(03-08-2022 04:10 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 03:58 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  The XII has had good on-field/court success. However, "unquestioned Top 3?" There is a question. Google "Should the Big 12 still be P5?" Then Google "Should the ACC still be P5?" 3 of the links on the latter ask "Should the Big 12 still be P5?" That's not scientific of course, but it means there are questions and certainly doesn't speak to the XII being an "unquestioned" #3.

A google search??

When the Big 12 was reduced to 8 teams, an avalanche of negative articles were written - which fed into those google searches. It was a period of perceived instability that produced speculation.
The Big 12 has since expanded and the metrics over the last year are now in (all of the important indicators have come in; including bowl performance, kenpom, NET, etc), showing the Big 12 expansion has been a big success.

During that same period, the metrics for the Pac 12 and ACC have looked meek in comparison (to say the least).

Do you fully expect Baylor, Cincinnati, Iowa State, and UCF to be featured in the same weekly time slots as Oklahoma/Texas? Especially not they aren't playing those teams anymore. I just don't see it happening.

Big Noon on Fox - Iowa State vs UCF. Not happening..Maybe if there's a undefeated team in November but not before then.

(03-08-2022 04:23 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 03:58 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  "Imagine the SEC and B1G are expanding tomorrow..."

This is where you are jumping the shark.

A LOT goes into expansion that make it less of an exercise of "choosing the best player on the Draft Board" and more about geographical considerations and 'goodness of fit' that defers to relationships between schools.

Most collegiate expansion has not been about taking the best teams - relative to all the other teams across the country.

Most expansion is driven by the map (and politicking according to the interests of the current membership).

The success of the Big 12's expansion (as corroborated the past years metrics) is they put the politicking aside and actually took the best properties.

It's not the 90s anymore. "Geographical considerations" are way down on the list of importance for modern-day expansion.

Pointing to "the success of the Big 12's expansion" ought to be exhibit A in that argument. They took the best teams they could realistically get.

(03-08-2022 06:54 AM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 01:05 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  If the Pac 12 decides to expand, which non P4 teams would it pursue? I think Texas Tech would be high on the list.

You're looking in the wrong direction.

Ask the Big 10 if they will expand, and which P12 teams would it pursue.

Then ask USC AD Mike Bohn if he is going to sign a Grant of Rights.

I kinda assume 'No' from his past comments.

I've always wondered if the Big 12 needs a GOR. It's in its own geography with top 3 metrics, and enough schools that share geography with schools in other conferences.

If the Pac 12 gets eaten then the Big 12 will more than likely have more neighbors for BYU.

I agree with you if PAC loses 4 Cal schools, Oregon, and Washington. But that makes sense since the remaining 6 were either lucky to be invited and wouldn't be now - OSU and Wazzup; Arizona schools are semi-eecent adds; Utah and Colorado are fresh adds. Those schools would merge with Big 12 but take the more branded PAC moniker.

(03-08-2022 04:20 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  ACC is a P4 because it's schools are actually brands and are wanted by other conferences. What happens on the field matters very little.

This is so hilarious. The ACC is coming apart at the seams - it seems - as they just torpedoed CFP expansion because Notre Dame is so crucial to their efforts to attempt renegotiate their awful long-term media deal.

Saying all those teams have such great value (and are wanted by other leagues) doesn't make it so. LOL. Notre Dame looks at them as stinky...

The ACC thought they were putting together a basketball super-conference, which never manifested (and crippled their football interests). The ACC is currently rated 6th.

(03-08-2022 09:24 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  I have already laid out the next dominoes in other threads/posts, but FSU/Clemson would be reluctant additions, but the best on the board for the SEC outside of UNC. Would they go further and add VaTech and NCSU? No, I do not see the SEC going to 20 schools just to expand the footprint slightly. But FSU and Clemson probably sneak in with the right coaching and leadership.

I believe UNC/Duke are tied at the hip. It’s either status quo or B1G for them. I don’t think the SEC has a chance to land UNC alone or both. The B1G can round it out with UVa/ND or UVa/GaTech. I firmly believe these are the moves to make, unlike pie in the sky Stanford and USC joining a bunch of Rust Belt peers.

The ACC without hesitation invites Big 12/AAC schools in this scenario:

North: Pitt, UC, WVU, UL, Cuse, BC
South: VaTech, Miami, NCSU, WF, UCF, USF/Memphis

There is no doubt the Big 12 schools accept. The new Big 12 exit fees could be problematic, but that is still a valuable package to ESPN or another network and rekindles the Big East rivalries. UConn could also be back in the north in this scenario if they want 14.

The Big 12 has MWC backfills.

Duke/UNC/UVA are tied to the hip.

(03-08-2022 04:27 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  It's not the 90s anymore. "Geographical considerations" are way down on the list of importance for modern-day expansion.

Pointing to "the success of the Big 12's expansion" ought to be exhibit A in that argument. They took the best teams they could realistically get.

EVERYONE takes the teams they can realistically get. The Big 12 took the teams with the most growth potential. On the whole, no one the ACC took - to put the Old Big East out of business - had the ability to play football at the highest level. How many of them have won BCS/CFP/NY6 games? The Big 12 took programs that were accomplished and proven.

(03-08-2022 04:29 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 04:20 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  ACC is a P4 because it's schools are actually brands and are wanted by other conferences. What happens on the field matters very little.

This is so hilarious. The ACC is coming apart at the seams - it seems - as they just torpedoed CFP expansion because Notre Dame is so crucial to their efforts to attempt renegotiate their awful long-term media deal.

Saying all those teams have such great value (and are wanted by other leagues) doesn't make it so. LOL. Notre Dame looks at them as stinky...

The ACC thought they were putting together a basketball super-conference, which never manifested (and crippled their football interests). The ACC is currently rated 6th.

Notre Dame not willing to join the ACC doesn't say anything about the ACC. Notre Dame is not willing to join ANY conference.

(03-08-2022 02:32 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 01:27 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 01:11 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 11:29 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 05:43 AM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  [quote='RUScarlets' pid='18123213' dateline='1646735623']

The biggest mistake that fans make is thinking that on-the-field success = conference realignment value and that has been proven over and over again that it's not true at all.

I agree with this. 100 percent.

The conference pecking order is not necessarily same as the conference football power ranking.

In terms of the pecking order, the BIG / the SEC have been top two conferences. No doubt about that. Now if you remember, the ACC and the Big 12 were in a way competing for the #3 spot (or #4 spot if you believe the Pac 12 was the #3). Or you can say the ACC and the Big 12 were competing for survival as a power conference.

Both conferences were courting ND as a non football member. ND eventually chose the ACC. But soon after that UMCP decided to leave and many people including some WV fans predicted several ACC teams would join the Big 12 and the ACC would become like an old Big East (this ACC becoming an old Big East scenario never dies by the way...). But in the end the ACC signed the very long GOR and you know what happened to the Big 12.

In my opinion, the battle is over. No matter how successful the new Big 12 would be on the field or on the court, if the ACC or the Pac decides to expand, the Big 12 teams will want to join. I don’t know how likely they want to expand, but one thing I can guarantee is this: the possibility of the ACC adding a team or two from the Big 12 is much much higher than the possibility of the Big 12 adding some ACC teams after 2036.

Here's the issue with that last paragraph: That's our snapshot today. Yes, right now the ACC is higher on the pecking order, but that doesn't mean that's where we'll be a decade or so from now. The reality is that when the GOR is up, the top 4-6 brands in the ACC are going to be very attractive to poaching from the SEC and B1G. And if the ACC loses those 4-6 top brands, their spot in the pecking order is significantly diminished.

(This would especially be bolstered if the XII has a team that has a Clemson-level decade, further helped with a second team having a Penn St.-level decade, and further helped if the ACC basically spends the next decade wandering in the forest--which isn't out of the realm of possibility.)

At that point, if I'm WVU, UC, UCF, would I rather join that bottom 8-10 of the ACC, or would I rather look to grab, say, NC St. and Pitt?

That pecking order is a snapshot of today and ten plus years. Remember the ACC GOR is very long.

I understand the scenario where the ACC is being poached and collaped has been oddly popular on this board and is certainly not impossible, but during that ten plus years, it is a lot more likely that the new Big 12 loses more members. For example, if the ACC feels threatened, wouldn’t it add some schools from the Big 12 BEFORE the GOR is up? I would.

As you said, it is possible one or two of the new Big 12 teams may step up and become a national brand. In my opinion, that will actually increase the possibility of being poached as that program becomes a more desirable target. TCU joined the Big 12 when it was good. The ACC pursued Miami when it reached to the height. VT would have not been even considered without the football sucessess. UConn (or someone else) might have been added to the ACC instead of Louisville if Louiville was not successful.

If Cicny sustains its recent success, then watch out.

Didn't Cincinnati have the same QB for 4 years? They aren't sustaining anything.

(03-08-2022 04:33 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 04:27 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  It's not the 90s anymore. "Geographical considerations" are way down on the list of importance for modern-day expansion.

Pointing to "the success of the Big 12's expansion" ought to be exhibit A in that argument. They took the best teams they could realistically get.

EVERYONE takes the teams they can realistically get. The Big 12 took the teams with the most growth potential. On the whole, no one the ACC took - to put the Old Big East out of business - had the ability to play football at the highest level. How many of them have won BCS/CFP/NY6 games? The Big 12 took programs that were accomplished and proven.

Miami and Va Tech were both playing at or near football at the highest level when they joined.

Right, EVERYONE does take the teams they can realistically get...but, again, that kills your argument about "geographical considerations."

The reality is that if you told the SEC and B1G tomorrow that they could have one school out of the ACC/XII, they'd both answer at the same time, "UNC." Why? They certainly aren't now, or really ever, playing football at the "highest level." But they are a huge national brand.

(03-08-2022 04:37 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 04:33 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 04:27 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  It's not the 90s anymore. "Geographical considerations" are way down on the list of importance for modern-day expansion.

Pointing to "the success of the Big 12's expansion" ought to be exhibit A in that argument. They took the best teams they could realistically get.

EVERYONE takes the teams they can realistically get. The Big 12 took the teams with the most growth potential. On the whole, no one the ACC took - to put the Old Big East out of business - had the ability to play football at the highest level. How many of them have won BCS/CFP/NY6 games? The Big 12 took programs that were accomplished and proven.

Miami and Va Tech were both playing at or near football at the highest level when they joined.

Right, EVERYONE does take the teams they can realistically get...but, again, that kills your argument about "geographical considerations."

The reality is that if you told the SEC and B1G tomorrow that they could have one school out of the ACC/XII, they'd both answer at the same time, "UNC." Why? They certainly aren't now, or really ever, playing football at the "highest level." But they are a huge national brand.

This is all hyperbole.

The posts you're posting are bunch of imaginary quotes and scenarios.

None of it is real.

Fortunately for the Big 12, we are talking about athletic conferences - and the performances on the field and court will ultimately win the day.

Most conferences have expanded very successfully with BCS/NY6/CFP participants and winners (as well as prominent basketball brands). It's always been the formula.

- The Pac 12 with Utah
- The ACC with Louisville
- The Big 12 with TCU.

The Big 12 had the good fortune of landing 3 of those BCS/NY6/CFP programs - along with BYU. They expanded the proven way, and in the process they've put separation between themselves and the ACC & Pac 12 in all the metrics.

(03-08-2022 01:27 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  when the GOR is up, the top 4-6 brands in the ACC are going to be very attractive to poaching from the SEC and B1G.

Unlikely, just because the payouts have soared so high. With new SEC contract estimated at $75M/yr, even FSU and Clemson are likely already priced out. A $5M bump per year for adding those schools would be an additional $230M/year. I don't think anyone can argue with a straight face that FSU and Clemson are worth a quarter of a billion dollars of TV revenue per year. And that's ignoring whether the SEC can even get the required votes to add them and/or go beyond 16 teams.

UVA/UNC are in a worse position, given football drives revenue and those schools don't drive much. UNC will never leave without Duke, and UVA will never leave without UNC, so any expansion with those would almost certainly have to package all 3. With the B10's payout expected to be near the SEC's, it's an even more unlikely scenario given that would take the B10 to 17 teams.

Maybe it will be more feasible if CFB revenues tank during now and when the ACC contract ends, but if not I don't see any ACC schools being "affordable" for the SEC/B10.

(03-08-2022 04:33 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 04:29 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 04:20 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  ACC is a P4 because it's schools are actually brands and are wanted by other conferences. What happens on the field matters very little.

This is so hilarious. The ACC is coming apart at the seams - it seems - as they just torpedoed CFP expansion because Notre Dame is so crucial to their efforts to attempt renegotiate their awful long-term media deal.

Saying all those teams have such great value (and are wanted by other leagues) doesn't make it so. LOL. Notre Dame looks at them as stinky...

The ACC thought they were putting together a basketball super-conference, which never manifested (and crippled their football interests). The ACC is currently rated 6th.

Notre Dame not willing to join the ACC doesn't say anything about the ACC. Notre Dame is not willing to join ANY conference.

ACC expansion was a disaster.

Do you seriously believe they would make the same moves if they had it all to do over again?

(I don't think so.)

This "basketball superconference in the making" is currently ranked SIXTH. Let that sink in.

The NBE is arguably outperforming them in the footprint they tried to conquer. They just lost their two stalwart coaches. Who was the ACC football champion?

Do you think the Big 12 would trade Cincinnati or UCF for Syracuse? No. lol. They'd laugh. Don McPherson isn't walking through that door. Of course I'm using your technique of creating a non-sensical scenario. College Football is the chief driver of revenue and the ACC schools don't produce on the field (at least not within the ACC structure).

(03-08-2022 04:49 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 04:37 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 04:33 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 04:27 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  It's not the 90s anymore. "Geographical considerations" are way down on the list of importance for modern-day expansion.

Pointing to "the success of the Big 12's expansion" ought to be exhibit A in that argument. They took the best teams they could realistically get.

EVERYONE takes the teams they can realistically get. The Big 12 took the teams with the most growth potential. On the whole, no one the ACC took - to put the Old Big East out of business - had the ability to play football at the highest level. How many of them have won BCS/CFP/NY6 games? The Big 12 took programs that were accomplished and proven.

Miami and Va Tech were both playing at or near football at the highest level when they joined.

Right, EVERYONE does take the teams they can realistically get...but, again, that kills your argument about "geographical considerations."

The reality is that if you told the SEC and B1G tomorrow that they could have one school out of the ACC/XII, they'd both answer at the same time, "UNC." Why? They certainly aren't now, or really ever, playing football at the "highest level." But they are a huge national brand.

This is all hyperbole.

The posts you're posting are bunch of imaginary quotes and scenarios.

None of it is real.

Fortunately for the Big 12, we are talking about athletic conferences - and the performances on the field and court will ultimately win the day.

Most conferences have expanded very successfully with BCS/NY6/CFP participants and winners (as well as prominent basketball brands). It's always been the formula.

- The Pac 12 with Utah
- The ACC with Louisville
- The Big 12 with TCU.

The Big 12 had the good fortune of landing 3 of those BCS/NY6/CFP programs - along with BYU. They expanded the proven way, and in the process they've put separation between themselves and the ACC & Pac 12 in all the metrics.

What's hyperbole? Do tell. You may not agree with "imaginary scenarios," but that doesn't make them hyperbole. As for "imaginary quotes," the only thing I've quoted have been your exact words/phrasing. Would you like to show me otherwise?

And the point of talking about potential SEC/B1G expansion isn't necessarily about will they or won't they but about where other teams fall on the pecking order. I asked earlier: What XII team comes in ahead of any ACC team in the top 5 on brand-value and national exposure/prominence? You still haven't answered that but have been moving the goalposts a lot.

Sure, Utah, Louisville, and TCU have all been decent to great additions to their respective conferences. But none of them have been make-or-break to the overall perception of any of those conferences.

(03-08-2022 04:57 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 04:33 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 04:29 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 04:20 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  ACC is a P4 because it's schools are actually brands and are wanted by other conferences. What happens on the field matters very little.

This is so hilarious. The ACC is coming apart at the seams - it seems - as they just torpedoed CFP expansion because Notre Dame is so crucial to their efforts to attempt renegotiate their awful long-term media deal.

Saying all those teams have such great value (and are wanted by other leagues) doesn't make it so. LOL. Notre Dame looks at them as stinky...

The ACC thought they were putting together a basketball super-conference, which never manifested (and crippled their football interests). The ACC is currently rated 6th.

Notre Dame not willing to join the ACC doesn't say anything about the ACC. Notre Dame is not willing to join ANY conference.

ACC expansion was a disaster.

Do you seriously believe they would make the same moves if they had it all to do over again? (I don't think so.)

This "basketball superconference in the making" is currently ranked SIXTH. Let that sink in.

The NBE is arguably outperforming them in the footprint they tried to conquer.

Do you think the Big 12 would trade Cincinnati or UCF for Syracuse? No. lol. They'd laugh. Of course I'm using your technique of creating a non-sensical scenario. College Football is the chief driver of revenue and the ACC schools don't produce (at least not within the ACC structure).

Again, moving the goalposts. None of that has anything to do with my post you quoted and that line of argument. Your argument was that Notre Dame won't join the ACC because "Notre Dame looks at them as stinky."

And, yet, Notre Dame hasn't joined any conference. So, is every conference "stinky?"

I think the Big 12 is set up nicely to replenish potential defections. Now they can't lose Kansas and TCU/Houston to the B1G/PAC12 respectively, but they can withstand the loss of 2/3 or 3/3 of their current Eastern flank to the ACC. I'm not sure how you set up the divisions currently, but were you to replace UC, UCF, WVU, and TCU/Houston with: BSU, Memphis, CSU, and SMU, that's an immediate buffer that stops the bleeding. Putative football divisions could be:

North: BYU, BSU, CSU, KU, KSU, ISU
South: Memphis, SMU, Baylor, TTech, TCU/Houston, OSU

Maybe not the most balanced for football but something you can work with. We are probably a decade away from this so not worth seriously discussing, but that's the only path I see for current MWC and AAC members looking to jump to P5 should the Big 12 cap themselves at 12 schools.

Therefore, I'd be prudent to take BSU and Memphis today and not wait. USF has fallen off the pace and can be left behind despite its proximity to UCF.

(03-08-2022 05:03 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  Again, moving the goalposts.

I've never moved the goal posts. The Big 12 has clearly outperformed those conferences.

BY A LOT.

Just keep your popcorn nearby.

(03-08-2022 05:05 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  I think the Big 12 is set up nicely to replenish potential defections. Now they can't lose Kansas and TCU/Houston to the B1G/PAC12 respectively, but they can withstand the loss of 2/3 or 3/3 of their current Eastern flank to the ACC. I'm not sure how you set up the divisions currently, but were you to replace UC, UCF, WVU, and TCU/Houston with: BSU, Memphis, CSU, and SMU, that's an immediate buffer that stops the bleeding. Putative football divisions could be:

North: BYU, BSU, CSU, KU, KSU, ISU
South: Memphis, SMU, Baylor, TTech, TCU/Houston, OSU

Maybe not the most balanced for football but something you can work with. We are probably a decade away from this so not worth seriously discussing, but that's the only path I see for current MWC and AAC members looking to jump to P5 should the Big 12 cap themselves at 12 schools.

Therefore, I'd be prudent to take BSU and Memphis today and not wait. USF has fallen off the pace and can be left behind despite its proximity to UCF.

Don't be surprised if future Big 12 additions include Utah, Colorado, and the Arizona schools.


Again, USC is the school to watch.


Do you really see Bohn committing to the Pac 12 model? Do you see him signing a "Grant of Rights"?

USC AD Mike Bohn loves him some Big 10. Always has.

Does anyone think he'll sign the Pac 12 GOR? I'd love to hear why or why not..





USC is the one school that could spin the realignment wheel again.

(03-08-2022 05:08 PM)TroyTBoy Wrote:  

(03-08-2022 05:03 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  Again, moving the goalposts.

I've never moved the goal posts. The Big 12 has clearly outperformed those conferences.

BY A LOT.

Just keep your popcorn nearby.

Well, you did...and I notice you took away the rest of that. Because we were talking about Notre Dame and what it means they won't join the ACC. Then you went off talking about ACC basketball rankings and whether the XII would trade UC/UCF for Syracuse. That's the literal definition of moving the goalposts.

Listen, if you want to believe there's a one-to-one correlation of on-field/court success and national perception, I guess you can't be disabused of that notion.

The real question is how many of the current Big 12 will be left to sign a GOR? Probably not many.