TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! THE BIG 12 IS DEAD! MAYBE!

Can't get enough of sports even on a development board? Get your fix here. Expect heavy moderation on smack talk.
bobbyhawks
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3720
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 1:19 pm

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby bobbyhawks » Wed May 21, 2014 9:44 am

aknowledgeableperson wrote:To go to more than 4 teams something has to give. League championship games or one week in the season. Schools can already play 14 games. How many more do you want them to play to win-it-all?

With the current 4 team playoff, teams can actually play 15. The most you could possibly play in a 16 team playoff format would be 17. The max is 20 in the NFL, and the rosters are way bigger in college. For a 16 team field, I would recommend that the NCAA take away a regular season game (max games = 16) since most teams have 2 to 4 fluff games anyway that don't really do much for the rankings. The NCAA needs more opportunities for the quality teams in a league to play one another (or at least have the same opportunity in a national tournament). As it stands, the best team in the SEC can tie by record with another team in the conference, be left out of the conference championship game and the national playoffs, and never have a shot to prove much nationally because of wonky scheduling.

Still, my best scenario for the near term would be to have 12 teams. The top 4 teams to win a conference championship game would get a first round bye. As of now, it is pretty straightforward (Big 10, SEC, Pac 12, and ACC). Doing nothing else, that is a max of 16 games (NFL regular season, though if another conference championship game winner made the national championship game, it could be 17). If you take away a fluff game, then you end up with a max of 15 games, which is actually the current max. So the truth is that you can get to 12 teams if you care about making the playoffs quality. Unfortunately, it is ruined by the fact that the non-playoff-likely teams will not give up KU vs. App St. and the revenue associated.

User avatar
AllThingsKC
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9199
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:57 am
Location: Kansas City, Missouri (Downtown)
Contact:

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby AllThingsKC » Wed May 21, 2014 10:25 am

KC-wildcat wrote:I guess I didn't realize these tradition-rich battles with your brethren LSU, Bama, Auburn, etc. would only be played about once every 6-8 years.


Then you haven't been paying attention to this thread. That was one reason why I didn't buy into the "Mizzou can't compete in the SEC" myth. I also said remaining at 8-game wouldn't hurt the SEC at all.

I like the uniqueness of the crossover rival and the long history associated with it in the longtime SEC members. It means we get others less often but when we do get them those games are EVENTS. Demand for tickets will be outrageous. Anticipation will be equally great. Those times aside we get to enjoy our rivals. The 8 versus 9 game argument put forth by some of the other conferences is bluster meant to distract from the fact that they have nothing to offer outside of another meaningless game.

Pac-12 boasts a 9 game conference schedule. They added Utah and Colorado who have combined for a .240 conference winning percentage. Big 12 likes their 9 game schedule too having added TCU and WVU, who have combined for an eye popping .333 conference winning percentage. All four of these schools have combined for 3 bowl appearances in 10 combined seasons and have no bowl wins. This is what they're selling you under the guise of 'tougher' schedules with 9 conference games.

Here's some 8 vs 9 game schedules among top teams. As a fan, which games would you tune into and which would you not?

OREGON 2014 SCHEDULE
TBA ARIZONA - yawn
TBA COLORADO - yawn
TBA STANFORD - good
TBA WASHINGTON - ok
TBA at California - yawn
TBA at Oregon State - yawn
TBA at UCLA - good
TBA at Utah - yawn
TBA at Washington State - yawn

OKLAHOMA 2014 SCHEDULE
Sep. 27 - at West Virginia - yawn
Oct. 4 - at TCU - yawn
Oct. 11 - vs. Texas @Dallas, TX - good
Oct. 18 - Kansas State - ok
Nov. 1 - at Iowa State - yawn
Nov. 8 - Baylor - ok...maybe good
Nov. 15 - at Texas Tech - yawn
Nov. 22 - Kansas - yawn
Dec. 6 - Oklahoma State - ok

AUBURN 2014 SCHEDULE
Aug. 30 - Arkansas - yawn
Oct. 4 - Louisiana State - good
Oct. 11 - at Mississippi State - yawn
Oct. 25 - South Carolina - good
Nov. 1 - at Ole Miss - ok
Nov. 8 - Texas A&M - good
Nov. 15 - at Georgia - good
Nov. 29 - at Alabama - good

As of now, I have no reason to believe that the SEC is a stupid conference. I mean, it's like not they went 2-3 against the Missouri Valley last year (like another local conference did). It's not like they had a losing bowl record since "upgrading" their conference (like another local conference has done). So, I'll trust the conference that has a reputation of being forward-thinking.

aknowledgeableperson
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12180
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:31 pm

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby aknowledgeableperson » Wed May 21, 2014 11:07 am

So all schools lose a game during the season just to have a so-called national champion. Not saying it wouldn't happen but I would see many schools fighting against it, enough not to have that large of a field.
By increasing the field do you really produce a true national champion? You just increase the odds of say having a team with two losses defeat an undefeated team in the big game. I can just see the uproar with that.

chingon
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3308
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 6:47 pm
Location: South Plaza

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby chingon » Wed May 21, 2014 11:34 am

AllThingsKC wrote: the conference that has a reputation of being forward-thinking.


Literally laughed out loud.

User avatar
KC-wildcat
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3528
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:54 am
Location: UMKC Law

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby KC-wildcat » Wed May 21, 2014 1:40 pm

AllThingsKC wrote:
KC-wildcat wrote:I guess I didn't realize these tradition-rich battles with your brethren LSU, Bama, Auburn, etc. would only be played about once every 6-8 years.


Then you haven't been paying attention to this thread. That was one reason why I didn't buy into the "Mizzou can't compete in the SEC" myth. I also said remaining at 8-game wouldn't hurt the SEC at all.

I like the uniqueness of the crossover rival and the long history associated with it in the longtime SEC members.


haha. nice take on the schedule. Would seem that most of your friends (er rivals) in the SEC don't share your sentiment, however.

nice discussion from an LSU message board. http://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/p/49 ... unced.aspx

--"So fricking ridiculous, we arent really even one conference anymore with this shite."

--"the SEC does NOT care about fan or the players experience or the integrity of the sport. They care about money."

--"the entire conference just needs to man up and accept the 9 game schedule"

--"A recruit could play here for 10 years and never go to Athens"

--"So Missouri joins the SEC and it takes us 10 years to go visit their stadium? Embarrassing."

--"Future Tiger players making LSU's first trip to Columbia, Missouri are now in elementary school. What a screw up."

--"So Tennessee has 10 years and 5 coaching changes before they play at starkvegas again?"

User avatar
AllThingsKC
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9199
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:57 am
Location: Kansas City, Missouri (Downtown)
Contact:

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby AllThingsKC » Wed May 21, 2014 2:05 pm

KC-wildcat wrote:
haha. nice take on the schedule. Would seem that most of your friends (er rivals) in the SEC don't share your sentiment, however.



So what? There are probably Mizzou fans who disagree with me. I am sure the are LSU fans who do agree with me.

If you care that much about what LSU fans think, I'd be happy to post some of their thoughts about K-State's and the Big 12 general.

Again, it might be a save assumption that the conference with a winning bowl record knows a thing or two about football.
Last edited by AllThingsKC on Wed May 21, 2014 2:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
KC-wildcat
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3528
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:54 am
Location: UMKC Law

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby KC-wildcat » Wed May 21, 2014 2:13 pm

AllThingsKC wrote:
KC-wildcat wrote:
haha. nice take on the schedule. Would seem that most of your friends (er rivals) in the SEC don't share your sentiment, however.



So what? There are probably Mizzou fans who disagree with me. I am sure the are LSU fans who do agree with me.

If you care that much about LSU fans think, I'd be happy to post some of their thoughts about K-State's and the Big 12 general.


Their thoughts about the BigXII would be interesting. While you're at it, maybe get their thoughts on programs like MU and A&M and their combined 1 BigXII title. that would surely be interesting.

User avatar
AllThingsKC
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9199
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:57 am
Location: Kansas City, Missouri (Downtown)
Contact:

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby AllThingsKC » Wed May 21, 2014 2:22 pm

What does 1 combined Big 12 title have to do with anything?

I can see why LSU fans would be discussing the pros and cons of a 9 game schedule. But they have problems if they're discussing Big 12 titles these days.

But if you really want to know what they think about that, I'll ask them. I mean, you might have to wait until they come to Columbia in 10 years from now, but I can let you know what they say. :P

bobbyhawks
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3720
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 1:19 pm

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby bobbyhawks » Wed May 21, 2014 3:47 pm

aknowledgeableperson wrote:By increasing the field do you really produce a true national champion? You just increase the odds of say having a team with two losses defeat an undefeated team in the big game. I can just see the uproar with that.

As many things in life, it is a balancing act. There is a point at which you can put so many teams into the field, the playoffs allow more opportunity for the best team to lose. However, my 12 team proposal allows for the exact same number of chances to lose as the current 4 team system. You are essentially converting a powder puff game into a top 12 matchup by replacing a regular season game with a playoff game, and what could be more meaningful than a single elimination threat? You would reduce overall injury and concussion exposure in FBS by decreasing the overall number of games. The average team next season will play 12.67 games. With an 11 game schedule, the average team would play 11.74 games. You can also add bowl play-in games if you want to add a game back in there at the end of the season so they don't have to give one up.

How many people argue the vailidity of the NFL Superbowl Champion? That is a league of 32 teams that puts 12 teams into the playoffs. If a 12-team playoff (38% of the league) is fair, then how is a 12-team playoff unfair in college (10% of FBS) when they barely play enough quality teams to get an accurate ranking to begin with. Those fluff games against directional schools do not help us understand the difference between #12 in the nation and #13. A classic example of how tricky things are is that Alabama was ranked #3, and Oklahoma was #11 last year prior to the bowl game. #12 Clemson beat #7 Ohio State. #6 Baylor couldn't keep up with #15 UCF. I think that those games show the difference between #1 and #12 is not that severe. I personally would also like to take as much media bias out of the crowning of the champion as possible. More teams absolutely diminishes this effect. Four teams just isn't enough to sift out the pretenders and to allow less heralded programs to overcome pre-season seeding advantages.

aknowledgeableperson
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12180
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:31 pm

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby aknowledgeableperson » Wed May 21, 2014 4:31 pm

Oh, wow. Compare a college championship series to the NFL playoffs. The one and only reason why the NFL has it's number of teams in the playoffs, and looking to add two more, is revenue. Not to give a .500 team a chance, just money.

That one less game does mean money to the schools that would lose a game. That's why it will be a hard sell to the schools.

bobbyhawks
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3720
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 1:19 pm

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby bobbyhawks » Wed May 21, 2014 5:03 pm

aknowledgeableperson wrote:Oh, wow. Compare a college championship series to the NFL playoffs. The one and only reason why the NFL has it's number of teams in the playoffs, and looking to add two more, is revenue. Not to give a .500 team a chance, just money.

That one less game does mean money to the schools that would lose a game. That's why it will be a hard sell to the schools.

That's why you can add a play-in game to the non championship bowls. For example, four teams are invited to a bowl. The two highest ranked teams (most likely the larger programs in the old cherry-picked manner of college football) play a home game and then play for the bowl title. You can even have a consolation game if you are that worried about getting to travel somewhere and line the pockets of a bowl committee.

And yes, I am comparing the NFL to the NCAA. If your argument is that the NFL playoffs are not able to select a legit champion due to too many teams, then point taken (but I doubt many would say that). But look at the percentages, and you see that 10% of the field making the playoffs vs. 38% is a completely different and more exclusive crowd. Next year, only 3% of the field will have a chance at the title. In a sport with so few chances for accurate comparison, 3% seems hardly fair.

aknowledgeableperson
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12180
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:31 pm

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby aknowledgeableperson » Wed May 21, 2014 11:18 pm

Just what the bowls want. A chance to have 2 sub .500 schools playing in the game. And it isn't the number of teams that get a chance to participate but get the best teams involved. Usually there is little to no debate about the top 2 or 3 teams after a season of play. The last 1 or 2 places could have some debate but the quality of teams drop quite rapidly.

Again, having more teams is only about money. Why not have a field of 64 teams with playoff games starting after week 7 or 8.

User avatar
KCMax
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 24051
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
Contact:

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby KCMax » Tue May 27, 2014 5:52 pm

St. Louis to host the 2018 SEC basketball tournament.

User avatar
AllThingsKC
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9199
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:57 am
Location: Kansas City, Missouri (Downtown)
Contact:

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby AllThingsKC » Tue May 27, 2014 9:04 pm

The Big 12's tournament agreement with KC runs through 2016. The Big 12 is expected to announce future sites this week or next. It would be awesome for Missouri to host tournaments for 2 different power conferences at the same time.

User avatar
Highlander
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8796
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby Highlander » Sun Jun 01, 2014 12:33 pm

AllThingsKC wrote:The Big 12's tournament agreement with KC runs through 2016. The Big 12 is expected to announce future sites this week or next. It would be awesome for Missouri to host tournaments for 2 different power conferences at the same time.


I could care less where the SEC conference tournament is held - it will never be held in the only city in the state I give a hoot about - but I'm holding my breath that KC continues to be the locale for the B12 tournament. The B12 conference is to the P&L District what the Wildebeest migration is to the Nile Crocodile.

User avatar
AllThingsKC
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9199
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:57 am
Location: Kansas City, Missouri (Downtown)
Contact:

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby AllThingsKC » Sun Jun 01, 2014 5:06 pm

Yes, because without an annual 4-day tournament, the P&L District will fail.

User avatar
Highlander
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8796
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby Highlander » Sun Jun 01, 2014 5:28 pm

AllThingsKC wrote:Yes, because without an annual 4-day tournament, the P&L District will fail.


The district has well known financial issues that eat up a certain amount of KC revenue on an annual basis. While I think the district is critical to DT and not a complete failure, that tourney is an immense help - it's probably the only time the district as a whole is extremely busy over a sustained multi-day period over the course of a year. What the B12 tourney generates for KC is not a menial sum. What the SEC anything generates for KC is a big fat zero.

User avatar
AllThingsKC
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9199
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:57 am
Location: Kansas City, Missouri (Downtown)
Contact:

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby AllThingsKC » Sun Jun 01, 2014 5:46 pm

Highlander wrote:While I think the district is critical to DT and not a complete failure, that tourney is an immense help.


I agree. Like you, I would love for the Big 12 tournament to stay in KC. The tournament certainly doesn't hurt the P&L District at all.

Highlander wrote:that tourney is an immense help - it's probably the only time the district as a whole is extremely busy over a sustained multi-day period over the course of a year.


You must not visit the P&L District very often.

Highlander wrote:What the B12 tourney generates for KC is not a menial sum.


Except in past years, when they've had it in Oklahoma City and Dallas. How much did it generate for KC then? What about the conference headquarters moving from KC to Dallas? How much money does that make for KC?

Here's what you wrote in 2011:
Highlander wrote:So it's not up to Missouri's institutions to aid Missouri's economy, or the economy of its biggest city? That's what they are there for. Correct me if I am wrong but the whole point of the university system was to provide the state with the talent necessary to develop the state's economy, you know, engineers, businessmen, architects, information technology, nurses, doctors, lawyers and what not. I know to some sports fans, maybe yourself, the university is there to produce winning football teams or at least be in a conference that gives it some kind of wierd bragging right, but I really don't give a shit about that stuff, it's window dressing. And it's window dressing that should be supporting the state's economy which is exactly what Mizzou is actually there for dispite your protests.


And here's what you wrote today:
Highlander wrote:I could care less where the SEC conference tournament is held - it will never be held in the only city in the state I give a hoot about


So, in 2011, you blame Mizzou for not caring about the STATE economy. Now that the STATE may benefit from having 2 major conference tournaments at the same time, you blame Mizzou for not caring about the CITY economy.

Highlander wrote:What the SEC anything generates for KC is a big fat zero.


True. But the SEC does help the state economy, which in 2011, you said "that's what Mizzou is there for."

User avatar
Highlander
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8796
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby Highlander » Sun Jun 01, 2014 6:09 pm

AllThingsKC wrote:
Highlander wrote:While I think the district is critical to DT and not a complete failure, that tourney is an immense help.


I agree. Like you, I would love for the Big 12 tournament to stay in KC. The tournament certainly doesn't hurt the P&L District at all.

Highlander wrote:that tourney is an immense help - it's probably the only time the district as a whole is extremely busy over a sustained multi-day period over the course of a year.


You must not visit the P&L District very often.

Highlander wrote:What the B12 tourney generates for KC is not a menial sum.


Except in past years, when they've had it in Oklahoma City and Dallas. How much did it generate for KC then? What about the conference headquarters moving from KC to Dallas? How much money does that make for KC?

Here's what you wrote in 2011:
Highlander wrote:So it's not up to Missouri's institutions to aid Missouri's economy, or the economy of its biggest city? That's what they are there for. Correct me if I am wrong but the whole point of the university system was to provide the state with the talent necessary to develop the state's economy, you know, engineers, businessmen, architects, information technology, nurses, doctors, lawyers and what not. I know to some sports fans, maybe yourself, the university is there to produce winning football teams or at least be in a conference that gives it some kind of wierd bragging right, but I really don't give a shit about that stuff, it's window dressing. And it's window dressing that should be supporting the state's economy which is exactly what Mizzou is actually there for dispite your protests.


And here's what you wrote today:
Highlander wrote:I could care less where the SEC conference tournament is held - it will never be held in the only city in the state I give a hoot about


So, in 2011, you blame Mizzou for not caring about the STATE economy. Now that the STATE may benefit from having 2 major conference tournaments at the same time, you blame Mizzou for not caring about the CITY economy.

Highlander wrote:What the SEC anything generates for KC is a big fat zero.


True. But the SEC does help the state economy, which in 2011, you said "that's what Mizzou is there for."


KC lost the HQ and that was regrettable. Should have stayed in KC but that's a very minor number of employees. I'd much rather have (and we did have) the bulk of the basketball tourney's as that is where the money is.

Tell me how the SEC helps Missouri's economy over the B12? A few SEC schools travel well and those folks contribute to the economy - but we play those teams on much less regular basis in Columbia than we did the big travel schools of the B8 and B12. As far as the state's economy goes, the move is at best a wash. Lose the Big XII tourney and it's worse than a wash as 1 SEC tourney in St Louis isn't going to make up the difference. And again, it' KC I care about any more, not so much the state. Again, I feel the state aided and abetted the move to the SEC which I see as a betrayal to KC.

The perception of the SEC and the states that comprise it - for the those who care about things other than football (hint: the overwhelming mass of people in the US) is not great. That image is well established around the country and is typified and reinforced by such incidents as this: http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/21/us/missis ... th-statue/

I could see leaving the B12 for the B10; it's a conference of schools with outstanding academic programs, that would be a true boost in perception and prestige - among the best state colleges in the nation and Northwestern. But the SEC - it's Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, South Carolina - I'm sorry but that's just not the direction I want Missouri headed. I'm much more interested in being a little more progressive or at least neutral rather than just backwards.

User avatar
AllThingsKC
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9199
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:57 am
Location: Kansas City, Missouri (Downtown)
Contact:

Re: TIME TO FREAK OUT AGAIN ABOUT CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT! TH

Postby AllThingsKC » Sun Jun 01, 2014 6:37 pm

Highlander wrote:Tell me how the SEC helps Missouri's economy over the B12?


It's not better than having the Big 12 tournament most years. But, it does put the state in a unique position to host 2 major tournaments every so often (assuming the Big 12 stays in KC often). It wouldn't be played in Missouri at all had it not been for the move. But, the Big 12 could have (and has) moved the tournament to other cities, even with Mizzou in the conference. Mizzou staying in the Big 12 doesn't guarantee that the tournament stays in KC. You want to talk about betrayal of KC? Look at the Big 12 moving their HQ from KC to Dallas...which they did while Mizzou was still in the conference. I wish the Big 12 cared about KC's economy as much as we do.

On a slightly different subject, I think the Big 12 would be foolish to NOT pick KC to host the tournament in most years. It wasn't as popular in OKC or Dallas and KC provides the better college basketball atmosphere. I suspect the Big 12 would have trouble selling tickets to a tournament in OKC or Dallas. That has rarely (if ever?) been the case in KC.

Highlander wrote:But the SEC - it's Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, South Carolina - I'm sorry but that's just not the direction I want Missouri headed. I'm much more interested in being a little more progressive or at least neutral rather than just backwards.


Say what you will about the South, but nobody retires and moves up North.


Return to “Kansas City Sports”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests