What's incorrect about it?
People's brains have melted with "brands = quality" and "TV value = on-field performance" and neither of them are true.
If the B12 remains intact and moves forward
- Thread starter Win5002
- Start date
What's incorrect about it?
People's brains have melted with "brands = quality" and "TV value = on-field performance" and neither of them are true.
Tv value = money.
money = the ability to have the resources to compete.
I will bet Hunter Dekkers was amazing to watch in High School. I’ll bet his games were fun, and when they played other good teams the football was entertaining.
but take his class a school and bring it to Texas to play highland park. How do you think that would go?
I can't really see myself purchasing any streams of ISU in a relegated Big 12. There just won't be that much interest from me.
And you don't think those UCF, Cincy, Boise final poll rankings had anything to do with the fact that they were top dogs in G5 conferences playing pretty weak schedules? Just looking at Cincy's schedule in 2019... UCLA, Ohio St., Miami (OH), Marshall, UCF, Houston, Tulsa, ECU, UConn, USF, Temple. When they played Ohio St. they lost 42-0.
There's a reason UCF went undefeated in 2017 and didn't get a CFP invite.
I just think it's a little off to look at those potential new additions final rankings over the past three seasons, given the schedules they played, and assume that they'd have done the same thing playing in a reconfigured Big 12, where the competition between each other and the likes of ISU, OSU, etc., would have undeniably been tougher.
What do you think Boise State has been doing for 15 years now? Or Cincinnati and UCF since the American was formed?
Money certainly helps but it does not equal success. Just ask Texas, the richest program in the history of the sport who has now lost twice in a row to little old Iowa State with less than half of its athletics budget.
Like I said, people just think "Big brands mean good" and "TV value and money mean wins" and they're simply not true. They're correlated but they aren't anywhere close to 1:1.
Again... 100% correct.
It really sucks because we are not in control of what may or may not happen.
But again, what do you do about it? Other than complain about the situation nobody can change?
Better than the Pac 12 most seasons IMO, probably not better than the ACC most seasons.
Beating up on ****** wac and conference USA teams. Boise football has more than any other team in that league.
And don’t think for a second if Texas got out of its own way and hired a strong ad and coach, they would not be a top flight program again.
Being ranked from playing weak schedules?? Sounds like another team I know of over in IC.
Something to chew on, if we do add a few teams and water the conference down I don't think this changes Campbell's position on being at ISU. His idol coached at mount union long term and hes still gonna be winning a crazy percentage of games.
According to some, complain and say they won’t support or watch ISU. I will keep attending and donating at my same level (at minimum, probably increase as kids graduate college) as I currently do.
Iowa's SOS in 2020 was #43. Cincy's was #91. But good shot, get them in while you can.
At this point, I’m drinking my second cup of coffee, and killing time until I have to take my wife to her spa appointment. Then I’m going to go find a case of yuengling somewhere around here because we have it in Texas now.
As far as the situation we are in goes, if these folks get what they seemingly have wanted since the news broke, we had better enjoy the hell out of this season.
Yeah but I think it will sit really badly with him if we cut 3 sports to be able to afford him.
I also think he doesn’t need to have the most, but he has to have enough to compete at the highest levels.
So you're saying the teams were overrated because they played weaker competition, and they wouldn't be ranked as often when they have to play better teams in the Big 12? Maybe.
I can't find the tweet now but I think I saw some advanced analytics like SP+ that analyzed this, too, and it was favorable for the new Big 12. The biggest takeaway here, I think, is that the ACC and Pac-12 have been awful in the last few years. It really wouldn't be that hard for the new Big 12 to be better than at least one of them year to year, unless they improve.
This year's preseason poll is thinking they will do better (in particular the Pac-12) but I guess we will see. It wouldn't surprise me at all if we reach the end of the year with Clemson and UNC ranked in the ACC, and 12 of its 14 teams outside the top 25. It has not been a strong football league on the field lately.
