A Realistic Scenario of How the Big 12 Could Die By Dissolution.

There have been many posts on this board analyzing how two or more conferences may invite schools from the Big 12 at the same time so that eight Big 12 schools could vote to dissolve that conference in order to avoid paying an exit fee and the grant of rights. The problem with all of such previous scenarios is that they did not take into account that no conference would agree to take a school they did not really want so another conference could get stronger, ie. The SEC taking in Oklahoma State so another conference could get Oklahoma and/or Texas. This post resolves this problem.

I start with the following five postulates: 1) the B1G would love to invite Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas together to get to the Texas market and preserve its contiguous boundary hegemony, 2) The PAC would also love to have those same three schools and would take their little brothers Kansas State, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech to get them, 3) Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas would prefer not to join the PAC because if they did they would have when given the chance three years ago, probably because of distance, time zone differences and the preference of staying put or joining other conferences, 4) The SEC does not want Kansas State, Oklahoma State or Texas Tech, and 5) It takes 8 schools to vote for the dissolution of the Big 12. I personally think the number is 7, but that is not the prevailing opinion on this board, so I went with 8. I also do not believe the Big 12 would have to be dissolved in order for schools to exit the Big 12 because I do not agree with the conventional wisdom that holds a grant of rights is an inescapable jail sentence.

For this to happen it would have to be initiated by the schools wanting to leave the Big 12, which means they actually would want to leave. This post presumes such schools would want to leave if and when Texas decides it wants to leave the big 12 because such ruminations would cause near panic to start for all Big 12 schools. I will also state this is not something I would want to happen being an SEC fan second (UGA fan first and foremost) because this would strengthen the B1G considerably. This is nothing more than game theory.
So how could it happen?

The B1G invites Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas.
Why would the B1G do this? This answer should be self evident. There are almost as many pairs of eyeballs in Texas as there are stars at night that are big and bright deep in the heart of Texas. The conference would remain contiguous, the Oklahoma/Nebraska rivalry is renewed and the B1G gets Kansas basketball.

The PAC invites Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Kansas State and Iowa State.
Why would the PAC do this? This certainly would not be the PAC’s first option as they would definitely prefer to have Texas in their conference, but the PAC could be incentivized. While the four little brothers (Iowa/Iowa State) would bring a lot of new viewers in the central time zone to the PAC Network by themselves, with the PAC Network broadcasting the little brothers’ home games hosting their big brothers, especially Texas Tech/Texas, the real value to the PAC in this sort of scenario would be for these games to be part of a larger B1G/PAC scheduling alliance matching up the rest of the B1G with the remaining schools in the PAC. A B1G/PAC Alliance almost happened two years ago with the PAC originally agreeing to it but then backing out after the non-traditional football powers decided they did not want the extra tough game, and USC and Stanford deciding ND was enough annual out of conference competition. But things have changed with the strength of schedule component of the College Football Playoffs, and the appeal of B1G/PAC synergy may now be too much to resist for both conferences. Such an alliance would now have interested viewers stretching from the Northeast, across the Midwest, down through Texas, west to California and up the West Coast. If the previous arrangement was almost good enough, then this could well do it.

The ACC invites West Virginia.
Why would the ACC want to do this? I could see three scenarios why the ACC would invite West Virginia.
One reason is they might decide it would be best for the conference to add another football power. Because of academics, West Virginia was never wanted by the ACC, but things have changed. The ACC has cracked the academic requirement seal by letting in Louisville, and the ACC is trying to start their own network. West Virginia would increase the football brand of the ACC, especially by renewing West Virginia’s rivalries with Pitt, Virginia Tech, Louisville and others.

The second reason might be the Big 12 dissolution could cause the SEC to expand to match the expansion of the B1G and PAC. This would be likely in my opinion, and the only schools left the SEC would want would be in the ACC. By deciding to go large the SEC would then invite football powers FSU and Clemson and see what other schools jump ship with them. Such offers could cause the SEC to end up with a school in the states of Virginia and North Carolina. Instead of a ruthless raid, the SEC could reach an understanding that if some schools were to join the SEC, the SEC would agree to a scheduling alliance with the remaining members of the ACC.

The third scenario is the B1G raiding the ACC. Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas make three, an odd number. The B1G would need either one or three more schools. Those three might be UNC, UVA and GT or even ND. If the B1G was somewhat attractive before it would be even more so with the three new additions. If the B1G could not get a big fish out of the ACC, and for whatever reason passes on UConn, there is, in my opinion, an ACC outlier that is low hanging fruit. A school that brings in the third large market in the Northeast, and arguably the nation’s best hockey program, which is a money making sport with the BTN. That school is Boston College. Would BC be the B1G’s first, second or third choice? No, of course not, especially because it is not a member of the AAU, but if the Rutgers model works then Boston College is a potential gold mine.

Lurker Above

Man, I was with you right until you mentioned the ACC inviting West Virginia.

The PAC 12 really didn't want OSU & Texas Tech even when it included getting Texas & OU. No way they take them with Iowa State & Kansas State.

The Big XII schools are happy at 10 & they aren't looking to leave.

(06-15-2013 12:47 PM)Tulsafanzz Wrote:  The PAC 12 really didn't want OSU & Texas Tech even when it included getting Texas & OU. No way they take them with Iowa State & Kansas State.

The Big XII schools are happy at 10 & they aren't looking to leave.

I agree that the Pac12 has no interest in OSU,TTech, or KSU. Those teams will stay in a P5 league somewhere, but not the Pac12. I haven't thought it out far enough to say where they'd land, but no way they lose their big boy card.

As far as the Big12 is concerned, if OU and UT pull out, the Big12 gets taken apart, if those two stay, so does the Big12. To be fair though UT has whored itself out very recently, and likely will again. OU of course will move to preserve their status elsewhere. So really its up to UT to disassemble the Big12. Even though, today, UT has just about the sweetest setup in CFB. But they've never been accused of being rocket scientists.

He lost me at the B1G inviting 3 schools. Why would they go to 17 teams, and not 16 or 18? Do they really want a prime number for their membership role, with all the scheduling problems that would create?

(06-15-2013 12:58 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  He lost me at the B1G inviting 3 schools. Why would they go to 17 teams, and not 16 or 18? Do they really want a prime number for their membership role, with all the scheduling problems that would create?

16 teams seems like the max number that makes sense, and still keep the payout/school up, and scheduling, etc...

Whew, I was wondering when We would see this Type of conversations again. LOL !

(06-15-2013 12:58 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  He lost me at the B1G inviting 3 schools. Why would they go to 17 teams, and not 16 or 18? Do they really want a prime number for their membership role, with all the scheduling problems that would create?

The B1G might go the easy route and just invite OU and Kansas. Makes a nice sixteen school set up and gets them further into the mid west and back with the Huskers... I can't see any downside to this. They have no reason to deal with UT and their LHN and other issues. Even if an announcement of future plans was all that went down now, the wheels would start grinding again. WVU will join the SEC if this happens...not the ACC. UT would make a hasty exit.. maybe to the ACC and ND. Texas actually has a very large Atlantic coast line so they are a geographical and academic ACC fit. That would just about do it, unless the other six just did the Big East thing and added four new members, say USM, Tulsa, SMU, and Rice.

I've read it only takes 6 votes to dissolve the big 12 since its incorporated in delaware, the state law being a majority vote can dissolve a corporation. No way the pac 10 will invite the school's on your list. For the pac 10 to expand, i think its 9 votes out of 12. Colorado and Utah can get cast aside to an eastern division but the ariz school's and original pac 8 school's won't vote for going east. Thus, i think for the pac 10 to expand its probably a pac 20 setup which probably won't bring any money bump but it does lead to clear playoff spot for the winner of their football only setup. If i'm wrong and the pac 10 would jump to 16, than its easy to see texas, texas tech, ou and ok state jump to the pac. Than you can pop in KU to the big 10 with wvu landing in either the sec or acc and you at 6. Or maybe OU/ok state to the sec, ku and texas to the big 10, and texas tech + tcu to the pac.

(06-15-2013 01:06 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(06-15-2013 12:58 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  He lost me at the B1G inviting 3 schools. Why would they go to 17 teams, and not 16 or 18? Do they really want a prime number for their membership role, with all the scheduling problems that would create?

The B1G might go the easy route and just invite OU and Kansas. Makes a nice sixteen school set up and gets them further into the mid west and back with the Huskers... I can't see any downside to this. They have no reason to deal with UT and their LHN and other issues.

Other than reviving the Nebraska rivalry, I'd really dislike the idea of OU in the B1G. As an OU grad, I'd rather see OU in the SEC with OSU. But that scenario is far fetched at best. The other scenario is "WHAT IF" OU chose to stay in the Big12 after UT leaves, and rebuild it? Is there any benefit to OU by doing this? Maybe they get offered an LHN type deal to keep the Big12 relevant, and dare I say expand the Big 12 footprint into a new market, like Florida, with say a UCF/USF combo?

Come on, you gotta like how I wrapped that all into a USF/UCF theme, Amirite?

It will eventually happen in my opinion because the LHN almost killed the conference once. Consequently, the GOR is just life support until the plug is pulled on it. Nevertheless, I have a different outlook than the op:

PAC 12—TX, TT (TX ‘s little brother)/TCU (Large Market), Ok and OSU. The PAC 12 previously invited four of these schools. I think it will consider them again.

B10—Kansas and UCONN (the B10 could have already taken Kansas, but was looking at eastern expansion)

ACC—WV and will be content with ND affiliation

Another scenario:

PAC 12—Takes all four Texas schools and has a stronghold on the huge market in that state. It could also swap Baylor or TT for Houston (another huge market).

SEC—Ok and OSU/WV

B10—The same as the above

The rest of the B12 schools would have enough power to raid any mid-major conference. However, the B12 would become a mid-major itself.

(06-15-2013 01:13 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(06-15-2013 01:06 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(06-15-2013 12:58 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  He lost me at the B1G inviting 3 schools. Why would they go to 17 teams, and not 16 or 18? Do they really want a prime number for their membership role, with all the scheduling problems that would create?

The B1G might go the easy route and just invite OU and Kansas. Makes a nice sixteen school set up and gets them further into the mid west and back with the Huskers... I can't see any downside to this. They have no reason to deal with UT and their LHN and other issues.

Other than reviving the Nebraska rivalry, I'd really dislike the idea of OU in the B1G. As an OU grad, I'd rather see OU in the SEC with OSU. But that scenario is far fetched at best. The other scenario is "WHAT IF" OU chose to stay in the Big12 after UT leaves, and rebuild it? Is there any benefit to OU by doing this? Maybe they get offered an LHN type deal to keep the Big12 relevant, and dare I say expand the Big 12 footprint into a new market, like Florida, with say a UCF/USF combo?

Come on, you gotta like how I wrapped that all into a USF/UCF theme, Amirite?

Good points here. I would love OU in the SEC too. I would love that Bedlam game in the SEC!

The whole point of the dissolution would be that it could facilitate the other four conferences getting to 16 and stopping. Going past 16 with this scenario doesnt help it happen. There are few rare gems in the Big 12 but there are plenty of valuable commodities. Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas all going to the same conference in the Big Ten is just not going to happen.

For this to happen, Texas and Oklahoma would have to agree to maintain their relationship as an OOC one because I just dont see how they stay together unless Missouri is somehow talked to the Big Ten with Kansas, then the Texoma-4 can stay together and go West.

If Oklahoma and Kansas go north then that would free up Texas to also make a move East to the ACC. They could perhaps sign a similar deal as Notre Dame.

I am sure the SEC would try to make sure WVU was with them. While folks might think Kansas State and Oklahoma State are bad for business but both culturally fit, especially OSU. OSU is full of money these days and they are performing better than Oklahoma in terms of living up to their team's potential. I dont see why an OSU/WVU combination is a bad one for the SEC. Four conferences at 16, new rules, expanded national playoff and two great new programs to bring into the conference. I'm sure they might choose some others first but this isn't picking teams for kickball. Those other schools that they would want first probably would rather be somewhere else.

(06-15-2013 01:20 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  The whole point of the dissolution would be that it could facilitate the other four conferences getting to 16 and stopping. Going past 16 with this scenario doesnt help it happen. There are few rare gems in the Big 12 but there are plenty of valuable commodities. Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas all going to the same conference in the Big Ten is just not going to happen.

For this to happen, Texas and Oklahoma would have to agree to maintain their relationship as an OOC one because I just dont see how they stay together unless Missouri is somehow talked to the Big Ten with Kansas, then the Texoma-4 can stay together and go West.

If Oklahoma and Kansas go north then that would free up Texas to also make a move East to the ACC. They could perhaps sign a similar deal as Notre Dame.

I am sure the SEC would try to make sure WVU was with them. While folks might think Kansas State and Oklahoma State are bad for business but both culturally fit, especially OSU. OSU is full of money these days and they are performing better than Oklahoma in terms of living up to their team's potential. I dont see why an OSU/WVU combination is a bad one for the SEC. Four conferences at 16, new rules, expanded national playoff and two great new programs to bring into the conference. I'm sure they might choose some others first but this isn't picking teams for kickball. Those other schools that they would want first probably would rather be somewhere else.

This was my reasoning earlier in the thread. OU/KU to the B1G, WVU to the SEC and UT to ACC/ND. Works pretty well in theory... Massive win for the B1G.

(06-15-2013 12:58 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  He lost me at the B1G inviting 3 schools. Why would they go to 17 teams, and not 16 or 18? Do they really want a prime number for their membership role, with all the scheduling problems that would create?

I have them inviting 4 schools if you read the entire post.

(06-15-2013 01:24 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(06-15-2013 01:20 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  The whole point of the dissolution would be that it could facilitate the other four conferences getting to 16 and stopping. Going past 16 with this scenario doesnt help it happen. There are few rare gems in the Big 12 but there are plenty of valuable commodities. Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas all going to the same conference in the Big Ten is just not going to happen.

For this to happen, Texas and Oklahoma would have to agree to maintain their relationship as an OOC one because I just dont see how they stay together unless Missouri is somehow talked to the Big Ten with Kansas, then the Texoma-4 can stay together and go West.

If Oklahoma and Kansas go north then that would free up Texas to also make a move East to the ACC. They could perhaps sign a similar deal as Notre Dame.

I am sure the SEC would try to make sure WVU was with them. While folks might think Kansas State and Oklahoma State are bad for business but both culturally fit, especially OSU. OSU is full of money these days and they are performing better than Oklahoma in terms of living up to their team's potential. I dont see why an OSU/WVU combination is a bad one for the SEC. Four conferences at 16, new rules, expanded national playoff and two great new programs to bring into the conference. I'm sure they might choose some others first but this isn't picking teams for kickball. Those other schools that they would want first probably would rather be somewhere else.

This was my reasoning earlier in the thread. OU/KU to the B1G, WVU to the SEC and UT to ACC/ND. Works pretty well in theory... Massive win for the B1G.

And quite frankly, the PAC is the little man at the table. Whatever option they get out of this will be better than the options they have out west. If they end up with Texas Tech, TCU, Kansas State and Iowa State then they will have gained considerable footprint in the Central Time Zone which they desperately need for TV programming.

My thinking on TCU is that once again, Baylor will attach itself to Texas and go with them out East.

(06-15-2013 01:24 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  This was my reasoning earlier in the thread. OU/KU to the B1G, WVU to the SEC and UT to ACC/ND. Works pretty well in theory... Massive win for the B1G.

(06-15-2013 01:27 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Moreover, it would have less schools to divide more money...And quite frankly, the PAC is the little man at the table.

The PAC 12 would have more to offer TX because of its network than the ACC. "Moreover, it would have less schools to divide more money..."

(06-15-2013 01:26 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  

(06-15-2013 12:58 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  He lost me at the B1G inviting 3 schools. Why would they go to 17 teams, and not 16 or 18? Do they really want a prime number for their membership role, with all the scheduling problems that would create?

I have them inviting 4 schools if you read the entire post.

I too only saw UT, OU and KU to the Big Ten in your post. Who was the fourth?

(06-15-2013 01:26 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  

(06-15-2013 12:58 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  He lost me at the B1G inviting 3 schools. Why would they go to 17 teams, and not 16 or 18? Do they really want a prime number for their membership role, with all the scheduling problems that would create?

I have them inviting 4 schools if you read the entire post.

Well +2 for bringing us back to life.

(06-15-2013 01:28 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(06-15-2013 01:24 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  This was my reasoning earlier in the thread. OU/KU to the B1G, WVU to the SEC and UT to ACC/ND. Works pretty well in theory... Massive win for the B1G.

The PAC 12 would have more to offer TX because of its network than the ACC.

Texas has it's own Network. The ACC doesn't and may very likely not be getting one. Yes their rights belong to ESPN but guess what, so does the LHN. I'm sure an agreement could be made in principle.