IF the Little XII stays together, 3 out of the 4 make it decently competitive: -SMU -BYU -Houston -TCU Or all four and add one of: -Air Force -Colorado State -UNLV -Rice -Tulsa -UTEP Ehh. Still better than the MWC and probably the Big East.
UT can go anywhere and do anything it wants. But I just can't take that move seriously. It makes so little sense outside of the academics. It would likely squash LHN, UT would surrender a tremendous amount of power and influence, they would be over 800 miles from the nearest school in their conference and over 1000 miles away from everyone else. Even IF Notre Dame were to be part of the deal, I think it would be a very bad thing for UT. I think they would be better served going independent than joining the Big 10. The Pac 16 is their best option for a "new" conference, IMO. In terms of what benefits UT, I'd say it looks something like this. Pac 16 > Independent > Big 12 + OU > Big 10 > SEC (lulz?) > Big 12 - OU
Oklahoma is playing a dangerous game if they are truly willing to disconnect themselves from the state of Texas. They need a major recruiting base here if they want to stay a power, Oklahoma is nothing without Texas players. You simply don't recruit in a state you don't regularly play in or get coverage in, it's proven fact. They are delusional to think they will be immune from this. I think they are calling Texas's bluff, assuming Texas is sure to follow them. I think they need us more than we need them. Curious what happens if we call theirs.
They will seek to maintain the annual Texas game for sure if only for recruiting, no matter what the noise the Chinless Maestro talks. SEC is going to invade north/east Texas where the Sooners make a lot of hay, they simply can't afford to let the annual game in Dallas go away, and you can't just swap it out with SMU and pretend like it's going to get as much pub.
OU was pretty successful for about 50 years while not playing in the same conference as any of the Texas schools. In any scenario, the TX-OU game would continue, and I'm sure they would occasionally play other Texas teams. At the same time, they'd now be getting more exposure on the west coast as well - and west coast kids leave all the time, so it opens up new potential recruiting pipelines.
My sole question to everyone saying Texas will independent is what about the other sports? There is a reason that the other big name independents are associated with conferences (BYU with WCC & ND with Big East). It is just too difficult to schedule full schedules for all sports. It also makes it a harder to be highly ranked in end-of-the-year NCAA tournaments because the schedule may not be as balanced or difficult and you cannot use accolades such as conference champions to help your case. So if the Big 12 is indead dead, there is no way the Pac 12, Big 10, ACC, or SEC allows Texas to play all sports, excepting football, for them. None, whatsoever. On top of that, if the "distances are too far" and "cultures are too different" for football, why wouldn't that be the case for all those sports with more matches/games and involving a much larger student population in total? That would relegate the Longhorns other sports to the Big East, CUSA, Mountain West, or WAC (unless they do something crazy and put their other sports in a non-football conference which won't happen). Those are all major steps down for the program, look very bad PR wise, and would likely outrage the BOR and alumni base. Yes, Football is the breakmaker in terms of college sports with all the other sports being its illegitamate children, but i see no way the UT athletic administration would be able to justify a noticable downgrade in all other athletic sports schedules, prospects, and reputation to stay a football independant.
Just for the record, that guy (Purple Book Cat) has absolutely zero credibility. A month ago, he had A&M in the final stages of accepting a Big Ten deal. A year ago, he had a quartet of UT/A&M/Mizzou/ND as all but a done deal to the Big Ten. He claimed to "break" Nebraska to the Big Ten by posting 12 hours after Chip Brown. Every one of his stories has been refuted over and over again by both the facts and actual sources. The guy is a fraud, but people keep giving him attention because he tells elaborate stories that are exactly what people want to hear.
Good to know - the only thing I had heard was that he was on top of the Nebraska story throughout last year.
"I don't know where they're going," Switzer said Monday in a telephone interview. "But I think (OU & OSU) would be making a hell of a mistake to not go where Texas goes. "What gives you the best chance to recruit in Texas? To compete against Texas." OU and OSU weren't in the same league with the Longhorns when Switzer coached the Sooners. The Bedlam Brothers belonged to the Big Eight, while Texas was in the Southwest Conference. "It was tougher for me and for all the schools in the Big Eight to recruit in Texas," Switzer said. "Every one of the schools in the Southwest Conference negatively recruited against us. "Bob (Stoops) doesn't have that problem. It's easier to recruit when you're in the same conference with Texas." Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/article.aspx?articleid=20110913_202_B1_STILLW10800
Personally, I think UT would be best off staying put, keeping OU around, and rebuilding a revamped version of the old SWC. Bring in UH for sure. Try and make a play for Arkansas if you can. See how hard the feelings are with TCU and if they're open at all. New Mexico actually makes a little bit of sense. I can't fathom ND signing on. Maybe BYU. But there's no way UT abandons LHN to go Pac-14/16. ACC makes even less sense.
There's some recent Stoops intel where he stated that he felt proximity and prestige was what got them recruits from Texas and that he would be excited about recruiting in California. I think OU could too. TAMU in the SEC might dip into their recruiting as is, fortifying themselves with a California pipeline could be big. They can win the Pac 16 as soon as they get there.
Apparently Texas to the ACC isn't just a stupid rumor. Sounds like a bluff though to get the other conferences to cave in to the LHN when Texas decides to jump off.
But it is looking more and more like OU will not stick around no matter what, given that It would be very hard for UT to stick around in the Big 12 next year because in 2012 the BCS will re-analyze who should have automatic qualifier status based on membership in the 2012 season!!! Losing Nebraska, OU, OSU and potentially Tech would make it extremely difficult for the remaining Big whatever conf to maintain AQ status even if they had Texas.
True - disappointing to see. I'd think UT may as well go independent if that happens. I'd rather see them go to Big Ten than Pac-45, personally.
My BU guy is saying there's very serious work going towards expansion for the Big 12 right now...says contrary to what you're hearing OU isn't walking at the door right now. Said there was a good deal of information he can't share with me yet. In the time since he emailed me (over lunch), this got posted to ESPN; completely contrary to Chip's "the OU regents are unanimous" report. Does anyone else wonder why...if the OU regents were unanimous on leaving, Chip Brown would be the only source for that information?? That doesn't hold a lot of water. By the way, it looks like BU's, ISU's, KU's and KSU's legal team wrote this article, below. Sets up everything as falling apart on A&M leaving; leading to argument against SEC for tortious interference. http://espn.go.com/dallas/ncf/story...rs-not-decision-pac-12-move-seeking-stability Source: Oklahoma nowhere near move By Andy Katz ESPN.com Archive The University of Oklahoma's leadership is interested in a move to the Pac-12 from the Big 12, but such a move is far from a done deal, as the school's overriding concern remains assuring a stable future for its athletic programs, a source said Tuesday. "There is strong interest within the leadership of Oklahoma about the Pac-12, really strong, but to characterize it as already (having) been done, well, that's going too far," said the source. "It is fair to say there is strong interest, but that doesn't mean the Big 12 is not an option anymore. The concern is long-term stability." The Sooners don't have a specific timetable for reaching a decision, according to the source, but there remains hope that one can be reached within three weeks. It's not too late for the Sooners to make a move and be in a new conference in time for the 2012 football season, the source said. The Sooners did meet with Texas officials Sunday in Norman, as was previously reported. But Oklahoma hasn't officially made up its mind as to whether or not it would leave the conference, the source said. Texas officials left the weekend meeting with Oklahoma officials convinced the Sooners plan to apply for Pac-12 membership, a Texas source told ESPN's Joe Schad. "They want to go. We'd like for them to stay. It was disappointing," a Texas source confirmed to ESPN. Among the major factors weighing in Oklahoma's decision are whether the Pac-12 would accept it as a member and whether the conference shows interest in growing to 16 teams. "What is fueling the interest in the Pac-12 is the idea of stability. A year ago, while people were disappointed in the loss of two members (Nebraska to the Big Ten and Colorado to the Pac-12), there was a structure put in place to make the league viable and everyone felt good about it," the source explained. That resolution, along with the new television contract signed last April with Fox and the knowledge that three years remained on the current contract with ESPN/ABC, made staying in the Big 12 more palatable. Then Texas A&M opted to leave the Big 12 and apply to the SEC for membership, throwing the Big 12's long-term future back in doubt. "Texas A&M didn't leave the Big 12 because the competition wasn't strong enough or the financial model wasn't good enough,'' the source said. "All of those are in great shape. They're leaving for other reasons.'' Sources told Schad on Wednesday that Texas is willing to make financial concessions in order to keep the Big 12 together, but if Oklahoma and Oklahoma State join Texas A&M in leaving the conference, Texas does not consider a Big 12 with seven teams remaining to be viable. In that case, Texas options could include following the Sooners and Cowboys to the Pac-12, or seeking independent status, sources said. Texas could also explore the viability of the ACC or Big Ten as possible landing spots, sources said. Among Texas' concerns related to a move to the Pac-12 are how to implement the Longhorn Network in the Pac 12's new TV framework, along with scheduling and travel concerns. One problem with a Big 12 break up is that many of the schools in the conference have already spent or set in motion projects to spend money based on television revenue projections, a source within the Big 12 said. The SEC has unanimously accepted Texas A&M, on the condition that the nine remaining Big 12 schools agree not to sue the conference and/or Texas A&M. But at least three schools -- Baylor, Iowa State and Kansas -- say they're not giving up their legal rights, meaning the SEC would have to waive the requirement for the Aggies to join in 2012. Baylor athletic director Ian McCaw on Monday said the school had no change in its stance, and that it has not been contacted by the SEC to request a change. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State have all said they will not sue the SEC, while Kansas State and Missouri have not indicated whether or not they will retain their legal rights. There always is the chance that the Sooners could be the only school to be invited to the Pac-12 but that it would be extremely difficult for Oklahoma to move without its sister school, Oklahoma State, the source said. Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott has indicated his conference would not be the first to pursue expansion but would monitor the situation nationwide and possibly react to events. Texas officials have publicly stated their desire to keep the Big 12 intact. The source said Oklahoma will have to make a decision before Texas makes up its mind what it will do with its future. Texas has signed a 20-year, $300 million deal with ESPN for its new Longhorn Network, a 24-hour showcase for Texas athletics that has caused several Big 12 members to worry it gives the Longhorns too much power and influence, especially in the areas of exposure and recruiting. Texas likely would have to accept an equal revenue sharing plan in a possible Pac-16 conference. But there are other options for the Longhorns, like the ACC, which would allow Texas to keep its own revenue without having to share with every other member. SEC commissioner Mike Slive said Monday that the 12-member conference has "started to look at schedules for 2012-13" for 13 teams. "Texas A&M is an outstanding academic institution with an exceptional athletic program, passionate fans and wonderful traditions," Slive said. "When Texas A&M joins our conference, we don't have immediate plans for a 14th member. We aren't thinking in terms of numbers. We think about the strength of the SEC and the attractiveness of Texas A&M as an institution."
Also hearing about uncertainty regarding what it takes for Pac12 to approve of new universities. Some thought that it needs to be unanimous...and suggestions that will never happen with CU and the AZ schools for OU and OK St, alone.
Didn't read but imagine the condensed version is -- ESPN wants UT to play OU? I'll let Aggy stay in Big 12 if Baylor drinks the j*zz Jar. Solve everything.
