(11-12-2014 03:39 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The 3 would make sense. Colorado St and BYU would be travel partners. Cincy would be a travel partner for WVU.

The Texas part is weird.

HOUSTON?

BTW, if true...I imagine the ACC will look real hard at UConn or counter offer for Cincy. Gotta imagine Cincy would jump at the ACC over the B12.

(11-12-2014 03:52 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(11-12-2014 03:46 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Why in the world would they need another Texas School? CSU, BYU, Cinci make sense but I would think UCONN, ECU or UCF would make sense to at least have two other schools partnered with WVU.

The only reason why would be the Houston market. Since A&M have a majority of the market and thus and SEC market, having UH as a Big 12 member would give part of that market back to the Big 12.

Urm, the Big 12 already has that market as they have cable rights for it. that's what it's all about. They do not need a school in every city as long as they have the most popular school.

The first 3 make sense

But I can guarantee you no 5th Texas school gets added because there are 4 automatic "no" votes against it who don't want their in state recruiting even further diluted by empowering the public school in their richest recruiting ground.

The whole "A&M runs Houston" thing is not an issue because as long as UT is in the Big 12, the Big 12 will receive full market credit for Houston by the networks.

I would posit Tulane as #7 for the B12 South. They ARE an AAU school and are would open up LA recruiting to the Big 12

(11-12-2014 03:53 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(11-12-2014 03:39 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The 3 would make sense. Colorado St and BYU would be travel partners. Cincy would be a travel partner for WVU.

The Texas part is weird.

HOUSTON?

BTW, if true...I imagine the ACC will look real hard at UConn or counter offer for Cincy. Gotta imagine Cincy would jump at the ACC over the B12.

I don't think a lot of folks in the conference would want to expand any more. 14 is already very unwieldly. Really don't see the ACC rushing to stop Cincy from going.

(11-12-2014 03:53 PM)USFRamenu Wrote:  

(11-12-2014 03:52 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(11-12-2014 03:46 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Why in the world would they need another Texas School? CSU, BYU, Cinci make sense but I would think UCONN, ECU or UCF would make sense to at least have two other schools partnered with WVU.

The only reason why would be the Houston market. Since A&M have a majority of the market and thus and SEC market, having UH as a Big 12 member would give part of that market back to the Big 12.

Urm, the Big 12 already has that market as they have cable rights for it. that's what it's all about. They do not need a school in every city as long as they have the most popular school.

I agree with you...but I responded to the rumor above. Personally I would look at Cincy, Memphis, USF and UCF with BYU and Colorado State as viable options.

Some of you might be well versed to look up the term travel partner, then reevaluate your statements

(11-12-2014 03:53 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(11-12-2014 03:39 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The 3 would make sense. Colorado St and BYU would be travel partners. Cincy would be a travel partner for WVU.

The Texas part is weird.

HOUSTON?

BTW, if true...I imagine the ACC will look real hard at UConn or counter offer for Cincy. Gotta imagine Cincy would jump at the ACC over the B12.

This would be a UC's fan dream scenario. I think most would prefer the ACC due to travel and Louisville.

(11-12-2014 04:00 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(11-12-2014 03:53 PM)USFRamenu Wrote:  

(11-12-2014 03:52 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(11-12-2014 03:46 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Why in the world would they need another Texas School? CSU, BYU, Cinci make sense but I would think UCONN, ECU or UCF would make sense to at least have two other schools partnered with WVU.

The only reason why would be the Houston market. Since A&M have a majority of the market and thus and SEC market, having UH as a Big 12 member would give part of that market back to the Big 12.

Urm, the Big 12 already has that market as they have cable rights for it. that's what it's all about. They do not need a school in every city as long as they have the most popular school.

I agree with you...but I responded to the rumor above. Personally I would look at Cincy, Memphis, USF and UCF with BYU and Colorado State as viable options.

There will be no expansion until either Texas leaves the conference or the LHN is dropped by ESPN. Either will only happen when Hell freezes over.

(11-12-2014 03:57 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  The first 3 make sense

But I can guarantee you no 5th Texas school gets added because there are 4 automatic "no" votes against it who don't want their in state recruiting even further diluted by empowering the public school in their richest recruiting ground.

The whole "A&M runs Houston" thing is not an issue because as long as UT is in the Big 12, the Big 12 will receive full market credit for Houston by the networks.

I would posit Tulane as #7 for the B12 South. They ARE an AAU school and are would open up LA recruiting to the Big 12

Getting into the Louisana market would be a good direction. However, can Tulane expand their stadium any more? They had a hard enough time for the capacity it has now with the neighborhood next door.

All about markets, California has 4 schools in the P12 , USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford (2 state, 2 private) B12 has 4 UT,TCU,Baylor, TTU (2 state, 2 private), Houston would add a 3rd state school, and help battle against further SEC encroachment in the Houston market, I believe that the thinking on the OU folks part as told by some supposed folks with some knowledge of the situation. If it holds water who knows? I know one thing UH along with OU is opening the 2016 college FBS season in Houston.

(11-12-2014 04:05 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(11-12-2014 03:57 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  The first 3 make sense

But I can guarantee you no 5th Texas school gets added because there are 4 automatic "no" votes against it who don't want their in state recruiting even further diluted by empowering the public school in their richest recruiting ground.

The whole "A&M runs Houston" thing is not an issue because as long as UT is in the Big 12, the Big 12 will receive full market credit for Houston by the networks.

I would posit Tulane as #7 for the B12 South. They ARE an AAU school and are would open up LA recruiting to the Big 12

Getting into the Louisana market would be a good direction. However, can Tulane expand their stadium any more? They had a hard enough time for the capacity it has now with the neighbors.

They are pretty land locked...I'm sure they could squeeze another 5k in there...but do they really need to?

(11-12-2014 04:06 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  All about markets, California has 4 schools in the P12 , USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford (2 state, 2 private) B12 has 3 UT,TCU,Baylot (1 state, 2 private), Houston would add a 2nd state school, and help battle against further SEC encroachment in the Houston market, I believe that the thinking on the OU folks part as told by some supposed folkts with soem knowledge of the situation. if it holds water who knows? I know one thing UH is opening the the college FBS season with OU in Houston.

Urm, you forgetting Texas Tech?????

Outside of Cincinnati and BYU, Colorado State is one of those schools that I've long believed would be a viable Big 12 expansion candidate if its football program had any type of pulse. (Others on that list: Memphis, Tulane, UNLV, and New Mexico.) CSU finally putting it together is a valuable school on paper - only one in-state rival that's way down right now in a fast-growing state.

(11-12-2014 04:05 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(11-12-2014 03:57 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  The first 3 make sense

But I can guarantee you no 5th Texas school gets added because there are 4 automatic "no" votes against it who don't want their in state recruiting even further diluted by empowering the public school in their richest recruiting ground.

The whole "A&M runs Houston" thing is not an issue because as long as UT is in the Big 12, the Big 12 will receive full market credit for Houston by the networks.

I would posit Tulane as #7 for the B12 South. They ARE an AAU school and are would open up LA recruiting to the Big 12

Getting into the Louisana market would be a good direction. However, can Tulane expand their stadium any more? They had a hard enough time for the capacity it has now with the neighborhood next door.

They could add 10K to Yulman which would put them right at the 40K which is comparable to TCU and frankly all the space they'd ever need.

(11-12-2014 04:08 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(11-12-2014 04:05 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(11-12-2014 03:57 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  The first 3 make sense

But I can guarantee you no 5th Texas school gets added because there are 4 automatic "no" votes against it who don't want their in state recruiting even further diluted by empowering the public school in their richest recruiting ground.

The whole "A&M runs Houston" thing is not an issue because as long as UT is in the Big 12, the Big 12 will receive full market credit for Houston by the networks.

I would posit Tulane as #7 for the B12 South. They ARE an AAU school and are would open up LA recruiting to the Big 12

Getting into the Louisana market would be a good direction. However, can Tulane expand their stadium any more? They had a hard enough time for the capacity it has now with the neighborhood next door.

They could add 10K to Yulman which would put them right at the 40K which is comparable to TCU and frankly all the space they'd ever need.

10th MTN did you read 10k somewhere as the ultimate upside? I thought going vertical would draw the ire of the surrounding houses...also, parking would be a huge concern. As you said do they really need to go to 40k? I think low 30s would be sufficient.

I have nothing official, just an AF buddy whose also a big Tulane booster who told me that it was possible to redo both end zones to be more robust and add about 5K each to bring it up to a max of about 40K.

(11-12-2014 04:08 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(11-12-2014 04:05 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(11-12-2014 03:57 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  The first 3 make sense

But I can guarantee you no 5th Texas school gets added because there are 4 automatic "no" votes against it who don't want their in state recruiting even further diluted by empowering the public school in their richest recruiting ground.

The whole "A&M runs Houston" thing is not an issue because as long as UT is in the Big 12, the Big 12 will receive full market credit for Houston by the networks.

I would posit Tulane as #7 for the B12 South. They ARE an AAU school and are would open up LA recruiting to the Big 12

Getting into the Louisana market would be a good direction. However, can Tulane expand their stadium any more? They had a hard enough time for the capacity it has now with the neighborhood next door.

They could add 10K to Yulman which would put them right at the 40K which is comparable to TCU and frankly all the space they'd ever need.

True. And as less people fill up large stadiums, the focus is more on the suites and a more intimate experience. Plus, they don't have as large of a student body to fill a large student section.

(11-12-2014 04:07 PM)USFRamenu Wrote:  

(11-12-2014 04:06 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  All about markets, California has 4 schools in the P12 , USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford (2 state, 2 private) B12 has 3 UT,TCU,Baylot (1 state, 2 private), Houston would add a 2nd state school, and help battle against further SEC encroachment in the Houston market, I believe that the thinking on the OU folks part as told by some supposed folkts with soem knowledge of the situation. if it holds water who knows? I know one thing UH is opening the the college FBS season with OU in Houston.

Urm, you forgetting Texas Tech?????

Yea, I forgot them....my bad......stuck way up there in Lubbock

BYU football only, UC all sports. No need for CSU. Otherwise you need BYU full time plus CSU, then you'd still need a WVU bridge. I think Memphis would be 14, with Tulane on the outside looking in.

1. I agree that if the Big 12 expanded Cincinnati, B.Y.U., Colorado State, and possibly Tulane would be the best way to do it. That's 4 new states and new markets.

2. I'm not sure that adding those four (unless the networks blessed it with generous cash) would add enough to make it worth more to the 10 present members.

3. If however it did happen then we have a very interesting twist to realignment. An expanding Big 12 opens the doors for other G5 schools to make the bump up. 14 is a scheduling dilemma waiting to happen. Truly 16 would be much easier to manage. If the ACC and Big 12 stand solid then suddenly the only available additions to any P5 conference become niche markets. East Carolina goes way up in value to the SEC, Central Florida and South Florida find legs to Big 12 and possibly SEC interest. The PAC may re-examine the viability of New Mexico and Nevada if the Big 12 is off the menu and suddenly may be a competitor for their markets. A defensive reaction by the PAC may be to add some of their neighboring states. Connecticut suddenly becomes more appealing to both the Big 10 and ACC. If the Big 12 adds another Texas school like Houston, perhaps the SEC looks at Rice and/ or S.M.U.. Temple might become a interesting prospect as well.

4. However, I don't believe this happens. Texas and OU wait for the same reasons they've been waiting. 1. They need time to figure out their best options and to see what develops in the ACC. 2. They would not be adding schools that are compelling to their fans, or peers.

5. But, it is fun to think about.