Wild Big 12 Expansion Idea

[CycloneWarning]

Heard someone on sports radio talk about a wild Big 12 idea.

(1) Invite 10 more teams for two divisions. Division champions play for conference championship.

(2) Continue a round robin in football and double round robin in BB. No cross-division games until FB championship, or post-season conference BB tourneys.

(3) The new 10 teams are all in the new division, and do not receive a full share of conference payout. This guy thought that there would be plenty of schools that would accept a 1/2 or 2/3 share to join a P5 conference and would still come out ahead compared to their current revenues. This would prevent dilution of revenue for the current Big 12 members.

(4) Here is the wild part. Follow the approach of some of the soccer leagues. The winner of the second division moves up to the Big 12 division for the following year in the three big sports (FB, MBB, WBB). The last place team in the Big 12 division in each sport moves down to the second division and has to earn their way back by winning that division.

Thoughts?

 

[coolerifyoudid]

First of all, just no.

For conversation's sake, if you get relegated, does that University's share of the money stay the same or do you get bumped down in revenue as well? As an ISU fan, I feel this would end poorly for us.

 

[dinger]

I am just recently becoming familiar with how the soccer leagues do that and I think its really cool. Not sure that would translate to the NCAA or American football of any level, but anything is at least worth conversation at this point.

 

[ImJustKCClone]

It would also make it difficult to schedule conference games which are set up well in advance. How would you know who the top team in the lower division and the bottom team in the upper division would be? Scheduling collegiate sports, you have to work around a lot more variables than in pro sports. I think the basketball scheduling would be exceptionally problematic.

 

[Mtowncyclone13]

what if you took 128 teams into one huge conference, broke it up into smaller divisions, played everyone in your division and 3 or 4 teams from the other divisions each year, and then the top 4 (or 8 if we're feeling crazy) get invited to a playoff.

the lesser schools can still play the big boys but won't get as much money.

 

[CloneinWDSM]

Relegation? lol no.

 

[CycloneWarning]

First of all, just no.

For conversation's sake, if you get relegated, does that University's share of the money stay the same or do you get bumped down in revenue as well? As an ISU fan, I feel this would end poorly for us.

He did not talk about that, but no, I don't think the money would change for the original Big 12 members. That would be devastating for a school like ISU that has invested in facilities to see their share cut to 1/2 or 2/3. But it would probably be easy to give the school moving up a bonus allocation of a couple of million and maybe penalize the school moving down a million.

Idk that scheduling would be terribly difficult. If a Houston moves up in FB, and a KU moves down, they simply take each other's schedule the next year. Logistics would have to be redone, but you would have a year to do it.

 

[KnappShack]

Heard someone on sports radio talk about a wild Big 12 idea.

(1) Invite 10 more teams for two divisions. Division champions play for conference championship.

(2) Continue a round robin in football and double round robin in BB. No cross-division games until FB championship, or post-season conference BB tourneys.

(3) The new 10 teams are all in the new division, and do not receive a full share of conference payout. This guy thought that there would be plenty of schools that would accept a 1/2 or 2/3 share to join a P5 conference and would still come out ahead compared to their current revenues. This would prevent dilution of revenue for the current Big 12 members.

(4) Here is the wild part. Follow the approach of some of the soccer leagues. The winner of the second division moves up to the Big 12 division for the following year in the three big sports (FB, MBB, WBB). The last place team in the Big 12 division in each sport moves down to the second division and has to earn their way back by winning that division.

Thoughts?

So is there no chance of going worst to first? My club has a star get hurt and misses the season. Next year he's the second coming of Payton Manning. They can't win the title because last year's team sucked?

Is that how it works? If so let's slap ads all over the uniforms and reward flopping. Go full Euro here

 

[jcyclonee]

what if you took 128 teams into one huge conference, broke it up into smaller divisions, played everyone in your division and 3 or 4 teams from the other divisions each year, and then the top 4 (or 8 if we're feeling crazy) get invited to a playoff.

the lesser schools can still play the big boys but won't get as much money.

But what would you call this conference? Maybe the Conference Organization for Recreation (activities) and Recruitment for Universities in the Public Trust.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

Interesting to think about but I don't see any situation where the current Big 12 schools agree to a system that could relegate themselves. Theres no benefit

 

[Cycsk]

It would also make it difficult to schedule conference games which are set up well in advance. How would you know who the top team in the lower division and the bottom team in the upper division would be? Scheduling collegiate sports, you have to work around a lot more variables than in pro sports. I think the basketball scheduling would be exceptionally problematic.

Not sure this is really an issue because I don't think they determine next year's schedule until after the season anyway. Correct?

 

[coolerifyoudid]

He did not talk about that, but no, I don't think the money would change for the original Big 12 members. That would be devastating for a school like ISU that has invested in facilities to see their share cut to 1/2 or 2/3. But it would probably be easy to give the school moving up a bonus allocation of a couple of million and maybe penalize the school moving down a million.

Idk that scheduling would be terribly difficult. If a Houston moves up in FB, and a KU moves down, they simply take each other's schedule the next year. Logistics would have to be redone, but you would have a year to do it.

It's an interesting idea, but I can't imagine packaging that television deal to a network to make it look appealing. It would make a few of the snoozer games at the end of the year mean something though. And it would be fun to see every KU football recruit jump ship in November.

 

[CycloneWarning]

So is there no chance of going worst to first? My club has a star get hurt and misses the season. Next year he's the second coming of Payton Manning. They can't win the title because last year's team sucked?

Is that how it works? If so let's slap ads all over the uniforms and reward flopping. Go full Euro here

If the team got relegated down, it could still win its lower division the next year and play the Big 12 division champion in the conference championship game (and get moved back up for the following year).

 

[WIBadger]

I wouldn't want to do it.

Also, I like promotion and relegation for professional sports, but it does really have some problems. First, it promotes stratification because it's really damaging to get relegated so it makes it really difficult for all but the best teams to win. Also, it can (IMO) make it harder for rivalries to form because if you or your rival are relegated and the other one isn't, you won't play each other until you are in the same league again.

 

[jcyclonee]

Interesting to think about but I don't see any situation where the current Big 12 schools agree to a system that could relegate themselves. Theres no benefit

I'm all for it. Anything to make American sports more like futbol I'm behind.

 

[Judoka]

This idea is bad and OP should feel bad.

 

[Cycsk]

what if you took 128 teams into one huge conference, broke it up into smaller divisions, played everyone in your division and 3 or 4 teams from the other divisions each year, and then the top 4 (or 8 if we're feeling crazy) get invited to a playoff.

the lesser schools can still play the big boys but won't get as much money.

I hate any system that has the national champion as its main goal. If we never compete for a national championship, but have great Big 12 rivalries and in-state rivalries, I will still be very happy. However, I'm afraid that the TV-fueled drive to determine the national champion will ruin football on Saturdays by sacrificing tradition and rivalries. Having great Saturdays (and an occasional great Thursday or Friday) is my priority. I don't care how the national champion is determined, but keep your hands off my Saturdays.

 

[coolerifyoudid]

But what would you call this conference? Maybe the Conference Organization for Recreation (activities) and Recruitment for Universities in the Public Trust.

I was thinking the Collectively Loathed and Unified Scholastic Tournament Entirely Restructured For Unmitigated Chaotic Karma

 

[CycloneWarning]

Interesting to think about but I don't see any situation where the current Big 12 schools agree to a system that could relegate themselves. Theres no benefit

My initial reaction also. But there is a benefit. Let’s be honest, ISU would be at risk of being relegated down in FB. Particularly since the Big 12 division will get more difficult. Assume a Houston wins the second division in year 1, and KU gets moved down. In year 2, ISU now has to play Houston instead of KU.

If we get relegated in year 2, we now get a much easier schedule. We might be celebrating a ten win season, a bowl game, etc instead of getting our brains beat in for 2-3 conference wins. And we could fight for the division championship and play in the conference championship game. As long as we get the same money, might be refreshing to get an easier schedule and kick some butt. You think Iowa fans complain they were in an embarrassingly easy division last year?

 

[CYCLNST8]