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 DJ's left nut:
God love ya, man.
I'm not sure what I'd do if you ever chose to not mindlessly parrot the company line.
"Proud Members of the Big 12!"
You really exposed yourself when you started touting how glad you were to have Bernadette Gray-Little running the show during all this; as though there was a name that could've been in there who you wouldn't have blindly supported.
You really are KnowMo with a chickenhawk hat on.
My school splits a state with another BCS school that has half the population of yours.
And still has a larger endowment...
The Big12 has served my school just fine.
Sorry it hasn't worked out as well for you. [Reply]
Originally Posted by alnorth:
Missouri has a higher football ceiling then Kansas, IF they do not devastate their Texas recruiting pipeline. Mizzou's population is much larger than Kansas, and undiluted by a 2nd school. Missouri is not big enough alone to be successful, but combine Missouri with punching above their weight in Texas recruiting, then combine that with the Big 12 north, and you've got a decent chance at a national championship at least every decade.
In the SEC, Mizzou becomes Arkansas or Vanderbilt, which is still better than potentially being left out of the BCS conferences, but far lower than the Big 12 north, if long-term stability were assured. (which might be why Mizzou was demanding a 13-year commitment)
You realize in the past 10 years Arkansas has been to 2 SEC Championship games and the Sugar Bowl? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Wickedson:
Read the posts man.
I didn't bring it up.
I go to Yankee games because I love baseball.
Frazod seems to think that makes me a Yankee fan. I don't get why he thinks that.
Whatever, not wanting to keep on an off subject issue in a thread that is already this jam packed.
I for one as an MU fan am in favor of going to the SEC. I see the challenges in football opponents as raising the bar higher and having to work to meet the new competive levels, just like playing the south teams more consistently would have in the B12. Hopefully losing on some of the recruiting clout in TX won't outweigh the additional benefits of being in the SEC and the new inroads in all these new states. I think the channels in TX aren't going to dissolve instantly, but could weaken over time as HS coaches and other types of relationships with recruiters end naturally.
I like MU taking their future the directions of their choosing instead of hanging on tight and hoping for the best. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
What do you base this on?
What inherent advantage does Arkansas have over Mizzou? None - absolutely none. There's no history, no geography, no population base - NOTHING that says that Arkansas should be more successful than MU.
Yet Arkansas is out there doing a hell of a job, getting good recruits and excelling. What keeps Mizzou from doing that? Absolutely nothing - but you damn haughty OU fans just want to keep seeing everyone but OU and UT as the little sisters of the poor - fine, whatever.
And do you think that Pinkel brought a lucky rabbits foot with him when he came to the XII from freaking Toledo and THAT'S why he can recruit Texas? No - Pinkel made damn strong inroads into Texas because he's a very very good recruiter. He'll make those same inroads into Louisiana, Florida, etc...
And again - Mizzou football has had great fan support for decades, even when we were truly shit. It will continue to have excellent fan support.
What's more likely than us whining about the SEC is us breathing a sigh of relief after OU and UT decides to finally get the hell out of dodge and the whole XII collapses in on itself.
What are you talking about? I said MU would probably be about 7th or 8th in the conference most years. Arkansas is about the 7th best program in the conference so I'm giving you that you can be Arkanas. What I won't give you is LSU, Alabama, Florida, Auburn, Georgia, and probably South Carolina. MU can beat a good team in a given year ,but I just don't see them as even being more then the 7th-8th best football program in the conference. Will they have some years they might creep up to a 4th or 5th place finish? Possibly, but they possibly could have some years where they drop to 9th or 10th as well. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
What inherent advantage does Arkansas have over Mizzou? None - absolutely none. There's no history, no geography, no population base - NOTHING that says that Arkansas should be more successful than MU.
Arkansas has a much closer proximity to the deep south and Texas. They get an OK number of recruits and still can't win. Mizzou gets their Texas recruits because they are the best Big 12 option after UT/OU and they play against 4 Texas teams. Texas kids who want to play against Texas A&M or for the SEC will have Mizzou pretty far down their list. Just about every major SEC team from Bama to Miss to Auburn to LSU would have to say no before they settle for Columbia.
Leaving for the SEC is going to crush Mizzou's Texas recruiting pipeline. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Wickedson:
Read the posts man.
I didn't bring it up.
I go to Yankee games because I love baseball.
Frazod seems to think that makes me a Yankee fan. I don't get why he thinks that.
Sorry, but if you spends thousands of dollars on season tickets for baseball, or any other sport for that manner, just about anyone with common sense would classify you as a fan of that team. Either that or incredibly stupid for lighting that much money on fire.
You just don't want to admit you are a Yankees fan. Which is funny, because as hated as the Yankees are, they have a history that their fans certainly can be proud of. [Reply]
Originally Posted by alnorth:
Arkansas has a much closer proximity to the deep south and Texas. They get an OK number of recruits and still can't win. Mizzou gets their Texas recruits because they are the best Big 12 option after UT/OU and they play against 4 Texas teams. Texas kids who want to play against Texas A&M or for the SEC will have Mizzou pretty far down their list. Just about every major SEC team from Bama to Miss to Auburn to LSU would have to say no before they settle for Columbia.
Leaving for the SEC is going to crush Mizzou's Texas recruiting pipeline.
Still can't win? Do you even follow football?
Arkansas was in the Sugar Bowl just last year. They are a top 10 team right now. Petrino is one of the highest paid coaches in the country because Arky is a big time program.
Saying Mizzou could become Arky as if it is some type of insult shows how clueless you truly are about all of this. [Reply]
