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 Mr. Plow:
Just to clarify. It looks like in 2010 MU made a profit on football of $11,618,417 - adding your estimates to it....
You expect MU football to jump from $11 million to $42-$52 million?
For the record, $42 million would put you ahead of Alabama, Tennessee, & Auburn in the SEC. $52 million would make you the most profitable program in the SEC.
Projections based on reworking television contracts, I'm sure. [Reply]
Originally Posted by buddha:
There is no way for any of us to know what the final figure could be in the SEC. We don't have to say the final figure for Mizzou because in THAT conference, they share equally...what a concept? Once the SEC Network gets going, all bets are off. The conference will print money. The Big 10 Network has been good to the BIG, but the SEC Network will be even bigger.
For the Mizzou fans who are wishing to stay put...it's based on nothing but wishful thinking and fond memories of a conference that no longer exists. The Big 8 was terrific. The Big Tex conference sucks and has sucked since Texas took over.
Anybody in KC who can't see that it was freaking Texas that moved the tournament the first time, moved the conference offices, etc. It's all Texas. Anybody who could leve the Big 12 either has or will in the not too distant future.
Texas sucks!
Thats all on Oklahoma. They could have stuck with the Big 8 schools on voting issues but chose to side with Texas. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Jerm:
Can't wait to see what excuses the hypocrite media comes up with when TCU and WVU come into the Big XII and get smashed...look at the fucking cupcake conferences they've been playing in.
I'm just glad this shit is almost done so EVERYONE can move on.
Just hope we don't have to wait until 2013 to move to the SEC.
Do you even pay attention to college football? [Reply]
Originally Posted by notorious:
I still have yet to figure out what academics or money have to do with any of this when it comes to the fans.
It's not putting a single penny into any of our pockets.
Not much.
But the last thing isn't entirely true.
Originally Posted by buddha:
DeezNutz, do you think anybody on here cares about conference academic standing? BTW, nice move to leave the Bugeaters off the brain list. They got kicked out of the AAU at just the right time. If it had happened a year earlier, they would have never been invited to join the BIG. As it is, they are the "Cousin Eddie" (Vacation movies ref) of the BIG.
Originally Posted by rageeumr:
I know the B1G isn't really an option. But when conferencemageddon 2010 was going down, I could look at Mizzou to the B1G and say "ok, that makes sense". I don't have that feeling with the SEC.
I can definitely agree with that
Originally Posted by rageeumr:
And I agree that we're probably past the point of no return. I'm just concerned that we're leaving for a conference that isn't a great fit. The strength and viability of the SEC is encouraging, but that's no guarantee that it will be a successful move.
I have those concerns as well and I anticipate we will take a step back, but hopefully only a small one backwards before we step forward... ala Arkansas. And as much as people bash Ark, you look at their recent history in the SEC and they have been pretty solid... that's what I am looking for from MU with of course pipe dreams of something bigger. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mr. Plow:
Just to clarify. It looks like in 2010 MU made a profit on football of $11,618,417 - adding your estimates to it....
You expect MU football to jump from $11 million to $41-$51 million?
For the record, $41 million would put you ahead of Alabama, Tennessee, & Auburn in the SEC. $51 million would make you the 2nd most profitable program in the SEC behind Georgia.
I didn't think I would have to explain this, but if the SEC reworks their TV deals, every other SEC member will also see a revenue increase. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Jerm:
Can't wait to see what excuses the hypocrite media comes up with when TCU and WVU come into the Big XII and get smashed...look at the ****ing cupcake conferences they've been playing in.
I'm just glad this shit is almost done so EVERYONE can move on.
Just hope we don't have to wait until 2013 to move to the SEC.
This.
And fuck Texas for causing this bullshit. I would have preferred to have Mizzou in the 12, but this shit that Texas has caused has brought out the worst in all of us. [Reply]
Originally Posted by notorious:
Mizzou fans are just upset that there is already a team of their equal sitting in their still warm chair.
And the talk that Mizzou will maintain a consistant Texas recruiting pipeline makes me :-).
Personally I don't give a rip what happens after we move on. We upgraded, a the big whatever is okay... Fine. Enjoy it. Everybody wins.
I don't think there are any mizzou fans who care about WV. why would they? The core issues are the same, they have a better offer, and Texas and OU won't be around forever and you don't want to be there when that happens. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry:
I think most of the St. Louis talk about not supporting MU is bc for whatever reason MU can't seem to recruit the top basketball players from St. Louis.
There's actually a very good answer to that.
Most of it is because Norm had an icy relationship towards the end of his tenure (I believe he had a falling out with a Vashon coach who was a major AAU guy in the area), Snyder then tried to recruit nationally and neglected STL altogether and MA pretty much just recruited relatives and folks from Alabama.
It's been a coaching issue over the last 10-15 years in STL. It's actually a very sore subject among the MU faithful; we're all equally perplexed that the MU coaches aren't working harder in STL. It has nothing to do with the personality of the city, but with the negligence of the coaching staff. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
There's actually a very good answer to that.
Most of it is because Norm had an icy relationship towards the end of his tenure (I believe he had a falling out with a Vashon coach who was a major AAU guy in the area), Snyder then tried to recruit nationally and neglected STL altogether and MA pretty much just recruited relatives and folks from Alabama.
It's been a coaching issue over the last 10-15 years in STL. It's actually a very sore subject among the MU faithful; we're all equally perplexed that the MU coaches aren't working harder in STL. It has nothing to do with the personality of the city, but with the negligence of the coaching staff.
Well, thank goodness we have Haith. (pukes) [Reply]
