Are you saying this as just your guess or did you have sources behind either of these predictions?
*****The Super, Mega, Huge Big 12 Expansion Thread*****
- Thread starter CloneFan4
- Start date
- Status
Are you saying this as just your guess or did you have sources behind either of these predictions?
FWIW, earlier this afternoon aggieyell was reporting similarly to that powermizzou report. Not completely like it, but similar (they wanted to have an idea of who was on the 14-16 list, but didnt necessarily need it nailed down)
Guess we'll find out over the next 24 hours. Several flights trackable from the various SEC campuses to Atlanta, so we know theyre meeting.
So are you predicting this stuff or do you have some inside information?
Throw the dice enough and you'll end up rolling a 7. That being said, I hope you are right.
Somehow, I think you are very close to reality on this. There is no logical reason for this to be the truth, but everything we're hearing from Rebecacy and from JP publicly (not much) says to me that not only have we had a plan in place for a while now, but it is done pending all of the formal maneuvering.
Baylor is the only one making a lot of noise. What that tells me is this:
1) The Big XII is done, and it's just a matter of time formally.
2) There is a landing spot for all schools other than Baylor that's already been worked out. No one else is going public with their displeasure.
3) The only ways I can see that happening is this:
OU, OSU, TX, TT - Pac
MU, KU, KSU, ISU - Big East with WV to SEC (or KU, KSU, ISU to Big East with MU to SEC)
Baylor - left alone on the outside, MWC/CUSA
- or - the nightmare situation happens where the Pac/B1G/SEC/ACC all try to get to 16, and we end up in the B1G along with ND, Pitt, and Rutgers, with the other Big East schools ending up split to the SEC, ACC, and non-BCS land.
My prediction: we will know this all by the end of the week. Honestly, this is what I'm coming to after reading this all.
I trust GG and JP to do what's best for us, whatever happens.
Last edited:
If OU and UT separate, the Red River Rivalry is probably gone
Oklahoma to Pac-12: Would it End its Rivalry with Texas?
Wow- can you imagine the financial repercussions in Dallas? I've heard the game brings $50 million to Dallas/yr. Then the Big 12 offices move out...And Dallas just upgraded the Cotton bowl not too long ago at a cost of $60 million...
And no Texas-Texas A&M game...
Add KC to the cities that will be feeling the economic pinch
http://voices.kansascity.com/entries/big-12s-death-would-really-hurt-kc/
Oklahoma to Pac-12: Would it End its Rivalry with Texas?
Wow- can you imagine the financial repercussions in Dallas? I've heard the game brings $50 million to Dallas/yr. Then the Big 12 offices move out...And Dallas just upgraded the Cotton bowl not too long ago at a cost of $60 million...
And no Texas-Texas A&M game...
Add KC to the cities that will be feeling the economic pinch
http://voices.kansascity.com/entries/big-12s-death-would-really-hurt-kc/
Last edited:
I had the thought this afternoon that with so many football fans exasperated with the way money is destroying tradition the B1G could really make a potentially brilliant PR move if they picked up the four remaining Big 12 north schools.
They could come out in say that in the face of super-conferences they did the best they could to maintain the heart of two old storied conferences, the Big Ten and the Big 8. Really all we'd lose would be Colorado (always a bit of an odd fit) and the two Oklahoma schools (Admittedly a huge part of the Big 8, but have really more closely aligned themselves with the south in the last decade).
How does that not make the B1G look great?
They could come out in say that in the face of super-conferences they did the best they could to maintain the heart of two old storied conferences, the Big Ten and the Big 8. Really all we'd lose would be Colorado (always a bit of an odd fit) and the two Oklahoma schools (Admittedly a huge part of the Big 8, but have really more closely aligned themselves with the south in the last decade).
How does that not make the B1G look great?
It'd make them look like nice guys instead of money-hungry presidents. No way each school goes from $30 mil/yr to $27 mil/yr in order to take the high road.
Didn't see this posted: former NCAA prez essentially says those in the Sun Belt, MAC, Conf USA, Mt West, WAC, etc about to get kicked to the curb
Ex-NCAA president Dempsey: FBS split on its way - CBSSports.com
The NCAA's head honcho from 1993 to 2002, Dempsey told the Birmingham News that "the handwriting is on the wall" when it comes to college athletics superconferences and the eventual split of those conferences from the rank-and-file of Division I.
The make-or-break issue, as you might expect, is the full cost of attendance scholarships that only the superconferences will be able to afford. "There's no doubt we're looking in the next three, four or five years -- at most -- of seeing conferences from 14 to 18 members," Dempsey said.
Those conferences would then either have a new set of NCAA rules rewritten for them, or -- in a move Dempsey characterizes as "less likely" -- simply withdraw from the NCAA entirely.
Keep in mind that this isn't some anonymous NCAA-hater who's been waiting with baited breath for the organization to finally lose its grip on the way college athletics is run. Quite the opposite: Dempsey has a vested interest in seeing the NCAA maintain something resembling the status quo. But even that isn't enough to make him optimistic major college football will be able to keep everyone on the same playing field.
Meanwhile, saw this article that says that those teams left out are going to be extremely upset and will probably sue
http://www.businessinsider.com/ncaa...bcs-division-and-40-******-off-schools-2011-9
Of course, the danger here is dealing with the 40 schools that are left without a chair at the BCS table. There is a lot of money at stake here, and schools left out of the super-conferences could get litigious in their desire to be kept in the loop.
Ex-NCAA president Dempsey: FBS split on its way - CBSSports.com
The NCAA's head honcho from 1993 to 2002, Dempsey told the Birmingham News that "the handwriting is on the wall" when it comes to college athletics superconferences and the eventual split of those conferences from the rank-and-file of Division I.
The make-or-break issue, as you might expect, is the full cost of attendance scholarships that only the superconferences will be able to afford. "There's no doubt we're looking in the next three, four or five years -- at most -- of seeing conferences from 14 to 18 members," Dempsey said.
Those conferences would then either have a new set of NCAA rules rewritten for them, or -- in a move Dempsey characterizes as "less likely" -- simply withdraw from the NCAA entirely.
Keep in mind that this isn't some anonymous NCAA-hater who's been waiting with baited breath for the organization to finally lose its grip on the way college athletics is run. Quite the opposite: Dempsey has a vested interest in seeing the NCAA maintain something resembling the status quo. But even that isn't enough to make him optimistic major college football will be able to keep everyone on the same playing field.
Meanwhile, saw this article that says that those teams left out are going to be extremely upset and will probably sue
http://www.businessinsider.com/ncaa...bcs-division-and-40-******-off-schools-2011-9
Of course, the danger here is dealing with the 40 schools that are left without a chair at the BCS table. There is a lot of money at stake here, and schools left out of the super-conferences could get litigious in their desire to be kept in the loop.
I posted something similar, but it might have been in a different thread...if UT, TAMU, and OU are all in different conferences, there is no way UT will put both TAMU and OU on their schedule every year as non-con games. It's makes the national championship quest too hard.
In the case of the separate conference scenario, one of these long-standing traditional games on a yearly basis is gone for sure, and maybe both if UT is ticked enough. Another possibility is that UT might alternate those games.
Last edited:
If it is the B1G (and I'm certainly not saying it is) and we're headed there, it would make some of the donors comments make sense. The B1G plays there cards the closest BY FAR if last year was any indication and JP/GG are silent as always. That would seem to suggest that maybe, just maybe there is some actual smoke here. But only maybe. I just don't see why the big dogs would say we're headed for "a dream" if it wasn't the B1G.
While I'm close enough to observe things that others cannot, I had no direct sources for the McDermott prediction and I have no direct sources for the conference prediction. I wouldn't pretend to know something that very few people know at this point.
In spite of what the media is hyping, the conference realignment is more than just football. No doubt, football has been the driving force behind all this, but it's also about geography, academic reputation, facilities, enrollment, etc. While ISU has never been a football power, it ranks highly in just about every other criteria.
I could be wrong, but I think ISU will end up MORE than just fine when the dust settles.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
Something that I'm missing there: Why would only the superconference schools be able to afford the full-cost scholarships? Is that term including some sort of stipend/increased stipend/paycheck?
I think the author was saying that pay-for-play is on its way with these schools leaving the NCAA in football so that they can okay this. They'd essentially function as minor league pro-sports teams flying 1/2 way across the country and getting paid for their time. My only question is why they would attend classes at all?
- Status
