Oklahoma Prepairing to Apply to Pac-12

• krambman

  

  http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1263940
  
  Sources say that the Board of Regents should vote by the end of the month. Oklahoma State is expected to follow suit.
  
  RIP Big XII
• se-alum

  

  If, in fact, the B1G didn't reach out to Oklahoma, they neeed some new leadership.
• ts1227

  

  Oklahoma just fucked A&M by way of Baylor.
• j_crazy

  

  Agreed se-alum
• krambman

  

  se-alum;892987 wrote:If, in fact, the B1G didn't reach out to Oklahoma, they neeed some new leadership.

  I'm sure that they did, but I honestly don't think adding OU and Ok State would be the best decision financially for the B1G, and I think that joining the Pac-12 is the best decision for them.
  
  Besides, there are reports floating around that Texas and Notre Dame and jointly working on joining the B1G. Adding them and then adding two eastern schools would be a better way for the B1G to get to 16 than by adding the two Oklahoma schools.
• krambman

  

  ts1227;892991 wrote:Oklahoma just fucked A&M by way of Baylor.

  How so? It was A&M who screwed OU and everyone else last year when they decided they didn't want to go west and join what would have become the Pac-16.
• ts1227

  

  krambman;893006 wrote:How so? It was A&M who screwed OU and everyone else last year when they decided they didn't want to go west and join what would have become the Pac-16.

  
  Baylor basically said they would drop it if OU stayed put, so A&M will be pissed (regardless of if they have a reason).
• OneBuckeye

  

  se-alum;892987 wrote:If, in fact, the B1G didn't reach out to Oklahoma, they neeed some new leadership.

  They have bigger fish in mind. OU's academics apparently don't align with the BIG10. (But I didn't think Nebraska's did either)
• vball10set

  OneBuckeye;893027 wrote:They have bigger fish in mind. OU's acidemics apparently don't align with the BIG10. (But I didn't think Nebraska's did either)

  too funny (the irony in the spelling, that is)
• OneBuckeye

  

  vball10set;893028 wrote:too funny (the irony in the spelling, that is)

  my bad FIFY
• se-alum

  

  krambman;893005 wrote:I'm sure that they did, but I honestly don't think adding OU and Ok State would be the best decision financially for the B1G, and I think that joining the Pac-12 is the best decision for them.
  
  Besides, there are reports floating around that Texas and Notre Dame and jointly working on joining the B1G. Adding them and then adding two eastern schools would be a better way for the B1G to get to 16 than by adding the two Oklahoma schools.

  Texas and Notre Dame would be great, but I don't see it happening. I can't imagine the B1G would let Texas have their own network without distributing equally among the teams, and I can't see Texas wanting to share.
• OneBuckeye

  

  Also another factor in BIG10 not getting oklahoma is that they are a package deal with OkieState. Not sure they wanted both.
• vball10set

  OneBuckeye;893034 wrote:my bad FIFY

  sorry, but it was too good to pass up (btw, I do agree with your post)
• OneBuckeye

  

  vball10set;893042 wrote:sorry, but it was too good to pass up (btw, I do agree with your post)

  Eh, I would have pointed it out too. I type faster than I can think.
• krambman

  

  ts1227;893008 wrote:Baylor basically said they would drop it if OU stayed put, so A&M will be pissed (regardless of if they have a reason).

  
  There's no way that Baylor would be able to win their suit against Texas A&M if OU and OK St both left and they didn't sue them as well. Besides, forcing TAMU to stay won't even matter if those other two schools leave. If OU and OK St head west, Baylor will either have to sue all three schools or drop their suit against TAMU. They will drop their suit.
  

  OneBuckeye;893027 wrote:They have bigger fish in mind. OU's academics apparently don't align with the BIG10. (But I didn't think Nebraska's did either)

  
  Nebraska is the lowest ranked school in the B1G academically, but they have been climbing in recent years and they weren't too far behind the rest of the schools. They were also a member of the AAU when invited to join, however, they were also recently the first school ever kicked out of the AAU. People try and downplay the academic side of expansion, and probably because it doesn't matter to most conferences, but the B1G is the second highest rated D-1 conference academically behind the Ivy League, and they would like to keep it that way.
  

  se-alum;893035 wrote:Texas and Notre Dame would be great, but I don't see it happening. I can't imagine the B1G would let Texas have their own network without distributing equally among the teams, and I can't see Texas wanting to share.

  I believe Texas has a clause in their contract that allows them out of the Longhorn Network if they join a conference. ESPN would then likely make the Longhorn Network into just a regional ESPN. If Texas could join a conference with equal revenue sharing and still earn more than they are now, I think they would join. Besides, not being allowed to carry HS football games and only having one carrier currently, it's very possible that the LHN isn't going to be as viable as originally estimated, and therefore, it's likely that they aren't going to make as much money as promised.
• Scarlet_Buckeye

  

  se-alum;892987 wrote:If, in fact, the B1G didn't reach out to Oklahoma, they neeed some new leadership.

  This. The B1G is really going to be screwed if they miss out on Oklahoma.
• enigmaax

  krambman;893057 wrote:There's no way that Baylor would be able to win their suit against Texas A&M if OU and OK St both left and they didn't sue them as well. Besides, forcing TAMU to stay won't even matter if those other two schools leave. If OU and OK St head west, Baylor will either have to sue all three schools or drop their suit against TAMU. They will drop their suit.

  At the moment, it isn't about any real lawsuit. It is solely about the threat of one that the SEC doesn't want to deal with. If the SEC says they won't let TAM in until they're assured there will be no lawsuit, then TAM is screwed. If OU and Ok St leave and the Big XII is stuck trying to expand...and the SEC still won't take TAM because they don't want to deal with any nonsense, TAM is screwed. Whether Baylor would win or not, it would be costly for the SEC and the SEC doesn't need to waste money and resources on it.
  
  As for what Baylor would do if the other schools leave, (and again, whether they'd win or not) they could just point to TAM as the cause of the whole thing. Oklahoma and Ok State were forced to start looking at options because of what TAM did. It does all seem like bullshit, but it could be pretty expensive bullshit.
• krambman

  

  enigmaax;893108 wrote:At the moment, it isn't about any real lawsuit. It is solely about the threat of one that the SEC doesn't want to deal with. If the SEC says they won't let TAM in until they're assured there will be no lawsuit, then TAM is screwed. If OU and Ok St leave and the Big XII is stuck trying to expand...and the SEC still won't take TAM because they don't want to deal with any nonsense, TAM is screwed. Whether Baylor would win or not, it would be costly for the SEC and the SEC doesn't need to waste money and resources on it.
  
  As for what Baylor would do if the other schools leave, (and again, whether they'd win or not) they could just point to TAM as the cause of the whole thing. Oklahoma and Ok State were forced to start looking at options because of what TAM did. It does all seem like bullshit, but it could be pretty expensive bullshit.

  What good does it do Baylor to gain TAMU, but lose all of Oklahoma? There's no way for this to work out well for Baylor. TAMU will eventually leave the Big XII and join the SEC, and Baylor may just lose a lot of money, and make themselves even less appealing to another conference that may want to take them, or to other teams that the remaining Big XII members may want to invite.
• Classyposter58

  

  Gahh I hate this. You know the thing is won't these Super Conferences create Mini Conferences? I mean if you have a 16 team conference then you'd get 7 division games and 2 cross divisional games...so essentially you'd never see anyone in the other division. Idk I just have a big problem with such large conferences because everybody will just beat each other up and essentially we'd be left with a 10-2 SEC Champ vs other team every year for a title
• enigmaax

  Classyposter58;893683 wrote:Gahh I hate this. You know the thing is won't these Super Conferences create Mini Conferences? I mean if you have a 16 team conference then you'd get 7 division games and 2 cross divisional games...so essentially you'd never see anyone in the other division. Idk I just have a big problem with such large conferences because everybody will just beat each other up and essentially we'd be left with a 10-2 SEC Champ vs other team every year for a title

  I guess the 16 team thing is a money issue and I agree, it is kind of pointless from a competitive standpoint. The "beat each other up" effect will depend largely on the distribution of teams. As it is, there are typically, at most, a couple of teams that make it through with 0-1 losses. That will still happen. The thing that you hope happens as a conference is that you set up a kick ass championship game because the best teams from each division don't have to face each other during the regular season.
• sportchampps

  TAM is not screwed the SEC will still take them eventually. Every conference is gonna need 16 teams. Schools like Baylor and Kansas are fighting it because they know they are on the outside looking in. They can sue all they want but TAM Oklahoma and OK State can just make to much more money by leaving.
  
  I think the B1G will be going after Norte Dame, Mizzou, and two eastern schools. Texas is gonna have to figure something out with the Longhorn network before anyone agrees with them. Texas would be the crown jewel to any conference though.
• krambman

  

  enigmaax;893707 wrote:I guess the 16 team thing is a money issue and I agree, it is kind of pointless from a competitive standpoint. The "beat each other up" effect will depend largely on the distribution of teams. As it is, there are typically, at most, a couple of teams that make it through with 0-1 losses. That will still happen. The thing that you hope happens as a conference is that you set up a kick ass championship game because the best teams from each division don't have to face each other during the regular season.

  Super conferences are likely to bring down the NCAA, at least in terms of D-1A football. What could happen is that the four super conferences that end up getting formed (Pac-16, SEC, Big ACC, and B16) break away from the NCAA and create their own bowl based playoff. All four conference champions square off in a two round playoff. Conference championship games would essentially serve as the first round of the playoffs. Those who want an 8 team playoff would basically get just that.
• j_crazy

  

  krambman;893755 wrote:Super conferences are likely to bring down the NCAA, at least in terms of D-1A football. What could happen is that the four super conferences that end up getting formed (Pac-16, SEC, Big ACC, and B16) break away from the NCAA and create their own bowl based playoff. All four conference champions square off in a two round playoff. Conference championship games would essentially serve as the first round of the playoffs. Those who want an 8 team playoff would basically get just that.

  
  Good.
• Tobias Fünke

  

  j_crazy;893769 wrote:Good.

  Not good. Not good at all. I think the maximum number of teams in a conference should be 12. It's the perfect number. A 16-team conference is retarded.
• krambman

  

  Tobias Fünke;893971 wrote:Not good. Not good at all. I think the maximum number of teams in a conference should be 12. It's the perfect number. A 16-team conference is retarded.

  Please explain how 12 teams in the perfect number? 10 is the perfect size. Anything bigger than that and you can't have everyone play everyone each year.