(01-12-2016 08:22 PM)Dasville Wrote:  So if this amendment is passed, the Big 12 is looking at a Conference Championship winner that will have been required to play 11 P5 schools out of 13 games.

I've got no problem with that.

The question is would the P5 vote to make the AAC and the MWC as P5 conferences? They are way ahead of the other G5 schools, and more closer to the P5 bottom feeders conferences.

This could move some FCS conferences up to be part of the new G5.

MWC and PAC 12 are better suited with each other for travel purposes for all sports. I could see some of the MVFC schools could be thrust into MWC as well to help the western Big 10 schools as well for travel/cost purposes.

(01-12-2016 07:42 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 07:40 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 07:38 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 07:31 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 07:21 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  and cue the talk of conferences going back to 10 members in 3...2...1.

ALL the cool conferences have only 10.....

SBC?

Has 12, or 14, depending on whether you count Idaho and NMSU.

In football it will be 10. Basketball will be 12 but football revenues aren't shared with UTA or Little Rock.

Yep, unfortunately for Idaho and NMSU this probably puts the nail in the coffin with respect to their continued SBC membership.

At least the Vandals can fall back on playing FCS football in the Big Sky. I don't know what the Aggies will do. Independence would be a tough row to hoe for them.

(01-12-2016 08:35 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 07:42 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 07:40 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 07:38 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 07:31 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  ALL the cool conferences have only 10.....

SBC?

Has 12, or 14, depending on whether you count Idaho and NMSU.

In football it will be 10. Basketball will be 12 but football revenues aren't shared with UTA or Little Rock.

Yep, unfortunately for Idaho and NMSU this probably puts the nail in the coffin with respect to their continued SBC membership.

At least the Vandals can fall back on playing FCS football in the Big Sky. I don't know what the Aggies will do. Independence would be a tough row to hoe for them.

Actually, it seems like this helps Idaho. 10-team conferences can only hold a CCG if they play a round robin schedule. Sun Belt schools don't seem likely to give up a money game and go to a 9-game conference schedule. So they'd need 12 teams under this rule.

(01-12-2016 08:35 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 07:42 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 07:40 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 07:38 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 07:31 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  ALL the cool conferences have only 10.....

SBC?

Has 12, or 14, depending on whether you count Idaho and NMSU.

In football it will be 10. Basketball will be 12 but football revenues aren't shared with UTA or Little Rock.

Yep, unfortunately for Idaho and NMSU this probably puts the nail in the coffin with respect to their continued SBC membership.

At least the Vandals can fall back on playing FCS football in the Big Sky. I don't know what the Aggies will do. Independence would be a tough row to hoe for them.

If MVFC could get the okay to upgrade as a conference? New Mexico State, West Texas A&M and Wichita State could be added to the conference. West Texas A&M would be New Mexico State's travel partner.

Talk about irony. The B1G and PAC-12 add Nebraska and Colorado/Utah in order to get to 12 members and ability to stage a conference championship game, only to be told years later that, in fact, you don't need 12 members for a conference championship game - all you need is 10.

No one is telling them anything, nor has any actual vote happened. Take my advice and go look at what is happening in the NFL right now. The vote was just taken. The Rams are in. Their plan was always the one that was going to win. The rest was just a show to leverage certain other parties to act in a way favorable to the NFL.

The same concept can be taken to this situation and applied. Just keep watching.

(01-12-2016 08:22 PM)Dasville Wrote:  So if this amendment is passed, the Big 12 is looking at a Conference Championship winner that will have been required to play 11 P5 schools out of 13 games.

I've got no problem with that.

So will the PAC-12 and Big 10.

I do think it is a tougher road than no CCG. If the Big 12 hosts a CCG it does make it easier for non champs to get in (more chances for CCG upsets and last second havoc).

(01-12-2016 08:54 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Talk about irony. The B1G and PAC-12 add Nebraska and Colorado/Utah in order to get to 12 members and ability to stage a conference championship game, only to be told years later that, in fact, you don't need 12 members for a conference championship game - all you need is 10.

The ACC asked back in 2003 to host a championship with less than 12 teams...

(01-12-2016 08:10 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 07:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Big 12 expansion going down the tubes.

Who cares about them? They're stuck in the bunker small market mentality. The real Golden Apple of Discord will come when the money makers/movers & shakers from the conferences that aren't doing as well as say the B10 or the SEC, say to their respective commissioners "why aren't we making as much?" FSU complaining about UF, GT complaining about UGA, Clemson complaining about South Carolina, UT and OU griping about take your pick; the crap will hit the fan when Delaney announces how much they're making from their network deals.

Texas makes $41 million+ from their media deals right now today

OU makes $34 right now today

so Texas and OU have nothing to complain about money wise and KU makes in the range of $32 so all of the Big 12 teams with options are doing fine financially in the Big 12

and as far as what the big 10 believes they will get for a TV deal and reality we will all have to wait and see

I suspect it will be a lot more like the SECn SECn SECn talk where fools were making twits out of themselves tweeting $20+ million just for the SECn or $15 for a low side and going up from there for the SECn

then when reality had to come out it was $5 million per team and a lot of "next year" talk

(01-12-2016 09:17 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 08:10 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 07:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Big 12 expansion going down the tubes.

Who cares about them? They're stuck in the bunker small market mentality. The real Golden Apple of Discord will come when the money makers/movers & shakers from the conferences that aren't doing as well as say the B10 or the SEC, say to their respective commissioners "why aren't we making as much?" FSU complaining about UF, GT complaining about UGA, Clemson complaining about South Carolina, UT and OU griping about take your pick; the crap will hit the fan when Delaney announces how much they're making from their network deals.

Texas makes $41 million+ from their media deals right now today

OU makes $34 right now today

so Texas and OU have nothing to complain about money wise and KU makes in the range of $32 so all of the Big 12 teams with options are doing fine financially in the Big 12

and as far as what the big 10 believes they will get for a TV deal and reality we will all have to wait and see

I suspect it will be a lot more like the SECn SECn SECn talk where fools were making twits out of themselves tweeting $20+ million just for the SECn or $15 for a low side and going up from there for the SECn

then when reality had to come out it was $5 million per team and a lot of "next year" talk

Amazing how people blame the LHN and forget Oklahoma and Kansas have side deals too

No expansion = OU gone = B12 done as a power conference and the undesirables like KSU, ISU, BU, TTU etc better start praying

(01-12-2016 08:57 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  No one is telling them anything, nor has any actual vote happened. Take my advice and go look at what is happening in the NFL right now. The vote was just taken. The Rams are in. Their plan was always the one that was going to win. The rest was just a show to leverage certain other parties to act in a way favorable to the NFL.

The same concept can be taken to this situation and applied. Just keep watching.

Are you saying that there is no compromise?

(01-12-2016 09:29 PM)rtaylor Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 08:57 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  No one is telling them anything, nor has any actual vote happened. Take my advice and go look at what is happening in the NFL right now. The vote was just taken. The Rams are in. Their plan was always the one that was going to win. The rest was just a show to leverage certain other parties to act in a way favorable to the NFL.

The same concept can be taken to this situation and applied. Just keep watching.

Are you saying that there is no compromise?

I am saying that it is very likely there is no compromise. All that was said is that the big 12 and Big Ten talked. It's not like Delany is truly the Dark Emperor of the NCAA.

The ACC doesn't support The Big 12 staying at 10. The ACC wanted to go to pods. Only thing ACC supported was eliminating 6+ team divisions.
CJ

Big 10 really messing with the acc here

It's pretty clear the other leagues actually want the Big 12 to play a CCG. Contrary to the conventional wisdom, I've said all along that not playing one is probably a slight net advantage.

I had been saying this along.

Any conference that plays a full round Robin schedule could just make up their temporary 2 divisions for that year after the regular season is complete to make sure the top 2 teams always go to the CCG.

This 2nd ammendment just acknowledges that fact so that there is no confusion.

The Big 12 doesn't want to expand and it will do everything in its power to not expand. The only way it adds teams is if it is forced to. they don't actually want your schools.

(01-12-2016 08:39 PM)LatahCounty Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 08:35 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 07:42 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 07:40 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 07:38 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  SBC?

Has 12, or 14, depending on whether you count Idaho and NMSU.

In football it will be 10. Basketball will be 12 but football revenues aren't shared with UTA or Little Rock.

Yep, unfortunately for Idaho and NMSU this probably puts the nail in the coffin with respect to their continued SBC membership.

At least the Vandals can fall back on playing FCS football in the Big Sky. I don't know what the Aggies will do. Independence would be a tough row to hoe for them.

Actually, it seems like this helps Idaho. 10-team conferences can only hold a CCG if they play a round robin schedule. Sun Belt schools don't seem likely to give up a money game and go to a 9-game conference schedule. So they'd need 12 teams under this rule.

Interesting. I didn't think about it that way. Actually I hope you're right because I wouldn't want Idaho to have to drop down a level. I would like to see the Vandals have success at the FBS level.

(01-12-2016 07:01 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  And then The ACC and one other come forward saying they wont approve that and once again the door is slammed shut on the big 12.

Actually, I don't think this is a good thing for the Big 12. Yes, they want it, but their long term survival is threatened by their minuscule footprint and lack of a network. They needed expansion, but Texas and company don't want it. This vote actually makes the Big 12 more susceptible to poaching in the future.

I think it's clear at this point that the original Big Ten amendment was aimed at the ACC because it's that league that the B1G really wants to raid in the future. The ACC will have a problem with the compromise, sure, but they are the only ones suffering here. I don't see anyone else voting with them...especially not the SEC.

If there is indeed a compromise then both the Big 12 and the ACC will be weaker in the future.

Remember these...

Dan Wolken on ACC -1

Dan Wolken on ACC -2