If there are going to be four 16-team Super Conferences . . .

[Jacie]

. . . why does everyone assume they will be the Pac 10, Big 10, SEC and an amalgamation of the Big East/ACC, with the Big 12 teams being split up amongst them?

Here is a much better alignment.

SEC absorbs aTm, Florida State, North Carolina and either Virgina Tech or Georgia Tech.

Big 10 absorbs Pitt, West Virginia, and two from a group including Boston College, Wake Forest, Maryland and Rutgers.

Pac 10 absorbs Boise State, Utah State, UNLV and either Sand Diego State or Hawaii.

That leaves the Big 12 with 9 teams needing 7 more to become a 16-team conference and here they are.

Big 12 absorbs TCU, Air Force, Cincinnati, Louisville and three from Conference USA's West Division of Houston, Rice, SMU, Tulsa, Tulane and UTEP.

Who gets left out of the Super Conferences (that conventional wisdom says should be included)?

Miami, BYU and Notre Dame. BYU and Notre Dame have chosen to be independent because they don't want conference alignment. Miami is a logical choice for the SEC but I don't think the current membership want the Canes. I see them as the odd man out in major conference realignment based on the inability to control their program. They'll have to remain in the ACC, which might merge with the remnants of the Big East to lobby for a fifth Super Conference.

[the-rover]

. . .

That leaves the Big 12 with 9 teams needing 7 more to become a 16-team conference and here they are.

Big 12 absorbs TCU, Air Force, Cincinnati, Louisville and three from Conference USA's West Division of Houston, Rice, SMU, Tulsa, Tulane and UTEP.



That disgusts me

[LiveLaughLove]

The Big XII is dead. The population is on both coasts. We and the Big X are the flyover and therefor, the weakest. Unfortunately, The Big X is more populated than us, so they will survive where we won't. It's all about televisions.

[saucysoonergal]

Pac-16, Clap, clap, clap!!!

[The Maestro]

Yeah, your scenario has OU in the "Not Even Bronze Medal" conference. We're better than that.

Fire it up, saucy!

[Tear Down This Wall]

Please call the SEC, Joe. Do not relegate us to the Pac-12.

[HToady]

SEC takes VT for 14th team.

Pac 12 counters with OU and OSU for 14

Dan Beebe continues to say..."we're right where we (Mac Brown) want to be.

The State of Oklahoma no longer cares.

That is all.

[Sooner5030]

16 team super conferences will suck. Fewer top-team OOC matchups and more consolidated influence through network/conference control. I'd be more in favor of 8 team conferences. The B1G, ACC, BIG EAST and others will be resistant to super conferences and therefore I doubt the BIG12-x will ever lose it's AQ status if the PAC/SEC go to 16.

[HToady]

4 16 team conferences (with 2 divisions of 8) = 64 0r 8 conferences of 8 =64.

All 8 division (or conference winner) head to 8 team playoff at 4 BCS bowl locations. It's that simple.

Lower bowls used to reward remaining teams.

Screw Notre Dame.

[LRoss]

I think 2 reasons.

#1 -- The B12 is Jericho, and Joshua's marched 6 1/2 times. What about Nebraska, Colorado, and now aTm leaving in rapid succession says "conference primed to take a big step forward!"?

Combined with,

#2 -- It seems to me that the B12 you lay out would be, numbers aside, a pretty un-super-conference. The SEC (already the best top to bottom) adds legit programs -- aTm, Fl St, VT, and a couple other lower-tier BCS conference schools. The B10, which just took a step forward with Nebraska, adds Pitt, WV, BC, and a lower-tier BCS conference school. The B12 has now LOST 3 legit programs, and becomes "super" by adding . . . TCU (decent program, sure, but coming from mid-major status), AFA, Cincy, Lville (mid-level up and down programs, not even close to the good programs that the SEC and B10 add), and then absolute garbage from CUSA (far worse than the lower-tier BCS conference schools that the B10 and SEC add). Sure, you made the P-whatever suck too, but that's not 4 super-conferences, it's 2 super-conferences and 2 suck conferences. I wish the B12 could stay together too, but only as a legit conference and not "Sun Belt for the next generation!"

All IMHO, of course.

[BigTip]

Jacie's idea would maybe work if you are starting from scratch, but it is not. There is too much of "if they go there, we'll have to do this, then they will do this, and then ...etc etc" going on. It is not going to happen all at once. In a perfect world yes, but NCAA football is far from that.

[Sabanball]

FSU will not be coming to the SEC. Florida has veto power over them and they will not allow it.

[silverwheels]

Please call the SEC, Joe. Do not relegate us to the Pac-12.

Give it up already.

[kssoonerfan7]

only way i say ou should stay in big 12 or whatever it is now is if it adds

notre dame, byu, arkansas. and then if it wants to be a 16 team conference then add schools like houston, smu, memphis etc...

dont think notre dame would happen so my choice would be the pac 12

[roll2tide]

An SEC opinion:

Maintaining the BIG XII is the worst option. You will not be able to replace Nebraska with an equal opponent in terms of name recognition and prestige. You likely could not replace Texas A&M. BYU, Houston, TCU.....none of these will serve to elevate the conference back to where it was 2 years ago. Keeping the BIG XII together can only, imo, keep you in a weaker conference than what your accustomed to.

A PAC-16 is a good option but not a great one. Oregon is probably the lone serious national threat right now. The PAC-16 would still be a weak conference in top-to-bottom terms and the travel distances would be tough on your fans. Also, while an OU-USC matchup appears good on paper, the games might be blowouts in the coming years as USC rebuilds from sanctions. Oregon would be a rotating opponent. Essentially, lose one regular season game and your probably out of national title contention.

An SEC-16 is a win-win for everyone, imo. A possible SEC West could contain OU, Texas, OSU, A&M, LSU, Arkansas, and the 2 Mississippi's. Travel distances make sense, traditional regional rival Arkansas comes back to your schedule, LSU/OU/Texas is a phenomenal annual battle, and the SEC gains 4 quality members in what is already the strongest conference in the nation. You know that even if you lose a game in the regular season you'll still have a top 5/10 opponent in the title game.

I live here in Norman and many OU fans got a taste of SEC football when we played several years ago and, from all that I've spoken with, everyone enjoyed it. Personally, I'd love to see this scenario play out.

Also, the SEC has no desire to cause the collapse of the ACC or Big East so this is our best shot at quality opponents in a neighboring geographical region.

[roll2tide]

only way i say ou should stay in big 12 or whatever it is now is if it adds

notre dame, byu, arkansas. and then if it wants to be a 16 team conference then add schools like houston, smu, memphis etc...

dont think notre dame would happen so my choice would be the pac 12

No shot at ND or Arky. No way the SEC would accept A&M without securing a commitment from Arkansas that they will stay. Lose Neb and A&M and gain BYU & Memphis? This relegates the BIG XII to MAC/WAC status, imo.

[silverwheels]

Texas isn't going to the SEC and neither is OU unless the Pac-12 declines.

[SoonerKnight]

An SEC opinion:

An SEC-16 is a win-win for everyone, imo. A possible SEC West could contain OU, Texas, OSU, A&M, LSU, Arkansas, and the 2 Mississippi's. Travel distances make sense, traditional regional rival Arkansas comes back to your schedule, LSU/OU/Texas is a phenomenal annual battle, and the SEC gains 4 quality members in what is already the strongest conference in the nation. You know that even if you lose a game in the regular season you'll still have a top 5/10 opponent in the title game.

I live here in Norman and many OU fans got a taste of SEC football when we played several years ago and, from all that I've spoken with, everyone enjoyed it. Personally, I'd love to see this scenario play out.

Also, the SEC has no desire to cause the collapse of the ACC or Big East so this is our best shot at quality opponents in a neighboring geographical region.


And then we can all chant SEC....SEC.....SEC.....SEC!!!!


No, thank you!

[roll2tide]

I don't see why not. Texas can't survive as an independent if both the SEC and PAC 10 have members inside the state and their respective member schools are playing games inside the state every year. They'll lose too much in recruiting. And let's face it.....even with the best recruiting classes most every year Texas doesn't have a lot of hardware to show for it. Going to the PAC 10 makes far less financial sense, imo.

[silverwheels]

Texas looks down upon the SEC's academics, so they're not going to the SEC unless they have to. And they don't want to be independent, either. At this point, they're trying their hardest to keep the Big 12 together but if they can't, they're talking to the Pac-12.

[roll2tide]

If anyone can make a logistical/financial/national prestige argument for maintaining the BIG XII or joining the PAC 10 over the SEC I'd have interest in reading any opinions.

[rekamrettuB]

So what about the other 64 teams or so?

[silverwheels]

If anyone can make a logistical/financial/national prestige argument for maintaining the BIG XII or joining the PAC 10 over the SEC I'd have interest in reading any opinions.

Financially, the Pac-12 and SEC will both offer a good deal of money in their TV contracts once restructured. That will probably even out or at least be close.

The SEC is closer overall, but should super conferences form, OU wouldn't be making road trips to the West Coast every other game, and I'm sure concessions would be made for traveling for non-football as well. SEC has this one, but it's not a huge margin. Travel will be worse no matter where OU ends up if the Big 12 dissolves, and the extra couple of hours won't mean much to the team or fans, at least for football.

Obviously the SEC is the king of football at the moment, but OU isn't just a football team. From top to bottom, the Pac-12 is a better conference academically, and I'd imagine the research grants given to OU would be fantastic. This is the main reason Boren wants the Pac-12. I think on the field, OU would do fine in the SEC, but when taking everything into account, the Pac-12 is probably the better option.

[BigTip]

If anyone can make a logistical/financial/national prestige argument for maintaining the BIG XII or joining the PAC 10 over the SEC I'd have interest in reading any opinions.

However that part works best for anyone is what is going to make anything happen.

[Tear Down This Wall]

An SEC opinion:

Maintaining the BIG XII is the worst option. You will not be able to replace Nebraska with an equal opponent in terms of name recognition and prestige. You likely could not replace Texas A&M. BYU, Houston, TCU.....none of these will serve to elevate the conference back to where it was 2 years ago. Keeping the BIG XII together can only, imo, keep you in a weaker conference than what your accustomed to.

A PAC-16 is a good option but not a great one. Oregon is probably the lone serious national threat right now. The PAC-16 would still be a weak conference in top-to-bottom terms and the travel distances would be tough on your fans. Also, while an OU-USC matchup appears good on paper, the games might be blowouts in the coming years as USC rebuilds from sanctions. Oregon would be a rotating opponent. Essentially, lose one regular season game and your probably out of national title contention.

An SEC-16 is a win-win for everyone, imo. A possible SEC West could contain OU, Texas, OSU, A&M, LSU, Arkansas, and the 2 Mississippi's. Travel distances make sense, traditional regional rival Arkansas comes back to your schedule, LSU/OU/Texas is a phenomenal annual battle, and the SEC gains 4 quality members in what is already the strongest conference in the nation. You know that even if you lose a game in the regular season you'll still have a top 5/10 opponent in the title game.

I live here in Norman and many OU fans got a taste of SEC football when we played several years ago and, from all that I've spoken with, everyone enjoyed it. Personally, I'd love to see this scenario play out.

Also, the SEC has no desire to cause the collapse of the ACC or Big East so this is our best shot at quality opponents in a neighboring geographical region.

Our athletic departments are not interested in the SEC schedule, sadly. Those of us who pay for season tickets would be very happy if OU joined the SEC. Tickets to games versus LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, etc. instead of Baylor, Tech...yes.

[saucysoonergal]

Pac-16, Clap, clap, clap!!!

[Tear Down This Wall]

Financially, the Pac-12 and SEC will both offer a good deal of money in their TV contracts once restructured. That will probably even out or at least be close.

The SEC is closer overall, but should super conferences form, OU wouldn't be making road trips to the West Coast every other game, and I'm sure concessions would be made for traveling for non-football as well. SEC has this one, but it's not a huge margin. Travel will be worse no matter where OU ends up if the Big 12 dissolves, and the extra couple of hours won't mean much to the team or fans, at least for football.

Obviously the SEC is the king of football at the moment, but OU isn't just a football team. From top to bottom, the Pac-12 is a better conference academically, and I'd imagine the research grants given to OU would be fantastic. This is the main reason Boren wants the Pac-12. I think on the field, OU would do fine in the SEC, but when taking everything into account, the Pac-12 is probably the better option.

Academic = baloney. Half of our players major in some form of communications and the other half in some sort of what we used to call P.E. Very few variances.

This whole nonsense about AAU is garbage. It doesn't mean a damn thing as far as football goes.

I don't sit in the stands on Saturday afternoon chatting up academics with the people around - at home or on the road. No one does. If they did, we'd ignore them.

Which came first, athletic conferences or these stupid, pointy head, academic snot affiliations? You can have your AAU with or without athletic conferences.

[LosAngelesSooner]

I don't see why not. Texas can't survive as an independent if both the SEC and PAC 10 have members inside the state and their respective member schools are playing games inside the state every year. They'll lose too much in recruiting. And let's face it.....even with the best recruiting classes most every year Texas doesn't have a lot of hardware to show for it. Going to the PAC 10 makes far less financial sense, imo.In the SEC you propose it would be almost impossible NOT to have at least 1 loss each year for every team and many years the champion will have 2 losses. Period. So welcome to the future of always being excluded from the championship game.

If the SEC added OU and Texas it would actually sink the SEC.

And if the PAC 16 included OU and Texas it would easily equal the SEC in terms of difficulty.

And as for the "we wouldn't have any great OOC games," to that I say, "Who cares? The IN conference games would be exciting enough."

[LosAngelesSooner]

It's cheaper to fly to most of the PAC towns than it is to most of the SEC towns.

Someone needs to explain to TDTW about grants, academics and how more people go to a University than just the football players and for other reasons than just playing football.

[silverwheels]

It's cheaper to fly to most of the PAC towns than it is to most of the SEC towns.

Someone needs to explain to TDTW about grants, academics and how more people go to a University than just the football players and for other reasons than just playing football.

He's going to ignore it and just focus on footbaw.

[jkjsooner]

4 16 team conferences (with 2 divisions of 8) = 64 0r 8 conferences of 8 =64.

All 8 division (or conference winner) head to 8 team playoff at 4 BCS bowl locations. It's that simple.

Lower bowls used to reward remaining teams.

Screw Notre Dame.

This will never work because if flat out rewards teams in the lesser super conferences. The current system can reward teams with easier schedules but it can also reward teams with harder schedules - depending on the specific circumstances.


As for the ACC joining with the Big East to form a super conference, didn't that already happen. The ACC already picked exactly who they wanted out of the Big East. I can't see them bending over backwards to grab the teams they intentionally left out the first time.

Given, if football was the only concern the BE should have taken WVU and Pitt above Boston College. Maybe they've secured their media markets and now want to improve football with these two. Either way, unlike the other conferences they're not growing their footprint considerably.

[LosAngelesSooner]

He's going to ignore it and just focus on footbaw.If we were discussing divisions in pro football, his argument may of held some water. But we're talking about Universities and, unfortunately, many people don't realize that the conference your school in has a MUCH bigger impact than just in football, or even sports. And the academic quotient has to do with all those OTHER kids who are, you know, GOING TO SCHOOL, than JUST the athletes.

But that's getting complex and nuanced...something TDTW isn't really good at handling.

[kevpks]

Academic = baloney. Half of our players major in some form of communications and the other half in some sort of what we used to call P.E. Very few variances.

This whole nonsense about AAU is garbage. It doesn't mean a damn thing as far as football goes.

I don't sit in the stands on Saturday afternoon chatting up academics with the people around - at home or on the road. No one does. If they did, we'd ignore them.

Which came first, athletic conferences or these stupid, pointy head, academic snot affiliations? You can have your AAU with or without athletic conferences.

I'm pretty sure the academic arguments have nothing to do with what our players are majoring in. Being in a conference with Stanford, Cal and USC is better for academic prestige, and more importantly the academic output, than being aligned with Iowa State and K-State. Many football fans might not care about that stuff but regents and presidents definitely do.

[silverwheels]

Iowa State is actually a pretty good school. Kansas State isn't, though.

[jkjsooner]

Academic = baloney. Half of our players major in some form of communications and the other half in some sort of what we used to call P.E. Very few variances.

This whole nonsense about AAU is garbage. It doesn't mean a damn thing as far as football goes.

I don't sit in the stands on Saturday afternoon chatting up academics with the people around - at home or on the road. No one does. If they did, we'd ignore them.

Which came first, athletic conferences or these stupid, pointy head, academic snot affiliations? You can have your AAU with or without athletic conferences.

Are you saying you don't care about OU academics? If so then, well, I don't know what to say.

The fact is that the membership to athletic conference do play a role in the academic reputation. In some cases, these conference affiliations go well beyond athletic. The Big 10 is a prime example of that.

It is Boren's first job to increase OU's academic reputation. If the Ivy League called tomorrow and asked us to join, you'd bet we'd strongly consider removing athletic scholarships and playing the likes of Harvard in football. You don't have to worry about that though because hell would freeze over before we got an invitation to join the Ivy League.

As for chatting about academics at a football game, that has nothing to do with anything. We're don't go to games to talk about academics but that doesn't change the fact that it is Boren's job to increase the academic reputation of our university.

[jkjsooner]

Iowa State is actually a pretty good school. Kansas State isn't, though.

I was about to state the same thing. I think Iowa State gets a bad rap here for some reason...

[silverwheels]

I was about to state the same thing. I think Iowa State gets a bad rap here for some reason...

Probably because they have one of the worst football programs of all time. I'd like to see them get into the Big Ten with Kansas and/or Missouri, but that's probably not going to happen. Everything I've heard says if the Big Ten expands, they want Notre Dame first (obviously) and then they'll look east at schools like Syracuse and Rutgers to get a better hold in the New York market. There are tons of Big Ten alums in New York.

[stoopified]

. . . why does everyone assume they will be the Pac 10, Big 10, SEC and an amalgamation of the Big East/ACC, with the Big 12 teams being split up amongst them?

Here is a much better alignment.

SEC absorbs aTm, Florida State, North Carolina and either Virgina Tech or Georgia Tech.

Big 10 absorbs Pitt, West Virginia, and two from a group including Boston College, Wake Forest, Maryland and Rutgers.

Pac 10 absorbs Boise State, Utah State, UNLV and either Sand Diego State or Hawaii.

That leaves the Big 12 with 9 teams needing 7 more to become a 16-team conference and here they are.

Big 12 absorbs TCU, Air Force, Cincinnati, Louisville and three from Conference USA's West Division of Houston, Rice, SMU, Tulsa, Tulane and UTEP.

Who gets left out of the Super Conferences (that conventional wisdom says should be included)?

Miami, BYU and Notre Dame. BYU and Notre Dame have chosen to be independent because they don't want conference alignment. Miami is a logical choice for the SEC but I don't think the current membership want the Canes. I see them as the odd man out in major conference realignment based on the inability to control their program. They'll have to remain in the ACC, which might merge with the remnants of the Big East to lobby for a fifth Super Conference.Personally I think ththat alignment would make OUr conference a joke.

[Tear Down This Wall]

Yes. Academics are so important that all of these conferences are knocking down Rice's president and athletic director with phone calls this week.

Which is it? Rice to the Pac-12? Rice to the Big Ten?

Maybe they can get Rice and Tulane as a package...if only they would agree to leave the C-USA and their high brow academic institutions.

You guys are so full of garbage. The whole academic part of the discussion is the most hypocritical element involved. If it weren't, we'd have taken Rice and Tulane in the Big 12 instead of Oklahoma State and Texas Tech.

Stop pretending there's some high brow reason we don't want to go to the SEC. The reason is, everytime we've played them in a championship game, they've mopped us up. And, Texas as well.

Bob and Mack want no part of preparing for that type of schedule week in and week out. So, we get this ridiculous academic smokescreen.

It's about money, not academics, first and foremost. Second, it's about competition. We'd make plenty of money with games week in and week out against SEC foes; and, we'd get competition in spades. I'm afraid it's the second count we're running from...all the way to the west coast.

Screw your academic pretense and give me the best football you can give me! I don't buy football season tickets to go walking around in the physics buildings. No one does. Show me the physics department that has a contract to have its classes and labs broadcast on ESPN and FOXSports.

Baloney. Highfallutin' baloney.

[silverwheels]

Whatever you say, man. And it doesn't matter, anyway, because we're not going to the SEC, regardless of what you think. So keep on keepin' on, I guess.

[jkjsooner]

Yes. Academics are so important that all of these conferences are knocking down Rice's president and athletic director with phone calls this week.


Academics is a consideration. Nobody said it was the sole criteria one would use.

I'd also point out that you're talking about two different things. Considering academics of a prospective new member is not the same as considering academics of all the members of an existing conference when choosing a new conference.

Adding Rice to the SEC (for example) would only increase the academic reputation of the SEC slightly. OU joining the PAC would have a larger increase in our academic reputation and only a slight decrease in the PAC's reputation.

But, anyway, most importantly you paint an all-or-nothing picture of a decision that involves multiple facets.

[jkjsooner]

The reason is, everytime we've played them in a championship game, they've mopped us up. And, Texas as well.

I knew you didn't give a crap about OU academics but now it appears you're willing to bend the truth to degrade our football program.

Only one team "mopped us up" in a championship game and that was a team from the conference we're about to join. This also was the only game that was truly in a neutral venue.

The other games were competitive well into the fourth quarter.

In the Florida game we represented ourselves well. Heck, I went into the game thinking we had no chance to win. I came out thinking we should have won the game.

Almost everyone assumed that our defense wouldn't be able to ever stop UF and we were going to get a USC type stomping. Our defense played much better than anyone expected.

[Tear Down This Wall]

Neutral venue? So what? You can't complain about where games are played. Everyone know where the bowl games are played. When we beat Florida State, we were playing in Florida.

We didn't move the ball well against either LSU or Florida. Texas couldn't move against Alabama. Alabama ran roughshod over Texas' defensive line.

An LSU freshman broke off 117 yards on the ground against us, Justin Vincent. Tim Tebow and Percy Harvin both used our defense for 100+ yards. Harvin, a sick 122 yards on only nine carries.

I don't care what the final scores were. When you're pounding your opponent to pieces on the ground, you take alot of time off the clock.

LSU and Florida poundeds us on offense, and their defenses stop us multiple times inside the 10 because their lines were manhandling our offensive line.

What? You don't like a candid assessment of how those games went? I've got to jump into some dream world where "we almost won those games" or "were a play or two here and there from taking them"? No way. That's Mack Brown talk. If you've got wide receivers and quarterbacks running you for 100+ yards rushing, you are getting your butt kicked.

The SEC is the elite college football conference, and we are an elite college football program. They don't publish kids' GPAs and majors in the programs. The Pac-10/12/16, no matter how you slice it, doesn't come close to the type of football competition week in and week out that the SEC provides.

We can choose where we want to go because of who we are, and we are choosing a conference with lesser competition than the SEC.

[silverwheels]

u mad?

[Tear Down This Wall]

No. Just disappointed. I'll get over it. I just hate to see this opportunity pass. For whatever reason Arizona and Arizona State don't pack the same punch of an LSU. Maybe if our basketball program is ever revived I could be excited about the Pac-10/12/16.

I'll give the Pac-12 this...at least they go ahead and change the name of their conference to match the number of schools in it. So, I mean, that's something.

[Tear Down This Wall]

This is what I liked and would relish again: the 2003 Bedlam game, driving the Aggies and Les Miles into the dirt of Owen Field to the tune of 52-9.

There's bad blood between us and Les. If we go to the Pac-12, there's just nothing intense there.

SEC would give us a heated border rivalry with Arkansas. We'd still be in Texas every other year to play A&M.

Look, man...I've been to Tuscon, Los Angeles, etc. They're not fire-breathing college football towns the way Fayetteville and Baton Rouge and Tuscaloosa, etc. are.

At the end of the day, I'm at OU or some other university soaking up the atmosphere and watching the game. The SEC has the best game day atmosphere. That's all I'm saying. The people in the Pac-16 won't care if we beat them; the SEC fans will cry and be in pain. It will effect their lives for a week or two.

Yeah, pathetic. But, you gotta love the devotion. It's like ours. Texas...they're perfect for the Pac-12 because they don't really love it. We're different.

[GottaHavePride]

1. Yeah, the SEC is playing the best footbal right now. They also have conference-wide the shadiest recruiting of any conference. Boren doesn't want our name associated with that. Right there, the SEC is out of contention.

2. Conferences aren't just football. They're basketball, baseball, track & field, softball, women's BB, etc. etc. etc. AND they're academic relationships. AND they're leverage for grant funding - foundations AND government money. AND they're big-dollar TV contracts.

In short, if you think anyone involved is going to make a decision based solely on what conference will give us the best football games on the weekend, then frankly, you're an idiot.

[LosAngelesSooner]

Look, man...I've been to Tuscon, Los Angeles, etc. They're not fire-breathing college football towns the way Fayetteville and Baton Rouge and Tuscaloosa, etc. are. That's because we have other things to do than just football and raping pigs.

Look, road trips to the PAC cities will be more fun, BY FAR, the game day atmosphere at MOST of the PAC schools ARE on par with anything in the SEC. The rivalries (you tellin' me you don't HATE USC and Oregon?) would be brilliant.

And you're still glossing over all the other advantages the PAC has over the SEC.

Simple truth? You have a hard on for the SEC and you don't care about anything other than your own happiness as a football fan. So? Go root for an SEC team so you can chant SEC. Me? I'm gonna pull for what's best for my University.

[Jdog]

If we go to the PAC 16 we'll probably be in a division with all the newer teams. Which means we'll play UTAH, Colorado, Arizona, ASU, Tech, Texas (or BYU) and OSU every year. We'll play the old PAC 8 teams SC, UCLA, CAL, Washington WSU, Stanford, UO and Oregon State at Home every 6 to 8 years -

for the most part - our division will be very watered down to the point that (it will be like the Big 12 north) we' ll be competing for the championship game with SC, or UO every year. Likely Championship venues will be Jerry world or the Rose Bowl and the winner goto the final 4.
That sums up why we should go west.[/SIZE][/SIZE][/FONT]

NOT all BAD

the biggest problem will be recruiting Texas - We could lose some of those recruits.

[silverwheels]

The Pac-# would never take BYU or they would have already. They seem averse to institutions with religious connections.

[kevpks]

the biggest problem will be recruiting Texas - We could lose some of those recruits.

I think we'll still do fine in Texas. I wouldn't mind getting an even stronger foothold in SoCal. The SUC boards are still bitter they missed out on Stills and Jefferson.

[aurorasooner]

OU with Stool State and Texas with Tech to the PAC may not be a lock. Gawd I don't want OU to go to a PAC-14 with Texas and have an OU/Texas PAC regional studio in Austin.

BCS football: Realignment update (Pac-12 CEOs don’t want to expand) Here’s the latest, based on weekend conversations with sources from several conferences and numerous schools:

*** The Pac-12 presidents and chancellors do not want to expand. Their strong preference is for Texas A&M-to-the-SEC to implode and for the Big 12 to remain viable — essentially, they want the status quo for as long as they can get it.

Why? Because they have everything they want.

The conference has stability… it has a football championship game … it has the richest TV deal in college sports history … and it has a wholly-owned network(s) to serve its fans, provide unprecedented exposure for its athletes, promote the league’s academic mission — and generate millions of dollars per school annually once it attains maximum distribution.

The CEOs believe the Pac-12 is the best-positioned conference in the country. They don’t want 16 teams, and they don’t want the SEC and Big Ten going to 16 teams, either.

But …

*** If Texas A&M becomes the SEC’s 13th team, that sets the superconferences in motion.

“The SEC won’t stop at 13, or even 14. And if the SEC is at 14 or 16, the Big Ten will do it,” a source said. ”At that point, (the Pac-12) would be crazy not to entertain the idea of expansion.”

(Multiple sources said the SEC’s 14th team would most likely be Missouri. Combine untapped TV dollars with geography, and the schools that make the most sense for the SEC are Texas A&M, Missouri and Virginia Tech.)

Only if the SEC goes to 13 would the Pac-12 evaluate its options.

It won’t take Oklahoma unless A&M leaves first, despite the accelerated timeline laid out last week by Oklahoma President David Boren.

*** And yes, in all likelihood the Pac-12 would take Oklahoma and Oklahoma State even if Texas were off the table, multiple sources said.

“Right now, it’s wait-and-see mode,” added one. “The happiest result for the Pac-12 is if the status quo is maintained.”

Academics would be a point of contention if the status quo unravels, however.

Sources said that at least five schools (Stanford, Cal, USC, UCLA and Washington) have serious questions about admitting the Oklahoma schools, which are not members of the Association of American Universities.

But when I asked a source close to Stanford president John Hennessy, one of the league’s most influential CEOs, if the AAU issue would be a deal-breaker, the answer was: “Probably not.”

Said another source: “If Larry (Scott) thinks adding (Oklahoma and OSU) is the right thing, the CEOs will ultimately fall in line.”

(Utah is not an AAU member. Nor are Arizona State, Oregon State and Washington State, for that matter.)

*** Would Texas be off the table for the Pac-12?

Sources said the implosion of the Big 12 would leave the Longhorns with only two choices: the Pac-12, or independence.

In other words, the Big Ten is not an option for the Longhorns because the B10 doesn’t want Texas Tech — and TTU would be a package deal with UT.

Taking the independent path would be fraught with challenges for Texas, which would have to find a home for its Olympic sports.

As noted on the Hotline recently, and confirmed by sources in the media-rights industry, there is more money for Texas in the Pac-16 than in the Big 12 or as an Independent — perhaps not in the first few years, but certainly once the league’s TV network(s) ramps up distribution and advertising.

But Texas-to-the-Pac won’t work unless the Longhorns agree to the league’s revenue sharing model, and the CEOs won’t budge on that issue.

So UT would have to swallow its pride and take the same cut as Texas Tech.

(Cue chuckles from Lubbock … and College Station.)

*** At the root of Big 12 destabilization is not Texas A&M’s departure — that’s hardly a death blow — but the deteriorating relationship between Texas and Oklahoma.

“Their bond has frayed,” a source said. “Texas overplayed its hand …

“Oklahoma wants into the Pac-12 with or without Texas. The partnership is no longer sacrosanct.”

*** If massive realignment occurs with the Oklahoma schools, Texas and TTU joining the Pac-12 … and with A&M and Missouri headed to the SEC … then Kansas probably goes to the Big East, likely in tandem with Kansas State.

The Big 12 schools in the biggest trouble would be Baylor and Iowa State.

“They might have to go backwards,” said a source — meaning Conference USA or the Mountain West.

*** A critical but oft-overlooked component to the realignment game is the SEC’s financial aims.

The conference cannot renegotiate its long-term deals with CBS and ESPN without membership change, and in order to get maximum value, it needs 16 teams.

From Gainesville to Knoxville to Baton Rouge, and all points along the way, the feeling among SEC athletic directors can be summed up like this:

“We’ve won five consecutive national titles and the Pac-12 has a richer TV deal than we do. What’s the hell’s going on?”

Hence the sooner-than-expected developments with A&M.

*** The Big Ten won’t expand until it’s time to renegotiate the league’s deals with CBS and ESPN, which expire in 2016, according to a source.

At that point, if the Pac-12 and the SEC have grown to 16 teams, then Notre Dame will join the Big Ten. http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2011/09/06/bcs-football-realignment-update-the-pac-12-doesnt-want-to-expand/ Ralphie not happy with a PAC-16
University of Colorado president Bruce Benson said this morning he is wary of further Pac-12 expansion, particularly if Colorado is placed in an "East" division with former rivals from the Big 12 such as Oklahoma and Texas.

Benson said he would discuss the situation with university chancellor Phil DiStefano later today. Expansion talks have heated up in the aftermath of the Big 12 losing Texas A&M last week, and widespread speculation that Oklahoma and Texas might now bolt, possibly to the Pac 12.

"One of the reasons - and there are a lot of reasons - we got in the Pac 12 is to play regularly on the West Coast," Benson said. "When I hear things like East-West divisions, we're going back to the Big 12 again. I don't know who's possibly going, but I sure don't want to get shorted out of the West Coast."

The Pac-12, which expanded with Colorado and Utah last spring, could possibly become the Pac-16. Oklahoma officials have indicated its priority, if the Big 12 doesn't stay solvent, is joining the Pac-12. Should OU commit to a move it could push others to join, such as Texas, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech.

Benson and DiStefano always maintained a major reason for CU joining the Pac-12 was that the schools matched Colorado's academic mission. While Oklahoma and Texas are on a par with CU academically, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State may not be.

"I believe that we should have a robust academic atmosphere among all schools in the league," Benson said. "What schools have cinch courses or gut courses? We don't have any and never will. The Pac-12 doesn't. Some Big 12 schools do."

Benson said he hasn't talked to Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott recently and doesn't know what his plans are or what a potential expansion would mean financially to the current members. Scott signed TV contracts that guarantee each school around $20 million a year in TV revenue in future years.

"I'm not sure if there is any more money per school," Benson said. "We'll wait and see. We'll see what Texas does with their (Longhorn) network. Texas likes things Texas's way."

The Longhorn Network will earn the school $15 million a year for 20 years. Scott's refusal to allow Texas to have the network if it was a Pac-12 member is believed to be a factor in why Texas didn't jump last year.

How Scott accommodates Texas, particularly with the Pac-12's four new regional networks, may be a key to whether the Pac-12 becomes the Pac-16.

"Look at the whole Texas funding," Benson said. "Boulder's (athletic) budget was $48 million before the new contract. Texas was $122 million and maybe that's a year old. That's before they got the bigger (TV) contract."

The San Jose Mercury News reported Tuesday that most Pac-12 CEOs favor standing pat and not expanding. They like the idea of six-team North and South divisions.

"That's kind of how I look at it," Benson said. "I just don't want to change this dynamic. Every year we're in Northern and Southern California. We want that. Every year we're in Arizona. We want that. We're in Washington. We want that."

Pac-12 expansion could happen soon. If it does, divisional alignment will be a major problem for Colorado if it's in the same division as the Texas and Oklahoma schools.

"I'm not happy at all if we go that way," Benson said. "I'm sure I'll make a lot of noise."http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_18834617

[delhalew]

I'm sure Colorado would rather not be in a division with us again.:D

I'll restate, PAC is a poor fit. However, at this point I just want out of this circus, preferably without Texas. That is another reason I find the SEC preferable. We know Texas won't follow to the SEC.

[SoonerMom2]

Colorado will have little to no say on who the PAC 12 brings in as a new member. Anyone thinking Colorado would keep us out doesn't have a clue. They don't want to play us again and you can bet that the PAC 12 would rather have OU then a team that goes to Hawii and loses 34-17. CO brought nothing to the table in football.

Conferences are not allowing new members to have much say in who comes into the conference according to several sites. Most laughed at CO opening their mouth.

[LosAngelesSooner]

The PAC is a PERFECT fit.

[delhalew]

The PAC is a PERFECT fit.
You live in LA.



















Says the dumb, toothless Okie.

[LosAngelesSooner]

You'll see the light when I'm buying you beers at the tailgates in Arizona and SoCal. ;)

[LosAngelesSooner]

Oh...and the SoCal teams are gonna be REALLY surprised when they have 25-30k Sooner fans showing up at their "home games." There's a LOT of Sooners out here. More than anywhere else outside of Oklahoma.

[delhalew]

You'll see the light when I'm buying you beers at the tailgates in Arizona and SoCal. ;)

With that...you win. I do miss the beer selection on the Pacific Coast.