Pac 12, Big 10 Enter Into A Sports Alliance

Nice info, srr50.

Do you think that other conferences will jump into mutual collaboration, competition? I’m not sure if SEC would give up their cream puff OOC opponents to play say ACC or Big 12. If SEC and ACC would set up such an alliance, it would create interesting matchups. However, if Big 12 and SEC would establish a sports alliance, then it would seem we would get to play those Aggies again.

I do not think such an alliance would happen at this time since 1) WVU is not quite in the B12 yet 2) it would seem an uneven balance of teams (10 - 14) in the conferences would present scheduling problems. Of course, if we get ND and BYU to join B12, then it would bring us to 12 teams and a little more balanced.

Maybe an ACC and Big East alliance would really bring some bitter rivals/former teams together.

This might become the end of BCS and beginning of playoffs in football.

At least this will be give us something to talk about as we head into off season. Any thoughts?

UTRico; Thanks, and I doubt the SEC would do anything like this. For one they have expanded to 14 teams, and as you pointed out, they already have the national media in their pocket, so there is no need to ramp up their non-conference schedule.

Besides, there are several in-state rivalries that are played involving ACC-SEC teams.

This alliance is a “Made For TV” event, and will really help sell both of the leagues regional channels.

The alliance will very well strengthen both the B10 and the PAC.

It makes me hope the B12 adds at least two more teams, preferably 4, and consider a similar arrangement with the ACC or SEC.

If they drop the auto qualifier I hope it comes back when we finally get a playoff. Automatic qualification for conference champs opens up the OOC schedule for better games. The current silly fascination with perfection, especially when it doesn’t matter who you play only so long as you are ‘perfect’, has ruined a lot of OOC scheduling.

Seems like more of a band-aid to me than anything else, honestly. In terms of short-term focus I know it’s cool to think of Oregon - Wisconsin or USC-Ohio State - but those schools already tend to schedule a marquee game or two and this probably just tends to displace it more than anything else. The bulk of these games are instead going to be more forgettable “Indiana v. Washington State” or “Nebraska v. Arizona State” type affairs. Nice but really I don’t know if anybody is going to care too much.

tangent: Nobody ever really discusses the fate of the Big Ten, it’s sacrosanct and rock solid - but is the rust belt really a fertile new territory for Larry Scott and Co. to get in on the ground floor of? It seems like nobody in CFB ever questions the Legends and Leaders, but long term, do state schools in negative pop growth states have some viabilty issues? Just putting it out there, not like I really give a shit though I’m sure Big 10 traditionalists would light many a couch on fire if they read it.

Really great info, srr50. I agree with your analysis, even if I don’t like the implications for the Big XII.

Good article.

This seems like a strategic move to counter the SEC in its weak point: OOC scheduling.

May make a difference for BCS Bowl or MNC appearances.

The bulk of these games are instead going to be more forgettable "Indiana v. Washington State" or "Nebraska v. Arizona State" type affairs. Nice but really I don’t know if anybody is going to care too much.

The Big Ten and Pac 12 Networks care — a lot. It will make it easier to sell those channels in the 15 states covered by the 24 teams. It will make it easier to get a higher monthly subscription fee from carriers.

but long term, do state schools in negative pop growth states have some viabilty issues?

Actually, thanks to the recession a lot of the Rust Belt college towns (as well as the metro areas like Pittsburgh and Cleveland) have seen a revival of sorts. A recent report stated that Rust Belt towns such as Columbus, Madison and others experienced gains in migration of college-educated adults between 2007 and 2009. Metro areas have started to depend on health care, financial services and IT companies as a base for the economy.

The housing bust has also made it easier to stay closer to home. Median home prices never went through the roof as elsewhere, and so it wasn’t as dramatic a drop when the bust hit.

The Big Ten schools are still pumping out a lot of graduates, and they have shown a loyalty to their schools in terms of buying the Big Ten Network, no matter where they live.

Re: “The cooperative agreement is a way for the leagues to derive some of the benefits from expansion without actually having to do the heavy lifting.”

The capability of folding a football independent (or two) into this design in a mutally beneficial way is what really jumps out at me. Being guaranteed 4 games from each of the PAC and B1G annually, for example, would eliminate a lot of the complexities of scheduling a competitive slate of games and create massive exposure for an independent. The ‘right’ independent that brings eyeballs and disproportionate cash benefits the alliance. ND and Texas fit the bill and the timing of one or both joining don’t appear to have to be linked (another advantage of this smart design). Texas could preserve its Big 12 alliance in all other sports and retain the LHN.

Another example of why Beebe needed to go. Big 12 is a strong conference, but should be even stronger and should have already forged an alliance like this.

It is great for fans, TV, and the PAC. Pac needs exposure and games in the eastern time zone. This helps them. I think it hurts the Big 10. Undefeated team in the big 10 would never get left out. This will make it harder to get to the title and get 2 teams into the BCS. It is a great idea if everyone jions them. If not, it is a competitive disadvantage. While SEC is having FCS week they are playing the PAC.

srr50,

Have always enjoyed your articles. Got a question for you re: Pac-12 and China.

Got something to run by you offline - what is the best way to reach you?

codaxx - I wouldn’t get too hung up on the BCS. Watch the BCS go poof in the not distant future. It has no substance, no raw materials, and no product. It exists as a network effect that can become hollowed out faster than a ’00 dot com. As an alliance, the PAC and B1G would wield tremendous influence on the organizational landscape of college football. It could be used to lobby for a playoff. It could withdraw from the BCS all together and pit the champs from each conf in the Rose if hardball was in order.

What I think is most interesting is that this is news at all. This just means each team in the Big 10 and Pac-12 will have one interesting non-conf game. Guess what? UT already schedules one BCS AQ team every year! So does OU! Where’s the news flash on that?!

In any case, if I were a TV network exec in negotiations for college football, I would require any or all of the following for non-conference matchups:
 - No Div 1-FCS (Formerly I-AA) opponents; Anyone scheduling an FCS team should have TV money withheld!
 - All non-conference games must be home-and-home or neutral-site-only. (No more home-only rent-a-wins! You either play someone your own size or you travel to a small program’s stadium and see how the “other half” lives. The more likely result is more interesting non-conf matchups.)
 - At least half your non-conference games should be against teams from BCS-AQ conferences or Notre Dame (since they’re sort of an AQ independent.)

One more thing… I understood that UT backed out of the Minnesota series because of the Big 10 Network ownership of replay rights included in their contracts. Did the BTN have a change of heart or somehow change the rules for the Pac-12?

The frustrating thing about the alliance is it WOULD have been a PAC/Big XII alliance IF the Big XII had had a stronger commissioner than Dan Beebe. Larry Scott proposed such an alliance with the Big XII at least a couple of years ago, but then, efforts shifted to attracting half of the Big XII into the PAC.

The alliance is a win-win for both conferences, and the Big XII, if it’s gonna be viable, needs to look at something similar with either the SEC or ACC. Timing’s going to be important on this too, because of the perception that the SEC and ACC are next door neighbors, and because both conferences have relatively proactive commissioners. IF the SEC and ACC do an alliance, who would be left for the Big XII? C-USA? The Mountain West? The Southland conference?

I understand the reluctance of some here to do an alliance with the SEC, even if that conference is willing. There’s the thought that agricultural shows up on our schedule again. However, it’s up to UT whether or not to agree to a game with the cult. The idea of a home and home with one of the SEC powers every year doesn’t suck. ‘Bama a couple of years, Florida, LSU, Georgia, maybe even the swine…Contrast that with what next year’s home schedule is gonna look like.

I’m not sure I see this as the beginning of the end of the BCS or the start of a playoff, but IF the Big XII doesn’t sit idly by, I could see a mutually advantageous regional arrangement with the SEC or ACC. The alternative is for the Big XII to do nothing, which I could see forcing UT’s hand in leaving the conference. After all, after OU and OSU, there’s really not many attractive matchups IN conference, much less what wlll be left for an OOC schedule after 2017.

Obviously, the world needed more Rose Bowls and found a way to supply them.

Can we at least get an annual Washington State v. Nebraska tilt for as long as both Leach and Pellini are on the sidelines? 2017 isn’t soon enough for that. Let’s try for next season instead. You could mic them on a few second delay broadcast and get rave reviews and ample youtube clips. Come on, Scott and Delaney, work your magic and make it happen.

The comments about the SEC’s “weak” and “cream puff” OOC are delusional. Are you referring to…

LSU v Oregon or @West Virginia?
Bama @ Penn St
Florida v Florida St
Georgia v Boise St or Georgia Tech
South Carolina v Clemson
Auburn v Clemson

Over last three years, here are our frightening OOC opponents:
Rice
Wyoming
Fla Atlantic
BYU
UCLA
Louisiana-Monroe
UTEP
UCF

Oh, and here are our next three years of OOC opponents:
Wyoming
UCLA
New Mexico
New Mexico St
Ole Miss
North Texas
UCLA

I’m afraid the cream puff OOC belongs to us, not the SEC teams. Their HCs aren’t afraid to play anyone.

Coolhorn, exactly my thought when I saw the news. I see Acc/ sec as more likely than Big12 with anyone. I also think OU and OSU are going to bolt by 2013, which would degrade the big12 even more. And if that happened, where would Texas go? Would LHN have to be substantially amended for anyone to take us?

Srr50, Am I reading correctly that PAC 12 gets paid 3 billion? Over how many years? Do you know what the Big 12 get paid for its tv contract?

I think a Big 12 - ACC arrangement would be good for both conferences… giving Big 12 schools more exposure along the Atlantic seaboard, while giving ACC schools more exposure in Texas. Texas-vs-Miami, Texas-vs-FSU and Texas-vs-Virginia Tech would be great OOC games.

Orangejello:

That’s a somewhat misleading argument. When we scheduled UCLA for 2010-11, the Bruins weren’t yet the abortion of a team they turned out to be. In 2009, we were scheduled to play Arkansas, but the pigs cancelled at the last minute. Going further back, we played Arkansas in 2008, TCU in 2007, Ohio State in 2005-06, and Arkansas again in 2003-04.

Also, I think a lot of complaint about the SEC’s out of conference schedule is that almost every one of them plays (and occasionally loses to) an FCS team. Say what you will about Wyoming and Rice, they’re better than the Citadel or Furman.

If our conference schedule was Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and Tennessee——-do you really think for OOC we’d go schedule Oregon? Or West Virginia away? Or Penn St away? Or Boise St ever? Or Clemson? Notice that SEC teams actually schedule their OOC in-state rival. Do you see Deloss and Mack doing that, or the opposite of that? You can say what you want about SEC teams, but you can’t call them soft. And you can’t call their OOC scheduling cowardly.

We intentionally schedule OOC that will give us 10 win seasons, so we can go back and say “we won 10 games. awesome!” without having to produce championships. It’s hard for the fanbase to get too upset with 10 win seasons, and that’s what our entire program is built to do. 10 win seasons. Our brass our perfectly content with just that. It sells boxes, TV rights, and merch.

Re: Srr50’s take on B1G grads continuing to big the network;

I would say that’s pretty accurate. There’s just something about the Big 10 that’s Regal, excluding tOSU of course. I was only at Wisconsin for a year working on a Master’s degree, but a care a great deal more about Wisconsin football than I do Texas Tech or SMU, (undergrad and law school.) I watch them both occasionally, and keep up with their record, but I don’t schedule my Saturday around them like I do with Wisconsin and Texas football.

I’ve generally always gotten the sports package to get the B1G network, although I have currently cancelled the sports package, letting the cable operator know that I won’t be picking it back up until they carry LHN, and of course the Tennis Channel.

Good lord, I wish there was an edit button. At least you guys got to see my pre-9:00 AM word-smithing in action.

LongCat,

Since 1999, UCLA has won the following number of games:

1999 - four
2000 - six
2001 - seven
2002 - seven
2003 - six
2004 - six
2005 - ten
2006 - seven
2007 - six
2008 - four
2009 - seven
2010 - four (ouch…)
2011 - six

Which UCLA were you referring to? The one from the 1950s?

The rust belt has overall de-population. It doesn’t matter what college towns they move to the demographics favor the coasts and south and southwest, that’s not going to change anytime soon. Big 10 is dying slowly since recruiting will also slip in thy region. They will have to get more out of less while losing money. Trainwreck in short.

Darrell Royal: “My goal is to win every single game. ACC? We don’t care who we play. We’ll play anybody, anytime, anywhere. Bring it.”

Fred Akers: “My goal is to win the Cotton Bowl or the Sun Bowl. ACC? That’ll work.”

David McWilliams: “My goal is to have more winning seasons than losing seasons. ACC? Let me think about it.”

John Mackovic: “My goal is to not have a losing season. ACC? I need to crunch the numbers.”

Mack Brown: “My goal is to keep getting multi-million dollar paychecks until I reach Bowden or Paterno’s age. Of all the options, what is the easiest way to do that? Win 10 games per year. ACC? As long as it’s not Florida St or Virginia Tech I’m ok with it. But if we do that Deloss, we need to downgrade the remaining OOC so we have a better shot to get to 10. Teams that typically win three games or less like Florida Atlantic, New Mexico, New Mexico St, UTEP, Rice. That should work. Oh, wait. We already schedule those guys.”

If we want to bring championship swag back to the Horns, like we had for two fleeting years with VY, we need to schedule SEC teams or USC for OOC. This will put pressure on our coaches and players. Pressure is a good thing. You want those coaches and players having to think a year or two ahead about those games.

I’ve always liked that our baseball teams schedule the Stanfords, Cal St Fullertons, Miamis of the world OOC every single year——teams they expect to see at the end of the year in the College World Series. That takes swag. It also CREATES swag. A&M baseball rarely did that.

Mysterious,

The trainwreck you speak of would have to continue at its current rate for about the next 200 years to have an impact on recruiting. These places are not seeing the growth that the South and Southwest are, but you make it sound like the last person is about to turn out the lights in Ohio.

Besides, population growth does not directly equal better recruiting.

Even with the current demographics, schools like Michigan and Ohio State still have national appeal - more so than nearly every school in the growing regions you speak of.

I keep getting the idea that Larry Scott, and Delaney with the B1G, are thinking ahead of others, and several steps ahead of Dodds.

Our administration keeps seeing the paychecks coming in from the LHN, and the perceived prestige of having your own ESPN-backed network, and seems to be saying don’t sweat the small stuff, like what’s happening to the Big XII, or what the Longhorns’ schedule is gonna look like in a few years. There seems to be this attitude that IF something happens to the watered-down Big XII, UT can just pick up and move wherever they want. There’s also been a lot of talk, but no action, about some nebulous deal with Notre Dame.

I agree with Longhorn NY that depending on OU and OSU to hang around is like building a house on sand. Those two are gone as soon as they can find another conference home.

I’m no Chicken Little, but I do NOT want to see UT’s athletic programs marginalized into unimportance over the LHN. Like a lot of others, I was impressed with the idea of our own network and all the money it’d bring in when the deal was first done. However, I now have NO confidence that the LHN is ever gonna find it’s place with the cable providers, and it’s done a lot more harm than good, at least it seems to me, to UT’s relationships with other Big XII members. I understand that agricultural, Mizzou, Nebraska, and Colorado used the LHN for their own purposes in leaving, but it was a factor in the mass defections.

This is NOT a rant about the LHN. It IS a rant about the direction I perceive UT athletics is headed. I’m worried that the arrogance associated with having our own network is only painting UT into a competitive corner in a few short years. The B1G/PAC deal means the schools in those conferences will have one less opening for OOC scheduling, and aren’t likely to schedule a UT with any remaining openings. The same would be true with the SEC and ACC if they do a deal, leaving only, at best, the Big (L)east as a partner for the Big XII. That’s not acceptable.

It’s time for the UT athletic administration to show some forward thinking about something other than the financial bottom line, if UT is not to become a bit player in college athletics. Reputation can only take you so far, as Nebraska, among others, has found out. I’d hate to think Sam Houston State is the most attractive OOC opponent UT could schedule.

Honey Badger:

Texas and UCLA scheduled their series in October 2005, the year UCLA won ten games. UCLA was even ranked in the top then nationally when the deal was finalized. I’m sure they expected that to be a easy win at the time.

Coolhorn,

That is a very good question and I will defer to srr50, but I seem to recall one of the issues that led to the death of the SWC was the failure of the conference leadership (be it the commissioner, Hoss Brock, or the schools themselves) to look much farther than their immediate concerns and work to protect the collective good.

Texas has every right to act in the best interest of the University. Just curious if ESPN came to UT not because it was the most marketable, but to some extent the most vulnerable to maneuver.

The thing about it is this…there are those who don’t remember, or choose to remember, that about a decade and a half ago, UT football had history, but wasn’t winning much. The UT athletic program in general was no powerhouse, and DeLoss Dodds was occasionally on shaky ground over some of his coaching hires. There’s nothing to say UT couldn’t go back to those days, especially if the best the Horns can do schedule-wise is a watered-down Not-So-Big XII schedule in football and basketball.

I keep hearing about all of these options available to UT as realignment plays out, but one-by-one those options keep slipping away. The PAC is no longer interested. I’m not sure the B1G ever was. The ACC? That was smoke and mirrors. The SEC? I hate to say it but maybe agricultural and Mizzou were smart to jump and make sure they don’t get left behind when everything shakes out, damn the consequences for right now. Some sort of new UT/Notre Dame/OU/BYU superconference? Please. Ain’t happening. The Big XII…is starting to look more and more like sloppy seconds.

I know this isn’t a popular view upstairs at Belmont Hall, but UT NEEDS a stronger Big XII, or NEEDS to seriously look at moving somewhere else if that’s not possible, and NEEDS to be flexible with the LHN, at least enough not to get painted into a corner by actions like the B1G/PAC cooperative agreement, actions UT has no control over. All the reputation in the world, AND the LHN will mean diddly if the Horns lose any more of their traditional rivals and can’t find valid competition in football and basketball. The fan is being left out when the only consideration is the financial bottom line…and besides, how much more money does the UT athletic program NEED to be considered a success?

‘coolhorn’ must be an ironic name, right?

PAC and BIG 10 are smart. they know that the fanbases alone cannot match the passion (and therefore the ratings/dollars) of the south and the SEC. So, like any big company, they move forward with alliances/mergers. Smart business. Makes them more attractive to networks. Just really smart.

The devil will be in the details, but in the main, I think this is a good move.

As for the idiocy about UT non-con schedule (although, not sure how that comes up here) there are multiple views about what to do with non-cons. Personally, I thought, when the Big 12 South was so ridiculous, we did not need any heavy opponenets there. Teams like UCLA, BYU, and Arkansas (attempted) were fine. Scheduling Ohio State I thought was great, but not really necessary.

Now that the Big 12 is slightly weaker, we’ll have to see what happens with this. But we do have Notre Dame scheduled in the near future, and with fewer non-cons to worry about, I doubt there will be much more.

Bottom line is taking a definitive stance on this is pretty silly. National Champions have been crowned with GREAT non-con opponenets (This year) and not (Florida - 2006).

Florida, in 2006 played a terrible FSU (6-6), UCF, Southern Mississpi, and Eastern Carolina. And Florida won those 4 games by a combined 168 - 21. And got the same trophy at the end of the title game.

Some of you must put aside your argument that every action Doods/Mack/University takes is based on the greatest return of dollar investment. This ain’t the occupy crowd and our administration is concerned with much more than just $. Of course money plays a part in all this but being Barkers who happen to read the greatest blog in the free world (a blog written by a woman in Sudia Arabia is better), understand its a very complex issue with multiple possible outcomes.

And I’m not gonnna sit here while you bad-mouth the United States of America!

Gentleman!

coolhorn: Larry Scott is being rescued by Delany here. Scott is the guy that talked big but couldn’t bring his bosses along. As a result, he has added Colorado and Utah instead of Texas and OU (and friends).

These things can take time, whether it is the establishment of the LHN to ESPN’s liking, or an alignment with Notre Dame. If the LHN disappeared tomorrow, Texas would not be markedly worse off and would still command a ton of attention, were it to signal that it was ready to move.

One more step towards 4 super conferences and the exclusion of all others from the coming playoff system that will supercede the BCS.

The Big12 was not approached to be part of this because it is a backwater conference with a limited life expectancy.

This certainly brings more TV’s to both conferences, but bon’t underestimate Delaney’s underlying motive to strengthen his stranglehold on the current BCS (non-playoff) system by keeping the sacrosanct Rose Bowl as his personal bargaining chip in the debate. Jim Delaney is smarter than Larry Scott, who is now officially bought and paid for and, as far as I can tell to date is long on form and short on substance. Larry currently presides over the second weakest AQ conference in the nation.

The good news is that this brings the Big 12/ ND alliance closer together, no matter what the B1G or Pac 12 want or are saying.

craig, this is the best blog in the free world if you take recruitocosm into account. Frankly, I did not understand anything else you wrote. But I am still tired from staying up all night watching RGIII make the Heisman Committee proud.

“a blog written by a woman in [Saudi] Arabia is better”

Are you talking about the blog where the chick posts naked pictures of herself and calls them “political statements”?

“Ironic”? Moi Ricky? Sorry…I don’t get your drift, but then, this thread’s already all over the map.

Any chance we can get Larry Scott as next AD when Deloss retires?

Why in the world would you want to do that?

Naked pictures of chicks are good, unless they’re, like, ugly.

Yes, SEC teams will combine to play much better OOC opponents than Texas will.

Here’s Bama’s 2012 OOC and RPI rankings:
Michigan (at Arlington, TX) 11
 Western Kentucky 64
 Florida Atlantic 155
 Western Carolina 236
Avg = 116.5

Here’s LSU’s:
 North Texas 93
Washington 54
 Idaho 140
Towson 99
Ave: 96.5

Texas’s:
Wyoming 47
UNM 144
Ole Miss 119
Avg: 103

Does this replace the Big 10’s MAC weekend? A week where your conference is guaranteed zero quality wins, an embarrassing near-miss for one of your Rose Bowl favorites, and a loss or two down the ladder just to reinforce the competitive “depth” of the league?

Delany - what a genius.

Seems that everyone else in the USA has a different view of our OOC:

TITLE: “LSU in 2012 has a OU or UT type of schedule” — enjoy reading…

http://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/p/30826431/LSU-in-2012-has-a-OU-or-UT-type-of-schedule.aspx

Cool horn, well put.

Jake, whatever the rumors were of ND joining the Big 12, there is IMO zero chance of that happening now. It appears they will be piggybacking on the “best of” the new merger.

Knowing a lot of ND grads here in NY, I always thought the rumors were a little silly. Zero affinity or interest in Texas. Most will never visit the state in their lifetimes, unless you count DFW. And from what i understand, the school views “student” athletics as part of the university, not the other way around, with a heavy emphasis on the athletics being played by real students.

ND may have been pitched on the idea, and that’s how maybe the rumor got started, but if that is the case i find it hard to believe it was ever seriously considered by ND except with total bemusement. It is even possible that such a pitch may have set in motion the merger, because it sure seems like ND got a very nice deal.

I think Delaney is a putz, the PAC 12 commish put this together I am sure, dont give Delaney too much credit, he is not an out of the box kind of guy.

Re Jake : "This certainly brings more TV’s to both conferences, but bon’t underestimate Delaney’s underlying motive to strengthen his stranglehold on the current BCS (non-playoff) system by keeping the sacrosanct Rose Bowl as his personal bargaining chip in the debate. "

I had to look back to get a more clear idea of where Delaney stands on the BCS, playoffs, and AQ considerations. From this 12/11 article, my sense is that Delaney is in favor of what benefits the B1G first and foremost, meaning he will change his stance accordingly. Perhaps he’s simply the best politician in the room with the ability to pull off being against something before being for it when self interest is all that really matters. He appears to be someone who is constantly maneuvering to build a coalition to promote his interests whatever the conditions, and this latest arrangement is evidence of that.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7332827/jim-delany-supports-bcs-changes-long-big-ten-rose-bowl

Do you happen to live in Greenspoint?

Last time I checked, I said in ONE post that Scott and Delaney are thinking ahead. Compared to whoever’s running the Big XII for at least the last couple of years, Scott and Delaney are Rhodes scholars.

OOC scheduling is just one factor in positioning a team for a championship run, but it’s an important factor. The PAC/B1G deal means consistently, schools in those two conferences won’t be likely to schedule home and homes with Big XII schools, among others. The two conferences in effect doubled their footprints, without further realignment. Commissioners in the SEC and ACC have already proven to be proactive, and would, I think, be looking at the PAC/B1G deal with an eye toward doing something similar. If they do, then schools in those two conferences won’t schedule outside of the agreement.

What I’m saying is, unless the BCS completely blows up in the next few years, UT could find itself having trouble putting together any kind of viable OOC schedule, and a perceived lack of strength of schedule could hurt the Horns. It won’t hurt for a few years, but could before the end of the decade IF the Big XII doesn’t look into a sweetheart deal of its’ own with either the SEC or ACC…BEFORE those two cut their own deal. The landscape is changing, and the Big XII is trying to do business as usual. UT’s insistence on trying to keep the Big XII together with bubble gum and bailing wire, all for the sake of the LHN, is gonna be a huge problem in a few years barring some creative thinking.

Oh, and nope…been to Greenspoint…don’t live there. Derp indeed.

The comments about recruiting and the rust belt are pretty typical of people that shoot off their mouths without thinking.
Check rosters.
Ohio State, Michigan, Notre Dame, Penn State and even schools on the West coast without huge populations nearby get some of their more talented players from other areas. They recruit the South really heavily and New Jersey. They don’t shake in their boots because a recruit is living in ‘SEC country’ like we seem to do. They just go in there and compete with whoever else is recruiting them mostly because they don’t have much of a choice.
Oregon gets a lot of it’s talent from the populated parts of California.
Ohio still puts out a lot of talent and so does Pennsylvania, but they saw a long time ago that they needed to supplement that talent with kids from elsewhere.

Can anyone find an example of where OOC schedule definitively made a difference in getting to the MNC game? I am talking about deciding between teams of equal prestige and equal conference profiles where the media basically pushed the position that OOC schedule should be the main reason for choosing team A over team B. OOC can be a factor, but it is way down the list of other factors and its funny to see people panic over it.

Let’s see what sort of match ups they set up before we act like this is some sort of great SOS coup. I bet we see mostly USC vs. Indiana and Ohio State vs. Oregon State. They’ll pit Nebraska against USC one year or Wisconsin against Oregon in another, but I bet we won’t see several top-of-the-line match ups in a single season and it is even less likely that one of those games will play a major factor in getting a team into the MNC over another team with a weaker OOC schedule.

Orangejello ~ “I’m afraid the cream puff OOC belongs to us, not the SEC teams. Their HCs aren’t afraid to play anyone.”

As has been the case ever since Mack Brown arrived on the 40 Acres. In 14 seasons, we have played a grand total of 4 ranked OOC opponents. From 1977 to 1997, on average, we played 1.5 ranked OOC opponent per season. Now we only schedule patsies and teams with HC’s firmly on the hotseat (Arkansas, UCLA, Wyoming, New Mexico, OleMiss and BYU).

“From 1977 to 1997, on average, we played 1.5 ranked OOC opponent per season.”

Does that reckoning include Oklahoma? If so, can you understand the fallacy in such a comparison?

I once looked into the whole ‘our OOC used to be great before Mack’ and indeed the effect is largely due to OU being on our OOC sched pre-Big 12. I believe Mack has played on average as many or more teams that were ranked in the Top 20 (at the time we played them) during the regular season than any other UT coach. The Big 12 is a solid conference and has been consistently much stronger than the SWC ever was which has balanced out some of the more sadistic OOC slates that we played under McWilliams and Mackovic neither of whom faced many ranked teams in the SWC.

I also think there is a fallacy that playing tough OOC opponents prepares you better for conference play. I don’t think that effect has played out since Mack has been here and I am not sure if there is a really a correlation between quality of OOC schedule and conference record in general. Perhap Huckleberry can run the numbers!

I believe Mack has played on average as many or more teams that were ranked in the Top 20 (at the time we played them) during the regular season than any other UT coach.

Nope — and it is not even close.

Fred Akers 10-years as coach was about as tough a regular season stretch as we have seen. Those teams played 110 regular season games, and 35 of the opponents were ranked in the Top Twenty at the time of the game — that’s 32%.

Of those, 21 were in the Top Ten, which is 19%

Mack has had 162 regular season contests, with 36 ranked in the Top 20, 22%, with 20 games against Top Ten opponents, which is 13.5%

That compares favorably with Darrell Royal who had 203 regular season contests with 40 against Top Twenty opponents (20%) and 25 with teams in the Top Ten for 12%

Post-season play is a great example of the dilution of the game today.

Royal played in 16 post-season bowls — 14 against Top Ten teams. — only one game (Bluebonnet Bowl against Mississippi) was against an unranked opponent.

Akers went to nine bowls, three against Top Ten Opponents, with 2 against unranked teams.

Counting the Big 12 Championship games, Mack’s teams have played in 17 post-season games, six against Top Ten opponents, with 8 of the contests against opponents outside the Top Twenty.

Actually found the file that had the numbers I ran which were for number of Top 20 conference opponents. I averaged per season rather than counting total conference games played.
Mack played 2.4 Top 20 teams in conference per season.
Mackovic played 1.3.
McWilliams played 1.6.
Akers played 2.2.
Royal played 1.3.
Obviously this was what I was remembering and not total ranked teams played. The numbers ssr runs are a bit skewed by the extra games added which most teams have used to add to their home slates rather than scheduling more home-and-homes with better teams so that makes Mack’s numbers look worse.

Now that we are at the point where being perfect almost matters more than who you play, I don’t have any qualms about avoiding too many difficult match ups early in the season. Playing in a tough conference pays more dividends than playing a ranked team in September. Akers ran some gauntlets in his days and looking back at his records gave me some new found respect for a coach who seems much maligned, but looking through all those games also made me see there was little tangible benefits to playing tough OOC games. Royal’s championship years (as well as Mack’s) certainly weren’t born out of overcoming a difficult schedule.

“Can anyone find an example of where OOC schedule definitively made a difference in getting to the MNC game?”

Ricky,
The Auburn Tigers ended the 2004 season undefeated, but were left out of the BCS title game because they ranked third in the final BCS rankings. That left undefeated USC and Oklahoma (ranked No. 1 and No. 2 respectively) to play in the Orange Bowl for the National Championship. I am sure if they were percieved to have more quality wins that year they would have been ranked higher and gone to the Championship game. That could happen someday the the Big XII champion.

I also agree with the things Coolhorn has been saying. I am starting to think that the major cable providers are not going to take the LHN. I think they love the idea of conference networks and hate the idea of schools having their own networks. So they have decided to draw the line now. UT could have been a leader in helping to create a Big XII network, that would have gone a long way the stregthening the conference. Instead they went their own way insuring a Big XII network never happens. Other schools see this and resent it. A Big XII network would be better for you anyway. Instead of watching the UT bowling team you could see shows on what is going on at other Big XII football programs, plus the networks would actually pick it up.

Brer, I said teams of equal prestige. Auburn doesn’t pass up USC or Oklahoma no matter who they played (they in fact played more ranked teams (4) that either OU (3) or USC). They started the year ranked #17 while OU and USC spent the whole season at 1 and 2. I doubt if they played LSU’s OOC from this year, it would have been enough to push them over the top. I do remember one or two excuses in the media that Auburn didn’t play a difficult enough OOC schedule, but there were as many others who said it didn’t matter considering they played a more difficult conference slate. The broad majority of the media still went with the ‘eyeball’ test and determined that USC and OU must be better than Auburn…in large part because they are USC and OU. This year is no different. Okie lite won’t ever pass up a team like Alabama if they have the same record. They have to be one game better because Bama’s history will always win them the beauty pageant.

I think the only time OOC schedule really seemed to play a big role was in 2008 with us and OU. There were certainly a fair share of people who acknowledged OU’s better OOC schedule in saying they should be ranked ahead of us. But that one’s a moot point since OU shares a conference with us they won’t be able to out-OOC-schedule us if coolhorn’s doom and gloom scenario were ever to happen.

I am starting to think that the major cable providers are not going to take the LHN. I think they love the idea of conference networks and hate the idea of schools having their own networks. So they have decided to draw the line now.

It’s dollars and cents, not a provider rebellion over content.

“Jake, whatever the rumors were of ND joining the Big 12, there is IMO zero chance of that happening now. It appears they will be piggybacking on the "best of" the new merger.”

Not accurate! They are still going to be invited to participate and will for the near term, but they are not now the “preferred” partner of either league. We will gladly let them come in every sport except football if they want to stay indy, and have told them so. Conversely, neither the B1G or Pac 12 will alow them to do that. Timing of TV contracts and the continued erosion of the Big East are keeping the phone lines lit between the Big 12 Office and South Bend with Powers and DeLoss playing major roles. It’s not a matter of whether but when it happens.

Oh, and what exactly is the freakin’ Pac 12 the best of?

jake, “best of” means ND will get the quality matchups of both conferences, I.e. USC, Michigan, etc. they won’t be playing Arizona.

I am sure you are right and we did invite them, but ND does not want to join the Big 12. They may be using us as a stalking rose, but that’s it.

In any case it will be a moot issue next year, when OU and OSU bolt and the Big 12 implodes.

Good grief. Stalking rose! I meant Stalking horse. Or Maybe both, come to think of it.

In any case it will be a moot issue next year, when OU and OSU bolt and the Big 12 implodes.

And exactly where are they going to go? The Big East?

A major point about this alliance is that the Pac 12 and the Big Ten do not want to take in any more teams.

srr50, one correction that is very relevant for us.

Pac-12 will stay at 9 conference games.

Thus, they will only have 2 open non-conference slots and USC/Stanford will actually only have one.

Fat chance we ever see USC or Stanford non-conference given that they have 9 Pac-12 games + 1 B1G game + Notre Dame.

As for the Big Ten, we can’t schedule them anyways because of their Big Ten Network issues and not allowing us to use content for highlights or whatever that problem was.

For the rest of the Pac-12, this means we are probably a lot less likely to see UCLA/Cal/Washington/Oregon on our schedules given that they all have 10 games accounted for and may not want to schedule us non-conference.

This is a big deal for us, and it almost certainly kills off any notion of Texas independence in football. We won’t be able to get a sweetheart deal like Notre Dame has with those 5 schools in those conferences, so unless we plan to play the old SWC schedule, we have no independence alternative.

As for the Big Ten, we can’t schedule them anyways because of their Big Ten Network issues and not allowing us to use content for highlights or whatever that problem was.

My guess is that the rebroadcast issues were used to get out of the deal with Minnesota. If ESPN and Fox can work out a trade of a Texas football game, they can work out a rebroadcast deal (Fox being the minority owner of the BTN).

That said, I agree that the B1G won’t be scheduling too many B12 teams anytime soon. Too many MAC schools are willing to take a check in that region, and B1G schools like to write them.

“I am sure you are right and we did invite them, but ND does not want to join the Big 12. They may be using us as a stalking rose, but that’s it. "

And you know this how? Seriously, I’d like to pass the news on to a very prominent person at the Big 12 who is being told the deal is still alive and well.