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

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by 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...

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.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Arles

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

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.

[RedKingGold]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

a Mizzou/Kansas Rose Bowl would be pretty epic.

Or the lowest rated Rose Bowl ever.

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by MJ4H

Dear Aggies:

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.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Arles

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

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.

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

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.

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.

[Arles]

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.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by RedKingGold

Or the lowest rated Rose Bowl ever.

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

[digamma]

Originally Posted by Arles

The reason OU and Texas are trying to stay together is for the red river shootout. That's a huge game for the OU and Texas pocket books and money that they don't have to share with the rest of the conference. If it's a conference game, it allows for another home game against a patsy out of conference where they make more money.

Fixed.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

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

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.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Arles

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

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.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

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.

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)

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

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.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

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)

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

[digamma]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

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.

[Marmel]

Originally Posted by Radii

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.

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

Current ACC plus:
Cuse
Uconn
Pitt
Kansas

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Marmel

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

Current ACC plus:
Cuse
Uconn
Pitt
Kansas

Lets do it!

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

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

Originally Posted by digamma

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.

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.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by wade moore

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 56.3 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...

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by MJ4H

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

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by wade moore

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 56.3 mil.

Originally Posted by MJ4H

Originally Posted by Blade6119

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...

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.

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

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

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

[miked]

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...

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by miked

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)

[RedKingGold]

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.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by wade moore

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.

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.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

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.

[miked]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

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)

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

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

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:

Sealed bids and related documents, until the bids are opened; and sealed proposals and related documents or any documents related to a negotiated contract until a contract is executed, or all proposals are rejected;

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

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by wade moore

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

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,

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by miked

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

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.

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

a lot of people here revel in poking fun at mbbf,

I wonder why that is

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by MJ4H

I wonder why that is

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

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

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.

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

[RedKingGold]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

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.

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

My unofficial sources stand 100% behind this.

[digamma]

Sorry if already posted:

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

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by RedKingGold

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

My unofficial sources stand 100% behind this.

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

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by MJ4H

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

^^^^^^^

[MrBug708]

For those who want to keep score

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I don't think A&M is the package deal that everyone thought it might be. My understanding continues to be that Mizzou officials KNOW that they will receive an invite. The uncertainty continues to be who those other teams will be. Let's assume that I'm correct for the sake of the discussion. If the Big Ten were to land Notre Dame, Texas, and Mizzou, they would land a 'national' team in ND and would essentially steal the top two TV markets (by state) in the B12 footprint and put them in their conference. That would make perfect sense given what we know about their goals with expansion.

The Pac 10 is going to land some good teams regardless of what Texas does. There's plenty to choose from in the West depending on what their priorities are.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Heard today that Mizzou and Nebraska plan on doing absolutely nothing in regards to the 'ultimatum' by the conferences. Both schools have been privately guaranteed that if the Texas 6 (new nickname evidently) head for the Pac-10, MU and NU will receive bids to the Big 10. Even more interesting, they've also been told that if that occurs, Notre Dame will accept a bid and the Big Ten will expand to 16 teams, grabbing two other Big East teams to fill out the league. Crazy stuff.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

It's a done deal. Alden and Osborne have contacted the Big 12 officials and the AD's and informed them that they will accept a bid to the Big 10.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I'm not sure how much clearer I can make it. Chip is about 2 days behind this process as far as what NU and MU are doing. Mizzou and Nebraska have already agreed to leave. Mizzou officials are hoping to make some sort of an announcement today. Have not heard anything specific on when NU plans on making their announcement. As digamma mentioned, the poster on the NU board who said a NU announcement was coming was making his 1st post, but his info is exactly the same as what's being circulated by people within the MU athletic department.

As for the Notre Dame situation, the person who wrote the article saying that ND may be the only team has since backed off that comment and said that is no longer the case. He described it as a 'very fluid situation'.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Official board votes by MU and NU to join the Big 10 will be done this week. MU Board of Regents meets today and tomorrow. Nebraska Board of Regents meets tomorrow and Friday. It would appear Beebe is going to get his response before the ultimatum clock expires.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I still can not honestly believe how many people are erroneously reporting that Notre Dame is interested in being the 12th team. The NU and MU deals are done. NU has been wanting to make an announcement all week to end the speculation, but the Big Ten president has asked them to wait until tomorrow. The Big 10 plans to add three teams in the next week or two, but that won't be the end of the expansion. They will add two more teams before the school year begins.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

There's a TON of things that have to fall in place for this scenario and even Kietzmann noted that this isn't anywhere close to a done deal. But it's certainly an interesting twist to be sure. The Big Ten had talked with Mizzou as recently as yesterday saying that a bid would be sent. We'll have to see what plays out tomorrow.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Mizzou has handled this more professionally than any other school involved. They're the only administration out of the major players in the Big 12 that has kept their dirty laundry behind close doors.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Wow. This isn't even close to resolved yet. There are good sources within Mizzou saying that most of the information that Kietzmann spoke of is not true and that Mizzou is still in play for a Big 10 bid.

This is crazy.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Truth is far stranger than fiction. Yesterday's situation was a well-orchestrated PR media hit directed by other schools to attempt to plant seeds of distrust and derail negotiations between various schools and conference leaders. It created quite a rise amongst fans (look at the last few pages of this thread), but not a whole lot has changed within the athletic departments. We're still roughly where we were before the media blitz started.

I agree with Matter concerning Mizzou's handling of this whole situation. It's amazing how much more polished they are in handling these kinds of situations than they were a few years ago with the Ricky Clemons fiasco. Much of the credit should go to Gary Forsee. He brought in a lot of knowledge from his years in business on how to keep things even-keeled from a PR perspective. As long as Mizzou remains quiet, it's generally good news for the University.

More or less the timeline in this thread

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

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

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

For those who want to keep score

More or less the timeline in this thread

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

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

For those who want to keep score

More or less the timeline in this thread

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.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

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"

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

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

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

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.

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by MJ4H

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.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

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.

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

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

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.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

You're confusing me for the Big 12 commissioner.

[MrBug708]

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