AL.com-SEC Expansion: Why the Big 12 is the key to SEC adding more schools

[MuskogeeHogFan]

The point is, if you have more people interested in your program, then you will have more people watching your games.

Whether people are paying to stream through Netflix or Amazon or YouTube or wherever, the more eyeballs you have on your  team (conference), the more $$ that means.

Exactly right. That's where having the interest of football fans on a nationwide basis pays off and promotes your conference. Miami had that at one time. Notre Dame seems in danger of losing a lot of that despite the fact that they have a loyal following. Texas used to be that way. In my travels all over the country I found that a lot of fans may hate the SEC for their overall success and promotion by the Sports Networks, but they still have a tendency to want to watch because they believe the hype that it is the best and toughest football conference in America. Teams joining the SEC may find that it is a difficult place to reside, but they become a part of the national reputation of being, SEC and generally speaking, pick up more viewers as a result.

[Supermark101]

The point is, if you have more people interested in your program, then you will have more people watching your games.

Whether people are paying to stream through Netflix or Amazon or YouTube or wherever, the more eyeballs you have on your  team (conference), the more $$ that means.

Interest! Exactly. media market does not automatically mean interest. It's a simplistic view. Look at Rutgers. Interesting team and match ups create interest.

[Cinco de Hogo]

Does it matter if the same fans are watching OSU as watch OU?  Isn't it still three hrs of tv time thus three hrs of commercial opportunity.  Fan will watch a OSU vs Arkansas matchup before they will many other games between P5 teams.

Head to head would be the only time it would be the same fans watching the same game at the same time.

[Murr]

Part of a Conferences' job is to maximize revenues for its members.  When the Big Ten looked for a 12th member so they could add a championship game, they took the best football brand available at that time in Nebraska over Missouri because that maximized revenue.  The next wave was primarily about enhancing revenues from conference networks. The PAC added new markets and a CCG.  SEC added markets and academics. The ACC added markets.

The next round of contract negotiations will be about content with new market additions only being a factor in the situation.  Oklahoma is the football blue blood that everyone will be looking to add.  The SEC would take just OU by itself.  OU wants to protect its two biggest football rivalries; OSU and Texas. They can't schedule them both out of conference.  Texas ain't gonna follow the rules if they don't have to, so OSU is the price it would take to keep OU from wondering off to the B1G if OU had to leave behind both schools. 

The CBS contract for the SEC game of the week is undervalued.  Adding a content multiplier like OU will sky rocket its value.  OSU brings its fans and ratings with them.  That package should be worth enough to give everyone a nice payday in the near future.

What needs to be available is greater scheduling flexibility and methods of determining who plays in a conference championship game.  Going to 16 teams will essentially create two conferences within one where the opposing side rarely play one another.  I would be in favor of playing three yearly rivals and then play the remaining teams every other year. Two best conference schedules meet in Atlanta; would prefer conference semifinal games too to reduce complaints. Our current 14 members would still keep 8 conference game schedule; 9 games if we moved to 16 members.

[oldgoat]

I'd like OU and Kansas.  Kansas gives the west an easy football opponent and really ups the basketball in the conference.

I believe this would be good for us financially and competition wise.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Does it matter if the same fans are watching OSU as watch OU?  Isn't it still three hrs of tv time thus three hrs of commercial opportunity.  Fan will watch a OSU vs Arkansas matchup before they will many other games between P5 teams.

Head to head would be the only time it would be the same fans watching the same game at the same time.

That's the thing. Okla State will have their fans in Oklahoma certainly. But if OU and OSU play at different times on the same day and both are telecast you are going to get some bleed over because Oklahomans and Texans might prefer OU but will watch OSU as well. For Oklahoma it isn't limited to Oklahoma or Texas, they have a larger national brand.

And you are right, head to head gets everyone together at the same time but not just from Oklahoma and Texas. This is why Oklahoma is such a valued commodity...the national brand.

[Inhogswetrust]

I disagree. For what the SEC would gain by getting OU, it would be well worth taking Okla State to get them. I still say the SEC will eventually take both schools.

You would be wrong.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

You would be wrong.

I'm sure that if there is any way possible (when the time comes) that the SEC could take Oklahoma and Okla State not be a part of the package, that is what they would do. However, I don't see the SEC getting one without the other unless Oklahoma is certain that Okla State already has a new home secured in another P-5 conference. If that doesn't happen, I doubt one comes without the other.

[Inhogswetrust]

I'm sure that if there is any way possible (when the time comes) that the SEC could take Oklahoma and Okla State not be a part of the package, that is what they would do. However, I don't see the SEC getting one without the other unless Oklahoma is certain that Okla State already has a new home secured in another P-5 conference. If that doesn't happen, I doubt one comes without the other.

I think it will not happen that they ever take both.

[GuvHog]

You would be wrong.

I don't think so. OU not only has local followers, they have support and viewers across the nation which would mean a heck of a lot more money for the SEC, enough money that it would be well worth taking Oklahoma State to get OU. More viewers (especially nation wide viewers) means a lot more money for the SEC. Getting OU is about MUCH more than just increasing the conference footprint.

[GuvHog]

I believe this would be good for us financially and competition wise.

Kansas is terrible at football and the SEC is a football first conference. I don't see Kansas going a different direction than Kansas State anyway and I don't see the SEC going after both of them so most likely the Jayhawks aren't an option for the SEC.

[RME]

Granted it's about 6 years old, but here's a pretty interesting study from 2011 conducted by the guy who now owns and operates FiveThirtyEight.

Relates to TV markets/fanbases/etc.

https://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/the-geography-of-college-football-fans-and-realignment-chaos/

[Inhogswetrust]

I don't think so. OU not only has local followers, they have support and viewers across the nation which would mean a heck of a lot more money for the SEC, enough money that it would be well worth taking Oklahoma State to get OU. More viewers (especially nation wide viewers) means a lot more money for the SEC. Getting OU is about MUCH more than just increasing the conference footprint.

Increasing the conference footprint IS about $. Getting any program to join the SEC is. ALL decent programs have support and viewers across the country. IF the money would increase for SEC members by getting OU and OSU then it might increase even more by getting OU and someone else outside the state of Oklahoma. Don't kid yourself. The footprint has an impact on that increased money thing.

[Inhogswetrust]

Kansas is terrible at football and the SEC is a football first conference. I don't see Kansas going a different direction than Kansas State anyway and I don't see the SEC going after both of them so most likely the Jayhawks aren't an option for the SEC.

I don't think KU and KSU are tied politically as much as OU and OSU are. JMO though. Kansas has as much potential in football as KSU did even though they were one of the worst at it at one time. KSU built the football program from nothing. Perhaps KU can also.

[Hogwild]

I disagree. For what the SEC would gain by getting OU, it would be well worth taking Okla State to get them. I still say the SEC will eventually take both schools.

If that were true the Pac-12 & the Big 10 wouldn't have both passed on taking them.  It doesn't make sense financially.

Adding one school creates an untenable membership of 15, so someone else would have to come along with OU. Oklahoma State would be the least messy option, but it would be out of step with the conference's incentives.

Expansion last time around was an opportunity to build up the subscriber base for the soon-to-come SEC Network. Adding Texas and Missouri increased the population in the conference's footprint by 53 percent based on 2011 estimates. None of the Big 12 states besides Texas is all that large, but the preferable goal would be to add multiple states.

The dream partner to Oklahoma would be Kansas. It would bring another new state, create a blockbuster basketball rivalry with Kentucky, and reignite the Border War with Missouri

Oklahoma's partner for the SEC must come from a different state, West Virginia is more likely than Kansas State. KSU is less of a draw than WVU, and its football could face a steep drop-off once Bill Snyder retires for good.

Adding Oklahoma and West Virginia would make for an easy division setup. The Sooners could go in the West, and the Mountaineers would go in the East. Done and done.

Thanks to T. Boone Pickens' money and Mike Gundy's coaching, the Cowboys have improved their football program dramatically over the past 10 years. The SEC, however, might not be thrilled with the prospect of adding two schools from the same state, especially one that doesn't claim a top-40 TV market.

Why it doesn't make sense:

The SEC has its sights set on the biggest fish it can land. As far as revenue is concerned, Okie State secured $95.9 million in the 2014-15 academic year, which ranks lower than all but four SEC schools. And if Oklahoma indeed jumps to the SEC, there's much less of an incentive for the conference to add a second school in the state of Oklahoma.

[GuvHog]

Increasing the conference footprint IS about $. Getting any program to join the SEC is. ALL decent programs have support and viewers across the country. IF the money would increase for SEC members by getting OU and OSU then it might increase even more by getting OU and someone else outside the state of Oklahoma. Don't kid yourself. The footprint has an impact on that increased money thing.

The foot print was important when the SEC went after A&M because there are a number of P5 schools in Texas and it was important when they went after Missouri (Kansas City and St. Louis markets).

The foot print is less of a factor when it comes to getting OU because OU has a more nationwide viewing audience than does A&M or Missouri. Enough so that I believe the SEC will take Okla State to get them.

The dream prize for the SEC would be getting OU and Texas together but the Longhorns aren't going to give up being the Big Dog where they are and they want no part of the SEC anyway so Okla State is the next best school to come with OU out of the Big 12.

[Inhogswetrust]

Granted it's about 6 years old, but here's a pretty interesting study from 2011 conducted by the guy who now owns and operates FiveThirtyEight.

Relates to TV markets/fanbases/etc.

https://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/the-geography-of-college-football-fans-and-realignment-chaos/

Thanks for that link. Having lived in Virginia this quote from that link is why I say VT should be a prime candidate for SEC inclusion. Unless one has lived there in tablet stater and area they have not clue of the large loyal following VT has:

Virginia Tech. In addition to its natural (and quite avid) fan base in western Virginia, it also has some reach into Washington, D.C. and other relatively populous markets — enough for it to rank 13th in the country with 1.3 million fans.

It also shows that KU ranks 40th in fan base size overall to OSU ranking 41st. Therefore KU is just as viable an expansion prospect as OSU.

[GuvHog]

Thanks for that link. Having lived in Virginia this quote from that link is why I say VT should be a prime candidate for SEC inclusion. Unless one has lived there in tablet stater and area they have not clue of the large loyal following VT has:

Virginia Tech. In addition to its natural (and quite avid) fan base in western Virginia, it also has some reach into Washington, D.C. and other relatively populous markets — enough for it to rank 13th in the country with 1.3 million fans.

They would be a prime candidate for the SEC if it wasn't for the ACC's Grant of Rights agreement. That makes them impossible to get.

[Inhogswetrust]

The foot print was important when the SEC went after A&M because there are a number of P5 schools in Texas and it was important when they went after Missouri (Kansas City and St. Louis markets).

The foot print is less of a factor when it comes to getting OU because OU has a more nationwide viewing audience than does A&M or Missouri. Enough so that I believe the SEC will take Okla State to get them.

The dream prize for the SEC would be getting OU and Texas together but the Longhorns aren't going to give up being the Big Dog where they are and they want no part of the SEC anyway so Okla State is the next best school to come with OU out of the Big 12.

The Kansas City market is split between Mizzou and KU and might have more of a KU following the Mizzou. After all it is much closer to Lawrence than Columbia. The Oklahoma market is split between OU and OSU. As I showed in my post right above yours' KU actually has a slightly larger fanbase overall than OSU ranking wise. NO need total two teams from a split state. Whether you like it for not footprint will still be a factor.

[Inhogswetrust]

They would be a prime candidate for the SEC if it wasn't for the ACC's Grant of Rights agreement. That makes them impossible to get.

Things can change. Maybe you haven't heard the little 12 itself did not extend its' own GOR...............but right now they still have it. They probably won't in the future since they didn't extend it. We have no clue what the ACC schools will or won't do for the future of the conference.

[GuvHog]

Things can change. Maybe you haven't heard the little 12 itself did not extend its' own GOR...............but right now they still have it. They probably won't in the future since they didn't extend it. We have no clue what the ACC schools will or won't do for the future of the conference.

The ACC agreement doesn't expire for another 18 years while the Big 12 agreement expires in 2025. BIG difference. It would be far more expensive for VT to leave the ACC than it would for OU and Okla State to leave the big 12.

[GuvHog]

The Kansas City market is split between Mizzou and KU and might have more of a KU following the Mizzou. After all it is much closer to Lawrence than Columbia. The Oklahoma market is split between OU and OSU. As I showed in my post right above yours' KU actually has a slightly larger fanbase overall than OSU ranking wise. NO need total two teams from a split state. Whether you like it for not footprint will still be a factor.

What you keep ignoring is the fact that the OU market is far, far bigger than just the state of Oklahoma. Big enough that the SEC would take Okla State to get them. OU is one of the few Universities in the USA that has a nation wide market. Besides, KU isn't going anywhere without KSU tagging along so I figure they'll both end up together in the Big 10.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

It also shows that KU ranks 40th in fan base size overall to OSU ranking 41st. Therefore KU is just as viable an expansion prospect as OSU.

The problem with this poll is that they only surveyed 30,000 fans and then projected results. There isn't any way in hades that Kansas has more football "fans" than Oklahoma State. Basketball maybe on a national basis, but football? No. They can't give away tickets to Kansas football games. Additionally, the poll results are 6 years old.

[Cinco de Hogo]

The problem with this poll is that they only surveyed 30,000 fans and then projected results. There isn't any way in hades that Kansas has more football "fans" than Oklahoma State. Basketball maybe on a national basis, but football? No. They can't give away tickets to Kansas football games. Additionally, the poll results are 6 years old.

Heck who watches Kansas football?  I'll bet you a lot of Arkansans watch OSU football and would turn from a Kansas game to a OSU game in a sec if they were going to watch football at those two team were on different channels at the same time.

[RME]

The problem with this poll is that they only surveyed 30,000 fans and then projected results. There isn't any way in hades that Kansas has more football "fans" than Oklahoma State. Basketball maybe on a national basis, but football? No. They can't give away tickets to Kansas football games. Additionally, the poll results are 6 years old.

I agree that I would like to see up-to-date data that isn't 6 years old.

But I can see (at that time), KU having a larger amount of fans, based on location if nothing else (and maybe some leftover high from their '07/'08 seasons). Proximity to Topeka, and ~40 miles from Kansas City, I can see it. Compared to Oklahoma State who is a clear little brother to Oklahoma in the state, plus probably some fan leakage into Texas schools, I can definitely see it.

Also, Kansas does have a larger enrollment than Oklahoma State, therefore producing more alumni and potential "fans."

Apart from that, yeah they're absolutely God awful. But I can see why they are (or were in 2011) ranked higher.

[Hogwild]

What you keep ignoring is the fact that the OU market is far, far bigger than just the state of Oklahoma. Big enough that the SEC would take Okla State to get them. OU is one of the few Universities in the USA that has a nation wide market. Besides, KU isn't going anywhere without KSU tagging along so I figure they'll both end up together in the Big 10.

If that was true why did the Pac 12 pass on taking them?  OU & OK State wanted to go to the Pac 12, the conference ran the numbers and the university presidents said no. 


There is no way in hell that the Big 10 is going to add two schools from Kansas.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I agree that I would like to see up-to-date data that isn't 6 years old.

But I can see (at that time), KU having a larger amount of fans, based on location if nothing else (and maybe some leftover high from their '07/'08 seasons). Proximity to Topeka, and ~40 miles from Kansas City, I can see it. Compared to Oklahoma State who is a clear little brother to Oklahoma in the state, plus probably some fan leakage into Texas schools, I can definitely see it.

Also, Kansas does have a larger enrollment than Oklahoma State, therefore producing more alumni and potential "fans."

Apart from that, yeah they're absolutely God awful. But I can see why they are (or were in 2011) ranked higher.

Here's some data that comes from Sports Media Watch with regard to how many viewers different games produced.

Saturday Dec 3, 2016
Oklahoma vs. Oklahoma State: 4.817 million viewers

Saturday Nov 26, 2016
Kansas vs. Kansas State: 264,000 viewers

I rest my case.

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college-football-tv-ratings/

[Cinco de Hogo]

What would be interesting would be the Neilson rating for each game the two played last year.

Ok I studied it pretty close and there is no doubt that OSU draws significantly better than Kansas.  Kansas even pulled mighty OU down below 1 mil viewers while the OSU/OU game drew about 3 mil.

One a side note, Arkansas has nothing to be ashamed of.  All games we played of note were top 8 for the weekend except MSU which was a little under 1 mil.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

What would be interesting would be the Neilson rating for each game the two played last year.

Well, you have the link.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

If that was true why did the Pac 12 pass on taking them?  OU & OK State wanted to go to the Pac 12, the conference ran the numbers and the university presidents said no. 


There is no way in hell that the Big 10 is going to add two schools from Kansas.

There were other issues at hand, like Baylor, who Texas politicians wanted to be a part of the deal. The Pac 12 didn't want a "religious" school. The deal fell apart.

[Inhogswetrust]

The ACC agreement doesn't expire for another 18 years while the Big 12 agreement expires in 2025. BIG difference. It would be far more expensive for VT to leave the ACC than it would for OU and Okla State to leave the big 12.

What part of things can change do you not understand................

[Inhogswetrust]

What you keep ignoring is the fact that the OU market is far, far bigger than just the state of Oklahoma. Big enough that the SEC would take Okla State to get them. OU is one of the few Universities in the USA that has a nation wide market. Besides, KU isn't going anywhere without KSU tagging along so I figure they'll both end up together in the Big 10.

I'm not ignoring anything. You think the OU fanbase is large enough across the whole country to make taking both them and OSU. I'd bet the SEC brass doesn't think so and neither do I. Actually neither one of us have a CLUE as to who might or not break apart from the same state.

[Inhogswetrust]

The problem with this poll is that they only surveyed 30,000 fans and then projected results. There isn't any way in hades that Kansas has more football "fans" than Oklahoma State. Basketball maybe on a national basis, but football? No. They can't give away tickets to Kansas football games. Additionally, the poll results are 6 years old.

Surveys make predictions of larger numbers based on smaller samples all the time.  Accuracy is not always 100% correct with surveys and statistics or Trump wouldn't be President now. I myself was dumbfounded when I read the list and rankings. Sure the list might be flawed. Also as to how old the list is perhaps in the year 2045 that list would be 100% accurate or not even 1% accurate.

[RME]

Here's some data that comes from Sports Media Watch with regard to how many viewers different games produced.

Saturday Dec 3, 2016
Oklahoma vs. Oklahoma State: 4.817 million viewers

Saturday Nov 26, 2016
Kansas vs. Kansas State: 264,000 viewers

I rest my case.

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college-football-tv-ratings/

I was talking about the estimated fanbase amount for an individual school Those ratings are nationwide, not related to specific, individual fanbases. That doesn't tell me much.

Of course the casual college football fan in California or Florida or New York is going to watch OU/OSU over KU/KSU. But that doesn't tell me anything about the individual fanbases of each school.

The OU/OSU game kicked off at 12:36 pm and shared a time slot with Temple/Navy, WKU/La. Tech, KSU/TCU, and Troy/Ga. Southern

The KU/KSU game kicked off at 11:59 am and shared a time slot with WKU/Marshall, Virginia/VT, UK/Louisville, and Michigan/OSU.

The nationwide viewership has little to do with that school's fanbase. I could be one of 16.8 million that watched Michigan/OSU, but I'm not representative of either of their fanbases.

[Inhogswetrust]

If that was true why did the Pac 12 pass on taking them?  OU & OK State wanted to go to the Pac 12, the conference ran the numbers and the university presidents said no. 


There is no way in hell that the Big 10 is going to add two schools from Kansas.

Nor any other state with the possible exception of Texas................neither will the SEC. and I doubt they would in Texas since they already got TAMU. They might would take one more from there though. I still doubt they would take both from Oklahoma. Now IF OU was to go elsewhere besides the SEC then I'd think they would look at trying to get OSU. In other words they might take either one by themselves but not both.

[Inhogswetrust]

There were other issues at hand, like Baylor, who Texas politicians wanted to be a part of the deal. The Pac 12 didn't want a "religious" school. The deal fell apart.

I don't remember but wasn't there also some issues with the shorthorn media rights and other things involving them?

[Inhogswetrust]

I was talking about the estimated fanbase amount for an individual school Those ratings are nationwide, not related to specific, individual fanbases. That doesn't tell me much.

Of course the casual college football fan in California or Florida or New York is going to watch OU/OSU over KU/KSU. But that doesn't tell me anything about the individual fanbases of each school.

The OU/OSU game kicked off at 12:36 pm and shared a time slot with Temple/Navy, WKU/La. Tech, KSU/TCU, and Troy/Ga. Southern

The KU/KSU game kicked off at 11:59 am and shared a time slot with WKU/Marshall, Virginia/VT, UK/Louisville, and Michigan/OSU.

The nationwide viewership has little to do with that school's fanbase. I could be one of 16.8 million that watched Michigan/OSU, but I'm not representative of either of their fanbases.

Well said. Also IF you put any school in the SEC I'd bet their viewership goes up. Some would dramatically go up.......................

[Cinco de Hogo]

Well, you have the link.

Yea I posted that just after you posted the link so I didn't see it til I posted. 

I viewed it, was very interesting, I didn't do numbers but I posted my thoughts on what I found.  It's not very close between OSU and Kansas.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I was talking about the estimated fanbase amount for an individual school Those ratings are nationwide, not related to specific, individual fanbases. That doesn't tell me much.

Of course the casual college football fan in California or Florida or New York is going to watch OU/OSU over KU/KSU. But that doesn't tell me anything about the individual fanbases of each school.

The OU/OSU game kicked off at 12:36 pm and shared a time slot with Temple/Navy, WKU/La. Tech, KSU/TCU, and Troy/Ga. Southern

The KU/KSU game kicked off at 11:59 am and shared a time slot with WKU/Marshall, Virginia/VT, UK/Louisville, and Michigan/OSU.

The nationwide viewership has little to do with that school's fanbase. I could be one of 16.8 million that watched Michigan/OSU, but I'm not representative of either of their fanbases.

I'll just put it this way (and no, it doesn't quote the # of fans each school has, which really doesn't matter), with regard to numbers of people who turned on their t.v.'s to watch a specific team or teams, Oklahoma State had 11 games telecast and averaged 2.203 million each game. Kansas football (bless their hearts) had 7 games telecast and averaged 458,000 each game.

OSU's most watched games were against Texas (3.9), TCU (3.825), OU (4.817) and Colorado (4.551).

Kansas' most watched games were against Okla State (454,000), Texas Tech (513,000), OU (636,000) and W. Virginia (827,000).

Just info for the masses.

[Hogwild]

There were other issues at hand, like Baylor, who Texas politicians wanted to be a part of the deal. The Pac 12 didn't want a "religious" school. The deal fell apart.

It had nothing to do with Baylor, the Pac 12 flat out turned down OU and OK state.

The Pac-12 Conference announced Tuesday night that it would not expand at this time, apparently ending one of the two stated options of OU and OSU.

OU President David Boren said Monday the Sooners were deciding between staying in the Big 12 and applying for the Pac-12. He indicated OU and OSU would be welcomed into the Pac-12. Just after 10 p.m. Oklahoma time, the Pac-12 released a statement that in part read "In light of the widespread speculation about potential scenarios for Conference realignment, the Pac-12 presidents and chancellors have affirmed their decision to remain a 12-team conference."

But if the Pac-12 closed the door on the Sooners — and some sources indicated Scott failed to muster support from his presidents to get the Oklahoma schools admitted

http://newsok.com/article/3606252

[MuskogeeHogFan]

It had nothing to do with Baylor, the Pac 12 flat out turned down OU and OK state.

http://newsok.com/article/3606252

Thanks for the link and the reminder, but it did have to do with Baylor as well and Texas, though I realize that wasn't your question.

[GuvHog]

It had nothing to do with Baylor, the Pac 12 flat out turned down OU and OK state.

http://newsok.com/article/3606252

I think that had more to do with academics than anything else. The Pac 12 has high academic standards that all of the schools are held to so they are picky about what schools they add.

[Inhogswetrust]

I think that had more to do with academics than anything else. The Pac 12 has high academic standards that all of the schools are held to so they are picky about what schools they add.

Not really.....of the last four schools added UA, ASU, UU and CU only one ranks in the top 100 and that's CU at 92.  That's the same as the last four added to the SEC with TAMU actually higher at 74. Only a total of six in the PAC12 rank in the top 100. That's only ONE better than the SEC which has 5. I also submit that once you get past 75 or higher in number it doesn't make a bit of difference hardly.  In some respects the SEC is being as picky or pickier than the Pac12. I do admit that there are more higher ranked schools in the top 50 academically in the PAC12 with 4 but they have been in that conference a long time. The SEC has 2. IF the Pac12 had added Baylor they would have added the highest rated of all the most current additions of both conferences since they rank 71. Therefore IF it was about only academics then Baylor would have been the big catch for either conference. In other words both conferences care about academics but only up to a point when it is about what schools to add. By the way OU and OSU rank 111 and 152 respectively.

[RebelliousHog]

I never understood why Big 12 hasn't expanded a to at least 12.
UT
TTech
Baylor
Houston
SMU/ or an independent like AF
OU
OK
KU
KSU
Iowa St
TCU
WVU

Add Houston and SMU/independent like AF Academy. Even go after a big name like Notre Dame, not that the Domers would do it. I'm just arguing for the sake of arguing.

MY BAD: AF not an independent. Would have to steal them from Mountain West.

[Hogwild]

I never understood why Big 12 hasn't expanded a to at least 12.
UT
TTech
Baylor
Houston
SMU/ or an independent like AF
OU
OK
KU
KSU
Iowa St
TCU
WVU

Add Houston and SMU/independent like AF Academy. Even go after a big name like Notre Dame, not that the Domers would do it. I'm just arguing for the sake of arguing.

MY BAD: AF not an independent. Would have to steal them from Mountain West.

The reason is $$$$.  The Big 12 TV deals generated $313 million last year, divided by 10 that's just over $31 million per school.  If you add to more schools to the conference they would need to generate $62 million in revenue for the schools to stay revenue neutral. No network is going to increase the pot by that much for Air Force or SMU.

Of the 10 current members only half (Texas, OU, West Virginia, Kansas, Kansas St.) have revenue greater than their expenses. The conference needs to increase revenue and right now the only schools that would do that for them in Notre Dame.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

The reason is $$$$.  The Big 12 TV deals generated $313 million last year, divided by 10 that's just over $31 million per school.  If you add to more schools to the conference they would need to generate $62 million in revenue for the schools to stay revenue neutral. No network is going to increase the pot by that much for Air Force or SMU.

Of the 10 current members only half (Texas, OU, West Virginia, Kansas, Kansas St.) have revenue greater than their expenses. The conference needs to increase revenue and right now the only schools that would do that for them in Notre Dame.

While SMU isn't a good candidate, Houston draws better than Kansas, K-State, Iowa State and for the most part, Texas Tech when they play, even in the AAC. Especially when they play the better teams of the AAC and OOC teams. Houston would be one that would draw a bigger audience if they played in the B12. As it is they pull 1 mil + and more when they play bigger teams. Of course, winning has a lot to do with that.

[Karma]

1. Maybe Stoops wanted to expand, I'm not sure.
2. Your implication that non-expansion was a reason for his recent retirement just shows how little you have researched the reason for his retirement, Guv. It had nothing to do with the conference not pursuing expansion.
3. I've never read where Bob Stoops pushed for leaving the Big 12 and joining the SEC, though perhaps he did mention at some point.

Guv if you could just provide links to verify what you just posted it will help me learn some things that I wasn't previously aware of. Thanks.

I don't think you want to see a link to the place he is pulling this information out of.

[RebelliousHog]

I don't think you want to see a link to the place he is pulling this information out of.

LMAO

[Inhogswetrust]

While SMU isn't a good candidate, Houston draws better than Kansas, K-State, Iowa State and for the most part, Texas Tech when they play, even in the AAC. Especially when they play the better teams of the AAC and OOC teams. Houston would be one that would draw a bigger audience if they played in the B12. As it is they pull 1 mil + and more when they play bigger teams. Of course, winning has a lot to do with that.

Houston has one of the largest fair weather fan bases in the country. Always has.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Houston has one of the largest fair weather fan bases in the country. Always has.

Well maybe, maybe not. I respect your opinion, but it is opinion nonetheless. I looked at their numbers this past season on Sportsmedia Watch and the numbers that they pulled for each game that was televised. Better than those teams above that I listed in the Big 12. But there is the "rub". Texas, Texas Tech, TCU and to a lesser extent, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State probably don't want Houston to join because of the incursion it might mean on their recruiting. So do you add a team that pulls more viewership than 4-5 of the teams in your conference to bolster your t.v. numbers in exchange for them pilfering your recruiting in Texas? Maybe not.