Author Topic: Smoke your cigars and enjoy the band while you can.... (Read 4978873 times)

CyberToothCat · « **Reply #8825 on:** August 31, 2011, 06:49:46 PM »

Quote from: Fuktard on August 31, 2011, 06:31:35 PM

I seem to remember that there was a requirement for a certain number of teams in a conference...but seems like 9 teams is about perfect. 8 conference games and 4 ooc games...works well in basketball also. what gives?

A few years ago (2003? 2004?), the ACC raided the Big East and stole Miami, Virginia Tech and Boston College.

The Big East was left with:
Syracuse
Pittsburgh
West Virginia
Rutgers

The promoted UConn from 1-AA, and invited Cincinnati, Louisville and South Florida from Conference USA.

... and they maintained their BCS AQ status.

jtksu · « **Reply #8826 on:** August 31, 2011, 07:10:14 PM »

They also have a crap load of very good basketball teams.

Pete · « **Reply #8827 on:** August 31, 2011, 07:46:34 PM »

Quote from: CyberToothCat on August 31, 2011, 06:49:46 PM

Quote from: Fuktard on August 31, 2011, 06:31:35 PM
I seem to remember that there was a requirement for a certain number of teams in a conference...but seems like 9 teams is about perfect. 8 conference games and 4 ooc games...works well in basketball also. what gives?

A few years ago (2003? 2004?), the ACC raided the Big East and stole Miami, Virginia Tech and Boston College.

The Big East was left with:
Syracuse
Pittsburgh
West Virginia
Rutgers

The promoted UConn from 1-AA, and invited Cincinnati, Louisville and South Florida from Conference USA.

... and they maintained their BCS AQ status.

And Louisville. That's who bailed them out. UL had a high enough ranked football team to save their BCS status, IIRC.

Fuktard · « **Reply #8828 on:** August 31, 2011, 07:57:47 PM »

Nobody's really answering te question: Why do we need to add a member to the Big 12 just because the Aggies leave? What's wrong with a 9 team conference? Seems like it works a little better than a 10 team conference (8 conf games and 4 non con....2 fewer in league basketball games)

SkinnyBenny · « **Reply #8829 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:00:18 PM »

We're already on super-thin ice. Would be nice to bolster that a little bit.

jtksu · « **Reply #8830 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:03:14 PM »

In today's climate you really want the conference to keep getting stronger. We did not get stronger by losing Nubb, CU, and aTm. Meanwhile, the Big 10, SEC, and Pac 10 (not because of CU though) all got stronger and look to be further expanding. We can't afford to just sit still and let the other conferences pick our conference apart. Also, more schools= more tvs= bigger tv contracts.

ChiComCat · « **Reply #8831 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:06:18 PM »

Awkward BBall tourneys. I think we push this thing to 12. With Mizzou looking to bolt, we would need to try to build up some other programs to make them seem more legit.

BYU would be a quality get and ND is just in the realm of possibility because our conference will make exceptions to favor the powerful. Try getting Nubb, OSU, and Michigan to let ND keep their own TV contract.

Rage Against the McKee · « **Reply #8832 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:13:59 PM »

Quote from: jtksu on August 31, 2011, 07:10:14 PM

They also have a crap load of very good basketball teams.

Football is all that matters regarding BCS status, though.

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #8833 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:15:12 PM »

Fleece C-USA and the Mountain West. Make a 16 team conference.

You can even call the divisions something cool. Instead of Legends and Leaders you could do something less ego maniacal and more midwesterny like hogs and cattles, or crop dusters and combines.*

*open competition to create the best conf division names

Houstoncat93 · « **Reply #8834 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:15:31 PM »

Quote from: Fuktard on August 31, 2011, 07:57:47 PM

Nobody's really answering te question: Why do we need to add a member to the Big 12 just because the Aggies leave? What's wrong with a 9 team conference? Seems like it works a little better than a 10 team conference (8 conf games and 4 non con....2 fewer in league basketball games)

Not sure if true or not but I've seen reports that the new fox deal had a void clause at less than ten teams

Rage Against the McKee · « **Reply #8835 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:16:45 PM »

Why do people think expanding the conference to 16 teams would be a good idea? It just would mean less money for everyone involved.

steve dave · « **Reply #8836 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:19:11 PM »

Quote from: Nuts Kicked on August 31, 2011, 08:16:45 PM

Why do people think expanding the conference to 16 teams would be a good idea? It just would mean less money for everyone involved.

it's an awful idea unless you are assuring yourself of a seat at the table....which would be great to have

Winters · « **Reply #8837 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:20:04 PM »

I would really enjoy having 12 teams again.

Katpappy · « **Reply #8838 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:20:29 PM »

Quote from: pike on August 31, 2011, 04:32:18 PM

http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/34815/bill-self-frank-martin-react-to-ams-move

Relax everyone, there a squawk quote to LOL by:
"As long as kansas stays in the leauge it is a leggit attractive league, because I honesltly believe that kansas basketball trumps any other sports team in the league and as long as they hang out there will always be other schools willing to join so its all good thanks to the legendary kansas basketball program. Rest easy BIG TWELVE. "

Rage Against the McKee · « **Reply #8839 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:21:49 PM »

Quote from: steve dave on August 31, 2011, 08:19:11 PM

Quote from: Nuts Kicked on August 31, 2011, 08:16:45 PM
Why do people think expanding the conference to 16 teams would be a good idea? It just would mean less money for everyone involved.

it's an awful idea unless you are assuring yourself of a seat at the table....which would be great to have

Yeah, but I guess I just see raiding CUSA as assuring us a seat at the little kids' table.

jtksu · « **Reply #8840 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:22:05 PM »

Obviously, the tv contracts would be reworked to account for the larger numbers just as it would need to be reworked for the unexpected absence of aTm, Mizzou, etc. You don't really think the other conferences are adding teams so their pieces of pie get smaller, do you?

steve dave · « **Reply #8841 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:23:24 PM »

Quote from: Nuts Kicked on August 31, 2011, 08:21:49 PM

Quote from: steve dave on August 31, 2011, 08:19:11 PM
Quote from: Nuts Kicked on August 31, 2011, 08:16:45 PM
Why do people think expanding the conference to 16 teams would be a good idea? It just would mean less money for everyone involved.

it's an awful idea unless you are assuring yourself of a seat at the table....which would be great to have

Yeah, but I guess I just see raiding CUSA as assuring us a seat at the little kids' table.

If a conference with Texas has 10 or 12 or 14 or 16 teams it will have a BCS bid.

steve dave · « **Reply #8842 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:23:56 PM »

Quote from: steve dave on August 31, 2011, 08:23:24 PM

Quote from: Nuts Kicked on August 31, 2011, 08:21:49 PM
Quote from: steve dave on August 31, 2011, 08:19:11 PM
Quote from: Nuts Kicked on August 31, 2011, 08:16:45 PM
Why do people think expanding the conference to 16 teams would be a good idea? It just would mean less money for everyone involved.

it's an awful idea unless you are assuring yourself of a seat at the table....which would be great to have

Yeah, but I guess I just see raiding CUSA as assuring us a seat at the little kids' table.

If a conference with Texas has 10 or 12 or 14 or 16 teams it will have a BCS bid.

or 8 or 9

steve dave · « **Reply #8843 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:25:31 PM »

and, honestly, what the eff do we care about a BCS bid other than money

Rage Against the McKee · « **Reply #8844 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:27:23 PM »

Quote from: jtksu on August 31, 2011, 08:22:05 PM

Obviously, the tv contracts would be reworked to account for the larger numbers just as it would need to be reworked for the unexpected absence of aTm, Mizzou, etc. You don't really think the other conferences are adding teams so their pieces of pie get smaller, do you?

There would be a diminishing return, though, as it's only feasible to air a set number of football games on a given day. The Pac 16 sort of made sense, as it would have been spread over 3 time zones. A 16 team ACC or Big 10 makes much less sense. There's no way a 16 team Big 12 with 6 teams who have never been BCS teams would be more valuable on a per team basis than the current 10 team Big 12.

Rage Against the McKee · « **Reply #8845 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:28:06 PM »

Quote from: steve dave on August 31, 2011, 08:25:31 PM

and, honestly, what the eff do we care about a BCS bid other than money

What else is there to care about in any of this?

steve dave · « **Reply #8846 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:29:58 PM »

Quote from: Nuts Kicked on August 31, 2011, 08:28:06 PM

Quote from: steve dave on August 31, 2011, 08:25:31 PM
and, honestly, what the eff do we care about a BCS bid other than money

What else is there to care about in any of this?

traditional rivalries, respect, distance to the teams we play, tv coverage, etc. I'm just saying that a BCS bid is meaningless to us personally other than what it brings to who we play.

steve dave · « **Reply #8847 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:30:44 PM »

Us in a crap Big East hybrid with a BCS bid does us no good.

Rage Against the McKee · « **Reply #8848 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:34:45 PM »

Quote from: steve dave on August 31, 2011, 08:29:58 PM

Quote from: Nuts Kicked on August 31, 2011, 08:28:06 PM
Quote from: steve dave on August 31, 2011, 08:25:31 PM
and, honestly, what the eff do we care about a BCS bid other than money

What else is there to care about in any of this?

traditional rivalries, respect, distance to the teams we play, tv coverage, etc. I'm just saying that a BCS bid is meaningless to us personally other than what it brings to who we play.

If we lose Texas, we lose all of that. At that point, we might as well try to scrounge a BCS bid in some shitty hybrid conference. It will be all we have left. I'd rather the reward for a conference championship be a BCS bowl than some shitty bowl game in Boise.

steve dave · « **Reply #8849 on:** August 31, 2011, 08:38:36 PM »

yeah, but who cares. at that point a BCS bid is meaningless. A BCS bid is pretty meaningless anyway. I mean, if your conference winner can't make a BCS game you are pretty shitty anyway (which we would be sans Texas). too much is made of the BCS crap. If you have good teams, you have good teams. I have no desire to have a group of crap teams that somehow holds onto a BCS bid for a year or two because of some clause or some crap.