Texas A&M is rattling the SEC sabre again because of ESPN 8: The Bevo

[druski_2k5]

Isn't Oklahoma State legally bound to whatever Oklahoma does anyway?

It's time to let the past be the past. If we meet up with Oklahoma in a future home and home, great, if we meet them in a bowl, wonderful. But the days of our conference tie-ins with them are over. Let it be.

Besides, I'm looking forward to new series and match-ups, and so should everyone else.

 

[redblooded]

Isn't Oklahoma State legally bound to whatever Oklahoma does anyway?

It's time to let the past be the past. If we meet up with Oklahoma in a future home and home, great, if we meet them in a bowl, wonderful. But the days of our conference tie-ins with them are over. Let it be.

Besides, I'm looking forward to new series and match-ups, and so should everyone else.

No, OSU is bound to Oklahoma by the fact that they have a billionaire that is very willing to throw his money around everywhere to try and make OSU relevant I'd imagine. In the end if OU is at risk OSU isn't going to drag it down with them, no matter how much of a tantrum T Boone throws.

The rumors are still rumbling on the A&M forums, including 9 figure donations for kyle field expansion if they go to the SEC, Board of Regent meetings to discuss conference alignment, and all kinda of ridiculous conference scenarios like this (trimmed down):

...

Sometime between next week's SEC meetings and season's end Slive will announce SEC is "considering" expansion.

OU to SEC and PAC, choice isn't clear yet.

After OU moves the UT will announce long term home and home deals with OU and A&M and more games with ND and BYU too, giving LHN the inventory to get the cable tier they want in Texas.

VaTech or Clemson if OU goes west. ACC get WVU.

KU and Mizzou to the Big East.

Tech, OSU, and KSU to MWC

BU and ISU to CUSA ...

Like I said ridiculous. For a few reasons. First they don't take into account the arms race one of the 3 major conference going to 14 will cause, since both the Big Ten and Pac will likely expand by 2-4 teams at that point.

Second they seem to think that with 9 game conference schedules Texas will still get its home & home series with OU as an independent. OU won't play that game if they end up in the SEC with A&M, and maybe not even in the pac 12 - 16. If there is one thing OU has been about its making their schedule easier... see dropping the yearly Nebraska game at big 12 formation. In a 14-16 team conference with 9 conference games and a championship they don't need Texas and frankly would be stupid to continue that series at that point.

 

[killer cacti]

What's interesting is that the SEC would take Clemson--I wonder if Oklahoma would steal Clemson's ticket should the Big XII be without Texas and A&M...

Clemson is more like an SEC school than 5 or 6 of the schools in the SEC...plus they need an East representative and a West rep.

Hey, KC. I was wondering where you'd got to. Good offseason?

I think Clemson makes a VERY strong case for SEC membership over Oklahoma. Not sure what the Sooners would do with themselves if Texas left them.

My work now blocks Huskerboard and that's where I did 95% of my cruising on the board while there - when I had a down moment.

Everything's good my way, how bout you?

 

[husker_99]

Isn't Oklahoma State legally bound to whatever Oklahoma does anyway?

It's time to let the past be the past. If we meet up with Oklahoma in a future home and home, great, if we meet them in a bowl, wonderful. But the days of our conference tie-ins with them are over. Let it be.

Besides, I'm looking forward to new series and match-ups, and so should everyone else.

No, OSU is bound to Oklahoma by the fact that they have a billionaire that is very willing to throw his money around everywhere to try and make OSU relevant I'd imagine. In the end if OU is at risk OSU isn't going to drag it down with them, no matter how much of a tantrum T Boone throws.

The rumors are still rumbling on the A&M forums, including 9 figure donations for kyle field expansion if they go to the SEC, Board of Regent meetings to discuss conference alignment, and all kinda of ridiculous conference scenarios like this (trimmed down):

...

Sometime between next week's SEC meetings and season's end Slive will announce SEC is "considering" expansion.

OU to SEC and PAC, choice isn't clear yet.

After OU moves the UT will announce long term home and home deals with OU and A&M and more games with ND and BYU too, giving LHN the inventory to get the cable tier they want in Texas.

VaTech or Clemson if OU goes west. ACC get WVU.

KU and Mizzou to the Big East.

Tech, OSU, and KSU to MWC

BU and ISU to CUSA ...

Like I said ridiculous. For a few reasons. First they don't take into account the arms race one of the 3 major conference going to 14 will cause, since both the Big Ten and Pac will likely expand by 2-4 teams at that point.

Second they seem to think that with 9 game conference schedules Texas will still get its home & home series with OU as an independent. OU won't play that game if they end up in the SEC with A&M, and maybe not even in the pac 12 - 16. If there is one thing OU has been about its making their schedule easier... see dropping the yearly Nebraska game at big 12 formation. In a 14-16 team conference with 9 conference games and a championship they don't need Texas and frankly would be stupid to continue that series at that point.

Obviously you don't know OU that well. They play actual teams in OOC games. Not cupcakes like the SEC does. The Big 12 didn't have protected cross games. If anything they should've dropped Texas since they were losing in that series to play us if they wanted an easier schedule from a historical point of view. If there is one thing you can't say about OU is that they constantly schedule cupcakes like Texas or the SEC.

 

[VectorVictor]

Looks like the Texas A&M Regents are going to be discussing all aspects of a possible move and the Bevo Network at their next meeting:

Houston Chronicle link

 

[redblooded]

Isn't Oklahoma State legally bound to whatever Oklahoma does anyway?

It's time to let the past be the past. If we meet up with Oklahoma in a future home and home, great, if we meet them in a bowl, wonderful. But the days of our conference tie-ins with them are over. Let it be.

Besides, I'm looking forward to new series and match-ups, and so should everyone else.

No, OSU is bound to Oklahoma by the fact that they have a billionaire that is very willing to throw his money around everywhere to try and make OSU relevant I'd imagine. In the end if OU is at risk OSU isn't going to drag it down with them, no matter how much of a tantrum T Boone throws.

The rumors are still rumbling on the A&M forums, including 9 figure donations for kyle field expansion if they go to the SEC, Board of Regent meetings to discuss conference alignment, and all kinda of ridiculous conference scenarios like this (trimmed down):

...

Sometime between next week's SEC meetings and season's end Slive will announce SEC is "considering" expansion.

OU to SEC and PAC, choice isn't clear yet.

After OU moves the UT will announce long term home and home deals with OU and A&M and more games with ND and BYU too, giving LHN the inventory to get the cable tier they want in Texas.

VaTech or Clemson if OU goes west. ACC get WVU.

KU and Mizzou to the Big East.

Tech, OSU, and KSU to MWC

BU and ISU to CUSA ...

Like I said ridiculous. For a few reasons. First they don't take into account the arms race one of the 3 major conference going to 14 will cause, since both the Big Ten and Pac will likely expand by 2-4 teams at that point.

Second they seem to think that with 9 game conference schedules Texas will still get its home & home series with OU as an independent. OU won't play that game if they end up in the SEC with A&M, and maybe not even in the pac 12 - 16. If there is one thing OU has been about its making their schedule easier... see dropping the yearly Nebraska game at big 12 formation. In a 14-16 team conference with 9 conference games and a championship they don't need Texas and frankly would be stupid to continue that series at that point.

Obviously you don't know OU that well. They play actual teams in OOC games. Not cupcakes like the SEC does. The Big 12 didn't have protected cross games. If anything they should've dropped Texas since they were losing in that series to play us if they wanted an easier schedule from a historical point of view. If there is one thing you can't say about OU is that they constantly schedule cupcakes like Texas or the SEC.

I know I've read comments by their AD and coaches a few times that suggest the exact opposite mentality. Maybe its changed lately but the en vogue thing at the time the big 12 was formed was making schedules as easy as possible because undefeated conference play was enough to propel a team to a NC game. OU has followed the exact same philosophy as every other school in that regard, schedule 1 decent non-conference game and 2 should-be cream puffs.

If you think scheduling FSU back when they were down and Bowden's teams were steadily getting worse along with Ball State and Tulsa is somehow any different then everyone else then okay, but I disagree. Those end up looking like big time games because they schedule teams like BYU or TCU (of over half a decade ago) and then lose games they shouldn't.

Oklahoma's probably created more flavor of the month teams in college football then any other team over the last 10 years by playing down to their non-conference opponents.

 

[knapplc]

Looks like the Texas A&M Regents are going to be discussing all aspects of a possible move and the Bevo Network at their next meeting:

Houston Chronicle link

The only leverage A&M has is to leave the conference. They can rattle their saber all they want, but until they actually do something Texas isn't going to budge, or hand over any revenues they generate with the Bevo Network / ESPN deal.

A&M's situation is pretty much all or nothing, the way I look at it. They either join another conference that'll make them more money and level the economic playing field or they stand pat and remain Texas' b!^@h.

 

[VectorVictor]

Looks like the Texas A&M Regents are going to be discussing all aspects of a possible move and the Bevo Network at their next meeting:

Houston Chronicle link

The only leverage A&M has is to leave the conference. They can rattle their saber all they want, but until they actually do something Texas isn't going to budge, or hand over any revenues they generate with the Bevo Network / ESPN deal.

A&M's situation is pretty much all or nothing, the way I look at it. They either join another conference that'll make them more money and level the economic playing field or they stand pat and remain Texas' b!^@h.

Agreed. And that their regents are looking at their options/angles suggests that 1) A&M is finally all in, including their blue-haired boosters, for a SEC move, and 2) they believe the current NCAA investigation won't impact the charter of the Bevo Network any.

 

[husker_99]

Isn't Oklahoma State legally bound to whatever Oklahoma does anyway?

It's time to let the past be the past. If we meet up with Oklahoma in a future home and home, great, if we meet them in a bowl, wonderful. But the days of our conference tie-ins with them are over. Let it be.

Besides, I'm looking forward to new series and match-ups, and so should everyone else.

No, OSU is bound to Oklahoma by the fact that they have a billionaire that is very willing to throw his money around everywhere to try and make OSU relevant I'd imagine. In the end if OU is at risk OSU isn't going to drag it down with them, no matter how much of a tantrum T Boone throws.

The rumors are still rumbling on the A&M forums, including 9 figure donations for kyle field expansion if they go to the SEC, Board of Regent meetings to discuss conference alignment, and all kinda of ridiculous conference scenarios like this (trimmed down):

...

Sometime between next week's SEC meetings and season's end Slive will announce SEC is "considering" expansion.

OU to SEC and PAC, choice isn't clear yet.

After OU moves the UT will announce long term home and home deals with OU and A&M and more games with ND and BYU too, giving LHN the inventory to get the cable tier they want in Texas.

VaTech or Clemson if OU goes west. ACC get WVU.

KU and Mizzou to the Big East.

Tech, OSU, and KSU to MWC

BU and ISU to CUSA ...

Like I said ridiculous. For a few reasons. First they don't take into account the arms race one of the 3 major conference going to 14 will cause, since both the Big Ten and Pac will likely expand by 2-4 teams at that point.

Second they seem to think that with 9 game conference schedules Texas will still get its home & home series with OU as an independent. OU won't play that game if they end up in the SEC with A&M, and maybe not even in the pac 12 - 16. If there is one thing OU has been about its making their schedule easier... see dropping the yearly Nebraska game at big 12 formation. In a 14-16 team conference with 9 conference games and a championship they don't need Texas and frankly would be stupid to continue that series at that point.

Obviously you don't know OU that well. They play actual teams in OOC games. Not cupcakes like the SEC does. The Big 12 didn't have protected cross games. If anything they should've dropped Texas since they were losing in that series to play us if they wanted an easier schedule from a historical point of view. If there is one thing you can't say about OU is that they constantly schedule cupcakes like Texas or the SEC.

I know I've read comments by their AD and coaches a few times that suggest the exact opposite mentality. Maybe its changed lately but the en vogue thing at the time the big 12 was formed was making schedules as easy as possible because undefeated conference play was enough to propel a team to a NC game. OU has followed the exact same philosophy as every other school in that regard, schedule 1 decent non-conference game and 2 should-be cream puffs.

If you think scheduling FSU back when they were down and Bowden's teams were steadily getting worse along with Ball State and Tulsa is somehow any different then everyone else then okay, but I disagree. Those end up looking like big time games because they schedule teams like BYU or TCU (of over half a decade ago) and then lose games they shouldn't.

Oklahoma's probably created more flavor of the month teams in college football then any other team over the last 10 years by playing down to their non-conference opponents.

so what if FSU was down? they weren't having losing seasons either. Same goes with Oregon and Miami. Plus lately they have been scheduling high profile games as the 1st game. In this day and age it's hard to know whether a team will be good or bad. It's not like the Mountain West and WAC have crappy teams at the top.

 

[redblooded]

Isn't Oklahoma State legally bound to whatever Oklahoma does anyway?

It's time to let the past be the past. If we meet up with Oklahoma in a future home and home, great, if we meet them in a bowl, wonderful. But the days of our conference tie-ins with them are over. Let it be.

Besides, I'm looking forward to new series and match-ups, and so should everyone else.

No, OSU is bound to Oklahoma by the fact that they have a billionaire that is very willing to throw his money around everywhere to try and make OSU relevant I'd imagine. In the end if OU is at risk OSU isn't going to drag it down with them, no matter how much of a tantrum T Boone throws.

The rumors are still rumbling on the A&M forums, including 9 figure donations for kyle field expansion if they go to the SEC, Board of Regent meetings to discuss conference alignment, and all kinda of ridiculous conference scenarios like this (trimmed down):

...

Sometime between next week's SEC meetings and season's end Slive will announce SEC is "considering" expansion.

OU to SEC and PAC, choice isn't clear yet.

After OU moves the UT will announce long term home and home deals with OU and A&M and more games with ND and BYU too, giving LHN the inventory to get the cable tier they want in Texas.

VaTech or Clemson if OU goes west. ACC get WVU.

KU and Mizzou to the Big East.

Tech, OSU, and KSU to MWC

BU and ISU to CUSA ...

Like I said ridiculous. For a few reasons. First they don't take into account the arms race one of the 3 major conference going to 14 will cause, since both the Big Ten and Pac will likely expand by 2-4 teams at that point.

Second they seem to think that with 9 game conference schedules Texas will still get its home & home series with OU as an independent. OU won't play that game if they end up in the SEC with A&M, and maybe not even in the pac 12 - 16. If there is one thing OU has been about its making their schedule easier... see dropping the yearly Nebraska game at big 12 formation. In a 14-16 team conference with 9 conference games and a championship they don't need Texas and frankly would be stupid to continue that series at that point.

Obviously you don't know OU that well. They play actual teams in OOC games. Not cupcakes like the SEC does. The Big 12 didn't have protected cross games. If anything they should've dropped Texas since they were losing in that series to play us if they wanted an easier schedule from a historical point of view. If there is one thing you can't say about OU is that they constantly schedule cupcakes like Texas or the SEC.

I know I've read comments by their AD and coaches a few times that suggest the exact opposite mentality. Maybe its changed lately but the en vogue thing at the time the big 12 was formed was making schedules as easy as possible because undefeated conference play was enough to propel a team to a NC game. OU has followed the exact same philosophy as every other school in that regard, schedule 1 decent non-conference game and 2 should-be cream puffs.

If you think scheduling FSU back when they were down and Bowden's teams were steadily getting worse along with Ball State and Tulsa is somehow any different then everyone else then okay, but I disagree. Those end up looking like big time games because they schedule teams like BYU or TCU (of over half a decade ago) and then lose games they shouldn't.

Oklahoma's probably created more flavor of the month teams in college football then any other team over the last 10 years by playing down to their non-conference opponents.

so what if FSU was down? they weren't having losing seasons either. Same goes with Oregon and Miami. Plus lately they have been scheduling high profile games as the 1st game. In this day and age it's hard to know whether a team will be good or bad. It's not like the Mountain West and WAC have crappy teams at the top.

It's the exact same thing as Boise State trying to goad Nebraska into the one and done when they thought Callahan was going to be the coach they'd face (or at least his leftovers). They were trying to schedule a "big name" program that they knew they could beat because the program was down. Notice how they backed out on that since there was no deal inked and Pelini started bringing the team back? It's basically the same thing all teams are trying to make bets on, including Oklahoma in their non-conference scheduling. That's all I am saying.

They also basically strait up said their schedule was tough enough and that they wouldn't want to add a regular non-conference series against Nebraska last year when all the conference realignment stuff was going on in the first place. Which tells me that they are trying to do their best to play the weakest "strong looking" non-conference they can get, just like everyone else. The problem is, as I said above, there is nobody that plays down to opponents quite like Oklahoma and it's bitten them more than a few times.

You're entitled to your opinion on Oklahoma's killer non-conference scheduling, I've looked at it and I just don't see it.

 

[BIGREDIOWAN]

I love watching this all unfold, everyone was giving us crap because we left, but now some of them are seeing why we left. Screw the Big XII, I hope the whole conference goes down in flames.

 

[druski_2k5]

:yeah

Would it even be remotely funny if the conference game that Texas purchased on the Longhorn network would be the Red River Rivalry? I don't think it will be, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did happen, although I don't see ABC selling that game. Also, what if they were to broadcast the Texas/Kansas basketball game on Longhorn Network only? That'd upset a lot of KU fans that's for sure.

 

[redblooded]

:yeah

Would it even be remotely funny if the conference game that Texas purchased on the Longhorn network would be the Red River Rivalry? I don't think it will be, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did happen, although I don't see ABC selling that game. Also, what if they were to broadcast the Texas/Kansas basketball game on Longhorn Network only? That'd upset a lot of KU fans that's for sure.

It's their game vs. Tech. It's all but been confirmed by ESPN themselves last I saw. Seen it mentioned a few places as fact.

 

[druski_2k5]

Ah okay, I had not seen that yet. Sucks for Tech fans.

 

[VectorVictor]

:yeah

Would it even be remotely funny if the conference game that Texas purchased on the Longhorn network would be the Red River Rivalry? I don't think it will be, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did happen, although I don't see ABC selling that game. Also, what if they were to broadcast the Texas/Kansas basketball game on Longhorn Network only? That'd upset a lot of KU fans that's for sure.

It's their game vs. Tech. It's all but been confirmed by ESPN themselves last I saw. Seen it mentioned a few places as fact.

Makes sense--the network is likely only going to be offered in Texas, and it would be simpler to just make the network available to everyone that day in Lubbock instead of trying to get a cable provider in Stillwater to carry a one-time feed.

Still, the move is sending games against Texas down a slippery slope, it can feasibily happen to any of the other nine--even Oklahoma, who self-admitted they are hooked on suckling Bevo teat during the conference realignment.