***OFFICIAL BIG 12 EXPANSION THREAD 2.0***

[Boxerdaddy]

And by the way, if 12 is so stable, why did the Big 12 almost go into nonexistence the last couple of years? Or why is the ACC about to be picked apart now? 12 is no more or less stable than 10, 14, or 16. TV money is what makes a conference stable.

I never said 12 was a surefire way to remain stable. But it certainly has a better track record than 16 teams. The near failure of the Big12 had nothing to do with its size. Those issues have been discussed ad nauseam. The reason the WAC failed was almost entirely due to it's size (Geographic and #)

Even with as much money as the Big10 will pull in, the schools will still be spending increased $ on travel etc especially for non-revenue sports. (Think Lincoln to Maryland or Rutgers)The SEC will be pretty much the only conference that won't really be spread too thin IMO.

 

[bluestarcyclone]

I never said 12 was a surefire way to remain stable. But it certainly has a better track record than 16 teams.

There's not much of a sample size to say that. Our 12 team conference as of a couple years ago? Obviously had instability. PAC is just now 12. Big 10 was 12 for all of 2 years.

16 teams has been tried once, by small teams that are apples to oranges to BCS teams.

Also, it says nothing about the stability of 10-12 while everyone else has gone to 16 and reaped the financial benefits from it.

 

[Boxerdaddy]

There's not much of a sample size to say that. Our 12 team conference as of a couple years ago? Obviously had instability. PAC is just now 12. Big 10 was 12 for all of 2 years.

16 teams has been tried once, by small teams that are apples to oranges to BCS teams.

Also, it says nothing about the stability of 10-12 while everyone else has gone to 16 and reaped the financial benefits from it.

Show me once where it has worked? That's all I'm saying. And what good does it do to have 16 teams pull in 1.6 billion as opposed to 12 teams pull in 1.2 billion? I haven't seen anything where the numbers go up just by adding teams. The teams added need value above and beyond the average per team as it is now. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on that.

 

[cykadelic2]

Precisely. If you want to match the aggressiveness of Delany, Slive and Scott (and I only want to out of survival) you absolutely have to add Louisville right now even if it means waiting at 11.

We have a bunch of "they don't add x to the pie cut x ways" parrots on this board. I guarantee you if Scott, Slive or Delany were running the Big 12 we'd be at 11 with Louisville right now. Not because Louisville is a must have, but because they make WVU more of a long term fit, are the #1 basketball $ program, are an above average overall athletic department and because adding them helps DESTABILIZE the ACC, repeat...it would help destabilize the ACC.

Delaney, Scott and Slive are working under different T3 revenue models than the B12. The B12 isn't going to add any school if it devalues T1 and T2 revenue shares of existing schools and Louisville does exactly that. Not sure why you and others are struggling with that concept.

 

[ripvdub]

But the only reason population matters at all is with a conference network on cable or satellite with subscribers. We could have s team in every state in the nation, doesn't matter if we don't have a big xii network.I would love one, but these geniuses are all electing to go on their own.

Adding FSU and Clemson alone would put the population in the Big 12 footprint near Big 10 numbers. There was discussion that the Big 12 TV contracts can be revisited every 5 years?

 

[Wesley]

Delaney, Scott and Slive are working under different T3 revenue models than the B12. The B12 isn't going to add any school if it devalues T1 and T2 revenue shares of existing schools and Louisville does exactly that. Not sure why you and others are struggling with that concept.

For the bigger picture. If we have two or three 16 team conferences, they wioll always have two BCS spots just by numbers and crap teams they can beat. If we stand pat at ten, every year may be like this year - sweating bullets that we have two BCS teams.

Sorry, 16 is more powerful than 10.

 

[swarthmoreCY]

Delaney, Scott and Slive are working under different T3 revenue models than the B12. The B12 isn't going to add any school if it devalues T1 and T2 revenue shares of existing schools and Louisville does exactly that. Not sure why you and others are struggling with that concept.

You are a one move man. Survivable in checkers, not good in chess. You know what devalues a conference? Sucking hind-*** after waiting for the Pac 12, Big 10, and SEC to expand to 16 (or up to 20 for the latter). The KU board had a discussion that the TV contracts can be revisited every 5 years (iirc). Like always the models can, and will, change.

 

[swarthmoreCY]

But the only reason population matters at all is with a conference network on cable or satellite with subscribers. We could have s team in every state in the nation, doesn't matter if we don't have a big xii network.I would love one, but these geniuses are all electing to go on their own.

I realize that, but models/plans change. They have changed- the Big 12 is already backtracking about staying at 10.
Once again the presidents of the Big 12 are a step behind.

 

[InCytful]

I realize that, but models/plans change. They have changed- the Big 12 is already backtracking about staying at 10.
Once again the presidents of the Big 12 are a step behind.

Link? I've been looking for stories on what the Big XII is actually doing. Hoping the current commish is more proactive than Beebe.

 

[Wesley]

Link? I've been looking for stories on what the Big XII is actually doing. Hoping the current commish is more proactive than Beebe.

Beebe was a bust. Even fake Beebe had more gumption.

 

[Cy$]

big 12 needs to add Louisville to cut the ACC off. If they don't the ACC will grow and will contend with the Big 12 to be the last superconference (if the 4 big conferences with 16 teams is true).

The big 12 needs to stop being reactive...get Louisville, G Tech, Clemson, and Florida St. and kill the ACC.

Divisions
------------
East
ISU
WVU
G Tech
Clemson
Florida St.
Louisville
Kansas St.

West
-----------
Kansas
Oklahoma
Okie St.
Texas
Baylor
Tech
TCU

play 6 division games and 3 of other conferences, making sure 1 game is against a Texas school at the least.

I don't know how they'd split the divisions without splitting Kansas-Kansas St. Maybe do it based on strength.

Big 12 "Corny Name"
Texas
Clemson
WVU
Tech
Kansas St.
Georgia Tech
Iowa St.

Big 12 "Corny Name"
Oklahoma
Florida St.
Okie St.
Kansas
TCU
Baylor
Louisville

play 6 division games, 1 protected game (oklahoma vs. Texas, flor St. vs. clemson, kansas vs. kansas st.) and then play 2 of the other 6 teams, meaning you'll play a team every three years.

 

[bluestarcyclone]

Show me once where it has worked? That's all I'm saying. And what good does it do to have 16 teams pull in 1.6 billion as opposed to 12 teams pull in 1.2 billion? I haven't seen anything where the numbers go up just by adding teams. The teams added need value above and beyond the average per team as it is now. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on that.

Show me once where it hasnt worked with BCS teams.

And the rumors have all said the numbers go up by adding teams. Especially if you include potential conference championship and semifinal games.

 

[cykadelic2]

Sorry, 16 is more powerful than 10.

Not if you add commuter schools like Louisville.

FSU, Clemson and ND are a different story.

 

[bluestarcyclone]

Not if you add commuter schools like Louisville.

FSU, Clemson and ND are a different story.

On some levels you need those schools. Too many powers makes everyone look bad.

 

[cykadelic2]

You are a one move man. Survivable in checkers, not good in chess. You know what devalues a conference? Sucking hind-*** after waiting for the Pac 12, Big 10, and SEC to expand to 16 (or up to 20 for the latter). The KU board had a discussion that the TV contracts can be revisited every 5 years (iirc). Like always the models can, and will, change.

Many of you here are having a helluva time with math. You simply don't add schools just to add bleepin schools. You have to maintain or increase value for existing schools. The only way you do that with schools like Louisville is if a 4=team conference playoff with 16 makes it worthwhile to do so.

 

[Wesley]

I think Fox and ESPN is making the rounds and telling the conferences what to do for more money. Having four conferences is better than six for the networks. This means less conferences to bid for.

One for ABC/ESPN, one for FOX, one for CBS, and maybe Comcast/NBC.

 

[swarthmoreCY]

Many of you here are having a helluva time with math. You simply don't add schools just to add bleepin schools. You have to maintain or increase value for existing schools. The only way you do that with schools like Louisville is if a 4=team conference playoff with 16 makes it worthwhile to do so.

The Big 12 at some point will have to add schools, the move to a play-off finalized that. You limit your future growth, and more importantly, stability, by waiting. Think of it as an investment if you must. Yes, you do not add schools to just add schools. That is why the programs discussed are FSU, Clemson, and UL (if it is what is needed to provide other ACC schools).

Poor math is not recognizing the future of college athletics is generating revenue from T3 with conference networks and the influence that a 16 member conference has over a 10 or 12. The Big 12 will come around, or it will eventually not exist.

 

[HFCS]

Many of you here are having a helluva time with math. You simply don't add schools just to add bleepin schools. You have to maintain or increase value for existing schools. The only way you do that with schools like Louisville is if a 4=team conference playoff with 16 makes it worthwhile to do so.

Try to think in a complex way...the Big Ten and SEC are headed toward 16...it's obvious...the Big 12 is at just TEN.

FSU was not thrilled with Syracuse adddition and that WVU wasn't even considered for the ACC...FSU strongly favors Louisville over UConn as Maryland's replacement to get the ACC back to 14. What happens if Louisville is unavailable for the ACC? FSU is once again less happy with their conference than they were before because it's UConn to the ACC...yet another crap ACC game they're saddled with sometimes making their path to a four team or even eight team playoff with one or two losses much less likely.

You're a "x$ cut x ways pie" guy and can't see past that. Adding Louisville now isn't remotely about just adding Louisville, if our leadership is thinking like the leaders of the other three major conferences. Just like the Big Ten adding Maryland wasn't about the Big Ten adding Maryland. The Big Ten adding Nebraska wasn't even about just adding Nebraska. If they were only going to add one team it sure as F wasn't going to be one team from a state with half the people of Iowa.

 

[DistrictCyclone]

Sorry, Boxerdaddy: alarson is spot-on here. Saying a 16-team conference is destined to fail simply because ONE such conference did is ridiculous, especially when said conference contained 16 much smaller schools in a different geographic area over a decade ago. Similarly, having 12 members guarantees nothing...how many conferences have had exactly 12 members for the last 5 years?

 

[jimmycy]

The B12 may very well expand but 16 is not necessarily better than 10. Sixteen could potentially dilute the payout. I think in the long run it will dilute the brand of some conferences. See the big10. 16 also makes it more difficult to achieve conference unity. More egos etc. I would be in favor of returning to 12 if we can add long term value to the league. Who those teams might be remains to be seen. I would also be in favor of going to 11 with Louisville and waiting to find the right number 12.