Welcome to the HornSports Forum

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our Texas Longhorns message board community.

SignUp Now!

**Running College Football Updates Thread**

Why not take SMU?
SMU has an undergraduate enrollment of just under 7000. SMU is in Texas, the BIG12 already has plenty of Texas teams including TCU in the DFW area.

I don't think bigger is better. I think there are 2 main criteria in expansion decisions,  the first is long term viability and survival.  I think that's what drove the BIG12 to take the 4 teams they took. If viability isn't a concern then the second reason comes into play, you try to add teams that you believe will enhance the per team value of the league.  

It seems to me SMU would mostly just be an extra mouth to feed, and wouldn't make the BIG12 any more stable. Sure a very weak PAC may take SMU, but IMHO that's not a good enough reason to take such a small school.

 
SMU has an undergraduate enrollment of just under 7000. SMU is in Texas, the BIG12 already has plenty of Texas teams including TCU in the DFW area.

I don't think bigger is better. I think there are 2 main criteria in expansion decisions,  the first is long term viability and survival.  I think that's what drove the BIG12 to take the 4 teams they took. If viability isn't a concern then the second reason comes into play, you try to add teams that you believe will enhance the per team value of the league.  

It seems to me SMU would mostly just be an extra mouth to feed, and wouldn't make the BIG12 any more stable. Sure a very weak PAC may take SMU, but IMHO that's not a good enough reason to take such a small school.
True but that small school has has beat TCU in two times in 3 yrs previous. Maybe they don't want all transfers from UT on field.?

 
Yes but USC & UCLA to big 10  weird too, as is UT,aggie,& okie to SEC
USC and UCLA to big 10 won't last. California is financially going downhill fast. I didn't mean for that to rhyme lol

UT and ou and aggy at least but up to the long existing SEC lines. None of the three schools had an option to go anywhere else that was worthwhile.

 
USC and UCLA to big 10 won't last. California is financially going downhill fast. I didn't mean for that to rhyme lol
What mechanism do you think will make it not last?

The only way I could imagine teams being effectively kicked out of a conference,  is if schools from several conferences decided they were going to all simultaneously leave and form a new conference.  Financially this would be attractive to the big schools. 

 
SMU?....Why not UTSA?
At least they have descent enrollment figures,  and are working hard to move up the food chain, both academically and in football. 

  If they can continue to build on that, then eventually they may become an expansion target for someone. 

 
4 hours ago, TFloss32 said:


I guess Kansas is improved. So, maybe this is not as much of a dis as I first thought. With a fair amount of luck, I could see CU winning the Big 12 in 2024.

 
At least they have descent enrollment figures,  and are working hard to move up the food chain, both academically and in football. 

  If they can continue to build on that, then eventually they may become an expansion target for someone. 
UTSA just jumped up from Conference USA to the AAC.

 
21 minutes ago, TFloss32 said:


Yormark seems like a good fit for the big12. 

Seems that he is all in in regards to making this a basketball conference, especially if he can add Arizona, UCONN or Gonzaga. 

Destined to be 3rd or 4th best in football so just go after the next biggest sport.

 
Back
Top Bottom