Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
Author Message
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #1
A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
Fall 2011 is probably one of the most pivotal periods of realignment history. Pitt and Syracuse announced plans to go the ACC, after a 27 month waiting period. In October TCU and WVU announced plans to go to the Big 12 but with the intention to start in 2012. But what if the Big 12 had taken Louisville and Cincinnati too? All 5 departing schools might have tried to leave for 2012 leaving Big East football with just UConn, Rutgers, and USF.

At that point, the basketball schools might have declined to rebuild football with full members. At that point, the 3 football schools might not have found anyone willing to join. They might have had to start making plans for life as independents or a conference to affiliate with.

Rutgers eventually gets a golden ticket out from the Big Ten creating a golden ticket for UConn in the ACC. USF joins C-USA who shops for a 14th from the ranks of Temple, the WAC, the SBC, Charlotte, and ODU.

The SBC stays relatively unchanged, the WAC stays in business, the MAC possibly keeps UMass and Temple for football.

GA Southern, App St, ODU, Charlotte, and Coastal Carolina all need new plans to get to FBS unless they get in by way of the WAC or SBC.
09-05-2018 08:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #2
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
The drip, drip, drip of that realignment span had its own impacts.

Consider C-USA. They lost three. Then one more. They replace four with six then lose two more then one more.
Completely different situation if C-USA is at five instead of eight.

Consider the WAC. If they lose the teams they lose faster than what happened, Texas State and UTSA don't have a conference invitation to join the WAC and start the transition to FBS.
09-05-2018 08:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoldenWarrior11 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,628
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 602
I Root For: Marquette, BE
Location: Chicago
Post: #3
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
The Big 12 absolutely should have taken Louisville and Cincinnati (in addition to TCU and West Virginia). They would have gone back to twelve members and had a nice block of Louisville/Cincinnati/West Virginia. Basketball would have still been very strong, and football would have been able to go to a conference championship game earlier. Football could have gone in a number of different combinations division-wise. Rutgers would still be taken by the B1G (along with Maryland). Notre Dame still goes to the ACC (along with Syracuse and Pittsburgh).

The ACC would have been interesting though. I remember reading that some (football schools) within the ACC were against UConn because of their lack of success in football. Unfortunately, no one else would have really moved the needle. USF was awful in basketball (a likely no-vote from the Tobacco Road schools). Navy would have been interesting as a football-only member. Memphis/ECU/Temple, IMO, would not have received enough support either. Not sure where the ACC would have gone.

In the unique scenario where UConn gets left out of the ACC, and the Big East discontinues football, I'd imagine they'd go down the Independent route, and keep Olympic sports in the Big East. In this scenario, I could see the C7 adding Butler (coming off two national championship appearances), Xavier (regain the Cincinnati market), VCU (coming off a Final Four with Shaka Smart), Saint Louis (big market) and UMass (fellow public school, large enrollment, Calipari-history). I struggle envisioning UConn deciding to stay behind if they are the only public school.
09-05-2018 08:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #4
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
09-05-2018 08:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 51,393
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 2017
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU, WYO
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #5
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
(09-05-2018 08:02 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Rutgers eventually gets a golden ticket out from the Big Ten creating a golden ticket for UConn in the ACC.

The opposition to UCONN is firmly and deeply entrenched within the ACC. If UCONN gets an ACC invite it will be shortly after the ACC no longer exists as a power conference.

The ACC doesn't want to be the SEC. It wants to be the Pac-12 of the east coast, but with enough eyeballs to actually make money. It wants to compete for titles in ALL sports while having high academic standards. Notice the ACC threw academics overboard with Louisville before they were interested in taking UCONN. I think the ACC would shoot academics in the head -- repeatedly -- by inviting WVU before they'd invite UCONN.
(This post was last modified: 09-05-2018 09:39 PM by georgia_tech_swagger.)
09-05-2018 09:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Cyniclone Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,302
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 813
I Root For: ODU
Location:
Post: #6
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
(09-05-2018 08:51 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  The Big 12 absolutely should have taken Louisville and Cincinnati (in addition to TCU and West Virginia). They would have gone back to twelve members and had a nice block of Louisville/Cincinnati/West Virginia. Basketball would have still been very strong, and football would have been able to go to a conference championship game earlier. Football could have gone in a number of different combinations division-wise. Rutgers would still be taken by the B1G (along with Maryland). Notre Dame still goes to the ACC (along with Syracuse and Pittsburgh).

The ACC would have been interesting though. I remember reading that some (football schools) within the ACC were against UConn because of their lack of success in football. Unfortunately, no one else would have really moved the needle. USF was awful in basketball (a likely no-vote from the Tobacco Road schools). Navy would have been interesting as a football-only member. Memphis/ECU/Temple, IMO, would not have received enough support either. Not sure where the ACC would have gone.

In the unique scenario where UConn gets left out of the ACC, and the Big East discontinues football, I'd imagine they'd go down the Independent route, and keep Olympic sports in the Big East. In this scenario, I could see the C7 adding Butler (coming off two national championship appearances), Xavier (regain the Cincinnati market), VCU (coming off a Final Four with Shaka Smart), Saint Louis (big market) and UMass (fellow public school, large enrollment, Calipari-history). I struggle envisioning UConn deciding to stay behind if they are the only public school.

I'm guessing the Big East passes on VCU and UMass because of the public school thing (and possibly football for UMass). I've heard Richmond has good relations with Georgetown, but I don't know if that and a fat endowment is enough to get them seriously on the radar then OR now.
09-05-2018 10:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #7
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
(09-05-2018 08:51 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  The Big 12 absolutely should have taken Louisville and Cincinnati (in addition to TCU and West Virginia).

Looking at it in hindsight: The Big 12 did the right thing in continuing with a 10 member conference.

If you value having a football conference title game, CCG rules now permit a 10 team conference to hold a CCG.

More importantly, the Big 12 is making about the same amount of money in total that they would be making if they had 12 members, but each of the 10 comes out way ahead because they split that pie 10 ways instead of 12. The Big 12 says that each member got about $34.3 million from the conference for 2017 (some of Baylor's money was withheld, but they'll get it eventually). So the conference distributed $343 million to its members. If they divided that amount of money among 12 members instead of 10, each would get only $28.6 million instead of $34.3 million. Each Big 12 athletic department gets almost $6 million more each year than they would get if the conference had 12 members.
(This post was last modified: 09-06-2018 12:56 AM by Wedge.)
09-06-2018 12:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoldenWarrior11 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,628
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 602
I Root For: Marquette, BE
Location: Chicago
Post: #8
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
(09-06-2018 12:55 AM)Wedge Wrote:  
(09-05-2018 08:51 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  The Big 12 absolutely should have taken Louisville and Cincinnati (in addition to TCU and West Virginia).

Looking at it in hindsight: The Big 12 did the right thing in continuing with a 10 member conference.

If you value having a football conference title game, CCG rules now permit a 10 team conference to hold a CCG.

More importantly, the Big 12 is making about the same amount of money in total that they would be making if they had 12 members, but each of the 10 comes out way ahead because they split that pie 10 ways instead of 12. The Big 12 says that each member got about $34.3 million from the conference for 2017 (some of Baylor's money was withheld, but they'll get it eventually). So the conference distributed $343 million to its members. If they divided that amount of money among 12 members instead of 10, each would get only $28.6 million instead of $34.3 million. Each Big 12 athletic department gets almost $6 million more each year than they would get if the conference had 12 members.

True, but you also don't have the "psychologically disadvantaged" comments from Boren. You don't miss out on seven years of a Big 12 Championship game. It also eliminates any perception that the Big 12 is ripe for raiding due to Texas' and Oklahoma's unhappiness/desire to leave (which still exists to an extent today).

The Big 12 is getting paid now. Who knows what that figure looks like in ten years - especially if Texas continues not being Texas.
09-06-2018 08:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Captain Bearcat Offline
All-American in Everything
*

Posts: 9,478
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 766
I Root For: UC
Location: IL & Cincinnati, USA
Post: #9
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
(09-05-2018 09:38 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(09-05-2018 08:02 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Rutgers eventually gets a golden ticket out from the Big Ten creating a golden ticket for UConn in the ACC.

The opposition to UCONN is firmly and deeply entrenched within the ACC. If UCONN gets an ACC invite it will be shortly after the ACC no longer exists as a power conference.

The ACC doesn't want to be the SEC. It wants to be the Pac-12 of the east coast, but with enough eyeballs to actually make money. It wants to compete for titles in ALL sports while having high academic standards. Notice the ACC threw academics overboard with Louisville before they were interested in taking UCONN. I think the ACC would shoot academics in the head -- repeatedly -- by inviting WVU before they'd invite UCONN.

Why? Just wondering. Is it all because of the lawsuits and the vitriol against BC from 2003/4's reallignment?
09-06-2018 08:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Captain Bearcat Offline
All-American in Everything
*

Posts: 9,478
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 766
I Root For: UC
Location: IL & Cincinnati, USA
Post: #10
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
(09-05-2018 10:56 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  
(09-05-2018 08:51 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  The Big 12 absolutely should have taken Louisville and Cincinnati (in addition to TCU and West Virginia). They would have gone back to twelve members and had a nice block of Louisville/Cincinnati/West Virginia. Basketball would have still been very strong, and football would have been able to go to a conference championship game earlier. Football could have gone in a number of different combinations division-wise. Rutgers would still be taken by the B1G (along with Maryland). Notre Dame still goes to the ACC (along with Syracuse and Pittsburgh).

The ACC would have been interesting though. I remember reading that some (football schools) within the ACC were against UConn because of their lack of success in football. Unfortunately, no one else would have really moved the needle. USF was awful in basketball (a likely no-vote from the Tobacco Road schools). Navy would have been interesting as a football-only member. Memphis/ECU/Temple, IMO, would not have received enough support either. Not sure where the ACC would have gone.

In the unique scenario where UConn gets left out of the ACC, and the Big East discontinues football, I'd imagine they'd go down the Independent route, and keep Olympic sports in the Big East. In this scenario, I could see the C7 adding Butler (coming off two national championship appearances), Xavier (regain the Cincinnati market), VCU (coming off a Final Four with Shaka Smart), Saint Louis (big market) and UMass (fellow public school, large enrollment, Calipari-history). I struggle envisioning UConn deciding to stay behind if they are the only public school.

I'm guessing the Big East passes on VCU and UMass because of the public school thing (and possibly football for UMass). I've heard Richmond has good relations with Georgetown, but I don't know if that and a fat endowment is enough to get them seriously on the radar then OR now.

I agree. UMass does nothing for the C7.

After Xavier, Butler, and Creighton, the next school they would have taken is Dayton. Then VCU. Then St. Louis. In that order.
09-06-2018 08:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoldenWarrior11 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,628
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 602
I Root For: Marquette, BE
Location: Chicago
Post: #11
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
(09-05-2018 10:56 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  
(09-05-2018 08:51 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  The Big 12 absolutely should have taken Louisville and Cincinnati (in addition to TCU and West Virginia). They would have gone back to twelve members and had a nice block of Louisville/Cincinnati/West Virginia. Basketball would have still been very strong, and football would have been able to go to a conference championship game earlier. Football could have gone in a number of different combinations division-wise. Rutgers would still be taken by the B1G (along with Maryland). Notre Dame still goes to the ACC (along with Syracuse and Pittsburgh).

The ACC would have been interesting though. I remember reading that some (football schools) within the ACC were against UConn because of their lack of success in football. Unfortunately, no one else would have really moved the needle. USF was awful in basketball (a likely no-vote from the Tobacco Road schools). Navy would have been interesting as a football-only member. Memphis/ECU/Temple, IMO, would not have received enough support either. Not sure where the ACC would have gone.

In the unique scenario where UConn gets left out of the ACC, and the Big East discontinues football, I'd imagine they'd go down the Independent route, and keep Olympic sports in the Big East. In this scenario, I could see the C7 adding Butler (coming off two national championship appearances), Xavier (regain the Cincinnati market), VCU (coming off a Final Four with Shaka Smart), Saint Louis (big market) and UMass (fellow public school, large enrollment, Calipari-history). I struggle envisioning UConn deciding to stay behind if they are the only public school.

I'm guessing the Big East passes on VCU and UMass because of the public school thing (and possibly football for UMass). I've heard Richmond has good relations with Georgetown, but I don't know if that and a fat endowment is enough to get them seriously on the radar then OR now.

I'm honestly not sure. The difference between UConn-to-the-Big East today and 2011 is that, under this unique scenario, UConn would still have been a core member of the reorganized Big East (non-football). I just find it incredibly hard that UConn is the only public school in this version of the conference, if given a say. I agree that UMass would not have gotten the nod; but I think there would have been a strong likelihood that VCU would have gotten added.
(This post was last modified: 09-06-2018 08:24 AM by GoldenWarrior11.)
09-06-2018 08:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 51,393
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 2017
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU, WYO
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #12
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
(09-06-2018 08:19 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(09-05-2018 09:38 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(09-05-2018 08:02 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Rutgers eventually gets a golden ticket out from the Big Ten creating a golden ticket for UConn in the ACC.

The opposition to UCONN is firmly and deeply entrenched within the ACC. If UCONN gets an ACC invite it will be shortly after the ACC no longer exists as a power conference.

The ACC doesn't want to be the SEC. It wants to be the Pac-12 of the east coast, but with enough eyeballs to actually make money. It wants to compete for titles in ALL sports while having high academic standards. Notice the ACC threw academics overboard with Louisville before they were interested in taking UCONN. I think the ACC would shoot academics in the head -- repeatedly -- by inviting WVU before they'd invite UCONN.

Why? Just wondering. Is it all because of the lawsuits and the vitriol against BC from 2003/4's reallignment?
That is part of it. The bigger rub is that football generates 80% of the revenue. And GT, FSU, and Clemson have SEC in state rivals pulling down $15m more a year just in TV money. What will UConn do to close that gap? Not a dang thing. in fact by adding another mouth to feed it will probably make it worse. BC is against UConn because they want all of New England to themselves. VT even though they do not have an in-state SEC rival would likely side with the three schools who do for similar motivations. That's already five rock solid no votes. Game over.

Sent from my ZTE A2017U using Tapatalk
(This post was last modified: 09-06-2018 12:23 PM by georgia_tech_swagger.)
09-06-2018 08:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CliftonAve Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 21,880
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 1171
I Root For: Jimmy Nippert
Location:
Post: #13
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
(09-06-2018 12:55 AM)Wedge Wrote:  
(09-05-2018 08:51 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  The Big 12 absolutely should have taken Louisville and Cincinnati (in addition to TCU and West Virginia).

Looking at it in hindsight: The Big 12 did the right thing in continuing with a 10 member conference.

If you value having a football conference title game, CCG rules now permit a 10 team conference to hold a CCG.

More importantly, the Big 12 is making about the same amount of money in total that they would be making if they had 12 members, but each of the 10 comes out way ahead because they split that pie 10 ways instead of 12. The Big 12 says that each member got about $34.3 million from the conference for 2017 (some of Baylor's money was withheld, but they'll get it eventually). So the conference distributed $343 million to its members. If they divided that amount of money among 12 members instead of 10, each would get only $28.6 million instead of $34.3 million. Each Big 12 athletic department gets almost $6 million more each year than they would get if the conference had 12 members.

Back then the media deal included a pro-rata clause. The networks would have had to pay more to add Louisville and one other. There would have been no loss of revenue, and for a short term the 10 schools would have gotten a little more in their pocket until those schools were fully vested (5 years I think it was).

By having WVU, Louisville, and Cincinnati in the conference the Big 12 would have really made a dent into a region of the country that really gets into college football and basketball. Not to mention there would have been a lot more exposure/coverage by media outlets in Cincinnati, Louisville, Lexington, Dayton, Indianapolis, Columbus, etc.

It would have been a good thing... but they didn't want those icky schools named after a city.
(This post was last modified: 09-06-2018 08:59 AM by CliftonAve.)
09-06-2018 08:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #14
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
Clearly, on the basis of football prowess alone, TCU made all the sense in the world for the Big 12. Except that they didn't add any market the B12 didn't already have.

What if the B12 had been more proactive sooner and tried to cut the ACC off at the pass? What if instead of TCU they tried to get Louisville, Cincinnati, West Virginia and Pitt as a package deal? If Pitt weren't yet assured of their safe landing in the ACC, might they have taken the bird in the hand (which included their arch rival)?

In that scenario, would the ACC have expanded at all in 2011?
09-06-2018 09:05 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardinalJim Offline
Welcome to The New Age
*

Posts: 16,477
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 2968
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Staffordsville, KY
Post: #15
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
The Big 12’s failure to invite Cincinnati and Louisville ranks up there with Penn State being denied membership in The Big East in terms of boneheaded conference expansion decisions. Could also include The Big East’s failure to invite Memphis and East Carolina before The Big 12 and The ACC expanded in the same category.
CJ
09-06-2018 09:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CliftonAve Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 21,880
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 1171
I Root For: Jimmy Nippert
Location:
Post: #16
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
(09-06-2018 09:05 AM)ken d Wrote:  Clearly, on the basis of football prowess alone, TCU made all the sense in the world for the Big 12. Except that they didn't add any market the B12 didn't already have.

What if the B12 had been more proactive sooner and tried to cut the ACC off at the pass? What if instead of TCU they tried to get Louisville, Cincinnati, West Virginia and Pitt as a package deal? If Pitt weren't yet assured of their safe landing in the ACC, might they have taken the bird in the hand (which included their arch rival)?

In that scenario, would the ACC have expanded at all in 2011?

Would Rutgers have been a viable option for the ACC? Assume the ACC came out in front of the B1G and offered the Scarlet Knights, its possible Rutgers would have left for the first conference that came calling. Rutgers would have been academically acceptable for the ACC and it would have given them the additional exposure in the NY market the conference desires.
09-06-2018 09:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


BePcr07 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,900
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 342
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #17
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
With the SEC and B1G going to 14 and the XII losing schools, stabilizing at 14 may have been the better play. Prior to the ACC expanding efforts and starting with 8 schools (Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Kansas, Kansas St, Iowa St): Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, TCU, Louisville, Cincinnati. If any school said “No” then go with Houston.

West: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Kansas, Kansas St, Iowa St
East: Baylor, TCU, Louisville, Cincinnati, West Virginia, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
09-06-2018 09:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HHOOTter Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 552
Joined: Feb 2009
Reputation: 23
I Root For: tulsa
Location:
Post: #18
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
(09-06-2018 08:58 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(09-06-2018 12:55 AM)Wedge Wrote:  
(09-05-2018 08:51 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  The Big 12 absolutely should have taken Louisville and Cincinnati (in addition to TCU and West Virginia).

Looking at it in hindsight: The Big 12 did the right thing in continuing with a 10 member conference.

If you value having a football conference title game, CCG rules now permit a 10 team conference to hold a CCG.

More importantly, the Big 12 is making about the same amount of money in total that they would be making if they had 12 members, but each of the 10 comes out way ahead because they split that pie 10 ways instead of 12. The Big 12 says that each member got about $34.3 million from the conference for 2017 (some of Baylor's money was withheld, but they'll get it eventually). So the conference distributed $343 million to its members. If they divided that amount of money among 12 members instead of 10, each would get only $28.6 million instead of $34.3 million. Each Big 12 athletic department gets almost $6 million more each year than they would get if the conference had 12 members.

Back then the media deal included a pro-rata clause. The networks would have had to pay more to add Louisville and one other. There would have been no loss of revenue, and for a short term the 10 schools would have gotten a little more in their pocket until those schools were fully vested (5 years I think it was).

By having WVU, Louisville, and Cincinnati in the conference the Big 12 would have really made a dent into a region of the country that really gets into college football and basketball. Not to mention there would have been a lot more exposure/coverage by media outlets in Cincinnati, Louisville, Lexington, Dayton, Indianapolis, Columbus, etc.

It would have been a good thing... but they didn't want those icky schools named after a city.

FWIW
Back when the Big 12 "Exploded"
After the WVU invite
The only other 'potential eastern schools
that were seriously considered
were Louisville & Pittsburgh
09-06-2018 09:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #19
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
(09-06-2018 09:12 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(09-06-2018 09:05 AM)ken d Wrote:  Clearly, on the basis of football prowess alone, TCU made all the sense in the world for the Big 12. Except that they didn't add any market the B12 didn't already have.

What if the B12 had been more proactive sooner and tried to cut the ACC off at the pass? What if instead of TCU they tried to get Louisville, Cincinnati, West Virginia and Pitt as a package deal? If Pitt weren't yet assured of their safe landing in the ACC, might they have taken the bird in the hand (which included their arch rival)?

In that scenario, would the ACC have expanded at all in 2011?

Would Rutgers have been a viable option for the ACC? Assume the ACC came out in front of the B1G and offered the Scarlet Knights, its possible Rutgers would have left for the first conference that came calling. Rutgers would have been academically acceptable for the ACC and it would have given them the additional exposure in the NY market the conference desires.

In that scenario, Rutgers might have been an obvious choice (to some) because of its proximity to New York, but only as a replacement for Maryland. The B1G would have screwed that up.

And I'm not sure how valuable Rutgers is/was as an entry to the New York market. I don't think the B1G wanted to bring Rutgers' fanbase into the fold. I think they wanted them more because there are so many midwestern B1G alumni now living in the New York area, just like they have a lot of alumni in the DC area. The size of those markets is just a plus.

After the hypothetical 2011 raid, the BE was left with Syracuse, Connecticut, Rutgers and South Florida. I think there would have been a lot of resistance from the southern football first contingent of the ACC to picking two from that group.
09-06-2018 09:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CrazyPaco Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,946
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 275
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #20
RE: A counter factual look at fall 2011 alignment
(09-06-2018 09:23 AM)HHOOTter Wrote:  
(09-06-2018 08:58 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(09-06-2018 12:55 AM)Wedge Wrote:  
(09-05-2018 08:51 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  The Big 12 absolutely should have taken Louisville and Cincinnati (in addition to TCU and West Virginia).

Looking at it in hindsight: The Big 12 did the right thing in continuing with a 10 member conference.

If you value having a football conference title game, CCG rules now permit a 10 team conference to hold a CCG.

More importantly, the Big 12 is making about the same amount of money in total that they would be making if they had 12 members, but each of the 10 comes out way ahead because they split that pie 10 ways instead of 12. The Big 12 says that each member got about $34.3 million from the conference for 2017 (some of Baylor's money was withheld, but they'll get it eventually). So the conference distributed $343 million to its members. If they divided that amount of money among 12 members instead of 10, each would get only $28.6 million instead of $34.3 million. Each Big 12 athletic department gets almost $6 million more each year than they would get if the conference had 12 members.

Back then the media deal included a pro-rata clause. The networks would have had to pay more to add Louisville and one other. There would have been no loss of revenue, and for a short term the 10 schools would have gotten a little more in their pocket until those schools were fully vested (5 years I think it was).

By having WVU, Louisville, and Cincinnati in the conference the Big 12 would have really made a dent into a region of the country that really gets into college football and basketball. Not to mention there would have been a lot more exposure/coverage by media outlets in Cincinnati, Louisville, Lexington, Dayton, Indianapolis, Columbus, etc.

It would have been a good thing... but they didn't want those icky schools named after a city.

FWIW
Back when the Big 12 "Exploded"
After the WVU invite
The only other 'potential eastern schools
that were seriously considered
were Louisville & Pittsburgh

Pitt was considered prior the WVU invite, as confirmed by Pete Thamel, and overtures were made which is not in published accounts. Although wanting out of the Big East, Pitt did not want to go to the B12 by itself, geographically, and was only considering it if it could force being invited as part of a group that would have included WVU and Rutgers or Louisville. That ended when Pitt received an invite to its preferred destination of the ACC. WVU was then approached.
(This post was last modified: 09-06-2018 09:44 AM by CrazyPaco.)
09-06-2018 09:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.