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 mikeyis4dcats.:
I know about contracts, I do write contracts routinely. I am not a lawyer.
But you can't argue both ways, you either go for the strict interpretation or you go for the "intent". MU wants it both ways.
For someone that knows all about contracts, you sure don't seem to know when/how they can be enforced. You should probably brush up on that before you write another one - it's kinda important.
MU can absolutely argue that it is governed by the letter of the contract it actually signed (i.e. its previous membership agreement and the by-laws it operated under at that time).
It can then argue that the ambiguity contained in said agreement makes it clear that they are subject to little to no exit fees. They can argue that the liquidated damages provision is punitive in nature and therefore unenforceable. They can argue all kinds of neat shit that would call the enforceability of the fees into question and greatly diminish the actual value of the cause of action.
Hence - they will settle at around $8 million because that's probably the 'true' value of the suit.
Again - I've already gone over this. Please try to pay attention with the rest of the class. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Saul Good:
I've been pretty consistent in predicting $3-6 million. If you think I've said otherwise, link it.
I've never said you thought anything other than $3 million, which I've said was way to low and that you'll end up in the $6-$12 million range.
I'll link you to the $3 million, you link me to where you said up to $6 million. I've missed it if you did.
Originally Posted by Saul Good:
Nebraska paid around $6,000,000. Now that the conference is a shell of what it was when we signed our contract, I'd guess Mizzou gets stuck for around $3,000,000. Your share would be in the $250,000 range. Don't spend it all in one place.
Originally Posted by Wickedson:
KK saying the SEC is in trouble.
I've not listened to one word he has said, but man, from what you guys type he sounds like he is just throwing shit at the wall and HOPING that something sticks. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Wickedson:
KK saying the SEC is in trouble.
And like I said - everytime KK says anything with regards to the SEC or Missouri, he exposes just how biased he is.
He's an absolute hatchet man on this thing.
He's just trying to position himself as the shining light for KU and K-State fans at this point. It can't be that he truly believes what he's saying here because it just doesn't make a damn bit of sense. [Reply]
We were talking about KK and Petro on Powermizzou today, and KK made an appearance and posted in it. Didn't say anything noteworthy, but I thought it was kind of funny. Those local sports guys read all this shit. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
And like I said - everytime KK says anything with regards to the SEC or Missouri, he exposes just how biased he is.
He's an absolute hatchet man on this thing.
He's just trying to position himself as the shining light for KU and K-State fans at this point. It can't be that he truly believes what he's saying here because it just doesn't make a damn bit of sense.
He alienated Nebraska fans last year apparently and now from what I am reading he is doing the same to MU fans... doesn't seem like a great business stratedgy to me. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
And like I said - everytime KK says anything with regards to the SEC or Missouri, he exposes just how biased he is.
He's an absolute hatchet man on this thing.
He's just trying to position himself as the shining light for KU and K-State fans at this point. It can't be that he truly believes what he's saying here because it just doesn't make a damn bit of sense.
Jack Harry comes on in twenty minutes.
I hope he mentions how the SEC ratings are down and that there isn't the big TV contract coming like everyone thought... [Reply]