Here we go again: Expansion carousel

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
45,502
46,845
187
On the other hand, wouldn't it be great to have Bob Stoops finally shut up about the SEC being over-rated? You can bet that if OU were to become a member of the SEC, he would be backpedaling all the way to California.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
Correct me if I'm don't get this right but the sec was looking at aTm, vt, and mizzou in that order when expansion looked possible. Vt then dropped out and aTm and mizzou made their intentions known. Mizzou got out of the big 12 smoothly because their contract was up, but Baylor tried to block aTm's early exit. I think it is here where ou started threatening Texas about leaving due to the lhn and the commissioner. From my understanding the sec flirted with ou but ou turned the sec down because of academic prestige, and thought the PAC 12 would welcome them in open arms. If that part is true the. Why should the sec even consider them when a North Carolina or Virginia school would bring in way more money?
This issue has been very, very complicated and a lot of things went on behind closed doors. I imagine a lot of people have different versions, and there's fragments of truth here and there. But, the two waves of expansion each had their own differing priorities. The second wave for instance clearly was more about adding TV sets and far less about just trying to add the top football products. My perspective on it had to do with the fact that I'd been playing with the idea prior to all the expansion talk, and I guess in part due to my arguing on behalf of Texas A&M to the SEC I was given some A&M insider info on the issue.

From what I gathered, the PAC move was primarily about Texas, they were willing to take several schools if that insured they get Texas in the deal. I'm sure they saw Oklahoma as a decent prize, but from what I heard it was Texas that blew up the deal (whether that was fear or being separated from Oklahoma or Texas A&M or just issues with the network is hard to verify). What I do know, is that the Big-12 deal that saved the conference was put together by people who didn't want to see the Big-12 go away and apparently didn't want the football landscape changed so radically.

The SEC's role in this is hard to tell, they clearly were late to the party, the Pac-12 already had their hooks in Colorado and the Big 10 already had Nebraska before the SEC became visible in the process. I'm not sure what their objective was the first time around, it really might have merely been to buy more time. However, one thing that did seem to emerge was that the SEC was willing to take Texas A&M by themselves, without a 14th team and from what I gather they left the offer open. How serious they were about Oklahoma, or who else they talked to at that time is not clear to me, but at this point there was no SEC Network on the horizon so their priorities might have been different at the time.

It seemed to be the Longhorn Network that triggered Texas A&M's getting fed up with the situation in their conference and revisiting the deal. At this point in time I think it's fair to think the SEC's priorities had shifted a bit and I didn't hear anything at all about their going after Oklahoma. However, I didn't hear much (aside from fans) about Virginia Tech either. I don't think the really bad ACC deal had been signed yet (which made the buyout massive), but while one can argue the pros and cons of Virginia Tech vs. Missouri, I think strategically the pairing made the most sense. It was harder for the Big-12 to resist the loss of two programs at once, and it made selling the two respective programs on leaving that much easier. Having said that, in terms of westward expansion Missouri is pretty much the last stop for the SEC (remember they were the second largest Big-12 state), and it doesn't exclude the possibility of eastward expansion so it just seemed like a solid move.

I can't really gauge how interested the SEC has been in Virginia Tech. I can get why there would be some interest, sure. It's a big state and Virginia Tech pretty much had to sue just to get included in the ACC, so they can't be too in love with that conference. Virginia might not be as easy a get (despite having better measurables in pretty much anything other than football). Now though, that will be tough period, as it will require a huge financial hit for any team to leave the ACC.

But, to sum up my take on expansion and what I'd like to see I can revisit the talk of a playoff earlier. They said 8 conferences, but put 6 of the top 13 in one conference (the SEC). That's really bad for any automatic bid setup obviously. If you have 8 conferences, you want balance in that scenario, so you'd want 2 top 16 teams per conference, but instead you had 10 left for the other 8. So the SEC would have 6 while most conferences would have 1, and yet both would get automatic bids. That's really messed up, and in a way illustrates my view on trying to stack football powers on top of football powers. There is a diminishing return at some point.

I think Oklahoma still has value, but primarily to a conference who feels they need to improve their football product. Of the Power 5, the only conference that really applies to would be the ACC (who despite the cakewalk for a playoff for FSU has a weak overall product). Virginia Tech is in a large enough state that their appeal would still be broad, but they don't seem to come up as a major target during expansion talks. Part of that might have to do with not being so far removed from the ACC not even wanting them (which made sense, they didn't need two teams in Virginia). Either way, if there's another wave of expansion the SEC might just take what ever North Carolina/Virginia teams they can get. I simply don't see any reason for the SEC to look west again.
 

GrayTide

Hall of Fame
Nov 15, 2005
18,810
6,245
187
Greenbow, Alabama
@finebaum According to @ESPN_Colin "The Big 5 in CFB is ready to be the Big 4... BigXII will evaporate, Oklahoma is SEC bound & the Pac12 wants Texas"
I thought about that today, but figured both texas and oklahoma would jump to the PAC 12 and leave the other eight programs to fend for themselves in the new AAC, CUSA, MWC or Sunbelt.

If oklahoma does join the SEC that is 15 teams, so bring Okie state and make it 16 teams. It would then necessitate realignment, moving Alabama and Auburn to the SEC East. Adding OU, OSU and moving mizzou to the west.
 
Last edited:

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
@finebaum According to @ESPN_Colin "The Big 5 in CFB is ready to be the Big 4... BigXII will evaporate, Oklahoma is SEC bound & the Pac12 wants Texas"
I certainly hope this is just Finebaum trying to generate something to talk about. But even if that is true, note the part about the Pac-12 wanting Texas, doesn't say it about Oklahoma... if they can get Texas without paying the price of adding a bunch of other teams that's a better deal for them, but there's still the Longhorn Network to deal with which is no small obstacle.

If oklahoma does join the SEC that is 15 teams, so bring Okie state and make it 16 teams.
That would be doubling down on bad, instead of one team from a state with 3.8 million, that would make it two. Just no financial sense there for the move at all. Also, I seriously doubt Texas A&M or other teams in the west would be overly fond of it, it doesn't open up new revenue for them, it doesn't open up new recruiting territory (Oklahoma already relies on recruiting Texas), it does nothing for them.

The only school left out there for the SEC worth the headache is North Carolina.
Close to it, yeah. Expansion at this point would all but insure a 9th conference game, which would make the toughest schedule even tougher. There's just not a lot out there that would be worth expanding for, North Carolina would generate more revenue and make the SEC better in basketball, an area it actually could benefit from improving.

Anyway, I was trying to feel out what was going on with Oklahoma and I wanted to read some of what was said on their part. I think they showed their hand a bit when Texas A&M left. They stated that they got offers from the SEC and Pac-12, and made it sound like they at that moment in time were weighing their options. Now, did the fact that they stayed indicate that may be the chances they were talking about are no longer there? They said the Pac-12 offered them an invite, and that was true, but the fact is it was part of a package deal with Texas! I never saw anything at all about a stand-alone invite, which really makes limited sense for the Pac-12 (just look at a map and consider adding Oklahoma by themselves).

So, it seems to me that Oklahoma's huff and puff about conferences wanted them might be exaggerating the nature of the invites. I certainly hope the same goes for the SEC, it's possible they at some point got a stand-alone invite, but there's no question that the SEC was pretty brisk in adding A&M and Missouri once A&M made up their mind, they didn't exactly stand there twiddling their thumbs waiting for Oklahoma. I think Oklahoma is unhappy with the current situation, and might be pressing for some changes in the Big 12, but I'm just not sure there are many conferences lining up like Oklahoma would lead some to believe.
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
Close to it, yeah. Expansion at this point would all but insure a 9th conference game, which would make the toughest schedule even tougher. There's just not a lot out there that would be worth expanding for, North Carolina would generate more revenue and make the SEC better in basketball, an area it actually could benefit from improving.

Anyway, I was trying to feel out what was going on with Oklahoma and I wanted to read some of what was said on their part. I think they showed their hand a bit when Texas A&M left. They stated that they got offers from the SEC and Pac-12, and made it sound like they at that moment in time were weighing their options. Now, did the fact that they stayed indicate that may be the chances they were talking about are no longer there? They said the Pac-12 offered them an invite, and that was true, but the fact is it was part of a package deal with Texas! I never saw anything at all about a stand-alone invite, which really makes limited sense for the Pac-12 (just look at a map and consider adding Oklahoma by themselves).

So, it seems to me that Oklahoma's huff and puff about conferences wanted them might be exaggerating the nature of the invites. I certainly hope the same goes for the SEC, it's possible they at some point got a stand-alone invite, but there's no question that the SEC was pretty brisk in adding A&M and Missouri once A&M made up their mind, they didn't exactly stand there twiddling their thumbs waiting for Oklahoma. I think Oklahoma is unhappy with the current situation, and might be pressing for some changes in the Big 12, but I'm just not sure there are many conferences lining up like Oklahoma would lead some to believe.
Duke or UNC would be the best additions. I think OU acts entitiled just because the name. I think if they truly wanted to get away from Texas and they were as big time as they act they would go independent. But since they didnt it seems they are scared because Bevo holds all the cards. Texas has a future if an earthquake happens, Oklahoma doesnt.
 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
36,284
30,897
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
Duke or UNC would be the best additions. I think OU acts entitiled just because the name. I think if they truly wanted to get away from Texas and they were as big time as they act they would go independent. But since they didnt it seems they are scared because Bevo holds all the cards. Texas has a future if an earthquake happens, Oklahoma doesnt.
I tend to agree. The more I think about it, the more I believe OU is just stuck. No one really wants them without Texas. I don't think that's wise, as Texas has a propensity to wreck conferences and ruin relationships, but they are the big money program that stands on their own. Oklahoma would be mediocre without their Texas recruiting pipeline, and they have attached themselves to the hips of the Longhorns because of it. They are much like Nebraska in their need to recruit out of state. Probably not as bad, but similar. I'm not trying to disparage their tradition and their loyal fan base. They would bring a lot to any conference they joined. The trouble is, no other power conference out their actually needs to expand. Absent a need, they would only expand for a cash cow like Texas or Notre Dame. Neither of those 2 are going anywhere due to their network deals.

I believe Texas wants the status quo to remain in place and if it blows up eventually, they will go Independent unless no power conference would allow them to park their Olympic sports somewhere a la the ACC and Notre Dame. The only way the Big 12 blows up is if Oklahoma really gets antsy and comings knocking on the SEC's or Big Ten's door (don't see that happening). The SEC might take them, but the Big Ten would turn their nose up at them just like the Pac 12 already did.
 

Big Kenny

New Member
Jun 21, 2015
6
0
0
Nashville, TN
The Big 12 has been in trouble since the A&M/Mizzou defection. They actually started reeling when Nebraska left in my opinion. Big time schools like that are just not available to add to a conference every day. The Big 12 needs to add more schools or fold. Here is my take:

If the current 10 teams stay, the Big 12 needs to add BYU and Boise St. Both are good programs and add credibility to the football in addition to giving them the conference title game that they have to add.

If TX and OK leave, the Big 12 better be content with mid-major status. They could then add Memphis and Colorado St. They would still be a good conference in overall athletics, but just not qualify as something worthy of Power 5 status in football. At that point, they might as well add 2 more schools like SMU and Houston to move up to 14 teams because nobody is going to take them seriously in football. The conference would have huge presence in the state of Texas, just not with the Big 2 that is Bevo and TAMU. They would end up being the biggest mid-major conference but could still put a team in the playoff if they had someone worthy.

If OK does come to the SEC, who else are they going to add to balance out the conferences? I'm not sure Virginia Tech makes sense. I'm not sold on West Virginia either. Both of those schools dream about being in the SEC, but I'm not sure they are a good fit for the SEC. North Carolina makes the most sense academically (current scandal aside) and geographically, but they are not a football school. They would put pressure on Kentucky and Florida in basketball, but I would think that there would have to be realignment just for football. I mean, it would be playoff suicide for the SEC to just throw the Sooners in the West. The SEC champion could be a team from the West with two or three losses, and they are not getting in a playoff at that point.

Let's say that Carolina and OK does join to make 16. The realignment could look like:

East: Kentucky, Tennessee, South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Vandy, Auburn, North Carolina
West: Alabama, LSU, Arkansas, A&M, Mizzou, Ole Miss, Miss St, Oklahoma

The Auburn and Mizzou swap just makes sense geographically. Drop NC in the East and OK in the West and be done with it. Alabama would have to lose the Tennessee game and replace that with the Auburn game for yearly inter-conference game. UT would just have to go into the rotation with the rest of them.

This realignment talk is great for the offseason.
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
The Big 12 has been in trouble since the A&M/Mizzou defection. They actually started reeling when Nebraska left in my opinion. Big time schools like that are just not available to add to a conference every day. The Big 12 needs to add more schools or fold. Here is my take:

If the current 10 teams stay, the Big 12 needs to add BYU and Boise St. Both are good programs and add credibility to the football in addition to giving them the conference title game that they have to add.

If TX and OK leave, the Big 12 better be content with mid-major status. They could then add Memphis and Colorado St. They would still be a good conference in overall athletics, but just not qualify as something worthy of Power 5 status in football. At that point, they might as well add 2 more schools like SMU and Houston to move up to 14 teams because nobody is going to take them seriously in football. The conference would have huge presence in the state of Texas, just not with the Big 2 that is Bevo and TAMU. They would end up being the biggest mid-major conference but could still put a team in the playoff if they had someone worthy.

If OK does come to the SEC, who else are they going to add to balance out the conferences? I'm not sure Virginia Tech makes sense. I'm not sold on West Virginia either. Both of those schools dream about being in the SEC, but I'm not sure they are a good fit for the SEC. North Carolina makes the most sense academically (current scandal aside) and geographically, but they are not a football school. They would put pressure on Kentucky and Florida in basketball, but I would think that there would have to be realignment just for football. I mean, it would be playoff suicide for the SEC to just throw the Sooners in the West. The SEC champion could be a team from the West with two or three losses, and they are not getting in a playoff at that point.

Let's say that Carolina and OK does join to make 16. The realignment could look like:

East: Kentucky, Tennessee, South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Vandy, Auburn, North Carolina
West: Alabama, LSU, Arkansas, A&M, Mizzou, Ole Miss, Miss St, Oklahoma

The Auburn and Mizzou swap just makes sense geographically. Drop NC in the East and OK in the West and be done with it. Alabama would have to lose the Tennessee game and replace that with the Auburn game for yearly inter-conference game. UT would just have to go into the rotation with the rest of them.

This realignment talk is great for the offseason.
If we get another western team then the most likely outcome would be mizzou and vandy to the west and bama and auburn to the east. Lsu would either get bama or auburn for permanent rivalries and the new west team would get the other. I tend to think if we get another two teams then the sec would go all out to get unc and duke. I just don't think the sec wants Oklahoma to be honest. It's mostly due to what does ou really bring to the table kinda thing. Ou really has football and softball but the other sports and the recruiting isn't there. I think the sec is more interested in a unc + duke or a nc state + virginia tech deal. The virginia and North Carolina markets are far more profitable than the okc market
 

GrayTide

Hall of Fame
Nov 15, 2005
18,810
6,245
187
Greenbow, Alabama
If we get another western team then the most likely outcome would be mizzou and vandy to the west and bama and auburn to the east. Lsu would either get bama or auburn for permanent rivalries and the new west team would get the other. I tend to think if we get another two teams then the sec would go all out to get unc and duke. I just don't think the sec wants Oklahoma to be honest. It's mostly due to what does ou really bring to the table kinda thing. Ou really has football and softball but the other sports and the recruiting isn't there. I think the sec is more interested in a unc + duke or a nc state + virginia tech deal. The virginia and North Carolina markets are far more profitable than the okc market
I tend to agree with this. OU has had some pretty good basketball teams over the past 20 years, not Kentucky or Florida good, but certainly better than most of the SEC teams. IMO it would be next to impossible to pull Duke, UNC and/or UVA from the ACC.

With the recent expansion to 14 teams and what may be headed to 16 team conferences; it is time to drop the cross divisional rivalry games. With a 16 team conference, a team would play all 7 divisional opponents and its one permanent opponent with no room for any other cross divisional games unless the conference schedule is increased to 9 conference games which probably isn't going to be popular.
 
Last edited:

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
36,284
30,897
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
I would rather drop Auburn and keep Tennessee on the schedule if we must choose. We've played Tennessee more than any other opponent except Mississippi State.

I don't see the SEC expanding west, anyway.
 

NationalTitles18

TideFans Legend
May 25, 2003
29,636
34,737
362
Mountainous Northern California
I don't see Duke or North Carolina leaving the ACC. Why would they? Besides, they are too, how should I say, proud to do that.

NC State, on the other hand just might - even given the exit fee. Maryland got away for roughly 31-32 mil. That's what the SEC paid each school this year. Avg football attendance is within 300 people/game compared to the Tarheels. The state offers a market of nearly 10 million new people. Undergrad enrollment of 24k. It is a rising star academically without all the craziness at NC. NC State would be a good choice for the SEC if expansion is on the table.

OU alone would be a good choice as well, but with the baggage of OSU AND Texas?! Ugh! Texas really is a cancer to every conference it has been in. OSU by itself would get in before Texas. OSU is similar to NC State, but with only 3.8 mil new people to bring in and OSU is not the name brand that OU is. The SEC might take both, but only if the conference expands to 18 teams after/during the total collapse of the Big 12-2. OU has been voicing some frustration with Texas so it's not out of the question that OU could get sick of them and decide a yearly game with aTm in the SEC is sufficient for recruiting. Interestingly enough, the SEC has worked hard to prop up the Big 12-2. IMHO, the conference folds within 5 years if there are not some big changes there, including dropping the LHN in favor of a conference network and inviting 2 quality schools in new states into the fold AND equal revenue sharing. Since I don't believe Texas will go for that I see the conference falling apart with the better schools being picked off. I believe Texas would stay and be happy with 9-11 little schools to beat up on the field and in the boardroom.

So looking back east VT is the only school I see making sense overall after State. Another new state with over 8 million new people in a truly Southeastern state. Football attendance of 61k. Bringing both VY and State in would allow Mizzou to move West, a more natural fit for them, although it would hurt their chances at making another SECCG anytime soon.

In all this craziness who knows what will happen next? I can see a number of different scenarios playing out. One thing seems certain: there are still some big changes on the horizon in college athletics. Some will be good. Some not so much.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
but which one do you want? UNC and Duke would be the biggest possible, but NC State and Wake wouldnt be horrible.
I know it wasn't directed at me, I'd take North Carolina first, then NC State and Duke are pretty close. I'd say this though, the SEC should only add one NC team if it comes down to it, even NC and Oklahoma is better than two NC programs.

I think OU acts entitiled just because the name
I think Oklahoma, and perhaps some conferences are still stuck in the pre-network era, and not just that but in an era in which recruiting itself was different. Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Michigan, it was a given that programs like these would be amongst the best. It takes more than just having a "brand" now.

I tend to agree. The more I think about it, the more I believe OU is just stuck. No one really wants them without Texas. I don't think that's wise, as Texas has a propensity to wreck conferences and ruin relationships, but they are the big money program that stands on their own.
I think it was a huge mistake to do what Oklahoma did, and what Oklahoma did should be pointed out here (again). The Big 8 headquarters were in Missouri, Oklahoma played Nebraska annually. There's no real reason Oklahoma should have allowed Texas to come in, take away their game with Nebraska, move the headquarters to Texas and so on. Remember, Texas was coming off of destroying one conference, but Oklahoma clearly sided with Texas and has that made Oklahoma any better? It doesn't seem to but it's no longer clear that Oklahoma is really worth much without Texas. At least Oklahoma State has someone who is insanely rich backing them, Oklahoma has... Texas.

They actually started reeling when Nebraska left in my opinion.
Absolutely correct, the fact is that had the Pac-12 deal happened, there would have been no Big 12. With Nebraska headed to the Big 10, and the deal on the table for 6 teams to join the Pac-12 they would have simply voted to disband to avoid any penalties for leaving the conference. As to why things reached that point, well the last paragraph alludes to that, but keep in mind that it was another instance in which Texas was ready, willing, and able to screw over programs like Kansas and Missouri.

If the Big 12 does lose Texas and Oklahoma somehow, they certainly won't be power 5 anymore. Baylor and TCU has SoS in the 40s and 50s as it was, without those two teams in their schedule the Big 12 would sink to Boise State levels. If the Big 12 wants to be taken seriously, they have to get stronger, they certainly can't get weaker. However, even an addition like BYU and Boise State won't really cure their ills. Their financial situations would still be tricky. The best additions that seemed at all possible would have been when FSU and Clemson were angry with the ACC, but that ship seems to have sailed. It's worth noting that the Big 12 (which at this point means Texas) didn't want the conference championship game because they see it as an extra obstacle, now they're seeing the foolishness of that.

If OK does come to the SEC, who else are they going to add to balance out the conferences? I'm not sure Virginia Tech makes sense. I'm not sold on West Virginia either. Both of those schools dream about being in the SEC, but I'm not sure they are a good fit for the SEC. North Carolina makes the most sense academically (current scandal aside) and geographically, but they are not a football school. They would put pressure on Kentucky and Florida in basketball, but I would think that there would have to be realignment just for football. I mean, it would be playoff suicide for the SEC to just throw the Sooners in the West. .
Adding Oklahoma and Virginia Tech could go very poorly. First we have Oklahoma, a football power from a small state with little else on the resume. They have great financial merit, but either they push down programs like LSU and make them weaker, or they get weaker in which case they just become a team from a small state (like Ole Miss). They're valuable to some conferences (like the ACC), but I don't see the value for the SEC.

Virginia Tech is tricky, because it is a big state, but they're a newcomer as a football power really. They are nowhere near Virginia as an athletic program, they make far less money and the product in other sports is vastly inferior. Either they continue their success in football, in which case the SEC just made things even tougher, or they fall off on football and they become another Miss. State, which doesn't sound all that appealing to me.

To me, the best potential expansion candidates would remain Notre Dame (special case, they have such national prestige that their membership would insure the SEC always commanded proper respect in any dialogue, besides they're in a good sized state and command attention in several northern states, extremely unlikely though), North Carolina (they are a basketball power, which would bolster the SEC Network, but they're also the #2 earner in the ACC, big state, decent football attendance, no downside at all), Virginia (the least as a football program, but still big state, #3 earner in the ACC, decent attendance, they'd be more than a consolation prize). I just don't see expanding without one of those programs on the hook. After that you can look at North Carolina State, Duke, Oklahoma, Virginia Tech, but the question is if there's enough of a reward for any of those programs to warrant the cost of expansion? I'm not even 100% on Virginia much less those programs...
II tend to think if we get another two teams then the sec would go all out to get unc and duke. I just don't think the sec wants Oklahoma to be honest. It's mostly due to what does ou really bring to the table kinda thing. Ou really has football and softball but the other sports and the recruiting isn't there. I think the sec is more interested in a unc + duke or a nc state + virginia tech deal. The virginia and North Carolina markets are far more profitable than the okc market
A lot of people seem to think you couldn't separate UNC and Duke, but a pair of teams from one state is a large price to pay. Now, you could argue convincingly that UNC+Duke is better than Oklahoma+Okie State, or even Oklahoma+West Virginia, however a deal with the premier programs in each state (North Carolina and Virginia) is still far better overall.

I don't see Duke or North Carolina leaving the ACC. Why would they? Besides, they are too, how should I say, proud to do that.
Money? Once the SEC Network really gets rolling, the financial incentive alone should be rather compelling. I do agree that those programs are not exactly dying to leave, but if the SEC could pull another piece loose first, getting a North Carolina could become possible.

NC State, on the other hand just might - even given the exit fee.

So looking back east VT is the only school I see making sense overall after State. Another new state with over 8 million new people in a truly Southeastern state. Football attendance of 61k. Bringing both VY and State in would allow Mizzou to move West, a more natural fit for them, although it would hurt their chances at making another SECCG anytime soon.
Decent analysis, it's hard to argue too compellingly against a tandem of NC State and Virginia Tech and State supports their football program better than many realize. I still think there's a bit of a risk in taking the lesser programs in a state though. With Texas A&M, it was such a huge state and such a rich program that it wasn't much of a risk, but we're talking about a smaller pie here though. I'm not sure if they're quite enough to make them the final pieces in an expanded conference, and it feels a bit like low hanging fruit. If the SEC can't get North Carolina (or the really long-shot Notre Dame), I'm not so sure they shouldn't stand pat.
 
Last edited:

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
36,284
30,897
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
I think it was a huge mistake to do what Oklahoma did, and what Oklahoma did should be pointed out here (again). The Big 8 headquarters were in Missouri, Oklahoma played Nebraska annually. There's no real reason Oklahoma should have allowed Texas to come in, take away their game with Nebraska, move the headquarters to Texas and so on. Remember, Texas was coming off of destroying one conference, but Oklahoma clearly sided with Texas and has that made Oklahoma any better? It doesn't seem to but it's no longer clear that Oklahoma is really worth much without Texas. At least Oklahoma State has someone who is insanely rich backing them, Oklahoma has... Texas.
I had forgotten about that bit of information. Oklahoma really threw the Big 8 under the bus by doing that. I believe Colorado also sided with Texas in that move. The vote was 7-5. Seems like only Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas, Kansas State, and Iowa State voted for the conference headquarters to stay in St. Louis. The reality of the situation is that even though the Big 8 officially dissolved (the Big 12 didn't retain the Big 8's history as its own), they still saved Texas from the SWC. Yet, they sold out to Texas. So OU made its bed back then and now they're sleeping in it.

However this goes, be certain that politics will enter the fray again. Baylor and TCU aren't going to let go of their newfound status easily. The best thing for all involved would be for Texas to give up its superiority (which they've rarely done anything with but botch it). Create a Big 12 network, pull in 2 teams, relaunch the conference championship game, and profit. Split up Texas and Oklahoma into separate divisions and if both schools get their acts together, you'll have a Red River rematch for the conference championship 90% of the time.
 

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.