9/2/2014 3:13 PM
The schools still had to meet whatever standards the conference set forth. 
9/2/2014 4:13 PM
Big 12 is strong at this point, after the very real threat that their conference would disband. Their cash per school was on par with the SEC (at least prior to SEC network).

As a fan I think they should add two schools, such as Boise St or BYU. I think they struck out not adding Louisville, who has been a good football school for awhile along with a yearly contender in basketball. But the Big 12 doesn't want to add anyone else (they didn't want WV or TCU as it is), to split up that pot of money.
9/2/2014 4:38 PM
There has to be a reason Boise State gets no love from the power conferences.   It's not football money.   Maybe it's eyes in Idaho, academics, school size, etc, etc.  I know I don't know but it's something.   Seems like they'd be a good fit in the PAC12 geographically.   Or the B10 or B12 to expand the footprint.   But they get nothing. 
9/2/2014 5:30 PM (edited)
Posted by moranis on 9/2/2014 2:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by AlCheez on 9/2/2014 2:08:00 PM (view original):
That may have been what caused them to drop to 10, but most of the remaining schools are clinging to Texas for dear life at this point.  I think the conference could certainly go grab two schools to get back to 12 if they wanted to, but they obviously don't see anyone out there right now that would expand the overall pie by enough to maintain/grow the slices of the current members.
Exactly.  Frankly I'm surprised they added TCU.  I don't really see the benefit there.  They could have just added West Virginia and stayed at 9.  

That said I think they could add some schools for football only, like Boise State and BYU, and go back to 12.  I could also see them consider some more eastern schools like Cincinnati or Memphis, but I just don't think at the end of the day, they will add enough in football to make it worthwhile (Louisville and Pittsburgh would have, but that ship is sailed) so I think they stay at 10 for the foreseeable future.

Frankly I think it is more likely the conference splits up and disbands with Texas and Oklahoma going to the Big Ten, West Virginia and Oklahoma St. going to the SEC, and the remaining schools joining up with the American Conference (or something like that).
I'd much rather have Ok in the SEC than Okie lite, but your scenario would be ok.  Historically, I just don't know how WV competes.  I say I wouldn't want Texass in the SEC, but honestly it would make football a lot better.  And you know TX and OK are package deals.

Texass is going to end up with their richard in their hands because they think everyone should pay have the privilege of playing them.  They don't want a conference championship because that lessens their chance of getting to a NC if they lose it.

I thought Boise chose to be on their own.  As a sidebar, I think Lewisville :) has the two best coaches in their respective sports in college athletics.  It is very realistic to imagine them winning them both at the same time soon.
9/2/2014 6:02 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/2/2014 4:38:00 PM (view original):
There has to be a reason Boise State gets no love from the power conferences.   It's not football money.   Maybe it's eyes in Idaho, academics, school size, etc, etc.  I know I don't know but it's something.   Seems like they'd be a good fit in the PAC12 geographically.   Or the B10 or B12 to expand the footprint.   But they get nothing. 
The football stadium seats 36k.  The Boise MSA only has 650k.   Its athletic expenditures are just 43 million (which matches its revenue).  It only gets 8.2 million from ticket sales (for all sports), which makes sense given the paltry size of the stadium.  It's other sports are basically terrible.  

For the record both the Pac 12 and Big Ten are heavy into academics.  Boise State will never be in either conference as its academics just aren't on par.  That is one of the reasons the Big Ten never seriously considered adding Louisville and went with Rutgers and Maryland (two much lesser football programs - though in good locations).  It is why the Big Ten would love Texas and North Carolina and why a team like Georgia Tech comes up a lot more frequently than you would think it would (I mean Atlanta helps there of course).

www.usatoday.com/sports/college/schools/finances/

9/4/2014 8:19 AM
Posted by moranis on 9/2/2014 3:09:00 PM (view original):
We look at it from a football perspective because it is the football money that drove the last round of conference moves.  And as we saw from the Big Ten, football money doesn't necessarily mean elite football programs, it means expanding footprints (it certainly helps if you expand the footprint and bring in a good program - see SEC with Texas A&M).  

If the Power 5 do decide to break away, I think the Power 5 might become the Super 4 with 16 teams each (it just so happens the Power 5 have 64 teams - though that would leave ND out) with a 4 team playoff comprising the 4 conference champions.  I could certainly see that happen where the Pac 12 adds Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma St.,  the Big Ten adds North Carolina and Georgia Tech, the SEC adds West Virginia and Baylor, and the ACC adds Kansas, Kansas St., TCU, and Iowa St. (or one of them gets squeezed out for a full conference member in ND) - or something like that.
Does this apply to what you just said about Boise State?
9/4/2014 9:35 PM (edited)
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/2/2014 4:38:00 PM (view original):
There has to be a reason Boise State gets no love from the power conferences.   It's not football money.   Maybe it's eyes in Idaho, academics, school size, etc, etc.  I know I don't know but it's something.   Seems like they'd be a good fit in the PAC12 geographically.   Or the B10 or B12 to expand the footprint.   But they get nothing. 
There are 1.6 million people in the entire state of Idaho. How many of those tune into Boise State? Not enough.

There are 2.9 million in Arkansas and there is only one real D1 school there with a fanbase who has been rabid since the 30s. The hogs have been ingrained into not only football fans, but in everyone from birth. We can still only support one school.
9/5/2014 8:26 AM
While I won't dispute that everyone in Arkansas wears a hog hat on Saturdays, I'd wager there are more out of state Boise State fans than Arkansas fans.  
9/5/2014 9:19 AM (edited)

Whatever those fan numbers are, Boise State's football revenues are still well below average for FBS schools: http://www.forbes.com/sites/aliciajessop/2013/08/31/the-economics-of-college-football-a-look-at-the-top-25-teams-revenues-and-expenses/, and Idaho isn't exactly a state that conferences are clamouring to add to their TV footprint.

Now, there's absolutely no doubt that if they were added to a Power 5 conference and got the subsequent TV money boost, that they would be generating as much/more as some of the bottom end teams on that list, but I don't think there's any way that they increase the value of say, the Big 12's TV deal by enough to make it worthwhile to the existing members to cut another team into the pie.  The Big 12 is probably their best bet (from a money perspective) simply because there's a chance that if they added them and another team, bringing back the conference title game would expand the pie enough to justify their inclusion.



9/5/2014 10:10 AM
A small stadium and low TV money will do that. 
9/5/2014 10:46 AM
The stadium is sized to the demand, it's not limiting it - they just expanded it a couple years ago and only added 3500 seats, and they haven't had a capacity crowd at the new size yet.  And their TV money being so low isn't exactly a mark in their favor. Even if Boise was responsible for every dime of MWC TV money, they'd still be brining in less than the average per team payout in the Power 5.

They just aren't as valuable of a football property as their level of national exposure would lead you to believe, and it's because of their location.  Now, I'm sure there are conferences that would be better off from a revenue perspective by booting an existing school and bringing in Boise, but that's whole different animal.  They just don't bring enough to the table to expand the pie enough for a Power 5 conference.  If they did, someone would be working around any other factors.
9/5/2014 11:19 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/4/2014 8:19:00 AM (view original):
Posted by moranis on 9/2/2014 3:09:00 PM (view original):
We look at it from a football perspective because it is the football money that drove the last round of conference moves.  And as we saw from the Big Ten, football money doesn't necessarily mean elite football programs, it means expanding footprints (it certainly helps if you expand the footprint and bring in a good program - see SEC with Texas A&M).  

If the Power 5 do decide to break away, I think the Power 5 might become the Super 4 with 16 teams each (it just so happens the Power 5 have 64 teams - though that would leave ND out) with a 4 team playoff comprising the 4 conference champions.  I could certainly see that happen where the Pac 12 adds Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma St.,  the Big Ten adds North Carolina and Georgia Tech, the SEC adds West Virginia and Baylor, and the ACC adds Kansas, Kansas St., TCU, and Iowa St. (or one of them gets squeezed out for a full conference member in ND) - or something like that.
Does this apply to what you just said about Boise State?
Sure, but Boise doesn't provide a big enough footprint, won't provide the increased revenue required to add them, etc.  They are a small little school that has terrible academics, terrible overall sports program, and not enough sustained long term success to overcome all of their deficiencies.  
9/7/2014 7:24 AM
LOL at the B1G in general and OSU/Michigan specifically. 

B1G day of incompetence for the B1G.
9/7/2014 11:09 AM
yeah it was bad.  Barrett just made so many rookie mistakes for OSU.  I get that he is a freshman who hasn't played much football in two year, but aside from a few running plays, he was awful.  two badly missed FG's.  Terrible 3rd down defense.  Just an absolutely awful game from OSU all the way around.

Michigan was always going to be bad this year.  they just don't have the talent to be anything more than mediocre.

MSU looked good early, then they changed some crap up and didn't adapt to oregon's changes and got blitzed in the end.
9/7/2014 11:59 AM
I think the playcalling for Ohio State was horrible. VT was bringing 5-7 guys every play and they kept calling for routes that took too much time to develop. They ran one play that was a quick out to a RB that would have been good for at least 15 yards or so (not 40 like the dipshit announcers said), and promptly didn't call another play like that.

Thankfully we are unlikely to get a Big 10 in the 4 team playoff.
of 5

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.