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.
Of course Deaton isn't going to tell the President of a different Big 12 school that Missouri has an offer from the SEC, or an agreement, or whatever under-the-table thing apparently is there. As has been posted many times, the SEC doesn't offer. Schools have to apply (after getting behind-scenes info that the offer will be well-received, but still...)
Missouri hasn't signed shit. Deaton made it pretty clear in his press conference, speaking for HIS school, that there were talks of the six-year deal, but no actual signing taking place.
Missouri is trying to strongarm UT and OU into making concessions about tier 3 rights, conference offices, etc. Of course, neither is ACTUALLY going to listen to Mizzou, so Missouri is likely out the door. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla:
Getting a bit touchy, aren't we? Every school, tard or not, would be smart to NOT sign such an agreement until members are ensured equal treatment.
Six years agreement and equal revenue sharing on first and second tier deals is pretty much a done deal. There is going to have to be a huge breakdown here soon to change that and that's likely not happening. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RustShack:
Six years agreement and equal revenue sharing on first and second tier deals is pretty much a done deal. There is going to have to be a huge breakdown here soon to change that and that's likely not happening.
Nothing is a done deal until a contract is signed. The last two years are proof enough of that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RustShack:
You are the one playing the "if" game. If Texas and Oklahoma are the only two teams ranked over the next five years? Sorry that isn't happening.
No...I'm calling YOU on playing the "if" game.
How about you show me the teams you believe will be consistently in the Top 25? And remember the key word here...consistently.
And if you actually are enough of a homer to put your Cyclones on the list then that will shoot your credibility. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RustShack:
Six years agreement and equal revenue sharing on first and second tier deals is pretty much a done deal. There is going to have to be a huge breakdown here soon to change that and that's likely not happening.
It's not a done deal until each school signs it.
Boren was trying to sell that it was already in place (you know, when he scheduled a conference call on TOP of the commissioner's conference call), but Deaton made it absolutely clear that what they had was an agreement to explore such an option.
Missouri is not going to sign that without some concessions. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Wickedson:
Not to start anything here but why do MU fans think that MU wouldn't be left with the same "no life raft" scenario?
The Big 10 has no interest in MU. The SEC has no interest in MU.
The Big 12 is the best option for MU. This is fact. Your administration knows this. They are not idiots like so many of you want to believe.
In fact the SEC has shown interest in MU. They just don't want to implode the XII to get them. It has been widely reported that the SEC actually contacted MU last season after the B1G implosion when it looked like the XII would die off. It's now been reported by several outlets in KC, STL and OKC that MU had an offer again this year if the XII implodes.
If the XII detonates on its own, MU will be just fine.
And yes, our administration is full of idiots. Those of us that actually follow the University (or, like me, live here and can speak to the day to day happenings around here) have no problem saying that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RustShack:
Six years agreement and equal revenue sharing on first and second tier deals is pretty much a done deal. There is going to have to be a huge breakdown here soon to change that and that's likely not happening.
What part of the last 2 years have you slept through? NOTHING is a done deal until the ink is dry....and we've all seen that there is erasable ink these days. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RustShack:
Six years agreement and equal revenue sharing on first and second tier deals is pretty much a done deal. There is going to have to be a huge breakdown here soon to change that and that's likely not happening.
You still believe in Santa Claus don't you? [Reply]
Originally Posted by RustShack:
Six years agreement and equal revenue sharing on first and second tier deals is pretty much a done deal. There is going to have to be a huge breakdown here soon to change that and that's likely not happening.
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
It's not a done deal until each school signs it.
Boren was trying to sell that it was already in place (you know, when he scheduled a conference call on TOP of the commissioner's conference call), but Deaton made it absolutely clear that what they had was an agreement to explore such an option.
Missouri is not going to sign that without some concessions.
Borens behavior in scheduling that presser and his spin during it was pretty pathetic.
I'm not sure how you can take the kick to the balls they just took in Norman and still be so damn haughty, but Boren has managed it quite nicely. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I'm not sure how you can take the kick to the balls they just took in Norman and still be so damn haughty, but Boren has managed it quite nicely.
He is a former politican, that is normal for them. [Reply]
I have a friend who is a die-hard Sooner and he is spitting nails today about Boren's presser. He feels the same way today about Boren that we do about Mike Alden. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mosbonian:
Actually I've very good at math (Accounting/Credit person here)...but even better at understanding just how little contracts mean these days which seems to escape you. If you think that OU and UT won't find a way out of that contract they've agreed to then you are being a pollyanna.
I'm still waiting for you to answer the first question about why you think that the contract will be for more than the PAC 12? I see you've managed to dodge that one.
Why do you think UT and OU's lawyers are better than the networks' lawyers? [Reply]
Originally Posted by eazyb81:
I normally like your posts, but your takes are pretty terrible on this situation.
No one with a functioning brain would turn down an offer from SEC - or B1G or PAC for that matter if the geography made sense - to stay in this zombie conference. UT has pushed the envelope since they came in, and the leadership has not been in place to prevent it.
Your entire premise is based on ifs and maybes. If UT gives into demands. If LHN is modified. If the new first tier contract is awesome.
When you have schools like Nebraska, Colorado, and now Texas A&M leave in one year, it should be obvious that something is rotten in Denmark.
You are assuming nothing changes. (that we don't share Tier 1/2 even after Texas said ok lets go ahead, and LHN shows high school games.) We don't have to take anything on faith. If the SEC tells you "you have 2 days to accept. We aren't going to give you any time to see if you can work things out, accept right now, or we'll close the door on you", then you may have a point. (I'm not even going to talk about our 2015 tier 1 contract. Our T2 contract with Fox is freaking massive relative to what they got. Our future Tier 1 contract is all but assured)
I guess its possible that nothing will happen, but that would require an assumption that everyone in power is lying. No one has to sign away anything until the above basic demands that everyone seems to be in agreement on are satisfied in black and white.
I'm saying "ok, assume we're not being lied to, and all that happens". Basically you go to Dallas, make those demands, and everyone says "ok, done", here's the contract. Now what? At that point going to the SEC is no upside and all downside. The only reason I can think of at that point is "I don't care, I'm still pissed at Texas!" [Reply]
