2010 NCAA football thread....

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

as a michigan fan, I am hopeful that Texas and ND join the B10 still. I am not convinced that the league benefits from adding the likes of Rutgers and Pitt or UConn along with Nebraska.

Though those BE schools fit the academic profile, the football itself isn't adding anything...

I think Texas is torn; either stay in the B12, leave with others to the Pac10 or leave by itself to the B10. If it were simply about money, the B10 would be the winner, if it was about football, the SEC stands a chance, and if about tradition, they should add a couple of teams and make a go of the B12

The Pac10 superleague of 16 doesn't make a lot of sense to me, and the time zone shift difference won't be a great move on the part of Texas, though the climate of the P10 is more in keeping with the B12, unlike the B10.

Really interesting times in the NCAA though.

Nebraska is instantly the third best program in the Big 10. I'm not sure why you think they aren't adding anything football wise.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Nebraska is instantly the third best program in the Big 10. I'm not sure why you think they aren't adding anything football wise.

Depends where Nebraska goes. Over the last 5 years they've been relatively poor. They could be the third best, or the could be a middle pack team. Bad news is that in basketball they;re about to get 100+ poured on them like its going out of style.

[PIMking]

Reports down in these parts that A&M is joining the SEC. Wait for it to be announced monday or tuesday.

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by PIMking

Reports down in these parts that A&M is joining the SEC. Wait for it to be announced monday or tuesday.

Makes sense. A lot of talk here about A&M wanting to "be their own school" and not follow Texas' lead. If that is the case, I'd look to Baylor to come back into play and become the 5th team to create the PAC-16.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

Makes sense. A lot of talk here about A&M wanting to "be their own school" and not follow Texas' lead. If that is the case, I'd look to Baylor to come back into play and become the 5th team to create the PAC-16.

Well, A & M would be more than competitive in basketball but would be a doormat in football. If they join the SEC they are confirming that they are no longer a football school.

[Gugstanley]

Baylor won't be in the Pac 16 and they have burned their bridge to join the MWC.

Utah should be announced as early as Monday as joining the Pac 16. Opens more recruiting doors in Texas and California which have been a hotbed for the program.

Will Oklahoma also go to the SEC or stick with the Pac 16?

Still need to find a home for TCU, BYU and other "mid majors" that have been consistantly strong. I would like to see the Big 12 stay alive and taken in the top mid major programs.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by nik-

This was brought up as a theory when this was unfolding by Jason Smith on All Night on ESPN radio. He was wondering if the SEC goes after ACC teams to try and puff up a bit.

Miami, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Florida State and Clemson would all make sense in the SEC. Granted only four would work, so I'd think that Georgia Tech would be the least likely.

Doesnt seem like thats an option.

As for other options for the SEC, a source familiar with the SEC's plans told ESPN on Saturday the SEC does not plan to consider adding Georgia Tech, Clemson, Florida State or Miami. The source saw no way the SEC would raid the ACC and added serious doubt that Virginia Tech could be pried away from Virginia. The source also dismissed the idea the SEC would go after Kansas, although a Kansas source said that would be a preference for the Jayhawks.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5279373

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Nebraska is instantly the third best program in the Big 10. I'm not sure why you think they aren't adding anything football wise.

Sorry, I meant the other Big East teams I named. Nebraska is a great program, with great tradition...

Pitt, Rutgers, Uconn, Syracuse...not so much, and I think the B10 hurts itself reputation wise by adding those football teams.

[transplant99]

ESPN reporting that Texas has declined the PAC 10 invite and the rest of the schools will stay in the Big 12 as well.

[oldschoolcalgary]

smart move by Texas imo...

The pac 10 is not the same traditionally rich conference that the SEC, Big 10 or the Big 12 is...only USC, UCLA and maybe Washington have decent traditions...and USC is a rogue program.

I think the Big 12 can survive, but beebe really should have been sending out feelers when Mizzou and colorado were making noise about leaving...rumblings of nebraska should have set off a red alert to TCU and maybe Utah...

[wpgflamesfan]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

smart move by Texas imo...

The pac 10 is not the same traditionally rich conference that the SEC, Big 10 or the Big 12 is...only USC, UCLA and maybe Washington have decent traditions...and USC is a rogue program.

I think the Big 12 can survive, but beebe really should have been sending out feelers when Mizzou and colorado were making noise about leaving...rumblings of nebraska should have set off a red alert to TCU and maybe Utah...

For Texas it's a smart move. For everyone else (OU, OSU, TT, aTm) it's not so smart. I know the Big 12 commissioner is saying that the teams remaining in the big 12 will see there tv revenues rise to SEC levels, but i honestly can't see how that could be. You lost Denver Tv market, lost a storied Nebraska franchise, lost the ability to hold a conference championship (which generates tons of money), and are allowing Texas to establish their own TV network.

Texas will be fine with its own network, but something tells me the others will be kicking themselves in a few years for not jumping to the pac.

[PIMking]

Once again those cowboy hat wearing hippies are running the show. If I were OU, OSU, TAMU I would bolt and leave UT in the dusst.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by wpgflamesfan

For Texas it's a smart move. For everyone else (OU, OSU, TT, aTm) it's not so smart. I know the Big 12 commissioner is saying that the teams remaining in the big 12 will see there tv revenues rise to SEC levels, but i honestly can't see how that could be. You lost Denver Tv market, lost a storied Nebraska franchise, lost the ability to hold a conference championship (which generates tons of money), and are allowing Texas to establish their own TV network.

Texas will be fine with its own network, but something tells me the others will be kicking themselves in a few years for not jumping to the pac.

OSU, TT and aTm are always going to be second tier schools; even in the Pac16. The question they needed to ask was whether the risk of the new Pac16 would have been worth the risk to their traditional rivalries, their time scheduling and their travel costs.

Yes, losing Nebraska and the Denver market hurt, but there was no guarantee that the Pac16 network would have equaled SEC numbers, much less B10 numbers.

Personally, I am not a fan of the Pac10 - U$C inflated their record because they pushed beyond the limits. Outside of them, who does the Pac10 have?

Preserving the Red River Shootout is worth a try at least; if the revamped B12 doesn't do as well as promised, I would bet the Pac16 idea will rise again...the Pac10, won't do anything for the next couple of years imo...no point to expand if you are picking off the likes of Utah...

The B10 will stop to (no raiding of BE) unless the Domers decide to join the 21st Century...

[wpgflamesfan]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

OSU, TT and aTm are always going to be second tier schools; even in the Pac16. The question they needed to ask was whether the risk of the new Pac16 would have been worth the risk to their traditional rivalries, their time scheduling and their travel costs.

What traditional rivals would any of these schools loose if they went to the pac 10? Oklahoma is loosing Nebraska anyways. Travel cost wouldn't be that much of an issue either as under the proposed pac-16 you would have seen a southwest division of OU,OSU, aTm, UT, TT, CU, AZ, & ASU and a pacific division of UW, WSU, UO, OSU, CAL, STAN, UCLA, & USC. They would have played 7 games within the division then 2 inter divisional games. That means aTm would only have to go to UW (the longest trip in the division) every 8 years.

Yes, losing Nebraska and the Denver market hurt, but there was no guarantee that the Pac16 network would have equaled SEC numbers, much less B10 numbers.

There's sure as hell a better chance of them matching SEC or Big 10 numbers then the current B12 has. The pac 16 would encompass 9 of the 25 larget tv markets in the United States. Los Angeles (2), Dallas (5), Bay Area (6), Houston (10), Phoenix (12), Seattle (13), Denver (16), Sacramento (20), Portland (22)

Personally, I am not a fan of the Pac10 - U$C inflated their record because they pushed beyond the limits. Outside of them, who does the Pac10 have?

USC & Oregon are currently probably the two best programs in the conference. Oregon State, Arizona, & Stanford were all pretty good last year. The Huskies, UCLA, and Cal are all improving. The problem with the pac-10 though is becuase they played a true round robin schedule, everyone beat everyone else up. I'm sure the Big 12 will have fun with that over the next couple of years.

[oldschoolcalgary]

well, the Pac16 would have had a chance to match the TV numbers based on the market, however, i am of the opinion that the pac10 is not a feverishly focused football conference...heck, when USC wasn't selling out games at the height of their power, you gotta wonder.

obviously, not to prolong the discussion, the B12 has made their decision, some based on their belief, rightly or wrongly that the TV money to be made would be comparable to the B10 or SEC.

fact of the matter is that espn is going to overpay because they don't want Fox getting in on the p16; so the money will be inflated and that Texas will be the beneficiary of that for sure...but Texas was always going to look for their own deal even if they wanted to pick the SEC or the B10

i would look to the B12 trying to add TCU and Memphis to get back to 12 and in order to have a conference championship (for tv money of course)

[PIMking]

The west coast isn't as rabid college football fans as they are down here.

There just isn't much to do but college athletics similar to CHL hockey up in rural Canada.

Look at sports down in the south. Atlanta is a poor pro city that ride the bandwagon but sell out UGA events all the time, Florida between FSU, and UF they all but killed the NFL in jacksonville. The fans would rather watch a bad Gator team (mid 80's and still packing the stands) than watch the Jags.

the thing we got going for us is the fans. Nothing and no one is more passionate about CFB that people down here.

[Clever_Iggy]

As a big Pac-10 fan (go Wildcats!) I was initially excited about the potential addition of Texas, Oklahoma and the rest after Colorado joined. After having the weekend to reflect, I started to think that 16 teams stretching to the edges of SEC territory would be... weird. So the news that the Big 12 will remain with 10 teams (maybe more if they go out and get a TCU, etc...) is good news with me.

A massive Pac-16 would have been incredible for inter-conference athletics and the addition of Texas and Oklahoma would have pushed all original Pac-10 schools to step up their game. But I prefer smaller expansion. Colorado is great for the TV market and if their athletics ever gets off life support, they will be a good addition that way too. Plus, geographically, Colorado seems more "Pac-10" than Texas/Oklahoma. Add a Utah and the Pac-12 will be nicely symmetrical with enough teams to have a championship game in football.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

As a big Pac-10 fan (go Wildcats!) I was initially excited about the potential addition of Texas, Oklahoma and the rest after Colorado joined. After having the weekend to reflect, I started to think that 16 teams stretching to the edges of SEC territory would be... weird. So the news that the Big 12 will remain with 10 teams (maybe more if they go out and get a TCU, etc...) is good news with me.

A massive Pac-16 would have been incredible for inter-conference athletics and the addition of Texas and Oklahoma would have pushed all original Pac-10 schools to step up their game. But I prefer smaller expansion. Colorado is great for the TV market and if their athletics ever gets off life support, they will be a good addition that way too. Plus, geographically, Colorado seems more "Pac-10" than Texas/Oklahoma. Add a Utah and the Pac-12 will be nicely symmetrical with enough teams to have a championship game in football.

I feel the same way as a Michigan/B10 fan...Texas would have been awesome from one perspective (ie the great Texas tradition), but it would be weird/sad not to see them in the B12.

Even Nebraska, which is a very good fit for the B10, is a little weird feeling...

we'll see if this is merely a short term solution for the big 12

[Gugstanley]

I wasn't a fan of the Super conference Idea. So I am glad the Big 12 (10) is sticking together. What needs to happen is every conference should jump up to twelve teams and have a championship game.

Utah should get the invite to join the Pac 10. They had been working on it and all was well until Texass got involved. Texass demanded Utah be dropped so they could bring along another conference buddy. The Pac 10 will be as competitive as any conference.

Hard to believe the Big 12 will stay at ten members. Jerry Jones will want that championship game in his building every year so I have to believe expansion is coming. TCU won't be one of those teams, they have to big of a rift with Baylor and Texas. Plus TCU, as a private institution, isn't viewed as bringing as much to the table. They will probably raid the Big East for teams not sure really who else fits.

Hope the Utah invite comes soon as the added TV revenue would really help the program. Right now the MWC only pays out a $1 million.

[Gugstanley]

Reports down here that Utah has given notice to the MWC that they are leaving. Might be a press conference today announcing the move to the Pac 10. The way things change I won't believe it until they play their first game in the Pac 10.