• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Conference Expansion: Stanford, California and SMU Join the ACC

If the Big 12 is staying at 10, are they still adding the conference championship game? It wouldn't make any sense to since each team would still get to play everyone.
 
If the Big 12 is staying at 10, are they still adding the conference championship game? It wouldn't make any sense to since each team would still get to play everyone.

Yes, still plan to play the title game starting next year. They want that extra "big" game in front of the committee that the rest of the conferences have that weekend (though they may luck into it this year with Baylor and West Virginia scheduled to play on Dec. 3rd).
 
As long as Texas insists on having its own network (and the resulting revenue), the Big 12 will teeter on extinction. Guessing it will implode when Oklahoma gets an offer from another that it can't refuse. The other 4 power conferences operate on a shared revenue model. Big 12 does not. It's no coincidence that the Big 12 is the only Power V conference on the verge of collapse.
 
As long as Texas insists on having its own network (and the resulting revenue), the Big 12 will teeter on extinction. Guessing it will implode when Oklahoma gets an offer from another that it can't refuse. The other 4 power conferences operate on a shared revenue model. Big 12 does not. It's no coincidence that the Big 12 is the only Power V conference on the verge of collapse.

There's very strong evidence that socialism works in sports.

So who has been the biggest winner in all the expansion movement? I think there's a strong case to be made for Nebraska.
 
There's very strong evidence that socialism works in sports.

So who has been the biggest winner in all the expansion movement? I think there's a strong case to be made for Nebraska.

no way. Louisville.
 
Not sure why Nebraska joining the Big Ten is better than Missouri or even Texas A&M joining the SEC.
 
Nebraska has a better chance to compete in the Big Ten and it's a boost academically as well. I think it's possible Nebraska could have been stuck in the Big XII if not for the Big Ten plucking them early.

Louisville has a strong case although it's less likely they would have been stuck in the AAC.
 
Somebody would've wanted Nebraska. Too much tradition, possibly most passionate fan base in the country
 
Big XII Expansion / Reinforces Status as Biggest Laughing Stock in College Sports

The Big Ten definitely boosted Nebraska's academics but it ended all the natural rivalries that the Huskers once had (OU, CU, KU, even UT to an extent).
Outside of a manufactured rivalry with Iowa there isn't much to get about excited about. Also they can no longer recruit Texas effectively. That really hurts. Look for them to have the occasional good season every 3-4 years, but big time Nebraska football is dead.

Louisville is the big winner
 
Last edited:
Big time Nebraska football was already dead. I'm not sure the SEC would have picked them over A&M or Missou. Maybe the Pac-12 skips over Utah or Colorado for them but that's doubtful.

Nebraska didn't try to rule the Big XII along with Texas and OU. They bailed and that was smart.
 
Before they joined the Big Ten, Nebraska had by far the biggest fan base here in Chicago outside of your traditional Big Ten schools - they're a much more natural fit with the culture of the Big Ten than with the Pac-12. Colorado and Utah make much more sense for the Pac-12 since so many more of their graduates wind up on the West Coast. As for the Big Ten, there's been much more negative reaction to adding Rutgers and Maryland (and before that Penn State) than there was when Nebraska joined - we Midwesterns would have preferred to leave the East Coast alone.

Part of the problem with the development of rivalries for Nebraska is the stupid Leaders/Legends fiasco - this is only the third season that Nebraska and Wisconsin have been in the same division, but they also had to sub out Michigan and Michigan St for Illinois and Purdue, which is a pretty big net negative.
 
Last edited:
The Big Ten definitely boosted Nebraska's academics but it ended all the natural rivalries that the Huskers once had (OU, CU, KU, even UT to an extent).
Outside of a manufactured rivalry with Iowa there isn't much to get about excited about. Also they can no longer recruit Texas effectively. That really hurts. Look for them to have the occasional good season every 3-4 years, but big time Nebraska football is dead.

Louisville is the big winner

Louisville's hookers are the big winners!

Deeper pockets with the ACC money. ;)
 
Every team that has left the Big 12 has been a winner.

The program that was saved from oblivion is Utah. Had the Pac 12 gone in different direction, Utah would either be an independent like BYU or would be relegated to playing the likes of Wyoming and New Mexico in the Mountain West with very little conference revenue and no national buzz. If the ACC had not grabbed L'ville, the Big 12 would've added them; while they would not have the same revenue stream from the Big 12 as they found in the ACC, they would still be relevant nationally in both football and basketball.
 
Every team that has left the Big 12 has been a winner.

The program that was saved from oblivion is Utah. Had the Pac 12 gone in different direction, Utah would either be an independent like BYU or would be relegated to playing the likes of Wyoming and New Mexico in the Mountain West with very little conference revenue and no national buzz. If the ACC had not grabbed L'ville, the Big 12 would've added them; while they would not have the same revenue stream from the Big 12 as they found in the ACC, they would still be relevant nationally in both football and basketball.
. While the league might still implode, the revenue stream might actually have been better for the time being?

"The Big 12 announced its members would split $304 million in revenue for 2015-16, an increase of around $50 million from a year ago.

The numbers put the league behind the SEC and the Big Ten but ahead of the ACC and the Pac-12, commissioner Bob Bowlsby said Friday at the Big 12 Spring Meetings."

The SEC dispersed $457.8 million to its member schools, an average of $32.7 million per school. The Big Ten dispersed $411.3 million and an average full share of $32.4 million. In the ACC, each of the 14 schools that received a full share of conference revenue – every one except Notre Dame, which is a part-time member that remains independent in football – received an average of $26.2 million in conference revenue, according to a tax filing the ACC recently released. Notre Dame received $6.2 million.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/sports/college/article83238577.html#storylink=cpy

Big XII is $30.4 mill per team vs ACC's $26.2 mill
 
I'm not happy with the BXII, but it's mostly twofold and has nothing to do with money, which is comparable for now. First, their attempts to force a CCG and 2 more teams, whether it makes sense or not. Neither Houston nor Cinci (the two most likely additions) strengthen the conference. BYU would be a solid add in football, but it makes no sense geographically and expands the conference westward when it should be adding teams to the east, if anything. Second, the quality of football is declining, affecting recruiting. This could very well be fleeting, but Texas being down is not good for the conference. Texas and OU need to be good for the long term success of the conference. It's fine if one is down for a year, but you can't have long stretches of suckitude. Now this just happens to be a year where nobody is great in the conference. OU and WVU appear to be the class of the conference now, and OU has two bad losses already and a secondary that can't cover my dead grandma in a pass-happy conference. Recruiting has fallen off at OU for a while, though that is largely due to complacency within the coaching staff. Texas recruits itself, but Austin appears to be a toxic environment for churning out motivated players. The style of play in the BXII also doesn't attract the best defensive recruits, who would rather play against more pro-style offenses in the SEC or B10 or even ACC. It also leads to recruiting smaller, more mobile guys on the lines, and we've seen how that presents problems when matching against other teams with meat in the trenches-- see OU vs. Clemson the last 2 years or OU vs. Ohio State this year. Doesn't mean the conference is bad or that anybody could come into the conference and win it because the style is such that a bad quarter or half can see you down 3-4 scores, but it does mean that conference teams are generally not built to perform in a playoff. They will lose battles in the trenches.

In the end much of this is reactionary. Shit, really overreactionary. Conference fortunes and perceptions can turn rather quickly. The B10 was turning into a joke and then it got Urban Meyer and Harbaugh and won a natty. Now it's a very good conference again, and that elevates both the quality of recruits attracted to it and the perception by the media, whether justified or not.
 
Back
Top