Pac 10 / Big 12 - Discussion
larryallen73
Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
Being a west coast guy I am very interested in this issue. Curious what y'all think.
I read Texas AM is not coming now and instead thinking about going to the SEC. That's a big loss I think. Sure Texas v. AM will still be a huge game but would have been nice for it to be in conference.
I also read that the Pac 10 is more interested in Utah than Kansas. I don't get that. I understand the population but Kansas is one of (if not the) biggest hoops team. Would love to see UCLA v. Kansas IN conference each year! Utah is a decent team but I think both Kansas and K-state bring better TEAMS on a consistent long term basis. Who knows what the future holds of course.
Also, why Texas Tech? They seem second rate to me. Again, I would rather have Kansas or Kansas State.
Lastly, where will Kansas and K-state end up? Would be huge for the Mountain West to get them. Would more than make up for losing Utah.
Interesting times....
I read Texas AM is not coming now and instead thinking about going to the SEC. That's a big loss I think. Sure Texas v. AM will still be a huge game but would have been nice for it to be in conference.
I also read that the Pac 10 is more interested in Utah than Kansas. I don't get that. I understand the population but Kansas is one of (if not the) biggest hoops team. Would love to see UCLA v. Kansas IN conference each year! Utah is a decent team but I think both Kansas and K-state bring better TEAMS on a consistent long term basis. Who knows what the future holds of course.
Also, why Texas Tech? They seem second rate to me. Again, I would rather have Kansas or Kansas State.
Lastly, where will Kansas and K-state end up? Would be huge for the Mountain West to get them. Would more than make up for losing Utah.
Interesting times....
0
Comments
The Kansas men's basketball program is obviously a huge prize, but who will also take KSU if need be? The Mountain West probably would, but I don't know about any BCS football conferences which would.
Collecting:
Brett Favre Master Set
Favre Ticket Stubs
Favre TD Reciever Autos
Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set
Football HOF Rc's
<< <i>I suspect the Pac 10 would prefer Kansas in a perfect world if A&M goes to the SEC, but the Jayhawks may have a "Kansas State problem" which politically prevents them from decoupling with KSU. If that's the case, the Pac 10 would likely go for Utah. They couldn't really take both KU and KSU and go up to 17 schools.
The Kansas men's basketball program is obviously a huge prize, but who will also take KSU if need be? The Mountain West probably would, but I don't know about any BCS football conferences which would. >>
I think the both Kansas schools and the majority of us here in Kansas want the two teams to stay together.
Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
I think A&M to the SEC is just talk right now. It will most likey follow Texas wherever they go.
The push to 16 team super conferences is now offically under way. I personally can't believe the NCAA is going to sit by quietly and let Football implode all other sports in the NCAA.
Iowa State and Kansas State are pariahs right now. Nobody wants to take them. If Kansas sticks to K-States side it could be looking at a WAC, Conf USA or MAC affiliation soon.
<< <i>Iowa State and Kansas State are pariahs right now. Nobody wants to take them. If Kansas sticks to K-States side it could be looking at a WAC, Conf USA or MAC affiliation soon. >>
Worst case, Kansas and Kansas State would be in the Mountain West rather than any of these other alternatives, which will likely receive an automatic BCS bid before too long.
Now Baylor, on the other hand, *could* wind up in CUSA or the WAC.
It seems to be all about butts and TVs - K-State, Iowa State, and Kansas seem to put the fewer butts in front of the TVs than any of the other teams mentioned.
JMO
D
Also, what will the Pac 10 be called? As it's clear teams will be changing more and more as time goes on it makes sense to go with names that don't have to be changed whenever a team comes or goes. Also, less geographic in nature since conferences are growing. The "Mountain West" conference could have teams pretty far from any mountains of the "west." Plus for the "Pacific ___ " conference to have teams 1,500 miles away from the Pacific Ocean (and 2 time zones) seems like that name is sort of silly.
I remember when the "Pac 8" became the "Pacific 10" in the late 70's.
At least the Big 10 and Big 12 have names that aren't geographically identified. However, will be confusing if the Big 10 has 12 teams and the Big 12 has 8 or 10 teams!?
It's sort of like the WAC which I believe has a team in Louisana. Maybe the W just stands for "Weak" and not "Western!?"
Just thinking out loud here. I don't know the answers.
<< <i>The push to 16 team super conferences is now offically under way. I personally can't believe the NCAA is going to sit by quietly and let Football implode all other sports in the NCAA.
>>
The NCAA has brought it upon itself. The easiest way to stay relevant would have been to force NCAA football playoff 20+ years ago before the money got too big for the schools to want it. When we get to four 16 team super conferences, the NCAA can go !#$@$ themselves.
<< <i>The NCAA has brought it upon itself. The easiest way to stay relevant would have been to force NCAA football playoff 20+ years ago before the money got too big for the schools to want it. When we get to four 16 team super conferences, the NCAA can go !#$@$ themselves. >>
Actually, the NCAA tried to stop it in the early 1980s, but they lost their case before the Supreme Court to keep control of TV contracts and revenues of member schools; thus it was the teams and the conferences, not the NCAA, now in charge of TV contracts.
The new Big 12
Kansas
K-State
Iowa State
TCU
BYU
Utah
Texas A&M
Texas
Baylor
Oklahoma State
Missouri
Texas Tech
Sort of a hy bred of the old Southwest Conference, Big 8 and throw in BYU and Utah
This assumes that Oklahoma goes Hollywood with Colorado and the Pac 10 goes to 12
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
The concept of a mega conference- 16 teams or more really creates a bigger problem- scheduling, divisions and the luck of the draw and AGAIN scheduling- example- team A played B and not C and C played D and D beat team A and A does not play C and A wins the title and C whines because they never had the chance to play A
So it really boils down to which schools get the money based on their conference because there will be excuses, arguments and reasons why a team that wins a conference championship or even a national championship was just not the team that should have won.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>This assumes that Oklahoma goes Hollywood with Colorado and the Pac 10 goes to 12 >>
OU stays with the Big 12/10.
Ironically, in basketball, the Big-12 conference RPI increased as the two arguably worst schools departed (Nebraska and Colorado), or so say the reports.
Thank goodness for Texas - they make KU, Kansas State, and Missouri more money than those schools could do alone!
Edited for spelling
<< <i>Colorado seems to have jumped the gun - it is being reported (tentatively) that they will receive LESS money in the PAC-10 than in the NEW TV deal that the "BIG-12" signed with Fox.
Ironically, in basketball, the Big-12 conference RPI increased as the two arguably worst schools departed (Nebraska and Colorado), or so say the reports.
Thank goodness for Texas - they make KU, Kansas State, and Missouri more money than those schools could do alone! >>
Since I have seen several press conferences from Colorado and Nebraska on their all the money they will make from joining the PAC-10....that is quite funny.
Anyone know why Kansas is so windy?
Because Colorado and Nebraska suck.
Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
I have heard the same until last night. However the newest agreement from Fox TV just reached last night(?) ironically could not have been reched if Colorado was still in the league...I get the feeling that they were a stumbling block in a major network TV deal.
Therefore when Colorado left for "greener football fields" a major deal was able to be struck without them.....basically a 10 team conference WITH Texas will have more revenue to be split than a 16(?) or 12 team conference without Texas that Colorado is now a part of.
At least that's what 810 AND 610 are reporting here in KC - can't tell you if it's all correct or not - that's the theory.
I heard the joke as: Was why do the trees in Kansas lean to the East ------- b/c Missouri sucks!
Therefore when Colorado left for "greener football fields" a major deal was able to be struck without them.....basically a 10 team conference WITH Texas will have more revenue to be split than a 16(?) or 12 team conference without Texas that Colorado is now a part of.
At least that's what 810 AND 610 are reporting here in KC - can't tell you if it's all correct or not - that's the theory.
I am NOT saying you are wrong as I have absolutely no clue. However, this doesn't totally make sense to me since Denver is about the biggest TV market in the Big 12. I realize their sports are nothing compared to Texas, et al but their TV market is huge. From everything I heard about the Pac 10 the key was TV market size (i.e. trying to get Denver, Dallas and Houston and not caring about Manhatten Kansas, etc...).
Again, this is not to infer that Colorado fans are collegiate-apathetic, but the television numbers, if the reports are to be believed, show a trend toward a more "professional" sports following.
<< <i>Again, this is not to infer that Colorado fans are collegiate-apathetic, but the television numbers, if the reports are to be believed, show a trend toward a more "professional" sports following. >>
It's always been like that. The schools have fantastic support from alumni and local fans but when it comes state-wide for TV audiences, not so much.
So what's next with Pac-10 expansion?
June, 15, 2010 Jun 152:39PM ETEmail Print Comments By Ted MillerOne of the good things about the Pac-16 scenario -- other than beaucoup dinero -- was that it was going to mostly keep intact the integrity of the traditional Pac-10 alignment (apologies to the Arizona schools), with the old Pac-8 settling in as a "Western" division.
Now, with Utah likely to soon join Colorado as the conference expands to 12 teams, there are some complications, starting with how the teams will be split up into divisions.
A North-South split appears most likely. In fact, the Boulder Daily Camera reported that Colorado was previously promised a spot in a South division if the 12-team scenario with Utah prevailed. That means the South would include Colorado, Utah, Arizona, Arizona State, USC and UCLA.
That would not go over well with the schools in the Northwest, which believe they need an annual trip to southern California for recruiting purposes. A "down the spine" split could alleviate that, with traditional rivals posted on opposite sides and guaranteed a game every year, but that creates travel issues, and the ACC tried that model and no one can keep up with which teams are in which division. A source said that idea has "no traction."
There are reports that Utah has already told the Mountain West Conference that it is leaving, but a source said no invitation has been extended from the Pac-10. Yet. That could change inside of 24 hours.
So instead of nine of the top 20 TV markets with the Pac-16 model, commissioner Larry Scott will have to settle for adding Nos. 16 (Denver) and No. 31 (Salt Lake City). That still might be enough to set up a conference TV network, and the addition of a conference title game could further increase revenue.
While the loss of $20 million a year, per team, a Pac-16 might have distributed likely has created some heavy hearts today, a Pac-12 is still expected to increase the conference's annual payout -- currently about $8 million to $9 million a year -- significantly.
How much, of course, remains to be seen when new broadcast rights are negotiated before the 2012 season.
Other issues ahead:
Is there any other scenario besides the "Utah joins and the conference becomes the Pac-12?" It doesn't appear so. But you never know.
When will the "Pac-12" start play? Utah can leave the Mountain West as early as 2011. Colorado and Pac-10 officials previously said the Buffaloes would join the Pac-10 in 2012, after the new media contracts are signed. But the Boulder Daily Camera suggested that 2011 is a possibility.
What about Colorado's "exit" fees from the Big 12, which could be as much as $9 million. Colorado and Pac-10 officials were vague on the matter, though it seems the conference has agreed to at least pick up a portion of the bill. It's also possible there might be a legal challenge to the fees. Or at least some negotiating the figure down.
Is there going to be a championship game and where? Holding the game every year in LA is a non-starter -- that means two trips to LA for fans of the winner. One solution is having the No. 1 seed play host for the game. Variations in stadium size could be an issue there, though.
An idea: What about Las Vegas as a neutral site? It's within driving distance for eight schools and it's certainly a nice destination with more to offer than just the game. Stadium size, at present, could be an issue, but stadiums can be upgraded. And, really, it's not about ticket sales. It's about TV inventory.
Will the conference schedule include eight or nine games? If it continues to be nine, that means there will be more opportunities for the "North" teams to play in southern California. If it's eight, then there will be more opportunities to schedule easy nonconference games. Or challenging ones.
Will a Pac-12 get better bowl arrangements? Scott already made a solid move when he added the Alamo Bowl. Might there be others?
How will the revenue eventually pencil out as things come together in 2012? Will it be enough to stay competitive with the rich conferences: the Big Ten, the SEC and the Big Texas?
Finally, are we done? Or will expansion be an issue that continues to loom?
What about the naming of conferences. Has anybody heard anything about that? The whole Big 10/Big 12 (with each having the opposite number of teams) seems like it should be fixed. Not sure what names though. The Big 10 could be the "Midwest" Conference, the Big 12 could be the "Central" and the Pac 10 could be the Pacific Conference!? I know not very original but do you have any better ideas?
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I could see LA schools, AZ schools and Nor Cal schools in the "south division" and utah/Colo, Oregons and Washington's in the north. Geographically it makes decent sense and I believe the Nor Cal schools would want to be with the so cal schools as the people of the state of nor cal think there is a big rivalry when playing so cal teams.
Of course, it all depends on your point of view.
Many people I know (and probably more people that I do not know) who live in the LA Basin, Orange County, San Diego County, Ventura County, southern Santa Barbara County, eastern Riverside County and southeastern San Bernadino have a mind set where any place north of Magic Mountain/Newhall on I-5 and north of the city of Santa Barabara on US 101 is "Northern California".
Many have never travelled more than 20 miles from their place of birth [my wife has high school classmates she went to school with in the 1970's in southern Orange County who have never been to San Diego or downtown LA
For others, at best they have taken a plane trip to San Francisco for a weekend and have no idea that the state capital is located in Sacramento.
If you mention Oregon, Washington, Nevada or any of the other states of the Union and show them a map of the USA you receive a blank stare. If you show them a world map, the stare becomes even more blank.
Funny how some people are like that.
<< <i>The Pac-10+ could still get into the bigger markets quite easily. Extending invites to TCU (and/or SMU) and Houston (and/or Rice) would give them two schools in Texas (including the two largest markets). If they added UNLV and New Mexico they could add the #42 and #44 markets in the US (both of which are growing). >>
According to Pac 10 commiss. Larry Scot, there are no more invitations out and and that they are "done" expanding.
Scott, as most or some of you know, was hoping at first to take all the powerhouse from Big 12, but only ended up with Colorado and settled with Utah. Of all the key players in everything that has happened, I imagine Scot came out the worst....not getting Oklahoma, Nebraska or the Kansas teams.
I think the Big 12 should invite TCU and them maybe Rice or Houston. Keep the teams in the same geographic region to some degree, get back to 12 for conference tourneys and namesake.
TCU already plays Kansas teams (in the Missouri Valley) and Fort Worth's semi-pro teams play our semi-pro teams, like in minor league baseball and independent hockey leagues.
Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.