Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

Pac-10 might ask Texas and five other Big 12 schools to join

rmartin65 said:
Where would those guys go? Split between the SEC, CUSA, WAC and MWC? This should be an interesting summer.
Click to expand...

I doubt the SEC would want any of those schools. None of them bring in any big $ or sponsors. If anything adding any of those schools would mean each current SEC team will get LESS money in the future so that eliminates the SEC.

I think Baylor and Iowa State goes to CUSA and Kansas and Kansas State head to the Mid American Conference.


I could also see the SEC and Big East diving in and scooping up some of the ACC schools and the ACC going away as well.
With the end of the Big XII and ACC it opens up two more at large BCS bids.
 
If the Pac 10 goes ahead and invites and gets the Big XII schools it would go to 16 teams. Now, instead of doing 2 8 team divisions, how about 4, 4 team divisions.

For example:
Division A: Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Colorado
Division B: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Arizona, Arizona State
Division C: USC, UCLA, California, and Stanford
Division D: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State

Each team wold play all three of its opponents in its division each year. They would then play 2 teams from each division and this would be on a rotational basis. Thats 9 games. The other 3 games can be out of conference games to schedule in some interesting matchups or cupcakes.

Each team has a natural rival except Colorado and Texas Tech. Colorado can develop one with tech or continue to play CSU every year. This would be a very fair way to break the 16 teams.

What do yall think?
 
Guys, OU and UT managed to schedule each other for 90 years when they were in separate conferences. They can keep it intact. I think the Pac 10 is most likely, due to the state leg mainly. There are FOIA records that indicate the Big 10 was willing to take UT and A&M, but there was "a Tech issue."
 
Big fish, little pond? gmab
UT isn't to blame for the Big 12 North being irrelevant
they only have themselves to blame

this "I'm taking my ball and going home" act is pitiful
one thing is for sure, Texas will not leave it's fellow Texas schools high n dry

if mizzou and Nebraska bolt, then just replace them
 
IDEXAN said:
Think so ? Where's their leverage because I can't see it ?
Just what do you think UT,er I mean the Big 12, going to do if MU (NU isn't going anyplace independantly, it might tag along after MU if it also gets an invite from the Big 10), doesn't snap up and respond by this deadline ?
Click to expand...

The Big XII seems to think it has some sort of leverage or else wouldn't have set an ultimatum.

More so I think there's so much speculation about the Big 12 having teams poached that at some point it had to go on the offensive instead of sitting around.

The Big 10 also hasn't made official invitations yet. Question is does NU and MU risk bolting without a guaranteed home?

You obviously aren't a Big 12 fan. It's been difficult for the Big 12 since some big names left the north division that kept it balanced.
 
Goldensilence said:
The Big XII seems to think it has some sort of leverage or else wouldn't have set an ultimatum.

More so I think there's so much speculation about the Big 12 having teams poached that at some point it had to go on the offensive instead of sitting around.

The Big 10 also hasn't made official invitations yet. Question is does NU and MU risk bolting without a guaranteed home?

You obviously aren't a Big 12 fan. It's been difficult for the Big 12 since some big names left the north division that kept it balanced.
Click to expand...

Who was it that left?

And I don't think the Big XII is worried about losing Nebraska and Missouri. The ultimatum is so they know what they have going forward. If those two leave, they will replace them with two others out of maybe Houston, TCU, Boise State...

I don't think there will be any change to the Big XII.

The Big X wants ND really bad and have for years. They keep coming up with scenarios to entice ND to join in, but no success. This time won't be any different.
 
Goldensilence said:
You obviously aren't a Big 12 fan. It's been difficult for the Big 12 since some big names left the north division that kept it balanced.
Click to expand...

Nobody has the left Big 12 since it's been formed.

However, at the time the Big 12 was formed, Nebraska, Kansas State, and Colorado were big time football programs and in the South it was pretty much just A&M and UT. Now, only Nebraska is back to being strong again up North while UT and OU have run the conference football wise since 2000.
 
JB said:
Who was it that left?

And I don't think the Big XII is worried about losing Nebraska and Missouri. The ultimatum is so they know what they have going forward. If those two leave, they will replace them with two others out of maybe Houston, TCU, Boise State...

I don't think there will be any change to the Big XII.

The Big X wants ND really bad and have for years. They keep coming up with scenarios to entice ND to join in, but no success. This time won't be any different.
Click to expand...

Pretty much what I think the Big X wants and has all along.

Tom Osborne retired from Nebraska in 97 and while I thought Frank Solich did a decent job after it wasn't good enough for Alums. Pelini has the program back on the right track though.

Bill Synder retired in 2005 from Kansas State. He came back last year, I don't know if he has it in him anymore, but his teams were competitive at K State.

Rick Neuheisel wasn't the greatest nor the most ethical coach but, he kept the Buffs fairly competitive. What I haven't been able to figure out is how Dan Hawkins has been kept around so long nor how he hasn't been able to translate the same success he had at Boise to Colorado.

I think if Neb or Mizz do leave it does leave the door open for a UH, TCU or possibly Boise. It also would allow them to realign the competitiveness of the league.
 
Goldensilence said:
Pretty much what I think the Big X wants and has all along.

Tom Osborne retired from Nebraska in 97 and while I thought Frank Solich did a decent job after it wasn't good enough for Alums. Pelini has the program back on the right track though.

Bill Synder retired in 2005 from Kansas State. He came back last year, I don't know if he has it in him anymore, but his teams were competitive at K State.

Rick Neuheisel wasn't the greatest nor the most ethical coach but, he kept the Buffs fairly competitive. What I haven't been able to figure out is how Dan Hawkins has been kept around so long nor how he hasn't been able to translate the same success he had at Boise to Colorado.

I think if Neb or Mizz do leave it does leave the door open for a UH, TCU or possibly Boise. It also would allow them to realign the competitiveness of the league.
Click to expand...

Solich was a very good coach. He just didn't have a recuiter on his staff that was worth a ****.
 
Goldensilence said:
I should've been more clear on what I meant.


I thought the last part article about the championships being awarded was interesting.


http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10410&ATCLID=204955138


Each school is looking to get 11.5 Million next season and looks like they did discuss realignment.
Click to expand...

I think you almost HAVE to realign. The Big XII south is so much stronger than the North it is not even funny. If Nebraska and Mizzou do leave, I say shift OU and OSU to the North to restore some balance. Then bring in UH and Rice up to the Big XII Texas division.

Big XII North: OU, OSU, KU, KSU, ISU, CU
Big XII Texas: UT, A&M, Tech, Baylor, Rice, UH
 
UofH in the big12 is a bad idea and wishful thinking
bad stadium and it's a commuter school with almost no campus life

Boise is almost as bad an idea

colorado state is a good idea though
large enrollment and alumni and could help retain the buffaloes in boulder
Arkansas would be great but that Is probably wishful thinking on my part
 
Second Honeymoon said:
UofH in the big12 is a bad idea and wishful thinking
bad stadium and it's a commuter school with almost no campus life

Boise is almost as bad an idea

colorado state is a good idea though
large enrollment and alumni and could help retain the buffaloes in boulder
Arkansas would be great but that Is probably wishful thinking on my part
Click to expand...

I have no issue with CSU, but they would need to be in the North. If you brought them in, who else would you bring in? As is, The North is already quite a bit weaker than the South. Bringing in CSU does not make the North any stronger and in fact makes it weaker. And what is the interest in Arkansas? I don't see any appeal to Arkansas.
How about shifting OU and OSU north and bringing in Rice and UTEP to the south.
 
If, and I think it is a big If, NE and MO leave the Big XII; I would like to see them move OU and OSU to the north, and bring in TCU and UH.
 
JB said:
If, and I think it is a big If, NE and MO leave the Big XII; I would like to see them move OU and OSU to the north, and bring in TCU and UH.
Click to expand...

that would eliminate the annual OU-UT matchup. not gonna happen.

UH has no business in the Big12. Nor does Rice. At least Rice has a huge, albeit ancient, stadium but the academic standards crush that idea.

Colorado State, Arkansas, and TCU seem to be the teams that make the most sense.

Personally, I would rather the Texas schools go to the Pac-10, including Baylor. Just add 7 teams and become the PacWest17. Baylor split for the Big12 from SWC so to leave them high and dry would be wrong. It's a package deal and if any Texas team was to be ommited, I would make it Texas Tech and not Baylor.

I am sure Uncle D would agree
 
Second Honeymoon said:
that would eliminate the annual OU-UT matchup. not gonna happen.
UH has no business in the Big12. Nor does Rice. At least Rice has a huge, albeit ancient, stadium but the academic standards crush that idea.

Colorado State, Arkansas, and TCU seem to be the teams that make the most sense.

Personally, I would rather the Texas schools go to the Pac-10, including Baylor. Just add 7 teams and become the PacWest17. Baylor split for the Big12 from SWC so to leave them high and dry would be wrong. It's a package deal and if any Texas team was to be ommited, I would make it Texas Tech and not Baylor.

I am sure Uncle D would agree
Click to expand...

Why would it eliminate that matchup? They have been playing every year since long before there was a Big XII.
 
Second Honeymoon said:
that would eliminate the annual OU-UT matchup. not gonna happen.

UH has no business in the Big12. Nor does Rice. At least Rice has a huge, albeit ancient, stadium but the academic standards crush that idea.

Colorado State, Arkansas, and TCU seem to be the teams that make the most sense.

Personally, I would rather the Texas schools go to the Pac-10, including Baylor. Just add 7 teams and become the PacWest17. Baylor split for the Big12 from SWC so to leave them high and dry would be wrong. It's a package deal and if any Texas team was to be ommited, I would make it Texas Tech and not Baylor.

I am sure Uncle D would agree
Click to expand...

Baylor? Really? If this move is about money, as has been repeated throughout this thread, then picking up a private school with 15,000 students and a perpetually worthless football team is not going to help the Pac-10. Sure they did well in basketball the last couple years, but if that's what matters then Kansas and KSU should be atop all the conference invites.

It's not a 'package deal' and the other schools don't owe them anything. The Big 12 appears to be a sinking ship, and everyone on board knows it. Once the first schools jump, the other schools will all follow suit to the first life-raft that presents itself. Chances are Baylor and Iowa State will be in the Conference USA when this is all over.
 
Just For Fun: The new Big 12 (Nebraska and Missouri Leave)

1. Texas
2. Texas aTm
3. Texas Tech
4. Baylor
5. Oklahoma
6. Oklahoma State
7. TCU
8. Colorado
9. Colorado State
10. New Mexico
11. Kansas
12. Kansas State
 
Super Mario said:
Just For Fun: The new Big 12 (Nebraska and Missouri Leave)

1. Texas
2. Texas aTm
3. Texas Tech
4. Baylor
5. Oklahoma
6. Oklahoma State
7. TCU
8. Colorado
9. Colorado State
10. New Mexico
11. Kansas
12. Kansas State
Click to expand...

Did Iowa State get swallowed by a sink hole?
 
I don't think any of this is going to happen. They've had all kinds of talks about conference expansion over the last year with so many different ideas being tossed around one after another. To get these conference elitists to actually agree on something takes forever. I think this is all a bunch of talk about nothing. Maybe something eventually ends up happening in like 5 years or something, but not any time soon. It takes way to much time and effort to get the decision makers in college football to do anything and rarely ever do they get anything right.
 
Super Mario said:
Just For Fun: The new Big 12 (Nebraska and Missouri Leave)

1. Texas
2. Texas aTm
3. Texas Tech
4. Baylor
5. Oklahoma
6. Oklahoma State
7. TCU
8. Colorado
9. Colorado State
10. New Mexico
11. Kansas
12. Kansas State
Click to expand...

What happens to Iowa State & why add New Mexico? I wouldn't be too thrilled if the Big 12 added Colorado State & New Mexico. They wouldn't add to the competition of the league IMO. I would hope they would send invites to TCU & Boise State. Small conference schools that could possibly be good competition for Texas & Oklahoma.
 
JCTexan said:
What happens to Iowa State & why add New Mexico? I wouldn't be too thrilled if the Big 12 added Colorado State & New Mexico. They wouldn't add to the competition of the league IMO. I would hope they would send invites to TCU & Boise State. Small conference schools that could possibly be good competition for Texas & Oklahoma.
Click to expand...

Boise State shouldn't get any sort of invite until they change their field to be a natural green color. The blue field is a ridiculous distraction for visiting teams.
 
Dutchrudder said:
Boise State shouldn't get any sort of invite until they change their field to be a natural green color. The blue field is a ridiculous distraction for visiting teams.
Click to expand...

Okay, so put a condition in the deal that says they can't have the blue grass. Utah would be another team I would consider sending an invite. If you want to save the Big 12 you have to expand if Nebraska & Missouri leave, & I would want the Big 12 North to be a little more competitive. Adding Boise State & Utah might help make them competitive. Of course this is what I would want to happen if the Big 12 were to lose Missouri & Nebraska, not actually saying it's going to happen.
 
JCTexan said:
What happens to Iowa State & why add New Mexico? I wouldn't be too thrilled if the Big 12 added Colorado State & New Mexico. They wouldn't add to the competition of the league IMO. I would hope they would send invites to TCU & Boise State. Small conference schools that could possibly be good competition for Texas & Oklahoma.
Click to expand...

Boise is 1/2 way across the US. That doesnt make any sense either.

I was going for keeping things close to one another, and rivals.

Iowa State is out of the way, and Iowa is in the big 10.

If you look at this on a map, adding a school like New Mexico would give us a solid area of big 12 contry.
 
looks like this will all come down to ND, if they join the big 10 then that will be the end. if not then the big ten will expand to 16 taking mizzou and neb. thus the pac 10 will move on the big 12 and so on
 
Baylor either gets it's pansy ass kicked in the PAC-10 or gets it's pansy ass kicked in the Big 12. Baylor will get it's pansy ass kicked in what ever conference they end up in.
 
Dutchrudder said:
Boise State shouldn't get any sort of invite until they change their field to be a natural green color. The blue field is a ridiculous distraction for visiting teams.
Click to expand...

So?

Like dealing with the roaring crowds at ATM isn't?
Like dealing with the elevation of Bolder isn't?
Like dealing with some of the fans at Tx Tech isn't a distraction or the arid climate of Lubbock?

That and I actually like the smurf turf.
 
gwallaia said:
Baylor either gets it's pansy ass kicked in the PAC-10 or gets it's pansy ass kicked in the Big 12. Baylor will get it's pansy ass kicked in what ever conference they end up in.
Click to expand...

I am sure I am going to get some disagreement for this, but as a total product Baylor is better than Texans Tech. While Tech ahs a may better football program, Baylor competes in all other sports (with very good facilities) and has a deep pocket alumni base even if they don't have the pure numbers of Tech. It is not an accident that Baylor had the influence to get that big twelve spot over UH, Smu, TCU, etc.
 
ArlingtonTexan said:
It is not an accident that Baylor had the influence to get that big twelve spot over UH, Smu, TCU, etc.
Click to expand...
I'm curious about the clout of Christian schools in the South ? In particular,
how was out-in-the-boondocks Baylor able to land this spot over Fort Worth-based TCU and Dallas-based SMU, especially when one considers that SMU had enough juice to secure a presidential libray, unless that was solely because Bushs wife was an alum ?
 
IDEXAN said:
I'm curious about the clout of Christian schools in the South ? In particular,
how was out-in-the-boondocks Baylor able to land this spot over Fort Worth-based TCU and Dallas-based SMU, especially when one considers that SMU had enough juice to secure a presidential libray, unless that was solely because Bushs wife was an alum ?
Click to expand...

Ann Richards
 
Goldensilence said:
So?

Like dealing with the roaring crowds at ATM isn't?
Like dealing with the elevation of Bolder isn't?
Like dealing with some of the fans at Tx Tech isn't a distraction or the arid climate of Lubbock?

That and I actually like the smurf turf.
Click to expand...

Those aren't the same at all, every team has the opportunity to fill its stadium with fans, belligerent drunks or not. The elevation of a stadium is not something you can control, but the deliberate coloring of your grass is.

When a QB has the ball in the pocket, it is much more difficult for him to identify the defensive secondary players when they match the turf and the lines. The blue and white is a strategic coloring for the Boise St defense to give them a slight edge in the game, which flies in the face of any sort of idea of fair competition.
 
As I've always heard from people who know here on campus, the then Lt. Governor, who had a law degree from BU, told the presidents of A&M and UT that they'd have a much easier time getting capital projects funded if Baylor was included in the Big XII, which is why A&M has Reed Arena.
 
Super Mario said:
So when is all of this supposed to go down? Soon? Later?
Click to expand...

I believe the decision pretty much depends on what Nebraska decides to do, and to a lesser extent Missouri. The Big 12 has set a time block of 2 weeks for these schools to make their decisions.

Having UT, TAMU, TT, Oklahoma, Ok St, and any other of the current Big 12 schools associated with the PAC-10 is just weird, based on geographic orientation. Not that it matters as revenue is the driving force behind any decision that will be made.
 
ESAD2-14 said:
I believe the decision pretty much depends on what Nebraska decides to do, and to a lesser extent Missouri. The Big 12 has set a time block of 2 weeks for these schools to make their decisions.

Having UT, TAMU, TT, Oklahoma, Ok St, and any other of the current Big 12 schools associated with the PAC-10 is just weird, based on geographic orientation. Not that it matters as revenue is the driving force behind any decision that will be made.
Click to expand...

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/colleg...how-the-pac-10-and-big-12-have-fallen-behind/

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sports/2009256167_uwmoney24.html

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/2094/how-the-big-12-teams-rank-in-revenue-sharing-funds

Interesting.

So it looks like financially there is no incentive for the teams listed to join the PAC 10 unless they start some sort of revenue sharing or start something similar to the Big X network.

Looks like this is what my prior article was alluding in something that made the BIG XII confident enough to push the date for Nebraska and Mizzou to make their decisions.

Still there has been no official offering from the BIG X for Mizzou or Nebraska to join. I still don't see how unless you're geographically speaking that Nebraska fits into the BIG X.

Mizzou might but, would they risk it?
 
Goldensilence said:
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/colleg...how-the-pac-10-and-big-12-have-fallen-behind/

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sports/2009256167_uwmoney24.html

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/2094/how-the-big-12-teams-rank-in-revenue-sharing-funds

Interesting.

So it looks like financially there is no incentive for the teams listed to join the PAC 10 unless they start some sort of revenue sharing or start something similar to the Big X network.

Looks like this is what my prior article was alluding in something that made the BIG XII confident enough to push the date for Nebraska and Mizzou to make their decisions.

Still there has been no official offering from the BIG X for Mizzou or Nebraska to join. I still don't see how unless you're geographically speaking that Nebraska fits into the BIG X.

Mizzou might but, would they risk it?
Click to expand...

The Pac 10's TV deal expires this year, and they would have enormous negotiating clout with the two biggest states in the US in their corner. The Big 12 has several years remaining on theirs. This is why it would make financial sense for the Texas schools to jump to the Pac.
 
The only 2 options that make sense to me are as follows.

A: Notre Dame accepts Big 10 invite and decide to stop at 12 teams. Neb and Miz get snubbed and the Big 12 stays intact.

B: Notre Dame stays independant. Neb and Miz get invited to the big 10 along with Syracuse, Pittsburgh and Rutgers, giving the Big 10, 16 teams. The Pac-10 invites Texas, Texas aTm, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Colorado to join up with Arizona, and Arizona State for the Pac-10 South or East. Then the other 8 Pac-10 schools stay the same making the North or West. Then they can have a Championship game.

Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State and Baylor get screwed.
 
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5265631

The source said the school is leaning toward the Big Ten, but an invitation hadn't yet been extended, and there was no indication when that would occur. The consensus within the athletic department is that Nebraska wouldn't separate itself from the Big 12 without some assurance that a Big Ten invitation would come, the source said. The Big Ten has set no date for any announcement in the coming weeks, leaving open the possibility that Nebraska could be left in limbo.
Click to expand...

I've maintained this the entire time. Nebraska might want to leave, but I really just don't see how they fit in the Big X's expansion plan other than just getting the conference to X number for a championship game.

Mizzou fits the bill for the Big X, but again there's nothing official on the table for them either.

Geographically the expansion of the PAC 10 just doesn't make sense. That could amount to some serious travel costs for all schools involved.

The PAC 10 would have to make a big contract renegotiation on their TV deal to make it worth it or promise to make a network ala Big X.

Big 12's contract with Fox Sports goes up next year as well so they'll be able to renegotiate that one.

One thing seems pretty certain if the Big 12 does survive this, they're going to have to realign the conferences.
 
ArlingtonTexan said:
I am sure I am going to get some disagreement for this, but as a total product Baylor is better than Texans Tech. While Tech ahs a may better football program, Baylor competes in all other sports (with very good facilities) and has a deep pocket alumni base even if they don't have the pure numbers of Tech. It is not an accident that Baylor had the influence to get that big twelve spot over UH, Smu, TCU, etc.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. Baylor > Texas Tech.
 
Goldensilence said:
One thing seems pretty certain if the Big 12 does survive this, they're going to have to realign the conferences.
Click to expand...

So what would you do?

North
Nebraska
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Iowa State
Kansas
Kansas State

South
Texas
Texas aTm
Baylor
Texas Tech
Colorado
Missouri
 
Super Mario said:
So what would you do?

North
Nebraska
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Iowa State
Kansas
Kansas State

South
Texas
Texas aTm
Baylor
Texas Tech
Colorado
Missouri
Click to expand...

Probably something along those lines. Might exchange K-state or Kansas for Colorado. But that looks like a much better competitively balanced Big XII.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top