(06-19-2021 12:06 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I like the Oklahoma/Kansas pairing in the Big Ten for a lot of reasons. Personally, I think Oklahoma has just as good a chance at making the field of 12 in a loaded Big Ten as they do in the Big 12–granted there won’t be as many first found byes.

There’s also the $20M/yr pay bump to consider too.

Personally I like Kansas and Missouri to the B1G, with Oklahoma and others going to the SEC.

(06-19-2021 12:21 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-19-2021 12:06 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I like the Oklahoma/Kansas pairing in the Big Ten for a lot of reasons. Personally, I think Oklahoma has just as good a chance at making the field of 12 in a loaded Big Ten as they do in the Big 12–granted there won’t be as many first found byes.

There’s also the $20M/yr pay bump to consider too.

Personally I like Kansas and Missouri to the B1G, with Oklahoma and others going to the SEC.

Assuming Texas refuses to go to the Big 10 or SEC and wants to stay and go down with the Big 12 ship, I'd say Oklahoma goes to the SEC alone and they stay at 14. Of course the SEC would either have to put Oklahoma in Missouri's spot in the East or juggle things around. It might be OK then to move Alabama and Auburn to the East and Vanderbilt to the West since Oklahoma will be able to balance out the West with LSU and Texas A&M. As for the Big 10, Purdue moves over to the East.

I will always be against more Big 10 members west of the Mississippi. I'm not stupid though. If Texas brings the Big 10 a boatload of cash I'll drop my objection in a hurry. If Oklahoma and Kansas do I would as well. I just don't think they will bring as much money as Oklahoma and Texas together would. Texas might have the ego but they are the second most populous state and tons of eyeballs. FOX, ESPN, CBS will pay the Big Ten way more for two extra members if one of those two is the University of Texas, plain and simple. Oklahoma is great now. 10-20 years from now they can be the next Nebraska. Texas will attract viewers if they're 7-5. Oklahoma won't. If I'm Illinois's or Penn State's president, I'm only going to vote for two extra members if it is a net financial positive for my school. If the network(s) can convince me Oklahoma/Kansas is a net financial positive, my ears will listen. Otherwise, no deal. There are a few academic dead weights I would probably say no to regardless of $ and I'd certainly negotiate for other options if I could.

(06-19-2021 12:21 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-19-2021 12:06 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I like the Oklahoma/Kansas pairing in the Big Ten for a lot of reasons. Personally, I think Oklahoma has just as good a chance at making the field of 12 in a loaded Big Ten as they do in the Big 12–granted there won’t be as many first found byes.

There’s also the $20M/yr pay bump to consider too.

Personally I like Kansas and Missouri to the B1G, with Oklahoma and others going to the SEC.

The Big Ten isn’t going to go for that. There will be no Big Ten expansion without a blue chip program in the mix. Why would the Big Ten facilitate creating an opening in the SEC to swap a lower value program with an elite one?

(06-18-2021 07:23 PM)johnintx Wrote:  Look out for the OU Tier 3 deal. It is currently with Bally Sports/Sinclair, having moved over from Fox when the regional networks were sold. Sinclair overpaid for the RSNs, and may not be in a position to renew. If ESPN gets OU's Tier 3 rights, either short-term or long-term, they can either do something with the Big 12 or they can move it over to the SEC Network at the proper time. However, if Fox is involved, they can move into a deal with the B1G Network.

Would Oklahoma reconsider a "Texas-Oklahoma" network while in the Big XII? , The equity arrangement would have to be worked out, but the network would immediately have twice as much content available to it. ESPN would be able to tie distribution of it with the SEC and ACC Networks.

(06-19-2021 12:21 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-19-2021 12:06 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I like the Oklahoma/Kansas pairing in the Big Ten for a lot of reasons. Personally, I think Oklahoma has just as good a chance at making the field of 12 in a loaded Big Ten as they do in the Big 12–granted there won’t be as many first found byes.

There’s also the $20M/yr pay bump to consider too.

Personally I like Kansas and Missouri to the B1G, with Oklahoma and others going to the SEC.

If you are the B1G, IMO you might consider OU and Missouri, but never Kansas and Missouri. I doubt that OU would consider going to the B1G without either OK State or Texas or both. And I doubt the B1G would go all the way with OU, OK State, UT and Missouri but it's not a bad option. It would leave the SEC with no good choices to replace Missouri (assuming Mizzou would agree to leave).

I would think B10 is more interested in NC and VA.
That's why they took MD.
As long as Tex and Oklahoma are in top 10 earnings,
Why would they look elsewhere.

(06-19-2021 12:38 PM)schmolik Wrote:  ... I will always be against more Big 10 members west of the Mississippi. I'm not stupid though. If Texas brings the Big 10 a boatload of cash I'll drop my objection in a hurry. If Oklahoma and Kansas do I would as well. I just don't think they will bring as much money as Oklahoma and Texas together would. ...

Not saying Oklahoma and Kansas in preference to Oklahoma and Texas ... heck, it's still the Big Ten, it would be Texas and Kansas in preference to Texas and Oklahoma to some of the worst academic snobs in the conference.

I'm not even saying they definitely would take Oklahoma and Kansas, though with the Big Ten having equity in the BTN, Kansas has an extra appeal that they might not have for other conferences.

But if the Longhorns are not on offer and the Sooners are, the other school they might consider to come along with Oklahoma is Kansas. Not Oklahoma State.

(06-20-2021 12:21 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  I would think B10 is more interested in NC and VA.
That's why they took MD.
As long as Tex and Oklahoma are in top 10 earnings,
Why would they look elsewhere.

If we were still on a market driven model then those states are attractive but we aren’t. Expansion candidates need to add actual eyeballs, not just potential ones. I really hope the Big Ten stays out of the Tidewater because I don’t think UNC and UVA offer the Big Ten what they need, as neither is a strong football power. (I still maintain that Rutgers and Maryland were bad additions).

(06-20-2021 06:53 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(06-20-2021 12:21 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  I would think B10 is more interested in NC and VA.
That's why they took MD.
As long as Tex and Oklahoma are in top 10 earnings,
Why would they look elsewhere.

If we were still on a market driven model then those states are attractive but we aren’t. Expansion candidates need to add actual eyeballs, not just potential ones. I really hope the Big Ten stays out of the Tidewater because I don’t think UNC and UVA offer the Big Ten what they need, as neither is a strong football power. (I still maintain that Rutgers and Maryland were bad additions).

Fortunately it is silly to argue that the Big Ten took Maryland only because they were hoping for UVA and UNC down the track ... they took Maryland because they are the University of Maryland, and because of the Big Ten alumni in DC.

I don't actually lump the Maryland add and the Rutgers add together ... Rutgers has been if anything a worse dumpster fire than predicted, but Maryland brings more to the conference than Rutgers does, and it seems like that's going to continue.

But if their #14 was going to be a school like Rutgers, it sure is a shame that Maryland couldn't jump when there were Big XII schools available if offered a safe landing spot.

(06-20-2021 06:53 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(06-20-2021 12:21 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  I would think B10 is more interested in NC and VA.
That's why they took MD.
As long as Tex and Oklahoma are in top 10 earnings,
Why would they look elsewhere.

If we were still on a market driven model then those states are attractive but we aren’t. Expansion candidates need to add actual eyeballs, not just potential ones. I really hope the Big Ten stays out of the Tidewater because I don’t think UNC and UVA offer the Big Ten what they need, as neither is a strong football power. (I still maintain that Rutgers and Maryland were bad additions).

and vice versa.....

(06-18-2021 04:11 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(06-18-2021 02:06 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-18-2021 11:00 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  OU wanted to get out of the Big 12 before, didn’t they? I don’t think the playoff expansion would affect OU’s decision much. The real question is whether the media would pay enough for the Big 12 and OU to be competitive with the SEC and the BIG and whether these two conference would take OU without UT.

I don't know how accurate that statement is. I do think it can be said that OU's former president, David Boren, used the threat of leaving as negotiating leverage. And, he might not have been happy with how OU was viewed compared with how UT was viewed by both fans and media. But he is now long gone and in disgrace, so who knows what the PTB at OU want today?

Didn’t OU want to join the PAC 12 with or without UT in 2011? I believe they filed an actual application.

You are right in that Boren is gone and we don’t know what’s OU’s current thinking. But why did OU want to leave at the first place?

I guess money, stability, and less political dominance from UT were the reasons. That’s probably why A&M left.

Now the question is: have these issues been addressed or not?

Random.....Yes, OU wanted out of the Big12 in 2011 when the conference appeared to be falling apart.....everybody was looking around. Nebraska, Colorado and A&M had already left, Boren's rhetoric scared Missouri into the SEC, Kansas and some of the rest of the Big12 were talking with the BigEast. Boren wanted in the Big10 and reportedly had discussions with the Big. Boren and apparently Scott tried to bluff UT into joining the PAC with OU and OSU. Dodds called their bluff.

Random, without any doubt the SEC would take OU without UT. In fact according to Boren the SEC reached out to OU at that time. Whether the BIG would take OU without Texas is questionable.

Ken and Random, as I have said before, the PTB at OU want the Big10, it is just that simple. Don't take my word for it, just keep up with the news in the State. Also Ken, OU would definitely join the Big10 without either OSU or Texas. No way is the Big offering OSU.

(06-20-2021 03:39 PM)texoma Wrote:  Ken and Random, as I have said before, the PTB at OU want the Big10, it is just that simple. Don't take my word for it, just keep up with the news in the State. Also Ken, OU would definitely join the Big10 without either OSU or Texas. No way is the Big offering OSU.

Which is interesting. The question is whether the academic snobbery which would have blocked Oklahoma in the last round has sufficiently weakened to allow Oklahoma to be the lead school in the move, rather than being allowed in as the price of getting Texas. If Oklahoma would prefer the Big Ten, and if Big Ten would offer the invite even if its with Kansas rather than Texas, I don't think there's much doubt Kansas would take the invite.

(06-20-2021 06:30 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(06-20-2021 03:39 PM)texoma Wrote:  Ken and Random, as I have said before, the PTB at OU want the Big10, it is just that simple. Don't take my word for it, just keep up with the news in the State. Also Ken, OU would definitely join the Big10 without either OSU or Texas. No way is the Big offering OSU.

Which is interesting. The question is whether the academic snobbery which would have blocked Oklahoma in the last round has sufficiently weakened to allow Oklahoma to be the lead school in the move, rather than being allowed in as the price of getting Texas. If Oklahoma would prefer the Big Ten, and if Big Ten would offer the invite even if its with Kansas rather than Texas, I don't think there's much doubt Kansas would take the invite.

I think it would be on the table. OU helps the TV contract. KU is AAU, and brings academic credibility. KU is actually someone you want in your conference: an easy football win, elite basketball, flagship university.

I don't see UT going to the B1G. KU is OU's only ticket into the B1G.

The SEC can offer OSU, while the B1G will not. OU is not legally tied to OSU, and is less politically tied to them than 10 years ago. Nonetheless, the current governor is a native of Norman but is a graduate of OSU. Whether he would intervene remains to be seen.

OU's administration definitely prefers the B1G. The fans and athletic donors would prefer the SEC. The politicians, if they get a say, would be pushed to the SEC.

It's a bidding war and no one knows who will win.

(06-20-2021 03:39 PM)texoma Wrote:  Ken and Random, as I have said before, the PTB at OU want the Big10, it is just that simple. Don't take my word for it, just keep up with the news in the State. Also Ken, OU would definitely join the Big10 without either OSU or Texas. No way is the Big offering OSU.

So, what if you are wrong and the B1G offered OU and KS (possibly after being rebuffed by UT), and decided to keep their 9 game conference schedule with 7 division games and 2 crossovers.

OU would likely be in a division with : Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Illinois and Kansas

Would the Sooners continue to schedule both OSU and UT OOC? They would no longer have 7 home games every year if they do. And if not, which one would they drop?

(06-20-2021 07:12 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-20-2021 03:39 PM)texoma Wrote:  Ken and Random, as I have said before, the PTB at OU want the Big10, it is just that simple. Don't take my word for it, just keep up with the news in the State. Also Ken, OU would definitely join the Big10 without either OSU or Texas. No way is the Big offering OSU.

So, what if you are wrong and the B1G offered OU and KS (possibly after being rebuffed by UT), and decided to keep their 9 game conference schedule with 7 division games and 2 crossovers.

OU would likely be in a division with : Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Illinois and Kansas

Would the Sooners continue to schedule both OSU and UT OOC? They would no longer have 7 home games every year if they do. And if not, which one would they drop?

OU will always play Texas. Period. The identity of the athletic department, the university, and the state (except for those who wear orange) is wrapped around that Saturday in September. The OU-Texas game is a large fundraising opportunity and is a point of state pride.

OU and OSU have a good institutional relationship. OU fans look down on OSU, especially in football, and are ambivalent about playing them. Conversely, OU is OSU's biggest rival. The politicians in Oklahoma would intervene to make sure the two play.

In addition, that geographical division alignment offers nothing to the Oklahoma fan base. Wisconsin would be a tough game every year. Nebraska is an old classic rival. None of those schools are chopped liver, but they are not names that would drive season ticket sales and donations among the Oklahoma fan base. Nor are they easy travel destinations for Oklahoma fans and alumni. Oklahoma fans, by and large, would rather stay in the Big 12 than play in the B1G West. However, crossover games with Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would move the needle.

The B1G would have to move to a divisionless pod system where OU, Nebraska, and Kansas would be in the same pod for an OU-B1G marriage to work.

(06-20-2021 07:33 PM)johnintx Wrote:  

(06-20-2021 07:12 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-20-2021 03:39 PM)texoma Wrote:  Ken and Random, as I have said before, the PTB at OU want the Big10, it is just that simple. Don't take my word for it, just keep up with the news in the State. Also Ken, OU would definitely join the Big10 without either OSU or Texas. No way is the Big offering OSU.

So, what if you are wrong and the B1G offered OU and KS (possibly after being rebuffed by UT), and decided to keep their 9 game conference schedule with 7 division games and 2 crossovers.

OU would likely be in a division with : Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Illinois and Kansas

Would the Sooners continue to schedule both OSU and UT OOC? They would no longer have 7 home games every year if they do. And if not, which one would they drop?

OU will always play Texas. Period. The identity of the athletic department, the university, and the state (except for those who wear orange) is wrapped around that Saturday in September. The OU-Texas game is a large fundraising opportunity and is a point of state pride.

OU and OSU have a good institutional relationship. OU fans look down on OSU, especially in football, and are ambivalent about playing them. Conversely, OU is OSU's biggest rival. The politicians in Oklahoma would intervene to make sure the two play.

In addition, that geographical division alignment offers nothing to the Oklahoma fan base. Wisconsin would be a tough game every year. Nebraska is an old classic rival. None of those schools are chopped liver, but they are not names that would drive season ticket sales and donations among the Oklahoma fan base. Nor are they easy travel destinations for Oklahoma fans and alumni. Oklahoma fans, by and large, would rather stay in the Big 12 than play in the B1G West. However, crossover games with Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would move the needle.

The B1G would have to move to a divisionless pod system where OU, Nebraska, and Kansas would be in the same pod for an OU-B1G marriage to work.

I wonder if Texas would feel the same way if they were looking at giving up a home game and having to accommodate a different conference's schedule.

(06-20-2021 08:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  I wonder if Texas would feel the same way if they were looking at giving up a home game and having to accommodate a different conference's schedule.

Hard to tell. Texas doesn't plan around anyone. Texas does what's best for Texas. But, they've already lost their other two biggest rivals (A&M and Arkansas). I'm not sure if they're willing to lose a third.

The Red River Rivalry is a really big deal for them, too. It's a big fundraiser for them as well as for OU. But, I'm not sure if they wouldn't back out if it meant rearranging their schedule for a bigger payday in another conference.

(06-20-2021 07:12 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-20-2021 03:39 PM)texoma Wrote:  Ken and Random, as I have said before, the PTB at OU want the Big10, it is just that simple. Don't take my word for it, just keep up with the news in the State. Also Ken, OU would definitely join the Big10 without either OSU or Texas. No way is the Big offering OSU.

So, what if you are wrong and the B1G offered OU and KS (possibly after being rebuffed by UT), and decided to keep their 9 game conference schedule with 7 division games and 2 crossovers.

OU would likely be in a division with : Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Illinois and Kansas

Would the Sooners continue to schedule both OSU and UT OOC? They would no longer have 7 home games every year if they do. And if not, which one would they drop?

With the new 12 team CFP there is already talk about the advantages of conferences dropping the divisions. Even if divisions continue to exist, then I would say OU would keep both OSU and UT on their schedule. They would still have 7 home games every other year and 6 home games the other years with one buy game each year..

(06-20-2021 10:27 PM)texoma Wrote:  With the new 12 team CFP there is already talk about the advantages of conferences dropping the divisions. Even if divisions continue to exist, then I would say OU would keep both OSU and UT on their schedule. They would still have 7 home games every other year and 6 home games the other years with one buy game each year..

Well, if the RRR stays at the Cotton Bowl, that actually is, with the number of Sooner alumni and supporters in the DFW area ... I don't know whether it is a neutral site game formally, or whether the formal host rotates, but the de facto reality would be that if they host Bedlam when 4H/5A Big Ten games, add a buy game and they have 6H, 1 Neutral Site.

Of course, this is all part of a cunning plan by the OSU Computer Science folks to increase the Big Ten to 16 schools so that the conference becomes the Big 0h10.

(06-20-2021 10:27 PM)texoma Wrote:  

(06-20-2021 07:12 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-20-2021 03:39 PM)texoma Wrote:  Ken and Random, as I have said before, the PTB at OU want the Big10, it is just that simple. Don't take my word for it, just keep up with the news in the State. Also Ken, OU would definitely join the Big10 without either OSU or Texas. No way is the Big offering OSU.

So, what if you are wrong and the B1G offered OU and KS (possibly after being rebuffed by UT), and decided to keep their 9 game conference schedule with 7 division games and 2 crossovers.

OU would likely be in a division with : Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Illinois and Kansas

Would the Sooners continue to schedule both OSU and UT OOC? They would no longer have 7 home games every year if they do. And if not, which one would they drop?

With the new 12 team CFP there is already talk about the advantages of conferences dropping the divisions. Even if divisions continue to exist, then I would say OU would keep both OSU and UT on their schedule. They would still have 7 home games every other year and 6 home games the other years with one buy game each year..

What would be better, IMO, for OU is not to go to the B1G where their academics will always be (unfairly) denigrated by the snobbish Big Ten schools. If, instead, they went with Kansas to the SEC, their division would look like this:

Oklahoma, LSU, Texas A&M, Mississippi State, Missouri, Ole Miss, Arkansas and Kansas

And with an 8 game SEC schedule they could keep both OK State and Texas every year and still have two buy games for a 7 game home schedule every year. That's a lineup of opponents that I believe would be much more satisfying to OU's fans than the B1G one, and their academics would fit like a glove compared to the B1G.

For the SEC's part, they weaken the Big 12, strengthen their own eastern division by putting Bama and Auburn in it, and add a foil to Kentucky in hoops that elevates that sport's stature even more than their recent success has.

Then, my only questions would be whether the Big 12 would remain at only 8 teams or whether they would add two replacements and where those replacements would come from. Any G5 school would weaken them, though not so much as to keep them close to the SEC in top to bottom strength. Could they attract anyone from the PAC 12? I doubt it.