TCU & SMU potential candidates for future Big12 expansion?
- Thread starter ISU2010
- Start date
I can't believe how many times this needs to be repeated...
First, TCU (and Boise State, etc) wouldn't have those rankings if they are in the B12 (BCS conference). Don't kid yourself, their best chance at a BCS bowl/title is from *outside* a BCS conference.
Secondly; TCU, SMU, Houston, etc add ZERO TVs to the B12's conference footprint.
Thirdly, no one in the B12; including UT, A&M, TT and Baylor, want more teams from TX in the Big12. It would just legitimize them further and cut into recruiting. Texas would go independent before letting that happen and Baylor would do everything possible to block TCU ala TCU moving to block Baylor during the conference realignment discussion.
And so on....
\
First, TCU (and Boise State, etc) wouldn't have those rankings if they are in the B12 (BCS conference). Don't kid yourself, their best chance at a BCS bowl/title is from *outside* a BCS conference.
Secondly; TCU, SMU, Houston, etc add ZERO TVs to the B12's conference footprint.
Thirdly, no one in the B12; including UT, A&M, TT and Baylor, want more teams from TX in the Big12. It would just legitimize them further and cut into recruiting. Texas would go independent before letting that happen and Baylor would do everything possible to block TCU ala TCU moving to block Baylor during the conference realignment discussion.
And so on....
\
The only way that these schools get an invite is if the Big12 needs to replace Texas. If Texas goes independent, then if the conference would want to stick together then maybe TCU gets a look to help keep the Dallas market. Otherwise, I don't see it.
I would love to see BYU get an invite. I think they would actually add more in market share than we lost with Nebraska and Colorado combined. If the TV deals go well the next time around, we could offer enough that I can see Arkansas being interested. The problem the Big12 has is that it can't match the money of the SEC. If they can get in the same ballpark, then you may see more teams seriously think about it.
I would love to see BYU get an invite. I think they would actually add more in market share than we lost with Nebraska and Colorado combined. If the TV deals go well the next time around, we could offer enough that I can see Arkansas being interested. The problem the Big12 has is that it can't match the money of the SEC. If they can get in the same ballpark, then you may see more teams seriously think about it.
Assuming the scenario where Texas goes indy, i would see a good chance of TAMU jumping out into the SEC, leaving 8 teams. At this point you'd want to look at TCU and probably Houston (to cover Dallas and Houston markets) .. and id still look at BYU\Louisville.
BYU and Notre Dame are the only two schools that would add enough to the economic footprint. Notre Dame has already stated they will not enter a conference (If they ever do) with more than 12 schools, which rules out the Big 10. Also, with the Big 12 allowing individual schools to have their own network, ND would be able to maintain their relationship with NBC. Another argument for ND to the Big 12 is the potential dismantling of the Big East over the next couple of years, which would leave ND BBall and their other non-revenue generating sports without a conference. A final nugget is how the Texas and ND presidents (or AD's, I can't remember which) are good friends. BYU has a large National following, which would provide for a more lucrative TV deal as well.
I dont think anyone's saying that (and they're definitely not)... but ND is never coming to the big 12, so might as well move on to better prospects for the big 12 like BYU.
absolutely, without a doubt, the last thing the Big 12 needs is another Texas team. Not only that, I may be the only one that doesn't want Arkansas either. We DON'T need to open up a door for the Razorbacks to start recruiting Texas....would not be good for ISU.
A couple things need to be kept in mind when discussing conference expansion:
1. Any school added to the conference needs to increase the value of TV package so much that it does not decrease the share that each school gets. That means any expansion candidate has to increase the value by at least $14 million. If it doesn't increase the value of the TV package by at least that much, the schools in the conference would actually have their shares DECREASE due to the expansion.
2. When the Big 12 was being formed, a number of different scenarios were explored. The Big 8 wanted to add just Texas and Texas A&M (ten total schools), but they also looked at adding all eight remaining SWC schools (16 total schools since Arkansas had left for the SEC already). They got values for the ten-team conference and the sixteen-team conference from the TV execs, and values were identical. In other words, as long as you have Texas and Texas A&M, the other Texas schools add no value to the TV package.
In order to maximize the shares each school got, they went with the ten school plan, but Texas politics got involved and made us take Texas Tech and Baylor as well as Texas and Texas A&M. There's been some after-the-fact revisionism about this saying Baylor got in over TCU due to politics, but the fact is we didn't want TCU or Baylor or even Texas Tech for that matter. Texas and Texas A&M give us the state of Texas. Adding another Texas school does nothing to increase the value of the TV package.
1. Any school added to the conference needs to increase the value of TV package so much that it does not decrease the share that each school gets. That means any expansion candidate has to increase the value by at least $14 million. If it doesn't increase the value of the TV package by at least that much, the schools in the conference would actually have their shares DECREASE due to the expansion.
2. When the Big 12 was being formed, a number of different scenarios were explored. The Big 8 wanted to add just Texas and Texas A&M (ten total schools), but they also looked at adding all eight remaining SWC schools (16 total schools since Arkansas had left for the SEC already). They got values for the ten-team conference and the sixteen-team conference from the TV execs, and values were identical. In other words, as long as you have Texas and Texas A&M, the other Texas schools add no value to the TV package.
In order to maximize the shares each school got, they went with the ten school plan, but Texas politics got involved and made us take Texas Tech and Baylor as well as Texas and Texas A&M. There's been some after-the-fact revisionism about this saying Baylor got in over TCU due to politics, but the fact is we didn't want TCU or Baylor or even Texas Tech for that matter. Texas and Texas A&M give us the state of Texas. Adding another Texas school does nothing to increase the value of the TV package.
There needs to be a stickied thread on CF that says "READ BEFORE POSTING" and will say the following things:
1) Public tailgate lots open 6 hrs before kick off. ALWAYS. Donor lots open 6 hrs before kick off or 7AM, whichever is earlier, except for Thursday games, when it's 6 hrs.
2) Austen Arnaud is going to start until we have a better option or he's hurt.
3) The South Endzone is not getting bowled in in the next 3 years.
4) The following teams will never be in the Big 12 because they add nothing in terms of new TV Markets: TCU, SMU, Rice, Houston, UTEP, Tulsa.
5) Please do not start a thread pertaining to the following topics. You will be banned for doing so. Good day.
1) Public tailgate lots open 6 hrs before kick off. ALWAYS. Donor lots open 6 hrs before kick off or 7AM, whichever is earlier, except for Thursday games, when it's 6 hrs.
2) Austen Arnaud is going to start until we have a better option or he's hurt.
3) The South Endzone is not getting bowled in in the next 3 years.
4) The following teams will never be in the Big 12 because they add nothing in terms of new TV Markets: TCU, SMU, Rice, Houston, UTEP, Tulsa.
5) Please do not start a thread pertaining to the following topics. You will be banned for doing so. Good day.
The real question is if SMU could somehow leapfrog Houston to be the second MWC team from Texas. Who knows maybe the MWC tries for two or three more Texas schools and really tries to embed itself there, for them it's more about recruiting than TV footprint, their TV footprint technically already includes California and Texas. I have really been impressed with their aggressiveness and don't think they will stop till they get a BCS bid or make the BCS a total joke by not having an auto bid. Even losing BYU and Utah, next year's MWC is would be a better line up this year than the current lineup:
This year's MWC:
#4 TCU
#13 Utah
#26 others with votes Air Force
Next year's MWC:
#3 Boise State
#4 TCU
#26 others with votes Air Force
#27 others with votes Nevada
#30 others with votes Fresno State
note that it's been rare for BYU to not even be closed to rated and they are down this year. Next year they could likely be back in top 25 and big loss for MWC's competitiveness. Houston has been rated several times the past few years and dropped out of the rankings this week. They are there for the picking I would think.
This year's MWC:
#4 TCU
#13 Utah
#26 others with votes Air Force
Next year's MWC:
#3 Boise State
#4 TCU
#26 others with votes Air Force
#27 others with votes Nevada
#30 others with votes Fresno State
note that it's been rare for BYU to not even be closed to rated and they are down this year. Next year they could likely be back in top 25 and big loss for MWC's competitiveness. Houston has been rated several times the past few years and dropped out of the rankings this week. They are there for the picking I would think.
In general I Agree with this but I just wanted to add something. When my wife came home from work last night from her managing job at a sports bar in manhattan, she made the observation that there were a lot of smu fans at her bar last night for the game. To put things in perspective, she never sees rutgers fans and the fan bases that normally come to her bar are usually national brands. Schools like Michigan Ohio state n Florida. I'm sure this was just a coincidence, but my point is that if June jones can help make smu into a national player it's possible they could be taken into consideration like four or five years down the road. Emphasis on the word "if".
1. How's that any different than Nebraska or Colorado recruiting Texas?
2. Arkansas is already recruiting Texas fairly well.
I should make it clear I highly doubt Arkansas ever comes to the Big 12, but I'm tired of the "adding X school is going to kill our ability to recruit Texas." As if we had this great ability to recruit Texas in the first place...
I agree with goldmember.. ND and Texas have a close relationship.. I think ND AD was mentored by Texas AD... I think best bet is ND BYU or Ark.. I dont see Ark leaving the SEC... BYU and ND are national but BYU isnt in ND's league as of fan support, but they bring their tv station set up and all the equipment to help get a B12 network off the ground.. ND is ND.. they are massive and bring in tons of money... Beebe said that the B12 would only go outside the current footprint.. So no texas schools will be joining...
As intriguing as BYU is, I think better candidates are Louisville, Cincy, and Pitt. All three would expand our footprint East into the more populated regions of the United States. All three are (or have been) basketball powerhouses, they play in the Big East which is in a precarious position. Should we be able to snag Pitt (which, for the record, I think is doubtful) I think that Louisville would be a better addition than Cincy.
