I used to think we would end up in the P2. Now, I’m left hoping CU and Arizona join the Big 12 (Doubtful) so we’re not the only AAU flagship in a conference full of misfits.

The SEC has the money and the foresight to add Kansas. It makes no sense not to do it from a geographic standpoint.

The SEC was built on geography, and they understand the value of it better than any of the other conferences. The reason the SEC is dominant today is its wise geographic composition from its beginnings up till today.

(07-18-2023 11:31 AM)Jhawkinva Wrote:  

(07-18-2023 08:06 AM)schmolik Wrote:  Kansas won the men's basketball national championship in 2022 but were a 2nd round loser in 2019, 2021 and 2023 (3 of last 4 NCAAT). We're still waiting for the hammer to drop on Bill Self but I'm not holding my breath if nothing has happened yet. With the Big Ten geographic window stretching further and their eyes possibly looking at the ACC in the 2030's, Kansas geographically and demographically isn't attractive to the Big Ten. They will have to be way better on a consistent basis in men's basketball (or become a perennial football powerhouse) to attract interest in the Big Ten (or SEC for that matter).

There are plenty of reasons to doubt KU's path to the SEC or B1G, but saying they need to be "way better on a consistent basis in men's basketball" is an absurd conclusion.

The last time they weren't a top 4 seed in the NCAA Tournament was 2000 when they got a 6 seed.

They are the most consistently excellent program in modern college basketball. They're not like UNC, Duke, Kentucky, or UConn that have true down years.

Correct. Convenient that the guy started his timeline after we went to the Final Four in 2018 (Villanova just drained another three as I’m typing). We also finished 2020 as the No. 1 ranked team when the tournament was cancelled.

(07-18-2023 09:21 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-18-2023 08:29 AM)Eggszecutor Wrote:  I've been leaning towards another possibility lately. Once the Big ten and SEC take what they want (probably in the next 10-12 years, the remaining schools of the ACC, Big XII and PAC-12 will all look around. There will be a group of them that think they should be in the Big Ten/SEC, but didn't make the cut. I think those schools will leave their respective conferences and create a new national conference that will be number 3 behind the Big Ten/ SEC. Think Oregon, Washington, Kansas, Duke, Virginia, etc. They will come from what remains of the Big XII, ACC and PAC-12. The TV money they will get won't be SEC/Big Ten, but it will be alright.

Ultimately, I think it’s who is left in the ACC will take the best of the Pac-12 and Big 12 and form that national conference. So, I generally agree with the outcome, but in terms of procedure, the ACC is structural vessel (as opposed to forming an entirely new conference). I think a lot of fans weirdly overrate how many ACC schools would add value to the Big Ten and SEC, but then underrate the value of the depth of the ACC even in the event of a B1G/ACC raid.

Now that the Big 12 has expanded with 4 formerly G5 schools and is looking (reportedly) at UConn and Gonzaga, I am rather disinclined to believe they will add PAC 12 schools. By default that makes the ACC seem the likely candidate around which to rebuild another national conference.

But that will depend upon a lot of things:
1. Does the SEC and Big 10 expand again and if so by how many?
2. Should ESPN wind up in anyone's hands but Disney, what are their priorities going to be?
3. Is there a breakaway or not. If so consolidation would likely be in order to potentially maximize CFP slots. If not and the six auto bids go to the top six conferences (which aren't the same quality as they were when the CFP expansion was proposed) then is it worth it to consolidate for maybe one more at large bid?
4. Do external global factors in politics and finances impact corporate spending and mergers and acquisitions and if so to what degree?
5. War is a potential inhibitor. I hope not, but relations are strained in some key and dangerous areas.

And there are more. If there is a breakaway of an upper tier organized around pay for players in whatever form that takes, and there is a push to more fully monetize basketball, then yes, absolutely we will have further consolidation. And in that world the ACC is best set up at this point to be that third entity. Their markets are stronger than those of the PAC 12, their current contract pays more than either the Big 12 or PAC 12's new contracts will pay, and the schools likely to remain would make better peers for those which will remain in the PAC 12 and for some of the original Big 12 members which have been left behind.

Using Frank the Tank's Criteria, I score Kansas about the same as he did Missouri back in 2009 (66 points). +5 for basketball, -5 for football. A contender? Yes.

But a lot of schools rank ahead of Kansas if we are talking about ND, Wash, Ore, Stan and any major ACC brands. I think even Cal is more likely than Kansas.

(07-17-2023 06:44 PM)Rockchalkchihawk Wrote:  So…Will KU ever get the BIG or SEC invite? AAU school, historic blue blood basketball program/ brand but the worst P5 football program over the last 15 years. Granted, football stadium upgrades coming and Lance Leipold has KU headed in the right direction. I’m not holding my breath in the near term but where would we be without wishful thinking?

AAU or not KU is where they will be, a B12 member. The only thing that could change that is the SEC AND the B1G both going to 24 schools each - & even then there are a lot of schools in front of them

I think the KU brand is more valuable than a lot of you think it is. However the value isn't as big as a lot of KU fans think it is.

We're probably at maximum market penetration in a small state that has two power 5 teams that should have at most 1. The population in state isn't growing at a clip to where we can churn our new fans. We share a decent sized market with 2 major colleges one of which is in a different conference and most of the population lives on their side of the state line.

There is room for the brand to grow further with t-shirt fans but there just aren't enough people in the state to lift the profile. We'd have to do something like win the conference 1 out of 3 years in a row and 8-10 games a season for a decade to grow our following enough to get enough viewership. None of which is going to happen unless Elon Musk decides to bankroll our program. I think our program's ceiling is probably about Oklahoma State or Wisconsin level.

I thought Kansas would end up in the B1G until USC and UCLA were added (aka geography no longer matters). Now I don't even think they are on the radar.

Kansas in the SEC would be laughable. I honestly chuckle when I think of how bad they would get their rears whooped every year in football. The SEC is going to have plenty of money to figure out basketball.

If and when the SEC and B1G expand again they will probably go to 18 each (2 at a time).

SEC Candidates: Florida State, Clemson, North Carolina, Notre Dame

B1G Candidates: Washington, Oregon, Florida State, Miami, Stanford, Cal, Notre Dame

(07-19-2023 05:22 PM)mvfcfan Wrote:  I thought Kansas would end up in the B1G until USC and UCLA were added (aka geography no longer matters). Now I don't even think they are on the radar.

Kansas in the SEC would be laughable. I honestly chuckle when I think of how bad they would get their rears whooped every year in football. The SEC is going to have plenty of money to figure out basketball.

If and when the SEC and B1G expand again they will probably go to 18 each (2 at a time).

SEC Candidates: Florida State, Clemson, North Carolina, Notre Dame

B1G Candidates: Washington, Oregon, Florida State, Miami, Stanford, Cal, Notre Dame

As to the number of schools taken, that depends on how certain they are of where they want to stop. I think there are plenty of reasons for the Big 10 or SEC to stop at 20. Brands and market reach can be optimized with 4 more, while profit can be maximized with the right 18. They each have network partners which might be more inclined to brands and reach over pure profit, especially if both still make more at 20, just not quite as much as at 18.

The SEC's top 3 requirements are met with the first three you listed for them. The 4th then becomes a matter of who is available and how much do they add. Obviously Notre Dame is the #1 target in the combined field of prospects for both conferences. I cannot discount Kansas because of their commercial impact upon their region. It is second only to Notre Dame of the remaining potential schools. It also meets an SEC need. But to your point that need would be met with North Carolina. Should the Tar Heels wind up in the SEC and Notre Dame remains aloof, who is #4? Do you move on a Virginia school, consider Miami, or do you look to balance the Western part of the SEC where Kansas makes that region more complete and a bit less daunting and accomplishes one goal Sankey has had, restoring rivalries?

We'll see. But if the SEC or Big 10, or both see an end game at 20, they may not drag this out. I think a final move would help the sport, eliminate the distraction of realignment, and enable fans to begin to adapt to their new faces and new digs.

Socially there is a need to end this. Sports are an escape from real life stressors. In a world where everything is in FLUX an escape like college sports needs stasis and a sense of permanence to balance in part all of the other things which are pulling at the fabric of society. Will the conferences think this way? Likely not. But if you want to build a new generation of college sports fans it would be a great time now, to get this over with for at least 20 years or so.

I tried to talk up Kansas about about a decade ago, but people were all in on markets and football only.

I feel like they have as much chance to get into the big10 as they believe that Memphis has of getting into the big12.,,,there I said it.

(07-19-2023 08:54 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-18-2023 09:21 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-18-2023 08:29 AM)Eggszecutor Wrote:  I've been leaning towards another possibility lately. Once the Big ten and SEC take what they want (probably in the next 10-12 years, the remaining schools of the ACC, Big XII and PAC-12 will all look around. There will be a group of them that think they should be in the Big Ten/SEC, but didn't make the cut. I think those schools will leave their respective conferences and create a new national conference that will be number 3 behind the Big Ten/ SEC. Think Oregon, Washington, Kansas, Duke, Virginia, etc. They will come from what remains of the Big XII, ACC and PAC-12. The TV money they will get won't be SEC/Big Ten, but it will be alright.

Ultimately, I think it’s who is left in the ACC will take the best of the Pac-12 and Big 12 and form that national conference. So, I generally agree with the outcome, but in terms of procedure, the ACC is structural vessel (as opposed to forming an entirely new conference). I think a lot of fans weirdly overrate how many ACC schools would add value to the Big Ten and SEC, but then underrate the value of the depth of the ACC even in the event of a B1G/ACC raid.

Now that the Big 12 has expanded with 4 formerly G5 schools and is looking (reportedly) at UConn and Gonzaga, I am rather disinclined to believe they will add PAC 12 schools. By default that makes the ACC seem the likely candidate around which to rebuild another national conference.

But that will depend upon a lot of things:
1. Does the SEC and Big 10 expand again and if so by how many?
2. Should ESPN wind up in anyone's hands but Disney, what are their priorities going to be?
3. Is there a breakaway or not. If so consolidation would likely be in order to potentially maximize CFP slots. If not and the six auto bids go to the top six conferences (which aren't the same quality as they were when the CFP expansion was proposed) then is it worth it to consolidate for maybe one more at large bid?
4. Do external global factors in politics and finances impact corporate spending and mergers and acquisitions and if so to what degree?
5. War is a potential inhibitor. I hope not, but relations are strained in some key and dangerous areas.

And there are more. If there is a breakaway of an upper tier organized around pay for players in whatever form that takes, and there is a push to more fully monetize basketball, then yes, absolutely we will have further consolidation. And in that world the ACC is best set up at this point to be that third entity. Their markets are stronger than those of the PAC 12, their current contract pays more than either the Big 12 or PAC 12's new contracts will pay, and the schools likely to remain would make better peers for those which will remain in the PAC 12 and for some of the original Big 12 members which have been left behind.

Probably not.

The lesson the P5 has learned from professional sports is this:
In order for everybody to be successful the sport has to have a national audience.
In order to have a national audience, there has to be successful teams in all sections of the country.
Pro sports have solved this problem by taxing the richer franchises and subsidizing the poorer ones so that the smaller market teams could afford to be competitive.
This approach won't/can't work for individual schools whose primary function is education.

(07-18-2023 09:42 AM)AzonTheKid Wrote:  Man. A lot of you guys really don't like Kansas.

Good

(07-19-2023 05:22 PM)mvfcfan Wrote:  I thought Kansas would end up in the B1G until USC and UCLA were added (aka geography no longer matters). Now I don't even think they are on the radar.

Kansas in the SEC would be laughable. I honestly chuckle when I think of how bad they would get their rears whooped every year in football. The SEC is going to have plenty of money to figure out basketball.

If and when the SEC and B1G expand again they will probably go to 18 each (2 at a time).

SEC Candidates: Florida State, Clemson, North Carolina, Notre Dame

B1G Candidates: Washington, Oregon, Florida State, Miami, Stanford, Cal, Notre Dame

For the BIG, I would add Oregon and Washington. For the SEC, I would add Clemson and Florida State.

First, I must preface my comment by saying I am starting my doctoral work at K-State in August and will be living in Manhattan (most of the time) for a year or two so my perspective of the higher ed "climate" in the Sunflower State obviously lacks extensive context. As it is, based on my time visiting K-State, KU as well as traveling the I70 corridor between Kansas City and Salina I have not taken notice to a KU superiority or tangible cultural/intellectual superiority. In fact, I have gotten a kick out of competing KU and K-State billboards along I70 in downtown Topeka! It's like twins each staking their claim of the bedroom they must share.

Certainly, some of the metrics favor KU but it is not overwhelming. K-State very much stands on its own merit as the first land grant school under the Morrill Act.

Gee, I don't know?!