(02-01-2016 05:08 PM)BE4evah Wrote:  This confirms what President David Boren has stated. He claimed that the schools being considered are the same everyone already knows.

So it looks like UConn, Cincy, USF, UCF made the cut.

BYU, Memphis, Houston, SMU have not.

That is bull, and the writer could be a paid shill for UConn.

Cincinnati, USF, UCF, East Carolina and Memphis made the cut.

UConn., Houston, SMU, Tulane, Rice BYU and others have not.

Cincy, Memphis and East Carolina have been more consistent than UConn. There was a year that UConn. had a lousy basketball season.

Cincinnati & UCONN would be great additions to the Big 12.

(02-01-2016 05:29 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 05:08 PM)BE4evah Wrote:  This confirms what President David Boren has stated. He claimed that the schools being considered are the same everyone already knows.

So it looks like UConn, Cincy, USF, UCF made the cut.

BYU, Memphis, Houston, SMU have not.

That is bull, and the writer could be a paid shill for UConn.

Cincinnati, USF, UCF, East Carolina and Memphis made the cut.

UConn., Houston, SMU, Tulane, Rice BYU and others have not.

Cincy, Memphis and East Carolina have been more consistent than UConn. There was a year that UConn. had a lousy basketball season.

To not include Arkansas Tech in the list of finalists is absolutely ridiculous. Writer is obviously trolling.

(02-01-2016 05:29 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Cincinnati & UCONN would be great additions to the Big 12.

The Big 12 could certainly do worse. I would have liked to have seen Louisville as 11, but the Big 12 sat on its hands and made a mistake.

Right now, the conference just needs to get on the same page regarding expansion. I think that is what Boren is trying to do. It doesn't matter if the conference decides to expand to 12 or 14 or 16, to take certain teams, or to take teams and wait, or to make a run at some ACC schools. What matters is that the conference decides what they want to do and make plans to execute it. Right now there isn't any progress being made because there are about 6 different opinions in regards to expansion. That needs to get knocked down to 1 or 2.

Its difficult because who knows what the future of cable holds for conferences, but if expansion must happen, I think 14 might be the best solution. Grab BYU and CSU/Air Force and Cincinatti and UConn. You have four respectable, established brands that will benefit from Big 12 inclusion, new markets, good academics, some geographic sanity, and enough teams for balanced divisions. If you want a network, these four will get you carriage in several states and big metros, if you want a subscriber model then you have a group of teams that can support themselves (except maybe CSU).

Memphis is also a brand name because of basketball. They fit better in the Big 12 than UConn. I think UConn would be better in either ACC or Big 10. Adding them would add another school on an island.

(02-01-2016 05:41 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Memphis is also a brand name because of basketball. They fit better in the Big 12 than UConn. I think UConn would be better in either ACC or Big 10. Adding them would add another school on an island.

Is Memphis really a 'brand' name basketball school? Since when?

Exactly David!! The ACC should want them, reuniting them with their BE brethren.

Does anyone ever get tired of trying to talk about how their school should be in the Big 12? Why do you care so much? Just let the process play itself out.

(02-01-2016 05:44 PM)rednblackattack Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 05:41 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Memphis is also a brand name because of basketball. They fit better in the Big 12 than UConn. I think UConn would be better in either ACC or Big 10. Adding them would add another school on an island.

Is Memphis really a 'brand' name basketball school? Since when?

Thou has forgotten where thine came from I see.

(02-01-2016 05:20 PM)CyclonePower Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 02:59 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 01:50 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  How I think the Big 12 is leaning right now:

Pro-Expansion

Oklahoma - duh

OSU - want OU to be happy and stay put so their program is not put at risk of being left out

Baylor/TCU - Both need a stable Big 12 and don't want to risk getting left out again. However, unlike OU do not want any expansion from TX

WVU - tired of being on an island and want either someone geographically closer or their access to Florida restored.

Anti-Expansion

UT - duh

TTU - probably doesn't care as long as more TX teams aren't added but will vote with UT because ensuring a coattail ride out of the B12 if things get real is more important.

KSU - As the North's only other FB school, being cut off from the OK and TX schools and put in a new B12 North is not in their best interests from a fan and recruiting point.

KU - Jayhawks seem to like the current B12 Basketball set up and don't want to see the old division restored. Plus they have options if anything happens.

Could go either way

ISU - All they want is to continue having a Power Conference home and they know if the Big 12 dissolves they are deep trouble and will vote whichever way they see as the path to a B12 not breaking up.

I follow the Oklahoma schools closely and I have never seen any indication by OSU one way or the other. Same goes for Baylor.

TCU has indicated they are against expansion, or at least Gary Patterson has. Also, the coach at Iowa State spoke out against expansion. Kansas seems to be against expansion, they love the RR schedule and they are the Kingpin of the conference. Of course Texas and Texas Tech are most likely against expansion.

Bill Snyder at Kansas State has indicated he is for expansion. The weaker North Division gives him the best opportunity of winning the Division and thus the Big12 championship. Of course Boren and Gordon Gee of West Virginia are pro expansion. However, ESPN reporter Jake Trotter who use to write for the Oklahoma newspaper, has said not one Big12 AD had spoken out in favor of expansion.

So we possibly have:

OU, West Virginia and KSU for expansion.
Baylor and OSU unknown.
Kansas, Iowa State, TCU, Texas and Tech against expansion.

It is my understanding it will take 8 schools to vote for expansion to make it happen.

Not very likely IMO

Other way around. He said he wanted expansion and it urged Iowa state to push for it.

I do not know where you are getting your information, Paul Rhodes who is sort of an institution at Iowa State came out against expansion while he was still Head Coach.

(02-01-2016 06:10 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 05:20 PM)CyclonePower Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 02:59 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 01:50 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  How I think the Big 12 is leaning right now:

Pro-Expansion

Oklahoma - duh

OSU - want OU to be happy and stay put so their program is not put at risk of being left out

Baylor/TCU - Both need a stable Big 12 and don't want to risk getting left out again. However, unlike OU do not want any expansion from TX

WVU - tired of being on an island and want either someone geographically closer or their access to Florida restored.

Anti-Expansion

UT - duh

TTU - probably doesn't care as long as more TX teams aren't added but will vote with UT because ensuring a coattail ride out of the B12 if things get real is more important.

KSU - As the North's only other FB school, being cut off from the OK and TX schools and put in a new B12 North is not in their best interests from a fan and recruiting point.

KU - Jayhawks seem to like the current B12 Basketball set up and don't want to see the old division restored. Plus they have options if anything happens.

Could go either way

ISU - All they want is to continue having a Power Conference home and they know if the Big 12 dissolves they are deep trouble and will vote whichever way they see as the path to a B12 not breaking up.

I follow the Oklahoma schools closely and I have never seen any indication by OSU one way or the other. Same goes for Baylor.

TCU has indicated they are against expansion, or at least Gary Patterson has. Also, the coach at Iowa State spoke out against expansion. Kansas seems to be against expansion, they love the RR schedule and they are the Kingpin of the conference. Of course Texas and Texas Tech are most likely against expansion.

Bill Snyder at Kansas State has indicated he is for expansion. The weaker North Division gives him the best opportunity of winning the Division and thus the Big12 championship. Of course Boren and Gordon Gee of West Virginia are pro expansion. However, ESPN reporter Jake Trotter who use to write for the Oklahoma newspaper, has said not one Big12 AD had spoken out in favor of expansion.

So we possibly have:

OU, West Virginia and KSU for expansion.
Baylor and OSU unknown.
Kansas, Iowa State, TCU, Texas and Tech against expansion.

It is my understanding it will take 8 schools to vote for expansion to make it happen.

Not very likely IMO

Other way around. He said he wanted expansion and it urged Iowa state to push for it.

I do not know where you are getting your information, Paul Rhodes who is sort of an institution at Iowa State came out against expansion while he was still Head Coach.

When Paul Rhoads was fired he told Iowa state to expand. He explained that Iowa state would be able to win more if there was years were we could dodge teams like OU and Baylor. He might of been against it when it was 2012 and 2013 but on his last press conference he told Jaime Pollard and our president to expand.

He even went on the big 12 teleconference and told the other presidents to expand too.

Plus I don't think he ever spoke against expansion as a head coach whenever asked he would say that's above his pay grade. It wasn't until he was fired till he said something.

(02-01-2016 03:05 PM)connecticutguy Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 02:43 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 02:35 PM)connecticutguy Wrote:  B12 needs to enter into metro NY market and Northeast market more generally -- just like ACC and B10. That means UConn for sure. I like BYU, but one other option is Temple -- it includes Philadelphia and Southern New Jersey. With UConn and second school B12 can be more of a player in TV channel. That means lots in revenue.

The Pac 12 should be in the New York market. And the SEC. So that makes space for UConn, Army and Fordham.

(and if you can't see the sarcasm-the Big 12 has no more reason to be in the NY market than the Pac 12-NY normally doesn't even pay attention to Rutgers).

If you don't think the NY market - and Boston to DC market more generally -- is important why did the B10 take Rutgers and MD. And why did ACC take Pitt, Syracuse and BC. It's about TV sets, demographics and revenue, not about your favorite teams. Not saying it's right -- it's the way it is.

Try looking at a map. It makes sense for them.

(02-01-2016 05:41 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Memphis is also a brand name because of basketball. They fit better in the Big 12 than UConn. I think UConn would be better in either ACC or Big 10. Adding them would add another school on an island.

I think you're making to big of a deal out of "islands ". Nowadays as long as you're close to an airport then it really doesn't matter. You can make a strong case for Memphis but if the B12 wants a network then I think UCONN would be better. Their basketball has been superior over the last 10-20 years, the football is about even but UCONN has a big advantage in academics & market.

Len: the teams can travel sure, but what about fans? Oh yeah, they don't matter, it's all about the Benjamins.

(02-01-2016 06:36 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 05:41 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Memphis is also a brand name because of basketball. They fit better in the Big 12 than UConn. I think UConn would be better in either ACC or Big 10. Adding them would add another school on an island.

I think you're making to big of a deal out of "islands ". Nowadays as long as you're close to an airport then it really doesn't matter. You can make a strong case for Memphis but if the B12 wants a network then I think UCONN would be better. Their basketball has been superior over the last 10-20 years, the football is about even but UCONN has a big advantage in academics & market.

I agree with this, if the big 12 wants network they will go after UCONN. I think the big12 wants a flagship. If the big 12 picks up both UCONN and Cincy you can argue without a doubt it would be the best basketball conference in the nation. Memphis has been good in basketball, but it's been faulting lately.

(02-01-2016 05:39 PM)Baylorbears11 Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 05:29 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Cincinnati & UCONN would be great additions to the Big 12.

The Big 12 could certainly do worse. I would have liked to have seen Louisville as 11, but the Big 12 sat on its hands and made a mistake.

Right now, the conference just needs to get on the same page regarding expansion. I think that is what Boren is trying to do. It doesn't matter if the conference decides to expand to 12 or 14 or 16, to take certain teams, or to take teams and wait, or to make a run at some ACC schools. What matters is that the conference decides what they want to do and make plans to execute it. Right now there isn't any progress being made because there are about 6 different opinions in regards to expansion. That needs to get knocked down to 1 or 2.

Its difficult because who knows what the future of cable holds for conferences, but if expansion must happen, I think 14 might be the best solution. Grab BYU and CSU/Air Force and Cincinatti and UConn. You have four respectable, established brands that will benefit from Big 12 inclusion, new markets, good academics, some geographic sanity, and enough teams for balanced divisions. If you want a network, these four will get you carriage in several states and big metros, if you want a subscriber model then you have a group of teams that can support themselves (except maybe CSU).

I was expecting Louisville & Cincinnati to get a B12 invite after WV & TCU. Coming along with FSU, Clemson & GT would've been nice to. Now I see those schools in the SEC if not the ACC.

Cincinnati, UCONN/Memphis and/or BYU & Colorado State would be nice adds. Whatever happens I hope Baylor comes out good. I would like to see Texas, TCU/Houston & Baylor in the ACC.

(02-01-2016 06:44 PM)Erictelevision Wrote:  Len: the teams can travel sure, but what about fans? Oh yeah, they don't matter, it's all about the Benjamins.

I didn't create the world, I just live in it. Don't hate the player, hate the game.

(02-01-2016 05:29 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 05:08 PM)BE4evah Wrote:  This confirms what President David Boren has stated. He claimed that the schools being considered are the same everyone already knows.

So it looks like UConn, Cincy, USF, UCF made the cut.

BYU, Memphis, Houston, SMU have not.

That is bull, and the writer could be a paid shill for UConn.

Cincinnati, USF, UCF, East Carolina and Memphis made the cut.

UConn., Houston, SMU, Tulane, Rice BYU and others have not.

Cincy, Memphis and East Carolina have been more consistent than UConn. There was a year that UConn. had a lousy basketball season.

Damn... The minute "DavidSt" mentions UC as "making the cut" means, by it's very definition, that UC is doomed.

So they'd be contend to go into 100% hostile arenas? Okay.

(02-01-2016 06:28 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 03:05 PM)connecticutguy Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 02:43 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-01-2016 02:35 PM)connecticutguy Wrote:  B12 needs to enter into metro NY market and Northeast market more generally -- just like ACC and B10. That means UConn for sure. I like BYU, but one other option is Temple -- it includes Philadelphia and Southern New Jersey. With UConn and second school B12 can be more of a player in TV channel. That means lots in revenue.

The Pac 12 should be in the New York market. And the SEC. So that makes space for UConn, Army and Fordham.

(and if you can't see the sarcasm-the Big 12 has no more reason to be in the NY market than the Pac 12-NY normally doesn't even pay attention to Rutgers).

If you don't think the NY market - and Boston to DC market more generally -- is important why did the B10 take Rutgers and MD. And why did ACC take Pitt, Syracuse and BC. It's about TV sets, demographics and revenue, not about your favorite teams. Not saying it's right -- it's the way it is.

Try looking at a map. It makes sense for them.

I don't think that "the New York market" had much to do with the ACC taking Pitt and BC.

Pitt has nothing to do with the "Boston to DC" market, either.

The Big Ten took Rutgers, among other reasons (Penn State), because it could extort money from NYC cable subscribers via "bundling" and the idea that Rutgers' inclusion justified (along with large numbers of Big Ten alumni in NYC) charging Tier 1 cable rates.

It also made sense for the Big Ten geographically.

With sensible geography and huge numbers of Big 12 NYC fans both lacking, plus with "bundling" looking less lucrative in the future and a Big 12 Network not existing nor looking promising at present (LHN, cord cutting), a Big 12 invitation to UConn to capture the NYC or Northeast (many of the people little interested in college sports) markets seems unlikely to me.