NCAA conferences

[papsrus]

The Big 12 is about to go the way of the dodo bird, and we're headed for a few (three, basically) mega-conferences.

Is that a good thing? Or a bad thing?

Will it help usher in a playoff system in college football? (a good thing).

Where will Notre Dame end up in this reshuffling?

(On a related note, I can't say I'm too broken up about the USC sanctions about to come down. Hope Lane Kiffin is enjoying himself now.)

EDIT: I tried include a poll with this but it didn't seem to take. Oh well.

Edited June 10, 2010 by papsrus

[alocispepraluger102]

traditional and long lasting rivalries are the foundation of college sports.

what good are longstanding traditions when there is big tv money to be made?

The Big 12 is about to go the way of the dodo bird, and we're headed for a few (three, basically) mega-conferences.

Is that a good thing? Or a bad thing?

Will it help usher in a playoff system in college football? (a good thing).

Where will Notre Dame end up in this reshuffling?

(On a related note, I can't say I'm too broken up about the USC sanctions about to come down. Hope Lane Kiffin is enjoying himself now.)

EDIT: I tried include a poll with this but it didn't seem to take. Oh well.

[Aggie87]

Colorado officially announced they're moving to the Pac 10 (or whatever it will be called next). That means Nebraska has to have pretty much committed to the Big 10.

That means TX, A&M, Tech are likely to follow to the Pac 10 for sure now. Unless A&M somehow ends up in the SEC, which they've looked at before. The TX/A&M rivalry needs to continue though, so my money's on them following alongside TX.

I liked the Big 12 after getting used to it. If they had just renegotiated the tv revenue, none of this may have ever happened.

Edited June 10, 2010 by Aggie87

[Quincy]

Just think how even trickier all this would be if you had to pay the talent on the field social security wages (rather than under the table cars, whores, & money)?

I hope before I croak some college players use the social networking and assorted internet tools to come together and go on strike, preferably before the bowl season. :rsmile:

Rah rah.

[Matthew]

Texas A & M seem to be between a rock and a hard place. I can see why they're balking at coming to the PAC 10 Conference, just doesn't seem to be a good fit. The stupidity of what's going on in college football is a joke, why Texas and Oklahoma schools are being yoked to the West Cost is beyond me, the only interest here is money. This has completely killed any interest in had in college sports -- at least with pro sports, no one pretends it's about anything but the money.

[papsrus]

Texas A & M seem to be between a rock and a hard place. I can see why they're balking at coming to the PAC 10 Conference, just doesn't seem to be a good fit. The stupidity of what's going on in college football is a joke, why Texas and Oklahoma schools are being yoked to the West Cost is beyond me, the only interest here is money. This has completely killed any interest in had in college sports -- at least with pro sports, no one pretends it's about anything but the money.

It's just so odd how this is all shaking out so quickly. You just know there were behind-the-scenes talks going on probably for a year or more before the dominoes started to fall.

The moves by Colorado and Nebraska actually make some sense from a geographic standpoint. But the Texas and Oklahoma schools to the Pac 10 makes no sense at all (other than the money they'll get, I suppose).

The travel costs alone are going to be tricky for the non-revenue sports, not to mention a headache for the student athletes, and the fans.

The rest of the Big 12 schools are likely to follow whatever Texas does, so here's hoping they do the right thing and work to salvage the Big 12, a great conference.

If all this does fall apart for the Big 12 though, I can't imagine the SEC won't go after Miami and FSU -- maybe Clemson and Va Tech. So then you end up with basically three super conferences, and then a playoff system might get a lot easier to configure.

[Dave Garrett]

Screw the Pac-10 South. Bring back the Southwest Conference.

[Dan Gould]

If all this does fall apart for the Big 12 though, I can't imagine the SEC won't go after Miami and FSU -- maybe Clemson and Va Tech. So then you end up with basically three super conferences, and then a playoff system might get a lot easier to configure.

WTF? Miami and FSU are in the ACC and I haven't heard anything about the ACC getting raided by other conferences. And I'm totally clueless why you think that three super conferences have anything to do with how a playoff system would be configured.

I am almost as clueless about why the Big 12 is getting split apart. What was the problem that the biggest schools wanted to be wooed into joining some other conference, other than the appeal of scheduling games against USC or Ohio State or Michigan? The Big East was Miami, sometimes BC and Syracuse and it made sense to go join the bigger schools. Same when FSU joined up. Was the Big 12 getting squat for its TV rights?

This whole situation merits a big WTF?

[papsrus]

If all this does fall apart for the Big 12 though, I can't imagine the SEC won't go after Miami and FSU -- maybe Clemson and Va Tech. So then you end up with basically three super conferences, and then a playoff system might get a lot easier to configure.

WTF? Miami and FSU are in the ACC and I haven't heard anything about the ACC getting raided by other conferences. And I'm totally clueless why you think that three super conferences have anything to do with how a playoff system would be configured.

I am almost as clueless about why the Big 12 is getting split apart. What was the problem that the biggest schools wanted to be wooed into joining some other conference, other than the appeal of scheduling games against USC or Ohio State or Michigan? The Big East was Miami, sometimes BC and Syracuse and it made sense to go join the bigger schools. Same when FSU joined up. Was the Big 12 getting squat for its TV rights?

This whole situation merits a big WTF?

Just speculating on the SEC. There have been some murmurings about the SEC talking to Texas A&M. Point being, they're watching what's going on and it's not beyond the realm that they (A) have been talking to schools outside their conference and (B) would look to recruit some "natural" fits. It would be a wet dream for the SEC to have FSU, Miami and Florida under one umbrella.

Given that the whole Big 12 thing broke rather quickly, I just think somebody might want to snoop around the SEC a bit to see if there are any back-channel deals percolating.

But, I agree. Breaking up the Big 12 is crazy. It all comes down to the way TV revenue is distributed among the schools, and apparently for at least Nebraska and Colorado, they could get better deals elsewhere. Plus it made at least some sense geographically. I believe Texas and Oklahoma get the largest slice of the TV revenue pie in the Big 12 and weren't willing to give that up, just recalling something I read.

[papsrus]

As far as getting a playoff system set up, well ... wishful thinking on my part. But certainly you could take the conference champions from the three supers and seed them against the conference champions from, say, the ACC, Big East and Mountain West. Add in a couple of at-large teams and there you go: an eight-team playoff scheme.

If the fat cats who run the NCAA and conferences can bust up one of the major conferences in a week and half, they can certainly cobble together a playoff system. The only thing standing in the way is ... money.

[Dan Gould]

I am fairly confident that no one is dismembering the ACC (hey, that word fits in two different ways!). And I am real confident that no one thinks the Mountain West deserves a dedicated spot in a playoff system. Any playoff system will end up depending on some BCS formula for the top 8 or top 16 teams.

[papsrus]

I am fairly confident that no one is dismembering the ACC (hey, that word fits in two different ways!). And I am real confident that no one thinks the Mountain West deserves a dedicated spot in a playoff system. Any playoff system will end up depending on some BCS formula for the top 8 or top 16 teams.

Remember, Boise State -- everyone's darling -- will now be part of the Mountain West. And they could conceivably sweep up a few more wayward former Big 12 schools, should the defections to the Pac 10 continue this week.

[papsrus]

As for the SEC raiding the ACC: The SEC might stay pat. What do they have to gain besides sharing their TV revenue with two or four more schools?

But ... Miami and FSU are football powers in a basketball power conference. The two schools are certainly regionally aligned with the SEC. You know Dan the interest in the state of Florida would be sky high for regular conference games among the three Florida schools. And when you add the $$$ factor, if the SEC were interested, they could almost certainly dangle more dough than the ACC.

But, just speculation. If the Big 12, Pac 10, Big Ten and other conferences are raiding each other, it's not unreasonable to think the SEC has talked about adding schools. In fact, they have, apparently, regarding Texas A&M.

[Aggie87]

But, just speculation. If the Big 12, Pac 10, Big Ten and other conferences are raiding each other, it's not unreasonable to think the SEC has talked about adding schools. In fact, they have, apparently, regarding Texas A&M.

It's not just talk - the SEC Commissioner was in College Station wooing the Aggies yesterday.

All the reports I've read have the Aggies torn (very torn - supposedly there's a razor thin margin of votes leaning one way or the other within the A&M Board of Regents) between moving to the PAC 10 and the SEC.

The PAC 10 Commissioner has also been in College Station this weekend - in addition to hitting the other "desirable" Big 12 South schools (Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Okie State).

I'm sort of torn myself - there's alot of history and tradition between A&M and Texas - hell, even our fight song is essentially about our hate for the Longhorns), and would like to see that maintained on into the future, with conference implications (read - we should move with UT to the PAC 10). On the other hand, we've always been in Texas' shadow, save for a brief period in the 80's and 90's where we really dominated them in football. Moving on to the SEC would allow us to chart our own course, out of their shadow. It would be a tougher challenge, football-wise, moving to the SEC, but I think it may be the better choice.

This *IS* all about football, not the other sports. That's why Kansas, despite being a powerhouse basketball program, isn't being pursued by either the PAC 10 or the SEC, but probably the Mountain West.

[Matthew]

But, just speculation. If the Big 12, Pac 10, Big Ten and other conferences are raiding each other, it's not unreasonable to think the SEC has talked about adding schools. In fact, they have, apparently, regarding Texas A&M.

It's not just talk - the SEC Commissioner was in College Station wooing the Aggies yesterday.

All the reports I've read have the Aggies torn (very torn - supposedly there's a razor thin margin of votes leaning one way or the other within the A&M Board of Regents) between moving to the PAC 10 and the SEC.

The PAC 10 Commissioner has also been in College Station this weekend - in addition to hitting the other "desirable" Big 12 South schools (Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Okie State).

I'm sort of torn myself - there's alot of history and tradition between A&M and Texas - hell, even our fight song is essentially about our hate for the Longhorns), and would like to see that maintained on into the future, with conference implications (read - we should move with UT to the PAC 10). On the other hand, we've always been in Texas' shadow, save for a brief period in the 80's and 90's where we really dominated them in football. Moving on to the SEC would allow us to chart our own course, out of their shadow. It would be a tougher challenge, football-wise, moving to the SEC, but I think it may be the better choice.

This *IS* all about football, not the other sports. That's why Kansas, despite being a powerhouse basketball program, isn't being pursued by either the PAC 10 or the SEC, but probably the Mountain West.

Texas A & M to the SEC makes a whole lot of sense to me. I'm not dumping on the states of Texas or Oklahoma, but geesh, I've lived in Cali all my life, I could care less about Texas sports, in fact, I still think of the Arizona schools as "the new comers" to the PAC 8. Someone on ESPN was going on and on about how Austin is more culturally West Coast -- hey, it's in Texas, that's all we know out here. I'm all for the West Coast staying West Coast, but $$$$$$ rules college sports now (as if it didn't before)....

[Dave James]

What's really perverted about all this is that not a single dollar of the truckloads of additional television revenue will go towards improving the academics at these so-called institutions of higher learning. What a wonderful set of priorities.

[Dan Gould]

What's really perverted about all this is that not a single dollar of the truckloads of additional television revenue will go towards improving the academics at these so-called institutions of higher learning. What a wonderful set of priorities.

And what convinces you of this? Major college football is a huge money-maker for universities. Even if the money raised supports non-revenue enhancing sports, is that so bad? That right there is more money for the academic mission if track and field or gymnastics isn't asking for it.

I'd agree with you that it sucks if you said that all this revenue is made off of students who don't receive any compensation aside from room and board and free tuition and are restricted in the jobs they can take and the money they can be paid outside of football. But are their investors in major universities who take out the profits from football TV rights money? The money goes into the university coffers - made off of the broken legs and ruptured knees of the athletes.

[Dave James]

What's really perverted about all this is that not a single dollar of the truckloads of additional television revenue will go towards improving the academics at these so-called institutions of higher learning. What a wonderful set of priorities.

And what convinces you of this? Major college football is a huge money-maker for universities. Even if the money raised supports non-revenue enhancing sports, is that so bad? That right there is more money for the academic mission if track and field or gymnastics isn't asking for it.

Check out. If this seems right to you, fine. It doesn't to me.

http://www.statesman.com/news/texas/does-big-time-college-football-deserve-its-big-149737.html

[Dan Gould]

Sorry that article says precious little as far as I am concerned. What exactly is the point? That they get an unfair tax advantage? Unfair to whom, anyway? Its debatable in the first place, and its really immaterial to the issue you raised anyway. And the article confirms what I said - that big-time athletic programs support non-revenue earning sports, as well as the school in general. And it points out another way it does that which I didn't mention: That army of tutors are most if not all from the College of Education. Future teachers getting experience tutoring idiot athletes. And future teachers who don't have to rely on the Education department for financial support, they get employed by the athletic department. Meaning more money for other elements of the school's educational mission.

[Dave James]

The University of Texas athletic department takes in approximately $200 million in revenue each year. Over the last several years (the article does not specify how many years "several" entails) the athletic department has contributed $6.6 million to the University. They pay their football coach $5.7 million a year. Silly me. How could I ever have thought that was wrong?

[Dan Gould]

Ever hear the phrase you have to spend money to make money? Or did I miss something and the football program has net profits of 200 million? And for better or worse, when money like that is at stake, it takes serious money to retain or hire topnotch talent - just like when Jim Carrey makes 20 million a picture. And don't fool yourself, University President ain't a bad gig either. I'll bet the UT President is making at least half what the head coach does, but no one questions that. :rolleyes:

[Dave James]

Mack Brown The University of Texas at Austin Head Coach $5,100,000

Richard D Barnes The University of Texas at Austin Head Coach $2,150,000

Michael F Sherman Texas A&M University COACH $1,700,000

Thomas Tuberville Texas Tech University Head Coach $1,500,000

Gail A Goestenkors The University of Texas at Austin Head Coach $1,040,000

Scott B Ransom University of North Texas Health Science Center President $904,562

William L Muschamp The University of Texas at Austin Asst Coach $900,000

August E Garrido The University of Texas at Austin Head Coach $850,000

Francisco G Cigarroa University of Texas System Chancellor $750,000

Clarence W Byrne Texas A&M University Athletic Director $690,000

Martin S Weiss University of North Texas Health Science Center Assistant Professor $675,000

Darrell D Dodds The University of Texas at Austin Athletics Director $627,109

William C Powers The University of Texas at Austin President $600,600

Kenneth I Shine University of Texas System Exec Vc For Health Affr $600,000

Lee F Jackson University of North Texas System Chancellor $581,028

David Michael Lichtman University of North Texas Health Science Center Professor $560,004

Russell A Wagner University of North Texas Health Science Center Associate Professor $550,008

Mckinney Michael D Texas A&M System Chancellor $533,816

Thomas W Gilligan The University of Texas at Austin Dean $525,000

Charles Anthony De Berardinis University of North Texas Health Science Center Associate Professor $500,004

Mark L Turgeon Texas A&M University COACH $500,000

John A Griswold Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center Department Chairperson $493,000

Scott W Dahlbeck Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center Physician $485,000

Thomas Harris State of Texas Chief Investment Officer $480,000

John C Baldwin Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center Professor $450,000

[Matthew]

Who is Gail A Goestenkors and why the heck is she making $1,040,000?

[Dave Garrett]

Head coach of women's basketball. She held the same position at Duke before coming to UT.

[Quincy]

Sorry that article says precious little as far as I am concerned. What exactly is the point? That they get an unfair tax advantage? Unfair to whom, anyway?

How about everyone else in the state who has to deal with declining & underfunded services? The U is engaged in business beyond "the mission" and should be taxed accordingly.