Tulane being considered for the Big 12?

[Wave755]

Did I not say 400K to begin with?

Metropolitan New Orleans has thousands of “crypto Tulane fans,” one good year won’t be enough for them to now come out from “deep cover.” This time, unlike ‘98, we must prove Tulane is “for real” for Div. 1 football. For everyone 35 and older the “sting of 1999” is not forgotten. The 2023 season will be pivotal for this reason.

I think this team will be even better. More confident, more hardened from big games.

I agree, and even for our 2023 CUSAAAC schedule we can expect dramatic improvement in attendance for this coming season.

[anEngineer]

It has to be quite an inspiration for current players to see that Cotton Bowl trophy on display every day. Saying that it can be done is one thing, knowing it is another.

[Wave Fan]

They have been on the big stage and looked right at home!

[HoustonWave]

If the PAC hangs on the the 4 corners teams, we may get interest from both. Certainly the Big12 gives us a look.

Exactly. In fact, if the Big 12 is suddenly giving us a renewed look, it may mean that their Four Corners strategy isn't taking off.

[HoustonWave]

Metropolitan New Orleans has thousands of “crypto Tulane fans,” one good year won’t be enough for them to now come out from “deep cover.” This time, unlike ‘98, we must prove Tulane is “for real” for Div. 1 football. For everyone 35 and older the “sting of 1999” is not forgotten. The 2023 season will be pivotal for this reason.

I think this team will be even better. More confident, more hardened from big games.

I agree, and even for our 2023 CUSAAAC schedule we can expect dramatic improvement in attendance for this coming season.

The first three games of the 2023 will tell the tale as to the season and the fan support. If we come out of those three games 3-0, we're on our way again and attendance will be strong throughout the year. If we're anything less than 2-1, I would expect attendance to fall dramatically as we start to bring in the CUSA line up that we have for 2023.

[HoustonWave]

Has the Tulane and Big 12 discussion been suddenly renewed? If so, by what? Is it part of a PAC12 CTZ blocking strategy? It would seem coincidental given tomorrow's reported PAC expansion vote, where we supposedly have at least 7 of the needed 8 votes. It would also suggest that the Big 12 is going to Plan B, as their Four Corners Plan A isn't panning out.

[anEngineer]

Has the Tulane and Big 12 discussion been suddenly renewed? If so, by what? Is it part of a PAC12 CTZ blocking strategy? It would seem coincidental given tomorrow's reported PAC expansion vote, where we supposedly have at least 7 of the needed 8 votes. It would also suggest that the Big 12 is going to Plan B, as their Four Corners Plan A isn't panning out.

If the 4 corners thing doesn't work out for Big12, I think we would have to be high on their list.

[Aberzombie1892]

The Big 12 is unlikely to expand outside of current P5 schools, as its expansion clause that provides for a pro-rata increase in payout is strictly limited to current P5s. To that end, Tulane/SMU and the like are likely completely off the table.

[RobertM320]

Did I not say 400K to begin with?

Metropolitan New Orleans has thousands of “crypto Tulane fans,” one good year won’t be enough for them to now come out from “deep cover.” This time, unlike ‘98, we must prove Tulane is “for real” for Div. 1 football. For everyone 35 and older the “sting of the 1999 season” is not forgotten. The 2023 season will be pivotal for this reason.

And I agree with this. Did I say otherwise anywhere?

[HoustonWave]

Did I not say 400K to begin with?

Metropolitan New Orleans has thousands of “crypto Tulane fans,” one good year won’t be enough for them to now come out from “deep cover.” This time, unlike ‘98, we must prove Tulane is “for real” for Div. 1 football. For everyone 35 and older the “sting of the 1999 season” is not forgotten. The 2023 season will be pivotal for this reason.

And I agree with this. Did I say otherwise anywhere?

Continued on-field success is essential. But even with such success, much of our viewership will come from locales far from the New Orleans TV market. I have to believe that Fitts and Dannen, in any related discussions, stress this characteristic which is unique to only a few schools.

[golfnut69]

The Big 12 is unlikely to expand outside of current P5 schools, as its expansion clause that provides for a pro-rata increase in payout is strictly limited to current P5s. To that end, Tulane/SMU and the like are likely completely off the table.

memo to USF...... U R screwed !!!!.... no UCF travel partner for U

[golfnut69]

from the Los Angeles Times
https://www.latimes.com/sports/story/20 ... ive-things

[tpstulane]

from the Los Angeles Times
https://www.latimes.com/sports/story/20 ... ive-things

If the 4 Corners go we’ll get a PAC-12 invite

[HoustonWave]

from the Los Angeles Times
https://www.latimes.com/sports/story/20 ... ive-things

Thanks Golf, interesting article. Especially the comment about USC being tired of providing for the lesser PAC teams. There is clearly a move to the better branded and more valuable teams getting bigger revenue slices. Essentially the OU/UT and USC/UCLA moves to the SEC and Big 10 were just revenue decisions. If the Big 12 and PAC 12 had given those schools considerably larger revenue shares, they might still be in those conferences--especially given that all four schools will now have a much harder time ever seeing a CFP game. And now we have Florida State and Clemson essentially demanding larger revenue shares. The "eat what you kill" movement is well underway throughout the P World--and already is happening in the AACUSA. Ironically, this trend will actually help Tulane down the road--we'll get out of the AACUSA and its disastrous schedule. And we'll get whatever P revenue share our viewership warrants--which isn't too bad at the moment.

[HoustonWave]

from the Los Angeles Times
https://www.latimes.com/sports/story/20 ... ive-things

If the 4 Corners go we’ll get a PAC-12 invite

If the 4 Corners go, the PAC will need anywhere from six to ten new schools. The top six candidates: SDSU, SMU, CSU, Tulane, Air Force and maybe Rice. If they want to go bigger, they'll have to abandon the academic factor and grab Boise, Memphis and maybe a couple others.

[Bigschtick]

from the Los Angeles Times
https://www.latimes.com/sports/story/20 ... ive-things

If the 4 Corners go we’ll get a PAC-12 invite

If the 4 Corners go, the PAC will need anywhere from six to ten new schools. The top six candidates: SDSU, SMU, CSU, Tulane, Air Force and maybe Rice. If they want to go bigger, they'll have to abandon the academic factor and grab Boise, Memphis and maybe a couple others.

I think you nailed It!

[RobertM320]

Some interesting facts about the "Four Corners Schools"

Arizona State - The last time ASU won a conference title was 1996. Also the last time they played in a major bowl

Arizona - AU has never won the PAC-12, and they're only trip to a major bowl was in 2013, when the went to the Fiesta after losing the PAC12 CG. Their last conference title was the WAC in 1975

Colorado - The last time CU won a conference title was 2001, which was also their last major bowl appearance. Prior to that you go back to Bill McCartney days in the 1990s.

Utah - The most successful of the 4 corners schools, although its all in the past 20 years. Two undefeated seasons in the MWC in 2004 and 2008, both conference champs, and two major bowl appearances. Nothing since until they won consecutive PAC12 titles and went to the Rose Bowl twice in the past two years.


My question is, I'm not quite sure why these are considered "big brands" and so desirable. Other than the last two years with Utah, there was a grand total of 4 major bowl appearances in the past quarter century, and two of those were Utah because of being undefeated and the new BCS system being in place. There's only one conference title in this century between ASU, AU and CU, and that was CU in 2001 in the Big12. What makes them different than a Mississippi State or an Ole Miss or a Baylor?

[anEngineer]

It's just more bias and solely because they are already there.

[HoustonWave]

Absolutely. I think the Arizona schools and Colorado are all paper tigers—both in on-field performance and viewership. Colorado may well return to prominence with Deion Sanders at the helm, but I don’t understand the obsession that Yormark seems to have for them.

[Ruski]

Some interesting facts about the "Four Corners Schools"

Arizona State - The last time ASU won a conference title was 1996. Also the last time they played in a major bowl

Arizona - AU has never won the PAC-12, and they're only trip to a major bowl was in 2013, when the went to the Fiesta after losing the PAC12 CG. Their last conference title was the WAC in 1975

Colorado - The last time CU won a conference title was 2001, which was also their last major bowl appearance. Prior to that you go back to Bill McCartney days in the 1990s.

Utah - The most successful of the 4 corners schools, although its all in the past 20 years. Two undefeated seasons in the MWC in 2004 and 2008, both conference champs, and two major bowl appearances. Nothing since until they won consecutive PAC12 titles and went to the Rose Bowl twice in the past two years.


My question is, I'm not quite sure why these are considered "big brands" and so desirable. Other than the last two years with Utah, there was a grand total of 4 major bowl appearances in the past quarter century, and two of those were Utah because of being undefeated and the new BCS system being in place. There's only one conference title in this century between ASU, AU and CU, and that was CU in 2001 in the Big12. What makes them different than a Mississippi State or an Ole Miss or a Baylor?

Arizona State - 75,000 enrollment, Phoenix TV Market

Arizona - 39,000 enrollment, Tucson TV Market

Colorado - 36,000 enrollment, Denver TV Market

Utah - 26,000 enrollment, Salt Lake City TV Market

Come again?

[DfromCT]

Arizona State - 75,000 enrollment, Phoenix TV Market

Arizona - 39,000 enrollment, Tucson TV Market

Colorado - 36,000 enrollment, Denver TV Market

Utah - 26,000 enrollment, Salt Lake City TV Market

Come again?

Exactly!

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the Big 12 would be adding 4 state flagship universities, with 3 top markets (sorry, Phoenix/Tuscon is too close to be considered a separate market IMHO.) There's not going to be any pushback from fans saying "you added WHO to the conference?" and the four of them are travel partners. It's a sweet package, and if the Big 12 pulls it off, it will put a stake in the ground as the 3rd of the P5 conferences. The ACC and PAC 12 will fight it out to see who becomes #4, and the writing is on the wall for 4 sixteen team conferences.

And the post belittling the on-field success should remember we have one of the worst all-time football records in D1. That didn't change with a 12-2 season, perception takes a long time to change.

[RobertM320]

I understand that. But we also talk about how losing teams don't draw eyeballs. And when anyone brings up Tulane as far as going P5, EVERYONE points to our lack of success. So let's phrase it a another way. What makes us different than Ole Miss or Baylor?


I wasn't belittling on field success. I was showing that over the past quarter century their on field success really hasn't been much better than ours when it comes to ACTUAL accomplishments. Its been pretty well pointed out by members of this very board that going 6-6 every year and going to a minor bowl isn't really any different than going 4-8 or 2-10 in the big scheme of things. Isn't that what everyone says?


Point being, which really matters? Eyeballs, or winning? Seems the winning really DOESNT matter when it comes to certain schools.

[Aberzombie1892]

Some interesting facts about the "Four Corners Schools"

Arizona State - The last time ASU won a conference title was 1996. Also the last time they played in a major bowl

Arizona - AU has never won the PAC-12, and they're only trip to a major bowl was in 2013, when the went to the Fiesta after losing the PAC12 CG. Their last conference title was the WAC in 1975

Colorado - The last time CU won a conference title was 2001, which was also their last major bowl appearance. Prior to that you go back to Bill McCartney days in the 1990s.

Utah - The most successful of the 4 corners schools, although its all in the past 20 years. Two undefeated seasons in the MWC in 2004 and 2008, both conference champs, and two major bowl appearances. Nothing since until they won consecutive PAC12 titles and went to the Rose Bowl twice in the past two years.


My question is, I'm not quite sure why these are considered "big brands" and so desirable. Other than the last two years with Utah, there was a grand total of 4 major bowl appearances in the past quarter century, and two of those were Utah because of being undefeated and the new BCS system being in place. There's only one conference title in this century between ASU, AU and CU, and that was CU in 2001 in the Big12. What makes them different than a Mississippi State or an Ole Miss or a Baylor?

The shortest answer is that wins and losses are a (distant) secondary consideration for P5 expansion.

[Aberzombie1892]

I understand that. But we also talk about how losing teams don't draw eyeballs. And when anyone brings up Tulane as far as going P5, EVERYONE points to our lack of success. So let's phrase it a another way. What makes us different than Ole Miss or Baylor?


I wasn't belittling on field success. I was showing that over the past quarter century their on field success really hasn't been much better than ours when it comes to ACTUAL accomplishments. Its been pretty well pointed out by members of this very board that going 6-6 every year and going to a minor bowl isn't really any different than going 4-8 or 2-10 in the big scheme of things. Isn't that what everyone says?


Point being, which really matters? Eyeballs, or winning? Seems the winning really DOESNT matter when it comes to certain schools.

The answer is simple, but at the same time, its not. At the ground floor:

1. Wins and losses are not the primary consideration for P5 expansion.
2. Comparing the qualities of legacy power programs (power programs since before BCS) with the qualities programs not in the P5 does not make sense for a wide variety of reasons.
3. Any G5s being elevated are largely evaluated based on their media deal/recruiting/media market/replacement value.
4. Pointing to existing P5s and claiming that they haven't won as many division/conference/national titles as a G5 program and arguing that that means something does not make sense for a wide variety of reasons.

[HoustonWave]

Some interesting facts about the "Four Corners Schools"

Arizona State - The last time ASU won a conference title was 1996. Also the last time they played in a major bowl

Arizona - AU has never won the PAC-12, and they're only trip to a major bowl was in 2013, when the went to the Fiesta after losing the PAC12 CG. Their last conference title was the WAC in 1975

Colorado - The last time CU won a conference title was 2001, which was also their last major bowl appearance. Prior to that you go back to Bill McCartney days in the 1990s.

Utah - The most successful of the 4 corners schools, although its all in the past 20 years. Two undefeated seasons in the MWC in 2004 and 2008, both conference champs, and two major bowl appearances. Nothing since until they won consecutive PAC12 titles and went to the Rose Bowl twice in the past two years.


My question is, I'm not quite sure why these are considered "big brands" and so desirable. Other than the last two years with Utah, there was a grand total of 4 major bowl appearances in the past quarter century, and two of those were Utah because of being undefeated and the new BCS system being in place. There's only one conference title in this century between ASU, AU and CU, and that was CU in 2001 in the Big12. What makes them different than a Mississippi State or an Ole Miss or a Baylor?

Arizona State - 75,000 enrollment, Phoenix TV Market

Arizona - 39,000 enrollment, Tucson TV Market

Colorado - 36,000 enrollment, Denver TV Market

Utah - 26,000 enrollment, Salt Lake City TV Market

Come again?

Large enrollments and TV market size don’t necessarily translate to strong viewership, as is the case with three of these Four Corner schools, and that’s even with their current P5 schedules which in theory should attract viewers. Going to the Big 12 won’t increase the current viewership of any of these four schools—like it would if a G5 were moving into the Big 12. It will be very interesting to see what kind of viewership bump BYU, Cincy, UCF and UH get from starting their Big 12 schedules. And all of them, except UH already have more viewers than Colorado or the Arizonas.