Expansion

[colbycheese]

The Big 12 should not even remotely consider academic prestige when expanding. There's zero reason to.

I would love to see Tulane have success in football and basketball and grow its fanbase. It would then become a possible expansion candidate (and we could do a lot worse than New Orleans as a conference).

Unless, of course, you're one of the ten university presidents who 1) are the only ones who have a vote, 2) are first and foremost academics serving in an academic capacity, and 3) actually care about the quality of universities with which your university is associated. As an ISU alum, and as a professor at another Big 12 school, I certainly care about the academic stature of the universities in the Big 12... especially after losing four different AAU schools and replacing them with WVU and TCU. I don't see how that line of thought can change so drastically once one becomes a university president, since most of presidents were teaching and researching as university profs in the not-so-distant past.

 

[CyFan61]

Unless, of course, you're one of the ten university presidents who 1) are the only ones who have a vote, 2) are first and foremost academics serving in an academic capacity, and 3) actually care about the quality of universities with which your university is associated. As an ISU alum, and as a professor at another Big 12 school, I certainly care about the academic stature of the universities in the Big 12... especially after losing four different AAU schools and replacing them with WVU and TCU. I don't see how that line of thought can change so drastically once one becomes a university president, since most of presidents were teaching and researching as university profs in the not-so-distant past.

Athletic conferences (generally) have nothing to do with academics. The Big 12 isn't the B1G with the CIC.

Do not misunderstand my comment for caring about athletics more than academics; of course, Iowa State should focus on improving its own academic profile as much as it can while improving the athletic profile of the Big 12, just like every other school.

It may even be worse for Iowa State for the Big 12 to add a couple of stronger academic schools. It likely won't raise the perception of the Big 12 on a national level academically at all and the Big 12 would still continue languishing in the lowest tier of major athletic conferences from an academic viewpoint (with the SEC), but it will take away a bit of the luster that ISU might enjoy as a school that currently has a legitimate argument as the second-best school in its conference.

 

[colbycheese]

Athletic conferences (generally) have nothing to do with academics. The Big 12 isn't the B1G with the CIC.

Do not misunderstand my comment for caring about athletics more than academics; of course, Iowa State should focus on improving its own academic profile as much as it can while improving the athletic profile of the Big 12, just like every other school.

The Big 12 was solidly in the middle of the power-5 conferences prior to realignment. Now it's the worst of the bunch because (surprise!) the schools that were taken were a good catch both academically and athletically. I've never spoken about realignment with an administrator where the topic of academic prestige did not come up. When professors are making the realignment decisions, academics will always be important (and university presidents/chancellors are professors btw).

 

[CyFan61]

The Big 12 was solidly in the middle of the power-5 conferences prior to realignment. Now it's the worst of the bunch because (surprise!) the schools that were taken were a good catch both academically and athletically. I've never spoken about realignment with an administrator where the topic of academic prestige did not come up. When professors are making the realignment decisions, academics will always be important (and university presidents/chancellors are professors btw).

You are telling me why academics will matter in expansion. I'm saying they shouldn't. Different topics.

 

[cyclones500]

I never claim to know a ton about who'd be lucrative/realistic expansion candidates. Obviously $ and football run the show, but not much as far as overall specifics

We can't put the genie back and wish for days of geographically-sensible conferences. Outside of seemingly unrealistic league-robbing (such as Clemson/GT/FSU and Arkansas/LSU), Big 12 isn't left with a bunch of options. If we're going east, UConn and Cincinnati seem like fine ideas if WVa is in for the long-haul. I don't mind the idea of Tulane.

Even if as people say going west is not going to happen I've trumpeted New Mexico for several years, I rarely see much support for that idea on CF. It just seems like untapped territory for a school that might want to jump up to a P5. It doesn't add "football success value," at least presently, but how much does that matter?

Nothing against West Virginia -- they had to land somewhere in wake of Big East tattering — but it seems to limit the possibilities a little. Like, now Big 12 must go East, unless we go straight to 16 and get true East-West mega-size.

 

[NEIACyclone]

If the big 12 were to dissolve any chance big 10 would be a landing spot for us? Never have given that option much thought but I do like the geographical fit and would lend itself to potential new rivalries; Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, and rekindle old ones with Nebraska

 

[Havs]

If the big 12 were to dissolve any chance big 10 would be a landing spot for us? Never have given that option much thought but I do like the geographical fit and would lend itself to potential new rivalries; Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, and rekindle old ones with Nebraska

The Big Ten is the only logical landing spot in the current "Power 4" setup and I think its quite the longshot.

 

[cykadelic2]

Unless, of course, you're one of the ten university presidents who 1) are the only ones who have a vote, 2) are first and foremost academics serving in an academic capacity, and 3) actually care about the quality of universities with which your university is associated. As an ISU alum, and as a professor at another Big 12 school, I certainly care about the academic stature of the universities in the Big 12... especially after losing four different AAU schools and replacing them with WVU and TCU. I don't see how that line of thought can change so drastically once one becomes a university president, since most of presidents were teaching and researching as university profs in the not-so-distant past.

Agree, there is a reason why Louisville is the only commuter school in a P5 conference and the last addition to the P5 group.

 

[isuno1fan]

Just say no to mindless expansion. We have a great thing at ten. It should remain that way until we are proven to be at a disadvantage to the other P5 conferences. That has yet to be proven btw.

 

[PerkyForHerky]

If the big 12 were to dissolve any chance big 10 would be a landing spot for us? Never have given that option much thought but I do like the geographical fit and would lend itself to potential new rivalries; Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, and rekindle old ones with Nebraska

I don't think so simply from a geographical and $$$ standpoint. There isn't $$$ to be gained by adding ISU as the B1G already has a team in the state.

It won't be popular on here, but the conference that makes the most sense to disband from a geographical standpoint is the B12. The ACC could pick up some of the eastern schools and the Pac, B1G and SEC could absorb what used to be the B12 and make a little sense out of it based on geography. But it would make the most sense if the ACC had Rutgers and MD.

Freakin B1G, gotta ruin everything.

 

[HoopsTournament]

I don't think so simply from a geographical and $$$ standpoint. There isn't $$$ to be gained by adding ISU as the B1G already has a team in the state.

It won't be popular on here, but the conference that makes the most sense to disband from a geographical standpoint is the B12. The ACC could pick up some of the eastern schools and the Pac, B1G and SEC could absorb what used to be the B12 and make a little sense out of it based on geography. But it would make the most sense if the ACC had Rutgers and MD.

Freakin B1G, gotta ruin everything.

Under the current TV model, there isn't. But if Fox can't bundle BTN with other channels in the future and eyeballs become more important than subscribers, ISU suddenly becomes attractive. The TV landscape is going to change dramatically in the next 10 years. So using today's assumptions on what TV markets look like to draw conclusions makes no sense.

Big 12 will be around for at least the next 10 years, so any "disband" will not happen at all until then. And it will take 8 schools within the conference to leave to dissolve the conference. That means 8 schools would need to have a better landing spot. (This is a point that many continue to fail to understand when they talk about dissolving the Big 12.)

 

[PerkyForHerky]

Under the current TV model, there isn't. But if Fox can't bundle BTN with other channels in the future and eyeballs become more important than subscribers, ISU suddenly becomes attractive.

If other schools and conferences were to adopt the same model that ISU is under, ISU would suddenly become attractive?

You just said that you can't look at the current TV market landscape. Then you wanted to use the current TV market landscape. Unless you think other conferences and schools won't adapt to something if it worked better than their current model?

 

[HoopsTournament]

If other schools and conferences were to adopt the same model that ISU is under, ISU would suddenly become attractive?

You just said that you can't look at the current TV market landscape. Then you wanted to use the current TV market landscape. Unless you think other conferences and schools won't adapt to something if it worked better than their current model?

Wow, you completely misunderstood what I said. I am saying that if you have to rely on people actually buying BTN instead of bundling, then adding ISU to the Big 10 can increase your subscriber base. That is a completely different model that ISU is under and a completely different model that BTN is under now. And I said IF. I know that conferences and schools will adapt, but my point is that there are models that ISU can be attractive because ISU actually has a larger fanbase than a lot of other schools that would be available (and they are AAU).

Definitions:

eyeballs = number of people actually watching the channel
subscribers = number of people who have the BTN whether they are watching it or not

eyeballs < subscribers because of bundling

IF ISU were added to Big 10:

ISU doesn't not add subscribers because of Iowa (under current model)
ISU does add eyeballs

 

[ameslurker]

If the big 12 were to dissolve any chance big 10 would be a landing spot for us? Never have given that option much thought but I do like the geographical fit and would lend itself to potential new rivalries; Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, and rekindle old ones with Nebraska

I keep hearing this is a possibility. I wanna even say it's the Sports Fanatics who are mentioning it, or referencing someone who is.

 

[PerkyForHerky]

Wow, you completely misunderstood what I said. I am saying that if you have to rely on people actually buying BTN instead of bundling, then adding ISU to the Big 10 can increase your subscriber base. That is a completely different model that ISU is under and a completely different model that BTN is under now. And I said IF. I know that conferences and schools will adapt, but my point is that there are models that ISU can be attractive because ISU actually has a larger fanbase than a lot of other schools that would be available (and they are AAU).

Definitions:

eyeballs = number of people actually watching the channel
subscribers = number of people who have the BTN whether they are watching it or not

eyeballs < subscribers because of bundling

IF ISU were added to Big 10:

ISU doesn't not add subscribers because of Iowa (under current model)
ISU does add eyeballs

How many eyeballs would ISU add? Can you honestly say it'd be more than bringing in a team from a different state? There are a lot more people that watch both teams than you think, I'm guessing. The majority of both fanbases do not belong to a group that calls themselves "fanatics".

 

[D UP Clones]

Lol. You hawk fans get so excited talking about this stuff. It's too bad for you that boat sailed.

That last paragraph is per gold. I laugh at the current big ten and how it works and looks. Bad football, on average, with no games against the few quality teams.

I would hate it. Yes money rules if assuming public sentiment doesn't change. I have a feeling some of the teams in these huge conferences won't be so happy. I'll let you in on something, there are some already disliking the new big ten schedule and the effects of huge conferences.

I know that won't sit well with you but that's reality.

I don't think so simply from a geographical and $$$ standpoint. There isn't $$$ to be gained by adding ISU as the B1G already has a team in the state.

It won't be popular on here, but the conference that makes the most sense to disband from a geographical standpoint is the B12. The ACC could pick up some of the eastern schools and the Pac, B1G and SEC could absorb what used to be the B12 and make a little sense out of it based on geography. But it would make the most sense if the ACC had Rutgers and MD.

Freakin B1G, gotta ruin everything.

 

[PerkyForHerky]

LOL. You, again?

My comment was in regards to, if there were a conference that would no longer be considered a power conference. I didn't say we will go to 4 conferences and I don't know if we will.

Now, go crawl back under your rock. Tell Bode I said hi :spinny:

 

[Havs]

A lot of people are suggesting that the OU president (and the league) doesn't want anything right at this moment, and that in the next couple of years, the landscape could be completely different and there are two obvious candidates, instead of candidates who seem like a stretch today. Two trains of thought with that include: 1) disgruntled members of 14-team conferences; 2) programs who are growing now, who may reach a prominent plateau within the next few years.

 

[KnappShack]

A lot of people are suggesting that the OU president (and the league) doesn't want anything right at this moment, and that in the next couple of years, the landscape could be completely different and there are two obvious candidates, instead of candidates who seem like a stretch today. Two trains of thought with that include: 1) disgruntled members of 14-team conferences; 2) programs who are growing now, who may reach a prominent plateau within the next few years.

...and North Dakota St is back on the clock

 

[Havs]

...and North Dakota St is back on the clock

My dream would be for LSU and Arkansas or Nebraska and Minnesota. .01% chance of happening, but who knows. Current scheduling isn't popular amongst coaches in the SEC. Nebraska and Minnesota would just be cool so ISU woudn't have to be on an island again.