Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

***Official B12 Expansion/Implosion Thread 3.0???***

acgclone

acgclone

Well-Known Member
Feb 21, 2007
12,037
3,769
113
Shocked to see no current discussion of this with the B12 Media Day going on.

Lots of comments out of the B12 Media Day that don't exactly give you warm and fuzzies about the B12's future.

Seems like lots of discontent among members reminiscent of 2010-11.

That is a recipe for disaster considering the B12 has the weakest hand of any major conference right now.
 
A bunch of OU and Texas fans complaining because they aren't winning as much as they seem entitled. Lowly Baylor and TCU taking them to the woodshed.
 
I lean toward the pessimistic side in regards to almost anything Big 12-related, based upon the track record of the league, and this really doesn't seem good (Re: OU) in regards to expansion/implosion.
 
CycoCyclone said:
I want to know why growth/expansion and a championship aren't on the table.

You have one job bowlsby
Click to expand...

It sounds like there's no consensus on the matter.

The Big 12 is in a tough spot. If we add BYU/Cincy/CSU/Directional Florida School, we will have 12 teams and a CCG. We will also then get hit with "their schedule isn't very good"/"they had to add mid-majors and watered down the league". If we don't, we get the "they have 10 teams and no CCG" thing.

I think the answer, no matter how damn dumb it is, is a 10 team league with a CCG.

The thing you have to remember is that we're a long damn ways off from the end of the GOR. If UT and OU are on top again by then, there will be zero talk of either of them looking around - unless the TV partners decide to not fund the league the way they have recently. Also, the idea that the Big 12 is always going to be out because it has no CCG only has 1 year to support it. I think (and it's a good idea) that waiting to see how the playoff committee does things is what the league is doing it. If it appears that 12 teams and a game are necessary, the Big 12 will probably add 2 mid majors. I think that means the Big 12 will be dead at the end of the GOR, too. If the Big 12 can get into the playoffs with 10 teams, we're safe, and at no need to expand.
 
I hope it happens eventually (implosion that is). We've never been a good fit for the Big Texas conference.
 
Al_4_State said:
It sounds like there's no consensus on the matter.

The Big 12 is in a tough spot. If we add BYU/Cincy/CSU/Directional Florida School, we will have 12 teams and a CCG. We will also then get hit with "their schedule isn't very good"/"they had to add mid-majors and watered down the league". If we don't, we get the "they have 10 teams and no CCG" thing.

I think the answer, no matter how damn dumb it is, is a 10 team league with a CCG.

The thing you have to remember is that we're a long damn ways off from the end of the GOR. If UT and OU are on top again by then, there will be zero talk of either of them looking around - unless the TV partners decide to not fund the league the way they have recently. Also, the idea that the Big 12 is always going to be out because it has no CCG only has 1 year to support it. I think (and it's a good idea) that waiting to see how the playoff committee does things is what the league is doing it. If it appears that 12 teams and a game are necessary, the Big 12 will probably add 2 mid majors. I think that means the Big 12 will be dead at the end of the GOR, too. If the Big 12 can get into the playoffs with 10 teams, we're safe, and at no need to expand.
Click to expand...

Not dumb at all. What's dumb is not being seen on championship weekend. Perception is reality and we MUST be perceived as the same as other conferences.
 
Last edited:
Al_4_State said:
I think the answer, no matter how damn dumb it is, is a 10 team league with a CCG.
Click to expand...

It isn't that stupid, really. In that situation round robin becomes pool play to determine the top two teams. Then the top two teams play for the championship. It would be unique among major college football conferences but it isn't something that the Big XII would be making up out of thin air.
 
weR138 said:
Agreed. But what happens after the implosion?
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone can say or predict how it all shakes out. The biggest problem is that it will likely become a game of musical chairs and ISU will be at the very tail end of the group looking for a chair to land on.

Unfortunately, we are almost completely helpless until other teams/leagues make their moves.
 
ribsnwhiskey said:
I hope it happens eventually (implosion that is). We've never been a good fit for the Big Texas conference.
Click to expand...

We don't really fit any better anywhere else.

Ideally, I'd like to see the current conference model abandoned for something that's set up like the NFL, where you have geographic divisions, and the winners of the division make the playoffs. Some people think that's where it's all heading, and I think ISU would be pretty damn safe in that set up, at least in terms of having a seat at the table.
 
Al_4_State said:
We don't really fit any better anywhere else.

Ideally, I'd like to see the current conference model abandoned for something that's set up like the NFL, where you have geographic divisions, and the winners of the division make the playoffs. Some people think that's where it's all heading, and I think ISU would be pretty damn safe in that set up, at least in terms of having a seat at the table.
Click to expand...

If it wasn't for Notre Dame you could just lop off the 64 Power-5 teams today, have 8 regional champs for an 8-team playoff and call it good. Some fanbases would ***** and moan about a more difficult region I guess, but if college football ditched the conference model, what would stop the NCAA (or whatever the new governing body would be) from standardizing the scheduling of everyone's five non-regional games every year?
 
Last edited:
Al_4_State said:
We don't really fit any better anywhere else.

Ideally, I'd like to see the current conference model abandoned for something that's set up like the NFL, where you have geographic divisions, and the winners of the division make the playoffs. Some people think that's where it's all heading, and I think ISU would be pretty damn safe in that set up, at least in terms of having a seat at the table.
Click to expand...

We would be a much better fit in the Big 10. However, do we ever realistically expect to be a player in the football playoff? You don't need to be in a major conference in basketball to make noise. We'll find a place if it ever comes to that.
 
Honestly i think some just need to cool it down for a year. I think there's been way too much overreaction given to the justifications that were given to keep TCU\Baylor out, when in reality the commitee, a committee which had very little big 12 representation on it, was looking for any excuse it could to get OSU in. By all metrics TCU had the better resume over OSU (they played similar SOS but TCU's one loss was a much better loss than OSUs) but you know OSU was a more attractive candidate than TCU or Baylor.

Lets see how it goes for a few years. Honestly 10 with a CCG seems like a terrible idea to me. Why add a guaranteed loss to one of our top 2 teams, when we were a couple plays away from having both TCU and Baylor in the top 4. I guarantee that CCG costs us a team in the playoff before too long, and if not directly im sure the powers that be will just come up with other justiications for why X big10\SEC team deserves it over a small school from flyover country.

That being said, i wouldnt mind giving a partial share and an invite to a growth opportunity (like a USF\UCF). See what they can do with a bigger stage and maybe give the rest of the big 12 further access into some of that recruiting market.

But ultimately i think there's going to be a lot of change in 10 years or so depending on how the video market plays out. Continued cord cutting could really cut into those networks that are making money on a per-subscriber but not necessarily per-viewer, and that could cause a lot of shakeup if the money train starts to grind to a halt.
 
alarson said:
Honestly i think some just need to cool it down for a year. I think there's been way too much overreaction given to the justifications that were given to keep TCU\Baylor out, when in reality the commitee, a committee which had very little big 12 representation on it, was looking for any excuse it could to get OSU in. By all metrics TCU had the better resume over OSU (they played similar SOS but TCU's one loss was a much better loss than OSUs) but you know OSU was a more attractive candidate than TCU or Baylor.

Lets see how it goes for a few years. Honestly 10 with a CCG seems like a terrible idea to me. Why add a guaranteed loss to one of our top 2 teams, when we were a couple plays away from having both TCU and Baylor in the top 4. I guarantee that CCG costs us a team in the playoff before too long, and if not directly im sure the powers that be will just come up with other justiications for why X big10\SEC team deserves it over a small school from flyover country.

That being said, i wouldnt mind giving a partial share and an invite to a growth opportunity (like a USF\UCF). See what they can do with a bigger stage and maybe give the rest of the big 12 further access into some of that recruiting market.

But ultimately i think there's going to be a lot of change in 10 years or so depending on how the video market plays out. Continued cord cutting could really cut into those networks that are making money on a per-subscriber but not necessarily per-viewer, and that could cause a lot of shakeup if the money train starts to grind to a halt.
Click to expand...

Yea, it will be interesting to see what happens with the larger conferences once the fat TV rights checks start drying up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom
Back