Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

*****The Super, Mega, Huge Big 12 Expansion Thread*****

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cyclophile1

Cyclophile1

Well-Known Member
Dec 14, 2009
1,910
120
48
Overland Park, KS
Yellow Snow said:
I understand what your are saying, but i seriously doubt our attendance would increase winning a conference like the MWC as opposed to our B12 attendance.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree that the MWC would just kill all interest.

I tend to think that with KU, KSU, and Mizzou still around there may be enough of the old familiar rivalries to keep casual fans interested. Add in some some teams like Louisville and TCU and you get some sense of legitimacy and regional flavor. I'm not saying it would be comparable to the BigTen, but I think it's decent.

Maybe I'm just trying to see some upside in this situation. I'm open to being wrong on it, but I have to find some hope in this somewhere.
 
Rogue52

Rogue52

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Oct 20, 2006
8,969
3,606
113
Cedar Rapids, IA
So, we've gone from one massive thread to one massive thread with a lot of little threads.

I have a recommendation to the mods. Let's change the title of this thread to "Official Realignment Discussion" and just merge them all together.
 
HoopsTournament

HoopsTournament

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 12, 2006
7,844
4,983
113
53
St. Joseph, MO
www.hoopstournament.net
Yellow Snow said:
I understand what your are saying, but i seriously doubt our attendance would increase winning a conference like the MWC as opposed to our B12 attendance.
Click to expand...

BIG East/Big 12 Hybrid would not be like MWC. TV contract would be better due to better markets and it would be an AQ league. And winning the league would give us a BCS bowl, so I think it would help attendance.
 
Judoka

Judoka

Well-Known Member
Jun 16, 2010
17,542
2,645
113
Timbuktu
HoopsTournament said:
BIG East/Big 12 Hybrid would not be like MWC. TV contract would be better due to better markets and it would be an AQ league. And winning the league would give us a BCS bowl, so I think it would help attendance.
Click to expand...

It would be bigger than the MWC, but still a big step down from where we are now. Basically where the Big East is at currently. Well, where they were 3 days ago.
 
Last edited:
Cyclophile1

Cyclophile1

Well-Known Member
Dec 14, 2009
1,910
120
48
Overland Park, KS
HoopsTournament said:
BIG East/Big 12 Hybrid would not be like MWC. TV contract would be better due to better markets and it would be an AQ league. And winning the league would give us a BCS bowl, so I think it would help attendance.
Click to expand...

I'm trying to be optimistic about it. I think it would be a step up from the MWC but clearly a step down from the four Supers. If we wind up going to four Supers, I would expect the power brokers to push very hard for letting the BCS model wither on the vine by the time things expire in 2014 or 2015. Eventually, they would move to a four conference champions and four wild cards model that basically sets up the #1 and #2 from each of the Supers.

If the BigXII/BigEast hybrid survives, it's winner would need to be undefeated to make it in as wild card. I think the Supers will make it so that the VAST majority of the money and prestige of the Final8 championship stays in the four Super conferences. It will all be strength of schedule and computer model arguments just like those that have held TCU, Boise, Utah and BYU down for many years. I don't want to be naive and just hang our hats on the AQ status that the hybrid would enjoy for 3-4 years. I'm not convinced that the Supers would let that go on - I think they would try to keep that money for themselves.
 
C

cyatheart

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Nov 18, 2008
9,443
6,950
113
49
Al_4_State said:
Newsflash: the monetary gap between us and Iowa has never been close, yet we compete with them on a regular basis, and Okie State had nothing before T. Boone.

If we're on a level playing field with our conference, and that conference has BCS access, we're going to be competitive.

We pack the house for some of the worst teams on our schedule most years. Our worst attendance is often for Big 12 games. I don't think the casual ISU fan cares that we're playing Cinci, SMU, etc, so long as we're winning.
Click to expand...

I just disagree, and I am talking long term. For example if Iowa is making 20 or 30M more a year just on football, we have a problem. It hasn't been till recently the B10 network put them well ahead of us. 10 or 15 years of that and we are going to be very far behind. 10 years of Cincinnati rolling into town, versus Nebraska, Michigan, etc in Iowa City. It isn't good. The gap will get wider, it hasn't been all that wide until recently with teams that I consider our peers.
 
TRZA

TRZA

Active Member
Mar 4, 2009
1,246
24
38
West Side of Des Moines
Is it better to have a 12-team conference with equal bowl access and tv money with 3 other major conferences having 14 or 16 teams. I think that is what the Big 10 wants here.
 
HoopsTournament

HoopsTournament

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 12, 2006
7,844
4,983
113
53
St. Joseph, MO
www.hoopstournament.net
Cyclophile1 said:
I'm trying to be optimistic about it. I think it would be a step up from the MWC but clearly a step down from the four Supers. If we wind up going to four Supers, I would expect the power brokers to push very hard for letting the BCS model wither on the vine by the time things expire in 2014 or 2015. Eventually, they would move to a four conference champions and four wild cards model that basically sets up the #1 and #2 from each of the Supers.

If the BigXII/BigEast hybrid survives, it's winner would need to be undefeated to make it in as wild card. I think the Supers will make it so that the VAST majority of the money and prestige of the Final8 championship stays in the four Super conferences. It will all be strength of schedule and computer model arguments just like those that have held TCU, Boise, Utah and BYU down for many years. I don't want to be naive and just hang our hats on the AQ status that the hybrid would enjoy for 3-4 years. I'm not convinced that the Supers would let that go on - I think they would try to keep that money for themselves.
Click to expand...

Right now each conference plus ND have 1 vote each in All Matters to do with BCS. That would be 11 votes if Big East and Big 12 merge. If ND joins a conference, that would be 10. To move to anything else that still includes everyone, it would require a majority vote. If the superconferences break away and exclude others, it will invite the government to intervene.

The media would like to make you think these things are going to happen, but they are not based in reality. They are based in the fantasy world of those who dream about them.

What is naive is just listening to media talking heads and not taking a step back to understand how the system actually works.
 
Last edited:
C

cyatheart

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Nov 18, 2008
9,443
6,950
113
49
Sorry for being bitchy but I am just at the point where I think we have the fanbase, the coaches, the AD, the president to compete with these south teams and hand it to them once in awhile. We have Texas coming to town and I think we have everything in place to give our guys a chance to beat their ***** and really take a huge step and instead we got David Boren running around like a lunatic. I was there against Iowa last week, and for the first time since the early 80's I felt like we had turned the corner in the fan support area. I was at Texas last year, and I was there when they lost to Drake in the 80's. I have sat my *** in that stadium and witnessed too many *** kicking and I have poured too much into this thing, along with countless others, to see SMU and Cincinnati roll into town instead of Texas, Nebraska and Oklahoma. We finally after all these years have it moving the right direction. It just infuriates me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: helechopper
S

swarthmoreCY

Well-Known Member
Aug 9, 2008
16,374
736
83
Here nor there
cyatheart said:
I just disagree, and I am talking long term. For example if Iowa is making 20 or 30M more a year just on football, we have a problem. It hasn't been till recently the B10 network put them well ahead of us. 10 or 15 years of that and we are going to be very far behind. 10 years of Cincinnati rolling into town, versus Nebraska, Michigan, etc in Iowa City. It isn't good. The gap will get wider, it hasn't been all that wide until recently with teams that I consider our peers.
Click to expand...

IRRC, percentage wise, the gap has been fairly constant (and relatively wide) for almost 30 years.

Long-term? 10 years ago was UConn even in FBS? Now they may be headed to the ACC while ISU is?....things change. Consistently winning (and competing for a BCS bowl) in the likes of a conference that Al has proposed may be just as good long-term than the route ISU has been trying for the past 15 years.
 
ajk4st8

ajk4st8

Well-Known Member
Mar 27, 2006
16,483
737
113
42
Ankeny
Al_4_State said:
Right. A reformed Big Tweast is a million times better than the MWC. Not sure what people don't get about that. It's not as good the Big 12, but it's not a death knell. Somewhere in between.
Click to expand...


Well said. Slightly less desirable financially. Drastically improved from a competition standpoint (we dont get our yearly beatdown by OU, Texas, OSU).

Im all for this. Im excited to start seeing some new teams.

It is depressing thinking that if we keep the current Big 12, we have the same schedule every year from now on. 9 conf games, Iowa. We would only change two games a year forever. That sounds sooooo boring.

Im getting excited for change, knowing fully well it might not be as great financially....
 
Cydkar

Cydkar

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2006
26,922
12,722
113
Other than stability I would hate to be a midwest team going to the Pac-whatever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom