(08-21-2018 01:53 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-21-2018 01:15 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Well, we could look at it like this.

If the SEC is willing to take Oklahoma and Oklahoma State then the decision becomes much simpler for Texas. If that's the prospect they're dealing with then it's much easier to say "wait a minute, just take us and Texas Tech."

Texas would have to be pretty stubborn to allow themselves to be forced into a corner where they end up making the same move under less favorable terms.

I don't follow your reasoning here. ESPN wants to hold onto to Texas. I think Texas already knows we would be willing to take OU and OSU. There have been enough leaks on this from Big 12 beat writers and Finebaum, etc. If these kinds of matters have been discussed they will never be mentioned publicly because of the GOR. And, if Texas has already expressed that preference they are hardly in a corner as they would be being proactive rather than reactive.

Monetarily and content wise the SEC would probably be more favorable with Texas/Tech over OU/OSU.

So if it is the intent of ESPN to hold onto to Texas (and the LHN contract expires in 2031) and it is the intent of Texas to move to their best advantage, and if they have any kind of political obligation to Tech, then I think given the nature of conversations in the past that these matters have already been discussed.

I agree Texas wouldn't be painted in a corner, I just don't think we need to do anymore with expressing the desire to take Oklahoma and the Pokes. That's what we have already done for the past two or three years. If Texas has an interest they've had ample time already to work out their angles and to have already discussed their interests via back channels, especially since they can talk to ESPN anytime without raising suspicions. And since ESPN is a business partner with the SEC they can easily pass along information should it be in their interest to do so.

My suspicions given the talk out of Norman is that their administration is trying to get out ahead on two issues one of which will not be discussed, they have more limited options now than they thought. The other is the drumbeat of having to move without OSU. Why would their administration push that angle unless they had to. It garners them no favors within their legislature to do so now unless the were having to acclimate people to the idea.

Now position on this is purely speculative, but speculation out of listening to the talking points coming out of Norman who otherwise at this juncture should be talking only about their wonderful multiple options instead of why they may have to move without Oklahoma State. And the silence out of Austin is to be expected. Those who already know what they are going to do have no reason to talk.

So this concept is just my thinking out loud while observing carefully what is and isn't being said, and who it is that is doing the talking. And while the University spokespersons haven't said a word in Norman, the chatter around the program and those claiming inside connections and to be donors are either full of hooey, or they've already been clued in and are merely trying to spin the issue.

Either way it's interesting.

What I'm saying is that if Texas has eyes on going anywhere else then our willingness to take OU and OSU limits their options.

If Texas knows what the end result is then there's no need to let it play out. From their perspective, it's probably better to not wait until their painted into that corner. Just cut OU off at the pass and move along with Texas Tech into the SEC.

That's assuming the SEC prefers to stop at 16. I think they do, but assuming 16 is more feasible then it is to UT's advantage to be #15 rather than waiting for the SEC to move on OU/OSU and force UT's hand further down the line.