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.
On Friday afternoon, Missouri officials announced that Chancellor Brady Deaton had been authorized to make decisions regarding the University's conference affiliation. Multiple sources have told PowerMizzou.com the first major decision from Deaton should come in the next 24 hours.
Three separate sources have told PowerMizzou.com Deaton is expected to inform the Big 12 Conference that Missouri will conditionally withdraw from the league on Monday.
There is a Big 12 Board of Directors meeting scheduled for Monday in Dallas. On Sunday, the Kansas City Star reported that Deaton would attend the meeting. Again, sources have told PowerMizzou.com the expectation is that Missouri will withdraw from the Big 12 at that time, pending acceptance into another conference.
While nothing official has happened, it is widely speculated and believed that the Tigers will become, upon their withdrawal from the Big 12, the 14th member of the Southeastern Conference. No exact timetable for that acceptance is known, though most believe it will happen by the end of the week.
Multiple sources have indicated that Missouri is likely to be placed in the Eastern Division of the SEC. PowerMizzou.com will continue to follow this story to its conclusion. [Reply]
Contrary to what that bozo Keitzman says, the DeArmonds have been all over this story from the start so it wouldn't surprise me at all if it goes down tomorrow.
Makes sense for the SEC to do this quickly...bunch of free pub with the upcoming Mizzou/A&M. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Jerm:
Contrary to what that bozo Keitzman says, the DeArmonds have been all over this story from the start so it wouldn't surprise me at all if it goes down tomorrow.
Makes sense for the SEC to do this quickly...bunch of free pub with the upcoming Mizzou/A&M.
That would make sense. This is being drug out too long and is really painting a poor image for Mizzou. [Reply]
West Virginia top Big 12 candidate
By Kirk Bohls | Sunday, October 23, 2011, 01:44 PM
Two high-level Big 12 school administrators said on Sunday the conference expects Missouri to leave and will act quickly to replace the Tigers, focusing primarily on West Virginia with Louisville as a strong second candidate.
“I think that’s accurate,” one school official told the American-Statesman. “I’d say West Virginia is the leader in the clubhouse. I think we’ll come out better than before. I’d rather be with someone who wants to be with our conference than anybody who doesn’t.”
Asked why the Big 12 would be upgraded, the official said, “West Virginia has better football than Missouri, better basketball than Missouri, a better budget than Missouri and more passion among its fans than Missouri. They’re better, anyway you turn ‘em. The travel’s not good (to Morgantown, W. Va) but that’s it.”
He added there is support for Louisville, but said a lagging football program hurts its appeal.
The well-placed administrator said Missouri would probably have to remain in the Big 12 next school year because it’s getting so late in the process to find a replacement quickly and an early Missouri exit could lead to financial liability for that school.
The Big 12 board of directors meet on Monday to discuss conference membership. Missouri’s board of curators on Friday authorized its chancellor, Brady Deaton, to negotiate and execute contracts with other conferences interested in the school.
A second Big 12 school official told the Statesman he prefers Louisville because of its closer proximity and said travel to West Virginia would make for too big a burden on the athletes.
“The only place where there’s an advantage for West Virginia is better football,” the second official said. “Their academics is not as strong. If there’s any thought about what’s best for the student-athlete, we’ll go with Louisville.”
Oklahoma athletic director Joe Castiglione told reporters on Saturday that “our intent would be to move as quickly as we could. There may be other issues that hinder our ability to move as fast as we want.”
Originally Posted by ChiTown:
West Virginia top Big 12 candidate
By Kirk Bohls | Sunday, October 23, 2011, 01:44 PM
Two high-level Big 12 school administrators said on Sunday the conference expects Missouri to leave and will act quickly to replace the Tigers, focusing primarily on West Virginia with Louisville as a strong second candidate.
“I think that’s accurate,” one school official told the American-Statesman. “I’d say West Virginia is the leader in the clubhouse. I think we’ll come out better than before. I’d rather be with someone who wants to be with our conference than anybody who doesn’t.”
Asked why the Big 12 would be upgraded, the official said, “West Virginia has better football than Missouri, better basketball than Missouri, a better budget than Missouri and more passion among its fans than Missouri. They’re better, anyway you turn ‘em. The travel’s not good (to Morgantown, W. Va) but that’s it.”
He added there is support for Louisville, but said a lagging football program hurts its appeal.
The well-placed administrator said Missouri would probably have to remain in the Big 12 next school year because it’s getting so late in the process to find a replacement quickly and an early Missouri exit could lead to financial liability for that school.
The Big 12 board of directors meet on Monday to discuss conference membership. Missouri’s board of curators on Friday authorized its chancellor, Brady Deaton, to negotiate and execute contracts with other conferences interested in the school.
A second Big 12 school official told the Statesman he prefers Louisville because of its closer proximity and said travel to West Virginia would make for too big a burden on the athletes. “The only place where there’s an advantage for West Virginia is better football,” the second official said. “Their academics is not as strong. If there’s any thought about what’s best for the student-athlete, we’ll go with Louisville.”
Oklahoma athletic director Joe Castiglione told reporters on Saturday that “our intent would be to move as quickly as we could. There may be other issues that hinder our ability to move as fast as we want.”
The first one: West Virginia has had a pretty easy road in the Big East over the past decade. I think you could put a number of Big 12 teams (Missouri, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, obviously Texas and Oklahoma, Nebraska) in that league over the past 10 years, and they'd do just as well as West Virginia (which fell off considerably after losing Rich Rodriguez and Pat White). I would have loved Missouri to be playing in that league in 2007. It would have been undefeated and in the national title game.
So I don't place much stock in the whole "West Virginia is better than Mizzou because it has been to the BCS."
Missouri and West Virginia have nearly identical athletic budgets (around $56 million). West Virginia is filling its stadium this year (with a new, exciting coach, mind you) at 92 percent of capacity. Right around what Missouri does (though they'd be around 95 percent if the GA hill seats were not counted). So those statements are also unfounded speculation.
West Virginia is better at basketball, I won't dispute that. But that's not what is driving the bus on this issue (in fact, the fact that this comment was included makes me wonder if, perhaps, it was a KU official who said this).
On the second statement...
Again, Missouri probably would have won the Big East in 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2010 (and been right there in 2003, when WVU won it despite going 8-5, and 2009).
Also, does anyone else find it ironic that the official made a grammatical error in his comment about academics? "academics is" :-) [Reply]
I don't fault the Big 12 for going on the defensive here, honestly I would want to do the exact same thing if the roles were reversed. Of course they want to trash Mizzou as we are leaving and praise our replacement. Everyone is bitter. West Virginia has a pretty solid athletic department and should help keep the Big 12 one of the best football conferences as long as it sticks around.
I think everyone is ready for this saga to end so both parties can move on. [Reply]
Originally Posted by eazyb81:
I don't fault the Big 12 for going on the defensive here, honestly I would want to do the exact same thing if the roles were reversed. Of course they want to trash Mizzou as we are leaving and praise our replacement. Everyone is bitter. West Virginia has a pretty solid athletic department and should help keep the Big 12 one of the best football conferences as long as it sticks around.
I think everyone is ready for this saga to end so both parties can move on.
Oh, no fault placed on my part. I just thought it was funny that their spin comes down to saying... well, WVU is better at basketball and then making several claims the numbers show are not true. [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
Oh, no fault placed on my part. I just thought it was funny that their spin comes down to saying... well, WVU is better at basketball and then making several claims the numbers show are not true.
I really think the point to it is that with WVU the Big 12 is going to be getting pretty much exactly what they'll be losing in MU & gaining a pretty solid basketball program on top of it.....which equals a win for the Big 12.
You can take it as talking shit on MU, but it is what it is. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mr. Plow:
I really think the point to it is that with WVU the Big 12 is going to be getting pretty much exactly what they'll be losing in MU & gaining a pretty solid basketball program on top of it.....which equals a win for the Big 12.
You can take it as talking shit on MU, but it is what it is.
Except for the whole hygiene and sleeping with their sister issue that WVU has. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mr. Plow:
I really think the point to it is that with WVU the Big 12 is going to be getting pretty much exactly what they'll be losing in MU & gaining a pretty solid basketball program on top of it.....which equals a win for the Big 12.
You can take it as talking shit on MU, but it is what it is.
In terms of football and basketball, most definitely the two programs are very similar. WVU's academics are pretty terrible, and many schools tend to coordinate on research projects with other conference members, so there could be an indirect hit there by replacing Mizzou with a school like WVU (and A&M with TCU). WVU does not bring any big TV markets but that is less of an issue for the Big 12 because there isn't a conference TV network. So purely in terms of football (and basketball with WVU), Big 12 made probably the best realistic additions they could make. [Reply]
Originally Posted by eazyb81:
In terms of football and basketball, most definitely the two programs are very similar. WVU's academics are pretty terrible, and many schools tend to coordinate on research projects with other conference members, so there could be an indirect hit there by replacing Mizzou with a school like WVU (and A&M with TCU). WVU does not bring any big TV markets but that is less of an issue for the Big 12 because there isn't a conference TV network. So purely in terms of football (and basketball with WVU), Big 12 made probably the best realistic additions they could make.
I have no idea about the academics of this move, but really - academics have as much to do with any of this as basketball does. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mr. Plow:
I really think the point to it is that with WVU the Big 12 is going to be getting pretty much exactly what they'll be losing in MU & gaining a pretty solid basketball program on top of it.....which equals a win for the Big 12.
You can take it as talking shit on MU, but it is what it is.
I'm taking it as spin, not shit talking. Just mildly amused by it. Here's some Mizzou spin to counter.
The Big 12 also has to deal with:
Losing four million people in its footprint (net), the No. 21 TV market, a big chunk of the No. 31 TV market. That could be hurtful when the next TV deal comes around.
Losing a strong academic partner.
The geographical displacement of WVU.
The fanbase. People want to talk about Missouri's fanbase being low class, etc? Wait till you meet the folks from Morgantown. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ChiTown:
West Virginia top Big 12 candidate
By Kirk Bohls | Sunday, October 23, 2011, 01:44 PM
Two high-level Big 12 school administrators said on Sunday the conference expects Missouri to leave and will act quickly to replace the Tigers, focusing primarily on West Virginia with Louisville as a strong second candidate.
“I think that’s accurate,” one school official told the American-Statesman. “I’d say West Virginia is the leader in the clubhouse. I think we’ll come out better than before. I’d rather be with someone who wants to be with our conference than anybody who doesn’t.”
Asked why the Big 12 would be upgraded, the official said, “West Virginia has better football than Missouri, better basketball than Missouri, a better budget than Missouri and more passion among its fans than Missouri. They’re better, anyway you turn ‘em. The travel’s not good (to Morgantown, W. Va) but that’s it.”
He added there is support for Louisville, but said a lagging football program hurts its appeal.
The well-placed administrator said Missouri would probably have to remain in the Big 12 next school year because it’s getting so late in the process to find a replacement quickly and an early Missouri exit could lead to financial liability for that school.
The Big 12 board of directors meet on Monday to discuss conference membership. Missouri’s board of curators on Friday authorized its chancellor, Brady Deaton, to negotiate and execute contracts with other conferences interested in the school.
A second Big 12 school official told the Statesman he prefers Louisville because of its closer proximity and said travel to West Virginia would make for too big a burden on the athletes.
“The only place where there’s an advantage for West Virginia is better football,” the second official said. “Their academics is not as strong. If there’s any thought about what’s best for the student-athlete, we’ll go with Louisville.”
Oklahoma athletic director Joe Castiglione told reporters on Saturday that “our intent would be to move as quickly as we could. There may be other issues that hinder our ability to move as fast as we want.”
Originally Posted by Mr. Plow:
Well, yeah....there's that. But I think that equals out with the loss the conference takes in meth production, porn & firework shops.:-)
What a bunch of bullshit. Porn and fireworks are awesome, and you know it. This is especially true when used in conjunction. [Reply]
