Big 12 is the deepest conference in America !!!!

[CoolHandLuke2005]

No, they didn't. Raycom didn't own those games. The University did. Here is the link:

http://www.imgcollege.com/news/2008/university-of-florida-uaa-sun-sports-and-img-colle

The contract was between Florida, IMG and Sun Sports

Not football

Why are you arguing this.

I already said that the SEC never gave the third tier rights to the universities ever since the early 2000's.
SEC was the first conference that controlled third tier rights in football


I already know the universities in the SEC had those rights with women's basketball, baseball or softball.

 

[topdecktiger]

Not football

Why are you arguing this.

I already said that the SEC never gave the third tier rights to the universities ever since the early 2000's.
SEC was the first conference that controlled third tier rights in football


I already know the universities in the SEC had those rights with women's basketball, baseball or softball.

Yes, football.

I'm arguing because you are wrong. The SEC schools did retain their Tier 3 rights up until 2013/14. They did not sign away their Tier 3 rights in their contracts with ESPN or Raycom.

Here is a story from Sports Business Journal, April 15, 2013:

The conference channel cleared its biggest obstacle in recent weeks when it reacquired the third-tier TV rights from IMG College, Learfield Sports and CBS Collegiate Sports Properties, the three rights holders that work with the conference’s 14 schools. Those third-tier TV rights represent one football game, eight men’s basketball games, baseball, women’s basketball and all other nonrevenue sports that are not picked up by ESPN or a syndicated partner.
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2013/04/15/Media/SEC.aspx

See, clear as day. The universities retained their Tier 3 Tv rights, and included in those rights were one football game.

 

[CoolHandLuke2005]

Yes, football.

I'm arguing because you are wrong. The SEC schools did retain their Tier 3 rights up until 2013/14. They did not sign away their Tier 3 rights in their contracts with ESPN or Raycom.

Do you understand that third Tier rights in other sports are worthless
Very few people watch women's volleyball or soccer on TV
Third tier rights in football are the only thing that matters and the Big XII allows each university to have the right to control their third tier rights

If I was Kansas St I would be trying to market my third tier rights in China or Europe.
Those two games for Kansas St could be shown in China and KSU could be collecting 25-40 million

It is their choice. Any university can make more than UT because of third tier rights if they wanted to

 

[topdecktiger]

Do you understand that third Tier rights in other sports are worthless
Very few people watch women's volleyball or soccer on TV
Third tier rights in football are the only thing that matters and the Big XII allows each university to have the right to control their third tier rights

If I was Kansas St I would be trying to market my third tier rights in China or Europe.
Those two games for Kansas St could be shown in China and KSU could be collecting 25-40 million

It is their choice. Any university can make more than UT because of third tier rights if they wanted to

I just edited my previous post, but I'll post it here again, to show you how wrong you are. This is an article about the SEC buying back its Tier 3 rights to start the conference network:

The conference channel cleared its biggest obstacle in recent weeks when it reacquired the third-tier TV rights from IMG College, Learfield Sports and CBS Collegiate Sports Properties, the three rights holders that work with the conference’s 14 schools. Those third-tier TV rights represent one football game, eight men’s basketball games, baseball, women’s basketball and all other nonrevenue sports that are not picked up by ESPN or a syndicated partner.
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2013/04/15/Media/SEC.aspx

The SEC schools each had one football game as part of their Tier 3 packages, prior to 2013-14. You are simply incorrect when you say that the SEC schools didn't have Tier 3 rights to TV football games since the early 2000s. As the article clearly indicates, the SEC schools retained the TV rights to 1 football game up until 2013/14.

 

[CoolHandLuke2005]

I just edited my previous post, but I'll post it here again, to show you how wrong you are. This is an article about the SEC buying back its Tier 3 rights to start the conference network:

The conference channel cleared its biggest obstacle in recent weeks when it reacquired the third-tier TV rights from IMG College, Learfield Sports and CBS Collegiate Sports Properties, the three rights holders that work with the conference’s 14 schools. Those third-tier TV rights represent one football game, eight men’s basketball games, baseball, women’s basketball and all other nonrevenue sports that are not picked up by ESPN or a syndicated partner.
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2013/04/15/Media/SEC.aspx

The SEC schools each had one football game as part of their Tier 3 packages, prior to 2013-14. You are simply incorrect when you say that the SEC schools didn't have Tier 3 rights to TV football games since the early 2000s. As the article clearly indicates, the SEC schools retained the TV rights to 1 football game up until 2013/14.

I am not sure if that money went to the conference or the individual university

You are not understanding that the individual school controls the third tier rights not the conference how that article explains it is that the conference originally was the one not the individual university that negotiated the contract.
If it was the University the university would be getting their third tier rights back and not the SEC

 

[topdecktiger]

I am not sure if that money went to the conference or the individual university

You are not understanding that the individual school controls the third tier rights not the conference how that article explains it that the conference originally was the one not the individual university that negotiated.
If it was the University the university would be getting their third tier rights back and not the SEC

No, incorrect. The individual schools owned those rights, not the conference. Those were individual contracts between the third parties and the individual universities.

YOU don't understand that. You have just made it up in your mind that the SEC signed away it's Tier 3 rights prior to the network, and they didn't. You are simply wrong, and you just don't want to admit it, despite facts to the contrary.

 

[CoolHandLuke2005]

I still don't understand what you are trying to prove here.

Third rights are good if you are a bigger university
And Third tier rights are not so good if you are a smaller university that does not want to put in the work.

If I was at one of these smaller universities in the Big XII I would be looking for other ways to generate revenue.

It is business. A lot of these smaller universities want hand outs and conference welfare instead of using their third tier rights and making tons of money

 

[topdecktiger]

I still don't understand what you are trying to prove here.

Third rights are good if you are a bigger university
And Third tier rights are not so good if you are a smaller university that does not want to put in the work.

If I was at one of these smaller universities in the Big XII I would be looking for other ways to generate revenue.

It is business. A lot of these smaller universities want hand outs and conference welfare instead of using their third tier rights and making tons of money

Here's what I'm trying to prove.

You are claiming that the SEC schools gave up their Tier 3 TV rights to football games in 2008 (or earlier). That's incorrect. The SEC schools retained the TV rights to their Tier 3 football games all the way until 2013/14, when the conference started the network.

 

[CoolHandLuke2005]

Here's what I'm trying to prove.

You are claiming that the SEC schools gave up their Tier 3 TV rights to football games in 2008 (or earlier). That's incorrect. The SEC schools retained the TV rights to their Tier 3 football games all the way until 2013/14, when the conference started the network.

That is their problem

That is why Texas will be able to make 40 million more than Alabama.

All these schools who gave up their third rights will have to ask for them back

Only people who are truthfully against third tier rights going to the universities are the media companies but the difference is Texas doesn't have to bend completely over to ESPN.

 

[topdecktiger]

That is their problem

That is why Texas will be able to make more than 40 million more than Alabama.

All these schools who gave up their third rights will have to ask for them back

Only people who are truthfully against third tier rights going to the universities are the media companies but the difference is Texas doesn't have to bend completely over to ESPN.

Nobody is against the schools having Tier 3 rights. The reason Alabama gave its Tier 3 TV rights to the conference is because Alabama makes more money from the conference network than they would make selling their Tier 3 TV rights individually.

The reason Texas makes $40 million more than Alabama is not because of Tier 3. It's because Texas has a larger alumni/fan base (and wealthier as well), which gives more donations to the university and buys more merchandise. That would not change even if Alabama still had its Tier 3 TV rights.

 

[CoolHandLuke2005]

Nobody is against the schools having Tier 3 rights. The reason Alabama gave its Tier 3 TV rights to the conference is because Alabama makes more money from the conference network than they would make selling their Tier 3 TV rights individually.

The reason Texas makes $40 million more than Alabama is not because of Tier 3. It's because Texas has a larger alumni/fan base (and wealthier as well), which gives more donations to the university and buys more merchandise. That would not change even if Alabama still had its Tier 3 TV rights.

The entire last 5 to 8 years have been media companies trying to force UT into giving up their third tier rights
I can go through every move made by companies like ESPN prior and after the LHN.
UT tried to compromise with ESPN and negotiated a deal with the company.
Truthfully I think Texas would be better without the LHN.
There are ways for UT to make that 15 million in countries like Australia and China.

There is even a market for UT basketball in Europe now.
The university truthfully wants their third tier rights back because the people connected are much better marketers than ESPN

 

[topdecktiger]

The entire last 5 to 8 years have been media companies trying to force UT into giving up their third tier rights
I can go through every move made by companies like ESPN prior and after the LHN.
UT tried to compromise with ESPN and negotiated a deal with the company.
Truthfully I think Texas would be better without the LHN.
There are ways for UT to make that 15 million in countries like Australia and China.

There is even a market for UT basketball in Europe now.
The university truthfully wants their third tier rights back because the people connected are much better marketers than ESPN

Nobody has been trying to force Texas to do anything.

There isn't a market for Texas basketball in Europe. Texas can't make $15 million in Australia and China. That's pure fantasy. The $15 million Texas gets from LHN is the ceiling.

 

[CoolHandLuke2005]

Nobody has been trying to force Texas to do anything.

There isn't a market for Texas basketball in Europe. Texas can't make $15 million in Australia and China. That's pure fantasy. The $15 million Texas gets from LHN is the ceiling.

No ESPN is purposely attempting to devalue UT's third tier rights.
You can make a market for any sport any where.
Look at European soccer and the NBA in China
NFL in Mexico
European soccer in the US.
If Texas creates an athletic powerhouse in all sports it could happen.

 

[topdecktiger]

No ESPN is purposely attempting to devalue UT's third tier rights.
You can make a market for any sport any where.
Look at European soccer and the NBA in China
NFL in Mexico
European soccer in the US.
If Texas creates an athletic powerhouse in all sports it could happen.

No, ESPN isn't trying to devalue Texas's Tier 3 rights.

All those things you mentioned are entire leagues, not an individual team, let alone an individual school competing in amateur sports.

NFL in Mexico and European soccer are niche sports. Aren't mainstream sports in either country.

You can't just create a market out of thin air. There simply isn't significant interest in college sports overseas, football or otherwise. For Texas to get $15 million or more overseas, there has to be 1) a large and sustainable fanbase of interest 2) a distributor willing to pay for the content. Neither of the two exist overseas.

Hell, it doesn't even exist here. Do you know how the LNH actually works? It's a subscription network, based on market. An LHN subscriber in the states of Texas pays double what an LHN subscriber pays in Arizona, or Colorado. That's where the money comes from. The reason for the difference in the rate is because logically there is more interest in Longhorn sports in Texas than there is in other states.

You are not at all grounded in reality on this issue.

 

[CoolHandLuke2005]

No, ESPN isn't trying to devalue Texas's Tier 3 rights.

All those things you mentioned are entire leagues, not an individual team, let alone an individual school competing in amateur sports.

NFL in Mexico and European soccer are niche sports. Aren't mainstream sports in either country.

You can't just create a market out of thin air. There simply isn't significant interest in college sports overseas, football or otherwise. For Texas to get $15 million or more overseas, there has to be 1) a large and sustainable fanbase of interest 2) a distributor willing to pay for the content. Neither of the two exist overseas.

Hell, it doesn't even exist here. Do you know how the LNH actually works? It's a subscription network, based on market. An LHN subscriber in the states of Texas pays double what an LHN subscriber pays in Arizona, or Colorado. That's where the money comes from. The reason for the difference in the rate is because logically there is more interest in Longhorn sports in Texas than there is in other states.

You are not at all grounded in reality on this issue.

They do not sell leagues they sell teams and players

People in Mexico do not care about the NFL they care about the Dallas Cowboys and to a lesser extent the Oakland Raiders
In China David Beckham was marketed than Kobe Bryant was marketed
If a player for the football team can be marketed for three years he still will be connected with Texas once he joins the NFL
Or one year in basketball. He will still be connected with Texas even in the NBA


I have studied in depth the psychological makeup of individual countries in terms of marketing.
Each country has products marketed to them in different ways

 

[Rootmaster]

coolhand...you are really working at getting your post number huh?

 

[still5-0vstarheels]

coolhand...you are really working at getting your post number huh?

And you ignore the 4800 post by a Clemson fan on this site.

 

[Cuyahoga Falls Eers]

I'll keep it simple. WVU is getting quadruple as a Big 12 member what it got as a Big East member. You can debate conference payouts, 3rd tier but the most important thing is that WVU is getting almost four times as much money now as it did in its best Big East year. Argue about which pockets the money came from all you want. All I care about is that my alma mater nearly quadrupled its income. That's good enough for me. The rest of the debate is poe-tay-toe puh-tat-oh.


M istakes by special teams + absence of Simms & Long = loss to Virginia Tech, 31-24

O bliterated East Carolina, 56-20

U nhinged Delaware State, 59-16

N ot sharp but beat Kansas, 56-34

T ops statistically but tough loss to TCU, 31-24

A mbushed Texas Tech, 46-35, with 20:49 minute goose egg

I nvincible to inept, nipped Baylor, 38-36

N ullify Oklahoma State

E rectile dysfunction Iowa State

E masculate Kansas State

R eam Texas

S hock Oklahoma

 

[topdecktiger]

They do not sell leagues they sell teams and players

People in Mexico do not care about the NFL they care about the Dallas Cowboys and to a lesser extent the Oakland Raiders
In China David Beckham was marketed than Kobe Bryant was marketed
If a player for the football team can be marketed for three years he still will be connected with Texas once he joins the NFL
Or one year in basketball. He will still be connected with Texas even in the NBA


I have studied in depth the psychological makeup of individual countries in terms of marketing.
Each country has products marketed to them in different ways

You are just throwing stuff against the wall at this point. The NFL is not widely popular in Mexico. It's a niche sport, like EPL soccer is here in the U.S. In China, they are marketing an entire league (NBA, EPL). I don't disagree that David Beckham or Kobe Bryant are used as the "face" of those leagues, but they are still marketing the leagues nontheless. There simply isn't significant interest in college sports overseas, and particularly not in one individual school. That's just reality.

And you ignore the 4800 post by a Clemson fan on this site.

The difference is, I'm not saying dumb shit like Kansas St can make $25 million a year off Tier 3 rights in China.

 

[Pitt4Life34]

They only fight that because of the 4 team playoff. ESPN's ultimate goal was 4 conferences, but they still can't control that with the B12 and Notre Dame on the outside of those other 4 conferences. Funny thing is Notre Dame plays 12 teams, no conference championship and will not be questioned about their right to be in the playoff, only because they are Notre Dame. Granted right now there are 5 ranked teams on their schedule but because they are Notre Dame they don't need that extra game at the end like the playoff committee said was important the first couple years. The fight for 8 teams will be louder every year, especially a year when Notre Dame or another conference gets in two teams and two conferences are left out. Until the B12 goes to 12 teams and splits into divsions they will always be fighting to get into the playoff. Sorry to disagree with your point about b12 respect but the b12 gets way more respect than the old bigeast and old acc.

For sure Big12 gets and deserves more respect but their placing among the P5s is similar. Maybe I didn’t word that right. That’s the point though. So yes a one loss ND or Clemson probably gets in.

 

[YourGranddadsSon]

For sure Big12 gets and deserves more respect but their placing among the P5s is similar. Maybe I didn’t word that right. That’s the point though. So yes a one loss ND or Clemson probably gets in.

A one loss ND kinds hurts the ACC because of the number of ACC schools ND plays
So it won't be ND and an ACC school right now

It will be ND or an ACC school right now

Both are looking at the outside in just as long as TCU stays undefeated

 

[Pitt4Life34]

LOL Irony at it's best.

Nope! I support WVU more than you do goofy. Go to games. Donate. Find the posts were I dog the program. LOL at you pal because you can’t. You are low grade value to this site. And your stalking has reared its ugly head.

 

[Pitt4Life34]

A one loss ND kinds hurts the ACC because of the number of ACC schools ND plays
So it won't be ND and an ACC school right now

It will be ND or an ACC school right now

Both are looking at the outside in just as long as TCU stays undefeated

If TCU goes undeafeated they absolutely belong in playoff. If Clemson runs the table my bet is that are in. If ND runs table they are 4 or 5 if TCU runs table. If Georgia and/or Bama, Clemson, ND, Washington, Oklahoma and TCU all have one loss do you see the Committee putting Oklahoma or TCU in at 4? I don’t!


Playoff if the one loss deal happens as I see it the playoffs will look like this if TCU doesn’t run the table.

SEC
Big Ten
Clemson
SEC/ND/TCU.

 

[still5-0vstarheels]

Nope! I support WVU more than you do goofy. Go to games. Donate. Find the posts were I dog the program. LOL at you pal because you can’t. You are low grade value to this site. And your stalking has reared its ugly head.

LOL Gregory. It is just so easy to goof at you and your low IQ post.

 

[MichiganHerd]

You are low grade value to this site. And your stalking has reared its ugly head.

I know exactly how you feel. We post, and out comes 5&0. Happens.Every.Time.

 

[Pitt4Life34]

LOL Gregory. It is just so easy to goof at you and your low IQ post.

So you troll a WVU fan and supporter. Hmmm ok.

 

[CoolHandLuke2005]

You are just throwing stuff against the wall at this point. The NFL is not widely popular in Mexico. It's a niche sport, like EPL soccer is here in the U.S. In China, they are marketing an entire league (NBA, EPL). I don't disagree that David Beckham or Kobe Bryant are used as the "face" of those leagues, but they are still marketing the leagues nontheless. There simply isn't significant interest in college sports overseas, and particularly not in one individual school. That's just reality.



The difference is, I'm not saying dumb shit like Kansas St can make $25 million a year off Tier 3 rights in China.

UT has the best swimming & diving program in the world for college athletics.
Australia is a nation that takes pride in their swimmers. If UT would go into Australia and recruit a few of their swimmers UT could then sell UT swimming to Australia. Then sell other sports.
Certain parts of the country love baseball as well.

You have to understand that you sell sports first then the brand name.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Longhorns_swimming_and_diving

 

[still5-0vstarheels]

So you troll a WVU fan and supporter. Hmmm ok.

No Gregory. I troll a Pitt fan who brags about how rich and successful he is, claims to be well connected at WVU and gives more money to WVU than anybody else. Sounds like little man syndrome to me. I understand why you have to have a second team to follow being a Pitt fan. You are not the only two teamer on this site.

 

[CoolHandLuke2005]

No Gregory. I troll a Pitt fan who brags about how rich and successful he is, claims to be well connected at WVU and gives more money to WVU than anybody else. Sounds like little man syndrome to me. I understand why you have to have a second team to follow being a Pitt fan. You are not the only two teamer on this site.

He is a PItt fan.
Says he went to a basketball game when PItt played UT and then compared UT to Penn State.

Very insecure person.

 

[Cuyahoga Falls Eers]

If we're dreaming up scenarios with 5 games and conference title games left, keep this in mind:
EVERY national playoff has had ONE undefeated team and THREE one-loss teams. So 2-loss teams like WVU, Stanford and Southern Cal are out.

Still unbeaten, with a LOT of mountains to climb:
Alabama
Georgia
TCU
Penn State
Wisconsin
Miami

Still in the running, with a LOT of mountains to climb:
Clemson
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Ohio State
Michigan State
Washington
Washington State
North Carolina State
Virginia Tech

History tells us that 5 of the 6 undefeated teams will lose in the 5 games plus conference title contests left.

No more than 3 of the 6 unbeaten teams will finish with 1 loss.

All 9 1-loss teams are on the precipice of elimination. Either win out or plan on a lesser, bowl game.

Now watch the 15 teams I listed start dropping like flies. After all, a lot of them have to play each other so a loser is guaranteed in this crowd.

But that's what makes college football so much fun to watch.

And why I'll be in Section 107 (East side) as usual cheering my fool head off for my alma mater against the Cowboys. And, if Grier, Sills, Long and Coach Gibson are having their "A+" game, maybe emotionally singing "Country Roads" with misty eyes (and taste of moonshine?) and the hair raising on the back of my neck.

We'll see.


M istakes by special teams + absence of Simms & Long =
loss to Virginia Tech, 31-24
O bliterated East Carolina, 56-20
U nhinged Delaware State, 59-16
N ot sharp but beat Kansas, 56-34
T ops statistically but tough loss to TCU, 31-24
A mbushed Texas Tech, 46-35, with 20:49 minute goose egg
I nvincible to inept, nipped Baylor, 38-36
N ail Oklahoma State
E rectile dysfunction Iowa State
E masculate Kansas State
R eam Texas
S hock Oklahoma

 

[TheAnointedOne]

I know exactly how you feel. We post, and out comes 5&0. Happens.Every.Time.

Hey Greg

 

[Rootmaster]

cuyahoga...the sun is setting in the east today. I agree with your post!

 

[TheAnointedOne]

cuyahoga...the sun is setting in the east today. I agree with your post!

Do you post more here or on your own message board

 

[Rootmaster]

Do you post more here or on your own message board

???????lol

 

[tOSUGrad90]

Here are your facts, tofu boy. But you can't handle the truth. Just like Donald Trump, Putin's marionette toy.

Team that left are worse off. Teams that joined are better off. Not my opinion. But from an unbiased source.

You lose again. But don't worry. Even after Penn State beats tofu again, the College Football Pretzel committee will concoct a new way to get tofu in the national playoffs so tofu can get shut out again.

Here's an unbiased look at the teams that left or joined the Big 12. It's further evidence that being in the Big 12 is a wise move.

Big 12 comparisons with previous conference affiliations:

TCU left Mountain West, in Group of Five, for 47-24 record in Power 5 Big 12. Unbeaten this season, TCU may make national playoffs denied TCU when it was unbeaten in the Mountain West. Big 12 wins that one.

Texas A&M had double-digit wins once in 16 years in the Big 12. Aggies won 11 in first SEC season. Big 12 wins that one.

WVU, despite 41-30 record since joining Big 12, is in Top 25 nearly every season and collects nearly $40 million compared to the $10 million in its now-extinct Big East days. Big 12 wins that one.

Nebraska, 55-31 since leaving Big 12 for Big 10, has plateaued. Big 12 at least a tossup in that one.

Missouri, 39-32 since leaving the Big 12, was in seven consecutive bowl games before leaving the Big 12, but may miss a bowl for the 4th time in 6 seasons this year. Big 12 wins that one.

Maybe leaving the Big 12 was a bad idea? Maybe joining the Big 12 was a great idea.

Just one of the many of the ancient one's failed predictions in red above.

 

[Cuyahoga Falls Eers]

Congratulations to tofu. Great comeback against Penn State for 1-point victory.

I thought WVU was doing the same thing when the defense had a pick-6 and special teams blocked a punt for a TD in a 2-minute period.

But the WVU offense continued to shoot itself in the foot and let a golden opportunity fritter away.

Four interceptions of Grier passes. Will and receivers were not on the same page the whole game, except for a few brief spurts. That cost us the game.

At one point, defense and special teams had out-scored the WVU offense, 14-10!

Defense had an interception and recovered 3 fumbles. But WVU offense had 4 interceptions and 3 fumbles only 1 lost fumble.

Defense kept giving WVU offense chances and Grier and friends kept giving it right back to Cowboys. I counted 7 times that defense had stops or turnovers and WVU offense got only 7 points from it. TWENTY FOUR defense players made tackles in the game! They deserved better from the offense.

And, in case you haven't noticed, the next opponent is Iowa State in Mountaineer Field. You know, the Cyclones team that shared the bottom of the standings with Kansas year after year.

Well, today Iowa State is tied for first place in the Big 12 with TCU and Oklahoma State and has victories over the Horny Frogs and Oklahoma.

My, how times have changed.


M istakes by special teams + absence of Simms & Long = loss to Virginia Tech, 31-24

O bliterated East Carolina, 56-20

U nhinged Delaware State, 59-16

N ot sharp but beat Kansas, 56-34

T ops statistically but tough loss to TCU, 31-24

A mbushed Texas Tech, 46-35, with 20:49 minute goose egg

I nvincible to inept, nipped Baylor, 38-36

N oxious offense deadly vs. Oklahoma State, 39-50

E rectile dysfunction Iowa State

E masculate Kansas State

R eam Texas

S hock Oklahoma

 

[Rootmaster]

Really don't care about the other teams in other conferences. I do care that the Mountaineers stand at 5-3 with four very iffy games coming. Once again, with DH and his staff, we can resort to arguing about what other teams might make the playoffs. Same crap every year from this crew.

 

[WVUALLEN]

Bragging about an ISU victory over TCU = Big 12 stays at home. How far does TCU drop? Out of top 10 is my guess.

 

[Cuyahoga Falls Eers]

Maybe Iowa State should be in the national playoffs.

An overtime loss to Iowa early in the season and a 17-10 loss to Texas was followed by 4 straight victories.

Cyclones at least the 2017 Big 12 champs

 

[WVUALLEN]

Iowa 4-3 (1-3)
Texas 3-4 (2-2)

Not likely.