The Big Ten Network is doing some redecorating...
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s...TenNetwork.jpg
Printable View
The Big Ten Network is doing some redecorating...
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s...TenNetwork.jpg
The Big Ten unanimously accepted Nebraska's application into the Big Ten, and will officially become a member of the conference July 1, 2011. This season, the Big Ten Network will be airing Nebraska athletics.
I am SO fricken happy right now! I can't believe it starts in a year though! GO BIG RED!
Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State will join the Pacific-10 Conference when a formal offer is made, a source told ESPN's Joe Schad on Friday.
Texas A&M, the Austin American Statesman reported, is torn between joining the Pac-10 or Southeastern Conference. The Aggies will have a 72-hour timetable to decide whether to accept the Pac-10's offer, the newspaper reported.
If the SEC were to expand to 16 teams, I would love to see A&M, FSU, Miami, VTech. LSU and A&M had a pretty good rivalry going on. UF, FSU, UM have their rivalries of course. And then VTech/Miami and FSU have a connection also. VTech and UT would have some recruiting rivalries going on close to home also. Though I haven't heard a word about FSU or Miami going anywhere near the SEC, it would nice if they would follow VTech if they were to leave.
Maybe now with the more money they should make from TV revenue in the Pac-10, TTU can stop raising our tuition every damn semester.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBHuskers
I think the SEC should be pretty careful with who they invite. They already have two superpowers in Florida and Bama. Considering LSU has won two titles and a few other teams have the capability to win it all if you add teams like FSU, UM, VT, A & M, it will become virtually impossible to go undefeated in that conference. Heck a 1 loss season would be astonishing. It could hurt the conference's national championship hopes.
The PAC 10 was different. It was viewed as a down conference or a Plus 1 conference. The Big 10 has been that way the last few years with OSU. Those conferences adding legitimate teams in Texas, OU and Nebraska gives them more credibility and a greater chance to get to the title game. A one loss team from the PAC 16, Big 10+2 and SEC will be given preference to an undefeated Big East team and probably an undefeated ACC team as well. This could make things messier unless you end up with four super conferences which vote for a 4 team playoff between them and shut all the small schools out. It could also go the other way as the PAC 10 and Big 10 could just go back to having the Rose Bowl.
I'm curious as to why TCU would block Baylor from going to the Mountain West.
Getting spurned in favor of Baylor for the Big 12, since it was politics that caused that, is probably part of it.
Not a chance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingpin32
Ah guess I didn't know it was between TCU and Baylor back then.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
I don't know if it was specifically between Baylor and TCU, but I'm sure TCU felt like they were the better program.
Can't help but think that Houston, Rice and SMU might also be bitter from 15 years ago. And also can't help but think that TCU's Christian affiliation versus Baylor's Baptist origins could be playing a part, albeit not significantly.
Back then Baylor was better than TCU, SMU, Houston and Rice. Some say politics got Baylor in the Big 12 though.
Have to retract my statement, because you're right. Looked back at the 1995 Season Preview I have, and Baylor was thought to be nearly on par with the Top 2 in the SWC (Texas & A&M), at least that year. That's a hell of a compliment. TCU was down at like #5. I knew Baylor was better than SMU, Houston and Rice, but wasn't sure about TCU.
But it was certainly politics that got them into the Big 12, from every indication I've ever read. Whether or not it was deserved appears to be a secondary consideration.
Very true, Jeff.
Look back on other years and Baylor was better than TCU as well.
Doesn't look like politics will save Baylor this time.
I'm hoping MWC or Big East. Big East keeps them in great basketball conference and a better
chance to compete in football.
WOW .... good insight guys, I wasn't so heavily following college sports in my HS days when this all happened, so I was pretty oblivious to it. Just kinda went about my business accepting what was in front of me on the TV.
Here's a classic Big 10 highlight!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiLbCCD267U
I'm definitely putting Nebraska in the Big 10 for NCAA 11. I may even use them if I put recruiting on AA or Heisman. I used Illinois here because I was thinking they would be a fun challenge in the Big 10 without Indiana (drop them for Nebraska).
The 1995 season was really the first season I followed closely (which is why I love my '95 Buckeyes). Then when I got into HS and started playing football I got even more obsessed. It's only grown from there.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBHuskers
The Big 12 is making one big push to keep the league together with 10 teams. I really hope it happens.
I can definitely see the advantages of keeping the Big 12 intact for schools like Kansas and Missouri, but at this point, I'd rather see an expanded Pac-10. If it happens, I think it will change how we think about conferences. In some ways, it'll be almost more like two 8 team conferences with regular, well-defined cross-scheduling. Plus, as a fan of the Pac-10, I'd be disappointed if we gave up our round-robin schedules in both football and basketball just to share revenue with Colorado...Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy
Also, I posed this JBHuskers' Conference Realignment thread, but I think it makes sense here as well.
Anybody else seen this? It's an interesting way to contextualize many of the factors affecting expansion. Shows just how much Oklahoma and Texas would be bringing to the PAC-16.
http://cdn2.sbnation.com/entry_photo...obig_large.png
Larger version
The Big 12 is trying to convince Texas and Oklahoma that the revenue would only drop 8 to 10% with the loss of Colorado and Nebraska which wouldn't affect the team's revenues since they would have two less teams to share it with. That's why the Big 12 probably wouldn't invite TCU (no extra TV viewers) or someone else. Plus Texas could still create their own TV network which wouldn't be allowed in the PAC 16. The Big 12 could drop to 10 and then take a little time to decide if they want to expand. One problem with that is I think the NCAA mandates that you can't have a conference championship game unless you have 12 members.
Honestly I don't see the big lure of the PAC 10. I think the move of those teams over there is more due to fear of the Big 12 failing than anything else. They would bring a bigger TV deal but have to share so much of that with everyone. I don't see what the rush is to join the PAC 10 either. Colorado joined, big deal. The Big 12 teams could easily wait another year before deciding. What's the PAC 10 going to do? Invite 5 other scrubs and dilute the money pool? No way. The PAC 10 would wait on the Big 12 South. They shouldn't rush into something they might regret.
The lure for Oklahoma, Texas Tech and Okie State is that the Pac-10 is expected to created their own TV network. For Texas, honestly, I don't see the point.
According to Chip Brown - Texas staying put in the Big 12
But Joe Schad is reporting the opposite. Chip Brown changes his story every two seconds.Quote:
Originally Posted by DookieMowf
Can you see the recruiting pools that could be in the works?
The Pac10 getting access/exposure to TX recruits? The same in the other direction for the Big12 schools to CA kids?
It just deepens the pool and gives a better in-road to that pool for these schools.
I've heard Brown's source is actually Texas AD DeLoss Dodds, and that the Texas is staying put story is Dodds covering his ass with the Texas State Legislature.Quote:
Originally Posted by DookieMowf
Oregon and Oregon State have had pretty good success recruiting Texas the last couple years (LaMichael James, the Rodgers brothers), but you're right, this can only help those efforts.Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinWolv
Another thing with all the rumored moves, in regards to conference strength:
The SEC could get DEEPER if Miami and FSU were poached over. TXA&M would be a solid get, but not a powerhouse addition. It would help TXA&M more than the SEC, I think, although the SEC would gain the academic reputation of A&M which it needs....that would also create some recruiting roads to TX for the SEC and into FL for A&M.
The Pac10 could get significantly stronger.
The B10.....not so much if no further changes occurred or only some teams like ND or some of the Big East or ACC teams joined up. Don't get me wrong, Nebraska is a strong addition, but one team addition versus the multiple strong teams that the other power confs are eyeballing is not on the same level.
Just sayin' that 10 years down the road will be interesting to see what teams stay strong and what confs benefit from that.....
Via Chip Brown's Twitter: Texas A&M turned down invite to join Pac-10 in mtg today with Larry Scott in College Station, a Big 12 AD confirms.
I think I heard an SEC rep is in College Station this week.
This stuff has more twists and turns than The Young and the Restless. Get your popcorn ready.
ESPN is saying that Texas is gonna stay in the 10 team Big 12.
:popcorn:Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
FWIW, the B10 commish said that moves aren't limited to just the short-term as there is expectation that this realignment stuff could likely project out another 12-18 months.
Texas staying in Big 12, rumor has conference adding BYU & Air Force and getting a huge TV deal. The rich get richer in the Big 12 and overall level of conference drops. A win-win for Texas.
I don't think there is much to the BYU and Air Force rumor.
I'm glad Big 12 is staying put. UT, OU and Oklahoma St all on board. I haven't heard about A&M.
Some ESPN reporter is saying A&M is staying put. It sounds like AF/BYU may have been just rumors or open speculation.
A Lincoln sportswriter had this to say:
- ssipplesports: Let me get this straight, Texas gets more TV money, easier schedule, no Big 12 title game. What a country. Well played, Hookems.
It's good for schools like Baylor, ISU, KU, KSU, Mizzou, but the rich get richer under the rumored/proposed TV deal that Beebe supposedly wrestled together. I just have the feeling the Big 12 will hit this same point again down the line.
Reports have been saying that Beebe is asking for 10 year commitments as part of the new TV contract deal. I cannot see the Big 12 lasting 10 years under a deal that allows Texas to make the most money in the conference and start their own network.
Just like CDJ said to me eariler, we're going to go through this same situation again a few years down the road. But it sounds like schools like OU, Tech, and A&M want to be TX's bitch, and the other schools have no choice because they're going to go to a lesser conference otherwise.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
A&M was tempted this time, but they, OU and UT make out like bandits under this deal. Possibly up to $20M for each. That's enough to get them back in line.
Supposedly, at the last minute Texas told the Pac-10 they wanted a sweeter deal including their own TV network. It also sounds like in this Big 12 'reunion tour,' UT gets to establish their own network and keep all of the profits. If true, the conference is back on shaky ground, but who will leave? OU pledged allegiance to Texas, and Baylor, ISU, KU, KSU have no where to go. Mizzou likely holds out for the Big 10 and maybe A&M maintains that SEC torch. The rest aren't going anywhere.
From the Denver Post:
A source close to the Pac-10's expansion negotiations told The Denver Post that Texas insisted on better revenue sharing and its own network, which essentially killed the deal.
"In the 11th hour, after months of telling us they understand the TV rights, they're trying to pull a fast one on the verge of sealing the deal in the regents meeting," the source said. "They want a better revenue sharing deal and their own network. Those were points of principle. (The Pac-10) wants to treat everyone fairly. It's been that way for months of discussions."
And in the meantime, they made the conference even weaker as a result, so who exactly is the genius on the TV side that is going to pay them more for a lesser product????
Ders a lot o' money down der in Texas.Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinWolv