Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
If not for the comments by Delany, Slive, and Bowlsby lately, it'd completely dismiss anything guys like the DudeofWV have to say. But with the commish's comments plus reputable people like Dennis Dodd chiming in, I think this has some legs to it
Dennis Dodd ‏@dennisdoddcbs 6h More Delany, less filling (than Bowlsby) today but Division 4 is coming folks.



If it happens, what does it mean for ISU? I don't think anybody really knows long term. I'd think it'd have the potential though of shaking things up as much as realignment has the last few years though.



helechopper said:
Rumor from the Dude. If true, true, this could be really interesting...

........................................
‏@theDudeofWV 2m
I'm told by a high-level ESPN contact that Pitt, Duke and Wake have told the ACC they would not play D4 football.

@theDudeofWV 2m
It's unclear if GT would or not.

@MHver3 51s
Getting word today that there are several schools in the ACC that are vehemently against D4 because they can't afford the extra expenditures
........................................

If this comes to fruition, could this be why there were scheduling aliance conversations between the BIG12 and ACC? Could the BIG12 take ACC teams as football only partners? Since the ACC stands to not make as much as the other big 4 conferences, could they slowly be choked out as the "Division 4" idea moves on through the years?
Click to expand...
 
Semi-dumb question: do the kids that play for Army and Navy already get paid since they're technically in the service? Would Army and Navy go D4?
 
TXCyclones said:
Semi-dumb question: do the kids that play for Army and Navy already get paid since they're technically in the service? Would Army and Navy go D4?
Click to expand...

No, they don't get paid b/c they are considered on inactive reserve status until they are commissioned as officers....
 
I could see 5 conferences as the "big boys" D4 or whatever we're calling it. Either 12 teams each, or 16 teams each. Playoffs would take the 5 conf champs and 3 wildcards. There would be either 60 or 80 D4 teams, depending. ISU might be at risk if only 60.

If they go to 16 team leagues, then I think there would be MUCH more focus on your half of the league - really it would be more like 8 team leagues, strongly affiliated with the other half. It'd be the Big8 comeback maybe...

It is starting to feel like the big league commisioners are wanting to call the shots and are sick of the NCAA BS.
 
CascadeClone said:
I could see 5 conferences as the "big boys" D4 or whatever we're calling it. Either 12 teams each, or 16 teams each. Playoffs would take the 5 conf champs and 3 wildcards. There would be either 60 or 80 D4 teams, depending. ISU might be at risk if only 60.

If they go to 16 team leagues, then I think there would be MUCH more focus on your half of the league - really it would be more like 8 team leagues, strongly affiliated with the other half. It'd be the Big8 comeback maybe...

It is starting to feel like the big league commisioners are wanting to call the shots and are sick of the NCAA BS.
Click to expand...
They arent breaking up leagues or legue autonomy.
 
ISUCyclones2015 said:
If we want to change it drastically... why don't we go this route? I would enjoy this much more.

Re-Think College Football
Click to expand...

That model has far too many schools. There will be only 70 to 80 schools in the new division that will be able to afford the additional full Cost of Attendance expense.

I do agree that it's possible to end up with 10-team conferences with many of them reverting back to the 10-team Big 10, 10-team Pac-10, 10-team SEC and 10-team ACC (with South Carolina who left in the early 70s).

The old Big 8 (minus Colorado) would add Texas, Texas A&M and Arkansas. Penn St would go the old Big East with BC, UConn, Syracuse, Rutgers, WVU, VA Tech, Pitt, Miami and Louisville.
 
ISUCyclones2015 said:
If we want to change it drastically... why don't we go this route? I would enjoy this much more.

Re-Think College Football
Click to expand...
So if Iowa State has a miracle season in 2015 and goes 12-0 the best they get is a ticket in the premiere league if they continue success like that for 5 years (if they continue the 10 year average if not why put it in their, why not use 2010 numbers if every year is alone?) J. This guy must be a soccer fan. This is America we like the idea that someone can come up any year and win it all, not this aristocratic notion that only the proven elite can compete.
 
Why not just make districts like HS football in Iowa. 8 districts, 10 teams per, winner takes all and goes to a play off. Give each team 3 predistrict games. As a warm up. Only district games count in who wins the district, except in a tie. First tiebreaker, over all record, 2nd tie breaker total wins of teams played in the predistrict (rewarding playing good teams). Change the districts around every 3 years.
 
Last edited:
I think we will see a Division 4 (probably with a better name) composed of SEC, B1G, Pac-12, ACC, and Big 12 somewhat soon.

The new D-4 will move to an 8-team playoff with the 5 conference champions automatically qualifying fairly quickly, once the Big Ten gets left out of the 4-teamer for a couple years.
 
CyFan61 said:
I think we will see a Division 4 (probably with a better name) composed of SEC, B1G, Pac-12, ACC, and Big 12 somewhat soon.

The new D-4 will move to an 8-team playoff with the 5 conference champions automatically qualifying fairly quickly, once the Big Ten gets left out of the 4-teamer for a couple years.
Click to expand...
Ohio state will compete. They will have the run at the best recruits in the area.
 
No kidding. I didn't realize we were hurting for revenue. Fine, we're not in the ballpark with Texas or Oklahoma, but we're not hurting either.
 
TXCyclones said:
We're a have-not? (Toward the end)

Will 5 power conferences break away from FBS?
Click to expand...

It wouldn't change who we play. It would only change who is in the new Division. The way I look at it is Division I would be broken into 3 Divisions instead of 2. And the playoff structure would also change. But there would be rules set up that would allow the Power 5 conference teams to play teams from the Group of 5 regularly and still have those games count towards bowl eligibility. So I don't understand how this would change our pecking order any more than it does now.
 
TXCyclones said:
We're a have-not? (Toward the end)

Will 5 power conferences break away from FBS?
Click to expand...

We're already a "have not" of major college football. I would see us gaining much more than we lose from such a break, as our recruiting would increase greatly while it wouldn't impact recruiting at all for teams like Texas. They already get the pick of the litter. But suddenly we'd be picking up all those guys that chose to go to non power conferences and star.
 
Judoka said:
We're already a "have not" of major college football. I would see us gaining much more than we lose from such a break, as our recruiting would increase greatly while it wouldn't impact recruiting at all for teams like Texas. They already get the pick of the litter. But suddenly we'd be picking up all those guys that chose to go to non power conferences and star.
Click to expand...

Exactly right. If this guy thinks ISU, Miss St., Wazzou, Wake, etc. would be anything but ecstatic with a move to D4 he's smoking crack.
 
Judoka said:
We're already a "have not" of major college football. I would see us gaining much more than we lose from such a break, as our recruiting would increase greatly while it wouldn't impact recruiting at all for teams like Texas. They already get the pick of the litter. But suddenly we'd be picking up all those guys that chose to go to non power conferences and star.
Click to expand...

As long as adding a stipend to a Div. 4 football scholarship doesn't open up a larger hole for rich schools to reward players and their families (which I'm not sure it wouldn't...IMO this is a slippery slope), then there is no reason to think we'd really lose anything by being a part of the money league. The lower league teams are the only losers with this. But...I'm not sure I'm on board with the stipend issue without knowing the regulations that come with it. It can't make it easier to hide money over-and-beyond that stipend...hiding it in plain sight.
 
I'm assuming it would be a stipend, not actually putting players on payroll. With Title IX I think a stipend is the only way it could happen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom