October 17th, 2016 at 4:07 PM ^
The "big" boys didn't want to get beat by Houston every year. Childish.
October 17th, 2016 at 4:23 PM ^
It's a little more complicated than that. OU and Texas were the ones leading the expansion until recently reversing course.
Texas was in support of Houston because they were going to get a very valuable piece land in the city of Houston for building a medical center. Most of the schools against Houston are the smaller schools, read: the non-powerhouse schools that don't want Houston taking recruits from them. On top of that, the TV networks were pretty pissed the Big Twelve would stick it to them by adding teams that aren't worth it just to trigger a contract clause. Sounds like the TV networks decided they're willing to pay them more to stay at 10 as it's cheaper than paying them more with 12 or 14.
Additionally, it sounds like Texas and OU have come around to the fact that the only thing that matters long-term for them is 2024, when their grant of rights agreement ends. At that point, they're going to figure out if they want to be in the Pac-16, SEC, or Big Ten.
October 17th, 2016 at 4:42 PM ^
It sounds like the TV networks need to fire whoever negotiates their deals. If the details of that particular provisison are actually as reported, then it was idiotic of the TV networks to agree to such guaranteed per-member premiums with a conference desperate to get back to 12 members after losing four members to other conferences. You would think that ESPN, Fox Sports, et al. would have learned from ESPN's mistake of overpaying for NFL, NBA, and MLB broadcast rights and then agreeing to carriage deals that allowed the cable and satellite companies to bump ESPN channels to premium programming tiers.
As Brian says, sometimes people who are in charge of things are in charge of them for no reason.
October 17th, 2016 at 6:59 PM ^
Terrible contract writing but might have been a calculated risk that ESPN took thinking it's a lesser evil than having less contracting negotiating power long term by allowing the leagues to consolidate to four.
October 17th, 2016 at 4:33 PM ^
It's not that they think Houston would beat them. Right now, the majority of Oklahoma, Texas, Baylor, TCU, Texas Tech's roster comes from the state of Texas. They can for the most part recruit over Houston because Houston can't say they are a Power 5 program. By adding Houston, that adds another hand in the pie to go along with Texas A&M in the SEC. Adding Houston would dilute the talent base and the overall product of the Big 12, potentially impacting their playoff chances.
October 17th, 2016 at 5:42 PM ^
So you do realize that UofH, Rice, Tech, Baylor, TCU, Texas, A&M, SMU were ALL in conference together at one point or another and recruiting wasn't an issue. Hell TCU wasn't part of the Big 12 until recently. This whole notion adding UofH would dilute anything is suspect. Now call it for what it is...OU, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State and Iowa State were the schools pissing and moaning about UofH. Texas, TCU, Baylor are going to get theirs. They could care a less. Its those other schools that I mentioned that are plain scared. Period. Chief complaint among those schools was the fact that UofH's roster was comprised primarily of kids within a 50 mile radius of Houston. Which meant that Coach Hermann didn't have to travel at all if much to recruit his kids. Where OU, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State and Iowa State have to travel so much and so far to get kids out of Texas...they saw it as an unfair advantage. Which is garbage.
October 17th, 2016 at 6:48 PM ^
Completely agree. On the one hand you have millions of dollars every year, on the other you have a baseless, vague notion of insecurity. I think there was only one reason they declined to expand.
October 17th, 2016 at 6:00 PM ^
about Houston. It's the middle of the pack schools.
October 17th, 2016 at 6:04 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 17th, 2016 at 4:07 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 17th, 2016 at 4:21 PM ^
October 17th, 2016 at 7:46 PM ^
October 17th, 2016 at 4:34 PM ^
Oklahoma to the Big 10 in 2025 confirmed!*
*I guess the chance that they go to the Pac 12 exists as well.
October 17th, 2016 at 6:46 PM ^
Of the 4 non-Big XII conferences, Oklahoma seems like an SEC school to me, geography notwithstanding.
Football, academics, culture.
October 18th, 2016 at 10:58 AM ^
They are closer to the SEC geographically than the Big Ten as well.
They border Arkansas, Texas and Missouri, all SEC states. Oklahoma is also far more culturally southern than midwestern in my opinion.
October 17th, 2016 at 4:09 PM ^
October 17th, 2016 at 5:37 PM ^
October 17th, 2016 at 4:10 PM ^
October 17th, 2016 at 6:01 PM ^
leaves Houston. I think he would have stayed if Houston joined the Big 12.
October 17th, 2016 at 11:13 PM ^
Yeah, Houston is toast.
October 17th, 2016 at 4:14 PM ^
In all seriousness though, ESPN was the biggest reason this didn't happen. They pay BYU and Cinci 2 mil a year for the rights to their broadcasts. They would have to up that to $25 a year if they joined the Big 12. Big media has all the power in these conferences, especially when there isn't a Big 12 Network to use as leverage.
October 17th, 2016 at 4:12 PM ^
October 17th, 2016 at 4:30 PM ^
Exactly. Rumor is ESPN was willing to break the contract all together if they expanded. It's not like the B1G where all the games could still be broadcasted via FOX and BTN if there was a standoff. Big 12 has no infrastructure.
That conference is so behind the times it's comical.
October 17th, 2016 at 4:16 PM ^
they can only recruit from non-power 5 teams whereas the SEC, B1G and Pac-12 have all taken from the Big 12
No one is leaving a power 5 conference to go to the Big 12 - they will eventually fall apart
October 17th, 2016 at 4:17 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 17th, 2016 at 4:42 PM ^
I've seen this offered elsewhere, but I don't see the logic of it.
Right now, the Big Ten is relatively stable while the Big 12 is at some risk of collapsing.
What's the motivation for Nebraska moving? I don't see it.
October 17th, 2016 at 4:57 PM ^
I'm certainly not getting a representative sampling, but I have a fair amount of Nebraska family, and they and those around them absolutely hated Texas and the way they dominated the Big 12. Not even with regards to football, but they way they dominated making decisions for the conference, and the unequal distribution of money from the conference.
I think Nebraska has probably not been thrilled with their start in the Big Ten--not being viewed as at the top of the league with Ohio State/Michigan/previously Michigan State--but I think the path is there for them to be successful, and I don't think being in the Big Ten has hindered that.
Obviously, a successful start to the year may have killed off some of the talk of switching, but it really surprised me when I heard rumors about wanting to switch back.
October 17th, 2016 at 5:27 PM ^
Those rumors were baseless and were floated by the desperate lower half of the Big XII who would be relegated to mid-major status if the Big XII fell apart. Literally no one associated with Nebraska thinks going back to the Big XII is a good idea, even if they miss the rivalries they left behind.
October 17th, 2016 at 4:47 PM ^
Starting next year Nebraska will also become a full fledged member of the Big ten and start receiving all of the bonuses and equal share of the profits. There's no reason for them to go back to the Big 12 now
October 17th, 2016 at 4:53 PM ^
Nebraska won't be leaving the B1G anytime soon. When they were invited to join the B1G, they agreed to wait six years to participate fully in the B1G's revenue sharing and to become a full partner in the Big Ten Network. That six years is up next year, so it makes zero sense for them to even think about walking away from a pile of money and go hunting for a new conference. And even if they did consider leaving the B1G, it wouldn't be to rejoin the Big XII. The current Big XII is a dumpster fire and barely resembles the conference they called home for 100+ years. Nebraska wants absolutely nothing to do with the Big XII.
October 17th, 2016 at 4:19 PM ^
October 17th, 2016 at 4:22 PM ^
October 17th, 2016 at 4:34 PM ^
Déjà vu all over again.
October 17th, 2016 at 4:21 PM ^
It's not strange. In the long term, TV contracts are determined by the quality of the teams in the conference, and the TV markets they bring. There were no viable expansion targets that would improve the quality of the conference and/or bring additional TV markets.
October 17th, 2016 at 4:21 PM ^
It's not strange. In the long term, TV contracts are determined by the quality of the teams in the conference, and the TV markets they bring. There were no viable expansion targets that would improve the quality of the conference and/or bring additional TV markets.
October 17th, 2016 at 4:32 PM ^
This makes a fair amount of sense. I was listening to a radio program in WV where they were talking about Big 12 expansion, and beyond Houston, the teams mentioned were UCF and BYU. And Houston is not guaranteed to be good post-Herman, and Herman is almost guaranteed not to be at Houston for his career.
October 17th, 2016 at 4:35 PM ^
Déjà vu all over again and again.
October 17th, 2016 at 4:49 PM ^
Do you think we could interest them in a Rutgers?
October 17th, 2016 at 4:29 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 17th, 2016 at 4:29 PM ^
October 17th, 2016 at 4:41 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 17th, 2016 at 4:50 PM ^
Are they actually good or just a team that hasn't played anyone relevant?
October 17th, 2016 at 5:44 PM ^
October 17th, 2016 at 8:19 PM ^
October 17th, 2016 at 4:30 PM ^
I'm glad someone has decided to at least postpone the madness; conference expansion has gotten ridiculous...
October 17th, 2016 at 4:31 PM ^
Could we pay them to take Nebraska, PSU, Maryland, and Rutgers? How about a Kickstarter?
October 17th, 2016 at 4:36 PM ^
What do you got against Nebraska?
October 17th, 2016 at 4:42 PM ^
But Nebraska is very "bottom tier" when it comes to academics compared to the bulk of the B1G. So a significant contingent resented them getting in on football prowess and football prowess alone.
I'm happy to have them in, FWIW.
October 17th, 2016 at 5:04 PM ^
In fairness, Nebraska was an AAU member when it was invited to join, and the process by which it was expelled from the AAU (which happened after it agreed to join but before its membership took effect) was less than fair. There were also two Big Ten schools, Michigan and Wisconsin, who voted in favor of the motion to expel Nebraska, and their votes ended up tipping the balance since it was a very close vote.
Nebraska is a much better school than its rankings and research numbers would suggest. For one thing, its biggest strength is in agicultural research, which is undervalued by traditional rankings methodologies. It also has a medical campus in Omaha whose research numbers aren't credited to UNL because it's under a different administrative structure.