🏀 KuBuckets Archive

As Espn is getting a smaller budget to work with year after year, and Fox is looking to sell to the highest bidder. The money just isn't their anymore for conference realignment. CBS stood tall when the SEC came calling for money. Rejecting the idea that just because you added another team/school we have to pay more.

Thing is the Dust has settled. Everybody is taking a wait and see approach. The dynamics of how and what we watch are changing. With the advancements of technology it appears at least for the moment al carte is knocking on the door. The days of the mob mentality of the Big 10 and SEC maybe over. Making people pay for something they may have no interest in watching.

With this being as it is. It's time for the The Big 12 to rebrand it's name. It's almost laughable to keep branding yourself as the Big 12 when you only carry 10 teams and have no chance of recruiting any big schools to the conference. If by chance conference realignment fires up agian. It's going to be the Big 12 that gets raided again.

So try and save what you got. Change the name. Rebrand yourself. Hell call it the Fly over confernce. Anything but the Big 12.

Big 12 isn't too far off from another football or bball champ. The conference seems profitable and stable. I like the idea of a rename.

Just an opinion here, appreciate the discussion topic. But my opinion is that rebranding is superficial. It changes nothing. I don't know, the Big 10 has 14 teams. Rebrand that? It would just be creating a stupid name. What name? It's like the KU football uniforms/helmets. All of the changing around each week is stupid and dilutes our brand. I don't even know what our football uniform is supposed to look like. Have an identity. Stick to it. What does a new name actually do? While many people are not that bright, I doubt a superficial change of name makes anyone think anything more or less of our teams and programs. The better way to sell all college sports is tradition and history, and a focus on the emotional tie to one's school for a lifetime. But what do I know? Mangino seemed to win just fine with one road look, and one home look.

@approxinfinity The team with the best chance of a title in CFB/CBB is KU in CBB. CFB is a joke, a fake playoff. SEC teams get the built in advantage of everyone presupposing the conference is better, so one loss teams get a pass (even if true, that's a fixed bet when there are only 4 teams). I can't see any Big 12 team making a dent in football until there's an expansion to a true playoff of 16 teams. The SEC has a stranglehold on this whole deal. Heck, even when there was just a two team playoff LSU got in with two losses (Les would remember).

@HighEliteMajor The LSU 2007 national title was a very weird season in college football to begin with. There were only two major conference teams that finished with 1 loss going into bowl season that year and they were Ohio St. and Kansas. Ohio St. won the Big 10 to get their spot in the title game which they deserved. Kansas didn't make the Big 12 title game so they really didn't have much of a leg to stand on in that debate. I also think OU would've beaten Kansas in the Big 12 title game that season anyway had they played each other.

The other major conference champs all had 2 losses going into bowl season (LSU, OU, WVU, USC, and Pitt). The two teams that had a shot at reaching the title game and blew it in their final games were West Virginia and Missouri. WVU lost to Pitt in their final game to give them their second loss and knock them out of the game and Missouri got blown out by OU in the Big 12 title game that year to knock them out of the title picture.

The debate on who was going to play Ohio St. was between LSU and USC because LSU had already beaten Virginia Tech that season so LSU had the advantage. The difference was that neither of LSU's losses were considered bad losses. Both were in triple OT to teams that finished 8-5 overall that season whereas USC lost at home to a 4-8 Stanford team that USC was favored to beat by 41 points.

LSU won the 2007 title with two losses because every other credible contender except Ohio St. also had 2 losses.

@DoubleDD

How about we cut two more teams and then we can go back to our old brand... The Big 8! Surely, we still own all of those trademarks still.

Imagine the perceived prestige.... a power conference that is busy CUTTING teams!

Hahahahahhaaaaaaa....

@Texas-Hawk-10 I’m really not sure of the point of reciting Info I can read on Wikipedia. Point is that the SEC gets every benefit of the doubt over others, as in 2007, and teams that are excluded from the process could win in a real playoff.

My thinking is? If we are truly moving to a al carte world. Then the names of the past have no weight. In fact they maybe a drag on future media dollars. As so many were getting stuck paying for something they didn't watch. My thought or thinking was the Big 12 could take advantage of the situation. Being innovative. and jumping out to the front and embracing the al carte movement. I don't know may be I'm crazy. It just seems to me the viewers love new ideas.

Also the Big 10 did kind of rebrand there conference. BG1 I think it is? Anyways the Big 10 has more weight than the Big 12. Just the Name Big 12 is a remembrance of teams lost. Where as the Big 10 has added teams. Even took Maryland from the untouchable Espn conference ACC. Anyways think about it? When I say post Big 10 what do you think? Power conference that adds teams/schools. Now what do you think when I say Big 12? A conference that has lost teams, and is only in holding together because Texas says it must. Well just my thoughts.

@HighEliteMajor Sorry, but 2007 is the wrong year to use that argument.

LSU had the best resume of the 4 teams in contention for that second title spot. Both of their losses were triple OT games to teams with winning records. They also beat Virginia Tech that season so there was zero argument for Virginia Tech deserving that spot. LSU also didn't lose at home as a 41 point favorite like USC or lose to middle of the road team like Oklahoma did.

The SEC wasn't at the point of getting the benefit of the doubt at that point as it was a couple of years before that when Auburn was the odd team out when them, OU, and USC all finished the regular season undefeated.

Since the Big 12 doesn't want (and maybe doesn't need) to add Memphis and Cincinnati (the two potential adds that make the most geographic and athletic sense, there's no point in moving from 10 teams at this point. Adding West Virginia meant the Big 12 could only expand east because a conference covering three time zones is just unworkable.

I will say this - if the Big 12 is left out of the CFP again this year, the conference may want to talk with the Pac-12 about breaking up the CFP. Big 12 and Pac-12 have both appeared in the CFP twice, and on each occasion, the other conference did not appear. It's as if the Big 12 and Pac-12 share a bid to the CFP. This year the Pac-12 has one loss Washington State probably being left out, while the Big 12 has one loss Oklahoma probably left out. Meanwhile, the Big 10 is likely to get the last bid unless Georgia upsets Alabama in the SEC title game, giving the SEC two teams in again since most think a one loss Alabama still gets the fourth spot. Notre Dame is undefeated and in. Clemson is undefeated and, barring an upset against Pitt, also in. Either Georgia or Alabama is definitely in.

Time to think about shaking things up and demanding an expansion to 8 teams.

I still say the playoff is working. OU and WSU are not among the two best teams in the nation, so their omission isn’t really a problem. It’s not about participation ribbons and giving everyone a chance; it’s about rewarding the best regular season performers with an opportunity. There are too many times 3 teams could lay claim to being the best in college football with no way to sort it out. I don’t see more than 4 teams laying a legitimate claim to the top spot.

The NCAA basketball tournament gets it wrong many years by inviting too many teams to a single elimination tournament. I’d hate to see football go down the same path.

@Dylans Historically, everywhere, in nearly every team sport, the ultimate champion is determined by a real playoff -- except D-1 football. D-II, III, NAIA use a full playoff. High schools do a large tourney format that includes every team (in Kansas, for ex.). The four spots are determined subjectively. The more spots, the less subjectivity matters. The NCAA tourney is masterpiece of competition. It does what the CFB fails to do -- test teams under high pressure to determine a champion.

Some confuse being a "champion" with having the best team. Being a champion is much different.

Without having their mettle tested in a real tourney format, there is no real champion. It's a joke.

And here's the best option in my opinion that I posted on another thread, in response to @Kcmatt7

@Kcmatt7 Did any game really matter this past weekend other than a few? You want to make every game matter, go to a 24 team playoff.

Top 8 get byes -- Five conference winners, top non-power 5 team, and next two best by committee determination.

The other 16 play, with the better seeded teams getting home field. The winners then play the top 8, on the top 8's home field.

Huge incentive for every team to play hard and win. Winning the conference is huge. Getting a bye huge. Getting to a 9-16 seed and a home game is huge. Getting in to the tourney 17-24 is huge.

This would be heaven.

And that is how you determine the "champion". Not the "best" @dylans. There's a difference. A champion is what we're looking for, and fighting through a tourney format is how that is accomplished. Not gifting teams the right to play for a title.

So the regular season doesn’t matter in determining the champion? Why devalue 12 regular season games completely? Every game is a playoff game as it stands. It seems you have a distaste for the regular season and only value playoffs, but as it currently stands every game is important.

The NBA, NHL, and MLB get the playoffs right. If you’re not doing series it’s hard to tell who the better team really is on the close teams. Some it’s obvious.

@HighEliteMajor

It is silly to compare the logistics of a football game versus a basketball game. Basketball teams have no problems playing 3 or even 4 games in on e week but football teams are pretty much limited to 1 per week.

Also, the logistics of staging a football game and getting the team to game location are orders of magnitude more complicated than those of a basketball team where the entire traveling party might be around 20 and the equipment fits in gym bags where a football traveling party is well over 100 and transporting the the equipment and supporting gear requires considerably more resources.

I just don't believe there is an audience for a 24 team football playoff.

I think a expansion to the CFP is needed. Problem is finding someone/entity to drop the coin.

I do believe the SEC gets a little more cache than other Power 5 conferences. I'm not sure if it's for viewership or just a misguided believe the SEC is just that tough. If I remember correctly when Texas A&M and Missouri moved to the SEC they handled the competition quite well. And both programs were really middle of the road programs in the Big 12.

This could be the last straw for OU and Texas. These two storied football programs aren't going to be left out of the playoffs. They'll make the necessary noise or changes. If they bolt the Big 12 would be nothing be more than a bleep on the screen of college sports.

The Pac I think is killing themselves. With the powers in California using their schools as pawns to push their political agenda on other states. Refusing to allow their schools to play in certain states and vice versa if said state doesn't accept their political beliefs. I'm not sure how serious they have been about it, but I do know the practice has been brought up more than once. The whole gender neutral bathroom issue was all the rage for a bit. With California threatening not to do business with North Carolina. Even to the point that public funded schools would not be allowed to play games of any kind in the State of North Carolina.

@JayHawkFanToo You say "can't." Some say "can."

How anyone can say that the public would not go crazy over such a playoff is living in a dark cave. Just a silly blanket statement to make. No audience? Right, let's tune in to the Poulan Weedeater O'Doul's Shake My Weiner bowl. Large interest there.

If KU sneaks in as the 23 seed, wins a very winnable game at the 18 seed, and then gets a chance to play a top team, my bet is you're gushing crimson and blue.

Lots of man junk references lately. 🤔

@HighEliteMajor

Outside of the top bowls the rest play in half full stadiums and only because is the last game of the season for both teams. If KU were to qualify and continue winning, how many fans do you thing would go to an extra 4 or 5 games? Not many. Look at the NCAA tournament, except for the later rounds or games involving elite teams, essentially all the other early round games, particularly those for lower seed play in half full arenas. You overestimate the audience for college football games.

I enjoy my dark cave. Les Miles is bringing at least the promise of some light.

JayHawkFanToo said:

@HighEliteMajor

Outside of the top bowls the rest play in half full stadiums and only because is the last game of the season for both teams. If KU were to qualify and continue winning, how many fans do you thing would go to an extra 4 or 5 games? Not many. Look at the NCAA tournament, except for the later rounds or games involving elite teams, essentially all the other early round games, particularly those for lower seed play in half full arenas. You overestimate the audience for college football games.

I think you make a very good point. In pro sports and even the NFL it's so hard to prepare a trip and with tickets and travel. Thing is in pro sports there a real good chance of a home game of some sort. Meaning it's a lot easier to pack a stadium with hometown fans.

The NCAA Basketball tourney in all it's glory is really made for tv. It's really hard for fans of said schools to plan a trip if they don't know if their team is going to being playing.

Look at the so called Chiefs and Rams game that was supposed to be played in Mexico City. Too many fans were left hanging with no choice but to go to Mexico City when the very reason they planned to go to Mexico City was no longer there. Shame on the NFL.

@HighEliteMajor your proposed solution is 5 games long. I don't think you can extend the length of the season too much because of the physical grind of the game. But you can't shorten everyone's season either. I think this is the rock and a hard place that makes a 5 game playoff unfeasible. I am good with a field of 8 but I think more than that, at least initially, would be too disruptive.

To talk of many things. Of shoes and ships and sealing-wax. Of cabbages and kings. And why the sea is boiling hot and whether pigs have wings.

@JayHawkFanToo The NCAA tourney is neutral site of course. All games early are on home fields. Nothing rational in thinking a home stadium wouldn't be near full for a CFB playoff game.

@approxinfinity What physical grind? NFL plays 20 games + playoffs. Disruptive to what? There is nothing to disrupt in January. An easy game to nix is the conference title games. Season's over. Then 16 teams play one game. Then some weeks off, and the playoff starts in January.

@HighEliteMajor I think the college football season is 10+(Max 2) games for the same reason the college bball season isnt 82+. Until the players are compensated above board they won't be asked to play more. If that happens then maybe. I don't think you're for compensation right? The two seem linked.

And you'd agree that football is physically punishing right? If the playoffs were longer I think you'd see more injuries and wouldn't that skew whether someone is a true champion if they got there because of injuries?

@approxinfinity

Exactly. college Athletes are not quite conditioned for a longer season since they are student-athletes and not full time athletes and school work would also be affected...not that it would affect elite players but the great majority do not move on to pro sports but work doing something else after school.

@JayHawkFanToo Explain to me the nuances of the conditioning you refer to. And then relate it to the number days and time off that NFL players get during the season. I'm sure you know.

@approxinfinity The sport is punishing, true. There is no magical number of reasonableness. This has nothing to do with compensation. But I know there is this desire to make everything about compensation.

Look, I don't really care whether anyone likes the idea. The point is that four teams is a joke. It's not a "champion." And it's indisputable that the champions of team sports in nearly all instances are determined in a tourney format. In this joke of a system, the team that won a power 5 conference, and many times two such teams, are excluded from even playing for the title.

All to protect crappy exhibition games (bowls).

@HighEliteMajor

Really?

The NCAA restricts student-athletes during season to 20 hours per week total practice/training and they also have school work to take care. Professional football players do this for a living and have one League mandated day off per week and the rest of the week they spend the entire day practicing with the team or doing training and conditioning and most spend additional time doing conditioning on their own ...not even close in preparation/conditioning time between college and pros with pros spending double or triple the preparation time of college players.

@HighEliteMajor if it's not about compensation, what do you say to players that play a possible 16 more games over 4 years under your proposed format and get injured because of it?

No compensation, and much greater risk of injury (in today's climate of heightened awareness of concussion affects and no solution there). I don't see how anyone can make the case that this is good for the players, only for the fans.

I get why you want a true champion but 15 games per season is untenable. I think an 8 team playoff is the max that can be done and gets you where you want to go, but to your point even that might require scrapping the conference championship games.

The reason I said it is too disruptive is that if you shorten it any longer then you have to figure out what games the teams that play 8 or whatever games and don't make the playoffs do. And it seriously undermines the spirit of the conferences. In Big 12 you have a nice even number of teams that play each other once. That's by design .

Guys already skip bowl games to no get injured. I.e. Christian McCaffrey. Football in Lawrence in January in a blizzard sounds like no fun. Football north of Texas outside of a dome in January sounds like no fun and would skew the results ending in a champion no more true than the NCAA tournament. Just a tourney champion, not a true champion. Best of series are the only way to determine that and there’s no way to safely extend the football season long enough to accomplish that.

;) :horse: :drum:

Semester break

More surefire draft picks should just sit out like Bosa. Don't get Lattimored for nothing. Seriously.