(07-10-2014 12:08 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 11:44 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 11:15 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 09:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 08:46 AM)pesik Wrote:  if the big 12 had no choice but to expand today they take byu and cincy, the 2 known commodities.

I don't see Cincy getting a P5 bid in the forseeable future. Ditto for UConn. IMO, just as Rutgers and UConn are redundant, such that only one would get a P5 bid, and just as USF and UCF are as well, I thought all along that Cincy and Louisville are, too. Cincy is just in too tight a box, surrounded on all sides by B1G and now ACC and SEC schools, to provide much value-added to the Big 12 or anyone else.

Everyone likes to talk about UofL getting picked "over" UConn, and that's how the ACC evidently framed it, but bigger picture, it was really Rutgers that got picked over UConn, and UofL over Cincy.

That is what TV execs want. Captive college TV viewers. A&M is getting much more viewers than Texas is now (nod to Johnny Football over the past 2 years) although they are surrounded by Big 12 schools. The Big 12 needs to expand their market and Ohio and Florida would good places to plant a flag. I am a Cincinnati guy and that is who I watch first and foremost,
but I probably watch AAC, Big Ten and SEC games equally.

I don't think it's fair to compare Cincy to Texas A/M. First, TAMU is not surrounded like Cincy is. They do have Texas in their backyard, but nobody else in the vicinity, and the nearest major city, Houston, is P5-free.

Also, TAMU is a traditional football power, they have been in a "power" conference for literally a century, as they were a founding member of the SWC in 1914. They are a gigantic land, sea, and space grant university with a $8 billion endowment and an immense fan base throughout Texas and the south/southwest. So they had a far bigger and broader 'footprint' of interest. Cincy, otoh, really is much more confined in terms of footprint.

I know about A&M. The idea Quo is you want your conference games, even the non marquee games, broadcast in populated markets that have a high % of college football audience. There are exceptions like adding Nebraska.
Back when we were in the Big east we had the dreaded Big East Game of the Week with John Congemi, lol I like him, and that was the non ESPN 12 Noon kick. However those games got broadcast to a ton of local stations in metro area all over the country. The better matchups ESPN would pick those up and there were usually regional.

I guarantee you if you put Cincy-Okie State on the sake time slot as Purdue-Iowa, Ohio viewers are going to tune into Cincy-Okie State more so than than the BIG game. And if the Big 12 is not in Ohio then then whoever Okie would have played never gets broadcast in Ohio.

All the P5 and even the AAC are national now. Adding a school doesn't get them into more markets. May get more viewers in those markets, but they are already on.

(07-10-2014 04:43 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 09:55 AM)NestaKnight1 Wrote:  Let me make this abundantly clear. Tampa is the 18th largest market in the country and Orlando is the 20th, however when you add the two markets together they constitute the 4th largest market in the nation. One thing the b-12 needs more than anything for national relevance is markets (especially outside of Texas, sorryHouston). I don't think the b-12 would Add either BYU or UC, they would have already been added if the need arose. I believe for the reasons stated multiple times before that the UCF/USF tandem is the b-12s best option for long term future success. Ucf had only one year to establish national relevance, certainly you are not suggesting that teams from c-USA are capable of establishing national relevance. Just for the record UCF has had 10 win seasons In Three of the last four seasons. UCF is hardly a "flash in the pan."

A couple things to consider...

1- The combined Tampa-Orlando Market: UCF and USF probably generate decent ratings in each other's home market. For instance the UCF-Houston game drew a 1.0 in Tampa despite going head to head with Bama-LSU, ND-Pitt, TX-WVU, and an ACC team from their state with VT-Miami.

Since they both likely get a chunk of each other's market you can make an argument that taking one and another team from outside the area would add more.

If you assume that they each deliver 25% of the other's market and that Cincinnati does the same with nearby Dayton and the total addition to the footprint is pretty much the same total with any of the 3 combos. Not to mention how BYU not only draws in their entire state (arguably better than the Utes historically) and significant chunks of surrounding states in the west.

2- How much would USF/UCF cannibalize each other?

We are talking about two teams that for most of the country were invisible prior to 2005 and since then only average around 4 appearances per year on ABC/ESPN/equivalent networks that aren't split up by region and end up reaching a truly national audience. That isn't much of a foundation for their brands to weather hard times so their ratings will rise and drop with their record more than a team like Pitt, AzSt, BYU, or Iowa who have long histories of being seen nationally and can draw some help in the ratings from it.

So the supply lines for an addition to be successful are going to be critical and one of them is recruiting. Compare the two scenarios:

A- UCF and USF are added and succeed in raiding away X number of Florida prospects with competing offers from out of state P5 schools. Many of these are guys both pursue.

B- One of UCF/USF and Cincinnati are added and USF/UCF raids away 2/3 of the previous number of prospects with P5 offers from out of state and Cincinnati gets about the same in their territory.

Option B leads to more talent coming into the league and avoids one addition diluting the other's talent supply which likely leads to better teams and a better shot at tv ratings.

But 6-8 schools in the Big 12 don't care about Florida or Ohio recruits. So it would really just be the schools themselves. And would Cincinnati combined with a Florida school generate enough interest in either state to really make a dent in the existing recruiting pecking order?

(07-10-2014 06:49 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 04:43 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 09:55 AM)NestaKnight1 Wrote:  Let me make this abundantly clear. Tampa is the 18th largest market in the country and Orlando is the 20th, however when you add the two markets together they constitute the 4th largest market in the nation. One thing the b-12 needs more than anything for national relevance is markets (especially outside of Texas, sorryHouston). I don't think the b-12 would Add either BYU or UC, they would have already been added if the need arose. I believe for the reasons stated multiple times before that the UCF/USF tandem is the b-12s best option for long term future success. Ucf had only one year to establish national relevance, certainly you are not suggesting that teams from c-USA are capable of establishing national relevance. Just for the record UCF has had 10 win seasons In Three of the last four seasons. UCF is hardly a "flash in the pan."

A couple things to consider...

1- The combined Tampa-Orlando Market: UCF and USF probably generate decent ratings in each other's home market. For instance the UCF-Houston game drew a 1.0 in Tampa despite going head to head with Bama-LSU, ND-Pitt, TX-WVU, and an ACC team from their state with VT-Miami.

Since they both likely get a chunk of each other's market you can make an argument that taking one and another team from outside the area would add more.

If you assume that they each deliver 25% of the other's market and that Cincinnati does the same with nearby Dayton and the total addition to the footprint is pretty much the same total with any of the 3 combos. Not to mention how BYU not only draws in their entire state (arguably better than the Utes historically) and significant chunks of surrounding states in the west.

2- How much would USF/UCF cannibalize each other?

We are talking about two teams that for most of the country were invisible prior to 2005 and since then only average around 4 appearances per year on ABC/ESPN/equivalent networks that aren't split up by region and end up reaching a truly national audience. That isn't much of a foundation for their brands to weather hard times so their ratings will rise and drop with their record more than a team like Pitt, AzSt, BYU, or Iowa who have long histories of being seen nationally and can draw some help in the ratings from it.

So the supply lines for an addition to be successful are going to be critical and one of them is recruiting. Compare the two scenarios:

A- UCF and USF are added and succeed in raiding away X number of Florida prospects with competing offers from out of state P5 schools. Many of these are guys both pursue.

B- One of UCF/USF and Cincinnati are added and USF/UCF raids away 2/3 of the previous number of prospects with P5 offers from out of state and Cincinnati gets about the same in their territory.

Option B leads to more talent coming into the league and avoids one addition diluting the other's talent supply which likely leads to better teams and a better shot at tv ratings.

But 6-8 schools in the Big 12 don't care about Florida or Ohio recruits. So it would really just be the schools themselves. And would Cincinnati combined with a Florida school generate enough interest in either state to really make a dent in the existing recruiting pecking order?

My point isn't even going as far as providing recruits to current members.

My point is:

- Any of these additions need to win to keep their ratings based on historical brand except maybe BYU but they are the outlier.

- Adding multiple teams in the same area/recruiting pool dilutes their potential talent as they would cannibalize each other's recruiting. Where one team elevated would usually win head to head battles having two would split the talent that could be convinced to stay home.

The goal is to elevate someone that is going to make life difficult for other P5 schools outside the B12 on the recruiting trail and not current or future members. Leads to more talent in the league and better teams which leads to increased likelihood of better ratings indirectly for all involved.

Each of Ohio and Florida offer enough recruiting that if those additions could take a few teams from lesser B1G or ACC teams you can still field a pretty talented team by most P5 standards. For instance Cincinnati isn't going to beat out tOSU for guys but might make things tough on a team like Purdue or Indiana. UCF/USF might not go toe to toe with FSU or Miami but could take guys from Wake, NC State, and others as a power 5 program at home.

(07-10-2014 09:07 AM)Chappy Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 08:47 AM)Bull Wrote:  Usually at this point people throw some comment at me about the tandem not adding enough to the B12 financially to be worth the addition, but I don't buy that. Both USF and UCF have now shown they can already play with the big dogs on the field (although USF regressed a wee bit). Put both in the B12 and watch the attendance and support blast through the roof.

Here I am on cue....

The bottom line these days is money, and the Big 12 is locked into a very nice TV deal through the 2024-25 season. They only expand before then if ESPN/Fox feel the additions (and the potential championship game) are worth dishing out more money for. I just don't see any schools that would add upwards of $40 million per year to the deal.

Add four pay them half shares until new contract or a six year period. Cincinnati, BYU, USA and USF all would grow in the time period. Sub one out for New Mexico if it works better for divisions.

(07-10-2014 07:43 PM)MJG Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 09:07 AM)Chappy Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 08:47 AM)Bull Wrote:  Usually at this point people throw some comment at me about the tandem not adding enough to the B12 financially to be worth the addition, but I don't buy that. Both USF and UCF have now shown they can already play with the big dogs on the field (although USF regressed a wee bit). Put both in the B12 and watch the attendance and support blast through the roof.

Here I am on cue....

The bottom line these days is money, and the Big 12 is locked into a very nice TV deal through the 2024-25 season. They only expand before then if ESPN/Fox feel the additions (and the potential championship game) are worth dishing out more money for. I just don't see any schools that would add upwards of $40 million per year to the deal.

Add four pay them half shares until new contract or a six year period. Cincinnati, BYU, USA and USF all would grow in the time period. Sub one out for New Mexico if it works better for divisions.

USA? South Alabama? Let's stop already.

(07-10-2014 07:43 PM)MJG Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 09:07 AM)Chappy Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 08:47 AM)Bull Wrote:  Usually at this point people throw some comment at me about the tandem not adding enough to the B12 financially to be worth the addition, but I don't buy that. Both USF and UCF have now shown they can already play with the big dogs on the field (although USF regressed a wee bit). Put both in the B12 and watch the attendance and support blast through the roof.

Here I am on cue....

The bottom line these days is money, and the Big 12 is locked into a very nice TV deal through the 2024-25 season. They only expand before then if ESPN/Fox feel the additions (and the potential championship game) are worth dishing out more money for. I just don't see any schools that would add upwards of $40 million per year to the deal.

Add four pay them half shares until new contract or a six year period. Cincinnati, BYU, USA and USF all would grow in the time period. Sub one out for New Mexico if it works better for divisions.

I prefer to add no one outside the P-5. Don't split the pie or gamble on hypothetical future returns. Keep the only long road trip slog as WVU. Schedule P-5 exclusively in non-conference play in the future to boost tv revenue predicated around marquee match-ups. The conference continues as is and everyone in it remains happy.

My goodness people. 1) none of you seem to understand the Orlando and Tampa market. They are mutually exclusive because they are very large schools
2). The b12 might still expand in 2017. 2016 is when negotiations would begone for the look in. They weren't going to do anything after the move towards a p5 separation happens
3) fsu isn't going anywhere because of the gor. They were rebuffed by the b1g and got tired of waiting for the b12 that was waiting on nd
4) other p5s may carry states but orlando metro has over 3 million folks alone and we own east of that. Usf has tampa. This city alone is larger than some state wide footprints. Add them together and you are talking a big opportunity
5) directional? You do realize both schools qualify for flagship status right? And I guess the university of Southern California is not directional?
6)the state of Florida produces enough recruits and has a large enough population to support both of us in the p5. Ucf alone is cranking out 15k undergrads a year.
6). We did really well in our markets and others. We just haven't had the platform
7) please don't try to use the age argument. Your school may have been around 100 years but most don't possess 10 decades worth of winning seasons. Heck we beat Alabama as a d2
8)how many fans travel for p5 schools? We have been 40k with our own fans. If we got some decent traveling teams I am sure we could average 60 a game
9)if tv reach is the game then the combo works well. Having lived in cincy and as most of my family lives there they are buckeye fans and not cincy. It has a strong following in cincy but Dayton is a smaller market with many osu fans. The population and existing segmentation help those fanbases take hold


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(07-10-2014 07:29 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 06:49 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 04:43 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 09:55 AM)NestaKnight1 Wrote:  Let me make this abundantly clear. Tampa is the 18th largest market in the country and Orlando is the 20th, however when you add the two markets together they constitute the 4th largest market in the nation. One thing the b-12 needs more than anything for national relevance is markets (especially outside of Texas, sorryHouston). I don't think the b-12 would Add either BYU or UC, they would have already been added if the need arose. I believe for the reasons stated multiple times before that the UCF/USF tandem is the b-12s best option for long term future success. Ucf had only one year to establish national relevance, certainly you are not suggesting that teams from c-USA are capable of establishing national relevance. Just for the record UCF has had 10 win seasons In Three of the last four seasons. UCF is hardly a "flash in the pan."

A couple things to consider...

1- The combined Tampa-Orlando Market: UCF and USF probably generate decent ratings in each other's home market. For instance the UCF-Houston game drew a 1.0 in Tampa despite going head to head with Bama-LSU, ND-Pitt, TX-WVU, and an ACC team from their state with VT-Miami.

Since they both likely get a chunk of each other's market you can make an argument that taking one and another team from outside the area would add more.

If you assume that they each deliver 25% of the other's market and that Cincinnati does the same with nearby Dayton and the total addition to the footprint is pretty much the same total with any of the 3 combos. Not to mention how BYU not only draws in their entire state (arguably better than the Utes historically) and significant chunks of surrounding states in the west.

2- How much would USF/UCF cannibalize each other?

We are talking about two teams that for most of the country were invisible prior to 2005 and since then only average around 4 appearances per year on ABC/ESPN/equivalent networks that aren't split up by region and end up reaching a truly national audience. That isn't much of a foundation for their brands to weather hard times so their ratings will rise and drop with their record more than a team like Pitt, AzSt, BYU, or Iowa who have long histories of being seen nationally and can draw some help in the ratings from it.

So the supply lines for an addition to be successful are going to be critical and one of them is recruiting. Compare the two scenarios:

A- UCF and USF are added and succeed in raiding away X number of Florida prospects with competing offers from out of state P5 schools. Many of these are guys both pursue.

B- One of UCF/USF and Cincinnati are added and USF/UCF raids away 2/3 of the previous number of prospects with P5 offers from out of state and Cincinnati gets about the same in their territory.

Option B leads to more talent coming into the league and avoids one addition diluting the other's talent supply which likely leads to better teams and a better shot at tv ratings.

But 6-8 schools in the Big 12 don't care about Florida or Ohio recruits. So it would really just be the schools themselves. And would Cincinnati combined with a Florida school generate enough interest in either state to really make a dent in the existing recruiting pecking order?

My point isn't even going as far as providing recruits to current members.

My point is:

- Any of these additions need to win to keep their ratings based on historical brand except maybe BYU but they are the outlier.

- Adding multiple teams in the same area/recruiting pool dilutes their potential talent as they would cannibalize each other's recruiting. Where one team elevated would usually win head to head battles having two would split the talent that could be convinced to stay home.

The goal is to elevate someone that is going to make life difficult for other P5 schools outside the B12 on the recruiting trail and not current or future members. Leads to more talent in the league and better teams which leads to increased likelihood of better ratings indirectly for all involved.

Each of Ohio and Florida offer enough recruiting that if those additions could take a few teams from lesser B1G or ACC teams you can still field a pretty talented team by most P5 standards. For instance Cincinnati isn't going to beat out tOSU for guys but might make things tough on a team like Purdue or Indiana. UCF/USF might not go toe to toe with FSU or Miami but could take guys from Wake, NC State, and others as a power 5 program at home.

I understood. What I'm saying is Cincinnati might still lose to Purdue and Indiana. UCF might still lose to Kentucky and Mississippi St. But with USF and UCF together, they might get enough attention to win some of those battles.

Does it really matter much as a P5 member that Cincinnati is now winning recruiting battles vs. Miami?

(07-10-2014 06:49 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 04:43 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 09:55 AM)NestaKnight1 Wrote:  Let me make this abundantly clear. Tampa is the 18th largest market in the country and Orlando is the 20th, however when you add the two markets together they constitute the 4th largest market in the nation. One thing the b-12 needs more than anything for national relevance is markets (especially outside of Texas, sorryHouston). I don't think the b-12 would Add either BYU or UC, they would have already been added if the need arose. I believe for the reasons stated multiple times before that the UCF/USF tandem is the b-12s best option for long term future success. Ucf had only one year to establish national relevance, certainly you are not suggesting that teams from c-USA are capable of establishing national relevance. Just for the record UCF has had 10 win seasons In Three of the last four seasons. UCF is hardly a "flash in the pan."

A couple things to consider...

1- The combined Tampa-Orlando Market: UCF and USF probably generate decent ratings in each other's home market. For instance the UCF-Houston game drew a 1.0 in Tampa despite going head to head with Bama-LSU, ND-Pitt, TX-WVU, and an ACC team from their state with VT-Miami.

Since they both likely get a chunk of each other's market you can make an argument that taking one and another team from outside the area would add more.

If you assume that they each deliver 25% of the other's market and that Cincinnati does the same with nearby Dayton and the total addition to the footprint is pretty much the same total with any of the 3 combos. Not to mention how BYU not only draws in their entire state (arguably better than the Utes historically) and significant chunks of surrounding states in the west.

2- How much would USF/UCF cannibalize each other?

We are talking about two teams that for most of the country were invisible prior to 2005 and since then only average around 4 appearances per year on ABC/ESPN/equivalent networks that aren't split up by region and end up reaching a truly national audience. That isn't much of a foundation for their brands to weather hard times so their ratings will rise and drop with their record more than a team like Pitt, AzSt, BYU, or Iowa who have long histories of being seen nationally and can draw some help in the ratings from it.

So the supply lines for an addition to be successful are going to be critical and one of them is recruiting. Compare the two scenarios:

A- UCF and USF are added and succeed in raiding away X number of Florida prospects with competing offers from out of state P5 schools. Many of these are guys both pursue.

B- One of UCF/USF and Cincinnati are added and USF/UCF raids away 2/3 of the previous number of prospects with P5 offers from out of state and Cincinnati gets about the same in their territory.

Option B leads to more talent coming into the league and avoids one addition diluting the other's talent supply which likely leads to better teams and a better shot at tv ratings.

But 6-8 schools in the Big 12 don't care about Florida or Ohio recruits. So it would really just be the schools themselves. And would Cincinnati combined with a Florida school generate enough interest in either state to really make a dent in the existing recruiting pecking order?

TV TV TV eyeballs population. The broadcasters are in control.

(07-10-2014 06:35 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 12:08 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 11:44 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 11:15 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 09:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't see Cincy getting a P5 bid in the forseeable future. Ditto for UConn. IMO, just as Rutgers and UConn are redundant, such that only one would get a P5 bid, and just as USF and UCF are as well, I thought all along that Cincy and Louisville are, too. Cincy is just in too tight a box, surrounded on all sides by B1G and now ACC and SEC schools, to provide much value-added to the Big 12 or anyone else.

Everyone likes to talk about UofL getting picked "over" UConn, and that's how the ACC evidently framed it, but bigger picture, it was really Rutgers that got picked over UConn, and UofL over Cincy.

That is what TV execs want. Captive college TV viewers. A&M is getting much more viewers than Texas is now (nod to Johnny Football over the past 2 years) although they are surrounded by Big 12 schools. The Big 12 needs to expand their market and Ohio and Florida would good places to plant a flag. I am a Cincinnati guy and that is who I watch first and foremost,
but I probably watch AAC, Big Ten and SEC games equally.

I don't think it's fair to compare Cincy to Texas A/M. First, TAMU is not surrounded like Cincy is. They do have Texas in their backyard, but nobody else in the vicinity, and the nearest major city, Houston, is P5-free.

Also, TAMU is a traditional football power, they have been in a "power" conference for literally a century, as they were a founding member of the SWC in 1914. They are a gigantic land, sea, and space grant university with a $8 billion endowment and an immense fan base throughout Texas and the south/southwest. So they had a far bigger and broader 'footprint' of interest. Cincy, otoh, really is much more confined in terms of footprint.

I know about A&M. The idea Quo is you want your conference games, even the non marquee games, broadcast in populated markets that have a high % of college football audience. There are exceptions like adding Nebraska.
Back when we were in the Big east we had the dreaded Big East Game of the Week with John Congemi, lol I like him, and that was the non ESPN 12 Noon kick. However those games got broadcast to a ton of local stations in metro area all over the country. The better matchups ESPN would pick those up and there were usually regional.

I guarantee you if you put Cincy-Okie State on the sake time slot as Purdue-Iowa, Ohio viewers are going to tune into Cincy-Okie State more so than than the BIG game. And if the Big 12 is not in Ohio then then whoever Okie would have played never gets broadcast in Ohio.

All the P5 and even the AAC are national now. Adding a school doesn't get them into more markets. May get more viewers in those markets, but they are already on.

That is silly.

(07-10-2014 09:22 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 07:29 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 06:49 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 04:43 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 09:55 AM)NestaKnight1 Wrote:  Let me make this abundantly clear. Tampa is the 18th largest market in the country and Orlando is the 20th, however when you add the two markets together they constitute the 4th largest market in the nation. One thing the b-12 needs more than anything for national relevance is markets (especially outside of Texas, sorryHouston). I don't think the b-12 would Add either BYU or UC, they would have already been added if the need arose. I believe for the reasons stated multiple times before that the UCF/USF tandem is the b-12s best option for long term future success. Ucf had only one year to establish national relevance, certainly you are not suggesting that teams from c-USA are capable of establishing national relevance. Just for the record UCF has had 10 win seasons In Three of the last four seasons. UCF is hardly a "flash in the pan."

A couple things to consider...

1- The combined Tampa-Orlando Market: UCF and USF probably generate decent ratings in each other's home market. For instance the UCF-Houston game drew a 1.0 in Tampa despite going head to head with Bama-LSU, ND-Pitt, TX-WVU, and an ACC team from their state with VT-Miami.

Since they both likely get a chunk of each other's market you can make an argument that taking one and another team from outside the area would add more.

If you assume that they each deliver 25% of the other's market and that Cincinnati does the same with nearby Dayton and the total addition to the footprint is pretty much the same total with any of the 3 combos. Not to mention how BYU not only draws in their entire state (arguably better than the Utes historically) and significant chunks of surrounding states in the west.

2- How much would USF/UCF cannibalize each other?

We are talking about two teams that for most of the country were invisible prior to 2005 and since then only average around 4 appearances per year on ABC/ESPN/equivalent networks that aren't split up by region and end up reaching a truly national audience. That isn't much of a foundation for their brands to weather hard times so their ratings will rise and drop with their record more than a team like Pitt, AzSt, BYU, or Iowa who have long histories of being seen nationally and can draw some help in the ratings from it.

So the supply lines for an addition to be successful are going to be critical and one of them is recruiting. Compare the two scenarios:

A- UCF and USF are added and succeed in raiding away X number of Florida prospects with competing offers from out of state P5 schools. Many of these are guys both pursue.

B- One of UCF/USF and Cincinnati are added and USF/UCF raids away 2/3 of the previous number of prospects with P5 offers from out of state and Cincinnati gets about the same in their territory.

Option B leads to more talent coming into the league and avoids one addition diluting the other's talent supply which likely leads to better teams and a better shot at tv ratings.

But 6-8 schools in the Big 12 don't care about Florida or Ohio recruits. So it would really just be the schools themselves. And would Cincinnati combined with a Florida school generate enough interest in either state to really make a dent in the existing recruiting pecking order?

My point isn't even going as far as providing recruits to current members.

My point is:

- Any of these additions need to win to keep their ratings based on historical brand except maybe BYU but they are the outlier.

- Adding multiple teams in the same area/recruiting pool dilutes their potential talent as they would cannibalize each other's recruiting. Where one team elevated would usually win head to head battles having two would split the talent that could be convinced to stay home.

The goal is to elevate someone that is going to make life difficult for other P5 schools outside the B12 on the recruiting trail and not current or future members. Leads to more talent in the league and better teams which leads to increased likelihood of better ratings indirectly for all involved.

Each of Ohio and Florida offer enough recruiting that if those additions could take a few teams from lesser B1G or ACC teams you can still field a pretty talented team by most P5 standards. For instance Cincinnati isn't going to beat out tOSU for guys but might make things tough on a team like Purdue or Indiana. UCF/USF might not go toe to toe with FSU or Miami but could take guys from Wake, NC State, and others as a power 5 program at home.

I understood. What I'm saying is Cincinnati might still lose to Purdue and Indiana. UCF might still lose to Kentucky and Mississippi St. But with USF and UCF together, they might get enough attention to win some of those battles.

They might not beat them but I think playing in a legitimate P5 league with elite national games would let them win their fair share of them and get enough to elevate their talent. I mean it only takes a few guys per class to dramatically alter a program.

Also while playing each other might help local exposure I see elevating both as a negative as it makes it tougher for one to carve out those recruits due to the other offering the same type of offer. I see recruits probably gravitating towards playing big national games more than a rival with only a five game history.

Quote:Does it really matter much as a P5 member that Cincinnati is now winning recruiting battles vs. Miami?

Depends which Miami you are talking about. Florida yes Ohio no.

(07-10-2014 09:28 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 06:35 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 12:08 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 11:44 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 11:15 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  That is what TV execs want. Captive college TV viewers. A&M is getting much more viewers than Texas is now (nod to Johnny Football over the past 2 years) although they are surrounded by Big 12 schools. The Big 12 needs to expand their market and Ohio and Florida would good places to plant a flag. I am a Cincinnati guy and that is who I watch first and foremost,
but I probably watch AAC, Big Ten and SEC games equally.

I don't think it's fair to compare Cincy to Texas A/M. First, TAMU is not surrounded like Cincy is. They do have Texas in their backyard, but nobody else in the vicinity, and the nearest major city, Houston, is P5-free.

Also, TAMU is a traditional football power, they have been in a "power" conference for literally a century, as they were a founding member of the SWC in 1914. They are a gigantic land, sea, and space grant university with a $8 billion endowment and an immense fan base throughout Texas and the south/southwest. So they had a far bigger and broader 'footprint' of interest. Cincy, otoh, really is much more confined in terms of footprint.

I know about A&M. The idea Quo is you want your conference games, even the non marquee games, broadcast in populated markets that have a high % of college football audience. There are exceptions like adding Nebraska.
Back when we were in the Big east we had the dreaded Big East Game of the Week with John Congemi, lol I like him, and that was the non ESPN 12 Noon kick. However those games got broadcast to a ton of local stations in metro area all over the country. The better matchups ESPN would pick those up and there were usually regional.

I guarantee you if you put Cincy-Okie State on the sake time slot as Purdue-Iowa, Ohio viewers are going to tune into Cincy-Okie State more so than than the BIG game. And if the Big 12 is not in Ohio then then whoever Okie would have played never gets broadcast in Ohio.

All the P5 and even the AAC are national now. Adding a school doesn't get them into more markets. May get more viewers in those markets, but they are already on.

That is silly.

For the P5 most of the games are national except for league networks or the bottom rung of games.

The Big 12 averaged 9 games for each school on a nationally rated network (Abc, espn, espn2, fox, fs1, espnu) so getting the game on tv isn't the issue with markets, it's increasing viewership in new areas.

(07-10-2014 09:40 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 09:28 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 06:35 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 12:08 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 11:44 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't think it's fair to compare Cincy to Texas A/M. First, TAMU is not surrounded like Cincy is. They do have Texas in their backyard, but nobody else in the vicinity, and the nearest major city, Houston, is P5-free.

Also, TAMU is a traditional football power, they have been in a "power" conference for literally a century, as they were a founding member of the SWC in 1914. They are a gigantic land, sea, and space grant university with a $8 billion endowment and an immense fan base throughout Texas and the south/southwest. So they had a far bigger and broader 'footprint' of interest. Cincy, otoh, really is much more confined in terms of footprint.

I know about A&M. The idea Quo is you want your conference games, even the non marquee games, broadcast in populated markets that have a high % of college football audience. There are exceptions like adding Nebraska.
Back when we were in the Big east we had the dreaded Big East Game of the Week with John Congemi, lol I like him, and that was the non ESPN 12 Noon kick. However those games got broadcast to a ton of local stations in metro area all over the country. The better matchups ESPN would pick those up and there were usually regional.

I guarantee you if you put Cincy-Okie State on the sake time slot as Purdue-Iowa, Ohio viewers are going to tune into Cincy-Okie State more so than than the BIG game. And if the Big 12 is not in Ohio then then whoever Okie would have played never gets broadcast in Ohio.

All the P5 and even the AAC are national now. Adding a school doesn't get them into more markets. May get more viewers in those markets, but they are already on.

That is silly.

For the P5 most of the games are national except for league networks or the bottom rung of games.

The Big 12 averaged 9 games for each school on a nationally rated network (Abc, espn, espn2, fox, fs1, espnu) so getting the game on tv isn't the issue with markets, it's increasing viewership in new areas.

Except for marquee games you need a search warrant to get Big 12 here or in Florida.

the AAC called and said thanks for staying!

(07-10-2014 09:57 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  the AAC called and said thanks for staying!

Word

(07-10-2014 09:22 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 07:29 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 06:49 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 04:43 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(07-10-2014 09:55 AM)NestaKnight1 Wrote:  Let me make this abundantly clear. Tampa is the 18th largest market in the country and Orlando is the 20th, however when you add the two markets together they constitute the 4th largest market in the nation. One thing the b-12 needs more than anything for national relevance is markets (especially outside of Texas, sorryHouston). I don't think the b-12 would Add either BYU or UC, they would have already been added if the need arose. I believe for the reasons stated multiple times before that the UCF/USF tandem is the b-12s best option for long term future success. Ucf had only one year to establish national relevance, certainly you are not suggesting that teams from c-USA are capable of establishing national relevance. Just for the record UCF has had 10 win seasons In Three of the last four seasons. UCF is hardly a "flash in the pan."

A couple things to consider...

1- The combined Tampa-Orlando Market: UCF and USF probably generate decent ratings in each other's home market. For instance the UCF-Houston game drew a 1.0 in Tampa despite going head to head with Bama-LSU, ND-Pitt, TX-WVU, and an ACC team from their state with VT-Miami.

Since they both likely get a chunk of each other's market you can make an argument that taking one and another team from outside the area would add more.

If you assume that they each deliver 25% of the other's market and that Cincinnati does the same with nearby Dayton and the total addition to the footprint is pretty much the same total with any of the 3 combos. Not to mention how BYU not only draws in their entire state (arguably better than the Utes historically) and significant chunks of surrounding states in the west.

2- How much would USF/UCF cannibalize each other?

We are talking about two teams that for most of the country were invisible prior to 2005 and since then only average around 4 appearances per year on ABC/ESPN/equivalent networks that aren't split up by region and end up reaching a truly national audience. That isn't much of a foundation for their brands to weather hard times so their ratings will rise and drop with their record more than a team like Pitt, AzSt, BYU, or Iowa who have long histories of being seen nationally and can draw some help in the ratings from it.

So the supply lines for an addition to be successful are going to be critical and one of them is recruiting. Compare the two scenarios:

A- UCF and USF are added and succeed in raiding away X number of Florida prospects with competing offers from out of state P5 schools. Many of these are guys both pursue.

B- One of UCF/USF and Cincinnati are added and USF/UCF raids away 2/3 of the previous number of prospects with P5 offers from out of state and Cincinnati gets about the same in their territory.

Option B leads to more talent coming into the league and avoids one addition diluting the other's talent supply which likely leads to better teams and a better shot at tv ratings.

But 6-8 schools in the Big 12 don't care about Florida or Ohio recruits. So it would really just be the schools themselves. And would Cincinnati combined with a Florida school generate enough interest in either state to really make a dent in the existing recruiting pecking order?

My point isn't even going as far as providing recruits to current members.

My point is:

- Any of these additions need to win to keep their ratings based on historical brand except maybe BYU but they are the outlier.

- Adding multiple teams in the same area/recruiting pool dilutes their potential talent as they would cannibalize each other's recruiting. Where one team elevated would usually win head to head battles having two would split the talent that could be convinced to stay home.

The goal is to elevate someone that is going to make life difficult for other P5 schools outside the B12 on the recruiting trail and not current or future members. Leads to more talent in the league and better teams which leads to increased likelihood of better ratings indirectly for all involved.

Each of Ohio and Florida offer enough recruiting that if those additions could take a few teams from lesser B1G or ACC teams you can still field a pretty talented team by most P5 standards. For instance Cincinnati isn't going to beat out tOSU for guys but might make things tough on a team like Purdue or Indiana. UCF/USF might not go toe to toe with FSU or Miami but could take guys from Wake, NC State, and others as a power 5 program at home.

I understood. What I'm saying is Cincinnati might still lose to Purdue and Indiana. UCF might still lose to Kentucky and Mississippi St. But with USF and UCF together, they might get enough attention to win some of those battles.

Does it really matter much as a P5 member that Cincinnati is now winning recruiting battles vs. Miami?

We are not losing those battles now so why wouldn't we?


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

In examining the Big 12 candidates, the following assumptions will be applied:

ASSUMPTION #1 – Think like a university president and NOT like a sports fan.
Conference realignment decisions aren’t driven by which school is most highly ranked in the latest BCS standings, who the fans like, or even what coaches and athletic directors may want (no matter how powerful they might be at their respective schools). Instead, university presidents are the ones that ultimately make realignment decisions and they’re looking at the long-term off-the-field big picture much more than short-term on-the-field issues that fans are generally focused upon. To be sure, how well a school plays football (and to a much lesser extent, basketball) is certainly relevant, but TV markets, demographic changes and academic rankings are factors that really get university presidents get much more engaged.

ASSUMPTION #2 – The Big 12 lacks the ability to raid another power conference.
A number of Big 12 partisans wanted to believe over the past year that the league would be able to poach high profile schools from the ACC such as Florida State and Clemson. However, that prospect was simply never realistic due to a number of issues that the Big 12 needs to address, namely the demographics of the league outside of the state of Texas (which will be explained further in the index criteria below), overall academic reputation and national football brand names beyond Texas and Oklahoma. The Big 12 was able to save itself due to Texas wanting the Longhorn Network over the creation of the Pac-16 and Fox and ESPN paying a lot of money to keep the league together, but it is a paper tiger when it comes to expansion. As a result, the schools being evaluated in the index are all from the “Group of Five” non-power conference ranks.


I think if the BIG 12 expanded the only choices today would be BYU and Cincinnati. BYU has strong enough of a national brand to garner an independent TV contract with ESPN, a massive worldwide fan base, its own TV network and a solid football tradition. BYU demographics are really related to the world’s Mormon population and it has top tier undergraduate academics. Boise State might have the best record of recent on-the-field achievements out of any non-power conference school, but BYU is the one institution at this level that legitimately looks, feels and acts like a power conference program.

Cincinnati is a strong Big 12 expansion candidate, among the Group of Five schools, its Football Brand Value is strong with multiple BCS bowl appearances and consistent performances over the past several years despite a number of coaching changes. The state of Ohio is a football recruiting powerhouse with only one in-state power conference competitor (albeit a massive one in the form of Ohio State). The school’s academics are solid, it has a great basketball history and its location is in a major market with probably the best geographic bridge to West Virginia of any viable candidate. The only question with Cincinnati is whether it can really perform any better on-the-field that it already has in football during the past few years. Still, that’s a minor issue compared to how the school has created a consistently competitive football program.

If the BIG 12 decided to go to into Florida I see the allure of USF as purely about a demographic play – athletic directors and coaches fall all over themselves over the thought of combining the recruiting territories of Texas and Florida. (Note that this is a bigger reason for any fan of a school that’s not in the SEC to be scared of how successful that league can integrate Texas A&M.) USF has shown some flashes of football ability, but it’s been inconsistent. There is also extremely heavy power conference competition within the state of Florida (with Florida, Florida State and Miami gobbling up market shares), so there’s a limit to how large of a fan base that USF can realistically build.

UCF has the exact same overview as USF above (just switch USF with UCF) except that UCF has a bit more upside as (a) being one of the largest schools by enrollment in the country and (b) having fresh chances to perform at higher levels of college football (whereas we’ve already seen what USF was and wasn’t able to do in the old Big East).

So, if the Big 12 were to expand today, it’s clear that Cincinnati and BYU have a huge gap over the rest of the field. Whether that type of expansion would be compelling enough to the Big 12 to make a move at all is still an open question.

EXPLANATION OF THE BIG 12 EXPANSION INDEX

The Big 12 Expansion Index assesses candidates on a 100-point scale. Please note that the schools are being graded on their values relative to only other Gang of Five schools. So, it doesn’t mean that if a school that receives a perfect score in the index that it would be as valuable as Florida State or USC. These values also have no relation to the figures that were calculated in the Big Ten Expansion Index*. This is only measuring the distinctions within the Group of Five universe that serves as the realistic pool of Big 12 expansion candidates. Here are the categories:

Football Brand Value (30 points) – As it was with the Big Ten, this is the most heavily weighted category as a reflection of the reality of the college sports landscape. The revenue generated from football is so massive in comparison to the other sports (including basketball) that it is the ultimate driver for expansion in every conference (including more historically basketball-focused ones such as the ACC).

It must be emphasized that Football Brand Value puts much more weight on the long-term history and financial underpinnings of a program over short-term or recent success. Thus, Team A that has sold out stadiums for years whether it wins or loses is much more valuable than Team B that only sells out a 40,000-seat stadium when it’s in the national championship race, even if Team A has had a mediocre seasons recently and Team B happens to rank in the top 25 of the BCS rankings this year. A lengthy tradition of playing football at the top level also carries more cache compared to being a noveau riche program. The “What have you done for me lately?” attitude of most sports fans doesn’t apply here. Instead, the proper question is the opposite: Even if the target school goes 0-12 in a season, will it still attract TV viewers and attendance? In other words, the true value of a football program is really measured by how much attention it still receives when it’s down as opposed to how much attention it gets when it’s up. Granted, it is much more difficult to find schools under this standard at the Group of Five level compared to at the power conferences, which is a large reason why those Group of Five schools aren’t in power conferences in the first place as of now.

National TV Value (15 points) – The calculation for TV values is a bit different for the Big 12 compared to the Big Ten. With the latter’s Big Ten Network, there was more of an emphasis on the value that schools would bring to that channel (which meant it was fairly large market-focused, albeit the Big Ten still ended up small market Nebraska first when all was said and done because of its extraordinary national TV value). The Big 12, though, is more concerned with the value of its national TV contract above all else since the league doesn’t have a conference network (and in fact, grants third tier TV rights to its individual members who then keep all of that revenue to themselves). Losing Nebraska was a major hit on that front and it led to the Big 12′s decision to add West Virginia instead of Louisville in 2011. As with the Football Brand Value category, there is much more weight on programs with longer histories of being national TV draws as opposed to the flavors of the moment. The issue with Big 12 expansion, of course, is that there are really only a handful of Group of Five schools that have any national TV value at all with respect to football.

Local TV Value (10 points) – While national TV value is more important to the Big 12 with respect to expansion candidates, there’s certainly still an interest for the Big 12 to expand to new TV markets (as the national TV contract can be impacted by local TV market coverage). The defections from the Big 12 over the past 4 years caused the conference to lose its only two top 25 TV markets that were located outside of the state of Texas (Denver and St. Louis). For this category, 10 points will be granted to a top 25 market, 7 points to a 26-50 market, 3 point to a 51-75 market, and then 0 points after that. Please note that any school that is already located in a Big 12 market will receive zero points in this category no matter how large its local market might be.

Demographics/Recruiting Value (20 points) – This was a category that wasn’t included in The Big Ten Expansion Index, but it would have been if I knew then that Jim Delany was going to use the word “demographics” in conjunction with expansion more than any other word over the past 4 years. While there’s some correlation between demographics and local TV value (as a larger market generally means more favorable demographics), the word “demographics” is really a code word for a very tangible concern for football fans and coaches: football recruits. It always irks me whenever I see comments to the effect that the Big Ten’s additions of Rutgers and Maryland didn’t do anything for the conference in football. Quite to the contrary, that expansion was very important for on-the-field matters because New Jersey and Maryland, according to a study by Football Study Hall, happened to be the top two non-Sun Belt states not already in the Big Ten footprint in terms of producing Division I football recruits (and it wasn’t even close).

The very real danger for the Big 12 compared to the other power conferences is that its coverage in the state of Texas (which is the nation’s top football recruiting state and a beast in terms of population growth) has masked its completely poor demographics in the rest of the conference. There’s no demographic depth at all in the conference once you get beyond the Lone Star State, which has come so close to collapse on multiple occasions over the past few years. Without Texas, the Big 12 dies (whereas each of the other power conferences might be severely wounded if their very top brand name school left, but they would likely still find a way to carry on since they have fuller slates of markets and populous states). In this category, 20 points go to any school in a state that is in the top 5 of Division I recruits annually under the Football Study Hall study (as there’s a huge gap between #5 and #6), 15 points go to any school in a state ranked 6 to 10, 10 points go to any school in a state ranked 11 to 20, 5 points go to any school in any other state that produces at least 20 Division I recruits per year, and 0 points for states under 20. As noted by Football Study Hall, the states that have 20 or more Division I recruits per year have produced 93% of all Division I football players since 2008, so any state under 20 isn’t helping the Big 12′s demographic cause. As with the Local TV Value category, any school that is already located in a Big 12 state will receive zero points in this category.

Academics (5 points) – The Big 12 would certainly like to add top tier academic schools, but it won’t necessarily nix any expansion candidate on those grounds. This is in contrast to the Big Ten, where the Academics category was weighted heavily enough to effectively exclude any school that didn’t meet the threshold as being a viable candidate. For the purposes of the Big 12, 5 points will be assigned to any school that has at least 2 of the following 3 qualifications: an AAU member, ranked in the top 100 of the US News undergraduate rankings and/or ranked in the top 300 of the ARWU world graduate school rankings. A school that has 1 of those qualifications will receive 3 points. Everyone else will receive zero (as the Big 12 would likely only be swayed by truly exceptional academic reputations).

Basketball Value (5 points) – As I stated in the Big Ten Expansion Index post, personally, there’s nothing that would make me more delirious as a sports fan than Illinois winning the national championship in basketball. However, when it comes to conference expansion discussions, basketball has been even less of a consideration than I originally thought 4 years ago. This is too bad since there is a whole slew of excellent or even elite basketball programs available in the Group of Five (much more so than football programs). That being said, if all things are relatively equal in the other categories, then basketball considerations could be the tipping point. An elite program and/or fan base will receive 5 points and a solid program and/or school with a fair amount of tradition will get 3 points.

Geographic Fit/Need (5 points) – Normally, this is a category that is based on pure geographic proximity. However, the Big 12 also has a geographic need to bridge the distance gap between West Virginia and the rest of the conference. As a result, schools in states that are located within that gap along with other states immediately adjacent to the current Big 12 footprint will receive 5 points, while everyone else will receive zero. This is an all-or-nothing category – either a school meets the geographic need or it doesn’t.

Tremendous Upside Potential/Monopoly Power (10 points) – This is a category that wasn’t considered for the Big Ten since it was really looking for established old money schools. In the Big 12′s case, though, its realistic expansion candidates almost all have warts of some nature. In fact, there are quite a few candidates that would be looked at in an entirely different light in a positive way if they were merely competent in on-the-field football performance (much less being powers). As a result, much like an unpolished prospect with a lot of athleticism in the NFL or NBA draft, the upside potential of a school should be taken into consideration by the Big 12. This is especially true for a school that could potentially have “monopoly power” of being the only power conference program in its home state. Other factors include whether a school is a flagship or academically elite, has a proven basketball fan base, or has made a lot of recent investments in football facilities.

(* Note that the Mutual Interest category that was in the Big Ten Expansion Index was eliminated here. Any Group of Five school would join the Big 12 in a heartbeat.)

EVALUATION OF BIG 12 EXPANSION CANDIDATES
The candidates are listed in reverse order from least desirable to most desirable. Once again, for the purposes of this evaluation, it is assumed that the only viable Big 12 expansion candidates are not currently power conference members and the calculations are based upon comparisons only to other schools within that non-power conference school group.

A. ALL HAT, NO CATTLE

RICE
Football Brand Value – 15
National TV Value – 5
Local TV Value – 0
Demographics/Recruiting Value – 0
Academics – 5
Basketball Value – 0
Geographic Fit/Need – 5
Tremendous Upside Potential/Monopoly Power – 5
Total: 35
Overview: Fantastic academic institution with a lot of history with the former Southwestern Conference teams in the Big 12, but the lack of a new market or recruiting area is a killer for its candidacy. It would take some massive on-the-field accomplishments (i.e. winning the Group of Five bid to a top bowl in the new College Football Playoff system multiple times) for Rice to move up here.

UNLV
Football Brand Value – 10
National TV Value – 5
Local TV Value – 7
Demographics/Recruiting Value – 0
Academics – 0
Basketball Value – 5
Geographic Fit/Need – 0
Tremendous Upside Potential/Monopoly Power – 10
Total: 37
Overview: The Runnin’ Rebels score low right now due to a horrid stretch of on-the-field football performances over the past several years, but they’re a program to watch if it can get a new state-of-the-art football stadium into place. This is a school that provides the highest profile sports teams in the Las Vegas market with a strong basketball fan base, so their value skyrockets if they can avoid complete ineptitude in football.

COLORADO STATE
Football Brand Value – 10
National TV Value – 5
Local TV Value – 10
Demographics/Recruiting Value – 5
Academics – 3
Basketball Value – 0
Geographic Fit/Need – 0
Tremendous Upside Potential/Monopoly Power – 10
Total: 43
Overview: It’s a mystery why Colorado State doesn’t ever seem to be able to get its act together on-the-field. On paper, this is an institution that ought to be attractive to a power conference with its solid academics and location in fast growing and demographically desirable Colorado, yet their putrid football performances over the past decade have nixed them from any type of consideration. CSU, like UNLV, is looking to build a new football stadium to increase its chances to move up in the athletic world.

SMU
Football Brand Value – 15
National TV Value – 10
Local TV Value – 0
Demographics/Recruiting Value – 0
Academics – 3
Basketball Value – 0
Geographic Fit/Need – 5
Tremendous Upside Potential/Monopoly Power – 5
Total: 43
Overview: The issue with SMU (and any other Texas-based school) is that they’re not bringing any new TV markets or recruiting areas that the Big 12 doesn’t already have blanketed. Now, that isn’t an automatic disqualifier for a Big 12 candidacy (see the addition of TCU in 2011), but it would likely take perfect scores in the Football Brand Value and National TV Value categories to make that happen.

NEW MEXICO
Football Brand Value – 10
National TV Value – 5
Local TV Value – 7
Demographics/Recruiting Value – 0
Academics – 3
Basketball Value – 5
Geographic Fit/Need – 5
Tremendous Upside Potential/Monopoly Power – 10
Total: 45
Overview: New Mexico is in a very similar situation to UNLV with an excellent basketball program and fan base with potential monopoly power in its home market… but its on-the-field football product has been unacceptably terrible for a long period of time. The Lobos actually have a leg up on UNLV in terms of academics and being a geographic fit with the Big 12, so they’re a school that can rise rapidly in the pecking order with merely some football competence (much less prowess).

HOUSTON
Football Brand Value – 15
National TV Value – 10
Local TV Value – 0
Demographics/Recruiting Value – 0
Academics – 3
Basketball Value – 3
Geographic Fit/Need – 5
Tremendous Upside Potential/Monopoly Power – 5
Total: 48
Overview: See the comments about SMU, only Houston has more basketball tradition. There is also the wild card that the Big 12 may want a physical presence in the Houston market in the same way that TCU is located in the Dallas-Fort Worth market, but the Cougars would still need to have some overwhelmingly extraordinary football success for this to be a possibility.

MEMPHIS
Football Brand Value – 10
National TV Value – 5
Local TV Value – 7
Demographics/Recruiting Value – 10
Academics – 0
Basketball Value – 5
Geographic Fit/Need – 5
Tremendous Upside Potential/Monopoly Power – 7
Total: 49
Overview: Memphis is essentially an Eastern mirror of UNLV: large urban basketball school with historically terrible football over the past decade. The advantage that Memphis has by comparison is that it’s located in a rich football recruiting area and aids in bridging the geographic gap between West Virginia and the rest of the Big 12. Memphis has shown that they have excellent basketball fans – if they can get that to translate to football, they have quite a bit of upside. The main drag is being the midst of heavy SEC competition.

B. INTRIGUING, BUT NOT PRACTICAL

BOISE STATE
Football Brand Value – 30
National TV Value – 15
Local TV Value – 0
Demographics/Recruiting Value – 0
Academics – 0
Basketball Value – 0
Geographic Fit/Need – 0
Tremendous Upside Potential/Monopoly Power – 7
Total: 52
Overview: From a national TV contract standpoint, Boise State might be the single most valuable school that is outside of the power conferences as of today. The question that university presidents will always ask, though, is, “How long will this last?” As you can see, Boise State doesn’t bring anything else in terms of demographics, academics, basketball or geography. This is a school whose attributes are purely based upon on-the-field football performance, which is actually exactly what university presidents tend to shy away from since such success is difficult to maintain even when a program has all of the financial resources in the world (see Texas and USC right now and Alabama prior to Nick Saban coming in). There might be a point where Boise State becomes the Gang of Five equivalent of Nebraska where markets and demographics become completely irrelevant with having such a strong football brand, but we aren’t there yet.

TEMPLE
Football Brand Value – 15
National TV Value – 5
Local TV Value – 10
Demographics/Recruiting Value – 15
Academics – 0
Basketball Value – 3
Geographic Fit/Need – 0
Tremendous Upside Potential/Monopoly Power – 5
Total: 53
Overview: This is an interesting potential play for the Big 12 by going directly east of West Virginia. The good news is that Philadelphia is a massive market with access to an excellent football recruiting state*. The bad news is that Philly is a tepid college football market (and those that follow college football there tend to follow the king program of Penn State) and there’s a sense that Temple won’t ever develop into much more than what is now (which isn’t satisfactory for the Big 12). The school has had plenty of chances to become a legit power program and never succeeded.
(* For fans of “Friday Night Light”s (the TV series), just picture that fantastic final scene in the finale with the football in the air transitioning from Texas to Philly. If only conference realignment were as smooth.)

CONNECTICUT
Football Brand Value – 20
National TV Value – 10
Local TV Value – 7
Demographics/Recruiting Value – 0
Academics – 5
Basketball Value – 5
Geographic Fit/Need – 0
Tremendous Upside Potential/Monopoly Power – 10
Total: 57
Overview: In a vacuum, UConn is arguably the most power conference-like school that isn’t in a power conference today. If this were an ACC Expansion Index, then UConn would be close to a perfect score. Frankly, there’s still a part of me that’s surprised that UConn isn’t in the ACC already, but I perfectly understand why Louisville got the nod last year. The problem with the prospect of UConn going to the Big 12 is that it’s not a good fit for what the conference is seeking in expansion. UConn has actually performed aptly in football over the past decade outside of the last couple of years, yet the New England region is a black hole when it comes for football recruiting (particularly considering how it’s a high population area) and the school’s men’s and women’s basketball prowess probably has the least value to the Big 12 out of any of the power conferences (as hoops mainly benefit conferences that either have networks like the Big Ten has or strong basketball syndication deals like the ACC). Now, UConn’s Big East pedigree and relatively strong brand name means that the school has a large amount of upside, but it may not matter to the Big 12 with Connecticut being so far geographically from the conference’s core.

C. NEEDS WORK, BUT KEEP AN EYE ON THEM

TULANE
Football Brand Value – 15
National TV Value – 5
Local TV Value – 3
Demographics/Recruiting Value – 15
Academics – 5
Basketball Value – 0
Geographic Fit/Need – 5
Tremendous Upside Potential/Monopoly Power – 10
Total: 58
Overview: Tulane has been in the on-the-field football doldrums since Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans, but the Green Wave might be resuscitating itself at just the right time. The school is building a brand new right-sized on-campus stadium and the football team is bowl eligible this season. Tulane’s academics are arguably the best of any school in the Group of Five besides Rice and the state of Louisiana is one of the best pound-for-pound football recruiting areas in the country. Honestly, out of all of the schools on this list, Tulane has the best chance out of anyone to realize its Tremendous Upside Potential and moving up to the top.

D. LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION

SOUTH FLORIDA
Football Brand Value – 15
National TV Value – 10
Local TV Value – 10
Demographics/Recruiting Value – 20
Academics – 3
Basketball Value – 0
Geographic Fit/Need – 0
Tremendous Upside Potential/Monopoly Power – 5
Total: 63
Overview: The allure of USF is purely about a demographic play – athletic directors and coaches fall all over themselves over the thought of combining the recruiting territories of Texas and Florida. (Note that this is a bigger reason for any fan of a school that’s not in the SEC to be scared of how successful that league can integrate Texas A&M.) USF has shown some flashes of football ability, but it’s been inconsistent. There is also extremely heavy power conference competition within the state of Florida (with Florida, Florida State and Miami gobbling up market shares), so there’s a limit to how large of a fan base that USF can realistically build.

CENTRAL FLORIDA
Football Brand Value – 15
National TV Value – 10
Local TV Value – 10
Demographics/Recruiting Value – 20
Academics – 3
Basketball Value – 0
Geographic Fit/Need – 0
Tremendous Upside Potential/Monopoly Power – 7
Total: 65
Overview: UCF has the exact same overview as USF above (just switch USF with UCF) except that UCF has a bit more upside as (a) being one of the largest schools by enrollment in the country and (b) having fresh chances to perform at higher levels of college football (whereas we’ve already seen what USF was and wasn’t able to do in the old Big East).

SAN DIEGO STATE
Football Brand Value – 15
National TV Value – 10
Local TV Value – 7
Demographics/Recruiting Value – 20
Academics – 0
Basketball Value – 5
Geographic Fit/Need – 0
Tremendous Upside Potential/Monopoly Power – 10
Total: 67
Overview: San Diego State has similar attributes as UCF and USF on the opposite coast when it comes to football, but the Aztecs have the advantage when it comes to basketball value and the fact that it is the primary Division I sports school in the San Diego market. While Florida and Florida State have statewide fan bases in the Sunshine State, California is much more fragmented by market, which means that SDSU has more potential to “deliver” its home market despite the on-paper proximity of UCLA and USC compared to the AAC’s Florida schools.

E. THE ONLY CHOICES TODAY

BYU
Football Brand Value – 30
National TV Value – 15
Local TV Value – 7
Demographics/Recruiting Value – 5
Academics – 3
Basketball Value – 5
Geographic Fit/Need – 0
Tremendous Upside Potential/Monopoly Power – 10
Total: 75

CINCINNATI
Football Brand Value – 30
National TV Value – 15
Local TV Value – 7
Demographics/Recruiting Value – 20
Academics – 3
Basketball Value – 5
Geographic Fit/Need – 5
Tremendous Upside Potential/Monopoly Power – 5
Total: 90

Entire Read can be found at http://frankthetank.me/tag/big-12-expansion/

The Big 12 is the weakest link in the Power Five chain because it is a conference cobbled together and suited solely to satisfy the needs and ego of the University of Texas. Evidence has shown that twice, the Big 12 almost imploded completely, with the bulk of its membership casting a lustful eye at the PAC-12. Only thing putting the kibosh on the whole deal was the asinine Longhorn Network of Texas. West Virginia, like an unhappy married woman, will be making overtures to other conferences in the future including the ACC and the SEC. Also, if The Longhorn Network implodes, which I think it will because of the launching of the SEC Network, Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State might terminate their grant of rights altogether and court the PAC-12 once more and this time, I think Larry Scott and the rest of the PAC-12 will welcome them with open arms. Just imagine the tailgating with games like Texas vs. Washington: Texas dry-rubbed beef from a hickory smoker and Chinook salmon. I think that the rest will have to scramble for new homes.

Here is my scenario for the rest: Kansas will join the Big Ten and Missouri will jump ship from the SEC and reunite with Kansas to reignite their rivalry. Both, after all, are large land grant institutions and AAU members.

This will be the chance for West Virginia to join the SEC and I think they would find a natural intrastate rivalry with Kentucky in all sports. I would not mind any of the SEC games being filmed in Morgantown, WV. Why not? WVU has a very similar football-first culture like the SEC has.

The rump of the membership, Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State, and Texas Christian, would be forced to join the AAC, which would be an absolute boon for that conference. This would turn the AAC into a plausible power in the coming years and this is how the possible line-up would look like:

WEST:

Baylor
Houston
Memphis
Navy
SMU
TCU
Tulane
Tulsa

EAST:

Central Florida
Cincinnati
Connecticut
East Carolina
Iowa State
Kansas State
South Florida
Temple