Interesting article from Jake Trotter

OU in SEC?

My personal opinion, and gut feeling, is no it would not.

If OU came to the SEC they would be the next Nebraska-- a program that has settled into above average status.

I think a lot of that comes from the complete disconnect from the teams and culture which created the program. When you take a program out of its natural habitat only bad things can happen.

In spite of what many people say OU does not have an SEC culture. It's roots are not in the South. OU's roots are in the great plains and that is where it needs to be to truly flourish.

That isn't to say I don't think there would be a temporary jump in excitement and such but I don't think it would last.

(08-08-2016 05:08 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  My personal opinion, and gut feeling, is no it would not.

If OU came to the SEC they would be the next Nebraska-- a program that has settled into above average status.

I think a lot of that comes from the complete disconnect from the teams and culture which created the program. When you take a program out of its natural habitat only bad things can happen.

In spite of what many people say OU does not have an SEC culture. It's roots are not in the South. OU's roots are in the great plains and that is where it needs to be to truly flourish.

That isn't to say I don't think there would be a temporary jump in excitement and such but I don't think it would last.

While I don't disagree with your assessment of the risks and perhaps the realities of such a move, if the Big 12 comes apart at the seems I think we are by far the better fit than the PAC or Big 10.

As a brand Oklahoma would simply help to keep the SEC on top. If they bring along little brother, or another Big 12 school then along with Arkansas, Missouri, and A&M there would be enough of a Plains flavor to keep them from totally losing their identity.

Nebraska after all is the lone Big 8 school in the Big 10. Oklahoma would not be the lone Big 8 or Big 12 school in the SEC.

I think ESPN is soft-soaping for the inclusion of the Cowboys.

It would be different for Oklahoma than it was Arkansas when we joined the SEC. When we left we lost the vast majority of our recruiting territory. You can't change the fact that Norman is just a few hours away from Dallas. With that said. OU would find it considerably harder to win in the SEC. Although the addition of OU would put Auburn and Alabama in the SEC-east. But the rest of the SEC west is more competitive than most of the Big 12.

(08-08-2016 07:47 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  It would be different for Oklahoma than it was Arkansas when we joined the SEC. When we left we lost the vast majority of our recruiting territory. You can't change the fact that Norman is just a few hours away from Dallas. With that said. OU would find it considerably harder to win in the SEC. Although the addition of OU would put Auburn and Alabama in the SEC-east. But the rest of the SEC west is more competitive than most of the Big 12.

Oklahoma didn't have a conference member in the state of Texas until the Big 12 formed. OU might, might run into the toughest recruiting issues if they join the Big Ten without Texasor if OSU went to the SEC, which won't happen.

As far as divisions if OU joined, I like JR's idea of making things work with 15 members until a solid 16th could be found.

I think OU would be fine, but the Sooners wouldn't be happy in the SEC. I'm not buying the projections they ran saying how difficult it would be for a 10 team conference to qualify for the CFP considering they made it in year 2 of the new system. As long as they keep their OOC schedule competitive the B12 willl be theirs for the taking. A move to the SEC will endanger that access for more than expanding the B12 by two teams.

From lurking on Sooner forums the impression I get is the OU fans aspirations are somewhat conflicted. Despite the fact that the B12 is easy to win, they don't care about the most of the conference members anymore. They want a move that will elevate the OU academic brands, ruling out the SEC. The assumption is that the Sooners will invariably maintain gridiron success in spite of better competition and will be considered an equal and valued peer upon the move.

(08-13-2016 07:19 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  I think OU would be fine, but the Sooners wouldn't be happy in the SEC. I'm not buying the projections they ran saying how difficult it would be for a 10 team conference to qualify for the CFP considering they made it in year 2 of the new system. As long as they keep their OOC schedule competitive the B12 willl be theirs for the taking. A move to the SEC will endanger that access for more than expanding the B12 by two teams.

From lurking on Sooner forums the impression I get is the OU fans aspirations are somewhat conflicted. Despite the fact that the B12 is easy to win, they don't care about the most of the conference members anymore. They want a move that will elevate the OU academic brands, ruling out the SEC. The assumption is that the Sooners will invariably maintain gridiron success in spite of better competition and will be considered an equal and valued peer upon the move.

It's pretty much the crowd at Land Thieves that is divided that way. Other OU sites are more pro SEC. Remember too that the LT crowd like the Shaggy crowd formed initially based on similar attitudes. So the cores of those boards vary in opinion from other sites for the same schools. It's hardly a scientific poll.

The key to OU being happy in the SEC will be familiar faces to play and proximity. And Vandiver our academics aren't that bad. OU would be right in the middle of SEC academic standing permitting them some growth room. Many SEC schools faced split disciplines from their inceptions following reconstruction because that is the way our new state constitutions were written, in part to discourage the potential growth of military emphasis in our schools. So disciplines like medicine and law were initially required to be under the auspices of different schools than those of agriculture, vet medicine, and engineering.

When you look at the requirements for AAU membership you can readily see that the Medical College of Georgia keeps UGA from being seriously considered in spite of their research money. Some (emphasis on some) of this is still a hangover of old state constitutions although now almost all of our states have moved past that, it wasn't the case in the 50's. So we were slow to the game of pooling research projects in each of our schools so that they could qualify for national rankings. In fact most of this national ranking emphasis has become a product of politics over the last 30 to 40 years. When I was first considering schools the Ivy's were the top, the service academies just below them, and state schools were state schools each with their own particular fields of emphasis. If you were an engineer from Georgia Tech, Auburn, or Purdue that was equally great, but you were probably going to stay near your own school for employment when you graduated. Aerospace engineering was a bit different. Huntsville, Houston, Nevada, and South Florida was likely to be your destination unless you went to the Mountain in Colorado.

USN&WR and AAU and ARWU are marketing tools for the schools and people have bought into the hype, especially helicopter parents who think they are setting up little Susie and Johnny to be rich.

BTW, schools may get you an interview at a major company, but the grades go out the window many times when during the interview other issues with personality etc. arise.

(08-13-2016 11:30 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-13-2016 07:19 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  I think OU would be fine, but the Sooners wouldn't be happy in the SEC. I'm not buying the projections they ran saying how difficult it would be for a 10 team conference to qualify for the CFP considering they made it in year 2 of the new system. As long as they keep their OOC schedule competitive the B12 willl be theirs for the taking. A move to the SEC will endanger that access for more than expanding the B12 by two teams.

From lurking on Sooner forums the impression I get is the OU fans aspirations are somewhat conflicted. Despite the fact that the B12 is easy to win, they don't care about the most of the conference members anymore. They want a move that will elevate the OU academic brands, ruling out the SEC. The assumption is that the Sooners will invariably maintain gridiron success in spite of better competition and will be considered an equal and valued peer upon the move.

It's pretty much the crowd at Land Thieves that is divided that way. Other OU sites are more pro SEC. Remember too that the LT crowd like the Shaggy crowd formed initially based on similar attitudes. So the cores of those boards vary in opinion from other sites for the same schools. It's hardly a scientific poll.

The key to OU being happy in the SEC will be familiar faces to play and proximity. And Vandiver our academics aren't that bad. OU would be right in the middle of SEC academic standing permitting them some growth room. Many SEC schools faced split disciplines from their inceptions following reconstruction because that is the way our new state constitutions were written, in part to discourage the potential growth of military emphasis in our schools. So disciplines like medicine and law were initially required to be under the auspices of different schools than those of agriculture, vet medicine, and engineering.

When you look at the requirements for AAU membership you can readily see that the Medical College of Georgia keeps UGA from being seriously considered in spite of their research money. Some (emphasis on some) of this is still a hangover of old state constitutions although now almost all of our states have moved past that, it wasn't the case in the 50's. So we were slow to the game of pooling research projects in each of our schools so that they could qualify for national rankings. In fact most of this national ranking emphasis has become a product of politics over the last 30 to 40 years. When I was first considering schools the Ivy's were the top, the service academies just below them, and state schools were state schools each with their own particular fields of emphasis. If you were an engineer from Georgia Tech, Auburn, or Purdue that was equally great, but you were probably going to stay near your own school for employment when you graduated. Aerospace engineering was a bit different. Huntsville, Houston, Nevada, and South Florida was likely to be your destination unless you went to the Mountain in Colorado.

USN&WR and AAU and ARWU are marketing tools for the schools and people have bought into the hype, especially helicopter parents who think they are setting up little Susie and Johnny to be rich.

BTW, schools may get you an interview at a major company, but the grades go out the window many times when during the interview other issues with personality etc. arise.

When it comes to rankings, I've tended to think about it this way...

While the research opportunities are nice tools to have in your arsenal, most students never have access to these learning opportunities. That and the professors focusing on them don't interact with students very much anyway.

Point being, I think it's a mistake for some of these groups to put so much emphasis on research expenditures as a measure of the quality of education. Not only are there many non-academic reasons why a particular university might have more money at their disposal to spend on such projects, but philosophically speaking; quality education is going to come down more to the ability of professors to teach students how to expand their own mind and learn for themselves.

How a particular school administers their funding shouldn't be as big of a consideration.

I became disenchanted with AAU membership, for example, when I found out a school is penalized for not offering certain programs. Well, that's a bit arbitrary. Just because UA can't count the success of its medical school towards its own standing doesn't do anything to invalidate the quality of other programs offered on campus. That notion is unreasonable in my opinion.

(08-13-2016 11:30 AM)JRsec Wrote:  It's pretty much the crowd at Land Thieves that is divided that way. Other OU sites are more pro SEC. Remember too that the LT crowd like the Shaggy crowd formed initially based on similar attitudes. So the cores of those boards vary in opinion from other sites for the same schools. It's hardly a scientific poll.

True. But I have never seen so many people roll out the same tired statements regarding the uplift of academic status via athletic associations.

Quote:The key to OU being happy in the SEC will be familiar faces to play and proximity. And Vandiver our academics aren't that bad. OU would be right in the middle of SEC academic standing permitting them some growth room. Many SEC schools faced split disciplines from their inceptions following reconstruction because that is the way our new state constitutions were written, in part to discourage the potential growth of military emphasis in our schools. So disciplines like medicine and law were initially required to be under the auspices of different schools than those of agriculture, vet medicine, and engineering.

I think the SEC's academics are great, but we are talking about a perception. It doesn't matter that at the undergrad level there is little difference between engineering programs across the country, because getting the ABET accreditation has set a baseline that really doesn't allow for much deviation between disciplines. The same can be said about physics, chemistry and biology. The difference comes IMO in the Liberal Arts and other subjective programs along with how robust the post grad department is.

The latter is what gets the SEC, but I don't find that to be a problem. Every school does not need to offer the full gambit of post-doc work. I prefer that schools remain focused on their core mission of educating the populous as opposed to getting into some ivory tower d***-measuring contest. The last thing the US needs are more Ivy League or wannabe Ivy schools. Which is why I'm a little cross at what UGA and GT are doing respectively.

Quote:When you look at the requirements for AAU membership you can readily see that the Medical College of Georgia keeps UGA from being seriously considered in spite of their research money. Some (emphasis on some) of this is still a hangover of old state constitutions although now almost all of our states have moved past that, it wasn't the case in the 50's. So we were slow to the game of pooling research projects in each of our schools so that they could qualify for national rankings. In fact most of this national ranking emphasis has become a product of politics over the last 30 to 40 years. When I was first considering schools the Ivy's were the top, the service academies just below them, and state schools were state schools each with their own particular fields of emphasis. If you were an engineer from Georgia Tech, Auburn, or Purdue that was equally great, but you were probably going to stay near your own school for employment when you graduated. Aerospace engineering was a bit different. Huntsville, Houston, Nevada, and South Florida was likely to be your destination unless you went to the Mountain in Colorado.

USN&WR and AAU and ARWU are marketing tools for the schools and people have bought into the hype, especially helicopter parents who think they are setting up little Susie and Johnny to be rich.

BTW, schools may get you an interview at a major company, but the grades go out the window many times when during the interview other issues with personality etc. arise.

Agreed.

To put this into perspective, OU would be 11th out of 14 when it comes to the quality of student they attract.

In light of Trammels article maybe the OP should change the thread title to: "Would the Big 12 be better off in the SEC?"

(08-14-2016 12:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  In light of Trammels article maybe the OP should change the thread title to: "Would the Big 12 be better off in the SEC?"

Why would the SEC want all of that dead wood? Kansas State? Really? Iowa State is in Ames, Iowa.....does anybody really know how to get there? Texas Tech? even Texas won't send their marching band to Lubbock anymore....it's not worth the $$.
That merger plea is from a few schools begging not to be left behind. The problem for Oklahoma, Kansas and Texas is that the little guys hold the majority of the votes in the conference.

(08-14-2016 12:44 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-14-2016 12:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  In light of Trammels article maybe the OP should change the thread title to: "Would the Big 12 be better off in the SEC?"

Why would the SEC want all of that dead wood? Kansas State? Really? Iowa State is in Ames, Iowa.....does anybody really know how to get there? Texas Tech? even Texas won't send their marching band to Lubbock anymore....it's not worth the $$.
That merger plea is from a few schools begging not to be left behind. The problem for Oklahoma, Kansas and Texas is that the little guys hold the majority of the votes in the conference.

I've enumerated reasons for why the network would have interest. So, aside a from that, all of this has been like a spoiled child throwing a tantrum because they can't get what they want. I get the feeling from the Big 12 side Texas will do any and everything to try to keep what they want, a fiefdom, even if it is now just to be in a division. OU & KU do have little brother issues. The best I can say for Iowa State is that their fans are committed, they are usually good in hoops, and they add some markets.

Still, Occam's razor says OU & UT or OU and OSU.