Saving The Big XII...

[Pokes]

Re: Saving The Big XII...

It's not about finiding two teams to fill. It's about finding the right teams. Adding any combination of Boise, BYU, TCU, Houston, etc. is just going to lower they payout to all the teams, including the prized free agents Texas, A&M, and Oklahoma. Then those teams bolt.

I don't see this conference lasting long term. Tech, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, and K-State don't have options now, but the moment they do, they'll be gone.

This. Everyone knows this situation is going to repeat in 3-5 seasons.

[Perfect Zero]

Re: Saving The Big XII...

It's not about finiding two teams to fill. It's about finding the right teams. Adding any combination of Boise, BYU, TCU, Houston, etc. is just going to lower they payout to all the teams, including the prized free agents Texas, A&M, and Oklahoma. Then those teams bolt.

I don't see this conference lasting long term. Tech, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, and K-State don't have options now, but the moment they do, they'll be gone.

These teams aren't going to look any better in the future, and these conferences aren't going to be any different. There is also no way that Texas, A&M, or Oklahoma lose out on their large share of the money. They make the big bucks while they control the conference. As much as the small teams may not like it, the Big XII is better than the MAC, WAC, or even the MWC.

[DonkeyJote]

Re: Saving The Big XII...

These teams aren't going to look any better in the future, and these conferences aren't going to be any different. There is also no way that Texas, A&M, or Oklahoma lose out on their large share of the money. They make the big bucks while they control the conference. As much as the small teams may not like it, the Big XII is better than the MAC, WAC, or even the MWC.

What about the Big 10 or Pac 10? Who's not to say the Pac 10 doesn't decide in 3-5 years they want to add Kansas and another school? Or the Big 10 decides they want Kansas or Missouri. Or the MWC conference becomes a AQ BCS conference, and their payouts increase? Yeah, Texas and Oklahoma wouldn't go there, but why wouldn't Missouri or Tech since their Big XII payout is probably lower than a BCS qualifying, equal revenue sharing MWC could offer. Even if the MWC does gain the BCS status after next season, it'd only be for 2012-2013, and they'd have to continue to make progress to make that status permanent.

The Big XII works with 10 teams, but would it continue to work with 8 or 9? I doubt it, and at that point, Texas looks at options.

[Cebby]

Re: Saving The Big XII...

What about the Big 10 or Pac 10? Who's not to say the Pac 10 doesn't decide in 3-5 years they want to add Kansas and another school? Or the Big 10 decides they want Kansas or Missouri.

Common sense is who won't say any of that.

Super conferences are a stupid idea and the only way any of the top 4 BCS conferences expand is if they're adding Notre Dame or Texas with the only possible exceptions of Oklahoma and TAMU. If anyone wanted Kansas or Missouri, they would have them now.

[DonkeyJote]

Re: Saving The Big XII...

Common sense is who won't say any of that.

Super conferences are a stupid idea and the only way any of the top 4 BCS conferences expand is if they're adding Notre Dame or Texas with the only possible exceptions of Oklahoma and TAMU. If anyone wanted Kansas or Missouri, they would have them now.

You think super conferences are a dumb idea. There's no way to know what the presidents think (and recent events say they think they're not such a bad idea). I don't see how the expansion is done. It's done for now, but it will probably resume. The Rose Bowl conferences decided to stop where they were for now, but I don't think they're done at least looking for other teams. I think they got to where it would work short term, and they'll continue to look long term. We'll see though. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see the Pac 10 want to expand further east and maybe gain the St. Louis market. Or if the Big Ten needed a team to pair with a Notre Dame or Rutgers type if they expanded to 14.

[Cebby]

Re: Saving The Big XII...

You think super conferences are a dumb idea. There's no way to know what the presidents think (and recent events say they think they're not such a bad idea).

Recent events showed that no conference wanted to expand past 12 unless Texas or Notre Dame were included.

[DonkeyJote]

Re: Saving The Big XII...

Recent events showed that no conference wanted to expand past 12 unless Texas or Notre Dame were included.

And if you think those conferences are done trying to convince them, you're kidding them. And what's the easiest way to convince Texas? Snag a couple teams out of the Big XII so that the conference collapses. Same with Notre Dame. I still think the Big Ten will go for the Big East to try and lure ND in the future, and I could see them adding either Missouri or Kansas in addition to 2 Big East teams and Notre Dame.

I think teams have stopped to regroup rather than over react. I think the Big Ten was hoping that grabbing Nebraska would lead to a chain of events that would end the Big XII, perhaps forcing the SEC's hand to expand as well, and Notre Dame's hand to join the Big Ten. When it didn't quite work, they regrouped, but I don't think they're necessarily done with expansion. It's all to try and get Notre Dame to join, but we don't know what direction they'll go. No one thought Nebraska was the team they'd go for a couple months ago. And if the Big Ten does something, the Pac 10 will follow.

[Cebby]

Re: Saving The Big XII...

And if you think those conferences are done trying to convince them, you're kidding them.

Given that I've been more correct than anyone in the country on conference expansion, I'm going to side with myself.

And what's the easiest way to convince Texas? Snag a couple teams out of the Big XII so that the conference collapses.

Who would they snag?

If anything, Texas would probably be happy to lose Baylor, Tech, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Mizzou, or Chokie St. It'd give them more money. ESPN isn't paying for those teams. They're paying for Texas, Oklahoma, and somewhat TAMU.

Same with Notre Dame. I still think the Big Ten will go for the Big East to try and lure ND in the future, and I could see them adding either Missouri or Kansas in addition to 2 Big East teams and Notre Dame.

Again, why would Notre Dame care?

The only way that Notre Dame joins a conference is if they're cut out of the BCS or a playoff. That will not happen.

And if the Big Ten does something, the Pac 10 will follow.

No they won't.

The conferences are not jealous girls. If the Big 10 somehow gets Notre Dame, the PAC 10 or SEC aren't going to add some average program because the Big 10 got a shiny new toy. This offseason proved that.

[DonkeyJote]

Re: Saving The Big XII...

Given that I've been more correct than anyone in the country on conference expansion, I'm going to side with myself.

I'll give credit where credit is due, and you were right about the Big XII south not moving west, but to say you were more correct than anyone else in the country doesn't seem correct. I remember you saying the Mizzou and Rutgers were both going to join the Big Ten, Utah and BYU going to the Big XII, and the Pac 10 adding nothing.

If anything, Texas would probably be happy to lose Baylor, Tech, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Mizzou, or Chokie St. It'd give them more money. ESPN isn't paying for those teams. They're paying for Texas, Oklahoma, and somewhat TAMU.

Playing in a weak 8 team conference isn't going to help Texas go to National Championship Games. Heck, playing in the soon to be weak 10 team conference (no one other than the big 3 will be able to afford to compete with them anymore), is going to hurt them. And that will cost them money.

Again, why would Notre Dame care?

The only way that Notre Dame joins a conference is if they're cut out of the BCS or a playoff. That will not happen.

That's exactly it. If the Super Conferences occur, we're talking about a blow up of the BCS, whether it be for a playoff or something else. And Notre Dame might be left out this time. They won't let that happen. Brian Kelly already said in an interview that ND was watching the realignment very closely, and had a plan A, B, C, etc. If Texas had gone to the Pac 10, to make the first super conference, they very well might have joined the Big Ten. If later, the Big Ten decides they do want to expand east and pillage the Big East, that conference would likely fold, ND would likely join the Big Ten, and that could set off another chain of events.

No they won't.

The conferences are not jealous girls. If the Big 10 somehow gets Notre Dame, the PAC 10 or SEC aren't going to add some average program because the Big 10 got a shiny new toy. This offseason proved that.

Conferences are not jealous girls, but everyone and their brother knows that the Pac 10 and Big 10 are almost joined at the hip. The BCS didn't happen without them, and a playoff won't happen without them. How in the world did the offseason prove that? Are Colorado and Utah really up to snuff compared to Nebraska? The Pac 10 didn't even begin discussing expansion until the Big Ten did it first.

And you know what, if the Pac 10 had let Texas have their own network, we aren't having this discussion, because they are already in the Pac 10. Oklahoma isn't getting as much money out of this as Texas either. The only two schools that can be truly happy here are Texas, because it got its massive check, and A&M, because they got to flex their muscles, and their on their way to being one of the big boys in the conference. Oklahoma can be okay, Baylor, Kansas, K-State, and Missouri can feel disgruntled by how they don't get a share of Nebraska and Colorado's exit money, and Tech and Ok. St. has the biggest gripe of all, since they had a nice fat deal in the Pac 10 waiting for them that is now gone.

And the economics are always changing. Who's to say in a couple years Oklahoma and/or A&M can't make more money in the SEC (which is feasible)? I don't think this is at all over. And Tuberville is probably more of an expert on college football and college sports in general than any of us.

[Cebby]

Re: Saving The Big XII...

I'll give credit where credit is due, and you were right about the Big XII south not moving west, but to say you were more correct than anyone else in the country doesn't seem correct. I remember you saying the Mizzou and Rutgers were both going to join the Big Ten, Utah and BYU going to the Big XII, and the Pac 10 adding nothing.

I said a lot of things. However, I also dismissed every rumor and since none of the rumors turned out to be true, I win.

Playing in a weak 8 team conference isn't going to help Texas go to National Championship Games. Heck, playing in the soon to be weak 10 team conference (no one other than the big 3 will be able to afford to compete with them anymore), is going to hurt them.

No it won't. If Texas goes undefeated, they're in the chip.

And that will cost them money.

How?

And Notre Dame might be left out this time.

There is no chance that Notre Dame would ever be left out. Any conference would take them.

How in the world did the offseason prove that?

Because, exactly as I said when the first "16 team Big 10!!!!" thing was brought up, every conference wants 12 so they can have a chip game. More than 12 and money per school drops unless Texas or Notre Dame are included (or TAMU/OU to the SEC).

And you know what, if the Pac 10 had let Texas have their own network, we aren't having this discussion, because they are already in the Pac 10. Oklahoma isn't getting as much money out of this as Texas either. The only two schools that can be truly happy here are Texas, because it got its massive check, and A&M, because they got to flex their muscles, and their on their way to being one of the big boys in the conference.

Oklahoma will be making more money since they can shake down the remaining Big XII schools for a higher percent of money than before.

[DonkeyJote]

Re: Saving The Big XII...

I said a lot of things. However, I also dismissed every rumor and since none of the rumors turned out to be true, I win.

I didn't realize it was a contest.

No it won't. If Texas goes undefeated, they're in the chip.

Not if a combination of two SEC/Big Ten/Pac 10 schools go undefeated. Without a conference championship game, and a widening gap between them and the bottom of the conference, they'll be left out in favor of undefeated teams from the stronger conferences with a Title Game. And there's no more margin for error. One loss, and they're probably out.

How?

Less BCS berths for Texas and the conference as a whole means less money for Texas.

There is no chance that Notre Dame would ever be left out. Any conference would take them.

Exactly. They'd have to join a conference. Which is still what I think all of this is about from the Big Ten side. They will continue to try and find a way to make joining the Big Ten the most appealing option, and if they have to do super conferences to do it, then they will.

Because, exactly as I said when the first "16 team Big 10!!!!" thing was brought up, every conference wants 12 so they can have a chip game. More than 12 and money per school drops unless Texas or Notre Dame are included (or TAMU/OU to the SEC).

I've honestly never understood what A&M really would add to the SEC. They're second fiddle in their own region, and aren't what I'd call among the top class of college football (though still a very good program overall). Oklahoma isn't going to bring in a top dollar either. I still think that potential move was purely reactionary by the SEC.

Oklahoma will be making more money since they can shake down the remaining Big XII schools for a higher percent of money than before.

They're making more than they did before, but the gap between them in Texas is widening, and A&M has quickly caught up. Oklahoma is slated to make about $20mil, while the SEC pays out $17 mil, and the Big Ten will probably be $20mil (I think?).

I think the year to look at is 2016, when the Big Ten will be eligible to negotiate a new TV deal. It doesn't make sense to add more teams, since they will take more than they give, but in new television negotiations, more teams could get you more money on that next contract. A new tv deal is, after all, why the Pac 10 expanded.

[rspencer86]

Re: Saving The Big XII...

Because, exactly as I said when the first "16 team Big 10!!!!" thing was brought up, every conference wants 12 so they can have a chip game. More than 12 and money per school drops unless Texas or Notre Dame are included (or TAMU/OU to the SEC).

This is assuming what's left of the Big XII survives. If the Big XII dissolved, where do you think all that TV contract money would go? It would make the superconference contracts worth much, much more, making it likely that it would be more lucrative than the current setup.

[Cebby]

Re: Saving The Big XII...

Not if a combination of two SEC/Big Ten/Pac 10 schools go undefeated.

The only possible chance an undefeated Texas team gets left out is if there's an undefeated SEC team and an undefeated Ohio State, Michigan, Penn St, or Nebraska and even then Texas would probably get the nod over the Big 10.

The only thing the Big XII lost with respect to Texas is the championship game. Texas only played Nebraska and Colorado so often.

Less BCS berths for Texas and the conference as a whole means less money for Texas.

How will there be fewer BCS berths for Texas and the Big XII?

Nebraska and Colorado haven't had a BCS appearance since 2001. Again, if anything Texas benefits because they're dividing by 10 instead of 12.

Exactly. They'd have to join a conference. Which is still what I think all of this is about from the Big Ten side. They will continue to try and find a way to make joining the Big Ten the most appealing option, and if they have to do super conferences to do it, then they will.

But there's no likely scenario where they'd "have to join a conference" in the future. Hell, the Big 10's obsession with a stupid parade is the biggest impediment to a playoff which is the only way Notre Dame even thinks about joining a conference.

I've honestly never understood what A&M really would add to the SEC. They're second fiddle in their own region, and aren't what I'd call among the top class of college football (though still a very good program overall). Oklahoma isn't going to bring in a top dollar either. I still think that potential move was purely reactionary by the SEC.

Of course it was reactionary.

However, you significantly underestimate TAMU and Oklahoma. Of all non-SEC and Big 10 teams, they're the third and fourth most valuable football programs.

They're making more than they did before, but the gap between them in Texas is widening, and A&M has quickly caught up. Oklahoma is slated to make about $20mil, while the SEC pays out $17 mil, and the Big Ten will probably be $20mil (I think?).

I think the year to look at is 2016, when the Big Ten will be eligible to negotiate a new TV deal. It doesn't make sense to add more teams, since they will take more than they give, but in new television negotiations, more teams could get you more money on that next contract. A new tv deal is, after all, why the Pac 10 expanded.

Much like super conferences, I'd hold off on proclaiming these mega-TV deals until one actually occurs.

The biggest problem for the conferences not named the SEC is that ESPN has basically given the SEC every prime time spot and the Big 10 the early spots. Short of doing a disastrous move like the PAC 10 did and going to Fox, I don't think there's much more money to be made in the contracts. They'll be bigger, but they aren't going to be insane.

If the Big XII dissolved

That's an unbelievably huge if. At this point, it's about as likely as "If Vanderbilt wins the next 5 national championships then..."

[DonkeyJote]

Re: Saving The Big XII...

When I say the Big XII is worse off on the field, I mean long term. All the teams other than the big three will be falling even farther behind because they aren't making any money. And I believe an undefeated Pac 12 Champion gets in over an undefeated Texas team a good amount of the time. It happened to USC. I think losing the conference title game is more harmful to any title chances than people realize.

[Cebby]

Re: Saving The Big XII...

All the teams other than the big three will be falling even farther behind because they aren't making any money.

1. How in the world can they fall "even farther behind"? Kansas, Missouri, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma St have been as good as they've ever been recently and Kansas St is still far better than their historic place. The only three programs performing worse than their historic averages are TAMU, Nebraska, and Colorado.

2. How will they not "making any money"? They're making less than Texas (as is every football program in the country) but they're far from broke.

And I believe an undefeated Pac 12 Champion gets in over an undefeated Texas team a good amount of the time.

Then you don't know how college football chooses its national champion. The only PAC 12 team who would even be a toss up with Texas would be USC but between the probation and Kiffin, they won't be in that position for a while.

If you think Oregon, Utah, or Cal are getting ranked above Texas then you live in an alternate universe.

It happened to USC.

The only two BCS programs to be left out from the chip game while undefeated were Auburn and Cincinnati. They were left out for USC, Oklahoma, Texas, and Alabama.