New Conference re-alignment thread

[Saulbadguy]

The old one has AIDS.

Anyways, Chip Brown from Orangebloods.com reports OU may apply to the Pac-12 by the end of the month.

Oklahoma will apply for membership to the Pac-12 before the end of the month, and Oklahoma State is expected to follow suit, a source close to OU's administration told Orangebloods.com.

Even though Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott said Friday the Pac-12 was not interested in expansion at this time, OU's board of regents is fed up with the instability in the Big 12, the source said.

The OU board of regents will meet within two weeks to formalize plans to apply for membership to the Pac-12, the source said.

Messages left Sunday night with OU athletic director Joe Castiglione and Oklahoma State athletic director Mike Holder were not immediately returned.

If OU follows through with what appears to be a unanimous sentiment on the seven-member Oklahoma board of regents to leave the Big 12, realignment in college athletics could be heating back up. OU's application would be matched by an application from Oklahoma State, the source said, even though OSU president Burns Hargis and mega-booster Boone Pickens both voiced their support for the Big 12 last Thursday.

There is differing sentiment about if the Pac-12 presidents and chancellors are ready to expand again after bringing in Colorado and Utah last year and landing $3 billion TV contracts from Fox and ESPN. Colorado president Bruce Benson told reporters last week CU would be opposed to any expansion that might bring about east and west divisions in the Pac-12.

Currently, there are north and south divisions in the Pac-12. If OU and OSU were to join, Larry Scott would have to get creative.

Scott's orginal plan last summer was to bring in Colorado, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and put them in an eastern division with Arizona and Arizona State. The old Pac-8 schools (USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington and Washington State) were to be in the west division.

Colorado made the move in June 2010, but when Texas A&M was not on board to go west, the Big 12 came back together with the help of its television partners (ABC/ESPN and Fox).

If Oklahoma and Oklahoma State were accepted into the Pac-12, there would undoubtedly be a hope by Larry Scott that Texas would join the league. But Texas sources have indicated UT is determined to hang onto the Longhorn Network, which would not be permissible in the Pac-12 in its current form.

Texas sources continue to indicate to Orangebloods.com that if the Big 12 falls apart, the Longhorns would consider "all options."

Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe held an emergency conference call 10 days ago with league presidents excluding Oklahoma, Texas and Texas A&M and asked the other league presidents to "work on Texas" because Beebe didn't think the Pac-12 would take Oklahoma without Texas.

Now, it appears OU is willing to take its chances with the Pac-12 with or without Texas.

There seemed to be a temporary pause in any possible shifting of the college athletics' landscape when Baylor led a charge to tie up Texas A&M's move to the Southeastern Conference in legal red tape. BU refused to waive its right to sue the SEC over A&M's departure from the Big 12, and the SEC said it would not admit Texas A&M until it had been cleared of any potential lawsuits.

Baylor, Kansas and Iowa State have indicated they will not waive their right to sue the SEC.

It's unclear if an application by OU to the Pac-12 would draw the same threats of litigation against the Pac-12 from those Big 12 schools.

Stay tuned.

[BWillie]

Originally Posted by Wickedson

This list that keeps getting posted is really just ticket sales from what I can tell. The biggest stadiums are all at the top.

Not including TV deals, merchandise etc that create revenue outside of ticket sales.

That's why the bball school numbers appear so low.

It's just cherry picking, but who really cares at this point.

Why else would a school like Iowa be listed alongside Ohio State.

In reality the schools aren't even close in value.

Pretty sure that list is total revenue including TV revenue, because if it wasn't, there is no way in hell the Big 10 basketball schools would be ahead of Kansas. But most of the Big 10 basketball revenues are actually higher than Kansas. The only thing I don't think it takes into account is the Williams Fund. A large majority of the ticket revenue is not actually on that list and is privately accounted for from what I am told. Don't know many other schools that do it that way except UNC.

You are correct about the 3rd tier network Kansas has. I'm astounded it's worth as much as it is televising shitty games against Fort Hayes State.

[tk13]

Originally Posted by BWillie007

I doubt it. Kansas barely turns a profit in football. I just looked up basketball and football revenue figures and KU is third to last in division 1 football profits. Revenue isn't all that much either.

If I was Pac 10, I'd want Oklahoma State over KU. Decent at football, Top 20 program in basketball. Throughout this I never thought of Oklahoma State as being the little brother of Oklahoma the same way K-State is to KU. OSU IMO is a legitimate school with a legitimate athletic program.

OSU also has T. Boone, which most schools don't have. Although I can believe some of the Pac 12 schools like Stanford do care about the academic side of it, which hurts OSU and Texas Tech. I also think all of the fans of California teams would probably rather light themselves on fire than make conference road trips to Lubbock, TX.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by BWillie007

Pretty sure that list is total revenue including TV revenue, because if it wasn't, there is no way in hell the Big 10 basketball schools would be ahead of Kansas. But most of the Big 10 basketball revenues are actually higher than Kansas. The only thing I don't think it takes into account is the Williams Fund. A large majority of the ticket revenue is not actually on that list and is privately accounted for from what I am told. Don't know many other schools that do it that way except UNC.

You are correct about the 3rd tier network Kansas has. I'm astounded it's worth as much as it is televising shitty games against Fort Hayes State.

I searched that site for the source of their numbers.

I can't find it so who knows what those numbers actually are from.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by |Zach|

So, that doesn't include football merchandise either? Oh shit.

I don't know what it includes.

It's a list created by a hot blonde girl who doesn't site any of her sources.

So who knows

[|Zach|]

Originally Posted by Wickedson

I don't know what it includes.

It's a list created by a hot blonde girl who doesn't site any of her sources.

So who knows

False.

The data in these charts is from reports filed by each school with the U.S. Department of Education

[007]

I see that there is no new information here. oh well

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by Guru

I see that there is no new information here. oh well

Its over. Everyone is stuck together as they should be.

[LiveSteam]

Originally Posted by Wickedson

Its over. Everyone is stuck together as they should be.

Who is everyone? OU & UT

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by LiveSteam

Who is everyone? OU & UT

I'm more concerned with the traditions of KU-MU-KSU

But sure. Throw the Sooners and Stacey King in there too!

[LiveSteam]

Hey KSU just ran an option into the end zone. God I hope they take it to THE ****ING U

[KcMizzou]

A little confirmation on MU and the SEC

By Mike DeArmond - Posted on 24 September 2011

I am not big on looking to other reporters to re-confirm what I have already reported as true. But for all those who insist that the Missouri-SEC connection is a fabrication.

Tony Barnhart of CBS (and Mr. SEC to most folk) just said on national TV that Missouri needed to make up its mind about the SEC.

You cannot make up your mind on a offer that has not been made, informal or otherwise.

The interest from the SEC to make Missouri SEC No. 14 is there.

Will Missouri end up in the SEC? Should it?

My personal opinion is that if Missouri and the other non-University of Texas schools in the Big 12 can legislate or initiate change in the Big 12, then staying in the Big 12 makes the most sense for Mizzou.

Think of it this way:

1. Forget the Longhorn Network's cash payout to Texas. Nothing you can do about it but you can legislate what they are able to NOT show on it.

2. For the first time in history, the other eight Big 12 schools actually vote as a block and after grandfathering in the LHN, rewrite conference bylaws to legislate totally even revenue distribution on everything else from this day forward.

If Missouri cannot get that within the next two weeks, then go ahead and take the SEC offer, whether informal or formal.

Four hours to game time in Oklahoma.
And I for one am looking forward to covering a game.

Read more: http://campuscorner.kansascity.com/n...#ixzz1YuaezPdh

http://campuscorner.kansascity.com/node/2078

[BWillie]

Originally Posted by Wickedson

I searched that site for the source of their numbers.

I can't find it so who knows what those numbers actually are from.

http://businessofcollegesports.com/2...rgest-profits/

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by BWillie007

http://businessofcollegesports.com/2...rgest-profits/

No I see that but they don't link it to any real site with data. Most meaningful being what comprises these numbers?

Tickets
Merchandise
TV Deals
Concessions
Donations (Williams Fund)
Adjust for regional inflation?

I'm just curious.

[WilliamTheIrish]

Boys, boys... Let's stay focused here. It's Saturday. Enjoy the games.

[LiveSteam]

Man aTm looks good. Look out SEC