The Big 12 expansion groundswell

[Uncle Ted]

Embedded Tweet

For DH...

Big 12 commish Bob Bowlsby says if he was a selection member he would have voted for TCU for 4th spot, not Baylor.

I am sure that comment will make Baylor feel better.

[USUC]

I saw that and wondered why that would be. Just buddies backing each other?

I am pretty pessimistic we get ultimately included but not down on BYU football in general. Our weirdness uniqueness makes us a longshot for an invite to the Big 12 but also makes us one of the few that could actually dream of Independence working out. There are a lot of issues with it and it may ultimately fail but I think it offers the possibility of staying relevant, even if it is slim.

If the Big-12 expands and BYU isn't included, there will be an epic meltdown among the fan base. But I don't necessarily expect it to mean the demise of BYU football is inevitable. BYU as an independent will be a lot of work, but it's viable. Sure BYU won't have access to the playoff and NY6 games, but its not like that would be common if BYU joined the Big-12. Once BYU is left out, I think people will come to terms with it and move forward. BYU can then work on positioning. Maybe a scheduling agreement with a P5 conference and to be included in the G5 auto bid if they are ranked the highest of the G5.

[USUC]

Embedded Tweet

For DH...


I am sure that comment will make Baylor feel better.

WTH? Way to be diplomatic Bowlsby. Why even bring it up? If it was a reporter's question don't answer it. He is probably a dead man walking as commissioner.

[Omaha 680]

Embedded Tweet

For DH...


I am sure that comment will make Baylor feel better.

This guy is sounding as bad as Beebe. Just shut your mouth, man.

[Surfah]

So, the B12 has the ACC on their side for the CCG waiver.. will that be enough to sway others?

No. Bowlsby is hitching his wagon to Swofford on this but their waiver applications are different.

The ACC is pushing for deregulation to allow the conference to determine who plays in the CCG. Right now the NCAA mandates that the CCG is between the divisional winners. The ACC wants to be able to pit their two best teams in the conference regardless of division in the CCG. The ACC views the CCG as a potential play in game to give their best two teams an SOS boost and a big win at the end of the year. So for example, with this waiver last year they could have put FSU and Clemson in the CCG instead of FSU and Duke.

The Big 12 is calling their waiver deregulation too, but they obviously want the CCG deregulated completely to allow them to stay at 10 teams and have a CCG.

Again, I cannot see anyway in which the NCAA allows the Big 12's waiver to be accepted. The other conferences wouldn't allow it. Remember, the ACC applied for a waiver before the 2004 season to hold a CCG with just 11 members and was denied by the NCAA. It wasn't until BC joined the following year they were allowed to hold a CCG. I don't think they'd reverse course when they have already set a precedent. I can see the ACC possibly being granted their waiver.

[Uncle Ted]

This guy is sounding as bad as Beebe. Just shut your mouth, man.

He already had his own parody twitter account... @OneTrueBowlsby

Embedded Tweet

[smokymountainrain]

No. Bowlsby is hitching his wagon to Swofford on this but their waiver applications are different.

The ACC is pushing for deregulation to allow the conference to determine who plays in the CCG. Right now the NCAA mandates that the CCG is between the divisional winners. The ACC wants to be able to pit their two best teams in the conference regardless of division in the CCG. The ACC views the CCG as a potential play in game to give their best two teams an SOS boost and a big win at the end of the year. So for example, with this waiver last year they could have put FSU and Clemson in the CCG instead of FSU and Duke.

As it should be. Every conference should do this. Good for the ACC.

[Hot Lunch]

No. Bowlsby is hitching his wagon to Swofford on this but their waiver applications are different.

The ACC is pushing for deregulation to allow the conference to determine who plays in the CCG. Right now the NCAA mandates that the CCG is between the divisional winners. The ACC wants to be able to pit their two best teams in the conference regardless of division in the CCG. The ACC views the CCG as a potential play in game to give their best two teams an SOS boost and a big win at the end of the year. So for example, with this waiver last year they could have put FSU and Clemson in the CCG instead of FSU and Duke.

The Big 12 is calling their waiver deregulation too, but they obviously want the CCG deregulated completely to allow them to stay at 10 teams and have a CCG.

Again, I cannot see anyway in which the NCAA allows the Big 12's waiver to be accepted. The other conferences wouldn't allow it. Remember, the ACC applied for a waiver before the 2004 season to hold a CCG with just 11 members and was denied by the NCAA. It wasn't until BC joined the following year they were allowed to hold a CCG. I don't think they'd reverse course when they have already set a precedent. I can see the ACC possibly being granted their waiver.

Except for the fact that the NCAA has become the P5's bitch and is scared that the P5 conferences will completely dump them.

[Hot Lunch]

As it should be. Every conference should do this. Good for the ACC.

Totally agree with you on this one.

[Jeff Lebowski]

All-sports is also worth exploring, Greg. I hope his comment isn't coming from WCC loyalty.

Come on, man. Use the new embedded tweet feature!

Also, some knucklehead with triplets replied to Wrubell's tweet.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Not TIC. If we were coming off several T25 finishes with a head full of steam, maybe. But we're a mediocre football program and have been for the last five years. Furthermore, based on discussions I've previously had with BYU/LDS church insiders, there's a lack of institutional will to get in to the Big 12.

lol. Knock it off.

[Surfah]

As it should be. Every conference should do this. Good for the ACC.

I agree. But it's an interesting debate. I can see in some years it would be good and others bad.

[Surfah]

Except for the fact that the NCAA has become the P5's bitch and is scared that the P5 conferences will completely dump them.

So what? You think the other P5 would allow the Big 12 to increase their revenue with the addition of a CCG, still play a true round robin and only have to share that with 10 teams?

[RC Vikings]

Why doesn't the University of Houston get more play as a possible member to the Big 12.

[Paperback Writer]

With four teams, I see this happening frequently. There are only four slots and five power conferences.

I read an article a few years ago outlining how much extra money Texas earned from merchandising, etc. after winning the national championship with Vince Young. I don't remember the exact figure, but it was astronomical. I think either TCU or Baylor would have had a great shot at winning the whole thing. This was a huge missed opportunity for the league. At every step of the recent power conference reshuffling, the B12 has blundered their way and made poor decisions. I think they are well aware of that too. Will be interesting to see how they respond.

Agree, it will be interesting to see how the Big 12 responds but they have already taken several missteps, as you note, when they've needed to react. What may be different this time is that OU and Texas may think that they could be the next TCU and Baylor. Because Michigan or Ohio St. could leapfrop OU and Texas in similar fashion in the future if the Big 12 doesn't expand and play a CCG. I wonder if Texas and OU will calculate the lost revenue of merchandise sales (that you mention) of when Texas or OU win another national championship as well as being denied the opportunity to play for it.

Back when Colorado and Nebraska left the Big 12, a common retort from the conference was: "good riddance, more money for the rest of us". I thought that was very short sighted and that the Big 12 should have invited TCU and BYU at that point. But I kept hearing that those additions wouldn't bring enough revenue to make up for the larger slices of the Big 12 pie they now had in front of them. Plus, Texas and OU now figured they had one less hurdle to jump without having to play in a CCG; a hurdle that should have cost OU in 2003 with their loss to KSU and one that nearly cost Texas in 2009 with their last second (literally) FG win over Nebraska. The Big 12 thought they could have their cake and eat it too and I was glad when the playoff committee replied "No cake for you". Maybe the Big 12 finally does what they should have done back in 2011.