Not to mention the networks gave the Big12 a financial windfall back in 2011 when they did not decrease the Big12 TV rights fee when the conference dropped from 12 to 10 teams.
***Official Big 12 Expansion Thread '16***
- Thread starter cyclones500
- Start date
Houston at Cincinnati tonight....are we potentially watching a soon to be Big 12 match up?
At this point, I'll take any of the viable candidates, but as a native of Cincinnati, I'm really pulling for the Bearcats to get an invite.
As for Houston, at first I wasn't too keen on another Texas school, but I think they bring more to the table than any of the other candidates.
At this point, I'll take any of the viable candidates, but as a native of Cincinnati, I'm really pulling for the Bearcats to get an invite.
As for Houston, at first I wasn't too keen on another Texas school, but I think they bring more to the table than any of the other candidates.
Cincinnati is really showing size and energy of the crowd tonight for this game versus Houston on ESPN. Looks like the school probably announced a "blackout" attire game and spent some money on those inflatable sticks. Aside from Cincy's obvious interest in a huge upset of Houston I am sure that the school is trying to present the best image for B12 consideration.
HoopsTournament
Well-Known Member
I love the speculation about what is going on behind the scenes. In reality, none of us know anything that is actually going on. Whatever happens will happen and I have no control over it. I find the whole thing to be pure entertainment.
I don't think NBC can sit back and not want to increase their college football footprint. You don't create a sports network to show 2nd rate sports. I still think this conference will be a 14 or 16 team conference when it is said and done. Give the networks plenty for games to chose from that get ratings and they can push the other games to 2nd and 3rd tier networks. Watching the Iowa game on BTN, made we wish the Big 12 could have a network like that as a platform to show games.
there were a lot of empty seats for playing a top 6 team and their stadium only seats 40k. Size isn't word I would use.
When that was written the only possible expansion candidates were basically the same as they are now. Not only that, it is Disney/ESPNs fault that the ACC is off the table. So I disagree with you there. They knew exactly what that clause meant and any expansion candidates from the cream of the G5 are exactly what was in mind when it was written.
I laugh when people rip on schools like Cincy for what they view as bad attendance. During McCarneys best years ISU couldn't get 40K for every conference game in a stadium that had capacity for 55.
How soon some ISU fans seem to forget how atrocious ISU attendance was for decades. Most also want to forget what Baylor, TCU, Tech, OSU, KU, attendances of the past were as well. It wasn't that long ago an ISU vs Baylor game in Waco was in the 20K range.
How soon some ISU fans seem to forget how atrocious ISU attendance was for decades. Most also want to forget what Baylor, TCU, Tech, OSU, KU, attendances of the past were as well. It wasn't that long ago an ISU vs Baylor game in Waco was in the 20K range.
To me, the earlier reaction from the network partners indicates that they have/had something rather different than adding G5 candidates in mind regarding Big 12 expansion.
So much this man. I was a freshman in the fall of 04, when we had a chance to win the Big 12 north and the stadium was half full. Still can't believe that today.
Anybody see Pete Thamel of Sports Illustrated on this? He reports:
*60% chance the Big 12 adds Houston and Cincinnati.
*30% chance the Big 12 doesn't expand.
*10% chance some other outcome.
*No school has 6 votes as of now, let alone the 8 required to get in the conference.
*60% chance the Big 12 adds Houston and Cincinnati.
*30% chance the Big 12 doesn't expand.
*10% chance some other outcome.
*No school has 6 votes as of now, let alone the 8 required to get in the conference.
Good grief. If this is the case, why is expansion being considered in such a public fashion? There are really only a few legitimate candidates, yet the decision-makers aren't even close to being on the same page (reportedly). So what's the point?
Always get a kick out of some unknown national sports writer being used as an expert. As stated many times, no one knows today, including the university presidents making the decision.
Here is a link to the full article that I reference above: http://www.campusrush.com/big-12-ex...cinnati-byu-uconn-david-boren-2006279271.html
I recommend reading the full thing, there is a lot of information, and most of it not good for the conference.
I recommend reading the full thing, there is a lot of information, and most of it not good for the conference.
But he may not be the best with numbers. How can there be a 60% chance of expansion when there isn't a single school with more than 5 votes?
But, if true, isn't that a problem? When they went public with exploring expansion, my assumption was that they already had a game plan. Otherwise, why go public and expose the conference to more ridicule?
I initially assumed this "exploration" and ongoing deliberation was just an act, and it would quickly end with an announcement of the decision they had already made some time ago... after having years to consider options, having been advised by the consulting firm, etc, etc.
The longer this drags out, the harder it gets to wrap your head around the possible alternatives that are in play. And I'm definitely leaning more towards the possibility that this was all just a ruse to try to pressure the networks into ponying up to prevent bad additions.
cylcl, I read the first paragraph and quit. This is nothing more than the typical, smart ass, east coast rehash. Bob Knight said it best, "Most of us learn to read and write by the 4th grade and then go on to make something of our lives. The remainder become sports writers." If you think this dude (BTW, I never heard of him) knows more about what's going on than the average fan here, I applaud your misplaced reverence for his trade.