probably will get bad reps for this but

[Paperback Writer]

FWIW, Colin Cowherd said on his show today that CU and Utah are Pac-10 bound.

And I would add that BYU is Big12 bound. There's no way the Utah politicans will allow Utah to leave the MWC without a good landing spot for BYU. And the PAC10 is not going to invite BYU. Although losing the Denver/Colorado market will hurt somewhat, I can't think of a better repacement than BYU for the Big12 in terms of competitiveness in multiple programs, facilities, fan base, etc. And NU fans won't have the fear of a drunken student section yelling obscenities and throwing urine bombs when they come to visit.

 

[sd'sker]

FWIW, Colin Cowherd said on his show today that CU and Utah are Pac-10 bound.

And I would add that BYU is Big12 bound. There's no way the Utah politicans will allow Utah to leave the MWC without a good landing spot for BYU. And the PAC10 is not going to invite BYU. Although losing the Denver/Colorado market will hurt somewhat, I can't think of a better repacement than BYU for the Big12 in terms of competitiveness in multiple programs, facilities, fan base, etc. And NU fans won't have the fear of a drunken student section yelling obscenities and throwing urine bombs when they come to visit.

i can't see CU leaving their/THE greatest rivalry ever, NU v. CU!

edit: and what will beachbuff do?

 

[Nexus]

FWIW, Colin Cowherd said on his show today that CU and Utah are Pac-10 bound.

And I would add that BYU is Big12 bound. There's no way the Utah politicans will allow Utah to leave the MWC without a good landing spot for BYU. And the PAC10 is not going to invite BYU. Although losing the Denver/Colorado market will hurt somewhat, I can't think of a better repacement than BYU for the Big12 in terms of competitiveness in multiple programs, facilities, fan base, etc. And NU fans won't have the fear of a drunken student section yelling obscenities and throwing urine bombs when they come to visit.

I've heard among all the expansion chatter the past couple of months that BYU would NEVER accept an invitation to the Pac-10 because of their political differences. Supposedly the Pac-10 is too liberal for BYU's taste. Also I've read that their religious affiliation is a turn off to the Pac-10 as well.

Among that same chatter, they said BYU is a better fit in the Big XII, politically speaking.

 

[skersfan]

I think this expansion stuff is based on super conferences. 16 teams in each, with conference champions playing each other and the one plus for a National champion.

I think Nebraska going to the Big 10 in the regular scenario kills the program. We recruit in Texas and the draw for them is that they play close to home and can be seen by parents and family.

Travel to Big ten powers would become a problem for the lesser sports. Texas will never join the Big 10 for those reasons I think.

If the super conferences do start to appear, we will stay where we are, bring Boise State and TCU into the fray. BYU and another one would make the 16.

It is all about money, so if we are truly offered by the Big 10 as the only addition, with their tv deal it is most likely a good deal, but it would not be the cake walk some think. Weather is normally worse there in the late season, would require divisions, but it is very interesting. I would love to see us play Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State every year or group there of. If we can continue to recruit in Texas like we are now.

Recruiting in Ohio/Michigan will be hard to get the top kids, they are bitter rivals and the best players go to one or the other normally.

 

[default_28]

I may be in the minority here but in all te expansion I would love to see the big 12 go untouched. Look at what happened to the big east when all there good football teams bolted for the ACC.

I would be more inclined to word it this way

'Look at what happened to the ACC after they stole the good football schools from the Big East.'

If there was a reason to not want Nebraska to bolt to the Big Ten it's because we've seen what happened to the ACC when they expanded. The three teams that bolted to the ACC all took a step back and the other Powers in the conference also took steps back. Will this happen to the Big Ten? I think it might since the Big Ten has had a reputation of being a paper tiger for many years now.

Most wins since 1970:

Nebraska - 393 wins

Ohio St. - 366 wins

Oklahoma - 364 wins

Michigan - 359 wins

Penn St. - 357 wins

3 of the Top 5 teams are from the Big 10.

I'm sorry for being dense but what were you responding to in my post?

Was it where I said the conference had a reputation for being a paper tiger? Because I was only referring to their reputation(rightly or wrongly) of not being able to beat quality teams out of conference and in bowl games. Not that they couldn't win games in general.

 

[Nexus]

I may be in the minority here but in all te expansion I would love to see the big 12 go untouched. Look at what happened to the big east when all there good football teams bolted for the ACC.

I would be more inclined to word it this way

'Look at what happened to the ACC after they stole the good football schools from the Big East.'

If there was a reason to not want Nebraska to bolt to the Big Ten it's because we've seen what happened to the ACC when they expanded. The three teams that bolted to the ACC all took a step back and the other Powers in the conference also took steps back. Will this happen to the Big Ten? I think it might since the Big Ten has had a reputation of being a paper tiger for many years now.

Most wins since 1970:

Nebraska - 393 wins

Ohio St. - 366 wins

Oklahoma - 364 wins

Michigan - 359 wins

Penn St. - 357 wins

3 of the Top 5 teams are from the Big 10.

I'm sorry for being dense but what were you responding to in my post?

Was it where I said the conference had a reputation for being a paper tiger? Because I was only referring to their reputation(rightly or wrongly) of not being able to beat quality teams out of conference and in bowl games. Not that they couldn't win games in general.

The same argument could be made against Nebraska too though. Bear in mind that under T.O. we had a losing bowl record of 12-13. There have been numerous non-conference opponents during his 25 year tenure that have beaten us during the regular season: Syracuse, Florida St., UCLA, Wisconsin, Washington St., Alabama, Iowa, Penn St. and the list goes on.

We would regularly plow through 6 of our conference foes in the Big 8 (with a few losses here and there) and then sometimes beat OU on a good day. Switzer got the best of Osborne all those years going 12-5 against us.

 

[bshirt]

Most wins since 1970:

Nebraska - 393 wins

Ohio St. - 366 wins

Oklahoma - 364 wins

Michigan - 359 wins

Penn St. - 357 wins 20 years NOT in the Big Can't Count - they were independent with a schedule much weaker than Notre Dumb most years

3 of the Top 5 teams are from the Big 10.

Well I would be fat and lazy if I played Indiana, Northwestern, Perdon't, Illinois, Mich St, Minnesota and most years Iowa all the time

Yup.

Watching the "tough" Big10 get it's head kicked in during the bowls the last several years has been comical.

 

[sd'sker]

Most wins since 1970:

Nebraska - 393 wins

Ohio St. - 366 wins

Oklahoma - 364 wins

Michigan - 359 wins

Penn St. - 357 wins 20 years NOT in the Big Can't Count - they were independent with a schedule much weaker than Notre Dumb most years

3 of the Top 5 teams are from the Big 10.

Well I would be fat and lazy if I played Indiana, Northwestern, Perdon't, Illinois, Mich St, Minnesota and most years Iowa all the time

Yup.

Watching the "tough" Big10 get it's head kicked in during the bowls the last several years has been comical.

they had a pretty impressive year this year. osu over oregon, iowa over ga. tech, psu over lsu.

 

[TheCheshireCat]

Here is another article on the situation which apparently does not look good for Nebraska:

There's a shift coming in major college football. And, its fallout, if seismic, could impact both LSU and Tulane.

 

The Big 10 Conference is expected to expand in the coming 12 to 18 months, if not sooner.

 

A source close to the process said that if the Big 10 takes just one school, it is likely to take the University of Missouri. But, if the conference, currently at 11 schools, expands to 16, the tremors in college football will be felt from coast-to-coast.

 

If the Big 10 goes to 16 teams, it would likely offer membership to several schools from the Big East including Connecticut and Syracuse. The source said the Big East could dissolve as a football league if that scenario plays out.

 

If the Big 10 goes to 16 teams, they will ask for 2 guaranteed spots in the BCS.

 

That could force the SEC to expand as well in order to grab 2 spots. Where would the SEC look?

 

To Texas and Oklahoma, of course. Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State could theoretically be asked to be part of a 16-team SEC. Can you imagine LSU in the SEC West with Oklahoma and Texas? And Florida continuing as its permanent football foe out of the East?

 

The Big 12 would then theoretically be minus Missouri, both Texas schools and both Oklahoma schools. What does the Big 12 do? Perhaps it adds Rice, Houston, SMU, UTEP, and possibly Tulane. But would this reconfigured Big 12 still get an automatic BCS spot?

 

Nebraska, returning to prominence under head coach Bo Pelini, could be left out of a BCS league. Said the source, “If I were Nebraska, I would be very nervous.”

 

The dominos would keep falling to the west. Expansion of the Big 10 and the SEC would then force the Pac 10 to expand. The Pac 10 would likely pursue Colorado, Utah and TCU.

 

If Utah and TCU bolt, what happens to the Mountain West Conference?

 

The reason for Big 10 expansion is, of course, money. Currently, the league gets 50 cents for every cable subscriber to the Big 10 Network that is in its “footprint.” For every subscriber the league gets outside of that, it gets $1.50. The economic windfall for the Big 10, if it included Kansas City, St Louis, and the entire east coast would be enormous.

 

Notre Dame we are told, is not likely to be part of a reconfigured Big 10.

 

And, what happens to the ACC?

 

Does the Atlantic Coast Conference expand and grab Louisville and Cincinnati?

 

Does the ACC, despite the fact that it has Florida State and Miami, invite Central Florida of Conference USA?

 

Conference shifts have always been a part of college football. In 1992, Arkansas left the Southwest Conference to join the SEC.

 

The University of Miami was an independent. The Hurricanes then joined the Big East, before moving again to the ACC.

 

Florida State was an independent before joining the ACC.

 

So, jumping leagues isn't out of the ordinary. But, the pending realignment, if it happens, will be the biggest in the history of the game.

http://www.neworleans.com/sports/sports-blogs/ed-daniels/377198-conference-expansion-dominos-could-fall-for-lsu-tulane.html#nola377198.htm

 

[Enhance]

Most wins since 1970:

Nebraska - 393 wins

Ohio St. - 366 wins

Oklahoma - 364 wins

Michigan - 359 wins

Penn St. - 357 wins 20 years NOT in the Big Can't Count - they were independent with a schedule much weaker than Notre Dumb most years

3 of the Top 5 teams are from the Big 10.

Well I would be fat and lazy if I played Indiana, Northwestern, Perdon't, Illinois, Mich St, Minnesota and most years Iowa all the time

Yup.

Watching the "tough" Big10 get it's head kicked in during the bowls the last several years has been comical.

they had a pretty impressive year this year. osu over oregon, iowa over ga. tech, psu over lsu.

Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and then.

The biggest hit to the Big 10's rep has been Ohio State's blunders in BCS games. Prior to 2009, they got beat by Texas, soundly beat by LSU in the title game, and soundly beat by Florida in the title game. They got beat in three of the biggest games nationally in three consecutive years.

Now, Nebraska didn't do so hot in bowl games in the late 80's and early 90's, but they were a physically dominant group of guys each year, regularly blowing out opposition or straight embarrassing some teams where everyone thought the game would be close. Ohio St. doesn't have an explosive offense and they had some unimpressive wins last year against pretty weak teams. That is a big difference, in my eyes.

 

[fro daddy]

From the Syracuse paper.

MU, NE, Syracuse, Pitt & Rutgers

If i were NE i would have NO, I repeat, NO!!!, worries about being left out if everything expands to super conferences. Although you might not get your first pick, your biggest program, the one that is the biggest for everyone, would be to great of a get for someone not to pick you over bundles of others. Personally I would love to see MU and NE leave the BIG12 together for the Big whatever if things went that way. I think it benifits both schools greatly. Both the athletic and acadimic budgets would increase greatly. NE all ready has a big money maker in football, what could the university do in other sports/programs/upgrades with an extra 11 million every year. Beyond that you could keep natural 'border' rivalries and develop new ones. (god know i wouldnt want to claim MU as a rival, some peoples heads might explode ) Also NE could then schedule a yearly OU game just like USC/ND, FL/FSU/MIAMI, KENTUCKY/LOUIS and so on.

I look at it this way, I think chances are better something happens now, then they are that nothing does. SO do you want to be a part of the choice beginning or the selection of the leftovers.

 

[knapplc]

You know the worst of it? If Nebraska were to join other schools in joining the Big 10, Time Warner in Lincoln would probably still refuse to add the Big Ten Network.

Jerks. :angry:

 

[fro daddy]

TW making a few college football/big 10 fans mad now would not compare to the pitchfork and rope that would be waiting for them if NE games were not available. :laughpound

 

[sd'sker]

Most wins since 1970:

Nebraska - 393 wins

Ohio St. - 366 wins

Oklahoma - 364 wins

Michigan - 359 wins

Penn St. - 357 wins 20 years NOT in the Big Can't Count - they were independent with a schedule much weaker than Notre Dumb most years

3 of the Top 5 teams are from the Big 10.

Well I would be fat and lazy if I played Indiana, Northwestern, Perdon't, Illinois, Mich St, Minnesota and most years Iowa all the time

Yup.

Watching the "tough" Big10 get it's head kicked in during the bowls the last several years has been comical.

they had a pretty impressive year this year. osu over oregon, iowa over ga. tech, psu over lsu.

Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and then.

The biggest hit to the Big 10's rep has been Ohio State's blunders in BCS games. Prior to 2009, they got beat by Texas, soundly beat by LSU in the title game, and soundly beat by Florida in the title game. They got beat in three of the biggest games nationally in three consecutive years.

Now, Nebraska didn't do so hot in bowl games in the late 80's and early 90's, but they were a physically dominant group of guys each year, regularly blowing out opposition or straight embarrassing some teams where everyone thought the game would be close. Ohio St. doesn't have an explosive offense and they had some unimpressive wins last year against pretty weak teams. That is a big difference, in my eyes.

well, i was just talking about last year. however, your point about OSU's BCS blunders words both ways. although they were publicly humiliated, they were in the big game. i'm not a big 11 apologist, i was just saying that i was surprised the big 11 beat oregon, lsu, and ga. tech. would not have bet on that outcome. following your logic, nebraska followed a far worse path than OSU, starting with the humiliation of the 2001 MNC and continuing really up to the end of this last season.

 

[Paperback Writer]

FWIW, Colin Cowherd said on his show today that CU and Utah are Pac-10 bound.

And I would add that BYU is Big12 bound. There's no way the Utah politicans will allow Utah to leave the MWC without a good landing spot for BYU. And the PAC10 is not going to invite BYU. Although losing the Denver/Colorado market will hurt somewhat, I can't think of a better repacement than BYU for the Big12 in terms of competitiveness in multiple programs, facilities, fan base, etc. And NU fans won't have the fear of a drunken student section yelling obscenities and throwing urine bombs when they come to visit.

I've heard among all the expansion chatter the past couple of months that BYU would NEVER accept an invitation to the Pac-10 because of their political differences. Supposedly the Pac-10 is too liberal for BYU's taste. Also I've read that their religious affiliation is a turn off to the Pac-10 as well.

Among that same chatter, they said BYU is a better fit in the Big XII, politically speaking.

BYU would accept a PAC10 invite if offered; in fact, the PAC10 would be their first choice. But the feeling is not mutual. The PAC10, specifically Cal-Berkeley, would not allow a conservative, religiously affilated school like BYU to join the PAC10. And the PAC10 voting has to be unanimous for conference expansion.

But the powers that be don't have to go down that road of why BYU should or shouldn't be included in the PAC10 because they don't have to. The schools that the PAC10 want are Colorado and Utah. With Colorado's departure, the Big12 needs a replacement and there's no better alternative than BYU. And the Mormon political power in Utah can block Univ. of Utah from joing the PAC10 unless BYU has an acceptable BCS landing spot. From a cultural standpoint, the Big12 is a better fit for BYU as they already have a private, religiously affilated school in Baylor. In short, it is correct that BYU is a better fit, politically speaking, in the Big12 than the PAC10. But BYU's first choice would be the PAC10 but it's not going to happen. BYU will be happy to join the Big12 and the Big12 will be happy to have them in the wake of Colorado's departure. I just hope Missouri will stay in the Big12 so the conference can stay more-or-less intact.