Most people seem to think there will be a bunch of realignment after the 2025 year because of new TV contracts and GOR resetting and now the real possibility of player compensation playing a central roll the speculation only gets more complicated
I think it’s quite possible that nothing changes in any realignment
I think player compensation becomes adopted by all 10 FBS leagues buy 2025
There will be a new and improved A5 playoffs but this time there will be no question that the A5 conferences will be the only ones to play in it
The G5 will see some realignment and will have to find its own path having realized they ain’t part of the A5 playoffs
So not much will change IMO

(07-23-2019 12:45 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  Most people seem to think there will be a bunch of realignment after the 2025 year because of new TV contracts and GOR resetting and now the real possibility of player compensation playing a central roll the speculation only gets more complicated
I think it’s quite possible that nothing changes in any realignment
I think player compensation becomes adopted by all 10 FBS leagues buy 2025
There will be a new and improved A5 playoffs but this time there will be no question that the A5 conferences will be the only ones to play in it
The G5 will see some realignment and will have to find its own path having realized they ain’t part of the A5 playoffs
So not much will change IMO

Looking back to 2012/2013; if GoR's had not been created for the Big 12 & ACC, would further realignment have occured? If not, why were GoR's needed? If "yes" why would the expiry date of GoR's matter now?

(07-23-2019 12:59 PM)33laszlo99 Wrote:  

(07-23-2019 12:45 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  Most people seem to think there will be a bunch of realignment after the 2025 year because of new TV contracts and GOR resetting and now the real possibility of player compensation playing a central roll the speculation only gets more complicated
I think it’s quite possible that nothing changes in any realignment
I think player compensation becomes adopted by all 10 FBS leagues buy 2025
There will be a new and improved A5 playoffs but this time there will be no question that the A5 conferences will be the only ones to play in it
The G5 will see some realignment and will have to find its own path having realized they ain’t part of the A5 playoffs
So not much will change IMO

Looking back to 2012/2013; if GoR's had not been created for the Big 12 & ACC, would further realignment have occured? If not, why were GoR's needed? If "yes" why would the expiry date of GoR's matter now?

Very possible. There was a lot of uncertainty for many schools at that time.

Maryland was willing to buy itself out of the ACC for the riches of long-term prosperity of the B1G, and that was with the GOR. Had the ACC not had a GOR, it is very possible that Delaney's master plan of acquiring Virginia, UNC, Duke and GA Tech could have come to fruition, along with a hypothetical SEC pursuit of NC State, Virginia Tech and West Virginia.

I do think that the P5 is pretty much locked-in (and grouped together) for 2025 and beyond. They added the additional value when they eliminated the Big East, and took the valuable programs away in consolidation. The G5 is essentially locked out of the CFP, unless a rash of unlikely scenarios play out, and the gap in payouts will undoubtedly grow even further over time.

Big Ten and SEC are the top dogs and aren't losing anybody

Pac 12 is geographically compact and no additions really make sense.

The ACC is stuck together until 2037 or whenever the GOR ends

The Big 12 is the only conference that realistically could experience attrition, but i don't think Texas and Oklahoma are really going anywhere because the money difference in negligible and they have an easy path to the playoff. The other 8 probably aren't super happy but none of them are getting invites to other conferences that make sense. Small possibility that they look at adding some combination of UCF, USF, or Houston, but it would take an exceptional run by one of those teams to get there.

I think the only realignment we see is with the G5 and independents.

(07-23-2019 01:50 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(07-23-2019 12:59 PM)33laszlo99 Wrote:  

(07-23-2019 12:45 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  Most people seem to think there will be a bunch of realignment after the 2025 year because of new TV contracts and GOR resetting and now the real possibility of player compensation playing a central roll the speculation only gets more complicated
I think it’s quite possible that nothing changes in any realignment
I think player compensation becomes adopted by all 10 FBS leagues buy 2025
There will be a new and improved A5 playoffs but this time there will be no question that the A5 conferences will be the only ones to play in it
The G5 will see some realignment and will have to find its own path having realized they ain’t part of the A5 playoffs
So not much will change IMO

Looking back to 2012/2013; if GoR's had not been created for the Big 12 & ACC, would further realignment have occured? If not, why were GoR's needed? If "yes" why would the expiry date of GoR's matter now?

Very possible. There was a lot of uncertainty for many schools at that time.

Maryland was willing to buy itself out of the ACC for the riches of long-term prosperity of the B1G, and that was with the GOR. Had the ACC not had a GOR, it is very possible that Delaney's master plan of acquiring Virginia, UNC, Duke and GA Tech could have come to fruition, along with a hypothetical SEC pursuit of NC State, Virginia Tech and West Virginia.

I do think that the P5 is pretty much locked-in (and grouped together) for 2025 and beyond. They added the additional value when they eliminated the Big East, and took the valuable programs away in consolidation. The G5 is essentially locked out of the CFP, unless a rash of unlikely scenarios play out, and the gap in payouts will undoubtedly grow even further over time.

The ACC GoR came into play AFTER Maryland had left.

The ACC had just agreed to increase the conference exit fees (up to $50 million dollars if my memory serves), and all schools in the conference agreed to that stipulation EXCEPT Maryland. So there was a legal fight over that money once Maryland bolted. A settlement of somewhere between $20m and $50m was the end result.

But media rights weren't yet turned over to the conference as a whole, which is what a GoR is.

(07-23-2019 02:01 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  Big Ten and SEC are the top dogs and aren't losing anybody

Pac 12 is geographically compact and no additions really make sense.

The ACC is stuck together until 2037 or whenever the GOR ends

The Big 12 is the only conference that realistically could experience attrition, but i don't think Texas and Oklahoma are really going anywhere because the money difference in negligible and they have an easy path to the playoff. The other 8 probably aren't super happy but none of them are getting invites to other conferences that make sense. Small possibility that they look at adding some combination of UCF, USF, or Houston, but it would take an exceptional run by one of those teams to get there.

I think the only realignment we see is with the G5 and independents.

The money difference and institutional security are not "negligible" for Oklahoma to move to say the B1G.

The current B12 setup includes roughly a 20% premium paid by CBS and ESPN to keep the conference together. But it's ludicrous to image that will continue. The SEC is about to get a big bump in pay, and the B1G continues to grow the separation. To believe the B12 will keep pace is simply delusional

For OU you are talking about $10-15M a year minimum, plus the institutional security. That was a huge factor in Nebraska joining the B1G and also Colorado the P12, as schools are seeking associations and geographic orientations to fit their needs to fill classrooms. The pressure on OU to move will be very high, and it extends well past football.

I think your read of the P12, SEC and B1G are correct, and the ACC is actually fairly stable, benefits from sitting on the wealthiest constituencies in the US (after California and Seattle), which means their classrooms are filled with high achieving students (well the schools that care anyway, like UVa, UNC, Pitt, Miami, Georgia Tech, et al).

The big question is not whether OU leaves, which is pretty much a given, but whether Texas sticks around without them. Texas does not need the SEC or B1G and do not want to be swallowed up as just another school, and prefer to stand out as the big kahuna. They have that in the B12, and I think they'd have it in the ACC. The question is will the money work in the B12 without OU? And is the ACC good enough money that Texas wont be at a disadvantage?

(07-23-2019 12:45 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  Most people seem to think there will be a bunch of realignment after the 2025 year because of new TV contracts and GOR resetting and now the real possibility of player compensation playing a central roll the speculation only gets more complicated
I think it’s quite possible that nothing changes in any realignment
I think player compensation becomes adopted by all 10 FBS leagues buy 2025
There will be a new and improved A5 playoffs but this time there will be no question that the A5 conferences will be the only ones to play in it
The G5 will see some realignment and will have to find its own path having realized they ain’t part of the A5 playoffs
So not much will change IMO

I dont think so. I think it will go to 8 and there will be a G5 slot. Mainly, becasue I think the networks will actually push for it. A big tent simply engages more viewers. The 65th team selected isnt going to ever win the NCAA basketball tournament--but having those smaller teams in the tournament engages a portion of the audience that wouldnt be there otherwise---including casual viewers who are attracted by the David vs Goliath aspect of the event.

Yeah sure, Oklahoma is just gonna move away from their recruiting grounds because stingray says so.... yeah .... right
Check Nebraska

There are still better G5 schools that the P5 did not take. Is Miami Florida valuable today than say a UCF or Boise State? Nope, they are not. They lost a lof fan and alumni support because of the scandal after scandal after scandal piling up. They got hurt the worst for accepting donations from a scam artist.

(07-23-2019 02:46 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(07-23-2019 02:01 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  Big Ten and SEC are the top dogs and aren't losing anybody

Pac 12 is geographically compact and no additions really make sense.

The ACC is stuck together until 2037 or whenever the GOR ends

The Big 12 is the only conference that realistically could experience attrition, but i don't think Texas and Oklahoma are really going anywhere because the money difference in negligible and they have an easy path to the playoff. The other 8 probably aren't super happy but none of them are getting invites to other conferences that make sense. Small possibility that they look at adding some combination of UCF, USF, or Houston, but it would take an exceptional run by one of those teams to get there.

I think the only realignment we see is with the G5 and independents.

The money difference and institutional security are not "negligible" for Oklahoma to move to say the B1G.

The current B12 setup includes roughly a 20% premium paid by CBS and ESPN to keep the conference together. But it's ludicrous to image that will continue. The SEC is about to get a big bump in pay, and the B1G continues to grow the separation. To believe the B12 will keep pace is simply delusional

For OU you are talking about $10-15M a year minimum, plus the institutional security. That was a huge factor in Nebraska joining the B1G and also Colorado the P12, as schools are seeking associations and geographic orientations to fit their needs to fill classrooms. The pressure on OU to move will be very high, and it extends well past football.

I think your read of the P12, SEC and B1G are correct, and the ACC is actually fairly stable, benefits from sitting on the wealthiest constituencies in the US (after California and Seattle), which means their classrooms are filled with high achieving students (well the schools that care anyway, like UVa, UNC, Pitt, Miami, Georgia Tech, et al).

The big question is not whether OU leaves, which is pretty much a given, but whether Texas sticks around without them. Texas does not need the SEC or B1G and do not want to be swallowed up as just another school, and prefer to stand out as the big kahuna. They have that in the B12, and I think they'd have it in the ACC. The question is will the money work in the B12 without OU? And is the ACC good enough money that Texas wont be at a disadvantage?

I don’t see it. Oklahoma has so much money that an additional 10 million isn’t going to make or break them. Why abandon your traditional rivals, recruiting grounds, and an easy path to the playoffs?

(07-23-2019 03:51 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  There are still better G5 schools that the P5 did not take. Is Miami Florida valuable today than say a UCF or Boise State? Nope, they are not. They lost a lof fan and alumni support because of the scandal after scandal after scandal piling up. They got hurt the worst for accepting donations from a scam artist.

Maybe, but the mountain they have to climb is getting taller and taller

Now maybe if they get to a few more access bowls plus 70k students? Even then the Big 12 would have to have a sudden need

(07-23-2019 02:46 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(07-23-2019 02:01 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  Big Ten and SEC are the top dogs and aren't losing anybody

Pac 12 is geographically compact and no additions really make sense.

The ACC is stuck together until 2037 or whenever the GOR ends

The Big 12 is the only conference that realistically could experience attrition, but i don't think Texas and Oklahoma are really going anywhere because the money difference in negligible and they have an easy path to the playoff. The other 8 probably aren't super happy but none of them are getting invites to other conferences that make sense. Small possibility that they look at adding some combination of UCF, USF, or Houston, but it would take an exceptional run by one of those teams to get there.

I think the only realignment we see is with the G5 and independents.

The money difference and institutional security are not "negligible" for Oklahoma to move to say the B1G.

The current B12 setup includes roughly a 20% premium paid by CBS and ESPN to keep the conference together. But it's ludicrous to image that will continue. The SEC is about to get a big bump in pay, and the B1G continues to grow the separation. To believe the B12 will keep pace is simply delusional

For OU you are talking about $10-15M a year minimum, plus the institutional security. That was a huge factor in Nebraska joining the B1G and also Colorado the P12, as schools are seeking associations and geographic orientations to fit their needs to fill classrooms. The pressure on OU to move will be very high, and it extends well past football.

I think your read of the P12, SEC and B1G are correct, and the ACC is actually fairly stable, benefits from sitting on the wealthiest constituencies in the US (after California and Seattle), which means their classrooms are filled with high achieving students (well the schools that care anyway, like UVa, UNC, Pitt, Miami, Georgia Tech, et al).

The big question is not whether OU leaves, which is pretty much a given, but whether Texas sticks around without them. Texas does not need the SEC or B1G and do not want to be swallowed up as just another school, and prefer to stand out as the big kahuna. They have that in the B12, and I think they'd have it in the ACC. The question is will the money work in the B12 without OU? And is the ACC good enough money that Texas wont be at a disadvantage?

I don't agree with the argument that "Texas has their business model and their going to stick with it." I agree even less with the argument that "Texas wants to be The Big Kahuna." Who do you mean when you say "Texas... ?" Is it the football fans, the alumni, the general public? Because if it's any of those, well, they don't much matter. The decision will be made by a very small knot of eggheads who care only a little bit about football when it is weighed against the future of the institution as a whole. These guys likely see their university as The Big Kahuna no matter where they align themselves, and it has precious little to do with the football won-loss record. Maybe these fine fellows in the halls of academe regard "Texas" as a synecdoche for themselves.

(07-23-2019 04:03 PM)33laszlo99 Wrote:  

(07-23-2019 02:46 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(07-23-2019 02:01 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  Big Ten and SEC are the top dogs and aren't losing anybody

Pac 12 is geographically compact and no additions really make sense.

The ACC is stuck together until 2037 or whenever the GOR ends

The Big 12 is the only conference that realistically could experience attrition, but i don't think Texas and Oklahoma are really going anywhere because the money difference in negligible and they have an easy path to the playoff. The other 8 probably aren't super happy but none of them are getting invites to other conferences that make sense. Small possibility that they look at adding some combination of UCF, USF, or Houston, but it would take an exceptional run by one of those teams to get there.

I think the only realignment we see is with the G5 and independents.

The money difference and institutional security are not "negligible" for Oklahoma to move to say the B1G.

The current B12 setup includes roughly a 20% premium paid by CBS and ESPN to keep the conference together. But it's ludicrous to image that will continue. The SEC is about to get a big bump in pay, and the B1G continues to grow the separation. To believe the B12 will keep pace is simply delusional

For OU you are talking about $10-15M a year minimum, plus the institutional security. That was a huge factor in Nebraska joining the B1G and also Colorado the P12, as schools are seeking associations and geographic orientations to fit their needs to fill classrooms. The pressure on OU to move will be very high, and it extends well past football.

I think your read of the P12, SEC and B1G are correct, and the ACC is actually fairly stable, benefits from sitting on the wealthiest constituencies in the US (after California and Seattle), which means their classrooms are filled with high achieving students (well the schools that care anyway, like UVa, UNC, Pitt, Miami, Georgia Tech, et al).

The big question is not whether OU leaves, which is pretty much a given, but whether Texas sticks around without them. Texas does not need the SEC or B1G and do not want to be swallowed up as just another school, and prefer to stand out as the big kahuna. They have that in the B12, and I think they'd have it in the ACC. The question is will the money work in the B12 without OU? And is the ACC good enough money that Texas wont be at a disadvantage?

I don't agree with the argument that "Texas has their business model and their going to stick with it." I agree even less with the argument that "Texas wants to be The Big Kahuna." Who do you mean when you say "Texas... ?" Is it the football fans, the alumni, the general public? Because if it's any of those, well, they don't much matter. The decision will be made by a very small knot of eggheads who care only a little bit about football when it is weighed against the future of the institution as a whole. These guys likely see their university as The Big Kahuna no matter where they align themselves, and it has precious little to do with the football won-loss record. Maybe these fine fellows in the halls of academe regard "Texas" as a synecdoche for themselves.

Obviously you have never spent any time in Texas to come to that conclusion. When people say Texas, it’s usually the administration, athletic department, boosters and fans. They’re all intertwined and they’re all agree on one thing: power.

Texas doesn’t have money issues. They have tons of it, they’re the wealthiest athletic department program in the most important football state. $10-15 million more in the SEC (a conference they consider is academically beneath them plus their ego won’t allow them to follow their “little brother”) or the Big Ten (or Big Slow as their fans call it) is not going to convince them to make a move. They’re Texas not Nebraska, Colorado or Maryland.

What Texas has is power issues. They like to be in control and exercise their power when it comes to conference matters. They would lose that power in the B1G, SEC and Pac-12. The thought of being seen as an equal to Illinois, Mississippi or Oregon State terrifies them. That’s why you won’t see Texas make a move based on money. It’ll take more than that. Worse case scenario, they’ll go independent in football and ask the next weakest P5 (ACC) to give them a Notre Dame type of deal. They won’t be forced to pick a conference either.

As much as I dislike Texas fans, I admit the school is one of, if not, the hottest property in FBS and any conference would take them in a heartbeat.

I don’t want then in the AAC

Oklahoma may sniff around, but in the end they will realize what a good deal they have in the Big 12. Texas does not want to leave. Only an unusual circumstance will cause another major shift in conference affiliations in 5 years. The playoffs will expand before that happens. This will give additional access to everyone as it should.

(07-23-2019 02:46 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(07-23-2019 02:01 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  Big Ten and SEC are the top dogs and aren't losing anybody

Pac 12 is geographically compact and no additions really make sense.

The ACC is stuck together until 2037 or whenever the GOR ends

The Big 12 is the only conference that realistically could experience attrition, but i don't think Texas and Oklahoma are really going anywhere because the money difference in negligible and they have an easy path to the playoff. The other 8 probably aren't super happy but none of them are getting invites to other conferences that make sense. Small possibility that they look at adding some combination of UCF, USF, or Houston, but it would take an exceptional run by one of those teams to get there.

I think the only realignment we see is with the G5 and independents.

The money difference and institutional security are not "negligible" for Oklahoma to move to say the B1G.

The current B12 setup includes roughly a 20% premium paid by CBS and ESPN to keep the conference together. But it's ludicrous to image that will continue. The SEC is about to get a big bump in pay, and the B1G continues to grow the separation. To believe the B12 will keep pace is simply delusional

For OU you are talking about $10-15M a year minimum, plus the institutional security. That was a huge factor in Nebraska joining the B1G and also Colorado the P12, as schools are seeking associations and geographic orientations to fit their needs to fill classrooms. The pressure on OU to move will be very high, and it extends well past football.

I think your read of the P12, SEC and B1G are correct, and the ACC is actually fairly stable, benefits from sitting on the wealthiest constituencies in the US (after California and Seattle), which means their classrooms are filled with high achieving students (well the schools that care anyway, like UVa, UNC, Pitt, Miami, Georgia Tech, et al).

The big question is not whether OU leaves, which is pretty much a given, but whether Texas sticks around without them. Texas does not need the SEC or B1G and do not want to be swallowed up as just another school, and prefer to stand out as the big kahuna. They have that in the B12, and I think they'd have it in the ACC. The question is will the money work in the B12 without OU? And is the ACC good enough money that Texas wont be at a disadvantage?

how do people that constantly write so much about realignment know so very little about what they are talking about

actually I think that is pretty much the answer right there.....people that have no idea what they are talking about using those false facts and half truths to continue to craft some nonsense

1. CBS does not have a contract with the Big 12

the Big 12 has contracts with ESPN and FOX

2. there is no "premium" paid to the Big 12

the tier 2 contract with FOX was signed when the Big 12 was a 10 member conference with aggy and MU as members and part of that contract called for the Big 12 to remain at 10 members if anyone left that is why the Big 12 was not able to wait on Louisville to fulfill the exit period for the Big East even if they wanted to

3. once aggy and MU left and TCU and WVU were added to the Big 12 the tier 2 contract with FOX was fully in compliance by the Big 12

I am sure someone with the "clear knowledge" of the situation would claim that Fox was probably not happy to lose aggy and MU and get TCU and WVU instead (ignoring the fact that FOX made no specifications on replacements of members left other than getting back to 10)

4. at that time the ESPN tier 1 contract with the Big 12 was set to end in 2015-16

in late 2012 ESPN came to the Big 12 and ask them if they wanted to renegotiate a new contract with dates that matched the Fox tier 2 contract (so over 3 years early)

the Big 12 said yes

5. at that time FOX also came back to the table and augmented their contract that was only a year or so old and paid some small additional money to get better choices in the football games

so for those that have even a small clue what they are talking about the Big 12 has contracts with ESPN and FOX not CBS

and 100% of the TV contracts the Big 12 has with ESPN and FOX were signed after the Big 12 was a 10 team conference and the ESPN contract was signed after the Big 12 was a 10 team conference with TCU and WVU as members and the FOX contract was augmented to pay slightly MORE at the same time with TCU and WVU as members

so when one knows the facts there is no 20% premium paid by ESPN and CBS because the Big 12 does not have a contract with CBS and there is not a 20% premium paid by ESPN and FOX either because 100% of those contracts were signed new, opened up and discussed, and finalized when the Big 12 was a 10 team conference with TCU and WVU as members

6. here is the part where you will try and bring up some other money that the Big 12 splits only 10 ways

but of course that is just you saving face because your statement was that ESPN and CBS pay a 20% premium to the Big 12

and of course CBS does not do so because they have no contract with the Big 12 it is FOX

and if you want to bring up The Sugar Bowl money well again that deal was signed with ESPN after the Big 12 was a 10 team conference with TCU and WVU as members

and the NCAA football playoff money is not a direct payment by ESPN to the Big 12 that is a payment by the NCAA to the Big 12 and that is based on the NCAA paying per conference and they do that same thing for all conferences P5 and G5 (with the P5 and G5 payout differences of course)

so when you do not even have a clue who the Big 12 has for their media partners (much less when the contracts were signed and who was in the Big 12 at that time), it is difficult to do anything other than think you just have no clue when you try and talk about a 20% premium that will not happen again

because ESPN came to the Big 12 over 3 years early to give them a brand new contract when the Big 12 was 10 members with TCU and WVU and FOX paid additional money at that time as well........which does not suggest there was any 20% premium paid by either of them (much less paid by CBS)

(07-23-2019 03:16 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  Yeah sure, Oklahoma is just gonna move away from their recruiting grounds because stingray says so.... yeah .... right
Check Nebraska

The difference between OU and Nebraska is location. OU is 450 miles closer to Texas than Nebraska. OU has always recruited Texas well, partly due to location, and partly due to a game played every year in October at the Texas State Fair. OU played for 89 years in a separate conference from Texas, winning six national championships.

As long as OU and Texas play every year in Dallas, it doesn't really matter what conference OU is in. OU will keep the rivalry, regardless. Texas has too much to lose if they ended the rivalry, as it is a big driver of donations. Texas would also lose their last big rival. Now if Texas were to break off the rivalry, then OU's calculus changes. OU would almost have to move to the SEC in order to keep a presence in Texas.

I don't know any insiders, but I think OU is gone in 2025. The SEC would be best for the athletic department, while the B1G would be a boon to the university as a whole. OU fits the SEC like a glove, both athletically and institutionally. The university (academically) dreams to be in the same space as the large flagships of the B1G.

OU's decision will determine the width and breadth of the next period of realignment among the P5.

(07-23-2019 03:51 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  There are still better G5 schools that the P5 did not take. Is Miami Florida valuable today than say a UCF or Boise State? Nope, they are not. They lost a lof fan and alumni support because of the scandal after scandal after scandal piling up. They got hurt the worst for accepting donations from a scam artist.

They were having team meetings in strip clubs when Jimmy Johnson was coaching, right? No Miami Hurricane fans turned on them because of scandals. That's a dumb thing to say even by your standards.

(07-23-2019 06:54 PM)johnintx Wrote:  

(07-23-2019 03:16 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  Yeah sure, Oklahoma is just gonna move away from their recruiting grounds because stingray says so.... yeah .... right
Check Nebraska

The difference between OU and Nebraska is location. OU is 450 miles closer to Texas than Nebraska. OU has always recruited Texas well, partly due to location, and partly due to a game played every year in October at the Texas State Fair. OU played for 89 years in a separate conference from Texas, winning six national championships.

As long as OU and Texas play every year in Dallas, it doesn't really matter what conference OU is in. OU will keep the rivalry, regardless. Texas has too much to lose if they ended the rivalry, as it is a big driver of donations. Texas would also lose their last big rival. Now if Texas were to break off the rivalry, then OU's calculus changes. OU would almost have to move to the SEC in order to keep a presence in Texas.

I don't know any insiders, but I think OU is gone in 2025. The SEC would be best for the athletic department, while the B1G would be a boon to the university as a whole. OU fits the SEC like a glove, both athletically and institutionally. The university (academically) dreams to be in the same space as the large flagships of the B1G.

OU's decision will determine the width and breadth of the next period of realignment among the P5.

All Oklahoma needs to do is take a look at Arkansas and Nebraska......especially Arkansas which used to have a big rivalry with Texas. Do they want to become that program?

(07-23-2019 07:14 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(07-23-2019 06:54 PM)johnintx Wrote:  

(07-23-2019 03:16 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  Yeah sure, Oklahoma is just gonna move away from their recruiting grounds because stingray says so.... yeah .... right
Check Nebraska

The difference between OU and Nebraska is location. OU is 450 miles closer to Texas than Nebraska. OU has always recruited Texas well, partly due to location, and partly due to a game played every year in October at the Texas State Fair. OU played for 89 years in a separate conference from Texas, winning six national championships.

As long as OU and Texas play every year in Dallas, it doesn't really matter what conference OU is in. OU will keep the rivalry, regardless. Texas has too much to lose if they ended the rivalry, as it is a big driver of donations. Texas would also lose their last big rival. Now if Texas were to break off the rivalry, then OU's calculus changes. OU would almost have to move to the SEC in order to keep a presence in Texas.

I don't know any insiders, but I think OU is gone in 2025. The SEC would be best for the athletic department, while the B1G would be a boon to the university as a whole. OU fits the SEC like a glove, both athletically and institutionally. The university (academically) dreams to be in the same space as the large flagships of the B1G.

OU's decision will determine the width and breadth of the next period of realignment among the P5.

All Oklahoma needs to do is take a look at Arkansas and Nebraska......especially Arkansas which used to have a big rivalry with Texas. Do they want to become that program?

The difference is that Nebraska and Arkansas quit playing Texas.

Nebraska, in their glory days, recruited nationwide. Once they were in the Big 12, they were able to recruit Texas more. When they left the Big 12, they lost all access to Texas, both for games and for recruiting.

Arkansas, in moving to the SEC, left their biggest rival behind in Texas. They went years without playing a game in Texas, thus losing the ability to recruit in Texas. They were able to get back in with some non-conference games and then with A&M's entry into the SEC. I don't think that makes up for the loss of their game with Texas, but it's an improvement. Still, their program is a shadow of its former self.

OU and the University of Texas have a 100+ year history playing at a neutral site in Dallas. They were in a conference together, split for 89 years, then got back together in the Big 12. OU has played at least one game in Texas every year since the days of leather helmets. As long as OU and Texas play (preferably in Dallas), OU has more freedom to either remain in the B12 or to listen to an offer from the SEC or B1G. The magnitude of the OU-Texas game means that OU and Texas need each other, regardless of conference. It is a big event, with fundraising opportunities tied to both schools. Even if OU leaves the B12 behind, they won't leave UT behind. Now that UT has lost the A&M game, they can't afford to lose the OU game.

OU needs Texas, and Texas needs OU. That can be accomplished both inside and outside the B12.