*****The Super, Mega, Huge Big 12 Expansion Thread*****

[weR138]

The Big 12 can't kill the LHN (not without Texas jumping ship and imploding the conference) and it can't seem to work out a reasonable compromise. I'll never understand why we think that the rules that have worked so well for other conferences (like equal revenue sharing and fair play on network issues) can't work here.

Wha?

How 'bout acting like a conference partner? If Missouri jumps ship it will be because they didn't want to build concensus w/ the other members and tell UT "no". None of us can do that alone but we all could have together. But hey, **** ISU, Baylor and KSU right? Gotta look out for number one.

Just stop with the "Texas imploding the conference" bull****. CU, NU, aTm, and now possibly MU are killing (trying to) the conference.

 

[CarrollCyclone]

If Texas would just make some concessions in regards to the LHN the conference would be much more stable. OU wouldn't be sniffing around, A&M likely wouldn't have left, Missouri wouldn't be leaving.

Texas is the root of all of this insecurity in the Big 12.

 

[State43]

Aggies would have left, they couldn't leave fast enough. I am shocked that MU really wants to leave, seems insane to me.

 

[1TRUFAN]

Flight just went from Columbia to the OU airport....FlightAware > Berry Aviation #335 Flight Tracker

Wow...that plane has been busy in the last 14 days.

2 trips to Columbia, MO (University of Missouri)
2 trips to Norman, OK (University of Oklahoma)
4 trips to Austin, TX (University of Texas)
1 Trip to Ames, IA (Iowa State University)
1 Trip to Lawrence, KS (Kansas University)
2 Trips to Oxford, MS (University of Mississippi)
2 Trips to Baton Rouge, LA (Louisiana State University)
2 Trips to Fayetteville, AR (University of Arkansas)

And 4 trips to San Marcos, TX; 2 trips to Atlanta, GA; and 2 trips to Tunica, MS.

 

[jbhtexas]

Texas is the root of all of this insecurity in the Big 12.

I know you like to post this statement, but it is just as incorrect this time as it was the last one hunderd times you posted it...

 

[weR138]

If Texas would just make some concessions in regards to the LHN the conference would be much more stable. OU wouldn't be sniffing around, A&M likely wouldn't have left, Missouri wouldn't be leaving.

Texas is the root of all of this insecurity in the Big 12.

Wrong. UT is currently still in the conference. The refusal on the part of certain institutions to act as true conference partners is the reason for insecurity.

 

[bluestarcyclone]

Wrong. UT is currently still in the conference. The refusal on the part of certain institutions to act as true conference partners is the reason for insecurity.

Since when has texas acted as a true conference partner?

 

[UNIGuy4Cy]

Since when has texas acted as a true conference partner?

Texas is the most independent a conference member can get while being in a conference.

 

[Al_4_State]

Since when has texas acted as a true conference partner?

They haven't, but by staying in the league they've been better than the schools that leave/threaten to leave constantly.

 

[UNIGuy4Cy]

They haven't, but by staying in the league they've been better than the schools that leave/threaten to leave constantly.

Course they have, why wouldnt they? There is no better luxury in college sports outside of what Texa$$ has.

 

[Cydwinder]

All the talk of national exposure for hs recruits on the LHN doesn't work right now since it can't get very many carriers.

 

[weR138]

Since when has texas acted as a true conference partner?

They haven't. Which is exactly why this could've been solved last year by the other conference partners unifying against them. Instead they jumped ship. The cause of instability for the Big XII conference will always lie with the schools who've left and are leaving. The 12 team Big XII minus UT was a viable conference. There is no logical argument that UT is more to blame for instability than the schools who left/are leaving.

 

[1TRUFAN]

Wow...that plane has been busy in the last 14 days.

2 trips to Columbia, MO (University of Missouri)
2 trips to Norman, OK (University of Oklahoma)
4 trips to Austin, TX (University of Texas)
1 Trip to Ames, IA (Iowa State University)
1 Trip to Lawrence, KS (Kansas University)
2 Trips to Oxford, MS (University of Mississippi)
2 Trips to Baton Rouge, LA (Louisiana State University)
2 Trips to Fayetteville, AR (University of Arkansas)

And 4 trips to San Marcos, TX; 2 trips to Atlanta, GA; and 2 trips to Tunica, MS.

And then there is this plane: FlightAware > N328DA

In the last 5 days it has been (only) to:
Manhattan, KS (Kansas State)
Ames, IA (Iowa State)
Cheyenne, WY (40 miles from University of Wyoming)
Hayward, CA (??? - SF Bay Area)
Reno, NV (University of Neveda)
Colorado Springs, CO (Air Force Academy)
Lawrence, KS (Kansas)
Waco, TX (Baylor)
Albuquerque, NM (University of New Mexico)
Concord, CA (6 miles from Pac12 headquarters)

 

[bluestarcyclone]

They haven't. Which is exactly why this could've been solved last year by the other conference partners unifying against them. Instead they jumped ship. The cause of instability for the Big XII conference will always lie with the schools who've left and are leaving. The 12 team Big XII minus UT was a viable conference. There is no logical argument that UT is more to blame for instability than the schools who left/are leaving.

I'll agree with that. Last june all 11 other members shouldve told texas they were starting a network and UT could get in or get out. But.. the south teams hitched their wagons to texas and the PAC instead of to the big 12.

 

[chuckd4735]

Texas is the most independent a conference member can get while being in a conference.

...and without Texas, the Big 12/8 is no better than the Big East. People need to realize that Texas is an asset to everyone's revenue in the Big 12. Without them, we probably dont have a new scoreboard, a football facility being constructed, etc. Everyone in this conference has lived off the brand Texas has brought for the past 12 years, and now all the sudden they are sick of Texas. I can see the likes of aTm and OU being upset with the LHN, because they acctually compete for the recruits that Texas is trageting, but the remaining schools rarley, if at all, compete with them for recruits, and those other schools are banking from Texas. ISU knows their role and has not barked up a storm about this. Schools like Mizzou feel some sort of entitlement here, and I dont get why.

 

[bluestarcyclone]

They haven't, but by staying in the league they've been better than the schools that leave/threaten to leave constantly.

Texas isnt one of those schools? 2 years in a row they've been in discussions with the PAC. The only reason they're still here is because the PAC shot them down.

 

[Al_4_State]

Texas isnt one of those schools? 2 years in a row they've been in discussions with the PAC. The only reason they're still here is because the PAC shot them down.

They only react to other schools moves. You think we weren't talking to other leagues?

I'm not saying Texas has no guilt. They have plenty of it. They just aren't quite as bad as the schools who've left.

weR has it right. Texas only has power because other schools would rather run away than work together to knock them down a peg.

 

[Mizzoulander]

They haven't. Which is exactly why this could've been solved last year by the other conference partners unifying against them. Instead they jumped ship. The cause of instability for the Big XII conference will always lie with the schools who've left and are leaving. The 12 team Big XII minus UT was a viable conference. There is no logical argument that UT is more to blame for instability than the schools who left/are leaving.

I suppose you blame battered spouses, too.

Seriously, that's nonsense. You expect TTU, Baylor, and TAMU to stick around in a conference that DOESN'T include UT? We can debate who's to blame for conference until the cows (longhorns?) come home. The fact is EVERY school is to blame, because the administrators failed to make the necessary agreements early on to take advantage of all the natural benefits the Big 12 could have provided. UT should have been more collaborative. The old Big 8 should have been more unified during the merger. We've never had strong conference leadership.

At the time, the Big 8 needed Texas, and the TX 4 needed the Big 8. That's no longer true. As more and more power shifted to the south, only single schools (NU, MU, etc.) stood up to protest, and only when it threatened their own narrow interests. That's everybody's fault.

As somebody said earlier, Missouri only has leverage right now because it has another option. Last year it didn't, and it was forced to agree to the UT/OU conditions. If ISU had the option, the fan base would be LIVID if they refused to pursue it in the name of "conference unity."

 

[UNIGuy4Cy]

...and without Texas, the Big 12/8 is no better than the Big East. People need to realize that Texas is an asset to everyone's revenue in the Big 12. Without them, we probably dont have a new scoreboard, a football facility being constructed, etc. Everyone in this conference has lived off the brand Texas has brought for the past 12 years, and now all the sudden they are sick of Texas. I can see the likes of aTm and OU being upset with the LHN, because they acctually compete for the recruits that Texas is trageting, but the remaining schools rarley, if at all, compete with them for recruits, and those other schools are banking from Texas. ISU knows their role and has not barked up a storm about this. Schools like Mizzou feel some sort of entitlement here, and I dont get why.

I just have to ask one question, who was Texas before they joined the Big 8?

 

[chuckd4735]

I suppose you blame battered spouses, too.

Seriously, that's nonsense. You expect TTU, Baylor, and TAMU to stick around in a conference that DOESN'T include UT? We can debate who's to blame for conference until the cows (longhorns?) come home. The fact is EVERY school is to blame, because the administrators failed to make the necessary agreements early on to take advantage of all the natural benefits the Big 12 could have provided. UT should have been more collaborative. The old Big 8 should have been more unified during the merger. We've never had strong conference leadership.

At the time, the Big 8 needed Texas, and the TX 4 needed the Big 8. That's no longer true. As more and more power shifted to the south, only single schools (NU, MU, etc.) stood up to protest, and only when it threatened their own narrow interests. That's everybody's fault.

As somebody said earlier, Missouri only has leverage right now because it has another option. Last year it didn't, and it was forced to agree to the UT/OU conditions. If ISU had the option, the fan base would be LIVID if they refused to pursue it in the name of "conference unity."

I would be livid if ISU even considered joining the SEC. Its not a good fit for ISU what so ever...its a much better fit for Mizzou to join the SEC than ISU joining the SEC. However, I still dont think its a good fit for Mizzou. Now if the talk was Mizzou going to the Big 10, my opinion would be much different.