o****3
发帖数: 5100 | 1 Biggest winner: Baylor, KS, K-state, i-state, Mizzou for staying in the bcs
conference
winner: tx for having its own network
even: tt/osu they always follow their big brothers,
OU/Atm they are in the same situation
Loser: pac10. pac16 will be really really good. | t*******n
发帖数: 417 | 2 I guess one of the big losers is mountain west, which is in line to inherit
the big12's bcs spot?
bcs
【在 o****3 的大作中提到】
: Biggest winner: Baylor, KS, K-state, i-state, Mizzou for staying in the bcs
: conference
: winner: tx for having its own network
: even: tt/osu they always follow their big brothers,
: OU/Atm they are in the same situation
: Loser: pac10. pac16 will be really really good.
| l******u
发帖数: 707 | 3 With the addition of Boise, we break even even if Utah leaves.
inherit
【在 t*******n 的大作中提到】
: I guess one of the big losers is mountain west, which is in line to inherit
: the big12's bcs spot?
:
: bcs
| t*******n
发帖数: 417 | 4 but u lose the bcs spot on the paper?
【在 l******u 的大作中提到】
: With the addition of Boise, we break even even if Utah leaves.
:
: inherit
| o****3
发帖数: 5100 | 5 that would have been huge for mwc if they can get in the bcs lineup.
you are right, they are the potential loser
inherit
【在 t*******n 的大作中提到】
: I guess one of the big losers is mountain west, which is in line to inherit
: the big12's bcs spot?
:
: bcs
| l******u
发帖数: 707 | 6 I never expected them to give AQ to MWC if Big12 disbands. Pac16 obviously
wants to have 2 bids if they have USC, OU and Texas. Then Big10 would also
want 2 bids. We'd still be playing for the at-large bid.
Now, we're still in good shape if Big12 doesn't go 12 (sounds weird).
【在 t*******n 的大作中提到】
: but u lose the bcs spot on the paper?
| l******u
发帖数: 707 | 7 BCS will never hand the AQ to MWC, never.
Two years down the road, IF we meet all 3 criteria, look for the BCS to
modify their equations.
【在 o****3 的大作中提到】
: that would have been huge for mwc if they can get in the bcs lineup.
: you are right, they are the potential loser
:
: inherit
| o****3
发帖数: 5100 | 8 Big12 has the automatic bid. If ks/kstate took the mwc, I assume that they
will have that for sure.
【在 l******u 的大作中提到】
: BCS will never hand the AQ to MWC, never.
: Two years down the road, IF we meet all 3 criteria, look for the BCS to
: modify their equations.
| l******u
发帖数: 707 | 9 you don't think Pac16 would claim they need 2 bids? New Big10?
BCS would change their by-laws re:6-7 BCS conferences if PAC16 formed. Still
no AQ for MWC. KU is a bball school, KSU doesn't have that much pull.
【在 o****3 的大作中提到】
: Big12 has the automatic bid. If ks/kstate took the mwc, I assume that they
: will have that for sure.
| P*********l
发帖数: 94 | 10 The ranking of the biggest losers:
1. BIG XII, losing 2 founding members to other BCS conference;
2. PAC X, expecting to pick up Texas, OU, OSU, A&M, and CU, only ended up
with CU in hand. With its flagship USC in NCAA violations, the conference
will have a tough time competing against other BCS conference;
3. BIG TEN, its strategic goal is getting ND, getting Texas would be a bonus
, and they got Nebraska.
The ranking of the biggest winners:
1. SEC, it did the smart thing by NOT offering A&M. O | | | b**j
发帖数: 20742 | 11 big ten is a winner. got what we wanted in nebraska that everyone loves. a l
ot of new rivalries will be created.
and still hold the card on ND - can play it at some other time
SEC did offer aTm. aTm had the votes to go to SEC but didn't go. i don't see
how SEC is a "winner" here.
Big Ten got stronger, SEC/ACC stayed put, Big XII weaked, and Pac-10 got 2 n
ew schools but not stronger. in fact I'd say Pac-10 is weakened because it u
sed 2 valuable spots on average teams limiting its future manuev
【在 P*********l 的大作中提到】
: The ranking of the biggest losers:
: 1. BIG XII, losing 2 founding members to other BCS conference;
: 2. PAC X, expecting to pick up Texas, OU, OSU, A&M, and CU, only ended up
: with CU in hand. With its flagship USC in NCAA violations, the conference
: will have a tough time competing against other BCS conference;
: 3. BIG TEN, its strategic goal is getting ND, getting Texas would be a bonus
: , and they got Nebraska.
: The ranking of the biggest winners:
: 1. SEC, it did the smart thing by NOT offering A&M. O
| c**********o
发帖数: 1941 | 12 SEC扇子写的？
呵呵，。。。
bonus
push
to
【在 P*********l 的大作中提到】
: The ranking of the biggest losers:
: 1. BIG XII, losing 2 founding members to other BCS conference;
: 2. PAC X, expecting to pick up Texas, OU, OSU, A&M, and CU, only ended up
: with CU in hand. With its flagship USC in NCAA violations, the conference
: will have a tough time competing against other BCS conference;
: 3. BIG TEN, its strategic goal is getting ND, getting Texas would be a bonus
: , and they got Nebraska.
: The ranking of the biggest winners:
: 1. SEC, it did the smart thing by NOT offering A&M. O
| c**********o
发帖数: 1941 | 13 Totally agree
我们还是闷生发大财吧，呵呵
l
see
n
u
【在 b**j 的大作中提到】
: big ten is a winner. got what we wanted in nebraska that everyone loves. a l
: ot of new rivalries will be created.
: and still hold the card on ND - can play it at some other time
: SEC did offer aTm. aTm had the votes to go to SEC but didn't go. i don't see
: how SEC is a "winner" here.
: Big Ten got stronger, SEC/ACC stayed put, Big XII weaked, and Pac-10 got 2 n
: ew schools but not stronger. in fact I'd say Pac-10 is weakened because it u
: sed 2 valuable spots on average teams limiting its future manuev
| P*********l
发帖数: 94 | 14 Geographically speaking, BIG TEN is the only place to go for ND. However, it
will maintain they independence as long as they can.
Only three things happen will change their mind:
1. BIG East falls apart and ND can't find a home for their other athletic
programs;
2. ND can no longer renewal its TV contracts;
3. BIG TEN revenues grow so large that ND just simply can't refuse to merge.
The last time Husker was on national stage was 2002 and it didn't even win
the BIG XII championship. Nebraska has | b**j
发帖数: 20742 | 15 nebraska was down because of a couple of bad hires. bo pelini
has righted the ship and their future is pretty bright. big
ten will not have added them if they could not increase the
profit per school even with one more added mouth.
just ask bama what a good coach can do to your program. your
example would have fit bama like a glove before saban came along
ND will only join big ten when Big East is no longer alive,
costing them their access to BCS
it
merge.
【在 P*********l 的大作中提到】
: Geographically speaking, BIG TEN is the only place to go for ND. However, it
: will maintain they independence as long as they can.
: Only three things happen will change their mind:
: 1. BIG East falls apart and ND can't find a home for their other athletic
: programs;
: 2. ND can no longer renewal its TV contracts;
: 3. BIG TEN revenues grow so large that ND just simply can't refuse to merge.
: The last time Husker was on national stage was 2002 and it didn't even win
: the BIG XII championship. Nebraska has
| P*********l
发帖数: 94 | 16 Your bama example is correct. However, that will NOT work on Nebraska.
"Talent is in the south" and Nebraska is no where near it.
In the past 15 years, we have seen OU, Texas, Florida, Bama, LSU, USC
raising soon after their coach change (while, it take Mack Brown bit longer.
) They all share something in common, nearby talented resources.
ND is another case of unsuccessful football story. and so is Penn State.
Their coach is still named Joe Paterno, but Nittany Lions has been mattered
since 90s |
|
