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.
You're acting like Kietzman is just some petty, jealous asshole. He's repeatedly told us that this isn't about jealousy. It's about what's best for Kansas City. In fact, he went so far as to say that he felt sorry for the University of Missouri. I'm sure he'll put his money where his mouth is. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Pants:
I hope they keep the Arrowhead game, though. I don't see a reason not to play MU at Arrowhead if both schools stand to make money as a result.
If anything other than bruised labias come into play, they will. I've heard over and over that this is a great rivalry that MU should work to preserve. If KU won't play us in the non-con, then it really wasn't a rivalry. It was just a game that they played because it was on the schedule. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Pants:
I hope they keep the Arrowhead game, though. I don't see a reason not to play MU at Arrowhead if both schools stand to make money as a result.
The football game to me is a tossup.
Biggest reason is the way college football has devolved into pretty much just being a showcase for NFL players anyway these days. Are we going to have any close games this year on a big stage??
CFB is a great gameday atmosphere with the tailgating, girls, and parties.
Basketball is a much more grind of a sport night in and night out. Much more complex when it comes to scheduling.
Plus the money will be too big for either school to pass up with the annual event. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Saul Good:
If KU won't play us in the non-con, then it really wasn't a rivalry. It was just a game that they played because it was on the schedule.
Originally Posted by Saul Good:
You're acting like Kietzman is just some petty, jealous asshole. He's repeatedly told us that this isn't about jealousy. It's about what's best for Kansas City. In fact, he went so far as to say that he felt sorry for the University of Missouri. I'm sure he'll put his money where his mouth is.
lol because he is a petty jealous asshole. On 810's home page it says MU hasn't decided to go to the SEC... I don't know it seems to me they have [Reply]
Originally Posted by Wickedson:
The football game to me is a tossup.
Biggest reason is the way college football has devolved into pretty much just being a showcase for NFL players anyway these days. Are we going to have any close games this year on a big stage??
CFB is a great gameday atmosphere with the tailgating, girls, and parties.
Basketball is a much more grind of a sport night in and night out. Much more complex when it comes to scheduling.
Plus the money will be too big for either school to pass up with the annual event.
Originally Posted by Saul Good:
Then count them. I don't really give a shit. In the last 20 years, Kentucky has won 2, and KU has won 1. In the modern era of college basketball, Kentucky has won 3, and KU has won 2. In the history of the NCAA tournament, Kentucky has won 7, and KU has won 3.
Define it however you want. I'm not saying that KU isn't one of the 5 or 6 best programs in NCAA basketball history. The discussion was about the rest of the conference. Outside of KU, no Big XII team has really mattered in decades.
Agreed, no team has actually won it all in (2) decades, but IMO they have mattered. I know 1988 doesn't fit into your "modern era" but OU had a pretty nice run that year. Texas has had several, OSU and others have had the teams to do it.
Do you think Florida will continue with the pattern they set of two championships? They missed the tournament 2 years in a row, then lost first round. But there is hope for them, the lost to Butler last year. :-)
But then again, I am not sure why we are even discussing this. The SEC doesn't give a crap about College BB. Just ask Rick Pitino, Billy Donovan, Kevin Stallings, Mike Anderson etc. [Reply]
