***Official B12 Expansion/Implosion Thread 3.0???***
- Thread starter acgclone
- Start date
Is there a chance when this thing all falls apart that the Pac12 or the ACC invites ISU. I mean, it gives both of them a new media market if thats what they are after. No different than the Big12 going after Colorado State or Tulane. I'd have to think a KSU/ISU/OSU/WVU combo to the ACC to match with some of their eastern schools (ND and Louisville) would be kind of interesting. Get to an 18 team conference with 9 teams in a sub?
First, you're dreaming with Notre Dame. They are going to hold out of joining a football conference for as long as they can, and I doubt an ACC implosion forces their hand. Basically, you would be picking up ND under a similar deal that they have with the ACC - 5 out-of-conference games and joining for basketball. Color me not excited for that proposition.
As a result, you still need one more school. I would offer up North Carolina State. There are a lot of televisions in North Carolina, and while the Big 10 and SEC are fighting over the rights to UNC, NCST is ripe for the picking for the Big 12. And once you've added the states of Florida, South Carolina, Virginia, and Kentucky to what we already have in Texas, Oklahoma, and Iowa (plus the KC market), it's on par with what the SEC has.
That, or go after Georgia Tech.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
So your solution to the problem you're inventing is for ISU to challenge the Grant of Rights, punt the whole Big 12 thing we fought to keep together, and gamble on a new conference with a bunch of mid-major teams to bring in comparable TV money to somehow offset the money we forfeit by leaving the Big 12.
And even then, the money doesn't offset anything for us, since our TV rights belong to the Big 12, barring a record-breaking upsurge in cyclones.tv subscriptions.
Good plan. This sounds like a winning solution. Let's throw that weight around.
Actually the teams would still own their third tier rights. So LHN would still bring in money for Texas and Sooner network would bring in cash for OU. They would each own a football game and a few basketball games.
I was going to type something similar to this. ISU would give one of those conferences the eyeballs of Iowa. Doesn't matter how many care about ISU. Look at Rutgers, same thing just a smaller market size obviously.
In addition to eyeballs you need to bring in ad $'s. Principal would love to advertise more in either of those markets. (Pac or ACC)
The stupidity in this and the rest of other pro-expansion posts is unreal.
The pro-expansionists have no frickin clue that the conferences cannot unilaterally add schools and expect that ESPN and Fox are willing to pay each added school over $25M/yr. Both networks are currently in the process of slashing other expenses in order to help pay off their existing TV deals so the last thing they'll do is add schools and game inventory that comes nowhere close to adding $25M/yr of value to the networks and conferences.
I think the three secure conferences (Pac, B1G & SEC) will remain that way with the Pac eventually adding UT & OU which we all know Larry Scott wanted to do.
I think an ACC/Big 12 merger makes a lot of sense because even if the prime targets get swallowed up (OU, UT, UVa, UNC) the remaining ACC/Big 12 teams would still be a compelling conference.
Are you serious? The B12 is only considered good in basketball in B12 country. Everyone else pretty much thinks we're a joke. You can't have a serious conference when only one team has done anything significant in the tourney, and is the conference champion every year for well over a decade.
Maybe you should mail a strongly worded letter to this guy, all of these guys, and someone called Ken Pomeroy telling them how wrong they are.
All those things you link to were written in December/January of last season. By the end of last season I doubt anyone objective would've said the Big 12 was the best. It didn't have a single top-10 team in last year's final rankings, its highest was 13th and that was Oklahoma. It got 7 teams into the tourney which is impressive, but their record was 5-7 with none getting past the Sweet Sixteen. The Big 12 has been doing well the last few years and has had some good depth, but it's also up against long term perceptions that it's not at the level of other conferences. There hasn't been a Big 12/Big 8 team not named "Kansas" that's even played for a national championship since 1988.
At what point do we get to turn this into a Spiderman thread? There's no expansion news at all, the OP just wanted to get in on the ground floor in case something happened. We haven't had a good Spiderman thread lately, and CyTheBird came within a hairs breadth of penning an open letter. This thread has no place to go but spidery.
I know its' not news but the OU president has expressed that our conference is at a "psychological disadvantage" w/o 12 teams and a CCG. Maybe its' not important but it seems kind of important to me.
Legit stories to me in order:
1. We have one member on the playoff committee, a TTech AD with no name recognition. Other conference have 2 or 3 including some college football legends. This is a clear disadvantage regardless of how many teams or CCG we have.
2. OU president talking about how adding two teams wouldn't hurt the $ divide like people said a few months ago.
The rest is fun but baseless speculation.
The OU prez likes the sound of his voice. Take that into consideration, as you try to uncover the meaning of his words.
This is true, which is why my #2 real issue is a distant #2. It's just one guy who said one thing, and one somewhat prideful guy. There's really only one clear major WTF issue when it comes to our conference stability right now and nobody mentions the elephant n the room. It's plain as day, yet not brought up.
