So NU SHould Have Went Back to the Big 12?

[ColoradoHusk]

45 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

This is one big reason why I can't figure out why Texas, OU, OSU, Clemson..etc....would all want to be in the same conference with Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Florida...etc.

 

If the playoffs take one team from every P5 conference, then one team is going to get the automatic bid and the rest will be fighting for the left over spots.  If Texas and OU really are as great as they think they are, then staying in their own conference (Big 12) would give them a better chance to be in the playoffs.

It's all money.  That's the only reason.  Plus, if I am OU, I am already recruiting in the top 5 programs in the country, so joining the SEC will maintain that level going forward.  If the playoff expands to 12 teams, the SEC is so big and strong, that I could see at least 4 teams coming from the SEC every year.  Yeah, OU may have down years, but I would expect them to be among those 4 teams 75% of the time.

[nic]

6 hours ago, hskrfan4life said:

So why does the B1G give a crap about AAU? We ain't the ivy league...

I feel like all of my "must be in the the AAU posts"  have been ignored.  It because the big10 is arrogant. Wisconsin and Mich were the deciding votes to kick NU out....if I remember right.

[Mavric]

 

[The Murphinator]

 

[Toe]

<insert conspiracy theories about Missouri's AD trying to get in the way of OU & UT getting into the SEC and being forced to resign>

[BigRedBuster]

1 hour ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

 

As I mentioned a few hundred posts back, you would be able to make the case that a team that comes out of the SEC at 10-2 might be a helluva lot better than a team that runs the table in the Big XII or Pac 12 -- maybe the ACC & BIG10 as well. And it wouldn't even be SEC bias.  Likewise, if one of those SEC powerhouses loses its playoff spot to a 9-3 Oklahoma State, that's not exactly great for college football. 

It’s a hell of a lot better for college football than all SEC. 

[BigRedBuster]

1 hour ago, ColoradoHusk said:

It's all money.  That's the only reason.  Plus, if I am OU, I am already recruiting in the top 5 programs in the country, so joining the SEC will maintain that level going forward.  If the playoff expands to 12 teams, the SEC is so big and strong, that I could see at least 4 teams coming from the SEC every year.  Yeah, OU may have down years, but I would expect them to be among those 4 teams 75% of the time.

That money dries up some if nobody cares but one region of the country because nobody else cares anymore. 

[Nebraska55fan]

42 minutes ago, Toe said:

<insert conspiracy theories about Missouri's AD trying to get in the way of OU & UT getting into the SEC and being forced to resign>

 

It is quite the coincidence. An AD resigning right now at this time- when college football is in a very critical stage. 

 

Don't underestimate the Texas money and political maneuvering. Or even ESPN for that matter. 

[B.B. Hemingway]

I just hope that Texas ruins the SEC, somehow.

[Crusader Husker]

30 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

I just hope that Texas ruins the SEC, somehow.

If anyone can do it, Texas can!

[FrantzHardySwag]

Honestly if you are gonna just dilute the conf with questionable additions, might as well not do anything. Much smarter play then adding KU and ISU just to add teams. 

[Notre Dame Joe]

 

On 7/26/2021 at 8:53 AM, VectorVictor said:

Except that we know this is bulls*** because Oklahoma was part of the five team plan to move to the B1G that A&M scuttled because of their greed. 
 

Morons like Adam keep clinging to this when they don’t really care—they knew Nebraska was going to lose its AAU membership before we joined. 

I thought the 2011 plan was to form a PAC-16. 

[Notre Dame Joe]

7 hours ago, ZRod said:

I'm curious what Oklahoma fans think of this. They're never making the playoffs again with their current brand if they join the SEC or B1G. They barely get in as is.

I have been asking that question a lot lately. I think the answer is that the President and BMDs would rather associate with richer partners than win conference or national titles. 

 

One rumor that seems plausible is that the other conferences could retaliate by opposing the playoff expansion. We know now that the SEC guys who negotiated it had OU/UT in mind.   If everyone else banded together to keep the playoff at four, then treacherous twosome basically moved themselves under a glass ceiling. 

[funhusker]

4 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

I have been asking that question a lot lately. I think the answer is that the President and BMDs would rather associate with richer partners than win conference or national titles. 

 

One rumor that seems plausible is that the other conferences could retaliate by opposing the playoff expansion. We know now that the SEC guys who negotiated it had OU/UT in mind.   If everyone else banded together to keep the playoff at four, then treacherous twosome basically moved themselves under a glass ceiling. 

I say still expand to 12, or even 16.  But only include the 12 (or 16) highest ranked conference champs.  No “at large”.  Norte Dame and other independents can decide if they want to play for nattys or not.

[southernoregonhusker]

26 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

 

I thought the 2011 plan was to form a PAC-16. 

Texas fans playing victim?   That's rich.

 

The plan was to form the Pac 16.  Texas got greedy wanted to keep the Bonghorn Network and were told to pound sand.