ISU feels like Rice, TCU, Houston in the SWC days

[OregonCyclone]

Texas is the unstoppable force. Does the Big 10 really want Texas? It would really change the dynamic of the Big 10, much more so than adding schools from northern states. Ohio State and Michigan step aside.

Agreed, for these reasons and others. The conference headquaters and TV network might want Texas, but would the individual schools? Think of the increased travel costs, especially in non-revenue sports. Also, teams like Iowa and Wisconsin could virtually kiss off any chance of BCS bids if Texas joined the league. They only get two, in good years.

Another factor is Texas's traditional rivalries with Oklahoma and Texas A&M, which they would not want to give up. If the Longhorns bolted for the Big 10 or any other conference, those would have to be non-conference games, which would limit the number of cupcakes they could bring in for stat-padding. I honestly can't see Texas moving to another conference unless A&M goes with them.

Re someone else's comment on the Big 10 booting Illinois and absorbing the Big 12 North.... It won't ever, ever happen because of reasons involving eyeballs and TV sets, but that's a really interesting concept! Iowa State-Iowa as a conference game. Has merit!

[swarthmoreCY]

The OP's post history in combination with his presence on HR..hmmm.

[jdoggivjc]

I can't sort out all the expansion scenarios floated about, but the SWC situation did occur to me a while back.

It came to me when I first heard about the possibility of losing not just Mizzou, but UT and NU to the B11. It's easy to assume the BCS leagues will exist forever (membership may change, but the conference would still continue). But then I thought, oh yeah, the SWC once seemed untouchable, but then imploded with the Big 8/12 expansion.

Then I thought, uh oh, ISU could be one of those "other teams." Using an example of TCU, they've been in 3 different conferences since the SWC folded. Traditionally speaking, the prospect of that for ISU is depressing.

Might want to revisit your history - the SWC was imploding and disbanded long before the Big 8 expansion - the Big 8 bailed out Texas, aTm, and Texas Tech, not the other way around. Why do you think so many members of the original Big 8 are so ****** off right now? The Big 8 let the Texas schools in as a favor to them (with benefits), and now the Texas schools, particularly Texas, act like they own the joint.

[cyatheart]

I am very worried about all this....Imagine if CU, Neb, Mizzou bolt....ISU is then surrounded by Big 10 schools on every side and is the mercy of Texas who is/will be running the remnants of the B12 and will bascially enslave ISU athletics and run it into the ground....not good, in fact that scenario could be a disaster

[cyclones500]

Might want to revisit your history - the SWC was imploding and disbanded long before the Big 8 expansion - the Big 8 bailed out Texas, aTm, and Texas Tech, not the other way around. Why do you think so many members of the original Big 8 are so ****** off right now? The Big 8 let the Texas schools in as a favor to them (with benefits), and now the Texas schools, particularly Texas, act like they own the joint.

You're right — thanks for the refresher on that.

I guess I should have gone straight to "disbanded" instead of "imploded."

The SWC dissolution and the current possible tattering of the B-12 aren't really parallel situations — it's just that if 1/4 of the conference goes elsewhere, it'll leave some teams in ex-SWC territory similar to Rice et al.

[wcbsas]

I am very worried about all this....Imagine if CU, Neb, Mizzou bolt....ISU is then surrounded by Big 10 schools on every side and is the mercy of Texas who is/will be running the remnants of the B12 and will bascially enslave ISU athletics and run it into the ground....not good, in fact that scenario could be a disaster

If CU, MU and NU bolt ... ISU will not be affiliated with Texas. UT will do something to benefit UT ... probably join the SEC with aTm, OU and OSU.

I suspect the MVC is a good landing spot for ISU or possibly a reconfigure Big 8 conference with NDSU, UND, SDSU, USD and UNI amongst others.

Be funny ... McDermott bolts for the MVC only to have ISU follow him there!

[isuno1fan]

I've been told from a very reputable source at sports clips that the big 10 is dropping illinois and adding the entire big 12 north

Finally some good information!

Thank you!

[weR138]

Oklahoma and Nebraska combined have 5.5 million people. Missouri alone has nearly 6mil. All of this is about stockpiling revenue...be it research grants, or television revenue. Oklahoma and Nebraska are nice second and third options for expansion, or maybe even third and fourth, because of what they bring in football. But outside of that, from a television perspective, they don't have much cache. Nor does the state of Iowa for that matter.

Temple is not a football market and its in a state where Penn State and Pitt are #1. Cincy is in the middle of the BUCKEYE State, and its a city school.

Texas holds all the cards..that's why they won't yield anything to help the rest of the Big 12 because with or without the Big 12, they are going to be fine.

No, it's not. That is all.

[jdoggivjc]

If CU, MU and NU bolt ... ISU will not be affiliated with Texas. UT will do something to benefit UT ... probably join the SEC with aTm, OU and OSU.

I suspect the MVC is a good landing spot for ISU or possibly a reconfigure Big 8 conference with NDSU, UND, SDSU, USD and UNI amongst others.

Be funny ... McDermott bolts for the MVC only to have ISU follow him there!

TROLL ALERT...

In other words - we're supposed to just drop down to FCS status because the Big 12 disbands? Go educate yourself with a Curious George book, if you're able to read at that level, Hok fan...

[bosco]

Oklahoma and Nebraska combined have 5.5 million people. Missouri alone has nearly 6mil. All of this is about stockpiling revenue...be it research grants, or television revenue. Oklahoma and Nebraska are nice second and third options for expansion, or maybe even third and fourth, because of what they bring in football. But outside of that, from a television perspective, they don't have much cache. Nor does the state of Iowa for that matter.

Temple is not a football market and its in a state where Penn State and Pitt are #1. Cincy is in the middle of the BUCKEYE State, and its a city school.

Texas holds all the cards..that's why they won't yield anything to help the rest of the Big 12 because with or without the Big 12, they are going to be fine.

Why doesn't the B12 just give Texas an ultimatum and say to be the the B12 there will be revenue sharing or get out? Sure if they leave it will hurt the B12 but I would argue that the rest of the B12 schools and whoever they would bring in would be better off in the long run.

Doesn't matter if Texas leaves to B10 or SEC because those schools already have a better TV deal than the B12. The schools left are not in a much worse position then they are currently. A B12 sans Texas still is a major conference with clout and could pick up a school and opens a door for a possible B12/Pac-10 network.

If the B12 continues to cater to Texas it will be to the detriment of the rest of the conference schools while Texas continues to Fatten. If this brings on the demise of the B12 Texas will say "oh well" and move on as an independent or b10 or SEC while the rest B12 schools are left in a bad situation.

[JonDMiller]

Texas is the unstoppable force. Does the Big 10 really want Texas? It would really change the dynamic of the Big 10, much more so than adding schools from northern states. Ohio State and Michigan step aside.

I sure as heck dont want them in the Big Ten.

[jdoggivjc]

Why doesn't the B12 just give Texas an ultimatum and say to be the the B12 there will be revenue sharing or get out? Sure if they leave it will hurt the B12 but I would argue that the rest of the B12 schools and whoever they would bring in would be better off in the long run.

Doesn't matter if Texas leaves to B10 or SEC because those schools already have a better TV deal than the B12. The schools left are not in a much worse position then they are currently. A B12 sans Texas still is a major conference with clout and could pick up a school and opens a door for a possible B12/Pac-10 network.

If the B12 continues to cater to Texas it will be to the detriment of the rest of the conference schools while Texas continues to Fatten. If this brings on the demise of the B12 Texas will say "oh well" and move on as an independent or b10 or SEC while the rest B12 schools are left in a bad situation.

Because the bylaws prohibit the conference from just giving Texas that ultimatum. To get revenue sharing 9 of the 12 schools have to vote for equal revenue sharing. Texas isn't going to vote for that, neither is A&M nor Oklahoma. In the past Nebraska hasn't been willing to go for it either. With that scenario, the best you could ever get is an 8-4 vote in favor of equal revenue sharing, one vote shy. One of those schools will have to jump sides.

[wcbsas]

TROLL ALERT...

In other words - we're supposed to just drop down to FCS status because the Big 12 disbands? Go educate yourself with a Curious George book, if you're able to read at that level, Hok fan...

Tell me if NU and MU leave for Big 10/11 and Texas (et al) leave say for the SEC what do YOU think will happen to ISU?

[alarson]

Texas isnt likely to leave for the SEC.

[Frak]

Oklahoma and Nebraska combined have 5.5 million people. Missouri alone has nearly 6mil. All of this is about stockpiling revenue...be it research grants, or television revenue. Oklahoma and Nebraska are nice second and third options for expansion, or maybe even third and fourth, because of what they bring in football. But outside of that, from a television perspective, they don't have much cache. Nor does the state of Iowa for that matter.

Temple is not a football market and its in a state where Penn State and Pitt are #1. Cincy is in the middle of the BUCKEYE State, and its a city school.

Texas holds all the cards..that's why they won't yield anything to help the rest of the Big 12 because with or without the Big 12, they are going to be fine.

I think that if the Big 12 DOES go into an agreement with the Pac 10 as far as starting a network, that's the only way that the Big 12 stays intact. Maybe CU still bolts and gets replaced by BYU, but that's not a huge deal. The money won't be what the expanded Big 11 is going to make for sure, but I'm betting that it would be similar to what the SEC just negotiated. That should be enough to keep Nebraska and Mizzou (assuming there is equal revenue sharing...otherwise Mizzou will bolt).

I'm betting that if that network comes into play, the Big 11 looks east, unless they can get ND, which isn't likely. I'd say Rutgers, UCONN and either Syracuse or Pitt. The way things are looking now, the Big East is in more trouble than the Big 12. I could see the SEC trying to keep pace by adding Louisville and maybe USF or WV or FSU. IMO 16 is a pipe dream for anyone at this point.