The Big 12 expansion groundswell

[myboynoah]

I hope this is true, but why rush this thing at this point?

Embedded Tweet

[Applejack]

Cal and Stanford should definitely be atop the BIGXII's list (I mean, they just took Arizona). But I doubt the schools would want in; Cal should, though.

[UVACoug]

Maybe I'm being too much of a conspiracy theorist, but it seems pretty obvious to me that UO, UW, Cal, and Stanford got some kind of assurance from the Big Ten that they would be added soon back when USC/UCLA got added. Those schools have shown no concern about the future of the Pac12, or about their own future, at any point in the last 13 months. At the same time, there are credible reports that they were not willing to sign on to a long term grant of rights with the Pac 12, which is the biggest reason (IMO) why the Pac 12 could never get a TV deal done.

If I remember correctly, when USC/UCLA joined the Big Ten, the consensus in the media was that the four other coastal schools would be added soon after. And then the Big Ten decided to "take a break." We never heard any definitive statement from the Big Ten that they were not adding the other west coast schools though. It was always some kind of vague statement about focusing on other things at the moment.

I'm convinced that the story about the Big Ten not wanting to be seen as destroying the Pac12 conference is 100% true. They did not want the blowback, while at the same time knowing that eventually they would take the four other schools. They were hoping the four corner schools would see the writing on the wall and bolt to the Big 12 so they could point the blame at Yormark. But ASU and Utah were too stupid and/or arrogant to get the message, so they fought it tooth and nail. The Big 10 left the Pac12 hang out there in the wind until the Big Ten had no choice but to blow it up to avoid the schools they wanted signing on to a new GOR.

I think Colorado saw through this nonsense pretty early on, and them leaving probably sped up the end game a little by forcing the remaining Pac12 presidents to demand that Kliavkoff present whatever terrible deal he could come up with. But in the end, it was the Big Ten that moved first and put the final nail in the Pac12 conference and no one should forget that. They didn't NEED to take Oregon and Washington. They always wanted to. They just didn't want to get the blame for what that would do to their formal Pac12 "allies."

I think Stanford and Cal will also join the B1G shortly, as has always been the plan. That explains why there is no sense of urgency from either of those teams to find a new conference home. They already found ... over a year ago.

Now its time for Yormark to continue to play the smart game and add Arizona and no one else. Let ASU and Utah eat what they've sowed.

[tooblue]

Maybe I'm being too much of a conspiracy theorist, but it seems pretty obvious to me that UO, UW, Cal, and Stanford got some kind of assurance from the Big Ten that they would be added soon back when USC/UCLA got added. Those schools have shown no concern about the future of the Pac12, or about their own future, at any point in the last 13 months. At the same time, there are credible reports that they were not willing to sign on to a long term grant of rights with the Pac 12, which is the biggest reason (IMO) why the Pac 12 could never get a TV deal done.

If I remember correctly, when USC/UCLA joined the Big Ten, the consensus in the media was that the four other coastal schools would be added soon after. And then the Big Ten decided to "take a break." We never heard any definitive statement from the Big Ten that they were not adding the other west coast schools though. It was always some kind of vague statement about focusing on other things at the moment.

I'm convinced that the story about the Big Ten not wanting to be seen as destroying the Pac12 conference is 100% true. They did not want the blowback, while at the same time knowing that eventually they would take the four other schools. They were hoping the four corner schools would see the writing on the wall and bolt to the Big 12 so they could point the blame at Yormark. But ASU and Utah were too stupid and/or arrogant to get the message, so they fought it tooth and nail. The Big 10 left the Pac12 hang out there in the wind until the Big Ten had no choice but to blow it up to avoid the schools they wanted signing on to a new GOR.

I think Colorado saw through this nonsense pretty early on, and them leaving probably sped up the end game a little by forcing the remaining Pac12 presidents to demand that Kliavkoff present whatever terrible deal he could come up with. But in the end, it was the Big Ten that moved first and put the final nail in the Pac12 conference and no one should forget that. They didn't NEED to take Oregon and Washington. They always wanted to. They just didn't want to get the blame for what that would do to their formal Pac12 "allies."

I think Stanford and Cal will also join the B1G shortly, as has always been the plan. That explains why there is no sense of urgency from either of those teams to find a new conference home. They already found ... over a year ago.

Now its time for Yormark to continue to play the smart game and add Arizona and no one else. Let ASU and Utah eat what they've sowed.

Yup ... and there is no reason to rush to add ASU or Utah. The next shoe to drop is Florida State:

https://www.cbssports.com/college-fo...-trustee-says/

The article is a couple of days old, but todays Washington and Oregon news could only ramp up action in the ACC. Utah adds nothing. The right ACC teams are worth waiting on.

[Donuthole]

Maybe I'm being too much of a conspiracy theorist, but it seems pretty obvious to me that UO, UW, Cal, and Stanford got some kind of assurance from the Big Ten that they would be added soon back when USC/UCLA got added. Those schools have shown no concern about the future of the Pac12, or about their own future, at any point in the last 13 months. At the same time, there are credible reports that they were not willing to sign on to a long term grant of rights with the Pac 12, which is the biggest reason (IMO) why the Pac 12 could never get a TV deal done.

If I remember correctly, when USC/UCLA joined the Big Ten, the consensus in the media was that the four other coastal schools would be added soon after. And then the Big Ten decided to "take a break." We never heard any definitive statement from the Big Ten that they were not adding the other west coast schools though. It was always some kind of vague statement about focusing on other things at the moment.

I'm convinced that the story about the Big Ten not wanting to be seen as destroying the Pac12 conference is 100% true. They did not want the blowback, while at the same time knowing that eventually they would take the four other schools. They were hoping the four corner schools would see the writing on the wall and bolt to the Big 12 so they could point the blame at Yormark. But ASU and Utah were too stupid and/or arrogant to get the message, so they fought it tooth and nail. The Big 10 left the Pac12 hang out there in the wind until the Big Ten had no choice but to blow it up to avoid the schools they wanted signing on to a new GOR.

I think Colorado saw through this nonsense pretty early on, and them leaving probably sped up the end game a little by forcing the remaining Pac12 presidents to demand that Kliavkoff present whatever terrible deal he could come up with. But in the end, it was the Big Ten that moved first and put the final nail in the Pac12 conference and no one should forget that. They didn't NEED to take Oregon and Washington. They always wanted to. They just didn't want to get the blame for what that would do to their formal Pac12 "allies."

I think Stanford and Cal will also join the B1G shortly, as has always been the plan. That explains why there is no sense of urgency from either of those teams to find a new conference home. They already found ... over a year ago.

Now its time for Yormark to continue to play the smart game and add Arizona and no one else. Let ASU and Utah eat what they've sowed.

Corvalis is closer to the coast than Eugene. NYK.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

The Bay Area schools, if they want to keep football, have three options: 1. Go to Big 10 with a severely reduced payout, literally half of whatever UW and Oregon are getting; 2. Go to Big 12, or 3. Go to the Mountain West.

The tweet from McMurphy or Thamel (can't remember) mentioned that AZ is basically going but that the Big 12 is now looking at their other options. It seems like those other options are the Bay area schools if they can't get something done with the Big 10. I know they don't want to go to the Big 12, but unless they give up football, what are their options? The MWC is worse.

[Goatnapper'96]

Yup ... and there is no reason to rush to add ASU or Utah. The next shoe to drop is Florida State:

https://www.cbssports.com/college-fo...-trustee-says/

The article is a couple of days old, but todays Washington and Oregon news could only ramp up action in the ACC. Utah adds nothing. The right ACC teams are worth waiting on.

So if Cal and Stanford are heading to the B1G, all for USC not wanting to continue to share the increasingly less and less West Coast recruiting grounds, then that puts it at 20 teams.

So with Notre Dame, and the potential unravelling of the ACC, still ahead what is the optimal number of teams these conferences want?

I kind of wonder if 22 is the optimal number. 11 teams per division. 10 division games. One cross over game and then one game vs a team from a different BCS conference for a schedule of 12. The conference championships then build into the 12 team playoff.

Maybee I have OCD and want it all so symmetrical.

[tooblue]

So if Cal and Stanford are heading to the B1G, all for USC not wanting to continue to share the increasingly less and less West Coast recruiting grounds, then that puts it at 20 teams.

So with Notre Dame, and the potential unravelling of the ACC, still ahead what is the optimal number of teams these conferences want?

I kind of wonder if 22 is the optimal number. 11 teams per division. 10 division games. One cross over game and then one game vs a team from a different BCS conference for a schedule of 12. The conference championships then build into the 12 team playoff.

Maybee I have OCD and want it all so symmetrical.

Florida State University taps JPMorgan to help find potential investors

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/04/flor...investors.html

The Big 12 should not rush to add ASU and Utah (unless it is at a significant discount). They should wait Florida State and the ACC out.

[Applejack]

Florida State University taps JPMorgan to help find potential investors

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/04/flor...investors.html

The Big 12 should not rush to add ASU and Utah (unless it is at a significant discount). They should wait Florida State and the ACC out.

I don't think florida state wants out of the acc so that they can join the BIGXII. But maybe they want to renew the Cincinnati rivalry.

[tooblue]

I don't think florida state wants out of the acc so that they can join the BIGXII. But maybe they want to renew the Cincinnati rivalry.

Of course Florida State is not leaving to join the Big12. They have eyes on the SEC or B1G. But if/when they leave, it is the next domino. Clemson thinks too highly of themselves to stand pat. And Notre Dame will be painted into a corner. There are ACC teams worth waiting on that offer much more value than Utah or ASU.

EDIT: I am not saying this to troll or be mean. It's just the reality of the situation. If ASU and Utah go to the Big 12 at a discount, then yes: invite them.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Someone recently shared internal rankings by the B1G and Stanford was in the third tier. With Utah. It’s time to abandon this dumb pretext that academics are the driver in this stuff. They added Oregon for heavens sake.

[Applejack]

Of course Florida State is not leaving to join the Big12. They have eyes on the SEC or B1G. But if/when they leave, it is the next domino. Clemson thinks too highly of themselves to stand pat. And Notre Dame will be painted into a corner. There are ACC teams worth waiting on that offer much more value than Utah.

Oh, you're playing the really long game. Yeah, you could possibly grab bc, nc st, Va tech, et Al in 2055.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

Of course Florida State is not leaving to join the Big12. They have eyes on the SEC or B1G. But if/when they leave, it is the next domino. Clemson thinks too highly of themselves to stand pat. And Notre Dame will be painted into a corner. There are ACC teams worth waiting on that offer much more value than Utah.

Even if Florida State and Clemson leave, that doesn't mean an end to the ACC. A school basically has to make enough extra money in the SEC/Big 10 to pay a loan they'd be taking out to pay the exit fee to the ACC. I don't think anyone beyond FSU and Clemson would even consider doing that.

[tooblue]

Oh, you're playing the really long game. Yeah, you could possibly grab bc, nc st, Va tech, et Al in 2055.

Speaking of the long game, there is a real threat that the SEC and B1G create their own super league with their own playoff and championship. The Big 12 though currently enjoying a position of strength, has to be looking at ways to thwart that potentiality. Basketball could be the key.

[USUC]

Embedded Tweet