Would the ACC ever invite Oklahoma and Oklahoma State? Surely everyone has heard the talk from Oklahoma lately
Most people think that Oklahoma would be looking at the PAC 12, B1G, or SEC....but would the ACC ever approach them?
(06-25-2015 01:28 PM)EvilVodka Wrote: [ -> ]Would the ACC ever invite Oklahoma and Oklahoma State? Surely everyone has heard the talk from Oklahoma lately
Most people think that Oklahoma would be looking at the PAC 12, B1G, or SEC....but would the ACC ever approach them?
Not claiming that I know for certain now, but if you had asked the question 5 years ago the answer would have been Hell no.
If the ACC is smart then they should. So the likely answer is no they won't. :)
There are, or more precisely were members that would have a problem with one or both.
OU has a history of cheating that was transferred to Maryland and UNC. The ACC gives an annual award in honor of one of OU's damndest rascals - Jim Tatum. Oklahoma State has a T. Boone Pickens perception problem.
Things may have changed, but in the past, UNC, WF, Duke, UVa, NC State, GT, and MD would have said no.
In today's environment the opinion of ND folks matter. What is their opinion of OSU - I don't know, but I know they don't feel a need to play them in football.
It seems to me that the only scenario that includes both, would have to include Texas and then ND upping the number of games it plays plus conference championship deregulation.
(06-25-2015 01:36 PM)domer1978 Wrote: [ -> ]If the ACC is smart then they should. So the likely answer is no they won't. :)
I think adding Oklahoma alone would be enough to legitimize ACC football...
I also think Oklahoma and Okie State would be a packaged deal. I'm not sure if the B1G and SEC would like that....and I feel the PAC 12 wants someone in Texas, not necessarily Oklahoma
IMO, the ACC is an undervalued league, and someone like Oklahoma would solidify the football perception of the ACC
ONE team from Oklahoma and ONE from Texas would make a LOT of sense.
TWO teams from Oklahoma doesn't make much sense to me; those guys rely on players from Texas, so if you put them on an island - separated from Texas - they'd quickly become irrelevant in football, IMO.
(06-25-2015 01:52 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]ONE team from Oklahoma and ONE from Texas would make a LOT of sense.
TWO teams from Oklahoma doesn't make much sense to me; those guys rely on players from Texas, so if you put them on an island - separated from Texas - they'd quickly become irrelevant in football, IMO.
Neither was in a conference with Texas until the Big 12 came along.
(06-25-2015 02:01 PM)samandrea Wrote: [ -> ] (06-25-2015 01:52 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]ONE team from Oklahoma and ONE from Texas would make a LOT of sense.
TWO teams from Oklahoma doesn't make much sense to me; those guys rely on players from Texas, so if you put them on an island - separated from Texas - they'd quickly become irrelevant in football, IMO.
Neither was in a conference with Texas until the Big 12 came along.
The increased number of conference games really changes some of the dynamics. The Big 8 only played 7 conference games giving them 4-5 to play OOC. OU had it's annual game with Texas.
Now we are getting to the point of perhaps just three, maybe as few as two OOC games a year if conferences expand to 16 or more and don't go to a 13th regular season game, starting the season a week early.
(06-25-2015 01:52 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]ONE team from Oklahoma and ONE from Texas would make a LOT of sense.
TWO teams from Oklahoma doesn't make much sense to me; those guys rely on players from Texas, so if you put them on an island - separated from Texas - they'd quickly become irrelevant in football, IMO.
Can't speak to Oklahoma State, but I know that for OU the three main states they recruit from are Texas, California, and Oklahoma.
Which is why, if the B12 goes bust, I see OU eventually in the PAC myself.
Cheers,
Neil
I don't think OU would be interested in that move at all, unless MAYBE as a package that included Texas as well. Even then, there would be some opposition. But I've always thought that the ACC might be the only conference willing and able to add all the required partners.
I think a more likely outcome might be Oklahoma and OSU to the SEC, and Texas and Baylor (or TT) to the ACC. That makes quite a bit of sense. The cultural fits of the new additions would be a little better.
The SEC definitely has no interest in doubling down in a small state like Oklahoma. HOWEVER...there just aren't that many good ways to get to 16 that make sense in the real world. And if this kind of deal was brokered all at once, the SEC reaps the massive advantage of locking the B1G out of the Southeast and Texas forever.
The only possible threat to the SEC's dominance (even if they aren't #1 in money) is the B1G somehow pulling off the additions of schools like Texas, OU, North Carolina, or even God forbid FSU. States that balloon BTN coffers, and put the B1G on the SEC's doorstep, and break the recruiting ground wide open.
If you're the SEC, and all you have to do to end that permanently is suck it up on Oklahoma State...that's a pretty decent checkmate opportunity.
And oh by the way...massive win for ESPN.
Oh and also by the way...massive win for Notre Dame and NBC, as the Irish would never (for the foreseeable future) face the possibility of being forced out of independence to stabilize the ACC. This would quite literally be the best way by far to secure independence for generations, rather than a few years at a time.
That's a LOT of very powerful interests that line up for such a move.
Opposed would be the B1G, Fox and the five Big 12 schools left behind (KU probably gets picked up by the B1G). The B1G definitely carries a lot of weight, but I don't know if it would be enough to shut that down...
(06-25-2015 02:01 PM)samandrea Wrote: [ -> ] (06-25-2015 01:52 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]ONE team from Oklahoma and ONE from Texas would make a LOT of sense.
TWO teams from Oklahoma doesn't make much sense to me; those guys rely on players from Texas, so if you put them on an island - separated from Texas - they'd quickly become irrelevant in football, IMO.
Neither was in a conference with Texas until the Big 12 came along.
Barry Switzer used to load his Oklahoma teams with players from Los Angeles, IIRC... and the Red River Shootout always gave OU a foot in Texas.
As for Oklahoma State, were they ever any good before the Big XII?
(06-25-2015 02:20 PM)omniorange Wrote: [ -> ] (06-25-2015 01:52 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]ONE team from Oklahoma and ONE from Texas would make a LOT of sense.
TWO teams from Oklahoma doesn't make much sense to me; those guys rely on players from Texas, so if you put them on an island - separated from Texas - they'd quickly become irrelevant in football, IMO.
Can't speak to Oklahoma State, but I know that for OU the three main states they recruit from are Texas, California, and Oklahoma.
Which is why, if the B12 goes bust, I see OU eventually in the PAC myself.
Cheers,
Neil
Good point. I do think the ACC could grab ONE of them, if it was part of a Western division (but TBH, I don't really like that idea). Most likely if those teams are split and one goes to the Pac-12, the other could end up in the SEC.
I would absolutely add both OU and OK State, together, as a package deal. For one, OU is college football royalty. Secondly, what better way to lure UT than with OU?
The questions I have are:
1. Why would OU leave the Big 12?
2. Does anyone think the ACC would actually aggressively pursue OU against other suitors if they were considering jumping conferences?
Would the ACC ever invite Oklahoma and Oklahoma State?
No.
Remove "Oklahoma State" from that question and the answer is "Maybe, but why?"
Remove "Oklahoma State" and replace it with "Iowa State" and the answer is, "Hmm... that's an interesting thought."
---
More to the point, I don't think OSU would have the votes, and I don't get a sense that Oklahoma's power structure would let OU leave OSU behind.
So... no.
You guys from FSU can continue to schedule OU to your hearts desire. Be sure to win a few of 'em for us please. Thanky.
(06-25-2015 01:41 PM)EvilVodka Wrote: [ -> ] (06-25-2015 01:36 PM)domer1978 Wrote: [ -> ]If the ACC is smart then they should. So the likely answer is no they won't. :)
I think adding Oklahoma alone would be enough to legitimize ACC football...
I also think Oklahoma and Okie State would be a packaged deal. I'm not sure if the B1G and SEC would like that....and I feel the PAC 12 wants someone in Texas, not necessarily Oklahoma
IMO, the ACC is an undervalued league, and someone like Oklahoma would solidify the football perception of the ACC
Yeah, but does OU improve on the ACC's pristine baseball reputation? How about basketball? That's where the ACC's money is -- "basketball"
(06-25-2015 02:43 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]As for Oklahoma State, were they ever any good before the Big XII?
In the leather helmet era they won 5-6 Missouri Valley Conference championships. They were pretty solid, not spectacular in the 80s under Jimmy Johnson and Pat Jones (thanks to some RB named Barry Sanders). They were god awful in the 90s.
Culturally I think the too Oklahoma schools would be a huge outlier in the ACC. You guys think WVU fans are hillbillies? Of course if the money is right I am sure people can overlook lots of things.
(06-25-2015 03:11 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote: [ -> ] (06-25-2015 01:41 PM)EvilVodka Wrote: [ -> ] (06-25-2015 01:36 PM)domer1978 Wrote: [ -> ]If the ACC is smart then they should. So the likely answer is no they won't. :)
I think adding Oklahoma alone would be enough to legitimize ACC football...
I also think Oklahoma and Okie State would be a packaged deal. I'm not sure if the B1G and SEC would like that....and I feel the PAC 12 wants someone in Texas, not necessarily Oklahoma
IMO, the ACC is an undervalued league, and someone like Oklahoma would solidify the football perception of the ACC
Yeah, but does OU improve on the ACC's pristine baseball reputation? How about basketball? That's where the ACC's money is -- "basketball"
1. STOP GOADING THE SEMINOLE FANS!
2. No interest here in Iowa State - if they dropped down to FCS it'd be no loss to me.
3. OTOH, if you can get OU and Kansas, let's do it - I don't care how far away they are!
4. If someone else grabs OU and Kansas, I'd settle for OSU and TCU. (Shut up about OSU's academics, UNC - you have no room to talk right now!).
5. If the ACC does end up taking a pair of Big XII teams NOT named WVU and ISU, then a partial membership for Texas might be in order (otherwise they can go full-independent and try to schedule with BYU).
6. My preference remains for football: #15 Notre Dame, #16 Cincinnati. Launch an ACC cable network and charge in-state rates in Ohio and Indiana, along with the rest, and call it DONE FOREVER!
FWIW - nobody in power really cares what I think anyway.
(06-25-2015 03:07 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote: [ -> ]Would the ACC ever invite Oklahoma and Oklahoma State?
No.
Remove "Oklahoma State" from that question and the answer is "Maybe, but why?"
Remove "Oklahoma State" and replace it with "Iowa State" and the answer is, "Hmm... that's an interesting thought."
---
More to the point, I don't think OSU would have the votes, and I don't get a sense that Oklahoma's power structure would let OU leave OSU behind.
So... no.
You guys from FSU can continue to schedule OU to your hearts desire. Be sure to win a few of 'em for us please. Thanky.
"Why would the ACC add Oklahoma?" Seriously? You need to ask?
Somebody was mentioning Iowa State a few years ago as a "good" expansion candidate, and while I don't remember who it was, your comment leads me to think it as you. What on earth is so great about Iowa freaking State? OU alone is "maybe but why?", but OU and ISU is "hmm, that's interesting"? What?
No.. this thread is the first time I've mentioned Iowa State and the ACC in the same context.
(06-25-2015 01:36 PM)domer1978 Wrote: [ -> ]If the ACC is smart then they should. So the likely answer is no they won't. :)
This.
It's not like the ACC has proactively made any smart moves in realignment in the past 10 year.
(06-25-2015 04:31 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote: [ -> ]No.. this thread is the first time I've mentioned Iowa State and the ACC in the same context.
I can't paste the State of Illinois DMA map, nor Minnesota's nor Missouri, but if you go to this link you will see what constitutes possible value of Iowa State for the ACC - they put you into the northern part of Illinois in addition to Iowa and the edges of other DMA's.
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=dma+...ajaxhist=0
The bulk of their alumni base migrates toward Chicago and Kansas City.
This footprint is of no extra value to the B10, to far away for the P12, unneeded by the SEC but adjoins ND's prime territory.
It's not ideal for the ACC but given that Iowa State is an AAU research university that might tip the balance between an Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, or Iowa State.
Do markets matter? Yes if there is an ACCN. Is it better to be third banana in Chicago or first in Oklahoma or Kansas - I don't know.
Anyway, the DMA's are why Iowa State could be considered.