# Big Ten talking about being big 12 **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [December 16, 2009, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424 "2009-12-16T00:35:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 16
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/301 "2010-06-10T13:57:42Z")
The funny thing is that as of today, with just Nebraska moving so far, the Big 10 (twelve teams) is bigger than the Big XII (eleven teams). Also: no matter how much the Big Ten expands, I really hope they don’t change their name. ---
**Author:** ![notfrommensa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f14d63/32.png) [@notfrommensa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/notfrommensa)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/302 "2010-06-10T14:00:47Z")
Wow, the Colorado article says the PAC10 might push for two automatic BCS Bids, one from each division. That is pretty ballsy. > [@](#): > > The coach said it’s possible the Pac-16 would push for two automatic bids to the BCS, one for each division champion. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/303 "2010-06-10T14:12:30Z")
> [@notfrommensa](#): > > Wow, the Colorado article says the PAC10 might push for two automatic BCS Bids, one from each division. That is pretty ballsy. I can’t see the other conferences going along with that. ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Scud](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f08c70/32.png) [@Tom\_Scud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Scud)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/304 "2010-06-10T14:18:35Z")
> [@Skammer](#): > > The funny thing is that as of today, with just Nebraska moving so far, the Big 10 (twelve teams) is bigger than the Big XII (eleven teams). > > Also: no matter how much the Big Ten expands, I really hope they don’t change their name. My all-time favorite put-down of a conference is a term used fairly widely on the old Usenet college football newsgroup: Big (sic) Ten (sic). ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/305 "2010-06-10T14:18:42Z")
I think the soution is pretty obvious: Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Baylor, Colorado, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State to the Pac-10 USC to the NFL Notre Dame, Nebraska and the Rams to the Big 10. Missouri, Kansas, Kansas St and Iowa form the Big 10 Annex Conference. Baylor vs. Colorado…solved NFL in Los Angeles … solved Big 10 gets the Missouri TV market…solved. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/306 "2010-06-10T14:22:04Z")
> [@Gangster\_Octopus](#): > > USC to the NFL Sounds like they were halfway there already. 😉 And since they can’t go to a bowl game the next two years anyway, they might as well drop the pretense. ---
**Author:** ![notfrommensa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f14d63/32.png) [@notfrommensa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/notfrommensa)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/307 "2010-06-10T14:23:17Z")
**Gangster Octopus** , that looks like a Win-Win-Win-Win solution!! Good one! ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/308 "2010-06-10T14:43:02Z")
> [@Skammer](#): > > The funny thing is that as of today, with just Nebraska moving so far, the Big 10 (twelve teams) is bigger than the Big XII (eleven teams). > > Also: no matter how much the Big Ten expands, I really hope they don’t change their name. Best name I saw was something like Big T(w)[el]e(ve)n ---
**Author:** ![markdash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@markdash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/markdash)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/309 "2010-06-10T15:01:31Z")
I can’t see the Pac-10 taking both TT and Baylor. The Pac-10 prides itself on being an elite academic conference (perhaps bested only by the Ivy League, and some conferences made up of really small liberal arts colleges) with Stanford, UCLA, and Cal perenially among the top 30 or so universities. The expansion plan is already stretching those boundaries by adding OSU, OU, aTm, TT and Colorado… basically all the non-Texas schools. Plus, adding an expressly religious school would change the existing dynamic; both Pac-10 private schools (USC and Stanford) are non-denominational, unless you count the almighty dollar as a deity. ---
**Author:** ![mkecane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9e8a1a/32.png) [@mkecane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mkecane)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/310 "2010-06-10T15:08:12Z")
One thing I read on another message board, just as a fan’s proposal, not that it was leaked from an “inside source” or anything, would be to have the Super Conferences go with 4 divisions of 4 rather than 2 of 8. That way, you could keep the regional rivalries, maybe have 1 team from each other division as a rival, and rotate the rest. The last week of the season would be teams A1 vs B1, A2 vs B2, C4 vs D4, etc. Then, you get the winner’s of A1-B1 and C1-D1 to play each other for the conference championship. For scheduling, you’d know before the season starts that you’re playing at home or away for that TBD game, but the opponent would not necessarily be known. You’d have 3 teams in your division, and 2 from each other division, and 2 non-conference games, and the TBD game for a total of 12. I like that (without a whole lot of thought in it so far), and I think especially for the Pac10 with the California schools and the PacNW schools, you’d have something very workable. I’d be a way to get a playoff system of sorts with almost all the top schools involved, but wouldn’t add a whole lot more in terms of teams playing 15 or 16 games in an NCAA playoff. ---
**Author:** ![fiddlesticks](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddlesticks/32/18129_2.png) [@fiddlesticks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fiddlesticks)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/311 "2010-06-10T15:22:29Z")
Baylor is on the outside looking in unless this thing gets political. Oops…too late. ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/312 "2010-06-10T15:29:30Z")
Back to our hijack…the hammer’s coming down [pretty hard](http://sports.espn.go.com/los-angeles/ncf/news/story?id=5267933) on USC. 2 year bowl ban, 20 scholies, vacated wins from 2004. ---
**Author:** ![Wolverine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ba9def/32.png) [@Wolverine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wolverine)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/313 "2010-06-10T15:32:31Z")
> [@MD12](#): > > I can’t see the Pac-10 taking both TT and Baylor. The Pac-10 prides itself on being an elite academic conference (perhaps bested only by the Ivy League, and some conferences made up of really small liberal arts colleges) with Stanford, UCLA, and Cal perenially among the top 30 or so universities. You know, the small liberal arts colleges like the ones found in the Big Ten. You do realize that even adding Nebraska which would be considered the worst academically in the conference, ALL Big Ten schools are better than half your conference: Arizona, Arizona State, Oregon, Washington State, and _cough Oregon State cough_. And that’s not even counting the University of Chicago. ---
**Author:** ![Sir\_T-Cups](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ed655f/32.png) [@Sir\_T-Cups](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sir_T-Cups)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/314 "2010-06-10T15:56:46Z")
Apparently [Colorado](http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5271438) is pulling a Nebraska and announcing a ship jump. Regionally I think Neb and Mizzou work well for the Big Ten…but what about Kansas? **Raft People** that is hilarious ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/315 "2010-06-10T16:02:30Z")
> [@Wolverine](#): > > And that’s not even counting the University of Chicago. You mean Northwestern? U of C hasn’t been considered part of the Big Ten since 1946. ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Scud](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f08c70/32.png) [@Tom\_Scud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Scud)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/316 "2010-06-10T16:03:53Z")
> [@MD12](#): > > Plus, adding an expressly religious school would change the existing dynamic; both Pac-10 private schools (USC and Stanford) are non-denominational, unless you count the almighty dollar as a deity. They could always ditch Baylor and add Rice instead. ---
**Author:** ![Wolverine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ba9def/32.png) [@Wolverine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wolverine)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/317 "2010-06-10T16:20:24Z")
> [@pulykamell](#): > > You mean Northwestern? U of C hasn’t been considered part of the Big Ten since 1946. But they are a part of the [Committee on Institutional Cooperation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_on_Institutional_Cooperation). It is the academic equivalent of Big Ten athletics. UofC stopped competing in the Big Ten but it still shares academic resources with all of the member schools. If you want to talk about conferences academically, you need to include Chicago in the mix. However, I felt I didn’t need to include them to claim that the Big Ten is the best conference academically in the FBS. They’re just gravy. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/318 "2010-06-10T16:23:39Z")
> [@pulykamell](#): > > You mean Northwestern? U of C hasn’t been considered part of the Big Ten since 1946. Perhaps he meant the CIC, which Chicago is still in. As a Big Tenner, I’d like to see Nebraska, Missouri, and one other school. I’d like to see it limited to AAU members and keep the Big Ten as the leaders and best both academically and athletically. ---
**Author:** ![markdash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@markdash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/markdash)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/319 "2010-06-10T16:24:42Z")
> [@Wolverine](#): > > You know, the small liberal arts colleges like the ones found in the Big Ten. You do realize that even adding Nebraska which would be considered the worst academically in the conference, ALL Big Ten schools are better than half your conference: Arizona, Arizona State, Oregon, Washington State, and _cough Oregon State cough_. > > And that’s not even counting the University of Chicago. Point taken, but you didn’t have to take offense. ---
**Author:** ![fiddlesticks](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddlesticks/32/18129_2.png) [@fiddlesticks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fiddlesticks)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424/320 "2010-06-10T16:28:25Z")
> [@Sir\_T-Cups](#): > > Regionally I think Neb and Mizzou work well for the Big Ten…but what about Kansas? Mizzou is one of the huge losers in the deal…apparently they bluffed when they should have called. Missouri is probably a better deal in terms of geographic fit, population numbers and existing rivalries, but it looks like Nebraska will be the sole invitee from the “West”…all further Big Ten+X expansion will be focused on the East Coast markets, either Rutgers and/or Maryland, and obviously, Notre Dame. Reading some of the insider coverage at [orangebloods.com](http://orangebloods.com), it sounds like NO ONE likes Missouri for whatever reason. Must have gotten too “uppity” in their Chase Daniel days. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-ten-talking-about-being-big-12/521424.md?page=17)