Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2010 11:54:54 GMT -8
If the pac16 retains the unequal sharring that both the pac and big12 currently have, texas could make huge money. Not sure anything happens either way, but the pac16 has the potential to obliterate the SEC and pass the big 10. The Rivals UT guy said on Bill King's show this morning that word is Texas would join the Pac or whatever the conference would be called without demanding formation of the Longhorn Network that is almost in the works. Why? Because at the risk of bringing up something besides money again (wink), Texas' president and board of trustees want the prestige of being linked academically with the likes of Stanford, Cal and UCLA. Why wouldn't they consider the Big Ten as an alternative? Two reasons. One is travel. The deal now being discussed would include Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Okie State, none of which could get admitted to the Big Ten because they aren't members of the Assn. of American Universities. Therefore, Texas' non-revenue sports teams would be making an awful lot of money-losing long trips to play conference opponents. Two, politics. It is apparent the Texas state legislature isn't going to allow UT to leave the Big 12 without Texas Tech. BTW, I know you always think Stanford is going to put its foot down and quash Pac expansion. As you may have noticed, Pac-10 fans from other conference schools are apparently so much in favor of this Pac8/Big12-6+2 deal that they think if Stanford doesn't want to play ball that the rest of them should just tell Stanford goodbye and I could actually see that happening. Granted, Stanford is great for the Pac academically and geographically but what else does The Tree bring? Revenue? Uh, hardly. Bottom line is in this poker game, Stanford really wouldn't have many chips to play. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2010 12:00:19 GMT -8
I read between the lines that Iowa State knows the big 12 is falling apart and likely soon, and that they need to start lobbying for the MWC. Yep. They and their fans are scared sh!tless that ISU could fall all the way from being a member of one of the four best conferences in the country down to Conference USA. |
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jun 4, 2010 12:14:49 GMT -8
If the pac16 retains the unequal sharring that both the pac and big12 currently have, texas could make huge money. Not sure anything happens either way, but the pac16 has the potential to obliterate the SEC and pass the big 10. The Rivals UT guy said on Bill King's show this morning that word is Texas would join the Pac or whatever the conference would be called without demanding formation of the Longhorn Network that is almost in the works. Why? Because at the risk of bringing up something besides money again (wink), Texas' president and board of trustees want the prestige of being linked academically with the likes of Stanford, Cal and UCLA. Why wouldn't they consider the Big Ten as an alternative? Two reasons. One is travel. The deal now being discussed would include Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Okie State, none of which could get admitted to the Big Ten because they aren't members of the Assn. of American Universities. Therefore, Texas' non-revenue sports teams would be making an awful lot of money-losing long trips to play conference opponents. Two, politics. It is apparent the Texas state legislature isn't going to allow UT to leave the Big 12 without Texas Tech. BTW, I know you always think Stanford is going to put its foot down and quash Pac expansion. As you may have noticed, Pac-10 fans from other conference schools are apparently so much in favor of this Pac8/Big12-6+2 deal that they think if Stanford doesn't want to play ball that the rest of them should just tell Stanford goodbye and I could actually see that happening. Granted, Stanford is great for the Pac academically and geographically but what else does The Tree bring? Revenue? Uh, hardly. Bottom line is in this poker game, Stanford really wouldn't have many chips to play. Stanford puts their foot down on Utah and Colorado and adding 1-2 million dollars (if that) over what they'd get anyways). 4 or 5 times the money, adding colorado and texas to the fold (where the academic elite of the conference would be: stanford, cal, ucla, texas, usc, washington, colorado, UofA or something like 8 of the top 50-75 schools in the country) that changes the game. Plus, they basically kick out those new kids the arizona schools from the athletic side and go back to the pac8, so even if it doesn't work, the pac8 stays together. I don't think stanford is going to object here. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Jun 4, 2010 14:59:10 GMT -8
I think this will be the start of 4 super 16 team conferences and the end of the BCS. That sort of alignment was being discussed on the MWC forum at least 10 years ago, I think before "The Alliance" became the BCS. I'm hardly a Constitutional lawyer, but it does seem to me that if they do this, it opens them up even more to accusation of being a cartel. However, I still think that the non-BCS schools have been wary of bringing that up because they would have to argue that college football is, in fact, a business and therefore subject to anti-trust laws as well as other business regulations. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Jun 4, 2010 18:30:55 GMT -8
This could work out well for SDSU. If regional conferences become a thing of the past, other conferences might want to get a foothold in the Southern CA market - and SDSU affords that opportunity. That is our only salvation. We haven't done a thing to justify being added somewhere else. We've been riding on the MWC coat tails forever. At this stage, I'm more afraid of us being left out than added on. |
|
|
|
Post by Zuma on Jun 4, 2010 22:10:22 GMT -8
ACC
clemson
BC
FSU
Wake
NC St
Maryland
Ga Tech
Va Tech
Miami
UNC
Duke
UVA
cinci
wv
louisville
uconn
|
|
|
|
Post by Zuma on Jun 4, 2010 22:10:51 GMT -8
Big 16
ohio st
iowa
penn st
northwestern
wisconsin
mich st
purdue
minn
ill
mich
indiana
nebraska
iowa st
rutgers
syracuse
pittsburgh
|
|
|
|
Post by Zuma on Jun 4, 2010 22:11:11 GMT -8
Pac 16
oregon
arizona
oregon st
stanford
usc
cal
wash
ucla
asu
wash st
texas
a&m
ok
ok st
tech
col
|
|
|
|
Post by Zuma on Jun 4, 2010 22:11:30 GMT -8
SEC
florida
uga
tenn
kent
s caro
vandy
ala
lsu
miss
ark
auburn
miss st
baylor
mizzou
kansas
k st
|
|
|
|
Post by jdaztec on Jun 4, 2010 23:07:29 GMT -8
Where are The Aztecs ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2010 9:02:24 GMT -8
SEC florida uga tenn kent s caro vandy ala lsu miss ark auburn miss st baylor mizzou kansas k st Baylor in the SEC? Uh, no. Actually no on all the bottom four. Mizzou will be in the Big Ten and the SEC is going to poach FSU, Miami, GA Tech and Clemson from the ACC. Kansas may yet also wind up in the Big Ten. If so, KSU will likely wind up in the MWC. If not, both Kansas schools could conceivably end up in the ACC. Welcome to the board BTW. |
|
|
|
Post by frustratedfan on Jun 5, 2010 9:32:13 GMT -8
[quote author=sleepinggiantsfan board=ats thread=816 post=5334 time=1275757344[/quote]
Baylor in the SEC? Uh, no. Actually no on all the bottom four. Mizzou will be in the Big Ten and the SEC is going to poach FSU, Miami, GA Tech and Clemson from the ACC. Kansas may yet also wind up in the Big Ten. If so, KSU will likely wind up in the MWC. If not, both Kansas schools could conceivably end up in the ACC.
Welcome to the board BTW.[/quote]
I think both KU and KSU end up in the MWC. After the dust settles the MWC will be stronger than the ACC (If it isn't already) and it will be shorter to travel to MWC schools than ACC schools for KU and KSU. I am kind of excited about the possibilities because all my family inlcuding cousins, aunts, and uncles either went to KU, KSU or SDSU. It would make for an interesting time at family get togethers. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Jun 5, 2010 9:41:41 GMT -8
I think both KU and KSU end up in the MWC. After the dust settles the MWC will be stronger than the ACC (If it isn't already) and it will be shorter to travel to MWC schools than ACC schools for KU and KSU. I am kind of excited about the possibilities because all my family inlcuding cousins, aunts, and uncles either went to KU, KSU or SDSU. It would make for an interesting time at family get togethers. ;D Rest assured KU will not be out there alone. Some major will grab them. Their academics are far superior than most. |
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jun 5, 2010 10:22:56 GMT -8
I think both KU and KSU end up in the MWC. After the dust settles the MWC will be stronger than the ACC (If it isn't already) and it will be shorter to travel to MWC schools than ACC schools for KU and KSU. I am kind of excited about the possibilities because all my family inlcuding cousins, aunts, and uncles either went to KU, KSU or SDSU. It would make for an interesting time at family get togethers. ;D Rest assured KU will not be out there alone. Some major will grab them. Their academics are far superior than most. Their academic profile is good, but not exemplary, surely not something that cancels out K-State and surely doesn't excite the Big 10 to add for academics alone. To quote the numbers, they are in the 200 to 300 range of world rankings, and the 91-112 national (same as Mizzou which points to them not being a straight up slam dunk either, but they don't have to carry weight). KU is basically one of the last universities in tier 1 As comparison SDSU is in the 300-400 range and 113 to 138 national range www.arwu.org/ARWU2009_4.jsp(this also points to how close SDSU is to being Tier One, and if we could just offer solo PhDs and/or professional degrees, we likely would quickly climb into tier one and the top 250 (easy) schools in the world -- the state of california is seriously hamstringing themselves) Point is their academics are not a detriment, but not a super duper institution on a hill standing either They might have to carry the weight of KSU. The SEC will have to decide that winning every football title is not enough and that they can renegotiate their 14 year left contract and raid the ACC for Kansas to become viable to the ACC. The ACC could poach superior football teams out of the big east that the big 10 doesn't touch. Kansas is concerned for a reason, they might have an anchor, KSU and don't have the promise of a dominant program. but, i agree, they likely will end up somewhere. |
|
|
|
Post by cvtower on Jun 5, 2010 11:08:14 GMT -8
I think this will be the start of 4 super 16 team conferences and the end of the BCS. Agreed. As I've said, I think the Pac and the Big Ten have been desirous of returning the Rose Bowl to being the Granddaddy of Them All and once the Big Ten also expands, the New Pac and the Big Whatever are going to politely tell the SEC-dominated BCS to shove it. As to this thread, it's where it belongs. I linked the same article yesterday under the MWC forum on this site but IMO, the MWC forum should just be dispensed with. BTW, anybody else thought of this? Right now anyway, it appears as though Kansas could be left out in the cold. If KU eventually joins the MWC, a certain less than highly regarded former Aztecs head coach could reappear on the sidelines at Qualcomm Stadium.    If Kansas joins the MWC...the thought of having that perenial top 10 team on the SDSU basketball schedule twice...wow |
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jun 5, 2010 11:16:34 GMT -8
Agreed. As I've said, I think the Pac and the Big Ten have been desirous of returning the Rose Bowl to being the Granddaddy of Them All and once the Big Ten also expands, the New Pac and the Big Whatever are going to politely tell the SEC-dominated BCS to shove it. As to this thread, it's where it belongs. I linked the same article yesterday under the MWC forum on this site but IMO, the MWC forum should just be dispensed with. BTW, anybody else thought of this? Right now anyway, it appears as though Kansas could be left out in the cold. If KU eventually joins the MWC, a certain less than highly regarded former Aztecs head coach could reappear on the sidelines at Qualcomm Stadium. If Kansas joins the MWC...the thought of having that perenial top 10 team on the SDSU basketball schedule twice...wow Kansas is a tide that will raise all sea-worthy boats; The established basketball schools will take a huge step up in the national consciousness |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2010 11:19:12 GMT -8
Tower, adding Boise will hurt the MWC in BB in the short term since their team is really bad. However, Boise's president is as interested in athletics as anybody so I think it's inevitable Boise will improve considerably. Further, adding not just KU but also KSU could mean that such a 12-member MWC would be one of the best BB conferences in the country.
|
|
