(08-31-2016 10:05 AM)Johnny Incognito Wrote:  

(08-31-2016 10:01 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Well at least they told ECU so they can try to get out in front and damage control as much as possible.

I figure they let more schools than just ECU know they're out of the running. Don't you think?

Probably, but ECU lobbied publicly the most of any of the "long shot" candidates, so ECU will probably be the only one who releases a statement out of that group that they were told no.

I didn't think we had a chance unless the Big 12 needed 6-8 schools, so I'm not upset at the news.

I do hope our players feel slighted though, we are at our best when there is a chip on our shoulder.

(08-31-2016 10:17 AM)Chappy Wrote:  I didn't think we had a chance unless the Big 12 needed 6-8 schools, so I'm not upset at the news.

I do hope our players feel slighted though, we are at our best when there is a chip on our shoulder.

Well between this and being picked 5th in the east motivation shouldn't be an issue.

Blaudschun has broken many, many stories.

He is old school. And his contacts are old school. Whether to insulate the Big 12 from tampering concerns is the reason that the Big 12 engaged in such a public process is not hard to believe.

While Blaudschun mixes opinion with fact, all reporters do. Whether he is a big UConn fan or not, I believe his ties are more personal. He broke the fact that a new Uconn athletic director would be named (warde manuel); lots of Calhoun news, etc.

So on that level, he is far superior to any blogger.

If the Big 12 has ruled out a western/front range expansion, the MWC will be in a position to claim clear P5 lite status IF they poach wisely.

(08-31-2016 10:35 AM)BE4evah Wrote:  Blaudschun has broken many, many stories.

He is old school. And his contacts are old school. Whether to insulate the Big 12 from tampering concerns is the reason that the Big 12 engaged in such a public process is not hard to believe.

While Blaudschun mixes opinion with fact, all reporters do. Whether he is a big UConn fan or not, I believe his ties are more personal. He broke the fact that a new Uconn athletic director would be named (warde manuel); lots of Calhoun news, etc.

So on that level, he is far superior to any blogger.

If the Big 12 has ruled out a western/front range expansion, the MWC will be in a position to claim clear P5 lite status IF they poach wisely.

But it would only take the AAC adding a true western div to completely wipe out any other G5 competition. Add BSU, CSU AF & SDSU to the AAC west & the MWC essentially becomes a low level conference. Conference travel is mitigated & most important, it gives the collective schools a much better leverage on a new, larger TV contract - clearly separating the new AAC from the rest. It's a much better position for the schools involved to bring the best of the MWC to the AAC than for those two conferences to compete for the best of the G5 conferences separately.

(08-30-2016 11:22 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(08-30-2016 11:07 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-30-2016 11:04 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  Also from the Commercial Appeal Article:

"...Blaudschun also disclosed "there was some chatter of a growing sentiment ... that the Big 12 presidents will table any expansion talk for at least one year... ."

Yeah, and in July they said 2 or 3 years. They are still wrong.

Who is wrong?

The B12 still has not expanded and they have made a farce out of this whole thing. So according to Bladschun they have basically cut their expansion list from 20 schools down to 9 or 10 schools?

According to the Commercial Appeal article Memphis officials a Memphis Athletic Official was not aware of the devlopment:

"...When reached Tuesday night, a Memphis athletic official said he was not aware of the development... .

In the same article Blaudshun wrote the following:

"...Blaudschun wrote there was some talk about football-only invitations, a move "that would be easiest for BYU and UConn." He said UConn "presumably has a landing spot for its other sports in the Big East" if a Big 12 football invitation is made."

So what is the truth? No expansion. Football only expansion with BYU and UConn; or expansion by 2 or 4 full members?

Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I was responding to the very last part of the last sentence in the post I quoted, where Blaudschun said expansion could be postponed a year. My comment is yeah, I don't believe that, b/c everybody in the media said on July 19 that expansion was dead for at least 2-3 years. So that comment sounds the same to me.

(08-31-2016 10:09 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(08-31-2016 10:05 AM)Johnny Incognito Wrote:  

(08-31-2016 10:01 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Well at least they told ECU so they can try to get out in front and damage control as much as possible.

I figure they let more schools than just ECU know they're out of the running. Don't you think?

Probably, but ECU lobbied publicly the most of any of the "long shot" candidates, so ECU will probably be the only one who releases a statement out of that group that they were told no.

Hate it for you guys. ECU would be a great fit in the Big 12.

(08-31-2016 09:35 AM)SMUfrat Wrote:  Sorry Guys,

Looks like SMU is technically still in the running. I know how everyone wants to forget them. Not going away yet.

Yeah, it appears that SMU is not one of the schools that received this week's "Sorry, you're out" message from the Big 12.

Quote:Chuck Carlton
‏@ChuckCarltonDMN

Working to confirm (along with other info) but SMU apparently made Big 12 cut. School only saying it's bound by non-disclosure agreement.

9:01 AM - 31 Aug 2016

Greg Flugaur ‏@flugempire · 6m6 minutes ago

BTM:OU Contacts

According to OU Contacts USF/UCF/UCONN/SMU/Tulane/UC/BYU/UH are involved in "Deep Vet" by Big 12 Conference.

No Memphis?

(08-31-2016 11:24 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Greg Flugaur ‏@flugempire · 6m6 minutes ago

BTM:OU Contacts

According to OU Contacts USF/UCF/UCONN/SMU/Tulane/UC/BYU/UH are involved in "Deep Vet" by Big 12 Conference.

Looks like more of this

(08-31-2016 11:26 AM)Johnny Incognito Wrote:  No Memphis?

Flugaur swings and misses, lol.

Are we sure they told ECU no or filed a restraining order? LOL

(08-31-2016 11:37 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-31-2016 11:26 AM)Johnny Incognito Wrote:  No Memphis?

Flugaur swings and misses, lol.

That guy must have a real problem with Memphis, I don't think I've ever seen anything out of him that even included Memphis as a consideration.

(08-31-2016 11:49 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Are we sure they told ECU no or filed a restraining order? LOL

Now THAT's funny.

(08-31-2016 10:52 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  But it would only take the AAC adding a true western div to completely wipe out any other G5 competition. Add BSU, CSU AF & SDSU to the AAC west & the MWC essentially becomes a low level conference. Conference travel is mitigated & most important, it gives the collective schools a much better leverage on a new, larger TV contract - clearly separating the new AAC from the rest. It's a much better position for the schools involved to bring the best of the MWC to the AAC than for those two conferences to compete for the best of the G5 conferences separately.

I won't be surprised at all if the AAC west expansion is the next play. SDSU and CSU want out of the MWC and, if Air Force can keep CSU and some other western schools close, they want games in Texas and wouldn't mind Navy as an in-conference game...

Boise St. would follow SDSU, CSU, and Air Force.

Then, grab pseudo-affiliations with Army, Hawaii (new independent), and BYU (if they are left behind) for some TV-worthy games and bowls.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Army actually becomes a serious AAC football target in that scenario. Army already has history of scheduling SMU, Tulane, Temple, UConn, and obviously Air Force and Navy (and Rice, if they replace Houston).

So I've heard SMU is in and out, I've heard BYU is in and out, and I've heard UCONN is in and out...


What a crap shoot

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

(08-31-2016 12:13 PM)Stay Cool Wrote:  So I've heard SMU is in and out, I've heard BYU is in and out, and I've heard UCONN is in and out...


What a crap shoot

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

In reality they're all out

(08-31-2016 12:13 PM)Stay Cool Wrote:  So I've heard SMU is in and out, I've heard BYU is in and out, and I've heard UCONN is in and out...


What a crap shoot

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Who is reporting BYU or UConn out? I've not seen that.
I've seen SMU and Tulane reported as being under NDA.

(08-31-2016 10:52 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-31-2016 10:35 AM)BE4evah Wrote:  Blaudschun has broken many, many stories.

He is old school. And his contacts are old school. Whether to insulate the Big 12 from tampering concerns is the reason that the Big 12 engaged in such a public process is not hard to believe.

While Blaudschun mixes opinion with fact, all reporters do. Whether he is a big UConn fan or not, I believe his ties are more personal. He broke the fact that a new Uconn athletic director would be named (warde manuel); lots of Calhoun news, etc.

So on that level, he is far superior to any blogger.

If the Big 12 has ruled out a western/front range expansion, the MWC will be in a position to claim clear P5 lite status IF they poach wisely.

But it would only take the AAC adding a true western div to completely wipe out any other G5 competition. Add BSU, CSU AF & SDSU to the AAC west & the MWC essentially becomes a low level conference. Conference travel is mitigated & most important, it gives the collective schools a much better leverage on a new, larger TV contract - clearly separating the new AAC from the rest. It's a much better position for the schools involved to bring the best of the MWC to the AAC than for those two conferences to compete for the best of the G5 conferences separately.

Why would those schools join a very weakened AAC? MWC is likely the better conference at that point, and you are adding a lot of travel to very unexciting places.

AAC will be left the deadwood of Tulsa, Tulane, etc. The only way you could really ensure a value-added conference is to start from scratch with the 12 best G5 schools.