(05-12-2015 01:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-12-2015 11:41 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(05-11-2015 09:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-11-2015 08:40 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-11-2015 08:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  While that outcome would be acceptable to me, and perhaps to the SEC, I'm not so sure that frees Oklahoma up to join. And round and round we go with the Okie-Pokie. Now should we take Virginia Tech and Oklahoma State we would have the Hokie-Pokie and that might work. If we are going to take 4 each to get it done there simply isn't an ideal workaround for either of us. Which is why the PAC said no the first time. Which is why Delany wouldn't bite on the overtures initially made to the Big 10, and why Slive said no when Boren came to us with the both Oklahoma's offer a few years ago.

The best thing I can say is that Oklahoma State does have value on their own. Their athletic department is in the black and for a decent margin, they are competitive in most sports, and they deliver the same demographic as their counterpart. The issue is that if Texas and OU go together there isn't enough value left with a Kansas (which is not a cultural fit to the SEC) to cobble together a plan that would be acceptable. O.S.U. and OU cannot be separated unless there is a Texas / OU pairing. That way the Sooners are still free for Bedlam and Texas. But if O.S.U. goes with Texas it is problematic for Sooner scheduling.

Texas as a brand adds value no matter what. Oklahoma by themselves could as well but not nearly what Texas brings. And that issue is the relevant issue for all would be suitors. Kansas has value. Texas and OU have value. Any of those can land a home. Kansas State, T.C.U., Oklahoma State, and Iowa State would be tight fits anywhere to the East. West Virginia could land in the ACC and might make the SEC in the right pairing. Baylor could be acceptable to both the SEC or ACC with the right pairing. Texas Tech might even be acceptable to the SEC with the right pairing. But those right pairings all involve either Texas or Oklahoma, or both.

Once those are placed there isn't enough interest in the rest to dissolve the conference without the magic bullet theory of the time zone issue for the PAC, which while possible, isn't probable.

Well the Hokie-Pokie might have some fans in Charlottesville,but it does not leave many table scraps for the B1G and 1 more has to go to get the Big 12 disolved. Leaving Texas Tech might be problematic, not to the level of Oklahoma State but a problem, none-the-less. Kansas State is going to be the real problem to place. Iowa State is a great school in a bad location in a tiny small hard to get to state. You could send Missouri to the B1G to pair with Iowa State and take Texas Tech. If this were easy, it would have been done already.

If I'm Delany, I would finance the PAC to make another run at Texas (all of Texas, Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor and TCU).

If anyone does the financing it will be FOX. I say let the SEC and ACC just move to 16. Then let the Big 12 and Big 10 divide up the PAC. It might be easier than trying to figure out how to split the Big 12 pie into equally acceptable parts.

Did I read that right? Between them the Big Ten and B12 have 24 schools. The PAC12 has 12. That's 36. Are you suggesting something along the lines of the B1G taking the four northwest teams and the B12 taking the rest?

Actually, since you are supposing the ACC and SEC go to 16 each, I assume they come from the B12. So if the B1G only took Oregon and Washington to get to 16, then the six remaining B12 teams would add 10 PAC teams. The little fish would swallow the big fish. Even if you assume it works the other way, and the PAC takes the B12 remnants, I don't see anybody being happy with the result. No way does the PAC buy this.

At the end of the day, every scenario that we imagine (and we've imagined a lot of them) seems to have a fatal flaw. Which keeps bringing me back to the same place - what we have now isn't ideal, but it's the only thing that works. It is going to take some cosmic event to overcome the inertia implicit in that conclusion.

Well yeah. My retort was really a bit more tongue in cheek. But if you took a serious look at it the Big 10 could just take Stanford, California, Oregon, Washington, and go to 16. Penn State could move to the ACC along with Maryland and they could move to 16. The SEC could take West Virginia and Florida State and move to 16. Texas and the 8 remaining Big 12 schools would take U.S.C., U.C.L.A., Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Brigham Young, and Colorado and move to 16.

Everyone is now at 16.

The ACC should be happy with swapping essentially F.S.U. for Penn State and taking Maryland back.

The SEC solidifies Florida and moves to 16 with a slither of the beltway.

Texas keeps the gang together (minus the Moutaineer Island) and picks up Southern California, Arizona, Utah and Colorado so that now the LHN can become a viable Big 12N.

Everybody wins. Fantasy, heck yeah, but it would work.

Well, everybody except Washington State and Oregon State who get relegated to the MWC, Notre Dame which is forced to join a conference against its will, and Penn State and Maryland who have to take a big financial hit. But everybody has to take one for the team occasionally.