MU ****The official NEW new conference realignment thread.**** - Page 211

**Saul Good** · 01-31-2012, 02:52 PM

the second thread has been pronounced dead.

qabbaan · 05-30-2012, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

counterpoint: Texas and OU have 2 votes.

Going from 2 votes out of 10, to 2 votes out of 12 dilutes their influence. Not sure why people panicked about them can't see that.

Move "haves" coming into the conference doesn't help the existing "have nots". They are simply further behind the conference standard than ever.

**alnorth** · 05-30-2012, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saul Good

There will be divisions. Don't over-think this.

I'm trying to think of a rational explanation other than "Snyder is a crazy old man".

The only way we can really say "we don't really have any permanent divisions", and still have a CCG, is dynamic divisions.

Otherwise, well, Snyder was misinformed.

**alnorth** · 05-30-2012, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qabbaan

Move "haves" coming into the conference doesn't help the existing "have nots". They are simply further behind the conference standard than ever.

You really don't know what your talking about. This isn't OU, UT, and 10 schools from the WAC.

**Saul Good** · 05-30-2012, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

I'm trying to think of a rational explanation other than "Snyder is a crazy old man".

No need to overthink it.

Bambi · 05-30-2012, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qabbaan

Move "haves" coming into the conference doesn't help the existing "have nots". They are simply further behind the conference standard than ever.

Can you please list us your "have-not" schools?

And then please quantify what "have-not" entails?

Championships? Facilities? Endowment? Boosters?

I'm very interested.

Pasta Little Brioni · 05-30-2012, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Codered

Yep, Texas and Oklahoma still hold all the cards. Some things stay the same.

The lesser schools have to pay homage to thier Texahoma liege lords. Bevo has called the banners to nix the division vote!!

**alnorth** · 05-30-2012, 07:47 PM

The Big 12 has now articulated what they want for the new postseason. Its closest to what the SEC wants, but not exactly.

The Big 12 does not want the top-4 champions model, instead they want the field to be picked by a selection committee, and they want that committee to heavily consider strength of schedule.

Bambi · 05-30-2012, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

The Big 12 has now articulated what they want for the new postseason. Its closest to what the SEC wants, but not exactly.

The Big 12 does not want the top-4 champions model, instead they want the field to be picked by a selection committee, and they want that committee to heavily consider strength of schedule.

Listened to the Q&A today. It's obvious they're just waiting until the whole "playoff" thing works itself out. Even though it's sounding like all this playoff talk is just going to be an extension of the BCS. We'll have to wait and see.

I chuckled when the dude who came all the way from Tallahassee showed up though. lol

**alnorth** · 05-30-2012, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wickedson

Even though it's sounding like all this playoff talk is just going to be an extension of the BCS. We'll have to wait and see.

Uhhh.... there's zero chance of that happening. A huge epic pile of money would be left on the table. At worst, we'll have plus-one, but even the odds of that are extremely slim. We're going to have a real 4-team playoff in 3 years.

Bambi · 05-30-2012, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

Uhhh.... there's zero chance of that happening. A huge epic pile of money would be left on the table. At worst, we'll have plus-one, but even the odds of that are extremely slim. We're going to have a real 4-team playoff in 3 years.

What I meant was that the playoff participants would be made up primarily of voters and committees and will most likely integrate the current BCS bowls into its format.

At least thats what I got from the press conference today.

Four superconference champions squaring off is a long way off... if ever. You will always have at larges involved one way of another.

Titty Meat · 05-30-2012, 08:38 PM

The 4 team playoff would be awesome.

**Saul Good** · 05-30-2012, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

Uhhh.... there's zero chance of that happening. A huge epic pile of money would be left on the table. At worst, we'll have plus-one, but even the odds of that are extremely slim. We're going to have a real 4-team playoff in 3 years.

I still say its eight teams with four auto qualifiers.

kchero · 05-30-2012, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saul Good

I still say its eight teams with four auto qualifiers.

This. The 4 top conference champs (SEC, Big 12, B1G, Pac 12) and then 4 at large (i.e. top 4 ranked teams remaining)

**alnorth** · 05-30-2012, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saul Good

I still say its eight teams with four auto qualifiers.

not right away, but maybe when the next contract expires

**alnorth** · 05-31-2012, 08:38 AM

Dennis Dodd is reporting that the Big 12's new TV deal will be announced any day now, and it will have an expansion clause. Apparently the theory that adding schools might bump the value up per school might not be true (though not sure if there will be look-ins or not, which could eventually bump the value up), but if the Big 12 expands to 12, the deals will go up by $40MM, so no current member will lose any money. This applies no matter who the Big 12 adds, whether they "add Appalachian State or Florida State."

Seems odd on the surface that the contract goes up no matter who is added, but it makes sense in that they obviously cant write into the contract, in black and white, "here's your ACC hunting license, go sick!" Right after denying expansion talk to make sure they don't get sued.

The TV folks probably trust the Big 12 not to do anything stupid, since the next contract would suffer.

01-31-2012, 02:52 PM
Saul Good Quit your bullshit Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Bored of winning Casino cash: $10052799	**The official NEW new conference realignment thread.** the second thread has been pronounced dead.
Posts: 41,870

05-30-2012, 07:47 PM	#3157
alnorth . Join Date: Dec 2002 Casino cash: $57176239	The Big 12 has now articulated what they want for the new postseason. Its closest to what the SEC wants, but not exactly. The Big 12 does not want the top-4 champions model, instead they want the field to be picked by a selection committee, and they want that committee to heavily consider strength of schedule. __________________ how many emo kids does it take to change a lightbulb? HOW MANY?! none they just sit in the dark and cry
Posts: 36,130

05-30-2012, 08:38 PM	#3161
Titty Meat Inmem 2.0 Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: My house Casino cash: $2307558	The 4 team playoff would be awesome.
Posts: 75,057

05-31-2012, 08:38 AM	#3165
alnorth . Join Date: Dec 2002 Casino cash: $57176239	Dennis Dodd is reporting that the Big 12's new TV deal will be announced any day now, and it will have an expansion clause. Apparently the theory that adding schools might bump the value up per school might not be true (though not sure if there will be look-ins or not, which could eventually bump the value up), but if the Big 12 expands to 12, the deals will go up by $40MM, so no current member will lose any money. This applies no matter who the Big 12 adds, whether they "add Appalachian State or Florida State." Seems odd on the surface that the contract goes up no matter who is added, but it makes sense in that they obviously cant write into the contract, in black and white, "here's your ACC hunting license, go sick!" Right after denying expansion talk to make sure they don't get sued. The TV folks probably trust the Big 12 not to do anything stupid, since the next contract would suffer. __________________ how many emo kids does it take to change a lightbulb? HOW MANY?! none they just sit in the dark and cry
Posts: 36,130