Big 10 Expansion Thread -Big Ten ready for a playoff .. finally?

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

It's a team that not a single solitary fan in the entire original conference footprint gives a damn about (I won't try to speak for Arkansas). I'd say Va Tech & WVU are both at least marginally more interesting in the territory, Clemson a great deal moreso.

I don't think LSU is necessarily chomping at the bit for A&M, but we do have a rivalry on sabbatical with them, one that ended with fairly ugly words that have continued as recently as a few years ago.

IMO, it could very quickly become LSU's second biggest rivalry after Ole Miss. (Arkansas LSU, for whatever reason, has never really turned into the energy of a rivalry. Good games, yes, but no rivalry yet.)

[Abe Sargent]

For the past 3 months, this whole story has looked like the start of someone's dynasty as they struggle to come up with a rational reason for Football Armageddon that allows them to set up a new dynasty

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Abe Sargent

For the past 3 months, this whole story has looked like the start of someone's dynasty as they struggle to come up with a rational reason for Football Armageddon that allows them to set up a new dynasty

"Oklahoma State Cowboys Rule the Pac-10!"

Pshaw... like that would ever happen. Now you're just making stuff up

SI

[M GO BLUE!!!]

I say, now that the Big Ten has 12 teams, why stop there or at 14 or 16? Go REALLY BIG and become the BIG TWENTY!

[duckman]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

You are the one who said the Big 10 was static. Now are you saying they aren't because the added Penn State over a decade ago?

You might want to look at my past posts. I never said a thing. Stick with politics because you have no clue about sports/athletics.

[duckman]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

Not trying to beat a dead horse from the Missouri crowd, but feel free to post a link or source of any sort from the MU President, Chancellor, Athletic Director or any other university official that use their "mouth" in any way.

I know everyone's taking delight in saying Missouri did a lot of talking, but I don't see it. The fan base? Yes. The fan base was tired of the Big 12 and its politics, and we didn't mind letting it known. But the administration never played their cards.

But as for running their mouths, we're not even in the top half of the Big 12.

From my understanding, the governor (Mizzou alum) ran his mouth off about jumping ship, and the representatives were not hiding it, even gloating about to the other members in private conversations. The Nebraska chancellor even mention the university's arrogance during the regents meeting.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

I saw something that bothered me earlier on the Big Ten Network. They had a show on the top 10 Big Ten RB's of the 1970's. Penn State RB's were included. I understand the idea that you want to include current member schools in network programming, but as good as Lydell Mitchell & John Cappelletti were, neither one was ever a Big Ten RB. Will the list be upgraded now to include Nebraska RB's, in turn bumping some of the finest players in Big Ten history to be disregarded?

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by duckman

From my understanding, the governor (Mizzou alum) ran his mouth off about jumping ship, and the representatives were not hiding it, even gloating about to the other members in private conversations. The Nebraska chancellor even mention the university's arrogance during the regents meeting.

Here's the quote from Gov. Nixon that got Nebraska's panties in a twist:

"I want to look at what options the Big Ten may have to offer. This is not something that should be kept on the sports page and treated with the back of the hand. We have an obligation to make our schools as excellent as they can be."

So that's why Nebraska left. Apparently Jay Nixon is the most powerful governor in the nation -- he makes a vague comment about exploring options and Nebraska leaves for the Big Ten.

As for the "gloating" in private conversations, I would say prove it. But I would also say that even if it happened, private conversations are far from the accusations being hurled at MU. MU didn't say a thing publicly, it was purely media and fan speculation.

Nebraska took a better deal, pure and simple. It's horsecrap for anyone to imply they left the Big 12 because of MU and CU.

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

Here's the quote from Gov. Nixon that got Nebraska's panties in a twist:

"I want to look at what options the Big Ten may have to offer. This is not something that should be kept on the sports page and treated with the back of the hand. We have an obligation to make our schools as excellent as they can be."

So that's why Nebraska left. Apparently Jay Nixon is the most powerful governor in the nation -- he makes a vague comment about exploring options and Nebraska leaves for the Big Ten.

As for the "gloating" in private conversations, I would say prove it. But I would also say that even if it happened, private conversations are far from the accusations being hurled at MU. MU didn't say a thing publicly, it was purely media and fan speculation.

Nebraska took a better deal, pure and simple. It's horsecrap for anyone to imply they left the Big 12 because of MU and CU.

Earlier in this thread I provided a link where professors at MU were openly lobbying for the Big Ten. So maybe Mike Alden and the President didn't specifically say anything, but there were plenty of others with ties to the Tigers that did talk openly about accepting a Big Ten bid.

Personally, I don't have a problem with MU doing it. In fact, I like how aggressive MU's government has been at thinking of themselves before the Big 12. They should. It's every team for itself.

[MJ4H]

Conference Realignment as told in MS Paint.

Warning, NFSW. Not even remotely.

The Way of The World-Conference Realignment Redux in MS Paint

Pretty awesome though.

[MrBug708]

ChipBrownOB

Beebe providing assurances to TX, OU, A&M, Tech, Ok St, KU, KSU, MIzzou, Baylor and Iowa St they can get to $17m/per in next TV deal.

[MrBug708]

The Big 12 has hired a new special commissioner. His name is John Brown, and he's apparently had a lot of experience keeping a cool head, making sure emotions don't take over, and seeing to it that groups of people with different agendas get along really swell. He'll make sure everything runs smoothly as the conference transitions into a new phase.

[MJ4H]

iraqi-information-minister.jpg

[Noop]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

ChipBrownOB

Beebe providing assurances to TX, OU, A&M, Tech, Ok St, KU, KSU, MIzzou, Baylor and Iowa St they can get to $17m/per in next TV deal.

I guess Fox has offered them a deal. If the Big 12 manages to stay intact then I hope they kick out Mizzou. Not cause I hate them but because the comedy generated would be top notch.

[MrBug708]

I cant imagine someone paid that much for the Red River shootout.

That being said, Texas will be getting even more of a share then they already were

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

Here's the quote from Gov. Nixon that got Nebraska's panties in a twist:

"I want to look at what options the Big Ten may have to offer. This is not something that should be kept on the sports page and treated with the back of the hand. We have an obligation to make our schools as excellent as they can be."

So that's why Nebraska left. Apparently Jay Nixon is the most powerful governor in the nation -- he makes a vague comment about exploring options and Nebraska leaves for the Big Ten.

As for the "gloating" in private conversations, I would say prove it. But I would also say that even if it happened, private conversations are far from the accusations being hurled at MU. MU didn't say a thing publicly, it was purely media and fan speculation.

Nebraska took a better deal, pure and simple. It's horsecrap for anyone to imply they left the Big 12 because of MU and CU.

Agreed. Mizzou has been very reserved in any public comments. Anyone who insists otherwise is buying into the Texas-sourced PR blitz that has been pushed out there in recent days. They're just looking to offload the blame on the breakup of the conference on someone else, but they know exactly why it happened. MU and CU aren't the one trying to get out of paying the exit fees. NU and the South schools are.

[duckman]

Hold the presses:

Orangebloods.com - New proposal to save Big 12 with 10 teams being considered by UT

[MrBug708]

Missouri has been so closed lipped that everyone on FOFC knows what they are thinking at all times.

Or we are being lied to. Whichever you want to believe

[duckman]

Here's something on Insider about the remaining Big 12 possibly absorbing the MWC:

Most of the talk about the future of the five Big 12 leftovers has revolved around their being picked up by the Mountain West. But MWC sources tell Matt Tait of the Lawrence Journal-World that the exact opposite might happen -- that the five-member Big 12 would actually absorb the entire MWC to protect the conference's automatic BCS berth and its NCAA tournament revenue.

This scenario very well could have been discussed on a conference call among representatives from the five prospective orphans, which the Kansas City Star reported.

"I know that both sides are going to be very sensitive to how that part's handled," one source said, "so that it doesn't jeopardize the BCS bid or any of the basketball shares that those schools have earned."

Tait points out that one other benefit to this would be that a Big 12 would still exist to collect penalties (which would be high) from the departing members. A three-quarters vote (nine schools) is required to dissolve the Big 12, and with five schools remaining, the seven others wouldn't have enough votes to do away with their financial obligations.

[Arles]

Moving the Pac-10 to 12 teams with Utah isn't the worst thing in the world. And keeping the Big "12" together with 10 teams would help Kansas and Missouri - which is a good thing. All things considered, this might be an OK option. Although,the new "super 16" would be cool to see in the Pac.

Plus, Texas is going to have to leave a lot of money on the table to stay with the big 12. Their share of the new TV network was projected in the $25+ mil range.

[MJ4H]

Not happening.

eta: I'd say less than 5% chance of happening. Texas isn't staying without B12 north adding a heavyweight to replace Nebraska, and if Texas goes, boom goes the dynamite.

[kcchief19]

The Fox deal that was proposed at the Big 12 meetings was supposedly pretty good -- it was on par with the SEC deal and would have put games on Fox, Fox Sports and FX. A good deal for Fox since they need some programming to beef up their football lineup, especially with the BCS games leaving for Disney.

Apparently Beebe has gotten Fox to step up to $17 million per team -- since it's only 10 teams now, Fox would be saving some money. Each school would also be allowed to participate in their own network. The projection is Texas could make $5 million per year on their own network. That means Texas would be getting a better deal than in the Pac 10 and the same as in the Big Ten -- except they get all the power and control.

If Beebe can pull it off, I would take back most of the bad things I said about him.

Plus, let's not forget the penalties Nebraska and Colorado owe. That's estimated to be at least $25 million total that would be shared by the other 10 schools.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by duckman

Hold the presses:

Orangebloods.com - New proposal to save Big 12 with 10 teams being considered by UT

I thought Chip Brown had reported over and over again that Texas to the Pac-16 was a signed and done deal...oh wait, the infallible Chip Brown doesn't know what hes talking about? OH NOOOO, WHOEVER WOULD HAVE PREDICTED THAT??!! THE WORLD IS ENDING!!!

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by MJ4H

Not happening.

eta: I'd say less than 5% chance of happening. Texas isn't staying without B12 north adding a heavyweight to replace Nebraska, and if Texas goes, boom goes the dynamite.

Under the proposed plan there would be no North -- no divisions, everybody plays a 9-game schedule. Stoops and Brown both hate the championship game, so this would be exactly what they want.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

I thought Chip Brown had reported over and over again that Texas to the Pac-16 was a signed and done deal...oh wait, the infallible Chip Brown doesn't know what hes talking about? OH NOOOO, WHOEVER WOULD HAVE PREDICTED THAT??!! THE WORLD IS ENDING!!!

Missouri's SB Nation called it best -- no one has been more right AND wrong in the past two weeks than Chip Brown.

[timmynausea]

If Texas becomes unattainable for the present, for whatever reason, would the Big Ten raid the Big East to try to force ND's hand? Or was all that talk basically a feint?

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

Under the proposed plan there would be no North -- no divisions, everybody plays a 9-game schedule. Stoops and Brown both hate the championship game, so this would be exactly what they want.

north or not, Texas wants another heavyweight for them to stay.

[Izulde]

The Big 12 merging with the MWC? Bleh. I don't like the Big 12 as a conference.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

Under the proposed plan there would be no North -- no divisions, everybody plays a 9-game schedule. Stoops and Brown both hate the championship game, so this would be exactly what they want.

So if Brown, Stoops and Osborne all hated the idea of a championship game, how did the Big 12 wind up with one, again?

[duckman]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

So if Brown, Stoops and Osborne all hated the idea of a championship game, how did the Big 12 wind up with one, again?

The university presidents and athletic directors are the ones that voted in the championship games. The coaches have little to no input on the matter.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

I thought Chip Brown had reported over and over again that Texas to the Pac-16 was a signed and done deal...oh wait, the infallible Chip Brown doesn't know what hes talking about? OH NOOOO, WHOEVER WOULD HAVE PREDICTED THAT??!! THE WORLD IS ENDING!!!

Chip Brown has never said it was a signed deal

[I. J. Reilly]

Originally Posted by Dan Beebe

"My plan is about what's best for the citizens in this part of the country and for the student-athletes and not having this section of the country with all its major institutions connected to conferences that aren't even here. We shouldn't be a fly-over zone," Beebe told Orangebloods.com

The Pac-Ten hates America!! Why don't they want real Americans to have a conference of there own?

I gues patriotism really is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by duckman

The university presidents and athletic directors are the ones that voted in the championship games. The coaches have little to no input on the matter.

I can see that for, say, Baylor or A&M. I have a hard time believing OU, Texas or Nebraska would shoo Stoops, Brown or Osborne out of the office when they came in to say "Guys, I don't think this is such a good idea."

Why would Texas, say, be willing to make Brown one of the highest paid coaches in the land, but not be willing to listen to him on matters that could directly impact the football program?

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Agreed. Mizzou has been very reserved in any public comments. Anyone who insists otherwise is buying into the Texas-sourced PR blitz that has been pushed out there in recent days. They're just looking to offload the blame on the breakup of the conference on someone else, but they know exactly why it happened. MU and CU aren't the one trying to get out of paying the exit fees. NU and the South schools are.

So it was a Texas-sourced PR blitz that originally pushed Mizzou's name out there as a team to the Big 10? Or was it one of your "sources" that said Texas for some reason would only create a PR blitz towards Mizzou, which is still a member of the Big 12 as is Texas, and stay silent on Nebraska and Colorado?

[Scarecrow]

Originally Posted by MJ4H

Not happening.

eta: I'd say less than 5% chance of happening. Texas isn't staying without B12 north adding a heavyweight to replace Nebraska, and if Texas goes, boom goes the dynamite.

Nebraska was a heavyweight. Here's their record for the past 10 years:

Year	Record	Final AP Poll Ranking
2009	10-4	#14
2008	9-4	NR
2007	5-7	NR
2006	9-5	NR
2005	8-4	#24
2004	5-6	NR
2003	10-3	#18
2002	7-7	NR
2001	11-2	#7
2000	10-2	#7

[timmynausea]

Latest tweet from Chip Brown:

Texas A&M turned down invite to join P10 in mtg today with P10's Larry Scott and Kevin Weiberg in College Station, a Big 12 AD confirms.

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by Scarecrow

Nebraska was a heavyweight.

Yep, and Texas wants another one to replace them.

Texas A&M declined PAC10 invite, apparently:

ChipBrownOB: Texas A&M turned down invite to join P10 in mtg today with P10's Larry Scott and Kevin Weiberg in College Station, a Big 12 AD confirms.

[MrBug708]

On to Kansas I guess

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

On to Kansas I guess

I'd prefer them over A&M. I think with their basketball program, they add more to the conference overall. Don't need A&M's market as long as we get Texas.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

I'd prefer them over A&M. I think with their basketball program, they add more to the conference overall. Don't need A&M's market as long as we get Texas.

Oh, so do I.

[duckman]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

I can see that for, say, Baylor or A&M. I have a hard time believing OU, Texas or Nebraska would shoo Stoops, Brown or Osborne out of the office when they came in to say "Guys, I don't think this is such a good idea."

Why would Texas, say, be willing to make Brown one of the highest paid coaches in the land, but not be willing to listen to him on matters that could directly impact the football program?

Because the coaches are thinking about wins and losses and not revenues and expenses. Athletic directors are essentially CEOs who are mostly thinking about promoting their product to bring the biggest revenues that they can muster. Two completely different perspectives.

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

On to Kansas I guess

I was really hoping Kansas and Missouri came to the Mountain West which would make a nice 12 team conference now that Boise State is in the fold.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by duckman

Hold the presses:

Orangebloods.com - New proposal to save Big 12 with 10 teams being considered by UT

One thing that makes me shake my head is the Big 12's lack of response from their conference being torn apart. There were rumors of the Big Ten and Pac 10 looking at adding schools and the Big 12 comes across as just sitting there. Certainly initially. If the Big 12 does fall apart, they will only have themselves to blame.

Originally Posted by Scarecrow

Nebraska was a heavyweight. Here's their record for the past 10 years:

Note this is just for the past 10 years and is only about football. Add in them looking to turn things around(within a literal second of beating Texas) and I don't see how their performance during the past decade matters that much. This would be like Michigan continuing to struggle for 6-7 years and then somebody saying getting Michigan involved would be bad because they used to be a heavyweight. Using 'Bama as an example when the NCAA virtually lived on their front steps works well as another example.

[MJ4H]

Here is the current situation with Texas A&M (this comes from a board member through a 3rd party, to here):

The PAC10 offer wasn't official, and the "no thanks" wasn't official, but they happened. This will account for the people that will be saying "We did not turn down an offer to the PAC 10 today" and then citing someone official. It happened. Anything else in the media regarding this the rest of the day is fluff since everyone just went home until Monday morning.

[Eaglesfan27]

Some sources talking to the Pac-10 don't think it is over yet with Texas A&M and that they may still take an offer.

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

Some sources talking to the Pac-10 don't think it is over yet with Texas A&M and that they may still take an offer.

Pac-10 going to offer again after just getting turned down?

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

So if Brown, Stoops and Osborne all hated the idea of a championship game, how did the Big 12 wind up with one, again?

Brown and Stoops weren't head coaches when the conference was formed and Osborne got outvoted 11-1.

I don't like the championship game when other conference don't do it. I think it puts you at a competitive disadvantage if you have one and some of your peers don't. I like the title game but would prefer it was all or none.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by MJ4H

Pac-10 going to offer again after just getting turned down?

Nope, but your source could be wrong.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by MJ4H

north or not, Texas wants another heavyweight for them to stay.

Curious, since I'm not aware of any source who has said Texas wants another "heavyweight" for them to stay, I'm assuming it's your assumption. Why would Texas want another power team? Why would they want MORE competition? Why would they want to split their pie with 11 teams instead of 12?

As for heavyweight, Missouri has won the same number of games as Nebraska since 2002.

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

Nope, but your source could be wrong.

I would be very surprised since he is talking directly to an A&M board member with confirmation from our board's mods.