# Big 12 No More?



## pike482 (Jun 9, 2010)

It looks like this is the beginning of the end for the Big 12. It seems like all this change is due to how much money the schools can get for TV time. I know that every bit helps the university these days, but shouldn't it be more than that? Aren't universities supposed to be about the students? What about rivalries and tradition? I haven't seen a single student (regular or athlete) opinion, just athletic directors and presidents. If I went to a Texas school, why would I want my school to be in a conference with Oregon? It's a little far away to make it in a weekend to see the game.


----------



## Supe (Jun 10, 2010)

As long as Nebraska signs with the Big 10, the Big 12 will be dissolved. Sure could make for some interesting Rose Bowls though!


----------



## RIP - VTEnviro (Jun 10, 2010)

They couldn't just carry on with 11 teams or recruit a 12th one from somewhere else?


----------



## Ble_PE (Jun 10, 2010)

VTEnviro said:


> They couldn't just carry on with 11 teams or recruit a 12th one from somewhere else?


What Supe is implying is that if Nebraska leaves the Big 12, it's going to create a mass exodus of other teams to other conferences. This has been in the making for a few months now and it looks like the dominoes are about to start falling. It will be interesting to see what happens.


----------



## roadwreck (Jun 10, 2010)

VTEnviro said:


> They couldn't just carry on with 11 teams or recruit a 12th one from somewhere else?


They wouldn't carry on with 11 teams b/c the conference would want a championship game ($$$) and they need 12 teams in the conference to do that. It sounds like another 6 teams in the Big 12 have invites to join the Pac-10. If those six leave, which people suspect they will, you now have a conference of 5.


----------



## Supe (Jun 10, 2010)

They scrolled on the ESPN ticker this morning that if Nebraska left, the Big 12 was going to disband in its entirety. The TX, OK, and CO teams are basically awaiting word on signing with the Pac-10.


----------



## RIP - VTEnviro (Jun 10, 2010)

> If those six leave, which people suspect they will, you now have a conference of 5.


So those school would then latch onto other conferences? or be screwed?

I don't really follow college sports so I'm not hip with the whole conference thing.


----------



## roadwreck (Jun 10, 2010)

VTEnviro said:


> > If those six leave, which people suspect they will, you now have a conference of 5.
> 
> 
> So those school would then latch onto other conferences? or be screwed?
> ...


I would assume those schools would end up latching onto another (lesser) conference.


----------



## kevo_55 (Jun 10, 2010)

Man, this doesn't look good.

Poor ISU!!


----------



## Chucktown PE (Jun 10, 2010)

there are all sorts of rampant speculations out there and it's very political. basically, no one wants to be left out of what are going to be the 4 power conferences. SEC, Pac-10, Big Ten, and Big East. I think the ACC and Big 12 are going to go away.


----------



## MechGuy (Jun 10, 2010)

Chucktown PE said:


> there are all sorts of rampant speculations out there and it's very political. basically, no one wants to be left out of what are going to be the 4 power conferences. SEC, Pac-10, Big Ten, and Big East. I think the ACC and Big 12 are going to go away.



I have a feeling the Big East would dissolve before the ACC would.

The ironic thing is that all of this could have been avoided had ND just agreed to join the Big 10. The Big 10 would have probably stopped there, and the Pac-10 probably wouldn't have made their grand power play to go to 16 teams.

ND cited their reasons for wanting to stay independent. Now if all the dominos fall as being rumored, ND might be forced to join a conference anyway because the "super-conferences" would be so big they wouldn't have any room in their schedule to play independent schools. Also, it would be unlikely ND would still get their almost-automatic bid into a BCS bowl anymore.

At least this gives us sports fans something to talk about while we wait for football season to come back around.


----------



## Master slacker (Jun 10, 2010)

1) PAC-10 needs to have at least 12. They've been skating along without the need for conference championship games for too long.

2) SEC had better not add another team. No school in the Big 12 is near the south east. Besides, isn't a requirement for being in the SEC is that your region needs to have a lot of rainfall?


----------



## Slugger926 (Jun 10, 2010)

VTEnviro said:


> They couldn't just carry on with 11 teams or recruit a 12th one from somewhere else?


Nebraska carries national recognition and national TV coverage. If they could pull in Notre Dame, they could survive.


----------



## Angstrom (Jun 10, 2010)

MechGuy said:


> The ironic thing is that all of this could have been avoided had ND just agreed to join the Big 10. The Big 10 would have probably stopped there, and the Pac-10 probably wouldn't have made their grand power play to go to 16 teams.ND cited their reasons for wanting to stay independent. Now if all the dominos fall as being rumored, ND might be forced to join a conference anyway because the "super-conferences" would be so big they wouldn't have any room in their schedule to play independent schools. Also, it would be unlikely ND would still get their almost-automatic bid into a BCS bowl anymore.


Notre Dame fails at game theory. Or they thought the Big 10 was bluffing. Actually, I thought the Big 10 was bluffing, but then the Pac 10 effectively forced their hand.

Anyhow, call me crazy, but I still think the Big 10 is going after Texas. There's a whole lot going on behind the scenes.


----------



## roadwreck (Jun 10, 2010)

It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out.

Some schools and conferences will win big, some schools and conferences will lose big. I would be pretty unhappy if I were the fan of one of those Big 12 schools who don't get an invite to go somewhere else. As other conferences play catch up or try to solidify their position as a super conference schools may be bounced all over the place. In our area, the major topic of conversation is what the SEC would do if the Big 10 became a 16 team conference. Now the discussion will be what to do now that the Pac-10 is a 16 team conference. Do other 12 school conferences expand? The theory I've often heard discussed was that the SEC would want to become a 16 team conference and to do so they would raid the ACC. The common thinking was that the SEC would try to pick up Miami, FSU, Clemson and VT. But, arguments have been made that three of those schools would do the SEC any good. These conference realignments are all about TV money and TV markets. The SEC already has a presence in Florida and South Carolina, so the addition of FSU, Miami and Clemson would be of little help to boost TV coverage area. The ACC school that the SEC would covet most is VT. They are a big fooball school and in an area that the SEC currently doesn't have a presence in.


----------



## Kephart P.E. (Jun 10, 2010)

This is from an outsiders perspective (Oregon State Alum), but the demise of the Big 12 can be firmly placed at the feet of Texas.

They got everything they asked for from the conference, but because they were so greedy and set up a situation with the TV deal where they made a lot more money than most of the other schools, it engendered zero loyalty with many schools. Namely the smaller players like Mizzou, but it appears lots of schools where chapped by it.

If they had been a bit more equitable to the smaller schools this wouldn't be happening. But I guess it really doesn't matter to UT, Okla., and A&amp;M cause in the end cause other Conf. want them to they will still come out ahead of Kansas, Mizzou, etc.

I do hope the new Pac-16 if it happens is Colorado, Texas, OkSU, Oklahoma, TT, and A&amp;M. Colorado is a much better fit than Baylor, I can't imagine the President of CAL, Oregon, or Stanford would be cool with some the stuff that goes on in Waco.

I am sure they (the University Presidents) aren't crazy about the academics at OkSU and TT, but I think they will overlook it for $20 million per season. Heck ASU wasn't all that when they joined the Pac-10 either.


----------



## EM_PS (Jun 10, 2010)

Mountain West or WAC may pick up some of the Big12 remnants...Boise St may finally get their wish to play more bigtime football, or at least those conferences won't be quite as pathetic


----------



## EM_PS (Jun 10, 2010)

interesting blurb from SI:



> Nebraska, for its part, has been competing alongside some of its old Big 8 counterparts -- Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Missouri, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Colorado -- since as far back as 1892. This isn't Miami ditching the Big East, folks. That league didn't even begin fielding football for another 99 years. This is one of the bedrock institutions of a century-old alliance suddenly choosing to align itself with a completely different crew.
> It is both stunning and completely logical.
> 
> Once you get over the sentimental part of it -- which, mind you, Kansas isn't about to do anytime soon -- Nebraska's decision is a no-brainer. The fact is, Tom Osborne and Co. aren't leaving the actual Big 8, the league in which it used to vie annually with Oklahoma for annual supremacy and accompanying trips to the Orange Bowl. There's no going back to those glory days of Johnny Rodgers, Mike Rozier and Thanksgiving dates with Barry Switzer.
> ...


----------



## Kephart P.E. (Jun 10, 2010)

EM_PS said:


> interesting blurb from SI:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I agree, Nebraska is a no brainer for the Big10. And so should be ND. But I am fine with ND staying independant because I want COLLEGE FOOTBALL ARMAGEDDON thats right I am hoping and praying for the end of the BCS and the whole bowl system.

Lets, gee I dunno give the bowl money to the schools that play the sport not some Fat Cat Bowl committees in town I never visit and get a real playoff.


----------



## Ble_PE (Jun 10, 2010)

Looks like Colorado has just joined the Pac-10.

Things are going to start getting interesting.


----------



## mizzoueng (Jun 10, 2010)

And the wall comes tumbling down......


----------



## Kephart P.E. (Jun 10, 2010)

IF Nebraska stays the Big 12 still survives. Man if you are one of the smaller Big12 schools don't you wish you had been nicer to the Huskers?

I think Nebraska is gone though, no real reason to stay based on Texas promising you that they won't screw you again on the TV money.

The Texas Schools will be the last to leave but really what else can they do? Start their own league? Unlikely at this stage you need at least 2-4 marque programs for a super league. And Oklahoma and Texas just isn't enough.


----------



## MechGuy (Jun 10, 2010)

Latest rumor I read -- Texas and A&amp;M go to the Big 10, and OK goes to the SEC.

I couldn't write a better consipiracy theory.


----------



## Angstrom (Jun 10, 2010)

MechGuy said:


> Latest rumor I read -- Texas and A&amp;M go to the Big 10, and OK goes to the SEC.
> I couldn't write a better consipiracy theory.


Ha, look at my post up above.


----------



## Chucktown PE (Jun 10, 2010)

Our (Clemson's) dumbass president is on the ACC task force to evaluate expansion. They're a day late and about $100 million dollars short. They need to fire our president and AD because we are going to get left out of the realignment. Any school that gets left out of what will be the 4 power conferences, can kiss their athletics goodbye for the next 50 years.


----------



## mark.herrmann (Jun 11, 2010)

I'm interested to see how this affects scheduling, and the smaller D-1 schools that are competitive. We're gonna see less Cinderella stories; these powerhouses are going to have less room to schedule good out-of-conference games when they play in these new 12- and 16-team conferences. I'd imagine that they would split them up into sub-conferences, but who knows? Even Notre Dame could lose some big games, especially if a team like USC is playing in the PAC-16.


----------



## Road Guy (Jun 11, 2010)

so USC loses bowl eligibility over something that none of the current staff or players were involved in, yet ncaa punichses the current folks..

I am in no way a USC fan but I disagree with how the ncaa handles these types of situations, they need to go after the boosters, players, even maybe make the players involved suspended for x# of games if they are in the NFL...


----------



## roadwreck (Jun 11, 2010)

Road Guy said:


> so USC loses bowl eligibility over something that none of the current staff or players were involved in, yet ncaa punichses the current folks..
> I am in no way a USC fan but I disagree with how the ncaa handles these types of situations, they need to go after the boosters, players, even maybe make the players involved suspended for x# of games if they are in the NFL...


I agree and disagree. It sucks that the student athletes that were not involved will be punished now. From what I've heard all upperclassmen athletes at USC will be allowed to transfer if they wish without having to be subject to the usually 1 year loss of eligibility. Underclassmen are stuck if they don't want to lose eligibility. Should the players that were responsible for having these sanctions leveled against USC be punished? Yes. But how are you going to do that? They are no longer subject to the rules of the NCAA, so what can the NCAA do to punish them? Nothing. Hopefully Bush will lose his Heisman, but who cares about that now?

I think punishments like this are more to do with punishing the school and the administration. The schools reputation takes a hit and their pocketbook takes a hit. The two year post season ban and loss of scholorships will hurt the teams performance on the field. Which will hurt fan support. Which will hurt ticket sales, tv revenue and donations to the school. The school administrators don't want that. The school administrators are the ones that hire the coaches. The coaches recruit the players. If you don't want to find your school in a situation like this the school administrators need to be on top of the coaches to recruit players who are less likely to put the school in a precarious situation and the coaches/administrators need to monitor the players to be sure that they are doing everything on the up and up.

USC was punished for "a lack of institutional control" which means they knew about what was going on with Bush and Mayo and chose to ignore it or they weren't doing their jobs and were completely oblivious to the whole thing. The real slimeball in all of this to me is Pete Carroll. He knew what was coming so he bolted while the getting was good. The funny thing is that Lane Kiffen walked into a total clusterfuck. Couldn't happen to a nicer fellow.


----------



## Chucktown PE (Jun 11, 2010)

I was personally pretty happy to have Lane Kiffin and Pete Carroll both get screwed by the NCAA. Karma is a bitch.

I do hate it for the players though.


----------



## udpolo15 (Jun 11, 2010)

roadwreck said:


> Road Guy said:
> 
> 
> > so USC loses bowl eligibility over something that none of the current staff or players were involved in, yet ncaa punichses the current folks..
> ...


Does their pocket book really take a hit? They made many many millions during the period in question. While certainly they will take a hit during the next few years, my guess is the gains far out weigh the losses. In two years, things will be back to normal and the money will continue to roll in.

If the NCAA/Universities really wanted to crack down, they will start levying high dollar fines against schools. Imagine if USC would have to forfeit all gate receipts and TV revenue for the games in question? If school's cared, they would put clawback provisions in coaches contract. Would Carroll allowed this to go on if he knew he might be returning millions to the school? Unfortunately there is too much money involved for folks to act rationally. Everybody turns a blind eye to this kind of stuff then act appalled when someone gets caught.


----------



## csb (Jun 11, 2010)

EM_PS said:


> Mountain West or WAC may pick up some of the Big12 remnants...Boise St may finally get their wish to play more bigtime football, or at least those conferences won't be quite as pathetic


Ouch.

You know, sometimes you need crappy conferences for crappy schools to keep their crappy athletic departments so there are bowl games for the rest of us to go to!


----------



## wilheldp_PE (Jun 11, 2010)

None of the Big 12 schools are anywhere close to the Pacific Ocean. I think if the Pac-10 ends up getting all of the schools they are going after, they need to completely change their name instead of just the number (i.e. Pac-16). I suggest Cornfed Hippie Conference. That embodies both the west coast hippie movement and the Great Plains reputation for growing abnormally large humans.


----------



## Master slacker (Jun 11, 2010)

Chucktown PE said:


> They need to fire our president and AD because we are going to get left out of the realignment.


They need to be fired for their piss poor reasons for eliminating the men's and women's swimming programs. :madgo:


----------



## Chucktown PE (Jun 11, 2010)

Master slacker said:


> Chucktown PE said:
> 
> 
> > They need to fire our president and AD because we are going to get left out of the realignment.
> ...



They were losing money and the almight dollar is all that matters now.


----------



## Kephart P.E. (Jun 11, 2010)

If the Pac10 goes to 16. I suggest the conference is renamed the PowerPac.

Although if they end up at 12 teams I want it to be the 12-Pac.


----------



## Supe (Jun 11, 2010)

Kephart P.E. said:


> If the Pac10 goes to 16. I suggest the conference is renamed the PowerPac.
> Although if they end up at 12 teams I want it to be the 12-Pac.



The PowerPac is a leftist PrObama NPO based out of California...


----------



## EM_PS (Jun 11, 2010)

Welcome, Nebraska, to the new Big 10 (12)!

from SI on Big 12 meltdown:



> With the Big 12 on the verge of implosion, other conferences are circling. The Mountain West, after delaying a decision last week on whether to add Boise State, changed course and decided to add the Broncos on Friday. If nothing else, the addition of Boise State strengthens the Mountain West's effort to qualify for an automatic qualifying berth in the BCS for the 2012 and 2013 seasons. "As the week progressed and dominoes started falling, the feeling was, hey, let's get better," Mountain West commissioner Craig Thompson told SI.com on Friday.
> But Thompson added that the Mountain West may not stand pat. If five more schools do leave the Big 12, Thompson said his league would consider adding some of the leftovers -- Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State and Missouri could be left in the league -- or even potentially merging with the Big 12. "That could be a possibility," Thompson said. "Everything is on the table right now." Thompson said some schools have approached the Mountain West. "Phones work both ways," he said. "I've had several phone calls from institutions in the past 24 hours."
> 
> Other conferences also are circling the Big 12. In a note to fans posted on the East Carolina athletic department Web site, athletic director Terry Holland said Conference USA also intends to make a play for the schools left behind in the Big 12. "Conference USA ," Holland wrote, "is rapidly preparing to compete for the remaining Big 12 members if the meltdown continues to a full implosion."
> ...


----------



## wilheldp_PE (Jun 11, 2010)

It wouldn't be a horrible thing for the Big East to pick up Missouri and Kansas from the rubble. But I don't think it will happen.

I'm actually surprised that the Big 10 didn't end up with more out of this deal. Just picking up Nebraska seems like a loss for them considering what the Pac 10 is getting out of the deal.


----------



## DVINNY (Jun 12, 2010)

Angstrom said:


> Anyhow, call me crazy, but I still think the Big 10 is going after Texas. There's a whole lot going on behind the scenes.


I agree fully. All isn't decided yet.



wilheldp_PE said:


> I'm actually surprised that the Big 10 didn't end up with more out of this deal. Just picking up Nebraska seems like a loss for them considering what the Pac 10 is getting out of the deal.


see quote above, if this is all Big10 gets, I agree with you. But I think this thing is far from finished.


----------



## ChemORME (Jun 13, 2010)

THe other impact the talking heads haven't seemed to really touch on is how this affects all the "small" teams such as track, diving, etc. Can a small sport such as women's golf in TX afford to make the trek to OR? Is that in their budget to do so?

When they discuss the big money teams like basketball and football - it's not as tough because they are chartering flights...but when you're in a 15 passenger bus for 20+ hours for a one day event...it's a lot tougher to justify these conference moves over huge distances.

Nebraska makes sense for the Big-10, even logisitically...as it's all still a days drive away (although Penn-State to Nebraska will be a helluva drive), but it's generally a feasible option. With some of the other choices....it just doesn't make as much sense!


----------



## Supe (Jun 14, 2010)

ChemORME said:


> THe other impact the talking heads haven't seemed to really touch on is how this affects all the "small" teams such as track, diving, etc. Can a small sport such as women's golf in TX afford to make the trek to OR? Is that in their budget to do so?




With the big-name schools... yes. When I was on Ohio State's rifle team, we were the smallest D1 sport there, and still had a massive budget all things considered, and that was in addition to all the free Nike crap from the endorsement deal. Hell, since I left, they even went ahead and made it a full scholarship team. Loading a team in a couple vans/coach buses is nothing for any of the schools in the power conferences. We did on occasion also have matches on "neutral locations" (usually when it was a multi-team event), so I'd imagine they could also do something similar.


----------



## mizzoueng (Jun 14, 2010)

I was under the impression that other sports did not have to compete in the same conference if they were not the required size. If the swim team at Mizzou is actually a D2 sized team, then why compete on the D1 level? Sure its a D1 school, but I thought there were team size requirements for the big conferences?

Also, Mizzou regents met again last night and are still "dedicated to the Big 12". They want to keep it going and make it a 10 team conference called the Big 12. There HAS to be something going on behind the scenes that we cannot see. Like Illinois and someone else going to jump from the Big 10 and join the Big 12. It makes NO sense that Mizzou would be loyal to a conference that is losing teams and has rumors that the entire Big 12 South is going to join the Pac-10. Pac-10 Commish is meeting with Texas, A&amp;M, Oklahoma, and Ok State today to discuss options.

I thought the talk about Mizzou, Kansas, and K-State going to the Mountain West were horrible. Sure I would love to see some Mizzou/Boise games on the Big Blue, but that is a long drive for the season.


----------



## Supe (Jun 14, 2010)

I REALLY doubt anyone from the Big 10 is going to jump ship. Why take a pay cut? Methinks Mizzou's "dedicated to the Big 12" is somewhere along the lines of "I did not have sexual relations with that woman."


----------



## roadwreck (Jun 14, 2010)

Mizzou is only saying they are dedicated to the Big 12 because they haven't gotten an invite to go anywhere else yet and they are hoping they don't get left out in the cold if Texas, A&amp;M, Oklahoma, &amp; OSU take off for another conference. Mizzou knows if they don't get an invite to the big 10 their only chance to stay in a relevant conference is to try to keep the Big 12 together.


----------



## Master slacker (Jun 14, 2010)

Chucktown PE said:


> Master slacker said:
> 
> 
> > Chucktown PE said:
> ...


Swimming and diving teams never make money. Never have and never will. But we sure as hell bring the athletic department GPAs up. Unfortunately, brains take a back seat to the sports that only serve to be the staging pad for professional sports and revenue with NO CARE (virtually) for prepping the athletes with job readiness for the majority who don't make the big time.



mizzoueng said:


> I was under the impression that other sports did not have to compete in the same conference if they were not the required size. If the swim team at Mizzou is actually a D2 sized team, then why compete on the D1 level? Sure its a D1 school, but I thought there were team size requirements for the big conferences?


At LSU, we always swam schools outside our conference and division. Every year or two we would swim against Western Kentucky, Colorado School of Mines, FIU, Florida A&amp;M, Delta State, etc... They all did the same thing, too. To my knowledge, there are no size requirements. If you're in the SEC, your records reflect SEC in the end.


----------



## EM_PS (Jun 14, 2010)

So the Big 10 is 12, and the Big 12 is 10...or something like that -



> AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- The Big 12 Conference, which has lost Nebraska and Colorado within the past week, is close to moving forward with its 10 remaining schools, The Associated Press has learned.
> A person with direct knowledge of discussions among the Big 12's remaining members said the University of Texas would be clear to set up its own TV network and keep all proceeds in exchange for remaining in the Big 12. The person, speaking on condition of anonymity because nothing has been finalized, stopped short of flatly predicting the league would survive, adding that details were still being worked out.
> 
> "Something could still happen," the person said Monday afternoon.
> ...


----------



## Supe (Jun 15, 2010)

And the PAC-10 is 11.

They basically told TX that by staying in the Big 12, they'll make more money by promising them their own "Longhorn TV" channel in the next few years.


----------



## Angstrom (Jun 15, 2010)

Supe said:


> And the PAC-10 is 11.
> 
> They basically told TX that by staying in the Big 12, they'll make more money by promising them their own "Longhorn TV" channel in the next few years.


I'm absolutely amazed that TX was able to hold it together. I wonder how stable the new Big 128 is going to be. TX was already more equal than others.


----------



## TouchDown (Jun 15, 2010)

Angstrom said:


> Supe said:
> 
> 
> > And the PAC-10 is 11.
> ...


Not stable at all.

The new TV deal looks to be lopsided to TX - which is fine, they are making their own demands because they are big enough to do it. They would much prefer to be in this situation than the PAC 10 where they wouldn't have as much say, that was just a power play on their part to call the Big 10's and the other schools that wanted away from Texas' bluff... (Mizzou and aTm).

So, here we are, I don't know what is good about this at all, but it's amazing to me what happens when people start talking money in college athletics.

I think Nebraska ended up with a sweet deal - they get to join a stable / very lucrative (both athletics and academics) conference, while getting away from UT.

Wonder if the Big 12 stays at 10 and holds together, if this stops "expansion" for a few more years...


----------



## EM_PS (Jun 15, 2010)

Big 10 got a good deal out of it. They got their 12th school in, one with a storied football program, and one which won't lower the Big 10's academic caliber (too much). Texas gets a push - they were already taking the lion's share of Big 12 revenue anyways, although now their conference is easier to dominate - Pac 10 really are the losers here...they get Colorado (not really big in athletics or academics - sorry) and now they got 11 teams - so much for their conference championship games.


----------



## Supe (Jun 17, 2010)

Utah has signed on with the PAC-10.


----------



## Slugger926 (Jun 17, 2010)

Jerry Jones and maybe T. Boone are coming up with a business plan to pull Arkansas and Notre Dame into the Big 12. That would be huge for the Big 12.


----------



## TouchDown (Jun 17, 2010)

Slugger926 said:


> Jerry Jones and maybe T. Boone are coming up with a business plan to pull Arkansas and Notre Dame into the Big 12. That would be huge for the Big 12.


Good luck with that one... Maybe they can convince Alabama and Tennessee to come along as well.

[/sarcasm]


----------



## Freon (Jun 17, 2010)

I think there is a lot of drama still to go. Will the Pac-Whatever sweeten the deal; for UT and OU? Maybe the SEC will? Why would the "Big-10" take in a power program from Nebraksa that could dominate the conference? It will get more enteresting as the days pass. Remember, it is always about the money....

And yes, I am drinking tonight.....


----------



## Supe (Jun 18, 2010)

Freon said:


> I think there is a lot of drama still to go. Will the Pac-Whatever sweeten the deal; for UT and OU? Maybe the SEC will? Why would the "Big-10" take in a power program from Nebraksa that could dominate the conference? It will get more enteresting as the days pass. Remember, it is always about the money....
> And yes, I am drinking tonight.....


1) Gives the big name schools more "quality" wins without having to rely on non-conference games.

2) Nebraska is going to dominate Ohio State, Michigan, and Wisconsin?


----------



## MechGuy (Jun 18, 2010)

Supe said:


> Freon said:
> 
> 
> > I think there is a lot of drama still to go. Will the Pac-Whatever sweeten the deal; for UT and OU? Maybe the SEC will? Why would the "Big-10" take in a power program from Nebraksa that could dominate the conference? It will get more enteresting as the days pass. Remember, it is always about the money....
> ...



That's what people said about Penn State 20 years ago when they joined the conference, that they would dominate and it would be the end of the days where the OSU-UM game determined the BIG 10 champ. Well in that time PSU has won or shared all of 3 Big 10 titles. So much for that theory.


----------



## DVINNY (Jun 18, 2010)

My Nittany Lions are just getting geared up. I will enjoy watching them whip Nebraska's ass on a regular basis.


----------



## EM_PS (Jun 19, 2010)

heh. i imagine Rich Rod will be outta here by time 'huskers are playing in Big 10 (yet another team for him to SUCK against!)


----------



## Slugger926 (Jun 19, 2010)

EM_PS said:


> heh. i imagine Rich Rod will be outta here by time 'huskers are playing in Big 10 (yet another team for him to SUCK against!)


It is going to take time for Nebraska to build back up to a quality team. They were dominate in the Big 8 due to recruiting TX, but not having to play against TX. Now they won't be playing down south close to TX, so it will be hard for them to recruit TX.


----------

