The longer we hear no news the worse this gets for a favorable outcome to the Big 12.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
Is worst case scenario not just the current 12?
Current 12 already been passed on by SEC and Big Ten.
Pac and ACC were similar money before poached, will not be worth it for any of our teams to leave to join them after they lost top brands.
"Worst" might be Pac and ACC stick together as smaller 8 or 10 team leagues...which is fine by me and I'd be happy schools like WSU don't get totally screwed.
I guess you could argue B12 is further behind if we can't add best leftovers of Pac and ACC.
(in the context that 100% of this all sucks and is stupid)
I agree, but I think each PAC university owes it to itself to flush out every possible outcome. See what the offers are and make a move. USC and UCLA have been gone about a week.
Right, but best case scenario, you get 4 corner schools, PNW schools, Cal and Stanford joining BC, Cuse, Pitt, VT, Wake, Louisville, Duke, GA Tech, and 2 of either Miami, Virginia, or NC. That conference doesn't pay out much more than the Big 12, and nearly half are mentioned in every Big10/SEC expansion article.
Yeah, it has been reported that USC and UCLA have been in talks with the B1G for two months before reaching an agreement. Assuming the other Pac schools were completely blindsided here they are going to need some time to evaluate options. This is a major, long term decision. They aren't going to make it in a couple days.
It feels like fox is on the big 12 side but the acc is now the focus so espn owning that gives them some power. Feels like it's going be espn pitching an acc/ pac hybrid with all the good meat picked off the bone and fox going with a big 12/pac version.
In what way? Even if the Big 12 stays as is (12 teams), it will rank ahead of both the ACC and PAC...it never will rival the top 2, no matter what happens, even best case. Best case is that the Big 12 can get 4-6 PAC teams and potential nab 2-4 teams from the remnants of the ACC when the BIG and SEC raid it.
ESPN about ready to become even more hated (as if that were possible)
Yeah divisions are going away. The Iowa/ISU thing is obv because they are dodging the best team in the conference regularly but it has also had other impacts. We had a good rivalry going with Wisconsin for a few years when both schools were competing to win the Big Ten and then we didn't play them for awhile completely killing the rivalry momentum. There are talks to have 2/3 protected rivalries (3 is the leading number for fairness) and then rotating the rest so you play the rest of the conference once every 3 years at least.
Did I miss something? A favorable outcome for the Big 12 would be just having things stay the way they are.
If the PAC 10 stays together:
1) It hurts the Big 12 because we want those 4 mountain schools
2) It hurts the Big 12 because their TV rights are up before ours. They can get into bed with Fox before we do.
3) They can add San Diego State, etc and get to 12 if they want (copy what we did last year).
4) With Oregon and Washington, their "elites" are more elite than our elites
5) They better get Oregon and Washington to sign iron clad Grant of Rights or they're gone at the first opportunity.
Really, the Big 12 has 2 things going for it:
1) Geography
2) Nobody wants their members (sounds bad but actually helps).
1) It hurts the Big 12 because we want those 4 mountain schools
2) It hurts the Big 12 because their TV rights are up before ours. They can get into bed with Fox before we do.
3) They can add San Diego State, etc and get to 12 if they want (copy what we did last year).
4) With Oregon and Washington, their "elites" are more elite than our elites
5) They better get Oregon and Washington to sign iron clad Grant of Rights or they're gone at the first opportunity.
Really, the Big 12 has 2 things going for it:
1) Geography
2) Nobody wants their members (sounds bad but actually helps).
Seems like 18 or 20 is more likely after today.
Pods would be for maintaining annual rivalries if that is valued? To me it's worth it, who knows for TV execs in control of all this.
I grew up an Iowa fan and most of my family/friends in Iowa are...so I'm more sympathetic than most here. The only annual game I'd miss as an Iowa fan is the new Nebraska rivalry because I hate them so bad. I hated them as an Iowa fan before I switched to ISU just because of proximity. My relatives and friends feel the same, we are western Iowa people though.
As an Iowa fan I'd be disappointed if we only got chance to to beat Nebraska every 6th year...but I really never cared that much about Minn/Wisc rivalries. Wisc is more just because of how consistent they have been.
The ISU rivalry meant more to me than Minn/Wisc/Purdue even when ISU sucked for decades just because it was in state.
The wild thing is every school is totally different.
Some really have two incredibly strong rivals, some have none. If ND joins I'm sure Purdue and Indiana will really care about playing them but ND probably could give a flying **** about it.
ISU technically had a rivalry with Missouri that didn't really mean that much to our fans. Nebraska, Iowa and KU were the games our fans got extra emotional about. When ISU football team finally got a pulse it was Nebraska we cared about beating, not official trophy rivalry with Missouri.
It really doesn't matter. I get that the PAC and Big 10 don't want to have an Ole Miss in their league, and like to have their leagues be top academic schools, but the two really have nothing to do with each other.
I know CW keeps bringing this up about Nebraska being in the Big 10 gives them research dollars, or UCLA going to the Big 10 was going to help Iowa get research dollars, but I can assure everyone, there is ZERO impact of what athletic conference you are in to research. Not that there isn't much, very little, or a tiny amount, but zero. I'm sure he's looking at that Big 10 alliance page where they say something $X in research. That's simply a sum of research dollars the individual universities got. That Alliance basically gets a discount on journal library access and software licenses through economies of scale.
As someone that's been in research including with schools from all major sports conferences, and as someone who reviews proposals, athletic conference membership has absolutely, and completely no impact on research. None. The Big 10 research alliance has absolutely and no impact on research dollars. None.
Zero research dollars are granted to an athletic conference. Hell, outside of MIT and probably the ivies and maybe Stanford, Very few research dollars even flow to the Universities.
Research is almost exclusively developed by faculty. They work together with colleagues that fit what they are doing. There is no thought to athletic conference. They might not even know what an athletic conference is. Nor do the people reviewing and awarding these.
The SEC already looked at a 16-team scheduling set up. 3+6 or 1+7. Think the B1G would want to do 3 protected. Problem is you can’t give everyone everything they want. Iowa fans would undoubtedly want Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin as their 3. Not sure how happy they would be if Wisconsin got swapped out for Maryland or UCLA.
Same thing in the Big 12 if we add the corner schools. I would hope ISU gets KU and K-State. I doubt we’d get OSU and I’d be fine with anyone as our 3rd protected game if we got those first two.
I get why some are (possibly delusionally) hoping for a Big 10 or SEC invite. It makes sense, who wouldn't want a golden ticket? Why do people play the lottery?
The Big XII should do what they can to use their position of strength. WA, OR and Utah think the Big 10 or SEC invite is coming? Cool. Let's re-write our GOR. You can leave for the Big 10, SEC or some future combination thereof. The buyout's a little steep for the first five years, but is something reasonable after that. Make no mistake, the Big XII will get a pound of flesh, but you're not tied in forever like the ACC is.
The biggest strength of the Big XII is that they've already been picked over by the SEC and Big 10. Anyone left is going to stay for lack of better options. But don't let someone else become a better option. The PAC had two chances to kill the Big XII - bin 2010 when Texas was ready to go but wanted to keep the LHN, and last year when the Angry 8 were exploring options. The Big XII shouldn't make the same mistake.
If WA and OR come for a couple of years then get a Big 10 invite, best of luck to them but we'll be just fine.
If/when the ACC blows up, the Big XII should do the same thing. Make the same GOR offer starting with the top targets and working your way down to anyone else of value. As new schools come on board, those that are still outside have progressively fewer viable options to the Big XII.
In my mind, the Big XII should do what the SEC and Big 10 are doing, just for second tier.
In Yormark I trust. He was brought in for his edge, aggressive nature, and the way he thinks outside the box. He wants/needs to make a big splash. I believe it's coming and it will be significant. In a positive way.
Those three protected rivalries for iowa wouldn't cause a problem because it is 1 good and 2 mediocre teams. Michigan is already throwing a **** fit and demanding rutgers as their third with sparty and OSU.
That’s what they want though. Consolidation. They want all the best of south in SEC, all best of rest in the 3rd conference. Any 3rd conference is going to basically be the same schools, it’s a matter of which few get cut. ESPN wants Pac and Big 12 schools cut because cutting ACC costs them money, whereas dissolution of Big 12 saves them money
Your analysis is spot on with regards to funding but the presidents still dont want to be affiliated with (in their mind) lower tier academic programs. They already had to be sold hard on Nebraska and they are a big academic outlier for the big ten.
