In an effort to prevent more essays, I'll try to keep this a little shorter 
The OU-Okie State combo was surprising to me when I first heard it, too. I always figured that the OU vs. TX rivalry would control conference politics, but surprisingly it hasn't. OU's president David Boren along with members of the athl. dept. implied last summer that they had no interest in playing in a conference without OSU. The reasoning is that the board of regents understands how much the state of Oklahoma benefits from OU's notoriety. As long as OSU can stay associated with OU, it's image is exposed on a larger scale, too. Separating those ties would be damaging to OSU over time. So it's not so much about the rivalry or some kind of state pride or any kind of love/hate for the Cowboys as much as its about not hanging the other state institution out to dry. In other words, the Board of Regents, said they won't let OU go out on its own, regardless of how good it may be for OU.
And as far as OU vs. TX is concerned, they've only been in the same conference for the lifetime of the Big XII, yet they managed to play eachother every year for well over 100 years despite being in different conferences for the vast majority of the time. That's why I think it's more likely Texas goes after the West Coast TV and recruiting zones as opposed to the SEC where there are so many schools fighting for the same players. It would work out well for Texas to control it's own Pac ## division as well as milk its TV network deal while it beats Utah, Colorado, ASU, Arizona, UCLA and matches up regularly with USC. On the other hand, they don't stand to make any more money in the SEC or B1G than in the PAC, but would have to deal with much more competition in the SEC, albeit a better match for the small sports programs, and would be completely foreign in the B1G. Living in Texas, I can tell you that there's no interest at all for the fans down here to see "Yankee" teams, and I doubt you'll see significant amounts of Texas fans traveling to colder climates like Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, etc. when it's comfortable in Texas in the fall. Going to Ames, IA is already far enough, and only worth it because it's usually a guaranteed W on the schedule.
Also, I doubt the SEC will ever make the first move in any of this. Mizzou started it last time, and I wouldn't be surprised if they start it up again. They could send requests to join the B1G or the SEC or maybe even the Big East if they think it might increase their odds of a BCS game. I think we all agree that the Big XII will eventually collapse as the remnants of the Big 8 start playing their odds and looking for better shots. Once we're there, I bet we'll see the PAC take their shot again at the TX/OK teams. B1G will match the PAC team for team as best as they can do, and the SEC may or may not expand. They're strong enough they really don't need to if they don't feel pressure to. And until any of these other superconferences start to bring in enough attention to start stealing recruits out of the SEC, I doubt more and more that the SEC makes any new moves.
Eh, but what do I know.... I agree that there's going to be so much wheeling and dealing under the table that there's no way to predict how anything will really go down and we can't put any real confidence that what anybody has said to this point will necessarily be maintained once the dollar signs start flying.
The OU-Okie State combo was surprising to me when I first heard it, too. I always figured that the OU vs. TX rivalry would control conference politics, but surprisingly it hasn't. OU's president David Boren along with members of the athl. dept. implied last summer that they had no interest in playing in a conference without OSU. The reasoning is that the board of regents understands how much the state of Oklahoma benefits from OU's notoriety. As long as OSU can stay associated with OU, it's image is exposed on a larger scale, too. Separating those ties would be damaging to OSU over time. So it's not so much about the rivalry or some kind of state pride or any kind of love/hate for the Cowboys as much as its about not hanging the other state institution out to dry. In other words, the Board of Regents, said they won't let OU go out on its own, regardless of how good it may be for OU.
And as far as OU vs. TX is concerned, they've only been in the same conference for the lifetime of the Big XII, yet they managed to play eachother every year for well over 100 years despite being in different conferences for the vast majority of the time. That's why I think it's more likely Texas goes after the West Coast TV and recruiting zones as opposed to the SEC where there are so many schools fighting for the same players. It would work out well for Texas to control it's own Pac ## division as well as milk its TV network deal while it beats Utah, Colorado, ASU, Arizona, UCLA and matches up regularly with USC. On the other hand, they don't stand to make any more money in the SEC or B1G than in the PAC, but would have to deal with much more competition in the SEC, albeit a better match for the small sports programs, and would be completely foreign in the B1G. Living in Texas, I can tell you that there's no interest at all for the fans down here to see "Yankee" teams, and I doubt you'll see significant amounts of Texas fans traveling to colder climates like Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, etc. when it's comfortable in Texas in the fall. Going to Ames, IA is already far enough, and only worth it because it's usually a guaranteed W on the schedule.
Also, I doubt the SEC will ever make the first move in any of this. Mizzou started it last time, and I wouldn't be surprised if they start it up again. They could send requests to join the B1G or the SEC or maybe even the Big East if they think it might increase their odds of a BCS game. I think we all agree that the Big XII will eventually collapse as the remnants of the Big 8 start playing their odds and looking for better shots. Once we're there, I bet we'll see the PAC take their shot again at the TX/OK teams. B1G will match the PAC team for team as best as they can do, and the SEC may or may not expand. They're strong enough they really don't need to if they don't feel pressure to. And until any of these other superconferences start to bring in enough attention to start stealing recruits out of the SEC, I doubt more and more that the SEC makes any new moves.
Eh, but what do I know.... I agree that there's going to be so much wheeling and dealing under the table that there's no way to predict how anything will really go down and we can't put any real confidence that what anybody has said to this point will necessarily be maintained once the dollar signs start flying.
Comment