New Conference re-alignment thread

[Saulbadguy]

The old one has AIDS.

Anyways, Chip Brown from Orangebloods.com reports OU may apply to the Pac-12 by the 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.

[|Zach|]

Of course there isn't a guarantee.

This is sports and we are not reeruned.

[HolyHandgernade]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showp...postcount=1835

So, its purely a financial motivation for you. That's fair.

[|Zach|]

Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy

Going to a conference that is not going to break apart and leave you on the outside looking in of the BCS is part of the better opportunity.

Better exposure on the national stage is another.

More money for the school is yet another, and being part of a league wide network as an equal partner is a huge part of that.

The fact that said money will be guaranteed, since the SEC will not dissolve, as opposed to any BIG XII contract, which becomes worthless the second Texas and OU leave is still another.

I am responding to this sooo....

These don't work as points anymore. Create new ones.

/HH thread rules.

[HolyHandgernade]

Originally Posted by |Zach|

You responding to something does not make it invalid.

So, we're back to avoidance. OK.

[mnchiefsguy]

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

Well, the PAC said they aren't taking the LHN and they have basically said no to OU. Texas doesn't want to go independent because they don't want to have to ship their non revenue sports all across the country.

Mizzou may very well be fine in the SEC, but there is no guarantee of that anymore than the Big XII won't continue to go on, and succeed, even if they do so as "the Bickersons".

Just because Texas does not want to go independent at this moment in time does not guarantee they are going to stick around. If it nets them more money, Texas would be out the door before anyone knew what hit them.

I don't think that the PAC said no to OU...I think they said no to OU and OSU as a package. They were willing to swallow it if Texas was in the deal, but if the PAC could just get OU without little brother, I think they would be all over it.

[HolyHandgernade]

Originally Posted by |Zach|

Of course there isn't a guarantee.

This is sports and we are not reeruned.

I was just responding to the post. I didn't bring up guarantees.

[|Zach|]

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

So, its purely a financial motivation for you. That's fair.

Stability.

I know you think that isn't a big deal but it is the main reason that is obvious to people who are not KU rationalizers acting dumb in conversations.

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

So, its purely a financial motivation for you. That's fair.

It is always about the money and as Zach said stability. I would throw in just overall fairness as well.

[|Zach|]

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

I was just responding to the post. I didn't bring up guarantees.

Do you think the SEC and the Big 12 have the same level of stability?

[mnchiefsguy]

Originally Posted by |Zach|

Of course there isn't a guarantee.

This is sports and we are not reeruned.

There are no guarantees, but the SEC is the strongest conference in the country, and is as close to a guarantee as one can get.

[HolyHandgernade]

Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy

Just because Texas does not want to go independent at this moment in time does not guarantee they are going to stick around. If it nets them more money, Texas would be out the door before anyone knew what hit them.

Yes, but you have to paint the plausible scenario. This is just projecting a worse case scenario with a really small chance of probability. It would take Texas wanting to move their sports team to some other region AND another conference that is willing to put up with the arrangement.

Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy

I don't think that the PAC said no to OU...I think they said no to OU and OSU as a package. They were willing to swallow it if Texas was in the deal, but if the PAC could just get OU without little brother, I think they would be all over it.

It would take OU if UT was included. UT has the LHN which the PAC has said it is not willing to accommodate. Therefore, the PAC does not want OU.

[|Zach|]

There is no reasonable incentive for Missouri to go to the SEC. None that I can see. The Big 12 is doing FANTASTIC these days.

[HolyHandgernade]

Originally Posted by |Zach|

Stability.

I know you think that isn't a big deal but it is the main reason that is obvious to people who are not KU rationalizers acting dumb in conversations.

No, I think that's a fair point. I don't know why it took so long to come around to it. Oh yeah, because first you wanted to blame it on the competitive and recruiting disadvantage of the LHN. Please, pull up where I said I didn't think stability wasn't a big deal. But, you do realize, right now, you are as much the cause of the instability as anyone else. It seemed somewhat hypocritical when OU used this rationale, and I don't think it is any less so when MU does.

[mnchiefsguy]

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

Yes, but you have to paint the plausible scenario. This is just projecting a worse case scenario with a really small chance of probability. It would take Texas wanting to move their sports team to some other region AND another conference that is willing to put up with the arrangement.



It would take OU if UT was included. UT has the LHN which the PAC has said it is not willing to accommodate. Therefore, the PAC does not want OU.

The PAC would take my dog and a jar of change if Texas was included in the bargain. Texas becoming independent and trying to be the next Notre Dame is not a worst case scenario, it was the endgame for Texas before the super conference mentality became all the rage. Texas truly believes that they are on that level of national following.

Plus, Texas can go independent in football but let the rest of their sports stay in what remains of the BIG XII. Since everyone in this conference is their bitch, they could get away with it. Is Kansas going to be for giving Texas the complete boot if they want to pull out in football? I doubt it.

[HolyHandgernade]

Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy

There are no guarantees, but the SEC is the strongest conference in the country, and is as close to a guarantee as one can get.

They are the strongest football conference in the country. Academics, sports other than football and baseball, they aren't nearly as strong. Remember when MU was going on and on about the academics in the B1G as the reason they wanted to leave last year? Well, you and Vanderbilt will now probably have two things in common if and when you go there.