The old thread on this is long gone and buried now, so figured we'll start fresh.

Announcement coming up of Appalachian St and Georgia Southern upgrading to FBS. They will be joining the Sun Belt in 2015.

Rumors include Jacksonville St, Lamar, and Sam Houston St to move up as well to, also joining Sun Belt, to take them to 12 teams.

Updates today...

Sun Belt will grow by four in 2014 - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/dennis-dodd/21949121/sun-belt-will-grow-by-four-in-2014-)

Announcement tomorrow will make official the movement of App State and Georgia Southern to FBS and will join the Sun Belt. Also orphaned WAC teams New Mexico State and Idaho will be joining as well. All of them will be in the league in 2014.

Some news closer to home. Tulsa will be making the move to the football conference formerly known as the Big East.
Old Big East expected to move on Tulsa - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/jeremy-fowler/21953312/old-big-east-expected-to-move-on-tulsa)

Western Kentucky likely headed from Sun Belt to CUSA to replace Tulsa.

Western Kentucky to Conference USA in 2014 - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/jeremy-fowler/21977761/western-kentucky-to-conference-usa-in-2014)

CUSA may be going to 16. Joy oh Joy.

Conference USA weighing 16-team model - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/jeremy-fowler/22030790/conference-usa-weighing-16-team-model)

CUSA may be going to 16. Joy oh Joy.

Conference USA weighing 16-team model - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/jeremy-fowler/22030790/conference-usa-weighing-16-team-model)

I guess if moving to sixteen teams catches on at the tier two conferences, there will be less we have to ignore.

It seems like there is hardly a shred of CUSA left, they should have to change their name and give it to the former known as Big East football schools as that is where most of the old CUSA schools are this year and most of the rest follow next year.

I still wonder what's going to happen if the Big Ten goes to 16. SEC will probably follow and it becomes a mess for everyone else. I still think Big 12 needs to do at least 11 teams if not back to 12. However, I have a feeling that won't happen until we see the results of what Maryland gets away with leaving the ACC.

Somewhat amusing through all of this...the MAC has remained probably the most stable.

B1G Looking at Vanderbilt as Potential Expansion Target

But relevant to OU is…….


As a side note, two sources have told The World-Herald that the Big Ten has done prior "homework" on Oklahoma, Kansas and Vanderbilt among other schools who might someday be expansion targets. The Big 12 grant-of-rights deal didn’t stop a look-see for OU and KU.

Report: Big Ten Has Evaluated Vanderbilt as Potential Expansion Target - Team Speed Kills (http://www.teamspeedkills.com/2013/4/23/4256822/big-ten-vanderbilt-expansion-conference-realignment)

You know that would be huge for Vanderbilt. They are the cellar-dwellers of the SEC but moving to the Big 10 would bring a unique product to the sports landscape in SEC territory. Even if they continued to be cellar-dwellers at least they would have something different to offer in the sport marketplace.

I would also prefer if OU and OSU were in different conferences. It would improve the sports scene in Oklahoma on every level.

Here's the CBS version of this story: Report: Big Ten did expansion 'homework' on Oklahoma, others - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/eye-on-college-football/22122683/report-big-ten-did-expansion-homework-on-oklahoma-others)

Here's the CBS version of this story: Report: Big Ten did expansion 'homework' on Oklahoma, others - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/eye-on-college-football/22122683/report-big-ten-did-expansion-homework-on-oklahoma-others)

Only way OU bolts the Big 12-2 is if the conference dissolves, and so long as Texas is in its catbird seat calling the shots, implying the conference is content at 10 with no expansion plans, that's not likely to change anytime soon.

I understand why Joe C and David B opted not to pursue other options for OU, but I can't help fearing that the long-term result for OU staying where it is (Big 12-2) will be negative. It is perceived, right or wrong, as a bit of an albatross conference whose member schools exist primarily to serve as artificial satellites to Texas.

Only way OU bolts the Big 12-2 is if the conference dissolves, and so long as Texas is in its catbird seat calling the shots, implying the conference is content at 10 with no expansion plans, that's not likely to change anytime soon.

I understand why Joe C and David B opted not to pursue other options for OU, but I can't help fearing that the long-term result for OU staying where it is (Big 12-2) will be negative. It is perceived, right or wrong, as a bit of an albatross conference whose member schools exist primarily to serve as artificial satellites to Texas.

Agreed. If the Big 12 was serious about long term stability and the ability to have more chances at the Playoff, then 10 isn't the way to go. Of course its hard to say if 14 or 16 will help any. Since it all comes down to selection by committee, there will probably be biases. How big will conference titles (and title games) play into everything. It'll be a mess for sure. I just can't help but ponder 3 SEC teams being selected being the norm.

So as far as realignment goes, here is the cliff notes version...

2013 Season

AAC - Add: Houston, UCF, SMU, Memphis ; Lose: Pitt, Syracuse, Boise, SDSU (last two never officially joined yet)
ACC - Add: Pitt, Syracuse ; Lose: No one.
CUSA - Add: La Tech, UT-San Antonio, FIU, North Texas, FAU, and Mid Tenn St; Lose: UCF, Houston, Memphis, SMU
Ind - Add: Idaho, New Mexico St ; Lose: No one.
MWC - Add: San Jose St, Utah St, Boise and SDSU retained ; Lose - No one.
Sun Belt - Add: Georgia St, Texas St ; Lose: FIU, North Texas, Mid Tenn St, FAU
WAC - No remaining FBS teams.

2014 Season

AAC - Add: Tulsa, Tulane, East Carolina ; Lose: Rutgers
ACC - Add: Louisville ; Lose: Maryland
Big Ten - Add: Maryland, Rutgers ; Lose: No one.
CUSA - Add: Western Kentucky, Old Dominion ; Lose: Tulane, Tulsa, East Carolina
Ind - Add: No one ; Lose: New Mexico St, Idaho
Sun Belt - Add: New Mexico St, Idaho, Georgia Southern, App State ; Lose: Western Kentucky

2015 Season

AAC - Add: Navy ; Lose: No one
CUSA - Add: Charlotte ; Lose: No one

Article on the Big 12's decision to stay at ten: Big 12 takes different path to college football playoff era - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/jeremy-fowler/22123230/big-12-takes-different-path-to-college-football-playoff-era)

ACC is pretty much locked now with GOR in effect, like the Big 12. Of course there can always be lawsuits and settlements. So if we ignore all of the ACC schools, there really isn't much left for the Big 12 to take.

Cincinnati - Probably the only viable decent school out of the AAC. Great basketball program and football has be decent to good from time to time.

South Florida is pretty horrible. The conference seems to want more exposure in Florida, but they aren't the way to go. Florida State really was the only option, but they are "locked" in now with the GOR in the ACC.

Notre Dame - Is essentially all in at the ACC, but they would be quality pick up with a huge fan base. The NBC deal cements them being independent though for awhile, unless they start to have issues getting into the playoff.

Boise State - Ehhh. Really far west, but a consistent performer.

Some people are talking about how the SEC has no locks in place to keep schools from jumping. Though who would really want to bust out of the SEC? No one has really taken on the "Texas" role of being the spoiled brat that controls everything, so I can't see much interest in anyone leaving. The most strategic picks would be the Arkansas or Florida. Neither will leave.

So yeah, not much there. Perhaps on the flip side it will be about the dissolution of the Big 12, which I can't see either. We would need to see a WAC style collapse to void the GOR (I assume). It almost seems it would be more likely for the conference to raid the mid majors first.

Can't help wondering if the legal beagles at the Big 10 have fashioned some sort of highly lawyerly legal loophole on the GOR issue. I mean, the whole point of the GOR was to lock schools down for the duration of their membership. What's the point in looking at a school in a GOR conference? Only thing that makes any sense to me is perhaps some scenario where the Big 10 in quiet concert with other conferences pulls away/cherry picks all the non-Texas members and, in effect, gets them all to agree to leave, thus dissolving the conference and rendering the GOR moot.

Just spitballing, of course....

It wouldn't make much sense for the Big 12 o pick up anyone who is remaining. If Boise went to the Big 12, we'd see exactly what we saw when TCU and WVU came in, a team getting smacked by a much higher learning curve. IF they were smart, they would have gone for Louisville to at least give us more of a basketball presence, since we're not getting anything in football.

And yeah, there's no reason for a team to leave the SEC at this juncture. The SEC is much more profitable and they have the distinct competitive edge at this time.

It wouldn't make much sense for the Big 12 o pick up anyone who is remaining. If Boise went to the Big 12, we'd see exactly what we saw when TCU and WVU came in, a team getting smacked by a much higher learning curve. IF they were smart, they would have gone for Louisville to at least give us more of a basketball presence, since we're not getting anything in football.

And yeah, there's no reason for a team to leave the SEC at this juncture. The SEC is much more profitable and they have the distinct competitive edge at this time.

Louisville would have been a good get for basketball and football. They did beat Florida this year in a BCS bowl.

But either way, if big 12 stays at 10 schools, the schools get a bigger share of revenues because we are only sharing with 10 schools instead of 16 while at the same time our chances of competing for football playoff spots remain the same as anyone else.

Only way OU bolts the Big 12-2 is if the conference dissolves, and so long as Texas is in its catbird seat calling the shots, implying the conference is content at 10 with no expansion plans, that's not likely to change anytime soon.

I understand why Joe C and David B opted not to pursue other options for OU, but I can't help fearing that the long-term result for OU staying where it is (Big 12-2) will be negative. It is perceived, right or wrong, as a bit of an albatross conference whose member schools exist primarily to serve as artificial satellites to Texas.

A conference needs at least 8 members to be a conference.
If OU & KU and Texas leave together for the B1G the BIG 12 is dissolved and the GOR issue goes away.
With those 3 universities and Nebraska there would be familiarity and shared interest. The geographical fit is much better for all than in the PAC.
The CIC and what comes with it would be very attractive to OU administrators and it would help advance the university’s mission statement to help the state.

Both OU and Texas need to play each other in the old Cotton bowl for the fund raising opportunities that the game provides. With the loss of A&M Texas needs its OU game more than ever. If it’s at all possible OU and KU would probably want to move to the B1G with Texas.
But we can say good bye to the Big 12 if OU & KU move to the B1G.

Louisville would have been a good get for basketball and football. They did beat Florida this year in a BCS bowl.

But either way, if big 12 stays at 10 schools, the schools get a bigger share of revenues because we are only sharing with 10 schools instead of 16 while at the same time our chances of competing for football playoff spots remain the same as anyone else.

It hurts in the long run though. If the other conferences decide to expand further, it'll be harder and harder for the Big 12 to compete financially and whenver they revise the playoff deal in the future.

Exactly. The pay off may be good now, but at some point the SEC and B1G will start to take in more money and the actually payout will be better even though there are more hands to fill.

But I'm not exactly sure why the sec and B1G will be pulling in more money. Are you just assuming they will be since they are so big? And didnt one or both of those conferences just renew their tv deals? I'm not sure we've seen the money increase exponentially as conferences add teams. ESPN's Darren Rovell has pointed this out during all the conference realignments the past couple years.

We're not talking about this tv deal, we're talking about the next one and the next one. Media outlets want the widest possible reach, and as conferences pull in more markets, they look more attractive when renegotiating these rates. Right now, with this current deal, there's no arguing that the Big 12 is fine, but in the future with the way the conferences have been playing, the Big 12 has slowly been sinking to little brother status and that probably isn't changing any time soon. The Big XII is fifth out of the six major BCS conferences in total profits, and unless the college football bubble collapses, the gap is only going to get bigger unless the Big XII does something proactive.

There's also a clout issue, and the Big XII has been losing theirs. Ten years ago, the Big XII would have warranted a second automatic bid like the ACC, B1G and SEC have in this new system. But they only have one and now have to compete for another. Those three conferences have a much bigger bargaining chip in the future, and the trend shows that they want expansion. The Big XII has been on a decline these past few years and individual teams may see the SEC, B1G and Pac as greener pastures with more opportunities. I don't think it's realistic to say "well, it's only Nebraska and only Missouri and only Colorado and only Texas A&M." We can't pretend that the Big 12 is immune from what happened to the Big East.

But I'm not exactly sure why the sec and B1G will be pulling in more money. Are you just assuming they will be since they are so big? And didnt one or both of those conferences just renew their tv deals? I'm not sure we've seen the money increase exponentially as conferences add teams. ESPN's Darren Rovell has pointed this out during all the conference realignments the past couple years.

BIG network and the new SEC network that is going to get announced on MAY 2 ..

the Pac 12 and Big 12 will be close to 30 each the ACC will be much closer to 20

the BIG and SEC will both be over 40

Exactly. The pay off may be good now, but at some point the SEC and B1G will start to take in more money and the actually payout will be better even though there are more hands to fill.



That’s when the Big 12 schools not named OU and Texas are gradually going to fall behind in their football facilities, recruiting and winning. They just don’t have a fan base large enough to sustain football success, but when have they. Only OU & Texas has ever won a ligament national title in modern times.

Adding West Virginia was a huge geographical mistake that I still don’t understand.

Adding West Virginia was a huge geographical mistake that I still don’t understand.

It makes less sense considering we didn't also add other teams near them. I always thought Louisville and another school would have allowed the Big 12 to break into two divisions again. But that ship has sailed... for now.

It makes less sense considering we didn't also add other teams near them. I always thought Louisville and another school would have allowed the Big 12 to break into two divisions again. But that ship has sailed... for now.True. I wonder if adding more eastern teams was the plan but somehow it got derailed?

True. I wonder if adding more eastern teams was the plan but somehow it got derailed?

Texas. :)

Seriously though I feel bad for WVU being out on their own little island. Louisville should have never got away, but they are locked into the ACC now. I think we need to go ahead and pick up Cincinnati. They are about all that is worth anything left in the AAC. Though I think we may need to watch the partnership between the Big 12 and ACC and see how that develops.

As it stands now, the Big 12 is the smallest FBS conference. Aligning with the ACC could prove very valuable for both conferences. You could essentially line up a new super conference of 24 teams. Four divisions of 6 with a built in conference playoff. You could also do this with the SEC as well, but it doesn't seem we are aligning as strongly with them.

Big XII / ACC Divisions

Midwest Division: Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Louisville, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Southwest Division: Texas, Baylor, TCU, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
Northeast Division: Wake Forest, Duke, Virginia Tech, Virginia, Boston College, Syracuse
Southeast Division: Miami, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Clemson, NC State, UNC

This is just a quick alignment by geography (as much as possible), but the Northeast Division (which goes pretty south) seems to be memories of the old Big XII North. :)

Big XII / SEC Divisions

North Division: Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Kentucky, West Virginia
East Division: South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Auburn
West Division: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Texas
South Division: Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Miss State, Ole Miss, Alabama

College football: Conference realignment has hit a wall | News OK (http://newsok.com/conference-realignment-has-hit-a-wall/article/3834702)

The rumors heating up again.... This time they have the BIG looking at OU & Texas, probably KU and maybe Missouri.
The new Division 4 is going to be a major driving force behind many of the moves that are likely to happen. It will eventually force this issue rather its wanted or not.

The rumors heating up again.... This time they have the BIG looking at OU & Texas, probably KU and maybe Missouri.
The new Division 4 is going to be a major driving force behind many of the moves that are likely to happen. It will eventually force this issue rather its wanted or not.

What's your opinion? Will OU move without OSU? Will UT require any block moves? IIRC, when PAC-12/16 moves were considered, several of the Big 12 were in solidarity about a block requirements.

The rumors heating up again.... This time they have the BIG looking at OU & Texas, probably KU and maybe Missouri.
The new Division 4 is going to be a major driving force behind many of the moves that are likely to happen. It will eventually force this issue rather its wanted or not.

Is this just another rumor from coal aggy or is there any real substance to this?

What's your opinion? Will OU move without OSU?

In a second..... !
especially if OU can go with KU and Texas. You add that to the BIG and that's a very powerful sport conference that will come with great academic benefits...
It's Boren's and many at OU academic dream come true.

The rumors heating up again.... This time they have the BIG looking at OU & Texas, probably KU and maybe Missouri.
The new Division 4 is going to be a major driving force behind many of the moves that are likely to happen. It will eventually force this issue rather its wanted or not.

This seems really unlikely right now, to get any Big XII teams they pretty much have to do some sort of move so drastic that it breaks up the Big XII completely or it will never work out money wise, with the need to take so many schools why even consider adding Missouri to the mix. This has the feel fanboy of rumors on how to make BIG considered better than like forth in football, this would clearly have then jump the Big XII and who knows maybe even put them above the Pac12 but I would be shocked if there is a way they could position them selfs above the SEC.

Is this just another rumor from coal aggy or is there any real substance to this?

I have pretty strong feeling that due to the Div 4 possibility that this is a lot more than just the typical Coal Aggie stuff.
We already know from reports months ago that the B1G has already been checking out OU and KU.
JMHO

Myth of the Big 12's Grant of rights : Outkick The Coverage (http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/myth-of-the-big-12s-grant-of-rights.php)


Myth of the Big 12's Grant of rights

That a grant of rights prevents conferences from being raided is a myth. The Big 12 is still vulnerable because Texas and Oklahoma are still in play to be gobbled up in conference realignment

This does not have legs. B1G would not accept OU because it is not an AAU school. The only reason it was not an issue for Nebraska is they lost their AAU status weeks before their move. Had they lost it before they applied to the then Big 10, it would have been an issue.

This does not have legs. B1G would not accept OU because it is not an AAU school. The only reason it was not an issue for Nebraska is they lost their AAU status weeks before their move. Had they lost it before they applied to the then Big 10, it would have been an issue.
This beyond a shadow of a doubt has legs......

and it's because of the formation of Division 4 which means we are in a totally new era of college sports.
It means things will be changing.
It's fair to say that nobody really yet knows for sure how it will shake out.

The OU AAU problem is apparently not the big hang up it once was.
The rumors say that most in the B1G now recognize that OU is close enough.... and that with the OU connection to the new GE research center that OU will almost certainly make the AAU with in a decade or so.

Apparently many of the B1G academic types have finally woken up to the importance of big time college sports and know know they can be helped by it. OU has very strong national brand that they know will be a net positive for all.

Also there are strong rumors that Texas has indicated they are interested in the B1G but only if OU goes with them as a package deal. If that's true then adding OU & Texas to the B1G becomes a no brainier for that conference.

The eventually formation of Div. 4 is the key to all this and it's the new factor that hasn't really been a factor until now. It could make the next few weeks interesting because everyone will be playing their cards in this power game. Each university will seek the best possible position going into Div 4. The fall out for the Big 12 teams left behind will also be interesting? Where they land will more less depend on their pecking order.

The part in all this that is being overlooked is that pesky little thing called the grant of rights. To keep the Big 12-2 together, the "grant of rights" was supposed to be the holy grail of commitment glue, meaning that even if OU were to bolt to the Big 10, their rights stay in the Big 12-2. The only way the rights revert is if the conference, itself, breaks up. More broadly, there's no way on earth the Big 10 is going to allow Texas to bring in its Longhorn Network unmodified.

Right or wrong, OU has decided to tether itself to both Texas and Oklahoma State. That's nothing more than a chain of coattails. OU, by every indication, turned down an SEC invite (at least one) because the SEC had no interest in OSU.

What's going to happen? I'm calling bupkiss on ALL of this until I see something happen. Texas will not allow the Big 12-2 to expand back to 12 teams under the current football structure. If all of CFB reorganizes in this new "Division 4" or whatever we want to call it, it makes perfect sense for big name schools to leverage the best possible interest, and in my opinion a midwestern alliance makes much more natural sense geographically than a west-coast alliance. Heck, it even raises the spectre of a renewed OU-Nebraska series.

But, as Jim Lovell said in Apollo 13 regarding their long trip home in their damaged spaceship, "There are 1,000 things that have to happen in order, and we are on step 4." And I'm not even sure we're that far. At the moment, its just rumor. And the very best, lead-pipe-cinch rumors the last time around turned out to be so much hot air.

The part in all this that is being overlooked is that pesky little thing called the grant of rights. To keep the Big 12-2 together, the "grant of rights" was supposed to be the holy grail of commitment glue, meaning that even if OU were to bolt to the Big 10, their rights stay in the Big 12-2. The only way the rights revert is if the conference, itself, breaks up. More broadly, there's no way on earth the Big 10 is going to allow Texas to bring in its Longhorn Network unmodified.

Right or wrong, OU has decided to tether itself to both Texas and Oklahoma State. That's nothing more than a chain of coattails. OU, by every indication, turned down an SEC invite (at least one) because the SEC had no interest in OSU.

What's going to happen? I'm calling bupkiss on ALL of this until I see something happen. Texas will not allow the Big 12-2 to expand back to 12 teams under the current football structure. If all of CFB reorganizes in this new "Division 4" or whatever we want to call it, it makes perfect sense for big name schools to leverage the best possible interest, and in my opinion a midwestern alliance makes much more natural sense geographically than a west-coast alliance. Heck, it even raises the spectre of a renewed OU-Nebraska series.

But, as Jim Lovell said in Apollo 13 regarding their long trip home in their damaged spaceship, "There are 1,000 things that have to happen in order, and we are on step 4." And I'm not even sure we're that far. At the moment, its just rumor. And the very best, lead-pipe-cinch rumors the last time around turned out to be so much hot air.

Realignment, expansion not out of the question | sports.omaha.com (http://sports.omaha.com/2013/04/22/r.../#.UfxcD22wVo8)



Published Monday, April 22, 2013 AT 9:03 PM / Updated at 9:40 PM
Realignment, expansion not out of the question

By Lee Barfknecht

Don’t slam the door on future college conference expansion and realignment just yet.

The trendy instant reaction Monday to news that members of the Atlantic Coast Conference agreed to a “grant of rights” clause for its television and media was that it would halt realignment.

By the schools “granting” media rights to the conference for 14 years, the theory is that it would be too costly for a school to change leagues because it wouldn’t have much of value to “carry” to a new league.

Several old friends in the business of college athletics I talked to Monday said they wouldn’t bet their own money on that.

These people — from conference offices and major-college athletic departments — all agreed that any number of lawyers would be delighted to challenge those deals in court.

The ACC, Big Ten, Big 12 and Pac-12 have such deals.


As one buddy with a wicked sense of humor said, “Do you really think Texas would sign up for something it couldn’t get out of?”


As a sidenote, two sources have told The World-Herald that the Big Ten has done prior “homework” on Oklahoma, Kansas and Vanderbilt among other schools who might some day be expansion targets. The Big 12 grant-of-rights deal didn’t stop a look-see for OU and KU.
Besides a legal challenge, the potential future TV money available could still make it profitable for a school to move.

So what do you take from all this? When the most powerful people in college athletics want something, there are ways to do it, regardless of the contracts and paperwork in place.

Formation of Division 4 is the next game-changer in college football - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/dennis-dodd/22988242/college-football-postseason-formats-evolve-but-catalyst-remains-same)

Formation of Division 4 is the next game-changer in college football

@schadjoe 3m
Oklahoma AD Joe Castiglione on Sirius XM College: I don't believe realignment is over.

More on division 4

Look for Division 4 to revolutionize college athletics - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/dennis-dodd/22847993/look-for-division-4-to-revolutionize-college-athletics)

More on division 4

Look for Division 4 to revolutionize college athletics - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/dennis-dodd/22847993/look-for-division-4-to-revolutionize-college-athletics)

That's just sad. So, they're going to decide who the "big football schools" are and create this Division 4 with them. The logic in this is mind numbing. They are basically guaranteeing that the "big football schools" will always be the "big football schools" and lock everybody else out.

I'd like to know why the NCAA has no teeth in keeping these kinds of side deals from ever seeing the light of day without going through them. I thought that's what the NCAA was for.

Sad. The full blown corporatization of bigtime college football. I say strip the school names off, it would just be minor league football, even paying the players.

Its fine that a news source found out that the Big 10 did a "look-see" on OU-KU in spite of the grant of rights, but there were myriad rumors the last time that the Big 10 was looking at more than one permutation of OU, KU, UT, et al in the fray last year.

It's all well and good to say that UT wouldn't sign on to anything they couldn't get out of, and the simplest, shortest path to that end is a shift that would dissolve the conference entirely. Legal challenges imply time, and the question becomes whom would be the ones to challenge? Are we saying School X would challenge School Y's right to grant it's own rights to a third party? Seems like a non-starter to me, eg Texas Tech going to court to force OU to retake its rights grant from the Big 12. Huh??

Or flip it - trash the grant of rights concept as somehow anti-competitive, ala OU-Georgia and their landmark suit that arguably set all this madness in motion three decades ago? Maybe, but you've got a much taller legal hill to climb there - member schools granted their rights voluntarily to a conference entity this time around, whereas the NCAA presumed to own those rights before. To me, that's a huge difference. It's one thing to have the ownership taken away. It's another entirely to say "Kings X," I didn't really mean to voluntarily surrender those rights.

If all this really were to happen, the simplest way out of the entire grant of rights issue is for the "big daddies" of the conference agree to a "dissolution settlement" (essentially a divorce decree) that would, as a practical matter, "buy" the other members' "Yes" votes for conference dissolution. And I suspect that payout (settlement?) would be mammoth.

The other possibility I can foresee, however remote, would be for a merger of conferences such that the grant of rights would, in effect, become a community property issue. The ugly part of that, however, is that "merged" conferences would have no use for the bottom-dwellers, and would probably do everything possible to have them voted out as members in such a merged conference. Who knows.

Its all speculation at this point. Lawyers, somewhere, are drooling. Maybe something really is brewing and will stun all of us in the next few weeks or months. But, like I said, until we see something more tangible, I'm staying firmly on the sidelines, arms folded, eyes squinting, and unyieldingly cautious this time around.

We'll see.

SoonerDave, Division 4 (a division of the "big football schools") is much more than just changing conferences. A lot more. It's going to ruin college football once and for all.

The CBS Sports article that OU48A posted spelled it out well.

This does not have legs. B1G would not accept OU because it is not an AAU school. The only reason it was not an issue for Nebraska is they lost their AAU status weeks before their move. Had they lost it before they applied to the then Big 10, it would have been an issue.

Not true. It had to have been known for quite a while that Nebbish would lose AAU. It wasn't a surprise that just popped up at the last minute like their credit card being declined at a restaurant.

B1G wasn't my first choice but I believe that Boren would bolt for the B1G without little brother. Yeah, he's been tied to them on all the other expansion stuff but being in the B1G and being associated with the B1G schools is a wet dream to Boren. I also don't believe the GOR is as big an obstacle as it's made out to be. Plus, if they got both OU and tejas, that would effectively end the Medium Sized 12.

SoonerDave, Division 4 (a division of the "big football schools") is much more than just changing conferences. A lot more. It's going to ruin college football once and for all.

The CBS Sports article that OU48A posted spelled it out well.

Yes, I read the article, and I think it is entirely too dismissive of the grant of rights issue.

And keep in mind the underlying, critical point: Conferences and NCAA divisions are two separate things.

The NCAA could create a Division 29 with a 32-team-playoff tomorrow, but it wouldn't necessarily have any impact on the existence and structure of those conference entities called the Big 12, Big 10, SEC, et al. And all those operating agreements, rights grants, the whole nine yards, would still be subject to those agreements. The Big 10 can "look see" at OU all its wants, and OU can be receptive to that "look see," but it still has to deal with that grant of rights issue somehow. It won't just disappear, no matter how much the CBS writer wants to make it go away.

Now, if you want to postulate that the attorneys who drew up those grants of rights included some smart language about grants rights automatically being revoked if the NCAA changed its overarching organization structure of the game, that's valid. Point given. If, however, there isn't such a trapdoor, then the grant of rights issue has to be addressed somehow.

All other things being equal, based on what we think we know, the only way those rights revert back to the member schools is if the member teams vote to dissolve the conference. And the only way the lower players in those conferences that might not even be part of a "Div 4" are going to agree to dissolution is if they get some kind of substantial consideration in return.

I also don't believe the GOR is as big an obstacle as it's made out to be.[/B] Plus, if they got both OU and tejas, that would effectively end the Medium Sized 12.

Not if they don't get the member schools to vote to dissolve it. That was what was supposed to make the GOR such good glue. Schools can't just walk away, because their rights don't go with them. That's why its an 800-lb gorilla.

Now, maybe the attorneys and legal beagles already know exactly how to wave the legal magic wand and make them go away, but right now, as I said before, all we know about getting the rights back is if the conference dissolved, and IIRC that requires a majority vote. The minor players like ISU aren't going to give up what amounts to their life blood without some kind of fight.

The chances of this happenijng is slim or none IMHO. Missouri just joined the SEC so why would they want to leave.

The one thing that always brings a laugh during these discussions is academics. As if thats what really matters when it comes to realignment. This is nothing more than a money and power grab.

The one thing that always brings a laugh during these discussions is academics. As if thats what really matters when it comes to realignment. This is nothing more than a money and power grab.

This EXACTLY. If academics were so important to Boren, why not join the Ivy League?

The chances of this happenijng is slim or none IMHO. Missouri just joined the SEC so why would they want to leave.

It pretty simple.....More money, far more academic prestige and perhaps they think it will be a better fit.
The B1G does a far more for Missouri in the long run than the SEC ever could. This really is a no brainier.

The one thing that always brings a laugh during these discussions is academics. As if thats what really matters when it comes to realignment. This is nothing more than a money and power grab.


Everybody paying attention knows its all about the money and power.....
In the real world that's how things operate at this level and everybody always wants more of both..
Those with a strong enough brand will be included, those who don't are going to be facing the hard reality of being left out.

It will be interesting to see how Division 4 plays out. AAC is fighting hard to get in but they might be locked out. That could mean more schools will want to bolt and get into the majors.

I'm not against going to the Big Ten...at least there will be some more quality football in that conference. I'm not sold on MU dumping the SEC to go up there. However, if KU goes that makes it favorable for MU then because you get conference games with KU and also Illinois.

Of course the other option is that the Big 12 get proactive (stop laughing) and raid the ACC. Div IV is likely going to lead to an expanded play off so for conferences, the more teams the better.

Plus I doubt TX will go anywhere they can't take their network.

Mizzou would jump at the chance to go to the B1G. That was their first choice. When the B1G said no thanks, they jumped to the SEC. Mizzou thinks they're too good for the SEC. They want to appear more academically prestigous so that's why the B1G was their first choice.

As far as the LHN. It hasn't turned out to be the big money maker texas had hoped it would be. A lot of cable/satellite companies aren't carrying it. Longhorn fans are complaining that they can't see UT games. It has become a joke. I'm not saying they can't or won't turn it around. But I'd say the fact that texas runs things in the B12 has more to do with why they won't join another conference than their network does. At least right now.

As far as the LHN. It hasn't turned out to be the big money maker texas had hoped it would be. A lot of cable/satellite companies aren't carrying it. Longhorn fans are complaining that they can't see UT games. It has become a joke. I'm not saying they can't or won't turn it around. But I'd say the fact that texas runs things in the B12 has more to do with why they won't join another conference than their network does. At least right now.

While that may be a reason ESPN might not want to extend the deal, wasn't it structured so they get the same amount if it was a success or a failure.

Missouri would pretty much do whatever they could for a chance at the Big 10, that has always been their #1 choice.

ESPN has some out clauses on the LHN, so that money isn't completely guaranteed. If the adoption rate for it continues to be as abysmal as it has been so far I think ESPN can buy out the contract after something like 4-5 years. UT also has some out clauses as well. Contracts are never written in stone, there is almost always some negotiation room on contracts of that size.

In regards to the AAU thinking, isn't some of their criteria a bit suspect? Seems like much of it is antiquated and does not really apply to the current formation of schools and campuses. I think one of the things that dinged Nebraska the hardest was their agriculture research was funded in large part by the FDA which is not counted by the AAU and the fact their medical school was not on campus, it was in Omaha instead.

Sports Extra - Blogs - Joe Castiglione: 'I don't believe that realignment is over' | Tulsa World (http://www.tulsaworld.com/blogs/post.aspx/Joe_Castiglione_I_dont_believe_that_realignment_is/12-21676)

Joe Castiglione: "I don't believe that realignment is over"

"I know it may not be popular for me to say it. I don't believe that realignment is over. I don't have any evidence to prove my point. It's just a gut feeling."



Jeremy Fowler, Dodd's colleague at CBS, reported last May that the Big Ten "entered into confidentiality agreements with possibly six or more schools to protect conversations about conference membership," and that "discussions were more serious than exploratory."

One of those six schools? Oklahoma, according to the Omaha World-Herald last spring.

I can easily believe that the Big 10 would be talking to Oklahoma and Texas and that both should listen. I really think that the Big 12 has to expand to 14 or 16 or go the way of the Dodo bird.