(08-03-2013 11:56 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 11:45 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Is this the same moron citing "The Dude" on the 247 sports board?

Quote:buckeye9595

**BREAKING TEXAS TO B1G TALKS**

The Dude of WV @theDudeofWV 11m
It doesn’t make me happy to say it, but Texas has something up Dodd’s 10-gallon hat. Texas thinks it can get out of the GoR. I HOPE NOT.

The Dude of WV @theDudeofWV 7m
@JakeBumgarner B1G. This is real and it scares the **** out of me

The Dude of WV @theDudeofWV 4m
The B1G & Dodd believe Texas can challenge the GoR due to the amount of $ Horns would bring to BTN.

The Dude of WV @theDudeofWV 3m
Vandy & Mizzo are NOT in play but another B12 school is.

The stuff from the Ohio State board comes from their pay Insider board, not the public board.

Just saw over on the WVU board the name of the guy stating all this, its not buckeye9595

fwiw, that nonsense IS from Ohio State's pay board on 247 sports. the rest of the 6 page thread is a bunch of bull speculation just like we've got here and 9595 pretending he knows what he's talking about while referencing "The Dude".

The B10 will be negotiating a new tv deal soon, so there could be some truth to this. Moreover, the B1G at one time was considering OU and KU according to certain reports:

“According to a report by omaha.com’s Lee Barfknecht, the Big Ten has looked into taking Oklahoma and Kansas from the Big 12….”

http://collegesportsblog.dallasnews.com/...g-12.html/


“Two sources have told The World-Herald that the Big Ten has done prior 'homework' on Oklahoma, Kansas and Vanderbilt among other schools who might some day be expansion targets. The Big 12 grant-of-rights deal didn’t stop a look-see for OU and KU.

Besides a legal challenge, the potential future TV money available could still make it profitable for a school to move.”

http://sports.omaha.com/2013/04/22/reali...XbGDSthlQ0

Consequently, the B10 might be considering this power move:

(08-03-2013 11:11 PM)JRsec Wrote:  If the move was to 18 it would mean three divisions of 6.

Iowa Nebraska plus Texas, OU, KU, and either ISU or possibly MU. Then the core of each divisions schedule would be 5 games within their geographical grouping and two each rotated each year from the other two divisions.

(08-03-2013 11:58 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 11:57 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  Also, the Dud shouldn't be worried. If this goes down the two big candidates for ACC inclusion would be West Virginia and Connecticut.

Wrong geographical direction. WVU wouldn't have anything to worry about though.

What do you mean by that?

(08-03-2013 11:54 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 11:37 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  To talk about collusion and stuff...

If the Big Ten wants/gets Mizzou from the SEC and Texas (and maybe two more?) from that region of the country (Kansas, OU?)...the SEC MUST (yes, MUST) move with three teams of its own and quickly. Getting poached (Mizzou) and sitting at 13 while the Big Ten has 16 or 18 is a PR NIGHTMARE for the SEC. (Yes, I realize how ridiculous that sounds to football minds...but it is.)

If the ACC is impenetrable....then the SEC has to go for a Texas school or two...Kansas State...West Virginia...and/or Oklahoma State for sure. The SEC wouldn't make out too badly. And five/six/seven schools bailing on the Big 12 would make the GOR nothing.

The PAC will have to be involved too. Will take 8 dissolution votes within the Big 12 and very likely none of them are willing to do it without all ten at least grudgingly going along with it.

Yep, and He1nous if there is any truth to this I don't think anyone expands beyond 16 because gaining that cooperation from all parties wouldn't be there if one conference was going to cherry pick the best 4 properties. In this rumor's scenario I could see Texas and Kansas to the Big 10. Then two of Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, and West Virginia to the SEC. And two to four of all of the remainder to the PAC. Only then would you see any others that might offer some value to the remaining conferences taken. What the ACC would do in my opinion is nothing if they weren't getting Texas.

This is another reason I give this a low probability of being true. If the rumor was Oklahoma to the Big 10 with Kansas then I could see Texas with Baylor and either Texas Tech or T.C.U. to the ACC. Then with Texas Tech to the PAC and West Virginia and one (Ok. St.) to the SEC its a done deal. Without Texas to the ACC I don't think it gets worked out at all to accommodate 8. If the Big 10 tries to grab the best 4 nobody is going to work with them and it is going to be very very costly.

Okay, just for fun, here's my guess at the domino effects of Texas somehow finding a way to invalidate the GOR and joining the Big 10:

- Someone has to go with them, and I don't think the Longhorns make the move without the Sooners. And the Big 12 will overlook Oklahoma's non-AAU status to land Texas. So UT and OU to the Big 10.

- The SEC responds by going to 16 with WVU and OSU, strong football schools that fit culturally and geographically.

- The ACC reinforces its basketball supremacy by going to 16 with Kansas and Kansas State.

- Now the Pac-12 has a problem. Texas Tech is an acceptable add but TCU doesn't meet its academic standards, Baylor is too conservative and Iowa State is too far out of the footprint. So the conference has to add three from the MWC to get to 16. Congratulations New Mexico (state flagship, academic fit, great basketball), UNLV (big market, great basketball) and Hawaii (state flagship, academic fit, gateway to Pacific/Asia).

See what I did there?

(08-04-2013 12:02 AM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 11:58 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 11:57 PM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  Also, the Dud shouldn't be worried. If this goes down the two big candidates for ACC inclusion would be West Virginia and Connecticut.

Wrong geographical direction. WVU wouldn't have anything to worry about though.

What do you mean by that?

I don't think WVU would end up in the ACC and I don't think UConn will end up in one of the Major Conferences. I DO think that the ACC would be adding two full time members though should all of this really happen.

If Texas is actually talking to folks, that is just the tip of the iceberg.

(08-04-2013 12:08 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  Okay, just for fun, here's my guess at the domino effects of Texas somehow finding a way to invalidate the GOR and joining the Big 10:

- Someone has to go with them, and I don't think the Longhorns make the move without the Sooners. And the Big 12 will overlook Oklahoma's non-AAU status to land Texas. So UT and OU to the Big 10.

- The SEC responds by going to 16 with WVU and OSU, strong football schools that fit culturally and geographically.

- The ACC reinforces its basketball supremacy by going to 16 with Kansas and Kansas State.

- Now the Pac-12 has a problem. Texas Tech is an acceptable add but TCU doesn't meet its academic standards, Baylor is too conservative and Iowa State is too far out of the footprint. So the conference has to add three from the MWC to get to 16. Congratulations New Mexico (state flagship, academic fit, great basketball), UNLV (big market, great basketball) and Hawaii (state flagship, academic fit, gateway to Pacific/Asia).

See what I did there?

UT to the ACC as a partial member with a similar contract as Notre Dame but not identical. Perhaps Baylor and TCU both come with them as small private institutions that fit best with the ACC than any of the other conferences.

WVU and OSU to the SEC

OU and KU to the Big Ten

Yes...the PAC does kind of get the left overs but those left overs are better than the rest of the PAC's options in the West. Nothing against the rest of the schools but it's true. It is especially true because the PAC really could use some Central Time Zone representation in regards to dealing with the Networks.

Tech, ISU and KSU all offer that and all of them offer competitive programs. You can pick one of those MWC schools to go along with them.

(08-04-2013 12:03 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 11:54 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 11:37 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  To talk about collusion and stuff...

If the Big Ten wants/gets Mizzou from the SEC and Texas (and maybe two more?) from that region of the country (Kansas, OU?)...the SEC MUST (yes, MUST) move with three teams of its own and quickly. Getting poached (Mizzou) and sitting at 13 while the Big Ten has 16 or 18 is a PR NIGHTMARE for the SEC. (Yes, I realize how ridiculous that sounds to football minds...but it is.)

If the ACC is impenetrable....then the SEC has to go for a Texas school or two...Kansas State...West Virginia...and/or Oklahoma State for sure. The SEC wouldn't make out too badly. And five/six/seven schools bailing on the Big 12 would make the GOR nothing.

The PAC will have to be involved too. Will take 8 dissolution votes within the Big 12 and very likely none of them are willing to do it without all ten at least grudgingly going along with it.

Yep, and He1nous if there is any truth to this I don't think anyone expands beyond 16 because gaining that cooperation from all parties wouldn't be there if one conference was going to cherry pick the best 4 properties. In this rumor's scenario I could see Texas and Kansas to the Big 10. Then two of Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, and West Virginia to the SEC. And two to four of all of the remainder to the PAC. Only then would you see any others that might offer some value to the remaining conferences taken. What the ACC would do in my opinion is nothing if they weren't getting Texas.

This is another reason I give this a low probability of being true. If the rumor was Oklahoma to the Big 10 with Kansas then I could see Texas with Baylor and either Texas Tech or T.C.U. to the ACC. Then with Texas Tech to the PAC and West Virginia and one (Ok. St.) to the SEC its a done deal. Without Texas to the ACC I don't think it gets worked out at all to accommodate 8. If the Big 10 tries to grab the best 4 nobody is going to work with them and it is going to be very very costly.

For realignment to occur in the P5 all you need are three parties; the school that wants to move and a negotiated agreement between ESPN and FOX, unless it was an ACC school wanting to move to the SEC. In that case there are only two parties, the school and ESPN.

This is true because the networks own the grant of rights, they can decide whether to pay enough money to the conference from where the school is leaving to prevent or limit damages, and they know how much money they will make when the school goes to their new conference.

Of course, the B1G and the SEC are willing beneficiaries if presented with Aces.

(08-03-2013 09:29 PM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  wish they would take Mizzou so WVU can go to the SEC where they belong

I want WVU in the SEC in the worse way, and they do belong, but with another school from the Big XII, and not named Missouri.

(08-04-2013 12:03 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 11:54 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 11:37 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  To talk about collusion and stuff...

If the Big Ten wants/gets Mizzou from the SEC and Texas (and maybe two more?) from that region of the country (Kansas, OU?)...the SEC MUST (yes, MUST) move with three teams of its own and quickly. Getting poached (Mizzou) and sitting at 13 while the Big Ten has 16 or 18 is a PR NIGHTMARE for the SEC. (Yes, I realize how ridiculous that sounds to football minds...but it is.)

If the ACC is impenetrable....then the SEC has to go for a Texas school or two...Kansas State...West Virginia...and/or Oklahoma State for sure. The SEC wouldn't make out too badly. And five/six/seven schools bailing on the Big 12 would make the GOR nothing.

The PAC will have to be involved too. Will take 8 dissolution votes within the Big 12 and very likely none of them are willing to do it without all ten at least grudgingly going along with it.

Yep, and He1nous if there is any truth to this I don't think anyone expands beyond 16 because gaining that cooperation from all parties wouldn't be there if one conference was going to cherry pick the best 4 properties. In this rumor's scenario I could see Texas and Kansas to the Big 10. Then two of Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, and West Virginia to the SEC. And two to four of all of the remainder to the PAC. Only then would you see any others that might offer some value to the remaining conferences taken. What the ACC would do in my opinion is nothing if they weren't getting Texas.

This is another reason I give this a low probability of being true. If the rumor was Oklahoma to the Big 10 with Kansas then I could see Texas with Baylor and either Texas Tech or T.C.U. to the ACC. Then with Texas Tech to the PAC and West Virginia and one (Ok. St.) to the SEC its a done deal. Without Texas to the ACC I don't think it gets worked out at all to accommodate 8. If the Big 10 tries to grab the best 4 nobody is going to work with them and it is going to be very very costly.

You nailed it. I wont bother going through specifics because you know my beliefs. This talk of Texas to the Big Ten at worst is just more realignment message board garbage. At best it is a coordinated effort to start dislodging important people from their stalwart positions that are holding back progress. The best way to do that is to install some fear into them. Fear motivates.

(08-03-2013 10:29 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  If Texas wasn't willing to share the limelight with USC in the Pac-12, why would it be willing to share attention with Michigan and Ohio State in the Big 10?

Sure the Big 10 would love to add the Longhorns but in the end I think Texas will always prefer to be the biggest fish in its own pond.

If the pond is worth keeping. The LHN is a failure. I think they would move on that issue.

(08-04-2013 12:20 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 12:03 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 11:54 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 11:37 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  To talk about collusion and stuff...

If the Big Ten wants/gets Mizzou from the SEC and Texas (and maybe two more?) from that region of the country (Kansas, OU?)...the SEC MUST (yes, MUST) move with three teams of its own and quickly. Getting poached (Mizzou) and sitting at 13 while the Big Ten has 16 or 18 is a PR NIGHTMARE for the SEC. (Yes, I realize how ridiculous that sounds to football minds...but it is.)

If the ACC is impenetrable....then the SEC has to go for a Texas school or two...Kansas State...West Virginia...and/or Oklahoma State for sure. The SEC wouldn't make out too badly. And five/six/seven schools bailing on the Big 12 would make the GOR nothing.

The PAC will have to be involved too. Will take 8 dissolution votes within the Big 12 and very likely none of them are willing to do it without all ten at least grudgingly going along with it.

Yep, and He1nous if there is any truth to this I don't think anyone expands beyond 16 because gaining that cooperation from all parties wouldn't be there if one conference was going to cherry pick the best 4 properties. In this rumor's scenario I could see Texas and Kansas to the Big 10. Then two of Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, and West Virginia to the SEC. And two to four of all of the remainder to the PAC. Only then would you see any others that might offer some value to the remaining conferences taken. What the ACC would do in my opinion is nothing if they weren't getting Texas.

This is another reason I give this a low probability of being true. If the rumor was Oklahoma to the Big 10 with Kansas then I could see Texas with Baylor and either Texas Tech or T.C.U. to the ACC. Then with Texas Tech to the PAC and West Virginia and one (Ok. St.) to the SEC its a done deal. Without Texas to the ACC I don't think it gets worked out at all to accommodate 8. If the Big 10 tries to grab the best 4 nobody is going to work with them and it is going to be very very costly.

You nailed it. I wont bother going through specifics because you know my beliefs. This talk of Texas to the Big Ten at worst is just more realignment message board garbage. At best it is a coordinated effort to start dislodging important people from their stalwart positions that are holding back progress. The best way to do that is to install some fear into them. Fear motivates.

Or, it could be disinformation designed to cover OU and KU's desire to go ahead and get things rolling. They could always claim they believed that Texas was going to jump based on public rumors (and likely actual talks). Texas gets its leverage with ESPN to gain some perks if they do move to the ACC, Slive picks up two new states to help with markets and scheduling. And the PAC might pick up a couple as well.

In the end they get out of the GOR by everyone pointing fingers at each other and bolting in the middle of all of the confusion. That way if only 8 go nobody takes the blame for leaving the other two behind.

How's that for a late evening cynical view of a conspiracy theory?

(08-03-2013 11:37 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  To talk about collusion and stuff...

If the Big Ten wants/gets Mizzou from the SEC and Texas (and maybe two more?) from that region of the country (Kansas, OU?)...the SEC MUST (yes, MUST) move with three teams of its own and quickly. Getting poached (Mizzou) and sitting at 13 while the Big Ten has 16 or 18 is a PR NIGHTMARE for the SEC. (Yes, I realize how ridiculous that sounds to football minds...but it is.)

If the ACC is impenetrable....then the SEC has to go for a Texas school or two...Kansas State...West Virginia...and/or Oklahoma State for sure. The SEC wouldn't make out too badly. And five/six/seven schools bailing on the Big 12 would make the GOR nothing.

Sorry, but count Missouri out of the equation. I think Mizzou is all through with Texas. Who would ever leave the SEC?

(08-04-2013 12:17 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 12:08 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  Okay, just for fun, here's my guess at the domino effects of Texas somehow finding a way to invalidate the GOR and joining the Big 10:

- Someone has to go with them, and I don't think the Longhorns make the move without the Sooners. And the Big 12 will overlook Oklahoma's non-AAU status to land Texas. So UT and OU to the Big 10.

- The SEC responds by going to 16 with WVU and OSU, strong football schools that fit culturally and geographically.

- The ACC reinforces its basketball supremacy by going to 16 with Kansas and Kansas State.

- Now the Pac-12 has a problem. Texas Tech is an acceptable add but TCU doesn't meet its academic standards, Baylor is too conservative and Iowa State is too far out of the footprint. So the conference has to add three from the MWC to get to 16. Congratulations New Mexico (state flagship, academic fit, great basketball), UNLV (big market, great basketball) and Hawaii (state flagship, academic fit, gateway to Pacific/Asia).

See what I did there?

UT to the ACC as a partial member with a similar contract as Notre Dame but not identical. Perhaps Baylor and TCU both come with them as small private institutions that fit best with the ACC than any of the other conferences.

WVU and OSU to the SEC

OU and KU to the Big Ten

Yes...the PAC does kind of get the left overs but those left overs are better than the rest of the PAC's options in the West. Nothing against the rest of the schools but it's true. It is especially true because the PAC really could use some Central Time Zone representation in regards to dealing with the Networks.

Tech, ISU and KSU all offer that and all of them offer competitive programs. You can pick one of those MWC schools to go along with them.

That's what the PAC 12 deserves. They had OU in their pocket and blew them off.

(08-04-2013 12:35 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 11:37 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  To talk about collusion and stuff...

If the Big Ten wants/gets Mizzou from the SEC and Texas (and maybe two more?) from that region of the country (Kansas, OU?)...the SEC MUST (yes, MUST) move with three teams of its own and quickly. Getting poached (Mizzou) and sitting at 13 while the Big Ten has 16 or 18 is a PR NIGHTMARE for the SEC. (Yes, I realize how ridiculous that sounds to football minds...but it is.)

If the ACC is impenetrable....then the SEC has to go for a Texas school or two...Kansas State...West Virginia...and/or Oklahoma State for sure. The SEC wouldn't make out too badly. And five/six/seven schools bailing on the Big 12 would make the GOR nothing.

Sorry, but count Missouri out of the equation. I think Mizzou is all through with Texas. Who would ever leave the SEC?

Tulane..... The most unconscionable mistake in history....

(08-04-2013 12:20 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 12:03 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 11:54 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 11:37 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  To talk about collusion and stuff...

If the Big Ten wants/gets Mizzou from the SEC and Texas (and maybe two more?) from that region of the country (Kansas, OU?)...the SEC MUST (yes, MUST) move with three teams of its own and quickly. Getting poached (Mizzou) and sitting at 13 while the Big Ten has 16 or 18 is a PR NIGHTMARE for the SEC. (Yes, I realize how ridiculous that sounds to football minds...but it is.)

If the ACC is impenetrable....then the SEC has to go for a Texas school or two...Kansas State...West Virginia...and/or Oklahoma State for sure. The SEC wouldn't make out too badly. And five/six/seven schools bailing on the Big 12 would make the GOR nothing.

The PAC will have to be involved too. Will take 8 dissolution votes within the Big 12 and very likely none of them are willing to do it without all ten at least grudgingly going along with it.

Yep, and He1nous if there is any truth to this I don't think anyone expands beyond 16 because gaining that cooperation from all parties wouldn't be there if one conference was going to cherry pick the best 4 properties. In this rumor's scenario I could see Texas and Kansas to the Big 10. Then two of Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, and West Virginia to the SEC. And two to four of all of the remainder to the PAC. Only then would you see any others that might offer some value to the remaining conferences taken. What the ACC would do in my opinion is nothing if they weren't getting Texas.

This is another reason I give this a low probability of being true. If the rumor was Oklahoma to the Big 10 with Kansas then I could see Texas with Baylor and either Texas Tech or T.C.U. to the ACC. Then with Texas Tech to the PAC and West Virginia and one (Ok. St.) to the SEC its a done deal. Without Texas to the ACC I don't think it gets worked out at all to accommodate 8. If the Big 10 tries to grab the best 4 nobody is going to work with them and it is going to be very very costly.

You nailed it. I wont bother going through specifics because you know my beliefs. This talk of Texas to the Big Ten at worst is just more realignment message board garbage. At best it is a coordinated effort to start dislodging important people from their stalwart positions that are holding back progress. The best way to do that is to install some fear into them. Fear motivates.

Yep. Fear sent Missouri to the SEC. I like fear.

(08-04-2013 12:46 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 12:20 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 12:03 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 11:54 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 11:37 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  To talk about collusion and stuff...

If the Big Ten wants/gets Mizzou from the SEC and Texas (and maybe two more?) from that region of the country (Kansas, OU?)...the SEC MUST (yes, MUST) move with three teams of its own and quickly. Getting poached (Mizzou) and sitting at 13 while the Big Ten has 16 or 18 is a PR NIGHTMARE for the SEC. (Yes, I realize how ridiculous that sounds to football minds...but it is.)

If the ACC is impenetrable....then the SEC has to go for a Texas school or two...Kansas State...West Virginia...and/or Oklahoma State for sure. The SEC wouldn't make out too badly. And five/six/seven schools bailing on the Big 12 would make the GOR nothing.

The PAC will have to be involved too. Will take 8 dissolution votes within the Big 12 and very likely none of them are willing to do it without all ten at least grudgingly going along with it.

Yep, and He1nous if there is any truth to this I don't think anyone expands beyond 16 because gaining that cooperation from all parties wouldn't be there if one conference was going to cherry pick the best 4 properties. In this rumor's scenario I could see Texas and Kansas to the Big 10. Then two of Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, and West Virginia to the SEC. And two to four of all of the remainder to the PAC. Only then would you see any others that might offer some value to the remaining conferences taken. What the ACC would do in my opinion is nothing if they weren't getting Texas.

This is another reason I give this a low probability of being true. If the rumor was Oklahoma to the Big 10 with Kansas then I could see Texas with Baylor and either Texas Tech or T.C.U. to the ACC. Then with Texas Tech to the PAC and West Virginia and one (Ok. St.) to the SEC its a done deal. Without Texas to the ACC I don't think it gets worked out at all to accommodate 8. If the Big 10 tries to grab the best 4 nobody is going to work with them and it is going to be very very costly.

You nailed it. I wont bother going through specifics because you know my beliefs. This talk of Texas to the Big Ten at worst is just more realignment message board garbage. At best it is a coordinated effort to start dislodging important people from their stalwart positions that are holding back progress. The best way to do that is to install some fear into them. Fear motivates.

Yep. Fear sent Missouri to the SEC. I like fear.

The B10 should have taken Misso and KU....

(08-04-2013 12:48 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 12:46 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 12:20 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 12:03 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 11:54 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  The PAC will have to be involved too. Will take 8 dissolution votes within the Big 12 and very likely none of them are willing to do it without all ten at least grudgingly going along with it.

Yep, and He1nous if there is any truth to this I don't think anyone expands beyond 16 because gaining that cooperation from all parties wouldn't be there if one conference was going to cherry pick the best 4 properties. In this rumor's scenario I could see Texas and Kansas to the Big 10. Then two of Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, and West Virginia to the SEC. And two to four of all of the remainder to the PAC. Only then would you see any others that might offer some value to the remaining conferences taken. What the ACC would do in my opinion is nothing if they weren't getting Texas.

This is another reason I give this a low probability of being true. If the rumor was Oklahoma to the Big 10 with Kansas then I could see Texas with Baylor and either Texas Tech or T.C.U. to the ACC. Then with Texas Tech to the PAC and West Virginia and one (Ok. St.) to the SEC its a done deal. Without Texas to the ACC I don't think it gets worked out at all to accommodate 8. If the Big 10 tries to grab the best 4 nobody is going to work with them and it is going to be very very costly.

You nailed it. I wont bother going through specifics because you know my beliefs. This talk of Texas to the Big Ten at worst is just more realignment message board garbage. At best it is a coordinated effort to start dislodging important people from their stalwart positions that are holding back progress. The best way to do that is to install some fear into them. Fear motivates.

Yep. Fear sent Missouri to the SEC. I like fear.

The B10 should have taken Misso and KU....

Yep, Sometimes being a pompous ass can cost you. They did get get Maryland though

(08-04-2013 12:17 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 12:08 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  Okay, just for fun, here's my guess at the domino effects of Texas somehow finding a way to invalidate the GOR and joining the Big 10:

- Someone has to go with them, and I don't think the Longhorns make the move without the Sooners. And the Big 12 will overlook Oklahoma's non-AAU status to land Texas. So UT and OU to the Big 10.

- The SEC responds by going to 16 with WVU and OSU, strong football schools that fit culturally and geographically.

- The ACC reinforces its basketball supremacy by going to 16 with Kansas and Kansas State.

- Now the Pac-12 has a problem. Texas Tech is an acceptable add but TCU doesn't meet its academic standards, Baylor is too conservative and Iowa State is too far out of the footprint. So the conference has to add three from the MWC to get to 16. Congratulations New Mexico (state flagship, academic fit, great basketball), UNLV (big market, great basketball) and Hawaii (state flagship, academic fit, gateway to Pacific/Asia).

See what I did there?

UT to the ACC as a partial member with a similar contract as Notre Dame but not identical. Perhaps Baylor and TCU both come with them as small private institutions that fit best with the ACC than any of the other conferences.

WVU and OSU to the SEC

OU and KU to the Big Ten

Yes...the PAC does kind of get the left overs but those left overs are better than the rest of the PAC's options in the West. Nothing against the rest of the schools but it's true. It is especially true because the PAC really could use some Central Time Zone representation in regards to dealing with the Networks.

Tech, ISU and KSU all offer that and all of them offer competitive programs. You can pick one of those MWC schools to go along with them.

I couldn't see the Pac-12 taking KSU without Kansas, or ISU under any circumstance. If it came to that I think they'd either stay at 12 or grab Texas Tech and New Mexico and stop at 14.

(08-04-2013 12:53 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 12:48 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 12:46 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 12:20 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 12:03 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Yep, and He1nous if there is any truth to this I don't think anyone expands beyond 16 because gaining that cooperation from all parties wouldn't be there if one conference was going to cherry pick the best 4 properties. In this rumor's scenario I could see Texas and Kansas to the Big 10. Then two of Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, and West Virginia to the SEC. And two to four of all of the remainder to the PAC. Only then would you see any others that might offer some value to the remaining conferences taken. What the ACC would do in my opinion is nothing if they weren't getting Texas.

This is another reason I give this a low probability of being true. If the rumor was Oklahoma to the Big 10 with Kansas then I could see Texas with Baylor and either Texas Tech or T.C.U. to the ACC. Then with Texas Tech to the PAC and West Virginia and one (Ok. St.) to the SEC its a done deal. Without Texas to the ACC I don't think it gets worked out at all to accommodate 8. If the Big 10 tries to grab the best 4 nobody is going to work with them and it is going to be very very costly.

You nailed it. I wont bother going through specifics because you know my beliefs. This talk of Texas to the Big Ten at worst is just more realignment message board garbage. At best it is a coordinated effort to start dislodging important people from their stalwart positions that are holding back progress. The best way to do that is to install some fear into them. Fear motivates.

Yep. Fear sent Missouri to the SEC. I like fear.

The B10 should have taken Misso and KU....

Yep, Sometimes being a pampas ass can cost you. They did get get Maryland though

True..... The same problem the PAC 12 now has with Utah and CU. The PAC 12 is actually encouraging Directv customers to switch because it refuses carry the PAC 12 network. The PAC 12 even wanted a ppv option for Directv customers....