Have to make sacrifices I guess. There is no way they do East West Divisions if TCU,BYU,Cincy,Lou. and WV are added. THat would make the west one of the toughest divisions in the NCAA and the East one of the easiest. Can see a big 10 system that is not dictated by geography. One on hand, the Big 10 schools are not as spread out as the big 12. On the other, it's only a system for football and with the amount of money involved traveling further is not that big a deal. Remember now every team gets an equal share of the tv deal pie. OU and UT need to be in different divisions but still play each other in the regular season every year. So many times UT and OU were at the top of the conference and championship game was against a trash north team. Not sure if those schools want a harder championship game though. It would make the conference so much better.
Well, I am stretching a bit here. But they have been a decent football program over the last 5 years. An up and comer. They are a pipeline into the Florida market and recruiting. And they are in the Tampa/St Pete TV market. So, from that perspective they make sense football-wise and TV-wise.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/s...ve-commissioner-ok-expand-big-east-conference Big East could be targeting SMU, Navy, Army, Air Force, Temple, and Central Florida. I'm willing to bet SMU would be contingent on TCU not leaving for the Big 12. Hopefully after Missou's regents meet tomorrow everything will start to roll. Would love to see Missouri stay and add BYU, Louisville and Cincy. I hope they don't try to go to 14. The schedule format for a 12 team conference is perfect and it gives you 4 non conference games. The 3 non conference game schedule we have now is a bit restrictive.
The MU Board of Curators meeting is officially set for tomorrow afternoon. Should basically know what's going to happen by tomorrow night.
South Florida started playing football in 1997, and only became D1 in 2001 when they joined CUSA. They got brought along with Louisville and Cincinnati to the Big East purely for geographic reasons (being the best CUSA leftover in the Eastern Timezone, and the Big East wanting to keep a foothold in Florida with Miami departing). Granted, in the small amount of time they've been playing football, they've done some good things, but you know what amazes me? Their attendance. They play at Raymond James (the Buccaneers) stadium... and they can go from literally 60K to 30K on any given week. When they play an unranked team (not a D2 cupcake, mind you, a name program... like North Carolina or Rutgers) they'll dip into the 30s for that. Mind boggling. When they play a ranked team like WVU, they'll stuff over 60K in there. It's an incredible amount of disparity. The biggest head scratcher of all is that when they played in the 2008 St. Petersburg Bowl, which is literally in the same city as the university, and less than 30 minutes from Tampa (where they play their home games), they drew only 25K. Seriously puzzling. UH's current president, Khator, came from USF. She spearheaded their effort to get D1 football going, and her ability to build their athletics program was a big part of why we brought her here. I'm banking she can replicate that success (USF is actually a very similar situation to UH, semi-urban commuter school, large student body, research oriented, big city competing with pro teams, etc.). It's paying dividends already. As for opening "new" markets, I think it's better to be concerned with how many tvs are on, rather than where they are on. If you want a reason to travel to florida or recruit there, etc. Fine. But logistically speaking, USF makes little to no sense.
http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_LANG=C&ATCLID=205307786&DB_OEM_ID=10410 Courtesy: Big12Sports.com Release: 10/03/2011 Chuck Neinas Teleconference The Big 12 Conference Board of Directors announced adoption of a position to equally distribute all conference related distributable revenue to include Tier I and II football television, men's basketball television and NCAA men's basketball tournament revenues. This action becomes effective after each member institution commits a grant of rights to the Conference for its Tier I and II television rights for at least six years. It is recognized by the Board that each member is directed by institutional policy relative to pursuing its grant of rights and that process will commence expeditiously at the institutional level. The Board is encouraged by the number of institutions indicating interest in the Big 12, which reflects positively on the standing of the Conference within intercollegiate athletics. The Board also looks forward to considering the recommendation of the expansion committee regarding future membership options.
ChuckCarltonDMN Chuck Carlton If TCU is staying with Big East, not a huge loss for Big 12 except in football & geography. Frogs brought recent BCS appearances and ... uh ChuckCarltonDMN Chuck Carlton No offense to Horned Frog Nation but TCU had trouble filling Amon Carter the past several years. The Big 12 already has the DFW TV market.
They average about 40K per game which isn't horrible. If you feel that they currently do a lot better which playing a higher regarded opponent, wouldn't moving to a bigger conference dramatically increase their attendance across the whole season?
I'm getting so tired of hearing this tripe. Yes, you "have" the market. Doesn't mean you can't have "more" of it.
I'm not sure. I mean, think about who would be coming to visit them. Other than a top 10 ranked team in primetime, it seems like there would be very little interest in playing most of the teams in the Big 12. Little geographic/regional sense there. But then again, that is probably the same problem they have in the Big East. I'd expect their attendance to stay about the same, honestly. Maybe a little bump, since the Big 12 tends to keep more teams in the Top 25, which seems to be where the real meat of their home attendance comes from. A perfect example of regional interest boosting attendance is that anytime USF plays UCF (or any other Florida team, for that matter), they draw an SRO crowd at Raymond James.
Aside from Mizzou stuff (more likely than ever that MU leaves, imo), these were the most interesting nuggets I saw today. From Jon Wilner: http://twitter.com/#!/wilnerhotline
i guess the question is whether having that "more" is more or less valuable than having a different region. i'd like to see TCU in..but honestly, i think i'd rather see UH in. i believe there's more potential there, long term.
as a mizzou guy, how do you feel about that? i can see A&M in the SEC....i have a difficult time imagining midwesterners in the SEC. just seems funny to me from a cultural perspective.
Something to chew on... The SEC is about to make major footprints in Houston. Meanwhile, DFW is safely nestled in the bosom of the Big 12. They might want to think about planting a flag in the Houston area for the future. Unless Rice plans on playing an all Big 12 OOC schedule for the rest of eternity, which actually might be the case. Heh.
Mizzou isn't a perfect fit for anywhere, culturally. The southern and eastern parts of Missouri are more "southern" in culture than College Station. Then again, the KC and STL metros are more standard midwest. Columbia is your typical college town. I don't think there's an easy answer. Missouri's a mix of everything, and it borders major schools from the Big 12, SEC and Big Ten. I'm on the fence, as far as the on-field fit. I love the Big 12, and the history with Kansas and Oklahoma is important. But if the Big 12 is going to eventually fold, I think the SEC is by far the best alternative. By competing with A&M and LSU, you still tap into the east Texas and Louisiana recruiting region that's been so good in recent years. It puts MU with the richest possible TV deal, and they'll be affiliated with a strongest conference in football - and one whose membership and fanbase is continually expanding. It won't take long to rekindle the MU-Arkansas rivalry, either. I much prefer the SEC to, say, the Big Ten. I think if MU could be convinced of long-term Big 12 stability, they'd stay. But when you think about it, even six years of a media rights commitment isn't that long. For example, ACC schools recently committed for 20. Plus, UT and OU would have the money to leave after three. No one else would. From what I've heard, MU is asking for a minimum commitment of 10 years, in addition to things like the league expanding back to 12 teams, reformed LHN content, etc., etc. As it stands now, what it comes down to is this: Can Mizzou leaders feel confident that OU isn't going to try and leave again on the next chance they get? Because you're never going to have an alternative better than the one they have right now. I think it ultimately depends on what concessions OU's Boren and UT's Powers are willing to make. Thus far, it doesn't sound like that many.
To me, this is the issue. The Big12 provides very little that the SEC doesn't, except a slightly better geographic fit (though if the Big12 adds Boise, BYU, and WVU, then its a geographic mess anyway). If Mizzou wasn't a member of either conference right now and had invites to both, I think it would clearly pick the SEC - more money, more stability, more equality. So the question is whether the hassle of leaving the Big12 outweighs the benefits of the SEC. If Mizzou is afraid of going through this in 5 or 6 years, they should go now. If they reasonably think this can all stay together for the long haul, then maybe its worth staying.
There are other issues to consider. TCU doesn't really help you in market share more than Rice or UH. But it does help the outside perception on the talent of the Big 12. After losing 3 teams, adding a program that has been so unbelievably successful can make the conference seem "harder" and help tie breakers when it comes to BCS rankings. Neither Rice or UH has won their conference in a while (if ever?) and Houston has not had prolonged success. The other big issue to consider is stadium size. TCU has a capacity of 50K in their stadium which is considerably more than UH. UH does not even have the financing in place for a new stadium much less the engineering and construction. That does leave Rice but that is such a crappy football program I don't think anyone would seriously consider it. As you point out, the big 12 has a lot of teams in the top 25. I think it's 6 at the moment to what I believe is 1 for the Big East. Overall, it's a much better conference and as I have pointed out before is tied with the SEC in total appearances in the BCS championship game as oppose to 3 with the Big East. All 3 teams from the Big East to go to the BCS game have moved to the ACC. One of the 7 appearances for the Big 12 in the BCS game was by Nebraska. It's a conference that voters on a consistent basis rank highly.
Yes, that is one of the best arguments for TCU. However, if you're Texas and OU, it probably smells like competition for recruits and conference titles. Which I doubt they want. UH won a conference title in 2006. Went to the CUSA title game in 2009. And, well, it's almost unfair to judge Rice by that measure. Not sure what you mean by "prolonged success". 1992-2002 were pretty much garbage and a lost decade, but other than that, things have been pretty peachy down on Cullen. Too bad the administration is only just *now* figuring out what to do with that success. There's a little thing you may have forgotten. Spoiler In addition to the fact that we're 20 million away (in other words, the naming rights) from breaking ground on our own 50K seat stadium.
wonder what the exit fee will be. my understanding the Ags will be stuck with somewhere between $28-31 million. i wonder how much of that would impact mizzou's decision.
Doubt it's that high. The same numbers were floated for Nebraska and Colorado a year ago, and the ultimate settlements were in the $7 to $9 million range. The massive numbers are usually used as a scare tactic.
