I haven't been duped. I'm hopeful we go to 12 or 16. FSU and Clemson are our best chances out there. Everyone else sucks balls. I'm just hopeful that for once in this nightmare of **** ups that our vaunted leadership doesn't take it in the ass again and spew bullshit cum out of their mouths the way they have the last two or three years.
Make no mistake, if we don't expand with quality teams this conference will die. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but eventually the gap will widen and the big12 will die. It may take 1 year or it may take 10 yrs but eventually, without quality expansion, this conference will die. If we add mid-major teams that only further weakens the conference. You can continue to bury your head in the sand, but more change is coming. The SEC and B1G are positioning themselves to grab as much power, money, and control as possible while the big 12 continues to hesitate and doesn't see what's happening. The SEC has always had strong leadership and been ahead of the game on conference expansion for the last 20 yrs.
As we speak, access to the postseason is becoming easier for SEC/B1G and harder for everyone else. When change happens there's always those that are slow to respond and those ahead of the curve. Which ones do you think end up as the weakling and which has the power? I think we all know the answer. The big12 has had numerous opportunities to expand and be aggressive. At each opportunity, they have hesitated and slow played the situation, for whatever reason (tx). When the SEC/B1G take 3 of 4 playoff spots and everybody else is fighting for 1 spot, when SEC/B1G make way more money and have way more power and influence over CFB, when OU & TX are at a competitive and financial disadvantage to the "big boys", then this conference will die. The only way the big 12 survives is with quality expansion. Stay at 10, we die. Add crap teams, we die.
I'm not sure that the SEC and Big Ten can kill the Big 12. The Pac 10 and Big Ten tried and were unsuccessful. The Big 12 is still the 2nd strongest conference and adding Colorado and Utah did nothing to help the Pac 10. Most of the the Pac 12 presidents are pissed that they added two schools that did nothing to help their image or get them in the championship game. Losing Nebraska looked like it might hurt the Big 12 but Nebraska hasn't been a big threat for over a decade and lost the Big Ten Championship to a Wisconsin team that finished with six losses, 70-31 (yeah, that's how strong the Big Ten is). The SEC got the best team of all the Big 12 defectors in A&M but that almost backfired on them when A&M knocked off Alabama but K-State and Oregon lost and put them right back in the NCG. The Big 12 was one loss away from putting a team in the NCG. Oklahoma beats either K-State or ND (preferrably ND) and K-State beats Baylor and they're in,
Texas wasn't big enough for both Texas and Texas A&M but as long as both OU and Texas agree to stay in the Big 12, it is not going to die, whether it has eight members or 16 members. They are as strong right now as they've ever been and adding a bunch of mid majors or middle of the road BCS teams isn't going to help the conference. FSU looks like a powerhouse in the ACC but this is a team that OU has beaten twice in the last three years, when everyone says that Oklahoma is down. The ACC is not much better than the Big East and needed the Big East defectors for fear of being raided themselves. Now that the ACC doesn't have to worry about going extinct, nobody is going anywhere. The Big Ten can grab up all the rest of the Big East teams to broaden their TV market but it will do nothing to make them a stronger conference. The SEC will always have one or two teams in the playoffs because one, they're the strongest conference in the country and two, because everyone knows they're the strongest conference in the country. The Big Ten can expand to 24 teams and it will not make them any stronger. The Big 12, Pac 12, Big Ten and FSU will always be playing for those other two or three spots. Someone is always going to get left out but I like the Big 12's chances as much as any other conference.
As an OU fan, I'm trying to figure out why I'm paying big bucks to the athletic department to watch home games against Iowa State, Baylor, Tech, and TCU? Not just this year, but all the time! The Big 12 has OU / Texas in Football and that's it. Everybody else is just filler for any league BCS or Mid Major.
David Boren has one chance here, and I sure hope he's been on the phone doing everything in his power to work a deal with the PAC, SEC, or BIG to save OU long term. I don't mind suffering short term say in the SEC, if long term OU is in a stable conference.
Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*
Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*
Just take one of the final two SEC spots and leave chance out of this thing with getting into the playoff. We would make a ton of money and have the opportunity to earn it on the field each and every year all the while playing some exciting conference match ups.
Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*
The B12's best team got housed by the Pac12s second best, our second best team got housed by the SECs 3rd or 4th best, and Texas was third best. The rest are a bunch of mediocre wanna bes. Dont see a very bright future either, with UT not looking to improve much, OU about the same, KSU probably taking a step back, etc.
We may be #2 in football right now, but the rest of our sports are getting left in the dust and football will too if we stand pat.
Rumor has it here on the East Coast that Oregon has scheduled UVA as one of their non-conference games...
Meetings are Monday and Tuesday. Maybe something interesting happens.
Didn't see this posted, nothing too interesting. It's just something to read.
This next one is SBNation so take it FWIW. Tulsa/BigEast stuff. Nothing particularly new, just a different POV and something to read.At the recent NCAA Convention in Grapevine, Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby suggested that his conference would talk about the advantages of the current size vs. 12, 14 or even 16 members.
While Bowlsby remains skeptical that bigger is better, even the small acknowledgement reignited rumors. One had the Big Ten, SEC and Big 12 raiding the vulnerable ACC for as many as 10 teams. Such a move would go against every signal Bowlsby has sent as commissioner.
In fact, Bowlsby confirmed “exploratory discussions regarding partnerships and collaborations” with three other conferences on scheduling and marketing, including the ACC. He cautioned that none was close to fruition.
A slow-motion version of the same ACC scenario might be something for ADs to game plan.
What if Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany, who has coveted ACC schools like North Carolina, Virginia, Georgia Tech and even new member Pittsburgh, goes rogue and plucks two schools? The Big Ten would move to super-conference status with 16 members.
SEC counterpart Mike Slive would likely respond by adding two more, Virginia Tech and one other. Because of a “gentlemen’s agreement” in the league, the SEC would be unlikely to add schools in states where they already have members. Florida State, Miami, Clemson and Georgia Tech (if not taken by the Big Ten) could be left in a floundering conference.
Imagine two or four or even six schools desperately calling the Big 12 seeking refuge and an immediate answer. The Big 12 would have to be prepared for a move large enough to reshape college sports.
Bowlsby told “The Ticket” KTCK-AM (1310) on Wednesday that he was “not convinced based on my conversations with both commissioners that the move to 16 is in any way imminent.”
Two days later, The Columbus Dispatch published minutes of an Ohio State athletic council meeting from December, after the Big Ten’s addition of Maryland and Rutgers. Ohio State president Gordon Gee told the group that “there has been ongoing discussion” about expansion and that he “believes there is movement towards three or four super conferences that are made up of 16-20 teams.”
Other scenarios could be in play, too. What if the majority of the conferences in the coming four-team football playoff mandate a conference title game as a condition for selection?
While the Big 12 seems set on 10, things could change. In an interview before the NCAA Convention, Texas men’s athletic director DeLoss Dodds, who favors 10 schools for now, acknowledged “there may be some thought of 12.”
Last month at the Heart of Dallas Bowl, Oklahoma State football coach Mike Gundy endorsed additional schools in the Big 12.
“Well, I think we need to expand,” Gundy said. “I said it last year and everybody laughed at me at the Big 12 meetings. I think other people are trying to expand, and I think if you don’t [expand] you get caught behind the 8-ball, in my opinion.”
What's the old gangland saying: Keep your friends close but your enemies closer?
Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby has to be familiar. His conference's ADs are meeting Monday and Tuesday in Dallas with just about everything on the table for the future.
Bowlsby confirmed to CBSSports.com that the league is in the exploratory stage about an alliance with the ACC and perhaps some other leagues. That could involve a scheduling agreement, marketing, anything to enrich both conferences.
“I think he is doing something that is very smart,” said a person with knowledge of the process. “He's looking at a way to enhance the value of the Big 12 without having split his money up any further.”
In other words, no expansion. Such an arrangement might quash speculation about Clemson and Florida State eventually coming to the Big 12. It's still a debate whether those schools add value to the Big 12. And the discussion doesn't start unless, say, Jim Delany raids the ACC again.
TV partners had not been looped in yet on what Bowlsby calls exploratory talks with those other leagues. And never say never in these uncertain times of realignment but that's why there is strength in joining hands from Tobacco Road to the Great Plains. Despite their different sizes (10 teams vs. 14), the Big 12 and ACC look a lot alike. They each have their cornerstone schools -- Texas/Oklahoma, North Carolina/Duke. Each has a similar profile in basketball. (Don't laugh: From 2000-2009, the Big 12 had more teams in the tournament and a similar winning percentage -- .624 compared to ACC's .654)
They need each other in football. Lord knows, the ACC could use an upgrade. Bowlsby admitted that Oklahoma State's situation was disconcerting in 2011. The Cowboys finished .0086 behind Alabama for the BCS title game. A nonconference scheduling alliance could be symbiotic.
That's why it's important that Bowlsby knows the intricacies of NCAA basketball committee. He spent two years as the chairman of the powerful body from 2003-2005. The playoff selection committee is going to be a lot like dealing with that basketball committee. Bowlsby told me there will be metrics for that football committee to measure conference strength and nonconference strength. Think of the RPI.
A scheduling alliance helps both leagues. Miami and Florida State available to the Big 12. Oklahoma and Texas matriculating through the ACC. Remember, the ACC already has Notre Dame. This might be what Bowlsby meant by being “proactive” in expansion.
The ACC and Big 12 each make about the same amount per year in TV revenue -- $19.8 million for the Big 12, $19.5 million for the ACC. (That is strictly TV revenue and does not include other payouts.)
“Bob doesn't want to expand, doesn't believe in it,” said a source. “Doesn't believe it's good for the student-athlete.”
Bowlsby has basically said that publicly, but the decision might not be his. If Delany gets that itchy trigger finger, then there might be a decision to be made. But if you're partners, then a midnight raid from the Big Ten becomes less likely. There's strength in numbers. Those numbers start with “$”.
Instead of expansion, “I'd go the other way,” said an industry source, “really own the fact that they're (Big 12) 10 teams, they're the only true conference champion, the annual tour [conference schedule] doesn't skip a town.”
It's already been reported that the ACC is exploring a network. A combined Big 12/ACC network is more problematic. The Big 12 has multiple TV partners (ESPN, Fox, Texas with Longhorn Network).
Bowlsby actually called the whole thing having “friends with benefits.”
If the Big 12 wanted to stage a conference championship game, it could probably do it tomorrow. Bowlsby's idea to get rid of the NCAA's 12-team conference minimum for such a game has support from the ACC -- and probably ever other conference. It is noncontroversial.
Bowlsby said the league could take the idea of a championship game with a 10-team league to the NCAA board of directors this year. But the Big 12 has to think long and hard about staging such a game. It is the only BCS league that doesn't have a conference title game.
Good or bad? It has been pointed out many times that in 2011, Oklahoma State would have passed Alabama for the No. 2 spot in the BCS if the Cowboys had played in and won a Big 12 title game. Aside from the SEC where the favorite has won the majority of the games, catapulting that league into national championship dominance, a conference title game has been a dicey proposition.
In 2012 if the Big 12 had a conference championship game, Kansas State would have most likely played Oklahoma. Whoever won, it would have made any difference in the BCS. There was only one at-large BCS berth available in 2012. (Oregon in the Fiesta Bowl). The championship game loser would not have gone to the BCS.
In the playoff era, there will be precious few at-large slots available after the two national semifinals. An ACC/Big 12 alliance would strengthen their shot at filling those slots.
I hate this cop-out 'friends with benefits' idea. I really do.
Is this accurate? Or is it accurate to a point but doesn't include the fact that the Tier 3 of the Big 12 is not included?The ACC and Big 12 each make about the same amount per year in TV revenue -- $19.8 million for the Big 12, $19.5 million for the ACC. (That is strictly TV revenue and does not include other payouts.)
So Boren and Co. brought in a commissioner that doesn't believe in expansion?“Bob doesn't want to expand, doesn't believe in it,” said a source. “Doesn't believe it's good for the student-athlete.”
Didn't know that. I wonder if Boren did. Surely he had to have.
This 'industry source' was from ESPN, I'd bet. They don't want to add any more money for ACC schools they already have by the balls.Instead of expansion, “I'd go the other way,” said an industry source, “really own the fact that they're (Big 12) 10 teams, they're the only true conference champion, the annual tour [conference schedule] doesn't skip a town.”
OU needs to ungraded its talent !
Does this “friends with benefits.” include better recruiting opportunities for OU?
#Big12 Commissioner Bob Bowlsby after today's meetings "We have found evidence on all sides of the issue (re: expansion)"
Bowlsby - "We are never going to get bigger just for the sake of getting bigger" #Big12
Bowlsby - "Our group thinks alliances have some merit. But that doesn't necessarily mean that is what we end up doing" #Big12
Bowlsby (regarding expansion topic) "It was a free-flowing opportunity to interject a lot of ideas. It was intended that way and it was"
Bowlsby (regarding expansion topics) "It is not what we are prepared to do. It is that we are prepared." #Big12
Bowlsby (Re: Conference Championship Game) "We like our path to the postseason and feel good about it." #Big12
Bowlsby (Re: FB Championship Games): "It is a good time not to be in the Championship Game business". #Big12
Bowlsby regarding bowls "We want good destinations, good opponents and appropriate compensation. It is not much different than anyone else"
Is this misdirection or does the big12 (Dodds) really believe all the shit they're shoveling. If we're trying like hell to kill the conference, can we speed it up please! I don't want to drag this out over several years. I'd rather it be done already.
So basically Bowlsby will still take the thumb up the ass approach?
Jeremy Fowler of CBS sports: http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoot...-big-12-agenda
This is from earlier in the afternoon.
Now the rumor and possible interpretation of this is a merger of the Big 12 and the ACC is a possibility. It would depend on who the B1G takes and if they go past 16. If they do then it could be a full on merger of what's left-over with the Big12/ACC going to 20 schools as well. (and adding from Tulane and/or BYU if the B1G or SEC take more and we need to fill out to 20.We're live from the lobby of the Four Seasons in Irving, Texas, where Big 12 athletic directors are considering expanding to 24 teams (take that, Jim Delany).
Well, 24 might be quasi-accurate depending on how commissioner Bob Bowlsby structures this “alliance” with a 14-team ACC. The two could enhance their scheduling portfolio while staving off real expansion -- at least in theory -- though talks haven't progressed beyond the exploratory phase.
The alliance will be on the agenda during the two-day meetings, as will “conference composition, academic discussion, where things are heading, future bowl agreements, where do we want to go from here,” according to league spokesman Bob Burda.
Personally I think that makes no sense. We don't have a conference network....so we don't need Boston College. We need big football match-ups, which the ACC is preciously short of themselves.
NOW....if we are talking some of the Big 12 heads west to the PAC....leaving a lot of schools in the Big 12 looking for a home.....then it makes far more sense.
I pray for OU to the PAC if we really are talking a merger with the ACC.
Big 12 considers what Big Ten, SEC might do next in expansion
By Jeremy Fowler | College Football Insider
January 28, 2013 9:18 pm ET
IRVING, Texas -- The Big 12 expressed widespread satisfaction with its 10-team model during a Monday meeting with athletic directors but still identified potentially available schools that the Big Ten and Southeastern Conference likely wouldn't target as expansion options, CBSSports.com has learned.
The Big 12 pointed out in its closed-door, four-hour meeting at the Four Seasons Las Colinas that the Big Ten, should it expand, would likely push for schools already included in the Association of American Universities – in the ACC, that list includes Virginia, UNC, Pitt, Georgia Tech and Duke.
The conference also explained the SEC, should it expand, would likely gravitate toward schools from states where it doesn't have a presence – in the ACC, that includes schools in Virginia (UVA, Virginia Tech) or North Carolina (UNC, Duke, N.C. State, Wake Forest).
Based on that information, the conference identified teams that would be left, including reputable football schools Florida State, Clemson and Louisville.
This was a fact-finding mission for a conference that seems comfortable with 10 teams but is exhausting all options.
Commissioner Bob Bowlsby made clear any additional members must bring the same amount of annual revenue as its per-school average of $26.2 million, the highest number among the conferences.
Bowlsby calls the 10-team setup “terrific” but also wants contingencies in place for the future, depending on what develops around him.
“We have to be prepared to respond to that changing environment,” Bowlsby said. “Planning ahead and trying to be nimble enough to deal with any eventuality.”
The 14-team ACC is one of the five power conferences but could be susceptible if Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany, or any other commissioner, gets aggressive. Maryland, which left the ACC for the Big Ten in November, projects to make $32 million when joining the league in two years, compared to $20 million with the ACC, according to a Sports Illustrated report.
ACC presidents have expressed public support for the league, which added Louisville in late November. The results of the ACC's lawsuit with Maryland over a $50 million exit fee could have expansion implications. The league is in better shape if it wins the case and Maryland has to pay the entire amount.
Upon leaving the meeting at around 5 p.m. Monday, athletic directors deferred to Bowlsby as part of a “one voice” mantra. Bowlsby basically spoke in eloquent code when discussing his group's meeting, which also included scheduling and a potential alliance with the ACC that could, in theory, curb expansion.
Tap-dancing is not optional in expansion. Specifics are barely divulged in public settings.
The group addressed several “what ifs” during the meeting, Bowlsby said, declining comment on the exact nature of those scenarios.
“We have evidence on both sides of it,” said Bowlsby on the pros and cons of adding vs. staying put. “I don't know if any of it's compelling enough to cause change right now.”
In other words: Be comfortable, but perhaps not too comfortable if word leaks that Delany is trigger-happy.
When asked what the plan is should the Big Ten expand from 14 to 16 teams, Bowlsby said, “It's not about what we're prepared to do, it's that we're prepared.”
With the college football playoff looming in 2014, conferences are jockeying for national semifinal positioning.
There's an argument that a conference championship game, which would necessitate 12 teams, would have elevated 2011 Oklahoma State and 2012 Kansas State -- both with one loss – closer to the top of the standings in a playoff format.
Bowlsby points out ratings and ticket sales are down across the country in those games (except with the SEC). Just in case, the league has asked the NCAA to revisit its ruling that 12 teams are necessary to qualify for a title game.
For now, the Big 12 is evaluating how much it can maximize value without splitting revenue more than 10 ways. But still, the rapid pace of today's realignment has made the league re-evaluate.
If the league gets proactive, it's still uncertain how attracted it is to the teams listed above.
The meeting also addressed the league's curiosity with Bowlsby's proposed alliance with the ACC – “friends with benefits,” he calls it. The two conferences could share resources, television scheduling, bowl agreements and more.
The Pac-12 and Big Ten tried this last year but plans fell through. Looking back, a completion of that deal might have satiated the Big Ten's appetite to expand.
The alliance seems more likely for the Big 12 than expansion. It would also be another boost of confidence for the ACC.
“We're prepared to support it,” Bowlsby said. “Everyone was on board with that. They were unanimous.”
whistling past the graveyard.
So the meeting on Monday was basically like "nothing to see hear move along" Big XII & Federal Govt seem to have alot in common.
**** it, let's go to the SEC
I understand that yesterday, a myriad of possibilities were discussed at the meetings. I also understand they talked about the value of expanding with ACC schools and non-ACC schools, including Tulane, BYU, & Boise St.
I'm of the belief that this conference is ultimately doomed if we don't go past 10. I'm also semi-convinced, that might actually be the ultimate goal of some of the schools. They want to see what happens to the NCAA landscape for the next 10 to 13 years, and then use the "new landscape" as excuse/cover to go independent...or to even try to form a new conference with cherry picked members (starting with UT and ND..which has been hinted at before)
They can get out of this conference and break it up MUCH easier if it has 10 members then if it has 14 or 16.
Personally I don't want to see OU slowly choking to death in a slowly dying conference for the next 10 to 13 years.
Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*
But that's just the thing. Trends are trends. They come and go. Like A&M's sparse periods of success. Oklahoma has had a great football program at least since the end of WW2. That's hardly a trend.
Picking on the Big 12 is one thing but just because we occasionally beat up on our coach/program doesn't give you the license to do that. You don't have the same expectations that we do. You can't even fathom those expectations. Congratulations on your 2-loss season. Under Stoops, we have farted those out regularly with the help of the punching bag known as Texas A&M. Thanks.
More meetings today, right?
I wonder if the expansion agenda has already been exhausted.
If the ACC is poached and is reduced to 10, then everything maybe be fine w/r/t this alliance. We both play round-robin schedules and then play a Championship Game. That all by itself cuts the Big 5 champions down to 4 assuring that we will have a chance to prove it on the field.
But I don't think that would be the case. The ACC would keep 12.
If they lost 4, they'd add UConn and someone (Cincy?) and keep their CCG.
Thus, let's say this happens in 2014. And those ACC teams (those in the playoff hunt in 2014) would have played 13 games, while the Big 12 co-champions OU and Texas play 12, and we don't even know which of the two deserves to go. I mean, Oklahoma beat Texas head to head but since Bob Stoops sold his soul on that issue by claiming "co-champs" with KSU in 2012, he's lost that head-to-head argument on principle. But whatever, I was just using this opportunity to get a dig in. But I'm sure you guys get the point. It remains an argument...the point here is to try and get as much clarity as possible.
The problem is playing fewer games relative to our peers. The same peers we are trying to beat into the playoff. We need CLARITY for our conference champion. We need to be in a position where the Big 12 champ is seen as a lock to get into the playoff. You can't do that by playing fewer games.
And a 'scheduling arrangement' with the ACC doesn't fix that.
What if we draw Clemson in a year where they suck? We played Miami back to back years and they weren't any good. FSU wasn't great. V-Tech is trending down. Playing them in the regular season might not help perception much at all especially with potentially SEC-1 and SEC-2 along with the B1G Champion AND the Pac 12 Champion.
The question is - do we really think the Big 12 brass are oblivious to this?
Or is that the guaranteed TV money is just that important?
We could add literally ANYBODY at #11 and #12 and it would cost us about $3 million per year, maybe less depending on what FOX or ESPN would kick in.
So is that what all this is about? $3 million dollars (or even less) per school per year? I'm not saying that is an insignificant amount of money. But it certainly is a relative number stacked up next to the potential playoff payouts.
Speaking of money, lets take a look at this Forbes report that was posted in the DMN :
Breaking down conference revenues
Revenue for the major conferences from bowl games, the NCAA basketball tournament and TV broadcast rights, as reported this month by Forbes magazine:
Conference , Bowl , NCAA , TV , Total , Per school
Big Ten , $40M , $20M , $250M , $310M , $25.83M
Pac-12 , $39M , $14M , $250M , $303M , $25.25M
ACC , $35M , $17M , $240M , $292M , $24.33M
SEC , $50M , $15M , $205M , $270M , $22.50M
Big 12 , $42M , $20M , $200M , $262M , $26.20M
According to that print out the ACC might not be as slow or behind as we think, thanks in large part to their BB earnings. By dropping and staying to 10 members, the big 12-2 has suddenly caught up to and surpassed alot of the larger conferences in the "per school payout" metric. Interstingly enough, I think the whole "adds value" comment is geared towards getting someone who adds to both pots (fb and bb) ... so yeah.
P.S in this scenario Louisville doesn't /didnt look that bad of a choice, especially if we could snag FSU/Miami and or GT
old Tulane rumors: http://www.nola.com/tulane/index.ssf...tting_inv.html
As for the new one, that was also mentioned by someone with a source at the Big 12 meetings on the WVU scout board yesterday.
Reasons why Tulane makes sense: 1) AAU member which the conference needs 2) New market for TV 3) Geographically VERY close 4) Once the prime school in the state of Louisiana and had a 80k stadium on campus (home of the Sugar Bowl and 3 Super Bowls) & as a former member of the SEC has 3 SEC championships Here's a Fox Sports article on the Old Tulane Stadium from 4 days ago.
Personally I think it will take time to build their program back up, but the egg-heads like their academics. The Big 12 can handle having a Northwestern/Vanderbilt type.
actually I read the numbers/collums wrong .... nevermind , I am a dumb ass
If we are going to Merge with the ACC, they need to trim some fat first, and probably trim some fat from the Big 12.
We made this same mistake in the 90's. Fat was trimmed from the SWC, but none from the Big 8. Before Arkansas joined the SEC the Big 12 should have been
That league could have formed in the 90's and would be as strong as the SEC
Same applies now, if we are doing anything with the ACC, lets merge and trim fat off both sides.
(Lousiville or VT)
Cut out dead weight like Iowa State, BC, Wake Forest ....
Tulane only makes sense as a #16 school, particularly if the Big 12 adds 5 other schools schools in "SEC Territory." That said, there's no reason the Green Wave couldn't be Vandy level competitive with the right coach. Big 12 conference membership wouldn't help Tulane beat LSU for in-state kids, but it's a big edge wrt getting kids who might otherwise go to Southern Miss, ULM, ULL, or LaTech. LaTech and ULM were both pretty solid a year ago. One of those four school is usually pretty decent. You could build a Big 12 caliber roster with the better players on those teams.
I saw the idea floated last year about the Big 12 growing into a "mirror" conference to the SEC. Depending on how things shake out, adding FSU, Miami, Clemson, Louisville, Georgia Tech, and Tulane would put the Big 12 all across the south. Same basic geography, similar number of historic heavy-weights, lots of built in rivalries. We'd be the coke and pepsi of college football in the South. And with Miami, Georgia Tech, and Tulane on board, we'd have added three Top 50 universities to our ranks.
But I don't think we can or will add anyone until either the B1G or SEC poaches another team or two from the ACC first. And I don't think that happens until the Maryland suit settles.
Problem is if your on the wrong side of too many in state match-ups (big bro- little bro, not who wins in a given year) you become a little sister conference. Like MR pibb to DR pepper
Certainly UCF or USF
Im ok with GT and probably Louisville but keep out Tulane, UCF, USF etc...
The Big 12 is being smart. The Big Ten or SEC is likely to take another ACC team... AFTER the Maryland crap gets sorted out. I still think we end up with 2 or more ACC teams after that happens. ACC is witholding revenue NOW from MD which is against their bylaws. At minimum I would expect another departing team to wait for the courts to set them straight on that before moving so they won't be without any league revenue for the short term.
Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*