ESPN analyst take on Big 12 adds...

[Rootmaster]

" I think there are some really attractive options if you can pull it off. BYU is a great one. Cincinnati is a great one. UCF or USF, one of the Florida schools to join, I think there are some good options that would really add to the profile of the conference."

Makes you wonder if these aren't the choices going around inside ESPN. Follow the money.

http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/col...ig-12-expansion-feel-like-going-uphill-battle

 

[Buckaineer]

Noticed the announcer wants the BIG 12 to steer clear of UConn--which probably brings the most in terms of wired cable subscribers and tv households--and also has national champion level basketball. Other sports writers have also tried to direct the BIG 12 from that pick. Wonder if its due to their average to poor football lately, or the distance-or-does another conference that a certain network owns all rights to (that also wants a network) have eyes on that program?

The BIG12 may not want to drag their feet too long.

 

[steeleer]

Noticed the announcer wants the BIG 12 to steer clear of UConn--which probably brings the most in terms of wired cable subscribers and tv households--and also has national champion level basketball. Other sports writers have also tried to direct the BIG 12 from that pick. Wonder if its due to their average to poor football lately, or the distance-or-does another conference that a certain network owns all rights to (that also wants a network) have eyes on that program?

The BIG12 may not want to drag their feet too long.

Seriously....stop. I would love the ACC to add them.

1) They add nothing in football. Zip. Zero.
2) It would again water down their football product.
3) It would confirm what everyone knows...the ACC is a BBall conference in a FBall driven market.
4) It would continue the comparisons to the BE (BBall centric, ND leech,etc)
5) I wouldn't have to hear any more demands to add this nothing school to the Big 12. They are far from us and ever farther for anyone else in the B12 and they have a nonexistent recruiting base.

 

[MikeRafone]

"UConn. Boston College, Part II: The Giant TV Market Where Nobody Cares."

 

[michaelwalkerbr]

At 11:00 am on a Saturday, UConn drew 2.4 million viewers for the St. Petersburg Bowl against Marshall. At 11:00 pm on a Saturday WVU drew 3.7 million viewers for the Cactus Bowl against ASU.

It's hard to compete for fans and viewers against the Patriots, Jets, Giants and even Syracuse. UConn just doesn't draw well no matter who they play, even in their stadium. It's a shame, the potential is enormous.

 

[BobbyBoucheer]

At 11:00 am on a Saturday, UConn drew 2.4 million viewers for the St. Petersburg Bowl against Marshall. At 11:00 pm on a Saturday WVU drew 3.7 million viewers for the Cactus Bowl against ASU.

It's hard to compete for fans and viewers against the Patriots, Jets, Giants and even Syracuse. UConn just doesn't draw well no matter who they play, even in their stadium. It's a shame, the potential is enormous.

The whole north eastern part of the country has a big population and one would think that BC or UConn could field fantastic teams and have huge fan participation. I've always wondered at the lack of success of either of those two schools.

 

[michaelwalkerbr]

Even Rutgers of the elite B1G only sold out their 52,000 seat stadium against Ohio State last year. Against Michigan State there were 2,000 unsold seats and against Nebraska there were 7,000. I remember when Syracuse used to regularly sell out the 50,000 seat Carrier Dome but that's about it for college teams in the Northeast. I guess four pro teams in the area is just too much competition for fans.

 

[Rootmaster]

A lot of the problem with high levels of achievement for college teams in the Northeast comes down to perceptional and money based conflict between "academics" and "athletics". Everybody wants scarce dollars for their self interest...and kudos for their work. Most professors etc see sports as a diversion or necessary evil. They truly don't care about an "athletic program."

How do I know this? First hand experience.

I was fortunate to work directly on the elevation of a Northeast school's move from Div III to Div 1 today. Hurdles included facilities, staffing, competition etc. It was a rocky road to say the least. Bottom line is most colleges/universities in the Northeast hold on tightly to the school's missions: education and research. Presidents come out of a very academic focused background. They see big time sports as a threat not as a marketing tool to help their institution, department, area of interest grow and prosper.

Students don't care as much either. Schools institute quotas for enrollment to include areas of the world who could care less about American sports, or sports in general ,for that matter. They want bigger and better class rooms and labs and help for those who can't afford to attend, but fight the athletic scholarship idea. Conflicting I would say.

They see Texas high school level facilities as "good enough". They see coaches as "factory workers intruding on their turf."

Because of money restrictions etc, most players tend to come from close in to the schools in areas where in high school a good football crowd is 65 moms and dads on any given day. Not exactly the South.

And yes because they are used to pro sports the population in general views a lot of college athletics as just a short jump from Friday Night Lights.

It is a tough environment to compete at Div 1.The ones that do success have had to work extremely hard.

Interestingly however, a lot of our studies showed these same folks watching Ohio State etc on a Saturday afternoon. Head scratching...and part of the reason for Rutgers getting to the Big 10. Media money is passive and they don't have to pass a new stadium on the work to the lab each day.

Just sayin'

 

[Charleston Mountie]

Seriously....stop. I would love the ACC to add them.

1) They add nothing in football. Zip. Zero.
2) It would again water down their football product.
3) It would confirm what everyone knows...the ACC is a BBall conference in a FBall driven market.
4) It would continue the comparisons to the BE (BBall centric, ND leech,etc)
5) I wouldn't have to hear any more demands to add this nothing school to the Big 12. They are far from us and ever farther for anyone else in the B12 and they have a nonexistent recruiting base.

UConn is worth it for the women's athletic programs alone. But, the university has been making strong gains in moving to an impending AAU invitation.

 

[steeleer]

UConn is worth it for the women's athletic programs alone. But, the university has been making strong gains in moving to an impending AAU invitation.

ESPN doesn't care if you are AAU when they offer up a contract. Academically, UConn is a very good school...but that isn't what's driving the bus here.

I have 3 daughters....so I'm saying this as objectively as possible. No one signing the check gives a hot damn about women's basketball (college or pro). It's fine for cheap live content, but that's it.

 

[Charleston Mountie]

ESPN doesn't care if you are AAU when they offer up a contract. Academically, UConn is a very good school...but that isn't what's driving the bus here.

I have 3 daughters....so I'm saying this as objectively as possible. No one signing the check gives a hot damn about women's basketball (college or pro). It's fine for cheap live content, but that's it.

You are a bit confused. ESPN does not call the shots on the movements of the Big Ten. ESPN has influence with the SEC but even there ESPN is not calling the shots. The only conference where ESPN has called any shots has been the ACC when it told them what schools to expand with on several occasions.

Conferences expand with a new potential based on many factors and only 'some' of them involved athletics, which is a rather odd way of doing things since conferences are purely athletic in nature and not academic at all. But when the decision is made to expand academics play a huge role. Other factors come into play such as TV-markets - which are not as important as they once were.

A conference like the Big Ten has enough A-list members in football and at this point they need something to round out their footprint and that is where UConn fails, it is not in a contiguous state for the Big Ten, but a conference like the ACC should have no problem with that issue.

 

[steeleer]

You are a bit confused. ESPN does not call the shots on the movements of the Big Ten. ESPN has influence with the SEC but even there ESPN is not calling the shots. The only conference where ESPN has called any shots has been the ACC when it told them what schools to expand with on several occasions.

Conferences expand with a new potential based on many factors and only 'some' of them involved athletics, which is a rather odd way of doing things since conferences are purely athletic in nature and not academic at all. But when the decision is made to expand academics play a huge role. Other factors come into play such as TV-markets - which are not as important as they once were.

A conference like the Big Ten has enough A-list members in football and at this point they need something to round out their footprint and that is where UConn fails, it is not in a contiguous state for the Big Ten, but a conference like the ACC should have no problem with that issue.

I'm not confused. I just used ESPN because the ACC was brought up as another potential landing spot for what is now apparently a red hot UConn property.

Athletics and demographics drive the bus for athletic conference expansion. Conferences can "prefer" certain academic requirements/research status, but that didn't stop the B10 from taking a Rutgers program that they knew was going to lose it's AAU status when they accepted them. As an aside, I will argue that while that was a good add under the conference network model now (lots of TVs in that market), they will be a bad add long term addition when once again the bus is driven by one simple criteria...."Is this team any good? Am I willing to take 3 hours from my day to spend on watching them play?"

The B10 does have some very good programs now (Michigan, OSU and MSU) but the bottom of that conference is awful. Dreadful. Bad. I doubt they feel they are in a position to take on more dead weight that will further dilute their product and make them a poor performer when live CFB becomes more "decentralized."

Double that for the ACC. Who is really good there outside of Clemson and FSU? Their rep has taken enough hits with adding awful football programs like Pitt, Syracuse and BC over the past several years.

Unfortunately, no one is taking UConn because now I will need to copy this post for future use to teach others how this thing works and why UConn is an awful choice. Or maybe I'll just let time make my argument for me.

 

[Charleston Mountie]

I'm not confused. I just used ESPN because the ACC was brought up as another potential landing spot for what is now apparently a red hot UConn property.

Athletics and demographics drive the bus for athletic conference expansion. Conferences can "prefer" certain academic requirements/research status, but that didn't stop the B10 from taking a Rutgers program that they knew was going to lose it's AAU status when they accepted them. As an aside, I will argue that while that was a good add under the conference network model now (lots of TVs in that market), they will be a bad add long term addition when once again the bus is driven by one simple criteria...."Is this team any good? Am I willing to take 3 hours from my day to spend on watching them play?"

The B10 does have some very good programs now (Michigan, OSU and MSU) but the bottom of that conference is awful. Dreadful. Bad. I doubt they feel they are in a position to take on more dead weight that will further dilute their product and make them a poor performer when live CFB becomes more "decentralized."

Double that for the ACC. Who is really good there outside of Clemson and FSU? Their rep has taken enough hits with adding awful football programs like Pitt, Syracuse and BC over the past several years.

Unfortunately, no one is taking UConn because now I will need to copy this post for future use to teach others how this thing works and why UConn is an awful choice. Or maybe I'll just let time make my argument for me.

With all due respect, you are totally clueless when it comes to why a conference like the Big Ten expands.

The Big Ten has Fox as the primary media carrier and the deal they had with ESPN - what is left of it - seems to be ending completely. You are of course welcome to your opinion, but you will not find anyone in the Big Ten Conference offices that shares it.

 

[steeleer]

With all due respect, you are totally clueless when it comes to why a conference like the Big Ten expands.

The Big Ten has Fox as the primary media carrier and the deal they had with ESPN - what is left of it - seems to be ending completely. You are of course welcome to your opinion, but you will not find anyone in the Big Ten Conference offices that shares it.

Feel free to re-read my last post. Focus on that last sentence. Get back to me when it's clear to you that absolutely no one worthwhile (in other words, don't go running on here bragging when they get picked up by the MAC) brings on UConn. Period. Never. Ever.

Please feel free to copy this. Heck, Vernon can make it a sticky post at the top. We'll use ESP instead of ESPN to watch live football before the B10 takes UConn.

 

[Charleston Mountie]

Feel free to re-read my last post. Focus on that last sentence. Get back to me when it's clear to you that absolutely no one worthwhile (in other words, don't go running on here bragging when they get picked up by the MAC) brings on UConn. Period. Never. Ever.

Please feel free to copy this. Heck, Vernon can make it a sticky post at the top. We'll use ESP instead of ESPN to watch live football before the B10 takes UConn.

I read your post and found it wanting and ill-informed. You even assert that Rutgers is no longer an AAU member. Might want to do some fact checking. Please, do not tell me about the business I work in, some of us are more than just a fan.

 

[VaultHunter]

Seriously....stop. I would love the ACC to add them.

1) They add nothing in football. Zip. Zero.
2) It would again water down their football product.
3) It would confirm what everyone knows...the ACC is a BBall conference in a FBall driven market.
4) It would continue the comparisons to the BE (BBall centric, ND leech,etc)
5) I wouldn't have to hear any more demands to add this nothing school to the Big 12. They are far from us and ever farther for anyone else in the B12 and they have a nonexistent recruiting base.

That's sounds alot like reasons for the Big10 not to add Rutgers. Actually Rutgers doesn't even come close to UConn as far as Basketball. No why in the world would a conference like the Big10 add a school like Rutgers? That's the same Rutgers that used to be a joke in the BIG East and had 5 good football seasons in a row in the history of their program. Now why would a conference like the Big10 add some school in New Jersey that brings nothing to the table? Hmmmmm

 

[VaultHunter]

Oh yeah and it's almost 700 miles from East Lansing to Piscataway NJ.. Just saying

 

[steeleer]

That's sounds alot like reasons for the Big10 not to add Rutgers. Actually Rutgers doesn't even come close to UConn as far as Basketball. No why in the world would a conference like the Big10 add a school like Rutgers? That's the same Rutgers that used to be a joke in the BIG East and had 5 good football seasons in a row in the history of their program. Now why would a conference like the Big10 add some school in New Jersey that brings nothing to the table? Hmmmmm

I would argue that 10 years from now that they won't be as happy with Rutgers or Maryland being on board when there won't be obligatory surcharge on everybody's bill for the Big 10 Network. That horse is on it's last leg.

Rutgers ain't much, but they are leaps ahead of UConn and that gap will get bigger with all the B10 money they are getting.

 

[steeleer]

I read your post and found it wanting and ill-informed. You even assert that Rutgers is no longer an AAU member. Might want to do some fact checking. Please, do not tell me about the business I work in, some of us are more than just a fan.

OK...It was Nebraska instead of Rutgers. That doesn't diminish my point that the B10 looked the other way academically when adding a new conference mate when they knew they were losing their AAU status. Muddying up the water doesn't help you here.

Oh...and I will tell you about something you obviously are clueless about. You could be the Queen of England and you're still looking dumb on this.

I have an idea. I'll bet you $1000 you that UConn won't be in the B10 before 2020. Too soon? Make it 2025 for all I care.

Or you can just admit you are blatantly wrong and give up.





Reply to this "You're right, I was being an idiot" or "I'll take that bet." Anything else is a waste of my time.

 

[Charleston Mountie]

OK...It was Nebraska instead of Rutgers. That doesn't diminish my point that the B10 looked the other way academically when adding a new conference mate when they knew they were losing their AAU status. Muddying up the water doesn't help you here.

Oh...and I will tell you about something you obviously are clueless about. You could be the Queen of England and you're still looking dumb on this.

I have an idea. I'll bet you $1000 you that UConn won't be in the B10 before 2020. Too soon? Make it 2025 for all I care.

Or you can just admit you are blatantly wrong and give up.





Reply to this "You're right, I was being an idiot" or "I'll take that bet." Anything else is a waste of my time.

Your opinion noted but as I have pointed it out before, it is shared by no one.

Your facts are wrong.

You stated ESPN called the shots in the Big Ten, Fox has the heavy lifting deal there and ESPN just lost what portion they had with the Big Ten.

You stated Rutgers was losing its AAU stated and it isn't. You then correct it to say Nebraska and not Rutgers. But Nebraska is not in the process of losing its AAU status; it lost it in 2011. Nebraska and the Big Ten was well aware of the metrics issue Nebraska had with the AAU scoring system, but Nebraska had been having such issues for more than a decade and had been successful in retaining their standing in spite of the changing landscape.

There was every reason to believe they would pass merit in the 2011 vote, but as we know they did not. The vote was very close and the report was littered with verbage stating how Nebraska could reenter membership - namely incorporating their medical school back into the auspices and seeking some redress for their USDA funded extensive agricultural research - which the AAU does not credit.

The Big Ten was in talks with Nebraska at least by 2008 and some 2007 over their move to the Big Ten. During this time the AAU was no an issue but Nebraska's Chancellor Harvey Perlman said, "I doubt that our application would've been accepted had we not been a member of the AAU."

So when someone challenges your position and questions your facts you issue a challenge to a bet that has a timeframe of a decade and if they don't agree you accept their lack thereof as self-admission of idiot status.

Do you not realize how such things reduce the impression of others about you to the level of Junior High School? As a result of this ploy, you do not strike me as particularly bright, but it is often that case that otherwise brilliant people do not speak well through text.

 

[steeleer]

Your opinion noted but as I have pointed it out before, it is shared by no one.

Your facts are wrong.

You stated ESPN called the shots in the Big Ten, Fox has the heavy lifting deal there and ESPN just lost what portion they had with the Big Ten.

You stated Rutgers was losing its AAU stated and it isn't. You then correct it to say Nebraska and not Rutgers. But Nebraska is not in the process of losing its AAU status; it lost it in 2011. Nebraska and the Big Ten was well aware of the metrics issue Nebraska had with the AAU scoring system, but Nebraska had been having such issues for more than a decade and had been successful in retaining their standing in spite of the changing landscape.

There was every reason to believe they would pass merit in the 2011 vote, but as we know they did not. The vote was very close and the report was littered with verbage stating how Nebraska could reenter membership - namely incorporating their medical school back into the auspices and seeking some redress for their USDA funded extensive agricultural research - which the AAU does not credit.

The Big Ten was in talks with Nebraska at least by 2008 and some 2007 over their move to the Big Ten. During this time the AAU was no an issue but Nebraska's Chancellor Harvey Perlman said, "I doubt that our application would've been accepted had we not been a member of the AAU."

So when someone challenges your position and questions your facts you issue a challenge to a bet that has a timeframe of a decade and if they don't agree you accept their lack thereof as self-admission of idiot status.

Do you not realize how such things reduce the impression of others about you to the level of Junior High School? As a result of this ploy, you do not strike me as particularly bright, but it is often that case that otherwise brilliant people do not speak well through text.

Lots of words signifying nothing..

Your assertion was that UConn is on the B10 radar and that somehow academics are the driving force behind expansion, which flies in the face of of common sense. I said you're wrong and gave an exact example as to how you are wrong. You try to cloud the water because I don't have the AAU membership list memorized. My point hasn't changed and it isn't made less right. You try to impress with an expansive history of where this process has gone.

The fact remains that a huge change like this doesn't happen overnight and the Big 10 had months if not years to see where this trend was going and ignored it. Why? You won't answer it with the truth because it makes you look worse here than you already do. It's because Nebraska is a blue-blood football entity and that overrides all....even academics (to a degree...Nebraska is still a very good school).

Are you afraid to back up your self-importance or are you willing to actually back up your ego with a bet?

It's really super simple...even for you. I'll even extend it to 15 years if that will help. All current GORs will have cycled out by then, so there will no longer be any excuses for you to hide behind. I have all the time in world to prove you wrong.

Is this a bet or not? Either put up or shut up because you are boring the crap out of me at this point.

Again, I would be fine with tacking this up for future reference.

 

[Charleston Mountie]

Lots of words signifying nothing..

Your assertion was that UConn is on the B10 radar and that somehow academics are the driving force behind expansion, which flies in the face of of common sense. I said you're wrong and gave an exact example as to how you are wrong. You try to cloud the water because I don't have the AAU membership list memorized. My point hasn't changed and it isn't made less right. You try to impress with an expansive history of where this process has gone.

The fact remains that a huge change like this doesn't happen overnight and the Big 10 had months if not years to see where this trend was going and ignored it. Why? You won't answer it with the truth because it makes you look worse here than you already do. It's because Nebraska is a blue-blood football entity and that overrides all....even academics (to a degree...Nebraska is still a very good school).

Are you afraid to back up your self-importance or are you willing to actually back up your ego with a bet?

It's really super simple...even for you. I'll even extend it to 15 years if that will help. All current GORs will have cycled out by then, so there will no longer be any excuses for you to hide behind. I have all the time in world to prove you wrong.

Is this a bet or not? Either put up or shut up because you are boring the crap out of me at this point.

Again, I would be fine with tacking this up for future reference.

I can see my words are bouncing off of brick. Feel free to continue to post as you like but I am done trying to steer you back onto the path. Some people can't be helped and although I made an exception for you because you are a fellow Mountaineer, it is pretty obvious you do not listen to anyone but yourself. I wish you well.

 

[Mountaineer Steve]

I would argue that 10 years from now that they won't be as happy with Rutgers or Maryland being on board when there won't be obligatory surcharge on everybody's bill for the Big 10 Network. That horse is on it's last leg.

Rutgers ain't much, but they are leaps ahead of UConn and that gap will get bigger with all the B10 money they are getting.

I think you are wrong. They get huge markets and a few more cupcakes to play. In because they are in the B1G, nobody will call them on it

 

[Rootmaster]

Who cares about Rutgers or Maryland or the BIg for that matter? LOL I care about WVU and hopefully seeing the the Big 12 get back to the number in its name. Stupid argument to watch but you guys do add some element of Animal House level humor.

 

[steeleer]

I can see my words are bouncing off of brick. Feel free to continue to post as you like but I am done trying to steer you back onto the path. Some people can't be helped and although I made an exception for you because you are a fellow Mountaineer, it is pretty obvious you do not listen to anyone but yourself. I wish you well.

Well if "bricks" equal "facts" and "the path" equals "my certifiably insane notion that the B10 will invite UConn when literally NO ONE wants them," then this is literally the smartest damn thing you've written all day.

Congrats.

 

[steeleer]

I think you are wrong. They get huge markets and a few more cupcakes to play. In because they are in the B1G, nobody will call them on it

For now, I agree. 5-10 years from now I think the market will change to a more of an a la carte menu. When that happens, Illinois v Maryland won't exactly be a huge cash cow.

 

[michaelwalkerbr]

Last season UConn played #19 Houston and won in front of under 27,000 fans at 40,000 seat Pratt & Whitney Stadium. The largest crowd for the year turned out for the Army game with 28,260 counted. They even played Marshall in the St. Petersburg Bowl in front of 14,652 fans who no doubt were mostly wearing green.

UConn played their asses off to make a bowl game and no one in New England cared. The TV ratings were just as bad with I believe 2.2 million viewers for an afternoon bowl game. Apparently UConn is a basketball school who sees football as a necessary evil. I feel bad for the coaches and players. They will not likely get an invitation from the Big 12 or anyone else.

 

[sammyk]

Houston and South Florida

 

[Buckaineer]

Its important to add contextual information when discussing the candidates.

for example UConn. Its mentioned above their bowl tv ratings "were just as bad with....2.2 million viewers"

First of all 2.4 million viewers is what the game actually had according to sports media watch. And that number of viewers isn't "bad"--that outdid many college football games over the season featuring higher profile opponents.

Its a bowl game though. But, was 2.4 million viewers "worse" or even "bad"? Not when you add in the context of that game being a minor bowl played between two current "Group of 5" opponents that get very little coverage during the season on major networks.

The UConn/Marshall game had the highest number of viewers of any bowl games between any two "G5" schools.
How did it compare to a game on the same network, same day featuring a "P5" vs. a "G5"?
The independence Bowl followed that game between the University of Washington and Southern Miss had 2.617 million viewers--just 200,000 or so more. So the UConn games ratings actually weren't bad ratings for such a bowl.

 

[rrwalls]

People change their mind on what School's they like on a daily basis.

 

[michaelwalkerbr]

UConn is right where they need and aspire to be, doing fine.

 

[Mountaineer Steve]

People change their mind on what School's they like on a daily basis.

Not me, if we are stuck with G5, then UCF and Cincy are the top two

 

[Charleston Mountie]

People change their mind on what School's they like on a daily basis.

People = fans. In general they are not very well informed and even when they are, they are biased to the point their views seldom make any sense. The conference does not change its mind daily and they are the one making the call. All the rest of us can do is discuss the merits of the situation.

 

[Charleston Mountie]

Houston and South Florida

You are a strident Houston supporter but you have not given a metric that matters on the subject. Just why do you have such ardent support for them? Do they pay your bills or something?

 

[sammyk]

No they fit the Big 12 and they are the best football team out there to get plus they have a huge growing city updated facilities and several college coaches who are from multiple conferences has mentioned that the word in the colleges football coaches world is that Houston is the first domino to fall. Plus like I mentioned earlier not everyone in Texas is a Longhorns fan and Houston can also lead to a state like Lousianna for talent and a possible footprint due to proximity.

 

[Charleston Mountie]

No they fit the Big 12 and they are the best football team out there to get plus they have a huge growing city updated facilities and several college coaches who are from multiple conferences has mentioned that the word in the colleges football coaches world is that Houston is the first domino to fall. Plus like I mentioned earlier not everyone in Texas is a Longhorns fan and Houston can also lead to a state like Lousianna for talent and a possible footprint due to proximity.

You are giving me opinions, not metrics. I understand you like them but trust the Big-12 is not sitting in some conference saying, "We better find out which team sammyk wants in the expansion because what he thinks is more important than any other consideration." It doesn't work that way.

When I ask you why you like them, I am not asking you to say, "Because."

If you take the time to dive into the criteria of the selection process you will find that Houston scores no points on anyone's check list that actually has a say in this matter.

So again I ask you, why do you support Houston as an expansion candidate?

 

[sammyk]

Did you not read what I posted. Many college coaches have stated that Houston is the mix for Big 12 expansion. Right now they are the best "team " The Big 12 can get with what I stated was a new footprint into surrounding states due to location. Also with the upgrade in facilities and level that Houston is playing out why would they not be in the conversation, thinking otherwise shows a lack of college football knowledge. And do not play semantics with me and no need to be condescending with snarky comments I mean it is a message board no need to be a douche bag. So you are saying if the SEC could get Clemson or Florida state if they wanted to expand they would pass over them because they are already in their footprint? Yea right oh and Houston just beat FSU by 14 points and is ready to become a player

 

[Orlaco]

Suddenly Houston deserves (would/should get) the same exceptions that programs like Clemson and FSU might be given ?

Makes perfect sense.

 

[BobbyBoucheer]

Colorado st gives the big 12 another land grant university and a great town.

Byu brings national clout and big time money and resources.

Memphis brings a great city, fed ex money and support. Also great recruiting areas ( SEC )

UCF brings Florida and a huge school that has big resources.

Cincy brings a great city and a university dedicated to its sports.

 

[Charleston Mountie]

Did you not read what I posted. Many college coaches have stated that Houston is the mix for Big 12 expansion. Right now they are the best "team " The Big 12 can get with what I stated was a new footprint into surrounding states due to location. Also with the upgrade in facilities and level that Houston is playing out why would they not be in the conversation, thinking otherwise shows a lack of college football knowledge. And do not play semantics with me and no need to be condescending with snarky comments I mean it is a message board no need to be a douche bag. So you are saying if the SEC could get Clemson or Florida state if they wanted to expand they would pass over them because they are already in their footprint? Yea right oh and Houston just beat FSU by 14 points and is ready to become a player

Let's take you reply sentence by sentence:

1) I did read what you posted

2) Many college coaches...who? The only ones that matter are those from the Big-12 and I do not know any of them favoring Houston

3) Personal opinion; not a metric

4) What facilities do they possess that are superior to the average G5? TDECU is a new little 40,000 seat stadium with expansion possibilities. Such stadiums exist all over the G5 map. While it is certainly an upgrade from the old stadium is not a stand out by any measure.

5) I have not been condescending or snarky. Emotion is difficult to properly relay in text but I have been straight with you and I do not appreciate name calling as it instantly lowers your credibility on the subject to the basement

6) I do not set SEC guidelines, they do and they have issued that very statement. They do not expand in states where there is already an existing SEC member. I call it the Florida rule because the Gators have been the poster child of that decision. Does that mean the SEC has to retain that position? They can do whatever they want, but doing so has consequences and to date they have held to that track record.

Florida State, Miami, UCF, USF, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Southern Mississippi, Memphis, Louisville, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, and Baylor are all off the SEC potential list because of this stance.

7) It may come as a surprise to you but beating a team on the field is not a metric anyone cares about in this selection process. What matters are:

TV-market - a meaningful subscriber base needs to be present that is not already covered by an existing member - Houston fails this metric

Recruiting Footprint - a meaningful production on a predictable basis of recruits able to perform at this level that is not already covered by an existing member - Houston fails this metric

Athletic Budget - This one is not what you might think it is. It is not the school that spends the most. It is those schools that show a track record of commitment to their athletics given the scale of their means. In simple terms, a track record of dedication to sports both in the form of money but in management of the AD and the number of sports present that mesh with the Big-12 and above all they must be Title IX compliant - Houston passes this one

As a side note Houston is better in this area than is WVU. In my opinion WVU fails this area as we lack Cross Country, Indoor Track and Field and Outdoor Track and Field for men

Academic Standing - This is not how a school is ranked on some list like USNews or their peers. This section gets down to the meat of the issue, is the candidate an AAU member? Houston fails this metric - but to be fair so do a lot of potential candidates and existing members

Ease of Transition - This is a combination of least cost, least litigation and most importantly lease negative PR to bring a school from another conference into the Big 12. Exiting the AAC is not difficult, costly or particularly messy - Houston passes this one

Ease of Access by Airline - This is as simple as it sounds, can one fly to the new member, get into a car and be at the school in a reasonable amount of time - Houston passes this one

The last category is the sexiness factor. This is purely subjective and varies over time. In your eyes, Houston passes this metric, but no one not a part of Houston thinks this. In truth NONE of the potentials have a sexy factor, which is why they are all still hanging on the branch.

When someone asks you why you hold a position, be prepared to answer with something more than 'because', you future postings will carry more weight and you might sway some minds. Good luck.