Big 10 Report: Conference Realignment

[Mr. Laz]

A source in St. Louis familiar with the situation told NewsCenter 16 Thursday afternoon that Missouri will leave the Big XII and soon join the Big 10. Other schools expected to follow the Tigers are Syracuse, Pitt, Rutgers and Nebraska.

Many have speculated that such an expansion would include Notre Dame but ND athletic director Jack Swarbrick told me today that the Irish prefer to stay independent in football and in the Big East for other sports. Swarbrick said maintaining football Independence is such a part of what Notre Dame is.

He went on to say the Big East is a great partner for the University in other sports.

"We do have to monitor what is going on," Swarbrick said. "There will be significant shifts. "Hopefully we can navigate them by keeping our football independent and keeping our Big East affiliation because that is what we care about."

The move of Syracuse, Pitt and Rutgers to the Big Ten from the Big East could categorically change the landscape of the Big East itself. Thus, what Swarbrick is referring to when stating the University must continue to monitor what is going on.

The interview with Swarbrick was done before the late afternoon announcement.

http://www.wndu.com/sports/headlines/92447574.html

[vailpass]

CU is thrilled to be joining the Pac X. CU is waiting a year because the penalty for leaving this year is much more $ than the penatly for waiting a year.
Money.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by vailpass

CU is thrilled to be joining the Pac X. CU is waiting a year because the penalty for leaving this year is much more $ than the penatly for waiting a year.
Money.

They're waiting 2 years, ****stick. Nice theory, though.

[HolyHandgernade]

Originally Posted by HerculesRockefell

CU had been in discussions with the PX since the beginning of the year to change conferences. They wanted to go and that hasn't changed. There isn't any buyer's remorse on their part.

And a former Chancellor of UCLA saying that the PX should not accept either CU or Utah isn't going to fly. Both those schools are getting in to the PX.

That might be true today. But, this is two years down the line, contract talks will start heating up, I'm jut saying that's a lot of time for a lot of different things to happen.

I'd rather have Notre Dame as well, its just so difficult to judge their true interest level. If I were in charge of the Big XII and could shoot for the moon, this is the way I would do it:

Use the independent revenue streams as a selling point and convince AU, ASU, USC and UCLA they would be better off cutting the dead weight to the north (potential snag is that UCLA is part of the Cal State system so I don't know if that would/could be blocked). Invite Notre Dame and Arkansas (I know they are secure in the SEC, but a super conference with Texas, OU, USC and Notre Dame might be too good to pass on). Divide the super conference into quads:

Eastern: Notre Dame, ISU, MU, Arkansas
Northern: KU, KSU, OU, OSU
Southern: Texas, aTm, T Tech, Baylor
Western: AU, ASU, USC, UCLA

Play your quad annually for a total of 3 games, play all the teams from a rotating quad for 4 more games, and play one "rover" or "rivalry" game to get to 8 conference games a year. The rover game would come from one of the two other quads or, if two schools agree, they can have an annual rivalry game in place of the rover (Tex-OU; USC-ND; KU-MU) Almost all other large rivalries are accounted for in the quads. If the rivalry game would be part of the natural quad rotation, then those teams would get a "rover" game that year. That way you could preserve the high profile rivalry games that are also usually candidates for national TV.

Negotiate with the BCS for an additional at large team on the condition that teams must win their quad to be eligible for a BCS game. So the Super 16 would have between 1 and 4 teams in any given BCS year. Quad champions go to a playoff system with a western site at University of Phoenix Stadium in Arizona and an eastern site at Arrowhead Stadium in KC. Championship game held in Dallas at Cowboys Stadium. This places an emphasis on winning your quad as well a winning your conference.

This might appeal to the western teams because they would get more exposure in the central and eastern time zones, it would offer incredible matchups, and puts at least one perennial college football power in each quad. While it doesn't guarantee a Tex-OU-ND-USC playoffs, it certainly provides excellent potential.

Anyway, if I could make my dream scenario work, that's what I would want.

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by Metrolike

They're waiting 2 years, ****stick. Nice theory, though.

Not theory, it's the report out Boulder from a friend of mine from when I lived in colorado.

I knew football when your parents were still peeling potatoes in whatever shithole country they escaped to come running to the US. I don't need a skinny loser like you piping up when I'm talking junior.
Get back to your real doll and leave the sports talk to those that have roots in it.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by vailpass

Not theory, it's the report out Boulder from a friend of mine from when I lived in colorado.

I knew football when your parents were still peeling potatoes in whatever shithole country they escaped to come running to the US. I don't need a skinny loser like you piping up when I'm talking junior.
Get back to your real doll and leave the sports talk to those that have roots in it.

Except you're the most uninformed "fan" on this board. Actually, I take it back, you're probably on the same level as some female posters here (not all, since certain women on this site are more informed than you). My parents, who have nothing to do with anything, are much smarter and more educated than you, I guarantee you that. Just like always, all you can do is drop some stupid shitty one-liner that has nothing to do with anything. Did you friend forget to mention to you that CU is staying with B12 through 11-12 school year, you ****ing ignoramus?

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by Metrolike

Except you're the most uninformed "fan" on this board. Actually, I take it back, you're probably on the same level as some female posters here (not all, since certain women on this site are more informed than you). My parents, who have nothing to do with anything, are much smarter and more educated than you, I guarantee you that. Just like always, all you can do is drop some stupid shitty one-liner that has nothing to do with anything. Did you friend forget to mention to you that CU is staying with B12 through 11-12 school year, you ****ing ignoramus?

Check out the pencil neck who never played a down in his life now thinks he can run game on the computer. You keep trying to fit in kid.

[Mr. Plow]

Really, who ****ing cares if Colorado leaves?

[Pants]

Originally Posted by vailpass

Check out the pencil neck who never played a down in his life now thinks he can run game on the computer. You keep trying to fit in kid.

So in other words, you are an uninformed, ignorant reerun incapable of backing up anything you say because everything you say is mindbogglingly wrong. KAY, champ.

[Spott]

Originally Posted by Mr. Plow

Really, who ****ing cares if Colorado leaves?

I'd like them to stay just because it's two easy wins in basketball and 1 in football every year.

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by Metrolike

So in other words, you are an uninformed, ignorant reerun incapable of backing up anything you say because everything you say is mindbogglingly wrong. KAY, champ.

What's this?
It's a kebble.
What's a kebble?
110 kebble make a lithnitch.
What's a lithnich?
270 lithnich make a matta.
What's a matta?
I don't know, what's the matter with you?

[Mr. Plow]

Originally Posted by Spott

I'd like them to stay just because it's two easy wins in basketball and 1 in football every year.

That's what Iowa State is for.

[HerculesRockefell]

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

That might be true today. But, this is two years down the line, contract talks will start heating up, I'm jut saying that's a lot of time for a lot of different things to happen.

I'd rather have Notre Dame as well, its just so difficult to judge their true interest level. If I were in charge of the Big XII and could shoot for the moon, this is the way I would do it:

Use the independent revenue streams as a selling point and convince AU, ASU, USC and UCLA they would be better off cutting the dead weight to the north (potential snag is that UCLA is part of the Cal State system so I don't know if that would/could be blocked). Invite Notre Dame and Arkansas (I know they are secure in the SEC, but a super conference with Texas, OU, USC and Notre Dame might be too good to pass on). Divide the super conference into quads:

Eastern: Notre Dame, ISU, MU, Arkansas
Northern: KU, KSU, OU, OSU
Southern: Texas, aTm, T Tech, Baylor
Western: AU, ASU, USC, UCLA

Play your quad annually for a total of 3 games, play all the teams from a rotating quad for 4 more games, and play one "rover" or "rivalry" game to get to 8 conference games a year. The rover game would come from one of the two other quads or, if two schools agree, they can have an annual rivalry game in place of the rover (Tex-OU; USC-ND; KU-MU) Almost all other large rivalries are accounted for in the quads. If the rivalry game would be part of the natural quad rotation, then those teams would get a "rover" game that year. That way you could preserve the high profile rivalry games that are also usually candidates for national TV.

Negotiate with the BCS for an additional at large team on the condition that teams must win their quad to be eligible for a BCS game. So the Super 16 would have between 1 and 4 teams in any given BCS year. Quad champions go to a playoff system with a western site at University of Phoenix Stadium in Arizona and an eastern site at Arrowhead Stadium in KC. Championship game held in Dallas at Cowboys Stadium. This places an emphasis on winning your quad as well a winning your conference.

This might appeal to the western teams because they would get more exposure in the central and eastern time zones, it would offer incredible matchups, and puts at least one perennial college football power in each quad. While it doesn't guarantee a Tex-OU-ND-USC playoffs, it certainly provides excellent potential.

Anyway, if I could make my dream scenario work, that's what I would want.

It's a nice scenario, but there's a big problem: As long as Texas runs the conference and there is an unequal revenue distribution, the Big XII-2 is not long for this world.

KU, KSU, Iowa St, Mizzou, and Baylor obviously did whatever they had to do to keep the conference together because they had no other BCS conference to go to, but nothing they did helped make the conference viable in the long-term.

Continually adding teams to the conference would only further perpetuate the haves and the have nots.

[DaKCMan AP]

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

Negotiate with the BCS for an additional at large team

I fail to see how that conference is better than the SEC, therefore it does not deserve an additional at-large bid.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

That might be true today. But, this is two years down the line, contract talks will start heating up, I'm jut saying that's a lot of time for a lot of different things to happen.

I'd rather have Notre Dame as well, its just so difficult to judge their true interest level. If I were in charge of the Big XII and could shoot for the moon, this is the way I would do it:

Use the independent revenue streams as a selling point and convince AU, ASU, USC and UCLA they would be better off cutting the dead weight to the north (potential snag is that UCLA is part of the Cal State system so I don't know if that would/could be blocked). Invite Notre Dame and Arkansas (I know they are secure in the SEC, but a super conference with Texas, OU, USC and Notre Dame might be too good to pass on). Divide the super conference into quads:

Eastern: Notre Dame, ISU, MU, Arkansas
Northern: KU, KSU, OU, OSU
Southern: Texas, aTm, T Tech, Baylor
Western: AU, ASU, USC, UCLA

Play your quad annually for a total of 3 games, play all the teams from a rotating quad for 4 more games, and play one "rover" or "rivalry" game to get to 8 conference games a year. The rover game would come from one of the two other quads or, if two schools agree, they can have an annual rivalry game in place of the rover (Tex-OU; USC-ND; KU-MU) Almost all other large rivalries are accounted for in the quads. If the rivalry game would be part of the natural quad rotation, then those teams would get a "rover" game that year. That way you could preserve the high profile rivalry games that are also usually candidates for national TV.

Negotiate with the BCS for an additional at large team on the condition that teams must win their quad to be eligible for a BCS game. So the Super 16 would have between 1 and 4 teams in any given BCS year. Quad champions go to a playoff system with a western site at University of Phoenix Stadium in Arizona and an eastern site at Arrowhead Stadium in KC. Championship game held in Dallas at Cowboys Stadium. This places an emphasis on winning your quad as well a winning your conference.

This might appeal to the western teams because they would get more exposure in the central and eastern time zones, it would offer incredible matchups, and puts at least one perennial college football power in each quad. While it doesn't guarantee a Tex-OU-ND-USC playoffs, it certainly provides excellent potential.

Anyway, if I could make my dream scenario work, that's what I would want.

That's an impressively awesome idea with a couple of well taken hurdles to overcome.

[HolyHandgernade]

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP

I fail to see how that conference is better than the SEC, therefore it does not deserve an additional at-large bid.

It would have 16 teams to the SEC's 12, that's why it would petition for the extra at large. Trying to determine the strength of one conference to another beyond a yearly timetable is a fool's errand. It had nothing to do with it in any event.