http://www.foxsports.com/college-footbal...lip-072815

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footbal...ast-072815

I cringed when I saw the headline: "The Audible: Could Big Ten dismantle Big 12 in next realignment wave?"

I get a feeling the Big Ten CEO's want nothing to do with "dismantling" a conference.

If the big 12 is dismantled, scratch that, when the big 12 is dismantled it will be by the Networks and by the big 12 itself.

What I think we are looking at:
1. The Big Ten has a planned "End Game" of getting to 16 members.
2. It wants the Indiana schools in the same division; meaning either two from the East or two from the West.
3. Continued expansion to the Southeast visa vie UVa and UNC is considered very doubtful.
4. That leaves expansion to the West as the only option for the foreseeable future.
5. Mizzu joining the SEC means that it is off of the table.
6. Texas is the big prize, but it only wants to be a "First Among Equals" in a conference, which the B10 rejects out of hand.
7. That leaves OU and KU as the most viable candidates RIGHT NOW.
8. A move would only happen if the money, timing and conditions were all right.
9. All of this could change tomorrow.

(07-29-2015 09:42 AM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  What I think we are looking at:
1. The Big Ten has a planned "End Game" of getting to 16 members.
2. It wants the Indiana schools in the same division; meaning either two from the East or two from the West.
3. Continued expansion to the Southeast visa vie UVa and UNC is considered very doubtful.
4. That leaves expansion to the West as the only option for the foreseeable future.
5. Mizzu joining the SEC means that it is off of the table.
6. Texas is the big prize, but it only wants to be a "First Among Equals" in a conference, which the B10 rejects out of hand.
7. That leaves OU and KU as the most viable candidates RIGHT NOW.
8. A move would only happen if the money, timing and conditions were all right.
9. All of this could change tomorrow.

The question I have asked this board, and never get an answer to is....

Is Oklahoma State part of the deal with Oklahoma or not?? It changes the entire picture. I would be surprised if politics in Oklahoma didn't make them a packaged deal

(07-31-2015 01:21 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(07-29-2015 09:42 AM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  What I think we are looking at:
1. The Big Ten has a planned "End Game" of getting to 16 members.
2. It wants the Indiana schools in the same division; meaning either two from the East or two from the West.
3. Continued expansion to the Southeast visa vie UVa and UNC is considered very doubtful.
4. That leaves expansion to the West as the only option for the foreseeable future.
5. Mizzu joining the SEC means that it is off of the table.
6. Texas is the big prize, but it only wants to be a "First Among Equals" in a conference, which the B10 rejects out of hand.
7. That leaves OU and KU as the most viable candidates RIGHT NOW.
8. A move would only happen if the money, timing and conditions were all right.
9. All of this could change tomorrow.

The question I have asked this board, and never get an answer to is....

Is Oklahoma State part of the deal with Oklahoma or not?? It changes the entire picture. I would be surprised if politics in Oklahoma didn't make them a packaged deal

I have no inside information. I believe that the reason why the original PAC-10 eats the B12 deal fell through was in part because of that issue. OU could not move without OSU and the PAC did not want an OU/OSU combination unless it was getting aTm along with UT and TT. Once aTm went to the SEC the deal unraveled. In fact the same problem holds true so far for KU/KSU. One reason mentioned as to why Neb, Mizzu, Col and Md/RU were all more attractive realignment targets has been that they were all stand alone state flagships. None has the State/Tech baggage that KU, OU, UT, UVa and UNC carry.
In order for this move to work, the Siamese twins will have to first be separated. That is a long shot. It could still happen IF (A) KSU & OSU get SEC offers OR (B) it appears that all four schools will be left behind in a rump G5 level B12, while UT pimp slaps the ACC for a ND type deal. Let's face it, this version of the B12 is UT and everybody else.
Of course that all being said, I would think that the BIG does not have a timeline on its next move. This league went 40 years between the time MSU and PSU joined. Then it went over 20 years more before adding Neb to get a CCG. Depending on conditions, the next move could come by the end of the year or not happen in our lifetimes.

As long as Purdue and IU play each other every year (preferably twice in basketball) and don't think it's a necessity to have them in the same division. At least, that's my take, living an equal distance from each.

They would need to bring back coaches Knight and Keady to make it what it used to be.

(07-31-2015 01:21 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  The question I have asked this board, and never get an answer to is....

Is Oklahoma State part of the deal with Oklahoma or not?? It changes the entire picture. I would be surprised if politics in Oklahoma didn't make them a packaged deal

Oklahoma's silence may be an indication that they're talking with people. As for the Big Ten, OSU will not get an invite, so complete non-starter if it's a package deal/