Just heard an interview with Dan Beebe in KC...

[K-State Spur]

Folks, our conference is asleep at the wheel. Our commissioner does not have any vision for the future and thinks innovation is a disease.

He seems to think Mizzou will hang around because they have such great rivalries with schools like Texas Tech (yes, he actually said this).

He has no understanding that a maintenance of the status quo will be death for the league long term.

[samikeyp]

Hey now, when Tech and Mizzou play, you can throw the records out!!


Yeah...I don't buy it either. :lol

[Blake]

Folks, our conference is asleep at the wheel. Our commissioner does not have any vision for the future and thinks innovation is a disease.

He seems to think Mizzou will hang around because they have such great rivalries with schools like Texas Tech (yes, he actually said this).

He has no understanding that a maintenance of the status quo will be death for the league long term.

what do you propose the conference should do for the future that it's not already doing?

[K-State Spur]

Big 12 TV Network, redo current television deals (no exclusive rights windows) , greater revenue sharing in line with the other BCS conferences, anchor conference championship sites (Dallas for football, KC for basketball, OKC for baseball) and market around that, adjust scheduling so that it does not destroy rivalries across north south/lines, make the bowl slots tie in more closely with conference standings, change the voting system to a simple majority instead of 9 required for any deviations, etc.

Most importantly - be thinking ahead. Right now, this guy is all about the status quo and is just a puppet for UT, OU, and Nebraska.

[Kermit]

what do you propose the conference should do for the future that it's not already doing?

A network would be nice. But I have no idea how they should go about doing it. Just that it's worked out pretty nice monetarily for other conferences (Big 10, SEC).

[Blake]

Big 12 TV Network,

seeing the Big 10's network, that would be nice.

Of course, it won't be long before UT and a couple of others have their own networks. I've notices on ATT Uverse that even BYU has their own network already.


greater revenue sharing in line with the other BCS conferences

this appears to be the biggest issue that Beebe is making out as a non-issue.

It's one reason that Mizzou is seriously considering moving to the Big 10.


anchor conference championship sites (Dallas for football, KC for basketball, OKC for baseball) and market around that

eh. I'm ok with it moving around. I also think it's a worthless game to begin with.


adjust scheduling so that it does not destroy rivalries across north south/lines

I miss the OU/Nebraska annual rivalry, but I don't know how you do that without scheduling fewer out of conference games.


make the bowl slots tie in more closely with conference standings

another reason Mizzou is pissed. They got screwed this year in the bowl selection.


change the voting system to a simple majority instead of 9 required for any deviations, etc.

yeah, 9 does seem to be a bit high. 7 seems more fair.


Most importantly - be thinking ahead. Right now, this guy is all about the status quo and is just a puppet for UT, OU, and Nebraska.

Beebe does appear to be rather laid back when it comes to change.

It would be nice to get a guy in there with just half of Jerry Jones marketing skills and vision.

[K-State Spur]

the SEC, Big 10, and Pac 10 all maintain rivalries without adding extra games to the schedule.

with regards to mizzou, the issue boils down to one thing and there is absolutely no way around this question if the big 10 comes calling:

does mizzou want an equal share of a big pie? or are they happy with an unequal lesser share of a smaller pie?

i believe mike alden when he says that he wants to stay in this conference. i also believe him when he says that this conference needs to change the way it goes about business.

if we all just continue to bend over for the 4 power athletic departments in this conference, the league is just going to stagnate and then they'll leave for other conferences anyways. depending on how much state legislatures get involved, baylor, isu, ksu, tech, okie state, and possibly colorado could all end up with the shit end of a very short stick.

[Blake]

the SEC, Big 10, and Pac 10 all maintain rivalries without adding extra games to the schedule.


The problem with the rivalries you are referring to is that they existed before the merger with OU playing everyone in the Big 8.

It's impossible to play all 11 other teams in a given year so someone has to to give up something.

[K-State Spur]

i don't quite get what your saying?

despite the fact that the teams rotate their schedules due to less than ideal conference sizes - USC & UCLA play in the PAC 10 every single year. Michigan and Ohio State play ever single year.

In the SEC, which is set up East/West just like the Big 12 is North/South - Auburn and Georgia play EVERY year, Tennessee & Bama play EVERY year, maintaining those rivalries even though the teams are in opposite divisions.

It doesn't make the scheduling ideal, but it's not that hard to maintain. Apparently, the Big 12 refuses to do anything that a 2nd grader couldn't handle.

[DMX7]

The Big XII has all kinds of programming besides just games on FSN.

[Blake]

In the SEC, which is set up East/West just like the Big 12 is North/South - Auburn and Georgia play EVERY year, Tennessee & Bama play EVERY year, maintaining those rivalries even though the teams are in opposite divisions.

It doesn't make the scheduling ideal, but it's not that hard to maintain. Apparently, the Big 12 refuses to do anything that a 2nd grader couldn't handle.

then they don't play everyone in their own division every year. If OU were to keep Nebraska every year, even if they rotate, someone in the Big XII south (other than Texas) misses out on playing OU.

You wanting to keep the rivalries like this seems to go against the revenue sharing that you also want.
OU coming to town is a big ticket and you are punishing the other schools financially because you want to keep a north/south rivalry in tact.

[MajorMike]

If Mizzou feels they got screwed so bad and went to a lesser bowl against a much lesser opponent, maybe they shouldn't have gotten their asses handed to them by that much lesser opponent.

I'm tired of this whole Mizzou thing; seriously B12 loses nothing if they go. Seeya. Go be the last B10 academic school instead of 10th of 12 B12 schools.

[StylisticS]

If Mizzou feels they got screwed so bad and went to a lesser bowl against a much lesser opponent, maybe they shouldn't have gotten their asses handed to them by that much lesser opponent.

I'm tired of this whole Mizzou thing; seriously B12 loses nothing if they go. Seeya. Go be the last B10 academic school instead of 10th of 12 B12 schools.

All of this is about TV dollars and ratings. You can't underestimate Mizzou and it's tv market leaving. They will take about half of the largest market outside of Texas in the big 12 with them. All of St. Louis is gone if it isn't already and half of KC is gone. They have to stay in this conference. Dan Beebe is a jackass though.

[K-State Spur]

If Mizzou feels they got screwed so bad and went to a lesser bowl against a much lesser opponent, maybe they shouldn't have gotten their asses handed to them by that much lesser opponent.

I'm tired of this whole Mizzou thing; seriously B12 loses nothing if they go. Seeya. Go be the last B10 academic school instead of 10th of 12 B12 schools.

that's a ridiculous opinion. we lose a founding big 8 member, we lose the most populous state in the conference north of texas, we lose 1/2 the KC and STL markets, we lose a school that has a rich basketball history and the resources to be a football power if they ever get their act together, and we are publicly shown that we are a second rate conference to the big 10.

mizzou leaving could very well be the beginning of the end of the big 12.

[NFO]

The Big 10 does not want Missouri, they add virtually nothing to the Big 10 other than 1/2 the KC market, which the Big 10 is looking for.

All the Big 12 people are worried about Missouri leaving. The Big 10 wants nothing to do with Missouri, Kansas, Kansas St, Iowa St.

If the Big 10 is going to expand it has to add something of value to the conference not pick up some other conferences trash to have a championship game.

[K-State Spur]

The Big 10 does not want Missouri, they add virtually nothing to the Big 10 other than 1/2 the KC market, which the Big 10 is looking for.

All the Big 12 people are worried about Missouri leaving. The Big 10 wants nothing to do with Missouri, Kansas, Kansas St, Iowa St.

If the Big 10 is going to expand it has to add something of value to the conference not pick up some other conferences trash to have a championship game.

Missouri is a populated state, offers NEW markets, fits the Big 10 academic profile (it's a member of the Association of American Universities), has a successful athletic department across the board, and does not have to worry about any state legislatures that would require a tandem jump.

If ND remains unwilling, Mizzou makes more sense than anybody else. Nebraska is probably the only way the Big 10 would do better, but the Huskers currently benefit from the Big 12 inequities, so they might be less willing to make a move.

I agree that KSU and ISU are not options for the Big 10. KU probably is not either - although their basketball tradition makes them attractive if they were looking to jump.

[Blake]

that's a ridiculous opinion. we lose a founding big 8 member, we lose the most populous state in the conference north of texas, we lose 1/2 the KC and STL markets, we lose a school that has a rich basketball history and the resources to be a football power if they ever get their act together, and we are publicly shown that we are a second rate conference to the big 10.

mizzou leaving could very well be the beginning of the end of the big 12.

yeah, I'm indifferent about Mizzou, but at the end of the day, them leaving would hurt the conference.

Who would the conference get to replace them? TCU? Houston? Colorado State? BYU? At best those are lateral acquisitions but none are step ups.

[K-State Spur]

yeah, I'm indifferent about Mizzou, but at the end of the day, them leaving would hurt the conference.

Who would the conference get to replace them? TCU? Houston? Colorado State? BYU? At best those are lateral acquisitions but none are step ups.

ALL of those are huge step downs. TCU might fit in some ways - but the Big 12 already owns the Dallas market. And I think you'll have a hard time getting any of the North schools to agree to shift the balance of power even further to the state of Texas.

We'd probably look more at a Memphis, Cincinnati, or Louisville type.

[NFO]

Missouri is a populated state, offers NEW markets, fits the Big 10 academic profile (it's a member of the Association of American Universities), has a successful athletic department across the board, and does not have to worry about any state legislatures that would require a tandem jump.

If ND remains unwilling, Mizzou makes more sense than anybody else. Nebraska is probably the only way the Big 10 would do better, but the Huskers currently benefit from the Big 12 inequities, so they might be less willing to make a move.

I agree that KSU and ISU are not options for the Big 10. KU probably is not either - although their basketball tradition makes them attractive if they were looking to jump.

I posted a link to an article in the "Big Ten pushing for 12" thread on the second page that discusses the pros and cons to each team the Big 10 might consider and the artilce narrows it from pretenders, to contenders to the favorites. The 2 favorites are ND and Texas. ND fits the best even though it is not a member of the AAU although its faculty wants to be, but the leadership at ND wants to remain independent, thus the other option is Texas. Texas did ask to join the Big 10 in the early 90s and they still might be interested. I guess time will tell.

[Blake]

ALL of those are huge step downs. TCU might fit in some ways - but the Big 12 already owns the Dallas market. And I think you'll have a hard time getting any of the North schools to agree to shift the balance of power even further to the state of Texas.

We'd probably look more at a Memphis, Cincinnati, or Louisville type.

I think Houston would be as a nice fit in the Big XII as Mizzou...but not any better....

but you are most likely right about having too many teams in Texas.

Memphis, Cincy or Lousiville being added would all suck.

[Blake]

Texas did ask to join the Big 10 in the early 90s and they still might be interested. I guess time will tell.

:lol no they aren't.

[K-State Spur]

I posted a link to an article in the "Big Ten pushing for 12" thread on the second page that discusses the pros and cons to each team the Big 10 might consider and the artilce narrows it from pretenders, to contenders to the favorites. The 2 favorites are ND and Texas. ND fits the best even though it is not a member of the AAU although its faculty wants to be, but the leadership at ND wants to remain independent, thus the other option is Texas. Texas did ask to join the Big 10 in the early 90s and they still might be interested. I guess time will tell.

Notre Dame makes all kinds of sense across the board, but it seems like they are going to stick with independent tradition in the face of reason.

Texas makes less sense than Mizzou for 3 reasons:
1) Travel costs - not a big deal for the revenue sports, but still a major expense and consideration for every sport other than football/men's basketball.
2) Texas receives the biggest benefits and inequities from the Big 12 that it won't get from any other conference.
3) Texas' athletic department has so much clout that Ohio State, Penn St., and Michigan may be less than receptive to adding another giant to the table.

[StylisticS]

:lol no they aren't.

I think they actually are. Texas has always wanted to join the Big X or Pac X.

[StylisticS]

Notre Dame makes all kinds of sense across the board, but it seems like they are going to stick with independent tradition in the face of reason.

Texas makes less sense than Mizzou for 3 reasons:
1) Travel costs - not a big deal for the revenue sports, but still a major expense and consideration for every sport other than football/men's basketball.
2) Texas receives the biggest benefits and inequities from the Big 12 that it won't get from any other conference.
3) Texas' athletic department has so much clout that Ohio State, Penn St., and Michigan may be less than receptive to adding another giant to the table.


Have you read this article. A guy talks about the expansion in the Big 10 and talks about the pretenders, contenders, and the only real choices ( only two schools are named. Guess which ones). Here is the link. It's long but very interesting.

http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2009/12/27/the-big-ten-expansion-index-a-different-shade-of-orange/

[K-State Spur]

He raises some good points, but I stand by my statement. Forgive me if I don't hold Frank the Tank and his own formula as the end-all-be-all authority on the expansion.

[Blake]

I think they actually are. Texas has always wanted to join the Big X or Pac X.

says who?

[Blake]

Have you read this article. A guy talks about the expansion in the Big 10 and talks about the pretenders, contenders, and the only real choices ( only two schools are named. Guess which ones). Here is the link. It's long but very interesting.

http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2009/12/27/the-big-ten-expansion-index-a-different-shade-of-orange/

:lol

This guy is definitely a pretender. Of course the Big 10 would want UT. Dur. Any conference would.

He says "UT is a lot more open to it [leaving for the Big 10] than what the public seems to realize" but he himself puts the mutual interest level at a 3. :lol

[romad_20]

then they don't play everyone in their own division every year.



Actually, just to clarify, SEC teams do play everyone in their division each year.

For example this year UGA played Tenn, SC, FL, Ken, Vandy (all of the east) and LSU, Ark and Auburn from the west (besides Auburn, the west teams are on rotation). UGA also plays Georgia Tech every year from the ACC. That still leaves 3 other games to be played OOC. This season they scheduled OK St, Az St and Tenn Tech.

Just an example but it would be possible for Ok to play Neb every year.

[NFO]

:lol no they aren't.

Then why did they ever inquire about joining in the 90s?

I think they actually are. Texas has always wanted to join the Big X or Pac X.

Very true. I think The Big 10 is a better fit time zone wise and all members of the Big 10 are AAU members, which UT is.



says who?

a lot of people. I believe the faculty would be behind the move. Texas could make 10 to 20 million more a year (enough to make up the losses for travel on non revenue sports). That and Texas has never really liked being in the Big 12.

[NFO]

He says "UT is a lot more open to it [leaving for the Big 10] than what the public seems to realize" but he himself puts the mutual interest level at a 3. :lol

That is because people like you and many other big 12 fans forget that Texas once tried to join the Big 10 and refuse to think that Texas would leave a conference that was thrown together at the last minute for potentially greener pastures.

[StylisticS]

Yup. They also tried to join the Pac 10 but the Texas government stepped in and said they must take A&M with them and Stanford didn't want any part of A&M because of the probation period they were in during that time. I don't believe they would be against adding A&M now since A&M cleaned up it's act supposedly. The Big 12 is something that both Texas fans AND Texas A&M fans did not want and still does not want.


He raises some good points, but I stand by my statement. Forgive me if I don't hold Frank the Tank and his own formula as the end-all-be-all authority on the expansion.


Well I didn't post the link for that. I just posted it to add to the conversation and since it had everything to do with the topic. But there are similar articles discussing Texas and Big 10 throughout the internet.

[Blake]

Actually, just to clarify, SEC teams do play everyone in their division each year.

For example this year UGA played Tenn, SC, FL, Ken, Vandy (all of the east) and LSU, Ark and Auburn from the west (besides Auburn, the west teams are on rotation). UGA also plays Georgia Tech every year from the ACC. That still leaves 3 other games to be played OOC. This season they scheduled OK St, Az St and Tenn Tech.

Just an example but it would be possible for Ok to play Neb every year.

right. by subtracting another OOC game.....or by simply bumping up to 14 games.

[Blake]

Then why did they ever inquire about joining in the 90s?

because the old SWC in the 90s was full of suck and they were asking everyone.


a lot of people.

be specific.


I believe the faculty would be behind the move. Texas could make 10 to 20 million more a year (enough to make up the losses for travel on non revenue sports). That and Texas has never really liked being in the Big 12.

who specifically has said that Texas has never really like being in the Big 12?

[K-State Spur]

right. by subtracting another OOC game.....or by simply bumping up to 14 games.

No, it's also possible by locking in one of your inter-division games and then rotating 2 other teams every 3 years instead of 3 teams every 2 years.

[Blake]

No, it's also possible by locking in one of your inter-division games and then rotating 2 other teams every 3 years instead of 3 teams every 2 years.

ah yeah ok, there you go. that makes sense.

Strange that the Big XII couldn't figure that out with OU/Nebraska.

[NFO]

because the old SWC in the 90s was full of suck and they were asking everyone.?

Perhaps but why did they seek out the Big 10, which doesn't really logisitcially fit if they didn't want to be in that conference. Becasue the Big 10at the time was probably the top 1 or 2 confereces in the country. Also the Big 10 is probably the best academic conference of the BCS confereces and most other confernces besides the Ivy League.

You are asking me to be specific but I don't see where Texas asked to join any other conference besides the PAc-10 and the Big 10. What other conferences did Texas ask to join???



who specifically has said that Texas has never really like being in the Big 12?

It is just common knowledge. Ask some of your Texas Longhorn fans and they will probably tell you that Texas does not like being in the Big 12 Conference. Besides no one from Texas would offically come out and say they did not like the Big 12 Conference. So if you are asking me to find a quote from person X in regards to Texas about not wanting to remain in the Big 12 I can't do that, but it that doesn't mean I am full of BS.

Maybe a UT fan would have a better grasp on it as I just started to follow this when the Big 10 announced expansion. Any UT fan have a quote for Blake about UT not being happy in the Big 12??

[Blake]

Perhaps but why did they seek out the Big 10, which doesn't really logisitcially fit if they didn't want to be in that conference. Becasue the Big 10at the time was probably the top 1 or 2 confereces in the country. Also the Big 10 is probably the best academic conference of the BCS confereces and most other confernces besides the Ivy League.

because the Big XII wasn't around yet


You are asking me to be specific but I don't see where Texas asked to join any other conference besides the PAc-10 and the Big 10. What other conferences did Texas ask to join???

The Big 8?

I'm asking you to be specific as to who says Texas still might be interested in joining the Big 10.


It is just common knowledge. Ask some of your Texas Longhorn fans and they will probably tell you that Texas does not like being in the Big 12 Conference.

I don't know any Texas Longhorn fan that does not like Texas being in the Big 12 Conference compared to the Big 10 or Pac 10.

Common knowledge is that the Big XII has been a superior football conference for a while now over the B10 and P10.


Besides no one from Texas would offically come out and say they did not like the Big 12 Conference.

so you are just guessing.


So if you are asking me to find a quote from person X in regards to Texas about not wanting to remain in the Big 12 I can't do that, but it that doesn't mean I am full of BS.

you are full of guessing and prone to fall for whatever some blogger named frank the tank tells you.


Maybe a UT fan would have a better grasp on it as I just started to follow this when the Big 10 announced expansion. Any UT fan have a quote for Blake about UT not being happy in the Big 12??

I'd love to see it as it would surprise me.

I am curious though as to what longhorn fans around here would think about a move to the Big 10........let's find out.

[NFO]

because the Big XII wasn't around yet

No kidding



The Big 8?

Do you know why the Big 8 turned them down before the formation of the Big 12.



I'm asking you to be specific as to who says Texas still might be interested in joining the Big 10.

Just what I have heard on some credible blogs and in the Columbus Dispatch that Texas would listen if the Big 10 came calling, not that Texas would switch. They were interested once before and the interest is likely still there. Do I have the UT president on speed dial to confirm this, no.




I don't know any Texas Longhorn fan that does not like Texas being in the Big 12 Conference compared to the Big 10 or Pac 10.

Well good for you.



Common knowledge is that the Big XII has been a superior football conference for a while now over the B10 and P10.

Since the Big 12 has only been around for about 15 years that is debatable, but not the issue here. Besides you are looking through football only glasses and not looking at television contracts, media markets, academics. There is much more to joining a different conference than just the football program.



so you are just guessing.

Not really. Look at it this way. When the two sports writers wrote the book about Barry Bonds and steriods they did not name their source from who they got their information from. Would you not find their book credible because they did not name a source.



you are full of guessing and prone to fall for whatever some blogger named frank the tank tells you.

I could care less about what Frank the Tank tells me. I was well aware of Texas's interest in the Big 10 before I read Frank The Tank's blog. Could it be that you are so nieve that you won't consider any information unless it comes from the almighty ESPN.



I'd love to see it as it would surprise me.

I'm not saying I would like to see it or not see it just that there is interest between the two parties, whether it unfolds or not is an entirely different story.



I am curious though as to what longhorn fans around here would think about a move to the Big 10........let's find out.

Same here. As the Buckeye board I post on has several Longhorn fans on it talking about Texas potentially going to the Big 10.

[Blake]

Do you know why the Big 8 turned them down before the formation of the Big 12.

don't hold back. Tell us why.


Just what I have heard on some credible blogs and in the Columbus Dispatch that Texas would listen if the Big 10 came calling, not that Texas would switch. They were interested once before and the interest is likely still there. Do I have the UT president on speed dial to confirm this, no.

so you are just guessing.


Well good for you.

you asking me to ask UT fan about it doesn't prove your point, so it's definitely not good for you.


Since the Big 12 has only been around for about 15 years that is debatable

since 1998, Ohio St is the only team to go to the title game from the Big 10 three times and won once.

Including this year, OU and UT have gone a combined five times winning twice, tonite possibly being a third.

the debate wouldn't last for long.


but not the issue here. Besides you are looking through football only glasses and not looking at television contracts, media markets, academics. There is much more to joining a different conference than just the football program.

the number you might be crunching in your head are still just more guessing on your part.


Not really. Look at it this way. When the two sports writers wrote the book about Barry Bonds and steriods they did not name their source from who they got their information from. Would you not find their book credible because they did not name a source.

Have you written and published a book on why Texas is still interested in moving to the Big 10?


I could care less about what Frank the Tank tells me. I was well aware of Texas's interest in the Big 10 before I read Frank The Tank's blog. Could it be that you are so nieve that you won't consider any information unless it comes from the almighty ESPN.

I could care less what your opinion is unless you have something substantial to back it up with.

Could it be that you are a buckeye fan that is just doing some wishful thinking?

I respect your opinions Nate, but I'm definitely not naive enough to consider random information from some biased buckeye poster on the college page of an NBA message board.



I'm not saying I would like to see it or not see it just that there is interest between the two parties, whether it unfolds or not is an entirely different story.

More guessing.


Same here. As the Buckeye board I post on has several Longhorn fans on it talking about Texas potentially going to the Big 10.

Post the link to what these UT fans are saying. You do at least have me curious.

[DarkReign]

The Big 10 does not want Missouri, they add virtually nothing to the Big 10 other than 1/2 the KC market, which the Big 10 is looking for.

If the Big 10 is going to expand it has to add something of value to the conference not pick up some other conferences trash to have a championship game.

Ehhhh!

Wrong. After reading this forum some time ago about this very issue, I decided to do some research into the local papers and scene.

Turns out, obviously, the B10 wants Notre Dame first and foremost. But they dont want to be denied (again), so its a no-go.

The next logical addition is Mizzou. Large market, good athletics, passable academics, great following...did I mention large TV market thereby increasing the already sizeable pool of TV money the B10 already gets?

Yeah. Mistreating Mizzou is not smart. B10 wants them as option 1B, which just so happens to be the only realistic option on the table (and a very, very good one for the B10 at that).

Now, this all hinges on the B10 expanding which is still up in the air. but if it does...Mizzou will be its first choice to get an offer. An offer that is FAR superior to their current deal in the B12.

[DarkReign]

Mind you, I dont think UT wants to join the B10. I did read that in other places but I just dismissed it as hogwash.

Doesnt make me right, but I still outright dismiss it.

[DarkReign]

Oh, I also dont believe Nebraska wants out of the B12 along the same lines of UT. They have a nice little monopoly intraconference and, IMO only, are an outright dismissal the same as UT.

Dont get me wrong. B10 would rape/kill/plunder for either Notre Dame, Texas or Nebraska. I just dont *think* either one of them has the same interest level.

[NFO]

don't hold back. Tell us why.

I don't know why, which is why I asked.




so you are just guessing.

I am just repeating what others have said. Yeah it is mostly just guessing that there is mutual interest, which I believe there is based upon the fact that Texas has requested yo be in the Big 10 before and the Big Ten rejected although listened to the offer before. I'm not saying that the interest level on either side is high, but I do think it is there depending on how a deal could be worked out.




you asking me to ask UT fan about it doesn't prove your point, so it's definitely not good for you.

Well I do not know one single UT fan, which is why I asked.




since 1998, Ohio St is the only team to go to the title game from the Big 10 three times and won once.

Including this year, OU and UT have gone a combined five times winning twice, tonite possibly being a third.

the debate wouldn't last for long.

True but Okalhoma has lost several (more than Ohio St) BCS bowls but never gets the same scrutinty that Ohio St. does.


In the BCS area which is just shorther than the existence of the Big 12. The Big 10 has 21 BCS appearances to the Big 12s 17 appearances. The Big 10 has a 10 wins to the Big 12s 7. The Big 10s winning % in BCS games is .476 and the Big 12s is .438. Each conference has had 7 different representatives. The Big 10 also has the school that has the most BCS appearances in Ohio State. So there is a debate.



the number you might be crunching in your head are still just more guessing on your part.

Really. If Texas was added to the Big 10 they would had the Dallas and Houston matches where as adding Missouri adds 1/2 the KC market. You don't need to crunch very many numbers to know which market would generate more revenue.



Have you written and published a book on why Texas is still interested in moving to the Big 10?

Not that I am aware of, although if I did I would dedicate it to you.



Could it be that you are a buckeye fan that is just doing some wishful thinking?

Not really, I would rather have Notre Dame in our league, but that is wishful thinking. I could care less if Texas was added because they would likely be in the opposite division IF Texas was added and would rotate years that they played.




I respect your opinions Nate, but I'm definitely not naive enough to consider random information from some biased buckeye poster on the college page of an NBA message board.

Fair enough.






Post the link to what these UT fans are saying. You do at least have me curious.

Just google "Texas to the Big 10" you will get plenty of information about it.



Ehhhh!

Wrong. After reading this forum some time ago about this very issue, I decided to do some research into the local papers and scene.

Turns out, obviously, the B10 wants Notre Dame first and foremost. But they dont want to be denied (again), so its a no-go.

The next logical addition is Mizzou. Large market, good athletics, passable academics, great following...did I mention large TV market thereby increasing the already sizeable pool of TV money the B10 already gets?

Yeah. Mistreating Mizzou is not smart. B10 wants them as option 1B, which just so happens to be the only realistic option on the table (and a very, very good one for the B10 at that).

Now, this all hinges on the B10 expanding which is still up in the air. but if it does...Mizzou will be its first choice to get an offer. An offer that is FAR superior to their current deal in the B12.


What.......

The Big 10 said (specifically Barry Alvarez) that they wanted to hit a home rum if it were to expand. Obviously that would be Notre Dame. If Missouri is the Big 10s home run then they must be playing in a little league park. IMO Missouri while fitting geogrpahically and academically 1/2 KC market is not the home run the Big 10 is really thinking of. Of course I could be wrong, but I just don't see Missouri in the Big 10.



Oh, I also dont believe Nebraska wants out of the B12 along the same lines of UT. They have a nice little monopoly intraconference and, IMO only, are an outright dismissal the same as UT.

I don't see the Big 10 asking Nebraska either. No real TV markets and academically is not very strong when comapred to the Big 10 schools.

[K-State Spur]

Mind you, I dont think UT wants to join the B10. I did read that in other places but I just dismissed it as hogwash.

Doesnt make me right, but I still outright dismiss it.

why would they? they're not a member of the big 12...they own the big 12.

[K-State Spur]

The Big 10 said (specifically Barry Alvarez) that they wanted to hit a home rum if it were to expand. Obviously that would be Notre Dame. If Missouri is the Big 10s home run then they must be playing in a little league park. IMO Missouri while fitting geogrpahically and academically 1/2 KC market is not the home run the Big 10 is really thinking of.

Why are you so focused in on just .5 the KC market? There are 6 million people in Missouri. It's the 18th most populous state. That's more than Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and only 300,000 less than Indiana.

Outside of Notre Dame's national following, it's hard to believe that they are going to be able to add any NEW markets that fit in geographically, academically, athletically, and approach that number.

[NFO]

Post the link to what these UT fans are saying. You do at least have me curious.

Could Texas BE Considered in Big Ten (http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/8495/could-more-than-just-nebraska-isu-missouri-be-considered-in-super-big-ten)

Will the Big 10 grow to a dozen (http://www.sportingnews.com/college-football/article/2007-07-31/will-big-ten-grow-dozen)

'Large Dozen' would bring Big Ten title game, more money (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/12665737/big-ten-expansion-to-large-dozen-makes-perfect-sense)

Blake, this article mentions that Texas has issues w/ the Big 12 FWIW


Texas (http://www.burntorangenation.com/story/2007/7/31/153259/001)

Just for you Blake.


Barking Carnival (http://barkingcarnival.fantake.com/2009/12/16/big-10-vs-pac-10-which-is-better-for-texas/)

Offers some fan response to the issue, some pro UT to the Big 10 and vice versa.


You said you were curious Blake, does any of that help you out? I'm not saying it would happen, in fact I think UT going to the Big 10 has less than a percent chance, but I still think there is some interest in both parties, how much interest, who knows.

[Blake]

Did you even read the articles in the links you posted?


Could Texas BE Considered in Big Ten (http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/8495/could-more-than-just-nebraska-isu-missouri-be-considered-in-super-big-ten)

^^
...We also remember how the Texas Legislature played a big part in the formative stages of the Big 12. It would be hard for Texas to be able to escape the conference from which it helped create less than two decades ago....

....I don't think we'll see the Big 12 raided by the Big Ten in their expansion plans.

confirms my thoughts :tu


Will the Big 10 grow to a dozen (http://www.sportingnews.com/college-football/article/2007-07-31/will-big-ten-grow-dozen)

This blog says nothing about UT being interested in joining the Big 10. All it does is list the positives for having UT in the Big 10.


'Large Dozen' would bring Big Ten title game, more money (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/12665737/big-ten-expansion-to-large-dozen-makes-perfect-sense)

^^
If the Big Ten wants to hit a home run, it could invite Texas. The school might be geographically undesirable, but the league would have to salivate at a chance to have the two richest athletic departments in one conference (Ohio State is the other).

It is known that Texas has been desired by the Pac-10 in the past. Texas has been upset at times with various Big 12 issues, the latest the three-team tiebreaker that kept it from winning the South Division last year.

another blogger with nothing new to say. Dodd isn't exactly the brightest bulb in the box.

what's funny is if you read the respones to Griffin and Dodd, many of them call the idea of UT moving to the Big 10 "stupid".



Blake, this article mentions that Texas has issues w/ the Big 12 FWIW

Texas (http://www.burntorangenation.com/story/2007/7/31/153259/001)

Just for you Blake.

first two paragraphs:


Could Texas be the team the Big 10 is eyeing to become the twelth member of the conference?

Maybe, but it's beyond unlikely Texas would do it. It's not so much that the Big 12 is so wonderful (all other factors being equal, Texas would rather be in the Big 10), it's that (at least for football) a move to the Big 10 would dramatically hamper Texas' ability to schedule. At all.

Now it does say "all factors being equal Texas would rather be in the Big 10" but doesnt expound on that or say why.

It's nothing more than his opinion.


Barking Carnival (http://barkingcarnival.fantake.com/2009/12/16/big-10-vs-pac-10-which-is-better-for-texas/)

Offers some fan response to the issue, some pro UT to the Big 10 and vice versa.

^^
The Big 12 is doomed moving forward, but backroom dealings have revealed that the Pac-10 will take the Longhorns if they don’t go to the Big Ten.

"backroom dealings"? WTF? :lol :lol

So you don't like frank the tank, but you'll trust a blogger named "huckleberry"?

:lol


You said you were curious Blake, does any of that help you out?

The last one helped me laugh.


I'm not saying it would happen, in fact I think UT going to the Big 10 has less than a percent chance, but I still think there is some interest in both parties, how much interest, who knows.

Although there is no evidence for it, and more evidence against it, I really have no problem with you thinking UT has interest in leaving the Big XII for the Big 10.

Just don't tell me "a lot of people do" when I see that really only you and Huckleberry do.

[NFO]

Did you even read the articles in the links you posted?

Some yes and some no. I posted the various links becuase you said you were curious. I posted them whether the link was for or against UT moving to the Big 10 and all of it was opinion, I wasn't trying to prove any point about posting those links other than there was talk that UT could go to the Big 10, nothing more and nothing less.



This blog says nothing about UT being interested in joining the Big 10. All it does is list the positives for having UT in the Big 10.

And there are positives if it would ever happen, but I doubt it ever would, but it goes to show you that there is the potential for it to happen, although I would guess that it won't.



another blogger with nothing new to say. Dodd isn't exactly the brightest bulb in the box.

I am going to play the role of you for a second. Be more specific to show Dodd isn't exactly the brightest bulb in the box? Do you have is IQ score, his transcripts to show that he is not exactly the brighest bulb in the box. Oh wait it is just your opinion and that means it actually has little merit.

Actually I could care less if you thought Dodd was an idiot or genius. Like I already said, I just posted the links to show that there was talk about the Big 10 asking UT or UT going to the Big 10, regardless if it ever materialized or not.



what's funny is if you read the respones to Griffin and Dodd, many of them call the idea of UT moving to the Big 10 "stupid".

Correct. I think Texas to the Big 10 would be good for the Big Ten in terms of TV revenue, conference perception, new rivalries, if it ever decided to leave the Big 12. But I think from Texas's perspective that it would not be a good decision mainly because I think the Big 12 caters to them and they are the Big 12s cash cow. Whether there are any problems with UT and the Big 12 I don't actually know, but some bloggers seem to think so, but that is merely opinion and really doesn't mean to much other than being a conversatino piece.



So you don't like frank the tank, but you'll trust a blogger named "huckleberry"?[QUOTE=Blake;3976791]

Frank the Tank did most some good facts on the TV Revenue deal. Never said I trusted either blogger, when did I say I trust a blogger.


[QUOTE=Blake;3976791]Although there is no evidence for it, and more evidence against it, I really have no problem with you thinking UT has interest in leaving the Big XII for the Big 10.

No evidence for it, the fact that they would make more substantially more TV revenue if UT did switch is not evidence that a possible move could happen. Look I don't think UT has much interest in leaving the Big 12, if at all but some people, albeit bloggers have talked about it, whether it is real or not. I was just trying to create some talking points.



Just don't tell me "a lot of people do" when I see that really only you and Huckleberry do.

Ok I will admit that "a lot of people" was a misuse of words, but you are putting words in my mouth saying that Texas will join the Big. All I am saying that there is talk out there of it possibly happening, knowing that all the talk is opinion and fodder. But Texas sis ask to join the Big 10 in the 90s, you can at least agree on that, right????? I'm just saying that if they asked once they might still have interest, and that is my personal opinion. Whether the Big 10 ever asks or is even remotely interest in asking UT I have no clue.

[Blake]

I am going to play the role of you for a second. Be more specific to show Dodd isn't exactly the brightest bulb in the box? Do you have is IQ score, his transcripts to show that he is not exactly the brighest bulb in the box. Oh wait it is just your opinion and that means it actually has little merit.

Actually I could care less if you thought Dodd was an idiot or genius. Like I already said, I just posted the links to show that there was talk about the Big 10 asking UT or UT going to the Big 10, regardless if it ever materialized or not.

I could post some of the blogs he has had over the years where he shoots off horrible opinions right off the cuff without researching them, while also blatantly showing his Missouri bias, but in the end, me saying Dodd isn't the brightest bulb in the box is absolutely all my opinion.

You saying "a lot of people say Texas has interest to leave the Big XII" is something based on substance that can easily be displayed.



Ok I will admit that "a lot of people" was a misuse of words, but you are putting words in my mouth saying that Texas will join the Big. All I am saying that there is talk out there of it possibly happening, knowing that all the talk is opinion and fodder. But Texas sis ask to join the Big 10 in the 90s, you can at least agree on that, right????? I'm just saying that if they asked once they might still have interest, and that is my personal opinion. Whether the Big 10 ever asks or is even remotely interest in asking UT I have no clue.


where did I quote you as saying "Texas will join the Big 10"?

Yes Texas talked to the Big 10 in the 90s because they wanted to bolt from the SWC like Arkie did. I think that's why they asked once upon a time.

Now they have settled well into a strong, yet controllable conference like the Big XII, I see no reason why they would have any interest in leaving.

I think that if the Big 10 thought they had a real shot at getting UT they would send an invite. I think they know they have no real shot.

[DarkReign]

why would they? they're not a member of the big 12...they own the big 12.

Exactly.

[DarkReign]

The Big 10 said (specifically Barry Alvarez) that they wanted to hit a home rum if it were to expand. Obviously that would be Notre Dame. If Missouri is the Big 10s home run then they must be playing in a little league park. IMO Missouri while fitting geogrpahically and academically 1/2 KC market is not the home run the Big 10 is really thinking of. Of course I could be wrong, but I just don't see Missouri in the Big 10.

I missed this the last time.

I dont disagree with you. If the B10 only wants the "homerun" and not a "bases clearing double", then yes, its Notre Dame or UT, end of discussion.

But it isnt realistic, at least not at this juncture.

Who knows? Maybe one day Notre Dame and its alum will get off their independent high-horse and join the B10.

Then again, maybe one day the messiah will walk the Earth. I am not holding my breath for either.


I don't see the Big 10 asking Nebraska either. No real TV markets and academically is not very strong when comapred to the Big 10 schools.

Yeah, but Nebraska is huge national draw with a lot of national recognition. Academically, I cannot speak for it, but I'll take what you say as truth. It would be a fine addition, IMO, but I am not Alvarez.

[NFO]

Why are you so focused in on just .5 the KC market? There are 6 million people in Missouri. It's the 18th most populous state. That's more than Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and only 300,000 less than Indiana.

Outside of Notre Dame's national following, it's hard to believe that they are going to be able to add any NEW markets that fit in geographically, academically, athletically, and approach that number.

I apologize. I meant to say 1/2 the St. Louis market because Illinois already delivers 1/2 of the St. Louis market. If Missouri were added they would obtain the KC market.




I dont disagree with you. If the B10 only wants the "homerun" and not a "bases clearing double", then yes, its Notre Dame or UT, end of discussion.

But it isnt realistic, at least not at this juncture.


I'm curious to see how it plays out, like who the Big 10 asks and if they even ask somebody. The list of home run teams is small. SO I guess time will tell if they hit a home run, a line drive single or stay in the dugout.




Yeah, but Nebraska is huge national draw with a lot of national recognition. Academically, I cannot speak for it, but I'll take what you say as truth. It would be a fine addition, IMO, but I am not Alvarez.

While Nebraska is a huge national draw, they would not actually had any TV markets and would not increase the revenue per school as a UT or ND would do. That and the academic side of Nebraska would really have to step in up to gain acceptance into Big 10 academic standards. As far as I know Nebraska is not a member of the AAU or the CIC.

[NFO]

I'd love to see it as it would surprise me.


Texas reportedly talks with Big Ten (http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/10455/texas-reportedly-talks-with-big-ten)


Big Ten making overtures to … Texas (http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2010/feb/11/big-ten-making-overtures-texas/?sports)

[Blake]

Texas reportedly talks with Big Ten (http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/10455/texas-reportedly-talks-with-big-ten)


Until now, the Texas-to-the-Big-Ten talk had been purely speculation.[2-11-10] Ever since the Big Ten announced in December that it will actively explore the possibility of expansion, a lot of junk has been thrown out, particularly the recent bogus rumors about Pitt. But this is the first legitimate news outlet to report discussions between the Big Ten and an institution.

Very interesting.

You should put this story up in it's own thread.

[vander]

I thought it was almost a done deal with Pitt ?

[Kermit]

It's not happening.

[NFO]

I thought it was almost a done deal with Pitt ?

That was purely a rumor.

Pitt brings no new TVs to the Big Ten, which means they rest of the teams would have to take less money to admit Pitt.

The only way I see Pitt getting invited is if the Big Ten adds 3 or 5 teams, which I don't see happening.

[Blake]

It's not happening.

I doubt it too......but just the fact that UT is talking with the Big 10 is interesting.