What about Kentucky?

[DistrictCyclone]

This is a wild, and likely very dumb idea, but I'll throw it out there for the purpose of good conversation: why doesn't the Big 12 roll the dice and extend an invite to the University of Kentucky?

If Missouri goes, it would be great because it would get the Big 12 back to 10 members AND (the best part) it would keep the SEC stuck at 13. The Big 12 could further stick it to the SEC by inviting Kentucky, Louisville, and WVU, limiting their list of expansion candidates to Cincinnati or ACC members. If Missouri stays, Kentucky could be paired with one or three Big East teams to make the Big 12 either a 12 or 14 team conference, and it would put the SEC at 12 where they belong.

The pros for the Big 12 are: geographic proximity, a decent and improving football program (good stadium and improving record), an amazing basketball team with great tradition, quality academics (better than Louisville/WVU/UC), an in-conference basketball rival in Kansas, the Big 12 asserting its position by poaching from an "untouchable" conference, etc.

UK's never struck me as a SEC school; they don't fit the profile. They are the lone basketball school in a football conference, and they have just 2 football conference titles to their name. Before Missery, they were the northern outlier, closer to Indianapolis, Columbus, and Chicago than to Gainesville, Auburn, and Athens. Their only in-conference rival is a lopsided, half-hearted border war with Tennessee. Especially if they came packaged with Louisville and Cincinnati, they'd have their fiercest rival in conference and two teams within an hour and a half away.

The Big 12 would also be able to pitch having football that they'd be more competitive in. They've actually been fairly decent the past 5 years, but as Missouri will find out fast if they indeed make the move, 6-8 wins in the SEC gets you no respect. Those wins would mean a lot more in the Big 12, where they might even wrack up a few more.

Thoughts? I'm sure there are millions of reasons why this is a bad idea ($20+million of them, no doubt), but what does the Big 12 have to lose? If they make an effective argument that it would be better for both parties and it pays off, they pick up a dynamite basketball school with the potential to be a solid football school, gain access to the Louisville/Cincinnati markets, and show the SEC what's up. And if Kentucky says "no thanks"...the Big 12 gambled and lost nothing.

 

[nickwc]

I like your line of thinking and it makes too much sense, exactly why it would never happen

 

[crash_zone]

eh, why not? Probably get turned down, but I don't see why we couldn't try (don't make the offer public).

 

[DistrictCyclone]

eh, why not? Probably get turned down, but I don't see why we couldn't try (don't make the offer public).

Exactly. The Big 12 tried with Arkansas, and didn't lose anything there, either. If anything, it makes the Big 12 look stronger by being assertive and proactive; if they get turned down, they could always spin it as "well, the SEC has a really good thing going...it doesn't mean that we don't, either".

 

[Tank]

I like it and I agree that Kentucky really doesn't fit in as a SEC school where as Arkansas does fit in with the SEC.

Another idea to stick it to the SEC is to go after a school like Vanderbilt where I don't think they really fit in with the SEC.

Imagine loosing Mizzou, falling down to 8 teams but then adding Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Louisville and West Virginia. So the Big 12 actually has 12 teams in it and then the SEC has 12 team with the addition of Mizzou and A&M.

The only thing that would concern me with this move though is that the SEC would still potentially try to go after schools like Texas, Tech, TCU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, etc... to boost their strength back up and then the Big 12 is right back at the beginning of this mess.

 

[CycloneYoda]

This is a wild, and likely very dumb idea, but I'll throw it out there for the purpose of good conversation: why doesn't the Big 12 roll the dice and extend an invite to the University of Kentucky?

If Missouri goes, it would be great because it would get the Big 12 back to 10 members AND (the best part) it would keep the SEC stuck at 13. The Big 12 could further stick it to the SEC by inviting Kentucky, Louisville, and WVU, limiting their list of expansion candidates to Cincinnati or ACC members. If Missouri stays, Kentucky could be paired with one or three Big East teams to make the Big 12 either a 12 or 14 team conference, and it would put the SEC at 12 where they belong.

The pros for the Big 12 are: geographic proximity, a decent and improving football program (good stadium and improving record), an amazing basketball team with great tradition, quality academics (better than Louisville/WVU/UC), an in-conference basketball rival in Kansas, the Big 12 asserting its position by poaching from an "untouchable" conference, etc.

UK's never struck me as a SEC school; they don't fit the profile. They are the lone basketball school in a football conference............

Tell that to Florida, a team that has 2 titles since UK's last one in '98.

 

[shadow]

I like it and I agree that Kentucky really doesn't fit in as a SEC school where as Arkansas does fit in with the SEC.

Another idea to stick it to the SEC is to go after a school like Vanderbilt where I don't think they really fit in with the SEC.

Imagine loosing Mizzou, falling down to 8 teams but then adding Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Louisville and West Virginia. So the Big 12 actually has 12 teams in it and then the SEC has 12 team with the addition of Mizzou and A&M.

The only thing that would concern me with this move though is that the SEC would still potentially try to go after schools like Texas, Tech, TCU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, etc... to boost their strength back up and then the Big 12 is right back at the beginning of this mess.

TCU puts us at 9 teams without Missouri. But I like the idea. Drop WVU due to iffy geography, academics, and a tough place to get to. Go for Kentucky, Louisville, and Vanderbilt. Split the conference West/East. However, I doubt this would ever fly.

 

[DistrictCyclone]

Tell that to Florida, a team that has 2 titles since UK's last one in '98.

When Florida wins 7 titles, 105 tournament games in 51 appearances, and becomes the winningest program in history, I'll be happy to call them right up.

 

[DistrictCyclone]

The only thing that would concern me with this move though is that the SEC would still potentially try to go after schools like Texas, Tech, TCU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, etc... to boost their strength back up and then the Big 12 is right back at the beginning of this mess.

That's a great point, and I completely agree with you; getting into a war like this with the SEC probably makes the Big 12 a loser in the long-run. I'd rather the Big 12 lose aTm and Missery than OU and Texas.

 

[jdoggivjc]

When Florida wins 7 titles, 105 tournament games in 51 appearances, and becomes the winningest program in history, I'll be happy to call them right up.

Now be honest - were you able to post that without looking up those numbers?

Sports is a "What have you done for me lately?" thing. Sure, Kentucky is still more than a relevant basketball program, but nobody's going to UK anymore because Adolph Rupp and Rick Pitino won a bunch of championships there 20+ years ago.

 

[MNCyGuy]

Now be honest - were you able to post that without looking up those numbers?

Sports is a "What have you done for me lately?" thing. Sure, Kentucky is still more than a relevant basketball program, but nobody's going to UK anymore because Adolph Rupp and Rick Pitino won a bunch of championships there 20+ years ago.

No, they get recruits because of John Calipari. They can afford to have Calipari as their coach because Adolph Rupp and Rick Pitino won a bunch of championships there 20+ years ago.

 

[Die4Cy]

I like the idea. In fact I mentioned it myself in the monster thread several weeks ago. While it wopuld be a great choice for the Big 12, I just don't see a pile of incentive for KU to do it.

 

[Cyclophile1]

TCU puts us at 9 teams without Missouri. But I like the idea. Drop WVU due to iffy geography, academics, and a tough place to get to. Go for Kentucky, Louisville, and Vanderbilt. Split the conference West/East. However, I doubt this would ever fly.

Unfortunately, you are forgetting the fact that this is, first and foremost, about getting football matchups that ESPN and FOX are willing to pay $4-$5 million a game for. Your suggestion is thumb in the eye of the SEC that unfortunately does very little and would be a net loss for the Big12.

No one in the SEC would come out and say that they would LOVE to swap MU for Vanderbilt, but Vandy is nothing more than a mouth to feed in the SEC - one of those little fish that attach themselves to the big sharks. For crying out loud, Vandy caved to the bow-ties and dissolved the athletic department a few years ago. It would never happen, but the powers of the SEC would love to pull the ejection handle on Vandy and swap in Missouri.

 

[MNCyGuy]

Unfortunately, you are forgetting the fact that this is, first and foremost, about getting football matchups that ESPN and FOX are willing to pay $4-$5 million a game for. Your suggestion is thumb in the eye of the SEC that unfortunately does very little and would be a net loss for the Big12.

No one in the SEC would come out and say that they would LOVE to swap MU for Vanderbilt, but Vandy is nothing more than a mouth to feed in the SEC - one of those little fish that attach themselves to the big sharks. For crying out loud, Vandy caved to the bow-ties and dissolved the athletic department a few years ago. It would never happen, but the powers of the SEC would love to pull the ejection handle on Vandy and swap in Missouri.

I'm not saying adding Vandy is some great idea, but couldn't you argue that they would be more valuable to the Big 12 than they are to the SEC? The SEC owns the Nashville area already with Tennessee. The Big 12 has no presence in that area, so even the smaller profile of Vandy would benefit the conference.

 

[CycloneYoda]

When Florida wins 7 titles, 105 tournament games in 51 appearances, and becomes the winningest program in history, I'll be happy to call them right up.

You can respect the past and live in the now at the same time. Yes, UK has a strong tradition, but it is impossible to ignore the glaring fact that since 2000, Florida has been to 3 title games, winning two of them. Tradition has to star somewhere.

To claim UK as the only basketball school in the SEC is false due to the rise of Florida basketball. Truth.

 

[Mizzoulander]

This is a wild, and likely very dumb idea, but I'll throw it out there for the purpose of good conversation: why doesn't the Big 12 roll the dice and extend an invite to the University of Kentucky?

If Missouri goes, it would be great because it would get the Big 12 back to 10 members AND (the best part) it would keep the SEC stuck at 13. The Big 12 could further stick it to the SEC by inviting Kentucky, Louisville, and WVU, limiting their list of expansion candidates to Cincinnati or ACC members. If Missouri stays, Kentucky could be paired with one or three Big East teams to make the Big 12 either a 12 or 14 team conference, and it would put the SEC at 12 where they belong.

The pros for the Big 12 are: geographic proximity, a decent and improving football program (good stadium and improving record), an amazing basketball team with great tradition, quality academics (better than Louisville/WVU/UC), an in-conference basketball rival in Kansas, the Big 12 asserting its position by poaching from an "untouchable" conference, etc.

UK's never struck me as a SEC school; they don't fit the profile. They are the lone basketball school in a football conference, and they have just 2 football conference titles to their name. Before Missery, they were the northern outlier, closer to Indianapolis, Columbus, and Chicago than to Gainesville, Auburn, and Athens. Their only in-conference rival is a lopsided, half-hearted border war with Tennessee. Especially if they came packaged with Louisville and Cincinnati, they'd have their fiercest rival in conference and two teams within an hour and a half away.

The Big 12 would also be able to pitch having football that they'd be more competitive in. They've actually been fairly decent the past 5 years, but as Missouri will find out fast if they indeed make the move, 6-8 wins in the SEC gets you no respect. Those wins would mean a lot more in the Big 12, where they might even wrack up a few more.

Thoughts? I'm sure there are millions of reasons why this is a bad idea ($20+million of them, no doubt), but what does the Big 12 have to lose? If they make an effective argument that it would be better for both parties and it pays off, they pick up a dynamite basketball school with the potential to be a solid football school, gain access to the Louisville/Cincinnati markets, and show the SEC what's up. And if Kentucky says "no thanks"...the Big 12 gambled and lost nothing.

No offense, but a couple of questions:

1. Why would UK or Vandy want to leave the SEC, a stable and lucrative home, for the unsettled situation in the Big 12?

2. If UK is interested in in a league that values BB, why wouldn't they turn to the ACC first? Clearly, they want to keep expanding too. And no matter how good the B12 is in BB, it will NEVER match the fan intensity of the ACC. With the exception of KU, nobody in the B12 values BB WAAAY above football.

3. What exactly IS the "profile" of an SEC team? How does it compare to the "profile" of a B12 team? Seems like there are lots of variations between both conferences.

4. How many schools can the B12 offer an invite to before it just starts to look desperate (reinforcing the whole "unstable" message)? "Never hurts to ask" doesn't really hold true when you're talking about expanding a conference.

Trust me...as a fan of a team that has done a lot of "courting" lately. :smile:

 

[Cyhart]

When Florida wins 7 titles, 105 tournament games in 51 appearances, and becomes the winningest program in history, I'll be happy to call them right up.

If this is what it takes to be considered a successful college basketball program, then there arent too many successful college basketball programs in the nation.

 

[ruxCYtable]

it's a great idea. but whether they fit or not they're still raking in all that sec cash so I couldn't see it happening.

 

[DistrictCyclone]

No, they get recruits because of John Calipari. They can afford to have Calipari as their coach because Adolph Rupp and Rick Pitino won a bunch of championships there 20+ years ago.

Exactly.

 

[DistrictCyclone]

If this is what it takes to be considered a successful college basketball program, then there arent too many successful college basketball programs in the nation.

I'm not saying Florida's not successful; just pointing out that Kentucky is one of, if not the most succesful in history. Kentucky being good doesn't mean that Florida is not.