Perhaps a full Merger with the Pac 10

[fsanford]

How would that work for FB?

9 conference games, 3 non-con, divisions to meet in championship. Probably about 12 bowl affiliations? Never see the other side outside championship?

Basketball? Play everyone once? Biggest league tourney ever?

Maybe it will be like the NFL, where you have 2 conferences a division
that you always play, for ISU it might be KU,KSU, 2 other team (assume Nebby and Mizzou to the Big 10).

Then you play 4 or 5 more game against other Pac 10/ other Big 12.

And then 3 or 4 out of conference.

It really would not be much different than how the Big 12 is run today.

The fact that you have to go out and play other teams in the conference would
offset the concern about playing in a perceived weaker division

In the end the 2 teams with the best record in each conference play
in the title game in Dallas or Los Angeles..

The one problem is there are really only 3 teams who would be considered "free
agents" in terms of what division they play in. ISU, CU, and Texas Tech.
All other schools have an instate rival they will want to play. Under my scenario
you would need 4 free agent volunteers..

[Wesley]

It's like kick them when they are down.

[DRCHIRO]

I would like this just for the fact that Texas wouldn't be able to call all the shots. They are going to have the 2 LA schools to deal with as well as OU.

Absolutely, and that raises the question of will Texas join a conference where they do not have complete control of the entire conference like that have always had?

[isuno1fan]

How would that work for FB?

9 conference games, 3 non-con, divisions to meet in championship. Probably about 12 bowl affiliations? Never see the other side outside championship?

Basketball? Play everyone once? Biggest league tourney ever?

See my opening post in this thread but basically yes.

In BBall 18 conf games (everyone in your own div twice). Then two divisional brackets for the conf championship with the winner of each playing for the overall.

[ppclone]

Okay, i'm excited about this. And the reason why is i've arrived to the sober realization that we really offer nothing to get taken by either the B10 or P10 outside of a package deal (we're the Texas Tech of the North). And it makes me sick. So this is really exciting.

It also makes sense - for the most part.
1. TV Power: everyone's made this point already. I also think a TV Network is absolutely doable...and likely. Thats a LOT of programming. It would be a bigger revenue driver than the Big Televen.

2. Scheduling: lotsa options - but they would want to keep it simple.
- Same scenario posted in here: 2 ten team entities. Minimize costs.
- Work in some inter-division schedulin
+ Football: maybe 7-8 games in division, 1-2 games out-of-division
+ BBall: easier b/c of more games. Would probably increase stregth of schedule as a benefit

Challenges/Issues/Barriers.
1. Texas. Any scenario like a Big 20 network would inhibit their ability to (a) start their own Longhorn Network and (b) take over the world
2. Education: we have some non-AAU schools that will certainly leave a bad taste in their mouth...or be a deal breaker (see: BYU not getting in to P10 b/c of this)
3. Any Football Championship between champs of each division. Hurts Texas/OU/USC chances at rollign to a national championship game.
4. NCAA. This could likely be the first shoe of mega-expansion. People have been talking about four 16-team superconferences and its ability to basically wreck the NCAA. This would be bigger than that...and could lead to maybe three superconferences (B12+P10, SEC/ACC, BigEast/Big10). Yes, its far out....but isn't everything at this point?

Again - i love this idea for ISU...and the Big 12. Its protective for us and proactive for the conference. Takes the sting off of losing Mizzery and Nebraska. Doesn't just salvage - but brings the likelihood of actually building equity in the only thing that matters anymore....money.

[CycloneErik]

As scheduling goes, I think the only ways to work in scheduling the "other conference" teams (if one went with the 2 ten-team format) are:
1) No round-robin within your division
2) 4 divisions.

[cyclones500]

This could still end up being Speculation Scenario No. 149, but it's probably the best idea I've seen.

[cyclones500]

Div NE
ISU
KSU
KU
CU
OU

Div SE
Texas
Baylor
Tech
A&M
OSU

Div NW
Oregon
Oregon St
Washington
Washington St
Cal

Div SW
USC
Stanford
UCLA
Arizona
ASU

I could see it working, for the most part. I like it better than two 10-team divisions and having no P10/Big12 matchups in the regular season.

It was brought up in other posts that this splits natural rivalries like Cal-Stanford and OU-UT. However, you could set up the out-of-division rotation to ensure those teams play every year.

Not sure how that would work with other rotations for fairness/balance, since there isn't an out-of-division natural matchup for the other teams.

It could set up this way (ISU as an example)
4 games within division
2 games vs. SE
1 game vs. NW
1 game vs. SW

In bball, it could be simple with 18-game double-round-robin, no divisions — but there's the travel factor. Might have to think about that one.

Or, I could wait and see what actually happens.

[sunnysideup]

Here are the notes from Beebe today. It doesn't sound like a merger is taking place. Sounds more like poaching to me...

Quick hits from Big 12 commissioner news conference | GazetteOnline.com

[CloneFan65]

I like this idea. It's pretty much the same idea as 2 ten team divisions except then you could rotate the divisions. Let's say in year 1, division 1 plays division 2 and the team with the best record in those divisions goes on to the championship game vs the winner of division 3 vs division 4. Then every year or every other year the division matchups rotate so you get to play everyone in the conference. And, there would be even scheduling when determining the championship representative.

Div NE
ISU
KSU
KU
CU
OU

Div SE
Texas
Baylor
Tech
A&M
OSU

Div NW
Oregon
Oregon St
Washington
Washington St
Cal

Div SW
USC
Stanford
UCLA
Arizona
ASU

That would be a great situation for most schools discussed, and might be better scheduling wise than going with 16 teams.

The Pac 10 is really into keeping pairs of rivals together. For basketball pairs of rivals travel to play another pair of rivals at the same time. For example, ASU and U of A will travel to Oregon on the same weekend. ASU will play OSU and U of A plays U of O on thursday night. Then on Saturday they flip flop, ASU plays at U of O and U of A plays at OSU. My point being, I'd be surprised if they split up the natural rivals like Cal and Stanford.

[DaddyMac]

Here are the notes from Beebe today. It doesn't sound like a merger is taking place. Sounds more like poaching to me...

Quick hits from Big 12 commissioner news conference | GazetteOnline.com

Beebe would seem to be the only person in America that somehow thinks the BigXII will expand and not implode.

[swarthmoreCY]

Beebe would seem to be the only person in America that somehow thinks the BigXII will expand and not implode.

Perhaps he is suggesting he is trying to fight "fire" with "fire". Probably not going to happen, but if ND, BYU/Utah, Louisville, etc where on board to come to the Big 12, it would change things.