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.
I noticed in an article on Yahoo that Neinas was saying that they expect WVU to be in the Big 12 next year. Kinda odd that he wants WVU in the Big 12 in violation of the bylaws of the Big East, but expects MU to fulfill their obligation to the Big 12. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mosbonian:
I noticed in an article on Yahoo that Neinas was saying that they expect WVU to be in the Big 12 next year. Kinda odd that he wants WVU in the Big 12 in violation of the bylaws of the Big East, but expects MU to fulfill their obligation to the Big 12.
That's probably because the Big East has 5 teams and doesn't have a 1.2 billion dollar TV contract. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kcfan82:
That's probably because the Big East has 5 teams and doesn't have a 1.2 billion dollar TV contract.
So what you are saying is that there are special circumstances where a Commissioner is allowed to encourage breaking contracts and obligations? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mosbonian:
So what you are saying is that there are special circumstances where a Commissioner is allowed to encourage breaking contracts and obligations?
I guess it depends on whether or not you call a conference with 5 teams a conference. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kcfan82:
I guess it depends on whether or not you call a conference with 5 teams a conference.
It's still a conference....I understand your point about it being reduced in size by almost 50 %, but it's still a conference. If Neinas is pretty much telling WVU to abandon the Big East he can't be hypocritical and act like he wants MU to stay. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mosbonian:
It's still a conference....I understand your point about it being reduced in size by almost 50 %, but it's still a conference. If Neinas is pretty much telling WVU to abandon the Big East he can't be hypocritical and act like he wants MU to stay.
I think the big issue surrounding the Big 12 is having 10 teams to save the TV contract. If WVU gets out of the Big East, I don't see why they would keep Missouri around if they want out.
In my opinion, the push to get WVU in next year is to allow Missouri to go and yet save the TV contract.
I'm not sure why the Big 12 would want to play the season with 11 teams. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mosbonian:
It's still a conference....I understand your point about it being reduced in size by almost 50 %, but it's still a conference. If Neinas is pretty much telling WVU to abandon the Big East he can't be hypocritical and act like he wants MU to stay.
lol. MU isn't getting out of their exit fees. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mr. Plow:
lol. MU isn't getting out of their exit fees.
I'm not worried about paying Exit Fees....I just think Neinas weakened his bargaining position yet again by his proclamation. Each time he opens his mouth the amount that MU has to pay should get smaller. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mosbonian:
I'm not worried about paying Exit Fees....I just think Neinas weakened his bargaining position yet again by his proclamation. Each time he opens his mouth the amount that MU has to pay should get smaller.
Yeah....I'm sure it will. His words make the contract invalid. If you guys hold out long enough, maybe you'll just have to buy him a double cheeseburger & you'll be good.
If MU leaves next year, and I expect them to, they'll pay no less than what CU paid but more likely around what NU paid regardless. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mr. Plow:
Yeah....I'm sure it will. His words make the contract invalid. If you guys hold out long enough, maybe you'll just have to buy him a double cheeseburger & you'll be good.
If MU leaves next year, and I expect them to, they'll pay no less than what CU paid but more likely around what NU paid regardless.
While I would love to see them pay as little as possible, if they only pay a little more than CU or NU I would be happy.
Although I would spring for a Cheeseburger for Neinas as an extra. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mosbonian:
While I would love to see them pay as little as possible, if they only pay a little more than CU or NU I would be happy.
Although I would spring for a Cheeseburger for Neinas as an extra.
How about the whole series of Matlock on VHS. I'm sure his grandkids bought him a VCR at some point. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mr. Plow:
Yeah....I'm sure it will. His words make the contract invalid. If you guys hold out long enough, maybe you'll just have to buy him a double cheeseburger & you'll be good.
If MU leaves next year, and I expect them to, they'll pay no less than what CU paid but more likely around what NU paid regardless.
Considering most anti-Mizzou folks in this thread seem to think that Mizzou will be paying 20 million or more, a six million dollar exit fee would be a clear victory for Mizzou.
From what I have read, the league hasn't even begun to negotiate exit fees with aTm yet, despite the university pestering the conference to do so. [Reply]
Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy:
Considering most anti-Mizzou folks in this thread seem to think that Mizzou will be paying 20 million or more, a six million dollar exit fee would be a clear victory for Mizzou.
From what I have read, the league hasn't even begun to negotiate exit fees with aTm yet, despite the university pestering the conference to do so.
I'm not vouching for anyone in this thread, but I've consistently stuck with $6-$12 million. It may start at $27 million, but in the end it'll $6-$12. [Reply]
