Big 12 will add b/w 1 & 3 schools to join Colorado in 2024, sources told @ActionNetworkHQ. League will 1st seek others from Pac-12 to join. If none do so, Big 12 would add 1 Group of 5 (UConn, Memphis, SDSU or UNLV) to reach even number of teams in 2024https://t.co/j31J8IUMQN pic.twitter.com/rXcumkWoqn

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) July 27, 2023

PAC 12 teams better hurry we don't have many spots left
Does this increase the pressure on the Pac 12!

gobears20 said:

---

PAC 12 teams better hurry we don't have many spots left
Does this increase the pressure on the Pac 12!

---

Yep. If I were Brett Yormark, I'd call Arizona's president and AD and put a hard deadline on a decision.

Colorado's decision sends all the leverage to the Big 12 and puts real pressure/urgency on the PAC-12 leftovers. Be patient with Oregon and Washington, but get No. 14 locked up quickly.

Tell Arizona they have first dibs at that 14th spot, but that offer is conditional. And if they don't make a decision by the deadline, move on to the next Four Corners school.

The only schools worth waiting on at this point are the Pacific Northwest schools. Take advantage of the situation to lock up a second PAC-12 defector and ratchet up the pressure on the real prizes.

Really wish we hadn't been so quick to bring in UC and UCF.

West
Oregon
Oregon State
Utah
BYU
Arizona
Arizona State
Colorado

East
Baylor
Texas Tech
TCU
Oklahoma State
Iowa State
Houston
West Virginia

Team America said:

---

Really wish we hadn't been so quick to bring in UC and UCF.

---

Colorado said those were highlights of joining the big 12 ironically

The Big 12 is going to remain divisionless.

Team America said:

---

Really wish we hadn't been so quick to bring in UC and UCF.

West
Oregon
Oregon State
Utah
BYU
Arizona
Arizona State
Colorado

East
Baylor
Texas Tech
TCU
Oklahoma State
Iowa State
Houston
West Virginia

---

I don't understand the buyer's remorse with UC and UCF. I posted about this in another thread. They are good teams that have upside. They want to be here. They are hungry to prove they belong. UC has been in a power conference and we're basically the first loser in the Big East implosion. They have been to the CFP recently. UCF is a huge school that is carrying more and more of their market. They put a good product on the field. Their biggest struggle is that they are less than 50 years old, so they don't have the history. Both of these schools are better than Oregon State in markets, potential market growth, and the the product they put on the field. I am glad we got them.

I think there is a consensus that if Oregon and Washington join the Big 12 that they will just be here until they get an invite from the Big 10. UC and UCF seem to be here for the long haul and will be working towards the long term success of our conference.

agreed . only bad entry was houston. UC and UCF are good adds.

Team America said:

---

Really wish we hadn't been so quick to bring in UC and UCF.

West
Oregon
Oregon State
Utah
BYU
Arizona
Arizona State
Colorado

East
Baylor
Texas Tech
TCU
Oklahoma State
Iowa State
Houston
West Virginia

---

Without them, it would've been the Big 12 falling apart and not the Pac 12.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

agreed . only bad entry was houston. UC and UCF are good adds.

---

None were "bad" adds.

Who will jump next with Colorado🦬🏈?

“I think the attention shifts to Arizona, and really to some degree, the rest of the Pac-12,” says @max_olson.. pic.twitter.com/Dx5EaGdRN9

— 365 Sports (@365sportsYT) July 28, 2023

Ucf has already made inroads in the state and developed a fan base. They're well on their way from transitioning commuter to a bought in following. They already have much more penetration in Fl than Houston has in Tx. Ucf has pretty big potential to be the third team in the state.

Uw and Oregon obviously preferred to ucf and Cincy but the big 12 probably isn't in the position without that stability in numbers.

Exactly right. Yormark loves the idea of UConn too though. Seems committed to trying to get these guys in someway as he's an east coast guy. Don't think Ad's will buy but another path.

Az should be the first follow up. Would add to a basketball super conference dream Yormark has. Huge growing state and okay cultural fit actually. A ton of Tx kids at Arizona and AZ St

SEC>>>Big 10>>>> Big 12 >> ACC

Big 12 survived but no Big 12 football matchups are going to garner national interest. No big brands and most of the teams are average or below. It'll be a terrific basketball conference though.

RightRevBear said:

---

Team America said:

---

Really wish we hadn't been so quick to bring in UC and UCF.

West
Oregon
Oregon State
Utah
BYU
Arizona
Arizona State
Colorado

East
Baylor
Texas Tech
TCU
Oklahoma State
Iowa State
Houston
West Virginia

---

I don't understand the buyer's remorse with UC and UCF. I posted about this in another thread. They are good teams that have upside. They want to be here. They are hungry to prove they belong. UC has been in a power conference and we're basically the first loser in the Big East implosion. They have been to the CFP recently. UCF is a huge school that is carrying more and more of their market. They put a good product on the field. Their biggest struggle is that they are less than 50 years old, so they don't have the history. Both of these schools are better than Oregon State in markets, potential market growth, and the the product they put on the field. I am glad we got them.

I think there is a consensus that if Oregon and Washington join the Big 12 that they will just be here until they get an invite from the Big 10. UC and UCF seem to be here for the long haul and will be working towards the long term success of our conference.

---

Same. Both were good additions and will prove as much in short order.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

agreed . only bad entry was houston. UC and UCF are good adds.

---

Houston was a necessary add by the Big 12. Without their inclusion, the Big 12 would have ceded Houston (the city/market, not the university) to the SEC, which would have been a massive mistake.

Now media in Houston is forced to talk about the Big 12, keeping the league top of mind in every major Texas market.

Bear8084 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

agreed . only bad entry was houston. UC and UCF are good adds.

---

None were "bad" adds.

---

cougar high was certainly a bad addition.

Even though they don't bring much marketshare, I would have opted for Oregon and UW vs UC and UCF.

montypython said:

---

Bear8084 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

agreed . only bad entry was houston. UC and UCF are good adds.

---

None were "bad" adds.

---

cougar high was certainly a bad addition.

Even though they don't bring much marketshare, I would have opted for Oregon and UW vs UC and UCF.

---

Oh, c'mon! We all can see that montypython really wants Oregon just so he can talk about….

"a DUCK!"

montypython said:

---

Bear8084 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

agreed . only bad entry was houston. UC and UCF are good adds.

---

None were "bad" adds.

---

cougar high was certainly a bad addition.

Even though they don't bring much marketshare, I would have opted for Oregon and UW vs UC and UCF.

---

They weren't. They want to be here, they helped save the Big 12, and we would not even be talking about possibly taking Oregon or UW if the Pac 12 grabbed them first. We would be talking about "Where does Baylor end up? The MWC or AAC?"

bear2be2 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

agreed . only bad entry was houston. UC and UCF are good adds.

---

Houston was a necessary add by the Big 12. Without their inclusion, the Big 12 would have ceded Houston (the city/market, not the university) to the SEC, which would have been a massive mistake.

Now media in Houston is forced to talk about the Big 12, keeping the league top of mind in every major Texas market.

---

Or if the Pac 12 took them first, that could've been game over for the Big 12.

bear2be2 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

agreed . only bad entry was houston. UC and UCF are good adds.

---

Houston was a necessary add by the Big 12. Without their inclusion, the Big 12 would have ceded Houston (the city/market, not the university) to the SEC, which would have been a massive mistake.

Now media in Houston is forced to talk about the Big 12, keeping the league top of mind in every major Texas market.

---

Bless your heart. I think it's cute you believe that.

montypython said:

---

Bear8084 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

agreed . only bad entry was houston. UC and UCF are good adds.

---

None were "bad" adds.

---

cougar high was certainly a bad addition.

Even though they don't bring much marketshare, I would have opted for Oregon and UW vs UC and UCF.

---

They were not available at the time. We got the best we could get & did ok. The conference survived and is now stronger. We are also now in a position, possibly, to grab another 1-3 from the Pac 9.

But definitely not a killer rabbit!

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

agreed . only bad entry was houston. UC and UCF are good adds.

---

Houston was a necessary add by the Big 12. Without their inclusion, the Big 12 would have ceded Houston (the city/market, not the university) to the SEC, which would have been a massive mistake.

Now media in Houston is forced to talk about the Big 12, keeping the league top of mind in every major Texas market.

---

Bless your heart. I think it's cute you believe that.

---

There's no belief/faith involved. The numbers speak for themselves. With Houston as part of the original four additions, the Big 12 added almost $10 million per school per year to its media rights contract despite the loss of OUT.

That some of you clowns still can't admit that the four original additions added value to the league is y'all's problem.

The Big 12 would not be in the position it's currently in without the four original additions. Period.

All the ones complaining about our four additions would look like GK if they were running a conference.

Robert Wilson said:

---

All the ones complaining about our four additions would look like GK if they were running a conference.

---

Or Beebe, or pre-OUT Bowlsby....

Exactly

If I recall correctly the Pac in the past 10 years actually flirted with the idea of bringing UH in however backed off, like they have backed off of everything to their demise. While I'm criticizing the Pac for that to be fair about the same time period, the XII also was flirting with the idea of adding UC and BYU but backed off, primarily due to Texas backing off of it. Thankfully not to our peril later.

Robert Wilson said:

---

All the ones complaining about our four additions would look like GK if they were running a conference.

---

Ok fine, then put UC and UCF in the East and ship OSU and ISU to the West.

I have zero interest in Colorado joining the league. They have done absolutely nothing in recent years. The same could be said about Arizona outside of looking good in men's basketball for the first half of last season.

dave714 said:

---

I have zero interest in Colorado joining the league. They have done absolutely nothing in recent years. The same could be said about Arizona outside of looking good in men's basketball for the first half of last season.

---

I feel the same.

Obviously I'm not in the tv industry so maybe they are seeing viewership numbers I am not.

Maybe football match ups between Okie State, Baylor, Tech vs a school like Colorado bring in more eyeballs....but its a marginal thing to me.

I never liked Colorado when they were in the old Big 12 and their fans (the few they actual have) are terrible.

To me the only real upside is it hurts the Pac-12 and secures the future for the Big 12.

We probably end up getting Arizonia and a few other good Pac schools from this move.

Redbrickbear said:

---

To me the only real upside is it hurts the Pac-12 and secures the future for the Big 12.

We probably end up getting Arizonia and a few other good Pac schools from this move.

---

That's the main point. Stability and survival. The SEC and B10 can't only play with each other forever. There have to be a couple other power conferences. Everyone has always talked 4 16-team conferences for some reason, and I'm not sure there is sufficient inventory for 5. B10 and sec both sitting at 14, and the ACC is at 15. We get to 14 with long term GOR locked up and Pac weakened ... we survive and maintain relevance. We add another flagship state university and another major metro market. Colorado remaining weak or mediocre is just a whatever.

Robert Wilson said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

To me the only real upside is it hurts the Pac-12 and secures the future for the Big 12.

We probably end up getting Arizonia and a few other good Pac schools from this move.

---

That's the main point. Stability and survival. The SEC and B10 can't only play with each other forever. There have to be a couple other power conferences. Everyone has always talked 4 16-team conferences for some reason, and I'm not sure there is sufficient inventory for 5. B10 and sec both sitting at 14, and the ACC is at 15. We get to 14 with long term GOR locked up and Pac weakened ... we survive and maintain relevance. We add another flagship state university and another major metro market. Colorado remaining weak or mediocre is just a whatever.

---

B1G and SECSECSEC jump to 16 next year.

I'm still trying to decide whether 14 or 16 is preferable. Add one more PAC school to get to 14 and you have somewhat of a geographical balance: 3 out west, 3 out east and 8 in the middle. Add 3 PAC schools and it gets a bit skewed.

whitetrash said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

To me the only real upside is it hurts the Pac-12 and secures the future for the Big 12.

We probably end up getting Arizonia and a few other good Pac schools from this move.

---

That's the main point. Stability and survival. The SEC and B10 can't only play with each other forever. There have to be a couple other power conferences. Everyone has always talked 4 16-team conferences for some reason, and I'm not sure there is sufficient inventory for 5. B10 and sec both sitting at 14, and the ACC is at 15. We get to 14 with long term GOR locked up and Pac weakened ... we survive and maintain relevance. We add another flagship state university and another major metro market. Colorado remaining weak or mediocre is just a whatever.

---

B1G and SECSECSEC jump to 16 next year.

I'm still trying to decide whether 14 or 16 is preferable. Add one more PAC school to get to 14 and you have somewhat of a geographical balance: 3 out west, 3 out east and 8 in the middle. Add 3 PAC schools and it gets a bit skewed.

---

I think you probably get to 14 and hold a while, unless you can finish out with AZ/OR/WA.

B1G and SEC keeping a little powder dry. So is ACC.

Oregon and Washington may be concerned B1G might go with Stanford and ND to close things out. That would leave them out in the cold. May be another reason they're talking to us now.

If there are likely 64 spots on the carousel, a few P5 get left out. It was poised to be us, ISU, KSU, TCU etc. - some subset of the hateful 8. Now, it is poised to be schools like Wazzu, Oregon St, Cal...

Still very unpredictable, but back to the point - I don't care if CO comes out of the doldrums or not. This is about positioning the conference so that we all survive to play at the highest level.

dave714 said:

---

I have zero interest in Colorado joining the league. They have done absolutely nothing in recent years. The same could be said about Arizona outside of looking good in men's basketball for the first half of last season.

---

Granted, they've consistently stunk it up in football for a long time, but Arizona has a lot more history of success in men's bball than just the first half of last season and has a solid, loyal, almost Kansas like fanbase for at least that sport.