Dia del DougO said:

---

We want a solid,competitive conference that will have a lot of value in the broadcast and media market. We can't be scared of Houston or others competing because it will help Texas recruiting. We need competition and an alliance that is good for all parties, with great competition. Otherwise, whatever is next won't last long, either.

---

Yes

Geography competition and value are important
1.BYU I think we can all agree
2. Memphis
3. UH
4.UCF(12)

bearmission8 said:

---

Geography competition and value are important
1.BYU I think we can all agree
2. Memphis
3. UH
4.UCF(12)

---

Cincinnati needs to be on the list of adds IMO. There's really no downside there.

My number 1 is BYU, I think they are currently the biggest name outside of Notre Dame that is not affiliated with a power 5 conference.

I think it would be fun to have the three service academies, but would they come? Lots of traditions. Army and Navy would give WV regional rivalries.

If the service academies didn't come my next choice would be Cincinnati. Proximate to WV.

Also I haven't seen this school mentioned much, but what about Temple, they have had some success as of late and are in a big market in Philadelphia and a big state and would also provide another regional rival for WV.

Thoughts on Temple???

bear2be2 said:

---

bearmission8 said:

---

Geography competition and value are important
1.BYU I think we can all agree
2. Memphis
3. UH
4.UCF(12)

---

Cincinnati needs to be on the list of adds IMO. There's really no downside there.

---

Cincinnati needs has to be on the list of adds IMO. There's really no downside there.

Bandito said:

---

My number 1 is BYU, I think they are currently the biggest name outside of Notre Dame that is not affiliated with a power 5 conference.

I think it would be fun to have the three service academies, but would they come? Lots of traditions. Army and Navy would give WV regional rivalries.

If the service academies didn't come my next choice would be Cincinnati. Proximate to WV.

Also I haven't seen this school mentioned much, but what about Temple, they have had some success as of late and are in a big market in Philadelphia and a big state and would also provide another regional rival for WV.

Thoughts on Temple???

---

Temple would be interesting if the conference went to 16.

Bandito said:

---

Thoughts on Temple???

---

Better than Killeen, not as nice as Belton.

Memphis has no shot Kodi nox

Memphis is one of my family's favorite destination along with Nashville
so here goes
Memphis
geography makes sense
stadium 62k
student body 22k
been to bowls the last 2 years under HC Ryan Silverfield
12 bowls appearances since 2003
good basketball HC Penny Hardaway
Fedex Fedex money
Memphis TV market is #51

imarockstar said:

---

Memphis has no shot

---

Not according to my sources

i believe that among the most mentioned candidates, Houston has the highest athletic budget, is in the largest market and a fast growing one, and has been successful at the top level before. They seem like a no-brainer to add.

Most of the rest are all pretty close in most areas, some make a lot more geographic and cultural sense.

Didnt realize SMU had Mordecai

SOURCE: SMU will name Oklahoma transfer Tanner Mordecai as starting QB. He had been battling with 4-star freshman Preston Stone.

SMU opens with Abilene Christian this Saturday. (@JoeJHoyt first reported)

— Chris Vannini (@ChrisVannini) August 29, 2021

Dia del DougO said:

---

i believe that among the most mentioned candidates, Houston has the highest athletic budget, is in the largest market and a fast growing one, and has been successful at the top level before. They seem like a no-brainer to add.

Most of the rest are all pretty close in most areas, some make a lot more geographic and cultural sense.

---

When Houston was at their most successful in the past, probation accompanied it. Worse, so did sparse crowds. They averaged around 20,000 when winning in the late 80s/early 90s and still only average 25k now, after looking up 2019, pre-Covid figures.

The big market only matters if people in that market tune in and care about the product.

Their on-field product would only be ranked ahead of Kansas, as evidenced by the fact they are a home underdog to the media-picked 9th place Texas Tech squad.

So basically, they're not good in football (nowhere near Top 25) and don't draw crowds.

Far from a no-brainer.

Big12Bear said:

---

Dia del DougO said:

---

i believe that among the most mentioned candidates, Houston has the highest athletic budget, is in the largest market and a fast growing one, and has been successful at the top level before. They seem like a no-brainer to add.

Most of the rest are all pretty close in most areas, some make a lot more geographic and cultural sense.

---

When Houston was at their most successful in the past, probation accompanied it. Worse, so did sparse crowds. They averaged around 20,000 when winning in the late 80s/early 90s and still only average 25k now, after looking up 2019, pre-Covid figures.

The big market only matters if people in that market tune in and care about the product.

Their on-field product would only be ranked ahead of Kansas, as evidenced by the fact they are a home underdog to the media-picked 9th place Texas Tech squad.

So basically, they're not good in football (nowhere near Top 25) and don't draw crowds.

Far from a no-brainer.

---

Actually, Houston fares just fine in average attendance compared to most of the favorites. Only BYU stands above the rest, for obvious reasons, but they also pose some unique obstacles that need to be assessed.

https://collegefootballnews.com/2019/07/college-football-attendance-rankings-no-1-130-2019-cfn-five-year-program-analysis

Attendance is based on the average per game over the last five seasons, followed up by % capacity, followed by last year's ranking.


32 BYU 56597.00 89.17% 28
61 Memphis 36295.80 62.24% 66
63 UCF 34814.60 78.76% 62
66 USF 32945.80 50.03% 63
68 Houston 32733.00 81.83% 74
71 Cincinnati 31694.80 79.24% 72
91 SMU 21122.00 66.01% 93

48 TCU 44720.40 99.38% 50
47 Baylor 44774.80 99.19% 51

Now if one projects the jump in attendance with Big 12 competition with bigger regional rivalries that are far more likely to travel and the logical assumption would be a significant bump.

Furthermore, Houston has finished first or tied for first in their conference six times between 2006 and 2018. Only once did they finish worse than third, and only one losing season until 2019. They finished in the top 20 twice during that span. And they reside in an area of Texas which is currently unoccupied in the Big 12.

And Houston's probation was around 30 years ago, as was aggy and TCU.

Dia del DougO said:

---

And Houston's probation was around 30 years ago, as was aggy and TCU.

---

They're going the wrong direction at the wrong time, just like the last few years of the SWC, although beating Tech would be big for them from an optics standpoint.

Their attendance figures over the 5 year period look, well, not completely terrible, but the fact is, they have been really declining since Herman left. As has their record. Not sure if those figures are including NRG neutral site games against OU and others.

Big12Bear said:

---

Dia del DougO said:

---

i believe that among the most mentioned candidates, Houston has the highest athletic budget, is in the largest market and a fast growing one, and has been successful at the top level before. They seem like a no-brainer to add.

Most of the rest are all pretty close in most areas, some make a lot more geographic and cultural sense.

---

When Houston was at their most successful in the past, probation accompanied it. Worse, so did sparse crowds. They averaged around 20,000 when winning in the late 80s/early 90s and still only average 25k now, after looking up 2019, pre-Covid figures.

The big market only matters if people in that market tune in and care about the product.

Their on-field product would only be ranked ahead of Kansas, as evidenced by the fact they are a home underdog to the media-picked 9th place Texas Tech squad.

So basically, they're not good in football (nowhere near Top 25) and don't draw crowds.

Far from a no-brainer.

---

Why are all your arguments against Houston based on things that happened over 30 years ago?
20 years ago Baylor was an absolute laughingstock in college athletics.

The idea that life is static is a silly assumption to make. Just because something happened a certain way 35 years ago does not mean that's the way things are destined to happened today.

I just recently watched the city of Houston get behind the Cougars on their Final Four run until they ran into us. Any large city will support a winner.

Using UH attendance numbers against them is kinda dishonest when they don't have UT, A&M or OU on their schedule to inflate their figures.

Texas Tech and TCU are not anymore prestigious of schools than the University of Houston.

Greybear59 said:

---

No to UH and SMU. No more Texas schools. UH can't even fill up their stadium in that hugh population. They are not an asset. Nothing needs to be said about SMU.

---

???????









At the end of the day, a small private school such as Baylor has no say in how any of this goes. Especially considering the school's reputation due to recent events over the last few years

cougar king said:

---

Greybear59 said:

---

No to UH and SMU. No more Texas schools. UH can't even fill up their stadium in that hugh population. They are not an asset. Nothing needs to be said about SMU.

---

???????









At the end of the day, a small private school such as Baylor has no say in how any of this goes. Especially considering the school's reputation due to recent events over the last few years

---

And yet, the Baylor AD was one of four selected to serve on the Big 12's expansion subcommittee. I, personally, would have no problem with Houston being chosen among the teams added to the Big 12, but you're talking out of your ass here.

Now that Texas and OU are gone and done bullying the other eight members of this conference, Baylor will have just as much say as any of the other seven remaining schools.

clubhi said:

---

bossbowman said:

---

May be totally wrong but I say Uconn because its a recognized brand and basketball. You may argue football but we have Kansas.

---

Last time I saw UConn play they beat us at home

---

Yeah but since then the football program there has gone through quite a few changes including the decision to shutter it for one year in 2020, I guess they are back to playing this year.

cougar king said:

---

Greybear59 said:

---

No to UH and SMU. No more Texas schools. UH can't even fill up their stadium in that hugh population. They are not an asset. Nothing needs to be said about SMU.

---

???????









At the end of the day, a small private school such as Baylor has no say in how any of this goes. Especially considering the school's reputation due to recent events over the last few years

---

Technically we do since our AD is on the expansion committee as bear2be pointed out.

Method Man said:

---

atomicblast said:

---

You are idiots if we let U of H in. Houston can eclipse us if we give them the chance. I say we do the first two we know for sure which can boost us- UCF and BYU. We do Cincinnati to pair up with WVU. and lastly we go for a project- Colorado State.

---

Yeah bro....lets just be a bunch of pu$$ies scared of competition.

We all know that the addition of TCU to the BIGXII caused our athletic department to crater......or maybe the added competition made the Baylor University Athletic Department reach heights that it had never done before.

---

One could argue that adding TCU placed a ceiling on Baylor's recruiting.

As Tech fell, TCU was added and replaced Tech's spot on the recruiting map and TCU has since recruited better than both Baylor and Tech. According to 247's Team Talent Composite, TCU has 13 blue chip recruits and an average roster rating of 87.03, while Baylor has 12 blue chip recruits and an average roster rating of 85.79, and, if the better recruits between those two programs could have consolidated into a single program, that program would be able to be more valuable and potentially be more competitive against top tier competition. It's true that since 2012, TCU has had P5 wins against Stanford, Oregon, Ole Miss, Minnesota, Purdue, CAL, and Arkansas and Baylor has had P5 wins against UCLA, UNC, and Vanderbilt during the same period; however, both programs had losses to Georgia, TCU lost to LSU and Ohio State (among others) and Baylor lost to Michigan State and Duke (among others), so there was room for those programs to have been more competitive.

Adding Houston would likely further split the recruits that currently go to TCU and Baylor, and then also split the recruits the currently choose Tech, which has 5 blue chip recruits and an average roster rating of 84.65. This ignores that it would also impact Oklahoma State's recruiting as well.

UH fan wanting to chime in and provide some data.

If B12 were to get back to 12 members, the best teams in my opinion are:
1) BYU
2) Cinci
3) Houston
4) UCF

I created a table that compares B12 member schools, minus ut & ou; the 4 above; Boise; Memphis; and SDSU

https://ibb.co/GsSzfm7

The table doesn't cover fanbase, but what it does highlight is each schools relative success/deficiencies and stats. Something I didn't realize until I put the table together is that BYU, Cinci, Houston, and UCF tend to rank higher academically than schools in the B12, individually and averaged. Something to note, which has been discussed at nauseum, is the DMA and Metro population, none of the outside schools are anywhere near Houston Metro numbers. Somewhat anecdotal, but Houston collegiate viewership goes: 1) UT 2) A&M 3) UH 4) OU 5) Tech 6) LSU. Regards to recruiting, the SEC clearly owns Houston now, but adding UH would help penetrate their stranglehold.

Concerns about Houston recruitment dilution are somewhat justified, but competition breeds excellence; you can't be afraid of it.

HitCoog said:

---

UH fan wanting to chime in and provide some data.

If B12 were to get back to 12 members, the best teams in my opinion are:
1) BYU
2) Cinci
3) Houston
4) UCF

I created a table that compares B12 member schools, minus ut & ou; the 4 above; Boise; Memphis; and SDSU

https://ibb.co/GsSzfm7

The table doesn't cover fanbase, but what it does highlight is each schools relative success/deficiencies and stats. Something I didn't realize until I put the table together is that BYU, Cinci, Houston, and UCF tend to rank higher academically than schools in the B12, individually and averaged. Something to note, which has been discussed at nauseum, is the DMA and Metro population, none of the outside schools are anywhere near Houston Metro numbers. Somewhat anecdotal, but Houston collegiate viewership goes: 1) UT 2) A&M 3) UH 4) OU 5) Tech 6) LSU. Regards to recruiting, the SEC clearly owns Houston now, but adding UH would help penetrate their stranglehold.

Concerns about Houston recruitment dilution are somewhat justified, but competition breeds excellence; you can't be afraid of it.

---

I agree with you. Having more and higher quality intra Texas matchups will be good for interest in the league and ultimately for all the teams in it. Should more than compensate for recruits lost to revitalized Houston. Our attitude should be to take all the best teams that want to join our league and not be afraid of creating more competition

Ewalker80 said:

---

HitCoog said:

---

UH fan wanting to chime in and provide some data.

If B12 were to get back to 12 members, the best teams in my opinion are:
1) BYU
2) Cinci
3) Houston
4) UCF

I created a table that compares B12 member schools, minus ut & ou; the 4 above; Boise; Memphis; and SDSU

https://ibb.co/GsSzfm7

The table doesn't cover fanbase, but what it does highlight is each schools relative success/deficiencies and stats. Something I didn't realize until I put the table together is that BYU, Cinci, Houston, and UCF tend to rank higher academically than schools in the B12, individually and averaged. Something to note, which has been discussed at nauseum, is the DMA and Metro population, none of the outside schools are anywhere near Houston Metro numbers. Somewhat anecdotal, but Houston collegiate viewership goes: 1) UT 2) A&M 3) UH 4) OU 5) Tech 6) LSU. Regards to recruiting, the SEC clearly owns Houston now, but adding UH would help penetrate their stranglehold.

Concerns about Houston recruitment dilution are somewhat justified, but competition breeds excellence; you can't be afraid of it.

---

I agree with you. Having more and higher quality intra Texas matchups will be good for interest in the league and ultimately for all the teams in it. Should more than compensate for recruits lost to revitalized Houston. Our attitude should be to take all the best teams that want to join our league and not be afraid of creating more competition

---

If we were to add Houston, the Big 12 would have the Nos. 3-6 programs in the state as members. In a state as populace as ours with as diverse a viewership as ours has, there would be value in that, for sure.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Method Man said:

---

atomicblast said:

---

You are idiots if we let U of H in. Houston can eclipse us if we give them the chance. I say we do the first two we know for sure which can boost us- UCF and BYU. We do Cincinnati to pair up with WVU. and lastly we go for a project- Colorado State.

---

Yeah bro....lets just be a bunch of pu$$ies scared of competition.

We all know that the addition of TCU to the BIGXII caused our athletic department to crater......or maybe the added competition made the Baylor University Athletic Department reach heights that it had never done before.

---

One could argue that adding TCU placed a ceiling on Baylor's recruiting.

As Tech fell, TCU was added and replaced Tech's spot on the recruiting map and TCU has since recruited better than both Baylor and Tech. According to 247's Team Talent Composite, TCU has 13 blue chip recruits and an average roster rating of 87.03, while Baylor has 12 blue chip recruits and an average roster rating of 85.79, and, if the better recruits between those two programs could have consolidated into a single program, that program would be able to be more valuable and potentially be more competitive against top tier competition. It's true that since 2012, TCU has had P5 wins against Stanford, Oregon, Ole Miss, Minnesota, Purdue, CAL, and Arkansas and Baylor has had P5 wins against UCLA, UNC, and Vanderbilt during the same period; however, both programs had losses to Georgia, TCU lost to LSU and Ohio State (among others) and Baylor lost to Michigan State and Duke (among others), so there was room for those programs to have been more competitive.

Adding Houston would likely further split the recruits that currently go to TCU and Baylor, and then also split the recruits the currently choose Tech, which has 5 blue chip recruits and an average roster rating of 84.65. This ignores that it would also impact Oklahoma State's recruiting as well.

---

Our recruiting cratered because of the assault scandal and then was hampered by the rhule to nfl flirtations and NCAA investigation. Losing battles we would have otherwise won with tcu because they got into a power five conference is pretty far down the list of negative factors in my view. Not to mention our most exciting era was when both Baylor and tcu were fielding very competitive teams. Our best recruiting classes were at end of briles era when tcu was also very good.

Some in the Twitterverse are reporting that B12 leaders today ruled out Houston as an expansion candidate. Man, Fertitta must have *really* pissed people off five years ago.

HARD NO to ALL of those!...at least for now. None of them will do anything but drag the conference further down and lower the $ each team receives. BYU and Cincy need to be added, but after that, hold tight and reevaluate the landscape in a few years. By that time their maybe FAR FAR FAR better candidates to choose from at that time.

LK4BU87 said:

---

Some in the Twitterverse are reporting that B12 leaders today ruled out Houston as an expansion candidate. Man, Fertitta must have *really* pissed people off five years ago.

---

That is very, very plausible.

LK4BU87 said:

---

Some in the Twitterverse are reporting that B12 leaders today ruled out Houston as an expansion candidate. Man, Fertitta must have *really* pissed people off five years ago.

---

1 guy with 800 followers said that. You should be more worried about Tech losing to us on Saturday.

cougar king said:

---

LK4BU87 said:

---

Some in the Twitterverse are reporting that B12 leaders today ruled out Houston as an expansion candidate. Man, Fertitta must have *really* pissed people off five years ago.

---

1 guy with 800 followers said that. You should be more worried about Tech losing to us on Saturday.

---

Why would we care if y'all beat Tech?

cougar king said:

---

LK4BU87 said:

---

Some in the Twitterverse are reporting that B12 leaders today ruled out Houston as an expansion candidate. Man, Fertitta must have *really* pissed people off five years ago.

---

1 guy with 800 followers said that. You should be more worried about Tech losing to us on Saturday.

---

I hope you run Tech out of the stadium

I hope you clobber Tech to be honest.

You hsMethod Man said:

---

Big12Bear said:

---

Dia del DougO said:

---

Ii believe that among the most mentioned candidates, Houston has the highest athletic budget, is in the largest market and a fast growing one, and has been successful at the top level before. They seem like a no-brainer to add.

Most of the rest are all pretty close in most areas, some make a lot more geographic and cultural sense.

---

When Houston was at their most successful in the past, probation accompanied it. Worse, so did sparse crowds. They averaged around 20,000 when winning in the late 80s/early 90s and still only average 25k now, after looking up 2019, pre-Covid figures.

The big market only matters if people in that market tune in and care about the product.

Their on-field product would only be ranked ahead of Kansas, as evidenced by the fact they are a home underdog to the media-picked 9th place Texas Tech squad.

So basically, they're not good in football (nowhere near Top 25) and don't draw crowds.

Far from a no-brainer.

---

Why are all your arguments against Houston based on things that happened over 30 years ago?
20 years ago Baylor was an absolute laughingstock in college athletics.

The idea that life is static is a silly assumption to make. Just because something happened a certain way 35 years ago does not mean that's the way things are destined to happened today.

I just recently watched the city of Houston get behind the Cougars on their Final Four run until they ran into us. Any large city will support a winner.

Using UH attendance numbers against them is kinda dishonest when they don't have UT, A&M or OU on their schedule to inflate their figures.

Texas Tech and TCU are not anymore prestigious of schools than the University of Houston.

---

You had me until you started talking about UH attendance and inflation in the Big 12 due to UT, A&M, and OU. Baylor draws about 40-45k to their games. Baylor historically has drawn 40-45k to their games. UH has always drawn less than Baylor, sometimes ranging between 25-35k. UH still draws in that range. Even in great years they still draw in that range.

Houston shared a conference with Baylor and Texas and Texas A&M. They still drew in that range. They still drew in that range despite winning the conference two out of their first three years in the conference. Houstonians, and Houston cougar alumni do not give two ****s about UofH athletics. They never have. UofH for many people is simply a convenient place to get a degree. There is simply very little buy-in from Houston alumni who frankly couldn't care less about being a "Cougar".

I like Houston, I support adding them to the conference, I think both parties benefit from the addition. Of all of Houston's feature, fan attendance and draw is not one of them. We don't have to sit a play make believe and "I wonder" about Houston attendance in a power conference, because we already know.