Might as well make it a conference game.

http://www.soonersports.com//ViewArticle...=210651094

Lot's of B1G games on those schedules for Oklahoma.

(01-20-2016 03:34 PM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  Might as well make it a conference game.

http://www.soonersports.com//ViewArticle...=210651094

Lot's of B1G games on those schedules for Oklahoma.

Intriguing that "future marquee non-conference games" includes Houston in 2016 and 2019.

The other schools besides Houston are Nebraska, Ohio St., UCLA, LSU, Michigan and Army.

Good!! I'm glad they were able to work it out non-conf.

Because OU has zero chance of being invited to the B1G!

(01-20-2016 04:38 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Good!! I'm glad they were able to work it out non-conf.

Because OU has zero chance of being invited to the B1G!

I wouldn't say zero...but I think this just signifies that it is extremely unlikely. Why schedule non-con games if you think you are going to be able to join their conference?

(01-20-2016 04:55 PM)5thTiger Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 04:38 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Good!! I'm glad they were able to work it out non-conf.

Because OU has zero chance of being invited to the B1G!

I wouldn't say zero...but I think this just signifies that it is extremely unlikely. Why schedule non-con games if you think you are going to be able to join their conference?

I'd rather have Iowa St than OU. Speaking of which, seems to me they just played a game recently...

(01-20-2016 05:04 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 04:55 PM)5thTiger Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 04:38 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Good!! I'm glad they were able to work it out non-conf.

Because OU has zero chance of being invited to the B1G!

I wouldn't say zero...but I think this just signifies that it is extremely unlikely. Why schedule non-con games if you think you are going to be able to join their conference?

I'd rather have Iowa St than OU. Speaking of which, seems to me they just played a game recently...

Your not a prospective Delaney, most assuredly.

Scheduling non conference games is a natural and easy thing to do when you are already at a table discussing other things. Yes, rescheduling a non conference game is easy for the likes of Oklahoma and Nebraska especially when their next match up is five years away.

The biggest signal on that schedule isn't Nebraska, it is Ohio State and Michigan. I mean, they run The Big Ten after all, right?

OU and Nebraska need to play again. It was a great rivalry, and it's a shame that it ended. Actually, on that note, the Big 12 could have been great if pettiness and greed didn't hamstring it. Texas, Texas A&M, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Kansas State, Kansas (basketball), and Arkansas (had they not jumped to the SEC in '91) would have been a great conference if they would have stuck together.

(01-20-2016 05:30 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Scheduling non conference games is a natural and easy thing to do when you are already at a table discussing other things. Yes, rescheduling a non conference game is easy for the likes of Oklahoma and Nebraska especially when their next match up is five years away.

The biggest signal on that schedule isn't Nebraska, it is Ohio State and Michigan. I mean, they run The Big Ten after all, right?

Weirdly enough, you make a great point. I think that the B1G West would do much better with a strong Big XII. Otherwise all the political power in the conference is in the east. That's where the strongest teams are, and that's where the strongest alternatives are.

As a tangentially-related aside, I think imbalances like that (or ACC north vs. south if you prefer) are what's going to bring about the end of mega conferences. It won't be soon, but I do think that it will be in the next 30-40 years. Look how much things have changed since 1980. I think that we'll see that much change moving forward, but it will be in the opposite direction (i.e. smaller conferences).

(01-20-2016 05:30 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  The biggest signal on that schedule isn't Nebraska, it is Ohio State and Michigan. I mean, they run The Big Ten after all, right?

So your theory is Cincinnati will be the next school to join the Big Ten, because they are on future Ohio State and Michigan football schedules.

(01-20-2016 04:55 PM)5thTiger Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 04:38 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Good!! I'm glad they were able to work it out non-conf.

Because OU has zero chance of being invited to the B1G!

I wouldn't say zero...but I think this just signifies that it is extremely unlikely. Why schedule non-con games if you think you are going to be able to join their conference?

If you are confident you can, there's an argument there ~ you'd have to replace those games on the schedule ~ but if you are hopeful you can but have a hurdle to overcome, it makes some sense to schedule games against the conference schools.

(01-20-2016 05:23 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 05:04 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 04:55 PM)5thTiger Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 04:38 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Good!! I'm glad they were able to work it out non-conf.

Because OU has zero chance of being invited to the B1G!

I wouldn't say zero...but I think this just signifies that it is extremely unlikely. Why schedule non-con games if you think you are going to be able to join their conference?

I'd rather have Iowa St than OU. Speaking of which, seems to me they just played a game recently...

Your not a prospective Delaney, most assuredly.

No one thinks Iowa St is going to the B1G. Duh.

That was the point.

(01-20-2016 06:35 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  OU and Nebraska need to play again. It was a great rivalry, and it's a shame that it ended. Actually, on that note, the Big 12 could have been great if pettiness and greed didn't hamstring it. Texas, Texas A&M, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Kansas State, Kansas (basketball), and Arkansas (had they not jumped to the SEC in '91) would have been a great conference if they would have stuck together.

I agree, they absolutely do need to play again. They had a great rivalry in the Big Eight.

And that's why I'm glad they could get something worked out non-conf.


Suggesting that it means OU is joining the B1G is like suggesting ECU should join the B1G.

(01-20-2016 07:30 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 06:35 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  OU and Nebraska need to play again. It was a great rivalry, and it's a shame that it ended. Actually, on that note, the Big 12 could have been great if pettiness and greed didn't hamstring it. Texas, Texas A&M, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Kansas State, Kansas (basketball), and Arkansas (had they not jumped to the SEC in '91) would have been a great conference if they would have stuck together.

I agree, they absolutely do need to play again. They had a great rivalry in the Big Eight.

And that's why I'm glad they could get something worked out non-conf.


Suggesting that it means OU is joining the B1G is like suggesting ECU should join the B1G.

Yeah, I generally try to not read into the tea leaves of future schedules. I guess it could mean something profound, but it generally just means that the school wants to play the other schools in its schedule.

(01-20-2016 07:32 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:30 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 06:35 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  OU and Nebraska need to play again. It was a great rivalry, and it's a shame that it ended. Actually, on that note, the Big 12 could have been great if pettiness and greed didn't hamstring it. Texas, Texas A&M, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Kansas State, Kansas (basketball), and Arkansas (had they not jumped to the SEC in '91) would have been a great conference if they would have stuck together.

I agree, they absolutely do need to play again. They had a great rivalry in the Big Eight.

And that's why I'm glad they could get something worked out non-conf.


Suggesting that it means OU is joining the B1G is like suggesting ECU should join the B1G.

Yeah, I generally try to not read into the tea leaves of future schedules. I guess it could mean something profound, but it generally just means that the school wants to play the other schools in its schedule.

Well there's only two people I've seen so far that really are pushing OU to the B1G:

- Nebraskafan: because he doesn't care about what's best for the conference and the "minor" teams that have been playing in it for over 100 years ... and why would he, his team just got here 5mins ago

- H1: literally for no other reason than he thinks it's a step in the right direction for his "master plan".

I would push for Oklahoma to Big 10 if the Big 10 has already grabbed Missouri. But the conference went in a different direction and grabbed Rutgers instead.

I would had loved to see a Big 10 like this

WEST
Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Kansas, Neb, Wisc, Minn, Iowa.

EAST
PSU, OSU, MSU, Mich,
Indy, Pur, ILL, NW

(01-20-2016 07:49 PM)goofus Wrote:  I would push for Oklahoma to Big 10 if the Big 10 has already grabbed Missouri. But the conference went in a different direction and grabbed Rutgers instead.

I would had loved to see a Big 10 like this

WEST
Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Kansas, Neb, Wisc, Minn, Iowa.

EAST
PSU, OSU, MSU, Mich,
Indy, Pur, ILL, NW

I don't think that the west has any leverage. The east will drive the decisions, and I think that it has been driving the decisions.

(01-20-2016 07:49 PM)goofus Wrote:  I would push for Oklahoma to Big 10 if the Big 10 has already grabbed Missouri. But the conference went in a different direction and grabbed Rutgers instead.

I would had loved to see a Big 10 like this

WEST
Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Kansas, Neb, Wisc, Minn, Iowa.

EAST
PSU, OSU, MSU, Mich,
Indy, Pur, ILL, NW

Goof, so in other words you wanted to pull Minn, Wisc and Iowa into the Big Eight + Texas.

No thanks and twice on Sunday.

(01-20-2016 07:51 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:49 PM)goofus Wrote:  I would push for Oklahoma to Big 10 if the Big 10 has already grabbed Missouri. But the conference went in a different direction and grabbed Rutgers instead.

I would had loved to see a Big 10 like this

WEST
Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Kansas, Neb, Wisc, Minn, Iowa.

EAST
PSU, OSU, MSU, Mich,
Indy, Pur, ILL, NW

I don't think that the west has any leverage. The east will drive the decisions, and I think that it has been driving the decisions.

Any leverage to do what?

Every school gets a vote. Every school gets to be heard. That's what a conference is.