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 Bearcat:
I don't see any reason why teams that have left would regret it... none of them were particularly relevant or successful before leaving, and now they're not successful but with more money. OU will be more interesting and Texas to a lesser extent.
Saying every team in the B12 doesn't want to be in the B12 is obviously making up shit though, especially with Texas on the way out and other schools joining.
Every remaining Big 12 team would take a Big 10 or SEC invite in a second.
The Big 12 is still a strong conference. But it is a marriage of convenience for all parties.
BYU, UCF, Cincy, and Houston are joining because it is the next step up the ladder. Natural progression. [Reply]
Q: I saw a piece last week about Hawaii maybe being a candidate for Pac-10 membership. New stadium underway and not a bad TV market. Wonder what your Fox media expert thinks? — @KenHollaren
A: Hawaii is a beautiful place to visit, but the state has only 445,000 television households. That ranks Hawaii the No. 65 market (DMA) in the country. For that reason, it’s not a great expansion option. Also, the travel is tough.
Q: Would it make more sense for the #Pac12 to merge with the #Big12 or the #ACC? — @MarkMcClune
A: The ACC television markets are dramatically better. There are 28.2 million total number of households in the ACC footprint. After the Big 12’s coming expansion, it will have only 15 million households. It’s not close. But… if you could somehow partner with the ACC, and merge with the Big 12, wouldn’t everyone be better off?
Q: In regards to Pac-12 expansion candidates - cable companies use local DMA to assign value to a college team, what would streaming providers use? — @DRS12103051
A: I asked Bob Thompson, the former Fox Sports Network president, this very question. He told me with Hulu, Google TV and Fubo TV and others that act like cable companies (but distribute via internet) Nielsen incorporates their ratings into a network’s overall rating. But Apple TV+ and Amazon Prime Video can tell how many homes are watching a stream of show/game at any given time. Apple and Amazon also take into account subscription gains.
Q: Does California Gov. Newsom’s issues with UCLA leave a window cracked for Oregon to replace them in the Big Ten if it becomes too muddled for UCLA? — @Deafdux
A: Feels like the bond holders of the UC system may have a bigger beef. But let’s assume UCLA does reverse course for the sake of argument. Oregon’s potential annual media value (~$30 million) is going to fall well short of the $71 million it takes to justify cutting them into the conference with a full share. But I think the Ducks would get consideration because of their brand. So would Stanford (Bay Area TV market + academic prestige) and Washington (Seattle TV market). That trio presents an interesting barstool debate.
Q: When comparing PAC 12 TV markets, how is the Portland market assigned to OSU and Oregon if it is at all? — @Ralong27
A: Both Oregon and Oregon State get credit for the 1,143,670 million TV households in the Portland (and beyond) region. Here’s a good look at the TV picture in college football.
Q: The panic of realignment has seemed to have died down with the remaining PAC-10/12 teams. Given Rick George’s comments on USC and UCLA, do either teams have to prove their worth this season? Do you think remaining teams who have USC/UCLA on the schedule have that game circled? — @JoeInOregon87
A: The hostility for the Trojans and Bruins is going to be an interesting study this football season. It will be real. I also think UCLA, which has been so-so in recent years in the Pac-12, is going to struggle to matter in the Big Ten.
Q: Does Phil Knight approve of the Pac-10 staying together? — @ValyaIvanova9
A: I had a well-placed source tell me that he didn’t think Phil Knight donated all those millions over the years for UO to get left in the college football minor leagues. I wrote recently about Knight’s role in this process. I believe he wants Oregon to matter and will do whatever it takes to help position the Ducks for success.
Q: Other than the loss of prestige, would OSU/WSU be better off if the Pac-12 does break up completely? In an expanded playoff, there will be a spot for a “non power 5” and I see an easier path to be that team than a champ of a major conference. — @EastboundFitzN
A: I suspect the vast majority of at-large berths for an expanded playoff would likely land with the Big Ten and SEC programs. Those two “Super” pigs are busy trying to monopolize the system and “game” in their favor.
The media revenue from being in a major conference is a game changer.
It’s why the Pac-12 needs a “Hail Mary” in this round of negotiations.
When the Broncos played the Redskins in the Super Bowl my dad rooted for the Broncos for divisional allegiance. I couldn't understand why he would root for a team that you actively root against in games and for championships the rest of the year. I still don't. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJay23:
When the Broncos played the Redskins in the Super Bowl my dad rooted for the Broncos for divisional allegiance. I couldn't understand why he would root for a team that you actively root against in games and for championships the rest of the year. I still don't.
There is an argument to be made for it in college sports (I don’t subscribe to it but, it is a legitimate argument) but, there is no logical reason for it the pros. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJay23:
When the Broncos played the Redskins in the Super Bowl my dad rooted for the Broncos for divisional allegiance. I couldn't understand why he would root for a team that you actively root against in games and for championships the rest of the year. I still don't.
The NFL and college football are apples and oranges.
One has always had a true playoff. No matter what, one team from your conference will make it to the championship. TV contracts, apparel, etc are negotiated as a league. The AFC West (or any division) is secure for the next 200 years. The draft supplies all teams/conferences with the same opportunity for obtaining talent. Rooting against your conference rivals makes so much more sense in the pro leagues.
College on the other hand, is every conference for itself. All conferences are competition to one another for dollars, recruits, bowls and now playoff access.
Conference foes winning national championships, bowls and games against other conferences helps the rest of the league, financially and their status.
With that said, it matters more for the B12, P12, ACC etc. so ISU or Tech fans were probably rooting for KU in the final four. On the other hand, I’m sure most of the SEC teams feel secure enough in their conference, that it makes much less sense for them to root for one another. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kcclone:
The NFL and college football are apples and oranges.
One has always had a true playoff. No matter what, one team from your conference will make it to the championship. TV contracts, apparel, etc are negotiated as a league. The AFC West (or any division) is secure for the next 200 years. The draft supplies all teams/conferences with the same opportunity for obtaining talent. Rooting against your conference rivals makes so much more sense in the pro leagues.
College on the other hand, is every conference for itself. All conferences are competition to one another for dollars, recruits, bowls and now playoff access.
Conference foes winning national championships, bowls and games against other conferences helps the rest of the league, financially and their status.
With that said, it matters more for the B12, P12, ACC etc. so ISU or Tech fans were probably rooting for KU in the final four. On the other hand, I’m sure most of the SEC teams feel secure enough in their conference, that it makes much less sense for them to root for one another.
There's only one conference that has a nerd-bundle of sticks chant, and it ain't the B12 or P12 or ACC.
SEC goons love putting their tongue up Bama's ass and tasting their success second-hand. mutt losers like PGM were definitely jizzing over this last title game and saying stuff like "I don't care who pulls it out, it's a win for the conference either way!!" [Reply]
