Big 12 Football 2016

[ljbab728]

This is a good way to start this discussion because it will have a major impact on the Big 12 for the next two years.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/...a-sooners-2017

In a reversal from the day before, the Big 12 approved a rule proposal Thursday that will make quarterback Baker Mayfield eligible at Oklahoma for the 2017 season.

[Bill Robertson]

Good for Baker! BOOMER SOONER

[Bunty]

Meanwhile, many OU fans want to be through with the Big 12. http://newsok.com/article/5501872?ut...n=NIC-Facebook

[Bill Robertson]

But many OU fans want to be through with the Big 12. http://newsok.com/article/5501872?ut...n=NIC-Facebook

I'm one of them. I think there will be 4 conferences in the not too distant future. They will be the PAC, Big 10, SEC and ?. The Big 12 is doing nothing to position itself to be the 4th conference so we need to get out before the implosion.

[Jersey Boss]

I'm one of them. I think there will be 4 conferences in the not too distant future. They will be the PAC, Big 10, SEC and ?. The Big 12 is doing nothing to position itself to be the 4th conference so we need to get out before the implosion.

Right now there is not much difference between the Big 12 and ACC in football, and the tie would go to the ACC based on BB. Game over. OU would do themselves and their fans a favor by joining the SEC.

[Jersey Boss]

Oklahoma and Texas A&M had agreed to allow the Longhorn Network in exchange for the $20 million guarantees in 2010, but in 2011, the reality of the network proved unacceptable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor..._12_Conference

OU endorses unequal sharing of revenue so I see very little to stand on in D-Bo's argument. They had their bite on the apple in 2010 to oppose it and now they want a do over. Texas is not going to walk away from 15 million a year, nor do I see OU agreeing to walk away from the 5-6 million a year they get from the SOONER SPORTS Network.

[dankrutka]

Right now there is not much difference between the Big 12 and ACC in football, and the tie would go to the ACC based on BB. Game over. OU would do themselves and their fans a favor by joining the SEC.

I think the Big 12 is well ahead of the ACC in football, which is driving all this. I think the demise of the Big 12 on the field is silly and people just keep saying it even though the Big 12 is having fine on the field success. Even in basketball, the Big 12 has more than held it's own in recent years. The Big 12 problem is off the field.

[Jersey Boss]

I think the Big 12 is well ahead of the ACC in football, which is driving all this. I think the demise of the Big 12 on the field is silly and people just keep saying it even though the Big 12 is having fine on the field success. Even in basketball, the Big 12 has more than held it's own in recent years. The Big 12 problem is off the field.

Why do you think this?

[dcsooner]

Right now there is not much difference between the Big 12 and ACC in football, and the tie would go to the ACC based on BB. Game over. OU would do themselves and their fans a favor by joining the SEC.

Agree , but b10

[dankrutka]

Agree , but b10

Have fun watching OU-Rutgers one week and then OU-Minnesota the next week. The Big 10 would result in far more terrible games then have ever existed in the Big 12.

[Bill Robertson]

Right now there is not much difference between the Big 12 and ACC in football, and the tie would go to the ACC based on BB. Game over. OU would do themselves and their fans a favor by joining the SEC.

Agree completely.

[Jersey Boss]

This is a good way to start this discussion because it will have a major impact on the Big 12 for the next two years.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/...a-sooners-2017

Based on the fact that Mayfield is being mentioned as a possible Heisman candidate, why would he hang around Norman for another year and forsake playing on Sunday?

[dankrutka]

Based on the fact that Mayfield is being mentioned as a possible Heisman candidate, why would he hang around Norman for another year and forsake playing on Sunday?

From all accounts, he's not expected to ever be a high draft pick. However, if anyone is willing to take the risk and bet on himself, it's Mayfield.

[dankrutka]

My preference will always be to find a way to make the Big 12 work. Currently, it's easy for OU fans to travel to games in Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas. The grass is always greener on the other side. I think the Big 10 would be a disaster. Aside from potentially harming OU's recruiting base in Texas, are people going to be excited to for football games at Minnesota, Rutgers, Illinois, Indiana, Northwestern, etc.? OU could only be playing Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State 2 out of every 4 years and those games are hard for fans to make. A similar problem comes up with all other conferences. A PAC-16 could potentially form a western division with some Big 12 schools + the two Arizona schools, but I would still prefer the Big 12. The SEC obviously gets OU into the best conference in the country (and is probably the best option overall), but I'd still rather keep our ties to traditional and local rivals. Again, the grass is always greener on the other side and joining a far-flung conference brings a lot of negatives, particularly for fans.

For the Big 12 to work I think Boren may need to seriously pursue other conference possibilities and then leverage the threat of leaving to make changes like expansion (I'm personally for adding Cincy and BYU or UConn) and a conference TV network. He was able to force a re-vote on walk-on/Mayfield issue. Maybe this is the start of Boren flexing his muscles.

[SoonerDave]

There was one reporter who tweeted out something I thought was just some Boren effort at sarcasm...in a nutshell, someone asked him about the "Mayfield Rule" revote and OU's future in the conference, and Boren said "He goes, we go."

That said, I just don't have any sense of optimism about OU's future in the Big 12, or the Big 12 as a conference. It's withering on the vine, and I'm not at all sure the BOR haven't reigned in Boren on his saber-rattling with regard to absolute expansion and absolute creation of a B12 network. There's just no doubt in my mind there is a ton going on behind the scenes we just don't know about - even down at Texas, especially considering Red McCombs (one of UT's BMD's) called Perrin on the carpet about being "dead wrong" on expansion.

Boren was unusually reserved in his comments yesterday. I think that belies one of two extremes - no middle ground. Either he really is getting consideration from the relevant parties about the issues he's put out there for the last several months, and as such is treading lightly for now, OR he's been reigned in by the OU BOR. I just don't see a middle ground.

The problem with pursuing a B12 future from a fan perspective is that, yes, its easy to get up to Lawrence or Manhattan for a game, but the problem is that if the Big 12 stands pat, CFB will evolve around it. I think the four-region/64-team structure (or some slight variation thereof) will emerge. OU may or may not have a later, ongoing football relationship with either or both Kansas schools (or any other in the region). Exactly how that future looks is pretty murky right now, and if anyone can tell you they know how its going to turn out, I'd also like to talk to you about buying a bridge in Brooklyn.

All this talk about the absolutism of GOR's and agreements completely ignores the reality that lawers are paid to break these "iron clad" agreements each and every day of the year and twice on Sunday. Big, hairy contract "penalties" are written up to make the prospect of breaking them unpleasant and inherently a thing to be avoided, but generally are negotiated away for some sort of mutual compensation when intractable differences are at hand.

A piece I read yesterday (regrettably, I have no link) was very thoughtful on this issue. It talked about how these conference arrangements are purposely written very loosely to afford "wiggle room" and negotiated exits, and the big legal donnybrook from a year or two ago was a case in point for the exception. I still maintain that the GOR isn't nearly as intractable as some members of the media insist. Yes, its a big obstacle, the 800 lb GORilla, but it isn't insurmountable. Few things legally are, like "iron clad" prenups. They are except to the extent they aren't.

In my heart of hearts, I genuinely and honestly believe OU has a legal nuclear strategy in its hip pocket, and I believe that's in the form of a lawsuit against UT in particular and the B12 in general for a breach of fiduciary duty. And I think the argument goes like this: UT, by virtue of it having the LHN, diminishes/dilutes the value of OU's (and everyone else's) broadcast rights. If Texas refuses to negotiate the LHN away (as a Big 12 network or some other arbitrary entity, they are breaching their fiduciary duty to every other member of the Big 12 not to harm any other member. As compensation, OU wants its GOR back from the B12. OU can even argue UT is harming by virtue of its refusal to expand - every piece of consultant data showing the Big 12's network value increases via expansion is a penny in OU's pot in that regard.

Would OU really go the nuclear route? In just the right circumstances, I think they would. The Big 12 can only get so much stronger. OU can get stronger financially much more quickly in another conference, and I believe an informal exit strategy to another conference is already in place. It has to be unofficial, because OU must demonstrate "clean hands" in its efforts to strengthen the Big12 before going nuclear.

I don't like much of OU's present options. We're hamstrung in a lame duck conference, tethered broadly to Texas' whims - and we have no one but ourselves to blame. I knew from the day the Big 12 was formed that, eventually, we'd live to regret it, and sure enough, we do. We can't recapture the past, but I sure think we can construct a better future. And I'm hoping Boren et al can figure out how to do it.

The path ahead isn't clear or guaranteed, no matter which choice we make. I just have an increasingly tough time seeing the Big 12 as the best of all possible worlds, yet it seems tougher still to see a clear way out. Ugh.

[ljbab728]

Another major announcement today by the Big 12.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/...itle-game-2017

RVING, Texas -- The Big 12 Conference unanimously voted Friday to bring back a conference championship game.

The conference will implement a championship game for 2017.

[Jersey Boss]

Another major announcement today by the Big 12.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/...itle-game-2017

http://www.cbssports.com/college-foo...e-realignment/
During the 15 years the Big 12 did stage a championship game (1996-2010), the Big 12 favorite lost six times (40 percent). That’s the highest failure rate among major conferences. In the combined 120-year history of the old Big Eight and Southwest Conference playing round-robin conference schedules in the wire-service era (1936-95), there were 16 national champions that were either undefeated or one-loss teams. That’s a 13 percent success rate without playing a championship game

[dankrutka]

Another assumption that I am not sure is correct is that a lot of people keep implying that Big 12 problems are/will drag OU down. Is there any evidence that this is true? OU athletics are absolutely on fire with two national championships (men's and women's gymnastics) and two final fours (men's basketball, football), and OU softball entering the college world series at #3 just this year. Historically, a lot of programs have succeeded with subpar conferences (e.g., Boise State and TCU in football, Memphis and Gonzaga in basketball), and many did so without the name brand recognition OU has. Again, I don't even concede that the Big 12 is subpar on the field as I see the conference as equal to any non-SEC conference, but I just don't think the OU-has-to-get-out arguments holds even if the Big 12 was inferior. I am not sure the Big 12 has to be good for OU to accomplish it's goals. For example, OU's 2017 football recruiting class is off to the best start it's had in over a decade. OU is currently succeeding, and there is no evidence the Big 12 is having any negative effect on athletics. Better questions might be, why is OU doing so well currently? And, would changing conferences affect that success?

Of course there are lots of other financial issues that fans don't consider about having to fly the track, tennis, softball, baseball, etc. teams to Indiana, Minnesota, and Wisconsin instead of drive to Fort Worth, Stillwater, or Waco on a regular basis. That has to cost a vast amount more in travel expenses.

[BlackmoreRulz]

B1G's TV revenue will probably dwarf that of the BigXII in the future with them adding the NJ and DC markets.

[dankrutka]

B1G's TV revenue will probably dwarf that of the BigXII in the future with them adding the NJ and DC markets.

TV markets only matter if people in the market care. No one in New York cares much about Rutgers football. Same with D.C. These markets are not nearly as valuable as people make them out to be.

[OKCRT]

B1G's TV revenue will probably dwarf that of the BigXII in the future with them adding the NJ and DC markets.

You are correct because as of now the networks pkg all the Big teams together. So they still get in the homes in NY and DC. The Big XII will never be able to compete with the BigX and SEC in revenues. No way no how. OU to the sec makes the most sense but Stoops isn't having that. Too much competition. Stoops is after Ws and it's much easier to run through the BigXII than it would be the sec.

[MagzOK]

This is a good piece written up today:

http://oklahoma.247sports.com/Bolt/B...ahoma-45678989

[dankrutka]

This is a good piece written up today:

http://oklahoma.247sports.com/Bolt/B...ahoma-45678989

Adding OU, Texas, FSU, and Clemson would put the SEC so far in front of other conferences it would seem to be almost a problem. The competition would be absurd. Is that many good teams in a top programs in one conference good for those teams or is there some kind of diminishing rewards point where exceptional programs could fail to see success? It's an interesting idea though. Texas is obviously the big problem as they'd have to completely change their mindset and give up the LHN.

If just OU and Texas (or OSU or another Big 12 team) joined the SEC I guess I could actually see a west division working well like this:

West:
OU
Texas (or OSU)
Texas A&M
Missouri
Arkansas
LSU
Ole Miss
Mississippi State

OU would be paired with several traditional rivals and the geography wouldn't be bad. Damn. I don't want OU to join the SEC, but this almost makes too much sense.

[Jersey Boss]

This article was written at the same time that A&M was about to enter the SEC. I imagine that these points would still be relevant today.
http://www.foxsports.com/college-foo...-states-081211

4. The SEC is unlikely to add any schools in states where they already have teams.
The reason is simple, the SEC believes it is already doing well enough in those markets. This means all the Florida State, Miami, Clemson and Georgia Tech talk is just that, talk. Similarly for all you Memphis and Louisville fans holding out fond hopes of joining the conference, you have no shot either.

For a school like Florida State -- which has been trying, off and on, to join the SEC since the 1950's -- this exclusion is a big deal. Incidentally, you need to read that link to all the stories about FSU joining the SEC. It shows what a hot-button expansion has been for fifty years.

5. Oklahoma isn’t worth it to the SEC if Oklahoma State has to come as well.
Now, is this playing negotiating hardball or will the SEC truly not take Oklahoma if Oklahoma State is a part of the price?
I'm inclined to believe what I've been told, that Oklahoma State is too steep of a price given the fact that the state of Oklahoma only has 3.8 million people. Effectively the SEC would be doubling down on the second smallest state in the league's footprint. There's a belief that doesn't serve the long-range interests of the league.


So no Clemson, FSU, Texas, or OSU.

OU should either join the SEC, maybe the Big 10, or in the alternative, try to keep the current set up afloat. When the GoR expires for the PAC 12, lure Arizona and Arizona State.

BYU, Houston, et. al will diminish the status of the league to a mid-major, WAC from the late 90's look alike.

[dankrutka]

So no Clemson, FSU, Texas, or OSU.

Yeah, I don't buy fora second that the SEC wouldn't take Texas (if they were willing to ditch the LHN) because they have A&M in Texas. UT would bring the biggest athletic department and fan base in their conference. I suspect the one-team-per-state expansion policy is either a theory or a general idea, not hard rule. It might not make sense for them to take OU and OSU, but they'd happily add Texas.