MUPanther wrote:SCS wrote:People keep saying 16x4 because it sounds cute, I don't think there is any merit behind it; even less if the playoff expands to 8 eventually.
Don't think eventually is anytime soon.
TBC Alum wrote:Agreed. I really doubt that 8 happens with the current conference system. The round of 8 is supposed to replace the conference title games to keep the number of games down. I highly doubt that any current conference would be willing to give up the $$$ of their own title game. Now if a 16X4 came to fruition, all bets are off.
stever20 wrote:...
no, it's a 12 year contract. 9 years to go after this year.
DeltaV wrote:TBC Alum wrote:Agreed. I really doubt that 8 happens with the current conference system. The round of 8 is supposed to replace the conference title games to keep the number of games down. I highly doubt that any current conference would be willing to give up the $$$ of their own title game. Now if a 16X4 came to fruition, all bets are off.
Think they would ever go to a 6 team playoff, where 1 and 2 get byes? That would near guarantee that each conference gets a piece of the pie, and throws a bone to the G5/Domers to keep them from getting too upset about not getting to play at the big boys table.stever20 wrote:...
no, it's a 12 year contract. 9 years to go after this year.
Ahh, I stand corrected.
JPSchmack wrote:The 4x16 is what people who like symmetry talk about. Back in 2003 when the ACC was raiding Miami, BC and (as it developed) VT; it was “Everyone is going to 12!”
We never had a single day where the power conferences were all at 12. The ACC, Pac-12 and Big Ten went to 12 teams… and it left the Big XII at 10 teams. Before the Big XII got back to 12 the SEC and Big Ten went to 14.
What makes anyone think that leagues acting independently out of self interest will ever be in the exact same situation where they have an optimal configuration of 16 each? It’ll never happen unless rule changes force it.
The Big XII will expand if their proposal fails and they have to have 12 to hold a CCG in football. In which case, Cincy is headed to the Big XII with one other school... and the debate will wage on their message boards (well, it already has) over teams like UConn, BYU, Houston, USF, Tulane, Memphis (And BTW, the Big XII should probably go Cincy, USF, UCF and Memphis).
notkirkcameron wrote:If the Big 12 has to expand, BYU and Cincinnati are the only oranges where the juice is conceivably worth the squeeze. Directional Floridas don't grow the pie enough in either major revenue sport to convince Texas and Oklahoma to take a smaller slice.
BEwannabe wrote:with Oklahoma easily making the National Championship I believe conference realignment based on that premise is gone. In my estimation , the force that will drive any further movement is the ability to conduct a huge revenue generating conference championship game. The B1G, I believe has a legitimate claim arguing some formula (division vs division) must be in place to conduct a championship game.
The extra conference game as Ohio State proved last year can make a difference in the process so I'm not completely dismissing what impact winning a conference championship game especially in convincing fashion. But other outcomes are also present, Oklahoma did not play in a conf championship game and earned a spot and losing in a conference championship will knock you out of contention. But always present in a conference championship scenario is a big payday for the leagues and networks.
Therefore I believe the conversation about how a league can have a conference championship is key. Will B1G, PAC12 and SEC allow ACC and Big12 to make up their own rules or will they be forced to comply with a like formula.
So I don't think the 4x16 discussion has anything to do with it but I do think there are other factors in play. I know the B1G best and I think the current East - West divisional make ups have issues especially moving forward with Ohio St, Michigan St and Michigan very much looking like the major football players. And 2 of those major players (Ohio St and Michigan) in any direction B1G considers (those 2 are why Rutgers and Maryland are even in the B1G).
So I think there are way more things driving realignment and certainly not a simplistic 4x16 direction.
notkirkcameron wrote:JPSchmack wrote:The 4x16 is what people who like symmetry talk about. Back in 2003 when the ACC was raiding Miami, BC and (as it developed) VT; it was “Everyone is going to 12!”
We never had a single day where the power conferences were all at 12. The ACC, Pac-12 and Big Ten went to 12 teams… and it left the Big XII at 10 teams. Before the Big XII got back to 12 the SEC and Big Ten went to 14.
What makes anyone think that leagues acting independently out of self interest will ever be in the exact same situation where they have an optimal configuration of 16 each? It’ll never happen unless rule changes force it.
The Big XII will expand if their proposal fails and they have to have 12 to hold a CCG in football. In which case, Cincy is headed to the Big XII with one other school... and the debate will wage on their message boards (well, it already has) over teams like UConn, BYU, Houston, USF, Tulane, Memphis (And BTW, the Big XII should probably go Cincy, USF, UCF and Memphis).
If the Big 12 has to expand, BYU and Cincinnati are the only oranges where the juice is conceivably worth the squeeze. Directional Floridas don't grow the pie enough in either major revenue sport to convince Texas and Oklahoma to take a smaller slice.
Return to Big East basketball message board
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 6 guests