Realignment talk not going away

[TKthunder2 5058]

Bama fan’s mock 24 team SEC.  I’d take UVA over NCSU (do we really need 3 NC schools). Also is seems like a big miss if you have the opportunity to add Kansas to the conference with Kentucky, Duke, UNC and don’t. I know this isn’t about basketball, but if you can lock up UNC/Duke, Kansas should be the next add. Also aggy would hate this setup.

https://bamahammer.com/2022/07/01/alabama-football-future-sec-24-teams/amp/2/

Quote

SEC West

• Missouri
• Oklahoma State
• Oklahoma
• Texas A&M
• Texas
• Arkansas

SEC Midwest

• Ole Miss
• Mississippi State
• LSU
• Alabama
• Vanderbilt
• Auburn

SEC Mideast

• Kentucky
• Tennessee
• Georgia
• Florida State
• Florida
• Miami

SEC East

• Virginia Tech
• North Carolina State
• North Carolina
• Duke
• Clemson
• South Carolina

 

Edited July 3, 2022 by TKthunder2

[DFW Horn 6637]

10 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

Bama fan’s mock 24 team SEC.  I’d take UVA over NCSU (do we really need 3 NC schools). Also is seems like a big miss if you have the opportunity to add Kansas to the conference with Kentucky, Duke, UNC and don’t. I know this isn’t about basketball, but if you can lock up UNC/Duke, Kansas should be the next add. Also aggy would hate this setup.

https://bamahammer.com/2022/07/01/alabama-football-future-sec-24-teams/amp/2/

 

I'm all for anything that aggy hates, but yeah. 3 NC teams is overkill.

Please sweet, baby Jesus make it so.

[Hagbard Celine 11157]

1 hour ago, Left Coast said:

I know everyone is assuming Oregon and Washington would be next into the B1G but this part of an analysis from the LA Times caught my eye:

The Cardinal would be a more palatable West Coast partner for USC and UCLA than the Ducks and Huskies. Both L.A. schools are sick of Oregon with its Nike flash coming into Southern California and stealing top talent, and USC’s and UCLA’s move to the Big Ten has wounded the Ducks.

https://www.latimes.com/sports/story/2022-07-02/big-ten-expansion-impacts-usc-ucla-notre-dame-footballo mybe SC and UCLA might not be so hot on Oregon joining them? Or may even try to actively block them? Wasn’t something I had considered before.

ucla compromising academics for it's athletes to play sports in the midwest is a bridge tree and cal will never cross.

tree and cal can lock down colorado, oregon, utah & washington by playing them every other home game (every 4 years) in LA at SoFi

and thus either tree or cal would have a neutral site game in LA every year

arizona and oregon schools could set up a similar LA rotation

it's also possible for the pac10 to play 9 conference games with a guaranteed neutral-site game in LA every year for each team, which would be 5 games a season at SoFi, more than enough to recruit LA

[bullet 1626]

6 hours ago, SL Xpress said:

I would say as long as Broyles was there it was a big game, and of course him and Royal had a special relationship. When he retired in 1976 and Lou Holtz took over it lost its luster. Arkansas just wasn’t that potent of a team any more. UH when they were admitted ended up winning the conference in their first year in 76, then in 78, and ‘79. They weren’t a rival either, but it was a bigger game. 

And yes, Texas was dominating its conference opponents. I agree that A&M was met with a lot of laughter and indifference, even when Ballard was there. 

So sure, if you’re saying of all the regular opponents Texas fans were mostly indifferent towards, Arkansas was the one they were the least indifferent about, you might have a point up to the late 70s. Even when Hatfield won the conference in 1988 and ‘89 they were mostly seen as plucky underdogs winning with their modified wishbone Hatfield brought with him from Air Force. 

There’s a huge drop off between OU as a rival and anyone else. And thanks to A&M’s bullshit under Sherrill and Slocum, they unfortunately rose to be seen as something other than complete laughingstocks, although let’s face it, they’re still laughingstocks. 

Whatever mystique is granted to the Arkansas series is based on one special decade, and the Razorback fans being over the top with their singular hatred towards the Longhorns. It’s never been returned the way it is for OU. Mentioning the two in the same breath, or even with A&M, is still manufacturing a feeling that simply wasn’t present back then, and certainly not after Broyles quit coaching. 

As an example, no one has ever hated Broyles, Holtz, or Hatfield the way Switzer, Stoops, Sherrill, or Slocum are hated. Or Jimbo Fisher, now. I mean, I always hated Holtz because he was such a mealy mouthed whiner, but it had nothing to do with being the coach at Arkansas. I couldn’t stand his ass at Minnesota and especially Notre Dame.

The Razorbacks have simply never elicited that much feeling in the Longhorn fan base outside of 60-69, and whatever afterglow occurred for a few years after that. But apparently now we’re going to collectively stretch our imagined past intensity towards them simply because we REALLY didn’t give a shit about everyone else. Which is definitely true. 

Arkansas was better than you remembered.  In the 60s, we had the 2nd best winning %, Arkansas was 3rd.  In the 70s, we were 10th (9th among power conferences, ie no MAC, Ivy, etc.) and Arkansas was 16th (11th among power conferences).  In the 80s, we didn't make the top 20 and Arkansas was tied for 11th with Alabama.  It was only after they moved to the SEC that their program went in the dumps.

It was always good to beat the pigs and the games were usually close.  And Broyles and Hatfield were likeable, Holtz not too bad.  Switzer, Stoops and Sherrill were a special level of jackass.  I always felt bad for Slocum that he had to work with aggies.   I remember watching on cable a bit of one of their bonfires.  He sounded absolutely classy compared to the aggy president who rambled on about kicking the ass of those teasips and chasing them back to Austin in their little cars.  Seriously.  The president of a university actually talked that way in public.

[DFW Horn 6637]

 

[TKthunder2 5058]

20 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

 

I feel the same way about most Big 12 games as I do Texas v South Carolina.

By my count we’ll get 3 lackluster games a year is the SEC (Vandy, SC, MSU, Ole Miss, Mizzou, Kentucky fb) vs 4 lackluster games in the Big 12 (West Virginia, Iowa St, K State, Kansas fb) and then we swap OSU, Tech, TCU, Baylor for aggy, Arkansas and 3 historical powers (UF, UGA, Tenn, Aub, Bama, LSU).

Comparing Texas moving to the SEC against USC moving to the B1G is dumb since we’re still geographically located in a regional conference with historical rivals. Oklahoma would have been a better example.

[Valmy77 13567]

16 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

I feel the same way about most Big 12 games as I do Texas v South Carolina.

By my count we’ll get 3 lackluster games a year is the SEC (Vandy, SC, MSU, Ole Miss, Mizzou, Kentucky fb) vs 4 lackluster games in the Big 12 (West Virginia, Iowa St, K State, Kansas fb) and then we swap OSU, Tech, TCU, Baylor for aggy, Arkansas and 3 historical powers (UF, UGA, Tenn, Aub, Bama, LSU).

Ok but we are having geographic rivals and powers in the SEC. Our situation in the SEC isn't even remotely what West Virginia's is in the Big 12.

In fact one of the few things I really like about this move is that we do have tons of regional partners. LSU, Arkansas, A&M, and OU are a whole lot of regional rivals to hate. In fact I don't think I could name four schools we more love to hate. I mean there is Baylor, and while I hate them I don't enjoy hating them. I think we already have lots of regional partners in the Big 12 but this gets better in the SEC, not worse.

That part works great for us. But that West Virginia fan's point is relevant for some of the batshit stuff going on in the Big 10.

Edited July 3, 2022 by Valmy77

[Sandbagging Steve 982]

51 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

Ok but we are having geographic rivals and powers in the SEC. Our situation in the SEC isn't even remotely what West Virginia's is in the Big 12.

In fact one of the few things I really like about this move is that we do have tons of regional partners. LSU, Arkansas, A&M, and OU are a whole lot of regional rivals to hate. In fact I don't think I could name four schools we more love to hate. I mean there is Baylor, and while I hate them I don't enjoy hating them. I think we already have lots of regional partners in the Big 12 but this gets better in the SEC, not worse.

That part works great for us. But that West Virginia fan's point is relevant for some of the batshit stuff going on in the Big 10.

West Virginia has been an Independent for most of its entire history. Their choice. That's what they wanted at the time. They have no one to blame but themselves. Penn State leads WVU 48-9-2 in that so called "rivalry". I don't think Penn State and WVU have ever been in the same conference. Both were Independents for most their history. I don't think they should ever play again. I think Penn State agrees. It's too lopsided in one direction. They've only met about 60 times (that's not exactly an old rivalry by college standards) despite being right next to each other geographically. For most of history, teams had no choice but to play teams within driving distance because of travel and cost restrictions. They used to play glorified high schools for this reason. Colleges, glorified high schools and Intramural squads put together for this reason that don't even exist anymore. Now you understand the only reason they've even played 59 times. Penn State has been playing football for like 130 or 140 years.

West Virginia is a bubble team that may still get a seat at the table anyway. Playing regional programs again. And I'm not sure they even deserve it. One of the reasons they've been left out to date is because they are known to have some of the most classless fans in the country. So classless they were left out of the ACC for that reason. They aren't getting the B1G because of academics. No one to blame but themselves.

The end result with all this realignment will be the elimination of the programs with NO or very small fanbases. Everyone else will get back together and any regional games worth even two pennies will be played again. You just gave an example right here. Texas is actually playing more real rivals and better regional competition in the SEC than it ever has before. Teams in their region that are the same size as them. No more teams smaller than some Texas high schools.  No more classless leeches AKA Baylor and friends who try to undermine, lie and cheat about everything Texas.

PAC has been fighting for nearly 100 years. They've split up before. The name has been changed 3 or 4 times. It's only been called the PAC for like 50 years because they've fought so much and kicked each other out so much the name has changed and changed. Expulsions, bans, breakups, you name it. They don't like each other. Off the field. On the field, you've never seen anything more tame in your life. The only "rivalries" in the PAC are: 

Arizona State vs. Arizona

USC vs. UCLA

Cal vs. Stanford

Washington vs. Washington State

Oregon vs. Oregon State

Washington vs. Oregon

I may be missing one or two, but not much. All those games will still be played. The Left Coast just doesn't have enough power teams and there isn't much else that can be done about it. There's way too much distance between teams out West and there's no solution for it. This has been 70+ years in the making. USC/UCLA hate the San Fran and PNW schools (and vice versa) and have been trying to find a solution for new partners for over 70 years. I'm not talking about on the field. I'm talking about at the administration levels. They fight like cats and dogs. In their histories, there's more collisions between the PAC universities and their presidents/admin/BOR/politicians than there is on the field. They've all been looking to separate forever. Read the history books. Some of them will probably still play again in the B1G but it will be where they can't boss each other around. There will be like-minded schools for the Southern California teams and actual leadership in the B1G to make big boy decisions. 

Colorado always wanted to be in the PAC

The rest of the Big 8 has been trying to get in the B1G since the formations of their colleges over a century ago.

Texas tried both the PAC and SEC several times. Lawmakers are the only reason Texas wasn't GONE many decades ago.

Irrelevance was the only reason ATM didn't join the SEC generations ago. ATM has wanted the SEC since Bear Bryant left them at the altar for Alabama.

The ACC and SEC used to be one conference and split up a long time ago. They still get along just fine.

None of this is new. It's been 100 years in the making. And since OU won their case in the mid-1980's, it's been a race to rid of the small schools that LEECH off everyone and then whine and cry and act disrespectful and classless to the breadwinners. No one outside of their very small fanbases is going to miss them. They aren't rivals to the Bluebloods. There's no more than 15-25 of these so-called teams. There may be one or two casualties that deserved to be included, but not really. And guess what? They are still going to get to play! And make money! And if they are good enough, they'll still get invited to the playoff. Nothing is changing but a restructuring that is best for all parties involved. It will be much more regional but also national than it is right now. It's just a slow process but it's about to finally happen. Everyone will finally be able to get along for once.

 

[pwood220 0]

This kind of spite and pettiness in rivalries is amazing.  Not sure if we'll ever get that back again as people say a decent portion of the incoming arky class comes from TX

I agree - it made me an even bigger Longhorn fan. Unfortunately, by the time I got to UT, it was Arkansas’ last year in the SWC & the football rivalry had fizzled out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[utee94 16065]

6 hours ago, pwood220 said:

I agree - it made me an even bigger Longhorn fan. Unfortunately, by the time I got to UT, it was Arkansas’ last year in the SWC & the football rivalry had fizzled out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not sure I agree, those last two years of the pigs in the SWC, the rivalry was VERY salty.  We whipped them pretty well in Austin in 1990 and jeered the SECSECSEC chant at them, then they beat us in Little Rock in 1991 and their fans returned the favor.  I don't think I would describe the atmosphere at those two games as "fizzled."

Anyway, I'm looking forward to bringing the hate back now that both teams will be in the same conference.  I'll certainly do MY part. 

 

Edited July 3, 2022 by utee94

[immamac 44198]

21 hours ago, SL Xpress said:

I hope you’re well, too. Without Arkansas being a dominant force there was nothing to it. Arkansas faded from national relevance after those heady days. It’s like saying UT-SMU had a rivalry due to the Pony Express days, or UH-Texas have a rivalry because of the run and shoot and the 1990 game. Not quite the same thing, I’d agree, but similar enough. 

The Arkansas-Texas series can be characterized by two things. UT’s overall complete dominance, and Arkansas fans’ complete obsession. During the 70s and 80s one of the biggest problems with the game is that it was always played right after OU, which really was a rivalry game. The team would go into Fayetteville and tend to be woefully ill prepared for how jacked up the Razorback players and fans were to be playing hated UT. And yet they still routinely came out victorious. 

There was never any real build up on the Texas side prior to the Arkansas matchup. But there’s a blood lust frenzy on the Arkansas side before every gridiron tilt. That’s not a rivalry. It’s a narrative being forced because of the games in the 1960s, Mack Brown fubaring the schedule and misunderstanding the nature of the series, and this nostalgic glow for when Texas was nationally relevant on a consistent basis. But when it comes to being on campus in the 70s and 80s, nobody gave that much of a shit any time Arkansas rolled into town any more so than the other conference foes. Most years even less because while consistently a solid team, they weren’t as talented or as good as some of the other opponents Texas would face in the SWC. 

The so called rivalry is being made up. And you’re doing it here, too, when you know better. Heck, look forward to it all you want. That’s your prerogative. Arkansas and the rest of the SEC certainly represents more compelling opponents than the Big 12 members. Of that there’s no argument. But when we talk about the storied Texas Arkansas football rivalry, we’re engaged in myth making, not a reflection of reality. 

That said, the pass to Tony Jones to break their hearts holds a special place for me, too. The first time Texas won on literally the last play of the game, although the UCLA game to keep the winning streak alive came close (there was a subsequent kickoff). I wish it had boded better for David McWilliams’ career, but alas. Ken Hatfield never did live that game down in Fayetteville. 

So much wrong in this post, but it does sound nice as lore. Others have covered it so I won't dogpile. 

After ND chooses I think the acceleration happens and we see GOR problems largely go away. 

[SL Xpress 7608]

2 minutes ago, immamac said:

So much wrong in this post, but it does sound nice as lore. Others have covered it so I won't dogpile. 

After ND chooses I think the acceleration happens and we see GOR problems largely go away. 

I do not agree with how others are covering it. Arkansas wasn't a big deal. Period the end. Outside of the magical 60s. We're making something up that wasn't there. Dogpile all you want.

The winning percentages don't tell the whole story. They feasted on the weak opponents in the SWC, but lost to just about anyone they faced with elite talent. They rarely won the conference. They had the huge blowout of an outstanding OU team in the '78 Orange Bowl when Holtz suspended several of his best players right before the game. Outside of that they simply weren't that impressive. They lost their 2 Cotton Bowl appearances under Hatfield. They got blown out by OU in the '87 Orange Bowl (admittedly, a juggernaut of a team). Holtz was fired because he could never win the conference. 

They ran a conservative never pass triple option offense under both Holtz and Hatfield that helped make them a solid opponent, but they were never anything special. They were the plucky undersized try hards who recruited undervalued players out of Texas to bolster the best players they automatically grabbed out of their backyard each year. The biggest compliment I can give them is that they won without cheating in an era in the SWC plus the two schools in Oklahoma when everyone in the region outside of them, Texas, Baylor, and Rice were cheating out of their gourd (and TCU once Wacker got there). 

Look, it's obvious people want to mythologize this stuff, so go right ahead. As I said before, the best that can be said about the so called Arkansas rivalry from the Texas side is that we were less indifferent about the Razorbacks than the Bears, Mustangs, Cougars, Owls, Horned Frogs, Red Raiders, and Aggies (until Sherrill/Slocum). So if that makes for a rich and storied rivalry, you got me. 

[MAUFRAIS 6731]

So all you cared about was OU?

[XOVERX 5]

9 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

I do not agree with how others are covering it. Arkansas wasn't a big deal. Period the end. Outside of the magical 60s. We're making something up that wasn't there. Dogpile all you want.

The winning percentages don't tell the whole story. They feasted on the weak opponents in the SWC, but lost to just about anyone they faced with elite talent. They rarely won the conference. They had the huge blowout of an outstanding OU team in the '78 Orange Bowl when Holtz suspended several of his best players right before the game. Outside of that they simply weren't that impressive. They lost their 2 Cotton Bowl appearances under Hatfield. They got blown out by OU in the '87 Orange Bowl (admittedly, a juggernaut of a team). Holtz was fired because he could never win the conference. 

They ran a conservative never pass triple option offense under both Holtz and Hatfield that helped make them a solid opponent, but they were never anything special. They were the plucky undersized try hards who recruited undervalued players out of Texas to bolster the best players they automatically grabbed out of their backyard each year. The biggest compliment I can give them is that they won without cheating in an era in the SWC plus the two schools in Oklahoma when everyone in the region outside of them, Texas, Baylor, and Rice were cheating out of their gourd (and TCU once Wacker got there). 

Look, it's obvious people want to mythologize this stuff, so go right ahead. As I said before, the best that can be said about the so called Arkansas rivalry from the Texas side is that we were less indifferent about the Razorbacks than the Bears, Mustangs, Cougars, Owls, Horned Frogs, Red Raiders, and Aggies (until Sherrill/Slocum). So if that makes for a rich and storied rivalry, you got me. 

The pig mythology didn’t spring fully formed from Zeus’ head, lol.

Nobody misses PhxHorn as much as you do; still, I wish he was here to weigh in on this argument.

[utee94 16065]

9 minutes ago, MAUFRAIS said:

So all you cared about was OU?

Apparently.  What a dumb way to approach college football.  And not at all representative of  UT fans in general.

[wildturkey8 24]

21 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

I do not agree with how others are covering it. Arkansas wasn't a big deal. Period the end. Outside of the magical 60s. We're making something up that wasn't there. Dogpile all you want.

The winning percentages don't tell the whole story. They feasted on the weak opponents in the SWC, but lost to just about anyone they faced with elite talent. They rarely won the conference. They had the huge blowout of an outstanding OU team in the '78 Orange Bowl when Holtz suspended several of his best players right before the game. Outside of that they simply weren't that impressive. They lost their 2 Cotton Bowl appearances under Hatfield. They got blown out by OU in the '87 Orange Bowl (admittedly, a juggernaut of a team). Holtz was fired because he could never win the conference. 

They ran a conservative never pass triple option offense under both Holtz and Hatfield that helped make them a solid opponent, but they were never anything special. They were the plucky undersized try hards who recruited undervalued players out of Texas to bolster the best players they automatically grabbed out of their backyard each year. The biggest compliment I can give them is that they won without cheating in an era in the SWC plus the two schools in Oklahoma when everyone in the region outside of them, Texas, Baylor, and Rice were cheating out of their gourd (and TCU once Wacker got there). 

Look, it's obvious people want to mythologize this stuff, so go right ahead. As I said before, the best that can be said about the so called Arkansas rivalry from the Texas side is that we were less indifferent about the Razorbacks than the Bears, Mustangs, Cougars, Owls, Horned Frogs, Red Raiders, and Aggies (until Sherrill/Slocum). So if that makes for a rich and storied rivalry, you got me. 

You have lost the argument, you best sue for peace.

[The Dog 44771]

It’s paywalled but my question is will ESPN really pay for OU to move earlier?

 

[Francisco 2.0 32542]

13 minutes ago, The Dog said:

It’s paywalled but my question is will ESPN really pay for OU to move earlier?

 

They already did a few months back when they entered into a long term deal with OU to carry their Tier 3 content.  

Terms were "undisclosed".  Meaning, whatever ESPN agreed to pay is probably the same amount it is going to take to leave the Big 12. 

 

[DFW Horn 6637]

37 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

They already did a few months back when they entered into a long term deal with OU to carry their Tier 3 content.  

Terms were "undisclosed".  Meaning, whatever ESPN agreed to pay is probably the same amount it is going to take to leave the Big 12. 

Wouldn't that info be available thru FOIA? I'm all for getting out early, though.

[jdhorn92 1587]

I could see SEC  going to 20 as a result of the recent moves.

West :

Texas, OU, OSU, TAMU, ARK, Mizzou, LSU, Tech, Baylor, TCU

East:

UF, UGA, Bama, Auburn, MSU, Ole Miss, UK, USC, TN, Vandy

9 conf games, final 4 playoff , Im guessing top 2 division winners and perhaps 2 at large (in case one division is top heavy)

In BB you would play your division home and home and play 1 game vs the other side.  18+ 10 = 28 conf games, that may be too many, if so, play the half the other side for 23.  We played 22 iirc when we had 12 teams

Edited July 3, 2022 by jdhorn92

[Poolflood 845]

6 minutes ago, jdhorn92 said:

I could see SEC  going to 20 as a result of the recent moves.

West :

Texas, OU, OSU, TAMU, ARK, Mizzou, LSU, Tech, Baylor, TCU, UH

East:

UF, UGA, Bama, Auburn, MSU, Ole Miss, UK, USC, TN, Vandy

9 conf games, final 4 playoff , Im guessing top 2 division winners and perhaps 2 at large (in case one division is top heavy)

 

 

[LTtxfan 49906]

19 minutes ago, jdhorn92 said:

I could see SEC  going to 20 as a result recent moves.

West :  Texas, OU, OSU, TAMU, ARK, Mizzou, LSU, Tech, Baylor, TCU

 

Edited July 3, 2022 by LTtxfan

[Thiefery 5108]

24 minutes ago, jdhorn92 said:

I could see SEC  going to 20 as a result of the recent moves.

West :

Texas, OU, OSU, TAMU, ARK, Mizzou, LSU, Tech, Baylor, TCU

East:

UF, UGA, Bama, Auburn, MSU, Ole Miss, UK, USC, TN, Vandy

9 conf games, final 4 playoff , Im guessing top 2 division winners and perhaps 2 at large (in case one division is top heavy)

In BB you would play your division home and home and play 1 game vs the other side.  18+ 10 = 28 conf games, that may be too many, if so, play the half the other side for 23.  We played 22 iirc when we had 12 teams

[66BUFF 2608]

43 minutes ago, jdhorn92 said:

I could see SEC  going to 20 as a result of the recent moves.

West :

Texas, OU, OSU, TAMU, ARK, Mizzou, LSU, Tech, Baylor, TCU

East:

UF, UGA, Bama, Auburn, MSU, Ole Miss, UK, USC, TN, Vandy

9 conf games, final 4 playoff , Im guessing top 2 division winners and perhaps 2 at large (in case one division is top heavy)

In BB you would play your division home and home and play 1 game vs the other side.  18+ 10 = 28 conf games, that may be too many, if so, play the half the other side for 23.  We played 22 iirc when we had 12 teams

 

[Francisco 2.0 32542]

44 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

Wouldn't that info be available thru FOIA? I'm all for getting out early, though.

 

I would think so, and maybe someone else has dredged that up for the world to see.  Here's the press release:

 

https://soonersports.com/news/2022/5/5/athletics-espn-and-the-university-of-oklahoma-announce-multi-year-soonervision-on-espn-agreement.aspx

 

Quote

NORMAN — ESPN+ and the University of Oklahoma announced today a multi-year agreement for SoonerVision on ESPN+ that will include more than 100 annual live events, studio programming and archival content. ESPN+ will stream one regular season college football game and the annual Oklahoma spring football game, as well as more than 100 additional competitions across men's and women's basketball and varsity Olympic sports, including Oklahoma's NCAA champion women's gymnastics and softball programs. On top of live game programming, SoonerVision on ESPN+ will also include classic content, coaches shows, pro days, pregame shows and more.
 

 

Quote

"Given the overwhelming size and passion of the Sooners fan base, we are thrilled that ESPN+ is partnering with Oklahoma to create SoonerVision on ESPN+, the most expansive agreement ESPN+ has with an individual university athletics program," said OU Vice President and Athletics Director Joe Castiglione. "SoonerVision on ESPN+ builds upon our previous media successes by offering over 1,000 hours annually of live OU sports events and other programming to ESPN+'s growing subscriber base of more than 21.3 million. As a result, OU fans will now have an easily accessible year-round media home on all their screens."
 

 

And from a Yahoo article:

 

Quote

The preexisting relationship between Oklahoma, the Big12 and ESPN played into the decision, too. ESPN is “carrying a lot of [OU] games on linear television” Berke said, which makes the tri-cast model possible. Financial considerations (the school was believed to be earning $5-10 million/year under the terms of the old deal), marketing resources, “and the fact there is only going to be a greater relationship between Oklahoma and ESPN in the years to come [when the school moves to the SEC]” were also factors in the move.

OU’s Tier 3 rights are a logical addition for ESPN. It is content the most passionate Oklahoma fans will pay for, and some of the programming could potentially be elevated to and used by an ESPN-owned linear network.

Once OU joins the SEC, it will fold the bulk of its Tier 3 programming into the SEC’s agreements and platforms. But there is a chance SoonerVision could still exist in some capacity. Castiglione said it remains to be seen how the SEC handles any member non-event programming that does not have a home on one of its channels.

 

[SL Xpress 7608]

1 hour ago, wildturkey8 said:

You have lost the argument, you best sue for peace.

 

I've lost countless arguments I wasn't wrong about. That's the nature of interacting on internet forums. It's never bothered me to post as a minority of one. I've also been wrong many times and stubbornly held out I wasn't. But I'm certainly not wrong about this one. But you guys enjoy your fanciful Arkansas rivalry. Oh how I long for the days when the whole student body would shimmer with excitement that the Hogs were coming to town. The week after the OU game. My goodness the campus was abuzz with excitement. Every year! I yearn for those days to be renewed again, and hark! On the horizon! Here they come yet again! How titillating!

[jdhorn92 1587]

10 minutes ago, 66BUFF said:

 

Ouch, was it that bad of a take?  I guess so.

[DFW Horn 6637]

59 minutes ago, jdhorn92 said:

I could see SEC  going to 20 as a result of the recent moves.

West :

Texas, OU, OSU, TAMU, ARK, Mizzou, LSU, Tech, Baylor, TCU NC State, VT, FSU

 

If and when the ACC collapses, I suspect UNC and UVA will be B1G bound. Maybe Duke, too.

Tech vs OSU is a toss up for me. Whose fan base is bigger/better?

[DFW Horn 6637]

4 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

If and when the ACC collapses, I suspect UNC and UVA will be B1G bound. Maybe Duke, too.

Tech vs OSU is a toss up for me. Whose fan base is bigger/better?

My 20-team SEC would look more like this.

West :

Texas, OU, A&M, ARK, Mizzou, LSU, Tech, Ole Miss, Miss St, Vandy

East:

UF, UGA, Bama, Auburn, UK, USC, TN, FSU, NC State, VT

[Vertigo 20461]

9 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

If and when the ACC collapses, I suspect UNC and UVA will be B1G bound. Maybe Duke, too.

Tech vs OSU is a toss up for me. Whose fan base is bigger/better?

One thing I had forgotten about is that Mack was vehemently against any moves to the SEC because he didnt want to have to compete with dirty recruiting. Now with him sitting at UNC, I could see him really trying to steer the ship to the B1G if they have any choice whatsoever. If UNC does go SEC, then I predict Mack bows out prior to 2024.

Edited July 3, 2022 by Vertigo

[DFW Horn 6637]

Just now, Vertigo said:

One thing I had forgotten about is that Mack was vehemently against any moves to the SEC because he didnt want to have to compete with dirty recruiting. Now with him sitting at UNC, I could see him really trying to steer the ship to the B1G if they have any choice whatsoever. If UNC does go SEC, then I predict Mack bows out prior to 2024.

With NIL, "dirty recruiting" isn't as pervasive. Only aggy is dumb enough to get caught for brazen stupidity. Regardless, the NCAA won't do anything about it.

Mack doesn't have much time left, anyway.

[DFW Horn 6637]

7 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

My 20-team SEC would look more like this.

West :

Texas, OU, A&M, ARK, Mizzou, LSU, Tech, Ole Miss, Miss St, Vandy

East:

UF, UGA, Bama, Auburn, UK, USC, TN, FSU, NC State, VT

More likely, it'd be four 5-team pods

Southwest - UT, A&M, Tech, OU, Arky

West - LSU, Ole Miss, Miss St, Mizzou, UK

East - Bama, Auburn, Vandy, UF, TN

Atlantic - UGA, USC, FSU, NC State, VT

[billfromlaketravis 11784]

36 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

More likely, it'd be four 5-team pods

Southwest - UT, A&M, Tech, OU, Arky

West - LSU, Ole Miss, Miss St, Mizzou, UK

East - Bama, Auburn, Vandy, UF, TN

Atlantic - UGA, USC, FSU, NC State, VT

Yeah, f*** that. 

[DFW Horn 6637]

Just now, billfromlaketravis said:

Yeah, f*** that. 

I'd rather the SEC stay at 16 teams, too. Pods and divisions don't make a shit to me, as long as we play OU, Arky, and aggy every year.

[billfromlaketravis 11784]

[DFW Horn 6637]

54 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

More likely, it'd be four 5-team pods

Southwest - UT, A&M, Tech, OU, Arky

West - LSU, Ole Miss, Miss St, Mizzou, UK

East - Bama, Auburn, Vandy, UF, TN

Atlantic - UGA, USC, FSU, NC State, VT, Clemson

Brainfart...FML

@billfromlaketravis is right. Fuck all this. Back to pre-party drinking.

[billfromlaketravis 11784]

The DC fanbase remains enigmatic. I guess it’s a Nationals town now? The problem with DC is nobody is from there, so adding VA Tech doesn’t do shit for the SEC. Hopefully they’re smart enough to figure that out. 
 

NC State is at best the third most popular school in the 10th most populous state. 
 

I guess you could make football arguments for Clemson, FSU, and Miami. 

 

[bullet 1626]

3 hours ago, SL Xpress said:

I do not agree with how others are covering it. Arkansas wasn't a big deal. Period the end. Outside of the magical 60s. We're making something up that wasn't there. Dogpile all you want.

The winning percentages don't tell the whole story. They feasted on the weak opponents in the SWC, but lost to just about anyone they faced with elite talent. They rarely won the conference. They had the huge blowout of an outstanding OU team in the '78 Orange Bowl when Holtz suspended several of his best players right before the game. Outside of that they simply weren't that impressive. They lost their 2 Cotton Bowl appearances under Hatfield. They got blown out by OU in the '87 Orange Bowl (admittedly, a juggernaut of a team). Holtz was fired because he could never win the conference. 

They ran a conservative never pass triple option offense under both Holtz and Hatfield that helped make them a solid opponent, but they were never anything special. They were the plucky undersized try hards who recruited undervalued players out of Texas to bolster the best players they automatically grabbed out of their backyard each year. The biggest compliment I can give them is that they won without cheating in an era in the SWC plus the two schools in Oklahoma when everyone in the region outside of them, Texas, Baylor, and Rice were cheating out of their gourd (and TCU once Wacker got there). 

Look, it's obvious people want to mythologize this stuff, so go right ahead. As I said before, the best that can be said about the so called Arkansas rivalry from the Texas side is that we were less indifferent about the Razorbacks than the Bears, Mustangs, Cougars, Owls, Horned Frogs, Red Raiders, and Aggies (until Sherrill/Slocum). So if that makes for a rich and storied rivalry, you got me. 

You aren't right about anything.  Arkansas cheated too, they just didn't get caught.  My Dad knew a guy who was making 10k a year playing for Arkansas way back in the 50s.

[billfromlaketravis 11784]

The SEC played the long game to drag Texas into the conference. Adding Piggy 30 years ago. Adding Aggy in 2012. Flirting with OU for the better part of a decade. 
 

Well done. Take away our rivals until we have to join. I’m sure they are many that office in the Tower that are disgusted with SEC affiliation. 

[SL Xpress 7608]

16 minutes ago, bullet said:

You aren't right about anything.  Arkansas cheated too, they just didn't get caught.  My Dad knew a guy who was making 10k a year playing for Arkansas way back in the 50s.

I don’t know anything because your Dad knew an Arkansas player was paid $10k a year in the 50s? What kind of horse shit response is that?

I’m talking about the 70s and 80s, when Switzer took illlicit recruiting - which had always been a Sooner specialty anyway, befitting their namesake - to a new level, with their athletic dorm, their new cars, their cash payouts after every game. 

Jimmy Johnson followed suit at Oklahoma State. And yes, it’s not coincidence that both of them played for Broyles at Arkansas. Pat Jones ran the system after that. 

In the SWC F.A. Dry at TCU was one of the first to take under the table payments to a new level, but he was such a terrible coach it didn’t matter. Ron Meyer transformed SMU, followed by Bobby Collins. And of course A&M paid Sherrill a record $1m over 6 years to bring that cheating bastard down from #2 Pittsburgh (they had actually offered Bo Schembechler at Michigan prior to that).

As someone who followed recruiting obsessively it was patently obvious Arkansas was never cheating at the level those programs were, regardless of how much your Dad’s friend was paid in the 50s. Under Holtz and Hatfield they went after athletes in Texas who tended to be a little more lightly regarded than the top players. 

[Dirk X West 772]

25 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Well done. Take away our rivals until we have to join. I’m sure they are many that office in the Tower that are disgusted with SEC affiliation. 

lol. Lil' Jay Hartzell an CDC are happily counting their money, and I doubt Jay has the slightest problem casting UT's lot with all the red state flagships.

[CooterBrown 18272]

So much wrong in this post, but it does sound nice as lore. Others have covered it so I won't dogpile. 
After ND chooses I think the acceleration happens and we see GOR problems largely go away. 

It’s probably why we haven’t paid the exit fee yet. Why pay when when can go for free in a few months when the other 3 P5 conferences cease to exist.

[LTtxfan 49906]

41 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

The DC fanbase remains enigmatic. The problem with DC is nobody is from there, so adding VA Tech doesn’t do shit for the SEC. Hopefully they’re smart enough to figure that out. 

NC State is at best the third most popular school in the 10th most populous state. 

I guess you could make football arguments for Clemson, FSU, and Miami. 

 

love the night games at Va Tech are crazy for Hokie fans...

"A crowd at Virginia Tech got so hyped by Metallica's 'Enter Sandman' it registered on a seismograph"

https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/a-crowd-at-virginia-tech-got-so-hyped-by-metallicas-enter-sandman-it-registered-on-a-seismograph/ar-AAOj0dE

Love that Mack Brown does not look happy in this pregame video... 😋

[TKthunder2 5058]

Florida St, Clemson, UNC, and UVA are invites 1-4.

As much as UNC and UVA may want to go to the Big Ten with Maryland, joining a coast to coast conference with Rutgers isn’t as appealing as it once was.  Add in that the Big Ten may not have many spots left for tag-a-longs and I could see them choosing the SEC which offers a more regional conference with same/better money and they have the ability to bring their partner like Duke/VT.

[SimkinsMan 4544]

10 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

Florida St, Clemson, UNC, and UVA are invites 1-4.

As much as UNC and UVA may want to go to the Big Ten with Maryland, joining a coast to coast conference with Rutgers isn’t as appealing as it once was.  Add in that the Big Ten may not have many spots left for tag-a-longs and I could see them choosing the SEC which offers a more regional conference with same/better money and they have the ability to bring their partner like Duke/VT.

Yes, if we could stop the Arkansas rivalry talk for a hot minute, raiding the ACC does seem like the best option. 

Does anyone have any intel on whether Florida would be successful in blocking Florida State? It seems the answer would be no. 

And are UVA and VT a "package deal?"

[utee94 16065]

Why should the SEC expand beyond 16?  Just because the B1G might do so?  

[billfromlaketravis 11784]

2 minutes ago, SimkinsMan said:

Yes, if we could stop the Arkansas rivalry talk for a hot minute, raiding the ACC does seem like the best option. 

Does anyone have any intel on whether Florida would be successful in blocking Florida State? It seems the answer would be no. 

And are UVA and VT a "package deal?"

Why is it a good option? The only reason the SEC would do it is to block the Big Ten. 
 

Additionally, ESPN, probably the most powerful entity in realignment, has a sweetheart deal with the ACC. They’ll be between agnostic to aggressively opposed to the SEC expanding past 16. 

[Trey3216 15450]

On 7/1/2022 at 10:25 AM, statsman said:

No. UW, Oregon, Cal and Stanford are a hell of a lot better than any four of the B12 leftovers. You have history, fan support, TV attractiveness, big stadiums, academic quality…

Fan support!? At Cal?!  

 

[BigHornedLurker 2107]

21 hours ago, totallynotabuttpirate said:

I remember her. 

Daddy ?

[utee94 16065]

6 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

Fan support!? At Cal?!  

 

Or Stanford????