Funny Stuff New Conference re-alignment thread - Page 35

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.
[Reply]

Dave Matter had some thoughts that I share.

http://www.columbiatribune.com/weblo.../four-and-out/

(after talking about different conferences and how Mizzou would fit into them)

Will it make for an easier path to the BCS? Absolutely. And that's the standard a lot of writers are giving for which conference makes the most sense for Missouri. I respectfully disagree. Since when has the only standard for Missouri football been winning championships? Why is the easiest path the best path? (Maybe it's because we have full-time careers, two high-maintenance dogs and very active 22-month-old twin boys, but my wife and I have a saying around our house: "Easy is boring." I think it applies to Missouri football's conference situation, too.)

Would the SEC be a meat grinder each and every week? Absolutely. But what's wrong with that? Would Missouri have to recalibrate its expectations in the SEC? Most likely, yes. Would recruiting get an SEC bump with kids who'd rather play against LSU, Alabama, Auburn and Florida? Possibly, yes.

Maybe I'm in the minority among my peers, but I find the journey more compelling than the conclusion. Wouldn't a pressure cooker regular season with games against traditional football powers be far more entertaining than a home lineup against the likes of Cincinnati, Rutgers or Air Force? I probably don't have the best perspective on this. Because I don’t care about the outcome each week or the team's final record. As long as Missouri plays in a relevant conference and plays important games, with a few appealing road trips along the way, I'm a happy guy. For my tastes, an 8-4 season in the SEC is far more interesting to cover as a journalist than 10-2 in some patched together Big 12 or Big East. Missouri should think big. Forget about finding the easiest path to college football's artificial, corporate-sponsored, postseason end game. College football should be about September, October and November — not some bloated bowl system.

[Reply]