(10-30-2014 11:42 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(10-30-2014 10:15 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(10-30-2014 10:02 AM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  A couple things that never seem to get brought up in these threads.

1. The WVU travel situation is WAY overblown on this board. It takes us just as long to bus to College Park Maryland as it does to fly to Lubbock Texas. Would it be nice to have a travel partner for the non revenue sports? Sure, but a few hundred extra K isn't breaking the athletic department bank with all the added revenue we now receive from being members of the Big 12.

Heck, the travel situation was even overblown for us in the MWC, and that was with a lot less conference revenue to mitigate it.

The thing I noticed in the MWC and am seeing it with WVU and the Big 12 is that geography just doesn't matter that much. If you have a good team vying for the conference championship like WVU has this year, rivalries develop. Put a #10 ranking in front of the visiting team's name and fans get up for games just like an old rival.

The travel situation for WVU isn't bad at all. You just fly more often.

It's the other schools (mainly coaches who are professional whiners) who complain in volleyball and basketball because they can't easily short hop to another game.

Is the Iowa State AD going to cave to his volleyball coach if it comes down to losing a home game in football with Texas or OU every year just so her girls can go to both Cincy and Morgantown on the same weekend? The answer is no btw.

(10-30-2014 12:17 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(10-30-2014 11:32 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  We'll see what happens on Dec 7th when all the other P4 teams get an extra win from the CCG and the Big 12 champ doesn't. Especially, if MSU gets a boost for beating a ranked Nebraska again and surpasses Big 12 champ TCU into the playoffs. TCU's last 3 games have teams currently with 5 losses (Texas, Kansas and ISU).

Sure its a chance for an extra quality win for the Big 10, but there's every indication that the committee will treat all quality wins the same (and will treat all conference titles the same, regardless of whether it was from a championship game or round robin play). Since the Big 12 has 5 teams (half of the conference) in the top 25 and has a round robin, all Big 12 teams will get 4 chances at quality wins. The Big 10 has 3 teams ranked, but because they don't play a round robin, they each only have one opportunity for a quality win, plus the championship game. A big 12 champ that has 3 or 4 quality wins is going to stack up well against a Big 10 champ with 2 quality wins, even if one of those wins is in a championship game.

That doesn't even take into account that the top ranked Big 10 team heading into the championship game could lose.

Frog, glad to see you guys having a good year. 12-1 over 11-1 all day long. Ohio State, MSU, Nebraska all have a shot at 12-1. 1 loss Oregon and 1 loss Bama are also ahead of Big 12.

Here's a scheduling idea, should the Big 12 expand to 12 teams:

Go ahead and split into 2 divisions, but instead of playing all 5 schools in your division annually and the other 6 schools bi-annually, do the scheduling in 4 pods. In this example, I will use Cincinnati and Connecticut as the expansion teams, but you can replace them with any of the AAC schools rumored to be expansion candidates:

Cincinnati/Connecticut/West Virginia
Iowa State/Kansas/Kansas State
Oklahoma/Oklahoma State/Texas
Baylor/TCU/Texas Tech

In this scenario, you play the 2 teams in your pod annually and you play 2 teams from each of the other pods on a 2-out-of-3 years basis. This preserves the most important rivalries (I think Texas could live without playing Texas Tech 1 out of 3 years) and ensures that everyone gets a game in Texas annually.

(10-30-2014 01:32 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  Here's a scheduling idea, should the Big 12 expand to 12 teams:

Go ahead and split into 2 divisions, but instead of playing all 5 schools in your division annually and the other 6 schools bi-annually, do the scheduling in 4 pods. In this example, I will use Cincinnati and Connecticut as the expansion teams, but you can replace them with any of the AAC schools rumored to be expansion candidates:

Cincinnati/Connecticut/West Virginia
Iowa State/Kansas/Kansas State
Oklahoma/Oklahoma State/Texas
Baylor/TCU/Texas Tech

In this scenario, you play the 2 teams in your pod annually and you play 2 teams from each of the other pods on a 2-out-of-3 years basis. This preserves the most important rivalries (I think Texas could live without playing Texas Tech 1 out of 3 years) and ensures that everyone gets a game in Texas annually.

How do you crown a champion with 3 pods? Two best teams with the overall record plays in the championship game regardless of pods?

I'm dreading the thought of Bowlsby picking off 2-3 AAC members for the Big XII. Tulane put a lot of money into matching AAC standards (approx. $100M - which is a big amount for a G5 school), and if this goes through it will have neutralized the benefits of Tulane joining the AAC.

Our only saving grace is that there is no G5 program that is even close to justifying a Big XII invite - at least right now.

(10-30-2014 01:35 PM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  

(10-30-2014 01:32 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  Here's a scheduling idea, should the Big 12 expand to 12 teams:

Go ahead and split into 2 divisions, but instead of playing all 5 schools in your division annually and the other 6 schools bi-annually, do the scheduling in 4 pods. In this example, I will use Cincinnati and Connecticut as the expansion teams, but you can replace them with any of the AAC schools rumored to be expansion candidates:

Cincinnati/Connecticut/West Virginia
Iowa State/Kansas/Kansas State
Oklahoma/Oklahoma State/Texas
Baylor/TCU/Texas Tech

In this scenario, you play the 2 teams in your pod annually and you play 2 teams from each of the other pods on a 2-out-of-3 years basis. This preserves the most important rivalries (I think Texas could live without playing Texas Tech 1 out of 3 years) and ensures that everyone gets a game in Texas annually.

How do you crown a champion with 3 pods? Two best teams with the overall record plays in the championship game regardless of pods?

You could still do 2 divisions... just put 2 pods in each division. In a 12+ team, 2 division conference, no two teams ever play the same schedule anyway, so it's really no different. The only difference would be instead of playing all 5 schools in your division every year, you only play 4.

Example:

Division 1:

Cincinnati/Connecticut/West Virginia
Oklahoma/Oklahoma State/Texas

Division 2:

Iowa State/Kansas/Kansas State
Baylor/TCU/Texas Tech

Each team plays the 2 other teams in its pod annually, and plays 2 teams from each of the other 3 pods on a rotating basis for an 8-game schedule. There will only be one team each year in your division that you don't play, and 2 teams in the other division that you won't play. I could see tie-breakers being a problem though... for instance, say West Virginia and Texas both finish 7-1 in the conference, but it was a year where they didn't play each other. You would have to use the CFP poll or something like that. I doubt any of this would ever happen, but just a thought to try to alleviate the concern of existing Big 12 schools losing games in Texas and rivalry games.

Here's another idea. This one also involves 2 divisions of 6 teams, but in this alignment, you do play all 5 teams in your division, plus 2 annual cross-division games, plus either 1 or 2 of the other 4 cross-division opponents (depending on if you prefer an 8-game or 9-game conference schedule).

Example:

Division 1:

Cincinnati
Iowa State
Oklahoma State
Texas
Texas Tech
West Virginia

Division 2:

Baylor
Connecticut
Kansas
Kansas State
Oklahoma
TCU

Cross-division annual games:

West Virginia - Connecticut, Kansas
Cincinnati - Connecticut, Kansas State
Iowa State - Kansas, Kansas State
Texas - Oklahoma, Baylor
Texas Tech - Baylor, TCU
Oklahoma State - Oklahoma, TCU

Connecticut - Cincinnati, West Virginia
Kansas - West Virginia, Iowa State
Kansas State - Cincinnati, Iowa State
Oklahoma - Texas, Oklahoma State
Baylor - Texas, Texas Tech
TCU - Texas Tech, Oklahoma State

NOTE: This isn't necessarily the divisional alignment I would pick, but is being used as an example. The good thing about this type of alignment though is it keeps your traditional powers (Texas/Oklahoma) in opposite divisions for competitive balance, while still maintaining annual rivalry games.

This alignment would work well in basketball too. Play your 5 division opponents twice, play your 2 cross-rivals twice, and play the other 4 cross-rivals once for an 18-game schedule. For the sake of basketball, maybe swap Kansas with Iowa State in the alignment above and it's nearly perfect IMO.

It's not happening at this time. Live with it for now.

I like jumping to 12 but not sure the best combo. I would pencil in BYU as a lock for spot 11 with these:

BYU/Cincy
BYU/Uconn
BYU/AFA
BYU/Boise
BYU/Col State
BYU/New Mexico
BYU/USF
BYU/UCF

THe FL market probably brings the most to the table. Yet, i think a school like boise could work since markets are over rated when it coming to TV ratings, see alabama vs auburn.

(10-30-2014 10:58 AM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 11:05 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 09:36 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 09:14 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 07:45 PM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  “In our case, I don’t know that there are a lot of obvious candidates out there,” Bowlsby said in a Q&A with The Oklahoman. “We’re distributing about $25 million per school through our distributable revenue, so anybody that would be considered for expansion in our league would have to bring at least pro-rata value.”

Of course this is true, but no matter how many times people like Bowlsby say it, some people keep believing it's false.

Then again, some people keep believing that all of the manned moon landings were faked, or that Howard Hughes is still alive, so even if something is absolutely true you'll never convince everyone.

How much does the Big 10, ACC, Pac 12 and SEC make on their conference title games? Both from TV, sponsors, game revenue, etc?

Gotta be at least $20M a game. Hell, it's almost like the quarterfinals of the national playoffs.

Adding two teams gets you access to that money. Not adding two teams prevents access to that money.

Next, factor in that adding two teams produces eight or nine more conference football games to the inventory, plus four or five nonconference games. Plus a lot more basketball inventory.

Extra inventory itself has significant value.

Do the two extra teams need to be attractive? Sure. But let's be real. If the bar ever was "You need to be making as much on your own as we make ourselves," then Utah, TCU, Louisville, Rutgers, West Virginia, Syracuse, Pitt, etc would have never been added to their respective leagues.

If it was that easy to instantly add over $50 million per year in value, the Big 12 would have 12 schools already, because when money talks the guys in suits listen.

TCU and WVU are in because the Big 12's TV deals required at least 10 schools in the league. Louisville is in the ACC because having 13 football teams is almost unworkable. When a conference already grosses over $200 million/year from TV alone, and doesn't need to backfill and just add "best available", the test is like what Bowlsby said it is.

If ESPN or some connected consultant shows the Big 12 that each Big 12 school will make a lot more money if they add Schools X and Y, then it will happen. It's going to take either that, or some unexpected defection from the conference.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I always thought the only way the B12 would expand was if ESPN decided they'd had enough with the failed LHN and thought it would be better to start a B12 network. It would take a lot of setup and negotiating to get the inventory it needed, but if ESPN really wanted it, they could. I think most people agree it would be likely that ESPN would want new markets to help with the launch, and a CCG would be a definite kicker to the deal. Adding 2 teams would be a natural follow up. That's when it would make sense for the B12 to go to 12. The schools they added wouldn't be adding their share directly, but certainly indirectly through what the conference would be making after the whole deal.

All that said, however, I don't see this as a very likely scenario in any capacity, so you won't find me holding my breath.

LHN is not failed. ESPN wanted to give UT a huge monetary incentive to not join the Pac-12. Mission accomplished.

ESPN controls 3rd tier TV rights for UT and KU. Fox controls 3rd tier TV rights for the other 8 Big 12 schools. I don't see any way that either ESPN or Fox would let the other control (or be the sole TV partner in) a Big 12 network. And, I don't see any way that UT or KU or OU would agree to an equally-shared Big 12 network given how much more they make from their current Tier 3 deals compared to the other 7. (At some point, the other P5 conferences are also going to have to face the issue of the higher-value programs wanting a greater-than-equal share of TV rights, but that's a topic for another thread.)

(10-30-2014 12:34 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  NIU over Cincinnati? Not a chance. Cincinnati has had more football success in the past 10 years than NIU and they did it in a power conference. That said, Boise State has easily been the most successful non-BCS program of the last 10-15 years.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I would have added you guys at the same time as WVU. I was just trying to fit an answer to the poster's question.

(10-30-2014 02:27 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  It's not happening at this time. Live with it for now.

If anything is going to happen, it won't be until after football season. If the Big 12 champion makes the playoff, it might not happen anytime soon.

(10-30-2014 02:37 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  

(10-30-2014 02:27 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  It's not happening at this time. Live with it for now.

If anything is going to happen, it won't be until after football season. If the Big 12 champion makes the playoff, it might not happen anytime soon.

If anything happens, it won't happen until the current TV contract is up for renewal, and only if the conference can make more money by adding teams. Not before, and not unless that monetary condition is met.

I realize there are a lot of people who want to believe otherwise, since it gives their school hope that they can improve their current station in college football life. But the only way it will happen is if it makes the Big XII money. The playoff isn't at issue, since it will expand long before the Big XII will.

Sorry, Cincinnati. Ain't happening.

(10-30-2014 02:51 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(10-30-2014 02:37 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  

(10-30-2014 02:27 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  It's not happening at this time. Live with it for now.

If anything is going to happen, it won't be until after football season. If the Big 12 champion makes the playoff, it might not happen anytime soon.

If anything happens, it won't happen until the current TV contract is up for renewal, and only if the conference can make more money by adding teams. Not before, and not unless that monetary condition is met.

I realize there are a lot of people who want to believe otherwise, since it gives their school hope that they can improve their current station in college football life. But the only way it will happen is if it makes the Big XII money. The playoff isn't at issue, since it will expand long before the Big XII will.

But if the Big 12 stands pat, there might not be a next TV contract because Texas and Oklahoma might bolt. The Big 12 will not keep pace with the B1G and SEC in TV money IMO. So I think they will have some decisions to make before they get to that point. That's not me wishful thinking -- just the reality of the state of college football and TV contracts. I personally don't think the Big 12 is well positioned to maximize their TV value once this contract is through because of demographic issues.

(10-30-2014 03:11 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  

(10-30-2014 02:51 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(10-30-2014 02:37 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  

(10-30-2014 02:27 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  It's not happening at this time. Live with it for now.

If anything is going to happen, it won't be until after football season. If the Big 12 champion makes the playoff, it might not happen anytime soon.

If anything happens, it won't happen until the current TV contract is up for renewal, and only if the conference can make more money by adding teams. Not before, and not unless that monetary condition is met.

I realize there are a lot of people who want to believe otherwise, since it gives their school hope that they can improve their current station in college football life. But the only way it will happen is if it makes the Big XII money. The playoff isn't at issue, since it will expand long before the Big XII will.

But if the Big 12 stands pat, there might not be a next TV contract because Texas and Oklahoma might bolt. The Big 12 will not keep pace with the B1G and SEC in TV money IMO. So I think they will have some decisions to make before they get to that point. That's not me wishful thinking -- just the reality of the state of college football and TV contracts. I personally don't think the Big 12 is well positioned to maximize their TV value once this contract is through because of demographic issues.

The PAC-12 may go after other Big 12 schools which will shake the Big 12 still. However, I think if the Big 12 want to keep pace with the other 4 conferences, they have to expand. While statements like no other school brings value to the Big 12 are said...it is a farce, because I'd bet if Cincy or Memphis were invited, the fan interest not just in their cities increases, but around the state of Ohio and Tennessee as well that gain more casual fans that tune in to those respective teams. Just as it was said TCU didn't bring any value either when it turns out the opposite is true.

(10-30-2014 03:11 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  

(10-30-2014 02:51 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(10-30-2014 02:37 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  

(10-30-2014 02:27 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  It's not happening at this time. Live with it for now.

If anything is going to happen, it won't be until after football season. If the Big 12 champion makes the playoff, it might not happen anytime soon.

If anything happens, it won't happen until the current TV contract is up for renewal, and only if the conference can make more money by adding teams. Not before, and not unless that monetary condition is met.

I realize there are a lot of people who want to believe otherwise, since it gives their school hope that they can improve their current station in college football life. But the only way it will happen is if it makes the Big XII money. The playoff isn't at issue, since it will expand long before the Big XII will.

But if the Big 12 stands pat, there might not be a next TV contract because Texas and Oklahoma might bolt. The Big 12 will not keep pace with the B1G and SEC in TV money IMO. So I think they will have some decisions to make before they get to that point. That's not me wishful thinking -- just the reality of the state of college football and TV contracts. I personally don't think the Big 12 is well positioned to maximize their TV value once this contract is through because of demographic issues.

The argument could be made that expansion could make UT and OU more likely to bolt, if it dilutes the quality of the conference and gets rid of yearly games with traditional rivals.

The really aren't big demographic issues with the Big 12 if there is no conference network, IMO. The conference networks need broad footprints to make sense with the carriage fee model, but the national contracts with Fox and ESPN/ABC are more dependent on national branding than local TV #s. Fox and ESPN/ABC are paying for brand and nationally ranked teams, not footprint. As long as the level of play is maintained and there are compelling teams, the Big 12 Tier 1 and 2 monies will grow like the other conferences.

If the conference gets a network, or some other revenue source that monetizes regional interest, then a narrow footprint becomes an issue.

(10-30-2014 01:37 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  I'm dreading the thought of Bowlsby picking off 2-3 AAC members for the Big XII. Tulane put a lot of money into matching AAC standards (approx. $100M - which is a big amount for a G5 school), and if this goes through it will have neutralized the benefits of Tulane joining the AAC.

Our only saving grace is that there is no G5 program that is even close to justifying a Big XII invite - at least right now.

You'll just be right where the rest of the AAC schools were a year ago.