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 DaneMcCloud:
This is all about Bowl money for the conference, especially now that the NCAA is considering expanding the playoffs.
The SEC could routinely dominate the Top 8 rankings and the bowl/playoff money to the conference would be insane.
They probably could have done that without needing to add two more teams and further divide up the $3 billion media contract they just signed and bowl/CFP money.
Just from a market expansion/potential new recruiting territory perspective, they should have looked east and added UNC and Virginia Tech or Virginia.
That adds new TV markets including Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham, Washington, D.C. and its Virginia suburbs and also increases their recruiting footprint in North Carolina and Virginia. [Reply]
Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88:
They probably could have done that without needing to add two more teams and further divide up the $3 billion media contract they just signed and bowl/CFP money.
Just from a market expansion/potential new recruiting territory perspective, they should have looked east and added UNC and Virginia Tech or Virginia.
That adds new TV markets including Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham, Washington, D.C. and its Virginia suburbs and also increases their recruiting footprint in North Carolina and Virginia.
It isn't just about media markets, it's about the quality of the team and value of the brands you bring in. I'd imagine this entire conversation is being driven by ESPN. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ntexascardfan:
It isn't just about media markets, it's about the quality of the team and value of the brands you bring in. I'd imagine this entire conversation is being driven by ESPN.
They just signed a new 10 year contract with ESPN worth $3 billion that goes into effect in 2024. [Reply]
Originally Posted by POND_OF_RED:
It was eye-opening realizing how far behind the competitive level was in the Big 12 and how little it prepared us for a tough week in-week out real conference, but I think Drink is making the right steps to becoming very relevant again. He will likely end up with a top 20 recruiting class this year and hopefully put us one step closer to competing at an SEC level. It beats the alternative to clinging to a dying conference, just because we were closer to the top with the weaker competition. As far as the basketball goes, I think you can see from the re-alignment talks and KU being left out of most of those discussions just how important college basketball programs are to these decisions. No one really gives a shit.
Right. That is why last time this came up the Pac12 and B1G came calling asking KU to join up.
MU made a mistake leaving the B12 as did Nebraska and Colorado. None have faired better in their new conferences. Hope the Texas envy was worth it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
And Texas Tech and Oklahoma State and West Virgina and TCU and Baylor.
IF UT + OU leave and IF the PAC decides to add schools, Texas Tech has a seat at that table. Tech has a strong history and partnership with the two AZ schools (shared a conference for decades) as well as CU (hours up the road and Big12 history). Geographically, that cluster of 4 would be easy travel. Tech has forged pretty strong relations with other PAC leaders over the last few rounds of re-alignment conversation. Tech has been deliberately scheduling non-con games with PAC teams. Tech also adds quite a bit of value in track, baseball, and basketball… all areas that the PAC wants to shore up. Tech isn’t big enough or strong enough to force realignment like OU and UT… but with a drastic shift in the landscape I think they have a life raft out of the Remnants of the Big12.
So, if the PAC does expand and we assume Tech is in… that leaves 1-3 spots depending on if they go to 14 or 16. There aren’t a lot of great candidates. BU, TCU, and BYU are hard no’s due to religious affiliation (non starter for the PAC).
Maybe they pull from Houston, Colorado State, San Diego State, Boise State, or UNLV…
But some combo OSU, KU, KSU, and ISU just feels better if I’m the PAC despite the geographic distance. That assumes that those schools are available. Certainly understand the BIG being a lot more appealing to KU/ISU/KSU if the offer is there. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ntexascardfan:
It isn't just about media markets, it's about the quality of the team and value of the brands you bring in. I'd imagine this entire conversation is being driven by ESPN.
Originally Posted by KChiefs1:
They’d only be adding Oklahoma to the footprint. I’d rather have North Carolina or Virginia.
Only Oklahoma adds to the SEC network footprint, however UT would triple or quadruple SEC programming viewership in the second largest (and fastest growing) state in the US while also converting it to firmly an SEC state.
A&M is first place in Houston, but is still second/third to the Big12 in the DFW and SA-AUS metros. Add UT and the SEC dominates all major Texas metros. The population and viewership add that Texas brings would likely exceed the reach in NC or VA. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Superturtle:
Assuming the B1G getting KU and ISU would be the next shoe to drop if this ultimately ends up happening. After that not too sure.
If I'm the BIG 10 I'm not sure that Iowa State really excites me all that much.
If the Big 10 expands I think it would look at schools like Colorado and someone else, maybe Kansas, but not sure about that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by lawrenceRaider:
Right. That is why last time this came up the Pac12 and B1G came calling asking KU to join up.
MU made a mistake leaving the B12 as did Nebraska and Colorado. None have faired better in their new conferences. Hope the Texas envy was worth it.
Did they really, though? All I remember was Kansas fans being upset that Texas Tech was being looked at over them by the PAC 12. A lot of KU fans speculated that’s where they could end up, but make no mistake, those conferences never actually showed as much interest in adding Kansas as KU fans would like to think. Their value is even lower now that it’s obvious the expansion is based on the CFP expansion. Good luck in the MVC or Big East. Maybe if you get lucky the ACC will throw you a bone. [Reply]
Originally Posted by POND_OF_RED:
But what does the Big 10 get out of that deal? They aren’t going to want to bring in a team that averages high school level attendances for football games.
