Orangebloods' Chip Brown says OU to PAC-12 by End of the Month
"Oklahoma will apply for membership to the Pac-12 before the end of the month, and Oklahoma State is expected to follow suit, a source close to OU's administration told Orangebloods.com.
Even though Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott said Friday the Pac-12 was not interested in expansion at this time, OU's board of regents is fed up with the instability in the Big 12, the source said.
The OU board of regents will meet within two weeks to formalize plans to apply for membership to the Pac-12, the source said.
Messages left Sunday night with OU athletic director Joe Castiglione and Oklahoma State athletic director Mike Holder were not immediately returned.
If OU follows through with what appears to be a unanimous sentiment on the seven-member Oklahoma board of regents to leave the Big 12, realignment in college athletics could be heating back up. OU's application would be matched by an application from Oklahoma State, the source said, even though OSU president Burns Hargis and mega-booster Boone Pickens both voiced their support for the Big 12 last Thursday.
There is differing sentiment about if the Pac-12 presidents and chancellors are ready to expand again after bringing in Colorado and Utah last year and landing $3 billion TV contracts from Fox and ESPN. Colorado president Bruce Benson told reporters last week CU would be opposed to any expansion that might bring about east and west divisions in the Pac-12.
Currently, there are north and south divisions in the Pac-12. If OU and OSU were to join, Larry Scott would have to get creative.
Scott's orginal plan last summer was to bring in Colorado, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and put them in an eastern division with Arizona and Arizona State. The old Pac-8 schools (USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington and Washington State) were to be in the west division.
Colorado made the move in June 2010, but when Texas A&M was not on board to go west, the Big 12 came back together with the help of its television partners (ABC/ESPN and Fox).
If Oklahoma and Oklahoma State were accepted into the Pac-12, there would undoubtedly be a hope by Larry Scott that Texas would join the league. But Texas sources have indicated UT is determined to hang onto the Longhorn Network, which would not be permissible in the Pac-12 in its current form.
Texas sources continue to indicate to Orangebloods.com that if the Big 12 falls apart, the Longhorns would consider "all options."
Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe held an emergency conference call 10 days ago with league presidents excluding Oklahoma, Texas and Texas A&M and asked the other league presidents to "work on Texas" because Beebe didn't think the Pac-12 would take Oklahoma without Texas.
Now, it appears OU is willing to take its chances with the Pac-12 with or without Texas.
There seemed to be a temporary pause in any possible shifting of the college athletics' landscape when Baylor led a charge to tie up Texas A&M's move to the Southeastern Conference in legal red tape. BU refused to waive its right to sue the SEC over A&M's departure from the Big 12, and the SEC said it would not admit Texas A&M until it had been cleared of any potential lawsuits.
Baylor, Kansas and Iowa State have indicated they will not waive their right to sue the SEC.
It's unclear if an application by OU to the Pac-12 would draw the same threats of litigation against the Pac-12 from those Big 12 schools.
Stay tuned."
http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1263940
I think this is a smart move by OU, it puts the pressure squarely on Texas.
The Big 12 has been a dead man walking for weeks, and there is no sense in trying to keep it together. Especially with the uneven payouts that Texas recieves. OU is essetially calling Texas' bluff. Either Texas accepts the equal payouts of the PAC 12 and gives up the LHN, or they go independent which is full of long term risks.
We should all be rooting for Texas to go Independent.
For sure.
I think a Texas going independent and OSU and OU going to the PAc-14, with MIzzou, KSAU and Kansas to the BE would be great. Baylor and TT could go to C-USa or the the WAc or Mountain west.
That scenario seems very palausible and would be great for the BE.
Of all schools going independent, Texas might just be one of the few situations that would work. Would lose the potential automatic bid in basketball but when have they ever been in a situation to need one and then get it? Could always hook up with another conference ala ND for its non football teams
Quote from: Aughnanure on September 12, 2011, 12:05:53 PM
We should all be rooting for Texas to go Independent.
No. We should be rooting for the B12 to survive....perhaps adding a team like BYU.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 12, 2011, 04:06:06 PM
No. We should be rooting for the B12 to survive....perhaps adding a team like BYU.
Or just bring back all the old Texas teams that got tossed.
Rice, SMU, and TCU (HA!)
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 12, 2011, 04:06:06 PM
No. We should be rooting for the B12 to survive....perhaps adding a team like BYU.
The Big 12 is dead, Texas overplayed its hand.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 12, 2011, 04:06:06 PM
No. We should be rooting for the B12 to survive....perhaps adding a team like BYU.
So then it will survive for another 3 years...max? Having Texas and Notre Dame as Independents will act as a safety net for the Bball schools, if we go 4 16-20 team conferences, as they are a conference they can house the #2 college sport.
If the Big East goes West of the Mississippi, it's time for a conference name change.
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on September 12, 2011, 05:05:19 PMIf the Big East goes West of the Mississippi, it's time for a conference name change.
Pretty sure TCU is west of the Mississippi.
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on September 12, 2011, 05:05:19 PM
If the Big East goes West of the Mississippi, it's time for a conference name change.
TCU is west of the Mississippi and why change names? Look at the B1G and Big 12...lol
OU and OSU to the Pac-12/14
KU, KSU, and Mizzou to the Big East for all sports
Texas goes independent in football, and joins the Big East in all other sports, just like ND.
Then the BE has 21 for bball, go to a 20 game schedule and play everyone once.
There's 12 in football for a championship game, while ND & Texas can do whatever the hell they want.
ISU, Baylor, and TTech get screwed. It just makes too much sense.
Quote from: Litehouse on September 12, 2011, 05:33:45 PMOU and OSU to the Pac-12/14
KU, KSU, and Mizzou to the Big East for all sports
Texas goes independent in football, and joins the Big East in all other sports, just like ND.
Then the BE has 21 for bball, go to a 20 game schedule and play everyone once.
There's 12 in football for a championship game, while ND & Texas can do whatever the hell they want.
ISU, Baylor, and TTech get screwed. It just makes too much sense.
I honestly don't know the answer to this...doesn't the NCAA have a rule that conference seasons can't be longer than 18 games? I really thought there was a cap to the number of conference games you could play. Or is it just total games?
If we could go to 20, that would limit us to 11 non-conference games, I believe. Figure a 4-game tournament, then the annual UW, UW-M, UW-GB games and we only have 4 games left. Not a lot of flexibility for non-conference scheduling.
There may be a rule limiting it to 18 games, but as conferences expand I could see the number being increased. I also can see the football season going one game longer.
Quote from: brewcity77 on September 12, 2011, 05:56:35 PM
If we could go to 20, that would limit us to 11 non-conference games, I believe. Figure a 4-game tournament, then the annual UW, UW-M, UW-GB games and we only have 4 games left. Not a lot of flexibility for non-conference scheduling.
The exempt tourneys only count as 1 game right now. So with a tourney, UW, UWM, and UWGB, that still leaves us with 7 extra games. I think it would be awesome.
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on September 12, 2011, 05:05:19 PM
If the Big East goes West of the Mississippi, it's time for a conference name change.
The name is a brand, no way you change the name EVER. It helps sell the league to casual fans, get more TV money, etc. The Basketball only schools (along w/ Texas and ND) are going to need that name when the split finally comes.
Quote from: Aughnanure on September 12, 2011, 08:52:54 PM
The name is a brand, no way you change the name EVER. It helps sell the league to casual fans, get more TV money, etc. The Basketball only schools (along w/ Texas and ND) are going to need that name when the split finally comes.
Forgot TCU was going to be an added team. d'oh
So what does it mean to be the BigGER East? It still makes no sense whatsoever. Eff the greedy bastards. Killing tradition of the sake of a dollar.
eff em
I hope Texas sports dies. All of those rivalries flushed.
Aside from the Red River Rivalry, what else does the B12 have at this point? Seems like the rest of their rivalry games are recognized only regionally. Besides, Nebraska in the B1G is going to be fun to watch...moreso than when they were in the B12.
Quote from: Litehouse on September 12, 2011, 08:21:40 PM
The exempt tourneys only count as 1 game right now. So with a tourney, UW, UWM, and UWGB, that still leaves us with 7 extra games. I think it would be awesome.
That's including the 4-game tourney as 1 game. Right now we can schedule up to 13 games, but 4 of those come as a tournament. Like last year, the tourney included Bucknell, UW-GB, Duke, and Gonzaga. One game, but totaled us at 13. This year is the same, Norfolk State then the 3 in the Virgin Islands.
It's actually 10 you can schedule against an 18-game conference schedule, but you get to 13 because of the exempt tourney (9+1 that counts as 4).
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on September 12, 2011, 09:20:38 PM
Forgot TCU was going to be an added team. d'oh
So what does it mean to be the BigGER East? It still makes no sense whatsoever. Eff the greedy bastards. Killing tradition of the sake of a dollar.
eff em
I hope Texas sports dies. All of those rivalries flushed.
What are you talking about? The name has meant absolutely nothing since Louisville, DePaul, Cincinnati & Marquette joined, it is first and foremost a BRAND. Going farther west doesnt change a single thing.
Texas and Oklahoma are basically a package. The Texas brass was in Norman today. If OU goes to the Pac 12 then the Pac 12 goes to 16. OSU, Texas, and most likely TTech will join. Baylor is pretty much ostracized due to their policy of expelling gay students, so their only hope is to sue like crazy to keep the current conference in place.
Quote from: PJDunn on September 12, 2011, 11:06:44 PM
Texas and Oklahoma are basically a package. The Texas brass was in Norman today. If OU goes to the Pac 12 then the Pac 12 goes to 16. OSU, Texas, and most likely TTech will join. Baylor is pretty much ostracized due to their policy of expelling gay students, so their only hope is to sue like crazy to keep the current conference in place.
if that's the case, the BE will just add the left-overs unless the bball side does what Marinatto articulated last year when he said that the bball schools will split if more fball teams are added. Will the fball schools call their bluff? I'm guessing, yes.
Texas and Oklahoma are not a package.
http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/bohls/index.html
OU and UT are not a "package," but OU and OSU like to have a presense in Texas because they recruit many students (not just student-athletes) from the state, especially the DFW area. I think the question they are asking is playing a couple football games in Texas really worthwhile however.
And remember, OU and UT went decades without being in the same conference.
For all intents and purposes they are a package. The Pac-12 wants the big Kahuna, and that is Texas. Texas will not go independent. The upcoming new world order of superconferences makes that scenario a loser (only a matter of time before ND comes to the same conclusion), thus the visit to Norman. If the Pac-12 makes an offer to OU and OSU they are doing so to get Texas and that is probably what will take place. The fact that Texas and OU were not historically in the same conference means zero. It is all about $$.
Marquette will be fine. The real losers are the D1 football schools that are not part of one of the superconferences. Wouldn't want to be a Iowa State fan right now.
PAC-12 will take OU regardless of whether it means UT comes along. Obviously they hope it causes Texas to join as well, but they are willing to grab OU (and OSU) by themselves. If UT doesn't join, for want of their network, KU, KSU or MU would be next. Tech could get screwed just as badly as Baylor if UT doesn't go to the PAC and bring them along.
The PAC seems completely unwilling to even consider BYU. Team like UNLV & Nevada are probably the only options for the PAC if UT doesn't come and KU decides to go to ACC or Big East instead. Can't see Boise St getting a look, New Mexico possibly because it is seen as a growing market, maybe Tech here and potentially Air Force - but those are only on the table if PAC is trying to keep up with the other conferences moving to 16+ and cant get the UT or KU brand.
I do not think Texas will go to Pac 10, based on articles I have read. Texas going independent will allow them to still schedule games with the Oklahoma teams assuming they will still schedule Texas.
"The Big 12 is done"
http://capstonereport.com/2011/09/13/report-from-austin-the-big-12-is-done/13691/
Justice would be served if Texas went independent and then all the power schools refused to schedule them.
Which is precisely why they won't go independent. If Texas doesn't go, don't be surprised if the pac 12 does not offer OU and OSU membership. This thing could still go sideways leaving a damaged, but viable B12 conference in place.
Quote from: PJDunn on September 13, 2011, 12:32:44 PM
Which is precisely why they won't go independent. If Texas doesn't go, don't be surprised if the pac 12 does not offer OU and OSU membership. This thing could still go sideways leaving a damaged, but viable B12 conference in place.
The PAc 12 will not miss out on a chance to obtain the Oklahoma football brand
^ This. OU will go regardless of UT. They are sick of Texas, and people thinking they follow Texas.
I found this article today.
Florida State Forms Expansion/Realignment Committee
http://www.mrsec.com/2011/09/fsu-forms-expansion-committee/
An interesting article on ESPN about the economic impact on the low-tier Big 12 schools.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6970677/big-12-schools-face-economic-impact-shuffling (http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6970677/big-12-schools-face-economic-impact-shuffling)
I really don't want the Big East to get stuck with ISU and Baylor, but that article makes it sound like more of a possibility. Then we'd be at 19/11. Maybe they'd reconsider Temple for football only.
Sounds like everybody is looking to the ACC as their back-up plan, but does the ACC really want the extra mouths to feed? However, left-over B12 teams going to the ACC helps prevent the ACC from poaching Big East teams, which helps preserve the status-quo for us.
I would not mind Iowa St. It would be a road game I could drive to.
I wonder what kind of out the Big 12 has with their TV contract? A team leaving effects what ESPN is paying for. The article said 5 teams could stay together and keep the BCS status and the TV money. I would have to think ESPN must have some rights to reopen the contract or sue the schools jumping ship.
DO. NOT. WANT. BAYLOR.
Quote from: Aughnanure on September 13, 2011, 01:40:48 PM
^ This. OU will go regardless of UT. They are sick of Texas, and people thinking they follow Texas.
OU is a gloriified juniior college. The pac 12 is still trying to pretend that they are a bastion of academic excellence (as long as you ignore ASU and WSU it makes sense) and the Oklahoma schools don't fit that mold. They are not chasing Oklahoma, they are using them to get to Texas. Texas and ND are the 800lb gorillas in this merry go round. Both will join a conference and both are being heavily recuited.
Baylor would make sense for the Big East considering we are getting TCU. So now the two Texas schools would have a rivalry that could develop.
I wouldn't mind having Baylor seeing their basketball has improved a lot over the past three years.
We don't want Baylor in the BE. We shouldn't want TCU in the BE. The more "football schools" that are added, the more the BE slips away from what Marquette is - an urban basketball school. This is why we want the B12 to survive - in the long run adding schools like Kansas and Missouri would be fool's gold for Marquette.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 15, 2011, 08:01:16 AM
We don't want Baylor in the BE. We shouldn't want TCU in the BE. The more "football schools" that are added, the more the BE slips away from what Marquette is - an urban basketball school. This is why we want the B12 to survive - in the long run adding schools like Kansas and Missouri would be fool's gold for Marquette.
agreed!
Quote from: ken8406 on September 15, 2011, 01:57:18 AM
Baylor would make sense for the Big East considering we are getting TCU. So now the two Texas schools would have a rivalry that could develop.
Not to pile on, but it bears repeating: just because we've not got one school that makes no sense at all (TCU) doesn't mean that another school located nearby will make sense. Hell, why not get UCSD and then the following year pick up SDSU. SDSU would make sense since they could develop a rivalry with their cross-town school.
Quote from: PJDunn on September 15, 2011, 01:10:04 AM
OU is a gloriified juniior college. The pac 12 is still trying to pretend that they are a bastion of academic excellence (as long as you ignore ASU and WSU it makes sense) and the Oklahoma schools don't fit that mold. They are not chasing Oklahoma, they are using them to get to Texas. Texas and ND are the 800lb gorillas in this merry go round. Both will join a conference and both are being heavily recuited.
Wow, someone really dislikes OU. Too bad you're wrong. A glorified junior college? Don't get me wrong, OU is no Harvard, but its a top 100 school with a very solid academic pedigree. You think Washington St, Arizona, Arizona st, Oregon St, etc got in on their academics? Jeez. PAC-12 will not hesitate to add a team like OU just as the Big Ten did not hesitate to add Nebraska. The only issue may be if they take on OSU, but they do really like the the "travelling partner" set up, so I doubt they would flinch too much.
Quote from: Aughnanure on September 15, 2011, 08:55:21 AM
PAC-12 will not hesitate to add a team like OU just as the Big Ten did not hesitate to add Nebraska.
You know what the "N" in their helmets stands for, right?
^ Watch it, there's a lot of Corn fans that went to MU, but I do still like that old joke.
The main point about Oklahoma getting in REGARDLESS OF TEXAS is because the PAC-12 doesnt have too many options after OU and UT. If we're all going to 16-20 team leagues then how is the PAC getting there without UT or OU?
With TCU already out and the PAC apparently not willing to give in on BYU's Sunday rule, where can they go? UNLV and Nevada suddenly become the main targets? If Tech is still around is that there best option to get into Texas?
The PAC is so constrained by their geography, and they'll need to get into the Central timezone to get on more TVs, so where do they go to grow their reach beyond the West coast? SMU, Rice? If OU gets tricked into going with UT to the ACC to form that Texas pod, Kansas, Missouri & Kansas State become the #1 priorities on their list immediately.
Quote from: StillAWarrior on September 15, 2011, 08:39:07 AM
Not to pile on, but it bears repeating: just because we've not got one school that makes no sense at all (TCU) doesn't mean that another school located nearby will make sense. Hell, why not get UCSD and then the following year pick up SDSU. SDSU would make sense since they could develop a rivalry with their cross-town school.
Sorry for throwing out a possible benefit for the addition. It's not like the Big East added two schools in a different time zone in the past.
Quote from: ken8406 on September 15, 2011, 11:36:20 AM
Sorry for throwing out a possible benefit for the addition. It's not like the Big East added two schools in a different time zone in the past.
Not a problem. I didn't mean for my post to sound harsh, and I agree that it would be a benefit to the addition. My comment was just that it still wouldn't "make sense."
Im starting to warm-up to Baylor/ISU/KSU should the opportunity be there to take them. If the conference is going to expand one way or another, isnt it better to take schools that are affiliated with a BCS conference than to take....UCF....or ECU....or SMU....or Houston? The negative stigma associated with non-BCS programs is greater than that of bottom-feeding BCS members, imo.
Quote from: StillAWarrior on September 15, 2011, 11:48:49 AM
Not a problem. I didn't mean for my post to sound harsh, and I agree that it would be a benefit to the addition. My comment was just that it still wouldn't "make sense."
I would not be excited about Baylor either. However, would it make sense for basketball to catch two teams on the same road trip. Visiting team flies to play TCU on Thursday and stays to play Baylor on Saturday. Same thing with Kansas/ Kansas St include them in the same road trip. However, what the Big East probably will do is make you play at Kansas one year and then Kansas St the next year, so every year you would be flying to Kansas and Texas to play one game.
Quote from: muhs03 on September 15, 2011, 11:55:29 AM
Im starting to warm-up to Baylor/ISU/KSU should the opportunity be there to take them. If the conference is going to expand one way or another, isnt it better to take schools that are affiliated with a BCS conference than to take....UCF....or ECU....or SMU....or Houston? The negative stigma associated with non-BCS programs is greater than that of bottom-feeding BCS members, imo.
I agree with you to a point, but UCF and Houston would be good adds in my opinion (though technically bad for the bball-only schools cause you are diluting the voting power). Hell even Rice (great academics, baseball) and SMU wouldn't be too bad and would really establish the Big East in Tejas. UCF helps solidify Florida and Houston or Rice helps solidify Tejas. After tha, I think Memphis should be in the discussion if they aren't already, but the first dominoes have to fall - Kansas, KSU, ISU Mizzou? Will only ISU and KSU be left? Will Mizzou want to stick with Kansas or will they go SEC (the B1G chance is slipping away).
Just simply do not want anything to do with Baylor, cheating bball program and a school everyone in Texas HATES. Houston or Rice would get you the top 2 markets in Tejas (Houston, DFW), and create a rivalry w/ TCU. Who cares about Waco?