Notre Dame, Texas, Nebraska

[husker98]

The plot on the story lady and gents only continues too thicken.

 

Check this out. http://spartannation.com/?p=12002

 

 

Scroll too the bottom near offices.

 

Don't know if this is for real or not but if it is we may as well start packing now.

 

Yeah I already posted this in post #11.

 

i fail sorry

[Nexus]

The plot on the story lady and gents only continues too thicken.

 

Check this out. http://spartannation.com/?p=12002

 

 

Scroll too the bottom near offices.

 

Don't know if this is for real or not but if it is we may as well start packing now.

 

Yeah I already posted this in post #11.

 

i fail sorry

 

No biggie.

[74Hunter]

The whole thing seems not much more than the Rumorville stuff from two years ago. It's unverifiable, but he "knows a guy" who's on the inside, and here's what he said.

 

The numbers don't add up, for one thing. The "report" states that Texas and Notre Dame are being allowed to play only 7 conference games, allowing them to play 6 OOC games. That adds up to 13, and that's one too many for the regular season. For someone who knows his stuff, that's a silly typo or a pretty funny oops!

 

What would the benefit be to Texas to play six OOC games? Aside from Oklahoma, what do they care who they play? They have no special relationship with Baylor, A&M and/or Tech that I'm aware of, and they don't require any other OOC games every year, like a game with Arkansas, which would be natural considering their SWC days, but if they don't care about that now, why would they care in the Big 10?

 

I'm with billdozer. Color me a skeptic on this one.

2 things:

 

1. The UT-A&M game, A&M is UTs #1 or #2 rival, and they seem to be a package deal.

 

2. If I read this correctly, there WON'T be a Big 10 championship game, instead each member will play one additional (13) game per year to add another week to the season, keeping the conference relevant while other conferences (Big 12, SEC, ACC) have their championship games.

 

It seems plausible, but I have a hard time believing that the other Big 10 schools would sign off on giving a 7-0 UT/ND the auto BCS game, while an 8-0 Big 10 champion tOSU, Mich, PSU, or Neb have to hope for an at large BCS bid. Well, now that you think of it, the chances of that happening are pretty good, especially if the Rose Bowl tie-in is still in play. 7-0 UT gets the BCS champtionship game while the 8-0 tOSU gets the Rose Bowl.

 

Really, it doesn't sound that far fetched.

[knapplc]

Except that:

 

1) Local guys from Michigan have already outed Honda as a non-credible source.

2) The package deal with A&M would include going to the same conference, so if they split with A&M, it doesn't do much good just to play one football game per year against them.

3) The NCAA only allows 12 regular season games per season. The exception is if one team is an FCS school, and it makes no sense that Texas would ask for a special clause to play a Div II school every year. That's not a fight worth fighting.

4) There is NO WAY Michigan, Ohio State and/or Penn State are going to bow down to Texas like the Big XII schools did when the conference was formed. I strongly doubt any of the Big 10 would, for any reason. They don't need Texas that much.

[wildman]

The whole thing seems not much more than the Rumorville stuff from two years ago. It's unverifiable, but he "knows a guy" who's on the inside, and here's what he said.

 

The numbers don't add up, for one thing. The "report" states that Texas and Notre Dame are being allowed to play only 7 conference games, allowing them to play 6 OOC games. That adds up to 13, and that's one too many for the regular season. For someone who knows his stuff, that's a silly typo or a pretty funny oops!

 

What would the benefit be to Texas to play six OOC games? Aside from Oklahoma, what do they care who they play? They have no special relationship with Baylor, A&M and/or Tech that I'm aware of, and they don't require any other OOC games every year, like a game with Arkansas, which would be natural considering their SWC days, but if they don't care about that now, why would they care in the Big 10?

 

I'm with billdozer. Color me a skeptic on this one.

2 things:

 

1. The UT-A&M game, A&M is UTs #1 or #2 rival, and they seem to be a package deal.

 

2. If I read this correctly, there WON'T be a Big 10 championship game, instead each member will play one additional (13) game per year to add another week to the season, keeping the conference relevant while other conferences (Big 12, SEC, ACC) have their championship games.

 

It seems plausible, but I have a hard time believing that the other Big 10 schools would sign off on giving a 7-0 UT/ND the auto BCS game, while an 8-0 Big 10 champion tOSU, Mich, PSU, or Neb have to hope for an at large BCS bid. Well, now that you think of it, the chances of that happening are pretty good, especially if the Rose Bowl tie-in is still in play. 7-0 UT gets the BCS champtionship game while the 8-0 tOSU gets the Rose Bowl.

 

Really, it doesn't sound that far fetched.

 

The problem I see with that is this. Say for example Alabama is undefeated ranked #1 Oklahoma stays in whats left of big 12 is also undefeated and ranked #2. Then wouldn't a undefeated Texas or Notre Dame undefeated ranked at highest #3 automatically go to the rose bowl which could leave a undefeated Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Nebraska out of the bcs game?

 

If that happens the best they could hope for is an at large bid for a different BCS game at best. The only way it would be doable is if the 7-0 Texas/ND team would automatically go to the National Championship game leaving the Rose Bowl open for the undefeated true Big 10 Champ.

 

Would that scenario happen every year no. But it could and probably would happen quite frequently or at least have a good potential to. If that goes through that way then the current Big 10 members more than likely would vote it down. As it would pretty much state the current and future members of Big 10 are important but not as important as Notre Dame and Texas.

[74Hunter]

3) The NCAA only allows 12 regular season games per season. The exception is if one team is an FCS school, and it makes no sense that Texas would ask for a special clause to play a Div II school every year. That's not a fight worth fighting.

I'm not aware of this, and is there any possibility that the NCAA would allow 13 regular season games? I think in some instances they do.

 

Also, I was referring to A&M being another one of the teams that the Big 10 would be considering because of the package deal with UT. My point was that UT and A&M have a special relationship and are true rivals.

[junior4949]

I just have a gut feeling Nebraska's going to be on the outside looking in when it's all said and done.

[knapplc]

Well, at some point we have to start using Occam's Razor and decide whether all of these conditions would/will be met, ranging from the special considerations allowed by a conference well-known for not treating any individual school different than the rest and including the NCAA hopping on board with a rule change spawned, apparently, by Texas' out-of-the-blue desire to play six non-con games (a desire that has yet to be satisfactorily explained), OR we can think this is all a bunch of hogwash.

 

I'm going with hogwash.

[knapplc]

I just have a gut feeling Nebraska's going to be on the outside looking in when it's all said and done.

All evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

[Judoka]

3) The NCAA only allows 12 regular season games per season. The exception is if one team is an FCS school, and it makes no sense that Texas would ask for a special clause to play a Div II school every year. That's not a fight worth fighting.

I'm not aware of this, and is there any possibility that the NCAA would allow 13 regular season games? I think in some instances they do.

 

Also, I was referring to A&M being another one of the teams that the Big 10 would be considering because of the package deal with UT. My point was that UT and A&M have a special relationship and are true rivals.

A team is allowed one extra home game if they play at Hawai'i. So in that instance 13 would be possible for a regular season.

[Caven]

Well, at some point we have to start using Occam's Razor and decide whether all of these conditions would/will be met, ranging from the special considerations allowed by a conference well-known for not treating any individual school different than the rest and including the NCAA hopping on board with a rule change spawned, apparently, by Texas' out-of-the-blue desire to play six non-con games (a desire that has yet to be satisfactorily explained), OR we can think this is all a bunch of hogwash.

 

I'm going with hogwash.

 

[HuskerTrucker]

I am totally against either Texas or Notre Dame getting any special considerations. This is the same crap we are putting up with in the Big 12 with Texas now, and it is getting old. They are not special...and should not be treated special. If I was any of the current Big Ten teams, I would tell Delaney that if they make special rules for these two teams they would not vote for the expansion. Period.

 

As far as Nebraska goes, if they get special rules, I would object, and I would think twice about heading to the Big Ten. Missouri is acting desperate, and I would bet they are in no matter what. They have no class, no standards to live by. We on the other hand, should have.

[huskerscott]

I am totally against either Texas or Notre Dame getting any special considerations. This is the same crap we are putting up with in the Big 12 with Texas now, and it is getting old. They are not special...and should not be treated special. If I was any of the current Big Ten teams, I would tell Delaney that if they make special rules for these two teams they would not vote for the expansion. Period.

 

As far as Nebraska goes, if they get special rules, I would object, and I would think twice about heading to the Big Ten. Missouri is acting desperate, and I would bet they are in no matter what. They have no class, no standards to live by. We on the other hand, should have.

 

 

Completely Agree.

[junior4949]

You are right. We should have, but money talks especially now.

[HuskerBCS]

working with freaking Beebe to hold the 12 together with a weakened south. I'd say add Utah and BYU or TCU and BYU or Utah.

 

If we get left in a conference that is adding mid-major teams to fill its slots, I will be so pi$$ed. If Texas, Texas A&M, Missouri and/or a combo of the 3 go to the Big 10, you know that teams like Oklahoma and Oklahoma State will be looking to join the SEC. Where then does that leave us? I feel like the Big 12 is going to die off and we will be left joining who knows what conference. If the Big 12 starts dissolving then we had better be headed to the Big 10 or Nebraska Football and athletics as a whole could be in serious trouble.