You’re the one that said what Campbell has done here has not been that impressive. any coach could do it.
you really think anyone outside of Boise or the parts of Oregon that want to join Idaho care.
That’s still the part that’s funny.
Big 12 Expansion (new thread)
- Thread starter Gilbyone
- Start date
You’re the one that said what Campbell has done here has not been that impressive. any coach could do it.
you really think anyone outside of Boise or the parts of Oregon that want to join Idaho care.
That’s still the part that’s funny.
USF is a good school also. I hope the Big 12 adds SDSU at some point. Their stadium is a going to be awesome.
DePaul built an arena right by the McCormick center a few years back. not on campus, but also not Rosemont.
Not instantly, but that's why they have phantom access for awhile. Losing and irrelevance gives people the wandering eye. The older fans, maybe, but inherently those fans are dying out. 10-15 years of no real success and the story all about the North-South BIG/SEC battle, and fans will start to have teams they root for in that drama.
For the same reason these schools weren't invited in 2023, you're not going to lose much in 15 years after they've been slowly suffocated out. People already don't watch them in the numbers networks can justify, That number will only go down as they are fodder for 15 years. Whatever hit in ratings is easily offset by this polarizing national North-South battle and feeding less mouths
It's funny how we like this and yet it would be unpopular at OSU and a total non-starter at Tech. This is not a split that would garner broad support outside of the Iowa and Kansas borders.
Again, why did you object to option 1 over option 2?
You're either resorting to strawmans, or dumb. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume strawmans as your white flag. Either way, those statements were never made or alluded to.
I see you still can't answer the questions:
Did Boise's brand grow? Would it have grown more if being 4-8 often? Would they have played OU in a big game if always 4-8?
No one picks going 4-8 over 8 or 9 wins for less OVERALL money (the example you chimed in on, JFC you're an idiot). No one would pick 4-8 over 8 or 9 wins for even a few million MORE. At some point perhaps you pick years of less wins for more money, but even then other factors come into play beforehand.
SDSU would fit in nicely if we end up with an Arizona school or both, after the BIG gets what they want
Yeah that's some iffy redistricting there.
Essentially what I assume will happen (among realistic options) is equal split/"recruiting access" of Texas schools and even split of the 4 newcomers (two in one division, two in other, can't be 3/1). Retaining ISU/KU/KSU might work while adhering to those aspects, or perhaps it won't, but that's probably priority 3.
I like this alignment the best but our division is much tougher currently. I would hate not playing Okie St but I think for the league, right now, that's the two best programs in the league. It would make sense to split them up. I think end the end, they'll try their hardest to split up TX and put 2 "new" teams in each division.
This could be true in a different angle. Right now ISU has seen that there will be a seismic shift coming. JP will prepare. Last I knew ISU had 66MM in debt and borrowed 20MM due to Covid. Payments of 6-8MM per year. JP will position to make sure ISU is sitting fine.
If this become a contest, the SEC will absolutely crush the Big ten in the athletic side, and I don't think the big ten Pres's will be happy to push academic money to athletics. The other conferences are seeing that something is happening and I could see them saying, hey lets put out a good team at the highest level, but not go for king maker level. The big ten schools could try to push, led by Mich and OSU, to compete with the SEC. While their budgets will handle it the others in the big ten probably couldn't. Unsure of others but use Iowa's since their stuff is easier to mind. They had 199MM of debt and added 50MM for Covid. They are sitting on a quarter of a billion in debt and had payments of 22-23MM before the Covid debt. They are about double their annual revenue in debt whereas ISU is one full years. When Covid hit, Iowa had 2.5X the debt required than ISU and ISU only had 12k fans at home games and cost was like 350/season ticket, so a little over 4MM from football attendance than Iowa's none.
If a war broke out between the Big ten and the SEC, some of those teams could get trampled and crushed. It may be better in 20 years for those other teams to not be in that mess. There are a lot of things that could happen, so who knows what is right and what is wrong?
10 games with one team rotated off, unless some math/schedule person points out it’s not possible.
seems best way to maximize viewing inventory.
CG guarantees your one off team isn’t dodging best team.
would need some marquee non conf games though and not flubbing it like we did saturday
seems best way to maximize viewing inventory.
CG guarantees your one off team isn’t dodging best team.
would need some marquee non conf games though and not flubbing it like we did saturday
The marginal cost of that is already baked into the exclusion. Say all of that interest or viewership in the leftovers goes away ($20-$25million worth per school?), to zero interest in CFB. That also means you're paying those schools zero eventually. No impact. In reality, some fans would still watch BIG-SEC just as before, while the pot for the leftovers continues to go down, and it would be a net positive for the networks
Last edited:
I think you hit it on the head. The ideal for the sport and the media companies is to have the big brands be consistently successful while having as many teams have fans that think there's a shot that some day they could make a run. There's a big difference in being at a big disadvantage but thinking that if the stars align and you hire the next Campbell you can make a run vs. you are simply in a lower league that is structurally eliminated from participation in a playoff no matter what you do.
People talk about carriage fees with BTN because of their model, but ESPN's dwarfs BTN. It would take very little loss of interest and subsequent loss of ESPN network subscriptions to be a huge financial hit. ESPN has a HUGE vested interest in preserving every single ESPN family of networks subscription they have. ESPN doesn't give two ***** if every team in the conferences lose money by adding teams. ESPN only cares that fans of teams keep watching and subscribing. If they feel like relegating 8, 20, or 30 teams to a lower division loses them some subscriptions and ad revenue by lower viewership, they are going to fight like hell to keep those teams relevant in some way.
I think those are the two realistic options:
1. BYU, OSU, and all of Texas in a West / everyone else in an East. Pick this one if maximizing rivalries wins out over splitting Texas for recruiting. The East gets UC and UCF so there is still good recruiting ground here.
2. Chop up Texas; either 2/2 across divisions or something like Tech/TCU/Baylor in one and Houston/UCF in the other. Pick this one if it's important to ISU/KSU/KU to have more Texas access. That might matter more if we go back to only 8 conference games, too.
"Keep the old Big 8 together" is not really a realistic approach.
I really doubt we do 10 conference games plus CyHawk. I would think we need as many home games as possible.
10 conference games in a 12-team conference feels unwieldy, plus it doesn't necessarily mean more inventory either. A network gets more inventory in a 12-team conference if 7 teams are playing home non-conference games in a given week vs. all 12 teams playing conference games.
I think it's an open question whether 8 or 9 conference games will be better for this league.
If the four texas schools are in the other half, and you play 9 conference games, There is a good chance you will be in texas every year and several times twice.
we don’t have the SEC luxury of 8 games and a late season Indiana State home game
Right, you could even do it with 8 conference games. If you play 3 games a year vs. the opposite division, that means the four Texas schools play a combined 12 games vs. the East. If they play half of them at home, that is enough to set up a schedule where every East school gets exactly one game in Texas per year. If you do 9 conference games, some of the East would get 2 games while the rest got at least 1.
