EagleOutsider.com

NOPE.

Obv very speculative, but dear lord i hope this guy is right and they get passed over again.

http://www.espn929.com/pages/20457311.php

I see what you did there.

I don't see what Memphis and Cincy brings to the B12 other than 2 more teams. If that is what they are going after (i.e. Conf Champ game), I think they would be much better off taking Houston and SMU. The B12 lives and dies with its ability to keep Texas and Oklahoma from going to the P12/SEC. I think the best way to assure that from happening is keeping the B12 all about Texas. As for TV markets, SMU brings nothing as Dallas is already covered with TCU, Baylor and Texas. But, Houston essentially reclaims a market that TAMU allegedly delivered to the SEC.

HJS {l Wrote}:I don't see what Memphis and Cincy brings to the B12 other than 2 more teams. If that is what they are going after (i.e. Conf Champ game), I think they would be much better off taking Houston and SMU. The B12 lives and dies with its ability to keep Texas and Oklahoma from going to the P12/SEC. I think the best way to assure that from happening is keeping the B12 all about Texas. As for TV markets, SMU brings nothing as Dallas is already covered with TCU, Baylor and Texas. But, Houston essentially reclaims a market that TAMU allegedly delivered to the SEC. The longhorns also deliver the Houston TV market

FIXED.

I have family in Houston. 99% of the people there are Longhorn fans. The other schools split the 1%.

Reading the boneyard is a riot today.

If they agree to play home football games against Texas and Oklahoma in NYC, they'll be one of the two teams the Big Twelve adds to get to twelve teams.

Watch out, BYU and Boise St. could be pretty good adds and the Big XI might consider it because of all the complaints about SOS.

10,000 ft view, boise and byu seem to make most sense for big 12

commavegarage {l Wrote}:10,000 ft view, boise and byu seem to make most sense for big 12

i'd say this would be the anywhere from 1 ft to eleventy,000,000,000 ft view

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:

commavegarage {l Wrote}:10,000 ft view, boise and byu seem to make most sense for big 12

i'd say this would be the anywhere from 1 ft to eleventy,000,000,000 ft view

The further you get from Rutgers, the more likely it is for people to think Rutgers is a good school. Does UConn also become an Ivy League school from eleventy,000,000,000 ft away?

talon {l Wrote}:

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:

commavegarage {l Wrote}:10,000 ft view, boise and byu seem to make most sense for big 12

i'd say this would be the anywhere from 1 ft to eleventy,000,000,000 ft view

The further you get from Rutgers, the more likely it is for people to think Rutgers is a good school. Does UConn also become an Ivy League school from eleventy,000,000,000 ft away?

with their fairly well publicized basketball post-season inelligibility, i think the lack of educational standards or performance at yukon is more widely known than rutgres

UConn fans are funny. They don't and I don't think ever will understand that basketball is cute, but in the whole scheme of things it doesn't matter.

Football pays the bills, gets the networks talking and brings in the viewers.

No one is jumping to add a team whose career D-I record is 85-95 in the a some ridiculously mediocre conferences. They like to throw pot shots at us, but most people don't realize BC has a fantastic history regards to college football and bring one of the top viewer markets in the country. So even when we suck, we are still desirable.

That's just to truth.

Although I can understand they shots at Rutgers. No clue how they got added to a P5 conference. Shitty team, no history, no fans, absolutely nothing in other sports including basketball. Really not sure what the hell the big 10 was thinking with that one.

eaglesfan06 {l Wrote}:UConn fans are funny. They don't and I don't think ever will understand that basketball is cute, but in the whole scheme of things it doesn't matter.

Football pays the bills, gets the networks talking and brings in the viewers.

In a way, they do seem to get that.

UConn doesn't own Rentschler Field; they're not even beholden to the sunk cost fallacy. Seems like the no-brainer move (if they truly care about basketball) would be to drop football (either completely or down to FCS) and continue playing sports against long time rivals PC, St. John's, Villanova, Georgetown, etc.

Because they value their shitty football team more than their national championship basketball teams, their biggest in conference rival is the University of Cincinnati. And if Cincinnati, for any unlikely reason, found themselves as a target of Big 12 expansion, they wouldn't even think about telling the Big 12 "can UConn come, too?" That's the partner they're hitching their future to.

this thread is why i will always argue to the death with anyone - even if we were to have 10 more years of donahue / spaz - that gene's tenure was more positive than negative. id be shocked if uconn football exists at the d1 level in 15 years. id be surprised if it existed in 10

also, regarding 81's true love, i think the big 12 will add 2-4 teams (most likely 2) within the next 12 months and that will be it for expansion for quite some time.

commavegarage {l Wrote}:this thread is why i will always argue to the death with anyone - even if we were to have 10 more years of donahue / spaz - that gene's tenure was more positive than negative. id be shocked if uconn football exists at the d1 level in 15 years. id be surprised if it existed in 10

I wonder if Gene would have helped UConn out in 2011 if UConn had never filed that law suit.

Agree that Rutgers' induction into The B1G was most curious. But I suppose that, once there, their recruiting will keep them, most years, competitive with other B1G bottom feeders -- doing better than that in the occasional year as the cycle turns. UCONN, on the other hand, would seem even an order of magnitude less attractive than Rutgers, not least because of their men's basketball team's unsavory reputation, which is now well established. I take it the football team's rep in that regard is not as bad, but that's not saying much. At the same time, I was somewhat surprised to see that UCONN has a decent academic rank among public universities, which makes a certain amount of sense in light of the state's location in the northeast and the ranking of its secondary education system.

Still, who -- athlete or real student -- would want to go to school in Storrs, if one had another choice?

Brooklyneagle {l Wrote}:Agree that Rutgers' induction into The B1G was most curious. But I suppose that, once there, their recruiting will keep them, most years, competitive with other B1G bottom feeders -- doing better than that in the occasional year as the cycle turns. UCONN, on the other hand, would seem even an order of magnitude less attractive than Rutgers, not least because of their men's basketball team's unsavory reputation, which is now well established. I take it the football team's rep in that regard is not as bad, but that's not saying much. At the same time, I was somewhat surprised to see that UCONN has a decent academic rank among public universities, which makes a certain amount of sense in light of the state's location in the northeast and the ranking of its secondary education system.

Still, who -- athlete or real student -- would want to go to school in Storrs, if one had another choice?

With regards to Rutgers vs. UConn, I'm still not sure why anyone would think UConn is below Rutgers and I despise UConn and are generally indifferent to Rutgers.

Rutgers has literally nothing going for them in athletics. At their best they are mediocre at football. At their worst they are horrific. But even outside football they bring nothing to the table. Rutgers athletics is just average to futile across the boards. Sure they have a long history with college sports/football, but they have been pretty much bad to average the whole time. I just don't really understand it.

UConn, while we may mock their football and deservedly so, they have a strong athletic department below that. I know that no one really cares about who wins the Men's Soccer or Women's Tennis title but the actually conferences and the people that play those sports, but at least they have won something and they have a good amount of national titles in those other sports.

In general, both teams should have been stuck in mid-major territory, because neither really brings anything to the table. But if I had to choose between the two I'd pick UConn.

Anyway, I'm still laughing at the idea that Yukon fans actually think they could get into the Big 12. Now that's hilarious.

new jersey has just under 8 million residents. connecticut has $3.5 million residents.

that's more than double the cable revenue generated by the b1g network on televisions in nj vs ct

case desmithed

eaglesfan06 {l Wrote}:

Brooklyneagle {l Wrote}:Agree that Rutgers' induction into The B1G was most curious. But I suppose that, once there, their recruiting will keep them, most years, competitive with other B1G bottom feeders -- doing better than that in the occasional year as the cycle turns. UCONN, on the other hand, would seem even an order of magnitude less attractive than Rutgers, not least because of their men's basketball team's unsavory reputation, which is now well established. I take it the football team's rep in that regard is not as bad, but that's not saying much. At the same time, I was somewhat surprised to see that UCONN has a decent academic rank among public universities, which makes a certain amount of sense in light of the state's location in the northeast and the ranking of its secondary education system.

Still, who -- athlete or real student -- would want to go to school in Storrs, if one had another choice?

With regards to Rutgers vs. UConn, I'm still not sure why anyone would think UConn is below Rutgers and I despise UConn and are generally indifferent to Rutgers.

Rutgers has literally nothing going for them in athletics. At their best they are mediocre at football. At their worst they are horrific. But even outside football they bring nothing to the table. Rutgers athletics is just average to futile across the boards. Sure they have a long history with college sports/football, but they have been pretty much bad to average the whole time. I just don't really understand it.

UConn, while we may mock their football and deservedly so, they have a strong athletic department below that. I know that no one really cares about who wins the Men's Soccer or Women's Tennis title but the actually conferences and the people that play those sports, but at least they have won something and they have a good amount of national titles in those other sports.

In general, both teams should have been stuck in mid-major territory, because neither really brings anything to the table. But if I had to choose between the two I'd pick UConn.

Anyway, I'm still laughing at the idea that Yukon fans actually think they could get into the Big 12. Now that's hilarious.

Don't forget BC interruption

Big 12 might not add any teams. The minimum dollars any new team must bring in on an annual basis is 25 million. If the Big 12 thinks UConn can deliver part of the NYC market they might take a shot at adding them, but it's very doubtful to say the least. It's more likely that the Big 12 folds into the other 4 conferences because while 25 million per team in tv revenue might be good now it won't be in 10 years and it's very doubtful the Big 12 will get their TV revenue up without adding a brand name. The old deal of Texas, TT, OU & OSU to the PAC 12, TCU & Baylor to the SEC, KU & KState to the B1G and WVU & ND to the ACC will net all of those schools a lot more tv revenue in the next 10-20 years versus adding BYU, Boise St, Yukon, UCF, USF, Memphis, Cincy, etc. I just do not see the logic in keeping the Big 12 together.

Eaglekeeper {l Wrote}:Big 12 might not add any teams. The minimum dollars any new team must bring in on an annual basis is 25 million. If the Big 12 thinks UConn can deliver part of the NYC market they might take a shot at adding them, but it's very doubtful to say the least. It's more likely that the Big 12 folds into the other 4 conferences because while 25 million per team in tv revenue might be good now it won't be in 10 years and it's very doubtful the Big 12 will get their TV revenue up without adding a brand name. The old deal of Texas, TT, OU & OSU to the PAC 12, TCU & Baylor to the SEC, KU & KState to the B1G and WVU & ND to the ACC will net all of those schools a lot more tv revenue in the next 10-20 years versus adding BYU, Boise St, Yukon, UCF, USF, Memphis, Cincy, etc. I just do not see the logic in keeping the Big 12 together.

I know the conference sold out when the schools voted to invite Louisville, but the thought of WVU in the ACC makes my skin crawl.

Eaglekeeper {l Wrote}:Big 12 might not add any teams. The minimum dollars any new team must bring in on an annual basis is 25 million. If the Big 12 thinks UConn can deliver part of the NYC market they might take a shot at adding them, but it's very doubtful to say the least. It's more likely that the Big 12 folds into the other 4 conferences because while 25 million per team in tv revenue might be good now it won't be in 10 years and it's very doubtful the Big 12 will get their TV revenue up without adding a brand name. The old deal of Texas, TT, OU & OSU to the PAC 12, TCU & Baylor to the SEC, KU & KState to the B1G and WVU & ND to the ACC will net all of those schools a lot more tv revenue in the next 10-20 years versus adding BYU, Boise St, Yukon, UCF, USF, Memphis, Cincy, etc. I just do not see the logic in keeping the Big 12 together.

The B12 may stay together simply because there isn't anyplace for the other schools to go. ACC won't expand again unless it involves ND. SEC, P12, and B10 won't unless it involves at least one of Texas/Oklahoma. The realignment you suggest would net the schools a lot more tv revenue but what would it do for the conferences (other than the additions of ND, Texas, and to a lesser extent Oklahoma--none of which are sure things)? It may happen eventually but either ND or Texas will have to be the first domino to fall.

Cincy and Memphis.

If you are a UCONN fan at what point do you say "Fuck it" drop Football to 1-AA, join the CAA for football and then beg the Big East to let them back in for non-football sports.

Know your place, Puppies.

What are you laughing at, Minutemen? You're next.

commavegarage {l Wrote}:this thread is why i will always argue to the death with anyone - even if we were to have 10 more years of donahue / spaz - that gene's tenure was more positive than negative. id be shocked if uconn football exists at the d1 level in 15 years. id be surprised if it existed in 10

also, regarding 81's true love, i think the big 12 will add 2-4 teams (most likely 2) within the next 12 months and that will be it for expansion for quite some time.

If Gene had just retired in like 2008, he would have been a legend in the BC community for all-time, it is truly a shame that the last few years destroyed his image for most BC people.

Like you said- his move to get us into the ACC has put BC in a (relatively) safe place since we got out of the Big East while the getting was good.

Sporting News claiming that B12 met with Cincy and that BYU might be involved. And... of course... Frank the Tank has weighed in. Here is your one-stop-shopping discussing both.
http://www.vivathematadors.com/2014/12/ ... -afternoon

HJS {l Wrote}:Sporting News claiming that B12 met with Cincy and that BYU might be involved. And... of course... Frank the Tank has weighed in. Here is your one-stop-shopping discussing both.
http://www.vivathematadors.com/2014/12/ ... -afternoon

https://twitter.com/McMurphyESPN/status ... 3871362048

I've heard the Big 12 will first try to get the rule changed that limits conference championships to conferences with at least 12 teams and 2 divisions. I've also heard that the ACC wants this rule changed. I doubt the ACC wants to kick five schools out, but I wouldn't be shocked to see the ACC scrapping the "atlantic" and "coastal" division concepts.

And I wouldn't mind the ACC doing that. I hate that BC will play Louisville or NC State every year, but games against Miami, Pitt, UVA, etc only happen once every seven years.

talon {l Wrote}:

HJS {l Wrote}:Sporting News claiming that B12 met with Cincy and that BYU might be involved. And... of course... Frank the Tank has weighed in. Here is your one-stop-shopping discussing both.
http://www.vivathematadors.com/2014/12/ ... -afternoon

https://twitter.com/McMurphyESPN/status ... 3871362048

I've heard the Big 12 will first try to get the rule changed that limits conference championships to conferences with at least 12 teams and 2 divisions. I've also heard that the ACC wants this rule changed. I doubt the ACC wants to kick five schools out, but I wouldn't be shocked to see the ACC scrapping the "atlantic" and "coastal" division concepts.

And I wouldn't mind the ACC doing that. I hate that BC will play Louisville or NC State every year, but games against Miami, Pitt, UVA, etc only happen once every seven years.

The ACC has been supportive of this in the past. However, I think it has more to do with self-preservation. First, it provides conferences with a little more stability (to take out a need to meet a manufactured threshold). Further, if the ACC ever gets poached again, they won't needlessly have to expand and could instead live at 10 or 11 (and still get a Conf Champs game).

talon {l Wrote}:

HJS {l Wrote}:Sporting News claiming that B12 met with Cincy and that BYU might be involved. And... of course... Frank the Tank has weighed in. Here is your one-stop-shopping discussing both.
http://www.vivathematadors.com/2014/12/ ... -afternoon

https://twitter.com/McMurphyESPN/status ... 3871362048

I've heard the Big 12 will first try to get the rule changed that limits conference championships to conferences with at least 12 teams and 2 divisions. I've also heard that the ACC wants this rule changed. I doubt the ACC wants to kick five schools out, but I wouldn't be shocked to see the ACC scrapping the "atlantic" and "coastal" division concepts.

And I wouldn't mind the ACC doing that. I hate that BC will play Louisville or NC State every year, but games against Miami, Pitt, UVA, etc only happen once every seven years.

I think the ACC desperately wants scheduling flexibility. All the 14-team conferences hate the cross-division set-up with rarely playing teams on the other side. It's just that only the ACC is worried that that dissatisfaction may actually lead to teams looking elsewhere.

Swofford mentioned not just scheduling flexibility and flexibility in choosing CG teams, he also specifically mentioned number of teams needed to have a CG in the last interview I read from him. I don't know if he just thinks he needs to pander to the Big12 to get this through or if he really wants the Big12 to have that flexibility, but it is what it is. I would love to see the BIG and SEC weigh in, allowing for dissolution of divisions, freedom in selecting CG teams, but not relaxing the 12-team minimum.

And then watch as UConn dissolves football after BYU and Cinci are added.

With 14 members (not counting Notre Dame) and an 8 game schedule, each ACC school could pick three teams they play every year, and the other ten schools, they play once every other year. Scrap the divisions and have the top two teams play for the championship.

You know the SEC would be in favor of doing away with the division setup because that would improve their odds of getting 2 playoff teams.