NCAA Conference Realignment

[jersey cubs fan]

That's a pretty strange definition of "controlling the conference" that you're working from. Nobody has ever suggested that Texas has total control of every institution within the Big 12. We're suggesting that Texas essentially calls the shots about how, financially, things work in the Big 12. The imbalance it creates certainly might drive schools like Neb and MU to look for better options elsewhere, but if you want to play in the Big 12, you play by UT's rules.

 

If MU and NU leave, that will continue to be the case. Because as long as UT is willing to stay, the other teams will likely want to hitch their wagons to UT, thus continuing to give them ultimate control of the conference. But UT might decide that a restructured Big 12 isn't worth keeping afloat. So it will leave. And with UT's departure, the Big 12 would become no more. Because the success of the Big 12 ultimately hinges on them. They're the only single team the Big 12 can't survive without.

 

If expansion occurs elsewhere, there is no way they can sit still minus 2 teams. They would be losing control by default, because that which they control would no longer be able to survive on its own.

[snoodmonger]

That's a pretty strange definition of "controlling the conference" that you're working from. Nobody has ever suggested that Texas has total control of every institution within the Big 12. We're suggesting that Texas essentially calls the shots about how, financially, things work in the Big 12. The imbalance it creates certainly might drive schools like Neb and MU to look for better options elsewhere, but if you want to play in the Big 12, you play by UT's rules.

 

If MU and NU leave, that will continue to be the case. Because as long as UT is willing to stay, the other teams will likely want to hitch their wagons to UT, thus continuing to give them ultimate control of the conference. But UT might decide that a restructured Big 12 isn't worth keeping afloat. So it will leave. And with UT's departure, the Big 12 would become no more. Because the success of the Big 12 ultimately hinges on them. They're the only single team the Big 12 can't survive without.

 

If expansion occurs elsewhere, there is no way they can sit still minus 2 teams. They would be losing control by default, because that which they control would no longer be able to survive on its own.

 

the big 12 could replace those teams. but only if texas decided it wanted to stay. if not, the big 12 collapses. so it still has a stranglehold on the direction of the conference.

[Butterscup1679666578]

The only reason I hope Mizzou leaves for the Big Ten and the Big 12 collapses is so Dan Beebe is out of a job.

[NeifiIsMyHomeBoy]

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/stories.nsf/mizzou/story/155C33BD4A6244698625771D00080866?OpenDocument

 

Found this article interesting about the benefits of Mizzou going to the Big Ten. I still think they are not anywhere near the top of the Big Ten's list, but Mizzou seems to have a major case of Texas penis envy. 13 million is a big difference in TV money for Mizzou, and I have to think if given the opportunity they will jump.

 

I think the Big Ten's list looks like this right now: ND, Texas (and with Texas goes A&M), Syracuse, Pitt, Rutgers, and then Mizzou, Nebraska, etc.

[Guest]

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/stories.nsf/mizzou/story/155C33BD4A6244698625771D00080866?OpenDocument

 

Found this article interesting about the benefits of Mizzou going to the Big Ten. I still think they are not anywhere near the top of the Big Ten's list, but Mizzou seems to have a major case of Texas penis envy. 13 million is a big difference in TV money for Mizzou, and I have to think if given the opportunity they will jump.

 

I think the Big Ten's list looks like this right now: ND, Texas (and with Texas goes A&M), Syracuse, Pitt, Rutgers, and then Mizzou, Nebraska, etc.

 

That article doesn't mention Texas once.

 

Doc Saturday linked to an article from March that I hadn't seen before, about how a leaked study showed the consideration was Rutgers first, Mizzou 2nd, and Pitt 3rd. That link then goes on to show why Rutgers won't actually be able to do the things that make them 1st.

 

Also, the KC Star had an article about how Big 12 sources were "tired of (Mizzou and Nebraska's) act" of flirting with the Big 10. Which is hilarious because the conference has done everything short of actively attempting to screw Mizzou over, especially the last few years.

[NeifiIsMyHomeBoy]

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/stories.nsf/mizzou/story/155C33BD4A6244698625771D00080866?OpenDocument

 

Found this article interesting about the benefits of Mizzou going to the Big Ten. I still think they are not anywhere near the top of the Big Ten's list, but Mizzou seems to have a major case of Texas penis envy. 13 million is a big difference in TV money for Mizzou, and I have to think if given the opportunity they will jump.

 

I think the Big Ten's list looks like this right now: ND, Texas (and with Texas goes A&M), Syracuse, Pitt, Rutgers, and then Mizzou, Nebraska, etc.

 

That article doesn't mention Texas once.

 

Doc Saturday linked to an article from March that I hadn't seen before, about how a leaked study showed the consideration was Rutgers first, Mizzou 2nd, and Pitt 3rd. That link then goes on to show why Rutgers won't actually be able to do the things that make them 1st.

 

Also, the KC Star had an article about how Big 12 sources were "tired of (Mizzou and Nebraska's) act" of flirting with the Big 10. Which is hilarious because the conference has done everything short of actively attempting to screw Mizzou over, especially the last few years.

 

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/columnists.nsf/bryanburwell/story/96D6D1A0B6A03CB38625771E000DA051?OpenDocument

 

My bad I read this article first this morning, and linked the two together in my head. Rutgers makes me want to vomit. I'd rather see Syracuse if they are trying to grab the New York market.

[RedFlash]

http://dennis-dodd.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/6270202/21612470?tag=headlines;headlines

 

I know this isn't Big Ten related, but the Big Ten like every other conference could be affected by this.

[snoodmonger]

 

Also, the KC Star had an article about how Big 12 sources were "tired of (Mizzou and Nebraska's) act" of flirting with the Big 10. Which is hilarious because the conference has done everything short of actively attempting to screw Mizzou over, especially the last few years.

 

How? I hear that all the time, but I never hear how the Big 12 screws over Missouri (any mroe than it screws over any school not named Texas.)

 

And even if they have, Missouri has been rattling its tin cup at the Big Ten since the Big 8. It's not like their solely reacting to some injustice.

[SouthSideRyan]

http://dennis-dodd.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/6270202/21612470?tag=headlines;headlines

 

I know this isn't Big Ten related, but the Big Ten like every other conference could be affected by this.

 

Texas couldn't even find the time to send their AD.

[Guest]

 

Also, the KC Star had an article about how Big 12 sources were "tired of (Mizzou and Nebraska's) act" of flirting with the Big 10. Which is hilarious because the conference has done everything short of actively attempting to screw Mizzou over, especially the last few years.

 

How? I hear that all the time, but I never hear how the Big 12 screws over Missouri (any mroe than it screws over any school not named Texas.)

 

And even if they have, Missouri has been rattling its tin cup at the Big Ten since the Big 8. It's not like their solely reacting to some injustice.

 

The distribution of revenue and Mizzou's treatment in bowl matchups for 3 years running are the main reasons, and there's some other non-revenue sport complaints(Soccer team missing the tournament despite winning the Big 12 is an example). Basically, the conference has never stood up for Mizzou, so they have no right to be upset if Mizzou looks for a place where they're treated with some semblence of equality(among other reasons to move).

[SouthSideRyan]

http://dennis-dodd.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/6270202/21612470?tag=headlines;headlines

 

I know this isn't Big Ten related, but the Big Ten like every other conference could be affected by this.

 

Texas couldn't even find the time to send their AD.

 

And why did Baylor, Texas Tech, and Iowa State even bother sending their ADs?? They wanted to make sure they have all their bases covered for how they'll be left out in the cold?

[snoodmonger]

 

Also, the KC Star had an article about how Big 12 sources were "tired of (Mizzou and Nebraska's) act" of flirting with the Big 10. Which is hilarious because the conference has done everything short of actively attempting to screw Mizzou over, especially the last few years.

 

How? I hear that all the time, but I never hear how the Big 12 screws over Missouri (any mroe than it screws over any school not named Texas.)

 

And even if they have, Missouri has been rattling its tin cup at the Big Ten since the Big 8. It's not like their solely reacting to some injustice.

 

The distribution of revenue and Mizzou's treatment in bowl matchups for 3 years running are the main reasons, and there's some other non-revenue sport complaints(Soccer team missing the tournament despite winning the Big 12 is an example). Basically, the conference has never stood up for Mizzou, so they have no right to be upset if Mizzou looks for a place where they're treated with some semblence of equality(among other reasons to move).

 

IMO, the bowl game thing is more on your AD than the Big 12. Alden hasn't found a way to sell his program as a better fit than the other schools. When the bowl game's committees have a choice, it's up to the AD to make his team marketable.

 

Don't know anything about the soccer team.

 

But again, you can't portray this like Missouri is only pissed about being treated unfairly. They've been begging for a Big 10 invite for forever.

[Guest]

 

Also, the KC Star had an article about how Big 12 sources were "tired of (Mizzou and Nebraska's) act" of flirting with the Big 10. Which is hilarious because the conference has done everything short of actively attempting to screw Mizzou over, especially the last few years.

 

How? I hear that all the time, but I never hear how the Big 12 screws over Missouri (any mroe than it screws over any school not named Texas.)

 

And even if they have, Missouri has been rattling its tin cup at the Big Ten since the Big 8. It's not like their solely reacting to some injustice.

 

The distribution of revenue and Mizzou's treatment in bowl matchups for 3 years running are the main reasons, and there's some other non-revenue sport complaints(Soccer team missing the tournament despite winning the Big 12 is an example). Basically, the conference has never stood up for Mizzou, so they have no right to be upset if Mizzou looks for a place where they're treated with some semblence of equality(among other reasons to move).

 

IMO, the bowl game thing is more on your AD than the Big 12. Alden hasn't found a way to sell his program as a better fit than the other schools. When the bowl game's committees have a choice, it's up to the AD to make his team marketable.

 

Don't know anything about the soccer team.

 

But again, you can't portray this like Missouri is only pissed about being treated unfairly. They've been begging for a Big 10 invite for forever.

 

I don't think it's unfair to ask the conference to stick up for you when hilarious logic like "Iowa State will bring a ton of people since they went to a bowl game 40 years ago and lots of people came" is used to move Mizzou down to a spot 3 bowls lower on the totem pole than they earned.

 

Regardless of any past flirtations with the Big 10, lumping Nebraska into those comments makes it clear that those people quoted were upset with what has happened in the last few months. Which, again, is funny considering that the conference won't give Mizzou the time of day when it's treated poorly, but apparently they're supposed to fall in line if someone were to consider asking them to leave the Big 12.

[snoodmonger]

 

Also, the KC Star had an article about how Big 12 sources were "tired of (Mizzou and Nebraska's) act" of flirting with the Big 10. Which is hilarious because the conference has done everything short of actively attempting to screw Mizzou over, especially the last few years.

 

How? I hear that all the time, but I never hear how the Big 12 screws over Missouri (any mroe than it screws over any school not named Texas.)

 

And even if they have, Missouri has been rattling its tin cup at the Big Ten since the Big 8. It's not like their solely reacting to some injustice.

 

The distribution of revenue and Mizzou's treatment in bowl matchups for 3 years running are the main reasons, and there's some other non-revenue sport complaints(Soccer team missing the tournament despite winning the Big 12 is an example). Basically, the conference has never stood up for Mizzou, so they have no right to be upset if Mizzou looks for a place where they're treated with some semblence of equality(among other reasons to move).

 

IMO, the bowl game thing is more on your AD than the Big 12. Alden hasn't found a way to sell his program as a better fit than the other schools. When the bowl game's committees have a choice, it's up to the AD to make his team marketable.

 

Don't know anything about the soccer team.

 

But again, you can't portray this like Missouri is only pissed about being treated unfairly. They've been begging for a Big 10 invite for forever.

 

I don't think it's unfair to ask the conference to stick up for you when hilarious logic like "Iowa State will bring a ton of people since they went to a bowl game 40 years ago and lots of people came" is used to move Mizzou down to a spot 3 bowls lower on the totem pole than they earned.

 

Regardless of any past flirtations with the Big 10, lumping Nebraska into those comments makes it clear that those people quoted were upset with what has happened in the last few months. Which, again, is funny considering that the conference won't give Mizzou the time of day when it's treated poorly, but apparently they're supposed to fall in line if someone were to consider asking them to leave the Big 12.

 

Well, regardless, it's pretty silly for anyone to get mad at a school for entertaining an offer that will make them tons of money and improve their academics dramatically.

 

If KU were to get an invite (and they won't), i'd be printing Big 16 t-shirts in a hot second.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Big Ten makes offer according to KC radio station

Missouri, Nebraska, Notre Dame, and Rutgers

[SouthSideRyan]

Burn in hell Rutgers

[fromthestretch]

Burn in hell Rutgers

 

I want nothing to do with Rutgers.

[NeifiIsMyHomeBoy]

I'm trying to figure out what the hell is about to happen to Texas if this is true. If we miss on Texas for Rutgers, Mizzou, and Nebraska I'm not going to be happy.

[Guest]

Like I said before, it might be that the first mover can't get Texas. And since pretty much every conference re-alignment theory is a reaction to the Big 10 expanding, it may be that they just aren't able to get them.

[Formerly Snayke]

I'm trying to figure out what the hell is about to happen to Texas if this is true. If we miss on Texas for Rutgers, Mizzou, and Nebraska I'm not going to be happy.

 

So you'd rather the Big Ten have Texas than Mizzou, Nebraska and Rutgers?

[NeifiIsMyHomeBoy]

Like I said before, it might be that the first mover can't get Texas. And since pretty much every conference re-alignment theory is a reaction to the Big 10 expanding, it may be that they just aren't able to get them.

 

Well if ND is ready to jump, Texas is stupid if they don't jump. I'm guessing three other schools would be required to get ND to jump because that would create the money, which leads to the Big 10 getting ND + sloppy seconds.

[SouthSideRyan]

If this report is true, I think Texas is the reason for 4 teams being invited to an 11 team league. If all accept, you've got one spot left for Texas, as it stares down a 10 team league. If ND declines(cause why in the hell would the other 3) then you've got Texas and A&M for spots 15 and 16.

[NeifiIsMyHomeBoy]

If this report is true, I think Texas is the reason for 4 teams being invited to an 11 team league. If all accept, you've got one spot left for Texas, as it stares down a 10 team league. If ND declines(cause why in the hell would the other 3) then you've got Texas and A&M for spots 15 and 16.

 

Makes a lot more sense. I just think if you are looking east Rutgers is the wrong school. Syracuse and Pitt are both better fits in my mind. Plus the addition of Pitt will give PSU a real rival

[SouthSideRyan]

I wonder if expansion was in Delaney's head back when he started the Big Ten Network

[NeifiIsMyHomeBoy]

I'm trying to figure out what the hell is about to happen to Texas if this is true. If we miss on Texas for Rutgers, Mizzou, and Nebraska I'm not going to be happy.

 

So you'd rather the Big Ten have Texas than Mizzou, Nebraska and Rutgers?

 

Yes my ideal and what I feel would be best for the conference is Texas, A&M, ND, Pitt, and Syracuse. Academically and athletically these are the best matches.