Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

[Muck]

At no time did I say it wasn't our fault! I was trying to point out what you proved just now.

You have based your opinion of Texas on forum driven boredom/hatred without knowing facts... [/i]

I'm probably the last person you want to get into an argument with about 'facts'.

What Longhorns need to understand is that copy & pasting long lists of various votes & numbers as evidence of 'facts' as to the motivations for what has happened completely misses the point.

When the B1G makes large scale decisions you'll almost always seen that the COP/C made the decision with a 'unanimous vote'. What people don't realize is that is mainly just a PR move. The real votes are often far more divisive...but once the writing is on the wall (and the relevant points have been made) everyone gets back together with a final vote of solidarity for public consumption. That doesn't mean that everyone really was 'all in' during the discussions (or deep down is happy with the final decision).

What you view as facts are really nothing more than justifications for your opinions. Until you (by 'you' I mean the species Homo Sapien Tejanicas) understand that others view things differently & you need to account for their opinion you just continue to reinforce the outside opinion regarding your close mindedness.

When a large part of your argument is "you'd do it too if you could" you're validating what various outside parties believe you to be...and that you're trying so hard to pretend you aren't.

Well on the positive side at least no Aggies have shown up yet to shout "Hey look at us! We're important!".

If everyone who has the opportunity to get away from you does so at the first opportunity (their public statements non-withstanding) eventually it becomes clear that it really is you and not them.

 

[Gaffords]

I'm probably the last person you want to get into an argument with about 'facts'.

Fair enough! Obviously we can control all the votes in the BIG 12 by threatening OU and A&M and Neb with leaving (not that anyone ever as much as hinted we have done this). Other than leaving what next? bodily harm?

I will do one better for you... I will let the KSU fans explain it to you:

Originally posted by Armistead101:
Yes the prop 48 was huge to nebraska

Yeah, and I bet in your little self-absorbed Big Red World, you didn't know that vote went 10-2, not 11-1. K-State was also dependent on Prop 48 athletes, and sided with NU. What did that earn us? Contempt from a-holes like you because you didn't get your way. Unlike you, we didn't pout for 15 years about the outcome, because we understand how democracy works. No Prop 48s? OK. We'll adapt, and focus on JuCos instead. Result? KSU enjoyed unparalleled success. NU with their breath held and their arms folded, and watched their Big Red Empire slowly crumble...

Yes, the league going south was huge to the Huskers

Again with the Big Red self-absorption. That vote went 7-5 (not 11-1), all schools around KC voted against it. You have to ask why the Oklahoma and Colorado schools sided with the Texans, however? CU was especially po'd that NU acted in the Big 8 the way NU thinks UT acts in the Big 12, and saw that as an opportunity to "get back" at what they saw as the KC Mafia. I'm still not happy about that, but unlike you, I still understand how democracy works in a conference.

Yes....OU leaving NU the rivalry was huge

Why blame the whole Big 12? That's an OU issue. It seems to me the only team you should REALLY be mad at is OU, which ironically is the only Big 12 team you all seem to like for some odd reason. You had the opportunity to ask for permanent N/S rivals like the SEC does with permanent E/W rivals. OU said "no". You could have scheduled OU as non-conference games, the Sooners said "no". Makes me wonder why OU doesn't want to play you all any more? Perhaps now we know why.

Yes the game never CCG never coming back to the North was huge

Here's where your selfishness interferes and ultimately ruins the Big 12. The financial impact of the games in Dallas dwarfs them being in KC. Everybody wins. But you all don't apparently need the "money" even though the smaller schools are desperate for every dollar. You want only what's good for NU, which I guess is usually ok, but when what's good for NU HARMS the conference you're in, perhaps you did the right thing by leaving. You all were the classic conference "team cancer".

Yes, being on pay per view was terrible for Nebraska

You know what you all told us when we complained we weren't on TV as often as you and OU were? "Get better". Good advice, I say.


Yes, all these things were huge....and Nebraska could never vote for an equal share if the other 3 big schools were going to get theirs

This makes no sense. Try again, using something other than "Husker logic"?

An MU and CU were always threatening to leave....for years
This might be your only logical response. Yes, that's true, so perhaps we should thank the Big 12 for delaying what ultimately would have happened to the Big 8. Both MU and CU were trying to find ways to leave the conference as far back as the 1980s. OU publicly talked about going independent. Both OU and NU tried to kick K-State out of the Big 8 and invite Arkansas in the mid-80s. The Big 8 was not the "happy family" you claim it to have been. This has obviously been exposed in the past few years.

http://kansasstate.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=10&tid=147068766&mid=147068766&sid=889&style=2

We are not blameless nor are the the sole root of all evil!

Anything else?

 

[OSU_D/]

UConn president Susan Herbst is aggressively pursuing membership in the ACC to become the 15th or 16th member institution in the conference, according to a source with direct knowledge of UConn's situation.

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/s...ies-aggressively-seeking-acc-move-source-says

Looks like if the Big 10 expands (and perhaps we don't) we get one of Rutgers and ND.

If we had to take 4 and going on the available rumors my 4 would be...
Rutgers or ND, Toronto, Mizzou (this makes me sick to my stomach that Mizzou could be the 2nd biggest name of the 4) and a team to be named later b/c Delany is letting other conferences get the schools they want.

 

[Saw31]

Not sure why it matters who gets the "blame" for anything. These are business decisions. Texas was in a position where it felt like it was carrying some dead weight. I have no problem with them wanting to maximize their opportunities. If they were to join the B1G, there is no dead weight. There is no "we'll leave and your conference will fail, give us more" threats to make. There's none of that. Business-wise, Texas would prosper, the B1G would prosper, and more hookers and blow for everyone...

 

[Buckeyefrankmp]

"Hello, is this the President of the University of Toronto? Yes? This is Jim Delany calling."

I brought them up when this whole thing started years ago. It would open up the whole country of Canada. Brilliant. Do they have a football team?

 

[Muck]

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/s...ies-aggressively-seeking-acc-move-source-says

FWIW A lot of enemies were made in the ACC during the last round of expansion when UConn filed a lawsuit.

Time/money heals wounds and all that but I'm pretty certain Boston College at the least will fight pretty hard to keep the Huskies out.

If we had to take 4 and going on the available rumors my 4 would be...
Rutgers or ND, Toronto, Mizzou (this makes me sick to my stomach that Mizzou could be the 2nd biggest name of the 4) and a team to be named later b/c Delany is letting other conferences get the schools they want.

What matters is that Big Ten gets the schools that IT wants. Who cares where the rest end up?

Syracuse, Pitt, WVU....none of them matter as far as the B1G is concerned.

Anything else?

No certainly not. Your posting an article by a Kansan with an ax to grind against Nebraska very clearly proved that Texas had absolutely nothing to do with Oklahoma, A&M and anyone with anything close to another alternative wanting to distance themselves from the Longhorns.

Not sure why it matters who gets the "blame" for anything. These are business decisions.

For whatever reason Texans seem to have some major insecurity issues.

I brought them up when this whole thing started years ago. It would open up the whole country of Canada. Brilliant. Do they have a football team?

LINK

 

[OSU_D/]

What matters is that Big Ten gets the schools that IT wants. Who cares where the rest end up?

Agreed, but some of the schools the Big 10 wants are seemingly going to go elsewhere.


And on a different topic:

http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/index.ssf/2011/09/rutgers_remains_in_contact_wit.html

Rutgers has been involved in talks with the ACC about possible membership over the past two days and its lines of communications with the Big Ten have remained open and "are active," according to a highly-placed college official.

 

[knapplc]

Pac-12 presidents on teleconf this afternoon to discuss Texas. Looking like Longhorns are in. Would go with OU, OSU, TT.

From Blair Kerkoff's Twitter.



PS - I'd refute the nonsense the Texas visitor is saying, but I don't have the patience. If I need to, I will.

 

[Muck]

Agreed, but some of the schools the Big 10 wants are seemingly going to go elsewhere.

Like who? Texas?

If anything Pitt & Syracuse to the ACC makes UT to the B1G more likely (and it's always been a long shot)...and the same in regards to ND (seeing as the Big East is now a dead conference walking).

 

[OSU_D/]

Like who? Texas?

If anything Pitt & Syracuse to the ACC makes UT to the B1G more likely (and it's always been a long shot)...and the same in regards to ND (seeing as the Big East is now a dead conference walking).

UT is going to the PAC. By more likely my understanding is the chances of UT to the Big 10 just went from 1% to 2% due to the ACC news.

 

[Muck]

PS - I'd refute the nonsense the Texas visitor is saying, but I don't have the patience. If I need to, I will.

Which reminds that I still need to reply in regards to Pearlman brilliant presentation to the AAU that actually managed to turn votes against Nebraska. :p

UT is going to the PAC. By more likely my understanding is the chances of UT to the Big 10 just went from 1% to 2% due to the ACC news.

So then what teams that the B1G is legitimately interested in are now off the table due the ACC's move?

 

[Muck]

ACC begins seismic shift, SEC & B!G will finish it

The ACC officially pulled out a cap gun Sunday, preening and posturing its proactive shot in college football expansion for all to see.

Careful fellas, don?t shoot your eye out. The big guns are up next.

While ACC commissioner John Swofford announced the ho-hum additions of Pittsburgh and Syracuse, the commissioners of the Big Three BCS conferences ? the SEC, Pac-12 and Big Ten ? are primed to drastically change college sports as soon as this week.

The ACC accomplished two things with yet another surprising raid of the Big East: It assured itself ? and not the Big East -- of a spot in the superconference era. And it was the first shot in a messy, get-yours process that could include the ACC itself getting cannibalized before it?s all over.

?In all my years of college athletics administration,? Swofford said, ?I?ve never seen this level of uncertainty and instability.?

And here?s the scary part: Mike Slive, the SEC commissioner, and Jim Delany, the Big Ten commissioner, have been eerily quiet during the process.

While Texas desperately tries to prove it?s not the reason for the madness; while Oklahoma defiantly tries to show it?s not Texas? lapdog; while the Pac-12 tries to convince us that expansion is about academic fit and not television money; the SEC and Big Ten are in the process of getting down and dirty.

The gloves are off in expansion.

.../cont/...

 

[OSU_D/]

Which reminds that I still need to reply in regards to Pearlman brilliant presentation to the AAU that actually managed to turn votes against Nebraska. :p



So then what teams that the B1G is legitimately interested in are now off the table due the ACC's move?

Well, if the article is correct Rutgers and the Big 10 have been in on-going talks but now Rutgers is keen on the ACC. That would qualify as the Big 10 having legitimate interest in my book. You also never know about the others schools how real or not the interest is.

 

[muffler dragon]

Fuck Rutgers.

 

[MaliBuckeye]

Rutgers? Wow... really? Are we sure they'll have an athletic department in three years?

Lawmakers question Rutgers' athletic spending

Rutgers leads nation in athletics subsidies.