Big XII Expansion

Discuss anything else athletic or non-athletic related that doesn't belong on the main Tulane athletics forum.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 1:46 pm

DfromCT wrote:
HoustonWave wrote:
Going to a P6 wouldn't be that traumatic, given that's what we use to have. Also a P6 might create the impetus to go to an eight team playoff. Lastly, I don't think either UT or OU want to go into another P conference because they would have a much harder path to national championships. They have much easier paths with the current Big XII, and would continue to have an advantaged path if they split into two conferences, that they each dominated. The bigger problem with this scenario is the question, does it solve the talent problem that the Big XII (including OU and UT) is currently experiencing. I think the proposed OU conference might have a serious recruiting problem (including OU if they can't keep the Red River Rivalry going). The UT conference would clearly have a recruiting advantage, but they would still have to deal with the SEC. I think UT knows that the SEC poses a huge threat to the current Big XII, and UT will be focusing on that threat in whatever conference structure it ends up in. A conference with the Texas schools, plus Memphis, Tulane and the Florida schools would have a much better chance of competing with the SEC than the current Big XII, or the OU version of an expanded Big XII.
So what you're saying is Memphis, Tulane, USF and UCF are worth more to a conference collectively than OU, OSU, ISU, KU, Kansas State and West Virginia? If you really believe that's true, I'd like you to take a look at a bridge for sale in the Arizona dessert.
Uh...

Memphis, New Orleans, Tampa, Orlando.

vs

Oklahoma City, Ames, Manhattan (KS), Lawrence, West Virginia.


User avatar
RobertM320
Tsunami
Posts: 6745
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Destrehan, LA
Contact:
Status: Online

Mon Sep 26, 2016 1:48 pm

I think he only means in reference to competing with the SEC as far as recruits. Given comparable monies, I'd have to think Tulane, Memphis, UCF and USF all have far more upside than ISU, KU or KSU.
"ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE! HANG EM AND BANG EM! HANG EM AND BANG EM!"-- Todd Graffagnini
DfromCT
Tsunami
Posts: 6515
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 2:12 pm

RobertM320 wrote:I think he only means in reference to competing with the SEC as far as recruits. Given comparable monies, I'd have to think Tulane, Memphis, UCF and USF all have far more upside than ISU, KU or KSU.

Fair enough. But I'm willing to bet NATIONALLY the Big 12 would draw better ratings than a conference of the Texas schools, Tulane, Memphis UCF and USF. You cannot leave out OU and OSU. Not for nothing, but K-State has done more this century than Tulane, Memphis UCF and USF. Heck, they were ranked higher in 1998 for most of the season than Tulane.
" For every alum, no matter where they are...I want a football coach that's going to make Saturday something you anticipate and look forward to." --Troy Dannen

Thank you all for your support as my son Zach continues to beat leukemia
mbawavefan12
Tsunami
Posts: 5227
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:17 pm
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 2:20 pm

RobertM320 wrote:I think he only means in reference to competing with the SEC as far as recruits. Given comparable monies, I'd have to think Tulane, Memphis, UCF and USF all have far more upside than ISU, KU or KSU.
Dear god. You may ant to keep thinking.
golfnut69
Green Wave
Posts: 8213
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 2:22 pm

jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
HoustonWave wrote:
Going to a P6 wouldn't be that traumatic, given that's what we use to have. Also a P6 might create the impetus to go to an eight team playoff. Lastly, I don't think either UT or OU want to go into another P conference because they would have a much harder path to national championships. They have much easier paths with the current Big XII, and would continue to have an advantaged path if they split into two conferences, that they each dominated. The bigger problem with this scenario is the question, does it solve the talent problem that the Big XII (including OU and UT) is currently experiencing. I think the proposed OU conference might have a serious recruiting problem (including OU if they can't keep the Red River Rivalry going). The UT conference would clearly have a recruiting advantage, but they would still have to deal with the SEC. I think UT knows that the SEC poses a huge threat to the current Big XII, and UT will be focusing on that threat in whatever conference structure it ends up in. A conference with the Texas schools, plus Memphis, Tulane and the Florida schools would have a much better chance of competing with the SEC than the current Big XII, or the OU version of an expanded Big XII.
So what you're saying is Memphis, Tulane, USF and UCF are worth more to a conference collectively than OU, OSU, ISU, KU, Kansas State and West Virginia? If you really believe that's true, I'd like you to take a look at a bridge for sale in the Arizona dessert.
Uh...

Memphis, New Orleans, Tampa, Orlando.

vs

Oklahoma City, Ames, Manhattan (KS), Lawrence, West Virginia.
Let's see here...OKC vs Memphis-NOLA....OKC in a heart beat....Lawrence, a city burned to the ground, much like Atlanta is nothing more than a Kansas City west suburb...Lawrence once again in a heartbeat....WVU...is just Pittsburg south, that is why it is called the "BackYard Brawl"...Manhattan and Ames...well they are Manhattan and Ames...somewhat Like Lubbock and Starkville
Last edited by golfnut69 on Tue Sep 27, 2016 5:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
Aberzombie1892
Swell
Posts: 1748
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 2:28 pm

jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote: So what you're saying is Memphis, Tulane, USF and UCF are worth more to a conference collectively than OU, OSU, ISU, KU, Kansas State and West Virginia? If you really believe that's true, I'd like you to take a look at a bridge for sale in the Arizona dessert.
Uh...

Memphis, New Orleans, Tampa, Orlando.

vs

Oklahoma City, Ames, Manhattan (KS), Lawrence, West Virginia.
I agree with D on this one. It seems like there is a disconnect between some of the points of view here - it seems like some posters are comparing what Tulane and some other members of the AAC "could' be one day to what OSU and other members of the Big 12 "are" right now. OU, Oklahoma State, ISU, KU, KSU, WVU, etc. are each more valuable than any program in the AAC, and it's not close. Even if someone wanted to argue that all of the non-OU/UT Big 12 teams have their values inflated due to being in a conference with OU/UT, those programs still generate fan interest, have nice sized turnouts at home games (aside from KU for now), generate tons of revenue outside of just the OU/UT games, and even are big enough deals to have their own 3rd tier rights contracts. In the AAC, only UConn/Memphis/Cincinnati and maybe ECU/Houston are "currently" big enough deals to even get a 3rd tier contract, and, even then, someone would be kidding themselves if they believed that UConn/Memphis/Cincinnati/ECU's 3rd tier deal would come even remotely close to the 3rd tier deal that ISU/KU get.

The notion that the non-Big 12 P5s would vote to create a P6 doesn't seem to follow if for no other reason that the power conferences have spent the last few decades consolidating power and interest into 5 conferences, and it wouldn't make sense to randomly choose to do a 180 in order to expand it for no real reason. Of course, this is pretty much mute since the massive revenue declines that the current Big 12 teams would experience - including OU/UT - would lead them away from this particular path.

Recruiting and how it would be impacted from this split would also prevent this from occurring. The TLDR version is that the "OU" conference would never exist solely because of recruiting - OU would go SEC/B1G before it would allow that travesty of a conference to happen ($40M in the SEC West versus $15-20M - if that - in whatever they would name that conference).

EDIT: Also, if the conference isn't an access conference, which it probably wouldn't be, a national title is off the table without an undefeated season and elite OOC opponents.
Last edited by Aberzombie1892 on Mon Sep 26, 2016 2:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.
mbawavefan12
Tsunami
Posts: 5227
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:17 pm
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 2:29 pm

golfnut69 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
HoustonWave wrote:
Going to a P6 wouldn't be that traumatic, given that's what we use to have. Also a P6 might create the impetus to go to an eight team playoff. Lastly, I don't think either UT or OU want to go into another P conference because they would have a much harder path to national championships. They have much easier paths with the current Big XII, and would continue to have an advantaged path if they split into two conferences, that they each dominated. The bigger problem with this scenario is the question, does it solve the talent problem that the Big XII (including OU and UT) is currently experiencing. I think the proposed OU conference might have a serious recruiting problem (including OU if they can't keep the Red River Rivalry going). The UT conference would clearly have a recruiting advantage, but they would still have to deal with the SEC. I think UT knows that the SEC poses a huge threat to the current Big XII, and UT will be focusing on that threat in whatever conference structure it ends up in. A conference with the Texas schools, plus Memphis, Tulane and the Florida schools would have a much better chance of competing with the SEC than the current Big XII, or the OU version of an expanded Big XII.
So what you're saying is Memphis, Tulane, USF and UCF are worth more to a conference collectively than OU, OSU, ISU, KU, Kansas State and West Virginia? If you really believe that's true, I'd like you to take a look at a bridge for sale in the Arizona dessert.
Uh...

Memphis, New Orleans, Tampa, Orlando.

vs

Oklahoma City, Ames, Manhattan (KS), Lawrence, West Virginia.
Let's see here...OKC vs Memphis-NOLA....OKC in a heart beat....Lawrence, a city burned to the ground, much like Atlanta is nothing more than a Kansas City west suburb...Lawrence once again in a heartbeat....WVU...is just Pittsburg south, that is what it is called the "BackYard Brawl"...Manhattan and Ames...well they are Manhattan and Ames...somewhat Like Lubbock and Starkville
Like Norman, Athens, Baton Rouge, Eugene, Oxford et all.

Those B12 brands have years of building a fanbase playing great schools. They have years of putting $25mm/year on their balance sheet. Sure they have weaknesses, far less than AAC schools. Green glasses? Those schools may not be great in FBall but they are P5 and making millions. Iowa State packs 50K+ per game. KState 40K+. Kansas is a mess but have a blue blood Bball program. Come on.
golfnut69
Green Wave
Posts: 8213
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 2:45 pm

The way OKC has grown, you can't tell Norman from OKC or OKC from Norman...besides..OKC has Will Rogers International Airport
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
DfromCT
Tsunami
Posts: 6515
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 2:57 pm

Since their last expansion of their stadium, K-State has averaged over 50k/game in a stadium that has a capacity of 53k. They also travel well.
" For every alum, no matter where they are...I want a football coach that's going to make Saturday something you anticipate and look forward to." --Troy Dannen

Thank you all for your support as my son Zach continues to beat leukemia
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 3:00 pm

DfromCT wrote:
RobertM320 wrote:I think he only means in reference to competing with the SEC as far as recruits. Given comparable monies, I'd have to think Tulane, Memphis, UCF and USF all have far more upside than ISU, KU or KSU.

Fair enough. But I'm willing to bet NATIONALLY the Big 12 would draw better ratings than a conference of the Texas schools, Tulane, Memphis UCF and USF. You cannot leave out OU and OSU. Not for nothing, but K-State has done more this century than Tulane, Memphis UCF and USF. Heck, they were ranked higher in 1998 for most of the season than Tulane.
You continue to make the mistake of thinking of everything through the lens of recent historical wins/losses. Since all of the above are hypothetical, you can't "bet" on anything. What Tulane or USF might be able to accomplish with P5 money in a conference with Texas has a far higher ceiling than anything KSU can accomplish in a watered down Big12. Nothing could be less relevant to this conversation than KSU's AP rankings in 1998.

Ratings are based on wins/losses and importance of game. Your hypothetical assumes that everything stays the same, when the new conferences in the example would change everything.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 3:03 pm

Aberzombie1892 wrote:
I agree with D on this one. It seems like there is a disconnect between some of the points of view here - it seems like some posters are comparing what Tulane and some other members of the AAC "could' be one day to what OSU and other members of the Big 12 "are" right now.

That's right. It's a hypothetical conference where the Big 12 splits with UT and OU going in different directions. Everything from money to scheduling changes under that scenario, and it would badly damage the KSU's and ISU's who have most or all of their value tied to UT/OU.
Aberzombie1892
Swell
Posts: 1748
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 3:18 pm

jonathanjoseph wrote:
Aberzombie1892 wrote:
I agree with D on this one. It seems like there is a disconnect between some of the points of view here - it seems like some posters are comparing what Tulane and some other members of the AAC "could' be one day to what OSU and other members of the Big 12 "are" right now.

That's right. It's a hypothetical conference where the Big 12 splits with UT and OU going in different directions. Everything from money to scheduling changes under that scenario, and it would badly damage the KSU's and ISU's who have most or all of their value tied to UT/OU.
I see what you are saying, but the decision for UT and OU to split would be made off of the current situation of all of the programs/tv networks right now, and there appear to be too many variables and other items outside the control of those two programs to even consider this path unless it included poaching from other power conferences.
DfromCT
Tsunami
Posts: 6515
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 3:21 pm

jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
RobertM320 wrote:I think he only means in reference to competing with the SEC as far as recruits. Given comparable monies, I'd have to think Tulane, Memphis, UCF and USF all have far more upside than ISU, KU or KSU.

Fair enough. But I'm willing to bet NATIONALLY the Big 12 would draw better ratings than a conference of the Texas schools, Tulane, Memphis UCF and USF. You cannot leave out OU and OSU. Not for nothing, but K-State has done more this century than Tulane, Memphis UCF and USF. Heck, they were ranked higher in 1998 for most of the season than Tulane.
You continue to make the mistake of thinking of everything through the lens of recent historical wins/losses. Since all of the above are hypothetical, you can't "bet" on anything. What Tulane or USF might be able to accomplish with P5 money in a conference with Texas has a far higher ceiling than anything KSU can accomplish in a watered down Big12. Nothing could be less relevant to this conversation than KSU's AP rankings in 1998.

Ratings are based on wins/losses and importance of game. Your hypothetical assumes that everything stays the same, when the new conferences in the example would change everything.
And your hypothetical is strictly based upon your best guess at what might happen in the future. I'd rather go on facts as they are today than guessing what the future will bring. Sorry, but you have ZERO argument if you eliminate your GUESSING GAMES. I'm not going to get sucked any further into this senseless argument. The chance of this hypothetical situation playing out is maybe 2-3%.
" For every alum, no matter where they are...I want a football coach that's going to make Saturday something you anticipate and look forward to." --Troy Dannen

Thank you all for your support as my son Zach continues to beat leukemia
Aberzombie1892
Swell
Posts: 1748
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 3:24 pm

DfromCT wrote:And your hypothetical is strictly based upon your best guess at what might happen in the future. I'd rather go on facts as they are today than guessing what the future will bring. Sorry, but you have ZERO argument if you eliminate your GUESSING GAMES. I'm not going to get sucked any further into this senseless argument. The chance of this hypothetical situation playing out is maybe 2-3%.

+1
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 3:44 pm

DfromCT wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
RobertM320 wrote:I think he only means in reference to competing with the SEC as far as recruits. Given comparable monies, I'd have to think Tulane, Memphis, UCF and USF all have far more upside than ISU, KU or KSU.

Fair enough. But I'm willing to bet NATIONALLY the Big 12 would draw better ratings than a conference of the Texas schools, Tulane, Memphis UCF and USF. You cannot leave out OU and OSU. Not for nothing, but K-State has done more this century than Tulane, Memphis UCF and USF. Heck, they were ranked higher in 1998 for most of the season than Tulane.
You continue to make the mistake of thinking of everything through the lens of recent historical wins/losses. Since all of the above are hypothetical, you can't "bet" on anything. What Tulane or USF might be able to accomplish with P5 money in a conference with Texas has a far higher ceiling than anything KSU can accomplish in a watered down Big12. Nothing could be less relevant to this conversation than KSU's AP rankings in 1998.

Ratings are based on wins/losses and importance of game. Your hypothetical assumes that everything stays the same, when the new conferences in the example would change everything.
And your hypothetical is strictly based upon your best guess at what might happen in the future. I'd rather go on facts as they are today than guessing what the future will bring. Sorry, but you have ZERO argument if you eliminate your GUESSING GAMES. I'm not going to get sucked any further into this senseless argument. The chance of this hypothetical situation playing out is maybe 2-3%.
Dude relax. Hypothetical future conferences necessarily involve "guessing games". Also, the future necessarily involves change. I think it's a great idea that you don't get further "sucked in".
HoustonWave
Swell
Posts: 1739
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:27 pm
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 4:28 pm

jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
RobertM320 wrote:I think he only means in reference to competing with the SEC as far as recruits. Given comparable monies, I'd have to think Tulane, Memphis, UCF and USF all have far more upside than ISU, KU or KSU.

Fair enough. But I'm willing to bet NATIONALLY the Big 12 would draw better ratings than a conference of the Texas schools, Tulane, Memphis UCF and USF. You cannot leave out OU and OSU. Not for nothing, but K-State has done more this century than Tulane, Memphis UCF and USF. Heck, they were ranked higher in 1998 for most of the season than Tulane.
You continue to make the mistake of thinking of everything through the lens of recent historical wins/losses. Since all of the above are hypothetical, you can't "bet" on anything. What Tulane or USF might be able to accomplish with P5 money in a conference with Texas has a far higher ceiling than anything KSU can accomplish in a watered down Big12. Nothing could be less relevant to this conversation than KSU's AP rankings in 1998.

Ratings are based on wins/losses and importance of game. Your hypothetical assumes that everything stays the same, when the new conferences in the example would change everything.
That is precisely what I am saying. Tulane, Memphis and the Floridas would have far more upside than KSU, ISU, WVU or Cincy for that matter--and when combined with the UT led Texas schools, would provide far more recruiting turf and TV markets than the current Big XII. That's why some of you say OU and OSU have be part of such a conference--and if so, fine but UT has the key to that car, not OU. And KSU had an abysmal history prior to Snyder, had an abysmal history after Snyder's first retirement, and will have an abysmal history when he retires for good. The truth is, Tulane, Memphis and the Floridas have more upside than TT or Baylor for that matter--but those schools would of course be in a UT conference. The northern Big XII for all their belly aching really don't have many good options--bow to UT, or scrape together their Plan B and try to make a go of it--to which UT will respond by creating its Texas conference (essentially an expanded SWC). If the Big XII north bow to UT, we'll see the Big XII expand with 1. UH, 2. Tulane, 3 & 4 the Floridas. Forget Cincy, forget any schools north, and WVU, enjoy your island. This is essentially where things seem to stand at this point.
Tulane is the University of Louisiana
mbawavefan12
Tsunami
Posts: 5227
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:17 pm
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 4:54 pm

HoustonWave wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
RobertM320 wrote:I think he only means in reference to competing with the SEC as far as recruits. Given comparable monies, I'd have to think Tulane, Memphis, UCF and USF all have far more upside than ISU, KU or KSU.

Fair enough. But I'm willing to bet NATIONALLY the Big 12 would draw better ratings than a conference of the Texas schools, Tulane, Memphis UCF and USF. You cannot leave out OU and OSU. Not for nothing, but K-State has done more this century than Tulane, Memphis UCF and USF. Heck, they were ranked higher in 1998 for most of the season than Tulane.
You continue to make the mistake of thinking of everything through the lens of recent historical wins/losses. Since all of the above are hypothetical, you can't "bet" on anything. What Tulane or USF might be able to accomplish with P5 money in a conference with Texas has a far higher ceiling than anything KSU can accomplish in a watered down Big12. Nothing could be less relevant to this conversation than KSU's AP rankings in 1998.

Ratings are based on wins/losses and importance of game. Your hypothetical assumes that everything stays the same, when the new conferences in the example would change everything.
That is precisely what I am saying. Tulane, Memphis and the Floridas would have far more upside than KSU, ISU, WVU or Cincy for that matter--and when combined with the UT led Texas schools, would provide far more recruiting turf and TV markets than the current Big XII. That's why some of you say OU and OSU have be part of such a conference--and if so, fine but UT has the key to that car, not OU. And KSU had an abysmal history prior to Snyder, had an abysmal history after Snyder's first retirement, and will have an abysmal history when he retires for good. The truth is, Tulane, Memphis and the Floridas have more upside than TT or Baylor for that matter--but those schools would of course be in a UT conference. The northern Big XII for all their belly aching really don't have many good options--bow to UT, or scrape together their Plan B and try to make a go of it--to which UT will respond by creating its Texas conference (essentially an expanded SWC). If the Big XII north bow to UT, we'll see the Big XII expand with 1. UH, 2. Tulane, 3 & 4 the Floridas. Forget Cincy, forget any schools north, and WVU, enjoy your island. This is essentially where things seem to stand at this point.
If those schools had been in P5 conference as long as a KSU, ISU....maybe but they have a massive head start. ISU is a crap FBall program and they still draw 50K+.
DfromCT
Tsunami
Posts: 6515
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 7:07 pm

jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
HoustonWave wrote:
Going to a P6 wouldn't be that traumatic, given that's what we use to have. Also a P6 might create the impetus to go to an eight team playoff. Lastly, I don't think either UT or OU want to go into another P conference because they would have a much harder path to national championships. They have much easier paths with the current Big XII, and would continue to have an advantaged path if they split into two conferences, that they each dominated. The bigger problem with this scenario is the question, does it solve the talent problem that the Big XII (including OU and UT) is currently experiencing. I think the proposed OU conference might have a serious recruiting problem (including OU if they can't keep the Red River Rivalry going). The UT conference would clearly have a recruiting advantage, but they would still have to deal with the SEC. I think UT knows that the SEC poses a huge threat to the current Big XII, and UT will be focusing on that threat in whatever conference structure it ends up in. A conference with the Texas schools, plus Memphis, Tulane and the Florida schools would have a much better chance of competing with the SEC than the current Big XII, or the OU version of an expanded Big XII.
So what you're saying is Memphis, Tulane, USF and UCF are worth more to a conference collectively than OU, OSU, ISU, KU, Kansas State and West Virginia? If you really believe that's true, I'd like you to take a look at a bridge for sale in the Arizona dessert.
Uh...

Memphis, New Orleans, Tampa, Orlando.

vs

Oklahoma City, Ames, Manhattan (KS), Lawrence, West Virginia.
South Bend, IN is not much of a town or TV market. Yet ANY P5 conference would admit ND in a heartbeat if they decided they wanted to join a conference. ND, being the super power media ratings wise that they are, will remain independent until the day they drop football.
" For every alum, no matter where they are...I want a football coach that's going to make Saturday something you anticipate and look forward to." --Troy Dannen

Thank you all for your support as my son Zach continues to beat leukemia
DfromCT
Tsunami
Posts: 6515
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 7:22 pm

JonathanJoseph wrote:
Yulman was supposed to create a game day experience that was lacking at the Dome, increasing attendance, but attendance seems unchanged from the same few thousand we had at the Dome. We were just outdrawn by ULL. The buzz is gone.
Yes, this crosses two threads. But it's the point you keep trying to force down our throats, HAVING NEVER BEEN TO A GAME AT YULMAN, NOR EXPERIENCED GAMEDAY ON CAMPUS.

That's what angers so many of us. The repeated attacks on a stadium and experience YOU'VE NEVER HAD.
" For every alum, no matter where they are...I want a football coach that's going to make Saturday something you anticipate and look forward to." --Troy Dannen

Thank you all for your support as my son Zach continues to beat leukemia
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Mon Sep 26, 2016 11:07 pm

DfromCT wrote:JonathanJoseph wrote:
Yulman was supposed to create a game day experience that was lacking at the Dome, increasing attendance, but attendance seems unchanged from the same few thousand we had at the Dome. We were just outdrawn by ULL. The buzz is gone.
Yes, this crosses two threads. But it's the point you keep trying to force down our throats, HAVING NEVER BEEN TO A GAME AT YULMAN, NOR EXPERIENCED GAMEDAY ON CAMPUS.

That's what angers so many of us. The repeated attacks on a stadium and experience YOU'VE NEVER HAD.
I'm forced to ask this question. What does my attendance at Yulman have to do with 1) actual attendance 2) recruiting rankings or 3) the financial performance of the stadium operations 4) Yulman's capacity as it relates to pitching the ability to host Big12 conference games or 5) the Big12's interest in the Dome for a conference championship game.

I'm just wondering which of the above factors changes depending on whether or not I've been present at a game at Yulman. Thanks for your answer in advance. Also, for your own health, please don't be "angered" by my lack of attendance. It's really shouldn't be that big a deal to you.
golfnut69
Green Wave
Posts: 8213
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

Tue Sep 27, 2016 5:43 am

DfromCT wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
HoustonWave wrote:
Going to a P6 wouldn't be that traumatic, given that's what we use to have. Also a P6 might create the impetus to go to an eight team playoff. Lastly, I don't think either UT or OU want to go into another P conference because they would have a much harder path to national championships. They have much easier paths with the current Big XII, and would continue to have an advantaged path if they split into two conferences, that they each dominated. The bigger problem with this scenario is the question, does it solve the talent problem that the Big XII (including OU and UT) is currently experiencing. I think the proposed OU conference might have a serious recruiting problem (including OU if they can't keep the Red River Rivalry going). The UT conference would clearly have a recruiting advantage, but they would still have to deal with the SEC. I think UT knows that the SEC poses a huge threat to the current Big XII, and UT will be focusing on that threat in whatever conference structure it ends up in. A conference with the Texas schools, plus Memphis, Tulane and the Florida schools would have a much better chance of competing with the SEC than the current Big XII, or the OU version of an expanded Big XII.
So what you're saying is Memphis, Tulane, USF and UCF are worth more to a conference collectively than OU, OSU, ISU, KU, Kansas State and West Virginia? If you really believe that's true, I'd like you to take a look at a bridge for sale in the Arizona dessert.
Uh...

Memphis, New Orleans, Tampa, Orlando.

vs

Oklahoma City, Ames, Manhattan (KS), Lawrence, West Virginia.
South Bend, IN is not much of a town or TV market. Yet ANY P5 conference would admit ND in a heartbeat if they decided they wanted to join a conference. ND, being the super power media ratings wise that they are, will remain independent until the day they drop football.

The only good thing to come out of South Bend was Studebaker cars.... playing ND, ya gotta fly into Chicago and bus for about an 90 minutes, but then again you do get to see Gary Ind on the way there and back !!!....I bet NBC just loves seeing ND get beat by Texas and Duke !!!!
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
User avatar
RobertM320
Tsunami
Posts: 6745
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Destrehan, LA
Contact:
Status: Online

Tue Sep 27, 2016 11:29 am

LOL. The ever changing saga of Big 12 expansion...

Chuck CarltonVerified account
‏@ChuckCarltonDMN
Can confirm report, via sources, by @SIPeteThamel that Oklahoma, Boren now negative on Big 12 expansion, a potential game - changer.
"ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE! HANG EM AND BANG EM! HANG EM AND BANG EM!"-- Todd Graffagnini
Aberzombie1892
Swell
Posts: 1748
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline

Tue Sep 27, 2016 11:33 am

RobertM320 wrote:LOL. The ever changing saga of Big 12 expansion...

Chuck CarltonVerified account
‏@ChuckCarltonDMN
Can confirm report, via sources, by @SIPeteThamel that Oklahoma, Boren now negative on Big 12 expansion, a potential game - changer.
Ouch. If true, I would assume that that means that he and OU want out in 2025.
HoustonWave
Swell
Posts: 1739
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:27 pm
Status: Offline

Tue Sep 27, 2016 1:38 pm

Aberzombie1892 wrote:
RobertM320 wrote:LOL. The ever changing saga of Big 12 expansion...

Chuck CarltonVerified account
‏@ChuckCarltonDMN
Can confirm report, via sources, by @SIPeteThamel that Oklahoma, Boren now negative on Big 12 expansion, a potential game - changer.
Ouch. If true, I would assume that that means that he and OU want out in 2025.
They'll probably want out much "sooner" if possible. Perhaps he will try to initiate the infamous Plan B. At the very least, I suspect Boren will start negotiating with UT to figure out what the next step should be. I bet Boren will insist that there is going to be a next step for OU, it just depends on what it's going to be. This does buy us the critical time that Dannen and Fritz need to get the Cowen rust and stench off our program. I think it's really going to get interesting. The P4 buzzards will probably start circling, and at the same time both UT and OU, and likely many of the other Big XII schools will start back channeling trying to come up with some alternatives. Once the Big XII finally announces that there will be no expansion, I hope and expect that Dannen will stay in close contact with Bowlsby as things evolve. I just don't see the Big XII staying at 10 schools for very long, why wait til 2025? They can readily negotiate alternatives with ESPN and Fox--who themselves would probably welcome some alternatives to the talent-declining Big XII. If they wait til 2025, the SEC will have completely locked down SE Texas--I don't think UT, nor UH, are going to sit back and let that continue.
Tulane is the University of Louisiana
mbawavefan12
Tsunami
Posts: 5227
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:17 pm
Status: Offline

Tue Sep 27, 2016 1:49 pm

HoustonWave wrote:
Aberzombie1892 wrote:
RobertM320 wrote:LOL. The ever changing saga of Big 12 expansion...

Chuck CarltonVerified account
‏@ChuckCarltonDMN
Can confirm report, via sources, by @SIPeteThamel that Oklahoma, Boren now negative on Big 12 expansion, a potential game - changer.
Ouch. If true, I would assume that that means that he and OU want out in 2025.
They'll probably want out much "sooner" if possible. Perhaps he will try to initiate the infamous Plan B. At the very least, I suspect Boren will start negotiating with UT to figure out what the next step should be. I bet Boren will insist that there is going to be a next step for OU, it just depends on what it's going to be. This does buy us the critical time that Dannen and Fritz need to get the Cowen rust and stench off our program. I think it's really going to get interesting. The P4 buzzards will probably start circling, and at the same time both UT and OU, and likely many of the other Big XII schools will start back channeling trying to come up with some alternatives. Once the Big XII finally announces that there will be no expansion, I hope and expect that Dannen will stay in close contact with Bowlsby as things evolve. I just don't see the Big XII staying at 10 schools for very long, why wait til 2025? They can readily negotiate alternatives with ESPN and Fox--who themselves would probably welcome some alternatives to the talent-declining Big XII. If they wait til 2025, the SEC will have completely locked down SE Texas--I don't think UT, nor UH, are going to sit back and let that continue.
I hope we included a bonus for TD if we get a B12 invite.
Post Reply