The new conference is fine. And I do believe that T.O. is right in saying that our move was due to the instability of the Big 12 overall, and not to spite Texas. Lots of teams, MU, A&M, Texas, Oklahoma, and CU were all among the rumor talk for moving out of the league. Big 10 wanted to add where the Big 12 looked ready to implode.
As far as the teams and culture stuff, I respectfully disagree.
Texas beat us a bunch of times and there is a lot of venom here for the Longhorns. I would have liked to stay in the league and turned that tide in our favor. We would have gotten it done. I have complete faith in that. Drivable games will be missed in CU, K-State, KU, ISU, and Missouri. We are down to just Iowa and Minnesota now and none are as close as say KU or KSU.
The conference power residing in the south argument seemed silly to me. I don't think it was all that much of a big deal to have the Big 12 title game in Dallas and what not.
Big 10 fit is good for our program, but our schedule just got a lot tougher. First off, we have to play Penn State every year. That's always going to be a tough out, particularly at Beaver Stadium, a house of horrors historically for our program. We replace Kansas with Minnesota, not a bit difference there. K-State and Northwestern seem similar from a football difficulty perspective. Missouri and Michigan State are probably a wash. Who here thinks playing Iowa will be the same as playing Iowa State? And Michigan has tradition and a base on which to build a powerful program. We play them instead of Colorado, a team that lacks a football compass.
Good fit. I understand. Difficulty level goes up though and I fear that if and when these teams beat us very much, attitudes will change a lot and in a hurry.