(06-10-2018 12:45 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(06-09-2018 11:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-09-2018 11:39 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(06-09-2018 07:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-09-2018 12:31 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Texas Tech is pretty far west and is considerable added travel. Pac12 needs to have an eye on them, with or without UT.

WVU would be the only B12 school that offers the SEC something east/northeast crossroad/midatlantic outskirts. WVU would offer better value to the ACC.

Baylor, just no.

TCU. Perceived value gets overstated IMO. Depends on where others go. When they go on decline, their size may not be enough of a boost during a sustained slump.

Iowa State. Well beyond south and border state region. Not an exciting destination. Another travel strain. In BIG footprint.

Texas. SEC makes the most sense. But a lot of attitudinal
divide and conflicting goals.

Kansas State. Another out-of-footprint consideration below the radar. Would Mizzou favor them? It would be tough for KSU to find placement in a P4.

Kansas. BIG the better fit. Awful fb.

Oklahoma State. Would fit in the SEC with or without OU. Athletically, they may blend very well.

Oklahoma. There appears no downside to adding OU. oSu with them has some clear, positive factors.

So you seem to be saying Oklahoma and Oklahoma State to 16 and if Texas wants in Kansas State to 18.

T.C.U. and Texas Tech could head to the PAC, Iowa State and Kansas to the Big 10, and West Virginia to the ACC while Baylor is out.

Am I reading you correctly?

We could do a lot worse.

Well Kansas State in the SEC should become "the" football school in Kansas. I agree we could do worse. But we could also do better. But really any of the 18 school scenarios I laid out above would be acceptable.

What would be ideal is for Texas Tech, T.C.U., Kansas State and Oklahoma State to head to the PAC to take them to 16. The Big 10 bites the bullet and takes the only two AAU schools left and adds Kansas and Iowa State. The ACC takes West Virginia and waits on Notre Dame and the SEC moves to 16 with the Sooners and Horns.

The second best option is for us to move to 18 with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and any of West Virginia, Kansas, Kansas State, T.C.U., or even Texas Tech.

Then the next best option is OU and OSU to 16.

If we get Oklahoma and Texas in the deal then it almost doesn't matter who the other two are...assuming it's necessary to go to 18 in order to land both studs.

With that said, I think some of those options are better than others.

Kansas adds subs, but doesn't offer much content value outside of basketball. Kansas State accesses a different market so they probably bring more value than Oklahoma State assuming we already have Oklahoma.

Oklahoma State is not a bad addition as far as content. It's just that they wouldn't give us much that Oklahoma didn't already secure. It's probably a safe bet that OSU is required to get OU though so it might not matter.

We've covered what I think of TCU.

Texas Tech is a decent addition in some respects, but we're not talking about a school with a huge fan base and it's atypical for them to provide much quality in regards to football or basketball. Texas might want them included, but I'm not sure UT is going to care.

Baylor offers very little. Iowa State would be an interesting choice, but they're awfully far away and I'm not sure the fit would be that tight.

Actually, I think West Virginia becomes more valuable in a streaming environment. They get you some subs up through the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast. You're always going to get decent football and probably decent basketball as long as they've got the money to spend on a coach.

There's not a lot of obvious choices here, but I'd say that if we could wrangle away TCU in addition to Texas and Oklahoma then we've got the vast, vast majority of value the Big 12 offers.

I would also say move to 20 so we don't have to figure out a tiebreaker system to send a wildcard to the conference semis. That and I think the more the merrier when it comes to creating value with streaming. The more content under one roof the better off we'll be in any negotiation.

In your reply you forgot the supposition of the discussion. That first it was necessary to take OSU to insure landing OU. Therefore for the purposes of this page of posts the active question was "What if after OU an OSU are offered, Texas decides to apply?" Therefore we are assuming 3 schools: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Texas. So the operative question was who is #4 and why? Odin Frigg seems to prefer Kansas State. I tend toward W.V.U. Odin Frigg tends to discount T.C.U. and I understand why. If we have the two Oklahoma's, and Texas in addition to Texas A&M and Arkansas we have the vast majority of the DFW market without T.C.U..

While I see value in having a school actually in DFW, their value would however be greatly diminished compared to the collective fan bases of the other 5 schools.

I see brand value in Kansas suckwind football or not and Missouri might prefer them, (might not) but they are their rival.

West Virginia does bring an interesting market. Kansas State does add the state of Kansas to our profile but that's a state of under 3 million.

Premise of the discussion aside if I could simply pick 4 without having to consider the politics and leverage necessary to make a big move happen I would simply take Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and West Virginia. That's three new states and 2 huge prizes.

Then the conference would look like this:

Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, West Virginia.

Without taking ACC schools that's as a complete haul of value from the Big 12 as we could acquire.

I'm just relatively convinced that Oklahoma State may be necessary.