Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Conference Expansion - Big 12 is a tire fire

hokiehead

hokiehead

Gobbler on the Mountain
Club Member
Inspired by Liver's thread. I didn't join Allbuffs until last year and thus missed all the expansion talk, which was an obsession of mine form 2010 - 2013 (until the ACC signed the GoR). I'll apologize in advance if this topic was beaten to death here already, but it's the off-season.

For purposes of this discussion, assume the Big XII is truly on the verge of collapse and that those schools are willing to negotiate for Pac membership. Consider the pending playoffs and associated criteria.

If the Pac were to expand again, who would you want? why?
Which schools have been mentioned as possible Pac candidates that you would NOT want?
 
Here's a Hokie's thoughts after hanging around for a year:

Might Want:
Texas -- I understand most everyone here hates all Texas schools, but given UT's fan base, academics and alumni donations I suspect the Pac would welcome the Longhorns with open arms if T's and C's can be worked out. From what I understand, The Longhorn Network was the big stumbling block back in 2010. (Side question, did you all hate Texas schools before 1996?)

Boise -- would have to hold my nose over academics (I'm used to it though, the ACC let Louisville join), but great fan support a national football name. <sarcasm>Plus the lucrative Boise TV market!</sarcasm>

Hawaii -- own whatever TV market there is on the islands, plus potential kick to recruiting ("son, stay four years and we guarantee a trip to Hawaii!"). Pac 12 travel expenses are already onerous though, so that could really hurt.

Kansas -- I doubt the Pac is interested in going further East, but KU is the total package from my perspective (academics, football, basketball) and you guys don't seem to hate them like other Big8/XII schools.

New Mexico -- better travel partner for CU, closer to a road trippable game. not seeing a lot of other compelling reaons

Nebraska - Omaha -- up and coming D1 school, gives all you Buffs a Nebraska on your annual schedule to hate

Also, I don't think most would want any more California schools. however, SDSU has a national name and reasonable fan support (if not the academics of the other Cali schools)

Wouldn't Want:
BYU -- the Pac seems to have a bias towards public schools :)thumbsup:) and to my knowledge has never had a religious based institution in it's membership. The Pac already has Utah, so BYU doesn't bring a new TV market. Decent academics and good research funding but no AAU membership (not that it seems to be a prereq). Besides, they wanted to go independent, let them stay independent.

Idaho -- they left once, screw 'em. doors closed.

Nevada -- not the most impressive academcis, but their technical program is on the upswing. No fan support.

UNVL -- no academics. no football support

CSU -- never mind Buff bias against little brother, it really wouldn't make sense from any POV I can think of.

AFA -- In some ways this would be great, but I don't see the Pac welcoming a service academy. It would be nice to have road trippable confernece game though
 
Don't want to expand. No need. There isn't a school that would interest me or provide any tangible benefit over what we have today.
 
Hawaii -- own whatever TV market there is on the islands, plus potential kick to recruiting ("son, stay four years and we guarantee a trip to Hawaii!"). Pac 12 travel expenses are already onerous though, so that could really hurt.

I would love this, and you have a good point with recruiting, but UH's pathetic facilities and athletic program funding are atrocious. The school itself isn't great either, but I guess I would have to double check whether it is on par with WSU, ASU and OSU. It has some decent programs I suppose.

I threw it out there during expansion talk, but it is a pipe dream.

On the plus side, the baseball and Volleyball (mens and womens) programs are great, and the Basketball and Football program have shown periods of relative success.
 
sackman said:
Don't want to expand. No need. There isn't a school that would interest me or provide any tangible benefit over what we have today.
Click to expand...

images
 
Boise and Hawaii are non starters.

PAC only expands with Texas. Then it's the texahoma 4.
Texas
Oklahoma

And two out of Tech, Lite and Kansas.

Would prefer Kansas out of those three, couldn't give a rip less about lite or tech

From phone
 
SD Buff said:
Boise and Hawaii are non starters.

PAC only expands with Texas. Then it's the texahoma 4.
Texas
Oklahoma

And two out of Tech, Lite and Kansas.

Would prefer Kansas out of those three, couldn't give a rip less about lite or tech

From phone
Click to expand...

This, and it will happen eventually. The UNM's and UNLV's of the world won't cut it.
 
sackman said:
Don't want to expand. No need. There isn't a school that would interest me or provide any tangible benefit over what we have today.
Click to expand...

It pains me to admit it but adding Texas (puke) and Oklahoma would absolutely elevate the TV profile of the conference. Such an expansion would deliver 2 massive metropolitan TV markets, Houston and Dallas, along with San Antonio, Austin, Chropus Christi, Oklahoma... Thats a very big chunk of change, like it or not.

My god I feel dirty. :puke:
 
Oklahoma and Kansas. They bring everything we need and don't throw the politics of the conference off. The down side is Okie Lite and KjSU probably tag along.
 
mdelpizzo_1 said:
Oklahoma and Kansas. They bring everything we need and don't throw the politics of the conference off. The down side is Okie Lite and KjSU probably tag along.
Click to expand...

If we have to expand, which I don't believe we do, this would be the best choice.

Texas of course brings the biggest potential financial gain for the conference with the Texas TV markets and their huge financial support basis. On the other hand Texas would never be willing to accept the status of one among equals that characterizes the PAC. Texas has had a big hand in destroying each of their prior conferences and are a big part of why the BigXII may be on the verge of collapse insisting on running things their way.

Oklahoma has improving academics, decent appeal on TV in Texas, and we have a long history of being able to work with them. Kansas is not good in football but would add some TV market and again we have good history of working with them.

Hawaii makes little sense financially. They don't add many TV viewers and don't get much support even at home, same with SDSU which is a non-factor in what should be a great market but isn't for them. Same applies to Boise which does dominate it's TV market which is to small to be significant and adds little nationally.

Bottom line for right now is outside of Texas an OU its hard to argue for any expansion that would add enough financially to cover the additional distribution of revenues, and Texas isn't worth it even though they would make more money for the conference.
 
We don't need to expand. We don't want to expand. There aren't any schools that would make expansion attractive.
 
The Big 12 will try and expand first before having OU or KU leave it. Texas won't leave and would try the independent thing before they joined the Pac12. OU and KU would be my first two choices if they were to expand by 2.
 
Will come down to when the SEC and the B1G move to 16. We'll see a test of the GoR before they expire imo. If it comes down to the B1G stealing OU and KU vs. taking the texahoma 4, need to be proactive. PAC Is on an island as it is.

And no way KjSU ever ends up in the PAC. Everything would have had to have gone terribly wrong for that to even be entertained.

Texas and Oklahoma +2 or nothing at all.

I do agree more likely see Tulane and Cincinnati get big boy invites and water down an already Meh big XII though and that honestly makes me sad

From phone
 
I wonder if this "Power 5" movement kind of puts a halt on the conference shifts, at least the dramatic movements. Especially considering once some of these schools(like the hangers on in the Big 12) now have a spot at that table, that anyone will let them be kicked out through another conference shift.

I think there'll be some non-power 5 schools added over the years, but some type of shift that would drop schools, would be met with so much protest, that it wouldn't happen. The Big 12 somehow escaped it's implosion moment a few years ago. We're stuck with it existing now.
 
note above about BYU prompted me to consider religious school membership in P5 conferences. The ACC and the Big XII are the only P5 conferences with religious affiliated schools as members. The ACC has the most, by far -- I guess conspiracy theorists could get worked up over 3 out of the last 4 schools to join the ACC being religious schools (or 3 of 5 once L-ville gets in).

  • ACC: Duke, BC, Wake, Syracuse, [Notre Dame]
  • Big XII: Baylor, TCU
  • SEC: 0
  • Pac-12: 0
  • B1G: 0 (Northwestern was founded by Methodists but my first order research is that a religious mission was never part of it's charter -- someone correct me if I'm wrong there).
Not sure if this is meaningful or not, just a trend I noted.
 
I greatly respect BYU's consistency in living their religious beliefs as a school. Agree or disagree with them they are willing to sacrifice financial opportunity for their beliefs. They showed this a couple years ago when they were in the NCAA tourney with one of the Jimmer teams and suspended their best big man for doing something that would be considered normal on most other college campuses. This move arguably cost them advancing at least one or two more rounds in the tourney along with the money and publicity that brings.

Huge difference between them and Baylor or TCU who have to old SWC mentality of "If you ain't cheatin' ya ain't tryin'. "

Problem for BYU is that the only conference that geographically makes any sense for them is the PAC and these same religious beliefs make PAC membership impossible.

BYU doesn't play on Sundays, the PAC schedules multiple events on Sundays including MBB, WBB, as well as many less prominent sports. Some of this is necessary due to travel requirements. Now having the PAC network they have to have seven day a week programming so this is a non-negotiable.

As an academic institution BYU also is not a good fit in the PAC. It simply doesn't have the kind of research standing and academic standing that makes it a good fit.

While it may never be admitted the biggest issue is cultural compatibility. The LDS church has taken strong and active stands on a number of social issues including gay marriage, abortion, and the role of women as well as historical stands on race that simply are not acceptable to many of the people running PAC universities.

It has been mentioned that the Big XII may be a candidate for dissolving but I don't think that you can set the ACC in concrete.

The Big 10 would love to have Notre Dame if Notre Dame ever agreed to be an equal member functioning as a regular member. Since the B1G payout is much bigger than the ACC and ND is a better regional fit with long running rivalries already in place this move wouldn't be a shock. If this happened they would probably take another ACC team with them, maybe Pitt, BC or Syracuse.

At this point the SEC may decide to reach in a grab when the getting is good and take FSU, Again they grab another to balance the schedule leaving the ACC in the same kind of limbo that the Big East was a couple years ago as a football conference.
 
I hate to say it, but I think it's inevitable. We're finally facing some sort of playoff system in the biggest money generator (fb), and there's a move afoot to give the power conferences more autonomy (by the Gestapo, uh, ncaa).
 
Texas will not come as a standalone entity.
Any deal that involves Texas comes with strings attached.
Texas DRK memorial seats 105K fans who are accustomed to SEVEN home games plus the OU game in Dallas.
Oklahoma - Connected at hip to Red River rival
Can't get Oklahoma without Oklahoma State.
Then other Texas schools pile on. Each have their financial commitments to their own big stadium projects and depend tie-ins with I-35 alumni bases. Baylor, TCU, and Tech would put fewer butts in seats and get less TV airtime if they were abandoned by the longhorns. (Just ask SMU).

P12 scheduling would be further compromised by the addition of Texas, which would disadvantage every school except USC and UCLA. Texas and their entourage would seek to dodge putting Utah, the Washington and Oregon schools in their schedules at every chance. CU would undoubtedly be grouped in a less favorable way, with fewer trips to California and would once again suffer red headed stepchild status with divisional partnership with Texas overlords and all the unsavory Texas politics that come with it.

From a cu perspective, the Texas situation is poisonous, no matter what $$$s look like. Been there. Done that.

Rice or U Houston and SMU or N Texas would be better options if access into big Texas markets is really is the goal.
 
BehindEnemyLines said:
I hate to say it, but I think it's inevitable. We're finally facing some sort of playoff system in the biggest money generator (fb), and there's a move afoot to give the power conferences more autonomy (by the Gestapo, uh, ncaa).
Click to expand...

Larry Scott isn't dumb and he's not going to add schools unless they add TV value. There's just no viable options for the foreseeable future for future schools who don't dilute the payouts
 
Skidmark said:
Texas will not come as a standalone entity.
Any deal that involves Texas comes with strings attached.
Texas DRK memorial seats 105K fans who are accustomed to SEVEN home games plus the OU game in Dallas.
Oklahoma - Connected at hip to Red River rival
Can't get Oklahoma without Oklahoma State.
Then other Texas schools pile on. Each have their financial commitments to their own big stadium projects and depend tie-ins with I-35 alumni bases. Baylor, TCU, and Tech would put fewer butts in seats and get less TV airtime if they were abandoned by the longhorns. (Just ask SMU).

P12 scheduling would be further compromised by the addition of Texas, which would disadvantage every school except USC and UCLA. Texas and their entourage would seek to dodge putting Utah, the Washington and Oregon schools in their schedules at every chance. CU would undoubtedly be grouped in a less favorable way, with fewer trips to California and would once again suffer red headed stepchild status with divisional partnership with Texas overlords and all the unsavory Texas politics that come with it.

From a cu perspective, the Texas situation is poisonous, no matter what $$$s look like. Been there. Done that.

Rice or U Houston and SMU or N Texas would be better options if access into big Texas markets is really is the goal.
Click to expand...

Okie lite is an issue that has to be dealt with if you want OU, it would be hard to get one without the other.

On the other hand I'm not sure that the Sooners wouldn't welcome a chance to leave Texas and join the PAC as long as they could maintain the Texas game on their schedule.

Since the PAC already allows USC and Stanford to play ND each year in the middle of the conference schedule I would think this would be doable. Oklahoma would give the PAC an entry in the market in that part of the country including a lot of interest in Texas without having to deal with Texas.

Overall though I agree with Sacky, it doesn't make sense for the PAC to expand unless the conference ends up better off for the expansion. Haven't seen a situation where that is the case. Most schools wouldn't add the financial value, those that would have baggage that isn't worth the trouble.
 
Whether you think they were serious or were playing the PAC for leverage, Oklahoma was ready to leave Texas (or at the very least force Texas' hand) when Boren publicly stated OU wasn't going to be a wallflower. But the PAC Presidents didn't like the possibility of Texas not coming and being stuck at a messy PAC 14, so an invite was never extended.

I prefer the PAC 12, all things being equal. But, IF there is one more round of chaos and the power conferences all move to 16, then I am 100% in favor of the Texahoma 4 than any alternative of Boise State, San Diego State, UNLV, New Mexico, etc.

The way 16 team scheduling works (and again this isn't ideal for CU) are 3+2+2+2 pod scheduling.

CU would play Arizona, Arizona State and Utah every year. Then rotate
Year 1 -
at USC, vs. Stanford
at Oregon, vs. Washington
at Oklahoma, vs. Texas

Year 2
at Stanford, vs. USC
at Washington, vs. Oregon
at Texas, vs. Oklahoma

Year 3 & 4 - same with the other two teams in the respective pods.

This way, every team in the conference is guaranteed an away game in California and Texahoma every year and you play every team in the conference a minimum 50% of the time.
 
I will be beyond pissed if Texass is ever in the PAC 12. They've ruined two conferences since I was born.
 
Duff Man said:
Texas, Oklahoma, Okie Lite, and Kansa would be great.
Click to expand...

Why?

CU gets put into a division with those 4, Utah and probably the AZ schools. We are now not playing as many games on the west coast, instead having scenic trips to places like Stoolwater and Lawrence. AZ schools are not going to be on board with losing trips to the west coast and it would be a matter of time before Texass insists that the conference HQ is moved to Austin and all championship games need to be played in Texass, regardless of the sport.

**** Texass and the rest of the Big12. We left to get away from those schools for a reason. Why would we want them back?
 
Well if we are just going to tread water in the PAC-12, might as well make more money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top