(06-04-2019 11:12 PM)wildcat33 Wrote:  I'm new here (Northwestern fan) but I wanted to comment. I'm a traditionalist and I believe in regional rivalries. I'm one of the people who thinks Maryland and Rutgers have no business being in the B1G. I'm sick of this all being about money and power and influence and all of that. We have a good thing here. I'd honestly like us to be back at 10 teams but of course that will never happen so the next best thing is to leave it just how it is. I have no desire to have NC State, UNC, Virginia, or any of those schools in the B1G. Our schools have nothing in common with those schools. Geography matters to me and this is a Midwestern conference and I'd like to see it stay that way. I just don't want tradition and rivalries lost all because of the almighty dollar. Just my two cents.

There are many in the SEC who feel as you do. The only hankering for expansion that our fan base has had goes back to 1992 when most would have been satisfied with Florida State, and a simple majority in favor of Clemson. We took South Carolina and Arkansas and it hasn't felt the same since. F.S.U. and Clemson were football first schools essentially within our footprint.

Money is and will continue to be the motivator in expansion. And for those speculating I'll merely say what I have before. If I were pushed to today to say how this is resolved I would refer to existing contracts as the inclinations of the networks and would refer everyone to the state legislatures of Texas and Oklahoma to find the answer.

FOX holds ties to Oklahoma. ESPN holds even greater ties to Texas. The Oklahoma legislature wants the Sooners to move with the Pokes. The Texas legislature wants Texas, A&M and Tech to all play each other every year. The Texas legislature is more powerful than that of Oklahoma and the Oklahoma legislature won't stand in the way of the Sooners leaving alone if there is no possibility of OSU tagging along.

So I think if any movement happens out of the Big 12 it will be Texas and Texas Tech moving to the SEC as repugnant and illogical as that may sound to some. It satisfies the state legislature and it is the only way in which all 3 can play annually (out of the same division). It satisfies ESPN. And in spite of their utterances to the contrary Texas has been in talks with the SEC since 1987. The SEC schedule allows them to keep their business model of playing at least 7 games in the state of Texas annually. They can't get that elsewhere. The money will be comparable for Texas and ESPN can work out the LHN issue with them by possibly rolling it into the SECN. I think when Oklahoma can point to the Texas move and say we have an offer to the Big 10 but they won't take the Pokes too then they have cover to leave. Now whether Kansas or a school to be determined leaves for the Big 10 with Oklahoma the new split will be basically SWC to the SEC and Big 8 to the Big 10. In both cases the fit will probably be a bit more natural.

I'd say that Texas would head to the PAC but the revenue just isn't there and present PAC politics no longer mesh as well with those of Texas. I don't see Texas taking a partial deal with the ACC because their minor sports are too important to them to be made to play at such distance. So Texas will push to keep the Big 12 and if they can't I think their cover story about the SEC is that they did what was necessary to protect Tech.

(06-04-2019 11:12 PM)wildcat33 Wrote:  I'm new here (Northwestern fan) but I wanted to comment. I'm a traditionalist and I believe in regional rivalries. I'm one of the people who thinks Maryland and Rutgers have no business being in the B1G. I'm sick of this all being about money and power and influence and all of that. We have a good thing here. I'd honestly like us to be back at 10 teams but of course that will never happen so the next best thing is to leave it just how it is. I have no desire to have NC State, UNC, Virginia, or any of those schools in the B1G. Our schools have nothing in common with those schools. Geography matters to me and this is a Midwestern conference and I'd like to see it stay that way. I just don't want tradition and rivalries lost all because of the almighty dollar. Just my two cents.

Nice to have you aboard, wildcat33!

Go Cats!

(06-06-2019 09:55 PM)cubucks Wrote:  

(06-04-2019 11:12 PM)wildcat33 Wrote:  I'm new here (Northwestern fan) but I wanted to comment. I'm a traditionalist and I believe in regional rivalries. I'm one of the people who thinks Maryland and Rutgers have no business being in the B1G. I'm sick of this all being about money and power and influence and all of that. We have a good thing here. I'd honestly like us to be back at 10 teams but of course that will never happen so the next best thing is to leave it just how it is. I have no desire to have NC State, UNC, Virginia, or any of those schools in the B1G. Our schools have nothing in common with those schools. Geography matters to me and this is a Midwestern conference and I'd like to see it stay that way. I just don't want tradition and rivalries lost all because of the almighty dollar. Just my two cents.

Nice to have you aboard, wildcat33!

Go Cats!

Second this, welcome to the B1G board.

(07-27-2017 07:05 AM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  

(06-25-2017 01:07 AM)AntiG Wrote:  I think we're going to end up within the next decade with B1G with the divisions becoming a 20 Team AAU Conference.

Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa State and one more school. I wish it would be either West Virginia (due to Rutgers' long-time love-hate rivalry with them), or if not them Florida State, or Rice for academic reasons and being in Houston to double down in the state of Texas. I don't see Kansas State, Oklahoma State or Baylor even being considered at all unless the B1G and B12 decide to merge all at once to expand to 24 which I doubt would ever happen. Texas Tech I could see if that were the request for Texas joining.

I was thinking the exact same thing about WVU. It might not be as far fetched as some might think

CONS
Not AAU
Less than stellar academics
Not necessarily a cultural fit
Doesn't bring many "eyes" to the TV

PROS
Good athletic pedigree
State flagship school - land grant university
Borders on several current B1G states
Fairly large and passionate fanbase

Just a thought, but if the B1G does decide to become the B18, they could do a lot worse than WVU.

If you think that the University of Kansas or Oklahoma will accept being in ANY Conference with WVU in it, both you and I are in a load of crap. WVU culturally has no plusses for the BIG to accept them. They are poor, Appalachian, and educationally on the stupid side (I have proof it shows in their low GPA) They have the WORST Addiction Disease rate in all the NCAA Bowl Division, have absolutely no big Cities to offer the BIG. Unless one counts Charleston as a "City" They have been a pain in the posterior for the Big12 since we allowed them in. Nasty Smell=you do not need them. I really don't think the BIG's expansion desires would be filled by WVU... And there are more options which would expand the Footprint of the Big without the heavy lugging it takes just to keep WVU Students and fans clean and sober for TV. I believe the best realignment deals at this time would be Oklahoma, Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri- 3 are firmly in the AAU. Oklahoma is just a little ways off. You gain 3 awesome rivalries by including these Universities (Kansas-Missouri-one of the NCAA's oldest and fiercest Rivalries, Nebraska and Oklahoma-also one of the all-time best rivals, and Kansas-Nebraska. All of these Rivalries are well over 100 years old and Historic). Add to this, IowaState and Nebraska. One thing I have read here is that the BIG interlopes into Big12, but actually it is not true- TV ratings in Missouri is split. Kansas City is FILLED with KU Grads, Mizzou rates well in the St. Louis Area. You also bring in the Plains Triangle of Wichita, Tulsa and Oklahoma City. That covers lots of land behind it.
Kansas will not be trying to bring along K-State. There was never a Law that ties KU with KSU is a lie. They are estranged permanently KU actually does not care that much about it. KSU has the In-State Rivalry fever, not KU. The law that ties them into the same Conference is NOT TRUE. There never was a law tying KU to K-State. Oklahoma does have a law that keeps OU-OSU in the same conference, but I am certain there are more OU Grads in the State Legislature in OKC. All but one of the Universities are firmly ensconced in the AAU. Oklahoma is close. And all of the Institutions I have proposed are contiguous within the BIG Footprint. Both OU and KU are getting tired of the uncertainty in the Big12. This should make a 2 division Conference, East-Rutgers (if they can keep up) Maryland, Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, MSU, Indiana and Purdue plus 2 other lucrative Eastern additions On the West- Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma Illinois, Iowa, Iowa State, Northwestern, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. That leaves the Big 20. And if you admitted Texas, you would find out a lot more stink than even the BIG can handle-they dominate every Conference they have ever in. I don't believe OSU, Michigan or any of the others would want the migraine Texas gives.
KU is spending time and $315 Mil on upgrades to Old Memorial, the seating will be up to 70,000 when done, and after a few years of Les Miles at the helm will be as good as anyone in the BIG (well, probably not like OSU or PSU) but we will end up Competitive. I have faith that the People of my home State and my Alma Mater want to be a big-time Football School. It will be a terror on both the Football Field and Basketball Court (With Kansas on the West and Indiana in the East, plus a Brain Trust Conference. Think about a 20 team 2 Division BIG and quite possibly we can be just as good -if not better than the SEC. 20 cooperative Universities in one conference would make even the SEC shake a bit!

(06-12-2019 05:33 PM)VSW0825 Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 07:05 AM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  

(06-25-2017 01:07 AM)AntiG Wrote:  I think we're going to end up within the next decade with B1G with the divisions becoming a 20 Team AAU Conference.

Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa State and one more school. I wish it would be either West Virginia (due to Rutgers' long-time love-hate rivalry with them), or if not them Florida State, or Rice for academic reasons and being in Houston to double down in the state of Texas. I don't see Kansas State, Oklahoma State or Baylor even being considered at all unless the B1G and B12 decide to merge all at once to expand to 24 which I doubt would ever happen. Texas Tech I could see if that were the request for Texas joining.

I was thinking the exact same thing about WVU. It might not be as far fetched as some might think

CONS
Not AAU
Less than stellar academics
Not necessarily a cultural fit
Doesn't bring many "eyes" to the TV

PROS
Good athletic pedigree
State flagship school - land grant university
Borders on several current B1G states
Fairly large and passionate fanbase

Just a thought, but if the B1G does decide to become the B18, they could do a lot worse than WVU.

If you think that the University of Kansas or Oklahoma will accept being in ANY Conference with WVU in it, both you and I are in a load of crap. WVU culturally has no plusses for the BIG to accept them. They are poor, Appalachian, and educationally on the stupid side (I have proof it shows in their low GPA) They have the WORST Addiction Disease rate in all the NCAA Bowl Division, have absolutely no big Cities to offer the BIG. Unless one counts Charleston as a "City" They have been a pain in the posterior for the Big12 since we allowed them in. Nasty Smell=you do not need them. I really don't think the BIG's expansion desires would be filled by WVU... And there are more options which would expand the Footprint of the Big without the heavy lugging it takes just to keep WVU Students and fans clean and sober for TV. I believe the best realignment deals at this time would be Oklahoma, Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri- 3 are firmly in the AAU. Oklahoma is just a little ways off. You gain 3 awesome rivalries by including these Universities (Kansas-Missouri-one of the NCAA's oldest and fiercest Rivalries, Nebraska and Oklahoma-also one of the all-time best rivals, and Kansas-Nebraska. All of these Rivalries are well over 100 years old and Historic). Add to this, IowaState and Nebraska. One thing I have read here is that the BIG interlopes into Big12, but actually it is not true- TV ratings in Missouri is split. Kansas City is FILLED with KU Grads, Mizzou rates well in the St. Louis Area. You also bring in the Plains Triangle of Wichita, Tulsa and Oklahoma City. That covers lots of land behind it.
Kansas will not be trying to bring along K-State. There was never a Law that ties KU with KSU is a lie. They are estranged permanently KU actually does not care that much about it. KSU has the In-State Rivalry fever, not KU. The law that ties them into the same Conference is NOT TRUE. There never was a law tying KU to K-State. Oklahoma does have a law that keeps OU-OSU in the same conference, but I am certain there are more OU Grads in the State Legislature in OKC. All but one of the Universities are firmly ensconced in the AAU. Oklahoma is close. And all of the Institutions I have proposed are contiguous within the BIG Footprint. Both OU and KU are getting tired of the uncertainty in the Big12. This should make a 2 division Conference, East-Rutgers (if they can keep up) Maryland, Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, MSU, Indiana and Purdue plus 2 other lucrative Eastern additions On the West- Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma Illinois, Iowa, Iowa State, Northwestern, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. That leaves the Big 20. And if you admitted Texas, you would find out a lot more stink than even the BIG can handle-they dominate every Conference they have ever in. I don't believe OSU, Michigan or any of the others would want the migraine Texas gives.
KU is spending time and $315 Mil on upgrades to Old Memorial, the seating will be up to 70,000 when done, and after a few years of Les Miles at the helm will be as good as anyone in the BIG (well, probably not like OSU or PSU) but we will end up Competitive. I have faith that the People of my home State and my Alma Mater want to be a big-time Football School. It will be a terror on both the Football Field and Basketball Court (With Kansas on the West and Indiana in the East, plus a Brain Trust Conference. Think about a 20 team 2 Division BIG and quite possibly we can be just as good -if not better than the SEC. 20 cooperative Universities in one conference would make even the SEC shake a bit!

Welcome to the board! Would love to have Kansas and Oklahoma join the conference. We shall see what the future holds?

(06-13-2019 10:01 PM)cubucks Wrote:  

(06-12-2019 05:33 PM)VSW0825 Wrote:  

(07-27-2017 07:05 AM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  

(06-25-2017 01:07 AM)AntiG Wrote:  I think we're going to end up within the next decade with B1G with the divisions becoming a 20 Team AAU Conference.

Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa State and one more school. I wish it would be either West Virginia (due to Rutgers' long-time love-hate rivalry with them), or if not them Florida State, or Rice for academic reasons and being in Houston to double down in the state of Texas. I don't see Kansas State, Oklahoma State or Baylor even being considered at all unless the B1G and B12 decide to merge all at once to expand to 24 which I doubt would ever happen. Texas Tech I could see if that were the request for Texas joining.

I was thinking the exact same thing about WVU. It might not be as far fetched as some might think

CONS
Not AAU
Less than stellar academics
Not necessarily a cultural fit
Doesn't bring many "eyes" to the TV

PROS
Good athletic pedigree
State flagship school - land grant university
Borders on several current B1G states
Fairly large and passionate fanbase

Just a thought, but if the B1G does decide to become the B18, they could do a lot worse than WVU.

If you think that the University of Kansas or Oklahoma will accept being in ANY Conference with WVU in it, both you and I are in a load of crap. WVU culturally has no plusses for the BIG to accept them. They are poor, Appalachian, and educationally on the stupid side (I have proof it shows in their low GPA) They have the WORST Addiction Disease rate in all the NCAA Bowl Division, have absolutely no big Cities to offer the BIG. Unless one counts Charleston as a "City" They have been a pain in the posterior for the Big12 since we allowed them in. Nasty Smell=you do not need them. I really don't think the BIG's expansion desires would be filled by WVU... And there are more options which would expand the Footprint of the Big without the heavy lugging it takes just to keep WVU Students and fans clean and sober for TV. I believe the best realignment deals at this time would be Oklahoma, Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri- 3 are firmly in the AAU. Oklahoma is just a little ways off. You gain 3 awesome rivalries by including these Universities (Kansas-Missouri-one of the NCAA's oldest and fiercest Rivalries, Nebraska and Oklahoma-also one of the all-time best rivals, and Kansas-Nebraska. All of these Rivalries are well over 100 years old and Historic). Add to this, IowaState and Nebraska. One thing I have read here is that the BIG interlopes into Big12, but actually it is not true- TV ratings in Missouri is split. Kansas City is FILLED with KU Grads, Mizzou rates well in the St. Louis Area. You also bring in the Plains Triangle of Wichita, Tulsa and Oklahoma City. That covers lots of land behind it.
Kansas will not be trying to bring along K-State. There was never a Law that ties KU with KSU is a lie. They are estranged permanently KU actually does not care that much about it. KSU has the In-State Rivalry fever, not KU. The law that ties them into the same Conference is NOT TRUE. There never was a law tying KU to K-State. Oklahoma does have a law that keeps OU-OSU in the same conference, but I am certain there are more OU Grads in the State Legislature in OKC. All but one of the Universities are firmly ensconced in the AAU. Oklahoma is close. And all of the Institutions I have proposed are contiguous within the BIG Footprint. Both OU and KU are getting tired of the uncertainty in the Big12. This should make a 2 division Conference, East-Rutgers (if they can keep up) Maryland, Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, MSU, Indiana and Purdue plus 2 other lucrative Eastern additions On the West- Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma Illinois, Iowa, Iowa State, Northwestern, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. That leaves the Big 20. And if you admitted Texas, you would find out a lot more stink than even the BIG can handle-they dominate every Conference they have ever in. I don't believe OSU, Michigan or any of the others would want the migraine Texas gives.
KU is spending time and $315 Mil on upgrades to Old Memorial, the seating will be up to 70,000 when done, and after a few years of Les Miles at the helm will be as good as anyone in the BIG (well, probably not like OSU or PSU) but we will end up Competitive. I have faith that the People of my home State and my Alma Mater want to be a big-time Football School. It will be a terror on both the Football Field and Basketball Court (With Kansas on the West and Indiana in the East, plus a Brain Trust Conference. Think about a 20 team 2 Division BIG and quite possibly we can be just as good -if not better than the SEC. 20 cooperative Universities in one conference would make even the SEC shake a bit!

Welcome to the board! Would love to have Kansas and Oklahoma join the conference. We shall see what the future holds?

Agree for the most part, though I haven't found any credence to the statement that OU and OSU are tied together. They share a Board of Regents just like KU & K-State but that's as far as it goes. Though I think Iowa State is a worthy school, I'm not sure the B1G wants another school in a relatively small state. I hope Indiana would regain some of its earlier glory....it has recently been as unremarkable in basketball as KU has been in football...but Michigan State is a worthy alternative!

I am in support of Kansas and Oklahoma to the Big Ten. Oklahoma is a national football brand and Kansas is a national basketball brand who needs to get their fb house in order.

Keeping the 2 hit wonder Big 12 intact with a seat at the big kids' table doesn't make sense.

Oklahoma, Nebraska, Wisconsin, and Iowa Make for a nice foursome to balance the powerful Eastern Foursome of Ohio St, Penn St, Mich, and Mich St.

I no longer have any interest in adding UConn, to give B1G a New England presence. UConn will eventually downgrade football to the FCS level.

Since there are no other east coast schools available, I'll throw my support behind Missouri and Oklahoma.

Who I support depends on how many we expand by and when. My overarching theme is to gain a critical mass so the schools don't feel out of place. For instance I liked UConn with the combination of Syracuse and Rutgers to get a good handle on the NYC market but going forward I thing Syracuse is in a good spot and UConn is best served focusing on basketball.

It was described at the time that Penn State was a bridge to Maryland and Rutgers and with a similar thought in mind I think Nebraska to the Southwest and Maryland to the SouthEast are the most logic maps forward even if we don't expand.

If we go to 16
Texas & Oklahoma
If we go to 18
Texas, Oklahoma, Virginia, Carolina
If we go to 20
Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Virginia, Duke, Carolina

I think the Big Ten should leave the ACC alone simply because if schools start leaving that league the SEC is going to get the best football schools: Florida St, Clemson, and VT.

I think it’s better to focus on reducing the P5 to a P4 by gutting the Big 12 into tweener conference status.

(07-16-2019 04:56 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I think the Big Ten should leave the ACC alone simply because if schools start leaving that league the SEC is going to get the best football schools: Florida St, Clemson, and VT.

I think it’s better to focus on reducing the P5 to a P4 by gutting the Big 12 into tweener conference status.

I think the ACC should be left alone because they generally don't have schools that add to the bottom line. Florida State and Clemson are about the only two that can pay for themselves; the rest just aren't there and the Big Ten is pulling away further, so much so that even FSU and Clemson won't be able to keep up for long.

Only FSU and Clemson increase the Big Ten's football attendance average: https://csnbbs.com/thread-873579.html (only Oklahoma and Texas of the Big 12 as well)

Only FSU and Louisville earned more revenue than the average B10 school in 2017-2018: https://csnbbs.com/thread-871659.html (Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas from the B12)

None of the ACC (and the usual two from the B12) are above average compared to the B10 in the WSJ football valuations: https://csnbbs.com/thread-869587.html

Texas and Oklahoma can pay for themselves plus a tag-along but Florida State and Clemson must come with each other or alone. I don't know if I'd want to invite someone with the hopes of the Big Ten brand lifting the profile of a school. It is risky and the Big Ten hasn't seemed to help Rutgers yet.

(07-16-2019 09:02 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 04:56 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I think the Big Ten should leave the ACC alone simply because if schools start leaving that league the SEC is going to get the best football schools: Florida St, Clemson, and VT.

I think it’s better to focus on reducing the P5 to a P4 by gutting the Big 12 into tweener conference status.

I think the ACC should be left alone because they generally don't have schools that add to the bottom line. Florida State and Clemson are about the only two that can pay for themselves; the rest just aren't there and the Big Ten is pulling away further, so much so that even FSU and Clemson won't be able to keep up for long.

Only FSU and Clemson increase the Big Ten's football attendance average: https://csnbbs.com/thread-873579.html (only Oklahoma and Texas of the Big 12 as well)

Only FSU and Louisville earned more revenue than the average B10 school in 2017-2018: https://csnbbs.com/thread-871659.html (Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas from the B12)

None of the ACC (and the usual two from the B12) are above average compared to the B10 in the WSJ football valuations: https://csnbbs.com/thread-869587.html

Texas and Oklahoma can pay for themselves plus a tag-along but Florida State and Clemson must come with each other or alone. I don't know if I'd want to invite someone with the hopes of the Big Ten brand lifting the profile of a school. It is risky and the Big Ten hasn't seemed to help Rutgers yet.

Good post. If the BIG were to enter the Southern market, I think they have to think in terms of sharing, not beating, the SEC in substantial markets. For example, the BIG taking Virginia, North Carolina, Clemson, Georgia Tech, and Florida State in one swoop would almost certainly result in the SEC taking North Carolina State and Virginia Tech. So, the SEC and BIG would share the states of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida. Each state would be worth different amounts in media negotiations in various proportions, but they would be shared nonetheless.

It is correct that none of these moves would immediately improve the financial standing of either conference, but it would be an investment in monopolizing the college landscape. This reminds me of the prisoner's dilemma; the BIG or the SEC thinking they can simply eliminate the other is absurd. However, they can find scenarios where both would win by sharing the Atlantic coast state schools. If the PAC would get their act together, a clean split of three conferences with 20 +/- teams each is easy to foresee.

(07-13-2019 10:14 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  I no longer have any interest in adding UConn, to give B1G a New England presence. UConn will eventually downgrade football to the FCS level.

Since there are no other east coast schools available, I'll throw my support behind Missouri and Oklahoma.

We have talked about this ad nauseam on the SEC board, but I still cannot understand the BIG's long term strategy of passing over Missouri when they had the chance. I understand the focus on the east coast for the last round of BIG Network negotiations, but Missouri combined with Nebraska was a natural bridge to Oklahoma, which would give a much better chance of leading into Texas. Kansas would be a shoe-in at that point if you wanted them. Sure, Mizzou would have been a negligible financial addition for the BIG this past decade, but there are not many contiguous AAU flagship schools with two major sport loving cities (Kansas City and St. Louis) going around.

(07-18-2019 05:23 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(07-13-2019 10:14 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  I no longer have any interest in adding UConn, to give B1G a New England presence. UConn will eventually downgrade football to the FCS level.

Since there are no other east coast schools available, I'll throw my support behind Missouri and Oklahoma.

We have talked about this ad nauseam on the SEC board, but I still cannot understand the BIG's long term strategy of passing over Missouri when they had the chance. I understand the focus on the east coast for the last round of BIG Network negotiations, but Missouri combined with Nebraska was a natural bridge to Oklahoma, which would give a much better chance of leading into Texas. Kansas would be a shoe-in at that point if you wanted them. Sure, Mizzou would have been a negligible financial addition for the BIG this past decade, but there are not many contiguous AAU flagship schools with two major sport loving cities (Kansas City and St. Louis) going around.

Though I certainly have no "inside info", my guess is simply that the B1G felt that Missouri (and probably Kansas) would be available anytime the B1G wanted them (assuming they did). I don't think anyone thought of Missouri as a possible SEC team given their relative sports position vis-a-vie the SEC. It appears that when OU wouldn't commit without OSU, Missouri became the "default" (closest to what the SEC could use) team to pair with TA&M.
As to an OU/Missouri pairing, I can't see that in the B1G future. Given SEC payouts I can't see enough benefits to cause Missouri to leave the SEC, even for the B1G. If the B1G decides to expand to the west, think there is really only an OU and/or KU possibility, unless the B1G decides to "double up" with Iowa State. Some people think that Colorado is a possibility but given that their alumni seem concentrated in the P12 footprint that would be a longshot. Even with the problems the P12 has I don't hear any discontent with CU fans. Texas....just can't see them in the B1G. They have no "friends" (other teams with which they have a meaningful history), the distances for Olympic sports are significant, their sports lineup emphasis is different than most B1G lineups other than football and basketball, they aren't going to be able to "control" the B1G like they did the SWC or B12, they would have few games with other Texas schools, and they would lose the LHN. Additionally, with the Texas-ESPN ties, I think ESPN might do whatever they need to not to lose Texas to Fox (push them toward to ACC or SEC, or even facilitate them as an independent (at least for football).
But, these are just my "thoughts"...no special knowledge claimed!

(07-18-2019 05:23 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(07-13-2019 10:14 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  I no longer have any interest in adding UConn, to give B1G a New England presence. UConn will eventually downgrade football to the FCS level.

Since there are no other east coast schools available, I'll throw my support behind Missouri and Oklahoma.

We have talked about this ad nauseam on the SEC board, but I still cannot understand the BIG's long term strategy of passing over Missouri when they had the chance. I understand the focus on the east coast for the last round of BIG Network negotiations, but Missouri combined with Nebraska was a natural bridge to Oklahoma, which would give a much better chance of leading into Texas. Kansas would be a shoe-in at that point if you wanted them. Sure, Mizzou would have been a negligible financial addition for the BIG this past decade, but there are not many contiguous AAU flagship schools with two major sport loving cities (Kansas City and St. Louis) going around.

I don't think Missouri gives the Big Ten anything they don't already have. Maryland and Rutgers add much needed recruiting grounds that Missouri doesn't. The Big Ten already gets penetration into Missouri from the surrounding schools like Illinois and Iowa. As ICThawk mentioned above, the B10 likely thought they could wait on Missouri. They obviously were not a priority.

The potentially final big fish of Texas and Oklahoma are left. Despite being a natural bridge of sorts to Oklahoma, I don't believe there is a strong relationship there that would have swayed Oklahoma towards the B10. If anything, the conference already has Nebraska which has much greater history with Oklahoma. Nobody is using Missouri as a reason that Oklahoma will join the SEC.

I believe Missouri wanted the Big Ten the most and was likely hurt when Nebraska got the 12th spot. Whether or not they still prefer the Big Ten, I find it near impossible they would leave the SEC barring some seismic shift that reorganizes the conference landscape among everyone.

If the objective is to strengthen B1G West football, then I think Missouri has greater upside potential than Kansas. Under Gary Pinkel, Missouri was competitive in both the Big 12 and the SEC. And the new coach, Barry Odom, appears to have turned around the program, which suffered after the Missouri BLM protests.

(07-21-2019 10:51 AM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  If the objective is to strengthen B1G West football, then I think Missouri has greater upside potential than Kansas. Under Gary Pinkel, Missouri was competitive in both the Big 12 and the SEC. And the new coach, Barry Odom, appears to have turned around the program, which suffered after the Missouri BLM protests.

I agree that Missouri football shows more promise than Kansas football. I assume it is like this most years, if not all, but the state of Missouri is much better for recruiting than Kansas so they have a more natural advantage which would help the Big Ten if they were added. Though I don't think it would be a big advantage, just not a negative like Kansas.

I guess the rub comes in at when you look at Kansas basketball. Are they good enough to make up the awful football? http://www.winsipedia.com/kansas/vs/missouri Winsipedia shows a clear but not dominant advantage to Missouri football. Missouri is likely the more valuable school as they were invited to the SEC while Kansas wasn't. I would rather have Kansas as Missouri doesn't have anything dominant or prestigeous the way Kansas has men's basketball. If you aren't going to be an asset in football or help land a whale (Texas, Oklahoma, etc.) then you better have something dominant to improve the conference with the most useful being men's basketball.

(07-21-2019 10:51 AM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  If the objective is to strengthen B1G West football, then I think Missouri has greater upside potential than Kansas. Under Gary Pinkel, Missouri was competitive in both the Big 12 and the SEC. And the new coach, Barry Odom, appears to have turned around the program, which suffered after the Missouri BLM protests.

Missouri would be the better football add but leaving the SEC could be complicated. Kansas does bring a great basketball brand and I think their football can get back to winning at least 4 games a year.

(06-25-2017 01:07 AM)AntiG Wrote:  I think we're going to end up within the next decade with B1G with the G becoming an 8.

Oklahoma, Kansas, Texas and one more school. I wish it would be either West Virginia (due to Rutgers' long-time love-hate rivalry with them), or if not them Florida State, or Rice for academic reasons and being in Houston to double down in the state of Texas. I don't see Kansas State, Oklahoma State or Baylor even being considered at all unless the B1G and B12 decide to merge all at once to expand to 24 which I doubt would ever happen. Texas Tech I could see if that were the request for Texas joining.

You really don't want WVU in your Conference for any reason. Here in the Big 12, we have found much to our chagrin that Playing with WVU is like playing with a bar full of rowdy drunks. What can anyone say about a State University where the Stills outnumber the Students 3 to 1, the rate of Substance Abuse is the highest in any NCAA University and the GPA is through the floor. I would think the BIG would have more self- respect than that. We traded Missouri (a Troublemaker if there ever was one-it is Mizzou that is wholly responsible for the Breakup of the Big 12 North- begging and slobbering to get in just to satisfy their St. Louis Fans. BTW Kansas City belongs to KU-not Missouri. Between the 2 of them, they would wreck the West Division- and Texas is poison for ANY Conference.

(07-21-2019 06:37 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(07-21-2019 10:51 AM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  If the objective is to strengthen B1G West football, then I think Missouri has greater upside potential than Kansas. Under Gary Pinkel, Missouri was competitive in both the Big 12 and the SEC. And the new coach, Barry Odom, appears to have turned around the program, which suffered after the Missouri BLM protests.

I agree that Missouri football shows more promise than Kansas football. I assume it is like this most years, if not all, but the state of Missouri is much better for recruiting than Kansas so they have a more natural advantage which would help the Big Ten if they were added. Though I don't think it would be a big advantage, just not a negative like Kansas.

I guess the rub comes in at when you look at Kansas basketball. Are they good enough to make up the awful football? http://www.winsipedia.com/kansas/vs/missouri Winsipedia shows a clear but not dominant advantage to Missouri football. Missouri is likely the more valuable school as they were invited to the SEC while Kansas wasn't. I would rather have Kansas as Missouri doesn't have anything dominant or prestigeous the way Kansas has men's basketball. If you aren't going to be an asset in football or help land a whale (Texas, Oklahoma, etc.) then you better have something dominant to improve the conference with the most useful being men's basketball.

Can't agree there. We now have Les Miles at the helm, a new Athletic Director that seems to know what he is doing and $315 Million in donations to gut the inside of our Stadium and bring the seating up to modern standards-and increase the seating to 70,000. I believe this year you will see some drastic changes in KUs Football Program. Within 3 years I believe you will be seeing a new Stadium and a record of at least 8 wins. And Texas would take any Conference out. They belong in the SEC. I also want to adress the lie that the Legislature and Board of Regents have tied KU and Silo Tech together. That is a baldface lie made up by K-State Grads.