T1B

Per the WWL...

ESPN Wrote:

"BREAKING NEWS
Source tells Doug Gottlieb Texas A&M will join SEC; Clemson, Florida St. and Missouri also may join"

The Big 12-2-2 is dead, long live the PAC 16!

Which 4 go to the Pac?

OU, OSU, Texas Tech, and either Texas or Kansas.

Apparently FSU and Clemson are a smokescreen

http://outkickthecoverage.com/fsu-and-c ... he-sec.php

I imagine the Superconferences will remain the FBS with the Houstons, Tulsas, ISUs (sup JON), and South Florida's of the world forming another football division (something in between the FCS and FBS).

I know I go to Doug Gottlieb for all my breaking news.

If the SEC is still looking right now, it's either OU or Mizzou (Mizzou being the fall back) and UNC, in my opinion. None of the other teams make any sense.

Don't care who goes or who reports it as long as the Big 12 dies.

KC Scott wrote:Lot of Big 8 history here in KC - lot of economic impact also from the rotating Championship football games

Which was moved to Dallas for at least the next 4 years as were the Big 12 offices from K.C forever...Dan Beebe and UT's grimy fingerprints all over the crime. This pissed off Osborne as much as anything, and all the other lemmings felt it was just dandy to let Texas call the shots and not make waves. Now, where did it get all those lost in the Big 12 today..that was, all kumbaya when NU and CU left?
Just this past spring Dan Beebe proclaimed the Big 12 was "better and stronger than ever". Gotcha.

Rest assured anything with Big 8 history died the day Texas was given the keys to the conference and everyone but one followed blindly. Much like the SWC, it's death was eminent.

Nice. It feels great from here!

KC Scott wrote:it's easy to look at that in hindsight and say it was wrong to bring the Texas schools on, but then you have to remember at the time the Big 8 was trying to compete for TV revenue and it made sense.

I'm not sure the Big 8 wouldn't have lasted if it hadn't made that move

It's not a question of bringing them in, it was all good.
It was allowing them to become the lord of the conference and everyone, other than NU, allowing support that favored Texas. You yourself must realize KC lost jobs (revenue) with the offices moving to Dallas. That wasn't Missouri's or Kansas St.'s or Iowa St's' idea. Did they fight it like Nebraska did? It seems to me if the entire north division and only one southern member would have opposed the move it would never have happened. Where were the north members in this issue? Not wanting to piss Texas off?
What seems lost in all this is it was Texas and the leftovers of the SWC that needed a place to go and the Big 8, which was still doing fine, provided open arms in what was thought to be an equitable situation for everyone. Texas took advantage of the fact that they could control other members rather than treat them as equals.

Thus we have the downfall of the Big 12. Maybe not tomorrow, but in 2-5 years...really Houston? (no offense Coogs') SMU?

Imagine Texas A&M playing TV games against Alabama, LSU, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee.... while OU and Texas are playing Baylor, Houston? SMU?, Iowa St. (opps sorry Texas) K-State and Kansas the same days. I gotta think Texas kids in the future will want to play against the best and it will make A&M stronger in recruiting and become the primer team in Texas.

If the Big X is getting torn apart, I'm thinking the Big Ten should take a run at Kansas and K-State and the steal two teams from the Big East...Pitt and Syracuse would be my choice. What a killer hoops conference that could become with Kansas, MSU, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Syracuse and Pitt. Whatever is left of the Big X should join C-USA.

Shoalzie wrote:If the Big X is getting torn apart, I'm thinking the Big Ten should take a run at Kansas and K-State and the steal two teams from the Big East...Pitt and Syracuse would be my choice. What a killer hoops conference that could become with Kansas, MSU, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Syracuse and Pitt. Whatever is left of the Big X should join C-USA.

I believe BCS conference expansion will be solely driven by football revenue; Hoops are not a reason for taking schools into a BCS conference. Not enough TV money to be made in basketball for the albatross of a "weaker" football program.

It wouldn't surprise me to see Pitt invited to the B1G if Notre Dame were to come into the conference next. Natural to the footprint and Penn St. would probably be game.

Cornhusker wrote:What seems lost in all this is it was Texas and the leftovers of the SWC that needed a place to go and the Big 8, which was still doing fine, provided open arms in what was thought to be an equitable situation for everyone.

Yep, so it kinda' sucks that what was the Big 8 is torn asunder while one of the orphans of the SWC is now threatening to take their ball elsewhere. I'd like to blame somebody but the real culprit, as always, is greed.

Sounds like the NY Times article was right. Twitter world stating that the SEC Presidents have said no to expansion.

I'm hearing that once A&M announced it's desire to accept an invitation should there be one, the SEC received calls from 9-10 other schools wanting in. The timing of this whole thing is bad, and the SEC is lining up their lawyers. It's going to happen.

I'd trade the SEC straight up - aTm for Arkansas.

Shoalzie wrote:If the Big X is getting torn apart, I'm thinking the Big Ten should take a run at Kansas and K-State and the steal two teams from the Big East...Pitt and Syracuse would be my choice. What a killer hoops conference that could become with Kansas, MSU, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Syracuse and Pitt. Whatever is left of the Big X should join C-USA.

That will never happen. KSU is a boarderline commuter college who's academic profile does not fit the Big 10. And Cornhusker is right about basketball. That sport doesn't even enter into the conversation when these decisions are being made.

Sudden Sam wrote:Yep.

SEC said no to A&M.

Not really. To me, it looks like the A&M folk leaked this a little too early and the SEC is going to embarass them for it. It will still happen.

Killian wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote:Yep.

SEC said no to A&M.

Not really. To me, it looks like the A&M folk leaked this a little too early and the SEC is going to embarass them for it. It will still happen.

seems what's happening is two things, SEC didn't have it's ducks in a row on a 14th team and some political wrangling will need to sort that out (NY Times article). additionally, there's some legal maneuvering that needs to take place to keep the SEC out of a lawsuit for breach of contract. i think it still happens, but not for a month or so. maybe more. at least that's the pro-Aggie spin. regardless, wouldn't want to be working in Texas A&M's PR offices this next week or so.

King Crimson wrote:

Killian wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote:Yep. SEC said no to A&M.

Not really. To me, it looks like the A&M folk leaked this a little too early and the SEC is going to embarass them for it. It will still happen.

seems what's happening is two things, SEC didn't have it's ducks in a row on a 14th team and some political wrangling will need to sort that out (NY Times article). additionally, there's some legal maneuvering that needs to take place to keep the SEC out of a lawsuit for breach of contract. i think it still happens, but not for a month or so. maybe more. at least that's the pro-Aggie spin. regardless, wouldn't want to be working in Texas A&M's PR offices this next week or so.

Agree on all points.

Killian wrote:

Shoalzie wrote:If the Big X is getting torn apart, I'm thinking the Big Ten should take a run at Kansas and K-State and the steal two teams from the Big East...Pitt and Syracuse would be my choice. What a killer hoops conference that could become with Kansas, MSU, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Syracuse and Pitt. Whatever is left of the Big X should join C-USA.

That will never happen. KSU is a boarderline commuter college who's academic profile does not fit the Big 10. And Cornhusker is right about basketball. That sport doesn't even enter into the conversation when these decisions are being made.

From what I've heard, the Big Ten really, really wants ND and Texas as its next two members, to the point where Delany is apparently willing to make concessions that would've been unthinkable just a few years ago. Specifically, Texas would keep the LHN, and ND would keep its contract with NBC. The B1G also would place ND and Texas in separate divisions, and create a protected rivalry between the two schools.

If they get ND and Texas onboard, the B1G would then get to 16 by adding two schools to shore up its presence in the northeast and/or mid-Atlantic, with the leading candidates being BC, UConn, Maryland, Rutgers, Syracuse and Virginia.

Not saying that will happen, and not saying it won't. Just saying that's what the Big Ten apparently wants. If it does happen, here's hoping that Swarbrick is savvy (Killian will get that reference) enough to negotiate a renaming of the Big Ten division names. "Leaders" and "Legends" is just plain gax. I'm no fan of the B1G, but even I think they ought to be able to do better than copy (badly) North Dakota State.

As for Kansas and K-State, look for both to wind up in the Big East if the superconference realignment does not go down immediately. If it does, Kansas will be headed to the Big East-ACC merged conference. K-State could be out of luck, headed either to the MWC or to the new SWC that Lefty and others have been discussing as a possibility.

Terry in Crapchester wrote:Swarbrick is savvy

Heh.

I’m not like the fanatical portion of the fan base that is against conference membership in all way, shapes and forms. I’m against it the way the conferences are set up now. If ND were to have been the Big 1G’s 12th team, they would have gained literally nothing while giving up a good chunk of what they had fought so long to maintain while quickly becoming a regional school.

As these situations unfold, I think a move to the Big 1G wouldn’t be as bad as it was before, if they take on Texas, Rutgers, and another team that broadens their footprint. In the scenario you brought up, if ND were allowed to keep USC and Navy (which I’m not against ending, as I think ND’s debt to them has been repaid) and could play them whenever they wanted, it could turn out very well for Notre Dame.

Personally, I think the super conferences are coming, but they won’t last. They will be around for 20 years or so before teams get sick of the politics and then decide to break away and form a smaller conference. If ND decides to maintain their independence, they will be fine.

Obviously, as I have stated numerous times before, this is all dependent on ND deciding they want to have a good football team again and actually putting one on the field for a consistent basis.

Killian wrote:

Shoalzie wrote:If the Big X is getting torn apart, I'm thinking the Big Ten should take a run at Kansas and K-State and the steal two teams from the Big East...Pitt and Syracuse would be my choice. What a killer hoops conference that could become with Kansas, MSU, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Syracuse and Pitt. Whatever is left of the Big X should join C-USA.

That will never happen. KSU is a boarderline commuter college who's academic profile does not fit the Big 10.

I think you meant "juco". Manhattan is about a zillion miles away from any known civilization. Academically, however, you would be correct. Kids go to school there to learn how to grow wheat and cure hoof-and-mouth disease. Oh, and beat Texas in football. 'Bout it.

First time I've seen the 'cats even remotely connected to the B1G, though...

i'd be surprised if KSU ends up in a BCS conference. KU has demonstrated very little appeal both 15 months ago and now....at least in rumors. shows how the talk about AAU member universities means little. and to what extent football is driving the whole bus....being a blueblood hoops program hasn't meant a lot, huh? all of which compounds KSU's problem if, indeed, the two schools are tied together.

if they are attractive to the Big E, might as well build a statue of Frank Martin right now. that's about all that been relevant for KSU since Darth Snyder took his LOA. maybe kind of like the big horse at the Denver Airport, with glowing red eyes. Big Frank...

template:

Truman wrote:Manhattan is about a zillion miles away from any known civilization. Academically, however, you would be correct. Kids go to school there to learn how to grow wheat and cure hoof-and-mouth disease.

My current boss got an architectural engineering degree there. Granted, he's the CEO's son, but I don't hold that against him.

Love the Av, btw.

War Wagon wrote:I'd trade the SEC straight up - aTm for Arkansas.

That's a fair trade, now that Arky's basketball program suxx.

Killian wrote:

Terry in Crapchester wrote:Swarbrick is savvy

Heh. I’m not like the fanatical portion of the fan base that is against conference membership in all way, shapes and forms. I’m against it the way the conferences are set up now.

If ND were to have been the Big 1G’s 12th team, they would have gained literally nothing while giving up a good chunk of what they had fought so long to maintain while quickly becoming a regional school. As these situations unfold, I think a move to the Big 1G wouldn’t be as bad as it was before, if they take on Texas, Rutgers, and another team that broadens their footprint. In the scenario you brought up, if ND were allowed to keep USC and Navy (which I’m not against ending, as I think ND’s debt to them has been repaid) and could play them whenever they wanted, it could turn out very well for Notre Dame.

Agree. Of course, there isn't a whole lot of wiggle room, from ND's perspective, as to which teams are invited in addition to them. Also, it's absolutely critical that Swarbrick negotiate a divisional realighment, which I think should be done on geographic terms as follows:

East: Eastern school TBD #1, Eastern school TBD #2, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Penn State.
West: Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Purdue, Texas, Wisconsin.

Obviously, every school east of the Ohio-Indiana border would be in the east, and every school west of the Indiana-Illinois border would be in the west. The three schools in Indiana would have to be split, two to the east and one to the west. I put Purdue in the west because it's the westernmost of those schools. If you prefer to swap out Indiana and Purdue, that's fine, but it's absolutely imperative that ND be placed in the east. It's also important that Texas be ND's protected crossover game.

If you're talking about OOC scheduling, I think a 16-team conference either has to go to a 10-game conference schedule or a 4x4 divisional format (the latter hasn't been approved by the NCAA), which would allow for an adequate 9-game conference schedule. If ND has only 2 OOC games, I think they should be against USC and a rotating western school (like you, I think the Navy debt has been repaid, and it makes little sense to play Navy annually if ND has a conference schedule which includes 3 annual games vs. teams in the northeast and/or mid-Atlantic). We've been grandfathered out of the Pac's requirement for early-season OOC games as to USC and Stanford only, but if we join a conference, it's not nearly as important to play those games later in the season, so we could rotate Stanford on and off our schedule. I would want to play a road game in the west every year, though, so it might make sense to play the 2 OOC games against western schools.

Personally, I think the super conferences are coming, but they won’t last. They will be around for 20 years or so before teams get sick of the politics and then decide to break away and form a smaller conference.

If ND decides to maintain their independence, they will be fine. Obviously, as I have stated numerous times before, this is all dependent on ND deciding they want to have a good football team again and actually putting one on the field for a consistent basis.

Partially agree, partially disagree. I believe the superconferences are coming as well, but that the eventual move will be back toward smaller conferences. The conferences are consolidating at a rate which is not in the best interests of the member institutions except financially. Too much travel will be required of the players within the superconferences.

The problem, from ND's perspective, is that the 4 x 16 superconference format is likely to break away from the NCAA and establish its own playoff format. Even if the superconferences only survive for a short-term period, in the greater scheme of things, that could have an irrepairable effect on ND's football program should ND elect to remain independent.

The solution, as you point out, is for ND to put out a better product on the playing field. And that product needn't necessarily match the unrealistic expectations of the more fanatical components of ND's fanbase. As little as one undefeated season and 1-2 other Top 10 finishes per decade on ND's part ought to be enough to discredit a playoff system which systematically excludes ND.

King Crimson wrote:i'd be surprised if KSU ends up in a BCS conference. KU has demonstrated very little appeal both 15 months ago and now....at least in rumors. shows how the talk about AAU member universities means little. and to what extent football is driving the whole bus....being a blueblood hoops program hasn't meant a lot, huh? all of which compounds KSU's problem if, indeed, the two schools are tied together.

if they are attractive to the Big E, might as well build a statue of Frank Martin right now. that's about all that been relevant for KSU since Darth Snyder took his LOA. maybe kind of like the big horse at the Denver Airport, with glowing red eyes. Big Frank...

template:

Being an elite basketball program is probably enough to land Kansas on the good side of the 4 x 16 format. I think they'll wind up in the merged Big East/ACC in that event. But they'll likely have very little pull in terms of other members of the conference.

If we assume the superconferences are forthcoming imminently, allow for TCU's impending move to the Big East, and assume ND will wind up in one of the superconferences, that means that four schools will drop from the BCS ranks. Imho, the three most likely to find themselves in that category are:

Iowa State
Kansas State
Wake Forest

Yes, there are a number of schools in the Big East that haven't been playing at the BCS level anywhere near as long as these schools have, but those schools generally have either better long-term football upside heading forward, a better (elite or near-elite) basketball tradition, or both. Wake Forest also is in a bit of trouble, I think, in that the Tobacco Road schools won't have as much pull in a merged Big East/ACC as they had in the old-school ACC. Also worth noting that the Big East schools in question (Cincinnati, UConn, Louisville, South Florida and TCU) all are located in or near media markets that are larger and/or more desirable than those occupied by the schools above (possible exception for Wake, but that market already will be accounted for by the other Tobacco Road schools). As to Wake, Duke's basketball program gives them an edge over Wake, and being a private school won't help Wake in that the merged Big East/ACC potentially will have plenty of private school options to choose from. BC, Duke, Miami, Syracuse, TCU and possibly Baylor certainly won't all be poached by other conferences.

From an institutional standpoint, there really isn't much to differentiate the three schools aboe in a negative manner from, say, Washington State, Mississippi State and Northwestern. But those three schools are all members of conferences that will survive the superconference scenario. Sometimes, being in the right place at the right time is everything.

As for Kansas State specifically, I think their best-case scenario is one in which the Big XII dissolves, but the superconference scenario doesn't occur immediately. That would allow them some additional time to make their case. That will happen, I think, if aTm leaves for the SEC, Oklahoma leaves for the Pac-16 with a number of other Big XII schools in tow, AND Texas goes independent and ND remains independent (which would put B1G expansion plans on hold, at least for the time being). In that scenario, Kansas winds up in the Big East and brings K-State with them. It could help K-State if they were to wind up in a conference which either survives the superconference scenario, or isn't badly balkanized in that scenario.

Or perhaps when the dust settles, the 4 x 16 super conferences will only apply to football and schools will adopt other smaller conference alignments for all of the other sports.

Goober McTuber wrote:Or perhaps when the dust settles, the 4 x 16 super conferences will only apply to football and schools will adopt other smaller conference alignments for all of the other sports.

That's a possibility as well. I've been saying for years that the conference alignment that serves most college sports well doesn't necessarily work as well for football. Hockey and, to a lesser extent, lacrosse, already use a different conference alignment than most other sports, why not football as well?

And going back to this . . .

Terry in Crapchester wrote:If we assume the superconferences are forthcoming imminently, allow for TCU's impending move to the Big East, and assume ND will wind up in one of the superconferences, that means that four schools will drop from the BCS ranks. Imho, the three most likely to find themselves in that category are:

Iowa State
Kansas State
Wake Forest

If the allegations are true, it looks like Miami could very well be #4.

War Stoops wrote:Per the WWL...

ESPN Wrote:

"BREAKING NEWS
Source tells Doug Gottlieb Texas A&M will join SEC; Clemson, Florida St. and Missouri also may join"

The Big 12-2-2 is dead, long live the PAC 16!

I think ATM is gone, it's just a matter of when, but Dodds(better him than Beebe) is already figuring-out the replacement(my guess would be BYU or Houston). The 12 goes on. If Mizzou also gets an invite too then I see a real chance of a feeding-frenzy and the con disbanding. But as long as OU and Texas are solid on staying things will be held-together. I think the PAC16 makes sense though. With Texas, Tech, OU, OSU, ASU, 'zona, Utah, and CU you have a western division that works quite well.

Terry in Crapchester wrote:Agree. Of course, there isn't a whole lot of wiggle room, from ND's perspective, as to which teams are invited in addition to them.

In my eyes, Swarbrick is hitting about .800 in his decisions, so I am very close to trusting implicitly when it comes to these matters. If this does come down the pipe, I think Swarbrick will finally be the wartime consigliere that ND has lacked for the better part of two decades, and negotiate ND from a position of strength, not weakness. Assuming that is the case, I believe Swarbrick, if a move was made, would have some pull/say as to who the other teams would be if the Big 1G expanded to 16 teams (assuming ND and Texas were 13 and 14).

Also, it's absolutely critical that Swarbrick negotiate a divisional realighment, which I think should be done on geographic terms as follows:

East: Eastern school TBD #1, Eastern school TBD #2, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Penn State.
West: Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Purdue, Texas, Wisconsin.

Obviously, every school east of the Ohio-Indiana border would be in the east, and every school west of the Indiana-Illinois border would be in the west. The three schools in Indiana would have to be split, two to the east and one to the west. I put Purdue in the west because it's the westernmost of those schools. If you prefer to swap out Indiana and Purdue, that's fine, but it's absolutely imperative that ND be placed in the east. It's also important that Texas be ND's protected crossover game.

If you're talking about OOC scheduling, I think a 16-team conference either has to go to a 10-game conference schedule or a 4x4 divisional format (the latter hasn't been approved by the NCAA), which would allow for an adequate 9-game conference schedule. If ND has only 2 OOC games, I think they should be against USC and a rotating western school (like you, I think the Navy debt has been repaid, and it makes little sense to play Navy annually if ND has a conference schedule which includes 3 annual games vs. teams in the northeast and/or mid-Atlantic). We've been grandfathered out of the Pac's requirement for early-season OOC games as to USC and Stanford only, but if we join a conference, it's not nearly as important to play those games later in the season, so we could rotate Stanford on and off our schedule. I would want to play a road game in the west every year, though, so it might make sense to play the 2 OOC games against western schools.

Agree. Hadn't put a lot of thought into the divisions, but this makes sense.

Terry in Crapchester wrote:

Killian wrote:Personally, I think the super conferences are coming, but they won’t last. They will be around for 20 years or so before teams get sick of the politics and then decide to break away and form a smaller conference.

If ND decides to maintain their independence, they will be fine. Obviously, as I have stated numerous times before, this is all dependent on ND deciding they want to have a good football team again and actually putting one on the field for a consistent basis.

Partially agree, partially disagree. I believe the superconferences are coming as well, but that the eventual move will be back toward smaller conferences. The conferences are consolidating at a rate which is not in the best interests of the member institutions except financially. Too much travel will be required of the players within the superconferences.

The problem, from ND's perspective, is that the 4 x 16 superconference format is likely to break away from the NCAA and establish its own playoff format. Even if the superconferences only survive for a short-term period, in the greater scheme of things, that could have an irrepairable effect on ND's football program should ND elect to remain independent.

The solution, as you point out, is for ND to put out a better product on the playing field. And that product needn't necessarily match the unrealistic expectations of the more fanatical components of ND's fanbase. As little as one undefeated season and 1-2 other Top 10 finishes per decade on ND's part ought to be enough to discredit a playoff system which systematically excludes ND.

I think we totally agree here, except perhaps the timing and length of the superconferences.