(02-05-2017 01:38 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-05-2017 12:30 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(02-02-2017 05:05 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-02-2017 04:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(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.

There are certainly some fun scenarios to look at depending on the teams chosen but anyway you slice it 16 team conferences make it more difficult to win and that is just simple math, nothing to do with SEC or OU.

Right now if OU goes undefeated 100% in the playoff. 1 loss still a very high likelihood of getting in the playoff. And even with 2 losses there is still a slim chance some years. A CC only helps increase that likelihood. And all of those scenarios are more likely in the Big 12 so any move to another conference will result in less likelyhood of getting in the playoff. I happen to believe the best conference scenario for OU if we were to move is the PAC. Both the B1G and SEC drop that likelihood to the point it needs to be taken into consideration. Schools like OU and KU walk into the PAC as the #1 FB and #1 BB program in the conference. Can't say the same in the SEC or B1G. I think Nebraska fans are starting to realize that the likelihood they win the B1G anytime soon is slim to none and they are becoming more insignificant to college football every year.

I personally see Baylor as the only school who might have a problem finding a home and it has everything to do wiht their handling of rape and nothing to do with finances or AD performance but you never know. I just have a hard time seeing a scenario where ISU,KSU, OSU, TT, WVU, KU, and TT are in the AAC while WSU and Wake are in the p-5. Maybe i'm just being a homer but those schools are not like other g-5 schools. Kansas isn't Memphis, OSU isn't Tulsa, ISU isn't Cinci, TCU isn't Tulane, WVU isn't Temple, TT isn't Houston, and KSU isn't Army/Navy. These are 75 m+ AD's which require little subsidy to operate because they have good fan support for the most part. Maybe they belong in the g-5 but I personally think that any school with fans will have value that only goes up in the coming years as fans willing to pay to watch their team play are the name of the game moving forward. The days of Rutgers being really valuable are going to be done in about 5 years. Cable subscriptions are shrinking and we are probably less than a year away from having ESPN available for purchase directly as well as conference networks. It's down to only $25 a month for the ESPN family of channels with another 20 regular channels from places like sling.

p23570 those are some interesting points for Oklahoma. Having to many brands in a single conference isn't good. Let's use Georgia as an example. One of JR's scenarios had them in a division with Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee & Vanderbilt. Say they go 2-2 against Bama, Auburn, Florida & Tennessee. They have to go undefeated the rest of the way by today's standards. They just fired a coach because he only won 9-10 games a year & not enough SEC championships. The difficulty of this task is amplified in this scenario. You have to many brands fighting for to few W's, it's inevitable that some of them will be damaged/weakened because of it. Will these fan bases be satisfied with a few more L's in exchange for more $?

Lenville you can't move into a new world with old world thinking. Two losses mattered in a beauty contest. In the New World winning the division is all that matters because if you can do that with even 3 losses you still control your own destiny. Maybe not for fans who never played the game, but for players that's a huge incentive. Everyone wants to control their own fate. Most of us can't. That's why having a pass time where people do, and are not hampered by politics in committees, is essential to the enjoyment of the game. The game is an escape and that's why it is popular. People need their escapes to be fair and free of the things in the world which they wish to escape. Accomplish that and the games will be better for everyone and their popularity will go back up.

You still aren't getting the fact that you can't have all big brands in a conference. The SEC is out of balance and that is why you have programs like Arkansas who have become insignificant. The last thing the SEC needs are 2 big names at this point like OU and UT. The SEC needs a couple of bottom dwellers to help pump up LSU, Tennessee, Georgia, etc...

When you look at each conference form a reputation standpoint the PAC is the conference who needs brands at this point. They really have nothing since Oregon has fallen off and USC hasn't been USC is years. Everyone else has a pretty solid balance.