Big Ten... err... Eleven... err... Twelve II?

[Sco]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2950700&campaign=rss&source=NCFHeadlines

Big Ten might be expanding to a twelve-team conference... interesting.

Who do you think they're considering? I think they might be trying to pull in Notre Dame yet again. But there could be some other interesting adds. What if they went for Boise State?

[goingoneight]

Domer Name. Won't happen, ND has seen what happens when you're a media baby playing the independent card. Don't think they're willing to drop that sweetness. OSewe would have done better in the last two BCS games they played in than they did.

[soonerinabilene]

ahh,once again, the power of television f*&ks with tradition. Not that I care about the big 10 all that much, im just sick of tradition getting thrown aside because of tv networks being in control.

[IronSooner]

It's gotta be Akron. Go Zips! ;)

[Harry Beanbag]

Notre Dame is the obvious choice that makes totally complete sense, but that won't happen. I'm having a hard time coming up with somebody that isn't already set in a big conference. I'm left with Syracuse, Pittsburgh, or possibly Louisville as options. Since the dude talked about adding a ninth state, that leaves out Pittsburgh.

[Ostate4life]

Rumor is they are targeting Mizzou. On Tigerboard.com they have a long thread talking about it. This could be a disaster for the Big 12 if it happens. Even though Mizzou isnt a traditional power they have a lot of viewers in the Kansas City and St. Louis TV markets. If they leave things could get ugly fairly quickly.

[Sco]

If it's Mizzou, then maybe Todd Dodge will bring the Mean Green into it all! RAWR!

[goingoneight]

Send Boise State. No?

[Harry Beanbag]

Rumor is they are targeting Mizzou. On Tigerboard.com they have a long thread talking about it. This could be a disaster for the Big 12 if it happens. Even though Mizzou isnt a traditional power they have a lot of viewers in the Kansas City and St. Louis TV markets. If they leave things could get ugly fairly quickly.


I guess if they plan on raiding the Big 12, they'd better be ready to take Nebraska, Kansas, and OU as well because the Big 12 would need to disintegrate. Time for the superconferences, UT and A&M to SEC, Colorado to Pac-10, etc.

[Scott D]

The rumor up here is that it's Missouri also. Feelers were put out to the Domers already and they rejected them. Ironically in that window where ND and Michigan won't meet, ND won't be playing Michigan St., Purdue, or Penn St. either.

Logic dictates they go after Iowa St. or a MAC School, however they want a new market they don't currently dominate.

[colleyvillesooner]

Am I the only one that doesn't think this would destroy the Big 12?

Couldn't we just add someone like Colorado State, UTEP, Air Force, or Houston?

[OUDoc]

What would be the advantage (to Mizzou) in bouncing from the Big 12 to the Big 10? I don't see it. Iowa State makes more sense.

[Harry Beanbag]

Am I the only one that doesn't think this would destroy the Big 12?

Couldn't we just add someone like Colorado State, UTEP, Air Force, or Houston?


Start adding schools like this and the Big 12 starts looking more like the Big East, only without the east coast population centers.

[Harry Beanbag]

Side note. Penn State fans are already upset with the travel they have to make for away games. If Mizzou gets added to their conference, their frustraction will be exacerbated.


Wouldn't the league most likely split into East-West divisions? I would think that would minimize travel.

[Mac94]

Missouri gives the Big-10 an expanded television market with the St. Louis and Kansas City area. The Big-12 really couldn't target a replacement that would offset the perceived loss in television market. Colorado St brings nothing in that regard, and neither do any of the other Texas schools ... and New Mexico or Utah, etc really wouldn't offset the loss.

The most logical replacement in many ways, although they don't bring the TV market, would be to try and raid the SEC and steal Arkansas. They have ties to the 4 former SWC schools and have a strong presence alum wise in the Tulsa area and they are a geographic fit. But I doubt Arkansas would leave the SEC.

For the Big-10 .... Notre Dame is obviously their first choice, but it ain't gonna happen. Missouri is logical, and as noted, that is the strong rumor. Other possibilities, if they are looking for a "name" with ties to a strong TV market might be Rutgers ... a new kid on the block but one that could bring the New York/New Jersey markets in to the Big-10.

[dougsooner]

Pittsburgh makes the most sense. After that Cinc. or maybe West Virginia. Missou could jump. I'd trade them for Arkansas for the Big12. Perhaps we could put a clause in the deal if Missou leaves then they have to take Baylor as well. They wouldn't want them but then maybe they could trade them on to some mid major for a basket of footballs and some jock straps....

[Mac94]

Pittsburgh makes sense also ... good point. I do remember, though, if the memory is working right, that Penn St and Pitt have issues and they may block that type of move.

One other thought .... if Missouri goes and we add one of the Texas schools, New Mexico, or Arkansas ... how would they split "north" and "south?" Geographically, Oklahoma and Oklahoma St would be the most "northern" but you know the Cowboys will not want to lose the annual ****** game and would OU want to see the OU-Texas game go the way of OU-Nebraska?

[OUDoc]

I understand the TV market, but if that's the only need, go east. Missouri still seems like a bad fit to me.

BTW, I always thought the Big 12 should be split east/west, not north/south.

[OUDoc]

BTW, why would Missouri take off and end several 100+ year football rivalries for the Big 10?

[Mac94]

BTW, why would Missouri take off and end several 100+ year football rivalries for the Big 10?

Well, we're just at the rumor stage in all of this ... but just to speculate ... the easy answer is money.

The Big-10 has a more lucrative TV contract and a revenue sharing plan. They may think it would be a financial windfall for them to make the move. And, as we all know, money is driving college athletics right now.

As for the rivalries ... they could always still play Kansas in OOC play in football and basketball .... all while cultivating the Illinois rivalry even more.

[Scott D]

I understand the TV market, but if that's the only need, go east. Missouri still seems like a bad fit to me.

BTW, I always thought the Big 12 should be split east/west, not north/south.

Well keep in mind, with Missouri, you are talking more about the St. Louis market than anything. And like Mac said, they'd definitely stoke up the Illinois/Missouri rivalry to a point where the Kansas rivalry would become fairly moot.

While we can sit here and say that an Iowa St. or a Pitt makes a lot more logistical sense for a Big-10 expansion to 12 teams, we can't really argue against them making a play for Missou.

Also, in an expected East/West format, Penn St. would have their travel costs cut down in football because they'd have a 3 and 3 rotation like what we have with the Big-12 and the SEC has.

Ideally we'd still prefer them to get the Domers in, but then they'd likely have to pay the Big East for ND to get ND out of the Big East in women's sports and baseball/basketball.

[soonervegas]

I do think it is Mizzou and I do think it is going to make other teams (i.e. Texas and Colorado) start shopping.

Could get interesting.

Mizzou would see an immediate increase in revenue. I can see why they would make the move.

[Mac94]

Soonervegas -

You hit at the longer term issues with the league ... if the Big-12 is further weakened ... would Texas, which is marketable, and Colorado, or others start looking to jump ship? Back in the early 1990's the Pac-10 was interested in Texas or Colorado ... although I seem to remember that Stanford had issues with Texas coming into the league.

The Big-12 is located in an area to be picked at by neighboring leagues ... so part of the speculation here is IF this goes down ... the Tigers leaving .... what is the domino effect, if any, with the league?

What alternatives are there if there is a three team defection?

[trey]

ahh,once again, the power of television f*&ks with tradition. Not that I care about the big 10 all that much, im just sick of tradition getting thrown aside because of tv networks being in control.

damn tv...i just hate it when there are 20 games on tv any given saturday. i hate that tv has these packages that allow me to see every ou game while living in california. i wish they would go back to just showing notre dame and one other game on abc. stupid tv. :rolleyes:

[soonervegas]

My opinion.....the SEC will get the pick of the litter. I don't think the Big 12 survives without a Texas. (I can't belive I just said that). Obviously, A&M and OU would look really attractive to the SEC. Rivalries with LSU and Arky could become instant rivalries. Nebraska would get a lot of attention as would Kansas, but where....I don't know.

Lot's of what ifs. I would rather just see ND cave and Mizzou stay with the Big 12.

[NormanPride]

Yet again, ND screws everything up. Why does ND have to ruin College Football for everyone else?

[Mac94]

soonervegas -

The issue would be whether the SEC would want to expand beyond 12. A&M was VERY close to going to the SEC in the early 1990's, but political pressure from the Lt. Governor Bob Bullock ... Baylor backer .... and the state legislature (reading state funding) forced our hand into the Big-12. But, they how have 12 teams and they may not look to go beyond that.

That's what makes this kind of scary in the long run. There is a real nightmare senario here for certain teams ... OU, A&M, and Nebraska ... that could have a real negative impact.

If the league loses Texas, Missouri, and Colorado ... the nightmare senario ... what is the fall back for the league. As it is right now, with 12 teams, the league has TV market issues which impacts TV revenue. Without three teams from three different TV markets (St Louis/Kansas City, Denver, DFW/Houston) what kind of TV deal could we get?

That has direct financial implications to each school invovled.

Now, this nightmare senario is unlikely ... but, at the same time, the league needs to plan this out. We can't sit back and wait to see what the Big-10 / Missouri does.

[illinisooner]

Iowa St. or Pitt makes the most logical sense, after ND obviously, but Mizzou makes the most sense financially. St. Louis gives the Big 10 a semi new market (lots of Illini alumni there) as opposed to the smaller or already tapped Pittsburgh or Ames (lol). Louisville is an intriguing possibility, but it's not exactly the biggest $$ market. Irregardless, the Big 10/11 needs another team and whoever it is will help the league very much. For our sake, I hope they add Pitt, Loserville, or ND.

[royalfan5]

The Big 10 is also very serious about their academic reputation. Mizzou is probably the best fit academically as well. I don't think they are willing to be sullied by a Louisville or similar school.

[Scott D]

The Big 10 is also very serious about their academic reputation. Mizzou is probably the best fit academically as well. I don't think they are willing to be sullied by a Louisville or similar school.

Which is why Notre Dame is the best fit. However, the history of the matter goes as such.

1926 - Knute Rockne tries to get ND into a conference, the Big-10 (in it's existing form) rejects ND.
1993 - Big 10 approaches ND, ND rebuffs approach.
1999 - Big 10 approaches ND, ND rebuffs approach citing enrollment size disparity, and need to remain faith based separation.

Truthfully the Big-10 could force ND to join a conference since in a way they have the BCS by the balls in the first place. ND's prime excuse for not joining is their BCS cut drops drastically by joining a conference. If Delany can find a way to make ND's cut no higher than the cut of any school in a BCS conference for getting to a BCS bowl, then he'll create the pull he needs to pull in the domers.

[cheezyq]

Does anyone else find the Weiberg connection in all of this interesting?

1. Weiberg neglects the non-Texas schools for years and creates a ruin of the Big 12 North.
2. Weiberg whimpers over to the Big 11 to help in the creation/promotion of the Big 11 Network.
3. Suddenly there are rumors that the Big 11 wants to add MU because of the TV draw.
4. MU considers the move because of the potential dollars involved for the school.

I turned up my conspiracy theory dial this morning, so I could just be on system overload. But it was interesting to note the oddity of the timing.

[MojoRisen]

IF Mizzou let's get Arkansas over to the Big 12

[royalfan5]

IF Mizzou let's get Arkansas over to the Big 12
or boot Baylor, have a ten team league and play a round robin schedule every year.

[Sooner98]

Let's be honest...we're not pulling Arkansas away from the SEC, and we're not pulling anyone away from any other BCS conference. If Mizzou jumps ship, we're probably looking at targeting a school from a mid-major conference like Conference USA, Missouri Valley, or the Mountain West. It'll definitely be a downgrade, but not devastating, financially. Possibilities include New Mexico, one of the smaller Texas schools like TCU, Colorado State, Creighton, Missouri State. Would Boise State consider joining? You'd have to consider the North/South split, also.

[royalfan5]

Let's be honest...we're not pulling Arkansas away from the SEC, and we're not pulling anyone away from any other BCS conference. If Mizzou jumps ship, we're probably looking at targeting a school from a mid-major conference like Conference USA, Missouri Valley, or the Mountain West. It'll definitely be a downgrade, but not devastating, financially. Possibilities include New Mexico, one of the smaller Texas schools like TCU, Colorado State, Creighton, Missouri State. Would Boise State consider joining? You'd have to consider the North/South split, also.
Creighton doesn't even have a football program. Missouri State isn't going to jump from 1-AA to the Big XII. The Big XII makes no sense for Boise State. If Mizzou leaves, the Big XII would be better of downsizing to 10 teams, instead of taking on a weaker program to have 12.

[Scott D]

Interesting....new scuttlebutt has Missouri as pretty much a 5th-6th choice.

1. Notre Dame (May be forced into joining a conference to keep basketball viable)
2. Syracuse (Competition from the ACC for adding them)
3. Rutgers (Becomes a very viable option if Syracuse joins the ACC)
4. Pittsburgh (Regionality is the only advantage here, but recreates natural rivalry with Penn St.)
5. Missouri (We've already discussed the reasons in this thread)

Missou is 5th because of this

Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Rutgers and Syracuse are all members of the prestigious Association of American Universities, a group of 62 leading research universities that includes all of the Big Ten.

[virginiasooner]

If Notre Dame joined a conference, they'd have to share their bowl payout, and they just don't wanna do that. Can't we give the Big Teneleven Iowa State and/or Baylor? Maybe we can pick up UTEP.

[royalfan5]

Missouri is a member of that group as well, as is UNL, ISU, KU, TAMU, CU, and Texas.

[Scott D]

If Notre Dame joined a conference, they'd have to share their bowl payout, and they just don't wanna do that. Can't we give the Big Teneleven Iowa State and/or Baylor? Maybe we can pick up UTEP.

you have to remember there is going to be more to such a move than just football. Notre Dame's entire athletic program can't survive off of the inconsistency of their football program, hence why they joined the Big East in their other 'primary' sports. If the Big East continues to turn into smaller schools then they may need to give in and join the Big Ten if for no other reason than to add revenue to Basketball and Baseball.

[Scott D]

Missouri is a member of that group as well, as is UNL, ISU, KU, TAMU, CU, and Texas.

maybe we can get lucky and they'll ask Chicago to come back ;)

[royalfan5]

maybe we can get lucky and they'll ask Chicago to come back ;)
The Maroons have been gone too long.

[silverwheels]

If Missouri leaves, pretty much any school within the region that could be a replacement would be a downgrade, except Arkansas, but SEC money is too good for them to leave. The Texas schools have already taken over the Big 12, so adding TCU or UTEP would only make that worse, plus OU or OSU would have to go to the North unless a realignment is made.

There's pretty much no way for the Big 12 to win if Missouri leaves, but I doubt they will.

[Scott D]

The Maroons have been gone too long.

indeed, they need to rise up from the depths of Division III

[Mac94]

How about a program like Utah? A state school that gets us farther west and also has a decent enough name right now.

[silverwheels]

How about a program like Utah? A state school that gets us farther west and also has a decent enough name right now.

Too far away. Colorado complains about their travel enough as it is.

[birddog]

it will be tough to replace mizzou if you look at geography. we'll probably get stuck with another texas school, if not new mexico or colorado state.

[virginiasooner]

it will be tough to replace mizzou if you look at geography. we'll probably get stuck with another texas school, if not new mexico or colorado state.

Do you really want to play in Fort Collins in late October-early November? I think I'll pass on that one. And don't the Rams have a tiny (<50,000) stadium? Just as long as we don't end up with North Texas State.

[TexasLidig8r]

It's not about geographics in this instance.. it's about. television sets.

No other Texas school would bring an adequate number of eyeballs to the party.

If Missouri does leave... this creates an incredible amount of instability. It detrimentally affects the Big XII's ability to negotiate a favorable television contract since Missouri at least arguably brought the St. Louis and Kansas City markets to the table.

The other schools mentioned.. Utah.. BYU.. Boise St.. any of the other Texas schools... simply do not bring the population and fan base needed to attract networks and their corporate sponsors. The major markets in the Big XII are.. Dallas, Houston, Denver, St. Louis, KC. If Mizzou leaves.. the St. Louis market is lost and since KU has never been a player in football.. arguably, Kansas City is lost as well.

If the rumors of Mizzou going to the Big 10/11 heat up and it becomes more than just a pipe dream... look for Texas to look west and aggy to look southeast.. and this time, there is no Condi Rice as the Provost at Stanford to stand in the way.

The powers to be better take this seriously.

[TMcGee86]

I suppose the money is too big a factor to consider just keeping it the same if Missou left and dropping the CCG?

I know I wouldn't mind.

[OSUAggie]

They would split Missouri, losing only St. Louis (not Kansas City). Losing the eastern half of Missouri could be offset by attracting another state.

[TMcGee86]

It's not about geographics in this instance.. it's about. television sets.

No other Texas school would bring an adequate number of eyeballs to the party.

If Missouri does leave... this creates an incredible amount of instability. It detrimentally affects the Big XII's ability to negotiate a favorable television contract since Missouri at least arguably brought the St. Louis and Kansas City markets to the table.

The other schools mentioned.. Utah.. BYU.. Boise St.. any of the other Texas schools... simply do not bring the population and fan base needed to attract networks and their corporate sponsors. The major markets in the Big XII are.. Dallas, Houston, Denver, St. Louis, KC. If Mizzou leaves.. the St. Louis market is lost and since KU has never been a player in football.. arguably, Kansas City is lost as well.

If the rumors of Mizzou going to the Big 10/11 heat up and it becomes more than just a pipe dream... look for Texas to look west and aggy to look southeast.. and this time, there is no Condi Rice as the Provost at Stanford to stand in the way.

The powers to be better take this seriously.

What's the allure of the Pac-10 for Texas? I don't get it.

Also, would the pac10 add another and a CCG? I assume that is the reasoning behind the big11 adding another?

[Scott D]

What's the allure of the Pac-10 for Texas? I don't get it.

Also, would the pac10 add another and a CCG? I assume that is the reasoning behind the big11 adding another?

theoretically Texas would drag Colorado along with them.

[Sooner98]

Creighton doesn't even have a football program. Missouri State isn't going to jump from 1-AA to the Big XII. The Big XII makes no sense for Boise State. If Mizzou leaves, the Big XII would be better of downsizing to 10 teams, instead of taking on a weaker program to have 12.

Duh, I guess my brain checked out there for a minute on Creighton.

Maybe if we downsize, the Big 12 and the Big 10 can just change names.

[birddog]

it will be tough to replace mizzou if you look at geography. we'll probably get stuck with another texas school, if not new mexico or colorado state.

Do you really want to play in Fort Collins in late October-early November? I think I'll pass on that one. And don't the Rams have a tiny (<50,000) stadium? Just as long as we don't end up with North Texas State.

i don't play. and quite a few of the big 12 stadiums hover around the 50k mark. look at tech, baylor, k-state.

lid, viewership is part of the equation, but don't try to say geography doesn't play a part in it too.

[birddog]

here's a scenario...

names the schools you would choose for 2 super conferences with 16 teams in each.

[Mixer!]

EAST:
Miami
Florida
Florida State
Auburn
Alabama
Louisiana State
Georgia
Georgia Tech
Tennessee
North Carolina
North Carolina State
Virginia Tech
West Virginia
Maryland
Penn State
Syracuse

WEST:
USC
UCLA
Stanford
Washington
Arizona State
Colorado
Texas
Oklahoma
Nebraska
Kansas
Missouri
Illinois
Michigan
Notre Dame
Ohio State
Indiana

LEFT OUT:
Oregon
California
Washington State
Brigham Young
Arizona
Texas A&M
Arkansas
Iowa
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Michigan State
Kentucky
Louisville
South Carolina
Virginia
Rutgers

[King Crimson]

Colorado State is not an option for a potential Big XII replacement. they offer nothing in terms of other sports, an invisible fanbase, the Denver market is Bronco-first, second, third, etc.

OU is on TV more than CU in Denver/Boulder.

but i'm against another SWC school. despite popular belief and the last 8 years of presidential politics, the world does not revolve around the Great State of Texas.

[birddog]

so, osu doesn't even make the "left out" list?

i like it.

i might be tempted to put oregon on the list and leave out washington state, arizona state, or stanford. and of course, notre dame will still reject conference affiliation. but nice list.

i'll give mine in the morning.

[47straight]

I took a straw poll among 3 st. louis / mizzou people tonight that i happened to be hanging with. None liked the idea of jumping to the big 10.

[Readyfor8]

I personnally think West Virginia or Louisville a far better choice for the Big 10 to go to 12 teams. Either team would probably be able to compete on the same level or better than Missouri in more than one sport and they are in a floundering conference named the Big East.

The only problem is the biggest tradition West Virginia has is called the Backyard brawl with Pitt, Louisville on the other hand was ready to jump when the ACC picked Boston College instead.

Notre Dame, ISU, Pitt all share states with a Big 11 school already. The question is could a Big East school stand up academically in the Big11, and what could their name possibly be changed to if they took a 12th school?

[Scott D]

I personnally think West Virginia or Louisville a far better choice for the Big 10 to go to 12 teams. Either team would probably be able to compete on the same level or better than Missouri in more than one sport and they are in a floundering conference named the Big East.

The only problem is the biggest tradition West Virginia has is called the Backyard brawl with Pitt, Louisville on the other hand was ready to jump when the ACC picked Boston College instead.

Notre Dame, ISU, Pitt all share states with a Big 11 school already. The question is could a Big East school stand up academically in the Big11, and what could their name possibly be changed to if they took a 12th school?

The likes of Rutgers, Syracuse, Pitt and Notre Dame could stand up academically in the Big-10/11 without a problem.

[Mixer!]

so, osu doesn't even make the "left out" list?

i like it.

i might be tempted to put oregon on the list and leave out washington state, arizona state, or stanford. and of course, notre dame will still reject conference affiliation. but nice list.

i'll give mine in the morning.
Think TV market size when you do. ;)

[PLaw]

If Notre Dame joined a conference, they'd have to share their bowl payout, and they just don't wanna do that. Can't we give the Big Teneleven Iowa State and/or Baylor? Maybe we can pick up UTEP.

What is the real impact? After all, if they join a conference like the Big 11, then they receive a cut of the bowl proceeds from the other schools. Let's face it, a $14MM paycheck is more than a drop in the bucket, but it isn't all that much of a windfiall either. My guesss is the cash flow would be balanced whether or not they are in a conference. The big paycheck only hits when they go to a BCS bowl - and how many times has that happened?

BOOMER

PLAW

[PLaw]

Just how much more lucrative is it to be in the Big 11 or SEC than the Big 12? Does anybody have the numbers? In God we trust, all others bring data.

The best cure for athletic department money woes are winning teams. I see alot of empty seats in the Indiana, Illinois, Northwestern, Minnesota, and Purdue football stadiums.

BOOMER
PLAW

[royalfan5]

Just how much more lucrative is it to be in the Big 11 or SEC than the Big 12? Does anybody have the numbers? In God we trust, all others bring data.

The best cure for athletic department money woes are winning teams. I see alot of empty seats in the Indiana, Illinois, Northwestern, Minnesota, and Purdue football stadiums.

BOOMER
PLAW
A better TV deal goes a long way to cushion the down turns. Lets say the Big 10 TV deal is worth 3 million more per team than the Big XII, that goes a long way. In addition, the Big 10 splits revenues equally amongst teams, while the Big XII does not.

http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_page=1200&u_sid=2392213

[Ardmore_Sooner]

If Missouri leaves, pretty much any school within the region that could be a replacement would be a downgrade, except Arkansas, but SEC money is too good for them to leave. The Texas schools have already taken over the Big 12, so adding TCU or UTEP would only make that worse, plus OU or OSU would have to go to the North unless a realignment is made.

There's pretty much no way for the Big 12 to win if Missouri leaves, but I doubt they will.

My vote goes to the Air Force Academy

[FaninAma]

It's not about geographics in this instance.. it's about. television sets.

No other Texas school would bring an adequate number of eyeballs to the party.

If Missouri does leave... this creates an incredible amount of instability. It detrimentally affects the Big XII's ability to negotiate a favorable television contract since Missouri at least arguably brought the St. Louis and Kansas City markets to the table.

The other schools mentioned.. Utah.. BYU.. Boise St.. any of the other Texas schools... simply do not bring the population and fan base needed to attract networks and their corporate sponsors. The major markets in the Big XII are.. Dallas, Houston, Denver, St. Louis, KC. If Mizzou leaves.. the St. Louis market is lost and since KU has never been a player in football.. arguably, Kansas City is lost as well.

If the rumors of Mizzou going to the Big 10/11 heat up and it becomes more than just a pipe dream... look for Texas to look west and aggy to look southeast.. and this time, there is no Condi Rice as the Provost at Stanford to stand in the way.

The powers to be better take this seriously.

And then the state politicians without any connection to UT or TAMU would do the same thing they did last time....thy would threaten to give an even larger share of the PUF to the Texas schools being left behind.

I know you longhorns are arrogant and stupid but I don't think you are that arrogant or stupid. I could be wrong, though.

Like it or not, UT's and TAMU's fates are tied to the fates of the other Texas Universities. Unless you *******s can think of a way to go totally private you're still answerable to the tax payers of Texas.

[FaninAma]

And all of this talk of television sets doesn't tell the whole story. Are you really telling me that Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, Purdue and Michigan State have more drawing power than all of the teams in the Big 12? Not only are they mediocre to poor programs with no tradition or drawing power they have to compete with professional teams. Having television sets is one thing, fans tuning in on those televisons to watch crappy/mediocre programs is another.

There is a reason the Big 10 is on the prowl for another team. IMO, I thnk their revenue producers (OSU, Michigan, PSU) are not happy with the revenue division. So in oder to placate them the @$$wipe of a commissioner they have is looking to increase revenue by makng his conference more attractive to the networks.

[MorningStar]

How about taking in ND? ND would keep all of the BCS proceeds they bring in but would not share in the BCS revenues of the other 11. The Big 12 would get a much larger (national) audience. ND gets a bowl tie-in, conference championship money and great match-ups (OU vs ND, Texas vs ND, Nebraska vs ND, Texas A&M vs ND---big TV bucks there). Allow ND to keep their Big East basketball affiliation.

[Harry Beanbag]

And all of this talk of television sets doesn't tell the whole story. Are you really telling me that Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, Purdue and Michigan State have more drawing power than all of the teams in the Big 12? Not only are they mediocre to poor programs with no tradition or drawing power they have to compete with professional teams. Having television sets is one thing, fans tuning in on those televisons to watch crappy/mediocre programs is another.

There is a reason the Big 10 is on the prowl for another team. IMO, I thnk their revenue producers (OSU, Michigan, PSU) are not happy with the revenue division. So in oder to placate them the @$$wipe of a commissioner they have is looking to increase revenue by makng his conference more attractive to the networks.


Nearly every Big 10 game is shown on national television between ABC and the ESPN network, while the Big 12 has the worst major conference TV deal out there. Apparently, they've got something going right up there.

[Scott D]

And all of this talk of television sets doesn't tell the whole story. Are you really telling me that Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, Purdue and Michigan State have more drawing power than all of the teams in the Big 12? Not only are they mediocre to poor programs with no tradition or drawing power they have to compete with professional teams. Having television sets is one thing, fans tuning in on those televisons to watch crappy/mediocre programs is another.

There is a reason the Big 10 is on the prowl for another team. IMO, I thnk their revenue producers (OSU, Michigan, PSU) are not happy with the revenue division. So in oder to placate them the @$$wipe of a commissioner they have is looking to increase revenue by makng his conference more attractive to the networks.

Jim Delany doesn't have to make the Big-10 more attractive to the networks. They have prime contracts with ABC/ESPN for football, and a prime contract with CBS for basketball. In less than two weeks or so they'll have their own CHANNEL on cable that is a combination of the NFL Network and ESPNU. If anything, the Big-10 has television by the short and curlies.

[GimmeRed]

How about taking in ND? ND would keep all of the BCS proceeds they bring in but would not share in the BCS revenues of the other 11. The Big 12 would get a much larger (national) audience. ND gets a bowl tie-in, conference championship money and great match-ups (OU vs ND, Texas vs ND, Nebraska vs ND, Texas A&M vs ND---big TV bucks there). Allow ND to keep their Big East basketball affiliation.
If ND won't go to the Big Televen they sure as heck won't come to the Big XII
They wouldn't take the paycut.

[utex74]

If it's Mizzou, then maybe Todd Dodge will bring the Mean Green into it all! RAWR!

A sports call in show down here had an interesting suggestion. Will never happen but they suggested Iowa State to the Big Televen to put them and Iowa in the same league. Also suggested sending Colorado to the Pac 10 because they suck at football and basketball and don't play baseball. To fill in behind those two they would bring in TCU and Arkansas.

That would be an interesting league.

[MorningStar]

If ND won't go to the Big Televen they sure as heck won't come to the Big XII
They wouldn't take the paycut.

That's just it. They wouldn't take a paycut. They would keep their normal viewership plus that of the Big 12 region. They would keep all of their BCS rev but could not benefit from the other schools BCS rev. It could be a win-win for the Big 12 and ND. Plus they could benefit from a CCG.

[Sco]

A sports call in show down here had an interesting suggestion. Will never happen but they suggested Iowa State to the Big Televen to put them and Iowa in the same league. Also suggested sending Colorado to the Pac 10 because they suck at football and basketball and don't play baseball. To fill in behind those two they would bring in TCU and Arkansas.

That would be an interesting league.

Arkansas would never leave the SEC. I could see TCU (and that would be really interesting), but it Dodge somehow turns the UNT program around, why not? They were considered to replace Baylor a few years back...

Then we'd have the South division be all Texas and the North be OU, OSU, KU, KSU, NU, and MU... The only think wrong with that is losing the annual rivalry with Texas, which would kinda suck... but we'd be back to playing Nebraska every year...

[birddog]

Arkansas would never leave the SEC. I could see TCU (and that would be really interesting), but it Dodge somehow turns the UNT program around, why not? They were considered to replace Baylor a few years back...

Then we'd have the South division be all Texas and the North be OU, OSU, KU, KSU, NU, and MU... The only think wrong with that is losing the annual rivalry with Texas, which would kinda suck... but we'd be back to playing Nebraska every year...

the only thing good about that scenario is the possibility of an ou-texass conference championship game every year.

[illinisooner]

And all of this talk of television sets doesn't tell the whole story. Are you really telling me that Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, Purdue and Michigan State have more drawing power than all of the teams in the Big 12? Not only are they mediocre to poor programs with no tradition or drawing power they have to compete with professional teams. Having television sets is one thing, fans tuning in on those televisons to watch crappy/mediocre programs is another.

There is a reason the Big 10 is on the prowl for another team. IMO, I thnk their revenue producers (OSU, Michigan, PSU) are not happy with the revenue division. So in oder to placate them the @$$wipe of a commissioner they have is looking to increase revenue by makng his conference more attractive to the networks.

Obviously since this is the Sooner Football board, we all think and talk football first when it comes to this issue...but don't forget about basketball. Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, and MSU aren't real sexy football programs (maybe Iowa...kinda) but they are basketball first schools. Fans of those schools will be far more likely to watch their basketball team than their football team. Also, with the national "Big 10 basketball is so boring" attitude, ESPN would probably be okay with the Big 10 network getting a semi marquee game (Illinois-Mich St) because more people would want to watch a semi marquee ACC game (Georgia Tech-Wake Forest) on at the same time.

[boomersooner24]

How come no one has mentioned Tulsa for replacing Missouri if they did happen to leave?...It's north of Norman and Stillwater so they could be in the North division. They also have become somewhat better in football and they use to be pretty good in basketball.

[Mixer!]

I don't think Tulsa meets the B12 FB requirements (stadium size, ST sold, etc.).


:pop:

[Husker In Oklahoma]

The Big 10 is also very serious about their academic reputation. Mizzou is probably the best fit academically as well. I don't think they are willing to be sullied by a Louisville or similar school.
So what your saying is, there players are smarter than the players in the Big 12? I'm not buying it one ioda. There are just as many academic casualties in the Big 10 (11) than in the Big 12. Maybe they like to "present" themselves as "strong" institutions, but I'd bet there players aren't any smarter than anyone else's.

[SoonerKnight]

I don't see this really happening. After all you take two teams from the Big 12 and give them to the Big 10. Ou will then be in the Big 10. What was the point of getting rid of the Big XIII?

[royalfan5]

So what your saying is, there players are smarter than the players in the Big 12? I'm not buying it one ioda. There are just as many academic casualties in the Big 10 (11) than in the Big 12. Maybe they like to "present" themselves as "strong" institutions, but I'd bet there players aren't any smarter than anyone else's.
No, I'm saying the overall research and academic reputations of the schools are on a much higher level as a whole than the Big XII. Conferences aren't just about sports, especially a group like the Big 10. The relative academic abilities of the players on the football teams have nothing to do with it.

[Scott D]

So what your saying is, there players are smarter than the players in the Big 12? I'm not buying it one ioda. There are just as many academic casualties in the Big 10 (11) than in the Big 12. Maybe they like to "present" themselves as "strong" institutions, but I'd bet there players aren't any smarter than anyone else's.

but one iota says their academic reputation is better than your spelling. ;)

[Jacie]

Though the television market isn't as big as Missouri's, I wonder if a raid on the SEC for Kentucky might be another plan in the works? There's already a natural rivalry with Indiana and the Wildcats might actually prefer the level of competition to that of the SEC. They aren't likely to beat the Wolverines or the Buckeyes anytime soon but every other team in that conference could be fair game for them one year or another. The SEC schedule for the less-than-elites is brutal.

[47straight]

Academic reputation? Two words, mah friends:

Maurice.

Clarett.

[Scott D]

we can't smack talk Clarett and academics though. Everyone else will mention Dexter Manley :(

[Texas Golfer]

Am I the only one that doesn't think this would destroy the Big 12?

Couldn't we just add someone like Colorado State, UTEP, Air Force, or Houston?

Rumor around here is that if the Big 10 gets Missouri, the Big XII will get TCU.

[Texas Golfer]

I understand the TV market, but if that's the only need, go east. Missouri still seems like a bad fit to me.

BTW, I always thought the Big 12 should be split east/west, not north/south.

I disagree. North/South makes more sense. We have several schools that are almost directly north and south of each other along I-35.

[Texas Golfer]

I do think it is Mizzou and I do think it is going to make other teams (i.e. Texas and Colorado) start shopping.

Could get interesting.

Mizzou would see an immediate increase in revenue. I can see why they would make the move.

I don't see Texas or Colorado jumping ship.

[Texas Golfer]

Arkansas would never leave the SEC. I could see TCU (and that would be really interesting), but it Dodge somehow turns the UNT program around, why not? They were considered to replace Baylor a few years back...

Then we'd have the South division be all Texas and the North be OU, OSU, KU, KSU, NU, and MU... The only think wrong with that is losing the annual rivalry with Texas, which would kinda suck... but we'd be back to playing Nebraska every year...

Are you suggesting that Missouri AND Iowa State would be leaving? I see maybe OSU going to the North but not OU.

[Sco]

Are you suggesting that Missouri AND Iowa State would be leaving? I see maybe OSU going to the North but not OU.

Someone made a claim that Colorado and Mizzou would leave to different conferences and I was going off that idea. I doubt we even lose one team, though. Big Tenelelve will probably go after a smaller conference.

[JohnnyMack]

It's not about geographics in this instance.. it's about. television sets.

No other Texas school would bring an adequate number of eyeballs to the party.

If Missouri does leave... this creates an incredible amount of instability. It detrimentally affects the Big XII's ability to negotiate a favorable television contract since Missouri at least arguably brought the St. Louis and Kansas City markets to the table.

The other schools mentioned.. Utah.. BYU.. Boise St.. any of the other Texas schools... simply do not bring the population and fan base needed to attract networks and their corporate sponsors. The major markets in the Big XII are.. Dallas, Houston, Denver, St. Louis, KC. If Mizzou leaves.. the St. Louis market is lost and since KU has never been a player in football.. arguably, Kansas City is lost as well.

If the rumors of Mizzou going to the Big 10/11 heat up and it becomes more than just a pipe dream... look for Texas to look west and aggy to look southeast.. and this time, there is no Condi Rice as the Provost at Stanford to stand in the way.

The powers to be better take this seriously.

The day Saxet joins the PAC-10 is the day you wear Sansabelt slacks into the courtroom.

I would however trade Aggie straight up for Arkie-saw.

[JohnnyMack]

JohnnyMack's Big XII

North
Nebraska
Kansas
Kansas State
Colorado
Iowa State
Arkansas

South
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Saxet
Aggie
Sand Aggie
TCU

I would trade Missouri straight up for Arkie-saw and Baylor for TCU.

Send Baylor to the Mountain West and Missouri joins the Big Ten. Arkansas is replaced in the SEC by Louisville.

[Chuck Bao]

I think this is just another one of of those typical "who do you want in your conference" threads. Okay off-season and all, it's fun to speculate.

So, I'll join in.

If you're talking about the potential number of TV sets tuned in, I think the BXII's best alternative is to look south of the border - like a very large university in Mexico City.

They wouldn't have the tradition yet, but it could potentially turn very huge, especially playing in one of those huge soccer stadiums.

The NCAA would first have to allow in universities in Mexico and Canada. But, that's not a stretch if their intent is on money and the spirit of NFTA and furthering their control over sports.

The Big 10 (11) could recruit a major Canadian university with the "prestige" that they feel is necessary. ND can just lose out on what would have been a reasonably good fit and conference.

The Pac 10, meanwhile, could go both north and south to get their two divisions and a conference championship game.

[TexasLidig8r]

And then the state politicians without any connection to UT or TAMU would do the same thing they did last time....thy would threaten to give an even larger share of the PUF to the Texas schools being left behind.

I know you longhorns are arrogant and stupid but I don't think you are that arrogant or stupid. I could be wrong, though.

Like it or not, UT's and TAMU's fates are tied to the fates of the other Texas Universities. Unless you *******s can think of a way to go totally private you're still answerable to the tax payers of Texas.

Baylor and Tech were only included because the governor at the time and her supporters.. were.. Baylor alums. The speaker of the house, where the true power in politics in Texas is.. was a Tech grad.

That is not the situation now.

The power structure now in the capitol revolves around Texas.. and aggy.

As for being arrogant and stupid.. if you want to get into name calling.. I am more than happy to oblige.

[OSUAggie]

If Mizzou leaves for the Big 10 (which is highly unlikely), I would think the Big XII would look towards Memphis or Louisville in an effort to add TV sets against the competing markets (Big 10 and ACC).

[badger]

I think a good option, considering the area, might be Marshall. The Herd isn't a bad program, plus they are in the area.

You all mention Notre Dame (I apologize to NP in advance for uttering that school's name) but they won't take the dive until the BCS screws them out of a championship opportunity. It may happen soon, when without a conference title, they aren't seen as a top-2 team when their fanbase thinks differently.

Another idea is Iowa State. Face it, we all want them gone anyways (especially Sherri Coale and women's basketball fans everywhere, those d@mn pesky cyclone chicks) and then, they could have a yearly inter-conference rivalry with the hawkeyes. They already have that rivalry every year, but now it might mean a little more.

Mizzou... hmm... the perennial underachievers. So much talent, so little accomplished. I don't see it happening.

Kansas... now here is a really possibility. What has the Big XII done for them? Not much. Playing basketball (and yea, maybe a little football too) against the likes of Michigan (yawn), Ohio State (double yawn) or Wisconsin (yeaaaa!) could up their national profile.

Kansas State... they might like it, but the Big 10 wouldn't, so not gonna happen.

Colorado... before you mention that it is out of their geography league, remember they already travel to the east coast to play Penn State. What's another long drive through some mountains when the final destination is a lot of rocky beer? Big 10 fans travel for such reasons!

Boise State... I was actually hoping they would join the Pac 10. You know, give USC a real challenge every year, not like Oregon State or UCLA. Zzz.

[silverwheels]

Notre Dame and Rutgers are probably their best bets, but ND already said no and I doubt Rutgers would move into such a tough conference when they've just started to emerge on the national scene.

I think the Big Ten should "give" Penn State to the Big East so they can actually have the same number of teams as their conference name, and Penn State can resume their rivalry with Pitt and dominate that conference. They could still play Michigan State and/or Ohio State OOC if those games are that important.

[Scott D]

Notre Dame and Rutgers are probably their best bets, but ND already said no and I doubt Rutgers would move into such a tough conference when they've just started to emerge on the national scene.

I think the Big Ten should "give" Penn State to the Big East so they can actually have the same number of teams as their conference name, and Penn State can resume their rivalry with Pitt and dominate that conference. They could still play Michigan State and/or Ohio State OOC if those games are that important.

Rutgers has this little thing going now called scheduling a middle of the pack Big-10 school and kicking their butt....the rest of us just call them Michigan State. :D

[royalfan5]

I think a good option, considering the area, might be Marshall. The Herd isn't a bad program, plus they are in the area.

You all mention Notre Dame (I apologize to NP in advance for uttering that school's name) but they won't take the dive until the BCS screws them out of a championship opportunity. It may happen soon, when without a conference title, they aren't seen as a top-2 team when their fanbase thinks differently.

Another idea is Iowa State. Face it, we all want them gone anyways (especially Sherri Coale and women's basketball fans everywhere, those d@mn pesky cyclone chicks) and then, they could have a yearly inter-conference rivalry with the hawkeyes. They already have that rivalry every year, but now it might mean a little more.

Mizzou... hmm... the perennial underachievers. So much talent, so little accomplished. I don't see it happening.

Kansas... now here is a really possibility. What has the Big XII done for them? Not much. Playing basketball (and yea, maybe a little football too) against the likes of Michigan (yawn), Ohio State (double yawn) or Wisconsin (yeaaaa!) could up their national profile.

Kansas State... they might like it, but the Big 10 wouldn't, so not gonna happen.

Colorado... before you mention that it is out of their geography league, remember they already travel to the east coast to play Penn State. What's another long drive through some mountains when the final destination is a lot of rocky beer? Big 10 fans travel for such reasons!

Boise State... I was actually hoping they would join the Pac 10. You know, give USC a real challenge every year, not like Oregon State or UCLA. Zzz.
Nebraska is a better fit for the Big 10 than all of those schools except Missouri. We already spend Big 10 type money on our programs, have strong academic ties to most of the Big 10 schools, and have a natural rivalry waiting with Iowa. Plus the fact that nobody in Nebraska likes being tied in with the Texas schools, and you have your self a school that would listen to the Big 10.

[BASSooner]

ummm Notre Dame?



This is their opportunity to get themselves out of the world of cowardliness

[Zing]

My vote goes to the Air Force Academy

That'd be fun away game every four years. Real pretty up there.


I don't think Tulsa meets the B12 FB requirements (stadium size, ST sold, etc.).


:pop:

And OSU does? I'm not even sure they actually sell STs.


JohnnyMack's Big XII

North
Nebraska
Kansas
Kansas State
Colorado
Iowa State
Arkansas

South
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Saxet
Aggie
Sand Aggie
TCU

Goes down smooth. :pop:

[OUDoc]

All this talk gives me a headache.
Screw 'em all. Maybe we should pull a ND and go independent. Maybe this can be the beginning of the end for the NCAA.
Sorry, just daydreaming there.

[SicEmBaylor]

I'm going to say that the only school that I wouldn't be ****ed to be replaced by in the Big XII would be Arkansas. Arkansas makes sense. TCU? You've gotta be f-ing kidding me.

You've also got to be delusional to want a satellite/directional school like UNT or UTEP. I think that would seriously lower the prestige of the Big XII as an entire entity not just the football programs. Any school system admitted into the conference should damned sure be the primary/flagship campus.

[Sooner in the Bluegrass]

I wonder if a raid on the SEC for Kentucky might be another plan in the works? There's already a natural rivalry with Indiana and the Wildcats might actually prefer the level of competition to that of the SEC.

Hmmm . . . I can't speak for everyone in the state, but my sense is that Kentuckians consider themselves primarily to be southerners, with the occasional midwestern sensibility. I don't know how well those of us east of Louisville (or maybe Shelbyville) and south of Florence (y'all) would like seeing UK sports associated with all those unseemly midwestern types (no offense to the midwestern types posting or reading here. You guys are without question the good ones, and so I'm obviously not talking about you . . .;) ).

Additionally, UK will likely continue to suck in football in perpetuity, regardless of which conference they belong to. There might be fewer teams in the Big Televen between them and fourth place in that conference . . . but it won't mean the 'Cats are actually any better. And rivalry-wise, we Kentuckians may have a certain amount of disdain for some of our midwestern neighbors, but we absolutely despise Tennessee. Generally speaking, of course.

As for basketball, the 'Cats play Indiana every year anyway, and leaving the SEC now-- or at any rate, prior to beating Florida at least ten straight times by an average of thirty points to punish them for their recent insolence-- would mean abandoning the hope of reasserting the total domination of the rest of the conference (which every UK fan considers to be the natural order of the universe. I mean, we've lost to frickin' Vandy four straight times).

[Vaevictis]

I'm going to say that the only school that I wouldn't be ****ed to be replaced by in the Big XII would be Arkansas. Arkansas makes sense. TCU? You've gotta be f-ing kidding me.

You've also got to be delusional to want a satellite/directional school like UNT or UTEP. I think that would seriously lower the prestige of the Big XII as an entire entity not just the football programs. Any school system admitted into the conference should damned sure be the primary/flagship campus.

Pfft, even SMU would be better than Baylor. At least they've got a reason to be so atrociously bad.

[John Kochtoston]

If Mizzou departs the Big XII, then the conference will go tits up within 5 years. I hate to say it, but the Big 12 already has the lowest number of potential TV viewers of any BCS conference, and no potential replacement offers the TV markets of St. Louis and part of Kansas City. OU and A&M would likely join the SEC, Texas and Colorado would go to the Pac-10 (or, possibly the WAC or Mountain West whould whore themselves out to Tejas and/or Colorado), Nebraska and Iowa St. would follow Mizzou into the Big 10, and the Kansas schools would be screwed. OSU would probably **** and moan in the state legislature enough that OU would probably have to take our little brother along to play, unless we could pawn Pokie State off on another super-conference.

[John Kochtoston]

Also, I don't see the Big 10 adding another private school, so the 'Cuse would be out. Same for the Big XII.

[TexasLidig8r]

Here's the newest bit of speculation as to whom the Big 10/11 will look at once Neutered Dame rejects this lastest overture...

http://www.pennlive.com/columns/patriotnews/jones/index.ssf?/base/columnists/118558413123270.xml&coll=1&thispage=3

about half way down the page......

Texas.

[FaninAma]

Baylor and Tech were only included because the governor at the time and her supporters.. were.. Baylor alums. The speaker of the house, where the true power in politics in Texas is.. was a Tech grad.

That is not the situation now.

The power structure now in the capitol revolves around Texas.. and aggy.

As for being arrogant and stupid.. if you want to get into name calling.. I am more than happy to oblige.

Well, if your going to be that sensitive to general comments about the horn faithful made on a Sooner board counselor, then bring it on beyotch.

And I still think there are too many politicians in control of the situation at both UT and TAMU who will not listen to the arogant horn fans who think they would be a better fit in the PAC 10. Politics in Texas is always in a state of flux and if UT and TAMU want to risk ****ing off the rest of the state and burning bridges then so be it. Do you want to hazard a guess at the percentage of politicians in the state legislature with any direct ties to UT or TAMU? And I'm not talking about the judges you guys try to influence with free season tickets.

The fact that so many UT fans, yourself included, are harping about how the PAC 10 is a better fit for UT based on academics and other vague evaluations is proof in itself of how full of it you guys are.

Actually, I would laugh my *** off if UT joined the PAC 10. Then at least half of their games would be on the west coast televised 2 hours after prime time in this time zone and where players families could not travel often to see them play. You think that might affect recruiting?

And in the PAC 10 Texas couldn't throw their weight around like they do in the Big 12 and Mack Brown would have an apolectic fit if he thought he was going to have to play USC and some of the other tougher PAC 10 teams every year on a home and home basis.

[John Kochtoston]

Here's the newest bit of speculation as to whom the Big 10/11 will look at once Neutered Dame rejects this lastest overture...

http://www.pennlive.com/columns/patriotnews/jones/index.ssf?/base/columnists/118558413123270.xml&coll=1&thispage=3

about half way down the page......

Texas.

Fair enough point about Texas' TV presence, but I think the travel issues would make this INCREDIBLY difficult. Champaign, the closest Big 10 town to Austin, is 1,000 miles away, as are Bloomington and Iowa City. Everyone else is further away. Florida's (the article also mentions the Gators) issues with travel would be identical, plus, the SEC is the best thing going today. Why leave?

[John Kochtoston]

That'd be fun away game every four years. Real pretty up there.



And OSU does? I'm not even sure they actually sell STs.



Goes down smooth. :pop:

Boone's Farm currently holds about 50K, plus is expanding to hold 3-4 million more people, or some such :D. Skelly has about 35K seats, and I don't think their expansion plans would bring it up to even 50 K.

[NormanPride]

Texas in the Pac-10 is laughable for the aforementioned time-zone reasons. Big 10 is more plausible, but still silly considering the travel difficulties. Halfway across the US for a Home&Home with Penn St.? Whatever.

I think we're looking at this the wrong way. This isn't an issue of "How does our poor conference survive after being raided by all the bigger, better conferences", it's an issue of "How do we strengthen our conference so that this **** doesn't happen?"

South: Add Arkansas to bring back the UTvsArkie rivalry. Ideally you'd like to steal LSU away as well, but that's NEVER going to happen, despite it making more sense, IMO. Since that won't happen, add in a New Mexico or like school. New Mexico may suck in football, but they're not terrible in basketball, right? Adding them to the Big12 may even help them out in those situations.

North: Add CSU to solidify the Colorado market and add some more flavor to the North, which badly needs it. Steal Iowa to bring that market more into the Big12 rather than the (now really) Big10. Yeah, unlikely. Yeah, Big10 is mean and big and better. Whatever. We're ****ing Oklahoma and those *******s below us are Texas. What do they have? Michigan? Pfft. Ohio is full of criminals and rioters.

I know. It's poorly thought-out and impossible. But it's the kind of thinking that the Big12 needs to survive.

[TexasLidig8r]

The Big XII may be in the long term, doomed for the same reason the Big 8 would have been doomed.... population. Except for Texas, Colorado and Missouri to a certain extent, the population in the other states hosting Big XII schools is not growing at a significant rate.

To a great extent, conferences are no longer about "rivalries" but about revenue! And where does the revenue come from? Your 6 home football games a year? Your 15 - 18 home basketball games?.. Some yes.. the big revenue comes from television contracts and deals with corporations...

So, how do you increase television revenue? You market your product to the greatest number of people possible? And why? So corporations will buy commercial time. When will corporations buy commercial time? When their product is going to the highest population base! The Big 10/11 have Chicago... Detroit... Cincinnati, Cleveland... Pittsburgh (a lot of Penn St. alums).... Indianoplace.. all of the upper midwest... That means... A LOT of teevee watchers, which means A LOT of potential customers. And, a lot of those urbanites in those cities will not only watch.. but, they will buy products as well.

So.. with that. .. how much corporate clout and television viewers do New Mexico... or Colorado State.. or for that matter even, Arkansas bring to the table? Not very much.

Fan's uninformed blathering to the contrary, the politicians in Texas are all about.. how much money can the universities bring to the State? Greater exposure outside the state mean a potentially a more diverse student body, additional sources revenue received, more money received all mean greater opportunities for the university to continue to build and grow.

and again, notwithstanding Fan's inability to understand how academics plays a role (perhaps too many days working/not working at Big Red has clouded his mind)... the power structure at most major universities is greatly concerned with increasing and improving the academic standing of their university (with a few notable exceptions who are too busy sending protest letters off the NCAA, or lying about coaches being offered jobs, or sending baseless appeals and completly supplanting the AD)... I believe all Big 10 schools are members of the CIC. Texas would welcome involvement with fellow CIC universities. And again, don't say academics is not important.. remember how Nebraska squealed when Prop 48 was done away with!

In short, the Big XII had better find a way to increase revenues with the understanding that its population base is not significantly increasing... if not, in our lifetime.. it won't last.

[colleyvillesooner]

You sure seem to have it all figured out.

[soonervegas]

(with a few notable exceptions who are too busy sending protest letters off the NCAA, or lying about coaches being offered jobs, or sending baseless appeals and completly supplanting the AD)

Two things:

The quote. Funny, but extremely uninformed. Pres. Boren, although he has faults, has done more to raise the academic profile of OU than any president I can remember in my lifetime. That University is not the same one I went to back in the mid-90's.

The dream. Texas just almost creams in their jeans thinking everything is about population. (If so, maybe that could mean the demise of OU?) Although important, there are some teams above their state's population. So sorry to burst your bubble, but OU will be just fine regardless of the state's population. OU brings in TV sets becasue of their name....not the population of the state. Just ask NBC....

[FaninAma]

Fan's uninformed blathering to the contrary, the politicians in Texas are all about.. how much money can the universities bring to the State? Greater exposure outside the state mean a potentially a more diverse student body, additional sources revenue received, more money received all mean greater opportunities for the university to continue to build and grow.

Yeah, that's why TAMU's and UT's attempt to leave their weak brothers and sisters behind from the old SWC worked so well the last time. :rolleyes:

If you think there aren't some good ol' boys with ties to TT, Baylor and other universities hoping to someday rejoin the Big 12(ie. TCU) in control of important oversight committees for higher education then you are deluding yourself. You know as well as I do that there is already a lot of bitterness over how the PUF is divied up among the public institutions of higher learning in Texas. UT and TAMU taking their ball and moving to a "better" neighborhood isn't going to sit well with the other universities who educate a lot more of the sons and daughters of Texas than the TAMU and UT systems do.

And your posts just reek with the arrogance I was talking about. You really think that the entire state of Texas wants what is only best for UT? Do really think the average Texan pines away for the burnt orange and helping the elitists in Austin do whatever helps them financially to the detriment of the other public universities in Texas? Do you really think all the rednecks and common folk(ie. non-UT grads) that live in east Texas, the Rio Grand Valley and the Panhandle really place that much of a priority on UT "gaining more exposure?" For that matter, does the average resident of the DFW, Houston, EP, and San Antonio metroplex really care that much about UT's national exposure.

Like I said. Horn fans are arrogant, elitists and, apparently, not too bright. You're blinded by your own self-importance and belief that what goes on in Austin is the center of the Universe. Believe it or not, there are actually other concerns, even in the field of higher education, outside the UT and TAMU systems. And until UT can it go alone and become independent of taxpayer money, the athletic interests of UT and the other public universities will be linked in a common bond .

BTW, I don't think that the PAC 10 would accept TAMU even if they were willing to take UT. And I don't think the SEC or Big 10 would, either. So that essentially leaves UT giving the finger to the rest of the state's higher education programs with a move to the PAC 10 or Big 10. Again, good luck with that.

[TexasLidig8r]

And your posts just reeks with the arrogance I was talking about. You really think that the entire state of Texas wants what is only best for UT? Do really think the average Texan pines away for the burnt orange and helping the elitists in Austin do whatever helps them financially to the detriment of the other public universities in Texas? WTFE. Do you really think all the rednecks and that live in east Texas, the Rio Grandd Valley and the Panhandle really place that much of a priority on UT "gaining more exposure?"

Like I said. Horn fans are arrogant, elitists and, apparently, not too bright. You're blinded by your own self-importance and what goes on in Austin. Believe it or not, there are actually other concerns, even in the field of higher education, outside the UT and TAMU systems. And until UT can go alone and become independent of taxpayer money, the intersts of UT and the other universities will be linked in a common interest.

:rolleyes:

Good Lord Fan.. can you really be that obtuse? You have certainly bought into the mantra of.. "oh.. those evil UT fans.. they are so elitist.. that are so arrogant.. blah blah blah..." Someone go call the waaaambulance.

That is comparable to Texas fans saying, "all Sooners and their fans wear mullets, live in trailer parks and have one tooth between them." Eventually most people grow past the "I have blind hatred for another university simply because we play them in football."

If the interests of UT and all other universities are tied together.. why didn't Houston throw a hissy fit?... or Lamar? Or North Texas? if the Big XII goes south, the sheep humpers are a better fit in the SEC anyway along with those other, cheatin' mouth breathers. The other schools are already on the outs. The only public school left is sand aggy. And sand aggy doesn't have the stroke statewide where it counts.

When the SWC folded, Tech and Baylor were brought along because the real power in Texas, the Speaker of the House, was Bob Bullock.. a Tech guy. His right hand man was David Sibley, a Baylor guy and the governor was Ann Richards, also a Baylor lesbo.

I am not saying it wouldnt take some back room deals. It would. And, I am certainly not saying that all Texans support the UT. Of course, that is not the case. But.. there are a lot of powerful, big buck UT alums who are instrumental in driving important industries here in the state.

But, back to the original point (notwithstanding the jabs back and forth)... as fellow Big XII members, we better find a way to make our conference more appealing to the major networks or we are going to end up with the same ole, crappy teeveen contracts... the same, if not reduced revenue.. and a bleak future.. On that point, I'm sure we can all agree.

[TexasLidig8r]

You sure seem to have it all figured out.

I'm the Shell, f'in' Answer Man! :D

[OSUAggie]

The Big XII may be in the long term, doomed for the same reason the Big 8 would have been doomed.... population. Except for Texas, Colorado and Missouri to a certain extent, the population in the other states hosting Big XII schools is not growing at a significant rate.

To a great extent, conferences are no longer about "rivalries" but about revenue! And where does the revenue come from? Your 6 home football games a year? Your 15 - 18 home basketball games?.. Some yes.. the big revenue comes from television contracts and deals with corporations...

So, how do you increase television revenue? You market your product to the greatest number of people possible? And why? So corporations will buy commercial time. When will corporations buy commercial time? When their product is going to the highest population base! The Big 10/11 have Chicago... Detroit... Cincinnati, Cleveland... Pittsburgh (a lot of Penn St. alums).... Indianoplace.. all of the upper midwest... That means... A LOT of teevee watchers, which means A LOT of potential customers. And, a lot of those urbanites in those cities will not only watch.. but, they will buy products as well.

So.. with that. .. how much corporate clout and television viewers do New Mexico... or Colorado State.. or for that matter even, Arkansas bring to the table? Not very much.

A couple of things in the TV market situation...

1. Adding a school from a state that we already "own" does absolutely nothing as far as adding TV viewers within the footprint of the conference.

A school from a state that is not "owned" (Arkansas, Louisville, Memphis) would accomplish this goal.

2. You have to look at the competing conferences. The Big XII doesn't compete with the SEC for network time in football because the SEC has their CBS deal, the Jefferson Pilot or Sports South or whatever it is deal, and the ESPN2 night game deal.

The Big 12 competes with the ACC and Big 10 for day games on ABC, and those 2 + the Pac 10 for night games (the games are national broadcasts, but the gravity of the game dictates which conference gets the night game). I think the regional Fox Sports game competes only with the Pac 10, while the Fox Sports games are national broadcasts.

------------------------------

Also, the Big XII is likely not in a position to add a team outside of the current market at the expense of a team within the current structure (Baylor, Iowa State, whomever). Of course, if the Big 10 or SEC or Pac 10 or whatever other 10 is able to lure a current member away, that changes things.

I think, right now, in order to secure the livelihood of the conference, at least 1 team needs to be added outside of the current market in an effort to get the conference to 14 teams and add TV sets.

The ideal situation would be to add Memphis and Louisville, strengthen the position in the east-central portions of the country (thus taking away TV sets from Big 10/ACC border areas), and add a few large markets to the footprint of the conference.

[OUDoc]

I still think the rumor of Mizzou leaving and Lid's opinion of the lack of strength of the Big 12 don't give the conference enough credit. They have football powerhouses OU, Texas and Nebraska. Basketball power Kansas, and powers-at-times OU, Texas and OSU. I have no facts to back any of this up, but (as I said before) it just doesn't make any sense to me, financially or otherwise, for Missouri to leave. We'll see.

[Rock Hard Corn Frog]

From a competition standpoint I don't think losing Missouri would be that big of a deal. They have been good at basketball over the years though not so much lately and in football they have traditionally been mediocre at best.

From a TV and $$ standpoint it would be a big disaster losing them. I for one live in SWMO and there are as many or more Sooner and Hog fans as there are MU fans. It would suck here is the local stations (Joplin) started carrying Big 10 games in lieu of Big 12 games. I know a number of games are carried on cable as well but not just in the case of OU. I'd rather watch Neb-KSU play than see Wisconsin-Illinois or Missouri-Indiana. I remember when the Rams moved to St Louis and the first year in Joplin the Cowboys were on pretty much every Sunday. By the second year the Rams were on every week and the Cowboys often weren't shown. It was like the Cardinals had never left St Louis and we were all Rams fans.

I can't see Arkansas jumping to the Big 12 though it would be a great trade. I think TCU is really the only program geographically and as far as competition that would make sense. Problem is people in DFW are already watching Big 12 games so it adds nothing to the TV market and everywhere east of Kansas City and Springfield would become Big 12 country.

[TexasLidig8r]

I think, right now, in order to secure the livelihood of the conference, at least 1 team needs to be added outside of the current market in an effort to get the conference to 14 teams and add TV sets.

The ideal situation would be to add Memphis and Louisville, strengthen the position in the east-central portions of the country (thus taking away TV sets from Big 10/ACC border areas), and add a few large markets to the footprint of the conference.

The resident Okie Lite bumpkin (said with all due respect)... is on to something. To lessen the likelihood of being a take over target, as is in business... you grow.. you strengthen yourself.

Adding two, outside the current market schools may accomplish that. Louisville would be attractive because they could bring the Cincy/Louisville, southern Indy/Northern Kentucky television viewing areas.... they would be a welcome addition to bolster the Big XII North.... and they do not have historical or traditional ties with their current conference.

Then, the debate becomes who brings more to the table in terms of marketing power and demographics.. a Utah? Memphis? BYU? Boise State? The conference would have to take population centers into account.

For long term survival.... being at the forefront of expansion is better than chasing the tail.

[OSUAggie]

Looking west does nothing as far as competing tv sets are concerned, unless we can yank an Arizona school to get Phoenix, which ain't happen'n.

Memphis brings a decent-sized market as well as possibly nabbing Nashville from the ACC market plus they bring a ****load as far as basketball is concerned (as does the 'Ville). And they're not terrible in football, possibly a program that could benefit from joining a Big XII-type structure to enhance recruiting.

The only negative to this is that it waters down the conference.

Perhaps the advent of the 12th game would allow a 9-game conference schedule (6 in, 1 outside the division) and less 1-AA opponents in the non-conference slate.

[FaninAma]

But, back to the original point (notwithstanding the jabs back and forth)... as fellow Big XII members, we better find a way to make our conference more appealing to the major networks or we are going to end up with the same ole, crappy teeveen contracts... the same, if not reduced revenue.. and a bleak future.. On that point, I'm sure we can all agree.

Lid, on that point we can all agree. My main point with the other discussion is that most Texas fans are naive if they think they can waltz off to the Big 10 or PAC 10 and leave the rest of the Texas universities to fend for themselves without any political or financial repercussions. I also think it is presumptious and even a bit arrogant to think the PAC 10 would be a better fit than a conference that is closer in both location and the social values/goals of the other schools they share a conference with......not to mention the fact that so many UT fans seem eager to bail out of the Big 12 because they deem it an inferior conference.

I think that UT's best interests are exactly as you outlined in the above quote....to be part of a vibrant athletic conference that is aggressive about staying ahead of the curve in terms of marketing and adding new programs.

And I don't agree with the conventional wisdom that the BIg 12 doesn't bring as much to the table in terms of quality of product or potential fans. From all the information I've seen, the Big East and the ACC actually have the lowest Nielsen ratings for their football games. So the Big 12 probably falls behind the SEC and the BIG 10 but on par with the PAC 10, IMO.

The problem is that we seem to project an attitude that we agree with the East Coast pundits who promote the notion that the Big 12 is an inferior conference when nothing could be further from the truth, especially when the strentgh of the conference in all sports, men's and women's, are taken into account.

I just think we need better marketing of our product and that starts at the top.....and that's another reason I think dumping Kevin Weiberg was a positive move.

Yes the East and West coasts have more television sets but I don't think they have more college football fans and that's who's going to tune in the games. In fact, I would think the Big 12 only trails the SEC in terms of die hard college football fans who are willing to tune in to a college football game. Somebody who has access to the Nielsen ratings of the various BCS confernces may prove me wrong because I haven't been able to find those figures via Google searches.

[NormanPride]

The resident Okie Lite bumpkin (said with all due respect)... is on to something. To lessen the likelihood of being a take over target, as is in business... you grow.. you strengthen yourself.

Hello? That's what I was getting at, ya silly whorn. ;)

Memphis is an interesting school. Their football is pitiful, but they're a pretty regular contender in Basketball now. It would be hard to pull Louisville from the Big East, considering they're a lock for football titles almost every year now, but adding a fanbase as large as that would be huge.

We also have to take travel distances into mind. Both Memphis and Louisville are quite a trek for texas aggy, but who cares about them? Also, which divisions would they fit in? Memphis being in the south would be a financial burden on a smaller school...

[silverwheels]

If Memphis is our best option, then the Big 12 is better off staying the way it is.

[TexasLidig8r]

Well said Fan.

[illinisooner]

If Memphis is our best option, then the Big 12 is better off staying the way it is.

Agreed. Unless the Big 10 can get ND or Pitt, they're probably better off staying at 11 teams. No use expanding just for the sake of expanding (re: NHL). I'm not sure how much they think they'd be expanding their TV markets by adding Mizzou. There's pretty much equal coverage of Illinois and Mizzou sports in the St. Louis paper, and I'd guess KC has a split between Mizzou/KU/K State/Nebraska. Even if Mizzou breaks off, it doesn't mean that the Neb/KU/KSU fans in the KC area will automatically convert to Big 10 fans. Now they would get the whole St. Louis market, but that's also not that big of a market to begin with.

On the other end of the conference, if Pitt is added, I'm guessing there's quite a PSU following in Pittsburgh already, so I'm not sure how big of an viewer impact there would be. Notre Dame would bring in tons of viewers nationally, outside of the midwest...but we know they won't join. Louisville would be decent from a competition standpoint, but from a viewership standpoint, I'm not sure they bring in many. My guess is that the Big 10 won't do anything; not for a few years at least.

[MichiganSooner]

My first thoughts were Notre Dame but it won't happen. Then West Virginia which is not a highly populated state and therefore not what they are looking for. Then Louisville or Cincinnati. Ohio State would vote against Cincinnati; a thing they enjoy is being the exclusive Ohio school in the Big 10. That left Iowa State and Missouri. Missouri is the best selection. The TV markets of St Louis and Kansas City and the academic fit of Missouri to the Big 10 schools is a match.

The big question is why would Missouri leave? The answer is money. What does the Big 10 offer its members that the Big 12 does not offer its members?
Money.

Now why doesn't the Big 12 have revenue sharing? One answer is our favorite school located in Norman. Right? OU, Texas, Texas A&M, Nebraska are the "haves", as I see it, and for the good of the league, need to share with the "have-nots". I am sounding too much like Clinton, Gore, and Edwards but either we play in the Big 12 or we change our name.

Arkansas would be an excellent fit for the Big 12 but they will not be leaving the SEC. Why? Money.

[NormanPride]

We've gone over this before. I think someone around here ran the numbers and found the monetary difference would be small. I think what most people didn't like about the Big12 was Weiberg running it like a goon. Now that he's gone hopefully someone will step in who knows how to appease the other schools without caving to them.

[Mixer!]

If Memphis is our best option, then the Big 12 is better off staying the way it is.

Memphis or Baylor?
Memphis or Iowa State?
Memphis or Texas Tech?
Memphis or Kansas State?
Memphis or aggy lite?

[Mixer!]

Quote:
I don't think Tulsa meets the B12 FB requirements (stadium size, ST sold, etc.).


:pop:


And OSU does? I'm not even sure they actually sell STs.
Not that I care, but budget aggy has been hovering around the B12's FB ST Mendoza line for the last two seasons. Another mediocre season, and they'll have no choice but to cut prices to get their numbers back up.

[silverwheels]

Memphis or Baylor?
Memphis or Iowa State?
Memphis or Texas Tech?
Memphis or Kansas State?
Memphis or aggy lite?

I would take all of those schools, except for maybe Iowa State, over Memphis. But I'm thinking about more than just football and men's basketball.

[TexasLidig8r]

If the Big 10 does expand by one... and assuming ND says no and Missouri is just not feasible (although, being a larger land grant university with pretty fair academics... they certainly fit the mold)... look for

Rutgers.

Why?

East Coast, i.e., NYC television market. This is not to say that Rutgers is a huge draw in the City.. but... conference games in which they are involved as well as the conference as a whole would have a lot of appeal to the many Big 10 alums who work in the City.

[JohnnyMack]

If the Big 10 does expand by one... and assuming ND says no and Missouri is just not feasible (although, being a larger land grant university with pretty fair academics... they certainly fit the mold)... look for

Rutgers.

Why?

East Coast, i.e., NYC television market. This is not to say that Rutgers is a huge draw in the City.. but... conference games in which they are involved as well as the conference as a whole would have a lot of appeal to the many Big 10 alums who work in the City.

Put down the crack pipe honkey. Not even people in NJ give a **** about Rutgers.

[colleyvillesooner]

Put down the crack pipe honkey. Not even people in NJ give a **** about Rutgers.

That's cause they don't even know it's in Jersey. ;)

[TexasLidig8r]

Put down the crack pipe honkey. Not even people in NJ give a **** about Rutgers.

That's due in part to the fact that college football in the northeast, and going as far south as the city, has been non-existent for the most part. But, don't tell me that Big 10 alums working Wall Street wouldn't like their conference to be right there....

As an aside... here ya go!


http://www.imc2health.com/images/cocaine_crack-pipe.gif

[OSUAggie]

Not that I care, but budget aggy has been hovering around the B12's FB ST Mendoza line for the last two seasons. Another mediocre season, and they'll have no choice but to cut prices to get their numbers back up.

33,000 (2006 #, 5-year low) in a 43,500-seat stadium is 76%, which is well above the Mendoza line in the Big XII.

[OSUAggie]

We've gone over this before. I think someone around here ran the numbers and found the monetary difference would be small. I think what most people didn't like about the Big12 was Weiberg running it like a goon. Now that he's gone hopefully someone will step in who knows how to appease the other schools without caving to them.

http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1914104&postcount=17

The idea that the "haves" are getting $3 million more than the "have nots" is a little misleading.

If the article's #'s are factual, the total amount of money that was shared between Big XII institutions was a little over $90 million (90.11). The article claims that all monies are shared other than the television money (which is based on appearances).

Thus, if you take away $50 million from the total monies shared (90.11 million), you're left with $40.11 million that was shared equally between the 12 universities. The $40.11 million equates to roughly 3.3 million (3.425) per school in "other" shared incomes (NCAA tournament, bowl games, whatever).

By subtracting the "other" income #'s from each school's "total" shared income #'s, you'll get the real amounts that television left for each school. They are as follows:

1. Texas (6.3375)
2. Oklahoma (5.7475)
3. Texas A&M (4.8875)
4. Nebraska (4.4675)
5. Colorado (4.2975)
6. Iowa State (3.9975)
7. Kansas (3.9375)
8. Texas Tech (3.4475)
9. Baylor (3.2875)
10. Oklahoma State (3.2775)
11. Missouri (3.1875)
12. Kansas State (3.1275)

These numbers seem fair based on television app's for each school during the 2005 football season and the '05-'06 basketball season. Again, the numbers change in a relatively dramatic fashion from year to year (we also only had 1 BCS app in 2005).

Now, if the $50 million TV contract was shared equally between member institutions, each school would have received roughly $7.5 million in shared income for the 2005-2006 school year. This gives the bottom feeder (K-State) an increase of roughly $1 million while it takes away more than $2 million from Texas because their football and basketball teams in 2005-2006 were simply more appealing to the rest of the world than the versions from Kansas State.

Complete revenue sharing is ****. I think the way the Big XII does it is perfectly fair. If the bottom programs want to be at the same level as the top programs, they need to pull themselves up by working hard and winning games, not by bitching for welfare and handouts.

[NormanPride]

Yeah, I knew it was you. I just didn't want to give credit to an ag. ;)

[John Kochtoston]

How about a westward expansion? Instead of Louisville or Memphis, snapping up UNLV, New Mexico, Utah and BYU? Create two eight team divisions, with Colorado, Texas Tech, New Mexico, UNLV, Utah, BYU and two other Texas schools, possibly on a rotating basis, in the West, and the old Big 8, minus Colorado and plus the other Texas school, in the East. Schedules would be 7+1 or 7+2, which would minimize the Ames-to-Las Vegas debacles that doomed the old WAC (plus, I think the extra money such a conference would bring in could soften the travel blow). Granted, it would mean only one Vegas trip for Sooner fans every six years, but, you can't have everything.

Plus, it adds the Vegas, Salt Lake City and Albuquerque TV markets which, while not Dallas or Houston, are all Top 50. Vegas is also the fastest-growing city in America. The Sweet 16 (or whatever) would have the following Top 100 markets:

DFW - No. 6
Houston - No. 10
Denver - No. 18
St. Louis - No. 21
Kansas City - No. 31
Salt Lake City - No. 35
San Antonio - No. 37
Vegas - No. 43
Albuquerque/Santa Fe - No. 45
Oklahoma City - No. 46
Austin - No. 52
Tulsa - No. 62
Wichita - No. 67
Des Moines/Ames - No. 73
Omaha - No. 75
Springfield, Mo. - No. 76
Cape Giradeau, Mo. area - No. 80
Shreveport/Texarkana - No. 81
Brownsville Area - No. 91
Colorado Springs - No. 94
Waco Area - No. 95
Quad Cities - No. 96
El Paso/Las Cruces - No. 99

Louisville might be nice, but are they going to pass up the Big East for a potentially harder road to the BCS? Memphis? Don't think that that's going to get the SEC faithful to change the dial, plus, Memphis football sucks (they would be a nice addition in hoops). Arkansas is not leaving the SEC. They do not miss playing OSU and Tulsa one bit. Plus, the SEC is the best thing going right now.

Lid, his shots at Boren not withstanding, is right in one respect: If the Big XII isn't at the fore of expansion, the leauge will die, as other leagues will cherry-pick the top teams, with the lesser schools begging to be carried on their coattails or left in the cold.

[silverwheels]

Twelve teams is already too many for a conference, and 14 is waaaay too many. The only benefit to adding programs like UNLV, New Mexico, etc., is expanding the conference's TV range, but other than that, they don't add much.

[illinisooner]

Twelve teams is already too many for a conference, and 14 is waaaay too many. The only benefit to adding programs like UNLV, New Mexico, etc., is expanding the conference's TV range, but other than that, they don't add much.

I'd say 10 or 12 is the best # of teams for a conference, depending on your thoughts on conference title games. Coaches hate them, presidents love them, and money talks...so they're here to stay. 10 teams works well if you go with the European soccer "single table" style and have the top 2 teams play for the title, regardless of division. It's been said many times before, but all the BCS conferences need to go to a conference championship, or don't have one. Using my best Les Miles voice, "It's not fair that LSU should have to play a top 10 team in an extra game, but USC doesn't have to play an extra game."

[silverwheels]

I'd say 10 or 12 is the best # of teams for a conference, depending on your thoughts on conference title games. Coaches hate them, presidents love them, and money talks...so they're here to stay. 10 teams works well if you go with the European soccer "single table" style and have the top 2 teams play for the title, regardless of division. It's been said many times before, but all the BCS conferences need to go to a conference championship, or don't have one. Using my best Les Miles voice, "It's not fair that LSU should have to play a top 10 team in an extra game, but USC doesn't have to play an extra game."

I personally prefer the Pac-10's setup: ten teams, round robin conference schedule, and no CCG. Ties are broken by head-to-head. Works for me.

Les seems to have forgotten that despite the SEC being the toughest conference ever created by man, they've had 3 BCS champions, the most of any conference since the system started.

[Sooner_Bob]

Twelve teams is already too many for a conference, and 14 is waaaay too many. The only benefit to adding programs like UNLV, New Mexico, etc., is expanding the conference's TV range, but other than that, they don't add much.

The Big XII is already the usual regional broadcast on ABC during football season. Also, with Fox Sports Rocky Mountain in the mix they usually show the Big XII game of the week as well. So, adding UNM wouldn't be that beneficial at all TV-wise. UNLV might be though.

[OSUAggie]

The Big XII is already the usual regional broadcast on ABC during football season. Also, with Fox Sports Rocky Mountain in the mix they usually show the Big XII game of the week as well. So, adding UNM wouldn't be that beneficial at all TV-wise. UNLV might be though.

You just don't switch the two competing markets that much if you go west... At best, you switch Vegas and Salt Lake, two top-45 markets...

If you go east (Memphis and Louisville), you can potentially switch a lot of markets in the top 101...

From the ACC:

Nashville (#30)
Memphis (#44)
Little Rock (#57)

And from the Big 10:

Louisville (#48)
Lexington (#63)
Evansville (#101)

You might switch these from the ACC, as well:
Knoxville (#60)
Chattanooga (#86)
Jackson (#87)
Tri-Cities (#92)

[MichiganSooner]

August 1, in the Detroit Free Press it says that the Big 10 not going to expand right now but that it is a possibility in the future. Commissioner mentioned Syracuse and Rutgers.

I would like to see Syracuse. The Orange Men have played Big 10 schools for years; Rutgers has not except for Penn State. Rutgers has not even been competitive till this year.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070801/SPORTS08/708010323/1048

Big Ten expansion to 12 teams? Not soon
Delany wants drug testing, is against "plus-one" playoff
August 1, 2007

BY SHANNON SHELTON

FREE PRESS SPORTS WRITER

CHICAGO -- The Big Ten will remain at 11 schools, despite speculation that the conference was considering adding a 12th member.

Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany clarified his comments on expansion during the conference's media days at the Hyatt Regency Chicago on Tuesday, stating that the Big Ten could become a 12-team conference in the future, but no plans are in place now.

Advertisement

"What I said was, every 3-5 years, we look at expansion and we will continue to look at it," Delany said. "We haven't looked at the issue since we had those conversations with Notre Dame in the late '90s. It is not a front-burner issue."

In an article published last week in the Des Moines Register, Delany said that the upcoming launch of the Big Ten Network could reopen the expansion discussion because of the conference's desire to attract a larger audience.

On Tuesday, Delany said he hadn't talked to specific institutions about joining the Big Ten, although the article suggested that the Big Ten "could look at Rutgers and Syracuse."

"I think expansion is always possible, but, as you know, we expanded in 1990 and, with the exception of Notre Dame, we really haven't had conversations with anyone. Nor do we have plans to have a conversation with anyone," Delany said. "But it did capture the imagination, I think, of newspaper writers and radio talk-show people."

Delany also unveiled a plan to test athletes for performance-enhancing substances. Ten percent of all athletes would be tested, with the possibility of athletes in certain sports making up a higher percentage of that group.

A positive test would result in a yearlong suspension.

"It's not an educational wake-up call -- it's a loss of eligibility for a year," Delany said.

Delany also said there are no plans to institute a conference championship or add a ninth conference game to the schedule, and he added that he is not in favor of the "plus-one" playoff concept that the Bowl Championship Series is considering.

Under the "plus-one" formula, two teams would advance from the first four BCS games and play a championship game. Pac-10 commissioner Tom Hansen threatened to leave the BCS if the "plus-one" came to be, but Delany wouldn't go that far.

"We're going to honor the agreements that we have with the BCS and with the Rose Bowl, and if there's an effort to change the structure of the BCS, that would have to be evaluated," he said.

NETWORK NEGOTIATIONS: With the football season drawing closer and the Big Ten Network lacking distribution agreements with the Midwest's major cable operators, network executives appear to be willing to compromise on one sticking point to reach a deal.

Network president Mark Silverman said there will be no concessions on the network's demand to be carried on cable operators' "expanded basic" platform in the eight states with Big Ten schools, but the $1.10-per-subscriber license fee that would be passed on to customers in those states could be reduced.

Less than a month from its Aug. 30 launch date, the network has agreements with only 30% of cable distributors in the target states and still hasn't reached a settlement with Comcast, the nation's largest distributor.

At issue remains the debate about placement -- Comcast and most of the other of the holdouts want to air the network on a digital "sports tier" that would not be available in most basic cable packages, a plan unacceptable to network executives.

"We've always been willing to negotiate, but there's been this 'sports tier' that's gotten in the way, in my opinion, and it's prevented some substantive conversations from happening," Silverman said.

"Everything is negotiable except for expanded basic in the eight states."

Although the conference hasn't made much progress in its talks with the major cable operators this summer, Delany is aware that this month will be a crucial period to get deals in place.

"Generally speaking, I think we're at halftime because we didn't expect much to be done in June or July," Delany said. "I think it's halftime, and we need to continue to work hard in negotiations. We will be out and about advocating our position."

Contact SHANNON SHELTON at 313-223-3215 or [email protected]

[Scott D]

psst..Rutgers finished a home and home with Sparty 2 years ago. It was the beginning of the end for John L. Smith's tenure when he lost to Rutgers after nearly losing to them the year before.

[MichiganSooner]

Scott, You got me. I was speaking historically. 'Cuse has played Big 10 teams over the long haul. Rutgers seemed to play Penn State every year until PSU joined the Big 10.

[Scott D]

well to be fair, at that point Penn St. like Miami, Florida State, and Notre Dame were independants, and Rutgers was basically a recruiting purposes cupcake for them back then.

[ric311]

While I personally think it's crazy talk, there's a TON of CU alumni in California who annually bring up the possibility of CU going to the Pac-10. CU plays a Pac-10 opponent in the OOC every year (ASU this year). And believe it or not, CU travels well to the West coast (expecting somewhere around 7,500 at the ASU game this year and I'll be one of them).

IF the Big 12 gets raided, the chorus of wails and cries from the thousands of alumni in California will become too strong to ignore any longer. I think it's nuts, but that's the reality of the situation. I think CU would have to bring back baseball before it happens, though. Having said that, the CU AD has said that reinstating Baseball is on their "to-do" list.

Just food for thought from up north.

[KaiserSooner]

Syracuse? Pitt? Hell, West Virginia?

[Statalyzer]

I'd say 10 or 12 is the best # of teams for a conference, depending on your thoughts on conference title games.

I like 9 or 12, so either way you can get 4 ooc games.


One other thought .... if Missouri goes and we add one of the Texas schools, New Mexico, or Arkansas ... how would they split "north" and "south?" Geographically, Oklahoma and Oklahoma St would be the most "northern" but you know the Cowboys will not want to lose the annual ****** game and would OU want to see the OU-Texas game go the way of OU-Nebraska?

Here's an idea: assuming the Big XII trades Missouri for Arkansas, put Arkansas with Colorado in the South and move the 2 Oklahoma schools to the North.

Then you change the scheduling so each team has 1 permament scheduled team from the other division so that OU-UT and CU-NU are still always played. I'm not sure how to divide up the others, there aren't any other good natural rivalries. My problem with this is I'm not sure about the idea of having Texas and Oklahoma play twice a year on a semi-regular basis. It'd make for more great games, but it'd also dillute the awesomeness of the RRS.

If that did happen it'd likely lead to the ripping effect of the SEC raiding Georgia Tech and then the ACC picking up a Big East team or else Army or Navy.