Big 12 announces Bob Bowlsby will step down as commissioner later this year

[Volbound1700]

I will give my two sense which I am not sure is worth that much:

Big12 was screwed when they failed to get CFB expansion. If they had expanded (even to 8 teams), I think they would have got a team in nearly every year. Without expansion, it will be more tricky.

ACC is in an interesting spot. Like the Pac12, they have great markets (better than even the B1G and SEC if you look at population). However, these markets are not great College Sports (specifically Football) markets for a variety of reasons, mostly being that urbanized areas do not translate well to football and outdoor sports because kids cannot play these sports year around like they can in suburban or rural areas.

Despite that, the ACC has football first powers set in the Southeast who can compete with the SEC: Georgia Tech, NC State, Virginia Tech, Clemson, Miami, Louisville, and Florida State all fit this bill.

ACC has significant potential with these powers along with the Alliance of Notre Dame. However, the major struggles of these powers has caused the league to fall behind the pecking order. The league is also split between Basketball focused teams (UNC, Duke, etc.) versus Football focused teams (Clemson and FSU). This split, I think, causes some disharmony and instability in the league. I agree with @Wild Turkey that the ACC screwed itself on the contract and has generally suffered from the fact that teams like FSU and Miami are not on par with where they have been in the past.

Pac12 is also in a tough spot. On paper, it should be dominate. It has the media and population mecha centers of Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, Denver, Phoenix, and Salt Lake City. Over 60 million people live in their region. Yet, it is a very urbanized area that sees football as a secondary hobby. Like the ACC's region, pro sports trump college sports and it is often hard in some regions for children to grow up playing football as a first sport. Therefore, despite having better markets than the B1G and SEC, it struggles to get a lot of viewership from the local population. It is also hamstrung, as people point out, with the time zone difference (even though there is enough people in the PST time zone to drive high ratings). Another major issue with the Pac12 is that there just really isn't great candidates for expansion other than Texas who is no off the table. However, the Pac12's geographically isolation might be its saving grace as it would be hard for Oregon or USC to fit into the B1G or SEC due to the long travel times. Definitely possibly but probably not that attractive for both conferences.

I can see the B1G and Pac12 doing a semi-merge with both keeping their brands but having at least one interconference matchup and perhaps a joint Championship game in the future.

However, the B1G and SEC are far more likely to poach from the ACC than they are the Pac12.

 

[Thiefery]

 

[Thiefery]

I will give my two sense which I am not sure is worth that much:

Big12 was screwed when they failed to get CFB expansion. If they had expanded (even to 8 teams), I think they would have got a team in nearly every year. Without expansion, it will be more tricky.

ACC is in an interesting spot. Like the Pac12, they have great markets (better than even the B1G and SEC if you look at population). However, these markets are not great College Sports (specifically Football) markets for a variety of reasons, mostly being that urbanized areas do not translate well to football and outdoor sports because kids cannot play these sports year around like they can in suburban or rural areas.

Despite that, the ACC has football first powers set in the Southeast who can compete with the SEC: Georgia Tech, NC State, Virginia Tech, Clemson, Miami, Louisville, and Florida State all fit this bill.

ACC has significant potential with these powers along with the Alliance of Notre Dame. However, the major struggles of these powers has caused the league to fall behind the pecking order. The league is also split between Basketball focused teams (UNC, Duke, etc.) versus Football focused teams (Clemson and FSU). This split, I think, causes some disharmony and instability in the league. I agree with @Wild Turkey that the ACC screwed itself on the contract and has generally suffered from the fact that teams like FSU and Miami are not on par with where they have been in the past.

Pac12 is also in a tough spot. On paper, it should be dominate. It has the media and population mecha centers of Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, Denver, Phoenix, and Salt Lake City. Over 60 million people live in their region. Yet, it is a very urbanized area that sees football as a secondary hobby. Like the ACC's region, pro sports trump college sports and it is often hard in some regions for children to grow up playing football as a first sport. Therefore, despite having better markets than the B1G and SEC, it struggles to get a lot of viewership from the local population. It is also hamstrung, as people point out, with the time zone difference (even though there is enough people in the PST time zone to drive high ratings). Another major issue with the Pac12 is that there just really isn't great candidates for expansion other than Texas who is no off the table. However, the Pac12's geographically isolation might be its saving grace as it would be hard for Oregon or USC to fit into the B1G or SEC due to the long travel times. Definitely possibly but probably not that attractive for both conferences.

I can see the B1G and Pac12 doing a semi-merge with both keeping their brands but having at least one interconference matchup and perhaps a joint Championship game in the future.

However, the B1G and SEC are far more likely to poach from the ACC than they are the Pac12.

it's only a matter of time before SC and a few friends join the BiG.. I also think the ACC is on borrowed time as well. But I see them sticking together til it's next negotiations in 10 years.

 

[Volbound1700]

it's only a matter of time before SC and a few friends join the BiG.. I also think the ACC is on borrowed time as well. But I see them sticking together til it's next negotiations in 10 years.

I think the travel costs will be too much, a semi-merger is more possible. I could be wrong. The Pac12 does have a few dead weight programs that they could kick to the curb: Washington State, Oregon State, Arizona, Cal, etc.

Another interesting hypothetical is Ohio State to SEC. I know that sounds laughable but the SEC could go for the throat and end it all. Interesting thing about that scenario is that Greg Sankey would basically make the SEC into the NCAA and then likely redo the league into regions that would recreate the traditional conferences/matchups from past eras.

If Ohio State leaves the B1G, I think Michigan would likely follow even though they wouldn't want to (similar to OU sticking with Texas. I don't think OU really wanted to go to SEC until Texas talked them into it). One both leave, this would be followed by Penn State and Nebraska which would kill the league.

The SEC would then start bringing in all of the other powers: Clemson, FSU, USC, etc. and would become the NCAA replacement. It would have to split up into conferences/divisions at that point since it would be too large and they would likely bring back a smaller version of the B1G, Big12, Pac12, and ACC again. For example the new Big12 would likely be Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Nebraska, Missouri, and maybe Oklahoma State and Kansas if they decide that they want to restore their rivalries with OU and Missouri.

The B1G might be smaller with just Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Wisconsin, Purdue, Michigan State, and Iowa.

Crazy scenario but it could happen. Basically a new Power 5 league under SEC umbrella with some of the smaller Power 5 teams left out.

 

[Volbound1700]

@Thiefery the biggest winner in 2021 realignment is your school. Texas is making out like a bandit in this arrangement.

For one, they have knocked most of their in-state competition. In the past, if you could not make Texas or didn't want to go there, you could play for Baylor, Texas Tech, or TCU and still be in the same league as Texas. Texas was competing against multiple other programs in your state. Texas A&M was also a headache now saying they were playing in the A+ league while Texas was in the A league.

Now it is just Texas and Texas A&M (at least for in-state, you will still need to compete against Arkansas, OU, LSU, etc.). The other Texas leagues will be B league in comparison. This is going to significantly help Texas recruiting.

You also have the NIL arrangement coming around. Texas has the most money, in the most prestigious league, and the best options. Arch Manning isn't on your radar, IMO, if you are still in the Big12. If you can get the right coach, Texas' future looks very bright with the SEC move.

 

[Wild Turkey]

it's only a matter of time before SC and a few friends join the BiG.. I also think the ACC is on borrowed time as well. But I see them sticking together til it's next negotiations in 10 years.

As long as ND keeps its contract with the ACC they have viability.

The big question is will the SEC be interested in 10 years when Clemson and FSU come knocking? If those two schools stay committed to the ACC and ND stays in the fold they will be fine. If one of the three jumps ship the league will start floundering and will go through phases like the Big 12 did.

 

[Deep Creek]

I can see the B1G and Pac12 doing a semi-merge with both keeping their brands but having at least one interconference matchup and perhaps a joint Championship game in the future.

Do you think the B1G schools want to share a portion of their revenue with the PAC 12? If not, then I'm not sure either of those two items will generate enough revenue to close the gap between the two conferences.

 

[Hu War Yu]

As long as ND keeps its contract with the ACC they have viability.

The big question is will the SEC be interested in 10 years when Clemson and FSU come knocking? If those two schools stay committed to the ACC and ND stays in the fold they will be fine. If one of the three jumps ship the league will start floundering and will go through phases like the Big 12 did.

Seriously: who wants Florida State these days?

 

[Thiefery]

I think the travel costs will be too much, a semi-merger is more possible. I could be wrong.

let's be real, the price for gas can go up to $10/gal and SC would still come out in the black with what the BiG is handing out distribution wise as of right now, let alone with a increase with SC in tow.

Texas will always do what it does best for itself. They were one of the biggest reasons why the Big12 is viewed as weak. Going through it's worst decade of football ever at the worst possible time. Being down so much on the field, let alone all the stuff going on behind the scenes (Gov Perry vs Powers/Deloss stepping down as AD and filling that spot with the worst ever AD, Steve Patterson).. hurt the image of the Big12 more than anything.

No one cares if Baylor or TCU or Kansas St had a good team or not, they are viewed inferior by most fans nationally. ou actually did their part, except in national televised CFP games.

I'm happy with the SEC move, because if anything, it beefs up the home schedule immediately. Playing old SWC foes in Arkansas and aggy every season is better than anything UT has in conference outside of the RRS.

 

[fordman84]

@Thiefery the biggest winner in 2021 realignment is your school. Texas is making out like a bandit in this arrangement.

For one, they have knocked most of their in-state competition. In the past, if you could not make Texas or didn't want to go there, you could play for Baylor, Texas Tech, or TCU and still be in the same league as Texas. Texas was competing against multiple other programs in your state. Texas A&M was also a headache now saying they were playing in the A+ league while Texas was in the A league.

Now it is just Texas and Texas A&M (at least for in-state, you will still need to compete against Arkansas, OU, LSU, etc.). The other Texas leagues will be B league in comparison. This is going to significantly help Texas recruiting.

You also have the NIL arrangement coming around. Texas has the most money, in the most prestigious league, and the best options. Arch Manning isn't on your radar, IMO, if you are still in the Big12. If you can get the right coach, Texas' future looks very bright with the SEC move.

 

[Volbound1700]

Do you think the B1G schools want to share a portion of their revenue with the PAC 12? If not, then I'm not sure either of those two items will generate enough revenue to close the gap between the two conferences.

It would probably be a scenario where the B1G makes money but doesn't engage in 100% revenue sharing other than perhaps the postseason game (Rose Bowl).

 

[Volbound1700]

let's be real, the price for gas can go up to $10/gal and SC would still come out in the black with what the BiG is handing out distribution wise as of right now, let alone with a increase with SC in tow.

Texas will always do what it does best for itself. They were one of the biggest reasons why the Big12 is viewed as weak. Going through it's worst decade of football ever at the worst possible time. Being down so much on the field, let alone all the stuff going on behind the scenes (Gov Perry vs Powers/Deloss stepping down as AD and filling that spot with the worst ever AD, Steve Patterson).. hurt the image of the Big12 more than anything.

No one cares if Baylor or TCU or Kansas St had a good team or not, they are viewed inferior by most fans nationally. ou actually did their part, except in national televised CFP games.

I'm happy with the SEC move, because if anything, it beefs up the home schedule immediately. Playing old SWC foes in Arkansas and aggy every season is better than anything UT has in conference outside of the RRS.

It is just about gas costs (they would fly btw), it is also about fans traveling to games, interesting matchups, etc.

Sure Ohio State vs. USC, Penn State vs. USC, or Michigan vs. USC looks very attractive. However USC vs. Iowa, USC vs. Illinois, USC vs. Purdue, USC vs. Minnesota, etc. That isn't much of a draw for their fans.

They are getting 2-4 matchups a year that generate black but the rest are probably meh.

The reason Texas made sense is the matchups. They get back two rivals: Arkansas and Texas A&M plus they get big name/interesting matchups such as Alabama, LSU, Tennessee (battle of UTs is going to be hyped), Georgia, Florida, etc. Those are intriguing matchups.

Not enough intriguing matchups for USC to really generate that interest to make move to B1G and vice versa. I could be totally wrong and speculating here but I kind of see that as the downside right now. USC would at least have to bring 3 friends. If I had to rank Pac12 teams on attractiveness, there is a big 4 (USC, Oregon, UCLA, and Washington). After that, it does get a little bit harder to predict. I am thinking Colorado or Arizona State are likely the next set of schools as attractive but they are a big drop off from the top 4.

 

[Volbound1700]

Seriously: who wants Florida State these days?

FSU still has a strong fanbase, they just need the right coach/players to get things moving again. I am not sure you can say the same thing about Miami who has been down longer and doesn't have the fan support.

 

[Wild Turkey]

Seriously: who wants Florida State these days?

That’s why I said if the SEC has the appetite. In 10 years Clemson might be in a dramatically different situation plus Florida and SC could potentially block them.

It’s not a slam dunk for the conference.

 

[CoalTrain]

JMO but I think the BIG, Notre Dame, and USC are going to need each other once Texas and OU join the SEC and the new contract money bar is set. The BIG is the only conference capable of staying in the same universe as the SEC financially but even they will need some big gets similar to what the SEC did by getting Texas and OU to stay on equal or maybe even higher ground than the SEC due to the SEC's built in advantages already, Notre Dame & SC would do that and both of those schools are going to need to make a move to compete in this NIL era where more and more and more money is needed at every turn to compete at the highest level, the PAC and ACC can't do that for either one of them so their hand imo will be forced. Notre Dame is playing footsy with the BIG already and the ALL of the PAC schools have been disgruntled & disadvantaged for reasons mentioned for quite awhile now so again, imo, it's going to be time for these parties to look out for their own survival and..... who can blame em?

 

[Cowboyinexile]

I would really like to be able to look back at the other site and see your stance on A&M going to the SEC a few years ago and if you were this level headed about it. Most Big12 fans were claiming we were running away, moping because we couldn't win the big12, complaining about "big brother", etc.

To be fair nothing you have said is false. Y'all couldn't meet expectations in the Big 12 and you had big brother running the show. I'm not knocking the move but ego in your administration played a big part in it.

 

[Volbound1700]

JMO but I think the BIG, Notre Dame, and USC are going to need each other once Texas and OU join the SEC and the new contract money bar is set. The BIG is the only conference capable of staying in the same universe as the SEC financially but even they will need some big gets similar to what the SEC did by getting Texas and OU to stay on equal or maybe even higher ground than the SEC due to the SEC's built in advantages already, Notre Dame & SC would do that and both of those schools are going to need to make a move to compete in this NIL era where more and more and more money is needed at every turn to compete at the highest level, the PAC and ACC can't do that for either one of them so their hand imo will be forced. Notre Dame is playing footsy with the BIG already and the ALL of the PAC schools have been disgruntled & disadvantaged for reasons mentioned for quite awhile now so again, imo, it's going to be time for these parties to look out for their own survival and..... who can blame em?

B1G's main issue is that it is a top heavy league and doesn't have access to talent hotbeds with the exception of maybe Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Right now, Michigan and Ohio State are the only two programs that can recruit nationally and have the talent (with the right coaching and players in the right position) to beat the power SEC programs (Alabama and Georgia). (Penn State has potentially).

Sure the SEC is top heavy as well but it has been more spread out over a longer term with Auburn, LSU, and Florida also winning National Titles in Modern era.

It would be a great move for the B1G to poach teams in recruiting hot bed such as USC, Miami, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, etc. However, I am not sure if that will happen due to a variety of issues.

However, Financial I think the B1G will be fine. It is a pretty balanced team. If you are looking for freeloaders, it is hard to find a lot (Northwestern and Rutgers might be free loaders). Most of the teams contribute. Illinois seems like the weakest state because neither of their Illinois teams are that great in sports. Indiana is also an interesting scenario with Indiana and Purdue. Both have strengths and weaknesses as well.

 

[fordman84]

To be fair nothing you have said is false. Y'all couldn't meet expectations in the Big 12 and you had big brother running the show. I'm not knocking the move but ego in your administration played a big part in it.

I mean, we won as many big12 titles as you but in fewer years. Then we took our destiny in our own hands instead of hoping another school would always look out for us. A&M being able to see that other schools look out for themselves, rightfully so, is what made us jump to a better league when we had the chance. You should have done the same instead of being relegated to essentially a G5 conference now.

 

[Volbound1700]

I mean, we won as many big12 titles as you but in fewer years. Then we took our destiny in our own hands instead of hoping another school would always look out for us. A&M being able to see that other schools look out for themselves, rightfully so, is what made us jump to a better league when we had the chance. You should have done the same instead of being relegated to essentially a G5 conference now.

While I understand your point, I think this is a lame argument with Oklahoma State. They have done everything to make their program better and have been more competitive in all sports than most Power 5 programs. You can't just make millions of people instantly become fans and watch your team overnight.

Oklahoma State has been a far better program than Tennessee over last 10 years in football but yet we would have a spot if we were in the Big12 due to our top 15 income-generating program and large, dedicated fanbase.

 

[fordman84]

While I understand your point, I think this is a lame argument with Oklahoma State. They have done everything to make their program better and have been more competitive in all sports than most Power 5 programs. You can't just make millions of people instantly become fans and watch your team overnight.

Oklahoma State has been a far better program than Tennessee over last 10 years in football but yet we would have a spot if we were in the Big12 due to our top 15 income-generating program and large, dedicated fanbase.

What has Okie St done to get more competitive to that is so revolutionary?
Regardless, that isn't my point. My point is that you don't sit back and hope someone else takes care of you. You plot a path and when an opportunity that is good for you arises, you take it. You don't say "no thanks, this other school is going to always look out for us". A&M knew this. And I have to believe that the SEC would have been much happier to have Okie St than Mizzou.