(08-18-2013 07:07 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 05:50 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Sort of, because like I mentioned the OK schools are basically defacto TX schools because TX is where they do the lion share of their recruiting and they sell recruits and their families on playing a lot of their games in the state of Texas

If a compromise was truly needed and we had to take a B12 team who isn't KU and or WVU, then I would support taking one of the DFW privates since they are low risk to A&M while still firmly planting the SEC flag in DFW (ie the same big prize taking an OK school offers)

I can absolutely see where you are coming with taking one of the privates instead but I actually think they are a bigger risk to you in the SEC then they are in the current Big 12. In the Big 12 they are heavily shadowed.

Also, as an Aggie, I understand that this may be hard to admit but you do realize that any of this happening depends on Texas receiving first satisfaction right? Their landing spot has to be figured out first. If it is the ACC then you have to take into account both Texas's viewpoint and the ACC's. Are they going to prefer one of the Oklahoma's? Between them and Texas, it just seems to me like the two privates are the compromise between the two of them. Of course that is simply my opinion and nothing more.

Once the Texas situation is figured out then you just go down the line in importance.

In fact you could say that after the last round of moves the question really to be answered was where are Notre Dame and Texas going to go? We got half of that answer and now when Texas decides the dividing up of the rest will be fairly simple. Oklahoma will have a say where they go but they are clearly the next big prize left on the board after Texas. After that it is merely a matter of finding some value and a willingness to accommodate that will decide placement.

The ACC has theirs in Notre Dame. The Big 10 might be getting Kansas. So maybe Texas goes to the PAC with T.C.U. and Texas Tech and the SEC gets Oklahoma. I just don't think there will be movement here unless the remaining money teams get divided up. We'll see.

(08-18-2013 07:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:07 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 05:50 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Sort of, because like I mentioned the OK schools are basically defacto TX schools because TX is where they do the lion share of their recruiting and they sell recruits and their families on playing a lot of their games in the state of Texas

If a compromise was truly needed and we had to take a B12 team who isn't KU and or WVU, then I would support taking one of the DFW privates since they are low risk to A&M while still firmly planting the SEC flag in DFW (ie the same big prize taking an OK school offers)

I can absolutely see where you are coming with taking one of the privates instead but I actually think they are a bigger risk to you in the SEC then they are in the current Big 12. In the Big 12 they are heavily shadowed.

Also, as an Aggie, I understand that this may be hard to admit but you do realize that any of this happening depends on Texas receiving first satisfaction right? Their landing spot has to be figured out first. If it is the ACC then you have to take into account both Texas's viewpoint and the ACC's. Are they going to prefer one of the Oklahoma's? Between them and Texas, it just seems to me like the two privates are the compromise between the two of them. Of course that is simply my opinion and nothing more.

Once the Texas situation is figured out then you just go down the line in importance.

In fact you could say that after the last round of moves the question really to be answered was where are Notre Dame and Texas going to go? We got half of that answer and now when Texas decides the dividing up of the rest will be fairly simple. Oklahoma will have a say where they go but they are clearly the next big prize left on the board after Texas. After that it is merely a matter of finding some value and a willingness to accommodate that will decide placement.

The ACC has theirs in Notre Dame. The Big 10 might be getting Kansas. So maybe Texas goes to the PAC with T.C.U. and Texas Tech and the SEC gets Oklahoma. I just don't think there will be movement here unless the remaining money teams get divided up. We'll see.

Maybe, but I really think that the SEC is Oklahoma's third choice. The conferences wont be setting the tone for the two Kings of the Big 12. Texas and Oklahoma will get to pick. From that point it becomes a negotiation for the rest in my opinion.

(08-18-2013 07:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:07 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 05:50 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Sort of, because like I mentioned the OK schools are basically defacto TX schools because TX is where they do the lion share of their recruiting and they sell recruits and their families on playing a lot of their games in the state of Texas

If a compromise was truly needed and we had to take a B12 team who isn't KU and or WVU, then I would support taking one of the DFW privates since they are low risk to A&M while still firmly planting the SEC flag in DFW (ie the same big prize taking an OK school offers)

I can absolutely see where you are coming with taking one of the privates instead but I actually think they are a bigger risk to you in the SEC then they are in the current Big 12. In the Big 12 they are heavily shadowed.

Also, as an Aggie, I understand that this may be hard to admit but you do realize that any of this happening depends on Texas receiving first satisfaction right? Their landing spot has to be figured out first. If it is the ACC then you have to take into account both Texas's viewpoint and the ACC's. Are they going to prefer one of the Oklahoma's? Between them and Texas, it just seems to me like the two privates are the compromise between the two of them. Of course that is simply my opinion and nothing more.

Once the Texas situation is figured out then you just go down the line in importance.

In fact you could say that after the last round of moves the question really to be answered was where are Notre Dame and Texas going to go? We got half of that answer and now when Texas decides the dividing up of the rest will be fairly simple. Oklahoma will have a say where they go but they are clearly the next big prize left on the board after Texas. After that it is merely a matter of finding some value and a willingness to accommodate that will decide placement.

The ACC has theirs in Notre Dame. The Big 10 might be getting Kansas. So maybe Texas goes to the PAC with T.C.U. and Texas Tech and the SEC gets Oklahoma. I just don't think there will be movement here unless the remaining money teams get divided up. We'll see.

Maybe, but I really think that the SEC is Oklahoma's third choice. The conferences wont be setting the tone for the two Kings of the Big 12. Texas and Oklahoma will get to pick. From that point it becomes a negotiation for the rest in my opinion.

I'd say judging by two of their forums that it was the second behind the Big 12. But those folks are the fans and the fans don't want to go to the Big 10. Some of the administration might, but not the fans, and apparently not some of the donors. It will get interesting.

(08-18-2013 07:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:07 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 05:50 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Sort of, because like I mentioned the OK schools are basically defacto TX schools because TX is where they do the lion share of their recruiting and they sell recruits and their families on playing a lot of their games in the state of Texas

If a compromise was truly needed and we had to take a B12 team who isn't KU and or WVU, then I would support taking one of the DFW privates since they are low risk to A&M while still firmly planting the SEC flag in DFW (ie the same big prize taking an OK school offers)

I can absolutely see where you are coming with taking one of the privates instead but I actually think they are a bigger risk to you in the SEC then they are in the current Big 12. In the Big 12 they are heavily shadowed.

Also, as an Aggie, I understand that this may be hard to admit but you do realize that any of this happening depends on Texas receiving first satisfaction right? Their landing spot has to be figured out first. If it is the ACC then you have to take into account both Texas's viewpoint and the ACC's. Are they going to prefer one of the Oklahoma's? Between them and Texas, it just seems to me like the two privates are the compromise between the two of them. Of course that is simply my opinion and nothing more.

Once the Texas situation is figured out then you just go down the line in importance.

In fact you could say that after the last round of moves the question really to be answered was where are Notre Dame and Texas going to go? We got half of that answer and now when Texas decides the dividing up of the rest will be fairly simple. Oklahoma will have a say where they go but they are clearly the next big prize left on the board after Texas. After that it is merely a matter of finding some value and a willingness to accommodate that will decide placement.

The ACC has theirs in Notre Dame. The Big 10 might be getting Kansas. So maybe Texas goes to the PAC with T.C.U. and Texas Tech and the SEC gets Oklahoma. I just don't think there will be movement here unless the remaining money teams get divided up. We'll see.

Maybe, but I really think that the SEC is Oklahoma's third choice. The conferences wont be setting the tone for the two Kings of the Big 12. Texas and Oklahoma will get to pick. From that point it becomes a negotiation for the rest in my opinion.

OU might be picking as they are not AAU.

(08-18-2013 09:20 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:07 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 05:50 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Sort of, because like I mentioned the OK schools are basically defacto TX schools because TX is where they do the lion share of their recruiting and they sell recruits and their families on playing a lot of their games in the state of Texas

If a compromise was truly needed and we had to take a B12 team who isn't KU and or WVU, then I would support taking one of the DFW privates since they are low risk to A&M while still firmly planting the SEC flag in DFW (ie the same big prize taking an OK school offers)

I can absolutely see where you are coming with taking one of the privates instead but I actually think they are a bigger risk to you in the SEC then they are in the current Big 12. In the Big 12 they are heavily shadowed.

Also, as an Aggie, I understand that this may be hard to admit but you do realize that any of this happening depends on Texas receiving first satisfaction right? Their landing spot has to be figured out first. If it is the ACC then you have to take into account both Texas's viewpoint and the ACC's. Are they going to prefer one of the Oklahoma's? Between them and Texas, it just seems to me like the two privates are the compromise between the two of them. Of course that is simply my opinion and nothing more.

Once the Texas situation is figured out then you just go down the line in importance.

In fact you could say that after the last round of moves the question really to be answered was where are Notre Dame and Texas going to go? We got half of that answer and now when Texas decides the dividing up of the rest will be fairly simple. Oklahoma will have a say where they go but they are clearly the next big prize left on the board after Texas. After that it is merely a matter of finding some value and a willingness to accommodate that will decide placement.

The ACC has theirs in Notre Dame. The Big 10 might be getting Kansas. So maybe Texas goes to the PAC with T.C.U. and Texas Tech and the SEC gets Oklahoma. I just don't think there will be movement here unless the remaining money teams get divided up. We'll see.

Maybe, but I really think that the SEC is Oklahoma's third choice. The conferences wont be setting the tone for the two Kings of the Big 12. Texas and Oklahoma will get to pick. From that point it becomes a negotiation for the rest in my opinion.

OU might be picking as they are not AAU.

I think the only current property in the Big 12 that would want to go to the Big 10 would be Kansas. Kansas State might like to go but they won't get the chance. Besides none of this has to play out just one way. There are other ways to accomplish this.

(08-18-2013 09:02 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:07 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 05:50 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Sort of, because like I mentioned the OK schools are basically defacto TX schools because TX is where they do the lion share of their recruiting and they sell recruits and their families on playing a lot of their games in the state of Texas

If a compromise was truly needed and we had to take a B12 team who isn't KU and or WVU, then I would support taking one of the DFW privates since they are low risk to A&M while still firmly planting the SEC flag in DFW (ie the same big prize taking an OK school offers)

I can absolutely see where you are coming with taking one of the privates instead but I actually think they are a bigger risk to you in the SEC then they are in the current Big 12. In the Big 12 they are heavily shadowed.

Also, as an Aggie, I understand that this may be hard to admit but you do realize that any of this happening depends on Texas receiving first satisfaction right? Their landing spot has to be figured out first. If it is the ACC then you have to take into account both Texas's viewpoint and the ACC's. Are they going to prefer one of the Oklahoma's? Between them and Texas, it just seems to me like the two privates are the compromise between the two of them. Of course that is simply my opinion and nothing more.

Once the Texas situation is figured out then you just go down the line in importance.

In fact you could say that after the last round of moves the question really to be answered was where are Notre Dame and Texas going to go? We got half of that answer and now when Texas decides the dividing up of the rest will be fairly simple. Oklahoma will have a say where they go but they are clearly the next big prize left on the board after Texas. After that it is merely a matter of finding some value and a willingness to accommodate that will decide placement.

The ACC has theirs in Notre Dame. The Big 10 might be getting Kansas. So maybe Texas goes to the PAC with T.C.U. and Texas Tech and the SEC gets Oklahoma. I just don't think there will be movement here unless the remaining money teams get divided up. We'll see.

Maybe, but I really think that the SEC is Oklahoma's third choice. The conferences wont be setting the tone for the two Kings of the Big 12. Texas and Oklahoma will get to pick. From that point it becomes a negotiation for the rest in my opinion.

I'd say judging by two of their forums that it was the second behind the Big 12. But those folks are the fans and the fans don't want to go to the Big 10. Some of the administration might, but not the fans, and apparently not some of the donors. It will get interesting.

I'm on their forum, with this name, and quite a few of them loved my idea. They "liked" my posts. There are some fans that like the SEC better of course but there are some that like being reunited with Nebraska and the idea of dominating in the Big Ten within a conference that is a step up for the University.

What it really comes down to will be the decision makers.

(08-18-2013 09:20 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:07 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 05:50 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Sort of, because like I mentioned the OK schools are basically defacto TX schools because TX is where they do the lion share of their recruiting and they sell recruits and their families on playing a lot of their games in the state of Texas

If a compromise was truly needed and we had to take a B12 team who isn't KU and or WVU, then I would support taking one of the DFW privates since they are low risk to A&M while still firmly planting the SEC flag in DFW (ie the same big prize taking an OK school offers)

I can absolutely see where you are coming with taking one of the privates instead but I actually think they are a bigger risk to you in the SEC then they are in the current Big 12. In the Big 12 they are heavily shadowed.

Also, as an Aggie, I understand that this may be hard to admit but you do realize that any of this happening depends on Texas receiving first satisfaction right? Their landing spot has to be figured out first. If it is the ACC then you have to take into account both Texas's viewpoint and the ACC's. Are they going to prefer one of the Oklahoma's? Between them and Texas, it just seems to me like the two privates are the compromise between the two of them. Of course that is simply my opinion and nothing more.

Once the Texas situation is figured out then you just go down the line in importance.

In fact you could say that after the last round of moves the question really to be answered was where are Notre Dame and Texas going to go? We got half of that answer and now when Texas decides the dividing up of the rest will be fairly simple. Oklahoma will have a say where they go but they are clearly the next big prize left on the board after Texas. After that it is merely a matter of finding some value and a willingness to accommodate that will decide placement.

The ACC has theirs in Notre Dame. The Big 10 might be getting Kansas. So maybe Texas goes to the PAC with T.C.U. and Texas Tech and the SEC gets Oklahoma. I just don't think there will be movement here unless the remaining money teams get divided up. We'll see.

Maybe, but I really think that the SEC is Oklahoma's third choice. The conferences wont be setting the tone for the two Kings of the Big 12. Texas and Oklahoma will get to pick. From that point it becomes a negotiation for the rest in my opinion.

OU might be picking as they are not AAU.

Funny....not many Big Ten folks think it will be difficult for OU's lack of current AAU status to be overlooked. It's just outsiders that think that. It is a convenient excuse for folks, that on the inside, wish to see Oklahoma elsewhere.

JR is one such person. I understand why too and I don't begrudge it but if he thinks the Boren administration prefers the SEC over the Big Ten then I am afraid he is having some wishful thinking.

You as a Missouri fan, I can completely understand why you would love to see Oklahoma make it to the SEC. Missouri loves being in the SEC now, no doubt. You know I am adamant in my support for the fact that Missouri would never accept a Big Ten invite now. Missouri's first choice though was the Big Ten. Why do you think Oklahoma would differ?

(08-18-2013 10:53 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 09:20 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:07 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I can absolutely see where you are coming with taking one of the privates instead but I actually think they are a bigger risk to you in the SEC then they are in the current Big 12. In the Big 12 they are heavily shadowed.

Also, as an Aggie, I understand that this may be hard to admit but you do realize that any of this happening depends on Texas receiving first satisfaction right? Their landing spot has to be figured out first. If it is the ACC then you have to take into account both Texas's viewpoint and the ACC's. Are they going to prefer one of the Oklahoma's? Between them and Texas, it just seems to me like the two privates are the compromise between the two of them. Of course that is simply my opinion and nothing more.

Once the Texas situation is figured out then you just go down the line in importance.

In fact you could say that after the last round of moves the question really to be answered was where are Notre Dame and Texas going to go? We got half of that answer and now when Texas decides the dividing up of the rest will be fairly simple. Oklahoma will have a say where they go but they are clearly the next big prize left on the board after Texas. After that it is merely a matter of finding some value and a willingness to accommodate that will decide placement.

The ACC has theirs in Notre Dame. The Big 10 might be getting Kansas. So maybe Texas goes to the PAC with T.C.U. and Texas Tech and the SEC gets Oklahoma. I just don't think there will be movement here unless the remaining money teams get divided up. We'll see.

Maybe, but I really think that the SEC is Oklahoma's third choice. The conferences wont be setting the tone for the two Kings of the Big 12. Texas and Oklahoma will get to pick. From that point it becomes a negotiation for the rest in my opinion.

OU might be picking as they are not AAU.

Funny....not many Big Ten folks think it will be difficult for OU's lack of current AAU status to be overlooked. It's just outsiders that think that. It is a convenient excuse for folks, that on the inside, wish to see Oklahoma elsewhere.

JR is one such person. I understand why too and I don't begrudge it but if he thinks the Boren administration prefers the SEC over the Big Ten then I am afraid he is having some wishful thinking.

You as a Missouri fan, I can completely understand why you would love to see Oklahoma make it to the SEC. Missouri loves being in the SEC now, no doubt. You know I am adamant in my support for the fact that Missouri would never accept a Big Ten invite now. Missouri's first choice though was the Big Ten. Why do you think Oklahoma would differ?

Because it is a long way from home and a helluva drive for their fans.

(08-19-2013 12:01 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 10:53 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 09:20 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  In fact you could say that after the last round of moves the question really to be answered was where are Notre Dame and Texas going to go? We got half of that answer and now when Texas decides the dividing up of the rest will be fairly simple. Oklahoma will have a say where they go but they are clearly the next big prize left on the board after Texas. After that it is merely a matter of finding some value and a willingness to accommodate that will decide placement.

The ACC has theirs in Notre Dame. The Big 10 might be getting Kansas. So maybe Texas goes to the PAC with T.C.U. and Texas Tech and the SEC gets Oklahoma. I just don't think there will be movement here unless the remaining money teams get divided up. We'll see.

Maybe, but I really think that the SEC is Oklahoma's third choice. The conferences wont be setting the tone for the two Kings of the Big 12. Texas and Oklahoma will get to pick. From that point it becomes a negotiation for the rest in my opinion.

OU might be picking as they are not AAU.

Funny....not many Big Ten folks think it will be difficult for OU's lack of current AAU status to be overlooked. It's just outsiders that think that. It is a convenient excuse for folks, that on the inside, wish to see Oklahoma elsewhere.

JR is one such person. I understand why too and I don't begrudge it but if he thinks the Boren administration prefers the SEC over the Big Ten then I am afraid he is having some wishful thinking.

You as a Missouri fan, I can completely understand why you would love to see Oklahoma make it to the SEC. Missouri loves being in the SEC now, no doubt. You know I am adamant in my support for the fact that Missouri would never accept a Big Ten invite now. Missouri's first choice though was the Big Ten. Why do you think Oklahoma would differ?

Because it is a long way from home and a helluva drive for their fans.

I Will give you that argument point. That doesn't mean it changes my mind though.

(08-18-2013 10:53 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 09:20 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:07 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I can absolutely see where you are coming with taking one of the privates instead but I actually think they are a bigger risk to you in the SEC then they are in the current Big 12. In the Big 12 they are heavily shadowed.

Also, as an Aggie, I understand that this may be hard to admit but you do realize that any of this happening depends on Texas receiving first satisfaction right? Their landing spot has to be figured out first. If it is the ACC then you have to take into account both Texas's viewpoint and the ACC's. Are they going to prefer one of the Oklahoma's? Between them and Texas, it just seems to me like the two privates are the compromise between the two of them. Of course that is simply my opinion and nothing more.

Once the Texas situation is figured out then you just go down the line in importance.

In fact you could say that after the last round of moves the question really to be answered was where are Notre Dame and Texas going to go? We got half of that answer and now when Texas decides the dividing up of the rest will be fairly simple. Oklahoma will have a say where they go but they are clearly the next big prize left on the board after Texas. After that it is merely a matter of finding some value and a willingness to accommodate that will decide placement.

The ACC has theirs in Notre Dame. The Big 10 might be getting Kansas. So maybe Texas goes to the PAC with T.C.U. and Texas Tech and the SEC gets Oklahoma. I just don't think there will be movement here unless the remaining money teams get divided up. We'll see.

Maybe, but I really think that the SEC is Oklahoma's third choice. The conferences wont be setting the tone for the two Kings of the Big 12. Texas and Oklahoma will get to pick. From that point it becomes a negotiation for the rest in my opinion.

OU might be picking as they are not AAU.

Funny....not many Big Ten folks think it will be difficult for OU's lack of current AAU status to be overlooked. It's just outsiders that think that. It is a convenient excuse for folks, that on the inside, wish to see Oklahoma elsewhere.

JR is one such person. I understand why too and I don't begrudge it but if he thinks the Boren administration prefers the SEC over the Big Ten then I am afraid he is having some wishful thinking.

You as a Missouri fan, I can completely understand why you would love to see Oklahoma make it to the SEC. Missouri loves being in the SEC now, no doubt. You know I am adamant in my support for the fact that Missouri would never accept a Big Ten invite now. Missouri's first choice though was the Big Ten. Why do you think Oklahoma would differ?

OU considers themselves a King and right now have a great deal of say in the B12. A move to any of the other 4 conferences would see their voice diminish to a whisper, so they have to get something out of such a decision. As I'm sure Boren's real mission is to enhance both the OU academic and athletic brand, he'd rank the conferences thusly:

PAC
B1G/ACC
B12
SEC

This is based upon which location best enhances OU academic cache as well has the ability to accommodate OKST.

(08-19-2013 07:18 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 10:53 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 09:20 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-18-2013 07:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  In fact you could say that after the last round of moves the question really to be answered was where are Notre Dame and Texas going to go? We got half of that answer and now when Texas decides the dividing up of the rest will be fairly simple. Oklahoma will have a say where they go but they are clearly the next big prize left on the board after Texas. After that it is merely a matter of finding some value and a willingness to accommodate that will decide placement.

The ACC has theirs in Notre Dame. The Big 10 might be getting Kansas. So maybe Texas goes to the PAC with T.C.U. and Texas Tech and the SEC gets Oklahoma. I just don't think there will be movement here unless the remaining money teams get divided up. We'll see.

Maybe, but I really think that the SEC is Oklahoma's third choice. The conferences wont be setting the tone for the two Kings of the Big 12. Texas and Oklahoma will get to pick. From that point it becomes a negotiation for the rest in my opinion.

OU might be picking as they are not AAU.

Funny....not many Big Ten folks think it will be difficult for OU's lack of current AAU status to be overlooked. It's just outsiders that think that. It is a convenient excuse for folks, that on the inside, wish to see Oklahoma elsewhere.

JR is one such person. I understand why too and I don't begrudge it but if he thinks the Boren administration prefers the SEC over the Big Ten then I am afraid he is having some wishful thinking.

You as a Missouri fan, I can completely understand why you would love to see Oklahoma make it to the SEC. Missouri loves being in the SEC now, no doubt. You know I am adamant in my support for the fact that Missouri would never accept a Big Ten invite now. Missouri's first choice though was the Big Ten. Why do you think Oklahoma would differ?

OU considers themselves a King and right now have a great deal of say in the B12. A move to any of the other 4 conferences would see their voice diminish to a whisper, so they have to get something out of such a decision. As I'm sure Boren's real mission is to enhance both the OU academic and athletic brand, he'd rank the conferences thusly:

PAC
B1G/ACC
B12
SEC

This is based upon which location best enhances OU academic cache as well has the ability to accommodate OKST.

The only way I see OU or Texas heading to the PAC would be if Scott offered them a division of 6 and moved the PAC to 18. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, and Kansas State. Then the move would be reasonable as 5 divisional games would be within a doable distance for the fans. Eight teams to 20 would even be better. That way they could add Iowa State and T.C.U. and guarantee no problems with the Big 10 and SEC not being interested in any of the remainder except maybe West Virginia.

Such a move would guarantee another eventuality. Both the Big 10 and SEC would expand to 20 by taking 6 each of the ACC which by the way gets to the magic number of 12 which is required for the dissolution of the ACC. Duke, Virginia, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Boston College to the Big 10. Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Georgia Tech, Florida State, Clemson, and either Pittsburgh or Louisville to the SEC.

Is it financially doable? Yep. All the networks have to do is pay equivalent amounts for the additions which right now is not that different from what they are already paying and leaving 5 behind in total saves them the difference between 20 plus million and whatever the AAC is getting or about 75 million a year. The elimination of 2 conferences also moves the needle 2 million per team in playoff revenue splits, not including the addition if they make the playoffs. Is it regional? You bet. The Big 10 would be much more defined as would the SEC. And, the PAC would be adding essentially the entire Big 12 footprint without West Virginia.

Other perks for the networks would be heightened regional interest, a higher percentage of compelling match ups, and a wild card at the national playoff level enabling them to invite a team with a large national audience if needed. The advertising would be greatly enhanced and the pathway to the National Championship would engage the whole nation until through the semifinals.

The losers in this scenario would be either Baylor or T.C.U., West Virginia, Miami, Wake Forest, and either Louisville or Pitt. If this were to be a problem the SEC could be paid to take the remainder of Baylor/T.C.U., Miami, West Virginia, and the remainder of Louisville and Pitt and move to 24. Then you have 3 regional conferences comprising the top 64 schools and none of the prior parameters would have been violated. Then your only loser is Wake Forest who is howling over paying stipends anyway.

Oh, and 1 huge perk for the schools is the elimination of the overhead expenses of two conferences thus dividing the expenses for such by many more teams for the remaining three conferences. That's a double win. If you can't visualize it:

Big 10 East: Boston College, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Rutgers, Syracuse
Big 10 South: Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Virginia
Big 10 North: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, Wisconsin
Big 10 West: Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern
(You could switch Wisconsin and Minnesota and have better balanced divisions for the last two.)

PAC North: Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
PAC West: Arizona, Arizona State, California, California Los Angeles, Southern Cal
PAC South: Colorado, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech, Utah
PAC East: Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

SEC North: Kentucky, Louisville, N.C. State, Pittsburgh, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
SEC East: Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Georgia, Miami, Vanderbilt
SEC South: Alabama, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Mississippi State, South Carolina, Tennessee
SEC West: Arkansas, Baylor, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Missouri, Texas A&M

Any way of all the scenarios I've played with I like this one the best.

(08-13-2013 01:30 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-12-2013 11:11 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  I agree that Big 12 absorption is the most likely scenario, but we have all tried to guess what Texas would do before and been burned.

The more scenarios I see, the more I believe that the B1G and SEC will stick to their guns and invite only those that meet their existing criteria. Is any gang of conferences going to seriously consider making rules that would disqualify the SEC or B1G, such as a minimum number of school members or how they decide their conference champs? I don't think so... nobody is making the SEC or B1G do anything now or in the foreseeable future. So, The B1G will bring in state flagships that are contiguous and are AAU members. Similarly, the SEC will bring in state flagships that are contiguous. Nothing in their histories or recent statements suggest otherwise. I believe when it comes to those two conferences, the adage "the more things change, the more they stay the same" will hold true.

I like your thinking here. Oklahoma and West Virginia are not AAU but are flagships so there are your two to 16 for the SEC. Kansas is AAU and would love to be part of the Big 10 so there is one for them. Buffalo has been rumored as well and is also AAU. Then there is the Canadian option that is intriguing as well. Either way number two for the Big 10 wouldn't come from the Big 12 unless it was either Texas who for a variety of reasons won't go Big 10, or Iowa State a redundant addition that the Big 10 is not likely to take. If Texas goes west they could easily move with Kansas State, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech. That satisfies the PAC completely but it doesn't get you to the required number of 8. Plus Dodds says he looks to the East. So let's say Texas does go to the ACC as a hybrid and the price of admission is Baylor and TCU and Iowa State takes their place in the group headed West. Now all 10 get placed. There are those who say the PAC won't go for that foursome without the big prize. However I agree with He1nous that the four central time zone slots and the additions of Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas to the PAC footprint would still be a better option than what they face out West. So maybe the deal gets done that way. It will be interesting to find out.

I also agree with you that the two largest and most powerful players aren't going to compromise their positions at least not on choices number 15 & 16. If it gets bigger than that then all initial criteria has to be subject to change.

Any options for the PAC, other than the options west of the Rockies is immensely better for them. I just do not see any real options for them out west. The SEC and B1G just might patiently wait to see if the ACC GoRs sticks, which will depend on what happens with the new ACCN... if it happens.

Well, lets try a new scenario. In this one DeLoss Dodds and Mack Brown retire at the end of the season and in January a new Texas administration faces some tough issues for the future. Do they go to the PAC where it is tough for their fans to follow (and where no network really owns a percentage of the PACN)? Do they go to the Big 10 where it is just as tough for their fans to follow? Do they stay in Big 12 with just 10 where they really only have 2 peer schools (Oklahoma and Kansas)? Do they stay in the Big 12 with two new weaker additions? Or do they move to the only conference that can offer a division of schools they have long considered to be rivals?

Texas and Oklahoma in the SEC added to Arkansas, Texas A&M, Missouri, and L.S.U. provides each with a very strong schedule to sell. And all of those schools are in a very reasonable distance for all sports travel. So, lets play with this pipe dream for a second and think about what possibilities could open up with such a move.

First, the Big 12 would have to place 6 or more of their other teams for this to work. Oklahoma State and Texas Tech would need profitable and competitive options. Sure the PAC might try to get one or two of these at best, but not enough to make it happen without the two prizes. They aren't academically qualified for the Big 10. So what now? Where is there room or interest enough to help dissolve the Big 12?

An SEC with Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Vanderbilt, Missouri, and Texas A&M would be a lot more alluring for North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and Georgia Tech. What if those four could extricate themselves from the ACC without economically damaging the remaining schools. Of those 4 none of them have a world beating football program. So ESPN could actually up their contract to the remaining ACC schools by adding the remaining Big 12 schools to the remaining ACC schools. If there are no monetary losses for the duration of the ACC contract there would be no real damages due to the departures.

Let's assume that Delany takes Kansas, and three of (Syracuse, B.C., UConn, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, and Iowa State) to get to 18. What would the remaining ACC look like:

North: Conn., Cincinnati, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Virginia T., W. Virginia
South: Clemson, F.S.U., Miami, N.C. State, S. Florida, Wake Forest
West: Baylor, Iowa St., Kansas St., Oklahoma St., T.C.U., Texas Tech

Or,
North: Connecticut, Cincinnati, Louisville, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
East: Clemson, Miami, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest
South: Baylor, Central Florida, Florida State, South Florida, Tulane
West: Iowa St., Kansas St., Oklahoma St., T.C.U., and Texas Tech

So with a Big 10 of:
East: Bos. College, Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn St., Rutgers, Syracuse
Central: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan St., Northwestern, Purdue
West: Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Ohio State, Wisconsin

We now have a Big 10 of 18, an SEC and ACC of 20 each, and a PAC of 12. That's 70 including Connecticut, Cincinnati, South Florida, Tulane, and Central Florida. You could substitute Houston or S.M.U. for either C. Florida or S. Florida, or Tulane and the results would still be comparable.

Our SEC would then look like this:
North: Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia
East: Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt
South: Alabama, L.S.U., Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
West: Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

The goals of realignment for the SEC are fairly straightforward: 1. Markets, 2. Enhance Academics for the sake of our version of the CIC, 3. Flagship Universities, 4. Enhance Basketball if possible.

The aforementioned arrangement violates none of these goals with the possible exception of Georgia Tech who is an academic asset. There are suitable replacements for Georgia Tech, but none that fit as well geographically or culturally.

We would have all of Texas without question, all of North Carolina, a viable equal share of Virginia, 9 AAU members, and two more name brand basketball programs and 4 more programs that play basketball at least as well as the middle of the pack in the SEC.

ESPN would have top content in the SEC and compelling football with good basketball in the new ACC with a larger footprint. The two networks could easily be bundled throughout the Southeast and Southwest and sold separately nationally. The ACC should be able to get a bump over what they receive now.

By approaching the problem this way the SEC is maximized in every way, the Big 12 dissolved, and the ACC given a raise and a network.

Like I said a pipe dream, but a great one to shoot for.

I'm personally a fan of the status quo. I supported the recent additions, but 16 or more is too crowded IMO

I would like to trade Auburn for Missouri. Nothing against Missouri, Auburn is just a closer drive.

(09-09-2013 09:16 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  I'm personally a fan of the status quo. I supported the recent additions, but 16 or more is too crowded IMO

I would like to trade Auburn for Missouri. Nothing against Missouri, Auburn is just a closer drive.

1. I think we are going to at least 16 no matter what.

2. I think the vast majority of Auburn people would love to swap places with Missouri. It was only Alabama's hold over politics at the conference office that prevented it from happening up front when Missouri came on board.

(09-09-2013 09:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-09-2013 09:16 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  I'm personally a fan of the status quo. I supported the recent additions, but 16 or more is too crowded IMO

I would like to trade Auburn for Missouri. Nothing against Missouri, Auburn is just a closer drive.

1. I think we are going to at least 16 no matter what.

2. I think the vast majority of Auburn people would love to swap places with Missouri. It was only Alabama's hold over politics at the conference office that prevented it from happening up front when Missouri came on board.

We may end up going to 16, but that doesn't mean I have to get excited about any of the teams. All the NC Schools seem pretty "meh" to me. VT and WVU would be fun.

In I perfect world I'd take the status quo but with Auburn in the East and no permanent opponents.

(09-10-2013 06:23 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(09-09-2013 09:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-09-2013 09:16 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  I'm personally a fan of the status quo. I supported the recent additions, but 16 or more is too crowded IMO

I would like to trade Auburn for Missouri. Nothing against Missouri, Auburn is just a closer drive.

1. I think we are going to at least 16 no matter what.

2. I think the vast majority of Auburn people would love to swap places with Missouri. It was only Alabama's hold over politics at the conference office that prevented it from happening up front when Missouri came on board.

We may end up going to 16, but that doesn't mean I have to get excited about any of the teams. All the NC Schools seem pretty "meh" to me. VT and WVU would be fun.

In I perfect world I'd take the status quo but with Auburn in the East and no permanent opponents.

That would have been an easy choice for the SEC but Bama was totally against it...for recruiting purposes I imagine.

(09-10-2013 06:23 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(09-09-2013 09:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-09-2013 09:16 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  I'm personally a fan of the status quo. I supported the recent additions, but 16 or more is too crowded IMO

I would like to trade Auburn for Missouri. Nothing against Missouri, Auburn is just a closer drive.

1. I think we are going to at least 16 no matter what.

2. I think the vast majority of Auburn people would love to swap places with Missouri. It was only Alabama's hold over politics at the conference office that prevented it from happening up front when Missouri came on board.

We may end up going to 16, but that doesn't mean I have to get excited about any of the teams. All the NC Schools seem pretty "meh" to me. VT and WVU would be fun.

In I perfect world I'd take the status quo but with Auburn in the East and no permanent opponents.

Head:

1. Texas
2. North Carolina
3. Oklahoma
4. Virginia

Heart:

1. FSU and Clemson tie
2. North Carolina
3. Oklahoma
4. Georgia Tech


If the move to 16 involves two west teams or one west/one east, I think Auburn gets to move east at that time with Mizzou heading west in the latter scenario.

I think a problem is that there are not a lot of teams left everybody can agree with because the addition steps on someones toes.

A&M doesn't want any OK/TX school
UF doesn't want FSU/Miami
UGA doesn't want GT
USC doesn't want Clemson or any NC schools
UK doesn't want Louisville
UT doesn't want WVU/VT

At this rate hawg may end up being right by default and somehow Cincinnati ends up in the SEC

(09-11-2013 03:27 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I think a problem is that there are not a lot of teams left everybody can agree with because the addition steps on someones toes.

A&M doesn't want any OK/TX school
UF doesn't want FSU/Miami
UGA doesn't want GT
USC doesn't want Clemson or any NC schools
UK doesn't want Louisville
UT doesn't want WVU/VT

At this rate hawg may end up being right by default and somehow Cincinnati ends up in the SEC

That is a funny way of looking at it. But I promise you however it ends up the only motivating factor as to who is in and who is not will be money. If Oklahoma makes us more money than anyone else they'll be in. Ditto for any team mentioned. In the end it will be earning power alone that dictates the final two selections if we move to 16. If we move to 20 there will be many more variables at play.