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.
He doesn't know shit. Big 10 hasnt said know to anything or anyone since they said no to Missouri
Big 10 is just sitting like all of us & waiting to see what,& if anything happens.
If expansion is the best move at that time for the Big 10. IMO KSU & KU are no brainers out of the big 12 [Reply]
Best comment
Andy_Staples Andy Staples
@
@BoldSlugger @BrendanPrunty The other thing is it has to be frustrating for fans. So much misinformation. Everyone in the dark. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
The B1G isn't expanding - it just isn't.
The rumors are that the SEC is looking towards VA for their 14th.
The Big East is just another dying conference.
The ACC...jesus, really? That's our new home?
The music looks like it's really close to stopping and if this thing stays like it is - MU is homeless next year. It really only takes 1 season in limbo like that to do a decade worth of damage to your prestige, recruiting, etc...
MU's in bad bad shape if something doesn't come together very soon and I have absolutely zero faith in our leadership at this point.
The SEC isn't looking at VA. They're looking at WV, and they aren't going to stop at 14. That number doesn't work well for conferences. In the end, I think the SEC adds WV, Mizzou, and someone from the Big East (likely Louisville or Cincy if they don't mind city schools).
The Big East is on life support, and ND may decide that they need a new home. That could lead to them landing in the B1G.
The B1G either moves to 16 early, or they get forced to get last pick in the future if they ever do expand. I don't think they want to be at 12 when the ACC, PAC, and SEC are all at 16. [Reply]
If everyone goes to 16 the B1G will end up doing it too. They said they weren't going to start it, but they will follow if other conferences start. But if the SEC stays at 14(assuming they add WVU), and B1G stays at 12, theres still room for a fifth BCS conference. [Reply]
Originally Posted by |Zach|:
Signed, Larry Scott (not that long ago)
Do you think they're that good at leak control?
In fairness, I should say they've shown zero interest in an expansion that includes MU.
The smoke has included Texas and ND, but that's it. And outside of the 'superschools', you simply don't hear any rumors at all out of the B1G.
I refuse to believe they simply have that conference on super-secret lockdown. There are too many people that have an interest in this for something, even rumors, to not slip out if there was legitimate interest.
I think they're just fine with 12. They know they can keep it at 12 and still get invited to the "Super playoffs" with their Conf. Champion. Hell, they could probably split into 2 6-teamers and still get their division champions invited.
They have no pressing need to expand unless its for ND or Tx. If they felt it, they'd have done it by now. [Reply]
At this point, KU's best chance is probably for ND to decide the Big East is dead and they have no choice but to go to the B1G.
If the Big 10 expands to 16, Kansas has to be on that list due to the sheer lack of alternatives, but if ND is not available, they could stay at 12. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Do you think they're that good at leak control?
In fairness, I should say they've shown zero interest in an expansion that includes MU.
The smoke has included Texas and ND, but that's it. And outside of the 'superschools', you simply don't hear any rumors at all out of the B1G.
I refuse to believe they simply have that conference on super-secret lockdown. There are too many people that have an interest in this for something, even rumors, to not slip out if there was legitimate interest.
I think they're just fine with 12. They know they can keep it at 12 and still get invited to the "Super playoffs" with their Conf. Champion. Hell, they could probably split into 2 6-teamers and still get their division champions invited.
They have no pressing need to expand unless its for ND or Tx. If they felt it, they'd have done it by now.
The problem that the B1G has is that by not acting, they may effectively have the choice made for them to never expand. Expanding to 16 may be shut off as an available option for them if they sit out. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kchero:
Thanks for the geography lesson on what cities are on the western side of the states. I still stand by my comments. Like I said I hope I am wrong for the sake of your conference, but do not presume so easily that you will not have drama with Texas in your conference down the road.
Texas won't destroy the Pac-1x conference like they have the Big-12. The revenue from the geographic monopoly that the Pac-1x has is far more powerful than Texas. That wasn't true of the Big-12. Texas has far less leverage with the Pac-1x than it did with the Big-12.
So unless you are agreeing with that fact, you are wrong.
That's not to say that "drama" can't come, but if it does, the Pac-1x has the leverage to show Texas the door. And Utah, Arizona and possibly Colorado aren't giving up the money from the LA, SF and other Cali markets to follow Texas anywhere.
Texas is joining the Pac-1x because it's their best available option. As long as it's mutually beneficial, the Pac-1x will let them in. [Reply]
The New York Times' guy has weighed in. I believe they were the first to officially report A&M's move. He says Texas is not talking to the ACC anymore, the four teams to the Pac 12 will play out over the next 7 to 10 days. According to him Scott has not approached the Pac 12 presidents officially yet, and (no surprise) the Arizona schools, Utah and Colorado all have concerns about the deal. Also, the academic reputation of OU, OSU, and TT.
Suggests Mizzou and the SEC really don't have that much interest in each other, but might do the deed out of necessity so Mizzou isn't left hanging. Also, the Big East and Big 12 leftovers could merge based on what's left. [Reply]
Originally Posted by jAZ:
Texas won't destroy the Pac-1x conference like they have the Big-12. The revenue from the geographic monopoly that the Pac-1x has is far more powerful than Texas. That wasn't true of the Big-12. Texas has far less leverage with the Pac-1x than it did with the Big-12.
So unless you are agreeing with that fact, you are wrong.
That's not to say that "drama" can't come, but if it does, the Pac-1x has the leverage to show Texas the door. And Utah, Arizona and possibly Colorado aren't giving up the money from the LA, SF and other Cali markets to follow Texas anywhere.
Texas is joining the Pac-1x because it's their best available option. As long as it's mutually beneficial, the Pac-1x will let them in.
Much earlier in the thread, I posed a question about researching funding for state universities. Where does this money come from? State appropriations? Part of the larger tuition pie?
All of this was based on the ruse that academics matter in any of this.
Utah: shit
OU: shit (but a better smelling pile than some of the other shit)
OSU: shit
TT: shit [Reply]
