B1G/Pac-12 to Start Interleague Games in 2017 for All Teams.
by GoAUpher on Dec 28, 2011 1:13 PM CST
Email
Print[BH: Bumped for discussion. Personally, I think that this is fantastic. I'd love to see it operate like this.]
The two leagues will begin playing each other and sharing some TV coverage in what amounts to as close to a merger between the conferences as we might ever see.
The significance for football, and it is big, is this: Starting in 2017, the Pac-12 and Big Ten plan to have a full 12-game schedule between the leagues, meaning each Big Ten team would have one Pac-12 team on its schedule every year.
I think this is a great idea. I also like that this might kill off the 9 game B1G schedule that I just never liked. There are still plenty of Pac-12 venues I want to visit, and while 2017 is a ways off this should enable me to hit the Pac-12 stops on my bucket list sooner rather than later. I'm sure there are reasons to oppose this, but being a fan on of a non-national title contender means I focus more on things like "cool road trips" instead of "might derail MNC dreams" when it comes to scheduling.
There could also be some nice national exposure considerations:
The two leagues could stage big events at places like the Rose Bowl, Soldier Field, Staples Center and Ford Field. They will also cross-promote each other on their league-run cable networks; the Pac-12 is set to launch its own network this spring.
What does everyone else think? Good idea? Horrible idea?
174 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think it is absolutely brilliant.
There are so many possibilities, and I don’t see many ways to screw this up.
by OSUreds on Dec 28, 2011 1:19 PM CST via iPhone app reply actions
yeah I'm on board
Off Tackle Empire
The quintessential Big Ten smoking room.
by Graham Filler on Dec 28, 2011 1:22 PM CST up reply actions
This is the best news this year.
This will both improve SOS for Big Ten teams while also consistently attracting national attention during the Non-Conference season.
How long before the SEC grabs the Big 12 or ACC and copies this? You know the ESSS EE SEEE has gotta be pissed that the BIG TEN got to this idea first.
Also, if the Big Ten is smart
the conference will schedule games where they host Pac-Ten teams as late in the year as possible. I would love to watch ASU freeze their asses off at the Bank in mid November.
by AhliBobwa on Dec 28, 2011 3:27 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
PAC-12 isn't dumb.
Probably will want to play in as close to normal temps as possible. That being said Utah, Colorado Oregon and Washington aren’t exactly balmy in November.
yes they are....
OH YES THEY ARE!!!!!!
They’re Dumb, dumb, dumb DUMB!!!!
Why? Because they’re the PAC-12.
Games will be played during the first four weeks of the season.
Weather won’t be an issue.
by The Mexican't on Dec 28, 2011 7:14 PM CST up reply actions
It'll take a BIG TIME change in attitude...
…for the SEC to do this. SEC teams rarely play non-con games outside of their own state and when they do they are usually in neutral venues.
This set of stats on the subject is several years old, but illustrates the SEC non-con scheduling philosophy nicely (things haven’t changed that much). http://thewizardofodds.blogspot.com/2007/12/complete-look-at-nonconference-travel.html
Wasn't Alabama's trip to Happy Valley...
… like the first trip north of the Mason-Dixon line for an SEC team since 1987 or 88 when LSU went to Columbus? I might be wrong, but I remember hearing something about that. Regardless, it is true that the SEC rarely leaves the Southeast.
by TheHumbleBuckeye on Dec 28, 2011 4:12 PM CST up reply actions
There have been a few trips out to the West Coast (primarily Tennessee, I think)
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
Ah, yes
the days when Tennessee was actually decent. I remember they had a series with Cal and UCLA not so long ago.
They also had a home game against Wyoming in 2008, which backfired spectacularly when the 3-6 Cowboys stunned the Volunteers 13-7.
Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog, and Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog
Whatever holds the image of an angel IS an angel. The eyes are not the windows of the soul, they are the doors.
Yes, I am on twitter.
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Dec 30, 2011 12:14 PM CST up reply actions
Love it.
Absolutely love it. Every Pac-10 fan I have encountered (with the exception of a few Johnny-come-lately bandwagon Oregon fans) has been very cordial and knowledgeable about football. I’m happy to interact with Pac-12 fans.
by TheHumbleBuckeye on Dec 28, 2011 1:27 PM CST reply actions
2017?
That’s kinda soon, I mean, Penn State might not even have a HC by then
You win with people (not named Joe Bauserman)
by BuckeyeSki on Dec 28, 2011 1:27 PM CST reply actions 13 recs
Heh
I hear Munchak mig—…never mind
"Go hard. I mean, like relentless. I want a bunch of coaches that coach like their hair’s on fire, and I want a football team that goes for four to six seconds (per play) with relentless effort." OSU Coach Urban Meyer.
by Ted Glover on Dec 28, 2011 1:41 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs
Rec'd
Rec’d so hard.
Visit Inside The Shoe
A Buckeye blog dedicated to bringing you the most up to date and interesting info about Ohio State Sports!
by Ian_InsideTheShoe on Dec 29, 2011 5:44 AM CST up reply actions
:3
Some guy at Penn State Hershey just discovered a virus that eats cancer. Where were the CNN trucks for that? Now Someone at PSU found something that could cure Leukemia. Coverage? None. THON will probably break $10 mil this year. Put that on "Outside the Lines" you sanctimonious pricks!
by ICEICETHATGUY13 on Dec 28, 2011 4:11 PM CST up reply actions
One thing I wouldn't like...
…would be too many neutral site games. If they limited these to the “marquee” matchups I guess it would be ok, but I’d hate to lose out on a game at the renovated Husky or Memorial Stadiums for one at Quest Field/Candlestick (or whatever their names are now…I’m not bothering to check for factual accuracy). Exemptions should be made for USC and UCLA, who can play in the new NFL palace all they want. The Colosseum is nothing special (plus I’ve been there) and the only time I want to see the Gophers play in the Rose Bowl is when they are in the Rose Bowl (I’m an traditionalist about that).
by GoAUpher on Dec 28, 2011 1:36 PM CST reply actions 3 recs
I agree to a point
Think of it like this:
every 12 years you rotate through the order, and each team has a ‘special’ opponent who, when playing, they go to a marquee
Have two spots, one in Indy (hopefully chicago instead) for B1G and one out west, and when the teams with their designated special play, then they are in the special stadium
Say the partnership is OSU and the other OSU – whenever they play, they will play in either Indy or West, so once every 12 years they are at a nuetral site. It might mean no stadium visits for that one team, but seems like a great idea
I think from a revenue perspective...
They’ll move to larger venues when necessary (i.e. Oregon as the “home” team might be moved to Seattle or a Northwestern “home” game moved to Soldier Field) but keep the games in venues that are already large enough (like the Coliseum or Ohio Stadium). Then again, since the B1G stadiums are generally bigger, it might be revenue neutral in the long run to do neutral sites for all of them, except I don’t think games like Colorado vs. Purdue would sell out if played away from either team’s campus. It’ll be interesting to see what they come up with.
Chalk another one up for Emperor Delany!
by TheHumbleBuckeye on Dec 28, 2011 2:05 PM CST up reply actions
I wouldnt mind seeing a home game at Soldier field so long as I never see another home game at Wrigley
almost 20 years ago I went to the NU-ND games at Soldier Field. The cats lost to the domers, but it was fun to see something different.
Wrigley field is too small for football, especially the concourses at halftime. Imagine how bad Ryan Field can get during a sellout (ie this year’s michigan game), and multiply that by 2 or 3.
by LincolnParkWildcat on Dec 28, 2011 10:32 PM CST up reply actions
No ...they just find the stadium on game day an open, quiet place to study.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
Kind of hard to miss them
In the name of the Woody, the Bo, and the Mustache Ride. Amen.
by Pariahwulfen on Dec 29, 2011 8:38 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I'm not high on those either
The neutral site game in the ACC-B10 challenge always has attendance problems if Duke wasn’t there.
Double BB headers could work, maybe. But I’m not sure.
I suppose FB is popular enough that it would sell out anywhere.
LOVE IT
HUGE HUGE HUGE!
1) I love the idea, the P12 and the B1G are great rivals, it is a great idea to create these games as well as our tie to the rose
2) This pretty much shuts down the idea of playoffs, as it clearly shows the unity between the two conferences, and we are not budging (thankfully)
Eager to hear details
I think this could be fantastic, and I hope that it lasts a long time.
The only hiccup that I’ve spotted is for Northwestern— we’ve already got a four-game series (2019 to 2022) planned with Stanford, but it sounds as though they want to mix up the matchups each year. Do we lose a series with a natural rival, or do we get a game against Stanford and a game against another Pac-12 team for those years?
Definitely don’t want to lose games against Stanford, since I’m guessing that no matter how the matchups are selected, NU probably won’t be trading up. Given that NU already has series planned with Stanford and Cal (2013-2014), I’d hate to be punished for being ahead of the game.
But otherwise, yes. I like this.
Haven't you heard?
Your four non-cons in 2019-2022 are Oregon, Stanford, USC, and the San Francisco 49ers.
I can ride my bike with no handlebars...
Wow, great idea!
Feels like the football version of the B1G-ACC Challenge, except it’s the Pac-12. I wonder if this isn’t some kind of subliminal pushback to conferences expanding past 12 teams. Add a good/marquee BCS OOC opponent every year, and now you get added exposure, SOS boost, and more revenue w/o having to add to the conference.
Great move all the way around for both leagues.
"Go hard. I mean, like relentless. I want a bunch of coaches that coach like their hair’s on fire, and I want a football team that goes for four to six seconds (per play) with relentless effort." OSU Coach Urban Meyer.
by Ted Glover on Dec 28, 2011 1:40 PM CST reply actions 2 recs
More a voting bloc
I think it is done to show that the P12 is united with the B1G against the ideas of playoffs – why else join us when we have pretty much said “either no playoffs or no big ten”
Yeah, makes sense
Wasn’t Larry Scott against a playoff as well?
"Go hard. I mean, like relentless. I want a bunch of coaches that coach like their hair’s on fire, and I want a football team that goes for four to six seconds (per play) with relentless effort." OSU Coach Urban Meyer.
He was, but some of the more recent comments have implied he would be okay with a change. This pretty much stops that idea
(also, it seems to almost force NDs hand, as they are rivals with everybody effected, and if the conferences keep the 9 game schedule, that’s 2 games open for each team, not a whole lot for ND)
Games to be shown on both the B1G Network and the Pac 12 network
high hard one to ESPN?
Possibly the NCAA as well
how many championships are claimed by these two conferences again?
In the name of the Woody, the Bo, and the Mustache Ride. Amen.
by Pariahwulfen on Dec 29, 2011 8:46 AM CST up reply actions
53
Big Ten = 33
Pac 12 = 20
These do not include any member who is currently in the conference who won while in other conferences.
"Coach Hayes always told us that when TV takes over college athletics, that would be the end of college athletics."
-John Hicks
Twitter: @NJConquest
by Culp's Freaking Hill on Jan 1, 2012 10:25 PM CST up reply actions
*these figures are only football
"Coach Hayes always told us that when TV takes over college athletics, that would be the end of college athletics."
-John Hicks
Twitter: @NJConquest
by Culp's Freaking Hill on Jan 1, 2012 10:26 PM CST up reply actions
does that include the 52 MSU NC?
MSU wasn’t given a full conference schedule ‘till 53 and couldn’t take a bowl trip to anywhere.
by James Rinkevich on Jan 3, 2012 8:25 AM CST via iPhone app up reply actions
I don't interpret those comments that way
ABC would still get first crack at these football games ESPN would still get second crack of the home games. It’s in the contracts.
Even when the new B10 deal hits, I don’t expect that to change. They pay WAY too much money to actually take games from them.
Really, all it is for the BTN is BETTER games.
ABC & ESPN probably can’t grab all 6 home games, so something will be left for BTN, and
MN vs. WA ST is going to be better draw than MN vs. Bowling Green.
ESPN contract is up in 2014(2015?). This will start in 2017. So yes, the Tier 1 broadcaster will get the first choice of games, the tier 2 will get second. That leaves lots of programming for the conference networks. ANd who knows, maybe the networks will morph from that time into providing more tier 1 and tier 2 programming.
Darth Delany and Darth Scott
have formulated an excellent stratagem against the rebels from Boise, Provo, and any other part of the country that wants a playoff.
by LincolnParkWildcat on Dec 28, 2011 10:35 PM CST up reply actions
So it might look a little something like this:
Wisconsin-Stanford
Ohio State-Oregon
Michigan-USC
Michigan State-Washington
Nebraska-Colorado
Penn State-Arizona State
Iowa-UCLA
Northwestern-Oregon State
Illinois-Cal
Purdue-Arizona
Indiana-Utah
Minnesota-Washington State
ffff
That does look fun, actually. I’m going to say – 7-5 B1G (of course I’d say that)
Off Tackle Empire
The quintessential Big Ten smoking room.
by Graham Filler on Dec 28, 2011 2:23 PM CST up reply actions
The infamous cheer still lingers
“Sal is dead, go big Red” from the NE students in 1990 was harsh.
Some still hold a grudge.
First the Big 12, now the B1G, forcing Nebraska into a "rivalry" with Colorado...
As long as Nebraska only has to play them once every twelve years, and only once every twenty-four in Boulder – I can live with that. But seriously – I think this is great. Time to get Mike Slive on the phone too…
by jrf2027 on Dec 28, 2011 2:43 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Mike Slive is busy setting up the SEC's new scheduling agreement with the Atlanta public high schools.
https://twitter.com/#!/SpartanKC
by Spartan D on Dec 28, 2011 2:48 PM CST up reply actions 20 recs
A million times rec'd
My hatred for Purdue is so great that no mortal human can detect its existence.
I regret that I have but one rec
to give your post.
/Nathan Hale’d
"Go hard. I mean, like relentless. I want a bunch of coaches that coach like their hair’s on fire, and I want a football team that goes for four to six seconds (per play) with relentless effort." OSU Coach Urban Meyer.
by Ted Glover on Dec 28, 2011 5:57 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs
I thought he was trying to get the Gainesville high schools in on the action?
Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog, and Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog
Whatever holds the image of an angel IS an angel. The eyes are not the windows of the soul, they are the doors.
Yes, I am on twitter.
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Dec 28, 2011 6:52 PM CST up reply actions
Agreed.
No more CU fans was supposed to be one of the perks of leaving the Big 12.
what's the bad blood between UN and CU?
(i’m too lazy to google it now)
by LincolnParkWildcat on Dec 28, 2011 10:36 PM CST up reply actions
as I understand it
you got a forced rivalry to replace the epic Nebraska v Oklahoma series when the old Big 8 took on the Texas 4.
In the name of the Woody, the Bo, and the Mustache Ride. Amen.
by Pariahwulfen on Dec 29, 2011 8:48 AM CST up reply actions
correct
If the Nebraska/Iowa rivalry feels forced, imagine replacing Iowa with a fanbase that generally takes a break from collective apathy only long enough to be poor loosers and poorer winners on gameday.
Also doesn’t help that CU “declared” NU their “rival” in effort to motivate the Buffs, while Husker fans generally considered CU historically insignificant.
Same screen name since AOL- 'cause like many Nebraska fans, I'm stuck in the '90s.
the Iowa rivalry isn't that forced
In the name of the Woody, the Bo, and the Mustache Ride. Amen.
by Pariahwulfen on Dec 29, 2011 10:10 AM CST up reply actions 4 recs
And it sounds like it goes beyond football, too.
Meaning there should be increased crossover in all sports.
There is also a chance a new bowl would be created exclusively for the conference networks.
Which makes me wonder if ESPN could get knocked out of televising any of these games. Which would be hilarious. When I think about it, I think these games could all go through the fox and NBC networks (versus is turning into NBC sports network, and I think that channel has a bright future)
by OSUreds on Dec 28, 2011 2:19 PM CST via iPhone app reply actions
Where would you put this new game?
Since the Rose is on Pac12 turf, maybe Delany negotiates it onto Big10 turf. Indy? Soldier? One End Zone Wrigley?
Detroit
Forget the MAC, let’s make the Pizza Bowl the battle of the bottom between the Big Ten and the Pac-12.
This is not a serious suggestion
Just to be clear.
Lambeau
Oh pretty please play a bowl game at Lambeau
Author at Acme Packing Company
by texwestern on Dec 28, 2011 5:41 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Ummm....NO.
Bowl games are supposed to be a reward. Going to GB in January is like being sent to Siberia.
https://twitter.com/#!/SpartanKC
Man, can you imagine the B1G #2 v. Pac-12 #2
bowl in the Midwest that’s not on ESPN?
Yeah, I consider that rolled, bitches.
"Go hard. I mean, like relentless. I want a bunch of coaches that coach like their hair’s on fire, and I want a football team that goes for four to six seconds (per play) with relentless effort." OSU Coach Urban Meyer.
by Ted Glover on Dec 28, 2011 2:27 PM CST up reply actions 8 recs
eSECpn DELENDA EST
Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog, and Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog
Whatever holds the image of an angel IS an angel. The eyes are not the windows of the soul, they are the doors.
Yes, I am on twitter.
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Dec 28, 2011 6:52 PM CST up reply actions
Delany's not giving up the Cap 1 payout
or the chance to play the SEC or the trip to Florida for the alumni. Besides, you don’t want multiple match-ups in a row with the same conference. Maybe replace the Outback (probably not) or Gator. You have to get a new bowl approved by the NCAA, though, and there are already 2 waiting. Would a P12 team want to come to the midwest? I’d settle for playing them in Florida instead of the SEC, or in TX instead of the B12.
by br27 on Dec 29, 2011 2:03 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
If he can make more money starting his own bowl
with the Pac-12 and a new sponsor, what makes you think he wouldn’t do it?
Say what you want about Delany, but his thinking is B1G first, and screw everybody else. And if it would benefit the B1G, he’d do it and not think twice about it.
"Go hard. I mean, like relentless. I want a bunch of coaches that coach like their hair’s on fire, and I want a football team that goes for four to six seconds (per play) with relentless effort." OSU Coach Urban Meyer.
by Ted Glover on Dec 29, 2011 7:57 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Solid point - Delany would dump the BCS if an alternative was more profitable.
However, I would be surprised if it was profitable enough to displace the Cap1.
It does make it interesting for lower selections.
Shortened stay to a few days (photo ops, fan day, press day, a few practices).
Get rid of the requirement to take so many motel rooms.
Throw it on the BTN and PAC network (simulcast or alternate).
…participants might not loose their arse paying for an invite.
…though I think an early season game similar to the Kickoff Classic is more likely…
By moving to a neutral venue, they can even take it off the broadcast contract offerings.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
Except that he wouldn’t. Recall the testimony before Congress about how much money they were leaving on the table from a playoff.
I see a Kickoff Classic-type deal working, though.
You should have read closer and read more
The issue isn’t playoff vs. bowls, it is revenue for the season.
Nobody with access to, and the ability to interpret and project revenues is claiming the majors would make more in any playoff format. This includes the majors, mid majors, networks, and private groups.
WAY too big a topic to cover here, but you will find their comments with links in this old blog series Lines in the Sand - it is more than a little wordy as I used it as much as a repository for links as blgged information.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
Sorry, thought the "dump the BCS" meant bowls/playoffs
because, the BCS is an end of the year thing.
I thought it was common knowledge that a playoff would bring in significantly more money that the bowl games, especially when taking into accountrequired ticket/hotel room purchases.
Here’s what Myles Brand had to say on revenue from a playoff in his testimony before Congress:
Mr. BRAND. The answer is more money would come to college football if there were a playoff system. The reason there isn’t a playoff system is because the majority of schools in Division I-A prefer the tradition and the excitement of the bowl games.
Mr. KELLER. So money is irrelevant to the fact that we don’t have a Division I-A post-season playoff.
Mr. BRAND. It is not the controlling factor.
Nobody is denying this.
The comparison isn’t BCS vs. Playoffs.
It is the revenue for the entire season.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
As for the link, while interesting, the broadcast side seems to be lots of supposition from BCS conference commissioners and ESPN (which, coincidentally, owns and broadcasts lot of bowls, take what they say with a grain of salt).
In other words, what evidence is there that the regular season gate receipts/broadcast contracts will be reduced if there were a playoff?
…what evidence is there that the regular season gate receipts/broadcast contracts will be reduced if there were a playoff?
The opinions of everyone with access to, and the ability to interpret and project relevant data.
Do you really think that if all of this information was piled on tables in front of you, you would have any idea how to project from this information, or even know most of what you were looking at?
This is why you go to experts because, well, they’re experts.
If the sources were limited, you might have a valid claim… but the opinions are shared by BCS proponents (majors and bowls), opponents (mid majors), self-interests (networks looking for biggest ratings), and independent research groups.
I will make this easier – find me any comment by any entity with access to, and the ability to interpret relevant information that claims a playoff would increase the season revenue for the majors, and I will be extremely grateful.
Without access to and the ability to interpret relevant information, I am left analyzing the findings of others.
The findings are not disputed by any qualified group. This leaves 3 possible conclusions:
1. They are telling the accurate truth.
2. They are all wrong. With no evidence to the contrary, and no skill to project if the evidence was laid before you, this is a monumentally arrogant viewpoint to declare everyone else wrong with no evidence to the contrary.
3. My favorite – they are all lying. Given that lying would necessitate collusion between the majors, mid majors, networks, and private research groups, I refer to this as the Conspiracy Theory.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
All I said was the links you provide don’t support that outside of the BCS conference commissioners (who, according to the link have a self-interest to support the bowls) and and ESPN programmer (whose network owns bowl games that would suffer from a playoff). They are not disinterested parties.
Ask yourself this, would the current conference contracts go down if there were a playoff?
Would gate receipts be hurt, and if so, which teams? Not Big 10, SEC, (some) Big 12, or (some) Pac 12. Those teams that don’t draw will continue to not draw, those that do, will.
What would the networks bid on a playoff? Would it be more than 5 BCS games?
Hell, Mark Cuban is offering 2 teams more money than the BCS.
Try harder
All I said was the links you provide don’t support that outside of the BCS conference commissioners (who, according to the link have a self-interest to support the bowls) and and ESPN programmer (whose network owns bowl games that would suffer from a playoff). They are not disinterested parties.
Read further, covered in later sections with quotes.
Ask yourself this, would the current conference contracts go down if there were a playoff?
Would gate receipts be hurt, and if so, which teams? Not Big 10, SEC, (some) Big 12, or (some) Pac 12. Those teams that don’t draw will continue to not draw, those that do, will.
What would the networks bid on a playoff? Would it be more than 5 BCS games?
Why would I ask myself this? I do not have access to, or the ability to interpret relevant information. In such cases, I look for the findings of experts and question if they have a hidden agenda. In this case, multiple entities with different desires are arriving at the same conclusion.
I am not exaggerating – 1 reference would be appreciated - I looked for a source for years.
Hell, Mark Cuban is offering 2 teams more money than the BCS.1. Mark Cuban is a self-promoting blow hard feeding off the attention of playoff proponents who herald anyone who tells them what they want to hear.
2. Last I read, Markie threw out numbers without having any specific format in mind. Zero chance you can derive a revenue projection without having a format to project from.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
You can feel free at any time...
…to post a link where someone with access to. and the ability to interpret the relevant data determined a playoff would generate more revenue for the season and I would be appreciative.
…because, believe it or not, playing the role of the Conspiracy Theorist and claiming everyone is lying isn’t as convincing as you might think to anyone but fellow conspiracy theorists…
Networks who would broadcast a playoff are protecting their bowls and broadcast contracts while simultaneously claiming a playoff would generate greater ratings is not only self contradictory (the networks are always looking for a chance to get greater ratings) , it has no basis in fact and no merit… just the conspiracy supported with a plausible sounding statement that has no basis in fact.
…believe it or not the game of questioning everything until you find some squiggly path to support a claim with no supporting evidence isn’t very convincing either, but at least there is the hope you will feel better at the end if you can just find that little sliver to slip thru.
From Part 8:
They all have overall TV ratings and/or the revenue they generate their primary concern, and all agree a playoff would decrease overall revenue. There is no conspiracy against playoffs unless all of these entities are acting against their self-interest.
Everyone with access to, and the ability to project, TV demographics who has looked at the issue have derived the same conclusion – a playoff can generate more money than the BCS, but would decrease overall revenue for the entire season.
…and as the linked references in part 1 show, the mid majors aren’t just being countered, they got body slammed and stomped on in the last round with the sole claim it would earn less revenue for the season…
The mid major response – change the topic. Apparently the mid majors must be hiding their evidence the majors and networks and private research groups are lying about the only reason they bother to give for not going to a playoff in another intricate part of the conspiracy? Hey, if everyone else is in collusion, why not the mid majors conspiring against their own interests?
While I use it in a condescending manner, “Conspiracy Theory” is an appropriate term, where the basis of support lies not in what is said and known, but what is unknown, not understood, not said, and when the above fails, dismissed as lies.
I have given you a ton to go on. I have heard all the conspiracy theories and plausible sounding statements substituted for facts a dozen times over… but how about spending your efforts on just 1 single task that would earn my gratitude… find a statement by anyone with access to, and the ability to interpret relevant information that claim the majors would earn more revenue for the season from a playoff.
This isn’t some mega request – just a simple little request to back a claim with something more substantial than conspiracies and statements with no basis in fact. Then again, maybe it is an impossible request if it doesn’t exist…
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
You quote yourself to prove your point?
The 9 parts of Line in the Sand You link to (and wrote) do not contain a study showing that they’ll lose money, just a bunch of conjecture about diminishing the regular season and the bowl games.
As for a study showing the the $$$ a playoff could generate, go to the PlayoffPac website. They have stat monkey’s that come to the opposite conclusion as the (1) networks; and (2) the BCS conference commissioners.
We’d also have to define “self-interest” as money is the motivating factor
As for “conspiracy theory,” this isn’t the Kennedy Assassination. This is universities and television networks that routinely talk out of both sides of their mouths (like welfare of the student athlete is paramount, when basketball plays significantly more games during finals, etc.), as well as a system of corrupt bowls (see Fiets, Orange, Sugar).
Can you narrow it down
1 supporting document only looked at impacting the teams playing for the NCG – the majors claim much broader concerns.
It claims harm to the mid majors – not a issue worth debating since this isn’t the 1 reason the majors now list.
The majors can’t make it easier – outside the court room they now list 1 and only 1 reason preventing a playoff. – the same reason they listed at the 1st meeting. No volume of information addressing other issues will substitute for addressing this 1 and only 1 reason given by the majors against the playoffs.
As for a study showing the the $$$ a playoff could generate, go to the PlayoffPac website. They have stat monkey’s that come to the opposite conclusion as the (1) networks; and (2) the BCS conference commissioners.
Coming to a conclusion takes little effort. Coming to a backed conclusion that counters the NCAA’s 1 and only listed reason is a different story. A belief based on the irrelevant, or developed in a vacuum of information, is not a belief to be held in high esteem, regardless of how many or how educated those holding the belief are.
The 9 parts of Line in the Sand You link to (and wrote) do not contain a study showing that they’ll lose money, just a bunch of conjecture about diminishing the regular season and the bowl games.
I never said it did. I say we wouldn’t know how to interpret and project from the information if it was laid out on tables in front of us, which leaves us evaluating the words and actions of experts.
Because of the breadth of people stating the same conclusion, including a lack of denial from those who oppose who have looked at the same information, you are left with 3 possible results:
1. They are accurate and truthful.
2. Arrogance – they are wrong with no credible evidence to the contrary.
3. Your Conspiracy Theory that they are all in collusion and lying.
As for "conspiracy theory," this isn’t the Kennedy Assassination. This is universities and television networks that routinely talk out of both sides of their mouths (like welfare of the student athlete is paramount, when basketball plays significantly more games during finals, etc.), as well as a system of corrupt bowls (see Fiets, Orange, Sugar).
Charges of corruption are irrelevant to the reason the majors give, but the rest should be very, very easy to prove wrong… because the 1 reason they list now is the same 1 reason the majors note now is the same reason they noted when it was 1st brought for discussion by the SEC and ACC.
…but claiming they are in collusion and lying for some hidden or self-contradictory agenda, with no credible evidence to the contrary, is a Conspiracy Theory. Having lots of people believe it, or even having “Stat Monkeys” believe it, doesn’t move it from Conspiracy to fact.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
Chicago is really the only logical destination for a midwest bowl.
PAC fans aren’t gonna travel to Indy or Detroit in winter, but Chicago has enough cache to draw some of them.
https://twitter.com/#!/SpartanKC
Hmmm, I would say yes and no
If they are going for the game, sitting outside at Soldier Field in December or January wouldn’t be something that would appeal to me if I’m a Pac-12 south fan. Most people go to the bowl site to see the game, at least in the past I have. The travel destination is secondary. I think what you’d lose in fans that are wanting to go to a location would be made up in fans that want to sit through the game in comfort.
"Go hard. I mean, like relentless. I want a bunch of coaches that coach like their hair’s on fire, and I want a football team that goes for four to six seconds (per play) with relentless effort." OSU Coach Urban Meyer.
Soldier Field is an embarrassment
I wouldn’t let kids play on that grass in winter, let alone college players. Add the weather, and that’s a non-starter. Why would USC ever want to play in lake effect snow with 20 mph winds and a 0 degree wind chill on a death trap of a field? Some B10 fans might find that appealing, but most people wouldn’t.
Broadcast only on the Big 10 and PAC 12 Networks
Some guy at Penn State Hershey just discovered a virus that eats cancer. Where were the CNN trucks for that? Now Someone at PSU found something that could cure Leukemia. Coverage? None. THON will probably break $10 mil this year. Put that on "Outside the Lines" you sanctimonious pricks!
by ICEICETHATGUY13 on Dec 28, 2011 4:20 PM CST up reply actions
For a couple games, sure, but
You still want most of the games available to a national audience. As large a viewership the conference networks have, NBC or FOX will have more people watching.
by OSUreds on Dec 28, 2011 4:40 PM CST via iPhone app up reply actions
This
I dislike our tie ins with the Insight, Ticket City, and Pizza Bowls so replacing any of those with a PAC 12 match up somewhere like Indy or Chicago would be cool.
http://victorypolka.blogspot.com/
Will these be home & home series, or will the matchups change every season?
If they change each year, I’d love to see the teams paired based on the prior year finish (i.e. 1st vs 1st, 2nd vs 2nd, etc)
Although, most years that would result in a rematch of the previous season’s Rose Bowl.
https://twitter.com/#!/SpartanKC
I don't see the 1 v. 1 as long as there is no playoff
One of those teams will essentially be eliminated after the first couple of games if we’re still going with the BCS system.
If they go back to the traditional bowl tie in I can see it, though.
"Go hard. I mean, like relentless. I want a bunch of coaches that coach like their hair’s on fire, and I want a football team that goes for four to six seconds (per play) with relentless effort." OSU Coach Urban Meyer.
by Ted Glover on Dec 28, 2011 2:25 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
no way
There is no way they would do 1 vs 1 in football, it just doesn’t work to immediately take one of their teams out. of the NCG. I could see a 1 vs 6, 2 vs 5 etc. and then 7 vs 12, 8 vs 11.. that way it isn’t too offsided but helps preserve playing a better team
Please let Arizona play Michigan
Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude
by Seer on Dec 28, 2011 2:38 PM CST reply actions 4 recs
It seems fair in the larger sense of the word to schedule teams to alternate home and away each year.
So MSU would play their PAC-12 opponent at home in 17,19,21,23,25,27 and away in 18,20,22,24,26,28.
I would also like to see a random draw to determine initial matchups and a single game rotation. That way each league team would play every other league team at least once in a 12 year span. Not home and home which would mean 24 years to complete the cycle. Hell some of us (and most of the coaches, commissioners and AD’s) might not be alive to see the end of the first rotation.
I wonder if these inter-conference games
will be simulcast on each network.
"Go hard. I mean, like relentless. I want a bunch of coaches that coach like their hair’s on fire, and I want a football team that goes for four to six seconds (per play) with relentless effort." OSU Coach Urban Meyer.
Probably not
but it sounds like, even during the regular season, they will be advertising each other
But, what about this, the P12 home games are on BTN and viceversa, what better way to get the networks to expand (tv companies would be forced to) AND to ensure that people watch games on TV at venues they never see (i would love this idea, probably not gonna happen)
There it is
The TV revenue had to be a huge factor in this. If we make 20 million a school right now, how much will we make when every TV on the west coast wants the B1G network?
Granted we will probably have to get the PAC12 network to see away games, but more sports is never a bad thing.
Everything in moderation. Including moderation.
by CaptainMorganHawkeye on Dec 28, 2011 3:46 PM CST up reply actions
I like the NFL TV model here.
Similar to the way FOX televises NFC-AFC games at AFC stadiums, and CBS gets them in NFC venues.
Author at Acme Packing Company
I would imagine...
… that if the games are spread throughout the season – which it seems to be they would be – then Fox will be broadcasting most of the games, so they’d reach a national audience.
It’s the smart move. Imagine Fox putting USC-Michigan/Ohio State-Oregon up against ABC’s Saturday Night Football. USC-Michigan/Ohio State-Oregon would get higher ratings than whatever ABC were to put up. Bank on it.
ESPN’s monopoly is about to be broken.
by TheHumbleBuckeye on Dec 28, 2011 4:00 PM CST up reply actions
Twelve weeks in the regular season... Twelve Big Ten vs. Pac-12 matchups
Coincidence?
Get used to Saturday Night Big Ten/Pac-12 matchups on Fox.
by TheHumbleBuckeye on Dec 28, 2011 4:02 PM CST up reply actions
I like the idea...
…but expect them to come closer together.
1. Nobody wants a non-conf game in the middle of the conference season.
2. The BTN wants some of these games passed to them, not snatched up by the networks.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
SEC does
Remember thos barnburners against the likes of Jacksonville State and Tennessee-Martin?
UF in 2012
Florida finishes with 3 straight OOC games next year.
Looks like it will be 4 games during each of the 1st three weeks of the season, per the joint news conference.
Would rather see them staggered throughout the season, but that might be too difficult to manage.
https://twitter.com/#!/SpartanKC
Yup.
But I’d imagine there will be a primetime game on Fox each of those weekends to compete with ESPN. I’d much rather watch just about any of the Top 6 Pac-12 teams against any of the Top 6 Big Ten teams over this year’s early season FSU-Oklahoma matchup (aka. “The Preseason Hype Bowl” or “Teams that will fail to meet expectations Bowl”).
by TheHumbleBuckeye on Dec 28, 2011 4:08 PM CST up reply actions
what will ESPN do now that they cant show the games on their network.
by spartynation on Dec 29, 2011 10:02 AM CST up reply actions
Wait for a player on one of the teams to get into minor trouble
and make it the the top headline on the website / red flashes of breaking news on the bottom line?
You win with people (not named Joe Bauserman)
by BuckeyeSki on Dec 29, 2011 10:24 AM CST up reply actions 2 recs
I really hope it’s done in that format, like the Big Ten-ACC challenge seeding. I also hope there aren’t any Neutral site games for teams like us, Michigan, Ohio State, etc, but for teams like Northwestern, a game at Soldier Field would be cool (And could also help reinforce the Chicago’s Big Ten team idea too)
Some guy at Penn State Hershey just discovered a virus that eats cancer. Where were the CNN trucks for that? Now Someone at PSU found something that could cure Leukemia. Coverage? None. THON will probably break $10 mil this year. Put that on "Outside the Lines" you sanctimonious pricks!
by ICEICETHATGUY13 on Dec 28, 2011 4:11 PM CST reply actions
Oh wait, hold up, great idea
What if these are done in November
Southern Cal going to a cold weather environment would be great!
Some guy at Penn State Hershey just discovered a virus that eats cancer. Where were the CNN trucks for that? Now Someone at PSU found something that could cure Leukemia. Coverage? None. THON will probably break $10 mil this year. Put that on "Outside the Lines" you sanctimonious pricks!
by ICEICETHATGUY13 on Dec 28, 2011 4:12 PM CST reply actions
Or Oregon.
Imagine Oregon at Camp Randall in November. Let’s see how that spread looks in 20 degrees with strong winds and snow.
by TheHumbleBuckeye on Dec 28, 2011 4:14 PM CST up reply actions
Mmmmm, it gets pretty cold up in Eugene
Not Wisky freeze-your-balls-off cold, but not that warm either.
Given, Oregon was my first thought too. But I’d rather see Oregon go to Penn State or Michigan, teams that don’t usually alter their uniforms. Classic look vs Phil Knight look.
Some guy at Penn State Hershey just discovered a virus that eats cancer. Where were the CNN trucks for that? Now Someone at PSU found something that could cure Leukemia. Coverage? None. THON will probably break $10 mil this year. Put that on "Outside the Lines" you sanctimonious pricks!
by ICEICETHATGUY13 on Dec 28, 2011 4:19 PM CST up reply actions
Eugene gets extremely rainy come late November.
Most Civil War games against OS are notable for torrential downpours and all sorts of wild fumbles.
Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog, and Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog
Whatever holds the image of an angel IS an angel. The eyes are not the windows of the soul, they are the doors.
Yes, I am on twitter.
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Dec 28, 2011 6:55 PM CST up reply actions
Great idea. It's a win-win for both conferences.
I’m stoked; though I’d be even more stoked in 2017 wasn’t so damn far away.
Love the idea in general...
…BUT
What are the chances that this will lead to regular rematches in the Rose Bowl and diminish that game in some capacity? It may seem like only a small chance from the outside looking in, but I’m just thinking about the BCS and the steps they took to ensure great games every bowl season only to see a nightmare scenario play out during the regular season that would give us sub-standard matchups. What steps could we take to make sure the Rose Bowl avoids a rematch? Should we even be trying to prevent that? Am I just overreacting to a possibility that really doesn’t matter?
I'd say the chances are about...
1 in 12…. maybe less…. assuming the games rotate with regularity.
It almost happened in 2008 with Ohio State and USC. It actually did happen in 1965 and 1975.
So it’s not unprecedented, and it would still be unlikely.
by TheHumbleBuckeye on Dec 28, 2011 5:38 PM CST up reply actions
It did happen in 1987.
MSU and USC played twice. Once to start the season and once to finish it. MSU went 2-0.
Someone at BHGP said the odds of a rematch are 1 in 78.
I’ve no idea how likelihoods are calculated, though, so I’ve no idea if it’s accurate. Even if a rematch were to occur, the games would be far enough apart that it probably wouldn’t be a negative.
by The Mexican't on Dec 28, 2011 7:21 PM CST up reply actions
Wasn't Michigan State vs. USC in the '88 Rose Bowl a rematch
of a nonconference game played earlier that year?
They're wrong.
It’s 1 in 12, assuming all matchups are equally likely (if the pairings for the in-season game are random). Whichever B1G team makes it, there’s a 1 in 12 chance that the Pac-12 team they play is the one they drew for the opener (or, more accurately, a 1 in 12 chance that they will draw the eventual Pac-12 champion).
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
Intersting tidbits from Gene Wojciechowski on ESPN
you can read it all here, but this was very cool:
According to Michigan State athletic director Mark Hollis, the future event list could include multicourt and multigames between Pac-12 and Big Ten teams at Dodger Stadium, the Rose Bowl, Ford Field in Detroit or Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis. Madison Square Garden also remains a possible venue, as do other NBA arenas, such as Staples Center in Los Angeles.
How cool would a basketball tripleheader or a football double header be? I mean, damn. That’s just cool.
"Go hard. I mean, like relentless. I want a bunch of coaches that coach like their hair’s on fire, and I want a football team that goes for four to six seconds (per play) with relentless effort." OSU Coach Urban Meyer.
Archer auto rec
"Go hard. I mean, like relentless. I want a bunch of coaches that coach like their hair’s on fire, and I want a football team that goes for four to six seconds (per play) with relentless effort." OSU Coach Urban Meyer.
How about a basketball dodecaheader?
12 games over the course of a weekend at the United Center or Staples Center.
https://twitter.com/#!/SpartanKC
One more step
towards the big conferences declaring the NCAA irrelevant.
Paul -
Go Sparty! Go Bucks! Go Tigers!
Behold the birth of the 52 team Uber Conference.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
Would Cincinnati be in the 52 team UberConference?
Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog, and Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog
Whatever holds the image of an angel IS an angel. The eyes are not the windows of the soul, they are the doors.
Yes, I am on twitter.
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Dec 28, 2011 11:02 PM CST up reply actions
Oh, good
CINCINNATI DELENDA EST
Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog, and Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog
Whatever holds the image of an angel IS an angel. The eyes are not the windows of the soul, they are the doors.
Yes, I am on twitter.
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Dec 29, 2011 3:14 AM CST up reply actions
I hate to say it, but the truth is...
…Cincinnati is barely in a major.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
by ProveIt on Dec 28, 2011 11:48 PM CST up reply actions 4 recs
I like the idea
We know it’s a good idea because most of the teams in the B1G do this already anyway. This will just provide some consistency in the scheduling.
Happy Virginian, Sconnie for life.
Delany is a marketing genius. Scott is a marketing genius. Together it's pure genius.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
Geniuses...Genius's...Genuisii??
"Go hard. I mean, like relentless. I want a bunch of coaches that coach like their hair’s on fire, and I want a football team that goes for four to six seconds (per play) with relentless effort." OSU Coach Urban Meyer.
Unless it kills the 9-team B1G schedule, this is bad for the teams that play ND.
Specifically, Purdue, MSU, and UM. If the 9-game sched gets added to this Challenge thing, that leaves them with 9 conf games, the Pac-12 game, and the ND game with only one tune-up left. Of course, this applies to anyone with a regular Out-of-Conf rivalry, too. (Iowa-ISU comes to mind.)
Other than the possible damage to traditional rivalries, though, I love it.
"Hey Jay, what time is it?"
"9:30"
"AND IU STILL SUCKS!"
by Boiler Bandsman on Dec 28, 2011 11:01 PM CST reply actions
Nah
Playing ND is a big boost to Purdue’s bottom line when its played in West Lafayette. And its not like one loss is going to kill Purdue’s chances of making a BCS Bowl.
Ever Grateful. Ever True.
by PurdueMatt on Dec 29, 2011 7:38 AM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Actually ND has already dropped MSU for the '15 &16 and '21& 22 seasons I believe.
Something about needing to “recharge” the rivalry.
I think it’s something more along the lines of us being 10-5 against over the last 15 years.
Notre Dame immediately cancelled all games against NU
after the Wildcats beat them in the mid 90s, I believe.
Posers.
Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog, and Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog
Whatever holds the image of an angel IS an angel. The eyes are not the windows of the soul, they are the doors.
Yes, I am on twitter.
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Dec 29, 2011 10:15 PM CST up reply actions
A BCS bowl, no.
But it could make it way harder to 6. In essence, now you need 5 wins against BCS-conference teams (ND included) to go bowling, whereas before you needed only 3, assuming you beat the cupcakes and MACrifices.
"Hey Jay, what time is it?"
"9:30"
"AND IU STILL SUCKS!"
by Boiler Bandsman on Dec 29, 2011 11:49 AM CST up reply actions
Delaney is saying this kills the 9 game schedule.
Could that change? I’m sure it could. But as of today it appears dead. (Hooray!)
Not that this is relevant to a sports blog
But I like that there is some discussion of academic collaboration with the PAC 12. Not sure how inclusive this is, but the possibilities of that are exciting.
http://victorypolka.blogspot.com/
This is totally relevant
If these two conferences can get behind each other in the research realm we’re talking about groundbreaking stuff coast to coast. Stanford, Cal, USC, etc. having collaborations with UM, PSU, Iowa, etc… That’s mindblowing stuff right there. That’s how cancer is cured and global warming is solved.
Always check the words with the red squiggly line. They mean you probably screwed up.
Author @ Off Tackle Empire
by KennardHusker on Dec 28, 2011 11:36 PM CST up reply actions
*Please note, I like to talk in hyperbole...
Always check the words with the red squiggly line. They mean you probably screwed up.
Author @ Off Tackle Empire
by KennardHusker on Dec 28, 2011 11:36 PM CST up reply actions
We know. We've read your Nebraska posts.
/just kidding
//not a writer-basher
///really
"Hey Jay, what time is it?"
"9:30"
"AND IU STILL SUCKS!"
by Boiler Bandsman on Dec 29, 2011 11:50 AM CST up reply actions
Hyperbole is understandable...
…it is the natural result of living in a flat, treeless landscape.
Could be worse… you could lives in Kansas.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
I'm waiting for details before making up my mind
Outside of FB, this seems like a lot of unnecessary trips across the country for minor sports. It also seems better for the networks than the teams. How many sports do both conferences offer, and would affiliated teams (for just that sport) be included?
For BB, who cares as long as the ACC/B10 challenge stays? The P12 isn’t a very strong hoops league except for UCLA’s history.
For FB, it’s a mixed bag. You lose the 9th conference game, so we are stuck playing certain teams 40% of the time instead of 60% of the time. That’s a big deal for the Heartland trophy. It also means that conference schedules are more unfair since you miss 3 of 6 teams instead of 2 of 6. On the other hand, you don’t have the 4 home games versus 5 home games issue making things unbalanced. Personally, I’d rather play another B10 team than a random P12 team.
I hear lots of hype about increasing the SOS, but I don’t buy it. It will for schools that schedule 4 cupcakes now, but that’s pretty rare. What it will do is reduce games against ACC, BE, B12 and SEC teams and convert them to P12 games instead. Some schools may choose to play 2 AQs OOC instead of the 1 they used to play, but I doubt it will change for most teams. On the other hand, schools like OSU are likely to stop scheduling elite OOC games (UT, OU, VT, USC, etc) because those have to be scheduled so far in advance that they won’t know what sort of P12 team they’ll have to play. Instead they may play it safe and schedule more middle tier AQs, hurting their SOS most years.
How they pair the teams for FB is an important detail I need to hear. Does OSU rotate through USC, OR, UW, etc, or do they play WSU and Utah just as much? Do they use recent success so the same teams could play over and over? Do they lock NE and CO because they have history?
I think the quote from Hollis serves to temper the $$$ for minor sports
It seems like they want to do B1G-Pac 12 weekend events, so you’ll have fall sportstagging along with football for say, a soccer, field hockey, volleyball weekend leading up to a football game. In the winter, you’ll have gymnastics and swimming leading up to Basketball games.
All shown on the B1G and Pac 12 networks, giving them content that leads to advertising dollars, and, most importantly for their networks, cable subscribers.
It's not the money for me
I don’t like the impact of the travel for the lesser sports. They don’t get the same coddling as the revenue sport athletes, and a cross country trip takes a toll on the body and on study time.
I think you're one of the few...
…who liked the 9th B1G game. Most folks didn’t care for it much as far as I could tell. I get why you did though.
Well, it beat another MAC game
It isn’t that hard to balance the 4 home games with the harder games, although the B10 might not have done that. I don’t see why playing WSU is better than playing MN though. I’d certainly rather travel to MN than WSU.
I think people are too caught up in the possibility of OSU/USC and MI/OR and such and ignoring all the IN/WSU, MN/CO, USC/IN, MI/WSU games. Most of these games will not be nationally relevant, so why travel 2000+ miles for them?.
Because road trips in college football are fun...
…and the Pac-12 has some great destinations. Even the “undesirable” destinations like Pullman are worth doing if you love the outdoors or if (like me) you love good golf.
More power to you
If you can afford west coast trips for FB. My budget is limited to driving to games. I also think the time change is hard on the players. Not so much in FB, but in the other sports.
The reason I didn't like the 9 game schedule...
…is that an unbalanced schedule is potentially horrible for a team like Minnesota. As a realistic MN fan, I know that any revival of our football team is very unlikely to be dynasty like. So what happens when that one special season includes an extra road game in conference? For a team like Minny, that could easily be the difference between a historically great year and another 2003.
Plus with 7 home games being a must for our athletic dept it means the home schedule would become even more blah in those 5 road game seasons.
I get that
But MN is already set up to fail by having WI locked as a rival. The ninth game would mean more OSU and PSU, but also more IN, IL and PU. The important thing is the ninth game means more WI for the rest of your division, balancing things out. I think it actually would help MN.
If the Big 10 wants to get more teams into the national title game, this is a bad idea
Voters prove year in and year out that they’ll vote for a 12-0 team that played non one over a 10-2 team that played the most difficult schedule in the country.
Between a 9th conference game and this agreement with the PAC-12, those are two extra weeks of the season for an Ohio St/Michigan/etc that could be spent resting guys and packing in 100,000 fans to see a 52-10 beating of Directional tech.
by Jonathan Loesche on Dec 29, 2011 6:25 AM CST reply actions
Except that...
This provides more national exposure for every Big Ten team. If the choice is between a 12-1 Big Ten champ and an 11-1 Big 12 champ, the voters on the West Coast might show more love for the Big Ten team if the conference did well against their Pac-12 teams in that year. If a Wisconsin/Michigan/Ohio State is 12-1 with their only loss being in conference, and the Big Ten goes something like 8-4 against the Pac-12 that year, you can bet all the West Coast voters will be voting for the Big Ten team.
by TheHumbleBuckeye on Dec 29, 2011 10:04 AM CST up reply actions
Great point
"Coach Hayes always told us that when TV takes over college athletics, that would be the end of college athletics."
-John Hicks
Twitter: @NJConquest
by Culp's Freaking Hill on Jan 1, 2012 10:29 PM CST up reply actions
Will we see a similar partnerships from other conferences?
SEC/Big 12 makes some sense (uneven # of teams aside).
Same screen name since AOL- 'cause like many Nebraska fans, I'm stuck in the '90s.
I was thinking the SEC in very SEC fashion would go after the ACC
There are enough ‘Southern’ schools in the ACC that they could still have a partnership that cared about the same ‘values’ and such… If that happened, the Big XII in typical Big XII fashion could be late to the party and partner with the Big East, you know, because… well… because.
Always check the words with the red squiggly line. They mean you probably screwed up.
Author @ Off Tackle Empire
by KennardHusker on Dec 29, 2011 10:24 AM CST up reply actions
Plus a lot of those games already exist.
Florida-Florida State
Clemson-South Carolina
Georgia-Georgia Tech
But I think Crowe’s right. The Big XII would be more intriguing games.
Until the Big XII implodes in a few years
Which they will.
"Go hard. I mean, like relentless. I want a bunch of coaches that coach like their hair’s on fire, and I want a football team that goes for four to six seconds (per play) with relentless effort." OSU Coach Urban Meyer.
I know what you're saying
Seems like every time they are on the brink of a collapse, somehow they save themselves. Somehow. Can’t last forever.
Visit Inside The Shoe
A Buckeye blog dedicated to bringing you the most up to date and interesting info about Ohio State Sports!
by Ian_InsideTheShoe on Dec 29, 2011 4:30 PM CST up reply actions
The Big 12 does have more intriguing matchups, but the ACC has 14 members, giving each team a matchup.
That said since the SEC and ACC don’t own their own networks they don’t have the impetus to create a cross-scheduling coup like this.
http://www.frogsowar.com/
by HawkeyedFrog on Dec 29, 2011 6:08 PM CST up reply actions
Except for the fact that playing the ACC would include road trips up north...
…to Pitt, Syracuse, and BC. And the SEC typically does not do road games up north as a general rule. Would love to see them change this policy, but won’t believe it’s going to happen until I see it. =)
I imagine this is going to scrap our home & home...
…with Michigan State was supposed to be 2016/17. Was really looking forward to that. Anyway, congrats on being a part of something awesome. Jealous as hell about this.
I think current plans will go fulfilled.
"Coach Hayes always told us that when TV takes over college athletics, that would be the end of college athletics."
-John Hicks
Twitter: @NJConquest
by Culp's Freaking Hill on Jan 1, 2012 10:30 PM CST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
