https://www.getmoresports.com/oklahomas-big-ten-agenda/

A column from a Mike Davis, where he opines that Oklahoma has named at least ten B10 schools as academic peers.

Great catch. You are going to have to share this gem. You will probably have a horde of mouth frothing SEC chanters chasing after you once you post this on the main board, but such is the price of carrying the torch of Enlightenment to the unclean masses!

Virginia Tech's academic peer list is likewise full of BIG schools, as is the list for many other schools that are or want to be viewed as STEM programs and research Universities. It's an interesting fact but doesn't really mean much.

Look at his 'about' me line, though. He's just "an avid basketball and football fan from Upstate New York," meaning an unpaid blog contributor who's not even listed as a staff writer for the website. He didn't even get the name of the CIC correct - it's "Committee on Institutional Cooperation." Basically, he's equivalent to you and me, except he knows someone with a website who'll let him post his opinion pieces.

Nevertheless, his point is well taken, in the sense that academics do matter to University Presidents and that gives the BIG a selling point. I'd love to see Oklahoma in the BIG along with both Kansas and Texas, but I won't hold my breath on that one.

H-1, by the way, sorry to see you got nicked on the Landthieves Board. I tried several times to join the board but got rejected each time as 'spam' - perhaps because I listed Ohio State or Cincinnati as my favorite.

(07-06-2015 11:21 PM)CintiFan Wrote:  Nevertheless, his point is well taken, in the sense that academics do matter to University Presidents and that gives the BIG a selling point. I'd love to see Oklahoma in the BIG along with both Kansas and Texas, but I won't hold my breath on that one.

H-1, by the way, sorry to see you got nicked on the Landthieves Board. I tried several times to join the board but got rejected each time as 'spam' - perhaps because I listed Ohio State or Cincinnati as my favorite.

It's all good, the mods there did what they had to do, as I knew they would. I had nothing left there to say until the next event happens. When it does, my short temp ban will already be over. Appreciate the words though.

In regards to the author of the piece, he isn't important but he understand what is important.

Unfortunately, we wont be getting Texas. I am not a big fan of the fact that Iowa is not going to be in the same division as Minnesota and Wisconsin anymore with the current plan. If we could pull Texas as well then I think we could yank some other schools and get to 20. With that Iowa could remain in division with Minny and Wisky but alas, that is not in the cards.

We will get used to our new rivals. I actually think that Iowa vs Kansas could get interesting.

I'm not sure about Texas being such a long shot, but I'll admit the odds are against it.

I can't see Texas following A&M to the SEC. The PAC would be a possibility but only if the PAC takes a sufficient number of other teams with them (and it seems Baylor and TCU would not be acceptable), Even then travel in three time zones would be a pain for all the sports that play more than once a week.

An ND type deal with the ACC works only if Texas can get a national deal like ND has with NBC, but I don't see Texas having the same kind of 'national' presence that Catholic ND has. Joining the ACC as a member would be a possibility, perhaps more appealing than the PAC, but if that's the case, then why not the BIG?

I'd love to see the Nebraska - Oklahoma game renewed at Thanksgiving as a BIG classic. Iowa - Kansas just seems like a natural one too.

(07-07-2015 12:26 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  I'm not sure about Texas being such a long shot, but I'll admit the odds are against it.

I can't see Texas following A&M to the SEC. The PAC would be a possibility but only if the PAC takes a sufficient number of other teams with them (and it seems Baylor and TCU would not be acceptable), Even then travel in three time zones would be a pain for all the sports that play more than once a week.

An ND type deal with the ACC works only if Texas can get a national deal like ND has with NBC, but I don't see Texas having the same kind of 'national' presence that Catholic ND has. Joining the ACC as a member would be a possibility, perhaps more appealing than the PAC, but if that's the case, then why not the BIG?

I'd love to see the Nebraska - Oklahoma game renewed at Thanksgiving as a BIG classic. Iowa - Kansas just seems like a natural one too.

Texas wont go to the SEC for multiple reasons, one very big one is because The Aggies went first. They also wont agree in principle to any agreement if it means that Oklahoma goes to The SEC. They would rather make Oklahoma sit around for another decade if they are going to do that and Texas knows Boren doesn't want to sit around for another decade.

Texas already said they don't want to go to the PAC. There isn't any grouping of schools that makes it any better if Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech wasn't enough. The PAC Network is garbage, Texas wont give up the LHN for that. An ESPN backed ACC Network though? Texas wanted to see the roll out of the SEC Network. They saw it and what is not to like about it?

The NBC deal is a nice pay day but it's unnecessary and the ratings on NBC have been sliding for quite some time. With the new flexibility of that schedule, Texas will be able to get themselves on ABC quite often.

Texas vs Oklahoma
Texas vs Notre Dame (NBC or ABC)
Texas vs Texas Tech
Texas vs Baylor
Texas vs UCLA
Texas vs Florida State
Texas vs Clemson
Texas vs North Carolina
Texas vs Louisville
Texas vs Virginia
Texas vs Virginia Tech

It's Texas mixed with East Coast viewership. It's huge and that is something that most folks on these boards just don't understand.

The ACC has a Southern Contingent and is seen as being ran by that Southern Contingent because that is the history of the ACC. That isn't the case for The Big Ten. Some folks running UT actually would prefer to join The Big Ten, they have actually talked, but the cultural explosion to happen after such a move is just too frightening for them. Austin might burn to the ground. I'm only being slightly sarcastic with those last too comments.

Would rather add Miami than anybody left in the B12 except Texas but as has been stated the likelihood of Texas coming to the Big 10 is slight. Just as much talent in Florida as Texas and Miami is in a major market with thousands of Big 10 alums nearby which would do wonders for their attendance.

Lots of B10 programs would love to go to Miami in November and during basketball season.

Miami does very little research.

I feel like Miami is a white whale. Everyone thought all they needed was to join the ACC and then they'd take off. I don't thing the Big Ten would suddenly be the magic that makes fans show up.

(07-07-2015 12:44 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 12:26 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  I'm not sure about Texas being such a long shot, but I'll admit the odds are against it.

I can't see Texas following A&M to the SEC. The PAC would be a possibility but only if the PAC takes a sufficient number of other teams with them (and it seems Baylor and TCU would not be acceptable), Even then travel in three time zones would be a pain for all the sports that play more than once a week.

An ND type deal with the ACC works only if Texas can get a national deal like ND has with NBC, but I don't see Texas having the same kind of 'national' presence that Catholic ND has. Joining the ACC as a member would be a possibility, perhaps more appealing than the PAC, but if that's the case, then why not the BIG?

I'd love to see the Nebraska - Oklahoma game renewed at Thanksgiving as a BIG classic. Iowa - Kansas just seems like a natural one too.

Texas wont go to the SEC for multiple reasons, one very big one is because The Aggies went first. They also wont agree in principle to any agreement if it means that Oklahoma goes to The SEC. They would rather make Oklahoma sit around for another decade if they are going to do that and Texas knows Boren doesn't want to sit around for another decade.

Texas already said they don't want to go to the PAC. There isn't any grouping of schools that makes it any better if Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech wasn't enough. The PAC Network is garbage, Texas wont give up the LHN for that. An ESPN backed ACC Network though? Texas wanted to see the roll out of the SEC Network. They saw it and what is not to like about it?

The NBC deal is a nice pay day but it's unnecessary and the ratings on NBC have been sliding for quite some time. With the new flexibility of that schedule, Texas will be able to get themselves on ABC quite often.

Texas vs Oklahoma
Texas vs Notre Dame (NBC or ABC)
Texas vs Texas Tech
Texas vs Baylor
Texas vs UCLA
Texas vs Florida State
Texas vs Clemson
Texas vs North Carolina
Texas vs Louisville
Texas vs Virginia
Texas vs Virginia Tech

It's Texas mixed with East Coast viewership. It's huge and that is something that most folks on these boards just don't understand.

The ACC has a Southern Contingent and is seen as being ran by that Southern Contingent because that is the history of the ACC. That isn't the case for The Big Ten. Some folks running UT actually would prefer to join The Big Ten, they have actually talked, but the cultural explosion to happen after such a move is just too frightening for them. Austin might burn to the ground. I'm only being slightly sarcastic with those last too comments.

I'm not familiar enough with the Network contracts to know the answer, but I assume ND gets its revenue from the NBC contract (essentially equivalent to a tier 1 deal) and a partial payment from the ACC for playing games against ACC teams.

If Texas became a partial member, could they duplicate the arrangement? The LHN contract pays $15 million but could Texas even sell home game rights to a national network without violating the LHN deal? Maybe they would get a partial payment from the ACC too, but either way, I think the partial member scenario gets complicated for Texas.

If Texas goes to the ACC as a full member, I could see the LHN being used as the base for an ACCN. If we do get down to only P4 conferences, then ND will be forced to join the ACC as a member. None of the others will offer ND a partial membership and, with its options and path to a CFP slot limited, ND would take an ACC conference slot over the SEC (not a cultural fit), PAC (major travel issues), or BIG (a bit of bad blood combined with a genuine ND preference for a conference with BC in it and a bigger east coast presence). With ND and its nationwide alumni and fan base, the ACCN would be a monster hit.

Texas could do exact as Notre Dame does. The LHN isn't Tier 1 equivalent. Texas would have their 6-7 ooc games to sell off as they see fit. Would the likes of NBC be willing to offer them the same deal that they have with Notre Dame? I don't know if it would be the same but they might very well be willing to do that especially if the Texas ooc schedule is strong. The LHN would be rolled into an ACCN either way. An ACCN could be better monetized by far.

(07-07-2015 12:44 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 12:26 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  I'm not sure about Texas being such a long shot, but I'll admit the odds are against it.

I can't see Texas following A&M to the SEC. The PAC would be a possibility but only if the PAC takes a sufficient number of other teams with them (and it seems Baylor and TCU would not be acceptable), Even then travel in three time zones would be a pain for all the sports that play more than once a week.

An ND type deal with the ACC works only if Texas can get a national deal like ND has with NBC, but I don't see Texas having the same kind of 'national' presence that Catholic ND has. Joining the ACC as a member would be a possibility, perhaps more appealing than the PAC, but if that's the case, then why not the BIG?

I'd love to see the Nebraska - Oklahoma game renewed at Thanksgiving as a BIG classic. Iowa - Kansas just seems like a natural one too.

Texas wont go to the SEC for multiple reasons, one very big one is because The Aggies went first. They also wont agree in principle to any agreement if it means that Oklahoma goes to The SEC. They would rather make Oklahoma sit around for another decade if they are going to do that and Texas knows Boren doesn't want to sit around for another decade.

Texas already said they don't want to go to the PAC. There isn't any grouping of schools that makes it any better if Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech wasn't enough. The PAC Network is garbage, Texas wont give up the LHN for that. An ESPN backed ACC Network though? Texas wanted to see the roll out of the SEC Network. They saw it and what is not to like about it?

The NBC deal is a nice pay day but it's unnecessary and the ratings on NBC have been sliding for quite some time. With the new flexibility of that schedule, Texas will be able to get themselves on ABC quite often.

Texas vs Oklahoma
Texas vs Notre Dame (NBC or ABC)
Texas vs Texas Tech
Texas vs Baylor
Texas vs UCLA
Texas vs Florida State
Texas vs Clemson
Texas vs North Carolina
Texas vs Louisville
Texas vs Virginia
Texas vs Virginia Tech

It's Texas mixed with East Coast viewership. It's huge and that is something that most folks on these boards just don't understand.

The ACC has a Southern Contingent and is seen as being ran by that Southern Contingent because that is the history of the ACC. That isn't the case for The Big Ten. Some folks running UT actually would prefer to join The Big Ten, they have actually talked, but the cultural explosion to happen after such a move is just too frightening for them. Austin might burn to the ground. I'm only being slightly sarcastic with those last too comments.

Austin and UT itself would fit in just fine with Big Ten from a cultural, institutional and academic standpoint. The athletic department is used to ruling the roost which will not fly in the Big Ten where power is probably the most evenly distributed of the major conferences. The state culturally doesn't fit so well with say Illinois, NJ, PA, Maryland or Ohio. It's probably an OK fit with Iowa and Nebraska.

I happen to agree that Boren's goal all along has been to get Okie into the Big Ten. The Big Ten I'm sure would gladly take them provided there is no Okie State coming along with them.

(07-08-2015 12:37 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 12:44 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 12:26 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  I'm not sure about Texas being such a long shot, but I'll admit the odds are against it.

I can't see Texas following A&M to the SEC. The PAC would be a possibility but only if the PAC takes a sufficient number of other teams with them (and it seems Baylor and TCU would not be acceptable), Even then travel in three time zones would be a pain for all the sports that play more than once a week.

An ND type deal with the ACC works only if Texas can get a national deal like ND has with NBC, but I don't see Texas having the same kind of 'national' presence that Catholic ND has. Joining the ACC as a member would be a possibility, perhaps more appealing than the PAC, but if that's the case, then why not the BIG?

I'd love to see the Nebraska - Oklahoma game renewed at Thanksgiving as a BIG classic. Iowa - Kansas just seems like a natural one too.

Texas wont go to the SEC for multiple reasons, one very big one is because The Aggies went first. They also wont agree in principle to any agreement if it means that Oklahoma goes to The SEC. They would rather make Oklahoma sit around for another decade if they are going to do that and Texas knows Boren doesn't want to sit around for another decade.

Texas already said they don't want to go to the PAC. There isn't any grouping of schools that makes it any better if Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech wasn't enough. The PAC Network is garbage, Texas wont give up the LHN for that. An ESPN backed ACC Network though? Texas wanted to see the roll out of the SEC Network. They saw it and what is not to like about it?

The NBC deal is a nice pay day but it's unnecessary and the ratings on NBC have been sliding for quite some time. With the new flexibility of that schedule, Texas will be able to get themselves on ABC quite often.

Texas vs Oklahoma
Texas vs Notre Dame (NBC or ABC)
Texas vs Texas Tech
Texas vs Baylor
Texas vs UCLA
Texas vs Florida State
Texas vs Clemson
Texas vs North Carolina
Texas vs Louisville
Texas vs Virginia
Texas vs Virginia Tech

It's Texas mixed with East Coast viewership. It's huge and that is something that most folks on these boards just don't understand.

The ACC has a Southern Contingent and is seen as being ran by that Southern Contingent because that is the history of the ACC. That isn't the case for The Big Ten. Some folks running UT actually would prefer to join The Big Ten, they have actually talked, but the cultural explosion to happen after such a move is just too frightening for them. Austin might burn to the ground. I'm only being slightly sarcastic with those last too comments.

I'm not familiar enough with the Network contracts to know the answer, but I assume ND gets its revenue from the NBC contract (essentially equivalent to a tier 1 deal) and a partial payment from the ACC for playing games against ACC teams.

If Texas became a partial member, could they duplicate the arrangement? The LHN contract pays $15 million but could Texas even sell home game rights to a national network without violating the LHN deal? Maybe they would get a partial payment from the ACC too, but either way, I think the partial member scenario gets complicated for Texas.

If Texas goes to the ACC as a full member, I could see the LHN being used as the base for an ACCN. If we do get down to only P4 conferences, then ND will be forced to join the ACC as a member. None of the others will offer ND a partial membership and, with its options and path to a CFP slot limited, ND would take an ACC conference slot over the SEC (not a cultural fit), PAC (major travel issues), or BIG (a bit of bad blood combined with a genuine ND preference for a conference with BC in it and a bigger east coast presence). With ND and its nationwide alumni and fan base, the ACCN would be a monster hit.

I'm pretty sure I can speak for the Domers when I say they could care less about BC being in the conference when making that decision. Its a nice bonus for them to have old football rivals such as Pitt, BC, Miami, Georgia Tech and other teams that they've developed a recent interest in playing in Syracuse, North Carolina and Florida State in the ACC. But ultimately its about East Coast (read as literally Maine to Florida not Northeastern + Virginia) exposure for them, if they are ever forced to join a conference.

So assuming there are some legs to this Oklahoma to the Big Ten rumor. What's everyone's take?

(07-07-2015 08:27 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I feel like Miami is a white whale. Everyone thought all they needed was to join the ACC and then they'd take off. I don't thing the Big Ten would suddenly be the magic that makes fans show up.

They have unique challenges in that even Miami's pro teams don't draw that well (even the Heat's # were down this year). There are thousands of B10 alums in Florida who would likely attend their alma mater's games in Miami along with the fact that Michigan, MSU, OSU, PSU, Wisky, Iowa & Nebraska travel well. Lots of fans would rather be in Miami rooting on their football team in November or Hoops program in Jan, Feb or March than freezing at home watching them on TV.

Having a program in So FLA would help B10 recruiting in most sports

(07-09-2015 01:04 PM)brista21 Wrote:  So assuming there are some legs to this Oklahoma to the Big Ten rumor. What's everyone's take?

Oklahoma adds little to the B10. Small in state population, not much talent in any sport. No

(07-09-2015 01:08 PM)Policiious Wrote:  

(07-07-2015 08:27 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I feel like Miami is a white whale. Everyone thought all they needed was to join the ACC and then they'd take off. I don't thing the Big Ten would suddenly be the magic that makes fans show up.

They have unique challenges in that even Miami's pro teams don't draw that well (even the Heat's # were down this year). There are thousands of B10 alums in Florida who would likely attend their alma mater's games in Miami along with the fact that Michigan, MSU, OSU, PSU, Wisky, Iowa & Nebraska travel well. Lots of fans would rather be in Miami rooting on their football team in November or Hoops program in Jan, Feb or March than freezing at home watching them on TV.

Having a program in So FLA would help B10 recruiting in most sports

Having a school in Florida would help the Big Ten in recruiting (depending on the school) but that's why the Big Ten has been focusing on these camps that they co-host in the south.

People said the EXACT same thing when Miami was joining the ACC. Just substitute the Big Ten schools in for Florida State, Clemson, UNC, Georgia Tech, etc. Miami needed schools that they were close to, not a bunch of northeastern schools. The Big Ten may help some, but history is not on Miami's side. Why don't you look at a historic attendance records and compare Big Ten schools at Miami compared to Miami's average attendance that year?

(07-09-2015 01:10 PM)Policiious Wrote:  

(07-09-2015 01:04 PM)brista21 Wrote:  So assuming there are some legs to this Oklahoma to the Big Ten rumor. What's everyone's take?

Oklahoma adds little to the B10. Small in state population, not much talent in any sport. No

You want to know what Oklahoma adds? Just look at our two divisions right now? You cant argue that they are equal, especially now that Harbaugh is at Michigan.

When we split into four divisions after expansion, Oklahoma will make their division equivalent to the others.

Not EVERY move is about a big market. Nebraska wasn't. Oklahoma and Kansas wont be either. They are what are called "Brand Expansions". You need markets and you need Brands to present in those markets.

Talk to Rutgers fans about what schools they are most excited to see come to town. You will of course get Penn State at the top of that list. Right after that is Ohio State and Michigan. I have seen a lot of enthusiasm from Rutgers folks about Nebraska coming to town.

Why is that? Because of National Brand recognition. Oklahoma has that as well. Oklahoma brings a lot to the Big Ten.

(07-09-2015 01:04 PM)brista21 Wrote:  So assuming there are some legs to this Oklahoma to the Big Ten rumor. What's everyone's take?

Myopically, I think Oklahoma in the Big Ten is a major grab. I think it would be great to have a national brand added to the Big Ten which gets about as strong of a foothold in the state of Texas as possible without getting Texas or the other schools that aren't attractive for academic or athletic reasons. Oklahoma isn't a basketball power though they have recently shown signs of life.

I believe that adding Oklahoma would have a majorly positive impact on Nebraska. Nebraska would have a familiar rival that they miss, and it could be a featured rivalry that puts them in the national spotlight in addition to reforging some of the recruiting inroads they made down south.

But my excitement would greatly diminish based on who came along with Oklahoma. If Oklahoma State came with "big brother," I'd be disappointed. Same goes for pretty much any Texas school other than Texas, which I know is a VERY long shot at best. Kansas is adequate. They have a basketball program that is nearly unmatched but football... And pretty much every other Big 12 school would make me vomit as a fan. UConn does nothing for me. I see that they are an overall good school with many things to like but are unfortunately located in the northeast.