NCAA realignment

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 09, 2010 5:27 PM GMT
    well, sports fans, it looks like nebraska will be the first school to move to the big 10 and start the dominoes a-falling.

    today at 1pm the exec. committee of the nebraska board of regents is deciding whether to publicly include the realignment issue on friday's agenda. which would make it look like the invitation from the big 10 has already been offered and is being ready to be accepted.

    this will change college football in so many ways it isn't even funny. historical moment right now that will destroy the BCS and the current bowl system.

    if NU defects, and i suspect they will, missouri will likely be next and then the next question is whether the big 10 will want texas (and all the schools texas is demanding come with them) or whether texas et. al. will go to the pac 10.

    for those of you who are KU and KSU fans. well...you're fucked. likely you'll be in the mountain west.

    this isn't just about athletics, btw. this will effect research money and academia noticeably too. so KU and KSU are begging NU to stay...if they get sent to the MWC, their programs will suffer greatly.
  • NashRugger

    Posts: 1089

    Jun 10, 2010 3:28 PM GMT
    Colorado now jumping ship.

    http://www.sportingnews.com/college-football/article/2010-06-10/colorado-set-announce-move-pac-10
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2010 3:33 PM GMT
    I'm trying to figure out what the Big 12 conference is thinking! Are they unconcerned about the dismantling of their conference?

    The rumor here is that six teams will come over to the Pac 10, including Oklahoma and Texas.
  • darkeyedresol...

    Posts: 171

    Jun 10, 2010 3:35 PM GMT
    I'm incredible excited to see how this all shakes out, the mixture of sports and politics is amazing in this situation. Governor of Texas, Perry, has been said to be working on a deal that keeps the Texas colleges, at least Texas, A&M, and Tech, in the same conference. The Governor of Missouri has tried to sell the Missouri to the Big Ten Conference, which it will probably end up going to.

    I honestly didn't see the Big-12 falling apart when this was under discussion a few months ago, I thought the Big East or ACC would be the first real causality of realignment.

    The Pac-16, or whatever it becomes, could suddenly vault itself to the top of the conference pack. It will have USC, Texas, and Oklahoma; each has been a BSC champion or played in the championship game in almost ever year in recent history.

    Notre Dame...come to the Big Ten, come on...
  • NashRugger

    Posts: 1089

    Jun 10, 2010 3:35 PM GMT
    I doubt the other 5 will all move to the Pac 10. I think the SEC now wakes up and goes after OU, OK State, TX, and A&M. It would make plenty of sense and make them 16 deep.

    If Notre Dame would've made up their damn mind, we wouldn't be going through this shit/
  • dhinkansas

    Posts: 764

    Jun 10, 2010 3:55 PM GMT
    Missouri does not have an offer to join the Big Ten per the KC media this am. They were a pawn in all of this and likely will join KU and KSU someplace other than the Big 12. It's all total bs and what a shame money is the only motivating factor.

    Nebraska can't beat the Big 12 South teams anymore, so they've opted for Northwestern, Indiana, Illinois...etc al on their schedule each year. I'm not Nebraska bashing...the fact is they aren't the power they once were, and today's climate makes it difficult to put together a program like they used to have. OU and Texas surpassed them on the football field. The Huskers will have a legit shot each year in the Big Ten. Fans suffer, because there were a lot of great matchups that will be lost...KSU/Nebr had some epic games in the late 90's, OU/Nebr of course. It proves there's never enough money...these college Presidents and AD's constantly want more more more.

  • NashRugger

    Posts: 1089

    Jun 10, 2010 4:03 PM GMT
    Yes, and this wanting more money is going to destroy college football, or at least tarnish the greatness of it.

    I blame Notre Dame and their wanting to stay independent. If they decide to stay status quo, they're going to get left behind and it'll hurt them bad.
  • dhinkansas

    Posts: 764

    Jun 10, 2010 4:09 PM GMT
    I find it interesting how quiet the SEC has been throughout this process. I really don't see the Big 12 as a financial failure...and for god's sakes...is the Big Ten ever going to learn to count? Time to change the name, boys. I think this is one way the college pres. are trying to go above and beyond the NCAA/BCS and force a playoff. Which is an admireable goal, but all the dirty business under the table of forming several superconference reeks of the Hollywood casting couch. Makes me want to follow pro sports exclusively now.
  • darkeyedresol...

    Posts: 171

    Jun 10, 2010 4:11 PM GMT
    I'm not really sure why this is a bad thing right now, no reason why rival games won't still be important and won't still be played.

    Nebraska had a rather good start but then faded at the end, however they did almost upset Texas and did a better job at playing them than their fellow Big 12 schools. They still schedule big rivalry games because they are huge draws of money and television ratings.

    How is it Notre Dame's fault? They have been independent for decades. They will probably be forced soon to chose a conference, which most likely depends on the Big East. The Big East could force Notre Dame to join because thats where the rest of their collegiate teams play in. The Big East could really use Notre Dame to bolster its football conference and even with the current state of Notre Dame's program, it would come in as one of the favorites to win it. I hope they go to the Big Ten since they have a great rivalry with Michigan and Michigan St.

    If its anyone's fault, its the Big Ten. They created the lucrative Big Ten network that gives it schools 22 million dollars. The other schools saw that money and really wanted a similar set up.
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Jun 10, 2010 4:11 PM GMT
    It is a HUGE concern... and it does look like Nebraska is going to the Big 10. With the Pac 12 trying to get some of the Texas schools, KU and KState could be left out in the cold. I know Nebraska is said to make an announcement tomorrow. We'll see what happens.
  • NashRugger

    Posts: 1089

    Jun 10, 2010 4:17 PM GMT
    Don't expect the Big East to be around much longer either, the Big Ten and ACC will go after them and the SEC after parts of the Big 12 and ACC.

    The ACC may have a nice tv contract, but FSU and Miami have always looked good to them, and Clemson in consideration as well.

    I do partly blame Notre Dame because the Big 10 wanted them and nothing at first, but ND kept saying no because they wanted to be special. Well, being special may bite them in the ass soon. Besides the football program, they're in the Big East, which has never made any sense to me at all.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2010 4:21 PM GMT
    I'm still curious about the Big 12 conference. Several of you are fans of teams in that conference.

    Is that conference consciously dissolving?

    If so, why? I thought the interconference games were hugely attended.

    OU-Texas? KU-Nebraska? They can't be hurting for money.

    If "my" conference, the Pac 10 (I am a long time Cal fan) becomes the Pac 16, are we now going to have to have conference championship games?

    I think that is a mistake. This allows good teams to knock each other out of the BCS.
  • NashRugger

    Posts: 1089

    Jun 10, 2010 4:24 PM GMT
    Per NCAA rules, a conference can not have a championship game unless they have 12 or more teams.
  • dhinkansas

    Posts: 764

    Jun 10, 2010 4:37 PM GMT
    I don't think it's about hurting for money, fastprof. I think is about wanting more and more and more...and the Big Ten Network can provide the extra cash. Needed or not, it's a matter of want.

    Yes, the Pac ten if it's 16 most likely would have a conf. championship game. Which, as KSU in '98 and OU in '03 can second...it's a good way to get knocked out of the national championship pic.

    As far as the Big 12, once Nebraska leaves, the Texas schools will bolt.......the total ripple effect. The old Big 8 caved into Texas demands from day one of the Big 12, and the Big 12 has been good for Texas. The Horns were not a top five team back in '96...seems like they were winning 6 and 7 games a year, and now, they are worth more than most corporations and ol' Mack Brown makes what, 5 million a year now?

    How ridiculous though State Legislators are getting involved in all this. Surely, things like education, unemployment and road work are more important...aren't they?
  • darkeyedresol...

    Posts: 171

    Jun 10, 2010 4:41 PM GMT
    The survival of the Big East seems to depend on what happens with the Big Ten. If the Big Ten decides to expand more west, where there is more money in football, then I think the Big east will be fine. The Big Ten, if the Big 12 really does fall apart, should swoop in and pick up Missouri, Kansas and Kansas St. This would cement it as the Midwestern football conference. I would like the Big Ten to pick up Cincinnati, and give an instate football rivalry for OSU.

    ACC would likely go, it could get ripped up by SEC and Big East. It would make more sense from a regional standpoint. The ACC might get take by the north by the Big East and the south by the SEC.

    I don't think the Big 12 is done, it all depends on Texas and less extent Oklahoma. Oklahoma could leave, but if Texas stayed, I would think the conference could remain. If Texas leaves, and Oklahoma stays, I don't think it would be enough to keep the Big 12 alive.
  • hartfan

    Posts: 1037

    Jun 10, 2010 4:48 PM GMT
    The Pac-10 has just announced that Colorado is joining them. Looks like Baylor might be left with no say in the matter if the Pac-10 comes knocking on the Longhorns' door. I have no doubt that if Texas (the holy grail of college athletics) moves, A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State are moving with them.

    College athletics, especially football, has always been big business. I don't blame the Big Ten for creating the Big Ten Network to increase their revenue; after all, the additional money does help pay for other less visible sports. However, once all the dust settles from the massive conference realignments, there definitely is legitimate concern how the mega-conferences will crowd out smaller schools. Unfortunately, in today's sporting climate, it looks to be mostly a zero-sum game.

    The Big 12 was doing well as a conference, though they still lagged behind the SEC and the Big Ten. But perhaps if the revenue sharing had been done in a different way like how the Big Ten does it, Nebraska might have had less gripe and been less tempted to move.

    While it seems like the Big Ten's expansion was the catalyst in setting off the chain of events, I believe that whoever in the Big 12 who issued that moratorium to Nebraska worsened the situation several fold. Once that happened, there was no trust left, and Nebraska (and probably Missouri at the time) had little choice but to leave, Colorado and the Pac-10 saw their opportunity, and the Big 12 was done faster than Billy Sims could score a touch down.

    Unfortunately, this is the death knell for Kansas, Kansas State and Iowa State. They will most likely end up in the Mountain West. However, this story may not be completely grim because if, as rumored, Boise State bolts the WAC for the Mountain West, and Utah stays instead of running to the Pac-10, the Mountain West has a legitimate shot of taking over the BCS conference spot vacated by the Big 12. That, however, may also be contingent upon a new Pac-16's ability to negotiate two automatic qualifying spots, one for each division.

    While it might seem like the Big Ten might stop with Nebraska for now, there's no guarantee it will, especially if the Pac-16 becomes too powerful. Then the Big Ten might look to cannibalize the Big East, and once that happens, Notre Dame has no choice but to swallow its pride and follow. However, Notre Dame would rather join the Big Ten as its 12th team rather than its 16th team, yet that wasn't their desire to begin with, not with their tradition of independence and the still lucrative contract with NBC. Notre Dame definitely won't seem to end up in an ideal situation no matter what happens. Of course, everyone's blaming the Irish for not just joining the Big Ten and setting off college football Armageddon in the first place.

    I don't think the SEC or the ACC will respond. The SEC is at a good place right now no matter what happens. Texas might be a good addition, but the Longhorns wouldn't want to move there. Whether they remain in the Big 12 or depart for the Pac-10, they will be a big fish in a small pond, but if they join the SEC, they have to contend with the likes of Alabama, Florida, LSU and Georgia--not an attractive prospect. The SEC is also not likely to add Florida State, Miami or Clemson, all of which will cut into other SEC schools' markets, furthering diminishing the pie.

    There have also been reports that academics play as much of a role in this, from several sources including Jack Swarbick, Notre Dame's AD. Nebraska's addition will boost the Big Ten, and Texas, Texas A&M would be fine additions to the Pac-10 as well. Also another reason why Texas would stay away from the SEC.
  • dhinkansas

    Posts: 764

    Jun 10, 2010 4:51 PM GMT
    I don't see a Texas staying/OU leaving or vice versa scenario. The two will be part of a package deal for the Pac Ten, and I'd guess it's already a done deal. The conference leaders have jumped into bed together at various meetings the last two weeks, salivating over Texas/USC and OU/USC matchups.

    Without Nebraska, the already light Big 12 North in football plunges even further behind the South schools. It's hard to think of a "name" school available to complete the Big 12 anyway.
  • dhinkansas

    Posts: 764

    Jun 10, 2010 4:54 PM GMT
    I am puzzled why the Pac Ten is enamored with Colorado. No offense to anyone, but CU hasn't been a top ten football team for awhile now, and the b-ball team pulls in 4,500 fans a game. It's hard to imagine the state of Colorado chomping at the bit for a Colorado/Oregon St matchup in anything.
  • hartfan

    Posts: 1037

    Jun 10, 2010 5:05 PM GMT
    dhinkansas saidI am puzzled why the Pac Ten is enamored with Colorado. No offense to anyone, but CU hasn't been a top ten football team for awhile now, and the b-ball team pulls in 4,500 fans a game. It's hard to imagine the state of Colorado chomping at the bit for a Colorado/Oregon St matchup in anything.


    It's not about how good the athletic teams are, it's about where the media markets are. Few schools have the influence of a national following, the few exceptions being Texas, Notre Dame, USC, Ohio State and Michigan.

    Colorado joining brings in the Denver market, which is the 16th largest market in the country, and that's where the revenue comes from. More households in Denver will tune in to watch a Colorado game than a Baylor game for instance, that's why Colorado is more attractive to the Pac-10 than Baylor, and that's also why the Pac-10 will only invite Oklahoma if Texas comes along, because the Oklahoma City(#45) and Tulsa (#61) markets are still not worth very much. By the same token, the Big Ten would add schools like Rutgers (with the huge #1 New York market) and Pittsburgh (with the #23 Pittsburgh market) before they would go after Kansas and Kansas City (which barely command a following in #32 Kansas City).
  • dhinkansas

    Posts: 764

    Jun 10, 2010 5:14 PM GMT
    I have to disagree to a point. Denver's a pro sports town......hard to imagine everyone tuning in to a CU game the way that happens in other cities. I think the Pac Ten could care less about Oklahoma...they want Texas and the Texas tv market, and OU/OSU are just part of the process.

    Just very sad to see conferences collapsing and forever changing. TV markets or not, increased travel time for the athletes certainly isn't a plus for them, and it makes it a lot more difficult for fans who like to travel to attend away games.
  • MSUBioNerd

    Posts: 1813

    Jun 10, 2010 5:18 PM GMT
    rangard saidwell, sports fans, it looks like nebraska will be the first school to move to the big 10 and start the dominoes a-falling.

    today at 1pm the exec. committee of the nebraska board of regents is deciding whether to publicly include the realignment issue on friday's agenda. which would make it look like the invitation from the big 10 has already been offered and is being ready to be accepted.

    this will change college football in so many ways it isn't even funny. historical moment right now that will destroy the BCS and the current bowl system.

    if NU defects, and i suspect they will, missouri will likely be next and then the next question is whether the big 10 will want texas (and all the schools texas is demanding come with them) or whether texas et. al. will go to the pac 10.

    for those of you who are KU and KSU fans. well...you're fucked. likely you'll be in the mountain west.

    this isn't just about athletics, btw. this will effect research money and academia noticeably too. so KU and KSU are begging NU to stay...if they get sent to the MWC, their programs will suffer greatly.


    Why do you say that this will have an effect on research money? The vast majority of research money comes from grants to either individual professors or collaborating sets thereof, and from national agencies (like the NIH, NSF, DOD, DARPA, DOE, etc) or private industry, with some money coming from local geographic regions. I am utterly perplexed why you would say that football conference affiliation will matter to a school's research money.
  • darkeyedresol...

    Posts: 171

    Jun 10, 2010 5:23 PM GMT
    Yea, unless more teams from the Big 12 come along, the closest home game for Colorado would be like 800 something miles. A regional aspect shouldn't be ignored in what is happening, it does diminish the game when you lose that. That is why the SEC might still be the dominant conference because its regional aspect makes it fiercely competitive, you pretty much have a rivalry game almost every week.

    There is some talk that the Big East would make a play for KU and Kansas St because of their basketball programs, and the Big East is a major basketball conference. It would make sense like that but it would make for an incredibly wide spread and regionally weak conference. I'm not sure how many Kansas fans want to go all the way out to the east cost to see their team play.

    At least with a mega conference of the Pac-16, it would be divided up internally to make it more regionally focused.

    I would personally love to see Texas in SEC, it would easily be the most competitive and most interesting conference in football history. To see Florida and Texas, or more Alabama and Texas match ups, it would make for some great sport TV.

    Though for people for wanted a play offs, this will probably begin to move that way. If you had a few super conferences, it would make it easier to put together a play off system.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2010 5:27 PM GMT
    Someone above posted that the Pac 10 would want Texas but not Oklahoma, if this mega conference idea comes to fruition.

    Oh boy. That's not what I think. The Pac 10 would LOVE having Texas and Oklhahoma to pair up with USC, at least, and with the ermergence of Cal and reemergence of Washington.

    I agree with MSUBionerd....the Colorado attraction is the Denver media market. It doesn't matter if Denver is a pro-town. I guarantee that there'd be huge market share to any Pac 10 game if Colorado is in the conference (and even more so if Texas and Oklahoma come over).

    Does it make sense? Oklahoma and Texas in a conference labeled "Pac 16"?

    No it makes no sense at all.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2010 5:34 PM GMT
    MSUBioNerd said
    W I am utterly perplexed why you would say that football conference affiliation will matter to a school's research money.


    ...and so am I. The research dollars that support a school is totally independent of athletics and athletic success. At some schools, like Cal and Stanford, it's so obvious, until recently, that it is independent that it is funny.

    I don't know, but I think that observation (not trying to speak for the OP, though) from rabid fan (aticiscm) perspective. That kind of logic is so alien to the perspective of schools in my area (for example, Cal, Stanford and UCLA).

    I'll agree that alumni support to the Athletics Departments would be connected to the conference affiliation. But that's a tail that wags the dog mostly in other conferences besides the Pac 10 (except for, of course, USC).

  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Jun 10, 2010 5:41 PM GMT

    1998 January 4, 1999 Tennessee 23 Florida St. 16 Fiesta Bowl
    1999 January 4, 2000 Florida St. 46 Virginia Tech 29 Sugar Bowl
    2000 January 3, 2001 Oklahoma 13 Florida St. 2 Orange Bowl
    2001 January 3, 2002 Miami 37 Nebraska 14 Rose Bowl
    2002 January 3, 2003 Ohio State 31 Miami 24 Fiesta Bowl
    2003 January 4, 2004 LSU 21 Oklahoma 14 Sugar Bowl
    2004 January 4, 2005 USC 55 Oklahoma 19 Orange Bowl
    2005 January 4, 2006 Texas 41 USC 38 Rose Bowl
    2006 January 8, 2007 Florida 41 Ohio State 14 BCS National Championship
    2007 January 7, 2008 LSU 38 Ohio State 24 BCS National Championship
    2008 January 8, 2009 Florida 24 Oklahoma 14 BCS National Championship
    2009 January 7, 2010 Alabama 37 Texas 21 BCS National Championship