(08-04-2013 02:39 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 02:16 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  I do not doubt that there have been discussions between Texas and the Big 10, just as there have been discussions between Texas and the the PAC, the ACC and the SEC. However, I can't believe that the Texas administration would subject itself to a public lynching if they were to accept an invitation to the Big 10. No Texas fan I know likes the idea. Some begrudgingly would have tolerated a move to the PAC, since Oklahoma, Tech and OSU were supposed to go along, but no one I know likes the idea of playing almost all of their games up north. And that's just talking about a narrow view regarding football. They would be throwing baseball under the bus along with 95% of their fan base. I don't see a single scenario where the fan base of the Longhorns gets giddy over the Big 10. And I'm not even getting into the reported $275 million it would take to do it.

Sounds like either someone's realignment wet dream or a concerted plan to offer misdirection for a move of another sort. I can see independence and I can see staying in the Big XII. I can even see aligning with the ACC or SEC if it were absolutely necessary for their survival or continued progress. But a move to the Big 10 makes almost no sense to me and would almost certainly be followed by backlash of the Longhorn faithful on a monumental scale.

If it makes more $$, it makes $en$e. However, I agree that TX isn’t a good fit for the B10—but look at WV and what its fans have to deal with…..

From the picture above I think they must be getting ready to burn a couch!

(08-04-2013 02:35 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 02:16 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  I do not doubt that there have been discussions between Texas and the Big 10, just as there have been discussions between Texas and the the PAC, the ACC and the SEC. However, I can't believe that the Texas administration would subject itself to a public lynching if they were to accept an invitation to the Big 10. No Texas fan I know likes the idea. Some begrudgingly would have tolerated a move to the PAC, since Oklahoma, Tech and OSU were supposed to go along, but no one I know likes the idea of playing almost all of their games up north. And that's just talking about a narrow view regarding football. They would be throwing baseball under the bus along with 95% of their fan base. I don't see a single scenario where the fan base of the Longhorns gets giddy over the Big 10. And I'm not even getting into the reported $275 million it would take to do it.

Sounds like either someone's realignment wet dream or a concerted plan to offer misdirection for a move of another sort. I can see independence and I can see staying in the Big XII. I can even see aligning with the ACC or SEC if it were absolutely necessary for their survival or continued progress. But a move to the Big 10 makes almost no sense to me and would almost certainly be followed by backlash of the Longhorn faithful on a monumental scale.

So true! If Texas ever had the nightmare that A&M would replace them as the state's favorite team then punching a ticket to the Big 10 just might make it come true.

This could happen if A&M has continued success in its new conference and TX keeps playing mediocre football. A&M will eventually get the best football recruits in TX because the B12 isn’t close to being on the same level as the SECond to none football conference….

(08-04-2013 01:43 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 01:20 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  If this is a true rumor, the SEC is in trouble.

The Big 10 won't stop at Texas and OU. They also want KU and Mizzou, and I don't doubt that they'll succeed.

That leaves the SEC down a member, and with the Big 10 in their biggest state. Who do they add? The ACC looks solid, so that's out of the question. How do they strike back? WVU is a decent add, but it doesn't exactly "strike back," and it doesn't even the playing field. I bet they go whole hog and and TT, OSU, and WVU.

I doubt OU would follow UT to the B1G. Probably Kansas. I think the GoR is starting to crack. I think the PAC will re-think the OU/OSU invite and take them. They have no choice. WVU comes to the SEC with one other.

Who is WVU's biggest football rival in the SEC? Is it Kentucky? Alabama? Don't get me wrong they've smoked a few SEC schools in bowl games but they don't make any sense in that conference.

Take a look at the B1G......Maryland (WVU plays every year), Penn State, Rutgers.....those are football rivals for West Virginia that they should be aligned with.

(08-04-2013 02:57 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 01:43 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 01:20 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  If this is a true rumor, the SEC is in trouble.

The Big 10 won't stop at Texas and OU. They also want KU and Mizzou, and I don't doubt that they'll succeed.

That leaves the SEC down a member, and with the Big 10 in their biggest state. Who do they add? The ACC looks solid, so that's out of the question. How do they strike back? WVU is a decent add, but it doesn't exactly "strike back," and it doesn't even the playing field. I bet they go whole hog and and TT, OSU, and WVU.

I doubt OU would follow UT to the B1G. Probably Kansas. I think the GoR is starting to crack. I think the PAC will re-think the OU/OSU invite and take them. They have no choice. WVU comes to the SEC with one other.

Who is WVU's biggest football rival in the SEC? Is it Kentucky? Alabama? Don't get me wrong they've smoked a few SEC schools in bowl games but they don't make any sense in that conference.

Take a look at the B1G......Maryland (WVU plays every year), Penn State, Rutgers.....those are football rivals for West Virginia that they should be aligned with.

WV doesn't belong academically in the B10, so the SEC is a better fit for it than being isolated in the b12....

Houston to the PAC 12. Better market and academics than Tech.

(08-04-2013 01:50 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 01:43 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 01:20 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  If this is a true rumor, the SEC is in trouble.

The Big 10 won't stop at Texas and OU. They also want KU and Mizzou, and I don't doubt that they'll succeed.

That leaves the SEC down a member, and with the Big 10 in their biggest state. Who do they add? The ACC looks solid, so that's out of the question. How do they strike back? WVU is a decent add, but it doesn't exactly "strike back," and it doesn't even the playing field. I bet they go whole hog and and TT, OSU, and WVU.

I doubt OU would follow UT to the B1G. Probably Kansas. I think the GoR is starting to crack. I think the PAC will re-think the OU/OSU invite and take them. They have no choice. WVU comes to the SEC with one other.

Why not? I have to think it would be more financially and competitively attractive to join Texas, Nebraska, Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State in the new Big 16 than USC and Oregon in the Pac-12.

If the B1G can strike hard enough at the B12's TV contract by taking Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Texas Tech (throw Texas a bone) would the GoR still apply?

Also if Texas moves to the B1G in 2016 there will be only 7 more years of the GOR anyway (goes to 2023).

B1G> Texas, TT, OU, Kansas
B12> Houston, Tulsa, Tulane, Memphis, UC, BYU
MWC> UTEP, SMU
AAC>UMass, Marshall, Army, ODU, So Miss, UAB
CUSA> Ark St, ULL, USA, Georgia St.
SBC> NDSU, Liberty, JX St, Lamar

(08-04-2013 03:02 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 02:57 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 01:43 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 01:20 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  If this is a true rumor, the SEC is in trouble.

The Big 10 won't stop at Texas and OU. They also want KU and Mizzou, and I don't doubt that they'll succeed.

That leaves the SEC down a member, and with the Big 10 in their biggest state. Who do they add? The ACC looks solid, so that's out of the question. How do they strike back? WVU is a decent add, but it doesn't exactly "strike back," and it doesn't even the playing field. I bet they go whole hog and and TT, OSU, and WVU.

I doubt OU would follow UT to the B1G. Probably Kansas. I think the GoR is starting to crack. I think the PAC will re-think the OU/OSU invite and take them. They have no choice. WVU comes to the SEC with one other.

Who is WVU's biggest football rival in the SEC? Is it Kentucky? Alabama? Don't get me wrong they've smoked a few SEC schools in bowl games but they don't make any sense in that conference.

Take a look at the B1G......Maryland (WVU plays every year), Penn State, Rutgers.....those are football rivals for West Virginia that they should be aligned with.

WV doesn't belong academically in the B10, so the SEC is a better fit for it than being isolated in the b12....

Louisville got into the ACC. 90% of their students are from a 7-8 county region around Louisville. They are basically a Toledo and they got into a top tier conference.

WV is better than that....might be a good option in the East for travel (PSU, OSU, Maryland, Rutgers). Strong bowl following which is important.

(08-04-2013 03:14 AM)GoCougars Wrote:  Houston to the PAC 12. Better market and academics than Tech.

Houston to the PAC is not a bad idea at all when you consider the market they bring on board.

(08-04-2013 03:28 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 03:02 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 02:57 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 01:43 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 01:20 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  If this is a true rumor, the SEC is in trouble.

The Big 10 won't stop at Texas and OU. They also want KU and Mizzou, and I don't doubt that they'll succeed.

That leaves the SEC down a member, and with the Big 10 in their biggest state. Who do they add? The ACC looks solid, so that's out of the question. How do they strike back? WVU is a decent add, but it doesn't exactly "strike back," and it doesn't even the playing field. I bet they go whole hog and and TT, OSU, and WVU.

I doubt OU would follow UT to the B1G. Probably Kansas. I think the GoR is starting to crack. I think the PAC will re-think the OU/OSU invite and take them. They have no choice. WVU comes to the SEC with one other.

Who is WVU's biggest football rival in the SEC? Is it Kentucky? Alabama? Don't get me wrong they've smoked a few SEC schools in bowl games but they don't make any sense in that conference.

Take a look at the B1G......Maryland (WVU plays every year), Penn State, Rutgers.....those are football rivals for West Virginia that they should be aligned with.

WV doesn't belong academically in the B10, so the SEC is a better fit for it than being isolated in the b12....

Louisville got into the ACC. 90% of their students are from a 7-8 county region around Louisville. They are basically a Toledo and they got into a top tier conference.

WV is better than that....might be a good option in the East for travel (PSU, OSU, Maryland, Rutgers). Strong bowl following which is important.

The B10 isn’t academically flexible as the ACC or SEC. A similar conference academically to the B10 is the PAC 12 (turned down OU and OSU), which is why the following won’t happen unless Houston obtains AAU status:

(08-04-2013 03:31 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 03:14 AM)GoCougars Wrote:  Houston to the PAC 12. Better market and academics than Tech.

Houston to the PAC is not a bad idea at all when you consider the market they bring on board.

(08-04-2013 03:24 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 01:50 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 01:43 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 01:20 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  If this is a true rumor, the SEC is in trouble.

The Big 10 won't stop at Texas and OU. They also want KU and Mizzou, and I don't doubt that they'll succeed.

That leaves the SEC down a member, and with the Big 10 in their biggest state. Who do they add? The ACC looks solid, so that's out of the question. How do they strike back? WVU is a decent add, but it doesn't exactly "strike back," and it doesn't even the playing field. I bet they go whole hog and and TT, OSU, and WVU.

I doubt OU would follow UT to the B1G. Probably Kansas. I think the GoR is starting to crack. I think the PAC will re-think the OU/OSU invite and take them. They have no choice. WVU comes to the SEC with one other.

Why not? I have to think it would be more financially and competitively attractive to join Texas, Nebraska, Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State in the new Big 16 than USC and Oregon in the Pac-12.

If the B1G can strike hard enough at the B12's TV contract by taking Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Texas Tech (throw Texas a bone) would the GoR still apply?

If I’m not mistaken, it will take eight schools to dissolve the GOR; thus the conference. Therefore, the B10 would have to work with the SEC and PAC 12 to take eight schools for the aforementioned to happen or be willing to expand to 18. If the B10 is willing to expand to 18, the B10 could possibly take KU (bball is worth more in the B10), Iowa St (a rival for Iowa), which are both AAU members along with OU (a marquee school) and OSU. If the B10 only wants two schools then the SEC takes OU + OSU (I don’t see these two schools separating). This leaves six schools and the only conference that could take four is the PAC 12: TX + TT (I don’t see these two schools separating either), Baylor, and TCU (if TX and the LHN isn’t in the deal, the PAC 12 would refuse to take the other schools). Consequently, WV would have to hope for an ACC invite, and K St would end up in either the MWC or CUSA.

(08-04-2013 12:43 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(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.

I totally agree.
It is beyond me how people think Larry Scott is some king of genius. He could have blown every thing up years ago and passed.
Does anybody really believe the additions of Utah & Colorado were all the PAC should have added?
They are the conference that will come up short if any of this BS comes to pass.

(08-04-2013 05:11 AM)lofi Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 12:43 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(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.

I totally agree.
It is beyond me how people think Larry Scott is some king of genius. He could have blown every thing up years ago and passed.
Does anybody really believe the additions of Utah & Colorado were all the PAC should have added?
They are the conference that will come up short if any of this BS comes to pass.

If the PAC works with the B10 or SEC, it could still redeem itself from the mistake of not taking OU and OSU. The PAC would have to take all four TX schools. If the B10 is willing to go to 18, it could take OU, OSU, KU, and Iowa St. If the B10 only wants to expand to 16, then it would likely be left with KU and Iowa St, which are AAU members while the SEC takes OU and OSU.

(08-04-2013 01:47 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 01:26 AM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 01:10 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(08-04-2013 12:54 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

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

Neither school meets the PAC 12’s academic requirements. Remember that the PAC 12 refused to take OU and OSU for the same reason….

Wrong again. Several PAC Presidents are helping Tech work towards AAU status. Our Chancellor has some good friends at PAC schools. Larry Scott, with permission from the PAC Presidents, was prepared to offer Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma St an invite( contingent on Texas acceptance).

Fast forward to today. If, and that is a big IF, UT goes to the B1G, the PAC will be forced to expand much the same way you have been spouting that the Big 12 needs to expand. In the Big 12's case, there is no one available that will add 20mm to our TV contract. In the PAC's case, adding fans from a state that has 26 million people in it, will add a butt load of cash for the PAC TV network.

Hopefully this happens and we get 4 true power conferences.

What I posted is true so why are you denying it for the umpteen time again? OU and OSU were turned down because of academic reasons, so what makes you think TT had a shot without TX? TX was not considered because it wouldn't give up control of the LHN. Therefore, TT didn't have a chance without TX. In my opinion, the PAC 12 made a serious mistake by not taking OU, OSU, and TT—TX would have given in. Nevertheless, if (and only if) TT can get AAU status, the PAC may consider it as a last option. What hurts TT is its very small market. Consequently, the PAC 12 would want another TX school in large market that meets its academic requirements.

Btw... BYU would add more value to the B12 contract than TT (and any other B12 school other than OU) so once again get real with yourself because that's why the B12 tried in vain to get BYU.....

OU and OSU were turned down by TX and ESPN, not the PAC 12. Neither could afford to lose those 2 schools and keep the Big 12 payout the same.

Again you are wrong. I said IF UT left, the PAC has very limited options if they want to keep up with other power conferences who might be expanding. Larry Scott wants the Texas market and Tech delivers a good portion of that. Our market isn't Lubbock but rather the whole state. Tech alumni live in Houston, Dallas, San Antonio and Austin.

The PAC won't take lightweights who can't average 30K for a season and hasn't averaged over 40K a season since 1977. They don't need another Washington St in terms of attendance. The PAC has no desire to add a project school based a "proposed" market and small 40K seat stadium.

As for BYU, they would be in a power conference but their religious affiliation holds them back. The PAC has repeatedly passed on them time and time again. How much does BYU earn from their TV network?

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily...Games.aspx

Quote:" Financial terms were not disclosed, but sources indicated that BYU "could reap between $800,000 and $1.2 million per home game -- considerably more" than the $1.3-1.5M the school "earned annually from the Mountain West's television arrangement."

Tech makes almost as much off our Tier 3 deal ( 1 football game and some basketball/baseball games) as BYU on their Tier 1 deal. The Big 12 tried to get BYU but wouldn't give into their demands. They simply don't add enough to meet their ridiculous demands( BYUTV, no play on Sunday).

(08-04-2013 03:14 AM)GoCougars Wrote:  Houston to the PAC 12. Better market and academics than Tech.

LOL. With that huge TV market, how much is UH earning in the AAC? How much are they earning on their Tier 3 deals? How are UH's graduation rates?

Thanks for playing.

Man, I stay away for a day or two and only to return to this bombshell..

I tend to think more along the lines of JRSec's thinking in that Texas likely using this B1G negotiations to manipulate ESPN. ESPN does not want to lose Texas to FOX.

What will likely happen is one of:

a) Texas is ACC member #16 with an "ND arrangement", or

b) Texas is ACC member #16 with an "ND arrangement" along with Kansas joining the ACC in all sports. This is something I have heard before. Boy, the timing of that recent ESPN announcement that they purchased Kansas' tier-3 basketball rights is something, ain't it?

Never discount the connection of North Carolina basketball and Kansas basketball.

And, if Texas is concerned about one of its in-state fellows, the ACC can easily absorb Baylor, who would fit right in with private-school culture of league.

Somewhere, John Swofford is preparing his "ninja" gear to make another shocking move...

If B1G expands from the Big 12, no one will want the Big 12 leftovers. Their options will be limited. They could:

1) remain together in an 8 school conference,
2) join the AAC,
3) join the MWC.

(08-03-2013 11:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-03-2013 11:20 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  IF there is anything to all this then I am still of the opinion that there is a whole hell of a lot of collusion going on up at the top.

If Texas wants East Coast markets then their best bet truly is the ACC. Whether or not the LHN is going well...well are they really willing to give up on it? That's what joining the Big Ten means.

The ACC on the other hand would probably be willing to bend over backwards to help them with it as long as Texas is willing to sign on with the ACC and in turn that tanks the Big 12 which makes the ACC much more secure in the eyes of EVERYONE including the Networks.

Delany and crew want two programs. Let's throw everyone into a tizzy and get the rumor mill started about Texas and Oklahoma to the Big Ten. For a scenario to happen like the one I have been surmising on, people are going to have to be made to feel uncomfortable in order to be willing to go forward with such compromises.

IF it's true, its some shadowy stuff going on. The ACC suits the needs of Texas much more than the Big Ten does.

Well let's just say that we agree on collusion if anything is happening. There is no way in this economy that any school is going to risk 275 million to make a move that could land them that kind of a loss either up front or in legal wranglings.

If Texas is indeed talking a move then somebody has coordinated at least 8 moves.

YES

WVU does belong in the ACC or SEC. This might open some doors for Cincinnati. We would love to be out there with those other Big 12 schools. I would just assume that Texas leave anyway. Texas yields too much power in that conference. Oklahoma may soon follow. The additional school that BIG should offer would be UVA. UVA is a great school, the signature state school and one of the top ACC schools. It would wound the ACC.

BIG- Texas and Oklahoma to BIG. (Texas does nothing without OU). This move will reduce the Big 12 to 8.

Big 12- adds four to get to 12 including Cincinnati, Houston, BYU and Boise State. If WVU leaves for SEC, Memphis to Big 12.

ACC- Stands pat at 15. (Louisville considered for SEC) (Cincinnati to possible replace Louisville in ACC if it moves to the SEC)

SEC-no changes (considering WVU)

PAC 12- who knows too far west for me. I think the expansion of Utah and Colorado have done next to nothing for the league. Both programs are rocked in average attendance and performance through their respective athletic programs.

at the end of the day a pac 16 would have been nice. but i think larry scott would have been perfectly happy to settle with utah/colorado. both have under rated academics, a great football history thats over looked, and are flagship land grants with large cities in their footprints. plus these two schools are such natural partners that i dont think any other conference added a pair of schools that compliment each other so well the way these two do.

the pac got its ccg, a huge tv contract. and added a bunch of schools that were not too far removed from its pacific roots. colorado was more of a pac school than a b12 school. their alumni is based on the west coast, most of their out of state students are from the west coast, and they recruit out of the west coast.

the pac 12 expanded, got rich, an didnt have to sell its traditional heritage the way the b10, b12, & acc did

at the end of the day theres no way larry scott is losing sleep over this.

(08-03-2013 11:40 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(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.

You don't really understand the arrogance of Texas. They likely expect that they will run the Big-10.

I believe that to be true also. Texas feels they can run the Big 10. They won't and when UT finds that out or discovers that fact, they will nix the deal or do something else.

Any movement, anywhere, at anytime will positively affect Cincinnati.