Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Buckaineer" data-source="post: 129460198" data-attributes="member: 1428007">The ACC doesn't have a chance to be vulnerable until 2027 at the earliest.&nbsp; That's well over a decade from now.&nbsp; the Big Ten is going to get a new contract in 2017--one likely to be the last big jump in pay due to significant drops in cable subscribers.&nbsp; No one else will have contracts up until 2024 (Pac 12).&nbsp; The Big Ten won't have any reason to expand within seven years.The only significant expansion likely to occur for a long time will be coming from the BIG 12People are watching.&nbsp; The committee has to have reasoning for what it does.&nbsp; They aren't going to just prop up Ohio State for no reason.&nbsp; The Big Ten did its part by having Wisconsin take a major dive in the B10 CCG last year (which the UW coach obviously didn't care for since he bolted for a lesser program unannounced to even his AD the following week).&nbsp; The committee used the fact the BIG 12 didn't have a 13th game against a quality opponent to drop TCU down 3 spots and hold Baylor behind Ohio State.&nbsp; They needed reasoning for their actions.Had TCU and Baylor rematched this would not have been possible.&nbsp; Baylor wins, they beat another top ten team giving them 3 for the season&nbsp; (Ohio State played only then top ten MSU all season and lost to unranked VT at home) --Wisconsin wasnt a top ten team.&nbsp; They could not have &quot;saved face&quot; leapfrogging Ohio State over a Baylor with a better loss and many more better wins -including in the final game.&nbsp; Likewise, TCU only had a loss to a top five program on the road--no way (desire by tv or not) could they justify dropping TCU from 3rd with a 13th game win over top five Baylor behind Ohio State--especially considering the game against a common opponent had TCU beating Minnesota by a much higher margin than the Buckeyes.The 13th game gave them cover, just as it did this year, to drop BIG 12 programs down--but luckily this year Stanford and Notre Dame both lost twice.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Buckaineer, post: 129460198, member: 1428007"] The ACC doesn't have a chance to be vulnerable until 2027 at the earliest. That's well over a decade from now. the Big Ten is going to get a new contract in 2017--one likely to be the last big jump in pay due to significant drops in cable subscribers. No one else will have contracts up until 2024 (Pac 12). The Big Ten won't have any reason to expand within seven years. The only significant expansion likely to occur for a long time will be coming from the BIG 12 People are watching. The committee has to have reasoning for what it does. They aren't going to just prop up Ohio State for no reason. The Big Ten did its part by having Wisconsin take a major dive in the B10 CCG last year (which the UW coach obviously didn't care for since he bolted for a lesser program unannounced to even his AD the following week). The committee used the fact the BIG 12 didn't have a 13th game against a quality opponent to drop TCU down 3 spots and hold Baylor behind Ohio State. They needed reasoning for their actions. Had TCU and Baylor rematched this would not have been possible. Baylor wins, they beat another top ten team giving them 3 for the season (Ohio State played only then top ten MSU all season and lost to unranked VT at home) --Wisconsin wasnt a top ten team. They could not have "saved face" leapfrogging Ohio State over a Baylor with a better loss and many more better wins -including in the final game. Likewise, TCU only had a loss to a top five program on the road--no way (desire by tv or not) could they justify dropping TCU from 3rd with a 13th game win over top five Baylor behind Ohio State--especially considering the game against a common opponent had TCU beating Minnesota by a much higher margin than the Buckeyes. The 13th game gave them cover, just as it did this year, to drop BIG 12 programs down--but luckily this year Stanford and Notre Dame both lost twice. [/QUOTE]

Name