***Official Big 12 Expansion Thread '16***

[isucy86]

I don't think there's really any pressure on the ACC or SEC to go to 9 games as it is. There is far more noise about the Big 12's lack of a CCG than over those conference's 8-game schedules, and they both have 14 teams.

......Strong schools like OU could go out and search for other strong schools to try to build the resume for a playoff run. (See USC-Alabama being played the first weekend.) And weaker schools like Iowa State will find each other in the hunt for 6 wins and a bowl. ESPN and FOX will like it for that first reason - more marquee hand-crafted matchups that they can promote and put in prime time. And with 8 conference games plus 2 Power 5 non-cons, if each school on average plays one of those two as a home game (or as the "home" team on a neutral field), then the Big 12 contract contains the same amount of inventory as it would for a 9 game conference. /QUOTE]

The fact that Jimbo Fischer brought up, means that creating an equal playing field is on coaches mind. And Jimbo is a coach in the ACC. This is an evolutionary process. The other P5 conferences made CCG game a requirement to earn a playoff bid, so now the Big12 will add in 2017. The Big10, Pac12 and Big12 aren't going to let the ACC and SEC standpat at 8 conference games. This is a big swinging d*** contest. If the Big10 can tweak the SEC, they will. I am sure Harbaugh and Urban Meyer would be willing to lead the charge and Stoops would jump in.

In 12 & 14 team conferences, why should teams look outside their conference for a required 2nd P5 game? The can just as easily keep the money in conference. If a team like OU wants to load up their non-con schedule, they can still do so. OU is playing nine Big12 games plus Houston and Ohio State.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

In 12 & 14 team conferences, why should teams look outside their conference for a required 2nd P5 game? The can just as easily keep the money in conference. If a team like OU wants to load up their non-con schedule, they can still do so. OU is playing nine Big12 games plus Houston and Ohio State.

12 teams playing 9 conference games: 54 games
12 teams playing 1 Power 5 non-con game, half at home/under control: 6 games
Total: 60 games

12 teams playing 8 conference games: 48 games
12 teams playing 2 Power 5 non-con games, half at home/under control: 12 games
Total: 60 games

The narrative that more conference games = more money is just wrong. The second option above would probably print more money for the Big 12 because the networks could curate those non-con games and get exactly what they want. Like I posted earlier, FOX and ESPN could help Oklahoma and Texas schedule Alabama and USC while they could make sure FS1 and ESPNU inventory was the Iowa State vs. Wake Forest, Kansas State vs. Oregon State type of game. And the same number of games are in the conference media rights.

 

[isucy86]

12 teams playing 9 conference games: 54 games
12 teams playing 1 Power 5 non-con game, half at home/under control: 6 games
Total: 60 games

12 teams playing 8 conference games: 48 games
12 teams playing 2 Power 5 non-con games, half at home/under control: 12 games
Total: 60 games

The narrative that more conference games = more money is just wrong. The second option above wold probably print more money for the Big 12 because the networks could curate those non-con games and get exactly what they want. Like I posted earlier, FOX and ESPN could help Oklahoma and Texas schedule Alabama and USC while they could make sure FS1 and ESPNU inventory was the Iowa State vs. Wake Forest type of inventory. And the same number of games are in the conference media rights.

I never said more confernce games means more money. Sure the Networks are going to be willing to pay more money for an OU & Ohio State game. But they won't be willing to pay more for a Baylor & Mississippi game or in your example ISU and Oregon State. The Networks are looking for more value for their TV rights deals rather than less. Both ESPN and FOX are going to want 9 conference games and not 8 for their $20M/school.

However, my biggest arguement for playing 9 comference games, is it is the right thing to do in a 14 team conference. To help create a strong sence of conference and rivalries, more conference games is better than less. Ask Nebraska fans.

 

[clonedude]

Another saying BYU/UH but with an earlier announcement.

So instead of having one school on and island, now we'll have two. Obviously Texas got their way again because Cincy makes WAY more sense than Houston.

 

[Yellow Snow]

So instead of having one school on and island, now we'll have two. Obviously Texas got their way again because Cincy makes WAY more sense than Houston.

Obviously. If Teacup Pigs says it... I'm pretty sure Texas got their way.

Damn, damn, damn,... green eggs and ham. If only Teacup Pigs didn't say it I could believe it wasn't true.

 

[isucy86]

So instead of having one school on and island, now we'll have two. Obviously Texas got their way again because Cincy makes WAY more sense than Houston.

I agree about now having 2 islands, but the Big12 was in a tough place since BYU is head and shoulders above the other schools in TV value. In fact BYU probably brings more $ than Houston, Cincy, UConn and UCF combined.

I am not a Houston fan, but if by adding Texas and OU agree to a GOR extension until 2031 (when the Longhorn Network deal with ESPN expires), I would be thrilled.

I would be curious if a GOR extension also means a TV rights extension with ESPN and FOX. That could be a very good thing as the Big12 would have their TV rights locked up before the next Big10 contract negotiations. Who knows Cincy, CSU, Memphis, etc could be round2 of realignment in 2024 to get the Big12 to 14 schools.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

Even if that were true, I wouldn't understand announcing it on Saturday and taking away from the first weekend; then again, maybe the idea is to add even more oomph to the OU-UH game that kicks off the weekend.

 

[cyclones500]

Houston was my 4th choice:
1. BYU
2. Cinci
3. UConn

mine, too, for the most part, even though I've figured for weeks Houston is in.
1. BYU
2. Cincinnati
3. UConn/Houston
4. Houston/UConn
5. New Mexico (I'm in the minority here, I think)

 

[cyIclSoneU]

I never said more confernce games means more money.

This is essentially saying that, though, because - again - more conference games does not necessarily mean more money/value:

Both ESPN and FOX are going to want 9 conference games and not 8 for their $20M/school.

So I think the only real argument for 9 games is this:

However, my biggest arguement for playing 9 comference games, is it is the right thing to do in a 14 team conference. To help create a strong sence of conference and rivalries, more conference games is better than less. Ask Nebraska fans.

And I could see playing 9 games in a 14-team league as the best idea. But playing 8 in a 12 team league makes perfect sense. It's what the Big 12 did for a long time. And the ACC and SEC have 14 teams and still play only 8 games so it would not be unusual.

 

[isucy86]

This is essentially saying that, though, because - again - more conference games does not necessarily mean more money/value:



So I think the only real argument for 9 games is this:



And I could see playing 9 games in a 14-team league as the best idea. But playing 8 in a 12 team league makes perfect sense. It's what the Big 12 did for a long time. And the ACC and SEC have 14 teams and still play only 8 games so it would not be unusual.

The Big12 has existing contracts with ESPN and FOX that call for 9 conference games or 10/11 weeks of Big12 football games. I am sure if the Big12 were to explore dropping to 8 games, then the networks would demand the contract be re-negotiated. No way ESPN/FOX would see the same value of an ISU home & home with Oregon State vs. an ISU home and home Big12 conference game vs. WVU.

In the end non-conference games have less meaning than a conference game where a W/L impact standings.

 

[ShopTalk]

UC looks like #3, but they would have been my #1 preference - closer to ISU & WV, good bball. I wonder why the networks prefer UH to UC, I would think the TV stuff would be a wash there since Ohio is new territory and Texas is already covered. Just the raw size of the city I suppose.

Not a huge BYU fan-- they bring the most brand, market, and FB success, but seriously disliked the geography. But would take them-- just don't want UH at all. Too much SWC already.

I will also be 60 in 2032...

Because a B12 team right in SEC and B10's recruiting territory could only strengthen the B12 against the network's wishes. Houston and BYU do nothing really good but not too bad either. Kinda stuck in neutral.

 

[alarson]

The Big12 has existing contracts with ESPN and FOX that call for 9 conference games or 10/11 weeks of Big12 football games. I am sure if the Big12 were to explore dropping to 8 games, then the networks would demand the contract be re-negotiated. No way ESPN/FOX would see the same value of an ISU home & home with Oregon State vs. an ISU home and home Big12 conference game vs. WVU.

In the end non-conference games have less meaning than a conference game where a W/L impact standings.

The only reason noncon games have less value is theyre often against lesser teams. I wouldnt've minded an 8 game schedule with a requirement to schedule a certain number of P5 opponents. If just 1 we'd already have iowa but it would force some teams (KSU, Tech, baylor typical) to stop scheduling entirely creampuff noncons. If 2 we'd be no worse than now, probably better as we could schedule weaker P5s than our average big 12 game that it'd replace.

The problem with the 9 game schedule is, often your average fan and commentator only looks at the number of wins. And this on the whole makes our league look bad as we add several guaranteed losses by having the extra game, whereas we could be out beating other conferences as the conference often does during its noncon slate

 

[MeanDean]

mine, too, for the most part, even though I've figured for weeks Houston is in.
1. BYU
2. Cincinnati
3. UConn/Houston
4. Houston/UConn
5. New Mexico (I'm in the minority here, I think)

I actually made a case for New Mexico several years ago. State with decent population. University in the largest city in the state. Potential for being a major player is there. Good MBB tradition.

 

[cyclones500]

I actually made a case for New Mexico several years ago. State with decent population. University in the largest city in the state. Potential for being a major player is there. Good MBB tradition.

Yes, seems to me like a sleeping giant, as far as untapped market, and in the current blueprint. I know the football tradition is poor, and it would be down the list for 2-team expansion for sure. But if it were 4 (unlikely right now, I assume), it seems as attractive to me as Memphis or UCF, for example (and if BYU is added, you've got westward movement).

 

[jbhtexas]

I wonder why the networks prefer UH to UC, I would think the TV stuff would be a wash there since Ohio is new territory and Texas is already covered.

It's not that difficult to find a reason why the networks like Houston.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-11-fastest-growing-cities-in-america-2016-05-19

https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/...ter-houston-area-has-largest-population-gain/

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/05/19/cincinnati-s-population-inches-up-again.html

It’s not just that people are moving from one Texas city to another; rather, they’re moving from other states to Texas. Last year, nearly half a million people moved to Texas, according to Census Bureau data released in March. What’s more, the four largest metro areas in the state — Houston, Dallas, Austin and San Antonio — “together added more people last year than any state in the country except for Texas as a whole,” the Census Bureau notes.

Over this last reporting period, the Houston metro area added 159,000 people, while the Cincinnati metro area added about 8600 people. I'm not a big fan of adding Houston, but I can see why, in the terms of the present money-driven college football economy, that networks might like them.

 

[cyclones500]

Here's a question: Assuming Houston is one of the two no matter what, which of BYU/UC can you afford to leave out because it'll "be there" if there happened to be plans to expand by an additional two at some point in the near future? Put another way, which school would Big 12 most regret not adding if other conferences were to snag one of them before B12 does?

Also: What prevents Big 12 from going straight to 14 right now, and is that better than 12? Is it mainly a money-distribution/piece-of-the-pie situation? Or network dictation?

I seriously am unclear on some of those Q's.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

Here's a question: Assuming Houston is one of the two no matter what, which of BYU/UC can you afford to leave out because it'll "be there" if there happened to be plans to expand by an additional two at some point in the near future? Put another way, which school would Big 12 most regret not adding if other conferences were to snag one of them before B12 does?

Also: What prevents Big 12 from going straight to 14 right now, and is that better than 12? Is it mainly a money-distribution/piece-of-the-pie situation? Or network dictation?

I seriously am unclear on some of those Q's.

I don't see either of them being in the mix. The Pac-12 has made their disdain of BYU well known. Cincinnati is a known entity - the Big Ten, ACC, and SEC all could have grabbed them multiple times and chose not to. There's no reason to think that either school will ever be in a Power 5 conference if they don't join the Big 12. But if you pressed me, I would think it's more likely that the Pac-12 ends up feeling pressured to expand beyond 12 and end up compromising, maybe with a BYU and Boise State football-only arrangement.

 

[cyclones500]

My guesses for division. This probably duplicates arrangements already posted.

If it’s Houston and BYU:
EAST
1. Iowa State
2. Kansas
3. Kansas State
4. Oklahoma
5. Oklahoma State
6. West Virginia
WEST
1. BYU
2. Baylor
3. Houston
4. TCU
5. Texas
6. Texas Tech

Houston and Cincinnati:
EAST
1. Baylor
2. Cincinnati
3. Iowa State
4. Oklahoma
5. Oklahoma State
6. West Virginia
WEST
1. Houston
2. Kansas
3. Kansas State
4. TCU
5. Texas
6. Texas Tech

I do not foresee putting UT w/ OU & OSU in same division, especially if BYU is not in the mix.

EDIT: I'm changing BYU/Houston scenario to keep ex-Big 8/SWC intact. Football power skews more West, but it maintains more natural rivalries.

 

[isucy86]

Here's a question: Assuming Houston is one of the two no matter what, which of BYU/UC can you afford to leave out because it'll "be there" if there happened to be plans to expand by an additional two at some point in the near future? Put another way, which school would Big 12 most regret not adding if other conferences were to snag one of them before B12 does?

Also: What prevents Big 12 from going straight to 14 right now, and is that better than 12? Is it mainly a money-distribution/piece-of-the-pie situation? Or network dictation?

I seriously am unclear on some of those Q's.

I think among Non P5 schools a popular expansion choice is UConn. If the ACC were to ever go 16, I think UConn would be at the top of the list. I also think UConn would be at the top of the Big10's list also. They would make a good compliment for Rutgers, MD and PSU. I think they would be a great choice for the Big12 other than geography.

I don't know if BYU has value other than to the Pac12 and Big12 from a geographic standpoint. A lot of posters have said the Pac12 won't take BYU, but if the choices are Boise State, UNLV, New Mexico or CSU, then BYU might look good. I realize they might not like BYU's politics, but sometimes money talks. I also find it interesting that over the last 4 or 5 years, BYU has played something like 7 Pac12 teams in FB. A little hypocritical to play them, if you don't like their honor code.

Otherwise I think Houston, Cincy, UCF, Memphis are going nowhere. If the Big12 stays intact, the other conferences probably aren't looking to expand.

I think the networks are preventing the Big12 going to 14 teams, at least at the current payout. The current contract total was based on a 12 team league and they didn't drop the payout when the Big12 dropped to 10 teams. For $300-$400M, I think they would take the Big12 to court.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

My guesses for division. This probably duplicates arrangements already posted.

If it’s Houston and BYU:
EAST
1. Iowa State
2. Kansas
3. Kansas State
4. Oklahoma
5. Oklahoma State
6. West Virginia
WEST
1. BYU
2. Baylor
3. Houston
4. TCU
5. Texas
6. Texas Tech

I have a really hard time seeing the northern schools being OK with five Texas schools in one division while they get none. The Pac-12 jiggered the geography to divide California schools 2/2 between its divisions as it was seen to be important for recruiting purposes. I think the Big 12 will do the same with an East/West split that puts Texas Tech in the West, Houston in the East, and splits the remaining three Texas schools in some fashion.