Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Dodd on Baylor
Author Message
jdgaucho Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,606
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 31
I Root For: UCSB
Location: Big West Land
Post: #21
RE: Dodd on Baylor
(07-04-2017 10:20 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 08:29 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Here's how I would look at it.

1) What's your support profile look like?
2) What's your institutional profile look like?
3) What's your history of success look like?
4) Are you a real threat to thrive as a top 20 program as an outsider?
5) Do you have any powerful allies pushing for you to be included?

Baylor has an issue with item 1, 2, 4, and 5. And 3 is iffy.

---

Also, remember that in a world without 'must take' cable contracts, Birmingham is more valuable than NYC. And Memphis is more important than DC. My question is this...how does this program being in this or that association help my team make money? If I leave that team out, will they create a CREDIBLE competitor to my conference? Can I actually add/retain this team without upsetting my stakeholders?

In a 'big bug out' scenario, Baylor is probably on the outside looking in. I don't see BYU making the cut either. They're on the outside now for a reason.

My guess is that the next realignment will take the form of a conference raid or a defection by certain teams. And that the Big XII will lose OU and UT and that the ACC's premier programs will be tempted to jump. If anything happens. OU and UT could actually even - gasp - just try to go indy.

Its kind of odd, but I think Oklahoma State has more to worry about than Vandy does at this point.

As I said before Texas (and also OU) cannot go Indy, because of their non-football sports. Football could possibly survive as an indy, but what would they do with their non-football sports? They cannot survive as an indy.

We'll take them, with a generous travel subsidy.
07-04-2017 10:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Side Show Joe Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,614
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 167
I Root For: North Texas
Location: TEXAS
Post: #22
RE: Dodd on Baylor
So far realignment has been limited to the power conferences growing larger by adding teams from lower revenue conferences. For the next round to reduce the pie down to 64 or so programs, would require several institutions to be booted from among the elite. I can't see those teams willingly leaving, and I can't see a way where the conferences can make them.

I'm not saying a few teams won't move, but I just don't see a big shift coming. Almost every program currently relegated to G5 status will probably remain there. I could see Navy and maybe BYU getting called up, but that is probably it.
07-04-2017 10:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,065
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 37
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Dodd on Baylor
Dodd is only stating the obvious--there is absolutely nothing profound here. Texas and Oklahoma are guaranteed spots in another Power 5 if they want to leave. Kansas has pretty good chances too. Texas Tech and Oklahoma St have modest chances of being able to tag along with their instate rivals. As for the rest--Kansas St, Iowa St, WVU, TCU, and Baylor don't have a whole lot to offer the Power 4.

While the scandals at Baylor have been bad for the Bears' public image it certainly hasn't changed the reality that already existed.
07-04-2017 10:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoldenWarrior11 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,670
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 150
I Root For: Marquette, BE
Location: Chicago
Post: #24
RE: Dodd on Baylor
(07-04-2017 10:01 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 09:52 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Baylor wouldn't get picked up by the PAC-12, ACC, SEC or B1G. There's too much radioactivity around not just their athletic program right now, but their institution as well. IMO, Houston has a very realistic shot at getting a call-up and taking their place.

I think Dodds is wrong about Kansas. Kansas will absolutely have interest from all four remaining power conferences. The SEC would be an intriguing option, for it would help them elevate basketball, and it would pair them again with Missouri. The B1G will always be there, because of their location and AAU. The PAC-12 would be interesting, as getting them into a basketball conference with UCLA and Arizona would get more eyeballs during the Winter. The ACC may be a long-shot, both because of geography, lack of big-time football, and less desire to improve basketball, but I still think there would be some interest there (especially if it gets a Texas or Oklahoma there too).

Kansas heavily investing in their football stadium is no mistake either. That is a calculated plan in order to prepare them for a move to another conference.

I think that one can see the value placed upon basketball schools by looking at where the best program in the last 20 years (by far) is.....the G5. No takers for UConn. Even in an environment where lots of schools were looked at and taken and the P5 was expanding.

The candidacy of Kansas and UConn is, and will be even more over time, different.

Between now and 2025, Kansas will be making $35 million annually from its Big 12 TV contract whereas UConn will be making anywhere from $1.7 to (optimally) $8 million (likely around $5 to $6 million). Within that time frame, Kansas is guaranteed of making $280 million. UConn is guaranteed $5.1 million from its TV deal through 2020, along with another $10 million this coming year from separation fees (last year before those funds dry up). From 2021-23, assuming UConn is not in a Power Conference, UConn will make somewhere between the $15 to $24 million annually from the new AAC TV deal. If you add it all up, it's $280 million to (at maximum) $40 million from TV revenue alone. That's seven times the revenue in under a decade. Heck, if you want to throw in the buy games that UConn is currently pursuing for $2 million annually starting in 2021, you can still throw in an extra $6 million and it still isn't even close.

Why does this matter? Because Kansas will be heavily investing in its program, strengthening its candidacy while still a member of the P5. UConn, which - by that point - will have spent 10 years attempting to get back into the power conference structure, while still member of the G5. This also doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of all of UConn's local rivals - Boston College, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Penn State, Maryland and Rutgers - all earning extravagantly more revenue annually. With Kansas, all of their geographic rivals are on equal footing, since all of them are still in power conferences.

It's an apples to oranges comparison. 07-coffee3
07-04-2017 10:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,500
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 332
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #25
RE: Dodd on Baylor
Consider this possibility for UT and OU.

They go independent in football, creating a pool of 4 P-level indies (with Notre Dame and BYU). The B12 replaces them with the two Florida schools, UCF and USF, who add football potential, new recruiting grounds, plus cannon fodder for the remaining B12 hoops programs (where the B12 doesn't need help to get bids).

The AAC now has 10 in football, 9 in hoops. By adding UT and OU they exchange two NCAAT caliber basketball teams for two bottom feeders. With 11 basketball members, they have a natural 20 game round robin to entice the networks. Throw in a 2 or 3 game football scheduling guarantee and the AAC now has great OOC scheduling options. In the AAC, UT and OU have five regional teams to help them maintain their local recruiting mojo.

Very few parts have to move for this to happen. And I'd bet UT and OU wouldn't have trouble putting together football schedules their fans and network partners would love.
(This post was last modified: 07-04-2017 11:04 AM by ken d.)
07-04-2017 11:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jjoey52 Online
Special Teams
*

Posts: 999
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 46
I Root For: ISU
Location:
Post: #26
Dodd on Baylor
Some of the schools that should be out: Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, Iowa State, KU, kSU, Oregon State, Purdue, and WSU. This will probably not happen, but several schools in the G5 are better than these football programs.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
07-04-2017 11:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,500
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 332
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #27
RE: Dodd on Baylor
(07-04-2017 11:24 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  Some of the schools that should be out: Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, Iowa State, KU, kSU, Oregon State, Purdue, and WSU. This will probably not happen, but several schools in the G5 are better than these football programs.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

What does that (bold) have to do with realignment?
07-04-2017 11:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardinalJim Offline
Welcome to The New Age
*

Posts: 7,333
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 629
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Planet Red
Post: #28
RE: Dodd on Baylor
I have a difficult time believing Kansas or West Virginia would be left out of any realignment scenario.
CJ
07-04-2017 01:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 734
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 41
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #29
RE: Dodd on Baylor
An SEC plus Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Kansas, and West Virginia adds some football and basketball depth.

West: Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma. Oklahoma St, Texas A&M, Arkansas
Central: LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama, Auburn, Vanderbilt
East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, West Virginia
07-04-2017 02:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OrangeDude Online
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 166
Joined: Jun 2017
Reputation: 44
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:
Post: #30
RE: Dodd on Baylor
(07-04-2017 02:19 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  An SEC plus Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Kansas, and West Virginia adds some football and basketball depth.

West: Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma. Oklahoma St, Texas A&M, Arkansas
Central: LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama, Auburn, Vanderbilt
East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, West Virginia

Nice. That to me is the optimal SEC while keeping the conference as compact as possible in terms of both geography and culture.

Cheers,
Neil
07-04-2017 03:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SMUmustangs Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,064
Joined: Jul 2004
Reputation: 65
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #31
RE: Dodd on Baylor
(07-04-2017 10:35 AM)chargeradio Wrote:  If Texas and Oklahoma are true football independents, their other sports would be welcomed by a host of other conferences. The Summit League would probably be the most malleable as it needs members who play baseball, and generally has schools with good academic profiles (Denver and the Dakota schools). I could see UT-Arlington coming in as #12 just to have a second member in the state of Texas.

Sure a lot of conferences would want Texas and OU teams, they would even welcome their football teams. You have lost it, if you think Texas and OU would stoop to placing their basketball, baseball and other sports in the Summit league.....good grief man.
(This post was last modified: 07-04-2017 03:35 PM by SMUmustangs.)
07-04-2017 03:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SMUmustangs Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,064
Joined: Jul 2004
Reputation: 65
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #32
RE: Dodd on Baylor
(07-04-2017 10:36 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 10:20 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 08:29 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Here's how I would look at it.

1) What's your support profile look like?
2) What's your institutional profile look like?
3) What's your history of success look like?
4) Are you a real threat to thrive as a top 20 program as an outsider?
5) Do you have any powerful allies pushing for you to be included?

Baylor has an issue with item 1, 2, 4, and 5. And 3 is iffy.

---

Also, remember that in a world without 'must take' cable contracts, Birmingham is more valuable than NYC. And Memphis is more important than DC. My question is this...how does this program being in this or that association help my team make money? If I leave that team out, will they create a CREDIBLE competitor to my conference? Can I actually add/retain this team without upsetting my stakeholders?

In a 'big bug out' scenario, Baylor is probably on the outside looking in. I don't see BYU making the cut either. They're on the outside now for a reason.

My guess is that the next realignment will take the form of a conference raid or a defection by certain teams. And that the Big XII will lose OU and UT and that the ACC's premier programs will be tempted to jump. If anything happens. OU and UT could actually even - gasp - just try to go indy.

Its kind of odd, but I think Oklahoma State has more to worry about than Vandy does at this point.

As I said before Texas (and also OU) cannot go Indy, because of their non-football sports. Football could possibly survive as an indy, but what would they do with their non-football sports? They cannot survive as an indy.

I bet the AAC would be willing to strike a deal with them.

Sure they would, but if you think Texas or OU would do that you too have lost it. Remember Texas does not keep up with the Joneses ...they are the Joneses
(This post was last modified: 07-04-2017 03:44 PM by SMUmustangs.)
07-04-2017 03:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SMUmustangs Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,064
Joined: Jul 2004
Reputation: 65
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #33
RE: Dodd on Baylor
(07-04-2017 11:02 AM)ken d Wrote:  Consider this possibility for UT and OU.

They go independent in football, creating a pool of 4 P-level indies (with Notre Dame and BYU). The B12 replaces them with the two Florida schools, UCF and USF, who add football potential, new recruiting grounds, plus cannon fodder for the remaining B12 hoops programs (where the B12 doesn't need help to get bids).

The AAC now has 10 in football, 9 in hoops. By adding UT and OU they exchange two NCAAT caliber basketball teams for two bottom feeders. With 11 basketball members, they have a natural 20 game round robin to entice the networks. Throw in a 2 or 3 game football scheduling guarantee and the AAC now has great OOC scheduling options. In the AAC, UT and OU have five regional teams to help them maintain their local recruiting mojo.

Very few parts have to move for this to happen. And I'd bet UT and OU wouldn't have trouble putting together football schedules their fans and network partners would love.

LOL. That would be great for the ACC ....now try to sell that to Texas and OU, not to even mention Notre Dame. If I did not know better I would think you are trolling.

PS- Do you think OU and Texas want their soccer, volley ball, etc. teams traveling all over the East half of of the US. Get real.
(This post was last modified: 07-04-2017 03:59 PM by SMUmustangs.)
07-04-2017 03:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,552
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 72
I Root For: tOSU SJSU
Location:
Post: #34
RE: Dodd on Baylor
I don't see how BYU makes it in.

Dodd seems to evaluate the Pac-12 entry criteria very differently than everyone else.
07-04-2017 03:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HawaiiMongoose Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,389
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 123
I Root For: Hawaii
Location: Honolulu
Post: #35
RE: Dodd on Baylor
(07-04-2017 10:38 AM)jdgaucho Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 10:20 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  As I said before Texas (and also OU) cannot go Indy, because of their non-football sports. Football could possibly survive as an indy, but what would they do with their non-football sports? They cannot survive as an indy.

We'll take them, with a generous travel subsidy.

LOL!
07-04-2017 04:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HawaiiMongoose Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,389
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 123
I Root For: Hawaii
Location: Honolulu
Post: #36
RE: Dodd on Baylor
(07-04-2017 10:49 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Dodd is only stating the obvious--there is absolutely nothing profound here. Texas and Oklahoma are guaranteed spots in another Power 5 if they want to leave. Kansas has pretty good chances too. Texas Tech and Oklahoma St have modest chances of being able to tag along with their instate rivals. As for the rest--Kansas St, Iowa St, WVU, TCU, and Baylor don't have a whole lot to offer the Power 4.

While the scandals at Baylor have been bad for the Bears' public image it certainly hasn't changed the reality that already existed.

I agree. In the next round of musical chairs I expect Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas to have P4 seats. Kansas understands its football situation needs improvement to guarantee its future power conference status, hence its $100 million stadium investment. Depending on who issues the invitations and what politics are in play, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State may or may not get invited to join their in-state brethren in the new P4.

As for the rest of the Big 12 members, it's unrealistic to think they'll just dissolve the conference and head off to the AAC and MWC. Instead we'll see a repeat of what happened when the remnants of the Big East formed the AAC. The remaining Big 12 schools will rebuild the conference by cherry-picking BYU and the top G5 schools. I expect the AAC to take the hardest hit, with Cincinnati and Memphis being added to build a bridge to WVU and Houston being added to shore up the conference's Texas foundation. The MWC will lose either Colorado State or Air Force to give BYU a travel partner. The new Big 12 will become the acknowledged best-of-the-rest conference between the P4 and the G5.
07-04-2017 04:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ARSTATEFAN1986 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 820
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 4
I Root For: Arkansas State
Location:
Post: #37
RE: Dodd on Baylor
(07-04-2017 09:46 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Boise State have been talked about. They are doing better than Washington State and Oregon State in football and basketball. I been hearing they would be one that they wuld include because you are leaving money on the table if you do not include them.
You forgot to mention North Dakota State!
03-nutkick
07-04-2017 06:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jjoey52 Online
Special Teams
*

Posts: 999
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 46
I Root For: ISU
Location:
Post: #38
Dodd on Baylor
BYU tried to join PAC with Utah, they were denied then and would be denied again. PAC plays a lot on Sunday, and secular schools do not want a church school.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
07-04-2017 08:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billings Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,238
Joined: Jun 2004
Reputation: 39
I Root For: Wyo / Mont St.
Location: Billings, Montana
Post: #39
RE: Dodd on Baylor
(07-04-2017 08:22 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  BYU tried to join PAC with Utah, they were denied then and would be denied again. PAC plays a lot on Sunday, and secular schools do not want a church school.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

There is more to it then that but yea BYU has zero shot at the PAC and even Utah would vote to not let them in
(This post was last modified: 07-04-2017 09:15 PM by billings.)
07-04-2017 09:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
panama Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,883
Joined: May 2009
Reputation: 333
I Root For: Georgia STATE
Location: East Atlanta Village
Post: #40
RE: Dodd on Baylor
(07-04-2017 08:07 AM)westwolf Wrote:  Dennis Dodd opines that Baylor will be excluded from the P5 in the next realignment. Not that he thinks it will be only 64 in the new P4, but Baylor, Kansas, KSU, ISU will be possibly out while BYU and a few others will go up. Heard his interview on College Sports (XM).
Yeah have fun excluding flagships and land grant universities. I believe those staes still have senators and congressmen.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
07-04-2017 09:47 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.