GSG Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Translation: it's actually kind of urgent. Yep, that's exactly how I read this too. I always hoped they would add SMU and Houston so that they could have The Texas Division and The Everybody Else Division. Maybe then OU would wise up that nothing is more important to the Longhorns than that stupid outline they call a state. In the last couple incarnations of the NCAA Football video game you could set up the conferences however you liked and I always had the Big 12 broken into a sort of old big eight division (minus us and Colorado) and a Texas division with SMU and Houston. From a fan stand point it has always been a pro/con thing for me. On the one hand conference championships equal more football which I'm always for. On the other hand I like that every team in the current Big 12 plays each other every year. I don't like how conferences with championships go years without playing teams in their own conference. For example if Iowa keeps their OOC game with Iowa State they will play Iowa State more than Michigan and any other team from the other division even though Iowa State isn't even in their conference. I also don't like that this time of year the conversation always starts with "this team misses these hard teams from the other division where as this team has an harder cross division schedule." It's almost as if the division champs have more to do with scheduling than winning and losing. I admit you control your own fate by winning all your games but some teams will always have a higher hill to climb than others. Is the bolded part still going to be true with the 9 game conference schedule? I thought it was supposed to fix (some of) that? I don't know if Iowa/Iowa State is still going to played annually but what I understand about the 9th conference game (and please someone correct me if I'm wrong) is that they are implementing something called preferred scheduling to ensure more high profile match ups to use as leverage for TV negotiation rights which equals more money. My understanding is it works a lot like the conference challenges in college basketball. So the top teams from each division who weren't already scheduled to play each other would, and on down the list until the worst vs the worst. Which is why if you look at future schedules on HuskerMax the 9th conference game is blank because the conference hasn't decided yet or doesn't know what the best (or most marketable) match ups would be yet. Personally i hate the whole preferred scheduling thing, Um, all the future schedules on there have 12 games scheduled (3 non-conference and 9 conference) except for the schedules that only have 1 or 2 non-conference games scheduled 2016 09/03 Fresno State Lincoln 09/10 Wyoming Lincoln 09/17 Oregon Lincoln 09/24 #Northwestern Evanston 10/01 #Illinois Lincoln 10/15 #Indiana Bloomington / 10/22 #Purdue Lincoln / 10/29 #Wisconsin Madison / 11/05 #Ohio State Columbus / 11/12 #Minnesota Lincoln / 11/19 #Maryland Lincoln / 11/25 #Iowa Iowa City / 2017 09/02 Arkansas State Lincoln / 09/09 Oregon Eugene / 09/16 N. Illinois Lincoln / 09/23 #Rutgers Lincoln / 09/30 #Illinois Champaign / 10/07 #Wisconsin Lincoln / 10/14 #Ohio State Lincoln / 10/28 #Purdue W. Lafayette / 11/04 #Northwestern Lincoln / 11/11 #Minnesota Minneapolis / 11/18 #Penn State State College / 11/24 #Iowa Lincoln / 2018 09/01 Akron Lincoln / 09/08 Colorado Lincoln / 09/15 Troy Lincoln / 09/22 #Michigan Ann Arbor / 09/29 #Purdue Lincoln / 10/06 #Wisconsin Madison / 10/13 #Northwestern Evanston / 10/20 #Minnesota Lincoln / 11/03 #Ohio State Columbus / 11/10 #Illinois Lincoln / 11/17 #Michigan State Lincoln / 11/23 #Iowa Iowa City 2019 08/31 South Alabama Lincoln / 09/07 Colorado Boulder / 09/14 No. Illinois Lincoln / 09/21 #Illinois Champaign / 09/28 #Ohio State Lincoln / 10/05 #Northwestern Lincoln / 10/12 #Minnesota Minneapolis / 10/26 #Indiana Lincoln / 11/02 #Purdue W. Lafayette / 11/16 #Wisconsin Lincoln / 11/23 #Maryland College Park / 11/29 #Iowa Lincoln 1 Quote Link to comment
gratefullred Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Here's the ESPN article link from the other thread discussing this: http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/111803/oklahoma-president-david-boren-puts-possible-big-12-expansion-back-in-news As for expansion, they need to focus on media markets, because the Big XII lost Denver and Houston, which are sizable markets. While CSU and Houston don't really move the needle for college football fans, it does give them a foothold back into those markets they lost. Remember, it isn't about fans of CSU and Houston, it's about getting the product on the air and people in Denver and Houston tuning in to see Texass and Oklahoma (the Big XII's only marquee, namebrand teams) play someone. That's most likely what ESPN wants (Big XII brand in large markets), and what they'll likely push for. That, and the rights to the Big XII Title Game (unless Fox snatches that out from under them too...) As for SMU...I'd be surprised, as TCU pretty much owns DFW already, so there wouldn't be any additional exposure for the conference, and Dallas is already saturated with Big XII programming. As for BYU, there's frankly too many complications borne from BYU's refusal to play games for any sport on Sunday. While it's a logistical nightmare that can be worked around, the juice isn't worth the squeeze in this case. Have we been through this before? Only like a lot of times. I like your argument, but see flaws. Would CSU get the Big12 on tv in Denver instead of the PAC? Would Cinncy get them on instead of the B1G or SEC? How about Memphis? I do agree with this being the argument for Houston. All of these teams have flaws, serious flaws. The Big12 also is in no hurry to move on this. I guess when enough of their members want to go to 12 they will. I don't see them getting FSU and Clemson like I once thought was possible. I also don't want to get into the lawyer legalize on it. I guess this just seems kind of boring. Quote Link to comment
RunMickeyRun02 Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Translation: it's actually kind of urgent. Yep, that's exactly how I read this too. I always hoped they would add SMU and Houston so that they could have The Texas Division and The Everybody Else Division. Maybe then OU would wise up that nothing is more important to the Longhorns than that stupid outline they call a state. In the last couple incarnations of the NCAA Football video game you could set up the conferences however you liked and I always had the Big 12 broken into a sort of old big eight division (minus us and Colorado) and a Texas division with SMU and Houston. From a fan stand point it has always been a pro/con thing for me. On the one hand conference championships equal more football which I'm always for. On the other hand I like that every team in the current Big 12 plays each other every year. I don't like how conferences with championships go years without playing teams in their own conference. For example if Iowa keeps their OOC game with Iowa State they will play Iowa State more than Michigan and any other team from the other division even though Iowa State isn't even in their conference. I also don't like that this time of year the conversation always starts with "this team misses these hard teams from the other division where as this team has an harder cross division schedule." It's almost as if the division champs have more to do with scheduling than winning and losing. I admit you control your own fate by winning all your games but some teams will always have a higher hill to climb than others. Is the bolded part still going to be true with the 9 game conference schedule? I thought it was supposed to fix (some of) that? I don't know if Iowa/Iowa State is still going to played annually but what I understand about the 9th conference game (and please someone correct me if I'm wrong) is that they are implementing something called preferred scheduling to ensure more high profile match ups to use as leverage for TV negotiation rights which equals more money. My understanding is it works a lot like the conference challenges in college basketball. So the top teams from each division who weren't already scheduled to play each other would, and on down the list until the worst vs the worst. Which is why if you look at future schedules on HuskerMax the 9th conference game is blank because the conference hasn't decided yet or doesn't know what the best (or most marketable) match ups would be yet. Personally i hate the whole preferred scheduling thing, Um, all the future schedules on there have 12 games scheduled (3 non-conference and 9 conference) except for the schedules that only have 1 or 2 non-conference games scheduled 2016 09/03 Fresno State Lincoln 09/10 Wyoming Lincoln 09/17 Oregon Lincoln 09/24 #Northwestern Evanston 10/01 #Illinois Lincoln 10/15 #Indiana Bloomington / 10/22 #Purdue Lincoln / 10/29 #Wisconsin Madison / 11/05 #Ohio State Columbus / 11/12 #Minnesota Lincoln / 11/19 #Maryland Lincoln / 11/25 #Iowa Iowa City / 2017 09/02 Arkansas State Lincoln / 09/09 Oregon Eugene / 09/16 N. Illinois Lincoln / 09/23 #Rutgers Lincoln / 09/30 #Illinois Champaign / 10/07 #Wisconsin Lincoln / 10/14 #Ohio State Lincoln / 10/28 #Purdue W. Lafayette / 11/04 #Northwestern Lincoln / 11/11 #Minnesota Minneapolis / 11/18 #Penn State State College / 11/24 #Iowa Lincoln / 2018 09/01 Akron Lincoln / 09/08 Colorado Lincoln / 09/15 Troy Lincoln / 09/22 #Michigan Ann Arbor / 09/29 #Purdue Lincoln / 10/06 #Wisconsin Madison / 10/13 #Northwestern Evanston / 10/20 #Minnesota Lincoln / 11/03 #Ohio State Columbus / 11/10 #Illinois Lincoln / 11/17 #Michigan State Lincoln / 11/23 #Iowa Iowa City 2019 08/31 South Alabama Lincoln / 09/07 Colorado Boulder / 09/14 No. Illinois Lincoln / 09/21 #Illinois Champaign / 09/28 #Ohio State Lincoln / 10/05 #Northwestern Lincoln / 10/12 #Minnesota Minneapolis / 10/26 #Indiana Lincoln / 11/02 #Purdue W. Lafayette / 11/16 #Wisconsin Lincoln / 11/23 #Maryland College Park / 11/29 #Iowa Lincoln Well like I said, correct me if I'm wrong and I was. I could have sworn they were still blank until really really recently. My bad. Quote Link to comment
mrandyk Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Just merge them with the AAC or Sun Belt and call it a day. Quote Link to comment
Redux Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Just merge them with the AAC or Sun Belt and call it a day. What did the Sun Belt ever do to you? Quote Link to comment
VectorVictor Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 Here's the ESPN article link from the other thread discussing this: http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/111803/oklahoma-president-david-boren-puts-possible-big-12-expansion-back-in-news As for expansion, they need to focus on media markets, because the Big XII lost Denver and Houston, which are sizable markets. While CSU and Houston don't really move the needle for college football fans, it does give them a foothold back into those markets they lost. Remember, it isn't about fans of CSU and Houston, it's about getting the product on the air and people in Denver and Houston tuning in to see Texass and Oklahoma (the Big XII's only marquee, namebrand teams) play someone. That's most likely what ESPN wants (Big XII brand in large markets), and what they'll likely push for. That, and the rights to the Big XII Title Game (unless Fox snatches that out from under them too...) As for SMU...I'd be surprised, as TCU pretty much owns DFW already, so there wouldn't be any additional exposure for the conference, and Dallas is already saturated with Big XII programming. As for BYU, there's frankly too many complications borne from BYU's refusal to play games for any sport on Sunday. While it's a logistical nightmare that can be worked around, the juice isn't worth the squeeze in this case. Have we been through this before? Only like a lot of times. I like your argument, but see flaws. Would CSU get the Big12 on tv in Denver instead of the PAC? Would Cinncy get them on instead of the B1G or SEC? How about Memphis? I do agree with this being the argument for Houston. All of these teams have flaws, serious flaws. The Big12 also is in no hurry to move on this. I guess when enough of their members want to go to 12 they will. I don't see them getting FSU and Clemson like I once thought was possible. I also don't want to get into the lawyer legalize on it. I guess this just seems kind of boring. Yeah, I know...it's deja vu all over again, right? And as for your argument, it's not an either/or scenario. It's a case of getting their foot in the door so if they decide to do a Big XII network, they can soak the whole of Colorado and Denver for carrier fees. That, and it's not CSU, per se, that's going to draw the big ratings. It's Texass, Oklahoma, and...um...TCU? coming to play CSU that will draw ratings and make the Denver market worthwhile again. Not unlike Nebraska when we start showing up in NJ this season or Maryland in future seasons--Nebraska is a big name draw/cache that people in the area will stop down for. FSU and Clemson aren't likely to bolt to the Big XII--there's not a lot of stability, and the money there is crap in comparison to what they could get from the B1G. FSU likely wouldn't get into the SEC on account of Florida c$%k-blocking them. Memphis is a possibility, but I don't know the size of their media market...though I'd wager it's smaller than Denver or Houston. Cincinnati would be a good pickup, decent media markets, decent team and facilities, gives WVU a buddy. Regardless, it doesn't matter if we map out the perfect scenario for the Big XII--at the end of the day, they're a bunch of incompetent f*******s that couldn't do anything right to save their souls (See 2014 Big XII Co-champions) or their conference. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.