I know you'd be able to count one one hand, with fingers left over, the number of times in my lifetime you'd be able to even *think* about the possibility...but if Missouri went to the Big Ten and Kansas to the Pac-10, a Mizzou/Kansas Rose Bowl would be pretty epic.

Like UConn, Syracuse and whichever of Nova, GTown and Pitt are really good that year, a strong three. Toss in Washington with what Romar's been able to do up there and an always fairly strong Oklahoma squad, and that's as strong a top five as most places. If Cuse is one of the new entries to the Big 10, that probably weakens the Big East as well, so that the Pac 16 would probably be the strongest basketball conference in the country. They would also probably move past the ACC and at least get even with the SEC in baseball.

Or the lowest rated Rose Bowl ever.

The weird thing is I want A&M to the SEC BECAUSE I am sure it will make A&M better. A&M's athletic department success right now isn't very attractive. Getting another Mississippi State level athletic department doesn't excite me. But I agree with this blog wholeheartedly. The SEC provides A&M a chance to keep their tradition and remarket themselves in a way that can better compete with Texas, Oklahoma, and unfortunately even LSU for recruits.

If the SEC takes the good football teams from the ACC, I want to see a conference with all the basketball leftovers, lets get UConn, Syracuse, Duke, UNC and Kansas all together. NC State and Wake are welcome too, so is anyone in the Big East who feels left out, and I'd love to have Mizzou too, it'd be better than the mountain west and I have lots of mizzou friends and acquaintances and would enjoy playing them in basketball every year.

:D

I agree. I see a little of Arkansas in A&M oddly. Our AD had the guts to get the hell away from Texas at exactly the right time. I'd like to see A&M jump at the chance, frankly. A little sad to see OU and OSU still attached to the Texas tit so blatantly. I would probably feel the same way about either of them if they showed the slightest desire to get the hell out.

I can't imagine going to the PAC whatever and knowing they accepted you just so they could get Texas.

The reason OU and Texas are trying to stay together is for the red river shootout. That's a huge game for both fanbases and having to face a big 10 or SEC schedule and having that as a nonconference game would be intense. If it's a conference game, it allows for a more manageable schedule - esp considering the desire to be undefeated for the BCS.

I mentioned it earlier, but the KU-MU game in 2007 was the highest rated regular season TV game of the year.

Fixed.

To be fair, you have to consider the context, given both teams were looking at possible BCS spots in a very good Big 12 that season.

That said, I agree with you that it's still going to be a decently watched bowl game, were it to happen.

I'll admit that part of my bias for adding Kansas is due to having some good friends that are huge Kansas alums/fans, but the idea of having the Jayhawks basketball program in the conference is awesome IMO.

No offense to Utah - they'd be a great fit for the conference in many respects.

Athletic Department revenue: 2007-08:

Texas A&M $74.8M (21st, would be good enought for 8th in the SEC)
Mississippi State: $30.4M (75th, and lowest among all BCS schools)

Didn't mean to compare them cash wise, I know A&M does fine there, was an extension of the previous sentence when I was talking about success. I would measure the current success/prestige level of the major and semi major sports for those two schools very evenly. With Texas A&M having a lot of upward potential, Miss St, not so much.

Even with that revenue, the A&M athletic program is currently $16M in the red.

That's not exactly correct. They have $16M in debt, which they service every year. So, yes, they have debt, but they are not operating at a deficit (or at least a very large one). Most schools have debt on the books in various forms--bonds they've sold to finance stadium projects or flat out loans. Very different from operating at a deficit.

How sick would an expanded ACC be in basketball with something like this:

Current ACC plus:
Cuse
Uconn
Pitt
Kansas

Lets do it!

Even better.

According to the NCAA Financial Reports Database ( NCAA Financial Reports Database | IndyStar.com ) A&M has a revenue of 64.2mil and expenses of 58.8mil.

By comparison, Missouri has a revenue of 46.8 mil and expenses of 46.3 mil.

Where do you see 56.3? Im looking at the list right now and im seeing 46.3, which would put Mizzou in the black...

Ya, its easy to make burns when you simply change the figures from the link you post :popcorn:

Typo :(.

Yes, 46.3 - putting them barely in the black, vs. A&M's significant profit where MBBF was trying to take a stab at them.

Initial post edited.

K deleted my post. I love that pic though. find something else so I can use it :(

Wait, I thought there were a bunch of posts that MU was already signed and they were just waiting for the right time to announce it. I believe on Monday or Tuesday we were told 36-48 hours...

I dont know if mbbf said that, but ive been posting all along that mizzou offer was contingent upon Texas joining, and according to the NW poster that is still the case. Various people like Keitzman reported mizzou had an offer for a month before having it pulled, but i just dont believe mizzou would take more then 10 seconds to accept it if they had ever recieved it. So most likely what i have shared is still the case, Mizzou is waiting for the big dominoes to fall before they find out what their options are(and this could be said for any school besides ND and Texas i think)

As a Penn State fan, this whole thing is win-win for me.

However, I also agree with everyone above that this is absolutely fascinating to watch unfold.

Where was I trying to take a stab at them? Good lord. I was simply pointing out that even the bigger revenue schools have issues making money.

:shurg:

Maybe I read too much into it, but it seemed clear to me that the only reason to point that out with no context is to take a dig at them - likely to show that MU is a ""better" candidate for these conferences.

Maybe that wasn't there, but you've earned the right for me to jump to that conclusion.

Days ago it was a done deal, both signed, and they were waiting for the right time to announce it.

Something's brewing at Mizzou. Special curator's meeting has been called for Sunday. By law, they're required to express the reason for the special session. It is as follows:


So the curators will be discussing in a closed session a contractual offer of some sort.

MBBF can be a very polarizing figure, but lets not pretend like hes taking digs at other schools while everyone else is playing nice. Missouri is getting the worst of it both in this thread and in the media. No doubt some of that is in response to things he and i have said, but its foolish to taunt a bull then be surprised when he charges you...and a lot of people here revel in poking fun at mbbf,

Mind telling me where your getting that from? I know i havent heard that from any reliable sources, but maybe it was reported and i missed it.

I wonder why that is

:lol: Oh i get the reasons, im just laughing that people are still surprised by how things play out

If the info originated from the state of Missouri, it's probably false

Report: Kansas has offered to buy Missouri sports. Both schools will merge by 2013.

My unofficial sources stand 100% behind this.

Sorry if already posted:

Delany Tells Beebe No More Big 12 Schools Considered | Tiger Tracker | STLtoday

If they merge what will that do to Perkins' plan to skim more money out of another athletic department?

^^^^^^^

For those who want to keep score












More or less the timeline in this thread :)

Roy Kramer gives his thoughts on what next moves will be.

College football realignment: Roy Kramer, architect of BCS and SEC expansion talks to Gene Wojciechowski - ESPN

:bowdown:

I never knew someone with so many sources could be so wrong. Can we sticky just this post for future generations?

I appreciate you posting most of the posts. The vast majority of those are still spot on, though the timing has obviously changed in regards to the NU move and the MU move.

I'm not sure we share the same opinion on the definition of the phrase "vast majority"

7 out of those 10 posts still remain very accurate in the current situation. The three in the middle noting that MU was going to move at the same time are obviously off, but I still contend that the move will happen, but in a different timeframe.

See! You still got to use it! :) Though to be fair I'd still take Perkins over Alden in a heartbeat. Not sure who the next AD will be, but hopefully they can make another quality hire.

You sound like the captain of the titanic telling everyone that the hole isn't that bad

You're confusing me for the Big 12 commissioner.

Honestly, the Big-12 commissioner is probably doing a better job then Mizzou has been

:lol:

Oh, you were serious??????

I think this may be one of my top 5 threads all time

Alden responds to Beebe's mention that Big 10 isn't taking any more members 'right now'........

Big Ten appears to close the door on MU - KansasCity.com

Call. For the record, I'm calling on the 7 out of 10. I have no idea if Missouri ends up in the Big Ten or the Missouri Valley Conference.

Is Baylor still being attached to Texas? As it stands right now with the last rumors that A&M will be hooking up their wagon with the SEC, it still leaves the PAC-10 with an open spot. Could Baylor's "MBBF-like" politicians get involved? If so, doesn't this put Texas in a weak spot with Baylor attached to them like a little kid?

I had to dredge this one up. MBBF, you my friend are not afraid of being totally wrong, lol.

Timing, yes. End result, not so much.

With that said, it would probably be best for you to avoid stalking in this thread as well. There's actually some good discussion going on here.

Baylor is probably 4th on the list of teams to replace TAMU. It probably doesnt get past KU/Utah in that instance

So Missouri is still the Big Ten's first option...it's just that they wanted to get Nebraska out of the way first before making their big splash with Missouri? I guess I could see that. ;)

I'd love to see KU find a way to wiggle into the Pac XX. As much as the hatred flows, I'd really hate to see their program fall on hard times. The entire state might commit suicide.

C'mon Bug. I need you to talk to your Pac 10 sources. Make it happen!

With all of the expansion centered on football, Kansas would be a nice step in the opposite direction, but Utah/Colorado would work a bit more.

I don't think Kansas will fall too hard. The Pac 10 would be my number one option especially if Texas lands there. That would allow Kansas to continue recruiting the state of Texas for football. There are whispers coming from the SEC they are interested in Kansas. I'm not sure I see the fit there, but a rivalry with Kentucky would be great. Who knows how serious that interest is. Might even be nice to see both Kansas and Missouri get invites there to keep the Border War alive. The Big East is the next major possibility though they may be just as ripe as the Big 12 is. The ACC would be interesting. I know Coach K and Roy Williams have recently gone to bat for Kansas. And then lastly the MWC which would only happen if KU and KSU are truly anchored together by some crazy politicians.

Well, I, for one, am excited by the prospect of Nebraska joining the Big-10.

Weclome my Cornhusking Brothers and Sisters!

All the Big 12 North leftovers can just go join Boise State in the Mountain West Conference. It will become a 14 team conference and they can get an auto BCS bid. Make it so!

I've heard Utah, but what does Utah bring? I don't know enough about them aside from their football program. Are they an AAU member? How are their markets compared to KC and Wichita? Do they have the revenue to compete in the Pac?

I may be way off on this, but I'd think given the potential new additions Kansas may be a better fit (especially in a division format). But I may not be seeing the big picture either given my lack of knowledge of Utah.

Utah brings in the SLC market, is closer then Kansas, and tends to have more of a PAC-10 feel to it. They have a decent enough of a basketball/football tradition as well as a strong Olympic sports package. That and their proximity to the rest of the PAC-10, especially Colorado makes it attractive. The PAC-10 always wanted Texas as part of it, but it was always thought that the PAC-10 expanded to 12 teams, Utah/Colorado would be those teams.

Kansas would be a solid move, I just think the PAC-10 would move towards Utah

Big East yay!

+1

I really like the idea of a PSU-Nebraska rivalry. I'm still sore over 1994.

I don't care if the Big East loses Syracuse or Rutgers, but my biggest fear is that they take Maryland away from teh ACC. It makes a ton of sense. Maryland and WVU have a longe rstanding out of confernece rivalry, and I'd hater to see that go away, since they'd likely be in a confernece with the powerful east teams like Penn State, Ohio, and U of M, and probbaly wouldn;t want to keep us around as an OOC rival...:(

Sigh.

InsideTexas.com - Source: Texas to Pac-10 imminent; A&M, individually, not offered by SEC

Our source also spoke to a high-ranking SEC official who reports that no invitation to join the SEC has been extended to Texas A&M and none is expected to be offered.

Our information indicates that any invitation to A&M was contingent upon either Texas or Oklahoma joining the league as well. But the Horns and the Sooners appear to both be onboard to allign with an expanded Pac-10.

Sad for the SEC and me. I was hoping A&M, WVU, V Tech and the one of the G Tech, FSU and Clemson they most could handle if the Big East was exploding.

I still don't really know how much to trust these Texas sources. That sucks if true, though.

Weird. I guess the SEC doesn't want to mess with Texas.

The SLC market is the same size as the KC market though. KU also brings in the Wichita market. I'm guessing the SLC market is probably a better opportunity for future growth though.

But let's say the Pac 10 add Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech. Would it then make more sense to add Kansas due to distance?

I'm probably grasping at straws here, but I'd love to see Kansas stick with Texas and align themselves with the Pac for obvious reasons, lol.

Yeah, I'd guess Utah is ahead of Kansas on the Pac-10's wishlist. They make more sense geographically, and they have a longer history with Colorado so they'd be a more natural "rival". They're not in the AAU, but they are a top-level research university (classified RU/VH by the Carnegie Foundation as are all the current Pac-10 schools). The SLC market is one spot above Kansas City, and it's got more room for growth IMO.

It's too bad, because I'd love to have the Kansas basketball program in the conference, but I'd guess Utah is preferred by Larry Scott.

Ugh, that would bite for Kansas given I was hoping for their spot in the Pac. I'm a bit surprised that the SEC wouldn't want Texas A&M on their own merits though.

Ah well, probably a moot point now if the A&M story is true.

This is good news for Mizzou and Kansas. Opens up more SEC options as the process moves forward. You can never have enough at this point.

Delaney said setting up divisions will be based on competition first, and location second.

There's the Michigan vs. Nebraska as well to due to the split title.

And of course the Alamo Bowl fiasco which ended up being the worst officiated game ever.

A bit of contrariness on the A&M no SEC offer speculation:

Kirk Bohls tweet

SEC school source tells me that "A&M is a school worth getting" and could be only school offered. "No nice, neat package sitting out there."

Looks more and more like the A&M to the SEC thing was contingent upon Oklahoma more than Texas. It is surprising that the SEC wouldn't want A&M by itself though, but it looks like the Pac 10 has given A&M 72 hours to join the other big 4 in moving over:

Source: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State plan to join Pac-10 - ESPN

AUSTIN, Texas -- Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State will join the Pacific-10 Conference when a formal offer is made, a source told ESPN's Joe Schad on Friday.

Texas A&M, the Austin American Statesman reported, is torn between joining the Pac-10 or Southeastern Conference. The Aggies will have a 72-hour timetable to decide whether to accept the Pac-10's offer, the newspaper reported.

A formal offer from the Pac-10 could come as soon as this weekend, the newspaper reported.

Another source with knowledge of the situation confirmed to ESPN.com's Andy Katz that Texas A&M was looking at the SEC, but the source said he is convinced the Aggies will end up in the Pac-10.

The source said the SEC consideration was fueled by "ego purposes" within Texas A&M, that the Aggies' power brokers sought distance from the Texas decision and didn't want to convey the appearance they were doing everything because of Texas.

Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe said Friday he is still working to convince the remaining 10 members to stay put.

"We're working with all those members. We've had a lot of positive feedback about the desire of those institutions to [stay] together," Beebe said. "There's been a lot of speculation about people going west ... I'm going all the way to the final whistle. I'm playing it out as hard and fast as I can."

So wait - I thought Mizzou to the Big Ten was a done deal?

Kinda like the prospects of that too.

(Nebraska is like Penn State but in red, anyway)

Ketchum tweets

Just had an informed Aggie I trust tell me the SEC thing is going to happen. Lots of smoke. I can't wait to watch the drama unfold

That article I posted about no offer to A&M has been poo-pooed on a lot of sites now. Looks like momentum might be moving the other direction now with some recent tweets.

I may be naive, but I think the musical chairs is over (for the most part). The only other defection will be Utah to the PAC 10, to create the PAC 12 (which is the new conference name said by both Colorado and PAC 10 officials in their press conferences). The Big 10 would then become the Big 12, and the Big 12 would become the Big 10.

Big 10 will never change their name. It's a brand, and no way they'd let the Big 12 take it considering how prestigious it is. It doesn't make sense but hell, we've had 11 teams for 15 years, why stop now?

I think you are naive.

:)

Very. Way too much smoke.

I just sit here and hope that the Big East can bring in teams that keep it competitive. I hate to think that UC gets screwed by all this just as the program is starting to get built.

"I'm receiving e-mail after e-mail from people telling me that A&M is going to the SEC and it will be announced before Texas meets on Tuesday."

same guy as before

I agree, I have a lot of respect for Cincy and Louisville for coming in and helping us out and just the time when we needed in. UConn and USF too - they all played their hearts out. I don;t want to see any of them go now from a BSC conference.

Y'know, I'm not exactly a BE fan nor do I have hardly any connection to any of the teams you mentioned so take this FWIW but ... I think you may have made one of the most rational & reasonable posts in this whole thread. Never mind BCS worthiness (or whatever), but your feeling about them in that regard makes perfect sense to me, none of them lack for effort & that's rightfully worth something.

I will say, there are a LOT of people that are suddenly thinking this is over and A&M is coming to the SEC. Still nothing I can find other than some smug people that I would think would know.

for example:

"It's a done deal.

The offer was unofficially extended, and before they left for the weekend, a deal was in place.

All it needs is the vote by the reagents, but that is seen as mostly a formality.

After the vote the official offer will be extended, and aTm will be in the SEC by Tuesday morning."

I think this really just happened.

Abe's Ideal Big East/ACC/Others after the chairs move: (Assuming Clemson, G Tech, FSU and A&M to SEC, and Rutgers/Syracuse/Notre Dame/Missouri to Big Ten)

Cincy
Louisville
Kansas
WVU
Pitt
U Conn
Maryland
UVA
V Tech
USF
Miami
Kansas State
Boston College


And then three of Wake Forest, UNC, NC State, Duke, or if they want to stay together good, and take UCF and Memphis and one other team (Iowa State? Another Big 12 that didn't make the cut that's not Baylor? Grab one other school of value that's doing well in teh smaller leagues and cut the tether). If you had to, you could take the four and drop Kansas State, but I'd prefer K State over the fourth of that group by a lot.

Oh, and seperate the bball and fball conferences finally.

And if the offers change, chane with them. So if Maryland goes over Missouri to the Big Ten, bring in Missouri, or V Tech to the SEC over Georgia Tech, then bring them in, etc.

Thanks!

My hope is that A&M, KU, KSU and maybe someone else (Virgina Tech?) goes to the SEC, with the OK-TX four to the pac 10 along with Utah. Finally, Rutgers, ND, Mizzou and Georgia Tech join up with the Big 10. Then, only Iowa State and Baylor would lose out from the Big 12. I'd hate to see one of Kansas/Missouri (and even KSU) get left in the cold. Those are some pretty good programs.