ESTONES6

Yes, I understand this leaves us with A&M and South Carolina playing annually, but hey, the Big Ten has Nebraska and Penn State as designated rivals by default, so travel isn't always a consideration.

Score another one for "tradition".

... oh wait.

It's more like if you're splitting up the 4 biggest powers in the Big Ten, and are placing Ohio State and Michigan in opposite divisions, the other two are going to be paired up as well for inter-divisional rivalries. At least there is some mutual historical grievance between Nebraska and Penn State to work with.

It's going to have to be Texas A&M and South Carolina, because once Oklahoma and Oklahoma State join the SEC, its going to be another predetermined, nonnegotiable rivalry.

So is today that day that we hear Missouri is officially being invited to the SEC?

I doubt it. The SEC still wants Mizzou for 2012 and the Big XII doesn't want them to leave until 2013 based on TV Deals. Until they get that worked out, they'll hold off on the announcement.

See my post above. The press releases of the Big XII in 2012-13 ommitting Mizzou and the premature webpage have all but guaranteed it's happening. They probably didn't want to announce it with the World Series going on because, trust me, it could very well have gone unnoticed. And with Deaton leaving the country, it'll probably happen today.

Oh, I know it's happening, I just don't think it'll be today. I just know the biggest thing they're working on is scheduling. It's happening because the SEC even went as far as making a 14 team schedule, why else would they do it unless they knew Mizzou was coming next year? I have confidence Mizzou will be part of the SEC in 2012, it's just a just going to take a little bit of time to make it happen.

To be honest, I think the SEC would have liked to make the announcement on Friday. Think about it. SEC comes out, says Missouri will be the 14th member to join the Conference. 24 hours later, Texas A&M plays Missouri, and the SEC can sit back and smile watching their 2 new schools. At the latest, I thought today would be the announcement, for the same reason of Mizzou and A&M playing each other this passed weekend.

Well now Deaton's trip has been postponed or possibly canceled. Just when you think it's over, it's not.

That's just because Metallica canceled their shows in India.

So is today that day that we hear Missouri is officially being invited to the SEC?

A local Tampa sports radio station had a writer from the Washington Examiner on this morning and here is the summary with a link to the interview:

http://www.620wdae.com/pages/usf.html?article=9319523

Essentially:

- Big East to invite UCF, Houston, and SMU for all sports with Boise, Air Force, and Navy for football only.

- Air Force and Navy will try to lobby Army to join as #12

- Should Army decline, backups are Temple, Memphis, and ECU

- He also said USF is a slight possibility for the Big 12 if they decide to go to 12 schools.

I'm surprised ECU is so low on the wish list. They actually fit geographically and the last 5 years have had a strong bowl presence.

WVU to Big XII.

http://brett-mcmurphy.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/29532522/32980106

I can't say I like this move at all.

Personally, I was hoping for West Virginia and Missouri to be members 13 and 14 to the Big 10. The Big 10 needs to wake up. These other Conferences are getting stronger (Big XII stronger in the sense that they lost 4 schools, knocking them down to 8, but have 2 coming over with TCU and WV).

I still have this sneaking suspicion that Maryland and Rutgers are going to get tapped on the shoulder.

Anyone see/hear the report that thhe official SEC website had a page for Missouri up last night? It was reporting that Missou would be an official member starting June or July 1st. The page has since been removed from the website. Expect reports later today.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/campusrivalry/post/2011/10/sec-website-missouri-announcement-pulled/1

Apparently at least OU an maybe others want 12, but Texas wants 10. Looks like this rivalry is becoming more about power than football games. Maybe even more than actual money.

Well, 12 teams dilutes the value of The Longhorn Network. So it makes sense why Texas is in favor of 10 teams. 12 teams at least give you a legitimate AQ bid for the BCS. 10 teams is pushing it, even if you have Texas and Oklahoma.

As long as OU, OkSt, Texas and Texas Tech remain, they're guaranteed to keep their AQ bid, so that's not an issue. If they bring in WVU, Louisville and Cincinnati, then it helps the chances of them keeping the bid if those aformentioned schools do in fact leave. Though if all 4 exit, they'll have to add more and it becomes murky, but I still think they retain the bid.

I don't know. If Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State leave... I don't see a conference getting and Automatic Big into the BCS with Kansas State and West Virginia being the "powerhouses," I think even if Texas Tech and Oklahoma State stay, it still may be tough for them to retain the Automatic Bid.

No, with Tech and Ok St staying they would definitely keep it. Plus, who else would it go to?

It wouldn't have to go to anyone. If the Big XII pulls more school from the Big East, the Big East would lose its AQ and if West Virginia and Kansas State are the powerhouses in a conference of 10, I would assume the Big XII would lose their AQ too. Then there are 4 AQ's... perfect.

Apparently at least OU an maybe others want 12, but Texas wants 10. Looks like this rivalry is becoming more about power than football games. Maybe even more than actual money.

Well, 12 teams dilutes the value of The Longhorn Network. So it makes sense why Texas is in favor of 10 teams. 12 teams at least give you a legitimate AQ bid for the BCS. 10 teams is pushing it, even if you have Texas and Oklahoma.

As long as OU, OkSt, Texas and Texas Tech remain, they're guaranteed to keep their AQ bid, so that's not an issue. If they bring in WVU, Louisville and Cincinnati, then it helps the chances of them keeping the bid if those aformentioned schools do in fact leave. Though if all 4 exit, they'll have to add more and it becomes murky, but I still think they retain the bid.

I don't know. If Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State leave... I don't see a conference getting and Automatic Big into the BCS with Kansas State and West Virginia being the "powerhouses," I think even if Texas Tech and Oklahoma State stay, it still may be tough for them to retain the Automatic Bid.

Apparently at least OU an maybe others want 12, but Texas wants 10. Looks like this rivalry is becoming more about power than football games. Maybe even more than actual money.

Well, 12 teams dilutes the value of The Longhorn Network. So it makes sense why Texas is in favor of 10 teams. 12 teams at least give you a legitimate AQ bid for the BCS. 10 teams is pushing it, even if you have Texas and Oklahoma.

Does it? I was under the impression that the more teams you add, the more tvs you add, meaning you'll get more money. Now, from what I heard and I don't if it's official, the Big XII is going to have even revenue sharing so in a sense it means less money for Texas which is probably why they don't want to do it.

Seems like Texas is really trying to strangle-hold the Big XII still. Last year it was Colorado and Nebraska, this year is was Texas A&M and Mizzou-rah, any takers on who's bailing next year?

Well, more schools means more viewers, for a Big XII Conference Network. But we are talking about the Longhorn Network. The stronger the Conference Network gets, the weaker TLN gets.

Apparently at least OU an maybe others want 12, but Texas wants 10. Looks like this rivalry is becoming more about power than football games. Maybe even more than actual money.

Well, 12 teams dilutes the value of The Longhorn Network. So it makes sense why Texas is in favor of 10 teams. 12 teams at least give you a legitimate AQ bid for the BCS. 10 teams is pushing it, even if you have Texas and Oklahoma.

And only good in football, can't see the Pac-12 letting them in for those two reasons as we've discussed before.

Here's a pretty good article on this whole Big XII/WVU/Louisville Soap Opera:

Louisville and WVU both eyeing Big XII

Heh, instead of picking one or the other...wouldn't it be a lot easier to just to pick up both and drag Cincy along also?

Easier? Easier in the sense that all the drama, paperwork, press, logistics, scheduling, conflicts, and contracts associated with ONE school leaving a conference to join another... three times over? Sure. "Easier."

I do love how there was a huge storm of rumors and news stories about Missouri's imminent move to the SEC at the start of the week. Now the last 2 days, there has been nothing about Missouri. I feel like this is what happened with Texas A&M.

Pathetically, there's actually serious talk of the Big Least, Conference USA, and Mountain West merging into a 32-team conference. No, I am not making this up. Boise State and Houston need to get the hell out while they can.

The Big Leftovers Conference

The Conference of Forgotten Schools

I'm just waiting for when these schools realize being in these 14-16 team "superconferences" isn't all it's cracked up to be and start looking for greener pastures.

Well, there is always going to be the plateau affect, no matter the topic or subject. That could be what these conferences are reluctant about. It seems the 12-14 range is a for-sure increase in revenue from TV, marketing, bowls, etc. However, the jump from 14-15/16 may not be as certain as the jump from 12-14.

Well the Big 12 sure beats the Big East. Although I'm only gonna believe it when Oliver Luck confirms it. The same stories last month had WVU in the SEC for sure.

I like the Big 12 move not only as a better football conference, but also as a strong basketball conference. Here's hoping this gets confirmed.

The Big XII a better football conference than the SEC?

I think the rumors were that West Virginia would NOT receive an invite to the SEC... not that they would.

But yes, the Big XII is a fairly strong basketball conference... 1 for 3 ain't bad.

I wouldn't really go by espn until you have multiple other sources reporting it. They tend to be behind, and also mess up the information. I follow 3-4 guys on Twitter who cover the Big XII, one of them is with the Columbia Tribune and another runs powermizzou.com. The other guys are in Oklahoma and somewhere in Big XII country, but when they all report the same thing, I find it to be pretty accurate.

You have to realize that ESPN doesn't want Missouri to leave the Big XII, so of course they're going to report on all the positive things that happen between the Big XII and Missouri. They left a lot out about what happened at the meeting yesterday and reported on what seemed like Missouri was staying. As I've said before, I have a source that comes from Big XII country as well and I've been hearing very similar things as McCall. When it's all said and done, I'll be completely surprised if Mizzou isn't sitting in the SEC.

That's all fine and well. But I'm sick of hearing source and no names or positions within the University or Conference. I keep thinking about that guy who was the first to break the story that Nebraska was going to the Big Ten. He was the same guy reporting that Texas and Notre Dame had a joint meeting in Chicago, trying to pitch the Longhorns and the Fighting Irish as a package deal to the Big Ten.

I'm not saying ESPN doesn't have a vested interest in where schools end up or how the TV contracts go, nor am I saying that ESPN is always the first to report stuff. But when it came to Pitt and Syacuse, ESPN had a story on their main page before anyone was talking about on this forum...

Anyway, McCall and BayouJim, do you mind messaging me the guys who you follow on twitter who seemingly have the scoop on the Big XII and PAC and SEC etc.? I'd like to keep up with it as well.

West Virginia is joining the Big XII, according to the New York Times:

West Virginia is headed to the Big 12, according to a person with direct knowledge of the situation, a move that leaves the Big East with five football programs and an uncertain future. The person said Tuesday that the Mountaineers had “applied and are accepted,” leaving only legal entanglements from making the move official. The person spoke on condition of anonymity because the deal had not been formally announced.

I'm getting sick of hearing "an un-named source" and "an anonymous source close to the situation". Start reporting names and position held with in the Conference/University, or don't report anything at all. How many reports have we heard citing the same un-named/anonymous sources? Let's see... Missouri to the Big Ten, Rutgers to the Big Ten, Notre Dame to the Big 10, Clemson to the SEC, Florida State to the SEC, Texas and Oklahoma to the PAC, Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State to the PAC, Notre Dame and Texas to the Big Ten, Miami to the SEC, Colorado to the PAC, Utah to the PAC. There were even rumblings early on about Georgia Tech and Maryland to the Big Ten. Its getting ridiculous.

The only real rumors we have heard that have come true are Nebraska to the Big Ten, Texas A&M to the SEC, Colorado and Utah to the PAC. I believe Pitt and Syracuse going to the ACC was reported by ESPN before an actual "rumor" turned up.

Its incredibly annoying at this point.

You know that statement one school official made about Mizzou really wanting to be in the B1G but would "settle" for the SEC if there were no other options? It's true.

Missouri will "settle" for the SEC if that's what it comes down to, but they're not going to leave the Big XII for the SEC as long as the Big XII has Texas, Oklahoma, and an auto-bid to the BCS. Now if the B1G rang... that would be different. Mizzou would be outta there like a jackrabbit at an Elmer Fudd convention.

Huh? Mizzou's still heading to the SEC.

Yeah, I thought it was a done deal. Do you have a legitimate source saying that Missouri is committed to the Big XII as long as Texas and Oklahoma are there? I know I posted the official link from ESPN stating how Missouri did NOT submit any conditional withdrawal papers, nor did the Missouri mention or hint at leaving the conference.

Missouri does NOT submit letter of Conditional Withdrawal or made any mention of leaving the Big XII at the the conference's board of directors meeting. http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7145629/no-departure-missouri-tigers-big-12-meeting

Reading the ticker on ESPN.....

Should Missouri decide to leave the Big XII, the conference's "wish list" to replace Missouri is as follows, in order:

-West Virginia

-BYU

-Louisville

-Cincinnati

Going from some Twitter reports, BYU is back in the running as favorite. They'll have to decide on 10 or 12 for next season. When they decide to go 12, it's expected that all those schools would be invited and probably would join.

With TCU, they could only take 3 to get to 12. I would think Cincinnati is the last choice, but isn't BYU enjoying independence?

However, this is somewhat respectable:

East: WVU, Cincy, Louisville, Iowa St., Kansas, K-State

West: TX Tech, Texas, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma, Ok-State

If this happens, doesn't Rutgers and UCONN go running to the ACC begging for a spot and then we say night night to Big East Football?

Give the Mountain USA champion a BCS spot and maybe then this madness can stop.

Then Big East basketball could merge with or take the good teams from the Atlantic 10 and have a beast of a basketball conference. And Notre Dame has a place to park its non-football sports.

So, whoever wins the Red River Rivalry would be the team coming out of the West? To be honest, I don't see how a Kansas State or West Virginia deserves to get a Big XII Championship spot when they play Louisville, Cinci, and Iowa State. That competition doesn't seem to pan out compared to Texas, Texas Christian, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State.

I really don't see OU and Oklahoma State going to the SEC. Mizzou is a good program, but they're not a dominating one like OU can be. I believe that's why OU would prefer the PAC. As a whole, the level of play isn't what the SEC is, though they do have some great schools. But OU could go in there, have some competition and still win the conference probably 4 out of 5 years. The SEC has too many schools that would challenge that year in and year out.

Bingo. Which is why Texas and Oklahoma will never go to the SEC. If there is LEGITIMATE power move for 16 team super conferences, I think it would be a safe bet that Texas and Oklahoma would be going to the PAC - assuming neither goes in dependent.

Actually, I think Texas will go Big Ten or Independent. PAC has basically said they don't want them, the SEC doesn't either, and they were only included in ACC talks because of Notre Dame, who I could see them going to the B1G as a pair with. Texas has kind of become the hot girl that everyone all of sudden realized is a total b****, and now pretty much no one wants to have anything to do with her... except the somewhat known, yet kind of desperate, girl who just wants the cool points. Also known as the Big Ten.

Well there was a rumor floating around last month about Notre Dame and Texas presenting themselves as a package deal to the Big Ten. Shortly thereafter were the major rumors about Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State joining the PAC. To be honest, I still think Texas would prefer the PAC over the Big Ten. I think Texas and Notre Dame want to be the final team to join a major super conference. Its the pride and arrogance they have.

I don't see the Big Ten allowing Texas to reserve/preserve The Longhorn Network if they join the Big Ten. There is no way the Big Ten would allow it. This whole realignment has been predicated off of money and TV revenue... so I don't see the Big Ten bending now just to bring in Texas. Sure, Texas would be a huge cash crop, but Texas is worth more to the Big Ten WITHOUT The Longhorn Network than with it.

I really don't see OU and Oklahoma State going to the SEC. Mizzou is a good program, but they're not a dominating one like OU can be. I believe that's why OU would prefer the PAC. As a whole, the level of play isn't what the SEC is, though they do have some great schools. But OU could go in there, have some competition and still win the conference probably 4 out of 5 years. The SEC has too many schools that would challenge that year in and year out.

Bingo. Which is why Texas and Oklahoma will never go to the SEC. If there is LEGITIMATE power move for 16 team super conferences, I think it would be a safe bet that Texas and Oklahoma would be going to the PAC - assuming neither goes in dependent.

I think K-State can be attractive...

I think the BCS would rather have 4 super conferences than 6 normal conferences. They have 4 major bowls + the National Title. Each conference can "host" a major bowl game, rotating the second place in the conference between the 3 other major bowls.

The way I see it, 4 super conferences forces more cross over playing between conferences. For example, Ohio State played Miami and Colorado this year. It would be easier to compare and contrast schools and who beat who during the course of the season if schools are condensed to only 4 conferences.

It would help the computer ranking system immensely if pretty much every school was forced to play 2 out of conference games against super conference opponents. They can guarantee each costume at least 2 major bowl bids, with a shot at the National Title.

Covered by Nebraska and Illinois respectively. Mizzou'd be nice to have but its not a crippling loss.

The Big 10 receives 70% of profit from States that contain a school within the conference. The Big 10 receives 30% of profit from States that do NOT contain a school within the conference. Done.

Again, is that 40% loss on profit that crippling?

Crippling? No. Impactful? Yes.