Jump to content

The Big XII should add these two schools...


LawDawg
 Share

Recommended Posts

IMO, a good scenario for the Big XII would be to add TCU (as a football power & Dallas TV market) and Rice (the most prestigious school in Texas - #17 in the country) and place them with the rest of the Texas schools in one Division. Both TCU and Rice were part of the defunct Southwest Conference alongside Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, and Baylor many years ago.

South:

Texas

Texas A&M

Texas Tech

TCU

Baylor

Rice

North:

Oklahoma

Oklahoma State

Kansas

Kansas State

Missouri

Iowa State

Oklahoma and Oklahoma State would move to the North, but this way, you keep the geographic integrity of the divisions and most importantly, you can have Oklahoma and Texas meet in a championship game (which was impossible before).

Just a thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that would just add more power to texas....the reason why Nebraska left

Nebraska left because it was attracted to the money-making potential of the Big Ten, not because of Texas. It was ALL about the money. Besides, Nebraska's had a hard enough time winning the Big XII North, let alone worrying about Texas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably would not work bacause UT owns Dallas (I know- I live there). Why split revenues in a market you already control? You idea makes sense from a football perspective, but alas, CF is now all about $$.

It's true that Texas dominates the state and that the addition of Rice would probably have little effect on the Dallas market, but it was reported over and over again that Texas (had it decided to leave the Big XII) was attracted to the Pac-10 (and not the SEC) because of the prestige of the conference with all its research universities. Rice University is the most prestigious school in the state of Texas, and I only suggested Rice because it's the type of institution that Texas wants to align itself with, as well as the fact that they're old Southwest Conference foes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, a good scenario for the Big XII would be to add TCU (as a football power & Dallas TV market) and Rice (the most prestigious school in Texas - #17 in the country) and place them with the rest of the Texas schools in one Division. Both TCU and Rice were part of the defunct Southwest Conference alongside Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, and Baylor many years ago.

South:

Texas

Texas A&M

Texas Tech

TCU

Baylor

Rice

North:

Oklahoma

Oklahoma State

Kansas

Kansas State

Missouri

Iowa State

Oklahoma and Oklahoma State would move to the North, but this way, you keep the geographic integrity of the divisions and most importantly, you can have Oklahoma and Texas meet in a championship game (which was impossible before).

Just a thought.

That's not a good thing. It would make the Red River Shootout meaningless if the losing team knew, especially now that Nebraska is gone, that they would get a second shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not a good thing. It would make the Red River Shootout meaningless if the losing team knew, especially now that Nebraska is gone, that they would get a second shot.

Though their success has tapered off in recent years, Florida State and Miami always meet during the regular season and have the potential to meet again in the ACC Championship game. I don't think this possibilty diminishes the fan ferver on either side. It's still a heated rivalry. But that's just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though their success has tapered off in recent years, Florida State and Miami always meet during the regular season and have the potential to meet again in the ACC Championship game. I don't think this possibilty diminishes the fan ferver on either side. It's still a heated rivalry. But that's just my opinion.

I remember a lot of people heavily criticizing the ACC for setting up the divisions with Miami and Florida State in separate divisions, especially since they're both in the same state, which makes even less sense for them to be in different divisions.

Remember a couple of years ago when Miami and Florida State strangely ended up playing each other in a bowl game and the fans of both schools went nuts about how they didn't want to play each other again and how everyone criticized the bowl selection committee for pairing them up?

It'd be the same thing. Nobody is going to complain about being in a Conference Championship Game obviously, but it lessens the annual, traditional rivalry that you have with a school during the regular season when you have to play again. That's why Oklahoma and Nebraska stopped playing annually, because they had the chance to meet up in the Big XII Title Game every year. At least they thought that when they moved to 12 teams and created the CCG.

It'd be like UGA playing Auburn in the last game of the season and then having to play them the next week in the SEC Title Game. Nobody would complain about being there, but it'd kinda be like eh, we've played these guys before.

The Big Ten wouldn't put Michigan and Ohio State in separate divisions for that very reason, nor would the Pac-10 put USC and UCLA in separate divisions, but the ACC has proven time and a again that when it comes to football, they're a ritard.

Edited by Testasparo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember a lot of people heavily criticizing the ACC for setting up the divisions with Miami and Florida State in separate divisions, especially since they're both in the same state, which makes even less sense for them to be in different divisions.

Remember a couple of years ago when Miami and Florida State strangely ended up playing each other in a bowl game and the fans of both schools went nuts about how they didn't want to play each other again and how everyone criticized the bowl selection committee for pairing them up?

It'd be the same thing. Nobody is going to complain about being in a Conference Championship Game obviously, but it lessens the annual, traditional rivalry that you have with a school during the regular season when you have to play again. That's why Oklahoma and Nebraska stopped playing annually, because they had the chance to meet up in the Big XII Title Game every year. At least they thought that when they moved to 12 teams and created the CCG.

It'd be like UGA playing Auburn in the last game of the season and then having to play them the next week in the SEC Title Game. Nobody would complain about being there, but it'd kinda be like eh, we've played these guys before.

The Big Ten wouldn't put Michigan and Ohio State in separate divisions for that very reason, nor would the Pac-10 put USC and UCLA in separate divisions, but the ACC has proven time and a again that when it comes to football, they're a ritard.

You bring up good points. But in your analogy, I think the overriding factor in keeping Michigan/ Ohio State and USC/UCLA in the same division would be primarily geographic concerns and not the fear that they'd get tired of playing eachother.

Besides, even if Texas and Oklahoma were placed in separate divisions, I think the Red River Rivalry would still be heated every year because there's no guarantee they'd meet again in the championship game, especially if one or both teams come in with a loss or two. Alot of factors need to be perfectly in place for a rematch to happen at season's end.

In any event, I understand the legitimate arguments both for and against splitting Texas and OU. I think both arguments have teeth.

BTW, you mispelled "******." :P ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nebraska left because it was attracted to the money-making potential of the Big Ten, not because of Texas. It was ALL about the money. Besides, Nebraska's had a hard enough time winning the Big XII North, let alone worrying about Texas.

no that was just part of it. Nebraska finally got tired of Texass bossing everyone around and them getting everything. just look at what they will get when the new TV deal comes out, and now that CU and NU left only tu OU and AnM get the money from the penalty fees. come on, the Big 12 wont last more than 5 years once the other teams get fed up with tu's BS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's clear texas and oklahoma want an easy road to the ncaa championship game.. don't expect them to add 2 more teams.. this conference is on life support.. this is embarrassing.. teams running away from competition.

Whats going to happen is the big 12 is going to be so weak that it will be easier to get a bid to the national championship if you are from the Mountain West than the Big 12. One loss and Texas will have 0 chance at the title game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's clear texas and oklahoma want an easy road to the ncaa championship game.. don't expect them to add 2 more teams.. this conference is on life support.. this is embarrassing.. teams running away from competition.

LOL! Colorado sure as **** didn't make this conference that much tougher and Nebraska sold their traditions and competition out for money from a "smart" conference that can't even count their own number of teams.

Oklahoma's 2010 schedule:

Utah State

Florida State (top 25 team)

Air Force

@ Cincinnati (top 25 team)

Texas (top 25 team)

Iowa State

Missouri (top 25 team)

Colorado

@ Texas A&M

Texas Tech (top 25 team)

@ Baylor

@ Oklahoma State (top 25 team)

Georgia's 2010 schedule:

Louisiana-Lafayette

@ South Carolina

Arkansas (top 25 team)

@ Mississippi State

@ Colorado

Tennessee

Vanderbilt

@ Kentucky

Florida (top 25 team)

Idaho State

@ Auburn (top 25 team)

Georgia Tech (top 25 team)

What a joke of a schedule! Talking about "easy road..." LOL look at UGA's schedule! If you guys don't have at least nine wins then that is embarassing for sure...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL! Colorado sure as **** didn't make this conference that much tougher and Nebraska sold their traditions and competition out for money from a "smart" conference that can't even count their own number of teams.

Oklahoma's 2010 schedule:

Utah State

Florida State (top 25 team)

Air Force

@ Cincinnati (top 25 team)

Texas (top 25 team)

Iowa State

Missouri (top 25 team)

Colorado

@ Texas A&M

Texas Tech (top 25 team)

@ Baylor

@ Oklahoma State (top 25 team)

Georgia's 2010 schedule:

Louisiana-Lafayette

@ South Carolina

Arkansas (top 25 team)

@ Mississippi State

@ Colorado

Tennessee

Vanderbilt

@ Kentucky

Florida (top 25 team)

Idaho State

@ Auburn (top 25 team)

Georgia Tech (top 25 team)

What a joke of a schedule! Talking about "easy road..." LOL look at UGA's schedule! If you guys don't have at least nine wins then that is embarassing for sure...

WOW. You really pulled up the 2010? They are discussing Oklahoma and Texas schedule next year with the conference changed in affect. Pulling up this year schedule is not a valid point. UGA's schedule is not as easy as it seems. Do your research!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL! Colorado sure as **** didn't make this conference that much tougher and Nebraska sold their traditions and competition out for money from a "smart" conference that can't even count their own number of teams.

Oklahoma's 2010 schedule:

Utah State

Florida State (top 25 team)

Air Force

@ Cincinnati (top 25 team)

Texas (top 25 team)

Iowa State

Missouri (top 25 team)

Colorado

@ Texas A&M

Texas Tech (top 25 team)

@ Baylor

@ Oklahoma State (top 25 team)

Georgia's 2010 schedule:

Louisiana-Lafayette

@ South Carolina

Arkansas (top 25 team)

@ Mississippi State

@ Colorado

Tennessee

Vanderbilt

@ Kentucky

Florida (top 25 team)

Idaho State

@ Auburn (top 25 team)

Georgia Tech (top 25 team)

What a joke of a schedule! Talking about "easy road..." LOL look at UGA's schedule! If you guys don't have at least nine wins then that is embarassing for sure...

robby the above doesn't follow what we are discussing at all. where are we talking about this year? we are talking about your joke of a conference after nebraska leaves and you no longer have a title game. Texas has many reasons for wanting to keep the big 12 together since it gives them an easier path to the ncaa championship game and it keeps texas a&m out of the sec and the sec out of texas. I brought up oklahoma because they will benefit as well from this move because it means one game a year they have to win in order to get the conference title, but they just followed texas who was the team behind most of this with talking with the pac-10 more than 6 months ago. Texas/Oklahoma is the only game in that conference that means a darn thing. texas needs to actually schedule some out of conference games unlike they did two years ago (at least oklahoma schedules some tough ooc games which can't be said for texas). what has happened to your conference is an embarrassment to college football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WOW. You really pulled up the 2010? They are discussing Oklahoma and Texas schedule next year with the conference changed in affect. Pulling up this year schedule is not a valid point. UGA's schedule is not as easy as it seems. Do your research!

yeah what he posted doesn't have anything to do with this. what we are discussing will be the case when nebraska does leave the conference not before and when they no longer have a title game. Playing an sec schedule and playing 2 bcs conference schools is a tough schedule to play especially having to play halfway across country on the road, but as i said above that has zero to do with what is being discussed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...