If they can grab Texas, TAMU, Colorado, Utah and they are forced to take Texas Tech, that leaves them at 15. I would assume that Oklahoma would be a natural 16th team? If not them, then UNLV?

From a football perspective, I'm sure they'd love to take Oklahoma. From an academic standpoint though, I think they'd prefer Nebraska.

It's probably a pipe-dream though - I'm afraid the Pac-10 Presidents are too conservative to act this boldly. And besides, they'd have to convince Texas that their revenues would increase, and at this point it's all speculation until they get a new TV deal and start figuring out a Pac-10 network and what kind of revenue that could generate.

One thing that has its advatange is that the UC president is also the former University of Texas president. (Not the school but the system) Most of the smaller schols would have to agree. The usual detractors are the California schools. If the UC's are on board, it probably would fall fairly quickly

I think the schools in the northwest (Washington, WSU, Oregon and Oregon State) are going to be against it as well unless a plan is written up that keeps their trips to Los Angeles intact.

I was speaking towards the schools that weren't the 9 that actually put money towards the general fund. Honestly, I was surprised that any did.

SI

Washington might have some pull and maybe oregon as well, but the every other year visit would probably be offset by the foray into Texas

If the Pac-10 were to go to 16 teams, I would guess it would operate more as two loosely affiliated conferences, with the old Pac-8 schools in one division and playing a full round-robin inter-division schedule plus 1-2 rotating games against teams from the other division (the Arizona schools, Utah, Colorado and whatever Texas schools and/or Nebraska/Oklahoma).

That would eliminate any concerns from the PNW schools about losing the annual trip to L.A. The only real scheduling issue would be how to schedule the 1-2 games with teams in the other division.

Maybe I'm naive here, but why would any Big 12 team outside of Colorado be interested in the Pac 10? If the Texas schools leave the Big 12, I would think it'd be for a conference like the SEC that already has a large tv contract in place.

No matter how this Big 10 expansion shakes out, I see the Big 12 remaining simply because Texas, Texas A&M, etc have little to gain from leaving. The SEC is the next big threat to expand and I wouldn't be surprised to see them go after a few ACC schools. The Big 12's tv contract is up in 2015 which means they'll likely create their own network. I've even seen it suggested that the Big 12 may do a joint network with someone such as the Pac 10. I don't know how far fetched that idea is though given the Big 12 rarely agrees with one another so I can't see them agreeing with the Pac 10. But I think at the end of the day the Big 12 will continue so long as the Texas schools are committed to it.

The PAC-10's contract is up next year, that's why it's a destination for Texas et al. If they load up on more schools, any existing contract negotiations would be basically torn up and they can get ESPN in a bidding war

Academics; whether it’s justified or not the Pac-10 is seen as an academic conference and the SEC is seen as a football factory conference.

And as far as Texas is concerned, if they join the Pac-10 the TV revenue will increase substantially. Of course they would have to get used to sharing that revenue equally, which might be hard for them to swallow. If the Big-12 only looses 1 or 2 teams I don’t see Texas going anywhere; but if the Big-10 goes ape shit and grabs a bunch of teams out of the North Division, and Colorado leaves, then who knows?

Exactly. In addition, the other conferences will renegotiate or rip up their contracts as well. There are clauses in all of these conference TV contracts that allow them to be voided or changed. Conference and team realignment\movement is one of those situations.

Adding Texas would certainly boost the Pac 10 revenue, but that's true of any conference they join. Even if they stay in the Big 12, they will most certainly boost their revenue in 2015 when they sign a new deal. Plus Texas isn't exactly hurting for money as is so I'm not seeing that as a big factor for them joining a conference. The money doesn't hurt, but I have to think there are other factors that are probably more important to them. Currently they are in a conference where the headquarters are in their backyard. I'm sure that will play a part as well.


Based on the rumors, the Big 12 is potentially looking at losing Nebraska, Missouri, and Colorado. Nebraska will probably be the biggest loss of the three because of their national following, but I honestly don't see the Cornhuskers leaving the Big 12. If it did happen though then it would hurt the Big 12, but they could off-set some of the damage by adding three new teams.

1. If Mizzou leaves which would trigger Colorado to leave, Nebraska won't have to be asked twice to leave. Judging from Harvey Perlman's comments when asked about expansion and Osborne's hatred for the old SWC teams, they'll be on the first plane to the Big Ten offices if asked.

2. I'd love to hear what three teams would offset the damage if Mizzou, NU, and CU left the conference.

Bingo. I have my doubts that research funding in the SEC is anywhere near what it is in the Pac-10.

I highly doubt Missouri leaving triggers Colorado. Colorado has more than enough ammunition to leave on their own. Out of all of the Big 12 schools they are the one who has always been on the outside looking in. Out of the three schools, Nebraska leaving would have the largest impact due to their national fan base. And Nebraska certainly owes itself to listen to the Big Ten to ensure their future. But again, I think when the time comes unless the Big 12 looks like it's in danger (Texas and Texas A&M leaving) then Nebraska will stay put.

The teams the Big 12 will look to add are teams like TCU, BYU, Utah, Memphis, New Mexico, etc. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Big 12 and Pac 10 partner up in some way if things go really crazy. Eventually the future BCS conferences could end up creating their own version of the NCAA (something that's already been discussed).

If Colorado and Missouri leave, that really kills two of the (if not the two) teams with the largest media markets outside the state of Texas. At that point, it pretty much depends on what, if, and how much Texas wants to continue inclusion in the Big 12.

Realistically, if the Big 12 replaces Missouri, Colorado, and Nebraska with TCU, BYU, and Utah (although they are probably likely to join Colorado in that scenario), wouldn't they probably be better off, from a stricly athletic standpoint, in football and men's basketball? I mean, if you absolutely had to bet on those teams playing one another in football over the past few years, you'd have to think all three would be favorites over Colorado, would probably be favored against Missouri, and it would be, at worst, toss-ups against Nebraska.

Hmm, one issue no one's mentioning is that Colorado leaving for the Pac 10 has more or less been linked to Utah also going to the Pac 10. In fact, it's Utah that's already the more or less given, and Colorado the one on the edge, if reports I have read/heard are true.

So whatever the B12 does, if they lose Colorado to Pac 10, it's doubtful Utah will still be available.

You're right in that losing St. Louis and Denver would be a blow, but again everything relies on Texas and Texas A&M. It is more likely the Big Ten or Pac 10 offer Texas and Texas A&M first before Colorado or Missouri. If Texas and Texas A&M leave first then the Big 12 would pretty much be done. So I'm not too concerned that MU or CU leaving would impact Texas' decision since at that point it is likely they would have already made their decision since they would have first choice.

TV markets are certainly important, but a program like Nebraska has a national fan base so in my opinion there is more value to NU than regional programs like MU and CU.

Actually word is the Pac 10 has already offered Colorado.

Colorado and Utah are the choices for now. I don't think the Pac 10 has gotten to the point where they are seriously considering going to 16 teams.

That might or might not be true if the Big 12 looks to expand. Utah would then have a choice. My guess is that the Big Ten expands before the Pac 10 and thus if there is an opening the Big 12 may come knocking on Utah's door before the Pac 10 does. There's a chance that Utah joins the Big 12 with Colorado remaining in the fold as well. Who knows how good of a chance.

Heh, not sure you're hearing me. Word on the rumor mill is the offers are already made, and if anything, Utah's already locked up. Also, with the Pac 10's TV contract up next year, they are under strong time pressure to get this done before they negotiate a new deal, while the Big 12 are not under that sort of pressure.

No way that the Big Ten takes Oxford without Cambridge.

Again as I suggested before those are rumors. I'll believe it when they are both signed. There are way too many rumors out there right now to start taking any of them at face value.

As for the tv contract unless I'm totally wrong about this, I can't imagine the Pac 10 couldn't just re-negotiate their tv deal if teams are added to the conference. So the tv contract shouldn't have much bearing on if they do or don't expand since they could opt to re-negotiate the deal.

The Big 12 is under the most pressure right now given that anywhere from one to three teams are rumored to be gone. If that happens then it could open up re-negotiation for their current tv deal. So they'll need to act fast if they want to remain the Big 12.

I think Rob Lowe would beg to differ.

That's kind of what I think a 16-team Pac would be - more of a merger with the bigger fish in the Big-12.

And if Colorado bolts for the Pac-10, Utah comes with them - that's the other team that would bump the conference up to an even 12. It seems likely both schools have been offered...

Yeah, but you're talking about the B12 reacting to these "rumors". Can't call one set of rumors true (Big Ten taking Mizzou/Nebraska) and assume the rest aren't or are just false or that the B12 will suddenly move from a wait and see mode to jumping past the Pac 10, which is already fully investigating its expansion options.

What I would like to eventually see is four or five "BCS conferences" that have anywhere from 64-100 teams. Cut out the eventual NCAA middle man and create your own improved version of the NCAA.

I'm not saying any of the rumors are true. I'm suggesting that the Big 12 needs to react to these rumors as if they are true and thus they better be contacting potential candidates as we speak. In all honesty though, I wouldn't be surprised if the Big 12 Commish is sitting on his hands as we speak given his incompetence. I'm just saying what I hope is happening though I have my doubts given the Commissioner.

As I said before, Colorado is the one program that I see with the most to gain by leaving simply because they already have relationships with the Pac 10. So I could see Colorado leaving for the Pac 10 unless the Big 12 can show it's serious about expanding. I think the Big Ten only takes one and maybe two programs on this expansion. Notre Dame is the obvious choice, but Pitt or UConn could be next in line. So there's a chance the Big 12 (if they are play their hand right) could leave this expansion unscathed. My confidence is low given the commissioner, but I'm not giving up hope just yet.

I think even if the Big-12 doesnt lose any teams to the Big-10, Colorado leaving might be just as well because TCU is probably as attractive at this juncture

I hear ya on the weak commissioner. I like the way the new guy we have thinks and his track record, but the best thing about him is he is not the staid and backward-thinking ex-commissioner Tom Hansen, whose only seeming positive quality in the office was his ability to remain in that office for way, way too long. He hamstrung conference efforts to expand to get a championship game, tied the conference to low tier bowls, locked the conference in to regional networks while everyone else was getting national pub on ESPN and pretty much anything that could be considered progressive was discarded as too risky. He was also commish while the conference featured some of the most awful refs in the country.

I'd hate to lose Colorado only to add another college from Texas. I'd much rather add a Memphis, BYU, Utah, etc. Of course the power of the Big 12 is in Texas so maybe they look in their backyard first. I hope not.

It's not more likely that UT or A&M get offered by the Big Ten before Mizzou. It's clear that Mizzou would be the Big Ten's first option out of the Big 12. The Texas to Big Ten ship has already sailed. It ain't happening.

If we're talking solely about athletics, your second statement about NU might hold weight. When you combine academics into the mix (which is exactly what the Big 10 is doing), Mizzou is the obvious choice over NU. Regardless, it would be a pretty big surprise if both of them weren't offered by the Big 10.

Because all of the other rumors in this thread have come true, so once something reaches rumor stage, people need to accept it as fact and stop discussing the possibility that its not true.

I know that scheduling, academics, and non-football sports make this impossible, but how cool would it be to convert the entire NCAA into a promotion/relegation model?

We can all agree that the U.S. News Rankings are flawed in many ways. But they do have Nebraska ranked higher than Mizzou. When you add athletic success and fan-base size into the mix, I don't see why MU is such a slam dunk choice over NU. It might still be the choice, but it does not seem to be much more than a toss-up, really.

You don't think that if Texas showed interest in the Big Ten that they wouldn't jump up and offer it to them over Missouri? The point of my argument was that if Texas was interested in leaving the Big 12 then they'd be first in line for the Big Ten (or SEC). And thus I feel safe that Texas isn't looking to leave the Big 12.

My second statement was with regards to fan base vs media markets. Missouri has the better media markets, but Nebraska has the better fan base which should result into more overall viewers.

And Albion hit the MU academics is greater than NU academics argument you're suggesting. They seem pretty close to me.

I would be all for that especially over the current system.

Oh, and just to be fair, if I had to choose a school for my son between the two, I'd probably want him to go to MU over NU. But only after I walked around the campus to make sure that the smell of Quinn Snyder's hair gel had finally dissipated. ;)

Texas isn't leaving because they'd have to take A&M and Tech with them. That's not going to happen in the Big Ten under any circumstances. It's a non-starter.

Your second measure is pretty subjective. Both have a wide ranging and active alumni base. Also, strictly from an athletic perspective, Mizzou has a much better basketball program and football is about the same between the two schools right now. Mizzou also has a hockey program, which is something the Big Ten is looking to improve, which is something that Nebraska doesn't currently have.

We'll let the U.S. News report stand on it's own merits, flawed as they may be as albion noted.

That's so cool of you to re-enact discussions we have already had, Samdari! Thanks for being such an entertaining poster and so onto current events here at the FOFC!

Hell, sounds an awful lot like the Big XII since its inception: silly tv deals, way too conservative with regards to helping the conference move foward, awful refs, etc. That's why I have a feeling if one of the big conferences is going to be ripped apart (aside from the Big East- that's pretty much a given), it probably will be the Big XII. They'll be in react mode the whole time and be dealing with contingencies they didn't even plan for.

SI

BP has deployed booms across the campus in an attempt to control the continuing gel problem.

Right, you whining "but guys, MY rumors are true, quit acting like they're not fact. WAAAAAHHH" is much more entertaining.

I mentioned it in the post you quoted above. ;)

I guarantee you that the Big Ten would take Texas A&M and Texas if they were tied together. Texas Tech is just a rumor at this point, but I highly doubt the Big Ten would turn their nose up at taking them if it meant they could grab Texas and Texas A&M. There is just way too much tv revenue and fan base tied up into those two programs. Again though, the point remains. Texas is likely not leaving the Big 12 for any conference.

Nebraska football has a long tradition of success. They were one of the football powerhouses in the 90's with a few national titles in tow. You're very biased if you believe MU has a fan base as strong nationally as the Huskers. MU football may be equal to NU football as far as on the field talent right now, but the NU fan base has been growing since when...the 80's at least?

Hockey? Really? You don't think Nebraska couldn't scratch together a hockey program with their budget? They have a much larger budget than Missouri so I'm sure a hockey program wouldn't too difficult to drum up.

Stronger legacy? In football, yes. In basketball, no. As good as NU has been in football, they've been extremely poor in basketball. They are one of a short list of major conference teams to never win a NCAA tournament game. Stronger fan base? Really depends of your definition of that. They've fallen pretty hard in recent years.

NU can afford to be extremely poor in basketball since they were extremely good for so long in football. The fact is they have multiple national titles under their belt in the last 20+ years. That means they were front and center of the college football world for a while. They've certainly declined since then, but that doesn't destroy the fan base. See Kentucky basketball, Notre Dame football, etc.

So are you suggesting that Missouri has a larger fan base nationally than Nebraska?

You've switched your argument from stronger to larger here, but we're arguing semantics at this point. Mizzou was and still is the #1 option for the Big Ten in regards to expansion. There's little question about that.

My point is, read the following posts to see that meanstrosity pretty much already had that conversation, and I would rather let that stand than repeat that conversation with you, Mr. Reading Comprehension.

Speaking of reading comprehension... :p