(02-13-2020 11:16 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(02-12-2020 08:54 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(02-12-2020 08:31 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The Big Ten will try for Oklahoma and Kansas as a pair.

The SEC can choose to either target Texas/TTU or Okla/Ok St. or they take the Oklahoma pair in the 2020s, and revisit adding Texas again in the 2030s.

There's no point in the Big Ten adding Kansas/Oklahoma. If Texas isn't included, I don't see any other reason for them to expand (well Notre Dame).

And Texas Tech is worthless as a second school with Texas. They should take Oklahoma as the second. Or they can't take Oklahoma because Oklahoma can't go without Oklahoma State, Kansas (and if they can't go without Kansas State, West Virginia).

Easy newbie—it’s a pretty well agreed upon fact that there are about 5 schools in the ACC/Big 12 that could make the SEC or Big Ten more money:

ND
Texas
Oklahoma
Florida St
Clemson

Oklahoma is very much a program that the Big Ten would like to help anchor their weaker West Division. Kansas would be the companion school because they are AAU, bring in a new market, and are a basketball blue blood. Oklahoma St would never get a Big Ten offer due to academics and the fact that they would duplicate a small market.

TTU, Okla St, and Kansas are not the types of schools that make the Big Ten or SEC money but they are the types of schools they might have to bring in to accommodate one of the big fish and ease the complications of state politics.

Agreed upon by whom? I would have said that it's a pretty well agreed upon fact that neither Clemson nor Florida State would bring either the SEC or the B1G more money.