According to orangebloods.com the PAC 10 is going to ask UT, TAM, OSU, OU, CU and TT to join the PAC 10

According to me.biz, it'll be a cold day in hell when that actually happens.

Pac-37?

Why doesn't our conference take four from theirs, so we can be the Sweet Sixteen Conference, and they can be the Six PAC?

Lew needs to get on this.

From Rivals

Thanks for the link to the interesting article.

In this scenario, it appears that KU is SOL and will be on the outside looking in. I thought it makes sense, based on KU's lack of football success, but then Nebraska appears to be on the outside looking in as well.

I guess it really boils down to population/eyeballs in a school's particular market; unfortunately, that's something that KU can't change and may ultimately lead to their relegation to also-ran conference status, along with the likes of Iowa State/Nebraska.

KU could really end up being screwed in this whole deal, and it will be interesting if there is anything proactive Lew can do to prevent this.

As college football becomes more and more tilted toward big biz, beware of sharks.

What's your problem with big business, shades? I demand to see your Patriot card IMMEDIATELY.

If that happened I would forever hate UT....you know the only reason Tech would be considered is because the Longhorns forced it.

Because the Texas Legislature forced it. And the Texas legislature won't permit this unless the little brothers, both of them and that means Baylor, are invited, too.

Personally, I think Baylor and TT should join the Mountain West with us.

SEANR9NE WHY WUOLD U HATE LONGHORNS FOR

I would like the conference to be:
After NU and MU leave for Big 11, Big 12 and Pac 10 combine. In football each team plays other division schools. 9 game conference schedule. After last division game the east plays the west. The first place team plays the first place team, second vs. second, third vs. third, etc. Even years the east schools host the game, odd years the west host the game. That give you 10 conference games. One non con game. ISU could play Iowa. KSU could play St. Marys school of the blind, etc.

If UT would drop their own personal TV network and opt in to a Big 12 network, all the other members of the Big 12 would be happy and nobody would be looking to jump ship. UT's steadfast refusal to do so, while tying desperately to keep the Big 12 together is a tough sell to the schools potentially being courted by other conferences. In the end virtually every scenario I've read leaves KU, ISU and KSU sh!t out of luck. It's amazing that no conference would want one of the top 3 basketball schools in the nation, the 30th biggest TV market, one of the top 10 wealthiest athletic departments and one of the highest selling brand names in all of college athletics. Hell, they get a state with a similar sized population to Oklahoma and a lot more national brand appeal, not to mention better academics and more $$ than either OSU or OU has. I guess a stagnant overall state population and geography will screw us in the end if any of this crap happens.

I hope to hell Lew and our Chancellor can work some sweet magic if any of this sh!t goes down and we end up in one of the new giant mega-conferences, otherwise anyone left out will slowly and surely slide into a mid-major also ran status. It really looks like 95% of all of this is being driven by pure potential athletic $$ and the other 5% is being driven by academics and potential academic $$. Fans are playing little to no role so far, other than speculating.

Well I know Colorado wants out because they suck. Can't we just let them go?

and can only say that in my humble mind this cannot and will not happen to the league. Somehow, they'll make sense, mend fences and work out a solution that fits the nature of this league. I can't imagine aTm, for example, running off to Pullman, WA and Corvallis, OR to play wbb. It just doesn't make sense.

The Big 12 should just mess with them and invite 4 pac10 teams to the Big 12.

It would be funny to see Mike Stoops again.

From what I understand, we're on the outside looking in because we have our own "Tech-type" problem over in Mancrappy...

The land granters have their ways, I guess. Although Tech is not in that family of schools.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_land-grant_universities

I'd think Texas would want to have ku with them, with ku being elite and all. Plus, they'd pad their record with cupcakes, seeing how you've never beaten them in football.

K-State would definitely not be welcome. We're the conference paupers that own the Longhorns, the richest team in the conference. Definitely not the way to go for the 'Horns.

So, by virtue of beating one team in the conference, you AREN'T the weaker of the two Kansas schools? Must be nice to focus like a laser beam on one category and draw massive conclusions from it. But I guess that's what the whole DoD was about.........

We ARE discussing the Big 12, no? So tell me ku's winning percentage in Big 12 play? Did it ever get past .350? Didn't think so. K-State's is above .600 in conference play, so it would appear that we dominated more schools than Texas, including ku (you've lost, what, 15 of the last 20?). The conclusion was not drawn from a "laser beam on one category". I'd be pleased to discuss all the other ways K-State was an asset to the conference in football, and how ku was too in it's own way (namely, a cupcake to pad the stats with). Make no mistake, the realignment is centered on football--that's where conferences make their gravy.

I differ from many 'Cat fans in that I don't want any mandates that ku be forced to take K-State with them to any conference they can find to accept them.
1. Don't think ku will find a better conference than K-State to begin with.
2. There's a chance that anyone that would want Kansas TV sets would not want them split with another conference, despite ku's insistence that everyone in Kansas loves ku, and only a few isolated farmers are fans of K-State.

I'd urge ku to look out for itself, ditto for K-State.

gus, you are right that football drives most of this. HOWEVER, that doesn't mean you ONLY look at the conference stats when considering a football program's status. If you can't accept that, I can't help you.

I wouldn't be surprised if, someday (20 years from now? 30 years? who knows?), college football essentially boils down to one or two super-conferences containing about 30 teams, with the Big Guys not much giving a damn what happens to the rest of the college football world.

For lack of a better term, call it an evolving (or devolving) toward the College Football Big Biz Model.

Proceeds and glory, baby.

Don't worry mdfraz, nobody can help little gussy out. Of course not everyone in Kansas loves KU, there's plenty of delusional jealous small minded people with Napoleon complexes like gussy running around as well as a few smart but misguided individuals too.

Kstate is hands down a GREAT get for any conference with their solid football tradition. I mean after all, it wasn't just a decade of being second best to Nebraska, no it's like 15 years or something. Plus, Old Balls isn't dead YET. So long as bucktooth is kicking over there, you can expect kstate to go AT LEAST .500 against FCS schools in a given year. Now granted, nobody and I mean NOBODY has ever managed to win in mancrappy besides ol' BS, but that's talking about the past and the near future. FOCUS ON THE NOW. Right now, KU's football team is breaking in a new coaching staff while kstate is reloading juco talent and trying to figure out who their next failure of a coach will be. When you think about it, this really does make kstate an interesting addition to a conference. You can claim that they didn't suck less than a decade ago and then you can beat the snot out of them for decades. Look for the Big Televen to say "To hell with academics, we want soil judging championships!" Isn't that right, kitty?