More Pac-12 Turmoil
- Thread starter Gorm
- Start date
Yeah all these talks about expansion are dead wrong. We will see more conferences doing away with Divisions in the future and possibly even CCGs in favor of an expanded playoff. That in turn may cause contract retraction if anything. The 14 team model is really unwieldy especially when attempting to play a round robin schedule. Division play and CCGs give us more of a diluted Champion and more likely the best team in the league gets knocked off somewhere.
I think a more general re-org will take place when this does come to fruition. 8 regional football conferences of 8-11 teams with 1 team making the playoff from each. Especially with declining attendance each year, ADs want to put butts in seats and more regional rivals will help with this.
Conferences will still exist the way they are for Basketball and Olympic sports ( Think Iowa High School mode with District play in FB and Conferences for the rest )
I think a more general re-org will take place when this does come to fruition. 8 regional football conferences of 8-11 teams with 1 team making the playoff from each. Especially with declining attendance each year, ADs want to put butts in seats and more regional rivals will help with this.
Conferences will still exist the way they are for Basketball and Olympic sports ( Think Iowa High School mode with District play in FB and Conferences for the rest )
Regarding adding Arizona and ASU, what is the motivation behind adding them to the Big 12?
Enrollment-wise, Arizona and ASU are large schools. And Arizona is an AAU school, which would add some academic prestige to the conference. However, according to the college fan base estimate that was published several years ago (and granted, this report is getting dated), Arizona and ASU don't have large sports followings...406,000 and 606,000 respectively. For reference, tOSU has 3,167,000, UT has 2,250,000, OU has 1,201,000, and ISU has 535,000.
And this is part of the Pac-12 problem. Despite having the state with the largest population in their geographic footprint, and several large-enrollment schools outside of California, nobody watches their sports network. College sports doesn't seem to carry the priority in the Pac-12 culture that it does in other conferences.
Arizona and ASU aren't going to bring alot of eyeballs to sweeten the Big-12 TV deal. They are going to add another timezone to the conference. They seem to be average or worse in football the past few seasons, and as such don't draw much national attention. Adding two schools would destroy the true round robin arrangement for most sports in the Big 12.
So apart from the inevitable posts of cute coed pictures, what will those two schools add to the Big 12? Is there some faux sense of stability that comes from having 12 teams? In the current college sports atmosphere, stability comes from the conference revenue distribution. If new members aren't improving the payout, then IMO, they aren't adding any kind of stability to the conference.
Enrollment-wise, Arizona and ASU are large schools. And Arizona is an AAU school, which would add some academic prestige to the conference. However, according to the college fan base estimate that was published several years ago (and granted, this report is getting dated), Arizona and ASU don't have large sports followings...406,000 and 606,000 respectively. For reference, tOSU has 3,167,000, UT has 2,250,000, OU has 1,201,000, and ISU has 535,000.
And this is part of the Pac-12 problem. Despite having the state with the largest population in their geographic footprint, and several large-enrollment schools outside of California, nobody watches their sports network. College sports doesn't seem to carry the priority in the Pac-12 culture that it does in other conferences.
Arizona and ASU aren't going to bring alot of eyeballs to sweeten the Big-12 TV deal. They are going to add another timezone to the conference. They seem to be average or worse in football the past few seasons, and as such don't draw much national attention. Adding two schools would destroy the true round robin arrangement for most sports in the Big 12.
So apart from the inevitable posts of cute coed pictures, what will those two schools add to the Big 12? Is there some faux sense of stability that comes from having 12 teams? In the current college sports atmosphere, stability comes from the conference revenue distribution. If new members aren't improving the payout, then IMO, they aren't adding any kind of stability to the conference.
Last edited:
Kick out WVU and Baylor? Isn't that what we were doing? Although I don't mind the couch burners so much. We'll be like the B1G used to be with 11 teams.
Assuming those estimates are correct, not now, but in the future, getting both Arizona schools isn’t a home run on first glance. I’d rather have just one. But there are positives:
-If you’re a fan of major change, it would likely end the PAC-12 as we know it. Does that result in other schools joining the Big 12. I’d prefer to destroy the ACC, but Clemson has nearly single handily kept the conference relevant.
-Fans are one thing, but a more important measure is population reached. I’m not a fan of the other Big 12 schools or any of the BIG schools, but due to having lived near ISU and Iowa, they all have my attention. The Big 12 needs to expand it’s footprint past the same general population.
Last edited:
In recent history, has a major conference ever expelled a team? I can't think of one. If you are actually talking about practical expansion, I don't see anybody is getting kicked out of the Big 12, unless something really bad comes down on Baylor from the Feds over Title IX. WVU has a good sports following (fanbase size is 959,000)...they aren't going anywhere unless they want out.
The only one that comes close is when temple was given the boot from the Big East when it was a power conference but that is before money went bonkers. I can’t imagine what would happen if a power conference school just lost $30M or more year over year by getting kicked out. I suppose lawsuits galore.
I think picking the most expensive real estate city in the US of San Francisco for their headquarters, says all I need to know about Scott.
I can’t believe heads didn’t roll over the USC-WSU replay fiasco.
The PAC 12 has more inherent problems than any other conference, but Scott has been a bad commissioner.
The bolded part, and lots of unwanted attention (i.e. bad publicity) for the conference doing the booting...
![average-review-time[1].png](https://image.oregonlive.com/home/olive-media/width600/img/john_canzano_impact/photo/average-review-time[1].png)
This is a surprise to no one who has seen a Big IIXII game.
Adding the AZ schools targets those neutral fans.There are tons of Midwest transplants wintering in AZ. I was there over Thanksgiving and I saw tons of North Dakota State, Nebraska, Iowa and Minnesota flags waving (as well as ISU, of course). I think you would get more casual fans attending AZ/ASU games if they had a known midwest-team to watch. Texas-AZ or OU-ASU would really get neutral fans in the football stadiums, and adding AZ to Big 12 basketball is a no-brainer.
Adding both AZ schools also solidifies the Big 12's foothold in the Phoenix TV market (#12). Like you said, PAC-12 fans aren't really the demographic to watch football - but those Midwest transplants would justify a Big 12 network of some-kind.
This is an almost 2 year old article, but AZ is #19 in producing blue-chip football players, which would be second in states where Big 12 universities are located.
I think the AZ schools are THE option when talking about expansion. If they aren't on board then don't even bother adding anyone else.
Totally agree as long as going to 12 teams makes financial sense. Would it?
I'll hang up and listen...
