By what objective measure are they a sleeping giant?
Simple. Tulane took a polysomnograph. It indicates that they are deep into their REM state.
So they are, by any objective measure, sleeping.
The giant bit? I can't help you with that.
By what objective measure are they a sleeping giant?
The thing is, we haven't really interfered with the process like the Big East has. And quite frankly, I'm ok with being hypocritical. The Big 12 needs to protect itself. The villians in all of this are those who started the process despite being in a perfectly fine position (Pac 12, Big 10, SEC). The Big 12 is in self preservation mode. We didn't start this out of pure greed like those leagues did. We're doing whatever we have to to keep our league strong and viable.
Yeah, we were upset. I don't blame the Big East for being upset. The Big 12 hasn't kept any of its members from making their moves. And the Big East can't keep WVU from moving, but their having a hissy fit over 1 year.
I'm fine with a 9 game schedule too. I just hope its not a TV contract issue. I don't think it would be, as a suit from our current TV partner would needlessly sever what has been and would continue to be a lucrative deal for both parties. It would allow someone else to swoop in on the Big 12 TV package, and I don't think our partners want that.
I agree with ISUFan22...it's splitting hairs when debating the motives for conference expansion. Every conference is doing it for the same reason: they believe adding teams is in their own best interest.
I don't think there are any "villians" in this deal. One person's villian is another person's savior. If a conference is convinced that they can make more for their schools by adding a team that wants to join, then those conference adminstrations are NOT doing their jobs by standing pat.
The Big East members signed an agreement to establish a 27-month waiting period. The Big 12 members didn't. But if they had, don't you think the conference would enforce the waiting period on Missouri or TAMU? I think they would.
I do agree with you on one thing: I think that if WVU can't join next year, then the TV networks cut a deal with the Big 12 to maintain the contracts. Fox will find the inventory for 2012...both sides want this deal to work.
I agree with ISUFan22...it's splitting hairs when debating the motives for conference expansion. Every conference is doing it for the same reason: they believe adding teams is in their own best interest.
I don't think there are any "villians" in this deal. One person's villian is another person's savior. If a conference is convinced that they can make more for their schools by adding a team that wants to join, then those conference adminstrations are NOT doing their jobs by standing pat.
The Big East members signed an agreement to establish a 27-month waiting period. The Big 12 members didn't. But if they had, don't you think the conference would enforce the waiting period on Missouri or TAMU? I think they would.
I do agree with you on one thing: I think that if WVU can't join next year, then the TV networks cut a deal with the Big 12 to maintain the contracts. Fox will find the inventory for 2012...both sides want this deal to work.
I would agree that schools are doing it to further their best interests, but that doesn't mean they're doing it for the same reason.
If you and I are sitting here with more than enough food to feed ourselves, but you steal half of my food with the idea that "I can always make use of more" and you know full well that I'm going to starve, when we both had plenty of food to be happy and healthy, do you not see something wrong with that?
The Pac-12 and Big 10 were just trying to get to 12 teams and have a conference title game, BUT they were making PLENTY of money as it was. There was no need for either league to expand. They expanded to make even more money. In order to do this, they nearly killed another league. When something might slightly be in one person's best interest, but to another's massive detriment, isn't there an issue there?
The SEC was even worse. They had absolutely no need to add 2 teams. They could have sat tight at 12 rolling in the cash forever. They made a move intended to destroy the Big 12 for reasons that don't even really make sense. There was room for all of these leagues to continue to be wildly successful, viable operations.
The Big 12's plucking of teams has been solely about survival. The Big 12 needed to fill a gap. The Big 10/Pac 12/SEC didn't need anything.
I cut the Big 10 a little bit more slack than the other two conferences. The Big 10's primary goal was to finally reel in Notre Dame, which wouldn't have hurt anybody. Yes, going for a 12th team that wasn't ND had a lot to do with the money generated by additional BTN subscribers and a championship game, but it also was about fixing their goofy 11-team set-up. Adding Nebraska to the conference made money and made sense, but it wasn't a move made to become or remain the dominant big-dog conference. That is definitely what the Pac-12 and SEC moves were all about.
Adding ND would have been great, and I agree that the Big 10 wasn't interested in destroying other leagues. Well, DeLaney probably was, but the presidents weren't. Also, the Big 10's goofy 11 team set up worked for 2 decades and was actually helping them get teams into the BCS. I can see wanting 12 and all that, but its not like they needed it. It's not like the Big 10 was in a precarious place and had to act or suffer harm.
Larry Scott is hell bent on blowing up college football and has been foiled by everyone around him. Adding 12 teams made sense for them, and was done without destroying other leagues.
The SEC is the prime example of rampant greed in all of this. They had 12 teams and a CCG. They were the most dominant on the field conference. They had a boat load of money. They did not need to add anyone. The ACC moves don't make much sense to me either. Congrats, you have 14 teams and are still as mediocre as ever.
I think the ACC move was pure survival. Syracuse and Pitt were added on the assumption that the SEC or someone else would be poaching at least two of their teams in the next 2-3 years.
I think the ACC will be able to hang onto their schools. For some reason there's some loyalty to that ball of mediocrity. But you could be right.
I think the ACC will be able to hang onto their schools. For some reason there's some loyalty to that ball of mediocrity. But you could be right.
I think the ACC move was pure survival. Syracuse and Pitt were added on the assumption that the SEC or someone else would be poaching at least two of their teams in the next 2-3 years.
I would agree that schools are doing it to further their best interests, but that doesn't mean they're doing it for the same reason.
If you and I are sitting here with more than enough food to feed ourselves, but you steal half of my food with the idea that "I can always make use of more" and you know full well that I'm going to starve, when we both had plenty of food to be happy and healthy, do you not see something wrong with that?
The Pac-12 and Big 10 were just trying to get to 12 teams and have a conference title game, BUT they were making PLENTY of money as it was. There was no need for either league to expand. They expanded to make even more money. In order to do this, they nearly killed another league. When something might slightly be in one person's best interest, but to another's massive detriment, isn't there an issue there?
The SEC was even worse. They had absolutely no need to add 2 teams. They could have sat tight at 12 rolling in the cash forever. They made a move intended to destroy the Big 12 for reasons that don't even really make sense. There was room for all of these leagues to continue to be wildly successful, viable operations.
The Big 12's plucking of teams has been solely about survival. The Big 12 needed to fill a gap. The Big 10/Pac 12/SEC didn't need anything.
Adding ND would have been great, and I agree that the Big 10 wasn't interested in destroying other leagues. Well, DeLaney probably was, but the presidents weren't. Also, the Big 10's goofy 11 team set up worked for 2 decades and was actually helping them get teams into the BCS. I can see wanting 12 and all that, but its not like they needed it. It's not like the Big 10 was in a precarious place and had to act or suffer harm.
Larry Scott is hell bent on blowing up college football and has been foiled by everyone around him. Adding 12 teams made sense for them, and was done without destroying other leagues.
The SEC is the prime example of rampant greed in all of this. They had 12 teams and a CCG. They were the most dominant on the field conference. They had a boat load of money. They did not need to add anyone. The ACC moves don't make much sense to me either. Congrats, you have 14 teams and are still as mediocre as ever.
In all reality the SEC's move in an attempt to kill the Big XII makes perfect sense. The Big XII is as strong in football as the SEC and this season was continuing to get stronger while the SEC has 2 great teams and 10 mediocre to poor teams. If you had an opportunity to kill the only competition that is on the same level or soon to be a level above you wouldn't you take it? They found 2 easy marks in A&M and Mizzou who are the whiny ******* who always complained that the Big XII Conference didn't treat them fairly (excuse for their lack of success since the Big XII formed). It was a simple and smart plan. Mizzou and A&M were so mad at their perception of unfair dealings with the Big XII that they would sign their own death certificates and do it with a smile on their face.
The SEC's goal in all of this was to kill off by their own perception a weakened Big XII. It didn't work and now they will have to deal with Mizzou and A&M and all of the baggage that those two idiot filled fan bases bring. The SEC membership is all for it as they see nothing but 2 easy wins being added to their schedule. The Big XII on the other hand will have won in a big way if they can get WVU into the Big XII next year. The SEC took out the garbage for the Big XII and the Big XII gets to replace them with last years Rose Bowl Champion and the annual Big East representative to the BCS in West Virginia.
SEC grades in this process...
Diabolical planning - A+
Recruiting 2 schools willing to implode their football programs to kill the Big XII - A+
Killing the Big XII - F
Adding 2 quality programs to the SEC - C-
Adding value to the SEC by bringing in 2 new teams - D+
Adding 2 quality fan bases that will travel and fill the stands at bowl games...
1. Mizzou - F
2. A&M - B+
Adding 2 quality recruiting regions to the SEC...
1. Missouri - F
2. Texas - B-
Overall... the SEC's ultimate goal to kill the Big XII backfired.
Wow...I don't even know where to begin on this one...
1. The Big 12 can destroy itself just fine on its own, without help from anybody else.
Why wouldn't the SEC give their biggest competitor in terms of high profile teams, exciting brand of football, quality of play, talent level, media attention, etc... a death blow if they had the chance? This is a business remember? Survival of the fittest and if you have the chance to try and bury your closest competitor why would you pass it up? You wouldn't. The SEC tried and failed. Pretty simple.
2. The SEC and the Big 12 don't compete for the same viewers. They're not in the same region and they're on (mostly) different networks. How does the SEC benefit from the Big 12's demise? Will more people watch their games on CBS? There aren't many people that LIVE in the Big 12, outside of Texas. Does the SEC really covet the Kansas and Iowa markets?
This is always an interesting argument. Most college football fans I know appreciate the history of the game, rivalries, tradition, big time matchups, etc... Outside of watching your favorite team play what games do you watch? The best game on tv with the most interesting matchup? The Big XII and the SEC have the most big name programs, the most big name players, the most exciting rivalries, the best traditions, the most matchups between ranked teams, and typically the most exciting games to watch that actually mean something, etc... So when you flip on the tv to watch college football outside of your favorite team... what 2 conferences are at the top of the list of games you want to see? Big XII & SEC. Killing the Big XII kills the rivalries, scatters the best players, scatters the best traditions, kills a bunch of games matching up ranked teams, etc.... Now the only place to find those games is where? The SEC.
3. I think it's pretty clear that the SEC's goal was to generate enough inventory to support a BTN-style conference network, and renegotiate the TV revenue deals with CBS and ESPN. Done and done.
See above. Kill the Big XII and demand for more SEC games on tv goes up. Insert the SEC Network on cable providers all over the midwest because let's face it... The PAC 12, the B1G, the ACC, and the Big East can't compete with the product that the Big XII and the SEC put on the field. Get rid of the Big XII and now the only quality games to watch are the SEC. Instant market penetration all over Big XII country.
4. I appreciate all of the work you went to assigning letter grades, but these aren't the primary reasons for SEC expansion. There's a reason that only the Big 12 and Big East have been taken to the brink of extinction multiple times over the past 24 months. The Pac 12, Big 10, SEC, and ACC will do what they want, and the Big 12 and the Big East will adapt. Nobody's looking to wreck the Big 12 anymore than they want to wreck the Big East, Mountain West, or Conf. USA. They'll just use them for expansion.
I don't really see the Big 12 and SEC as "business competitors" where one has to prosper at the other's failures.
That's why it's so odd that the SEC was hell bent on killing it.
Originally Posted by MizzoulanderThe only reason the Big XII was targeted was for the simple fact that teams with name recognition nationally like A&M and Nebraska wanted out because they couldn't compete in the Big XII. They made this very clear. The SEC didn't have many options outside of Mizzou to get to 14 because nobody else was interested. That left their options at Mizzou or some mid-major football school. Congratulations to you and the Tigers... you are more highly sought after then Central Florida, Tulane, Florida Atlantic, FIU, Arkansas State, etc... better put that one in your media guide.
And please Missourilander, don't kid yourself MISSOURI was NEVER choice #1, let alone choice #2. they realistically were somewhere between 5 and 10. the other ones just didn't work out. But hey congrats, glad to see they got hitched.