The Big 12 is talking about taking a team from a conference that is much stronger than the Big 12. What happens if the BIG or SEC offer the Kansas or Oklahoma schools. As I see it the Big 12 is sitting at a poker table with four other players and they have the short stack. I think there is a chance the conference does not survive.
Big 12 losing some more teams
- Thread starter jedimasterjed
- Start date
Great point; or if it does it may grab 4 " weaker " teams to do it, with the thought to have a conference play-off game and build from there. OSU was the defending champion; who's to say if they couldn't have rolled Ala to win again - I know the controlling factor : we grew to a 64 team play off in CBB; we can't have an 8 teamer in CFB ? - should, if they are going to cave and allow Ok in like last year ( didn't have to win conference play in a championship game ) . Wanted to appear fair to the "lesser" world? There are always upsets in college football, fans love when they are competitive.
Nobody is going to leave the SEC or Big 10 in order to join the Big 12, especially with Texas and their Longhorn Network. So they're going to have to try to scrape together some other schools.
If they want to expand to 14, adding Houston is a must. Then they could go one of three directions. Since West Virginia is already in the conference, it may make sense to just add an East Carolina, Memphis and a Cincinnati. Or you could go west and add Boise State, BYU and maybe even Colorado State to the mix. All of those schools have larger enrollments, but nothing out there is going to elevate the Big 12 to a much higher level than it is already. Colorado State isn't a big time football school, but neither is KU or Iowa State. Then there's the more likely scenario which is not to pay any attention to regional geography and just add Boise State, Central Florida and Connecticut or something like that.
If they want to expand to 14, adding Houston is a must. Then they could go one of three directions. Since West Virginia is already in the conference, it may make sense to just add an East Carolina, Memphis and a Cincinnati. Or you could go west and add Boise State, BYU and maybe even Colorado State to the mix. All of those schools have larger enrollments, but nothing out there is going to elevate the Big 12 to a much higher level than it is already. Colorado State isn't a big time football school, but neither is KU or Iowa State. Then there's the more likely scenario which is not to pay any attention to regional geography and just add Boise State, Central Florida and Connecticut or something like that.
The
The Big12 is the walking dead. They died the day NU, MU and A&M left. Texas will stick around cobbling together a bunch of no name programs as it suits their ego and their football sucks right now. OU on the other hand I think is about ready to jump ship. I think OU and KU end up in the BIG
agree ... this is the way I think things play out over the next decade - or should play out
- there will be 4 super conferences with 2 divisions of 9-10 teams each (bye bye big 12)
- all conference games -with the exception of game # 12 will be divisional (no crossovers)
- division champs are thus determined by only divisional games - each team plays the same schedule thereby eliminating the effects of unequal scheduling
- game # 12 (after the division champs are determined) is a cross over
- the national championship is determined by a 16 team playoff (4 teams in each conference - top 2 teams in each division qualify - no subjective selection committee)
- game #12 (1st round of the playoffs) would see East #2 @ West #1 and West #2 @ East #1
- game #12 for the other nonqualifying teams would be a meaningless crossover
- round 2 of the playoff is the conference championship game based on game # 12 results
- this then pairs the teams down to 4 and the playoff proceeds as we have now
this format gives us 16 teams - very little chance of anyone deserving being left out and even opens the door for a cinderella run
eliminates the subjective nature of a selection committee
every conference is equally represented
as above it eliminates unbalanced scheduling from playing a role in determining divisional champions
the last week of the regular season is the first round of the playoff making Thanksgiving weekend games more intriguing
most importantly this expands the field to 16 while not needing to add any additional games
I still don't think the Big 12 is going anywhere and if we didn't feel so spurned by the conference I doubt most opinions shared on this board would be the same as they are now. Admit it, most Husker fans are rooting for it's implosion so we can say "Told ya so"! Which is understandable, I just think that our contempt for that conference clouds our thinking. Big 12 could add one "name" school (BYU, Boise?) and another nobody and be just fine.
Big 12 may be around but they are talking about adding a bunch of smaller teams with no tv markets after losing 4 pretty premier programs, at least if you look at history, market share, etc. Plus, if they add 2-4 teams they may increase their revenue but then you are splitting it 12-14 ways. I have a hard time believing they will see much increase per team except for the teams they just added. Like others have said, if they lose one of their three remaining premier teams they are doomed.
Nicely done; a lot of work and knowledge. My thought was if the B1G took a couple of the not quite 12; the 12 would shop from a generally considered lesser list; you have provided an excellent list for the 12 to expand back to 12, even with losses - hoping to maintain and have a conference championship game - Texas stays and has a shot at winning the conference. IMO, and it was the same before A+M went to the SEC : Texas thinks its TX, but the rest of the nation will watch an A+M with the same TV and eyeball thoughts - lol to UT, A+M is probably a bigger more relevant name now ( already has had one moment in the sun ). The B!G could probably get huge eyeballs from taking Houston. TX has some fine fans; but belongs in their own institution; not worth the drama.
It will surviive, was in my days, Big 6, then came Big 8, then texas, A&M, tech, and finally Baylor.
It will suceed, you can count on it. Oklahoma, Kansas, will be strong rest will follow.
# GBR
Anything can happen, but really, what's the most likely thing to happen. Nothing? Oklahoma made it to the football playoffs,....without a conference championship. The majority of Big12 teams don't have a better spot to go to. Texas doesn't want to expand, and they run the conference.
If it's about the money, the Big12 will expand if the money will be better. Big12 teams can make their own money off of certain lower tier rights. The more popular you are, the more money you can make. I'll be honest, I don't know much about how their contract rights work (or NU's for that matter). I did see some payout numbers but I don't know if they're apples to apples, our conference payout was less than every member of the Big12 this last year, including TCU and WVU.
We left because we thought the conference was about to collapse. It didn't. We "bargained" from a fire-sale mentality, and ended up with a fire-sale contract (go figure).
If it was that bad, Oklahoma would have left already. Something other than the day of week has to change before the Big12 collapses.
If it's about the money, the Big12 will expand if the money will be better. Big12 teams can make their own money off of certain lower tier rights. The more popular you are, the more money you can make. I'll be honest, I don't know much about how their contract rights work (or NU's for that matter). I did see some payout numbers but I don't know if they're apples to apples, our conference payout was less than every member of the Big12 this last year, including TCU and WVU.
We left because we thought the conference was about to collapse. It didn't. We "bargained" from a fire-sale mentality, and ended up with a fire-sale contract (go figure).
If it was that bad, Oklahoma would have left already. Something other than the day of week has to change before the Big12 collapses.
The issue I see with your scenario is the lack of regular season crossover games. While publicly the B10 schools have shown unanimous support for the expansion moves made so far, there have been plenty of rumblings that behind the scenes some schools have not been happy that teams they had been playing for 100 years are now only on the schedule here and there. The B10 conference is the oldest in D1 and for better or worse tradition is our brand.
Expansion is probably inevitable and I'm not claiming the B10 presidents (remember they, not the ADs are the voters) will block it. What I'm saying is that the way you have it structered, where it essentially turns it into two mini-conferences, probably won't pass. While I'm sure there are plenty of ways to skin this cat what is more likely is the B10 adding two schools and going to 10 conference games...7 in your division and 3 crossover...its not perfect but I just don't see a scenario passing where the only time you play a school in the other division is during the post season.
Edit: Fwiw...your scenario with having a 16 team playoff with a mini-playoff amongst 4 b10 teams to send one to the final four lends itself to a "pod" structure...this alignment would have 4 pods of four...each year you play the other teams in your pod and each year the pods rotate playing each other so that all teams in each pod have a similar schedule and you would play every school in the conference at least once every three years...the only imbalance (not including who you get home/away) would be that would only account for 7 games...you'd probably also have to have a couple "random" matchups each year (which could include protected rivalries for schools not in the same pod)
Last edited:
all good points - I just think too much is determined by the unbalanced schedule -- Northwestern this year plays both Michigan and OSU and some schools play only one or neither.
the second thing I will add is that my proposal would allow for both Michigan and OSU to reach the playoff and conference championship game rather than just one - they (or 2 other top programs who just happen to be in the same division) could play a second time at a neutral site (the conf championship game). I get tradition and sympathize but at the end of the day only the 2 programs involved give a rip about some ax or pig. The best traditions are built when 2 storied programs play yearly with a great deal at stake - ie Michigan and OSU and formerly Neb and OU
Last edited:
I'm not going to say there is a perfect solution to this as any scenario will have its warts short if going to a 15 game season of only conference play.
However, the B10 presidents will not vote for a system where two schools might literally never play each other again in their entire history. And in your scenario that literally could happen. For example, Michigan and Minnesota play for something called the little brown jug which is cfb's second oldest trophy game. Unless things change, Minny is not likely to go to the playoff often, it would need to align with a year Michigan does too and the chances become even slimmer if it is not a first round game. The little brown jug might not matter to anyone but those two but Michigan and Minny are not going to vote for a structure in which they literally might never play each other in FB again (though over decades I'm sure it happens by chance)...and that is just one example...I'm sure other schools have theirs
Big 10-4 is not going to take OU based on academic concerns alone (not to mention OSU is coming with them and even the SEC would have a hard enough time talking themselves into that).
I could see K-state split with KU, but that could result in political issues in Kansas.
I could see K-state split with KU, but that could result in political issues in Kansas.
To your second point...I can't speak for every Michigan person but for the most part a scenario that we could play tOSU a second time is not a selling point. This discussion was played out (by alumni, fans, the media, etc.) when you guys joined the conference. As you might remember (the legends and leaders thing was only 3 years ago) Michigan and tOSU were put in two different divisions and the B10 tried selling us on the rematch thing (which never ended up materializing anyway). It was generally hated by Michigan folk because part of The Game is the finality of it...one school goes home and licks their wounds for the next 364 days. It's part of what make The Game special and the generally feeling was that if the two teams had a do over a week or two later it would ruin the whole thing.
The thing you have to understand is that for us old time B10 programs the conference means something to us...not in the SEC way as we tend not to chant B1G, B1G, B1G after wins unless it is to mock the SEC...but our traditions matter. Things like our trophy games and the Rose Bowl matter.
The world of college football has changed and the B10 had to change with it. And if/when expansion happens again there will likely be a lot of compromises made. However, don't be surprised when the conference as a whole fights to preserve to as many of its traditions as possible even if by doing so it creates some inequalities for the small handful of programs that have a legitimate chance to contend for NCs.
Can I ask why the Rose Bowl matters? Is it just because it's always been the bowl game where the conference winner goes to?
I have a hard time believing the Rose Bowl is ever going to matter to a Nebraska fan. Back in the day we had our Orange Bowl for a few years, but that's been gone for ages..
I would think the conference playoff is what's going to matter, not the Rose Bowl.
If in a super conference scenario, there is no cross-over, then in essence, you're saying there should be 8 mid-sized conferences. What's the point being in the same conference as Ohio State if you'll never play them.
Honestly, everyone talks about how inevitable increases are, but I don't know why it is needed. If they simply expand the final 4 to the final 8 (make the first round on home fields), I see each conference winner getting an invite and 3 wildcards that can include mid-majors. Why does this have to be more complicated than that?
Honestly, everyone talks about how inevitable increases are, but I don't know why it is needed. If they simply expand the final 4 to the final 8 (make the first round on home fields), I see each conference winner getting an invite and 3 wildcards that can include mid-majors. Why does this have to be more complicated than that?
As I said these things matter to the old time B10 conference programs. It probably matters a little less to the younger kids and I can understand why it doesn't matter to NU folk because you are new to the conference. But there is a reason why the conference initially refused to join the BCS unless they kept the game B10/P10(12)...there is a reason we fought again to protect that game when the playoff era began recently.
Maybe you know all this but the Rose Bowl was the first ever bowl game and it was first played in 1902 pitting Michigan vs. Stanford. From the 1940s-70s the Rose Bowl was the only post season game the B10 allowed its teams to play in...yes, only one team from the B10 was allowed to play in a bowl so it was the Rose Bowl or bust.
Since then B10 teams were allowed to play in other bowls but until the BCS what you played for was to get to the Rose Bowl...when you spoke about a certain team...such as your squad from 19XX you said they were a Rose Bowl team...you didn't have to say conference champ because it meant the same thing and if you did it probably meant you tied for the title but lost the tie breaker meaning you really came in second and went to a lesser bowl.
Getting to the Rose bowl was the goal...period. B10 programs were judged on how many they went to and the last time they did. Obviously that is not quite the case anymore because of the playoff but it is still is a part of our tradition...it connects generations of fans..."hey remember that rose bowl team of 19XX"...its a part of the conferences DNA and not just another bowl game...the last BCS game my wolverines went to was the Orange Bowl...while it was a BCS game it felt like we fell short on our goals because we didn't get to the Rose Bowl.
i get tradition and the Rose Bowl but when tradition gets in the way of a potential national championship then there is a problem ... tradition, the big ten and the Rose Bowl basically prevented Nebraska from winning a unanimous national title in 1997 .. I can see why Michigan and the BIG would cling to it as in this case it allowed Michigan to squeak by a weaker Washington State team and be given a back door split national title while Nebraska was destroying Peyton Manning and 3rd ranked Tennessee
Yeah, I got connected with a girlfriend from 30 years ago and we exchanged emails about how our lives turned out. She was married and divorced twice, and surprise, surprise, she had horrible things to say about both ex hubbys. Funny how that works.
It isn't needed, and that's why all these merry go round discussions start. It's what some fans want to see, rather than market forces at work. It may happen if one conference can provide more incentives than another. But invites may only apply to teams that won't dilute profits.
The Big12 could pick up a new member or two, but only if it gets texas more money (or a sweet land "donation" by Houston that would have absolutely nothing to do with Houston entering the Big12, but would only be "donated" to texas if Houston is invited to join).
Seems to me like some market forces will have to change before anything big happens.
Lets not turn this into a 97 and backdoor debate (cough, cough mizzou)...lets stay on subject...
The subject is that your "proposal" essentially means that the B10 would really be two separate mini-conferences (for football) with teams on each side never playing each other until the post season...meaning you will have programs who have a lot of history together that could literally never play each other again (more likely only see each other once every few decades). If you think the original members of the B10 are going to let that happen I have some ocean front property in Omaha I'd like to sell you.
You guys are new to this conference and it appears you actually don't get and/or appreciate the traditions of this conference. That's fine...they aren't a part of your history but they are a part of ours. You don't have to understand why they are important to us...just know that they are so that your can understand why certain decisions will be made if expansion goes forward.
Look, I get your opinion that you want things to line up fairly for teams with a real shot at the NC. But, there are only a small handful of programs that realistically have a true shot competing for a title in the foreseeable future...do you think having a fair path to the NC game is a big enough priority for say Northwestern that they would give up playing schools like Michigan and tOSU who they have been playing for over 100 years? Do you think that MSU fought to be in the East because they thought it gave them an easier path to the playoff?
My school is one of the programs that could have a legitimate shot at winning an NC in the foreseeable future. However, we just reupped our series with ND when picking a more manageable OOC opponent would make a title run easier. But somethings are just that important that you take on the challenge fair or not...it's called tradition.
ellbo, if you are referring to the kicked ball go back and watch the whole game. Missouri had a completion on a kicked ball earlier in the game.... Imagine that.
Also WSU spiked the ball sooner than texaas did( 2009Big 12 CCG) at the end of the Rose Bowl game. (cough, cough, cough).
Also WSU spiked the ball sooner than texaas did( 2009Big 12 CCG) at the end of the Rose Bowl game. (cough, cough, cough).
You are not the sole owner of tradition. Like it or not, change is coming. I was against a college football playoff. My reasoning was that it would diminish the importance of the regular season and alter tradition.
Well, with the BCS, conference re-alignment and, now, the playoffs, all that is altered immensely. The Big 8 had their tie in to the Orange Bowl. Outside the pretty floats I didn't give a crap about the Rose Bowl unless it was a good matchup. The first iteration of the BCS came along, matching #1 and #2 in the BCS. That pretty much regulated all other bowl games to a lower tier of interest.
The Pac 10 and the Big 10 realized that they were being left out (1997 ring a bell?) and we negotiated a BCS revision. With all the Power 5 involved the bowl games became less and less meaningful.
Now, with a full blown playoffs in play I find almost no interest in any bowl game outside of the one that my team plays. We might as well rip the band-aid off. Tradition is shot. We lost our long standing rivalry with OU, which one could argue was the best matchup in the modern age.
As these conferences grew we no longer could reasonably play everyone in our conference. We now had members with whom we had little to no tradition with. Tradition means everything to me, but it is what it is. We've made our bed to create this NFL Lite.
And before you say that your tradition is more meaningful than anyone else's tradition.. stop. Michigan has long been my second favorite team. I remember listening to Bob Ufer on the radio as a kid. AC with "the pose". Hail to the Victors. I hated Notre Dame. Still do.
You do understand that you didn't just "let" NU into your conference. The B1G without expansion was pretty weak. Not a lot of interest outside of your shrinking population footprint. I'll give you the conference longevity award. University of Chicago. You guys go way back. But we were there too. Not afraid to play your conference's best. Knute Rockne. With the addition of NU you improved your brand nationally.
Many of the traditions will remain. They are what makes college football great. Paul Bunyan's axe. The oaken bucket. The dotting of the "i". The tunnel walk. The warrior spiking the spear into mid-field.
But things will change. Rivalries will weaken with the larger conferences. If you don't play each other every year it just can't remain the same. No way around that. TV money now dictates playing night games and playing games outside of Saturday.
That tradition you call the Rose Bowl just doesn't mean what it used to with the advent of playoffs in the FBS. It just can't. It will never again be the game it once was. Even if it holds the playoff championship game it will just be the CG at the Rose Bowl. If it holds the semi-final matchup then it may very well not have any Big Ten or Pac 12 participants. There will be no local interest outside of the alumni base of the participating schools. If it is just a "regular" Rose Bowl it most likely won't have the conference (Big Ten/Pac 12) winners playing unless neither conference made the CFP.
Change will come. One you realize that tradition has been altered for good you have to vote what's good for the playoffs. After all, you ditched the tradition many years ago. You can't put that genie back in the bottle.
Fewer people care about the Rose Bowl every year and that ain't changing. Rose Bowl is the grand daddy of them all in name only at this point, it just doesn't have as much cache anymore. Sorry to be the one to break it to you. Conference realignment and the Playoffs are probably the two biggest culprits, and neither of those are going to be undone anytime soon.
A lot to respond to so I will try to do so orderly:
1) I never said the B10 is the sole owner of tradition. I just said it is important to us and will factor into decisions
2) I agree that change is (likely) coming. I also said (in a prior post) that compromises will be made. Going back to my point #1, tradition will factor into decisions and don't be surprised when the B10 does as much as possible to protect those traditions while adapting to the new where it has to.
3) While I understand you guys don't give a crap about the Rose Bowl or any other specific bowl, it matters to us. In most years, during the BCS era, the RB was the highest rated bowl game besides the NC game because it matters to B10 fans. I'll just leave this here for you if you curious at all what your conference cares about
http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/delany-rose-bowl-move-accommodate-playoffs-40895202
4) You do realize that how things in 1997 played out had zero bearing on the B10 and P10(12) joining the BCS...NADA, NONE, ZILCH. The deal was hammered out before and in fact is completely my point. The two conferences demanded they protect the Rose Bowl match-up vs. allowing the BCS to determine teams.
5) You are trying to tell us how we feel about the Rose Bowl. Stop, I don't tell African-Americans what it feels like to be black because I am not black. I have already said the importance isn't the same...I just said it matters.
6) I'm sorry you guys gave up your traditional rivalries. It seems you had a pretty crappy situation going on in the B12 and made a decision that you felt was best for your university. My school didn't have to make that decision because we were already in the B10. Again, there will (likely) be compromises but the conference will also dictate a lot of it's own terms (not all, but a lot).
7) THIS IS THE BIG POINT...I'M NOT ARGUING THAT, WITH CONFERENCES GETTING BIGGER, THAT ALL THE B10 TEAMS WILL FIND A WAY TO PLAY EACH OTHER EVERY YEAR. WHAT I AM SAYING IS THAT ANY PROPOSAL THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE CROSS-DIVISION GAMES (AND TEAMS THAT HAVE BEEN PLAYING EACH OTHER FOR 100+ YEARS NOT PLAY EACH OTHER, IN THE REGULAR SEASON, EVER) IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
8) I never said our tradition was more "meaningful"...rather I said tradition is core to our conference's brand. How many different conferences has NU been in during it's history? Michigan has been in one (with a short leave to independence a 100 years ago) as have all the original members except for the one who no longer participates in D1 sports (University of Chicago). Interesting fact: All but one of the original members (sans Chicago) reside in the West Division. Michigan is the only one in the East.
9) I'm not going to say you didn't grow up a Michigan fan...but it was Desmond who made "the pose" and not AC
10) Yes, the B10 didn't just "let" you in...but you also understand you weren't on the original list (well or the second list...the first list was ND, ND and then ND). But some things happened (thanks Barry Alvarez) and it became a fit. It became a match made in heaven. I can tell you that I heard first hand from people that had a say in this, from the Michigan side, that they were highly considering voting against expansion if it meant some of the schools on the first list (meaning the one after ND only). NU was a no brainer because it has TRADITION.
11,12,13) Again, I'm not saying that certain "rivalries" won't be deluded because they won't be able to play each other each year but rather the B10 will not go to a structure where certain schools never play each other. Again, I'm not saying that there won't be compromises based on the reality of the future and adapting to it. Again, I am not saying that the Rose Bowl is as important as it used to be...just that it matters to us...jeez...I was asked a question and answered it...sorry if you don't understand.
14) The CFB landscape has changed and is changing but the tradition is still there for the B10 and it will make sure it protects it the best it can without becoming irrelevant.
BTW...I'm calling this post my Ten Points of Light...even though there are 14 just like our conference. Weird how we haven't changed the name of the conference...maybe it's that tradition/brand thing...
Last edited:
You keep saying that things are never going to happen. Never is a long time. It doesn't really matter if the Rose Bowl is still important to you. Over time it will mean less and less, especially to the younger crowd. I suppose you can shake your fist and tell them to get off your lawn (conference). I do know how you feel though. I'm very big on tradition. Many on here can tell you that I'm not fond of practices that do away with our school's traditions. Maybe I'm playing devil's advocate, but things do change whether we like them or not.
You are right. My ol' memory cells seem to remember AC striking that pose. Everyone does it nowadays. Thanks ESPN.
you are scheduled to play Minnesota once in the next 4 years ..... that tradition is dead - you just haven't realized it yet ... both teams will have completely different staffs and nearly a complete roster turnover between games
in the Big 12 OU and Neb still played twice every 4 years and even that break was enough to kill tradition
The Big traditionally likes the Rose Bowl because that's all they could hang their hats on. Nobody in the conference has been national championship caliber in years with the exception of OSU a couple of times.
Do not be surprised to see two power conferences with 32 to 40 teams, much like how the NFL is set up.
There would be four divisions of 8-10 schools with a regional setup. Think Old BIG, old Big8ish, old pac8, old sec, old acc, old bigEast etc...
Why? Think how competitive networks are going to become in the future, especially with potential cord cutting. The BTN could leverage an adiitional channel or two, people would be inclined to purchase it even if their favorite schools are in another conference, and the higher cost leverage reaching more markets.
There would be four divisions of 8-10 schools with a regional setup. Think Old BIG, old Big8ish, old pac8, old sec, old acc, old bigEast etc...
Why? Think how competitive networks are going to become in the future, especially with potential cord cutting. The BTN could leverage an adiitional channel or two, people would be inclined to purchase it even if their favorite schools are in another conference, and the higher cost leverage reaching more markets.
Consolidation does tend to improve bargaining power. I don't think many people have considered 2 conferences before, it's always been said things would boil down to 4. Maybe this eventually happens, it's certainly a new twist.
I was thinking two because the network powers clearly are the SEC and BIG. The ACC and PAC are destabilizing because what networks they have or will have are not going well at all. UCLA, Colorado, both Arizona schools are beginning to see greener grass and the ACC has almost broken up as many times as the Big12 in recent years. Their new network is going to be a digital only network with little optimism.
Eventually the two current powers will absorb more as they begin to realize the larger the reach, the more enticing the BIG and SEC networks will become to purchase. Even for out of markets.
Watch it unfold... Big12 powers leave first, then the PAC and ACC, then some BIG and SEC reshuffling on the fringes, then the a few more pickups and the new medium will be reached.
I think this story is more interesting than what the big 12 is doing. Is she still hot?
With gawd as my witness I was going to ask for pics when I read his response, but I didn't want to be so juvenile, then you came along and saved me the trouble
IMO there will end up being 4 or 5 conferences with 16 teams. 4 divisions in each one. The B12 better try & catch up before everyone pilfers them to extinction. Adding the 4 teams does nothing to enhance their likeability.