Big 12 2018 vs 2017

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Feb 7, 2007
2,079
852
1,743
Sand Springs OK
#23
Houston would be nice.
Oh, what the heck??? Let's just grab Rice and SMU while we're at it and go for a new name for the times, like Southwest Conference 2.0. Satisfies all kinds of needs - more wins for those chasing rankings, maybe enough wins for teams like Kansas to keep playing football rather than changing coaches every other year.
 

Kev_Dawg

Banned
Banned
Apr 14, 2018
502
200
43
26
Owasso
#24
Why not? They beat OU in 2016, #21 Louisville, and they just beat the brakes off Arizona. They have a lot more students than OSU. 43,000. SMU and Rice are about like TU (Tulsa). Their football stadium has a capacity of 40k. TCU only has 10k students. 8 current NFL players, with maybe the best defensive player in the nation on their team right now. About the same as Baylor and more than Iowa State.
Not much different than adding TCU...I'm assuming you were opposed to that.
 
Jul 9, 2011
2,033
1,230
743
63
Near Bryan/College Station in Iola, TX
#25
Why not? They beat OU in 2016, #21 Louisville, and they just beat the brakes off Arizona. They have a lot more students than OSU. 43,000. SMU and Rice are about like TU (Tulsa). Their football stadium has a capacity of 40k. TCU only has 10k students. 8 current NFL players, with maybe the best defensive player in the nation on their team right now. About the same as Baylor and more than Iowa State.
Not much different than adding TCU...I'm assuming you were opposed to that.
The difference is for better or worse we already have TCU and Baylor. We don't need another Central/South Texas school. One of the problems with the old SWC was too many teams in the same state/TV markets - it doesn't draw much interest outside of that area. Really need no more than 2 or 3 teams from the same state/area/TV market, and sad to say we are over our quota already. Houston would be a really bad fit.

One of the great things about the SEC from a TV$ standpoint is it covers 11 (I think that's right off the top of my head) states and gets all the TV markets in those states. The Big 12 currently covers only 5 with 40% of their teams in 1 state.
 
Last edited:

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
15,708
23,446
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#26
OU - Was the same until they lost Anderson, might be slightly down now, might not.
WVU - Up
TCU - Unknown, probably about the same
OSU - Down
UT - Should be up but for some reason look down right now
KSU - Down, maybe a lot
TTU - About the same, maybe down slightly
ISU - Down, especially after losing their QB
BU - Up slightly
KU - About the same

Conference as a whole is down.....a lot. We will continue to battle the Pac 12 for last place power 5 conference until we decide to add more teams and move to 8 conference games a year.
 

Philranger

Territorial Marshal
Oct 6, 2010
7,881
6,829
743
Owasso
#27
The difference is for better or worse we already have TCU and Baylor. We don't need another Central/South Texas school. One of the problems with the old SWC was too many teams in the same state/TV markets - it doesn't draw much interest outside of that area. Really need no more than 2 or 3 teams from the same state/area/TV market, and sad to say we are over our quota already. Houston would be a really bad fit.
This 100%. Expansion/realignment is rarely about competitiveness of teams being added. Or at least lower down the priority list. Did the SEC take A&M and Missouri because they thought they would make the league more competitive or because they offered access to media markets that the SEC wasn't in (Houston/TX in general and Kansas City)? Did the Big 10 take Rutgers and Maryland because of the talent of those programs?

If you are going to expand you take the best program available from a market that you do not currently own or have a large percentage of. Adding Houston doesn't add a market to the Big 12.

Now you are probably asking why we added TCU then. At that point for the Big 12 we were in real danger of becoming an 8 team league so we grabbed the two best programs available WVU and TCU. Boise and BYU were arguably good, but both stretch the conference across 3 timezones which is less than ideal, the Big 12 is also not super great from an academic prestige standpoint and Boise would be worse than any of the current members and doesn't add anything other than a competitive football program to offset that (terrible media market), and BYU (and by extension the LDS church) offer their own headaches. So you end up with WVU and TCU. In hindsight we probably should have taken Louisville and probably Pitt was well and just full on raided the Big East. But the Big 12 liked sharing the pie with 10 schools and not 12 so here we are.
 
Oct 27, 2011
223
173
593
#28
If you think OU is down then I don't know what you watched last weekend. FAU is a solid G5 team and they swept them aside like they were Schnelly's FAU.

The only teams that surprise me so far are Texas Tech and Kansas. I knew they wouldn't be that good, but damn. I didn't know Tech would take it on the chin that hard against Ole Miss, and I definitely thought KU would at least kind of improve past the point where they're losing to Nichols State. My goodness.

KSU always starts slow.

Texas is exactly as mediocre at best as they've been.

West Virginia and TCU learned about as much as we did against Missouri State.

Iowa State didn't get to play.

Baylor is going to struggle, but probably not winning only one this year.
Where did all the Tech hype come from? I was not expecting them to be good at all and that’s how they looked against Ole Miss.
Mainly from the fact their defense was only marginally below average last year instead of laughable like usual. The idea was they’d take another step forward. I never bought that based on what they run and where their scheme is weak but that’s the rationale many used.
 
Oct 27, 2011
223
173
593
#29
OU/OSU- Both will be a step down on O, likely equal or better on D. Murray looks good so far. Waiting to see OSU vs Boise which is de-facto P5 competition.

TCU- Big dropoff at QB so far but has decent talent around him, defense likely still very good.

ISU- Gotta get Kempt healthy and their replacements on the OL need to improve. Small step back

KSU- About the same until a QB starts moving them consistently. Typical average bend/don’t break D. Typical Field position hidden yard advantages.

WVU- D looks better but the Vols aren’t known for offensive precision and it’s the only FBS test so far. Likely best offense right now. Will learn more vs NC State

Tech- On par with the quality of team from last year. Marginally better OL, marginally worse QB/WR. Needs to get healthy in the secondary

Texas- Offense struggling still. Defense not quite as good but among the league’s best.

KU- Better but not by much. One real TD drive, one long play from midfield, and defensive TD. Ten points off short fields aside from that. Defense was better than O the last couple of years and O still isn’t very good.

Baylor- Better than last year by far but still likely only shooting around .500 when it’s all said and done. Huge if they can knock off Duke this week. Was 24-20 in the 4th last fall before two turnovers (10pts)when Duke had a stronger roster and BU was much weaker.

No elite teams yet but four or so could challenge for it in the coming weeks if they keep winning. OU, OSU, WV, TCU are setting up the best. KU is the worst.
 
Nov 27, 2007
685
121
1,593
#30
Couldn't happen to a better guy. The douche factor is strong with Herman.



They lost to Navy, Wisconsin & Buffalo last year, then went on to beat literally nobody on their way to 10 wins last year. The hype with FAU is way, way overblown & primarily all about Kiffin. Yes, OU looked great against them, but FAU ain't this year's Central Florida.
FAU won 11 games last year. And they lost by only 14 on the road to a Top 10 Wisconsin. FAU getting destroyed by a down OU team was a surprise. They are likely a perfectly decent team.
 
Nov 27, 2007
685
121
1,593
#31
This 100%. Expansion/realignment is rarely about competitiveness of teams being added. Or at least lower down the priority list. Did the SEC take A&M and Missouri because they thought they would make the league more competitive or because they offered access to media markets that the SEC wasn't in (Houston/TX in general and Kansas City)? Did the Big 10 take Rutgers and Maryland because of the talent of those programs?

If you are going to expand you take the best program available from a market that you do not currently own or have a large percentage of. Adding Houston doesn't add a market to the Big 12.

Now you are probably asking why we added TCU then. At that point for the Big 12 we were in real danger of becoming an 8 team league so we grabbed the two best programs available WVU and TCU. Boise and BYU were arguably good, but both stretch the conference across 3 timezones which is less than ideal, the Big 12 is also not super great from an academic prestige standpoint and Boise would be worse than any of the current members and doesn't add anything other than a competitive football program to offset that (terrible media market), and BYU (and by extension the LDS church) offer their own headaches. So you end up with WVU and TCU. In hindsight we probably should have taken Louisville and probably Pitt was well and just full on raided the Big East. But the Big 12 liked sharing the pie with 10 schools and not 12 so here we are.
I actually see multiple time zones as a plus. More national eyes with regional tv coverage.

Also, I think there are only 2 time zones in the current configuration of the Big XII, right? Now that Colorado is gone?

I agree with the rest of your post though.
 

TypicalGooner

Territorial Marshal
Oct 21, 2011
6,453
1,476
743
38
Norman Trailerpark
#32
OU - Was the same until they lost Anderson, might be slightly down now, might not.
WVU - Up
TCU - Unknown, probably about the same
OSU - Down
UT - Should be up but for some reason look down right now
KSU - Down, maybe a lot
TTU - About the same, maybe down slightly
ISU - Down, especially after losing their QB
BU - Up slightly
KU - About the same

Conference as a whole is down.....a lot. We will continue to battle the Pac 12 for last place power 5 conference until we decide to add more teams and move to 8 conference games a year.
Losing Anderson sucks, but it’s not a death knell by any stretch of the imagination. There’s plenty of talent in that table to take his place.

OU as a team got better. Defense and special teams are playing at a level that hasn’t been seen in Norman in many years. Combine that with the offense and it’s dangerous.

They’re a playoff team and has a great shot to go undefeated from here forward.

Everybody else in the Big 12 is meh.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

ostateim

3rd Doctor in Spies Like Us
A/V Subscriber
Sep 2, 2008
1,496
1,072
1,743
Enid
#33
Losing Anderson sucks, but it’s not a death knell by any stretch of the imagination. There’s plenty of talent in that table to take his place.

OU as a team got better. Defense and special teams are playing at a level that hasn’t been seen in Norman in many years. Combine that with the offense and it’s dangerous.

They’re a playoff team and has a great shot to go undefeated from here forward.

Everybody else in the Big 12 is meh.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mods, I don’t want to tell Jeff to eat shit anymore. So, is it ok if I tell this guy to eat shit? Cause he seems worse than Jeff.
 

Philranger

Territorial Marshal
Oct 6, 2010
7,881
6,829
743
Owasso
#34
Mods, I don’t want to tell Jeff to eat shit anymore. So, is it ok if I tell this guy to eat shit? Cause he seems worse than Jeff.
I mean he's not quite wrong. With Anderson I would have favored OU in every game they play this year and a good chance to run roughshod over the Big 12 (like they have since like forever). Probably something like a 60% chance of going undefeated in the regular season. Without him I drop it down to like 25%-30% although still favored in every game. They're still head and shoulders better than anyone else in the conference but I'm more inclined to think they drop one they shouldn't ala Iowa State last year. Not sure who it would be though.
 

ksupoke

We don't need no, thot kuntrol
A/V Subscriber
Feb 16, 2011
12,050
16,371
743
dark sarcasm in the classroom
#35
This 100%. Expansion/realignment is rarely about competitiveness of teams being added. Or at least lower down the priority list. Did the SEC take A&M and Missouri because they thought they would make the league more competitive or because they offered access to media markets that the SEC wasn't in (Houston/TX in general and Kansas City)? Did the Big 10 take Rutgers and Maryland because of the talent of those programs?
sec took Ta&m because alabama wanted better access to the texas recruiting grounds and the occasional Oklahoma player, iow they asked alabama and they said, ok and a&m wanted away from tex and ou.
alabama is the ou and tex of the sec with one major exception, they aren't afraid of the competition, imho.
 

ksupoke

We don't need no, thot kuntrol
A/V Subscriber
Feb 16, 2011
12,050
16,371
743
dark sarcasm in the classroom
#36
OU/OSU- Both will be a step down on O, likely equal or better on D. Murray looks good so far. Waiting to see OSU vs Boise which is de-facto P5 competition.

TCU- Big dropoff at QB so far but has decent talent around him, defense likely still very good.

ISU- Gotta get Kempt healthy and their replacements on the OL need to improve. Small step back

KSU- About the same until a QB starts moving them consistently. Typical average bend/don’t break D. Typical Field position hidden yard advantages.

WVU- D looks better but the Vols aren’t known for offensive precision and it’s the only FBS test so far. Likely best offense right now. Will learn more vs NC State

Tech- On par with the quality of team from last year. Marginally better OL, marginally worse QB/WR. Needs to get healthy in the secondary

Texas- Offense struggling still. Defense not quite as good but among the league’s best.

KU- Better but not by much. One real TD drive, one long play from midfield, and defensive TD. Ten points off short fields aside from that. Defense was better than O the last couple of years and O still isn’t very good.

Baylor- Better than last year by far but still likely only shooting around .500 when it’s all said and done. Huge if they can knock off Duke this week. Was 24-20 in the 4th last fall before two turnovers (10pts)when Duke had a stronger roster and BU was much weaker.

No elite teams yet but four or so could challenge for it in the coming weeks if they keep winning. OU, OSU, WV, TCU are setting up the best. KU is the worst.
ku will win at least one b12-2-2+2 game this year, suspects are; ksu, isu, bu, tt, tx
 

TypicalGooner

Territorial Marshal
Oct 21, 2011
6,453
1,476
743
38
Norman Trailerpark
#37
Mods, I don’t want to tell Jeff to eat shit anymore. So, is it ok if I tell this guy to eat shit? Cause he seems worse than Jeff.
I mean he's not quite wrong. With Anderson I would have favored OU in every game they play this year and a good chance to run roughshod over the Big 12 (like they have since like forever). Probably something like a 60% chance of going undefeated in the regular season. Without him I drop it down to like 25%-30% although still favored in every game. They're still head and shoulders better than anyone else in the conference but I'm more inclined to think they drop one they shouldn't ala Iowa State last year. Not sure who it would be though.
The loss of Anderson hurts because he was a sure thing. Great hands, instincts, burst. I’m actually thinking Kennedy Brooks will emerge this year. He was insanely productive in high school. He scored 78 touchdowns his last two years against 6A Texas competition. He was out last year due to injury. Redshirt freshman.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Oct 27, 2011
223
173
593
#38
OU/OSU- Both will be a step down on O, likely equal or better on D. Murray looks good so far. Waiting to see OSU vs Boise which is de-facto P5 competition.

TCU- Big dropoff at QB so far but has decent talent around him, defense likely still very good.

ISU- Gotta get Kempt healthy and their replacements on the OL need to improve. Small step back

KSU- About the same until a QB starts moving them consistently. Typical average bend/don’t break D. Typical Field position hidden yard advantages.

WVU- D looks better but the Vols aren’t known for offensive precision and it’s the only FBS test so far. Likely best offense right now. Will learn more vs NC State

Tech- On par with the quality of team from last year. Marginally better OL, marginally worse QB/WR. Needs to get healthy in the secondary

Texas- Offense struggling still. Defense not quite as good but among the league’s best.

KU- Better but not by much. One real TD drive, one long play from midfield, and defensive TD. Ten points off short fields aside from that. Defense was better than O the last couple of years and O still isn’t very good.

Baylor- Better than last year by far but still likely only shooting around .500 when it’s all said and done. Huge if they can knock off Duke this week. Was 24-20 in the 4th last fall before two turnovers (10pts)when Duke had a stronger roster and BU was much weaker.

No elite teams yet but four or so could challenge for it in the coming weeks if they keep winning. OU, OSU, WV, TCU are setting up the best. KU is the worst.
ku will win at least one b12-2-2+2 game this year, suspects are; ksu, isu, bu, tt, tx
Well they are batting one for 27 under Beatty and it was the best defense they had in the four years including this one. I have my doubts as that O is far and away the weakest in the league.

Buuuut... Don’t let this discussion distract us from the fact that Texas lost to Kansas in football.
 

ksupoke

We don't need no, thot kuntrol
A/V Subscriber
Feb 16, 2011
12,050
16,371
743
dark sarcasm in the classroom
#39
Well they are batting one for 27 under Beatty and it was the best defense they had in the four years including this one. I have my doubts as that O is far and away the weakest in the league.

Buuuut... Don’t let this discussion distract us from the fact that Texas lost to Kansas in football.
KU would be 2-0 if they had Pooka jr for the Nicholls game, having said that a p5 should be able to be a man down and win that game but depth is their issue.
side note: this means there is a Pooka sr,
At this point I'm not sure that ku's O is worse than ksu's O and I think ku's defense is better, that's as of now, the magician of Manhattan will probably rectify both of these in time.