Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

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

alarson said:
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
Click to expand...

I would agree historically, we might have looked bad, but starting this year the Big10, Pac12 and Big12 will all play 9 conference games. I would be willing to bet that by the time the ACC Network goes live in 2019, they will be at 9 conference games. They have already announced they will play 20 ACC games in MBB. The SEC will be forced to go to 9 games.

It kind of meaningless because the Networks are paying for inventory based on 9 Big12 games. I think the bigger issue is the Big 12 should vote to require all teams play at least one P5 in their non-conference. Baylor's scheduling is laughable for a team that wants to be considered a national power.
 
isucy86 said:
It kind of meaningless because the Networks are paying for inventory based on 9 Big12 games.
Click to expand...

Sorry to say this, but you continue to miss the point. The inventory in terms of number of games is the same with 8+2 as it would be with 9+1. Every Big 12 school would still play five games against a Power 5 team with the media rights under its control (i.e. either home games or neutral site games where it is the "home" team under the Big 12 media rights deal). Fox and ESPN would have a better ability to set up those games, and the schools could choose their level of opponent, too. Everybody wins.
 
cyIclSoneU said:
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.
Click to expand...

That was my initial thought, too, which I'll re-post below. Probably makes more sense, for reasons you stated. Plus, BYU might not want to be in all-Texas division. (This also adds the two newbies in different divisions, if that matters).
Houston and BYU
EAST
1. Baylor
2. Houston
3. Iowa State
4. Oklahoma
5. Oklahoma State
6. West Virginia
WEST
1. BYU
2. Kansas
3. Kansas State
4. TCU
5. Texas
6. Texas Tech
 
  • Like
Reactions: tejasclone
Redman97 said:
But how many of those 17 chose us over OU or another school that competes for championships?
Click to expand...

That's not the issue. OU's last recruiting class had a couple of 3* recruits from TX, and the one before that had (5) 3* recruits from TX. ISU's last recruiting class had 14 3* guys (the rankings do depend on the site). Yes, OU typically gets higher * players than ISU, but there is some overlap in the players recruited by each school, so there is no reason to simply hand OU any more advantage by reducing ISU's TX exposure through conference alignment. Campbell has already shown he's not afraid to go after the higher * players, so in the future there will be even more competition with OU (as well as the other TX schools for that matter)
 
cyIclSoneU said:
Sorry to say this, but you continue to miss the point. The inventory in terms of number of games is the same with 8+2 as it would be with 9+1. Every Big 12 school would still play five games against a Power 5 team with the media rights under its control (i.e. either home games or neutral site games where it is the "home" team under the Big 12 media rights deal). Fox and ESPN would have a better ability to set up those games, and the schools could choose their level of opponent, too. Everybody wins.
Click to expand...

Not missing the point, I can handle 3rd grade math.

The TV Networks have contracted with the Big12 for a 9 conference game schedule. If the Big12 were to change they would have to re-negotiate their TV contract.

Additionally, the Networks don't want to be in the scheduling business for 64 P5 teams. Nor would schools want the networks to do that for them.

In the end you would rather see Iowa State schedule its two additional P5 non-conference games against Iowa and the likes of Wake Forest, Oregon State, etc. I would rather we schedule Iowa and a Big12 oppomemt. IMO, I would rather play more conference games because they can impact who is the conference champ. They also create a better sense of conference among fans, when conference teams play each other more frequently.

Using an example most Cyclone fans can appreciate. Let's say back in 2011 if the Big12 only had an 8 conference game schedule. Okie State was replaced on our schedule with Wisconsin. Would the sweetness of knocking Okie State out of the national title game been matched by beating Wisconsin? IMO not even close. Personally, I would rather play and beat TCU, Baylor, Tech or Okie State than a similar quality school from another P5 conference.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: HoopsTournament
Just add BYU and Cincy and be done with this.

SWC
Texas
Texas Tech
TCU
Baylor
West Virginia
Cincy

Big Eight
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
BYU

Permanent cross-over games
Texas-Oklahoma
Texas Tech-Oklahoma State
Kansas-TCU
Kansas State-Baylor
Iowa State-West Virginia
Cincy-BYU

9 conferences games in football with the championship at Jerry World. 22 game round robin in basketball with the tourney in KC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBHMagic
Bryce7 said:
Jiggerballs@bigmonster
Big 12 to announce adding Houston and BYU on Sept. 3rd

1 :40 PM - 29 Aug 2016
Click to expand...


If Houston has made it in over Cinnci then a new GOR extension was negotiated for getting Houston in and that's the only way they get in IMO..which I'm totally fine with..Houston will be a very very tough program in big 12..it's like we just replaced what will be the demise of Baylor with Baylor 2.0..From ISU perspective I'd much rather they add Cinnci.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: HoopsTournament
cyclones500 said:
That was my initial thought, too, which I'll re-post below. Probably makes more sense, for reasons you stated. Plus, BYU might not want to be in all-Texas division. (This also adds the two newbies in different divisions, if that matters).
Houston and BYU
EAST
1. Baylor
2. Houston
3. Iowa State
4. Oklahoma
5. Oklahoma State
6. West Virginia
WEST
1. BYU
2. Kansas
3. Kansas State
4. TCU
5. Texas
6. Texas Tech
Click to expand...


This would be a complete nightmare set up for ISU..Hell it would be worse than now..lol..really hope they Houston over Cinnci that is picking up steam isnt' true..Would much rather have Cinnci over Houston for ISU sake. Only benefit is if Houston did get the votes then a new GOR was negotiated and that is good.

but a conf schedule that would have ISU every year playing:

Baylor- Top 25 until otherwise seen
Houston- Top 20
OU- TOp 5
Okie st- Top 25
WV- Top 40

Is a disaster more so than now for ISU. Not to mention you just know the first 2 years our cross over games will be Texas and TCU..lol. Plus Iowa.

Would much rather see this:

North
1. ISU
2. KU
3. KSU
4. BYU
5. TCU
6. WV

South
1. Houston
2. Texas
3. OU
4. Okie st
5. Texas Tech
6. Baylor
 
  • Like
Reactions: Redman97
Beyerball said:
This would be a complete nightmare set up for ISU..Hell it would be worse than now..lol..really hope they Houston over Cinnci that is picking up steam isnt' true..Would much rather have Cinnci over Houston for ISU sake. Only benefit is if Houston did get the votes then a new GOR was negotiated and that is good.

but a conf schedule that would have ISU every year playing:

Baylor- Top 25 until otherwise seen
Houston- Top 20
OU- TOp 5
Okie st- Top 25
WV- Top 40

Is a disaster more so than now for ISU. Not to mention you just know the first 2 years our cross over games will be Texas and TCU..lol. Plus Iowa.

Would much rather see this:

North
1. ISU
2. KU
3. KSU
4. BYU
5. TCU
6. WV

South
1. Houston
2. Texas
3. OU
4. Okie st
5. Texas Tech
6. Baylor
Click to expand...
Having your perennial powerhouses in the same division actually sets up better. The loser gets that one loss in conference play...doesn't make the conference championship game, but they only have that one loss...meanwhile gives teams in the "lower" division better records because of strength of schedule.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Yellow Snow, CYCLNST8 and surly
Boxerdaddy said:
Having your perennial powerhouses in the same division actually sets up better. The loser gets that one loss in conference play...doesn't make the conference championship game, but they only have that one loss...meanwhile gives teams in the "lower" division better records because of strength of schedule.
Click to expand...

East
BAYLOR
CINCINNATI
ISU
KU
KSU
TCU
WVU

West
BYU
COLORADO STATE
HOUSTON
OU
OSU
TEXAS
TECH
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom
Back