How bad would adding TCU, Houston, and SMU hurt the others?

[thebigabd]

OSU depends on those upper mid level guys from Houston and Dallas. OU and UT will get whoever they want, for the most part. But OSU really depends on those next tier players from these areas to be competitive. They have a lot of Okies in key spots this year (Weeden, Blackmon, Smith, etc) but usually its Dallas and Houston area.

Would adding in these Texas schools hurt OSU or the others at all? One would have to imagine that some of these guys would stay home and play for one of these schools if they played in a major conference.

 

[stoops4pres]

OSU depends on those upper mid level guys from Houston and Dallas. OU and UT will get whoever they want, for the most part. But OSU really depends on those next tier players from these areas to be competitive. They have a lot of Okies in key spots this year (Weeden, Blackmon, Smith, etc) but usually its Dallas and Houston area.

Would adding in these Texas schools hurt OSU or the others at all? One would have to imagine that some of these guys would stay home and play for one of these schools if they played in a major conference.

I agree, I think it would hurt Ok. State's pipeline.

It'd hurt OU a little bit as well, but to a much lesser extent.

 

[NickZepp]

It would destroy the conference. Add no value with 3+ team and make it would lose money for the top teams. A Missouri would just have more reasons to leave.

 

[boksooner]

There is, literally, no logical reason to add SMU.

I could buy TCU and maybe Houston, if you bring in BYU as well, but SMU adds nothing.

 

[campbest]

SMU adds nothing, no way it should be allowed.

 

[tycat947]

It sure won't help when our Tier 1 TV contract comes up for renewal. They add ZERO market share!!!!!!! I don't know why this is so hard to understand! Texas, OU, Tech, OSU, Baylor already have the Houston market, the DFW market, the San Antonio market, the Austin market, etc, etc, etc! If we're just adding teams to add teams, I'd rather have Midwestern State and Tarelton State!

 

[stoops4pres]

There is, literally, no logical reason to add SMU.

I could buy TCU and maybe Houston, if you bring in BYU as well, but SMU adds nothing.

This.

 

[MsProudSooner]

There are only 2 people who want SMU added:

Craig James
The SMU Athletic Director

 

[boksooner]

It sure won't help when our Tier 1 TV contract comes up for renewal. They add ZERO market share!!!!!!! I don't know why this is so hard to understand! Texas, OU, Tech, OSU, Baylor already have the Houston market, the DFW market, the San Antonio market, the Austin market, etc, etc, etc! If we're just adding teams to add teams, I'd rather have Midwestern State and Tarelton State!

You could argue that A&M didn't add any additional markets either, so adding TCU could be considered a wash. SMU adds nothing, because OU, OSU, UT, TT and TCU would put an absolute stranglehold on the DFW market. BYU adds a national Mormon following, so they could come closer to replacing a share. Finding a third replacement is tough. It would be a home run to get S. Florida, but I am starting to warm up to C. Florida. If OU can't expand into Cali, why not shoot for Florida.

 

[AdaSooner]

TCU may not be too bad. Houston and SMU would bring nothing to the conference. Adding all three would be a disaster!

 

[thebigabd]

TCU, Houston, BYU are the top 3, I would think.

Houston and BYU provide good basketball and football, while TCU brings football.

 

[WTSooner]

Adding all three would be a disaster!

I just don't get this line of thinking. We aren't trying to replace OU and UT here. We're replacing some schools that didn't add much in the way of markets, and hadn't done a lot in football over the last 15 years.

A lot of these schools we're talking about adding have the potential to grown into what aTm or CU was when they left. Houston? I think they could be a very solid program once in a larger conference. Same with ALL of those Florida schools. BYU is every bit the football program that aTm was.

Sometimes, adding a school, no matter how "average" they are, an still help a conference. We won't survive 10 years with 9 or probably even 10 teams. Our goal should be to get back up to 12. That also reinstates the conference championship game. I don't know how much that game makes for the conference, but I'm willing to bet it offsets the "costs" to the other teams in terms of revenue sharing with an additional team or two.

 

[propoke]

OSU depends on those upper mid level guys from Houston and Dallas. OU and UT will get whoever they want, for the most part. But OSU really depends on those next tier players from these areas to be competitive. They have a lot of Okies in key spots this year (Weeden, Blackmon, Smith, etc) but usually its Dallas and Houston area.

Would adding in these Texas schools hurt OSU or the others at all? One would have to imagine that some of these guys would stay home and play for one of these schools if they played in a major conference.

I don't think it would hurt OSU all that bad. I don't see SMU or Houston beating OSU on very many recruits. TCU may get a few, but not enough to hurt that bad. OSU has expanded their recruiting a little more nationally the last few years, which would ease any recruiting losses.

OU will not be hurt at all in recruiting with the addition of these schools.

 

[AdaSooner]

I just don't get this line of thinking. We aren't trying to replace OU and UT here. We're replacing some schools that didn't add much in the way of markets, and hadn't done a lot in football over the last 15 years.

A lot of these schools we're talking about adding have the potential to grown into what aTm or CU was when they left. Houston? I think they could be a very solid program once in a larger conference. Same with ALL of those Florida schools. BYU is every bit the football program that aTm was.

Sometimes, adding a school, no matter how "average" they are, an still help a conference. We won't survive 10 years with 9 or probably even 10 teams. Our goal should be to get back up to 12. That also reinstates the conference championship game. I don't know how much that game makes for the conference, but I'm willing to bet it offsets the "costs" to the other teams in terms of revenue sharing with an additional team or two.

Disaster might be a poor choice of words, but there are definitely better schools out there that I would consider before settling on those three. BYU, TCU and WVU would be my first picks.

I agree that the Big 12 will not survive without adding more schools. I'm all for that. For my part, I would like to see a return to the original number of twelve. I'm just not in favor of bringing in schools like Houston or a SMU, based on the notion that playing in a major conference will suddenly transform one or both into an even semi-major power.

The only thing either school would bring to the conference are major television markets, which certainly can't be discounted completely. However, it's not like those schools haven't had every opportuntity to emerge on the national scene in football and basketball. Unlike the relatively new schools in Florida, Houston (1927) and SMU (1911) have been around for a very long time, and yet despite being positioned in the first and third largest cities in Texas, they have been mediocre at best over the years.

 

[NorthCarolinaSooner]

Adding two Florida teams would significantly open up recruiting in Florida for sure because you add games in state......would be good for recruiting.

If youo add WVU, Louisville, Cincy you are adding new markets the conference doesn't currently have. BYU definitely adds to the marketability for tv dollars. I could buy TCU or Houston (especially Houston). How about UCONN? They are trying to get out of the BE............how about pulling Villanova (trying to move up in football and would bring the Philly tv market, which would be big).

Some of these choices may not be extremely popular in the short term but in the long term make a LOT of sense.

 

[Sawyer]

Adding TCU, Houston and SMU would likely put the Big 12 at 11, because it would almost certainly drive MU to the SEC.

 

[thebigabd]

BYU, Central Florida, Houston.

I like it.

 

[Sawyer]

Once again, find a fourth.

 

[thebigabd]

Once again, find a fourth.

You mean that if the Big 12 adds BYU (a fantastic athletic program with lots of tradition), Central Florida, and Houston (who should have been in the Big 12 over Baylor in the frst place) are the teams they pick that you will demand Mizzou leave the Big 12?

Why? What issue would Mizzou have with those teams?

 

[WTSooner]

Adding TCU, Houston and SMU would likely put the Big 12 at 11, because it would almost certainly drive MU to the SEC.

If MU is that fickle, I say peace out.