*****The Super, Mega, Huge Big 12 Expansion Thread*****

Status
Not open for further replies.

alarson

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 15, 2006
59,623
74,484
113
Ankeny
Why wouldn't they? It would make perfect sense for them to do that. It expands the Big 10 west and gets all of Iowa, Kansas, and Missouri's TV sets...

Big 10 already has Iowa.

They could invite KU\MU if they wanted and get the same benefit.
 

acgclone

Well-Known Member
Feb 21, 2007
12,037
3,769
113
Well I guess at least not to you.

No, I re-read your post and I really don't get the argument. I'm not trying to be a smart ***, but why has this approach not held conferences together in the past. There have been many that disappeared and lots of schools have ended up in inferior conferences because of similar realignments.

Look at SMU, Houston, etc.

I'm sure those schools made financial decisions based on the SWC and then all of a sudden, UT and others bailed.
 

ISUCyclones2015

Doesn't wipe standing up
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 19, 2010
14,662
10,963
113
Chicago, IL
K-State will cling on to Kansas and Iowa State would attempt to cling on to Iowa. Big 10 doesn't want Pitt at all, and definitely not Syracuse. I could see them going after Notre Dame and West Virginia instead of K-State and I-State.
 

alarson

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 15, 2006
59,623
74,484
113
Ankeny
K-State will cling on to Kansas and Iowa State would attempt to cling on to Iowa. Big 10 doesn't want Pitt at all, and definitely not Syracuse. I could see them going after Notre Dame and West Virginia instead of K-State and I-State.

'cling to iowa'? If iowa werent a part of the big 10 and the big 10 wanted them then maybe. They already have iowa, and iowa isnt going to threaten to leave for us. Hell, if they did the big 10 would say 'well, have fun with that', and theyd be in the same boat as us.
 

ISUCyclones2015

Doesn't wipe standing up
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 19, 2010
14,662
10,963
113
Chicago, IL
'cling to iowa'? If iowa werent a part of the big 10 and the big 10 wanted them then maybe. They already have iowa, and iowa isnt going to threaten to leave for us. Hell, if they did the big 10 would say 'well, have fun with that', and theyd be in the same boat as us.

We would try to cling to them, Iowa wouldn't care, but we would try to make a ruckus.
 

acgclone

Well-Known Member
Feb 21, 2007
12,037
3,769
113
'cling to iowa'? If iowa werent a part of the big 10 and the big 10 wanted them then maybe. They already have iowa, and iowa isnt going to threaten to leave for us. Hell, if they did the big 10 would say 'well, have fun with that', and theyd be in the same boat as us.

Exactly. The Big 10 already has everything they need from the state of Iowa, and the UofI has no leverage with them, and even if they did, they likely wouldn't use it for us.
 

everyyard

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Nov 24, 2006
8,223
3,643
113
48
www.cyclonejerseys.com
ISU to B1G is the crack pipe dream of all crack pipe dreams. That is the conference that showed everyone else that it is now all about money...and all of a sudden they will take a net revenue loser for them like ISU? You must be thinking they think more about academic research money than I think they do.
 

ISUCyclones2015

Doesn't wipe standing up
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 19, 2010
14,662
10,963
113
Chicago, IL
Guess I'm not gonna convince anyone with my dream of going to the Big 10. I'll just sit back and enjoy the ride then... :jimlad:
 

FarminCy

Well-Known Member
Nov 14, 2009
4,680
2,993
113
Nowhere and Everywhere
No, I re-read your post and I really don't get the argument. I'm not trying to be a smart ***, but why has this approach not held conferences together in the past. There have been many that disappeared and lots of schools have ended up in inferior conferences because of similar realignments.

Look at SMU, Houston, etc.

I'm sure those schools made financial decisions based on the SWC and then all of a sudden, UT and others bailed.

The whole point is this. Sure there is verbiage that says the TV deal is off if the conference disbands and that Fox/ESPN or whomever doesn't owe the conference or it's schools any money. Or if one team wants to leave they pay exit fees etc. But if we allowed a clause that says 6 schools can leave and force the disbanding of the conference, and the remaining 4 schools can not sue for projected lost income from previously signed contracts with said 6 schools we have some really stupid people negotiating for us.

The reason it hasn't worked in the past is that it wasn't an arms race about trying to get the biggest TV contracts etc. Todays college football world has changed tons since 94 when UT announced they were leaving the SWC. The BCS changed all of this and now it is one big money game and making sure you get paid.
 

isukendall

Well-Known Member
Nov 30, 2006
2,446
581
113
Fort Collins, CO
For all the ESPN conspiracy theorists out there why haven't we seen any reports about this on ESPN like last year. There is one small article written about the Governor's quote last night and that is it. Last year when all this talk was happening it was the only thing they talked about. Is ESPN realizing that they are at fault for this and trying not to blow it up or are they trying hide it to protect Texas and the Big 12?

This has me very puzzled as well. For as much information is out there on the message boards, and other sports pages for that matter, there has been nothing about this on ESPN until today, and even then, just a little quip. I'm guessing they're so deep in bed with Texas on the TV deal that they're trying to stay out of it.
 

minnclone99

Member
Nov 22, 2006
371
6
18
Rompots
I would feel a lot better about all of this if TCU hadn't made the move to the Big East. If that takes one of the 4 landing spots for KSU, KU, Mizzou, and ISU, our exit strategy may be on shaky ground.

Not if the B1G steals Rutgers, or if the SEC steals FSU, leading the ACC stealing WVU or USF. If SEC -> 14 or 16, all the puzzle will reshuffle among Big XII, ACC, and BE.
 

CyCrazy

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2008
27,073
15,313
113
Ames
I am in the minority but I think Iowa would come to bat for us if no other BCS offer came to fruition. Would it help or work I dont know and neither does anyone on here. Iowa officials dont speak for the fans who couldn't care less what happens to us. The natural rivalries would easily exist for us in the Big10. I know its a HUGE stretch but I dont dismiss it as quickly as others do. Big East schools such as Syracuse/Rutgers/ Pitt or whoever may bring more TV sets but that part of the country is Pro sports not real big college fans. So it might not be that big of a gain. ISU brings no more TV sets in Iowa I know but at some point it becomes irrelavant. Just a thought.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CyForPresident

everyyard

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Nov 24, 2006
8,223
3,643
113
48
www.cyclonejerseys.com
This has me very puzzled as well. For as much information is out there on the message boards, and other sports pages for that matter, there has been nothing about this on ESPN until today, and even then, just a little quip. I'm guessing they're so deep in bed with Texas on the TV deal that they're trying to stay out of it.

I think their silence is a pretty clear indicator that ATM is gone and of how deep they are in bed with Texas and that they don't want all the negative pub it will bring so they are kid gloving this thing for now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.