dbackjon wrote:
Quinn wrote:
seanbo wrote:
dbackjon wrote:
Quinn wrote:
Doesn't take too much reading between the lines. If/when the SEC goes to 13, the path is set for 14. And at 14, there is the risk that Oklahoma/OSU could be 15/16 at some point. Only way around that is to be proactive in bringing in OU/OSU for 14 and show them the big profit boost. That move would hopefully for the P14, open the door for texas to join (with TTech) for a Pac16.
Make no mistake, P12 is happy at 12. But if they don't bring in Oklahoma/OSU, they run the risk of those schools going to SEC with perhaps Texas as some point.
And the reality is that while Oklahoma might not seem like a huge get (with OSU), the pair is the best option the Pac12 will have in the region. Kansas? Missouri? Boise St? UNLV? New Mexico? None are close to OU. So it's a matter of moving at a time when you CAN since if you wait, it's too late and there are no backups. That's why it does appear that even if for the 2013 season, the Pac-12 would accept OU/OSU if they apply for the Pac12 first. Texas would be a bonus...a HUGE bonus, but not required for a Pac14 to happen.
The question is - is a PAC-14 with OU/OSU better than a current PAC-12? I think a PAC-16 with OU/OSU/TT/UT is as attractive as the current PAC-12, but not sure a PAC-14 is.
Without the PAC14 now, you may never get to the PAC16
Exactly. And the Pac14 economics work for the current 12...in adding OU and OSU alone. If those two schools werent' options (meaning say KU and Mizozu), then, no, the P14 would not be profitable for the current 12 schools. But without OU/OSU, there is no chance at ever attracting Texas, if they ever even can. It's all still up in the air. But OU/OSU would be the required first step. And as long as it makes the P12 schools more money, it's "attractive". It's not like the P12 is all AAU schools, so academics aren't a deal breaker.
Adding OU/OSU AND Texas (with TTech) turn the P12 from the conference with the richest Tv contract now, to one that would have the richest in both long term profitability AND annual per-school payouts.
But do you add OU/OSU in hopes that UT comes along eventually? Are you ok with the possibility of being stuck at 14?
That's the question that the Pac-12 WAS faced with, meaning worst-case-scenario, would you be alright with a total of 14 schools for the next 100 years with Oklahoma and OSU as those 2 schools? And the most trusted sources regarding Pac12 news are saying "Yes". As in, the Pac-12 has considered that they MIGHT be able to get Oklahoma and Oklahoma St, but might NOT EVER be able to get Texas. But based on the financial reviews, expanding to 14 with those two (as the SEC would be expanding to 14) would be a profitable move for the conference.
It might not have the power of a P16 with Texas, but one can see the benefits of expanding further east for the P12.
As for those who favor rivalries, etc, as a part of conference structure, that is still something that could exist (not that it matters much as we already have seen non-geographic splits in the Big Ten, P12...4 CA schools split).
But you could have:
Oklahoma, Oklahoma St., Colorado, Arizona, Arizona St., USC, UCLA in the south
UW, WSU, Oregon, Oregon St., Stanford, California, Utah
Personally, I'm with you. I'd prefer the Pac-12 OR P16. But I'm not the one making the money like the P14 would be. But there would still be hope that things slow down and P12 remains at 12.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
