Pac-12 to decide whether to expand within a couple weeks

[cyIclSoneU]

Tell me, do you consider the AD at Penn State University (one of the premier Big 10 institutions) to be as credible as the "industry sources" you referred to above? I'm just asking because this Big 10 AD's comments seem to suggest that AAU status would be factored heavily into the Big 10's expansion considerations.

I hope that you're right but I read those comments more as why the Big Ten wants to align with the ACC and Pac-12. Not so much about expansion. The B1G and Pac-12 at least are in a different realm of AAU membership.

AAU membership by conferences post-OU and UT move, with schools in AAU listed in parenthesis:

B1G - 13/14 (all but Nebraska)
Pac-12 - 9/12 (all but WSU, OSU, ASU)
ACC - 5/14 (Pitt, UVA, UNC, Duke, Georgia Tech)
SEC - 5/16 (Florida, Vandy, Mizzou, Texas, A&M)
Big 12 - 2/8 (ISU and KU)

I think this bodes well for ISU and KU on both B1G and Pac-12 expansion fronts. If either league wants to expand, both are very well situated. But I don't necessarily think PSU president comments are worth reading that much in to.

If anything, it shows that the B1G's realistic options for getting bigger than 14 (if AAU status remains crucial) are: poach the Pac-12, add the white whale of Notre Dame, wait for the ACC GOR to end to get Virginia and UNC, or snag ISU and KU right now, maybe with an outside chance at persuading Missouri to jump.

On those options, it sounds like the Alliance is going to keep the B1G from Pac poaching, and Notre Dame (and UVA/UNC) are tied to the ACC contractually for the next fifteen years. No clue if there is mutual interest for B1G and Mizzou, let alone interest on either side.

So if the B1G wants to expand, which is a huge if, then ISU and KU can make a strong argument with the reduced TV money shares they would accept up front.

 

[Neptune78]

Holy **** this thread more than doubled since Friday. Did I miss anything? Didnt think so.

It did take one step in the right direction-- Smarty Sparty said he was going to 'bow out.'

 

[Bestaluckcy]

Sparty had a likeability this round to the Dude WV last round.

 

[CyCrazy]

Sparty had a likeability this round to the Dude WV last round.

Well both knew nothing so I guess they have that in common.

 

[aeroclone]

I hope that you're right but I read those comments more as why the Big Ten wants to align with the ACC and Pac-12. Not so much about expansion. The B1G and Pac-12 at least are in a different realm of AAU membership.

AAU membership by conferences post-OU and UT move, with schools in AAU listed in parenthesis:

B1G - 13/14 (all but Nebraska)
Pac-12 - 9/12 (all but WSU, OSU, ASU)
ACC - 5/14 (Pitt, UVA, UNC, Duke, Georgia Tech)
SEC - 5/16 (Florida, Vandy, Mizzou, Texas, A&M)
Big 12 - 2/8 (ISU and KU)

I think this bodes well for ISU and KU on both B1G and Pac-12 expansion fronts. If either league wants to expand, both are very well situated. But I don't necessarily think PSU president comments are worth reading that much in to.

If anything, it shows that the B1G's realistic options for getting bigger than 14 (if AAU status remains crucial) are: poach the Pac-12, add the white whale of Notre Dame, wait for the ACC GOR to end to get Virginia and UNC, or snag ISU and KU right now, maybe with an outside chance at persuading Missouri to jump.

On those options, it sounds like the Alliance is going to keep the B1G from Pac poaching, and Notre Dame (and UVA/UNC) are tied to the ACC contractually for the next fifteen years. No clue if there is mutual interest for B1G and Mizzou, let alone interest on either side.

So if the B1G wants to expand, which is a huge if, then ISU and KU can make a strong argument with the reduced TV money shares they would accept up front.

Just so everyone is aware, Notre Dame is a top notch undergrad school, but it is not an AAU school. Not sure if people are just assuming ND is AAU or else they are assuming the B1G would make an exception for ND.

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

Just so everyone is aware, Notre Dame is a top notch undergrad school, but it is not an AAU school. Not sure if people are just assuming ND is AAU or else they are assuming the B1G would make an exception for ND.

Their actions in the past would indicate that they would give ND a pass on the AAU requirement if they were interested in joining the league.

After all this is ND not Nebraska academics we are talking about here.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

Just so everyone is aware, Notre Dame is a top notch undergrad school, but it is not an AAU school. Not sure if people are just assuming ND is AAU or else they are assuming the B1G would make an exception for ND.

I don’t think anyone believes the B1G would reject ND if they are interested in joining. Despite lack of AAU.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

I hope that you're right but I read those comments more as why the Big Ten wants to align with the ACC and Pac-12. Not so much about expansion. The B1G and Pac-12 at least are in a different realm of AAU membership.

AAU membership by conferences post-OU and UT move, with schools in AAU listed in parenthesis:

B1G - 13/14 (all but Nebraska)
Pac-12 - 9/12 (all but WSU, OSU, ASU)
ACC - 5/14 (Pitt, UVA, UNC, Duke, Georgia Tech)
SEC - 5/16 (Florida, Vandy, Mizzou, Texas, A&M)
Big 12 - 2/8 (ISU and KU)

I think this bodes well for ISU and KU on both B1G and Pac-12 expansion fronts. If either league wants to expand, both are very well situated. But I don't necessarily think PSU president comments are worth reading that much in to.

If anything, it shows that the B1G's realistic options for getting bigger than 14 (if AAU status remains crucial) are: poach the Pac-12, add the white whale of Notre Dame, wait for the ACC GOR to end to get Virginia and UNC, or snag ISU and KU right now, maybe with an outside chance at persuading Missouri to jump.

On those options, it sounds like the Alliance is going to keep the B1G from Pac poaching, and Notre Dame (and UVA/UNC) are tied to the ACC contractually for the next fifteen years. No clue if there is mutual interest for B1G and Mizzou, let alone interest on either side.

So if the B1G wants to expand, which is a huge if, then ISU and KU can make a strong argument with the reduced TV money shares they would accept up front.

thinking about this a bit more - If the B1G wants to hurt the SEC, and the SEC wants to end the Big 12, it would not be too crazy to see:

B1G adds Mizzou and Kansas;

SEC gets back to 16 by adding OSU or WVU;

Pac-12 adds Tech, KSU, ISU, and OSU or any other school (TCU? Houston, UNLV, BYU, Boise?);

Big 12 dissolves and everyone gets off pretty much scot free

 

[ISUTex]

He was actually born in Woolstock, IA. Just kidding I know the story.

George Reeves - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

And Norwalk. Played soccer with Aquaman.

 

[ISUTex]

This is a good reason why "TV value" is not some static number that all the players can calculate and know. I think USC is something of a sleeping giant. They have an enormous pool of casual fans. Those casual fans don't follow CFB very closely. If USC is just decent, and playing in Alamo Bowls, they don't tune in. But if USC gets back to Matt Leinart and Reggie Bush era of quality, and is able to compete with Clemson and Alabama, then their TV numbers are going to skyrocket.

Very few schools have that kind of upside. If Iowa or Iowa State or South Carolina or Virginia etc. went 12-0 and made the CFP in consecutive seasons, sure they would be more of a TV draw. But it would not to compare to USC.

Now take the flip side of "value" - the floor rather than the ceiling. How many diehards a school has, that will definitely subscribe to Amazon Prime (or whatever) to watch their team's games, no matter the team's performance. This also varies by school and is difficult to predict. I think Iowa State has an advantage here with its reputation of a fanatical fanbase that goes to games and watches them on TV even when ISU is 2-10. The tail end of the Rhoads era was miserable football and yet ISU TV numbers during that stretch, while not very good, are still in the range of the entire rest of the remaining Big 12. Not every school is like this - KU for example has TV numbers that are 50% or less than the rest of the league. And now that we ARE good, we are near the top of the list (I think the best numbers I saw for the just the last couple of years had us 2nd behind OSU, when OU and UT are excluded).

It's all very complicated and "value" is intrinsically tied to a lot of factors, including how good the team is playing. Who knows what the Iowa program's performance will look like when Ferentz retires? Sure they will have a high floor but it's hard to predict exactly how high because they have been decent to good very consistently for the last two decades.

USC has a very large and loyal fan base. They're a college football blueblood. All it takes is the right coach. They are still the most popular pro football team in LA.

 

[2speedy1]

From what I heard about the alliance this weekend, from people quoting several articles about the subject.

The alliance is supposedly partially about agreeing to not Poach from each other at this time. It is not about them adding or not adding teams, whatever they decide just they agree not to take from each other.

If this is true that means the B1G is agreeing not to try to take teams from the PAC or the ACC at this time and vice versa.
Note the Big 12 was left out of this. This very well could be because they all 3 plan to take from the Big 12 and not from each other...or Not.

It was also noted the alliance was about the Playoff and that the Big 12 and SEC were the ones that drafted the plan to go to 12 and that the Big 12 already had their say and since Bowlsby was working with Sankey and the SEC he not only already got his say about the playoff, they dont necessarily trust him on the subject as it pertains to the SEC. And they plan to put the brakes on that plan at this time.

This is what I took from the information I got from some discussion on the major articles that came out this weekend on the subject.

 

[aeroclone]

I don’t think anyone believes the B1G would reject ND if they are interested in joining. Despite lack of AAU.

Perhaps. But there were rumors when this all broke that UT and OU approached the B1G and were rejected due to OU not having AAU status.

I personally don't buy it and think any one of these conferences will chase the money regardless of academics. I also think ISU fans are putting too much stock in the importance of AAU status in all this just because it makes our own situation seem more hopeful.

 

[IceCyIce]

Perhaps. But there were rumors when this all broke that UT and OU approached the B1G and were rejected due to OU not having AAU status.

I personally don't buy it and think any one of these conferences will chase the money regardless of academics. I also think ISU fans are putting too much stock in the importance of AAU status in all this just because it makes our own situation seem more hopeful.

Without AAU there would be 0% chance for the BIG and extreemly low for the PAC. Without AAU ISU would be screwed.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

Perhaps. But there were rumors when this all broke that UT and OU approached the B1G and were rejected due to OU not having AAU status.

I personally don't buy it and think any one of these conferences will chase the money regardless of academics. I also think ISU fans are putting too much stock in the importance of AAU status in all this just because it makes our own situation seem more hopeful.

I also think it’s not an “AAU means B1G has to take us” thing, but more of a situation where if the B1G is in a non-poaching alliance and wants to expand, they have 3 realistic options, 1 of which is currently in the SEC.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

Without AAU there would be 0% chance for the BIG and extreemly low for the PAC. Without AAU ISU would be screwed.

AAU is not going to be the reason ISU gets in the Pac if we do. If we go to the Pac it seems likely Tech and OSU would also do so and neither are AAU.

 

[IceCyIce]

AAU is not going to be the reason ISU gets in the Pac if we do. If we go to the Pac it seems likely Tech and OSU would also do so and neither are AAU.

My point is it's better to have than not.

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

I also think it’s not an “AAU means B1G has to take us” thing, but more of a situation where if the B1G is in a non-poaching alliance and wants to expand, they have 3 realistic options, 1 of which is currently in the SEC.

Why would Mizzou leave the SEC for the Big 10? They have been in the conference since 2011, they are about to have more money that they ever dreamed start to roll in, and as much as people think the academics in the SEC are not that bad.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

Why would Mizzou leave the SEC for the Big 10? They have been in the conference since 2011, they are about to have more money that they ever dreamed start to roll in, and as much as people think the academics in the SEC are not that bad.

I don't think Mizzou would leave the SEC. But I also could see it happen if a university president/regent thought the B1G conferred more academic prestige and/or the AD realized that being the northernmost school in the SEC is a recipe to lose a lot of football games. The money in the B1G and SEC is basically a wash. Not to mention if the B1G could promise a B1G West with KU, Nebraska, Iowa etc., that's much more fan friendly than the SEC East that Mizzou is in now. Mizzou could go back to playing KU at Arrowhead and Illinois in St Louis every year as conference games.

I think Mizzou would say no but (1) I wouldn't be surprised if they said yes and also (2) the B1G stealing Mizzou would be a very interesting response to the SEC's aggression and there is a chance they decide to try it.

Remember the Big 12's instability in 2010 was in part caused by Mizzou openly pining for a B1G invite. They settled for the SEC.

 

[AuH2O]

I don't think Mizzou would leave the SEC. But I also could see it happen if a university president/regent thought the B1G conferred more academic prestige and/or the AD realized that being the northernmost school in the SEC is a recipe to lose a lot of football games. The money in the B1G and SEC is basically a wash. Not to mention if the B1G could promise a B1G West with KU, Nebraska, Iowa etc., that's much more fan friendly than the SEC East that Mizzou is in now. Mizzou could go back to playing KU at Arrowhead and Illinois in St Louis every year as conference games.

I think Mizzou would say no but (1) I wouldn't be surprised if they said yes and also (2) the B1G stealing Mizzou would be a very interesting response to the SEC's aggression and there is a chance they decide to try it.

Remember the Big 12's instability in 2010 was in part caused by Mizzou openly pining for a B1G invite. They settled for the SEC.

I don’t buy the “northern outpost” argument. Even under Pinkel they never recruited that great. Hell, his last Big 12 class was rated 11th in the league. That class as Jrs and SRs went on to go 7-1 in the SEC both years. People forget that while Pinkel was good in the Big 12, two of his best three win totals were in the SEC.

It’s what drives me nuts about the “I don’t know if it’s sustainable at ISU” argument. You’re right, you never know. You hire John Blake at Oklahoma and you win 4 games a year. You hire Mike Shula or Mike DuBose at Alabama and you have some 5 win seasons. You hire Charlie Strong at Texas and they suck. You hire Matt Campbell at ISU and they win a Fiesta Bowl.
Same goes for the dumb Big 10 and Nebraska argument. It has zero to do with the conference. The last 10 years of the Big 12 and first 10 years of the Big 10 have seen consistency in recruiting. The win totals are a bell curve with the peak crossing over both conferences with Riley and Frost on the right of the curve, Callahan on the left, and Pelini at the peak in the middle.

It’s all about the coach, with the odd one year flukes like Chiz sprinkled in.

 

[Gonzo]

I don't think Mizzou would leave the SEC. But I also could see it happen if a university president/regent thought the B1G conferred more academic prestige and/or the AD realized that being the northernmost school in the SEC is a recipe to lose a lot of football games. The money in the B1G and SEC is basically a wash. Not to mention if the B1G could promise a B1G West with KU, Nebraska, Iowa etc., that's much more fan friendly than the SEC East that Mizzou is in now. Mizzou could go back to playing KU at Arrowhead and Illinois in St Louis every year as conference games.

I think Mizzou would say no but (1) I wouldn't be surprised if they said yes and also (2) the B1G stealing Mizzou would be a very interesting response to the SEC's aggression and there is a chance they decide to try it.

Remember the Big 12's instability in 2010 was in part caused by Mizzou openly pining for a B1G invite. They settled for the SEC.

Mizzou was desperate for a B1G invite. Never came.