Big 12 expansion

[Lone Clone]

I'm not totally up on the financials of every conference other than the Big 10 and SEC r much better off than the rest and getting richer. OU is pushing to get something done with the Big 12 as far as a network and dealing with Texas. They would also like to improve the Big 12's chances of getting into the playoffs. Their President Boron would like expansion but will listen to other conferences if expansion is voted down. He's has the political clout within the state of Oklahoma to probably get it done without involving OSU. Being a once 2 term Governor and Senator of that state plus his son is now the Senator. OU is not going to wait 20 yrs. before something is done.

As I said, right now the Big XII, SEC and BiG are pretty much the same in terms of payouts to members. The BiG is going to get richer faster no matter what anybody else does because of all the TV sets, which is what hurts the Big XII most. That's why the gossip is about Cincinnati, Colorado State, UConn......schools in major TV markets. But nobody in Ohio cares about Cincy and nobody in Colorado cares about anything except the professional teams, and I doubt UConn would bring many viewers despite the population base.

OU president Boren has been slapped down by the conference and by his own board of regents, but there certainly is a lot of sentiment for expansion. Personally, I think it's a coin flip as to whether expanding increases the odds of getting into the playoffs. Back when the Big XII had a championship game and nobody else did, all we heard was how stupid it was because about half the time there was an upset and it cost the league a shot at a national title. It works both ways.

Obviously, if OU or Texas were to bail out and go elsewhere, it would be a serious blow to the remaining schools. But if either of them were to do that, it would cost them megabucks; their television rights would stay with the conference. Makes a departure a whole lot less attractive.

I just ran across the linked column. It's interesting reading if you're interested in this subject.
http://landgrantgauntlet.com/2016/0...l-four-but-expansion-hinges-on-texas-the-acc/

 

[grosie#2]

As I said, right now the Big XII, SEC and BiG are pretty much the same in terms of payouts to members. The BiG is going to get richer faster no matter what anybody else does because of all the TV sets, which is what hurts the Big XII most. That's why the gossip is about Cincinnati, Colorado State, UConn......schools in major TV markets. But nobody in Ohio cares about Cincy and nobody in Colorado cares about anything except the professional teams, and I doubt UConn would bring many viewers despite the population base.

OU president Boren has been slapped down by the conference and by his own board of regents, but there certainly is a lot of sentiment for expansion. Personally, I think it's a coin flip as to whether expanding increases the odds of getting into the playoffs. Back when the Big XII had a championship game and nobody else did, all we heard was how stupid it was because about half the time there was an upset and it cost the league a shot at a national title. It works both ways.

Obviously, if OU or Texas were to bail out and go elsewhere, it would be a serious blow to the remaining schools. But if either of them were to do that, it would cost them megabucks; their television rights would stay with the conference. Makes a departure a whole lot less attractive.

I just ran across the linked column. It's interesting reading if you're interested in this subject.
http://landgrantgauntlet.com/2016/0...l-four-but-expansion-hinges-on-texas-the-acc/

Interesting article. I have heard that when Rick Nuehisel asked Mack Brown about 2 yrs. ago what conference he thought Texas will end up at, he stated the ACC. Unless TCU and Texas Tech vote for the expansion against Texas's wishes, the Big 12 maybe done. Texas holds most of the cards and the ACC is willing to deal.

 

[Lone Clone]

Interesting article. I have heard that when Rick Nuehisel asked Mack Brown about 2 yrs. ago what conference he thought Texas will end up at, he stated the ACC. Unless TCU and Texas Tech vote for the expansion against Texas's wishes, the Big 12 maybe done. Texas holds most of the cards and the ACC is willing to deal.

There are no limits to the number of scenarios I've seen. This one -- Texas moving to the ACC -- is as likely as Arkansas & LSU moving to the Big XII, which is another one I saw today.

 

[ichawk24]

Boren just said yesterday that expansion only makes sense if they put together a conference network. Without a network, no expansion.

LHN is blocking a conference network, and LHN ain't going away.

Status quo in the B12. We will see of OU jumps ship. I think it is highly unlikely until the ~2023 time frame.

 

[grosie#2]

Listen to the AD of KSU on Full Ride. Stated that he thought the Big 12 has a lot to offer. Even though they don't have a network their conference plays games on ESPN, FS1, and ABC. He thought their teams got good TV coverage. When asked if KSU had a backup plan if the league crashed. He said he expects the conference to last but they would be less than honest if they hadn't thought about all their options. Sounds like a glass half full kind of guy hoping the Big 12 stays together.

 

[whatsup13579er]

Listen to the AD of KSU on Full Ride. Stated that he thought the Big 12 has a lot to offer. Even though they don't have a network their conference plays games on ESPN, FS1, and ABC. He thought their teams got good TV coverage. When asked if KSU had a backup plan if the league crashed. He said he expects the conference to last but they would be less than honest if they hadn't thought about all their options. Sounds like a glass half full kind of guy hoping the Big 12 stays together.

That's because KSU's options are about as bad as ISU's if the Big 12 folds. Their only hope is that they can hitch their wagon to KU.

 

[DodgerHawki]

Listen to the AD of KSU on Full Ride. Stated that he thought the Big 12 has a lot to offer. Even though they don't have a network their conference plays games on ESPN, FS1, and ABC. He thought their teams got good TV coverage. When asked if KSU had a backup plan if the league crashed. He said he expects the conference to last but they would be less than honest if they hadn't thought about all their options. Sounds like a glass half full kind of guy hoping the Big 12 stays together.

He is saying exactly what the AD of a school in a low-population state like Kansas or Iowa would be saying. I am the biggest Hawkeye homer there is, but realize Iowa had the good fortune of joining the Big 10 many decades ago. And that the Big 10 has a long-standing commitment to all of its members, not just to 1 or 2. Michigan and Ohio State could have caused huge problems for the conference if they had decided to create their own network instead of agreeing to solidarity with the other league teams in forming the BTN.

There would be no good options for Iowa should the B1G ever be in a similar position as the B12. Just like there really aren't good options for Iowa State or K-State if the B12 disbands.

 

[Lone Clone]

That's because KSU's options are about as bad as ISU's if the Big 12 folds. Their only hope is that they can hitch their wagon to KU.

KSU and ISU are in analogous positions, except for the KU angle (which isn't as significant as it is in Oklahoma, judging from what I've read about it).

This is the point I've tried to make here a couple of times, with varying success. First, that the view of the Big XII's situation held by a number of posters is simply not accurate. The league members have outstanding television coverage, and currently members are getting as much or more revenues from the league as members of any other conference, including the SEC. The Big XII has been a godsend financially for Iowa State. I personally liked the old Big Eight better, but I'm a traditionalist, and I realize it couldn't survive in today's college athletics world. In almost every respect, ISU is better off in its conference situation now than ever in its history.

One of the exceptions is the geographical isolation. With Nebraska and Missouri gone, only two league members are in reasonable driving distance. The isolation is a factor that also works against ISU when people start talking about major reorganizations and regrouping. Unlike KSU, which has Kansas, ISU is out by its lonesome. And it doesn't have either a major population base or recruiting base; the state is limited in both respects, and Iowa gets a majority of what's available.

ISU and KSU are in the same situation as a number of schools in every major conference. They bring enough to the table to be a valuable member, but if everything were being started over, they wouldn't be high-priority recruits for a new league.

 

[DodgerHawki]

KSU and ISU are in analogous positions, except for the KU angle (which isn't as significant as it is in Oklahoma, judging from what I've read about it).

This is the point I've tried to make here a couple of times, with varying success. First, that the view of the Big XII's situation held by a number of posters is simply not accurate. The league members have outstanding television coverage, and currently members are getting as much or more revenues from the league as members of any other conference, including the SEC. The Big XII has been a godsend financially for Iowa State. I personally liked the old Big Eight better, but I'm a traditionalist, and I realize it couldn't survive in today's college athletics world. In almost every respect, ISU is better off in its conference situation now than ever in its history.

One of the exceptions is the geographical isolation. With Nebraska and Missouri gone, only two league members are in reasonable driving distance. The isolation is a factor that also works against ISU when people start talking about major reorganizations and regrouping. Unlike KSU, which has Kansas, ISU is out by its lonesome. And it doesn't have either a major population base or recruiting base; the state is limited in both respects, and Iowa gets a majority of what's available.

ISU and KSU are in the same situation as a number of schools in every major conference. They bring enough to the table to be a valuable member, but if everything were being started over, they wouldn't be high-priority recruits for a new league.

Lone, where are you getting your revenue numbers from? This is from CBS Sports from Dec. 2015. Texas and Oklahoma are both in top 5 in athletic revenues, with the average B12 athletic revenues at $99 million. SEC led at average of $110M and B1G at $103M average revenue. The numbers for the B1G will jump significantly with the new TV deal kicking in next year. The B12 is doing fine compared to the ACC and Pac-12, but appears to be falling behind the SEC and B10.

CBS Sports

I think the B12 is fine as long as Texas and Oklahoma can co-exist.

 

[Lone Clone]

Lone, where are you getting your revenue numbers from? This is from CBS Sports from Dec. 2015. Texas and Oklahoma are both in top 5 in athletic revenues, with the average B12 athletic revenues at $99 million. SEC led at average of $110M and B1G at $103M average revenue. The numbers for the B1G will jump significantly with the new TV deal kicking in next year. The B12 is doing fine compared to the ACC and Pac-12, but appears to be falling behind the SEC and B10.

CBS Sports

I think the B12 is fine as long as Texas and Oklahoma can co-exist.

Revenue numbers were from CBS sports, I think last month. Didn't I link the story? My bad if not. But it looks like you're talking about apples and I'm talking about oranges. I never said anything about overall budgets/revenues. I've been commenting solely about what the schools get from their respective conferences.

Big XII overall revenues are always going to be lower than the BiG and SEC because of the football attendance. ISU has, I think, the third-largest stadium in the league, and it would be well below average in the other two conferences.

 

[CradleKing26]

Colorado State wants to build a new football stadium even though there is some opposition to the plan. If the Rams some how get that new stadium built, they will get an offer to join the B12.

Fort Collins would not be a hard sell for recruits.

 

[Lone Clone]

Fort Collins would not be a hard sell for recruits.

I don't know about that. Every time I went to Boulder, I wondered why any athlete would choose to go anywhere else. Nice campus, incredible scenery, lots of things to do, and the place is absolutely overrun by beautiful blonde coeds. Good academics, too. Yet the Buffaloes never seemed to recruit all that well.

 

[NevadaHawk]

Fort Collins would not be a hard sell for recruits.

Agreed, Ft. Collins is a very beautiful place.

 

[MITCH492]

Ft. Collins is a great place.

I think the Big 12 would be well served inviting CSU join the conference. In the long run it would be a great move considering the population growth along the front range. CU fans won't want to hear this, but CSU will experience exceptional growth in coming years too. The average B12 football stadium capacity is right at 61,911 (or 57,400 when you take the Texas Memorial Stadium's 100,119 out of the equasion). The 57,400 to 61,911 average stadium capacity of the B12 seems to make CSU's stadium project fit in. From what I remember CSU will have 40,000 with room to grow. Baylor's stadium only holds 46,000.

 

[wyohawk]

Ft. Collins is a great place.

I think the Big 12 would be well served inviting CSU join the conference. In the long run it would be a great move considering the population growth along the front range. CU fans won't want to hear this, but CSU will experience exceptional growth in coming years too. The average B12 football stadium capacity is right at 61,911 (or 57,400 when you take the Texas Memorial Stadium's 100,119 out of the equasion). The 57,400 to 61,911 average stadium capacity of the B12 seems to make CSU's stadium project fit in. From what I remember CSU will have 40,000 with room to grow. Baylor's stadium only holds 46,000.

Does the big 12 really want another KSU, TTU, OSU, or ISU in the mix? No amount of growth and attendance projections will ever change the little brother status of that school in a state that, as has already been said, doesn't give a lick about college football.

 

[paednoch23]

I've been perusing the boards for Oklahoma. I'm beginning to agree with some of their posters who say Boren and OK are gonna leave and are trying to do so diplomatically. I'm gonna guess here that the sooners are gonzo. We are seeing the last moments of the Big 12. It will be devastating for some of those schools left out. There has to be much anxiety in Ames...especially in the AD office.

 

[Lone Clone]

I've been perusing the boards for Oklahoma. I'm beginning to agree with some of their posters who say Boren and OK are gonna leave and are trying to do so diplomatically. I'm gonna guess here that the sooners are gonzo. We are seeing the last moments of the Big 12. It will be devastating for some of those schools left out. There has to be much anxiety in Ames...especially in the AD office.

Where are they going to go, and under what circumstances?

 

[bdg8]

I don't know about that. Every time I went to Boulder, I wondered why any athlete would choose to go anywhere else. Nice campus, incredible scenery, lots of things to do, and the place is absolutely overrun by beautiful blonde coeds. Good academics, too. Yet the Buffaloes never seemed to recruit all that well.

They sure did in the late 80's and early to mid 90's. Clearly they have not found the right coach since Mac

 

[paednoch23]

Where are they going to go, and under what circumstances?

I don't know. I am not an insider. This is a message board and I was offering my speculation. I think David Boren is playing the "we wanted to keep the conference together" card. There is just strange about this whole ordeal. Last January he gave cryptic remarks about standing invitations from the BIG and the comments about being 1/2 hour from leaving. I went over to the Sooner boards and I see people saying the same thing...he is sandbagging prior to packing up and moving on to another conference. I haven't a clue where to maybe the BIG maybe the SEC who knows...maybe nowhere..

 

[Lone Clone]

I don't know. I am not an insider. This is a message board and I was offering my speculation. I think David Boren is playing the "we wanted to keep the conference together" card. There is just strange about this whole ordeal. Last January he gave cryptic remarks about standing invitations from the BIG and the comments about being 1/2 hour from leaving. I went over to the Sooner boards and I see people saying the same thing...he is sandbagging prior to packing up and moving on to another conference. I haven't a clue where to maybe the BIG maybe the SEC who knows...maybe nowhere..

I didn't mean for my response to be snarky. Sorry if it seemed that way.

I asked the question because from everything I've heard, the BiG -- despite the Nebraska embarrassment -- is still putting a lot of emphasis on academics, specifically membership in the AAU. Oklahoma is not a member.

So if the BiG is off the table, we're looking basically at the SEC or the Pac-12. Neither seems particularly likely, for a number of reasons. The Pac-12 lags well behind the Big XII in terms of revenues, and OU has nothing in common geographically with any of the current members. The SEC might take OU, but would OU want to submerge itself in that league?

Moreover, since we're talking almost solely about money, the matter of GOR cannot be ignored. Switching conferences takes on an entirely different perspective when you are going to lose ALL your television rights (and revenues) for a decade or so.

 

[Niko13]

They sure did in the late 80's and early to mid 90's. Clearly they have not found the right coach since Mac

Colorado's biggest problem with recruits is facility upgrades. From what I understand they haven't updated a single football facility (outside of minor things to Folsom Field) since the late 70's early 80's. Some of their former football players have been very vocal about it on social media in the past.

 

[whatsup13579er]

I didn't mean for my response to be snarky. Sorry if it seemed that way.

I asked the question because from everything I've heard, the BiG -- despite the Nebraska embarrassment -- is still putting a lot of emphasis on academics, specifically membership in the AAU. Oklahoma is not a member.

So if the BiG is off the table, we're looking basically at the SEC or the Pac-12. Neither seems particularly likely, for a number of reasons. The Pac-12 lags well behind the Big XII in terms of revenues, and OU has nothing in common geographically with any of the current members. The SEC might take OU, but would OU want to submerge itself in that league?

Moreover, since we're talking almost solely about money, the matter of GOR cannot be ignored. Switching conferences takes on an entirely different perspective when you are going to lose ALL your television rights (and revenues) for a decade or so.

I agree that the B1G is off the table for OU. They just aren't a very good fit. The ACC should swoop in and give OU and KU a deal that is too good to pass up. Adding OU to Miami, Florida State, and Clemson makes ACC football more intriguing. Adding KU to Duke, UNC, etc. would make ACC basketball really, really good.

 

[hawkssox1]

[
I do not believe Nebraska[/QUOTE]

I agree that the B1G is off the table for OU. They just aren't a very good fit.

According to who?

 

[SoDakHawk]

Oklahoma sees itself as one of the premier football programs in the country. The only way to maintain that status is to bridge the widening revenue gap between the have and have not conferences. When looking at it in those terms there are only two possible destinations for OU athletics that will be acceptable, the BIG and the SEC.

I think OU is lining things up so that they can make the case that they will become financially disadvantaged if they don't leave the conference. They are setting things in motion to make the case for leaving.

 

[DodgerHawki]

Revenue numbers were from CBS sports, I think last month. Didn't I link the story? My bad if not. But it looks like you're talking about apples and I'm talking about oranges. I never said anything about overall budgets/revenues. I've been commenting solely about what the schools get from their respective conferences.

Big XII overall revenues are always going to be lower than the BiG and SEC because of the football attendance. ISU has, I think, the third-largest stadium in the league, and it would be well below average in the other two conferences.

Gotcha.

 

[DodgerHawki]

I didn't mean for my response to be snarky. Sorry if it seemed that way.

I asked the question because from everything I've heard, the BiG -- despite the Nebraska embarrassment -- is still putting a lot of emphasis on academics, specifically membership in the AAU. Oklahoma is not a member.

So if the BiG is off the table, we're looking basically at the SEC or the Pac-12. Neither seems particularly likely, for a number of reasons. The Pac-12 lags well behind the Big XII in terms of revenues, and OU has nothing in common geographically with any of the current members. The SEC might take OU, but would OU want to submerge itself in that league?

Moreover, since we're talking almost solely about money, the matter of GOR cannot be ignored. Switching conferences takes on an entirely different perspective when you are going to lose ALL your television rights (and revenues) for a decade or so.

The B1G puts emphasis on academics, to be sure. But the fact that nary a peep was mentioned when Nebraska lost its AAU membership means that it is a desired qualification rather than a requirement. If the B1G were able to arrange for OU to join the league, the presidents wouldn't refuse them for the AAU thing.

GOR are obviously a big deal. My guess is we'll find out how ironclad the GOR agreements are at some point in the near future.

 

[Lone Clone]

The B1G puts emphasis on academics, to be sure. But the fact that nary a peep was mentioned when Nebraska lost its AAU membership means that it is a desired qualification rather than a requirement. If the B1G were able to arrange for OU to join the league, the presidents wouldn't refuse them for the AAU thing.

GOR are obviously a big deal. My guess is we'll find out how ironclad the GOR agreements are at some point in the near future.

I thought the BiG added Rutgers instead of UConn because of the AAU angle. It would seem the Huskies would have been a better choice for all the other reasons.

As for OU going to the ACC......I guess I could see that, but it would be a step down for the Boomers in football, and that's the only sport they really care about in Norman. They've had very good basketball teams, but who cares? I'm pretty sure the only game they sold out this year was ISU -- this is a team that was #1 in the polls for a time. If Iowa or ISU were #1, tickets for playing the lousiest double-directional non-conference game would be going for megabucks.

But Boren isn't stupid. He obviously has something in mind.

 

[And1Hawk]

I thought the BiG added Rutgers instead of UConn because of the AAU angle. It would seem the Huskies would have been a better choice for all the other reasons

I disagree and comments like this show how uninformed some folks are. Rutgers is a very good academic institution and its network of campuses comprise around 60k+ students which is almost the same as Iowa/ISU combined. They are either number 5 or 6 in the B1G in terms of total research dollars already. Dollars which amount to 4-5x the entire Texas athletics budget which we all know is huge.

It's situated in the NYC/NJ region of approximately 20+ million people which is more than 6x Iowa's population. You only need a very small % of interest to eclipse Iowa's or ISU's draw.

Rutgers football has a bigger stadium than UCONN (53k v 40k). Yes UCONN adds a stadium of 40k! Rutgers football had a pretty good run under Schiano and has won a bowl game more recently than Iowa or ISU.

UCONN owns both men's and women's basketball for sure and Rutgers has struggled quite a bit no doubt. Keep in mind this is a school that has not been flushed with cash/resources and will not be until earning a full share from B1G membership which takes a few years to become vested. There's potential to grow with resources over time.

There's a little more to it and if each of our members gets a check for 45+ million a year in the near future then we can all give some thanks to Rutgers & Maryland.

 

[Lone Clone]

I disagree and comments like this show how uninformed some folks are. Rutgers is a very good academic institution and its network of campuses comprise around 60k+ students which is almost the same as Iowa/ISU combined. They are either number 5 or 6 in the B1G in terms of total research dollars already. Dollars which amount to 4-5x the entire Texas athletics budget which we all know is huge.

It's situated in the NYC/NJ region of approximately 20+ million people which is more than 6x Iowa's population. You only need a very small % of interest to eclipse Iowa's or ISU's draw.

Rutgers football has a bigger stadium than UCONN (53k v 40k). Yes UCONN adds a stadium of 40k! Rutgers football had a pretty good run under Schiano and has won a bowl game more recently than Iowa or ISU.

UCONN owns both men's and women's basketball for sure and Rutgers has struggled quite a bit no doubt. Keep in mind this is a school that has not been flushed with cash/resources and will not be until earning a full share from B1G membership which takes a few years to become vested. There's potential to grow with resources over time.

There's a little more to it and if each of our members gets a check for 45+ million a year in the near future then we can all give some thanks to Rutgers & Maryland.

I thought UConn had a better football program in recent years. If not, I stand corrected. The rest of what you wrote supports my position, which is that the BiG still claims to put a high priority on academics.

I also assumed UConn and Rutgers are in basically the same TV market area. Is that not the case?

 

[And1Hawk]

I thought UConn had a better football program in recent years. If not, I stand corrected. The rest of what you wrote supports my position, which is that the BiG still claims to put a high priority on academics.

I also assumed UConn and Rutgers are in basically the same TV market area. Is that not the case?

UCONN has been fairly competitive over the years in FCS football but what does a 40k stadium with a 31k enrollment (half of Rutgers) say about their presence in the NYC/NJ market? There's a reason they are still on the board and not in a power 5 conference. When looking at the total package Rutgers >> UCONN despite the talking points people try to push.

 

[paednoch23]

Again I am just a football fan sharing my uneducated opinion but its seems to me that OK is up to something regarding the conference and I wouldn't be surprised to find out they were grooming and scheming to exit the conference. Maybe even try to implode the conference due the GOR issue.

 

[whatsup13579er]

[
According to who?

According to me. I don't think OU is a good fit. The only thing they have going for them is they are a national football brand. They don't fit academically or geographically and Oklahoma is a small population state. Would adding OU be enough to get BTN into the Dallas/FW market? DFW is nearly double the population of Oklahoma and is the largest metro area in the South.

The B1G puts emphasis on academics, to be sure. But the fact that nary a peep was mentioned when Nebraska lost its AAU membership means that it is a desired qualification rather than a requirement. If the B1G were able to arrange for OU to join the league, the presidents wouldn't refuse them for the AAU thing.

GOR are obviously a big deal. My guess is we'll find out how ironclad the GOR agreements are at some point in the near future.

I remember hearing rumblings that the B1G brass was none too happy that Nebby had their AAU membership revoked and that Nebby may or may not have hid the fact that they knew it was going to happen.

However, and I can't believe I'm about to defend Nebby, I think they reason they got it taken away had more to do with how the college is structured or how Ag funding is counted (or something like that) more than their shoddy academics.

 

[SoDakHawk]

To defend Nebraska (can't believe I am doing this) I believe a lot of their research grant money comes from the USDA and are not considered competitive grants. I don't know how the whole thing operates but from what I understand Nebraska is a big research university it's just the stuff they do does not check the necessary boxes for the AAU people. That and the med school is structured under the UN-O umbrella. Nebraska is still a good school and beings in a lot of dollars, it's more about how the school is structured and the sources of the research dollars they bring in.

 

[Lone Clone]

To defend Nebraska (can't believe I am doing this) I believe a lot of their research grant money comes from the USDA and are not considered competitive grants. I don't know how the whole thing operates but from what I understand Nebraska is a big research university it's just the stuff they do does not check the necessary boxes for the AAU people. That and the med school is structured under the UN-O umbrella. Nebraska is still a good school and beings in a lot of dollars, it's more about how the school is structured and the sources of the research dollars they bring in.

I think the situation is similar at ISU......a couple of years ago, there was scuttlebutt that ISU's position in the AAU wasn't all that secure, but apparently that was incorrect.

 

[grosie#2]

The biggest problem for the Big 12 expansion is that they're isn't any big name schools, other than ND, to add to the conference. If ND goes anywhere it will be the ACC. I think within 5 yrs. the Big 12 will dissolve and it will become the power 4 conferences. It's about money and how much is left to go around. The Big sports networks are pretty much done spending hundreds of millions of dollars for conferences that have only a few big name teams. The conference most vulnerable to having teams going elsewhere is the Big 12. As soon as they get the money they want, the likes of Texas and OU will be gone.

 

[bdg8]

Colorado's biggest problem with recruits is facility upgrades. From what I understand they haven't updated a single football facility (outside of minor things to Folsom Field) since the late 70's early 80's. Some of their former football players have been very vocal about it on social media in the past.

But it is possible to win there with right coach . But you are totally right and their last couple hires show that no high end candidate will consider coaching there until they stop being cheap and put money into program

 

[hawkssox1]

The biggest problem for the Big 12 expansion is that they're isn't any big name schools, other than ND, to add to the conference.


So you do not think Oklahoma and Texas are big name schools?Interesting.

 

[Lone Clone]

The biggest problem for the Big 12 expansion is that they're isn't any big name schools, other than ND, to add to the conference. If ND goes anywhere it will be the ACC. I think within 5 yrs. the Big 12 will dissolve and it will become the power 4 conferences. It's about money and how much is left to go around. The Big sports networks are pretty much done spending hundreds of millions of dollars for conferences that have only a few big name teams. The conference most vulnerable to having teams going elsewhere is the Big 12. As soon as they get the money they want, the likes of Texas and OU will be gone.

Now you're getting into semantics. Would you consider Rutgers and Maryland "big name" schools?

I would not consider them as big a name as Florida State, which is one of the possibilities being rumored for a Big XII expansion.

I think you are right about the TV megacontracts being peaked out.

I have no freaking idea what will be happening five years from now.

I also have no freaking idea what you mean by "As soon as they get the money they want, the likes of Texas and OU will be gone."

 

[whatsup13579er]

Now you're getting into semantics. Would you consider Rutgers and Maryland "big name" schools?

I would not consider them as big a name as Florida State, which is one of the possibilities being rumored for a Big XII expansion.

Florida State jumping from the ACC to the Big12 is a pipe dream.

 

[Hoosker Du]

I didn't mean for my response to be snarky. Sorry if it seemed that way.

I asked the question because from everything I've heard, the BiG -- despite the Nebraska embarrassment -- is still putting a lot of emphasis on academics, specifically membership in the AAU. Oklahoma is not a member.

So if the BiG is off the table, we're looking basically at the SEC or the Pac-12. Neither seems particularly likely, for a number of reasons. The Pac-12 lags well behind the Big XII in terms of revenues, and OU has nothing in common geographically with any of the current members. The SEC might take OU, but would OU want to submerge itself in that league?

Moreover, since we're talking almost solely about money, the matter of GOR cannot be ignored. Switching conferences takes on an entirely different perspective when you are going to lose ALL your television rights (and revenues) for a decade or so.

"The Nebraska Embarrassment"as you call it, was a result of our Medical Center not being able to be included in our university system during the AAU review process for some strange reason. That is the only reason why we lost our AAU standing. Well, that and the fact that some dyke Chancellor from Wisconsin, and Michigan voted us out because we have a higher than average number of classes dedicated to agriculture. Imagine that, Nebraska with a lot of Ag classes.

BTW, ISU is still ranked lower than us in US News and World Report. If the AAU did a fair review, and included our Med Center, we would have never lost AAU status.