Would B1G go after TCU ?
- Thread starter New Pal Boiler
- Start date
Why would we? Their fanbase is small. The school itself is tiny.
Northwestern and Ball State both have double the amount of undergrads as TCU
Yeah - Texas Christian University doesn't really fit from a number of established objectives. Seems like they already got two of the few ones left that made sense (if not geographically) in USC and UCLA. Notre Dame and Texas would have been ideal for the conference.....but those ships sailed a while ago......and I'm not sorry to see ND pass by for sure. Maybe one day it will be the Big 64......or Big Ten (plus 54).
Longhorns made the most sense as far as Texas schools. I can’t see TCU, Texas Tech, or Baylor being a fit. TCU really grew after joining the Big 12. They were equal to SMU before that happened.Yeah - Texas Christian University doesn't really fit from a number of established objectives. Seems like they already got two of the few ones left that made sense (if not geographically) in USC and UCLA. Notre Dame and Texas would have been ideal for the conference.....but those ships sailed a while ago......and I'm not sorry to see ND pass by for sure. Maybe one day it will be the Big 64......or Big Ten (plus 54).
Yes - they've done a good job building that program after the break-up of the old Southwest Conference (WAC and Mountain West before joining Big XII) - they were an afterthought for decades in the old SWC. Credit to Dennis Franchione and Gary Patterson for the impetus.
always liked Sonny Dykes ( his name sounds like a group of happy lesbians). I know the cupboard wasn't bare for him but this is his first year there and he has done a more than great job.
The big 10 doesn’t want to add good teams. They want to add teams in big revenue and Tv markets! Or teams that would be a good draw on pay Tv channels! Like Notre Dame! The only reason the big 10 would want to add Notre Dame now is because of market share. The big 10 no longer cares about academics or geography or the caliber of the team. It’s market share and revenue!
Yet schools being added, UCLA and USC, will probably be ranked 2 and 3 in terms of academics in the B1G.
That wasn’t why they were added! We both know the real reason they were added! If we could have added Texas and Alabama we surely would!
I think both boxes have to be ticked and USC and UCLA did that.
I personally believe the move was directed / influenced by the BIG 10 network. I also personally believe that these two schools were not the #1 priorities to add to our conference, but the BIG 10 was turned down by Texas and notre Dame, and felt they had to make a move so they looked around and found USC and UCLA as willing teams . I personally doubt academics was the #1 factor. if Academics was a consideration, the BIG 10 would have gone after Stanford and Duke.
I believe it's nice that UCLA and USC are both strong academically, but I believe that is used just to justify their additions.
I did not say academics/researrch was the only consideration, but it is a necessary component.
You will not see a non AAU school brought into the B1G with the exception of Notre Dame. Today Nebraska would not get in. They were a member of AAU when they were offered membership in the BiG but they lost that status.
Would that be as a result of both being ahead of Northwestern or of Michigan?
Similar threads
