The Final Four is upon us!

Spring football is underway!

But we need some fodder to mull over and I'm your man!

I'm going to throw out a crazy thought that I haven't seen anyone else talk about so I want to see what you folks' take on it is...

Theory: Oklahoma does not want to be in a conference with Texas going forward

Now sure, they're still buds and they'll still play every year in Dallas because it's a huge game and helps drive ticket sales and donations. With that said, they have existed in two different leagues for the vast majority of their history. And it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that the experiment has failed as 4 founding members of the Big 12 decided the whole league was more trouble than it was worth.

Oklahoma has suffered from this maybe more than anyone else. They lost 3 long time rivals in the split and their annual tilt with Nebraska was an early casualty of Big 12 politics.

Add to that, more programs in the state of TX had access to big money and big exposure and that ultimately made the Sooners' job tougher. Elevating TCU a few years ago only exacerbated that problem.

Of course, OU hasn't really suffered on the football field. They've won plenty of conference titles and competed for national championships. They have, however, suffered a great deal of instability with all this conference shuffling.

Now, a good while back we saw Berry Tramel comment that certain Big 12 officials had stated that the best solution to their problem was to merge with either the SEC or PAC 12 with the SEC being the first choice.

My theory continues that this was the Big 12 powers' opening offer...

A merger with the PAC 12 won't happen for a lot of different reasons, but I think they also knew a straight merger with the SEC wasn't going to happen either. However, a split between the SEC and ACC is a compromise that most could probably live with. It's a lot of content for 2 leagues that will need it for their respective networks.

Being that Big 12 schools don't have the best T3 deal, gaining access to these networks and increasing their exposure across many of the most populated markets will pay huge dividends.

Also, there's the added bonus that OU could game the situation in such a way that they separate from Texas while protecting several regional rivals. Texas doesn't have to follow A&M, but they still get a regional division.

The Big 12's earning power is split evenly among the 2 leagues. While OU and UT certainly make up the majority of that value, ensuring that other schools that aren't quite as rich make it into the club will balance out the competition rather than making a CFP run about as difficult as a Super Bowl campaign.

(03-28-2018 02:29 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  The Final Four is upon us!

Spring football is underway!

But we need some fodder to mull over and I'm your man!

I'm going to throw out a crazy thought that I haven't seen anyone else talk about so I want to see what you folks' take on it is...

Theory: Oklahoma does not want to be in a conference with Texas going forward

Now sure, they're still buds and they'll still play every year in Dallas because it's a huge game and helps drive ticket sales and donations. With that said, they have existed in two different leagues for the vast majority of their history. And it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that the experiment has failed as 4 founding members of the Big 12 decided the whole league was more trouble than it was worth.

Oklahoma has suffered from this maybe more than anyone else. They lost 3 long time rivals in the split and their annual tilt with Nebraska was an early casualty of Big 12 politics.

Add to that, more programs in the state of TX had access to big money and big exposure and that ultimately made the Sooners' job tougher. Elevating TCU a few years ago only exacerbated that problem.

Of course, OU hasn't really suffered on the football field. They've won plenty of conference titles and competed for national championships. They have, however, suffered a great deal of instability with all this conference shuffling.

Now, a good while back we saw Berry Tramel comment that certain Big 12 officials had stated that the best solution to their problem was to merge with either the SEC or PAC 12 with the SEC being the first choice.

My theory continues that this was the Big 12 powers' opening offer...

A merger with the PAC 12 won't happen for a lot of different reasons, but I think they also knew a straight merger with the SEC wasn't going to happen either. However, a split between the SEC and ACC is a compromise that most could probably live with. It's a lot of content for 2 leagues that will need it for their respective networks.

Being that Big 12 schools don't have the best T3 deal, gaining access to these networks and increasing their exposure across many of the most populated markets will pay huge dividends.

Also, there's the added bonus that OU could game the situation in such a way that they separate from Texas while protecting several regional rivals. Texas doesn't have to follow A&M, but they still get a regional division.

The Big 12's earning power is split evenly among the 2 leagues. While OU and UT certainly make up the majority of that value, ensuring that other schools that aren't quite as rich make it into the club will balance out the competition rather than making a CFP run about as difficult as a Super Bowl campaign.

I don't think OU minds being in a conference in the Longhorns. They just don't want to be in a situation where UT has unrivaled leverage. As for rivals, outside of NU, I don't think the Sooners really cared for many of their old B8 brethren.

The problem with the ACC and SEC splitting the B12 is that there are too few valuable properties to offset the low value schools that would need to tag along.

(03-28-2018 04:17 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 02:29 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  The Final Four is upon us!

Spring football is underway!

But we need some fodder to mull over and I'm your man!

I'm going to throw out a crazy thought that I haven't seen anyone else talk about so I want to see what you folks' take on it is...

Theory: Oklahoma does not want to be in a conference with Texas going forward

Now sure, they're still buds and they'll still play every year in Dallas because it's a huge game and helps drive ticket sales and donations. With that said, they have existed in two different leagues for the vast majority of their history. And it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that the experiment has failed as 4 founding members of the Big 12 decided the whole league was more trouble than it was worth.

Oklahoma has suffered from this maybe more than anyone else. They lost 3 long time rivals in the split and their annual tilt with Nebraska was an early casualty of Big 12 politics.

Add to that, more programs in the state of TX had access to big money and big exposure and that ultimately made the Sooners' job tougher. Elevating TCU a few years ago only exacerbated that problem.

Of course, OU hasn't really suffered on the football field. They've won plenty of conference titles and competed for national championships. They have, however, suffered a great deal of instability with all this conference shuffling.

Now, a good while back we saw Berry Tramel comment that certain Big 12 officials had stated that the best solution to their problem was to merge with either the SEC or PAC 12 with the SEC being the first choice.

My theory continues that this was the Big 12 powers' opening offer...

A merger with the PAC 12 won't happen for a lot of different reasons, but I think they also knew a straight merger with the SEC wasn't going to happen either. However, a split between the SEC and ACC is a compromise that most could probably live with. It's a lot of content for 2 leagues that will need it for their respective networks.

Being that Big 12 schools don't have the best T3 deal, gaining access to these networks and increasing their exposure across many of the most populated markets will pay huge dividends.

Also, there's the added bonus that OU could game the situation in such a way that they separate from Texas while protecting several regional rivals. Texas doesn't have to follow A&M, but they still get a regional division.

The Big 12's earning power is split evenly among the 2 leagues. While OU and UT certainly make up the majority of that value, ensuring that other schools that aren't quite as rich make it into the club will balance out the competition rather than making a CFP run about as difficult as a Super Bowl campaign.

I don't think OU minds being in a conference in the Longhorns. They just don't want to be in a situation where UT has unrivaled leverage. As for rivals, outside of NU, I don't think the Sooners really cared for many of their old B8 brethren.

The problem with the ACC and SEC splitting the B12 is that there are too few valuable properties to offset the low value schools that would need to tag along.

Technically, they would just need 8. Likely: Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Kansas, West Virginia, and either Kansas St or Iowa St (or both.)

Assuming Notre Dame doesn't go all in with football to the ACC and that Texas would probably want a Notre Dame type deal:
SEC + Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Kansas, Iowa St
ACC + Texas Tech, TCU, West Virginia, Cincinnati (and Texas on ND-deal)

SEC
West: Iowa St, Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas A&M
Central: Arkansas, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama, Auburn
East: Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina

ACC
South: Texas Tech, TCU, Miami, Florida St, Georgia Tech, Clemson
East: North Carolina, North Carolina St, Duke, Wake Forest, Virginia, Virginia Tech
North: Louisville, Cincinnati, West Virginia, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College

(03-28-2018 04:26 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 04:17 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 02:29 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  The Final Four is upon us!

Spring football is underway!

But we need some fodder to mull over and I'm your man!

I'm going to throw out a crazy thought that I haven't seen anyone else talk about so I want to see what you folks' take on it is...

Theory: Oklahoma does not want to be in a conference with Texas going forward

Now sure, they're still buds and they'll still play every year in Dallas because it's a huge game and helps drive ticket sales and donations. With that said, they have existed in two different leagues for the vast majority of their history. And it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that the experiment has failed as 4 founding members of the Big 12 decided the whole league was more trouble than it was worth.

Oklahoma has suffered from this maybe more than anyone else. They lost 3 long time rivals in the split and their annual tilt with Nebraska was an early casualty of Big 12 politics.

Add to that, more programs in the state of TX had access to big money and big exposure and that ultimately made the Sooners' job tougher. Elevating TCU a few years ago only exacerbated that problem.

Of course, OU hasn't really suffered on the football field. They've won plenty of conference titles and competed for national championships. They have, however, suffered a great deal of instability with all this conference shuffling.

Now, a good while back we saw Berry Tramel comment that certain Big 12 officials had stated that the best solution to their problem was to merge with either the SEC or PAC 12 with the SEC being the first choice.

My theory continues that this was the Big 12 powers' opening offer...

A merger with the PAC 12 won't happen for a lot of different reasons, but I think they also knew a straight merger with the SEC wasn't going to happen either. However, a split between the SEC and ACC is a compromise that most could probably live with. It's a lot of content for 2 leagues that will need it for their respective networks.

Being that Big 12 schools don't have the best T3 deal, gaining access to these networks and increasing their exposure across many of the most populated markets will pay huge dividends.

Also, there's the added bonus that OU could game the situation in such a way that they separate from Texas while protecting several regional rivals. Texas doesn't have to follow A&M, but they still get a regional division.

The Big 12's earning power is split evenly among the 2 leagues. While OU and UT certainly make up the majority of that value, ensuring that other schools that aren't quite as rich make it into the club will balance out the competition rather than making a CFP run about as difficult as a Super Bowl campaign.

I don't think OU minds being in a conference in the Longhorns. They just don't want to be in a situation where UT has unrivaled leverage. As for rivals, outside of NU, I don't think the Sooners really cared for many of their old B8 brethren.

The problem with the ACC and SEC splitting the B12 is that there are too few valuable properties to offset the low value schools that would need to tag along.

Technically, they would just need 8. Likely: Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Kansas, West Virginia, and either Kansas St or Iowa St (or both.)

Assuming Notre Dame doesn't go all in with football to the ACC and that Texas would probably want a Notre Dame type deal:
SEC + Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Kansas, Iowa St
ACC + Texas Tech, TCU, West Virginia, Cincinnati (and Texas on ND-deal)

SEC
West: Iowa St, Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas A&M
Central: Arkansas, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama, Auburn
East: Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina

ACC
South: Texas Tech, TCU, Miami, Florida St, Georgia Tech, Clemson
East: North Carolina, North Carolina St, Duke, Wake Forest, Virginia, Virginia Tech
North: Louisville, Cincinnati, West Virginia, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College

IMO, Baylor will not go quietly into that good night. They will push for discovery in any scenario where they are on the outside looking in.

(03-28-2018 04:17 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 02:29 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  The Final Four is upon us!

Spring football is underway!

But we need some fodder to mull over and I'm your man!

I'm going to throw out a crazy thought that I haven't seen anyone else talk about so I want to see what you folks' take on it is...

Theory: Oklahoma does not want to be in a conference with Texas going forward

Now sure, they're still buds and they'll still play every year in Dallas because it's a huge game and helps drive ticket sales and donations. With that said, they have existed in two different leagues for the vast majority of their history. And it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that the experiment has failed as 4 founding members of the Big 12 decided the whole league was more trouble than it was worth.

Oklahoma has suffered from this maybe more than anyone else. They lost 3 long time rivals in the split and their annual tilt with Nebraska was an early casualty of Big 12 politics.

Add to that, more programs in the state of TX had access to big money and big exposure and that ultimately made the Sooners' job tougher. Elevating TCU a few years ago only exacerbated that problem.

Of course, OU hasn't really suffered on the football field. They've won plenty of conference titles and competed for national championships. They have, however, suffered a great deal of instability with all this conference shuffling.

Now, a good while back we saw Berry Tramel comment that certain Big 12 officials had stated that the best solution to their problem was to merge with either the SEC or PAC 12 with the SEC being the first choice.

My theory continues that this was the Big 12 powers' opening offer...

A merger with the PAC 12 won't happen for a lot of different reasons, but I think they also knew a straight merger with the SEC wasn't going to happen either. However, a split between the SEC and ACC is a compromise that most could probably live with. It's a lot of content for 2 leagues that will need it for their respective networks.

Being that Big 12 schools don't have the best T3 deal, gaining access to these networks and increasing their exposure across many of the most populated markets will pay huge dividends.

Also, there's the added bonus that OU could game the situation in such a way that they separate from Texas while protecting several regional rivals. Texas doesn't have to follow A&M, but they still get a regional division.

The Big 12's earning power is split evenly among the 2 leagues. While OU and UT certainly make up the majority of that value, ensuring that other schools that aren't quite as rich make it into the club will balance out the competition rather than making a CFP run about as difficult as a Super Bowl campaign.

I don't think OU minds being in a conference in the Longhorns. They just don't want to be in a situation where UT has unrivaled leverage. As for rivals, outside of NU, I don't think the Sooners really cared for many of their old B8 brethren.

The problem with the ACC and SEC splitting the B12 is that there are too few valuable properties to offset the low value schools that would need to tag along.

A couple of points if I may.

1. If Texas moves it will have to be to a conference paying at least 50 million in TV revenue because that's what Texas makes now and I can't see them taking a hit. So if Texas moves to the SEC or ACC everyone in the conference needs to get a bump up.

2. Texas has not really looked favorably at the idea of independence because their minor sports are too far from their geographical center in the ACC.

3. If the streaming giants get involved in the bidding on the SEC or ACC contracts in the mid 30's it's going to cost ESPN 50 million plus to hold onto the properties anyway, and in the case of the SEC probably much more. By merging the Big 10 completely with the SEC and ACC and taking both conferences to 50 million plus now with the same kinds of escalators we have now (and assuming that ESPN keeps the same % of the Big 10 and PAC that they have now) it will cost them between 700-800 million to do just that. That's 4% of their total worth. In other words not much.

So while the streaming services will likely pursue pro content because it is produced by the leagues and uplinked, I don't see them getting into producing college sports to readily, and I don't think you see that either. So ESPN will need more content anyway and if they let the NFL go they can buy these rights and still increase their total worth.

4. The only way Texas moves to the ACC is in a division of their own. And I don't see Cincinnati getting in this mix at at (directed at the other post in this thread). I could see Houston getting into it if any G5 does. In a 20 team ACC a division of 5 Texas friendly schools is workable. Tech's too far. I would look for Baylor and T.C.U. along with KState and Houston for reasons I've posted before.

5. Texas and Oklahoma together are worth roughly the same amount as the entire ACC in economic impact terms. If the Big 12 is currently worth a TV contract of 35 million with 8 little brothers milking it, then the ACC is worth at least 15 million more with just Texas. That's roughly 44 million. Add the multiple games in Texas every week as regionally strong games and I think you could justify 50 million. Oklahoma along with Kansas to the SEC is probably worth our bump up to between 50-55 million. And where ESPN makes out is with contract extensions in to the 2040's, a nice duration before having to worry about the Amazon's of the world screwing up their business model and content. And like I said at a cost of 4% of NET Worth that's nothing.

So yeah it's very doable. The only question in my mind is will they make an attempt to do so prior to the Fall of 2019?

Texas Tech drags this group down .... THE LOWEST ACADEMIC RANKING OF ALL P 5 ...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

(03-28-2018 04:59 PM)michael.stevens.3110 Wrote:  Texas Tech drags this group down .... THE LOWEST ACADEMIC RANKING OF ALL P 5 ...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

That may be but they are a Texas state school, and in this kind of move would have to be accounted for.

T.C.U. puts the ACC in DFW while Oklahoma/Oklahoma State does that for the SEC. If the RRR remains with Texas in a different conference from Oklahoma then the Pokes need to stay with the Sooners to keep annual games easier to schedule. Consequently if Kansas heads to the SEC in this scenario then Kansas State needs to be in the ACC where their annual with the Jayhawks is an ACC/SEC crossover.

So I think you would be looking at Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech and West Virginia to the SEC. And, Baylor, Houston, Kansas State, T.C.U., and Texas to the ACC. I do think if something like this happens then Notre Dame needs to make a decision and with Texas in the fold I think the ACC is as good as it gets for them.

Why Houston? It gives Texas that local division that the Horns like.

So the SEC sets up this way:

Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Texas A&M, Texas Tech

Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, West Virginia

And for the ACC something like this:

Baylor, Houston, Kansas State, Texas, T.C.U.

Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse

Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Wake Forest

(03-28-2018 05:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 04:59 PM)michael.stevens.3110 Wrote:  Texas Tech drags this group down .... THE LOWEST ACADEMIC RANKING OF ALL P 5 ...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

That may be but they are a Texas state school, and in this kind of move would have to be accounted for.

T.C.U. puts the ACC in DFW while Oklahoma/Oklahoma State does that for the SEC. If the RRR remains with Texas in a different conference from Oklahoma then the Pokes need to stay with the Sooners to keep annual games easier to schedule. Consequently if Kansas heads to the SEC in this scenario then Kansas State needs to be in the ACC where their annual with the Jayhawks is an ACC/SEC crossover.

So I think you would be looking at Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech and West Virginia to the SEC. And, Baylor, Houston, Kansas State, T.C.U., and Texas to the ACC. I do think if something like this happens then Notre Dame needs to make a decision and with Texas in the fold I think the ACC is as good as it gets for them.

Why Houston? It gives Texas that local division that the Horns like.

So the SEC sets up this way:

Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Texas A&M, Texas Tech

Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, West Virginia

And for the ACC something like this:

Baylor, Houston, Kansas State, Texas, T.C.U.

Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse

Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Wake Forest

9 game conference schedule?
Play everyone in your own division every year and rotate another division every year? You could play every school every three years.

(03-28-2018 04:17 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 02:29 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  The Final Four is upon us!

Spring football is underway!

But we need some fodder to mull over and I'm your man!

I'm going to throw out a crazy thought that I haven't seen anyone else talk about so I want to see what you folks' take on it is...

Theory: Oklahoma does not want to be in a conference with Texas going forward

Now sure, they're still buds and they'll still play every year in Dallas because it's a huge game and helps drive ticket sales and donations. With that said, they have existed in two different leagues for the vast majority of their history. And it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that the experiment has failed as 4 founding members of the Big 12 decided the whole league was more trouble than it was worth.

Oklahoma has suffered from this maybe more than anyone else. They lost 3 long time rivals in the split and their annual tilt with Nebraska was an early casualty of Big 12 politics.

Add to that, more programs in the state of TX had access to big money and big exposure and that ultimately made the Sooners' job tougher. Elevating TCU a few years ago only exacerbated that problem.

Of course, OU hasn't really suffered on the football field. They've won plenty of conference titles and competed for national championships. They have, however, suffered a great deal of instability with all this conference shuffling.

Now, a good while back we saw Berry Tramel comment that certain Big 12 officials had stated that the best solution to their problem was to merge with either the SEC or PAC 12 with the SEC being the first choice.

My theory continues that this was the Big 12 powers' opening offer...

A merger with the PAC 12 won't happen for a lot of different reasons, but I think they also knew a straight merger with the SEC wasn't going to happen either. However, a split between the SEC and ACC is a compromise that most could probably live with. It's a lot of content for 2 leagues that will need it for their respective networks.

Being that Big 12 schools don't have the best T3 deal, gaining access to these networks and increasing their exposure across many of the most populated markets will pay huge dividends.

Also, there's the added bonus that OU could game the situation in such a way that they separate from Texas while protecting several regional rivals. Texas doesn't have to follow A&M, but they still get a regional division.

The Big 12's earning power is split evenly among the 2 leagues. While OU and UT certainly make up the majority of that value, ensuring that other schools that aren't quite as rich make it into the club will balance out the competition rather than making a CFP run about as difficult as a Super Bowl campaign.

I don't think OU minds being in a conference in the Longhorns. They just don't want to be in a situation where UT has unrivaled leverage. As for rivals, outside of NU, I don't think the Sooners really cared for many of their old B8 brethren.

The problem with the ACC and SEC splitting the B12 is that there are too few valuable properties to offset the low value schools that would need to tag along.

I think the issue is the leverage. Texas has historically thrown its weight around a good bit and seems to damage OU's interests in the process.

That and I didn't mention it in the OP, but I think OU has observed the advantages A&M has received since leaving the Big 12 and might like to have some of that for themselves. They'll always play UT, but sharing a league with them may be more trouble than it's worth.

I wouldn't say OU would want to separate from UT at all costs, but moving in concert with UT might require too many concessions on the part of Oklahoma.

(03-28-2018 08:18 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 05:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 04:59 PM)michael.stevens.3110 Wrote:  Texas Tech drags this group down .... THE LOWEST ACADEMIC RANKING OF ALL P 5 ...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

That may be but they are a Texas state school, and in this kind of move would have to be accounted for.

T.C.U. puts the ACC in DFW while Oklahoma/Oklahoma State does that for the SEC. If the RRR remains with Texas in a different conference from Oklahoma then the Pokes need to stay with the Sooners to keep annual games easier to schedule. Consequently if Kansas heads to the SEC in this scenario then Kansas State needs to be in the ACC where their annual with the Jayhawks is an ACC/SEC crossover.

So I think you would be looking at Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech and West Virginia to the SEC. And, Baylor, Houston, Kansas State, T.C.U., and Texas to the ACC. I do think if something like this happens then Notre Dame needs to make a decision and with Texas in the fold I think the ACC is as good as it gets for them.

Why Houston? It gives Texas that local division that the Horns like.

So the SEC sets up this way:

Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Texas A&M, Texas Tech

Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, West Virginia

And for the ACC something like this:

Baylor, Houston, Kansas State, Texas, T.C.U.

Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse

Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Wake Forest

9 game conference schedule?
Play everyone in your own division every year and rotate another division every year? You could play every school every three years.

This, but with one permanent in conference rival. So a 10 game schedule.

(03-28-2018 09:54 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 04:17 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 02:29 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  The Final Four is upon us!

Spring football is underway!

But we need some fodder to mull over and I'm your man!

I'm going to throw out a crazy thought that I haven't seen anyone else talk about so I want to see what you folks' take on it is...

Theory: Oklahoma does not want to be in a conference with Texas going forward

Now sure, they're still buds and they'll still play every year in Dallas because it's a huge game and helps drive ticket sales and donations. With that said, they have existed in two different leagues for the vast majority of their history. And it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that the experiment has failed as 4 founding members of the Big 12 decided the whole league was more trouble than it was worth.

Oklahoma has suffered from this maybe more than anyone else. They lost 3 long time rivals in the split and their annual tilt with Nebraska was an early casualty of Big 12 politics.

Add to that, more programs in the state of TX had access to big money and big exposure and that ultimately made the Sooners' job tougher. Elevating TCU a few years ago only exacerbated that problem.

Of course, OU hasn't really suffered on the football field. They've won plenty of conference titles and competed for national championships. They have, however, suffered a great deal of instability with all this conference shuffling.

Now, a good while back we saw Berry Tramel comment that certain Big 12 officials had stated that the best solution to their problem was to merge with either the SEC or PAC 12 with the SEC being the first choice.

My theory continues that this was the Big 12 powers' opening offer...

A merger with the PAC 12 won't happen for a lot of different reasons, but I think they also knew a straight merger with the SEC wasn't going to happen either. However, a split between the SEC and ACC is a compromise that most could probably live with. It's a lot of content for 2 leagues that will need it for their respective networks.

Being that Big 12 schools don't have the best T3 deal, gaining access to these networks and increasing their exposure across many of the most populated markets will pay huge dividends.

Also, there's the added bonus that OU could game the situation in such a way that they separate from Texas while protecting several regional rivals. Texas doesn't have to follow A&M, but they still get a regional division.

The Big 12's earning power is split evenly among the 2 leagues. While OU and UT certainly make up the majority of that value, ensuring that other schools that aren't quite as rich make it into the club will balance out the competition rather than making a CFP run about as difficult as a Super Bowl campaign.

I don't think OU minds being in a conference in the Longhorns. They just don't want to be in a situation where UT has unrivaled leverage. As for rivals, outside of NU, I don't think the Sooners really cared for many of their old B8 brethren.

The problem with the ACC and SEC splitting the B12 is that there are too few valuable properties to offset the low value schools that would need to tag along.

I think the issue is the leverage. Texas has historically thrown its weight around a good bit and seems to damage OU's interests in the process.

That and I didn't mention it in the OP, but I think OU has observed the advantages A&M has received since leaving the Big 12 and might like to have some of that for themselves. They'll always play UT, but sharing a league with them may be more trouble than it's worth.

I wouldn't say OU would want to separate from UT at all costs, but moving in concert with UT might require too many concessions on the part of Oklahoma.

Well, if UT headed to the ACC and OU to the SEC in this set up, it would permit Texas to be the King in their Division and would permit Oklahoma to be the same. And that feeds both's ego while working them into a larger structure where they don't have veto ability any longer.

(03-28-2018 11:01 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 09:54 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 04:17 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 02:29 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  The Final Four is upon us!

Spring football is underway!

But we need some fodder to mull over and I'm your man!

I'm going to throw out a crazy thought that I haven't seen anyone else talk about so I want to see what you folks' take on it is...

Theory: Oklahoma does not want to be in a conference with Texas going forward

Now sure, they're still buds and they'll still play every year in Dallas because it's a huge game and helps drive ticket sales and donations. With that said, they have existed in two different leagues for the vast majority of their history. And it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that the experiment has failed as 4 founding members of the Big 12 decided the whole league was more trouble than it was worth.

Oklahoma has suffered from this maybe more than anyone else. They lost 3 long time rivals in the split and their annual tilt with Nebraska was an early casualty of Big 12 politics.

Add to that, more programs in the state of TX had access to big money and big exposure and that ultimately made the Sooners' job tougher. Elevating TCU a few years ago only exacerbated that problem.

Of course, OU hasn't really suffered on the football field. They've won plenty of conference titles and competed for national championships. They have, however, suffered a great deal of instability with all this conference shuffling.

Now, a good while back we saw Berry Tramel comment that certain Big 12 officials had stated that the best solution to their problem was to merge with either the SEC or PAC 12 with the SEC being the first choice.

My theory continues that this was the Big 12 powers' opening offer...

A merger with the PAC 12 won't happen for a lot of different reasons, but I think they also knew a straight merger with the SEC wasn't going to happen either. However, a split between the SEC and ACC is a compromise that most could probably live with. It's a lot of content for 2 leagues that will need it for their respective networks.

Being that Big 12 schools don't have the best T3 deal, gaining access to these networks and increasing their exposure across many of the most populated markets will pay huge dividends.

Also, there's the added bonus that OU could game the situation in such a way that they separate from Texas while protecting several regional rivals. Texas doesn't have to follow A&M, but they still get a regional division.

The Big 12's earning power is split evenly among the 2 leagues. While OU and UT certainly make up the majority of that value, ensuring that other schools that aren't quite as rich make it into the club will balance out the competition rather than making a CFP run about as difficult as a Super Bowl campaign.

I don't think OU minds being in a conference in the Longhorns. They just don't want to be in a situation where UT has unrivaled leverage. As for rivals, outside of NU, I don't think the Sooners really cared for many of their old B8 brethren.

The problem with the ACC and SEC splitting the B12 is that there are too few valuable properties to offset the low value schools that would need to tag along.

I think the issue is the leverage. Texas has historically thrown its weight around a good bit and seems to damage OU's interests in the process.

That and I didn't mention it in the OP, but I think OU has observed the advantages A&M has received since leaving the Big 12 and might like to have some of that for themselves. They'll always play UT, but sharing a league with them may be more trouble than it's worth.

I wouldn't say OU would want to separate from UT at all costs, but moving in concert with UT might require too many concessions on the part of Oklahoma.

Well, if UT headed to the ACC and OU to the SEC in this set up, it would permit Texas to be the King in their Division and would permit Oklahoma to be the same. And that feeds both's ego while working them into a larger structure where they don't have veto ability any longer.

Being King is no longer more preferable than stability. Swofford and ESPN have proven that.
The ACC wrapped themselves in the bosom of ESPN and have long term stability. University Presidents like stability more than money.

(03-29-2018 07:50 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 11:01 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 09:54 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 04:17 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 02:29 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  The Final Four is upon us!

Spring football is underway!

But we need some fodder to mull over and I'm your man!

I'm going to throw out a crazy thought that I haven't seen anyone else talk about so I want to see what you folks' take on it is...

Theory: Oklahoma does not want to be in a conference with Texas going forward

Now sure, they're still buds and they'll still play every year in Dallas because it's a huge game and helps drive ticket sales and donations. With that said, they have existed in two different leagues for the vast majority of their history. And it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that the experiment has failed as 4 founding members of the Big 12 decided the whole league was more trouble than it was worth.

Oklahoma has suffered from this maybe more than anyone else. They lost 3 long time rivals in the split and their annual tilt with Nebraska was an early casualty of Big 12 politics.

Add to that, more programs in the state of TX had access to big money and big exposure and that ultimately made the Sooners' job tougher. Elevating TCU a few years ago only exacerbated that problem.

Of course, OU hasn't really suffered on the football field. They've won plenty of conference titles and competed for national championships. They have, however, suffered a great deal of instability with all this conference shuffling.

Now, a good while back we saw Berry Tramel comment that certain Big 12 officials had stated that the best solution to their problem was to merge with either the SEC or PAC 12 with the SEC being the first choice.

My theory continues that this was the Big 12 powers' opening offer...

A merger with the PAC 12 won't happen for a lot of different reasons, but I think they also knew a straight merger with the SEC wasn't going to happen either. However, a split between the SEC and ACC is a compromise that most could probably live with. It's a lot of content for 2 leagues that will need it for their respective networks.

Being that Big 12 schools don't have the best T3 deal, gaining access to these networks and increasing their exposure across many of the most populated markets will pay huge dividends.

Also, there's the added bonus that OU could game the situation in such a way that they separate from Texas while protecting several regional rivals. Texas doesn't have to follow A&M, but they still get a regional division.

The Big 12's earning power is split evenly among the 2 leagues. While OU and UT certainly make up the majority of that value, ensuring that other schools that aren't quite as rich make it into the club will balance out the competition rather than making a CFP run about as difficult as a Super Bowl campaign.

I don't think OU minds being in a conference in the Longhorns. They just don't want to be in a situation where UT has unrivaled leverage. As for rivals, outside of NU, I don't think the Sooners really cared for many of their old B8 brethren.

The problem with the ACC and SEC splitting the B12 is that there are too few valuable properties to offset the low value schools that would need to tag along.

I think the issue is the leverage. Texas has historically thrown its weight around a good bit and seems to damage OU's interests in the process.

That and I didn't mention it in the OP, but I think OU has observed the advantages A&M has received since leaving the Big 12 and might like to have some of that for themselves. They'll always play UT, but sharing a league with them may be more trouble than it's worth.

I wouldn't say OU would want to separate from UT at all costs, but moving in concert with UT might require too many concessions on the part of Oklahoma.

Well, if UT headed to the ACC and OU to the SEC in this set up, it would permit Texas to be the King in their Division and would permit Oklahoma to be the same. And that feeds both's ego while working them into a larger structure where they don't have veto ability any longer.

Being King is no longer more preferable than stability. Swofford and ESPN have proven that.
The ACC wrapped themselves in the bosom of ESPN and have long term stability. University Presidents like stability more than money.

Every university is different and every university president is different. Wake Forest probably does prefer stability and couldn’t care less about being king. Texas, on the other hand, has proven itself to care about being king. It doesn’t matter how big or small its kingdom is. The SWC was small and the original XII was big. Most of the ACC, if not all, probably prefers stability with no opportunity of being relegated to a non-power conference. Oklahoma probably doesn’t have to wear a crown like Texas as long as it’s treated in high regard and doesn’t fade into the background.

(03-28-2018 10:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 08:18 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 05:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-28-2018 04:59 PM)michael.stevens.3110 Wrote:  Texas Tech drags this group down .... THE LOWEST ACADEMIC RANKING OF ALL P 5 ...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

That may be but they are a Texas state school, and in this kind of move would have to be accounted for.

T.C.U. puts the ACC in DFW while Oklahoma/Oklahoma State does that for the SEC. If the RRR remains with Texas in a different conference from Oklahoma then the Pokes need to stay with the Sooners to keep annual games easier to schedule. Consequently if Kansas heads to the SEC in this scenario then Kansas State needs to be in the ACC where their annual with the Jayhawks is an ACC/SEC crossover.

So I think you would be looking at Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech and West Virginia to the SEC. And, Baylor, Houston, Kansas State, T.C.U., and Texas to the ACC. I do think if something like this happens then Notre Dame needs to make a decision and with Texas in the fold I think the ACC is as good as it gets for them.

Why Houston? It gives Texas that local division that the Horns like.

So the SEC sets up this way:

Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Texas A&M, Texas Tech

Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, West Virginia

And for the ACC something like this:

Baylor, Houston, Kansas State, Texas, T.C.U.

Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse

Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Wake Forest

9 game conference schedule?
Play everyone in your own division every year and rotate another division every year? You could play every school every three years.

This, but with one permanent in conference rival. So a 10 game schedule.

That really would be a very nice conference setup for the SEC & ACC and the existing Big 12 schools really couldn't complain too much. If ESPN wants to lock up rights it would be a great move. What would be really great is if Nebraska from the B1G traded spots with KU or Missouri. You would restore one of the great rivalries of all time. And IMO while Nebraska might like the academics of the B1G, the recruiting gains they would get would give them a much better chance at succeeding again.