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.
Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy:
Travel costs mean nothing in any of this. Football by far incurs the most travel expenses, and Texas plays football wherever it wants now.
It isn't just travel expenses in costs. Right now, parents can go to the majority of their kid's athletics contests. But, if Texas puts its non football sports in the ACC, how often can they go now. All of their away games are major trips for a family, whereas now Baylor, Tech, OU and OSU are all day trips.
Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy:
So SEC country is a bunch of cultural misfits then? It is that kind of arrogance that has helped create this whole fiasco in the first place.
Well, now you're misrepresenting what I said. I was saying that if Texas went to the ACC or the PAC, they would be the cultural misfits there. You do realize there are subtle differences among regions of the country, don't you?
Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy:
I do not think we are arguing both sides at all. Folks in this thread have given multiple reasons why Mizzou leaving is good for the school in the long run. That is what we care about. What is best for Mizzou. I fail to see how it is okay for Texas and OU to do whatever they want, with no regard for anyone else, and that is somehow okay...but don't let Mizzou think about doing anything...that would be horrible.
So, it is an envy thing. They did it, so I'm going to do it too? Look, when UT and OU were doing this, I was critical of them as well. You taking up that torch now doesn't mean its any more noble than when they did. You guys were arguing both sides depending on what narrative you wanted to fill:
If your argument was that the LHN was evil and the PAC proved it by not wanting it, then the PAC doesn't want the LHN.
If your argument is that UT is just looking for a better deal like in the PAC, then you must be arguing the PAC will change their stance on the LHN or Texas will alter it.
Seeing some conflicting tweets about what today's Big XII meeting meant. Chip Brown seems to think we are staying, but other tweets say Deaton is playing some serious hard ball. Which is more likely? [Reply]
Originally Posted by dirk digler: There is many reasons why. Pinkel has stated he absolutely hates the LHN because he believes it gives Texas a huge recruiting advantage.
All of which have been talked about over and over in this thread already. [Reply]
Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy:
Seeing some conflicting tweets about what today's Big XII meeting meant. Chip Brown seems to think we are staying, but other tweets say Deaton is playing some serious hard ball. Which is more likely?
Chip Brown is the voice of Texas so this is not surprising. [Reply]
Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade:
It isn't just travel expenses in costs. Right now, parents can go to the majority of their kid's athletics contests. But, if Texas puts its non football sports in the ACC, how often can they go now. All of their away games are major trips for a family, whereas now Baylor, Tech, OU and OSU are all day trips.
Well, now you're misrepresenting what I said. I was saying that if Texas went to the ACC or the PAC, they would be the cultural misfits there. You do realize there are subtle differences among regions of the country, don't you?
So, it is an envy thing. They did it, so I'm going to do it too? Look, when UT and OU were doing this, I was critical of them as well. You taking up that torch now doesn't mean its any more noble than when they did. You guys were arguing both sides depending on what narrative you wanted to fill:
If your argument was that the LHN was evil and the PAC proved it by not wanting it, then the PAC doesn't want the LHN.
If your argument is that UT is just looking for a better deal like in the PAC, then you must be arguing the PAC will change their stance on the LHN or Texas will alter it.
It can't be both.
Are all KU fans this dense? This has nothing to do with envy. This has to do with the fact that no one at Mizzou believes that Texas or OU will stay faithful to this conference. Period.
As Zach has stated repeatedly..it is about stability first and foremost. The fact that we get to tell Texas to fuck off on our way out the door is just a bonus. [Reply]
Originally Posted by |Zach|:
I did that because I find it really hard to believe someone with a working brain hadn't seen those answers in this thread.
So if I was wrong at any point I was wrong for assuming how smart you were.
Apologies.
Here is what I originally responded to:
Originally Posted by :
Originally Posted by eazyb81
I think the main issue would be turning LHN into a legit Big 12 Network, and the odds of that happening are around 0%.
To wit I said:
Originally Posted by :
I don't understand why the schools that can't support a TV Network of their own don't just produce one of their own? Why does this have to be such a big deal? I bet that network would have a wider audience, it would definitely be able to broadcast more games. I fail to see why this is such a huge stumbling block, if it indeed that it is.
Now, you're trying to tell me its all about stability. This is what I mean about the narrative in your brain that nobody else is privy to. I'm not a mind reader. If you want to have a discussion, you have to relate to me what you think. You chose to ignore that and have now turned the whole thing around like I was always addressing the stability issue. So, yes, in the narrative that goes on in your mind, I'm sure I don't have a working brain. That would make it much easier to fulfill your fantasy of being completely forthcoming in you arguments. [Reply]
Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy:
Are all KU fans this dense? This has nothing to do with envy. This has to do with the fact that no one at Mizzou believes that Texas or OU will stay faithful to this conference. Period.
As Zach has stated repeatedly..it is about stability first and foremost. The fact that we get to tell Texas to **** off on our way out the door is just a bonus.
Yes, we're all this dense. I'm glad you guys could settle on the stability issue and stomp up and down about that as if it was your original point. Sorry, but your reasoning sure sounded like envy to me. "Everyone else is doing it!" [Reply]
Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade:
That would make it much easier to fulfill your fantasy of being completely forthcoming in you arguments.
We brought up stability because it is an obvious incentive to bolt the Big 12. It is an obvious incentive for anyone who has, has thought of, or is thinking of leaving the Big 12. It has been brought up a lot as you can see by the posts I brought up.
Yet when we bring it up you act like it is some magical idea that just popped into your brain.
You either are...or are playing stupid.
Zach: We want to go to a more stable conference
HH: THIS IS NEW! I AM INTRIGUED BY YOUR IDEAS AND WOULD LIKE TO SUBSCRIBE TO YOUR NEWSLETTER! [Reply]
Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade:
Yes, we're all this dense. I'm glad you guys could settle on the stability issue and stomp up and down about that as if it was your original point. Sorry, but your reasoning sure sounded like envy to me. "Everyone else is doing it!"
I look forward to your envy when KU is stuck in the Mountain West when Texas decides to take off and leave them behind. [Reply]
Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade:
Sorry, but your reasoning sure sounded like envy to me. "Everyone else is doing it!"
And all of your takes sound like a KU fan trying to rationalize the health of a conference his school is stuck in. It has been like this from the start. [Reply]
Originally Posted by |Zach|:
And all of your takes sound like a KU fan trying to rationalize the health of a conference his school is stuck in. It has been like this from the start.
I suppose it would sound that way to you. Sorry to have bothered you. [Reply]
Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy:
I look forward to your envy when KU is stuck in the Mountain West when Texas decides to take off and leave them behind.
I'm sure you do, we'll look forward to that day. [Reply]
Fucking Christ, HHG. The Longhorn Network is one of the biggest causes of the instability in the Big 12. Your performance in this thread makes me want to punch a hole in my monitor. [Reply]