The scenario in a north/south division pairings would be TERRIBLE for both Udub, Oregon and WV. That's almost coast to coast travel.
https://www.foxsports.com/college-f...aluable-football-program-in-the-pac-12-011116
Washington has the most valuable football program in the Pac-12
And I think they would make more money in the Big 12.
It's time to make the move.
It would be a broader base for sure. But Texas and Oklahoma would still be the only "plums" other conferences would want. I mean Texas Tech, Iowa State and K-State types just aren't attractive to other conferences. JMO.yes but if they can grab the AZ and SoCal schools, one would think that the conference would be on much stronger footing, no?
I'm of the belief that there should be football only conferences. Or, let all the big dogs be independent. That way the true "money generators" don't have to share with the lessers.
I'm of the belief that there should be football only conferences. Or, let all the big dogs be independent. That way the true "money generators" don't have to share with the lessers.
I thought it might stir up some of the ones that think their schools are big dogs instead of knowing their place.
Sure, except Rutgers owns the television market. The University of Washington doesn’t own the television market of the city their University is in.
You are right. Well 1/2 right but that wasn't what I was responding to. My response was in regard to whether a school was any good at a sport or not as a reason another conference would puruse them.Sure, except Rutgers owns the television market. The University of Washington doesn’t own the television market of the city their University is in.
But they are very necessary programs for a conference. How do you think the power teams create their gaudy records every year? It's certainly not by playing a schedule full of only powerful teams. Take OU's or Texas' all-time record vs. those 3 schools (Texas Tech, K-State and Iowa State) away and their all-time wins and and all-time winning % take a serious dip. Plus, these 3 programs are competitive and draw well in both power sports. ISU is top 3 in attendance in both sports actually. Just saying there are two sides to conference mates. That being said, I'd love for 2, 4 or 6 Pac teams to come join the Xii.It would be a broader base for sure. But Texas and Oklahoma would still be the only "plums" other conferences would want. I mean Texas Tech, Iowa State and K-State types just aren't attractive to other conferences. JMO.
No doubt they are necessary for a conference to exist. And I love it when one of the "non marquee" schools have success. In my neck of the woods, there are a lot of rusty cow and agnut fans that are not real satisfied with their schools performance compared to Texas Tech's recently...at least in relation to the correlation between money spent to performance. Tech grabbed headlines in Men's hoops, Baseball and Men's track on a lot less money than what their beloved universities are spending.But they are very necessary programs for a conference. How do you think the power teams create their gaudy records every year? It's certainly not by playing a schedule full of only powerful teams. Take OU's or Texas' all-time record vs. those 3 schools (Texas Tech, K-State and Iowa State) away and their all-time wins and and all-time winning % take a serious dip. Plus, these 3 programs are competitive and draw well in both power sports. ISU is top 3 in attendance in both sports actually. Just saying there are two sides to conference mates. That being said, I'd love for two or 4 Pac teams to come join the Xii.
I get your point, but it depends on what the conference wants + it has to be a good thing for both sides. The SEC and B1G are both chock full of Football Powers (with a nice balance) and OU and Texas want no part of that. However, I could see the Pac and ACC wanting those two programs, but the ACC doesn't fit, and the Pac would not be as good for either of those schools who like eyeballs on their product.No doubt they are necessary for a conference to exist. And I love it when one of the "non marquee" schools have success. In my neck of the woods, there are a lot of rusty cow and agnut fans that are not real satisfied with their schools performance compared to Texas Tech's recently...at least in relation to the correlation between money spent to performance. Tech grabbed headlines in Men's hoops, Baseball and Men's track on a lot less money than what their beloved universities are spending.
Answer this one 78. If you were to give the ACC, SEC, B1G, and PAC 12 the chance to poach a single school from the Big 12, would any of them choose Texas Tech first? How about K-State? TCU?
And the Big 12 isn't any different from any other conference. If the Big 12 had a their "pick of the litter" from the B1G, would Purdue be their first choice? Don't think so.
I agree that WVU was a good pick up for the Xii. Gives the Xii eyeballs in the East, and I just like 'em. Good series in both football and basketball for Iowa State. However, at the time, I thought they would be the choice for the SEC instead of Mizzou.Rutgers and MD were about TV markets. Nebraska was about a blueblood, even in just in name only. Aggy was also for TV, and Mizzu was.. ??? I even think die hard SEC fans don't know why they really chose to include Mizzu only as a partner for aggy.. Think Utah was a good addition to the PAC, Colorado has a name atleast.
TCU proved itself in Football and baseball, good addition for the Big 12 and despite the distance WV was also a good pick up.
I'm cynical but IMHO all the conferences AND all the schools want is money. They may try to spin it in an altruistic way but anything can be rationalized.I get your point, but it depends on what the conference wants + it has to be a good thing for both sides. The SEC and B1G are both chock full of Football Powers (with a nice balance) and OU and Texas want no part of that. However, I could see the Pac and ACC wanting those two programs, but the ACC doesn't fit, and the Pac would not be as good for either of those schools who like eyeballs on their product.
So, the real answer to your question is that Iowa State should be the #1 goal of every conference looking for a new program. Member of AAU, Top 3 in the Big Xii in both football and basketball attendance, decent in both sport (Bowls and NCAA Tournaments), the incredible Des Moines TV market and the nicest fans in the country! Will not embarrass the conference in any way, shape or form but not upset the power structure either.
If the conference also needs a basketball power, add KU (along with ISU) and the joint DSM-KC Market, two AAU schools and the top two passionate basketball fan bases in the Xii + a solid football program in ISU that draws well and a sleeping giant in KU - would be hard to pass up! Of course, I like the Xii and would rather import talent than leave for another. So, take my tongue in cheek comments for what they are.
Mizzou was to get to an even number.Rutgers and MD were about TV markets. Nebraska was about a blueblood, even in just in name only. Aggy was also for TV, and Mizzu was.. ??? I even think die hard SEC fans don't know why they really chose to include Mizzu only as a partner for aggy.. Think Utah was a good addition to the PAC, Colorado has a name atleast.
TCU proved itself in Football and baseball, good addition for the Big 12 and despite the distance WV was also a good pick up.