Football Officiating > NCAA Discussion

Fate of the Big 12

(1/2) > >>

Looks like the 12 will be going by the wayside. I know there are quite a few on here that work that Conference.
Any insights?

If they only lose two, maybe they could reform as some sort of "Big 8" conference instead...

Also, why are all the generically named conferences "Big", but no other adjectives? Why not make the 12 Large or the Great 8 or the Medium 7 or something?

I still think they should ditch all current conferences and replace them with a promotion/relegation system covering D1/D2. You'd get the "Power 5" as the "Premier League", and then the "Group of 5" as the Championship to start, and then 1-AA is League 2 and so on, but you can only move up if you win and get relegated down if you lose.

You think Boise State deserves national attention? Well, win their conference and they get promoted into the "Pac 12" and then see what happens -- meanwhile Washington State or Arizona gets demoted to the Mountain West.

Big 12 is toast in my humble opinion.  The 4 schools that left a decade or so ago seem to have made the right decision apparently. Unfortunate for the schools remaining after OU & UT leave as they are out in the cold.  Sad, but I think we all know it based on money and nothing more, including winning.

Very sad that this is happening to what used to be a wonderful institution in this country - amateur sports. This is driven by nothing but money. I am all in favor of capitalism, but these are supposed to be STUDENTS first, playing sports at their institution as a recreational activity. You know. The "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy" concept. When intercollegiate football got started, it was just a bunch of chemistry, business, engineering students getting together on weekends to have some fun. Then they graduated, got 'real' jobs, and contributed to society.

Athletic scholarships opened the door to what is happening today. Scholarships can be a very good thing if everyone remembers what they are. They are the compensation that the students receive in exchange for the use of their extracurricular (ha) time and athletic abilities. They get a free, or significantly reduced cost, education, in exchange for representing their institution on the athletic venue of their particular sport(s).  Fair enough. I honestly don't know what is the average cost to of an undergraduate degree. I know what my wife and I paid to put our son through a modest, but good, public university. Something in the neighborhood of $25,000. Total. For all four years. "That's all" you say? Well, I'd love to have that money back. It ain't chicken feed, to me. But, yeah. A place like SMU runs something in the neighborhood of $30,000 per year.  That's $120,000 for a four-year program. That's a lot of money to most folks. And, to walk away with a degree that will help ensure their ability to start a business, have a long, successful career in some business or trade, or develop/invent things to help America, and the world, be a better, safer place, most folks would gladly sacrifice their extracurricular time, and offer their athletic talents to accomplish.

But, today, many - not all, but many - of these people take a scholarship simply to put themselves into a better marketing position for the professional sports that seek top athletes. They use their institutions' athletic programs to strengthen their bodies, and sharpen their athletic skills. Most don't give one rats you-know-what about the educational opportunities the scholarships provide. Many are 'one and done' (especially basketball people). Even football people are getting to be 'two and out.' "What degree? Who cares? I got a big guaranteed bonus, and fat contract. Who needs a degree?"  Graduate? Contribute to society? Too, too few.

So, to keep these people from leaving prematurely, these people are now going to get paid to play college sports. Yeah, I know, marketing their likenesses, name, yada, yada. Call it what you want. They are still getting paid to play. As if the value of the scholarship isn't enough.

And that is what has caused OU and UT to jump ship. They see that, in this pay-for-play landscape, the Big XII will not be able to compete with the SEC in terms of recruiting student-athletes (term used loosely), in this environment. So, if they can become SEC members, they would then be recruiting in a broader area, with greater exposure to people in the southeastern part of the country. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

It's all about the money. With Olympic athletes getting paid, and now NCAA people, amateur sports are on their death bed. I would not be surprised at all to see some high school kids showing up on TV, hawking cars, burgers, real estate - you name it. A state athletic association might try to fight it, but they'll lose.

Ironically, and sadly, I think the Supreme Court made the right decision, based upon Constitutional law. Would that all their decisions were made as fundamentally.


Completely agree. The only (partial) solution that I've ever thought of, is for the NFL/NBA/MLB to 1) require rookies to have a college degree (but then we get players with BA in underwater basket weaving, but it's something, at least), or, 2) by pretty much following the model of businesses everywhere in that players with degrees are paid more, and are eligible for higher salaries/contracts.  This obviously would complicate salary caps, etc but IMO the NFL/NBA/MLB has a role in fixing this, since they are the sole beneficiary of college athletics beyond the college years.


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version