So which team is going to the B12? | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com

So which team is going to the B12?

Rumors that it is a BE team.
Chuck Nienas is getting resistance to the idea of adding a Texas school.

So I don't think its TCU.

I am hoping for BYU or Boise State.

And if it's not TCU, than I have to believe that the BE has a chance to stay alive.

And, it should - it has a BCS bid for gosh sakes - it should not just survive, but should thrive.

I hope somebody in the BE office has the brains and the skill to make it happen.
 
Can we at least all agree that at this day in age, having a number in your conference's name is just plain stupid.
 
You better believe TCU is doing everything in it's power to get out of the BE now. They were just told to meet on the 18th green at midnight, only to get soaked by sprinklers
 
#1 - Louisville (Big 12 or SEC)
#2 - West Virginia (Big 12)
#3 - TCU (where they belong, but I think the Texas schools would fight this)

Beyond the Big East, I would think that they would look at BYU and/or Boise State.

I think the teams that get "screwed" in the Big East reshuffle/collapse are Rutgers, UCONN, Cinci, and USF. I can't picture where any of those teams are going to land in a BCS conference.
 
"The Big XII is happy with 10. That's what their TV contract calls for."

I think it is more accurate to say that Deloss Dodds and Texas are happy with ten. Oklahoma probably is too. Neither wants to lose a chance at a NC by coming up short in a championship game. What Texas wants, Texas gets.

That said, it looks like Louisville is the top choice if it is a Big East team.
 
Also, 10 teams less money to share since the deal has already been done. Texas owns this conference and watching Missouri cower and fall in line just helps prove it.
 
Why split the TV money with 12 when you can split the same number with 10?
 
Why split the TV money with 12 when you can split the same number with 10?

People NEED to have 12 teams in their conferences. But you know who doesn't need it? Texas and OU. They don't need to rematch in a conf championship game most years. And putting them in the same division would make no sense, Red River Rivalry would be the de facto conf championship game, and the real game would be boring.

Agree that they would rather stay at 10. But I wonder if they'll change the name, it's the kind of league that to me, is too insecure to keep Big 12 as the name.
 
Chip

IMO Texas rather have 9 or 12 teams. That way they have only eight conf games and can schedule 4 OOC. More OOC games, more possible content for TLN. If they play OU early enough in the year then playing them in the B12 CG stil has meaning. Also I think with 12 they could get more money as a conference for TV. I could see old B8 in the North (OU, Okie St, Mizzou, ISU, KU, K St) and Texas and the dwarfs in the South (Texas, Tech, Baylor, UL, WV, RU). Yes RU. Texas cares about the TLN and getting it on in NJ, plus playing a game at the Meadowlands every other year vs RU is nice. They know they will be in another conference within 3 years. Might as well maximize revenue until then with a mismash conference. Plus by taking RU, the B1G can use the data from TLN to see if RU is worth inviting when they take Texas, ND, and Mizzou. Otherwise they take KU.
 
Actually I thought they would stay at 9, and no one has used Big 9 yet. For the reasons you say, true round robin, OOC stays open, split the pot between even less teams. But Neinas has been saying 10, so I figured the scheduling part was what was in the way, someone in the league needs to either have a bye or OOC each week. Maybe that's not hard to schedule, don't know. I just know I was somewhat surprised they'd even replace Texas A&M. They have their 2 heavyweights, no one really adds anything unless they want to invest in the RU idea you mention.
 
Chip

IMO Texas rather have 9 or 12 teams. That way they have only eight conf games and can schedule 4 OOC. More OOC games, more possible content for TLN. If they play OU early enough in the year then playing them in the B12 CG stil has meaning. Also I think with 12 they could get more money as a conference for TV. I could see old B8 in the North (OU, Okie St, Mizzou, ISU, KU, K St) and Texas and the dwarfs in the South (Texas, Tech, Baylor, UL, WV, RU). Yes RU. Texas cares about the TLN and getting it on in NJ, plus playing a game at the Meadowlands every other year vs RU is nice. They know they will be in another conference within 3 years. Might as well maximize revenue until then with a mismash conference. Plus by taking RU, the B1G can use the data from TLN to see if RU is worth inviting when they take Texas, ND, and Mizzou. Otherwise they take KU.
the only thing about rutgers to the big 12, is i think texas, okie and okie st(?) at Giants Stadium would get old quick.

it would never get old for michigan, ohio st, penn st and wisc.
to me, NYC is more of a destination for b10 alums, than texas ones.

plus the b10 RVs can get here in a day and be home in time for work on monday, not so in texas.
 
the only thing about rutgers to the big 12, is i think texas, okie and okie st(?) at Giants Stadium would get old quick.

It would be a temp thing though. IMO Texas will end up in the B1G within 10 years. This is a perfect opportunity for the B1G to have a real market test of what RU brings. If it does nothing, then RU never gets a B1G invite. If it creates a buzz and brings money to the TLN then the B1G can offer RU when they offer Texas and ND in 5-10 years. Why risk taking RU on a theoretical increase to the BTN, when you can get actual real data? Why risk taking RU without knowing if they can compete in the B12, let alone the B1G? Why take RU without knowing if their fans will stay around to support the program after the draw of the B12 gets old? If Texas has really been in talks with the B1G then taking RU would benefit both.

Also I have met a ton of Texas alums in NYC. In fact there are more Texas fans in NYC than RU, who owns 20% of the market :D I have also met a ton of OU fans as well. I would put both ahead of all but PSU from the B1G.
 
It would be a temp thing though. IMO Texas will end up in the B1G within 10 years. This is a perfect opportunity for the B1G to have a real market test of what RU brings. If it does nothing, then RU never gets a B1G invite. If it creates a buzz and brings money to the TLN then the B1G can offer RU when they offer Texas and ND in 5-10 years. Why risk taking RU on a theoretical increase to the BTN, when you can get actual real data? Why risk taking RU without knowing if they can compete in the B12, let alone the B1G? Why take RU without knowing if their fans will stay around to support the program after the draw of the B12 gets old? If Texas has really been in talks with the B1G then taking RU would benefit both.

Also I have met a ton of Texas alums in NYC. In fact there are more Texas fans in NYC than RU, who owns 20% of the market :D I have also met a ton of OU fans as well. I would put both ahead of all but PSU from the B1G.

To paraphrase FrankTheTank, adding ND and Texas to the BiG makes it the "Give Me the F#@#'ing Cash" conference. But, ND has always been reluctant to joining the BiG and last year the Texas president actually laughed at the notion of Texas playing in a North Midwestern conference.

As for NYC, the last poll I saw regarding favorite college teams, Michigan was fifth or sixth and Texas wasn't in the Top 10. Might have changed since then, but I agree with the Kaiser. I think besides PSU, Michigan, Ohio State, even Nebraska all would outrank OU in the city. Texas may be higher than the rest outside of Michigan.

Cheers,
Neil
 
Neil

I have never ever met an Ohio State alumnus or fan. Not sure they even exist in these parts. The Texas and OU fans are all alumni. I have met more of their alumni than any B1G school's alumni. What puts the ND, Penn St, and Mich fan bases ahead of Texas/OU are the local band wagon fans who have zero affiliation with the schools they root for. In that cae Texas and OU have just about zero.
 
With a&m leaving July, having TCU would be a good sub. Don't know why other schools don't want another Texas team.
 
Neil

I have never ever met an Ohio State alumnus or fan. Not sure they even exist in these parts. The Texas and OU fans are all alumni. I have met more of their alumni than any B1G school's alumni. What puts the ND, Penn St, and Mich fan bases ahead of Texas/OU are the local band wagon fans who have zero affiliation with the schools they root for. In that cae Texas and OU have just about zero.

Not sure why you are placing the emphasis on alum. Again, I'm going off of an actual poll asking college football fans in the area who their favorite college football team was. But I'm sure your anecdotal evidence is far superior to any poll.

Cheers,
Neil
 
With a&m leaving July, having TCU would be a good sub. Don't know why other schools don't want another Texas team.

Recruiting purposes probably
 
Can we at least all agree that at this day in age, having a number in your conference's name is just plain stupid.
It's also stupid to have any reference to direction or geography (e.g., east, southeastern, pacific) in a conference's name.
 
the only thing about rutgers to the big 12, is i think texas, okie and okie st(?) at Giants Stadium would get old quick.

it would never get old for michigan, ohio st, penn st and wisc.
to me, NYC is more of a destination for b10 alums, than texas ones.

plus the b10 RVs can get here in a day and be home in time for work on monday, not so in texas.

When I lived in NYC, there were a TON of Big 10 alums that I would see when I was out watching games. (For basketball, too).
 
Whatever happens, I want the ACC to stay at 14, and the Big Ten at 12.

I hope the Big East becomes the new ConferenceUSA.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
168,152
Messages
4,753,280
Members
5,943
Latest member
Diamondmakr

Online statistics

Members online
248
Guests online
1,211
Total visitors
1,459


Top Bottom