(05-24-2017 04:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:  My remarks about Tramel stating that the overwhelming number of fans and alumni support an SEC move came in a televised and twitter interview with Paul Finebaum. It was then he talked about a good many donors supporting that move.

Tramel's personal leanings are pretty apparent.

I read and post at Land Thieves and yes it is a no holds barred surly board. Since Barnhart did say (and thank you) that he thought the SEC would push OU & OSU I consider that more than likely. I doubt that option would be below the PAC in efficacy. My opinion of Barnhart is one of the highest respect for how he conduct himself and what he verifies before he speaks.

Most twitter, news print, and beat covering reporters I give little thought to believing. They are looking for sensationalism, or playing the hand their information providers desire, or are just plain sloppy. That goes for SEC hacks like Finebaum as well (muckraker might be more apt).

I mostly listen to press releases from conference offices, talk to people I've known within a university's information loop, and read publicly available statistical reports of various kinds. Many times there is telling data that simply hasn't be covered that is buried in those reports. And in my first 20 years of corporate life I was in a position to track recruiting violations as a sideline. So I do trust some of those loop sources.

I'd say what Texas or OU does is too close to call in any direction because the ones that will ultimately decide haven't had to yet. What they say publicly and what they do privately are frequently two different things. And I do think there will be a great deal of division at OU no matter which way it goes. But we'll see.

WARNING THIS POST COULD CAUSE INJURY FROM EXTREME EYEROLLING
My opinion is that the SEC has not expanded in a purely economic driven manner. Back when the 80's were drawing to a close television markets were much more critical because Nielsen was relying on diaries to calculate ratings super detailed ratings data was gathered twice a year (those of us who are older remember the two "sweeps" weeks as mega tv time when the networks did big rating draw events and local news was running all sorts of crazy stuff to get viewers). A huge part of TV value was based on guesses centered around market size.

In that environment the SEC added Arkansas and South Carolina, combined they brought in 6 states with a combined population of 6 million (PEOPLE NOT TV HOMES) representing less than 3% of the US population. Neither major recruiting hotbeds. But they fit the culture of the league.

Texas A&M was obviously a high value but anyone who has ever been in College Station, Austin, Baton Rogue, and Auburn knows one those is not like the other in game day experience. TAMU's fan culture fits the SEC like a glove. Years ago when TAMU and LSU had a non-conference series announced, my Dad summed it up well, "That'd be a fun game to watch because all their fans are crazy."

Mizzou wasn't an easy fit and when I went there for a game, my adult son remarked before we got in the stadium that "it just doesn't feel like it's SEC" and before we got to our seats I had received two texts from others making similar comments.

But OU and OKST? Their fan culture fits.

Just fitting isn't enough, no one is voting to expand for the dollars to go down or stay the same but the fit does matter and OU is a high value. While Oklahoma is growing a decent pace in population, it is becoming a more valuable target. A decade ago the median household income in Oklahoma was ahead of just Arkansas, West Virginia, and Mississippi. It has since passed South Carolina, New Mexico, Louisiana, Tennessee, Alabama, and Kentucky.

As I've suggested before, OU/OKST makes for a great defensive move. SEC would hold the top three rivalries of Longhorn history. Makes it unlikely Texas can go to B1G with a regional partner and makes it harder for Pac-12 to create a bundle acceptable to their membership.