So, OU is staying. Now we HAVE to add teams, correct?

Status
Not open for further replies.
There are already enough TV sets. The asset the Big XII lost was A&M and that loss hits the Texas market. We need to respond strategically to that loss by adding TCU, Houston and either SMU or Rice. Then we not only recover the ratings from A&M we can exceed it and focus on the brand to lock up Texas recruiting. If you're a Texas high school athlete you need to play in the Big XII. Period.

We need to solidify the core. If we run around the country adding 3rd tier programs we will fragment the conference and make it even weaker.

The more this process unfolds, I'm starting to come around to this mindset. Now I don't think a SMU or Rice helps, but a TCU/Houston is viable. Lock up this region and then look outside. With the demographic projections and business opportunities in the state of Texas for the next 20 years, this region is only going to grow at a rate that surpasses any other portion of the nation.
 
I think it's more likely the Big 12 retracts than expands. There aren't any schools in the region that really add enough. Missouri will likely go to the SEC. Texas will probably go indy in a few years if the LHN ever gets going.

UT does not want to go independent.

And Mizzou likely stays, until the Big 12 falls apart.
 
I get your point....but you tell me about "third tier" teams.

I'm all for adding TCU......maybe even Houston...but as for the rest of the possibilities mentioned.

Who is bringing more to the table?

Louisville or SMU?

Memphis or Rice?

BYU?

West Virginia?

Any of those would bring more to the table than SMU or Rice. Plus they would bring in tv sets in markets we dont already control. The entire Texas market is already in the Big XII back pocket....even without aTm.


I can see the argument for both sides....I'm just saying if the conference is expanded outside the existing borders then you have a case for a much larger tv deal.

I think TCU/Houston/Rice or SMU combined blow away what WVU/Louisville/BYU/Memphis bring combined. Not only in recruiting (those teams have no recruiting base) but also in revenue (they are fragmented small market teams).

The mission of the Big XII should be to OWN, totally OWN Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Missouri. That is an achievable goal and we need those 12 teams to agree on the mission and do everything strategically to accomplish it.
 
Last edited:
Boca, what problems would you see grabbing all "major" Texas programs and going to a 14 team league that owns the states?

Big 12 North
OU
OSU
KU
MU
KSU
ISU
TCU

Big 12 South
UT
TT
UH
UTEP
Rice
SMU
Baylor

That is a 14 team league that dominates Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Missouri.
 
14 is too many IMO. These teams don't bring much more revenue than we lost with A&M so splitting with 4 extra instead of 2 does not work financially even if they receive below average shares.

UTEP is too far in the boonies

You pick between SMU & Rice which is still tough. How about this. Let them play for it. lol That would be some competitive shiiiit. SMU would probably win.
 
Boca, what problems would you see grabbing all "major" Texas programs and going to a 14 team league that owns the states?

Big 12 North
OU
OSU
KU
MU
KSU
ISU
TCU

Big 12 South
UT
TT
UH
UTEP
Rice
SMU
Baylor

That is a 14 team league that dominates Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Missouri.

Replace UTEP with Tulsa, FTW!

Big 12 North
OU
OSU
KU
MU
KSU
ISU
Tulsa

Big 12 South
UT
TT
UH
TCU
Rice
SMU
Baylor
 
Big 12 North
KU
KSU
MU
ISU
Central Florida
BYU

Big 12 South
OU
OSU
UT
TT
BU
Houston
You're the guy who put the Arizona Cardinals in the NFC East and the Atlanta Falcons in the NFC West, aren't you?
 
As cool as that would be, Tulsa simply doesn't belong in the Big 12. They'd have a hard time competing in any of the major sports, IMO.

That depends, do you consider tennis a major sport?
 
Replace UTEP with Tulsa, FTW!

Big 12 North
OU
OSU
KU
MU
KSU
ISU
Tulsa

Big 12 South
UT
TT
UH
TCU
Rice
SMU
Baylor

You know what. This is not a totally bad idea. the problem is you are locking OU into having to play too many conference games with 14 teams. With 12 you play the Big 8 schools once, Texas every year, then 2 of the other 5 texas schools rotating.

Of course the problem with this model is that UT is going to have 4-5 gimme conference wins every year. They would win the Texas division constantly but if TCU was in the Big XII they would consistently be as good or better than A&M as long as Patterson stayed.
 
UT does not want to go independent.

And Mizzou likely stays, until the Big 12 falls apart.
UT doesn't want to go indy right now. In the long run the want to.

The best course is really merging the Big East and Big 12 football leagues and then adding either BYU or Central Florida. Since Missouri is likely going to the SEC.
 
14 is too many IMO. These teams don't bring much more revenue than we lost with A&M so splitting with 4 extra instead of 2 does not work financially even if they receive below average shares.

UTEP is too far in the boonies

You pick between SMU & Rice which is still tough. How about this. Let them play for it. lol That would be some competitive shiiiit. SMU would probably win.

There is a huge campaign to get SMEW in the Big XII right now, as someone who lives in Dallas (and an alum) it would be cool. With that said, I'd rather grab TCU and Houston then a Louisville on top.
 
There is a huge campaign to get SMEW in the Big XII right now, as someone who lives in Dallas (and an alum) it would be cool. With that said, I'd rather grab TCU and Houston then a Louisville on top.

Agreed. I think TCU, Houston, and Louisville comes pretty darn close to replacing what we've lost. Maybe not historically, but market-wise, and potential going forward.

The only potential problem I see is how to group the teams in divisions. I really think OU needs to stay in UT's division, or it jacks with the scheduling too much to keep us playing each year. Maybe split it to an East/West format? I don't know. Guess that really wouldn't help much either.
 
I think that would be great for SMU... maybe after being in a big conference they would recruit better and recover from the death penalty. I use that term lightly today (death penalty), given that Georgia may have lynched an innocent man last night.

SMU, TCU, Houston.

Interesting.
 
Agreed. I think TCU, Houston, and Louisville comes pretty darn close to replacing what we've lost. Maybe not historically, but market-wise, and potential going forward.

The only potential problem I see is how to group the teams in divisions. I really think OU needs to stay in UT's division, or it jacks with the scheduling too much to keep us playing each year. Maybe split it to an East/West format? I don't know. Guess that really wouldn't help much either.

At this juncture, the conference is in stability and re-grouping mode, it needs to corner its market and solidify the base. Adding two Texas schools (TCU, Houston) does that. But at the same time there needs to be some sort of expansion outside the region to get a foothold.

As for the divisions, they don't have to be geographic...just name them something stupid like the Big 10 did. I prefer the "Movers" and "Shakers" divisions.
 
UT doesn't want to go indy right now. In the long run the want to.

The best course is really merging the Big East and Big 12 football leagues and then adding either BYU or Central Florida. Since Missouri is likely going to the SEC.

central florida or south florida?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top