Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Its fall of 2010 and B12 is losing 4 members. Why not add WV @ Louisville?
Author Message
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,495
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1214
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #61
RE: Its fall of 2010 and B12 is losing 4 members. Why not add WV @ Louisville?
(01-06-2020 05:16 PM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  
(01-06-2020 05:09 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(01-06-2020 05:02 PM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  What's obvious is the Big 12 was and still is shortsighted. At a time where you needed a minimum of 12 to keep a conference championship game, getting back to 12 makes the most sense, as does expanding your conference footprint east, as does increasing your basketball prowess. All of this could have been achieved by adding TCU, Cincinnati, Louisville, and WVU to get back to 12. Even now.. the conference SHOULD be looking to UCF, USF, Memphis, and Cincinnati to get to 14 (matching other P5s and moving into large TV markets and new recruiting areas).

Again. The Big 12 has been very shortsighted with their moves (or lack thereof) over the last decade and here we are, all waiting for the mid 2020s to see if any major players leave or if the Big 12 stays put with their current 10 (leaving WVU on an island) and almost exclusively in the central time zone.

"Yeah but those are 'city/directional schools'.... number of beds on campus... moving needles... would water down the conference.... blah, blah, blah".

-Big Twelve Fan The Past 10 years



"What happened. We used to be in a conference with Texas and Oklahoma. Now we are on the outside looking in."

- Same guy in 2025.

Yeah, I know. Their shortsightedness and pridefulness will be their downfall. Texas and OU have nothing to worry about as they are highly desired, the others I feel may be playing on borrowed time. We'll see how it all shakes out though. Hopefully when the TV numbers for 2025/26 show up they will realize they need to expand.

ESPN and Fox said no. In fact, they threw a fit when the Big 12 tried to expand.
01-06-2020 06:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
goodknightfl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,477
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 262
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #62
RE: Its fall of 2010 and B12 is losing 4 members. Why not add WV @ Louisville?
Because they did not want to add both. Honestly they did not want either, but were in a pickle. 02-13-banana 03-2thumbsup and in the end slipped on a banana.
(This post was last modified: 01-07-2020 09:23 AM by goodknightfl.)
01-07-2020 09:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 33,078
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 836
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #63
RE: Its fall of 2010 and B12 is losing 4 members. Why not add WV @ Louisville?
(01-07-2020 09:21 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  Because they did not want to add both. Honestly they did not want either, but were in a pickle. 02-13-banana 03-2thumbsup and in the end slipped on a banana.

Well as someone else pointed out, it has worked out well for the Big 12. They are doing just fine right now.
01-08-2020 04:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,925
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 414
I Root For: Common Sense
Location: Nunnayadamnbusiness
Post: #64
RE: Its fall of 2010 and B12 is losing 4 members. Why not add WV @ Louisville?
I think there’s a lot of timeline confusion and historical revisionism in this thread. A lot of people are criticizing the decisions with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. Unfortunately, that’s just not how it works.

There have also been all sorts of myths associated with this whole era — typically perpetuated by the schools themselves.

At the end of the day, everyone involved acted in their own interests and did what they felt they needed to do at the time to survive.

I will say that in real time, I was surprised that West Virginia did not insist on travel partners before it joined the Big 12.

I certainly understand why the Big 12 would only want to 10 teams - to meet its contractual obligations. However, as Deloss Dodds said in the clip earlier in this thread, I have no idea why they would be willing to go there without some relief on their end?

I understand that they were in an any port in a storm situation and they were just looking to find a safe harbor for their athletic programs. However, I have always contended that they had more negotiating leverage than they realized.

I have always believed that if West Virginia had formed an alliance with Louisville and say, Cincinnati, all three of the schools would be in the Big 12 right now — and everyone would be better off for it. They may not be making quite as much money, but it would be a much more stable league for everyone than what they ultimately ended up with.

However, the climate at the time — particularly among the old Big East schools — was every man for himself and that was a terrible mentality that left the Northeast with no home league.

And before anyone accuses me of also being guilty of the historical revisionism I was just decrying, I can assure you I am not.

We know for a fact that Pitt was invited to join the Big 12 before any of those other schools. However, from the very beginning, Pitt made it clear to the Big 12 that they would not come alone. Pitt was actively lobbying Louisville, West Virginia and Rutgers to join it in any new venture.

However, the response from all of those schools was pretty tepid. Louisville and West Virginia both thought they had a chance at the SEC at the time and Rutgers was waiting on a Big Ten 10 invite — which at the time (and in retrospect) seemed ludicrous. However, against all odds, Rutgers was the only one who was proven right.

In fact, that is exactly what spurred the ACC’s expansion in the first place. The ACC could obviously see where the Big 12 was looking to backfill and that was worrisome for a conference whose long term ambitions were always to control the Eastern seaboard in the same way that the Pac 12 controls the West Coast. The ACC knew that it needed New York and Pennsylvania to make that happen – which is why Pittsburgh and Syracuse were targeted.

Incidentally, that is also exactly what prompted the Big Ten to take Rutgers and Maryland despite the fact that both had very modest athletic histories Dash particularly in football, the moneymaker Dash and both seemed ill-equipped to handle the challenges of their new conference. Still, Delany and company did not want to ceed the entire Eastern seaboard to the ACC.

I think everyone expected UConn to be the next one in line and it was a surprise when they were passed over. However, I think that had a lot to do with ACC league politics more than anything else. I think Boston College helped block the addition of the Huskies and more to the point, I think the football powers to the south — Clemson, Florida State, Miami, etc. — were adamantly opposed to another basketball centric addition.

That’s what made Louisville such an attractive candidate. Louisville definitely had some character concerns and it obviously has academic concerns as well. However, what Louisville also has, and which is why they are in the ACC ahead of Connecticut, is they have a decently strong football program and yet they also have an outstanding men’s basketball program. They kind of gave you the best of both worlds if you could deal with some of the other stuff that comes along with adding a school like Louisville.

I will go to my grave knowing in my heart that the Big 12 screwed up by failing to add Louisville and Cincinnati (or BYU as a compromise) when it also added West Virginia. That was a big tactical mistake by all concerned, IMHO.
01-09-2020 09:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 33,078
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 836
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #65
RE: Its fall of 2010 and B12 is losing 4 members. Why not add WV @ Louisville?
(01-09-2020 09:04 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I will go to my grave knowing in my heart that the Big 12 screwed up by failing to add Louisville and Cincinnati (or BYU as a compromise) when it also added West Virginia. That was a big tactical mistake by all concerned, IMHO.

I think the Big 12 did the best they could under the circumstances. Would adding Louisville and Cincy and WVU right after UNL and Colorado left have prevented Missouri and TAMU from leaving for the SEC? Nope.

Would having those three schools right now make the B12 more profitable? Nope, to the contrary, just more mouths to feed.

Would it make them more stable right now, meaning less chance for defections in 2025? Nope, the notion that there is stability in numbers is a myth.
01-09-2020 09:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AntiG Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,148
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 28
I Root For: Rutgers
Location: NYC
Post: #66
RE: Its fall of 2010 and B12 is losing 4 members. Why not add WV @ Louisville?
(12-12-2019 11:37 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Boy, what if...

What if the Big 12 does grab Cincinnati and Louisville (after TCU/West Virginia), and creates a nice little Eastern pod for the Big 12. The ACC is now forced to take UConn to fill Maryland's departure. Does that push FSU/Clemson out of the ACC (and to the Big 12)? Does the B1G go Big and make another attempt at Virginia/Georgia Tech/UNC/Duke? Ironically, the ACC would have then been looking at Boston College, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, UConn, Virginia Tech, NC State, Wake and Miami; Perhaps the SEC then goes after Virginia Tech and NC State? It would have been a weird twist of fate if the ACC left-behinds pair, again, with the basketball schools to try and preserve a best of the rest league.

I certainly remember the FSU and Clemson inquiries into jumping to the Big 12 or SEC due to being unhappy with Tobacco Road not prioritizing football quality. B1G was also exploring expanding with Georgia Tech, FSU and Miami as well as looking into Maryland, Virginia, UNC and Duke.

Timeline up through Louisville's decision:
MWC / BE - TCU agrees to leave for BE

B12 / PAC - Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State waffle over decision to leave for PAC

B12 / B1G - Nebraska to B1G

B12 / PAC - Colorado to PAC

B12 / PAC - Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State decide against PAC

MWC / PAC - Utah to the PAC

B12 / B1G - rejects Mizzou after their president leaks the candidacy

CUSA / B12 - State of Texas pushes for Houston, but doesn't pass

B12 / SEC - loses Texas A&M to SEC

BE / ACC - Pitt and Syracuse to ACC

MWC / BE / B12 - TCU decides to B12 instead of BE

BE / B12 - WVU to B12

CUSA / MWC / BE - BE invites Houston, SMU, Memphis, UCF as full members; and Boise State, SD State, BYU, Air Force, Navy as football only

CUSA / BE - Houston, SMU, Memphis, UCF to BE

BE - Navy to BE

MWC / BE - Boise State and SD State agree to join BE as football only; BYU and Air Force decline offer

MAC / BE - Temple to BE

ACC / B1G - Maryland to B1G

BE / B1G - Rutgers to B1G

ACC / B1G - B1G reaches out to Georgia Tech, FSU, Virginia, UNC and Duke about potential expansion to 20 members, with 20th member TBA (hoping for Notre Dame of course)

BE/ACC - ACC invites Louisville over UConn

CUSA / BE - Tulane (full) and East Carolina (football only) to BE

BE / ACC - Notre Dame leaves conference for ACC, stays independent for football

Here's where things start changing
BE / B12 - B12 jumps in and offers Louisville and Cincinnati

BE / B12 - Cincinnati to B12

BE / ACC / B12 - Louisville chooses B12 over ACC

BE / ACC - UConn to BE

MWC / BE - Boise State rescind their agreement to join.

BE / AAC - The infamous Big East conference split still happens, Catholic 7 take BE name, football schools become The AAC. East Carolina upgrades to full membership.

MWC / AAC - SD State rescind their agreement to join.

CUSA / AAC - Tulsa to AAC

CUSA / AAC - Southern Miss to AAC

ACC / B12 / SEC - FSU, Miami and Clemson ongoing talks with B12 and SEC

ACC / B1G - B1G extends offers Ga Tech, FSU, Virginia, UNC, Duke

ACC / SEC - SEC extends offers to FSU, Miami, NC State, Clemson

ACC / B1G - Ga Tech and FSU to B1G; Virginia, UNC and Duke decline

ACC / SEC - Clemson and Miami to SEC; NC State and Va Tech decline

AAC / ACC - Temple and South Florida to ACC

MAC / ACC - UMass to ACC

CUSA / AAC - Marshall, Rice and UAB to AAC

CUSA / SBC - CUSA and SBC announce merger
01-09-2020 12:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
orangefan Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,339
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 240
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: New England
Post: #67
RE: Its fall of 2010 and B12 is losing 4 members. Why not add WV @ Louisville?
A little history lesson and then my two cents.

First, TCU was the first school invited. In addition to its football success and presence within the existing B12 footprint, TCU was available immediately. It had already given notice to the MWC so it could move to the Big East, but the additional exit fee payable to the Big East did not limit TCU's ability to join immediately.

UL and WVU, on the other hand, were contractually bound to the Big East until the 2014 season. The B12 needed new members to begin play immediately, in 2012. UL was an early favorite to get the invite, as travel to Louisville would not present a significant issue as compared to Morgantown, WV. However, UL was not willing to shoot its way out of the Big East. WVU, recognizing that the B12 may be the last train out of town, was willing to shoot its way out. To my mind, this willingness tipped the balance to WVU. After multiple lawsuits, including one in which the Big East sought to enjoin WVU from leaving, WVU managed to negotiate an early exit from the Big East to allow it to begin play in the B12 in 2012.

Having said this, in my mind, the B12 should have invited both UL and WVU, perhaps waiting for WVU to negotiate its early departure before inviting UL. This would have provided a much needed travel partner for WVU, as well as adding another strong brand. To get back to 12, I would have invited BYU as football only. BYU had been an earlier target by the B12, but the conference and BYU were unable to reach agreement regarding various issues, including Sunday play for other sports.
(This post was last modified: 01-16-2020 03:35 PM by orangefan.)
01-09-2020 02:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 22,472
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2069
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #68
RE: Its fall of 2010 and B12 is losing 4 members. Why not add WV @ Louisville?
(01-09-2020 02:34 PM)orangefan Wrote:  A little history lesson and then my two cents.

First, TCU was the first school invited. In addition to its football success and presence within the existing B12 footprint, TCU was available immediately. It had already given notice to the MWC so it could move to the Big East, and the additional exit fee payable to the Big East did not limit TCU's ability to join immediately.

UL and WVU, on the other hand, were contractually bound to the Big East until the 2014 season. The B12 needed new members to begin play immediately, in 2012. UL was an early favorite to get the invite, as travel to Louisville would not present a significant issue as compared to Morgantown, WV. However, UL was not willing to shoot its way out of the Big East. WVU, recognizing that the B12 may be the last train out of town, was willing to shoot its way out. To my mind, this willingness tipped the balance to WVU. After multiple lawsuits, including one in which the Big East sought to enjoin WVU from leaving, WVU managed to negotiate an early exit from the Big East to allow it to begin play in the B12 in 2012.

Having said this, in my mind, the B12 should have invited both UL and WVU, perhaps waiting for WVU to negotiate its early departure before inviting UL. This would have provided a much needed travel partner for WVU, as well as adding another strong brand. To get back to 12, I would have invited BYU as football only. BYU had been an earlier target by the B12, but the conference and BYU were unable to reach agreement regarding various issues, including Sunday play for other sports.

You nailed that one! UT was antsy to get to the magic number the networks stated so that their current contract would be honored upon the departure of the other 4. The networks said 10 minimum and that's what drove the angst to get there. Otherwise the implosion might have begun. The NCAA would have given them a couple of years to get back to minimums but the quantity of games had dramatically changed from the contracted amount. Technically the networks could have demanded 12, but there were some mea culpas going on for other failed deals.
01-09-2020 04:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2020 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, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.