After long contending that expansion was unnecessary, the Big 12, according to ESPN.com, is indicating that it hopes to make a decision on adding teams by October 17.
According to the same article, the shorter-short list is down to 12 schools: Air Force, BYU, UCF, Cincinnati, Colorado State, UConn, Houston, Rice, South Florida, SMU, Temple, and Tulane.
Though each of these options has its own set of pros and cons, what if the Big 12 will incur irreparable damage by choosing any of the schools still left standing?
Think about it this way, why is the Big 12 expanding? Is it to form bigger divisions for its league championship game, due to be reinstated in 2017? Is it to make the conference more comparable, in size, to the ACC (14), Big Ten (14), Pac-12 (12), and SEC (14)?
Or, is it to give it more weight when it comes down to the College Football Playoff committee making its decision?
The Big 12 is competing with the ACC, Big Ten, Pac-12, and SEC for a four-slot CFB Playoff. Until something changes, it’s five pegs vying for four coveted holes.
That means one Power league will be left out every single season. Add in a top-ranked Notre Dame team, and two conferences don’t get the opportunity to compete for a national title.
In a tie, the committee’s decision is going to come down to strength of schedule within each conference, even if it’s only perceived strength. And the only league which currently gets a pass is the SEC.
That basically leaves three slots for four conferences to argue, debate and yes, play themselves into.
Though having a member run the table is the best way to guarantee a place even that becomes an at-risk situation if the given team’s schedule is perceived as weak.
So, why wouldn’t the Big 12 add teams that would push their schedule strength decidedly above what is arguably the weakest Power league top-to-bottom—the ACC?
In other words, if it’s going to expand for a league title game and overall size, why not, while it’s already at it, add teams that will pull the conference’s strength of schedule up?
Adding Cincinnati and Houston, much less Colorado State and SMU, do nothing to boost strength, at best it would maintain the current level. That’s true even if Houston continues to thrive. At some point it’s logical to think that head coach Tom Herman will take the next step in his career. Rightly or wrongly, that would put the Cougars back at square one.
Things get even trickier when you split into divisions and stop playing every other conference member as is the case in the current format. Yes, not playing Oklahoma or Texas is good, that is, until you need that big win to make your case to the CFB Playoff committee.
Adding non-Power partners and splitting into divisions does nothing but dilute schedule strength.
The more effective approach—if the end game is creating a guaranteed slot like the SEC enjoys—is to quell all doubts by adding two current Power programs.
It’s time to poach.
The Big 12 needs to look for partner schools who can add prestige to the league, both academically and athletically, but who won’t be impossible to score wins against. So, while they do need a competitive Power program, they don’t need a Top 5 school.
On the flip side, a potential candidate needs to be willing. Either they are stuck in a league where they have no real identity, or they suffer from playing in a conference where their hopes of a Playoff slot are diminished by strength of schedule.
This makes the ideal target an ACC school, also, ironically the league that borrowed enough teams from the Big East to end its era as a football conference.
The other compelling argument for a team to leave the ACC, from a football standpoint, is the conference’s standing as an elite basketball league. An ideal target for the Big 12 is an ACC school that isn’t a basketball powerhouse, and doesn’t have a reason to stick around to amp up its national standing in that sport.
For those rightly concerned with the ACC’s 20-year grant of rights deal, making it as per ESPN.com “financially untenable for a school to leave,” it’s important to remember that other lucrative deals have been broken in the past. If not, the huge wave of recent conference realignment would have never happened.
Back in 2011, when Nebraska and Colorado fled the Big 12 for the Big Ten and Pac-12 respectively, the two schools were originally supposed to forfeit 80% of their Big 12 payout in 2009-10 and 2010-11. This per the established Big 12 bylaws.
Following the letter of the law would have cost Nebraska close to $20 million and Colorado $15 million. What really happened, to keep the case out of court, was a settlement. The Cornhuskers paid $9.25 million and the Buffaloes $7 million, or roughly half of what they owed.
And then there’s Maryland, which left, of all things, the ACC for the Big Ten in 2014. The league had originally determined that the Terps owed it $52.2 million, they settled for $31.4. That was $21.1 million less than the established agreement.
The ACC’s new grant of rights is stiffer still, but history proves that deals can be broken, especially if your partners have deep enough pockets.
Consider the following possibilities.
Miami (Fla.)
Perhaps the most compelling option, Miami hasn’t had an identity or any palpable football success since bolting from the Big East in 2004.
The Hurricanes’ run of titles as Big East members from 1991-2003 (nine conference and two national championships) ended abruptly when they joined the ACC. They are also the “second best” Florida team from the conference. Big 12 membership would mean being on par with Florida and Florida State as being a big-time player in its own big-time conference.
Miami would also earn the Big 12 a significant recruiting win by having its teams play annually in the richest-talent pool in the nation.
Everybody wins including fans across the map. Would you rather watch Oklahoma-UConn or Oklahoma-Miami?
Georgia Tech
Adding Georgia Tech with Miami or as a stand-alone could add serious long-term viability to the Big 12.
What hurts is that the Yellow Jackets don’t have an urgent need to leave the ACC. Tech has been a member of the league since dropping independent status in 1978. In that time, it’s won three conference titles and one national championship.
That said, if Georgia Tech were to win the ACC now, in the era of the CFB Playoff, it is plausible that it would be overlooked by an option with a bigger fan base. To illustrate, if Alabama won the SEC and then Georgia Tech, Texas, Ohio State, USC all captured the other conference crowns with one-loss a-piece, Tech would likely be left out in the cold. That wouldn’t necessarily be the case if Florida State or Clemson won the league instead, likely getting the nod or at least more serious consideration.
Pittsburgh
Pitt is the first of three options that would not only add a “bigger” name to the Big 12, it would help shore up West Virginia as a geographic partner.
The Panthers have only been ACC members since 2013, so it’s not like years and years of history, tradition and lore are tying them down.
Additionally, bringing in Pitt would give the Mountaineers more than a local team to play, it would renew the Backyard Brawl, one of many significant rivalry games lost to realignment.
Virginia Tech
Virginia Tech and Pitt would serve as a tremendous two-team combo to a possible North division. Like Georgia Tech, the Hokies have less reason to abandon the ACC as they’ve enjoyed plenty of success since joining in 2004.
Other than Miami, Virginia Tech would provide more attractive matchups than any of the other options. Again, when you start fantasizing about TCU-Virginia Tech and Oklahoma State-Virginia Tech, you see the bigger picture. Not only could the Big 12 boost its own viability by abandoning its list of final candidates, it could make college football even better.
Louisville
Last but not least is Louisville, which joined the ACC in 2014. Though the move got the Cardinals off the sinking ship that was the Big East, their placement in the Atlantic Division means that they’ll always be in a three-way power struggle with Clemson and Florida State.
It’s as tough as a division as there is outside of the SEC West and the Big Ten East. Why the Cardinals didn’t negotiate themselves into the more wide-open Coastal is hard to understand.
For the Big 12, Louisville has it all, including a stepping-stone location between West Virginia and the rest of the league.
The issue is, why would they want to leave the ACC? The answer may be as simple as saying, would Bobby Petrino leave Louisville for the Oklahoma job?
View Comments (78)
I'm not sure why you think these teams would leave their stable conference, especially with the new ACC network that's sure to boost revenues well above what the Big 12 teams are getting. You did address the Grant of Rights issue by saying it's negotiable, well, that works both ways. OU could go to the SEC, Big 10 could tap Kansas, even the ACC could court WVU.
no one is leaving the acc, big 10 , or the sec,,,,, get that out of your head right now,,,, it's all about money, and each of these conf. pay out more than the big 12,,, plus theres a certain peaking order, and the big 12 is at the bottom of the power 5 or at least tied with the pac12 for the bottom
I agree, Tiger Lily. No one is leaving any Power 5 conference to join the Big 12. It has nothing to offer any P5 school, and everybody knows that Texas and Oklahoma are the Big 12 -- hence, they run the show. The conference exists at their pleasure. Nobody wants to be in a conference with two bullies. Besides, the conference is unstable, and the revenue is far less in the Big 12 than any other power conference. Not exactly enticements.
The Big 12 needs to expand if it wants to keep up with the other P5 leagues. Houston and Cincinnati are probably the two best choices.
ACC schools, including Notre Dame, are tied down by grant of rights through 2035. That is just stupid to even talk about it. It shows a lack of research by the author here.
All the other power conference schools are locked in by these GOR agreements until 2024 or 2025 seasons. So expansion can only come from the group of five.
For the Big 12 Expansion is about two things. Money now and existence in 2025 when Oklahoma and Texas are likely to move to other conferences (B1G will take whomever they want, the SEC will be able to claim a solid school or two after that), likely taking Kansas with one of them. The money now comes from FOX and ESPN paying full shares for new schools that take a haircut (still better than their G5 earnings) for the remainder of the TV contract.
The other schools in the Big 12 need to know they will have a conference. Second expansion is about building a digital network like the ACC just accomplished with ESPN. That is necessary for the long term survival of the Big 12, and to generate revenue as media shifts. Having 12 or 14 schools increases the inventory of games, and thus the value of the league, for their own network. The B1G, ACC and SEC basically have 40% more inventory which they have leveraged into networks.
As for institutional prestige, that is the one factor you have correct. Neither UH nor UC brings that. BYU and UConn would help there, but LGBT issue with one, and bad football with the other may make them indigestible. Those four schools are the only G5 who have P5 or close budgets. Every other G5 is a 20 year project ... might as well wait out the ACC Network GOR time line.
Sure the Big 12 would love to have Arizona or Florida State. But no P5 school would ever consider the Big 12, and that is why none expressed any interest and why none is on the potential expansion list. Arizona is an equity owner in the P12N, besides the GOR, and the projected 50% equity sale is targeted around $0.5-1B in the 2023 time frame, or put another way a $40-80m carrot hanging in front of Pac-12 schools to stay put, even as the P12N generates an anemic sub $2m per school annual income right now (it's increasing, but not like the B1G or SEC).
Articles on expansion by the Big 12 need to keep such realities in mind, and not pretend some ACC or P12 school will walk away from a > $100m revenue.
The author addressed the Grant of Rights issue.
Did either TCU or Baylor ( despite it's issues) on the field bolster the Big12 after the last round of expansion ( look at their rankings the last 5 years) - the answer is of course and adding UH UofM UCONN UC would do both and on the basketball court too in big college football and basketball markets and Baylor likely will slide and the Big12 needs some new blood badly ..
UH and the UofM were both in the top 25 the last two years btw ! UCONN not UofL FSU or OU beat UH last year in football .. those four AAC schools are better than the perceptions especially moving forward and fighting on a leveled playing field or court ..
You're joking right... You call out the author for not doing research then you make statements without any knowledge of what you're talking about. uc is an excellenct academic school.
I don't understand your reasoning on several points. You quickly dismiss U of Cincinnati but then suggest Pitt and U of L. When the three were conference mates in the Big East, it was UC who as winning conference titles. You don't recognize that the GORs are a significant change from the last time poaching occurred. Given their intent to stop the poaching, I suspect conferences will be very aggressive to defend them. Finally, going to a conference with TX and OU is an easier path for U of L than FSU & Clemson? I don't see that. Finally, the ACC is a much better run conference. The current expansion process of the Big 12 is a mess. Why would any of the P5 teams want to join the Big 12 dysfunction?
Each of the P5 leagues have teams that are patsies in football on many given years...ACC has Wake Forest, Duke and Virginia; PAC 12 has Washington State, and Colorado; Big 10 has Purdue, Illinois, Rutgers, Indiana; SEC has Vanderbilt, and Kentucky. Big 12 has Kansas. Kansas, Duke, Indiana and Kentucky do help their conferences in basketball consistantly. To say Houston and Cincinnati or even Connecticut don't hold their own to the Power Conferences just isn't so.
I completely agree and check UH & UofM's recruiting football recruiting rankings on rivals 2017 for a pretty good indication that they are beating P5 schools for top talent too ..
BYU is an obvious choice. The LGBT issue is way over blown and the Big 12 presidents know it. Did you watch the BYU - Arizona game which was in Arizona. There were 25,000 BYU fans at the game, more than Arizona. The BYU home game with UCLA game had over 62,00 plus in attendance. After the game the UCLA coach said BYU and it's fans were classy.
I have known Mormons since high school and that have always treatt me with love and respect. Yes, they have traditionall Christian beliefs. So do many Americans. But they extend the hand of fellowship to all beliefs in a charitable way. They recently came from many Southern states to help the flood victims in Baton Rouge. The governor of Louisiana sang their praises.
BYU would add to the success and prestige of the Big 12. They are a class act.
I'm gay and I have no issue with BYU in the Big12; I think UH & BYU are the best choices. Geography is an issue but BYU does travel well and BYU & WV would be in separate divisions so some mitigation there. Unfortunately, it appears BYU is out. If the Big12 adds 2 now perhaps 2 more later on. My view is BYU would be best served by aligning with Boise, San Diego State, CSU and merge with the 10 AAC members assuming UH, CINCIN are in. That would be a potent conference; SMU, Tulsa, Memphis joining in a west division & the others in the east. BYU would have a path to a NY6 bowl that's much easier and the AAC is the go-to conference for Power5s looking for non-P5 candidates for expansion. It would also prove that BYU can work within a conference framework.
I think the LGBT is the cop out, as the BXII has other religious schools and they would, by nature, all be bigoted towards that group. What is the big issue is their staunch no-Sunday play, which would be like trying to bring in a Hasidic Jewish school to play college football, and doesn't bode well for all other sports, tournaments, bowl games, etc.
UH doesn't make sense because the BXII already has Texas covered, UConn is just too far away. I think the only one that does make sense is Cincinnati as it provides a natural rival for WVU and they compete well and have been upgrading their facilities. Outside of them.... well, slim pickings especially if you look at a radius that makes sense for the schools to be in the same league.
Shep, you're wrong about one thing: The Big 12 does not have Texas covered. It certainly doesn't have Houston covered, and Houston is the largest city in the state with more than 6 million people in the metro area. Right now, the SEC owns Houston -- not the Big 12. Look at the giant Houston TV market. Last season, the SEC had 6 of the 10 college games with the best viewership. The University of Houston had 2 of the top 10 games, and the entire Big 12 conference had 2. This year, the UH-Oklahoma game at NRG Stadium got a 12.8 rating in Houston, which is higher than any game last season except the national championship game. A lot of Big 12 supporters claim that the conference "owns Houston and Texas," but that simply isn't true. There are a lot of Texas A&M and LSU fans in Houston (note the proximity to Louisiana), and if the Big 12 wants to improve their market share, they definitely need to add Houston, which would at least double their market share in that major city.
Let's see......For all of you who think UH should not be asked to join because it brings another Texas school into the fray of the conference making it 5 Texas schools...well what about the Pac-12 having 4 California schools? That theory just got shot down. The writer talks about if/when Tom Herman leaves and UH falls back....well, isn't that the case for almost every school every year? Another dumb theory rebutted. Look people, it is not rocket science. Houston brings the recruits in truly the hottest bed of talent (who want to stay close to home), the fans (look at OU vs. UH) and the viewership (highest rating among ALL BIG 12 schools just for OU/UH. The Coogs always crank out the best coaches (i.e. Sumlin, Kingsbury (asst. coach), Holgerson, Briles, etc...and now Herman (saving the best for last). Houston deserves the higher calling and the Big 12-2 needs Houston. Period.
Don, I live in Houston, you're wrong. That would be like saying this area is exclusively populated with Texans fans and that Cowboys and Saints games don't get good ratings. The main thing these conferences want is to be included on the basic cable tier (see: B1G getting Maryland and Rutgers, P12 getting Colorado) and that isn't something that works in the BXII's favor due to LHN. Houston IS covered by the BXII as much as it can be at this moment, and adding Houston does nothing but dilute that even though they are realistically the 2nd best choice (I'd say behind Cincinnati). If there were an actual BXII network, the Florida schools would be better options.
BYU has issues on top of issues to join any league and if gaining 23 yards rushing last Saturday vs UCLA ...hmmmm
UH is not back to square one if Herman leaves; a lot of investment has been put into the program. Remember Sumlin? Briles? Both UH coaches; UH will attract another good coach. UH's push will continue whether he leaves or not. The Big12's main knock against UH is that it would be a regular power if in a power conference. Sounds like UH would increase Big12 strength. A championship game with a round robin format is stupid and will lead to problems and has little upside. If the Big12 wants to add 2 weak programs then I agree that the conference is better off doing nothing.
Houston Memphis and Cincy play in big boy back yards ( SEC & B1G) and that's exactly where the Big12 should go! UH football has produced and will produce great coaches frankly similar to Tulsa in basketball historically ... for the record without Barry Odom ( left Memphis for MO now HC SEC) Justin Fuente Va Tech or Paxton Lynch .. with a first time head coach Mike Norvell Memphis buried Kansas 43-7 ( granted but ) the show goes on and he's recruited the best class in UofM history in 9 months on the job !
Despite laughable " list" Memphis has not announced nor the Big12 that they are out of Big12 expansion and passing on adding Memphis and a top global sports mktg partner will signal the end of the Big12 ( ask the PGA Tour if FedEx knows what they are doing )
I disagree with your conclusion that Houston would not add anything to the Big 12 and that Tom Herman will soon leave as head coach, leaving UH as an also-ran. Houston is an up-and-coming program. They are among the Top 20 FBS schools in winning percentage over the past decade, and that is under four different head coaches. UH is in the 8th largest TV market in the nation and last year had the same number of games in the Top 10 in their market as the entire Big 12. This year's season-opener against Oklahoma got a 12.8 rating locally, which exceeded ANY college game last year. It also beat the Texas-Notre Dame game that was in prime time on a Sunday night by a wide margin. The Big 12 needs Houston more than Houston needs the Big 12. Frankly, Houston shouldn't have to compete with anyone for Big 12 expansion. They should have been invited to join long ago.
Why should UH of been invited long ago? At the time of the demise of the SWC, UH had dismal fan support, inadequate facilities, and terrible on-the-field results. They were left behind and rightfully so. UH is only generating good ratings now because they have a good team. Where were the fans from 1995 through 2014?
I meant 2011 when Texas Christian and West Virginia were invited to join the conference -- one small private school and one school in a different time zone from the rest with no natural rivals in the Big 12. (Do you have any idea how hard it is to get to Morgantown from Lubbock, Texas, or Ames, Iowa, or Manhattan, Kansas?) At that time, UH was well on the way back from its down period in the 1990s and early 2000s. However, Baylor should never have gone to the Big 12 over UH when the SWC broke up. That was strictly a political move. Texas Gov. Ann Richards, a Baylor alum, insisted that Baylor go to the new conference over UH or she would take action changing the Permanent University Fund (PUF), an oil royalty fund that greatly benefits two schools only -- the University of Texas and Texas A&M University. Richards' bluff worked, and Baylor went along for the ride to the Big 12 instead of Houston, the state's third-largest university after UT and Texas A&M, located in the fourth-largest city in the U.S. and the eighth-largest TV market. It didn't make sense at the time, and leaving out Houston this time would be even worse.
If by some miracle any of the schools in the Acc left and went to the Big 12, forget Miami because it's a private school. If you look at the Power 3 conferences, there are only 4 private schools, total. And if the B1g and the Sec were able to, they would probably dump Northwestern and Vanderbilt. Large state schools are the way to go. I am surprised that the Acc was able to get such a good contract with Espn, as they have 6 private schools in BC, Miami, Wake Forest, Notre Dame, Syracuse, and Duke. And Syracuse is the only one that has a student enrollment greater than 11k.
Power 3 Conferences? You're an idiot.
The B1G actually values academic status, hence why a lot of schools were left off their expansion list years ago due to subpar academics. Vanderbilt is far and away the best academic institution in the SEC, and they need that bad bad. Miami, ND, Cuse, and Duke are all huge brands that draw ratings nationwide regardless of enrollment size.
Shep, if academic status were important in conference expansion, Rice and Tulane would be in the Big 12. Frankly, performance in the classroom isn't a consideration. Performance on the field is the main criterion. TV market size probably comes next. Why does the SEC need Vanderbilt? Do the Florida, Georgia and Alabama alumni boast about the conference's SAT scores? That's ridiculous, of course. The conferences are about athletics, and football is 90 percent of that. Duke is a basketball school, period. Kansas is a basketball school, period. They are in their respective conferences because they were grandfathered in when conferences meant less than they do now. No one wants to watch Duke football. And I would take issue that Syracuse is a national brand. It's a regional brand on the East Coast. Syracuse hasn't been a national football power since Ernie Davis, Floyd Little and Larry Csonka played there in the 1960s.
Don, once again, you have no idea what you're talking about. All you're looking at is performance on the football field, but conferences are much more than that. Here's an article from when Rutger's decided to make the move, highlighting what the benefits of joining the B1G are: http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/index.ssf/2012/11/joining_big_ten_could_also_bri.html
Here's another one:
"In 2014–2015, members generated more than $10 billion in research expenditures." http://www.btaa.org/docs/default-source/research-data/at-a-glance-2015.pdf?sfvrsn=10
This matters and it is why the B1G went after Maryland and Rutgers, they fit the profile of expanding the footprint but still being in the region and creating natural rivals for PSU, brought in substantial TV markets, and importantly are both members of the AAU. All members that joined the B1G were a part of this, although Nebraska has since lost their membership and I would assume are fighting to get it back due to the perks it brings. There are big bucks outside of the football field, too.
Shep, we're going to have to agree to disagree. Maryland and Rutgers are the largest public universities in their respective states. They are both in large TV market areas -- Baltimore-Washington and the greater New York City area. That is considerably different than Duke or Syracuse. While their high academic rating may have helped them slightly in their effort to gain membership to the Big Ten, that was not the main reason Maryland and Rutgers were admitted. If it were, the Big Ten would have invited Harvard and Princeton. While the Big Ten has a research alliance component among member schools, they are unique in that regard among major collegiate athletic conferences. BTW, the University of Houston is a Carnegie-rated Tier 1 research university, so adding this component when evaluating a school's credentials for membership in a P5 conference would actually help UH, not hurt it.
Although I personally oppose institutionalize discrimination, I have drawn upon the conclusion that does not represent a problem on the BYU campus and should probably not be held against them in their quest for membership.
The Big-12 needs to do something, not having a championship game is hurting them, plus this year (as of right now) will be very hard to get into the CFP system. I can't see any of those ACC leaving to join the Big-12, I think those teams are happy where they are. I can see Cincinnati & Houston getting in, right now Houston is a huge catch but Cincinnati is hit or miss. Also the SEC & Pac-12 have their eyes on a couple of teams from the Big-12 so they may want to act fast. I think the BIG gained a lot when they got Nebraska & the Pac-12 broke even when they got Colorado. Big-12 is looking for two power house teams but there are none out there, well, none will be coming from SEC, BIG, Pac-12 at least.