well why not. But stadium size does matter. But from a pure line-em-up football game they could compete.
-
You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.
HuskerMax readers can save 50% on Omaha Steaks .
Texas and OU to SEC
- Thread starter wcbsas
- Start date
I would be for Kansas and Mizzou. Although we won more than we lost. They were often good games especially Mizzou.
Without UT and OU, the Big 12 just doesn't have a prayer for multiple reasons.
One, adding the Dakota schools doesn't add many TV viewers. IMO the biggest reason this is happening now is UT tried to start negotiations on a new deal for the Longhorn Network early and ESPN said no. That signals a huge problem for UT and the Big 12. They're not going to get the big haul of $$ the Big Ten and SEC are going to get in their next TV deals. Subtract UT and OU and there's just no way ESPN or Fox Sports are going to pay very much for the remaining schools plus the two Dakota schools.
Two, if there's going to be a 12 team playoff, without OU and UT, the Big 12 loses most of its argument that it's still a power conference and the conference champion deserves an automatic bid into the playoff.
Last edited:
So about those whispers that Jamie Pollard blew Nebraska off, wonder if he is regretting that now 
Last edited:
Yep. Would be a dumb move on their part.
Back during expansion Phase 1 Missouri certainly was bending the knee to the Big 10. They are a better fit in the B1G. If we could pull them and Iowa State I would be pleased. Much rather see Oklahoma and Oklahoma State or Texas but Mizzo and Iowa State wouldn't be a bad compromise. Notre Dame would be incredible but for some odd reason they seem to have tied their horse to the ACC wagon. With their history with the B1G I don't get it and if anyone knows I would be curious as to why.
ISU does nothing for the B1G. If anything adding them would hurt Iowa and Nebraska. Possibly Minnesota and Wisconsin as well.
I do not think any other B12 team aside from Kansas would be a candidate for the B1G.
Notre Dame may be contractually locked up to join the ACC if they join any conference.
Since conference realignment from a decade ago, this situation with Texas and OU has been inevitable. A&M and Mizzou (and most likely Arkansas) are probably pissed, but I doubt they are upset enough to bolt the SEC for another conference. KU should be on the phone with the B1G offices today figuring out what they need to do to gain membership. I think that would be a very good addition to the B1G. I for one would like to see Mizzou jump to the B1G, but I just can't see that happening. I really don't think ISU is a viable candidate either, because the idea of expansion is getting your brand into new markets.
I agree. While I would like to have a couple former Big 8 bros in the B1G, I just can't see how adding ISU improves the B1G brand. It's a good school with decent athletics (IMO better overall than Rutgers and Maryland), but they bring in no additional market, and would not be a boost to future TV contracts.
I think ND's dalliance with the ACC is just a bargaining chip in negotiations with the B1G. The B1G will have to make concessions to get ND, but the footprint just screams B1G.
ND could potentially still make it as an independent. Warren would really have to sweeten the pot.
Those 3 (aTm, Arkansas and Mizzou) and LSU could probably block OU and Texas though. The move would hurt the recruiting of those 4 schools.
Last edited:
Leaving them out would actually help Iowa and Nebraska in recruiting as the B12 would essentially be relegated to a G5 level conference.
I suspect aTm is not happy but Arkansas has clearly yearned for the days they were in the SWC with Texas.
If I am Missouri ... why not welcome OU and Texas ... they've always felt a bit like a step child with the SEC ... welcome some familiar faces!
