If we go 16, the other conferences will go 16, and if we make a push for TX and OK, you can bet the SEC will too because they have A&M already.
If we were to get TX and OU, I could see the SEC taking Kansas (for basketball and the border war) and maybe either Kansas State or Oklahoma State. Texas Tech is fucked because they’re in the middle of nowhere, no one wants Iowa State or Baylor (for different reasons), West Virginia would make more sense for the ACC, TCU isn’t really a big time player...which leaves Oklahoma State without bedlam (not much of a target), Kansas State which is meh, and Kansas for basketball.
The PAC is at 12 and has made no secret in adding 4 to be 16... eyeing a package deal for TTech and Texas. TTech is kinda Austin's directional yesman.
Nothing. Adding Maryland (a founding member of the ACC) and Rutgers (ouside of NYC $$$, why?) really made me shake my head.
If expansion is a MUST, then to me it would be Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri and Iowa State. They most closely match what the B1G is.
I realize I am the only person on earth who would want that.
None of those states have anyone worth recruiting. This is again why adding VA and UNC makes more sense.... though there's cultural issues there too.
We're better off staying at 14 than adding any of those Wannabe12 filler schools.
I could actually envision a scenario with 3 16 team leagues, where we got OU and Oklahoma State, the SEC gets Texas and Kansas, the ACC adds West Virginia and Notre Dame, and then the PAC 12 is left to figure out what leftovers they want to add to Colorado and Utah...could be BYU, Boise State, Texas Tech, Baylor, who knows. But the rest are AAC or MW fodder.
Hell no to OkSt... OU is bad enough.
OkSt adds nothing. No markets. No recruits. Shit academics. They're another Iowa at best.
The conference doesnt need more underwhelming shit teams in the West that have to import talent... and especially not ones outside AAU.
Upvote
0