U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > College Football
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-15-2010, 09:06 AM
 
Location: Chicago
5,853 posts, read 6,521,925 times
Reputation: 5331

Advertisements

In an era when 12 teams and two divisions each seems to be the ideal for college conferences, particularly the BCS schools, one has to question the direction that the sport (sports actually: football and basketball).

The trend to towards an expanded "footprint' with additional media markets brought into the fold. I'm not sure how that one is a winning proposition.

Theoretically, if the Big Ten could grab Rutgers to capture a piece of the NY/Philly market as a positive, wouldn't the Big East coming into the Midwest and grabbing Notre Dame football be a negative? Seems all that is going on is trading with conferences grabbing schools in other regions for networking strength that is negated by other conferences coming into their to do the same.

The trend of poorly defined "regions" has done nothing but accelerate. I'm not sure what the Texas schools share with Iowa State and Colorado in the Big 12. The ACC is way away from its southeastern roots in a BC that is about as removed from the idea of Dixie as you can get.

There is silly talk of a Big Ten-Texas union or Colorado skipping the Rockies all together and jumping into the Pac Ten (when even Boulder is a city of the plains, not mountains). Texas in the Big Ten talk is seen as part of a 16 school monster that sends shivers down my back. Twelve to me is optimim in size and beyond that, you're nothing but strangers anyway.

Who is getting served here? isn't revenue going to remain the same with some switches taking place, not becoming larger. Seems to me there are only so many football games a fan will watch, so shfiting conferences hardly adds to the pool.

How is anything other than the bottom line financial considerations benefitted by expanding markets and even the conference championship itself, an awkward mix of two divisions designed not for optimum competition but for the revenue of the conference championship game. Does anyone seriously belief any conference comes close to doing it right like Pac Ten with its 9 game round robin. Indeed, the Big Ten could run a ten game round robin and run rings competiton wise around the conferences with championship games.

I'm a Big Ten fan. i love the middlewestern nature of the conference. These schools have been together for a long time, they're local and they are linked. Indeed for all I respect PSU, I'm sorry Penn State didn't stay in the East. Great school, great program, but decidedly non-midwestern.

As a Big Ten fan, I would rather see matchups within the region than to have ones with even prominent programs outside of it. Texas-Ohio State has been a great concept; let it remain such when it happens again as an out-of-conference game.

College football is the most traditional of sports, right up there with MLB; the geographic link between schools is exceedingly important. When it comes to footprints, this is one fan who does not wish to see them expanded.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-22-2010, 06:40 AM
JJG
 
Location: Fort Worth
13,247 posts, read 19,169,167 times
Reputation: 7005
I'm just gonna answer ALL that in the simplist way:


$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2010, 11:52 AM
 
Location: Chicago
5,853 posts, read 6,521,925 times
Reputation: 5331
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJG View Post
I'm just gonna answer ALL that in the simplist way:


$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
sadly I knew that one, JJG. I'm just wondering if there is any non-revenue value to the concept of expanded, transregional conferences.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2010, 12:29 PM
JJG
 
Location: Fort Worth
13,247 posts, read 19,169,167 times
Reputation: 7005
Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25 View Post
sadly I knew that one, JJG. I'm just wondering if there is any non-revenue value to the concept of expanded, transregional conferences.
I doubt it. I mean, maybe to return some rivalries that were lost in the last big shake up, but I seriously doubt that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2010, 01:08 PM
 
Location: Abilene, Texas
8,746 posts, read 7,735,843 times
Reputation: 55865
Great post edsg25! I couldn't agree more! My team is in the Big 12 (Texas Tech) and I don't want my team to play schools way across the country every week. Regional sports has a value beyond the TV money IMO. The more that colleges and universities play this money game with the networks the more they'll become like pro sports. It'll all be about how much money they can grab every time their TV contracts expire and there will be no regard given to the rivalries and traditions of the schools, which is one of the things that makes college sports so great IMO. I can see adding or dropping a team here and there to a conference but total conference shake-ups like they're talking about possibly happening here in the Big 12 should be avoided as much as possible IMO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2010, 03:48 PM
 
Location: Chicago
5,853 posts, read 6,521,925 times
Reputation: 5331
Quote:
Originally Posted by TT Dave View Post
Great post edsg25! I couldn't agree more! My team is in the Big 12 (Texas Tech) and I don't want my team to play schools way across the country every week. Regional sports has a value beyond the TV money IMO. The more that colleges and universities play this money game with the networks the more they'll become like pro sports. It'll all be about how much money they can grab every time their TV contracts expire and there will be no regard given to the rivalries and traditions of the schools, which is one of the things that makes college sports so great IMO. I can see adding or dropping a team here and there to a conference but total conference shake-ups like they're talking about possibly happening here in the Big 12 should be avoided as much as possible IMO.
Dave, thanks so much for the comment. in retrospect, Texas Tech may have been best served by the old SWC. There is something absurd about the notion that it was "too small" a pond. It wasn't. Texas is just a big state. And the conference would have gotten past the scandal issue that helped kill it.

Obviously UT, A&M, TT, & Baylor officially killed the conference. But Arkansas was the one that started the process. And how did that one work out? It would be virtually impossible to suggest that the SEC has been better for the Hogs than the SWC was.

Now I'm not sure how one solves the notion of a bit of access (SMU, TCU, Baylor, Rice) of private universities, but truthfully during the reign of the conference, Rice was the only one that seemed overpowered. SMU, for example, had plenty of success. Point is, the SWC in construct today would be just as viable as the Big East is.

And special. What a league. Where else but in state with 8 out of 9 conference teams could you have come up with all the different hand and fist signals of the old SWC. Talk about the ultimate connection between schools.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2010, 04:28 PM
 
2,057 posts, read 3,151,941 times
Reputation: 980
Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25 View Post
in retrospect, Texas Tech may have been best served by the old SWC.
How so? I know I'm going back to money, but Tech's athletic revenues increased from $9 million in the Big 12's first year (1996) to nearly $56 million in 2008 (next fiscal year's should be significantly higher than that). This September Tech will have completed its third football stadium renovation/expansion in ten years, and it will have a capacity of over 60,000 with 80 luxury suites and about 1500 club seats. Academic fundraising is off the charts compared to the SWC days, and enrollment is the highest it's ever been (over 30,000 last fall). People in West Texas like their Red Raiders.

Travel expenses have increased, but not exponentially like they would at about any Big 12 school if it switched conferences.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2010, 04:51 PM
 
Location: Chicago
5,853 posts, read 6,521,925 times
Reputation: 5331
Quote:
Originally Posted by shoe01 View Post
How so? I know I'm going back to money, but Tech's athletic revenues increased from $9 million in the Big 12's first year (1996) to nearly $56 million in 2008 (next fiscal year's should be significantly higher than that). This September Tech will have completed its third football stadium renovation/expansion in ten years, and it will have a capacity of over 60,000 with 80 luxury suites and about 1500 club seats. Academic fundraising is off the charts compared to the SWC days, and enrollment is the highest it's ever been (over 30,000 last fall). People in West Texas like their Red Raiders.

Travel expenses have increased, but not exponentially like they would at about any Big 12 school if it switched conferences.
I think you got me wrong on this one, shoe. I was suggesting that UT, A&M, and Baylor would have ALL been better off in the old SWC and let the Big 8 schools keep their own region.

Mine was no put down to TT which I fully agree with you belongs with the Horns and Aggies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2010, 06:02 PM
 
Location: Abilene, Texas
8,746 posts, read 7,735,843 times
Reputation: 55865
Quote:
Originally Posted by shoe01 View Post
How so? I know I'm going back to money, but Tech's athletic revenues increased from $9 million in the Big 12's first year (1996) to nearly $56 million in 2008 (next fiscal year's should be significantly higher than that). This September Tech will have completed its third football stadium renovation/expansion in ten years, and it will have a capacity of over 60,000 with 80 luxury suites and about 1500 club seats. Academic fundraising is off the charts compared to the SWC days, and enrollment is the highest it's ever been (over 30,000 last fall). People in West Texas like their Red Raiders.

Travel expenses have increased, but not exponentially like they would at about any Big 12 school if it switched conferences.
Yeah, being in the Big 12 hasn't been bad money wise that's for sure. In addition, in the Big 12 we still play most of our old SWC teams anyway in non-conference games (SMU, TCU, Rice, and Houston) so I've always been happy being in the Big 12. I just hope the conference doesn't totally collapse so it will stay that way!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2010, 06:42 PM
 
9,807 posts, read 13,447,720 times
Reputation: 8158
As a Big 10 fan ( Golden Gophers) I kinda agree with th OP about Penn State.

I would have no problem with Notre Dame, Iowa State, and Missouri joining, however.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > College Football
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top