Good news for the Big 12 this week...they aren't as far behind the other P5s as some thought. That has to be allowing the little 7 a breath of relief.

But for the Big 3, they still don't want to be behind anyone...and they don't want to see their gap growing larger. Which it WILL with or without expansion.

So, my thought is do the Big 3 (UT, OU, KU) expand to give the Little 7 a stronger footing this summer? Then, make their move to greener pastures, under the guise of "anger" at the expansion?

The expansion would establish the Big 12 as a solid P5 conference going forward...and that would allow OU/KU/UT to leave OSU/KSU/TTech behind with a solid footing.

(06-04-2016 06:17 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  Good news for the Big 12 this week...they aren't as far behind the other P5s as some thought. That has to be allowing the little 7 a breath of relief.

But for the Big 3, they still don't want to be behind anyone...and they don't want to see their gap growing larger. Which it WILL with or without expansion.

So, my thought is do the Big 3 (UT, OU, KU) expand to give the Little 7 a stronger footing this summer? Then, make their move to greener pastures, under the guise of "anger" at the expansion?

The expansion would establish the Big 12 as a solid P5 conference going forward...and that would allow OU/KU/UT to leave OSU/KSU/TTech behind with a solid footing.

Just want to add this here. Latest on the Big 12 dropping the name, "Big 14".

"For now, everyone in the Pure Prairie League is happy. They're playing an extra game. They're making more money. And they may not be done yet.

Big 14, anyone? That sounds so bad-ass.

"Kind of got busy with it, didn't we?" a gleaming Bowlsby said."


http://www.cbssports.com/college-footbal...he-big-ten

The sports rights bubble of 2010-14 convinced the ACC, SEC, B1G to expand to 14 teams. The PAC had to go to at least 12 to cash in on a conference championship game, the rule at the time and to be viewed as a more national conference.

The B12 in the end may turn out to having it right. They allowed Texas to have its own Network to the tune of monster cash. They changed the rule to allow conferences of less than 12 members to have a championship game. The conference could be better positioned post sports bubble world where future TV contracts will be smaller.

(06-04-2016 09:32 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  The sports rights bubble of 2010-14 convinced the ACC, SEC, B1G to expand to 14 teams. The PAC had to go to at least 12 to cash in on a conference championship game, the rule at the time and to be viewed as a more national conference.

The B12 in the end may turn out to having it right. They allowed Texas to have its own Network to the tune of monster cash. They changed the rule to allow conferences of less than 12 members to have a championship game. The conference could be better positioned post sports bubble world where future TV contracts will be smaller.

You wonder what would have happened had the NCAA allowed 10-team conferences to have title games. Would the Pac still have invited Colorado and Utah, or would it have held serve to find a better partner for Colorado? Or just stayed at 10 and called it a conference?

Then if Colorado isn't going to the Pac 10, do Texas A&M and Missouri stick around, or are they still gone? And does the Big 12 still invite both TCU and West Virginia, necessitating one more team to get to 12? Or do they invite one of the two to replace Nebraska, then remain at 10?

If it's TCU, then West Virginia probably stays in the Big East/AAC, and the race with Louisville for a Big 12 bid becomes one for an ACC bid. If the AAC keeps both, then it could be they get a spot at the CFP/NY6 table. If they keep West Virginia *or* Louisville, then they can still make the "tweener conference" claim with more gravitas than they can now, but they'll still be outside the P5 -- unless they make a more spirited grab for the Mountain West's top programs.

If it's West Virginia, then the Mountain West is looking pretty strong again with TCU and Utah still in the fold. And BYU probably doesn't go independent. That also means there's no reason to invite San Jose State, Utah State, Fresno State, Nevada, or Hawaii football, which then keeps the WAC alive. Even if the MWC takes, say, Fresno and Nevada, there's still enough left over to maintain the WAC, along with Idaho, New Mexico State, Texas State, and possibly Louisiana Tech and UTSA (though they might have left for CUSA anyway).

And that's to say nothing of all the potential moves that might have been hypothesized or actually executed in this different environment.

Funny how one little rule change could have dramatically altered the course of college sports realignment had it been ratified in 2011 and not 2016.

My guess is that the big 3 will threaten to leave about 2-3 years before the TV contract ends. The little 7 will sweat bullets and offer them HUGE guarantees to stay. Knowing that the Big XII is *their* best conference option (money being equal), the big 3 will stay. Everyone will "win," and equal revenue sharing in the Big XII will go away (again).

You'll see a lot of smoke in 5-6 years, but that's all it will be.

REASONING:
Texas won't turn down B1G/SEC money + the LHN AND "preferred member status," Texas-heavy schedules, the political support of Texas Tech, Baylor, and TCU, and a walk to a major bowl (like FSU). And, schools like TCU will happily pay that to keep Texas in the conference. When you're a P5 school, and the American is your next best option, you have a lot of room to give. That's the situation for 5-7 Big XII schools.