The BigXII shot itself in the foot yesterday with the round-robin setup. 4 of the 5 P5 conferences have a championship game. The higher seed in each of those games got into the playoffs...whether those are the 4 top teams or not. I don't think FSU or OSU are a top 4 team...but that's for another thread.
The Big12 is going to be relying on the lower seed to win one of these championship games from her on out if they choose not to have a B12 CCG. IMO, that isn't a good way to get your conference represented in the playoffs...
The round-robin is cute...but until they expand to 8 teams. The B12 could find themselves in this situation more often than Not.
The Baylor vs KSU was the championship argument is flawed as is the B12 could have had 2 teams in the playoffs...
So....to get the B12 back to....12 teams, what two teams would you add?
Originally Posted by BryanBusby:
I'm not sure why sentiment is Big12 is a greater scene than the PAC rn.
Oklahoma and Texas leaving is a bigger loss.
Maybe so, but the Big 12 is in a better position/better stability standpoint than the Pac 12. The Pac 12 has problems that don't go away with USC leaving... they get worse. The Big 12 doesn't have those fundamental problems.
Big 12 has better tv ratings, attendance and on the field results. Big 12 programs are financially healthier. Pac 12 has a worst TV deal and their attendance at their stadiums is worse than Big 12. Big 12 is a football orientated conference with passionate fans.
Football is king. Football is 90% of a conference's value in terms of TV. The money in basketball is in the NCAA tournament, and it doesn't quite come close to football.
Anyways, every eyeball is on ND at this moment. What ND decides to do will set off the dominoes. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Coach:
Maybe so, but the Big 12 is in a better position/better stability standpoint than the Pac 12. The Pac 12 has problems that don't go away with USC leaving... they get worse. The Big 12 doesn't have those fundamental problems.
Big 12 has better tv ratings, attendance and on the field results. Big 12 programs are financially healthier. Pac 12 has a worst TV deal and their attendance at their stadiums is worse than Big 12. Big 12 is a football orientated conference with passionate fans.
Football is king. Football is 90% of a conference's value in terms of TV. The money in basketball is in the NCAA tournament, and it doesn't quite come close to football.
Anyways, every eyeball is on ND at this moment. What ND decides to do will set off the dominoes.
The B12 has excellent quality of sports. It’s normally 1 or 2 in hoops and 2-4 in football divisions according to sports rating systems.
But I’m having a hard time wrapping my head around why the PAC wouldn’t absorb 4-6 of us. These are elite institutions, flagships with great brands in a very populous region. The B12 with the exception of Kansas is a collection of afterthoughts in their own states. With low fan base numbers. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Coach:
Maybe so, but the Big 12 is in a better position/better stability standpoint than the Pac 12. The Pac 12 has problems that don't go away with USC leaving... they get worse. The Big 12 doesn't have those fundamental problems.
Big 12 has better tv ratings, attendance and on the field results. Big 12 programs are financially healthier. Pac 12 has a worst TV deal and their attendance at their stadiums is worse than Big 12. Big 12 is a football orientated conference with passionate fans.
Football is king. Football is 90% of a conference's value in terms of TV. The money in basketball is in the NCAA tournament, and it doesn't quite come close to football.
Anyways, every eyeball is on ND at this moment. What ND decides to do will set off the dominoes.
Stadiums are worse than the Big 12? Eh. Man that's a real stretch.
They can add 2 solid programs and do better in the next round of negotiations and get some quick stability. Could it go sideways and blow up? Certainly, but I wouldn't call the Big12 any more stable than the PAC as of today.
On a side note, if I were the SEC and wanted to expand further with a big splash, I'd go after Ohio State, Penn State, North Carolina and Notre Dame to get to 20. The geography aspect is dead and gone so might as well get some big TV areas and a national brands. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BryanBusby:
Stadiums are worse than the Big 12? Eh. Man that's a real stretch.
They can add 2 solid programs and do better in the next round of negotiations and get some quick stability. Could it go sideways and blow up? Certainly, but I wouldn't call the Big12 any more stable than the PAC as of today.
On a side note, if I were the SEC and wanted to expand further with a big splash, I'd go after Ohio State, Penn State, North Carolina and Notre Dame to get to 20. The geography aspect is dead and gone so might as well get some big TV areas and a national brands.
Pac12s tv deal sucks, they aren't getting schools from conferences with better TV deals.
Without USC and UCLA, Pac12s next tv deal isn't going to move them up much. [Reply]
Originally Posted by POND_OF_RED:
Mizzou’s move to the SEC can’t really even be questioned at this point.
Mizzou and Nebraska were obviously very smart to make the moves when they did. The ice is melting and everyone outside of the B1G and SEC are just trying to find some solid land every year now.
