oh, it's a huge deal. no question about it. that's why i THINK all of this is about OU trying to reign in UT a bit.
First Boren and now Stoops says this. I seriously doubt Stoops is just posturing. You know he's saying this with the approval of Boren and Castiglione. OU & OSU are leaving for the Pac 14/16 whether UT comes or not. I love it!
he's a mouthpiece for the university in this. i don't think any comments are coming out here that aren't somewhat rehearsed..whether they be from coaches or anyone else. notice pickens comments the other day...the big xii won't last 5 years....UNLESSSSSSS UT shares revenues. "This conversation is going to come up every year as long as the conference is not equal. You've got to have an equal deal like the SEC...."You can fix the Big 12 now, but it's got to go to an equal deal, and it's not equal." of course the only comments the media focused on were the ones where he predicted the demise...
No, he was politicking. He admitted it too. Here's the original source: http://newsok.com/stoops-hints-ou-t...article/3601616?custom_click=lead_story_title Oklahoma football coach Bob Stoops said Tuesday the OU-Texas series wouldn't "necessarily" continue if the ancient rivals end up in separate conferences. “Life changes,” Stoops said. “If it works out great, if it doesn't it doesn't.” Stoops made his comments at his weekly press conference, but later in private, Stoops smiled when asked if he was playing politics with his statement. “Maybe, playing cards,” Stoops said. Stoops said he was not interested in adding Texas as a non-conference game to go with Notre Dame, Ohio State, Tennessee and LSU the rest of this decade. But Stoops admitted it was possible, or even likely, that the Sooners would seek to get out of those contracts rather than drop Texas.
I've not really seen any coaches behaving as mouthpieces so far. Granted, they try not to say things that stir the pot or could get themselves in trouble. Typically they just give a bunch of "coach speak" and go about their business, letting the administrators and regents handle things. I don't see as much of a threat in those statements as you do, obviously. To me, that's just a dude acknowledging the obviousness and inevitability of change.
i've seen coaches not saying anything...saying they're trying to avoid distraction... i think this whole thing with OU is ultimately about keeping UT in check...about getting them to share revenues. i don't think they're remotely interested in leaving without UT. and i think they know they have it pretty good where they are in terms of competing for national titles. if they can find a way to stay put and get UT to share more, they have no reason to go. that's what i think is happening...that's what i hear is happening. also hearing that aggies will get their invite tomorrow. we'll see.
holy crap, that's classic. i'm telling you....OU isn't leaving without UT. and UT is not interested in giving up the LHN...not yet, anyway. they're looking for a more equitable way to live with one another, and apparently OU has more clout to fight that fight than A&M does.
Keep in mind, Stoops seems more involved in realignment than any other coaches. He was disappointed to stay in the Big12 last year, and he talked a few days ago about how much he'd love playing in the Pac12. And he's apparently very close personally to the AD and the President at OU and has quite a bit of influence. I don't think OU is any longer on the "let's try to fix the Big12" bandwagon. I think they have every intention of going to the Pac12 if they can make it work.
I'm not sure what I think of OU leaving on their own - but I tend to think OU isn't trying to get more equal share in the Big12. They are already a winner in the current setup, so forcing equal share would probably mean less for them unless it becomes two big bullies on the block. I think they are trying to pressure Texas into coming along to the Pac12 as their first option. The fallback would either be going without Texas or keeping the Big12 together. I think if it comes down to that, they go without Texas and know that TX-OU would work just fine as a non-conference game. But this is, of course, all conjecture. I'm hoping A&M officially announces to the SEC this week, and is quickly followed OU stating they are looking at other conferences (like A&M's letter a few weeks back). That puts the pressure on Texas to do something. The longer this all goes on behind the scenes, the more worried I get that we're going to have some kind of crappy outcome.
Again... the conference destroyed the conference. UT just did what it felt was best for itself within the rules the conference set forth. Its on the Big 12.
i think he means that aggy destroyed the conference by being stupid and smelling like a sack of assh*les. that's word on the street, at least.
UT is directly or indirectly a reason for the departures of Neb, Colo, A&M, and possibly soon OU. Granted UT was acting in its self-interest and any school offered the ESPN deal would have been dumb not to accept. Let me rephrase...I can't believe ESPN destroyed the Big 12.
Agreed. It's a lesson in how to avoid getting 20 million dollars in debt like A&M. Woops, I forgot every team in college football is about the collective.
Well, you certainly don't see Michigan or Ohio State or USC or Alabama demanding to be treated differently than their other conference members. Not surprisingly, they are rewarded with conference stability. UT can choose to do what it wants. But the consequences of alienating everyone else shouldn't be too surprising either.
