If the B12 remains intact and moves forward

[Yellow Snow]

The new big 12 in your world doesn’t have one national brand program that will compel any network to give even equal money.

your fellow doom guy even projected 20 million tv dollars when he was trying imply we’d loan all these schools money to come to the big 12.

You are very confusing...

What do you propose we do? I'm not saying your line of thinking is wrong at all, but in your opinion... what should ISU be doing now?

Number one... beg like hell to get into a P5 conference (pac or B10). Right? OK, agreed. I assume we are doing that. It's like asking a girl out. You can't make them say yes.

At the same time, I believe we should be exploring a back up option. NOBODY on this board thinks we should just jump and expand right now. At least I would hope not. But the fact remains that we can't also stay at 8 schools if choice number one doesn't bear fruit.

You are arguing with yourself in a way. Both admitting that we are at the mercy of other conferences to accept us, as well as getting all angry when others are discussing the other options. Which we all agree won't be even equal to what we had with OU and Texas.

 

[Cyclones1969]

There’s no reasoning with the people who are doom and gloom about ISU’s future if it’s in a reconstituted Big 12; they just can’t wrap their minds around it. That league will probably be better than at least one of the ACC or Pac-12 most seasons. And it will be in the playoff.

Where is the guarantee for the playoff spot?

Pretending that the current staff will stay and take less than market value, or even pay cuts, to compete with Oklahoma state and whomever else they bring in, rather than go challenge themselves at the highest level is a bad take, and that’s saying something with some of your other hot takes.

also pretending that cutting sports due to budget restrictions is good for Iowa state is also a hot take.

 

[Cyclones1969]

Huh? Ten years ago. Never mind then.

So basically AAC levels. We are 28 MM TV for tier 1/2. We get 1 MM for tier 3 (rip off where we make less than on our own and OU and UT even gets a cut, so that could triple back to where it was) that puts us at 29 MM for TV and 11 for the rest. Bowlsby said 14 per OU and UT leaving. That drips us to 15.5 ( they aren’t getting a cut of our tier 3 anymore) plus 11 so 26.5. The CFP of expanded is estimated at 90 MM per bid. Put a team there (with 10 teams) and that bumps us to 35.5 total. That is going off then numbers we contracted for 10 years ago and no increase.

I’m sorry, you didn’t say this?

 

[Cyclones1969]

You are very confusing...

What do you propose we do? I'm not saying your line of thinking is wrong at all, but in your opinion... what should ISU be doing now?

Number one... beg like hell to get into a P5 conference (pac or B10). Right? OK, agreed. I assume we are doing that. It's like asking a girl out. You can't make them say yes.

At the same time, I believe we should be exploring a back up option. NOBODY on this board thinks we should just jump and expand right now. At least I would hope not. But the fact remains that we can't also stay at 8 schools if choice number one doesn't bear fruit.

You are arguing with yourself in a way. Both admitting that we are at the mercy of other conferences to accept us, as well as getting all angry when others are discussing the other options. Which we all agree won't be even equal to what we had with OU and Texas.

Actually. Some People are arguing that we should go straight to expansion. And they’re trying to argue how it really won’t be a big deal, because the league will be “exciting”

I think we will be ok in this, which I have said all along. But adding aac teams and byu is a disaster for the future of Iowa state athletics.

 

[Yellow Snow]

Actually. Some People are arguing that we should go straight to expansion. And they’re trying to argue how it really won’t be a big deal, because the league will be “exciting”

I think we will be ok in this, which I have said all along. But adding aac teams and byu is a disaster for the future of Iowa state athletics.

For the most part, I agree.

Question now becomes, what should we be doing about it now? Why so angry over something we are not in control of?

If it comes down to the disaster situation, we have to make it as minimally disastrous as possible. No real other choice. I think that is what people are discussing.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

Where is the guarantee for the playoff spot?

Pretending that the current staff will stay and take less than market value, or even pay cuts, to compete with Oklahoma state and whomever else they bring in, rather than go challenge themselves at the highest level is a bad take, and that’s saying something with some of your other hot takes.

also pretending that cutting sports due to budget restrictions is good for Iowa state is also a hot take.

I don’t think we disagree on many things. We agree ISU should do everything to try to get in the B1G Pac or ACC. We agree that if we fail to accomplish that our budget is going to drop a lot. We agree that those budget effects very well could push Campbell & Co. out of town and would be worse for ISU than status quo. Literally no one I have seen on CF is disagreeing with any of these points.

we apparently disagree on what a new Big 12 would mean for ISU. I think it would be a relevant football league and we would have a real chance to make the playoff. I’d keep watching and buying tickets. You apparently think this outcome is so horrible that it is a death sentence. When the playoff expands, I don’t think that is even kind of true.

As for the playoff spot, the last proposal on the table was 12 teams and top 6 conference champions, and there is little double that the Big 12 and G5 will continue to push for that. The SEC wants 12 teams too. And the Alliance will want something that slows down the SEC’s aggression, which means more conference champions slots keep the number of SEC at-large bids low. Even if it’s pared down to only top 5 conference champions, the Big 12 is still getting in (especially after slicing off the top American and/or Mtn West programs).

Right now we play in a league where if we win it we probably make the CFP and if we win like 8-9 games we’re in the top 25. The new Big 12 with playoff expansion would be… exactly the same as that.

 

[Cyclones1969]

For the most part, I agree.

Question now becomes, what should we be doing about it now? Why so angry over something we are not in control of?

If it comes down to the disaster situation, we have to make it as minimally disastrous as possible. No real other choice. I think that is what people are discussing.

i come from a close family of 6 boys, 4 served in the military. This isn’t angry, this is discussion. All we need is some scotch, and cigars.

So what should we be doing now, in your opinion?

The discussions are really weird. The same people that were saying that Iowa state offers nothing and will be relegated down, are now on here trying to pretend that this will not be a disaster for Iowa state athletics, using we will say optimistic arguments that don’t stand up to logic

 

[Yellow Snow]

we apparently disagree on what a new Big 12 would mean for ISU. I think it would be a relevant football league and we would have a real chance to make the playoff. I’d keep watching and buying tickets. You apparently think this outcome is so horrible that it is a death sentence. When the playoff expands, I don’t think that is even kind of true.

I'm to lazy to look it up... but I believe all remaining 8 members have been ranked in the top 10 at some point in the B12. Name another conference that has had every member do that?

We are a P5 conference with P5 teams, and proven that on the field and in the polls. The no value ******** pisses me off.

 

[Cyclones1969]

I don’t think we disagree on many things. We agree ISU should do everything to try to get in the B1G Pac or ACC. We agree that if we fail to accomplish that our budget is going to drop a lot. We agree that those budget effects very well could push Campbell & Co. out of town and would be worse for ISU than status quo. Literally no one I have seen on CF is disagreeing with any of these points.

we apparently disagree on what a new Big 12 would mean for ISU. I think it would be a relevant football league and we would have a real chance to make the playoff. I’d keep watching and buying tickets. You apparently think this outcome is so horrible that it is a death sentence. When the playoff expands, I don’t think that is even kind of true.

As for the playoff spot, the last proposal on the table was 12 teams and top 6 conference champions, and there is little double that the Big 12 and G5 will continue to push for that. The SEC wants 12 teams too. And the Alliance will want something that slows down the SEC’s aggression, which means more conference champions slots keep the number of SEC at-large bids low. Even if it’s pared down to only top 5 conference champions, the Big 12 is still getting in (especially after slicing off the top American and/or Mtn West programs).

Right now we play in a league where if we win it we probably make the CFP and if we win like 8-9 games we’re in the top 25. The new Big 12 with playoff expansion would be… exactly the same as that.

The current big 12 has two marquee programs that allowed it to live in 2010. None of the brands in the remaining 8 have any of that.


Yes the other 3 conferences paid lip service to keeping the conference relevant. Of course that was done as part of a pr campaign to stop espn from controlling the cfb playoffs, and to avoid getting their brand schools raided themselves.

when the rubber meets the road, this conference you are excited about will be the 29 year old bachelor uncle that has to sit at the kids table on thanksgiving

And are you and everyone going to exponentially increase your donations to keep the current coaching staffs in place? it’s not a very long drive to 2015-2016.

 

[KnappShack]

The current big 12 has two marquee programs that allowed it to live in 2010. None of the brands in the remaining 8 have any of that.


Yes the other 3 conferences paid lip service to keeping the conference relevant. Of course that was done as part of a pr campaign to stop espn from controlling the cfb playoffs, and to avoid getting their brand schools raided themselves.

when the rubber meets the road, this conference you are excited about will be the 29 year old bachelor uncle that has to sit at the kids table on thanksgiving

And are you and everyone going to exponentially increase your donations to keep the current coaching staffs in place? it’s not a very long drive to 2015-2016.

The new Big 12 conference logo should be a pirate flag

Play the heel. Celebrate like there's no tomorrow when our league knocks off blue bloods. Burn couches.

Or....hope KU and ISU go to the Big Ten, the PAC picks up some schools, WVU to the ACC and Baylor's stadium burns to the ground

 

[cyIclSoneU]

The current big 12 has two marquee programs that allowed it to live in 2010. None of the brands in the remaining 8 have any of that.


Yes the other 3 conferences paid lip service to keeping the conference relevant. Of course that was done as part of a pr campaign to stop espn from controlling the cfb playoffs, and to avoid getting their brand schools raided themselves.

when the rubber meets the road, this conference you are excited about will be the 29 year old bachelor uncle that has to sit at the kids table on thanksgiving

And are you and everyone going to exponentially increase your donations to keep the current coaching staffs in place? it’s not a very long drive to 2015-2016.

So you don't expect the CFP to expand with at least five bids reserved for conference champions? Because if that does happen, the new Big 12 is going to be relevant and considered just as much a power league as the ACC or Pac-12. And I am pretty confident that is going to happen if the Big 12 continues to exist.

 

[Cyclones1969]

I'm to lazy to look it up... but I believe all remaining 8 members have been ranked in the top 10 at some point in the B12. Name another conference that has had every member do that?

We are a P5 conference with P5 teams, and proven that on the field and in the polls. The no value ******** pisses me off.

Kansas State was good for how many years under Snyder? Tcu and Oklahoma State have been consistently good.

None of that means people care about them in Pittsburgh, unfortunately. With no big dogs, that is very much the case.

the hits to the athletic budgets at these schools is going to show relatively quickly too. Look at the projects pollard has lined up.

with no ability to pay for them, the facilities battle is lost.

 

[Yellow Snow]

i come from a close family of 6 boys, 4 served in the military. This isn’t angry, this is discussion. All we need is some scotch, and cigars.

So what should we be doing now, in your opinion?

The discussions are really weird. The same people that were saying that Iowa state offers nothing and will be relegated down, are now on here trying to pretend that this will not be a disaster for Iowa state athletics, using we will say optimistic arguments that don’t stand up to logic

I'm a bourbon guy, but cigars and discussion is excellent.

I think we are doing what we should do. Exploring all options. I'm not doom and gloom and hope for a landing spot, but at the same time, we have to be looking at fallback options. We appear to be doing that as well.

Like I said in a prior post. The leftover 8 teams are not chopped liver (except KU at the moment) and have proven that. Who knows how much money that brings.

I agree that **** would really change in our AD if we can't land somewhere else. Can't afford coaches, etc. Agree 100%. BUT we will still play football. I think the argument people are making is that adding BYU and Cincinnati would mitigate the disaster as well as we can.

 

[Gonzo]

There’s no reasoning with the people who are doom and gloom about ISU’s future if it’s in a reconstituted Big 12; they just can’t wrap their minds around it. That league will probably be better than at least one of the ACC or Pac-12 most seasons. And it will be in the playoff.

You seriously think a Big 12 with ISU, KSU, KU, OSU, WVU, TT, Bay, TCU, and a few new additions would be better than the ACC or Pac 12 most seasons?

 

[Cyclones1969]

So you don't expect the CFP to expand with at least five bids reserved for conference champions? Because if that does happen, the new Big 12 is going to be relevant and considered just as much a power league as the ACC or Pac-12. And I am pretty confident that is going to happen if the Big 12 continues to exist.

I’ve never been one of those people that roots for my conference. That’s such a big 10 thing.

I care about Iowa State, because that is my school.

and if you want to believe a big 12 with whomever they add, will be considered on par by anyone but fans of the remaining schools with even the acc or pac 12, you’re not being honest with yourself.

And what ny6 bowl is going to sign up for the big 12 champ when this contract runs out? I mean the current big 12 bowl line up is bad as it is, so maybe it won’t get too much worse.

I mean, regardless of how many Texas teams there would be in the league, it’s still a ut and A&M State, so I would be hard pressed see the Alamo bowl continuing to align with the big 12.

so there is other fallout to consider as well

 

[cyIclSoneU]

You seriously think a Big 12 with ISU, KSU, KU, OSU, WVU, TT, Bay, TCU, and a few new additions would be better than the ACC or Pac 12 most seasons?

Somebody did the math with Boise, BYU, Cincy, and UCF to show that that Big 12 would have averaged 4 teams in the final AP Poll per year over the last like six or seven seasons. That's 33% of the league ranked.

I just did the last three years for the ACC and Pac-12 and it is absolutely miserable:
ACC ended the last three seasons with 3, 1, and 2 teams ranked - average of 2/14 - 14%.
Pac-12 ended the last three seasons with 1, 2, and 2 teams ranked - average of 1.67/12 - 14%.

33% compared to 14% for both of those leagues is not close.

ACC and Pac-12 have Clemson, Oregon, USC top brands and most people will perceive them as better accordingly, just like most people who have paid attention to CFB for many decades perceive Nebraska as actually relevant. But top to bottom the new Big 12 is clearly better on the field than today's ACC and Pac-12 if you look beyond just who makes the four-team CFP.

 

[Cyclones1969]

I'm a bourbon guy, but cigars and discussion is excellent.

I think we are doing what we should do. Exploring all options. I'm not doom and gloom and hope for a landing spot, but at the same time, we have to be looking at fallback options. We appear to be doing that as well.

Like I said in a prior post. The leftover 8 teams are not chopped liver (except KU at the moment) and have proven that. Who knows how much money that brings.

I agree that **** would really change in our AD if we can't land somewhere else. Can't afford coaches, etc. Agree 100%. BUT we will still play football. I think the argument people are making is that adding BYU and Cincinnati would mitigate the disaster as well as we can.

That’s probably true.

But that doesn’t make it any less of a disaster for Iowa State. This would be crushing to everyone in the league, except for the schools that are brought in because they will have more than they have now.

 

[BCClone]

I’m sorry, you didn’t say this?

Comprehensive

 

[Legend12]

Somebody did the math with Boise, BYU, Cincy, and UCF to show that that Big 12 would have averaged 4 teams in the final AP Poll per year over the last like six or seven seasons. That's 33% of the league ranked.

I just did the last three years for the ACC and Pac-12 and it is absolutely miserable:
ACC ended the last three seasons with 3, 1, and 2 teams ranked - average of 2/14 - 14%.
Pac-12 ended the last three seasons with 1, 2, and 2 teams ranked - average of 1.67/12 - 14%.

33% compared to 14% for both of those leagues is not close.

ACC and Pac-12 have Clemson, Oregon, USC top brands and most people will perceive them as better accordingly, just like most people who have paid attention to CFB for many decades perceive Nebraska as actually relevant. But top to bottom the new Big 12 is clearly better on the field than today's ACC and Pac-12 if you look beyond just who makes the four-team CFP.

You aren't being serious with this post, are you?

 

[Cyclones1969]

Somebody did the math with Boise, BYU, Cincy, and UCF to show that that Big 12 would have averaged 4 teams in the final AP Poll per year over the last like six or seven seasons. That's 33% of the league ranked.

I just did the last three years for the ACC and Pac-12 and it is absolutely miserable:
ACC ended the last three seasons with 3, 1, and 2 teams ranked - average of 2/14 - 14%.
Pac-12 ended the last three seasons with 1, 2, and 2 teams ranked - average of 1.67/12 - 14%.

33% compared to 14% for both of those leagues is not close.

ACC and Pac-12 have Clemson, Oregon, USC top brands and most people will perceive them as better accordingly, just like most people who have paid attention to CFB for many decades perceive Nebraska as actually relevant. But top to bottom the new Big 12 is clearly better on the field than today's ACC and Pac-12 if you look beyond just who makes the four-team CFP.

Ok now take 20 million dollars from each of the athletic department’s budgets. See what that does to coach retention.

The part you really do seem to miss, continually, is that short term with exit fees, and whatever espn gives us to try to avoid court, the money will not be significantly different.

The impact will show in the next 3-4 years as schools have to make choices about which sports to cut because they lost 30-40 million in ad revenue. The impact will be when facility improvements have to be shelved because they don’t make enough money to guarantee bonds to move ahead with the projects. All of that leads to everyone of these schools falling further behind, which leads to the conference becoming what espn originally wanted, the aac.