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 Pants:
Oh yeah, the NCAA tournament was for conference and regional champions while the NIT was for 6 teams invited by a committee. I see your point. Before the tournaments, there were obviously no champions. Good call, man.
If you want to consider the NCAA tourney the national championship from 60 years ago, go for it. Its not true, but it's not important enough to bother disputing. Congrats on maybe having the best group of white-only set-shooters six decades ago. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Saul Good:
If you want to consider the NCAA tourney the national championship from 60 years ago, go for it. Its not true, but it's not important enough to bother disputing. Congrats on maybe having the best group of white-only set-shooters six decades ago.
Tradition is tradition. Football ain't the same as it was 60 years ago, either.
You're right, though, this argument is irrelevant. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Saul Good:
There aren't bad teams in SEC football. Shit, Kentucky has been to something like 5 or 6 straight bowl games. Vanderbilt is the worst team in the SEC, and they aren't awful.
There is only one basketball school in the Big XII, and that's Kansas. Kentucky basketball trumps Kansas any day (7 national championships compared to 2). Then you've got Florida with 2 recent titles whereas the entire Big XII has 1 in the last 20 years.
KU has three, but who is counting, right? Especially when the facts hurt your point. In the last 50 years Kentucky has won 3 and KU 2. In the last 25 it is 2 and 2.
My point was, you keep referring to the strong teams in the SEC and the weak ones in the "big 9," as you have through out this thread.
Honestly, I am really glad Mizzou is going, and look forward to the results. They did do a good job today, no doubt about that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Saul Good:
If you want to consider the NCAA tourney the national championship from 60 years ago, go for it. Its not true, but it's not important enough to bother disputing. Congrats on maybe having the best group of white-only set-shooters six decades ago.
So, it's 8 (7, actually) for UK and not 3, but 2 for KU and not 3... Posted via Mobile Device [Reply]
Originally Posted by Jerm:
Can't wait to hear Keitzman's head explode lol...
He shouldn't be mad. His (supposed) beef was the KC economy, and Mizzou showed they care for both the university and KC so they are going to have a basketball tournament and football game. Hopefully KU agrees to play to continue the rivalry and help KC, but if not Mizzou will join up with other local teams.
It was a pretty brilliant strategy to be honest. [Reply]
Originally Posted by HemiEd:
KU has three, but who is counting, right? Especially when the facts hurt your point. In the last 50 years Kentucky has won 3 and KU 2. In the last 25 it is 2 and 2.
My point was, you keep referring to the strong teams in the SEC and the weak ones in the "big 9," as you have through out this thread.
Honestly, I am really glad Mizzou is going, and look forward to the results. They did do a good job today, no doubt about that.
When MU fans twist years to fit their argument I always end up laughing because no matter what years you choose for MU Athletics it always ends the same. [Reply]
Originally Posted by eazyb81:
He shouldn't be mad. His (supposed) beef was the KC economy, and Mizzou showed they care for both the university and KC so they are going to have a basketball tournament and football game. Hopefully KU agrees to play to continue the rivalry and help KC, but if not Mizzou will join up with other local teams.
It was a pretty brilliant strategy to be honest.
I expect Kietzman to have Mizzou's back and call on KU and K-State to follow Missouri's lead and do what's best for Kansas City. He should propose a Big XII SEC showdown preseason tourney in the Sprint Center with Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, and Kentucky. Think that would draw fans? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Saul Good:
I expect Kietzman to have Mizzou's back and call on KU and K-State to follow Missouri's lead and do what's best for Kansas City. He should propose a Big XII SEC showdown preseason tourney in the Sprint Center with Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, and Kentucky. Think that would draw fans?
This is actually a pretty cool idea.
However KU is tied up playing in the Champions Classic w/ Kentucky for the next few years.
Originally Posted by HemiEd:
This fits your entire posting mantra in this thread.
You don't count the 1952 for KU, but you count the 4 from 1948 to 1958 for UK.
Excellent.
Then count them. I don't really give a shit. In the last 20 years, Kentucky has won 2, and KU has won 1. In the modern era of college basketball, Kentucky has won 3, and KU has won 2. In the history of the NCAA tournament, Kentucky has won 7, and KU has won 3.
Define it however you want. I'm not saying that KU isn't one of the 5 or 6 best programs in NCAA basketball history. The discussion was about the rest of the conference. Outside of KU, no Big XII team has really mattered in decades. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Saul Good:
I expect Kietzman to have Mizzou's back and call on KU and K-State to follow Missouri's lead and do what's best for Kansas City. He should propose a Big XII SEC showdown preseason tourney in the Sprint Center with Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, and Kentucky. Think that would draw fans?
