The realignment carousel keeps spinning - Big 12 Edition
by MonkeyBusiness on Sep 5, 2011 12:13 AM EDT
Email
PrintAs anyone that's paid attention to college football has noticed, the realignment carousel is spinning again. Reports are that Oklahoma and Texas A&M are preparing to blow up the Big 12 because of the Longhorn Network.
Let's be realistic: without Oklahoma and Texas A&M, the Big 12 is Texas and the Pips.
Supposedly, Oklahoma is courting the Pac-12 and Texas A&M is courting the SEC.
So, let's say the Big 12 dissolves and everyone starts grabbing schools from the Big 12, ACC, and Big East. I added the ACC and Big East because basketball realistically isn't the money maker football is, and top football schools in those conferences are going to be looking for new conferences in short order to boost football profits. From a football perspective, who would you want to pick up?
My thoughts? Boston College, Rutgers, Mizzou, and Kansas. Good fits geographically, add major media markets, all have national cachet, and are well regarded academically.
FanPosts can be created by any member of The Crimson Quarry. While such posts are subject to community guidelines, the statements therein are the assertions or opinions of the poster only. Please no profanity in subject lines.
8 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
There's more than football, though
In your scenario you have to remember that for every moneymaking game between Nebraska and Boston College there would be a dozen non-revenue sports having to make the bus trip between Lincoln and Chestnut Hill, taking funds away from the athletics dept. and taking student athletes out of the classroom for multiple days. In short, super conferences do not work. The Big XII falling apart is the prime example of that (remember, the Big XII was the super conference experiment of the 90’s).
I am not a Leader, and I am not a Legend.
The Big XII fell apart because Texas wanted it’s own TV network, and none of the remaining schools had the clout to tell them to back down.
Put Texas in the Big Ten or SEC where they have to talk with the big boys of College Football, and they’re suddenly in a much weaker negotiating position.
That’s the same reason Texas to the Pac-12 doesn’t make sense. No one in the Pac-12 has the clout of Texas, and Texas will run it the same way they ran the Big XII.
We rise. They fall.
Proud to have my own tag on KSK
http://monkeybiziu.deviantart.com
by MonkeyBusiness on Sep 7, 2011 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions
I see your point, and I don't necessarily disagree with it.
I think it can’t be pinned all on the Longhorn Network though. First off, hardly anyone gets the Longhorn Network. Remember when the Big Ten Network launched and everyone in the media was crowing about how useless it was and how hardly anyone could watch it? Well, the Longhorn Network is available to about a tenth of the homes that the Big Ten Network was when it first launched. Perhaps I’m wrong and perhaps the Longhorn Network will take off (just like the majority of the media was wrong about the BTN being a flop). With that said, though, I don’t disagree with the fact that the other Big XII schools, as well as the former Big XII schools, grew tired of Texas bullying people around with how much money they brings to the table. One point that shouldn’t be lost however is that the Big XII was formed out of a desire for the Big 8 to bring all of that Texas money to the table so they really don’t have much room to complain.
I am not a Leader, and I am not a Legend.
by Aaron Go Bragh on Sep 7, 2011 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions
I really don’t like the expansion trend. I think that anything beyond 12 is more of a confederation than a conference. I do think that geographic coherence and culture matter. One of the reasons the Big 12 failed is because the Texas schools, particularly UT, never meshed. The original Big 8 members saw it as a continuation of their old conference, while Texas saw it as a new conference in which it was the prize. The Big 12 implosion shows, I think, that a conference is best as an all-or-nothing affair. If Texas wants to be an independent in football, like Notre Dame, then UT should go for it and try to find a place for its other programs. If UT wants to be in a conference, then it should follow the lead of the Big Ten’s powers and treat its members as equals, even if they really aren’t.
Having said that, if the Big Ten were going to expand, I like the idea of Kansas and Missouri. They fit the Big Ten in region and in the nature of the institution. I don’t like your eastern choices. If the conference were going to move in that direction, I would prefer Maryland and Connecticut. BC would be an odd fit geographically and culturally and doesn’t have great fan support. Also, I have never bought that adding Rutgers would “deliver” New York. Rutgers has a horrid tradition in both football and basketball.
The Crimson Quarry, SB Nation's Indiana Hoosiers blog
by John M (The Crimson Quarry) on Sep 6, 2011 9:39 AM EDT reply actions
I agree with this
remember when the WAC tried having a sixteen team football conference and it imploded after only two years? I think that if a major conference tried something similar then it would have a similar result, only on a larger and much more expensive scale. The Big East works as a sixteen team basketball conference for a number of reasons: the conference has done a good job of maintaining a round robin schedule where everyone plays each other once and most rivals play each other twice, the fact that the emphasis has always been on the Big East tournament (which is probably the best conference tournament in Division I), and the fact that the conference is essentially split down the middle between public and Catholic schools so that creates a natural rivalry. Obviously, none of these would be true for any attempt at a super conference in Division 1-A when it comes to football.
I am not a Leader, and I am not a Legend.
by Aaron Go Bragh on Sep 6, 2011 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Twelve is plenty, thank you
I think that the Big Ten is just fine the way it is now. If the college sports world shifts to Super Conferences, the Big Ten should not feel compelled to play along. First, the conference does not need more than 12 members. Second, when you consider geography, culture, and academics, there is not an obvious “next” member. And don’t tell me Notre Dame. Notre Dame would pull the same kind of crap that Texas has pulled with the Big XII.
by hoosierdaddynow on Sep 6, 2011 11:51 AM EDT reply actions
As I said, I think Notre Dame’s path is more respectable than what Texas is doing. ND is willing to go it alone and take whatever risks and benefits that entails. Texas is trying to get the riches of independence while retaining the comfort of a conference.
The only way Notre Dame will ever join the Big Ten is if it somehow becomes a necessity, and in that case, ND wouldn’t have much leverage.
The Crimson Quarry, SB Nation's Indiana Hoosiers blog
by John M (The Crimson Quarry) on Sep 6, 2011 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
