Berry Tramel says OU is not desperate to leave the Big 12.

He says they're desperate for the Big 12 to work, but they don't know if it will work so they're not going to allow themselves to be a 2nd class citizen.

You have to read the article to get the full context, but this piece mostly sounds like self-contradictory gobbledygook.

(05-07-2017 05:15 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Berry Tramel says OU is not desperate to leave the Big 12.

He says they're desperate for the Big 12 to work, but they don't know if it will work so they're not going to allow themselves to be a 2nd class citizen.

You have to read the article to get the full context, but this piece mostly sounds like self-contradictory gobbledygook.

Bingo! Tramel just wants to keep a job as a Big 12 beat writer. He's an OU homer and realizes that their situation isn't as rosy as many have depicted. At least he realizes that the Big 10 isn't a slam dunk due to academics. But he contradicts himself several times in that article.

Not much substance there. It's pretty much a fluff piece.

Seems early for these fluff pieces, but Pawl did open his mouth.

I've posted this before. But the SEC should be making overtures to Kansas. I've never been a fan of adding Kansas. But if the SEC started hinting about adding them on the SEC network. It would start to destabilize the Big 12 as its members start to jockey for positions. This would lead OU and Texas to have to make a decision about the Big 12 and their place in it.

(05-07-2017 08:56 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  I've posted this before. But the SEC should be making overtures to Kansas. I've never been a fan of adding Kansas. But if the SEC started hinting about adding them on the SEC network. It would start to destabilize the Big 12 as its members start to jockey for positions. This would lead OU and Texas to have to make a decision about the Big 12 and their place in it.

I don't know. I would assume OU and Texas' allegiances would be closer tired to in state rivals than their out of state ones. I sometimes think KU's AAU status and blue blood basketball program gets overplayed.........but that's just me.

(05-07-2017 10:00 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(05-07-2017 08:56 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  I've posted this before. But the SEC should be making overtures to Kansas. I've never been a fan of adding Kansas. But if the SEC started hinting about adding them on the SEC network. It would start to destabilize the Big 12 as its members start to jockey for positions. This would lead OU and Texas to have to make a decision about the Big 12 and their place in it.

I don't know. I would assume OU and Texas' allegiances would be closer tired to in state rivals than their out of state ones. I sometimes think KU's AAU status and blue blood basketball program gets overplayed.........but that's just me.

Kansas is only one of 9 schools that meet the SEC expansion metrics, as publicly stated by Sankey in 2015:

1) AAU membership
2) Great athletic traditions
3) Contiguous state

All the others are in the ACC (Duke, UNC, UVA) or B1G (Purdue, Indiana, OSU, Illinois, Iowa).

Even though not AAU, I'm sure Oklahoma is on the short list too because they score so well in criteria #2 and #3 (ie, not just a contiguous state, but touching 3 SEC states and history with Missouri and A&M).

Kansas benefits the SEC academic profile (one of the 3 listed criteria) and Kansas and Oklahoma both improve SEC basketball. Oklahoma plays a frontrunner role in the realigned SEC West, and Kansas serves to ensure shiny win-loss records for the contenders...and brings the Kansas-Missouri rivalry game to the party.

Also, Oklahoma City and Tulsa are consistently top-10 college football TV markets and Kansas City is frequently in the top-25.

I guess the question is, does the SEC care if the Big 12 survives or if the PAC or B1G grabs Oklahoma and Kansas first?

I would think that Oklahoma and Kansas provide enough benefit to the SEC to justify the move, but even more so to keep out the B1G and PAC.

(05-08-2017 01:18 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(05-07-2017 10:00 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(05-07-2017 08:56 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  I've posted this before. But the SEC should be making overtures to Kansas. I've never been a fan of adding Kansas. But if the SEC started hinting about adding them on the SEC network. It would start to destabilize the Big 12 as its members start to jockey for positions. This would lead OU and Texas to have to make a decision about the Big 12 and their place in it.

I don't know. I would assume OU and Texas' allegiances would be closer tired to in state rivals than their out of state ones. I sometimes think KU's AAU status and blue blood basketball program gets overplayed.........but that's just me.

Kansas is only one of 9 schools that meet the SEC expansion metrics, as publicly stated by Sankey in 2015:

1) AAU membership
2) Great athletic traditions
3) Contiguous state

All the others are in the ACC (Duke, UNC, UVA) or B1G (Purdue, Indiana, OSU, Illinois, Iowa).

Even though not AAU, I'm sure Oklahoma is on the short list too because they score so well in criteria #2 and #3 (ie, not just a contiguous state, but touching 3 SEC states and history with Missouri and A&M).

Kansas benefits the SEC academic profile (one of the 3 listed criteria) and Kansas and Oklahoma both improve SEC basketball. Oklahoma plays a frontrunner role in the realigned SEC West, and Kansas serves to ensure shiny win-loss records for the contenders...and brings the Kansas-Missouri rivalry game to the party.

Also, Oklahoma City and Tulsa are consistently top-10 college football TV markets and Kansas City is frequently in the top-25.

I guess the question is, does the SEC care if the Big 12 survives or if the PAC or B1G grabs Oklahoma and Kansas first?

I would think that Oklahoma and Kansas provide enough benefit to the SEC to justify the move, but even more so to keep out the B1G and PAC.

Sankey also said that he would uphold Slive's declaration that they must also be cultural fits for the SEC. Other than that I would tend to agree except Texas should be on that list as well as Oklahoma although neither meet the criteria. OU is not AAU and Texas is from a contiguous state but one we already have.

I seriously doubt we will have expansion out of the ACC at this point. ESPN won't pay us for it.

(05-08-2017 01:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Sankey also said that he would uphold Slive's declaration that they must also be cultural fits for the SEC. Other than that I would tend to agree except Texas should be on that list as well as Oklahoma although neither meet the criteria. OU is not AAU and Texas is from a contiguous state but one we already have.

I seriously doubt we will have expansion out of the ACC at this point. ESPN won't pay us for it.

I'm not from the South, so I can't pretend to know exactly what constitutes a 'cultural fit.' However, isn't there an argument that Kansas and Oklahoma would be cultural fits with Texas A&M and Missouri? From an academic culture, isn't Kansas a peer with Florida and Vanderbilt? From a sports culture, isn't Kansas similar to Kentucky? Oklahoma similar football culture to SEC schools that get 80K+ on a Saturday afternoon?

Is that enough?

(05-08-2017 04:32 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(05-08-2017 01:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Sankey also said that he would uphold Slive's declaration that they must also be cultural fits for the SEC. Other than that I would tend to agree except Texas should be on that list as well as Oklahoma although neither meet the criteria. OU is not AAU and Texas is from a contiguous state but one we already have.

I seriously doubt we will have expansion out of the ACC at this point. ESPN won't pay us for it.

I'm not from the South, so I can't pretend to know exactly what constitutes a 'cultural fit.' However, isn't there an argument that Kansas and Oklahoma would be cultural fits with Texas A&M and Missouri? From an academic culture, isn't Kansas a peer with Florida and Vanderbilt? From a sports culture, isn't Kansas similar to Kentucky? Oklahoma similar football culture to SEC schools that get 80K+ on a Saturday afternoon?

Is that enough?

It just depends upon what the SEC actually wants. Oklahoma is wanted for DFW, but Texas could give us that too. It's just that OU gives us another state to boot.

Kansas gives us less than 3 million eyeballs, averages only 24,000 at a home football game (53,000 below the SEC MEAN), but does give you an AAU school with great basketball. Basketball in the SEC accounts for 15% of our total gross revenue. With the addition of two more schools we move to around 47 million per year in TV payouts. Is Kansas basketball worth 47 million a year to the SEC? Especially at the expense of lost gate due to poor travel crowds from their football fans, and a bridge too far for ours to want to go see a lousy game?

I think the answer is fairly well decided, No! Will we say that? No! We will say they weren't a cultural fit. If they added enough to pay their way we would say they were a fit for the schools you named.

Wow. I just did a little research on Jayhawks football attendance...and they really do stink!

The losing has really taken its toll. In the pre-alignment Big 12 (2011 and earlier), Kansas could get over 50K at home. Now, as JR mentions, its 25K range, even for more popular opponents like Oklahoma and Texas.

Interesting that the last three years of the Kansas-Missouri rivalry games in Kansas City, the attendance was over 50k. In 2009, Kansas-Missouri in KC had 70K attendance and an ABC broadcast! Kansas was 5-6 and Missouri was 7-4.

So, Kansas has potential, but the football program needs to be righted and set on a better trajectory or the SEC competition would continue to bury the Jayhawks.

(05-08-2017 05:17 PM)YNot Wrote:  Wow. I just did a little research on Jayhawks football attendance...and they really do stink!

The losing has really taken its toll. In the pre-alignment Big 12 (2011 and earlier), Kansas could get over 50K at home. Now, as JR mentions, its 25K range, even for more popular opponents like Oklahoma and Texas.

Interesting that the last three years of the Kansas-Missouri rivalry games in Kansas City, the attendance was over 50k. In 2009, Kansas-Missouri in KC had 70K attendance and an ABC broadcast! Kansas was 5-6 and Missouri was 7-4.

So, Kansas has potential, but the football program needs to be righted and set on a better trajectory or the SEC competition would continue to bury the Jayhawks.

I think even UConn had a higher home attendance. But if they are going to right the ship they had better get her done in about 3 or 4 years because come 2022 it's D Day on negotiations.

(05-08-2017 04:38 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-08-2017 04:32 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(05-08-2017 01:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Sankey also said that he would uphold Slive's declaration that they must also be cultural fits for the SEC. Other than that I would tend to agree except Texas should be on that list as well as Oklahoma although neither meet the criteria. OU is not AAU and Texas is from a contiguous state but one we already have.

I seriously doubt we will have expansion out of the ACC at this point. ESPN won't pay us for it.

I'm not from the South, so I can't pretend to know exactly what constitutes a 'cultural fit.' However, isn't there an argument that Kansas and Oklahoma would be cultural fits with Texas A&M and Missouri? From an academic culture, isn't Kansas a peer with Florida and Vanderbilt? From a sports culture, isn't Kansas similar to Kentucky? Oklahoma similar football culture to SEC schools that get 80K+ on a Saturday afternoon?

Is that enough?

It just depends upon what the SEC actually wants. Oklahoma is wanted for DFW, but Texas could give us that too. It's just that OU gives us another state to boot.

Kansas gives us less than 3 million eyeballs, averages only 24,000 at a home football game (53,000 below the SEC MEAN), but does give you an AAU school with great basketball. Basketball in the SEC accounts for 15% of our total gross revenue. With the addition of two more schools we move to around 47 million per year in TV payouts. Is Kansas basketball worth 47 million a year to the SEC? Especially at the expense of lost gate due to poor travel crowds from their football fans, and a bridge too far for ours to want to go see a lousy game?

I think the answer is fairly well decided, No! Will we say that? No! We will say they weren't a cultural fit. If they added enough to pay their way we would say they were a fit for the schools you named.

Kansas may not be a cultural fit, but they do fit in with Missouri/Texas A&M, etc.

SEC basketball would be worth more with Kansas in it, especially with Kansas/KY or Kansas/Missouri (after they figure themselves out), and Kansas-Florida.

I honestly think that while yes, the average attendance is not there, being in the SEC would help with that. SEC schools may not care about Kansas, but Kansas would care about SEC schools. Add a winning coach and that is a recipe for alot more fans.

SEC west fans will also appreciate having a team that can generally count on as a win. If Alabama/Auburn move East if we get OK/Kansas, that will be pretty important because west teams will still have to play OK/LSU/Ole Miss every year, plus their P5 OOC game. East will like it because it gets Auburn and Alabama to the East. TN will like that every East team plays Alabama every year, making their schedule more equal to the rest of the divisions.

Presidents will like AAU status.

I think Kansas is a win-win-win, while I admit that they may not be the best fit or bring enough to the table.

On a comparison basis, Kansas also has more population than West Virginia, the population of half of OK if both OK/OK State came in (I admit that might be a straw man, since Kansas will still compete with Kansas State, but the SEC effect certainly helped Texas A&M get viewers), and more population than the city of Dallas/Fort Worth if we take TCU (especially since we already have some viewership in that area, and if we get OK would get more).

So, if we can't swing Texas/OK, Kansas brings alot to the table. Our best bet might be to go to 15, but if we desire 16, Kansas might be the "best of the rest" option.

If the options are:
Kansas
TCU
OK State
West Virginia

I would take Kansas in a heartbeat. That obviously assumes we don't get Texas. And that doesn't consider Texas Tech, Baylor, Rice, SMU, Houston, Cincy, either.

Iowa state to the SEC way before West Virginia.

(05-08-2017 09:13 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  Iowa state to the SEC way before West Virginia.

We've been talking about the Big 8 schools going to the Big 10 and the SWC schools going to the SEC.

If the SEC took OK/OK State/Kansas/Iowa State we would have 5 of 8 of the Big 8.

(05-08-2017 09:43 PM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  

(05-08-2017 09:13 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  Iowa state to the SEC way before West Virginia.

We've been talking about the Big 8 schools going to the Big 10 and the SWC schools going to the SEC.

If the SEC took OK/OK State/Kansas/Iowa State we would have 5 of 8 of the Big 8.

While I don't have an agenda for any particular 5 it just makes sense that WVU will probably be one of them. FOX and ESPN own 50% each of the Big 12. Neither incurs extra expense other than the bump in pay the would create in their new conference homes if they split the Big 12 50/50.

ESPN obviously wants Texas. FOX would therefore insist upon OU and likely KU. Who does that leave? The Big 10 would not take WVU. ESPN would likely not want to share Texas with FOX.

But if ESPN just wanted to scoop the brands then Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Iowa State make for a heckuva run. ESPN gains access to Iowa without the Big 10. They have the two strongest brands in Texas and they add three states to the SECN.

The ACC could pick up Notre Dame, Cincinnati, West Virginia and Connecticut.

That's a nice 5. Then it's up to FOX to pick up any of the others if they wanted them. I think Texas Tech and T.C.U. might give the PAC a share of a desirable market. Oklahoma State, Kansas State, and Baylor could all head to the AAC.

If OU and UT are together then they could play their other in state school as an OOC game.

But that could only happen in 2024-5. It would take three getting placed by FOX to make it happen early and they wouldn't be in a cooperative mood.

If the ACC took Cincinnati and the SEC took Iowa State and Kansas it would really penetrate Big 10 territory.

ESPN would be able to take advertising for Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, parts of Illinois, Indiana (N.D.), Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and New York. That's a lot of penetration and it would cost the Big 10.

Tramel backtracks to some degree on the idea that OU would not be accepted in the B1G.

I'll just say it...this sounds like total BS.

If Berry Tramel is taking his cues from some "professor" in Big Ten land then it's more than obvious this guy has no clue what he's talking about. Whatever connections he has at OU either aren't being honest with him or he doesn't have any real connections. Or possibly he's just tossing misinformation out there, I don't know.

The talking points he regurgitates are all over message boards and Twitter so it's not like we're dealing with Earth-shattering information here. The fact that it supposedly comes from some unnamed professor via an email conversation? I find that laughable.

I think when you look at relatively peer schools academically, similar game day culture, passionate fan base, etc... Oklahoma really has the most logical fit in the SEC. But I don't think the Big 10 is a zero chance probability for Oklahoma either, OU and Nebraska really are very similar schools academically. I don't really see how Oklahoma would be all that overly interested in the Big 10...although it is a fantastic group of universities (the best in my bias opinion of someone who completed a graduate degree at UW-Madison), I don't see a great value to Oklahoma by gaining exposure in the upper Midwest and great lakes.

From a recruiting standpoint Oklahoma needs to get/keep exposure in Texas and the SE United States. The SEC delivers that, especially if another Texas member is brought into the fold along with Oklahoma.

(05-09-2017 02:41 PM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  I think when you look at relatively peer schools academically, similar game day culture, passionate fan base, etc... Oklahoma really has the most logical fit in the SEC. But I don't think the Big 10 is a zero chance probability for Oklahoma either, OU and Nebraska really are very similar schools academically. I don't really see how Oklahoma would be all that overly interested in the Big 10...although it is a fantastic group of universities (the best in my bias opinion of someone who completed a graduate degree at UW-Madison), I don't see a great value to Oklahoma by gaining exposure in the upper Midwest and great lakes.

From a recruiting standpoint Oklahoma needs to get/keep exposure in Texas and the SE United States. The SEC delivers that, especially if another Texas member is brought into the fold along with Oklahoma.

Yes, like Texas, or T.C.U..

(05-09-2017 02:41 PM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  I think when you look at relatively peer schools academically, similar game day culture, passionate fan base, etc... Oklahoma really has the most logical fit in the SEC. But I don't think the Big 10 is a zero chance probability for Oklahoma either, OU and Nebraska really are very similar schools academically. I don't really see how Oklahoma would be all that overly interested in the Big 10...although it is a fantastic group of universities (the best in my bias opinion of someone who completed a graduate degree at UW-Madison), I don't see a great value to Oklahoma by gaining exposure in the upper Midwest and great lakes.

From a recruiting standpoint Oklahoma needs to get/keep exposure in Texas and the SE United States. The SEC delivers that, especially if another Texas member is brought into the fold along with Oklahoma.

Well, I do think OU to the B1G is a possibility, but if it happens then I think Berry Tramel will be the last one to know about it. He does not appear to be a good source of information.