(04-29-2015 10:20 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  As soon as someone shows me how 2 teams from the AAC can bring in about $50 million in revenue for the big 12 so that they do not dilute income.... then Ill finally listen.

So far not one single credible source has shown that the Big 12 wants to expand.... in fact they are fighting for every possible option that will help them not expand. This should be a pretty big sign that they do not want us.

Good point but then again cough Rutgers or anyone else not named USC UT Alabama Michigan cough

(04-30-2015 09:30 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:38 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:37 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  They will get their rule change, and add a champ game in 2017. No expansion wanted nor needed.

Correct

The other conferences would be cool with that?

Why would they give a crap?

(04-29-2015 10:37 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  They will get their rule change, and add a champ game in 2017. No expansion wanted nor needed.

yup

(05-01-2015 05:42 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:20 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  As soon as someone shows me how 2 teams from the AAC can bring in about $50 million in revenue for the big 12 so that they do not dilute income.... then Ill finally listen.

So far not one single credible source has shown that the Big 12 wants to expand.... in fact they are fighting for every possible option that will help them not expand. This should be a pretty big sign that they do not want us.

Good point but then again cough Rutgers or anyone else not named USC UT Alabama Michigan cough

B10 is different because of network. If a team is the difference in them gaining cable entrance into a huge market,(ie NYC/DC) they will bring in that kind of money. B12 does not have the network to sell. With their current TV deal, the B12 does not need inventory nor markets.

The B12 appears by many to be run by morons. Actually, it kind of is in the sense that they are still treating things like it's 1955. They really don't want any outsiders, they like playing each other, and they really don't appear to care about markets, reach, etc. i.e. all the things that savvy conferences like the B1G are focused on for long term, sustainable growth.

Some of this is because the B12 is run by morons. But some of it is, they have hamstrung themselves with the LHN. If I remember correctly, the LHN was 'allowed' by the other members in exchange for the other members getting to keep 100% of their third tier money -no splitting. Because of all that, the B12 will not, cannot under the current structure have a network. Because they can't have a B12 network, they don't see the need to add teams/markets. The B12 potentially sacrificed long term growth and sustainability with this short term thinking. Hence the teams are 'stuck' but they are also making a lot more money than they are probably worth right now. So they are doing what any one of us would do under the circumstances....ride it out, enjoy it while it lasts.

The current situation won't last forever and at that time, they may look at things the other conferences look at, markets, outreach, population centers, etc. and at that point they probably will expand, but then again, I have zero faith in the B12 leadership and so what will probably happen is Texas will strip mine this thing as long as they can and then bolt. In fact, I would be surprised if this isn't how this goes down.

So the B12 doesn't need markets now because they can't 'use' them to an advantage like say the B1G. So this goes back to them saying there are NO teams among those available (G5 candidates) that, by themselves move the needle enough to add. Which is true.

(05-01-2015 11:02 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-30-2015 09:30 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:38 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:37 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  They will get their rule change, and add a champ game in 2017. No expansion wanted nor needed.

Correct

The other conferences would be cool with that?

Why would they give a crap?

You think UNC, UF, NCSU, or FSU want another P5 team in their state? Hell no. And that's why they care.

(05-02-2015 10:47 AM)PGPirate Wrote:  

(05-01-2015 11:02 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-30-2015 09:30 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:38 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:37 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  They will get their rule change, and add a champ game in 2017. No expansion wanted nor needed.

Correct

The other conferences would be cool with that?

Why would they give a crap?

You think UNC, UF, NCSU, or FSU want another P5 team in their state? Hell no. And that's why they care.

Uf and fsu enjoyed a political majority in the past. They don't have the pull that they used to

(05-02-2015 09:02 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  The B12 appears by many to be run by morons. Actually, it kind of is in the sense that they are still treating things like it's 1955. They really don't want any outsiders, they like playing each other, and they really don't appear to care about markets, reach, etc. i.e. all the things that savvy conferences like the B1G are focused on for long term, sustainable growth.

Some of this is because the B12 is run by morons. But some of it is, they have hamstrung themselves with the LHN. If I remember correctly, the LHN was 'allowed' by the other members in exchange for the other members getting to keep 100% of their third tier money -no splitting. Because of all that, the B12 will not, cannot under the current structure have a network. Because they can't have a B12 network, they don't see the need to add teams/markets. The B12 potentially sacrificed long term growth and sustainability with this short term thinking. Hence the teams are 'stuck' but they are also making a lot more money than they are probably worth right now. So they are doing what any one of us would do under the circumstances....ride it out, enjoy it while it lasts.

The current situation won't last forever and at that time, they may look at things the other conferences look at, markets, outreach, population centers, etc. and at that point they probably will expand, but then again, I have zero faith in the B12 leadership and so what will probably happen is Texas will strip mine this thing as long as they can and then bolt. In fact, I would be surprised if this isn't how this goes down.

So the B12 doesn't need markets now because they can't 'use' them to an advantage like say the B1G. So this goes back to them saying there are NO teams among those available (G5 candidates) that, by themselves move the needle enough to add. Which is true.

I'm still trying to figure out why they invited TCU and West Virginia.

TCU is a private school with small attendance numbers (both undergraduate and game day) in a market DOMINATED by a Big 12 presence.

West Virginia makes sense, but only because they drug their feet on inviting Louisville.

The Big 12 made some idiotic mistakes, when if they were proactive they could have had Louisville AND Cincinnati in a home run add. That would leave them with options for WVU + 1 for a very valuable 12 member league.

I'm kind of hoping that the Big 12 doesn't expand so UCF isn't forced with the possibility of being under such poor leadership.

(05-02-2015 04:17 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 09:02 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  The B12 appears by many to be run by morons. Actually, it kind of is in the sense that they are still treating things like it's 1955. They really don't want any outsiders, they like playing each other, and they really don't appear to care about markets, reach, etc. i.e. all the things that savvy conferences like the B1G are focused on for long term, sustainable growth.

Some of this is because the B12 is run by morons. But some of it is, they have hamstrung themselves with the LHN. If I remember correctly, the LHN was 'allowed' by the other members in exchange for the other members getting to keep 100% of their third tier money -no splitting. Because of all that, the B12 will not, cannot under the current structure have a network. Because they can't have a B12 network, they don't see the need to add teams/markets. The B12 potentially sacrificed long term growth and sustainability with this short term thinking. Hence the teams are 'stuck' but they are also making a lot more money than they are probably worth right now. So they are doing what any one of us would do under the circumstances....ride it out, enjoy it while it lasts.

The current situation won't last forever and at that time, they may look at things the other conferences look at, markets, outreach, population centers, etc. and at that point they probably will expand, but then again, I have zero faith in the B12 leadership and so what will probably happen is Texas will strip mine this thing as long as they can and then bolt. In fact, I would be surprised if this isn't how this goes down.

So the B12 doesn't need markets now because they can't 'use' them to an advantage like say the B1G. So this goes back to them saying there are NO teams among those available (G5 candidates) that, by themselves move the needle enough to add. Which is true.

I'm still trying to figure out why they invited TCU and West Virginia.

TCU is a private school with small attendance numbers (both undergraduate and game day) in a market DOMINATED by a Big 12 presence.

West Virginia makes sense, but only because they drug their feet on inviting Louisville.

The Big 12 made some idiotic mistakes, when if they were proactive they could have had Louisville AND Cincinnati in a home run add. That would leave them with options for WVU + 1 for a very valuable 12 member league.

I'm kind of hoping that the Big 12 doesn't expand so UCF isn't forced with the possibility of being under such poor leadership.

I am not it's easier to move later if you are an existing p5

(05-02-2015 03:20 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 10:47 AM)PGPirate Wrote:  

(05-01-2015 11:02 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-30-2015 09:30 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:38 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Correct

The other conferences would be cool with that?

Why would they give a crap?

You think UNC, UF, NCSU, or FSU want another P5 team in their state? Hell no. And that's why they care.

Uf and fsu enjoyed a political majority in the past. They don't have the pull that they used to

You missed the point. This isn't a legislative thing. I mean the SEC and ACC (and the other P5) will allow B12 to stay at 10, to keep the club as exclusive as possible.

(05-02-2015 06:45 PM)PGPirate Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 03:20 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 10:47 AM)PGPirate Wrote:  

(05-01-2015 11:02 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-30-2015 09:30 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  The other conferences would be cool with that?

Why would they give a crap?

You think UNC, UF, NCSU, or FSU want another P5 team in their state? Hell no. And that's why they care.

Uf and fsu enjoyed a political majority in the past. They don't have the pull that they used to

You missed the point. This isn't a legislative thing. I mean the SEC and ACC (and the other P5) will allow B12 to stay at 10, to keep the club as exclusive as possible.

Perhaps, but the existing P5 is an "exclusive" club with a bunch of non-contributing, less-than-exclusive members. Perennial doormats, to put it bluntly.

(05-02-2015 06:45 PM)PGPirate Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 03:20 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 10:47 AM)PGPirate Wrote:  

(05-01-2015 11:02 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-30-2015 09:30 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  The other conferences would be cool with that?

Why would they give a crap?

You think UNC, UF, NCSU, or FSU want another P5 team in their state? Hell no. And that's why they care.

Uf and fsu enjoyed a political majority in the past. They don't have the pull that they used to

You missed the point. This isn't a legislative thing. I mean the SEC and ACC (and the other P5) will allow B12 to stay at 10, to keep the club as exclusive as possible.

Actually everyone in fbs has a vote due to the committees it has to clear. The p5 doesn't have the majority on them and that's an easy scapegoat. What I find interesting is the pro division story espn just put out. The backtracking etc might signal espns preference?

(04-30-2015 09:30 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:38 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:37 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  They will get their rule change, and add a champ game in 2017. No expansion wanted nor needed.

Correct

The other conferences would be cool with that?

Well, we know the ACC and B1G would be on board. The Sun Belt too.

Remember, deregulating the championship game would not just allow conferences with fewer than 12 schools to hold title game. In addition, it would do away with divisions as a requirement, which would be a huge deal to the ACC and the B1G. These two in particular see the added scheduling flexibility you get from scrapping divisions as a way to keep more of the traditional rivalries in tact.

(05-02-2015 09:45 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 06:45 PM)PGPirate Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 03:20 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 10:47 AM)PGPirate Wrote:  

(05-01-2015 11:02 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Why would they give a crap?

You think UNC, UF, NCSU, or FSU want another P5 team in their state? Hell no. And that's why they care.

Uf and fsu enjoyed a political majority in the past. They don't have the pull that they used to

You missed the point. This isn't a legislative thing. I mean the SEC and ACC (and the other P5) will allow B12 to stay at 10, to keep the club as exclusive as possible.

Actually everyone in fbs has a vote due to the committees it has to clear. The p5 doesn't have the majority on them and that's an easy scapegoat. What I find interesting is the pro division story espn just put out. The backtracking etc might signal espns preference?

No they don't. They switched to each conference getting a vote a few years ago. Which is another reason why I thought AAC would get the nod. To give the P5 a majority vote in the FBS world.

Unless I missed if they switched back.

(05-03-2015 10:10 AM)PGPirate Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 09:45 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 06:45 PM)PGPirate Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 03:20 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 10:47 AM)PGPirate Wrote:  You think UNC, UF, NCSU, or FSU want another P5 team in their state? Hell no. And that's why they care.

Uf and fsu enjoyed a political majority in the past. They don't have the pull that they used to

You missed the point. This isn't a legislative thing. I mean the SEC and ACC (and the other P5) will allow B12 to stay at 10, to keep the club as exclusive as possible.

Actually everyone in fbs has a vote due to the committees it has to clear. The p5 doesn't have the majority on them and that's an easy scapegoat. What I find interesting is the pro division story espn just put out. The backtracking etc might signal espns preference?

No they don't. They switched to each conference getting a vote a few years ago. Which is another reason why I thought AAC would get the nod. To give the P5 a majority vote in the FBS world.

Unless I missed if they switched back.

I believe youre right that each conference has a vote, but as long as the P5 all vote yes, then the Sunbelt is going to because it benefits them... so it wont matter if we vote with them or not.

Now where the Big 12 is in trouble is within the P5 governance structure. Each school gets a vote there, so the ACC has 15 votes whereas the Big 12 only has 10.

(05-02-2015 04:17 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  The Big 12 made some idiotic mistakes, when if they were proactive they could have had Louisville AND Cincinnati in a home run add.

I suspect that Big 12 people do not, in the least, consider urban universities to be "home run adds".

(05-03-2015 10:10 AM)PGPirate Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 09:45 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 06:45 PM)PGPirate Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 03:20 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 10:47 AM)PGPirate Wrote:  You think UNC, UF, NCSU, or FSU want another P5 team in their state? Hell no. And that's why they care.

Uf and fsu enjoyed a political majority in the past. They don't have the pull that they used to

You missed the point. This isn't a legislative thing. I mean the SEC and ACC (and the other P5) will allow B12 to stay at 10, to keep the club as exclusive as possible.

Actually everyone in fbs has a vote due to the committees it has to clear. The p5 doesn't have the majority on them and that's an easy scapegoat. What I find interesting is the pro division story espn just put out. The backtracking etc might signal espns preference?

No they don't. They switched to each conference getting a vote a few years ago. Which is another reason why I thought AAC would get the nod. To give the P5 a majority vote in the FBS world.

Unless I missed if they switched back.

That's what I said. Everyone meant all conferences had reps. There are two committees for them to go through. They just can't make p5 only decisions. These changes are voted on by conf

(05-03-2015 11:19 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 04:17 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  The Big 12 made some idiotic mistakes, when if they were proactive they could have had Louisville AND Cincinnati in a home run add.

I suspect that Big 12 people do not, in the least, consider urban universities to be "home run adds".

Correct. They know full well none of our schools are going anywhere so they could be picked up anytime they feel the need. As for not getting UL I don't think they care much about it and wouldn't trade WV or TCU for them if they had to for it again.

(05-02-2015 10:47 AM)PGPirate Wrote:  

(05-01-2015 11:02 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-30-2015 09:30 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:38 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:37 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  They will get their rule change, and add a champ game in 2017. No expansion wanted nor needed.

Correct

The other conferences would be cool with that?

Why would they give a crap?

You think UNC, UF, NCSU, or FSU want another P5 team in their state? Hell no. And that's why they care.

Can't speak for North Carolina but fsu and Florida just don't care. They didnt try to stop ucf when we were joining the BE when they were still a power. They don't see us as a threat and doubt they ever will.

(05-04-2015 12:55 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(05-03-2015 11:19 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(05-02-2015 04:17 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  The Big 12 made some idiotic mistakes, when if they were proactive they could have had Louisville AND Cincinnati in a home run add.

I suspect that Big 12 people do not, in the least, consider urban universities to be "home run adds".

Correct. They know full well none of our schools are going anywhere so they could be picked up anytime they feel the need. As for not getting UL I don't think they care much about it and wouldn't trade WV or TCU for them if they had to for it again.

Texas didn't make a bowl game in 2010... and has lost two straight bowls. This year TCU 'could' have contended for the national title (B12 CCG issues not withstanding). I'd bet money that UT would much, much rather have LV than a small private school in their own backyard showing them up...

Moot point though.