NCAA Conference Realignment

[Just the facts]

also media market contributions (except WVU).

Parts of West Virginia are 45 miles from the White House.

[venture]

Not sure how much I buy this...I don't see Big 12 holding at 9 to 10 teams.

http://articles.boston.com/2011-10-2...ig-east-target

West Virginia looms as next Big 12 target
October 20, 2011|Mark Blaudschun, Globe Staff

The Big 12 as expected will lose Missouri to the Southeastern Conference within the next few days, but according to sources in the Big 12, the target team to replace the Tigers is West Virginia.
According to sources in the Big 12 and Big East, the Big 12 expansion will hold at 10 teams for the time being. And while Missouri will leave for the SEC next season, West Virginia will not be available to the Big 12 until the 2014 season since the Big East will enforce the 27 month departure rule for all of its teams (Syracuse, Pittsburgh to the ACC) who are moving,
With Missouri's decision, and only the departure of West Virginia, the Big East is expected to offer inviations to Boise State, Southern Methodist, Houston, Central Florida, Air Force and Navy over the next several days.

[dankrutka]

Several schools (namely Texas) want to hold at 10 teams because they don't want to share money. They don't understand that stability is serioulsy threatened if the conference stays at 10. They have been idiots throughout this process. Blinded by greed without recognizing the instability it causes. The conference must expand to a minimum of 12 to survive long term.

[MDot]

If we do go back to 12 teams cause of Missouri leaving then it doesn't really matter, but if Texas gets their way then we're screwed. But I HIGHLY doubt Texas will get their way in this scenario.

[betts]

What I don't understand is why David Boren doesn't see what a house of cards the Big Twelve currently is. If schools like Nebraska, Texas A&M, Colorado and Missouri are bolting, there are serious, serious flaws in the system, flaws that will ultimately threaten OU and OSU. I don't know if he's one of the people who are foolish enough to think OU's tradition will carry them through any conference. We invited TCU because they've been good for the past few years. No one cares about what happened 20 years ago, as we'll find when OU goes through its next rough patch. TV money is going to fall, and we don't have the population to support the team through the bad times.

[Roadhawg]

I still don't understand why the conference just didn't tell TX to go away before members started bolting. 1 school leaving vs. 4 (so far)

[ljbab728]

TV money is going to fall, and we don't have the population to support the team through the bad times.

Betts, I've been going to OU football games for 50 years and have seen a number of bad times stretches. The population hasn't been a problem and the support will not wane if that happens again.

[betts]

I probably wasnt clear enough, although I remember some pretty bleak John Blake years. If we have a less impressive conference, our television money will drop with the next television contract. We've already agreed to more revenue sharing with the lesser schools. It could become a vicious cycle where our conference isn't impressive enough to attract lots of high level recruits, we end up in lesser bowls where we're not bringing in as much money and we're sharing more of what we do get. Then, we don't have the population to ensure that money rolls in no matter what and so our facilities don't keep up and we get even worse recruits. That becomes a vicious cycle. The players being recruited now were six when OU won their last national championship. They don't care what OU was in the 50s and 70s. It may be a worst case scenario, bit I don't think it's that far-fetched and it worries me. If I were in charge we would have been in the SEC the day the PAC-10 said it wasn't interested.

[venture]

I still don't understand why the conference just didn't tell TX to go away before members started bolting. 1 school leaving vs. 4 (so far)

Because no one has the guts to stand up to Texas. If the Big 12 decides to just stick with 10 teams it is an obvious victory for Texas...especially since many other schools want 12. I think it is about time I just go back to rooting for MAC schools. LOL At least they don't move around all that much - core has been together for decades. Yeah they aren't elite programs, but that doesn't make the football any less entertaining.

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/e...70202/32845433

In related news, Missouri has proceeded to the next step according to Dodd's article above. University chancellor was given authority to negotiate contracts in regards to conference realignment.

At this point the Big 12 just needs to get the invites rolling out. The only issue we have is that WVU, UL, and Cincy will be locked into the Big East until 2014. So that means two seasons with just 9 teams. Perhaps it is time to just go to 14 schools by 2014 and invite Boise State and another school that won't be tied to the Big East's long wait time. That will give us 11 teams to live off of until the 2014 season and it bulks us up for stability purposes. Or maybe we entertain an agreement with the Big East like the CUSA/MWC arrangement. Granted that would tie up two AQ slots which won't fly.

EDIT UPDATE - KWTV reported tonight that Missouri has stated if they switch conference they WILL play in the new conference next year. So the Big 12's thinking that they will remain until 2013 was a pipe dream.

[ljbab728]

I probably wasnt clear enough, although I remember some pretty bleak John Blake years. If we have a less impressive conference, our television money will drop with the next television contract. We've already agreed to more revenue sharing with the lesser schools. It could become a vicious cycle where our conference isn't impressive enough to attract lots of high level recruits, we end up in lesser bowls where we're not bringing in as much money and we're sharing more of what we do get. Then, we don't have the population to ensure that money rolls in no matter what and so our facilities don't keep up and we get even worse recruits. That becomes a vicious cycle. The players being recruited now were six when OU won their last national championship. They don't care what OU was in the 50s and 70s. It may be a worst case scenario, bit I don't think it's that far-fetched and it worries me. If I were in charge we would have been in the SEC the day the PAC-10 said it wasn't interested.

I guess we'll just agree to disagree then. I'm not buying that scenario. I was in favor of the PAC-12 move but would never support the SEC. I just have to hold my nose thinking about them no matter how much money they have. I have confidence in the leadership at OU to make sure that they will come out fine.

[dankrutka]

Betts you are completely wrong. OU has tradition whichgoes a long way towards donations. OU football is a successful brand. They could succeed in any conference. What happened 20 years ago matters a lot b/c tradition builds a brand that sustains success. Having said that, OU is still better off in a stronger conference, but OU does not need it to succeed. Down years happen, but no program can buy what OU already has. Do you think Missouri will become a better program than OU if they leave the Big 12 for a better conference? Nope. B/c they can never build the excitement and fan base OU has b/c they lack the brand, the tradition.

[ljbab728]

Betts you are completely wrong. OU has tradition whichgoes a long way towards donations. OU football is a successful brand. They could succeed in any conference. What happened 20 years ago matters a lot b/c tradition builds a brand that sustains success. Having said that, OU is still better off in a stronger conference, but OU does not need it to succeed. Down years happen, but no program can buy what OU already has. Do you think Missouri will become a better program than OU if they leave the Big 12 for a better conference? Nope. B/c they can never build the excitement and fan base OU has b/c they lack the brand, the tradition.

Well said, Kilgore. I agree completely. Betts has good points but she doesn't have the long term Oklahoma roots to understand why OU is somewhat unique.

[Just the facts]

Traber mentioned this article on the Sports Animal the other night. The story doesn't say where OU ranks but we know it isn't in the Top 5.

http://athleticbusiness.com/articles...icid=136030023

A NEW WAY TO KEEP SCORE IU professor's groundbreaking study values nation's college football programs

An Indiana University finance professor has done what some say is a first-of-its kind analysis of the value of college football programs. The 242-page dissertation puts a price tag on them as if they were for sale on the open market, and it's filled with nuggets sure to grab the attention of academics, sports business experts and fans alike.

...

The study concluded that the University of Texas, valued at $848.3 million, has the richest football program. With its huge stadium, massive fan base and immense revenue stream, Texas far outdistanced the No. 2 school in Brewer's study, Georgia, which had a valuation of $483.6 million.

Penn State, Florida and Louisiana State rounded out the top five.

3 teams in the Top 5 are in the SEC.

[Just the facts]

Found this list:

*private schools are not ranked since their data is not public information.

Big XII teams are in Red
SEC in Green

http://www.ibj.com/the-score/2011/10...AMS/post/30084

1. Texas $848.3 million
2. Georgia $483.6 million
3. Penn State $446.9 million
4. Florida $421.8 million
5. LSU $397.4 million
6. Michigan $393.5 million
7. Alabama $374.3 million
8. Auburn $359.4 million
9. Oklahoma $343 million
10. Tennessee $321.3 million
11. South Carolina $316.8 million
12. Ohio State $292.8 million
13. Nebraska $284.7 million
14. Texas A&M $245.9 million
15. Iowa $245.8 million
16. Michigan State $239.4 million
17. Arkansas $235.7 million
18. Oklahoma State $155.2 million
19. Wisconsin $153.3 million
20. Kentucky $152.5 million
21. West Virginia $141.2 million
22. Washington $136.2 million
23. Mississippi $136 million
24. Virginia Tech $134.2 million
25. Clemson $131 million
26. Minnesota $126.5 million
27. Colorado $122.7 million
28. Illinois $122 million
29. Arizona State $105.7 million
30. Oregon $102 million
31. North Carolina State $101.8 million
32. Texas Tech $100.4 million
33. Missouri $99.4 million
34. Arizona $93.2 million
35. Georgia Tech $85 million
36. Indiana $77.8 million
37. Oregon State $73.4 million
38. UCLA $66.1 million
39. North Carolina $65.2 million
40. Boise State $64.8 million
41. Iowa State $59.9 million
42. Kansas State $59.8 million
43. Cal Berkley $55.9 million
44. Purdue $55.5 million
45. Central Florida $53.8 million
46. Utah $44.8 million
47. Pittsburgh $44 million
48. Mississippi State $43.3 million
49. South Florida $38.9 million
50. Washington State $32.1 million
51. Louisville $30.4 million
52. Virginia $28.2 million
53. Wyoming $24.7 million
54. Florida State $23.6 million
55. Fresno State $23.1 million
56. UTEP $18.7 million
57. Cincinnati $15 million
58. Maryland $14.99 million
59. Kansas $14.9 million
60. Idaho $14.5 million
61. San Diego State $11.8 million
62. Eastern Michigan $9.1 million
63. San Jose State $6.9 million
64. Florida International $6.3 million
65. East Carolina $6.2 million
66. Troy $3.1 million
67. UAB $2.6 million
68. Louisiana Tech $2.3 million
69. Nevada $1.1 million
70. Bowling Green $876,287
71. Ohio $696,035
72. Arkansas State $0
73. Ball State $0
74. Central Michigan $0
75. Colorado State $0
76. Kent State $0
77. Marshall $0
78. Miami of Ohio $0
79. Middle Tennessee $0
80. Buffalo $0
81. Temple $0
82. Akron $0
83. UConn $0
84. Louisiana Lafayette $0
85. Louisiana Monroe $0
86. Memphis $0
87. New Mexico $0
88. North Texas $0
89. Southern Miss $0
90. Toledo $0
91. Western Kentucky $0
92. Western Michigan $0
93. Rutgers -$19
94. New Mexico State -$2.2 million
95. Houston -$4.3 million
96. Utah State -$7.1 million
97. UNLV -$13.1 million
98. Hawaii -$18.7 million
99. Florida Atlantic -$22.2 million
100. Northern Illinois -$32.3 million

[Snowman]

I am shocked Iowa State is that high, I wonder if Kansas and Kansas State are still paying something off or just spending more per year to not be the conference doormat. I do wish a little more could have been posted about all the metrics that went in than sure we did the basic stuff, what they know that was not reflected in the report and the other factors can be important. Revenue and expenses would have been good to put where available.

[MDot]

No one man should have all that power. (yes, that is a reference to Kanye West)

[betts]

Betts you are completely wrong. OU has tradition whichgoes a long way towards donations. OU football is a successful brand. They could succeed in any conference. What happened 20 years ago matters a lot b/c tradition builds a brand that sustains success. Having said that, OU is still better off in a stronger conference, but OU does not need it to succeed. Down years happen, but no program can buy what OU already has. Do you think Missouri will become a better program than OU if they leave the Big 12 for a better conference? Nope. B/c they can never build the excitement and fan base OU has b/c they lack the brand, the tradition.

I hope you're right and I hope I'm wrong. But, perhaps because I haven't lived here all of my life, I'm not looking at things through OU-colored glasses. My point is that the media is all about the here and now. They're faster than anyone to jump on a new bandwagon, and ESPN especially has reason to try to hype the SEC. My point is that kids teams are recruiting, who are 15 through 18 years old, have very little understanding of OU tradition unless they've been raised in the state of Oklahoma. And our school is dependent on out of state recruits for its success. Let's imagine 10 years down the line. Bob Stoops has retired and they pick Brent Venables to replace him. The team isn't doing so well, and we're playing teams like Louisville, Boise State, Iowa State and Kansas every week on television. Let's say Texas has a few bad years that happen to coincide with our bad years. All of a sudden we're no more glamorous than the Big East. You'll hear people complaining about us having an automatic BCS berth. Why? Because Texas is the only state in the conference with population of any significance. And we're little school/little population heavy with respect to the other conferences. That leads to less money. And conferences that have grown, like the SEC, with big state schools with lots of population (adding Texas A&M and Missouri is brillliant in that regard) will be rolling in money and television attention. I think this is a dangerous course and I can only hope that it's not a huge mistake. Because, if we're going to move conferences, we need to do it from a position of strength. We don't have enough television sets to be attractive to another conference, unless OU has had at least a 5 to 10 year history of winning big. Hope I'm wrong.

[venture]

Geez...so now it appears MWC/CUSA are actually wanting to join up with the Big East to compete for one AQ slot.

http://dennis-dodd.blogs.cbssports.c...70202/32854353

Under the plan being circulated by the Mountain West and Conference USA to FBS administrators, those two conferences would hope to join forces with the Big East in a grouping of 28 to 32 schools in football only. The Big East is still pursuing a 12-team football league.

The idea is for the three conferences to stay viable to the BCS for automatic qualification to a BCS bowl or bowls. For now, call it the Global Conference.

Those conferences would reorganize to compete in four, eight-team divisions or four, seven-team divisions. It’s not clear from the document how many automatic bids would emerge out of the group.

[MDot]

Geez...so now it appears MWC/CUSA are actually wanting to join up with the Big East to compete for one AQ slot.

http://dennis-dodd.blogs.cbssports.c...70202/32854353

might as well.

[Just the facts]

This is what happens when you have 124 teams competing for 8 slots and 1 championship.

[MDot]

This is what happens when you have 124 teams competing for 8 slots and 1 championship.

Can you say "playoffs?".

[MDot]

[jn1780]

What are the arguments for and against playoffs?

Is trying to schedule a month full of playoff games during a month of college finals one of the biggest issues?

[MDot]

What are the arguments for and against playoffs?

Is trying to schedule a month full of playoff games during a month of college finals one of the biggest issues?

Why don't you research that for us and come back with a full report. ;-)

[betts]

Conference Championship games are usually the week to 10 days before finals. If you had an 8 team playoff, the first series could occur in place of conference championship games, so there's one week. Then, give them the next week off for finals and play a semi-final game two weeks later, which is usually when bowl season begins anyway. Then you could have a week or two off after the semi-final game and play the final game the first week in January, about the time the National Championship game is played anyway. Most schools don't start until the third week of January, so there's almost a month when teams aren't even in school. Since they already play their Conference Championship games during the school year, it's hard to argue that the first round couldn't be pre-finals.

The reason I'm in favor of a limited playoff is because at this point in time, one loss can spell the end of a season, and sometimes those teams are better than teams that have won every game (not talking about OU here, but past seasons). If there's a playoff, teams with a loss or two would still have hopes of making the tournament. The problem with a tournament is that when it's single elimination, sometimes the best team doesn't end up as national champion. But, the way it's set up now, sometimes the best team doesn't even get to play for a national championship. I'd personally love to see a playoff instituted.