if the leftover B12 schools are willing to pay, the Big West might gladly take them...

(08-02-2013 06:21 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You are focusing far too heavily on the PAC in this.

I think you are underestimating the PAC12's power and not thinking enough about their interests.

The PAC12 isn't going to be push around into bad expansion no matter the scenario. It is wishful thinking to believe otherwise.

(08-02-2013 08:43 PM)monarchoptimist Wrote:  

(08-02-2013 06:21 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You are focusing far too heavily on the PAC in this.

I think you are underestimating the PAC12's power and not thinking enough about their interests.

The PAC12 isn't going to be push around into bad expansion no matter the scenario. It is wishful thinking to believe otherwise.

Perhaps that is the case, in the end it will come down to which conferences the most desirable programs from the Big 12 would wish to move to. I would contend that we have proof that Texas does not wish to move West.

Oklahoma definitely pushed for it at one time but was that with the intention that Texas would feel pressured to go with? If so then is that desire still there if Texas is up front in the discussions that they intend to take a deal with the ACC if this goes forward?

I would contend that Oklahoma would then prefer the Big Ten as long as Oklahoma State is taken care of in equal fashion. That does not mean Oklahoma State in the Big Ten, for clarification.

Once again though, I also disagree that Tech, KSU and ISU is bad expansion for the PAC. On that I do not see us finding common ground and that is alright.

(08-02-2013 08:58 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-02-2013 08:43 PM)monarchoptimist Wrote:  

(08-02-2013 06:21 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You are focusing far too heavily on the PAC in this.

I think you are underestimating the PAC12's power and not thinking enough about their interests.

The PAC12 isn't going to be push around into bad expansion no matter the scenario. It is wishful thinking to believe otherwise.

Perhaps that is the case, in the end it will come down to which conferences the most desirable programs from the Big 12 would wish to move to. I would contend that we have proof that Texas does not wish to move West.

Oklahoma definitely pushed for it at one time but was that with the intention that Texas would feel pressured to go with? If so then is that desire still there if Texas is up front in the discussions that they intend to take a deal with the ACC if this goes forward?

I would contend that Oklahoma would then prefer the Big Ten as long as Oklahoma State is taken care of in equal fashion. That does not mean Oklahoma State in the Big Ten, for clarification.

Once again though, I also disagree that Tech, KSU and ISU is bad expansion for the PAC. On that I do not see us finding common ground and that is alright.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...NQ#t=1322s

Dodds said that Texas wouldn't move west because it wasn't good for the kids.

(08-02-2013 09:47 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-02-2013 08:58 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-02-2013 08:43 PM)monarchoptimist Wrote:  

(08-02-2013 06:21 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You are focusing far too heavily on the PAC in this.

I think you are underestimating the PAC12's power and not thinking enough about their interests.

The PAC12 isn't going to be push around into bad expansion no matter the scenario. It is wishful thinking to believe otherwise.

I'm skeptical if his truest intentions are altruistically for the kids but I see no reason to doubt his statement of looking to the East.
Perhaps that is the case, in the end it will come down to which conferences the most desirable programs from the Big 12 would wish to move to. I would contend that we have proof that Texas does not wish to move West.

Oklahoma definitely pushed for it at one time but was that with the intention that Texas would feel pressured to go with? If so then is that desire still there if Texas is up front in the discussions that they intend to take a deal with the ACC if this goes forward?

I would contend that Oklahoma would then prefer the Big Ten as long as Oklahoma State is taken care of in equal fashion. That does not mean Oklahoma State in the Big Ten, for clarification.

Once again though, I also disagree that Tech, KSU and ISU is bad expansion for the PAC. On that I do not see us finding common ground and that is alright.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...NQ#t=1322s

Dodds said that Texas wouldn't move west because it wasn't good for the kids.

Not so sure if his truest intention is all that altruistic but I see no reason to doubt the rationale of him preferring to look East rather than West.

(08-02-2013 08:58 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Perhaps that is the case, in the end it will come down to which conferences the most desirable programs from the Big 12 would wish to move to. I would contend that we have proof that Texas does not wish to move West.

Oklahoma definitely pushed for it at one time but was that with the intention that Texas would feel pressured to go with? If so then is that desire still there if Texas is up front in the discussions that they intend to take a deal with the ACC if this goes forward?

I would contend that Oklahoma would then prefer the Big Ten as long as Oklahoma State is taken care of in equal fashion. That does not mean Oklahoma State in the Big Ten, for clarification.

Once again though, I also disagree that Tech, KSU and ISU is bad expansion for the PAC. On that I do not see us finding common ground and that is alright.

I understand your thinking on the Big XII teams and believe your reasoning is solid. As far as Texas is concerned, I believe their preference will be to be a football independent, no matter what conference they flirt with. They either want independence or for the Big XII to continue. I disagree with you on Oklahoma, at least in regard to Big 10 interest. IMHO, their willingness to join the PAC was always about what Texas was going to do and they wouldn't have wanted to go west in another scenario, even with OSU. If the Big XII is dissolving and Texas goes their own way -- whether indy or alone to the ACC in a Notre Dame-style deal -- I strongly believe the Okies would be doing all they can to move to the SEC with OSU.

Judging by this thread I guess it is true that expansion talks will never end

The Big Ten realeased their 2017 schedule not a month ago and the article that mentioned Iowa/Nebraska as a season ending possibly being replaced (at least some years) with Nebraska/Wisconsin and Iowa/Minnesota said the 2018 schedule will probably be out within a month. I have a hard time believing the Big Ten is releasing future 14 team schedules that far in advance if it's got plans to expand again soon.

I don't doubt the Big Ten will keep their eyes open, but the don't want to challenge the notion of grant of rights given they have their own.

(08-03-2013 08:38 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  The Big Ten realeased their 2017 schedule not a month ago and the article that mentioned Iowa/Nebraska as a season ending possibly being replaced (at least some years) with Nebraska/Wisconsin and Iowa/Minnesota said the 2018 schedule will probably be out within a month. I have a hard time believing the Big Ten is releasing future 14 team schedules that far in advance if it's got plans to expand again soon.

I don't doubt the Big Ten will keep their eyes open, but the don't want to challenge the notion of grant of rights given they have their own.

/endthread

(08-03-2013 08:38 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  The Big Ten realeased their 2017 schedule not a month ago and the article that mentioned Iowa/Nebraska as a season ending possibly being replaced (at least some years) with Nebraska/Wisconsin and Iowa/Minnesota said the 2018 schedule will probably be out within a month. I have a hard time believing the Big Ten is releasing future 14 team schedules that far in advance if it's got plans to expand again soon.

I don't doubt the Big Ten will keep their eyes open, but the don't want to challenge the notion of grant of rights given they have their own.

So it is impossible for a conference to change a schedule under such a situation that they should have to?

I am not saying that it is happening, but released schedules are hardly tells that no talks are ongoing.

(08-03-2013 10:25 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 08:38 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  The Big Ten realeased their 2017 schedule not a month ago and the article that mentioned Iowa/Nebraska as a season ending possibly being replaced (at least some years) with Nebraska/Wisconsin and Iowa/Minnesota said the 2018 schedule will probably be out within a month. I have a hard time believing the Big Ten is releasing future 14 team schedules that far in advance if it's got plans to expand again soon.

I don't doubt the Big Ten will keep their eyes open, but the don't want to challenge the notion of grant of rights given they have their own.

So it is impossible for a conference to change a schedule under such a situation that they should have to?

I am not saying that it is happening, but released schedules are hardly tells that no talks are ongoing.

They can and have changed schedules due to expansion. Releasing ones for 5 years out at the game time you are expecting new additions is doubtful though. It's not like they realeased them last year and are now thinking of switching. It's less than a month old with a new for at least 2018 likely comming in the next month. That's a lot of work to go through if you don't currently think it's going to amount to anything.

(08-03-2013 10:51 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 10:25 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 08:38 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  The Big Ten realeased their 2017 schedule not a month ago and the article that mentioned Iowa/Nebraska as a season ending possibly being replaced (at least some years) with Nebraska/Wisconsin and Iowa/Minnesota said the 2018 schedule will probably be out within a month. I have a hard time believing the Big Ten is releasing future 14 team schedules that far in advance if it's got plans to expand again soon.

I don't doubt the Big Ten will keep their eyes open, but the don't want to challenge the notion of grant of rights given they have their own.

So it is impossible for a conference to change a schedule under such a situation that they should have to?

I am not saying that it is happening, but released schedules are hardly tells that no talks are ongoing.

They can and have changed schedules due to expansion. Releasing ones for 5 years out at the game time you are expecting new additions is doubtful though. It's not like they realeased them last year and are now thinking of switching. It's less than a month old with a new for at least 2018 likely comming in the next month. That's a lot of work to go through if you don't currently think it's going to amount to anything.

I would imagine they were pretty much worked out from the beginning. The roughest schedule to come up with is the first one. After that you just start plugging in as the possibilities of combinations become less due to wanting everyone to play everyone eventually.