Crow and Anderson openly did not want to join the Big 12 despite coaches and fans wanting to. At this point are they just trying to get fired so they can each get hefty severance?
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
Crow and Anderson openly did not want to join the Big 12 despite coaches and fans wanting to. At this point are they just trying to get fired so they can each get hefty severance?
Where are you getting that they could be members of the B12 but refuse?
I have not seen anything that says there was ever an offer for them, or application for them.
Just rumors that there was "talks" But Im sure there has been talks for damn near everyone. But the B12 has said they are not interested in them too.
And it very likely could be a ploy by them saying they have talked to the B12 to get the ACC to let them in.
I dont like Stan or Cal. I like Wazzu and OSU, but dont think they are a good add.
My entire point is looking at the bottom half or so of the ACC I dont see a huge difference in Value between them.
So would adding Syracuse be that much better of an add than Stanford...I just dont see it. Would adding BC be a better add than Oregon St, I dont think so. Fact of the matter is neither is a good add. And trying to say BC brings some sort of big media market...the numbers just dont show that, and in the same breath Stan and Cal are in a huge media market too, it just appears neither markets care much for those teams.
We also have to look at which of these teams in the ACC would be available. We have no idea in the end who might go to the B1G and SEC. We are all just guessing on that, people say NCSt would be a good add, great, but they also might be headed to the SEC. Same with Miami etc.
So, you somehow think that the Big 12 did not offer Stanford and Cal membership? No one is saying the B12 refused, what I am saying is both schools think they are too good for the conference and never asked and "if" the conference approached them, the schools blew them off.
Why would the B12 not at least inquire if either school would be interested, allows them to get into California which could be a big deal for the conference.
If not like the B12 would not take the top of the ACC, but those schools know they have better options with more money in the Big Easy and SEC conferences, so the B12 is going to pick over the leftover schools. That pool will probably be schools like Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville, Duke, VT, maybe NC State. Take four of them and be done with it.
The thing you keep forgetting is both sides have to want to reach a deal, its easy to see that Stanford does not want the B12, and there is nothing the B12 can do about that. Now down the road, their opinion might change, but as of today, they want the ACC or independent.
I disagreed with the middle part of your argument that schools like ISU, VT & Cal are equal- "it should average out".
The mix of games between networks matters. It matters that Stanford had 3 conference games on Pac12 Network where no viewership is reported.
All I'm saying (and showed) is there is hugh differences in viewership #'s by network/channel- so people pushing a strong viewership narrative for Stanford or Washington State are oversimplifying viewership by using aggregate #'s.
Because neither one is really worth all that much? There's been no indication that the big 12 is interested in expanding any further.
It's probably the smart move. Take a bowl ban in year 1 of new coaches time at ASU. Wait 2-3 for NCAA to sort things out and they might face a bowl ban in a season when they might be good enough to play in a bowl.
I read their coach has clause in his contract where he gets a year added because of ban.
Never said ISU, VT, and Cal are equal.
Only that a team with a mix of many of the networks and slots averages are able to be compared to another team with a mix of the various slots, as long as that mix is somewhat similar. Where the issue is, when you compare a team like ISU that has a mix of said slots, vs a team like Alabama, that has had almost all, if not all games in the premium slots.
In other words a team with 1 on ABC, 2 on ESPN, 2 on Espn2, 3 on FS1, 2 on Fox, at various times, is able to be compared to someone with a similar mix. But can not be compared to someone that has 7 games on ABC, and 6 on ESPN, at premium times. Because obviously the team that always has the premium slots is going to always draw better. In that case you can only compare ABC to ABC etc.
They just screwed over their players though because if they had announced this earlier lots of the seniors likely would have transferred out. By announcing it this late, nobody has the chance to transfer and find another team.
A good case to be made that any 'self-imposed penalties' like this should have to be announced at some point prior to the transfer portal deadline in order to be given credit by the NCAA.
There is that conjecture.
But ASU was 3-9 last year with wins over NAU, CU and UW. So if players stayed at ASU, not likely they stayed because they looked forward to playing in the LA Bowl or LV Bowl.
The new coach seemed pretty pissed about it. And the players for sure.
I was following on Twitter. Tennessee had worse infractions yet avoided a bowl game ban by paying 8 million dollars and giving up scholarships. Sounds like ASU could have gone that route OR instituted a bowl game ban last year after they fired Herm Edwards (for some reason they didn’t fire him with cause either, so they had to pay his buyout).
No guarantee the NCAA would have accepted that punishment. But either of those would have been better than a bowl ban during the first year of an hot head coach. Can you imagine if this had happened at CU?
Add this as another blunder for the vaunted Anderson/Crow regime.
The Big12 isn’t taking the Pac4. If they were interested, they would have just agreed to merge and gotten Oregon and Washington too.
They paid his buyout because Anderson and Herm were old buddies from the NFL or something, werent they?
You are correct NOW, but when Oregon and Washington told the league that they were leaving, on the heels of Colorado already leaving, then was the time if Stanford or Cal wanted to move to the B12, that the league would have taken them. Worth little or not, taking two more teams from the P12 and their academics would help the look of the league.
Neither school saw the B12 as an option, so they quietly told the league "No" is what I would say happened. Do really think that if Stanford approached the league Monday morning that we would turn them down? Why would they, until the ACC teams are free, Stanford is the cream of the crop for the league to pick up, and now you could do it on the cheap.
Yes, Stanford is an quality add. One of the best athletic/academic school combos in then country. I’ve said before only a few of their sports even cross over with the big12. But a +1 means a 9 game schedule can’t happen. Maybe they agree to play less games (and less money) and not partake in a championship game. Down the line we add an odd number of ACC schools to get back to a good number.
Based on what evidence?
Everything we heard was that the only teams of interest at that point were the other corner schools and if those schools turned us down we'd round things out with UConn.
There's no evidence the big 12 had any interest in Stanford\Cal.
Yes. 100% the league would absolutely turn them down. All reporting has indicated this. Stanford isn't this high value option you keep claiming it is.
Seems like a lot of ink wasted over the last 20-ish pages of this thread on Stanford, not sure why. What part of 0.0 do you not see in terms of Stanford ever agreeing to join the B12? We are beneath them in their eyes, we meaning the traditional B8/B12 teams other than Texas.
Stanford's "high value" is the belief that Notre Dame will request them to be their "pair" when joining a conference. No idea if that is actually true or not, but if it is then any conference will take them.
Thats their biggest theoretical value.
They DO have some value to the B1G, who still care abt tv markets (SF is a big one) and has a few teams geo-isolated out on the coast to pair with. However, all those are worth zero to the Big12.
Idk how much value they would bring to the B1G, but its less than 30M per year apparently.