Smoke your cigars and enjoy the band while you can....

[catzacker]

Texas and OU like this format because it allows them the easiest route.  Their game b/t each other is minimized in terms of conference importance.  A loss or a win in that game doesn’t nearly always determine your eventual fate.  Divisions are good for the conference, a round robin is good for OU and Texas.  This conference is not about the collective good.

[michigancat]

Texas and OU like this format because it allows them the easiest route.  Their game b/t each other is minimized in terms of conference importance.  A loss or a win in that game doesn’t nearly always determine your eventual fate.  Divisions are good for the conference, a round robin is good for OU and Texas.  This conference is not about the collective good.

Unless the money increases, divisions aren't better IMO.

[thebigcatbowski]

Texas and OU like this format because it allows them the easiest route.  Their game b/t each other is minimized in terms of conference importance.  A loss or a win in that game doesn’t nearly always determine your eventual fate.  Divisions are good for the conference, a round robin is good for OU and Texas.  This conference is not about the collective good.

Unless the money increases, divisions aren't better IMO.

In divisions, you can conceivably have an undefeated and three one-loss teams at the end of the season. With round robin, the best you can hope for is an undefeated and a one-loss team or three one-loss teams and no undefeateds.

[Panjandrum]

Texas and OU like this format because it allows them the easiest route.  Their game b/t each other is minimized in terms of conference importance.  A loss or a win in that game doesn’t nearly always determine your eventual fate.  Divisions are good for the conference, a round robin is good for OU and Texas.  This conference is not about the collective good.

I agree with you, but here is the problem, going forward, for Oklahoma and Texas.

Oklahoma is not going to be an SEC candidate because they have, somehow, bound themselves to Oklahoma State.  That may not always be the case, but it is for now.  The SEC was interested in OU, but was not interested in OU + OSU.  The Big Ten already said, "No," to OU.  The Pac-12 may still be there, but again, they didn't want OU + OSU, and they made it clear that any expansion without Texas wasn't worth it to them.

In regards to Texas, they do not want the SEC, the Pac-12 no longer wants them (I guess they burned a ton of bridges), and the Big Ten is kind of a horrible fit.  Also, the state of Texas was cool with A&M splitting as long as A) the Big 12 didn't break up, and B) other Texas schools benefited from it.  Both of those things happened, and if you're a fan of TCU, and to a lesser extent, SMU and Houston, what happened last year was a massive improvement.  Any movement by Texas, now, could put all of the other schools at risk.  The legislature will shoot that down.

What is good for Texas and Oklahoma is a strong conference.  They can treat this like their own personal fiefdom and watch this conference turn into North Korea, or they can be like Alabama and Florida and help promote the brand.

Texas is always going to make more money than God.  What they need to do is be the kingpin of a (perceived) strong conference.  That's what's missing.

Expansion allows that to happen.

[WildcatNkilt]

Anyone want to sum up the past 895 pages for me? TIA.

MU wanted to go to Big 10, but Big 10 took Rutgers instead.   

[Panjandrum]

This is from jon morse on our blog.  It kind of lays it out pretty well.

http://www.bringonthecats.com/2012/11/19/3666736/the-national-11-19-12-carousel-realignment-big-12-expansion

In summary, so many 9+ win teams creates poll momentum going into the next season, which perpetuates poll momentum into the following season, etc.  Next thing you know, six years later, the SEC owns college football because they scheduled and expanded intelligently.

[catzacker]

Pan, I’m not insinuating that UT and OU are looking around, I’m saying that they want it this way and that’s the way it will stay, imo.  They know that based on their brand recognition (not the Big 12’s mind you, just theirs) that if they are a 1 loss or undefeated, they are going to be in the championship game or in the playoff – And there’s a greater chance for them to both be in if they are playing for the conference title each week, instead of one week in October and one week in December. 

The SEC, on the otherhand, has realized that the way to create the “greatest conference” is through multiple members being artificially “good” to promote one or two as “great” (and thus their conference).  OU and specifically UT only care about them.  It’s fine for us and everyone else not named UT or OU.  None of the rest of us have options. 

[sonofdaxjones]

This is from jon morse on our blog.  It kind of lays it out pretty well.

http://www.bringonthecats.com/2012/11/19/3666736/the-national-11-19-12-carousel-realignment-big-12-expansion

In summary, so many 9+ win teams creates poll momentum going into the next season, which perpetuates poll momentum into the following season, etc.  Next thing you know, six years later, the SEC owns college football because they scheduled and expanded intelligently.

I did the 15 second glance (man you guys are wordy), and yeah it make sense about poll momentum. 

[Panjandrum]

Pan, I’m not insinuating that UT and OU are looking around, I’m saying that they want it this way and that’s the way it will stay, imo.  They know that based on their brand recognition (not the Big 12’s mind you, just theirs) that if they are a 1 loss or undefeated, they are going to be in the championship game or in the playoff – And there’s a greater chance for them to both be in if they are playing for the conference title each week, instead of one week in October and one week in December. 

The SEC, on the otherhand, has realized that the way to create the “greatest conference” is through multiple members being artificially “good” to promote one or two as “great” (and thus their conference).  OU and specifically UT only care about them.  It’s fine for us and everyone else not named UT or OU.  None of the rest of us have options.

I know you aren't.  I just didn't make my point very clearly.

It behooves OU and UT, IMO, to inflate the Big 12.

I think it would be easier for them to do an Alabama/LSU in the new playoff model than have a 3 game non-con and round robin in our deathtrap conference.

[EMAWesome]

This is from jon morse on our blog.  It kind of lays it out pretty well.

http://www.bringonthecats.com/2012/11/19/3666736/the-national-11-19-12-carousel-realignment-big-12-expansion

In summary, so many 9+ win teams creates poll momentum going into the next season, which perpetuates poll momentum into the following season, etc.  Next thing you know, six years later, the SEC owns college football because they scheduled and expanded intelligently.

I think the SEC dominance is completely cyclical...remember in the 90's - early 00's when The Florida big 3 had a string of dominance (specifically the U & FSU)? It seemed then that the talk was how the College FB world would always be dominated by the state of FL. We are in an era of SEC dominance, it isn't permanent, but of course the media is trating it like it is, the same way they treated the FL dominance back then...individual teams like Bama/LSU are set up for a 10 year preseason top-5 poll like OU has been in with Stoops since they seem to have head coaches that are going to be there until they decide to leave...remember, just last week we were certain the SEC's reign of terror was ending

[sonofdaxjones]

I still don't see Texas going anywhere because the Big 12 virtually assures them maintaining their status as the most profitable athletic department in the Country.   

Sure, some other conference might drop their pants, and sure the LHN might eventually fail.   But I don't see anybody wanting to go back now and giving Texas what they want, and Texas is going to play out the LHN until it floats or drowns.    No conference can put together a financial package that equals what Texas has now, or will have in the very near future.    Texas will easily surpass the $40 million mark per year on media/bowl/playoff/NCAA money in the next several years, in fact, they could surpass the $50 million mark in that category depending on the playoff payout.   No amount of Clay Travis SEC kool-aid is going to change that reality.   

[ednksu]

ESPN saying it was a unanimous vote

[TheHamburglar]

30 seconds into the BigTen Network Expansion show they said "Maryland is a member of the AAU, as are all member of the BigTen."  Apparently no one told the BigTen that Nebraska quit before they got kicked out. 

[Rage Against the McKee]

ESPN saying it was a unanimous vote

I'm not entirely sure what you are referring to here (assuming the Maryland vote to join the Big 10), but you never see where a school or conference reports any vote was not unanimous. ESPN also reported that the vote for the $50 million ACC buyout was unanimous until information was leaked out that said otherwise.

[Mr Bread]

I think the FSU to the Big 12 for eleven teams idea sounds pretty good.  They should do that.

I think 11 team conferences are a terrible idea.  Not enough for a CCG but too many for a round robin.  Plus, there is the possibility of two teams going undefeated in conference games but never playing each other.

Who gives a crap about conference champions?  You have two undefeateds in that setup and they both make the rough ridin' NC playoff.  Yeah, pretty terrible idea.  Oh wait, it's a rough ridin' great idea.

[bunter]

So do we get serious now? I buy this...

http://www.bringonthecats.com/2012/11/19/3666736/the-national-11-19-12-carousel-realignment-big-12-expansion

[Super PurpleCat]

30 seconds into the BigTen Network Expansion show they said "Maryland is a member of the AAU, as are all member of the BigTen."  Apparently no one told the BigTen that Nebraska quit before they got kicked out.

It's kinda like when the kid in the group with Downs has a Batman shirt on and says "I'm Batman!" nobody corrects him.

[EMAWesome]

 

[Rage Against the McKee]

30 seconds into the BigTen Network Expansion show they said "Maryland is a member of the AAU, as are all member of the BigTen."  Apparently no one told the BigTen that Nebraska quit before they got kicked out.

It's kinda like when the kid in the group with Downs has a Batman shirt on and says "I'm Batman!" nobody corrects him.

I think a better example is when a high school baseball team has a special ed player and the other team agrees to lob some pitches to him and then not field the ball when he hits it. The kid gets a home run, but nobody actually counts that in the box score on either side.

[Super PurpleCat]

Man it's so great to not read that stuff and relax.   

[Super PurpleCat]

I'm thinking both examples apply.

[pissclams]

i'm going to go ahead and move this into the 900 page thread we have on this topic

[Shacks]

I think the FSU to the Big 12 for eleven teams idea sounds pretty good.  They should do that.

I think 11 team conferences are a terrible idea.  Not enough for a CCG but too many for a round robin.  Plus, there is the possibility of two teams going undefeated in conference games but never playing each other.

Who gives a crap about conference champions?  You have two undefeateds in that setup and they both make the rough ridin' NC playoff.  Yeah, pretty terrible idea.  Oh wait, it's a rough ridin' great idea.

There shouldn't be more than one team per conference in a four team playoff.  I know that won't happen, but in a sport with 120 teams and 12-13 games, there should not be multiple teams from a small sample size (10, 12, 14 team conference).  College football teams play the majority of their games against conference foes, and it's impossible to compare conferences unless the top teams from across the country actually play each other.  Just look at how mortal Alabama was when they had to play against the type of offense you see every week in the Big 12.  Therefore, the playoff needs a one team/conference cap.  In any given year, you can find four elite teams from four different conferences.

[ZappaCat]

This is from jon morse on our blog.  It kind of lays it out pretty well.

http://www.bringonthecats.com/2012/11/19/3666736/the-national-11-19-12-carousel-realignment-big-12-expansion

In summary, so many 9+ win teams creates poll momentum going into the next season, which perpetuates poll momentum into the following season, etc.  Next thing you know, six years later, the SEC owns college football because they scheduled and expanded intelligently.

This expands out quite a bit on what I mentioned last week.

http://goEMAW.com/forum/index.php?topic=24606.100

"The SEC is set up to maximize the number of 1 loss teams in the conference.
They each play 4 Western Carolina type teams so even a winless conference team like Tennessee doesn't look like a bad opponent when they get beaten.
Then the top 6 teams only play 2 or 3 of the other top teams. So if you go 1-1 or 2-1 in these three games and you sweep through the UK, Vandys, Ole Miss of the worlds you end up with 5 or 6 teams in the toughest conference in the world all sitting at 11-1 or at worst 10-2. This enough to put any BCS team in the top 10.
In the big 12 it is mathmatically impossible to end up with more than 3 1-loss teams. The round robin automatically makes the conference look worse no matter how good it is. This is why K-State was in the top 25 but picked 6th in the big 12 before the season. 5 road games in this confernece and having to play every team guarantees the team that emerges has nothing to be ashamed of."

[ZappaCat]

The conference models that have been used in the past are:
8 teams (Big 8), 10 teams (Big 10, Pac 10, Big 12), 11 teams (Big 10/11), 12 (SEC, Big 12, Pac 12), 14 (SEC, ACC, New Big 1G?), 16 (Mountain West, Big East basketball / football hybrid)

What is the best model for balancing competitive play, conference stability, and maximizing revenue?

8 teams appears to be too small to maintain conference stability, is 10 teams large enough in today’s landscape?
12 teams does seem to be a nice symmetrical size, but the divisional set up seemed to pit members of the conference against other members and led to infighting.
The 14 team conference seems to lead to even more of this “us vs. them” and “haves and have not’s”. It seems to have many drawbacks in terms of scheduling. Will it work moving forward?
The 16 team conferences have seemed to be the most unstable, can one of the big boys make this work, or will it eventually fall apart.

Is there a model that hasn’t been tried that could be successful? Three 5 team pods, four 4 team pods?