There’s obviously tons of conference realignment news out there from a lot of different fronts, so let’s get right to it (and I’ll warn you ahead of time that I’ll be jumping around a bit):
(1) ACC officially adds Syracuse and Pitt – I don’t know if adding Syracuse and Pitt alone makes financial sense for the ACC, but it’s a great move from a cultural fit standpoint. Neither Syracuse nor Pitt were likely going to receive Big Ten invites, so it made sense for them to jump at the chance to move to the more stable ACC. (Personally, I’ve long been a proponent of Syracuse receiving a Big Ten invite and thought that if Pitt could just trade locations with Rutgers, they would’ve been invited to the Big Ten many years ago. Alas, the Big Ten is looking for football grand slams, which I’ll get to later on.) This might not be a great football move on paper, yet from a market and academic standpoint, it still makes the ACC stronger than where they were a couple of days ago.
(2) Is 14 (not 16) the new 12? – With the Pac-16 looking like it might come to fruition (Oklahoma seems to be steamrolling over there) and speculation turning to the ACC supposedly not being done and planning to move up to a 16-school league (with candidates like Texas, Notre Dame, Rutgers and UConn being thrown around), the argument is that we are on the precipice of the full-fledged superconference era.
Call me skeptical right now. The Pac-12 is on the verge of going up to 16 with both Texas and Oklahoma, which certainly justifies an expansion to 16. For the Big Ten, ACC and SEC, though, there isn’t quite as compelling of a financial argument to move beyond 14 (or even 12 in the case of the Big Ten) simply for the sake of getting to 16… unless we see Notre Dame join one of them. I’ll have more on that in a moment. Otherwise, there’s just not enough firepower available for spots 15 or 16 in these leagues to justify large-scale expansion.
Regardless, there are a bunch of schools in the Big East and Big 12 (i.e. Rutgers, UConn, Louisville, maybe West Virginia, maybe Kansas, etc.) that are better off either with as little change as possible (i.e. Texas deciding to stay in the Big 12, which makes that a more palatable destination) or full-fledged realignment Armageddon with 4 16-school superconferences (of which those schools would presumably be in the “top 64” to be included). What’s NOT good for them is a “tweener” superconference era of 14-school leagues, as they’ll likely end up in a league with Big East and Big 12 retreads without any football kings.
(3) What should the Big Ten do? – Since I’m a Big Ten guy, lots of people have been asking me what Jim Delany should be doing right now. My unequivocal response: ABSOLUTELY NOTHING UNLESS NOTRE DAME AND/OR TEXAS WANT TO JOIN. The Big Ten has a tight-knit conference with a national TV network, huge fan bases, great academics and four football kings (Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State and Nebraska). There is absolutely no reason to have Big Ten expansion without Notre Dame (and/or the much less likely Texas) involved. If the Irish come calling, then my feeling is that the Big Ten would look to add Rutgers to provide a direct New York City market presence (even though I believe UConn has the better overall athletic department). The Big Ten seems to like Rutgers but not enough to add without Notre Dame. With the amount of money that the Big Ten is splitting already, the standard is massively high. Speaking of the Irish…
(4) Notre Dame has to start thinking again – Let’s be clear about one thing: from a pure football perspective, Notre Dame will never be forced to give up independence. As long as the BCS exists, it’s going to deal with Notre Dame on favorable terms. When BYU can get a multi-year multi-million dollar TV contract from ESPN, it shows that Notre Dame is not within one iota of being in danger of losing its NBC contract (or having someone else like ESPN pick it up instead). TV networks and bowls will always want Notre Dame while power schools such as Michigan and USC will continue to schedule the Domers no matter what.
The irony is that the main way to get Notre Dame to join a conference has nothing to do with football. My reader M pointed out a blog post that I wrote back in June 2010 that could almost be written verbatim again today (Pac-16 on the horizon, Texas A&M going to the SEC and the Big East in danger). In that blog post, I referenced a source that had knowledge of the Big East conference agreement, which states that in the event the league loses 2 football members, the football and non-football sides can split and maintain their respective revenue distributions (i.e. NCAA Tournament credits). At that time, what I was told was that the Catholic members were actually the ones looking to opt for a split in the event of the loss of any members.
It’s unclear whether there’s the same understanding now, but either way, Notre Dame’s overall athletic department has progressed to the point where a league with only the BE Catholic schools wouldn’t be satisfactory for a program of the size that’s in South Bend. Basketball would be fine, but it’s everything else that would be a large problem. While Notre Dame’s alumni base might be willing to throw all non-football sports under the bus in the sake of football independence, Jack Swarbrick and the rest of the leadership at the school aren’t going to have the same perspective as they have to weigh the interests of a whole lot more student-athletes. Like Texas, Notre Dame was in the position of having its cake and eating it, too, with football independence coupled with a BCS-level league for non-football sports. Now, it’s probably going to have to give up one or the other, and considering that Notre Dame was on the verge of joining the Big Ten in 2003 when the remaining Big East schools were much more attractive than whose in place now, it’s an indicator that independence is in danger. It would be great if the ACC could offer them non-football membership outlined in my last post, yet that seems extremely unlikely now. Granted, independence is still an institutional identity issue for the school more than a money issue (which is contrary to what a lot of college football fans believe), so you never know where the Irish might come out on this.
One thing to note (and I’ll have to give credit to one of the Northwestern posters on a Purple Book Cat thread on Wildcatreport.com for pointing this out, but I can’t find the link right now): keep a close eye on what Notre Dame is doing (or not doing) with respect to hockey conference membership. The college hockey world experienced its own Conference Realignment Armageddon this past summer after the formation of the Big Ten hockey conference and a new league that siphoned off many of the best of the remaining WCHA and CCHA programs. Notre Dame, though, hasn’t announced a single thing about joining a different hockey league even though everyone else had done so a couple of months ago. If you see Notre Dame announcing that it’s joining the Hockey East next week, it’s probably a pretty good indicator that the Irish aren’t joining the Big Ten. However, the longer that Notre Dame doesn’t say anything about hockey, the more likely it means the Big Ten is a viable option. Consider the Notre Dame hockey program the college football realignment canary in the coal mine.
(5) Mergers and Acquisitions – A couple of mergers might be on the horizon to create even more mega-conferences. CBS Sports is reporting that the remaining Big 12 and Big East football schools are exploring a potential merger. This makes sense in a number of ways since as long as the Big East and Big 12 are existence, they will have BCS AQ bids through 2013.
Someone that had worked with a conference office told me a couple of weeks ago that a merger between the Big 12 and Big East would be a smart move for the leftover schools. A conference merger actually occurred in 1991, where the American South Conference merged with a wounded Sun Belt Conference that was on the verge of collapse after losing nearly all of its members. Why did the American South step in to save the Sun Belt? It’s because in the event of a merger, it meant that the Sun Belt wouldn’t dissolve and therefore, the NCAA ensured that the new merged league (which would decide to keep the Sun Belt name) would retain all of the NCAA Tournament credits of the departed schools. In the cases of both the Big 12 and Big East, there’s an even stronger incentive for both conferences to avoid dissolution in order to preserve the NCAA Tournament credits of the schools that left their respective leagues (which are actually quite substantial with schools like Syracuse and Pitt involved) along with AQ status for football. At the same time, the SEC, Pac-12 and ACC all have fairly strong incentives to see a merger occur as it lowers their potential legal exposure from schools such as Baylor and Iowa State that might otherwise be left out of the AQ level.
On the non-AQ front, the Mountain West and Conference USA are considering a football-only merger in an attempt to procure BCS AQ status. It will be interesting to see whether a mega-league would be persuasive to the BCS powers-that-be on that front since the issue has largely been about the weakness in the bottom halves of those 2 conferences, which won’t go away (and might even be exacerbated) with a merger.
(6) The Geography of Conference Realignment – Finally, as a political junkie, one of my favorite analysts out there is Nate Silver of the FiveThirtyEight blog. So, I was ecstatic to see him post a massive analysis of college conference realignment to determine the different values of various schools. I actually wrote about the CommonCensus Sports Map Project several years ago (prior to when most of you had stumbled onto this blog) that Silver used in his posting and had noticed at the time that the SEC schools were largely underrepresented in the college football fan numbers. Regardless, both the Nate Silver piece and the CommonCensus Sports Maps provide a starting point and an incredible amount of data points to examine for anyone interested in how fans of sports teams are distributed by market.
Over 1500 words about the latest in conference realignment and I’ve barely talked about Texas. Don’t worry – I’ll be writing much more about the Longhorns soon. Until then, enjoy the hourly changes in the rumor mill.
(Follow Frank the Tank’s Slant on Twitter @frankthetank111 and Facebook)
(Image from TV Tropes)
FRANK THE TANK'S SLANT 
Frank,
How do you keep up with all the comments? I’ve been going crazy lately, skipping hundreds of posts. That’s a problem since I’m a bit obsessive and always worry about what I’m missing in the posts I skip. 🙂
Do you actually read everything?
Thanks by the way. Always interesting and entertaining.
LikeLike
@joe4psu – When we go through mushroom cloud periods (like right now), it can be tough to keep up, but I still try to read everyone’s comments since this is truly an incredibly insightful group of commentators. It helps that I have an iPhone with a WordPress app that gives me pretty quick access to everything that comes in. I also have 2-year old twins, which means I really have no life outside of the home these days and why you usually see new posts come up around midnight. It’s not like I can go out partying after they go to bed.
LikeLike
“It’s not like I can go out partying after they go to bed.”
-Sure you could! It would probably make a horrible parent & a terrible person but you COULD do it. 😉
Congrats on the twins BTW mine will be 3 in Jan (fraternal girl & boy).
LikeLike
Agreed… On his last post, I commented before catching up w/ all of the other comments and almost my entire post was old news.
LikeLike
add
LikeLike
Add.
LikeLike
Add
LikeLike
Add
LikeLike
Go blue
LikeLike
Go Orange
LikeLike
Beat SDSU!
LikeLike
Aztecs are going to take down cHoke
LikeLike
Hell hath no fury like a program scorned.
However. Since Aztecs consider 60 degrees cold,
I’m seeing 30-20/Michigan in my crystal ball.
LikeLike
I’d be OK with that. SDSU is a tough team.
LikeLike
I posted this before, but the Big Ten has researched every possibility including the former (and current) Big East schools.
If none of them work in terms of growing the pie more than their share, then it’s just not going to happen (or if they dilute the brand name matchups that you get with 4 out of 12 kings along with an addition 2 out of 12 upper/middle tier brands).
LikeLike
The smartest move for the big12/big east left overs is to take UCF, Houston, SMU and TCU and become the east, with the MWC + BYU in the west:
The 11×11
West
SDSU
Fresno
Boise
Hawaii
UNLV
UNR
New Mexico
AFA
CSU
WYO
BYU
East
Iowa State
Baylor
KState
Cincy
Louisville
USF
UCF
Memphis
TCU
Houston
SMU
Each side is self-contained, plays a title game between the leagues, plays title ix sports in their region, has easy bball scheduling for RPI games, or has a really good tourney if they cross that over too.
Recruiting for both sides, big markets, and will produce year-on-year a better football champion than the ACC
LikeLike
At this point, I wouldn’t be surprised if UTx ended up in the new Big 12 (B12/BE leftovers).
East: ISU, Cin, UL, MU/WVU, USF & RU/ND(?)
West: BU, KU, KSU, TCU, TTU & UTx
* UConn &/ BYU could be included to round it out
(depending what teams are left w/o a conference)
This conference would maintain it’s BCS AQ. They could play 6-9 conference games, so UTx (& ND?) would have scheduling flexibility. The conference SoS wouldn’t be overly difficult, so UTx could keep OU & TAMU annually. Presumably, UTx could keep the LHN. UTx would get everything that it wants, or so it would seem.
LikeLike
A TV Tropes image? Frank you have to start doing pop culture posts sometime!
LikeLike
On the topic of pop culture, Ziggy creator Tom Wilson has died. I know this has nothing at all to do with college sports, but I feel like there are probably a lot of Ziggy fans on this board.
RIP
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2011/9/prweb8806450.htm
LikeLike
The CUSA/MWC has all the hallmarks of “starts as merger, ends as raid” setup.
I think the ACC plans to go to 16. Either they’re waiting for ND to join, or Rutgers is waiting to see if ND joins the Big Ten so they can come along.
In some sense, the ACC additions of Syracuse and Pitt calls in the basic assumption that all expansion decisions are about football. I don’t think you can argue that they improve the ACC in football, either on the field or from a media perspective. Both of them are below the ACC average in attendance and combined they have 2 BCS bowls total. This was a basketball move by a basketball conference; check out any FSU message board or blog if you think differently.
LikeLike
@M – Totally agree regarding your C-USA/MWC comment. If they really want to have a serious shot at an AQ bid, it would best to take the cream of one of the conferences (maybe the top 4 schools) and add them onto the other.
LikeLike
Agreed on both counts.
Why does this read exactly like the original MWC split off the WAC-16?
Plus, considering the history of the MWC, if I was C-USA, I’d be very careful about this arrangement…
LikeLike
Which “cream of the crop” is stronger?
Mountain West
Boise State
Fresno State
Nevada
Hawaii
Air Force
UNLV
C-USA
Houston
SMU
Tulsa
UCF
Memphis
ECU
Worth noting:
– C-USA currently has the better TV deal
– ECU has the highest attendance of any non-AQ program in the country, except for BYU
– Air Force has a modest-sized yet national following
– Boise State is by far the best at drawing in casual sports fans’ viewership
LikeLike
It makes sense though to just combine Boise, Fresno State, Nevada, Hawaii, Air Force, and UNLV with UCF, ECU, etc.
Everyone knows the MWC TV deal is crap, so it wouldn’t be a surprise if they used this as a way of jumping the ship.
LikeLike
You forgot SDSU, SDSU has won 45 of their last 52 in football and bball, has a bigger market than most of those teams, is doing big ratings in San Diego, academics is the same or better than most of those. SDSU is averaging 46k in football so far, and sold out all but 2 games last year in bball
And. CUSA’s deal is worth slightly less per team than the MWC and was signed 6 years later. Hard to say they have the better tv deal. The MWC also can apply for a BCS waiver, CUSA can not.
MWC is the hunter. Any group left after the big 4 finish up would be silly not to make sure they have Boise, SDSU and UNLV anchoring their west
LikeLike
Although it could be a prelude to a raid, CUSA has geography on its side. And the Texas schools would be very leery of the MWC. They’ve had experience with them. Rumours are that the Utah St. expansion story to MWC was dependent on UTEP saying yes and they refused. There are also rumours that SMU and UH have been approached by MWC and also had no interest. In any event, SMU and UH don’t do anything until the 12East or East 12 or Sunbeast 666 appear.
With the right combination of factors, the raid could go the other way. What about Navy, Army and Air Force all joining a CUSA West with the private schools? Army & Navy would be football only. It would probably be a better setup for Air Force.
LikeLike
The problem with SDSU is this is the absolute high-water mark of their athletic history, kind of like when Cincinnati went to the BCS. Historically SDSU is average in football and terrible in basketball. Now, I’m not saying that things aren’t changing for the better at the Mesa, but right now the sample size is too small to start talking about the Aztecs like they’re a top-end mid-major.
LikeLike
Geaux Fightin’ Tigers!
LikeLike
add
LikeLike
While it makes sense for fans of current Big Ten schoosl to be resistent to change and to be against further expansion other than Notre Dame and Texas, I think what we’re experiencing right now is a once in a century seismic shift, and the Big Ten is not going to want to be the Little 12 among 3 Big 16s. The Big Ten was the conference that started all of this in the first place. And why did they do it? The Big Ten Network. Look at this article from last year:
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/13230366/lucrative-big-ten-network-could-be-driving-force-for-expansion
Key quote: “Take the state of Missouri as an example of the profit potential for the Big Ten. The state had an estimated 2.2 million households in 2008. Let’s assume that almost all of those have satellite or cable or both. If the Big Ten added the University of Missouri, it could potentially increase those subscriber fees from 10 cents per person to 70 cents. That’s the difference between a gross of $220,000 and $1.54 million per month. ”
Multiply that times 12 and you get $15.84M in increased revenue for the Big Ten for adding Missouri from the BTN alone. Add in other revenue and they easily pay for themselves and then some. And Missouri’s population is only 6M. New Jersey’s is 9M, albeit with a smaller fanbase. Both schools would be easily worth it, money-wise. No, they wouldn’t make a huge splash like Notre Dame and Texas, but they’re both big flagship state schools with 33k to 38k students, both are AAU members with huge campuses. Both would fit right in with the Big Ten.
That gets the Big Ten to 14. Other than raiding the ACC, which looks difficult right now, the only other candidates would be Notre Dame, Kansas, and Connecticut. Notre Dame of course was the goal all along so I’m sure the Big Ten will do its best to get them. UConn and KU don’t bring much as far as football, but what they bring in basketball is substantial. KU is AAU, UConn is not.
Nate Silver’s analysis in the NYT today was amazing. You can see exactly where the expansion candidates fit in with the current Big Ten:
1 Ohio State
2 Michiga
3 Penn State
*4 Notre Dame
12 Wisconsin
15 Iowa
18 Nebraska
20 Michigan State
*23 Missouri
27 Illinois
28 Minnesota
*30 North Carolina
*32 Rutgers
*36 Virginia
*40 Kansas
44 Indiana
46 Purdue
*47 COnnecticut
*51 Duke
54 Northwestern
*58 Maryland
As you can see, Notre Dame and Missouri are no-brainers. Rutgers is prett good too. North Carolina and Virginia would be nice if the Big Ten could get them, but that’s doubtful. Kansas would work as a school 16 if it came to it, plus their basketball is very strong. UConn and Maryland are not good choices.
LikeLike
I don’t think the ACC is off limits forever (or even now). Miami, for one, would always be receptive if the B10 ever calls, as they know that they’re screwed if the SEC ever goes to 16 and takes FSU.
I know they have Nevin-gate right now, but you don’t base half-century-long decisions on sanctions that have an effect over at most a decade. Academically, Miami is trending in the right direction and is already on the AAU threshold. Athletically, despite their meager local support, they’re a brand on TV.
That’s why I don’t think the B10 moves without ND, because even if Rutgers is off the table, I believe Miami would always be available.
LikeLike
I agree that the ACC isn’t off the table, which is why I included 4 ACC schools in my analysis. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Big Ten was able to get Maryland and/or Virginia. Getting North Carolina and Duke out of the ACC seems almost absurd, but not completely beyond the realm of possibility. Georgia Tech and Miami don’t make any sense at all geographically, so I consider them highly unlikely additions to the Big Ten, but not impossible.
A great combo for the Big Ten if they can’t get Notre Dame might be Missouri/Rutgers/Maryland/Virginia.
LikeLike
The ACC IS off the table, and always has been.
Possible exception is VA TECH, FSU, and/or Clemson in case ACC goes to 16 by adding Rutgers and U CONN. That trio couldn’t be thrilled by the addition of 4 NE schools, 3 of which are “basketball schools”.
LikeLike
Uh, so if there are exceptions, then ACC schools aren’t off the table (as an ACC weakened by an SEC raid would be susceptible to an B10 raid as well no matter how many BE schools they add).
BTW, if FSU is an exception, Miami is as well (if they ever get an offer somewhere), as they’d have little reason to prefer the ACC over, say, the B10 if FSU isn’t in the ACC any more.
LikeLike
I actually think getting GTech and Miami are more realistic than getting UNC & Duke as that is the heart of the ACC, and I’m now convinced that they’d defend the ACC to the death with whatever number of BE castoffs to at least have a premier NC-centered bball conference.
LikeLike
BTW, school that isn’t at least B10 average in support or academics isn’t a no-brainer.
LikeLike
Fair enough, not a total no-brainer, but definitely a high value acquisition. One of the better options out there, especially if you take geography into account.
LikeLike
Gonna post this even though you already tweeted it Frank.
http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1267651
Chip Brown: Decision within 2 weeks.
Biggest two weeks in the past 20 years of college sports.
LikeLike
I know Chip’s reporting from a Texas angle of things, but is the Pac-12 really going to let Texas be “more equal” right off the bat before things even out?
Maybe they’ll all take the long view on these things, but it just doesn’t seem like the right way to start off what you expect to be a 100 year decision…
LikeLike
Also, I have to believe that anything about Tech in the SEC is a way of urging the Pac-12 to make the first move on Texas. Hard to see why Tech would ever leave Texas’ side.
LikeLike
“is the Pac-12 really going to let Texas be “more equal” right off the bat before things even out?”
This has been the fundamental question of conference realignment for two years: which conference will fold and give in to Texas’ demands. The Big 12 rejected them (or at least Nebraska, Oklahoma and A&M rejected them). The ACC and Big Ten have apparently rejected the unequal treatment as well. Will the Pac-12 resist, or will it swallow the poison pill? If it rejects Texas’ demands, will Texas drop them or cobble together a new conference of minions?
LikeLike
It is not a certainty that OU has rejected Texas. Let’s wait and see what Boren does first.
LikeLike
Again, USC and UCLA were made “more equal” just last year with guarantees while the Big 12 has not done anything like that. UT and OU refused guarantees. A floor for UT could be worked out, especially if the Pac 12 network is as lucrative as predicted which would make such a floor moot in short order. Telling someone we’ll deem to let you in our club if you share your income with us since we make less than you doesn’t exactly seem like a good start either. A good deal is a win-win.
In my mind the trickier parts are negotiating with ESPN, agreeing on the branding part and figuring out what gets thrown into the common pot. Apparently UT believes there is a lot out there beyond TV that is going to become very valuable in the future and is reluctant to give that up.
LikeLike
As you well know the financial arrangement for current members was a stepping stone to full equality, a way to not require a reduction while the others were catching up, and was never likely to be required as projections even at that time had the Pac coming in above the threshold.
Agree with the possible probs with ESPN. UT kind of signed a Faustian bargain. There will be no ESPN involvement in the P16N, Texas beyond what it takes to release the rights to the Pac.
LikeLike
I’ll just leave this here for the ND fans who want to join the ACC over the B1G:
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/d47a560045aad7aab88ffc9080650d5b/2010_Attendance.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=d47a560045aad7aab88ffc9080650d5b
In the ACC, only FSU and Clemson are over 70,000 attendance, compared to 7 Big Ten schools. The average attendance at an B1G game in 2010 was 20,617 more than the average ACC game, . This was before the addition of Nebraska, which will push the Big Ten average up by roughly 1000 (without considering any secondary effects of Nebraska road games). It’s also before the addition of Syracuse and Pitt, who will push the ACC average down by approximately the same amount.
Have fun playing half your games on the grandest 50,000 seat stages that the ACC has to offer.
LikeLike
Well that’s the decision isn’t it? Playing against what are likely to be less high profile opponents on average, but more geographically located to their alumni/fan bases.
It would also make it easier for them to schedule. ACC is likely to have 9 games. Play Navy, USC, and Stanford annually to get a game on the West Coast.
Sure they lose their Big Ten rivals, but location-wise, they’d be playing 6 games at home in the Midwest along with 5 games on the East Coast and 1 game in California.
It wouldn’t be optimal at all, but if geographic mix is their goal it makes sense.
They’d be betting that their being high profile outweighs some of the less high profile matchups they’d probably have in a 16 team ACC as opposed to a 14 team Big Ten.
Maybe they’d end up in a pod of ND/Miami/BC/Pitt or something like that, so 3 of their 9 conference games for sure would be typical games that they’d expect.
LikeLike
The problem is that the ACC (especially the original ACC) is not more geographically located to their alums. I would bet that there are more ND alumni in any Big Ten state except Nebraska (and maybe Iowa) than in VA, NC, SC, and GA combined.
If the ACC put ND in a division with Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers, Maryland, Miami, FSU, and Boston College, that might be close to equaling the alumni reach of the Big Ten. Would the oldline ACC members be willing to give up almost all their games against any team in Florida or the northeast? Would Maryland give up playing UVA and UNC with any regularity? Would these teams agree to having FSU, Miami and ND in the same division?
Also, that division isn’t that much different than the Big East conference circa 2002 (just swap Maryland and FSU for VT). If ND wasn’t willing to join the Big East in football then, why join it now? An extra game against FSU? Not to harp on attendance, but other FSU none of the other teams are in the 30 in country. 3 of them were under 41000 last year.
ND joining the ACC would be like throwing the remote through your television when your team does something stupid. It might make you feel good to do it, but you’re worse off for having done it.
LikeLike
I actually tend to agree with what you’re saying here.
I’m just offering the rationalization you’re going to find mostly centered about ND as an East Coast school. If it’s from Wetzel and co., you’ll also find the typical stuff about the Midwest dying off and all that.
The main problem I see with the ACC for ND’s football is that too many of the ACC schools are primarily basketball schools, which is pretty much what you’ve stated as well.
Outside of Florida State, Miami, and Va Tech, the football brands haven’t really developed as strongly as they can. Clemson has strong attendance but outside of that it’s going to be problematic.
LikeLike
Wetzel and co need to take a look at the unemployment, poverty, and education levels in those states and then consider where a university would like to affiliate. Other than Texas and maybe Florida, the Sun Belt has far greater economic problems than the midwest (other than Michigan).
LikeLike
I hate everything written by Dan Wetzel. I have never been a fan of him or his opinions. His anti Midwest stuff is just stupidity. I would put the economy of where I live, Indianapolis, up against just about anywhere else in the country.
I think the ND to the ACC fans are mostly the subway alums who have regaled themselves with stories about how fielding yost tried to black ball Notre Dame. Of course that ignores the fact that Purdue and Michigan State continued to schedule them, but whatever. If they feel that way, fine. As a Purdue fan I just hope we still have ND on the schedule, no matter where they end up. If they aren’t onethe schedule anymore, that will be disappointing, but life goes on.
LikeLike
@ Purduemoe
Totally agree. I don’t want the midwest to sink to the south’s and atlantic coast’s level. There are nice places and sh*tholes in both regions, but the bottom line is that the midwest enjoys a better overall standard of living in basically every facet of life. Busting families down to taking $12-$15 an hour or worse for a job is not my idea of prosperity.
I also agree with you about ND. They have what is generally a friendly rivalry with MSU, and it seems to be the same with Pur. MSU and ND helped each other get to where they are. On the other hand, UM tried to keep them both down – that’s just a historical fact and it carries over to this day.
These days you also get a lot intellectual snobbery about ND being a religious school. As if you can’t be religious and intelligent. I went to UM. A lot of the people are great and the school is world class, but there are certainly a lot of douchebags and ultraliberal elitists. I suppose the domers can be pretty obnoxious too; I think I just relate to them better – I went to 12 years of catholic school.
LikeLike
Moe-
From my understanding the biggest thing is that unlike the B1G with it’s ONE private school and all heavily grad focused universities doesn’t LOOK as much like ND as the ACC with it’s four-ish (I still don’t quite get Pitt’s set-up) private schools and much smaller and more undergrad focused flagships. Also, the ACC has schools in Florida, Boston, near DC, and now NY and PA. Get Texas (becoming more unlikely) as a non-football (which means they’d be open to us as non-football as well) and the ACC looks even better.
Only three stadiums in the ACC are under 50K. And ND has played home and homes with BC in the past. The B1G has only one (NU), but I don’t remember the Irish @ NU, I thought it was @ Soldier Field.
Even though the ACC doesn’t look *good* they do look better than they did, and are a potentially viable alternative to the B1G if push is truly coming to shove.
IIRC, Michigan State and ND started the series because Michigan was blackballing both of us. Purdue ignored Michigan because they needed a second local rival. Michigan State didn’t get in the B1G until 1950, after Chicago deemphasized. ND also sought that spot, IIRC, and were turned down. Michigan’s blackball was effective…since we were only sought to join the B1G in 1999, over 50yrs after Yost’s death.
LikeLike
FLP
I understand what you are saying, and I agree that Yost did try to blackball you. But Others in the B1G didn’t. I also understand the private school aspect, but Northwestern is doing just fine in the B1G, and has for decades. The CIC already includes another private school in the University of Chicago. I don’t think ND would be on an island in the B1G. Like I said before, as a Purdue fan, as long as we keep the ND game I don’t care where ND lands in a conference, the rivalry is important to me. I was at Purdue the same time Brees was there, and the 99 and 2000 ND games were two of the most exciting games I ever saw, one in person. I love the atmosphere for the ND game at Purdue, as we always get a bunch of ND fans in there, most of whom are very well behaved and fun. I think ND is a good fit for the BIG, but it seems like the winds are blowing towards the ACC. If ND goes to the ACC I think the Purdue game is one of the rivalry games ND will cut, since Purdue isn’t the name like USC or Michigan, and didn’t save the school like Navy. Like I said all things pass, but I hope it doesn’t.
As an aside, I do think some of the message board talk of ND being afraid of the B1G is ridiculous. ND has always played anyone, and has never ducked a matchup, at least that I know about. But I do think ND needs to think before it essentially gets rid of some longstanding Midwestern rivalries.
LikeLike
I never understand the Yost blackball theory. In that 39 year gap (1903-1941), 4 of ND’s 10 most commonly played opponents were Big Ten schools (Northwestern, Indiana, Purdue, Wisconsin). ND also played every Big Ten team except Michigan and Chicago at least twice.
If Yost tried to stop Big Ten members from playing ND, he did an extraordinarily poor job.
LikeLike
Have to rep the history of the alma mater: University of Chicago stands 5-0-0 against Notre Dame and remains (for obvious reasons) the only program undefeated against the Irish in multiple contests to date.
LikeLike
Make that 4-0-0, had to look back to seriously old record books…
Click to access fb-recordbook-earlyera.pdf
LikeLike
In rebuttal, I will just leave this here for why the ACC makes more sense for Notre Dame than the B1G.
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-wetzel_notre_dame_should_jump_to_acc_091911
What you argue as a strength may in fact be a weakness, depending on your perspective.
LikeLike
Because clearly, nothing says “national schedule” like teams no one cares about.
LikeLike
Rice #3!
Big 12 set a conference record for attendance at nearly 63k. Well ahead of Pac and ACC.
LikeLike
Also brings up the 9 game conference schedule. UGA’s game vs. Coastal Carolina broke a long sellout streak with 800 seats unsold and an estimated 10,000 empty seats at the start. Not as unenthused a crowd as Idaho St. last year (when people were giving away tickets-1st prize-2 Idaho St tickets, 2nd prize-4 Idaho St. tickets…), but not much better. People were leaving at halftime (35-0 and the game wasn’t that close). Maybe half had left by the end of the 3rd quarter. We stayed until the end and beat the traffic. There was NOONE left on campus. Everyone was long gone. You would have thought it was summer as empty as the campus was.
A 9 game conference schedule gives you fewer of those type of games.
LikeLike
I was at UT’s 1997 66-3 loss at home to UCLA in 95 degree weather and there were probably as many people left in the stadium at the end of that game than at the end of UGA-Coastal Carolina (and it was a perfect football Saturday). The ADs are not thinking long term with these types of matchups and mega-conferences which kill rivalries.
LikeLike
To be fair to the rivalry question, there weren’t many UT fans in the Cotton Bowl beyond the third quarter of the OU games in 2000 or 2003, and that’s both a long-term and conference rivalry. Getting drilled encourages people to leave the stadium.
LikeLike
Yes, but Georgia won and the stadium still emptied out. That was my point.
LikeLike
Their fans don’t care. Notre Dame’s an East Coast school located in the Midwest.
They might have a national fan base, but the majority of them are on the East Coast, and the majority of them would rather play against Syracuse and Maryland than Ohio State and Wisconsin.
LikeLike
If they really wanted to play the small east coast schools, they would have stopped playing Michigan, Michigan State, and Purdue years ago and substituted Wake Forest, Duke and Syracuse.
As I state below, the best case scenario for joining the ACC is nearly indistinguishable from the Big East circa 2002. ND didn’t want anything to do with that conference (even though they probably could have kept the whole together had they joined).
LikeLike
Their fans =! The administration
LikeLike
Stupid question: what are NCAA Tournament credits?
LikeLike
Credits come from playing games in the NCAA tournament (one credit per game). Revenue from the tournament is split into equal amounts per credit. Credits count for 6 years, so the money is spread out. Generally, the revenue based on the credits go to the conference, instead of the school participating. Thus, the Pitt and Syracuse revenue from 2006-2011 tournaments remains with the Big East unless the Big East dissolves. In that case, they revert back to the school that earned them.
LikeLike
How does is this affected by a merger? Say Big 12/Big East? How do you structure such a thing to keep the credits from both? Is that even possible?
LikeLike
If the Big East and Big 12 merge, the credits will remain in place. Neither conference can actually dissolve before the merger, or the credits will revert. That’s my understanding anyway.
LikeLike
thank you sir
LikeLike
Something that makes Kansas valuable to the Big Ten, despite no one believing me.
LikeLike
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/6995058/mwc-looking-keep-tcu-conferences-shift
ESPN finally picks up the story on the MWC trying to lure back TCU. FWIW, I think a new Big 12-Big East would likely become the new “little brother” conference with a BCS slot if they voted alongside the other conferences as the Big East previous received…
That’s mainly why TCU is likely to stick it out with Kansas/Kansas State/Missouri or WVU (whoever isn’t taken by the SEC if that happens)/Iowa State/Baylor/Louisville/Cincinnati/USF/UConn/Rutgers (if the latter two are ignored by the ACC).
LikeLike
Google’s Larry Page and Nate Silver only lived a stone’s throw from each other in East Lansing and went to the same high school. I remember when Nate Silver was younger he became a local celebrity for his obsession with batting averages and the unsolicited advice he sent to MLB managers who quickly pegged him as a genius. He’s a real straight shooter. His stint at Daily Kos notwithstanding.
LikeLike
I could see the ACC letting Connecticut twist in the wind for a while, perhaps even relegating it to the conference of misfit toys for a few years. There are still plenty of people in the ACC hierarchy who resent UConn for a variety of reasons — Jim Calhoun’s recruiting, the 2003 lawsuit the state filed against the conference, and so on. Since it has nowhere else to go (no AAU status will prevent it from entering the Big Ten, which was a longshot to begin with), Connecticut would be taken out of circulation for a while facing largely second-tier opponents in conference #5, and perhaps learning a bit of humility when the ACC finally deigned to take UConn in expansion to 16. (One wonders whether Bristol-based ESPN — which originated in 1979 as a way to show Connecticut sports — will coerce the ACC into taking the Huskies without delay.)
The only bad part of this scenario is that Rutgers suffers, too.
LikeLike
VP19, Same could apply to Baylor also.
LikeLike
And remember, the Huskies have only had FBS football since 2000. They are a glorified basketball school, historically speaking. I’m hopeful that the Eastern conferences will stop at 14 until ND’s future will be determined. I’m not sure how much of a boost Rutgers or UConn football will be.
LikeLike
In SU and Pitt, the ACC acquired colleges with legitimate, longtime “big-time” tradition. In contrast, 40 years ago Rutgers was an ersatz Ivy and Connecticut was playing Vermont (which still had football then) and other New England schools in the Yankee Conference.
LikeLike
ESPN – which originated in 1979 as a way to show Connecticut sports –
So the LHN is really just a subsidiary of the UConn family of networks. Now can everyone let up on Texas?
LikeLike
Realignment playing out in the UK as well
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/sep/20/scottish-secretary-attacks-alex-salmond?CMP=twt_fd
LikeLike
I’ve got insomnia, and I think I may have figured the end game out while I tried to fall back asleep.
ACC: Stays put at 14, leaves UConn twisting in the wind
SEC: Goes to 14 by adding TA&M and Mizzou
Pac X: Adds UT, TT, OK, OkSt
BIG: Adds Notre Dame, Rutgers (why Rutgers? Nate Silver’s terrific 538 post explains it best. This would give the BIG the 3 most popular teams in NYC)
Big East/12: Basketball only schools spin off the oft-discussed Catholic league. Remaining teams from both leagues merge (including TCU). That is still a pretty good league and should be able to keep its BCS bid.
MW/CUSA: Merge for football, as described earlier to try and fill the remaining sixth BCS bid. Keeps politicos happy because the non-bcs schools now have a shot.
Even Sun Belt, WAC, MAC are happy because they could now fill one of the non-BCS slots in the future, if they have the right team.
Ok?
One final thought before I attempt to fall back asleep.
BIG could add just Notre Dame only and stay at 13. How? Notre Dame becomes a ‘floater’ team between Legends and Leaders each year. It plays in the Legends one year, Leader the next, and alternates back and forth for football only. The get to keep NBC for home games (because it is over the air network that all BIG fans get without any extra effort). BTN/ESPN get all ND road games, including non-con. That money is all pooled and split between all 13 schools. BIG goes to already planned 9 game sched, so ND gets 3 non-cons per year (USC, Navy and one other). This allows each BIG team to play at ND once in 4 years, ND to keep relationship w/NBC, BIG gets to rake in even bigger $$$, and ND gets a semi-national sched each year. Mizzou goes to SEC. ACC may or may not take UConn, Rutgers in this scenario.
Whew. Ok, back to bed.
LikeLike
I don’t believe that any of the remaining ‘big 4’ (SEC, ACC, PAC X, BiG) would ever allow a non-football membership. The ND deal destabilized the BEast in the end, and did not help it. This is why ND is in a vary precarious position right now. They could still be independent after all of this, and put their non-football sports in the aforementioned Catholic League, but they may get shut out of many schedules because football is going to 9 and maybe even 10 conference games. Independence is their goal at all costs, and they will probably achieve it, but at what price? BiG will only expand for ND at this point. Delany has made it clear that he thinks 12>16. Its quality over quantity.
LikeLike
The Big East was/is intrinsically unstable because the northeast is focused on the NFL. No traditional football kings reside in the Northeast…unless we’re calling Happy Valley NE. Or at least they haven’t since Army and the Ivies abdicated in the 40s and 50s. Syracuse was a prince, and could easily be again.
The problem is that today the money doesn’t come approximately equal parts football and MBB, but far and away from football. While NYC loves it some college hoops, with no local football king, the Big East is a casualty of the new era in television.
LikeLike
That could leave an opening for a Big East/Big 12 blend where Notre Dame and Texas participate in everything but football, but agreeing to play conference schools a few games a year. ND could continue that role with the Big East emigres, while UT could do likewise with its Big 12 counterparts. It makes sense as an endgame for all concerned.
LikeLike
5 conferences works much better for an 8 team playoff than 6 with autobids. I don’t see why the big conferences would want to go from 9 or 10 of 10 slots to 8 or 9 just because they all got bigger. CUSA/MWC merger for autobid is unrealistic. And a championship game means there is a greater risk the team isn’t deserving.
LikeLike
I’m sorry USC, Navy (neutral site), and X equals “semi-national” how?
LikeLike
According to SportsCenter… ND plans on remaining in the Big East. If that becomes impossible, then they will seek to join the ACC, not the Big Ten.
LikeLike
Not really sure that’s something they’re going to decide in a matter of minutes after getting blindsided by this Pitt/Syracuse to the ACC move.
ND is under no pressure to join a football conference at this point in time. They can wait and see what happens to the Big East and consider joining the Catholic schools.
Their NC/BCS access is not changed by this move.
LikeLike
I was thinking exactly the same thing before I read your post.
LikeLike
So ESPN says that ND plans on remaining in the conference that ESPN basically founded. If not, it will join the only conference where ESPN controls all of the media rights.
I trust ESPN to broadcast games, compile highlight reels, and devise catchphrases. As a news organization, it has roughly the credibility of Missouri radio stations.
LikeLike
Agreed, but I still think it stops the ACC from moving to 16, right now. Much of eSECpn’s reporting is quite Chip Brown-ish… but, why should facts get in the way of a good story/spin. I get sick & tired of the way they ridicule the B1G, but the SEC can do no wrong.
LikeLike
M wins. Most of this ‘reporting’ is ESPN manipulation.
LikeLike
With ND stating, per ESPN, that they’d prefer the ACC, it would seem that the conferences will have: B1G (12), ACC (14), SEC(14) & Pac-1# (14/16). But… for whatever reason, I have a hunch that the B1G will end up w/ 14.
LikeLike
We all love a good conspiracy theory…but PBC’s “ESPN vs. The Big Ten” power play theories seem to work with every new story that comes out. Again, I admit to having “Big Ten glasses” on as I read this, but it just seems like every story goes against anything that the Big Ten would want to do.
LikeLike
I have thought the same thing as time has gone on. Now it may turn out the PBC is completely full of dung, and heck that is probably the most likely outcome, but it seems like ESPN is reporting everyone to everywhere but the B1G. This makes sense with Delaney’s comments, and I thought nothing of it, until I heard on Mike and Mike this morning that they think Notre Dame would go to the ACC before the B1G. Maybe thats true, but it just doesn’t smell right to me. It seems like ESPN is trying to use the bully pulpit to get UT and ND into the conference where they control all of the media rights.
LikeLike
I just read that as, “ND believes it has a shot to get in as a Non-football school in the ACC, and knows it has no shot to pull that stunt with the B1G.” It seems like Swarbrick was just as shocked as the rest of us that Syr and Pitt bolted.
I didn’t catch Sportscenter this morning, so if I’m wrong, plz correct.
LikeLike
and White
LikeLike
Frank, do you think Delaney laughed a hard and sinister laugh when he heard Pitt And Cuse left for the ACC? “Mwahahahahhahahahahahahhahahahah!”
LikeLike
Actually, he probably was getting a little distracted while putting. His filler is rapidly disappearing. He wants ND and UT, but what if he only gets one? Pitt and SU are off the board. UConn and Rutgers may be. Missouri could be in SEC. Or Kansas/Missouri could end up in Pac with their rights sewn up for 15 years.
So does he bring in Iowa State if Notre Dame comes calling? 13 is just not a tenable number for more than a couple of years. The Cyclones may be the only AAU member available.
LikeLike
If ND comes calling (which I doubt), the B1G won’t be stuck with Iowa State. Rutgers and others will still jump to the B1G if the chance to join with Notre Dame is there.
Hopefully the B1G is “stuck” with 12.
LikeLike
Hey Frank.
I’m an ACC guy (UVA!!)
I think at the end of the day the world will still turn and people will find a way to cope no matter what happens……
BUT, what do you think about Florida State?
They voted to up the conference buyout yet made a committee to “examine realignment options”. Also message board buzz from Noles fans are horrfied at the additions of Pitt and Cuse.
You think they leave?
I think it’s either or because the educational brass reportedly likes the ACC partnerships.
LikeLike
What the fans want is honestly worth diddly-squat.
Florida State’s administration has been outspoken in favor of the Pitt/Syracuse additions and all of the ACC members voted to raise the buyout.
Obviously raising the buyout is a signal that you’re playing defense, and the Pitt/Syracuse moves were made with the thought that “the best defense is a good offense”.
Yeah, FSU fans would have wanted the ACC to get either ND or Penn State, but other than that, what logical alternatives did they have? There’s a lot of synergy between UNC/Duke and Syracuse/Pitt for basketball, and even though this doesn’t really do anything for football, it helped their market presence in the Northeast.
It seems highly unlikely that the FSU brass would want to leave the ACC, since according to the ACC they can renegotiate (or maybe that means just getting a pro-rata raise) from the contract language, so that might help fix the distance in $ between the ACC and SEC.
The FSU administration isn’t really concerned with creating the best matchups for the fanbase. They’re concerned with money, educational prestige, as well as probably the ease with which they can get to the BCS.
For most of the ACC teams, the SEC doesn’t make sense. Va Tech and FSU can get to the ACC CCG any year they want, and if they run the table, they get to the NC. There’s no evidence that the SEC would improve recruiting since FSU already can pull down top-5 classes without much effort.
LikeLike
“What the fans want is honestly worth diddly-squat”
I call BS on this. Just ask the A@M administration. At these sothern schools the football coach calls the shots, and the administration listens.
LikeLike
While I agree about A&M’s fans wanting to leave the Big 12, I think that is a broad generalization to say Southern schools’ football coaches call the shots. I’d like to hear what Bernie Machen or Michael Adams have to say about that. It’s not like A&M is leaving the Ivy League for the SEC – they’re leaving a league that is arguable worse on the bottom academically than the SEC.
And considering the Big 12 and SEC conference relationships don’t have any meaningful academic affiliation outside of general association and reputation, I think it means even less.
I think Zeek is dead-on about FSU: the school itself is very young and has benefitted significantly in academic circles from its loose affiliation with the ACC school and their reputations. TPTB will always listen to fans; that doesn’t mean they’ll act on their wishes.
LikeLike
Michael Adams would never make a Gee type quote about Mark Richt firing him (of course Richt is the one on the hot seat).
And with A&M it wasn’t the mass of fans, it was the key fans-the big donors and the board of regents. A&M’s never worshipped its football coach-its the program. Dana Bible, Bear Bryant, Gene Stallings and RC Slocum for that matter all left or got run off. Texas and Alabama are grateful for the great coaches A&M has sent their way.
LikeLike
As to that generalization business….was it Bear who said “This football team needs a university it can be proud of….”?
LikeLike
mushroom god: It was George Cross, a former long-time president of OU.
LikeLike
“Michael Adams would never make a Gee type quote about Mark Richt firing him…”
—Which is neither here nor there. Gee’s quirky sense of humor hides the fact that no one pushes him around.
LikeLike
FSU is different from A&M. A&M’s fanbase and administration think alike.
As for FSU, sure coaches call the shots, but at this point, FSU is entrenched in the ACC. The academic side of FSU likes being associated with those schools. The football coaches like the idea of being able to offer kids a shot at the BCS (or NC) every year.
It’s a totally different situation.
A&M was in a perfect spot to move to the SEC in terms of needing to get out of Texas’ shadow and create its own brand. The fanbase has long wanted that.
There’s no rush to join Florida in the SEC for FSU.
LikeLike
You make a good point about A&M which also applies to Frank’s think like a college president. A&M’s current president is a former student. 2 of the last 4 have been former students (and 1 of the others got run off in a year). Most schools have the philosophy that they want outside thinking and usually don’t have former students as president. So at A&M the college president may think like a fan in addition to thinking like a college president.
LikeLike
I think this is right about A&M. The LHN was the last straw for them and the SEC is more than happy to have them–it will help the academic standing of the conference. Let’s see, if after 20 years, A&M–like Arkansas–hasn’t cracked the conference football elite, how the Aggies feel about their brand at that point.
LikeLike
If the A&M admin thought like the fans they would have been in the SEC last year. The fans/donors pressured the admin and the “details” of the LHN was the last straw from where I’m sitting.
LikeLike
@zeek
…and Florida wouldn’t support FSU anyway. FSU doesn’t have the opportunity right now, so it is very hard to get a quality assessment of their interest level.
LikeLike
Replace football coach with boosters & you’re nearer to the mark.
LikeLike
If the big money donars/boosters want to move to the SEC (and if the SEC wants FSU), then FSU will be in the SEC. The screams of the average fan may not be enough to force FSU’s administration’s hand, but you can bet that the big money folks’ screams will. And there were a lot of big boosters that wanted to go to the SEC back when the SEC last expanded, but were appeased by Coach Bowden and his insistance on having the easier path in the ACC. Bowden is no longer there, and I don’t think Fisher will be that upset about moving considering he is from the SEC. If the Big money folks start screaming, and if the SEC will accept them, FSU’s administration will not fight it.
LikeLike
This, 100x this.
LikeLike
Add
LikeLike
add
LikeLike
add.
LikeLike
add
LikeLike
add
LikeLike
Hawks.
LikeLike
I still don’t see how Texas to PAC at the moment makes sense in any way. It could only happen with true equal revenue sharing, the main thing OU is demanding for wherever they end up. If Texas will truly accept that revenue model, they would just stay and do so in the Big 12.
From the PAC side, there is major concern with adding any additional teams even with equal revenue sharing. Any proposal to give Texas more than an equal share is likely to be rejected, or risk destabilizing the long term future of the conference.
Essentially, a “Texas” that could maybe get PAC acceptance is a “Texas” that OU would be willing to stay in Big 12 with.
LikeLike
Equal revenue sharing isn’t really an issue for OU. Stability is. The former is a means, the latter is an end.
UT probably can do nothing to salvage the Big XII at this point. Most importantly, there is no trust, and no demographic counterweight to UT if it should ever leave.
LikeLike
Revenge of the Leftovers.
As I understand it, a majority of Division I members can vote to authorize a playoff. To date, the 6 BCS conferences have held together a slim majority of Division I schools that has prevented that from occurring (that is why talk of the Big East losing its automatic bid has always been misinformed). But with the implosion of the Big East and Big 12, there are currently a majority of schools on the outside looking in.
Instead of those schools prostituting themselves to get into one of the 4 remaining “super-conferences” or otherwise competing with each other to form a conference that can get an automatic bid from the BCS, they ought to simply combine within the NCAA to vote to authorize a Division 1 playoff. That would force the super-conferences to either accept it or split from the NCAA. Splitting from the NCAA is not nearly as easy as a lot of people think, and it would face enormous resistance from Congress and the public.
I think the leftover schools should unite and take over the NCAA and bring some sanity back to the system.
LikeLike
WVU fan here. I am panicking, worried that we’ll wind up in the Island of Misfit Toys conference.
WVU
Louisville
USF
Cincinnati
TCU
Kansas
Kansas State
Baylor
Iowa State
and maybe Houston/SMU/UCF/etc. for spots 10-12.
…wouldn’t be that bad, right?
…
Okay, no, that’s pretty terrible. F***.
LikeLike
Sad to say, I think you’re there. SEC would be unwise to take WV over Missouri. ACC isn’t going to happen.
LikeLike
News flash: WVU is a misfit toy.
LikeLike
No.
LikeLike
For what it’s worth, I went to UC and we’re solidly a misfit toy.
LikeLike
Take it from the board’s resident TCU fan: no one here cares what happens to us. They’re too busy drawing up B1G 16 pod alignments.
And yeah, that’s terrible. It’s really not so much different from the current Big East, but when everyone around you is forming 16-team mega-conferences that can ditch the NCAA and leave you behind, it starts looking a little worse. That’s why I’m still letting myself get my hopes up over the Pac-16 and the ACC, even though everything indicates that my school doesn’t even register for those conferences. What else can I do?
LikeLike
If it makes you feel better, I care. A class mate of mine was a scholarship athlete for TCU ’99 – ’02.
LikeLike
I think at this point, most Big Ten fans are hoping everyone just stays at 12 and ND stays independent.
If that doesn’t happen, I think we’re hoping that the Big Ten stays at 12, and there’s as little movement elsewhere.
Honestly, I think we were all hyped up about getting to 14 and 16, and now it just doesn’t make as much sense.
Yeah, it’d be nice to have ND in the conference, but we’ll be fine without them.
The Big 12 surviving would be nice, but I don’t think Beebe has anything left to offer and OU/Texas are going to have to work it out between themselves.
A lot of us wanted TCU to get a Big East invite, although we assumed that the Big East wouldn’t get raided by the ACC. The latter was our big mistaken assumption.
LikeLike
I don’t know whether I not a B1G fan or if I’m just not most B1G fans. I’d like this process to play out quickly and go away for another 20-25 years. If the only changes are A&M to the SEC and the ACC’s addition of Pitt and SU, then I think this continues to bubble up every year or so. I hope I’m wrong.
Although I’d miss all the speculation on this board. 🙂
LikeLike
Also, I just want to say, I have a huge amount of respect for the TCU program.
Like most Big Ten fans, we all rooted for Wisconsin against TCU in the Rose Bowl, but we all came away with a huge amount of respect for your program.
As a Northwestern fan, our situation is similar to yours (without having access to Texas) in terms of trying to make a dent in a pro-sports market where college football for us hasn’t been relevant in 50 years. The fact that you guys are succeeding among giants like Texas, OU, and A&M is pretty impressive.
In any case, I think TCU will come out of this fine as long as the Big East/Big 12 hybrid can hold together and come up with a way to maintain a decent national profile.
LikeLike
@zeek, mike – Thanks. Unfortunately, the giant state schools in our historic, regionally based conference decided they didn’t want to carry around private schools anymore. Doesn’t look like that will be a problem for NW. Must be nice. And while the Big Tweast might be okay for a little while, when the Big 4 decide they’re tired of sharing, that’s going to be the first conference on the outside.
LikeLike
I think the key in all honesty will be keeping Notre Dame out of the Big Ten and ACC.
As long as the Big Ten stays at 12 and ND stays in the Big 12/Big East; I don’t see that conference getting left out.
Maybe we go back to the older bowl system, but I think there’ll still be at large slots open for ND and the Big 12/Big East.
LikeLike
I’d prefer TCU not be in a BCS conference because I want your coach. No offense of course.
LikeLike
You just got rid of SU (10 or so miserable years), Rutgers (136 of 142 miserable years) and UConn (not much history at all). TCU, Kansas, Kansas State and Baylor are improvements. Pitt will almost certainly play you ooc. BYU joins at least for football.
UL, UC and Kansas makes for a serious basketball conference even if its not the BE.
You don’t have the hybrid monster from Providence deciding what you do. You’re taking a step up.
LikeLike
Thanks for the pep talk, needed that. 🙂
Just throwing an idea out there: should WVU try to go football independent if the Big XII/Big East merger happens? WVU has been independent for most of its history, could schedule whoever it wanted, and could presumably rejoin the A10 for non-football sports.
LikeLike
WVU does not have the national cache or track record to get a BCS – or even a decent – bowl tie-in as an independent, and has no TV draw to get it any money. WVU is also in the bad category of schools that aren’t sure wins for your team but which provide little cred for beating them.
Independent football would be suicidal for WVU.
LikeLike
Makes sense. Figured it was a crazy idea.
LikeLike
@Peter – Nah, beating WVU is a solid win, particularly if you do it in Morgantown. TCU was in the in-between category for awhile, but I think we have the cred now where big schools won’t face an existential crisis for losing to us. We’ve got OU coming to town next year, plus home-and-homes with Arkansas and LSU in upcoming seasons, so I guess they’re not too worried.
But independence is still a bad idea. BYU can pull it off because they have fans all over the country and their own cable channel supported by the church. And they apparently don’t care too much about BCS bowl games.
LikeLike
I am pretty surprised that the SEC would be after WVU. I am not sure as to their appeal in the region however they are an after thought in the Midwest and Western regions. Good bball program with Huggins there with a good fb program that has hired a good offensive minded head coach. Perhaps the play is to not only hopefully expand up the east coast in conjunction with adding a mid tier program to the already tough SEC. I suppose when you weigh them out against Missouri that they currently have a better athletic outlook however not by much.
LikeLike
PSU fan here. I feel for WVU. WVU supported the Eastern All Sports Conference proposed by Joepa as AD. WVU supported it, but Pitt and SU did not. They voted against PSU in the Big East, and the Big East has been a second rate hoops conference ever since. And now they bolt from the conference of their own making? Texas and Notre Dame only wish they could be such prima donnas. And who gets screwed (twice)? Hoopies.
LikeLike
Penn State wouldn’t have done diddly squat for the Big East in Hoops. That said, it should have been worked out somehow 30 years ago.
I’d still rather see Pitt on the schedule every year sometime around Thanksgiving. That ship sailed a long time ago.
LikeLike
Look, you guys are going to be needed. Don’t forget that the other 4 conferences (ACC/Big Ten/SEC/Pac-16 if that happens) are going to only have around 56-58 schools.
They’ll need the hybrid Big 12-Big East conference to become the new 5th conference that tags along and helps vote for whatever excuse against a playoff that comes around in the next deal.
I can easily see that Big East/Big 12 conference surviving. It would porbably get a decent deal from ESPN, maybe $5-7M per year.
You’d have Kansas carrying the lot in basketball; TCU/WVU and probably USF carrying the load in football. I think you would want to consider inviting Boise State possibly to help the image of the league, since they obviously have a competitive program in place.
The best thing you could do (and I can’t believe I’m saying this) is to give Notre Dame a home for its non-football sports. That would probably help your bowl slots and help your national profile.
Maybe consider inviting schools like the Nevada schools or UCF or Houston if you need more territory.
There’s still a chance for that conference to survive but it would probably require the ACC to stop at 14 and the SEC to only take 1 of Missouri or WVU. I really don’t think that conference has too much of a chance otherwise.
LikeLike
Yeah, that was pretty much my assessment. Of course, SEC expansion might help some of us – if they take two ACC teams, the ACC might respond by taking four from the Big Tweast group. Which would only leave the left behind-left behinds that much more f%&@eder.
At least we can always go back to the MWC.
LikeLike
If the BE got $11 without bid and most was for football, I think the 12East will get more than just $5-$7 million.
LikeLike
It depends on a lot of factors though; I also think that split may have been something along the lines of 60-40 football-basketball. Who’s left? If UConn and Rutgers leave, they’ll probably be nearer to that range I mentioned. Ditto for if ND doesn’t come to an arrangement with them for non-football and maybe an agreement to play 2 or so of them every year.
The basketball side loses Syracuse/Pitt and MSG. The latter is the real thing they’d lose, since they’ll be gaining Kansas.
I don’t know. It depends on so many factors that can’t really be measured right now.
LikeLike
Around 60/40 was what I was reading as the estimate.
LikeLike
WVUer as well. I think we’re going to the Island as well (I’m betting against SEC and ACC invites). I don’t actually think that conference is all that bad. Who in the Big East (current or past) is demonstrably better than that lineup? VTech maybe. Not Miami, not BC, not Pitt (under the ‘stach they had one big win to knock WVU out of title contention, one year where they were pretty well ranked and WVU returned the favor), nor Syracuse (they’ve been a football poo-poo platter for the last 15+ years).
Where this move makes things worse is in Basketball. Kansas is a decent add, but certainly doesn’t come close to making up for all the talent that’s lost.
LikeLike
Interesting interview with former BE Commish MIke Tranghese. I know the first quote has been reported, but the rest is interesting.
“You know who’s going to be the winner in all this when it’s all is said and done if you want to talk about conference? Big Ten. The Big Ten is sitting there, they took Nebraska, they’re on the sidelines, they’re watching all this chaos, everybody’s going to be taking people. And you know you could be standing there all alone at the end? Notre Dame and Texas. And the Big Ten would not be accused of raiding because they’re just going to be sitting there.”
Commissioner Jim Delany’s patience might pay off, according to Tranghese.
Tranghese also discussed whether the Big Ten would pursue Rutgers and Connecticut.
“I don’t think so. … Before the Big Ten took Nebraska, knowing Jim Delany as well as I do … Jim did a lot of work. He did a lot of analysis, and I believe that Rutgers was looked at, and Pittsburgh was looked at, and Syracuse was looked at, and Connecticut was looked at. And a lot of schools were looked at. And I think the Big Ten came to the conclusion that the addition of any one of those schools wasn’t going to deliver them the New York market. … So that’s why I think that ultimately led them to Nebraska. Now they sit there and they ask themselves the same question: Can they get the New York market with Rutgers or Connecticut? You can do it with Notre Dame.”
LikeLike
Nothing is more infuriating to fans of the remaining Big East schools than to have one of the idiots who mishandled this conference into oblivion being allowed to spout off now like he is an expert. The salt in the wound is his confirmation of all of our worst thoughts when he also said in this interview that recently deceased commissioner Gavitt’s number one request of Marinotto in this trying time would be that he “make sure Providence College is taken care of”.
LikeLike
Yeah… that’s like taking beauty advice from Roseanne Barr.
LikeLike
One more factor that I think plays into the 14 instead of 16 numbers game: Brand Value.
The bigger a conference gets, the more fragmented it gets. Just look at the monstrosity that was the Big East and try to remember all of the teams that were in that conference. But beyond confusion is the watering down of rivalries, which makes the rights fees for games less valuable. Sure, Iowa fans are always going to care about playing Ohio State. But is a UI/OSU game in a future 16 team conference where they are in different divisions as valuable from a national ratings perspective as an UI/OSU tilt in the old 10 team conference? This is dissolution of brand value, albeit outside the core market.
Of course, there are certainly positive factors to size such as greater basic tier carriage footprint, more inventory for your self-owned network, and better quality games (read: higher ratings and thus more advertising revenue) on your self-owned network. But don’t forget to factor the potential negatives into the equation. Think of the dogfight that was ACC basketball back when it was only a 9 team league and how that drove up both the competition and value for all their games, not just the marquee matchups. A 12 team B1G could actually be the small powerhouse conference in the future.
LikeLike
The SEC has such great rivalries. There’s an intensity to nearly every game. A&M and WVU/Missouri dilute that. Other than Arkansas and LSU, noone cares about A&M in the SEC. They really don’t care much about Arkansas and they’ve been there 20 years. For the eastern schools they get WVU or Missouri and occassionally A&M and less of Alabama, Auburn, LSU and Ole Miss who they have been playing for at least 80 years.
LikeLike
You are single mindedly obsessed with Texas A&M. I’m sure A&M and the SEC will be just fine there, bullet, so don’t lose any sleep over it. At least you’ve come to terms with the fact that A&M will actually BE in the SEC so kudos to you for that “growth”.
A&M is a perfect fit for the SEC and the rivalries that come out of playing each other will grow. Fact is, A&M vs. both Arkansas and LSU will be instantly be heated. How many rivals exactly does it take after that?
LikeLike
I grew up an SEC fan and am married to a UGA grad, so I’m quite familiar with the SEC.
I don’t like superconferences. Its nothing against A&M in particular in the SEC. I wouldn’t want OU or Texas or FSU either.
LikeLike
A few comments on where we are:
*I think ACC stays at 14 for awhile. Yes, they want a shot at ND, but just as important is what VA Tech, FSU, and Clemson will want. These schools are already upset that ACC football doesn’t match that of the SEC. Adding Rutgers and U Conn means you’ve added 4 NE schools, all of which are middle of road football schools, 3 of which are presently known more as basketball schools. Not good culturally, and not particularly good for football.
*As an advocate of adding RUT and MO to the BIG, I have to admit adding them together does liitle to entice ND. That would be adding 2 more large state schools, when the ACC just added 2 smaller schools, one private, one semi-private.
*To Frank’s point about the non-revenue sports being important to ND’s decision–I would think that would point to the BIG over the ACC for 2 reasons: transportation/time lost to students due to transportation, and hockey, which is a large and recent investment. As to basketball, what priority will ND basketball have in a league which includes Carolina, Duke, Pitt, Syracuse, and, possibly U Conn?
*Although I think Frank’s comment about a base for ND’s non-revenue sports is spot on, I still think they trudge on as is for at least a couple more years. They will want to see what NBC and BTN networks #s look like in 2 years when everythings being re-done. They will also look at the ESPN/ACC #s…
LikeLike
The more I think about it this could be the exact PBC scenario. Sounds like the UT BOT is going to scrub anything Powers comes up with that is not staying in the Big 12, and buy time to see how LHN evolves. Pac will likely wait on 14 as long as UT is in play. ACC will likely wait for a bit at 14 for ND, but seems to me like they will want to get to 16 to make sure they are the Eastern conference. B1G is in no hurry to expand with anybody other than UT and/or ND, so we could be in a holdign pattern untill 2014.
LikeLike
I’d imagine if Powers came back with “The PAC has caved to all of our demands,” the Texas BoR would jump on it.
The issue is that Texas’ demands essentially turn the PAC-16 into the Big 12 Mk. II with Texas as boss school. If Scott somehow accepted that, the actual PAC schools would vote it down in flames.
LikeLike
No chance Texas can get a special deal from PAC, B1G, ACC, or ESS EEE CEE.
Does Texas want to be part of the new B1GEA2T? I don’t think the B1GEA2T will allow a special deal for Texas either. TCU, Kansas, K-State, and Iowa State will object.
Conference USA, Mountain West, Missouri Valley, and Southland aren’t desperate enough to take Texas.
That leaves the WAC as the only conference that is willing to cede control over to Texas.
LikeLike
Neither Powers nor Dodds has any interest in the BIG. The BIG isn’t an option as long as either of them are in office.
LikeLike
That’s not really the best negotiating posture with the PAC for them and I think it’s a little too much of the “Texax uber alles” framing. The B1G was never going to compromise on:
— Equal revenue sharing
— No OU/OSU/Tech
— No LHN
That’s not up to Powers/Dodds or what the B1G thinks of Powers/Dodds (probably not a lot after the whole “dying Midwest” schtick…). It’s a nonstarter regardless of who the figures at the table are. You have those all the time in business, where both sides are not mutually better off by doing the deal and so they don’t bother to talk beyond initial feelers.
Texas SHOULD be compatible with the B1G but that sure doesn’t look like the way they want to go.
LikeLike
As long as the ACC has openings, ND can’t be pushed. Once they invite UConn and Rutgers, we can become the Cumaean Sibyl.
Until then, we must wait.
LikeLike
Frank,
I still feel the B1G missed the boat on Pitt, but I understand the argument. I still say the PSU overlap was worth it if the long term dealings between Pitt and Notre Dame gave the Domers a better feeling of security. I know I may be in the minority, but I think the ACC move was directly aimed at getting ND in the ACC fold. If the PAC takes oSu to get OU, then how is taking Pitt any different in trying to get ND?
LikeLike
It’s entirely different. Taking Oklahoma State is a 100% requirement to getting Oklahoma. That’s been made extremely clear by everyone from that state who has opened their mouth. It’s a necessary condition. Don’t like OSU? Don’t call us.
There’s no actual connection between Pitt & ND that is either a necessary or a sufficient condition of getting ND to join a conference.
LikeLike
Oklahoma & Oklahoma St are siamese twins while ND & Pitt are two guys who get together
somewhat regularly to shoot hoops at the Y.
LikeLike
Not frank, but I think if the Purdue, MSU, and Michigan ties aren’t enough for ND, then I don’t think Pitt would add much more. Purdue and MSU both have played ND more than Pitt, and the ND/Michigan game is huge even when both teams are down.
LikeLike
And the biggest advantage for playig Pitt — exposure in Western PA, with a good recruiting base an a number of fans for ND — is accomplish just as well with playing PSU regularly. I think playing Pitt might be a slight extra incentive for the Irish, but small enough to not make a difference really.
LikeLike
Duffer:
If ND called in 2014 and said we’re coming & let’s get Pitt too, I think we could get Pitt then. I agree Pitt is a fine addition to any conference.
LikeLike
jj,
sort of my point, as Pitt looks most like a B1G, not already in the B1G.
B1G 16 = ND / Pitt / Toronto / MU or MD 😉
I am still not convinced UT in the B1G 16 is a good fit.
LikeLike
Add
LikeLike
Once again, the Western Athletic Conference would like to welcome the University of Texas at Austin as a non-football member.
===
WAC basketball divisions
WAC West
Seattle (non-football)
Idaho
San Jose State
Utah State
Denver (non-football)
New Mexico State
WAC South
Texas (non-football)
Texas-Arlington (will add FBS football by 2020)
Texas-El Paso
Texas-San Antonio
Texas State
Louisiana Tech
====
University of Texas annual football schedule
Week 1: Rice or Sun Belt Conference opponent at Austin – Longhorn Network
Week 2: Navy (at Austin or Fed Ex Field) – ESPN Networks
Week 3: PAC opponent from California (USC, UCLA, Cal, or Stanford) – ABC (at Austin), ABC or FOX (at PAC)
Week 4: WAC opponent at Austin – Longhorn Network
Week 5: Oklahoma at Fair Park in Dallas – ABC
Week 6: WAC opponent at Austin – Longhorn Network
Week 7: Notre Dame (at Austin or South Bend) – ABC (at Austin), NBC (at South Bend)
Week 8: WAC opponent at Austin – Longhorn Network
Week 9 : BYU (at Austin or Provo) – ESPN Networks
Week 10: WAC opponent at Austin – Longhorn Network
Week 11: Army (at Austin or Yankee Stadium) – ESPN Networks
Week 12: BYE
Week 13: Texas A&M – ESPN
WAC opponents: Texas-San Antonio, Texas-El Paso, Texas State, and Texas-Arlington or alternate opponent
LikeLike
Nice cut and paste.
LikeLike
And once again Karl Benson, you look like a fool.
LikeLike
I just keep laughing at the idea that this really is Karl Benson and that the WAC has gotten so desperate that he’s reduced to campaigning for UT to join the WAC on this board.
Meanwhile, his wife and kids have moved out and are living in Craig Thompson’s basement.
LikeLike
I think Rick Barnes would committ suicide. No way Texas BB in WAC. PAC 16 real deal, plus I see Missouri to SEC, rest of Big East combines with Big 12 to make the “Not ready for prime time players” conference.
Getting mean out there, isn’t it?
LikeLike
I know you’re pushing this, Karl, but I don’t see it. Even assuming that Texas chooses not to join any of the superconferences but would rather go independent, why wouldn’t they just do that by parking the non-football sports with the B12, which could add WV, Louisville, Cincy, etc, plus maybe even BYU? You are placing WAY too much emphasis on the LHN’s ability to carry Texas-San Antonio games.
LikeLike
Heck, if there were going to join a conference for all but football, I think Conf-USA would be a better choice anyway. Better hoops, still a bunch of Texas school (including old SWC rivals) and bette academics. And I feel pretty secure that Conf USA would let them in for all but football even though they are no longer a hybrid.
LikeLike
add
LikeLike
I still say UT joining the Pac 12 or any of the other three power conferences (B10, SEC, ACC) is unlikely, and not just because of the LHN. The LHN is a symptom of the larger problem, which is that UT will have a difficult (if not impossible) time adjusting to a conference where it will have to coexist with other alpha dog members that are a lot more entrenched than it is. Plus, I think the Pac 16 scenario has the added problem of maintaining a conference where there is a bloc of four new members (UT, TT, OSU, OU) with no historical appreciation of the group’s traditions, and which are from a geographically and–especially–culturally/politically alien land. We’re talking meshing solid red Texas/Oklahoma with solid blue Bay Area/Pacific NW.
Further, the newcomers include a school that already has trouble sublimating its individual interests to group goals. This, my friends, has disaster written all over it, even if somehow an LHN compromise is cobbled together.
More likely is a Weekend at Bernie’s version of the Big 12 that includes UT and the six dwarves plus a series of newcomers from the disintegrating BE (Cinci, Louisville, TCU, maybe even SFU), BYU and some Conference USA/WAC/Mountain West wannabes attracted by an AQ conference (Boise State?) that gets the number to 12 and therefore a CCG. This conference may even merge/affiliate with the BB schools left from the BE disintegration (Marquette, St. Johns, GT, Nova, etc.) and welcome ND’s non-football package as well. It would be a damn good BB conference though a lackluster FB conference, but might be able to finagle an AQ extension.
And meanwhile UT gets to keep the LHN, which it seems to hold in the same regard as Gollum regarded the Ring…
LikeLike
Before the Big 12, Texas was in the old SWC and OU was in the Big 8. They’re not married to each other and probably found out that being in the same conference was too much to handle. I think that’s another reason why Texas may keep the big 12 alive, and your scenario is highly plausable.
LikeLike
Being in conference with UT is very desirable for OU — that’s what kept OU in the Big XII last round. OU is working very hard to get UT on board with going to the PacX. OU is no longer willing to sacrifice stability just to stay in conference with UT, however.
LikeLike
Love your gollum analogy there, but I hope we’re not that far down the self-delusional path.
With repect to Texas and blue/red states, I have to disagree. Basically Austin has sucked the vast majority of any liberal elements that are in the state into Austin. Austin cultutlrally is more akin to San Fran and Berkeley than anything else in Texas. I think the cultural fit will work out just fine for Texas. But I think your point is valid for Tech, OU and OSU.
LikeLike
New ACC TV contract?
Virginia Tech athletic director Jim Weaver:
But expansion will allow the ACC to renegotiate its contract with ESPN to give members more revenue to share.
“The renegotiation of the television contract will certainly help us handle all the additional travel costs that we might incur,” Weaver said.
http://hamptonroads.com/2011/09/va-tech-ad-weaver-time-was-right-acc-expand
LikeLike
We’ll see whether that’s a full blown renegotiation or a “good faith offer” from ESPN. I’d find it hard to believe that the ACC contract has more lenient terms than the SEC contract.
LikeLike
This helps build the theory that ESPN influenced the ACC to expand after the Big East rejected their offer. They don’t want the new Vs/NBC sports network to gain programming so they’re trying to knock off the Big East..
LikeLike
add
LikeLike
ND has positioned itself well despite this turmoil. Both the ACC and B1G are poised to accept them. And they can stay independent until the mega-conference landscape is settled. What’s the hurry? Living here in the Triangle I am amazed at how little ND talk there is. I don’t believe the ACC Presidents or AD’s are obsessed with ND like the B1G. College football is important for the local rivalries, but basketball drives the students, alumni and donors. Obviously the addition of Pitt and Syracuse are for benefits other than filling football stadiums. So I believe ND will have to officially ask the ACC to join and will be treated as an equal. I say all this as one who has allegiance and affection for both the ACC and BiG.
LikeLike
What have they done to position themselves?
From all appearances there in the same exact position they were a decade ago. Now they may be well positioned but I don’t see that as due to any recent moves on their part…rather it’s the same as it’s always been, they generate interest & have name recognition based on a history of storied accomplishments (not that there is anything wrong with that).
LikeLike
New Big 12 mabey:
Texas, TT, KU, KSU, MO, Louisville, Cincy, TCU, then pick BYU, SMU, Houston, and (Fill in the blank) to get back to 12.
Sort of a middlin’ conference. Not a player, but no wall flower either.
LikeLike
Texas probably won’t stay in that kind of conference. They know how irrelevant the SWC was becoming, and without OU, it’s just not practical for them to stay there.
LikeLike
The Big 12/Big East hybrid has a chance to survive if Texas goes to the Pac-16 and they can keep a BCS slot while agreeing to vote with the other conferences. Giving ND a place for their non-football sports is probably their best bet at this time.
Texas just won’t stay without OU. It’s probably as simple as that.
LikeLike
The new B1GEA2T:
Cincinnati
Louisville
South Florida
TCU
Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
Texas Tech
Central Florida
Notre Dame (non-football)
BYU (football only)
======================
Didn’t make the cut:
Baylor
Memphis
Houston
East Carolina
Southern Mississippi
Boise State
LikeLike
You can’t leave Baylor and Iowa State out of that grouping in favor of Southern Methodist and Houston.
LikeLike
If UT, Tech and Baylor (who you forgot, not that I blame you) are in the conference, TCU won’t be.
LikeLike
I know no one saw the Syracuse and Pitt move to the ACC coming, but I think there may be a few assumptions we are making that are incorrect.
1. “Think like a university president” is most accurate for the B1G and ND, but most other university president’s are going to heavily consider the AD’s advice (and in the state of Texas, the legislature). We have been underestimating AD power, it seems.
2. AQs are permanent and transferable.
The BCS is designed for the Bowls (to guarantee good ratings, ticket sales, and holiday vacationers for the home cities) and the Conferences (to make $$$). When the current BCS began (1998), each of the AQ conference had at least a “king” and some pretty good other teams for bowl purposes. However, the facade began to crack when the Big East lost its resident “king”, Miami, in 2004. Now with all the adjustments we have UNRANKED UConn losing it’s shirt because of unsold tickets to a New Years Day BCS bowl and TEN teams outside the top 10 played in these major bowls since 1/1/2005. I don’t think this is what the Bowls or the Big conferences had in mind. I think the BCS will be blown up again in 2014 when the contracts expire.
The MWC remains on the outside looking in because neither the bowls nor the public wants to see any of their schools on NYD unless they are undefeated and beat some big time teams (lately, that means BSU). There are no teams in the CUSA that move the needle for the Bowls, so even if the MVC raids the CUSA, they will remain on the outside. Any combo of the Big XII without Texas or OU and the Big East has the same problem. WVU on it’s own does not an AQ make. TCU is essentially Boise with history and better facilities. If they want in, they’ll have to win out or find a conference with a king to escort them.
The conferences on the borderline were not brought in as units, they were brought in for specific schools. The ACC and Big East got in because of FSU and Miami respectively, and the bowls figured any team that could beat them would be worth having. Without a “king” you won’t be AQ in 2014. That’s what Syracuse and Pitt correctly anticipated, and why they got off the sinking ship.
3. Frank’s right: Sixteen is less inevitable than we think since there aren’t that many schools on the outside that will increase payouts.
We talk about 4 x 16, but there doesn’t appear to be 64 programs that will cause the schools already in the big 4 to make more money. In the end, it may well be that we end up with 59 haves and a lot of have-nots. Oh, and there are 59 Div.I hockey schools; what a coincidence.
—
Not one we are missing, but that was a great defensive maneuver by the ACC going to 14. They insure themselves of a conference championship game even if they are raided for #14 by the SEC. Furthermore they now made themselves THE destination for schools east of the Rockies who have no stomach for SEC shenanigans and lack AAU credentials that keeps them out of the B1G.
LikeLike
I agree with a lot of what you’re posting, but I don’t necessarily think access will be that heavily restricted in the next contract.
I still think ND will figure out a way to be independent, and if they can make a deal for non-football sports in the Big 12/Big East conference, I think there’ll be a way for that conference to get an AQ slot.
Maybe the other conferences will remove the limit on BCS teams (or raise it to 3), but as long as it’s not the 4×16 scenario, it won’t really change that much.
With the Big Ten at 12 seemingly for the haul and ND independent, I agree that the max schools the BCS will have is 56-59 with ND included. I think they’ll want to bring in the Big 12/Big East as long as ND is independent in order to vote for whatever system they make.
Maybe it’s not sustainable for the long haul, but I do think there’ll still be some level of access for the rest as long as ND isn’t in a conference.
LikeLike
I concur. I can easily see where the Bowls (probably five: Rose, Sugar, Orange, Fiesta, Cotton) will be allowed to take up to three from the 4 AQ conferences so long as they are in the top say 10, and be obligated to take any school in the top 6. I would imagine in the future that there will be fewer auto-qualifiers, more at-larges, bowls will have more say, but that will be limited so that we won’t see a situation where a bowl takes a 7-5 ND team over someone in the top 10.
LikeLike
Yeah, that’s how I’ve been envisioning it breaking down. 10 BCS slots; 5 AQs. ND will get some kind of preferential treatment (Top 8 guarantee or something). Other 5 BCS slots will mostly go to the other conferences, but that’s how they want it…
LikeLike
My pet theory about the BCS is that it will dissolve after 2014. The championship game will still be played, but the bowls will revert to their old system. I think they are prepping for this result by separating the championship game from the bowl game itself in this contract.
LikeLike
I think the BCS is with us for some time … but maybe there will be a +1 or +2 playoff. It is in the conferences’ best interest to maintain the BCS, which they control directly.
Part of what this musical chairs is all about is determining who will have access to the BCS as an AQ, and the TV contracts that go with that status.
The endgame here is whether the big conferences, having secured all of the football revenue, strike at the heart of the NCAA by seceding from the D1 basketball tournament.
LikeLike
“It is in the conferences’ best interest to maintain the BCS, which they control directly.”
The big conferences have lost control of the BCS. The Rose Bowl didn’t get to do Pac-10/Big Ten. They’re now forced to take 8-4 Connecticut, which they wouldn’t do otherwise. They’ve been forced to add the effective berth for the non-AQ.
By dropping the BCS system and returning to the old bowl system, the Big conferences regain the ability to sign the best bowls instead of being restricted.
LikeLike
M,
The old system didn’t sign the best bowls. They signed the best bowls possible with their tie-ins. Big difference. If the conferences are stupid enough to go back to the old system they get what they deserve.
I’m not a traditionalist with the bowls, Rose included. I was just as happy to see PSU play in all the various bowls as I am to find them tied to the Rose if they win the B1G regardless of the matchup. I’m sure USC was thrilled to get Illiniois a couple of years ago.
Give me a playoff or give me PSU independence! 🙂
LikeLike
Yeah, I agree that the BCS will be blown to pieces when the current contracts expire.
I fully anticipate a quasi-playoff system centered around the 4 or possibly 5 major conferences.
LikeLike
A 12 team B1G while the other conferences go to 16 may be what Delany wants. Let the other conferences kill each other and limit the number of conferences for networks to bid on, yet the B1G benefits earliest with their upcoming first tier negotiation.
LikeLike
I honestly just think it’s as simple as that they crunched the numbers and decided that without Texas or ND; there’s no reason to have less matchups between Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin as well as with the other half of the conference (that like seeing them visit and fill their stadiums with marquee names as well as raise ticket prices; TV likes having more matchups of those teams rather than less).
Texas for a whole host of reasons isn’t looking at the Big Ten. It would be on an island (in the Big Ten or ACC), since the only partner it’d probably have is Missouri (same goes for Oklahoma in the Big Ten). They’re a natural fit with the Pac-16 scenario of OU/OSU/Tech in terms of geography, demography, climate, fit.
Notre Dame for its own set of reasons isn’t looking at the Big Ten; namely, independence as its football identity and institutional identity. For that matter, they probably aren’t looking at the ACC. Going to either means they probably lose games in the Southeast (in the case of the Big Ten), or only play in South Bend in the Midwest (in the case of the ACC).
The Big Ten is stable at 12. Although our group includes a disproportionate amount of Big Ten fans, there’s not going to be any action on the Big Ten front for a long time.
LikeLike
Doesn’t this whole thing come down to how much UT and ND value their pet projects?
It seems like one of two outcomes is inevitable:
1. They align themselves with some kind of quasi-alliance of schools in the current Big12 and BigEast allowing each to retain these pet projects largely on their own terms or
2. They end up sharing equally as members of the ACC, Pac12, SEC or B1G.
Feels to me like the oligarchy of conferences mentioned above are combining to force the hands of these two schools.
LikeLike
They’re different though.
As others have pointed out, Texas really values the overall image of their programs. They have an AD for women’s sports; they want their non-football sports to be in a major conference. The Big 12 can remain a major conference as long as it has OU and Texas. If OU leaves, then Texas is going to have to figure out what the best choice is for the whole department.
It’s pretty clear that the Pac-16 is the best choice for a lot of reasons we’ve gone over. If OU leaves the Big 12, then Texas is likely to have little choice but to negotiate the best possible entrance into the Pac-16 (if that’s even possible).
For Notre Dame, they want to be independent as a core goal of the institutional identity in football. You can’t really reconcile that with joining a conference, since they’re regional in nature.
LikeLike
Right. Agreed that they are different.
What I am saying is that ultimately they will need each other if they want to maintain their individual and different “Pet Projects”. I was careful to call it an alliance rather than a conference, an alliance that not only protects their “Pet Projects” but also gives each school’s non-football sports the best possible landing spot(s) that doesn’t include joining one of the major conferences.
IMO, it is pretty obvious that neither UT nor ND is going to be given special privileges in aligning with any of the major conferences.
If UT decides it needs to find the best possible landing spot for the non-football sports then it will be giving up the advantages it has with the LHN. ND is not going to find a conference willing to give it the sweetheart deal it got from the Big East.
If UT joins one of the major conferences then I think ND will also be forced to join a conference and vice versa. Not necessarily the same one, of course.
LikeLike
I mentioned earlier, but I really think there are only 3 things that can force ND to join a conference.
1) Too restrictive BCS (or whatever playoff or replacement there is) after 2014 contract.
2) Comcast/NBC pulling the plug on their TV contract and FOX or ESPN/ABC not offering one
3) Situation becomes too problematic for non-football sports.
At this point, none of those 3 is really a problem for ND. BCS and Comcast/NBC are fine until 2014 at the earliest. And the non-football sports issue can be solved by aligning with the Big 12/Big East or joining the Catholic schools.
Until a lot of things change, there’s nothing pressuring ND into a conference at this point.
LikeLike
Agree with your POV. The only difference is that I am saying that UT joining a conference will force NDs hand on numbers 1 and 3 above.
Consider:
1. ND has bowl agreements with the BigEast that are now in jeopardy.
2. It is staring at some big unknowns when the BCS contract ends.
3. The Big East is going to separate and it is going to further water-down an already weak field of conference-competition for ND.
LikeLike
Those are fair points; I’d just add that the 3rd consideration is by far the weakest of the 3.
The bowl agreements and the unknowns surrounding the BCS are by far the biggest issues in 2014 (along with Comcast/NBC).
LikeLike
Texas has been among the forefront in women’s athletics (and still lost a lawsuit). They are not just lip-synching on Title IX. And some on here complain that Texas doesn’t have a lot of sports like B1G schools, but there is a different philosophy. If Texas does it, they want to fund it to a level that they can be nationally prominent. They have national championships in 4 of 9 men’s sports and 7 of the 11 women’s sports and have become competitive at their 3 newest women’s sports-softball, soccer and rowing.
LikeLike
It looks like West Virginia isn’t going anywhere (besides a possible reconstituted Big 12).
LikeLike
Bad for WFV, good for Team Misfits. I wish my school was getting rejection letters; it would at least mean that we’re trying.
LikeLike
maybe the greatest comment Ive ever read on this board…
LikeLike
That pretty much means Missouri to the SEC, it seems. Delaney is a smug, arrogant bastard who is fucking this up, imo.
LikeLike
That same smug, arrogant b**tard who has overseen the addition of two of college football’s most powerful programs to the mix and ushered in the ultra-successful Big Ten Network? The man who chose to approach expansion by being forthright with the media AND his competitors about the Big Ten’s intentions to expand, rather than being sneaky like Swofford with the Big East, attempting to kill off a conference like Scott, or putting a competing conference AND a prospective new member like Slive?
So far, the only major conference that has handled conference expansion without being truly cutthroat in the past ten years has been the Big Ten.
And just look at the results: Three programs who draw over 100,000 per game even in down years. Two more which draw over 80,000 per game, one of whom is the newest member and is matched only by Florida for most national titles since 1990. Two more which draw over 70,000 per game. Two teams making the BCS every single freaking year. A conference which was taking baths in money BEFORE adding Nebraska and BEFORE the market for college sports content skyrocekted in the past 18 months. Just think what the conference will make when its next TV contract is up for negotiation!
LikeLike
Without Missouri, who do you pair with Rutgers to add to the Big 10? I think that’s Mushroom’s point. Which is based on the assumption that Rutgers is somehow needed.
Why the wealthiest and happiest conference needs to expand at all is beyond me. Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.
The Big 10’s net gain in this process is making the Big 12’s football teams spread out among a few conferences, including the Big 10. Good for OSU, PSU, Michigan, Wisconsin, etc. The Big East’s basketball teams are similarly diluted. Good for MSU, Indiana (someday), Illinois, Purdue.
LikeLike
Exactly, EXCUSE. There is no B1G Rutgers without Notre Dame. Rutgers + Missouri for 14 will not happen, ever.
LikeLike
Even assuming you want Rutgers with ND (already a doubt), why not UConn? Why not Kansas theoretically? Heck, why not be able to poach a team from the ACC like Pitt, Syracuse, Virginia or Maryland?
LikeLike
He had NOTHING to do with PSU joining…check the history on that…it was all the work of the PSU and ILL presidents…
To those of you who think this smug asshole is infallible consider Legends and Leaders and the Butkis-Grange-Randle El-Dirty Brees award…..
LikeLike
He’s clearly made his share of mistakes. No one is saying he hasn’t.
But the point is, as EZCUSE and Peter are implying: Missouri makes perfect sense for a #14. Not so much for a #13.
LikeLike
Yes. PSU is in the B1G because of the relationship between the then-president of the U of I, Stanley Ikenberry, and Penn State. Ironically, Joe Pa’s vision as AD was to construct an all-sports conference anchored in the northeast, what he liked to call “the Big 10 of the East,” and it was Pitt and Syracuse that insisted most strongly on staying in a basketball-centric Big East.
LikeLike
And on PSU joining, Michigan was very opposed to us joining. If we can get over it, so can Notre Dame.
LikeLike
That same smug, arrogant b**tard who has overseen the addition of two of college football’s most powerful programs to the mix and ushered in the ultra-successful Big Ten Network?
This. Jim Delany is The Kid Who Only Hit Homers.
LikeLike
There is no incentive to expand with Rutgers and Missouri. What is the point?
LikeLike
The question becomes, who is the SEC’s #14? Are they willing to go for Missouri, or will they wait at 13 as the Big Ten waited at 11. (Obviously, it’s a lot harder to wait at 13 since you have 2 divisions as opposed to 11 where you have no divisions).
LikeLike
That’s also a sign that either Missouri has told the SEC OU is definitely leaving (and no decision has been made is a Boren negotiating ploy for the Pac) or someone in the ACC is talking to the SEC.
But if OU stays and noone in the ACC goes, WVU would seem to be back on the table as #1.
LikeLike
Agreed; I don’t think this “rejection” of WVU by the SEC really changes anything. It could still happen if the other things you state are also what’s in the works.
LikeLike
Looks like West Virginia will be stuck in the new B1GEA2T:
The new B1GEA2T:
Notre Dame (non-football)
West Virginia
Cincinnati
Louisville
South Florida
Central Florida
Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
Missouri (if it doesn’t end up in the ESS EEE CEE)
Texas Tech
TCU
=====
BYU will probably be invited for football only, but BYU will probably reject the invitation.
======================
Didn’t make the first cut:
Baylor
Memphis
Houston
East Carolina
Southern Mississippi
Boise State
LikeLike
Add UConn and Rutgers. I don’t see them moving right away.
Slide Baylor ahead of UCF. I think current BCS teams get the edge over non-current.
ND for all sports? Be pretty funny if this new conference said “no thanks.” We saw what happened to the Big East. ND basketball is nice and all… but so what? And no hockey or lacrosse in this league either.
LikeLike
The B1GEA2T doesn’t want to do business with nutjobs such as Kenneth Starr (let him sue everyone) and Fred Smith (who will NEVER be able to buy Memphis a place at the big boy’s table.)
Central Florida makes much more sense than Baylor if the B1GEA2T will be the surviving entity instead of the XII.
LikeLike
This new conference wouldn’t be under the thumb of Providence. You don’t have to spell it in ALL CAPS.
LikeLike
T. Boone must have a much bigger stack of Benjamins than Fred Smith. OK State looks pretty well set for a place @ the table when this storm passes but there’s no talk of Memphis catching a ride into a reconstructed BCS conference.
LikeLike
Boston College has parked its hockey aside from the rest of its athletic programs. ND can do likewise.
LikeLike
The Big Ten (in 2013), is the only non-hockey only conference.
LikeLike
If ND gets to play in a conference with everything EXCEPT football, I would bet Texas is in that conference EXCEPT for football as well. They want to do anything to save the LHN.
So I’d say, put Mizzou in the SEC and put Texas in that spot (everything but football).
Would these schools agree to let Texas and Notre Dame own them? probably.
Is that conference too slummy for non football sports at UT and ND? Maybe.
Does that type of conference get ‘looked down’ upon by the other power conferences? Absolutely
Would they keep AQ status? Definitely
LikeLike
http://www.mrsec.com/2011/09/25-answers-and-rants-on-sec-expansion/
Really good article from Mr.SEC on the thought process going on in the SEC. He’s definitely got his finger on the pulse of the SEC much in the same way that we’ve focused on the pulse of the Big Ten.
All of his points are salient for the continuing discussion of #14 (just modify the statements about WVU).
LikeLike
Yeah, he’s also touching on something that I think is being overlooked in the aftermath of the news that PItt/SU would head to the ACC eventually.
Namely that there are a few football-heavy schools in the ACC that might well be interested in overtures from the SEC.
While all eyes are on Norman and Austin, there could still be some big expansion news along the Eastern seabord.
LikeLike
Add
LikeLike
I think Mizzou to SEC is a lock at this point, SEC won’t go to 16, they will stay at 14 play a 9 game schedule of 7,1,2 (7 intra division, 1 fixed rival, 2 rotating) move Auburn to the East and DONE!
LikeLike
Nah, they’ll just put Missouri in the East. It’s in the SEC’s best interests to be able to maintain Alabama-vs.-Tennessee, and if Auburn’s in the East, then Alabama can’t play both Auburn and Tennessee every year. Missouri, as the new kid on the block, would just have to suck it up and deal with it.
LikeLike
Mizzou has been playing the B1G against the ESS EEE CEE.
However, neither one has to blink first.
The B1G still wants Bevo and ND.
ESS EEE CEE still wants Florida State.
==
My bet: Mizzou will be in the B1GEA2T along with Kansas, K-State, Iowa State, and TCU.
LikeLike
I don’t think the B1G knows that Missouri was playing them against the SEC, or cares.
LikeLike
Here are my thoughts related to B10, UT, and ND:
B10 – they seem to want UT and/or ND and no one else.
UT – they want to see how the LHN will work out.
ND – they want independence, but do need a good home for their other sports.
Can ND maintain their independence forever? Maybe. Can UT make the LHN work out? Maybe.
So the conditions for UT/ND joining the B10 may simply not be favoarable at this point. So why would the B10 expand? I see no reason for it. Yes, the midwest is losing its share of population to the South, but in terms of college athletics, the B10 is still top dog. Some times you just have to wait until the conditions are ripe. Now may not be the time.
LikeLike
Regardless of PBC’s source(s), I don’t think there’s a grand play for ND here.
If it was going to happen it would have already happened. I mentioned above, but what about this raid on the Big East changes ND’s position re: anything? Nothing changes for ND here.
I also don’t think anything changes for the Big Ten. The Big East and Big 12 were its competitors in the Northeast and Midwest. Now it has no competitor in the Midwest and the ACC is a competitor to both the SEC and Big Ten.
A strong ACC is in the Big Ten’s best interests…
LikeLike
“Nothing changes for ND here”?
I’d suggest a couple of changes–
1. ACC is far more attractive as a potential ND destination than it was previously.
2. Big Misfit conference is a less than desirable landing place for ND’s non-revenue sports. Tennis at TCU anyone? How about hockey v. that KSU juggernaut?
Whether the changes are enough to force ND to go a different direction is another issue.
LikeLike
Looking at that potential new conference–
WVU
Cincy
UL
USF
UCF
Kansas
KSU
ISU
TTU
TCU
maybe baylor
maybe memphis
Final Director’s Cup standinds 2010-11
WVU 40 Cincy 150 UL 34 USF 86 UCF 63 Kansas 72 KSU 58 ISU 60 TTU 48 TCU 53 Baylor 35 memphis 159
ND was #18
Pretty bad….but overall not much worse than the Big Least actually…so I guess ND could survive with this mess….however, the Catholic schools are gone and travel will be worse…
LikeLike
Looking at a Catholic schools conference for all sports–
Villanova 50 georgetown 55 ST Johns 94 Marquette 96 dayton 110 providence 113 Depaul 140 Xavier 150….doesn’t look doable for ND…
LikeLike
TCU has a really nice tennis facility, fwiw. I used to go there just to study because it was such a pretty spot. But I’m sure the Irish got a good look at TCU’s facilities when their brass came down for the Big East invite in November. And ND can keep their hockey … wherever it currently is, I suppose.
I’d really like to see ND and Baylor try to coexist in the same conference. Talk about a holy war. Throw in BYU for good measure.
LikeLike
Yeah, hockey has nothing to do with where ND parks its other non-football sports — The BE/B12 leftover conference won’t sponsor hockey. The only think hockey tells us is that maybe some discussion are going on with ND and the B10, because otherwise ND probably would have picked a hockey conference by now.
LikeLike
Get Yeshiva to start up a FB team & you’re really set.
LikeLike
Ouch for West Virginia. Permanently known as the school rejected by the SEC for academic reasons.
The ACC reject you could see coming a mile away, though. That was about as likely as the B1G deciding that WVU was their newest best friend.
LikeLike
Here comes the first of what I suspect are many refutations of the “WVU rejected by SEC” story:
https://twitter.com/#!/SouthernPigskin/status/115966552020492288
LikeLike
This is relevant to the Big East schools, who now know that WVU is not right behind SU/PItt walking out the door. They’ll be around for a bit anyway.
This is also relevant to Pitt and Syracuse because a viable Big East means that they have to wait until 2014. But this is far from over too. Depending on who survives the merger of the Big XII and Big East, the timeline will speed up anyway. Either the Big East will want the room to add its new schools or there will not be a Big East schedule to require Syracuse/Pitt.
LikeLike
-“Not right now” could just as easily mean “just until we get the A&M mess cleared up” so we could still be looking at time table in the area of weeks rather than years.
I have little doubt something will be worked out so that ‘Cuze & Pitt aren’t stuck as lame ducks for two years.
LikeLike
I am not sure as to the accuracy of this info however I found it interesting as it shows the current average ticket price for tickets to specific College Football Teams with Nebraska currently ranked #1.
http://tiqiq.com/tiqiqtop25/
LikeLike
Go list tickets for your favorite team for 1 Million dollars and see how fast the Cornhuskers get knocked off.
LikeLike
This may not be a popular stance here, but I think people might want to really examine the Pac-12 and tell me in the future what a Pac-14 without UT looks like and how it works economically. The Big 12 needs to be a precautionary tale for everyone.
So far if you analyze the P12 you see many of the symptoms that were fairly evident in the Big 12. The superior leadership of the P12 has lead the way, but eventually the underlying symptoms will erode the P12 from within unless kept in check. Look at the early Big 12 and what did you see? Skewed population patterns, have and have not programs, unbalanced power within the conference divisions and internal strife due to the combination of a long standing conference with revenue issues with the absorption of the profit centers of another conference and unbalanced divisions.
The P14 would still be a heavily skewed conference as far as population density goes. One of the major problems within the B12 was that Texas routinely made up over 60% of the population footprint of the old Big 12 and it began to effect both the TV value and the overall perception and branding of the conference. Combine that with several state run institutions that are currently or continuing to be hit by a poor state economy and a steady reduction in funding for capital sports projects. Even with equal revenue distribution you are going to see a continued rise of have and have not schools. The only way to begin to buffer that possibility is to raise the floor of each schools athletic budget considerably by the continued leverage of their media distribution rights.
The problem with raising the floor to unprecedented levels is that currently the RSN market in LA is causing concerns with carriers about carry the Pac12N, much less the regional network that would supplement it. If there are problems gaining market traction due to the LA centric nature currently, how does the P12 launch it nationwide? That would be the only way to drive revenue high enough to raise to overall floor of the have nots to levels comparative to the haves or middle of the pack players in other conferences. Hopefully the added national prominence allows the Pa14 to peruse a national distribution model, but I have my doubts.
Now look at the old Pac-8 schools and the voting block they have created. Looks strikingly similar to the Big 8. In conference politics everything is going to go through them. Expanding to 14 does nothing to change that. Being on the continued losing sides of votes vs the Pac-8 hardliners will eventually create a divide. The only real way to become close to balancing that power is a 16 team, not 14 team league. As the time line stretches conference politics tends to have a cumulative effect and eventually that bitterness and rivalry spills out. When will the idea that the Pac-12 expanded to 14 just to make sure we made more money go away? When to the Pac-10 schools treat the other 4 as equals? There are still strife between the original Pac-8 schools and the Arizona schools. Does anyone think that all of those problems will disappear just because they went to 14?
How does the Pac-14 function? 7 team divisions? Who of the original Pac-8 members get sent to play with the also rans? How do you work around the historically strong Cal schools and then OU and everyone else. We have gone down this road. Eventually OU will become a point of spite due to the perceived “easy” schedule to the conference title and the bloodbath it takes to get out of the West. The inability to balance a conference is just one more thing the Big 12 got wrong and more importantly something the Pac 14 would have to figure out.
The problem is that many of the solution to these problems are tied to the elephant in the room, Texas. Adding Texas and TT fixes the uneven population distribution. Adding UT allows for the ability to if not launch the Pac-16N nationally, at least in every household west of the Mississippi.As an added bonus, any move for the Pac-12 that gets UT, keeps UT away from strengthening their own or another RSN that could be used to either price out or lock out a potential PacN from individual markets. Hopefully that allows for enough revenue to help insulate against the continued fall of the have not schools of the conference. Hitting 16 provides a balance between the old Pac-8 and everyone else. The Arizona schools may not be happy about the idea and most likely have just exchanged one slave master for another, but balancing the voting blocks will most likely lead to doing what is best for all parties, not what is best for the west coast. Adding Texas to OU gives the East the clout, and the political savvy and cold bloodedness, to stay on somewhat equal footing with the Pac-8. 16 allows for pods instead of straight divisions, and in effect limits the power of OU and UT by locking them into a continued duel instead of allowing for OU to dominate a side of the conference. Make no bones about it, without Texas to balance OU, OU can becomes just as much of a monster to the rest of the Pac-12 is left unchecked as bringing in Texas on their own.
The next time someone says that UT has no leverage with the Pac-12, try to determine how in depth there analysis really is. The Pac-12 should in no way shape or form cave to every UT demand, but to say that the Pac-12 is in a position to make a full scale take it or leave it proposition is extremely off base. Some form of compromise should be reachable at this point. I am not sure that the UT ends up in the Pac-16, but long term it is the path to real stability for all parties involved. Adding OU and OSU is just a band-aid that does not fix many of the underlying problems. Until those are addressed the Pac-12 will be vulnerable to instability and without strong leadership can potentially fall back down the overall national hierarchy on conferences.
Sorry for the essay.. got rolling and should really just learn to shut up
LikeLike
Homerun analysis laxtonto
LikeLike
UT has some leverage; the question is what it really wants.
UT wants the Big 12. It wants to buy time to further secure the LHN (carriage, etc.) and then make the negotiations to enter into a Pac-16 or whatever conference it wants (most likely the Pac).
That’s what this is all about. If UT can’t get OU to change its mind (all indications are no as of now), then it would have to negotiate an entrance into the Pac-16.
The Pac-12 knows that UT doesn’t really have other options due to the Tech problem among other things.
Also, they don’t want to put Tech in a bad spot. How can you start off a 16 conference with one member “more equal” and one “less equal” than the rest (if the network is based more on UT coverage). I honestly don’t think there’s any way most of the Pac-12 will go with that. The other thing is with respect to everyone else. USC and UCLA agreed to give up their “sweetheart” deals when they got the new media contracts. All of a sudden they’ll let Texas get one when they don’t have one?
LikeLike
@zeek – Tech will do just about anything, I’d wager, to get into the Pac right now. As for the rest of the schools, I don’t think that’ll be too much of a problem. UT already makes more money than anyone else, so what does it matter if they take a bit more from Tech so long as it doesn’t come out of anyone else’s pocket? And USC and UCLA didn’t give up all of their special privileges in the new contract – they still had a few guarantees. They might just see Texas as a potential ally.
LikeLike
I don’t know, I mean if I’m Oregon State or Washington State or Arizona State, it might set a bad precedent to let Texas be more equal than Texas Tech.
Yes money can solve problems, but they’d obviously prefer for Texas and Texas Tech to enter on the same terms as OU and OSU.
Maybe Scott can work out a deal to sell to the Pac-12 presidents, but I think some of the schools will want to make sure Texas doesn’t start out “more equal” than them (USC, UCLA) or “more equal” than Tech (OSU, WSU, ASU).
LikeLike
The question is whether the Pac sees it that way. All of the problems you listed might be ones that they see as surmountable. While the old Pac 8 are tight, there are divisions within that group, and USC, for example, may find they have more in common with OU than with Stanford and Cal. And if Texas plays too hard to get, the Pac has other options, and while none of them are nearly as desirable as Texas, they would at least balance the conference.
LikeLike
I am not sure that the individual schools see it that way, but I am fairly sure that Scott has. There has been too many issues that the Pac schools have leaked that would be problems that Scott has said could be worked out. If he though the same way as the presidents he would just parrot the line.
We heard that the LHN was the problem leaked from Pac officials and then Scott goes on the record saying no, that was not the issue. Then we hear that the LHN will never be accepted and then Scott throws out that it is just something that needs to be negotiated. At some point either the unnamed sources throughout the Pac have no knowledge of what Scott is doing or Scott knows that even if the hardliners are apprehensive about UT, it is in the best interest of the conference.
As far as being equal or more equal than others, the UCLA/USC sweetheart deal is only not applicable now because the average payout is above the threshold. Scott knows that little concessions are worthwhile long-term and can be negotiated into deals. The presidents of schools might be concerned about UT, but Scott will get what he wants. His vision is what makes him great. If he can pull this off, long term the Pac-16 will dominate college football until we see the next major paradigm shift in college football due to the divergence from the current model for media distribution. As long as the carriage rights model survives, Scott is building a monster.
LikeLike
This sounds like a formula for interminable war within the conference. Boy would I like to be a fly on the wall during some of these projected Pac 16 board meetings. I think this whole OU/OSU/TT/UT move to the Pac is a recipe for disaster waiting to happen. You’re introducing a bloc of four alien members, representing a quarter of the votes, into a conference whose traditions, culture and values they don’t understand or appreciate. That’s on top of two other new arrivals. And one of the new members has already shown a disturbing inability to sacrifice individual advantages for the sake of the group and a proclivity for making its own rules, to the point of alienating longtime partners. Good luck with that.
LikeLike
laxtonto: Jon Wilner says the Pac-14 would use the zipper method: One natural rival in one division, one in the other.
LikeLike
Very, very good post I agree with almost completely. A PAC-16 with Texas works much better long term than a PAC-14 without it. If equal revenue sharing for absolutely everything means we get the latter instead of the former, then the conference is LESS stable because of it rather than more and would be better off returning 3rd tier rights to the schools.
LikeLike
@sptwri
Missouri beat writer for the KC Star and unabashed curmudgeon for truth, justice and the American way
Story going up momentarily at Kansascity.com that Missouri has an offer from SEC but that SEC is willing to wait on implosion of Big 12
LikeLike
http://www.kansascity.com/2011/09/20/3155336/source-Mizzou-has-sec-offer-but.html
Maybe this is what the SEC is scared of. Sounds like Baylor’s smoking gun. Still doesn’t solve the problem of saying the SEC caused it if everyone leaves.
The SEC and Pac still have to figure out how to solve the KU/KSU/ISU/BU problem. 6 schools X 28 million exit fees split 4 ways is $42 million apiece + NCAA credits. Might be enough.
LikeLike
Ken Starr on Cap. Hill. T Boone alluding to A&M backtracking. KC Star writing article on MU to SEC w/ incendiary quotes regarding who pursued who. Seems like the OU & UT Regent votes set off a last gasp salvo to try and stop conference realignment.
Stay strong OU!!!
LikeLike
Mr. SEC on Missouri (Emphasis mine)
Associate commissioner Charles Bloom has now stated that “The SEC has not extended an invitation to any school beyond Texas A&M since it extended invitations to Arkansas and South Carolina.”
As was the case with Texas A&M, the SEC does not want to appear to be breaking up other conferences (nevermind that the ACC, the Big Ten and the Pac-12 have all raided rival leagues in the past 14 months). The folks in the SEC aren’t happy that this story got out as it did.
[snip]
Our take? The SEC has an under the table agreement with MU officials that if the Big 12 implodes, explodes or any other kind of plodes, the Tigers will join Slive’s band of 14.
But it’s highly doubtful that the SEC has extended an “official” invitation to Missouri or anyone else. That’s not done until the process is complete so both parties can save face should something go wrong.
Here’s one last concern on all of this, though. The SEC is darn good at closing ranks and keeping quiet. Georgia AD Greg McGarity said yesterday that Slive met with the leagues ADs in a regularly scheduled get-together a few weeks ago and he would not talk expansion with them. He told them to trust him and trust their presidents. That’s how you control leaks.
Well Missouri has already sprung a leak in its dealings with the SEC. More worrisome — Mizzou totally misplayed things last year with regards to the Big Ten. Tiger brass made no bones about the fact that they wanted out of the Big 12 and into the Big Ten. When the invite didn’t come, they were left with a full omelette on their face.
This isn’t a dealbreaker by any means, but one has to wonder if Missouri is capable of playing high-stakes poker alongside its potential new leaguemates.
LikeLike
http://www.mrsec.com/2011/09/sec-denies-sending-missouri-an-invitation/#comments
LikeLike
A little tidbit on the NU board from a purported Pitt insider on what the ACC was thinking:
http://northwestern.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=57&tid=163127980&mid=163127980&sid=901&style=2
“Basically, the ACC was afraid that they were going to lose Florida State and likely Virginia Tech – they believe that the SEC would like to go to 16 teams, not 14 teams – so it made an aggressive overture towards both Notre Dame and Texas to see where they stood.
ND was cool to the whole thing (but is still possibly in play in some capacity – at least in the opinion of one person with whom I have spoken) but Texas was another story altogether. The Longhorn brass seemed eager to speak with the ACC so off they went to try and hammer out a deal.
While talking to the Longhorns it became clear that Texas’ priority was the LHN (big surprise there, right?) and for reasons that I don’t quite understand that didn’t fit into what the ACC was looking to do. However the real killer was that Texas wanted basically the same deal that ND has with the BE (or with some minimal number of guaranteed games against ACC schools) and they insisted on Texas Tech coming along as well. And to get to 16 teams that also likely meant other B12 schools.
That was a killer for the ACC because it is very market hungry. Remember four of that league’s 12 teams are located in the same Raleigh, NC DMA. That is a problem for that league and why they were always going to be forced to go outside their footprint. Now they have the only major college football program in the entire state of heavily populated New York and one of two major programs in similarly heavily populated (and recruiting rich) Pennsylvania. That is a BIG deal for the ACC and way more than Kansas or K-State (the other schools believed to be in the discussion) could have given them.
Still, even despite that, Texas was STILL in play because they are Texas. However after speaking with the UT officials for a few days the ACC people began to believe that they were being used as leverage for what Texas really wanted – either a reconstituted B12 (with the LHN of course) or an invitation to the Pac-16 (also with the LHN as part of the deal).
—–
What the ACC began to suspect was that Texas was using them to bluff others into staying in the B12 and that the meetings on Monday were going to be to announce that they presidents had the sole authority to find the right league for their schools and that they were first going to try to make the B12 work – with the BE programs in tow.
It made the ACC nervous that the B12 was going to aggressively pursue the Northeast and they were worried that their inactivity was going to cost them the Noles and the Hokies to the SEC so they acted first and instead offered Pitt and the Cuse – the two BE football programs with the best overall academic profiles and the best football traditions. No offense to WVU or Louisville or anyone else but if you put an all-time team from all of the rest of the BE schools combined it would not compare to either Pitt’s or SU’s.
However the ACC’s offer was conditional on the schools immediately accepting their invites/applying for membership. If they hesitated, the ACC was simply going to move down their list until they found some teams in the NE that were willing to say yes. I’m told that this all happened “incredibly fast.”
—-
The ACC’s plan is not to stop at 14 teams but rather to go to 16 teams and they plan to do so quickly. I am told that they actually asked both Pitt and Syracuse who they would recommend for those extra spots if push came to shove? I found that piece of info absolutely fascinating. I don’t know who SU’s preferences were but Pitt’s were believed to be West Virginia and Rutgers. My personal choices would be WVU and UConn but I guess I can live with Rutgers.
Apparently the goal is to make one more run at ND and perhaps Texas – and Texas alone – for those spots to see if they can make a deal work. However that is considered a very long shot so then they are likely to go after two of Rutgers, Louisville, Connecticut and West Virginia. If the league loses two schools – which could still happen even after raising the exit fee to $20 – I’m told that all four schools would likely get in.”
LikeLike
Rutgers and UCONN, most likely. Kansascity.com report:
http://www.kansascity.com/2011/09/20/3155336/source-mizzou-has-sec-offer-but.html
LikeLike
I know we’re all content and all in B1G land, but ND joining up with the ACC seems very plausible to me the more I think about it. If the ACC lands Rutgers (I know) and ND, they are suddenly a mother of a conference. UConn would probably work well too.
If I’m Big Jim, maybe I put the clubs down and see what’s up.
LikeLike
I’m not really sure the Big Ten can or should do anything.
ND wants to be on the coasts. The Big Ten can’t do that for ND. It’s really as simple as that. It’s up to them to decide what to do for themselves.
We all talked about the potential of a Big East raid spooking ND into making a decision. But it’s obvious the world doesn’t work like that or the Big Ten might have done that years ago.
I’m pretty sure Delany will know when ND will join a conference, and if they’re only focused on the ACC, then that’s how it goes.
It’d be a loss for both sides in terms of the Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue rivalries with ND, but that’s a loss for both sides. Sometimes, that’s just what happens in this realignment business (see Nebraska-Oklahoma).
LikeLike
Nonsense. The B10 adding Miami along with the Domers gets ND on the coasts. So does adding BC. Now if you’re saying that the B10 shouldn’t add Miami or BC, that’s a different proposition.
If ND joins a conference, they likely can bring Miami or BC along with them (or maybe even any 3 of Miami, BC, GTech, & FSU), whether that’s the B10 or ACC. Then, the question becomes, would ND rather play Michigan, OSU, and PSU or Clemson, VTech, and UNC in football?
LikeLike
I can’t believe we have moved from ND will never give up its independence to join the B10, to I can see why ND would want to join the ACC.
The ACC is a great long-standing conference. But let’s be honest, it is #4 in terms of football prestige, even though it has some great programs.
But how does the ACC make more sense to ND than the B10.
LikeLike
Some plusses.
The ACC basically owns the east coast at this point in terms of old money and academics
8 games – end up in some pod with Pitt, Syr and Rutgers/Uconn, play the U, FSU, NC and MD on a regular basis, keep USC, Navy, one body bag and start rotating the B1G 3. They’d probably be more likely to win this over the B1G.
Great BB
Many similar institutions
Join Hockey East
If they have to do something, this is pretty interesting.
LikeLike
my only real point is, this looks plausible to me if the Beast falls apart . if ND is thinking about it, Jim needs to pick up the damn phone because if ND is moving, you want them.
LikeLike
Not sure it really matters what JD says if that’s what ND wants, but mark me down as someone who thinks ND is still independent when all is said and done.
LikeLike
It’s simple. 6 games in South Bend, 5 games on the East Coast (Navy + 4 ACC or 5 ACC), 1 game in California (USC or Stanford). As opposed to 6 games in South Bend, 4 games in the Big Ten’s Midwest footprint, 1 game in the East (Navy or Penn State), 1 game in California.
You’re basically looking at 10 games in the Midwest in a 9 game Big Ten, with only 1 game in the Northeast and 1 in California, at best.
You’re basically looking at 6 games in the Midwest in a 9 game ACC, with 5 games on the East Coast and 1 in California.
Sure the stages won’t be as big as you get from the top half of the Big Ten. But I’m not entirely sure the argument about being on the biggest stages would outweigh the ability to travel to 5 East Coast locations over 4 in the Big Ten’s Midwest footprint.
LikeLike
i haven’t thought the numbers through all the way, we’re on the same wavelength dude.
who gives a crap if PSU, OSU and UM put 100K or 500K in a stadium, the ACC appears to spread them out over the country better and ND doesn’t really care about CIC. They’re a bit more akin to the U, Duke, and Syr if you ask me, which no one ever does.
LikeLike
Well the TV ratings won’t be as good as matchups with Big Ten teams, but I don’t think ND is going to choose to join a conference because of TV ratings…
LikeLike
Zeek-
What Notre Dame’ schedule looks like actually depends a bit more on whether or not the ACC goes to pods or divisions and how those two are set up.
If its divisions based on a north/south axis, then you have something like this (assuming UConn is the 16th team):
ACC North – Boston College, Connecticut, Maryland, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia, Virginia Tech
ACC South – Clemson, Duke, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami-FL, North Carolina, North Carolina State, Wake Forest
Notre Dame would play seven games against opponents within its own division with alternating years of three and four home games with those teams. Any away game ND plays against those teams will be in an area between Boston and Charlottesville. Of the remaining two games, one per year would be south of the North Carolina-Virginia border. Add in a game against Navy (usually played in Baltimore or Washington, DC) and that means four to six games per year are played in the northern half of ACC territory with the remainder in South Bend and alternating seasons in California.
So while you talk about ND being stuck in the Midwest if they were part of the Big Ten, the ACC doesn’t provide too much geographic diversity with this setup.
Now if the ACC were to have a zipper format with teams divided on an east-west access, it might help out a bit, but at that point, we’re probably looking at protected interdivisional rivalries and that means ND would only rotate thru one team from the other division each year.
Now if the ACC did pods, it’s a whole other story. Assuming this set up with four pods based on geography with ND playing the thee in its own pod every year plus two each in the other three pods:
Pod A – Boston College, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Syracuse
Pod B – Maryland, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Pod C – Duke, North Carolina, North Carolina State, Wake Forest
Pod D – Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami,FL
Then Notre Dame would be getting games up and down the coast with two years out of four in Florida (one against FSU, one against Miami-FL). That would probably suit ND better if getting a real geographic mix was part of the appeal.
LikeLike
Fair enough cutter. I also tend to just think that ND will stay independent. There is no evidence that a Pac-16 or even an SEC-16 and ACC-16 would force ND to reconsider as long as it has a path to the BCS/NC. Right now that’s still not at stake.
LikeLike
You can’t do pods that way. You have to have divisions and round-robin within the division. The 3-2-2-2 does not work. Need 3-4-1-1.
LikeLike
“who gives a crap if PSU, OSU and UM put 100K or 500K in a stadium, the ACC appears to spread them out over the country better”
—If exposure is your real goal then games against PSU, OSU & TSUN are going to get more eyeballs on you than playing in Blacksburg, Chapel Hill & Clemson. Yes that’s cherry picking but even swapping in Miami & Tallahassee won’t tilt the balance.
LikeLike
I agree, Isn’t it possible that ND and UT (in an attempt to go Independent) were just inquiring if the ACC would give their Non-football sports a place to land?
LikeLike
Big 12 was looking seriously at Pitt. Although another article said Pitt approached the ACC first.
LikeLike
I still think B1G is a better fit for Mizzou, but that won’t ever happen. They won’t kick the SEC out of bed, though. Columbia will be rockin’ and rollin’ to see neighbor Arkansas in town for basketball. Can hear the boos for Mike Anderson already cranking up. Seeing KY in BB and the bigs (Alabama, et al) in football will mean big local $$$.
LikeLike
Joe press conference this afternoon
On Pitt and Syracuse’s move.
Joe: I very rarely look at things like this. I thought Syracuse and Pitt were talking to them. Has it been accomplished? (Yes). I think it’s a good move for the conference and the two schools. Obviously with Penn State I’ve been trying to get one of those schools in the Big Ten. I think there’s a tremendous market for recruiting and marketing for the areas that these kids are into. I would imagine that moving into the ACC would be an asset football-wise but also in basketball.
The problem that you have right now is that things are changing and you’re not sure what direction it’s going.
There’s speculation that Penn State is going to look into something different or try to get some more eastern schools into the Big Ten. Go to Delaney and say, ‘Why don’t we take a good look at Rutgers or someone in the East?’ I think there’s people talking about that.
I think it’s a good move for Syracuse and Pitt. A lot of those guys that are associated with those programs I grew up with.
LikeLike
Interesting on that last bit. I’ve heard him mention Rutgers and Pitt as expansion candidates a few times; maybe even Syracuse.
LikeLike
Here’s a link:
Paterno also addressed Penn State’s future as a result of the sudden flurry of expansion.
“Things are changing and you’re not really sure what’s going to happen,” Paterno said. “I don’t know where we’re going to end up. There might be even some speculation that Penn State maybe ought to get into something different, or we ought to try to go out and get some people from the East to come into the Big Ten.
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11263/1176175-100.stm#ixzz1YWOzoZb2
LikeLike
Love Joe Pa, but only an insane person would suggest that PSU even think about leaving the B1G. The university has benefitted immensely from that status.
LikeLike
As I keep posting, from PSU’s perspective, MD, DC, VA, NC and further south are a more fertile recruiting and marketing area that benefit them more NOW than MI, IN, IA, WI etc. People stream up from those southern areas to PSU games. I think the population growth and wealth creation in those areas dwarfs and will dwarf the midwest.
PSU has benefited from the Big Ten, but this isn’t a one way street.
LikeLike
Yeah, Paterno is right that Syracuse and Pitt are attaching themselves to a good conference for recruiting, etc.
But I don’t think this changes anything for Penn State. They can’t leave until 2027 or 2032 at the earliest, so this is all a moot point.
Whether there is a viable Eastern expansion possible, I’ll be waiting to see.
LikeLike
“But I don’t think this changes anything for Penn State. They can’t leave until 2027 or 2032 at the earliest, so this is all a moot point.”
Assuming that is airtight.
LikeLike
If all of the schools were giving their TV rights to the conference as a way of ensuring stability and as partial inducement for the BTN contract (which seems to run parallel to the assignment of rights this time), I’d have a really hard time seeing how any university could just walk out of the Big Ten with any of their TV rights.
Plus, the schools already did this in the 80s until 2007. I’m sure the language was tighter the second time around.
Perlman himself said that the only ironclad way to bind a school to a conference was assignment of TV rights. He told Texas that the only way Nebraska would stay in the Big Ten is by assignment of TV rights.
LikeLike
Er, meant to say Big 12 in that last statement.
LikeLike
And also, I would think Joe would know if it was a moot point.
LikeLike
That’s just Joe Pa being Joe Pa. I mean he’s always said that no one asks him what he thinks about things like expansion since it’s just Delany and the presidents in charge. Look at what is going on in the SEC right now. The ADs and coaches have almost no idea what’s going on with expansion. The same thing happened with Nebraska.
Look, he might be nostalgic for his super east conference. But the idea of Penn State leaving the Big Ten is beyond absurd.
It’s an impossibility. You think Pegula throws $80M at a hockey program, and the Big Ten starts a hockey conference so that Penn State will get regular visits from the marquee hockey teams in Minnesota/Wisconsin/Michigan/Michigan State and then decides to join the ACC because Syracuse and Pitt joined the ACC?
If this was even remotely a concern for Penn State’s president or anyone in charge at Penn State (including boosters, or whoever), they would have flatly told Delany “Get Pitt and Syracuse into the Big Ten or we’re leaving.”
Obviously, they didn’t do that. Ergo, Penn State isn’t going anywhere. If getting Pitt and Syracuse or Rutgers into a conference was required to keep Penn State in, it would have already been done. There’s really nothing else to discuss in this matter.
LikeLike
I would appreciate it if you would take that last set of points to the posters at Penn State’s Rivals site who seem to have gone off the deep end over this.
If there was any reasonable chance that Penn State would leave the Big Ten for the ACC because Pitt and Syracuse went to the ACC, then those two programs would have been put in the Big Ten a long time ago (or some combination of teams).
What a subset of fans want has no bearing on what the power brokers want.
LikeLike
Explain this… what if Penn State just gave up its media rights? What does that even mean?
If Penn State plays Alabama… does Penn State’s contract with the B1G prevent Alabama from having its own media rights? Do the B1G and SEC sit down and negotiate who gets the TV rights in a deal like that? Do the schools?
If so, what stops Penn State from joining the ACC and doing so without its rights? If the ACC can still televise the games, the market benefit is there. If the B1G still owns those rights, so be it. Are they going to televise PSU v Clemson on the BTN just because they can? Does that just give more exposure to PSU and another conference? Does BTN even care? Viewers are viewers.
Not trying to be a jerk or naive… but how does the assignment play out?
LikeLike
Well it’s an assignment of all TV rights that the university would own for sports, so my best guess would be that it’s an assignment of all TV rights for all home sports games over that period of time. i.e. home football v Alabama, home basketball v whoever, etc.
Think about whenever you schedule a home-home with a non-conference team. You basically agree to play on the home team’s media arrangement (if they have one) and then maybe you make an agreement for the away team to be able to use highlights in their media arrangement.
So basically, the Big Ten owns the TV rights to all of Penn State’s home games in all sports until 2027 or 2032.
LikeLike
Interesting. That’s a poison pill to be sure.
But if you are ESPN and wanted to deal a blow to the B1G and BTN, why not just agree to pay the ACC for PSU’s value, without regard for how many home games it would be able to show. They still get all the road conference games. PSU @ FSU on ESPN.
And what’s the BTN going to do? NOT show PSU-Va Tech? That would cause PA to drop BTN.
I am not sure Texas A&M would be so pissed off as to bring on this dispute, much less the happy PSU/B1G family, but it mostly centers on money. And when the issue is merely money, obstacles can be overcome. If ESPN sees this as a way to get back at BTN/B1G, why not pay for it???
LikeLike
Let me go one step further. If the PSU left the BTN and joined the ACC… wouldn’t the end result be the BTN owning the rights to a bunch of games involving schools in that region. Way to expand your footprint indirectly. FSU @ PSU… on the BTN. I guess folks in Florida need the BTN now. Charge $10 for the BTN for a season–even though that means only one pertinent game. Multiplied by all the home games PSU has, think of the numbers. Heck… send Nebraska to the Pac 16 and do the same thing. You’d have a coast to coast footprint for 20 years. 🙂
The assignment benefits the BTN, which benefits the schools. Neat.
LikeLike
The reality is it would be a good business move to leverage the Penn St. brand on the East Coast. I don’t buy that exit fees will prevent poaching, and I don’t buy that a school that gives every indication to the BEast that they are loyal while they are pusuing the ACC will not be in play in two or three years when a better offer comes around from the B1G. When the time is right Rutgers, Pitt or Maryland will be there. I could be OK with any of these three as a complementary add.
LikeLike
I agree 100% drwillini.
I’ve said many times here that getting Maryland and Rutgers would be a pretty big coup for the Big Ten. Penn State’s alumni base location being centered in the NYC to DC corridor along with bringing the 4 national brands to NYC and D.C. would probably have a lot of synergy to it.
That being said, we’ve all long doubted Maryland’s availability in all of this…
LikeLike
@ EZCUSE
When this all settles down, I fully expect the ACC to adopt assignment like the Pac-12 just did. Kind of surprised they haven’t already given the situation.
LikeLike
Regardless of whether PSU can leave or not, why exactly would they (the administrators, that is, not the fans who only care about football)? The B10 is going to have higher payouts _even_if_ND_joins_the_ACC, has a visible network, and while the undergrad academics are similar (though there’s no Clemson in the B10), if PSU cares about research at all, I can’t see why they’d want to leave the CIC.
LikeLike
Richard, I just want to know how it works to get an idea of whether it is a virtual impossibility or a mere difficult obstacle.
LikeLike
According to this: http://blogs.mcall.com/nittany_lines/2011/09/staying-put.html
Graham Spanier says PSU ain’t goin’ anywhere.
Now if he could only find the stones not to renew Joe’s contract…
LikeLike
Hey, a new Pickens plan.
http://newsok.com/boone-pickens-big-12-isnt-dead-texas-am-sobering-up/article/3605929#ixzz1YWJAenhr
Boone Pickens doesn’t believe the Big 12 is dead. The Oklahoma State benefactor even believes Texas A&M’s departure for the SEC can be stopped.
OSU booster Boone Pickens says he thinks the Big 12 is not dead, and he’s urging Texas Gov. Rick Perry to step in and do something about all this realignment mess. Pickens has even pulled out the big sales job. He’s petitioned Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who is running for the Republican presidential nomination.
Pickens said he told Perry to show America that “you fix problems, don’t contribute to ’em.”
[snip]
Pickens said his plan for A&M is to tell the University of Texas that the Aggies will stay in the Big 12, but only if UT folds its Longhorn Network into an equitable revenue distribution. However, that’s a different cause than what irks A&M and OU about the Longhorn Network. The network’s association with ESPN, which has pushed to air high school content, bothers the Sooners and Aggies, who believe it would give Texas a recruiting advantage.
“I would cut them off on that thing real quick,” Pickens said. “Your problem is DeLoss (Dodds, UT’s athletic director). DeLoss is a guy who’s always played with all the cards.
“I told him six weeks ago, ‘we understand you’ve got the best hand. But you can’t keep doing that to people. You gotta show leadership.
“Big 12, come to your senses. Step up on leadership. Explain to Texas that whatever they have that’s different, it’s not (going to be) different anymore.”
LikeLike
http://www.macon.com/2011/09/20/1710527/mcgarity-like-everybody-in-dark.html
In the SEC, the ADs are totally out of the loop on expansion. Its being driven by Slive and the Presidents and ADs are told nothing, except “Trust me.”
LikeLike
OU will stay if reforms are implemented.
http://newsok.com/source-removal-of-big-12-commissioner-dan-beebe-among-ous-demands/article/3605958#ixzz1YWjhxKU1
The University of Oklahoma is considering remaining in the Big 12, but only in a “reformed” version of the conference that includes hard and fast rules for Texas’ Longhorn Network and removal of Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe, a high-ranking Big 12 source told The Oklahoman on Tuesday.
[snip]
The other reform the Sooners demand is Texas and ESPN retreating on some its plans for the Longhorn Network. The UT/ESPN partnership angered Big 12 members on two counts: 1) the network reached an agreement with Fox Sports to move a conference game to the Longhorn Network; and 2) The Longhorn Network announced it would show high school highlights even after the conference voted to keep televised high school games off school-branded networks.
LikeLike
OU is drawing a line in the sand. That’s a really strong stand out of OU.
LikeLike
I think it’s an attempt by OU to appear as if they are saving the conference. They know their demands can’t be met and are headed to the PAC.
LikeLike
Those demands are fairly ordinary. I mean getting rid of Beebe? Just having the LHN only have 1 non-conference game and no highlights for recruits?
If I’m Texas, I’d compromise on those issues.
I really don’t see OU demanding anything egregious…
LikeLike
I would think the big issue is that UT’s partner in the LHN, ESPN, won’t be thrilled with the idea of trying to build a TV Network in an environment where it has to answer to 8+ entities that aren’t directly involved with the actual business.
LikeLike
Beebe is easy. The others depend on how much Fox and ESPN want the Big 12 to survive.
They aren’t unreasonable demands. I think the fears on HS games are overblown, but it is a slippery slope.
LikeLike
I really don’t see anything in there that Texas would say it can’t agree to…
The revenue sharing thing might be something, but that would have happened in the Pac-16 anyways…
LikeLike
Pulling their own longhorn gambit eh?
LikeLike
This is admirable, but can also be dismissed as posturing. They know Texas won’t compromise to that degree. When they leave and the Big12 falls apart, the party responsible will be clear.
As it is now, when OU and OSU leave, Texas has plausible deniability.
Of course Texas will not compromise since OU is demanding the same deal Texas would have in the PAC_N, ACC, or Big Ten. One would have to believe Texas cares about the Big 12 even if it is not in their long-term financial interest.
On the other hand, the play here might not be UT, but rather Texas politicians.
LikeLike
Agreed, there are going to be a lot of people reading this out of OU that will lobby Texas to compromise and stay. This isn’t just targeted at Texas.
LikeLike
It could also be targeted at the Pac 12.
You’re never sure what is just posturing for negotiating position.
LikeLike
(Copy paste from something I put in the previous thread)
http://blog.newsok.com/ou/2011/09/19/boren-transcript-part-deux/
Last question asked at David Boren’s press conference was whether he had any regrets about not being more proactive last year. His response:
I have tremendous regret that that’s happened. I would simply say it is not a strong vote of confidence in the conference office that this has happened in such a short period of time.
Ouch.
I think that is closest anyone of significance has come to publicly faulting Dan Beebe for what has happened over the past 18 months. Makes me hope someone from SU or Pitt will take a final shots at Marinatto.
————————————
Well, if we came up with our own network, we think it would be financially successful. Let me say that we’re in the process, at this moment in time – because we’re still a member of the Big 12 – for months, for more than a year, of planning our (network). I would say the level of interest of those who would like to be partners, media partners in our network, has gone up considerably – even over the past few weeks. There are a number of financial opportunities for the University of Oklahoma, too. The important thing is, if we have a network of our own, we want to run that network in a way that doesn’t seek to advantage us over other members, particularly in recruiting and other areas like that.
Significant for two reasons:
1. Boren has no philosophical objections the LHN
2. Multiple media companies have suddenly taken an increased interest in creating a Sooner network on OU’s terms. Sounds like someone is trying to make OU an offer it can’t refuse to stay in the Big XII.
I think its clear that Oklahoma would actually be willing to stay under the right circumstances.
LikeLike
i.e. ESPN creates the Oklahoma Network. Since OU and Ok St. Are joined at the hip go ahead and join their media rights.
LikeLike
OU is making demands that they would love to see, and deep down they know Texas will not agree to them. It is a public way to deflect blame back to Texas when this comes crashing down.
I think Texas *should* make concessions but I don’t think they ever will. But OU doesn’t want to hear the Texas blame game that it is all SMU, Arkansas, Colorado, Nebraska, Texas A&M, Oklahoma State, Oklahoma’s fault that the Big 12 feel apart.
They are finally putting into words exactly what A&M and Nebraska said, putting their issues into the public forum before ejecting.
LikeLike
For the OU fans here:, this is a sincere request.
And the impression has been that Texas, via Beebe, has run roughshod over the Big 12.
“The perception is, he answers only to one school,” the source said. “That does not work.”
“Impressions” and “perceptions” are one thing, but reality is another. What specific actions has Beebe taken which have been advantageous to Texas which have also been opposed by Oklahoma?
Methinks it’s a very short list.
LikeLike
The second and third paragraphs in that were quotes from the article, BTW.
LikeLike
I just want to know about the OU-Neb game? Why didn’t both schools insist on maintaining it annually? Did they both want to stop, did they stop because of the divisions (which could have easily been overcome)? I have never understood why either school or the B12 gave up a big rivlary game. Did the schools feel it would be a competitive disadvantage if they had to play each other each year? If so, I think they missed the forest through the trees. Anyway, could someone give me the history. Other than simply saying OU was in the South and Neb in the North. Unless it is just that simple.
LikeLike
My understanding is that OU felt like it would be a competitive disadvantage. Nebraska wanted to keep it.
LikeLike
From a NU perspective:
At the time of the formation of the Big 12, Nebraska was the best program in the country and OU was at its lowest point in 50 years. OU didn’t want to take the annual ass whoopings that Nebraska was handing out at that time.
LikeLike
It was the split that made the most sense and Nebraska and Oklahoma took one for the team. Nebraska wanted to play even if the game was considered out of conference, but Oklahoma declined. I don’t blame them, remember when the Big 12 was formed Oklahoma was way down. Their schedule was tough enough without adding Nebraska to it in years they didn’t have to.
LikeLike
Yeah, ending the NU-OU game was one of the most short sighted decisions in modern NCAA history. I still maintain that if the Big XII had offered to return it to an annual game and put the CCG in Arrowhead every other Nebraska would have stuck around. But I guess it was not to be…
LikeLike
I still think even all that might not have kept Nebraska in the Big 12.
Nebraska is one of the schools with the fewest options (as is the case for the Big Ten schools in the Midwest).
Powers tipped off Perlman about the Pac-16 talks, and he knew he would have to find a seat for Nebraska.
LikeLike
Hopkins –
I was clicking around the BON comments, and it got me wondering. Do you think even anyone at UT still wants Beebe? It seems to me that the fan base, at the minimum, would have no problem with kicking him to the curb, but what about the Powers and company?
LikeLike
No clue about what the Powers That Be think, though I suspect he’s less of a Texas puppet than he’s made out to be in the popular fictionalization of events which is occurring nowadays. As for the fanbase, if one bases an opinion on what BON readership thinks, it’s clear a strong majority thinks he incompetent and needs to go. Being from the “geography is destiny” camp on this, I’m not really sure what anyone could have done differently with the siren songs of Big 10, SEC and PAC membership at the conference’s doorsteps.
LikeLike
I disagree, these are easy concessions for Texas, considering the alternatives are a) give up the LHN in the Pac, or b) stay in a crappy Big12/BigEast hybrid. Firing Beebe? No problem. No high school content? No problem, that one pissed everyone off anyway, and would probably ultimately be totally nixed by the NCAA. No Big 12 game on LHN? Ugh, that one stings a bit, but is probably a fair compromise.
LikeLike
The Big 12 game had to be approved by the conference anyway. Its not something ESPN had in hand when they signed the LHN deal.
LikeLike
Agreed, didn’t ESPN just say in the contract that Texas had to push for multiple games? If the conference rules that out, then Texas can’t push for multiple games and the point becomes moot.
Regardless, I really don’t see no conference game on the LHN as a big stumbling block here. The LHN is about a lot more than that.
LikeLike
If anyone involved with the Big12 has any foresight (and let’s face it, right now it seems like that skill was unique to Boulder, Lincoln, and College Station) they’ll understand that this is still an environment that probably cannot work over the long haul.
If I’m Kansas, I’ve got to think I have better options than being UT and OU’s b*itch.
If I’m Baylor, ISU or Kansas St. I have to wonder if I would be better off competing with the BCS powers from the same angle Boise State and TCU have done so recently.
LikeLike
No one is guaranteed to have better options outside of Texas and Oklahoma along with Texas Tech and OSU if they take them with them. Missouri is likely to have better options with Big Ten and SEC as possibilities.
But there is no way anyone else has anything remotely comparable to what they have now.
Kansas especially needs the Big 12 to survive. It’s a weird thing, but to really be a primary basketball power, they need to be in a high profile football conference.
It shouldn’t matter but it does. Kansas State, Iowa State, and Baylor have no other options.
They’re all in the middle of massive $ upgrades to better compete with BCS programs.
LikeLike
zeek: The contract uses the words “mutual desire” for a second game. This sounds like something, but it’s actually nothing. It doesn’t obligate either party to do anything.
LikeLike
Sure until LHN offer more than 5 million dollars for a team to agree to LHN. That’s better than the pay out most of the teams will get for a bowl game. When the have nots want more they may change their tune.
LikeLike
The reality is that the conference would still only have Texas and OU and a bunch of mediocre schools. Long-term they will continue to see major separation from the rest of the power conferences and the Big 12. All this does is buy the league another 3-5 years.
LikeLike
Last 10 years:
CU,UNL, A&M 122-118 in Big 12. A&M was 6 games under .500.
Big 12 has arguably been the 2nd best conference over that time period. Noone could reasonably argue they weren’t in the top 4 and close to #2. The schools with a mediocre history have gotten better-Missouri, Texas Tech, T Boone State.
Big 12 is 1st in the ESPN power ratings so far this year. They finished 4th last year but were 1st in the computer rankings.
There’s no problem competitively and financially they are up there with everyone else, at least for now.
LikeLike
As any good consultant or I-banker knows, after every good merger, comes a consolidation. Look mout if your stadium cannot bring 70k fans per game. The new college football will be about yield, more than just revenue.
LikeLike
Probably more true than you realize. FBS football bleeds big-time money at most schools (even most bowls are money-losers). I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see some of the losers in the realignment reconsider their commitments to playing FBS.
LikeLike
ATHLETIC DEPARTMENTS tend to bleed money.
That is a very different thing than their football programs.
LikeLike
Cincinnati
LikeLike
A few thoughts:
1. It seems to me the only way ND joins a league is if the writing is on the wall and we’re looking at a 4×16 arrangement.
2. It seems to me that the only way the Big Ten expands is if ND joins.
3. This seems to imply two things to me:
a. The only league ND could end up in is the Big Ten, and then only when the other 3 putative “super conferences” have already cast their lots with 16 members. Moreover, it would seem to require that the Big Ten mutually agree to go to 16 for the sake of being at 16 (i.e., taking some new members that do not carry their weight in revenue just to fill out the league size, in order to enable the discontinuous leap in revenue that would be a playoff).
b. The Big Ten would add 4 schools all at once.
4. It seems to me that, if the Big Ten were to add 4 schools all at once, there’s no intrinsic reason why it could not poach schools from other “strong” leagues which are considered a good fit. E.g., I see no reason why Pittsburgh can’t be had from the ACC (this $20 million exit fee is less than 1 year’s worth of revenue distributions from the league office, and we can expect those to jump substantially if ND joins). Similar observations are possible for Missouri.
Just kind of thinking out loud.
LikeLike
The ACC is likely to have assignment of rights fairly soon. I doubt it’ll be poachable after that.
LikeLike
zeek:
They haven’t yet. If FSU is asked to commit to the ACC forever, they may suddenly ask the SEC if they have any interest in expanding to 16. I’m not sure the ACC will demand that of their schools any time soon.
LikeLike
You make a great point. What is motivating Notre Dame is the desire to be left out of a 4X16 arrangement. (The posters at Irish Envy all seem to think that 4X16 is a foregone conclusion). If 4X16 actually were coming, and Notre Dame actually HAD to do something, it would probably join the ACC. (All things considered, the ACC makes the most sense for Notre Dame in a conference setting because it allows ND to play a more national schedule.)
But, Delaney knows this! That is why he is being so adamant about the Big Ten not needing to expand. As long as the Big Ten stays at 12, Notre Dame can stay independent. If the ACC gets itchy and expands to 16 with Rutgers and U-Conn, then the Big Ten is the only conference that can end up with Notre Dame.
If getting Notre Dame is the end game, then all the B1G has to do is be the last conference to get to 16. Until then, it’s a stalemate.
LikeLike
Sorry, it’s the desire NOT to be left out of 4X16.
LikeLike
Then it behooves Notre Dame to aid the schools in danger of falling off the BCS cliff — Baylor, Iowa State, Cincinnati and the like. Being a non-football member (with or without Texas) of a Big East/Big 12 hybrid helps keep the BCS membership above 64, preventing Notre Dame from ever having to make that 4 x 16 decision.
LikeLike
zeek:
“If there was any reasonable chance that Penn State would leave the Big Ten for the ACC because Pitt and Syracuse went to the ACC,”
You really aren’t paying attention.
LikeLike
I’m paying complete attention.
My point stands. If Penn State had any and I mean any concerns about being the only Eastern team in the conference, they would have taken them directly to Delany.
If you really think about it, if there was any chance that Penn State would leave because of a lack of Eastern teams in the conference, that would have been dealt with already…
LikeLike
Penn State hates eastern football becasue of its non-invite to the Big East in 1979. Even Holy Cross was invited to join, but said no. Additionally, they cannot stand Pitt and will not even agree to play them on a regualr basis ditto for the ‘Cuse.
LikeLike
So wrong on so many points…
-PSU doesn’t hate eastern football. Why hate teams it beats regularly? Fact is they stopped scheduling their traditional “rivals” because of scheduling realities when they first joined (the first 4 games could basically stay but anything scheduled after Oct, where most of those eastern schools would have been placed, had to go for B1G conference play).
-PSU doesn’t really care about Pitt any more than it does Temple, Rutgers, Cuse, etc. Pitt wanted to maintain a home-and-away relationship with PSU on a yearly basis. Problem was PSU needed the flexibility to schedule its other traditional playing partners from the old eastern independent days while still maintaining at least 3 home OoC games per year. Playing Pitt as a home-and-away would make that very difficult (and still maintain the same scheduling methodology). PSU responded with a “2 home, 1 away” in PSU’s favor and Pitt said hell no. As such Pitt became one of the “random” old eastern independent games that gets rotated through every 5-10 years)
Interesting FYI…the Pitt / PSU series is split 75/25 % Pitt / PSU as far as where the home game has been played and Pitt regularly doesn’t sell out it’s 60000 seat pro stadium. Wonder why PSU didn’t mind putting that rivalry on the back-burner…
LikeLike
“If Penn State had any and I mean any concerns about being the only Eastern team in the conference, they would have taken them directly to Delany.”
What makes you think they haven’t? Joe has brought up adding Eastern teams to the Big Ten at least a dozen times in his press conferences.
“If you really think about it, if there was any chance that Penn State would leave because of a lack of Eastern teams in the conference, that would have been dealt with already…”
Penn State keeps saying how important it is to them, and nothing has been done about it. So I have no idea what you’re trying to say here. You claim that this airtight agreement holds us to the conference until 2027 (and maybe it does), so why would the Big Ten be doing anything “if there was any chance we would leave”? You’re arguing two different sides of the coin simultaneously.
Doesn’t address what I’ve been saying:
“As I keep posting, from PSU’s perspective, MD, DC, VA, NC and further south are a more fertile recruiting and marketing area that benefit them more NOW than MI, IN, IA, WI etc. People stream up from those southern areas to PSU games. I think the population growth and wealth creation in those areas dwarfs and will dwarf the midwest.”
LikeLike
Pitt and Syracuse going to the ACC doesn’t change that last paragraph above.
LikeLike
“I think the population growth and wealth creation in those areas dwarfs and will dwarf the midwest.”
GDP rankings by state ($Millions):
5 Illinois 644,200
6 Pennsylvania 575,600
8 Ohio 483,400
9 Virginia 427,700
10 North Carolina 407,400
13 Michigan 372,400
15 Maryland 300,000
16 Indiana 267,600
17 Minnesota 267,100
20 Wisconsin 251,400
LikeLike
Sorted per capita:
1 District of Columbia
9 Virginia
13 Maryland
14 Minnesota
15 Illinois
17 Nebraska
19 Iowa
25 Pennsylvania
29 Wisconsin
30 North Carolina
32 Ohio
35 Indiana
LikeLike
jake, I will be the first to say that I think it is in the best interest of the Big Ten that it had a travel partner for Penn State from the east. Has a number of good points to it.
At the same time, there are so many parts moving we have no clue what the Big Ten is really doing or going to do. Could the long term strategy be that the Big Ten plans to expand into the east to mid atlantic area. Delany last year talked about it as far as demographics and growth.
Just because schools realign now does not mean that they are going to stay put or that the present members are happy about what is going on. The SEC has only so many options and a lot of those options point to the ACC. If certain members are targeted and do leave, the ACC could become a glorified better version of the Big East. Then other members might entertain options else where.
I assume that the Penn State and the other members of the Big Ten know what the grand scheme is and whom they are interested in. I believe it is beyond UT & ND whom the Big Ten is interested in long term.
LikeLike
Pingback: Boston College Daily Links: Syracuse, Pitt Must Wait 27-Months » College Football Daily News - Get all your football news on one site
Listening to BTramel’s insights, some interesting logic just hit me. First, I think the Pac10 has pushed back against the 4 Big 12 schools. I don’t think OU would be offering demands to stay if they had a clear road to move ahead. Think about when you fight with the cell phone company. If you wanted to change service providers, you just go. If you don’t, you’ll start to say something like, “if you give me X,Y, Z, I’ll stay in hopes they agree to it”. I have a feeling Colorado will vote NO on anything involving Texas because of they way they got treated last year and I think Cal and Stanford will vote NO on anything involving Texas just because they don’t like Texas on principal. My gut tells me the Pac 10 schools are saying no to Tech and OSU and AZ/ASU are saying no to a pod system that cuts them off from LA.
I have a feeling for the first time in my gut that we are going to wake up 6 months from now and we are going to wake up empty…like last year. My gut tells me the Big 12 stays in tact, brings in a couple of Big East teams, lets ND and BYU(?) stay independent and have their non football schools play in the conference. They bring back TCU and maybe Boise and the Big 12 now becomes a major conference again and the only casualty is the Big East.
It’s all clear to me now. Thoughts?
LikeLike
bullet, you might have been on to something:
dennisdoddcbs Dennis Dodd
Good point by P. Thamel. If Beebe was so bad why was he given a raise and extended in June? OU doesn’t have Pac-12 votes, pure and simple.
9 minutes ago
Not that I think Dodd knows the inner workings, but why in the world was Beebe given a raise and extension in June…
LikeLike
RT @DufresneLATimes: Hearing today of tremendous push back from block of Pac 12 prezes re expansion with 4 schools mentioned.
LikeLike
DufresneLATimes Chris Dufresne
Nine votes needed for expansion changes in pac 12. Can Scott get them? We’ll see. Sentiment seems different from last year’s push to 16
2 hours ago
LikeLike
Perhaps this is a warning from the Pac to OU, etc ? Make a decision soon, Little brother’s welcome won’t last as long as yours?
LikeLike
Is it 4 schools that are getting the pushback?
RE: Texas not giving in on the LHN and the Pac Presidents are balking at that. Could they vote in OU and OSU independently? Is Texas and the LHN the sticking point?
LikeLike
He didn’t specify what his source(s) were telling him. Just that there’s a lot of pushback from around 4 presidents. Issues would probably include South California exposure, cohesiveness of the conference, academics, a possibly unequal entrance for Texas, not wanting to just go to Pac-14, etc. There’s a lot of issues at stake here…
LikeLike
Seeing new tweets, OU and OSU are in if they choose. Texas will need to give up the LHN.
Texas has already wrecked the Big 12 (it’s more geographically natural home) with the LHN, if they won’t give it up for their current conference why give it up for some new conference?
LikeLike
I’ve liked Dodd’s reporting throughout the realignment messes — he seems to have original takes and observations — so this makes sense.
The Dufresne twit raises all sorts of questions…
LikeLike
Completely randomly: I just pulled up Dodd’s bio — I thought he was an OU grad. (One of those CBS guys is, I think — nothing bad, but might reveal particular insight.) He’s not, but I did see that he’s 54. 54?!? Never would have guessed that.
LikeLike
We’ve all commented on it, but access to California is a big deal. Right now if you’re Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, and Utah, you get to play in South California every year. That’s so big for recruiting that it really changes a lot of things.
I don’t see why they’d all want to give that up so soon for a Pac-16 with pods or whatnot.
The Pac-12 money is already going to be gigantic; more money doesn’t solve the issue of lost exposure in South California.
If I was those 4 schools, I’d really be wondering why we’re trading a bit more money for a guaranteed game in South California…
LikeLike
But the Pac 16 would give them access to California AND Texas, if the issue of access is that important.
LikeLike
But a Pac 14 would not. And probably wouldn’t raise the $ that much.
LikeLike
Could be that they just dont want to go to Texas or that they want to be connected to California like Colorado. Does anyone know exactly why they dont want to be grouped with Texas really?
What if there is a Tech/Okie Lite issue like there is in the B1G?
LikeLike
bullet is right about the Pac-14.
If you go Pac-8, SWC-II, they lose access to California almost completely.
And in pods, you’d have a pod of Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, and Colorado. They’d be gambling that Scott’s proposal of games gets them a game in Texas every other year with a game in California every year.
Is that as good as a guaranteed game in South California in a geographically cohesive conference?
The money is already mindboggling for a school like Utah that has never seen this kind of TV money from a Pac-12.
LikeLike
We know that its important for the AZ schools and CU to be connected to California.
LikeLike
Part of it may be fear of the unknown. They know California, but they don’t know Texas nearly as well. In addition, they know that they can convince California kids to move, but hey don’t know whether they can convince Texas kids to move.
LikeLike
And yet just a year the 16 with an E/W arrangement was what everyone was on board for….
LikeLike
I think they were all on board with a Pac-16 because they weren’t yet at a Pac-12.
It’s different going from Pac-10 to Pac-16 than it is going from Pac-12 to Pac-16.
They’re cozily in divisions now with Colorado/Arizona/Arizona State/Utah all having a game in South California.
They have a gigantic media deal similar to the Big Ten’s deal with additional local networks for the pairs.
The world is a different place from a Pac-10 that was way behind and needing the 6 to catch up to everyone else.
LikeLike
Query… who has the absolute most to gain by the Big XII surviving?
I say Notre Dame. If the Big XII survives with 9 + +… the Big East has to add schools (rather than disband or take on other teams)… which leaves a viable home for Notre Dame’s other sports… which staves off “difficult decision time.”
LikeLike
@EZCUSE – I agree that Notre Dame is the biggest winner if the Big 12 lives because that likely preserves the Big East hybrid (which they still want badly). The less change, the better for ND.
LikeLike
I mean…other than the Big XII schools not rumored to be going anywhere desirable.
LikeLike
Last year they wanted a much bigger media rights deal. Now they got a big one even without Texas. I think they’ll be more picky even if adding 4 will bring them more.
A bigger point might be that it was assumed that bringing Oklahoma automatically would bring Texas. Adding OU and OSU without Texas might not be ideal for the conference. With Texas, the eastern members can at least shift recruiting/attention focus from California to Texas which is just as important. Without gains in Texas to counter it, losing California exposure is a much bigger deal.
LikeLike
The problem for the Big East is that they will have to find at least one more football member in order to qualify has a D-1A conference and their are going to be VERY limited if the Big XII survives.
Plus after the Villanova debacle the basketball schools may be in no mood to help if they can’t find anyone to go football only.
LikeLike
If it has to be the Pac-14 with OU and Okie State, do a zipper involving Southern Cal and UCLA. Since Westwood is north of Exposition Park, put UCLA in the North and SC in the South (he said facetiously).
LikeLike
If Texas, TT, OSU, and Oklahoma stay in the Big XII, would they still add the Big East leftovers or maybe just pluck West Virginia and Louisville? Or do the Big East leftovers go after Central Florida, East Carolina, and make a go on their own? I hope they both survive. No need to give ESPN and Fox any discounts by being able to buy bulk.
LikeLike
I think they go back to 12 now. If Missouri leaves I’d guess they add add Louisville, Rutgers, West Virginia, and UConn. If Missouri stays, keep them, but cross out West Virginia who will end up in the SEC.
LikeLike
@Frank and your tweet
With the Navy/AF to BE we can see why Pitt and SU left. The rest need to find a home as quick as they can somewhere else. Villanova, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Coast Guard. Yet noone picks up a phone to Provo.
At least the Big 12 doesn’t have Marinatto.
LikeLike
Seriously. Navy? Air Force
http://brett-mcmurphy.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/29532522/32135950
‘No official invitation was extended by the league, but both parties had extensive discussions about Navy joining the league in football only and it very well could have happened in the next couple of weeks, college football industry sources told CBSSports.com.
Besides Navy, the Big East also was targeting Air Force and league sources felt confident both schools would have been Big East members, perhaps within the next year – that is until Pitt and Syracuse announced they were leaving for the ACC.
“Navy is one of the most special things out there, prestige,” said an administrator who would benefit from Navy being in a BCS league.
“I don’t see why Air Force doesn’t fit in a BCS league,” said the same person. “Class, class, class.”’
——————————————–
This is worse than Villanova. Are you kidding me? The Big East’s problem was that it wasn’t competitive in football (the exact opposite of the Big 12’s problem). Navy just makes the Big East less competitive in football. Air Force even more so.
Who the hell is an administrator that would benefit from Navy being in a BCS league? Navy’s president? Jack Swarbrick? (The latter in jest, he’s clearly too intelligent to be the person behind these quotes).
BYU and Boise State should have been way in front of Navy, Air Force, Villanova, and whoever else they were thinking of….
They got TCU right, but their next couple of choices were horribly wrong.
Pitt/Syracuse was pushing for a 12 team conference. Now we know why they didn’t stick around to see them try to bring it to 12.
Honestly, how does anyone even consider Villanova, Navy, and Air Force to be BCS-level programs. Did Navy’s mission statement change to becoming a football factory when I wasn’t looking?
LikeLike
And it would be bad for Navy and Air Force. Unless Villanova, UMass… were used to fill out the conference.
LikeLike
What a horribly run situation.
The obvious thing for a conference lacking football prestige was to go to BYU first. If they didn’t pick up the phone go straight to Boise State.
We’re talking about survival. I know Boeheim and the basketball schools would have thrown a fit over having 20 basketball members, but the Big East really needed to think outside the box in order to survive.
Total short-sightedness to the end. They had a chance to get to 12 football schools if they had just taken Boise State, UCF, and ECU (or Houston or someone like that). Boise State may be a short term phenomenon but the Big East just has to survive BCS contract to BCS contract. UCF is basically USF in Orlando. A lot of upside to being a school 4th or 5th in Florida. ECU can pack a 50k stadium and seems to pull in similar ratings to NC State against BCS-level competition.
Letting basketball considerations get in the way of saving the conference (and they were already at 17 basketball schools, what’s the difference between 17 and 20 when we’re talking about saving the conference) is a total debacle.
LikeLike
Someone has got to explain to me this fascination with Army/Navy joining a conference? Whoever said they would ‘benefit’ fromNavy joining the conference clearly is looking at the revenue from the Army/Navy/ND games. Why does anyone think after Army’s experience in C-USA that the service academies would be willing to split those profits?
LikeLike
If BYU had any interest in being a football only member in the Big East they would already be a football only member in the Big East.
LikeLike
Psst there is no USMC Academy. :p
LikeLike
Alright-US Merchant Marine Academy.
LikeLike
Trying to entice ND with Navy being a member?
LikeLike
I mean to keep them non rev sports in the Big East… came out wrong
LikeLike
It says that the Navy invite was football only so not sure how that would have helped ND.
LikeLike
Am I the only one who wishes the University of Toronto was a viable member? I doubt they’d want to come, but we should still look into working with the U15 all the same.
LikeLike
Do you live in Michigan?
Those up here seem to be all aboot this one.
LikeLike
Flint, yes.
It’s a new rival for us, a “national” rival for Notre Dame (who thinks they’re the Dallas Cowboys of CFB), and they’re both an outstanding university but also a research powerhouse. Plus the added benefits of selling our rights in Canada.
The question isn’t “do we want them”, it’s “do they want us?”
LikeLike
I knew it!
You don’t have to sell me. I’m all for it.
LikeLike
NEWSFLASH! Commissioners Bob and Doug McKenzie (of the Great White North Conference) are in beer drenched negotiations with Delany as we speak.
LikeLike
jj, you know I am too!!
make it happen Delany.
LikeLike
I hope we never have Canadian universities in I-A college football. Let the sport remain American. We are competing for national titles after all.
LikeLike
yeah, like the college World series?
LikeLike
God bless America, and no one else.
LikeLike
eric,
you know the maize and blue learned football from toronto right?
LikeLike
…and got their helmet from Princeton.
LikeLike
Actually msu invented the winged helmet. They sobered up and realized what it looked like. Google it, I’m serious.
LikeLike
Well they were all just a stock leather head gear sold by a sports company at the time (Spalding?). TSUN is just the only one that kept the design after the move to plastic helmets.
LikeLike
Per wikipedia msu was using it in 1933. It looks different as it doesn’t have the stripes, but the idea is the same.
LikeLike
I know but as I was saying they were standard that way from the company. The ‘wings’ were not decoration added by the schools.
The school that really first wore them?
Ohio State
Seriously
Indiana & I think one other school also sported them before MSU.
(I’ll hunt down a link for you)
LikeLike
They’ve already invaded Division II. Simon Frasier.
LikeLike
Yeah but that’s just 2 guys, eh?
LikeLike
If Big East is entertaining Navy, etc, I’m really thinking the Big 12 is staying together. I thought the initial move would be the football conference would essentially merge and play football under the Big 12 flag and the basketball would stay under the Big East contract flag.
I think if the Big East is reaching, they now feel that there is a good chance they can’t get a block of teams matched up with the Big 12 and they are trying to fend off having to be part of Conference USA. Ha.
The bigger question is whether this means the Big East is trying to angle to keep ND in non football sports or if it means they know that ND wants to move to the ACC and it’s left Rutgers/WVU/UConn in play which they could argue keeps the conference viable in football.
Very interesting to see how the smaller conferences are freaking out when I really feel more and more like we will still see the Pac12, Big 12, Big 10, SEC, and ACC conferences after it’s all said and done and probably only the ACC, if any of them, actually go to 16 teams.
LikeLike
I think the Big East WAS interested in doing so.
That would be a fine idea in conjunction with Army, Air Force, Texas, and Notre Dame playing partial football schedules to maintain a national presence. Independently? Not so sure.
Maybe Navy can be Penn State’s eastern partner though. It’s got the right location and would facilitate Notre Dame’s addition. One less OOC game to worry about. Navy football is about legends, while Navy itself is about leaders. Tough choice there. This paragraph is 98% tongue in cheek, btw. I don’t need 12 reasons why it doesn’t work…
LikeLike
On a separate note, any chance ESPN steps in and offers the Big 12 money equal to the Pac 12 if they can keep it together and maybe add Boise (and possibly WVU, etc)?
LikeLike
Y’all are killing my inbox. I have a hearing all day and return to my computer to find over 280 Frank the Tanks in the inbox.
Since West Virginia is such a hot topic ( and I’m not even to 11am post yet), I thought you all might enjoy this blurb from a local news service in Baton Rouge.
http://www.daily-report.com
“Apparently, West Virginia University students have a tradition of setting fires to celebrate athletic victories, and Morgantown Fire Chief Mark Caravasos believes the 16th-ranked Mountaineers have a real shot of toppling the 2nd-ranked Tigers on Saturday night. The Dominion Post reports Caravasos’ is trying to prevent the spectacle of nationally televised street fires by ordering hundreds of people to remove furniture and other flammable material from their properties. The city, which has been trying to end the victory burns for years, had posted nearly 700 notices in problematic neighborhoods as of Monday. Residents have until 8 a.m. Thursday to comply or face fines of up to $1,000. ESPN’s GameDay is visiting Morgantown for the first time ever on Saturday, with kickoff set for 7 p.m.”
LikeLike
alan,
I will hope your tigers win. Take a couch or two with you then light them and run. 😉
GameDay folks will think it was a few of the locals, just getting ahead of themselves. 🙂
LikeLike
All kinds of stuff swirling around. One report that expansion in Pac 12 will be voted on this week. And this UCLA’s ADs decidedly unenthusiastic comments on expansion:
http://thegazette.com/2011/09/20/big-12-round-the-clock-missouri-loves-company/
LikeLike
Frank’s Twitter sounds like Texas is being given an ultimatum – ditch LHN and all financial special treatment or no PAC for you. So much for the idea of the PAC surrendering to Texas, must not have anywhere near enough votes.
LikeLike
But does no Pac for UT mean no Pac for OU (and Okie State), or Texas Tech for that matter?
If I were Scott, I’d go for the jugular — invite OU/OSU/TT, then say #16 is there for Texas if it accedes to the Pac conditions, or it goes to another Big 12 member (Kansas?). Make the Board of Regents sweat out the possibility that UT could be left not as king of the hill, but king of a molehill.
LikeLike
There’s no way Texas Tech would have the votes to join without Texas. OU & OSU go to 14; Tech would be a #15 which causes a lot of logistical issues totally forgetting about everything else that makes Tech a problem from the B1G’s or ACC’s perspective.
You can’t sit at an odd number of schools in a divisional set-up once you have more than 12.
LikeLike
Inviting TT without UT is getting rid of the TT problem and increasing the chance of UT going to another major conference.
LikeLike
Not absolutely for sure, but I believe TT would trigger 4 million basic cable subscribers for the P12(1?) network.
LikeLike
Very big risk for the PAC-12. If UT says no, you have to go to 16 still I suspect a lot of PAC-12 members wouldn’t like that arrangement without UT (it might not even pay for itself). Also if they come later, you are forced up to at least 18.
LikeLike
I said a couple of weeks ago that the Pac-12 will not take the Oklahomas, let alone Texas Tech, without Texas. It just ain’t gonna happen, no matter what Redhawk says. And pods probably are necessary to make this expansion to Pac-16 work. But, how can you do pods without giving up the CCG?
LikeLike
Pods actually work out very well for a PAC-16 if you get OU and UT (big if I’m beginning to think for the first time in awhile). You have a California pods, an Oregon/Washington pod, an Arizona/Utah/Colorado pod, and a Texas/Oklahoma pod. They rotate to create new divisions every 2 years. You play every team in your division every year and 2 teams from your assigned adjacent pod. The Texas/Oklahoma and California pods are always separate (and thus so are the other two pods from each other), but will always play their out of division games against each other (as will the other two pods).
This would lead to playing every team in your pod every year, everyone else 2 out of 4 years, equal access to California/Texas from those from other regions, annual games between USC and one of Oklahoma/Texas.
Example: Let’s say you are USC and in year 1 you have the northern schools in your division. You’d play all your pod teams (California teams) and all the Oregon/Washington schools. You’d also play 2 of the Texas/Oklahoma schools (say Oklahoma and Oklahoma State). Year 2, you have the same schedule, but rotate home and away games.
In year 3, you’d have the Arizona/Colorado/Utah schools in your division instead of the Oregon/Washington schools. You’d continue to play all the California schools (your pod) and this year play the Arizona/Colorado/Utah schools as divisional opponents. As crossover games, you’d play Texas and Texas Tech. In year 4 you’d rotate home and away.
Note: I know this would be hard for fans to understand, but it’s the way pods would probably have to work.
LikeLike
Its a rather big risk depending on pods when they didn’t work the last time they were tried.
LikeLike
No reason to add Tech unless Texas is going to accept.
LikeLike
If UT won’t play along, there’s a Texas school with a strong football program, academics far superior to Texas Tech, and who just happens to be the reigning Rose Bowl Champions. They’re also known for making new friends easily.
LikeLike
Yes, but they are killer frogs to conferences!
LikeLike
They’re the Ted McGinley of college football.
LikeLike
Odessa Permian?
LikeLike
If the BE/B12 misfit merger occurs, how can anyone argue that a FB conference with
UC, UL, USF, TCU, WVU, KU, KSU,BU, ISU plus any 3 of the following (Boise, BYU, UCF, Upgraded Vill.,) is not stronger than the current 8 team BE?
LikeLike
I think they should go all the way to 14.
WEST
Iowa State
Kansas
Kansas State
Baylor
TCU
Boise State
UNLV
EAST
West Virginia
Louisville
Cincinnati
USF
UCF
Memphis
East Carolina
There’s some pretty good basketball tradition in the mix too.
LikeLike
Anyone notice PBC’s forum posts are being deleted? If you click on most of his recent posts they say the message is no longer available, leading me to believe they are being deleted by a moderator or administrator. Wonder why? He has even posted saying that they have been being deleted recently. I am not one to wear a tin foil hat, but WTF?
LikeLike
Maybe he keeps crashing the server.
LikeLike
My guess is they think he’s posting BS, but I don’t spend time on the forum.
LikeLike
Where is this forum where they eliminate the B.S.? 😉
LikeLike
Invite him here!
LikeLike
UCLA AD probably uninthusiastic about much related to FB….
LikeLike
disregard…was a quip for bullet.
LikeLike
I haven’t read all the comments yet so I don’t know if this has been proposed, but now that the ACC has taken Pitt and ‘Cuse, I would take Rutgers and Miami if I was the B10. These aren’t the home runs that PSU and UNL were, but I don’t think Texas is worth the divisiveness, and if you take those 2 schools (who I believe would jump this instant), you are set up for FSU and ND in the future–2 true kings. Plus, unlike Texas, FSU & Miami are brand names that want equal revenue sharing. Taking Rutgers not only solidifies PSU but gives the large number of B10 alums in NYC a chance to see their team. Plus, if the B10 adds Miami, FSU, and Rutgers, they’d be in 3 geographic regions; ND would not be able to find a more national conference. Academically, Rutgers is a perfect fit and the U actually is good in undergrad and is knocking on the door of the AAU already. FSU is more problematic, but they also have an upwards trajectory and are in a large population growing state. Culturally, FL (especially SFL) is pretty close to the north. The ‘Canes do have to deal with Nevin-gate, but you don’t base half-century decisions on what happens in the next few years, especially since the U actually seems to be well along the path trodded by Stanford, USC, and NYU before from rich kid backup party school to academically prestigious private school.
A BigTen plus FSU, Miami, ND, and Rutgers) wouldn’t be surpassed, no matter who the SEC adds and even if Texas goes to the Pac.
LikeLike
Why not offer FSU and Miami right now, if you’re the B1G? It really screws the ACC, which now becomes the Big East with a championship game – a basketball conference with VT and Clemson as middle of the road football powers. This firmly puts the B1G in Florida. Next round, add in Notre Dame and Texas, and you’ve hit NYC, Florida and Texas, surrounding the SEC and weakening the ACC in the process. And the ACC may feel threatened and raid more Big East teams, which accelerates ND joining.
LikeLike
Ever heard of a little thing called the Association of American Universities?
LikeLike
FSU is at least the equal of Nebraska academically/research-wise.
The U is already on the doorstep of the AAU using their own criteria.
LikeLike
I’d do that.
I think FSU is a tossup between the SEC and B10 if they decide to leave the ACC, though. While Miami would jump at a B10 invite, I’m not sure FSU would right now.
LikeLike
Notre Dame fans hate the Big Ten. It will be insufferable having them as conference mates. I really really hope they go to the ACC and get this thing over with.
LikeLike
Notre Dame fans hate the Big Ten….which is why it would be AWESOME to have them as conference mates.
LikeLike
If anyone else legitimately hoping the Big 12 survives. I hope Texas and Oklahoma stay in it and it continues. 16 team conferences don’t excite me at all (even if the process does).
LikeLike
Looks like we’re in the middle of a caulk measuring contest in the Mid-Continent.
LikeLike
Questions for the UT fans here….
If (when) OU and OSU leave for the Pac and A&M and Missouri leave for the SEC……
1) Would Texas attempt to go independent and leave it’s olympic sports in a WAC’esque composite of Big East and Big 12 leftovers?
2) Is Notre Dame heading for this WAC’esque composite also with it’s non-football athletics?
3) Would a conference made up of Iowa State’s and South Florida’s generate enough interest for ND and UT’s other sports?
LikeLike
Texas’ 2 options for football independence
1. The B1GEA2T
Big Division
Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
Texas Tech
TCU
Texas (non-football)
East Division
Notre Dame (non-football)
West Virginia
Cincinnati
Louisville
South Florida
Central Florida
(Did not make the cut: Baylor, Memphis, East Carolina, Houston, Southern Mississippi, Boise State. BYU rejected football-only membership to remain independent.)
2. The WAC
WAC West
Seattle (non-football)
Idaho
San Jose State
Utah State
Denver (non-football)
New Mexico State
WAC South
Texas (non-football)
Texas-Arlington (non-football for now)
Texas-El Paso
Texas-San Antonio
Texas State
Louisiana Tech
LikeLike
I’m beginning to suspect that you are not the real Karl Benson.
LikeLike
I’m beginning to suspect that he is. It would explain a lot.
LikeLike
lol
LikeLike
touche good sir.
LikeLike
The B1GEA2T
Big Division
Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
Texas Tech
TCU
Texas (non-football)
East Division
Notre Dame (non-football)
West Virginia
Cincinnati
Louisville
South Florida
Central Florida
Methinks the “little 10” of that group would like two more members for a football title game (since you need 12 football-playing members), so in that scenario, Baylor enters the Big and another school enters the East — heck, if Rutgers and Connecticut aren’t taken by the ACC if it chooses to hold at 14, bring them in and not Central Florida.
Oh, and no revenue from that game would go to Texas or Notre Dame, just the 12 football conference members. Could be a sweetener UT would offer in exchange for its keeping the Longhorn Network.
LikeLike
Karl, the Big 12 may need a new commissioner soon, are you interested in the job. 🙂
LikeLike
No. UT joins Pac or B1G or ACC or even SEC before staying in that and trying to go indy.
LikeLike
Texas will NEVER share revenue equally.
That means no B1G, no PAC, no ACC, and no SEC for Texas.
That also means the XII will fold. The B1GEA2T will clean off the carcass of the XII.
Texas can choose between the B1GEA2T and the WAC as non-football options.
LikeLike
I am I the only one concerned that rotel is gonna cost 10 bucks a can when this is all over?
LikeLike
LOL – That’s it you’re Facebook……. deleated.
I spent half the summer telling my wife I was glad to be rid of those crappy Ticket Express commercials, then football starts and they are still there!
LikeLike
Patrick,
To be fair, way back in March of 2010 I believe we were discussing swimming pools filled with Ro*tel as a concession.
LikeLike
That’s the championship game prize, right? A swimming pool full of Ro*tel.
In reality though the BTN is really coming along with better programs and better commercials.
In a tv perspective, if you want to know how well a network is doing, count the automotive commercials. They are typically big spenders, nationally and locally, corporate and dealer. First show I watched this season on BTN Mercedes Benz was the sponser. They are savvy advertisers, and it shows that the BTN is going to earn lots and the viewers have some cash. That is really good for the BTN.
LikeLike
Some seem to think that the money in play is limitless. I don’t. Some of the rescue plans floated have small value that only goes down as the big fish feast. If I were anyone in the beast or b12 I’d be proactive as hell right now.
Someone mentioned the tulip craze awhile back. We may well be in the middle of one.
LikeLike
If report is true about Mizzou being offered SEC slot, will B1G also make Mizzou an offer? As an Illinois and B1G fan, I feel like SEC is creeping into B1G territory and I don’t like it….
LikeLike
The B1G only wants schools that are accretive.
Mizzou does not bring enough money to the B1G to be accretive.
Georgia Tech, Florida State, and Miami also don’t bring enough tot he B1G to be accretive.
Only ND, Texas, and U$C are accretive to the B1G.
LikeLike
Dallas Cowboys to the WAC!
LikeLike
Florida State is a national brand in a huge media market and has nine-figure research funding. They would be a plenty worthwhile addition to the B1G.
The B1G presidents & researchers would also love to bring Georgia Tech to the CIC.
LikeLike
Mizzou is a great #14.
LikeLike
Mizzou is off the table. SEC now positioned in the very heart of BIG 10.
The SEC is not unlike a dagger poised to penetrate the smug and arrogant heart of
a conference headed for demographic disaster…
LikeLike
If the Midwest suffers a “demographic disaster” then I really won’t care about college football anymore. Until then, I’m happy to play Wisconsin and Ohio State.
LikeLike
Yes you where saying MikeF…
LikeLike
And Missouri is going to save us from “demographic disaster” because?
LikeLike
In life, and in conference makeup, accretive, is not, and should not be the answer!
LikeLike
Well, they’re offering Mizzou as a #14 complement to their #13 Texas A&M.
That’s a really strong combination of schools.
LikeLike
I always wanted Mizzou to be in the B1G, a shame the economics of it does not work.
LikeLike
Missouri by itself doesn’t add enough, they’d need to come with a king for the B10 to be interested; certainly Missouri + 1 of Rutgers/Syracuse/Pitt doesn’t add enough… IMO A&M is undervalued after underachieving so long is why the SEC likes those two, in the late ’90s they were near king status.
LikeLike
Missouri is trying any and everything to avoid heading to the SEC, but why? We dog on the SEC, but they’re good at being a conference. The dining room on stilts that is the Big XII can’t be preferable, unless Texas A&M really is a taking a big pay cut to play JUCO ball.
I’m guessing they’re #14 when Notre Dame comes around. They have to be, nothing else makes sense.
LikeLike
I’m not sure that I see Missouri like this. The president of Missouri is also the current head of the Big 12 presidents. He is going to try to make something work, if only to cover his own backside, then when any other schools move, he’s off like a shot to the SEC. I don’t see Mizzou trying to avoid the SEC as much as trying to make it appear that they are negotiating with the Big 12 in good faith.
LikeLike
Oklahoma, please don’t go. Okay, I tried. SEC here we come.
LikeLike
If Mizzou is in the SEC – you know those great seasons a few years back with Chase Daniels at QB, where Mizzou won 9-10 games a year and was ranked as high as number 3? In the SEC those types of seasons are gone. That is why Mizzou doesn’t want to go to the SEC, nevermind the academics, dirty recruiting and long travel. In the Big12 Mizzou was a rising football power – basically in the same second tier as Texas Tech and Ok State. In the SEC Mizzou would be only slightly above Vanderbilt and Kentucky, and a notch below A&M, SC and Ark.
LikeLike
Yeah, Missouri, avoid the SEC, despite its money and stability, for fear of looking bad in football. Place your bets on the most dysfunctional conference west of the Mississippi, or continue your Big Ten pipe dream. This has South Carolina 1971 written all over it.
A few years from now, when you’re stuck in the conference of misfit toys and continuing the Telephone Trophy game with ISU followed by trips to Baylor and Cincinnati, you’ll be kicking yourself.
LikeLike
That’s my point though. They should jump at the chance if this is real.
LikeLike
Why would ND be so averse to parking it’s non football sports in a Catholic league made up of Georgetown, St. John’s, Marquette, Providence, etc? It seems like a Catholic sports league would garner a lot of interest in basketball.
LikeLike
I don’t entirely understand that either (particularly since they’d probably expand with a few more stronger basketball schools). I think most of the logic though is outside of basketball. Notre Dame’s football obviously can pay for a lot more sports than most of the athletic departments without football so it needs a stronger conference to put a lot of sports in and doesn’t want the conference to be weak in most those sports.
LikeLike
They could, and very likely would at least initially. But IMHO such a league is going to fall off eventually, as more and more recruits will go to bigger name schools with bigger facilities and better TV deals. Eventually, I would expect to such a conference to be similar to what the A10 is today — a good mid-major, but clearly not at the top. And I don’t think that that would be an ideal place from Notre Dame’s perspective.
And, as said, it probably would be pretty mediocre in most other sports. And Notre Dame is an institution that prides itself in a quality across the board athletic department.
LikeLike
because those schools have a fairly limited number of other sports. ND’s basketball would be
alright in the speculated Catholic sports league but a lot of Notre Dame’s other sports would
be left without quality competition. And those teams and their student athletes are important
to ND. They really need their non football sports in a league with other football schools that have the resources to support a larger number of teams.
LikeLike
Notre Dame sponsors 26 varsity sports. Georgetown has 23. St. John’s has 17. Marquette has 11. Providence sponsors 19. Seton Hall 14. DePaul has 13. Starting to see the problem?
LikeLike
I for one stand corrected from the other day about the Big 12…it is still, unbelievably, breathing. But I am glad that it sounds like OK said here is the slate of what it will take for us to stay. No grudge against Texas other than athletic competition is not like monopoly. If there is no competition, then people like me don’t bother watching. competition is what makes athletics compelling. I still don’t see the Pac turning down OK and OK State if they went without UT.
LikeLike
In case noone else has posted, here is Chip Brown’s latest. Note the reference to the ND AD.
http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=126798
LikeLike
Wow, that’s an interesting set of events. Must be a part of the reason why Dodds and Swarbrick are so tight…
LikeLike
The proper OrangeBloods link:
http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1267981
The other one had all sorts of UNC-related stuff from 2002.
LikeLike
This is getting ridiculous – how many times will a conference have to go through a “last second hail mary” attempt to fix the conference before the schools themselves realize that there is something inherently unstable in the conference? Super Conferences are coming whether people like it or not, A&M is still moving to the SEC and Pitt and Syracuse are still going to the ACC.
Hopefully OU isn’t stupid enough to fall for this a SECOND time and pack their bags for the Pac.
LikeLike
If successful, do you guys think the Big 12 would stay at 9, go back to 10, or back to 12?
LikeLike
It would be cool to see them add West Virginia, Louisville (for basketball), and TCU (to replace TAMU).
LikeLike
If the Big 12 took those three and West Virginia is still open (looking more likely) then Missouri is probably gone so they’d probably add one of BYU (if they’d come), UConn, Cincinnati, or Rutgers too. That would be extremely bad for the Big East as it would leave them with at most 4 conference teams. Under those circumstances, do you think the basketball schools would even vote to add 4 new football members? Other than maybe Temple (whom Villanovia would oppose), most possible teams are outside the core of the Big East and I’m not sure the basketball schools would go for that as their link to the football schools is dropping quickly without Syracuse and Pitt.
LikeLike
If this is successful and I very highly doubt that it will be since I agree with the train of thought that this is a public relations attempt by OU image-wise, then it will go back to 10 at least.
They surely won’t stay at 9.
LikeLike
10 now, 12 in the spring
LikeLike
Wow. 500 posts in less than a day.
LikeLike
Big East has pledged to stay together? Until someone gets an offer from a conference, which they obviously can’t refuse. Why would a pledge mean anything? 5 Big East schools have left that conference within a decade, what in the world could a pledge possibly mean?
LikeLike
BREAKING Larry Scott says PAC12 WILL NOT EXPAND!
LikeLike
wilnerhotline Jon Wilner
Scott: “after careful review we have determined it’s in the best interests of our member institutions .. to remain a 12-team conference.
4 minutes ago
Jon Wilner
wilnerhotline Jon Wilner
Pac-12 announces it will NOT expand
5 minutes ago
FRANK GET A NEW POST UP PRONTOOOOO
LikeLike
I am surprised by that. Missouri is likely headed for the exits. Can’t see a Texas and OU conference hanging together in the long-term. Could be Pac12’s last chance to expand for a long time.
LikeLike
Holy shit. Boren must be pissed at Texas, but I bet Slive is going to buy them flowers.
LikeLike
Wow…did not see that comming. Powers resignation comming soon?
LikeLike
Say what? Resignation?? Texas is in no hurry, has always wanted to keep the B12 together.
LikeLike
The SEC said that too…
LikeLike
I think I actually believe this too. My guess is that OU couldn’t get the votes without UT coming along and surprised the PAC-12 by not going along. First time we’ve seen these meeting to give president authority and then not see a move follow it up if this is true. Let’s see if Oklahoma State still has there meeting. It’s tomorrow right?
LikeLike
Scott’s statement:
“After careful review we have determined that it is in the best interests of our member institutions, student-athletes and fans to remain a 12-team conference. While we have great respect for all of the institutions that have contacted us, and certain expansion proposals were financially attractive, we have a strong conference structure and culture of equality that we are committed to preserve. With new landmark TV agreements and plans to launch our innovative television networks, we are going to focus solely on these great assets, our strong heritage and the bright future in front of us.”
LikeLike
LOL I bet OU is really wishing they had just left last year…
LikeLike
I find it incredibly ironic that the Pac12 pumped the brakes on expansion. I lived in northern Cali for five years, and those folks are fiercely loyal to the region and the lifeystyle it affords its residents. We all assumed that the Pac12 wanted more east coast attention and bias…. Perhaps that assumption was wrong, and maybe the conference prefers its west coast orientation. This is in addition to Stanford and Cal saying “Hell No” to Okie State….
Wow…. Did Not See That Coming….
LikeLike
This looks like an academic revolt. Presidents & chancellors saying “enough is enough” on bringing in the substandard schools for football.
I thought something like this could happen, but I was more thinking it would be over Texas Tech’s general Techness or UT’s demands versus USC/UCLA. That they’re not even going to 14 signifies that enough of them thought that the Oklahoma pair wasn’t worth the headache even without the Texas fiasco.
LikeLike
That’s my guess too.
I think fit became a big questionmark.
LikeLike
It’s as much a revenue issue. OU and OkState are a drain. Scott needed to land Texas. Until he does, there’s no reason to add anyone.
I can’t remember when I saw it, but it was 24 hours or less that the thinking was that the Pac would take OU and Ok State and wait for Texas. I was skeptical.
LikeLike
Everyone’s been blasting the greed of the conferences and schools and the bad effect on the student-athletes. That was bound to have some effect on the academic side.
As quick as this vote happened after the OU leaks yesterday, I don’t think it was OU and UT backing off and the Pac 12 voting to save face. In addition to the academic pushback, I think they were struggling to get a deal with UT and decided OU alone wasn’t worth it. OU/OSU didn’t do anything academically for them, a Pac 14 as I have been saying was real awkward and OU/OSU didn’t add enough money to make it worth it. OSU doesn’t add anything financially to a conference with OU already in it and if OU increased the value of the Pac contract by 1/3 (probably a generous estimate), it would only mean an increase from $21 million to $24 million a year. And they probably diluted the tier 3 rights as there wouldn’t be much OU football on there and they only add a small market.
LikeLike
So are A&M and/or Missouri still going to the SEC?
LikeLike
A&M definitely, Missouri unknown.
The SEC still needs a 14th, but they might just pull out all the stops on a disgruntled and too tired to fight back Oklahoma.
LikeLike
Mr. Luck? This is Mr. Slive. About that rejection…
LikeLike
So one of two things need to happen the SEC has to drop their requirement that all B12 schools agree to not sue them and man up.
Or….
B12 teams sign the agreement not to pursue action against the B12.
Since it looks like the B12 is sticking around for a little while longer it looks either of the two are feasible.
LikeLike
Man, if I were Delaney, I’d look very hard at adding Rutgers and Oklahoma to the Big 10 right now. Rutgers gives you an East Coast travel partner for PSU, and a fertile recruiting state in New Jersey, and Oklahoma gives the conference another powerhouse program.
Then the Big 10 would be positioned to add Texas or Notre Dame down the road when superconferences inevitably emerge.
The divisions would work perfectly into an East / west breakdown
East – Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, Purdue and Indiana
West – Oklahoma, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, Northwestern
LikeLike
Oklahoma and Oklahoma State are still linked. And I suspect that OU would have the same lack of excitement for going to B1G venues by itself.
LikeLike
Oklahoma would love to be in the same division as Nebraska. It’s also used to playing in Iowa. A division comprised of Oklahoma, Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois, Northwestern, Wisconsin and Minnesota is reasonably comfortable.
LikeLike
I’m all for that.
LikeLike
OK does not come close to the academic requirements for the Big 10. If you think that the Pac-12 presidents were complaining…
LikeLike
The Pac presidents were not upset with the idea of OU, it was OU and OSU without UT.
The B1G needs to get off their high horse. It is eventually going to bite us in the butt. I can see not wanting OU and OSU but turning down OU and RU now, with UT and ND as future targets is not a good idea.
UT won the game out west by sticking to their guns and betting that OU didn’t have enough juice to get the invite on their own. This doesn’t change the fact that UT will only stay in the B12 if OU is a member. The B1G should move now with OU and RU, forcing UT to make a decision. That decision may be independence but how long do you think that would last? The B1G can afford to wait on UT and ND as long as it takes.
Add RU and OU today.
LikeLike
Yes, they should add Oklahoma, but I’m not sold on Rutgers without Notre Dame. If Oklahoma is coming in, I’d rather see Maryland as #14. Or, if Maryland passes, Missouri. Then you wait for Notre Dame and/or Texas.
LikeLike
I didn’t say RU without ND. I said add RU now with OU and get ND when they’ll join. UMD makes alot of sense too but I think that RU offers the best chance of penetration into NYC along with ND and PSU. Some people will say that ND and PSU get you as much attention in NYC as you’re going to get, I just happen to disagree. During RU’s big year, 2006 I believe, they set ratings records for NYC. You can say that that was only 1 year but RU with B1G money for continued facilities improvements and quality coaches, which the school has committed to, can become as successful as Iowa and Wiscy.
LikeLike
LOL it would be funny if Mizzou suddenly takes their SEC golden ticket and says “aite we OUT suckas!” No one puts Mizzou in a corner!
LikeLike
I think this is a temporary move. I just don’t see the Big 12 hanging together. TAMU is already in the SEC and they’re going to add a 14th and likely move to 16. The PAC could be out of options.
LikeLike
Well, hell. See y’all here this time next year?
LikeLike
So much drama. So little payoff.
LikeLike
@jj – It’s not over by a long shot, folks! Don’t forget about the other coast. The Big East could still split and there’s a ton of speculation to be had about Notre Dame until they state for the millionth time that they’re staying independent.
LikeLike
And the SEC is at 13 right now.
Something eventually has to give.
LikeLike
This year on as the Big 12 turns. We’ll see you next year.
LikeLike
I kept saying we weren’t as far along as they were last year. Last year the board meetings that got cancelled were to approve the contracts. Scott had already flown to the cities to meet with the Presidents. They didn’t have the deals done yet this time.
Still pretty surprising that OU didn’t go to the Pac after all the talk from both sides and also that UT didn’t go to Pac or B1G or somewhere other than Big 12. But after last year I kept some skepticism until the ink was dry.
Seems the OU leak was a face saving gesture, knowing the Pac vote was coming.
LikeLike
I also figured the exit fees coupled with some scheduling guarantees would be adequate to satisfy the future members of the 12East to not sue the Pac and SEC. Split 4 ways the fees add up. At the full price, it comes to $42 million per school and that doesn’t include the bb credits. The Fox contract for 12 years and ESPN for 3 total $126 million/school ($180 million if you count ESPN for 12) and they would have gotten a decent contract in the 12East, given that the BEast was going to get $11 million a year. Assuming $10 million a year, that would generate $120 million + $42 million gives you $162 million, nearly to the value of both contracts for 12 years.
LikeLike
@Zeek
Until the ink is dry applies to Big 12 reform as well. The Big 12 staying together this year is only slightly more likely than OU to the Pac 2 days ago.
LikeLike
Wow. The PAC has already voted….not to expand.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6998751/pac-12-conference-decides-expand-further
LikeLike
OOPS. Didn’t go up far enough to see someone had mentioned this. The article is good though.
LikeLike
1. PAC 12 refuses to expand.
2. B1G remains above the fray.
3. SEC denies aggy unconditional love.
4. ACC adds 2 maybe 4.
5. Big 12 fires Bebee and restructures equal revenue blah blah blah
6. ESPN starts a new regional network in Tulsa focusing primarily on collegiate sports (but perhaps also some relevant h.s. extra-curriculars) with on campus studios in Norman nd Stillwater.
7. OU and OSU enthusiastically support new Big 12 and ESPN agrees to RENEGOTIATE tv contract of the conference if they add more teams.
9. Big Eastfits join bring total membership to 15 with a nintyhundremillion dollar contract leaving a spot for….
…NotreDame to New Big 12
The first superconfrence appears, the realignment era ends and the Domer Law is realized in nine easy steps.
LikeLike
And there was dancing in the streets in Waco, Manhattan, Ames and South Bend
LikeLike
I read the Wilner article. If this is true, all the PAC assumptions are out. Of course what you hear for the next 24 hours is that UT deep sixed OK’s plans.
LikeLike
Good point. It will ALWAYS be Texas’ fault if something bad happens to someone else!
LikeLike
Honestly, OU should get their share of the blame for this one.
They totally bluffed on every with an Ace (themself) and a 4 (OSU).
The Pac-12 folded.
Texas is still holding the LHN (two aces; one for themself, one for the LHN).
And it’s just became obvious to everyone in the universe that OU is bluffing (re: Beebe, the LHN, everything, since there’s no conference that will take them and OSU).
Texas just won this round of the great game.
LikeLike
I still think Beebe is out. I just can’t imagine him surviving this.
LikeLike
see Frank’s tweet.
LikeLike
HH you have to change that Pac 16 avatar on your board now.
LikeLike
Frank
apparently 12 is the new 16
LikeLike
PeteThamelNYT Pete Thamel
Now you have to wonder how much of Oklahoma’s decision today is tied to them having a sense they would get shot down by Pac-12 presidents.
28 minutes ago
Now what for OU? They put down a big list of demands, mostly reasonable. But including firing Beebe and all that too. This is a very interesting plot twist.
LikeLike
So how long before the Oklahoma to SEC rumors start?
LikeLike
Big 12 = Ron Zook, aka “the rooster.” They just can’t die
LikeLike
So the PAC-12 is going to remain the PAC-12 and the ACC is going to 14. Umm…Who saw that one coming.
LikeLike
No one saw this all coming. What a turn of events.
LikeLike
The SWC version 2.0 is the rooster as well. Although there are some better additions out there now. The beast is mortally wounded.
LikeLike
I think Dan Beebe himself describes the events best:
“PEW PEW PEW PEW #SUCCESSLASERS #DANNYDANJUICE”
The most urgent questions: would Missouri stay in a revamped Big 12? Does the SEC “raid” the conference against their previous statements? Does Baylor still threaten to sue? How does Rick Perry keep his hair like that?
LikeLike
I think Baylor will back down if the Big 12 is going to survive almost as is. I’m not sure they’ll actually get the schools to sign those letters though.
LikeLike
If I was Mizzou I would get the hell out while I still can…
LikeLike
It’s Swofford’s master plan. Uninvite Pitt and Syracuse. Texas, Texas tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State to the ACC.
LikeLike
This is surreal, and a complete embarrassment for all involved. How could Scott and OU, let it get to this point if there wasn’t strong support for expansion with just OU/OSU? It particularly makes Scott look untrustworthy. Maybe it’s just a temporary position (ala SEC)? Or maybe OU got cold feet?
LikeLike
OU threw Beebe and Texas under the bus today with no backup plan. They’re the ones who are going to have egg on their faces tomorrow.
That PR stunt to put this all on Texas exploded.
LikeLike
Beebe will always have egg on his face.
LikeLike
My personal feeling is that Scott (and OU) badly underestimated how easy it would be to get the PAC-12 to go along with (a) adding OU & OSU, and (b) laying the groundwork to go to 16 teams and cause the pod problem for SoCal access.
If the PAC does not want to go to 16 – for a variety of reasons, i.e. who #15 & #16 are & what they want, who gets to play in SoCal etc. – then ramping up the arms race to 14 and blowing up Texas’ home in the process makes little sense.
I can come up with reasons why every school in the PAC would have voted against it. Doesn’t mean they all would have/did in this straw poll, but no school in the PAC stood to benefit. Totally different situation than telling the B1G presidents they get a CCG, higher visibility and a super TV deal in the future for Nebraska.
LikeLike
Ego. Scott wanted to build his empire and didn’t consider that college sports have some different implications than pro sports. And he was dealing with a lot of egos in the Pac who suddenly realized they were being viewed as the SEC Pacific in doing everything for money and not caring about academics and the student-athlete.
LikeLike
Note the ESPN article mentions that NCAA Prez Emmert DID have an impact in arguing against the super-conferences.
LikeLike
Oklahoma, Okie St. Missouri, aTm to the SEC is the hot topic on ESPN.
Oklahoma has been determined to upgrade their academics. I hope it’s not true
that Delany turned them down, even after they inquired about coming alone.
LikeLike
They didn’t inquire about coming alone. Big Ten didn’t turn them down.
It just won’t happen with OSU. Just like it didn’t happen with the Pac-12.
LikeLike
If B1G took Oklahoma (hey, we tried, you suck Okie State) and Missouri, would the SEC take Okie State to go with A&M?
LikeLike
Well the SEC is indicating that they only want OU, not OSU.
And even if OU/Missouri was obtainable, the Big Ten would much much much rather have the Big 12 survive than force any action anywhere. I don’t think the Big Ten wants to be the one to annihilate the landscape, so they’ll stay out of this…
Best case scenario is for everyone to stay in place until the Big Ten gets its T1/T2 rights upgraded in 2014-2015. Then the Big Ten will figure out if 14 is worth it.
But, I really don’t think OU goes anywhere without OSU so that makes it unlikely to go anywhere.
LikeLike
I have to admit I’m shocked that the ACC is the only one at 14 right now (although I assume the SEC will join them).
But I’m glad that Syracuse and Pitt ended up in a conference that makes sense for them.
Didn’t feel that way until I heard about the Big East’s attempt for Navy and Air Force…
LikeLike
Well then, you and PBC can have a cage match to see who is right because he claims they did.
When someone asked:
“PBC when you said the Big Ten said no to Oklahoma is that because of Oklahoma State or is it that they just would not offer them period.”
PBC responded
“Nothing was mentioned of Oklahoma State.”
However. Based on your all-knowing tone, I assume your a fly on the wall, so I stand corrected.
LikeLike
Boren implied what I said. Didn’t mean to write it as if it was sourced to me.
Two days ago Boren said that he had had preliminary discussions with several conferences and wasn’t rejected by any.
I’d assume today is the first rejection they’ve received.
LikeLike
Boren has just as much reason to lie about that as PBC.
LikeLike
If that’s the case — and from an SEC perspective it would make sense, because you could simply slide Auburn and Alabama over to the East — Texas loses hand (again), as does Florida State. It would also benefit the Big East remnants, because the Big 12 would diminish to six and would need to be replenished (WVU, Rutgers, Connecticut, Cincinnati, Louisville, South Florida). Alas, Texas Christian might be odd member out, even though it’s clearly the best geographic fit.
LikeLike
The case being Texas A&M, Missouri, Oklahoma and Okie State go to the SEC (and if I’m Slive, I give in and admit T. Boone Pickens U. — heck, you already have Miss State).
LikeLike
@GreatLakeState – I honestly don’t think the SEC wants to kill off the Big 12. Maybe they still try to take Mizzou, yet it’s not so easy now if the Pac-12 isn’t on the attack. Personally, I would take Oklahoma in a heartbeat if I were running the Big Ten, but only if they were coming alone. The ability for them to come alone doesn’t appear to be a viable option, though.
LikeLike
I’d bet Delany would take Oklahoma solo too. Just like Scott would add Oklahoma and OkSt to the Pac12. But neither has the votes.
LikeLike
@PeteThamelNYT: Pac-12 decision came down Scott meeting with Texas and realizing no way conference could be one of equals. So they passed
16 minutes ago
This makes it pretty clear that Texas is going to do its own thing.
LikeLike
Query: Is a King still a King if it must be accompanied by a pig?
Nebraska and Penn St. Kings flying solo.
Texas and Oklahoma. Kings with tagalongs that cause problems.
At what point does the laden down King become a mere Prince?
LikeLike
In the case of Texas, you’re assuming that Texas wanted to leave. To my annoyance, I’m thinking Texas got exactly what it wanted.
LikeLike
Texas did get exactly what it wanted.
Reading Scott’s remarks as well as the reporters covering the situation, the Pac-12 simply didn’t think that Texas would be willing to be an equal in the conference.
Then they decided that adding just OU and OSU wasn’t worth it.
LikeLike
If this deal was blown up because the PAC-12 couldn’t adjust 3rd tier media, then I’m even more firmly of the conviction that equal revenue sharing has nothing to do with conference stability. It’s often a by product of conference stability (smaller teams will vote for it knowing the bigger ones won’t leave), but we have a concrete example of a big school not coming because of it now.
LikeLike
Unless Texas was trying to sabotage the deal and call the Pac and OU bluffs, it really would have been easy to do a deal similar to USC’s if the Pac wanted to, whereby Texas would get a guarantee until Pac 16 revenue caught up. But maybe Scott overplayed his hand taking a hard line or just overestimated how much his Presidents wanted to expand and is using Texas intransigence as his excuse. Hard to tell with all the spin that happens in these situations.
Only things reasonably clear are that Pac decided OU/OSU alone wasn’t worth it and UT and Pac didn’t reach a quick settlement of the LHN issue.
LikeLike
You can also find opinions that say the Pac representative’s position on important issues may have, um, shifted unexpectedly.
LikeLike
So my initial reaction is whether the Big Zombie Conference (please credit me for that one, as I never got my credit for “Conference Realignment Armageddon” last year) will attempt to stick a fork in the Big East as a football conference by going for three (or four, depending on Mizzou) schools from the group of Louisville/Cincinnati/WVU/Rutgers/USF. (I’m assuming UConn is ACC bound or too far away to make sense anyway.)
This time last week, I wouldn’t have entertained the thought, as the Big East was projecting more stability than the Bog Zombie.
Today? All bets are off.
LikeLike
Another scenario…. WVU to the SEC with A&M.
CIncy, USF, and Lville to the Big 12/10/9/12
TCU to the WAC, I guess.
Rutgers and UConn… wait patiently for the ACC.
Although with Rutgers 3% of the NYC market, they could go independent. 🙂
LikeLike
Forgot that TCU was in the group of Big East football schools. So easy to do that. (Hi, Jake!)
LikeLike
This is TCU’s worst scenario.
LikeLike
The SEC turned down WVU this morning. It is hard to imagine them suddenly changing their minds just because the PAC stayed put. Crazier things have happened (in the last hour alone!) but I don’t see it happening.
LikeLike
Now there’s an intricate and multifaceted question: which is more stable, the Big East or the Big 12? What happens when a stoppable force meets a movable object?
LikeLike
That is outstanding.
The Big 12 is like the Black Knight in The Holy Grail. Take Colorado? Just a flesh wound. Nebraska? Tiz but a scratch. A&M? Hey… where are you going….coward!
The Big East is like a university laundering service. Spend 8 years there and you have some AQ cache for your next move. USF? Nothing in 2001. Possible Big 12 addition in 2011. Louisville? Some people think you are SEC-worthy. CIncy? Sorry, no refunds.
LikeLike
This should be the topic of Frank’s next post.
It’s obvious that OU at least would want the Big 12 back to 12 for some semblence of stability.
In a way, Frank’s description of the LHN as golden handcuffs has come to pass entirely.
OU is binded to OSU, so they’re not going anywhere either.
Take 3 others and figure out how to make it work… FWIW, I think Missouri will stay, all evidence is that they’ve helped lead the charge to keep the Big 12 intact even though they have an SEC invite under the table.
LikeLike
Has some sort of mind-altering gas descended upon the Great Plains states, so that schools that actually have some options instead decide to remain a burnt orange vassal? It seems so self-defeating, along the lines of domestic abuse victims who can’t bring themselves to leave.
Maybe Missouri is playing this to a T, thinking Slive’s fear of having to admit WVU will ultimately lead him to invite Mizzou. Or perhaps Columbia is delusional, too, dreaming of a Big Ten date that will never come.
As for Oklahoma, I swallow my pride, call Slive and say, “I’ve had enough — so have my cousins in Stillwater; you’ll like them, honest. Please take us in.”
As for the Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State and Kansas serfs, I call up the six remaining Big East football members (and Texas Christian, too) and say, “Let’s talk about getting together and finding a marriage that works. We need to liberate ourselves from the Bevo bully, and we all need a good home. (Who would you bring in as #12 for a CCG? Memphis? Houston? East Carolina? Brigham Young?)
Simply put, everyone in the Big 12 not named Texas needs to extricate themselves from this mess, and all have possible ways to do it. Who will summon up the courage to actually do so?
LikeLike
They may not have choices in all of this.
What evidence is there that the SEC wants to go to 16?
The SEC just wants to go to 14 with A&M + 1 as of right now.
Yes, Missouri is still dreaming of that Big Ten invite, but I think it makes sense for them to stick it out with the Big 12 as long as they can. Not really sure the SEC is right for them. They aren’t Arkansas.
LikeLike
Forgot to mention, the rest may have no choice. The Big East will be killed by the Big 12.
LikeLike
@zeek – One other thought – there could still be a merger between the Big 12 and Big East football schools (with the Big 12 being the ultimate destination conference). There’s 9 remaining Big 12 schools and 7 Big East schools (if you include TCU). Put them together and – voila! – we have an instant 16-school superconference! If Missouri or West Virginia end up as #14 in the SEC, the league can just plug in BYU as a replacement. Notre Dame would also probably find this to be a satisfactory home to be a non-football member and maintain independence.
The Big East Catholic schools could then stay together and keep the Big East name.
LikeLike
Okay, let’s say the A&M-less Big 12 does stick together. If the six remaining Big East schools (assuming the ACC declines to pick up Rutgers and Connecticut) plus Texas Christian come in, you have your 16. How do you divide things? The Big East emigres + TCU + Iowa State in the East, and Missouri, the Kansas duo, the Oklahoma twins and the three Big 12 Texas schools in the West?
LikeLike
Well I think they’ll just go for 12 and leave some out. Maybe they go for 16 though; no idea what’s going to happen at this point.
I just think the lure of being with Texas and OU is too strong to resist after Syracuse/Pitt broke ranks.
LikeLike
Missouri, like Texas and OU, doesn’t want to go to the SEC.
If the Big 12 holds together, it gives them a better chance to eventually go to B1G. Plus, they probably make more money.
LikeLike
Theri fans sure do. The administration does not.
LikeLike
The Western Athletic Conference would like to welcome the University of Texas at Austin as a non-football member.
===
WAC basketball divisions
WAC West
Seattle (non-football)
Idaho
San Jose State
Utah State
Denver (non-football)
New Mexico State
WAC South
Texas (non-football)
Texas-Arlington (will add FBS football by 2020)
Texas-El Paso
Texas-San Antonio
Texas State
Louisiana Tech
====
University of Texas annual football schedule
Week 1: Rice or Sun Belt Conference opponent at Austin – Longhorn Network
Week 2: Navy (at Austin or Fed Ex Field) – ESPN Networks
Week 3: PAC opponent from California (USC, UCLA, Cal, or Stanford) – ABC (at Austin), ABC or FOX (at PAC)
Week 4: WAC opponent at Austin – Longhorn Network
Week 5: Oklahoma at Fair Park in Dallas – ABC
Week 6: WAC opponent at Austin – Longhorn Network
Week 7: Notre Dame (at Austin or South Bend) – ABC (at Austin), NBC (at South Bend)
Week 8: WAC opponent at Austin – Longhorn Network
Week 9 : BYU (at Austin or Provo) – ESPN Networks
Week 10: WAC opponent at Austin – Longhorn Network
Week 11: Army (at Austin or Yankee Stadium) – ESPN Networks
Week 12: BYE
Week 13: Texas A&M – ESPN
WAC opponents: Texas-San Antonio, Texas-El Paso, Texas State, and Texas-Arlington or alternate opponent
LikeLike
Will someone please lift the needle from this record? It’s stuck.
LikeLike
It’s not even a record. Just a circle of paper with a lot of black crayon marks on it.
LikeLike
Do you have this on some sort of auto-posting schedule?
LikeLike
I’m just sitting here laughing hysterically thinking that this is the real Karl Benson sitting in a Starbucks somewhere posting this onto every website he can find in the hope that it somehow saves his conference.
LikeLike
@Frank
As Hopkins mentioned, a Big 12 raid of the Big East has to be on the table.
How could Louisville, WVU, Cincy, TCU, Rutgers, even UConn, turn down the Big 12 if Texas and OU are there.
That conference will still be getting money hand over fist. Big East’s situation is way more precarious today than it was yesterday.
LikeLike
Let’s not forget BYU, either, with OU recommiting to the Big Zombie like the good little team players they are.
LikeLike
Yes, HH, but what if BYU asks Texas, “How long to do you plan to stay in the Big 12?”
That’s a conversation stopper.
LikeLike
Big Zombie is good, but I prefer the Rasputin Conference. Everyone knows it should die but no matter how hard they try they can’t kill it.
LikeLike
Zombies are cooler, though.
LikeLike
Point take, though the dudedid kind of look like a zombie
LikeLike
@zeek – I wouldn’t doubt that at all. What’s interesting is that a month ago, I had heard rumblings about Louisville and WVU being possible targets for the Big 12. (This was when the assumption that it would only lose A&M and before the OU to the Pac-12 storyline started.) I talked to a few people from those schools and they wanted absolutely nothing to do with being a part of a Texas-run Big 12. After the latest ACC raid, though? The prospect of being a Texas worker bee looks pretty damn good right now.
LikeLike
Agreed re: that last sentiment. Wouldn’t it be odd if the ACC’s raid of the Big East led to long term stability with a survivable Big 12 (maybe with ND there as well in non-football sports)?
LikeLike
Poor Marinatto… with the Big XII imploding, he at least had a chance. Goes to a meeting. Rallies the troops. And now the Big XII is looking for a couple teams. Unreal.
I feel sorry for him now. I do.
LikeLike
He was going to add Villanova, Navy and Air Force to a BCS conference. Don’t feel sorry for him.
Maybe the BEast can upgrade their commissioner. I understand there’s one in Dallas sending out resumes.
LikeLike
“Rallies the troops”?? No, that was him just talking out of his other end as usual. He said after the meeting that the seven remaining schools committed to the conference, now multiple annoyed leaks have stated as many as three schools (WVU,UCONN, RU??) refused to do so.
LikeLike
Bold idea: The Big East seems to want a new commissioner. Dan Beebe seems like he’ll be looking for a new job.
LikeLike
For the last year, my standard reaction has been “BYU or none of the above” when asked who I think the Big Zombie should target as replacement schools.
Today? Not so sure. My initial reaction is to be aggressive in the face of a surviving a near-death experience and go for BYU/TCU/Louisville to get to 12. Or add Cincy/WVU to get to 14.
LikeLike
I’d really lean towards being aggressive. 12 or 14 makes more sense than 10 to me for the Big 12.
Texas is not going to be looking around anymore, and it’d be better for the conference if it has at least 8-10 if Texas and OU try to jump ship again.
Plus, if you do that, you can take ND on as a non-football member.
LikeLike
I’m tending to agree. Louisville’s looking a hell of a lot more attractive than they did 24 hours ago.
LikeLike
I think the old logic of TCU in the Big 12 still applies. With Texas already in there (plus Baylor and Texas Tech), they don’t really add that much and the focus should be elsewhere.
LikeLike
From a financial standpoint Louisville + 3 Texas teams is probably an upgrade over having 4 Texas teams. UL and BYU are good adds. WVU is solid, but I think the SEC comes back and apologizes. Not sure who #12 is if WVU is gone. USF and TCU seem unlikely. 14 with UL,BYU,RU,UConn,UC maybe?
LikeLike
I agree. Wouldn’t the Big 12 get their tournament credits since they are leaving as a group? If they did take those teams, that would be a pretty good basketball conference. It would also let Beebe say “See, I’m not the worst conference commissioner.” Assuming he still has a job after this.
LikeLike
Someone here earlier in the thread compared Dodds and Scott, saying his money was on Scott winning because of his Harvard degree, whereas Dodds was a track coach and an alum of Kansas State. Well, K-State just beat Harvard, though to be honest I think Berkeley and Stanford helped.
LikeLike
Good point on that. Have to say, Texas played everyone over. It’ll be interesting to see what happens next.
LikeLike
Statement from David Boren:
We were not surprised by the Pac 12′s decision to not expand at this time. Even though we had decided not to apply for membership this year, we have developed a positive relationship with the leadership of the conference and we have kept them informed of the progress we’ve been making to gain agreement from the Big 12 for changes which will make the conference more stable in the future. Conference stability has been our first goal and we look forward to achieving that goal through continued membership in the Big 12 Conference.
LikeLike
Well, he did a real good job in the 24 hours that he was empowered to make a decision.
LikeLike
Yeah. The fact this happened so shortly afterward strongly suggests the votes aren’t there.
LikeLike
This may be the most blatantly face-saving PR crap I have ever seen in my life.
LikeLike
Let’s run through our commissioners:
Swofford: Added Pitt and Syracuse. I am personally pleased, but what was the ACC rush? Not like the B1G was swooping in on either school. And if the concern was football schools leaving, not sure taking two hoops schools is going to smooth things over. But… could be worse.
Slive: Added A&M. Or wants to. But can’t because of Baylor’s power. Oh. Well, at least the SEC could get to 16 in 15 minutes. Except the ACC just upped their exit fee by 40%. OK, well… still have WVU and Missouri. Chooses Missouri. Whoops. But it could be worse.
Scott: Just got the Pac-12 a raise by adding a non-AQ and a castoff from the Big XII. The Midas Touch. Heck… he’s so good, he can take more Big XII schools. With enough time, he’d solve the Middle East. Texas and Oklahoma don’t even really hate each other. FAIL! Oh well, the Presidents support me. FAIL! Well, it could be worse.
Marinatto: Woken up from a slumber with news that Pitt and Syracuse defected. Curious as to why Navy and Villanova weren’t seen as long-term solutions. Oh well, the mascots sent by the football schools to the meeting in NY were friendly. The one that looked like a dog was cute. And they all wagged their tail at the idea of staying here forever. That’s never happened before. So he bravely announced that the Big East is stronger than ever!!!! Still… it could be worse.
Lazarus Beebe: Just hangin’ on. Somehow. OU wants him out. And they have no leverage. So I guess he’ll stay. It will be interesting to see how few schools the Big XII can get to without changing their name.
And then Delaney. He dropped the ball by not getting Missouri and Rutgers, according to some. Laughable. Last I checked, those two schools are quite available.
LikeLike
I’ll add various schools and conferences:
Big big win for Syracuse and Pitt. Without question. They secured their future today.
ACC gets a win for mortally wounding the Big East, and there was a legitimate concern that Pitt might go to the Big 12 if it survived all of this. Not saying Swofford had the foresight to get that far ahead of the game, but Pitt/Syracuse were the best options to an ACC-14. No loss to the ACC in going there. Renegotiating its deal even for just a pro-rata increase would be fine. ACC might be impenetrable now. No concern at all about schools leaving unlike just a few weeks ago.
This will lead the Big 12 to go back to 12 by raiding the Big East.
Big East is the biggest loser here. They end up facing a split up football/basketball schools as well as a Big 12 raid.
OU has a bit of egg on their face after today’s list of demands which were all a big bluff. They’re a bit of a loser here for not being able to land a Pac-14 invite at least. Not clear whether the SEC is interested in 16 to take them and OSU.
Texas is a winner here. Gets their quasi-independence back (i.e. Big 12) in the form of keeping the LHN
ND is a quasi-winner here. Big East could explode. But Texas/Big 12 might offer ND a spot for football independence (rest of sports in Big 12). That would make them a winner since the Big 12 might actually reach long term stability.
LikeLike
If the Big 12 only partially raids the Big East remnants (assume the Big 12’s current nine stays intact, leaving three vacancies), who goes in, who’s out, hanging by a thread for their BCS lives?
Set up two scenarios where it only grows to 12 — A) where Rutgers and Connecticut are part of the mix, and B) where they’re ACC-bound and off the table.
A. Rutgers, Connecticut, West Virginia
B. West Virginia, Louisville, Cincinnati
South Florida might enter via “B,” if only to get some sort of foothold in that talent-rich state, but Texas will try to keep Texas Christian out (and if it can’t, put TCU in an “opposite,” eastern-oriented division).
LikeLike
Should we not assume BYU for #10 though? BYU makes the most sense, straight up.
For #11-12 I’d go with WVU for sure along with Louisville probably? If they want 4, WVU, Cincy, Louisville, TCU in a move to 14.
Something tells me Rutgers and UConn won’t have a Big 12 spot unless they move to a Big 16.
LikeLike
Forgot USF, they’ll probably be involved somehow.
LikeLike
I’m thinking USF could be a good fit for the B1G.
LikeLike
BYU for 10 is likely, but one of West Virginia or Missouri is most likely SEC bound so either the Big 12 needs 4 to get to 12 or West Virginia isn’t an option.
LikeLike
BYU is probably announced as #10 the day the “reforms” are put in place.
LikeLike
http://byu.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1268216
BYU Rivals site says BYU will be joining the Big 12, assuming they can be “assured” of stability.
LikeLike
2 more to 12 if they want that. Who knows where this goes next.
LikeLike
David Boren said a few weeks ago that OU would feel more secure returning to 12, but after the events of the last 2 hours it’s tough to know how much leverage he will have.
LikeLike
I think everyone but Texas now wants 12. Texas will go along.
LikeLike
Brigham Young probably just put the kibosh on Texas Christian in a reconstituted Big 12; even if it has 16 members, BYU would join the current Big 12 nine and the six Big East football members that are already in that league.
In that vein, if you’re Rutgers or Connecticut, do you go with this league or still covet an ACC invite? Texas, Oklahoma and BYU for football probably have more potential appeal than North Carolina, Duke or Syracuse basketball.
LikeLike
If the rest of the Big East schools are going, you have to go. You have no choice. Can’t wait out in the wild for the ACC.
LikeLike
Yeah, but what happens if they throw on a large “you owe us $20 million if you want to leave” or other onerous condition for joining? That’s when it will get interesting. If I was the Big XII the last thing I would want is more teams leaving in the next few years. I bet they’ll try to go the ACC route and put major penalties in place.
LikeLike
Rutgers would take any offer they got. They already played the game when they turned down original Big East membership (sticking with Penn St and the dream of an eastern football conference) and cost their sports programs 10-15 years in the wilderness.
LikeLike
I can see some or all of those schools accepting a Big 12 invitation out of desperation, but unless Texas and Oklahoma play nice, they’d just be jumping from a burning house to a snake pit. I feel bad for all involved; this whole realignment mess has benefitted some (NE, CO, Pitt, Syracuse), but seems to have made life worse for most (maybe even for Texas). I’m sure glad Nebraska got an early call.
LikeLike
At the risk of looking like a jackass in a week, it’s worth reiterating that we aren’t done yet. There is still a mess in Providence, TAMU, Pitt and Syracuse have to find exit strategies, the SEC needs to find a 14th and the Big XII has some “issues” to work through.
LikeLike
I’d think a lot of us would agree we’re nowhere near done yet.
Even if BYU goes to the Big 12, do they stay at 10? Why not go for 12 or 14 which allows for a CCG and might be a stronger conference with the Big East schools in tow.
Would ND come along for non-football?
You’re also right that the Big East basketball schools and SEC’s #14 are also huge issues.
Lot’s left to this drama.
LikeLike
If the Big 12 future is indeed secure and there’s less of an inclination for lawsuits, Slive still might pick off MIssouri, putting pressure on Texas to let TCU join the party.
LikeLike
And then there is the big question of divisions. ACC divisions at 14 actually look pretty nice to set-up. Big 12 divisions if they go to 12 though are much harder to figure out.
LikeLike
Most likely OU and UT stay together. That means BYU has to go in a northern division. Someone like Louisville gets put in the South.
The alternative is the Big 6 in the north with BYU/TX schools and 2 eastern schools in the south.
Its awkward, but its just for football. They gave up divisions in bb.
LikeLike
@GreatLakeState
(SEC or Big Ten options at all?)
“Well, I wouldn’t comment on that. If I told you, I’d have to kill you. (speaking to Dean Blevins; Berry Tramel heard advocating this in background) You’re too good of a person for me to have to want to do that. I think we’ve had options. It’s pretty well known we had options last year.
(Pac-12 say to back off? Academic stuff? Just OU/OSU?)
“No one has given us any words of discouragement on any front. No conference. Nor has the Big 12 given us any words of discouragement, either.
———————
From Boren’s chat earlier with Henry of the Oklahoman (I think).
Who are you going to go with, Boren or PBC. Look, I get that OU might have some egg on their faces after that bluff today got exposed by the Pac-12. PBC has sources, but he also has his own agenda. I’ll take Boren’s word over PBC. No reason to believe that OU has been rejected by anyone other than the Pac-12.
LikeLike
If the Big 12 survives and the remaining Big East football schools join the Big 12, would the new Big 12 offer Notre Dame the same partial membership the Big East did? It was rumored that DeLoss Dodds offered Swarbrick this deal last year, but I’m not sure if Texas will have the same kind of power in a merged Big 12/Big East that they had previously. For instance, I can’t imagine Beebe lasting long on the job now that OU wants him gone.
LikeLike
It seemed like Dodds offered ND a full spot in the Big 12, which ND wasn’t interested in…
However, what you’re referencing is probably that Dodds mentioned offhandedly that the Big 12 might consider a similar non-football style relationship with ND at some point.
That might be coming soon if the Big East schools move to the Big 12.
LikeLike
Right, this was back before the Big Ten added Nebraska, and everyone expected them to destroy the Big East. Notre Dame would have been left without a conference for its non-revenue sports, and I think Dodds made some assurances to ND that they could stay independent in football.
LikeLike
Yes, I believe that this will finally come to pass in the new Big 12 after it absorbs some Big East schools.
LikeLike
http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1267981
Huge information out of Chip Brown:
“I’ve been told Texas and Oklahoma officials will get together in the next week to iron out differences and pledge to at least a five-year commitment in the Big 12.
The Longhorns, who had been hoping the Big 12 could stay alive from the beginning, got the news early Tuesday from Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott that he didn’t have the votes to expand.
Sources told Orangebloods.com at least six Pac-12 presidents opposed further expansion, and Larry Scott needed nine of 12 votes to approve any new additions.”
LikeLike
At least 6? Stanford, Cal, Colorado, Utah, Arizona, Arizona State, and UCLA against it?
Only USC + the 4 Washington/Oregon schools for it, is my guess. Mainly because it gets Washington/Oregon schools more games in South California if you go to a Pac-16. USC seems like it’d favor going East for exposure.
Not sure whether this is for a Pac-16 or Pac-14 though. Seems like those ones against it would definitely be against a Pac-14 if it meant less South California or in the case of the first two (academics problems).
LikeLike
WSU might have gotten the shaft in a Pac 14, so while they may have liked 16, they might have opposed 14.
LikeLike
My final linked tweet for the night:
PeteThamelNYT Pete Thamel
My final thought for the night is that I’ll be STUNNED, after talking to 3 people today, if Mizzou ends up in SEC.
LikeLike
As a Nebraska fan, chalk us up as winners right now. Not involved in the ridiculous drama of the Big Zombie Conference (all rights for name to HH). Don’t have to deal with the now completely unstoppable force that is UT and the LHN (could be showing HS games by end of the month). Looking forward to playing football against the new conference mates.
Now just waiting for UT and LHN to use some of that new-found super power to reel aTm back into the fold. The wailing and gnashing of teeth from College Station will be biblical. (Sorry, Aggies.)
LikeLike
I think we’re launching LHN2 and LHN Classic this week, Red.
LikeLike
I’m waiting for LHN the Magazine…
LikeLike
Well played, sir.
What do you think the odds of aTm actually getting out of the conference are? And how about OU getting any of their “demands” met?
LikeLike
I think people have missed the story re: ACC move to 14.
The story is not ACC moves to kill the Big East but rather the Big East has finally ruptured. It is true that conference realignment is in the air, but what happened here was the key Big East football schools have finally given up on the conference. None of this a surprise. The writing was on the wall when Marinatto was elected Big East commissioner, continuing the dominance of the basketball schools. The strategic plan to strengthen the (football) conference, built around promoting Villanova to D-1, was designed to improve the conference only somewhat, so as to not challenge the control of the conference by the basketball schools. TCU was a good move but after that — nothing. This was by design. Pitt and Syracuse quit the Big East — the ACC did not poach, notwithstanding the fact this move fits ACC’s strategic needs in this stage of conference instability.
Nobody saw it coming because we were all thinking in terms of proactive moves by the stable conferences. It is more than a little interesting that all of the moves so far have been by schools that were unhappy to profoundly unhappy with their conference. So far, realignment has been driven mostly by schools leaving dysfunctional conferences (Big 12 and Big East) rather than being solicited by the desirable conferences. Of course, there is still the bouncer at the door — certain unhappy schools are not member-worthy ( cf WVU).
It will be very interesting to see WBWD now that PAC has rejected OU etc. Assuming Texas is not hep to revenue sharing, has OU already decided to go to the SEC (assuming an OU/OSU package)? Would OU join forces with the rest of the Big 12 to force equal revenue even that means Texas leaves? There would be schools interested in a Big 12 sans Texas that still had the OK schools and Missouri. I doubt the Big East heals itself. Things are terribly broken.
LikeLike
Look up to a few hours ago, the problem was the Big East’s strategy of returning to football prominence was to #1 get TCU (so far so good). Next, to not disturb the number of basketball schools (because heaven forbid we have 20 basketball schools in a conference when we’re already at 17), they tried to get Villanova up to FBS. The football schools weren’t biting.
The next strategy apparently (new info today) was to get Navy and Air Force as football-only schools.
Are you kidding me? On what planet would Navy and Air Force be able to restore respectability to the Big East’s football ranks. They’re military academies. It doesn’t even make sense for either side to consider this in an attempt to fix the Big East’s lack of football power.
After that, Pitt/Syracuse decided enough was enough and Pitt (with Rutgers) pulled the plug on the $11M ESPN offer. Both jumped to the ACC.
The Big East had a chance to survive this. They had to force the basketball schools to accept 20 schools in the basketball conference and go for some combination of 3 of Boise State, UCF, ECU, Houston among others.
They were fiddling with the deck chairs while the Pac-12 was considering Texas/OU, and while the SEC was considering A&M. It was obvious that they weren’t making any attempt to try to even rationally keep up with the other conferences, so Pitt/Syracuse ran.
Now, the Big 12 is reformed at 9, possibly with BYU at 10. They’re likely to go to 12 or 14 (or maybe 16) for a semblance of stability. Say hello to Louisville, WVU, Cincinnati, and USF or TCU or Rutgers or UConn.
LikeLike
Zeek… did you see Boeheim’s comment about ND nixing the $1B offer?
http://blog.syracuse.com/orangebasketball/2011/09/jim_boeheim_blames_syracuses_d.html
A: With the state the Big East has been in and the fact that certain schools and Notre Dame’s one of them that voted down the football contract, we’d probably be in the Big East right now if it wasn’t for that. But now they’re crying about us leaving. They shouldn’t have even voted on the football contract because they’re not even in it.’’
Q: To clarify, you’re talking about Notre Dame’s Father Jenkins being on the committee.
A: “Yeah. I don’t know why that is. Why would he have a say on the football contract when they don’t participate in it? If they really wanted to keep the Big East together they would have come in in football, then we wouldn’t be talking about this.
LikeLike
Ah, didn’t realize that. Well, I’d only seen the reports that it was Pitt and Rutgers that pushed against the contract. Didn’t realize that ND had a vote on the football contract…
LikeLike
Boeheim said this on Pardon The Interruption yesterday also, although I don’t think
he named names (ND) outright, but the inference was clear.
LikeLike
The article someone posted the other day was interesting in that the ACC did it as a defensive move. Their biggest concern was that they would be locked out of good candidates if Pitt went to the Big 12. So the SEC and Pac convinced the ACC to expand.
LikeLike
Yeah, that’s a good point.
LikeLike
The one thing that seems to have been more or less missed on this board is the ACC’s motivations, perhaps due to Frank’s confusing post on the subject. It seems pretty clear to me that the ACC was/is very concerned about being raided.
Sequence of events:
1. FSU forms committee on realignment.
2. ACC raises exit fees.
3. ACC invites Pitt/Cuse
1&2 happened more or less concurrently.
ACC expansion had nothing to do with Notre Dame or Texas, imo. Someone reposted a Pitt insider’s take earlier that said as much and Coach K alluded to it, saying they might lose a few teams. All this leads me to believe that they had legitimate reason to fear, and the SEC/FSU chatter will heat up in the coming days/weeks.
In light of this, the interesting nugget of the past few days is that Mizzou has an SEC invite. If true, the SEC could very well be gunning for 16.
LikeLike
btw, I have really been enjoying kirk bohls’ twitter throughout the Pac16 talks:
kbohls kbohls
Thank God Texas and OU decided to do what’s best for the student-athlete. Oh, right.
49 minutes ago
LikeLike
If the SEC could get to 14 by adding FSU and A&M, they wouldn’t go to 16 by adding Missouri and WVU.
LikeLike
If this tweet above:
“Big 12 schools told BE schools on Tuesday that they didn’t want a merger”
is true, seven schools (including Texas Christian, if it’s not a Big 12 candidate) are in major difficulty. Are they doomed to remain with Marinatto, perhaps adding East Carolina and a few other members of dubious value?
The ACC now has them behind the 8-ball, particularly Rutgers and Connecticut.
LikeLike
Of course, they didn’t want a merger.
And now that they have Texas and OU back (and Ponzi Beebe firmly in command), they’ll raid the Big East and offer ND a spot for non-football sports.
I have to believe that the Big 12 brass will view it as imperative that they get back to 12-14 for some semblence of stability as well as a CCG.
That means BYU and 2-4 of the Big East schools will get spots.
LikeLike
Here’s an interesting question, if Louisville is looking for a new home in the conference shuffling, how does that impact their AD revenue and, specially, the new KFC Yum Center?
The Big East allows Louisville to sell alcohol at its games, which obviously produces revenue in itself but also means that alcohol companies also pay for advertising at Louisville games. If UofL were to join a conference where the sale of alcohol at athletic events is forbidden, how much does their revenue suffer? The alcohol sales would seem to be a big part of their payment plan for the new arena, and I know they top the basketball revenue charts solely because of that revenue.
Interesting dilemma for the Cards, for more than just the obvious problems facing both them and their Big East brethren.
LikeLike
Yep. Good day to invest in flask futures.
LikeLike
I thought the NCAA banned alcohol sales within 100 yards of any NCAA event. It’s why the Coors Event Center in Boulder quit selling alcohol years ago.
LikeLike
West Virginia started selling beer this year, to help curb drinking. Seriously.
I believe the alcohol ban covers NCAA championships only (exceptions exist for club levels and suites, which is why you can buy drinks at the College World Series). Schools can sell alcohol if they choose. I thought Colorado stopped selling beer due to behavior problems, but I could be wrong.
LikeLike
I believe beer is sold at SU games at the Carrier Dome.
LikeLike
If the Big 12 decides to go to 16, their best option my be something like this:
Pods
Atlantic:
UConn
Rutgers
WVU
Louisville
Plains:
Missouri
Iowa State
Kansas
Kansas State
Western:
Oklahoma
OSU
BYU
Air Force
Texan:
Texas
Texas Tech
Baylor
TCU
LikeLike
My best guess at how it will sort out:
Big 14
Uconn/Rutgers/Louisvlle/Missouri/Iowa State/Kansas/KSU
Texas/Texas Tech/Baylor/TCU/Oklahoma/Oklahoma State
Notre Dame – Independent in Football, Big 14 in other sports
SEC 14
Texas A&M/LSU/Arkansas/Ole Miss/MSU/Alabama/Auburn
West Virginia/Kentucky/Tennessee/Vandy/South Carolina/Georgia/Florida
ACC 14
Syracuse/Boston College/Maryland/North Carolina State/Wake Forest/Clemson/Florida S
Pitt/Virginia/Virginia Tech/North Carolina/Duke/Georgia Tech/Miami
Pac 12
Washington/Washington State/Oregon/Oregon State/Stanford/Cal
Colorado/Utah/Arizona/Arizona State/UCLA/USC
B1G 12
Nebraska/Michigan/Michigan State/Iowa/Northwestern/Minnesota
Ohio State/Wisconisn/Penn State/Illinois/Purdue/Indiana
USF and Cincinatti back to CUSA
LikeLike
+BYU in the Big 14 Southwest
LikeLike
So under your scenario, instead of Baylor and Iowa State losing at musical chairs, it will be Cincinnati and South Florida. (If Florida State was picked off by the SEC, USF could certainly plug into FSU’s ACC slot. And if Brigham Young was insistent no alcohol be sold at conference events, Cincinnati might get a Big 12 nod over UL, which possibly then could find a home at the SEC should it go to 16.)
LikeLike
Mentioned earlier by post but yes, Kirk Bohls at the Austin American Statesman newspaper provides pretty accurate reporting. Read today’s article, that the Pac basically was exhausted with the whole expansion thing and tired of negotiating.
LikeLike
“the Austin American Statesman newspaper provides pretty accurate reporting”
weren’t they reporting a couple of days ago that Scott was making concessions on the revenue model and it was just a matter of days?
LikeLike
That might have been Chip Brown more than the A-AS.
Wilner has been shooting that down though consistently saying that there’s been no headway between Texas and the Pac-12 at any point.
LikeLike
Seems to me that the Big 12 needs a Larry Scott-type of commissioner: a consensus-builder. The Pac-10 was not a particularly united conference prior to Scott’s arrival, with USC and UCLA commanding an unequal amount of revenue and influence. Now, Washington State, Oregon State, and, by 2014, Utah all will get the same amount of revenue as USC, Washington, Cal, and UCLA. With the exception a few whining USC fans who fail to realize that the newfound strength of the conference is from its equality, the result is that everyone in the league is very happy.
In no successful conference does any single member carry such a disproportionate level of influence on policy to the point that members want to leave. Granted, Colorado wanted to leave not because of Texas; rather, they left because a west coast league was its more natural home. But Nebraska might have stayed had it not been for Texas’ persuasion of Tech, Oklahoma, Ok. State, and A&M to flirt with the Pac-10. A&M certainly would have stayed had it not been for Texas’ influence and the Longhorn network. A strong commissioner would keep the Longhorns’ power in check and keep the Longhorns happy all at the same time.
LikeLike
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/andy_staples/09/21/pac.12.realignment/
Looks like OU/OSU are stuck unless they try and finangle a deal to head to the Big East as Pitt/Syracuse replacements (IMHO unlikely) or manage to swing the SEC invite (can’t see why they wouldn’t be offered).
Now there’s a thought…SEC picks up TAMU, Ok, OkSt, and Mizzou(hope not)/WVU (sorry, still just don’t see FSU leaving the ACC). Texas is left with the Big12 which basically means “AQ independence”.
LikeLike
You know, once I think about it though…I really expect the SEC to continue to push for TAMU and stop at 14 with WVU. FSU will stay in the ACC (which sits at 14) and Mizzou will stick with the (more) depleted Big12 with Texas and Oklahoma. The Baylor’s of the world will allow TAMU to leave since Texas is staying (because OK is staying).
The Big East / Big12 probably add a midling school or two off the usual list (then again maybe Boise finally gets a nod) to get their numbers back up, but in the end we finish up this year with two 14 team conferences (ACC, SEC), two 12 team (Pac, B1G), and the “leftovers” are left to simmer for another year.
However, I expect the same type of conference conversations to be happening again next year…
LikeLike
The SEC won’t offer them because OSU is extreme financial dilution. They are West Virginia in the Big 12 – no TV value and no institutional academic value. They are married to Oklahoma but Oklahoma is not an imperative for the SEC. The SEC has excellent national distribution as-is with their CBS deal and plenty of dominant football programs.
LikeLike
Agreed, I think the problem here is OSU has no landing spot outside of the Pac-16 and the Big 12.
LikeLike
The National Collegiate Hockey Conference did NOT add Notre Dame with its two new additions.
http://www.uscho.com/2011/09/21/report-western-michigan-st-cloud-state-to-nchc/
LikeLike
What do you guys think the odds are that the Big 12 doesn’t expand past 10? I know that seems to be the assumption, but it might be difficult to find members who add more value than they take at that point (especially if we are going to more equal revenue sharing) and division issues are pretty big with two kings who want to remain in the same division.
LikeLike
I think the idea is that 12 adds stability. Its easier to absorb the loss of 1 or 2 (as long as those aren’t UT or OU). The championship game adds enough to pay for 1 school even if the two adds were UTSA and Texas State.
I’m pretty certain they get back to the Big 12 even if its slightly dilutive. In any event, they will all be making more when the ESPN contract comes up shortly.
BYU this week or early next. They may sit back until spring when they have more time to run through the scenarios for #11 and #12 and they have a chance to get some sleep. But then again, the whole BE is probably flying down to Dallas this week with their applications, so it may be quicker.
LikeLike
Agreed; the semblance of stability is important.
The CCG will help cover a lot of the costs of adding 2. Getting back to 12 is imperative in my mind. Being at 10 isn’t really that great an idea when you’re in a world with several 12-14 team conferences.
LikeLike
I think for UT/OK it is a wise move. A CCG hurt the B12 in the past with respect to getting 2 teams into the BCS.
LikeLike
Actually it helped get two teams in the BCS more than it hurt. It sometimes knocked teams out of the championship game.
LikeLike
Well, maybe add BYU, Louisville, Cincy. But, traveling out to the east coast for vollyball an swimming and such from BYU or UT/OU would take its toll.
I think you are right that they would be happy at 10 if the TV dollars didn’t add up for adding Cincy, UL or WV. And to be honest, those schools add basketball value but not much football (sorry WV).
It’ll be intersting what concessions UT will have to make with the LHN for OU. Big drama there.
LikeLike
I take back my pity for Marinatto. Last night’s comments were about taking people at their word, etc.
NO… today’s era is about actions, not words. Make the football schools pledge to stay–double the exit fee or leave. Where are they going to go? You’ve got the leverage, use it.
Then, locking in the 7 football schools, you have a solid foundation to build on. And if any school refuses to sign–pretty good indication that you should not be taking their word.
Heck, most conferences should periodically bind themselves more. The ACC’s exit fee raise should be revisited every few years. The B1G media rights assignment–same thing. Rolling 25 year assignment. If you’re in, you’re in.
LikeLike
For Jake
via @Dave_Matter
Heard this from Big 12 school official: If Big 12 can survive, league needs to get Texas to change mind on letting in TCU.
LikeLike
I think Texas could spin a TCU addition to its favor. “We lost A&M, but we are getting TCU–the only other Texas team to make a BCS appearance in the past ___ years. If TCU could be successful with limited resources, we are confident that TCU can do wonders with the resources that A&M had while in the Big XII. We look forward to an exciting in-state rivalry.”
LikeLike
Just throwing this out there. Would a TCU/Notre Dame combination be enticing for ND to join the ACC?
Divisions:
A: ND, BC, Pitt, Syracuse, Va Tech, Maryland, Virginia, Miami
C: TCU, GT, Clemson, FSU, NC 4.
Heck, you could swap Miami and TCU too. Regardless, ND and TCU could play their games in the Jerry Dome. ND and Carolina in Charlotte. ND and GTU in Atlanta. In fact, if TCU was a protected rivalry, they would always get Texas visibility.
Add USC to the West, Navy, and Michigan. What is more national than that for ND?
ND and TCU would placate FSU. The ACC would keep up with the SEC in having a Texas footprint.
LikeLike
I don’t really understand why the non-Texas schools would want TCU so badly. What do they add that BYU or someone else doesn’t? Is there a desire to get back to 12, but not expand into the Big East?
LikeLike
I should have said current Big East. I know TCU is heading there next year.
LikeLike
Why not add both BYU and TCU? What’s the downside? And if they added Boise St. too, you are looking at quite the football conference again. The three biggest football non-AQ powers, all at once.
Regardless, forcing Texas to not be happy for once would probably make some schools happy. Plus, if Texas makes a ton of $$$ on LHN and leaves somehow, they still have a solid core to build around too.
LikeLike
Very interesting development, in part because some parties have extended themselves assuming that the Pac16 was going to happen, but it didn’t, and now we’ve seen their cards.
–Oklahoma clearly wanted out, made a bunch of threats about what it would take to bring them back to the B12, but now they have almost no leverage. Why should Texas cave on the LHN stuff now? Where is Oklahoma going to go as a credible threat? Now that the B12 is in reconciliation mode, does this cut off the Sooners’ ability to start their own network? They seem like the biggest losers here by far.
–The SEC must have felt pretty confident about Mizzou, but now do they have to go back to WV after the Mountineers have already been rebuffed? I can’t see the SEC staying at 13 for the long-term, so there should be some intrigue here.
–As for B12 expansion, I can’t see them going beyond 12 because the money won’t be there. Adding BYU is a no-brainer.
–The Big East is not out of the woods. Both the ACC and B12 could come calling for the likes of UConn, Rutgers, LVille, etc. If either of these conferences makes a move, the BE is in real trouble, which brings me to . . .
–Notre Dame, which has to be sweating this a bit. The loss of Syracuse and Pittsburgh was a big blow to the BE, but if it can hang on without further losses, Notre Dame probably stays in the BE. If the conference is gutted, it creates a real problem. We’ve already heard that it would be unlikely for ND to park its non-football programs in a Catholic league, but at least such a league would fit the school’s image and geographical desires. If there’s no BE, then it does raise the question whether B12 non-football status is available (I think it would be), but the geography of it is awful for the Domers’ east coast identity. Another option is the ACC, but would they bring in the Irish as a non-football member? If the only non-football option is the B12, would ND go with that over finally biting the bullet and joining a more prestigious and geographically friendly conference (ACC or B10) for all sports?
LikeLike
Big winner: A&M. OU stays and Baylor won’t sue.
Big loser: Baylor’s lawyers and their billable hours.
LikeLike
Oklahoma to Texas “Stop treating us like a kept mistress.”
Texas to Oklahoma “We’ll do whatever we want. You have nowhere to go.”
LikeLike
OU to UT: We’re going to the PAC-12 and you have no choice, but to follow.
UT to OU: We’re not going.
OU to UT: Nuts
LikeLike
Texas played OU like a fiddle. OU was making noise about leaving to the PAC with or without UT and next thing you know Texas appears to be on the PAC bus with OU. But Texas must have known its unequal revenue plan would never fly in the PAC “culture of equality”.
Machiavellian Texas appears to be accommodating OU while simultaneously scuttling the deal, stopping the OU (and OSU) exodus, and retaining their beloved LHN. Additionally Texas effectively removed any leverage OU has.
LikeLike
I don’t think there was ever going to be a deal without Texas. Scott was good, but he is never going to get the votes for less California access (especially southern California) if it wasn’t at least made up for with big exposure in Texas.
LikeLike
Lots of U of Houston support though too. That’s quite a fight if BYU does not join. Big 12 leaders already talked/talking to BYU, not anyone else. If BYU thing falls through, then you have a good fight between Uof H and TCU. U of H is big…38,000 and has a ton of legislative support. U of H could play at Reliant stadium if they wanted too. TCU small, but successfull. Crummy small stadium, but strong Dallas support. Interesting side battle there.
Big 12 will leave Big East orphans alone because ND is running that show. They need a league to park their non-football sports and will work to keep the BE alive in some form. Can’t belive they turned down a BILLION dollar offer to join BE in football. Arrogance….
LikeLike
TCU is rebuilding their stadium I thought. Should be pretty nice when it’s done. I recall hearing something about the Camden Yards of Texas or something like that.
LikeLike
@zeek – Indeed, it’s about halfway finished. Should look pretty slick when it’s done. I don’t know about this Camden Yards of college football thing, though. It’s an art deco style, doesn’t look much like any ballpark I’ve seen. Supposed to seat around 43,000 when it’s done, with ample standing room and the ability to expand well beyond 50,000 “at a moment’s notice,” if the press releases are to be believed. And if we have a really big game, there’s a pretty decent stadium about 20 miles away in Arlington. I think they played some kind of bowl there back in February.
Here’s a link to the latest on the stadium:
http://gofrogs.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/082911aad.html
Houston’s advantages are entirely political; it’s a state school with some friends in Austin (the capitol, not the 40 acres). Yeah, it’s big, but it’s also a commuter school with pretty poor fan support. But they are fun to watch. They keep talking about building a new stadium to replace that former high school stadium they’re in, but I haven’t heard much about moving dirt.
LikeLike
Notre Dame apparently voted to turn down that deal. While I understand the not kicking ND out part, I don’t understand the ND having a vote on football matters part.
LikeLike
Wasn’t the deal for all the sports though? Did they vote on the basketball and football parts separately or just turn down the whole thing?
LikeLike
Did someone say WV was #179 in the US News ratings? I think the SEC is looking at A@M in the 60s or so and wanting a better academic match. So they have a problem right now. If I was the ACC I wouldn’t go to 16 with Rutgers and U CONN at present, as it might put FSU, Va Tech, or Clemson in play………
LikeLike
ACC’s best play is to stay at 14 and protect its flanks. FSU and co. were all on board with the addition of Pitt/Syracuse as it removed its main competitor…
LikeLike
Wilner
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2011/09/21/did-the-pac-12-risk-its-future-by-not-expanding/
If the collegiate athletic landscape were static, then passing on OU would have minimal impact on the future. But we all know the Big Ten and SEC will grow in the next few years.
You get a chance to grab a program of OU’s caliber, you have to take it — not for today but for 10 or 20 years down the road.
Instead, the Pac-12 took a pass because the CEOs are content with where the league stands right now. They’re content with the money and the TV network and the structure … the whole shebang, really.
You know what? They were content in a decade ago, too, and look what happened.
LikeLike
If I’m Scott, I let Nevada and UNLV know that they need to up their academic and athletic profile. If they ever want to expand their best choices are the Nevada schools, Hawaii, and New Mexico.
LikeLike
So, in other words, they should have had the foresight to cut a deal on LHN today if they want to think decades down the road.
LikeLike
I don’t think he meant that. He is saying Texas will never be an option because it isn’t a fit in their “culture of equality.”
The first issue is whether the conference should have bowed to Texas’ revenue demands and cut a special deal with the Longhorns.
The answer is no — no, no, no.
LikeLike
Well he’s talking about OU with respect to leaving OU on the table…
I think Texas is too much like ND to be worked into one of the 4 conferences. With Texas, you just sit back and wait for them to come to you wanting equality.
There’s really no other play you can make on Texas.
LikeLike
I really don’t see it that way.
When I compare his thoughts (i.e. Pac-12 possible thoughts re: future) to what Mr.SEC is saying and what we’re saying about the Big Ten, there just aren’t that many viable candidates for expansion.
I think OU would rather be with Texas in the Big 12 than be in the SEC.
I don’t think the SEC has great options behind Texas A&M to be #14, let alone #15-16 if the ACC is secure and OU/Texas agree to stay in the Big 12.
Big Ten has no expansion options other than ND or some play on the ACC. But ND has no reason to join a conference and the ACC seems to be really secure.
So why would the Pac-12 fall behind this time? They finally have a network that will allow their payouts to grow over time (like the BTN). Maybe it won’t be as successful or it’ll be more successful, but I don’t see why the Big Ten and SEC would go to 16.
It’s a huge leap to make that assumption given how this has all played out.
5 conferences of 12-14 may be a long-term solution when all is said and done…
LikeLike
My cynical mind says there’s more politics to this than anything. The PAC doesn’t ALL OF A SUDDEN change course and decide not to offer OU/oSu the day after Ken Starr goes to Capitol Hill to lobby on behalf of Baylor, just because. It appears that Mizzou’s SEC offer was more or less contingent on OU/oSu going to PAC so to minimize the SEC’s liability for destroying the Big XII. But this all comes back to BU’s flimsy legal argument against the SEC. If the Big Ten can take NU, PAC can can CU & Utah, and ACC can take SU & Pitt, then how on God’s green earth can BU stand in the way of A&M (and therefore MU) going to the SEC. I guess the thinking is that BU’s going to “let” A&M go to SEC if UT & OU opt to keep the Big XII together via no PAC option. But this thing ain’t sticking together long. Total cluster-F.
LikeLike
‘flimsy’ is an interesting word choice. is the sec calling that legal argument ‘flimsy’?
LikeLike
Those West Coast politicians and Ken Starr are strange bedfellows. I am not buying that.
Pods don’t work when the members of three pods all NEED to play the members of one pod (the Cal pod). You just can’t make that work in football. And if you can’t make divisions work any better for those schools, that’s problem #1. Factor in LHN, OSU, and Tech issues… and this was easily a “why are we doing this again?” situation.
LikeLike
By this, I mean that all the Cal schools need to play each other, and the Oregon, Washington, Arizona, and new two do also. The Texas/Oklahoma block does not NEED to play the Cal schools.
LikeLike
Seems like a shot at OU/Boren,
1-over end of last week/weekend OU/OkSU looked like they were in the Pac.
2-In what seemed like a political cover move OU makes demands of UT to save Big 12-2-1 (moves not necessary if you are in fact gone)
.
3-Pac responds by abruptly cutting most of the negotiating power OU had out from under them.
Reasonong? Perhaps the Pac is happy at 12 and just did that not think or caring how the announcement, and its timing, would effect OU.
Or, OU changed the conditions, required UT to come along. Power play was going to try to force some (but not all) concessions from UT, hoping the Pac would relent. Non starter.
Or, OU was using the Pac all along as leverage with UT.
Conclusion: either the Pac is very poor at managing relations outside the conference, or this was a very direct, damaging and public rebuke of a very highly regarded program intended to send a message, and reduce OU’s power (welcome to Bevo conference, version 3.1)
LikeLike
I think it’s more like the Pac-12 schools made it clear to Scott that they had enough of these shenanigans with trying to cut a deal with Texas and with OU and Texas squabbling.
I don’t think this was in Scott’s hands or the people in charge of PR.
The Pac-12 presidents made it clear they wouldn’t take OU/OSU alone because they didn’t like 14 for whatever reason (scheduling, conference divisions, academics, etc.). They wanted either 16 with Texas as an equal or they wanted 12.
They already knew that the LHN was a non-starter. Wilner’s been saying for days that Texas and the Pac-12 have gotten nowhere on the LHN negotiations (regardless of what Chip Brown has said).
If anyone managed this poorly, it’s OU. They took shots at everyone through an “unnamed source” to the Oklahoman, and the Pac-12 decided it didn’t want anything to do with the OU/Texas shootout.
That’s when the Pac-12 decided to shut down this process. It had gotten way too public, and there was too much acrimony between OU and Texas. They were going to get caught in the crosshairs and the Pac-16 didn’t look viable at all because Texas made it clear it wouldn’t be an equal in the Pac-16. So they shut the entire process down.
LikeLike
Zeek:
I diasgree. Through several leaks last week it was made clear that the Ok’s alone would be ok. A bit of schedualing issues keep a King and his squire out? I think not. If you want UT what better position could you aspire to (unless you are the B1G and “ND says we’re in if UT is too”).
But you are right, OU messed the chance up. Had they just started the process of leaving, and followed it quietly through, a Pac14 could have been a temporary (and stronger) holding point. I think the Pac, while percieved as being not quite as strong a conference athletically, may have dodged a future Bevo superfund project. Don’t have a cost projection on that.
LikeLike
You are exactly right and that is why the ‘pod’ system was always a loser for the PAC. More so than for any other potential 16 team conference.
LikeLike
I’m not sure the Pac 12 changed their mind at all. I think OU was told “maybe” and heard “yes.” I’ve always been suspicious of the OU/OSU to the Pac12 rumors since all of them were coming out of OK and TX and none of them seemed be coming from sources based in California.
Last year they were told “yes” because the Pac 12 felt they needed the Big12 schools for a conference network and a big TV contract. Since they got those things without them, there was no need to repeat the offer.
I think the interest in the Pac 12 was always more one-sided than people made it out to be.
LikeLike
(btw, I can finally post now after catching up through the 200+ emails from the site)
One thing I never understood during the PAC-OU dalliance was where the money would come from. Would the new PAC mega-deal be broken open for re-negotiation? That didn’t seem likely. I doubt the PACTN would have been able to use the additional inventory/better games to pay for two new mouths, although it may have made a big dent.
PAC-14 never made sense other than a way to entice Texas to the PAC, and we saw how well the LHN to PAC “negotiations” worked. Finally, the PAC-14 as a long term grouping never made sense.
I’ve said a few times that I didn’t foresee huge changes, since so many people, institutions and more people were involved. The last couple weeks, I appeared to be incorrect. I’m glad that the inability of people to get along has killed another huge landscape shift.
LikeLike
That article is silly. The SEC will expand to 14 because 13 just doesn’t work for them, but the B1G has no interest and would not be more accommodating of the Oklahoma & Texas schools than the PAC wasn’t.
Texas being stubborn as hell about the LHN and unequal revenue distribution makes them a non-candidate for any other conference if the PAC has concluded that is unacceptable. If the ACC goes to pooled media rights – and they’d be nuts not to, since they have to defend against B1G or SEC interest – that’s the end of Texas’ destinations. With Texas & Oklahoma locked in to the Big 12, there is a limit on how much expansion can happen because they will still be able to build a conference around that, even if it stinks.
The entities that have a bad scenario here are honestly Texas & Oklahoma, because this is probably their last opportunity to negotiate from a position of strength. If Missouri leaves at some point – a ND pair with the B1G or to the SEC as a #14 or #16 – they have absolutely nowhere to go. None of the other four major conferences want Little Brother (the PAC was the last option there, and they seem closed for business), and it doesn’t seem that any of them will accept Texas’ financial demands.
The PAC & B1G will probably stand at 12. The SEC will stand at 14. The ACC will probably stay at 14 for now as well, since no one else is pushing 16 & 16 works the least for the ACC financially of any of those conferences. The Big East is irrelevant & will either split between FB & BB schools and/or lose AQ status when the Big 12 raids for replacements/the SEC takes West Virginia as 14.
I think Texas & Oklahoma will have to keep the Big 12 alive for lack of other options.
LikeLike
With the Pac12 turning down expansion for the moment, all those people who thought Texas had put themselves in a box with the LHN now must realize that Texas is more powerful and dominate then ever. It’s clear that no matter how alluring Oklahoma was, with Oklahoma State chained to them, nobody wants them straight up without Texas. From this point forward, Texas can do anything it wants with the LHN because Oklahoma simply has nowhere to go because of their “State” problem. Who cares if Missouri bolts for the SEC. If Texas wants to, they can be absolute pricks in any of these reconciliation meetings the Big 12 intends on having. All they have to say when someone objects is “STFU, what are you going to do about it.”
LikeLike
That’s not really a position of strength. The Big 12 isn’t a financially viable major conference without Missouri. Nothing the Big 12 can realistically bring in can plug the hole of Missouri leaving. Texas is big but its not THAT big and the Big 12 population base would shrink up to Texas, Oklahoma & Kansas. That is BY FAR the smallest TV footprint of any of the major conferences and would warrant a deal appropriate to that size.
You have two marquee names, one more reliably good team (OSU) and no population centers outside the state of Texas. That’s not strong, that’s weak.
LikeLike
If I were DeLoss Dodds, I will now shoot for the moon and require the XII to turn over 51% of its football and basketball Tier 1 and Tier 2 TV rights fees to the University of Texas at Austin as a condition to keep Texas in the XII.
Will Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Texas Tech, and Baylor have the huevos to expel the University of Texas at Austin from the XII, knowing full well that the BIG EAST or the WAC will be willing to take Texas as a non-football member at Texas’ terms?
I don’t think so.
LikeLike
Yeah. I’d like to see someone come up with a viable schedule of who Texas could possibly play as a WACko member, where they would play, and what network would broadcast.
Tongue-in-cheek for the sarcastically challenged.
LikeLike
I am sure we will see said schedule again, and again, and again thanks to KB.
LikeLike
hey, is there anything in the known universe that is colder than a two-day-old comment on college football realignment?
LikeLike
Can someone explain to me what the value of Notre Dame as a non-football member is to the ACC or any other conference? ND basketball is nothing special compared to the ACC, and hockey would still be separate. What am I missing?
LikeLike
The value is if they agree to play some games with you in football and if they enhance the quality of your bowl bids.
Since most of us suspect that it will be the Big 12 raiding the Big East soon to move back up to 12 and possibly to 14, there is a reason to believe that adding ND’s non-football sports will help bring stability to that conference. Maybe it won’t, but it might work.
LikeLike
so you’re saying ther’s a chance?
LikeLike
The value to the Big 12 is that they don’t go to the B1G or ACC and that expansion deb-stabilizes the Big 12 again.
The value is less to the ACC, but its the same point.
There is no value to Pac, SEC or B1G.
To the BE, they are the best all-around athletic program, in addition to the fact that if they went anywhere, one of the BE fb schools would likely go with them.
LikeLike
To the extent that the football schools in the ACC (FSU/Clemson) think that Va Tech is not enough to anchor the north (which seems foolish considering that Va Tech has been so much more consistently good of late), adding ND would restore some power to the North side of the equation and show a devotion to football. That has a huge value in keeping the ACC together and preventing an SEC raid.
LikeLike
They were #18 in the Director’s Cup standings last year……they have a strong overall athletic dept….and yhey’ve got so much $ it’s getting better all the time–witness the new 5000 seat hockey arena…
LikeLike
Question for you lawyers out there: If the Big East holds Pitt to its exit window and exit fees, are they effectively still in play until they join the ACC. What happens if within the exit window B1G decides to invite Pitt and ND? Does Pitt have any additional liability to the ACC? Conversely, what happens if the ACC tells Pitt they “reconsidered” during the exit window?
LikeLike
Depends on what the contracts reached to date say. They might cover this contingency in the preliminary documents already signed.
Anyone can break any contract. If you have a contractual obligation to work for someone for $50,000… but someone else offers you $1,000,000… you can always just breach your first contract and use your excess money to pay the damages of the party breached. If you hired someone for $80,000 to do your first job and they did so adequately–aren’t you still better off? And if the person you worked for can replace you for $50,000 and no other damages… there is not much they can do. It sucks, but they didn’t suffer damages.
That is why many contracts try to set out what the damages will be in the event of a breach. And even those clauses can be challenged.
If we assume no spelled out penalties, then it is a matter of calculating the damages to Syracuse and Pitt. Syracuse and Pitt went on a huge limb in leaving the Big East. They would be able to blackboard a lot of damages (difference in $$$), plus the corresponding lack of prestige. If they were forced to go to the Mac because the Big East had disbanded, the damages would be even greater than if they had a nicer landing spot. Of course, if they landed in the B1G, they might not have any damages at all. But how likely is that. I think the ACC turning them down would be far too ugly to be worth it.
However, if the B1G offered Pitt. what are the ACC”s damages? If they could replace Pitt with UConn, it is less clear that the ACC would actually be damaged. Maybe, maybe not. I just don’t know how it would all play out.
I just have to expect that there is some preliminary agreement in place to determine how this all plays out. Too many lawyers for this to be left to chance.
LikeLike
Mr SEC on Missouri
http://www.mrsec.com/2011/09/mizzou-site-reports-mu-to-sec-is-dead/
The folks at PowerMizzou.com — the Rivals site covering Missouri — are reporting behind their paywall that according to a source at Texas A&M, Missouri will no be getting an formal or informal invitation from the SEC any longer.
Also, the site states:
“The SEC talked to (Oklahoma president) David Boren late last night about the possibility of MU, OU, and OSU going to the SEC. That was rebuffed. OU is staying in the Big 12.”
also
We have been told that SEC officials were not happy with the very loud leak that was sprung in Columbia yesterday. The SEC conducts its business stealthily. Missouri obviously cannot (especially considering last year’s nonsense with the Big Ten).
LikeLike
So OU turned down the SEC in a package deal with OSU and Missouri? Not too surprised by that I guess.
Would have made sense for the SEC for sure if they could have pulled that off…
LikeLike
Oklahoma may still end up there some day…..this screw-up with the SEC probably hasn’t gone down well with the Oklahoma faithful….Boren has probably lost some credibility….won’t happen when he’s still the president, but wouldn’t surprise me when he’s gone……
As far as the SEC being pissed with MO…….that sounds like 90% bullshit with everything else that’s going on…….
LikeLike
Kind of like the SEC BS that they haven’t been interfering with the Big 12 TV contract.
Pretty clear Baylor has a slam dunk win on that point.
Its that the SEC caused the damages would still be the hard part to prove. Although if the MU/OSU/OU deal went through that might be easier as everyone would be leaving for one place.
Is Mr SEC still spouting the party line that the SEC really doesn’t want to hurt any other conference and that they are nice guys?
LikeLike
Actually, zeek, I read it the other way: the SEC turned down OU, oSu, and MU as a package.
LikeLike
That’s fair; I doubt it really matters either way.
The question now, who’s #14?
LikeLike
How long was the B1G at 11? And there’s arguably more incentive to go from 11 to 12 (CCG) than from 13 to 14. I think the SEC will wait for a Nebraska-esque #14.
LikeLike
Boggles my mind that OU and Missouri would turn down the option to head to the SEC so they can further empower UT.
Perhaps they enjoy their dominant relationship with Kansas, KSU, ISU, and Baylor more than they dislike their submissive relationship to UT.
LikeLike
So for the second year in a row the inability of parties associated with Missouri to keep their mouths shut has very likely hurt their chances to join a new conference.
Loose lips people!
LikeLike
Mr SEC on Florida St.
http://www.mrsec.com/2011/09/fsu-negotiated-down-the-accs-new-exit-fee/
1. The SEC has to know that FSU would be the grand “get.” Like Oklahoma, Texas, Nebraska or Penn State, Florida State is one of the top brands in college sports. The Noles would increase ratings across the board no matter who they were playing. Networks would like that.
2. Florida State knows that it would probably make more money in a 14-school SEC with Texas A&M than in a 14-school ACC with Syracuse and Pitt. Now, if the ACC lands Notre Dame, Texas or the Pittsburgh Steelers, yeah, all bets are off. But if FSU is the 14th school in a league, it would be wealthier in a 14-school SEC than a 14-school ACC.
3. We know that FSU has announced and then un-announced the formation of an expansion committee. Why even consider an expansion committee if leaving the ACC were not an option?
4. We know that FSU helped keep the new ACC exit fee from going higher.
5. Add it all up and… hell if I know.
Haggard and FSU have been so far all over the board that it’s impossible to get a read on their thoughts. And from afar it seems as though Haggard just likes to see his words in print. Who knows if his back-and-forth ramblings are to be taken as gospel or not?
LikeLike
With two new members, does that change the vote on raising exit fees? Let’s say a super-majority of >75% is required to raise the exit fee.
Maybe it was 9-3 for $30M. But 12-0 for $20M.
But suppose the league votes again right away with 2 new members. Now it is 11-3 for going to $30M.
LikeLike
In other words, does an exit fee vote have to be unanimous? Just wondering.
LikeLike
I imagine Pitt and Syracuse won’t get a vote until they actually join the ACC. Just like Nebraska didn’t get a vote (they were consulted) in B1G matters until 7/1/11.
LikeLike
That’s not the best way to do it though.
I think the ACC will go the Big Ten/Pac-12 route towards assignment of rights. I don’t know if that’d be too sensitive for FSU to consider, but if you really want to lock in schools, that’s the only way. Take their TV rights for the next X years.
LikeLike
Here is the thing. I believe that the B1G and Pac assigned their rights to the networks, not the conferences. The ACC does not have a network.
While you can vote to raise exit fees, you cannot vote to make a contractual assignment. Each school has to do that on its own.
LikeLike
Naw, it’s a grant of all TV rights to the conference, not the networks. The Pac-12 already assigned their TV rights to the Pac-12 when Scott became commissioner.
The Big Ten did so starting in the 80s way before it even had these TV deals and the rest.
LikeLike
EXCUSE,
BIG rights are assigned to the conference office first. The conference office then decides where to assign them based on a variety of factors.
London
LikeLike
The Big 10 assigned their rights back in 1988 so the conference definitely owns them. Not sure about the PAC
LikeLike
‘The chairman of FSU’s board of trustees, Andy Haggard, told WarChant.com — the Rivals site covering FSU — that school president Eric Barron worked hard to make sure the league’s new exit penalty didn’t go even higher:
“There was talk of a $34 million penalty and it was at $16 (million). Eric made some outstanding comments to the committee, to the ACC to explain this and that and did a great job for us. He brought that (penalty) down. He and I think Maryland and another school, they all had a problem with it being that much and brought it down to $20 (million) which is only an increase of four (million).”’
Can we get some comments out of vp19 about this?
FSU and Maryland and a 3rd school opposed raising it beyond $20M? That’s interesting. I mean it’s like a wisp of smoke at this point, but I don’t get why Maryland is involved in that unless they still want an exit route to the Big Ten if they ever need it. I really don’t get what other option Maryland would have should the SEC raid the ACC.
LikeLike
Wow. Unless the Maryland vote was based on… look… we need partners to the North before we can fully commit. So maybe the addition of Pitt and Syracuse is to appease Maryland, who voiced their lack of commitment to the 12-team ACC.
LikeLike
Maryland would join the B1G in about 10 minutes if they received a call. They ARE a B1G school except located on the East Coast – 40k students, AAU, half-a-billion in research funding, top undergraduate academics, Top 50 global ranking. The only more B1G-ish school in the ACC is UNC (which IS essentially Wisconsin) and UNC is unpoachable because its their conference and they are wedded to NC State.
If the B1G actually gets predatory as opposed to just waiting for unhappy superstar schools, Maryland would be a lead-pipe certainty as a target. It doesn’t surprise me at all that Maryland wants to keep that as an option.
LikeLike
Couldn’t have put it better, Peter. Maryland wants to keep its options open, and while I don’t think any Big Ten invite is imminent, you never know.
A question: Should Florida State defect to the ACC, should the conference pick up South Florida as a replacement? Or, in the event it stays as 14, take either Rutgers or Connecticut (I prefer Rutgers, as many ACC fans want to isolate UConn after the 2003 lawsuit, Calhoun’s recruiting tactics, etc.).
LikeLike
And ND is an ACC school except it’s located in the MW.
That exception is a very big one. Geography and history/tradition are routinely underrated by the robber barons on this board.
60-70% of the Maryland fan base would not want to be in the BIG. That’s a big hurdle to overcome for those who do….
LikeLike
If FSU defects, wouldn’t Maryland put in a call to Delany? I mean you never know what any of these schools want (including FSU which as Mr.SEC says, has been all over the place on this).
ACC might just end up at 12 anyways if 2 leave…
LikeLike
It’s plenty telling that Maryland is a founding member of the ACC and still feels that it is not in its institutional best interest to raise the exit fee to the point where it would be prohibitive. They feel they can move somewhere else; that’s the only reason to do that. They are probably thinking B1G or SEC as possibilities, in that order of preference. The academic side of them would be dragging H-A-R-D for the B1G over the SEC due to the research sharing agreement. SEC has nothing comparable.
The SEC is probably more realistic for the very big reason that the B1G has never attacked a conference. The SEC is willing to do that.
Florida State is impossible to read. They’re apparently driving ACC strengthening, but at the same time are among the least attached to it and have an obvious ability to exit. The SEC is obvious but the B1G isn’t unthinkable down the line. They want to get where the B1G is at academically VERY badly (read their 2005 strategic plan).
LikeLike
Peter, what would the SEC want with Maryland (and vice versa)? UMd may be the one ACC member that would be an even worse cultural fit than North Carolina.
LikeLike
Its a geographic balance and a good media market where the SEC currently has no direct presence. Culturally, it’s not a good fit at all but neither is Missouri. Virginia Tech would be a better fit but is impossible politically (tied to Virginia, Virginia is ACC till death).
Both Maryland & Missouri are round-out schools for the SEC. I don’t think its a great fit at all for Maryland, but Maryland going to the B1G instead, barring ACC collapse, would be a first for the B1G. They didn’t raid anyone for PSU or Nebraska. Nebraska quit for very well known reasons as the Big 12 was imploding (including the PAC-16 offer) and approached the B1G.
I just see the SEC poaching Maryland as more likely than the B1G poaching anything. It’s more slim-versus-none than any degree of likely.
LikeLike
Peter. The B10 wouldn’t have to raid. If FSU leaves the ACC (for either the SEC or B10), I’m certain that Miami would dearly want to get in to the B10 (actually, I think just a phone call would get them in now). I don’t think UMD would need any persuasion either.
I think that Miami + Rutgers/UMD to the B10 is both feasible and sensible. Then the B10 could wait for ND and/or Texas for 15/16 (one of FSU/BC/GTech if only one of them comes).
LikeLike
The SEC is in a really interesting spot in this.
WVU or Louisville would be dilutive to the TV contracts and would each fall below the median in the SEC for academic prestige.
Can they really yank someone from the ACC?
LikeLike
I love how all this self-annointed prognosticators in the media, each one determined to be Mr. Know-it-all, have now been relegated to ‘bad-guessing geek’ status. Primary among these are Dodd at CBS Staples at Sports Illustrated and of course Wlner. Each has made an air-tight statement that the PAC 16 was a done deal– and each now has a back-tracking excuse making, ‘I-knew-it-all-along’ post up. Wilner’s is particularly funny. “What I REALLY meant, when I said Scott could get the votes was…..
The fact is, only a handful of people have any clue what is really going on, and they aren’t talking.
‘anonymous’ inside sources almost always are pushing an agenda, yet it feeds the beast and so their words are reported as fact. ‘Notre Dame prefers the ACC to the BIG ten’ being the latest example from ESPN.
LikeLike
Anything that ESPN says about the ACC has to be taken with a grain of salt considering that they own all the TV rights. Of course, that’s their preferred destination for everybody.
With Dodd and the rest of the clowns, you can really only take that as what their sources are telling them.
Honestly, I think Scott’s people told Wilner that he could get the votes together to get OU/OSU to a Pac-14 or cut a deal with Texas to get to a Pac-16.
Then he went to the presidents, and they totally shot it down. A lot of us suspected that it would be really hard for the Pac-12 schools (especially USC and UCLA) to agree to some kind of “more equal” status for Texas, considering those schools all agreed to give that up.
I think a lot of people overreached here. Especially OU and Larry Scott.
The Pac-12 presidents decided they only wanted all 4 or none of them whether on academics grounds or scheduling or California recruiting or whatever, and Scott realized it was a dead deal.
As bullet mentioned, Scott has presented himself as an empire builder the past few years. The Pac-12 board shut it down.
LikeLike
I certainly do question that ND to ACC post by Andy Katz….
Don’t follow the guy personally, but he’s said to be an ACC homer who is close to Brey, the ND coach. Brey has been known to not think much of the BIG. If Brey is his single unnamed source for that story, it might well say more about Katz than about ND.
It does appear as if most journalistic standards have been erased in this reallignment saga. These guys are looking for headlines and know most people have very short memories….
The one media type who I’ve come to trust is the reporter out of Chicago with the BIG connections–Greenlee???or Greenfield?? I can’t recall his name because he’s not posting a new rumor every other day, but when he does write I think he’s accurate and has good sources….
LikeLike
mushroomgod,
the Trib guy is Teddy Greenstein. I agree that he is pretty good.
Andy Katz is good with hoops, but it seems that any time he attempts to do anything other than straight hoops, he is out of his league.
LikeLike
That would be odd for Katz to be an ACC homer, since he is a Wisconsin alumn. I think it’s more that anyone working for ESPN has to stick to the party line. It seems that working at ESPN is akin to living in North Korea.
LikeLike
ESPN has some very bad blood with the B1G & the BTN, and conversely a very cozy relationship with the ACC. They’re not at all that objective.
LikeLike
That hasn’t stopped them from hammering Syracuse and Pitt.
LikeLike
ESPN talks out of both sides of their mouths at all times.
LikeLike
Right. Right. Right. Right and right.
LikeLike
To put everything in Duffman’s analysis:
The Big 12 prey survived (for now at least) attacks on 3 sides from 3 predator conferences because:
a) One only wanted prime cuts and those remaining members of the herd stayed far away;
b) One was big, ugly and smelly and it scared most of the herd away before it could feast; and
c) One was a little weak and feared over-extending itself when it faced the largest of the prey which had very long horns.
LikeLike
This board has been on a roll since vp19/M’s comments about Texas and chess.
LikeLike
I can’t stop laughing!
LikeLike
Frank mentioned the canary in the coal mine as ND’s hockey team conference home. The NCHC, which was expecting to accept W. Michigan and ND as the 7th and 8th members extended invites to W. Mich and St. Cloud State, leaving Hockey East and the B1G hockey conference as the only logical homes left for ND hockey. It was fully expected that ND would announce intentions for the NCHC in August, this is a significant development.
LikeLike
Or independence. That has been mentioned for their hockey team too.
LikeLike
I don’t thiink it means anything independence, as Eric suggests. Also, I think they still have a week or two left to accept the offer??
I’m going to say something now that will put me at odds with a lot of other BIG fans.
This BIG-ND stuff is getting very tiring to me…I’m tired of both sides being so stubborn….This hockey business is a perfect example…ND should be playing in the BIG league but won’t because of the football independence issue……
So I propose the BIG surrender and let ND join in all sports other than football. The BIG should recognize the unique history of BT football vis’-a-vis’ ND….ND’s olympic sports teams are very good and would bring a lot to the actual COMPETITION on the field….which is suppossed to be what this is all about. And student travel times would be much reduced for the ND kids.
And you know what…..after 15-20 years of that ND would join the BIG ….. IF it was then in their best interests….
So Big Jim…..add Rutgers and MO….add ND in all but football…..and tell the other leagues “we’re done boys, let us know when it’s all over”….
LikeLike
I don’t disagree with letting in ND in all sports but football. I do have a problem with giving ND a B1G bowl spot. I prefer B1G teams to play in B1G bowls. I would only want this to happen if ND plays tOSU, PSU, MU, and Neb on a regular/rotating basis.
One plus would be preventing espn/abc from airing ND games. Once B1G signs a new TV contract, if they sign with Fox or NBC, then espn/abc would be frozen out of ND games.
LikeLike
I couldn’t agree more. That is a much better option than giving them a special exemption as a full member. The BTN would still benefit greatly.
LikeLike
I agree the bowls would be seperate….at least the Rose….
ND could agree to play 4 or 5 BIG teams/year in football
ND would keep the NBD contract; BIG would keep the BTN
ND would be in the CIC
Has some advantages for BIG, ND, and CF as a whole….(assuming RUT and MO added as well)
—-ND’s status wouldn’t be an issue for next 2o years
BT would benefit from ND in the Olympic sports-re BTN. Plus the BIG presidents would be out of the college reallignment discussions–they’d like that as they have universities to run…
BIG would be out of the expansion market so other conferences would have a degree of certainty
LikeLike
Given the way ESPN is interfering in the college football world, I like your last point a lot….
LikeLike
The BIG should recognize the unique history of BT football vis’-a-vis’ ND
Then Notre Dame should recognize the unique history of Big Ten athletics vis’-a-vis’ everything. The Big Ten’s history of complete cooperation is every bit as “unique” as Notre Dame’s football independence. The Big Ten was the first conference to assign media rights, the only conference to share gate revenue and the only conference to running a fully integrated academic consortium.
The Big Ten is the oldest conference in the country by decades has NEVER given any school special treatment and that is every bit as important to the Big Ten’s identity as independence is to Notre Dame’s.
LikeLike
See above comments….
The alternative is talking about this crap for another 20 years. I’d like to see this resolved before I die, if possible….
I don’t think this makes OSU or Michigan less unique…..there are just different histories…
LikeLike
I don’t know about you, but I for one don’t think stopping the “talking about this crap for 20 years” is worth sacrificing the integrity of the conference.
LikeLike
I don’t know if it’s accurate to say that the Big Ten has never given any school special treatment. Ever since Penn State joined, at least 1 league team has had to sit idle each week of the league schedule. But I can’t remember any of the “kings” being forced to take their idle week as the first week of the league schedule and then play 8 straight league games without a break. (Contrast with Purdue 2011, which has it arguably even worse; they have this weekend off (Non-Conference Week 4 for everybody else), then they get a rivalry game against Notre Dame while everybody else is playing Conference Week 1, and after that they get 8 straight league games). The league has tolerated Michigan’s refusal to play night games at any point during the season for a long time, even though that would (presumably?) allow for some marginal increase in the rights fees for the league (i.e., allowing the networks the option of putting Michigan’s home games in prime time would potentially increase what they’re willing to pay for the rights).
These small favors don’t really offend me; the league treats everybody the same where it counts, which is with the money. But the assertion seems over broad to me.
LikeLike
The alternative is talking about this crap for another 20 years.
That’s better than spending the next 20 years yelling about how unfair it is that Notre Dame gets a special deal and they need to either join for football or be thrown out. Trust me, the current debate is better than that.
LikeLike
No special treatment, except that Michigan gets to pick all the referees.
LikeLike
ND will go indy in ice hockey.
Why?
1. No need for road trips to Lowell or Merrimack.
2. No need for road trips to Colorado Springs, Grand Forks, or Duluth.
3. No need for road trips to Alaska.
By going indy, ND can cherry-pick to put together a national schedule at major ports of call ( BC, BU, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Omaha, Denver) without having to play at backwater locations (Merrimack, Lowell, Vermont, Alaska, Colorado Springs, Grand Forks, Duluth, etc.)
LikeLike
And
4. Because, aside from the University of Chicago in the CIC, the Big Ten is an all-or-nothing conference.
LikeLike
Karl Benson, why are you posting about ND hockey?
I think you are getting your multiple site logins confused.
LikeLike
The WAC just added University of Denver. They’ve already got one hockey team.
LikeLike
ND hockey can avoid backwater locations just as much as ND football never has to play Tulsa or Western Michigan.
LikeLike
Yes, but in hockey the backwater locations are often the best teams, with the most supportive/passionate fans.
LikeLike
GreatLakeState, I was being facetious. ND already plays Tulsa and Western Michigan in football.
LikeLike
ND played Tulsa and Western Michigan at South Bend, not on the road.
ND will be willing to play Merrimack, Lowell, Anchorage, etc. at South Bend, but not on the road.
LikeLike
Uh, you do realize how well ND draws at home in hockey, don’t you?
ND is _not_ a power in hockey. Plus, once conference play starts, who exactly is ND going to play in hockey besides UAH?
LikeLike
Well, I had a feeling yesterday that all of this talk would be, in general, a whole lot of nothing and it looks more and more like that is the case.
Clearly, the Big 12 will stay in place. I even think the Big East stays in place. However, here are my big questions going forward:
1) Is BYU really thinking of changing? Much like Notre Dame, they can tailor their schedule to make them look like a top 10-20 program. In the Big 12, they will just be another team and would lose an identity they could thrive in.
2) Did ESPN get involved? I would have to think conversations were had where the ESPN brass maybe said, “We are not changing anything under any circumstances”. By playing hardball, they made the LHN toxic keeping a full conference so instead of paying 20M/yr on Iowa St v Cincinnati games, they keep all the big boys together and get their investment back.
3) Are we now looking at 6 12-14 team conferences? A really good way to avoid anti-trust discussions in congress is to get more teams in AQ conferences.
4) The biggest and only question here: Will the Big East make it?!?
LikeLike
ND has a top 8 clause for the BCS. (And really wouldn’t need it since they’d be taken if they were that high anyways).
BYU doesn’t. BYU’s BCS access is the same as Navy or Army; Top 2 for BCS NC.
That’s the main difference there. In actuality, ND can easily get a BCS bid off the strength of its name brand and getting butts into seats, etc. BYU even ranked 3-6 isn’t a lock at all for an at-large bid.
LikeLike
From Yahoo http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ap-big12-texas
‘AUSTIN, Texas (AP)—University of Texas President William Powers said Wednesday that creating stability is the top priority for the Big 12 and suggested Texas is open to a new revenue-sharing model.
A day after the Pac-12 said it had no plans to add any Big 12 members, Powers said one way to build stability is to restructure media contracts and Texas will work toward that.
“There are methods of doing that, including the way media deals are structured and we’ll be working with our partners in the Big 12 and our media partners to structure something that has stability,” Powers told reporters at the state Capitol.
When pressed on the prospect of revenue sharing, Powers said: “We are open to every idea … We’ve never said that’s off the table.”’
LikeLike
Everything but this…
via @mikefinger DeLoss Dodds says B12 will share first and second tier TV rights equally but sharing third-tier (LHN) in non-negotiable.
LikeLike
“I don’t think our network is in play,” Dodds said. “Our network is our network. Anybody can do one. If somebody thinks something is wrong with our network, and thinks it’s hurting the conference, we would absolutely address it.”
LikeLike
Did BYU accept an invitation to the Big 12, thus bringing them back to 10?
Are we still waiting to see if OU and Texas work out their differences.
Personally, if they are looking to go back to 12, I’d try and add South Florida and Central Florida. Adding both would provide a footprint in talent rich Florida, increase the amount of games played in Florida yearly (which could help recruiting there), plus provide instant arch rivals for those 2 schools. I realize that neither would off-set the lose of aTm, but I don’t really think there is any school out there that would do that.
LikeLike
One thing to think about. How much more attention have people been paying to BYU since it became an independent. I feel I’ve heard a lot more about them than I ever did with them in the Mountain West (not just on TV, but in general). I think that says something about the value of independence that is often missed. That said, I still think they head to the Big 12.
LikeLike
Eric, have you actually been hearing more coverage of BYU, or does it just seem that way since you hang out on the Internet’s Conference Realignment hub?
I haven’t noticed much more coverage of them by ESPN or in general.
LikeLike
It does, but BYU was like a mini-ND with their own network apparatus and built-in fanbase distributed across the West (and other parts of the country).
Really hard to replicate that. And to keep it going would require a large amount of success (i.e. getting to the BCS).
LikeLike
East Carolina has applied to Big East:
http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/story/2011-09-21/mountain-west-would-keep-tcu-east-carolina-applies-for-big-east
BE looking at Navy, Air Force, Temple, UCF, Memphis and Houston, the Times reported.
I heard Navy was seriously considering until Pitt and Syracuse left, now not interested. Air Force? Huh? Temple…OK. UCF…OK….Memphis….worst footbal program in US….Houston….OK….maybe.
LikeLike
Dodds interview. I think the last paragraph is a little of the reason the Pac 12 decided to be 12.
http://blog.chron.com/longhorns/2011/09/ut-athletic-director-says-big-12-will-survive/
LikeLike
There’s been so many people embarrassing themselves the past couple of weeks in their race to chase dollars (but also stability in some cases) that it has gotten out of control.
Never thought I’d say this since I love the topic, but I’m glad the Pac-12 presidents reined in the process and didn’t allow the $ to take over the entire process.
That might have been the first decision with the best interest of the athletes in mind in years.
LikeLike
For Dodds to say he was embarrassed is an amazing statement on several levels. Maybe the Delany strategy of staying on the golf course was the correct one, after all. It seems clear to me now, as it was not last summer, that neither UT nor ND will ever go to the B1G, and that’s perfectly OK. Maybe we’ll add Missouri, or Rutgers, or Maryland, or maybe 12 is the magic number. At least the conference avoided the public spectacle of all this, and maybe that means something in and of itself.
LikeLike
ND and Texas don’t fit in the 4 big conferences. ND wants its national schedule. Texas wants a group of vassals.
If there’s anything this past year has shown, it’s those facts.
LikeLike
Totally agree with the Pac-12 holding with 12. I would also like the Big 12 to make it for the non kings benefit. Also agree on the UT/ND to the B1G. They aren’t coming, and if they did, the B1G would regret it. FtTs ‘Fuck you, pay me’ conference would become the ‘We’re rich, but we’re fucked’ conference.
LikeLike
Re: Dodd’s interview (bullet)
Seriously how long have Dodds and Scott been talking about this. Dodds says the LHN is non-negotiable. That should have been the beginning and end of conversation. Bad enough they wanted to drag TT into this.
LikeLike
Dodds comments are directed at LHN in Big 12, not so much the Pac 12.
LikeLike
Re: LHN and fiasco of misunderstanding (bullet)
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6998751/pac-12-conference-decides-expand-further
“The Pac-12 decided it won’t expand further late Tuesday because commissioner Larry Scott failed to get assurance that Texas would back an equal revenue sharing plan if the league added the Longhorns, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State, a source with direct knowledge told ESPN.com.
“Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott elaborates on the reasons why the conference decided against expansion to 16 teams…”
(Note PAC statement citing “culture of equality”)
“After careful review we have determined that it is in the best interests of our member institutions, student-athletes and fans to remain a 12-team conference,” Scott said in a statement. “While we have great respect for all of the institutions that have contacted us, and certain expansion proposals were financially attractive, we have a strong conference structure and culture of equality that we are committed to preserve.”
LikeLike
Spin. We really don’t know what the discussions were.
If you believe Chip Brown you get a viewpoint that it was just like the USC/UCLA deal (actually not quite as good as USC/UCLA were guaranteed significant increases). Texas is guaranteed to keep their current level of revenue and then share when Pac network exceeded it.
The deal was really pretty easy on the financial sharing side.
Now on how TLN fit into their regional networks, that may have been difficult and Texas may have wanted different things than the standard.
LikeLike
I think there are 2 scenarios out there:
1) Big East blows up and eliminates football. The remaining big 12ish conference is football only. I think this is something frank has mentioned a few times and I think it makes more and more sense. Cincy, USF WVU, UConn, maybe Louisville all play football in the Big 12 and play basketball, etc in the “Big East” with the basketball only schools. Let’s face it, the Big East has been about basketball first and this would just prove it.
– One of those schools I mentioned go to either the ACC or the SEC. The other 3 go to the Big 12 making the conference truly a Big 12 again. Everyone wins. I could maybe even see the Big 12 go to 14 or 16 schools (football only) in this scenario. This would get TCU back where it belongs and keeps the Big 12 with enough non football teams to have conference sports outside of football.
– This is the only option if the ACC goes to 16
Big 16
Texas Div
Texas
TTech
TCU
Baylor
Tornado Div
OU
OSU
KU
KSU
Corn Div
ISU
Cincy (football only)
Louisville (football)
USF (football?)
East
UConn (football)
Rutgers (football?)
West Virginia (football)
Temple, Navy, or whomever (football only
2) The Big East stays in place. Splits off basketball core and basically becomes conference USA2. Again, I see at least 1 of the schools I mentioned above ending up in the SEC or ACC. All depends on who the SEC brings in. Either way, ACC and SEC wind up with 14. The Big East would then add teams to get to 12 (at least). Temple, E Carolina, UCF (or FIU), Navy, Army get added. This keeps things open for ND so if the NCAA forces them into a conference, they have a home all nice and warm for them. I would really think they would have to also move on Boise State. UNLV, Nevada, Colorado State, or BYU would interesting additions.
Northish Division
UConn
Rutgers
WVU
Cincy
Temple
E Carolina
Southish Division
Louisville
UCF/FIU
BYU/Boise
USF
TCU
someone from the south or west
LikeLike
I think the recent history suggests that the force favoring the status quo is stronger than the force for massive change.
More likely that the scenario you just outlined, is one that sees the following:
– Big12 add BYU to get to 10.
– SEC decides to stick to 13 for a while
– What is left of the BigEast, could simply do something like adding TCU, Houston, and maybe UCF and then the whole thing just stops for a while.
Instead of the much rumored, and congruent 16×4 we could end up with an absurd set up with BCS conferences with 8, 10, 12, 12, 13, and 14 teams.
LikeLike
I should know this, but SEC isn’t “officially” at 13 yet, right, pending the Baylor “waiver”?
Presumably that would happen now, if the 12 settles down….subject to negotiation of the withdraw fee.
If so, hard to see the SEC going more than 1 year without resolution…..so this stuff may start up again a year from now…
And do Rutgers and U Conn go to the 12, or accepted into ACC? (I think the former).
LikeLike
I’m wondering if the 12 wants Rutgers and Connecticut, or would it be satisfied picking off Cincinnati, Louisville and West Virginia (to accompany Brigham Young and Texas Christian)?
LikeLike
The SEC isn’t going to get a waiver. They’ll just get an indication Baylor has taken its lawyers off retainer. Dodds comment was a 1st step-something like-A&M’s gone and I think everyone is ok with that.
LikeLike
Scott – slight adjustment:
NORTH
UConn
Rutgers
WVU
Cincy
Louisville
East Carolina
SOUTH/WEST
Boise
BYU
Houston
TCU
UCF
USF
Temple’s in a nice market, but the BEast needs to worry about its AQ bid in a big way and add solid football programs. At the very least, it needs to make sure it’s well ahead of the non-AQ leagues in all of the calculations, so hurting the MWC (while helping itself) is essential. Also, this gives you nice pairs of rivals. Except for ECU and WFV – they’ll have to learn to hate each other.
Of course, this all assumes there is no further raiding by the ACC and/or Big 12. Both of which are distinct possibilities.
LikeLike
Also, there aren’t many things in conference realignment that I’m willing to say with certainty, but UT will never allow TCU into the Big 12 so long as it’s running the conference. That one you can pretty well take to the bank. They believe (probably with good reason) that they are all that is necessary to deliver the Texas market and TCU won’t bring anything to the table.
LikeLike
Agree with you.
Unfortunately, I think TCU is going to get left out of the AQ conferences just when they were on the verge of getting back in. I don’t think you and Houston can convince Scott that your new stadiums rate you a spot in the Pac when OU couldn’t get there.
LikeLike
Just when I thought I was in …
Yeah, I only considered TCU a candidate for the Pac as a partner with UT, if the Pac presidents decided Tech’s academics weren’t up to snuff and/or they didn’t relish the idea of trips to Lubbock; even then it was a huge longshot. I guess we just have to hope the BEast can hold it together.
LikeLike
Pingback: Keeping up with the Pittsburgh Steelers One Tweet at a Time 9/21/2011 | The Penalty Flag
kbohls kbohls
by dennisdoddcbs
Texas not giving an inch on the Longhorn Network. Dodds notes OU will have its own soon. UT wants 2nd game on LHN.
1 hour ago
Not sure how OU can respond to this. I mean, Texas is basically saying “my way or the highway”. But we all know OU isn’t going to leave, so they’ll just roll over now?
LikeLike
I think the ACC needs to step up and offer OU and OSU. I know the academics aren’t great but I think OU is improving and OSU is a state land grant school that could really blossom if placed in the right environment. That would make Texas stand up.
Someone needs to knock them back in their shoes. I’m tired of watching them run over everyone.
I wish the Big 10 would offer them. Throw in Missouri and Boise or UConn and a huge chunk of the country is yours now. Bring back the NU/OU classics
LikeLike
OU surely has plan B….to SEC with Missouri and OSU. Heard that deal may happen if Texas doesn’t behave.
LikeLike
not a chance.
sec has all the quality programs it needs. it needs tv sets and recruiting advantage, neither of which they would find in oklahoma.
oklahoma needs an easy path to bcs glory and someone to defuse the lhn. sec offers neither. only the threat of leaving has any value to the sooners, and boren just blew their most promising wad.
LikeLike
expect a good deal more intransigent texas after yesterday’s news. boren really hurt the sooner position.
LikeLike
I’d love to have OU/Missouri in the Big Ten, but the Big Ten presidents seem to have shut the process down in the same way the Pac-12 presidents just did.
The ACC is probably only looking at ND in a move to 16; maybe UConn. I think they’re going to stay geographically correct unless Texas is looking.
OU and Scott overplayed their hands. Scott didn’t have quite the mandate that he had last summer when the Pac-16 invites were going out because the schools are quite content in a Pac-12 without dealing with questions of California access and the rest.
LikeLike
Wait, did you just throw out Boise as a B1G expansion candidate?
LikeLike
Throw in Boise? For the valuable Idaho market? They are one step up from a community college. Good football team, bad at all other sports, and crappy academics. Doesn’t sound like a B1G school.
LikeLike
@Purduemoe – I think we’re saying the same thing, just with different prepositions. Unless the B1G wants to increase its role in the field of truck driving research, Boise can’t even get into the room to get laughed out of it.
LikeLike
My dissertation was on the lingering effects of jake braking on endangered lot lizard habitat.
LikeLike
Jake. I loved the room line.
LikeLike
LOL.I’m sure OU will blame this on Beebe.
LikeLike
IMO Texas will give in on everything except sharing the 3rd tier $ and the network itself.
I imagine conference games (after this year) and HS games will be off limits.
I’d forgotten the ADs had already recommended sharing 1st tier rights equally. That moves the Big 12 to the same spot as the SEC on revenue sharing.
LikeLike
So the forced marriage that is the Big 12 remains in place, at least for now. However, the Big East is still in trouble, no way around that. They need to add at least two schools and there really aren’t any good candidates. Plus, the SEC still needs to add 14th school and if that school isn’t Missouri, it’s coming from the ACC or Big East…which in the end, is probably the death knell for the Big East either way.
All eyes are on the SEC now, you’d think. Then we go through this again.
LikeLike
First time caller, long time reader…
This is extreme tin-foil-hat territory, I’ll admit. But I’ve thought way, way too much about the forces behind conference realignment and based on the events of the last 24 hours, I’ve come up with a theory of who the SEC will add as their 14th, which I believe could be TCU. I’ll try to make this as concise/clear as possible. As always I subscribe to Frank’s motto: “Think like a president.”
I’m always fascinated when people, orgs, or corporations that are currently leaders in market share in their given industries suddenly start taking risks as opposed to just keeping competition suppressed. So my theory harkens back to the NFL lockout, in which the owners, IMO, drew a surprisingly hard stance on certain split issues going forward, to the point of risking the season and losing some PR. Basically, it seemed to me that the owners were very convinced that despite essentially dominating the sports-entertainment industry, they were extremely convinced that they had something to lose if they didn’t win certain critical advantages going forward. IMO, the NFL risked more than I would’ve assumed it needed to in the labor siege that we faced all spring/summer.
So now, I’ve been fascinated with the driving forces behind conference expansion, especially those which seemingly are already doing pretty well in terms of media payouts – SEC and Larry Scott’s led Pac 12 (which albeit, backed off the ledge last night). IMO, the SEC is taking on far more risk by expanding than one would immediately assume they need to. The SEC is already dealing from a position of strength in college sports revenue, and while the PAC may have the most-recent best deal, population dynamics suggest that the SEC’s advantage in the college sports market isn’t going to be going away anytime soon. Sure, there were benefits to adding A&M – but again, what’s motivating these presidents to take the risk of actually expanding and rocking the boat that’s working quite well for them? And my assumption is that somebody is telling these conferences & these presidents that they are just scratching the surface of the sports-entertainment market share that they can obtain. In other words, I think these conferences are making a conscious decision to go after the NFL’s market share in the belief that they have a product that can compete (& win). In some ways – and this is just my own personal interpretation – this idea is borne out of the fact that in the Southeast, the SEC is arguably the more successful product than the NFL franchises in those areas.
So the SEC in my opinion is expanding to gain market share from the NFL. Adding A&M to compete for the Houston market (and to a significant extent the Dallas market) – check. Tried to add Missouri in an attempt to compete with STL/KC, but blocked by the resurgent Big 12. Won’t add West Virginia because there’s no direct competition w/ an NFL franchise. TCU – compete with one of the top NFL brands head on, albeit with a much, much weaker brand, but nonetheless an opportunity to get your best brands into the market to compete with the Cowboys. On their own, TCU couldn’t compete with the Cowboys. But emboldened by the SEC’s brands & the newly converted DFW Aggie grads – and I think that the SEC believes there are significant customers to gain in DFW. Which is why I think the SEC is expanding regardless if they can restructure their current agreement or not – they’re not going to defeat the Cowboys overnight… but in 10 years, DFW could be considered significant college football territory, at the expense of the Cowboys.
Theoretically, I suppose Virginia Tech would also be an attempt to compete w/ the DC NFL market, but I don’t know if the presidents can stomach taking more risk than they already are by potentially fighting the other college conferences head on, especially after the Baylor stalemate. Because IMO, they’re already subjecting themselves to more risk than one would (on the surface) assume they need to.
LikeLike
I’ll hang up & listen
LikeLike
NFL teams always win out in popularity, especially over small private colleges. The Cowboys are one of the most popular NFL teams. I can’t not think of a single example where a private (or private like) school has beaten a local NFL franchise in popularity. I can name a half-dozen that have been significantly harmed (Northwestern, Georgia Tech, SMU, Rice, TCU, Stanford), plus several more which dropped major football at least in part due to the rise of the NFL (Fordham, Penn, Chicago). College football beats out the NFL in much of the south because NFL teams there are either new or located a substantial distance away from the college (or both).
As you say, the SEC is a position of strength. They would strongly prefer to simply bring in an already popular team rather try to build one from a program whose stadium currently seats 40k.
The NFL is in absolutely zero financial trouble. The lockout was about taking a larger part of the spoils, not trying to be profitable. Just this last weekend, several NFL games beat Game 6 of the NBA finals in ratings. The NFL always wins. No one in their right mind goes out of their way to compete with it.
LikeLike
@M – I’d agree that trying to compete with the NFL is a losing proposition. The Rose Bowl is the second highest rated college football game of the year after the national championship game and it garners the rating equivalent to the average late Sunday afternoon NFL game. Where conferences have a growth opportunity is to add on NFL fans that exist in its footprint. There seems to be more crossover between NFL and college football fans compared to NBA and college basketball fans.
Now, I do believe that college football has been undervalued compared to other pro sports (at least until the Pac-12 signed its monster contract). College football is consistently the highest rated sport besides the NFL yet, even with all of the TV money we’ve been talking about lately, hasn’t really been paid like it.
LikeLike
@Frank
I think one of the huge differences is that the majority of NFL games involve at least one team that is in contention for a playoff spot. Contrast that with the number of college games that occue between two teams with absolutely no shot at a BCS Bowl, let alone the National Championship game.
LikeLike
Okay, I’ve been busy today. Is Mizzou going to the SEC or not?
LikeLike
Future hazy. Try again later.
LikeLike
Seems dead from all indications. Who knows what the SEC’s #14 move is. Either they hold out for an ACC school or settle for WVU.
LikeLike
SEC + A&M, Mizzou, VT, and FSU would be pretty mighty, if they can pull it off. They take two from the ACC, things get real quiet in the Big East meetings real fast.
LikeLike
Oklahoma trying to save face:
A high-ranking source from OU told The Oklahoman on Wednesday that both schools have actually been working behind the scenes to sell Big 12 reform to other schools in the conference.
“But frankly, we wanted the impression out there that we might go to the Pac-12 because that gave us some leverage,” the source said. “We were using that as leverage to say, ‘Hey, you want us to stay? Let’s have some of these reforms.’”
…
The behind-the-scenes lobbying of OU and OSU began gaining traction in recent days. Yet as it did, there was a sense their leverage might be slipping. The OU source said there was a shift in the mood of Pac-12 leaders, largely because Texas was pushing to get special concessions and exemptions for its network.
So, on Tuesday morning, OU and OSU let the Pac-12 know that it wouldn’t be applying for membership.
http://newsok.com/source-ou-preferred-reformed-big-12-all-along/article/3606281?custom_click=lead_story_title
LikeLike
Not sure I’m buying this.
I think Scott convinced himself and OU that he had the votes in hand to get a Pac-14 at least. The presidents were already pushing back hard and refused to even vote on it. They wanted Texas +3 or nothing, and everyone knew that Texas was a non-starter because of the LHN.
OU’s now putting out this story to try to remove the egg from their faces.
It’s pretty obvious to anyone objectively viewing the situation that the Pac-12 presidents weren’t buying what Scott and OU were selling.
LikeLike
That may be the case, Zeek, but with the abruptness of the about face by Scott (middle of the night) at a time that seriously damaged OU’s leverage with UT I’d bet this is at least a partial truth. Not sure I’d be telling someone who I had seemed to developed a relationship with that I were just using them, unless I did not expect to have to deal with them in the future. I probably wouldn’t do it anyway, but I don’t worry as much trying to save face. (don’t put self in position to lose face)
LikeLike
I agree. Scott thought he had the votes and didn’t and both him and OU operated if the vote was a formality.
LikeLike
Re: “What happened? (coldhusker)
The quote if true implies OK and OSU were playing this wierd double game.
Probably only Scott and Boren know the truth, but how could they be talking all this time and not reach a meeting of the minds?
“But frankly, we wanted the impression out there that we might go to the Pac-12 because that gave us some leverage,” the source said. “We were using that as leverage to say, ‘Hey, you want us to stay? Let’s have some of these reforms.’”
And UT meanwhile apparently never had any interest in joining without a special deal.
If true, that may explain the PAC statement pulling the plug. If I was Scott, I would put Boren’s (and Dodds) email, phone, fax numbers into a spam filter.
LikeLike
Any Minnesota football season ticket holders out there?
LikeLike
Yeah, man. Why do you ask?
LikeLike
Just looking to score some Minnesota @ Michigan tix for next weekend
LikeLike
I would not be surprised too see the Sooners head to the SEC with Texas A&M. They have had enough of the Longhorns, LHN, etc, and it is now every man for himself. Right? Or – if they really are glued to the Cowboys thanks to the state legislature, would the SEC take both OK programs and concentrate on finding #16?
I just do not see stability in the Big XII no matter how it is “resolved”.
LikeLike
Right now I could believe it if you told me that the Big XII survived without any members at all.
LikeLike
I don’t know. I’m starting to believe the story from Norman/Stillwater. I think the Okies biggest fear is losing their ties to Texas and the potential hit to their recruiting as a result.
I think OU may have tried to thread the needle on this one by trying to help Larry Scott land UT on an equal revenue share basis. Barring that possibility, I think OU saw its best move to try and advantage itself further against the non-UT schools in the conference.
LikeLike
http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/longhorns/entries/2011/09/21/dodds_big_12_ca.html?cxntfid=blogs_bevo_beat
Texas is committed to equal revenue sharing for all its Tier 1 and Tier 2 television rights with other Big 12 members, but Longhorns athletic director DeLoss Dodds told a select group of reporters Wednesday afternoon that the Longhorn Network is non-negotiable and will not be compromised.
In other words, Texas’ $300 million network venture with ESPN is not on the table for discussion.
Dodds said the relationship between Texas and Oklahoma remains strong, and that the Longhorns and Sooners both are committed to the future of the Big 12.
“I don’t think our network is in play,” Dodds said. “Our network is our network. Anybody can do one. If somebody thinks something is wrong with our network, and thinks it’s hurting the conference, we would absolutely address it.”
On the revenue sharing, Dodds reiterated that Big 12 athletic directors approved equal revenue sharing for all conference money from Tier 1 and Tier 2 as late as last spring, and recommended that Big 12 presidents approve it. But Big 12 presidents never took action on it.
Dodds said he would push to add at least one team to the Big 12, and that he prefers a 10-member league because it allows for total round-robin play in football, double round-robin play in basketball, and “a clear path to the (BCS) championship game.”
“Nine works, but I’ve always liked 10,” Dodds said.
Dodds stressed the need for strong guarantees keeping Big 12 teams from leaving, and hopes to see the league put that in writing.
“Stronger exit fees might be a solution,” he said.
Dodds added that he doesn’t expect Texas A&M to stay in the Big 12, and that it was unlikely that Texas would continue to play the Aggies in football.
“In my mind, they’re in the SEC (already),” he said. “People feel OK with that. A lot of people wish they were still here, but they’ve moved on.”
As for playing A&M, Dodds said that would be “problematic” because both teams would have scheduling commitments to work around.
The Big 12 athletic directors’ regularly-scheduled meeting is on tap for next Tuesday and Wednesday, in Dallas. Dodds said he did not know when the Big 12 expansion committee, on which both he and Oklahoma athletic director Joe Castiglione are members, will meet again.
“I’m sure we’ll get active again,” Dodds said.
Dodds declined to name the schools that the Big 12 will consider, but still did not rule out Notre Dame.
“I think there’s always a chance,” he said.
Dodds said Texas looked at being an independent, but dismissed that option because it would not be in the best interest of Texas’ student-athletes.
LikeLike
Why couldn’t a group of Kansas, KSU, ISU and Baylor get together and head off to be with the Big East, joining Louisville, Cinci, WVU, UCONN, Rutgers and USF? Then add in TCU, Houston, UCF, BYU, UNLV and Boise to get to 16 schools and launch a championship game.
You’d have something like 8 or 9 BCS Bowl appearances amongst the group. You’d have a few really good basketball brands (KU, UL, UCONN, UNLV and Cinci) and you’d create some stability and a measure of control for all of the members. Presence in Dallas, Tampa, Houston and either Orlando would offer good recruiting grounds.
If you can add ND as a non-football member all the better, but you would not need that necessarily. With the move, you’ve basically forced OU,OSU,UT and TT to the Pac12, you’ve forced Mizzou to the SEC and you might have created a measure of stability in the market (finally) which is the only way these 4 schools and the leftovers from the BigEast is going to realize any stability at all.
It could be a conference of equals so even if the ACC, SEC, or B1G decided to expand further and pulled some from your ranks you would still be at the minimum for BCS consideration (8) and/or you could always plug those holes with C-USA or MWC left-overs.
LikeLike
Because Kansas, K-State, Iowa State, and Baylor would make less money by going to the BIG EAST than if they were to stay in Bevo’s harem.
LikeLike
OK, that’s fine.
However, if I am on the Kansas BOR or part of the ISU administration, I’m making a bet that I can have a helluva lot more on-field success over the next 50 years if I break away from UT’s shadow than if I continue to try and take on Texas’ M-1 Abrams tank with my pea-shooter.
For me, the experience at TCU and Boise shows that you could build a competitive operation from outside the mainstream and those schools wouldn’t have to deal with the fact that they are in a non-AQ conference.
Hell, look at the Big East as an example. Rutgers, Louisville, UCONN, and Cinci each have gone to BCS games under the Big East banner, isn’t that more success than KU, KSU, ISU or Baylor have experienced in UTs shadow?
I’m betting that on-field success would do more good for my University than the extra $8-$10M of empty money that I get from being associated with UT and/or OU.
LikeLike
KU and KSU have both gone to BCS games, KSU won the conference once. But I would agree its probably easier to build a consistent winner in a more evenly matched conference.
LikeLike
Except there’s no real benefit. The Big East is even more unstable, since it doesn’t have a Texas or Oklahoma to anchor it down.
Their best bet is to keep their heads down, build their academic reputation, and pray someone notices them soon.
LikeLike
Sooo….
There’s still a chance?
LikeLike
Thank you for the update, commissioner Dodds…
LikeLike
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/15617283/texas-prez-says-big-12-money-deals-can-be-redone
More interviews with Powers and Dodds. Some of the same as the earlier articles, but some interesting additional comments. He says, as some of us expected, that the boards got involved.
LikeLike
Frank,
There was an article that said Rutgers was talking to the B1G. If this was the case, and TAMU takes the SEC to 13, what would you do?
I know you are not Delany, just asking you to play him on here.
ps, if you posted it before I missed it, but is there a good site or book that explains pods for dummies like me?
LikeLike
Pods-Where is Karl Benson when we really need him????
LikeLike
A quick and dirty explanation
1. Divide league members into 4 evenly sized groups-pods A, B, C, D
2. Combine two and rotate.
Years 1&2 A & B are one division, C and D are the other
Years 3&4 A & C are one division B and D are the other
Years 5&6 A & D are one division B & C are the other
Start over in years 7 & 8.
So in a 16 team league with 4 team pods, you get everyone at least home & away over 6 years even if you only play a 7 game league schedule.
LikeLike
or you could do it WAC style and just to A/B C/D then A/C B/D so that B/C is never a division, even though your strongest members with the most long-standing rivalries now rarely play. That always works well.
LikeLike
When the Big Ten renegotiates their deal, how many traditional networks will have open slots to air their games?
We already have four huge national draws, plus Notre Dame if they ever join. We could conceivably go the NFL route and get our games on multiple networks at once. That’s a lot more money than ESPN2 and the BTN.
LikeLike
More to the point, how many conferences and networks are locked into long-term deals?
FOX airs MLB, but only halfway through the CFB season.
NBC only airs Notre Dame’s home games.
CBS ???
ABC juggles several conferences on the mother network and their ESPN children.
Something would have to be reworked with the BTN (which FOX owns a majority) or worked around, but we need to be thinking B1G.
LikeLike
I need to stop replying to my own posts, but the point I’m trying to make is getting NATIONAL coverage. A lot of games on ABC/ESPN are regional affairs, with the exception of certain high-profile games. The SEC on CBS, in contrast, gives the SEC a national game every week.
I think we can make in aggregate more (though individual deals will be less), but more importantly, we get more exposure and value for our “brand”. Plus, we could all watch as many live Big Ten games as possible.
LikeLike
It isn’t that shocking to me that Notre Dame home games are still aired exclusively on NBC. What is shocking is that NBC excludes itself from broadcasting any other programs besides Notre Dame.
College football is second only to the NFL for TV viewership. Big bowl games beat even the World Series, and any big matchup beats any regular season MLB game, including (stunning as it may be to ESPN) Yankees-Red Sox. It certainly is a bigger draw than golf, tennis, NASCAR, and other sports.
So I would be stunned if NBC isn’t a player for Big Ten games, and I would find it rather surprising if Fox considers shifting some baseball games to FX or FSN so it can make room for regular season college football games.
LikeLike
Fox wouldn’t even have to do that. They could air a Big 10 game of the week in prime time during baseball season. It would get better ratings than anything else they would air, although it might anger a few die hard Cops fans.
LikeLike
FOX is probably thinking heavily about something similar to the CBS deal that the SEC has.
They bought the Big Ten and Pac-12 CCGs (and paid over 20M+ for the Big Ten’s). They also obviously have a 51% stake in the BTN.
Might be useful for them to take over the Big Ten’s first tier rights in 2014-2015 negotiations. We’ll see though.
LikeLike
In that case, might a Rutgers/Maryland combo work to secure the Big Ten along the eastern seaboard for Fox, particularly considering the somewhat uncertain post-Paterno Penn State era?
LikeLike
Does the SEC need teams in California or New England to get people to watch their games on CBS? No. Rutgers and Maryland aren’t national draws (or even regional ones at that), which is why I’ve been against moves to the East.
If we were to get a game on FOX or NBC, they’d have their pick of some of our more exciting games. To use this year as an example, Nebraska and Wisconsin.
LikeLike
Back in the days when Texas and Notre Dame were both joining the Big Ten, I thought they might split up the 1st tier rights by division, Legends home games could be on Fox and Leaders home games could be on NBC (or vice versa, I still don’t know my Legend from my Leader).
If it’s just ND and Rutgers/Mizzou/Maryland joining, then I think the best way to keep everyone happy and monetize value would be to sell Fox the rights to the first pick of game each week (except for ND home games), sell NBC all Notre Dame home games (except for 1 or 2 a year for the BTN) and give NBC 2nd pick of Big Ten games when they don’t have a ND game to air. They could even pick up the ND road games if they aren’t selected by Fox that week. The rest of the games would go to ESPN/BTN.
Doing this would:
1. Allow ND to continue their relationship with NBC, although the money would now be going to the conference instead of directly to ND.
2. Give NBC a good game to air every week instead of just the ND home games.
3. Give the Big Ten more exposure and more money.
LikeLike
I really can’t keep up with all the posts, but I do have a few random thoughts about recent events.
No one should ever use “done deal”, “always”, “never” or any other absolute in any post in which realignment is a topic. As the Les Miles of a previous era used to say, “It ain’t over ’till its over.”
OU’s President Boren must be getting senile. Governor Boren or Senator Boren would have never been played like President Boren was last night.
The Big XII is a grease fire you just can’t put out.
If TPTB at Oklahoma, OK State, and Mizzou really had a package deal offer to join the SEC and turned it down, they really shouldn’t be in leadership positions at the university level. To stay in the soap opera that is the Big XII rather than go to a stable conference that makes more money is just crazy. I am glad that deal didn’t happen though. While 3 of the 4 schools would have added value, I don’t know if having 1/4 of the conference coming out of such a dysfunctional relationship would have been good for the SEC.
I think the best thing for the SEC to do right now is to prepare to play with 13 teams for the 2012 season. In order to start play for the 2013 season, any ACC school would need to withdraw by Aug 15, 2012. From what I’m hearing from my FSU friends, momentum is building for a move to the SEC. It may take several months to reach critical mass, and that’s OK. There’s no reason to take West Virginia just to get to 14, yet.
Speaking of West Virginia, I’m really looking forward to my trip to Morgantown this weekend. Couch burning, West F#@%ing Virginia t-shirts, in-stadium beer sales to control consumption. It really appears to be a different kind of place. Coming from South Louisiana, that’s saying something.
Duff, as always, thanks for the mad Tiger support in Indiana. We really need to get you and Beano Cook down to a night game in Tiger Stadium.
LikeLike
SEC, unless the TV execs quoted are wrong, isn’t going to make a whole lot more with A&M. So in 4 years when the ESPN deal comes up, the Big 12 will undoubtedly make more than the SEC for the duration of the SEC contract.
BTW, somewhere saw an article talking about UNL that the B1G is making $22.6 million per team. Don’t think I saw it here, but it might have been.
LikeLike
bullet – I’d like to add “undoubtedly” to my word list of absolutes that shouldn’t be used in realignment posts. In this environment, no one can say with certainty what will happen tomorrow. How can you say something will “undoubtedly” happen four years from now. Heck, the Big XII, errr 10, errr 9, errr whatever may not be around in four years.
LikeLike
The assumption is that it will be around. Your comment was the SEC makes more money. That’s true now, $17 million/school vs. $15 million/school. But the Big 12 would only have to increase their Tier I contract when it comes up from $60 million to $85 million to beat the SEC TV deal (if expansion doesn’t increase the per school payout) and their Tier II just went up 450%.
The SEC is “undoubtedly” more stable (or are LSU and Arkansas talking about joining the Big 12?). But if Big 12 holds together your comment about the SEC making more money won’t be true for very long and the Big 12 would be making more money until 2022.
I think being in a 10-12 team league is a big advantage for schools and their athletes than being in a 16 team league even without the travel issues.
LikeLike
Bullet – you can add up all your assumptions and “buts” and “ifs” together and they they don’t equal “undoubtedly”, they equal “may”. Right now, the Big XII-2-1 is a grease fire. Everything was supoposedly solve during Summer 2010, but it wasn’t. Supposedly, everything will be solved next week. I’m guessing it won’t. You “undoubtedly” think it will.
My original point was and still is that if Boren, Scott, and Slive (and rest of the cast of characters that we act like we know well, but in reality most of us have never even met even one of these guys) don’t know what’s going to happen, you probably don’t either.
Using absolute terms doesn’t help your argument. We are all guessing here. Some opinions are educated, and some people just throw opinions up against the wall.
LikeLike
Alan, don’t forget to ride the PRT in Morgantown, and thank Rep. Harley Staggers for providing such pork.
LikeLike
alan,
will be interested to hear your opinion of morgantown!
Beano, just turned 80, and still younger than JoPa 🙂
His observation about the Heisman cracks me up
LikeLike
Duff – Starkville (more cowbell) one week and Morgantown (more couch burnings) the next. I love road trips!
LikeLike
In a weird way, every time the Big XII tries to fall apart and fails, it’s continued existence (and, hence, stability) seems a little bit more certain.
LikeLike
Be prepared, they put french fries on their salads.
LikeLike
Pretty ironic the PAC ended up taking Colorado and Utah instead of OU-OSU. About at the level of the ACC taking Pitt-Syracuse. Imagine the B1G or SEC settling for that—hardly worth the trouble.The four of them put together don’t equal the B1G’s getting Nebraska, on any level: TV ratings, increased revenue, getting a King, rounding out the conference numbers, heck even academics only Pitt is better.
Delaney and Perlman must be laughing up their sleeve, one move and they outdid eveyone with a minimum of fuss or drama, meanwhile all the other conferences and schools settling for 2nd or 3rd best (or nothing), looking greedy, stupid, or weak.
LikeLike
Re: Delany”s “minimum of fuss and bother” and relative “outcome” (?) (ChicagoRed
As I recall, the public part of the Big 10 expansion process lasted months and months, with every rumor and spin under the sun, until finally the supposed big target “mirages” of UT and ND and whoever disappeared from the stage: to reveal another midwest school Nebraska: a school that fits into the Big 10 culture well and has a strong team and large following: good addition.
The PAC 10 expansion to 12 eventually (after UT and OK and company vanished from the stage) ended up adding schools that actually wanted to be part of the conference, creating the basis of a conference playoff and later a huge TV deal, unpredicted by anyone: worked out well: to the point they can now tell UT and OK no thanks.
The SEC if and when they add A&M will have expanded their footprint into a huge market: be interesting to see how the A&M recruiting and TV payout goes: good addition.
The ACC added 2 schools that also actually want to be part of the conference: transformed themselves from a southern based conference into a true north-south coastal conference, expanding it’s footprint into NY, PA and integrating BC into that northern footprint. The result of that decision is not going to be apparent one week later, but over time it provides a platform to bring media focus on FSU, VT and Miami football and SU, Pitt, Duke and UNC BB from Florida to Massachusetts: very good additions.
Next chapter: to be written.
LikeLike
I think Pitt & Syracuse are pretty good adds. They have history, if not present, in football and have the present in basketball. ACC, if they go to 16, will have 8 of the past 11 bb champs. Most importantly, the NE is now ACC country. It may be more NFL/NBA territory, but between those two and BC and Maryland, they have a pretty good presence in the most populous part of the country. The 2 new additions add value to BC and Maryland. I might have taken UConn for #14 instead of Pitt to avoid taking on JoePa head on, but PItt does have a better fb history, better area talent and probably better potential. ACC did beat B1G and Pac in basketball, new markets and recruiting territories.
CU and Utah got the Pac off the Pacific Coast and to 12, so they aren’t horrible adds just by virtue of that. CU is down, but they have a pretty good history. They had 4 division titles in the Big 12, behind only OU, UNL and UT and all of those were in the last 10 years (admittedly with UNL down).
LikeLike
I actually like the additions for the ACC and Pac-12.
Pac-12 gets to dominate the mountain region because they’ll be taking the high profile teams to Utah and Colorado.
And the ACC pretty much crippled its biggest competitor on the East Coast while strengthening its hand internally.
There’s only two available kings out there in Texas and OU. Both have baggage (Tech/OSU or LHN), and as stated below, Nebraska was the only low-maintenance king.
The same is true of Penn State. The Big Ten got lucky that it had two low-maintenance kings on its Eastern and Western border and they were both available for the taking.
I don’t think the Pac-12 and ACC did that poorly at all. Both came out winners.
LikeLike
Re: northeast as ACC territory (bullet)
Agree with your post:
The ACC may well benefit by taking a pause to allow time for the conference members to get comfortable with the adds of SU and Pitt; see how the divisions work out and see what the reaction may be among a school like FSU.
This really is a not a small change in the composition of the conference. By staying at 14, there is an opportunity for more competition and thus connection among the schools. And opportunity to preserve existing rivalries.
However, even a school focused on football like FSU can understand the value of expanding the footprint. Its not just SU or Pitt delivering the northeast markets but rather providing a platform for the conference schools together to deliver the market, just as SU and Pitt can help expand on the interest in BB across the conference footprint.
SU for example recently signed a 20 year deal to play a high profile game every other year at the Meadowlands. Next year they play USC. Last year, the new Pinstripe bowl in NY City at Yankee stadium invited SU to play against KSU. That bowl in time may become an ACC bowl. Similarly, SU’s presence in NY allows for high profile BB games in MSG.
Conversely, with Pitt and SU now in the ACC, their football recruiting may well improve when competing with other regional schools. Same may apply with BC now that it is now longer on an island.
With SU, Pitt, BC and MD, the ACC has additionally set the stage for additional northeast expansion should the conference perceive the value of such an add from a marketing, network, media payout perspective.
LikeLike
The difference is, the Pac and ACC were dealing with a king that provided nothing but headaches, and a second king who was ultimately taken in by the first one. In contrast, Nebraska is a low-maintenance king.
In football terms, the ACC wasn’t going to land a king in the first place, one reason Florida State (an unappreciated king) and Maryland (which isn’t a king, but would like to consort with them to fill up Byrd Stadium) might want to go elsewhere if the opportunity arose.
LikeLike
Pitt could be a sleeping football giant. They are in prime recruiting territory, and being in the ACC should open recruiting up to the south. PSU has been the king of PA football in the Joe Pa era, but that’s waning. OTOH, they will have to contend with VaTech, Clemson, and FSU etc now, so they will have to step up to have a chance at winning the conference. I think Pitt is pretty weak in Olympic sports, but that just means they can pour most of their cash into basketball and football. Probably their biggest obstacle is fan support in a Steeler crazy city.
LikeLike
In regards to PSU’s waning….they’re in a very similar position to the one FSU just came out of. An aging icon for a coach who has started to become more of a burden to the program’s growth than a leader.
Once JoePa finally retires/dies/is forced out if PSU makes a solid hire they will be back in the national spotlight.
LikeLike
Let me put it another way,
Nobody’s flocking to watch Syracuse, Pitt, Colorado, or Utah. They’re all “Missouri” (or worse) type adds.
A&M going to the SEC hasn’t happened yet.
Lots of speculation by outside parties around who the B1G would add, but no missteps, premature announcements, or other nonsense by the actual players, Nebraska and the B1G.
LikeLike
A “what-if” scenario: What if the AAU had dropped Nebraska before the Big Ten expansion process had taken place? If conference presidents were adamant that member schools must belong to the AAU (aside from Notre Dame, a different animal both academically and athletically), and felt pressured to bring in a 12th member to establish a football title game, who takes Nebraska’s place? There were no real available “kings” meeting the presidents’ criteria, and it’s apparent that neither Notre Dame nor Texas would have entered without concessions the conference was not prepared to make.
LikeLike
You know, Nebraska’s AAU has been in question for a while now. It is particularly interesting that the Big Ten took action when it did.
I think the Big Ten brass knew there was a chance that Nebraska could lose its AAU after being admitted, maybe they even knew this when they announced that the Big Ten was looking for an addition…
LikeLike
Looking at the schools available at the time, other than ND there weren’t any schools other than UNL that really “moved the needle” football-wise and were within/adjacent to Big Ten territory. With ND adamantly sticking to the independent course, UNL was the best choice available. As far as AAU membership, for UNL it was somewhat in question but I’m thinking most Big Ten presidents figured UNL losing that membership was unlikely. As it turned out, they were proven wrong. In any case, UNL still was an AAU member when they joined the B1G.
LikeLike
If Dodds gets his way, and the new Big 12 is again with 10, only with Brigham Young replacing Texas A&M, it looks as if the Big East football schools are really stranded, even more at the mercy of the Providence hoop clique. With only seven members after SU and Pitt leave compared to eight non-conference football members, they won’t have much of a say — moreover, the prospects for league expansion are lackluster at best (East Carolina, Temple, Houston, Central Florida, Memphis), and several of those candidates may not want to join if they are restricted to football-only membership. (Given the Big East mentality, Memphis — the worst football program among them — would be the only one to get an all-sports nod because of their basketball prowess.)
If I’m Swofford, I milk this for all it’s worth. If Florida State leaves, I pick up Rutgers and let the rest stew in their own juices.
LikeLike
vincent,
did you notice the Terps were one of the 3 limiting the exit fee?
LikeLike
Yes, I did, duffman. Maryland is keeping its options open, just like FSU (though the Seminoles will almost certainly get in a position to pay that fee before the Terrapins will).
LikeLike
vincent,
not saying it will happen, but how would you feel if FSU + MD + TAMU + VT were how SEC got to 16?
LikeLike
Not sure. Part of me would feel like the Terrapins are sheep being led to the slaughter; perhaps I’d feel semi-confident having Tech (and FSU) along for the ride. It would certainly benefit the athletic department in revenue, and there are a few sports I think Maryland would do well in, particularly men’s and women’s basketball (and that’s taking nothing away from the SEC in either sport, notably women’s hoops). However, the SEC doesn’t sponsor many sports Maryland competes in, such as men’s soccer, field hockey, wrestling or men’s and women’s lacrosse; finding places to park those programs would be difficult. And Maryland would be so unlike another SEC school in athletic culture, with the possible exception of Vanderbilt or Kentucky. I’d think about it, but if I accepted it, I would have to be 100% sure that Maryland could both compete in the SEC and do so cleanly.
It’s comparable to becoming involved with a woman who’s wealthy, attractive and can offer you plenty on the surface, but isn’t much of a match otherwise, especially mentally (apologies to SEC schools and fans, but it simply doesn’t have the academic rep the ACC or Big Ten have). Yes, you could be satisfied spending a life with her, but would you be happy?
LikeLike
Actually its worse for the BE if the Big 12 goes to 12.
LikeLike
I think they’ll add Temple, Memphis, and Villanova football, for starters. Two good basketball adds. Then maybe Houston (for TCU) and Central Florida, which are better teams than most people think.
It’s not horrible..
NORTH
Rutgers (NY/NJ, arguably B1G material)
U-Conn (storied basketball program)
Temple (almost beat PSU)
Villanova (one less BB only team)
West Virginia (solid program)
Cincinnati (good in flashes)
SOUTH
Louisville (great BB)
Memphis (great BB)
South Florida (sunny)
Central Florida (sunny)
TCU (Texas, football credibility)
Houston (Texas)
LikeLike
Interesting how unnamed sources (obviously Pac 12 school or conference officials) are speaking condescendingly of Texas and Oklahoma and bad-mouthing them. I must have read at least a half a dozen different articles-national, WA, CA. I haven’t seen a negative peep out of Texas and Oklahoma over this.
And yet its Texas and, in some articles, Oklahoma who are called arrogant and greedy. I’d say Texas and especially Oklahoma (who was really on a limb) have been very gracious.
LikeLike
Re: reaction to yet another bungled negotiation (bullet)
If you believe the article I cited above, OK officials say their goal was to leverage their negotiations with Scott to force changes in the Big 12.
The other article stated quite clearly, Scott ended the discussions with UT because they apparently wanted a special deal on the LHN and subsequent comments make clear UT above all wants to preseve the Big 12 regional competition along with its LHN.
Contrast this public soap opera fiasco to how the ACC proceded: they studied their options; they had conversations with interested schools, they knew who they wanted, they recognized quickly that UT was not a good add (when teamed with TT and their special demands) and moved on to schools who wanted to be part of the conference. The public process was over within a day.
If I’m Scott, based on what I’ve read, I wouldn’t take any more calls from Dodds or Boren, though as a professional I’m sure he will. Clearly there was either a massive misunderstanding or a wierd double game going on, and I don’t believe it was Scott who was playing the game.
I’m hoping Frank takes a leave from work and writes the great American novel.
LikeLike
Why would Wilner’s sources have told him several times that they believed that Scott could sell the Pac-12 on OU/OSU.
I don’t get why anyone but Texas would want the current result. Larry Scott looks like he was an empire builder that was rebuked by his presidents, and OU looks like they got rejected.
Maybe this was all a game, but the only winner in terms of perception is Texas. OU made a bunch of demands that now come off as empty because Texas can just reject them anyways…
LikeLike
zeek,
The bigger issue now is the egg on Scott’s and Boren’s face. OU now may be lost forever to the PAC, and they may look at the SEC now.
LikeLike
Texas may have gotten what it wanted, but I’m not sure that makes it a winner in terms of perception. Texas has developed a reputation as the most pompous, narcissistic and greedy university in the country (deserved or not). Its behavior has alienated nearly every university in the Big 12, and many outside of the Big 12. Many alumni, even, are mortified by how Texas has behaved or at least how it is perceived. While some people might be bloviating about Texas’ so-called victory, I think it’s likely to be pyrrhic.
LikeLike
Fair enough, but I don’t think they care what gets thrown their way.
I just mean in terms of winners in this “poker game”, it’s obvious that Scott folded and OU bluffed.
LikeLike
There are some who are disturbed about how Texas behaved but they are a tiny minority on the boards (mainly they think TLN is worthless and think administration is being excessively hardline on TLN issues). Many like me are frustrated by the constant false information put out by mainstream media (I’m talking factual errors, not just opinions). A number are upset the administration hasn’t done better PR with factual information. But when you get a barrage of idiot sportswriters putting out untruths, it creates a bad perception, regardless of what reality is.
LikeLike
“Larry Scott: ‘We could have expanded’ (Zeek)
I doubt anyone but Scott or Boren know the full story but this process was a fiasco.
“On Wednesday, a source told The Oklahoman that Oklahoma was using the Pac-12 for leverage to get some concessions from the Big 12:
“But frankly, we wanted the impression out there that we might go to the Pac-12 because that gave us some leverage,” the source said. “We were using that as leverage to say, ‘Hey, you want us to stay? Let’s have some of these reforms.’”
That would seem to imply that Oklahoma wanted to make it public that it was negotiating in bad faith with the Pac-12, but Scott had no issue with this strategy.
“I have nothing but respect for the leadership of the University of Oklahoma,” he (Larry Scott) said. “I don’t want to contradict anything that they feel they need to say as part of the process they are in.”
http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/47703/larry-scott-we-could-have-expanded
LikeLike
Wilner wrote a week ago that there was no headway at all on Texas giving up the LHN, and that Scott knew that there probably wasn’t going to be a way to bring Texas in as an equal partner.
Wilner’s sources and most sources around the country indicated that the Pac-12 would move to at least Pac-14 for OU/OSU.
But now, they’re all saying that the presidents of the Pac-12 only wanted all 4 schools or 0 schools. That’s like a catch-22. They’ll only take Texas +3, but Texas won’t join equally, so there’s no way that the Pac-12 could logically expand.
I know that everyone’s trying to put a lot of spin on the situation because yesterday’s events went off with a thud, but if you cut through the spin, the Pac-12 presidents shut the process down despite the fact that Scott and OU had previously believed that they could get OU/OSU into a Pac-14.
Maybe all these sources are all wrong, but I have a hard time believing that Boren who has a vast wealth of political experience would be trying to bluff so blatantly. It sounds more like the rug got pulled out from under Scott and OU.
Maybe no one wants to hear that, but piecing together the story from Wilner among other writers with sources, it sure sounds like that’s what happened.
Of course, who knows which sources to believe, but OU’s behavior was so bizarre yesterday that it’ seems obvious that they thought they had an invite in hand but it got yanked.
LikeLike
Re: what happened (Zeek)
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2011/09/19/pac-12-expansion-the-latest-on-texas-revenue-sharing-and-16-team-division-alignment/
from recent Wilner article:
“*** Yes, yes, 100 times yes: The Pac-12 would add the Oklahoma schools and become a 14-team conference even if Texas follows a different path.
“*** Last point: I’ve read and heard a lot about whether Scott has the CEO support to expand or is getting significant push-back from a handful of presidents and chancellors. (Nine votes are needed to approve new members.)
Bottom line: If Scott needs the votes, he’ll have the votes”
—————–
So according to Wilner, yes OK and OSU are ok regardless; seems clear:
yet according to the above cited article, OK at the end of the day, was using the threat of going to the PAC as an leverage for change, decided they actually would prefer to stay in the BIg 12; and by inference Scott decided he didn’t want to play that game.
Obviously, the more this whole process played out with UT, the more time for Scott and the Presidents to decide: this isn’t going anywhere and really was a sign that UT and OK were not good candidates for membership.
This is the second time around for all these negotiations.
So as an outsider, I find it interesting that Boran or some source isn’t saying they are disappointed and thought they had a deal: instead the “source” is saying we used the PAC negotiations as a way to pressure UT to make changes. Preserving the Big 12 was our goal.
Scott’s statement quoted in the above post: “We could have expanded” is even tempered and highly respectful and professional.
It’s not clear to me that Boran was ready to take yes for an answer; UT said they would work things out to OK, and under the circumstances Scott decided to pull the plug.
BUt this is only speculation on my part.
LikeLike
Re: Scott’s management style by Wilner (Zeek)
Thanks for mentioning Wilner as a source of info.
Seems like Scott’s style makes it unlikely he lacked the votes for OK to go forward, but rather OK decided not to take the offer, wanted to stay with a reformed Big 12 with UT, and Scott then pulled the offer.
Who knows: maybe next year there will be yet another chapter.
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2011/09/20/pac-12-expansion-does-scott-have-the-votes-and-other-matters/
LikeLike
As you say, this is all speculation on our parts as to motives and where all of the pieces were moving.
I’m sure we’ll be revisiting this within a few years, so we’ll have plenty of time to hash this out.
LikeLike
Re: what “really happened” (part 3) (Zeek)
http://newsok.com/source-bob-stoops-has-been-strongest-adviser-to-david-boren/article/3606341?custom_click=pod_headline_ou-sports
from Newsok: 9/21:
1) “The source called Stoops “the strongest adviser” to school president David Boren in the process, which ended Tuesday night when the Pac-12 said it had no immediate plans to expand to include Oklahoma and others. OU has told The Oklahoman it pulled its name from consideration Tuesday morning, deciding instead to again hold together the Big 12.
Stoops’ advice to Boren? Stay in a conference in which winning has been the norm.
“He was open to the Pac-12,” the source said, “but he really preferred to stay in the Big 12. To sort of put it in his words, ‘If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.’
————–
so according to this article, according to an OK source: OK withdrew it’s application in the morning and then PAC issued its statement that evening.
————————————————–
For purposes of reference:
In an article on 9/21, Wilner “believes” Boran was led to believe he had an invite:
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2011/09/21/did-the-pac-12-risk-its-future-by-not-expanding/
2) “But … and here’s the second issue … what about adding the Oklahoma schools to get to 14?
I know the Pac-12 CEOs did not particularly want to expand. That has been clear from the outset.
But it sure seemed like OU president David Boren believed an invitation would come — if the Sooners asked for it, of course — based on his public comments these past few days and weeks.
Maybe the CEOs got cold feet, the result of so much public backlash over the realignment money-grab.
Maybe they thought the geography and logistics of a 14-team league were too awkward.
(If the reason for not taking the Oklahoma schools was that they aren’t members of the prestigious Association of American Universities, well, that’s lame.
—————————–
3) In a Wilner article on 9/20:
“here’s why the league didn’t expand”:
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2011/09/20/pac-12-conference-no-expansion/
2a) “9:10 p.m. update: Been on the phone for last 30 minutes. Here’s why league did not expand, in a nutshell:
It determined that a 14-school conference was awkward and it would not bow to Texas’ revenue demands.
According to a source, Larry Scott walked away from weekend meeting with Texas knowing the Longhorn Network and the Pac-12 revenue model could not work together.
It was zero or four and the four was too problematic — no interest in meeting UT’s revenue demands — so it’s at zero, which is where the CEOs wanted to be all along.
It never even got to a vote.”
Yet later in this article, he raises the question:
2b) “The question is: Is the Pac-12 not expanding because Oklahoma was considering staying … or was Oklahoma considering staying because the Pac-12 is not expanding?
Based on Scott’s statement, it would seem the Pac-12 was the proactive party in this.
Either way, the two events — the news out of Oklahoma today and the league’s announcement tonight — are probably related.
I hope to get answers tonight.”
LikeLike
I’m with Zeek. We don’t really know who is trying to save face, but believing OU’s source that said previously they were lying is a little hard to swallow. The explanation that Scott was simply wrong that he could twist arms and get the votes for a Pac 14 makes a lot more sense. There was always a question about how much the Pac supported it. Wilner’s articles make it sound like Scott was convinced he could get the votes of the fence-sitters, NOT that Scott already had the votes. Scott is also talking publically while the OU source is anonymous. Scott’s last comment is kind of a condescending way of saying they are lying.
If OU was bluffing, wasting that Sunday meeting with Texas and then starting to negotiate once they have lost their leverage makes it clear that Boren should stay away from poker tables.
LikeLike
seems like Texas got an assist from Delany and the Big Ten here. the Pac-12’s sister conference openly stating that they are happy at 12 had to cool off the Pac-12 presidents’ urgency to expand under sub-optimal conditions.
LikeLike
Nebraska takes down Penn State in an epic 5 match contest tonight. Huskers first Big Ten volleyball contest. This is what Delaney was after all along, crafting the world’s greatest women’s volleyball conference. Bravo, Jim, bravo!
LikeLike
Well all that noise and really nothing came about – nothing truly earth shaking anyway. See you guys next year!
LikeLike
Sorry, zeek, I wasn’t disagreeing with your main points. Texas definitely outplayed OU in the conference affiliation game. Scott looks bad, and Boren looks worse. I guess I’m reacting mostly to the strutting I’ve seen in some of the Texas forums. While fans might think that Texas has improved its position, I can’t believe that Powers is happy with how this whole mess has affected people’s perception of Texas. Most presidents seem to be very careful about managing how their institutions are perceived not only within their states, but also externally.
LikeLike
Texas comes off as the LeBron James of conference realignment in all of this.
And I’m a huge Miami Heat fan saying that…
LikeLike
I’ve suggested at least once that ESPN should make a regular “Decision”-like show of Texas realignment choices. They could broadcast it every June on LHN.
LikeLike
surprising they didnt air “the decision” on the LHN
LikeLike
I don’t disagree with that.
But I think a lot is due to the false information put out by sportswriters (Texas asked for and took the leftovers exit fees when actually the others offered and Texas refused, Texas asked for guarantees last year when they just kept the current deal which doesn’t guarantee anything and actually made it more equal by fully sharing Tier II rights and proposing to share Tier I, Texas is getting a Tier III deal when everyone else shares when of course the SEC schools get to keep Tier III, and a whole other series of flat out false info that gets repeated by sportswriters all over the country). You can’t blame people on message boards when the idiots paid for writing put out things that simply aren’t true.
And some is due to anonymous sources saying Texas is untrustworthy and arrogant and greedy. Obviously, I have a bias, but when someone after a confidential negotation claims anonymously that someone else is untrustworthy and arrogant and greedy, I think that is just a reflection on the anonymous source, certainly on their own trustworthiness. Obviously, I’m not in the private meetings, but in everything public I think Powers and Dodds have handled everything with class and with credit to the University.
LikeLike
From Dodd, looks like Okie is getting at least one of their wishes…
http://dennis-dodd.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/6270202/32165006
“The Big 12 is poised to replace commissioner Dan Beebe with former Big Eight commissioner Chuck Neinas, CBSSports.com has learned.
One highly placed source said the conference was moving quickly to replace Beebe who had been under fire from some conference members after recent instability within the league. Neinas, currently a well-known college consultant, is expected to be named interim commissioner.
…/cont/…”
LikeLike
REMINDER: Words of wisdom from the recent past–please note all Presidents, Conference Commissioners, and Realignment Junkies:
Harvey Perlman said there’s only one way you can fully commit long term to a conference, and that is you assign the media rights to your athletic contests to the conference for the long term. Perlman asked if the Big 12 members were willing to do that.
“The University of Texas made it clear they were not able to do that,” Perlman said.
LikeLike
Edit: not meant as a dump specifically on Texas, just a succinct bottom line case in point on where the rubber meets the road in conference stability in the today’s world of media driven college athletics.
If you’re not willing to commit like this or be a member of a club that takes this stance, its all short term negotiation, independence, and conference flipping till the next spin cycle.
LikeLike
No one in the Big 12 OR the Big East would be able to commit to that.
LikeLike
Agreed, I’m just not seeing either of those conferences as secure or stable enough to commit their TV rights to it for longer than a few years at most.
It’s not like the Big Ten or Pac-12 where they can look at periods of 10 years or even 20-25 years (in the Big Ten case) and know that they’ll be together.
LikeLike
Supposedly Texas was prepared to do just that in the Sunday meeting with OU when OU was studying going to the Pac 12.
There was never any indication how long that rights committment was, although recent reports mention an effort to get everyone to commit (without specifically mentioning media rights) for 5 years.
LikeLike
I would think they could easily committ to 2022 except for the fact that B1G rights come up in about 5 years. If the B1G gets a really huge offer, I don’t think MU, OU, KU or UT wants to not at least have an opportunity to discuss that option.
LikeLike
Behold, gentle FtTS posters! The Texas Legislature descends from the mount and deigns to address the masses! Harken unto their words and bask in the warming rays of their wisdom!
http://www.tcu360.com/sports/2011/09/13433.texas-lawmakers-ut-stay-big-12-and-let-tcu-join
Anyway, it looks as if there’s at least a baker’s dozen down in the Texas statehouse who read college football realignment blogs. Basically they want UT to stay in the Big 12 and merge with the Big East to form a 16 team (24[!] for basketball) conference.
Lessee how that’d break down:
TEXAS POD
Baylor
Texas
Texas Christian
Texas Tech
PLAINS POD
Kansas
Kansas State
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
MIDWEST POD
Cincinnati
Iowa State
Louisville
Missouri
EAST POD
Connecticut
Rutgers
South Florida
West Virginia
You probably don’t want Texas and OU in the same division, so those pods can be the ones that are never paired. 7+1+2 ought to do it. Not sure who TCU’s protected rival would be, but I imagine we’ll figure it out. We have a lot of practice making new friends and enemies.
For hoops, it’s the Texas, Plains and Midwest Pods in the West Division, the East Pod and the eight non-football members in the East Division. You get 11 division games, a couple of protected home-and-homes within your division, then six inter-divisional games. 19’s a good number, right? I thought about splitting that non-football group up, but the basketball strength isn’t too unbalanced this way and you protect some older rivalries.
Basketball tournament stays at MSG, football title game at Cowboys Stadium. That should work well most years, except for those rare occasions where Cincinnati and Connecticut win their divisions. But in that case you aren’t getting much turn out regardless.
LikeLike
Dodds doesn’t want TCU, and even if he was forced to, one of those would have to be bumped for Brigham Young, and it’s not going to be one of the Big 12 nine.
LikeLike
More likely Rutgers, UConn, and WVU have homes on the other side of the Mississippi.
Cincinatti, Louisville, and TCU make it twelve.
LikeLike
Yeah, I figure someone from that trio won’t be available. I wouldn’t mind having BYU around. And Dodds will most likely fight TCU’s inclusion into the Big 12.
I guess I should have made that two different posts; the main point was that the Texas Legislature (or a part of it, at least) has an opinion on the matter. I was just trying to visualize their suggestion.
LikeLike
Let’s say it’s Brigham Young, Cincinnati and Louisville to make the Big 12 twelve again.
East: Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Louisville, Missouri.
West: Baylor, Brigham Young, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech
It’s essentially the Big 12 North and South, with Cincinnati and Louisville in place of Nebraska and Colorado, and BYU in place of Texas A&M. Obviously, there’s an imbalance in football, but basketball would be solid.
LikeLike
The level of ascribed self-importance of the Texas legislature never ceases to amaze me.
I mean in what other conference or school system does the legislature always attempt to impose its will as if it was the puppet-master behind UT.
In all seriousness though, I actually wouldn’t mind seeing a 14 team conference come out of the Big 12. I know Dodds is going to be opposed to TCU, but I’d actually like to see the Big 12 achieve something near stability for the medium term at least.
LikeLike
Is 2014 considered long term?
LikeLike
In the context of stability:
If you’re talking about the Big East, yes.
If you’re talking about the Big 12, maybe 5-7 years (if they really can get Texas and Oklahoma to commit), then again I won’t be surprised if we’re all here writing about this next summer.
If you’re talking about the ACC, 10-15 years out is probably long term.
If you’re talking about the Big Ten, Pac-12, or SEC, 25 years out is probably long term.
LikeLike
As we move toward the end of the current realignment disruption, what have we learned? I think it’s more clear than ever that Notre Dame is the straw that stirs the conference realignment drink (and Texas provides the kick).
In this round, we saw the ACC expand, but leave two spots for ND and a partner to eventually fill. The B1G stood pat, waiting for ND to come on board. Available mid-level additions like Missouri and Rutgers were not snapped up. And Notre Dame stayed independent. Take it as a given that Notre Dame would prefer to stay independent in order to preserve its national schedule. As long as Notre Dame remains theoretically “available,” we are not going to see 4X16. It looks like a stalemate.
Realistically, how can we get to a situation where Notre Dame needs to join a conference?
Can the Pac-16 happen again? If it does, and the ACC has already added Rutgers and U-Conn to get to 16, then ND would have to join the B1G. But ND could still remain indy in an environment with a Pac-16, Acc-14, SEC-14, B1G (12), & Leftover Conference. Getting both the PAC and the ACC to 16 without ND seems unlikely now-unless Texas has a change of heart. So I don’t think ND will ever be “forced” into a conference.
Maybe ND would change its mind if it could both join a stable conference and retain its national schedule… The only way I can foresee this happening would be if Texas and Notre Dame eventually decide to join the ACC together. This would result in a conference with teams in the Northeast, Midwest, Mid-Atlantic, Southeast, and Southwest. ND could use its non-conference schedule to play teams like USC/Stanford/Washington on the west coast. But for this to happen, either Texas or the ACC would have to give-in on the LHN issue. The most likely way this happens is if OK and MU finally decide to drop Texas and go to the SEC. This would leave Texas alone on an island.
In that case, Texas and Notre Dame might decide to get the “last laugh” on the PAC, B1G, and SEC by jointly entering the new Mega-ACC.
Can you think of any other scenarios that would put ND into a conference?
If Notre Dame stays on the sidelines, then how much more realignment are we likely to see among the major conferences?
LikeLike
The Longhorn Network helps Notre Dame by effectively putting the kibosh on a 4 x 16 scenario. That’s probably also good news for some of the weaker BCS members (Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State), although Cincinnati and BCS member-in-waiting Texas Christian remain in peril if the Big East can’t survive.
LikeLike
But it’s a two-sided coin. Without the LHN, we probably wouldn’t have seen Nebraska and Texas A&M leave the Big 12, and things would generally have remained more stable.
LikeLike
Catch 22
LikeLike