Big 12 thread

WhosYourDawggy said:
I am with you ... also, the B12 has the advantage, it appears, of having a new commissioner who is a businessman who is likely to be more creative with what he is putting together. They also have all the time zones which is going to be more attractive for TV. The PAC is dead, IMO. They can't add anyone that will bring what UCF, Cincy, BYU and Houston brought (not that they brought a lot).

I can see 4 Power conferences - B12 (Florida to Cali), B1G (NJ to Cali), the ACC (Miami to upstate NY), and the SEC (from Florida to Texas/Oklahoma). The PAC, west coast only is done.

CFP will be 5 AQs (top 5 conferences), byes to the top 4 schools regardless of conference. Give me home games for the 2nd set of games and we are off and running. Fuck you Rose Bowl.
Click to expand...
I’m good with it. I just don’t think the SEC and B1G are done expanding. But I would certainly would take it.
 
ralphiewvu said:
I’m good with it. I just don’t think the SEC and B1G are done expanding. But I would certainly would take it.
Click to expand...
Other than ND, I think they are. Before we talk money, the ACC GOR pretty much puts the brakes on SEC expansion, and outside of Oregon and Washington, there are no obvious B1G targets.

More than anything, no other teams bring enough revenue to earn a share of the SEC or the B1G. They aren't going to expand just to expand. Remember, too, that every time you expand there are friction costs ... what it takes to make it happen and stick. For example, the huge friction cost in USC/UCLA deal is the distance. That has a monetary cost for travel, a culture cost, and a non-rev sport cost. Glad the B1G is dealing with that and the SEC isn't. Friction costs are often seen as trivial, but they rarely are. Any time my company talks about doing anything new, I always ask - tell me about the friction costs. Often overlooked, rarely trivial.

I think many sports writers got caught up in the idea that we were heading for "super conferences" and people just ran with it and didn't think it through. You have to have a reason for them. And perhaps there are long-term reasons I am not thinking of. But the short-term reasons just aren't there. I am starting to hear more and more about the idea that the SEC and B1G won't go further as they realize that total consolidation won't be good for the sport overall.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
I think many sports writers got caught up in the idea that we were heading for "super conferences" and people just ran with it and didn't think it through. You have to have a reason for them. And perhaps there are long-term reasons I am not thinking of. But the short-term reasons just aren't there. I am starting to hear more and more about the idea that the SEC and B1G won't go further as they realize that total consolidation won't be good for the sport overall.
Click to expand...

It's about generating clicks to their social media accts.

Being a sportswriter is a lot like being a weatherman. You can be wrong 50% of the time, but people still tune in to your next forecast.
 
Red_Alert said:
Why you telling me this and asking me these questions?

I'm not the one who's been using mental gymnastics to figure out how TX/OU can depart the Big 12 early and avoid the GOR exit fee.
Click to expand...
I'm not doing mental gymnastics.. Don't have to
ralphiewvu said:
Yeah I’m not really sure what you are getting at. No one here is arguing the B12 adding anybody from the PAC is going to get paid what they are now. It’s basically about survival and killing off a conference that was a hunter 12 months ago but now is getting hunted. But adding markets such as Denver and Phoenix is actually pretty decent given the circumstances. Also it basically solidifies the B12 (while behind by a lot) is the 3rd wheel to the P2.
Click to expand...
How were they mentioned as a HUNTER when last summer they came out and said they weren't looking to expand after the UT/ou bomb?
Red_Alert said:
I find it hilarious that tejas started this entire re-alignment fiasco. They wanted to take 3 other Big 12 teams to the PAC. That made Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri, and A&M jump ship for security.

Of course tejas had two fingers crossed behind their back the entire time.

View attachment 79037
Click to expand...
Damn right... SEC better watch out, the DeathStar from Austin is coming...



meanwhile Nebraska continues to lick Warren's boots...

We def aren't the same
 
Thiefery said:
How were they mentioned as a HUNTER when last summer they came out and said they weren't looking to expand after the UT/ou bomb?
Click to expand...
You aren't serious are you?

Klivkoff came out and said at this time we aren't expanding. They certainly could have killed off the B12 though
 
Thiefery said:
Damn right... SEC better watch out, the DeathStar from Austin is coming...

meanwhile Nebraska continues to lick Warren's boots...

We def aren't the same
Click to expand...

The same Kevin Warren that Nebraska finally convinced to play a 2020 football season?

The Warren bootlickers are Desmond Howard and Michigan.

 
Red_Alert said:
The same Kevin Warren that Nebraska finally convinced to play a 2020 football season?

The Warren bootlickers are Desmond Howard and Michigan.

Click to expand...

lol Nebraska didn't convince them.. Seeing the ACC/SEC/Big12 begin playing without a hitch while y'all were watching from the couch making no money, is the reason why
 
ralphiewvu said:
You aren't serious are you?

Klivkoff came out and said at this time we aren't expanding. They certainly could have killed off the B12 though
Click to expand...
again he said he wasn't expanding.. so when was he the Hunter? And like today.. there really isn't value expanding..it's the same shit
 
Thiefery said:
again he said he wasn't expanding.. so when was he the Hunter? And like today.. there really isn't value expanding..it's the same shit
Click to expand...
They still had the option too. Which was my whole point. Are you under some reasonable impression the PAC couldn’t expand last year after UT and OU said they were leaving?
 
ralphiewvu said:
They still had the option too. Which was my whole point. Are you under some reasonable impression the PAC couldn’t expand last year after UT and OU said they were leaving?
Click to expand...
yeah they couldn't cause nothing good would come of it.. but maybe if they added Tech, okie light and... kansas? that would have kept SC in the Pac... lol
 
Thiefery said:
yeah they couldn't cause nothing good would come of it.. but maybe if they added Tech, okie light and... kansas? that would have kept SC in the Pac... lol
Click to expand...
Not saying it would of, but even you know last year at this time that PAC had way more leverage then the B12 that just had UT/OU announce their exit. now the roles are reversed. Get it?
 
outofyourmind said:
I guess I'm wondering where 'the value' is
Click to expand...
What was UCLA's when the BIG took them?

Agree 100% with @ralphiewvu, The Big12 would crumble the PAC if they can get CU, Utah, AZ ect. The PAC can't replace them with an equally valuable programs, there isn't any out there to be had and that leaves UW and UO hanging out to dry if the BIG doesn't want them right now and that forces their hand to stay at least in shouting distance financially moving forward.
 
Last edited:
While I think it’s a pipe dream, it’d be awesome if the B12 could get Stanford right off the bat….

www.heartlandcollegesports.com

How the Big 12 Can Get Creative With Notre Dame and NBC

Is there anything that the Big 12 Conference can do to entice Notre Dame to leave its partnership with the ACC and join the Big 12? That’s the question I’ve been ruminating on the past several days. And the answer I keep coming back to is no. If you’re keeping up with realignment talk, it’s […]
www.heartlandcollegesports.com www.heartlandcollegesports.com

Notre Dame has three big rivals — USC, Navy and Stanford. You’re not getting USC and there’s no real need to get Navy. Stanford can offer you two things.

The first is a yearly game with Notre Dame on Thanksgiving weekend. I think that Notre Dame will want to continue its rivalry with USC, even as the Trojans join the Big Ten. But, as we’ve seen, rivalries can become imperiled when teams jump to new leagues (see Aggies, Texas A&M, and Longhorns, Texas — at least until 2025).

By adding Stanford, the Big 12 could guarantee a Thanksgiving weekend rivalry game that would be a part of their TV package every year, home or road. The Big 12 could further make the deal richer by ‘encouraging’ Notre Dame to play a Big 12 team every year.

Second, inviting Stanford is actually good for television negotiations. Palo Alto is in Santa Clara County, which is part of the designated San Francisco television market, which is the sixth-largest television market in the country. Say what you want, but television markets matter in these negotiations. Add Stanford and you get access to three of the eight largest TV markets in the country (Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston). I’m not talking about viewership or ratings — I’m talking about ACCESS. That matters nearly as much.

Add Notre Dame, even in a tangential relationship like this? Well, South Bend, Ind., is the No. 98 TV market. That doesn’t get you much. But Notre Dame has enough clout to have its own national radio network (they have an affiliate in San Francisco, for crying out loud) and its own spinoff television contract for football. Not even Alabama has a national radio network.

Let’s face it — the Big 12 has PLENTY of experience with partners that like to have things their way and expect special treatment. If it increases the conference’s revenue, what would it hurt?

It may not be ‘young and bold,’ but it’s creative and it has potential. It would help Notre Dame, potentially help the Big 12 and have the added benefit of potentially hurting both the Pac-12 and the ACC.

What was it Michael Scott used to say about negotiation? You want a ‘win-win-win?’

This might be it. And you don’t have to give up anything you don’t already have to make it happen.
 
duckboy33 said:
I'm just going on what people have said. Big 12 fans on twitter seemed insistent that a Big 12 couldn't leave for the PAC without a huge exit fee. Maybe they were just FOS
Click to expand...

No one will right now because we need ou and Texas to pay us if they want to leave early and if that isn't going to happen we will position ourselves in the best way possible after the GOR expires and wait it out until then.

With regards to the Pac, the sentiment on the remaining Big 12 side is we don't have to disband the conference to join the Pac. We just have to wait on you guys to do it first. We had the luck of getting dicked over first and were able to shore up the conference with the best G5 programs available to keep the conference viable. Heck we were in the same boat you guys are in this time a year ago and when we were begging to get in yall said thanks but no thanks.

Ideally both movements would have happened at the same time and the best 6-7 programs from each conference would have gotten together, voted to disband and formed a legitimate 3rd super conference. You guys tell Oregon State and Washington State to piss off. We say the same to Kansas State and pick up BYU. If it makes sense maybe we keep Kansas State and add Cincy as well. I'd argue Boise or San Diego State instead of Cincy but they are hot right now and both would be in the future Big 12 over Houston if it made financial sense.
 
This guy is gonna fuck up Bama and ou this year
1658717704237.png
 
ralphiewvu said:
If the PAC loses 4 more teams it’s absolutely going To force Udubs and Oregons hand to do something. They aren’t going to remain in a PAC with themselves and 4 other schools.

The B12 has virtually no shot at teams like Clemson, FSU, UNC etc…. They are getting into the SEC/B1G. Holding out for the likes of Pitt, BC, VPI, Syracuse or Wake isn’t going to add some monstrous deal for the B12 ether. (Although I’d love it)

I get it, you don’t want Oregon to be forced to do something right away. But the b12 needs to be hunters on this for Once though or in 12 months we maybe talking again how the PAC could be a hunter.
Click to expand...
Honestly Oregon and Washington don’t have to do anything for about a year. Even if 4 other schools agree to join the Big 12 they can wait it out if they want. It’s not like the B12 is going to say no.

They will definitely try to get in without signing a GOR but I don’t see the B12 doing that so it will be a wait game. By this time next year we’ll know what is happening and they will make a move contractually.

Potential Dominoes:

1. NBC signs a renewal deal with ND. That will keep the ACC together. Or they don’t offer enough and ND starts talking to the B1G. I think they renew

2. Utah, AZ, ASU and Colorado bolt for the Big 12. Or the PAC decides to stay together.

3. The PAC and Big 12 sign new network deals.

All of the above is in play.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top