Play Fantasy The Most Award Winning Fantasy game with real time scoring, top expert analysis, custom settings, and more. Play Now
 
Tag:ACC
Posted on: September 20, 2011 12:31 pm
Edited on: September 20, 2011 3:28 pm
 

Big 12 leftovers

With Oklahoma and Texas clear to leave, it seems like the Big 12 is dead. Personally I don't see a merger between the Big 12 and Big East going to happen. I think schools like: West Virgina, New Jersey Rutgers, and Missouri will try to fine greener pasters then staying in a jumbled mess. Now the plus side of a merged Big 12 and Big East conference is it'll be a good basketball conference, but that doesn't matter in NCAA sports anymore. All these conference realignment debates are tied to football because that is where the money is. To be honest, I can't see the Big East survive, but the atheletic directors are having a meeting tonight to discuss the Big East's future. As the dust clears, we'll see what happens to the Big East.  


As an alum from Mizzou, a Big 12 school, I'm glued to the news in regaring to the Big 12 and it's schools. Assuming Texas and OU head to the Pac 12, here are my guesses to what'll happen. First of all, I'm surprised Texas might go to the Pac 12. I orginally thought they might go independent as they have their own network, and I'm curious how that will play out down the road if the Pac 12 takes them. No matter how much Texas wants their own network, there is no way the Pac 12 will allow that network to survive unless they adapt Pac 12 programing. That said, if the Big East survives, I could see them taking Texas as they'll probably allow that network to survive in order to have them in their conference. As things look right now, it looks like Texas has a spot in the Pac 12, but we'll see what happens to the Longhorn Network.


It seems like OU is pose for the Pac 12, but I don't see the Pac 12 stopping with only 14 members. I wouldn't be surprised if they took Oklahoma State and Texas Tech. My reasoning for Oklahoma State is they have a solid football program, and I know Oklahoma will prefer to bring them along to the Pac 12. That said, OU will jump the Big 12 ship alone if they have to for their own interests. Lastly I see Texas Tech joining the Pac 12. Texas Tech has a solid football program, and they are another rival for: Texas, OU, and OK State. In regards to Baylor in the South, I see them being left out of a BCS conference. They aren't attractable enough to join a BCS conference.


What does conference realignment look like to the Big 12 North leftovers? If we go back to OK State and Texas Tech, lets say they don't go to the Pac 12, then I see Kansas and Kansas State heading West. Both schools aren't the best in football, but they are big schools and at least have some appeal in football. Since Kansas State has finally gotten decent again; they could be a good addition to the Pac 12. I also see Kansas State wanting to bring their counterpart Kansas along. Both have a good rivarly, and Kansas might have another breakthrough season again in the near future. Otherwise if OK State and Texas Tech head to the Pac 12, I don't see them joining anywhere. The Big 10 is being stubborn right now, and they are still focus on getting ND, and possibly the New Jersey Rutgers. ND is an obvious fit for the Big 10, and the NJ Rutgers will bring the NYC tv market which is the sole reason the Big 10 them. If ND stays independent, and lets say the Big 10 adds NJ Rutgers, they'll either add one more school, or 3 more schools. Right now I don't see them expanding pass 14 teams, and they can survive as a 14 school conference. Now if ND and NJ Rutgers refuse to go to the Big 10, then I see Kansas and Kansas State heading to the Big 10 if they decide to add 2 more teams. Otherwise, they might be left behind with Iowa State. I don't see Iowa State going anywhere as they don't bring much to the table. Most of their bowl apperances are tied to 6-6 records, and they don't bring anything with them besides their alumni base.


Finally there is my school, Mizzou. The first scenario I see is Mizzou to the Big 10. Geographically they would fit well in the Big 10. They have a rivarly with Illinois and Nebraska. In addition, they have had some good games against Iowa in the past. Again, the Big 10 is stubborn. The Big 10 is still focused on getting ND, and most likely the NJ Rutgers because of their tv market. But if one of those schools decide to stay put, then Mizzou seems like the best fit as the 14th team. Otherwise, it seems like the SEC has their eyes on Mizzou if WVU decides to stay put, or join the ACC. The SEC needs a 14th member, and Mizzou would be a good fit. They have a rivarly with Arkansas, and they bring a decent football program along with a solid tv market. That is my guess of where Mizzou goes as I can't see them being left out. I'm not saying that as an alumni, but I'm saying that by looking at why certain teams are moving over others. Mizzou has consistently: gone to several bowl games recently, they have been a top 25 caliber team in recent years, they bring the St Louis and Kansas City tv markets, and finally they are a large school. They have a significant presence in the area, and I can't see them being left behind due to what they bring to the table. The problem with Kansas and Kansas State is their influence is limited to mostly KC when it comes to a major city market, and that city is split among several schools. Furthermore, Kansas and Kansas State aren't the most appealing schools when it comes to football. As of now, I only see Mizzou from the Big 12 North being able to survive the conference realignment battle. These are my guesses of how things will play out for the Big 12 schools.




Posted on: March 21, 2011 11:45 am
 

Simply put, the Big East was overhyped

To start off, I'm not saying the Big East sucks. In fact, they are a good conference, but what is considered a down year in terms of quality teams and players, the Big East was clearly affected. Unfortunately the media, particulary ESPN, for weeks kept talking about how this was the most complete conference EVER and deserved 11 bids. I never bought into that and I believed they only deserved their normal 7 to 8 bids, but not 11 bids. On top of that the seeds they got were so favorable that they shouldn't even perform as bad as they have, but here we are with only 2 Big East teams left while as many teams from Richmond, VA are in the Sweet 16. Personally this post is show the bias in how the Big East hype was inflated


Here are three teams that got an easy pass. Villanova and Georgetown got favorable seeds at 8 and a 6 seed. First, Villanova and Georgetown struggled so badly down the road they shouldn't got theri seeds. Missouri got punished for struggling down the road and got an 11 seed. MO deserved that seed for their inconsistent and poor performance as of late, but when Villinova and Georgetown commit the same acts, Villanova gets and 8 seed while Georgetown gets a six seed. That is pathetic that Villanova who had 2 wins since Feburary 9th which were against Seton Hall and Depaul, and it took an overtime game to get that win against DePaul. While Georgetown couldn't beat any tournament quality team since mid-February with their only win against South Flordia and for 21 wins they are awarded a six seed. I understand the argument for doing well throughout the season for being awarded a good seed, but there is such a double standard here. Mizzou went to overtime against Georgetown, and finished with a similar record to Georgetown on terms of standing and conference play, and yet G-Town had significanlty better seeding than MO. In regards to Villanova, they are just sad and shouldn't be in the tournament. When I saw them in the tournament over Missouri State with 26 wins, it brought back memories of the mid 2000s when a 23 win MO State was left out while and 18 win Seton Hall made the tournament. That's pathetic.



Briefly I want to mention Marquette. First of all they are going through a good tournament run, but does that mean they deserved to be there. I'm sure people are still arguining VCU shouldn't be in the tournament, and yet there are a Sweet 16 team too. Let's use the season argument which was probably used for Villanova and G-Town's seeding. Marquette had zero wins against big schools before Big East play, they lost to Duke, Wisconsin, Gonzaga (I know they are a mid-major, but they are one of the most consistent mid-major I consider them part of the big boys), and Vanderbilt. Only Vanderbilt was on the road, therefore they had 3 home games and they couldn't pull a victory. And during Big East play, they were 3-7 against other top 25 Big East teams during the season. They became an ingigma that can beat ND one week, and lose at Seton Hall down the road. Overall their marquee wins to losses of the same caliber teams was sad. Most of their wins came from beating bad teams, and their 21 wins seem very inflated and didn't deserve to be in the tournament. Overall I think the main reason they are in the tournament is because the media keeps talking about that the Big East is so tough that it's ok to have a mediocre record as the conference is tough. But yet, Marquette can't even pull victories against other good teams from other conferences. Final line is they didn't deserve to be in the big dance and are only there because of their media hype.


I can go on and on about other teams and their seeding, but I made my point thorugh these three teams. I will finish this rant is the experts reasoning on why the Big East is struggling. Jay Bilas said the Big East teams are struggling because they were "limping into the tournament." Basically he says theri Big East teams are worn out and the main reason why they are performing below par is because they are tired. Are you kidding me? Is the Big East the only conference tournmaent leading up to March Madness? No, but you would relaize that if you ever left the New York City area. How is UCONN who played 5 rounds in the Big East touranment made the Sweet 16? Especially considering they had less time to rest compared to ND and Syracuse who had a two more days off from the Big East tournament leading to their first match in the big dance. Answer that Jay Bilas! Seriously, there are so many flaws with that stupid argument. Teams from the ACC, the Big 10, and Big 12 all had tough conference tournaments and schedules, and yet their teams are performing as expected, or even better than expected in certain cases. Maybe the reason the Big East is struggling is that several of their teams were overhyped without much substance to their hype. Another reason is that ESPN always seems to overlook mid majors, but it's understandable when they send half of their studio to the Big East tournament and lack knowledge on smaller conferences which is why I'm not completely surprised that the smaller teams took down some of these Big East giants.
 
 
 
 
The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com