Big 10 Expansion Thread -Big Ten ready for a playoff .. finally?

[Arles]

This just hit ESPN's insider:

The Texas board of regents announced on Friday that it has called a special meeting for noon ET on Tuesday for "discussion and appropriate action regarding athletic conference membership." That would seem to suggest that a vote will be taken and an announcement subsequently made about Texas' future home.

The fact that a meeting was called suggests that the Big 12 probably is dead, since presumably no votes would have to be cast to maintain the status quo.

---

By most accounts, Texas is not going to the SEC. And by most accounts, Texas has given up on the Big 12. Which means that two possible destinations remain: the Pac-10 and the Big Ten.

The Texas-based media, led by Chip Brown of OrangeBloods.com, have been focused on the Pac-10. Brown tweeted overnight: "I'm told Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State are going to the Pac-10 with or without Texas A&M," and that the announcements are expected to come next week. He also tweeted: "There is no truth to reports that Texas and Texas A&M are considering the Big Ten," referring to the KCTV story.

However, other outlets report the Big Ten is focused on Texas or on Texas and Notre Dame, which suggests the Horns are at least considering the conference. (We previously told you about the San Antonio Express-News piece that detailed Texas' attempts to join the Big Ten in 1990, so it is not out of the question that the Longhorns might be interested.)

Blogger Frank the Tank, who does appear to have sources, writes, "My understanding is that Texas DOES want to join the Big Ten despite public posturing." He lays out three scenarios that the league is looking at: 1) add Texas and Notre Dame and stop at 14; 2) add UT, ND, Texas A&M and a fourth school (Missouri, Rutgers or Syracuse) to get to 16; 3) stop at 12 with Nebraska.

Billy Liucci of ESPN affiliate TexAgs.com tweeted: "A&M and OU to the SEC is picking up steam on the rumor mill and there might be some real smoke to that fire" and "...if it happens, it's going to be due in large part to the Big Ten making another hard run at Texas."

That said, Teddy Greenstein of the Chicago Tribune, who has been on top of this from the Big Ten's perspective and continues to push a 14-team league with Notre Dame and Rutgers, writes: "It's worth repeating that it makes no sense for Texas to join the Big Ten -- from having to cough up travel costs for its 18 teams to destroying its rivalries with Oklahoma and Texas Tech to taking its highly ranked baseball team to a conference that's less than elite in that sport."

So much contrary information. But it should play out in a few more days.

[duckman]

This came off the live chat on the Omaha World Herald's coverage of the board of regents meeting:

Brian Norton, OWHsports:
It's official, from Lee Barfknecht:

Nebraska has officially accepted an invitation to join the Big Ten Conference, The World-Herald learned early Friday afternoon.

Two sources from conference offices said that Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany contacted BIg 12 Commissioner Dan Beebe on Friday morning to inform Beebe that Delany had officially invited Nebraska to join.

A source with direct knowledge of the situation said Nebraska accepted.

[timmynausea]

Here's the latest from the NW rivals guy with the possible connection in the Big Ten office:

Had an update this morning. Same story as yesterday, Missouri must convince Texas & A&M to come to the conference for Mizzou to get an invite, while the Big East schools must pressure Notre Dame to either join fully (which it won't do) or leave the conference. Big Ten may move forward with Texas and ND only, but Texas must ensure that it has done whatever it can to ensure its former Big Twelve partners find a good home. Texas administration is internally divided, and Orangebloods is connected to only one side of the conversation - the side that has not been involved with the strategy all along.

[Galaxy]

If A&M or/and OU go to the SEC, could this make Texas take Baylor with them?

[rjolley]

Does a home for Baylor and Texas Tech have to be a top tier conference? Would a mid tier be good enough?

[terpkristin]

I've only been following this tangentially at best, and it's very hard to keep up with this thread...is there a place where the general "picture as it stands now" can be found in terms of what sounds like could potentially become a major re-organization of many of the NCAA conferences. Who's definitely going where? Who might go somewhere? Where might they go?

/tk

[Logan]

Honestly, if you want a clear picture, you're better off just staying away for awhile. The only thing you should focus on is that Colorado has left the Big 12 for the Pac 10, and Nebraska is extremely likely to leave the Big 12 for the Big 10. Your last two questions would best be answered with a couple dartboards at this point.

[duckman]

Colorado to Pac-10
Nebraska to Big Ten
Boise State to Mountain West

Nothing else is official yet.

[Galaxy]

Could the PAC-10 try to force the Texas school's hands by extending an invite to either Utah or Oklahoma State? Seems like the good ole boys won't let Baylor be left alone.

[hoosierdude]

live streaming on regents conference. They want to move in 2011.

Live @ 1 P.M. CT: Nebraska Regents Meeting - Video - KOCO Oklahoma City

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

Could the PAC-10 try to force the Texas school's hands by extending an invite to either Utah or Oklahoma State? Seems like the good ole boys won't let Baylor be left alone.

That's a risky move, because they don't want to get left holding a team that they aren't totally happy with if it doesn't work. That's why Colorado got an invite - regardless of what happens with Texas and the rest, the Pac-10 is totally comfortable adding Colorado.

Utah is probably a plan B - they'd take them if the Big-12 South schools end up not coming so they can have a 12th team to pair with Colorado.

Oklahoma State is probably not a school the Pac-10 would want individually, just as a partner with Oklahoma.

[SnDvls]

Most recent Chip Brown (Orangebloods.com) tweets

Texas will announce its plans to join the Pac-10 after its regents meet next Tuesday, source confirm to Orangebloods.com.


TYPO COR: B12 Souh schools (TX, TTech, OU, OSU) confirm to OB with Neb move they go to Pac-10!!! Sorry bout that!!

[MJ4H]

I really think Chip Brown is only getting half the story. I think there is a lot going on from the big 10 side he is being told is not happening when it really is.

[Logan]

Not actually listening to it, but read that the ongoing Mizzou press conference isn't making it sound good for their future Big 10 prospects.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Logan

Not actually listening to it, but read that the ongoing Mizzou press conference isn't making it sound good for their future Big 10 prospects.

I would be shocked - SHOCKED I TELL YOU - if it turned out MBBF was wrong this whole time...

[Passacaglia]

Everyone on twitter is saying that they're really ripping on Texas at the Nebraska press conference. Anyone have the details?

[SnDvls]

all the regents of Nebraska voted yes for a move to the Big 10

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by MJ4H

I really think Chip Brown is only getting half the story. I think there is a lot going on from the big 10 side he is being told is not happening when it really is.

My thing is, Brown has to be reading these same reports and asking his source(s) these questions about the Big 10. Even if those sources aren't involved, wouldn't they still allow there were other potential elements they aren't connected to that could also be taking the university in a different direction? And if Brown heard that, wouldn't he then try to contact those other sources to get the dirt on the Big 10 stuff?

I think there is interest there from some elements at Texas to go to the Big 10, but the logistics of it are compelling to me that it's not a move that makes sense (the travel costs particularly for the other sports, the Tech/Baylor issue, having to possibly use two of three non-conf games for rivalry games with OU and TXAM every year, the fact that Texas is a much more important school, big fish, in a Pac-16 pond than in the Big Ten). I mean there are a ton of logical, rational reasons why Texas is a much better fit for the Pac 16 than for the Big 10. And even if Texas thinks B10's academics are better, it's not like the Pac 10 is a pushover in that department, considering they stress academics just as much as the Big 10.

[MJ4H]

His sources might be telling him to go the way he's going or his sources dry up.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by SnDvls

all the regents of Nebraska voted yes for a move to the Big 10

So as of now the Big 10 has 12 schools and the Big 12 has 10 schools.

[Abe Sargent]

This is an awesome time to be a fan of college football. Nebraska, Colorado Boise State and many rumors. Rock!

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by cartman

So as of now the Big 10 has 12 schools and the Big 12 has 10 schools.

Ping: Alanis.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by MJ4H

His sources might be telling him to go the way he's going or his sources dry up.

So on top of all the logisitcal reasons that would need to be ignored in going to the Big 10 over the Pac 10, we also have hidden agenda/consipracy theories? Little much, don't you think? If Texas wanted to go to the Big 10 first and foremost, what reason would it have to keep it secret?

[MrBug708]

I've decided that any bit of info from the state of missouri is probably made up whether from the radio, tv, or website

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

So on top of all the logisitcal reasons that would need to be ignored in going to the Big 10 over the Pac 10, we also have hidden agenda/consipracy theories? Little much, don't you think? If Texas wanted to go to the Big 10 first and foremost, what reason would it have to keep it secret?

Bargaining power. If the big 10 thinks they will go to the pac 10, they can get more out of the big 10.

edit: and no I don't think it's a little much. I think it's patently obvious that at least something like this is going on based on the conflicting reports.

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by cartman

So as of now the Big 10 has 12 schools and the Big 12 has 10 schools.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by MJ4H

Bargaining power. If the big 10 thinks they will go to the pac 10, they can get more out of the big 10.

edit: and no I don't think it's a little much. I think it's patently obvious that at least something like this is going on based on the conflicting reports.

That doesn't make so much sense to me. An element of Texas wants to go to the Big Ten, in spite of all the logisitical reasons it doesn't work, and I can see that. I can see that being a fairly strong desire.

The Big 10 on the other hand is already in a terrific spot. They already have plenty of candidates to go to 16, with or without Texas, and they will likely end up with Notre Dame, too. They already have the best conference network deal. They are in a position to like the idea of adding Texas--but they don't need it.

If Texas plays a game where they try to leverage a possible Pac 10 deal against Big 10 membership, I think the Big 10 shrugs its shoulders, says "enjoy the West Coast" and keeps its money and power. I don't think the gain in revenue from adding Texas to an already significant pot is enough enticement for the Big Ten to take Texas's Pac 10 threats seriously.

It makes a lot more sense to me that the opposite of what you say is happening--Texas is leaking the Big 10 rumors to leverage its position in negotiations with the Pac 10, which is in a much weaker position than the Big 10. The Pac 10's footprint and profile would be significantly improved by adding Texas, and they only add the other schools (the ones to get to 16 that is; they'll go to 12 regardless) if they add Texas as well. Unlike the Big ten, the Pac 10 doesn't have a network in place yet and their TV contract is up next year. The Pac 10 needs Texas to make a big move.

But if the Pac 10 is convinced the Big 12 is falling apart and Texas has nowhere else to turn, Texas's position is neutered. They need the threat of another conference possibility to regain the power edge.

In short, on top of the logistical reasons I have listed above, Texas also stands to have signficantly more influence in its new conference in the Pac 10 than in the Big Ten, and the reports I have seen have indicated the money in each scenario is roughly the same (TV contract-wise).

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by terpkristin

I've only been following this tangentially at best, and it's very hard to keep up with this thread...is there a place where the general "picture as it stands now" can be found in terms of what sounds like could potentially become a major re-organization of many of the NCAA conferences. Who's definitely going where? Who might go somewhere? Where might they go?

/tk

[Radii]

It is nice to see Mizzou, Kansas, K-State and Baylor going to help clean up the oil spill in the gulf.

[MJ4H]

Hey they've gotta be somewhere.

[Arles]

Yeah, it doesn't make sense for Texas to choose the Big Ten over the Pac 10. They figure to make similar money with the new TV network in the Pac 10, plus they get significant more stature/power in the Pac 10. In the big ten, they don't face Oklahoma or Texas Tech in conference, the Pac 10 both are conf games. In the big ten, they have to compete against Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State and what looks like Notre Dame for supremacy. In the Pac 10, it's just a sanctioned USC and Oklahoma.

All things point to Texas getting more control, stature and power in the Pac 10 - without the need to use non-conf spots on their 2 big rivals (Tech and OK). Given the money is similar between both offers, I don't see any reason Texas would choose the Big Ten over the Pac 10. It's just not logical.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Arles

Yeah, it doesn't make sense for Texas to choose the Big Ten over the Pac 10. They figure to make similar money with the new TV network in the Pac 10, plus they get significant more stature/power in the Pac 10. In the big ten, they don't face Oklahoma or Texas Tech in conference, the Pac 10 both are conf games. In the big ten, they have to compete against Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State and what looks like Notre Dame for supremacy. In the Pac 10, it's just a sanctioned USC and Oklahoma.

All things point to Texas getting more control, stature and power in the Pac 10 - without the need to use non-conf spots on their 2 big rivals (Tech and OK). Given the money is similar between both offers, I don't see any reason Texas would choose the Big Ten over the Pac 10. It's just not logical.

Texas is a big rival for Tech, but not the other way around. The two big rivals for Texas are OU and A&M.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

Originally Posted by cartman

So as of now the Big 10 has 12 schools and the Big 12 has 10 schools.

New math.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by cartman

Texas is a big rival for Tech, but not the other way around. The two big rivals for Texas are OU and A&M.

Heh...yeah, I was thinking Arles had that wrong. Tech is the tag along school in this. If A&M ends up going to the Pac 10 after all, the case for the Pac 10 end is even stronger. But either way, A&M doesn't seem to be a consideration for the Big Ten on its own--just the SEC. So either way, Texas has to use a non-conf game on A&M if A&M doesn't go with them to the Pac 10.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by M GO BLUE!!!

New math.

Just for fun, the ACC and Pac 10 should change names, too.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Logan

Not actually listening to it, but read that the ongoing Mizzou press conference isn't making it sound good for their future Big 10 prospects.

Not sure where you got that indication. They continued to say they were loyal to the Big 12, which is the party line that Mizzou has been using for months now. There was absolutely zero information in that news conference today, which continues to be the best way to handle the situation.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by cartman

Texas is a big rival for Tech, but not the other way around. The two big rivals for Texas are OU and A&M.

The point is they will want to schedule atleast 2 of Tech, OU and A&M each season. In the Big 10, all 3 must be nonconference. in the Pac-10, only 1 is a nonconf game.

If you're Texas, do you really want to have a schedule of A&M, Oklahoma, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Wisconsin, Notre Dame, 3-4 more conf games (could be a strong Iowa/Minnesota team as well) and just 1 non-conf slot to tune up with?

In the Pac-10, they would play Tech, OK, OK St, Arizona, ASU, Colorado and KU/Utah, 2 other Pac 10 teams (one decent, prob one cupcake like Washington State) and have all 3 their nonconference slots open (or 2 if they schedule A&M). So, if they face a strong USC or Cal in the other division, they can schedule two games against "sisters of the poor" in nonconf.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Everyone on twitter is saying that they're really ripping on Texas at the Nebraska press conference. Anyone have the details?

That Nebraska press conference was classless at times. The president and Osborne demonstrated exactly why this conference is falling apart. These schools simply do not know how to get along and act like adults.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

But if the Pac 10 is convinced the Big 12 is falling apart and Texas has nowhere else to turn, Texas's position is neutered. They need the threat of another conference possibility to regain the power edge.

Bingo.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Pretty telling move here. Notre Dame has cancelled all Army-ND games 2013 and beyond. Another indicator that ND may be on the move.

Football: Army-Irish tilt in 2013 off the books | Varsity845U.com

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Arles

The point is they will want to schedule atleast 2 of Tech, OU and A&M each season. In the Big 10, all 3 must be nonconference. in the Pac-10, only 1 is a nonconf game.

If you're Texas, do you really want to have a schedule of A&M, Oklahoma, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Wisconsin, Notre Dame, 3-4 more conf games (could be a strong Iowa/Minnesota team as well) and just 1 non-conf slot to tune up with?

In the Pac-10, they would play Tech, OK, OK St, Arizona, ASU, Colorado and KU/Utah, 2 other Pac 10 teams (one decent, prob one cupcake like Washington State) and have all 3 their nonconference slots open (or 2 if they schedule A&M). So, if they face a strong USC or Cal in the other division, they can schedule two games against "sisters of the poor" in nonconf.

To be fair, it's almost certain the Big Ten will also do a division split which will likely limit Texas's vists to the easternmost powerhouses (Mich, tOSU, Penn St). Of course, I would guess it will be rare for them to not have at least one game each year against one of those schools. So then you have Oklahoma, Iowa, Wisconsin, maybe Illinois, along with that one game against one of the eastern powerhouses and A&M. Notre dame would probably be in the east division to keep its standing Big 10 rivalries (Mich, MSU, Purdue). Of course, that just means four potential powerhouses in the East, with it more likely than Texas will face two of them every other year or three or so.

I'm not trying to detract from your overall point, just noting Texas liekly won't play all of those teams in the same year, given the size of the conference. They'll still have a brutal schedule with very little wiggle room.

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

That Nebraska press conference was classless at times. The president and Osborne demonstrated exactly why this conference is falling apart. These schools simply do not know how to get along and act like adults.

Did Nebraska take a pot shot at Missouri in the press conference?

[Chief Rum]

Heh...I keep forgetting Nebraska moves over, too. That's another potentially big opponent for Texas they would certainly face every year, and I think Nebraska's move to the Big 10 is likely to re-boot Nebraska's flagging fortunes and return it closer to the powerr it once was.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by the_meanstrosity

Did Nebraska take a pot shot at Missouri in the press conference?

Most of the vitrol was at Texas. I believe they mentioned Missouri at some point, but it wasn't anything like the piss and vinegar they lobbed at Texas. All of these announcements and movements are very orchestrated right now. Each of these teams and conferences is doing their best dance to make sure they don't get blamed for triggering all of this in case the federal government gets involved.

[MJ4H]

Dear Aggies:

[dawgfan]

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/conte...=breaking_news

We'll see on Tuesday, but it sounds like most of the smoke out there indicates Texas, Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State will move to the Pac-10. If true, and if A&M moves to the SEC, it will interesting to see who the Pac-10 goes for to make an even 16. Probably Utah, but I'd like to see them grab Kansas instead...

[timmynausea]

Joe Schad tweet:

Dan Beebe: "My understanding is there aren't any other conference members considered by the Big Ten."

And:

Dan Beebe says at this time Delany says he's not interested in other Big 12 schools (read: Missouri)

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Official statement released from Mike Alden.......

Open Letter From Mike Alden - MISSOURI OFFICIAL ATHLETIC SITE

The following quote makes it pretty obvious that negotiations are still ongoing. Until Texas makes their move official, there's not going to be much happening on the Big 10 front.

"When the dust settles, Mizzou will be in a strong position nationally. We don't know the timeline of all of these activities, so your patience and commitment is appreciated. Many will look at this time as a challenge, but we will look at it as an unbelievable opportunity."

[Arles]

Can you imagine the basketball conference with UCLA, Arizona and Kansas all together? That would be pretty intense.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

Joe Schad tweet:

Dan Beebe: "My understanding is there aren't any other conference members considered by the Big Ten."

Dan Beebe is still trying to save the Big 12 conference while the tombstone is being shipped to the graveyard.