(01-29-2014 11:02 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 04:17 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  I think KU and MU will play again once things stabilize, at least in BB. Football is so much harder to schedule for a lot of reasons mentioned here. I think right now KU is not happy that MU left and destabilized the B12 further after the defections of NU and CU. Texas probably feels similarly towards A&M. All the flagships without little brothers left the conference (I consider A&M a flagship because Texas is so big and they fit the mold, though Texas is THE flagship) and now UT, OU and KU have to support a lot of less valuable schools on their own. Without a little brother school to consider, I think OU and KU would already have moved. Texas likes being a king so who knows about them. Once conference realignment shakes out and KU either finds a power conference home or the B12 stabilizes and thrives again, I think KU/MU will resume in some form. Probably the same with UT and A&M.

Yes, very true. I'm curious... was there ever any talk in your area about where Kansas, Oklahoma, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, or Iowa State would have preferred to end up? Is there ever rumblings about any of them wanting into the SEC? I would think that Oklahoma State would be the only school that would have the SEC as their #1 destination, although Kansas State has to know that they are not getting a Big 10 invite. Surely they would prefer the SEC over the PAC.

I think that there are definitely some OU fans interested in the SEC, although the interest seems to be less within their administration. I haven't heard about KU fans being interested in the SEC, although while the B1G may be the generally preferred destination should things go south for the Big 12 there are also some who think the B1G is "boring". I haven't really heard a lot of chatter from OSU, KSU, or ISU fans. I think that ISU and KSU in particular, despite their strengths (which they do have) would be looking just to stay within a power conference setup.

(01-29-2014 11:54 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 10:41 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(01-08-2014 09:54 AM)BewareThePhog Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 12:14 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Great insight, Phog. It is sad seeing outside issues affecting old rivalries (like UK and Indiana's basketball issues), but it is part of the new order of things. It completely makes sense for Kansas to get ramped up for a B1G invite. I would think that playing home and home basketball games with schools Iowa, Minnesota, and Nebraska would bring about some goodwill.

A new item for the "Kansas Cultivates Relationships with the B1G" folder has just arrived - we've just inked a deal to play Illinois in a home-and-home football series. It doesn't start until 2023, but it may be reflective of our athletic department's long-term strategy. We also play Rutgers next year, but I have to think that was scheduled prior to Rutgers' invitation to the B1G.

Yes, great move by Kansas. You all to the B1G feels as natural as Colorado to the PAC and TAMU to the SEC. Showing interest in a Nebraska home and home is something any school would do, but going with Illinois shows the B1G that you want to compete with the harder programs to sell for OOC events.

I was under the impression that KU just didn't have scheduling room for an OOC game with Mizzou... While I also see this as a possible gesture to the B1G by Kansas for a future invite by the B1G, it does render the OOC scheduling excuse invalid. I see this as maybe a back door slight to Missouri. Missouri scheduled a B1G team, Indiana this year, and I doubt we are planning any conference moves. That said, schools have to choose the business plan that best suits their interests. If the Jayhawks were in anyway interested in the SEC I think they would schedule Mizzou, so this seems to point away from that issue.

I hadn't heard the "no room on the schedule" reason, although for the very short term that may well be true since games are often scheduled out many years in advance. I suspect there may have been at least some schedule cascade caused by the Big 12 having moved from 8 conference games to 9, although any such ripples would again only impact the near-term schedules.

(01-29-2014 11:02 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(01-29-2014 04:17 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  I think KU and MU will play again once things stabilize, at least in BB. Football is so much harder to schedule for a lot of reasons mentioned here. I think right now KU is not happy that MU left and destabilized the B12 further after the defections of NU and CU. Texas probably feels similarly towards A&M. All the flagships without little brothers left the conference (I consider A&M a flagship because Texas is so big and they fit the mold, though Texas is THE flagship) and now UT, OU and KU have to support a lot of less valuable schools on their own. Without a little brother school to consider, I think OU and KU would already have moved. Texas likes being a king so who knows about them. Once conference realignment shakes out and KU either finds a power conference home or the B12 stabilizes and thrives again, I think KU/MU will resume in some form. Probably the same with UT and A&M.

Yes, very true. I'm curious... was there ever any talk in your area about where Kansas, Oklahoma, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, or Iowa State would have preferred to end up? Is there ever rumblings about any of them wanting into the SEC? I would think that Oklahoma State would be the only school that would have the SEC as their #1 destination, although Kansas State has to know that they are not getting a Big 10 invite. Surely they would prefer the SEC over the PAC.

In my opinion:

From message boards, Kansas fans strongly prefer the B1G, followed distantly by the PAC. Most do not see the SEC as an option because we figure the SEC is not that interested in us (KU is down the list a bit before the SEC would invite us). If the SEC becomes an option they could climb fast because KU fans really want a consistently great basketball rival ala UNC/Duke. Kentucky/Kansas would do that.

From message boards, OU fans are really split. The B1G, PAC, and SEC all get support from some posters. The PAC used to be the front runner, but now I think most prefer, almost evenly, the SEC or B1G. PAC is a distant 3rd now. Those thinking sports want the SEC and those wanting possible academic benefits and easier path to playoffs prefer the B1G.

Oklahoma State fans would prefer the SEC if that was an option, but mostly they talk about the PAC because that has almost happened twice. Also they know OU would have first shot at the SEC if they wanted it.

TTU fans talk about the PAC a lot because they almost ended up there twice and because Stanford and a couple other PAC schools are supposedly helping them towards AAU status according to TTU fans. The PAC is probably their only realistic option. They would be all over the SEC if they were offered and A&M already being there was not an obstacle. I think they see the PAC as their chance to go their own way (like A&M to the SEC) if UT doesn't go. SEC is not considered a realistic option due to A&M being there and the SEC not doubling up in states they are in, plus there is some bad blood I think between the two schools (IMO - I could be wrong).

KSU and ISU really don't talk about it much because they are the two public schools in the most danger of being left out if the B12 dissolves. Either would JUMP at any offer that gave them a stable home in a power conference (the B12 is only temporarily stable at this time). I think ISU would prefer the B1G, if they had first choice due to geography and Iowa and NU being in the B1G. KSU is more split. The SEC would be their best fit I think.

Thanks, hawk, all of those views make a lot of sense. Culturally, Kansas to the Big 10 and Texas Tech to the PAC make the most sense. Texas Tech is really the only Big 12 school that I can't imagine a scenario where the SEC would take them. They are such an outlier.

Nothing like dumping 12 oz of coffee into your laptop to take you out of the mix for three days.....