matter where there is no other data point needed. Adding the game will likely add around $20 million per year to the conference revenue totals. The on-the-field "problems" that people see with CCGs are a complete wash - there are going to be years where it might hurt the league to have a CCG and there are going to be years where might hurt the league to *not* have a CCG. However, what's clear is that the CCG is an unambiguous money-maker *especially* if it doesn't require any expansion. No one needs any other "data points" on that front.
03-16-2016 01:50 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: #11
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
(03-16-2016 01:50 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I can understand if the Big 12 can't come to a consensus on expansion. I've been pretty open that the Big 12 should expand, but I get that it's not necessarily a "no-brainer" decision.

The conference championship game, on the other hand, is a matter where there is no other data point needed. Adding the game will likely add around $20 million per year to the conference revenue totals. The on-the-field "problems" that people see with CCGs are a complete wash - there are going to be years where it might hurt the league to have a CCG and there are going to be years where might hurt the league to *not* have a CCG. However, what's clear is that the CCG is an unambiguous money-maker *especially* if it doesn't require any expansion. No one needs any other "data points" on that front.

They've done simulations (think the number was 40,000). I'm guessing the simulations show that the ccg hurts getting into the playoffs and NY6 if they do a 10 team RR with a ccg. They really don't need a data point. Its pretty clear the committee values the ccg. The simulations will tell them far better than another year how upsets will impact them.

My guess is the SEC and Big 10 have already done this analysis and that is why they were so receptive to letting them have a ccg with 10 teams.
03-16-2016 02:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #12
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
(03-16-2016 01:50 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I can understand if the Big 12 can't come to a consensus on expansion. I've been pretty open that the Big 12 should expand, but I get that it's not necessarily a "no-brainer" decision.

The conference championship game, on the other hand, is a matter where there is no other data point needed. Adding the game will likely add around $20 million per year to the conference revenue totals. The on-the-field "problems" that people see with CCGs are a complete wash - there are going to be years where it might hurt the league to have a CCG and there are going to be years where might hurt the league to *not* have a CCG. However, what's clear is that the CCG is an unambiguous money-maker *especially* if it doesn't require any expansion. No one needs any other "data points" on that front.

If a CCG adds $2 million per school per year to the conference revenue distributions, that would be hard to turn down. They could add the CCG this year (or agree this year to add it starting next year) and keep the expansion discussion ongoing until they get a unanimous or near-unanimous agreement on that.
03-16-2016 02:21 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: #13
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
I hope they don't add a CCG as I really like the traditional set-up and it's nice seeing someone still using it (although I don't like them getting rid of co-champs). That said, my prediction was that they would have found a way to get one this year and I'm surprised they didn't jump on it already. I think one way or another there will be one in 2017.

Expansion on the other hand is a harder question. I think the conference is probably stronger round robin with a CCG right now than at 12, but understand other arguments.
03-16-2016 02:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Offline
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,358
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
(03-16-2016 01:50 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  However, what's clear is that the CCG is an unambiguous money-maker *especially* if it doesn't require any expansion. No one needs any other "data points" on that front.

This is complete speculation, as usual. But:
1. IT is widely reported that the Big 12's media contracts with ESPN and Fox provide for pro-rata expansion to 12, with whoever the Big 12 might pick.
2. When those contracts were signed, the only way to have a CCG was with 12 teams.

2 is a fact. If 1 is true, what are the chances that the Big 12 CCG is already included in the Fox/ESPN contract, in such a way that there is no money earmarked for the CCG? IOW, that the CCG money is contractually tied into the money for School #11 and School #12?
03-16-2016 02:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
upstater1 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,404
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 35
I Root For: UConn
Location:
Post: #15
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
(03-16-2016 01:49 PM)OKIcat Wrote:  As I recall, Cincy and UCONN have many metrics that meet or exceed those of some current AAU members. AAU is an academicians' country club; there is no measurable tipping point to gaining entry.

There is no lump sum number. There are metrics that relate to peer-reviewed grants, and also breadth of disciplines, as well as faculty strength. So you can be a small school (as many AAU's are) with a lower research budget, but if you're punching well above your weight, then you can be admitted. What often goes missing in these discussions is that people tend to look at total research, (ex. look at USF, not to pick on them), which includes teaching hospital revenues/expenses, but these are outside off peer-reviewed research grant. Which is what the AAU looks at.

Obviously, the AAU is not even a country club. The AAU is just lawyers. A lobbying firm that spreads its dough to politicians who will fund the National Foundations.
03-16-2016 02:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EvilVodka Offline
stuff

Posts: 3,585
Joined: Jan 2014
I Root For: FSU LSU
Location: Houston, TX
Post: #16
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
(03-16-2016 01:50 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I can understand if the Big 12 can't come to a consensus on expansion. I've been pretty open that the Big 12 should expand, but I get that it's not necessarily a "no-brainer" decision.

The conference championship game, on the other hand, is a matter where there is no other data point needed. Adding the game will likely add around $20 million per year to the conference revenue totals. The on-the-field "problems" that people see with CCGs are a complete wash - there are going to be years where it might hurt the league to have a CCG and there are going to be years where might hurt the league to *not* have a CCG. However, what's clear is that the CCG is an unambiguous money-maker *especially* if it doesn't require any expansion. No one needs any other "data points" on that front.

Just adding the championship game is the safest bet...

JMO, but the wind is changing rapidly with Conference TV networks....

If the ACC is having trouble, why would the Big XII have any hope of getting a conference TV network, especially if Texas isn't willing to roll the LHN into a Big XII network....

And if no network, why expand?
03-16-2016 03:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


ecuacc4ever Offline
Resident Geek Musician
*

Posts: 7,491
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation: 239
I Root For: ACC
Location:

SkunkworksDonatorsPWNER of Scout/Rivals
Post: #17
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
(03-16-2016 12:29 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  If the research data indicates that the Big 12 should expand, then they would be foolish to dilly-dally for a year.

It appears you don't understand the ego that is, Texas. They'll dilly-dally around for as long as they believe they have leverage.

[Image: burtreynolds-smokeyii.gif]
(This post was last modified: 03-16-2016 03:04 PM by ecuacc4ever.)
03-16-2016 03:03 PM
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: #18
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
(03-16-2016 02:41 PM)upstater1 Wrote:  
(03-16-2016 01:49 PM)OKIcat Wrote:  As I recall, Cincy and UCONN have many metrics that meet or exceed those of some current AAU members. AAU is an academicians' country club; there is no measurable tipping point to gaining entry.

There is no lump sum number. There are metrics that relate to peer-reviewed grants, and also breadth of disciplines, as well as faculty strength. So you can be a small school (as many AAU's are) with a lower research budget, but if you're punching well above your weight, then you can be admitted. What often goes missing in these discussions is that people tend to look at total research, (ex. look at USF, not to pick on them), which includes teaching hospital revenues/expenses, but these are outside off peer-reviewed research grant. Which is what the AAU looks at.

Obviously, the AAU is not even a country club. The AAU is just lawyers. A lobbying firm that spreads its dough to politicians who will fund the National Foundations.

But they did a listing when Nebraska got kicked out. Cincinnati was pretty well up there, #62, ahead of 11 AAU schools. UConn was #81, ahead of 3 (+ Syracuse and Nebraska who left). Cincinnati was #11 among non-members who weren't specialized institutions (i.e. medical or science research institutions).
03-16-2016 03:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CyclonePower Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 401
Joined: Jan 2016
Reputation: 29
I Root For: Iowa State
Location:
Post: #19
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
Am I the only one that thinks have a CCG with round robin is stupid??
03-16-2016 03:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,886
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #20
RE: Big 12 action could be delayed
(03-16-2016 11:45 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-16-2016 11:30 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  IMO, this is a clear indication that some schools are saying no thanks right now and want to play things out more, especially Texas.

Kirk Bohls

‎@kbohls

Bohls: Big 12 action could be delayed; Perrin era could be shortened http://www.mystatesman.com/news/spor...-era-co/nqmC5/
8:26 AM - 16 Mar 2016

Don’t be surprised if the Big 12 leaders do nothing concrete at their May-June meetings in Irving. They’ll consider the research data from two analytic firms, but it’s possible no serious action will happen on key issues such as a conference football championship game, expansion and a Big 12 television network until later in the summer. “I think that’s accurate,” Big 12 Commissioner Bob Bowlsby told me in Kansas City, Mo. “There could be some things that slow us down.” One could be the direction Texas wants to take. No one seems to have a good feel for the Longhorns’ stance, in part because the school has a new chancellor, president and athletic director. Any feel for Texas’ desires? “We’ve had conversations, but I’m not at liberty to characterize them.” Still betting the title game happens with the outcry for a 13th “data point.” One Big 12 AD told me he thinks the league should wait and get one more season and decide on a game next January. Three years is just a better sample size than two

It would seem unlikely they would get the data on one day and make all their decisions the next. Its quite logical that no decisions would be made until later in the summer. That's not a delay. That's just deliberation.
You have a standing realignment committee that has been around for at least a year. All of the other conferences vet their applicants and those that they have interest in prior to meetings. It's simply SOP. This "IS" a delaying tactic, and the oldest one in the book at that. So I call hooey!
03-16-2016 03:49 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.