The B12's problems this year are QB centered. Texas, OU, OSU, WVA, and TCU are struggling with the QBs and taken losses for it. Texas Tech has gone with a true walk-on freshman for QB. That is 6 of the 10 B12 teams. One of the 6 solved its QB problem (Texas Tech); the others appear to still be a work in progress at QB.

That formerly hopeless and hapless Baylor is successful, as last nite's 41-12 stomp of 7 time National Champion Oklahoma shows, the B12 is a solid platform for team success. Ditto for KSU previously.

I wish to make a second point.

I wish the B12 had gone to 12 teams and added Louisville along with WVA. I put a post on this board some time ago that not taking Louisville might come back and haunt the B12. That post was made before the ACC invite to UL came out of the blue.

For better or worse, the B12 must now stay in its 10 team structure; there simply are not any teams left out there that would be attractive and/or fit within a reasonable B12 geography (although reasonable geography does not seem to apply these days).

What the B12 must do in the future is what they are doing now--schedule attractive and challenging nonconference games. The old theory is schedule 4 pancakes and then play the tough games inside the conference.

Well, it appears the B12 has too many pancakes within the conference. So, do a little dance jig here and reverse it. Play tough games in the nonconference schedule and some pancake wins will come within the conference (KU, ISU). That appears to be what B12 is doing. Although the reason give is to strengthen the SOS, it also fills in the problem of attracting a large tv audience (for the big tv bucks that a BiG or SEC are/will draw in the future).

For example, Oklahoma State opened with Mississippi State @Houston in 2013 and will open with Florida State @Jerry's World in 2014. Oklahoma has just scheduled UCLA.

A third point. The destruction of the B12 was prevented from the outside. The B12 simply did not have the horses to force a solution like BiG or SEC. Both FOX and ESPN stepped in with the bucks and renegotiated the B12's tv contract to save B12 and put money in their pockets so B12 teams would not leave for PAC. Both FOX and ESPN realize that having the B12 there....helps both networks with the conferences that can stand up to FOX and ESPN. That is, the 10 team B12 provides an alternative if FOX and ESPN find it a touch challenge dealing with ACC, BiG, SEC, and PAC.

For all these reasons, I don't think the B12 is in the depth of trouble many posters on this board believe. But I am agreement with posters who criticize the B12 for not expanding and I do not disagree with posters on this board stating the B12 is a conference under pressure.

The B12 conference, of course, hinges on Texas and OU. THis is what I think their strategy is: Play each other early in the season so that the loser can climb back up into the high BCS rankings and still make the four team playoff. And that the B12 is a good enough conference to do that.

The issue is not that Texas and OU get stronger and perform better--they will. The issue for the B12 is for WVA, TT, Baylor, OSU, KSU, KU, and ISU to get better. My guess is many of these latter schools will solve their QB problems and improve in 2014.

As an Oklahoman and supporter of TU, OSU, and OU, congrats to Baylor! What a defensive performance! Yes, OU does not have a high quality passing QB, but OU could not block the Baylor defensive line. It appears Baylor is the real deal. And, for B12 fans, this is a huge positive in an otherwise very disappointing season for the conference.

For OU, this smackdown by Baylor may prove to be a good thing in the longer run. OU must now realize they better put on their thinking cap and probably make some changes in players, strategy, and assistant coaches. By OU's standards, 2013 is now a lost year; best get ready for next year by making adjustments now.

(11-08-2013 12:07 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  The B12's problems this year are QB centered. Texas, OU, OSU, WVA, and TCU are struggling with the QBs and taken losses for it. Texas Tech has gone with a true walk-on freshman for QB. That is 6 of the 10 B12 teams. One of the 6 solved its QB problem (Texas Tech); the others appear to still be a work in progress at QB.

That formerly hopeless and hapless Baylor is successful, as last nite's 41-12 stomp of 7 time National Champion Oklahoma shows, the B12 is a solid platform for team success. Ditto for KSU previously.

I wish to make a second point.

I wish the B12 had gone to 12 teams and added Louisville along with WVA. I put a post on this board some time ago that not taking Louisville might come back and haunt the B12. That post was made before the ACC invite to UL came out of the blue.

For better or worse, the B12 must now stay in its 10 team structure; there simply are not any teams left out there that would be attractive and/or fit within a reasonable B12 geography (although reasonable geography does not seem to apply these days).

What the B12 must do in the future is what they are doing now--schedule attractive and challenging nonconference games. The old theory is schedule 4 pancakes and then play the tough games inside the conference.

Well, it appears the B12 has too many pancakes within the conference. So, do a little dance jig here and reverse it. Play tough games in the nonconference schedule and some pancake wins will come within the conference (KU, ISU). That appears to be what B12 is doing. Although the reason give is to strengthen the SOS, it also fills in the problem of attracting a large tv audience (for the big tv bucks that a BiG or SEC are/will draw in the future).

For example, Oklahoma State opened with Mississippi State @Houston in 2013 and will open with Florida State @Jerry's World in 2014. Oklahoma has just scheduled UCLA.

A third point. The destruction of the B12 was prevented from the outside. The B12 simply did not have the horses to force a solution like BiG or SEC. Both FOX and ESPN stepped in with the bucks and renegotiated the B12's tv contract to save B12 and put money in their pockets so B12 teams would not leave for PAC. Both FOX and ESPN realize that having the B12 there....helps both networks with the conferences that can stand up to FOX and ESPN. That is, the 10 team B12 provides an alternative if FOX and ESPN find it a touch challenge dealing with ACC, BiG, SEC, and PAC.

For all these reasons, I don't think the B12 is in the depth of trouble many posters on this board believe. But I am agreement with posters who criticize the B12 for not expanding and I do not disagree with posters on this board stating the B12 is a conference under pressure.

The B12 conference, of course, hinges on Texas and OU. THis is what I think their strategy is: Play each other early in the season so that the loser can climb back up into the high BCS rankings and still make the four team playoff. And that the B12 is a good enough conference to do that.

The issue is not that Texas and OU get stronger and perform better--they will. The issue for the B12 is for WVA, TT, Baylor, OSU, KSU, KU, and ISU to get better. My guess is many of these latter schools will solve their QB problems and improve in 2014.

As an Oklahoman and supporter of TU, OSU, and OU, congrats to Baylor! What a defensive performance! Yes, OU does not have a high quality passing QB, but OU could not block the Baylor defensive line. It appears Baylor is the real deal. And, for B12 fans, this is a huge positive in an otherwise very disappointing season for the conference.

For OU, this smackdown by Baylor may prove to be a good thing in the longer run. OU must now realize they better put on their thinking cap and probably make some changes in players, strategy, and assistant coaches. By OU's standards, 2013 is now a lost year; best get ready for next year by making adjustments now.

Maybe the Big XII is losing the best QB recruits to other conferences now... Just a thought...

I don't buy that the Big 12 is any less attractive to recruits. They care about winning and getting to the NFL and the Big 12 is no less suited for that now than before.

In all of this we tend to look at all of this stuff too short term. Heck, when the bowls deals expiring this year where signed, the Big Ten was still at 11, the Big 12 looked completely stable to most at 12, etc.

(11-08-2013 12:20 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  I don't buy that the Big 12 is any less attractive to recruits. They care about winning and getting to the NFL and the Big 12 is no less suited for that now than before.

In all of this we tend to look at all of this stuff too short term. Heck, when the bowls deals expiring this year where signed, the Big Ten was still at 11, the Big 12 looked completely stable to most at 12, etc.

The real instability within the Big 12 is stemming from a lack of peers for Texas and Oklahoma and to a lesser extent Kansas. Kansas, outside of what has proven to be an upsurge in Baylor basketball, has no competition. Texas and OU alums are constantly complaining about the lack of compelling games on their schedules. The perception is that the rest of the conference is diminishing their product more than their teams. If Texas and Oklahoma bolt it will be for these reasons and not because of the football being played. Face it when a visiting Ole Miss is a big deal for Texas their world is out of whack. But who else of note came to Austin this year?

the b12 as we know it will die. its kinda like republicans saying "the polls are wrong" the week before election day, then the week after they say "well no one ever became president and said: the polls got it wrong"

its pretty much the exact same thing with the b12. no conference has ever succeeded on a model of having fewer teams, weaker academics, weaker non football sports, connections between schools, no conference network and a smaller conference blueprint and then went on to say "hey all that stuff is unnecessary"

b12 homers will continue to say the b12 is as strong & as stable as can be up until doomsday. after doomsday the b12 fans who schools find a home in a power conference will say "yeah the b12 has always been doomed"

(11-08-2013 12:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 12:20 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  I don't buy that the Big 12 is any less attractive to recruits. They care about winning and getting to the NFL and the Big 12 is no less suited for that now than before.

In all of this we tend to look at all of this stuff too short term. Heck, when the bowls deals expiring this year where signed, the Big Ten was still at 11, the Big 12 looked completely stable to most at 12, etc.

The real instability within the Big 12 is stemming from a lack of peers for Texas and Oklahoma and to a lesser extent Kansas. Kansas, outside of what has proven to be an upsurge in Baylor basketball, has no competition. Texas and OU alums are constantly complaining about the lack of compelling games on their schedules. The perception is that the rest of the conference is diminishing their product more than their teams. If Texas and Oklahoma bolt it will be for these reasons and not because of the football being played. Face it when a visiting Ole Miss is a big deal for Texas their world is out of whack. But who else of note came to Austin this year?

i think the simple fact that texas does not have a single academic peer within the b12 is the most destabilizing prospect for the b12

It is interesting to watch this board. While I have been criticized for my viewpoints on this board--and that is certainly fair--sometimes, what is not stated is more interesting. If the B12 fell apart with 4 B12 schools to PAC, then that would probably leave: Iowa State, KSU, KU, Baylor, TCU, and WVA. So the following B12 (or some version of it) would emerge, keeping the B12 name for publicity's sake:

B12/WEST: Houston/Baylor, TCU/Memphis, KSU/KU, Colorado State/New Mexico
B12/EAST: Iowa State/Cincy, WVA/UConn, UCF/USF, Temple/ECU

The continual bashing of the B12 by AAC fans on this board is really an unstated desire to be associated with the left behind B12 schools. That may well happen and, to me, reflects the instability of the AAC. Given my choices, I would not want to place a bet one way or the other. But if I were forced to place a bet on the table, my guess is B12 holds....all it needs is to get some of its teams back to the high level they were previously performing.

(11-08-2013 12:51 PM)john01992 Wrote:  the b12 as we know it will die. its kinda like republicans saying "the polls are wrong" the week before election day, then the week after they say "well no one ever became president and said: the polls got it wrong"

its pretty much the exact same thing with the b12. no conference has ever succeeded on a model of having fewer teams, weaker academics, weaker non football sports, connections between schools, no conference network and a smaller conference blueprint and then went on to say "hey all that stuff is unnecessary"

b12 homers will continue to say the b12 is as strong & as stable as can be up until doomsday. after doomsday the b12 fans who schools find a home in a power conference will say "yeah the b12 has always been doomed"

(11-08-2013 05:17 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(11-08-2013 12:51 PM)john01992 Wrote:  the b12 as we know it will die. its kinda like republicans saying "the polls are wrong" the week before election day, then the week after they say "well no one ever became president and said: the polls got it wrong"

its pretty much the exact same thing with the b12. no conference has ever succeeded on a model of having fewer teams, weaker academics, weaker non football sports, connections between schools, no conference network and a smaller conference blueprint and then went on to say "hey all that stuff is unnecessary"

b12 homers will continue to say the b12 is as strong & as stable as can be up until doomsday. after doomsday the b12 fans who schools find a home in a power conference will say "yeah the b12 has always been doomed"

Picture is worth a thousand words, so they say. The Big12 isn't "doomed", but it does have challenges, and they can't afford to get dug in on this 10 team, with no CCG thing. They need to be proactive and get back to 12 teams. I'm not going to stump for any particular team, but the current payout vs. the long term health of the Big12 is a real issue.

yeah i knew someone was gonna bring this up.....

before 1948 most of the major polls stopped polling in mid september because the general theory was that the voters had already made up their mind by then. and to top it all off the chicago daily tribune was basically the fox news of the day. they were a pro-republican newspaper.

1948 caused a massive change to how public opinion polls were conducted and if they had used the modern approach that they do now, they would of gotten it right.

The Big 12 is not doomed and it's foolish to even think it is. Even if a doomsday scenario happened and it lost Texas and Oklahoma to the Big 10 it still has programs like West Virginia, TCU, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Kansas. All of those are strong programs if you throw in USF, UCF, Houston, and ECU it's still a power conference without a doubt.

Heck, you can even take Kansas out as part of the doomsday scenario and just replace them with Memphis and it's still a power conference.

(11-09-2013 12:13 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  The Big 12 is not doomed and it's foolish to even think it is. Even if a doomsday scenario happened and it lost Texas and Oklahoma to the Big 10 it still has programs like West Virginia, TCU, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Kansas. All of those are strong programs if you throw in USF, UCF, Houston, and ECU it's still a power conference without a doubt.

Heck, you can even take Kansas out as part of the doomsday scenario and just replace them with Memphis and it's still a power conference.

Nah... it's a nice middle tier conference.

(11-09-2013 07:56 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-09-2013 12:13 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  The Big 12 is not doomed and it's foolish to even think it is. Even if a doomsday scenario happened and it lost Texas and Oklahoma to the Big 10 it still has programs like West Virginia, TCU, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Kansas. All of those are strong programs if you throw in USF, UCF, Houston, and ECU it's still a power conference without a doubt.

Heck, you can even take Kansas out as part of the doomsday scenario and just replace them with Memphis and it's still a power conference.

Nah... it's a nice middle tier conference.

LOL. Yet Missoura couldn't win in that middle tier conference.

(11-08-2013 04:33 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  It is interesting to watch this board. While I have been criticized for my viewpoints on this board--and that is certainly fair--sometimes, what is not stated is more interesting. If the B12 fell apart with 4 B12 schools to PAC, then that would probably leave: Iowa State, KSU, KU, Baylor, TCU, and WVA. So the following B12 (or some version of it) would emerge, keeping the B12 name for publicity's sake:

B12/WEST: Houston/Baylor, TCU/Memphis, KSU/KU, Colorado State/New Mexico
B12/EAST: Iowa State/Cincy, WVA/UConn, UCF/USF, Temple/ECU

The continual bashing of the B12 by AAC fans on this board is really an unstated desire to be associated with the left behind B12 schools. That may well happen and, to me, reflects the instability of the AAC. Given my choices, I would not want to place a bet one way or the other. But if I were forced to place a bet on the table, my guess is B12 holds....all it needs is to get some of its teams back to the high level they were previously performing.

You need to get real with yourself.... The B12 has the weakest "structure" of any P5: It has no CCG and network, lost four schools along with OU and OSU also attempting to escape from LH lockdown, and a deformed footprint.

Here is your fine "structure"....

(11-09-2013 07:56 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-09-2013 12:13 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  The Big 12 is not doomed and it's foolish to even think it is. Even if a doomsday scenario happened and it lost Texas and Oklahoma to the Big 10 it still has programs like West Virginia, TCU, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Kansas. All of those are strong programs if you throw in USF, UCF, Houston, and ECU it's still a power conference without a doubt.

Heck, you can even take Kansas out as part of the doomsday scenario and just replace them with Memphis and it's still a power conference.

Nah... it's a nice middle tier conference.

Middle tier or not simply adding West Virginia and Oklahoma State to the AAC would arguably make it a power conference. Like it said even if a doomsday scenario happened the Big 12 leftovers will still be in a power conference.

(11-12-2013 09:50 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(11-09-2013 07:56 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(11-09-2013 12:13 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  The Big 12 is not doomed and it's foolish to even think it is. Even if a doomsday scenario happened and it lost Texas and Oklahoma to the Big 10 it still has programs like West Virginia, TCU, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Kansas. All of those are strong programs if you throw in USF, UCF, Houston, and ECU it's still a power conference without a doubt.

Heck, you can even take Kansas out as part of the doomsday scenario and just replace them with Memphis and it's still a power conference.

Nah... it's a nice middle tier conference.

Middle tier or not simply adding West Virginia and Oklahoma State to the AAC would arguably make it a power conference. Like it said even if a doomsday scenario happened the Big 12 leftovers will still be in a power conference.

Not without UT and OU.... Dodds admitted that the B12 would have died without OU, so that should tell you something about the rest of the B12.....