From Landthieves

[CoastAtlantic]

The first three posts is from a poster named Redhawk, who has claimed to know people connected to the top brass at OU or had close contacts with OU people at a high level. The fourth post is from a Nebraska fan responding to Redhawk.

CR Part XIV: Revenge of the Wallflowers - Page 13

For some of you with contacts at OU, and hear rumors, I wonder if you can chime in on what I heard from my used to be very connected friend, who isn't as much.

He said, right now, OU along with Texas and some market TV consultants are running the math/numbers on a number of possible scenarios and many different conference configurations for the future. The timing they are looking at is after the Big 12 current TV deal (and Grant of Rights expire).

They are really looking at what the landscape of college football, could be, or should be in the near future, considering the decline of cable as we currently know it. One thing they seem to agree on, is the Big 12 schedule for home games for OU and Texas, isn't going to work (we don't play each other at home....obviously) and that is a big issue at both schools.

Options my friend mentioned, a few schools going to the PAC, a few going to the B1G, a lot of schools going to the PAC (almost a PAC/B12 merger) & a couple going to the B1G, scheduling arraignments with the PAC, the B1G, and/or the PAC AND the B1G. OU is the point group talking to the B1G, UT is point on the PAC, but that's just a matter of relationships, not where one side is leaning.

The few goals they have seemed to identify: More games with different teams in Norman and Austin and in college football in general, regular games between OU and Nebraska hopefully that have something on the line like a division championship (Regional Rivals...real rivalries sell tickets, breaking up those hurt both sides), make the Big Ten Network, and the PAC network, desirable as over the top add on subscriptions beyond their current footprint (they might get combined)...for example if you are a college football fan in Dallas, and you have cut the cable cord, they want that guy to want to pay $X a month to add those networks either al a cart or as a package add on to say basic Sling.

College football and how people consume media is going through a major restructuring. The folks in charge are really looking at how best to stay relevant and to keep money coming in with that changing landscape. Nothing is off the table, and creative, out of the box ideas are being looked at.

The SEC has a few hardcore supporters, but seems to have hardcore "never SEC" supporters as well. What my friend was saying was the landscape of college football would/could be very different than what we know today, but the folks in the athletic department are looking west and north.

And to get the fans pissed off, he said Nebraska isn't completely satisfied with what they have in the B1G, and neither is Missouri in the SEC. This seems to have OU and UT officials a pause in just running off and joining another conference, and since we have time, to look at many different combinations, some conventional, some very not. One option is OU, KU, Missouri, and Texas joining the Big Ten. 18 teams, 3 division so of 6 was one (of many) option. (Big Ten West: Texas, OU, Missouri, KU, Nebraska, Iowa)



CR Part XIV: Revenge of the Wallflowers - Page 13

Since my friend's connection was in the "SEC SEC SEC" camp, here's their thinking: OU is a football power. Our athletic budget is driven by football. Football ticket sales, donations to make sure you get tickets to the big football games fuels/pays for all of OU's Athletic Department. It trickles down to academic side, with football success being a direct correlation to how easy or hard it is to raise money for academics. The better the football team is doing, the more people donate all around including academic stuff (sad but true). So they look at the SEC and see the best football factory conference, and think that it will drive the entire university including, eventually and importantly, academics. Also, they see regional schools like LSU and Arkansas.....Arkansas gives in-state tuition to kids from the Tulsa area, so the SEC flag is planted in the Tulsa area, and the SEC sphere of influence is present. You can also see college football becoming more regionalized in the south, much like NASCAR. If you want to continue to make money off of college football like OU has for decades, the SEC is the one trending the right way.

Those against the SEC seem to really see the whole conference as dirty, and so dirty that it will taint every university that is associated with it as being dirty, or at best "just a football school" which are two images OU is trying real hard to leave behind.

The upside is OU's SEC folks were responsible for getting OU to re-do L. Dale Mitchell, which was inspired by Auburn's redo of their baseball stadium. (my friend on a "business trip" was one of the OU people to tour Auburn's baseball stadium while OU was planning the remodel)



CR Part XIV: Revenge of the Wallflowers - Page 13

1) I wouldn't say the SEC is off the table per say, the SEC does have it's supporters, it's just not the main focus or choice at the moment at OU. My contact is with a person in the the pro-SEC group, and I think the SEC is the fall back, if all else fails option.
2) Let's just say options with the B1G and PAC are the main focus
3) I think you mistook me. OU-UT in Dallas as far as I know is still the cornerstone of OU athletics...it's just that leaves a pretty dull home schedule for OU and Texas in the Big 12, and they want to figure out how to fix the home schedules, but moving OU-Texas to home and home not being one of the options.....I mean maybe they have run the numbers, but there would be a full revolt if that game went H/H. Dallas is a tradition...so much orbits around that weekend.



CR Part XIV: Revenge of the Wallflowers - Page 14

Thanks Redhawk for another interesting peek behind the realignment curtain!
The information sounds plausible, although it does challenge three of my most
cherished beliefs.

An OU/UT partnership to investigate conference options is a logical approach
to the issue; there are many advantages (repeatedly voiced on LT) if the
Sooners and Longhorns remain conference mates. I've always believed, however,
that UT's main goal is to either dominate their conference or achieve a
situation similar to Notre Dame; I simply cannot visualize UT in either the
SEC or Big Ten, where they would undoubtedly be one of the main players, but
would in the end have but one vote and be unable to intimidate Alabama/Florida
or Michigan/Ohio State. I could imagine UT moving with a set of minions to the
PAC, controlling a voting bloc that could veto any crucial (e.g., super-majority
required) issue. (Which would give me considerable pause if I was a current
PAC school.)

A number of people have commented that the new UT administration is more
diplomatic than the one in place six years ago. I do believe this view to be
accurate; I've had one (brief) face-to-face conversation with Fenves (on
an academic matter, not realignment), and found him to be quite gracious and
engaging. Still, as others have noted, Presidents come and go, and Texas
remains Texas. I'm convinced that if Texas wanted to join the Big Ten as a
"regular" member, Nebraska would strongly support the application.

I've read many proposals that Missouri would consider (or leap at) the
chance to move to the Big Ten. Yes, the school made it obvious that they
wanted a Big Ten invite, and yes, they are a bit of a cultural outlier in the
SEC, but I cannot believe for one second that MU has the slightest interest
in leaving the SEC. If I was the MU president, I would find myself engaged
in dealing with a potential existential threat to the university's stature
as a top-flight public flagship institution. It will take considerable
effort, leadership, and resources to reverse the dangerous spiral that has
taken hold over the past two years, and I would not spend one second considering
a proposal (and the associated distractions) that I leave what is arguably
the best athletic conference. Indeed, even if the difficulties that started in
2015 had never materialized, I would still find the idea the MU would abandon
the SEC to be an absurd one.

As for Nebraska and the Big Ten, there are aspects of the change that are less
than perfect. Prior to the move we had several venues (KU, KSU, ISU, MU)
that were "day trips"; the only Big Ten school that falls into that category
is Iowa. The travel is also more demanding for the athletes. Rivalries
inevitably take time to build. To say that Nebraska is not completely
satisfied may be technically correct, but the Big Ten and Nebraska brass
with whom I've interacted believe that the integration has gone extremely
smoothly, and the Nebraska leadership is extremely pleased to be a member of
the Big Ten.

 

[shizzle787]

UT is point on the PAC,

This could land us in the B1G. If the Texahoma 4 go to the Pac-12 (and if Texas wants this, Oklahoma will probably follow), the worst we could do is the Big 12 or we could go to the B1G to Kansas. UConn avoiding getting kicked in the nuts again only happens if TX/OK go to the Pac-12.

 

[CoastAtlantic]

It reads to me like more options might open up that could be even more significant than Texahoma-4. Imagine this scenario: the PAC offers not only Texas and Oklahoma but also Kansas, Missouri, Iowa State and Nebraska. That's five flagships, 4 AAU schools, three traditional football powers, a state that has over 25 million residents and every former Big 8 school except for two. Does Nebraska stay in the B10 in that scenario? Would Mizzou leave the SEC to reunite with Kansas? All of a sudden both the Big Ten and SEC would need to replace a program.

It's just one possibility that may not exist now but could in the future.

The more important development, if you believe what he wrote, is that both OU and UT believe that they'll have to leave the Big XII eventually.

 

[dayooper]

It reads to me like more options might open up that could be even more significant than Texahoma-4. Imagine this scenario: the PAC offers not only Texas and Oklahoma but also Kansas, Missouri, Iowa State and Nebraska. That's five flagships, 4 AAU schools, three traditional football powers, a state that has over 25 million residents and every former Big 8 school except for two. Does Nebraska stay in the B10 in that scenario? Would Mizzou leave the SEC to reunite with Kansas? All of a sudden both the Big Ten and SEC would need to replace a program.

It's just one possibility that may not exist now but could in the future.

The more important development, if you believe what he wrote, is that both OU and UT believe that they'll have to leave the Big XII eventually.

I think that 2022-2025 time period potentially could be one of the biggest shifts in college sports. By that time, the paradigm of how sports are watched will most likely be known. Whether cable survives or viewing shifts to streaming, the conferences can then decide what path to take. They then can adjust what they do and who they want to associate with. Can the Big12 survive in it's present form? The biggest fish in the sea left to catch right now is Texas and OU (ND is cornered by the ACC), who will reel them in? Will a conference go larger than 14-16-18-20?

The Big10 and PAC can push for a merger of media control while still remaining separate conferences. I can see the PAC and Big10 forming an alliance and pool the games together. 9 conference games and two games against the PAC/Big10. That still leaves one game to have outside the alliance (Colorado can still play Colorado St.). The conferences would have to be pretty close in size, so a 16 or 18 team Big10 would have to match up with a 14-18 team PAC. If both conferences are at 16, that 16 games a week for 11 weeks and a majority of games that 12th week that the alliance would control. That's about 185 games a year. They can sell some off, put them on various channels and show them as they see fit.

 

[Stinger92860]

The top 32 teams should get together and form their own conference and be done with it. They could play on Sunday's too.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

The top 32 teams should get together and form their own conference and be done with it. They could play on Sunday's too.

Sure, and they could potentially name it "Not the NCAA". Whether such a scenario helps UConn ... ?

 

[HoopsFan21]

I think that 2022-2025 time period potentially could be one of the biggest shifts in college sports. By that time, the paradigm of how sports are watched will most likely be known. Whether cable survives or viewing shifts to streaming, the conferences can then decide what path to take. They then can adjust what they do and who they want to associate with. Can the Big12 survive in it's present form? The biggest fish in the sea left to catch right now is Texas and OU (ND is cornered by the ACC), who will reel them in? Will a conference go larger than 14-16-18-20?

The Big10 and PAC can push for a merger of media control while still remaining separate conferences. I can see the PAC and Big10 forming an alliance and pool the games together. 9 conference games and two games against the PAC/Big10. That still leaves one game to have outside the alliance (Colorado can still play Colorado St.). The conferences would have to be pretty close in size, so a 16 or 18 team Big10 would have to match up with a 14-18 team PAC. If both conferences are at 16, that 16 games a week for 11 weeks and a majority of games that 12th week that the alliance would control. That's about 185 games a year. They can sell some off, put them on various channels and show them as they see fit.

What's in that sort of set up for the B1G? I know historically there has been a loose association between those two conferences, but the B1G doesn't need anyone else as they have some of the biggest brandnames in the business of college sports.

 

[sportsart]

The first three posts is from a poster named Redhawk, who has claimed to know people connected to the top brass at OU or had close contacts with OU people at a high level. The fourth post is from a Nebraska fan responding to Redhawk.

CR Part XIV: Revenge of the Wallflowers - Page 13

For some of you with contacts at OU, and hear rumors, I wonder if you can chime in on what I heard from my used to be very connected friend, who isn't as much.

He said, right now, OU along with Texas and some market TV consultants are running the math/numbers on a number of possible scenarios and many different conference configurations for the future. The timing they are looking at is after the Big 12 current TV deal (and Grant of Rights expire).

They are really looking at what the landscape of college football, could be, or should be in the near future, considering the decline of cable as we currently know it. One thing they seem to agree on, is the Big 12 schedule for home games for OU and Texas, isn't going to work (we don't play each other at home....obviously) and that is a big issue at both schools.

Options my friend mentioned, a few schools going to the PAC, a few going to the B1G, a lot of schools going to the PAC (almost a PAC/B12 merger) & a couple going to the B1G, scheduling arraignments with the PAC, the B1G, and/or the PAC AND the B1G. OU is the point group talking to the B1G, UT is point on the PAC, but that's just a matter of relationships, not where one side is leaning.

The few goals they have seemed to identify: More games with different teams in Norman and Austin and in college football in general, regular games between OU and Nebraska hopefully that have something on the line like a division championship (Regional Rivals...real rivalries sell tickets, breaking up those hurt both sides), make the Big Ten Network, and the PAC network, desirable as over the top add on subscriptions beyond their current footprint (they might get combined)...for example if you are a college football fan in Dallas, and you have cut the cable cord, they want that guy to want to pay $X a month to add those networks either al a cart or as a package add on to say basic Sling.

College football and how people consume media is going through a major restructuring. The folks in charge are really looking at how best to stay relevant and to keep money coming in with that changing landscape. Nothing is off the table, and creative, out of the box ideas are being looked at.

The SEC has a few hardcore supporters, but seems to have hardcore "never SEC" supporters as well. What my friend was saying was the landscape of college football would/could be very different than what we know today, but the folks in the athletic department are looking west and north.

And to get the fans pissed off, he said Nebraska isn't completely satisfied with what they have in the B1G, and neither is Missouri in the SEC. This seems to have OU and UT officials a pause in just running off and joining another conference, and since we have time, to look at many different combinations, some conventional, some very not. One option is OU, KU, Missouri, and Texas joining the Big Ten. 18 teams, 3 division so of 6 was one (of many) option. (Big Ten West: Texas, OU, Missouri, KU, Nebraska, Iowa)



CR Part XIV: Revenge of the Wallflowers - Page 13

Since my friend's connection was in the "SEC SEC SEC" camp, here's their thinking: OU is a football power. Our athletic budget is driven by football. Football ticket sales, donations to make sure you get tickets to the big football games fuels/pays for all of OU's Athletic Department. It trickles down to academic side, with football success being a direct correlation to how easy or hard it is to raise money for academics. The better the football team is doing, the more people donate all around including academic stuff (sad but true). So they look at the SEC and see the best football factory conference, and think that it will drive the entire university including, eventually and importantly, academics. Also, they see regional schools like LSU and Arkansas.....Arkansas gives in-state tuition to kids from the Tulsa area, so the SEC flag is planted in the Tulsa area, and the SEC sphere of influence is present. You can also see college football becoming more regionalized in the south, much like NASCAR. If you want to continue to make money off of college football like OU has for decades, the SEC is the one trending the right way.

Those against the SEC seem to really see the whole conference as dirty, and so dirty that it will taint every university that is associated with it as being dirty, or at best "just a football school" which are two images OU is trying real hard to leave behind.

The upside is OU's SEC folks were responsible for getting OU to re-do L. Dale Mitchell, which was inspired by Auburn's redo of their baseball stadium. (my friend on a "business trip" was one of the OU people to tour Auburn's baseball stadium while OU was planning the remodel)



CR Part XIV: Revenge of the Wallflowers - Page 13

1) I wouldn't say the SEC is off the table per say, the SEC does have it's supporters, it's just not the main focus or choice at the moment at OU. My contact is with a person in the the pro-SEC group, and I think the SEC is the fall back, if all else fails option.
2) Let's just say options with the B1G and PAC are the main focus
3) I think you mistook me. OU-UT in Dallas as far as I know is still the cornerstone of OU athletics...it's just that leaves a pretty dull home schedule for OU and Texas in the Big 12, and they want to figure out how to fix the home schedules, but moving OU-Texas to home and home not being one of the options.....I mean maybe they have run the numbers, but there would be a full revolt if that game went H/H. Dallas is a tradition...so much orbits around that weekend.



CR Part XIV: Revenge of the Wallflowers - Page 14

Thanks Redhawk for another interesting peek behind the realignment curtain!
The information sounds plausible, although it does challenge three of my most
cherished beliefs.

An OU/UT partnership to investigate conference options is a logical approach
to the issue; there are many advantages (repeatedly voiced on LT) if the
Sooners and Longhorns remain conference mates. I've always believed, however,
that UT's main goal is to either dominate their conference or achieve a
situation similar to Notre Dame; I simply cannot visualize UT in either the
SEC or Big Ten, where they would undoubtedly be one of the main players, but
would in the end have but one vote and be unable to intimidate Alabama/Florida
or Michigan/Ohio State. I could imagine UT moving with a set of minions to the
PAC, controlling a voting bloc that could veto any crucial (e.g., super-majority
required) issue. (Which would give me considerable pause if I was a current
PAC school.)

A number of people have commented that the new UT administration is more
diplomatic than the one in place six years ago. I do believe this view to be
accurate; I've had one (brief) face-to-face conversation with Fenves (on
an academic matter, not realignment), and found him to be quite gracious and
engaging. Still, as others have noted, Presidents come and go, and Texas
remains Texas. I'm convinced that if Texas wanted to join the Big Ten as a
"regular" member, Nebraska would strongly support the application.

I've read many proposals that Missouri would consider (or leap at) the
chance to move to the Big Ten. Yes, the school made it obvious that they
wanted a Big Ten invite, and yes, they are a bit of a cultural outlier in the
SEC, but I cannot believe for one second that MU has the slightest interest
in leaving the SEC. If I was the MU president, I would find myself engaged
in dealing with a potential existential threat to the university's stature
as a top-flight public flagship institution. It will take considerable
effort, leadership, and resources to reverse the dangerous spiral that has
taken hold over the past two years, and I would not spend one second considering
a proposal (and the associated distractions) that I leave what is arguably
the best athletic conference. Indeed, even if the difficulties that started in
2015 had never materialized, I would still find the idea the MU would abandon
the SEC to be an absurd one.

As for Nebraska and the Big Ten, there are aspects of the change that are less
than perfect. Prior to the move we had several venues (KU, KSU, ISU, MU)
that were "day trips"; the only Big Ten school that falls into that category
is Iowa. The travel is also more demanding for the athletes. Rivalries
inevitably take time to build. To say that Nebraska is not completely
satisfied may be technically correct, but the Big Ten and Nebraska brass
with whom I've interacted believe that the integration has gone extremely
smoothly, and the Nebraska leadership is extremely pleased to be a member of
the Big Ten.

That Spackler epic would have been awesome if there was one frickin mention of UConn. Just a tiny frickin mention? Would it have frickin killed you?

Ok, carry on.

 

[dayooper]

What's in that sort of set up for the B1G? I know historically there has been a loose association between those two conferences, but the B1G doesn't need anyone else as they have some of the biggest brandnames in the business of college sports.

What's in it is total control. By controlling 11 of each teams 12 teams, they don't share with any other media entity. Why do you think that ESPN wants SEC teams to play ACC teams? They own those games. Yes, they Big10 has OSU, PSU and Michigan, but owning games against USC, Texas, Oklahoma, Washington and showing them or selling them to the highest bidder puts more money and more control in their pocket. Even packaging lower games with some of those big name games can get them even more money while dumping the games they don't want to show.

 

[BUConn10]

Bigger fish leaving their conferences doesn't help UConn one bit, if anything it just moves us even further down the list of potential expansion candidates than we already have been relegated to by the powers that be.

 

[CL82]

Bigger fish leaving their conferences doesn't help UConn one bit, if anything it just moves us even further down the list of potential expansion candidates than we already have been relegated to by the powers that be.

When they leave, there is a gap to be filled. Change isn't the enemy to UConn right now. P5 stability is the enemy.

 

[BUConn10]

When they leave, there is a gap to be filled. Change isn't the enemy to UConn right now. P5 stability is the enemy.

We missed the boat entirely, that's my unpopular opinion.

 

[CL82]

We missed the boat entirely, that's my unpopular opinion.

Unpopular? I guess, but I don't think it is disputed. We need a "seismic event" to change our situation. The status quo ante is death to us.

 

[BUConn10]

Unpopular? I guess, but I don't think it is disputed. We need a "seismic event" to change our situation. The status quo ante is death to us.

Considering how much speculation goes on here I figured it was unpopular.

 

[Fishy]

Bigger fish leaving their conferences doesn't help UConn one bit, if anything it just moves us even further down the list of potential expansion candidates than we already have been relegated to by the powers that be.

Change might not be our friend, but the status quo is our enemy.

(I sound like a fortune cookie.)

 

[dayooper]

Change might not be our friend, but the status quo is our enemy.

(I sound like a fortune cookie.)

No, it’s “Change might not our friend, but the status quo is a punch to the throat.”