By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our Texas Longhorns message board community.
SignUp Now!That's a good point. I'm not sure what the price difference is between traveling from Oregon to Arizona, vs Michigan.What does it cost to send a band, all of their equipment and support, a football team and all of their equipment and support?
And thats without talking about non-revenue sports.That's a good point. I'm not sure what the price difference is between traveling from Oregon to Arizona, vs Michigan.
I'm sure there is some price increase but I doubt enough to cancel out the increased income.
May be worse for teams like Arizona who now have to travel to the east coast and aren't getting as big of a pay bump.
20 minutes ago, TFloss32 said:
Oh I think this is exactly where this is headed. 3 conferences of 24 or so. I think in time the schools in those conferences break away from the ncaa and do their own thing. I see the major college sports platform looking completely different in 10 or so years.We're going to have 24 teams in a conference before you know it.
I disagree. Conferences don't expand just to expand. They expand to add stability, or to increase the per team value.Oh I think this is exactly where this is headed. 3 conferences of 24 or so. I think in time the schools in those conferences break away from the ncaa and do their own thing. I see the major college sports platform looking completely different in 10 or so years.
I don't disagree with you, but the have and have nots are more and more clear. I meant to specify that I only meant the big 3 sports. The perennial top 10, top 25 would only play each other if they could, but that doesn't work. They need more teams to fill out a schedule. I see an NFL type conference system with only the top 60-70 teams in the top tear. It could be divided by 2,3, or 4 conferences and eventually get back to a regional schedule, but without ncaa involvement. If nothing else for football and basketball. It's all about the money in the end.I disagree. Conferences don't expand just to expand. They expand to add stability, or to increase the per team value.
Adding teams beyond 16 makes it difficult to have a schedule that allows each team to play all of the other teams often. When you get to 24 the schedule becomes ridiculous, particularly if you don't go beyond a i game conference schedule.
The future is hard to predict, but I don't see any future expansion by the SEC or B1G beyond 20, and those expansions would only be to increase per team value. The BIG12 and ACC are harder to predict,but unless the ACC can figure out how to dissolve their GOR, I wouldn't expect any major Changes until 2036.
What happened was they got rid of Bowlesby. He, like the PAC, wouldn’t see the changes in the sport. You have to adapt or die regardless of whether you want to or not.Remember when the b12 was going to implode and everyone was looking for a landing spot?
I don't know how it happened, but the b12 is now the 3rd most stable conference. The ACC still has better teams as of 2024, but how much longer will they last? If fsu leaves, the wheels come off.
Would seem like a very odd conference if there were teams that never played each other.Is it set in stone somewhere that teams in a conference has to play every one?