The Death of the Big 12 Conference

Let's get one thing straight. This piece is not designed to defame, belittle, or ceremoniously attack a league that I count among college football's finest. It's also not intended to cheer on the destruction of a modern gridiron giant. The simple fact is this: when the Big Ten announces plans to add to its collective roster in the next ten to sixteen months -- whether it expands to twelve teams or sixteen -- some other BCS conference is going to take a hit. It's Newton's third law. And although the Big East would seem like the likely loser, the more and more I think about how the dominoes will fall, the more I believe a far stronger conference is at risk. How so? One word: share. As in the percentage of television sets in use tuned to a particular program But we'll get to that.
When The Big Ten Calls, People Will Listen
First, I want to explain why the Big Ten is in a position to flex its muscle to the detriment of the rest of the college football landscape. The Big Ten is the oldest Division 1 college football conference in the United States. Its origins date back to to the late-nineteenth century when the presidents of seven distinguished Midwestern universities met in Chicago to mull over the future of regulation in intercollegiate athletics. By 1917, with the return of Michigan after a nine year absence, the conference adopted its present moniker. By comparison, the Southeastern Conference came into being in 1933, the Atlantic Coast Conference in 1953, the Pacific 10 in 1959, the Big East in 1979, and the Big Twelve in 1996.

The reason this time line matters is because collegiate conferences are so much more than athletic alliances. They are horizontal academic cooperatives, sharing academic resources like research funding, and engaging in complimentary pedagogical pursuits. Most importantly, they're symbols in higher education. For a textbook example of this, see the "Ivy League" which turned a consortium of eight private colleges into the world's premiere intellectual arcade.
The importance of a cohesive brand in college sports cannot be understated, and the Big Ten is an NCAA elite. Its current revenues are somewhere in the $250 million range annually. The conference's majority ownership interest in its own television network is primed to eventually pay 2.8 billion to the league's member institutions. Combined with a billion dollar ESPN deal, Big Ten schools are earning more from television revenues than any other conference. It shouldn't be any surprise that the Big Ten is home to four of the six wealthiest athletic departments in the nation.
In a game that's all about exposure the Big Ten owns or shares 7 of the 25 largest media markets in the United States, including No. 3 Chicago, No. 4 Philadelphia, No. 11 Detroit, No. 15 Minneapolis, No. 17 Cleveland, No. 23 Pittsburgh, and No. 25 Indianapolis. In total, Big Ten broadcasts reach 21,998,720 metropolitan households. By comparison, the Pac Ten is prominent in 6 top 25 markets, the ACC lives in 5, the Big 12 plays to 4, and the Big East and the SEC net 3.
Big Ten academic programs are in the top tier in national rank, and the conference is home to some of the strongest public and private research institutions in the world. When the University of Texas was looking for a new home in 1994, then President Robert Berdahl compared Big Ten academics to the Southeastern Conference:
Having added Penn State in 1990, the Big Ten was now made of universities that, in the view of UT officials, matched UT's profile — large state schools with strong academic reputations. Berdahl liked the fact that [all eleven] conference members belonged to the American Association of Universities...But after adding Penn State in 1990, Big Ten officials had put a four-year moratorium on expansion. Although admitting interest, Big Ten bosses ultimately rejected UT's overtures.
That left the SEC as a possible relocation target for the Longhorns — until Berdahl let it be known that UT wasn't interested because of the league's undistinguished academic profile. Only two of 12 schools in the SEC were American Association of Universities members and UT officials saw admissions standards to SEC schools as too lenient. "We were quite interested in raising academic standards," Berdahl says. "And the Southeastern Conference had absolutely no interest in that."
Factor in that the Big Ten has been just as competitive on the field -- the conference is currently tied with the SEC for the most national championships of all time (27) -- and it's easy to see why if the if the Big Ten calls, people will listen.
Bad News for the Big Twelve

Commissioner Dan Beebe is between a rock and a hard place.
Texas, Missouri, and Nebraska -- three of the five most widely publicized expansion candidates -- are current members of the nouveau riche Big Twelve. Legislative and geographic hurdles might put Texas out of reach, but the other two are pretty safe bets. Nebraska, the former baron of the Big Eight, has watched the center of power in the Big 12 gravitate south. Frustrated by a weak north division, it probably wouldn't take much prodding to get them to walk. Missouri, on the other hand, is an even surer thing. Fed up with limited exposure in the Big 12, and marginal academics, Mizzou already practically has one foot out the door. Even the state governor is urging them to jump ship...
If the Big Ten poaches either Nebraska or Missouri, it might not seem like the end of the world for the Big XII -- after all the league will still have its two strongest powers (Texas and Oklahoma) in play, and wouldn't have any trouble courting current Mountain West giant and former Southwest Conference member TCU to pick up the slack. The problem is that Texas Christian can't make up for the dramatic depletion of an already anemic television base. No realistic candidate within the Big XII regional footbrint can.
Stuck in the Middle
I've already mentioned that the Big Twelve is currently present in four of the top 25 television markets in the nation. They are No. 5 Dallas-Ft. Worth, No. 10 Houston, No. 18 Denver and No. 21 St. Louis.
What about overall population density? Only two states in the Big Twelve's idyllic, seven state footprint rank among the 20 largest states in the country. They are, No. 2 Texas, and No. 18 Missouri. The average Big XII member sovereign ranks 24th in the U.S. by population. By comparison, 6 states in the Big Ten's industrial, Midwestern territory rank in the top 20 -- and four of those (No. 5 Illinois, No. 6 Pennsylvania, No. 7 Ohio, and No. 8 Michigan) are in the top 10. The average state in Big Ten country ranks 14th in the U.S.
It doesn't matter how you look at it, the Big Twelve brings a dramatically smaller audience to the table, tying its hands in negotiations for premiere television contracts. The current Big XII television arrangement pays less than $7 million on average per member each year. By comparison, Big Ten member schools are earning $19.45 million, and SEC schools are earning $17.08 million. While Big Ten and SEC games are showing on national networks, Big Twelve competitors are relegated to pay-per-view.
And that's with its present membership.
When the Queen Strikes
If the Big Ten looks to a Big XII school when it expands in the next 10 to 16 months, the net loss will dramatically erode the conference's viewer base. It doesn't really matter who the Big Ten takes:
Doomsday Scenario No. 1: Missouri to Big Ten
It's pretty well accepted that if the Big Ten wants Missouri to suit up, all it has to do is ask. The departure of Missouri would definitively take the St. Louis market off the table, limiting the Big 12 presence to just 3 of the Top 25 media centers in the U.S., and would take away the Big Twelve's second largest state. The fallout would also affect Kansas City -- currently the 31st largest television actor in the U.S.
If the Big Twelve replaced Missouri with TCU, they'd be effectively adding no new markets, diluting their overall share by a minimum of 17 percent. The Big Twelve could try to soften the blow by aggressively pursuing programs in large neighboring markets like Phoenix (Arizona State), Salt Lake City (Utah), or Tampa (South Florida). But it's unlikely the Big XII could convince the Sun Devils to leave the wealthy Pac 10 conference -- with its strong academic backbone. Further, it's not clear that the addition of the Utes or the Bulls would make the Big Twelve a more competitive entity from top to bottom. Competitiveness, of course, is probably second on a television network's wish list, behind viewership. After all, the SEC caters to just three top markets, but its national perception as the strongest conference in the country helped it ink a 3.5 billion dollar 15-year television deal with ESPN.
Doomsday Scenario No. 2: Nebraska to Big Ten
At first glance, this move seems almost preferable for the Big Twelve, because the 38th largest state in the country represents a comparably small television audience. The problem, of course, is Nebraska's status as an elite college football power -- which brings ratings, and a national following. If the Cornhuskers split, the power disparity between the Big Twelve North and South will be magnified by a factor of 10,000. The conference will scramble to plug in a fair geographic contender, and -- when it becomes obvious that no one fits the bill -- will ultimately be forced to realign divisions.
If the Big XII has trouble convincing networks now to shell out big dough, imagine where they'll be after losing the Big Red.
Doomsday Scenario No. 3: Texas to Big Ten
The first two scenarios are like Biblical plagues for the Big Twelve Conference. This one is pure Armageddon. If Texas leaves the Big XII, the conference will spontaneously collapse in its wake. Not only will the conference drop its trump ace, it will lose a terminal 62 percent of its present market share. The entire Big 12 landscape will be buried in a smoldering blanket of hot ash, molten lava, and toxic gas. After the dust settles, the remaining lame duck members will scramble to evacuate -- some, like Oklahoma, Colorado, and Kansas will find good homes. The resulting graveyard will be picked clean by non-BCS conferences, and the Big East.
Hybrid Doomsday Scenarios
What if the Pac 10 sets its sights on Colorado for expansion? What if the Big Ten takes more than one Big Twelve team? Could two conferences merge to form a strategic television alliance? As speculation abounds about the future of the traditional conference blueprint, no league appears worse positioned to weather the storm than the Big Twelve. Any one of the following scenarios will bankrupt the conference:
1. Missouri, Kansas, & Syracuse/Pitt to Big Ten.
2. Missouri, Nebraska, & Kansas to Big Ten.
3. Texas, Oklahoma, & Texas A&M to Big Ten.
One scenario Commissioner Dan Beebe doesn't have to worry about -- at least in the immediate future -- is deflecting expansion overtures on two fronts. Despite talking the talk, the Pac 10's unanimous voting structure (requiring the approval of all ten member institutions to move forward) will severely hamper most expansion initiatives. The reason? Stanford. Don't forget that Stanford objected to Texas' academic qualifications when it threw its hat in the ring in the early 90s. If Texas doesn't cut it, neither will Colorado -- or Utah or BYU for that matter.
Which brings me to my final point. If the writing is on the wall for the Big Twelve, should Texas get out while the getting is good, like it did in the waning days of the Southwestern Conference? Our friend Frank the Tank addressed the possibility of a pre-emptive move by the Longhorns in his landmark expose on Big Ten expansion:
[I]f all of the Big 12 schools could be theoretically up for grabs, why the heck would the Big Ten go after a minnow (Missouri) when it could get a whale (Texas) instead? Why the heck would the Big Ten take Missouri or even Nebraska and let Texas possibly walk off to the much less financially powerful Pac-10? Why the heck would Texas just let a middle tier school like Missouri leaving for another conference put its future in limbo? Simply put, if a decent-but-not-great school like Missouri leaving could have that much of a potential impact on the Big 12, then that’s clearly evidence that the conference is unstable and maybe a powerhouse school like Texas will understand that it needs to start evaluating more stable options (if it hasn’t already). This presents a monster opportunity for the Big Ten to swoop in and solidify its place as the nation’s most powerful sports conference.
So, what do you think?
48 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
We need some lobbyists.
Need to pay off the TX state legislature.
"...there'll be some woman, maybe 45 or 50, she'll come up and give me a hug, and I'll give my wife a wink: See? I'm not that old." - Joe Paterno
by ReadingRambler on Feb 16, 2010 12:03 PM CST reply actions
We need Charlie Wilson
Never insult seven men when all you have is a six shooter --COL Sherman T Potter
by psu in the w-b on Feb 16, 2010 9:24 PM CST up reply actions
For a minute I thought that said Charlie Weiss
And I was confused. Charlie Wilson definitely makes more sense.
Fuck tOSU
He's too busy doing the walk of shame back from UT's apartment to shop for good pants.
"...there'll be some woman, maybe 45 or 50, she'll come up and give me a hug, and I'll give my wife a wink: See? I'm not that old." - Joe Paterno
by ReadingRambler on Feb 16, 2010 2:06 PM CST up reply actions
UT ain't leaving
It just isn’t going to happen. Mizzou or Nebraska would be good picks, which combined with the theoretical poaching of Colorado for a Pac-12 would make for another round of fun speculation (Personally, I figure some combination of Arkansas, BYU and CSU – as smart as it would be to just add 2 of Houston/SMU/TCU and kick the Oklahoma schools to the North, certainly the non-Texas schools wouldn’t go for it).
commodore
You are right Texas is not leaving not only that but where Texas goes so shall the big12
by honest indian on Feb 17, 2010 12:17 PM CST up reply actions
No
If Colorado bolts for the Pac-10 (which is both likely and would occur before any Big Ten invite), then EVERYONE in the Big XII would be looking for a safe harbor to land in, because the ineveitable end of the Big XII would be in play, and every AD would know it. IF the Pac-10 makes a play, and its 50-50 that it will, then it will force Texas into the Big Ten’s hands.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
But if Texas knows that Mizzou or Nebraska is gone, that changes the whole landscape. Money talks, and if one of those schools leave (esp Mizzou) financially the big twelve doesn’t make much sense. I don’t think Texas is going to leave, b/c I don’t think the big ten will expand, but if they can convince UT that the big ten will poach Mizzou or Nebraska, I think Texas will have to leave. And if they have to leave, they might as well come here and not to the pac-10.
this.
Don’t overlook Oklahoma. Big Ten would overlook marginal academics for elite power. Mizzou, Oklahoma, Texas brings geographic connection down to Tejas.
Could not
disagree more. Nebraska, Kansas and Missouri have “marginal” academics by Big Ten standards. Oklahoma’s are grossly inadequate and would do much to erode the academic reputation that is infinitely more important to Big Ten presidents (who would vote on the scenario) than football is in the big picture. “Geographic connection” is a concept caught in the last century and only serves to soothe discomfort with the visual aesthetic created by looking at a disjointed map.
If Texas is allowed to come alone, the Big Ten would be wise to take them and cease any further expansion plans lest they stray too far from their mission and further dillute the per-school take from TV revenue…unless the appeal of such a conference is so staggering that Notre Dame finally comes running. Then you grab them both and add Missouri to cement divisional balance and claim television dominion over the entire college landscape.
If Texas is forced to take a “partner” (A&M) by the Texas legislature, the third school could come from any of the aforementioned candidates so long as it is not Oklahoma.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Feb 17, 2010 5:50 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
While I'm not saying Oklahoma is up to the standards of the Big 10 academically,
Nebraska and OU have roughly the same academic profile now.
So assuming that why is Nebraska so much more attractive than Oklahoma in this discussion? They have similar football programs, OU has a much, much, much better basketball program, and non-revenue sports are comparable (I’d argue that OU has the edge, especially of late). Marketwise the fanbases are similar sizes, Oklahoma is a bigger state, and it adds OU-Texas into your conference, giving you two of the three most marquee matchups in college football.
Of course if I was Delany I would just take Texas…
Even if Texas proceeds to move to the Big Ten,
I doubt that the confrence as a whole would collapse.
Visit Inside The Shoe
by Ian_InsideTheShoe on Feb 16, 2010 7:22 PM CST reply actions
I actually wrote a scenario exploration of Texas' choices
I would be interested to see what others thought of it:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/346875-on-the-brink-of-history-texas-choice-of-conference-is-the-key/
The old Big 8
sounds good when thinking of teams, but when thinking of their financial impact on the modern game (and, yes, things have changed that much in 15 years) they would have no clout left. Essentially, they would become the Big East but with far less profitable television markets. The SEC, having exactly zero standards that go beyond those of football, would instantly make a grab at Oklahoma and A&M (and I can’t imagine either denying the invite) if Texas were to jump to the Big 10. Colorado would do anything in their power to slip away to the Pac 10 at this point. The 8 remaining schools would have so little power left that they would be forced to make a desperate grab at the heart of the Mountain West hoping the “emerging” markets would be enough to stop them from drowning. There are even those that feel the same game of dominoes could play out if Texas were to stay and Missouri (the second most populous state in Big XII country by a longshot) were to leave. The Big XII was a fire hazard built from the embers of another burning house, the SWC. The clock has been ticking on them from day 1.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Feb 17, 2010 6:01 PM CST up reply actions
TV markets?
For owning/sharing markets, I counted five of the top 25 for the SEC – Atlanta, Tampa, Miami, Orlando, and Nashville. Having grown up in Orlando, spent plenty of time around Tampa, and known people from south Florida, I can tell you that UF delivers at least a share of Miami and the majority share of Orlando and Tampa. I’d even give the SEC maybe a fourth of Charlotte (my current home) during football season because even though this is ACC country for sure, there are enough South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee transplants that SEC football is more than just a sideshow.
Of course thanks to the CBS contract, every TV market is an SEC market for the best game of the week.
Also, not every TV market is made equal in college football. New York and Boston are next to worthless since no one cares about college football there.
Team Speed Kills
SBNation's SEC Blog
Also, the SEC is getting close to the same wide spread alumni/fan base that the Big Ten has always had. Florida and Georgia have surprisingly large bases of support in New York, Washington and Los Angeles. Just as my father grew up in New York rooting for Ohio State, people have become SEC fans because they have been on TV so much in the last 15 years.
mlmintampa
UF C/O 06
http://www.alligatorarmy.com
Regarding Texas...
…you almost have to include Texas A&M in the discussion if you’re talking about Texas leaving for the Big 10. If the Big 10’s expansion target is Texas, then it’s almost assuredly going to at least 14 teams, because it’s going to have to take TAMU, too, and then somebody else (Nebraska, Missouri, or some East Coast school). Losing Texas is the Armageddon scenario you describe for the Big 12, and TAMU’s representatives in the Texas Legislature will force Texas to take them along.
As for Nebraska, I have a hard time seeing Tom Osborne making the first move. He’s a Big 8/Big 12 guy to the core, and unless his hand is forced, I doubt he’ll go to the Big 10. Now, if Texas is leaving and he sees the handwriting on the wall, he wouldn’t have much choice but to leave. But I don’t think he’d let Nebraska make the move alone or even just with Missouri.
Regarding replacements for the Big 12 — if indeed we’re talking replacements and not outright dissolution — TCU is a no-go. Utah and/or BYU are much higher on the list, and I would even put New Mexico, Memphis and maybe even Colorado State (if CU leaves) ahead of TCU.
We'll carry the banner high!
Bring On The Cats
death of the big12
Reports of the death of the big 12 are overly exagerated. I really don’t think that The University of Texas wants to join the big 10 because of the downfall of the economy in the rust belt. There are more jobs being created in the states that have big 12 members than the big10. More people are moving into our states. People are leaving the rust belt. The money is leaving with them. Lets look down the road a few years. There will be a net loss of 10+% of jobs in the rust belt and a net growth of 1+% in the states with big12 teams. The leaders of colleges and university know this. Plus our conferences are competing at a higher level than the big 10 Why on gods green earth would UT OU Atm would want to go to an environment of rust and decay is beyond me. Another pius for the big 12 is weather why would anybody want to have to play ball where you have to play football in 0 degree weather with snow of freezing rain. When you can play where the temp. is tropical in comparison. The answer is the big 12 is not dyinf but the big 10 might without an infusion of fresh blood.
You obviously
know nothing about the weather in Big 10 country or the financial condition of the conference. Why should we believe that you can describe the economic conditions of an 8 state area while comparing and contrasting it with the rest of the country?
The simple facts are that the Big 10 and PAC 10 are looking to expand. The SEC seems happy with it’s current size. There is absolutely zero reason to believe that an of the 33 schools that compose those conferences are unhappy with their situation.
The mid majors? Well, they little guys always have trouble getting a nice piece of the pie and would jump to a BCS conference instatnly if given the chance.
The Big East and ACC, hard to say really Pitt stated that they are not interested in moving and none of the other schools have expressed unhappiness, even if they are low on the revenue ladder.
Only in the Big 12 are there AD’s all but bitching out loud regarding the state of the conference and saying if another conference calls, they will listen. While it is just a rumour that UT and the Big 10 have spoken, it seems possible given what UT would gain.
And yet, you think the Big 10 is in trouble?
In 100 years, we'll all be dead.
death of big 12
the sentence reading that the big 10 will lose 10% of jobd and states in big 12 should read net groyh of 10%. there was an error on my part.
Demographics
I think the demographics is a very overlooked aspect. If the B10 is treating this like the Pentagon Quadrennial Review and looking out at strategizing for 20 years down the line I think teams like Pitt and Syracuse lose a couple points.
Honest Indian is right – demographics are in favor of the B12 (South), but also against the B10 territory. It isn’t an EU style crisis, but its something we must consider.
Without breaking out the Almanac at the moment the demographic argument adds a few notes:
1. UT obviously becomes exceedingly more valuable. Texas may exceed Cali as a power center depending on how things shake out in the next 10+ years. Plenty of households being added to Houston, Austin, San An, DFW…
2. Mizzu gets bumped up because as has been noted it adds St. Louis and a reasonable share of KC. Two nice sized TV markets. Missouri’s population is growing, while not exceedingly fast it is much higher than the bulk of the B10.
3. Pitt has to be docked a few points. It merely adds another school and metro in a population struggling region.
4. Syracuse knocked down. Unless it adds NYC, which is of course the ultimate trump card, Syracuse and the tri-cities aren’t beacons of growth.
5. Perhaps it adds to the 14 team possibility. Barring Texas, we aren’t going to add a NV, or FL, GA, NC, AZ, etc. So maybe we counter speed with size (ha) and do any of the aforementioned 3 team adds.
It’s worth more than a just this simple reply and I belive the topic of demographics is worth more attention than we are giving it.
IMO,
IP
by InflectionPoint on Feb 17, 2010 1:26 PM CST reply actions
What?!?
If anything, its people lazily giving demographics TOO much attention. No offense, but you really don’t understand what it means to “own” a market. To actually control a market, you cannot simply exist in the same state, you have to draw an audience. Thats why Nebraska, even though it doesn’t have a large market, consistently outdraws Missouri and Colorado regarding TV ratings since the inception of the Big XII. Nebraska simply draws more attention, be it from their ownership of the entire state or its national brand. That is why nobody is talking about any of NYC based Big East teams simply because even though they are “close” to NYC, nobody is watching CF there, probably including many of their alumni.
Ultimately, you need to max out the people who will watch you product, not just the reach. Without draw, Ad revenue shrinks up, negotiating more lucrative deals with your current markets doesn’t happen regardless of being everywhere. And to be frank, if I am looking at further leveraging my product, when is that going to make that happen, games like PSU vs. Missou or games like PSU vs. Neb. That is why demographics alot of times is viewed as a lazy metric that people tend to be suckers for.
Having said that, I dont think Neb goes to the Big Ten. Mutual disinterest.
whattabout the SEC?
Big 10 takes Missouri/Nebraska or both because Texas legislature vetoes Texas joining. UT finds itself in a dying conference and the SEC offers them a new home. The Texas legislature, consiering the SEC much more geographically palatable, agrees. UT (and, hence, aTm) go to the SEC.
Oklahoma, it seems, gets completely screwed in this scenario. Poor Sooners.
"In case you're wondering what the offense should look like, that wasn't it." - Urban Meyer
IF Texas were a free agent
Then the Pac-10 would sweep them up before they had any chance to go the SEC. Even if the SEC made the first move, Texas has already denied them once because of the piss-poor academic rep, and would presumably do so again, knowing that the Pac-10 would soon come calling (or, alternatively, that they could be the basis for some new conference to be cobbled together from the Big XII, former SWC and various “mid-majors”).
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
This is not 1955
and geography is not the great draw/barrier it used to be. Texas is not going to join a conference whose selling points are 1)strong football and 2)contiguous geography at the expense of damaging their academic standing and gaining little television revenue. If Texas was a square peg in the round hole (giggle) of the Big XII, they would be an even more awkward fit for the SEC.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
Forget sports
This is just my gut feeling. Super conference, championship, blah, blah, blah.
It’s nice and all, but the university presidents won’t care.
Let’s look at cash. Again, forget sports. Forget TV revenue all of that. Look at research.
I’ve been trying to find some information on where the Big Ten stands in terms of research. If I’m understanding this report correctly (and if I’m not, somebody please correct me, I haven’t had much luck finding this information), the Top American Research Universities report in 2007 (helpfully linked here) shows that the Big Ten school with the lowest research grant money is Indiana at 122,855,000. 122 million. In 2005. Just 2005. Everyone else is upwards of 1/3 of a billion dollars.
Texas comes in at 410 million. Oklahoma at 105 million.
Sports are fun, but research is the lifeblood of any major university, and Oklahoma doesn’t stack up.
Again, just my gut feeling. And for the record, some of the other potentials: Texas A&M – 212, Pitt – 510, Mizzou – 220, Nebraska – 200, Kansas – 116, Syracuse – 62, ND – 71.
It never gets to be easy
by chitownhawkeye on Feb 17, 2010 8:02 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Thanks
The more I think about this, the more I’m convinced that just looking at it like a university president isn’t correct. We need to look at it like the U of Chicago president. He can’t really care about athletics. But a school that will enhance the prestige of the CIC and allow for more research collaboration will fit right in.
It never gets to be easy
by chitownhawkeye on Feb 18, 2010 9:06 AM CST up reply actions
Texas and Texas A&M in the SEC???
The best fit athletically for Texas and Texas A&M, beside Big 12, is the SEC. Four of the six SEC West team border the state of Texas. The four are LSU, Miss, Miss State, and Arkansas. Arkansas is Texas’s old rival from the SWC. Texas A&M and Arkansas just renewed their rivalry by signing a long term deal to play every year at the new Jerry Jones Dome in Dallas. The schools are close enough to form rivalries and not cost too much for non-revenue generating sports.
The SEC could move Auburn to the SEC East and then have 2 seven team divisions.
SEC West: Texas, Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State
SEC East: Florida, Georgia, Tenn, Auburn, South Carolina, Vandy, Kentucky
Not a bad conference. The Big 10 could take Mizz, Nebraska and Oklahoma. The Pac 10 could take Colorado.
Not going to happen
and they’ve said as much back when the Big 12 was formed.
It never gets to be easy
by chitownhawkeye on Feb 18, 2010 9:10 AM CST up reply actions
Joining the SEC would not hurt Texas academically.
Kevin McCann’t,
Joining the SEC would not hurt Texas academically. Joining the Big 10, Pac 10, or ACC would help Texas’s academic standing. The SEC is slightly better than the Big 12 academically is you look at the 2010 US News and World Report rating. Texas is the highest ranked Big 12 school tied at 47th with Penn State and Florida. In the SEC they would be tied with Florida for second behind Vandy ranked 17th(Tied with 2 other schools). The University of Georgia is next in the SEC at #58 just ahead of the next Big 12 school of Texas A&M at 61(tied with 5 other schools). Then Baylor #80 slight edges Auburn #88. If you take out Vandy they are the same conference academically. If Texas cared that much about academics they should have pushed to include Rice #17, tied with Vandy, and SMU #68 into the Big 12. So joining the SEC is neutral when comparing it to the current Big 12.
The SEC has a very large TV deal when compared to the Big 12. The Big 10 pays $19.4M/yr per team, the SEC pays $17.1M/yr per team, the Big 12 pays under $7M/yr per team. The SEC deal pays about 2.5 times what the Big 12 deal pays. That extra 10M per team pays for a lot on non-revenue generating sport teams.
That SEC TV deal
is already signed and locked in for what, 15 years? Adding two teams just dillutes the pool, unless there is a clause that allows for more money or renegotiation due to membership change. So Texas would get more TV money, everybody else would get less.
The Big 10 gains a championship game and BTN all over the state of Texas.
The PAC 10 I comment on elsewhere, but they also have a lot to gain by adding Texas.
In 100 years, we'll all be dead.
"death of the big12" and "Demographics"
I think people from Big 12 country are under estimating the Big 10 -Rust Belts growth. Only a few Rust Belt states are in really bad shape. They are Michigan and Ohio. The others are doing better. MN, IN, WI, PA and IL are still growing. The Metro Areas of Philly, Chicago, Indy, Minn, Milwaukee and all doing fine to Ok. They are doing better than STL and KC. The Rural Rust Belt town are falling but the Urban area are fine outside of Mi and OH.
Outside of TX and CO what Big 12 states are really growing. IL is outgrowing its neighbor MO and IL is twice the size. Just read the STL Today paper to see that. The other states are really to small OK, NE, KS, IA compare to the Big 10 states. It would take 75-100 years for them to catch in population which drive TV revenue. If someone has $10M and is slow losing it while someone else has $1000 and it s growing very fast. Eventually that will cross but it will take a very long time and things could change before then.
A Plausible Scenario
The PAC 10 is going to make a serious play for Texas. They are lagging behind pretty seriously in football revenue with no relief in sight. Since they have already announced they want to add 2 teams, this leaves a spot open for A&M as well. So Texas keeps A&M on the in conference schedule, OK goes back to a non conference game, Tech pouts but gets promised semi regular non confernece games with UT and A&M, and the Texas legislature won’t grumble too much.
This puts the PAC 10 in CA, TX, WA, AZ & OR which gives them a big enough population base (78.8 million) to start their own PAC 10 network and the muscle to get a better TV deal.
It’ll be TX, A&M, AZ, ASU, USC & UCLA in one division so Texans will stop whining about the weather. A few will notice that their travel situation is even worse than it would be in the Big 10 but nobody will listen to them.
The TX recruiting market is exposed to the PAC 10, but TX gets better exposure in SoCal, and that’s not a bad tradeoff.
Texas isn’t worried about money in the short term, but they also don’t want to be stuck with the Big 12’s crappy TV money, moving to the PAC 10 solves the TV money problem for both sides.
The catch here is that ALL of the PAC 10 schools have to agree, and that might be a tough sell. Last time, Stanford blocked TX but… times have changed.
This will bump the Big 12 to slightly better than mid-major status and move the PAC 10 onto more equal footing with the Big 10 and SEC.
In 100 years, we'll all be dead.
The Pac might be thinking bigger.
Yes, the Pac is falling behind these days, but any solution that splits up the old Pac8 via divisions will probably be vetoed. Look for the Pac to go for a Hail Mary that goes beyond Utah, Colorado or even Texas. The Pac may offer Texas membership as well as invitations for one to three hanger-on schools. That may just be aTm or maybe even TTech and Baylor, too, if Texas politics demands it.
The Pac would then look like this:
[West] UW, WSU, Oregon, Oregon St., Stanford, Cal, UCLA, USC
[East] Arizona, Arizona St., Colorado, Nebraska, Texas, aTm, TTech, Baylor
If politically possible, replace the last two with Utah and BYU* or Kansas and Mizzou.
Basically, the Pac can go to 16 by poaching 4 to 6 BigXII schools. That conference would have enough “reach,” wouldn’t you say?
- BYU may be a nonstarter, as the Cali schools may still be mad about Prop 8.
by RobberBaron on Feb 19, 2010 12:59 AM CST up reply actions
Pac-10
is also hindered by the requirement that any expansion requires an unanimous vote of the league. And the huge stumbling block (read: school that doesn’t want to “dilute” academics) is Stanford.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
Why do I get the feeling that the rest of the PAC 10...
that they will tell Stanford to sit down, shut up and vote for expansion or be expelled from the league.
Stanford does not carry THAT much power in that league.
There is a God and I'm not it, after that EVERYTHING is subjective. Be careful for what you wish for, you just might GET IT!
If a single veto can kill a motion
then, yes, they do. And the Pac 10 is in no hurry to kick out a charter member of its conference that also happens to be its best school and 14-time defending Director’s Cup champion. Stanford is as elite as elite gets.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Feb 23, 2010 4:05 AM CST up reply actions
Maybe
BYU is not going to happen, prop 8 is one reason, I think being a religious college would keep them out anyway. Utah is also full of mormons and could be found guilty by association. I think they would be the last choice on the list at any rate.
I have no idea what the feelings on splitting the old PAC 8 by division would be. That went away 32 years ago, so I question that particular loyalty.
Lastly, I read a piece last night that gave a very good reason for UT to got PAC over BX, the football schedule would be a lot easier out west. They would have a much better chance of dominating the conference that in the BX where they have to face M, OSU, PSU & IA all the time.
In 100 years, we'll all be dead.
Here's why
The California schools want to play each other every year. The NW schools want to keep their annual trips to LA and the Bay Area. I think that may be enough to keep the old Pac8 together.
I agree with you on the other reasons for keeping out BYU, but those same reasons would make BYU an excellent instant villain/opponent to the other schools. Can you imagine what the Stanford band would come up with? It would be entertaining.
BYU is an excellent school with solid academics and athletics. But they’re not getting into the PAC 10 as long as the conference insists on its new members being research universities (which BYU is not), and that a unanimous vote is required (no way in hell Berkeley lets them in).
www.gopherfootball.blogspot.com
The good old dominoes are just about to start.
Preface by saying this … not sure this will happen at all, but if the rumors we hear are true, let’s say this happens:
Texas, to the Big 10/ new Big12
Colorado and Utah to the Pac 10/12
Arkansas and TCU to the old Big12
SEC has to scoop an ACC team, say GA Tech or Fla State.
ACC now has to poach a Big East school or upgrade a C-USA team.
That would give 5 of the 6 BCS conferences 12 teams each, withe Big East the only one lagging.
Or we could go with the monster scenario:
Big 10 nabs Texas, Missori and Pitt for 14 teams.
Pac10 nabs Colorado and Utah for 12 teams.
SEC, ACC, stand pat.
Big 12 takes TCU, Boise St, and BYU to stay at 12.
The scraps of the MWC and WAC merge to a 14 team conference. And the Big EAst poaches a MAC school (Temple??) to stay at 8 teams.
you forgot about a&m
There’s no way texas is going to get the policital cover to move without either taking a&m with them or finding a&m a decent landing spot (most likely the pac 10).
Also, there is no way arkansas or any other sec school leaves that conference (which is the only conference that approaches the big 10’s tv money) for a sinking ship big 12.
I’d think the big east would be more likely to pick up memphis (which has had some history of athletic success) or ucf (which would give them two schools in florida) over temple, who was already kicked out of the big east.
by Joe Hamilton's Chauffeur on Feb 24, 2010 1:48 PM CST up reply actions

by 


































