(07-19-2018 06:50 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I don't think Texas will want to be the only school from the state of Texas in the conference. How far down the list would the Big Ten go to land Texas? In no particular order: Texas Tech, TCU, Rice, Baylor, Houston.

Texas Tech is in the wrong part of the state, isn't a strong brand, and may not meet the academic threshold.

TCU has a solid athletic brand, is in a great location, but isn't a research school and is private.

Rice has the academics in spades but is the opposite in athletics. Their enrollment is one of the smallest in Division I and are private. Great location.

I can't imagine Baylor tagging along. Houston is likewise a long shot.

To land Texas, Oklahoma is a must but I think a combination of TCU and either Texas Tech or Rice would land the Longhorns. If the Big Ten could get some sort of performance guarantee from Rice to go fully invested into athletics unlike their bare minimum right now, they may allow the conference to accept two schools they otherwise wouldn't academically.

Honestly, I think that if the B1G were in the mood to expand and both TX & OU were interested, they'd do whatever it takes to land TX.

The idea of landing the proverbial whale that would give them an huge market, a huge audience, a huge following, great sports, and great academics would be to great to pass up.

Not to mention if it looks like the XII is going the way of the T-Rex, they'd do it to keep TX out of the hands of the SEC.

If TX insisted on bring TT, the B1G would grin, bear it, and swallow hard because the benefits of having TX would outweigh the little brother tagging along.

It's kind of like this. If the Prom Queen agreed to go on a date with you but insisted her homely friend came along, you'd be ordering dinner for three.....

Then the question would become do you go full 18 with TX, TT, OU, and KS? Stick at 17 by saying thanks, but no thanks to KS?

Should be fun AND interesting the next few years.