Pitt to B12, UConn, SU, RU to ACC all mentioned. Plausible scenarios.
http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1258695
http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1258695
Pitt to B12, UConn, SU, RU to ACC all mentioned. Plausible scenarios.
http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1258695
Why would Pitt go to the Big 12? There is a good argument to be made that the The Big East is currently a more stable and potentially more lucrative conference going forward than the Big 12 at this point. And Pitt would be a huge outsider in that league. Just doesn't make sense at all.
All of these rumors of Big 12 expansion are being started by the Big 12 and Texas. I really do no see any situation in which a team leaves a BCS league to go to the Big 12. Everyone knows that the Big 12 will not exist in 8 years and no one wants to put up with Texas and all that comes with that. If the Big 12 wants to expand, it is going to be either a former SWC school (SMU/Houston/Rice) or BYU. I just don't see why anyone would leave a current BCS conference in order to go to that mess.
The bigger question is what the SEC is going to do. What they decide to do now is what will determine how big this 'bang' is here.
Pitt is not going to the Big XII. They would have to be idiots. Ask yourself this -- if the Big XII invited us today, would we take it? No way we would. And Pitt being a few hundred miles west doesn't change the analysis at all.
Pitt to B12, UConn, SU, RU to ACC all mentioned. Plausible scenarios.
http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1258695
A NOT insignificant fact in your Pac 12 analysis (YOH ... they are 3 hours behind the EST and a big Demographic). Living out there, you never can get away from how that affects you. The Boxscores NEVER get in the paper in baseball & a lot gets missed. So ... I beg to differ. I don't know what we are seeing with the hierarchy. There is no doubt, in my mind, that the SEC, Pac12 & B10 are the top tier. But, I'd argue that the BIG EAST has the most room to grow. Could our urban flavor & big demos push us far beyond the aCC?
The Boxscores NEVER get in the paper in baseball & a lot gets missed. ?
Not necessarily the boxscores, more that they lose viewers. The East Coast is either asleep, watching the news, or going to sleep when their games are on TV. Weekday games originating on the west coast do not command high ratings, and thus aren't as valuable to advertisers.A NOT insignificant fact in your Pac 12 analysis (YOH ... they are 3 hours behind the EST and a big Demographic). Living out there, you never can get away from how that affects you. The Boxscores NEVER get in the paper in baseball & a lot gets missed. So ... I beg to differ. I don't know what we are seeing with the hierarchy. There is no doubt, in my mind, that the SEC, Pac12 & B10 are the top tier. But, I'd argue that the BIG EAST has the most room to grow. Could our urban flavor & big demos push us far beyond the aCC?
excuse me.
It is the EYEBALLS on TV sets that matter. That should be understood.
The SEC, I would argue, is highly flexible. They are the behemoth. I guarantee there are opt-outs early in that contract, and the SEC can/will eventually throw its weight at ESPN and CBS and tell them what the score is. They are not going to stand by as other conferences eat their lunch. ESPN and CBS are petrified of ever losing the SEC. They will do practically everything to please them.
So despite a 10 year deal, you believe the SEC can unilaterally change any of the terms or terminate the contract any time they want?
Thank you! Like countries often try to fight the last war (think France and the Maginot line) columnists are trying to analyze the current climate according to last round of realignment. With a new contract pending the Big East is a much more stable conference. The Big 12 or the ACC taking teams is wishful thinking on their part. I think the Big East may be well positioned to pick up a few pieces.Chip Brown's sources are a combination of the Texas Athletic Department and his own imagination.
As of right now, the hierarchy of conferences in expansion is:
1) Pac 12 - great contract that is flexible, great demographics in target markets
2) Big 10 - great contract that is flexible, poor demographics
3) SEC - great contract that is not flexible, ok demographics (high growth but poor)
4) Big East - blank slate of a contract that will probably be very strong, ok demographics (low growth but high density and wealthy)
5) ACC - lousy contract that is not flexible, ok demographics (overlap with SEC is problem)
6) Big 12 - OK contract, membership chaos, weak markets in the north of conference
The ACC is not adding Big East teams because it can't. The ACC is a victim in this, not an aggressor.
Thank you. Like countries often try to fight the last war (think France and the Maginot line) columnist try to analyze the current climate according to last round of realignment. With a new contract paending the Big East is a much more stable conference. The Big 12 or the ACC taking teams is wishful thinking on their part. I think the Big East may be well positioned to pick up a few pieces.
Pitt to B12, UConn, SU, RU to ACC all mentioned. Plausible scenarios.
http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1258695
Didn't you once say that any contract was open for renegotiation?
I concur. Herbst is an incredibly beautiful and intelligent woman.you won the internets today with your avatar
Every contract is a starting point. But sometimes that starting point is pretty set in stone. As desperately as the Big East needed to make something happen a year ago, they didn't get it done. ESPN didn't have to budge, so they didn't.