The Ball's in Missouri's Court

[horn4jc]

The Chip Brown article in OB seems to indicate that Mizzou is not as dead set on leaving as A&M was. Sure, there's a greater chance that they'll leave, but it seems to me they are willing to still consider staying in the Big XII if the contract is worked out to their satisfaction.

 

[XOVER]

Tell you what, horn4jc, Texas and ESPN better get to work at once on making MU happy if there's a way to make MU happy. Once people's minds get solidified on an idea, you just can't change their mind with a crowbar at some point.

Anyhow, I think MU's gone, and probably gone to the SEC. I don't know if the B1G could turn MU at this point even if the B1G wanted to turn MU.

But there's another school out there: West Virginia. What's going on with WV? Is the SEC going past 14 or not?

If both MU and WV are taken off the board then pickins become very slim very quickly for the B12. Basically all that's left of the potential "quality" additions out there are BYU, WV, and Louisville. Those three wouldn't even get the B12 back up to 12. And if WV winds up gone, too?

Interesting times for college realignment.

 

[dusthorn]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Pericles]

40s is perfect football weather?

Not to Texas kids.

Screw any thought of a move to the Big 10. Too cold and too far to travel for fans and teams alike

Just add a team or two to the Big XII and keep it for at least six more years.

 

[XOVER]

dusthorn: Well, yea, after BYU, WV, and possibly Louisville, there's a host of Air Force quality schools. Here are some targets being discussed by the Big 12 and fans, and their average football attendance per home game for 2010:

14. Notre Dame: 80,795
27. BYU: 61,381
34. West Virginia: 56,325
42. Louisville: 50,648
50. Rutgers: 46,195
56. TCU: 42,466 (35,500 for 2011)
58. South Florida: 40,849
59. Air Force: 40,093
63. Central Florida: 39,614
66. Connecticut: 38,248
69. Cincinnati: 35,067
73. Boise State: 33,269
75. Houston: 31,728
82. Rice: 25,571
85. SMU: 23,515
87. Colorado State: 22,400
89. New Mexico: 20,888
91. UNLV: 20,612
95. FIU: 19,808

I guess if you expand west into the unhappy mountain time zone with BYU (and you really have no choice if BYU agrees to come), you might add a regional partner for BYU, like Air Force or Boise State. But in the end, Texas and OU (and BYU) will subsidize those teams. It will cost more to have an Air Force in the conference, I think, than they will give back to you. In Colorado, CU kind of dominates that state anyway, not AF. Still, I'm not stunned if the B12 has no choice but to add Air Force. Options are extremely limited.

If I were running the show, I would take a flyer on USF/UCF, to get into the Florida market, and Rutgers/CN, to get into the NYC market. Might not pan out, but if it did, it could be a home run in 15-30 years. Options are limited. Only long-shots want to join the B12, not established name schools that are members of one of the stable big four conferences.

Pericles: Oh, god, not temperatures again. You do realize that after BYU, West Virginia would be the B12's top target, right? Then Louisville? Then maybe even Cincinnati? You know, schools up there in and around B10 country? Some are even begging for Boise State. Up there close to Canada? Air Force? There in the foothills of the mile high state? Rocky Mountains? Really fricking cold Rocky Mountains? Are these schools all okay with you? Hey, take BYU. You want to add them, right? Okay, let's look at the average highs/lows of these places:

BYU: October 66/37; November 51/28.
WV: October 64/44; November 54/35.
Boise State: October 64/38; November 48/31.
Air Force: October 64/36 w/ 4.1 snow; November 50/24 w/ 5.2 snow.
Louisville: October 68/48; November 56/39.
Cincinnati: October 67/44; November 54/35.

Are all these places too cold for you, too? Should we just forget about BYU and all the others? Too cold for us? You realize it can get pretty doggone cold right here in Texas, right? We usually get one freezing game right here in Texas every year.

Let's do it again: In 2009, all teams in the Big Ten had average home game temperatures between 51 and 59 degrees. And now the B12 is going to be adding teams ... er, right in B10 territory? Or in the Rocky Mountains? So what's the difference?

Please let go of the "brrrrrr, it's cold." It's really silly.

 

[overseasbbfan1]

Is this really a surprise? I thought Missouri was always a likely choice to become the SEC's 14th teams. So, let them go. Apparently the remaining eight Big 12 programs are committed to its' long term viability, with OU/OSU being the only possible exceptions. But they're only interested in one potential new home and that won't ever happen without Texas also in the mix. And I'm not convinced they were ever all that excited about the PAC anyway; IMO it could have been a ploy to elicit more concessions from Texas and the Big 12. So, MU's departure wasn't unexpected, the current 8 are committed, so let's move quickly to bring the conference back to 12. Let's add BYU, TCU, Boise State and a fourth (Louisville or WVU), and be done with it. The Big12 is certainly a much better option for TCU than the Big East. These twelve make sense for a lot of different reasons, and would ensure the Big 12's long term viability. It also works well in terms of Divisions, as someone pointed out previously. WEST = Texas, TT, Baylor, TCU, BYU and Boise. EAST = OU, OSU, KS, KSU, ISU and WVU or Louisville. There are a couple who don't have the biggest FB attendance averages, but so what?? Most do, and the few that don't...well, that should improve when you add Texas, OU and others to the schedule. I think this conference makes sense in terms, for the most part, of geography, and also protects most traditional rivalries (important from a fan persepctive.). One thing is for certain ; people are tired of this ongoing drama, and don't want to deal with it for aniother year or two, or longer. Fill the open spots now, and bring in four programs instead of two. It seems all of the major conferences are going to end up with 12-14 teams and we shouldn't the one with a couple less than everyone else.