you cray. TCU got elevated to big boy status and it's impacted recruiting heavily in Texas. Do the same thing to Houston and it'll be just as bad, if not worse.
imagine kliff recruiting against another P5 texas school - may not even be able to get 3 defensive recruits to sign
Nebraska leaves the B1G. Rutgers gets kicked out. Michigan schools move to the West. Purdue moves to the East.
In state schools aren't the problem with recruiting: http://247sports.com/Season/2016-Football/CompositeRecruitRankings?State=TX
UH showed up 3 times before tech did - them getting into the big 12 would keep kliff from signing a top 50 texas recruit ever again tbh
We sign like one a year anyway. That's a Tech problem and we should probably adjust our strategy as opposed to being scared of UH. My point is after Texas and A&M the next teams on the list are LSU, Bama, and Ole Miss.
Elevating UH to P5 status would definitely help their recruiting (and therefore hurt other instate schools). Would also help them keep their head coaches.
Yes it would help them. I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing for the Big 12. A rising tide lifts all boats.
Q. And the prospect of exploring expansion with teams already in Power Five conferences? DAVID BOREN: I think it would be inappropriate to comment about what teams have expressed interest to us. I want to underline the fact that -- that the Big 12 Conference has not gone out and sought conversations with other schools.
if you say so. the moment TCU joined the conference they passed us as a program and our recruiting got noticeably worse. same thing happens if we add houston and we sink to the 6th best program in the state
we can't because tech fans think 7 win kliff is way way different (wow he's a genius) than 7 win tuberville (wow this is the end of the world)
What's good for the B12 isn't necessarily good for anyone individual school within the conference. Some would possibly benefit, while others would not. I think adding UH to the B12 would be a bad thing for Tech, but not necessarily a bad thing for KSU or ISU.
The two are correlated, though TCU has averaged 11 wins for like 12 years. Joining the Big 12 gave them more exposure, but they had already run a ridiculous capital campaign, renovated or built all me facilities across the campus, and paid big for coaching. All this you already know, I'm just saying I don't believe their invitation didn't make it happen imo. They spent their way (combined with good hires) to relevance.
That can be argued, and that's Taques point too I believe. I guess my counter argument is the Big 12 has a perception problem, not an on the field one. More good teams doing good things on the national stage could be a route to resolution. More money is good too.
Despite not being competitive and looking for a way to help Coach Grandpa match Bo's success, I can't see Nebraska leaving the B1G just for third tier competition.
Missouri and A&M. Possibly Colorado. Or old Bill just doesn't know what he's talking about anymore. Nebraska's invested pretty heavily in the B1G, I don't see them bailing when they are going to start getting paid off in 2017.
There are a ton of Nebraska fans who hate the B1G, mostly older ones who just miss the old rivals and don't like the boring division they're in.
Justin A. McNabb– @Juddrock #BIG12CONFIRMED July 19 and stuff 6:15 AM - 11 Jul 2016 from Middletown, OH
A 13 team conference really screws up the idea of divisions. http://www.ncaa.com/news/football/a...usa-releases-one-year-schedule-model-13-teams
Yeah, i'd be surprised if Nebraska is disgruntled. The Huskers seem to have adjusted pretty well. I guess it's possible, though they are basically going back to a scenario they hated in the first place. I think Colorado is a no-brainer -- the Pac-12 with its network bumbling hasn't been the boon the Buffs were hoping for. Missouri could be a possibility just due to cultural fit and being a fish out of water in their division, but that's just pure speculation with no sort of proof behind it.