read all about it here: http://www.foxsports.com/college-fo...a-state-sought-to-join-big-ten-in-2010-072615
Oklahoma, Nebraska, Texas A&M, Kansas and Iowa State Sought To Join Big Ten in 2010
- Thread starter Scarlet_Scourge
- Start date
Don't see the benefit of adding OK aside from football name recognition....would add another power to the West though that may
Balance the East somewhat.
Balance the East somewhat.
They may be one of the very few Big Name National Powers left that would consider jumping to the Big Ten.
Texas is staying or if they are forced to ditch the other they will go West. UND will never join a conference.
It's Oklahoma or nothing. Kansas is in the midwest and adds a Basketball super power to the league and academic weight to the package
Purdue would move to the East divsion. Both divisons would play rotating crossover games, two different schools every year. That way every school plays every school at least once every 4 years.
I am not suggesting that this will happen but i will say that this is the only expansion opition that makes sense, and is realistic.
All the ACC nonsense is based on revenge fantasies. While the above has some truth behind it.
Just my opinion.
Texas is staying or if they are forced to ditch the other they will go West. UND will never join a conference.
It's Oklahoma or nothing. Kansas is in the midwest and adds a Basketball super power to the league and academic weight to the package
Purdue would move to the East divsion. Both divisons would play rotating crossover games, two different schools every year. That way every school plays every school at least once every 4 years.
I am not suggesting that this will happen but i will say that this is the only expansion opition that makes sense, and is realistic.
All the ACC nonsense is based on revenge fantasies. While the above has some truth behind it.
Just my opinion.
Good column. There is a lot to consider. The B1G adding Oklahoma and Kansas is an interesting thought. If the conference was to remain configured as a 2-Division (instead of 4 pods combining to create 2 divisions), then Purdue would likely head to the East and the divisions would have greater balance.
Cincinnati and Memphis does make sense for the Big 12 if they create a network. The Big 12 North-South divisions failed before because Texas was the only state with outstanding high school football and the South was dominated by Texas teams. Adding Ohio and west Tennessee to the new north would help create a North division with good high school football in their footprint. Cincinnati, Memphis, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, and West Virginia could be a more formidable group than when Nebraska and Colorado were in the north despite Nebraska's history and tradition.
Lastly, we were still in the Big East when this occurred. There was talk that the Big East would also expand with the Big 12 leftovers if Texas, Oklahoma, etc bolted for the Pac-12. A lot of people, including myself, thought this was something that could help save and possibly catapult the Big East into legitimacy among the other BCS conferences. But this makes it sound like Oklahoma would have preferred the B1G, which not only would have thrown a huge wrench into the Big East's plans, but would have also likely have prevented RU from ever getting a B1G invite. This would have been a disaster for RU as we, like UConn, would be treading the waters of obscurity while praying for an ACC invite.
Cincinnati and Memphis does make sense for the Big 12 if they create a network. The Big 12 North-South divisions failed before because Texas was the only state with outstanding high school football and the South was dominated by Texas teams. Adding Ohio and west Tennessee to the new north would help create a North division with good high school football in their footprint. Cincinnati, Memphis, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, and West Virginia could be a more formidable group than when Nebraska and Colorado were in the north despite Nebraska's history and tradition.
Lastly, we were still in the Big East when this occurred. There was talk that the Big East would also expand with the Big 12 leftovers if Texas, Oklahoma, etc bolted for the Pac-12. A lot of people, including myself, thought this was something that could help save and possibly catapult the Big East into legitimacy among the other BCS conferences. But this makes it sound like Oklahoma would have preferred the B1G, which not only would have thrown a huge wrench into the Big East's plans, but would have also likely have prevented RU from ever getting a B1G invite. This would have been a disaster for RU as we, like UConn, would be treading the waters of obscurity while praying for an ACC invite.
This article makes it pretty clear that many schools were/are interested in getting away from Texas. It's pretty evident that Texas is the Big 12's problem and it doesn't appear that anything that is happening with that conference is helping to bring Texas into line as a team player.
As for Oklahoma, I could see it in the SEC but not in the B1G. It's not an AAU member and has no real chance to become one, so far as I know. I could see KU in the B1G but don't think that it would add all that much other than its men's bball program. The state of Kansas wouldn't add all that much in the way of TV sets for the BTN, nor would Oklahoma.
Perhaps the most interesting comment in the article was about ESPiN not wanting to look like it was luring teams out of the B12 for fear of a lawsuit by the schools left behind. I always wondered why the Big East didn't sue ESPiN after it worked to convince the ACC to take Syracuse and Pitt. The two situations were basically similar.
The article doesn't mention GORs at all and they seem to be the primary sticking point to any conference realignment in the near future.
As for Oklahoma, I could see it in the SEC but not in the B1G. It's not an AAU member and has no real chance to become one, so far as I know. I could see KU in the B1G but don't think that it would add all that much other than its men's bball program. The state of Kansas wouldn't add all that much in the way of TV sets for the BTN, nor would Oklahoma.
Perhaps the most interesting comment in the article was about ESPiN not wanting to look like it was luring teams out of the B12 for fear of a lawsuit by the schools left behind. I always wondered why the Big East didn't sue ESPiN after it worked to convince the ACC to take Syracuse and Pitt. The two situations were basically similar.
The article doesn't mention GORs at all and they seem to be the primary sticking point to any conference realignment in the near future.
You don't say no to a school like Oklahoma, they are the exception to the rule (AAU). Like I said before there are only a small number of monster football programs that will ever come into play (plus killer wrestling too, B1G loves their wrestling). Most will NEVER leave the SEC and Pac-12 or they are stuck in the ACC due to that insane exit fee and GOR and Big Ten presidents have a soft spot for Kansas for whatever reason.
Again, the time may have passed for this one, and perhaps going to 16 is a bad idea. But, this combo is the only one that makes sense. I wouldn't hold my breath or start looking at plane tickets and tailgate sites for Oklahoma but I wouldn't be shocked if this did happen in the years to come (just keep the end of the Big 12 GOR date in mind)
Again, the time may have passed for this one, and perhaps going to 16 is a bad idea. But, this combo is the only one that makes sense. I wouldn't hold my breath or start looking at plane tickets and tailgate sites for Oklahoma but I wouldn't be shocked if this did happen in the years to come (just keep the end of the Big 12 GOR date in mind)
Last edited:
What I find interesting and somewhat surprising is that OSU was left out and ISU was part of the group. The B10 already has Iowa and ISU really adds nothing. It also puts a little dent in the notion that OU is tied to OSU at the hip.
LOL. Could you be more wrong.
Here's a list of conferences that have explitly or implicitly (by not inviting them when they had opening) said no to Oklaoma
PAC12 - explicitly said thanks but no thanks
Big Ten - didnt invite them when they easily could have. You think OU would have ditched if they had invited them instead of Rutgers
SEC - OU is a much bigger program than Missouri. But its not as big of a state. Therefore Missouri is in and OU is out.
Right now, no one wants basketball powers or small population states even if they have great FB programs.
That might change. But for the time being its simply a ticking clock - which will happen first - Texas goes to the PAC12 or FSU goes to the Big 12 or SEC. Whichever happens first dooms the conference being left to the dustbin of history.
I'll summarize the article without heaving read it: Those schools came up against the mighty Rutgers, and lost. And we have lots of TV sets. The end.
LOL. Actually since this all went down in 2010, those schools came up against Nebraska alone, and lost. (Rutgers also lost, sort of, since the Big Ten would have taken Rutgers in 2010 if Nebraska hadn't expressed interest. But the Big Ten took Nebraska, knowing that they'd still get their chance to nab Rutgers two years later.)
Der, you said I was wrong about Rutgers and Maryland being the best choices for the Big Ten before they were invited, and I think you are wrong again. You made the same wrong argument back then, saying that the Big Ten would never invite Rutgers because they had a chance to and went with Nebraska instead.
Please read the article, sources have reported that the Big Ten looked into both schools again. So they are at least doing their home work. Doesn't mean it will happen or that they will go after these schools, but it does mean that they are NOT off the table.
Once again, the timing wasn't right, at that time OU seem to want to stay in the Big 12, now they might be changing their mind or not. Things change. The Big Ten REALLY wanted the #1 TV market in the United States and wanted Rutgers since before 2010 but the timing wasn't right until it was. They didn't go with Nebraska because they didn't want Rutgers, they went with Nebraska, because Nebraska wanted out of Big 12 and if the Big Ten hadn't jumped at the chance to add them, the Pac-12 or SEC would have and you have to be really stupid to not add a school like Nebraska when you get the chance. When the SEC added Missouri, OU was not available period. Missouri wanted out and OU wanted to sign the GOR the Big 12. If you honestly think that the SEC would have picked Missouri over OU given an actual choice then you really, really, really do not understand how this whole College Football thing works.
I agree with your last point at least :sunglasses:
Pretty soon we'll be hearing rumors of expansion frenzy starting again and speculating which schools will be leaving the conference their in for supportable greener pastures.
You can bet Oklahoma will be a school mentioned and other Vitamin Conference schools as well.
But in the end, the B-12 probably won't lose any schools and might add two schools.
They are the only conference that I think will look to add in the next couple of years.
Eventually the P-5 will be all 16 schools , but hard to see who the PAC could add that would make that conference better instead of worse.
So the PAC might start the next expansion feeding frenzy raiding another P-5 conference and OK might become more desirable for the PAC in a few years.(?????????)
You can bet Oklahoma will be a school mentioned and other Vitamin Conference schools as well.
But in the end, the B-12 probably won't lose any schools and might add two schools.
They are the only conference that I think will look to add in the next couple of years.
Eventually the P-5 will be all 16 schools , but hard to see who the PAC could add that would make that conference better instead of worse.
So the PAC might start the next expansion feeding frenzy raiding another P-5 conference and OK might become more desirable for the PAC in a few years.(?????????)
OU very publicly went begging to the PAC12 in 2011 and got rejected- about the time that A&M was leaving for the SEC.
You got your timeline confused, the PAC-16 was going to be the Pac-10 Plus: Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Colorado, Texas Tech, and Texas A&M.
Only Colorado ended up joining and Nebraska left for the Big Ten.
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/6/17/8767533/conference-realignment-texas-pac-12
Last edited:
Your memory is off. A year later OU tried again, making a pretty public deal of the fact that they would go without Texas if need be.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6998751/pac-12-conference-decides-expand-further
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
***WAR ROOM: Latest Recruit Scoop and Team News on Rutgers Athletics***- Latest: RU-Choppin-Ohio
-
Football Things Rutgers submitted to EA Sports for the NCAA Video Game?
- Latest: Scarlet Shack
-
-
-
