How should the Big 12 play the hand it has been dealt
- Thread starter cyphoon
- Start date
Adding the Arizona schools, CU, and Utah is a good case scenario for Big 12.
Adding the above plus Oregon and/or Washington is a home run. At that point we are a little below the Big 10 but seriously- not by much.
Neutering the Pac 12 is the best play available to us at the moment.
I know people want to raid the ACC, but that door is sealed until the Big 10 and/or SEC break it open.
The key is what the initial strategy should be. If you get those first 4 schools, will Oregon and Wash follow?
I thought about having all 6 as a choice, but if you can get Oregon and Washington, the other 4 will be a piece of cake, so the second option kind of covers that.
H
PAC 12 is pretty much screwed. This “loose affiliation” is a ridiculous ploy to extract a bit more money by essentially selling a playoff game between the ACC and PAC 12 Champions. Except it is a Play In Game. One team from the 2 Leagues will end up in the playoffs.
ACC is pretty much scheduled to be picked apart as well. B1G is well positioned to get the best. But Notre Dame will remain Independent. Because they can. SEC will take some. Big 12 will sift through the crumbs. Make sure the ACC carcass is sufficiently plucked so there is no real threat of #3 coming from that flank. ACC is screwed by their contract.
Utah, Colorado, and Arizona schools. Big 12 needs them to protect their flank. Washington and Oregon will end up most likely following. Big Ten will fill out with ACC teams that are more valuable to them.
This is like a game of Risk.
ACC is pretty much scheduled to be picked apart as well. B1G is well positioned to get the best. But Notre Dame will remain Independent. Because they can. SEC will take some. Big 12 will sift through the crumbs. Make sure the ACC carcass is sufficiently plucked so there is no real threat of #3 coming from that flank. ACC is screwed by their contract.
Utah, Colorado, and Arizona schools. Big 12 needs them to protect their flank. Washington and Oregon will end up most likely following. Big Ten will fill out with ACC teams that are more valuable to them.
This is like a game of Risk.
You go after the mountain 4 first.
They should be sellable on the fact that their best case (ie UO and UW stay, Pac12 add teams and get a bigger tv deal than now) is STILL less money than what the Big12 will get, and they STILL have to live with the risk of UO and UW jumping at a later date.
Big12 offers more money and more stability. Its kind of a no brainer, honestly. No amount of ACC crossover games is going to bring enough incremental tv money and stability to beat a deal with the Big12.
Now, once those 4 are signed up, you can go talk to UO and UW with enough leverage to force a GoR on them. They still may not sign, but at that point you can walk away and still have won.
I hope Yormark isnt fiddle farting around on this. Need to be aggressive, now.
They should be sellable on the fact that their best case (ie UO and UW stay, Pac12 add teams and get a bigger tv deal than now) is STILL less money than what the Big12 will get, and they STILL have to live with the risk of UO and UW jumping at a later date.
Big12 offers more money and more stability. Its kind of a no brainer, honestly. No amount of ACC crossover games is going to bring enough incremental tv money and stability to beat a deal with the Big12.
Now, once those 4 are signed up, you can go talk to UO and UW with enough leverage to force a GoR on them. They still may not sign, but at that point you can walk away and still have won.
I hope Yormark isnt fiddle farting around on this. Need to be aggressive, now.
Probably can't take ND...they are not an AAU school.Oregon, Stanford, Washington and Norte Dame...
UW is not a pipe dream. It looks like the Big 10 may not be interested. In that case the Big 12 might be their only real option.
I think the move is to take 4 (utah, col, ari, asu) if you can... I don't think that is a done deal. If media companies do not want this to happen they will do something about it (similar to what they did to save B12 and stop the PAC 12 grabbing tx, ou, osu, and ttu about 10 years ago).
If we can do this, you put the pac in a really tricky spot long term. I think short term, they have a pretty fun league with 6-8 teams.. but would not last.
Once that is done, I think you wait unless wash/oregon want to come on their own. But I think you have to expect that in the next 10 yrs or so, the P2 will pick up these schools as part of a longer term structure - this would include eliminating current members of the P2 and creating a final structure that consolidates the top 24 - 32 brands. With Nike, I think oregon is on that list. Less certain about Washington.
I think the B12 should focus on becoming the nationwide structure for all 100 "left behind" FBS programs eventually consolidating all football schools into a single league that splits revenues evenly, defines rules for player and coach contracts and salaries.... basically establish the structure that everyone wants in college football.
It will be missing the top 24 to 32 teams, but it would be a much more attractive version for fans of college athletics. Who knows, in 25 years, maybe the 24 'brands' come crawling back from a failed semi-pro experiment and agree to join the B12!
If we can do this, you put the pac in a really tricky spot long term. I think short term, they have a pretty fun league with 6-8 teams.. but would not last.
Once that is done, I think you wait unless wash/oregon want to come on their own. But I think you have to expect that in the next 10 yrs or so, the P2 will pick up these schools as part of a longer term structure - this would include eliminating current members of the P2 and creating a final structure that consolidates the top 24 - 32 brands. With Nike, I think oregon is on that list. Less certain about Washington.
I think the B12 should focus on becoming the nationwide structure for all 100 "left behind" FBS programs eventually consolidating all football schools into a single league that splits revenues evenly, defines rules for player and coach contracts and salaries.... basically establish the structure that everyone wants in college football.
It will be missing the top 24 to 32 teams, but it would be a much more attractive version for fans of college athletics. Who knows, in 25 years, maybe the 24 'brands' come crawling back from a failed semi-pro experiment and agree to join the B12!
Do you really want this without the P2? If we do this we are cutting our payouts down to about 10 MM or so. We fight to be #3 and we probably are getting more than we are now and most likely have 1-2 teams in the playoffs for even more money.
The Big 12 Borg assimilating all of college football is a fun idea, but we should probably wait on sharing revenue with MAC schools until there’s some kind of breakaway that we’re not a part of.
The other big issue that always comes up with an all-college football league is mobility between levels. If every school is getting an equal piece of the pie, what stops FCS schools from moving up to get a piece, eventually making the slices of pie too small for everyone?
I love strategy and often people can out think themselves. I think back to what a lot of professional athletes say, 'Make the easy play.' If you take care of what you can get now it leaves you in a good position to act on things which have not occurred. Best case scenario that easy play aids in your advancement towards achieving higher over arching goals. What does all this mean for our current situation? The PAC must die. Then the ACC.
Wondering what peoples’ thoughts are on an idea I had. (Not sure if it’s been thrown out elsewhere, but hadn’t seen it).
The idea is to do a full merger with the PAC 12; add 2 teams to get to 24. Then break the conference up into two divisions (Big 12; PAC 12). The divisions serve two purposes; 1. To continue the nostalgia of the old conferences, which is still important to many, 2. It will serve as a means to set up a 4 team conference championship playoff.
Teams will be set up in pods of 4. The pod system would work the same as the 16 team conferences except you would play pods in your division every year and then rotate one pod in the other division each year or two.
All of those games count as a conference game (9 conference games each). At the end of the regular season the conference would hold a 4 team playoff. The 1st and 2nd teams in each division play first, then the winners play for the overall conference championship.
Depending on what happens with the other conferences, games can be added if non-conference games become an issue. For instance, pods of three would get you to 11 conference games easily.
I image a system like this would be very appealing to a media partner. All the abandoned schools stick together and creat something equally as appealing as the 16 team conferences out east.
Thoughts?
The idea is to do a full merger with the PAC 12; add 2 teams to get to 24. Then break the conference up into two divisions (Big 12; PAC 12). The divisions serve two purposes; 1. To continue the nostalgia of the old conferences, which is still important to many, 2. It will serve as a means to set up a 4 team conference championship playoff.
Teams will be set up in pods of 4. The pod system would work the same as the 16 team conferences except you would play pods in your division every year and then rotate one pod in the other division each year or two.
All of those games count as a conference game (9 conference games each). At the end of the regular season the conference would hold a 4 team playoff. The 1st and 2nd teams in each division play first, then the winners play for the overall conference championship.
Depending on what happens with the other conferences, games can be added if non-conference games become an issue. For instance, pods of three would get you to 11 conference games easily.
I image a system like this would be very appealing to a media partner. All the abandoned schools stick together and creat something equally as appealing as the 16 team conferences out east.
Thoughts?
