Pages:
Actions
  • #201 by GuvHog on 10 Jul 2017
  • If those are the only two options standing pat is the best deal.  While I agree there is a political fight if OU & OSU breakup, the Kansas schools are not linked the same way.  I believe that if the Big 10 expands again Kansas would be one of their two selections.

    I think Kansas and Kansas State will end up in the Pac 12.
  • #202 by Hogwild on 10 Jul 2017
  • I think Kansas and Kansas State will end up in the Pac 12.

    What would make you think that?  It makes less sense than OU and OK State, which the Pac 12 rejected.

    Quote
    Iowa State and West Virginia to Big 10

    Zero % chance of that ever happening for multiple reasons.
  • #203 by Cinco de Hogo on 10 Jul 2017
  • After all that's been written here let me now say, I'm in favor of the Big12 surviving.  I think college football can handle 5-16 team conferences and it works fine with an 8 team playoff.

    My opinion is that 16 teams borders on too big a conference much less 18 or 20.  So at 4-16 team conferences there are just too many schools left out and I don't like that. 

    There are enough schools willing to be the league rent a win teams without it having to be Arkansas.  The Bamas, Floridas, LSU etc have us, I'm in favor of us having some conference rent a win teams too.
  • #204 by GuvHog on 10 Jul 2017
  • What would make you think that?  It makes less sense than OU and OK State, which the Pac 12 rejected.

    Zero % chance of that ever happening for multiple reasons.

    They didn't actually reject OU and Oklahoma State, they just decided to not expand any farther. OU and Okla State were part of the original deal that had 6 Big 12 schools going to the then Pac 10 (Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, OU, Okla State, and Colorado). That deal fell through because A&M refused to be a part of it causing Texas to back out of it. Later, Colorado went anyway and the Pac 10 also picked up Utah then, deciding not to expand any farther, did not consider OU's or OSU's applications to join..

    The Pac 12 did not want to expand to 14 teams because they considered that an odd number but would expand to 16 teams given the chance. That's why I believe they will take Texas, Texas Tech, Kansas, and Kansas State. They won't take TCU or Baylor because they made it clear that they won't accept religious Universities.

    The SEC won't take Kansas because they are HORRIBLE at football and the SEC is by far a football first conference.
  • #205 by oldhawg on 10 Jul 2017
  • After all that's been written here let me now say, I'm in favor of the Big12 surviving.  I think college football can handle 5-16 team conferences and it works fine with an 8 team playoff.

    My opinion is that 16 teams borders on too big a conference much less 18 or 20.  So at 4-16 team conferences there are just too many schools left out and I don't like that. 

    There are enough schools willing to be the league rent a win teams without it having to be Arkansas.  The Bamas, Floridas, LSU etc have us, I'm in favor of us having some conference rent a win teams too.

    I like the idea of five 16-team conferences and an eight team play-off comprised of each conference winner and three at-large selections.
  • #206 by Hogwild on 10 Jul 2017
  • After all that's been written here let me now say, I'm in favor of the Big12 surviving.  I think college football can handle 5-16 team conferences and it works fine with an 8 team playoff.

    My opinion is that 16 teams borders on too big a conference much less 18 or 20.  So at 4-16 team conferences there are just too many schools left out and I don't like that. 


    I agree, read this in the New Orleans paper last fall.  LSU will make it next trip to Columbia in 2023, their last trip to Columbia was in 2008.  The SEC has two teams that call Columbia home and they still will go 15 years without playing in either city. 

    We don't go to Vanderbilt until 2025, can't remember the last time we played them there.
  • #207 by Cinco de Hogo on 10 Jul 2017
  • I like the idea of five 16-team conferences and an eight team play-off comprised of each conference winner and three at-large selections.

    Exactly, it works fine and only money hungey idiots would push to eliminate a historic conference already made up of the SWC and Big8.   I have more of a problem with the inability of the NCAA as a whole not being able to rain in programs like Texas, BYU and ND.  If we are going to go to 4 or 5 superconferences, every member should be on the same page and not treated like a nation unto themselves.

  • #208 by Hogwild on 10 Jul 2017
  • They didn't actually reject OU and Oklahoma State, they just decided to not expand any farther. OU and Okla State were part of the original deal that had 6 Big 12 schools going to the then Pac 10 (Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, OU, Okla State, and Colorado). That deal fell through because A&M refused to be a part of it causing Texas to back out of it. Colorado went anyway and the Pac 10 also picked up Utah then, deciding not to expand any farther, did not consider OU's or OSU's applications to join..


    This was after that, A&M had already announced that they were joining the SEC a month earlier.  Colorado joined the previous June. This time it didn't include any Texas teams.

    http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/10/02/report-oklahoma-oklahoma-state-surprised-by-pac-12-snub/

    Quote
    t the height of the conference realignment drama, all signs pointed to Oklahoma and Oklahoma State leaving — or, at the very least, wanting to leave — for the Pac-12, but in the 11th hour, the Pac-12 decided not to expand any further.

    How close the deal was to being finalized, we’ll probably never be 100 percent sure. Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott claims it was never that imminent; Oklahoma played it off like it was one big psyche for the Big 12.

    “We were not surprised by the Pac 12′s decision to not expand at this time. ” OU president David Boren said via statement after the announcement. Conference stability has been our first goal and we look forward to achieving that goal through continued membership in the Big 12 Conference.”

    But while OU labeled the decision as mutual, the Tulsa World has obtained e-mails and documents that indicate perhaps the decision by the Pac-12 to remain in the status quo was more of a surprise to the Oklahoma schools than they let on.

    From the OK State site-

    Quote
    By now, you know how it works: it’s all a “done deal” until it isn’t.
    At the height of the conference realignment drama, all signs pointed to Oklahoma and Oklahoma State leaving — or, at the very least, wanting to leave — for the Pac-12, but in the 11th hour, the Pac-12 decided not to expand any further.

  • #209 by MuskogeeHogFan on 10 Jul 2017

  • First if they can't east, I doubt they expand. 
    If they do get to add OU,  they would definitely take Kansas ahead of Ok State.

    No one in the ACC is going to leave before 2035-2036. That's just too much to give up. That's also why, because of your insistence that expansion will be in the East, who it would be?

    Kansas is a better fit for the Big Ten and they have the academics and basketball to go there. Are they tied at the hip by state politics with K-State like Oklahoma and Oklahoma State have been for years? Don't know.

    In the past, Oklahoma wasn't about to leave without Oklahoma State and that may still be the case. I think that the only other way that Oklahoma would ever go somewhere on their own would be if Oklahoma State had already cut a separate deal with another P-5 Conference, so that the politicians knew they wouldn't be left holding the bag with an Oklahoma departure.

    As far as the SEC adding Kansas, Kansas can't come remotely close to filling their stadium for football. I know they have a great basketball team but football is King and the basis for media deals. If a school can play basketball as well, that's great, but it isn't basketball that fills the coffers.
  • #210 by GuvHog on 10 Jul 2017
  • This was after that, A&M had already announced that they were joining the SEC a month earlier.  Colorado joined the previous June. This time it didn't include any Texas teams.

    http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/10/02/report-oklahoma-oklahoma-state-surprised-by-pac-12-snub/

    From the OK State site-


    Regardless of what the Tulsa paper says, the Pac 12 never seriously considered OU's and OSU's applications to join. The Pac 12 just simply decided not to expand any farther.

    I'm aware that this occurred after the original deal fell through. I stated that in the post that you quoted.
  • #211 by GuvHog on 10 Jul 2017
  • I agree, read this in the New Orleans paper last fall.  LSU will make it next trip to Columbia in 2023, their last trip to Columbia was in 2008.  The SEC has two teams that call Columbia home and they still will go 15 years without playing in either city. 

    We don't go to Vanderbilt until 2025, can't remember the last time we played them there.

    That's why I don't like teams having one common opponent from the other division and one rotating opponent from the other division. Both games against teams from the other division should rotate opponents. IMHO a 16 team conference with a 9 game conference schedule that includes 2 rotating games against teams from the other division would be perfect. Too many games against teams from the other division would allow one division to have too much say in who the other division's champion is and that's not right.
  • #212 by MuskogeeHogFan on 10 Jul 2017
  • Regardless of what the Tulsa paper says, the Pac 12 never seriously considered OU's and OSU's applications to join. The Pac 12 just simply decided not to expand any farther.

    I'm aware that this occurred after the original deal fell through. I stated that in the post that you quoted.

    There's this from 2011 and a lot more inside the link. I would suggest reading the entire story.

    A source told ESPN.com's Andy Katz the move to add Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State still has a long way to go before the Pac-12 leadership would be comfortable recommending it to the league's presidents, who have made it clear to the league's leadership that they don't want to expand beyond 12 at this point.

    The proposed deal would allow Texas to keep ESPN's Longhorn Network, though The Statesman reports the network would have to add other Pac-12 programming to the network.

    The new Longhorn Network, a 24-hour showcase for Texas athletics, has caused several Big 12 members to worry it gives the Longhorns too much power and influence, especially in the areas of exposure and recruiting.

    "This is not yet a done deal," a source familiar with the discussions told The Statesman, saying nothing had been definitively confirmed. "It appears that Scott is going to be able to work some magic and help Texas keep the Longhorn Network and their revenue stream."

    ESPN, which operates the Longhorn Network, had no comment.

    The University of Texas regents are set to meet Monday to discuss the future of the Big 12. The meeting set for 4 p.m. ET follows two hours after a University of Oklahoma regents meeting, also on the topic of conference affiliation.

    Oklahoma State said Monday its regents have also scheduled a special meeting, for Wednesday, to "consider matters relating to athletic conference membership."

    Oklahoma State president Burns Hargis said the Cowboys have "attractive options" and are working closely with Oklahoma to make sure the "best interests of both institutions" are achieved. He said the regents want to resolve the issue as soon as possible.

    A source close to the Oklahoma athletic department told SoonerNation's Jake Trotter it's expected that the Oklahoma board of regents will vote Monday to authorize president David Boren to take action regarding conference realignment.

    The source said Pittsburgh was one of the Big 12's top options as a replacement for Texas A&M, and that when Pitt announced it was going to the ACC, it "clobbered everything" regarding the Big 12's future.

    Another source close to the situation told The Statesman it's expected the Texas board, like Oklahoma, will vote Monday to authorize Powers to make a decision regarding realignment.

    A source told Katz the Pac-12 wouldn't be surprised if the board of regents suggested an application to the conference from Texas and Oklahoma Monday, but "it ain't getting done anytime soon."


    http://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6989288/pac-12-working-deal-texas-oklahoma-oklahoma-state-texas-tech-according-source
  • #213 by Inhogswetrust on 10 Jul 2017
  • OU won't come without Okla State and Kansas isn't coming without Kansas State. Of the 2, getting OU and OSU is the better deal.

    In my opinion (and it's strictly an opinion, nothing more) the Big 12 will break up before their Grant of Rights agreement expires and here is what I think will happen:

    Texas, Texas Tech, Kansas, and Kansas State to PAC 12 (Texas will shut down the Longhorn Network as part of the agreement)
    Oklahoma and Oklahoma State to SEC West
    Iowa State and West Virginia to Big 10 (or the ACC will release Louisville from their Grant of rights agreement allowing them to go to the Big 10 and take West Virginia in their place)
    Baylor and TCU to either the Mountain West or WAC

    Wasn't it you that said the PAC12 put an emphasis on academics? Yet you then say they will take TTU and KSU? And if you think ISU and Louisville would be taken by the Big10 and WVU would go to the ACC then I want what you're smoking!
  • #214 by Inhogswetrust on 10 Jul 2017
  • They didn't actually reject OU and Oklahoma State, they just decided to not expand any farther. OU and Okla State were part of the original deal that had 6 Big 12 schools going to the then Pac 10 (Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, OU, Okla State, and Colorado). That deal fell through because A&M refused to be a part of it causing Texas to back out of it. Later, Colorado went anyway and the Pac 10 also picked up Utah then, deciding not to expand any farther, did not consider OU's or OSU's applications to join..

    The Pac 12 did not want to expand to 14 teams because they considered that an odd number but would expand to 16 teams given the chance. That's why I believe they will take Texas, Texas Tech, Kansas, and Kansas State. They won't take TCU or Baylor because they made it clear that they won't accept religious Universities.

    The SEC won't take Kansas because they are HORRIBLE at football and the SEC is by far a football first conference.

    Still smoking that good stuff I see..................
  • #215 by Hogwild on 10 Jul 2017
  • Regardless of what the Tulsa paper says, the Pac 12 never seriously considered OU's and OSU's applications to join.


    That's my point, if the Pac 12 never seriously considered the Oklahoma schools,

    A) why would they(Pac12) now consider taking two schools from Kansas?

    B) why would the SEC consider two schools that the  "Pac 12 never seriously considered"?
  • #216 by Hogwild on 10 Jul 2017
  • That's why I don't like teams having one common opponent from the other division and one rotating opponent from the other division. Both games against teams from the other division should rotate opponents. IMHO a 16 team conference with a 9 game conference schedule that includes 2 rotating games against teams from the other division would be perfect. Too many games against teams from the other division would allow one division to have too much say in who the other division's champion is and that's not right.

    I agree with everything, but the bold text, it could be a disaster for us.

    9 conferences games = 4/5 home road split in alternating years. 
    A&M game in Dallas? Does it stay or go?
    If we are able to be listed as the home team in the + years, and the road team in the - years, that would mean every season we would play 4 games in Fayetteville, and 5 games our opponents home states.

    Little Rock game? even if it is our worse OOC do we keep it?

    Remaining two OOC games, one cupcake, the other home and away.

    Four SEC games at home, four away, one neutral.  OOC games cupcake home game, cupcake LR, P5 home & away. I think we get the short end of the stick with that scenario.


  • #217 by GuvHog on 10 Jul 2017
  • That's my point, if the Pac 12 never seriously considered the Oklahoma schools,

    A) why would they(Pac12) now consider taking two schools from Kansas?

    B) why would the SEC consider two schools that the  "Pac 12 never seriously considered"?


    The Pac 12 did consider the Oklahoma schools in the first deal and would have taken them then but when OU and OSU tried again later on their own, the Pac 12 decided they weren't going to expand any farther at that time. They didn't specifically turn down the OU schools the second time, they decided they wouldn't expand any farther and weren't taking any other schools at all.

    The Pac 12 would take Kansas and Kansas State with Texas and Texas Tech to become a 16 team conference but they would not take Kansas and Kansas State by themselves and become a 14 team conference.
  • #218 by MuskogeeHogFan on 10 Jul 2017
  • That's my point, if the Pac 12 never seriously considered the Oklahoma schools,

    A) why would they(Pac12) now consider taking two schools from Kansas?

    B) why would the SEC consider two schools that the  "Pac 12 never seriously considered"?


    Because the Pac 12 as a football conference, did entertain cutting a deal to bring OU, OSU, TT and Texas to the Pac 12, but the Pac 12 school Presidents won out at the end of the day.

    The SEC isn't going to take Texas as long as the LHN exists and maybe not if it doesn't exist. They aren't taking Kansas, K-State, Baylor, Texas Tech, Iowa State or W. Virginia either. They'll either take OU and OSU as a package at the end of the B12 GOR's, or if OSU finds another home on their own, maybe OU comes alone, but those are about the only two scenarios that I see as possible, but that is JMO.
  • #219 by Hogwild on 10 Jul 2017
  • The Pac 12 did consider the Oklahoma schools in the first deal and would have taken them then but when OU and OSU tried again later on their own, the Pac 12 decided they weren't going to expand any farther at that time. They didn't specifically turn down the OU schools the second time, they decided they wouldn't expand any farther and weren't taking any other schools at all.

    The Pac 12 commissioner was interesting in expanding, he couldn't get the votes from the Pac-12 Presidents. That is not up for debate.


    The Pac 12 would take Kansas and Kansas State with Texas and Texas Tech to become a 16 team conference but they would not take Kansas and Kansas State by themselves and become a 14 team conference.

    That is possible, the only way the two Kansas school move to the Pac 12, is if the Longhorns are in on the package.
  • #220 by Hogwild on 10 Jul 2017
  • Because the Pac 12 as a football conference, did entertain cutting a deal to bring OU, OSU, TT and Texas to the Pac 12, but the Pac 12 school Presidents won out at the end of the day.

    I agree, then OU and OK State tried again and were rejected.  That said I don't see the Pac-12 reversing course and now adding Kansas & Kansas St.

    The SEC isn't going to take Texas as long as the LHN exists and maybe not if it doesn't exist. They aren't taking Kansas, K-State, Baylor, Texas Tech, Iowa State or W. Virginia either. They'll either take OU and OSU as a package at the end of the B12 GOR's, or if OSU finds another home on their own, maybe OU comes alone, but those are about the only two scenarios that I see as possible, but that is JMO.

    I agree, but if the SEC expands I don't see them taking more than one school from the state of Oklahoma, they would stand pat (which I believe they will for the foreseeable future)
  • #221 by GuvHog on 10 Jul 2017
  • I agree with everything, but the bold text, it could be a disaster for us.

    9 conferences games = 4/5 home road split in alternating years. 
    A&M game in Dallas? Does it stay or go?
    If we are able to be listed as the home team in the + years, and the road team in the - years, that would mean every season we would play 4 games in Fayetteville, and 5 games our opponents home states.

    Little Rock game? even if it is our worse OOC do we keep it?

    Remaining two OOC games, one cupcake, the other home and away.

    Four SEC games at home, four away, one neutral.  OOC games cupcake home game, cupcake LR, P5 home & away. I think we get the short end of the stick with that scenario.




    The A&M game in Arlington would stay giving the Hogs 4 home SEC games, 4 away SEC games and 1 neutral SEC game

    they Little Rock game is likely gone after 2018 anyway so the Hogs would have 2 cupcakes in DWRRS and one home and away opponent in non-conference play.

    To sum up: In years that all 3 non-conference games are at home, the Hogs would have 7 games in DWRRS. In years where 1 non-conference game is away, there would be 6 games in DWRRS.

    It most certainly would not be a disaster. Getting to play OU and Okla State every year instead of Bama and Auburn would make it even better for the Hogs.
  • #222 by GuvHog on 10 Jul 2017


  • Say what you want but if the Pac 12 goes after Kansas, KSU, Texas, and Texas Tech to become a 16 team conference, the SEC will go all out after OU and Okla State to also become a 16 team conference. If any one of the other P5 conferences announce that they are looking to expand, the SEC won't just stand pat with 14 teams.
  • #223 by JOKERHOG on 10 Jul 2017
  • I still say if the SEC goes after 2 Big 12 teams, it will be Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. I'm not backing away from that.

    I'm with you on that Guv.  I have thought that for a long time. 
  • #224 by GuvHog on 11 Jul 2017
  • I'm with you on that Guv.  I have thought that for a long time. 

    The Big 10 and the Pac 12 have both been talking about expanding for sometime now but neither has made a move to do so. Eventually one will make the move and that will set the SEC wheels in motion. The fact that the Big 12 decided not to expand and also did not extend their grant of rights agreement is a strong sign that changes are on the horizon for more than 1 P5 conference.
  • #225 by Murr on 15 Jul 2017
  • Regardless of what the Tulsa paper says, the Pac 12 never seriously considered OU's and OSU's applications to join. The Pac 12 just simply decided not to expand any farther.

    I heard a rumor schools voted against expansion to 14 members because access to the California schools would have been decreased. 
  • #226 by Sanctified Swine on 15 Jul 2017
  • I would like to see the big 12 survive and add 3 to 5 teams..

    with 3 .. across from common opponent

    1. Texas              1. Oklahoma
    2. Texas Tech       2. Oklahoma St.
    3. Baylor             3. BYU
    4. Kansas            4. Iowa St.
    5. TCU                5. West Virgnia
    6. Kansas St.      6. Cincinnati

    with 5

    1. Texas            1. Oklahoma
    2. Texas Tech     2. Oklahoma St.
    3. Baylor           3. Iowa St.
    4. TCU               4. West Virginia
    5.  BYU              5. Cincinnati
    6.  UCF              6. Kansas
    7.  USF              7. Kansas St.     

    others... Boise St. and San Diego St. instead of the 2 Florida schools... East Carolina instead of 1 of the Florida schools               
  • #227 by MuskogeeHogFan on 16 Jul 2017
  • I would like to see the big 12 survive and add 3 to 5 teams..

    with 3 .. across from common opponent

    1. Texas              1. Oklahoma
    2. Texas Tech       2. Oklahoma St.
    3. Baylor             3. BYU
    4. Kansas            4. Iowa St.
    5. TCU                5. West Virgnia
    6. Kansas St.      6. Cincinnati

    with 5

    1. Texas            1. Oklahoma
    2. Texas Tech     2. Oklahoma St.
    3. Baylor           3. Iowa St.
    4. TCU               4. West Virginia
    5.  BYU              5. Cincinnati
    6.  UCF              6. Kansas
    7.  USF              7. Kansas St.     

    others... Boise St. and San Diego St. instead of the 2 Florida schools... East Carolina instead of 1 of the Florida schools               


    I think that surviving would be great for them but they looked at a lot of those schools and decided that the addition of those schools wouldn't help them. They also met with resistance from their media partners about the talk of expansion and it appears the Big 12 decided to cooperate with their partners (ESPN and Fox). In another notable move, the Big 12 also voted to not extend the Grant of Right's for the conference, which might indicate that they have decided to make other arrangements for each of their teams and the conference as a whole, post 2025. If that is true, I would suspect we will see talk about forthcoming changes and agreements not later than the 2022-2023 seasons because future scheduling will certainly have to be a part of the conversation.
  • #228 by GuvHog on 16 Jul 2017
  • I think that surviving would be great for them but they looked at a lot of those schools and decided that the addition of those schools wouldn't help them. They also met with resistance from their media partners about the talk of expansion and it appears the Big 12 decided to cooperate with their partners (ESPN and Fox). In another notable move, the Big 12 also voted to not extend the Grant of Right's for the conference, which might indicate that they have decided to make other arrangements for each of their teams and the conference as a whole, post 2025. If that is true, I would suspect we will see talk about forthcoming changes and agreements not later than the 2022-2023 seasons because future scheduling will certainly have to be a part of the conversation.

    I agree Muskogee and I believe it'll happen sooner than some think. I believe when the expansion movement is complete, there'll be 4 major conferences with 16 teams each (PAC 16, SEC, ACC, BIG 10), but there will still be smaller conferences such as the WAC, Mountain West, and American Conference etc.
  • #229 by medloh on 19 Jul 2017
  • The thing most people don't consider is that conference expansion has little to nothing to do with how good you are at sports.  OSU being pretty good at football and ok at basketball doesn't matter.  It also doesn't matter how much revenue OSU makes for themselves.

    The things that matter are how much you would increase the revenue of existing teams in the conference and to a lesser degree how you affect the image of the conference and academics.

    Once you have OU, OSU fails badly on each and every one of the things that matter
  • #230 by NaturalStateReb on 19 Jul 2017
  • I'd like to see us get one of the Oklahoma schools and West Virginia if we expand again.  Don't know if we ever will, but that's how I'd like to see it fall out.

    OU/OSU would be fine, too.

    I don't think Texas is interested, and I'd just as soon not have them in the league.
  • #231 by NaturalStateReb on 19 Jul 2017
  • The thing most people don't consider is that conference expansion has little to nothing to do with how good you are at sports.  OSU being pretty good at football and ok at basketball doesn't matter.  It also doesn't matter how much revenue OSU makes for themselves.

    The things that matter are how much you would increase the revenue of existing teams in the conference and to a lesser degree how you affect the image of the conference and academics.

    Once you have OU, OSU fails badly on each and every one of the things that matter

    There's really only one metric:  will ESPN and CBS make it worth our while?  If the answer is yes, then it's possible; if the answer is no, then it's not.
  • #232 by Hugo Bezdek on 19 Jul 2017
  • If the SEC expands from the B12 it will be OU and Texas. Otherwise what's the point? Those are the only two programs that add enough revenue to make it worthwhile. Merge the LHN into the SECN. ESPN cuts their operating costs and makes it happen.

    West:            East:
    Arkansas       Alabama
    LSU              Auburn
    Ole Miss        Florida
    MSU             Georgia
    Mizzou          Kentucky
    OU               S. Carolina
    Texas           Tennessee
    A&M             Vandy
  • #233 by GuvHog on 19 Jul 2017
  • If the SEC expands from the B12 it will be OU and Texas. Otherwise what's the point? Those are the only two programs that add enough revenue to make it worthwhile. Merge the LHN into the SECN. ESPN cuts their operating costs and makes it happen.

    West:            East:
    Arkansas       Alabama
    LSU              Auburn
    Ole Miss        Florida
    MSU             Georgia
    Mizzou          Kentucky
    OU               S. Carolina
    Okla State    Tennessee
    A&M             Vandy

    Texas isn't coming because they'd have to give up the LHN to be accepted and they won't do that. They'll go independent to keep it if they have to. Replace Texas with Okla State. That's the way it will likely happen.
  • #234 by tusksincolorado on 19 Jul 2017
  • Texas isn't coming because they'd have to give up the LHN to be accepted and they won't do that. They'll go independent to keep it if they have to. Replace Texas with Okla State. That's the way it will likely happen.

    Well that will be the only way they will ever win a national championship....again.
  • #235 by Hugo Bezdek on 19 Jul 2017
  • Texas isn't coming because they'd have to give up the LHN to be accepted and they won't do that. They'll go independent to keep it if they have to. Replace Texas with Okla State. That's the way it will likely happen.

    I think that scenario is highly unlikely. Texas isn't going it alone and OSU will never be a member of the SEC IMHO.
  • #236 by GuvHog on 19 Jul 2017
  • I think that scenario is highly unlikely. Texas isn't going it alone and OSU will never be a member of the SEC IMHO.

    Texas won't join another conference if it means giving up their Longhorn Network so if the Big 12 collapses, they'll go it alone.

    OU isn't coming without Okla. State so their addition to the SEC is more likely than you think.
  • #237 by MuskogeeHogFan on 19 Jul 2017
  • Texas won't join another conference if it means giving up their Longhorn Network so if the Big 12 collapses, they'll go it alone.

    OU isn't coming without Okla. State so their addition to the SEC is more likely than you think.

    Ehhh, a few things here. Back when the Pac 12 Commissioner was trying to bring some of the Big 12 schools to the Pac 12, he was arranging it so that Texas could keep the LHN BUT, it would have to provide other Pac 12 content if it were going to be allowed. That ship I believe, has sailed. If the Pac 12 took Texas now, I'm not sure that they would be allowed to keep the LHN.

    Notre Dame was the first to actually have their own network years ago, but that was an arrangement with NBC and when Notre Dame became less successful, that deal burned NBC. Same situation with the LHN. If they were in the top 5 every year they probably wouldn't have any trouble selling subscriptions, but they have fallen on more difficult times, which is why it is killing ESPN's investment and deal with Texas.

    Texas won't come to the SEC. They want to be the big dog in the conference in terms of influence and would have to ditch the LHN and while I might be wrong, I can't ever see the SEC allowing that to happen.

    OU might come without Okla State but it would probably only come when we get closer to 2025 and only then if Oklahoma State already had another deal cut to join another P-5 conference and wouldn't be left in a lurch. Otherwise, they will be tied at the hip by Oklahoma politics. Lot's of folks outside the state just don't understand that.
  • #238 by medloh on 19 Jul 2017
  • Also a lot of people don't understand that the SEC would be much better off standing pat than adding 2 schools from a state the size the size of OK.  It makes no sense for a strong rich conference to double up in a small market.  It's a move that severely limits future growth potential.
  • #239 by MuskogeeHogFan on 20 Jul 2017
  • Also a lot of people don't understand that the SEC would be much better off standing pat than adding 2 schools from a state the size the size of OK.  It makes no sense for a strong rich conference to double up in a small market.  It's a move that severely limits future growth potential.

    Oklahoma, whether we like them or not, has national appeal from the standpoint of viewership and ratings. Oklahoma State generally pulls about the same national viewership ratings as Missouri when they play. Folks sometimes think that all you are adding are viewers that are limited to being from the state of Oklahoma when you talk about those two teams and that is just not the case.
  • #240 by oldhawg on 20 Jul 2017
  • Oklahoma, whether we like them or not, has national appeal from the standpoint of viewership and ratings. Oklahoma State generally pulls about the same national viewership ratings as Missouri when they play. Folks sometimes think that all you are adding are viewers that are limited to being from the state of Oklahoma when you talk about those two teams and that is just not the case.


    Wonder where Arkansas stands in comparison to Oklahoma State and Missouri?  In years gone by I use to think that Arkansas had a decent national appeal (not Oklahoma numbers, but still higher than most).  Now I am not so sure, seems like that may have slipped some in the last decade or two, in both football and basketball.
  • #241 by medloh on 20 Jul 2017
  • Do you think schools like UF, Georgia, SC, most of the flagships in the SEC are going to want to give the state of OK two SEC votes when they only get one?  OU has about average SEC academics, OSU less.  That's not going to impress SEC presidents making the decision.

    OSU would add zero additional SECN revenue on top of OU.

    OU would be a nice add solo or with another state flagship, but they aren't valuable enough to support 2 mouths.  The Pac had lower revenue requirements and they said no thanks to the OK pair.  That's pretty compelling, and all you really need to know.

    Oklahoma, whether we like them or not, has national appeal from the standpoint of viewership and ratings. Oklahoma State generally pulls about the same national viewership ratings as Missouri when they play. Folks sometimes think that all you are adding are viewers that are limited to being from the state of Oklahoma when you talk about those two teams and that is just not the case.
  • #242 by hobhog on 20 Jul 2017
  • Do you think schools like UF, Georgia, SC, most of the flagships in the SEC are going to want to give the state of OK two SEC votes when they only get one?  OU has about average SEC academics, OSU less.  That's not going to impress SEC presidents making the decision.

    OSU would add zero additional SECN revenue on top of OU.

    OU would be a nice add solo or with another state flagship, but they aren't valuable enough to support 2 mouths.  The Pac had lower revenue requirements and they said no thanks to the OK pair.  That's pretty compelling, and all you really need to know.

    Good points.....
  • #243 by MuskogeeHogFan on 20 Jul 2017
  • Do you think schools like UF, Georgia, SC, most of the flagships in the SEC are going to want to give the state of OK two SEC votes when they only get one?  OU has about average SEC academics, OSU less.  That's not going to impress SEC presidents making the decision.

    OSU would add zero additional SECN revenue on top of OU.

    OU would be a nice add solo or with another state flagship, but they aren't valuable enough to support 2 mouths.  The Pac had lower revenue requirements and they said no thanks to the OK pair.  That's pretty compelling, and all you really need to know.


    We will just have to agree to disagree. And while Oklahoma and Oklahoma State may be linked by politics by virtue of being in the same state, I can assure you that doesn't mean that the two of them always see things the same way when it comes to voting issues. There is no love lost between those two.

    In any case, when the time comes to make theses decisions no one at the SEC office is going to ask me, (not sure about you since I don't know you) what my opinion is about adding those two schools or whichever two schools they choose to invite.
  • #244 by GuvHog on 20 Jul 2017
  • Do you think schools like UF, Georgia, SC, most of the flagships in the SEC are going to want to give the state of OK two SEC votes when they only get one?  OU has about average SEC academics, OSU less.  That's not going to impress SEC presidents making the decision.

    OSU would add zero additional SECN revenue on top of OU.

    OU would be a nice add solo or with another state flagship, but they aren't valuable enough to support 2 mouths.  The Pac had lower revenue requirements and they said no thanks to the OK pair.  That's pretty compelling, and all you really need to know.


    OU has such a large viewership footprint that it would be well worth taking Oklas State to get them in the SEC.

    The PAC 12 didn't say "no thanks" to the Oklahoma schools, they said "we have decided not to expand any farther so we won't consider any other schools".
  • #245 by Inhogswetrust on 20 Jul 2017
  • OU has such a large viewership footprint that it would be well worth taking Oklas State to get them in the SEC.

    The PAC 12 didn't say "no thanks" to the Oklahoma schools, they said "we have decided not to expand any farther so we won't consider any other schools".

    Dang Guv that's simply another way of saying "No Thanks" to Oklahoma and everyone else.
  • #246 by MuskogeeHogFan on 20 Jul 2017
  • Dang Guv that's simply another way of saying "No Thanks" to Oklahoma and everyone else.

    He is right in what he was talking about, just not detailed enough. The Pac 12 Commissioner was pushing for the expansion and adding some of the Big 12 schools. It was the school Presidents of the Pac 12 who dug their feet in the ground and said, "we are not interested in expansion at this time".
  • #247 by Inhogswetrust on 20 Jul 2017
  • He is right in what he was talking about, just not detailed enough. The Pac 12 Commissioner was pushing for the expansion and adding some of the Big 12 schools. It was the school Presidents of the Pac 12 who dug their feet in the ground and said, "we are not interested in expansion at this time".

    True but that is the Presidents of the PAC 12 schools saying "No Thanks". Guv was playing semantics in his post.
  • #248 by j-mann on 20 Jul 2017
  • here what  i thinK 

    Okle SEC or Pac-12 BTen   
    Okle st whatever Okle wants   
    Kan P-12 or B10
    Iowa st B10  Neb and IOWA will really push for this   
    Tex  Indy 
    K-ST M West or AAC
    T Tech M West
    Bay M West
    TCU AAC   
    W V   AAC 
  • #249 by Hugo Bezdek on 21 Jul 2017
  • Ehhh, a few things here. Back when the Pac 12 Commissioner was trying to bring some of the Big 12 schools to the Pac 12, he was arranging it so that Texas could keep the LHN BUT, it would have to provide other Pac 12 content if it were going to be allowed. That ship I believe, has sailed. If the Pac 12 took Texas now, I'm not sure that they would be allowed to keep the LHN.

    Notre Dame was the first to actually have their own network years ago, but that was an arrangement with NBC and when Notre Dame became less successful, that deal burned NBC. Same situation with the LHN. If they were in the top 5 every year they probably wouldn't have any trouble selling subscriptions, but they have fallen on more difficult times, which is why it is killing ESPN's investment and deal with Texas.

    Texas won't come to the SEC. They want to be the big dog in the conference in terms of influence and would have to ditch the LHN and while I might be wrong, I can't ever see the SEC allowing that to happen.

    OU might come without Okla State but it would probably only come when we get closer to 2025 and only then if Oklahoma State already had another deal cut to join another P-5 conference and wouldn't be left in a lurch. Otherwise, they will be tied at the hip by Oklahoma politics. Lot's of folks outside the state just don't understand that.

    Some of these arguments keep being repeated on here like they are incontrovertible fact, but I don't buy them. I have no doubt OSU would fight like hell to tag along with OU if the Sooners decided to leave the B12. I just think that if OU has decided to move on they will ultimately get their way, especially if the B12 is still alive when they depart.

    As for Texas, I think we can all agree that the Whorns are a bunch of blustering blowhards. But they're not going independent, because the LHN has been a financial disaster for ESPN and no media company is going hitch their wagon to Texas to fund their independence. And while I agree the LHN is a barrier to entry to the Big Ten or the Pac-12, that relationship with ESPN makes the SEC or ACC possibilities. Longhorn fans aren't going to be happy about road trips to North Carolina and Virginia if OU, A&M and Arkansas are all sitting in the SEC West (along with a new border rivalry with LSU), so I would look for fans and alumni to push for SEC membership over ACC.

    And I don't think the B12 will die completely. I think they'll survive by becoming a catch-all conference, maybe even merging with the Mountain West and/or AAC and keeping their P5 status, or just adding programs like BYU, Houston, Boise State, etc.
  • #250 by Cinco de Hogo on 21 Jul 2017
  • Some of these arguments keep being repeated on here like they are incontrovertible fact, but I don't buy them. I have no doubt OSU would fight like hell to tag along with OU if the Sooners decided to leave the B12. I just think that if OU has decided to move on they will ultimately get their way, especially if the B12 is still alive when they depart.

    As for Texas, I think we can all agree that the Whorns are a bunch of blustering blowhards. But they're not going independent, because the LHN has been a financial disaster for ESPN and no media company is going hitch their wagon to Texas to fund their independence. And while I agree the LHN is a barrier to entry to the Big Ten or the Pac-12, that relationship with ESPN makes the SEC or ACC possibilities. Longhorn fans aren't going to be happy about road trips to North Carolina and Virginia if OU, A&M and Arkansas are all sitting in the SEC West (along with a new border rivalry with LSU), so I would look for fans and alumni to push for SEC membership over ACC.

    And I don't think the B12 will die completely. I think they'll survive by becoming a catch-all conference, maybe even merging with the Mountain West and/or AAC and keeping their P5 status, or just adding programs like BYU, Houston, Boise State, etc.

    Reasonable thoughts, don't think any possibility is off the table.
Pages:
Actions