New P5 (or P6) Conference...Give the Texas and OK the finger...The Big X
- Thread starter cyfanatic1968
- Start date
Those schools would go from current per school payouts from $25M-$45M down to $2M-$4M.
Ok.. we declare ourselves our own power 5 conference. The Big I.
Spring game becomes our conference championship game and we schedule 12 non conference games.
Plus we don't have to split the big TV money with anyone. That's like $250MIL per year. We'll be unstoppable.
Spring game becomes our conference championship game and we schedule 12 non conference games.
Plus we don't have to split the big TV money with anyone. That's like $250MIL per year. We'll be unstoppable.
How did this make two pages. Need to ban the OP for this stuff.
Is it nut day today here? Some of these suggestions gotta be drunk posts. Then again I wouldn't consider this smart even if I was drunk
Is it nut day today here? Some of these suggestions gotta be drunk posts. Then again I wouldn't consider this smart even if I was drunk
LOL...
What is smart? Playing OU, OSU, TT, TCU, BU, UT every year and trying to compete geographically for the TX OK Southern kids or maybe trying something different. Think over the longer term - 20 yrs. I don't know what the right answer is - I was just tossing an idea out there.
People can argue if we did just this and this and this...this year we could've beat Iowa, KSU, and OSU (and Toledo but forget them for now)...I agree but my point is year over year/decade over decade - the Texas/Oklahoma schools are going to beat us 95 out of 100 times.
Sure we are going to have the occasional 1000+ yd rusher like Warren or beat a #2 ranked OSU etc...but year over year, decade over decade we lose.
Have to change the paradigm - otherwise we are okay with 4-5-6 win seasons with the occasional 7-8 win season a couple times a decade.
Change it up.
What is smart? Playing OU, OSU, TT, TCU, BU, UT every year and trying to compete geographically for the TX OK Southern kids or maybe trying something different. Think over the longer term - 20 yrs. I don't know what the right answer is - I was just tossing an idea out there.
People can argue if we did just this and this and this...this year we could've beat Iowa, KSU, and OSU (and Toledo but forget them for now)...I agree but my point is year over year/decade over decade - the Texas/Oklahoma schools are going to beat us 95 out of 100 times.
Sure we are going to have the occasional 1000+ yd rusher like Warren or beat a #2 ranked OSU etc...but year over year, decade over decade we lose.
Have to change the paradigm - otherwise we are okay with 4-5-6 win seasons with the occasional 7-8 win season a couple times a decade.
Change it up.
The idea is "parity" at a conference level over the long haul. You might have a better chance of getting the 3-5 star southern recurits to come to your new "P6" conference to stand out at a national/conference/school level than just be another 5 star that goes to TX, Alabama, etc...and has to wait a few years to play.
That conference would not be national, it would get less respect than the old Big East. Your population base is what, Illinois? That state doesn't give two ***** about college sports, outside ND football or Lou Henson era Illini basketball.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
Realignment has nothing to do with wins and losses. It's all about non-profit college sports raking in all the TV money that they can get.
In another vein, if you rack up wins in a conference so bad that PBS thinks the ratings would be too low, have you really scored any victories?
Short term you may get an exceptional staff in who can recruit and has the X&O chops to compete for a couple of years but ultimately...
They will leave for greener pastures - more fertile recruiting areas and to schools with tradition to pull the 4&5 star recruits in.
Long term you will still have a program that finishes 7th thru 10th nine years out of ten in the new "Big 12" conference.
We must think longer term.
They will leave for greener pastures - more fertile recruiting areas and to schools with tradition to pull the 4&5 star recruits in.
Long term you will still have a program that finishes 7th thru 10th nine years out of ten in the new "Big 12" conference.
We must think longer term.
Don't mean any disrespect, sir, but apparently the page in your dictionary in the "r's" where REALITY would be is missing. If geography is involved, why not include the Hoks? Why would those BIG teams willingly leave the cash that tOSU, UM, PSU football generate? CO had been thinking it belonged out west for 20-30 years. WVU might be in a similar position on the opposite side of the compass, looking south or east. And most curiously, sir, your new league would be a 10 school arrangement, which means no football championship game unless the NCAA changes the rules. But since I do feel a little insecure as the northernmost team in the BIGXII, with no common state border with our fellow schools, keep working at it. I look forward to the next installment.:smile:
Don't limit yourself...reach for the stars! You've got miles to go on how dumb you can get. Crash course:
http://hawkeyenation.com/forum/
You speak as though such a thing would be completely up to ISU. Like, we just float this idea and it will happen. Doesn't work that way, bro.
Every year:
Texas
Oklahoma
TCU
Baylor
Oklahoma State
Texas Tech
Kansas
West Virginia
Kansas State
Texas
Oklahoma
TCU
Baylor
Oklahoma State
Texas Tech
Kansas
West Virginia
Kansas State
I'd rather watch Iowa State compete and finish somewhere from 5-7 to 7-5 every year than demolish the MAC (which is what you're suggesting btw, those teams would never form this thing). People that complain about the schedule are so full of ****. Baylor will not always be Baylor. I was in school from '05 to '09 and watched Texas DESTROY Iowa State. That's a game ISU has a chance to win every year until they get that dumpster fire figured out. KSU KU WVU and TTU are all teams we can compete with year in year out. OU owns us, but who knows what happens when they get tired of Big Game Bob?
