Future B12 Expansion

[ISUAgronomist]

And this is why people never post on CR.

Yep, a PM ******* match between these two would better serve this board.

[Cyclophile1]

And this is why people never post on CR.

No kidding. I thought I was getting away from these old, infantile pis$$ing matches.

[rebecacy]

And this is why people never post on CR.

I finally couldn't stand it - lost my cool and went off on the fat-bastard and was banned. Don't miss a thing. Well actually I'm still a member just never post. Hit ignor here so it doesn't happen again. It's a peaceful easy feeling. It's done.

[Klubber]

Wonder how the Big XII went from the dying conference with 4 'have not' schools being forced to go to the Big East......... To the Big XII having a position of power and picking off who they think are the best fits to add value to the conference and quickly moving back to 12. You know nothing, eat another cheeseburger.

So you're saying the endgame is 12 rather than 10? I hope so. I hope that all the talk of staying at ten is just to quell speculation of other teams involved in Big XII expansion.

[Senolcyc]

please make it so.

I'll be happy to take the bullet for so many here who want to tell him to shut the **** up but aren't as obnoxious as me to actually do it. The positive rep I get is off the charts.

[Palmer]

I'll be happy to take the bullet for so many here who want to tell him to shut the **** up but aren't as obnoxious as me to actually do it. The positive rep I get is off the charts.

oh dear...a martyr.

please go away.

[BooneCy]

I'll be happy to take the bullet for so many here who want to tell him to shut the **** up but aren't as obnoxious as me to actually do it. The positive rep I get is off the charts.

I see you have a reputation beyond repute.

[Clones85']

If I have to genuflect in awe of his imminence and lick his sack while I am down there to play nice, then I'm not going to. Ban me.

Ok will do.

You don't have to lick his **** but you can be a big boy and ignore him. You go looking for a fight. Be a big boy and look away. Instead you act like a toddler and now you are in timeout

[Frak]

You are one of the few that have followed this from the beginning. You were extremely sceptical and I can understand that but you did watch carefully and it did happen as we said it would. Was blinded sided by the 2 from big east to acc but that was not in the Big XII strategic plan and they adjusted nicely. We have great leadership at ISU.

I think that Pitt/Syracuse to the ACC was a shock to everyone. Sure sounds like ESPN was in the ACC's ear and was telling them that the Big 12 was sniffing around Pitt and they better do something. That's OK, the ACC gave the Big East a shove off the ledge...again. And all the Big 12 had to do was sit there and wait for it to happen and then grab a TCU team that hadn't even fully joined their conference yet. Now the Big East is like a bunch of rats trying to get off a sinking ship. UCONN and Rutgers are praying for an ACC bid or even a Big 11 bid...but neither of those conferences want to fill their spots with ND still out there. WV and Louisville are begging to get into the SEC or the Big 12...anywhere with a solid landing spot, because nothing is going to be worse than the CUSA-type conference the Big East is heading for.

[cyclones18]

I've been thinking about this a lot tonight, and if the Big 12 decides to expand to 12, it makes sense to either go east or west. The most logical candidates to the east are Louisville and West Virginia. To the west, it's BYU and Boise State.

None of those four teams provide huge markets, but I don't know that markets are quite as important to a conference that doesn't have a TV network. What's most important is good match-ups that will attract viewers for the Tier 1 and Tier 2 packages. With that in mind, either of those two sets of teams would be solid additions.

If we could keep Missouri, I would prefer to go east with Louisville and West Virginia because it would deliver the kill shot to the Big East and put the Big 12 in a more stable position. If Missouri stays though, West Virginia probably ends up in the SEC. So would we be willing to take Louisville and Cincinnati or Tulane as a group? I'm not sure how much value there is with that.

So what about going west? BYU and Boise State are far away, but so are West Virginia and to a lesser extent Louisville. You could make a decent case that the western teams have more potential value.

The benefits of adding BYU have been discussed extensively. Solid overall athletics, good football program and attendance, semi-national following due to the LDS connection, etc. They basically bring to the Big 12 what Colorado did, albeit in a smaller market.

As for Boise State, they have the potential to be a budding national power. With Big 12 money and affiliation, that potential increases greatly. They're in a small market, but so was Nebraska. If they stay on their current track, they could be the powerhouse in a new Big 12 North. Boise State vs. Oklahoma or Texas in the Big 12 Championship game is something that would bring a lot of viewers around the country. Adding Boise State would be betting on potential, but the same is true for just about all expansion candidates, and Boise State just might bring the biggest potential reward out of all of them.

Adding BYU and Boise State to the old North with TCU replacing A&M in the South might be the best opportunity for the Big 12 to replace what it's lost in the last couple years.

Boise is out based solely on academics. They are the 3rd rated university in the state of Idaho. The reason they succeed in football is because they allow partial qualifiers. The Bix12 does not allow that. That was one of the issues Nebby had when the Big8 went to 12. Nebby couldn't take partial qualifiers anymore and it showed in their performance. No matter what ESPN says there is more to this than just football. Academics do play a role on a much bigger scale than everyone is giving credit for. Esp in the Big12

[cyclones18]

I'll be happy to take the bullet for so many here who want to tell him to shut the **** up but aren't as obnoxious as me to actually do it. The positive rep I get is off the charts.

oh well that's humble

[cyfan15]

I think some are selling Boise State short. Their academics aren't great, but neither are Texas Tech's. They do have some partial qualifiers, but that's not the primary reason for their success.

They have a national name now whether we like it or not. With Big 12 affiliation and the money/facilities improvements that come with that, their recruiting could only benefit. They have 19 players in the NFL. As for their California recruiting, they also recruit Texas. They only average one game per year in California as it is, and they could continue that in non-conference scheduling.

It isn't just a Chris Petersen thing either. They've been steadily improving since becoming a 1-A school in 1996. They've won conference titles with three different coaches. They won a BCS bowl after just 11 years as a 1-A school. They've averaged double digit wins over an entire decade, and now they're holding their own against top BCS conference teams and finishing in the top ten regularly. They aren't a flash in the pan.

[weR138]

I think some are selling Boise State short. Their academics aren't great, but neither are Texas Tech's. They do have some partial qualifiers, but that's not the primary reason for their success.

Are you certain of this? As someone who doesn't know my perception is that BSU is a place where high quality CA recruits who can't get into Pac 12 schools go to play football. Clearly, BSU has had solid coaching but is Hawkins failure at CU an indication of tougher requirements there?

[cyfan15]

Are you certain of this? As someone who doesn't know my perception is that BSU is a place where high quality CA recruits who can't get into Pac 12 schools go to play football. Clearly, BSU has had solid coaching but is Hawkins failure at CU an indication of tougher requirements there?

Actually after further research, it looks like Boise State doesn't accept partial qualifiers at all, at least not before 2006. I have a hard time believing they've changed that policy. As I understand it, the WAC allowed partial qualifiers, but Boise State didn't take them.

Louisville on the other hand does accept partial qualifiers, but people have to understand that most schools with partial qualifiers don't have more than a few, and they aren't all big time difference makers.

Hawkins failed at Colorado just like Koetter failed at Arizona State, but Boise State kept on winning when each of them left. Boise State is just a program that wins regardless of who the coach is.

[NATEizKING]

Actually after further research, it looks like Boise State doesn't accept partial qualifiers at all, at least not before 2006. I have a hard time believing they've changed that policy. As I understand it, the WAC allowed partial qualifiers, but Boise State didn't take them.

Louisville on the other hand does accept partial qualifiers, but people have to understand that most schools with partial qualifiers don't have more than a few, and they aren't all big time difference makers.

Hawkins failed at Colorado just like Koetter failed at Arizona State, but Boise State kept on winning when each of them left. Boise State is just a program that wins regardless of who the coach is.

Boise used to be a JUCO and hasn't upgraded their academic qualifications since.