(03-02-2014 02:41 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:23 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:07 PM)john01992 Wrote:  as for the b12.......

ucf
usf
new mexico
rice

if i was the b12 commish that's who i would add

I don't think any of those options would ever get a serious look. When the BIG12 finally expands, the biggest factor in choosing programs will be if adding them benefits Texas and OU. TCU gave Texas and OU and easy road game between the two schools, in a talent rich region.

I still think WVU was a bad addition. I doubt the BIG12 will make that mistake again, so the Florida schools don't seem to be real options. New Mexico offers nothing to Texas or Oklahoma. They don't have a market. They aren't in a recruiting hotbed. They don't get the fans of Texas or OU excited. I like Rice, but I can't see Texas adding them to the BIG12, when they can schedule them for a OOC game any time they want. Plus, Texas, along with A&M, already controls more of the Houston market then Rice, just like those two control more of every major market in Texas. I can't see Texas or Oklahoma letting another Texas team into the BIG12. It just wouldn't benefit them.

Yup. Tulane would be more likely than Rice.

I disagree. Tulane is Oklahoma's Rice. Adding them would mean nothing to Texas, and Oklahoma can schedule them in OOC games any time they want.

You could say the same thing about every team you have listed. I don't think Tulane is the choice. I simply said Tulane is MORE LIKELY than Rice. I doubt either is very high on the list. Like I said, I think Cincy and ECU are the best available choices. I don't think the B12 goes beyond 12.

(03-02-2014 02:41 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 12:14 PM)C Marlow Wrote:  I think the most probable outcomes for expansion will be very similar to what we see today. I think the P5 will stay intact as we see it today. I don't foresee the demise of the BigXII nor the ACC. It looks like all the schools in the P5 like their current connections. I doubt that four by 16 or five by 14 is the endgame based on current ties between the schools. The PAC is stuck at 12 unless the BigXII folds. It appears the Big XII schools like associating with each other, so I don't expect to see it fold. The ACC schools signed a GOR after numerous feelers sent to various schools from the B1G and BigXII, so those schools also want to stay connected. Plus, the ACC stays at 14 until ND commits, and I don't see that happening any time soon. The only P5 who may want to expand would be the BigXII. Only slam dunk candidate, if there is one, would be BYU. And that is a stretch at this point.

IMHO, I think P5 conf expansion is done. BigXII is the only one that might do it, but no current school seems to want that as of today.

I agree. I think we are set for a couple of decades. By 2035 when the last of the agreements expire (and probably the 2nd Pac 12 and Big 12 contract), the media market will be much changed and things will happen then. But I won't venture a guess. It all depends on how things change.

Texas, FSU, North Carolina and Notre Dame all looked carefully and made the choices they made over the last few years. I don't see any reason to believe any will make a different decision 10 years from now unless something changes (media market-which I think will take longer than a decade for a major difference, O'Bannon case, concussions causing some schools to re-think football). So I don't expect changes in the P5 anytime soon. Now I expect the G5 to continue to jockey around and change over the next decade.

I highly doubt that. Things change fast in the world of college football. If someone would have told me 5 years ago that Texas A&M would leave for the SEC and garner more fan support then Texas, I'd have called you crazy. Now the two don't even play each other on Thanksgiving.

As new media creates new opportunities and revenue sources, college football will adapt, and that will destabilize the landscape again, and it won't take decades for it to happen. As long as college football continues to follow the money (and it will), stability will continue to be short-lived.

(03-02-2014 02:23 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:07 PM)john01992 Wrote:  as for the b12.......

ucf
usf
new mexico
rice

if i was the b12 commish that's who i would add

I don't think any of those options would ever get a serious look. When the BIG12 finally expands, the biggest factor in choosing programs will be if adding them benefits Texas and OU. TCU gave Texas and OU and easy road game between the two schools, in a talent rich region.

I still think WVU was a bad addition. I doubt the BIG12 will make that mistake again, so the Florida schools don't seem to be real options. New Mexico offers nothing to Texas or Oklahoma. They don't have a market. They aren't in a recruiting hotbed. They don't get the fans of Texas or OU excited. I like Rice, but I can't see Texas adding them to the BIG12, when they can schedule them for a OOC game any time they want. Plus, Texas, along with A&M, already controls more of the Houston market then Rice, just like those two control more of every major market in Texas. I can't see Texas or Oklahoma letting another Texas team into the BIG12. It just wouldn't benefit them.

the b12 is not weak in athletics. their weakness is markets/academics and the wvu outlier.

lets take a moment to look at wvu. would they be better served adding a school in between them and the b12......a region that they don't normally recruit out of and have a small alumni presence........

or would they be better served with expansion in florida.....a state they recruit heavily out of and has nearly double the amount of registered wvu alumni than every b12 state combined.

seems like a valid question to me.....

the way i see it unless the b12 adds an entire eastern division wvu will always be an outlier. so any realignment proposal with cincy, ville, memphis etc. has the purpose of diminishing the problem but not solving the problem. to solve the problem a conference needs to go after regions that give wvu the best resources to succeed not the best way to cut travel time.

huge travel distances between conference members isn't a problem when every member has a alumni/student body/recruiting footprint that is mostly within the conference blueprint. that is why no one raises an issue with colorado in the pac12 being an outlier but colorado in the b12 was an outlier even though the distances were closer. or how BC, pitt, & SU can be perfectly happy playing fsu/miami (1500 miles) but wvu playing isu (860 miles) is a problem.

(03-02-2014 02:38 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:12 PM)brista21 Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 01:40 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 12:30 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  I think the Big <12 will probably expand at some point, but they clearly are in no rush to do so.

I think PAC-12, SEC, B1G, or ACC only expands if a bona fide "game change" possibility steps forward (i.e., Texas, Notre Dame, Florida State, etc.).

I think the Big12 is still feeling buyers remorse from adding TCU and West Virginia. TCU can't consistently compete in the Big 12, and WVU is too far away from the rest of the league. They need to get back to 12 teams, but there just aren't any P5 programs in their region that would accept an invitation (Texas & Oklahoma have way too much power in the BIG12), and I don't think they don't feel any of the G5 programs would advance their conference.

If Memphis could figure out how the game of football is played, they and Louisville would be the best options. Just my opinion.

I really don't see them having buyers remorse. WVU and TCU both just happened to have horrific timing with going into rough patches. WVU does potentially have additional issues competing so far outside their own natural footprint. If the Big 12 builds a bridge out to them say UCF, USF, Cincy and Memphis for instance then WVU will start to rebound being better able to recruit Florida, Ohio and Tennessee. Its not going to help them with their NJ and Eastern PA recruiting where they've always picked off some good ones though.

TCU benefited from playing in the MWC. They didn't play a BIG12 quality schedule when they won the Rose Bowl. I don't think they have hit a rough patch. I don't think Patterson has lost his ability to coach. I don't think they have the same talent as the better teams in the BIG12, and I don't see that changing. I also don't think they can stand up to the grind of a BIG12 schedule. And, in the long run, I don't think they will be able to consistently recruit well enough to compete in the BIG12. I believe TCU's current situation is going to be the new normal for them. I believe these issues made them a very safe pick for Texas and Oklahoma.

As for WVU, I can't see the BIG12 expanding to 14 or 16 teams, just to throw a lifeline out to them. They appear to be stuck in a bad situation. As time passes, and their supporters become even more restless, they will probably seek another situation. I just don't see them spending an extended period of time in the BIG12.

I'm not sure how well TCU will compete with larger schools with more resources over the long run. But last year they lost their starting QB and a good chunk of their D due to them getting caught with drugs. They were tied for 2nd in the nation in the number of true freshmen played (behind Ohio St., tied with Texas). This year they were the Big 12 favorite in several polls. They are recruiting very well. The last couple of years have just been bad luck and bad QB play in a very balanced conference. Again, long run, if they hit a bad streak, I don't know how well they recover, but it still remains to be seen.

(03-02-2014 02:11 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:08 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:07 PM)john01992 Wrote:  as for the b12.......

ucf
usf
new mexico
rice

if i was the b12 commish that's who i would add

Thank goodness you aren't the B12 commish.

LOL. i have my reasons and have explained them before.

I know you have your reasons. That doesn't make them valid, however. It's just an opinion, and I disagree with it.

(03-02-2014 02:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:41 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:23 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:07 PM)john01992 Wrote:  as for the b12.......

ucf
usf
new mexico
rice

if i was the b12 commish that's who i would add

I don't think any of those options would ever get a serious look. When the BIG12 finally expands, the biggest factor in choosing programs will be if adding them benefits Texas and OU. TCU gave Texas and OU and easy road game between the two schools, in a talent rich region.

I still think WVU was a bad addition. I doubt the BIG12 will make that mistake again, so the Florida schools don't seem to be real options. New Mexico offers nothing to Texas or Oklahoma. They don't have a market. They aren't in a recruiting hotbed. They don't get the fans of Texas or OU excited. I like Rice, but I can't see Texas adding them to the BIG12, when they can schedule them for a OOC game any time they want. Plus, Texas, along with A&M, already controls more of the Houston market then Rice, just like those two control more of every major market in Texas. I can't see Texas or Oklahoma letting another Texas team into the BIG12. It just wouldn't benefit them.

Yup. Tulane would be more likely than Rice.

I disagree. Tulane is Oklahoma's Rice. Adding them would mean nothing to Texas, and Oklahoma can schedule them in OOC games any time they want.

You could say the same thing about every team you have listed. I don't think Tulane is the choice. I simply said Tulane is MORE LIKELY than Rice. I doubt either is very high on the list. Like I said, I think Cincy and ECU are the best available choices. I don't think the B12 goes beyond 12.

I don't have any teams listed. I think all of these are bad options. When the BIG12 finally does expand, I think they will focus on new larger markets with solid football and basketball that border their current historic footprint. I don't believe the BIG12 will expand in Texas or Oklahoma. Like I stated in another post, I believe Louisville and Memphis will probably get the nod, but probably not until Memphis gets better at football.

(03-02-2014 01:26 PM)bluesox Wrote:  I think the big 10 and sec would like to add some acc and/or big 12 school's while the pac 12 would like big 12 school's. If the acc doesn't lose anybody than the target will be the big 12. I'm not sure if anybody can pry open the acc but i'd go with the big 10 able to crack the big 12 with offers to KU and OU. Also, have a hard time seeing texas happy in the big 12 longterm. The move that could save everybody would be a football only merger of the big 12/acc with 4 pods of 6 expandable to 4 pods of 7 with invites to cincy, uconn, byu and ND (playing 6 games).

I find it incredible that people think that Texas is not happy in the Big12. They have the best situation in all of college football.

(03-02-2014 02:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:41 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:23 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:07 PM)john01992 Wrote:  as for the b12.......

ucf
usf
new mexico
rice

if i was the b12 commish that's who i would add

I don't think any of those options would ever get a serious look. When the BIG12 finally expands, the biggest factor in choosing programs will be if adding them benefits Texas and OU. TCU gave Texas and OU and easy road game between the two schools, in a talent rich region.

I still think WVU was a bad addition. I doubt the BIG12 will make that mistake again, so the Florida schools don't seem to be real options. New Mexico offers nothing to Texas or Oklahoma. They don't have a market. They aren't in a recruiting hotbed. They don't get the fans of Texas or OU excited. I like Rice, but I can't see Texas adding them to the BIG12, when they can schedule them for a OOC game any time they want. Plus, Texas, along with A&M, already controls more of the Houston market then Rice, just like those two control more of every major market in Texas. I can't see Texas or Oklahoma letting another Texas team into the BIG12. It just wouldn't benefit them.

Yup. Tulane would be more likely than Rice.

I disagree. Tulane is Oklahoma's Rice. Adding them would mean nothing to Texas, and Oklahoma can schedule them in OOC games any time they want.

You could say the same thing about every team you have listed. I don't think Tulane is the choice. I simply said Tulane is MORE LIKELY than Rice. I doubt either is very high on the list. Like I said, I think Cincy and ECU are the best available choices. I don't think the B12 goes beyond 12.

i like rice because they have

good facilities
history with the TX schools
elite academics

as much as everyone hates the idea of more tx expansion in the b12. it is more to the benefit of the tx schools who don't want to see their political power diluted down with more additions. so if the b12 does expand by more than 2 teams i think including a tx school to keep UT satisfied is a no brainer. they won't want anything to do with elevating another in-state land grant which leaves rice/smu as the most likely options. having more tx schools give all the other b12 schools more tx access as well. so it is beneficial to the conference as a whole. no offense to smu but i believe that rice provides more of what the b12 is looking for/needs.

(03-02-2014 03:08 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 01:26 PM)bluesox Wrote:  I think the big 10 and sec would like to add some acc and/or big 12 school's while the pac 12 would like big 12 school's. If the acc doesn't lose anybody than the target will be the big 12. I'm not sure if anybody can pry open the acc but i'd go with the big 10 able to crack the big 12 with offers to KU and OU. Also, have a hard time seeing texas happy in the big 12 longterm. The move that could save everybody would be a football only merger of the big 12/acc with 4 pods of 6 expandable to 4 pods of 7 with invites to cincy, uconn, byu and ND (playing 6 games).

I find it incredible that people think that Texas is not happy in the Big12. They have the best situation in all of college football.

Totally agree. They should just change the name of the BIG12 to the Texas/Oklahoma Conference. Those two control that league. No other P5 conference in football would allow Texas to have their own television network. Oklahoma was developing their own network with ESPN too. I can't blame Nebraska, Missouri, Texas A&M, or Colorado for leaving.

(03-02-2014 02:51 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:23 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:07 PM)john01992 Wrote:  as for the b12.......

ucf
usf
new mexico
rice

if i was the b12 commish that's who i would add

I don't think any of those options would ever get a serious look. When the BIG12 finally expands, the biggest factor in choosing programs will be if adding them benefits Texas and OU. TCU gave Texas and OU and easy road game between the two schools, in a talent rich region.

I still think WVU was a bad addition. I doubt the BIG12 will make that mistake again, so the Florida schools don't seem to be real options. New Mexico offers nothing to Texas or Oklahoma. They don't have a market. They aren't in a recruiting hotbed. They don't get the fans of Texas or OU excited. I like Rice, but I can't see Texas adding them to the BIG12, when they can schedule them for a OOC game any time they want. Plus, Texas, along with A&M, already controls more of the Houston market then Rice, just like those two control more of every major market in Texas. I can't see Texas or Oklahoma letting another Texas team into the BIG12. It just wouldn't benefit them.

the b12 is not weak in athletics. their weakness is markets/academics and the wvu outlier.

lets take a moment to look at wvu. would they be better served adding a school in between them and the b12......a region that they don't normally recruit out of and have a small alumni presence........

or would they be better served with expansion in florida.....a state they recruit heavily out of and has nearly double the amount of registered wvu alumni than every b12 state combined.

seems like a valid question to me.....

the way i see it unless the b12 adds an entire eastern division wvu will always be an outlier. so any realignment proposal with cincy, ville, memphis etc. has the purpose of diminishing the problem but not solving the problem. to solve the problem a conference needs to go after regions that give wvu the best resources to succeed not the best way to cut travel time.

huge travel distances between conference members isn't a problem when every member has a alumni/student body/recruiting footprint that is mostly within the conference blueprint. that is why no one raises an issue with colorado in the pac12 being an outlier but colorado in the b12 was an outlier even though the distances were closer. or how BC, pitt, & SU can be perfectly happy playing fsu/miami (1500 miles) but wvu playing isu (860 miles) is a problem.

When West Virginia joined the Big12 they knew the distance problems. So I do not think the other Big12 schools are worried about having to do something to help out West Virginia.

It wouldn't surprise me if B1G-PAC comes back to life as the PAC may hit a lower revenue ceiling with 12 schools and a footprint that falls short of the eastern half the country, while the Big Ten really wants more than 14 schools but can't find "quality." Both backs are scratched with that one.

B1G picks up an ice hockey program somewhere outside of its current membership. These guys want a program more north and east than Penn State.

Outside of the majors, I think CAA might be in for some dark days very soon.

(03-02-2014 03:19 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:51 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:23 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:07 PM)john01992 Wrote:  as for the b12.......

ucf
usf
new mexico
rice

if i was the b12 commish that's who i would add

I don't think any of those options would ever get a serious look. When the BIG12 finally expands, the biggest factor in choosing programs will be if adding them benefits Texas and OU. TCU gave Texas and OU and easy road game between the two schools, in a talent rich region.

I still think WVU was a bad addition. I doubt the BIG12 will make that mistake again, so the Florida schools don't seem to be real options. New Mexico offers nothing to Texas or Oklahoma. They don't have a market. They aren't in a recruiting hotbed. They don't get the fans of Texas or OU excited. I like Rice, but I can't see Texas adding them to the BIG12, when they can schedule them for a OOC game any time they want. Plus, Texas, along with A&M, already controls more of the Houston market then Rice, just like those two control more of every major market in Texas. I can't see Texas or Oklahoma letting another Texas team into the BIG12. It just wouldn't benefit them.

the b12 is not weak in athletics. their weakness is markets/academics and the wvu outlier.

lets take a moment to look at wvu. would they be better served adding a school in between them and the b12......a region that they don't normally recruit out of and have a small alumni presence........

or would they be better served with expansion in florida.....a state they recruit heavily out of and has nearly double the amount of registered wvu alumni than every b12 state combined.

seems like a valid question to me.....

the way i see it unless the b12 adds an entire eastern division wvu will always be an outlier. so any realignment proposal with cincy, ville, memphis etc. has the purpose of diminishing the problem but not solving the problem. to solve the problem a conference needs to go after regions that give wvu the best resources to succeed not the best way to cut travel time.

huge travel distances between conference members isn't a problem when every member has a alumni/student body/recruiting footprint that is mostly within the conference blueprint. that is why no one raises an issue with colorado in the pac12 being an outlier but colorado in the b12 was an outlier even though the distances were closer. or how BC, pitt, & SU can be perfectly happy playing fsu/miami (1500 miles) but wvu playing isu (860 miles) is a problem.

When West Virginia joined the Big12 they knew the distance problems. So I do not think the other Big12 schools are worried about having to do something to help out West Virginia.

while they obviously knew. it was

1. a knee jerk reaction because they had limited options and decided to go all in on athletics

2. didn't realize how much wvu would struggle. i don't think anyone was predicting wvu to get just 1 tx recruit in the 13/14 classes combined nor have such a downturn in FB.

now that the conference has stabilized (somewhat) the b12 now needs to focus on rebuilding. and part of that rebuilding is fixing the wvu problem because the last thing they need is another disgruntled program who feels the b12 isn't doing that much for them.

(03-02-2014 03:15 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:41 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:23 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  I don't think any of those options would ever get a serious look. When the BIG12 finally expands, the biggest factor in choosing programs will be if adding them benefits Texas and OU. TCU gave Texas and OU and easy road game between the two schools, in a talent rich region.

I still think WVU was a bad addition. I doubt the BIG12 will make that mistake again, so the Florida schools don't seem to be real options. New Mexico offers nothing to Texas or Oklahoma. They don't have a market. They aren't in a recruiting hotbed. They don't get the fans of Texas or OU excited. I like Rice, but I can't see Texas adding them to the BIG12, when they can schedule them for a OOC game any time they want. Plus, Texas, along with A&M, already controls more of the Houston market then Rice, just like those two control more of every major market in Texas. I can't see Texas or Oklahoma letting another Texas team into the BIG12. It just wouldn't benefit them.

Yup. Tulane would be more likely than Rice.

I disagree. Tulane is Oklahoma's Rice. Adding them would mean nothing to Texas, and Oklahoma can schedule them in OOC games any time they want.

You could say the same thing about every team you have listed. I don't think Tulane is the choice. I simply said Tulane is MORE LIKELY than Rice. I doubt either is very high on the list. Like I said, I think Cincy and ECU are the best available choices. I don't think the B12 goes beyond 12.

i like rice because they have

good facilities
history with the TX schools
elite academics

as much as everyone hates the idea of more tx expansion in the b12. it is more to the benefit of the tx schools who don't want to see their political power diluted down with more additions. so if the b12 does expand by more than 2 teams i think including a tx school to keep UT satisfied is a no brainer. they won't want anything to do with elevating another in-state land grant which leaves rice/smu as the most likely options. having more tx schools give all the other b12 schools more tx access as well. so it is beneficial to the conference as a whole. no offense to smu but i believe that rice provides more of what the b12 is looking for/needs.

That makes no sense. Texas doesn't need any other Texas programs to make them happy. Texas along with Texas A&M already have a majority of fan support in every media market in Texas. TCU got the nod because the were winning at the highest level (BCS Bowl), and located between UT and OU. Rice doesn't have the same situation, and SMU was beaten out by TCU for the spot. Their will be no more Texas teams in the BIG12 as long as Texas is in the conference, and they aren't going anywhere.

You are right about no large public universities. Neither Texas nor Oklahoma would let a Houston, UTEP, North Texas, or UTSA into the BIG12.

(03-02-2014 02:50 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:41 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 12:14 PM)C Marlow Wrote:  I think the most probable outcomes for expansion will be very similar to what we see today. I think the P5 will stay intact as we see it today. I don't foresee the demise of the BigXII nor the ACC. It looks like all the schools in the P5 like their current connections. I doubt that four by 16 or five by 14 is the endgame based on current ties between the schools. The PAC is stuck at 12 unless the BigXII folds. It appears the Big XII schools like associating with each other, so I don't expect to see it fold. The ACC schools signed a GOR after numerous feelers sent to various schools from the B1G and BigXII, so those schools also want to stay connected. Plus, the ACC stays at 14 until ND commits, and I don't see that happening any time soon. The only P5 who may want to expand would be the BigXII. Only slam dunk candidate, if there is one, would be BYU. And that is a stretch at this point.

IMHO, I think P5 conf expansion is done. BigXII is the only one that might do it, but no current school seems to want that as of today.

I agree. I think we are set for a couple of decades. By 2035 when the last of the agreements expire (and probably the 2nd Pac 12 and Big 12 contract), the media market will be much changed and things will happen then. But I won't venture a guess. It all depends on how things change.

Texas, FSU, North Carolina and Notre Dame all looked carefully and made the choices they made over the last few years. I don't see any reason to believe any will make a different decision 10 years from now unless something changes (media market-which I think will take longer than a decade for a major difference, O'Bannon case, concussions causing some schools to re-think football). So I don't expect changes in the P5 anytime soon. Now I expect the G5 to continue to jockey around and change over the next decade.

I highly doubt that. Things change fast in the world of college football. If someone would have told me 5 years ago that Texas A&M would leave for the SEC and garner more fan support then Texas, I'd have called you crazy. Now the two don't even play each other on Thanksgiving.

As new media creates new opportunities and revenue sources, college football will adapt, and that will destabilize the landscape again, and it won't take decades for it to happen. As long as college football continues to follow the money (and it will), stability will continue to be short-lived.

Anyone who can predict how media will change will be rich. But no one can do that with certainty. Major conference changes have been driven by external changes. There was the growth of the state schools after WWII; the growth of the pros hurting urban schools, especially private ones; the growth of the Sun Belt and West (see Utah, Arizona and Florida schools), Deregulation of the airlines making air travel easier and the end of the NCAA TV monopoly. The growth of cable networks giving more coverage encourages larger conferences and the latest changes driving the Big 10 and SEC expansion is the idea of forced carriage conference networks.

I think we've pretty much run the course of these changes for the P5. Maybe on-line learning throws a new dynamic into realignment decisions. The internet and changes in how we receive entertainment will definitely change things. The question is how long that takes to encourage change in realignment. And as I mentioned above, O'Bannon and the concussion issue could cause changes.

(03-02-2014 03:15 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:41 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:23 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  I don't think any of those options would ever get a serious look. When the BIG12 finally expands, the biggest factor in choosing programs will be if adding them benefits Texas and OU. TCU gave Texas and OU and easy road game between the two schools, in a talent rich region.

I still think WVU was a bad addition. I doubt the BIG12 will make that mistake again, so the Florida schools don't seem to be real options. New Mexico offers nothing to Texas or Oklahoma. They don't have a market. They aren't in a recruiting hotbed. They don't get the fans of Texas or OU excited. I like Rice, but I can't see Texas adding them to the BIG12, when they can schedule them for a OOC game any time they want. Plus, Texas, along with A&M, already controls more of the Houston market then Rice, just like those two control more of every major market in Texas. I can't see Texas or Oklahoma letting another Texas team into the BIG12. It just wouldn't benefit them.

Yup. Tulane would be more likely than Rice.

I disagree. Tulane is Oklahoma's Rice. Adding them would mean nothing to Texas, and Oklahoma can schedule them in OOC games any time they want.

You could say the same thing about every team you have listed. I don't think Tulane is the choice. I simply said Tulane is MORE LIKELY than Rice. I doubt either is very high on the list. Like I said, I think Cincy and ECU are the best available choices. I don't think the B12 goes beyond 12.

i like rice because they have

good facilities
history with the TX schools
elite academics

as much as everyone hates the idea of more tx expansion in the b12. it is more to the benefit of the tx schools who don't want to see their political power diluted down with more additions. so if the b12 does expand by more than 2 teams i think including a tx school to keep UT satisfied is a no brainer. they won't want anything to do with elevating another in-state land grant which leaves rice/smu as the most likely options. having more tx schools give all the other b12 schools more tx access as well. so it is beneficial to the conference as a whole. no offense to smu but i believe that rice provides more of what the b12 is looking for/needs.

John you and I have discussed the Big12 before. No disrespect intended, but I just don't see why you keep posting on something that you do not seem to have a great deal of insight.

For example you say Rice has good facilities. Have you seen their facilities ?

And this has nothing to do with SMU. SMU brings nothing to the table of the Big12, same as Rice.

(03-02-2014 03:19 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:51 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:23 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:07 PM)john01992 Wrote:  as for the b12.......

ucf
usf
new mexico
rice

if i was the b12 commish that's who i would add

I don't think any of those options would ever get a serious look. When the BIG12 finally expands, the biggest factor in choosing programs will be if adding them benefits Texas and OU. TCU gave Texas and OU and easy road game between the two schools, in a talent rich region.

I still think WVU was a bad addition. I doubt the BIG12 will make that mistake again, so the Florida schools don't seem to be real options. New Mexico offers nothing to Texas or Oklahoma. They don't have a market. They aren't in a recruiting hotbed. They don't get the fans of Texas or OU excited. I like Rice, but I can't see Texas adding them to the BIG12, when they can schedule them for a OOC game any time they want. Plus, Texas, along with A&M, already controls more of the Houston market then Rice, just like those two control more of every major market in Texas. I can't see Texas or Oklahoma letting another Texas team into the BIG12. It just wouldn't benefit them.

the b12 is not weak in athletics. their weakness is markets/academics and the wvu outlier.

lets take a moment to look at wvu. would they be better served adding a school in between them and the b12......a region that they don't normally recruit out of and have a small alumni presence........

or would they be better served with expansion in florida.....a state they recruit heavily out of and has nearly double the amount of registered wvu alumni than every b12 state combined.

seems like a valid question to me.....

the way i see it unless the b12 adds an entire eastern division wvu will always be an outlier. so any realignment proposal with cincy, ville, memphis etc. has the purpose of diminishing the problem but not solving the problem. to solve the problem a conference needs to go after regions that give wvu the best resources to succeed not the best way to cut travel time.

huge travel distances between conference members isn't a problem when every member has a alumni/student body/recruiting footprint that is mostly within the conference blueprint. that is why no one raises an issue with colorado in the pac12 being an outlier but colorado in the b12 was an outlier even though the distances were closer. or how BC, pitt, & SU can be perfectly happy playing fsu/miami (1500 miles) but wvu playing isu (860 miles) is a problem.

When West Virginia joined the Big12 they knew the distance problems. So I do not think the other Big12 schools are worried about having to do something to help out West Virginia.

The distance problems are over-rated. Look at a map and see where Tallahassee and Miami are relative to the ACC. Look at the Pac 12 schools. If you took out state lines on the map, WVU wouldn't look so out of place compared to the ACC and Pac.

(03-02-2014 03:27 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 03:15 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:41 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Yup. Tulane would be more likely than Rice.

I disagree. Tulane is Oklahoma's Rice. Adding them would mean nothing to Texas, and Oklahoma can schedule them in OOC games any time they want.

You could say the same thing about every team you have listed. I don't think Tulane is the choice. I simply said Tulane is MORE LIKELY than Rice. I doubt either is very high on the list. Like I said, I think Cincy and ECU are the best available choices. I don't think the B12 goes beyond 12.

i like rice because they have

good facilities
history with the TX schools
elite academics

as much as everyone hates the idea of more tx expansion in the b12. it is more to the benefit of the tx schools who don't want to see their political power diluted down with more additions. so if the b12 does expand by more than 2 teams i think including a tx school to keep UT satisfied is a no brainer. they won't want anything to do with elevating another in-state land grant which leaves rice/smu as the most likely options. having more tx schools give all the other b12 schools more tx access as well. so it is beneficial to the conference as a whole. no offense to smu but i believe that rice provides more of what the b12 is looking for/needs.

That makes no sense. Texas doesn't need any other Texas programs to make them happy. Texas along with Texas A&M already have a majority of fan support in every media market in Texas. TCU got the nod because the were winning at the highest level (BCS Bowl), and located between UT and OU. Rice doesn't have the same situation, and SMU was beaten out by TCU for the spot. Their will be no more Texas teams in the BIG12 as long as Texas is in the conference, and they aren't going anywhere.

You are right about no large public universities. Neither Texas nor Oklahoma would let a Houston, UTEP, North Texas, or UTSA into the BIG12.

reading comprehension dude

you missed the whole "political power within the b12" aspect that i was getting at. the b12 schools have traditionally held 33% of the votes. right now they hold 40%. do you really think they would stand for that number to drop down to 28%????

(03-02-2014 03:32 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 03:19 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:51 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:23 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:07 PM)john01992 Wrote:  as for the b12.......

ucf
usf
new mexico
rice

if i was the b12 commish that's who i would add

I don't think any of those options would ever get a serious look. When the BIG12 finally expands, the biggest factor in choosing programs will be if adding them benefits Texas and OU. TCU gave Texas and OU and easy road game between the two schools, in a talent rich region.

I still think WVU was a bad addition. I doubt the BIG12 will make that mistake again, so the Florida schools don't seem to be real options. New Mexico offers nothing to Texas or Oklahoma. They don't have a market. They aren't in a recruiting hotbed. They don't get the fans of Texas or OU excited. I like Rice, but I can't see Texas adding them to the BIG12, when they can schedule them for a OOC game any time they want. Plus, Texas, along with A&M, already controls more of the Houston market then Rice, just like those two control more of every major market in Texas. I can't see Texas or Oklahoma letting another Texas team into the BIG12. It just wouldn't benefit them.

the b12 is not weak in athletics. their weakness is markets/academics and the wvu outlier.

lets take a moment to look at wvu. would they be better served adding a school in between them and the b12......a region that they don't normally recruit out of and have a small alumni presence........

or would they be better served with expansion in florida.....a state they recruit heavily out of and has nearly double the amount of registered wvu alumni than every b12 state combined.

seems like a valid question to me.....

the way i see it unless the b12 adds an entire eastern division wvu will always be an outlier. so any realignment proposal with cincy, ville, memphis etc. has the purpose of diminishing the problem but not solving the problem. to solve the problem a conference needs to go after regions that give wvu the best resources to succeed not the best way to cut travel time.

huge travel distances between conference members isn't a problem when every member has a alumni/student body/recruiting footprint that is mostly within the conference blueprint. that is why no one raises an issue with colorado in the pac12 being an outlier but colorado in the b12 was an outlier even though the distances were closer. or how BC, pitt, & SU can be perfectly happy playing fsu/miami (1500 miles) but wvu playing isu (860 miles) is a problem.

When West Virginia joined the Big12 they knew the distance problems. So I do not think the other Big12 schools are worried about having to do something to help out West Virginia.

The distance problems are over-rated. Look at a map and see where Tallahassee and Miami are relative to the ACC. Look at the Pac 12 schools. If you took out state lines on the map, WVU wouldn't look so out of place compared to the ACC and Pac.

you should read (or reread) the part i bolded

(03-02-2014 03:32 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 03:15 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:41 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Yup. Tulane would be more likely than Rice.

I disagree. Tulane is Oklahoma's Rice. Adding them would mean nothing to Texas, and Oklahoma can schedule them in OOC games any time they want.

You could say the same thing about every team you have listed. I don't think Tulane is the choice. I simply said Tulane is MORE LIKELY than Rice. I doubt either is very high on the list. Like I said, I think Cincy and ECU are the best available choices. I don't think the B12 goes beyond 12.

i like rice because they have

good facilities
history with the TX schools
elite academics

as much as everyone hates the idea of more tx expansion in the b12. it is more to the benefit of the tx schools who don't want to see their political power diluted down with more additions. so if the b12 does expand by more than 2 teams i think including a tx school to keep UT satisfied is a no brainer. they won't want anything to do with elevating another in-state land grant which leaves rice/smu as the most likely options. having more tx schools give all the other b12 schools more tx access as well. so it is beneficial to the conference as a whole. no offense to smu but i believe that rice provides more of what the b12 is looking for/needs.

John you and I have discussed the Big12 before. No disrespect intended, but I just don't see why you keep posting on something that you do not seem to have a great deal of insight.

For example you say Rice has good facilities. Have you seen their facilities ?

And this has nothing to do with SMU. SMU brings nothing to the table of the Big12, same as Rice.

rice has a 47k stadium that is expandable to 70k. from a stadium perspective rice is in a much better position than most g5 schools in the region looking for a b12 invite.

(03-02-2014 03:27 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:50 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 02:41 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-02-2014 12:14 PM)C Marlow Wrote:  I think the most probable outcomes for expansion will be very similar to what we see today. I think the P5 will stay intact as we see it today. I don't foresee the demise of the BigXII nor the ACC. It looks like all the schools in the P5 like their current connections. I doubt that four by 16 or five by 14 is the endgame based on current ties between the schools. The PAC is stuck at 12 unless the BigXII folds. It appears the Big XII schools like associating with each other, so I don't expect to see it fold. The ACC schools signed a GOR after numerous feelers sent to various schools from the B1G and BigXII, so those schools also want to stay connected. Plus, the ACC stays at 14 until ND commits, and I don't see that happening any time soon. The only P5 who may want to expand would be the BigXII. Only slam dunk candidate, if there is one, would be BYU. And that is a stretch at this point.

IMHO, I think P5 conf expansion is done. BigXII is the only one that might do it, but no current school seems to want that as of today.

I agree. I think we are set for a couple of decades. By 2035 when the last of the agreements expire (and probably the 2nd Pac 12 and Big 12 contract), the media market will be much changed and things will happen then. But I won't venture a guess. It all depends on how things change.

Texas, FSU, North Carolina and Notre Dame all looked carefully and made the choices they made over the last few years. I don't see any reason to believe any will make a different decision 10 years from now unless something changes (media market-which I think will take longer than a decade for a major difference, O'Bannon case, concussions causing some schools to re-think football). So I don't expect changes in the P5 anytime soon. Now I expect the G5 to continue to jockey around and change over the next decade.

I highly doubt that. Things change fast in the world of college football. If someone would have told me 5 years ago that Texas A&M would leave for the SEC and garner more fan support then Texas, I'd have called you crazy. Now the two don't even play each other on Thanksgiving.

As new media creates new opportunities and revenue sources, college football will adapt, and that will destabilize the landscape again, and it won't take decades for it to happen. As long as college football continues to follow the money (and it will), stability will continue to be short-lived.

Anyone who can predict how media will change will be rich. But no one can do that with certainty. Major conference changes have been driven by external changes. There was the growth of the state schools after WWII; the growth of the pros hurting urban schools, especially private ones; the growth of the Sun Belt and West (see Utah, Arizona and Florida schools), Deregulation of the airlines making air travel easier and the end of the NCAA TV monopoly. The growth of cable networks giving more coverage encourages larger conferences and the latest changes driving the Big 10 and SEC expansion is the idea of forced carriage conference networks.

I think we've pretty much run the course of these changes for the P5. Maybe on-line learning throws a new dynamic into realignment decisions. The internet and changes in how we receive entertainment will definitely change things. The question is how long that takes to encourage change in realignment. And as I mentioned above, O'Bannon and the concussion issue could cause changes.

The smart T.V. and mobile devices are changing the entertainment experience. Soon it will extend deeper into the college sports landscape. It is not a stretch to imagine conference channels streaming on Netflix or Hulu. Most new T.V.s and Blu Ray players already feature Netflix buttons on their remotes. An extra expense of $5 to $10 a month per customer should generate large revenues. The channels could stream non televised games from stadium feeds and out of market games in football and basketball. The channel could stream Olympic sports. Coaches shows and daily conference news programs could also stream. I'd pay an extra $10 a month to Netflix for that. I think it will become a reality in the not too distant future. If not through Netflix, then through another site.