(02-02-2017 03:40 PM)p23570 Wrote: I wish I agreed with yo JR and the old OU was a dirty program but it truly upsets me how clean this program is run. Quite frankly we need a few more bagmen and more alumni willing to get involved with that stuff as well as an administration who knows when to look away. I am not here pretending to be holier than thou and I certainly embrace the OU history before Stoops but OU is not doing what it needs to do to land these 5 star kids, and that involves $.
OU loses a lot of exposure in Dallas by going SEC unless it involves friends which is unlikely, for one we would never play anywhere close aside from Bryan and OOC. Not to mention we would not have won nearly as many CC's and made it to nearly as many big bowls. There is a point in a conference where the balance of schools is out of whack and the SEC needs to keep adding more Missouri's and aTm's as opposed to OU's and UT's. There just isn't enough room for all these great programs in one conference. I personally think the SEC would be better off going to pods with OSU and WVU to help Tennessee and LSU get back to winning something on a regular basis. OU with 1-2 CC's the last decade and 1-2 NY6 appearances is a much different situation than winning a CC every other year or more and going to a NY6 bowl most years never hurts recruiting or fan interest. That is lost in the SEC for schools like FSU, Clemson, OU, and UT. More is not always better.
I was trying to be nice about bowls but in the end I didn't' see much difference in bowls aside from Bama and Clemson. Everybody else looked fairly well matched. I felt the same way OOC. P-5 conferences didn't really look much better than g-5 and in some cases even FCS schools. I don't buy into the conference superiority complex. There are a few elite teams and then everybody else. This year there were only 2 elite teams.
If OU came to the SEC they would likely have either OSU or UT, or even both with them. I don't think the SEC is looking for OU to compete with Alabama in the West. I think the SEC is essentially looking at a revamped West with Alabama and Auburn moving East.
So, if OU heads our way here is the division you would likely be looking at playing:
Arkansas, L.S.U., Mississippi, Miss State, Missouri, Oklahoma, (O.S.U. or Texas), Texas A&M
Or possibly a division of 6 in a three division conference:
Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech
The East would become:
Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
or possibly these two divisions:
Alabama, Auburn, L.S.U., Mississippi, Miss State, Texas A&M
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Either way you would essentially have the same crowd to beat to get into the CCS, or CCG.
What we are headed into if expansion continues are conferences where divisions equal essentially what conferences once were.
If things are won on the field having to have 5 easy wins in hopes of producing a resume worthy of an invitation will become an outdated and moot method of scheduling. Win your division, win your conference, play for the national championship will be the goals for everyone.
Fewer conferences = lower overhead and more bargaining power.
If we do wind up paying players (whether a stipend or more) we will end with this kind of model sooner rather than later.
If the SEC ever moves to 16 schools it will be with Westward expansion. The new Western division will essentially be comprised of old SWC schools and a few Big 8 tossed in plus the Mississippi schools and L.S.U..
The East will be the old SEC minus the Mississippi schools and L.S.U.. Both will be more regional and the winners of each will be essentially what the old Sugar Bowl would have once matched.
Is it harder? Maybe a little. But then there is the extra game now anyway.
I think OU will be fine no matter where they land, Texas too. I'm not so sure about the rest.