CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big XII => Topic started by: CWSooner on June 21, 2022, 12:06:46 PM
-
DMN
Is Big 12 in danger? Chuck Neinas, man who once saved conference, gives his take
Neinas, 90, is a decade removed from his year-long term as interim commissioner of the Big 12.
By Kevin Sherrington
6:00 AM on Jun 20, 2022
Chuck Neinas ran the Final Four, College World Series, Big Eight and the visionary outfit that wrested the TV remote from the hands of the NCAA, turning college football into a money-making machine in the process. He sat on the USOC’s board of directors and chaired the NCAA Olympic and International Relations Committee. No job was too big. DeLoss Dodds once called him “the best administrator I’ve seen in 30 years in college athletics.”
And Texas’ former athletic director made that proclamation before his old boss pulled off his greatest trick of all:
Bailed out the Big 12, even as lifeboats were being lowered.
Feel like trying it again, Chuck?
“No [expletive] way,” he said.
Neinas, a robust 90 and living with his wife in blissful retirement in Colorado, is a decade removed from his year-long term as interim commissioner of the Big 12. In case you’ve forgotten, the league had nearly fallen apart twice in the 15 months prior to his installation. A quarter of its membership had already jumped ship or was sneaking toward the railings. Given what seemed inevitable for the Big 12 at the time, yours truly prepared for the worst. Still got the obit around here somewhere.
By the time Neinas handed the reins to Bob Bowlsby in 2012, the league had been stabilized. Neinas got everyone to sign a grant-of-rights through 2025 that kept anyone else from leaving, because if they did, it meant forfeiting their TV revenues to the league. The agreements reassured FOX and CBS. Also helped that Neinas presided over the additions of TCU and West Virginia, the latter of which may not have been his finest moment, come to think of it.
But it all held together, and against all odds, at least until Texas and Oklahoma decided to walk.
Neinas — who has remained in touch because of his curiosity and work ethic, not to mention a consulting firm that once placed Mack Brown at Texas and Bob Stoops at Oklahoma and filled more vacancies than an Airbnb — doesn’t think the Big 12 is in any danger of going under this time. The additions of BYU, Houston, Cincinnati and UCF mean it will remain a viable league.
“Number one, they got the four best schools that were left,” he said. “There’s no argument. They don’t have the same marketability without OU and Texas, but it’s going to be a strong conference, and I think they will play very good and entertaining football. And in basketball, the Big 12 will be even better. They are not going to be any softer than the Pac-12 or ACC.
“What is going to screw things up is the TV contract that the Big Ten and SEC are going to have compared to the rest.”
Just guessing, but think somewhere in the neighborhood of $20-$30 million more per school.
Instead of just the haves and have-nots in D1, we will shortly see a middle class, where the Big 12 will reside in perpetuity.
So no 64-school consortium of 16-team super conferences and a divorce from the NCAA? Not with the money the SEC and Big Ten will be bagging, Neinas said. They’ll have no desire to divide it any further. Meaning expansion by the other leagues is probably moot.
As for growing the College Football Playoff to 12 teams, Neinas thinks it’s a “done deal,” despite the fact the Big Ten and ACC gave it the kibosh in favor of an eight-team model instead. Neinas finds the ACC’s stance ironic. A bigger field stands to benefit that league’s prospects the most. But the ACC, Pac 12 and Big Ten still said no, and because it required a unanimous vote before the contract expires in 2026, that was that.
“The fact that you’ve got to get a unanimous vote is ridiculous,” Neinas said. “You can’t even get a unanimous vote on adjournment.”
So why is a 12-team model a done deal?
“That’s what the SEC wants,” Neinas said. “And the Big Ten, too. Unfortunately, the Big Ten has a new commissioner.
“If Jim Delany was still there, it’d be done.”
Funny what a connected commissioner can do. Of course, sometimes matters are beyond even the brightest minds. Like when the old Southwest Conference came to an end. The popular opinion is that Texas got tired of dragging around all the have-nots. Neinas, who was in the room, says it was all ESPN. The Big Eight and SWC had decided to sell their TV rights jointly, and ESPN was agreeable. But the only schools it wanted from the SWC were Texas and Texas A&M.
Next thing you know, the governor and lieutenant governor intervene, and Texas Tech and Baylor win reprieves.
The Big 12 was a big-league operation, too, at least until the defections. Neinas objected to A&M’s exit at the time because it weakened the league, and the Aggies left their roots in a local league. But at least they’re competitive.
“The ones you gotta question are Missouri and Nebraska,” he said. “Do you know why Missouri is in the East and not the West? LSU and Alabama wouldn’t vote to take them unless they put them in the East. Who in the SEC cares about Missouri? And Nebraska’s program has gone south. Just think if A&M and Nebraska and Missouri hadn’t left the Big 12. You can forget Colorado.
“Just think. Oklahoma and Texas probably wouldn’t be leaving now.”
Nothing to be done about that. Just like NIL. The NCAA can’t impose any parameters, Neinas said, because of anti-trust concerns.
“I don’t know what they can do, to be honest,” he said.
And if Chuck Neinas doesn’t know what to do, who does? He has “great concerns” for college athletics, but, for the first time in more than 60 years, he’s not in charge of anything anymore. He put in his time, and he enjoyed it, but it’s someone else’s responsibility now.
He claims he doesn’t know the identity of the next Big 12 commissioner. Frankly, I don’t know whether to believe him. He says no one’s asked for his advice. If that’s true, someone ought to. For that matter, somebody should offer him the job straight up. Worked out pretty well last time. Maybe you could catch him on a day he’s bored. But if his wife answers, hang up.
-
Interesting, and sounds about right.
I wonder if the SEC should split into two conferences, aligned somehow, but separate.
I guess that's called divisions.
I've never seen such rapid changes in the large landscape of CFB with more to come, no doubt.
-
I never considered the actual definition of the term before. Now, I agree that the new Big 12 will most likely "survive". They'll survive because there's no other options.
I believe the Big 12 will play entertaining, competitive football that nobody will watch. It will be so competitive that their champion will likely have losses every season (not unusual - most leagues do). They'll be good enough that they'll have a tough time finding takers for serious OOC games. The Kentuckys and Washingtons might play a Tech or a TCU, but a "name" program won't risk it.
The new Big 12 should draw acceptable contract dollars. As long as they don't get envious of other leagues, it should be sufficient to keep the departments running in the black. Not sure how long WVU will want to travel to BYU under those conditions, though.
-
Have the elite programs often scheduled any of the KSU's and TCUs in the regular?
Arkansas is playing Cincy this season.
-
Have the elite programs often scheduled any of the KSU's and TCUs in the regular?
Arkansas is playing Cincy this season.
The following teams have played Kansas State over the past decade: Miami, Stanford, and Mississippi State. Those aren't bluebloods, but they often field good teams.
Go back another decade and you find USC, UCLA, and Cal playing K-State.
I'm sure that there's at least one elite program in there somewhere.
As for TCU, since joining the Big 12, they've played Ohio State, Arkansas, Virginia, and Purdue.
I think Badge hit it on the nose when he said that elite programs don't want to schedule Wisconsin. That's the kind of program a blueblood is reluctant to schedule. You don't get the fan base or the poll voters energized with a win, and yet it's the kind of program that can kick your team's ass on a given Saturday.
I think I've read that Cincy has lost of lot of its key players from last year.
-
This from the OP flies in the face of all that is right and good.
Like when the old Southwest Conference came to an end. The popular opinion is that Texas got tired of dragging around all the have-nots. Neinas, who was in the room, says it was all ESPN. The Big Eight and SWC had decided to sell their TV rights jointly, and ESPN was agreeable. But the only schools it wanted from the SWC were Texas and Texas A&M.
That just can't be true!
I'll stick with Texas being the villain of the story. :86:
-
I never considered the actual definition of the term before. Now, I agree that the new Big 12 will most likely "survive". They'll survive because there's no other options.
I believe the Big 12 will play entertaining, competitive football that nobody will watch. It will be so competitive that their champion will likely have losses every season (not unusual - most leagues do). They'll be good enough that they'll have a tough time finding takers for serious OOC games. The Kentuckys and Washingtons might play a Tech or a TCU, but a "name" program won't risk it.
The new Big 12 should draw acceptable contract dollars. As long as they don't get envious of other leagues, it should be sufficient to keep the departments running in the black. Not sure how long WVU will want to travel to BYU under those conditions, though.
WVU is the geographical outlier that hasn't made much sense from the start. Not because of anything wrong with the school or its athletic programs--just its remoteness from the rest of the conference.
I wonder if BYU will be much the same.
-
UGA scheduled H&A series with UCLA, Louisville, and FSU. I think those teams can beat you on a given day also.
I'm not mentioning Clemson, Ohio State, OU, and Texas because those programs do get juices flowing. Of course, how good a team will be when the game is played 5-10 years after being scheduled is an unknown.
-
UGA scheduled H&A series with UCLA, Louisville, and FSU. I think those teams can beat you on a given day also.
I'm not mentioning Clemson, Ohio State, OU, and Texas because those programs do get juices flowing. Of course, how good a team will be when the game is played 5-10 years after being scheduled is an unknown.
Yeah, you never know how a team will be when the game is finally played, and nowadays it's more like 15 years down the road from the scheduling agreement.
But . . . you can figure that USC is probably going to be a tougher opponent than UCLA. I'm not picking on UGA here. OU has had two H&H series with UCLA over the last 20 years, and my response has been to wish that we had scheduled USC instead. The Trojans have a big ugly scoreboard on the Sooners that needs to be rectified.
UCLA is tied with Washington for 2nd in number of conference championships in the PCC/Pac-8/Pac-10/Pac-12. But USC has more conference championships than UCLA and UW put together (37 vs. 17/17).
OU and Georgia are scheduled to play in 2023 and 2031. It seems probable that OU and Texas will still be in the Big 12 in 2023, but what will become of the 2031 game scheduled for Athens? A "we owe you guys a favor down the pike"?
OU also has an odd singleton scheduled with Tennessee in 2024. It's in Knoxville. I think the game in Norman was lost in the COVID year.
And so was our return game to Army. I was really looking forward to taking my esposita to a game at Michie Stadium.
-
My point is UCLA is roughly the same as Wisconsin.
-
Ah. Maybe so.
UCLA might even have a better overall history than Wisconsin does. The Bruins have 3 more conference championships.
-
I think scheduling UCLA suffers about the same risks as scheduling Wisconsin, or Louisville, or FSU, or Baylor, ... it's not a marquis opponent historically, but good enough to deal you a L. If you schedule and lose to Ohio State or OU, there is some "glory" in it, and you get publicity. Wisconsin is playing LSU as I recall, curiously not on campus, which I find bizarre for a H&A series.
ND wishes they had not scheduled Cincy last year I imagine.
-
. . . ND wishes they had not scheduled Cincy last year I imagine.
Yep.
That's a good example.
OU scheduling Houston for 2016 is another.
You can recover from a loss to a blueblood.
Not so much when the loss is to a 2nd- (or 3rd-) tier program.
-
Of course, had ND made the playoffs, the outcome could well have been to their detriment anyway.
-
My point is UCLA is roughly the same as Wisconsin.
Unless they play Wisconsin, of course. Then they are not the same.
-
Winsipedia - UCLA Bruins vs. Wisconsin Badgers football series history (http://www.winsipedia.com/ucla/vs/wisconsin)
They are closer than I thought.
-
and you did say "roughly"
-
Yeah, they looked to me to be about the same level programs, I didn't know they were really that close in history. I think Wisconsin has been the tougher out of late.
-
Manning to Texas.
-
Manning to Texas.
I wonder what Ewers and Card think about this
-
If you sign with a major program at QB, you should expect to have a lot of competition.
-
I wonder what Ewers and Card think about this
My guess is that Card already realizes that he has been recruited-over.
-
My guess is that Card already realizes that he has been recruited-over.
He looked pretty good in the spring game but I do think he would be number 3
-
If we could keep Ewers who might be the starter that would be a great combo
It just depends on what Manning was promised
-
Card's not out quite yet. Manning is in the 2023 class.
Card will likely be #2 this year. Next year, he'd be #3 behind Ewers and Maalik Murphy.
I'd be surprised if some reshuffling didn't occur in the next couple of years. Realistically, as a Texas fan, QB hasn't been my chief concern. I need to find a way to keep my QBs vertical for four seconds per play at least.
-
the Huskers will gladly take the scraps
-
Card's not out quite yet. Manning is in the 2023 class.
Card will likely be #2 this year. Next year, he'd be #3 behind Ewers and Maalik Murphy.
I'd be surprised if some reshuffling didn't occur in the next couple of years. Realistically, as a Texas fan, QB hasn't been my chief concern. I need to find a way to keep my QBs vertical for four seconds per play at least.
Yeah it's hard for me to get excited about any QB-- Ewers or Manning or anyone else-- when our oline has been such complete trash for almost two decades. Four different head coaches, 6 or 7 different OCs, maybe a dozen different OL coaches, and still, no improvement.
Not sure what's left to do.
-
so far our current recruiting class has 7 OL 1 three star, 4 four star and 2 five star
so it looks like we are trying to reload
its just going to take a little time and these guys will have to grow up fast
-
Yeah it's hard for me to get excited about any QB-- Ewers or Manning or anyone else-- when our oline has been such complete trash for almost two decades. Four different head coaches, 6 or 7 different OCs, maybe a dozen different OL coaches, and still, no improvement.
Not sure what's left to do.
The setup we have right now checks all the boxes for improvement. The NCAA changed the summer practice rules this year allowing coaches to spend time on instruction and on-field development. At this time last season, Kyle Flood had barely been able to meet his squad in person. During the season, it's hard to fix many OL problems due to the installs needed during game weeks.
That said, I don't know if the material he has to work with is sufficient. Texas got a king's ransom of OL commits, but placing your faith in true freshman OL is a the way to disappointment.
The development of J'Tavian Sanders at TE may end up being the best improvement to the OL.
The point still remains. Until the Texas OL acquits itself when a hostile defense attacks it, it's still the mess we saw last season.
-
so far our current recruiting class has 7 OL 1 three star, 4 four star and 2 five star
so it looks like we are trying to reload
its just going to take a little time and these guys will have to grow up fast
We've had other highly recruited olines, though. Nothing quite like this, but still rated far superior to what their onfield production ever became.
I guess I'll believe it when I see it. But I'm not holding out much hope. I think our football program is just cursed.
-
It's interesting to ponder how someone can evaluate HS OL talent and potential. I watched a game years ago played by Moeller Cincinnati, they had three interior OLs over 300 pounds, including a fellow named Munoz (the son). They pushed the other team all over the place, they could and did run QB sneaks for 7-8-9 yards consistently. The opponent was a very good team, but without the meat in the middle of course. I imagine those guys looked great in every game.
I'm sure they try and judge strength and 40 times and whatever else, but top college OLmen of course have to learn a complex system, be able to pull, be able to block fast edge guys, etc. Maybe you just find HS players with a large frame who look good and hope?
And then you have to develop them obviously. You could have a fellow with the physical talents who simply can't learn the playbook. Maybe you post him at right tackle and tell him to block whoever he sees.
-
The frame is a good place to start. In the 6'4"-6'6" or so range. We like arm length particularly. Crucially, does the frame look like it can support muscle mass?
How big is the kid? If he's a "skinny" 280 or so, then a collegiate strength coach can put 30lbs of muscle on him in a year. Some 290lbs high school players have lived in the gym, and are at their maximum muscle build.
"Get off" speed: How quickly does he get from "hand in the dirt" to "set"? LOS battles come down to who gets their hands placed first. The DL wants to get in tight, grab jersey, and throw the OL out of the way. The OL wants to keep their interior clean by getting hands high and arms extended (see arm length above). Fast twitch muscle fibers are a thing. I can't grow or develop those. A kid is either quick out of the blocks or he isn't.
Demeanor: OL is an ugly, painful, thankless position. Your name is only called when you screw up. However else the kid lives, when he gets between the lines of a football field, I need him to enjoy shoving people over. Angry people still win football games. After your initial assignment, work to the next one. Look for opponents to flatten, and keep doing it until the whistle dies out.
I haven't said much about mechanics, and OL is all about mechanics. I'm taking it as accepted that the kid will have a decent base (feet squared underneath the body) and have an idea about how to move. An OLineman must move through an unpredictable tangle of bodies while keeping his feet on the ground underneath him for as long as possible (even though this sounds mutually exclusive). This is where a great OL coach can turn a 3-star project into an All-American. Foot technique. Balance. Leverage. Hand placement. Committing these to muscle memory so they happen without thought sets the player up for success.
A safety that exceeds his body type can be a LB. LBs can spin down to DE/DL. Since OL players don't usually get lighter, there's no real place for them to go. Committing scholarships to 16-17 year old males who you hope grow into useful OL players is definitely a voodoo science.
-
All good points, I get that it's difficult and inexact.
But Texas is routinely recruiting and signing O-linemen that were also recruited by OU, Alabama, LSU, Ohio State, etc. All schools that have produced MUCH better o-line play over the past 15 years.
If those coaches from those other schools see something in those linemen, and they end up at Texas, then it looks to me like UT has a serious lack of player development. Or poor schemes that utilize those players ineffectively.
Or most likely, both.
-
Anyway, back to the original topic, I think the B12 will certainly "survive." And I actually think it will be a competitive and fun conference to watch. Lots of contrasting styles, lots of geographical differences. I think it'll be more interesting and compelling than the entire PAC, and all of the ACC aside from maybe Clemson.
If I were the commissioner, I'd really focus on branding it as "The Fun Conference" and I'd also explore engaging every possible streaming route to market-- Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, YoutubeTV-- whoever bites, try it out. Don't even attempt to follow the same models as the B1G and SEC. The PAC tried that and failed miserably. So you know it won't work for the B12, and you go the opposite direction.
Just my thoughts.
-
We may be seeing two super conferences, three middlin conferences, and the G5s. Money makes money.UGA is a 17.5 point favorite over Oregon, who is one of the conference favorites out there. That shouldn't happen. Yes, the game is here, but two TDs? Oregon may well win, I'm shocked at the line. But if they lose say 34-17, well, it's not a great look.
The ACC should be more competitive, they have FSU and Miami and VT, all programs fallen on harder times. UNC and NCSU should be decent, Pitt, even Tech.
But when I see them play a B1G/SEC team, I often see poor tackling and bad line play.
-
We may be seeing two super conferences, three middlin conferences, and the G5s. Money makes money.UGA is a 17.5 point favorite over Oregon, who is one of the conference favorites out there. That shouldn't happen. Yes, the game is here, but two TDs? Oregon may well win, I'm shocked at the line. But if they lose say 34-17, well, it's not a great look.
The ACC should be more competitive, they have FSU and Miami and VT, all programs fallen on harder times. UNC and NCSU should be decent, Pitt, even Tech.
But when I see them play a B1G/SEC team, I often see poor tackling and bad line play.
The ACC is nearly unwatchable, and the TV ratings prove that out.
Competitively it's the worst, with the PAC being slightly better. In recent years, only Clemson has saved the ACC from basically being a G5.
-
I was quite surprised my first football Saturday in Chapel Hill how laid back it was, it was really a quiet time before the game, and the games weren't very enthused either.
-
its the SEC and the Big Ten
after that there's a cornsiderable drop
-
its the SEC and the Big Ten
after that there's a cornsiderable drop
In what? What factor or factors, specifically, do you see a "significant drop" from the SEC and the B1G, to the other conferences?
Money obviously, but are you talking about something else?
-
In what? What factor or factors, specifically, do you see a "significant drop" from the SEC and the B1G, to the other conferences?
Money obviously, but are you talking about something else?
I was quite surprised my first football Saturday in Chapel Hill how laid back it was, it was really a quiet time before the game, and the games weren't very enthused either.
-
and I'm talking post Texas/Oklahoma to the SEC
once the Big 12 loses those two, the energy just won't be there on a national scale
-
and I'm talking post Texas/Oklahoma to the SEC
once the Big 12 loses those two, the energy just won't be there on a national scale
Fair enough. Compared to the SEC and B1G, I'd agree with that.
I think the B12 is still going to have more energy than the PAC or ACC, who simply play bad football outside of one or two teams at the top.
-
I think I concur the B12 will have more energy and passion that most of the other two, especially passion, at least I hope so.
-
How does the practically-announced-almost-a-done-deal-quasi-official move of USC and UCLA to the Big Ten change things for the 2025-and-beyond Big 12?
-
the Big 12 might poach Colorado and the Zona schools and dump a couple lesser additions
-
the Big 12 might poach Colorado and the Zona schools and dump a couple lesser additions
Yeah I'm not sure how you back out of an offer, but if there's a way to do it, then I'd be surprised if the B12 isn't considering it.
-
The Big 12 might want to know which way the wind is blowing first.
The Pac-<x> might look to poach a couple of Big 12 teams. They might need their filler schools to keep the lights on.
Time zones are irrelevant.
-
They could
simply merge.
-
I think you'd have to remove the word "simply" from the above.
-
I saw this in a tweet in an article on Yahoo Sports.
Big 12 East:
-Cincinnati
-UCF
-West Virginia
-Houston
-Iowa St
-Kansas
-Kansas St
-OK St
Big 12 West:
-Arizona
-ASU
-Baylor
-BYU
-Colorado
-TCU
-Texas Tech
-Utah
It's ... not completely horrible?.
-
I'd watch several of those games.
-
Cats are sleeping with dogs.
(https://i.imgur.com/DeelPIM.png)
-
The ACC is nearly unwatchable, and the TV ratings prove that out.
Competitively it's the worst, with the PAC being slightly better. In recent years, only Clemson has saved the ACC from basically being a G5.
normally i’d say fla st and mia will get their acts together but there’s no longer time seemingly
i think that at this point there is quite a lot i’d necessarily believe
the big12 is almost assuredly on the phone with the pac as we speak
if i were the pac i’d invite what’s left of the old big 8 stat. if ore/wash bounce throw in baylor and ttech.
the doomsday sotospeak mega league scenarios we speculated about 10-12 years ago is playing out
idk what notre dames going to do the acc is a good fit if they can keep it together. the acc should be on the phone with them and wva if they know what’s good for them.
among other things lesson 1 in r/a is waiting and reacting will burn you
-
normally i’d say fla st and mia will get their acts together but there’s no longer time seemingly
i think that at this point there is quite a lot i’d necessarily believe
the big12 is almost assuredly on the phone with the pac as we speak
if i were the pac i’d invite what’s left of the old big 8 stat. if ore/wash bounce throw in baylor and ttech.
the doomsday sotospeak mega league scenarios we speculated about 10-12 years ago is playing out
idk what notre dames going to do the acc is a good fit if they can keep it together. the acc should be on the phone with them and wva if they know what’s good for them.
among other things lesson 1 in r/a is waiting and reacting will burn you
Glad to see you posting. Been a while. Not really much of an SEC board here, so I get it.
I actually think the XII is more viable long term than the PAC. XII has Texas and Florida - football passion.
What's left in Pac Land as far as passionate fans is pretty much Oregon, Washington, Utah and Colorado.
The XII should grab them ASAP, and then maybe the AZ schools. Then choose from the leftover PAC and consider UNLV and maybe Boise????
That would get them to 20.
-
Glad to see you posting. Been a while. Not really much of an SEC board here, so I get it.
I actually think the XII is more viable long term than the PAC. XII has Texas and Florida - football passion.
What's left in Pac Land as far as passionate fans is pretty much Oregon, Washington, Utah and Colorado.
The XII should grab them ASAP, and then maybe the AZ schools. Then choose from the leftover PAC and consider UNLV and maybe Boise????
That would get them to 20.
Astute and wise, you are.
Something along these lines is definitely what I'd be thinking, were I a B12 commissioner or AD.
-
I'm going to sigh a bit, be somewhat amazed, watch what happens in all of this, not stress trying to predict much, and enjoy CFB to the extent possible.
So much money in all of this now....
-
yes, the top programs left in the 12 and the PAC should merge to form what would be a conference the equal or better than what the ACC will become
4 total large conferences
there's your 4 team playoff with no one being left out
-
There will be a time when some 10-3 team wins a conference.
-
I'm fine with that
I'm not fine with pods or any overly rotating schedules trying to play 16, 18, or 20 teams regularly
-
yes, the top programs left in the 12 and the PAC should merge to form what would be a conference the equal or better than what the ACC will become
4 total large conferences
there's your 4 team playoff with no one being left out
The New Big 12 is already better than the ACC. Outside of Clemson, ACC football is completely unwatchable.
-
Glad to see you posting. Been a while. Not really much of an SEC board here, so I get it.
I actually think the XII is more viable long term than the PAC. XII has Texas and Florida - football passion.
What's left in Pac Land as far as passionate fans is pretty much Oregon, Washington, Utah and Colorado.
The XII should grab them ASAP, and then maybe the AZ schools. Then choose from the leftover PAC and consider UNLV and maybe Boise????
That would get them to 20.
i think they need each other & that its semantics whether one invites the other or vice versa
i disagree that they have fla. they have a directional u that is an afterthought in that state regardless of recent on field success
the pac inviting the best of what's left gives those schools a path to escape the 4 they just invited which was my thought process in wording it that way.
speaking of afterthoughts unlv is terrible as well. i would be hard pressed to find another school that's more ignored in their own city let alone state. you are most certainly correct re: how much the pac cares but most of their properties are still better than cinci, houston, ucf, etc.
ua/asu
stan/cal
ore st/wazzu
utah/col
ku/kst
okst/ttech
baylor/byu
ist/tcu
if wva sticks around take your pick from the boise's of what's left.
that league will lag behind the two monsters but it's better than every g5 as currently comprised. they'll never win anything in fball but a hoops title every once in awhile.
i would imagine someone's taking ore/uw though & its probably the big ten.
the other question is what the acc's going to do & how that impacts all of that.
& lastly this all continues to suck as it has for 12 years & counting.
i also wonder what lincoln riley thinks of all of this as it pertains to why he necessarily left ou.
big coup for the big ten getting into that recruiting footprint.
it is good to still see you here.
-
There will be a time when some 10-3 team wins a conference.
they already have
the big 12 has had a few mostly early on, i'm sure the pac has w/o looking it up. they've probably had a bunch. probably the acc too.
sec/big 10 not as many.
-
I'm fine with that
I'm not fine with pods or any overly rotating schedules trying to play 16, 18, or 20 teams regularly
i haven't been fine with any of it tip to tail no one cares
you'll play your pod & like it if the networks pay for it.
which brings up a question, how many of you have actually met a normal fan who likes r/a. i haven't.
-
i was sorry to see about hh somebody referenced his passing in another thread i perused yday. i didn't know.
-
i haven't been fine with any of it tip to tail no one cares
you'll play your pod & like it if the networks pay for it.
which brings up a question, how many of you have actually met a normal fan who likes r/a. i haven't.
I know but it sucks
It's only a matter of time before Texas/Oklahoma and Ohio St/Michigan and Notre Dame/USC are not played annually
-
Yeah it all sucks.
If I were emperor of college football, I'd switch everything back to the conference alignments, and bowl affiliations, from about 1983. That was the very tail end of the Golden Years of college football.
-
Glad to see you posting. Been a while. Not really much of an SEC board here, so I get it.
I actually think the XII is more viable long term than the PAC. XII has Texas and Florida - football passion.
What's left in Pac Land as far as passionate fans is pretty much Oregon, Washington, Utah and Colorado.
The XII should grab them ASAP, and then maybe the AZ schools. Then choose from the leftover PAC and consider UNLV and maybe Boise????
That would get them to 20.
Are there passionate fans of the U of Colorado? Seems to me that that program has floated off on a smoky, fragrant haze.
I heard a suggestion that the Big 12 should offer Oregon and Washington--both rumored to be seeking membership in the Big Ten--if and when the Pac-12 (-2) breaks up or they otherwise are able to leave. I don't think either school would accept if offered.
It would be a barrel of monkeys to see Stanford in the same conference with Oklahoma State and Texas Tech.
The B1G with USC and UCLA spans nearly 3,000 miles in driving distance. Makes WVU's membership in the Big 12 seem entirely sensible by comparison.
-
Are there passionate fans of the U of Colorado? Seems to me that that program has floated off on a smoky, fragrant haze.
I heard a suggestion that the Big 12 should offer Oregon and Washington--both rumored to be seeking membership in the Big Ten--if and when the Pac-12 (-2) breaks up or they otherwise are able to leave. I don't think either school would accept if offered.
It would be a barrel of monkeys to see Stanford in the same conference with Oklahoma State and Texas Tech.
The B1G with USC and UCLA spans nearly 3,000 miles in driving distance. Makes WVU's membership in the Big 12 seem entirely sensible by comparison.
Yeah, but in reality they're all flyaway destinations anyway. Is there a difference between a 2.5 hour flight and a 4.5 hour flight? Sure, a little, I guess. Don't think it makes any significant difference though.
-
I was on a place from Hawaii to LA and in front of us was seated the New Mexico lady's soccer team. I was getting pretty interested in women's soccer at that point. It's a long flight.
-
Yeah, but in reality they're all flyaway destinations anyway. Is there a difference between a 2.5 hour flight and a 4.5 hour flight? Sure, a little, I guess. Don't think it makes any significant difference though.
I saw a description of what it would be like for the Rutgers hoops team to play at USC or UCLA. For a Tuesday game, the team would leave Monday morning or noontime. They'd play Tuesday and come back on Wednesday, missing classes for up to 3 days out of the week.
-
they didn't go to Rutgers to play school
-
Not only hoops, but every other sport obviously like soccer. I think the airlines are behind this, and Big Oil.
-
drop soccer and lacrosse to save the planet
Title IX is killin the planet, those women should be ashamed
-
No way man, can't drop the non-revenue sports-- they're the only ones Texas is good at!
-
I pretty much have given up even having opinions about conferences. Go here, go there, OK, fine with me. Have a 64 team playoff, well OK I guess. Have pods, have CGs, have 13 teams and call yourself the Mighty 10, got it, move along now.
And I don't even care that I'm apathetic.
-
I pretty much have given up even having opinions about conferences. Go here, go there, OK, fine with me. Have a 64 team playoff, well OK I guess. Have pods, have CGs, have 13 teams and call yourself the Mighty 10, got it, move along now.
And I don't even care that I'm apathetic.
Yeah I'm getting the same way.
I can at least be happy that with Texas and OU both going to the SEC, there's a good chance Texas will once again get to regularly play all three of its traditional rivals. Pods or weird scheduling might screw it up, but we'll hopefully still get to play all three more years than not.
As strangely non-geographical as some of the realignment has been, this particular move actually restores some regional rivalries, for Texas anyway, which is a positive move, IMO.
-
I was musing about have the Dawgs join say the B1G, and played only Tech OOC. Complete MEH.
Or the ACC, aside from Clemson, no real history with anybody. $$$$$$$$$$$
-
Big 12 expansion plans as of 15 minutes ago?
https://youtu.be/BKxAklMw0ZU (https://youtu.be/BKxAklMw0ZU)
-
https://twitter.com/TomFornelli/status/1544357573830361090?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1544357573830361090%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.surlyhorns.com%2Fboard%2Findex.php%3Fapp%3Dcoremodule%3Dsystemcontroller%3Dembedurl%3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2FTomFornelli%2Fstatus%2F1544357573830361090
-
i believe they’re talking bc common sense but nobody knows less about r/a than dd.
that combined league could get a team into an expanded po.
-
i believe they’re talking bc common sense but nobody knows less about r/a than dd.
that combined league could get a team into an expanded po.
Oh yeah, for sure. I won't believe any of it's true until it's announced as done deal. And even then, things have a way of changing...
-
deep discussions
-
Ooops, I got twitter-trolled. Deleting before someone calls me out for being a dumbass!
-
meh. who hasn’t been tricked.
-
It was pretty funny actually. I left my post up on the B1G forum's USC&UCLA thread.
-
it amusingly underscores a not so amusing fact which is the only diff between yer trollsby tweet & many "respected" sports journalists' r/a updates are the blue checkmarks.