Terry replied in the thread that I created that was closed abrubtly.
Everyone has to win enough to make it matter.......

ND may be able to play in other big bowls than the Orange Bowl, but that will not be a bad bowl to have a tie in with.

Finally, you fail to factor in that keeping football independence, by itself and for itself, was the second biggest goal (other than playoff access) for Notre Dame.

Mission accomplished.


I'm sorry- but to me it's much ado about nothing. Unless the big 5 conferences are going to lock up all the at large spots- which I suppose is possible with how corrupt they are- whenever ND has been good enough just about- 3/4 times(with the one time not because there were only 4 BCS bowls instead of 5)- they've gone to the BCS. I don't think politically they could go to having all the spots in the bowls filled by conferences- so their independence was never really in question.

Now, they would be assigned to the Orange Bowl to play what has been on record the worst conference in the BCS, when they don't make the playoff.

That's why I gave ND not a plus or a minus, but rather a wait and see. Because until we see things in practice- we really don't have any idea how this will be good/bad for Notre Dame. It's not the easy plus that it is for the Big 12 and Pac 12- just great chances for them to almost always have 2 teams with no questions in the BCS. It's not the easy minus that the Big East is of course, and frankly the ACC- either getting a ND team in the 5-14 range(depending on ratings threshold) or a typical 3rd place team from one of the Big 4 conferences or a non-AQ conference champ. Outisde of ND- none are really good options for the ACC at all.

If you look at all the conferences-
P12- much better than before
B10- better than before- but has to get teams into the playoff
B12- much better than before- situation like last year doesn't happen again.
SEC- depends on if they can get 2 into playoffs most years.
ACC- depends. If they can get ND most years- better. If not- same or even worse.
BE- worse

I think Pac 12 and Big 12 are clear winners in this system. Big Ten winner ACC, if ND is good(but not too good)- better, but when they're not, it's at best equal to what they've had. BE worse.

as far as ecuaccforever
Who is this "we" that stever heard from?

I am going off all the information that we've heard so far.

So let me get this straight:

-------------------------------

The Big 12 loses...

1.) Economic behemoths Nebraska and Texas A&M - two of the largest revenue generators in the NCAA and each of which consistently sells out their 80K+ seat stadia.

2.) State flagship schools with large markets, Colorado and Missouri

3.) All told that is FIVE combined national championships.

-------------------------------

The B12 subsequently replaces those schools with...

1.) West Virginia, a state school with absolutely no markets in arguably America's poorest state and which does not regularly sell out its stadium.

2.) Texas Christian, a small private school with a small following to match that also happens to be located in a duplicate market and which has sold out its tiny stadium like a handful of times in the past decade.

-------------------------------

...and yet we are to believe that the Big 12 is now somehow better off than it was before the realignment began?

Ooooo-kie-dokie.

(07-10-2012 01:30 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  So let me get this straight:

-------------------------------

The Big 12 loses...

1.) Economic behemoths Nebraska and Texas A&M - two of the largest revenue generators in the NCAA and each of which consistently sells out their 80K+ seat stadia.

2.) State flagship schools with large markets, Colorado and Missouri

3.) All told that is FIVE combined national championships.

-------------------------------

The B12 subsequently replaces those schools with...

1.) West Virginia, a state school with absolutely no markets in arguably America's poorest state and which does not regularly sell out its stadium.

2.) Texas Christian, a small private school with a small following to match that also happens to be located in a duplicate market and which has sold out its tiny stadium like a handful of times in the past decade.

-------------------------------

...and yet we are to believe that the Big 12 is now somehow better off than it was before the realignment began?

Ooooo-kie-dokie.

Great points....hard to argue with that

(07-10-2012 01:33 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 01:30 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  So let me get this straight:

-------------------------------

The Big 12 loses...

1.) Economic behemoths Nebraska and Texas A&M - two of the largest revenue generators in the NCAA and each of which consistently sells out their 80K+ seat stadia.

2.) State flagship schools with large markets, Colorado and Missouri

3.) All told that is FIVE combined national championships.

-------------------------------

The B12 subsequently replaces those schools with...

1.) West Virginia, a state school with absolutely no markets in arguably America's poorest state and which does not regularly sell out its stadium.

2.) Texas Christian, a small private school with a small following to match that also happens to be located in a duplicate market and which has sold out its tiny stadium like a handful of times in the past decade.

-------------------------------

...and yet we are to believe that the Big 12 is now somehow better off than it was before the realignment began?

Ooooo-kie-dokie.

Great points....hard to argue with that

In terms of what they have gotten in the new system, yes. Last season, they had a 10-2 2nd place team left out. Now, not only would they have been guaranteed in, but Baylor or Oklahoma would have had a much better shot of getting in. It's not questionable they are in better shape system wise now than going in. They would have been in the playoffs of the last 6 years 4/6 times. 1 of the 2 times they wouldn't, TCU would have gotten in. With the Champions Bowl not hosting SF much, they would be guaranteed a 2nd team into the BCS.

(07-10-2012 01:30 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  So let me get this straight:

-------------------------------

The Big 12 loses...

1.) Economic behemoths Nebraska and Texas A&M - two of the largest revenue generators in the NCAA and each of which consistently sells out their 80K+ seat stadia.

2.) State flagship schools with large markets, Colorado and Missouri

3.) All told that is FIVE combined national championships.

-------------------------------

The B12 subsequently replaces those schools with...

1.) West Virginia, a state school with absolutely no markets in arguably America's poorest state and which does not regularly sell out its stadium.

2.) Texas Christian, a small private school with a small following to match that also happens to be located in a duplicate market and which has sold out its tiny stadium like a handful of times in the past decade.

-------------------------------

...and yet we are to believe that the Big 12 is now somehow better off than it was before the realignment began?

Ooooo-kie-dokie.

Same logic can be applied to the nBE getting more money than the old BE.

(07-10-2012 01:30 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  So let me get this straight:

-------------------------------

The Big 12 loses...

1.) Economic behemoths Nebraska and Texas A&M - two of the largest revenue generators in the NCAA and each of which consistently sells out their 80K+ seat stadia.

2.) State flagship schools with large markets, Colorado and Missouri

3.) All told that is FIVE combined national championships.

-------------------------------

The B12 subsequently replaces those schools with...

1.) West Virginia, a state school with absolutely no markets in arguably America's poorest state and which does not regularly sell out its stadium.

2.) Texas Christian, a small private school with a small following to match that also happens to be located in a duplicate market and which has sold out its tiny stadium like a handful of times in the past decade.

-------------------------------

...and yet we are to believe that the Big 12 is now somehow better off than it was before the realignment began?

Ooooo-kie-dokie.

Yet the TV execs said that TCU's TV ratings were equal to or more than A&M's. And believe me the TCU audience and the A&M audience are NOT the same group. Our stadium is sold out for the season.

(07-10-2012 01:38 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 01:33 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 01:30 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  So let me get this straight:

-------------------------------

The Big 12 loses...

1.) Economic behemoths Nebraska and Texas A&M - two of the largest revenue generators in the NCAA and each of which consistently sells out their 80K+ seat stadia.

2.) State flagship schools with large markets, Colorado and Missouri

3.) All told that is FIVE combined national championships.

-------------------------------

The B12 subsequently replaces those schools with...

1.) West Virginia, a state school with absolutely no markets in arguably America's poorest state and which does not regularly sell out its stadium.

2.) Texas Christian, a small private school with a small following to match that also happens to be located in a duplicate market and which has sold out its tiny stadium like a handful of times in the past decade.

-------------------------------

...and yet we are to believe that the Big 12 is now somehow better off than it was before the realignment began?

Ooooo-kie-dokie.

Great points....hard to argue with that

In terms of what they have gotten in the new system, yes. Last season, they had a 10-2 2nd place team left out. Now, not only would they have been guaranteed in, but Baylor or Oklahoma would have had a much better shot of getting in. It's not questionable they are in better shape system wise now than going in. They would have been in the playoffs of the last 6 years 4/6 times. 1 of the 2 times they wouldn't, TCU would have gotten in. With the Champions Bowl not hosting SF much, they would be guaranteed a 2nd team into the BCS.

And when NO B12 team is in the top 4, how will they stand? Oh right, they get to play in the Consolation Bowl vs the #3 SEC team.

I will say this Dr. The Big 12 should have been severely damaged. But- it's remarkable what Nienas quite frankly has done. It's one of the best jobs any interim commish has ever done I'd say. TV contract up signifigantly- up from before going to be 15 million to now 20 million. Associated with the #1 football conference in new bowl game. Don't think anyone ever imagined 10 months ago this would be where the Big 12 was quite frankly- and anyone has to admit that.

(07-10-2012 02:43 PM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 01:38 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 01:33 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 01:30 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  So let me get this straight:

-------------------------------

The Big 12 loses...

1.) Economic behemoths Nebraska and Texas A&M - two of the largest revenue generators in the NCAA and each of which consistently sells out their 80K+ seat stadia.

2.) State flagship schools with large markets, Colorado and Missouri

3.) All told that is FIVE combined national championships.

-------------------------------

The B12 subsequently replaces those schools with...

1.) West Virginia, a state school with absolutely no markets in arguably America's poorest state and which does not regularly sell out its stadium.

2.) Texas Christian, a small private school with a small following to match that also happens to be located in a duplicate market and which has sold out its tiny stadium like a handful of times in the past decade.

-------------------------------

...and yet we are to believe that the Big 12 is now somehow better off than it was before the realignment began?

Ooooo-kie-dokie.

Great points....hard to argue with that

In terms of what they have gotten in the new system, yes. Last season, they had a 10-2 2nd place team left out. Now, not only would they have been guaranteed in, but Baylor or Oklahoma would have had a much better shot of getting in. It's not questionable they are in better shape system wise now than going in. They would have been in the playoffs of the last 6 years 4/6 times. 1 of the 2 times they wouldn't, TCU would have gotten in. With the Champions Bowl not hosting SF much, they would be guaranteed a 2nd team into the BCS.

And when NO B12 team is in the top 4, how will they stand? Oh right, they get to play in the Consolation Bowl vs the #3 SEC team.

Well, considering that they would have been in the playoffs 5/6 years- with 1 year having 2 teams in the playoff(2008 with Oklahoma and Texas)- that's not going to happen that often.

(07-10-2012 02:43 PM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 01:38 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 01:33 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 01:30 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  So let me get this straight:

-------------------------------

The Big 12 loses...

1.) Economic behemoths Nebraska and Texas A&M - two of the largest revenue generators in the NCAA and each of which consistently sells out their 80K+ seat stadia.

2.) State flagship schools with large markets, Colorado and Missouri

3.) All told that is FIVE combined national championships.

-------------------------------

The B12 subsequently replaces those schools with...

1.) West Virginia, a state school with absolutely no markets in arguably America's poorest state and which does not regularly sell out its stadium.

2.) Texas Christian, a small private school with a small following to match that also happens to be located in a duplicate market and which has sold out its tiny stadium like a handful of times in the past decade.

-------------------------------

...and yet we are to believe that the Big 12 is now somehow better off than it was before the realignment began?

Ooooo-kie-dokie.

Great points....hard to argue with that

In terms of what they have gotten in the new system, yes. Last season, they had a 10-2 2nd place team left out. Now, not only would they have been guaranteed in, but Baylor or Oklahoma would have had a much better shot of getting in. It's not questionable they are in better shape system wise now than going in. They would have been in the playoffs of the last 6 years 4/6 times. 1 of the 2 times they wouldn't, TCU would have gotten in. With the Champions Bowl not hosting SF much, they would be guaranteed a 2nd team into the BCS.

And when NO B12 team is in the top 4, how will they stand? Oh right, they get to play in the Consolation Bowl vs the #3 SEC team.

Who is the ACC champ going to play in the Orange Bowl when they do not make the play-offs and when ND is unavailable? This should be a concern to Pitt for obvious reasons, but for the rest of the conference....

Some people rely too much on the past. FSU is highly probably this year to be top 4.

(07-10-2012 02:39 PM)ConanX Wrote:  Same logic can be applied to the nBE getting more money than the old BE.

Part of that is quite frankly timing. TV rights fees for sports growing exponentially the last few years since it's the one thing that generally isn't tivoable.

(07-10-2012 02:48 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 02:43 PM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 01:38 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 01:33 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 01:30 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  So let me get this straight:

-------------------------------

The Big 12 loses...

1.) Economic behemoths Nebraska and Texas A&M - two of the largest revenue generators in the NCAA and each of which consistently sells out their 80K+ seat stadia.

2.) State flagship schools with large markets, Colorado and Missouri

3.) All told that is FIVE combined national championships.

-------------------------------

The B12 subsequently replaces those schools with...

1.) West Virginia, a state school with absolutely no markets in arguably America's poorest state and which does not regularly sell out its stadium.

2.) Texas Christian, a small private school with a small following to match that also happens to be located in a duplicate market and which has sold out its tiny stadium like a handful of times in the past decade.

-------------------------------

...and yet we are to believe that the Big 12 is now somehow better off than it was before the realignment began?

Ooooo-kie-dokie.

Great points....hard to argue with that

In terms of what they have gotten in the new system, yes. Last season, they had a 10-2 2nd place team left out. Now, not only would they have been guaranteed in, but Baylor or Oklahoma would have had a much better shot of getting in. It's not questionable they are in better shape system wise now than going in. They would have been in the playoffs of the last 6 years 4/6 times. 1 of the 2 times they wouldn't, TCU would have gotten in. With the Champions Bowl not hosting SF much, they would be guaranteed a 2nd team into the BCS.

And when NO B12 team is in the top 4, how will they stand? Oh right, they get to play in the Consolation Bowl vs the #3 SEC team.

Who is the ACC champ going to play in the Orange Bowl when they do not make the play-offs and when ND is unavailable? This should be a concern to Pitt for obvious reasons, but for the rest of the conference....

#2 ACC team will probably then play a #2 B12 team, Texas or Oklahoma.

(07-10-2012 02:49 PM)curtis0620 Wrote:  Some people rely too much on the past. FSU is highly probably this year to be top 4.

With the schedule they have, if they lose 1 game, they'll struggle to be in the top 6.

(07-10-2012 02:50 PM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 02:48 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 02:43 PM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 01:38 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 01:33 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  Great points....hard to argue with that

In terms of what they have gotten in the new system, yes. Last season, they had a 10-2 2nd place team left out. Now, not only would they have been guaranteed in, but Baylor or Oklahoma would have had a much better shot of getting in. It's not questionable they are in better shape system wise now than going in. They would have been in the playoffs of the last 6 years 4/6 times. 1 of the 2 times they wouldn't, TCU would have gotten in. With the Champions Bowl not hosting SF much, they would be guaranteed a 2nd team into the BCS.

And when NO B12 team is in the top 4, how will they stand? Oh right, they get to play in the Consolation Bowl vs the #3 SEC team.

Who is the ACC champ going to play in the Orange Bowl when they do not make the play-offs and when ND is unavailable? This should be a concern to Pitt for obvious reasons, but for the rest of the conference....

#2 ACC team will probably then play a #2 B12 team, Texas or Oklahoma.

Try again.....if the B12 champ is in the play-offs, the #2 team will be in the Championship Bowl. Orange Bowl would get a #3 team at best or the Big East Champ.

(07-10-2012 01:33 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  Great points....hard to argue with that

Not hard to argue with, impossible to argue with.

And yet you can bet your bottom dollar that they'll try. Oh, mercy they'll try. I've seen some mental gymnastics on this site that would make Mary Lou Retton blush.

The problem for all of these guys is that eventually reality sets in and when it does they get CRANKY!

(07-10-2012 02:51 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 02:49 PM)curtis0620 Wrote:  Some people rely too much on the past. FSU is highly probably this year to be top 4.

With the schedule they have, if they lose 1 game, they'll struggle to be in the top 6.

So a tough schedule helps the SEC team but not FSU?

(07-10-2012 02:50 PM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 02:48 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 02:43 PM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 01:38 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Great points....hard to argue with that

In terms of what they have gotten in the new system, yes. Last season, they had a 10-2 2nd place team left out. Now, not only would they have been guaranteed in, but Baylor or Oklahoma would have had a much better shot of getting in. It's not questionable they are in better shape system wise now than going in. They would have been in the playoffs of the last 6 years 4/6 times. 1 of the 2 times they wouldn't, TCU would have gotten in. With the Champions Bowl not hosting SF much, they would be guaranteed a 2nd team into the BCS.

And when NO B12 team is in the top 4, how will they stand? Oh right, they get to play in the Consolation Bowl vs the #3 SEC team.

Who is the ACC champ going to play in the Orange Bowl when they do not make the play-offs and when ND is unavailable? This should be a concern to Pitt for obvious reasons, but for the rest of the conference....

#2 ACC team will probably then play a #2 B12 team, Texas or Oklahoma.
[/quote]

Or not. I'd much rather having been like Big 12- with 5/6 years in the playoffs than the ACC with 1/6 years in the playoff(and that is extremely questionable if it was a playoff that year).