Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So you'd prefer another Rutgers or Maryland?Pass, dont need another fading brand stinking up the west.
Nope. UT or UNCSo you'd prefer another Rutgers or Maryland?
maybe part of this would to restore the NU - OU rivalry, what about when psu joined , there was no rumors about Pitt which is a much better school academically than the BIG12 ones, but I know it's about the TV markets.So you'd prefer another Rutgers or Maryland?
maybe part of this would to restore the NU - OU rivalry, what about when psu joined , there was no rumors about Pitt which is a much better school academically than the BIG12 ones, but I know it's about the TV markets.
I was on the faculty at Texas A&M at the time the Aggies left the B12 for the SEC. A&M was furious about the start-up of the Longhorn Network and the way it was done. Texas A&M will go balls to the wall to keep Texas out of the SEC and I do not believe that the SEC will ever be an option for UT.Also about the fact the Big 12 is a dying conference. My guess is that Kansas, Kansas St, Baylor, and Okie St jump to the Pac 12 while Texas and Texas Tech probably jump to the SEC. That would leave OU, Iowa State, TCU, and WVU. I am guessing WVU could easily join the ACC while TCU may be relegated back to a sub-P5 conference in the AAC. That would leave a double expansion to the B1G to the West which would push Purdue to the East which would make the divide of the conference the Indiana/Illinois border. Purdue would have an immense of a rebuild if they suddenly found themselves playing MSU, PSU, OSU, and Michigan every year.
I was on the faculty at Texas A&M at the time the Aggies left the B12 for the SEC. A&M was furious about the start-up of the Longhorn Network and the way it was done. Texas A&M will go balls to the wall to keep Texas out of the SEC and I do not believe that the SEC will ever be an option for UT.
Both are owned/supported by ESPN. Wouldn't be as big of problems as it appears.Texas is one of the 5 best programs in the country and has a massive following. A&M can fight it all they want, but the SEC would take them if the terms were right. The TV deal would be the only stumbling block.
Nope. UT or UNC
I fear UT thinks they are to big for the Big and will want a special deal like they have now, not an equal deal. I'd pass on them and take OU first as I don't think they will ruffle feathers, though worry about them academically fitting.
There is a long-standing - like 50 years - Gentlemen's Agreement in the SEC that the presidents of UGA, Florida, USCe and KY will vote as a block to keep out a second school from any of those states. 75% is needed for new members. The specific intent is to keep out GT, FSU, Clemson or Louisville. A&M has now joined the club to block UT and I flat guarantee that the Horns will not be joining the SEC.Texas is one of the 5 best programs in the country and has a massive following. A&M can fight it all they want, but the SEC would take them if the terms were right. The TV deal would be the only stumbling block.
Money is a powerful motivator. UT would bring far more than those other schools you listed.There is a long-standing - like 50 years - Gentlemen's Agreement in the SEC that the presidents of UGA, Florida, USCe and KY will vote as a block to keep out a second school from any of those states. 75% is needed for new members. The specific intent is to keep out GT, FSU, Clemson or Louisville. A&M has now joined the club to block UT and I flat guarantee that the Horns will not be joining the SEC.
No, they won't. Texas is already within the footprint of the SEC Network and this goofy Longhorn Network overlaps the SECN. Both networks are owned by ESPN.Money is a powerful motivator. UT would bring far more than those other schools you listed.
There is a long-standing - like 50 years - Gentlemen's Agreement in the SEC that the presidents of UGA, Florida, USCe and KY will vote as a block to keep out a second school from any of those states. 75% is needed for new members. The specific intent is to keep out GT, FSU, Clemson or Louisville. A&M has now joined the club to block UT and I flat guarantee that the Horns will not be joining the SEC.
It appears you do not understand what is happening at Mizzou. Frosh enrollment has dropped from 6,000 in 2015 to 4,000 in 2017 and Black Lives Matter racists have overtaken the campus. Mizzou closed four dormatories this year due to lack of residents.Of those on the list there are several would be better in the B1G than iu, NW MICH & Iowa.....
1. MiZZou
I think Mizzou fits perfectly and brings in St. Louis & KC TV markets
You are ignoring three issues:Not to mention it would only take one school to decide they no longer want to abide by this unwritten agreement.
This is a joke, right? As dumb as your knock on IU is, wanting to kick out Michigan and Northwestern, two of the best universities in America, is completely asinine.Blue collar schools that fit the B1G --- Middle America Land Grant Institutions under the Morrill Act..... MSU, PURDUE, MN, WIS, NE, PSU, OSU, & IL. To a lesser extent MD and RUT as they are land grant U's, but so far away....but it is nice to bring in new TV markets there for sure.
Schools that I would like to kick the He## out of the B1G....iu, NW & MICH & Iowa. Never understood why iu.....a music & business school was in the B1G? Why snobby, expensive NW is in the B1G....I also have no idea??
The complete list of Land grants is @.... http://www.higher-ed.org/resources/land_grant_colleges.htm
Of those on the list there are several would be better in the B1G than iu, NW MICH & Iowa.....
1. MiZZou
2. Texas A&M
3. Okie State
4. Iowa State
5. West Virgina
6. Kentucky
7. TN
I think Mizzou fits perfectly and brings in St. Louis & KC TV markets, and Texas A&M although far away could bring in some new TV markets. Iowa State would be fun and fits the mold better than Iowa, and Okie State would be a better alternative than OK. WVU, KY and TN also fit the pattern.
The Gentlemen's Agreement does exist and A&M is in it. I know this for a fact. It was a pre-condition for A&M joining the SEC.
It appears you do not understand what is happening at Mizzou. Frosh enrollment has dropped from 6,000 in 2015 to 4,000 in 2017 and Black Lives Matter racists have overtaken the campus. Mizzou closed four dormatories this year due to lack of residents.
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_b7417bf6-268e-58c4-b358-ac369c4481fc.html
Google it for yourself. There are dozens of links like this one:Don't get me wrong... I believe the pact exists. However...
You can't know this for a fact unless you have very close ties to the highest levels of these schools athletic administrations. The schools themselves have never acknowledged that one exists, so I'm not sure how you can state it as fact. You will always see it couched in terms such as, "Sources tell us..." or "it's reported that..." If you have a link showing it confirmed by one of the four schools, I'd love to see it.
Google it for yourself. There are dozens of links like this one:
http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/fsu-and-clemson-have-no-shot-at-the-sec-081311
As I said above, I was on the faculty at Texas A&M at the time the Aggies left the B12 for the SEC. My source of that information is not internet rumor, rather it is an administrator at A&M who was involved with the negotiatians at that time. Obviously there is not going to be any official announcement by the schools involved that this Gentlemen's Agreement exists.Your link states, "Multiple sources have told me that Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina have a Survivor-style pact"
I live down here and read this stuff all the time. That's how I know you can't know it as fact. This is not a confirmation by any of the the schools, but nameless sources.
It is highly likely that A&M has in fact joined together with the other four, but you should present it as such... not as known fact.
W Vir and GT are interesting. I believe the BIG 10 could offer them more than what they currently receive.
You are ignoring three issues:
1. The Gentlemen's Agreement does exist and A&M is in it. I know this for a fact. It was a pre-condition for A&M joining the SEC.
2. There is no enhancement in TV revenue if Texas joins the SEC. All of those TV sets within the State of Texas are already captured by the SECN. This "huge revenue increase" with UT joining has no logical justification. If you can explain a logical increase if TV revenue, please do so.
3. UT is a bunch of academic snobs and they would thumb their noses at the SEC.
historically the BIG 10 was created and composed of state universities with high academic standards. the University of Chicago was once a part of our conference. I'm not sure I like the philosophy of throwing standards and values out the window and targeting new schools based solely on $$$ and market share. At some point, we need to state values >>>>> $$$.
I wonder why Pitt was once considered highly, but was dropped. With the addition of Penn St, do we no longer need Pitt to secure that state's market coverage ? I also wonder why we are not pursuing Louisville and Cincy ? Not enough $$$ ?
Just as I wouldn't mind OU joining the B1G as I moved near their campus last fall, for similarly selfish reasons I wouldn't mind Pitt also joining the B1G (my daughter is a student at Pitt).historically the BIG 10 was created and composed of state universities with high academic standards. the University of Chicago was once a part of our conference. I'm not sure I like the philosophy of throwing standards and values out the window and targeting new schools based solely on $$$ and market share. At some point, we need to state values >>>>> $$$.
I wonder why Pitt was once considered highly, but was dropped. With the addition of Penn St, do we no longer need Pitt to secure that state's market coverage ? I also wonder why we are not pursuing Louisville and Cincy ? Not enough $$$ ?
So in one paragraph you talk about standards and values and then in the next you advocate for Louisville and Cincy? And previously say one of your top two is WVA? Weird.historically the BIG 10 was created and composed of state universities with high academic standards. the University of Chicago was once a part of our conference. I'm not sure I like the philosophy of throwing standards and values out the window and targeting new schools based solely on $$$ and market share. At some point, we need to state values >>>>> $$$.
I wonder why Pitt was once considered highly, but was dropped. With the addition of Penn St, do we no longer need Pitt to secure that state's market coverage ? I also wonder why we are not pursuing Louisville and Cincy ? Not enough $$$ ?