Expansion candidates that made the cut in 2016

[JUKEBOX]

I do think those are sensible options but I am open to others. I also am skeptical that any option at all would prevent a decline of the Big 12 Conference, which is kind of my point all along. Some people are discussing what we think are the best options on the table, while others are just kind of yelling about how all the options are worse than they would prefer. Frankly, no s**t.

B1G would be better -- not sure when the Pac-12 media rights expire, but even if the big dogs leave there, a re-constituted Big 8 - Pac-12 leftover merger could salvage a decent league. Staying at 8 wouldn't be the worst if it was in some way profitable.

If we need more inventory, there are a few last-resort options from that list of teams like SMU that could expand their stadium and be a decent fit in the Big 12 due to their SWC legacy and cultural/academic fit within the league.

Most of those last-resort schools are irrelevant, a bad fit, and imo would severely reduce the value of our product. Even the years when Cincinnati had like Tony Pike, nobody gave a crap about them -- we share no history -- they make no sense in our league.

At the very least, it seems like we should wait to see what happens with the Pac 12 if the media contract expiration comes up soon.

 

[CloneJD]

B1G would be better -- not sure when the Pac-12 media rights expire, but even if the big dogs leave there, a re-constituted Big 8 - Pac-12 leftover merger could salvage a decent league. Staying at 8 wouldn't be the worst if it was in some way profitable.

If we need more inventory, there are a few last-resort options from that list of teams like SMU that could expand their stadium and be a decent fit in the Big 12 due to their SWC legacy and cultural/academic fit within the league.

Most of those last-resort schools are irrelevant, a bad fit, and imo would severely reduce the value of our product. Even the years when Cincinnati had like Tony Pike, nobody gave a crap about them -- we share no history -- they make no sense in our league.

The idea that cinci makes ‘no sense’ and SMU does is a bit far fetched. SMU isn’t a serious contender for the spot from everything i’ve read.

 

[WhoISthis]

It’s not just about the conference we’re in. Why is that difficult to understand?

No one gives a **** about boise and Cincinnati because the belief is that they are successful because they play who they play.

This is also the first year that we are seeing the uptick in recruiting.

It actually is. What’s so tough for you to admit it’s all about wins? Why didn’t you answer the Missouri or ISU question?

No one gives a **** about losing in a power conference because you have a tough schedule and a smaller budget. If they did, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. If they did, nearly every SEC program would have been ranked higher than Cincy last year.

They care about wins. UCF has gone from nothing to mattering has much as bottom P5 brands because of WINNING.

Would winning in a P2 be better? Yes. But we can move forward by winning in what would be a much improved AAC. Potentially faster in reality. If Cincy can be more valuable now than as a member of a P6, Iowa St can have success and grow in an even more regarded conference.

 

[Land Grant]

What you say is all true. Doesn't mean we have to like it, or act like its okay. I'd be decidedly less interested in ISU football if they play a slate of Boise's, Cincinnati's, et. al. This has already happened for me with wrestling, where realignment has handed us such powerhouses as South Dakota and Wyoming. Its not just that I care less about those meets, I care less overall.

But if there is no B1G/PAC/ACC invite coming … what else is Iowa State supposed to do?

This is out of the fans’ hands. We can’t control realignment, we have next to zero impact on how things shake out, no matter how many season tickets we buy or how much we boycott ESPN or how many times we email JP. We can hope for the best, and continue to support ISU to make them look as attractive as possible - but we must be prepared for the fact that there may not be a P4 lifeline coming.

And the program will continue, for Pete’s sake, if that invite doesn’t come. We aren’t closing down the athletic department or dropping to D-3. Will it be different? Sure. Will we need to readjust our expectations for budgets and hiring coaches? Absolutely. But as mentioned above, programs like Cincinnati/UCF/Houston and others continue to be relevant and competitive, in that G5 way of thinking. It’s not the “death knell” of Cyclone football … geez, if things had gone differently in 2010 we might very well be in the MWC right now, no way that’s happening at this point!

Okay. Personally, I think ISU fits great in the B1G and could bring a lot in expanding that conference to 16. I think the PAC 12 is teetering on collapse if they don’t do something, with expansion (taking in nationally relevant teams in the Central time zone) being a very viable step to improve their situation. But it doesn’t matter what I think. I’m not the one portioning out blue blood football programs in an effort to concentrate obscene amounts of money at the top while starving everyone who’s out of the “Self Important 41.”

Of course not staying in a Power conference would be a devastating blow to the athletic department. But it wouldn’t kill it. It’s not “B1G or D-3.” That’s not the dichotomy we’re faced with here. A reconstituted Big XII, adding BYU or Cincinnati or someone like that, would be by far the best of the non-Power conferences, and if that’s the best option we have (outside a P4 invite), well, that’s not nothing.

 

[deadeyededric]

What you say is all true. Doesn't mean we have to like it, or act like its okay. I'd be decidedly less interested in ISU football if they play a slate of Boise's, Cincinnati's, et. al. This has already happened for me with wrestling, where realignment has handed us such powerhouses as South Dakota and Wyoming. Its not just that I care less about those meets, I care less overall.

I'm looking at this like the final season. I couldn't give a **** less about being in the new Big 12. It'll give me more time to do outdoor activities on Saturdays in the future.

 

[JUKEBOX]

The idea that cinci makes ‘no sense’ and SMU does is a bit far fetched. SMU isn’t a serious contender for the spot from everything i’ve read.

I've seen a lot of people "repeat" Cincinnati as being an option, but I have no idea where it's coming from. Maybe some WVU realignment speculator or something about TV markets (with streaming now, I don't know how relevant that is anymore)..

In any case like what was said above about the wrestling, if we make some kind of rash decision here, I will have a lot more free time on Saturdays.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

I've seen a lot of people "repeat" Cincinnati as being an option, but I have no idea where it's coming from. Maybe some WVU realignment speculator or something about TV markets (with streaming now, I don't know how relevant that is anymore)..

In any case like what was said above about the wrestling, if we make some kind of rash decision here, I will have a lot more free time on Saturdays.

If your criteria is "they used to be in the SWC so they have some history here" and "cultural fit" then I think the decisionmakers in the league are probably going to be making decisions you will disagree with because they will use different criteria.

"Nobody gave a crap about Cincinnati eleven years ago" is also not really a good argument against them IMO.

I would love to see a detailed apples to apples TV breakdown of Cincy vs. other options.

 

[ISU_Guy]

I will keep saying these options in order:
1. Hoping to get B1G invite
2. If no B1G then hoping for revamped Pac12
3. Add BYU and Cincy to B12 and weather the storm for now.

Not sure what's going to attempt to ruin ISU football faster. ESPN or NIL.

 

[AppleCornCy]

It’s not just about the conference we’re in. Why is that difficult to understand?

No one gives a **** about boise and Cincinnati because the belief is that they are successful because they play who they play.

This is also the first year that we are seeing the uptick in recruiting.

I will say that while that’s the perception about Cincinnati and I agree with it to a degree, Vegas power ratings last year consistently ranked them very high. If I remember correctly, they would have been a slight favorite against us on a neutral field. I think we were/are a better team, but that’s how the oddsmakers would have set it.

I think adding them would be similar to when the Big East got raided by the ACC the first time and added Louisville. The Big East during its “Big Least” period is a probably a good comparison to what the the Big 12 would be going forward if it stays together and expands. That conference kept its automatic qualifier spot in the BCS in spite of not having a marquee national brand. I know 2007 was a weird year, but West Virginia was an upset loss at Pitt from playing for the national championship. The conference only lost AQ status when it got raided again to the point where all the original members were gone.

 

[Cyclones1969]

It actually is. What’s so tough for you to admit it’s all about wins? Why didn’t you answer the Missouri or ISU question?

No one gives a **** about losing in a power conference because you have a tough schedule and a smaller budget. If they did, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. If they did, nearly every SEC program would have been ranked higher than Cincy last year.

They care about wins. UCF has gone from nothing to mattering has much as bottom P5 brands because of WINNING.

Would winning in a P2 be better? Yes. But we can move forward by winning in what would be a much improved AAC. Potentially faster in reality. If Cincy can be more valuable now than as a member of a P6, Iowa St can have success and grow in an even more regarded conference.

Do you think Missouri would trade places with Iowa State?

 

[KidSilverhair]

What you say is all true. Doesn't mean we have to like it, or act like its okay. I'd be decidedly less interested in ISU football if they play a slate of Boise's, Cincinnati's, et. al. This has already happened for me with wrestling, where realignment has handed us such powerhouses as South Dakota and Wyoming. Its not just that I care less about those meets, I care less overall.

Oh, hell no, I'm not saying it's okay. Like I said, my personal opinion is that ISU fits great in the B1G, and could be a good addition to the PAC 12. I'm just responding to the people who seem to think if neither one of those happens we shouldn't even consider growing the Big XII because athletics will be "over."

 

[Land Grant]

I've seen a lot of people "repeat" Cincinnati as being an option, but I have no idea where it's coming from. Maybe some WVU realignment speculator or something about TV markets (with streaming now, I don't know how relevant that is anymore)..

In any case like what was said above about the wrestling, if we make some kind of rash decision here, I will have a lot more free time on Saturdays.

Exactly right about free time on Saturdays, it's not like I'm gonna turn to SEC football. There'll be others like me tuning out. This is where the SEC gambit will hurt college ball.

 

[Cloneon]

I'm looking at this like the final season. I couldn't give a **** less about being in the new Big 12. It'll give me more time to do outdoor activities on Saturdays in the future.

Boy, I'll bet you're a riot on holidays.

 

[KidSilverhair]

I know 2007 was a weird year, but West Virginia was an upset loss at Pitt from playing for the national championship.

(Completely off topic, but in an NCAA 07 dynasty I was running a couple of years back, WVU won the national championship in 2007. Then again in 2012, 2015, and 2018 - they won 82 straight games before losing in the 2020 Orange Bowl.

Anyway, your comment reminded me of that. Back to our regularly scheduled thread)

 

[WhoISthis]

I'm looking at this like the final season. I couldn't give a **** less about being in the new Big 12. It'll give me more time to do outdoor activities on Saturdays in the future.

Playing an average UT team meant that much to you?

It wouldn’t change much to me. We’d face the same schedule outside of 2 games, and the SOS would be too different given UTs been mediocre. Not different than playing in the Big 12 North 2004-10. Or the Big 10 West.

Revenue wise this is huge. On the field, it’s not. There are only 12 games, all but two are the same.

If you were following ISU based so much on beating OuT to win the conference, how did you last this long?

 

[Cyclones1969]

What you say is all true. Doesn't mean we have to like it, or act like its okay. I'd be decidedly less interested in ISU football if they play a slate of Boise's, Cincinnati's, et. al. This has already happened for me with wrestling, where realignment has handed us such powerhouses as South Dakota and Wyoming. Its not just that I care less about those meets, I care less overall.

Iowa State is very much a small die hard fanbase, that is historically very very cheap.

To think that the meager donating class will approach similar levels to what they have done up to this point, is extremely optimistic. In fact, I would say it’s probably more truthful to say many will align with your thought process.

 

[JUKEBOX]

Exactly right about free time on Saturdays, it's not like I'm gonna turn to SEC football. There'll be others like me tuning out. This is where the SEC gambit will hurt college ball.

exactly -- these "decision makers" are making short term decisions and killing the golden goose in terms of college athletics imo

good for some teams -- bad for the sport overall -- I think ISU/Big 12 will have some options to weather the storm and I hope we can get something serviceable and don't nuke our league

 

[WhoISthis]

Do you think Missouri would trade places with Iowa State?

I definitely think they’d trade the last 4 seasons. No one cares about the “but we had more revenue, a similar SOS, and played more SEC teams” banner. Did they finish ranked ahead of ISU last year?

 

[Land Grant]

Playing an average UT team meant that much to you?

It wouldn’t change much to me. We’d face the same schedule outside of 2 games, and the SOS would be too different given UTs been mediocre. Not different than playing in the Big 12 North 2004-10. Or the Big 10 West.

Revenue wise this is huge. On the field, it’s not. There are only 12 games, all but two are the same.

If you were following ISU based so much on beating OuT to win the conference, how did you last this long?

Your response is a bit of a red herring. The loss is in no longer being part of a major conference. And the proposed "rejiggered" B12 would not be one. The B12 would be an afterthought to most top level conversations. Boring.

 

[heitclone]

If having basically the same exact schedule except for two different teams every year makes you lose interest in ISU football then you are probably casual fan, not sure why you care about any of this. We'd essentially be playing the big 12 north rotation without UT/OU/Tech from the old days. That was still fun right?