Home > Blogs > Official Husker Locker Blog > If Mizzou Bolts - Who Comes to the Big 12?
Official Husker Locker Blog
2009 Dec 15
If Mizzou Bolts - Who Comes to the Big 12?
3,007 views
The Big Ten, at long last, is looking hard at getting a 12th team, and setting up a conference title game.
Notre Dame is at the top of the wish list - but the Fighting Irish are tied into the Big East for every sport but football, and the football team, which acts like a de facto Big Ten team anyway with its schedule, much prefers having a special clause that gets the team into the BCS - without having to share any of the dough.
Missouri just may be No. 2.
Why? Well, the university fits the academic profile, for one thing - state school, bloated reputation, lots of name graduates. Second, the Tigers would theoretically draw the St. Louis and Kansas City markets. Third, Mizzou allows the Big Ten to make a perfect East/West split between the 12 teams, with Missouri, Iowa, Illinois, Northwestern, Minny and Wisky on one side, and all the big, money-making names on the other.
Anyway, presuming a whole bunch of variables fall into place - where does the Big 12 look? Here's our thoughts, based on criteria that we think the league would consider in its choice:
1. Strength of football program
2. Potentially new TV markets/recruiting grounds
3. Fan Base/Booster Support
4. Geographical Considerations for North Division
5. Strength of basketball programs
6. Strength of athletic profile (track, baseball, volleyball, etc)
7. Current league (read: Texas) approval
So, some choices:
Arkansas. Pros: North just enough to make sense. Solid athletic profile from top to bottom. Good fan support for every sport, especially football. Cons: TV markets/recruiting ground is neglible. Plus - why would Arkansas want to switch to the Big 12, losing out on that sweet SEC cash?
TCU. Pros: Football program has never been better. Texas would love a road game just three hours away every other year. Cons: Everything else. Rotten fan support. Worst stadium in college football. Weak athletic programs outside of football. Too far south. No new TV markets, as Fort Worth is Longhorn country.
Houston. Pros: Again, Texas wouldn't mind. Just another close "road" game. Football program isn't bad. Some smaller sports (baseball, women's hoops) aren't bad. Newly refurbished stadium to enjoy. Cons: Not that good in football, a commuter school without much of a passionate fan base, no new TV markets or recruiting grounds.
BYU. Pros: Good football program. Strong, national fan base. Solid athletic profile. Committed to many sports. Utah has suddenly become a nice recruiting zone. Provo is plausibly in the North, albeit a day's drive from any program other than Colorado. Cons: Provo might as well be on the other side of the moon, it's so far from fans. Minor TV markets. Finally, the Cougars have long hoped for joining the Pac 10.
Utah. Pros: Really good football program. Similiar strengths to BYU, minus the national fan base. Cons: Same weaknesses as BYU, plus a small fan base.
Colorado State. Pros: Truly in "The North." Decent athletic profile overall. Better fan base than CU. Cons: Awful in men's basketball. Football program is so-so at best. The state of Colorado can barely sustain one Big 12 team, much less two.
It's not much of a list, is it? Our take: The Big 12 needs to hold on pretty tightly to Missouri, or know it has Arkansas ripe to move, which we seriously doubt.
A risky-but-clever pick might be BYU. The Cougars bring quite a bit to the table. As Oklahoma found out.
Did we miss a school? Tell us!
Notre Dame is at the top of the wish list - but the Fighting Irish are tied into the Big East for every sport but football, and the football team, which acts like a de facto Big Ten team anyway with its schedule, much prefers having a special clause that gets the team into the BCS - without having to share any of the dough.
Missouri just may be No. 2.
Why? Well, the university fits the academic profile, for one thing - state school, bloated reputation, lots of name graduates. Second, the Tigers would theoretically draw the St. Louis and Kansas City markets. Third, Mizzou allows the Big Ten to make a perfect East/West split between the 12 teams, with Missouri, Iowa, Illinois, Northwestern, Minny and Wisky on one side, and all the big, money-making names on the other.
Anyway, presuming a whole bunch of variables fall into place - where does the Big 12 look? Here's our thoughts, based on criteria that we think the league would consider in its choice:
1. Strength of football program
2. Potentially new TV markets/recruiting grounds
3. Fan Base/Booster Support
4. Geographical Considerations for North Division
5. Strength of basketball programs
6. Strength of athletic profile (track, baseball, volleyball, etc)
7. Current league (read: Texas) approval
So, some choices:
Arkansas. Pros: North just enough to make sense. Solid athletic profile from top to bottom. Good fan support for every sport, especially football. Cons: TV markets/recruiting ground is neglible. Plus - why would Arkansas want to switch to the Big 12, losing out on that sweet SEC cash?
TCU. Pros: Football program has never been better. Texas would love a road game just three hours away every other year. Cons: Everything else. Rotten fan support. Worst stadium in college football. Weak athletic programs outside of football. Too far south. No new TV markets, as Fort Worth is Longhorn country.
Houston. Pros: Again, Texas wouldn't mind. Just another close "road" game. Football program isn't bad. Some smaller sports (baseball, women's hoops) aren't bad. Newly refurbished stadium to enjoy. Cons: Not that good in football, a commuter school without much of a passionate fan base, no new TV markets or recruiting grounds.
BYU. Pros: Good football program. Strong, national fan base. Solid athletic profile. Committed to many sports. Utah has suddenly become a nice recruiting zone. Provo is plausibly in the North, albeit a day's drive from any program other than Colorado. Cons: Provo might as well be on the other side of the moon, it's so far from fans. Minor TV markets. Finally, the Cougars have long hoped for joining the Pac 10.
Utah. Pros: Really good football program. Similiar strengths to BYU, minus the national fan base. Cons: Same weaknesses as BYU, plus a small fan base.
Colorado State. Pros: Truly in "The North." Decent athletic profile overall. Better fan base than CU. Cons: Awful in men's basketball. Football program is so-so at best. The state of Colorado can barely sustain one Big 12 team, much less two.
It's not much of a list, is it? Our take: The Big 12 needs to hold on pretty tightly to Missouri, or know it has Arkansas ripe to move, which we seriously doubt.
A risky-but-clever pick might be BYU. The Cougars bring quite a bit to the table. As Oklahoma found out.
Did we miss a school? Tell us!
Permanent Link to this Blog Post
Tags: big 12
Home > Blogs > Official Husker Locker Blog > If Mizzou Bolts - Who Comes to the Big 12?
I would like to see maybe BYU come in if Missouri leaves, but I'd rather not lose Missouri.
Boise State might not be bad, but I don't know much about them other than their football team is usually pretty decent.
I would hate for the Big 12 to add another Texas school. (I thought the Southwest conference disbanded, I didn't know we were joining it.)
And I know they would never do it, but I wouldn't mind seeing Notre Dame join the Big 12. (I know, I know- they play in the Big East in all their other sports).
Realistically, I think a school like Wyoming would probably be most likely. Arkansas wouldn't leave the SEC.
– Dec 22, 2009
How bout Nebraska leave the texas takeover and go to the Big Ten instead of Mizzou. Heck, why not NE, Mizzou, and Pitt go to give the big X 14 teams.
– Dec 18, 2009
a couple of long shots - Boise State (they want to up the profile of their school) or maybe try to get Iowa (they would be very competitive in the Big 12 north)
– Dec 16, 2009
in a word, *&^% Texas! They can suck air, far as I am concerned. Time comes when enough concession is enough. Even if a team is added, it is time to drop the conference c-chip game, and the divisions, schedule 9 conference games, have to play every other team at least once every other year and allow schools to maintain (in our case, renew) rivalry games. Oh yeah, in case I did not put enough emphasis on it the first time, *&^% Texas...
– Dec 16, 2009
If Misery leaves, I say we drop Baylor, too. Then the two conferences can just switch names.
– Dec 16, 2009
Personally, I think that all the BCS conferences should expand to 16 teams, have a conference championship, and get rid of the partial round-robins that all the BCS conferences have. Then add a 7th BCS conference. Although that only adds up to 112 teams, and there would be a few left over. Not sure what to do with them, I haven't thought this out much.
– Dec 16, 2009
Is this a serious possibility of Mizzery moving to the Big 10, or is this just hypothetical? I have a hard time believing that Mizzery would make a big-time change like that. If that happens, though, and the Big XII adds another team from the south like Arkansas, TCU, or Houston, then what about re-aligning the North/South at the same time and put OU or OKSt in the North? Geographically it makes sense, it balances the league better, and it brings back the yearly NU-OU rivalry game. It means more competition for NU, but as anxious as that makes me, it should force NU to get more competitive. The down side is that OU-TX lose the yearly Red River Rivalry, but if they are both truly as competitive as they think they are they should have to worry because they would play each other in the Big XII title game anyway - arguably a bigger stage than the RRR (but not if NU has anything to say about it).
Unfortunately, all the selections except Arkansas, and maybe BYU, lessen the overall competitiveness of the Big XII as compared to other top BCS conferences (read SEC). BYU's record would suffer, but in the long run they would improve as a program being in the Big XII with the extra money and recruiting pull of being in a BCS conference.
– Dec 16, 2009
Do you think that the Big X can pass up the 14 million TV sets in the New York area by not taking Rutgers?
– Dec 16, 2009
why don't we beat 'em to it, and jump the husker nation to the big 10!
I knew it was gonna be a texas league, when we became the big 12
– Dec 16, 2009
Hmmm...honestly, I'd say none of the above, save for Arkansas.
However, if the Big 10(11) dawdles for too long on including a 12th team and a conference title game, I could see a team like Illinois or Iowa jumping ship.
Illinois already has a rivalry with Mizzou (albeit a weak one), and is decent in other sports, plus they would be able to reach to the Chicago market. While they may be taking a hit in pay and exposure (thanks to the craptacular Big XII TV contract--which likely won't get better unless we take a gamble with Comcast/Versus and their NBC acquisition...), the fact that they will be in a conference that has exposure in December and the higher level of competition may balance that out somewhat.
As for Iowa, that's more geography than anything else. But again, if the Big 10(11) teams start to grumble about the lack of December exposure and the conference doesn't add a 12th member or changes things up, you may see some of the weaker Big 10(11) teams looking for a possible change.
– Dec 16, 2009