Thoughts on B12 Future

  • Fanatics -

    Thank you for your patience today and welcome to the newest version of Cyclone Fanatic!

    Most of the changes we have made are very simple, but will greatly improve your user experience while visiting the website.

    We have upgraded our forum software to speed things up. Our homepage is much cleaner and should be even more mobile friendly than before.

    We appreciate your loyalty and are committed to not only keeping Cyclone Fanatic in tip-top shape, but continuing to build this community for the next decade and beyond.

    We ask that if you are experiences any glitches to let us know in this thread . Will will be diligently working on the site all day.

    Thanks again.

    Chris Williams - Publisher

Bucklara

New Member
Jan 14, 2016
23
30
3
So much of a teams success hinges on solid QB play. With a majority of the conference bringing back proven signal-callers we should see further escalation of parity. Going to be a bunch of down-to-the-wire type games.
As fans, we will probably enjoy the circus atmosphere every week but it's not good for CFP chances in the Big12. As someone already pointed out, a conference power needs to feed off the weak to increase the perception of dominance. Look no further than OU. Just getting by vs high quality competition the past few weeks hasn't helped heal the wound from Manhattan.
That's life in the Big12 right now. Every week you are faced with a fight and that is very anti Big10. Bless their hearts but they have some real tomato cans in that conference.
In the end, I think it all circles back to QB play. If you have a winner running the offense, you are gonna be a tough out. I think we are seeing a Big12 conference with more than its share of winners taking snaps. ISU is certainly in good hands for the foreseeable future.
 

jbhtexas

Well-Known Member
Oct 20, 2006
13,177
2,557
113
Arlington, TX
The problem the Big 12 has with perception outside of our footprint is that ESPN, still the main source for sports news and analysis to the largest part of the country, has a built in bias to promote the SEC and the ACC because they own and operate the conference networks. They also want to promote the Big 10 because it represents a large amount of their inventory of games in high population areas. Texas is the only Big 12 school they have a financial self interest to promote.
Well said. I've posted this same sentiment several times here. The Big 12 doesn't have a media "partner" who is interested in promoting the conference. Rather, they have a media conglomerate that that sends checks and uses the conference as it sees fit. Kind of sounds like a pimp.

Take a look at the Big 12 FB scores over the past few weeks. You won't see any 63-3 variety blowouts. The games are generally competitive and fun to watch, with the majority being 1-2 score affairs. A media "partner" would promote that. Instead, we get a steady diet of conference putdowns and the occasional back-handed compliment from ESPN.

Maybe 2024 will bring something better...
 
Last edited:

CascadeClone

Well-Known Member
Oct 24, 2009
3,592
2,360
113
this is a bit skewed with some of these teams not playing the conferences other good teams.
Exactly!! That's how it is intended to work.

Pump up the top dogs with lots of easy wins. Nationally, no one really notices the difference between a quality win over a decent 5-5 TCU team (sagarin #31) or a win over hot wet garbage like 4-6 Purdue (sagarin #71).
 

CoachHines3

Well-Known Member
Oct 29, 2019
677
1,197
93
Exactly!! That's how it is intended to work.

Pump up the top dogs with lots of easy wins. Nationally, no one really notices the difference between a quality win over a decent 5-5 TCU team (sagarin #31) or a win over hot wet garbage like 4-6 Purdue (sagarin #71).
Also, people say preseason rankings don't make a difference.. they totally do.

Listen to this by Joel Klatt:

 

twojman

Well-Known Member
Jun 1, 2006
5,894
1,194
113
Clive
Like basketball, the Big 12 will be the most competitive and toughest to accumulate a lot of wins. This will lead to the perception of not having as many top teams.
The Big 12 gives itself a perception problem by playing 9 conference games, Big 12 needs to move to 8 games. This stops a guaranteed loss for at least 5 teams. What is perception if OU did not play KSU this year? What if Texas did not lose to ISU and beat someone in noncon? What if ISU did not play Okie St this year and instead beat Kent St? The records are all better and perception goes up.

ACC and SEC have this figured out to get to the playoffs. Those conferences have sent a team every year and they have only 8 conference games. The conferences left out all have 9 conference games. You need quality wins to build your resume and a quality win is beating a team that is above .500. Beating a 6-6 TCU does not help you but beating 7-5 Akron DOES help. What if TCU did not have to play ISU and they go 7-5? Everyone who beat them in conference gets a quality win which boosts your college football playoff rankings.

So to be simple, play 8 conference games and get 4 winnable games in noncon against teams that might finish 7-5 and your SOS looks amazing.
 

Nolaeer

Member
Nov 24, 2012
60
66
18
As a WVU fan, I have given this matter a great deal of thought. And I'd like to start out by saying the past is no indication of the future. Broadcasts of live sports have/are changing rapidly. Cable TV, the model on which the BIG took Rutgers based on perceived TV market will not apply in the future.

Viewers will pay to stream content they want to see. In other words having diehard fans will trump being located in Boston or pittsburgh and playing before a half empty stadium(or worse).

WVU played @ Pitt the other night in hoops, and it was like a WVU home game. This changing dynamic will help teams like Iowa State, WVU, kstate and hurt teams in big markets with few real fans.

Now, if you take the above as true, look at which conferences have great fanbases. The SEC, outside of vandy, is one. The BIG has some schools with great crowds(and some with no fans at all, Maryland, Rutgers to name 2).

The Big 12 is blessed to several teams with rabid fanbases. I think the Big 12, which looked almost dead a few years back, is in a much stronger position going forward to expand than the ACC or Pac.

Of course every conference needs a blue blood, but I dont see Texas going anywhere. OU flirted with the PAC, but now the Big 12 is making a lot more money than the PAC and ACC, and that disparity is only going to get worse.

I do think the SEC and Big want to expand to 16 teams so they can have pods of 4 like the NFL, but I think the teams those conferences want, with the exception of Texas, are all in the ACC.

I think the SEC will poach VT and it will be a race between the BIG and SEC for UNC.
In the end i think the sec and BIG each poach 2 from the ACC, UVA, VT, NC State, and UNC.

I dont think Clemson, FSU, and Miami will want to be stuck in a conference with schools with no fanbases, Duke, Wake Forest, BC, Syracuse, Pitt. Those teams are all being carried.

I think the big 12 could end up taking 6 ACC teams(and kicking baylor to the curb).

So you'd have 1. Clemson, 2. FSU, 3. Miami, 4. WVU, 5. Louisville, 6. G tech, 7.Duke(for hoops) and 8. Iowa State in the east

1.Texas, 2. TCU, 3. TT, 4. OU, 5. Okla. State. 6. kstate, 7. kansas, 8. Arz. in the west
 

ISUMojoMan

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2010
399
466
63
The big 12 needs to start winning some national championships in football and basketball. If Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas can’t get it done then ISU might as well step up and do it.
 

FinalFourCy

Well-Known Member
Mar 5, 2017
9,357
9,144
113
36
The Big 12 gives itself a perception problem by playing 9 conference games, Big 12 needs to move to 8 games. This stops a guaranteed loss for at least 5 teams. What is perception if OU did not play KSU this year? What if Texas did not lose to ISU and beat someone in noncon? What if ISU did not play Okie St this year and instead beat Kent St? The records are all better and perception goes up.

ACC and SEC have this figured out to get to the playoffs. Those conferences have sent a team every year and they have only 8 conference games. The conferences left out all have 9 conference games. You need quality wins to build your resume and a quality win is beating a team that is above .500. Beating a 6-6 TCU does not help you but beating 7-5 Akron DOES help. What if TCU did not have to play ISU and they go 7-5? Everyone who beat them in conference gets a quality win which boosts your college football playoff rankings.

So to be simple, play 8 conference games and get 4 winnable games in noncon against teams that might finish 7-5 and your SOS looks amazing.
There are many reasons for the perception problem, but most stem from a demographics disadvantage. We play 9 because we need to in order to be competitive financially after our footprint was reduced.

People, including media, are biased to whatever is local. We lack people. That led to losing schools, which further hurt perception.

Probably the biggest factor is conferences go as their brand names go, and UT has been down since we lost A&M and NU, being replaced with two pathetically small private schools having success. The SEC’s biggest brands are killing it. The Big 10’s best brands are generally at their all-time levels (The ACC is damn lucky Clemson is peaking past historical success, otherwise they’d have Pac12 trouble).