*****The Super, Mega, Huge Big 12 Expansion Thread*****

[HFCS]

Wow, shocking (said in most sarcastic tone ever)........


Andy Staples ‏ @Andy_Staples RT @McMurphyCBS: ACC commissioner John Swofford said ACC membership prefers conference champ model in playoff[/LIST]

This sounds like it gives them more hope, but not really. They'd still have been #5, #6 or even #7 for most of the past decade.

Nearly every elite Utah, TCU and Boise State team would have had a higher rating than the ACC champ. A few of the old Big East champs, the most common one is now a Big 12 school. Not to mention that the big 4 conferences have usually had 4 higher ranked champs recently.

It would improve their lot a little, but still not much if ACC SOS remains in the 40s to 90s. If they stick together they might actually be well served to go to 9 games in terms of getting into the title game under top 4 BCS ranked conf champs.

If they really want consistent inclusion there's only two routes. VaTech, FSU, Clemson, GT and Miami all improve to the level of the best Big 12/Big 10/Pac 12...or the BCS expands to 8 teams and then I could see the best ACC team usually being involved. I don't see them getting to where they need to be with the bottom of their conference improving.

 

[jbhtexas]

It isn't just the cost of adding a baseball team. There has to be an additional cost of adding an athletic Woman's team as well due to Title IX. That's why Iowa still has Woman's Field Hockey.

That may be the case at Iowa. That doesn't mean it's the case at ISU. Please provide a link showing that ISU will have to add a women's sport if it adds baseball.

 

[CyFan61]

It isn't just the cost of adding a baseball team. There has to be an additional cost of adding an athletic Woman's team as well due to Title IX. That's why Iowa still has Woman's Field Hockey.

Not necessarily.

There are many considerations for Title IX compliance, but one of the easiest to consider is number of participants. For the '10-'11 school year, Iowa State had 356 men and 301 women participate in athletics. That works out to 54.2% male and 45.8% female.

Iowa State has it a lot easier than many schools because of our heavily male student body. ISU's target split based on enrollment is 56-44, so we were well within the bounds of compliance.

Adding 30 or so members to a men's baseball team (UT's team has 35 members) would push those percentages to 56.2% male and 43.8% female. That's actually closer to the target than now. A variance of about 3% is generally allowable. I would guess that Iowa State would be unwilling to see the female percentage drop below 42% or maybe 42.5%, but 43.8% is certainly within compliance.

Again, there are many other considerations (the next most prominent being scholarships awarded by gender), but just looking at it this way, adding baseball would not necessarily require Iowa State to add a female sport.

Still don't think we should do it, though.

 

[HFCS]

I previously found the ACC would have got one team in the BCS top 4 the past decade.

If it were conference champs only they'd have gotten...

'11 out - 5th ranked champ
'10 out - 6th ranked champ
'09 out - 7th ranked champ
'08 out - 7th ranked champ
'07 VT 3 seed
'06 out - 7th ranked champ
'05 out - 7th ranked champ if Notre Dame ranked 6th and much higher counts
'04 out - 5th ranked champ
'03 FSU 4 seed, only got in because higher ranked Oklahoma lost B12 title game
'02 1 seed if you count Miami who was in the Big east, out if you count ACC of the time

So it goes from being left out 90% of the time to being left out 80 to 70% of the time if only conference champs are allowed in. Either way they need to drastically improve or they won't be a major part of a 4 team playoff. A lot of those years they're not even getting close to making the 4 team playoff by champs only or top 4 BCS. The years the Big 12 or Big Ten doesn't make the top 4 or top 4 champs, they're right on the edge, there's rarely a year where the 4 major conferences have no team near the top 4 by any metric. It's been common for the Big East and ACC.

 

[snowcraig2.0]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20...es/05/14/florida-state-realignment/index.html

 

[DCR]

I say this knowing I would never go to either event. I would rather see Men's Gymnastics return to Iowa State before baseball. Why? They both cost much more than they bring in, but unlike baseball Iowa State was actually competitive on a national stage in Mens Gymnastics. If we're going to add a sport that has already existed at ISU which didn't garner enough fan support to continue I'm for bringing back the one we were winning national titles in right before it got the axe instead of the one that was under .500 and the cellar dwellar of the conference for it's final 5 years.

Baseball had 3 postseason bids in 110 years of existence and next to no fan support. You have got to be the biggest idiot in the world to think that adding a team from the south to the conference somehow alters the equation.

I would like to see Hockey in Div1 but no other big 12 school has hockey. We would get fans to go and could get kids out of the north.

 

[cyhiphopp]

This sounds like it gives them more hope, but not really. They'd still have been #5, #6 or even #7 for most of the past decade.

Nearly every elite Utah, TCU and Boise State team would have had a higher rating than the ACC champ. A few of the old Big East champs, the most common one is now a Big 12 school. Not to mention that the big 4 conferences have usually had 4 higher ranked champs recently.

It would improve their lot a little, but still not much if ACC SOS remains in the 40s to 90s. If they stick together they might actually be well served to go to 9 games in terms of getting into the title game under top 4 BCS ranked conf champs.

If they really want consistent inclusion there's only two routes. VaTech, FSU, Clemson, GT and Miami all improve to the level of the best Big 12/Big 10/Pac 12...or the BCS expands to 8 teams and then I could see the best ACC team usually being involved. I don't see them getting to where they need to be with the bottom of their conference improving.

I think what hurts FSU SOS so much is the lack of depth in the conference games. They get dinged because they play Duke, BC, and Maryland. More games against ACC schools might not help. FSU played OU and Florida in their non-conference last year which had to have helped them. Their big issue was playing eventual 3-9 Duke, 2-10 Maryland, and 4-8 BC.

Of course they have to get good schools to want to play them OOC every year.

 

[CycloneJL]

I say this knowing I would never go to either event. I would rather see Men's Gymnastics return to Iowa State before baseball. Why? They both cost much more than they bring in, but unlike baseball Iowa State was actually competitive on a national stage in Mens Gymnastics. If we're going to add a sport that has already existed at ISU which didn't garner enough fan support to continue I'm for bringing back the one we were winning national titles in right before it got the axe instead of the one that was under .500 and the cellar dwellar of the conference for it's final 5 years. Baseball had 3 postseason bids in 110 years of existence and next to no fan support. You have got to be the biggest idiot in the world to think that adding a team from the south to the conference somehow alters the equation.

I would like to see Hockey in Div1 but no other big 12 school has hockey. We would get fans to go and could get kids out of the north.

This. You would actually get fans to attend and it might even have a chance of breaking even. Unfortunately we would have to affiliate it with a different conference. The only thing I remember about baseball at ISU when I was there was that we didn't win many games, and I never knew someone who actually went to a game.

 

[CycloneJL]

I say this knowing I would never go to either event. I would rather see Men's Gymnastics return to Iowa State before baseball. Why? They both cost much more than they bring in, but unlike baseball Iowa State was actually competitive on a national stage in Mens Gymnastics. If we're going to add a sport that has already existed at ISU which didn't garner enough fan support to continue I'm for bringing back the one we were winning national titles in right before it got the axe instead of the one that was under .500 and the cellar dwellar of the conference for it's final 5 years. Baseball had 3 postseason bids in 110 years of existence and next to no fan support. You have got to be the biggest idiot in the world to think that adding a team from the south to the conference somehow alters the equation.

I would like to see Hockey in Div1 but no other big 12 school has hockey. We would get fans to go and could get kids out of the north.

This. You would actually get fans to attend and it might even have a chance of breaking even. Unfortunately we would have to affiliate it with a different conference. The only thing I remember about baseball at ISU when I was there was that we didn't win many games, and I never knew someone who actually went to a game.

 

[HFCS]

I think what hurts FSU SOS so much is the lack of depth in the conference games. They get dinged because they play Duke, BC, and Maryland. More games against ACC schools might not help. FSU played OU and Florida in their non-conference last year which had to have helped them. Their big issue was playing eventual 3-9 Duke, 2-10 Maryland, and 4-8 BC.

That's a good point, FSU already schedules tough as nails non-conf. There really may be little they can do to improve their SOS and thus BCS ranking short of running the table or going one loss with convincing victories.

Wake, Duke, NC State, UNC, Maryland, BC

Compare that to a typical bottom 6 in the Big 12

TCU, KSU, Baylor, ISU, TTech, KU...we have ranked teams and lots of bowl teams in our bottom six

 

[CycloneRoss]

This. You would actually get fans to attend and it might even have a chance of breaking even. Unfortunately we would have to affiliate it with a different conference. The only thing I remember about baseball at ISU when I was there was that we didn't win many games, and I never knew someone who actually went to a game.

I hate to get my hopes up for hockey, but we would fit perfectly in the WCHA and I bet we could join easily because Wisconsin and Minnesota are leaving for the Big 10's hockey conference.

 

[bosco]

It isn't just the cost of adding a baseball team. There has to be an additional cost of adding an athletic Woman's team as well due to Title IX. That's why Iowa still has Woman's Field Hockey.

That may be the case at Iowa. That doesn't mean it's the case at ISU. Please provide a link showing that ISU will have to add a women's sport if it adds baseball.

Whatevs.

 

[ricochet]

This. You would actually get fans to attend and it might even have a chance of breaking even. Unfortunately we would have to affiliate it with a different conference. The only thing I remember about baseball at ISU when I was there was that we didn't win many games, and I never knew someone who actually went to a game.

There is no universe that exists where ISU hockey would ever come close to breaking even. The only thing less likely than baseball coming back as a sport is hockey becoming a sport.

 

[KnappShack]

This. You would actually get fans to attend and it might even have a chance of breaking even. Unfortunately we would have to affiliate it with a different conference. The only thing I remember about baseball at ISU when I was there was that we didn't win many games, and I never knew someone who actually went to a game.

I hate to get my hopes up for hockey, but we would fit perfectly in the WCHA and I bet we could join easily because Wisconsin and Minnesota are leaving for the Big 10's hockey conference.

If (when?) I hit the $uper Mega Jackpot Wad I will look into endowment for a division I NCAA hockey program.

you're very welcome!

 

[cykadelic2]

This sounds like it gives them more hope, but not really. They'd still have been #5, #6 or even #7 for most of the past decade.

Nearly every elite Utah, TCU and Boise State team would have had a higher rating than the ACC champ. A few of the old Big East champs, the most common one is now a Big 12 school. Not to mention that the big 4 conferences have usually had 4 higher ranked champs recently.

It would improve their lot a little, but still not much if ACC SOS remains in the 40s to 90s. If they stick together they might actually be well served to go to 9 games in terms of getting into the title game under top 4 BCS ranked conf champs.

If they really want consistent inclusion there's only two routes. VaTech, FSU, Clemson, GT and Miami all improve to the level of the best Big 12/Big 10/Pac 12...or the BCS expands to 8 teams and then I could see the best ACC team usually being involved. I don't see them getting to where they need to be with the bottom of their conference improving.

SOS is a secondary issue with the ACC and it will be secondary issue, if at all, in FSU's decision-making process for the B12. A bigger issue for the ACC in recent years has been getting at least one undefeated or one-loss team from the ACC in the national title picture like a TCU or BSU. They simply have not had a team like that in recent years, it has little or nothing to do with ACC SOS. An undefeated or one-loss ACC team will generally make the 4-team playoff.

 

[HFCS]

SOS is a secondary issue with the ACC and it will be secondary issue, if at all, in FSU's decision-making process for the B12. A bigger issue for the ACC in recent years has been getting at least one undefeated or one-loss team from the ACC in the national title picture like a TCU or BSU. They simply have not had a team like that in recent years, it has little or nothing to do with ACC SOS. An undefeated or one-loss ACC team will generally make the 4-team playoff.

One loss ACC team would not have last year by top 4 BCS rankings. The SOS of every ACC team sucked compared to LSU/Bama/OKState/Oregon/Stanford. 1/3 of the formula weights that heavily and the other 2/3 looks at it.

10% of the time they participate in the last decade by top 4 BCS.

20-30% in the last decade by top 4 champs like their league commissioner wants.

I don't see how they can spin it any other way than improve or become irrelevant. 10 years isn't a short random sampling, it's pretty significant. I could have cherry picked it and said their champ is only a top 4 champ once in the last 8 seasons, 10 years is giving the ACC a good time frame.

 

[jbhtexas]

This. You would actually get fans to attend and it might even have a chance of breaking even.

According to the latest gender equity report from the NCAA, the average FBS team spends over $2,100,000/yr on hockey, which is nearly the same as the WBB expense, (and nearly $900,000 more than the average FBS team spends on baseball). At that expenditure level, I don't see ISU coming anywhere close to breaking even on ice hockey.

See page 31.
http://www.ncaapublications.com/DownloadPublication.aspx?download=GEQS10.pdf

 

[jbhtexas]

Whatevs.

I clicked on that, but it didn't take me to a link showing that ISU would have to add a women's sport if it added baseball (or any other men's sport for that matter)...

 

[cykadelic2]

One loss ACC team would not have last year by top 4 BCS rankings. The SOS of every ACC team sucked compared to LSU/Bama/OKState/Oregon/Stanford. 1/3 of the formula weights that heavily and the other 2/3 looks at it.

10% of the time they participate in the last decade by top 4 BCS.

20-30% in the last decade by top 4 champs like their league commissioner wants.

I don't see how they can spin it any other way than improve or become irrelevant. 10 years isn't a short random sampling, it's pretty significant. I could have cherry picked it and said their champ is only a top 4 champ once in the last 8 seasons, 10 years is giving the ACC a good time frame.

A one-loss ACC team would have likely topped both Oregon (2 losses) and Stanford (lost to Oregon) in the human polls last season and ended up in the Top 4 of the the BCS. Also, in any other playoff selection process being bandied about, a one-loss ACC team would have got in last season.

Again, the problem with the ACC is not SOS, it has been the glaring inability to produce an undefeated or one-loss team. When FSU or Miami were previously undefeated or had one loss, they were always top 4.

 

[JohnnyFive]

A one-loss ACC team would have likely topped both Oregon (2 losses) and Stanford (lost to Oregon) in the human polls last season and ended up in the Top 4 of the the BCS. Also, in any other playoff selection process being bandied about, a one-loss ACC team would have got in last season.

Again, the problem with the ACC is not SOS, it has been the glaring inability to produce an undefeated or one-loss team. When FSU or Miami were previously undefeated or had one loss, they were always top 4.

I agree with part of your statement.

It is true that their inability to produce a clear-cut undefeated contender has been a problem for them over the last decade, but in some years even an 11-1 record against some of those ACC teams would be comparable to a 10-2 record in the B12, B10 or SEC. What I mean is, a 10-2 B12/B10/SEC team could still be ranked ahead of an 11-1 ACC team based on SOS, costing them a playoff spot.