Division 1 College Conference Realignment

[infrared41]

The Big Ten could have 28 teams and they're still going to call it The Big Ten. Yes it's silly but it's also a brand name that I don't think they're willing to mess with.

[rams80]

To BBTV

Some of the "standards" have been waived. However, the Pac 10 and Big Ten have still been focusing on large state-run schools (especially of the "flagship" variety) that have decent academic pedigrees (or in the case of Texas Tech, promises of massive financial influxes from the state to get the pedigree). Boise State remains a secondary state school (of a small state) in terms of prestige and treatment, and with a low focus on research.

There remains a sizable gulf academically between Boise State and even Oklahoma State and Texas Tech.

Also, if Villanova, Georgetown, and ODU are concerned about missing the major Conference boat, perhaps its time they hauled their Division I-AA football programs up to I-A status. (Well...that may actually be the long term goal for ODU's renewed football team. I'm not sure)

[dfwabel]

I can flat out guarantee the Pac 10 won't take Boise State. All they literally have is the football team-everything else is historically sub par athletically, and academically the school is little more than a jumped up junior college.

Why does this matter to a conference anymore? It's out in the open now that it's all about money and competitiveness. That's not a bad thing. In fact it's good that they're no longer living a lie.

Also, back to my earlier question - what happens to Villanova, Georgetown, ODU, et al who are essentially basketball only schools if these super conferences just go ahead and form their own playoff system? Certainly they wouldn't let the A-10 or Little East join in... right?

It matters in terms of being associated to research schools. Large research dollars make TV annuals deals look like chump change as they assist in keeping many more people on staff and have a longer lasting impact.

Now we have to go back to the 1980s. In 1984, when SCOTUS ruled the NCAA no longer could control college football telecasts, and the CFA began negotiating contracts to televise games for its members. The CFA was doing well until 1994 when the SEC moved to CBS (or that is Texas's side as they never want to be seen as the instigator).

Final Days of the SWC...Hello Big XII

[RyanMcD29]

Seeing as the Atlantic 10 Conference has 14 teams and the Great West Conference has a team located in New Jersey, I think DI conference's have moved past trying to have accurate names.

Don't get me started on the Big West. My cousin plays for NYIT's baseball team (located on Long Island) and plays in... you guessed it, the Big West

[ZapRowsdower8]

I wouldn't be suprised if the Big 10 justifies their name by saying something like, "all of our schools are 10 out of 10s!"

[pcgd]

Big Ten's getting a new logo, but no way they change the name.

Big 12 might, not much history with the name Big 12 but you never know, they might just keep it as is but who knows. Pac-10 can simply change the 10 to whatever so they'll change I bet.

[infrared41]

I wouldn't be suprised if the Big 10 justifies their name by saying something like, "all of our schools are 10 out of 10s!"

Other than Michigan it's true.

[Hontas]

I still think that the Pac-10 wins.

Maybe they do but they went after Texas and grabbed a handful of Colorado which has a weak football team, a phantom basketball program and no baseball at all. Selling a Pac-whatever network would be better with Texas than with CU.

[Hontas]

The Big Ten = 12 teams only 10 of which can be called big (Nebraska, you are not one of them).

Big 12 could be called Texas and Associates

[dfwabel]

I still think that the Pac-10 wins.

Maybe they do but they went after Texas and grabbed a handful of Colorado which has a weak football team, a phantom basketball program and no baseball at all. Selling a Pac-whatever network would be better with Texas than with CU.

Since both the Big Ten and Pac-10 went after Texas as the primary target with Notre Dame as a sole target for Big Ten, I think that both really won. Big Ten got Nebraska and the KC market and the Pac-10 still for Denver and possibly Utah; please see the TV markets in size listed above. In essence, The Mtn. Network may go away since Utah could leave and more moves from that conference to be added.

If Colorado possessed no value to the Big XII as they claimed, that does not mean that it has no value to the Pac-10 and their suppliers.

[ESTONES6]

I still think that the Pac-10 wins.

Maybe they do but they went after Texas and grabbed a handful of Colorado which has a weak football team, a phantom basketball program and no baseball at all. Selling a Pac-whatever network would be better with Texas than with CU.

Since both the Big Ten and Pac-10 went after Texas as the primary target with Notre Dame as a sole target for Big Ten, I think that both really won. Big Ten got Nebraska and the KC market and the Pac-10 still for Denver and possibly Utah; please see the TV markets in size listed above. In essence, The Mtn. Network may go away since Utah could leave and more moves from that conference to be added.

If Colorado possessed no value to the Big XII as they claimed, that does not mean that it has no value to the Pac-10 and their suppliers.

They actually get a significant decrease in revenue by not adding Mizzou. They will still get the KC/St. Louis market, but they would get a bigger cut of the pie if they had a school in Missouri.

[spyboy1]

So with Texas staying put, the Big 12 will have ten teams and the Big Ten will have 12 teams.

Riiiiight...

[BaltimoreFan]

So with Texas staying put, the Big 12 will have ten teams and the Big Ten will have 12 teams.

Riiiiight...

Do you think they will trade names? Or even come up with entirely new numberless names? My thought was that the Big Ten would change its name to something like the Great Lakes Conference (or something like that) if they became a superconference. I think something needs to happen because the names have been confusing for a while, now its only become worse.

[Gothamite]

I think it would be more confusing for the Big Ten to change its name. They've had the same name for nearly a century. You can't buy that kind of brand equity.

Even casual fans knows what the Big Ten is, but I think very few know (or care) that they have had eleven teams for the past twenty years. Adding another (or even a couple more) won't really change that.

[B-Rich]

Texas has announced already that they are staying in the Big 12, so the SEC is off the table for now. Plus that was something that I don't think Texas would want as the SEC deal with ESPN turns over all the league inventory to them. Texas wants to start their own network, which the Big 12 is allowing them to do that the other conferences wouldn't allow....

That's not entirely accurate... In discussions I've heard and seen in the media, it's been pointed out that Texas is looking to have what LSU has under the SEC, a third-tier form of network called "TigerVision". Essentially what it means is that ALL LSU games are televised live in some form or another. Through their contracts with the SEC, CBS has first "right of refusal" to broadcast a game, then ESPN, then if neither of those big boys exercise their option (say, for a home tilt against Colorwerx's alma mater N. Texas )then the game goes to TigerVision, which is a pay-per-view deal via cable, satellite, on-line, etc.

However, this is only done within the borders of the state of Louisiana. Outside of the state, the same TigerVision games are only offered on ESPN Gameplan... obviously the devil is in the details...

[BBTV]

At this point, the numbers are just words (even when represented numerically) not literal numbers. They have a brand (at least the Big Ten), and should probably just keep it.

[dfwabel]

I still think that the Pac-10 wins.

Maybe they do but they went after Texas and grabbed a handful of Colorado which has a weak football team, a phantom basketball program and no baseball at all. Selling a Pac-whatever network would be better with Texas than with CU.

Since both the Big Ten and Pac-10 went after Texas as the primary target with Notre Dame as a sole target for Big Ten, I think that both really won. Big Ten got Nebraska and the KC market and the Pac-10 still for Denver and possibly Utah; please see the TV markets in size listed above. In essence, The Mtn. Network may go away since Utah could leave and more moves from that conference to be added.

If Colorado possessed no value to the Big XII as they claimed, that does not mean that it has no value to the Pac-10 and their suppliers.

They actually get a significant decrease in revenue by not adding Mizzou. They will still get the KC/St. Louis market, but they would get a bigger cut of the pie if they had a school in Missouri.

Illinois already gave them STL. Nebraska lobbied that they could still provide KC as well as either KU or Mizzou.

[ESTONES6]

I still think that the Pac-10 wins.

Maybe they do but they went after Texas and grabbed a handful of Colorado which has a weak football team, a phantom basketball program and no baseball at all. Selling a Pac-whatever network would be better with Texas than with CU.

Since both the Big Ten and Pac-10 went after Texas as the primary target with Notre Dame as a sole target for Big Ten, I think that both really won. Big Ten got Nebraska and the KC market and the Pac-10 still for Denver and possibly Utah; please see the TV markets in size listed above. In essence, The Mtn. Network may go away since Utah could leave and more moves from that conference to be added.

If Colorado possessed no value to the Big XII as they claimed, that does not mean that it has no value to the Pac-10 and their suppliers.

They actually get a significant decrease in revenue by not adding Mizzou. They will still get the KC/St. Louis market, but they would get a bigger cut of the pie if they had a school in Missouri.

Illinois already gave them STL. Nebraska lobbied that they could still provide KC as well as either KU or Mizzou.

As I have already stated... According to BTN contract, the Big 10 gets 70% revenue from a state if they have a school in that state = Missouri/Mizzou.

The Big Ten only receives around 30% of the revenue from households in state where a University is not located = Nebraska/Illinois picking up the St.L and KC markets.

So... would you rather have an additional 40% or no?

[FiddySicks]

I don't care if the names have historic value, having a conference with 12 teams called the big ten and one with 10 teams called the big 12 is easily the most stupid thing that could possibly happen in college football, and college football is the KING of stupidity. Just change the names of the conferences or this is gonna make about as much sense as the BCS.

[dfwabel]

I still think that the Pac-10 wins.

Maybe they do but they went after Texas and grabbed a handful of Colorado which has a weak football team, a phantom basketball program and no baseball at all. Selling a Pac-whatever network would be better with Texas than with CU.

Since both the Big Ten and Pac-10 went after Texas as the primary target with Notre Dame as a sole target for Big Ten, I think that both really won. Big Ten got Nebraska and the KC market and the Pac-10 still for Denver and possibly Utah; please see the TV markets in size listed above. In essence, The Mtn. Network may go away since Utah could leave and more moves from that conference to be added.

If Colorado possessed no value to the Big XII as they claimed, that does not mean that it has no value to the Pac-10 and their suppliers.

They actually get a significant decrease in revenue by not adding Mizzou. They will still get the KC/St. Louis market, but they would get a bigger cut of the pie if they had a school in Missouri.

Illinois already gave them STL. Nebraska lobbied that they could still provide KC as well as either KU or Mizzou.

As I have already stated... According to BTN contract, the Big 10 gets 70% revenue from a state if they have a school in that state = Missouri/Mizzou.

The Big Ten only receives around 30% of the revenue from households in state where a University is not located = Nebraska/Illinois picking up the St.L and KC markets.

So... would you rather have an additional 40% or no?

The contract gives a much greater income from within state, but those cities are still border towns to ILL and KS, so the households are split anyway. Plus there is no greater likelihood that a cable carrier will have BTN on a expanded basic tier there, than in a one team state like Nebraska. The conference did their research and Nebraska was seen as a better fit, academically and economically.