Actually, that was my reasoning behind a leak today/announcement tomorrow timeline for BYU.
The original thought (that was proven wrong by ACC a few weeks ago) was that Fri/Sat would be off-limits so the kids could play ball.
Posted 30 September 2011, 3:39 p.m.
Well, if institutions are thinking about the 50-year timeframe, then maybe we can wait until Sunday or Monday when we have guys getting ready to take the field on Saturday.
Posted 30 September 2011, 12:57 p.m.
Yeah, I checked your page then posted on Twitter then saw your Tweet. Talk about crazy timing.
Do you think Mizzou staying or leaving could change BYU's decision? If you assume no other defections come thanks to Mizzou announcing something, BYU could decide that joining the B12 is the best call with Mizzou or without Mizzou, right?
I always assumed that Friday/Saturday announcements would be off-limits, but that clearly isn't the case. If BYU does decide something, they wouldn't want it leaked on Sunday so a Friday leak and Saturday announcement would fit -- just like the ACC moves.
Posted 30 September 2011, 11:30 a.m.
Reminded me of the relative quiet before ACC surprised everyone and expanded. I figured it would be quiet on Friday night and Saturday out of respect to the kids who play on gameday. But... Maybe the big news will break Friday night again??
Posted 30 September 2011, 10:38 a.m.
I still have a Muck Fichigan shirt from my Michigan State days. You bet I'm not getting rid of that!
Posted 23 September 2011, 12:54 p.m.
Have you heard anything specifically addressing OU going to the SEC alone? That would fix the SEC's "13" problem and make them like like a real power. For OU, it would mean an escape hatch that I'm guessing they really, really want. Are the politics of dividing OU/OSU enough to stand in the way?
When they demanded equal share and Beebe out, I figured they'd have options other then Pac-12.
Posted 21 September 2011, 11:46 a.m.
I'm an MSU guy so I don't track KU all that often. Please consider starting a blog covering conference inter-working. We've seen over the last few years that it should remain relevant for some time.
Posted 21 September 2011, 11:36 a.m.
I'm an MSU guy and I don't even know what to call it. My gut feeling is that further expansion wasn't ruled out (explicitly or subconsciously) so they never really defined the conference.
The logo is now B1G, even though it looks more like B16 than the B10 it is supposed to be close to. There are B1G banners at all of the stadiums now, too.
Posted 19 September 2011, 12:29 p.m.
Here's a neat blog post about cutting a 16-member league. This guy uses the Big Ten (er Big 10 or B1G, whatever..) and adds ND, KU, Mizzou, and UConn as the example. I'd guess UConn is a bit off, but that's not his point.
The idea is to start with 4 pods, or his word, quads with 4 teams each. There's the typical in-pod game across the board, a cross-pod rivalry game, and a few extra to get to 8 conference games. Then, the 9th game is a semi-final that leads into the conference final. Other non-pod winners play each other as well.
A novel concept that I don't think I've seen elsewhere.
Posted 19 September 2011, 12:14 p.m.
Tried to find a reference, but no luck. I think Iowa dominates recruiting there and doesn't want to give ISU the advantage. That's the direct conflict.
I think academically the fit isn't great either. But more importantly they don't bring in enough cash to pull their weight. The equal revenue sharing would have ISU taking revenue away from the cash cows in the conference.
They don't bring in TV markets that aren't already dominated by Iowa. From what I read, this is still a down-side of KU/KSU/Mizz compared to eastern schools. Any school that has the Big Ten thinking NY region has everyone drooling over that market.
Posted 17 September 2011, 10:32 a.m.