The Invites
- Thread starter Boomer
- Start date
just don't think the Big 12 South is going anywhere. Texas/OU want to hold the Big 12 together, and Texas Tech and OSU would not get 100% of the votes from Pac 10(Standford and Cal) due to academic concerns.
Pac 10 is probably looking at Utah and Colorado.
Pac 10 is probably looking at Utah and Colorado.
any chance you guys wont go anywhere without Iowa State...you guys still need someone to beat up on dont you!
I'm not sure why Texas would want to join a 16 team super-conference.
I have to believe that USC just gains recruiting possibilities out of this
I have to believe that USC just gains recruiting possibilities out of this
Can anyone explain how and under what conditions the big 12 would lose it's AQ status?
To me that's the biggest if right now. If we keep the aq status, some teams leave, we as the big 12 can raid other conferences to replace them. There are several schools that would benefit from joining the big 12.
To me that's the biggest if right now. If we keep the aq status, some teams leave, we as the big 12 can raid other conferences to replace them. There are several schools that would benefit from joining the big 12.
If I had the power i would .been in the same damn league since what 1919? This is how it ends? Sad...
The Big XII would keep its AQ status for several years after the official departure. AQ status comes up for review but its based on several things that wouldn't be hurt immediately with ou and texas leaving
I guess it depends on who we would replace the South schools with. If we could bring in TCU, BYU, Utah and Boise (+2 others obviously), then we might have a decent shot.
If the 6 teams in the South bolt for the Pac 10/16, and Neb and Mizzou head to the Big 10/11, then I don't see how the Big 12 could possibly keep its AQ. Even if the conference survived and added 8 new teams to replace those that have left, it would be a pretty bad league.
My theory has been the Pac 10 is casting a wide net to see where it gets them with the full intention of only landing two schools in the future. They say they aren't interested in 12 teams but I don't think they have the cache to get up to 16.
Essentially invite six, change your stance to having only two teams later, and then use the ensuing competition to find the two schools who want to be in the Pac 10 the most.
I blame Notre Dame for not going to the Big 10 the past few years. Big 10 could have had 12 teams and a championship game and all would be good.
If true boomer than I'm fine with those teams leaving.
Let em leave and then we'll backfill their spots with who we want. With them out of the picture we can set up the revenue sharing to be more equal and attractive to any team in or joint the conf.
Let em leave and then we'll backfill their spots with who we want. With them out of the picture we can set up the revenue sharing to be more equal and attractive to any team in or joint the conf.
Well, I'm not sure if that's correct or not...
I remember reading somewhere in an article about Boise State joining the MWC (the vote is today I believe) that if they do indeed make the jump, Boise State's rankings and BCS appearances would be grandfathered into the MWC's profile for gaining AQ status.
So I guess the question is would it be taken away from the WAC as well...(i.e. would Texas' rankings go to the Pac 10 AND be excluded from Big XII).
Certainly you could be right, but that's just what I read.
I'll try to find the article again.
**Edit: Link
Still doesn't answer the question though if Texas/OU/Tech's rankings would then be pulled from Big XII
Last edited:
If KSU and KU are around and they grab Cincinatti and Louisville there are four teams who have been to a BCS game in the last 8 years, plus if they are able to pick off Utah then there are 5.
It won't be on the level of the new PAC10/16 or Big 10 but it won't be a bad league. Plus think of the basketball side of it.
OK, here's my issue with it:
1.The Pac-10 has always been more about prestige athletically and academically more than money. They haven't seemed to care so much that some of the other conferences were making more money, they were fine with just walling off the west coast. So now, they are going to mortgage their academic profile for money? Will Stanford and Cal really OK a vote letting in TT, OU, OSU...Tier 2 and 3 schools?? I don't see it.
2.In the current proposal, it looks like they take the entire Big 12 South and add them in with the Arizona schools. So...who really believes that ASU and UA would vote to join the meat grinder that is the Big 12 South?? Why would they sign off on that? Yeah, your budget gets a boost, but is it worth it having to play those teams and getting the crap kicked out of you every year? I mean, there is no possible way that either of those teams would end up second in that division much less first. More likely, they'd be toiling down with Baylor at the bottom and not even making bowls anymore.
Serious question: what is the procedure in the PAC-10? As in what number need to agree for expansion?
couple of things. OU is Tier 1, Tech and OSU are crap.
The Pac has given authority to their commish to extend the offers. That means they have already voted on it.