Conference realignment discussion - v. 2015

[DeltaV]

I wonder how much Fox has to say in if we expand or not, and if so if Fox getting at least a portion of the BIG contract would effect us.

Right now FS1 and 2 need more programming, more games; this has been mentioned as a potential driver for our expansion. But...if BIG sends at least a portion of its games to FS1, then the capacity is filled. Thats a big reason to want to stay at 10...less times trying to find our games pushed to FS2 (or worse) by a less exciting but more eye-gathering game of, say, Illinois vs. Rutgers (Chicago vs. NYC market, in the networks eyes).

[JPSchmack]

I’ll never understand why Xavier is so anti-Dayton.

You own them. If the Big East added them for 11 teams (Home & Away vs 7 teams, one game vs 4), Xavier is getting 2-0 vs Dayton, and the two games that replace are probably from the Eastern group of teams that Xavier is 12-14 against since joining the Big East.

That makes you about a game better every year.

It's been nearly three years since the last great shift in conference realignment at the power levels of the NCAA. Forget about the Big East, but the other power conferences are content and satisfied where they are at - however right/wrong fans believe them to be. Conferences will not be making widespread additions/changes for at least another several years, at least when the time to renegotiate TV contracts with networks come closer. Even the conference that needs expansion the most (Big 12) will not expand because the 10 schools cannot even agree on whether expansion is a positive or not. Nothing will happen now or in the near future.

In the meantime, the Daytons, Saint Louises, UConns, Cincinnaties and Richmonds of college sports can only hope to continue building their conference resume (on-court success, facilities upgrades, national following, academics, etc.) in hopes of getting selected in the next go-around. They need to continue to be patient.

PS When do we update the thread to reflect that it is 2016???

I think because of all of the expansion and realignment, and conferences LOSING MEMBERS and subsequently chasing the best programs possible to replace them; everyone tends to view expansion in terms of “powerful programs coveted.”

But your 10-team Big East isn’t losing anyone. It’s more like the Big Ten, SEC and round 2 of the ACC expansion. Those conferences didn’t NEED powerful members. They targeted what they needed.

The Big Ten needed to put BTN on standard cable in the NYC/DC area, so they took Rutgers & Maryland. Maryland isn’t very good at football and Rutgers isn’t good in football or basketball.

The SEC wanted to put the new SEC Network in as many homes as possible, so they took Missouri and Texas A&M because those stats have lots of people. A&M went from .500 in the Big XII to 8-4 in SEC football (Even though the SEC is supposed to be the best, and the SEC West is loaded!). Mizzou is pretty terrible at basketball right now. Most the SEC is terrible at basketball.

The ACC needed more TV sets watching basketball and football north of Virginia.

They took the best teams that fit their needs. What the Big East needs isn’t power at the top or middle; it needs people watching the FS2 games.

Or you could try and form your own network. That could work with the metro areas you have (that would slam the door on Dayton). One interesting concept… form a conference cable network with the WCC. Doubles your inventory and makes it national instead of regional.

[UD Flyer Fanatic]

I don't get it either- we're all so lovable! All kidding aside, we would compete head to head so I can respect the X perspective. To their credit they earned the invite and I respect that.

[sheg]

(I’d also say you should swap year 2 and year 3, so you’d play the everyone 3 times in two years, not half 4 times and half twice in a two-year span).


But 13 definitely gives you the right blend of “thirds” in the league: Top third (the ranked teams), the middle third (NCAA contenders), and bottom third (absorbing conference losses and enabling that middle third to get in).

I wanted to answer this, but I couldn't remember the logic. Now I do, so I'm answering it 30 pages later!

The reason you play the same six teams twice in consecutive years is understood best if I illustrate it:

Let's call your team team #1. They use your method of alternating your pod.

In year 1 (the "normal rotation") you play 2 4 6 8 10 and 12 at home, and 3 5 7 9 11 and 13 on the road.
Your "pod" (the six teams you play twice) is 2 5 6 9 10 13.
You're playing 2, 6, and 10 already at home, so the pod games with them are on the road.
You're playing 5, 9, and 13 already away, so the pod games with them are at home.

In year 2, your "normal rotation" games are 3 5 7 9 11 13 at home, 2 4 6 8 10 12 away.
Your pod is 3 4 7 8 11 12.
You're playing 3 7 11 already at home, so those pod games are on the road.
You're playing 4 8 12 already away, so those pod games are at home.

In year 3, your normal rotation is 2 4 6 8 10 12 home, 3 5 7 9 11 13 away.
Your pod is 2 5 6 9 10 13.
You're playing 2 6 10 already at home, so those pod games are on the road.
You're playing 5 9 13 already away, so those pod games are at home.

In year 4, your "normal rotation" games are 3 5 7 9 11 13 at home, 2 4 6 8 10 12 away.
Your pod is 3 4 7 8 11 12.
You're playing 3 7 11 already at home, so those pod games are on the road.
You're playing 4 8 12 already away, so those pod games are at home.

You'd play 4 5 8 9 12 13 four times at home over the four year cycle, and those same teams twice each on the road.
You'd play 2 3 6 7 10 11 twice each at home over the four year cycle, and those same teams four times each away.

You can see the fail. However, this is resolved by playing the same six teams in a pod in years one and two, then the other six in years three and four.

EDIT: And I can certainly see the problem with agreeing on three, let alone two, expansion candidates!

[Xudash]

Very interesting read from the Cincinnati Enquirer Re UC"s effort to position UC for membership in the Big 12:

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2016/02/13/inside-ucs-bid-join-big-12/80280488/

The bottomline appears to be that Ono is doing everything he can in terms of having put together a position paper (i.e. comparative metrics that line up UC against the existing members in key evaluative areas) and hopping on planes to visit with whomever will visit with him about it, but with absolutely no sign or signal of intentions from the Big 12 side when it comes to expansion.

To say the least, the stakes are beyond high.

[GoldenWarrior11]

Reading more and more about the "quiet optimism" that Cincinnati fans have in being selected for expansion into the Big 12. Their president has really gone all out in meeting with other Big 12 presidents and officials over the past year, giving a strong case that UC would help elevate the Big 12 - both academically and athletically. A huge boost now is the support that Boren (and probably Gee and others will also support) brings. I'd say it's only a matter of time before Cincinnati gets announced as a Big 12 member (my guess would be with Houston).

Personally, I'd be happy for the Bearcats. They did more than enough to show they belonged from 2005-2012, and were, unfortunately, passed over in 2013.

Not sure where that would leave UConn...

[HoosierPal]

Reading more and more about the "quiet optimism" that Cincinnati fans have in being selected for expansion into the Big 12. Their president has really gone all out in meeting with other Big 12 presidents and officials over the past year, giving a strong case that UC would help elevate the Big 12 - both academically and athletically. A huge boost now is the support that Boren (and probably Gee and others will also support) brings. I'd say it's only a matter of time before Cincinnati gets announced as a Big 12 member (my guess would be with Houston).

Personally, I'd be happy for the Bearcats. They did more than enough to show they belonged from 2005-2012, and were, unfortunately, passed over in 2013.

Not sure where that would leave UConn...

There are several Big 12 university presidents that wish Boren would shut up. The Big 12 is in an historic run in hoops, and all Boren wants to talk about is football related expansion.

From several other sources I've read, IF the Big 12 expands, a likely #1 target would be BYU. The sleeping giant then may well be UCF. The Big 12 realizes the potential of the Florida market for recruiting and new viewers. UCF cranks out 15,000 graduates each year. Plenty of $$ in Southern Florida gets the Big 12 by the weak football resume of UCF. No way the Texas schools would want to add Houston.

The Big 12 needs to solve the Longhorn Network in lieu of a Big 12 Network issue before they make a move. And with all the cord cutting being done in cable, now isn't a great time to start up a new network.

[DudeAnon]

I made a thread on Reddit about BE expansion that has gotten some pretty interesting response from non-BE fans.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CollegeBasketb ... st_expand/

Edit: Murphy needs to go in there and inform the Dayton posters about the evils of Fox

[Bill Marsh]

I made a thread on Reddit about BE expansion that has gotten some pretty interesting response from non-BE fans.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CollegeBasketb ... st_expand/

Edit: Murphy needs to go in there and inform the Dayton posters about the evils of Fox

I love the guy toward the end of the thread who advises that "public/private is a bigger deal than you think", and then by the end of his post is recommending Wichita State.

[Xudash]

The Big 12 got into the playoff this year, they can otherwise now stage a CCG with 10 members, and they're situated with a media markets configuration that is less than conducive for making additions.

Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if they held at 10, at least for a while. Just like the Big East, they don't NEED to expand to achieve success. And imagine what may happen when UT, in particular, wakes back up in football.

Here's a follow-up article from the Cincinnati Enquirer on the idea of further expansion for Nippert Stadium: http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2016/02/15/nippert-expansion-possible-if-uc-joins-big-12/80405222/

Key quotes:

It's believed a majority of the Big 12's presidents and chancellors are hesitant to add schools to the 10-member conference, because they're not sure it would grow television revenues enough to make expansion worth doing.

If revenue-sharing were equal, UC would have made around $20 million more last year in the Big 12 than it did in the AAC. Over the long haul, UC would stand to make millions more than it currently does.

"An unqualified yes," Ono said when asked if moving to the Big 12 would be worth it.

In 2015, UC used $27.7 million from its general fund to run its sports programs, and Ono said moving to the Big 12 "would put us in a much stronger position to reduce or eliminate the subsidy that goes to athletics."

The importance of having a strong media package/partner and significant funding from that arrangement simply cannot be overstated.

Finally, it is rather amazing to read fan reaction to all this, as it is all over the map and depends upon the particular fan's point of view. A UC fan? Let's go. We'll add to the conference. Very logical thing to do. Clearly one of the best positioned expansion candidates. Now visit a Texas Longhorns board. While some are okay with the idea, many don't like it and want to go back to the days of when everything was blowing up so that UT could wonder off to the PAC 12, or stay within the Big 12 by bringing in FSU and Clemson.

The month of May may provide a little drama in the world of collegiate sports.