SMU, TCU likely a package deal for big conferences

[PonyKai]

Before anyone worries about whether or not we get to hear the ping of the bat in college "baseball," I would think a more pressing need for the financial commitment that would be required for a conference shift would be a significant expansion of GJFord Stadium.

That won't be a problem.

[davidpaul123]

I feel like if there's 2 slots open, a conference would rather have TCU and Houston than TCU and SMU.

What does U of H offer a conference? Academic excellence? Quality facilities? The City of Houston (seriously)? Texas and A&M own Houston much like they own DFW. U of H was lucky to even get into the SWC. Much like UNT, they are mainly a commuter school.

This is exactly right. I live in Houston and am working on my MBA at U of H (insert laugh here) but the school does not own or bring the Houston market to any conference. Houston is not a great sports town, let alone a college town. If anything, A&M does being an hour and a half away.

UH has no money and lousy facilities. The school on the whole is a dump, although they have made strides in recent years improving the facilities with several new buildings.

I’m not here to say SMU alone brings the Dallas market, because it probably doesn’t. But I can tell you U of H doesn’t bring the Houston market.

[EastStang]

I also think it depends on the Conference, political interference, and whether there is (as has been expressed before) a secret handshake deal with Rice, Tulsa and Tulane concerning expansion. I could see for example if he MWC lost 3 teams, the MWC going to 12 and taking with them the western half of CUSA and if Tulane wanted to not join, then add Boise. That would give the conference a strong TX-OK presence with SMU, TCU, Rice, UH, Tulsa and UTEP. Adding Boise is probably a key for them to make sure that they get the BCS points.

[CalallenStang]

I also think it depends on the Conference, political interference, and whether there is (as has been expressed before) a secret handshake deal with Rice, Tulsa and Tulane concerning expansion. I could see for example if he MWC lost 3 teams, the MWC going to 12 and taking with them the western half of CUSA and if Tulane wanted to not join, then add Boise. That would give the conference a strong TX-OK presence with SMU, TCU, Rice, UH, Tulsa and UTEP. Adding Boise is probably a key for them to make sure that they get the BCS points.

Adding Boise alone will not get MWC the required amount of BCS points.

[Water Pony]

Assuming miminal changes by all conferences, Big Ten adds one (ND) and MWC adds Boise State, it is reasonable that the rest of the conferences will maximize their individual cable payments by not inflating there membership and watering down the impact per school?

Someone has suggested that the new ACC contract would suggest that the Pac10 would be better served by not adding more schools. The best indicator is not total cable revenue, but rather revenue per member.

[CalallenStang]

Assuming miminal changes by all conferences, Big Ten adds one (ND) and MWC adds Boise State, it is reasonable that the rest of the conferences will maximize their individual cable payments by not inflating there membership and watering down the impact per school?

Someone has suggested that the new ACC contract would suggest that the Pac10 would be better served by not adding more schools. The best indicator is not total cable revenue, but rather revenue per member.

That's a good question and it all depends on whether or not a new member would add enough cable revenue to raise those revenue per member numbers.

[PK]

Assuming miminal changes by all conferences, Big Ten adds one (ND) and MWC adds Boise State, it is reasonable that the rest of the conferences will maximize their individual cable payments by not inflating there membership and watering down the impact per school?

Someone has suggested that the new ACC contract would suggest that the Pac10 would be better served by not adding more schools. The best indicator is not total cable revenue, but rather revenue per member.

That's a good question and it all depends on whether or not a new member would add enough cable revenue to raise those revenue per member numbers.

Of course the added revenue from a conference championship game has to be added into the PAC-10 equation too.

[NickSMU17]

Its not going to be a small re-alignment....this is going to be large with many teams from many areas moving...

I realize SMU doesn't have a ton to offer....but I don't think the circle of championship guys, orsini, JJ, are going to sit on their [deleted] and watch us get thrown to the wolves....

The optmist in me believe our very powerful alumni, who are well connected in the NCAA, NFL, and media world, are making many calls and using their resources to keep us in the fold for bigger and better things...

G.J. Ford didn't throw 20 mil and a mil a year at the program to watch it play UNT, Troy, UT- arlington...

Just my opinion...

[Topper]

I feel like if there's 2 slots open, a conference would rather have TCU and Houston than TCU and SMU.

What does U of H offer a conference? Academic excellence? Quality facilities? The City of Houston (seriously)? Texas and A&M own Houston much like they own DFW. U of H was lucky to even get into the SWC. Much like UNT, they are mainly a commuter school.

This is exactly right. I live in Houston and am working on my MBA at U of H (insert laugh here) but the school does not own or bring the Houston market to any conference. Houston is not a great sports town, let alone a college town. If anything, A&M does being an hour and a half away.

UH has no money and lousy facilities. The school on the whole is a dump, although they have made strides in recent years improving the facilities with several new buildings.

I’m not here to say SMU alone brings the Dallas market, because it probably doesn’t. But I can tell you U of H doesn’t bring the Houston market.

Houston may not compete with UT or the Aggies in terms of TV numbers, but they help open the Houston recruiting door to any major conference school that wants to tell its kids they will play in their hometown a couple of times during their career. That is why JerryWorld is undermining our position as entre into the DFW reruiting market by scheduling Arkansas, OSU, Aggies, etc without our participation.

[Pony81]

U of H is a commuter school and does not have a significant Houston following. Evidence is the glorified high school stadium they play in.

DFW has JerryWorld and Houston has Reliant Stadium. Reliant probably isn't as aggressive as Jerry but they can and do host college football games. Rice - Texas anyone?

Bottom line is that no "formerly known as a SWC school" can bring a TV market. UT and A&M are so dominant all over the state that TCU, SMU, and UH are picking up the crumbs.

SMU gets into a major conference because they want someone they can regularily beat, the non-Texas schools want a good recruiting venue, and great trip for their fans. Even then our invitation is extended after the big state school (Utah) has said no.

Trust me - UT and A&M do not want to legitimize SMU or TCU by letting them in the Big 12. They don't need us and they need the hassle of having to recruit a little harder.

[EastStang]

I agree with this, unless it is pre-emptive. By scooping up TCU, SMU, Rice and UH, the Big XII keeps the SEC, Big Ten, PAC 10, and possibly an energized MWC, out of Texas. I suspect that Alabama, Auburn, Georgia and Tennessee would love to have inroads to DFW and Houston area kids if for no other reason than to pluck a few that end up at LSU, UT and A&M. If SMU was forceful, it would schedule a game for the Cotton Bowl against LSU, Alabama or Florida the same date that Jerry Jones was hosting a game at Jerry World for Baylor, OSU or Arkansas. And TCU should schedule BYU the same date. That would tell Jerry Jones, that if he keeps scheduling games in Dallas, that do not include SMU or TCU, we will not make it profitable for him.

[NavyCrimson]

I like your aggressiveness EastStang!

[westexSMU]

UH makes no sense whatsoever and just does not have alumni $$ support and never will. They have some of the worst facilities in D1. Do they bring the Houston market ? Come on.... Rice and Houston together don't make much more sense either.

[couch 'em]

UH makes no sense whatsoever and just does not have alumni $$ support and never will. They have some of the worst facilities in D1. Do they bring the Houston market ? Come on.... Rice and Houston together don't make much more sense either.

SMU makes no sense whatsoever and just does not have state $$ support and never will. They have some of the smallest facilities in D1. Do they bring the DFW market ? Come on.... SMU and UNT and TCU together don't make much more sense either.

[Stallion]

"UH makes no sense whatsoever"
"No alumni support"

If UH makes no sense then neither does SMU. I wouldn't take that belief to the bank. A conference could make a very logical decision to choose UH over SMU if for no other reason than the MWC for example could add a new Houston market and they already are in the DFW market. We are not buying our way into any conference-that concept might work with 2-3 aligned schools but not an entire conference-you can get that out of your head right now. It will be based on the same factors all other conferences choose expansion teams. Now we could improve those factors with money by improving facilities, etc. but this idea that SMU will buy its way into a new conference is NONSENSE.