|
Post by bigjohn043 on Jul 26, 2021 15:30:34 GMT -5
FWIW, I think on first order it probably doesn't make a ton of for the Pac-12 to expand. OTOH, adding a TCU and Houston would give them teams in two very large cities. That makes some level of sense. The SEC schools have much larger fan bases but aren't in either of Texas major cities.
I also think at some level a move to simply kill the B-12 makes sense. Being the worst football of the 4 major conference is better than being the worst of the 5.....
|
|
|
Post by hammer on Jul 26, 2021 15:55:41 GMT -5
FWIW, I think on first order it probably doesn't make a ton of for the Pac-12 to expand. OTOH, adding a TCU and Houston would give them teams in two very large cities. That makes some level of sense. The SEC schools have much larger fan bases but aren't in either of Texas major cities. I also think at some level a move to simply kill the B-12 makes sense. Being the worst football of the 4 major conference is better than being the worst of the 5..... How about the B1G and Pac-12 combine and possibly pickup a few teams, maybe have East, Central and West divisions. The obvious name of the new conference: B1GPAC.
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jul 26, 2021 16:05:37 GMT -5
FWIW, I think on first order it probably doesn't make a ton of for the Pac-12 to expand. OTOH, adding a TCU and Houston would give them teams in two very large cities. That makes some level of sense. The SEC schools have much larger fan bases but aren't in either of Texas major cities. I also think at some level a move to simply kill the B-12 makes sense. Being the worst football of the 4 major conference is better than being the worst of the 5..... The Big 12 is likely dead anyway (well, as a true power conference--it's possible that the remaining eight schools get shut out elsewhere and decide to stick together with some AAC schools) as soon as Oklahoma and Texas are officially gone in 2025. I think the other schools in the conference are going to see their recruiting really drop off even before that happens. The Pac-12 needs to worry about retaining its own top programs, as there is a lot of talk that the Big Ten will try to poach USC and a handful of others (Oregon, Washington, some of the other California schools, maybe Colorado) to keep up with the SEC.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jul 26, 2021 16:27:04 GMT -5
FWIW, I think on first order it probably doesn't make a ton of for the Pac-12 to expand. OTOH, adding a TCU and Houston would give them teams in two very large cities. That makes some level of sense. The SEC schools have much larger fan bases but aren't in either of Texas major cities. I also think at some level a move to simply kill the B-12 makes sense. Being the worst football of the 4 major conference is better than being the worst of the 5..... The Big 12 is likely dead anyway (well, as a true power conference--it's possible that the remaining eight schools get shut out elsewhere and decide to stick together with some AAC schools) as soon as Oklahoma and Texas are officially gone in 2025. I think the other schools in the conference are going to see their recruiting really drop off even before that happens. The Pac-12 needs to worry about retaining its own top programs, as there is a lot of talk that the Big Ten will try to poach USC and a handful of others (Oregon, Washington, some of the other California schools, maybe Colorado) to keep up with the SEC. I would be fine with dropping WSU/OSU in any chair shuffling.
|
|
|
Post by vbcoltrane on Jul 26, 2021 16:45:52 GMT -5
You just blew your chance to join this illustrious list of Admirals in the Nebraska Navy.
Gene Autry Jack Benny George W. Bush Johnny Carson Dick Cavett Bing Crosby Sandy Dennis Costa Dillon Queen Elizabeth II Julius "Dr. J" Erving Eileen Farrell[3] Craig Ferguson[4] Gerald Ford George Gallup Bill Gates[5] John Glenn Chuck Hagel Sir Edmund Hillary Bob Hope Chuck Jones Dorothy Kilgallen[6] Ernest King Martin Luther King III Ann Landers David Letterman[7] Douglas MacArthur Bill Murray Ben Nelson Jack Nicklaus Tom Osborne Arnold Palmer Ronald Reagan Franklin D. Roosevelt Roger Smith Mark Spitz Harry S. Truman
Minnesota should not be considered land locked if they're allowing for navigation through the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway, which thy seem to be for other Great Lakes states.
|
|
|
Post by vbcoltrane on Jul 26, 2021 16:49:44 GMT -5
Do any Big Ten schools ever think they could be the ones left out in the realignment cold? Obviously people have asked "why Northwestern? from time to time simply because of the private and much smaller reasons, but do NWU fans themselves (I'm an alum and a fan) or any other school's fans REALLY think the B1G would nix them?
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jul 26, 2021 16:51:51 GMT -5
The Big 12 is likely dead anyway (well, as a true power conference--it's possible that the remaining eight schools get shut out elsewhere and decide to stick together with some AAC schools) as soon as Oklahoma and Texas are officially gone in 2025. I think the other schools in the conference are going to see their recruiting really drop off even before that happens. The Pac-12 needs to worry about retaining its own top programs, as there is a lot of talk that the Big Ten will try to poach USC and a handful of others (Oregon, Washington, some of the other California schools, maybe Colorado) to keep up with the SEC. I would be fine with dropping WSU/OSU in any chair shuffling. I don't think it will just be those two. It's hard to imagine the Big 10 wanting more than 6-7 teams max. I think that they would take just USC by itself if they could make it work (i.e. if USC was willing to come alone--they have by far the most football brand value). The more schools they take, the more they dilute their own shares. This is why the SEC was interested in Texas and Oklahoma only and not any of the other schools.
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jul 26, 2021 16:54:11 GMT -5
Do any Big Ten schools ever think they could be the ones left out in the realignment cold? Obviously people have asked "why Northwestern? from time to time simply because of the private and much smaller reasons, but do NWU fans themselves (I'm an alum and a fan) or any other school's fans REALLY think the B1G would nix them? I think it's likely that at some point, maybe in the the mid-2030s when the ACC's grant of rights expires, that all the major college football brands in the country will get together and leave their respective conferences to form one super league and keep as much money for themselves as possible. I think Northwestern (and Vanderbilt) is safe for a while, and I don't think they'll get kicked out. I just think that Ohio State and Michigan will leave.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jul 26, 2021 17:19:53 GMT -5
I would be fine with dropping WSU/OSU in any chair shuffling. I don't think it will just be those two. It's hard to imagine the Big 10 wanting more than 6-7 teams max. I think that they would take just USC by itself if they could make it work (i.e. if USC was willing to come alone--they have by far the most football brand value). The more schools they take, the more they dilute their own shares. This is why the SEC was interested in Texas and Oklahoma only and not any of the other schools. Eh. The mountain time zone schools are all AAU, flagships in states with fast growing populations (fed in large part by refugees from B1G country). A larger haul/alliance makes much more sense than grabbing just 3 or 4 current PAC schools. Also, Cal/Stanford aren’t up there in terms of revenue sports or ability to generate revenue but B1G probably wants the NorCal media market plus their academics.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jul 26, 2021 17:21:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jul 26, 2021 17:31:58 GMT -5
I don't think it will just be those two. It's hard to imagine the Big 10 wanting more than 6-7 teams max. I think that they would take just USC by itself if they could make it work (i.e. if USC was willing to come alone--they have by far the most football brand value). The more schools they take, the more they dilute their own shares. This is why the SEC was interested in Texas and Oklahoma only and not any of the other schools. Eh. The mountain time zone schools are all AAU, flagships in states with fast growing populations (fed in large part by refugees from B1G country). A larger haul/alliance makes much more sense than grabbing just 3 or 4 current PAC schools. Also, Cal/Stanford aren’t up there in terms of revenue sports or ability to generate revenue but B1G probably wants the NorCal media market plus their academics. I strongly disagree that taking 10 Pac-12 schools makes more sense than taking 4-6. If AAU status was that important (it matters--just not nearly as much as football branding does), then the Big Ten could take in Kansas, which is a more natural geographic fit and at least has a great basketball brand. The 1-6 Pac-12 schools that the Big Ten will be looking to add are all AAU schools anyway, so it's probably a moot point. And TV markets are not nearly as important now as they were in the last round of realignment. This is due to the number of cable subscriptions continuing to dwindle, a trend that isn't stopping. Having a large loyal fanbase for your football program and/or having a big football brand is a lot more important now than just what market you're in. As for Cal and Stanford, I think there are special circumstances for both. It would be very difficult to disentangle Cal from UCLA because they're part of the same system, and Stanford is the one school in a power conference whose academic brand is so strong that it might be worth taking even if their football isn't so great. And even then, I'm not completely convinced that either of them are an absolute lock to get an invite.
|
|
|
Post by hammer on Jul 26, 2021 17:35:19 GMT -5
Do any Big Ten schools ever think they could be the ones left out in the realignment cold? Obviously people have asked "why Northwestern? from time to time simply because of the private and much smaller reasons, but do NWU fans themselves (I'm an alum and a fan) or any other school's fans REALLY think the B1G would nix them? I think it's likely that at some point, maybe in the the mid-2030s when the ACC's grant of rights expires, that all the major college football brands in the country will get together and leave their respective conferences to form one super league and keep as much money for themselves as possible. I think Northwestern (and Vanderbilt) is safe for a while, and I don't think they'll get kicked out. I just think that Ohio State and Michigan will leave. Some have suggested that football just break off from all other sports, in which case you would have about 50-75 top tier teams, and maybe a 2nd tier of 50-75. All other sports would play in traditional conferences. The top tier would sort of be like the NFL with regions, but you would have cross-regionals games, like USC/Notre Dame.
|
|
|
Post by vergyltantor on Jul 26, 2021 17:39:21 GMT -5
Do any Big Ten schools ever think they could be the ones left out in the realignment cold? Obviously people have asked "why Northwestern? from time to time simply because of the private and much smaller reasons, but do NWU fans themselves (I'm an alum and a fan) or any other school's fans REALLY think the B1G would nix them? Like someone once said, "The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself". The B1G, ACC and PAC have big enough brands to withstand this assault if they don't let the fear of being left out get the best of them. They could do something like have the top 12 teams in each division play teams from the other 2 conferences every year. It might make a good incentive, for an improved broadcast package. The respective league offices need to treat this as the assault on their members that it is, and do what they can to make any predatory behavior by the SEC as painful as possible.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jul 26, 2021 17:46:02 GMT -5
Eh. The mountain time zone schools are all AAU, flagships in states with fast growing populations (fed in large part by refugees from B1G country). A larger haul/alliance makes much more sense than grabbing just 3 or 4 current PAC schools. Also, Cal/Stanford aren’t up there in terms of revenue sports or ability to generate revenue but B1G probably wants the NorCal media market plus their academics. I strongly disagree that taking 10 Pac-12 schools makes more sense than taking 4-6. If AAU status was that important (it matters--just not nearly as much as football branding does), then the Big Ten could take in Kansas, which is a more natural geographic fit and at least has a great basketball brand. The 1-6 Pac-12 schools that the Big Ten will be looking to add are all AAU schools anyway, so it's probably a moot point. And TV markets are not nearly as important now as they were in the last round of realignment. This is due to the number of cable subscriptions continuing to dwindle, a trend that isn't stopping. Having a large loyal fanbase for your football program and/or having a big football brand is a lot more important now than just what market you're in. As for Cal and Stanford, I think there are special circumstances for both. It would be very difficult to disentangle Cal from UCLA because they're part of the same system, and Stanford is the one school in a power conference whose academic brand is so strong that it might be worth taking even if their football isn't so great. And even then, I'm not completely convinced that either of them are an absolute lock to get an invite. Kansas joins the club here too in this scenario. And media market isn’t irrelevant. It’s not the same trump card it was in the “let’s add Maryland/Rutgers” days, but it’s not a non-factor. Once you’re past 16, it makes more sense to go to 24/25 than 20 given the current conference footprints.
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jul 26, 2021 18:08:32 GMT -5
I strongly disagree that taking 10 Pac-12 schools makes more sense than taking 4-6. If AAU status was that important (it matters--just not nearly as much as football branding does), then the Big Ten could take in Kansas, which is a more natural geographic fit and at least has a great basketball brand. The 1-6 Pac-12 schools that the Big Ten will be looking to add are all AAU schools anyway, so it's probably a moot point. And TV markets are not nearly as important now as they were in the last round of realignment. This is due to the number of cable subscriptions continuing to dwindle, a trend that isn't stopping. Having a large loyal fanbase for your football program and/or having a big football brand is a lot more important now than just what market you're in. As for Cal and Stanford, I think there are special circumstances for both. It would be very difficult to disentangle Cal from UCLA because they're part of the same system, and Stanford is the one school in a power conference whose academic brand is so strong that it might be worth taking even if their football isn't so great. And even then, I'm not completely convinced that either of them are an absolute lock to get an invite. Kansas joins the club here too in this scenario. And media market isn’t irrelevant. It’s not the same trump card it was in the “let’s add Maryland/Rutgers” days, but it’s not a non-factor. Once you’re past 16, it makes more sense to go to 24/25 than 20 given the current conference footprints. Agree to disagree. The more schools you take, the more you dilute the revenue shares of the existing members. And I don't believe I said that media market was completely "irrelevant." I said that it isn't nearly as important as it was in the last round of realignment.
|
|