You seriously think this is a good argument? You really are a dipshit. I hope your dream scenario comes true, you should put money on the Big 12 adding 6 irrelevant schools that bring jack shit to the table just to make your pretty divisions.
I’m sure the current members of the Big 12 will be excited about splitting revenue with 6 more Iowa States. People are predicting that the new tv contracts will be worth less, not more. Why would the current members want to share the revenue? The Big12 is stable now but it’s more likely to implode than add 6 leeches that are looking for a lifeline.
You talk about ‘logic,’ try using it. If they were gonna add you they would have already. Instead they realized they didn’t need you. I can’t say that I know what it’s like to be an outcast that nobody wants because that’s never been Nebraska and it never will be. You need to learn to accept the fact that nobody wants you and your directional school buddies in their conference. You are nothing. Deal with it.
Dude, your original rebuttal to what I posted was that it all had to do with location (read post 21, you wrote that).
I just showed that with an eastern and western division, the distances wouldn't be so significant. The current easternmost school (WVU) in the B12 is closer to UCF/USF than Nobraska is to the easternmost school in the B10 (UMD).
Now, you are changing the argument to "the school name matters", and that the 4 schools (not 6) wouldn't add any value to the conference. If nothing else, they would be adding 4 large TV markets in urban settings; if not mistaken, the only urban school location is UTX (Austin). Also, the schools could be in a temporary probation, and only get a percentage of the TV money. Then, when/if the newbies prove their worth on the field and/or TV ratings, they would get the full share.
If you want to make an argument, stick to one point and don't change the narrative to fit what you want it to be.