I posted this on the Louisville board thought I would share this link here. I pretty much limited to rehashing crap now but that's OK. I'll serve my time for pi$$ing off the wrong people and move on.
CJ
Conference Realignment
Jim, there are millions of those people and they all are bravely hiding on the world wide web!
I disagree w the article where he says we wouldn't join the b12 because its inferior to the Pac12?..? Thats 90% why I want to join b/c in both bb and FB the big 12 is a better league. What a better way to 1 up utah! Playing indy with no bowls and high school gym basketball doesn't really cut it.
It was an ok summary. The interesting part was a pop up link from 5/10/10 titled: "Source: Big Ten Extends Invites to Notre Dame, Nebraska, Missouri & Rutgers"
http://collegesportsinfo.com/2010/05/10/...i-rutgers/
In the 2nd article the chancellor from Nebraska says there is no truth to the rumor. We now know that Nebraska left the B12 about a month later. Missouri never got the invitation it campaigned so hard for. I'm sure if Rutgers got an invite they would be in the B1G now.
(02-18-2012 11:06 AM)BYUcoog Wrote: [ -> ]I disagree w the article where he says we wouldn't join the b12 because its inferior to the Pac12?..? Thats 90% why I want to join b/c in both bb and FB the big 12 is a better league. What a better way to 1 up utah! Playing indy with no bowls and high school gym basketball doesn't really cut it.
This. The PAC 12 has gotten a lot of hype over the last year or so but if you really break it down, the Big 12 is far superior to the PAC 12 in terms of what takes place on the athletic field. What the Big 12 needs to demonstrate is stability and learn to spread the wealth evenly. The Big 12 will garner a bigger TV deal than the PAC 12 if they stay together which I think they now will.
IMO, the Big Three AQ conferences are the SEC, Big 12, and Big Ten. Then there is a significant dropoff after that. BYU would definitely one up Utah if they get into the Big 12.
It sounds like realignment is constantly going to be endless.
The most important thing for a school is not the label of where they end up but how much $$$ they are making. Any school that can elevate to the Big East level of beyond is going to make a ton of money by association.
The MAC may be an exception where the philosophy is more about cost containment and competitive balance but even the MAC is going to become more desirable heading into future post season contracts simply because its an FBS conference.
The PAC-10 was basically a 100 year old conference (not technically, but essentially). The Big 12 was stronger in football before and after PAC-10 expansion. It's real weakness was that it was a relatively new conference without the built in loyalty factor, and surrounded by more established conferences that wanted some of its members (remember Colorado long wanted in the PAC-10, Missouri wasn't shy about wanting in the Big Ten, the Southwestern Conference members weren't exactly long old friends with most the conference, and Nebraska was peeved about what the old Big 8 became).
The PAC-10 was more unequal with revenue before expansion than the Big 12, but there was no worry of losing members and its long history and tie to the Rose Bowl just made it the more stable one. If the remaining big powers in the Big 12 are fully committed though (and locking down the TV rights with the conference is a very good sign they are), it can still easily be a conference with more attention than the PAC-12.
(02-20-2012 04:58 PM)ohio1317 Wrote: [ -> ]The PAC-10 was basically a 100 year old conference (not technically, but essentially). The Big 12 was stronger in football before and after PAC-10 expansion. It's real weakness was that it was a relatively new conference without the built in loyalty factor, and surrounded by more established conferences that wanted some of its members (remember Colorado long wanted in the PAC-10, Missouri wasn't shy about wanting in the Big Ten, the Southwestern Conference members weren't exactly long old friends with most the conference, and Nebraska was peeved about what the old Big 8 became).
The PAC-10 was more unequal with revenue before expansion than the Big 12, but there was no worry of losing members and its long history and tie to the Rose Bowl just made it the more stable one. If the remaining big powers in the Big 12 are fully committed though (and locking down the TV rights with the conference is a very good sign they are), it can still easily be a conference with more attention than the PAC-12.
Someone else that understands the strength the Big 12 has if they show it is a permanent establishment.