Does The Big 12 Expand In The Next Two Years ?

[SD Buff]

“I don’t think our position has changed one iota,” Bowlsby said, nothing that conference presidents have not met recently. “We like 10 [members]. We’re going to stay at the 10 for the foreseeable future.” LINK


[tweet]543197896049717248[/tweet]

 

[sackman]

“I don’t think our position has changed one iota,” Bowlsby said, nothing that conference presidents have not met recently. “We like 10 [members]. We’re going to stay at the 10 for the foreseeable future.” LINK


[tweet]543197896049717248[/tweet]

If they aren't going to 12, they us as Hell aren't going to 14 or 16, which is where CSU might get some consideration.

 

[Buffnik]

If they aren't going to 12, they us as Hell aren't going to 14 or 16, which is where CSU might get some consideration.

The P5 needs to stabilize its memberships and conference affiliations.

Once that happens, the best of the G5 in terms of resources and ability to play by P5 rules on scholarships & cost of attendance stipends should form a Conference USA of 10-16 teams in an effort to become the P6.

 

[sackman]

The P5 needs to stabilize its memberships and conference affiliations.

Once that happens, the best of the G5 in terms of resources and ability to play by P5 rules on scholarships & cost of attendance stipends should form a Conference USA of 10-16 teams in an effort to become the P6.

that would be the worst athletic conference in the history of the world. You'd have UCF, USF, Memphis, UNM, UNLV, Boise, Cincy, Houston, SDSU... Basically a conference of also-rans with no geographical commonality.

 

[Pale Ale]

This just needs to go to 4 conferences with 16 teams each. CCGs are like a playoff game anyway. The winner of each moves on to the Final Four. Each conference has a champion, and there is no dispute about who was the best team out of the 64. Some schools are going to be left out.

 

[sackman]

This just needs to go to 4 conferences with 16 teams each. CCGs are like a playoff game anyway. The winner of each moves on to the Final Four. Each conference has a champion, and there is no dispute about who was the best team out of the 64. Some schools are going to be left out.

No. No they don't.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

This just needs to go to 4 conferences with 16 teams each. CCGs are like a playoff game anyway. The winner of each moves on to the Final Four. Each conference has a champion, and there is no dispute about who was the best team out of the 64. Some schools are going to be left out.

^^^^This.

When the BigXII adds USC, UCLA, Cal, UA, ASU, Furd, Oregon, Notre Dame and the The Sea Hawks then they can be the 4th conference.

No. No they don't.

Your struggling with the future. Embrace change.

 

[Buffnik]

sackman is right. There's no "have to" in this. If expansion enhances/maintains culture while increasing revenue, then maybe make the decision to add teams. Otherwise, what's the point? There's no mandate to turn college football into the NFL model for scheduling and playoffs.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

sackman is right. There's no "have to" in this. If expansion enhances/maintains culture while increasing revenue, then maybe make the decision to add teams. Otherwise, what's the point? There's no mandate to turn college football into the NFL model for scheduling and playoffs.

TV drives the bus. All they need to do is dangle dollars and it happens. First came the bowls, then the BCS, now a 4 team playoff. What's next? Well, anything that creates more live TV moments. That's a "play in" round or eight teams. Or 4 super conferences. Bigger and better.

The above created the Big12 and the ever expanding SEC, B1G, and ACC.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

And for the record, I do not like the idea of the Big12 being allowed to play a CCG with only 10 teams. They need to follow the standard the rest of the conferences have in having a minimum of 12 teams to play one.

 

[skibum]

TV drives the bus. All they need to do is dangle dollars and it happens. First came the bowls, then the BCS, now a 4 team playoff. What's next? Well, anything that creates more live TV moments. That's a "play in" round or eight teams. Or 4 super conferences. Bigger and better.

The above created the Big12 and the ever expanding SEC, B1G, and ACC.

Except that at some point an expanded playoff kills the bowls, and subtracts their TV revenue. It's not all additive.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

Except that at some point an expanded playoff kills the bowls, and subtracts their TV revenue. It's not all additive.

The bowls get their money from TV.

 

[Sheldon]

I'd say they better.

All the alignment has led to one thing, or at least heading that way. 4 major conferences with 16 teams each. Knowing that... one is out. Big XII might want to revisit this "FSU and whoever else" idea that was tossed around, buyouts be damned.

They are at what, 10?

Pick up FSU, VT, Pitt, Cincy, Clem, NCState (something along those lines - Just thinking of if they paired with WVU had a Big XII East and a Big XII West; Iowa St. gets the shaft and thrown into the East).

I think alignment is still very "fluid" (comically enjoyed that word during the most recent changes). Whoever acts first, and gets to 16 will almost be guaranteed to be one of the Conference 4.

 

[MtnBuff]

The bowls get their money from TV.

They do, in huge amounts.

Expanded playoffs makes the bowls much less valuable. The NIT in BB used to be a big attraction, and a huge money maker. As the tourney has expanded it has become an afterthought that can actually cost teams money to participate in.

It comes back again to the idea that college football is unique in large part because it doesn't have a playoff system that is the end all, be all. Every game in the season matters. Expand the playoffs and the individual regular season games don't hold the same attraction. Take away the "must see" nature of early to mid-season games and then the TV value of those games also goes way down.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

They do, in huge amounts.

Expanded playoffs makes the bowls much less valuable. The NIT in BB used to be a big attraction, and a huge money maker. As the tourney has expanded it has become an afterthought that can actually cost teams money to participate in.

It comes back again to the idea that college football is unique in large part because it doesn't have a playoff system that is the end all, be all. Every game in the season matters. Expand the playoffs and the individual regular season games don't hold the same attraction. Take away the "must see" nature of early to mid-season games and then the TV value of those games also goes way down.

I like the playoff structure with 4 teams. You win your division you go to the CCG. That makes the regular season important. You win the CCG and you get a seat at the playoffs.

To deal with the oddity of the P5 I'd say a "play in" with 6 teams* total for that 3rd and 4th spot in the playoff is also good. Being #6 means you had a really good season, your Notre Dame, or your a non P5 school. But no bigger than 6 because it waters down the value of a playoff.

* teams that lost their CCG or did worse do not qualify. Not SEC rematches. Sorry TV (they'll f this up just like they did with the BCS)

Your point about the NIT is well taken. But the NCAA set out to squash the NIT and they were successful. Alums love their schools. They will always watch their team in the bowl of their choice which is a nice consolation prize. If the bowl is in a city with nice weather they might even visit.

 

[Buffnik]

Playoff will make the bowls into 3rd class citizens, the same way the NCAA Tourney did to the NIT.

But the NIT did not die. It's still on tv. In fact, there's such a market for live sports in the post-season that the CBI and CIT tournaments have been successfully added for those teams that didn't make the NIT. Bowls will survive.

 

[MtnBuff]

I like the playoff structure with 4 teams. You win your division you go to the CCG. That makes the regular season important. You win the CCG and you get a seat at the playoffs.

To deal with the oddity of the P5 I'd say a "play in" with 6 teams* total for that 3rd and 4th spot in the playoff is also good. Being #6 means you had a really good season, your Notre Dame, or your a non P5 school. But no bigger than 6 because it waters down the value of a playoff.

* teams that lost their CCG or did worse do not qualify. Not SEC rematches. Sorry TV (they'll f this up just like they did with the BCS)

Your point about the NIT is well taken. But the NCAA set out to squash the NIT and they were successful. Alums love their schools. They will always watch their team in the bowl of their choice which is a nice consolation prize. If the bowl is in a city with nice weather they might even visit.

I'm not a giant fan of the four team playoff but I can deal with it. In typical years you can make serious arguments that 2 or 3 teams are actually the best team based on the entire season. This comes from being undefeated or a one loss team that played a very difficult schedule. I can't remember a time when more than four teams could legitimately make this argument. I think that to be in the playoff a team should have had to win their conference, no "wild cards" they had their chance. Also the fact that you won your conference doesn't automatically mean you should be in. I agree with the B12 not having a team in this year. Nobody can tell me something that says one of their teams was the best team in the country this year, no NC just for getting hot/lucky at the end.

 

[patebuff]

I'm not a giant fan of the four team playoff but I can deal with it. In typical years you can make serious arguments that 2 or 3 teams are actually the best team based on the entire season. This comes from being undefeated or a one loss team that played a very difficult schedule. I can't remember a time when more than four teams could legitimately make this argument. I think that to be in the playoff a team should have had to win their conference, no "wild cards" they had their chance. Also the fact that you won your conference doesn't automatically mean you should be in. I agree with the B12 not having a team in this year. Nobody can tell me something that says one of their teams was the best team in the country this year, no NC just for getting hot/lucky at the end.

Ya don't say!

 

[sackman]

There's a way to keep the bowls AND have a playoff, ya know. Just incorporate the playoff into the bowl system. Have each bowl host one of the playoff games. In a 16-team playoff, that's 15 bowl games. That covers the majority of bowl games with BCS tie-ins. The rest of the bowl games would still be fine for the teams that didn't make the playoff and for lower division teams.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

I'm not a giant fan of the four team playoff but I can deal with it. In typical years you can make serious arguments that 2 or 3 teams are actually the best team based on the entire season. This comes from being undefeated or a one loss team that played a very difficult schedule. I can't remember a time when more than four teams could legitimately make this argument. I think that to be in the playoff a team should have had to win their conference, no "wild cards" they had their chance. Also the fact that you won your conference doesn't automatically mean you should be in. I agree with the B12 not having a team in this year.

Those two cancel each other. So Which is it? You want a committee to decide? If so, plan on ND and two SEC schools always getting in.

Nobody can tell me something that says one of their teams was the best team in the country this year, no NC just for getting hot/lucky at the end.

You mean like 1-1-1 big8 team with a fifth down that won an mNC? Or maybe that team that struggled in Austin and in Ann Arbor before dominating most the rest of the season and producing a Heisman. Then there is that team that narrowly lost early, lost again to Texas, thumped Nebraska, then beat Texas for the Big12 title?

Yeah, no one here likes those streaky teams that go on late season runs.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

There's a way to keep the bowls AND have a playoff, ya know. Just incorporate the playoff into the bowl system. Have each bowl host one of the playoff games. In a 16-team playoff, that's 15 bowl games. That covers the majority of bowl games with BCS tie-ins. The rest of the bowl games would still be fine for the teams that didn't make the playoff and for lower division teams.

That's what we have now.


Jan. 1 Rose Bowl Game Oregon vs. Florida State 5 p.m. ESPN
Jan. 1 Allstate Sugar Bowl Alabama vs. Ohio State 8:30 p.m. ESPN

Jan. 12 College Football Championship Game TBD 8:30 p.m. ESPN. (Arlington, Tx.) (WTF???)

16 teams is way too many. Six at most, seating the P5 winners that have a CCG and one or two play ins. No two teams from same conference.

 

[MtnBuff]

Those two cancel each other. So Which is it? You want a committee to decide? If so, plan on ND and two SEC schools always getting in.



You mean like 1-1-1 big8 team with a fifth down that won an mNC? Or maybe that team that struggled in Austin and in Ann Arbor before dominating most the rest of the season and producing a Heisman. Then there is that team that narrowly lost early, lost again to Texas, thumped Nebraska, then beat Texas for the Big12 title?

Yeah, no one here likes those streaky teams that go on late season runs.

No you wouldn't have 2 SEC schools, only one can win the conference, and a conference winner who managed to lose 2-3 games doesn't automatically get another shot.

And the team that went 1-1-1 had the best overall season that year. I want college football to remain special. I don't want early games to be meaningless like they are in basketball or in the NFL since as long as you get a decent seed in the tourney or playoffs you are good anyways. That 1-1-1 team was special because they knew they couldn't stumble even once more and have a shot at their dreams.

 

[FlatironsBuff]

If so, would they take us back? I could deal with the UT drama for being able to at least be competitive in a couple of conference games.

For having the 'Stand Strong' pic there on your avatar, you sure are the weak sister around here.

 

[Burrito]

For having the 'Stand Strong' pic there on your avatar, you sure are the weak sister around here.

Oooooooh!