Pac Super Conference

[Townhallsavoy]

Looks like this could become official.

The University of Oklahoma's board of regents and their counterparts at Texas granted their school presidents the authority to take action regarding conference realignment on Monday.

The moves clear the way for the Sooners and Longhorns to apply formally to the Pac-12, with whom they have been undergoing discussions in recent days on how to make the schools' addition to the conference work.

After the regents meeting had adjourned, Oklahoma president David Boren admitted he's had "very warm and constructive discussions" with Pac-12 officials, but wouldn't say when the Sooners might apply for conference membership.

But Boren made it clear that OU had not notified the Big 12 Conference it was leaving and that remaining in the Big 12 was "still on the table." He added, however, that the threat of litigation by other Big 12 members had not affected OU's position of exploring realignment.

"Obviously, we do not want to continue to have these kinds of situations where our membership in a conference has to be revisited every year," Boren said.

The Big 12 has moved to the brink of extinction just one summer after the remaining 10 members pledged to stick together, then hammered out a $1.2 billion television contract. They decided not to create a conference network similar to the ones in place by the Big Ten and Pac-12, not to split revenue equally and not to create any barriers to Texas' creation of the Longhorn Network through a 20-year, $300 million agreement with ESPN that proved to be divisive.

On Sunday, those Texas-OU talks were still a long way from the point at which Pac-12 leadership would be comfortable recommending the move to the league's presidents, a source told ESPN.com's Andy Katz. The proposed expansion would include fellow Big 12 schools Oklahoma State and Texas Tech.

"I would simply say it is not a strong vote of confidence in the conference office that this has happened in such a short period of time," Boren said, adding that he speaks daily with Oklahoma State president Burns Hargis.

Oklahoma State's regents have called a special meeting on the topic Wednesday.

"There has been a great deal of movement around the country and press reports around the country concerning conference realignment,'' school president William Powers told the Texas board. "We believe that it would be very helpful if the campus and I, and along the terms that were discussed earlier with consultation the chancellor and the chairman of the board and others, be able to explore options and have the authority to make decision with respect to this including continued participation in the Big 12."

"And we will do that first and foremost with the interest of our student athletes and the long-term interest of the University of Texas in mind.''

Texas coach Mack Brown shared the apparent skepticism of an overwhelming majority of fans throughout Big 12 country when he said the best interests of players should be duly considered in any decisions on conference alignment.

That sentiment was echoed by Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe.

"The actions taken today by the governing boards of the universities of Oklahoma and Texas was anticipated," Beebe said in a statement. "It is my opinion that the case for the Big 12 Conference continues to be as strong today for all of our current members as it was last year, especially considering the welfare of those to whom we owe the greatest responsibility -- the student-athletes.

"We continue to apply all effort and resources toward assuring our members that maintaining the Big 12 is in the best interest for their institutions."

Texas' regents met privately by telephone before approving a motion that still would require any move executed by Powers to be submitted to the regents for final approval. After the vote, Powers said only that the process is "ongoing" and left without further comment.

Boren said the schools are "always stronger when Texas and Oklahoma move together" but it's possible the two could part ways.

"We have different perspectives," Boren said. "I would put it this way: We're listening with respect to each other at this point in time, but it's too early to tell whether we'll make a common decision or not."

According to the results of a poll released Monday that was commissioned by Baylor and conducted by KRC Research, college football fans prefer traditional rivalries and regional conferences over super-conferences.

According to the poll over the weekend of 1,500 college graduates within Big 12 states, 76 percent of fans said they would be disappointed by the creation of super-conferences.

Brown turned impassioned in the Big 12's weekly conference call with the league's head coaches and media. "As much as we talk about money," Brown said, "as much as we talk about college football, as much as we talk about realignment, as much as we talk about great games, playoffs and all that stuff, we better go back and make sure that we're taking care of the players and that the players and the high school coaches are always considered in the equation.

"Because if not, we're not going to have a game, and they're the ones that are playing. And, for parents to travel all the way across the country is going to put a bigger burden on them."

The breadth of consideration should extend even wider, according to Baylor executive John M. Barry.

"We believe strongly that taxpayers, elected officials, university alumni and others ought to have the opportunity to contribute to the on-going dialogue regarding the so-called super conferences," the Baylor vice president for marketing and communications said in a statement released with the poll's results.

Brown cautioned the conference maneuvering and resulting logistics could spoil the allure of the sport for players.

"It's going to be more difficult," Brown said. "And right now with the regional leagues the parents can go see their kids play and that's really important because these kids are working their guts out year-round for us to have a show on Saturday that everyone enjoys.

"College football's as great as it's ever been, but we better keep considering what's in the best interest of the players or at some point they're going to get so frustrated it won't be fun for them."

Information from SoonerNation's Jake Trotter and The Associated Press was used in this report.

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6992952/regents-oklahoma-sooners-texas-longhorns-ok-presidents-act-pac-12

[BZ770]

I hope the SEC doesn't jump the gun and just fill in the slots. We could just sit back and watch what happens and keep our slots open for a long time.

[Townhallsavoy]

I agree that our product would remain better if we stayed at 12 teams. 

Even adding Texas A&M would be ok. 

But if Texas and the Oklahomas take off to the Pac 16 and the ACC solidifies itself as a legit conference, who do we take into the SEC? 

Would we go to 14 teams?  16? 

I think we'll have to keep up money wise.  The TV contracts are only going to grow with the new conferences.  We may be looking at Missouri in the SEC before it's all said and done with.  And honestly, that ruins the pride of the SEC. 

[BZ770]

14 is the highest I want to see us go.  TAM imo is a good addition to the SEC.  Geographically it still sort of fits.  I hope we raid the ACC and try and get FSU, GA Tech or Clemson.  But I know the other schools don't want them but that would be the best fit.

[AUChizad]

I would take Virginia Tech & FSU also.

I'm way too OCD to be able to appreciate 13 teams. Makes no sense. The current structure is so perfectly symmetrical. Granted, the East is down the last couple of years. Need 14. Maybe 16. But it had better be 3 of VT, GT, FSU, or Clemson. I could deal with UNC in a 16 team scenario also, for basketball's sake.

[chinook]

but does it really benefit the SEC to sit back and wait?  will there be quality teams left...will the newly formed conferences place clauses in the govering contract to prevent teams from saying adios without stiff penalties?

this is the start of the end to the bcs as well.  perhaps...?

[jmar]

I would take Virginia Tech & FSU also.

I'm way too OCD to be able to appreciate 13 teams. Makes no sense. The current structure is so perfectly symmetrical. Granted, the East is down the last couple of years. Need 14. Maybe 16. But it had better be 3 of VT, GT, FSU, or Clemson. I could deal with UNC in a 16 team scenario also, for basketball's sake.

Wonder how TCU is gonna make it in the shrinking east. What timing!

 

[AUJarhead]

I don't think we would have turned down WVU if we didn't already have 14, 15, and 16 in the bag.

I'm guessing Mizzou for 14.

[Saniflush]

Fuck the fighting goiters.

[War Eagle!!!]

This was my point earlier for trying to be proactive instead of reactive. It looks like now the ACC is trying to beat us to the punch and keep their conference alive. The ACC is now a BIG TIME power in basketball. The only way we can compete is to offer football schools of the ACC. We need to do something quick in my opinion so that we don't get left out. You know that everyone wants to stick it to the SEC anyway.

And I am with Chad. 13 teams will be ugly. It will suck. We need at least 14 teams or my head will explode...

[JR4AU]

This was my point earlier for trying to be proactive instead of reactive. It looks like now the ACC is trying to beat us to the punch and keep their conference alive. The ACC is now a BIG TIME power in basketball. The only way we can compete is to offer football schools of the ACC. We need to do something quick in my opinion so that we don't get left out. You know that everyone wants to stick it to the SEC anyway.

And I am with Chad. 13 teams will be ugly. It will suck. We need at least 14 teams or my head will explode...

Actually, I think the Jones everybody is trying to keep up with is he SEC.  We'll get  a nice bunch to choose from when the time comes.  And, some that we may want may find it more lucrative to be elsewhere.   We were the first "Super Conference". We'll get what we need, though I'm not sure we NEED anybody.

[GH2001]

Add aTm and FSU and be done at 14. Anyone else waters the SEC down market wise.

[AUChizad]

Add aTm and FSU and be done at 14. Anyone else waters the SEC down market wise.

I'll say it again, if market is what we're after VT > FSU.

DC & Virginia area far trumps redundancy in a market we already have.

[GH2001]

I'll say it again, if market is what we're after VT > FSU.

DC & Virginia area far trumps redundancy in a market we already have.

FSU gets ratings. They have a bigger fan base. They just have that IT factor. Their fans travel better. Va Tech didnt even sell out their bowl game. Fair weathered bastards. I just don't think they culturally fit into the SEC.

aTm and FSU seem to the most. I was down in the panhandle this weekend. FSU fans everywhere. Lots of them and they were excited about football. Most of them were pretty nice folks too. Aggies seem the same way (even though they can go full tard at anytime).

[wesfau2]

Look at the "name" teams looking for homes right now (ie- their conference has fallen apart):

Texas
OU

and...

?

Everyone else is already in a major conference.  There is no one team available that brings any extra quality or clout.  I say we stand pat.

[JR4AU]

FSU gets ratings. They have a bigger fan base. They just have that IT factor. Their fans travel better. Va Tech didnt even sell out their bowl game. Fair weathered bastards. I just don't think they culturally fit into the SEC.

aTm and FSU seem to the most. I was down in the panhandle this weekend. FSU fans everywhere. Lots of them and they were excited about football. Most of them were pretty nice folks too. Aggies seem the same way (even though they can go full tard at anytime).

FSU doesn't add any TV market to the SEC's current market footprint. 

[Kaos]

Okay..

SEC (Currently 13 teams):
Auburn
Arkansas
Tennessee
Florida
Georgia
A&M
Vandy
Mississippi State
LSU
Ole Miss
Alabama
Kentucky
So. Car

PAC-X (16 teams)

Texas
OU
OK State
Texas Tech
USC
Oregon
UCLA
Stanford
Arizona
Arizona State
Cal
Colorado
Oregon State
Washington
Washington State
Utah


Big Ten Plus (Currently 12)

Ohio State
Michigan
Purdue
Wisconsin
Northwestern
Iowa
Nebraska
Michigan State
Illinois
Indiana
Penn State
Minnesota

ACC  (Currently 12/14):
Miami
FSU
Duke
Wake Forest
North Carolina
Clemson
NC State
Virginia
Va Tech
Maryland
Boston College
Georgia Tech
And adding
Syracuse
Pitt


Assuming the 64-team super conference alignment is the goal, you've got 55 of the spots taken as things currently stand. 

Teams currently on the outside looking in:

Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State from the former Big 12

Cincinnati, UConn, Marquette, Louisville, Georgetown, DePaul, Providence, Rutgers, St. John, Seton Hall, USF, West Virginia, Villanova, Georgetown from the eroding Big East.

Notre Dame, Army, Navy from the Independents

The entire WAC
The entire Mountain West (including Boise, Air Force, Colorado State, Wyoming and UNLV)
The entire Conference USA (including Southern Miss, Memphis, Marshall, UAB, UCF)

PAC 12 is full up. 

Big Ten Plus can only take four and of the ones left, you'd have to think Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri and Notre Dame would be the naturals.

SEC would have three to give.  As the WVU rumor burns, that means the SEC would likely raid other conferences leaving them to scramble.  Geographically Clemson makes the most sense because it's closer to most SEC schools than South Carolina.  And FSU is a natural fit.   Then Va. Tech?  I don't want them (any of them) but the SEC won't be left hanging.  Would we take Louisville, Memphis and South Florida instead?  Would the SEC throw Ole Miss and Vandy out and replace them with better schools?  I'd love to trade Ole Miss for Southern Miss, for instance.  Would improve the league.  Would we try to sneak in and steal Notre Dame from the Big 10?

ACC has two left.  UConn and Rutgers seem the most likely to me.  Bust New York market wide open. 

At the end of the day Baylor seems destined to be adrift with no home.  West Virginia, now that the SEC has spurned them, also seems destined to float off into the netherlands.   

The more I look at this, the more it seems like a bad, bad deal.   What happens to a team like Southern Miss?  Or Boise State?  They now wake up every August knowing that they have absolutely zero chance of winning a national title?  Their revenues will shrink.  Part of what (used to) make college football great was that one of those smaller teams really could come out of nowhere and win their way into the polls and have a shot -- albeit remote.   

What becomes of teams like South Alabama now trying to transition to D1?  What's the fucking point?  Why bother?

I say boo to this whole deal. 

(For the record, super conference won't work in basketball, but that's another story for another day). 

[Townhallsavoy]

Agreed.

You want a super conference?  Screw the regional (a term used lightly nowadays) conferences.

Go NFL style.  One conference.  Six divisions.  Ten teams each.  Implement a playoff and forget the pageantry and tradition of college football. 

Let the rest battle in Division II and III.

[AUChizad]

SEC (Currently 13 teams):
Auburn
Arkansas
Tennessee
Florida
Georgia
A&M
Vandy
Mississippi State
LSU
Ole Miss
Alabama
Kentucky
So. Car

PAC-X (16 teams)

Texas
OU
OK State
Texas Tech
USC
Oregon
UCLA
Stanford
Arizona
Arizona State
Cal
Colorado
Oregon State
Washington
Washington State
Utah


Big Ten Plus (Currently 12)

Ohio State
Michigan
Purdue
Wisconsin
Northwestern
Iowa
Nebraska
Michigan State
Illinois
Indiana
Penn State
Minnesota

ACC  (Currently 12/14):
Miami
FSU
Duke
Wake Forest
North Carolina
Clemson
NC State
Virginia
Va Tech
Maryland
Boston College
Georgia Tech
And adding
Syracuse
Pitt

Looking at it that way, we don't look so vastly superior anymore. That PAC conference looks especially strong.

Need at least one more really strong team, IMO.

The more I look at this, the more it seems like a bad, bad deal.   What happens to a team like Southern Miss?  Or Boise State?  They now wake up every August knowing that they have absolutely zero chance of winning a national title?  Their revenues will shrink.  Part of what (used to) make college football great was that one of those smaller teams really could come out of nowhere and win their way into the polls and have a shot -- albeit remote.   

What becomes of teams like South Alabama now trying to transition to D1?  What's the fucking point?  Why bother?

I don't see why there couldn't be an "At large" team that makes it into the "tournament" in place of the Boise and TCU type "flies in the ointment".

[GH2001]

Looking at it that way, we don't look so vastly superior anymore. That PAC conference looks especially strong.

Need at least one more really strong team, IMO.
I don't see why there couldn't be an "At large" team that makes it into the "tournament" in place of the Boise and TCU type "flies in the ointment".

Yeah, FSU.

The market addition will come from aTm.