(05-14-2018 07:00 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(05-14-2018 05:57 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-14-2018 10:20 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(05-13-2018 08:23 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(05-13-2018 07:47 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  Are you considering ND in this situation?

And Texas with their LHN brightens everyone in the Big12

Yes and Yes. The old Big East certainly did not benefit from ND's contract, as it eventually got torn apart. The Big 12 was/is on the verge of being picked apart whenever the next cycle comes around. The strongest and most consistent conferences (B1G, SEC and PAC) do not have any members that have a unique contract situation within its membership (I believe).

The very instance of an individual school having a unique contract creates inequality - and, by effect, uncertainty and instability - for that conference.

No, it reflects inequality, it does not create it. Imagine that Penn STate had formed their Eastern League as a football-only conference--Penn State, BC, Syracuse, Rutgers, Temple, Pitt, WVU, Virginia Tech, and let's say Maryland jumps from the ACC to the Eastern Football Conference and the Big East.

That group would have been unstable, simply because one member has so much more gravitational pull than the second-fiddle schools.

The Big 12 isn't unstable because Texas has the LHN. The Big 12 is unstable because Texas throws their weight around. The WCC isn't unstable because Gonzaga has a sweetheart deal, Gonzaga got a sweetheart deal because the WCC is unstable.

History 100% agrees with you, johnbragg

From these group SEC, B1G, ACC and PAC I doubt the SEC, B1G and probably the PAC now put up with that type of behavior from UT. If Texas IMHO ever decides to take their services/weight elsewhere they'll either join the ACC, remain in the Big12 or take the independent route.

Hunch says UT goes Independent if things get hectic in their crumble we so called world.

My favorite realignment never-happened is Texas to the ACC in 2011, with a Notre DAme-style arrangement.

Big 12 is left with Iowa State, Kansas, KSU, Oklahoma, OSU, Texas Tech, Baylor, and maybe TCU. Big East is at 6 football members, 7 with TCU.
Merger? Cannibalism? Big Ten taking Rutgers (get into NYC), Kansas, Missouri and Oklahoma? PAC-16 without Bevo?

(05-14-2018 07:19 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-14-2018 07:00 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(05-14-2018 05:57 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-14-2018 10:20 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(05-13-2018 08:23 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  And Texas with their LHN brightens everyone in the Big12

Yes and Yes. The old Big East certainly did not benefit from ND's contract, as it eventually got torn apart. The Big 12 was/is on the verge of being picked apart whenever the next cycle comes around. The strongest and most consistent conferences (B1G, SEC and PAC) do not have any members that have a unique contract situation within its membership (I believe).

The very instance of an individual school having a unique contract creates inequality - and, by effect, uncertainty and instability - for that conference.

No, it reflects inequality, it does not create it. Imagine that Penn STate had formed their Eastern League as a football-only conference--Penn State, BC, Syracuse, Rutgers, Temple, Pitt, WVU, Virginia Tech, and let's say Maryland jumps from the ACC to the Eastern Football Conference and the Big East.

That group would have been unstable, simply because one member has so much more gravitational pull than the second-fiddle schools.

The Big 12 isn't unstable because Texas has the LHN. The Big 12 is unstable because Texas throws their weight around. The WCC isn't unstable because Gonzaga has a sweetheart deal, Gonzaga got a sweetheart deal because the WCC is unstable.

History 100% agrees with you, johnbragg

From these group SEC, B1G, ACC and PAC I doubt the SEC, B1G and probably the PAC now put up with that type of behavior from UT. If Texas IMHO ever decides to take their services/weight elsewhere they'll either join the ACC, remain in the Big12 or take the independent route.

Hunch says UT goes Independent if things get hectic in their crumble we so called world.

My favorite realignment never-happened is Texas to the ACC in 2011, with a Notre DAme-style arrangement.

Big 12 is left with Iowa State, Kansas, KSU, Oklahoma, OSU, Texas Tech, Baylor, and maybe TCU. Big East is at 6 football members, 7 with TCU.
Merger? Cannibalism? Big Ten taking Rutgers (get into NYC), Kansas, Missouri and Oklahoma? PAC-16 without Bevo?

* Merger - No way
* Cannibalism - The money isn't there anymore...Not gonna happen again.
* PAC 16 without Bevo - Very possible, their big and only target however still remains Bevo so no and no again b/c the numbers $$$ wouldn't be as sexy as once calculated before and b/c their gorrila weight is far to risky scary too.

(05-14-2018 08:07 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(05-14-2018 07:19 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-14-2018 07:00 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(05-14-2018 05:57 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-14-2018 10:20 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Yes and Yes. The old Big East certainly did not benefit from ND's contract, as it eventually got torn apart. The Big 12 was/is on the verge of being picked apart whenever the next cycle comes around. The strongest and most consistent conferences (B1G, SEC and PAC) do not have any members that have a unique contract situation within its membership (I believe).

The very instance of an individual school having a unique contract creates inequality - and, by effect, uncertainty and instability - for that conference.

No, it reflects inequality, it does not create it. Imagine that Penn STate had formed their Eastern League as a football-only conference--Penn State, BC, Syracuse, Rutgers, Temple, Pitt, WVU, Virginia Tech, and let's say Maryland jumps from the ACC to the Eastern Football Conference and the Big East.

That group would have been unstable, simply because one member has so much more gravitational pull than the second-fiddle schools.

The Big 12 isn't unstable because Texas has the LHN. The Big 12 is unstable because Texas throws their weight around. The WCC isn't unstable because Gonzaga has a sweetheart deal, Gonzaga got a sweetheart deal because the WCC is unstable.

History 100% agrees with you, johnbragg

From these group SEC, B1G, ACC and PAC I doubt the SEC, B1G and probably the PAC now put up with that type of behavior from UT. If Texas IMHO ever decides to take their services/weight elsewhere they'll either join the ACC, remain in the Big12 or take the independent route.

Hunch says UT goes Independent if things get hectic in their crumble we so called world.

My favorite realignment never-happened is Texas to the ACC in 2011, with a Notre DAme-style arrangement.

Big 12 is left with Iowa State, Kansas, KSU, Oklahoma, OSU, Texas Tech, Baylor, and maybe TCU. Big East is at 6 football members, 7 with TCU.
Merger? Cannibalism? Big Ten taking Rutgers (get into NYC), Kansas, Missouri and Oklahoma? PAC-16 without Bevo?

* Merger - No way
* Cannibalism - The money isn't there anymore...Not gonna happen again.
* PAC 16 without Bevo - Very possible, their big and only target however still remains Bevo so no and no again b/c the numbers $$$ wouldn't be as sexy as once calculated before and b/c their gorrila weight is far to risky scary too.

I was suggesting that the ACC strike at the Big 12 in 2011, bring in Texas as a member for Olympic sports, independent in football with a scheduling arrangement and bowl pool like Notre Dame got a year later. They had just struck at the Big East (a second time), shanking the Big 12 would have established the ACC as the big dog in the conference realignment prison yard. You wouldn't hear any rumblings about Florida State and Clemson to the Big 12 in THIS timeline.

(05-14-2018 05:57 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  The Big 12 isn't unstable because Texas has the LHN. The Big 12 is unstable because Texas throws their weight around. The WCC isn't unstable because Gonzaga has a sweetheart deal, Gonzaga got a sweetheart deal because the WCC is unstable.

Don't forget about Oklahoma. E.g., the Big 12 went through that process of vetting G5 candidates for expansion in 2016 almost entirely because of Oklahoma demands.

Texas wanted none of that, but Oklahoma did, and they are too big to be ignored as well. Texas is the 900 pound gorilla of the B12, but OU is an 800 pound gorilla and they can throw weight around too.

Expansion didn't fall off the table until it was proved to OU that no available candidates would add value.

As for Texas, of course they throw their weight around. Why wouldn't they?

Don't forget the two Oklahoma schools and their attempt to join the PAC.

I don't think it's that bad for the AAC. I don't think Navy is big-leaguing the AAC as much as I believe Navy just has to take care of itself and protect its options. Navy's been on steady ground as a football program for a little while now, but for pretty much all of my childhood years and then some, they sucked. They watched Army, who had more of a pulse at the time, try out CUSA with disastrous results.

I wouldn't call the AAC unstable because of the Navy arrangement. Navy's arrangement only pronounces its own complex issues, the history of the chase the "Big East" (which the AAC is here) had with Navy (and Army for that matter), and the well-known internal issues within the AAC.

If the Big XII expands tomorrow and takes Houston, and the ACC calls up Cincy and UConn, Navy's set. If a future AAC deal fails to thrill, Navy is set. If the AAC falls apart, Navy is set. Good for the AAC to have them (while they do), but, clearly, not at a place or in a time where the two seem to be fully embedded and partnered with each other.

(05-14-2018 08:18 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-14-2018 08:07 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(05-14-2018 07:19 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-14-2018 07:00 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(05-14-2018 05:57 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  No, it reflects inequality, it does not create it. Imagine that Penn STate had formed their Eastern League as a football-only conference--Penn State, BC, Syracuse, Rutgers, Temple, Pitt, WVU, Virginia Tech, and let's say Maryland jumps from the ACC to the Eastern Football Conference and the Big East.

That group would have been unstable, simply because one member has so much more gravitational pull than the second-fiddle schools.

The Big 12 isn't unstable because Texas has the LHN. The Big 12 is unstable because Texas throws their weight around. The WCC isn't unstable because Gonzaga has a sweetheart deal, Gonzaga got a sweetheart deal because the WCC is unstable.

History 100% agrees with you, johnbragg

From these group SEC, B1G, ACC and PAC I doubt the SEC, B1G and probably the PAC now put up with that type of behavior from UT. If Texas IMHO ever decides to take their services/weight elsewhere they'll either join the ACC, remain in the Big12 or take the independent route.

Hunch says UT goes Independent if things get hectic in their crumble we so called world.

My favorite realignment never-happened is Texas to the ACC in 2011, with a Notre DAme-style arrangement.

Big 12 is left with Iowa State, Kansas, KSU, Oklahoma, OSU, Texas Tech, Baylor, and maybe TCU. Big East is at 6 football members, 7 with TCU.
Merger? Cannibalism? Big Ten taking Rutgers (get into NYC), Kansas, Missouri and Oklahoma? PAC-16 without Bevo?

* Merger - No way
* Cannibalism - The money isn't there anymore...Not gonna happen again.
* PAC 16 without Bevo - Very possible, their big and only target however still remains Bevo so no and no again b/c the numbers $$$ wouldn't be as sexy as once calculated before and b/c their gorrila weight is far to risky scary too.

I was suggesting that the ACC strike at the Big 12 in 2011, bring in Texas as a member for Olympic sports, independent in football with a scheduling arrangement and bowl pool like Notre Dame got a year later. They had just struck at the Big East (a second time), shanking the Big 12 would have established the ACC as the big dog in the conference realignment prison yard. You wouldn't hear any rumblings about Florida State and Clemson to the Big 12 in THIS timeline.

Pretty sure that sexy scenario approach was definitely brought up for discussion to bad nothing came of it.