Big 12 Conference

[GoGators]

^

You are just speculating as we all are. The college football landscape is rapidly shifting. It wasn't that long ago that nobody could imagine A&M and Mizzou in the SEC, Nebraska in the Big 10 and Colorado in the Pac 12.

Who knows if it will happen but it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility, and it's interesting to think about. It wasn't that long ago that the Pac-12 and OU/Texas gave each other a long look.

And there are lots of valid arguments to be made in favor of such a change.

I'm not sure I would want this change, but it does make a certain amount of sense.

It makes sense for OU. Doesn’t make a lot of sense for Texas or the SEC.

Unless there is a potential tv contract out there that is so incredibly massive it convinces everyone to go with it. But I don’t see a Texas market that the SEC already has and an Oklahoma market that is pretty tiny bringing in some incredible new tv contract. I very well could be wrong.

[Pete]

TV markets don't matter nearly as much due to the continuous trend towards streaming services.

The Big 12 commissioner said exactly that just last week.

The more recent realignments have been driven by ESPN, and the influence of that network is fading fast.

[GoGators]

TV markets don't matter nearly as much due to the continuous trend towards streaming services.

The Big 12 commissioner said exactly that just last week.

The more recent realignments have been driven by ESPN, and the influence of that network is fading fast.

The tv contract is the only reason why this would get done. If tv contracts matter less going forward there is even less reason for Texas or the SEC to do this. No reason to cut more slices out of a shrinking pie.

[Pete]

The tv contract is the only reason why this would get done. If tv contracts matter less going forward there is even less reason for Texas or the SEC to do this. No reason to cut more slices out of a shrinking pie.

There are tons of good reasons that I've already listed.

It may need to wait a couple more years due to contracts, though.

That's the way it usually works: an announcement is made and then it takes a couple of years to unwind everything.

[catcherinthewry]

How sad is it that the link to The Oklahoman article is actually an Austin Statesman article?

[Pete]

How sad is it that the link to The Oklahoman article is actually an Austin Statesman article?

More from the Houston Chronicle, and funny that they credit them.

[Pete]

BTW, these are the academic ratings from US News; the SEC would be a step up from the Big 12:

[Pete]

A friend of mine made a good point...

While Boren was president, he was adamant about taking OSU with us no matter where we went. Probably due to his deep political ties in the state. Lots of talk that that was the reason OU didn't go to the Pac-12 a few years back.

But President Harroz is a very different guy and thinks differently about a lot of issues. I'm sure he is also very concerned about securing the best possible financial long-term deal for the university, especially due to the huge loss of revenue in the last couple of years, and with the prospect of things never completely returning to where they were.

[GoGators]

A friend of mine made a good point...

While Boren was president, he was adamant about taking OSU with us no matter where we went. Probably due to his deep political ties in the state. Lots of talk that that was the reason OU didn't go to the Pac-12 a few years back.

But President Harroz is a very different guy and thinks differently about a lot of issues. I'm sure he is also very concerned about securing the best possible financial long-term deal for the university, especially due to the huge loss of revenue in the last couple of years, and with the prospect of things never completely returning to where they were.

OSU is not the reason OU didn’t go to the PAC. The PAC was already set to take OU OSU Texas and Texas Tech. Texas decided not to go so everyone stayed. It wasn’t Borens OU or the PACs decision on whether OU went. It was Texas decision. It certainly had nothing to do with staying in the Big 12 because of OSU. OSU had already got the invite to join the PAC.

[Swake]

OSU is not the reason OU didn’t go to the PAC. The PAC was already set to take OU OSU Texas and Texas Tech. Texas decided not to go so everyone stayed. It wasn’t Borens OU or the PACs decision on whether OU went. It was Texas decision. It certainly had nothing to do with staying in the Big 12 because of OSU. OSU had already got the invite to join the PAC.

The PAC refused to accept the Longhorn Network and UT wouldn't go without it.

[GoGators]

The PAC refused to accept the Longhorn Network and UT wouldn't go without it.

Yes, the Big 12 offered Texas their own network if they stayed. OU OSU and Tech weren’t involved in any decision. They were all just going to do whatever Texas told them to do. If OU and Texas do go into the SEC it won’t be Harroz decision either. That decision will also come from Austin. If OU wants to go and Texas turns it down then OU isn’t going.

[Pete]

Yes, the Big 12 offered Texas their own network if they stayed. OU OSU and Tech weren’t involved in any decision. They were all just going to do whatever Texas told them to do. If OU and Texas do go into the SEC it won’t be Harroz decision either. That decision will also come from Austin. If OU wants to go and Texas turns it down then OU isn’t going.

You keep stating things as fact that simply aren't. You have no idea what is going on behind the scenes.

OU has one of the best athletic departments in the entire country and probably better than anyone in the SEC. The SEC took Missouri and A&M, it's absurd they wouldn't love to have OU.

[BoulderSooner]

OSU is not the reason OU didn’t go to the PAC. The PAC was already set to take OU OSU Texas and Texas Tech. Texas decided not to go so everyone stayed. It wasn’t Borens OU or the PACs decision on whether OU went. It was Texas decision. It certainly had nothing to do with staying in the Big 12 because of OSU. OSU had already got the invite to join the PAC.

this is correct .... .OU was in lock step with texas ... OU was not going to the Pac12 if Texas was also not going .. (it would not have been a good long term choice with out texas included )

[Pete]

this is correct .... .OU was in lock step with texas ... OU was not going to the Pac12 if Texas was also not going .. (it would not have been a good long term choice with out texas included )

But it's also true that under Boren, OU wouldn't have gone to the Pac-12 without OSU.

It seems that has likely changed under Harroz.

[BoulderSooner]

But it's also true that under Boren, OU wouldn't have gone to the Pac-12 without OSU.

It seems that has likely changed under Harroz.

absolutely correct ..

[Pete]

^

A&M finished just outside the playoffs last year and have a great new coach.

That's miles better than they've done in a long time.

They finished #5 and OU #6 even though we won our conference and they didn't even win their division.

[dankrutka]

Right, but it’s just a blip. A&M was good in the 90s for a bit too. I don’t think we can credit the SEC for A&M having one decent season in their 9th year in the conference.

I just tend to think programs stand more on their own. There’s a lot of SEC schools who have stunk at football for a long time. Changing conferences doesn’t change things much. Missouri is the same story. They were national title contenders before leaving for the SEC. Now, what is Missouri? Basically the same program they’ve been, if not more hopeless.

[Pete]

Jimbo Fisher is a great coach and you shouldn't discount that.

He's done an amazing job in a very short time.

[dankrutka]

Yes, I agree that he’s a good coach. I think A&M could have attracted him if they’d stayed in the Big 12 though. They’ve always had resources, but they’ve never been a consistently elite program… and they’re still in a tier below Alabama and LSU as programs in their division. A&M can haa as be success, but I just don’t think their position has changed because of their conference affiliation.

[Pete]

A&M was like OSU is to OU: under a big shadow.

Time will tell, but it looks like it was a very smart move for them and they are doing great in recruiting.

[Teo9969]

Why not do four 4 team divisions:

A: Mizzou, OU, UT, A&M
B: Arkansas, LSU, Miss St., Ole Miss
C: Auburn, Bama, KY, Vandy
D: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee
(I think that's the right groupings to keep most important SEC rivalries, but Tennessee/KY/Vandy/SC might need to shuffle a bit)

You play all three in your division + one home and one away in each of the other 3 divisions.

[Swake]

Reportedly, there was an old agreement between South Carolina, Florida, Georgia and Kentucky to keep out other schools from their states, which vetoed Louisville, Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech or Clemson joining the SEC. No idea if that still holds, but, Missouri and A&M have already come out against Texas, and they only need two more votes to kill that school's invite.

[PhiAlpha]

Reportedly, there was an old agreement between South Carolina, Florida, Georgia and Kentucky to keep out other schools from their states, which vetoed Louisville, Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech or Clemson joining the SEC. No idea if that still holds, but, Missouri and A&M have already come out against Texas, and they only need two more votes to kill that school's invite.

That’s what has been said by unnamed sources or insinuated without explicitly stating it by known sources publicly. No way of knowing if that’s just posturing for their fan bases or if they’ll actually vote that way. At any rate, we likely will not ever know who voted for or against. It will either be announced that an invitation will be extended or it won’t…so what ADs or any one else insinuates publicly isn’t indicative of much. If the SEC sees the end result of realignment being 4 conferences of 16 teams, they all agree to this without a second thought. Under that premise it would be insane not to from a financial standpoint. No conference is adding two better teams than OU and UT. With OU and UT, the SEC will always unquestionably be the most powerful conference in college football and it won’t even be close most years.

[Swake]

That’s what has been said by unnamed sources or insinuated without explicitly stating it by known sources publicly. No way of knowing if that’s just posturing for their fan bases or if they’ll actually vote that way. At any rate, we likely will not ever know who voted for or against. It will either be announced that an invitation will be extended or it won’t…so what ADs or any one else insinuates publicly isn’t indicative of much. If the SEC sees the end result of realignment being 4 conferences of 16 teams, they all agree to this without a second thought. Under that premise it would be insane not to from a financial standpoint. No conference is adding two better teams than OU and UT. With OU and UT, the SEC will always unquestionably be the most powerful conference in college football and it won’t even be close most years.

I disagree a bit. I think the point may well be to kill the NCAA entirely and go independent. There may well be other conferences waiting to see what happens.

[PhiAlpha]

I disagree a bit. I think the point may well be to kill the NCAA entirely and go independent. There may well be other conferences waiting to see what happens.

Good point. Very well could be the case.