Cincinnati to the Big 12?

[GIMMFD]

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2016/02/13/inside-ucs-bid-join-big-12/80280488/

I know it's an old article, but with Big 12 talks of expansion heating up even more what do you guys think? Personally being a WVU fan, it's brilliant. Absolutely bring UC in, the recruiting grounds open up even more into Ohio (WVU does well there in football regardless), a new TV market for the Big 12 which would only bring in more cash. Macy's and Kroger are willing to back this move, Nippert's renovation, hell even Gordon Gee's (president of WVU) ties to the state of Ohio, and even TCU/Baylor being shut out of the top 4 (granted Ohio State obviously deserved it in the end) a couple seasons ago, I just don't see why the Big 12 wouldn't do this. thoughts?

[Juice]

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2016/02/13/inside-ucs-bid-join-big-12/80280488/

I know it's an old article, but with Big 12 talks of expansion heating up even more what do you guys think? Personally being a WVU fan, it's brilliant. Absolutely bring UC in, the recruiting grounds open up even more into Ohio (WVU does well there in football regardless), a new TV market for the Big 12 which would only bring in more cash. Macy's and Kroger are willing to back this move, Nippert's renovation, hell even Gordon Gee's (president of WVU) ties to the state of Ohio, and even TCU/Baylor being shut out of the top 4 (granted Ohio State obviously deserved it in the end) a couple seasons ago, I just don't see why the Big 12 wouldn't do this. thoughts?

Because I think BYU and Houston do all of those things but better than UC.

[casualfan]

Because I think BYU and Houston do all of those things but better than UC.

Houston brings a new TV market?

[xubrew]

I don't know if the Big Twelve will expand, and if they do I don't know what schools they'll add. I'm pretty sure I know who they will not add, though. It will not be BYU.

[xeus]

I think if they expand, UC is in.

[Lamont Sanford]

Agreed. I think that UC is in if they expand. Bad Santa Ono has been begging and pleading anyone that will listen to him that UC belongs in that league.

Naturally, I hope they pass them over for BYU and Houston.

Suck it Bad Santa!

[xubrew]

Agreed. I think that UC is in if they expand. Bad Santa Ono has been begging and pleading anyone that will listen to him that UC belongs in that league.

Naturally, I hope they pass them over for BYU and Houston.

Suck it Bad Santa!

So what you're saying is that the UC president feels that UC belongs in the Big Twelve?? SHOCKING NEWS!!!

[GoMuskies]

I think the Big 12 can do better than UC. Western Kentucky and Temple are wide open.

[xubrew]

I think the Big 12 can do better than UC. Western Kentucky and Temple are wide open.

North Dakota State would be a good addition. So would Wichita since rumors are that Wichita is looking at adding football.

[Juice]

Houston brings a new TV market?

Houston is one of the top 5 most populous cities in America. And the Cincinnati market is shit bc it's divided with Ohio State. Ask how adding Rutgers has helped the Big Ten.

[Musketeer]

Cincinnati is not really a great market, especially if UC is the team you are drawing on.

[xubrew]

It would make more sense for the Big Twelve to invite the Bengals instead of UC.

[casualfan]

Houston is one of the top 5 most populous cities in America.

You're dancing around my question, which is what new TV market Houston brings.

With UT, TTU, and TCU (UT especially) that league already owns the TV market in Texas.

[Seven Eighths]

Texas doesn't want garbage additions like UC so I think they stay at 10 unless they somehow can get an ACC team. The only way that happens is if the B10 takes some ACC teams first. The Big 12 doesn't need AAC schools.

[Juice]

You're dancing around my question, which is what new TV market Houston brings.

With UT, TTU, and TCU (UT especially) that league already owns the TV market in Texas.

Houston is just a better program, located in a bigger city, in an area that fits your conference. Adding UC doesn't add the Ohio market, and barely adds Cincinnati, which isn't a good market. Why would you share revenue with a program like that?

And I don't think they're necessarily trying to add new markets. I think they're just trying to build a sustainable conference that will better enable getting their tops teams into the playoff. I think they do that by adding the best teams available, not new markets.

[casualfan]

Houston is just a better program, located in a bigger city, in an area that fits your conference. Adding UC doesn't add the Ohio market, and barely adds Cincinnati, which isn't a good market. Why would you share revenue with a program like that?

And I don't think they're necessarily trying to add new markets. I think they're just trying to build a sustainable conference that will better enable getting their tops teams into the playoff. I think they do that by adding the best teams available, not new markets.

Houston football at this point is Tom Herman who will be gone by the time any of this actually happens.

I just don't see them rolling the dice on a program like Houston who outside of last year has been an extremely modest program.

I'm not saying UC is a world beater in football, but they have been light years ahead of Houston the last 20 years outside of when Houston struck hold on a once in a lifetime coach who again will be gone after next season.

The programs holding up Big 12 expansion are the Texas 3. If you're one of those schools why would you prop up another in-state program who you'd then have to compete with for recruits on more equal footing when you could go add UC, memphis, or UCONN who you will rarely have to deal with on that trail?

[xubrew]

It's interesting. Texas and Texas Tech would much rather have Cincinnati than Houston. In fact, they'd probably much rather have just about anyone than Houston. But, the Texas Board of Regents may pressure those two schools into fighting for Houston even though neither one of them wants anything to do with Houston.

Xavier fans will instinctively come up with all the reasons as to why UC shouldn't be selected, and none of them are necessarily wrong, but in reality UC makes as much sense as anyone else. If there is talk of a Big Twelve Network, and they can convince (or strong arm) the providers throughout Ohio to pick up said network, then Cincinnati is as good a choice as any. Cincinnati does add the Ohio market in the sense that it will likely result in a conference network being distributed throughout much of Ohio. Boston College doesn't really add the Boston market, yet the ACC still claims Boston as part of their footprint.

So, with Houston, Cincinnati, Memphis, and UConn all being realistic candidates, UC has as good (and as bad) of a case as any of the other three. I personally don't think the Big Twelve should do anything, but what I think schools and conferences should do is often rarely done. If I had to guess, I think the Big Twelve will eventually expand.

[GIMMFD]

Houston football at this point is Tom Herman who will be gone by the time any of this actually happens.

I just don't see them rolling the dice on a program like Houston who outside of last year has been an extremely modest program.

I'm not saying UC is a world beater in football, but they have been light years ahead of Houston the last 20 years outside of when Houston struck hold on a once in a lifetime coach who again will be gone after next season.

The programs holding up Big 12 expansion are the Texas 3. If you're one of those schools why would you prop up another in-state program who you'd then have to compete with for recruits on more equal footing when you could go add UC, memphis, or UCONN who you will rarely have to deal with on that trail?

I wouldn't necessarily say once in a lifetime coach, look what Houston did as Kevin Sumlin (at Texas A&M now) as their coach, granted with Case Keenum as their quarter back. I think they don't want Houston because it'll almost be the exact same as the SWC, Texas is already pissed off that A&M opened the doors to let the SEC into Texas' recruiting hot beds, and adding Houston will just take away even more recruits from them. I highly doubt that they'd add Houston, so I do agree with you on that aspect.

On the flip side, UC is a new market, a partner with West Virginia, and other members of the Big 12 have already looked at UC taking a small financial hit by not sharing equal revenue, the move would be huge for UC, and they're thinking more "potential" of the Cincinnati market, rather than what the market is right now, another addition that's being strongly considered is UCF, that opens Florida up to Texas and other Big 12 schools (WVU already does very well in Florida), which even though they went 0-12 last year it's considered an anomaly, and that they'd have the 4th highest average attendance with an Orlando market. BYU brings BYUtv, and a large devout of Morman followers, they have a decent football tradition, and could be considered an interesting add.

I think the big thing is the 3 time-zone difference, that would ultimately hold BYU out, not to mention BYU doesn't play on Sundays for religious reasons, which affects other sports and even though UCONN is in the eastern time zone, they would have to travel more than any other school, imagine a flight from UCONN to Kansas/Kansas State, that would be torture. Realistically Cincinnati would be a better fit for the Big 12, not necessarily by on field performance, but they'd also get a decent basketball program, and a much better location for travel and etc.

[Juice]

Houston football at this point is Tom Herman who will be gone by the time any of this actually happens.

I just don't see them rolling the dice on a program like Houston who outside of last year has been an extremely modest program.

I'm not saying UC is a world beater in football, but they have been light years ahead of Houston the last 20 years outside of when Houston struck hold on a once in a lifetime coach who again will be gone after next season.

The programs holding up Big 12 expansion are the Texas 3. If you're one of those schools why would you prop up another in-state program who you'd then have to compete with for recruits on more equal footing when you could go add UC, memphis, or UCONN who you will rarely have to deal with on that trail?

You mean like UC with Brian Kelly?

[casualfan]

You mean like UC with Brian Kelly?

If you want to ignore what Dantonio and Butch Jones did there that is your prerogative.

At the end of the day their football program has a much more impressive recent history of sustained success than Houston. Houston may get there, but they aren't there yet.

I'm of the opinion that i hope they get in. An OOC win every year against a Big 12 schools will look a little better on the team sheet than one against an AAC school.

[GoMuskies]

Houston has a much better stadium situation. Also, in their one shot at a major bowl game Houston managed to not get the shit kicked out of them. Advantage: Houston

[Juice]

If you want to ignore what Dantonio and Butch Jones did there that is your prerogative.

At the end of the day their football program has a much more impressive recent history of sustained success than Houston. Houston may get there, but they aren't there yet.

And UC is trending downward with a retarded hire of Tubberville. They're going to have to rebuild big time getting back from him. It's all about momentum with middle level programs like Houston and UC. But I'll put my money on the school located in the largest city in Texas.


But this recent post by someone at the thebiglead.com actually makes the most sense to me on the future of Big 12, in that it doesn't have one. http://thebiglead.com/2016/05/06/the-big-12-is-already-dead-kill-the-expansion-chatter/

[casualfan]

But I'll put my money on the school located in the largest city in Texas.


If you want to bet on Houston getting into the Big 12 I'll take that bet all day long. Name your price.

[GIMMFD]

And UC is trending downward with a retarded hire of Tubberville. They're going to have to rebuild big time getting back from him. It's all about momentum with middle level programs like Houston and UC. But I'll put my money on the school located in the largest city in Texas.


But this recent post by someone at the thebiglead.com actually makes the most sense to me on the future of Big 12, in that it doesn't have one. http://thebiglead.com/2016/05/06/the-big-12-is-already-dead-kill-the-expansion-chatter/

Yes if Texas/Oklahoma leaves that really messes with things in the Big 12, however, they have good programs in Baylor, TCU, and Oklahoma State as well to where it would leave one wondering what the hell happens to everyone else, make a new conference, and pretty much lose Power 5 status? How will the SEC feel if Texas, Oklahoma, Miami, Florida State, etc. make a conference, SEC football is protected by ESPN for god sake, will those powers allow for that move to even happen? Same with them moving to the Big 10.. also, I still just don't see Houston as a player in this, athletically yes, they're a damn good option with their football program trending upwards, but logically I don't see Texas letting that happen.

[paulxu]

Realignment will return. Equilibrium is probably four, closed off, 16-team super conferences

Good lord it would have all been much simpler if they just did this in the first place.

[casualfan]

Yes if Texas/Oklahoma leaves that really messes with things in the Big 12, however, they have good programs in Baylor, TCU, and Oklahoma State as well to where it would leave one wondering what the hell happens to everyone else, make a new conference, and pretty much lose Power 5 status? How will the SEC feel if Texas, Oklahoma, Miami, Florida State, etc. make a conference, SEC football is protected by ESPN for god sake, will those powers allow for that move to even happen? Same with them moving to the Big 10.. also, I still just don't see Houston as a player in this, athletically yes, they're a damn good option with their football program trending upwards, but logically I don't see Texas letting that happen.

2023-2025 is when the next round will start. 2023 is when the Big Ten's TV deal expires then 2025 the rest do.

That's when the grant of media rights that is keeping all these conferences together will expire and schools can move around freely.

[MADXSTER]

Nippert cannot handle 20k fans. The amenities are few. They talk about adding seats to comply with the conference but in reality it's not about the seats as much as everything else that goes with running a stadium.

20k at Nippert creates gridlock at entrances, bathrooms, concessions, walking area and pretty much everything else. 50-60k ha

[GIMMFD]

2023-2025 is when the next round will start. 2023 is when the Big Ten's TV deal expires then 2025 the rest do.

That's when the grant of media rights that is keeping all these conferences together will expire and schools can move around freely.

So hypothetically we could see the 16 team mega-conferences by 2025? I wonder how they'll play that out, breaking it down into regions? Also what would that mean for us in the Big East, granted we're not affected by football, but it would definitely be interesting to see how things shake out...

[Juice]

So hypothetically we could see the 16 team mega-conferences by 2025? I wonder how they'll play that out, breaking it down into regions? Also what would that mean for us in the Big East, granted we're not affected by football, but it would definitely be interesting to see how things shake out...

I think the environment of tv deals will be nothing like it is today since ESPN is cutting costs, the SEC network has kind of sucked, the Longhorn network has been a failure for ESPN (not Texas), etc. The days of blank checks to the conferences could be over unless people figure out how to monetize the fact that more people are dropping cable and watching over the Internet.

[X-band '01]

CBSSports.com - OU President v. OU Board of Regents (http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/theres-infighting-at-oklahoma-over-potential-big-12-expansion/)


Weitzenhoffer explained why the Big 12 stands to gain little in expanding to schools most commonly mentioned -- Boise State, BYU, UCF, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Houston, Memphis and South Florida, among others.

"Those are the ones I keep hearing," Weitzenhoffer said. "They have no seating capacities in their stadiums. They really don't build them up. They really don't have any TV. I really don't know what we have to gain by that."

"The problem with Cincinnati is ... then they start getting all this money," Weitzenhoffer said. "Then what do we do? We build up somebody we don't want to build up."

I'm sure UC fans are thrilled with that quote from Oklahoma's Board of Regents.

[GIMMFD]

CBSSports.com - OU President v. OU Board of Regents (http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/theres-infighting-at-oklahoma-over-potential-big-12-expansion/)



I'm sure UC fans are thrilled with that quote from Oklahoma's Board of Regents.

If we look at potential markets, then well this guy on a UCONN board broke down some numbers, and they're pretty damn impressive to be honest:
http://the-boneyard.com/threads/uconn-power-conference-profile-a-long-look-at-the-numbers.85564/

[Juice]

CBSSports.com - OU President v. OU Board of Regents (http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/theres-infighting-at-oklahoma-over-potential-big-12-expansion/)



I'm sure UC fans are thrilled with that quote from Oklahoma's Board of Regents.

Hahaha, what a verbal beat down

[xudash]

Hahaha, what a verbal beat down

Ouch!

Hey, I have an idea: let's go out and raise a lot of private money and sink about $80 million into a nice, but too small stadium in an effort to POSSIBLY CREATE A SMALL CHANCE of getting called up to the big leagues. While we're at it, we'll pursue a grandiose plan for renovating our basketball dinosaur, since we're all about turning a basketball school into a football school unsuccessfully, but we still want to keep basketball relevant, though under the direction of a total douchebag.

All this will make us look like a no brainer pick.

Let's do this!

[xubrew]

Ouch!

Hey, I have an idea: let's go out and raise a lot of private money and sink about $80 million into a nice, but too small stadium in an effort to POSSIBLY CREATE A SMALL CHANCE of getting called up to the big leagues. While we're at it, we'll pursue a grandiose plan for renovating our basketball dinosaur, since we're all about turning a basketball school into a football school unsuccessfully, but we still want to keep basketball relevant, though under the direction of a total douchebag.

All this will make us look like a no brainer pick.

Let's do this!

If a school is able to raise $80 million in private funds, then it's not a bad idea for them to do so. In fact, it's generally a good idea to raise as much money as you can. Even if the Big Twelve doesn't invite them, it's not like $80 million in private donations is a bad thing to have. in fact, being able to raise $80 million, but deciding not to do so, would be a horrible idea. If they don't get the Big Twelve invite, their response is not going to be "Wow, that $80 million dollars that we raised is really screwing us! What a horrible mistake that was!"

[MauriceX]

If we look at potential markets, then well this guy on a UCONN board broke down some numbers, and they're pretty damn impressive to be honest:
http://the-boneyard.com/threads/uconn-power-conference-profile-a-long-look-at-the-numbers.85564/

That guy put some work into that. Very impressive. However, this one line made me laugh:


UConn would easily become the top basketball program for men's and women's in the B12.

[casualfan]

That guy put some work into that. Very impressive. However, this one line made me laugh:

Why'd it make you laugh?

[xubrew]

Why'd it make you laugh?

I think they're half right.

In men's basketball, I think there are four teams who, no matter which of the 351 div1 teams that they play, would almost always be considered the biggest game on every opponent's schedule. Kansas is one of the four. UConn is not. Just my opinion. UConn is a great basketball program, but they're not Kansas.

[MauriceX]

I think they're half right.

In men's basketball, I think there are four teams who, no matter which of the 351 div1 teams that they play, would almost always be considered the biggest game on every opponent's schedule. Kansas is one of the four. UConn is not. Just my opinion. UConn is a great basketball program, but they're not Kansas.

This is exactly what made me laugh. I don't think there is any doubt about the women's team. But saying the men's team would "easily" be better than Kansas? Child please.

[casualfan]

Uconn has as many titles since 2004 as Kansas does in their history.

[xudash]

If a school is able to raise $80 million in private funds, then it's not a bad idea for them to do so. In fact, it's generally a good idea to raise as much money as you can. Even if the Big Twelve doesn't invite them, it's not like $80 million in private donations is a bad thing to have. in fact, being able to raise $80 million, but deciding not to do so, would be a horrible idea. If they don't get the Big Twelve invite, their response is not going to be "Wow, that $80 million dollars that we raised is really screwing us! What a horrible mistake that was!"

Perhaps you're missing the point: it is always good to be able to raise money, but it's what you do with the money once it's raised that truly matters.

Now, you can argue that the specific people that contributed that money did so because they have an acute interest in UC football becoming better, and that they otherwise may not have been inclined to contribute to the library fund, as an example. If that's how it went down and if that is behind your line of thinking, then so be it.

But, IMHO, in a world where funds are finite for everyone and every entity, using fund raising capacity to drop $80 million into a 40k seat stadium is less than swift. They were clearly gambling with this approach, and it may come back to bite them, though they'll end up with a nice little stadium.

[xubrew]

Uconn has as many titles since 2004 as Kansas does in their history.

They're not the brand name that Kansas is. They don't have a waiting list for tickets that is several years long, and they aren't a guaranteed sellout when they play on the road. When it comes to brand, which I realize is subjective to a degree, I don't think the two are even close. At the very least, it isn't "EASILY" the top basketball program as the article claims. It's kind of absurd to claim that you're easily better than Kansas. Even if they have "as many" titles, they're at most "arguably" somewhat close to as good.

[casualfan]

They're not the brand name that Kansas is. They don't have a waiting list for tickets that is several years long, and they aren't a guaranteed sellout when they play on the road. When it comes to brand, which I realize is subjective to a degree, I don't think the two are even close. At the very least, it isn't "EASILY" the top basketball program as the article claims. It's kind of absurd to claim that you're easily better than Kansas. Even if they have "as many" titles, they're at most "arguably" somewhat close to as good.

As Herm Edward's said, you play to win the game.

Easily was overstating it though, you're right there.

And they don't have as many. They have more.

As many since 2004 was to say they have as many in the last 12 years as Kansas has in the last 64.

[paulxu]

though they'll end up with a nice little stadium.

Use it for Cincinnati's pro soccer team?

[xubrew]

As Herm Edward's said, you play to win the game.

Easily was overstating it though, you're right there.

And they don't have as many. They have more.

As many since 2004 was to say they have as many in the last 12 years as Kansas has in the last 64.

It depends on how you want to keep score. Kansas has 14 Final Fours and has been nationally relevant for the entire duration of their program. I think of Kansas as being in the same company as Kentucky, Duke, and North Carolina. I'm not trying to downplay UConn's program at all. It is among the best. I just don't think their entire package equals Kansas's entire package. I don't think too many would disagree with me on that, but I guess it's all relative to how you want to measure it.

[GIMMFD]

Well another kink in the expansion story now is Texas. They have rights over the LHN, that's a $15 million dollar contract plus the $20 million they get from the conference, they don't want to share that because not only does it affect their athletics, it also affects their academics. Post from another board:


Half of what UT brings in from LHN goes directly to funding academic schools, chairs, programs, etc. The actual LHN studio crews, production crews, all personnel, etc. are UT grad students. Many of them doing their internships through The department of Radio-Television-Film and The School of Journalism in the Moody College of Communication. Many of the grad student films are on LHN. The Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs have many of their guest lectures on LHN. The Division of Textiles and Apparel in the School of Human Ecology have their shows broadcast on LHN. That is just a few examples.

The other half goes to the athletic department.

So when Boren starts screaming and demanding that Texas turn over their network to the Big 12, he isn't asking the athletic department to just give up some sports games on Bevo TV, he's asking the entire University of Texas to give up academic funding and jobs.

So at the end of the day it's Oklahoma really pushing to get into expansion, with some discourse amongst themselves. While Texas is trying to protect their assets. Texas is the only school in the Big 12 that can do whatever the hell they want, they can join any conference and still thrive and prosper. For example, let's say Oklahoma turns to the Big 10, I think they become like Nebraska, they need Texas to recruit Texas kids and the Big 12 brand. So pissing Texas off by expanding would be an awful idea. To be honest, Texas doesn't want/need expansion, and when they pull the weight of the conference it's going to be hard to see how it will come into fruition.

[xudash]

Well another kink in the expansion story now is Texas. They have rights over the LHN, that's a $15 million dollar contract plus the $20 million they get from the conference, they don't want to share that because not only does it affect their athletics, it also affects their academics. Post from another board:



So at the end of the day it's Oklahoma really pushing to get into expansion, with some discourse amongst themselves. While Texas is trying to protect their assets. Texas is the only school in the Big 12 that can do whatever the hell they want, they can join any conference and still thrive and prosper. For example, let's say Oklahoma turns to the Big 10, I think they become like Nebraska, they need Texas to recruit Texas kids and the Big 12 brand. So pissing Texas off by expanding would be an awful idea. To be honest, Texas doesn't want/need expansion, and when they pull the weight of the conference it's going to be hard to see how it will come into fruition.

I guess it's safe to say that it is important to have alignment and similar expectations and positions when it comes to joining other schools in a collegiate athletic conference. The Big XII has a 900 lb. guerrilla and it is named Texas and it sits among 9 Wildebeests.

[xubrew]

Well another kink in the expansion story now is Texas. They have rights over the LHN, that's a $15 million dollar contract plus the $20 million they get from the conference, they don't want to share that because not only does it affect their athletics, it also affects their academics. Post from another board:



So at the end of the day it's Oklahoma really pushing to get into expansion, with some discourse amongst themselves. While Texas is trying to protect their assets. Texas is the only school in the Big 12 that can do whatever the hell they want, they can join any conference and still thrive and prosper. For example, let's say Oklahoma turns to the Big 10, I think they become like Nebraska, they need Texas to recruit Texas kids and the Big 12 brand. So pissing Texas off by expanding would be an awful idea. To be honest, Texas doesn't want/need expansion, and when they pull the weight of the conference it's going to be hard to see how it will come into fruition.

It is kind of funny.

Oklahoma wants expansion, but the Oklahoma Board of Regents does not.

Texas does not want expansion and certainly doesn't want Houston, but the Texas Board of Regents seems to be pushing for it and wants Houston to be a part of it.

[xubrew]

From a football standpoint, it makes business sense for a power conference to have 12 teams. The reason being that playing eight conference games instead of nine makes it so everyone can schedule a fourth OOC game, which will most likely be an additional home game against a crap team. If every team in the conference can play seven home football games every year, then it's a boost in revenue. That's difficult for everyone to do when you're playing nine conference games, and half the teams are playing five road conference games.

From a competition standpoint, one of the biggest misnomers in all of sports is that "The Big Twelve winner doesn't have to play a conference championship game, so they don't deserve as much credit as a team from another conference who won a championship game." That's crap because the SEC, ACC, Big Ten, etc champions won nine conference games. So did the Big Twelve winner. So in reality, the "extra game" that the other power conference teams have to play is an OOC home game against a weak team.

But, here's the thing. I think people are too stupid to realize that, and because they're too stupid to realize that, the Big Twelve is at a disadvantage.

So, I get wanting twelve. I get wanting to play seven home games every year. I get wanting the revenue that comes from a football championship game. I get wanting to get credit for playing an "extra" ninth conference games, which they don't seem to get now even though they already play nine conference games. I also get not liking the LHN, which no one in the Big Twelve does except for Texas, and if they think expanding the league can somehow neutralize the LHN even more, I can see why that's appealing.

I also understand why West Virginia would want either Cincinnati or UConn. I think WVU is really stupid for whining about how their travel budgets have gone through the roof. That was obvious to seemingly everyone except for them when they joined the league. I don't feel sorry for them, but I at least get why they're frustrated (even if they deserve to be).

So, I get why people within the Big Twelve think it makes sense. I also get why others are against it, but ultimately most of those who are against it aren't directly involved with athletics. From a basketball standpoint, I don't think they gain anything at all. From a football standpoint, I think they certainly do. Being able to play seven home games a year is no small thing, and going to twelve would allow all of them to do that.

[casualfan]

From a football standpoint, it makes business sense for a power conference to have 12 teams. The reason being that playing eight conference games instead of nine makes it so everyone can schedule a fourth OOC game, which will most likely be an additional home game against a crap team. If every team in the conference can play seven home football games every year, then it's a boost in revenue. That's difficult for everyone to do when you're playing nine conference games, and half the teams are playing five road conference games.

From a competition standpoint, one of the biggest misnomers in all of sports is that "The Big Twelve winner doesn't have to play a conference championship game, so they don't deserve as much credit as a team from another conference who won a championship game." That's crap because the SEC, ACC, Big Ten, etc champions won nine conference games. So did the Big Twelve winner. So in reality, the "extra game" that the other power conference teams have to play is an OOC home game against a weak team.

But, here's the thing. I think people are too stupid to realize that, and because they're too stupid to realize that, the Big Twelve is at a disadvantage.

So, I get wanting twelve. I get wanting to play seven home games every year. I get wanting the revenue that comes from a football championship game. I get wanting to get credit for playing an "extra" ninth conference games, which they don't seem to get now even though they already play nine conference games. I also get not liking the LHN, which no one in the Big Twelve does except for Texas, and if they think expanding the league can somehow neutralize the LHN even more, I can see why that's appealing.

I also understand why West Virginia would want either Cincinnati or UConn. I think WVU is really stupid for whining about how their travel budgets have gone through the roof. That was obvious to seemingly everyone except for them when they joined the league. I don't feel sorry for them, but I at least get why they're frustrated (even if they deserve to be).

So, I get why people within the Big Twelve think it makes sense. I also get why others are against it, but ultimately most of those who are against it aren't directly involved with athletics. From a basketball standpoint, I don't think they gain anything at all. From a football standpoint, I think they certainly do. Being able to play seven home games a year is no small thing, and going to twelve would allow all of them to do that.

Difference between the Big 12 winner playing 9 conference games and other conference winners playing 9 is that the other conferences winners are guaranteed to play another really good time in the title game.

So yes, while they are both playing 9 conference games by the nature of the setup the title winners from conferences with a title game would have likely played a tougher schedule.

[STL_XUfan]

Difference between the Big 12 winner playing 9 conference games and other conference winners playing 9 is that the other conferences winners are guaranteed to play another really good time in the title game.

So yes, while they are both playing 9 conference games by the nature of the setup the title winners from conferences with a title game would have likely played a tougher schedule.

Except that the 10 team conference member has to play every single member of their conference, while the 12 team conference member may get to skip 3 of the top 4 (Mizzou's back to back SEC East Championships for example).

[xubrew]

Difference between the Big 12 winner playing 9 conference games and other conference winners playing 9 is that the other conferences winners are guaranteed to play another really good time in the title game.

So yes, while they are both playing 9 conference games by the nature of the setup the title winners from conferences with a title game would have likely played a tougher schedule.

That doesn't matter. They're playing the same number of good teams. It's just that the Big Twelve plays all the good teams in the conference during the regular season. The "extra game" is really nothing more than an OOC game against a bad team. Had Michigan State played Iowa during the regular season (which they would have had to do if it were set up like the Big Twelve) and not played Western Michigan, Central Michigan, or Air Force in an OOC game, then their schedule wouldn't have been any less difficult. The "extra game" that the Big Ten, Pac Twelve, SEC, ACC, etc have to play is really just an additional easy OOC game.

[casualfan]

That doesn't matter. They're playing the same number of good teams. It's just that the Big Twelve plays all the good teams in the conference during the regular season. The "extra game" is really nothing more than an OOC game against a bad team. Had Michigan State played Iowa during the regular season (which they would have had to do if it were set up like the Big Twelve) and not played Western Michigan, Central Michigan, or Air Force in an OOC game, then their schedule wouldn't have been any less difficult. The "extra game" that the Big Ten, Pac Twelve, SEC, ACC, etc have to play is really just an additional easy OOC game.

The point is that an SEC champ may play more good teams because of the champ game. For example, if one of the conference mates they miss in the regular season is UK and their 9th game is LSU or Alabama or Georgia they will have played a harder schedule than if that 9th game was UK.

Each conference plays 9 conference games, but due to the nature of the way that 9th game gets decided the championship leagues have a better chance of their champ coming out with a stronger record.

That won't always be the case necessarily, but it will happen fairly often as conferences stack the deck for teams predicted to be good.

Look at the Big 12 last year for example. Let's say they didn't play a round robin and because of that Oklahoma did not play Iowa State during the regular season.

That's a weak opponent that would typically be conference game #9. Instead, they would have played a strong opponent in the title game.

Point being that with a true round robin there is no possibility to miss the dredges of the league whereas with an uneven schedule there is.

Now that opponent in the title game could be a rematch which brings up a whole other set of issues/questions, but ultimately Oklahoma would be better off playing say TCU twice and missing Iowa State.

That could happen with a championship game. Without one it can't.

[Juice]

The point is that an SEC champ may play more good teams because of the champ game. For example, if one of the conference mates they miss in the regular season is UK and their 9th game is LSU or Alabama or Georgia they will have played a harder schedule than if that 9th game was UK.

Each conference plays 9 conference games, but due to the nature of the way that 9th game gets decided the championship leagues have a better chance of their champ coming out with a stronger record.

That won't always be the case necessarily, but it will happen fairly often as conferences stack the deck for teams predicted to be good.

Look at the Big 12 last year for example. Let's say they didn't play a round robin and because of that Oklahoma did not play Iowa State during the regular season.

That's a weak opponent that would typically be conference game #9. Instead, they would have played a strong opponent in the title game.

Point being that with a true round robin there is no possibility to miss the dredges of the league whereas with an uneven schedule there is.

Now that opponent in the title game could be a rematch which brings up a whole other set of issues/questions, but ultimately Oklahoma would be better off playing say TCU twice and missing Iowa State.

That could happen with a championship game. Without one it can't.

And what if say Oklahoma didn't play Baylor but instead played Iowa State? It goes both ways.

[xubrew]

The point is that an SEC champ may play more good teams because of the champ game. For example, if one of the conference mates they miss in the regular season is UK and their 9th game is LSU or Alabama or Georgia they will have played a harder schedule than if that 9th game was UK.

Each conference plays 9 conference games, but due to the nature of the way that 9th game gets decided the championship leagues have a better chance of their champ coming out with a stronger record.

That won't always be the case necessarily, but it will happen fairly often as conferences stack the deck for teams predicted to be good.

Look at the Big 12 last year for example. Let's say they didn't play a round robin and because of that Oklahoma did not play Iowa State during the regular season.

That's a weak opponent that would typically be conference game #9. Instead, they would have played a strong opponent in the title game.

Point being that with a true round robin there is no possibility to miss the dredges of the league whereas with an uneven schedule there is.

Now that opponent in the title game could be a rematch which brings up a whole other set of issues/questions, but ultimately Oklahoma would be better off playing say TCU twice and missing Iowa State.

That could happen with a championship game. Without one it can't.

Look at the numbers. Of the eight teams that played in power conference championship games, Oklahoma played a tougher schedule than all of them other than Alabama and Clemson. That's actually pretty typical. If you're going to use the SEC as an example, then realize you're using the SEC and the reason it's tougher for those teams has nothing to do with them having a championship game.

Oklahoma also only played six home games, whereas Alabama and Clemson both played seven. The teams in the Big Twelve play schedules that are every bit as tough (and usually tougher) as the teams who win conference championship games. Really, the only difference is that they have one less OOC game, which typically means one less easy game. Adding two more teams to the Big Twelve won't make the conference any tougher to win for the teams that are currently in it than it already is, but people will think of it as being tougher because of that "extra" championship game. If anything, splitting a conference into divisions means avoiding more good teams than it means avoiding bad teams. Take Iowa, for instance.

[GIMMFD]

Look at the numbers. Of the eight teams that played in power conference championship games, Oklahoma played a tougher schedule than all of them other than Alabama and Clemson. That's actually pretty typical. If you're going to use the SEC as an example, then realize you're using the SEC and the reason it's tougher for those teams has nothing to do with them having a championship game.

Oklahoma also only played six home games, whereas Alabama and Clemson both played seven. The teams in the Big Twelve play schedules that are every bit as tough (and usually tougher) as the teams who win conference championship games. Really, the only difference is that they have one less OOC game, which typically means one less easy game. Adding two more teams to the Big Twelve won't make the conference any tougher to win for the teams that are currently in it than it already is, but people will think of it as being tougher because of that "extra" championship game. If anything, splitting a conference into divisions means avoiding more good teams than it means avoiding bad teams. Take Iowa, for instance.

Plus the teams added for expansion (Bar Houston and maybe BYU right now) are pretty weak currently, and should chalk up more wins for the traditional powers, however that waters down the league, meaning the Big 12 won't seem "as prestigious" it's a tricky line to walk when discussing potential expansion mates.

[casualfan]

And what if say Oklahoma didn't play Baylor but instead played Iowa State? It goes both ways.

If you think the big 12 wouldn't manipulate the schedule in favor of marquee matchups then I have some oceanfront property in ames you may be interested in.

[casualfan]

Look at the numbers. Of the eight teams that played in power conference championship games, Oklahoma played a tougher schedule than all of them other than Alabama and Clemson. That's actually pretty typical. If you're going to use the SEC as an example, then realize you're using the SEC and the reason it's tougher for those teams has nothing to do with them having a championship game.

Oklahoma also only played six home games, whereas Alabama and Clemson both played seven. The teams in the Big Twelve play schedules that are every bit as tough (and usually tougher) as the teams who win conference championship games. Really, the only difference is that they have one less OOC game, which typically means one less easy game. Adding two more teams to the Big Twelve won't make the conference any tougher to win for the teams that are currently in it than it already is, but people will think of it as being tougher because of that "extra" championship game. If anything, splitting a conference into divisions means avoiding more good teams than it means avoiding bad teams. Take Iowa, for instance.

And with a conference championship the big 12 champions schedule would consistently be tougher than it already is.

That it's already very tough is not a counter to that nor is it an argument against a conference championship.

If they can make their conference champions schedule that much stronger by getting them one more really solid game the fact that their champion's schedule is already pretty strong isn't an argument against doing that.

I've already laid out a scenario but which the conference champs' schedule gets tougher with a championship and it seems like your response is "yeah, but their schedule is pretty darn tough alresdy"

Well, ok. That may be true, but it doesn't disprove the point that by manipulating the divisional crossover opponents and having a championship game their schedule would be tougher than it is already.

And that's without even mentioning that one of their toughest games, the championship, would come towards the end of the season and be fresh in the committee's mind.

[GoMuskies]

If you think the big 12 wouldn't manipulate the schedule in favor of an oklahoma baylor matchup then I have some oceanfront property in ames you may be interested in.

That works now. But Baylor sucked for 20 years. Most of the conferences are setting up schedule rotations that last for a long time.

[paulxu]

Yawn. (Alabama fans)

[xubrew]

And with a conference championship the big 12 champions schedule would consistently be tougher than it already is.

That it's already very tough is not a counter to that nor is it an argument against a conference championship.

If they can make their conference champions schedule that much stronger by getting them one more really solid game the fact that their champion's schedule is already pretty strong isn't an argument against doing that.

I've already laid out a scenario but which the conference champs' schedule gets tougher with a championship and it seems like your response is "yeah, but their schedule is pretty darn tough alresdy"

Well, ok. That may be true, but it doesn't disprove the point that by manipulating the divisional crossover opponents and having a championship game their schedule would be tougher than it is already.

And that's without even mentioning that one of their toughest games, the championship, would come towards the end of the season and be fresh in the committee's mind.

No it wouldn't!!

I don't understand why so many people cannot grasp something that's so simple. Unless Houston, or Memphis, or Cincinnati, or UConn, or whichever teams it turns out to be are national football powerhouses that are regularly in the championship game, the schedule will not become tougher. If they're playing a team in the championship game that isn't one of the two that was added to the league, then they're simply playing a team that they would have been playing during the regular season anyway. That's not tougher. That's the same.

A team's schedule isn't tougher if all they had to do was play a team in a championship game that they would have had to play anyway if there wasn't a championship game. That's so obvious that I don't see why people don't understand it. Like I said, it's a huge misnomer. If anything, having a twelve team format is EASIER because it allows for the opportunity to avoid some of the better teams, AND it gives you an additional OOC game, which will almost always be a home game against a weak team. They're not "adding" a tougher game. They're taking away a conference game from all the teams that aren't in the championship game, and replacing it with an easy OOC home game against a team that's probably not even as good as the worst team in the conference.

[paulxu]

Maybe the attraction is to clearly have a conference winner to slot into the bowl pool. Maybe not.
Just go to 4 X 16 and all this crap disappears.

[Juice]

If you think the big 12 wouldn't manipulate the schedule in favor of marquee matchups then I have some oceanfront property in ames you may be interested in.

I can see OU and Texas playing every year, and other rivalries, but why would Texas, OU, Baylor (the good teams) agree to a schedule scenario that screws them?

[Juice]

No it wouldn't!!

I don't understand why so many people cannot grasp something that's so simple. Unless Houston, or Memphis, or Cincinnati, or UConn, or whichever teams it turns out to be are national football powerhouses that are regularly in the championship game, the schedule will not become tougher. If they're playing a team in the championship game that isn't one of the two that was added to the league, then they're simply playing a team that they would have been playing during the regular season anyway. That's not tougher. That's the same.

A team's schedule isn't tougher if all they had to do was play a team in a championship game that they would have had to play anyway if there wasn't a championship game. That's so obvious that I don't see why people don't understand it. Like I said, it's a huge misnomer. If anything, having a twelve team format is EASIER because it allows for the opportunity to avoid some of the better teams, AND it gives you an additional OOC game, which will almost always be a home game against a weak team. They're not "adding" a tougher game. They're taking away a conference game from all the teams that aren't in the championship game, and replacing it with an easy OOC home game against a team that's probably not even as good as the worst team in the conference.

Yeah, it's pretty much like taking away something, then giving it back in the championship game and arguing it's different. It's the same matchup but in a different part of the season.

[xubrew]

Maybe the attraction is to clearly have a conference winner to slot into the bowl pool. Maybe not.
Just go to 4 X 16 and all this crap disappears.

Much easier said than done. Everyone is interested in their own personal and selfish agendas, and as a result nothing is done that benefits the sport as a whole. Who decides which sixteen teams are in which four conferences?? Getting all the teams to agree on that is almost impossible. Why would anyone in the SEC want to do that?? The fact that it's better for more people doesn't concern them because they seem to kinda like things the way that they are.

[GoMuskies]

The Big XII could really improve their collective strength of schedule with one simple move: agree that no one has to actually play Kansas in football.

[xubrew]

yeah, it's pretty much like taking away something, then giving it back in the championship game and arguing it's different. It's the same matchup but in a different part of the season.

thank you!!!

[THRILLHOUSE]

ESPN has obtained some Big 12 committee documents regarding expansion, no mention of UC (or UConn):

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/15502359/documents-show-big-12-flirting-houston-memphis-ucf-colorado-state-expansion

[paulxu]

Who decides which sixteen teams are in which four conferences??

I do.
Laid out in a thread like this a few years ago.
Any questions?

[casualfan]

I can see OU and Texas playing every year, and other rivalries, but why would Texas, OU, Baylor (the good teams) agree to a schedule scenario that screws them?

How does it screw them?

[Masterofreality]

ESPN has obtained some Big 12 committee documents regarding expansion, no mention of UC (or R
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/15502359/documents-show-big-12-flirting-houston-memphis-ucf-colorado-state-expansion

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA........HA!

One big problem with SucKS is that they don't have that one big corporate sponsor like FedEx that would step up and give big dollars and support. Memphis is a craphole, but it does have FedEx. I also think that markets like Denver for Colorado State and BYU would be more attractive than the institution in Clifton...that has very few attractive qualities.

Seems like the main thing Borecat supporters are banking on is that they would be the most convenient "bridge" to West Virginia. That is no way enough. Cincinnati would deliver next to zero TV ratings given the proximity of Ohio State plus their athletic funding is woefully short.

SucK it Clifton.

[X-band '01]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA........HA!

One big problem with SucKS is that they don't have that one big corporate sponsor like FedEx that would step up and give big dollars and support. Memphis is a craphole, but it does have FedEx. I also think that markets like Denver for Colorado State and BYU would be more attractive than the institution in Clifton...that has very few attractive qualities.

Seems like the main thing Borecat supporters are banking on is that they would be the most convenient "bridge" to West Virginia. That is no way enough. Cincinnati would deliver next to zero TV ratings given the proximity of Ohio State plus their athletic funding is woefully short.

SucK it Clifton.

Are you telling me Kroger wouldn't be the biggest B12 sponsor?

- YTG

[Juice]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA........HA!

One big problem with SucKS is that they don't have that one big corporate sponsor like FedEx that would step up and give big dollars and support. Memphis is a craphole, but it does have FedEx. I also think that markets like Denver for Colorado State and BYU would be more attractive than the institution in Clifton...that has very few attractive qualities.

Seems like the main thing Borecat supporters are banking on is that they would be the most convenient "bridge" to West Virginia. That is no way enough. Cincinnati would deliver next to zero TV ratings given the proximity of Ohio State plus their athletic funding is woefully short.

SucK it Clifton.

The other thing about BYU is that they're quasi-national in that they're a Mormon Notre Dame, but to a lesser degree in number of fans. They will draw the Salt Lake/Utah market big time but also the other Mormons around the country. Also, they have competed at a high level at times and their stadium holds 60,000 something people.

[GIMMFD]

Are you telling me Kroger wouldn't be the biggest B12 sponsor?

- YTG

Correct, Kroger and Macy's CEO's have already said they'd be very interested in helping UC's profile for the Big 12.

[PM Thor]

I actually love Memphis. People are great and they have the absolute best chicken restaurant in the world, bar none.

That's all I got. My bar is really low.

[Masterofreality]

Correct, Kroger and Macy's CEO's have already said they'd be very interested in helping UC's profile for the Big 12.

Well, sounds like FedEx has already placed the bar with definitive statements that they WOULD, and sponsor the Championship game. That's a lot stronger than "interested".

[xudash]

Well, sounds like FedEx has already placed the bar with definitive statements that they WOULD, and sponsor the Championship game. That's a lot stronger than "interested".

I'm guessing that Fred Smith still controls FedEx. What is certain is that Terry Lundgren does not control Macy's. He would have to answer to his shareholders for this. $500 million is a BIG commitment (CO).

[GoMuskies]

Why does P&G suck?

[paulxu]

I actually love Memphis. People are great and they have the absolute best chicken restaurant in the world, bar none.

That's all I got. My bar is really low.

Ribs and blues are good too. That's actually a pretty high bar.

[outsideobserver11]

Well, sounds like FedEx has already placed the bar with definitive statements that they WOULD, and sponsor the Championship game. That's a lot stronger than "interested".

They also made promises about the Liberty Bowl/money to get into the Big East (now American) and that worked out well.

[DoubleD86]

How does it screw them?

I can't speak for Juice, but if Texas, OU, Baylor etc all play the best teams throughout the season in an unbalanced schedule to make sure they have the best schedule, then the "lesser" teams have a better chance of winning the division and playing in the conference championship since they play an easier conference schedule.

Also, playing all of the hardest teams in your conference means a higher likelihood of more losses and less chance of making the playoffs.

[xubrew]

Perhaps you're missing the point: it is always good to be able to raise money, but it's what you do with the money once it's raised that truly matters.

Now, you can argue that the specific people that contributed that money did so because they have an acute interest in UC football becoming better, and that they otherwise may not have been inclined to contribute to the library fund, as an example. If that's how it went down and if that is behind your line of thinking, then so be it.

But, IMHO, in a world where funds are finite for everyone and every entity, using fund raising capacity to drop $80 million into a 40k seat stadium is less than swift. They were clearly gambling with this approach, and it may come back to bite them, though they'll end up with a nice little stadium.

You're right. I'm missing your point. They are raising money to spend on facilities, and are spending the money they raise on facilities. How are they gambling?? It's private funding and donations. They're not using funds from the general athletics budget, or the general university budget, or endowment money, or state money. They're using money that people are giving them to use for that specific purpose. There is no risk there. There is no gambling there. They're not spending any existing money that they can't afford to lose in the hopes that it pays off, nor are they taking the money they raised for some other purpose and spending it differently than they said they would.

I fail to see how this is a bad idea as you implied earlier.

[Juice]

I can't speak for Juice, but if Texas, OU, Baylor etc all play the best teams throughout the season in an unbalanced schedule to make sure they have the best schedule, then the "lesser" teams have a better chance of winning the division and playing in the conference championship since they play an easier conference schedule.

Also, playing all of the hardest teams in your conference means a higher likelihood of more losses and less chance of making the playoffs.

Thank you. Honestly, I stopped responding because I could see it wasn't worth my time.

[XU 87]

You're right. I'm missing your point. They are raising money to spend on facilities, and are spending the money they raise on facilities. How are they gambling?? It's private funding and donations. They're not using funds from the general athletics budget, or the general university budget, or endowment money, or state money. They're using money that people are giving them to use for that specific purpose. There is no risk there. There is no gambling there. They're not spending any existing money that they can't afford to lose in the hopes that it pays off, nor are they taking the money they raised for some other purpose and spending it differently than they said they would.

I fail to see how this is a bad idea as you implied earlier.

I would add one thing to this. If Donors A-E donate $1 million each for stadium renovation, I don't see how you realistically use that money for something else unless Donors A-E agree the money can be used for something else.

I would also think even asking someone to use a specific donation for something else opens the school up to a "bait and switch" allegation from said Donar.

[principal]

You're right. I'm missing your point. They are raising money to spend on facilities, and are spending the money they raise on facilities. How are they gambling?? It's private funding and donations. They're not using funds from the general athletics budget, or the general university budget, or endowment money, or state money. They're using money that people are giving them to use for that specific purpose. There is no risk there. There is no gambling there. They're not spending any existing money that they can't afford to lose in the hopes that it pays off, nor are they taking the money they raised for some other purpose and spending it differently than they said they would.

I fail to see how this is a bad idea as you implied earlier.

Dash is arguing that the purpose of the funds, the final cause if you will, is to gain entry into the Big 12, not to improve facilities. Improving the facilities, while in many cases an end in itself, in this case, Dash believes, is a means to another end, not the end goal in itself. This being the case, the donors/UC are taking a huge gamble, especially in light of recent news (I realize the project began before the recent news hit) - if they don't get in to the Big 12 they have improved facilities but they don't have what they want, membership in the Big 12. To counter Dash you would have to do one of two things, argue he has not proven his case that the purpose of the donations is to gain entry to the Big 12, or prove that the purpose of the funds is to improve facilities. I tend to side with Dash as it is my understanding the sales pitch has been "we want to improve the facilities so we can get into the Big 12".

Principal

[xubrew]

I can't speak for Juice, but if Texas, OU, Baylor etc all play the best teams throughout the season in an unbalanced schedule to make sure they have the best schedule, then the "lesser" teams have a better chance of winning the division and playing in the conference championship since they play an easier conference schedule.

Also, playing all of the hardest teams in your conference means a higher likelihood of more losses and less chance of making the playoffs.

Exactly. And, here's the obvious fact that so many people fail to realize. When you're playing all of the teams in your conference as the Big Twelve currently does, then you're playing all the hard teams. If you go to divisions, then you're not necessarily playing all of the hard teams. The championship game is also not an extra game that's harder. It's simply a game against a team you would have played anyway if the league had a single division format.

I'm not picking on casualfan specifically. This is a widely shared misnomer among tons of people who think a championship game makes the schedule harder. It doesn't. Adding Houston and Cincinnati and playing one less regular season conference game won't make the Big Twelve a tougher conference to win. Juice summed it up better than I did....


it's pretty much like taking away something, then giving it back in the championship game and arguing it's different. It's the same matchup but in a different part of the season

[xubrew]

Dash is arguing that the purpose of the funds, the final cause if you will, is to gain entry into the Big 12, not to improve facilities. Improving the facilities, while in many cases an end in itself, in this case, Dash believes, is a means to another end, not the end goal in itself. This being the case, the donors/UC are taking a huge gamble, especially in light of recent news (I realize the project began before the recent news hit) - if they don't get in to the Big 12 they have improved facilities but they don't have what they want, membership in the Big 12. To counter Dash you would have to do one of two things, argue he has not proven his case that the purpose of the donations is to gain entry to the Big 12, or prove that the purpose of the funds is to improve facilities. I tend to side with Dash as it is my understanding the sales pitch has been "we want to improve the facilities so we can get into the Big 12".

Principal

Okay, I guess I see that point. But, I also think that UC realized their facilities needed upgrading, and decided to raise the money for it through private donations rather than stretching their already stretched budget even more. I don't see how that's a stupid idea. If they fail to get into the Big Twelve, then it's probably better to have $80 million to spend on facilities upgrades and not be in the Big Twelve than to not have $80 million to spend on facilities and not be in the Big Twelve.

Throughout this entire process a handful of people have been insinuating that UC is stupid for wanting to raise money to improve their facilities, and that the BOT would never approve it, and that it's basically ridiculous and impossible for them to do what they're trying to do. I just don't understand why. Their facilities are piss poor, and whether they get into the B12 or not they need to improve them. I say good for them for raising the money through private donations instead of begging the state for it or dipping into the university's general fund at the expense of everyone else. It's as if they looked at what Rutgers did, and decided to do the opposite, and as a result they're much better off for it.

[principal]

Okay, I guess I see that point. But, I also think that UC realized their facilities needed upgrading, and decided to raise the money for it through private donations rather than stretching their already stretched budget even more. I don't see how that's a stupid idea. If they fail to get into the Big Twelve, then it's probably better to have $80 million to spend on facilities upgrades and not be in the Big Twelve than to not have $80 million to spend on facilities and not be in the Big Twelve.

Throughout this entire process a handful of people have been insinuating that UC is stupid for wanting to raise money to improve their facilities, and that the BOT would never approve it, and that it's basically ridiculous and impossible for them to do what they're trying to do. I just don't understand why. Their facilities are piss poor, and whether they get into the B12 or not they need to improve them. I say good for them for raising the money through private donations instead of begging the state for it or dipping into the university's general fund at the expense of everyone else. It's as if they looked at what Rutgers did, and decided to do the opposite, and as a result they're much better off for it.

I see where you are coming from and I agree that UC needs the renovations whether or not they get into the Big 12. I don't know how multi-millionaire donors think, but if I were donating millions for the hope of getting into the Big 12 and membership does not occur, I would be pretty unhappy. Looking at the recent news it appears UC isn't even under consideration. One has to ask - is UC under the impression they are under consideration when they are not, or have they known all along? If the former, how could their perception of their candidacy be so different from reality? And if the latter, well, they better hope it never gets out if that is what they were selling to their donors. The real risk seems to be upsetting your major financial contributors. If they have been misled, knowingly or unknowingly, it may be difficult to get them to write a check the next time around. If you donated a million dollars six months ago and are now finding out UC isn't even in the running, how happy are you?

But in relation to the facilities, I agree, an upgrade will benefit the program with or without Big 12 membership. Hopefully that wasn't used as a pretense for raising money.

Principal

[drudy23]

I seriously doubt UC was "baiting and switching" donors to give money under a false Big 12 pretense. As much as I despise UC, they aren't doing that.

[JTG]

Why in the Hell didn't Mack sign someone this Spring, so that meaningless threads like this would have come to a quick end after a handful of posts.

[GoMuskies]

And why can't threads have something that describes their contents before you click on them so that one might know whether or not the subject of the thread will be of interest?!?

[XU 87]

I seriously doubt UC was "baiting and switching" donors to give money under a false Big 12 pretense. As much as I despise UC, they aren't doing that.

If you are referring to my post, that's not what I was saying. I was just saying UC could get accused of "bait and switch" if they went back to donors and said, "I know you donated the money specifically for athletic facilities, but we want to use it for something else. Is that ok with you?"

[nuts4xu]

And why can't threads have something that describes their contents before you click on them so that one might know whether or not the subject of the thread will be of interest?!?

http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/10/10087250b12adf60b850c4c049e2447e56dc1bb3efe203cf69 ab5ecef6336652.jpg

[drudy23]

Part of me wants them to get in because it elevates the rivalry, and part of me wants them to be ignored because it's really funny.

[GIMMFD]

http://www.cincinnativseveryone.com/columbus-doesnt-want-cincinnati-in-the-big-12/

I lost a few brain cells reading this article, but I think they bring up an interesting conversation point. I'm sure Ohio State doesn't really care if Cincinnati joins the Big 12 or not, cool they get Power 5 status, but I don't think they'd steal many recruits away from OSU. Big 12 style is a lot different than Big 10 style, and guys in Ohio grew up watching the Big 10 (from what I understand). However, I wonder if it could potential affect anything in the area, Cinci is close to some good recruiting areas, would a Big 12 jump change that?


The most delirious comment is saying that Cincinnati in the Big 12 would be a better basketball program than X. Dear god Bearkittens can be so delusional sometimes. Well next to them thinking that Texas is dead and that they won't return to former glory. That might have been the stupidest comment actually.

[Juice]

http://www.cincinnativseveryone.com/columbus-doesnt-want-cincinnati-in-the-big-12/

I lost a few brain cells reading this article, but I think they bring up an interesting conversation point. I'm sure Ohio State doesn't really care if Cincinnati joins the Big 12 or not, cool they get Power 5 status, but I don't think they'd steal many recruits away from OSU. Big 12 style is a lot different than Big 10 style, and guys in Ohio grew up watching the Big 10 (from what I understand). However, I wonder if it could potential affect anything in the area, Cinci is close to some good recruiting areas, would a Big 12 jump change that?


The most delirious comment is saying that Cincinnati in the Big 12 would be a better basketball program than X. Dear god Bearkittens can be so delusional sometimes. Well next to them thinking that Texas is dead and that they won't return to former glory. That might have been the stupidest comment actually.

Ohio State with Urban is recruiting on a whole different level. And I mean that compared to past coaches at OSU, not UC, because any comparison is laughable.

My concern with UC joining the Big 12 is in basketball. Right now X has better facilities, better success, and what I find most important, a better conference. If UC gets in the Big 12 it levels it a bit. I think X still has more factors in it's favor, but suddenly UC is in arguably the best basketball conference in the country (some may say the ACC but the Big 12 has an argument).

[Juice]

http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/behind-the-hype-oklahoma-president-calms-down-big-12-expansion-talk

[GIMMFD]

http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/behind-the-hype-oklahoma-president-calms-down-big-12-expansion-talk

If Boren says it has to be reached by consensus and 8-2 won't matter, I don't see it happening, I also don't see Texas giving up LHN as I said before and giving up $15 million. Right now Fox Sports has the Big 12 football contract, and Big East basketball contract, I couldn't see why they would want to flow more money in if UC or UCONN joined, considering they have these regions covered when Big East basketball games are on (which is only a month or two after football season starts), I don't know. I just can't see them trying to dish out even more money for conference members that would be a complete gamble on.

[MuskieCinci]

I'm thinking of this purely from a Xavier standpoint, because I don't really care about the Big 12, UC, or the actual logistics. In the short term it is funny watching UC scramble and fail, so I like that. It is probably better long term though for them to be in a major conference as well so that it elevates the rivalry and remains a consistent nationally relevant game. Although like others have speculated, 10 years from now the Big 12 might not even exist in a capacity that resembles the current Big 12.

Totally off topic but how good could the Mountain West have been if they were more proactive about 10 years ago? They had TCU, Utah, and BYU who are all consistently good. I don't know why they didn't add Boise State as soon as possible, but that would have brought them to 10 teams and that conference would have been at least as good as the Big East and ACC of the time. Maybe adding a couple other decent schools like Houston and Fresno State to shore up California and Texas a bit more for recruiting and to get a championship game if they wanted it. I think that could have really separated them from all the other non BCS conferences at the time and maybe forced the BCS to include their conference.

[drudy23]

I'll never understand how people have the logic that UC getting in a great situation hurts us. XU/UC is already great...has the potential to be DUKE/UNC....how is that bad thing?

It's the old "it hurts recruiting" logic. Stupid.

[Juice]

I'll never understand how people have the logic that UC getting in a great situation hurts us. XU/UC is already great...has the potential to be DUKE/UNC....how is that bad thing?

It's the old "it hurts recruiting" logic. Stupid.

Ok. Then why doesn't X let UD into the Big East?

[GoMuskies]

Ok. Then why doesn't X let UD into the Big East?

Why would X want UD in the Big East?!? UD blows. At least UC is a respectable rival (competitively).

[sirthought]

Yeah — Dayton is a completely different region. Having UC in a better conference helps the city Xavier is in all around, not just in sports.

Dayton adds nothing to the Big East mix, not to mention the Big East doesn't really need anything right now.
Big 12 does need something and UC would provide more positives than most of the schools being considered. I think it would be a shame if they get shut out again.

[Juice]

Yeah — Dayton is a completely different region. Having UC in a better conference helps the city Xavier is in all around, not just in sports.

Dayton adds nothing to the Big East mix, not to mention the Big East doesn't really need anything right now.
Big 12 does need something and UC would provide more positives than most of the schools being considered. I think it would be a shame if they get shut out again.

I would love to hear this argument. Remember that this city/county paid for two huge stadiums that were supposed to spur economic development.

[sirthought]

I don't want them to build anything new. I want them to draw fans, give business to restaurants, gas stations, hotels...all the things that come when a fan base is engaged.

It's not hard to figure out. And for all the bitching we do about the downtown stadiums (I think we got hosed on both) when those teams are playing in town, business and tourism is benefitted greatly.

[Kahns Krazy]

I would love to hear this argument. Remember that this city/county paid for two huge stadiums that were supposed to spur economic development.

I sure wish that had been successful. The 2,000 jobs GE is putting there, along with 600 apartments, more than a half dozen bars, restaurants, retail stores, a world class riverfront park, a hotel under construction, a hosted all star game and phase III underway sure has been disappointing so far.

[X-band '01]

I would love to hear this argument. Remember that this city/county paid for two huge stadiums that were supposed to spur economic development.

It's not so much to spur development as it is to maintain such development. When I think of "spurring" development, I think of places like Indianapolis in the mid-80s when they made a push to help the Colts move from Baltimore to Indianapolis. (Of course, the final straw there was the state of Maryland trying to seize the Colts by eminent domain; the rest is history)

[Juice]

I sure wish that had been successful. The 2,000 jobs GE is putting there, along with 600 apartments, more than a half dozen bars, restaurants, retail stores, a world class riverfront park, a hotel under construction, a hosted all star game and phase III underway sure has been disappointing so far.

http://www.businessinsider.com/worst-stadium-deal-cincinnati-2011-7

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704461304576216330349497852

https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/the-stupid-sports-stadium-clause-thats-screwing-you-over
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/01/18/the-staggering-taxpayer-costs-of-paul-brown-stadium/
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/nfl/bengals/2015/07/13/johnoliver-lasstweektonight-hbo-bengals/30083053/

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-12-18/cincinnati-stadiums-bury-county-government-in-debt

http://www.wcpo.com/news/insider/county-has-spent-920m-in-deal-to-build-stadium-keep-nfl-team-in-town-since-2000

[Juice]

It's not so much to spur development as it is to maintain such development. When I think of "spurring" development, I think of places like Indianapolis in the mid-80s when they made a push to help the Colts move from Baltimore to Indianapolis. (Of course, the final straw there was the state of Maryland trying to seize the Colts by eminent domain; the rest is history)

We are talking about a college joining a different conference. How the hell does that do shit?

[GoMuskies]

We are talking about a college joining a different conference. How the hell does that do shit?

I would say the city of Louisville is much better off for having Louisville in the ACC.

[Juice]

I would say the city of Louisville is much better off for having Louisville in the ACC.

You have no proof of this. Why couldn't Louisville experience the same growth, development, or whatever without being in the ACC?

If study after study has shown that stadium deals do nothing and in fact hurt local governments, why would you suddenly think that a college being in a different conference would be successful?

[xubrew]

As far as Xavier is concerned, I really don't think it matters either way. A common theme throughout realignment is that so many schools seem to think the status of other schools in their region have a huge impact on their own status and they spend all this time worrying about it. In reality, I haven't seen any evidence of that being the case.

Richmond has not really had their status impacted, positively or negatively, by VCU.

Same with West Virginia and Pitt.

Same with BYU and Utah.

You could make an argument that Texas A&M is better off now without Texas, but you could also make the same argument that Texas ISN'T better off, and that the reasons one is better and one is worse have absolutely nothing to do with them not being together anymore.

I mean, it's kind of absurd to think that either Duke and UNC would be better off if they were in different leagues. Or Stanford and Call. Or UCLA and USC. Or Michigan and Michigan State. Or Indiana and Purdue. Or any number of teams. I mean, really. Who's really better off or worse off because they're in the same conference as another team from their region, or because a team from their region got themselves into a good situation?? I can't think of a single example.

If UC gets into the Big Twelve, I don't think it really effects us. And, if UC doesn't get into the Big Twelve, then I don't think it really effects us.

[XUFan09]

I don't feel strongly about this, but one way it would affect Xavier is on the recruiting front. If Cincinnati gets perceived as a member of a mid-major conference, top-level players will be less inclined to go there. That recruiting advantage for Xavier is lost if Cincinnati makes it into the Big 12.

It's not a big deal, as it's rare for both schools to seriously be pursuing the same players, but there's already a lot of competition in Xavier's region so a little less doesn't hurt.

[xubrew]

I don't feel strongly about this, but one way it would affect Xavier is on the recruiting front. If Cincinnati gets perceived as a member of a mid-major conference, top-level players will be less inclined to go there. That recruiting advantage for Xavier is lost if Cincinnati makes it into the Big 12.

It's not a big deal, as it's rare for both schools to seriously be pursuing the same players, but there's already a lot of competition in Xavier's region so a little less doesn't hurt.

How many of the same players do we recruit though??

And, the other side to that is that having a big conference rival in the same city may attract recruits, which offsets whatever recruits we would have lost to them.

[MauriceX]

If UC gets into the Big Twelve, I don't think it really effects us. And, if UC doesn't get into the Big Twelve, then I don't think it really effects us.

Excellent post Brew. With your theme of it not mattering, I can only think of two insignificant ways I could see UC's conference affiliation affecting Xavier.

1) It's nice to have OOC opponents from big name conferences. In a perfect world, teams would all be judged by their individual merits, but in the real world, beating a Big 12 opponent would probably hold more weight with people than beating an AAC opponent. This is probably a rather small impact.

2) I'm just guessing, but I would think that UC would lose more games in the Big 12 than they do in the AAC. That would have a small negative impact on our RPI.

[GIMMFD]

Excellent post Brew. With your theme of it not mattering, I can only think of two insignificant ways I could see UC's conference affiliation affecting Xavier.

1) It's nice to have OOC opponents from big name conferences. In a perfect world, teams would all be judged by their individual merits, but in the real world, beating a Big 12 opponent would probably hold more weight with people than beating an AAC opponent. This is probably a rather small impact.

2) I'm just guessing, but I would think that UC would lose more games in the Big 12 than they do in the AAC. That would have a small negative impact on our RPI.

But to counter 2, shouldn't a move to the Big 12 bring in better talent, and possibly help them become better? I know Big 12 basketball is one of the best in the country, but I don't see stability in the good teams there except for Kansas. Like Baylor seems hit or miss to me, same with Iowa State, I don't see them continuing to be great at basketball, but I could also be very wrong, I have zero statistics or anything to back that claim, just an assumption.

[Nigel Tufnel]

That recruiting advantage for Xavier is lost if Cincinnati makes it into the Big 12..

Maybe, but not as much as it probably should...presuming it happens. The thought of playing for Cronin in the mind of most 18 year olds probably evens the playing field in terms of recruiting. I kid...I think.

[Juice]

Here's why the Big 12 needs to add Houston. 60% of the top rated games in the city of Houston were SEC games. Add Houston and you change that.

https://twitter.com/jason_cook/status/735091315709476864

[xubrew]

Here's why the Big 12 needs to add Houston. 60% of the top rated games in the city of Houston were SEC games. Add Houston and you change that.

https://twitter.com/jason_cook/status/735091315709476864

Yeah, Houston v Texas would certainly crack the list of top rated games in Houston.

I'm a firm believer that schools who hate each other should be forced to play each other. One of the many reasons is that it will inevitably crack the list of top rated games in those markets.

[GoMuskies]

I don't think Houston and Texas hate each other. Houston probably hates Texas, but I doubt Texas even notices Houston.

[paulxu]

I'm a firm believer that schools who hate each other should be forced to play each other.


I don't think Houston and Texas hate each other. Houston probably hates Texas, but I doubt Texas even notices Houston.

This sounds eerily like our friends up the road. They really were butt hurt we wouldn't schedule them...then they played us.

[xubrew]

I don't think Houston and Texas hate each other. Houston probably hates Texas, but I doubt Texas even notices Houston.

I think Texas notices them because it seems like they want to point out how they don't notice them far more often than they'd be pointing that out if they genuinely didn't notice them. Besides, it's kind of hard not to notice them when the Board of Regents is pushing for them to get into the Big Twelve.


This sounds eerily like our friends up the road. They really were butt hurt we wouldn't schedule them...then they played us.

Oh, so you noticed them??

Yunno, since joining the Big East we've played 10 OOC games against NCAA Tournament teams. Four of those (two being Tennessee in the same year) were against teams that ended up in the First Four, so they barely got in. Another one was against Stephen F Austin two years ago who wouldn't have gotten in without the automatic bid. Three more were against UC, another one was against USC this past year, and the other was against Dayton.

Of those ten, the two games that by far ended up helping us out the most were the two games that virtually everyone wanted to play the least. The win against UC at US Bank Arena was one of them. Had that game been at Cintas instead of US Bank, we probably don't get nearly as much credit for winning it (especially with that year's committee) and we probably end up missing the field since we barely got into the First Four as it was.

Dayton, who earned a #7 seed last year, was the other game that no one wanted to play, yet it's our second biggest OOC win, and the second best OOC team we've played, since joining the Big East.

So, yeah, playing the games you hate can really end up paying off. We don't need to play those games. But, saying you don't need something is one thing. Saying there is no benefit is another thing. There has been a clear benefit to playing those games.

[X-band '01]

Here's why the Big 12 needs to add Houston. 60% of the top rated games in the city of Houston were SEC games. Add Houston and you change that.

https://twitter.com/jason_cook/status/735091315709476864

I wondered why Houston-Florida State wasn't on the list, but then read that they were games in the regular season (2015). Without the Peach Bowl, the only Houston games that cracked the list were Navy (regular season) and Temple (American championship game). They would definitely benefit from playing the old SWC and the Oklahomas.

[X-man]

I think Texas notices them because it seems like they want to point out how they don't notice them far more often than they'd be pointing that out if they genuinely didn't notice them. Besides, it's kind of hard not to notice them when the Board of Regents is pushing for them to get into the Big Twelve.



Oh, so you noticed them??

Yunno, since joining the Big East we've played 10 OOC games against NCAA Tournament teams. Four of those (two being Tennessee in the same year) were against teams that ended up in the First Four, so they barely got in. Another one was against Stephen F Austin two years ago who wouldn't have gotten in without the automatic bid. Three more were against UC, another one was against USC this past year, and the other was against Dayton.

Of those ten, the two games that by far ended up helping us out the most were the two games that virtually everyone wanted to play the least. The win against UC at US Bank Arena was one of them. Had that game been at Cintas instead of US Bank, we probably don't get nearly as much credit for winning it (especially with that year's committee) and we probably end up missing the field since we barely got into the First Four as it was.

Dayton, who earned a #7 seed last year, was the other game that no one wanted to play, yet it's our second biggest OOC win, and the second best OOC team we've played, since joining the Big East.

So, yeah, playing the games you hate can really end up paying off. We don't need to play those games. But, saying you don't need something is one thing. Saying there is no benefit is another thing. There has been a clear benefit to playing those games.

Not the cryers. Not this season, not ever. Whatever "benefit" isn't worth the cost of putting up with their lame sweater-vested fans.

[paulxu]

Oh, so you noticed them??

Of those ten, the two games that by far ended up helping us out the most were the two games that virtually everyone wanted to play the least. The win against UC at US Bank Arena was one of them.

I can hear them bitching and moaning all the way down here in South Carolina.

As for the pussycats? Any time, any where.

[xubrew]

So, what are the rumors that everyone is hearing??

The B12 Spring Meeting is going on right now, and apparently they're discussing the possibility of adding as many as four teams. Well, that's the rumor anyway.

[BMoreX]

I thought they decided to table expansion discussion until 2017?

[xubrew]

I thought they decided to table expansion discussion until 2017?

I thought their plan all along was to discuss it at the league's spring meeting. Either way, that's exactly what they're discussing today and tomorrow. If they go all the way out to fourteen teams, I can't imagine UC not being one of them.

[xudash]

So, what are the rumors that everyone is hearing??

The B12 Spring Meeting is going on right now, and apparently they're discussing the possibility of adding as many as four teams. Well, that's the rumor anyway.

Screw the rumors: http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/big-12-could-earn-an-additional-1-billion-by-expanding/

Before you dive into the entire article, I have a three word'ish phrase for anyone wondering if expansion will happen or not: "Hook 'em Horns."

Don't count on it.

[xubrew]

Okay, without knowing all of the specifics, the Big Twelve TV deal is apparently screwy.

If the conference expands, the amount of money that the league gets will increase to the point to where each team gets more.

So, whereas if the Big East would go from ten to twelve, the ten teams would get the same amount as they were getting before, and the total number would increase only to the point to where the two new teams also got the same amount. So, as far as the ten current Big East teams are concerned, there is no financial incentive to expand (THANK GOD!!).

In the case of the Big Twelve, the amount of overall money will increase to the point to where it actually increases the dollar amount per school. I'm not sure why, but that's apparently how the contract works. The ten current schools could each could earn close to $5 million more per year by going out to 14. So, therefore, they're seriously discussing going out to fourteen.

[xubrew]

Screw the rumors: http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/big-12-could-earn-an-additional-1-billion-by-expanding/

Before you dive into the entire article, I have a three word'ish phrase for anyone wondering if expansion will happen or not: "Hook 'em Horns."

Don't count on it.


Texas is interesting. They will be against it, but they may be compelled by the Board of Regents to vote for it anyway. But, to your point, as I understand it the vote has to be unanimous, so in theory Texas could stop it if they wanted to.

[xudash]

Okay, without knowing all of the specifics, the Big Twelve TV deal is apparently screwy.

If the conference expands, the amount of money that the league gets will increase to the point to where each team gets more.

So, whereas if the Big East would go from ten to twelve, the ten teams would get the same amount as they were getting before, and the total number would increase only to the point to where the two new teams also got the same amount. So, as far as the ten current Big East teams are concerned, there is no financial incentive to expand (THANK GOD!!).

In the case of the Big Twelve, the amount of overall money will increase to the point to where it actually increases the dollar amount per school. I'm not sure why, but that's apparently how the contract works. The ten current schools could each could earn close to $5 million more per year by going out to 14. So, therefore, they're seriously discussing going out to fourteen.

That article isn't clear on what has to happen, if anything, to the Longhorn Network. It sounds like something has to happen to it for Texas to be so adamantly opposed to expansion. That puppy throws off $15 million per year to UT, so, as Boren has already freely admitted, Texas isn't going to do anything that jeopardizes that revenue stream. And, in fact, they view the benefit of that network JV as being above and beyond its dollar contribution; they also value its marketing and exposure benefits for the institution.

[xubrew]

That article isn't clear on what has to happen, if anything, to the Longhorn Network. It sounds like something has to happen to it for Texas to be so adamantly opposed to expansion. That puppy throws off $15 million per year to UT, so, as Boren has already freely admitted, Texas isn't going to do anything that jeopardizes that revenue stream. And, in fact, they view the benefit of that network JV as being above and beyond its dollar contribution; they also value its marketing and exposure benefits for the institution.

The short answer is that Texas has to be made to feel expansion is worth their while, or be forced to vote for expansion by the Texas Board of Regents even if they feel it is not worth their while.

The more detailed answer is that the deal with the LHN is good through 2031. It's carried all throughout the state of Texas, and Texas gets 29 cents per customer. In other words, virtually anyone in Texas who has cable or satellite is paying 29 cents per month to Texas. Outside the state of Texas, they get two cents per subscriber. So, not a whole lot.

If there is a Big Twelve Network as it has been proposed, then I would imagine that the money that Texas gets from it (along with the new TV deal) would have to at least equal what they're getting from the LHN, and continue to equal it through 2031. So, if they say to Texas if you fold up the LHN, we'll give you the same rates you're getting with that with the new B12 network, then they may go for it.

The question is whether or not it makes financial sense to everyone else to do that. I don't know, and although I'm curious, I'm not going to take the time to tabulate the whole thing up. Is the increase they're giong to get from going out to 14 teams enough to cover what Texas is getting off the LHN, and still result in an increase for everyone else.

[xubrew]

More news from the Big Twelve Spring Meetings....

The conference was discussing the possibility of adding Wichita State if the school were to go through with the decision to add football. The league felt that having a second football team in Kansas in a relatively decent sized market would be an asset for the league.

Several hours later, it was discovered that the state of Kansas already has two Big Twelve football teams. Everyone just kind of forgot about the Jayhawks. So, it's unlikely that Wichita is still a candidate.

[GoMuskies]

Everyone just kind of forgot about the Jayhawks.


I don't think anyone forgot....

[X-band '01]

More news from the Big Twelve Spring Meetings....

The conference was discussing the possibility of adding Wichita State if the school were to go through with the decision to add football. The league felt that having a second football team in Kansas in a relatively decent sized market would be an asset for the league.

Several hours later, it was discovered that the state of Kansas already has two Big Twelve football teams. Everyone just kind of forgot about the Jayhawks. So, it's unlikely that Wichita is still a candidate.

On the other hand, the Wichita market would not be the same as the KC market where Kansas and Kansas State have much closer proximity.

[LA Muskie]

Texas is interesting. They will be against it, but they may be compelled by the Board of Regents to vote for it anyway. But, to your point, as I understand it the vote has to be unanimous, so in theory Texas could stop it if they wanted to.
I don't think unanimity is required. The article says "supermajority" and included a quote saying that Texas would go along with expansion if the vote were 9-1 in favor.

[LA Muskie]

Okay, without knowing all of the specifics, the Big Twelve TV deal is apparently screwy.

If the conference expands, the amount of money that the league gets will increase to the point to where each team gets more.

So, whereas if the Big East would go from ten to twelve, the ten teams would get the same amount as they were getting before, and the total number would increase only to the point to where the two new teams also got the same amount. So, as far as the ten current Big East teams are concerned, there is no financial incentive to expand (THANK GOD!!).

In the case of the Big Twelve, the amount of overall money will increase to the point to where it actually increases the dollar amount per school. I'm not sure why, but that's apparently how the contract works. The ten current schools could each could earn close to $5 million more per year by going out to 14. So, therefore, they're seriously discussing going out to fourteen.

That's not the way I read the article. I read it to mean that if schools are added, they must be on par with the original 10 -- i.e., the conference could not condition entry on a lower rights payment. The networks will agree to pay new schools the same $23mm/yr that the original 10 get. The article implies that the current 10 wouldn't be entitled to anything extra, but that they could use expansion to leverage an even better deal. That doesn't make a ton of sense to me, given that the value of media rights has dropped precipitously since expansion.

[GIMMFD]

More news from the Big Twelve Spring Meetings....

The conference was discussing the possibility of adding Wichita State if the school were to go through with the decision to add football. The league felt that having a second football team in Kansas in a relatively decent sized market would be an asset for the league.

Several hours later, it was discovered that the state of Kansas already has two Big Twelve football teams. Everyone just kind of forgot about the Jayhawks. So, it's unlikely that Wichita is still a candidate.

I think I cried laughing, I don't see them adding Wichita because, why would they add 3 schools from Kansas? However, that Wichita/Kansas series yearly would be an absolute joy to watch, especially if Greg Marshall stays around.

[xubrew]

That's not the way I read the article. I read it to mean that if schools are added, they must be on par with the original 10 -- i.e., the conference could not condition entry on a lower rights payment. The networks will agree to pay new schools the same $23mm/yr that the original 10 get. The article implies that the current 10 wouldn't be entitled to anything extra, but that they could use expansion to leverage an even better deal. That doesn't make a ton of sense to me, given that the value of media rights has dropped precipitously since expansion.

I didn't read the article when I posted that, and to be honest I still haven't. And having said that, in choosing between what I said and what the article said, the article is undoubtedly more accurate.

[THRILLHOUSE]

Big 12 announced they are adding a championship game in 2017. Will make decision about expansion by end of summer.

[GIMMFD]

Really sorry to beat a dead horse here guys, but how much does it hurt UC's chances of getting into expansion with Ono gone?? He was the one making all the meetings with the Big 12 heads at other schools, can't say it's going to get any better for UC now.

[Masterofreality]

Really sorry to beat a dead horse here guys, but how much does it hurt UC's chances of getting into expansion with Ono gone?? He was the one making all the meetings with the Big 12 heads at other schools, can't say it's going to get any better for UC now.

It can't help. Just feeds the impression of a school that can't keep its act together.

When you're only hope is that you are the best positioned geographically to be a bridge to West Virginia, you ain't got nuthin'.

[xubrew]

Really sorry to beat a dead horse here guys, but how much does it hurt UC's chances of getting into expansion with Ono gone?? He was the one making all the meetings with the Big 12 heads at other schools, can't say it's going to get any better for UC now.

In this case, I don't think it matters too much. They're not really looking at who the presidents of the universities are. Some are trying to decide how to make the most money, and others are trying to decide if it makes sense to expand if it means giving up some of the control and money that they currently have.

[muskienick]

Really sorry to beat a dead horse here guys, but how much does it hurt UC's chances of getting into expansion with Ono gone?? He was the one making all the meetings with the Big 12 heads at other schools, can't say it's going to get any better for UC now.

I don't think it makes much of a difference either especially considering the final results of the recent Big 12 meetings. They pretty much laid out the conclusion that it was both monetarily unwise to expand at this time and also that there were no current candidates out there that would "move the needle" in a positive manner.

[xudash]

I don't think it makes much of a difference either especially considering the final results of the recent Big 12 meetings. They pretty much laid out the conclusion that it was both monetarily unwise to expand at this time and also that there were no current candidates out there that would "move the needle" in a positive manner.

Agree with you nick.

If anything, the Big XII Presidents are relieved with this news. Ono is a good guy. He's done great things for UC and he's been a great ambassador for the City of Cincinnati.

I believe the Presidents are relieved because they no longer will have to smile at him during his promo visits, knowing they have no intention of bringing UC into the fold.

[Cheesehead]

Texas doesn't want UC in the BIG12 and that is all there is to it. As Texas goes, the rest of the Big 12 follows.

[paulxu]

By God I'm happy we're in the Big East.

[SM#24]

http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/oklahoma-ad-says-big-12-expansion-is-dead-for-the-time-being/

[xubrew]

They added a championship game, but didn't expand. You know who that really sucks for? The first place team who will have already played everyone in the conference. Now they have to play TEN conference games. I think a ten team league that plays a true round robin AND has a championship game will make it much harder, rather than easier, to reach the four team playoff.

[Masterofreality]

Texas doesn't want UC in the BIG12 and that is all there is to it. As Texas goes, the rest of the Big 12 follows.

I would guess that the fact that the most visible SucKS advocate- Santa Clause Ono couldn't stick around long enough to see if he could help get them on the league. Now that he took off, who the hell would the league be dealing with?

The Borecats are DEAD.

[xudash]

I would guess that the fact that the most visible SucKS advocate- Santa Clause Ono couldn't stick around long enough to see if he could help get them on the league. Now that he took off, who the hell would the league be dealing with?

The Borecats are DEAD.

For me, the question with all this, at least recently, was whether I would prefer to have Xavier going up against a stronger UC, with them as part of a Power 5 Conference, or whether I would have preferred the current dynamic of Xavier being in the "better" conference. That goes into quotes given the apples/oranges reality of football v. no football, etc.

Would it have been better for UC? For the City of Cincinnati by extension? Would our annual Shootout with them have been elevated to a higher level? Would any or all of that have happened had they been called up to the Big 12, and what would that have meant over the long-term to us?

It doesn't appear as though we'll get to find any of that out.

Like MOR, I'm perfectly fine with that, because I want to now stand on top of their heads for the next few decades or so. The bottom line most likely is that UC will remain fine as an institution for what it provides and what it does, and it's big enough and has enough history to continue to field more than adequate basketball teams under a truly midget-minded coach.

So, again, yes, I'm beyond fine with this pending direction the Big 12 is taking, and without feeling much empathy for our friends in Clifton.

We are not all Bearcatty in Cincinnati.

[THRILLHOUSE]

@GeorgeSchroeder
After meeting today, Big 12 presidents likely to announce tabling of expansion consideration, at least for the near-term (several years).

[xubrew]

The Big Twelve is a trip. They say they're going to discuss expansion, then after the discussion they say that it's dead, but that they'll discuss it again after they discuss tabling it.

What else would you expect from a group that approved a championship game without expansion?? Nothing they do matches or makes any sense.

The next order of business is that they will announce that they are, in fact, expanding out to twelve teams, but after doing so will also the name of the conference back to the Big Eight and getting rid of the championship game.

[casualfan]

The rumors coming out of the meetings were false. They actually more or less just confirmed they are going to expand this afternoon publicly after the meetings.

[xubrew]

The rumors coming out of the meetings were false. They actually more or less just confirmed they are going to expand this afternoon publicly after the meetings.

....and tomorrow, they'll say they aren't expanding, and a few hours later they'll say that they're still considering it but are tabling it.

[casualfan]

....and tomorrow, they'll say they aren't expanding, and a few hours later they'll say that they're still considering it but are tabling it.

I would typically agree, but they made some really strong statements this afternoon. They're expanding. The question is who.

[justinhub2003]

I would typically agree, but they made some really strong statements this afternoon. They're expanding. The question is who.
UC has a very strong case.

Travel partner for WVU, Strong football and basketball program, Newly renovated stadium, upcoming renovations to arena and the ability to host Tex or Oklahoma games at Paul Brown Stadium.

Also it puts the big 12 in Ohio. I think UC is the best candidate on paper. BYU is really good as well but they refuse to play on Sunday which is a scheduling nightmare for non football/basketball sports. Memphis and the two Florida schools have a shot as well (UCF/USF) but UC is the closest to WV that has a good football and basketball program.

[GoMuskies]

If BYU was exactly the same but wasn't Mormon (which would make it impossible for them to be what they are in the first place, but never mind that), they'd be a slam dunk.

If you were serious about having the best possible football conference, Boise would be a no brainer.

As is, if they really grab two more teams, I'd guess UC and South Florida.

[THRILLHOUSE]

I leave work, and B12 Expansion is off. I get home and it's back on. Geez, just make up your mind B12.

Guessing the candidates will be (in no particular order): UC, UConn, BYU, Colorado State, Houston, Memphis, Boise, South Florida and Central Florida.

Could make a good case for and against all of them, but would be pretty surprised if UC isn't in their Top 2 choices.

[casualfan]

If BYU was exactly the same but wasn't Mormon (which would make it impossible for them to be what they are in the first place, but never mind that), they'd be a slam dunk.

If you were serious about having the best possible football conference, Boise would be a no brainer.

As is, if they really grab two more teams, I'd guess UC and South Florida.

If BYU was the same and not mormon they wouldn't be up for expansion, they'd already be in a conference.

They'd have to be nuts to even consider Boise. Mediocre basketball and their academics and endowment are not good.

I think they'll go to 4 and take UC UCF Memphis and UCONN.

[xubrew]

BYU is further away from the closest Big Twelve school than West Virginia is. I fail to see what is so appealing about them. Furthermore, I haven't seen any real indication from BYU that they even want to be in the Big Twelve. Everyone keeps bringing them up as a candidate and I cannot figure out what anyone is actually basing that on.

[THRILLHOUSE]

BYU is further away from the closest Big Twelve school than West Virginia is. I fail to see what is so appealing about them. Furthermore, I haven't seen any real indication from BYU that they even want to be in the Big Twelve. Everyone keeps bringing them up as a candidate and I cannot figure out what anyone is actually basing that on.

Well, the BYU athletic director has publicly commented about the latest B12 news:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cnw7FSSUAAABEPd.jpg

[paulxu]

Can we call it the Big 14?

[GoMuskies]

If BYU was the same and not mormon they wouldn't be up for expansion, they'd already be in a conference.

They'd have to be nuts to even consider Boise. Mediocre basketball and their academics and endowment are not good.

I think they'll go to 4 and take UC UCF Memphis and UCONN.

Yeah, bit no one actually cares about academics endowment or even basketball if the football is good. And Boise football is clearly legit.

[xubrew]

Well, the BYU athletic director has publicly commented about the latest B12 news:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cnw7FSSUAAABEPd.jpg

Okay, I have now seen indication from BYU that they are interested.

But, I still don't understand why everyone is so enamored with them. I think they have a good athletic program. I don't think there is anything particularly special about them. Basketball wise, they've been to one Sweet Sixteen since the tournament went out to 64 teams, and have won just six games. They've been seeded better than 8th just once since 1993. The list of teams that have done more than that is rather long.

Football wise...I really don't see it either. They've managed four top twenty BCS finishes. That's not bad, but it's not so good that you'd be knocking yourselves over in order to get them. They're 1100 miles away from the closet Big Twelve school, so they're not exactly a geographic fit. Perhaps they are the best football program available outside of Boise State, but they're not so good that I'd be all that anxious to add them if I were the B12.

So...the Big Twelve will probably end up adding them.

[GoMuskies]

BYU has a very solid athletic program, and an incredibly loyal national fan base. None of the other programs available can reliably draw as much national (or even local) interest as BYU.

[muskienick]

Yeah, bit no one actually cares about academics endowment or even basketball if the football is good. And Boise football is clearly legit.

I agree! and by pairing Boise State with Utah, they'd be getting two schools that could be travelling partners since the distance between them is only about 30 miles greater than that between Cincinnati and Morgantown, WV (which UC apologists have been suggesting as a travelling partner for West Virginia).

[Milhouse]

It truly feels like Texas has one foot out the door anyway...it's starting to feel like the Old Big East again. I don't think UC really has a choice though- they're going to have to accept an invite if they get one. But I think we could see Texas to Pac12 and Oklahoma to B10 perhaps even Kansas to B10 as well.

Uconn would be a no brainer for ACC if BC wasn't there to block them.

Talk about a travel nightmare for UC in non-football sports though....especially if UC is the only eastern expansion. They already subsidize their AD a ton- but TV revenue would help w travel

[GoMuskies]

BC is such a cluster fuck that I cannot imagine that the ACC would let them be an obstacle if the league actually wanted UConn.

[THRILLHOUSE]

It truly feels like Texas has one foot out the door anyway...it's starting to feel like the Old Big East again. I don't think UC really has a choice though- they're going to have to accept an invite if they get one. But I think we could see Texas to Pac12 and Oklahoma to B10 perhaps even Kansas to B10 as well.



Yeah, I think in the early to mid 2020's, both UT and OU leave.

[xubrew]

It truly feels like Texas has one foot out the door anyway...it's starting to feel like the Old Big East again. I don't think UC really has a choice though- they're going to have to accept an invite if they get one. But I think we could see Texas to Pac12 and Oklahoma to B10 perhaps even Kansas to B10 as well.

Uconn would be a no brainer for ACC if BC wasn't there to block them.

Talk about a travel nightmare for UC in non-football sports though....especially if UC is the only eastern expansion. They already subsidize their AD a ton- but TV revenue would help w travel

I'm not so sure about Texas having one foot out the door, although I'm certain they're always browsing the isles of the store to see if there are any good deals. I think you got it backwards, though. Texas is much more likely to go to the Big Ten, and Oklahoma is more likely to end up in the Pac Twelve.

As far as BC and UConn, times change and people change. People have changed. The two current ADs are actually good friends. They just agreed to a football series, and if the ACC had any real interest in UConn, I don't think BC would stand in their way anymore.

[BMoreX]

According to Katz, if UConn found a football-only home, a source says the Big East would welcome UConn back for all other sports.

I approve.

[GoMuskies]

According to Katz, if UConn found a football-only home, a source says the Big East would welcome UConn back for all other sports.

I approve.

In.

Though I'd feel really bad for Xavier's womens' basketball team.

[drudy23]

According to Katz, if UConn found a football-only home, a source says the Big East would welcome UConn back for all other sports.

I approve.

Just saw a tweet on this...would be a solid addition in hoops with great tradition and results.

[Xville]

Why would Texas leave? They control that conference, something they wouldn't be able to do in any other conference. If they pulled some of the crap they have pulled in say the SEC, PAC 900 or anywhere else....the rest of the conference members would laugh at them and give them a big middle finger. There is a reason why Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri and A&M all left the conference, and it starts with a T and ends with an EXAS

[Muskie]

According to Katz, if UConn found a football-only home, a source says the Big East would welcome UConn back for all other sports.

I approve.

I bet the MAC would take them in a heart beat for FB.

[GoMuskies]

They're not leaving the AAC for the MAC.

[Muskie]

They're not leaving the AAC for the MAC.

That's probably true. But think of the MAC titles they could collect.

[GoMuskies]

That's probably true. But think of the MAC titles they could collect.

In about a decade of FBS football, UConn has had maybe one team good enough to win the MAC.

They probably could avoid being a doormat, though.

[X-band '01]

The only reason I'd imagine UConn would be interested in such a scenario would be because of their travel budget for other sports outside of football.

The likely reason is for leverage in case the Big 12/8 tries to lowball UConn like they're already doing to UC, Memphis and anyone else looking to join.

[OH.X.MI]

In about a decade of FBS football, UConn has had maybe one team good enough to win the MAC.

The Pioneer League would probably be a better fit for Uconn football IMO

[xubrew]

Whether or not we think FBS football is a good idea for UConn, UConn seems pretty damn convinced that FBS football is good for UConn. I don't think they'll join a league that isn't FBS, nor do I think they'll seek out being an affiliate/football only member because doing so generally means you have no say in the conference, and you get less of the revenue sharing, and you have to agree to some sort of scheduling agreement for men's basketball. The MAC requires four OOC home and homes in basketball every year for it's football only members. UConn simply won't agree to that.

In short, I SERIOUSLY doubt they'll end up joining the Big East. Maybe they'll get invited to the Big Twelve or ACC, but if they don't I don't think they'll even consider joining a non FBS conference.

[Cheesehead]

My head hurts...

[94GRAD]

My head hurts...

Does your face hurt?

[XU 87]

Yeah, bit no one actually cares about academics endowment or even basketball if the football is good. And Boise football is clearly legit.

Someone I know who is "connected" to UC has told me otherwise. I was told the B12 is not interested in Boise because it's not considered to be a very good school and academically has little if anything in common with the other B12 schools.

[xubrew]

Someone I know who is "connected" to UC has told me otherwise. I was told the B12 is not interested in Boise because it's not considered to be a very good school and academically has little if anything in common with the other B12 schools.

They do.

This really isn't in my wheelhouse, but I think federal money and grant money is sometimes granted to an entire conference in addition to being granted to the individual institutions, or the grant money and research funding is somehow shared, or.....something. I do know that university presidents and board members are the ones who ultimately make these decisions, and they are very conscious of a school's academic standing and how much research funding they have.

[LA Muskie]

The big conferences create academic consortiums which includes, among other things, teaming on research projects and pooling grant funds.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Muskie]

Unless I'm missing something, I can't think of a conference that UConn would want to park its football in, but not be a full member. Conversely, I don't see a conference that UConn would want to join that would want its football program but not the rest. It just doesn't make sense in either direction.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Muskie]

The likely reason is for leverage in case the Big 12/8 tries to lowball UConn like they're already doing to UC, Memphis and anyone else looking to join.

This is a common misconception/rumor. The Big 12 TV contract requires parity for new members. At least with respect to the TV money (which, let's be honest, is what it's all about...) any new members would share equally with the current members.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[THRILLHOUSE]

The Big 12 TV contract requires parity for new members. At least with respect to the TV money (which, let's be honest, is what it's all about...) any new members would share equally with the current members.



I'm not sure about that. This is what the Big 12 commissioner has to say:

"@ChuckCarltonDMN: New members won't be getting rich quick. Bowlsby:"There isn’t any question there will be a phase-in from a revenue distribution standpoint.""

[xubrew]

This is a common misconception/rumor. The Big 12 TV contract requires parity for new members. At least with respect to the TV money (which, let's be honest, is what it's all about...) any new members would share equally with the current members.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I'm not sure about that. This is what the Big 12 commissioner has to say:

"@ChuckCarltonDMN: New members won't be getting rich quick. Bowlsby:"There isn’t any question there will be a phase-in from a revenue distribution standpoint.""

It would not surprise me, not even a little bit, if Bowlsby doesn't know the specifics of the league's media deal.

[THRILLHOUSE]

Here's a quote from a recent ESPN article about how the money works out initially for new B12 members:

"The Big 12 won't give full shares to new members upon arrival. It's common practice for incoming schools to receive partial revenue shares for a few years. TCU and West Virginia just finished their fourth seasons in the Big 12 and for the first time received full shares. That means for several years, the current 10 members share the new money. And which schools are willing to accept less money for the longest period of time could help determine whether an institution receives an invitation from the Big 12."

Source - http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/17115091/big-12-football-coaches-favor-houston-cougars-byu-cougars-expansion-espn-poll-shows

[GoMuskies]

Apparently the Big XII football coaches prefer Houston and BYU by a narrow margin over Cincy and Memphis. I would love to see WV continue to be isolated on their little island.

[LA Muskie]

Here's a quote from a recent ESPN article about how the money works out initially for new B12 members:

"The Big 12 won't give full shares to new members upon arrival. It's common practice for incoming schools to receive partial revenue shares for a few years. TCU and West Virginia just finished their fourth seasons in the Big 12 and for the first time received full shares. That means for several years, the current 10 members share the new money. And which schools are willing to accept less money for the longest period of time could help determine whether an institution receives an invitation from the Big 12."

Source - http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/17115091/big-12-football-coaches-favor-houston-cougars-byu-cougars-expansion-espn-poll-shows
They may not be full members in certain regards -- for example, may not participate in NCAA units earned prior to their membership, or they may only get partial BCS/Bowl revenue shares -- but with respect to the ESPN/Fox TV money CBS Sports has reported that the Big 12 is "contractually bound to provide 'pro rata' for any new Big 12 members. That is, any new members would be paid an equal share of the current Big 12 members -- approximately $23 million per year. (http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/big-12-could-earn-an-additional-1-billion-by-expanding/)"

[Cheesehead]

Apparently the Big XII football coaches prefer Houston and BYU by a narrow margin over Cincy and Memphis. I would love to see WV continue to be isolated on their little island.

I also heard this twice on ESPN, (last night and today) that BYU and Houston are the front runners for expansion. UC is sweating it out big time right now.

[bleedXblue]

I also heard this twice on ESPN, (last night and today) that BYU and Houston are the front runners for expansion. UC is sweating it out big time right now.

unless they expand to 4

[kellernr]

I would love to see them take CSU and BYU then pick up UH and Memphis to get to 14. That would be a kick in the tw@t for the bearcats.

[xudash]

unless they expand to 4

If UC is sweating it out, then UCONN is passed out on the floor.

[Cheesehead]

true, but do really think they will add 4 after being at 10?

[xubrew]

I also heard this twice on ESPN, (last night and today) that BYU and Houston are the front runners for expansion. UC is sweating it out big time right now.

BYU and Houston are not the frontrunners for expansion. ESPN polled the football coaches, and that's who the coaches said they'd most like to see added. The people who will actually make the decision don't really care what the coaches think. Out of the ten coaches that are currently in the Big Twelve, most university presidents and board members probably don't even know who nine of them are. Most of the athletic directors were against expansion, yet the presidents met and decided to do it anyway. If they don't care what the ADs think, then they certainly don't care what the coaches think.

[xubrew]

true, but do really think they will add 4 after being at 10?

I'm guessing yes.

The athletic directors met, and decided they either wanted to table it or not expand at all, so that's what was largely report. Then the presidents met, and decided to expand. They're not listening to those who know athletics the most. Maybe that's good. Maybe that's bad. But, either way, it is what it is. I'm guessing they do go all the way out to fourteen right away. That's just a guess, though. I haven't heard that from any sort of source or anything.

[bourbonman]

I would love to see them take CSU and BYU then pick up UH and Memphis to get to 14. That would be a kick in the tw@t for the bearcats.

Listening to XM College Sports channel yesterday on a drive and these were the 4 they were talking about, yet in reverse order. Houston (especially since the Pac 12 recruit heavily in the area so its a preemptive move) and Memphis (to dabble into SEC territory). Then BYU and CSU. They made cases against other possibilities and never mentioned UC in the conversation. Of course these were the "talking heads" so who knows what they know.

[xubrew]

Listening to XM College Sports channel yesterday on a drive and these were the 4 they were talking about, yet in reverse order. Houston (especially since the Pac 12 recruit heavily in the area so its a preemptive move) and Memphis (to dabble into SEC territory). Then BYU and CSU. They made cases against other possibilities and never mentioned UC in the conversation. Of course these were the "talking heads" so who knows what they know.

Just to emphasize this again because I don't think it can be overemphasized...

The people who are making the decisions are not listening to the people who know sports (or, at least, who are SUPPOSED to know sports). For better or worse, the people who know sports indicated they did not want to expand. Then, suddenly, the presidents decided to expand. Chances are their thinking and thought processes do not match the thinking and thought processes of anyone who knows sports. So, I don't think any school being speculated about by a sports person is actually a candidate at this point.

[X-band '01]

Brew, Missouri is not re-joining the Big 12. Deal with it.

[GoMuskies]

Missouri, A&M and Nebraska should all come back and restore some sanity to college sports and conference affiliation.

[xubrew]

Missouri, A&M and Nebraska should all come back and restore some sanity to college sports and conference affiliation.

Those three returning, and West Virginia landing in the ACC with their regional and traditional rivals like Virginia, Virginia Tech, Maryland (who also needs to go back. They can swap places with Louisville), and Pittsburgh, would restore quite a bit of sanity!

[xubrew]

Brew, Missouri is not re-joining the Big 12. Deal with it.

YES THEY ARE!!!! The league voted to expand!! Mizzou is going back!!!

[bleedXblue]

this is all just pure American greed...money has f'd it all up

and we fans just keeping buying the tickets and watching the games....all are to blame

[xubrew]

this is all just pure American greed...money has f'd it all up

and we fans just keeping buying the tickets and watching the games....all are to blame

I think that's the ultimate irony with college sports. The natural part of it is what's great, particularly the natural and regional rivalries that formed prior to all of this realignment. Because it was great, it became a huge money making enterprise. Once it did, steps were taken to make more money. Those steps ultimately made it less great. Now that it's less great, it will get to a point to where it doesn't make as much money. I know that's not the case for the short term, but I think it will end up being the case for the long term. Less people have the strong natural interest that they used to have. Viewership and ratings will go down. This is already occurring. Eventually, the media deals won't be so rich anymore.

So, when it's not about money it's more awesome and makes more money. When it is about money, it's less awesome and my prediction is that in the long run it will result in less money.

[STL_XUfan]

YES THEY ARE!!!! The league voted to expand!! Mizzou is going back!!!


Hahahaahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.. .[deep breathe].....hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahaha.... Oh shit you're serious....yeah no.

[xubrew]

Hahahaahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.. .[deep breathe].....hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahaha.... Oh shit you're serious....yeah no.

Yes, clearly I'm COMPLETELY serious. Mizzou is going back to the Big Twelve!!

[xudash]

BYU and Houston are not the frontrunners for expansion. ESPN polled the football coaches, and that's who the coaches said they'd most like to see added. The people who will actually make the decision don't really care what the coaches think. Out of the ten coaches that are currently in the Big Twelve, most university presidents and board members probably don't even know who nine of them are. Most of the athletic directors were against expansion, yet the presidents met and decided to do it anyway. If they don't care what the ADs think, then they certainly don't care what the coaches think.

If they don't care about what their key direct reports or near direct reports think on key matters, then they shouldn't be in such positions of leadership.

That's a crazy position to take brew.

The Presidents care about all of it:

Institutional alignment - - which primarily concerns itself with branding and fundraising (rep & grant monies, etc.).
Athletic competitiveness - - in order to keep that end of the brand strong and so that schools don't have to repeatedly live through this process.

What good does it do to think only about research dollars if, at the end of the day, they solved poorly with respect to putting together a competitive conference that is respected by its peers and the press and the people and, and and...

Delaney has all of it in place. All of it. The Big XII guys have to try to emulate that as much as possible if that conference is to survive long-term. It carries different grades when it comes to performing a SWOT Analysis, but that doesn't mean they have any choice but to try to get ALL OF IT RIGHT.

[BMoreX]

Texas president:
As we look at opportunities for Big 12 expansion, I support considering @UHouston for the conference. UH is a huge asset for Texas.

So congratulations to Houston for joining the Bog XII.

[THRILLHOUSE]

Texas president:
As we look at opportunities for Big 12 expansion, I support considering @UHouston for the conference. UH is a huge asset for Texas.

So congratulations to Houston for joining the Bog XII.

Or Texas knows UH won't get the 8 needed votes, but they want to make it seem like they tried to get them in. Or who knows, maybe they actually want Houston. I can no longer make sense of any of this. (as if I ever really could)

edit - I forgot that Texas is trying to expand in the Houston market with a UT-Houston campus, and UH has been fighting them on it. So I'm sure this could be a reason for Fenves (UT President) publicly supporting UH to the B12. Basically, we'll try to get you in the B12 if you stop fighting our UT-Houston expansion plans.

[xubrew]

[/B]

If they don't care about what their key direct reports or near direct reports think on key matters, then they shouldn't be in such positions of leadership.

That's a crazy position to take brew.



I'm not saying it's not crazy. I'm saying that's what they did. Don't ever make the mistake of thinking that people in high level leadership roles are incapable of being crazy. They oftentimes are.

The athletic directors met at the spring meetings, they discussed expansion, and then afterwards said it was dead.

Then the university presidents met and said they were expanding. Most of the ADs indicated that they were shocked by the decision.


Texas president:
As we look at opportunities for Big 12 expansion, I support considering @UHouston for the conference. UH is a huge asset for Texas.

So congratulations to Houston for joining the Bog XII.

Yet another example of not listening to the people who are supposed to know sports. No one in the Texas athletic department wants Houston in the league for obvious reasons. Yet, here is the university president basically welcoming them in.

[xubrew]

Or Texas knows UH won't get the 8 needed votes, but they want to make it seem like they tried to get them in. Or who knows, maybe they actually want Houston. I can no longer make sense of any of this. (as if I ever really could)

edit - I forgot that Texas is trying to expand in the Houston market with a UT-Houston campus, and UH has been fighting them on it. So I'm sure this could be a reason for Fenves (UT President) publicly supporting UH to the B12. Basically, we'll try to get you in the B12 if you stop fighting our UT-Houston expansion plans.

I agree that Houston will be one of the schools, but I don't think anyone in Texas's athletic department wants them in.

I'm not going to declare myself correct until it happens because a million things can change between now and when this thing is settled, but I've said all along that I thought Houston would be one of schools. The reason being that the Texas Board of Regents, who just recently hired the new University of Texas President and oversees all the schools in the state, wants them in and will put pressure on the Texas schools to get Houston in. Now, lo and behold, here is the new president praising Houston.

[THRILLHOUSE]

and of course Gov. Abbot has now chimed in:

@GregAbbott_TX
Big 12 expansion is a non-starter unless it includes University of Houston. @UHouston

[bleedXblue]

One spot down. 3 more to go.........BYU is in if they want it. I think UC is last in or last out.........if they go to 4.

[xubrew]

I actually think UC is the next one up. I can't really call it anything but a hunch, but I do think they'll ultimately end up getting in.

[drudy23]

What splash is made adding BYU and Houston? At least BYU is decent in most sports. Houston? They pretty much suck at everything and would be the doormat.

[GoMuskies]

What splash is made adding BYU and Houston? At least BYU is decent in most sports. Houston? They pretty much suck at everything and would be the doormat.

Houston stomped FSU in the Chik-Fil-A Bowl last year and is likely to be top 15 coming into this year. They also have a pretty sweet football stadium that's very new just outside downtown. Houston is definitely on the upswing, and at just the right time.

[THRILLHOUSE]

Houston stomped FSU in the Chik-Fil-A Bowl last year and is likely to be top 15 coming into this year. They also have a pretty sweet football stadium that's very new just outside downtown. Houston is definitely on the upswing, and at just the right time.

They are also renovating their basketball arena. So they have definitely invested in their Athletics program, and like you said, just at the right time.

[X-band '01]

Houston would also help to reinforce their own market in the Big 12 after Texas A&M left.

BYU is a much bigger football brand than UC would be.

[Strange Brew]

BYU is a much bigger football brand than UC would be.

And they're so much more fun to watch

[xudash]

Houston also is the 4th or 5th largest TV market in the States if I recall correctly.

And, as long as Tom Herman is there, I'd say their chances of remaining competitive in football are pretty solid.

UC may or may not make it, but I can't imagine being a UCONN fan right now given what the press clippings and tweets indicate.

[xubrew]

Houston stomped FSU in the Chik-Fil-A Bowl last year and is likely to be top 15 coming into this year. They also have a pretty sweet football stadium that's very new just outside downtown. Houston is definitely on the upswing, and at just the right time.

Yeah, I know. Houston is likely to start off the season ranked in the top ten. They don't suck at football. Hell, they are arguably the best team in the state of Texas right now.

[Juice]

Houston also is the 4th or 5th largest TV market in the States if I recall correctly.

And, as long as Tom Herman is there, I'd say their chances of remaining competitive in football are pretty solid.

UC may or may not make it, but I can't imagine being a UCONN fan right now given what the press clippings and tweets indicate.

I see Houston at where UC used to be. Even if they lose Herman, I could see them adding another good, up and coming coach. They're in Texas, in a huge city that's crazy for football, and have better facilities. UC killed all the momentum they had with Tubberville.

[GoMuskies]

If they get into the Big XII, Herman may even hang in there for a while. I would think the pool of jobs you'd leave Houston for would shrink considerably once Houston is in "the club".

[Juice]

http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2016/08/01/Media/Big-12-TV.aspx


The Big 12’s TV partners are pushing back on the conference’s plans to expand.

ESPN and Fox Sports believe that expansion with schools from outside the power five conferences will water down the Big 12 and make it less valuable, not more, sources said. But the Big 12 is financially motivated to add more teams. A clause in the conference’s media deals stipulate that if the Big 12 expands, it would receive pro rata increases in its rights fees.

[XUGRAD80]

Quite understandable why the media wouldn't want them to expand, if it's going to cost the media more money to cover them. That alone is a reason to be skeptical about the media's true beleifs in regards to expansion. ALL of the schools involved have pluses and minuses in regards to being a candidate for inclusion in the B12. As a UC FOOTBALL fan, and season ticket holder, I sincerely hope they get into the B12. But I'm not holding my breath. If it happens it would be great, but if it doesn't so be it. They will still play games and I'll still go.

[X-band '01]

The media AND the ADs are against expansion for the most part, but the push is coming from university presidents (read: Texas lobbying for expansion, especially for Houston).

[xudash]

The Big XII is doing everything it can to impersonate the Old Big East.

Unaligned.

Unequal (Texas V. Iowa State).

Substantial ill will would be generated should this conference expand. The broadcast partners have zero interest in paying up for this mess.

Just considering UC, UCONN, UH, BYU, and perhaps Memphis, and assuming this clown act does expand, but only by two programs, it will create an entirely new and expanded comprehension of ABC's contribution to sports television: "the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat."

[Juice]

I could totally see the Big 12 blowing up in the next 5 years. Texas being unhappy could join the Big 10 to make crazy money.

[GIMMFD]

I could totally see the Big 12 blowing up in the next 5 years. Texas being unhappy could join the Big 10 to make crazy money.

Them and Oklahoma walk, and the Big 12 is done. Which is a major possibility, the money they'd receive in another conference is scary to think about, I could see it becoming 4 major conferences (football wise) with the ACC, Big 10, Pac and SEC.

[bjf123]

Things were so much simpler were conferences were geographic in nature and everyone wasn't chasing dollars to the exclusion of just about anything else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[xubrew]

The Big Twelve has narrowed it down to 12 schools. Well, maybe 13 schools. Or more. But, they've narrowed it down. They hope to have a decision by October 17th. According to the article, they are also considering not expanding at all.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/17436368/big-12-narrows-list-expansion-candidates-least-12-schools

I love how frequently the Big Twelve changes its end goal. It happens almost every day. They're looking at twelve teams, but may not take any of them. Or, they might take two. Or four. Or....none. Or, maybe all twelve. Or, they may kick someone out and go down to just nine teams. Who knows??

[xudash]

The Big Twelve has narrowed it down to 12 schools. Well, maybe 13 schools. Or more. But, they've narrowed it down. They hope to have a decision by October 17th. According to the article, they are also considering not expanding at all.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/17436368/big-12-narrows-list-expansion-candidates-least-12-schools

I love how frequently the Big Twelve changes its end goal. It happens almost every day. They're looking at twelve teams, but may not take any of them. Or, they might take two. Or four. Or....none. Or, maybe all twelve. Or, they may kick someone out and go down to just nine teams. Who knows??

I missed the announcement where the Big X!! hired Linda Bruno as key strategist and publicist.

[xubrew]

Arkansas State did not make the cut. When the Big Twelve discovered that the university had no intention of moving the entire school out of Jonesboro altogether and reopening in another city, the league voted to exclude them.

[GoMuskies]

Congrats to UC on getting a rose at the first rose ceremony. I hope they get a one on one date in the next round with the Big XII.

[xubrew]

Congrats to UC on getting a rose at the first rose ceremony. I hope they get a one on one date in the next round with the Big XII.

It's possible that once the current TV/media deal is up that there won't be another one, or at least not one that's anything like the current one. That may prompt the heavyweights like Texas and Oklahoma to look elsewhere. In a twenty year period, UC may have the distinct honor of being part of two power conferences that quickly ceased to be power conferences very shortly after they joined.

[THRILLHOUSE]

It's possible that once the current TV/media deal is up that there won't be another one, or at least not one that's anything like the current one. That may prompt the heavyweights like Texas and Oklahoma to look elsewhere. In a twenty year period, UC may have the distinct honor of being part of two power conferences that quickly ceased to be power conferences very shortly after they joined.

That's what I think will end up happening. I don't think Texas or OU have any interest in extending the Big 12 Grant of Rights. So when that expires in 2025, wouldn't be surprised if both schools bolt.

[X-band '01]

I hope ITT Tech wasn't a buy game for UC or anyone else:

ABC 6 Columbus - ITT Tech Says They're Closing All Campuses, Cancelling All Classes (http://abc6onyourside.com/news/nation-world/itt-tech-says-theyre-closing-all-campuses-canceling-upcoming-classes)

[paulxu]

Maybe McKinney, TX is angling for a Big 12 invite.

2079

[xudash]

After all the theatrics, is it all falling apart:

http://landgrantgauntlet.com/2016/09/26/is-big-12-expansion-falling-apart/

Poor Bearkittens. Et tu Brute - - West Virginia does NOT support their inclusion. There now appears to be a "Texas block" that is completely against them. And poor UCONN isn't even on the radar screen, according to that article.

[paulxu]

For their part, BYU has told the conference that the honor code will be changed in two ways. One, to give amnesty from honor code violations to anyone reporting a possible Title IX violation, and two, BYU has promised to revise the honor code to not discriminate against LGBT rights. However, promises just are not enough. The Big 12 wants to see the changes publicly announced before making a decision to invite the Cougars.

BYU people: It's our honor code. As part of our religious background, we are on very firm ground, and will continue to hold it.

Big 12 person: Would you like to be in our conference? You'll have to change that honor code.

BYU people: How much money will we make? That much? Really. OK then, we'll change the code.

[xubrew]

From the article....


Just over a year ago, president Boren set the sports media world on fire by speaking out in favor of expansion when up until then, the conference and Bob Bowlsby had been against it. He went as far to call the conference “psychologically disadvantaged” without expansion. However, it seems that he isn’t as sold on expansion as he used to be, and hinted that maybe it isn’t the conference’s best choice after all.

“We’re going to look at every way in which we can make the conference stronger and better,” Boren said last week. “But I’m not sure the automatic answer to that is expansion.”



This is rather disappointing.

I'm a firm believer that people who make stupid decisions deserve what they get. Furthermore, when stupid decisions don't effect me in any way but do effect something that I'm not a fan of, then I actually root for the stupid decision.

There is no good reason for the Big Twelve to expand, and virtually everyone who is athletically minded knows it. As has already been mentioned in the thread, the athletic directors pretty much unanimously voted it down, and Bob Bowsby isn't pushing for it either. It would weaken the league and it would damage (perhaps irreparably) the relationships with the major networks if they vote to expand, grab the cash, and then look to dissolve the league in 2025.

But, isn't that what we want to see?? The presidents ignored all this and said they were going to expand. That's great! Wreck the league! One less power five conference is just fine by me!!

Unfortunately, it looks like they're starting to come to their senses.

[MuskieXU]

After all the theatrics, is it all falling apart:

http://landgrantgauntlet.com/2016/09/26/is-big-12-expansion-falling-apart/

Poor Bearkittens. Et tu Brute - - West Virginia does NOT support their inclusion. There now appears to be a "Texas block" that is completely against them. And poor UCONN isn't even on the radar screen, according to that article.

I was starting to think I was going crazy as Cincinnati to the B12 looked like more and more of a possibility, but it sounds like people are finally coming to their senses. In what world does it make sense for two of the most valuable teams in the country to agree to travel 1000 miles to play against a team that cant even sell out a 40,000 person stadium?

[GoMuskies]

In what world does it make sense for two of the most valuable teams in the country to agree to travel 1000 miles to play against a team that cant even sell out a 40,000 person stadium?

Agree. They already travel 250 and 500 miles, respectively, to have that experience at Kansas. Why go so much further to do it in Cincinnati, too?

[Juice]

I was starting to think I was going crazy as Cincinnati to the B12 looked like more and more of a possibility, but it sounds like people are finally coming to their senses. In what world does it make sense for two of the most valuable teams in the country to agree to travel 1000 miles to play against a team that cant even sell out a 40,000 person stadium?

Especially when the TV networks really don't want the conference to add said team either

[xubrew]

I was starting to think I was going crazy as Cincinnati to the B12 looked like more and more of a possibility, but it sounds like people are finally coming to their senses. In what world does it make sense for two of the most valuable teams in the country to agree to travel 1000 miles to play against a team that cant even sell out a 40,000 person stadium?

The people pushing for expansion are for it because each individual school will get more money if teams are added. They'll only get more money until 2025, but expanding the league will generate more revenue per school. That's what the TV deal states.

Now, the reason the networks are against it is because they don't want to pay more money for more schools that water down the league. But, if the league expands, they'll have no choice because they'll be locked into it until 2025.

So, that's basically it in a nutshell. Texas and Oklahoma traveling to Cincinnati makes sense if they think getting more money makes the trip worth it. Most athletics minded people feel that it's not worth it. Yeah, it's great until 2025, but after that it's going to be very difficult to negotiate a deal with the networks after you've pissed them off by expanding.

Oklahoma's president has said all along that he wants to expand. Same with Texas (I know they have a relatively new president, but he's been for it since he got there). Perhaps their plan is to expand, take all the money that they can until 2025, and then just leave the conference in 2025 and who cares what happens to everyone else? But, now they're finally starting to see that expansion may not be the best long term option.

Ironically, it looks like the Big Twelve may save itself because those who want to ruin it by expanding can't quite agree on the best way to go about ruining it.

And, here's the thing, everyone other than Texas or Oklahoma BETTER be against expansion. Texas and Oklahoma can milk the money for what it's worth and easily go elsewhere in 2025 when the TV contract expires and the league is unable to negotiate another good one after that. The rest of the league is stuck with each other without Texas and Oklahoma and with two major networks who will be pissed at them.