Texas to Pac 12

[ThePop]

is what 247 is reporting.

Lets see if this year it's true

[tlongII]

Please let this happen!

[DesignatedT]

Yep. Hearing Texas, Tech, OU and OSU to PAC. Still uncertain about LHN, some think PAC might let Texas keep it fully intact.

Also hearing A&M and West Virginia to SEC.

[Spursfan092120]

love it...

[Mr. Body]

Probably the best option, given what's there. But travel will be hard, and you basically kiss east coast media markets goodbye at least half the games because they are on PST.

[Kermit]

Probably the best option, given what's there. But travel will be hard, and you basically kiss east coast media markets goodbye at least half the games because they are on PST.

This is the second time you've posted something about the time zone. Do you know how a pod system will work? And what? Can people on the East Coast not watch football at 3:00 in the afternoon?

[Blake]

Ut to the pac with the others makes much more logistical sense than anything else.

I'm sure they can work out something regarding the lhn.

[JMarkJohns]

Yep. Hearing Texas, Tech, OU and OSU to PAC. Still uncertain about LHN, some think PAC might let Texas keep it fully intact.

LHN will be phased out gradually. I think first year is full, second half, third dully integrated into Pac's profit-sharing system (or something like this).

This is what a Pac Insider in know is saying:


ESPN will likely get an expanded stream of games in its first tier rights and a guarantee of Texas in a certain amount of telecasts. Also, the league will help absorb some of LHN's startup costs as they fold it into the Pac 16 Network. So basically, the league allows UT to save face, ESPN gets probably more UT football than the LHN would have been able to provide and the Pac gets to re-up first tier rights fees with both ESPN and FOX while getting even more premium content for its own networks.

Eventually everyone plays everyone equally and all profits are shared equally, and it will happen sooner than later.

Also, for football it will be four 4-team pods, with a schedule that guarantees everyone plays in California every year, which is crucial for everyone.

The budding Conference Championship Playoffs will likely be as follows:

- Once the LA NFL Arena is built, go between it and Jerry World, with the divisional games at one and the Title at the other in a rotating schedule. Until the new LA NFL arena is built, this may stay true, only as the Rose Bowl.

[JMarkJohns]

Here's the rumored pods

- Northwest -
Oregon
Oregon State
Washington
Washington State

- Pacific -
Cal
Stanford
UCLA
USC

- Mountain -
Arizona
Arizona State
Colorado
Utah

- Plains -
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
Texas Tech

Problem is this creates two super division and two largely mediocre divisions. Not really balanced. Plus, this doesn't work well to fit within the soon-to-be-voted-upon parameters of everybody playing one game in California every year. Talk is people would like to do the same in the new region (we'll call it mid-west, even though it's not really).

I wouldn't mind seeing something like below:

(bolded teams the division headliner)
(Italicized teams main challenger)

USC - Arizona State - Washington - Tech
UCLA - Arizona - Oregon - Oklahoma State
Cal - Utah - Washington St - Texas
Stanford - Colorado - Oregon State - Oklahoma

The schedule could be:
- Each team plays their pod every year (3 games) and two from every other pod (6 games) with a +1 for geographical rival (1 game) in years you're not scheduled to play them already. Within this a team would have nine conference games guaranteed, with an occasional 10th for the geographic rival game. In these seasons the non-conference games are cut from three to two to fit within the 12-game season (pre playoffs).

Not sure this works beyond the basics, but it ensures a game in California and Midwest every year, which is what everyone would want.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

If an Arizona-ASU-Utah-Colorado pod happens, the great recruiting pipeline to California we have in basketball and football vanishes like a fart in the wind.

[scottspurs]

Espn bottomline says deal will allow texas to keep LHN.

[JMarkJohns]

If an Arizona-ASU-Utah-Colorado pod happens, the great recruiting pipeline to California we have in basketball and football vanishes like a fart in the wind.

For football, not for basketball, as it only takes playing San Diego State and St. Mary's in an alternating home-n-home series, and a "neutral" site game vs. Gonzaga or St. John's (rumored) in Anaheim to gain the needed exposure.

But I'm hearing the pods may be for football only.

[DesignatedT]

Oregon would absolutely destroy that "pod" :lol

The former big12 pod would immediately be the best one lol

[DesignatedT]

How would pod scheduling work? So the conference would have 4 divisions?

[JMarkJohns]

Espn bottomline says deal will allow texas to keep LHN.

Interesting. Maybe keep the network but share the proceeds (which is what everyone in the Pac does).

[JMarkJohns]

Oregon would absolutely destroy that "pod" :lol

The former big12 pod would immediately be the best one lol

Agree, which is why they need to go the balanced pods I discussed after.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

How would pod scheduling work? So the conference would have 4 divisions?
Basically.


It doesn't make sense why fans/students of less powerful schools like Arizona want a Pac-16 superconference so badly. If OU and Texas are added, the chances at Arizona ever making a Rose Bowl go from 2% to 0.00002% and it can only hurt their basketball program. I don't see anything good that can come of it for Arizona. Everyone I know wants it and is so excited for it, as if getting pooped on by UT and OU every year is something to look forward to.

[DesignatedT]

Basically.


It doesn't make sense why fans/students of less powerful schools like Arizona want a Pac-16 superconference so badly. If OU and Texas are added, the chances at Arizona ever making a Rose Bowl go from 2% to 0.00002% and it can only hurt their basketball program. I don't see anything good that can come of it for Arizona. Everyone I know wants it and is so excited for it, as if getting pooped on by UT and OU every year is something to look forward to.

Well hopefully all these superconferences eventually create some sort of playoff system in the BCS. An 8 team playoff would be awesome with some bowls after that and would seem necessary with so many good teams in these conferences.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Well hopefully all these superconferences eventually create some sort of playoff system in the BCS. An 8 team playoff would be awesome with some bowls after that and would seem necessary with so many good teams in these conferences.
If there's gonna be a playoff system it seems like the most sensible solution is four 16-team superconferences (just for hypothetical sake the Pac-12, SEC, ACC, and Big-10 becoming 16 team conferences) where there's a 4 team BCS playoffs involving the winner of each conference.

[DesignatedT]

That makes sense. You would most likely get teams with 2 or even 3 losses in those games as well. So it would eliminate virtually having to run the table like you do now.

[JMarkJohns]

I don't think it holds any real undercutting potential for basketball for reasons I said above for California, plus it adds exposure in Texas, which is a hotbed Arizona once had strong pull in.

Technically Arizona could have a CA game every year with even that original pod structure so long as the schedule has a home-n-home series vs. your pod (6 games) and 2 from remaining three pods (6x2=12 games). That's 18 games, same as now. So if the CA has it's own pod, UA would play HnH vs. USC and Stanford one year and UCLA and Cal next, ensuring a conference game in both southern and northern California every year.

[DesignatedT]

What about starting a HnH with UT and dipping your hand in Texas. It would definitely help recruiting this state a little easier as well.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I hope Pitt and Syracuse create a domino effect in the Big East falling apart and we no longer have to deal with that shitty, fuckstained and overrated conference getting easy seeding and biased officiating during March madness.

[DesignatedT]

Basketball in the ACC will be unreal. Adding Pitt and Cuse lol

[JMarkJohns]

Big East will dissolve into the ACC (Pitt and Syracuse, maybe UConn) and SEC (West Virginia, maybe TCU or Louisville) and the rest will become scraps for Conference USA (Rugters, St. John's, Cincinnati, Notre Dame, Marquette, etc) or worse (South Florida).

All the Big East's best going to the ACC with Duke and UNC only means ACCSPN will be even worse.

[DesignatedT]

I'm interested to see what the SEC does. Go to 14 or 16?

The ACC will be at 15 with UCONN and then will add 1 more from BE for 16.

The SEC would then be at 13 with A&M. Mizzou and WV seem like the only viable options for them.

Unless you see the B1G starting to get involved and inviting Mizzou.

[JMarkJohns]

ACC should add Rutgers for the NY/NJ exposure along with UConn.

Everything I'm hearing has A&M, Mizzou and West Virginia to their existing 12, which means they need one more (hence possibility of TCU? makes sense geographically and adds another solid football program and furthers the conferences exposure in Texas).

[DesignatedT]

What about the big10 during all of this. Sit back and watch everyone expand and strengthen their conferences?

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

It'd be cool if the Big-10 did something crazy and under the wire like adding Boise State. I'm actually surprised that there's been absolutely no talk about Boise potentially joining a big conference during all of this.

[JMarkJohns]

What about the big10 during all of this. Sit back and watch everyone expand and strengthen their conferences?

I've heard their "academic" prestige keeps them from pursuing certain teams that make some sense (Kansas schools, Louisville and Cincinnati). They are already at 12, so they are looking at a few options, but if they don't land Mizzou or leverage Notre Dame into joining the conference entirely, then I'm not sure what they will be doing.

I think ideally they land Mizzou, leverage Notre Dame into joining, then maybe reach south and add Rice and maybe sees if it can't pilfer Vanderbilt from the SEC. All four of which make sense for academic prestige (much the same way they added Northwestern), Notre Dame is Notre Dame, and Missouri and Vanderbilt help in a few sports, and Rice adds a strong baseball program.

[JMarkJohns]

It'd be cool if the Big-10 did something crazy and under the wire like adding Boise State. I'm actually surprised that there's been absolutely no talk about Boise potentially joining a big conference during all of this.

Boise adds nothing but football. Not any other athletic program, not anything academically.

[NFO]

What about the big10 during all of this. Sit back and watch everyone expand and strengthen their conferences?

They have been quiet. Delany has said they would expand only to add quality and not quantity.

If the B1G does not land Notre Dame in this then they would have failed in the expansion game imo.

A lot should happen tomorrow or Tuesday though.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

What's the deal with Notre Dame in all of this anyway? Is it almost a sure thing they can't remain independent anymore once the Big East dies and they'll no longer have a basketball only conference?

[DesignatedT]

If ND joins a conference it will be the big10. If Big10 invites missouri, they would also accept in a heart beat. Those would be 2 quality pick ups for them.

[NFO]

If the Big East dies and other conferences go to 16 ND is pretty much forced to join a conference at that point for their Olympic sports, and I doubt they want to join the Mountain West or Conference USA.

[JMarkJohns]

If the Big East dies and other conferences go to 16 ND is pretty much forced to join a conference at that point for their Olympic sports, and I doubt they want to join the Mountain West or Conference USA.

This. It'll be Big-Whatever should they. Same with Missouri. If these two join, then maybe they concede a bit on the academics and add Kansas schools, but if not, Rice and Vandy fit their mold.

[JMarkJohns]

Here's the rumored pods

- Northwest -
Oregon
Oregon State
Washington
Washington State

- Pacific -
Cal
Stanford
UCLA
USC

- Mountain -
Arizona
Arizona State
Colorado
Utah

- Plains -
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
Texas Tech

The schedule (w)ould be:
- Each team plays their pod every year (3 games) and two from every other pod (6 games)

So this will be the pod structure, I am hearing. Done deal...

The same thing I said in the quoted post below holds true in football halved:


Technically Arizona could have a CA game every year with even that original pod structure so long as the schedule has a home-n-home series vs. your pod (6 games) and 2 from remaining three pods (6x2=12 games). That's 18 games, same as now. So if the CA has it's own pod, UA would play HnH vs. USC and Stanford one year and UCLA and Cal next, ensuring a conference game in both southern and northern California every year.

So three games vs. pod, and six vs. two from each other pod. This creates an Arizona schedule like this every year:

Non-Con
Non-Con
Non-Con
ASU
Colorado
Utah
vs. CA School
@ CA School
vs. NW School
@ NW School
vs. Plains School
@ Plains School

[DesignatedT]

Got it. That's not so bad then I guess.

[JMarkJohns]

Got it. That's not so bad then I guess.

No. Not at all, really. The schedule could actually favor Arizona vs. what my earlier proposed balanced pod was.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Yeah depending on what effect it has on recruiting that schedule could turn out really good. Next step is introducing our 2012 football coach Mike Leach.

[JMarkJohns]

Yeah depending on what effect it has on recruiting that schedule could turn out really good. Next step is introducing our 2012 football coach Mike Leach.

Probably, but I like Richt if available more.

[DesignatedT]

Leach will end up somewhere over there. UCLA maybe?

[JMarkJohns]

He's been linked to UA pretty strongly. UA likes to run his system already, so the offensive base is already here to a nice degree. Just bring in more talent on the O-line and defense, largely.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Leach will end up somewhere over there. UCLA maybe?
If Leach ends up at a Pac-12 school other than UA I'll be pretty pissed

[robino2001]

So this will be the pod structure, I am hearing. Done deal...

The same thing I said in the quoted post below holds true in football halved:


So three games vs. pod, and six vs. two from each other pod. This creates an Arizona schedule like this every year:

Non-Con
Non-Con
Non-Con
ASU
Colorado
Utah
vs. CA School
@ CA School
vs. NW School
@ NW School
vs. Plains School
@ Plains School

And you would think the pods would be split into mini-pods/pairs, no? For example, Arizona vs the Plains schools... I doubt they'd go home/home with OU and UT for two years then go Ok St/Tech for the next two. There'll be balanced pairs I'd assume if this structure holds.

[Blake]

had me here:


I think ideally they land Mizzou, leverage Notre Dame into joining

lost me here:


then maybe reach south and add Rice

[Blake]

If Leach ends up at a Pac-12 school other than UA I'll be pretty pissed

Leach seems like the A&M of coaches. Nobody wants to hire him until he gets this lawsuit thing behind him.

I like Tubbs, but he is boring as hell.

I miss the entertainment value of the Pirate.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I didn't know there was still a pending lawsuit involving Leach. Is it still about that lazy n!gger Adams who's daddeh used ESPN to sabotage Leach's career?

A lesser program like UA should just hire him before his lawsuit is settled, if he'll become a commodity once his lawsuit is settled it means there might be better programs with coaching vacancies trying to hire Leach. After Stoops is gone this year UA can't waste time hiring a coordinator who'll need several years to establish himself, they need a big name head coach who'll keep UA semi-relevant.



As for your comment about Rice, it's basically every reason other than football or basketball. It didn't make any sense to me at first why major conferences had interest, but they offer an elite baseball program, great academic school, and it opens up the Houston area for recruiting/TV ratings.

[Blake]

I didn't know there was still a pending lawsuit involving Leach. Is it still about that lazy n!gger Adams who's daddeh used ESPN to sabotage Leach's career?


LUBBOCK, Texas (AP)—The Texas Supreme Court on Friday said it wants more information in Mike Leach’s lawsuit against Texas Tech, a fresh sign of life for the fired coach’s claims against the school.

The state’s highest civil court asked Leach and Texas Tech to file briefs on the merits of the case by Sept. 19.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ap-texastech-leach


As for your comment about Rice, it's basically every reason other than football or basketball. It didn't make any sense to me at first why major conferences had interest, but they offer an elite baseball program, great academic school, and it opens up the Houston area for recruiting/TV ratings.

I think TV market attractiveness get overblown in these rumors.

If big markets were really that attractive, then TCU, SMU, Rice and UH would all be in big time conferences.

Rice also has an extremely low enrollment.

No way does Rice go Big 10.

[stretch]

heres an interesting idea i saw on barking carnival in regards to how this could work (a bit long though)


Divisional Pod Structure for determining a Champion in a 16 team football conference.

Too Long, Didn’t Read:

1. Allow teams to play the schools in their 4 school region every year.
2. Allow teams to visit the other three regions once a year and have a team from the other 3 regions visit them once a year.
3. Codify the unstated law that ‘the season is the playoff’.
4a. Reduce the chance of a championship rematch to below 20%.
4b. Eliminate the possibility of a rematch in a fair way.
4c. Create a fun, exciting new paradigm for conference post season that eliminates the possibility of a rematch in a fair and lucrative way.

I’m a nerd. A big nerd. I really like to think about the best way to crown champions in sports. So when I say that this Pac 16 thing not happening hurts my soul, I’m not kidding. It is like an entire imaginative side of my self was enticed by Lucy and then the ball was pulled away at the last second. And then beat with a club.

I’m putting this out anyway in the hopes that one day the 16 team super conference will become a reality and the head of the competition committee will stumble upon this doing a google search. Also to see if anyone is as crazy as me.

When doing something like this the media message is very important. The 16 team WAC failed at this and their Quadrant system failed miserably and was confusing to fans. The media message is this:

Win your division. Win your pod. Play for the championship.

Here is how it works. When each team is put in a pod and a divsion:

The Pods:

There are 4 regional pods. This allows for the maintaing of long standing rivalries.

East:
Texas
Texas Tech
OU
Oklahoma St.

Mountain:
Arizona
Arizona St.
Colorado
Utah

California:
USC
UCLA
Cal
Stanford

Northwest:
Oregon
Oregon St.
Washington
Washington St.

The Divisions:

The two divisions will be rebalanced every two years to allow for both even competition and road trip diversity. Each pod sends two teams to each division:

Rose Division:
Texas
Oklahoma St.
Arizona St.
Utah
USC
Stanford
Oregon St.
Washington

Fiesta Division:
OU
Texas Tech
Arizona
Colorado
Cal
UCLA
Oregon
Washington St.

A team plays every team in its pod and every team in its division. Texas’ schedule would look like this:

Texas Tech
@OU
Oklahoma St.
Arizona St
@Utah
USC
@Stanford
Oregon St.
@Washington

In this structure Texas gets a road trip to each region every year. This great for fans as well as for recruiting exposure. Due to the striking regional symmetry of the Pac-16 teams in the same sub region(Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, Rocky Mountain, LA, San Fran, Oregon, Washington) can be split into separate divisions ensuring media and/or road trip access to every sub region every year.

The following three scenarios can be used for determining a champion in the league:

A. Traditional Divisional Champions:

After running this model 50,000 times through my computer, a rematch only occurs 19.94% of the time. This is a 20% improvement over a straight up 8 team division, play everyone in your division + 2 cross divisional games. This is a pretty big deal as rematch are against the very core of college footballness.

B. Alt-Championship:

In this model, the way to guarantee you get a spot in the championship game is to ‘Win your Division and win your Pod.’ 80% of the time your championship will not need to employ the alt championship rule. In an alt-championship scenario the traditional championship game would be a rematch. The only way this can happen is if the team that won the other division was in the same pod as you.

Say that Texas and OU both finished 8-1 in their division and there were no other 8-1 teams in the divisions. Texas and OU compete in the East Pod. Who won? Was it a 3 way tie? If so, only two teams are represented here so use the head to head tie breaker. Say Texas won their pod. They stay in the championship game and OU is booted out for the next highest place finisher in the the Fiesta Division that has not played Texas. 85% of the time this will be the 2nd place team. This equates to about 3% of the seasons that a 3rd place finisher would end up in the title game.

C. A new Paradigm. The Championship weekend.

In this system you do not have one championship game. You have 2. The season can end in one of 5 ways. 3 of them are crown a conference champion very cleanly and make up occur in 97.6% of model seasons simulated

Type 1: 61.7%

The 2 divsional winners have not played each other and the 2 second place winners have not played each other. In this scenario you play a Championship game and 3rd/4th place game.

Type 2: 15.6%

The 2 divisional winners have played already but neither has played the 2nd place team from the other league. The 2 games consist of the Rose Champ vs. Fiesta 2nd and Fiesta Champ vs. Rose 2nd. The team with the best record against the league after these games is the champion. The extra 2 games give you the head to head ammo you need to break any ties.

Take the following example:

Rose
———
1. Arizona State (6-3) Division Record.
2. Washington (6-3) Division Record. Defeated Utah
3. Utah (6-3) Division Record. Lost To Washington
4. Oregon State (5-4) Overall Record. Defeated Oklahoma State
5. Oklahoma State (5-4) Overall Record. Lost To Oregon State
6. Stanford (4-5) Division Record. Defeated Texas
7. Texas (4-5) Division Record. Lost To Stanford
8. Southern California (4-5) Division Record.

Fiesta
———
1. Arizona (6-3) Record.
2. Oregon (5-4) Overall Record. Defeated Colorado
3. Colorado (5-4) Overall Record. Lost To Oregon
4. UCLA (4-5) Record.
5. Washington State (3-6) Division Record. Defeated California
6. California (3-6) Division Record. Lost To Washington State
7. Oklahoma (3-6) Division Record. Defeated Texas Tech
8. Texas Tech (3-6) Division Record. Lost To Oklahoma

Rocky Mountain
———
1. Arizona (2-1) Alone in the Division.
1. Arizona State (2-1) Defeated Utah.
2. Utah (2-1) Lost To Arizona State.
3. Colorado (0-3) Record.

Arizona State would play Oregon. and Washington would Play Arizona. If both Arizona teams won, leaving two teams at 7-3, Arizona would get the trophy because they beat Arizona St. during their pod play.

In this system you can never take a week off because you never know when that game may end up being a de facto ‘Championship’ game.

Type 3: 20.36%

The top two teams haven’t played so they play a championship game. The second two teams have played so we have to break the tie between them and then go get a second team that the tie winning team hasn’t played.

Type 4: 2.02%

In this scenario the top two teams have played and one of the divisional champs has played the 2nd place team in the other division. We have to go down a rank and get a different team. You then decide the champ like in Type 2.

Type 5: 0.2%

In this scenario All of the 1st and 2nd place teams come from the same pod. For example. Texas, OU finish 1st in their divisions and Oklahoma St. and Texas Tech finish 2nd. Here we just go down to the 3rd place teams to find a match for the Divisional champions.

I love the championship weekend. I think it is lucrative for TV and really fun for fans. It also removes the annoyance of rematches that have ruined a number of college football seasons. Plus, more quality football.

[Girasuck]

We're the luckiest school in America.

[pkbpkb81]

The plains pod is by far the best it is a mother fucker.


One thing no one is talking about is how bad ass the pac 16 would be in baseball.


Do the current pac 12 schools have wrestling programs if not how would that work out for OU and osu?

[JMarkJohns]

had me here:



lost me here:

Big-10 likes having high academic-types as well as all-around programs. Northwestern really adds nothing, and Rice, while a bit far south, helps gain a foothold into the Houston market, and they are a tremendous academic institution. On the down low, the Pac tried to get Rice instead of Tech. You may think I'm crazy, but I'm not. I told DoK about it a week ago via PM.

[JMarkJohns]

Do the current pac 12 schools have wrestling programs if not how would that work out for OU and osu?

Several do, although I've heard many rumblings about the programs being cut. But ASU has a strong program.

[JMarkJohns]

Saw an alternate Pod structure on ESPN this morning:

Plains and Northwest are the same, but rather than a solely CA pod, the SoCal schools are paired with the Arizona schools and the NoCal schools are paired with Utah and Colorado.

I like this for basketball a lot, and it helps keep Arizona's football recruiting strong, as this means every year Arizona has either two in-CA games or one in-CA game and one in-Plains game. Sucks to always have to play USC, but I'd prefer it to the other pod for recruiting, because it helps with exposure, which should help bring in a better coach. Recruiting potential is more important than a weaker schedule to a good coach.

[tlongII]

Oregon State has a strong wrestling program. We finished 2nd in the Pac-10 last year.

[JMarkJohns]

Rose Division:
Texas
Oklahoma St.
Arizona St.
Utah
USC
Stanford
Oregon St.
Washington

Fiesta Division:
OU
Texas Tech
Arizona
Colorado
Cal
UCLA
Oregon
Washington St.

Nope.

The draw of this for Larry Scott is a potential USC/Texas Title game. This doesn't happen with them in the same division. I can guarantee if a division happens, which it won't, that USC headlines one, and Texas headlines the other.

Also, and its probably BS, but I'm now hearing rumblings of a Pac-20, where Rice/TCU and Kansas/K-State are added.

The Pacific Division
Arizona
Arizona State
Cal
Oregon
Oregon State
Stanford
UCLA
USC
Washington
Washington State

The Plains Division
Colorado
Kansas
Kansas State
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Rice
TCU
Texas
Texas Tech
Utah

[Blake]

Big-10 likes having high academic-types as well as all-around programs. Northwestern really adds nothing, and Rice, while a bit far south, helps gain a foothold into the Houston market, and they are a tremendous academic institution.

Again, if Rice was really that attractive a market, they would be in a bigger conference already.

It's very possible if we do end up with 4 16 team conferences that Rice is left out.


On the down low, the Pac tried to get Rice instead of Tech. You may think I'm crazy, but I'm not. I told DoK about it a week ago via PM.

Not crazy if you have a link.

[Blake]

Nope.

The draw of this for Larry Scott is a potential USC/Texas Title game. This doesn't happen with them in the same division. I can guarantee if a division happens, which it won't, that USC headlines one, and Texas headlines the other.

Also, and its probably BS, but I'm now hearing rumblings of a Pac-20, where Rice/TCU and Kansas/K-State are added.

The Pacific Division
Arizona
Arizona State
Cal
Oregon
Oregon State
Stanford
UCLA
USC
Washington
Washington State

The Plains Division
Colorado
Kansas
Kansas State
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Rice
TCU
Texas
Texas Tech
Utah

A Pac-18 with 3 divisions of 6 makes more sense, imo.

[coyotes_geek]

If ND joins a conference it will be the big10. If Big10 invites missouri, they would also accept in a heart beat. Those would be 2 quality pick ups for them.


This. It'll be Big-Whatever should they. Same with Missouri. If these two join, then maybe they concede a bit on the academics and add Kansas schools, but if not, Rice and Vandy fit their mold.

If the Big10 wants Missouri, they might need to hurry. With the ACC seemingly having set themselves up to avoid getting raided by the SEC, Mizzou is a prime candidate for SEC #14.

Also, Kansas is an AAU member. Big10 wouldn't need to make any concessions on academics if they added them. K-State is another story.

[Blake]

If the Big 10 stay put while SEC and PAC go 16, will that really be a bad thing for them?

[coyotes_geek]

If the Big 10 stay put while SEC and PAC go 16, will that really be a bad thing for them?

Probably not. At least not in the short term.

[Blake]

Probably not. At least not in the short term.

They have it pretty good right now, I just wonder where the pressure would come from to go to 16.

[coyotes_geek]

They have it pretty good right now, I just wonder where the pressure would come from to go to 16.

I doubt the big10 would consider it pressure, but I'm sure the ACC/SEC/Pac would be trying to persuade the big10 into expanding just so they can have a superconference playoff.

[JMarkJohns]

Again, if Rice was really that attractive a market, they would be in a bigger conference already.

It's very possible if we do end up with 4 16 team conferences that Rice is left out.

I understand, but some think with the increased funds from being in a major conference, Rice athletics would improve, and every conference likes to have a high-academic cake-walk to both improve academic rates/perception and schedules. Not saying they eventually get the invite, but they've been mentioned.


Not crazy if you have a link.

I do, but it's premium content for a board I moderate for, so access is limited to subscribers beyond paraphrased word of mouth.

The idea is that Larry Scott wanted Texas/Oklahoma only for football, Rice for academics and Kansas only for basketball. That was his ideal.

[JMarkJohns]

A Pac-18 with 3 divisions of 6 makes more sense, imo.

The three division things doesn't really work.

It wouldn't work because of headliners (USC and Texas in same division), but this would be ideal:

Pacific North
Cal
Kansas
Oklahoma
Oklahom State
Oregon
Oregon State
Stanford
Washington
Washington State

Pacific South
Arizona
Arizona State
Colorado
Rice
Texas
Texas Tech
UCLA
USC
Utah

It adds the academic idea in Rice and the basketball ideal in Kansas. Each division has schools from California and the plains, good competitive balance in both Football and Basketball.

[coyotes_geek]

Dallas Morning News put together a realignment widget which you may or may not find entertaining........

http://res.dallasnews.com/graphics/2011_09/realignment/

[stretch]

The three division things doesn't really work.

It wouldn't work because of headliners (USC and Texas in same division)

How is that?

I think you could definitely have 3 headliners for three divisions, in Texas, USC, and OU.

But the problem would be figuring out a conference champion.

[Blake]

Not saying they eventually get the invite, but they've been mentioned.

Mentioned by Big 10 officials?

Doubtful any type of serious consideration was given.


I do, but it's premium content for a board I moderate for, so access is limited to subscribers beyond paraphrased word of mouth.

The idea is that Larry Scott wanted Texas/Oklahoma only for football, Rice for academics and Kansas only for basketball. That was his ideal.

Who quoted Larry Scott on this ideal?

[JMarkJohns]

How is that?

I think you could definitely have 3 headliners for three divisions, in Texas, USC, and OU.

But the problem would be figuring out a conference champion.

This. Only way is top-overall BCS ranking of the three division winners gets a bye, then winner of first game vs. that bye team.

But that's pretty convoluted.

[NFO]

Mentioned by Big 10 officials?

Doubtful any type of serious consideration was given.

Colin Cowherd said on his radio show today that Texas was still flirting with the Big 10.

Probably just smoke or Texas trying to leverage the best deal they can with the PAC-12

[Blake]

The three division things doesn't really work.

It wouldn't work because of headliners (USC and Texas in same division), but this would be ideal:


Why would USC and UT be in the same division?

I was thinking OU, Okie st, Tech, UT, AZ and ASU.

Conference championship game participants could be determined by whomever has the higher BCS standings......like what happened in the Big XII in 08.

[JMarkJohns]

Mentioned by Big 10 officials?

Doubtful any type of serious consideration was given.

Like I said, I mentioned them as a team that would make sense for their ideals.



Who quoted Larry Scott on this ideal?

Pac insider who broke news on these meetings and parameters over a week ago. The insider is well-respected with ties to the LA schools and is a booster of Arizona.

He said Scott's ideal wasn't just for football, but wanted to expand the conference's overall prestige and brand. Adding a top-flight academic institution and baseball program in Rice brings a lot, plus the in with the Houston market, and adding a blue blood in Kansas to join UCLA, Arizona and Texas gives the Pac 4-top-20 schools year in, year out. The hope was the Pac could leverage need into getting Oklahoma without State and Texas without Tech, but obviously politics has won out. My guess is this talk of 18/20 teams is specifically to add these two schools. Chances are some of the same politics could require Kansas to bring State with them, at which point to add Rice, a fourth additional team is needed, enter a lesser-religious TCU (although not sure this works) or, and this is me talking, maybe Missouri if the religious affiliation of TCU is deemed to much to look past. Missouri brings quality academics, and good programs, plus an untapped market.

[JMarkJohns]

Why would USC and UT be in the same division?

I was thinking OU, Okie st, Tech, UT, AZ and ASU.

Conference championship game participants could be determined by whomever has the higher BCS standings......like what happened in the Big XII in 08.

That 08 conclusion was controversial, though.

The problem with the two-division, 9-team league is you can't go West/East, as the original 10 west are geographically linked in five tandoms, while just 4 of the 8 Eastern (or recently added) teams are, with Colorado, Kansas, Rice and Utah all being geographical wildcards. It makes sense to split them up, and not one of the original 5 tandoms.

I suppose one way to do this is

West: Cal, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington, Washington State

East: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Rice, Texas, Texas Tech

But this removes Arizona schools from traditional rivalries, and separates California from everyone, which isn't what is being discussed/been agreed upon. In order to spread the CA wealth around, it needs to be even pods, or that North/South, but you cant' do even pods with 18 teams, and the North/South doesn't meet the idea of the potential USC/Texas Title game.

[stretch]

That 08 conclusion was controversial, though.


it was controversial, but understandable, because OU was at that time a hotter team than UT, even though UT had actually put together a better body of work through the entire season, and had a tougher SOS.

i still think that the two most deserving teams (prior to the outcome of the NC) was OU and UT for the national championship game, as both of them had one loss against top 5 opponents, while Florida lost to an unranked team. Also, OU and Texas both had tougher strength of schedule ranking than Florida did prior to the NC game.

ugh i so wish there was a playoff system...

[Blake]

That 08 conclusion was controversial, though.



k, just take the two top records and use BCS ranking for tie breakers or go with a 4th wild card team.

In two 10 team conference, by the time you play all the teams in your division and maybe a couple on the other side, you would never have any OOC games.

[Blake]

Like I said, I mentioned them as a team that would make sense for their ideals.



Pac insider who broke news on these meetings and parameters over a week ago. The insider is well-respected with ties to the LA schools and is a booster of Arizona.

He said Scott's ideal wasn't just for football, but wanted to expand the conference's overall prestige and brand. Adding a top-flight academic institution and baseball program in Rice brings a lot, plus the in with the Houston market, and adding a blue blood in Kansas to join UCLA, Arizona and Texas gives the Pac 4-top-20 schools year in, year out. The hope was the Pac could leverage need into getting Oklahoma without State and Texas without Tech, but obviously politics has won out. My guess is this talk of 18/20 teams is specifically to add these two schools. Chances are some of the same politics could require Kansas to bring State with them, at which point to add Rice, a fourth additional team is needed, enter a lesser-religious TCU (although not sure this works) or, and this is me talking, maybe Missouri if the religious affiliation of TCU is deemed to much to look past. Missouri brings quality academics, and good programs, plus an untapped market.

lol at people running with insider rumors.

all I found is some blogger from mercurynews.com throwing out a Pac20 scenario with Rice (and without Boise St).

Pretty crazy and rather stupid, imo.

[stretch]

im not a fan of a 20 team conference. the idea of a 16 team conference seems rather loaded even, but doable. 20 is just excessive.

[DesignatedT]

For one thing, the Longhorn Network would have to be folded into the Pac-12 regional model — it wouldn’t exist as a separate entity.

What’s more, there is no chance that any school will have more than 1/16th of the revenue that comes from the conference’s first, second or third-tier rights. NO CHANCE.

We’re more likely to see USC give up football and join the Big West.

Remember, the Pac-12 CEOs would like to have Texas, but they are not desperate to have Texas.

They have all the leverage.


Source: Pac-12 and Texas "nowhere near agreement." Numerous hurdles ahead.

Source: Pac-12 has Missouri on its radar.



** Yes, yes, 100 times yes: The Pac-12 would add the Oklahoma schools and become a 14-team conference even if Texas follows a different path.

And if the number is 14, there’s a very good chance the conference would use the Zipper model for division alignment (i.e., split the natural rivals).

The league will not — I repeat: will not — pair USC and Oklahoma in the same division.



yahoo_Graham Graham Watson
Hearing the Pac-12 wouldn't have the nine member votes to let Texas in right now. Not sure who else besides Colorado is against it.
17 minutes ago

:lol hilarious if true

[vander]

so no one wants BSU? :depressed

we have a good wrestling program too

both BSU and the treasure valley are growing. the academics, prestige, and profitability of BSU will continue to rise over the next decade, while most other "major universities" will stagnate or even recede.



if CFB becomes 4 super-conferences and they give the BCS the boot, how will the outsiders ever get piece? terrible programs like WSU, Indiana, etc. etc. will be raking in the conference football money year after year, while BSU starves to death on the outside.

BCS gave hope (and money) to teams on the rise. super-conferences will destroy that, it will be the haves and the have-nots, and it will destroy my interest in college football, along with many others. the BCS and the open landscape of college football is what made it so insanely interesting.

:depressed

[Blake]

:lol hilarious if true

is A&M in the SEC yet?

[Blake]

BCS gave hope (and money) to teams on the rise. super-conferences will destroy that, it will be the haves and the have-nots, and it will destroy my interest in college football, along with many others. the BCS and the open landscape of college football is what made it so insanely interesting.

:depressed

bs, imo.

4 super conferences with a playoff system would make college football more popular than ever.

[JMarkJohns]

Blake, I know what I am talking about. Everything I've said would happen one week ago is now happening with the Pac, and the fact other bloggers are now discussing what the Pac Insider was saying a week ago shows the info is trickling through the ranks.

I am a moderator for the premium boards at Scout.com and Rivals.com and am comped their best subscription packages for the information I bring to premium boards. I, too, am an Arizona Insider, as DoK has attested to on multiple occasions. I told DoK one week ago all this was going down within short order based upon other Insider info. Said what the ideal was, and what would happen if it couldn't be had.

I don't post privy Insider info in public, so few know the extent of my info, but IceColdBrewski was another I shared information with.

I'm certainly not always right, and I've jumped the gun on some info, but if I am saying Rice was amongst Scott's ideals for Pac-16 expansion, it comes from quality information, because I don't quote anybody, and I hate being wrong/looking stupid.

Anyways, this thread isn't about me, my contacts or my information, because those who care know I don't spout BS. Hell, I think I was the first on this forum to say it was for sure going to be pods, and that they and the other soon-to-exist 16-team conferences will be petitioning the NCAA for it to be allowed.

[stretch]

bs, imo.

4 super conferences with a playoff system would make college football more popular than ever.

this would be just amazing.

get rid of the ranking system

have the regular season to determine seedings within the conference

8 best teams in each conference duke it out to win the conference, seeding plays each other just like in NBA

4 conference winners have a playoff, reseeded as 1-4 to determine opponent, again NBA style (1 plays 4, 2 plays 3)

or if they want to keep the ranking system, the ranked teams in each conference get the top seeds in their conferences, and then the unranked get seeding based on record

and for the 4 conference winners, they have the official national championship game for the winners of the two games (battling for end-season #1/#2 ranking), and a losers game (to determine who gets ranked #3 and #4 in the final polls).


there are currently 34 bowl games. doing the playoff system with the "losers" championship game would result in 34 playoff games, and shouldnt cause any issue with losing revenue. difference is, this method is exponentially more exciting, and would eliminate the bullshit 1 month layoff for the championship teams (which is a BIG reason why the SEC has done so well in BCS bowl games, as they often feature run based, clock-control offense, while other conferences like the Big 12 and Pac 12 have teams featuring pass-happy offenses which require timing and rhythm between QB and receivers. make no mistake, this 1 month layoff fucks with teams)

[Blake]

Blake, I know what I am talking about. Everything I've said would happen one week ago is now happening with the Pac, and the fact other bloggers are now discussing what the Pac Insider was saying a week ago shows the info is trickling through the ranks.

What exactly did you say a week ago that nobody else was saying?


I am a moderator for the premium boards at Scout.com and Rivals.com and am comped their best subscription packages for the information I bring to premium boards. I, too, am an Arizona Insider, as DoK has attested to on multiple occasions. I told DoK one week ago all this was going down within short order based upon other Insider info. Said what the ideal was, and what would happen if it couldn't be had.

So the ideal was Rice over Tech?

lmao, bullshit.

Let me get this straight.....

the "insider" with this info prefers to tell messageboard bloggers that can only have their super secret info read if you pay for it?

why? does this insider get a cut of the messageboard profits? why is this info so secretive? Why have no real journalists picked this up?


I don't post privy Insider info in public, so few know the extent of my info, but IceColdBrewski was another I shared information with.

I'm certainly not always right, and I've jumped the gun on some info, but if I am saying Rice was amongst Scott's ideals for Pac-16 expansion, it comes from quality information, because I don't quote anybody, and I hate being wrong/looking stupid.

have you yourself talked to Scott?

if not, sorry, but a Rice over Tech call makes you look stupid. Not many ways around that.


Anyways, this thread isn't about me, my contacts or my information, because those who care know I don't spout BS. Hell, I think I was the first on this forum to say it was for sure going to be pods, and that they and the other soon-to-exist 16-team conferences will be petitioning the NCAA for it to be allowed.

I know it's not really about you, but what date and time did you call the Pac 16 possibly going to a pod system?

[Blake]

this would be just amazing.

get rid of the ranking system

have the regular season to determine seedings within the conference

8 best teams in each conference duke it out to win the conference, seeding plays each other just like in NBA

4 conference winners have a playoff, reseeded as 1-4 to determine opponent, again NBA style (1 plays 4, 2 plays 3)

or if they want to keep the ranking system, the ranked teams in each conference get the top seeds in their conferences, and then the unranked get seeding based on record

and for the 4 conference winners, they have the official national championship game for the winners of the two games (battling for end-season #1/#2 ranking), and a losers game (to determine who gets ranked #3 and #4 in the final polls).


there are currently 34 bowl games. doing the playoff system with the "losers" championship game would result in 34 playoff games, and shouldnt cause any issue with losing revenue. difference is, this method is exponentially more exciting, and would eliminate the bullshit 1 month layoff for the championship teams (which is a BIG reason why the SEC has done so well in BCS bowl games, as they often feature run based, clock-control offense, while other conferences like the Big 12 and Pac 12 have teams featuring pass-happy offenses which require timing and rhythm between QB and receivers. make no mistake, this 1 month layoff fucks with teams)

yeah, the 1 month layoff sucks ass.

[stretch]

yeah, the 1 month layoff sucks ass.

as much as Bob Stoops screwed up the game, does Florida beat OU as easily as they did, without the 1 month layoff? I think it was pretty clear that Bradford was not in rhythm, despite having one of the finest years a QB has ever had, and led probably the most prolific passing offense of all time.

SEC = overrated

[Sisk]

SEC = overrated

:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

[stretch]

:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

:lmao @ you getting asshurt at this statement because some SEC teams had unfair advantages due to the month-long layoff for the NC game.

whats even funnier is, not long ago, when A&M werent considering going to the SEC, you and other aggies would almost certainly agree

funniest is, there is a 100% chance you deny it now, to make yourself look like less of a dumbass over your knobslobbing of the SEC, which will have aggies crying their asses off in a couple years when they are winning 3 games a year, but saying "but but but we are in the SEC :cry :cry :cry" to make some sort of bullshit excuse for their pathetic excuse of a school, which the SEC teams are only willing to add in order to expand their recruiting to Texas, have another easy annual doormat win in their conference, and make a few extra bucks off retarded aggie fans who think aggie has a chance in these games, only to waste their money seeing them get curbstomped 50-3.

[vander]

this would be just amazing.
...

only the playoffs themselves would be "amazing"... somewhat

regular season would be boring

the elitism and exclusion will cost many casual fans and fans of "mid-majors"


fundamentally changing a wildly successful thing just so an 8-3 team can win the championship? :lmao

[stretch]

only the playoffs themselves would be "amazing"... somewhat

regular season would be boring

the elitism and exclusion will cost many casual fans and fans of "mid-majors"

fundamentally changing a wildly successful thing just so an 8-3 team can still win the championship? :lmao

how do you choose to back these statements up?

[Blake]

the elitism and exclusion will cost many casual fans and fans of "mid-majors"

you mean we will lose fans of Boise St?

Oh noes!

[vander]

this would be just amazing.

...

there are currently 34 bowl games. doing the playoff system with the "losers" championship game would result in 34 playoff games, and shouldnt cause any issue with losing revenue. difference is, this method is exponentially more exciting, and would eliminate the bullshit 1 month layoff for the championship teams (which is a BIG reason why the SEC has done so well in BCS bowl games, as they often feature run based, clock-control offense, while other conferences like the Big 12 and Pac 12 have teams featuring pass-happy offenses which require timing and rhythm between QB and receivers. make no mistake, this 1 month layoff fucks with teams)


SEC = overrated

how do you choose to back these statements up?

[stretch]

how do you choose to back these statements up?

see 2009 BCS National Championship game

a team that had perhaps the most prolific offense in NCAA history (an offense that is pass-oriented and requires a lot of timing and rhythm) suddenly struggles to move the ball after not playing a football games in a month?

id say it speaks for itself. and i fucking hate OU.

[stretch]

you mean we will lose fans of Boise St?

Oh noes!

:lmao

[vander]

you mean we will lose fans of Boise St?

Oh noes!

believe it or not, there are lots of people in America who aren't fans of the traditional powers of college football, :wow there are lots of fans of the little guy, the underdog, the Cinderella story, and of course other teams.

yes college football would be well served to alienate them.

[vander]

see 2009 BCS National Championship game

a team that had perhaps the most prolific offense in NCAA history (an offense that is pass-oriented and requires a lot of timing and rhythm) suddenly struggles to move the ball after not playing a football games in a month?

id say it speaks for itself. and i fucking hate OU.

yeah, it couldn't possibly say anything about SEC defenses
or OU's recent tendency to choke

[Blake]

believe it or not, there are lots of people in America who aren't fans of the traditional powers of college football, :wow there are lots of fans of the little guy, the underdog, the Cinderella story, and of course other teams.

yes college football would be well served to alienate them.

serious question:

how bad would it hurt college football if they lost the Idaho TV market?

[JMarkJohns]

Blake, I'm just moving on. I'm glad you're such an expert. Fact is I moderate for multiple recruiting sites premium boards, and am comped unlimited subscriptions for my information and services. I know plenty of people, and while I've not talked to Scott, I've talked to others. While I'm not the main source on this, and I've never claimed to be, even in secret, the truth is I know actual Insiders within the Pac and Arizona athletics who are legitimate sources, who do talk to school athletic directors and conference commissioners. You act as though you've never heard of subscription-based premium information before. Do some get paid as primary Insiders? Sure. Did this guy? No. He's a booster to Arizona with direct ties to the SoCal schools. And I told you this was for Rivals.com (Owned and promoted by Yahoo Sports) and Scout.com (Owned and promoted by Fox Sports). So the standards are not just some POS blog, mind you, not that you can be convinced.

But cool. Glad you call bullshit. Good to have you in the Pac, even if you were the third state-of-Texas option.

[ChumpDumper]

believe it or not, there are lots of people in America who aren't fans of the traditional powers of college football, :wow there are lots of fans of the little guy, the underdog, the Cinderella story, and of course other teams.

yes college football would be well served to alienate them.How many fans?

[stretch]

believe it or not, there are lots of people in America who aren't fans of the traditional powers of college football, :wow there are lots of fans of the little guy, the underdog, the Cinderella story, and of course other teams.

yes college football would be well served to alienate them.

you fucking idiot

if anything, a playoff system would actually give teams like Boise St and TCU a good chance to play for a National Championship, like they have probably deserved a couple times by now

this should most definitely be something you would be in favor of.

:lmao idaho

[stretch]

yeah, it couldn't possibly say anything about SEC defenses
or OU's recent tendency to choke

im not saying its 100% due to the layoff, but if you think that the layoff doesnt give rhythm-based teams a disadvantage (especially being that these are still kids), you are a moron.

[stretch]

believe it or not, there are lots of people in America who aren't fans of the traditional powers of college football, :wow there are lots of fans of the little guy, the underdog, the Cinderella story, and of course other teams.

yes college football would be well served to alienate them.

also, there is a reason that there are many Cinderella stories in NCAA basketball, but basically never in NCAA football.

its called the playoff system.

[Blake]

Blake, I'm just moving on. I'm glad you're such an expert.

I'm not claiming to be the expert. You are.

But this isn't about me ( or you I thought).


Fact is I moderate for multiple recruiting sites premium boards, and am comped unlimited subscriptions for my information and services. I know plenty of people, and while I've not talked to Scott, I've talked to others. While I'm not the main source on this, and I've never claimed to be, even in secret, the truth is I know actual Insiders within the Pac and Arizona athletics who are legitimate sources, who do talk to school athletic directors and conference commissioners. You act as though you've never heard of subscription-based premium information before. Do some get paid as primary Insiders? Sure. Did this guy? No. He's a booster to Arizona with direct ties to the SoCal schools. And I told you this was for Rivals.com (Owned and promoted by Yahoo Sports) and Scout.com (Owned and promoted by Fox Sports). So the standards are not just some POS blog, mind you, not that you can be convinced.

so an Arizona booster with ties to SoCal schools says Larry Scott wants Rice over Tech.

The standards for any rumor remains the same: put up, shut the fuck up or look stupid.


But cool. Glad you call bullshit. Good to have you in the Pac, even if you were the third state-of-Texas option.

Oh snap.

How lmfao funny would it be to invite Rice just because they are super smart, only to have drunk Tech stumble in the room and spill their beer all over them, right before beating them 70-10 on the field.

[vander]

serious question:

how bad would it hurt college football if they lost the Idaho TV market?

why do you keep narrowing it down to just Boise?

Texas fans are going to watch Texas regardless, the big TV money is in the casual fans everywhere. how is a playoff system between the 4 elite conferences going to attract casual fans and outsider team fans?

[ChumpDumper]

why do you keep narrowing it down to just Boise?

Texas fans are going to watch Texas regardless, the big TV money is in the casual fans everywhere. how is a playoff system between the 4 elite conferences going to attract casual fans and outsider team fans?The same way the BCS championship game has attracted casual fans and outsider team fans.

By existing.

[Blake]

why do you keep narrowing it down to just Boise?

Texas fans are going to watch Texas regardless, the big TV money is in the casual fans everywhere. how is a playoff system between the 4 elite conferences going to attract casual fans and outsider team fans?

broaden it then.

Throw out a number of the total loss of college football fans

[vander]

also, there is a reason that there are many Cinderella stories in NCAA basketball, but basically never in NCAA football.

its called the playoff system.

no, it's because basketball requires one great player to be a contender, one hot hand to beat a better team. football teams are slow-built empires. most of those cinderellas never have a real chance anyways. who cares if some 16 seed makes it to the second round? just means that some great team lost it's chance at the title on one bad game after 30+ games of dominance in the regular season. college basketball should cut down to 16 team playoffs with best of 3 in round 1, best of 5 the rest of the way. how often does the best team actually win out in college basketball? half the time?

and do you want the college football regular season to be as irrelevant as college basketballs?

playoffs between just the 4 super-conferences without the BCS would eliminate the BSUs, Utahs, and TCUs.
and eliminate the must-win nature of the regular season

if I want to see inferior teams winning playoff games I've got the NFL playoffs.

you really want to see 2 and 3 loss championship teams?

[JMarkJohns]

so an Arizona booster with ties to SoCal schools says Larry Scott wants Rice over Tech.

The standards for any rumor remains the same: put up, shut the fuck up or look stupid.

You do realize that USC ups have been one of the most powerful in pushing for this, and that Arizona has been one of the schools with the most concerns, so being tapped into both thought processes, especially when one is connected, can yield valuable information?

And I never claimed to be an expert. I posted content from an Insider I trust that said this past week Scott was working to get Oklahoma without State and Texas without Tech to free up two spots to bring in Kansas (without State) for basketall and, another target, first being Missouri who expressed no interest, then Rice for their academics, their baseball, and their market. Everyone knows Tech destroys Rice in football. Once the Pac gained Texas and Oklahoma, I have to say the other schools better than Rice but worse than USC/Texas/Oklahoma are basically meaningless in football. Texas brings the Texas market largely, and Rice adds a school in Houston, the largest market in the state, plus helps buoy academics along with Texas, Stanford and the public California schools.

When you took exception, I explained where I got it. Then you impugned everything involved based upon your opinion that anyone wanting Rice would already have them if they liked academics over athletics, a seemingly absurd position to you, as if strong conferences have never added lesser competitive schools based upon their academic prowess (I see you SEC and Vanderbilt, Big-10 and Northwestern).

I'm fine if you disagree. I know the value of the information and the informer. Since it looks pretty clear the discussed ideal didn't come into existence due to politics, I shared the information I discussed with DoK via PM a week ago. It's probably not going to happen, and the furthered expansion to 18/20 seems impractical, so the expansion becomes almost solely for football and avoiding destructive politics to make it happen, another provision I discussed a week ago with DoK. But whatever. I can't link you the Insiders premium content, and quoted one section from his post on the matter. It's what I can do. It's cool if you don't see the value in it.

[tlongII]

I think JMark is telling it like it is. I think there have been strong concerns regarding Tech's academics.

[ChumpDumper]

I think JMark is telling it like it is. I think there have been strong concerns regarding Tech's academics.But they are thinking of taking OK State, right?

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

no, it's because basketball requires one great player to be a contender, one hot hand to beat a better team. football teams are slow-built empires. most of those cinderellas never have a real chance anyways. who cares if some 16 seed makes it to the second round? just means that some great team lost it's chance at the title on one bad game after 30+ games of dominance in the regular season. college basketball should cut down to 16 team playoffs with best of 3 in round 1, best of 5 the rest of the way. how often does the best team actually win out in college basketball? half the time?

and do you want the college football regular season to be as irrelevant as college basketballs?

playoffs between just the 4 super-conferences without the BCS would eliminate the BSUs, Utahs, and TCUs.
and eliminate the must-win nature of the regular season

if I want to see inferior teams winning playoff games I've got the NFL playoffs.

you really want to see 2 and 3 loss championship teams?
:tu to all of this


also, cinderella stories aren't all that they're cracked up to be. Butler made the national championship unwatchable last year because of how much they didn't belong.

[JMarkJohns]

But they are thinking of taking OK State, right?

Not in the ideal I said was being discussed. The ideal was Texas and Okahoma plus two of Kansas, Missouri and Rice. KU for basketball. Once Missouri said no thanks they were discussing Rice for academics, baseball and Houston foothold.

Scott was wanting to improve the Pacls overall brand, not just keep up with SEC in football.

[ChumpDumper]

Not in the ideal I said was being discussed. The ideal was Texas and Okahoma plus two of Kansas, Missouri and Rice. KU for basketball. Once Missouri said no thanks they were discussing Rice for academics, baseball and Houston foothold.

Scott was wanting to improve the Pacls overall brand, not just keep up with SEC in football.Alright. I can see Texas' moving on without Tech, but OU without State seems to be a much harder sell.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Idk how much interest they ever truly had in Rice, but the Kansas part makes sense. Pac-12 basketball has been terrible for 2 straight years now and no program with the exception of Arizona is making any noise with recruits. Another basketball powerhouse would give the Pac-12 the jolt it needs in basketball, which is something IMO that's as big a concern as football.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Alright. I can see Texas' moving on without Tech, but OU without State seems to be a much harder sell.
That's exactly what I thought. I don't see OU and OK State separating from each other.

[DesignatedT]

Oklahoma isnt going anywhere without OSU. 0 chance.

[NFO]

You do realize that USC ups have been one of the most powerful in pushing for this, and that Arizona has been one of the schools with the most concerns, so being tapped into both thought processes, especially when one is connected, can yield valuable information?

And I never claimed to be an expert. I posted content from an Insider I trust that said this past week Scott was working to get Oklahoma without State and Texas without Tech to free up two spots to bring in Kansas (without State) for basketall and, another target, first being Missouri who expressed no interest, then Rice for their academics, their baseball, and their market. Everyone knows Tech destroys Rice in football. Once the Pac gained Texas and Oklahoma, I have to say the other schools better than Rice but worse than USC/Texas/Oklahoma are basically meaningless in football. Texas brings the Texas market largely, and Rice adds a school in Houston, the largest market in the state, plus helps buoy academics along with Texas, Stanford and the public California schools.

When you took exception, I explained where I got it. Then you impugned everything involved based upon your opinion that anyone wanting Rice would already have them if they liked academics over athletics, a seemingly absurd position to you, as if strong conferences have never added lesser competitive schools based upon their academic prowess (I see you SEC and Vanderbilt, Big-10 and Northwestern).

I'm fine if you disagree. I know the value of the information and the informer. Since it looks pretty clear the discussed ideal didn't come into existence due to politics, I shared the information I discussed with DoK via PM a week ago. It's probably not going to happen, and the furthered expansion to 18/20 seems impractical, so the expansion becomes almost solely for football and avoiding destructive politics to make it happen, another provision I discussed a week ago with DoK. But whatever. I can't link you the Insiders premium content, and quoted one section from his post on the matter. It's what I can do. It's cool if you don't see the value in it.

There are to many words there for Blake to comprehend. Unless it is a story feed to him by BSPN he calls it BS. Same old story.

[JMarkJohns]

Alright. I can see Texas' moving on without Tech, but OU without State seems to be a much harder sell.

Ultimately the politics to gain the "ideal" were impossible, so it's Oklahoma with OK-State, and Texas with Tech. Likely as expected, but not necessarily preferred.

As for how much interest Rice ever generated, I don't know. To what degree, I am not sure. It wasn't my content, but the info is from a good source who's had a finger on the pulse of this for over a year now, and who said stuff was going down this last week, the weekend prior to it all going down. If he says Rice, I don't distrust it.

[ChumpDumper]

Rice makes sense if Tech isn't a prerequisite for UT's joining. Rice can always decide to spend more money on athletics.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

It woulda been nice if they coulda just gotten one of the schools without having to take the little brother. I loved the idea of Kansas joining the Pac when I first heard about it. OU, OK state, UT and Kansas woulda really made it a "superconference" in both football and basketball.

[JMarkJohns]

Rice makes sense if Tech isn't a prerequisite for UT's joining. Rice can always decide to spend more money on athletics.

At one point it seemed like the ideal could occur. Once Missouri expressed zero interest Rice was mentioned as a way to bring in two Texas schools, as well, likely a token attempt to appease the Texas legislature should Texas join without Tech. However, in addition to politics, Rice added prowess in areas other than football, which was already deemed strong enough. Now it seems it's Tech with Texas or nothing.

[Blake]

You do realize that USC ups have been one of the most powerful in pushing for this, and that Arizona has been one of the schools with the most concerns, so being tapped into both thought processes, especially when one is connected, can yield valuable information?

sure, but you havent talked to Scott yourself.

BS as far as I'm concerned.


And I never claimed to be an expert.

A matter of semantics as to what you claim to be,


I posted content from an Insider I trust that said this past week Scott was working to get Oklahoma without State and Texas without Tech to free up two spots to bring in Kansas (without State) for basketall and, another target, first being Missouri who expressed no interest, then Rice for their academics, their baseball, and their market. Everyone knows Tech destroys Rice in football. Once the Pac gained Texas and Oklahoma, I have to say the other schools better than Rice but worse than USC/Texas/Oklahoma are basically meaningless in football. Texas brings the Texas market largely, and Rice adds a school in Houston, the largest market in the state, plus helps buoy academics along with Texas, Stanford and the public California schools.

-OU isnt going anywhere without OSU

-UT owns the Houston market more than Rice.

Basically if what you say is true and Scott does want Rice, all he wants is a nerd to throw to the front when someone asks how the Pac is doing academically.

Honestly, that's stupid a reason when we are talking athletic realignments.

I could see several scenarios where Tech gets left out of the mix. I can't see any logical scenario where a commissioner would want Rice instead.


When you took exception, I explained where I got it. Then you impugned everything involved based upon your opinion that anyone wanting Rice would already have them if they liked academics over athletics, a seemingly absurd position to you, as if strong conferences have never added lesser competitive schools based upon their academic prowess (I see you SEC and Vanderbilt, Big-10 and Northwestern).

I'm fine if you disagree. I know the value of the information and the informer. Since it looks pretty clear the discussed ideal didn't come into existence due to politics, I shared the information I discussed with DoK via PM a week ago. It's probably not going to happen, and the furthered expansion to 18/20 seems impractical, so the expansion becomes almost solely for football and avoiding destructive politics to make it happen, another provision I discussed a week ago with DoK. But whatever. I can't link you the Insiders premium content, and quoted one section from his post on the matter. It's what I can do. It's cool if you don't see the value in it.

I think someone ass talked and several posters like you ran with it.

[Blake]

There are to many words there for Blake to comprehend. Unless it is a story feed to him by BSPN he calls it BS. Same old story.

lol you still being butthurt because your rumors were proven to be shit.

[JMarkJohns]

I think someone ass talked and several posters like you ran with it.

Or you're asshurt and ran with it.

Like I said, doesn't seem to matter now. Politics of Texas with Tech and Oklahoma with State won, so ideals now become maintaining this so the seminal ideal behind all of this in adding Texas and Oklahoma stays in place.

[NFO]

lol you still being butthurt because your rumors were proven to be shit.

:rollin you must be on some good drugs.

[Blake]

Or you're asshurt and ran with it.

Neh. Even if it had been some other school besides tech, I still think your story sounds like bullshit.


Like I said, doesn't seem to matter now. Politics of Texas with Tech and Oklahoma with State won, so ideals now become maintaining this so the seminal ideal behind all of this in adding Texas and Oklahoma stays in place.

Aww. I guess you have no choice now but to take it when I say your Rice story is full of shit.

[Blake]

:rollin you must be on some good drugs.

:rollin :rollin your hurting ass appears to need some.

[Bill_Brasky]

Apparently unless you've talked to Larry Scott yourself, you have no room talking or speculating about any of this.

[NFO]

:rollin :rollin your hurting ass appears to need some.

:lmao your mentally retarded responses are pretty funny even if you don't know you imply that you are a raging homosexual with the number of times you reference butthurt, or ass hurtings:lmao.

Keep it up bro:lol

[Blake]

Keep it up bro:lol

Freudian slip tbh

[coyotes_geek]

Not in the ideal I said was being discussed. The ideal was Texas and Okahoma plus two of Kansas, Missouri and Rice. KU for basketball. Once Missouri said no thanks they were discussing Rice for academics, baseball and Houston foothold.

Scott was wanting to improve the Pacls overall brand, not just keep up with SEC in football.

I'm having a hard time believing the Pac schools would be interested in forking over $20 mil/yr (or whatever their cut of the tv money would be) to a school like Rice over just a good baseball team and being able to say "look how smart our new friend is".

[JMarkJohns]

It was the potential of the cumulative, not the specific. Rice has more potential for development than Vandy and Northwestern with the right conference affiliaitions due to being in a talent hotbed in a rabid sports state, brings enough early with academics and peripheral programs, and puts enough viewership of the Pac in a large market, helping keep Houston prospects in the Pac and not heading East to the SEC. It made plenty of longterm sense.

[coyotes_geek]

It was the potential of the cumulative, not the specific. Rice has more potential for development than Vandy and Northwestern with the right conference affiliaitions due to being in a talent hotbed in a rabid sports state, brings enough early with academics and peripheral programs, and puts enough viewership of the Pac in a large market, helping keep Houston prospects in the Pac and not heading East to the SEC. It made plenty of longterm sense.

Still not seeing it. I lived in Houston for 15 years and at best Rice is the 5th most followed college program in that city behind Texas, A&M, UH and LSU. OU and Arkansas might even have bigger followings there.

Only Wake Forest has a smaller enrollment. There aren't many Rice students, there aren't many Rice alumni, there aren't that many people with a rooting interest to turn on the TV to watch them. Their academic standards cancel out any advantage to being located in a talent hotbed. They would be a perennial doormat in the Pac. They don't deliver TV ratings, nor do they have the potential to, especially if Texas ends up in the Pac.

Yeah, Pac schools like to recruit Houston, but that doesn't mean they're going to cough up a full revenue share to Rice just so that they can make a trip there once every four years.