(08-20-2016 07:03 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(08-20-2016 05:01 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(08-19-2016 11:58 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I cannot imagine that any school would resent an SEC invite.

Texas, KU and OU would.

I disagree. Texas probably doesn't want to come, I buy that. I think OU and KU would be happy to be here.

You can't always go with what a handful of fans on particular message boards think. We fans tend to be demonstrative with what we think we know when in reality we have little fact to back up our position. The more knowledge on a topic we acquire, we realize that things aren't always so black and white. When you see a fan boy online spout off about "such and such school would never want to associate with those guys" then you can bank on that person not knowing what they're talking about. If nothing else, people with influence don't limit their own options. They're smarter than that. So when you see a leader express a certain position you generally notice it sounds vague, diplomatic, and short of concrete statements. That's by design.

That and regardless of what Boren would prefer or not, a decision that big will come down to what the BMDs and Trustees want. Boren's leadership has an expiration date.

Then let me clarify; some OU fans would be happy in the SEC along with some BMD. I think the admin of the university would consider the move a failure and downgrade. Yes, big cigars have influence along with season tix holders, but ultimately this is a decision is in Boren's hand. And his narrative is that any move would have athletic and academic benefits.

(08-20-2016 12:25 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(08-20-2016 07:03 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(08-20-2016 05:01 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(08-19-2016 11:58 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I cannot imagine that any school would resent an SEC invite.

Texas, KU and OU would.

I disagree. Texas probably doesn't want to come, I buy that. I think OU and KU would be happy to be here.

You can't always go with what a handful of fans on particular message boards think. We fans tend to be demonstrative with what we think we know when in reality we have little fact to back up our position. The more knowledge on a topic we acquire, we realize that things aren't always so black and white. When you see a fan boy online spout off about "such and such school would never want to associate with those guys" then you can bank on that person not knowing what they're talking about. If nothing else, people with influence don't limit their own options. They're smarter than that. So when you see a leader express a certain position you generally notice it sounds vague, diplomatic, and short of concrete statements. That's by design.

That and regardless of what Boren would prefer or not, a decision that big will come down to what the BMDs and Trustees want. Boren's leadership has an expiration date.

Then let me clarify; some OU fans would be happy in the SEC along with some BMD. I think the admin of the university would consider the move a failure and downgrade. Yes, big cigars have influence along with season tix holders, but ultimately this is a decision is in Boren's hand. And his narrative is that any move would have athletic and academic benefits.

The SEC is a downgrade from the Big XII? Academically, the SEC does not even need OU. If they feel that way then they apparently have the Longhorn Syndrome. We do not need that in the SEC. Their choice is the SEC or dying in the B1g, which they surely will. The SEC better really do their homework before inviting OU.

OU is pretty much right in line academically with much of the SEC, they would be the worst school in the Big 10 and they are at highest number 4 out of 10 in the Big 12 behind Texas, Iowa State, and KU. Hard to compare against TCU or Baylor since both are more undergraduate focused.

(08-20-2016 01:52 PM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  OU is pretty much right in line academically with much of the SEC, they would be the worst school in the Big 10 and they are at highest number 4 out of 10 in the Big 12 behind Texas, Iowa State, and KU. Hard to compare against TCU or Baylor since both are more undergraduate focused.

What I was referring to in this conversation was the fact that the SEC is trying to improve academically. Does OU provide that? They are a fine academic school and would certainly not hurt the SEC. I like OU as a potential SEC member if they can appreciate the fact the SEC is a major upgrade from the Big XII. That is why the SEC has to be "attitude" cautious. The bottom line is OU is used to being co-boss of a conference. That goes out the window if they go anywhere else. Like UT, that is probably the real reason for the attitude they seem to have.

(08-20-2016 12:25 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(08-20-2016 07:03 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(08-20-2016 05:01 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(08-19-2016 11:58 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I cannot imagine that any school would resent an SEC invite.

Texas, KU and OU would.

I disagree. Texas probably doesn't want to come, I buy that. I think OU and KU would be happy to be here.

You can't always go with what a handful of fans on particular message boards think. We fans tend to be demonstrative with what we think we know when in reality we have little fact to back up our position. The more knowledge on a topic we acquire, we realize that things aren't always so black and white. When you see a fan boy online spout off about "such and such school would never want to associate with those guys" then you can bank on that person not knowing what they're talking about. If nothing else, people with influence don't limit their own options. They're smarter than that. So when you see a leader express a certain position you generally notice it sounds vague, diplomatic, and short of concrete statements. That's by design.

That and regardless of what Boren would prefer or not, a decision that big will come down to what the BMDs and Trustees want. Boren's leadership has an expiration date.

Then let me clarify; some OU fans would be happy in the SEC along with some BMD. I think the admin of the university would consider the move a failure and downgrade. Yes, big cigars have influence along with season tix holders, but ultimately this is a decision is in Boren's hand. And his narrative is that any move would have athletic and academic benefits.

I don't think anybody but delusional Sooners think the SEC is a downgrade academically.

(08-20-2016 06:22 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(08-20-2016 12:25 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(08-20-2016 07:03 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(08-20-2016 05:01 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(08-19-2016 11:58 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I cannot imagine that any school would resent an SEC invite.

Texas, KU and OU would.

I disagree. Texas probably doesn't want to come, I buy that. I think OU and KU would be happy to be here.

You can't always go with what a handful of fans on particular message boards think. We fans tend to be demonstrative with what we think we know when in reality we have little fact to back up our position. The more knowledge on a topic we acquire, we realize that things aren't always so black and white. When you see a fan boy online spout off about "such and such school would never want to associate with those guys" then you can bank on that person not knowing what they're talking about. If nothing else, people with influence don't limit their own options. They're smarter than that. So when you see a leader express a certain position you generally notice it sounds vague, diplomatic, and short of concrete statements. That's by design.

That and regardless of what Boren would prefer or not, a decision that big will come down to what the BMDs and Trustees want. Boren's leadership has an expiration date.

Then let me clarify; some OU fans would be happy in the SEC along with some BMD. I think the admin of the university would consider the move a failure and downgrade. Yes, big cigars have influence along with season tix holders, but ultimately this is a decision is in Boren's hand. And his narrative is that any move would have athletic and academic benefits.

I don't think anybody but delusional Sooners think the SEC is a downgrade academically.

Yeah, I don't see any evidence the administration over there looks down upon the SEC. The only comment I've seen from Boren on the matter was that he was disappointed we didn't also offer Oklahoma State and Texas back in 2011. That would seem to indicate there was interest, but that OU wanted more regional partners before making a move like that. I don't blame them, but that's a far cry from saying "we don't want the SEC."

Unfortunately, there are a lot of fan boys out there that can't differentiate. According to some, OU told the SEC to go pound sand. That's not at all what happened.

For example, A&M and the SEC flirted back in the late 80s/early 90s. They didn't make a move though. We offered them in 2010 from what I understand and they decided to stick it out in the Big 12 and try to make it work. Low and behold they made the move only a year after that.

These things are complicated and there are varied interests involved. Sometimes a school would like to move to a certain league, but the circumstances just don't work out. Sometimes a school moves to a league that it wasn't really gunning for because the circumstances made it a good idea.

If nothing else, these leaders aren't dumb enough to burn bridges by saying "hey, we think you suck." If the SEC was received that way then they wouldn't bother pursuing the school again on grounds of principle. It's one of the reasons I don't believe that UT has ever shut the door in the SEC's face. I don't think the SEC is their first choice, mind you, but if UT didn't have any interest then we would see evidence of that from administrators. The UT admins would have said something to the effect of "we don't feel that SEC membership is in our long term interests." They'd leave it at that. All we see are arrogant posters on message boards voicing their own individual bias. I say that fully aware that I'm an arrogant poster on a message board with bias...lol.

As far as Boren goes, the B1G might be his first choice, I don't know. He's smart enough to know though that B1G membership will not turn OU into an academic powerhouse by association. That sort of progress has to be organic. The CIC is in no way a mechanism to make that happen. Some people don't understand that though. They've heard all the fluff and chest beating online and buy into it. They think going to the B1G will turn OU and by extension the state of Oklahoma into an economic giant. It simply doesn't work that way.

If it did then the B1G wouldn't be worried so much about athletics as they would be concerned with joining up with every academic giant in the country. They don't do that though. They are an athletic conference first and that's why they're interested in OU. The Presidents of the B1G schools are not about to share their most treasured resources with a university that is considered subpar by their standards. They aren't in the business of charity. The CIC is not an organization that elevates schools from one strata into another. It's a cooperative, nothing more. None of that is knock on OU, don't misunderstand. It's just that at the end of the day these athletic associations do actually focus on athletics.

What's best for the state is that their flagships maintain or increase exposure. Whether they do that in the SEC or the PAC is their decision to make, but OU leaving OSU behind won't get the job done.

(08-21-2016 02:07 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(08-20-2016 06:22 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(08-20-2016 12:25 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(08-20-2016 07:03 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(08-20-2016 05:01 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  Texas, KU and OU would.

I disagree. Texas probably doesn't want to come, I buy that. I think OU and KU would be happy to be here.

You can't always go with what a handful of fans on particular message boards think. We fans tend to be demonstrative with what we think we know when in reality we have little fact to back up our position. The more knowledge on a topic we acquire, we realize that things aren't always so black and white. When you see a fan boy online spout off about "such and such school would never want to associate with those guys" then you can bank on that person not knowing what they're talking about. If nothing else, people with influence don't limit their own options. They're smarter than that. So when you see a leader express a certain position you generally notice it sounds vague, diplomatic, and short of concrete statements. That's by design.

That and regardless of what Boren would prefer or not, a decision that big will come down to what the BMDs and Trustees want. Boren's leadership has an expiration date.

Then let me clarify; some OU fans would be happy in the SEC along with some BMD. I think the admin of the university would consider the move a failure and downgrade. Yes, big cigars have influence along with season tix holders, but ultimately this is a decision is in Boren's hand. And his narrative is that any move would have athletic and academic benefits.

I don't think anybody but delusional Sooners think the SEC is a downgrade academically.

Yeah, I don't see any evidence the administration over there looks down upon the SEC. The only comment I've seen from Boren on the matter was that he was disappointed we didn't also offer Oklahoma State and Texas back in 2011. That would seem to indicate there was interest, but that OU wanted more regional partners before making a move like that. I don't blame them, but that's a far cry from saying "we don't want the SEC."

Unfortunately, there are a lot of fan boys out there that can't differentiate. According to some, OU told the SEC to go pound sand. That's not at all what happened.

For example, A&M and the SEC flirted back in the late 80s/early 90s. They didn't make a move though. We offered them in 2010 from what I understand and they decided to stick it out in the Big 12 and try to make it work. Low and behold they made the move only a year after that.

These things are complicated and there are varied interests involved. Sometimes a school would like to move to a certain league, but the circumstances just don't work out. Sometimes a school moves to a league that it wasn't really gunning for because the circumstances made it a good idea.

If nothing else, these leaders aren't dumb enough to burn bridges by saying "hey, we think you suck." If the SEC was received that way then they wouldn't bother pursuing the school again on grounds of principle. It's one of the reasons I don't believe that UT has ever shut the door in the SEC's face. I don't think the SEC is their first choice, mind you, but if UT didn't have any interest then we would see evidence of that from administrators. The UT admins would have said something to the effect of "we don't feel that SEC membership is in our long term interests." They'd leave it at that. All we see are arrogant posters on message boards voicing their own individual bias. I say that fully aware that I'm an arrogant poster on a message board with bias...lol.

As far as Boren goes, the B1G might be his first choice, I don't know. He's smart enough to know though that B1G membership will not turn OU into an academic powerhouse by association. That sort of progress has to be organic. The CIC is in no way a mechanism to make that happen. Some people don't understand that though. They've heard all the fluff and chest beating online and buy into it. They think going to the B1G will turn OU and by extension the state of Oklahoma into an economic giant. It simply doesn't work that way.

If it did then the B1G wouldn't be worried so much about athletics as they would be concerned with joining up with every academic giant in the country. They don't do that though. They are an athletic conference first and that's why they're interested in OU. The Presidents of the B1G schools are not about to share their most treasured resources with a university that is considered subpar by their standards. They aren't in the business of charity. The CIC is not an organization that elevates schools from one strata into another. It's a cooperative, nothing more. None of that is knock on OU, don't misunderstand. It's just that at the end of the day these athletic associations do actually focus on athletics.

What's best for the state is that their flagships maintain or increase exposure. Whether they do that in the SEC or the PAC is their decision to make, but OU leaving OSU behind won't get the job done.

Oklahoma was silently involved with the SEC in '91. Their interest was contingent upon Texas and Texas A&M moving to the SEC. When Texas pulled back, citing internal state politics (but they were checking other options) Oklahoma withdrew interest. A&M was the one that was hamstrung in '91. Arkansas who was in discussion in '91 came on in. Oklahoma did approach us prior to 2011 about coming with Oklahoma State. We had A&M coming in and wanted the Sooners but didn't have a slot for OSU and had little interest. They didn't decline us. They solicited us.

Things are a bit different today. We aren't expecting a North Carolina and a Virginia school like we were in 2011. We have two more slots if Oklahoma is one of them. We'll see?

I live in houston and my thoughts are that i would rather. See houston go to the sec for sure.
Nobody in texas even likes houston or the people who live here and never have.
True this a pro sports city but this city is tottally ready for the cougars and i mean in a big way.
The aggies will never want houston in the sec trust me on this, they were allways helping texas to keep houston under controll and down
But this are very different now in the state of texas in many ways


Sent from my LG-D415 using CSNbbs mobile app

Jake Trotter on the divide between the SEC and Big 12 over Houston.

This would seem to indicate that as far as ESPN is concerned, Houston belongs to the SEC and there's really nothing the Big 12 can do about it.

If we go ahead and take OU and OSU then I'm still in the camp where we get TCU to come along as well to lock down the DFW market.

How about this...

SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, and West Virginia

ACC takes Baylor, Houston, UConn, and Navy

B1G takes Kansas and Iowa State

PAC takes Texas and Texas Tech

(08-24-2016 12:48 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Jake Trotter on the divide between the SEC and Big 12 over Houston.

This would seem to indicate that as far as ESPN is concerned, Houston belongs to the SEC and there's really nothing the Big 12 can do about it.

If we go ahead and take OU and OSU then I'm still in the camp where we get TCU to come along as well to lock down the DFW market.

How about this...

SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, and West Virginia

ACC takes Baylor, Houston, UConn, and Navy

B1G takes Kansas and Iowa State

PAC takes Texas and Texas Tech

I tend to think the SEC should try and avoid doubling up in Oklahoma by adding Okie State as well...

I don't understand the logic behind it either. If you're going to double up in a state, the IDEAL states to double up on are Texas and Florida

If Okie State is ok, why didn't the SEC take FSU?? Adding Okie State is a bad move

If Oklahoma is a sure thing as #15, then I imagine Kansas, Iowa State, or even Houston or Cincinnati would work as #16

(08-24-2016 04:02 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(08-24-2016 12:48 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Jake Trotter on the divide between the SEC and Big 12 over Houston.

This would seem to indicate that as far as ESPN is concerned, Houston belongs to the SEC and there's really nothing the Big 12 can do about it.

If we go ahead and take OU and OSU then I'm still in the camp where we get TCU to come along as well to lock down the DFW market.

How about this...

SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, and West Virginia

ACC takes Baylor, Houston, UConn, and Navy

B1G takes Kansas and Iowa State

PAC takes Texas and Texas Tech

I tend to think the SEC should try and avoid doubling up in Oklahoma by adding Okie State as well...

I don't understand the logic behind it either. If you're going to double up in a state, the IDEAL states to double up on are Texas and Florida

If Okie State is ok, why didn't the SEC take FSU?? Adding Okie State is a bad move

If Oklahoma is a sure thing as #15, then I imagine Kansas, Iowa State, or even Houston or Cincinnati would work as #16

You probably have to take OSU to get OU. The state politicians are probably going to force everyone's hand in that matter.

The SEC has tried to get Florida State at various times. For various reasons, it never worked out.

(08-24-2016 12:48 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Jake Trotter on the divide between the SEC and Big 12 over Houston.

This would seem to indicate that as far as ESPN is concerned, Houston belongs to the SEC and there's really nothing the Big 12 can do about it.

If we go ahead and take OU and OSU then I'm still in the camp where we get TCU to come along as well to lock down the DFW market.

How about this...

SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, and West Virginia

ACC takes Baylor, Houston, UConn, and Navy

B1G takes Kansas and Iowa State

PAC takes Texas and Texas Tech

No, no, no....the SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and TCU (or Baylor) and the ACC takes South Carolina and West Virginia.

(08-24-2016 07:43 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-24-2016 12:48 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Jake Trotter on the divide between the SEC and Big 12 over Houston.

This would seem to indicate that as far as ESPN is concerned, Houston belongs to the SEC and there's really nothing the Big 12 can do about it.

If we go ahead and take OU and OSU then I'm still in the camp where we get TCU to come along as well to lock down the DFW market.

How about this...

SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, and West Virginia

ACC takes Baylor, Houston, UConn, and Navy

B1G takes Kansas and Iowa State

PAC takes Texas and Texas Tech

No, no, no....the SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and TCU (or Baylor) and the ACC takes South Carolina and West Virginia.

Nah! We take Oklahoma and Florida State and call it quits. You guys get Texas, T.C.U., and Baylor!

(08-24-2016 08:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-24-2016 07:43 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-24-2016 12:48 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Jake Trotter on the divide between the SEC and Big 12 over Houston.

This would seem to indicate that as far as ESPN is concerned, Houston belongs to the SEC and there's really nothing the Big 12 can do about it.

If we go ahead and take OU and OSU then I'm still in the camp where we get TCU to come along as well to lock down the DFW market.

How about this...

SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, and West Virginia

ACC takes Baylor, Houston, UConn, and Navy

B1G takes Kansas and Iowa State

PAC takes Texas and Texas Tech

No, no, no....the SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and TCU (or Baylor) and the ACC takes South Carolina and West Virginia.

Nah! We take Oklahoma and Florida State and call it quits. You guys get Texas, T.C.U., and Baylor!

Jr, you know that FSU has already turned you guys down and Johnny and ESPN wants all of the ACC in the Eastern Time Zone.

(08-24-2016 07:43 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-24-2016 12:48 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Jake Trotter on the divide between the SEC and Big 12 over Houston.

This would seem to indicate that as far as ESPN is concerned, Houston belongs to the SEC and there's really nothing the Big 12 can do about it.

If we go ahead and take OU and OSU then I'm still in the camp where we get TCU to come along as well to lock down the DFW market.

How about this...

SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, and West Virginia

ACC takes Baylor, Houston, UConn, and Navy

B1G takes Kansas and Iowa State

PAC takes Texas and Texas Tech

No, no, no....the SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and TCU (or Baylor) and the ACC takes South Carolina and West Virginia.

Being that you've got a network now, adding new markets becomes a winning proposition.

You've pretty much covered everything up and down the East Coast. There are options in the middle of the country though and as long as they are near major cities with regular airport access then the travel shouldn't be that bad. That's one of the reasons I think Houston is a good option for you all.

(08-24-2016 08:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-24-2016 07:43 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-24-2016 12:48 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Jake Trotter on the divide between the SEC and Big 12 over Houston.

This would seem to indicate that as far as ESPN is concerned, Houston belongs to the SEC and there's really nothing the Big 12 can do about it.

If we go ahead and take OU and OSU then I'm still in the camp where we get TCU to come along as well to lock down the DFW market.

How about this...

SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, and West Virginia

ACC takes Baylor, Houston, UConn, and Navy

B1G takes Kansas and Iowa State

PAC takes Texas and Texas Tech

No, no, no....the SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and TCU (or Baylor) and the ACC takes South Carolina and West Virginia.

Nah! We take Oklahoma and Florida State and call it quits. You guys get Texas, T.C.U., and Baylor!

(08-24-2016 09:23 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(08-24-2016 07:43 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-24-2016 12:48 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Jake Trotter on the divide between the SEC and Big 12 over Houston.

This would seem to indicate that as far as ESPN is concerned, Houston belongs to the SEC and there's really nothing the Big 12 can do about it.

If we go ahead and take OU and OSU then I'm still in the camp where we get TCU to come along as well to lock down the DFW market.

How about this...

SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, and West Virginia

ACC takes Baylor, Houston, UConn, and Navy

B1G takes Kansas and Iowa State

PAC takes Texas and Texas Tech

No, no, no....the SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and TCU (or Baylor) and the ACC takes South Carolina and West Virginia.

Being that you've got a network now, adding new markets becomes a winning proposition.

You've pretty much covered everything up and down the East Coast. There are options in the middle of the country though and as long as they are near major cities with regular airport access then the travel shouldn't be that bad. That's one of the reasons I think Houston is a good option for you all.

Wouldn't mind seeing TCU, Texas, and Houston. With BC, Duke, Miami, and Wake Forest TCU would have a nice core of other private universities that are somewhat similar to TCU from a institutional standpoint.

If the ACC did expand with teams not named Texas, ND, or Penn State...

New markets would probably be the reason. Let's say Texas goes to the B1G or PAC with Texas Tech and OU/OSU go to the PAC or SEC. If the ACC ended up with TCU and Houston, it might not be that bad of an idea. Both are close to major airports, which makes travel easier for Olympic sports. Both offer a foothold for cable subscribers in huge TV markets (Dallas/Ft. Worth and Houston). The devil would be in the details as far as how you set up those divisions/pods or whatever. Highly unlikely, but nonetheless interesting.

(08-24-2016 09:23 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(08-24-2016 07:43 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-24-2016 12:48 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Jake Trotter on the divide between the SEC and Big 12 over Houston.

This would seem to indicate that as far as ESPN is concerned, Houston belongs to the SEC and there's really nothing the Big 12 can do about it.

If we go ahead and take OU and OSU then I'm still in the camp where we get TCU to come along as well to lock down the DFW market.

How about this...

SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, and West Virginia

ACC takes Baylor, Houston, UConn, and Navy

B1G takes Kansas and Iowa State

PAC takes Texas and Texas Tech

No, no, no....the SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and TCU (or Baylor) and the ACC takes South Carolina and West Virginia.

Being that you've got a network now, adding new markets becomes a winning proposition.

You've pretty much covered everything up and down the East Coast. There are options in the middle of the country though and as long as they are near major cities with regular airport access then the travel shouldn't be that bad. That's one of the reasons I think Houston is a good option for you all.

(08-25-2016 01:12 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  If the ACC did expand with teams not named Texas, ND, or Penn State...

New markets would probably be the reason. Let's say Texas goes to the B1G or PAC with Texas Tech and OU/OSU go to the PAC or SEC. If the ACC ended up with TCU and Houston, it might not be that bad of an idea. Both are close to major airports, which makes travel easier for Olympic sports. Both offer a foothold for cable subscribers in huge TV markets (Dallas/Ft. Worth and Houston). The devil would be in the details as far as how you set up those divisions/pods or whatever. Highly unlikely, but nonetheless interesting.

(08-24-2016 09:23 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(08-24-2016 07:43 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-24-2016 12:48 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Jake Trotter on the divide between the SEC and Big 12 over Houston.

This would seem to indicate that as far as ESPN is concerned, Houston belongs to the SEC and there's really nothing the Big 12 can do about it.

If we go ahead and take OU and OSU then I'm still in the camp where we get TCU to come along as well to lock down the DFW market.

How about this...

SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, and West Virginia

ACC takes Baylor, Houston, UConn, and Navy

B1G takes Kansas and Iowa State

PAC takes Texas and Texas Tech

No, no, no....the SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and TCU (or Baylor) and the ACC takes South Carolina and West Virginia.

Being that you've got a network now, adding new markets becomes a winning proposition.

You've pretty much covered everything up and down the East Coast. There are options in the middle of the country though and as long as they are near major cities with regular airport access then the travel shouldn't be that bad. That's one of the reasons I think Houston is a good option for you all.

If you took Tulane and either T.C.U. or Houston it would be virtually contiguous. Georgia Tech, Miami, F.S.U., Tulance, TCU/Houston/Baylor, & Clemson could actually form a really nice division.