View Full Version : How Long Will New Big Xii Last



Kerry
07-01-2010, 11:49 AM
How long do you think the new Big Xii will last? I say it will collapse the day the new TV deal expires. With Texas, and most likely OU, getting their own networks, the rest of the conference will be left way behind. I don't see Iowa St, Missouri, and Baylor being able to keep up.

Spartan
07-07-2010, 10:31 PM
Well, there are ten schools. Obviously not all of them have the same clout at OU and Texas. Obviously not all of them are as worthless (in my opinion) as Baylor and Iowa State. There's some good middle ground there, with OSU, A&M, Taco Tech, KU, and maybe Mizzou until you deal with those fans' complex. That's the meat and potatoes of a conference and those will be the schools with potential options as well, they just won't have every conference commissioner in the nation at their beckoning. If the middle of the pack schools are still strong, then obviously the Big 12 survives and it is beneficial for Texas to continue to tie themselves to those schools.

bluedogok
07-08-2010, 08:05 PM
I think it all depends on what happens to the college football world in the next few years, there could be some big changes that happen. If things stay the same, I foresee another round of what just happened about a year before the contracts are up.

Kerry
07-09-2010, 06:08 AM
While many people see mega-conferences as the future (I did to for a long time), I think the future is going to be more independents. If that happens the NCAA will also see a lot of teams drop out.

Take the PAC-10 and USC as a current example. For TV revenue USC has been carrying the PAC-10. They will continue to do so even after adding Colorado and Utah. However, like most conferences they share revenue equally. As the gap between teams like USC and Washington St widens where is the benefit to USC to stay attached? At the same time USC is going to suffer some serious financial penalties over the next few years as a result of NCAA violations. However, membership in the NCAA is voluntary so in essence USC is providing their own means of punishment.

Like the US government, the NCAA is a necessary evil that requires members to give up a little to protect the rest. But what happens when it turns from giving up a little to giving up a lot? What happens if the top 30 or 40 teams in college football decided they would be better off going it alone on TV deals? Notre Dame already does it and very soon OU and Texas will be doing it. It is a trend that could catch on and explains why conferences don't allow it now. They know it spells the end to the current college football landscape.

The gap between the really good teams and the really bad teams will widen; not so much because the good teams will get better but because the bad teams will get really really bad. If not for the funds provided by the Big Xii, how would Iowa St even afford a weight room, much less state of the art practice facilities. Even OSU needed a multi-hundred million dollar gift from T. Boone just to catch up but it isn't like their competition (OU and Texas) are standing still. In 10 years is OSU going to get another $300 million gift to catch up again? Teams will have to pull their own weight or get left behind.

The Pirates Code might be the new college football motto. Those who fall behind get left behind. Universities have relied on state funding to meet their education requirements while the athletic departments have generated their own revenue. I think those days are about to change. Schools in blue states are seeing their funding state funding cut, or in the case of Illinois, the check isn't even in the mail. Public universities in California aren't far behind. These universities, like most universities, are run by liberals and they aren't going to layoff professors and close Women's Studies programs when the athletic department is sitting on millions of dollars building practice facilities that can simulate snow, rain and 90 mph winds.

Schools are going to be forced to maximize revenue and won't be so willing to share with the schools that don't pull their weight. This takes me back to universities working their own TV contracts. It is the circle of life.

Laramie
08-21-2010, 09:56 AM
Oklahoma State, Oklahoma, Texas & Texas A & M should have committed to joining what would be the Pac-16. We are just delaying the inevitable!. Commissioner Dan Bebe may have saved his job and increased potential payoff on his retirement.

metro
08-24-2010, 03:35 PM
Looks like Colorado may be wanting back in as they might not be accepted into the Pac 10 after all. I say let them be lone rogues like BYU.

nik4411
09-02-2010, 08:50 AM
where did you see that i havent heard anything about it.

TAlan CB
09-02-2010, 11:23 AM
There has been recent articles that the PAC 10 may reject the addition of Utah and Colorado, while possible it is likely they will be joining.

But to post by KERRY..lot of good points, but if you look at history this has all happen many times before, just research the history of the "Big 8". There was a time in the 1960's, and 70's up to the early 80's when there were certain teams that had so much talent on them that they were hard to beat - thus the dynasties. Even if a player was going to be a second string starter, they would go to the big programs for a chance, instead of a smaller program where they would have started. This changed with tighter rules and scholarship limitations. Even Nebraska, which would give 2 year scholarships to players who had "put in their time" in the weight room, even they were hit. All of this is to say I have been watching college football for more than 40 years, and never has there been as much equity between teams and conferences as there is now. The football is better, and you don't know who is going to win until the game is over. Some schools will have weaker teams - possibly for a long time, but not always. Baylor and Iowa State will enjoy the victories all the more when they happen. When you win most of the time, the only thing that can look forward to is losing. I can remember both Iowa State and Baylor having a series of bowl years ... it will happen again. Big names may leave because they can get independent tv contracts because of the size of the alumni - fan base. But the rest of the teams will stay in a conference. And as long as there is a NCAA or similar organization (NAIA), large independents will still have to go by the same rules as long as they want to play against teams that are part of these organizations. If they split and create their own organizations how long due you think other teams will want to play in organizations that are weighed against them? How else will a state like Delaware feel they have equal say and opportunity, if they don't belong to an organization that gives them this - like the federal gov. In the end the greedy teams will only hurt themselves - and good football will be played with, our without, them. One thing is for sure, change is a constant and every generation has to learn from their own mistakes.

Kerry
09-02-2010, 02:15 PM
TAlan CB - the next 10 years in college football will be almost as much fun off the field as it is on the field to be sure. The money thing is so powerful that the Big X just put Ohio St and Michigan in different divisions, assuring that their annual rivalry will end. A rivalry by the way the goes back to the Toledo War in 1835.

The University of Illinois is not getting their annual $500 million from the State of Illinois. That money has to come from somewhere or the University shuts down. Meanwhile, the Illini athletic department is sitting on million of dollars in cash. How long until the University starts using this money for 'other' things. What happens to the football program as a result? I mean, they are already a bad team most of the time and this will make them worse. Eventaully they will become a drag on the Big X money wise, and we already how the Big X feels about money.

http://news.illinois.edu/news/10/0810higheredfunding.html

bluedogok
09-02-2010, 06:42 PM
TAlan CB - the next 10 years in college football will be almost as much fun off the field as it is on the field to be sure. The money thing is so powerful that the Big X just put Ohio St and Michigan in different divisions, assuring that their annual rivalry will end. A rivalry by the way the goes back to the Toledo War in 1835.
I bet they keep it like the SEC has done with some traditional rivalries but they move it to earlier in the year ala OU-Texas. That allows for the loser of the game to still possibly be in contention later in the season. They have always had a goofy rotating schedule in the Big 10/11 where some teams may not play tOSU and Michigan in the same season. I could see a longer rotation than the Big 12 had with a single "tradition game" like the SEC implemented. Instead of playing three out of division team every two years they may go to a two team rotation plus the rival .

metro
09-03-2010, 08:55 AM
where did you see that i havent heard anything about it.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=colorado+may+not+be+accepted+to+PAC+10

nik4411
09-03-2010, 09:12 PM
oh arent you just such a clever little guy metro. im glad you have enough free time to waste on bullsh!t like that.

i still havent seen anything where colorado wasnt accepted into the pac 10.

Swake2
09-13-2010, 07:52 AM
What makes it an even more dooshy reply from Metro is that the google search returns nothing that says CU might not be going to the Pac-10.

Priceless.

Kokopelli
09-13-2010, 02:45 PM
Two to three weeks before the season started there was an article in the Oklahoman about Colorado not joing the Pac 10. It seems that the chancellors from a couple of the northern California schools might not vote for Colorado in the final vote.

The article lacked conviction that it was anything more the the chancellors expressing their discontent. Especially considering that Utah and Colorado were the PAC 10s original expansion targets back when the expansion rumors first began.

On the other hand what could happen is that some member schools could balk at having to loan the Buffalos money to get out of the Big 12. Colorado athlethics was already in debt to the tune of 10million and will probably need a loan to pay the Big 12's breakup fee, app 9million.

Swake2
09-13-2010, 03:15 PM
Two to three weeks before the season started there was an article in the Oklahoman about Colorado not joing the Pac 10. It seems that the chancellors from a couple of the northern California schools might not vote for Colorado in the final vote.

The article lacked conviction that it was anything more the the chancellors expressing their discontent. Especially considering that Utah and Colorado were the PAC 10s original expansion targets back when the expansion rumors first began.

On the other hand what could happen is that some member schools could balk at having to loan the Buffalos money to get out of the Big 12. Colorado athlethics was already in debt to the tune of 10million and will probably need a loan to pay the Big 12's breakup fee, app 9million.

The article, I finally found it, quotes a single retired school president. He has no say. And the article now sports a disclaimer that basically discredits the entire premise of the article. Another gem brought to you by the worst newspaper in America.