Cincy and the Big 12

[amory]

Actually, based on what's happened in the past I can totally see that happening.

Well yeah. Rule #1 is alive and well.

I'm just saying that rationally speaking, expansion without UConn makes no sense.

 

[MattMang23]

I saw a comment above about guessing who is in our camp and who is against us, but I'm not scrolling back up to hit reply. If I would venture a guess, I'm going to guess the following:

Oklahoma: Wants expansion, obviously. Likes us. Would probably be willing to compromise and take UC and BYU over us if the three of us all bear out closely in television analysis. Would not substitute any other candidate but BYU/Cincy for us is my inclination, but would vote yes for us if it were put as a yes/no question.

WVU: Firmly in the exapansion camp. Likes us. Would be less willing than OU to substitute BYU for us for travel reasons, but would probably be willing to substitute Memphis, or a directional Florida for us if asked to. Would vote yes for us if asked.

Kansas: On the fence on expansion. Is willing to compromise and expand if the right schools are taken. Chatter I've read has said that UC and us are the two they would prefer and are seen as acceptable if expansion has to happen, but they'd rather not expand if it isn't necessary. If there's a yes/no vote on us, they'd vote yes.

Kansas St.: See Kansas, although they seem, based on Cincinnati emails, that they're a bit more inclined to expand. Yes on us, with reservation.

Iowa St.: Another fence rider. Haven't heard much from them. If I had to guess, they'd stick with KU and vote as they do. Swing vote but if OU, KU and the like are championing us, it'll be a yes.

OSU: Mostly crickets in Stillwater. I'd be willing to say that as OU goes, the Cowboys go. Yes on us if BYU is not on the table.

That brings us to Texas.

Texas: Firmly anti-expansion. Would be persuaded to expand only if monetary considerations are made their way. I get the idea that they're totally OK with staying as close to Texas with the teams in the league as they can possibly be so Houston may be appealing here. The only way they're willing to bring in an outpost like UConn is if they can't be the king of conference payouts without having the NYC DMA. If a compromise is reached and their bottom line isn't hurt by the LHN transitioning to a conference network (ie. A network is created and even without NYC/northeast the network still pays them what they make now- even if it's an imbalanced revenue distribution.) we would be off the table for them. They'd go in the direction of Houston or directional Florida. If the only way they make more or the same money by having a conference network is by adding NYC, they'll do it, but they will exhaust every avenue before signing off. We are a no for them as it stands now.

Texas Tech: Red Raiders definitely would be trying to keep in Texas' good graces. They don't like that they're not profiting off a network while Texas does anymore than anyone else but don't want to upset big brother. They're a no for us at the moment but they'll swing yes quickly if we add the money that no one else can.

Baylor: Badly needs a network. If this league implodes they have few options. TCU would be scooped up before they would be due to proximity to Dallas. Would certainly like to keep playing nice with Texas but with their own future on the line, they're going to end up siding with Oklahoma. They got into BXII on a compromise to begin with. They don't want this league to fall apart. Candidates would likely be sticking point for them but I don't see them being in a strong enough position to go against a candidate OU is pushing if the TV money backs that candidate up.

TCU: See Baylor.

In all, in a vacuum, I think we are safely looking at OU, OSU, KU, KSU, WVU and ISU saying yes to us if it's a simple yes/no. Baylor and TCU are next in line to shift that way followed by TTU and finally Texas. Problem is that it's not a simple yes/no. There will be suggestions made to substitute one school for another and many of the schools on the list would just as soon vote for a UC/BYU combo if the money is in the same ballpark.

We need to hope our TV analysis blows theirs out of the water so much so that subsituting us seems like a silly proposition.

 

[ct06111]

http://newsok.com/how-david-boren-f...rss&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

On potential expansion targets: “We’re all talking with each other. We’ve agreed not to speculate about any one school or another school that might get in. But we have some good choices. We’ve all agreed to be very confidential about schools. We don’t want to let some school{Cincinnati} get a lot of publicity and they’re ‘oh, they’re about to get in the Big 12,’ and maybe they don’t get in. We don’t want to have any of that. So we’re trying to keep that all in-house.”

Its best for the Courant and Tdog to keep quiet…

 

[huskymedic]

Only cuz it was posted yesterday.

JasonKirkSBNMar 11, 3:24pm via TweetDeck
Cincinnati's Big 12 video pitch includes a reminder Tommy Tuberville once went 13-0 at Auburn
http://www.sbnation.com/college-foo...nnati-big-12-conference-expansion-realignment

 

[MattMang23]

And most of us didn't have a receding hairline

 

[SubbaBub]

Facts don't always carry the day in business. Perception matters and it matters a lot. Decision makers make there bones by thinking they know better. Bad decision makers think they are smarter than facts sometimes, see Swofford and the ACC.

I'd wager that at this time last year over half the B12 presidents and AD's couldn't find Storrs on a map. I know that half the B12 fan base couldn't. The fan base does influence the decision makers because it's their donations and opinions that keep the decision makers in power, especially in Texas. Mack Brown doesn't have it anymore...gone.

The margin of breaking Rule #1 can be that small. Every little bit counts and that means intangibles count and relationships count. Underestimate them at your own peril.

 

[UConn Dan]

Only cuz it was posted yesterday.

JasonKirkSBNMar 11, 3:24pm via TweetDeck
Cincinnati's Big 12 video pitch includes a reminder Tommy Tuberville once went 13-0 at Auburn
http://www.sbnation.com/college-foo...nnati-big-12-conference-expansion-realignment

In one of the videos Mick Cronin performs a Hoboken Squat Cobbler - fully clothed of course.

 

[mavblues]

In one of the videos Mick Cronin performs a Hoboken Squat Cobbler - fully clothed of course.

Was he crying?

 

[Charley Horse]

I'm on a terrible device at the moment so I can't write much but I'm thinking some concerns expressed are unfounded. I hope to elaborate more later but for now just let me say:
Texas may not be as anti-expansion as you think;
Texas certainly wouldn't advocate Houston to the Big 12;
Of all expansion candidates, i have reasons to think UConn is Texas' choice.

 

[Charley Horse]

I can expound now, but first a disclaimer. I'm no insider. I'm just a long-time Texas fan in Austin who follows the Horns religiously, connects the dots and draws conclusions based on experience.

1. Texas and expansionism. Texas was anti-expansion at one time but now everybody (chancellor, president and AD) is new. When the new players left millions on the table to sign a recent contract with Nike instead of Under Armour, they justified it by saying they value relationships.

Now think of Texas' rivals: Arkansas, Texas A&M and Oklahoma. Thanks to realignments, OU is the only one left. I can't even imagine Texas athletics without OU as an adversary.

If Texas really values relationships more than money, they should be willing to make a concession or two to hang onto the very last rival they have.

2. Texas and the U of H. Football is paramount and recruiting is its lifeblood. I seriously doubt Texas wants to help an in-state recruiting rival by giving them P5 legitimacy.

3. Texas and the expansion candidates. I think Cincy is in because they're Boren's pick. I think Texas will try to assert a preference too. Texas isn't picking an in-state rival (like U of H) or another church school (like BYU). So who would Texas pick? I happen to think that a school that values its brand so much that it plays basketball in China and hosts fund raisers in Dubai would salivate at the thought of being one of the flagship schools of a conference with an in-footprint presence in Hartford and NYC.

And that's why I'm here, trying to get to know the thoughts of UConn fans better. I see the writing on the wall.

Some of you may imagine Texas is Uconn's adversary when it comes to expansion. I'm thinking UConn is actually Texas' nominee.

 

[junglehusky]

@Charley Horse - thanks for your UT perspective. My perception a year ago was that UConn had a nonzero shot at the Big12, so President Herbst should make contacts and tell UConn's story. But I thought at the time the chances although nonzero, were very low. Not that other candidates have more to offer, I did and do think UConn's portfolio overall is as good as or better than other G5 candidates. But I couldn't imagine that most of the B12 schools valued those assets (research, basketball, olympic sports, access to NY + southern New England market).

Once Berry Tramel from Oklahoma wrote that UConn was likely to be a top ~5 candidate, and that at least OU and WVU were pro-UConn, and others started talking about academics and research I started to believe UConn had a much better chance. I know UT is an outstanding research institution. I don't have a great handle on Texas politics but I know there is some complex dynamics at play in the statehouse between UT, A&M and Houston (for starters). I'm confident if/when Susan Herbst meets with UT leadership they'll like what they see on the academics/research side at least. My hope is UT decides to support Cincy/UConn and can convince Baylor, TCU and Tech at least to vote with them.

And our football has been in a prolonged funk but Diaco will at least make it an adequate program!

 

[Charley Horse]

Hey junglehusky, you're right about complex dynamics at the statehouse. I can't even begin to disentangle or describe the multitude of paradoxes involved, but a lot can be guessed based on personalities and precedents.

In 1994 Texas flirted with the Pac-10 while A&M eyed the SEC but the most powerful people in state government were Ann Richards (a Baylor-ex) and Bob Bullocks (a Texas Tech undergrad and Baylor law school grad) so Texas and A&M were not allowed to go anywhere without Baylor or Tech.

Note that Baylor, a private church school was protected, but Houston, a public school was left to fend for itself, simply because of the people who happened to be in power at the time.

I thought that set a precedent and I assumed Texas and A&M would always be tied together regardless of whatever tertiary school of the day was protected, but in 2012 when Rick Perry (an A&M grad) was the most powerful person in Texas, A&M was able to leave the others to join the SEC.

So maybe a new precedent has been set and teams can look out for their best interest.

UofH likes to rally its political supporters but they've never been able to accomplish anything.

The old SWC was hampered by small church schools with small fanbases so I suspect Texas has resented being saddled with Baylor and I am utterly amazed that they acquiesced to allowing TCU in the Big 12. (The story is that TCU's AD took Texas' old AD, DeLoss Dodd's out of for a night of drinking and that's the only reason Texas finally said yes). It also makes me think Texas will never agree to BYU joining the conference.

When I look at UConn, I see everything Texas (the University) values in a partner: a state flagship; great academics; a commitment to excellence; outstanding athletic programs for men and women; great facilities; a dedicated fan base; an appealing destination.

Other candidates don't have all of those things.

I'm really anxious to see how things work out.

 

[Duncan Idaho]

Hey junglehusky, you're right about complex dynamics at the statehouse. I can't even begin to disentangle or describe the multitude of paradoxes involved, but a lot can be guessed based on personalities and precedents.

In 1994 Texas flirted with the Pac-10 while A&M eyed the SEC but the most powerful people in state government were Ann Richards (a Baylor-ex) and Bob Bullocks (a Texas Tech undergrad and Baylor law school grad) so Texas and A&M were not allowed to go anywhere without Baylor or Tech.

Note that Baylor, a private church school was protected, but Houston, a public school was left to fend for itself, simply because of the people who happened to be in power at the time.

I thought that set a precedent and I assumed Texas and A&M would always be tied together regardless of whatever tertiary school of the day was protected, but in 2012 when Rick Perry (an A&M grad) was the most powerful person in Texas, A&M was able to leave the others to join the SEC.

So maybe a new precedent has been set and teams can look out for their best interest.

UofH likes to rally its political supporters but they've never been able to accomplish anything.

The old SWC was hampered by small church schools with small fanbases so I suspect Texas has resented being saddled with Baylor and I am utterly amazed that they acquiesced to allowing TCU in the Big 12. (The story is that TCU's AD took Texas' old AD, DeLoss Dodd's out of for a night of drinking and that's the only reason Texas finally said yes). It also makes me think Texas will never agree to BYU joining the conference.

When I look at UConn, I see everything Texas (the University) values in a partner: a state flagship; great academics; a commitment to excellence; outstanding athletic programs for men and women; great facilities; a dedicated fan base; an appealing destination.

Other candidates don't have all of those things.

I'm really anxious to see how things work out.

Thanks for the kind words, Charley. Hope you can spread them around your way.

 

[UT4Big12]

Hey junglehusky, you're right about complex dynamics at the statehouse. I can't even begin to disentangle or describe the multitude of paradoxes involved, but a lot can be guessed based on personalities and precedents.

In 1994 Texas flirted with the Pac-10 while A&M eyed the SEC but the most powerful people in state government were Ann Richards (a Baylor-ex) and Bob Bullocks (a Texas Tech undergrad and Baylor law school grad) so Texas and A&M were not allowed to go anywhere without Baylor or Tech.

Note that Baylor, a private church school was protected, but Houston, a public school was left to fend for itself, simply because of the people who happened to be in power at the time.

I thought that set a precedent and I assumed Texas and A&M would always be tied together regardless of whatever tertiary school of the day was protected, but in 2012 when Rick Perry (an A&M grad) was the most powerful person in Texas, A&M was able to leave the others to join the SEC.

So maybe a new precedent has been set and teams can look out for their best interest.

UofH likes to rally its political supporters but they've never been able to accomplish anything.

The old SWC was hampered by small church schools with small fanbases so I suspect Texas has resented being saddled with Baylor and I am utterly amazed that they acquiesced to allowing TCU in the Big 12. (The story is that TCU's AD took Texas' old AD, DeLoss Dodd's out of for a night of drinking and that's the only reason Texas finally said yes). It also makes me think Texas will never agree to BYU joining the conference.

When I look at UConn, I see everything Texas (the University) values in a partner: a state flagship; great academics; a commitment to excellence; outstanding athletic programs for men and women; great facilities; a dedicated fan base; an appealing destination.

Other candidates don't have all of those things.

I'm really anxious to see how things work out.

Charley, I've been reading the posts in this thread throughout the day and thinking the same as what you posted here.
Texas will never allow UH to be a member of the Big 12. UT will never give UH p5 legitimacy. Since the 2001 bleacher gate incident, UT followed up by deliberately not scheduling UH as an out-of-conference opponent. It is hilarious that the chairman of UH's BOR had the audacity to ask state politicians to force the Big 12 to take UH. Obviously he is not aware of UT's political clout in the state capital and the state governor is a UT grad.

UH says bleachers no-go amid conflicting reports - Houston Chronicle
Board of Regents chairman wants to threaten Houston's way into the Big 12 | Dr. Saturday - Yahoo Sports

There is no question UT would back UConn for Big 12 membership over anyone else. You and I know this because we are familiar with what the UT administrators would be looking for in an expansion candidate.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

Hey junglehusky, you're right about complex dynamics at the statehouse. I can't even begin to disentangle or describe the multitude of paradoxes involved, but a lot can be guessed based on personalities and precedents.

Thanks for your insight.

Question, and pardon my ignorance of Texas state politics. A while back in late 2015 I was told that the folks at U Texas were very concerned over the growing political power of A&M in Austin, which you noted. Thus, my Texas friend advised that U Texas may invite U Houston into the XII to 'save' it and in turn guarantee that people aligned with U Houston would vote to support U Texas in any statehouse row with the A&M contingent. Any truth to that?

More recently, I have been advised that the threat of U Oklahoma leaving the XII for the SEC or B1G would be a greater loss to U Texas than internal Texas politics. The Long Horns have realized that adding Houston and Memphis, for example, would guarantee Oklahoma leaving and thus are now less likely to approve U Houston ti the XII.

 

[Charley Horse]

Thanks for your insight.

Question, and pardon my ignorance of Texas state politics. A while back in late 2015 I was told that the folks at U Texas were very concerned over the growing political power of A&M in Austin, which you noted. Thus, my Texas friend advised that U Texas may invite U Houston into the XII to 'save' it and in turn guarantee that people aligned with U Houston would vote to support U Texas in any statehouse row with the A&M contingent. Any truth to that?

More recently, I have been advised that the threat of U Oklahoma leaving the XII for the SEC or B1G would be a greater loss to U Texas than internal Texas politics. The Long Horns have realized that adding Houston and Memphis, for example, would guarantee Oklahoma leaving and thus are now less likely to approve U Houston ti the XII.

Hmm... when Perry was governor he tried to load the Board of Regents with his donors (minions) to oust the president, Bill Powers. But that was the only even-remotely A&M driven political power play I caught wind of. And now both Perry and Powers have moved on and the new governor is a Texas ex.

I can't even fathom what Texas and A&M could be fighting over because politically what's good for one is usually good for the other.

I've heard a few overly dramatic fans anguish over the thought of Houston becoming an SEC town because of all the Aggies there and how the Big 12 needs the UofH to save the Big 12 but for a number of reasons that's not a very valid concern or solution.

And you're right. I too think Texas wants to keep OU and is willing to play ball to do so.

 

[UT4Big12]

Thanks for your insight.

Question, and pardon my ignorance of Texas state politics. A while back in late 2015 I was told that the folks at U Texas were very concerned over the growing political power of A&M in Austin, which you noted. Thus, my Texas friend advised that U Texas may invite U Houston into the XII to 'save' it and in turn guarantee that people aligned with U Houston would vote to support U Texas in any statehouse row with the A&M contingent. Any truth to that?

More recently, I have been advised that the threat of U Oklahoma leaving the XII for the SEC or B1G would be a greater loss to U Texas than internal Texas politics. The Long Horns have realized that adding Houston and Memphis, for example, would guarantee Oklahoma leaving and thus are now less likely to approve U Houston ti the XII.

The present governor is a UT grad. The previous governor was a Texas A&M grad. He tried to cause problems for UT academics, which backfired.

UT has never been under any obligation to invite UH, especially not for any political reason. UT has the largest university system in the state and it carries a lot of weight in state politics.

Not long ago, it was rumored Oklahoma's Boren favored UH as a new member. I don't know what changed, but now Cincinnati seems to be Oklahoma's preference. Memphis was never a consideration by either UT or Oklahoma.

On the Big 12 message boards, OU's president is getting a lot of criticism for the way he conducts himself in public on Big 12 issues that should be kept quiet and only discussed behind closed doors.

 

[Adios]

All UT has to do is keep graduating notable Houston residents and it's good.