Anyways, Chip Brown from Orangebloods.com reports OU may apply to the Pac-12 by the end of the month.
Oklahoma will apply for membership to the Pac-12 before the end of the month, and Oklahoma State is expected to follow suit, a source close to OU's administration told Orangebloods.com.
Even though Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott said Friday the Pac-12 was not interested in expansion at this time, OU's board of regents is fed up with the instability in the Big 12, the source said.
The OU board of regents will meet within two weeks to formalize plans to apply for membership to the Pac-12, the source said.
Messages left Sunday night with OU athletic director Joe Castiglione and Oklahoma State athletic director Mike Holder were not immediately returned.
If OU follows through with what appears to be a unanimous sentiment on the seven-member Oklahoma board of regents to leave the Big 12, realignment in college athletics could be heating back up. OU's application would be matched by an application from Oklahoma State, the source said, even though OSU president Burns Hargis and mega-booster Boone Pickens both voiced their support for the Big 12 last Thursday.
There is differing sentiment about if the Pac-12 presidents and chancellors are ready to expand again after bringing in Colorado and Utah last year and landing $3 billion TV contracts from Fox and ESPN. Colorado president Bruce Benson told reporters last week CU would be opposed to any expansion that might bring about east and west divisions in the Pac-12.
Currently, there are north and south divisions in the Pac-12. If OU and OSU were to join, Larry Scott would have to get creative.
Scott's orginal plan last summer was to bring in Colorado, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and put them in an eastern division with Arizona and Arizona State. The old Pac-8 schools (USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington and Washington State) were to be in the west division.
Colorado made the move in June 2010, but when Texas A&M was not on board to go west, the Big 12 came back together with the help of its television partners (ABC/ESPN and Fox).
If Oklahoma and Oklahoma State were accepted into the Pac-12, there would undoubtedly be a hope by Larry Scott that Texas would join the league. But Texas sources have indicated UT is determined to hang onto the Longhorn Network, which would not be permissible in the Pac-12 in its current form.
Texas sources continue to indicate to Orangebloods.com that if the Big 12 falls apart, the Longhorns would consider "all options."
Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe held an emergency conference call 10 days ago with league presidents excluding Oklahoma, Texas and Texas A&M and asked the other league presidents to "work on Texas" because Beebe didn't think the Pac-12 would take Oklahoma without Texas.
Now, it appears OU is willing to take its chances with the Pac-12 with or without Texas.
There seemed to be a temporary pause in any possible shifting of the college athletics' landscape when Baylor led a charge to tie up Texas A&M's move to the Southeastern Conference in legal red tape. BU refused to waive its right to sue the SEC over A&M's departure from the Big 12, and the SEC said it would not admit Texas A&M until it had been cleared of any potential lawsuits.
Baylor, Kansas and Iowa State have indicated they will not waive their right to sue the SEC.
It's unclear if an application by OU to the Pac-12 would draw the same threats of litigation against the Pac-12 from those Big 12 schools.
Originally Posted by WilliamTheIrish:
This is why KK is the best in the biz. He talks and people listen. Just to disagree or speculate. As if the guy would fire Petro for anything said on the air.
Petro quit to take a competing job at the old 980 during PM drive time. Petro lost his ass in the ratings and walked right back in the door to 810.
KK would never fire him.
I love the annual "BOYCOTT 810" threads on Phogtard.net [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP:
They're going to have to spend more $$ to compete.
Rank School Athletic Expenses ’09-’10 (Millions)
1 Florida 105.2
2 LSU 102.2
3 Tennessee 96.6
4 Auburn 90.8
5 Alabama 85.3
6 S. Carolina 78.2
7t Georgia 76.2
7t Kentucky 76.2
9 Arkansas 71.8 X Missouri 53.1
10 Vanderbilt 45.7
11 Ole Miss 43.9
12 Miss. State 36.2
My main concerns have been: 1) Continuing to recruit the Texas pipeline; 2) Will Missouri spend what is required to compete in SEC sports
Both have been blunted recently. Despite the noise coming from KC-area sports folks, reports from closer to the situation - coaches and recruits from Texas - say that the SEC would not hurt Missouri's recruiting there (mostly due to the pipelines Pinkel has built).
And from what I've heard, the spending will increase. Part of that is due to travel (A little bit more distance on average will increase a lot of costs). A big part of that is the windfall expected from SEC membership (especially if the the SEC network happens for Tier 3 rights). And another part of it is commitment from boosters.
Based on current feelings, I'd expect the booster base to expand, everyone to donate more, etc. Part of that will be to keep tickets/parking spots.
And I expect the big donors to be polarized. I have heard that the some of the big Columbia donors relish the idea of beating the crap out of Mike Anderson (and perhaps the "kin" that drives Arkie hoops) and are willing to pony up big bucks to help with that... [Reply]
Why didn't MU want to sign their T1/T2 rights away to the Conference with equal sharing between all schools? That would have made the conference 100% stable for 6 to 13 years. Was this all about MU fans' egoes after the Big10 fiasco? I'm sorry if this has already been covered. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Pants:
Why didn't MU want to sign their T1/T2 rights away to the Conference with equal sharing between all schools? That would have made the conference 100% stable for 6 to 13 years. Was this all about MU fans' egoes after the Big10 fiasco? I'm sorry if this has already been covered.
MU wanted longer than six years, but Texas balked. They didn't feel like six years would hold Texas or OU back if they wanted to leave. If Texas wanted to leave to three or four years, they could swallow some losses. This is especially true since they could try to move programming to the LHN for a few years.
A rolling six year commitment would have made more sense. If you leave, the conference owns your 1st and 2nd tier media rights for six years from the time you leave the conference. [Reply]
Originally Posted by beer bacon:
MU wanted longer than six years, but Texas balked. They didn't feel like six years would hold Texas or OU back if they wanted to leave. If Texas wanted to leave to three or four years, they could swallow some losses. This is especially true since they could try to move programming to the LHN for a few years.
A rolling six year commitment would have made more sense. If you leave, the conference owns your 1st and 2nd tier media rights for six years from the time you leave the conference.
Ultimately, I believe that will happen soon. 12-13 years, and Mizzou will stay. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Saulbadguy:
Ultimately, I believe that will happen soon. 12-13 years, and Mizzou will stay.
I hope you are wrong. I think Mizzou has started setting the bridge on fire.
As to KC, this is where KU, KSU, and ISU need to flex what little muscle they have. Texas and OU don't really care about BBall, so conceding the BIG XII tourney to KC is an easy bone to throw to those three schools to keep them quiet and in their corner.
I would not be too terribly surprised if an SEC Tournament winds up in Missouri at some point. It would be a great opportunity for SEC hoops to be on display close to B1G country. St. Louis would probably be the pick, but a totally cool scenario would be the Big 12 being in a KC every other year, and in some of the years that the BIG XII is in Dallas or OKC, have the SEC tournament here in KC. Hopefully the city leaders are smart enough to make a pitch and at least try, even though it would be a long shot. [Reply]
Oh, and Bill Self can kiss my ass. Despite the prestige of KU in recruiting, if he does not play Mizzou he will hurt his chances of recruiting in KC, especially if Mizzou winds up in the SEC West, which is pretty weak in BBall, and has some success. Might not see it a first, but a successful Mizzou bball program in the SEC would hurt KU recruiting in this area, given that recruits want TV time and national exposure, which the SEC will provide in spades. [Reply]