Big 12's Bowlsby on Conference Expansion

GetYaNumbersUp

New member
Mar 15, 2013
8,163
39
0
some people are obsessed with expansion, I don't get it. Adding a couple ****** mid majors does nothing for me, might as well stay at 10 and if/when the Big 12 implodes hope like hell the ACC or SEC takes us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EEResistable

CT Mountaineer

New member
May 29, 2001
5,255
8
0
Last edited:

bobhertzel'ssweatpants

Well-known member
Nov 10, 2009
48,498
578
113
This is not a good sign. It means Texas doesn't want expansion and is vetoing it. They are obviously more focused on their own economic situation than they are on league stability. Of course, as long as Texas is happy with the situation the conference is stable.

Why would anyone want expansion by adding mid-major programs? The only way expansion would make sense for the Big 12 is if they added a program that brings true value to the league (Florida State, Clemson, Arkansas - which is not going to happen). Adding CUSAish type programs like Cincinnati & Memphis would be a terrible move & would not add any stability to the league. If anything that would make it less stable. That's a Big East type move.
 

Wvu21795_rivals

New member
Oct 29, 2011
333
26
0
Well there is a reason the old teams from the Big12 left, and the reason is Texas. Their greed will eventually do the Conference in.
 

43rd Parallel

Active member
May 29, 2001
56,215
312
83
Staying at 10 is the smart play at this point. Why add schools that are going to cost you money? It's a conference not a charity.

And does anyone really want to replace Oklahoma or Texas on the home schedule for Cincinnati or Memphis?
 

doctom4

New member
Aug 4, 2006
12,885
10
0
Big 12 should add BYU and either Louisville, Houston or Cincinnati. Maybe Memphis, but that would be my last choice of those. Houston would be my first choice. It fits in the league, used to be an SWC school and has a huge untapped market.

Not expanding is shortsighted. It'll lead to better TV deals, playoff money and will prevent what happened last year (and maybe this year, if you've seen the "schedules" Big XII teams are playing) from happening again.
 

bobhertzel'ssweatpants

Well-known member
Nov 10, 2009
48,498
578
113
Big 12 should add BYU and either Louisville, Houston or Cincinnati. Maybe Memphis, but that would be my last choice of those. Houston would be my first choice. It fits in the league, used to be an SWC school and has a huge untapped market.

Not expanding is shortsighted. It'll lead to better TV deals, playoff money and will prevent what happened last year (and maybe this year, if you've seen the "schedules" Big XII teams are playing) from happening again.

How is playing Houston in league play going to help a team get into the playoffs? Houston in most seasons is a joke. They haven't been consistently good since the 70's (Finished the season ranked 4 times since 1979 - and haven't finished in the top 25 since 2011). Not to mention, they are another generic fan base. They don't even average 40,000 fans per game. Do our fans really want to go back to the Big East?? Hell that's not even like the Big East - more like CUSA or the Sun Belt.

Houston Attendance
2010 31,728
2011 31,731
2012 27,247
2013 24,256
2014 28,311
 

tigeer

New member
Nov 19, 2003
1,713
4
0
Agree 100%. What I'm saying is we can't hope that one of the others takes us should the Big 12 dissolve. This should be a back burner topic everyday.

Adding ****** mid majors isn't a sound strategy either. No one else wants Cinci, Memphis, or UCF, the Big 12 sure as hell shouldn't either.
 

wbgvwbgv

New member
Nov 19, 2001
8,321
134
0
Agree 100%. What I'm saying is we can't hope that one of the others takes us should the Big 12 dissolve. This should be a back burner topic everyday.

Everyday for 12 years? By the time an existing member school can think about leaving the Big 12 or ACC or B10, the national debt will be so large that every penny of the federal budget will go to paying the interest on the debt and entitlement spending.

That means no money for national defense. No money for homeland security. No money to fix the nation’s crumbling bridges and roads. No money for medical research to find a cure for cancer or Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s diseases and so on. And this will happen sooner if we allow citizenship for 30,000,000 illegal immigrants.

There are much bigger things to worry about over the next 12 years. I think the power conferences will look exactly as they do now until the media rights contracts expire, and IMO that is very good thing for WVU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BackpageNews

TruWVblu

New member
Jun 1, 2001
12,183
47
0
I agree that adding two mid majors is not an attractive idea. However, it is my opinion that a 10 team conference will not survive long in what has become the very big business of college football. BYU can hardly be considered a mid major along the lines of Memphis or Cincy, and the only other school currently available that makes any sense is Houston.
 

Darth_VadEER

New member
Dec 14, 2010
23,025
3,212
0
Adding a couple misfits won't provide us any additional security and what's the point of sacrificing income just to appease a handful of insecure fans?
 

Orlaco

Active member
Dec 13, 2007
29,107
229
63
Adding a couple misfits won't provide us any additional security and what's the point of sacrificing income just to appease a handful of insecure fans?

Your point is valid.. ....but a good argument could be made about investing in expansion to help build a solid future for the conference. Yes, investing cost cash and isn't guaranteed to give us solid additions in the long run.... .....but doing nothing does guarantee status quo or a decline in quality. With only 10 teams it would be difficult to argue that Big 12 athletics could improve.

I'm not arguing that expansion should happen....just that it's a worthy discussion. A discussion you feel is only about/for the fans even though several influential Big 12 'members of management' have participated too.
 

Darth_VadEER

New member
Dec 14, 2010
23,025
3,212
0
Your point is valid.. ....but a good argument could be made about investing in expansion to help build a solid future for the conference. Yes, investing cost cash and isn't guaranteed to give us solid additions in the long run.... .....but doing nothing does guarantee status quo or a decline in quality. With only 10 teams it would be difficult to argue that Big 12 athletics could improve.

I'm not arguing that expansion should happen....just that it's a worthy discussion. A discussion you feel is only about/for the fans even though several influential Big 12 'members of management' have participated too.

If investments need to be made, they should be made by the universities wishing to gain membership. Let them assume the risk in order to make themselves better, not us. Make no mistake, these universities aren't flying blind. They know what benchmarks they need to meet in order to be considered a legitimate candidate and current conference membership won't be cutting their own income and budgets simply to be charitable. Surely, WVU wasn't provided that gracious helping hand and I don't expect the B12 to become the Mother Teresa of college athletics.

Of course, a sudden and drastic infusion of revenue into a program would improve the program itself but gaining that privileged is the responsibility of the universities positioning themselves for inclusion. Besides, there will always be universities ready to make the jump if we ever seriously needed someone in a pinch. So why sacrifice our own funding when it's not necessary?

In response to your statement I put in bold, I'm not sure I agree. To accept your argument, I'd have to accept the premise that things always improve when they get bigger, and I don't believe that. Expansion and organizational growth is not a symptom of improvement, or becoming better. It's just means something got bigger and if the entity was lousy to begin, now it's just bigger and even more lousy. Bad acquisition can destroy an organization, it happens everyday and IMO, the B12 has an awful lot of improving to do before they should add new members.

College football expansion is a great microcosm for geo-politics, so keep that in mind. At the heart of everything rests a government budget.

Is it a worthy discussion? Sure, in the context of message board discussions it's great. I just typed four paragraphs about it, so I obviously don't mind it.
 

WarezEER

New member
Sep 18, 2008
5,142
27
0
The Big 12 is a charitable organization and I thank them for taking the WV Mountaineers into their fold. Texas is the big dog in the conference and they didn't veto the inclusion of WV.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EEResistable

VaultHunter

New member
Apr 15, 2014
13,233
522
0
I love how some of you act like there are absolutely zero schools out there that would not be a good addition to the Big12. Like any of those schools wouldn't become P5 programs after a few years in the conference. Some of you need to look in the mirror because many people looked at WVU as basically a mid major.....So basically what your saying is WVU was in the exact same position before it joined the Big12 as it is now 3 years in?

And there are absolutely no schools out there who could grow just as much as WVU can being a member of a P5 conference?... Lol ok
 

Orlaco

Active member
Dec 13, 2007
29,107
229
63
If investments need to be made, they should be made by the universities wishing to gain membership. Let them assume the risk in order to make themselves better, not us. Make no mistake, these universities aren't flying blind. They know what benchmarks they need to meet in order to be considered a legitimate candidate and current conference membership won't be cutting their own income and budgets simply to be charitable. Surely, WVU wasn't provided that gracious helping hand and I don't expect the B12 to become the Mother Teresa of college athletics.

The financial distance between the have and have-nots is growing at a rate that I doubt very very few schools not already in a P5 conference (or named Notre Dame) could possibly keep pace with..and that's without considering how far they're already behind. Even if it is possible such a school would most likely have multiple suitors....while a team the Big 12 invested in would have an obligation (GOR too) to continue the relationship.

I get and respect that you don't think the Big 12 needs to expand but I completely disagree that if that day ever comes it can be anything other than an investment (as opposed to an acquisition of a well established product).
 

WarezEER

New member
Sep 18, 2008
5,142
27
0
Schools can spend all they can beg, borrow or steal to 'improve' their sports program but in the end...................there will be losses just like they had to deal with before they spent the dough to improve. There just ain't enough wins to go around. Some folks will never understand this. The fans need to shake the Pepsi out of their ears! The administrators are laughing all the way to the bank!
 

Buckaineer

New member
Sep 3, 2001
7,294
59
0
Expansion isn't about appeasing a few "insecure fans", its about getting the BIG 12 into the playoffs regularly and adding viewers for tv ratings and increasing the conference footprint and adding to the recruiting base.
Its also about creating future revenue streams that aren't possible now.

For the next 10 years no one is likely going to think about departing the conference, but if over that time the BIG 12 doesn't do anything at all then the revenues aren't going to be there to keep everyone happy and the conference is likely to have experienced many years out of the playoffs and tons of negative press as a result.

The idea that adding schools that have shown they could be competitive in any conference over time would be worse than doing nothing is shortsighted and bound to lead to significant problems in the future.
Unfortunately there are many who live in a fantasy land where WVU is going to just move to their dream of the ACC? for some reason--but the most likely scenario is WVU is going to be left out of major college athletics along with a few others down the road because of a desire to do nothing so for a few seasons WVU can play UT and OU every year instead of one every year and another every other year or two on, two off.
 

Buckaineer

New member
Sep 3, 2001
7,294
59
0
Adding a couple misfits won't provide us any additional security and what's the point of sacrificing income just to appease a handful of insecure fans?

There are schools that aren't "misfits" out there that aren't currently part of the party.

Anyone added will get pro rata shares at least of tv revenue and will likely bring new revenues such as a new bowl and NCAA revenues to the conference to be divided. A CCG add with more teams will more than likely offset any splitting of bowl or NCAA monies over more programs anyway (unless of course the CCG payout is negotiated for a 10 team league rather than a 12 team one).

Expansion would help greatly with making the playoffs regularly which is essential, and with the right choices recruiting, fanbase and viewership could also be improved.

In 9 years the conference will need to renegotiate tv contracts and without expansion that could be problematic--nothing new to add to the network pot and likely years of bad press, lower tv ratings and marginal competitive success certainly won't help. You can be guaranteed that others will be trying to come after the "choice" programs at the end of the tv contracts so the league is going to have to be able to ensure that staying looks better than leaving for everyone.
 

Cheat Lake EER

Active member
Jun 4, 2003
30,230
264
83
How is playing Houston in league play going to help a team get into the playoffs? Houston in most seasons is a joke. They haven't been consistently good since the 70's (Finished the season ranked 4 times since 1979 - and haven't finished in the top 25 since 2011). Not to mention, they are another generic fan base. They don't even average 40,000 fans per game. Do our fans really want to go back to the Big East?? Hell that's not even like the Big East - more like CUSA or the Sun Belt.

Houston Attendance
2010 31,728
2011 31,731
2012 27,247
2013 24,256
2014 28,311

I'm with you. Give me BYU and one other quality team, preferably east of the Mississippi. I think BYU is going to see the light after this year that they need a conference soon - the rest of their schedule is CUSA-like. I'd have been OK if we'd had also taken BYU and Louisville when they added us and TCU.
 

wbgvwbgv

New member
Nov 19, 2001
8,321
134
0
Why would expansion help with the playoffs? I'll agree that adding teams won't reduce our share of revenue, but I also don't think that expansion will get us more money. Why are you anticipating bad press, lower TV ratings, and marginal competition?

I am not sure how Texas or Oklahoma could have a better conference arrangement than what they have now. Texas & Oklahoma are in the top 10 in revenue. 60% of the conference members are in their states and the Big 12 has a great Bowl schedule ( including the Sugar Bowl ). Great basketball, baseball, and Olympic sports. What could the PAC12 or SEC give them that they don't already have in abundance?
 

Charleston Mountie

New member
Sep 20, 2015
680
19
0
Why would expansion help with the playoffs? I'll agree that adding teams won't reduce our share of revenue, but I also don't think that expansion will get us more money. Why are you anticipating bad press, lower TV ratings, and marginal competition?

I am not sure how Texas or Oklahoma could have a better conference arrangement than what they have now. Texas & Oklahoma are in the top 10 in revenue. 60% of the conference members are in their states and the Big 12 has a great Bowl schedule ( including the Sugar Bowl ). Great basketball, baseball, and Olympic sports. What could the PAC12 or SEC give them that they don't already have in abundance?

Many things go into conference stability, after finances there is no factor more critical than perception. While it does one's pride some good if others think of the Big 12 as a stable and growing conference, the people that really must hold that opinion are its members. More than one school has switched conferences because they thought it was going down and they took the first lifeboat they could grab. The Big 12 almost lost Oklahoma that way.

There is also the benefit of an extra game at a time when the playoff's are being decided. TCU and Baylor are not going to be rare instances as they were in 2014 for the Big 12. Not playing the week the choices are made is a huge negative.

As for expansion candidates. All the new school has to be is better than Kansas and that is not hard to do. That is the minimum, the hope is that you land another Texas level school, but that is not going to happen. So the plausible outcome is adding a mid-level school, like WVU or K State and there are several of those.

My opinion is that the next round starts when the SEC fills out its roster and goes to 16. There are only two schools that fit their needs in every department; North Carolina and Virginia. The last SEC expansion took schools on their western flank and they, if they are logical, will move east next time. I think both schools would go without pausing to say yes. That will shake up the ACC and start the dominoes.

The hold up is the Grant of Rights. Much as some like to think it is just paper, it isn't.
 

Charleston Mountie

New member
Sep 20, 2015
680
19
0
I love how some of you act like there are absolutely zero schools out there that would not be a good addition to the Big12. Like any of those schools wouldn't become P5 programs after a few years in the conference. Some of you need to look in the mirror because many people looked at WVU as basically a mid major.....So basically what your saying is WVU was in the exact same position before it joined the Big12 as it is now 3 years in?

And there are absolutely no schools out there who could grow just as much as WVU can being a member of a P5 conference?... Lol ok

You really do not know anything about WVU do you? WVU has not been a mid-major since the term was invented. You sound like a Hokie or a Pity Cat with a chip on your shoulder. VT has been a mid major in its lifetime and Pitt hasn't, but it is so bad now, who can tell the difference?
 

wbgvwbgv

New member
Nov 19, 2001
8,321
134
0
Many things go into conference stability, after finances there is no factor more critical than perception. While it does one's pride some good if others think of the Big 12 as a stable and growing conference, the people that really must hold that opinion are its members. More than one school has switched conferences because they thought it was going down and they took the first lifeboat they could grab. The Big 12 almost lost Oklahoma that way.

There is also the benefit of an extra game at a time when the playoff's are being decided. TCU and Baylor are not going to be rare instances as they were in 2014 for the Big 12. Not playing the week the choices are made is a huge negative.

As for expansion candidates. All the new school has to be is better than Kansas and that is not hard to do. That is the minimum, the hope is that you land another Texas level school, but that is not going to happen. So the plausible outcome is adding a mid-level school, like WVU or K State and there are several of those.

My opinion is that the next round starts when the SEC fills out its roster and goes to 16. There are only two schools that fit their needs in every department; North Carolina and Virginia. The last SEC expansion took schools on their western flank and they, if they are logical, will move east next time. I think both schools would go without pausing to say yes. That will shake up the ACC and start the dominoes.

The hold up is the Grant of Rights. Much as some like to think it is just paper, it isn't.

Oklahoma and Texas have stabilized the Big 12 because it gives them the best conference arrangement in college football. They flirted with becoming PAC12 members which caused a few Big 12 schools to jump ship, but in the end that idea was rejected. The Big 12 then added two great schools (TCU & WVU), signed a grant of rights for the next 12 years or so, and finalized a very good TV contract.

"Just a piece of paper" - it is a contract worth a gazillion bucks to each member school. Also, the Big 12 can easily add a conference championship game in the future if not having one hinders them in anyway, but I don't think that will even be necessary.
 

Orlaco

Active member
Dec 13, 2007
29,107
229
63
Oklahoma and Texas have stabilized the Big 12 because it gives them the best conference arrangement in college football. They flirted with becoming PAC12 members which caused a few Big 12 schools to jump ship, but in the end that idea was rejected. The Big 12 then added two great schools (TCU & WVU), signed a grant of rights for the next 12 years or so, and finalized a very good TV contract.

"Just a piece of paper" - it is a contract worth a gazillion bucks to each member school. Also, the Big 12 can easily add a conference championship game in the future if not having one hinders them in anyway, but I don't think that will even be necessary.

I'm happy to be in the Big 12.... ....but I think most people would agree it didn't gain what it lost in the latest (or even earlier) round of expansion.
 

skygusty_rivals

New member
May 14, 2003
4,990
65
0
Expansion isn't about appeasing a few "insecure fans", its about getting the BIG 12 into the playoffs regularly and adding viewers for tv ratings and increasing the conference footprint and adding to the recruiting base.
Its also about creating future revenue streams that aren't possible now.

For the next 10 years no one is likely going to think about departing the conference, but if over that time the BIG 12 doesn't do anything at all then the revenues aren't going to be there to keep everyone happy and the conference is likely to have experienced many years out of the playoffs and tons of negative press as a result.

The idea that adding schools that have shown they could be competitive in any conference over time would be worse than doing nothing is shortsighted and bound to lead to significant problems in the future.
Unfortunately there are many who live in a fantasy land where WVU is going to just move to their dream of the ACC? for some reason--but the most likely scenario is WVU is going to be left out of major college athletics along with a few others down the road because of a desire to do nothing so for a few seasons WVU can play UT and OU every year instead of one every year and another every other year or two on, two off.


It's about getting the Big12 into the playoffs regularly? Regularly????. We have had one year of the playoffs. Give it a few years where the BIG12 is the ONLY conference left out and you may have a point.

You may also have a point that there could be some schools who would take advantage of Big12 membership and truly become a Power 5 school. Or they could be another Vanderbilt, or Wake Forest or Kansas, or Northwestern or Boston College or some other team that is a member of a power conference with no particular qualifications other than being legacy members who are doormats and bottom feeders.

The ACC? They can go #$%^ themselves. The ACC folding is equally as likely a scenario as is WVU being left out of major college athletics.

To Vault Hunter: Which Mid-major is WVU most like that is on the outside looking in? Cincy? Memphis? Houston? UCF? Please, WVU is a mid-major? You don't think we belong in the top 64 sports programs? Less worthy than Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, Boston College, Texas Tech, TCU, Iowa State, Kansas, Northwestern, Illinois, Colorado, Utah, Rutgers, Maryland, Purdue, Ole Miss, Arkansas, etc. etc. etc.

Even if we go to 12 teams and have a championship game there are still 5 major conferences vying for 4 playoff slots. It will change nothing, will not make the conference stronger, will not make it more prestigious.
 
Last edited:

Charleston Mountie

New member
Sep 20, 2015
680
19
0
Oklahoma and Texas have stabilized the Big 12 because it gives them the best conference arrangement in college football. They flirted with becoming PAC12 members which caused a few Big 12 schools to jump ship, but in the end that idea was rejected. The Big 12 then added two great schools (TCU & WVU), signed a grant of rights for the next 12 years or so, and finalized a very good TV contract.

"Just a piece of paper" - it is a contract worth a gazillion bucks to each member school. Also, the Big 12 can easily add a conference championship game in the future if not having one hinders them in anyway, but I don't think that will even be necessary.

I agree the GoR is much more than a piece of paper, but there are those that is all that is. The GoR is a very tight document that I do not think anyone would try to break.

As much as Oklahoma likes to think so, I don't think they stabilize the Big 12 on the same level as Texas does. In all of college football there is one Texas and few schools have that level of clout. Notre Dame, Ohio State, Michigan are probably the only other schools on that level ultimate power. Schools like Oklahoma are powerful schools but they down a step from a school like Texas. If Texas left the conference would fold, if Oklahoma left it would survive so long as Texas stayed.
 

Charleston Mountie

New member
Sep 20, 2015
680
19
0
It's about getting the Big12 into the playoffs regularly? Regularly????. We have had one year of the playoffs. Give it a few years where the BIG12 is the ONLY conference left out and you may have a point.

You may also have a point that there could be some schools who would take advantage of Big12 membership and truly become a Power 5 school. Or they could be another Vanderbilt, or Wake Forest or Kansas, or Northwestern or Boston College or some other team that is a member of a power conference with no particular qualifications other than being legacy members who are doormats and bottom feeders.

The ACC? They can go #$%^ themselves. The ACC folding is equally as likely a scenario as is WVU being left out of major college athletics.

Which Mid-major is WVU most like that is on the outside looking in? Cincy? Memphis? Houston? UCF? Please, WVU is a mid-major? You don't think we belong in the top 64 sports programs? Less worthy than Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, Boston College, Texas Tech, TCU, Iowa State, Kansas, Northwestern, Illinois, Colorado, Utah, Rutgers, Maryland, Purdue, Ole Miss, Arkansas, etc. etc. etc.

Even if we go to 12 teams and have a championship game there are still 5 major conferences vying for 4 playoff slots. It will change nothing, will not make the conference stronger, will not make it more prestigious.

Unlike many, I am not whistling past the graveyard. A Big 12 being left out in any given year is more likely than not if the other four conferences have unbeaten or one loss candidates. Not playing a game during that week to earn exposure when the committee is making a choice of which 4 of the 5 should be is critical.

I do not ever think WVU has been a mid-major and that is not what I said. I said middle of the pack Big 12 school and WVU is that and likely always will be except for a rare appearance at the top or bottom. The Big 12 has 2 schools at the top, 2 at the bottom and 6 in the middle in any given year.

The Big 12 does not have to prove it is stronger than any other P5 conference, it has to prove it is not weaker. The perception is that because it has 10 members and no CC that it is weaker. No one can argue that the Big 12 does not have that perception nationally.

What schools would make a good choice to brought in? I don't think it matters really. They just have to be good at something like Kansas is in basketball. Kansas is Syracuse of the Midwest. In truth, Kansas is not as good as Syracuse, Syracuse used to be able to play football, Kansas never has.

If I were to prognosticate, I believe the next round starts when the SEC plucks Virginia and North Carolina and I think they will do so to keep the Big Ten from grabbing them first. The SEC and the Big 10 have already done their raids of the Big 12, but so far only Maryland from the ACC has been snatched. The next moves will come out of the ACC and not the Big 12.

If the SEC does take Virginia and North Carolina, FSU, Clemson and Georgia Tech have to ask themselves do they want to go elsewhere or face the situation that the Big 12 currently faces: adding schools like UCF or USF or ECU or some other mid major. I have no idea how that would shake out, but at the end of the day, the ACC will fall apart, mostly because it is built just like the old Big East down to Notre Dame leeching off it and calling the shots without paying their dues.

I would not take BYU. Their no-Sunday policy is a killer in Olympic sports and the conference does not need to move further west. I would hope we do not take Notre Dame, we already have one prima donna, don't need two hogging the spotlight. Besides Texas is better at playing the Drama Queen than ND ever could be. If we have to have one, best to have the best one.

I really do not see any school that is going to please everyone but we do need to get 2 in the next 12 to 18 months.
 

skygusty_rivals

New member
May 14, 2003
4,990
65
0
We are not going to get to 12 teams in the next 12 to 18 months. The conference has said they are standing pat. I think it is smart - not whistling past the graveyard. I think the SEC raiding the ACC is pretty likely, but not in 12 to 18 months. IF the ACC gets a couple of teams poached (or even more if the Big10 sees an opportunity and I think THEY also have an eye on UNC and UVA) then there are a whole bunch of teams potentially available that would add quality, population, viewership, tradition, expanded geography and financial potential. I would hate to see the Big12 add teams like Cincy or Memphis or Houston when a little patience and forbearance might get you a VT, NCState, GT, Syracuse, Pitt, or yes even Clemson or Florida State. Any of those schools would be good to decent travel partners for WVU, balance the footprint of the BIG12 and expand viewership.
 

Buckaineer

New member
Sep 3, 2001
7,294
59
0
Something critical to keep in mind that people tend to ignore or gloss over--the ACC has tv contracts locked in through 2027. That includes their grant of rights agreements.

The BIG 12s tv agreements expire in 2025.

I've yet to hear someone explain how the SEC or Big Ten is going to pry away an ACC school in 2027 or after, and this is going to benefit the BIG 12-which will have had to try to renew contracts two or three seasons earlier, probably coming off years of inaction which led to being left out of the playoffs and tons of negative press over the years, not to mention making getting a new set of tv contracts that much more difficult in 2025 with moderate success between now and then at best?

Waiting for others to act has the BIG 12 in this state of "psychological disadvantage" in the first place--allowing FSU to be locked up in a grant of rights and Louisville to be added to the ACC rather than into the BIG 12 which would have made the current situation a bit easier.
 

skygusty_rivals

New member
May 14, 2003
4,990
65
0
I've yet to hear someone explain how the SEC or Big Ten is going to pry away an ACC school in 2027 or after, and this is going to benefit the BIG 12-which will have had to try to renew contracts two or three seasons earlier, probably coming off years of inaction which led to being left out of the playoffs and tons of negative press over the years, not to mention making getting a new set of tv contracts that much more difficult in 2025 with moderate success between now and then at best?

That's a lot of negative assumptions. How about a scenario in the next 10 years where the Big12 makes the playoffs for at least five of those years and wins a National Championship twice? That would not generate tons of negative press or make it difficult to get a new TV contract. If we are going to play Shoulda, Woulda, Coulda, then the BIG12 should have added WVU and Louisville. TCU would have still been on the table for a long time and could have been added with a Cincy or Memphis or some other team to get to 12 at about any time. But now is now and Louisville is gone. Florida State was a rumor as far as I can tell as was Clemson. Lots of doubt about whether they would have left the ACC at that time. If the playoffs go to 8 teams then a lot of the pressure is off. If the playoffs stay at 4 and the Big12 expands to 12, there are still only 4 slots for 5 Power conferences and we will still get left out some years. Adding Cincy and Memphis are not going to change that and their addition would generate a lot of negative press because of perceived weakness and desperation. I think things are going to work out OK and the league has close to ten years to mull things over.

The SEC, the BIG10 and the PAC have one thing that no other conference has, Iron clad stability, toss in 50 to 75 million bucks and a lot of things become possible. Give Notre Dame 10 years to poison the well and it will have an effect too. Get television interested in further SEC and Big10 expansion and you have a recipe for change.
 
Last edited:

doneagain

New member
Mar 12, 2004
52,778
203
2
First we have to get past the "WVU needs a travel partner" perspective. We don't. Scheduling eastern non conference games will offset most of that.

I know ideally the B12 would expand east, but there are no teams that provide ratings in the east that are available to the B12.

I would add BYU and Boise State. Both have proven over time they are worthy of playing in big games. Unlike us, BYU has a title and a Heisman. We hang our hat on BCS bowl wins, well Boise has those too. Both have been in the top 25 this year too, unlike us so far.

And any game featuring any Big 12 team versus either Boise or BYU would get national TV coverage.

Those are the only 2 teams that add TV value to the B12. Some people do not have the ability to understand that.

As far as sitting still and doing nothing... THAT... is a Big East move. Apparently some here don't remember that. Yeah, stay at 10 for the next 10 years and see what happens when those contracts expire. While we are at it, why don't we bring in Paul Tagliabue as an advisor for the league, too.
 

skygusty_rivals

New member
May 14, 2003
4,990
65
0
First we have to get past the "WVU needs a travel partner" perspective.

I think we ought to get past the "THAT is a Big East move" mentality. This situation has virtually nothing to do with the Big East scenario of fighting the Catholic controlled basketball only faction and the oh while we're at it lets add Note Dame and give them bowl tie-ins without requiring a damn thing from them in football, and the we'll add a football school only if we also get to add another basketball only school mentality. The let's get to 24 teams in the conference and have a scheduling nightmare just so we can have 12 football teams. Moveover, the power in the Big East was in Providence Rhode Island, not Austin, Texas. We had the "lets elevate Connecticut and Villanova in football" crowd too. No real football school wanted to join that mess. The only option was either to leave as a group or sneak out the back door one by one at the earliest opportunity. BYU brings some value and some problems, Boise State is 'meh' in many ways. What we need is for a Big12 team to win a national championship. That would be good medicine for the conference and all the nervous nailbiters.
 

Woody in Helvetia

New member
May 29, 2001
17,437
243
0
First we have to get past the "WVU needs a travel partner" perspective. We don't. Scheduling eastern non conference games will offset most of that.

I know ideally the B12 would expand east, but there are no teams that provide ratings in the east that are available to the B12.

I would add BYU and Boise State. Both have proven over time they are worthy of playing in big games. Unlike us, BYU has a title and a Heisman. We hang our hat on BCS bowl wins, well Boise has those too. Both have been in the top 25 this year too, unlike us so far.

And any game featuring any Big 12 team versus either Boise or BYU would get national TV coverage.

Those are the only 2 teams that add TV value to the B12. Some people do not have the ability to understand that.

As far as sitting still and doing nothing... THAT... is a Big East move. Apparently some here don't remember that. Yeah, stay at 10 for the next 10 years and see what happens when those contracts expire. While we are at it, why don't we bring in Paul Tagliabue as an advisor for the league, too.
One expansion team must be in the east - and my preference is Cincy. I will take BYU with out any problem. Boise is not really a good option especially in the rest of the sports programs.
 

LSUTigersRoar

New member
Sep 11, 2015
46
12
0
The Big 12 in my mind is a power 5 conference, that said Bayor, TCU are the top teams of this conference. My question is why not BYU add them in and stay at 11 teams. I am fearful the same thing will happen again this year, either TCU or Baylor will lose and than at the end both are tied how will the big 12 handle it this time? This college playoff is still new and I am just saying the PAC 12 will be out not Big 12