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.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Why is he even referencing exit fees? He should just say that we are members in good standing, and that's it.

He's referencing exit fees because MU is contemplating leaving. It doesn't mean you're not members in good standing and it's not throwing you out to the wolves.

[Mr. Plow]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Why is he even referencing exit fees? He should just say that we are members in good standing, and that's it.

But MU is also going out of its way to make sure the Big 12 knows it wants to leave. Why leak info about wanting into the Big 10.....why leak info about how much money you'll make moving to the SEC....why vote to look at moving conferences?

It's not like MU has been sitting there saying "We are members of the Big 12 and are looking forward to the expansion of the conference."

[eazyb81]

Well this is interesting....

http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/index.ssf/2011/10/big_east_continues_to_explore.html

"Rutgers’ Board of Governors is expected to give athletic director Tim Pernetti the authority to pursue conference options during a regularly scheduled meeting Wednesday."

[eazyb81]

Maybe the dominoes aren't stopping with Mizzou.

Is the ACC ready to go up to 16? Is Big Ten thinking about a move?

Rutgers could get the excitement going again.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Mr. Plow

So, it's either "Let MU have what they want" or "The Big 12 loses". Gotcha.

Its more like both sides lose. The Big XII might get a few bucks, but at what cost? When you're trying to sell yourself as an attractive, stable conference, do you really want to be publicly fighting with a charter member who wants nothing more than to get the hell away from you?

If you're considering joining a gym, and when you walk into the business office, 25% of the membership has just left for better gyms, and another is yelling about getting screwed because the gym won't let them cancel their membership even though the place is falling apart, are you joining that gym?

[Pants]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

If you're considering joining a gym, and when you walk into the business office, 25% of the membership has just left for better gyms, and another is yelling about getting screwed because the gym won't let them cancel their membership even though the place is falling apart, are you joining that gym?

The programs B12 is going for are going to love this gym because it's going to make them a shit ton more money than their previous gym.

It's not like B12 is planning on plucking B10 members.

I don't think they're too worried about their "image" at this point.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Pants

He's referencing exit fees because MU is contemplating leaving. It doesn't mean you're not members in good standing and it's not throwing you out to the wolves.

Who says we're contemplating leaving? Nobody who is authorized to make that decision has said that. At worst, that should be between the Big XII and Mizzou. Neinas shouldn't be airing dirty laundry when Mizzou has said nothing other than "we are proud members of the Big XII".

[mikeyis4dcats.]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Who says we're contemplating leaving? Nobody who is authorized to make that decision has said that. At worst, that should be between the Big XII and Mizzou. Neinas shouldn't be airing dirty laundry when Mizzou has said nothing other than "we are proud members of the Big XII".

Mizzou hasn't said that.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Who says we're contemplating leaving? Nobody who is authorized to make that decision has said that. At worst, that should be between the Big XII and Mizzou. Neinas shouldn't be airing dirty laundry when Mizzou has said nothing other than "we are proud members of the Big XII".

Neinas is not airing dirty laundry. He's addressing an issue. All he said is he doesn't believe MU would leave the conference until after 2012 due to the steep penalties they would incur as a result. He's not calling your school names, dog. I don't know why this is bothering you so much.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Mr. Plow

But MU is also going out of its way to make sure the Big 12 knows it wants to leave. Why leak info about wanting into the Big 10.....why leak info about how much money you'll make moving to the SEC....why vote to look at moving conferences?

It's not like MU has been sitting there saying "We are members of the Big 12 and are looking forward to the expansion of the conference."

My guess would be that those leaks are coming from people within Mizzou that don't want to leave the Big 12, not from people who do.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by patteeu

My guess would be that those leaks are coming from people within Mizzou that don't want to leave the Big 12, not from people who do.

Do you think Neinas is stepping out of line by claiming a school would probably not leave the conference due to steep exit fees?

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by Pants

Do you think Neinas is stepping out of line by claiming a school would probably not leave the conference due to steep exit fees?

Yes, he is. The public message should be about discussing any concerns Mizzou may have and trying to resolve them, not about threatening a penalty many times larger than what anyone else has incurred. He's gone from "you don't need to leave" to "screw you guys, we're going to use the bylaws to hold you here for 2012".

Its fine to talk bluntly behind the scenes, but when you do it publicly in front of the media, you don't give Mizzou any way to save face if they stay. That might sound like stupid prideful garbage, but if its close to a 50/50 decision, which this would be only at best, then public financial threats would be my tiebreaker.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by eazyb81

Well this is interesting....

http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/index.ssf/2011/10/big_east_continues_to_explore.html

"Rutgers’ Board of Governors is expected to give athletic director Tim Pernetti the authority to pursue conference options during a regularly scheduled meeting Wednesday."

you are right, this is very interesting. They would not be doing this unless Rutgers had a solid offer from the ACC or the B1G.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by alnorth

Yes, he is. The public message should be about discussing any concerns Mizzou may have and trying to resolve them, not about threatening a penalty many times larger than what anyone else has incurred. He's gone from "you don't need to leave" to "screw you guys, we're going to use the bylaws to hold you here for 2012".

Its fine to talk bluntly behind the scenes, but when you do it publicly in front of the media, you don't give Mizzou any way to save face if they stay. That might sound like stupid prideful garbage, but if its close to a 50/50 decision, which this would be only at best, then public financial threats would be my tiebreaker.

I disagree. I would have no problem if he said he did not believe that Kansas would leave the conference due to the steep exit fees.

Just like Kansas, no one in position to do so at MU has claimed that MU is contemplating leaving.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Pants

Do you think Neinas is stepping out of line by claiming a school would probably not leave the conference due to steep exit fees?

As far as I'm concerned it's just meaningless noise. He has to respond to inquiries from the media and I would expect someone in his position to play the role of someone who couldn't possibly see Mizzou deciding to leave the conference even if he actually knows they're already gone. (I'm not saying that I know they're gone, I'm just saying they might be and he might already know it).