There may be falsehoods in my subjective statements but the numbers don't lie. We haven't broke the top 20 in revenue since joining the big 10, and we are a very low spender relative to our revenue. Who cares if there is left over money at the end of the fiscal year? Not the fans or athletes, it should all be spent, like most teams spend. We aren't richer relative to other powers, we haven't won, we aren't treated particularly well or fairly by the big10...and so we sacrificed our generational history with regional rivals for..........
Tier 3 rights for Oklahoma
- Thread starter PlanOUred
- Start date
Texas being good? You seem to forget, we were also getting rolled by Kansas, Missouri, and even Iowa State when we left the Big 12. It has nothing to do with joining the BIG 10, it was more about trying to replace a coaching icon, which we failed at miserably. Hopefully with Frost we got it right. Time will only tell. Start w
While the Kansas legislature may have a problem with KU seperating KSU, Kansas will do anything in their power to go to the Big Ten. If Oklahoma and Texas leave the Big 12 I doubt the conference will dissolve, but it will lose it's power five status. This will lead to a four team playoff consisting of the power four conference champions (also forcing Notre Dame to join a conference).
Kansas State is dead wait and won't be joining any other power conference in the future. I would think that the Kansas legislature realizes this and understand that trying to block KU from moving would ultimately eliminate any school from Kansas of power conference affliction.
Kansas State is dead wait and won't be joining any other power conference in the future. I would think that the Kansas legislature realizes this and understand that trying to block KU from moving would ultimately eliminate any school from Kansas of power conference affliction.
Long is a highly respected AD. He consistently had Arkansas in the Top 20 of Director's Cup standings. He had to fire Petrino because he couldn't keep it in his pants. Bielma was thought of as a very good hire when it was made. Didn't work out because he didn't fit Arkansas' culture and for some reason refused to recruit Texas.
I think he'll be a good hire for KU.
Last edited:
First, Texas wasn’t great. They won 3 Big 12 titles from 1996 to 2010. And had we not shot ourselves in the foot during the last two minutes of the 2009 CCG, we would have won. They were great in 2005, they were great in making money and recruiting, but otherwise they were just good most seasons. OU won 11 titles. They were great. It was incompetent leadership that was content to kow tow to Texas that was the downfall of the Big 12.
Bo’s best recruiting classes came in 2010 (#22) and 2011 (#15) AFTER we announced the move to the Big Ten. The downside to those two classes is that a good number (at least 10 four star kids by my count) never made it to campus, transferred or were non-contributors. Guys like Chase Rome, Bubba Starling, Braylon Heard, Tyler Moore, Todd Peat, etc. if you go back and really review the numbers Bo’s classes in the Big Ten were really no different than they were in the Big 12. The difference is nominal at best. He hated to recruit, and he wasn’t shy about making that fact public. His recruiting suffered, not because of our conference affiliation, but because of his inability to embrace recruiting and his unwillingness to really work on it.
Finally, please prove most BIG teams spend 90-95% of their revenue and we save 90% of ours. That’s a very large discrepancy and seems quite skewed and unrealistic without concrete numbers to back it up. As far as revenue, you’re comparing apples and oranges. Yes we left the Big 12 for the Big Ten for money. And yes, since we left the Big 12 we have been in the 24-21 range in revenue. However, that was BEFORE a full Big Ten share. We received full Big Ten membership in July last year. So we’re only now, exactly one year into full Big Ten membership and revenue. I don’t know what our Fiscal year is, but if it’s calendar year, then we won’t show a full fiscal year of Big Ten revenue until December 31 this year. At a $20M+ bump, that should land us solidly in the top 20 if not top 15. Frankly the fact that we were able to stay in the top 25 while NOT receiving full Big Ten revenue is really quite amazing. We’re only now seeing the positive effects of Big Ten money (see Scott Frost and his top #10 National Contract). Big Ten money bought us a big time coach and staff. The compounding effects of Big Ten revenue won’t truly be realized for another 1-3 fiscal years. If Frost can do here what he did at UCF, there is no reason we won’t start competing for top 10 in revenue and top 10+ on the field.
I remember fleeing the Big 8 when we could never beat Oklahoma all of those years.
wonderful. texass would be given another chance to ruin another conference.
True enough. NOBODY knows how to destroy a conference like the Longhorns.
OU isn't going anywhere.
winning championships and being successful on the field is more important than making a few extra million dollars
OU is OU because they are in the B12. Move to the SEC or B10 and OU will drop a notch.
they know it. everyone knows it.
they don't need the B10 to recruit well they don't need the B10 to get rich.
they already have everything they want and need in the B12.
OU may not have a choice in the matter. The Big Ten, SEC and ACC are all at 14 schools. The Big Ten and SEC have already stated their intent to go to 16. The ACC will follow suit. That leaves the Pac 12 at 12 teams and the Big 12 at 10. If the Big Ten and SEC go to 16 teams, and the ACC does likewise then 4 mega conferences are almost inevitable. At this point the most logical choices for conference expansion would be Notre Dame (most likely ACC bound), OU, Texas and then after those teams likely expansion candidates would be KU, Oklahoma State, West Virginia, and BYU. West Virginia and Notre Dame seem likely candidate for the ACC. OU and KU would be good candidates for the Big Ten. I doubt Texas would go SEC due to academics, and as they did in the mid 1990’s may look west to join the Pac 12.
At this juncture the Big 12 seems the odd man out in a 4 mega conference scenario. If that scenario plays out, OU will not have a choice in the matter if they want to continue to play at the highest level, they will be forced to choose a new conference. Hard to say how it will shake out, but expansion WILL happen again with the Big Ten and the SEC leading the way, and as has been the case for nearly a decade now, the Big 12 will be a day late and a dollar short when it comes to expansion.
Big 12 had a chance to get the leg up on the ACC but they failed when they passed on Louisville. Yes, it may have diluted the payout, but there was a bigger picture at stake there. Big 12 plays tiddlywinks while Pac12 plays checkers and everyone else plays chess.
Yep. The Big 12 is in it’s final term. Once the next round of expansion and TV contracts are finalized the Big 12 will either cease to exist or will exist as a mid-major conference and lose “Power” status. It’s no longer a matter of “if” but “when.” 2025 at the latest with announcements coming earlier than that. I’d say 5 years tops... if not before.
Actually in today’s college football landscape money is probably more important now than ever. The BIG is projecting over $50M per school in 2018. The SEC is paying out north of $41M. The Big 12 is at $34M. A $16M to $17M delta over 5 years is roughly $85M without inflation or compounded investment returns. You won’t win championships long with that delta. And this short sighted mindset is exactly why in the long term the Big 12 will be irrevelant.
Yes, the issue is not a "few" bucks it really is a lot of bucks. One scenario I could see happening is that Texas and Oklahoma leave for the PAC 12 taking a couple or so of the other Big 12 schools with them. Basically a merger of the two conferences with the divestiture of some Big 12 midgets who would be totally screwed (eg. the Iowa State type schools).
Remember if conference realignment takes off in a big way again, the PAC will really be scrambling. Its geography doesn't give it many viable expansion candidates other than raiding the best of the Big 12.
Arguing against that scenario is the fact that the biggest name PAC schools are two times zones away from the Big 12 and those home games are somewhat problematic for national TV viewing. The TV viewing issue isn't a problem for all games of course but I believe it is enough of an overall problem to have hurt the PAC revenues relative to the B1G, SEC and ACC.
Last edited:
Nebraska was a good addition to Big Ten.
- Northwestern has been a good game for the Huskers and football fans
- Iowa vs. Nebraska is developing as a rivalry
- Minnesota vs. Nebraska has been competitive
- Wisconsin is team to beat
- Michigan State should have been a West team, with Purdue staying with Indiana in East
- Michigan State game should be an annual series
That’s what the Pac12 has going both for and against it. Geography. They have essentially cornered the Power 5 market on the West Coast. It’ not like the BIG, SEC or ACC are eyeing Pac teams for expansion. So the Pac 12 is insulated from expansion raiding the conference, but they also have very few expansion options. Although Texas was looking West 20 years ago, so Texas and OU to the Pac is certainly a possibility and I could see Okie State going as well. Then the Pac could pick up a Mountain West team like Boise State or Colorado State. It will be interesting.
Michigan and Michigan State had to be in the same Division. And it goes without saying that Ohio State and Michigan had to be in the same Division. So there was no way Michigan State could have been in the West.
Oklahoma and their decision on where to go is the key to the next round of expansion. OU is realistically the only school that is on the top of the want list of three of the four power conferences that want to expand. They could go to the Pac 12 with Texas and two other members of the Big 12. They could go to SEC where they could take Oklahoma State with them (which may be what the Oklahoma state legislature decides for them) and make a ton of money. They could also go the Big Ten with Texas or Kansas to help build their academic profile and also make a ton of money.
The winner of the next round of conference expansion will be the team that lands OU because they will be the conference that doesn't have to resort to plan B.
Note: The ACC has an entirely different plan for expansion that doesn't include Oklahoma, but that's for another post.
The winner of the next round of conference expansion will be the team that lands OU because they will be the conference that doesn't have to resort to plan B.
Note: The ACC has an entirely different plan for expansion that doesn't include Oklahoma, but that's for another post.
Texas and OU going to the SEC makes more sense to me. Texas gets to reactivate the rivalry with aTm, keeps the RRR, money is better, game times are good, travel is as good as it'll get if expansion is inevitable, cultural cohesiveness, contiguous footprint, population shift is heading south...
PAC nothing, B1G nothing. If I were in charge at UT I would be phoning the SEC right now and wait for OU to show up following me like a lost puppy a week later.
PAC nothing, B1G nothing. If I were in charge at UT I would be phoning the SEC right now and wait for OU to show up following me like a lost puppy a week later.
UT will likely NOT end up in the SEC specifically because of academics. As much they are asshats about their sports, they are as much if not moreso when it comes to their academic prestige. The most prestigious conferences from an academic standpoint are the Big Ten, ACC and Pac 12 and not necessarily in that order. Texas will give significant consideration to academics when considering conference affiliation. That’s one of the reasons they were looking to join the Pac 10 back in the mid 1990’s. Then the Texas Legislature/governor stepped in and tied them to A&M and Baylor (moreso Baylor than A&M) which is why they went Big 12 and not Pac 10.
I'm also fairly confident that one of the stipulations Texas A&M mandated upon going to the SEC is that the conference would never allow Texas in. One of A&M biggest motivators for leaving the Big 12 was to get away from Texas. Just like South Carolina has the no Clemson rule, Florida has the no Florida State or Miami rule, and Kentucky has the no Louisville rule, I'm sure A&M has a no Texas rule.
Indeed, the presidents of those schools have a "Gentlemens' Agreement" in which they will vote as a block against a second member from those five states.
Another issue, the footprint of the SEC Network doesn't expand at all if UT joins the SEC.
Yet another issue, the Longhorns have too much pride to follow Little Brother into the SEC.
The problem with the Pac-12 Network is that they don't have a sugar daddy. BTN has Fox, SECN has ESPN and the ACCN will also have ESPN. Fox and ESPN are able to bundle the conference networks with their other content when selling to the cable companies. P12N has to go it alone.
The only three conferences that are safe are the big, sec, and pac. No other is safe, but one other will survive for four.
The ACC is very safe. The ACC and ESPN will launch the ACC Network next fall which will make the ACC the number three conference in payout per school. Also, if Notre Dame is forced to join a conference anytime before 2036 (which they will if we get down to four power conferences), they'll have to join the ACC due to ACC grant of rights contract that Notre Dame signed. The ACC is in a great spot now, and will be through the next round of conference realignment.
Actually there is a good deal of uncertainty about the revenue potential of the ACC Network. Much smaller fan base than the B1G or SEC, only two flagship state schools, four colleges in one state, six small private schools and Notre Dame without football.
https://pilotonline.com/sports/college/article_d2f5b3cc-7a2f-11e8-bef3-df7e58cacc52.html
Purdue and Indiana should be in the same division.
Then, let Michigan and Michigan State be the protected rivalry.
What happens when you add in Third Tier rights for teams like Kansas (and Texas). I think the $$$ go up a good bit, don't they?
Yeah but there are new players in the legislature, got to be. However maybe nothing has changed since the 90's. I think the two hour time difference for the PAC might be a stretch, however NU hardly sees Indiana on the field so that might not be a big deal either
There is a good deal of speculation that the ACC GOR is contingent upon the launch of the ACC Network. The GOR has never been made public. If it flops, the addition of VT and one of the NC schools would expand the SECN footprint considerably.
If the B12 goes belly up, there is WV and longtime Mizzou archrival Kansas.
The ACC is defiantly behind the Big Ten and SEC right now. However, they are already ahead of the Pac 12 in money distribution to member schools, and they'll surly pass the Big 12 once they start cashing in on their ESPN conference network money.
I also think there is a very good chance that Texas chooses the ACC in the next round of realignment. Texas will choose between the Big Ten, Pac 12, and ACC.
Texas could go to the Big Ten if that's what Oklahoma chooses to do, but I don't think Texas wants to be in a northern league. They really won't want to appear that they're following OU who broke up their conference. Also, the ESPN owned Longhorn Network will collide with the 50% Fox owned Big Ten Network.
Texas has had so many chances to go to the Pac 12, but never ends up going. They could take three Big 12 members with them, but would still have to play half of their games two time zones away. This wouldn't be so bad for football, but when the basketball team has a game in Seattle on a Wednesday night and the players are expected to be back in class on Thursday morning, you have a problem. And again, what do you do with the Longhorn Network?
Texas could join Notre Dame in the ACC as the 15th and 16th members, perhaps even playing ND on Thanksgiving Night like Texas likes to do, creating an annual ratings extravaganza type game. Texas has consulted with Notre Dame regarding conference realignment in the past. This isn't a surprise as they both look down on the rest of the NCAA schools. Don't be surprised if Texas and Notre Dame work together again.
ESPN would also love this move. They could roll over the Longhorn Network into the ACC Network, thus eliminating the dead wait of the Longhorn Network and strengthening the new ACC Network.
There are lots of reasons why Texas would be a good fit in the ACC, both athletically and academically. If they choose the ACC with Notre Dame, the ACC could quickly get on equal footing with both the Big Ten and the SEC.
I was curious about the duration of the ESPN contract with Texas for the LHN, looks like it's a 20-year deal that started in Fall 2011. Wonder if ESPN would be willing to sell the rights to Fox given it has lost money most (if not all) years.
Tangentially, I still remember the debacle when a Texas Tech game was going to be aired on LHN and Texas Tech told ESPN to pound sand. Here's the entry from Wikipedia...
"In addition to a non-conference game each season, ESPN desired to place a Big 12 Conference game on the Longhorn Network. At the same Big 12 meeting that discussed high school football telecasts, it was agreed upon that a conference game would be acceptable as long as both schools and the conference office approved the broadcast. It was reported that ESPN asked Texas Tech for permission to broadcast the team's November 5 game against the Longhorns on the network. ESPN told the university that the game would most likely not be carried on any of the ESPN family of networks, leaving a broadcast on the LHN as its only option. In return, ESPN promised to televise two non-conference football games over the next four seasons, televise some other non-football programming, $5 million cash, and help from the network to try to arrange a home-and-home series against a top BCS conference school. Texas Tech passed on the offer with the university's chancellor Kent Hance explaining that "I don't want a Tech fan to have to give one dime to the Longhorn Network". ESPN then contacted Oklahoma State about airing games on the network; that university also refused the invitation to appear on the network. Texas Athletics eventually announced that the Kansas Jayhawks had agreed to let its game against the Longhorns on October 29 air on LHN (the University of Kansas's third-tier media rights are also managed by LHN co-owner IMG College). The agreement allowed the Longhorn Network to be the national carrier of the game, except in Kansas markets, where the game was shown on broadcast television. ESPN revealed plans to broadcast the Texas Tech-Texas State game on the Longhorn Network in 2012, however Texas Tech threatened to drop the game in favor of an 11-game schedule, resulting the game being removed from LHN's schedule."
With both schools having a national following, yes I would think the money goes up.
Certainly there are new players in the legislature. And as I posted earlier regarding KU and KSU, the landscape of college football has changed so much in the last 10-20 years I don’t think state politics are going to play a major role anymore. A&M left the Big 12 with no stipulation and no political involvement so precedence has been established.
And yes I do think the 2 hour time difference causes problems. NU and Indiana are only 1 hour difference, which both the BIG and SEC have teams in both the central and eastern zones, but one hour is far easier to overcome than 2 hours.
Last edited:
20 years ago? Try 7.5 years ago, one of the reasons we're in the BIG 10.
The Kansas legislature has absolutely NO say over what KU chooses to do. The Chancellor at KU made a public statement regarding this to clear up the myth. There is nothing that binds the schools together. Nothing. The legislature can jump up and down all they want but they have no power to stop KU. K-state knows this very well. But still people automatically think this is the case. The Regents only must approve the move and K-state does not control the Regents.
Too many small private schools. They jumped to fill in their ranks (after Maryland split) for survival with city/commuter schools (Pitt - Louisville) to join Boston College, Syracuse, Miami and Wake Forrest. This is going to catch up with the ACC. Not enough UNC;UVA flagship types. You take West Virginia all day long over Louisville.
Texas will NOT go to the SEC because it's beneath them academically. You don't understand the depth of Longhorn arrogance. PAC, ACC and B1G are OK from an academic standpoint but NOT the SEC.
They tried protected cross divisional rivalries in the first go around. That turned out to be a huge dud. Purdue and Indiana carry FAR less political clout in the conference than does Michigan and Michigan State.
Similar threads
