Great read here about Oklahoma and Texas in the current Big 12. Personally I believe Oklahoma will eventually join the B1G; maybe Kansas as well.
http://newsok.com/article/5521024
http://newsok.com/article/5521024
Big 12...
- Thread starter teals
- Start date
I could see OU in the SEC. The big 12 is a dumpster fire though. UT can burn in hell.
I would think it would make sence to have ku, 0u, and ut go to the big. then the osu, ksu's would go to the pac. then you have a big ten that goes from ny to texas all connected by land. and you pump texas recruits into the big 10. the only 2 hurdels is aau and lhn, which could both be handled by some texas billionare...I think that's who got us kicked out of the aau, along with the unl med center deal not being able to be counted. then you could send a few west big teams to the east.
also I think it would make games like ku vs ksu or 0u vs osu more meaningfull.
west virgina could just go to the acc..
oops here I go on a conference alinement tangent...
also I think it would make games like ku vs ksu or 0u vs osu more meaningfull.
west virgina could just go to the acc..
oops here I go on a conference alinement tangent...
Texas actually voted w Nebr on AAU, several B1G schools did vote agains however
oh, I thought I read somewhere back when it was happening some texas guy helped kick NU out of the aau, when I say texas guy, I mean aau texas guy, not horns texas guy.
Much speculation centers with Texas since Berdahl (who is retiring from the AAU at the end of this month) was President at Texas during the 1990s when the Big 12 was formed.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-from-the-aau-reprisal-for-leaving-the-big-12
Last edited:
I live in KC and to me it seems like the Big 12 is already dead. Either that or it's like life support. Everyone is hoping for the best but knows what is inevitable.
IMO, at this point the Big 12 is probably too far gone to save. With OU and UT at 2 losses, TCU getting beat by OU and Baylor barely squeaking by ISU (not to mention all of their internal issues) the Big 12 is certainly on the outside looking in when it comes to the playoff. And really outside of Washington, the PAC-12 may be as well. The ACC, SEC and BIG have really separated from the other two. And from a money standpoint, when you consider that the BIG schools will be at nearly $50M per school versus the Big 12 at $30-35M per school; that $15M-$20M per year gap is really going to take it's toll on the Big 12 over time.
The thing is, what can the Big 12 do to boost the conference? Add Houston? Ok so they've had one or two solid top 25 seasons in the last 10 years. But if I'm a network executive I'm wondering how much does Houston add in the way of revenue that we don't already have? It's not like UH has a national following like OU or Texas. How much of the Houston metro market do we already have because of Texas, A&M, and honestly... LSU. So where else do you expand? Cincinnati? Ok, that's possible but it's going to take time to build and time is something the Big 12 doesn't have. Colorado State? Boise State? Again, that is great but going to take time. So they need a big name like Norte Dame or BYU. I think if ND ever joins a conference it's ACC or BIG in that order, so I think the Big 12 is reaching there. That leaves BYU, which is possible and brings a brand name and power, but it could be too little too late, especially if the BIG or SEC move first and go to 16.
IMO, at this point the Big 12 is probably too far gone to save. With OU and UT at 2 losses, TCU getting beat by OU and Baylor barely squeaking by ISU (not to mention all of their internal issues) the Big 12 is certainly on the outside looking in when it comes to the playoff. And really outside of Washington, the PAC-12 may be as well. The ACC, SEC and BIG have really separated from the other two. And from a money standpoint, when you consider that the BIG schools will be at nearly $50M per school versus the Big 12 at $30-35M per school; that $15M-$20M per year gap is really going to take it's toll on the Big 12 over time.
The thing is, what can the Big 12 do to boost the conference? Add Houston? Ok so they've had one or two solid top 25 seasons in the last 10 years. But if I'm a network executive I'm wondering how much does Houston add in the way of revenue that we don't already have? It's not like UH has a national following like OU or Texas. How much of the Houston metro market do we already have because of Texas, A&M, and honestly... LSU. So where else do you expand? Cincinnati? Ok, that's possible but it's going to take time to build and time is something the Big 12 doesn't have. Colorado State? Boise State? Again, that is great but going to take time. So they need a big name like Norte Dame or BYU. I think if ND ever joins a conference it's ACC or BIG in that order, so I think the Big 12 is reaching there. That leaves BYU, which is possible and brings a brand name and power, but it could be too little too late, especially if the BIG or SEC move first and go to 16.
I agree. Sure, I understand the AAU argument, but the west needs another anchor and OU would fit the bill. They also bring a national crowd, a decent media market (and part of Texas, too, I'm sure), and the prestige the B1G used to go on about. Lots of benefits, only a few drawbacks. Pros outweigh the cons, and if the B1G can be satisfied being 88% AAU members it'd be a great match.
Kansas would be surefire. AAU, helps the B1G's basketball reputation, adds another team west of Chicago. I know people knock their football program, but KU would help academically (perhaps offsetting OU's addition) and basketball IS a moneymaker.
Move Purdue or Illinois to the east division, add OU and KU to the west, and the divisions look more balanced IMO. OU would be a huge get, and I'm sure they'd accept if invited. Apparently OK State is not tied to the hip like some believe.
The Big 10 will never accept OU. It isn't a serious research institution. Texas much more likely to join Big 10.
The B1G isn't about to turn down a Blueblood in college football that isn't a cancer. And that rules out the Horns.
I would take Texas in a heartbeat. B1G has leadership that SWC and Big 12 severely lacked. Texas' ego would be checked at the door.
I pretty much agree with this...Texas can only rule Texas Schools. Any other Conference already has their big dogs that can't be messed with. I would like to have them as well. It would give the Conference a better national "feel" with games in the cold North and some in the warmer South. They bring far more to the table than OU.
What's funny is there are a lot of fans from the B12 that think we are interested in going back to that dumpster fire. I'd love OU in the B1G, but I don't see it happening due to academics and their Okie Lite problem. Texas brings $$ and academics, but will they be able to handle the fact that they would no longer run things in the conference? I doubt it. They could go Independent and be fine, but the landscape is changing towards super conferences so IDK if they would. It will be interesting to watch unfold and I am happy Nebraska is in a stable conference.
Oklahoma will NEVER be in the big Ten. People will be discussing this twenty years from now, the Big 12 will be long gone but OU will still not be in the Big Ten.
It will just never happen.
Bullcrap. Texas joined the Big 8 and proceeded to dismantle it. Made it their personal toilet and then crapped in it. Eff that. I never want to be in bed with those arrogant jagoffs again. Let them form the Longhorn Conference and be done with it.
Except for your colorful language, I totally agree....
Oh and I thought I had cleaned it up.
as an aside, i keep hearing that there'll be 64 teams in the four main confs. but are the 4 major conferences really willing to add 10 more teams...I think after a couple years of expansion, 14 will be the max per conf - law of diminishing returns and who really wants to add competition? PAC12 has 2 more slots and then it's complete...there could be some big programs left on the side of the road.
I would like to see 4 16+ team conferences where only divisional games counts toward the division championship
you can then set up a 16 team playoff that begins in week 12 of the season
if you take the BIG as an example:
first round of the playoff is east runner-up @ west champ and west runner-up @ east champ (other conf teams would play a meaningless crossover game to complete their 12 game season)
2nd round -- conf championship game as already set up
final four - conference champions (seed 1 v seed 4 -- seed 2 v seed 3)
championship game
- this format would expand the playoff from 4 to 16 without adding any additional games
- the format for the final 4 teams is already in place and wouldn't need changing
- would allow a better opportunity for teams that don't win their division to still qualify (see Michigan or OSU this year) - the penalty for finishing 2nd in your division would be a first round playoff game on the road
- allow for a "cinderella" team or 2 to emerge - similar to March Madness
i don't think the super conferences will happen for another 10 years, when all of the current media deals expire. If then.
Secondly, Texas didn't join the Big 8. The Big 12 was a new conference. When Nebraska joined the Big 10, they didn't start over with a new record book and begin a new history.
The Big 12 was more of a merger between a failing SWC and the Big 8. New name, new record book, new commissioner, new HQ. new conference. Like I said before, it was all good when there were four teams getting more than the rest. It turned bad when 1 of the 4 got even more greedy and the remaining three got mad. Two left, one stayed.
Secondly, Texas didn't join the Big 8. The Big 12 was a new conference. When Nebraska joined the Big 10, they didn't start over with a new record book and begin a new history.
The Big 12 was more of a merger between a failing SWC and the Big 8. New name, new record book, new commissioner, new HQ. new conference. Like I said before, it was all good when there were four teams getting more than the rest. It turned bad when 1 of the 4 got even more greedy and the remaining three got mad. Two left, one stayed.
Except that the current B10 leadership won't be around forever. One would hope that future leaders wouldn't be pressured by Texas politics and boosters, but there's no guarantee. They've proven their ability to influence and take things over, I just don't understand why Nebraska fans would want to take that chance again.
Acquaintance of mine is very connected to OU leadership - -many on this board already know this - Very tough politically for OU to move without Oklahoma St. Also OU would have to consider Texas. Basically Texas can move to B1G on its own whereas OU needs to consider two other programs.
Last edited:
makes perfect sense. just not sure if all the players in deciding this will want 64...
it may be static until grant of rights start expiring. i expect to see nasty and perhaps, prolonged battles from conferences and teams on the outside looking in and some on the inside struggling to stay in.
I've heard contrary to that now, but you never know. I think most have realized it's everyone for themselves. the state can't afford to lose relevant conf affiliation for both.
Last edited:
4x64 seems to be more fan and media dreams than reality. Conferences are still profit driven and too many teams that would dilute profits.
Well it's possible there has been a change in philosophy - my contact advised the Oklahoma St politics were very real but maybe Oklahoma has served notice - politics be damned.
