Here we go again. Conference expansion

ScionOfSouthland said:
Dont poke too much fun, we are one poaching exercise away from being just like them!
Click to expand...

I'm not poking any fun. Unless you mean at all the message board warriors that think "hurr durr expansion or die" at any scenario that doesn't include Notre Dame.
 
GT flunkout said:
Describe to me any way that adding Kansas doesn't dilute the Big Ten or any other conference. You can't. Same with the rest of the Big East....oh I meant Big 12.
Click to expand...
I was thinking this too, but then again Big Ten did add freaking Rutgers and Maryland. I suppose those expand the conference into areas with a lot more cable subscriptions compared to Kansas, but still...
 
cyptomcat said:
I was thinking this too, but then again Big Ten did add freaking Rutgers and Maryland. I suppose those expand the conference into areas with a lot more cable subscriptions compared to Kansas, but still...
Click to expand...

That was all about a misguided attempt to expand the footprint. To get into mass population centers like DC and NYC. Kansas is wheat fields. Kansas City is a garbage market on its own. There is no comparison. In hindsight taking Nebraska was *almost* as foolhardy as Rutgers/Maryland.

The ACC did the same thing with Pitt and Syracuse. Completely misguided but the logic of footprint expansion was sound at the time. There are no Texases or Oklahomas left except Notre Dame. That's the only thing that will bring schools like Kansas and West Virginia into the conversation.
 
cyptomcat said:
I was thinking this too, but then again Big Ten did add freaking Rutgers and Maryland. I suppose those expand the conference into areas with a lot more cable subscriptions compared to Kansas, but still...
Click to expand...

someone’s got to be there to lose the games to Ohio State Michigan Penn State etc.… Everyone can’t be at the top, and some of the fans bases wanting change are going to realize they miss ruling their little part of the world
 
savbandjacket said:
We shouldn’t throw things from a glass house that includes Duke, Wake and BC.
Click to expand...
And Syracuse, Pitt… and I don’t put it past us to go nuts because the BIG added Kansas and therefore scoop up UConn or something dumb like that.
 
clapper said:
Kansas looks more like a basketball add, not football.
Click to expand...

Ain't nobody adding schools in 2021 because of hoops. Imagine adding Kansas to your conference because another conference took Texas and Oklahoma. It's pretty silly, unless you're rounding out as a result of adding Notre Dame.
 
savbandjacket said:
This. In a thread where people have seriously suggested adding Army, Navy, Cincinnati, Etc to the conference.
Click to expand...

While I haven't suggested any of those 3, Army & Navy have higher profile and more storied football programs than Kansas along with a larger fan base.
 
aeromech said:
While I haven't suggested any of those 3, Army & Navy have higher profile and more storied football programs than Kansas along with a larger fan base.
Click to expand...
And smaller players who have no business in a power conference
 
aeromech said:
While I haven't suggested any of those 3, Army & Navy have higher profile and more storied football programs than Kansas along with a larger fan base.
Click to expand...
And all would be horrible product additions to a conference with already mediocre on field play.
 
GT flunkout said:
That was all about a misguided attempt to expand the footprint. To get into mass population centers like DC and NYC. Kansas is wheat fields. Kansas City is a garbage market on its own. There is no comparison. In hindsight taking Nebraska was *almost* as foolhardy as Rutgers/Maryland.

The ACC did the same thing with Pitt and Syracuse. Completely misguided but the logic of footprint expansion was sound at the time. There are no Texases or Oklahomas left except Notre Dame. That's the only thing that will bring schools like Kansas and West Virginia into the conversation.
Click to expand...
Didn't the ACC need to expand so they could have a championship game? Or is my memory bad or for that matter gone?
 
79tech said:
Didn't the ACC need to expand so they could have a championship game? Or is my memory bad or for that matter gone?
Click to expand...

We already had a championship game before the Pitt and Syracuse expansion. In the previous expansion at least we got VPI and Miami and Matt Ryan era BC.
 
GT flunkout said:
We already had a championship game before the Pitt and Syracuse expansion. In the previous expansion at least we got VPI and Miami and Matt Ryan era BC.
Click to expand...

The old rule was 12 for a championship game. That is why the SEC added SC and Ark. We got to 12 with Miami, BC, and VT. Then we added Pitt and Cuse for reasons.

Then we stupidly voted to change the rule so the Big12 wouldn’t die after losing Mizzou, TAM, Neb, and Col. Changing that rule let the Big12 go a decade more without collapsing.
 
JJacket said:
Army and Navy, but maybe Kansas too.
Click to expand...

In a round robin tournament between Army, Cincinnati, Kansas & Navy; I would bet Kansas comes out on bottom of that and Army vs Navy gets more viewers than all the games Kansas plays combined. Excitement for all!
 
WracerX said:
The old rule was 12 for a championship game. That is why the SEC added SC and Ark. We got to 12 with Miami, BC, and VT. Then we added Pitt and Cuse for reasons.

Then we stupidly voted to change the rule so the Big12 wouldn’t die after losing Mizzou, TAM, Neb, and Col. Changing that rule let the Big12 go a decade more without collapsing.
Click to expand...

True. The Big 12 was always a Dead Man Walking. No meaningful media markets outside of Texas meant it was basically the same or worse than the old Southwest Conference. They should have been forced to expand to get to their championship game, and could have done so without any dilution at all with some combo of BYU and Colorado St/Boise St/Houston, but their massive imbalance towards Texas wouldn't let them.
 
aeromech said:
While I haven't suggested any of those 3, Army & Navy have higher profile and more storied football programs than Kansas along with a larger fan base.
Click to expand...

More history? Sure. If you go back 50 years. "But Navy went 7-5 against a öööö schedule and played in the "öööö on my face Bowl" 5 of the past 7 year!!!". Who cares?

But larger fanbase? Not a chance. A lot of people assume that anyone who served in the Navy is a Navy football fan. The fact is the only people in the Navy who care about Navy football are the 1,000 new Ensigns who graduate from there each year (and half of them aren't even football fans and/or resent the football team for their bullshit admission standards). Officers from ROTC don't give a öööö about Navy football. The enlisted don't give a öööö about Navy football. "I know I grew up in rural Texas as a lifelong TAMU fan, but now that the Navy is paying me $30k a year to chip paint and swab the deck on this ship I've change my allegiances to Navy! #Midshipmen4Lyfe" Nah.

The Army-Navy game which is the only game on that weekend usually draws between 3 and 4 million viewers each year to watch high school football out of nothing other than patriotism. The same number of people watched GT play ND.

Kansas has sucked for a decade, but if they ever fielded a competitive team again they would sell out like they did in 2008. They have 20,000 undergrads and are the marquee college in the state. They have a rabid basketball fanbase that would gladly hop on the bandwagon if the team didn't completely suck.

All of these suck and I don't want any of them. Army and Navy shouldn't even be mentioned at all in these discussions except as a joke.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top