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

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

It seems like a tremendous stretch to think that the Pac 10's new deal would be greater (and $25-million is much greater) than the Big Ten's current deal with Texas not involved. You can bring in all the Oklahomas and Coloradoes that you want, but the state of Texas is where the value lies.

Texas brings about 6-8 million per school extra. It's a big incentive for the PAC-10 to land them. Without, the PAC-10 is looking about 17 million per school

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Wouldn't that send Texas right to the Big 10, who would be happy to take them without Texas Tech?

I didnt think the Big-10 was even a player with Texas anymore? If that is a problem, then the PAC-10 doesnt invite TTU to eliminate that aspect

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

I think that's the plan. The last measure is to invite TTU, Oklahoma, and Ok State. All three of them want in and if all three jump to the PAC-10, Texas won't have much left in conference to stay with.



Could also happen. If the Big-12 is going to basically develop the Texas network, why not take that deal?

I don't think it would work out that way. In that scenario, all you are doing is empowering Texas to play the Big Ten, Pac Ten, and SEC against one another, without the added weight of schools that have various levels of undesiriability, until one of the conferences grants Texas a favorable situation.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

Texas brings about 6-8 million per school extra. It's a big incentive for the PAC-10 to land them. Without, the PAC-10 is looking about 17 million per school

Which is the number the Big 12 will reportedly get per team AND they will let Texas have their own network. Texas has all the leverage in this situation.

[DeToxRox]

Chris Level, the Rivals Texas Tech writer, just tweeted this:

The odds of Texas Tech joining the Pac 10 conference are now much less than 50%.

[digamma]

The OU rivals site is supposedly saying that there is a flaw in the Texas plan in that it hinges upon petitioning the NCAA for a championship game (the ABC contract supposedly contains a clawback provision to recoup $$$ if there is no championship game).

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Which is the number the Big 12 will reportedly get per team AND they will let Texas have their own network. Texas has all the leverage in this situation.

I thought the numbers were about 12 million per team, no? And if TAMU heads to the SEC, doesnt that leverage disappear?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

Arles, that's about right. Even if the Big-12 stays together for now, it's just a house of cards

Yep. It's going to blow up whether it's now or in 3-4 years. They might as well taking the wrecking ball to it right now. There's no level of trust left.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by digamma

The OU rivals site is supposedly saying that there is a flaw in the Texas plan in that it hinges upon petitioning the NCAA for a championship game (the ABC contract supposedly contains a clawback provision to recoup $$$ if there is no championship game).

That would be an interesting vote. I believe the ACC's request to have a championship game with 11-teams was declined, which lead them to invite weak-link Boston College.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Yep. It's going to blow up whether it's now or in 3-4 years. They might as well taking the wrecking ball to it right now. There's no level of trust left.

Regardless of the trust issue (which is a miniscule factor compared to $$$), I think you are correct. Either way, Texas is going to come out wonderfully and Oklahoma, OSU, and A&M are going to find good landing spots.

[DeToxRox]

Perhaps this was posted in the thread already but I guess if the 10 team Big 12 continues on and there is no title game, then UT and OU would move the RRS to the end of the year at Jerryworld.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Perhaps this was posted in the thread already but I guess if the 10 team Big 12 continues on and there is no title game, then UT and OU would move the RRS to the end of the year at Jerryworld.

That would take A&M moving to the SEC, as that has been the final game of the regular season for both schools forever. I'd say there would be more of a chance of the Texas-OU game moving to a home and home than there would be to move it from the Cotton Bowl during the Texas State Fair.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

I thought the numbers were about 12 million per team, no? And if TAMU heads to the SEC, doesnt that leverage disappear?

I thought they said $14-17M + Texas could start its own network ($3-5M).

That gives Texas between $17M-22M and keeps them a head taller than all the other teams (as opposed to making the same amount as, say Oregon State or Washington State in the Pac 10).

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by cartman

That would take A&M moving to the SEC, as that has been the final game of the regular season for both schools forever. I'd say there would be more of a chance of the Texas-OU game moving to a home and home than there would be to move it from the Cotton Bowl during the Texas State Fair.

Makes sense.

[DeToxRox]

As long as UT is "available" they hold the cards, namely because no deal will match the Big 10's with UT involved in it. I say this too because I firmly believe should UT join the Big 10, ND would be team #14 and the conference would stop there.

That would be a huge financial windfall for everyone in the conference.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

As long as UT is "available" they hold the cards, namely because no deal will match the Big 10's with UT involved in it. I say this too because I firmly believe should UT join the Big 10, ND would be team #14 and the conference would stop there.

That would be a huge financial windfall for everyone in the conference.

Yes. I concur.

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by cartman

That would take A&M moving to the SEC, as that has been the final game of the regular season for both schools forever. I'd say there would be more of a chance of the Texas-OU game moving to a home and home than there would be to move it from the Cotton Bowl during the Texas State Fair.

I hope that's the case. IMO, there is no place better for OU-Texas than where it is now. I probably wouldn't care as much to go in a generic environment like JerryWorld where I'm paying money to tailgate in a huge parking lot...in December.

[MrBug708]

I feel sorry for Mizzou. They made some of the first public statements that led us to believe change was coming because they were tired of being in Texas' harem. Now it looks like they'll have to service Texas and be thankful that they have a home not called the MWC

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Which is the number the Big 12 will reportedly get per team AND they will let Texas have their own network. Texas has all the leverage in this situation.

Texas has less leverage than they used to have. Because with only the ten teams involved, they are in a situation where they can't lose any more of their playing partners. Even Mizzou leaving would kill it off. OU and A&M would as well. I think there are places to go for OU and A&M, so the leverage isn't all with Texas. That being said, they sure have a lot more than most other teams.

But if Texas gets all the power and money, there could be a big push from the other schools to go to the Pac Ten in an effort to force Texas to move with them so they won't be put in as much of a competitive disadvantage (while still making the extra money). The only backfire is if Texas goes to the Big Ten or SEC.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Regardless of the trust issue (which is a miniscule factor compared to $$$), I think you are correct. Either way, Texas is going to come out wonderfully and Oklahoma, OSU, and A&M are going to find good landing spots.

Mizzou is better off with the Big 12 getting the wrecking ball now as well. It would force a larger Pac-10 which would instigate expansions in the Big Ten and SEC, both of which are good fits for Mizzou. Without that trigger, not much will change.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

As long as UT is "available" they hold the cards, namely because no deal will match the Big 10's with UT involved in it. I say this too because I firmly believe should UT join the Big 10, ND would be team #14 and the conference would stop there.

That would be a huge financial windfall for everyone in the conference.

This would be awesome, but I just don't see it.

But the Big Ten Network would become a national cable player if they could add UT and ND. The money for it alone would surpass anything any other conference could offer.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by sooner333

Texas has less leverage than they used to have. Because with only the ten teams involved, they are in a situation where they can't lose any more of their playing partners. Even Mizzou leaving would kill it off. OU and A&M would as well. I think there are places to go for OU and A&M, so the leverage isn't all with Texas. That being said, they sure have a lot more than most other teams.

But if Texas gets all the power and money, there could be a big push from the other schools to go to the Pac Ten in an effort to force Texas to move with them so they won't be put in as much of a competitive disadvantage (while still making the extra money). The only backfire is if Texas goes to the Big Ten or SEC.

This.

Some of these schools can throw a wrench in the renegotiations to break apart the conference if they don't like what's being offered. My understanding is that, although the total amount is higher, the distribution will be even more uneven than before. I'm not sure that some of these schools who have places to move want to buy into that knowing it will likely blow up anyway in a few years.

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Mizzou is better off with the Big 12 getting the wrecking ball now as well. It would force a larger Pac-10 which would instigate expansions in the Big Ten and SEC, both of which are good fits for Mizzou. Without that trigger, not much will change.

Mizzou is a good fit for the Big Ten...less so for the SEC. When I say fit, I mean more than just $ (which I think is pretty important for the SEC). For the record, I think OU and the SEC is a terrible "fit."

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by sooner333

Mizzou is a good fit for the Big Ten...less so for the SEC. When I say fit, I mean more than just $ (which I think is pretty important for the SEC). For the record, I think OU and the SEC is a terrible "fit."

Agreed. Big 10 is the better fit of the two.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

I feel sorry for Mizzou. They made some of the first public statements that led us to believe change was coming because they were tired of being in Texas' harem. Now it looks like they'll have to service Texas and be thankful that they have a home not called the MWC

Nobody from the university or athletic department ever said they were tired of being in the Big 12 or tired of being with Texas. You keep making comments that have absolutely zero factual basis, and its comical to me how much of a clown you are coming across as in all of this

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by sooner333

Mizzou is a good fit for the Big Ten...less so for the SEC. When I say fit, I mean more than just $ (which I think is pretty important for the SEC). For the record, I think OU and the SEC is a terrible "fit."

Some SEC writers seem to think Mizzou would be the best choice out there:

SEC: Expounding on Expansion - Southern Pigskin: The Leading Name in Southern College Football Coverage

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

This would be awesome, but I just don't see it.

But the Big Ten Network would become a national cable player if they could add UT and ND. The money for it alone would surpass anything any other conference could offer.

I don't see it either, but I have no doubts that if UT joined the Big 10 it'd bring ND into the fold. Obviously it's easier for them to take the money, keep with most of their rivals and go play in the Pac, but I think if A&M goes to the SEC then they will pursue what is best for them, and the Big 10 would most likely be that.

[timmynausea]

There hasn't been a peep out of the ACC during all of this, presumably because they are afraid of a potential SEC raid and keeping quiet. If the Big Ten and SEC wind up staying at 12, could the ACC leap at the chance to be the first to expand to 16 rather than waiting around a few years to pick through leftovers (assuming this will all eventually lead to 4 or 5 16 team conferences)? Not only that, but putting together a strong 16 now could help prevent them from being raided down the road.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Nobody from the university or athletic department ever said they were tired of being in the Big 12 or tired of being with Texas. You keep making comments that have absolutely zero factual basis, and its comical to me how much of a clown you are coming across as in all of this

Huh? It's like you purposely don't follow the situation that is going on in expansion or your fellow Missouri fans

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

There hasn't been a peep out of the ACC during all of this, presumably because they are afraid of a potential SEC raid and keeping quiet. If the Big Ten and SEC winding up staying at 12, could the ACC leap at the chance to be the first to expand to 16 rather than waiting around a few years to pick through leftovers (assuming this will all eventually lead to 4 or 5 16 team conferences)? Not only that, but putting together a strong 16 now could help prevent them from being raided down the road.

I could see them raiding the Big East, grabbing WVU, Rutgers, Pitt and Syracuse/Uconn, but I am not sure what good it does for them financially. It seems like if they got there own network it wouldn't be a huge deal compared to the Big 10 or SEC, so splitting it 16 ways would probably not go over well.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

There hasn't been a peep out of the ACC during all of this, presumably because they are afraid of a potential SEC raid and keeping quiet. If the Big Ten and SEC winding up staying at 12, could the ACC leap at the chance to be the first to expand to 16 rather than waiting around a few years to pick through leftovers (assuming this will all eventually lead to 4 or 5 16 team conferences)? Not only that, but putting together a strong 16 now could help prevent them from being raided down the road.

I've been surprised by this too. To me, the "grab Nebraska and hold at 12 for now" philosophy of the Big 10 was always questionable because we know they wanted two things (or at least said so publicly): expansion into new markets and maintaining the high academic profile of the conference. Nebraska doesn't really accomplish either unless you're a firm believer that they have a strong enough national appeal for it to matter, which again I'm not really sure of. As a result, I'm surprised the Big 10 has left NYC in play...the ACC being proactive and grabbing Rutgers, Syracuse and UConn all at once could be a great grab.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Some SEC writers seem to think Mizzou would be the best choice out there:

SEC: Expounding on Expansion - Southern Pigskin: The Leading Name in Southern College Football Coverage

I'm sorry. I stopped taking that article seriously in the first paragraph. The grammar was atrocious.

Dear SouthernPigskin.com "writer" (and I use the term incredibly loosely): "dominate" is a verb - not an adjective - you stupid fuck. If you can't even get that right before you click 'submit' on your breathless piece of mental masturbation, that tells me precisely how seriously you take your work, as well as precisely how seriously I ought *not* to.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by Logan

I've been surprised by this too. To me, the "grab Nebraska and hold at 12 for now" philosophy of the Big 10 was always questionable because we know they wanted two things (or at least said so publicly): expansion into new markets and maintaining the high academic profile of the conference. Nebraska doesn't really accomplish either unless you're a firm believer that they have a strong enough national appeal for it to matter, which again I'm not really sure of. As a result, I'm surprised the Big 10 has left NYC in play...the ACC being proactive and grabbing Rutgers, Syracuse and UConn all at once could be a great grab.

Big Ten has all the power still, mainly because they can see what happens with UT. If UT becomes a legit option, I think the Big Ten adds them and ND and calls it a day.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

I could see them raiding the Big East, grabbing WVU, Rutgers, Pitt and Syracuse/Uconn, but I am not sure what good it does for them financially. It seems like if they got there own network it wouldn't be a huge deal compared to the Big 10 or SEC, so splitting it 16 ways would probably not go over well.

The ACC bylaws require schools to actually be in coastal states from what I've read, so that eliminates Pitt and WVU if that's maintained (nothing to say it wouldn't be). The new TV deal got a lot more money for each school, and who knows what kind of conditions are built in that could escalate the value. We're talking about the entire east coast of the US (guess no Maine), that's a lot of people.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Big Ten has all the power still, mainly because they can see what happens with UT. If UT becomes a legit option, I think the Big Ten adds them and ND and calls it a day.

Definitely agree, my point was more along the lines of recognizing that would be an unlikely best-case scenario. If those two are added, you don't have to really worry much about local and regional markets...people all over the country are tuning in for those.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Logan

I've been surprised by this too. To me, the "grab Nebraska and hold at 12 for now" philosophy of the Big 10 was always questionable because we know they wanted two things (or at least said so publicly): expansion into new markets and maintaining the high academic profile of the conference. Nebraska doesn't really accomplish either unless you're a firm believer that they have a strong enough national appeal for it to matter, which again I'm not really sure of.

Nebraska fits the academic profile of the conference just fine - they're one of the longest-standing members of the AAU and are a top-tier research university. And Nebraska still carries a strong name brand for football.

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

I'm sorry. I stopped taking that article seriously in the first paragraph. The grammar was atrocious.

Dear SouthernPigskin.com "writer" (and I use the term incredibly loosely): "dominate" is a verb - not an adjective - you stupid fuck. If you can't even get that right before you click 'submit' on your breathless piece of mental masturbation, that tells me precisely how seriously you take your work, as well as precisely how seriously I ought *not* to.

It's basically a blog.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Nobody from the university or athletic department ever said they were tired of being in the Big 12 or tired of being with Texas. You keep making comments that have absolutely zero factual basis, and its comical to me how much of a clown you are coming across as in all of this

He's just trying to get MBBF's attention. Anyone familiar with the situation knows that nobody associated with the university has said anything. The governor was just trying to win some votes with his Big Ten statement and that has nothing to do with Mizzou.

[MrBug708]

LOL@ESPN

Running stories about how Texas is about to merge with the PAC-10 and how the Big-12 is staying as is. I guess one of them has to be right, might as well run both

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by Logan

Definitely agree, my point was more along the lines of recognizing that would be an unlikely best-case scenario. If those two are added, you don't have to really worry much about local and regional markets...people all over the country are tuning in for those.

Gotcha. It is a good question though as to why the ACC is so quiet. I just wonder if say Rutgers would jump at the offer without knowing what is going on with the Big Ten.

[MrBug708]

For Panerd, who keeps on drinking the kool-aid

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I don't think A&M is the package deal that everyone thought it might be. My understanding continues to be that Mizzou officials KNOW that they will receive an invite. The uncertainty continues to be who those other teams will be. Let's assume that I'm correct for the sake of the discussion. If the Big Ten were to land Notre Dame, Texas, and Mizzou, they would land a 'national' team in ND and would essentially steal the top two TV markets (by state) in the B12 footprint and put them in their conference. That would make perfect sense given what we know about their goals with expansion.

The Pac 10 is going to land some good teams regardless of what Texas does. There's plenty to choose from in the West depending on what their priorities are.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Heard today that Mizzou and Nebraska plan on doing absolutely nothing in regards to the 'ultimatum' by the conferences. Both schools have been privately guaranteed that if the Texas 6 (new nickname evidently) head for the Pac-10, MU and NU will receive bids to the Big 10. Even more interesting, they've also been told that if that occurs, Notre Dame will accept a bid and the Big Ten will expand to 16 teams, grabbing two other Big East teams to fill out the league. Crazy stuff.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

It's a done deal. Alden and Osborne have contacted the Big 12 officials and the AD's and informed them that they will accept a bid to the Big 10.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I'm not sure how much clearer I can make it. Chip is about 2 days behind this process as far as what NU and MU are doing. Mizzou and Nebraska have already agreed to leave. Mizzou officials are hoping to make some sort of an announcement today. Have not heard anything specific on when NU plans on making their announcement. As digamma mentioned, the poster on the NU board who said a NU announcement was coming was making his 1st post, but his info is exactly the same as what's being circulated by people within the MU athletic department.

As for the Notre Dame situation, the person who wrote the article saying that ND may be the only team has since backed off that comment and said that is no longer the case. He described it as a 'very fluid situation'.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Official board votes by MU and NU to join the Big 10 will be done this week. MU Board of Regents meets today and tomorrow. Nebraska Board of Regents meets tomorrow and Friday. It would appear Beebe is going to get his response before the ultimatum clock expires.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I still can not honestly believe how many people are erroneously reporting that Notre Dame is interested in being the 12th team. The NU and MU deals are done. NU has been wanting to make an announcement all week to end the speculation, but the Big Ten president has asked them to wait until tomorrow. The Big 10 plans to add three teams in the next week or two, but that won't be the end of the expansion. They will add two more teams before the school year begins.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

There's a TON of things that have to fall in place for this scenario and even Kietzmann noted that this isn't anywhere close to a done deal. But it's certainly an interesting twist to be sure. The Big Ten had talked with Mizzou as recently as yesterday saying that a bid would be sent. We'll have to see what plays out tomorrow.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Mizzou has handled this more professionally than any other school involved. They're the only administration out of the major players in the Big 12 that has kept their dirty laundry behind close doors.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Wow. This isn't even close to resolved yet. There are good sources within Mizzou saying that most of the information that Kietzmann spoke of is not true and that Mizzou is still in play for a Big 10 bid.

This is crazy.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Truth is far stranger than fiction. Yesterday's situation was a well-orchestrated PR media hit directed by other schools to attempt to plant seeds of distrust and derail negotiations between various schools and conference leaders. It created quite a rise amongst fans (look at the last few pages of this thread), but not a whole lot has changed within the athletic departments. We're still roughly where we were before the media blitz started.

I agree with Matter concerning Mizzou's handling of this whole situation. It's amazing how much more polished they are in handling these kinds of situations than they were a few years ago with the Ricky Clemons fiasco. Much of the credit should go to Gary Forsee. He brought in a lot of knowledge from his years in business on how to keep things even-keeled from a PR perspective. As long as Mizzou remains quiet, it's generally good news for the University.

[DeToxRox]

Apparently it's coming out of Big 12 North schools that the conference has been saved. We'll see soon enough I guess.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Gotcha. It is a good question though as to why the ACC is so quiet. I just wonder if say Rutgers would jump at the offer without knowing what is going on with the Big Ten.

I don't think we'd make a move without having a better understanding on what the Big Ten's plans are. At this point, you have to trust your powers-that-be until they give you a reason not to. From what I've heard, there continues to be a lot of contact back and forth so I think whatever decision would be made would be based on the feel of it. If the ACC went down that route, I'd be surprised that they would offer Rutgers an ultimatum.

But to your earlier point, if they felt there was a strong likelihood that Texas ends up as Big Ten #13, we'd grab the ACC spot in a second.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

I'm sorry. I stopped taking that article seriously in the first paragraph. The grammar was atrocious.

Dear SouthernPigskin.com "writer" (and I use the term incredibly loosely): "dominate" is a verb - not an adjective - you stupid fuck. If you can't even get that right before you click 'submit' on your breathless piece of mental masturbation, that tells me precisely how seriously you take your work, as well as precisely how seriously I ought *not* to.

Sack, you're such a grammar nazi sometimes

(tho, yeah, the dominant-dominate thing is one of the most frustrating things to come from illiterate sports "writers" in years)

SI

[MrBug708]

Since Texas is holding off on leaving, I bet the PAC-10 holds off on Utah and goes with an unbalanced grouping of 11 teams and holds those 5 spots until one of the teams gets tired of Texas' crap.

[TroyF]

If Texas were to join the Big10, I'd love to be a fly on the wall at the first meeting when their reps walk past Nebraska reps.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

For Panerd, who keeps on drinking the kool-aid

LOL. Hundreds of posts about how MBBF is a homer is Mizzou-deluded and he is your source. OK. Now how about an actual statement from the Mizzou adminstation or the athletic department about going to the Big Ten? If the kool-aid I am drinking is making me so delusional this one should be easy.

All I can remember is an idiot KC sports talk host (who by the way hates Mizzou) and the governor making national news. I conceded a few posts ago that the fans deserve this for getting all giddy and basically saying "fuck you" to K-State, ISU, etc but never once have I seen anyone from within the university make any statement.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

There hasn't been a peep out of the ACC during all of this, presumably because they are afraid of a potential SEC raid and keeping quiet. If the Big Ten and SEC wind up staying at 12, could the ACC leap at the chance to be the first to expand to 16 rather than waiting around a few years to pick through leftovers (assuming this will all eventually lead to 4 or 5 16 team conferences)? Not only that, but putting together a strong 16 now could help prevent them from being raided down the road.

Hard to have much leverage when everyone knows you're going to be raided by your bigger, stronger competitor to the south. I mean, if you were a good school in the Big East, say, West Virginia- why would you accept an invite to the ACC when you could either be raided in a couple of years or just get an invite to the SEC. Would, say, USF be interested? Sure. But any of the big powers (WVa, Pitt, etc) is in a better position waiting.

SI

[Recoil]

This thread:

[Logan]

Originally Posted by panerd

LOL. Hundreds of posts about how MBBF is a homer is Mizzou-deluded and he is your source. OK. Now how about an actual statement from the Mizzou adminstation or the athletic department about going to the Big Ten? If the kool-aid I am drinking is making me so delusional this one should be easy.

If it was okay to acknowledge that there were all these back-channel moves going around to solicit Missouri to the Big 10, why not acknowledge that the same people are likely making those statements you're looking for?