dfwabel

Division 1 College Conference Realignment

4,697 posts in this topic

I don't think that classifies as desperate or pathetic. They are just trying to make sure they don't lose anymore schools the way they lost BYU/TCU/Utah. I could see your point if this rule was put into place very recently (like once Air Force and Boise thought about jumping to the Big East) but since this has been in effect since June the desperate and pathetic terms don't really apply. They are just doing what every organization should do, protecting their investments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alabama doesn't want to risk losing it's rivalry game with Tennessee if Auburn had moved to the East.

Anyone want to take a real good guess on which 2 schools realistically will join the SEC to make it a 16 team conference

I said this a couple weeks ago: I believe the SEC will make one more pitch to Oklahoma about joining the conference, especially since the Pac-12 looks content on staying at 12 for the immediate future.

I don't think the SEC would frown upon taking the duo of Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. They could do a lot worse.

Then you could put both Alabama & Auburn in the East

EAST

Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

WEST

Arkansas,LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M

I think it works pretty well to bring in Oklahoma State and Oklahoma. Alabama gets to keep it's two games against Auburn and Tennessee, so there shouldn't really be a problem there. I agree with Hedley and when Missouri joins, they need to make one more pitch to Oklahoma. I'm not sure if the move to 16 happens this year or not, if I had to guess, it'll happen in the next wave next year. Oklahoma and Oklahoma State are two great pickups. I truly believe the SEC will look a lot more inviting to Oklahoma once Missouri joins.

Now my question is, why was the SEC uninterested in Oklahoma State? I've read it a few places and also heard it from a few people and I just never really understood. Is it because the SEC doesn't want two schools from the same state?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's say hypothetically in a few years Oklahoma & Oklahoma State do join the SEC.

So then the Pac-12 will add 4 among these 7 schools: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, BYU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's say hypothetically in a few years Oklahoma & Oklahoma State do join the SEC.

So then the Pac-12 will add 4 among these 7 schools: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, BYU

... or the Pac-12 stays at 12 because all of those schools either a) carry baggage (Texas and their Failhorn Longhorn Network), b) are traditionally bad at football (Kansas, Baylor), c) are religious schools (BYU, TCU), or d) simply not all that attracive options (Texas Tech, K-State).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think K-State can be attractive...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think K-State can be attractive...

frank+martin.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't see OU and Oklahoma State going to the SEC. Mizzou is a good program, but they're not a dominating one like OU can be. I believe that's why OU would prefer the PAC. As a whole, the level of play isn't what the SEC is, though they do have some great schools. But OU could go in there, have some competition and still win the conference probably 4 out of 5 years. The SEC has too many schools that would challenge that year in and year out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't see OU and Oklahoma State going to the SEC. Mizzou is a good program, but they're not a dominating one like OU can be. I believe that's why OU would prefer the PAC. As a whole, the level of play isn't what the SEC is, though they do have some great schools. But OU could go in there, have some competition and still win the conference probably 4 out of 5 years. The SEC has too many schools that would challenge that year in and year out.

Bingo. Which is why Texas and Oklahoma will never go to the SEC. If there is LEGITIMATE power move for 16 team super conferences, I think it would be a safe bet that Texas and Oklahoma would be going to the PAC - assuming neither goes in dependent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't see OU and Oklahoma State going to the SEC. Mizzou is a good program, but they're not a dominating one like OU can be. I believe that's why OU would prefer the PAC. As a whole, the level of play isn't what the SEC is, though they do have some great schools. But OU could go in there, have some competition and still win the conference probably 4 out of 5 years. The SEC has too many schools that would challenge that year in and year out.

Bingo. Which is why Texas and Oklahoma will never go to the SEC. If there is LEGITIMATE power move for 16 team super conferences, I think it would be a safe bet that Texas and Oklahoma would be going to the PAC - assuming neither goes in dependent.

Actually, I think Texas will go Big Ten or Independent. PAC has basically said they don't want them, the SEC doesn't either, and they were only included in ACC talks because of Notre Dame, who I could see them going to the B1G as a pair with. Texas has kind of become the hot girl that everyone all of sudden realized is a total b****, and now pretty much no one wants to have anything to do with her... except the somewhat known, yet kind of desperate, girl who just wants the cool points. Also known as the Big Ten.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God I want Oregon vs Oklahoma to be a rivalry sooooo badly. Already a lot of bad blood between those schools. Plus, in terms of style of play and uniforms, they are polar opposites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, wait wait.. There's bad blood between Oregon and Oklahoma? Since when??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't see OU and Oklahoma State going to the SEC. Mizzou is a good program, but they're not a dominating one like OU can be. I believe that's why OU would prefer the PAC. As a whole, the level of play isn't what the SEC is, though they do have some great schools. But OU could go in there, have some competition and still win the conference probably 4 out of 5 years. The SEC has too many schools that would challenge that year in and year out.

Bingo. Which is why Texas and Oklahoma will never go to the SEC. If there is LEGITIMATE power move for 16 team super conferences, I think it would be a safe bet that Texas and Oklahoma would be going to the PAC - assuming neither goes in dependent.

Actually, I think Texas will go Big Ten or Independent. PAC has basically said they don't want them, the SEC doesn't either, and they were only included in ACC talks because of Notre Dame, who I could see them going to the B1G as a pair with. Texas has kind of become the hot girl that everyone all of sudden realized is a total b****, and now pretty much no one wants to have anything to do with her... except the somewhat known, yet kind of desperate, girl who just wants the cool points. Also known as the Big Ten.

Well there was a rumor floating around last month about Notre Dame and Texas presenting themselves as a package deal to the Big Ten. Shortly thereafter were the major rumors about Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State joining the PAC. To be honest, I still think Texas would prefer the PAC over the Big Ten. I think Texas and Notre Dame want to be the final team to join a major super conference. Its the pride and arrogance they have.

I don't see the Big Ten allowing Texas to reserve/preserve The Longhorn Network if they join the Big Ten. There is no way the Big Ten would allow it. This whole realignment has been predicated off of money and TV revenue... so I don't see the Big Ten bending now just to bring in Texas. Sure, Texas would be a huge cash crop, but Texas is worth more to the Big Ten WITHOUT The Longhorn Network than with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The PAC is less likely to give in than the Big Ten, who seem to always be waiting to see what the other conferenes do and then following suit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State might be a solution for the Pac-12 then. It always about football but you would get 1 great basketball program and 3 decent ones as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Missouri Board of Curators gave Chancellor Deaton the authority to make any conference move without needing their approval. He said it won't be long before a decision is made and that it would take place beginning next year, and not later, as acting Big XII commish Neinas has said.

Story

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State might be a solution for the Pac-12 then. It always about football but you would get 1 great basketball program and 3 decent ones as well.

Is there really a problem which needs a solution?

If they go to 16 schools, the current Pac-12 members will lose 2.1% of their future media revenue. And losing it to a state with a population of under 4 million (Oklahoma) and one under 3 million people (Kansas). Sure, the Missouri side of Kansas City would have to be added, but that is not a footprint which is enough for them to add for the sake of adding right now.

The biggest issue to be dealt with with Missouri leaves is can the remaining Big XII members find opponents to play them next season as replacements. The price to get your a$$ beat by a Big XII school may have gone up 30%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it works pretty well to bring in Oklahoma State and Oklahoma. Alabama gets to keep it's two games against Auburn and Tennessee, so there shouldn't really be a problem there. I agree with Hedley and when Missouri joins, they need to make one more pitch to Oklahoma. I'm not sure if the move to 16 happens this year or not, if I had to guess, it'll happen in the next wave next year. Oklahoma and Oklahoma State are two great pickups. I truly believe the SEC will look a lot more inviting to Oklahoma once Missouri joins.

Now my question is, why was the SEC uninterested in Oklahoma State? I've read it a few places and also heard it from a few people and I just never really understood. Is it because the SEC doesn't want two schools from the same state?

I never said the SEC needs to talk to Oklahoma. I just said I have a feeling that they'll talk to them one more time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think K-State can be attractive...

frank+martin.jpg

"Billion Dollar Federal Biological Warfare Research Center?"

"Football team that was passably good before they decided they needed a Prince to lead them?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't see OU and Oklahoma State going to the SEC. Mizzou is a good program, but they're not a dominating one like OU can be. I believe that's why OU would prefer the PAC. As a whole, the level of play isn't what the SEC is, though they do have some great schools. But OU could go in there, have some competition and still win the conference probably 4 out of 5 years. The SEC has too many schools that would challenge that year in and year out.

Bingo. Which is why Texas and Oklahoma will never go to the SEC. If there is LEGITIMATE power move for 16 team super conferences, I think it would be a safe bet that Texas and Oklahoma would be going to the PAC - assuming neither goes in dependent.

Actually, I think Texas will go Big Ten or Independent. PAC has basically said they don't want them, the SEC doesn't either, and they were only included in ACC talks because of Notre Dame, who I could see them going to the B1G as a pair with. Texas has kind of become the hot girl that everyone all of sudden realized is a total b****, and now pretty much no one wants to have anything to do with her... except the somewhat known, yet kind of desperate, girl who just wants the cool points. Also known as the Big Ten.

Well there was a rumor floating around last month about Notre Dame and Texas presenting themselves as a package deal to the Big Ten. Shortly thereafter were the major rumors about Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State joining the PAC. To be honest, I still think Texas would prefer the PAC over the Big Ten. I think Texas and Notre Dame want to be the final team to join a major super conference. Its the pride and arrogance they have.

I don't see the Big Ten allowing Texas to reserve/preserve The Longhorn Network if they join the Big Ten. There is no way the Big Ten would allow it. This whole realignment has been predicated off of money and TV revenue... so I don't see the Big Ten bending now just to bring in Texas. Sure, Texas would be a huge cash crop, but Texas is worth more to the Big Ten WITHOUT The Longhorn Network than with it.

I'm not sure how often we're going to have to shoot down the aforementioned "rumor" because the source kept getting crap wrong last year, but yeah...source has been proven to make :censored: up repeatedly, therefore no validity to the rumor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now