Pac-12 to decide whether to expand within a couple weeks

[SEIOWA CLONE]

a better question would be - What does ISU bring the to BIG 10 that Missouri does not?

ISU is a member of a dying conference, Mizzou is not. So again, why would Mizzou leave the SEC to move to the big 10 after being in the conference for ten years. I get they wanted to get into the conference 10 years ago, but times have changed and they are in a good place. So why would they leave? They wouldn't, so to answer your question, ISU is available and willing to move, while Mizzou in neither available or willing to leave the SEC.

 

[scyclonekid]

Mizzou isn’t leaving the SEC, and those saying pac won’t add any of us remaining big 8 schools cause no value are throwing poo on the wall. It’s silent and they hate that, but there’s a lot of moving pieces to be hashed out.

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

Mizzou is AAU and OSU is not. Mizzou's academics are in par with ISU and better than OSU

Mizzou brings St Louis & KC eyeballs. Like it or not, a conference with a linear network- households matter.

Mizzou already has a big rival in the BIG10- Illini

I said adding Mizzou was intriguing as part of a Mizzou, ISU and KU bundle. Along with Nebraska that would be Big8 renewal

I also said, Mizzou wanted to be in Big10 over SEC ten years ago and Big10 turned them down. Maybe times have changed.

Heck, back in 2011, one could have made the argument Mizzou would have been a better add than Nebraska based on sport teams. Then add in carriage fees for Big10 Network.

St. Louis and KC could care less about Mizzou football, and Mizzou has a better rivalry with KU than it will ever have with Illinois.

The Big 10 already has 14 teams, they are NOT going to move to 17 teams, why would they? If the Big 10 could do a redo, they would today take Mizzou over Nebraska, but that is not going to happen now, and no way is Mizzou going to leave the SEC when they are about to get rich for the Big 10. No matter how many Big 10 fans think they can just steal any team they want.

 

[cyman05]

a better question would be - What does ISU bring the to BIG 10 that Missouri does not?

Ummm...fan support? Did we forget that one of the initial sparks for the Missouri governor’s comments about listening to the B10 in 2010 came from ISU’s 6-6 team jumping a 8-4 Missouri team in the bowl pecking order because of fan support?

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

 

[jsb]

The goal of the other conferences is a power 4 not power 5. We’re ******.

 

[WesternPA]

Missouri’s last attempted dance with the B1G ended on a very bad note.
And, of course, there are two sides to the story:
Background: A group of influential Kansas City alums, unhappy from the start with the Texas-dominated Big 12, had been pushing Missouri toward the Big Ten since the early 1990s. And when the door seemed to open, MU jumped and stumbled, including that embarrassing bout of verbal diarrhea from the then Governor.
The Big Ten seems to have thought Mizzou misread its intentions and that the school didn’t make it out of the preliminary round because its AAU research was not at a level that the conference big sticks wanted and Missouri lacked a sufficient national football brand.
(Later the B1G invited Nebraska, also a lower rated AAU school — at the time— but one with a larger national football following.)
Muzzou read what was going on as virtually a done deal which fell apart when, very late the process, the B1G introduced the idea of a conference buy-in.
Two versions but they both point to a relationship neither side will care to resume.

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

Missouri’s last attempted dance with the B1G ended on a very bad note.
And, of course, there are two sides to the story:
Background: A group of influential Kansas City alums, unhappy from the start with the Texas-dominated Big 12, had been pushing Missouri toward the Big Ten since the early 1990s. And when the door seemed to open, MU jumped and stumbled, including that embarrassing bout of verbal diarrhea from the then Governor.
The Big Ten seems to have thought Mizzou misread its intentions and that the school didn’t make it out of the preliminary round because its AAU research was not at a level that the conference big sticks wanted and Missouri lacked a sufficient national football brand.
(Later the B1G invited Nebraska, also a lower rated AAU school — at the time— but one with a larger national football following.)
Muzzou read what was going on as virtually a done deal which fell apart when, very late the process, the B1G introduced the idea of a conference buy-in.
Two versions but they both point to a relationship neither side will care to resume.

Everything I have read was the Mizzou was going to be next team to be added to the Big 10, and was ready to move. But then Nebraska had reached the point of having enough of Texas, and then approached the Big 10 about joining the league.

Once Nebraska said they were interested in moving, then the Big 10 pivoted away from Mizzou and turned its attention to Nebraska, thinking they were getting the Big Red of the 80's that was a national championship caliber team, that is not what they ended up with.

 

[2speedy1]

I dont think MU will leave the SEC for the B1G but one has to agree they are a better target than KU, I also think ISU is a better target than probably both KU and MU. KU has a large upside for the BB program but the negative of their FB and rest is hard to overcome.

 

[Klubber]

What if the Pac-12 announces in 2 weeks that it is not expanding? Would you believe that Dan Patrick is probably well-sourced then? He is one of the most prominent people in all of sports media.

If the Pac-12 says “We are officially exploring expansion and actively vetting candidates,” then I would totally agree with you and many other posters that everything up to that point was keeping things quiet, and I’d start thinking that ISU to a Pac-16 is probably likely. But if they say “We have received lots of interest. We will not explore expansion. Look at this cool alliance with the B1G and ACC though” (which I think is the probable outcome), what do you think that will mean for the Big 12?

Their commissioner (PAC 12) has already said they have a committee currently vetting candidates. That's not something I inferred. He stated it in an interview last week. Patrick's just repeating the ESPN company line. He doesn't have some in to realignment any more than all the other sportswriter clowns who are saying exactly what he said.

 

[jdoggivjc]

Everything I have read was the Mizzou was going to be next team to be added to the Big 10, and was ready to move. But then Nebraska had reached the point of having enough of Texas, and then approached the Big 10 about joining the league.

Once Nebraska said they were interested in moving, then the Big 10 pivoted away from Mizzou and turned its attention to Nebraska, thinking they were getting the Big Red of the 80's that was a national championship caliber team, that is not what they ended up with.

Wasn't part of it also people at Mizzou couldn't keep their fat traps shut about their discussions with the Big 10, which meant when Nebraska came calling it made it that much easier for them to change targets?

 

[cyIclSoneU]

Their commissioner (PAC 12) has already said they have a committee currently vetting candidates. That's not something I inferred. He stated it in an interview last week. Patrick's just repeating the ESPN company line. He doesn't have some in to realignment any more than all the other sportswriter clowns who are saying exactly what he said.

The link in the first post of this thread includes the commissioner’s comments, in which he says they will decide in a couple weeks whether or not to move forward with expansion. That doesn’t really answer my question, though, of what your reaction will be if the Pac-12 says no expansion.

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

I dont think MU will leave the SEC for the B1G but one has to agree they are a better target than KU, I also think ISU is a better target than probably both KU and MU. KU has a large upside for the BB program but the negative of their FB and rest is hard to overcome.

Our only negative in joining the Big 10 is that there is already a school in the conference, so we do not expand the footprint of the league. Outside of that, we stack up well against the rest of the remaining Big 12 teams. The only school ahead of us would be OSU, but they are not an AAU team so the Big 10 will not take them.

TCU and Baylor are small religious private schools, which will hurt them in the long run.
TT and KSU have horrible academics, and are not AAU schools. TT football history is a lot like our when they had Leach as head coach, while Snyder was great at KSU, but going forward we still do not know if they can repeat what Snyder accomplished.
WV has the worst academics in the conference, and are too far for the Pac 12 to be interested.
KU is a BB Blue Blood, AAU school but is that enough when this is all about football?

ISU and OSU are the best of the bunch, both have a great history in wrestling, quality BB programs over the last 20 years. OSU football is the better program of the two, but we are reaching heights we have never seen, with a solid fan base, 21st in the country in attendance in 2019 and in the top 30 for that past 4 seasons.

ISU is on the verge of becoming a very solid football program, much like our BB programs, we will end up our feet no matter what happens to the Big 12, we just have to be patient and let the process work itself out.

Go Cyclones

 

[WesternPA]

Everything I have read was the Mizzou was going to be next team to be added to the Big 10, and was ready to move. But then Nebraska had reached the point of having enough of Texas, and then approached the Big 10 about joining the league.

Once Nebraska said they were interested in moving, then the Big 10 pivoted away from Mizzou and turned its attention to Nebraska, thinking they were getting the Big Red of the 80's that was a national championship caliber team, that is not what they ended up with.

I think the timing was different with MU done with B1G or the B1G was done with MU before Nebraska got the golden ticket. But I could be wrong
In any case, Missouri isn’t going to the B1G, even though it would be a better cultural fit there than the SEC. Missouri doesn’t have the recruiting bases or enough big money donors who care enough to cheat at the SEC level.
Missouri takes the beatings and cashes the checks with the hope lightning strikes some season.

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

The link in the first post of this thread includes the commissioner’s comments, in which he says they will decide in a couple weeks whether or not to move forward with expansion. That doesn’t really answer my question, though, of what your reaction will be if the Pac-12 says no expansion.

Is the Pac 12 saying NO to expansion NOW or maybe in the future? I really do not think that the Pac 12 will expand until their next TV deal is completed. Which is fine for the remaining Big 12 schools, we do have time to wait, our current GOR's do not run out for another 4 years.
Granted we will lose recruits if we have to wait, but in the end, we will be better off.

 

[Cyclones1969]

Is the Pac 12 saying NO to expansion NOW or maybe in the future? I really do not think that the Pac 12 will expand until their next TV deal is completed. Which is fine for the remaining Big 12 schools, we do have time to wait, our current GOR's do not run out for another 4 years.
Granted we will lose recruits if we have to wait, but in the end, we will be better off.

Very likely, None of this will be resolved this year. It doesn’t matter how many stories the people more concerned about being right about Iowa State falling, than about Iowa State, post, none of them know anything.

Read the breaking news articles they all post as some sort of proof, they’re all the same. So the conferences are working their way down their Rolodexes to try to get their version of truth out.

 

[UNIGuy4Cy]

Enjoy the last year of relevancy, I’ll have free time, after this year, in the fall.

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

I think the timing was different with MU done with B1G or the B1G was done with MU before Nebraska got the golden ticket. But I could be wrong
In any case, Missouri isn’t going to the B1G, even though it would be a better cultural fit there than the SEC. Missouri doesn’t have the recruiting bases or enough big money donors who care enough to cheat at the SEC level.
Missouri takes the beatings and cashes the checks with the hope lightning strikes some season.

Mizzou got the invite in Dec of 2011 and Nebraska got their invite in June of 2012. From what the PD in St. Louis was reporting at the time was the academic people wanted the Big 10, but the athletic department, really Pinkel and BB coach wanted the SEC for recruiting, which won the day. The fan base in St. Louis wanted the SEC, while the KC fan base wanted the Big 10 or staying put in the Big 12 to keep their KU rivalry.

The Athletic had a story last year about how the whole thing went down, and it was basically Nebraska, being feed up with losing power in the Big 12 to Texas that caused the move. aTm was always looking to break away from UT, they felt that their university would be better off in the SEC, much like Colorado always wanted to be aligned with the Pac 12.

I tend to think that Mizzou saw the writing on the wall after the first go around of OU and UT looking to leave to the Pac 12 and realized if they stood pat, they could get left out if the whole conference went to crap and was looking for a way out to insure that they were not on the outside looking in.

 

[Klubber]

The link in the first post of this thread includes the commissioner’s comments, in which he says they will decide in a couple weeks whether or not to move forward with expansion. That doesn’t really answer my question, though, of what your reaction will be if the Pac-12 says no expansion.

The commissioner also said that they have a working group who has taken meetings with interested teams and will recommend to the league who should get a bid to join if they go that route. That doesn't sound to me like a league not interested in expanding.

My reaction to the PAC saying no would be that they have a complete tool for a commissioner.

I don't know what's going to happen any more than anyone else. I'm not clairvoyant like "Friendly Spartan". But I would be very surprised if the PAC doesn't expand.

 

[2speedy1]

Very likely, None of this will be resolved this year. It doesn’t matter how many stories the people more concerned about being right about Iowa State falling, than about Iowa State, post, none of them know anything.

Read the breaking news articles they all post as some sort of proof, they’re all the same. So the conferences are working their way down their Rolodexes to try to get their version of truth out.

I think right now its a lot of "what do we do now" and just waiting and seeing who makes the next move to a point.

I think when the next media deals really start to heat up, I think the PAC is next 2023? then the B1G? Thats when things may really move. Now I don't think its going to wait until right before the end of the deals, but when the negotiations start or during. If these conferences start hearing or believing they can get a better deal by adding certain teams then they will start pushing for that. Those teams will be invited and that will be negotiated into the contract.

This could be a standard deal or it could include a deal from Amazon or someone else. Regardless, unless something in the next couple weeks comes out from this PAC announcement, I think it will be a long process until we get close to the next conference starts negotiating, which my guess is about a year from now.

Which sucks because its going to be a long year of what we have all had to put up with for the last month.

 

[Legend12]

This could be a standard deal or it could include a deal from Amazon or someone else. Regardless, unless something in the next couple weeks comes out from this PAC announcement, I think it will be a long process until we get close to the next conference starts negotiating, which my guess is about a year from now.

Announcement will likely be made tomorrow.