If the Big10 wanted Mizzou, they would have added them back when the Huskers were added. Since then Mizzou's rep hasn't improved. If the Big10 was going to poach a school from the SEC, it would be Vanderbilt.
***Official Big 12 Expansion Thread '16***
- Thread starter cyclones500
- Start date
If the Big10 wanted Mizzou, they would have added them back when the Huskers were added. Since then Mizzou's rep hasn't improved. If the Big10 was going to poach a school from the SEC, it would be Vanderbilt.
Welcome to the discussion Rice. Unbelievable?
http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/col...-wants-add-academic-powerhouse-expansion-rice
http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/col...-wants-add-academic-powerhouse-expansion-rice
In a way, I'm surprised Rice didn't surface as a candidate sooner than this.
In a scenario where the Big 12 would add a small, private, AAU member school, I'm not sure how great Rice would work out. Though it is an AAU school, Rice only has 6,000 students, compared to TCU (10,000) and Baylor (16,000). I feel like a school of that size would sort of limit it's game attendance and gameday atmosphere (at least for football), and likely wouldn't deliver Houston TVs as much as one would think.
Tulane has 13,500 students, is an AAU member, and is outside of our current footprint. Not that school size is the biggest factor in such hypothetical decisions, but I think it would be a pretty significant factor. If I had to choose between the two, I'd probably go with Tulane. I would take either one of those over SMU or even Memphis just based on academics alone... but as an academic, I'm biased.
Tulane has 13,500 students, is an AAU member, and is outside of our current footprint. Not that school size is the biggest factor in such hypothetical decisions, but I think it would be a pretty significant factor. If I had to choose between the two, I'd probably go with Tulane. I would take either one of those over SMU or even Memphis just based on academics alone... but as an academic, I'm biased.
If Rice gets in over Houston, the Houston fanbase's meltdown will be epic.
SolarGarlic - As a fan I can post and see what others think - your attempts at social bullying me will not work. Why not post something intelligent of your own rather than attacking someone who actually has an idea. You probably cannot understand sarcasm so see the capitalized statement OZ - that must have gotten by you?
Here's one comparing views of Big 12 bloggers.
SB Nation: If our Big 12 blogs were in charge of expansion
SB Nation: If our Big 12 blogs were in charge of expansion
SIAP, but I found this to be fascinating:
http://www.campusrush.com/big-12-conference-oral-history-swc-merger-1974972078.html
http://www.campusrush.com/big-12-conference-oral-history-swc-merger-1974972078.html
Our "friends" down in Lubbock had this to say...I know it's something that has been hashed over here and there, but they have a little different take on it. I like the idea even knowing there is no way anything like this will every happen.
http://www.vivathematadors.com/2016/8/17/12508044/the-foolproof-solution-to-big-12-expansion
http://www.vivathematadors.com/2016/8/17/12508044/the-foolproof-solution-to-big-12-expansion
That's great for schedules and playing the actual game, but how would the finances work? Do relegated teams earn less money? If so, then it's a nonstarter. You can't make long term decisions when your income isn't guaranteed. If the money is equal then there wouldn't be enough to go around. Even with the TV clause, you still have the championship and NCAA tournament money that would be split from 10 teams now to 24.
I think you missed the part where I said it wouldn't ever happen...there are too many variables involved. I think it's a great idea, but the little ins and outs of it would be too much for a conference to undertake.
That is fascinating. Confirms much of what we had "heard" throughout the process.
I take away a few things from that article:
1. The reason Wefald and The Big 8 schools (ex-Neb) sided with Texas on the early votes was probably due to the fact that they were sick of Nebraska's power and influence and probably envious of their success. They saw this as a way to knock Neb down a peg. Unfortunately for ISU, KSU, Mizzou, KU, Colorado, and OSU; they got into bed with a self satisfying monster (UT). Nebbie (see Osbourne) never forgot. Lucky for CU & Mizzou, they were attractive enough to escape (maybe not lucky though.....)
2. Nebbie and Texas both forced unequal revenue sharing down everyone's throats.
3. Nebbies eventually fall from the pinnacle and OUs rise to prominence and growing rivalry with Texas was too much for Nebraska to take. (the tables had turned and the power they once held was rapidly eroding under them)
4. Nebraska hypocritically joined the B1G on the premise of stability and anti-Texas sentiment, when in reality they were joining a shared revenue conference that they had been so ardently fighting against for the pasts 15+ years.
5. When Nebbie left, CU jumped ship, shattering the Big 8 brotherhood and tilting the voting power back to Texas (as OU and OSU were now fully in bed with Texas and the Big 8's best recruiting beneficiaries).
IMO, had Nebraska remained, CU and Mizzou would have never left, and the Big 12 would probably be stronger than ever.
The net result for our former 3 amigos is debatable at best:
More $$$, sure, but what has that gotten them?
Nebraska- Cash kings, but success on the field has been far inferior to their Big 12 days. They are lost in a mediocre shuffle of Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern, Iowa, and Purdue. Once every few years they get their coveted match ups against the Blue Bloods from the east. Only problem is that the "Nebraska" brand ain't what it used to be, so what once would have been prime time ABC match-ups are relegated to the BTN at 7pm. Instead of easy fan travel trips to ISU, KSU, KU, Mizzou, & CU; with the exception of Iowa City and Minny, they now have 7+ hour journeys anywhere. I get the sense that allure of visiting the Big 10 stalwarts has faded, but I'm just a jaded little Cyclone fan.
Mizzou- great start in the SEC, on the heels of a string of excellent Big 12 years and down cycles from Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee. Have since floundered, and with Tennessee rising, Florida rebuilt, and Georgia always strong; I forsee a long-term future similar to Kentucky in the SEC East. Basketball has all but disappeared. Norm Stuart Court is a shell of it's former self.
Colorado- arguably the worst outcome of any former Big 8 compatriot. Football has essentially been wiped from the face of this institution. Despite the allure of the Pac12, nobody on the West coast gives a damn about college football the way they do in the heartland. But hey, the basketball Buffs have quietly emerged......
Your athletic departments can make $1 B/year, but if the product and the results are worse than before, what's the point? As far as $$ into ADs and building athletic shrines, I think we've hit the point of diminishing returns. You can only invest so much in infrastructure, especially if attendance is falling. The net effect will be continued skyrocketing of coaching salaries; as this is the only viable outlet for huge revenue growth.
Agree with your synopsis mostly, except Colorado left before Nebraska did. They were the first school to leave the original Big 12.
I always wondered Why Baylor over Rice, Yeah there were a lot of politics behind that decision. Rice is academically on par with Ivy Schools, the Ivy of the South. It could have been the Northwestern, Duke, Vanderbilt, Stanford of the Big 12