Advertisement

Advertisement

Realignment Today: What to expect from this week's Big 12 meetings in Kansas City; plus a few of the latest links regarding Big 12 expansion and ACC survival

The Big 12 spirng meetings are scheduled to begin tomorrow in Kansas City, Mo., and although the topics of conference realignment and Big 12 expansion likely will be kicked around plenty by the league’s athletic directors, presidents and chancellors, it seems like a safe bet to predict we won’t see anything like we saw a couple of years ago when former Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe dodged reporters by ducking into an elevator to avoid talking to the media.

I’m OK with that.

There was something pretty incredible about stalking the hallways at The Intercontinental Hotel near the plaza for a few days a couple of years ago, not really knowing what the outcome was going to be. It was a rush and it made the six or seven hours spent there each day fly by.

I don’t imagine that this year’s meetings will be anything like the previous two. Even last year was a little interesting because it was the first since the wild summer of 2010 and we were able to compare and contrast the vibe and mood. That’s not to say, however, that there won’t be some interesting things that happen and are discussed.

As you all know, there continues to be some serious talk about the Big 12 picking up a couple of teams — maybe more — from the now-vulnerable ACC.

Florida State and Clemson have been the two most talked about possibilities, but Georgia Tech, Maryland, Miami and even Notre Dame remain on the radar.

Before diving into some more links regarding what’s up in that part of the world, here are a few interesting soundbites regarding this matter from a few of my Big 12 sources:

Regarding what’s better, 10 teams or 12 or more, in college football’s new scenario with a BCS final four?
“If you’re now a league with 12 or 14 teams, you think you might not be regretting it a little bit? It also means, if you’re a 10-team league and you’re looking to expand, it better be with the best teams out there.”

On the role newly named Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby can and will play until he’s officially introduced as the league’s commissioner on June 15:
“He’ll have to be real active. And with all of his connections and all our needs, I think he really enhances our position. I don’t want to say it’s much ado about nothing, but this is a situation where your conference commissioner just does his job and the rest of us keep doing our jobs and stay informed about everything.”

On the Big 12 keeping its eyes open:
“Our league will always consider all options. We’ve never been in a not-consider position. We like what we have, but we’re not going to be stupid either.”

On the importance of giving West Virginia a travel partner?
“It’s over-rated. They haven’t even brought it up.”

On if the ACC is in serious trouble:
“I wouldn’t go that far, but, yeah, they’re a little nervous right now, I think. And the irony of that is just unbelievable.”

OK, on to some of the day’s expansion talk....

Here’s a solid update on the status of the Big 12-Florida State relationship from Jim Lamar of the Tallahassee Democrat:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/story/2012-05-28/florida-state-big-12-meetings/55249830/1

This Associated Press report clearly spells out where Miami and Clemson stand in this whole mess. The Hurricanes at least are saying they are proud members of the ACC and remain committed to the league, while Clemson, through board chairman David Wilkins, now is on record as saying it would consider a move to the Big 12 if that option were presented:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/acc/story/2012-05-25/miami-committed-acc-clemson-consider-options/55205602/1

Here’s a nice column from Rick Gosselin of the Dallas Morning News, who praises the job that Big 12 interim commissioner Chuck Neinas did to keep the league alive.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/columnists/rick-gosselin/20120525-gosselin-credit-interim-commish-chuck-neinas-for-revival-of-big-12.ece?action=reregister

This one’s a little older, but it’s a solid read and it comes from CBSsports.com’s Gregg Doyle, who says that Florida State moving to the Big 12 would destory the ACC:
http://www.cbssports.com/columns/story/19132507/florida-state-was-supposed-to-save-acc-but-instead-its-killing-it

This, too, is a little older, and a lot can change in a week, but here’s Mark Bradley, of the Atlanta Journal Constitution, listing the reasons why the ACC is not doomed:
http://blogs.ajc.com/mark-bradley-blog/2012/05/23/is-the-acc-doomed-not-hardly-and-here-are-reasons-why/

That’s it for today. Be sure to check back throughout the week for more. I’ll be over at the Big 12 meetings at least once or twice and should emerge with some interesting stuff. It remains to be seen whether that’s related to conference expansion, the league’s input on the changing BCS or more on the Big 12’s epic television deal.

Stay tuned...

;

Comments

billhawk 2 years, 3 months ago

Good stuff Matt!

If I were on the committee I'd vote to wait on the Golden Domers to make a decision; possibly after the new BCS playoff announcement next month. There's no need to go to 12, but if ND and FSU were both willing it would be too good to pass up.

IF Notre Dame joins a conference in the next year or two I'm convinced it will be with the Big 12 (3rd tier TV rights). That would be a home run. No need to expand unless its a home run (or at least a triple).

0

baldwinjhawk 2 years, 3 months ago

No to Notre Dame. And just sitting at 10 is short sited and stupid. We are not a strong enough football conference and KU is to blame for that. Adding Florida State and Clemson to go back to 12 would be huge!

0

texashawk10 2 years, 3 months ago

Academics matter to the PAC 12 and B1G, although I have doubts about how much they really matter after accepting a school they knew was getting ready to lose their AAU membership. Academics were the reason the PAC 12 didn't wan't OU, OSU, or TTU. Texas was the only school the PAC 12 wasn't opposed to for academic reasons because UT is on par or superior to most PAC 12 schools academically. It was the Longhorn Network that kept UT out of the PAC 12 and I still wouldn't be shocked if ESPN tries to turn it into a Big 12 network to get more subscribers because it is failing epically and that is probably the only way for ESPN to not lose millions of dollars on that deal.

0

Steve Hillyer 2 years, 3 months ago

Academics are nice but if they matter all that much Neb would not be in the B10, Colo & especially Utah would not be in the Pac 12.

0

Steve Hillyer 2 years, 3 months ago

I guess it depends on how you define solid academic schools, if you are going by the US News and World Report ranking, in 2012 CU was ranked 94th, Utah was 124th, not exactly elite universities, in fact Utah is barely ahead of KSU.

0

danmoore 2 years, 3 months ago

Demographics matter. In spite of being the 4th best football conference for the last 40 plus years, the big10 is the top revenue producing conference and that is what’s driving realignment.

0

Rock_Chalk_NYC 2 years, 3 months ago

You're dead wrong. Academics don't matter even 1% for ATHLETIC conference affiliation. See Mizzery, Nebraska, SDSU, Boise St., T A&M, etc...etc...etc... Its about cash and football power my man... thats it!

0

Hank Cross 2 years, 3 months ago

Yeah, that's why the P10 was going to invite OK state and TT if that's what it took to get UT.

0

Carter Patterson 2 years, 3 months ago

Mark Bradley is a buffoon. He hated Roy Williams when he was at Kansas and then loved him when he went to UNC. He's an ACC homer and never wrote a single article that was not biased.

0

LogicMan 2 years, 3 months ago

My best guess of what results from the meeting, on this topic:

"The Big 12 will consider expansion to 12 or more members. No institutions have or will be contacted -- any interested and readily available institutions seeking to join the Big 12 should state so publicly."

Then FSU, Clemson, GaTech, UMd, VaTech, NCState, etc. in the ACC all go public with statements "We intend to leave the ACC, and apply for membership in other conferences."

Louisville and Notre Dame du Lac are already on the table.

Then the mad scramble is on between the Big 12, SEC, and maybe the Big 10. ACC is devoured.

0

Vernon Riggs 2 years, 3 months ago

Mad Scramble? Maybe for the SEC and B1G, they both have (or will have) conference-owned cable networks that are driven by the number of cable subscribers. The more subscribers = more money. But even with that there is a point of diminishing return. Meaning that the school would have to more millions of dollars than they are taking. There is a point where they won't. Methzoo on the surface cost the SEC money. Their value does reach net zero until the SEC launches their SEC Network using the Tier3 programing the SEC owns. The Big12 doesn't own those rights or their own conference cable network. Adding #13, #14, or #15, #16 may not make economical sense for the Big12.

0

LogicMan 2 years, 3 months ago

Yes, I'm predicting a mad scramble by all three to snatch teams from the ACC. Git 'em while the git'ing is good! Whether it will be visible to the public I don't know. It quite possibly has or is already going on now. E.g., competition for VaTech by two or more conferences, one being us.

There are millions of TV sets for the Big 12 to gain, but as you talk about, not so many for the SEC. What about the B1G?

0

Vernon Riggs 2 years, 3 months ago

Rugers and Notre Dame is one possible move for the B1G.

Virginia and UNC is another possible move for the B1G.

Rutgers and UNC? Dude of WV is saying that UNC may be talking to the SEC too.

I don't see many other options for the B1G

SEC and Big12 very chumy with new Championship Bowl. Was part of Wink-Wink Deal taking VaTech off the Big12 watch list?

0

Hank Cross 2 years, 3 months ago

Right on. Adding schools does not autmatically mean they will generate enough additional revenue to pay for their own share. ND can do it. Maybe FSU. But beyond that, it's hard to see how adding GTech will bring in enough to pay for its own share.

0

jgkojak 2 years, 3 months ago

There is a pretty clear time-table here: 1) NCAA meets on 6/20 and decides about the play-off structure.

2a) If its the Top 4 teams (not Top 4 conf champs), Notre Dame stays Indy.

2b) If its the Top 4 Conf Champs or some variation (current theory is the Top 4 ranked in the Top 6, if not they can be replaced by an at-large non-champ team) Notre Dame probably has to join a conference.

3) July- negotiations begin. FSU and Clemson probably come first. ND comes in next round with the team of their choice (Louisville, Pitt, Ga Tech- you tell US what you want, ND).

0

Vernon Riggs 2 years, 3 months ago

If Notre Dame get to pick, don't be surprise to see fellow private Jesuit university Boston College get the nod.

0

Travis Clementsmith 2 years, 3 months ago

Don't think so. If Notre Dame has to pick, it will be a school they have history with that they can continue in a conference setting: Georgia Tech and Pitt, fit the bill in that regard.

0

Sam Constance 2 years, 3 months ago

I have to admit, while my feelings about the current slate of realignment talks is more optimistic than it was at this time last year (or in 2010), I'm still highly annoyed by all of the realignment and shuffling of conferences.

If teams are going to move, then I'd rather have the Big 12 be on the "winning" side rather than the dissolving side, but I don't like what the Big 12 is doing to the ACC any more than I liked what the Pac-12, Big 10, or SEC were doing to the Big 12 last year.

There is no rhyme or reason to the associations and alignments anymore. It's all about a bottom line and any respect for the things I love about college athletics is nonexistent. Conferences should be about common culture, common geography, common history. As marquee a team as FSU is, it doesn't make a damn bit of sense for them to play in a conference whose primary geographic footprint is the Great Plains and Texas. Just like it makes no sense for us to be playing WVU. At least TCU is a situation where a team is upgrading it's lot in life, and doing so by moving into a conference that makes SENSE for it's location and the types of rivalries that will come to pass as they play in our conference.

Realignment is a sham. If it's going to happen, then I'd rather the Big 12 be on the inside looking out, but it's still offensive to me as a fan of college athletic competition.

0

Matt Bowers 2 years, 3 months ago

Agreed. If the Big XII goes ahead with this thing, it will lead to four super conferences and it will suck. If there is expansion, the focus should be Louisville, ND and Cincinnati because they make sense.

Rock Chalk

0

LogicMan 2 years, 3 months ago

"Louisville, ND and Cincinnati"

Last year, yes. This year, bigger names (except for ND) are available from the ACC, but hopefully Louisville will get the last slot if we go to 16.

Does anyone know if ND has a special fondness for UofL? If they don't, and other big ACC teams are available, UofL is in a bad way.

But at least they still have a chance, unlike BYU who shot themselves in both feet last year. BYU should start sweet talking the PAC 12, and making the required cultural changes. BYU, UNLV, and two more out west (Hawaii? San Diego?) to make the PAC 16.

0

baldwinjhawk 2 years, 3 months ago

L'ville makes sense for us in bball. That's all.

0

FLJHK 2 years, 3 months ago

Couldn't agree with you more marchphog. Conferences used to be cultural entities, associated by the features you mention. That is no longer the case, and sadly, the Big 12 has been forced into a position of being the worst violator. Of course I want the conference to flourish in this new paradigm, but we're losing the very things that made college athletics so compelling along the way. I suppose I may get to a point where I root for West Virginia against non-conference foes someday, but it won't be the same or as meaningful as in the past.

0

texashawk10 2 years, 3 months ago

I'm just waiting for ESPN to cut their losses on the Longhorn Network and turn it into the Big 12 Network. At this point, that seems like the only way ESPN isn't going to lose millions of dollars on that deal as the Longhorn Network is proving to be an epic failure so far.

0

billhawk 2 years, 3 months ago

That's a great point. We'll have to see if the LHN can grow to something profitable or just UT's cash cow.

0

Travis Clementsmith 2 years, 3 months ago

Won't happen, the LHN is set up to the benefit of the academic as well as athletic budgets. Texas' money is guaranteed, they have no incentive to reorganize it and the ability to control your own 3rd Tier is the Big 12's ace in the hole, especially in regards to Notre Dame, which Texas really wants in. More likely, you'll see a "sister network" type setup for schools that want to pool their 3rd Tier together.

0

Krohnutz 2 years, 3 months ago

So the last article was pretty much drivel. If you read through it, he pretty much said nothing factual.

I particularly liked the part about "propping up Texas." Because the ACC props up two schools, that makes it twice the conference?

I also find it a little bit of a stretch that the ACC's problems stem from Florida State not being elite for a WHOLE decade (different article). Six billion dollar Duke is unable to afford the facilities or clout to field even a bowl eligible team, and that is somehow FSU's fault? Miami going to the toilet and sailing prostitute boats while adamantly refusing to upgrade facilities is FSU's fault?

FSU is possibly the only ACC school that is typically competitive in all sports. I don't buy his argument.

For the record, it is 1200 miles from Tallahassee to Lubbock, it is 1300 from Tallahassee to Boston. I don't see the travel argument holding water, particularly if their closest ACC compadres come aboard (Miami, Clemson and/or Georgia Tech).

Let me ask the FSU people, "Would you rather say you are excited about Oklahoma and Texas added to your home-and-home schedule on a permanent basis, or are you still psyched up about seeing Syracuse and Pittsburgh coming to town?"

I thought so, the recruits feel the same way.

0

Jeff Kilgore 2 years, 3 months ago

Krornutz, this is Kilgnutz. Your defense of FSU makes sense. FSU fans (Clemson fans and others) desperately want to land in a solid conference where nat'l titles are possible. Couple that with the $$$$, and you can see why fans are agitated.

Do you believe that the Big12 should sit tight this year, or should we be out "guns up" to borrow a conference cry, and snag every member we can?

As far as ND, I'm torn. Yeah, quite the name recognition, but them butting heads with UT wouldn't make the conference any more stable. Why not add Clemson, FSU, Louisville, and GT? Keep the Prosticanes out of the B12.

Finally, is there any way that Bowlsby isn't at the meetings? Shouldn't he be there?

0

Krohnutz 2 years, 3 months ago

I think the Big 12 should make a move as soon as possible if it is the right teams. If Florida State says they want in, then the powers that be figure out a way to get them involved, and bring along at least one regional partner to make it work. Get us back to a title game for the money and exposure, and we'll work from 12.

And I feel you on Notre Dame. Why is it their fans seem to be fine with an athletic department that makes a ton of money but under-performs? I would never be proud to say, "My basketball team is mediocre and my football team is annually overrated, but DAMN does our athletic department makes some serious cash. Hey, and we always got Rudy!"

If Bowlsby is not at the meetings (I haven't heard that) it probably isn't a bad sign, it likely means he is out discussing things with people while "not the acting" president of the Big 12. But to be honest, I'm not sure.

0

Steve Hillyer 2 years, 3 months ago

If FSU and Clemson want into the B12 it would be malpractice not to take them, at that point you stop at 12 and wait on ND.
Matt- I'm curious to get your read on KU scheduling Colorado, I support not playing MU but now that we scheduled CU I think it makes us look like whiny, petty little kids who didn't get invited to the dance. I think it may confirm this is more about marketing than it is about MU leaving the conference. The conspiracy theorist in me though wonders if KU and MU may not have been working together on something regarding realignment and MU reneged and left KU out in the cold.

0

jakejayhawk 2 years, 3 months ago

Interesting question regarding CU-MU. I thought about the same issues and appearances. But the difference may very well be that most folks believe CU got out of the Big XII because they could no longer compete at that level. I know this is a slam on the PAC12, but it seemed to hold to form when a CU team that could not compete in the Big XII won the postseason tournament of the PAC12.

Also, CU left when there was a bit more stability in the Big XII. Granted, things were still in motion, but it didn't seem to be critical mass at that point. MU left after apparently pledging to be loyal to the Big XII at a point that nearly caused the collapse of the conference. That is a very big difference.

Finally, the entire issue of the Big XII collapsing began when MU made it public that they wanted to join the Big 10. From the Big XII perspective, MU has been at the center of this entire mess. I still wonder how the old Big 8 ever agreed to the stupid Big XII contract language in the first place.

0

Steve Hillyer 2 years, 3 months ago

I'm not sure they left due competition reasons, they have been looking at the Pac 10 for years. Of the four schools that left, CU makes the most sense to me(still don't like that they left), they don't really have any presence in the Big 12 states and most of their alumni outside of CO are in the western states.

0

Jeff Kilgore 2 years, 3 months ago

I think just the opposite, as if MU leaves the Big12 and then dictates who KU schedules. KU would come off looking needy. Do you think MU is necessary for KU? I never have.

Besides, there will always be more potential recruits in Denver than Columbia. I also think that not playing MU is a major slap in their face.

Self spoke for many KU fans who bristled at the talk of what Missouri wants. Don't you see this?

0

Steve Hillyer 2 years, 3 months ago

No I don't think KU needs MU and as I said in my original post I support not scheduling MU, however by making it such a big deal that we won't play MU now that they are no longer in the conference and we turn around and schedule the first team to actually leave makes little sense to me.

0

scooter7 2 years, 3 months ago

As a Denver alum, I must say Denver has a lot of alumni. The ONLY reason I was upset about CU leaving was the fact the Jayhawks would no longer be playing a game every year at Coors Event Center. It truly was comparable to a home game for KU as the game was the ONLY sellout most years for CU with most of the attendance being KU fans. I think this scheduling is to reach out to the alumni base in the Denver area, which is huge.

0

Steve Hillyer 2 years, 3 months ago

I thought about that too, and the Tad Boyle connection may be a reason, but if it's to give our alumni a chance to see us play then they can schedule CSU and play the game at the 'Can. Apparently it's only a big deal to me and no one else, in fact I may go to the game here as I grew up in Denver and still cheer for the CO schools except when they play KU, just think it makes us look bad but oh well.

0

bradynsdad 2 years, 3 months ago

I agree with texashawk10 about the longhorn network. It has been a bust. If the longhorn network isn't getting ratings then there is no way in hell the sooner network would draw an audience. Make the longhorn network turn into the Big 12 network which would guarantee FSU and probably ND would be begging to join. The BIG 10 network has been very lucrative for those schools. Either way lets expand not die.

0

jgkojak 2 years, 3 months ago

Note: Shouldn't the committee have scheduled this meeting to take place in KANSAS? Don't give the state of Missouri any more B12 business other than Sprint Ctr?

0

Jeff Kilgore 2 years, 3 months ago

You're right again, jgkojak. Get the Big12 completely out of Missouri. I don't care if we have to drive to Norman or Dallas. KU plays anyone anywhere.

0

danmoore 2 years, 3 months ago

The last 2 springs have been a bit tense. As much as I loathe realignment, it's good to see the big12 as a hunter instead of the hunted.

0

flyundertheradar 2 years, 3 months ago

Isn't it a little wrong that the Big 12 meeting is in Kansas City, Missouri??

0

LogicMan 2 years, 3 months ago

My guess is that it was scheduled there long ago.

0

Krohnutz 2 years, 3 months ago

This is the perfect opportunity for the remaining Big 12 presidents to show their junk to the seven Mizzou fans still in Kansas City. I don't find it wrong at all, as long as we don't make a habit of it. : )

0

FLJHK 2 years, 3 months ago

Does anyone else find it ironic that football is driving the college realignment revenue bus, when it is not inconceivable that football could go the way of boxing in the not too distant future? I think it's possible that the head injury issue could be the beginning of the end for America's most popular sport.

0

danmoore 2 years, 3 months ago

Football has never been more popular and has far and away surpassed baseball as the national pastime. Even steroid use and cheating have had little impact on fans. Players are bigger, faster and stronger and that translates to more injuries which is why they are constantly revising the rules. I don’t know if injuries are the beginning of the end but I do believe it poses the biggest threat and should be the sports biggest concern.

0

Jeff Kilgore 2 years, 3 months ago

I've wondered that myself, but it's just too popular. Look for new equipment, new hitting technique, excuses, whatever. Too much money to care too much for the student athlete.

0

Robert Brown 2 years, 3 months ago

While I believe that expansion for the sake of expansion makes no sense, if the conference has a chance to get a well know football brand, it needs to jump. Adding Florida State and Clemson to get to 12 members will arguably more than make up for the losses of NU, MU, CU, and A&M resulting in an even stronger conference.

Florida State more than makes up for the loss of Nebraska. It has great history, but has been down for a few years. It has an 80,000+ seat stadium and it opens up a huge TV and recruiting area. Clemson, with an 80,000+ seat stadium and a very passionate fanbase makes up for the loss of A&M. It probably brings in some pluses in that the conference already had/has a foothold in Texas and Clemson opens up a new market.

West Virginia has a better athletic program than MU, even if the fan base is smaller. Today, I doubt the Big 12 would have invited TCU. I don't understand why they chose them over Louisville last year, but TCU probably come close to making up for the loss of Colorado.

If the Big 12 can get FSU and Clemson, they should invite and hold at 12 until there is some resolution with Notre Dame.

0

Travis Clementsmith 2 years, 3 months ago

I disagree about TCU, and I was not in favor of them joining before it was announced. After seeing their reaction, their passion and the fact we didn't have a team in the DFW area, I'm glad we did that. KU has a huge alumni base there, biggest out of state. It also means four Texas teams which gets us increased exposure to the state of Texas for recruiting. I like the TCU add more than even before it happened.

0

Krohnutz 2 years, 3 months ago

OK, so I did this last year with the realignment issue, whereas I posted the mileage to different potential conference opponents, in the much heated debate on where KU was going to end up.

So I am going to do it again this year, but the good news is, this time it is another school that I will be figuring the mileage for.

So let's REALLY see how "far" Florida State could potentially have to travel in the Big 12 vs. the ACC.

First, some notes:

  1. I removed the three potential allies in the move, as it is likely that one or all three could end up moving. So Georgia Tech, Clemson, and Miami are not on the list. I will cover them separately.

  2. The totals and averages include both new members to each conference, but it does not include other potential members (so no UConn in ACC, Notre Dame in Big 12, etc.)

I will chain the totals as replies, so I don't get cut off by a Jaybate seven page rant on biscuits. Hope you feel better Jay, and next time make sure they cook the meat until it is at least pink. Here we go...

0

Krohnutz 2 years, 3 months ago

The ACC:

Boston College = 1313 miles (the longest of both conferences) Duke = 640 Maryland = 885 North Carolina = 643 NC State = 615 Pittsburg = 991 Syracuse = 1237 (second longest of both conferences) Virginia = 833 Virginia Tech = 716 Wake Forest = 621

Total Mileage = 8,494 miles Average = 849 miles

My take: Not as low a number as most people seem to throw out there. People seem to act like Florida State can literally hang their junk out at all the members of their conference as they drive to work. Not the case.

Also, with the exception of Virginia Tech, not one of those schools are a guaranteed sellout crowd for any major event outside of basketball. Now, with the ACC's partner system, it keeps at least two "partner" schools that each team always schedules. For Florida State it is not so bad; Miami and Clemson (BOTH are moving targets right now, for the record), but if you are Miami, are you really happy with Boston College and Florida State as your permanent partners? Newp. We'll get back to that...

0

Krohnutz 2 years, 3 months ago

The Big 12:

Baylor = 893 Iowa St. = 1179 Kansas = 1016 Kansas St.= 1105 Oklahoma = 1013 Oklahoma St. = 1007 Texas = 873 TCU = 917 T. Tech = 1229 (third longest of both conferences) WVU = 919

Total Mileage = 10,151 miles Average = 1,015 miles

My take: High when you look at the extra digit, but really only 160 more miles per team when it gets right down to it. And you would like to think that the extra buck and a half in mileage would be more than made up for with primetime matchups against the likes of OU, TCU, UT, WVU as compared to VT and.... ehh, who else?

The ACC has one thing going for them, their "partnership" system. Right now it works for Florida State and Clemson, but primarily because they play each other. But why couldn't a similar system be set up in the Big 12? The ACC is moving the partner system to single partners, due to the addition of two schools, further weakening the "mileage advantage" the ACC had.

I think with the proper addition of correct schools, and a partnership system (UT and OU would favor this, you can bet), the Big 12 could nullify that mileage advantage giving Florida State primetime matchups within their own league, in addition to their annual Florida game. Say if the Big 12 were to add Georgia Tech, Clemson, and/or Miami...

0

Krohnutz 2 years, 3 months ago

If you were going to snag partners for Florida State, who better to get than:

Clemson = 389 Georgia Tech = 270 Miami = 485

Each school has advantages and disadvantages to adding, but if you were pick and choose through the ACC schools for adding revenue, wouldn't those schools all rank pretty high?

I beleive Clemson is serious about moving on. I believe Georgia Tech would be screaming for help if Clemson left. Florida State at that point would have to follow suit.

So the question becomes, do you take Miami, does Florida State even want to take Miami if they don't have to (competitive advantage)? And if not Miami, who else can be snagged? Is there a partner for West Virginia?

0

Robert Brown 2 years, 3 months ago

It would seem that the Virginia and Maryland schools are similar distances to three of the Texas schools, Baylor, UT and TCU.

I could see a Big 12 South with the Texas schools and FSU and Clemson and a Big 12 North with the remaining schools.

There could be permanent cross division rivalries to preserve UT-OU. Of course, after that there are no real obvious rivals.

Florida State- O-State Clemson- WV KU-TCU- I think KU history played more non-conference games agains TCU than any other school. K-State- TT- the two more remote locations in the Big 12 ISU- Baylor- two schools that feel very fortunate to still be in a major conference.

0

Krohnutz 2 years, 3 months ago

The ACC actually has it set up right now as "two divisions," but similar to how the B1G handled Michigan and Ohio State, they get a "partner" school.

It should be noted that each partner school was not always the same. So Miami had Florida State and Boston College (all 1300 miles of it every year), while Florida State had Miami and Clemson.

The same style of system could be put in place to guarantee UT vs. OU, and OU vs. OSU, and KU vs. KSU, etc.

Couple that with the typical three or four early season home games that bigtime teams always schedule (Cupcake Alley) and Florida State could easily play in the Big 12 with no more than two or three distance road games. And as I've said before, I would sooner travel a few more miles to play the likes of UT, OU, TCU, or WVU than say Pitt, Syracuse, Virginia, or god forbid if they added UConn.

0

Robert Brown 2 years, 3 months ago

Of course, you have to take the good with the bad. Va, MD, Pitt and Syracuse probably compare favorably to ISU, KU, KSU, TT. At least Baylor and TCU are in the Dallas area so could be good for recruiting.

0

Krohnutz 2 years, 3 months ago

Aye, my argument is not that the advantage is in playing those four teams vs. our four teams; actually, that is just about equal, one is stronger in football the other is stronger in basketball.

My argument lies in that they would rather play a rotation of those south teams than the entire rest of the ACC, and it is not as far as people think.

I would rather travel to play UT, OU, WVU, TCU, Tech, OSU, or Baylor just for the money, recruiting, and exposure. As compared to say Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, or some other football game the networks will ignore unless it is at 10am. Does that make sense?

Oh, and thanks for reading my posts, I know they can be long, but I really dig this topic.

0

Robert Brown 2 years, 3 months ago

I have always been fascinated by this topic and how the pieces will eventually fall in place, so am always interested in everyone's opinion. I'm happy that KU appears to be on stable ground, at least for the time being. From KU's standpoint, I don't see where UT has impacted their ability to compete and aligning with UT is not the worst thing.

0

Rock_Chalk_NYC 2 years, 3 months ago

Why meet in KC, Mizzery? There's a conference room or two on the Kansas side...

0

ahpersecoachingexperience 2 years, 3 months ago

Yeah, why have the meetings in KCMO?!? Do what's right Big 12, move them to Topeka!!!!

0

LogicMan 2 years, 3 months ago

"If any teams in ACC go they will go to the SEC!"

Any way you slice it, the ACC as you know it is over starting a year from now in my and many others opinion. Where their valuable football teams go is the question, and if the ACC can survive by taking more Big East, etc. teams. Some ACC teams, up to six, can quickly earn a soft landing in the Big 12. Or take a big chance and go after the SEC or Big 10, but at the massive risk of being left out of one of the big four conferences.

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

0

Robert Brown 2 years, 3 months ago

Likely spots for the 14 ACC teams if college football evolves to four super conferences (Big 10, Big 12, SEC, Pac-12).

Va, UNC, Duke to Big 10 NC-State, Va Tech to SEC FSU, Clemson to Big 12 Maryland, Ga Tech to either Big 10 or Big 12.

Pitt, Syracuse, Wake, Miami, BC looking for a landing spot and Notre Dame is the wild card.

0

BPSkelly 2 years, 3 months ago

While id agree with the concept that the 'football schools' in the ACC would love to join the SEC, the reality is there is almost NO shot at that happening. At least not with the schools that really would want to.

FSU... Florida wont even let this topic get broached in meetings.

Clemson... South Carolina wont let it happen... not quite to the level of the FSU / UF thing. But close.

Ga Tech... Georgia wont go all out to the level the other two above may to block it, but GaTech if im correct left the SEC back in the day. Cant see this at all.

VaTech... im quite sure they'd be interested. Problem is, they waited for YEARS for UVA to open the back door and have them in the ACC. There was TONS of politics involved with this. It's hard for me to see them doing that... unless of course the ACC is falling apart.

My guess is the SEC would have interest in some of these schools. But they dont 'expand' anything by adding teams where they're already the dominant teams in their states. Which is why NC State and VaTech (new states added) are the ones that get the most play with the SEC talk.

I'll also add that if a lot of these schools think / feel like the "annoying little brothers" NOW being in the ACC how do you think they'd feel if they were in the same conference as them? I just dont see it. Why do you think A&M left? My guess is it had more to do with getting outta UT's shadow than it does money.

0

Vernon Riggs 2 years, 3 months ago

The Dude of WV says that VaTech announces they are requesting membership in SEC one day after FSU announces their move.

Dude also said that UNC as talked to SEC too.

0

Vernon Riggs 2 years, 3 months ago

Big12 Football Division A & Division B Baylor & Texas Christian Texas & Texas Tech (Chancellor’s Spurs since 1928) Oklahoma & Oklahoma State (Bedlam Series since 1904) Kansas State & Kansas (Sunflower Showdown since 1902) Iowa State & West Virginia Clemson & Florida State

Note each division has 2 Texas teams, 1 Oklahoma team, 1 Kansas team, 1 Florida / South Carolina team. Thus equivalent travel and equal Texas/SE exposure

1 annual cross division rivalry game 2 rotating cross division games (one home, one away) 5 in division games 8 Total Conference Football Games

Other Sports in 4 team Pods - Texas Pod, KS/OK Pod, Eastern Pod.

Scheduling is better with 12 teams or 16 teams. 14 teams is more difficult

0

Steve Williams 2 years, 3 months ago

F Notre Dame,, Snag FSU for Football, Georgia Tech for the atlanta market and academics, then UNC and Duke to make the sickest bball conference possible

0

Vernon Riggs 2 years, 3 months ago

UNC and Duke television markets are the same. Doesn't add new TV markets. No new TV markets - No more TV Money.

0

Vernon Riggs 2 years, 3 months ago

I don't say that, Tier 1 and 2 providers would say that.

0

bville_hawk 2 years, 3 months ago

JHWKDW, do what you want, but I find it difficult to wade thru your posts since you neglect to double space between sentences.

0

Benjamin Piehler 2 years, 3 months ago

And apparently missed the day of class where they explained that an explanation point is not a period.

0

bad_dog 2 years, 3 months ago

"Exclamation" point, damn it!!!!!!!!!!!!

0

JayHawkFanToo 2 years, 3 months ago

JHWKDW,

Your post makes no sense. Why is Notre Dame toxic? Which teams in the Big East are saying they will not play Notre Dame and why? I would say that in the current expansion climate, Notre Dame is the top prize.

Notre Dame plays in the Big East in all sports except FBall and a couple of minor sports (fencing, ice hockey) that have no league competition, In league play there are no negotiations involved; they simply play the schedule the league develops; no reason for anyone to get their panties in a bunch.

As far as FBall, they have what every school in the country dreams of, a TV contract that pays them tons of money. The only reason Notre Dame is going to eventually join a conference in FBall is because a playoff system is a matter of time, and without a BCS conference affiliation, it would have no chance to ever play for a National Championship.

0

LeBo 2 years, 3 months ago

No longer collegiate athletics it's semi-pro university competion pool play

0

LogicMan 2 years, 3 months ago

Latest from Greg Swaim is that they will expand by only two (FSU and CU), and the news could come today.

GaTech and Miami not being taken even though they've shown interest.

UT blocking UofL, and no movement on ND for now.

Others saying VaTech to court SEC a day later, maybe with UNC or NCState


DeLoss: Big, big, Texas-sized mistake not to take GaTech! And Maryland as a natural rival for WVU, if they'd come.

"Opportunity knocks but once."

0

LogicMan 2 years, 3 months ago

ESPN reporting, though, that the Big 12 won't expand.

Others speculating that since ESPN has the ACC TV contract, they are trying to stop the loss of the ACCs 2 best teams.

0

Krohnutz 2 years, 3 months ago

ESPN has been trying to bury the playoffs and conference expansion for months now.

I both love and hate them.

0

Robert Brown 2 years, 3 months ago

And not that academics matters, but Maryland and Ga Tech are members of the AAU.

0

ltownatrain 2 years, 3 months ago

I disagree I think academics do matter a little. In that it allows people outside of the Big 10 to say look look we care about student athletes..even if it is all just a show.

0

Robert Brown 2 years, 3 months ago

I'm not sure how being associated with a conference affects that. Washington State is still Washington State if it hangs out with Stanford, USC, and Cal. I heard that in the Big 10 there is some joint research that is done between conference members, but I don't think any other conference does something similar.

Each school has a different mission and just because the school is not AAU or on the US News Top 50 doesn't mean they don't take academics seriously.

0

LogicMan 2 years, 3 months ago

Weird news from KSU's coach -- most members (in TX and OK) do not want a Big 12 championship game, even if they expand to 12. Very strange.

0

Robert Brown 2 years, 3 months ago

I can't help but think that if the other three power conferences have a championship game, the Big 12 will look like a lesser entity if it does not have a championship game.

0

Jeff Kilgore 2 years, 3 months ago

Since OU and UT would find themselves highly ranked most years, a championship game could end their hopes of a national title.

0

Robert Brown 2 years, 3 months ago

I realize that, but I don't think the "real" power brokers of the BCS, which are the SEC, Big 10 and Pac 12, wouldn't see through that scheme and come up with a methodology that penalizes a team who gets an easier path to the championship.

Of course, the coaches are not going to like the championship. Stoops, Brown, and Snyder have all been upset in championship games causing the latter two to miss out playing for a national championship. The path toward winning a championship should be hard, not easy.

0

aerohawk 2 years, 3 months ago

And playing in the PAC12 isn't an easier path?

0

Randy Bombardier 2 years, 3 months ago

Since we now have 9 conference games over the 8 games when we had 12 members the conference is pretty rugged. The BCS could just as easily adopt a "accept no counterfeits" policy where they refuse to take a conference winner who had an easy cross-division schedule. I think our path is as tough as anyone's. Six of ten teams ranked in preseason. I would not put down our conference. There are enough people out there doing that.

0

Hank Cross 2 years, 3 months ago

Expansion depends on whether the playoff system is between 4 conference champions (favored by P12 and B10) or best 4 (favored by SEC and B12). If the champions format is selected, OU and UT would likely be against expansion b/c it would be another potential trip-up. OTOH, the B12 could ensure that it would always be on of the top 4 conferences by raiding the ACC, which in turn would raid the BE.

The ACC and BE likely have to choose between irrelevancy by supporting the 4 best format and destruction by supporting the conference champion format.

0

Randy Bombardier 2 years, 3 months ago

Does anyone here know where Matt Connor attended school? He is the editor of SBNation, KC Area. He has twice written articles setting up Dodds as stepping on toes and inferring that there is a power struggle (or there ought to be) between Dodds and a new commish who hasn't even taken office yet. The first time his story was picked up by either ESPN, SI, or Fox. It is editorializing with an attempt to create news. My concern is that people are quick to believe "reporting" like this. I figure he has to be a Mizzu grad.

0

KUWorldTraveler 2 years, 3 months ago

I don't really understand no media member has ever noted that we're basically going to an eight-team playoff if things go the way they are.

Four 16-team conferences Two 8-team divisions in each Four conference championship games Those four winners play in a "4-team playoff" that has essentially already had the first round played.

Better get into one of those four conferences quick FSU, Notre Dame, et al. Otherwise you're gonna be left behind.

Chris

0

Alan Braun 2 years, 2 months ago

I read the article by the CBS guy, the one that says FSU will kill the ACC. The thing that caught my eye was this quote at the end:

"We knew the Big East would go away, but we also saw the Big 12 getting devoured by some combination of the Big Ten and Pac-10. Sure enough, the Big East became nothing more than comic relief, while the Big 12 was weakened by the losses of Nebraska, Colorado and Texas A&M. " Notice NO mention of Mizzery! Hahaha ROTFLMAO

0

LogicMan 2 years, 2 months ago

Latest from the boards is that the FSU BoT meets starting today, and that there will be a discussion like what MU's board had just before they moved. CU's board to meet soon too.

0

LogicMan 2 years, 2 months ago

They meet again this morning, and the latest is that the FSU board is moving into fact-finding mode. Nothing to happen soon, but still possible later this summer or maybe next year after the post-season is settled.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.