Jump to content

O.T. Conference Shuffle ( OU and Texas inquire about joining SEC)


Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

The Big 12 tried to expand 5 years ago.  Texas and Oklahoma, according some sources, killed it because they didn't want to make certain concessions.  Those two schools, especially Texas, had been holding the conference hostage a long time.

That's one way to look at it, or Texas and to a lesser extent OU were propping up the conference. 

 

Exhibit A. Everyone wants to blame Longhorn Network for certain terrible lesser schools leaving.  But Texas wanted a conference channel the other members didn't so Texas did their own thing because they can.   They had $100mil reasons to do so.

 

Exhibit B.  See above and your assertion as reasons Nebraska left.  But the real story is that Nebraska hates Texas because they put a stop to partial qualifiers.   Texas actually cares about academics.  Nebraska hasn't won anything of significance since they stopped taking partial qualifiers and lost their ability to recruit in Texas. 

 

Exhibit C. Have any of the remaining B12 schools gotten an invite to any other conferences? Nope, not even after a BB national championship.  Why? Because they bring nothing.   Baylor scandal is maybe the worst all time in college sports.  The other schools don't bring enough to justify diluting TV contracts (OSU, TTU might be close and are best situated).

Texas has been propping up these schools and the main reason they get the amount of revenue they currently receive is due to that affiliation with Texas.

So go ahead and blame Texas for all of it, they're the big bad evil empire and it's the easy explanation. 

Now they get to run things themselves without the Big Bad Orange Evil Empire.  Let's see how that TV contract looks on Hulu.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 363
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

5 minutes ago, TheA_Bomb said:

That's one way to look at it, or Texas and to a lesser extent OU were propping up the conference. 

 

Exhibit A. Everyone wants to blame Longhorn Network for certain terrible lesser schools leaving.  But Texas wanted a conference channel the other members didn't so Texas did their own thing because they can.   They had $100mil reasons to do so.

 

Exhibit B.  See above and your assertion as reasons Nebraska left.  But the real story is that Nebraska hates Texas because they put a stop to partial qualifiers.   Texas actually cares about academics.  Nebraska hasn't won anything of significance since they stopped taking partial qualifiers and lost their ability to recruit in Texas. 

 

Exhibit C. Have any of the remaining B12 schools gotten an invite to any other conferences? Nope, not even after a BB national championship.  Why? Because they bring nothing.   Baylor scandal is maybe the worst all time in college sports.  The other schools don't bring enough to justify diluting TV contracts (OSU, TTU might be close and are best situated).

Texas has been propping up these schools and the main reason they get the amount of revenue they currently receive is due to that affiliation with Texas.

So go ahead and blame Texas for all of it, they're the big bad evil empire and it's the easy explanation. 

Now they get to run things themselves without the Big Bad Orange Evil Empire.  Let's see how that TV contract looks on Hulu.

Your absolutely right. The Big 12 schools made more money every year that they had UT with them. However, UT bullied them into a nice little line, and now they get dropped off of a financial cliff. UT wouldn’t shoulder any of the costs to develop teams like Cinncy or BYU in the B12. Now the Big 12 gets to do so without the financial buffer UT provided. It is not Texas’s fault, it is the fault of the Big 12 management and the weak backbone of the other schools. They need to be better at looking at the long term, and not the current year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, wgstl said:

add temple and WSU and stop there 

I'd rather see WSU and Loyola ... the A10 already has Philly covered, plus you don't have to deal with whatever football plans Temple has. Add two non-football schools that are further West - that helps SLU. Plus it would be good for the conference and SLU to get in the Chicago market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ACE said:

I'd rather see WSU and Loyola ... the A10 already has Philly covered, plus you don't have to deal with whatever football plans Temple has. Add two non-football schools that are further West - that helps SLU. Plus it would be good for the conference and SLU to get in the Chicago market.

I went nuts and blew all of my likes for the day so I just wanted to stop by and tell you I liked this comment.

WSU and Loyola (basketball centric schools) are my choices as well. Road trips to Chicago every year would be cheap, convenient, and fun. Not as fun as visiting Olean but still fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AnkielBreakers said:

Let’s just be honest, the B12 is run by a group without any vision. If they had a brain, they would bring in Memphis. They needed to make today’s moves a decade ago, but failed. I am not even sure if Memphis should go to the B12, it is such a mess. The B12 will wait for Kansas and Iowa State to announce their moves to the B10, and then invite Memphis.

Kansas ain't going to the B10. Maybe Iowa State will. Football is running this, otherwise Memphis would get an invite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ACE said:

I'd rather see WSU and Loyola ... the A10 already has Philly covered, plus you don't have to deal with whatever football plans Temple has. Add two non-football schools that are further West - that helps SLU. Plus it would be good for the conference and SLU to get in the Chicago market.

If we had the power to shape this in a way that #1 benefits SLU and #2 benefitted the A10, I'd take these factors into consideration. 

Adding teams that help SLU by opening up a recruiting market. What team would add a regional travel spot?  What team would help add basketballb depth to the A10.

Belmont, decent program.  Does Nashville have decent basketball talent?  Plus it's close and a good road game destination.

Loyola, we probably are already close enough to recruit but more access to Chicago couldn't hurt. 

Wichita State does that help in KC? I don't want to road trip there

U. Detroit?  Nah.

Temple? Maybe good for ball but doesn't really help SLU.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, AnkielBreakers said:

Your absolutely right. The Big 12 schools made more money every year that they had UT with them. However, UT bullied them into a nice little line, and now they get dropped off of a financial cliff. UT wouldn’t shoulder any of the costs to develop teams like Cinncy or BYU in the B12. Now the Big 12 gets to do so without the financial buffer UT provided. It is not Texas’s fault, it is the fault of the Big 12 management and the weak backbone of the other schools. They need to be better at looking at the long term, and not the current year.

Of course schools made more money with UT, it's the flagship school in the 2nd most populated state in the Union.  I never said Texas did anything wrong.  They just used their considerable leverage to operate in their best interests, which wasn't necessarily the best long-term interests of the Big 12. 

The Big 12 leadership can have all the backbone they want.  It still doesn't change the fact that there was a stark difference in power between Texas and everyone else.  For example, UT's athletic budget last year was $187 million.  And that's with no revenue from student fees, institutional or state sources -- you know, the lifeblood of most athletic departments.  Oh my stars and garters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, slufan13 said:

Since geography doesn't matter at this point

Is that really the case? Sure, the A10 has SLU and Dayton and the Big East has Creighton, but I think conferences prefer a geographic identity (even when there are a few outliers) to being completely scattered to the wind like The American, C-USA, or the new Big XII. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/10/2021 at 12:05 PM, AnkielBreakers said:

Let’s just be honest, the B12 is run by a group without any vision. If they had a brain, they would bring in Memphis. They needed to make today’s moves a decade ago, but failed. I am not even sure if Memphis should go to the B12, it is such a mess. The B12 will wait for Kansas and Iowa State to announce their moves to the B10, and then invite Memphis.

I slightly disagree.  The group running the B12 does have vision.  It just that this group (Texas and Oklahoma) had a vision of leaving the B12.  Since they run (ran) the B12 and that was their goal, having plans for the future wasn't the conferences priority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, cgeldmacher said:

I slightly disagree.  The group running the B12 does have vision.  It just that this group (Texas and Oklahoma) had a vision of leaving the B12.  Since they run (ran) the B12 and that was their goal, having plans for the future wasn't the conferences priority.

Nah Ankiel's right Bowlsby (B12 Commissioner) is weak and clueless.   Dude was caught completely blind sided by the Texas move.  He should've had some fore warning if he had any cache or reliable contacts,  friends at all.   The look at expansion a few years ago was also dumb.   Why look at expanding, if it they weren't going to do it? See Fertittas (the Houston booster) response to the whole debacle. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
5 minutes ago, johnbj14 said:

Belmont is leaving the OVC for the Missouri Valley. Second departure this year for the OVC, as Austen Peay just left for the ASUN. Realignment is happening at all levels of D1  

 

https://www.extrapointsmb.com/conference-realignment-mvc-belmont-ovc/

Good move for Belmont. 

I actually enjoy a good MVC(no I dont want to move there).  Its fun and makes the tourney in STL better for the city. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see what Wichita St. decides to do going forward.  Not sure if they still view the AAC as the best fit with UConn, Houston and Cincinnati no longer part of the conference they joined.  I would hope the A10 would be on the phone with them, but going back to the MVC has to be a possibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, brianstl said:

It will be interesting to see what Wichita St. decides to do going forward.  Not sure if they still view the AAC as the best fit with UConn, Houston and Cincinnati no longer part of the conference they joined.  I would hope the A10 would be on the phone with them, but going back to the MVC has to be a possibility.

Belmont and Wichita State to the MVC plus Loyola and Drake is a formidable top four.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wgstl said:

Should try and get Murray state too 

Whether or not they can get Wichita State back, I would pursue Murray State.

If WSU's only options are staying in the AAC or going back to the Valley, here's what they're looking at:

Memphis
SMU
Tulsa
South Florida
Temple
East Carolina
Tulane

vs.

Loyola
Belmont
Drake
Illinois State
Indiana State
SIUC
UNI
Evansville
Bradley
Valpo
Missouri State

It's tempting to stay in the first, smaller group and try to remain a strong 1-2 punch at the top with Memphis, but we all know Memphis is gone at the first opportunity.

Question number two is if there's a conference with Loyola, Belmont, and Wichita State at the top, does SLU's view of the Valley shift again? I've been a hard no on this since as far back as the CUSA days, but what if WSU goes back and the Valley is willing to go to 14 with SLU and Dayton?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Aquinas said:

I think it cost Wichits st 2.5 million to join the AAC. THE AAC has a 10 million exit fee. I can't see Wichita St  paying that to get back where they started. Their situation shows the folly of a basketball only school joining a football conference

I didn't realize this. I'm guessing there's no clause that says the fee is contingent upon the conference existing in its form when they entered 4 years ago? I've been searching but it seems like $10MM is a hard number.

This is a good piece about the AAC vs. the Valley, albeit before Belmont joined. In short, every AAC school outspends every Valley school on basketball (except Loyola is right above East Carolina). They argued WSU is still probably better off in the American.

However, those budgets are going to change once the long-term impact of the AAC's departures sets in. The next broadcasting deals aren't going to be as favorable, for instance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Pistol said:

Whether or not they can get Wichita State back, I would pursue Murray State.

If WSU's only options are staying in the AAC or going back to the Valley, here's what they're looking at:

Memphis
SMU
Tulsa
South Florida
Temple
East Carolina
Tulane

vs.

Loyola
Belmont
Drake
Illinois State
Indiana State
SIUC
UNI
Evansville
Bradley
Valpo
Missouri State

It's tempting to stay in the first, smaller group and try to remain a strong 1-2 punch at the top with Memphis, but we all know Memphis is gone at the first opportunity.

Question number two is if there's a conference with Loyola, Belmont, and Wichita State at the top, does SLU's view of the Valley shift again? I've been a hard no on this since as far back as the CUSA days, but what if WSU goes back and the Valley is willing to go to 14 with SLU and Dayton?

Why can’t we start a new conference and bring in the teams we want. Basketball only, higher pedigree.

To your question, I am biased. I would probably rather watch SLU play any MVC team than watch SLU play the bottom half of the A10. That said, it is fun to play Dayton, and without them, it would be a hard sell. I definitely feel an affiliation with VCU and whatever hot teams show up from year to year, but nothing that wouldn’t heal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Pistol said:

Whether or not they can get Wichita State back, I would pursue Murray State.

If WSU's only options are staying in the AAC or going back to the Valley, here's what they're looking at:

Memphis
SMU
Tulsa
South Florida
Temple
East Carolina
Tulane

vs.

Loyola
Belmont
Drake
Illinois State
Indiana State
SIUC
UNI
Evansville
Bradley
Valpo
Missouri State

It's tempting to stay in the first, smaller group and try to remain a strong 1-2 punch at the top with Memphis, but we all know Memphis is gone at the first opportunity.

Question number two is if there's a conference with Loyola, Belmont, and Wichita State at the top, does SLU's view of the Valley shift again? I've been a hard no on this since as far back as the CUSA days, but what if WSU goes back and the Valley is willing to go to 14 with SLU and Dayton?

I don’t understand why posters continue treating Loyola as some power program. It is just as likely that they will fall back to where they were without Porter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...