IMO this process has had to much publicity to do nothing. So my guess is...
60% they add 2 teams
30% they add 4
10% they kick the can to end of the season

(10-08-2016 04:13 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-08-2016 03:44 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-08-2016 12:30 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-08-2016 11:42 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-08-2016 11:34 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Okay, you're saying #2 (kick the can) and #3 (add 2) are 50-50.

I say it's #4 (add 4) at 60%, #3 (add 2) at 30%, and #2 (kick the can) at 10%. I agree that saying expansion is completely dead, or saying nothing, are out the window.

Any other brave predictions?

My odds
60% add two-Houston and BYU or Cincinnati
10% add four-Houston, BYU, Cincinnati and somebody else
20% no expansion
10% defer decision to November, December or January when they add two but probably for 2018, not 2017

That's a lot closer to public opinion than mine, lol. My issue with adding UH as one of two is that the opposition would be too great to increase the percentage of Texas schools. But at 14, it stays virtually the same.

I also think UT is pushing for UH, so those two assumptions together steer me toward 14.

I have a backup theory, too. I think the Big 12 had every intent to add BYU, but their public image, in light of Baylor's scandal, is just too toxic to add them right now. So, it's possible the Big 12 will add two, and revisit 13/14 for 2018 or 2019.

I'm inclined to believe Stitler who said Boren liked UH. There have been lots of rumblings that OU is opposed to UH, but it just rings like fans and boosters who don't like Texas politicians telling them what to do. I think the UH opposition is from the old Big 12 North. So unless they are willing to scuttle expansion, UH is in.

When you look at historical success or even success for the last 20 years since UH left the SWC, UH is simply the top of the class (excluding BYU). Cincinnati is the only one who is really close.

And they have publically said they want schools that will contribute now. That means no projects unless they happen to be #14 (UConn, USF, UCF, Tulane).

I'm just guessing, but I don't think OU is opposed to Houston. I think some of the other non-Texas schools are, though, and maybe even Baylor and/or TCU. I know several ADs and HCs have complained publicly about admitting Houston.

Enough that a compromise could be UT gets in UH, if the little 8 get 14 instead of 12.

I agree there is an issue with finding a #14 that isn't a project in FB, and I think that has been part of the holdup. Again, just a guess. But there is some logic to it.

Eh, UConn's got the facilities and the budget already. They're not a total project in football, just need the recruiting bump. They also bring the best non-football package.

60% of the time, the Big 12 fails every time.

(10-08-2016 05:13 PM)Bogg Wrote:  

(10-08-2016 04:13 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-08-2016 03:44 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-08-2016 12:30 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(10-08-2016 11:42 AM)bullet Wrote:  My odds
60% add two-Houston and BYU or Cincinnati
10% add four-Houston, BYU, Cincinnati and somebody else
20% no expansion
10% defer decision to November, December or January when they add two but probably for 2018, not 2017

That's a lot closer to public opinion than mine, lol. My issue with adding UH as one of two is that the opposition would be too great to increase the percentage of Texas schools. But at 14, it stays virtually the same.

I also think UT is pushing for UH, so those two assumptions together steer me toward 14.

I have a backup theory, too. I think the Big 12 had every intent to add BYU, but their public image, in light of Baylor's scandal, is just too toxic to add them right now. So, it's possible the Big 12 will add two, and revisit 13/14 for 2018 or 2019.

I'm inclined to believe Stitler who said Boren liked UH. There have been lots of rumblings that OU is opposed to UH, but it just rings like fans and boosters who don't like Texas politicians telling them what to do. I think the UH opposition is from the old Big 12 North. So unless they are willing to scuttle expansion, UH is in.

When you look at historical success or even success for the last 20 years since UH left the SWC, UH is simply the top of the class (excluding BYU). Cincinnati is the only one who is really close.

And they have publically said they want schools that will contribute now. That means no projects unless they happen to be #14 (UConn, USF, UCF, Tulane).

I'm just guessing, but I don't think OU is opposed to Houston. I think some of the other non-Texas schools are, though, and maybe even Baylor and/or TCU. I know several ADs and HCs have complained publicly about admitting Houston.

Enough that a compromise could be UT gets in UH, if the little 8 get 14 instead of 12.

I agree there is an issue with finding a #14 that isn't a project in FB, and I think that has been part of the holdup. Again, just a guess. But there is some logic to it.

Eh, UConn's got the facilities and the budget already. They're not a total project in football, just need the recruiting bump. They also bring the best non-football package.

I don't disagree. It's all relative. You are a possible pick, for sure. And I agree about the non-football package. It's just that FB is the main ingredient. But based on the UC-UConn game today, maybe UC is the biggest "project," lol.

Sorry, UC. J/K. But Tubbs has to go.