Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Keeping up with the Abernathys.
Who?  
Whoever.  See:  Maryland and Rutgers

Would it be better to move teams into the AAC or into the Big 12?  The big 12 just needs 4 teams to be whole. UH is one obvious choice. You still have some decent football programs left in Ok State and Tex Tech. The Big 12 would still have better name recognition than the AAC.

I think it's the same thing with the name change.  If the AAC discarded their weak sisters in football and added Baylor et al., they'd be better than the Big East was at times.

At least deeper, lacking helmet teams still, which the BE had to an extent.

I agree other conferences will panic trying to figure this out and they will be "in contact" with other teams to see where they can move, and often that panic incurs "Maryland and Rutgers".  It gets to be more about numbers than quality.

I think it's the same thing with the name change.  If the AAC discarded their weak sisters in football and added Baylor et al., they'd be better than the Big East was at times.

At least deeper, lacking helmet teams still, which the BE had to an extent.

I agree other conferences will panic trying to figure this out and they will be "in contact" with other teams to see where they can move, and often that panic incurs "Maryland and Rutgers".  It gets to be more about numbers than quality.

West Virginia was the Big East's "helmet" after Miami left. 

The Big East remained a BCS conference all through the time that they were "starting" to look like the AAC. It wasn't until they WERE the AAC that they lost their BCS status. 

The B12 was already dicey when the choose WVU, not that WVU is bad IMHO, but the geography is strained.  They can pick up several "city teams" and still be fairly OK I think, Houston, Memphis, Cincy, and one more from somewhere.  That isn't a terrible conference at all, it's just without any helmets.  At all.

I suppose Notre Dame would not be interested, at all, right?  I mean they could come in and pretty much win every year.  Crazy I know.

Well the difference between four 16-team conferences and three 20-team conferences is only 4 schools.

Texas is definitely staying with OU.

I've said for the past ten years that OU actually has the power in the relationship.  Texas was fine to stand pat in the B12, because Texas wanted to keep it more regional and not endure the far-flung travel associated with joining any of the other conferences, especially for the olympic sports. 

But OU has had wanderlust ever since 2010, I believe they felt they missed out in those two rounds of realignment and haven't been satisfied staying in the B12 ever since.

So I'd agree with the reports you've heard-- OU was going no matter what, and Texas' hand was forced, because we know we need them and the TX-OU rivalry, to maintain our sports brand.  Sure, an OOC rivalry could be set up, indeed the TX-OU rivalry existed as an OOC game for 8 decades before it become an in-conference game.  But there's risk to that-- it's not the 1920s anymore, and times are quite different.  How many rivalries have survived in the past 3 decades, when one or both teams switched to different conferences?

Anyway, if the B1G really wanted Texas, they'd need to be willing to take OU.  There are factions at OU that would have preferred the B1G all along, but the B1G wasn't overly receptive, given their academics.  If that has changed, then now would be the time for the B1G to make a push for both teams.