(10-09-2016 11:09 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 10:51 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 04:14 PM)mike012779 Wrote:  If the Pac 12 gave in to Texas 6 years ago, Kansas is in the MWC or AAC today.

No, they are in the Big East today. When Texas was ready to bolt, the Big East was ready to pounce on 4 Big 12 left behinds. This would have given the Big East 12 football schools, and up to 20 total schools. The Big East would have survived as a BCS or "power" conference, even had a couple schools left.

This is very doubtful. For the BE to be part of the P5, we would have needed a couple of anchor teams like a FSU, or a Penn State. Otherwise, there was no major bowl that would have aligned with the league, like the SEC has with the Sugar and the ACC has with the Orange bowls. That was the first step in being P5. In the P5 landscape, their would be no rotating of major bowls to play in like the BE had during the bcs.

For those who think that the BE would have stayed together if Kansas came aboard after the B12 had imploded, thats ridiculous. What major bowl would have aligned itself with the BE for the P5 landscape, simply because Kansas is a member of the BE.
Kansas may be a basketball blue blood, but the P5 landscape is about football. SU and Pitt was leaving whether Kansas was coming to the BE or not. Kansas simply does not have the kind of juice to hold a league like the BE together. I do agree that Kansas would have been invited to the BIG

KU wasn't the only school moving to the BE. ISU and MU were going to come also. KSU was trying to get into the deal too. While non of us are football blue bloods, I thinking adding them would show some commitment to schools that care about football.

(10-09-2016 10:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 10:03 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  KU gets paid very well for its third tier rights and that's basically basketball. For a conference network, it will be gold for viewership especially during a season that games are on many different days of the week.

So what major conference out there which is contiguous with Kasnas would have a weak lineup for its Winter network programming? Because that would be the conference most likely to take Kansas. Hmmm?

True, the SEC is most in need of a basketball name brand and least likely to care about KU's football ineptness.

Funny thing is, the SEC, Big Ten, and Pac-12 are all contiguous with Kansas.

(10-10-2016 12:37 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 10:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 10:03 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  KU gets paid very well for its third tier rights and that's basically basketball. For a conference network, it will be gold for viewership especially during a season that games are on many different days of the week.

So what major conference out there which is contiguous with Kasnas would have a weak lineup for its Winter network programming? Because that would be the conference most likely to take Kansas. Hmmm?

True, the SEC is most in need of a basketball name brand and least likely to care about KU's football ineptness.

Funny thing is, the SEC, Big Ten, and Pac-12 are all contiguous with Kansas.

As is the AAC and MWC.....

(10-10-2016 12:37 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 10:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 10:03 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  KU gets paid very well for its third tier rights and that's basically basketball. For a conference network, it will be gold for viewership especially during a season that games are on many different days of the week.

So what major conference out there which is contiguous with Kasnas would have a weak lineup for its Winter network programming? Because that would be the conference most likely to take Kansas. Hmmm?

True, the SEC is most in need of a basketball name brand and least likely to care about KU's football ineptness.

Funny thing is, the SEC, Big Ten, and Pac-12 are all contiguous with Kansas.

Quite. I am not entirely sure that Kansas is a #15 school for either the Big Ten or the SEC, but they make a fine #16 for either.

(10-09-2016 10:36 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 10:16 PM)CyclonePower Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 06:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  My view all along has been that among the Big 12 schools, Kansas is a "tweener" as far as finding another P5 home if the Big 12 implodes.

They aren't a sure thing to do so, like Oklahoma or Texas, but they aren't almost surely not going to be able to, like an Iowa State or TCU.

It could go either way, IMO slightly towards the favorable side for them, 60-40 they do find a home. AAU and basketball isn't enough to make it a sure thing.

why does everyone write us off? I know we don't have good football currently but we hold our own in a lot of other categories.

- We are AAU
- We bring strong basketball
- We have loyal fans that travel well
-50,000+ fans in the stands no matter the opponent and record
- Big school that has good academics.

I'll admit we aren't a sure thing and we could end up in the American but at the same time, a conference that wants to add a good academic school that supports sports really well we could get the call.

I agree Iowa State has a lot to offer and I think very few on this board realize that. The most obvious negative is their location, except for the Big10 and they already have Iowa. Not a good geographic fit for the ACC, SEC or PAC

I would also agree. If the Cyclones give Matt Campbell a little time to build something, football there may become viable. I think Iowa State may have some distant B1G hopes with network viewership starting to decline while other forms of digital media pick up. The cable network is the main reason that the B1G doesn't add teams inside their own footprint right now. That could change over time. Since that conference only takes AAU members, Iowa State may have a shot.

(10-09-2016 10:16 PM)CyclonePower Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 06:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  My view all along has been that among the Big 12 schools, Kansas is a "tweener" as far as finding another P5 home if the Big 12 implodes.

They aren't a sure thing to do so, like Oklahoma or Texas, but they aren't almost surely not going to be able to, like an Iowa State or TCU.

It could go either way, IMO slightly towards the favorable side for them, 60-40 they do find a home. AAU and basketball isn't enough to make it a sure thing.

why does everyone write us off? I know we don't have good football currently but we hold our own in a lot of other categories.

- We are AAU
- We bring strong basketball
- We have loyal fans that travel well
-50,000+ fans in the stands no matter the opponent and record
- Big school that has good academics.

I'll admit we aren't a sure thing and we could end up in the American but at the same time, a conference that wants to add a good academic school that supports sports really well we could get the call.

Yeah, those are some strong attributes. I guess I "write you off" because you are the second-banana school in an already small state/market.

But those are quality attributes and explain why you've always to this day been in a Power league, so maybe I'm wrong.

(10-09-2016 02:39 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Yes, Kansas would have a landing spot due its AAU status, it being a state-land grant university, and it's blue blood program. The B1G, PAC, SEC and ACC would all take them in if they became available if/when the Big 12 implodes. They will be fine.

KSU is the land-grant, not KU.

(10-09-2016 01:54 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I've read a lot of talk about how Kansas, along with Texas and Oklahoma, would be attractive to the other leagues if the Big 12 implodes. I'm not entirely convinced that they are guaranteed a spot. They are AAU and bring a name brand basketball program but they are in a state with a tiny population and their football program has been in the dumpster. Seeing as how football and cable subscriptions are currently the driving force it wouldn't seem that Kansas has all that much to offer. Kansas also is a footprint and cultural stretch for the SEC, Pac 12, and Big Ten. I just don't see anyone jumping all over them, particularly the 14 member leagues that need to be highly selective when expanding to 16 and would only want programs that would really move the needle.

Any thoughts on why Kansas should or shouldn't be a lock?

Kansas is a bridge to other football powers. I believe Delaney's marching orders included expansion be contiquous. Plus the KU being AAU may make taking OU more palatable.

It would appear to me that of the current Big 12 teams, Kansas would be third or fourth in the pecking order, if all of the teams had to find a new home. Obviously Texas and OU would be numbers 1 and 2, but after that Kansas would seem to be third, as they have a tangible asset to offer: Premier college basketball. While people talk about how football drives expansion, and it is true, much like how Duke is near the top of the ACC teams in terms of value, premier basketball has value. And Kansas certainly has that, as shown by their very high third tier rights fees, despite a rather small market, and being in rather close proximity with two other P5 schools to fight for those fans. This is in addition to their academic credentials, history of games with current P5 schools in the conferences that may consider them, and as JR mentions, their "unusual" value to football.

The only reason I say they might be fourth on a wish list, is that while they'd probably be the third school of choice of the SEC, Big 10, or Pac 12 among the Big 12 schools, it is possible that to the ACC, they might be behind WVU (if scores have been settled) due to geography. But outside of that, of teams in the Big 12, they seem a solid third to everyone else, which means if they had to find a new home for whatever reason, they'd almost surely have one if openings came up.

(10-09-2016 10:16 PM)CyclonePower Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 06:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  My view all along has been that among the Big 12 schools, Kansas is a "tweener" as far as finding another P5 home if the Big 12 implodes.

They aren't a sure thing to do so, like Oklahoma or Texas, but they aren't almost surely not going to be able to, like an Iowa State or TCU.

It could go either way, IMO slightly towards the favorable side for them, 60-40 they do find a home. AAU and basketball isn't enough to make it a sure thing.

why does everyone write us off? I know we don't have good football currently but we hold our own in a lot of other categories.

- We are AAU
- We bring strong basketball
- We have loyal fans that travel well
-50,000+ fans in the stands no matter the opponent and record
- Big school that has good academics.

I'll admit we aren't a sure thing and we could end up in the American but at the same time, a conference that wants to add a good academic school that supports sports really well we could get the call.

I don't think it is a matter of Iowa State being "written off".
But handicapping what "might" happen IF there is a P5 realignment the Cyclones have problems.
Sure bowl directors love Iowa State, I've heard it straight from their mouths.
But Iowa State isn't Kansas in hoops and until recently, arguably a step back of Mizzou in hoops.
Iowa has half the population of Missouri and twice as many P5 programs, heck twice as many FBS.

The Cyclones are in an awkward spot in my opinion. Unquestionable chops to be P5 based on fan interest but not likely of interest to B1G and "round things out" candidate if it is P12, SEC or going predatory not a "must have to get where we want to be" candidate.

(10-09-2016 01:54 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Any thoughts on why Kansas should or shouldn't be a lock?

They are a large public that is top flight institutionally. They have one of the top 5 brands in basketball.
They are monstrously attractive, #3 in the Big 12...and #4 in the Big 12 is a long ways behind them.

(10-09-2016 02:48 PM)Chappy Wrote:  Don't underestimate their appeal to the SEC, who already has enough football but could use another brand name in basketball.

Not sure there would be enough momentum to add them, unless maybe paired with Oklahoma or Texas. They don't bring enough on their own.

(10-09-2016 03:30 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  I don't see the appeal, personally.. Especially if Uconn is still on the table.

If the B1G could take Rutgers, they certainly can take KU

Rutgers tricked B1G. Their football program had five good years. But after joining B1G, they returned to the suck status. Too late B1G has already hooked. If B1G could re-do the expansion, they would have chosen Pitt or Syracuse instead.

(10-10-2016 06:03 PM)ArQ Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 03:30 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  I don't see the appeal, personally.. Especially if Uconn is still on the table.

If the B1G could take Rutgers, they certainly can take KU

Rutgers tricked B1G. Their football program had five good years. But after joining B1G, they returned to the suck status. Too late B1G has already hooked. If B1G could re-do the expansion, they would have chosen Pitt or Syracuse instead.

Doubt since the Big Ten wanted Rutgers in 1994.

When thinking about Kansas going to another Power 5 you have to consider who they are going to be in a package deal with. I think the other leagues are going to want a big player like Oklahoma to be partnered with them. For the Big Ten, Oklahoma and Missouri might be a more attractive add in which case Kansas would be left out.

(10-09-2016 11:09 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 10:51 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 04:14 PM)mike012779 Wrote:  If the Pac 12 gave in to Texas 6 years ago, Kansas is in the MWC or AAC today.

No, they are in the Big East today. When Texas was ready to bolt, the Big East was ready to pounce on 4 Big 12 left behinds. This would have given the Big East 12 football schools, and up to 20 total schools. The Big East would have survived as a BCS or "power" conference, even had a couple schools left.

This is very doubtful. For the BE to be part of the P5, we would have needed a couple of anchor teams like a FSU, or a Penn State. Otherwise, there was no major bowl that would have aligned with the league, like the SEC has with the Sugar and the ACC has with the Orange bowls. That was the first step in being P5. In the P5 landscape, their would be no rotating of major bowls to play in like the BE had during the bcs.

For those who think that the BE would have stayed together if Kansas came aboard after the B12 had imploded, thats ridiculous. What major bowl would have aligned itself with the BE for the P5 landscape, simply because Kansas is a member of the BE.
Kansas may be a basketball blue blood, but the P5 landscape is about football. SU and Pitt was leaving whether Kansas was coming to the BE or not. Kansas simply does not have the kind of juice to hold a league like the BE together. I do agree that Kansas would have been invited to the BIG

I think that Pitt and Syracuse would have stayed in the Big East if the B12 schools came to us. They left because expansion was going nowhere. Perhaps the ACC wouldn't have looked as attractive with Kansas, Missouri, KState and Iowa State in.

And while the Big East didn't have a contract bowl of their own, it still would have received the same/similar TV contract, putting it ahead of where the American contract came in. Maybe with KState, Missouri, Pitt, WVU, CIncinnati and Louisville in the mix, a contract bowl could have happened.

We'll never know.

(10-10-2016 09:15 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  When thinking about Kansas going to another Power 5 you have to consider who they are going to be in a package deal with. I think the other leagues are going to want a big player like Oklahoma to be partnered with them. For the Big Ten, Oklahoma and Missouri might be a more attractive add in which case Kansas would be left out.

I'd say if there was going to be movement from the Big 12 that Oklahoma and Connecticut to the Big 10 and Texas and Kansas to the SEC would be pairings to watch out for. I realize it will light the fan boys and internet junkies up, but there are reasons.

(10-10-2016 09:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-10-2016 09:15 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  When thinking about Kansas going to another Power 5 you have to consider who they are going to be in a package deal with. I think the other leagues are going to want a big player like Oklahoma to be partnered with them. For the Big Ten, Oklahoma and Missouri might be a more attractive add in which case Kansas would be left out.

I'd say if there was going to be movement from the Big 12 that Oklahoma and Connecticut to the Big 10 and Texas and Kansas to the SEC would be pairings to watch out for. I realize it will light the fan boys and internet junkies up, but there are reasons.

I don't think that there's any chance in hell that Texas goes to the SEC. They're not going to follow A&M.

How about Kansas and UConn to the B1G
Oklahoma and TCU to the SEC
KSU, OSU, TTU, Texas to the PAC??

(10-10-2016 10:13 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(10-10-2016 09:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-10-2016 09:15 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  When thinking about Kansas going to another Power 5 you have to consider who they are going to be in a package deal with. I think the other leagues are going to want a big player like Oklahoma to be partnered with them. For the Big Ten, Oklahoma and Missouri might be a more attractive add in which case Kansas would be left out.

I'd say if there was going to be movement from the Big 12 that Oklahoma and Connecticut to the Big 10 and Texas and Kansas to the SEC would be pairings to watch out for. I realize it will light the fan boys and internet junkies up, but there are reasons.

I don't think that there's any chance in hell that Texas goes to the SEC. They're not going to follow A&M.

How about Kansas and UConn to the B1G
Oklahoma and TCU to the SEC
KSU, OSU, TTU, Texas to the PAC??

1. What the Horns mouth off about, and internet message board junkies repeat, is not necessarily what Texas will do. They have been in discussions with the SEC at least 3 times since '91.

2. Should the SEC land Oklahoma they don't need T.C.U.. The idea is to gain a greater % of the DFW market. Texas does that the best. Oklahoma does that the second best. T.C.U. does it the third best. And Oklahoma State gets a little more but not enough.

3. The only way Texas is going anywhere prior to 2031 when their contract is up with ESPN is if they go someplace where ESPN has a stake in the conference. Right now they lease PAC product, but don't have a stake in any of it. So no Big 10 for the Horns. ACC or SEC is it.

Texas also has a need they won't address publicly. A&M just outdrew the UT/OU RRSO by slightly over 2 to 1. A&M and Tennessee got a 4.0 share while UT & OU got a 2.0 share. The only way Texas can reestablish itself as the prominent Texas school is to take away A&M's brand advantage (by joining the SEC) and by doing so without Baylor, T.C.U. or Tech. It reunites them with historical rivals Arkansas and A&M, relegates the other three Texas schools to either the PAC, ACC, rebuilt Big 12, or a G5 because none of the other three will get a look from the Big 10. So by that strategic move Texas scoops all other schools in their home state. And should OU only have the Big 10 as an option it scoops them too. They can blame the move on ESPN and save face.

Kansas doesn't help the Big 10 that much. The Big 10 carries most of the Kansas market (a very small one) without the Jayhawks. Kansas would be valuable as a football product in the SEC West. It's called relief. And they provide Kentucky a true blue blood conference rival. And as I've pointed out already the SEC is deficient only in Winter Sports.

Connecticut gives the Big 10 a bigger market and a greater slice of New England and the Huskies augment the NYC market.

Both the Big 10 and SEC will have landed a major football brand for their Western Division, solved some of their scheduling issues and balance issues, and landed a major college basketball brand. Neither gains a significant advantage and the Big 10 by virtue of the RRSO gets exposure in DFW as well.

The serendipity for the networks is that they reunite many rivalries severed by realignment and this is PR coup for an industry with many disillusioned fans.

OU/NEB, UT/Ark, UT/A&M, Mizzou/Kansas, and should WVU head to the ACC the WVU/Pitt & WVU/VaTech game would be back on the docket.

(10-10-2016 10:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-10-2016 10:13 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(10-10-2016 09:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-10-2016 09:15 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  When thinking about Kansas going to another Power 5 you have to consider who they are going to be in a package deal with. I think the other leagues are going to want a big player like Oklahoma to be partnered with them. For the Big Ten, Oklahoma and Missouri might be a more attractive add in which case Kansas would be left out.

I'd say if there was going to be movement from the Big 12 that Oklahoma and Connecticut to the Big 10 and Texas and Kansas to the SEC would be pairings to watch out for. I realize it will light the fan boys and internet junkies up, but there are reasons.

I don't think that there's any chance in hell that Texas goes to the SEC. They're not going to follow A&M.

How about Kansas and UConn to the B1G
Oklahoma and TCU to the SEC
KSU, OSU, TTU, Texas to the PAC??

1. What the Horns mouth off about, and internet message board junkies repeat, is not necessarily what Texas will do. They have been in discussions with the SEC at least 3 times since '91.

2. Should the SEC land Oklahoma they don't need T.C.U.. The idea is to gain a greater % of the DFW market. Texas does that the best. Oklahoma does that the second best. T.C.U. does it the third best. And Oklahoma State gets a little more but not enough.

3. The only way Texas is going anywhere prior to 2031 when their contract is up with ESPN is if they go someplace where ESPN has a stake in the conference. Right now they lease PAC product, but don't have a stake in any of it. So no Big 10 for the Horns. ACC or SEC is it.

Texas also has a need they won't address publicly. A&M just outdrew the UT/OU RRSO by slightly over 2 to 1. A&M and Tennessee got a 4.0 share while UT & OU got a 2.0 share. The only way Texas can reestablish itself as the prominent Texas school is to take away A&M's brand advantage (by joining the SEC) and by doing so without Baylor, T.C.U. or Tech. It reunites them with historical rivals Arkansas and A&M, relegates the other three Texas schools to either the PAC, ACC, rebuilt Big 12, or a G5 because none of the other three will get a look from the Big 10. So by that strategic move Texas scoops all other schools in their home state. And should OU only have the Big 10 as an option it scoops them too. They can blame the move on ESPN and save face.

Kansas doesn't help the Big 10 that much. The Big 10 carries most of the Kansas market (a very small one) without the Jayhawks. Kansas would be valuable as a football product in the SEC West. It's called relief. And they provide Kentucky a true blue blood conference rival. And as I've pointed out already the SEC is deficient only in Winter Sports.

Connecticut gives the Big 10 a bigger market and a greater slice of New England and the Huskies augment the NYC market.

Both the Big 10 and SEC will have landed a major football brand for their Western Division, solved some of their scheduling issues and balance issues, and landed a major college basketball brand. Neither gains a significant advantage and the Big 10 by virtue of the RRSO gets exposure in DFW as well.

The serendipity for the networks is that they reunite many rivalries severed by realignment and this is PR coup for an industry with many disillusioned fans.

OU/NEB, UT/Ark, UT/A&M, Mizzou/Kansas, and should WVU head to the ACC the WVU/Pitt & WVU/VaTech game would be back on the docket.

Makes sense I guess but how many big time football programs want to pack themselves into the SEC.

I think for schools like Texas and Oklahoma they would rather find a home in the B1G west or in the PAC where they can have a chance to be successful and win games.

I think eventually you need some whipping boys, that's the only way a proud school like Texas is going to be happy. Being 6-6 every year in the SEC west is not an exciting idea for them.

IMO the schools that make the most sense for the SEC out of the BIGXII are Oklahoma,OSU, Kansas, TCU and WVU. I think if the BIGXII truly were to fall apart they will send invitations to 2 of those 5.