My point is and remains that Texas is already the largest and most profitable athletic department in the country and because of that there isn't much of an incentive to do anything because their current financial model clearly works, despite being saddled with a bad TV deal. the gains that Texas might incur by moving to the Big 10 are not that big relative to their current profit margins. If you want Texas to join you have to make it worth their while, The Big 10 simply offering for Texas to be included in the conference isn't enough. If the Big 10 is serious about adding a 12th school and they decide that Texas is going to be their target then Texas will be operating from a position of strength. As an athletic department and as a university they want for nothing and have nearly bottomless resources. It would be up to the Big 10 to prove that a move would be worth it to their bottom line in the long run, which is debatable.

DaBrowns41 wrote: Very interesting article. I think it'd be a HUGE upgrade if Texas moved to the Big 10, although I just don't see it happening. I wouldn't be opposed to it, and it would help the Big Ten get back to elite status.

We are back to "elite status" and don't need Tex-ass.

dude realy breaks it down nice, i think the key to his reasoning has to be "think like a college president and not like a drunk fan" (i threw in the drunken part) sounds like the big 12 is shakey at best and the loss of any team especially Texas would cripple it or destroy it all together.

Texas would be a huge addition to the Big 10 but I wouldn't get too fired up over the opinion of one person's blog. I highly doubt Texas would bolt for the Big 10, financially it makes sense but they already have more money than they can spend and logistically it's stupid for them to do so. Plus, they pretty much have a strangle hold on the Big 12 along with Oklahoma, there's a good chance that the Big 12 gets two teams to the BCS every year, Texas' chances would be reduced by joining the Big 10........JMHO.

I want Nebraska

My vote goes to Rutgers. But FWIW, it was a good read...

Hesston wrote: dude realy breaks it down nice, i think the key to his reasoning has to be "think like a college president and not like a drunk fan" (i threw in the drunken part) sounds like the big 12 is shakey at best and the loss of any team especially Texas would cripple it or destroy it all together.

Eh, the Big 12 is fine until someone leaves (which may not happen for a long while), THEN you could classify it as "shaky".

Do you think the President of Texas and the Big 10 Conference folks are looking on the net somewhere and putting any credibility in a blog by a guy named "FranktheTank"?

Kentucky

Little Danny wrote: Do you think the President of Texas and the Big 10 Conference folks are looking on the net somewhere and putting any credibility in a blog by a guy named "FranktheTank"?

In the article it states that his idea was used by the Big Ten's lawyer in a description of their expansion plans.

(Note that the excellent Big Ten lawyer blog The Rivalry, Esq. borrowed a modified version of the 11 + 1 = 13 concept in its own analysis of Big Ten expansion candidates and gave a shout out my way in the process.)

I'm not sure I believe his numbers on TV revenue sharing. If I'm not mistaken, Texas makes much more than other B12 schools. There was an attempt to create a B12 network, similar to the B10 network a few years back and Texas put a stop to it because they made more revenue on their own than sharing.

Lets be honest here. Nebraska would be the best fit. They are the 3rd most valuable football school, have a HUGE fan base nationwide, would make a perfect anchor for a west division with neighbors (Iowa), rank #1 for PPV revenue when their games aren't available, midwest, smashmouth, defense, great facilities, and the B10 network would make bank when huskers fans lined up in droves to get it.

of course texas makes more sense than missouri or rutgers, but texas is not a realistic option and we all know it deep down.