This would completely upset the whole apple cart....but man the travel logistics would be a PITA.

The Eastern Division would have to look like:

Colorado
Kansas
Mizzou
OU
OSU
AZ State
AZ
Utah

The Western Division would have to look like:

Washington
Washington State
Oregon
Oregon State
Stanford
Cal
USC
UCLA

Maybe I'm just being stupid, but I'd much rather us head to the Big East than Pac 12 given the choice. Don't get me wrong, I'll take any BCS conference at this point....but I'd rather not go west.

It wouldn't be quite as crazy as it seems due to East/West divisions or even four team pods.

See my posted edited above....

Would be a pain to schedule since you would have to play everyone in your division....and then 4 games from the other division. That leaves you no chance to pick cupcake games like all teams do. Unless you don't play any time from the other division.

THE DEAL IS DONE!!1!1!!11!


ChiefsInsider Warpaint Illustrated
Big XII Rumblings: Hearing #TCUcould replace A&M and if the league goes back to an even dozen conference looking @ #Boise State & #BYU.

HOLY MOLY. This fits in perfectly with my friend who said that he saw TCU Athletic Director Chris Del Conte at Best Buy and he winked at him. A sign of things to come.

Seriously though, I am tired of the entire of state of Texas. The whole state can go **** itself.

This! ..I would rather have KU go to the PAC 10 or Big East then stick around and be Texas`s bitch...

Apparently, ESPN Radio is saying that Texas turned down the Pac-12 and is in discussions with the ACC. Rumormania is running wild, brother.

The ACC? WTF?

I heard that too and was wondering WTF did that come from?

Indeed it absolutely makes no sense.

Might have to do with the Pac 12 having its own TV deal and TX having their own..TX not wanting to give up any of their TV money. From what I have heard though, TX doesn't even have an actual deal with a cable provider , just ESPN. It makes since for TX if you think about it. TX would probably much rather deal with teams that are on Eastern time ,then Pacific. Its a longer travel time for them to go to OR, WA , then FL or VA. If you think about it, regionally its not that much of a difference for TX in the ACC then it is in the PAC 12..plus they would be the big dog in the ACC and be in control, something they would probably not have in the PAC 12

ESPN basically owns all of the ACC media rights so the LHN can fit it just fine. Not to mention they could bring Tech and Baylor along with them as well.

I've heard the UT to ACC rumor this evening, but I don't buy it as legit for a second. I think it is UT's way of negotiating with both PAC and Big Ten to show that another power conference could snatch them away, so those two better allow them to keep Bevo Network.

It is a desperation ploy, just like UT's prior threats of lawsuits against the SEC.

you really think that Texas would go to the Big 10? Nobody in the Big 10 is going to take any of their shit. Texas wants to be the big fish, even if it's in a smaller pond.

Exactly.. ACC is a better fit for TX. Now lets hope that KU, MU and KSU all land in a BCS conference..

Here's the latest from Chip Brown at Rivals:

http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1261031

I honestly don't give a shit where KU or K-State lands.

It depends on what you want. If you want to be earning between 30 and 40 million a year for the athletic department, you say "yes" in a heartbeat to the PAC. If you think the east coast exposure is more important, then maybe you hold off.

If Texas isn't part of the PAC, it'll hurt football recruiting, gotta keep that in mind. But 30-40 million can buy a lot of recruiting trails.

I'd like to say I don't because I hate KU with such passion, but the rivalry really is good for Kansas Citians.

I would honestly love to burn Missouri to the ****ing ground...but I`m trying to be civil about it and hope all three local teams land in the same spot...so that I could enjoy picking on MU fan year after year for being the best at sucking...ROCK CHALK Motherf**ker

As a KU grad....I too would like the 3 schools, KU-KSU-MU, to remain in the same conference as I enjoy the rivalry.

But it isn't a deal breaker if they split. I would hope that a rivalry game would be established such as Iowa and Iowa State have done.

Those games will always be played, regardless of where the teams end up. But as an old big 8 fan, I find this whole thing disgusting.

I'm just a fan of MU football as my school for all other sports is Missouri State, so it really doesn't matter to me.

My priority:

1. KU is in an AQ Conference
2. KU remains connected with MU
3. KU has access to Texas recruiting
4. KU remains connected with KSU

Dan Bebe ....possibly the worst job performance in the history of Jobs:clap::banghead:

Close, but I think Gary Bettman should is the winner of that award.

That is the Hockey commissionaire right ? I dont follow hockey that much ...so I cant judge how bad of a job he did...Bebe is my top guy!

If Orangeblood report is accurate and Texas won't give up LHN but OU and OSU elect to stay in the PAC, that will put KU-MU on the spot, assuming the PAC still wants to go to 16. So, if the PAC comes to MU and says, we'll make you a regional network with KU, you'll earn around 20 million a year, and in four years you'll make between 30 and 40 million, do you say yes?

Absolutely.

Once again, yes, omfg yes. You take it and run and get away from all of those Texas ****s.

This should be the one thing we can all agree on.

There are two reasons why I want KU in the Pac 12. The first is that if KU goes to the Big East we'd be jumping out of an unstable conference into another unstable conference. A couple of schools are already looking to bail on the Big East right now for the ACC. If KU went to the Pac it would end up in a stable conference that isn't fighting another conference to stay alive like the Big East and ACC will be doing very soon. Jumping to the Big East is just a stop gap until those two leagues fight it out and decide which teams will make it into that new merged 16 team league.

The other reason is selfish. I live on the west coast and would love to see the Jayhawks come out here to Seattle every couple years so I can watch them play the Huskies, Ducks, or Cougars.

I don't really think KU is going to get a Pac 10 invite, but if they do they have to take it the second that its offered and not look back IMO.

Enjoy your stay on this Kansas City Chiefs message board.

Pac-12/16 would suck as a fan. 9:00 PM games would be no fun.

Most of the games for the central time zone teams wouldn't start then. One of the main points the PAC wants to grab 4 big XII schools was to have a presence in those time zones. They're not going to get those time slots and then convert them to west coast time.

Also, there was this for those hoping to hold out for the B1G:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports...1469215.column

Perhaps the games between those schools, or home games, but what about games @USC, @UCLA, @UW..etc? Those will get priority.

It would be a huge advantage for the teams in the Central Time Zone. How would you like to have to play an 11:00 game two time zones to the East? It would be like playing at 9 in the morning.

I love betting against teams that have to travel 2+ time zones to the east for a noon or earlier game. It makes an enormous difference. Traveling west doesn't really have the opposite effect because staying up a little later is easier than playing when you aren't fully awake yet.

It all depends on the setup. If its a Coastal/Inland setup, you probably only play 2 football games a year on the west coast and you probably try to schedule those for earlier start times.

I think the Big 10 goes east next trying to pull the east coast market and then they'll have the dough to make a move towards Notre Dame by this time the mega conferences will be forming.

This can't be right...none of those conferences really want Mizzou. And surely they don't need expansion. (sarcasm)

You're a little late.

I think everyone can agree that the implusion of the Big 12 is due to Texas demanding that they get special treatment. A bigger piece of the pie than the other teams. They thought that was an unfair system. You could see it coming a mile away.

You mean the link to the article from the Tribune...the one where you missed the part where Delany hedged his bet with the comment about barring any significant changes?

No a year ago it was because Nebraska couldn't beat Texas.

My priority:

1. KU is in an AQ Conference
2. KU is in an AQ Conference
3. KU is in an AQ Conference
4. KU is in an AQ Conference

K-State, KU, MU have nothing to worry about, in that regard.

Baylor, ISU might need to be worried, a bit.

Every one of those schools needs to worry. KSU could be ****ed. They are right there with ISU.

They all "could be" ****ed - but I highly doubt it.

Perhaps somebody who's got a lot of time on his hands could review this thread from beginning to end and give us an exact number of sure-bet stories leaked from absolutely credible sources by well respected members of the media that turned out to be 100% BULLSHIT. Must be hundreds of them.

I liked your take earlier....for all of us who are speculating, there is little that any of us truly know as a fact.

What do ISU, KSU, Tech, or Baylor bring to the table? I mean they are really only considered candidates to move because they are currently in a BCS conference. If they were all in CUSA, nobody would be mentioning them regarding re-alignment.

Are they really more attractive than some of the top mid-major programs?

I got sucked in by this shit last summer - all the rumors that MU was going to the Big 10.... it all made so much sense, was so logical, would have been so perfect for me living in the Chicago area.... and then BOOM Lucy yanks the ball away and I fly through the air and land on my head.

Never again. I'm not getting worked up over any of this shit. Whatever happens, happens. Nothing I can do about it but wait and see what happens.

LandThieves
Rumor of the night is that OU,OSU,Tech,Texas, KU,Mizzou will move to disband the conference in lieu of paying exit fees
1 hour ago

No KSU on that list. Interesting.

That's unnecessary. I believe five or six schools are needed to even have a conference per NCAA rules. If those schools all leave, there is no conference.

If that happens you have to laugh at A&M for paying over $10M to get out.

Im sure Dollar Bill has put a stop payment on that check till things get settled.

I don't think A&M would have to pay a cent if the league was disolved at the end of this season.

That's ****ing desperate.

If you click on their homepage they have that same logo but it says "Baylor... committed to the Big XII." LOL

LMAO they rode the coatails of those other universitys into a LOT of money over the last 15 years yet feel they should still ride their coatails again?



**** TEXAS should be their slogan

Heh it's the Big X right now......

Bears are gripping hard.

Prepare for shit to get real today.

Someone wake me up when this starts getting a little more real.

Since when is the state of Texas a sovereign nation, thus having its own "citizens"?

Very interesting update.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/college...ant-to-expand/

Still seems like little more than speculation at this point.

We'll know something when we know something. It appears to be mostly a lot of guessing right now with some guys (like Gregorian in STL) just grinding axes where they can.

I found this quote interesting....which is what I have been arguing with HH all along:

But …

*** If Texas A&M becomes the SEC’s 13th team, that sets the superconferences in motion.

“The SEC won’t stop at 13, or even 14. And if the SEC is at 14 or 16, the Big Ten will do it,” a source said. ”At that point, (the Pac-12) would be crazy not to entertain the idea of expansion.”

(Multiple sources said the SEC’s 14th team would most likely be Missouri. Combine untapped TV dollars with geography, and the schools that make the most sense for the SEC are Texas A&M, Missouri and Virginia Tech.)

Only if the SEC goes to 13 would the Pac-12 evaluate its options.

This entire thread is speculation.

I wouldn't take anything as concrete until schools are voted in as new members of conferences. This stuff is fluid and seems to change by the day, if not the hour.

Multiple sources also believe VaTech is the most likely 14th.

I don't think there's any question that Mizzou will find a soft landing if everyone goes to 16. But there's absolutely no assurances that anything of the sort will happen.

I think there's a decent chance the B1G tells everyone to take a flying leap and sticks at 12 (they're just snobbish enough to do it). And if they're at 12 and the PAC is at 16 - the SEC fills a 'niche' so to speak right in the middle at 14 - they have no real drive to expand to 16 because both sides of them are covered.

There's rampant speculation from all sides right now. I don't think anyone truly knows anything.

The only person to follow in this mess is Chip Brown from Orangebloods.

Haven't you guys learned your lesson from last year?

I heard Bob Fescoe may know something.

:LOL:

Sounds like the Conference Armageddon is finally upon us.

/bracing myself

LETS DO THIS