(07-29-2021 08:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ... I believe the B10 will move on the ACC in concert with the SEC and that they'll take 6 to get to 20. The SEC will take 4. ...

And plenty of time before 1931/1932 to get the CCG fully deregulated.

(07-28-2021 01:38 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-28-2021 12:28 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-27-2021 11:38 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  There is I think a good chance OU was being courted by the B1G, who thought Spring/Summer 2022 was the year they need to start to close the deal, not summer 2021, as that was when they would be negotiating the last three years of Sooner TV, nominally run by Fox, but actually administered by the Big Ten Network.

The thing is ... as insane as it is, it seems quite possible that the six academic snobs would put their vanity ahead of the long term interests of the Big Ten and say they would only reluctantly accept Oklahoma, but only if they were the tagalong for Texas.

And even worse, it is possible that after deliberation, they flat out vetoed Oklahoma. It really only takes three of the group to be opposed, and the whole group will vote no.

So while Texas gazumping a possible Oklahoma move to the Big Ten is certainly plausible, it's also plausible that Oklahoma decided try for the Big Ten, despite the scheduling problems, and were turned down. At that point, Oklahoma going to the SEC may well be the driver.

Now, it was always one of the possibilities, and with the SEC the only practical alternative destination for Texas, and with Presidents being risk-averse, the Longhorns would have been in discussion with ESPN as to contingencies with the Longhorn network if the Longhorns "were to" move to the SEC, in either case.

Never underestimate the ability of those who live in an idealistic bubble to screw up!
Sound business isn't a theory. It is a real world, real time discipline.
The quick cancellation of the B1G's season last year sent chills through OU's athletic department when they saw their once proud rival berated and shut down. This is a recurrent theme in many of their conversations.

Excellent point. Everyone pretty much knew, for the better part of a decade as we approached the end of the Big12 TV deal, that OU and Texas were gone to either the BIG or the SEC. Amazing that anyone should be surprised.

(07-30-2021 06:14 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-29-2021 08:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ... I believe the B10 will move on the ACC in concert with the SEC and that they'll take 6 to get to 20. The SEC will take 4. ...

And plenty of time before 1931/1932 to get the CCG fully deregulated.

Do you mean 2031/2032 ?

(07-30-2021 12:32 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-29-2021 11:46 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recr...=164793190
The John Skipper interview talks a lot about the things JR is discussing.

Except he's still talking market footprint which was big in his day but past major importance. He'd have you ignore a second major brand in the same market and branding is where the money is now. Still a good listen all in all.

Yes, but market does matter indirectly. Population doesn't mean you have viewership, but it is a major help. One of the problems with the old Big 8 and Big 12. Texas was the only large state and Missouri and Colorado the only ones in the top half (currently 18 and 21) in population.

(07-28-2021 01:38 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-28-2021 12:28 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-27-2021 11:38 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  There is I think a good chance OU was being courted by the B1G, who thought Spring/Summer 2022 was the year they need to start to close the deal, not summer 2021, as that was when they would be negotiating the last three years of Sooner TV, nominally run by Fox, but actually administered by the Big Ten Network.

The thing is ... as insane as it is, it seems quite possible that the six academic snobs would put their vanity ahead of the long term interests of the Big Ten and say they would only reluctantly accept Oklahoma, but only if they were the tagalong for Texas.

And even worse, it is possible that after deliberation, they flat out vetoed Oklahoma. It really only takes three of the group to be opposed, and the whole group will vote no.

So while Texas gazumping a possible Oklahoma move to the Big Ten is certainly plausible, it's also plausible that Oklahoma decided try for the Big Ten, despite the scheduling problems, and were turned down. At that point, Oklahoma going to the SEC may well be the driver.

Now, it was always one of the possibilities, and with the SEC the only practical alternative destination for Texas, and with Presidents being risk-averse, the Longhorns would have been in discussion with ESPN as to contingencies with the Longhorn network if the Longhorns "were to" move to the SEC, in either case.

Never underestimate the ability of those who live in an idealistic bubble to screw up!
Sound business isn't a theory. It is a real world, real time discipline.
The quick cancellation of the B1G's season last year sent chills through OU's athletic department when they saw their once proud rival berated and shut down. This is a recurrent theme in many of their conversations.

Yes.

Also, the SEC is just a lot easier to join, or leave, than the B1G. On the leave side, should a school ever want to, the SEC has no exit fees, the B1G does.

And on the join side, the B1G is a *****, they put Nebtaska, Maryland and Rutgers through years and years of reduced payouts. IIRC it was 8 years after joining before any of them got full shares.

I read a report from a couple years ago saying Rutgers won't actually get a free-and-clear full B1G share until *2027*, because while it started getting a full share Fall 2020, it borrowed money against that during the past 8 years and so is on a schedule to be paying those loans back until then.

In contrast, as far as I know, Mizzou and TAMU gained full membership rights, including payouts, as soon as they joined the SEC.