Possible Big 10 Expansion Sooner Than Expected?

[tenacious_dog]

Losing the St. Louis and Kansas City markets doesn't hurt? The Big 10 wouldn't be interested if Missouri didn't bring something to the table.

I think the problem with Missouri is their admin has been very fickle over the years. Plus they haven't been a top drawer program athletically. The Big 12 feels they more than make up for what they lose in Missouri if they hang together and make the deal with the PAC 10.

Missouri fits the bill for the Big 10 academically, which is a big deal with them, and they are acceptable athletically. Ohio State won't mind having another team in the conference they can whip up on.

More than likely, Missouri gets a soft landing no matter what happens.

[tenacious_dog]

With the MWC delaying their invite of Boise St till later in the month - makes me think the West goes nuclear....

Thompson is probably one of the smartest commissioners in the nation and they KNOW something is up and that Texas and other Big XII schools to the PAC10 has some serious legs to it - if not they would be inviting Boise TODAY -

He KNOWS they (MWC) could end up with CU, KU, KState, ISU, Baylor and or any combination of those schools in addition to Boise St -

Basically any of these programs could trump Boise...

Very very interesting -

You're absolutely right about Boise if it goes nuclear out west. Until that gets settled, it makes sense for the MWC to keep their powder dry for the time being.

I'll bet the Boise admin is massively bent if this gets put on hold. For all they've done, they still haven't developed enough gravity on their own.

[HogDawg]

Baylor fights back!

"Baylor continues to make a major push to be part of any Pac-10 expansion plan with its fellow South members (Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State). In a Twitter post, Pete Thamel of the New York Times reported that Baylor "appears to have bumped" Colorado in the expansion sweepstakes."

Baylor's academics --and political clout-- seem to be winning over the PAC 10 crowd.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont....793f801a.html

The scuttlebutt in Texas is that the PAC 10 is more concerned with Texas Tech's academics (or lack thereof) than they are with any concerns about Baylor. Apparently Baylor's academic profile fits nicely in the PAC 10.


HD

[HogDawg]

More.............

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...e.1ada11c.html


HD

[DONW]

When's the last time you heard a rich man say he didn't need any more money?

I don't know anybody that that made $135,000,000 last year. Everybody I know is going broke because they have their money invested in the stock market.

[HogDawg]

"While Baylor is working to secure its spot, one source familiar with the process indicated that some Pac-10 presidents might have concerns about the academic credentials of schools like Texas Tech and Oklahoma State."


http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...l.1accba0.html


HD

[dchi72]

Baylor fights back!

"Baylor continues to make a major push to be part of any Pac-10 expansion plan with its fellow South members (Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State). In a Twitter post, Pete Thamel of the New York Times reported that Baylor "appears to have bumped" Colorado in the expansion sweepstakes."

Baylor's academics --and political clout-- seem to be winning over the PAC 10 crowd.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont....793f801a.html

The scuttlebutt in Texas is that the PAC 10 is more concerned with Texas Tech's academics (or lack thereof) than they are with any concerns about Baylor. Apparently Baylor's academic profile fits nicely in the PAC 10.


HD

I do not have any inside sources but I am hearing the same thing.

Baylor is more attractive to the PAC10 due to academics and thier overall sports package.

Texas has as they stated in emails to Ohio State, a "Tech" problem.

[hookdown]

It still might happen, but I do not see Cal, Stanford, Oregon, etc. voting for Baylor. They are somewhat more "acceptable" I suppose than BYU, but they still have a lot of baggage in the eyes of the left coast libs...

[Dawg06]

Baylor fights back!

"Baylor continues to make a major push to be part of any Pac-10 expansion plan with its fellow South members (Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State). In a Twitter post, Pete Thamel of the New York Times reported that Baylor "appears to have bumped" Colorado in the expansion sweepstakes."

Baylor's academics --and political clout-- seem to be winning over the PAC 10 crowd.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont....793f801a.html

The scuttlebutt in Texas is that the PAC 10 is more concerned with Texas Tech's academics (or lack thereof) than they are with any concerns about Baylor. Apparently Baylor's academic profile fits nicely in the PAC 10.


HD

Baylor has the academics, but I don't see Baylor's Southern Baptists fitting in well with the Left Coast, much like BYU.

[johnnylightnin]

Baylor isn't Southern Baptist...hasn't been for a while.

[HogDawg]

It still might happen, but I do not see Cal, Stanford, Oregon, etc. voting for Baylor. They are somewhat more "acceptable" I suppose than BYU, but they still have a lot of baggage in the eyes of the left coast libs...

They (CAL, Stanford, Oregon, etc...) won't have a choice. If they want Texas and Texas A&M, they are gonna have to take Baylor too. The Texas legislature is likely going to see to that.

This is VERY smart politics on the part of the state of Texas. It's in the state of Texas' best interest to get as many schools as possible into the new PAC 16.


HD

[Dawg06]

Baylor isn't Southern Baptist...hasn't been for a while.

Amidst concerns of a potential fundamentalist takeover, the university changed the terms of its charter in 1991 with the permission of the Texas legislature in order to establish a governance less directly dependent upon the Baptist General Convention of Texas. The Baptist General Convention of Texas continues to elect one-quarter of the members of the university's all Baptist Board of Regents, Baylor's governing board.

[Champ967]

Amidst concerns of a potential fundamentalist takeover, the university changed the terms of its charter in 1991 with the permission of the Texas legislature in order to establish a governance less directly dependent upon the Baptist General Convention of Texas. The Baptist General Convention of Texas continues to elect one-quarter of the members of the university's all Baptist Board of Regents, Baylor's governing board.

[johnnylightnin]

Amidst concerns of a potential fundamentalist takeover, the university changed the terms of its charter in 1991 with the permission of the Texas legislature in order to establish a governance less directly dependent upon the Baptist General Convention of Texas. The Baptist General Convention of Texas continues to elect one-quarter of the members of the university's all Baptist Board of Regents, Baylor's governing board.

Baptists in the south do not equate to Southern Baptist.

[inudesu]

Amidst concerns of a potential fundamentalist takeover, the university changed the terms of its charter in 1991 with the permission of the Texas legislature in order to establish a governance less directly dependent upon the Baptist General Convention of Texas. The Baptist General Convention of Texas continues to elect one-quarter of the members of the university's all Baptist Board of Regents, Baylor's governing board.

Baptists in the south do not equate to Southern Baptist.

Baylor is a Texas Baptist school, not a Southern Baptist School. Many Texas Baptists are also Southern Baptist, but the SBC does not run Baylor in any way.