Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

***OFFICIAL BIG 12 EXPANSION THREAD 2.0***

Status
Not open for further replies.
ISUCyclones2015 said:
You guys make it seem like the MAC couldn't woo some other schools to come with them that didn't make it into an AQ and are in the Midwest. Travel costs for non-profit sports would be astronomical for the Big East and Mountain West.
Click to expand...

OMG - The MAC teams have stadiums that seat 15k, while Big 12 have over 45k. There is a huge difference. The AQ leftovers would have just formed their own conference with a few CUSA teams. There would be enough midwest teams that travel costs would not be that bad. You act like it would have been ISU just joining the existing teams in the given conferences with no other movement.

Once again, NO WAY IN HELL that we would have ever been in the MAC. If you are trying to argue this, you need to go see a shrink to reverse the brainwashing that the Hawkeye Media has done on you.
 
Also, I would not put AAC at the same level as the MAC. AAC>>>MAC. It is definitely not a power conference and would have been much less desirable for ISU to land than our current situation. But my main point is that ISU would have never ended up in the MAC under any situation. It is laughable to think so.
 
The Dude of WV on WVU: Don't Be Left Holding the Bag

Dude time....



Texas is against expansion.



Oklahoma is against expansion.


WVU, TCU, Baylor, Kansas State, and Texas Tech want to expand. Why stop at 12 they say when we could have 16.


Kansas and Iowa State are interested in expansion and support the concept but only if they get to play in a division that includes Texas.
Click to expand...
  • J.B. TexasExJuly 16, 2012 at 10:55 AM
    Bottom line is Bowlsby only needs to convince ISU to accept being aligned in the East for this to go down?

  • b36-rounded.png

    The Dude of WVJuly 16, 2012 at 11:40 AM
    And either OSU or Kansas.

Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
CyFan61 said:
That article is from a year ago, pre-ACC GOR.

Who's even left to add now? BYU is out. Cincinnati? Houston? SMU? USF/UCF?

At this point in time, 10 is infinitely better than any potential alternative.
Click to expand...

LOL at some of their old ISU comments. It is summer and time to waste before kickoff. It is interesting that conference realignment talk has become very quiet.
 
This is what gets me, from last summer:

The Big 12 could add FSU, Clemson, Maryland, Georgia Tech, Miami and Louisville tomorrow. They could add them all or choose to expand only to 12 or 14, but the key point is I’m told they would all accept.
Click to expand...

If true, I'm pretty surprised the conference didn't move to 12 or 14. Looks like a bad move at this point.

Of course, we have no idea if this is true at all.
 
ISUCyclones2015 said:
Also, you guys are crazy to think we would've ended up in a AQ conference if everything went to ****. The only thing that would save us is potentially the BOR ******** at Iowa to ***** at the B1G to take us in. Power 4 = 16 teams each, they might have room. MIGHT.
Click to expand...

Jesus Flapjacking ******. Iowa State is a large public research university, soon to be the largest one in the state. We have a great fan support, solid facilities, and are AAU to boot. We are attractive to any conference but the B1G, and the only reason we aren't an option for them is TV rights. The worst we were going to end up Is the Big East, which would have been a decent conference with the Big 12 leftovers.

Some of you must wake up and have to talk yourselves out of slitting your wrists every time you put on your ISU gear.
 
Burnt Orange Nation did a Q&A about conference realignment with Frank the Tank (in three parts):

Part 1 - (Realignment Q&A With Frank The Tank, Part 1: Grants of rights - Burnt Orange Nation)

Summary: 1) Leagues are done expanding at the current time because of Grant of Rights deals, unless the Big 12 decides that they "have to be at 12", then they could poach away some smaller conference schools just for the sake of getting to 12

2) Next round of realignment might be more related to "who might be willing to move" rather than conferences expanding for the sake of expanding. He sees Texas, Notre Dame and North Carolina as the three key lynchpins in any further realignment with Texas probably being the most likely to look around of the LHN doesn't get off the ground since they have already shown they were willing to look around (see their serious negotiations with the Pac-10 in 2010).
 
ISUCyclones2015 said:
I thought the lawmakers said the wouldn't allow Kansas and K-State to be split up. That was my thinking behind that. If the Big 10 would take Rutgers and Maryland, they would take K-State.
Click to expand...

No they wouldnt. K state has the highest admission rate in the country. Rutgers and Maryland are AAU Iowa State is a million times more likely in the B1G then ksu (and our odds are\were slim)
 
Part 2 - (Conference realignment Q&A with Frank the Tank, Part 2: Winners and losers - Burnt Orange Nation)

Summary:

1) He sees Rutgers as the biggest winner in the last round of realignment. They got their B1G invite because they were in the right place (NYC market) at the right time (B1G needed a partner for Maryland). Their actual football history meant very little for their addition to the league. Doesn't see a biggest "loser" school in conference realignment, as he says any school that ended up in a BCS league isn't a loser, however noted that some schools were put on notice (i.e. Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Baylor, Wake Forest) etc. that they aren't necessarily safe if realignment comes around again as some of those schools were nearly left without a home last time around.

Says SEC was the biggest winner in realignment because of the addition of A&M. Not only because of the success the Aggies had last year, but because of the fertile recruiting state of Texas and TV markets that are now open to the SEC. The markets in Missouri are gravy. Frank's biggest conference loser in the whole realignment fiasco: the Big 12. Yes, the Big 12 kept quality on-the-field play by integrating strong programs such as West Virginia and TCU, and will continue to draw great recruits because of the league's stronghold in Texas, but suffered some pretty significant losses. Says that no college administrator in their right mind would trade a national brand with a massive fan base (Nebraska), the second most popular school in Texas (A&M), and two AAU flagship schools with the largest population bases outside of Texas (Colorado and Missouri) for TCU and West Virginia. It's not a knock on those two new additions, but rather speaks for the quality of programs the Big 12 lost. Also says, that while Texas may be okay going forward, the Big 12 might not be as their demographics outside of the state of Texas have the same problems that the old Southwest and Big 8 conferences did before they merged.
 
And finally, Part 3 - (Conference realignment Q&A with Frank the Tank, Part 3: How Texas fared - Burnt Orange Nation)

Basically Frank says he doesn't begrudge Texas for wanting to basically control its own conference, but says if he was running UT, he would have snapped up the Pac-16 offer in a heartbeat. It was a perfect scenario for Texas from improved academics, larger media markets, the ability to take five close friends from the Big 12 with them and they probably could have made more money off of new TV deals and a Pac-12 Network with Texas than what the LHN will bring in.

In the next 10 to 12 years he still sees the SEC and Big Ten being the two power leagues calling most of the shots. He sees Texas possibly switching leagues, but doubts it would happen. Figures the Big 12 at some point will probably break down and add at least two schools....likely some combination of BYU, Cincinnati and/or UConn (or possibly Tulane or UNLV if either school can show even a little football competency). Thinks the Big Ten will still try to get to 16 with some combination of Virginia, Georgia Tech, Kansas and Oklahoma. Doesn't think the Pac-12 will try to expand further unless they can resurrect their Pac-16 idea and somehow entice Texas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: helechopper
IAStubborn said:
No they wouldnt. K state has the highest admission rate in the country. Rutgers and Maryland are AAU Iowa State is a million times more likely in the B1G then ksu (and our odds are\were slim)
Click to expand...
Actually it was confirmed that KU and K-State are not a combo. They would like to stay together but wouldn't have to if push comes to shove.
 
Note to Frank the Tank: The Big Ten still doesn't have a presence in the fertile southern recruiting grounds. As has been posted previously, NU is already bemoaning that fact, now that they've lost their TX connection and can't get the athletes from the existing Big Ten footprint they feel they need to once again become a major football power. Adding Rutgers and Maryland didn't really help that problem, and may have made it worse.

And we all know what happens to conference stability when Nebraska isn't happy...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom