Big 12 Expansion (new thread)

[SCNCY]

The problem with the SEC going their own way is that the other major conferences won't schedule them. The loss of out of conference games and bowl games probably makes an SEC only league less interesting. Although, if this did happen, I would bet ESPN would force other smaller conferences to break away with the SEC. But the marquee matchups would only be SEC conference games and nothing too exciting in the non-conference games.

 

[JM4CY]

If the SEC says "Let's do this" and everyone else says "Let's not" it isn't going to happen. I don't believe SEC football on an island is that valuable.

I agree. It's whether or not the SECSPN is powerful enough to force others on the island.

 

[SCNCY]

I agree. It's whether or not the SECSPN is powerful enough to force others on the island.

I think fully owned ESPN properties wouldn't have a choice. It would be either follow us or we don't bid next round.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

Game of chicken. The other 4 without the SEC are also diminished. And good luck recruiting against the SEC when they’re pay to play. The other 4 conferences would lose key programs to the SEC (Clemson), be viewed as the NIT of CFB postseason, and eventually all that could, would leave to join the SEC

College football is too regional for the entire country except the southeast to be deemed “NIT.” People care about their schools. If the SEC broke off and paid players and had objectively the 10 best teams in the country in it, it wouldn’t stop Midwesterners from watching Big Ten games.

 

[Sigmapolis]

College football is too regional for the entire country except the southeast to be deemed “NIT.” People care about their schools. If the SEC broke off and paid players and had objectively the 10 best teams in the country in it, it wouldn’t stop Midwesterners from watching Big Ten games.

Yeah, I'm not going to stop watching Iowa State because the SEC becomes a semipro league and any of their teams would objectively slaughter any of the other teams throughout the country.

It is not like Alabama becoming an NFL team would make me all the sudden watch them because they are "better" or the football is "better" -- people are loyal to their school and their rivals.

 

[surly]

A lot of us have a low interest in the NFL and other pro sports for similar reasons.

 

[Cyclonepride]

No idea how reliable this guy is, but he's been all about expansion from day one.

 

[2speedy1]

If the SEC says "Let's do this" and everyone else says "Let's not" it isn't going to happen. I don't believe SEC football on an island is that valuable.

I agree, but I am just saying that the current agreement changed what was before, so the next agreement can change what is now.

No one can say they know what is going to happen with the future agreements and how the landscape of college football management will change. It could very well stay the same or similar, or a complete and total restructuring of the system could happen and throw the entire current agreements out the window.

The nature of agreements and contracts are that they get renegotiated and changed when demanded. We have no idea right now whether the rebuilt Big 12 will be in or out of any future Power structure agreement, just because the current agreement says they are.

 

[KnappShack]

No idea how reliable this guy is, but he's been all about expansion from day one.

Excellllllent....

Actually no. I like the PAC. The history. The style of football.

Another step to the destruction. B1G could pick off some big markets (LA, SF, Seattle, Phoenix, Denver) for their network.

Big 12 would then possibly take a few? Sucks. It all sucks

 

[drmwevr08]

Excellllllent....

Actually no. I like the PAC. The history. The style of football.

Another step to the destruction. B1G could pick off some big markets (LA, SF, Seattle, Phoenix, Denver) for their network.

Big 12 would then possibly take a few? Sucks. It all sucks

Agreed. But if its us or them, I want us to win and them to lose. Unfortunate that we are here, but...

 

[isucy86]

College football is too regional for the entire country except the southeast to be deemed “NIT.” People care about their schools. If the SEC broke off and paid players and had objectively the 10 best teams in the country in it, it wouldn’t stop Midwesterners from watching Big Ten games.

People love their own school and follow teams that impact their schools relevance.

As far as current SEC schools, I can't recall the last time I have watched more than a quarter of the same game over the last 3 years of the following teams: S. Carolina, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Arkansas, Missouri, Kentucky and Vanderbilt. And truthfully, I question if I have watched that much of a Tennessee game.

And the other reality is if I watch 6-8 full SEC games over a 13 week season, that is it. And I probably watch 60 full games over the course of a regular and bowl season.

 

[2speedy1]

No idea how reliable this guy is, but he's been all about expansion from day one.

So did we jump at the AAC teams too soon? Or did that trigger more movement?
Does the B1G raid the Big 12 or the PAC 12 or both?
If the Pac 12 gets raided does that mean the Big 12 can raid teams from the Pac 12 and we can pick up better brands than G5, and we add more, or should have waited and added them in place of the G5s we just added?

Lot of questions, Never thought any of this was done, but I thought teams would be going to the Pac, B1G and ACC but now things may have shifted a bit. But who knows everyone just seems to be throwing crap at the wall and seeing what sticks. But all this does keep the questions going.

 

[Cloneon]

So did we jump at the AAC teams too soon? Or did that trigger more movement?
Does the B1G raid the Big 12 or the PAC 12 or both?
If the Pac 12 gets raided does that mean the Big 12 can raid teams from the Pac 12 and we can pick up better brands than G5, and we add more, or should have waited and added them in place of the G5s we just added?

Lot of questions, Never thought any of this was done, but I thought teams would be going to the Pac, B1G and ACC but now things may have shifted a bit. But who knows everyone just seems to be throwing crap at the wall and seeing what sticks. But all this does keep the questions going.

Maybe we're looking at this wrong. Maybe we should consider the length of the current season, the 'projected' increase in the number of games per season. Once we determine the ideal number of games, then approach conference expansion as a 2 division scenario where the divisions play as if they're their own conference and the conference championship then becomes it's own 4 game playoff. The CFP would then have a much better evaluation of the top 4 teams in a conference and the order. Then recruit other P5 teams to match that approach. If the B12 is the first to do this, it will always be a power player and the others will be left to try and do the same. The additional money for their conference playoff plus the college playoffs would be huge.

 

[CloniesForLife]

I'd be down for adding the 2 Arizona schools and Utah (a nice rival for BYU). Not sure who the 4th team I'd want would be. Obviously Oregon, USC, and Washington are big brands but I'm guessing those would be targeted by the BIG in this scenario

 

[CascadeClone]

No idea how reliable this guy is, but he's been all about expansion from day one.

I don't see how B1G could take 4, just super awkward with 18 teams. Gonna put Iowa, Minny, Nebby, Wisky, and Illinois in the "pacific" division?? Can't even do equal pods with 18. .

So if B1G takes USC and probably Oregon... what does Big12 do?

Take 4 and go to 16 is great, but you have probably 6 worth having - Wash, UCLA, Utah, Colorado, and the Arizonas. Yeah, did we add teams too early?

2nd thought: what the hell wrt the Alliance?? That took about 5 minutes after the kum-bah-yah ended for the backstab to happen. Jeez. SEC commish would be proud, so would Satan.

 

[CascadeClone]

I'd be down for adding the 2 Arizona schools and Utah (a nice rival for BYU). Not sure who the 4th team I'd want would be. Obviously Oregon, USC, and Washington are big brands but I'm guessing those would be targeted by the BIG in this scenario

Colorado seems obv to me - former Big8/12, and close geography.

But what if UCLA or Oregon is available because B1G only takes 2 teams?

 

[Cyclonepride]

Excellllllent....

Actually no. I like the PAC. The history. The style of football.

Another step to the destruction. B1G could pick off some big markets (LA, SF, Seattle, Phoenix, Denver) for their network.

Big 12 would then possibly take a few? Sucks. It all sucks

I don't care for it either, but if that's what it takes for ISU to end up in a good spot, then burn it all down.

 

[Cyclonepride]

So did we jump at the AAC teams too soon? Or did that trigger more movement?
Does the B1G raid the Big 12 or the PAC 12 or both?
If the Pac 12 gets raided does that mean the Big 12 can raid teams from the Pac 12 and we can pick up better brands than G5, and we add more, or should have waited and added them in place of the G5s we just added?

Lot of questions, Never thought any of this was done, but I thought teams would be going to the Pac, B1G and ACC but now things may have shifted a bit. But who knows everyone just seems to be throwing crap at the wall and seeing what sticks. But all this does keep the questions going.

I have no idea what the PAC 12 was thinking, as this was pretty much foreseeable if the Big 12 reconstituted with likely candidates. They really have few options to expand, which makes them a sitting duck.

 

[heitclone]

No idea how reliable this guy is, but he's been all about expansion from day one.

This would line up with the comments about Houston being added to prevent someone else from taking them. If the big 12 could end up with some kind of combo of the Arizona schools, Utah, Colorado or the leftover Cali schools, that would be game changing.

Interested to see what the big 12 chicken littles think of big 12 teams turning down the pac.

 

[Cyrealist]

I agree, but I am just saying that the current agreement changed what was before, so the next agreement can change what is now.

No one can say they know what is going to happen with the future agreements and how the landscape of college football management will change. It could very well stay the same or similar, or a complete and total restructuring of the system could happen and throw the entire current agreements out the window.

The nature of agreements and contracts are that they get renegotiated and changed when demanded. We have no idea right now whether the rebuilt Big 12 will be in or out of any future Power structure agreement, just because the current agreement says they are.

I think that's what The Alliance is all about. Those conferences are saying they will stand firm against any move toward a Super League. Cynics say they still might go for the money, but I don't think they will.