Oklahoma could be on the cross hairs as well if they continue to pass the same type of bills. Even though I am on the left, I think California and the LGBTQ community are bonkers for their push on the bathrooms.

Tom Osborne - or as I call him, "Bob" - is definitely talking about OU and KU. There is no doubt about it.

I think Texas to the ACC makes a lot of sense culturally. Academically, I think Texas desires the Big Ten. This seems to be the time to strike as the ACC is trending up the past few years...but I don't think the ACC wants a travel partner. If they add Texas as #15...and ND is a quasi-member for #16 in other sports, that's awfully appealing to both ND and Texas (and shoots the ACCN and men's basketball deals up a lot).

(06-27-2017 07:07 AM)micahandme Wrote:  I think Texas to the ACC makes a lot of sense culturally. Academically, I think Texas desires the Big Ten. This seems to be the time to strike as the ACC is trending up the past few years...but I don't think the ACC wants a travel partner. If they add Texas as #15...and ND is a quasi-member for #16 in other sports, that's awfully appealing to both ND and Texas (and shoots the ACCN and men's basketball deals up a lot).

BIG 10 wants AAU schools that are currently P5,Kansas,Texas,Ga Tech,UNC and UVA

(06-27-2017 07:46 AM)ctx48c Wrote:  

(06-27-2017 07:07 AM)micahandme Wrote:  I think Texas to the ACC makes a lot of sense culturally. Academically, I think Texas desires the Big Ten. This seems to be the time to strike as the ACC is trending up the past few years...but I don't think the ACC wants a travel partner. If they add Texas as #15...and ND is a quasi-member for #16 in other sports, that's awfully appealing to both ND and Texas (and shoots the ACCN and men's basketball deals up a lot).

BIG 10 wants AAU schools that are currently P5,Kansas,Texas,Ga Tech,UNC and UVA

Agree with that. The last 3 were on the hit list before settling on UMD & Rutgers.

Well another dimension is potential market/population of TV households that the Big Ten can try to tap into for growth of their cable TV network.

The last four mentioned (Texas, GA Tech, NC, and VA) would obviously be huge. Not so much with Kansas or Oklahoma (or Nebraska, for that matter).

I think the big 10 wants ku and ou to get to 16 than either get Texas or stop at 16. I could also see KU and Missouri combo if willing to get to 16.

(06-27-2017 08:06 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Well another dimension is potential market/population of TV households that the Big Ten can try to tap into for growth of their cable TV network.

The last four mentioned (Texas, GA Tech, NC, and VA) would obviously be huge. Not so much with Kansas or Oklahoma (or Nebraska, for that matter).

Florida State would be a huge market for the Big 10 if they can grab them. It would be bigger than the others besides Texas.

I don't think the CA travel ban will survive judicial review. Many CA government employees and contractors have relatives and connections in the states the travel is banned, and they make a substantially large injured class. Further the interference in contractor and beneficiary agencies (e.g., entities doing business with CA) can claim undue and unfair restrictions in areas governed by federal interstate trade, not CA preferences. I'm not a lawyer, but I am pretty sure this is going to come under attack from several legal angles at the first attempt to enforce it. It defies common sense, and invites the nation to start to put of barriers of all sorts between states which don't see eye to eye on a myriad of issues, and so restrict the free flow of people, commerce and ideas. That is just not going to hold. Even slavery did not create such laws.

And this is not the same as a ban on State pension buying stocks of a particular industry or country, as those are not directed at specific US states and residences of those states. So that line of argument wont hold up.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-footbal...out-there/

Article about Tom Osborn and Kansas. It has to do with Kansas upgrading their stadium and all that.

Let's not forget, it was only 6 weeks ago that Boren had this to say:

“We wouldn’t walk away from the Big 12 lightly, I’ll put it that way. We don’t have any plans to leave right now."

"The question is are you in a conference that’s going to have a chance to play for national championships and is going to be in the playoffs? And I think probably more than anything else, performance is going to determine that.”

“I would just say that we’re, at this point in time, hoping the Big 12 will improve and succeed.”

“No one has a crystal ball to see exactly how these conferences are going to evolve. I think there’ll be more consolidation frankly …"

“I think we’re really looking ahead at a whole wave of realignment as these contracts come to an end. I think we’re four or five years away from it.”

"The Big 10 and Pac 12 have a deserved stature in the academic community. I think what you need [to get in those leagues] is some strong brag points. For example, the number of national merit scholars we have. We’ve beaten all of the privates, Harvard, Yale, everybody, as well as publics. The AAU has been mainly in the past based upon simply research dollars. And I think they look at everything. They look at number of endowed chairs and so on."

http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/ou...86f74.html

In this context, Tom Osborne's comments take on a whole new light.