The Conference Realignment Saga... RELIVED!

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

CTeamPoke

Legendary Cowboy
Jun 18, 2008
44,617
47,268
1,743
Dallas, TX
#1
David Ubben did a pretty great piece on the Pac-16 debacle that we were swept up in in the summer of 2010.

My thoughts:

A) Missouri and their former governor Jay Nixon can rot in hell. They deserve all of the bad things that happen to them forever. "Poop swastika" doesn't cover the amount of scorn they deserve... but it was a decent start.

B) We had such a sweet deal if this would have happened. Would've hurt TCU and Baylor... their big runs probably would've never happened in the first place...

C) Blaming the LHN is fine and easy... but foolish. A&M, Nebraska, OU, CU, and Mizzou still voted against revenue sharing and a conference network after all of this stuff started.

Here is a portion article from The Athletic:

The superconference that wasn’t: How the Pac-16 plan changed college sports

By David Ubben

Larry Scott was sitting in an Oklahoma City airport lounge, waiting to board a plane. He was in the midst of a tour of multiple Big 12 campuses when he glanced at the television and saw a breaking news report.
Pac-10 commissioner Larry Scott is in Oklahoma City as we speak, on his way to pitch multiple Big 12 schools in person on the prospect of forming the Pac-16.
He couldn’t help but look over his shoulder.
“That was a bit of an eerie feeling,” Scott told The Athletic.
He joked with a few other members of the Pac-10’s traveling faction to break the tension.
“It was like we were on an episode of ‘America’s Most Wanted’ or characters in ‘The Fugitive,’ ” he said. “That was uncomfortable to see so much scrutiny and focus on where we were, who we were talking to, a lot of rumors circulating. … I learned a lot about how easy it is to track someone. That was not something I welcomed, but I realized it goes with the territory. It’s a reflection of the passion and intensity of feeling people have around these issues and their importance.
“It was eye-opening.”
So, too, was Scott’s plan.
In the summer of 2010, conference realignment monopolized the conversation across college sports. Scott had been in charge of the Pac-10 for less than a year when he embarked on a bold plan to raid the Big 12 and build a superconference.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sep 2, 2012
336
174
593
37
#3
I wish OU would have gone to the SEC and we would have gone to the PAC 12. They haven't done much in the SEC, but I am sometimes envious of A&M breaking away and finding its own identity.
 

Jostate

CPTNQUIRK called me a greenhorn
A/V Subscriber
Jun 24, 2005
18,942
13,970
1,743
#4
C) Blaming the LHN is fine and easy... but foolish. A&M, Nebraska, OU, CU, and Mizzou still voted against revenue sharing and a conference network after all of this stuff started.
:
I didn't remember about the others voting against revenue sharing besides OU. I've always blamed them.

UT is the arrogant jack wagon in the room who thinks they don't need anyone else, but can't understand why they keep destroying conferences. I remember OU thinking they were a big dog too and thinking they could have their own network. If they had stuck with the conference against UT we might just have a Big 12 Network now instead of a LHN. Karma has bitch slapped UT though because they've sucked in revenue sports ever since they made that deal.

BTW, what in the name of wide world sports made CU think they were too good for revenue sharing?
 

Jostate

CPTNQUIRK called me a greenhorn
A/V Subscriber
Jun 24, 2005
18,942
13,970
1,743
#5
I wish OU would have gone to the SEC and we would have gone to the PAC 12. They haven't done much in the SEC, but I am sometimes envious of A&M breaking away and finding its own identity.
Geographically, culturally, politically and every other way we would fit in the PAC 12 like the Jimi Hendrix opening for the Monkees. (which really happened)
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
#6
I didn't remember about the others voting against revenue sharing besides OU. I've always blamed them.

UT is the arrogant jack wagon in the room who thinks they don't need anyone else, but can't understand why they keep destroying conferences. I remember OU thinking they were a big dog too and thinking they could have their own network. If they had stuck with the conference against UT we might just have a Big 12 Network now instead of a LHN. Karma has bitch slapped UT though because they've sucked in revenue sports ever since they made that deal.

BTW, what in the name of wide world sports made CU think they were too good for revenue sharing?
I think a revenue "sharing" deal was in place, it was based on the number of appearances that you had on TV.... improve your schedule, and you get on TV more was the theme of the day.

Nebraska was also adamantly opposed to the creation of the Longhorn Network. Well, then why did they, along with 10 other Big 12 teams (minus Texas), vote against a joint Big 12 TV network in 2006-2007? Nebraska and the others didn't want to put the necessary resources is in to create such a network, so Texas did it by itself.
https://bleacherreport.com/articles...o-blame-for-the-collapse-of-the-big-12#slide4


A prologue for the uninitiated: The Big 12 regularly fields top teams in football and men's basketball — college revenue-generating sports — and features some of the NCAA's highest paid coaches. Several Big 12 programs boast self-sustaining budgets, whereas most college athletic departments need significant student fees and university financial support to stay afloat, according to data accumulated by USA Today.

The conference is also poised to start a 13-year cable TV contract with Fox valued at $1.17 billion while riding out an eight-year deal with ESPN, worth $480 million, that's set to expire in 2016, according to The Dallas Morning News.

Yet it was not enough. Yearning for ever greater revenues or prestige, eyes wandered. Some, like Missouri's, cast glances toward the Big Ten; others were put off by the ego and dollars behind Texas' exclusive Longhorn TV network.

Cue sound and fury.

In 2010, amid rumblings of an impending realignment, Colorado made the first move, eloping westward with the Pac-12. Soon thereafter, Nebraska cited the need for stability and a better cultural fit as it slipped out the door to join the Big Ten. The Big 12 then held together for one rickety year until Texas inked an exclusive $300 million TV deal with ESPN. Texas A&M, having seen enough, closed its eyes and jumped ship this summer, hoping the football-crazy SEC would catch it.
https://www.thepitchkc.com/news/article/20572585/a-big-12-breakup-most-foul
 

Jostate

CPTNQUIRK called me a greenhorn
A/V Subscriber
Jun 24, 2005
18,942
13,970
1,743
#7
I think a revenue "sharing" deal was in place, it was based on the number of appearances that you had on TV.... improve your schedule, and you get on TV more was the theme of the day.

Nebraska was also adamantly opposed to the creation of the Longhorn Network. Well, then why did they, along with 10 other Big 12 teams (minus Texas), vote against a joint Big 12 TV network in 2006-2007? Nebraska and the others didn't want to put the necessary resources is in to create such a network, so Texas did it by itself.
https://bleacherreport.com/articles...o-blame-for-the-collapse-of-the-big-12#slide4


A prologue for the uninitiated: The Big 12 regularly fields top teams in football and men's basketball — college revenue-generating sports — and features some of the NCAA's highest paid coaches. Several Big 12 programs boast self-sustaining budgets, whereas most college athletic departments need significant student fees and university financial support to stay afloat, according to data accumulated by USA Today.

The conference is also poised to start a 13-year cable TV contract with Fox valued at $1.17 billion while riding out an eight-year deal with ESPN, worth $480 million, that's set to expire in 2016, according to The Dallas Morning News.

Yet it was not enough. Yearning for ever greater revenues or prestige, eyes wandered. Some, like Missouri's, cast glances toward the Big Ten; others were put off by the ego and dollars behind Texas' exclusive Longhorn TV network.

Cue sound and fury.

In 2010, amid rumblings of an impending realignment, Colorado made the first move, eloping westward with the Pac-12. Soon thereafter, Nebraska cited the need for stability and a better cultural fit as it slipped out the door to join the Big Ten. The Big 12 then held together for one rickety year until Texas inked an exclusive $300 million TV deal with ESPN. Texas A&M, having seen enough, closed its eyes and jumped ship this summer, hoping the football-crazy SEC would catch it.
https://www.thepitchkc.com/news/article/20572585/a-big-12-breakup-most-foul
I remember when A&M almost got caught flappin in the breeze. Thujon did some of his best work on this.
 
Jul 25, 2018
2,250
592
243
48
Boulder, CO
#8
Interesting trip back in time. I'll admit that I was all for the move when it looked like it was going to happen
Geographically, culturally, politically and every other way we would fit in the PAC 12 like the Jimi Hendrix opening for the Monkees. (which really happened)
Completely agree. I was totally in support of joining the PAC at the time, but it would've been an odd fit, for sure.

I now think we're better off for not having made that move because of a few reasons. One being that the Pac12 can't even get a deal with the largest satellite provider in the country, & two being that the networks simply need programming & will continue to keep the Big 12 viable due to their own self interests.
 
Aug 31, 2004
2,124
925
1,743
Austin, TX
#9
Interesting trip back in time. I'll admit that I was all for the move when it looked like it was going to happen


Completely agree. I was totally in support of joining the PAC at the time, but it would've been an odd fit, for sure.

I now think we're better off for not having made that move because of a few reasons. One being that the Pac12 can't even get a deal with the largest satellite provider in the country, & two being that the networks simply need programming & will continue to keep the Big 12 viable due to their own self interests.

Yes, it was kind of intriguing at the time, but can you imagine having to stay up until 2 a.m. to finish watching a game? That would have been brutal.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
#11
I'm still in favor of a 4 time-zone conference.

Central Florida, San Diego State, a decent team near WVU, and a Mt Team (like BYU, or maybe even a Colorado, Utah or another CA team)

Nation-wide coverage and appeal.... I think it would really make a difference.
 
Jul 25, 2018
2,250
592
243
48
Boulder, CO
#12
I'm still in favor of a 4 time-zone conference.

Central Florida, San Diego State, a decent team near WVU, and a Mt Team (like BYU, or maybe even a Colorado, Utah or another CA team)

Nation-wide coverage and appeal.... I think it would really make a difference.
Yeah, the only one that moves any needle at all is BYU.

4 time zones is a terrible idea, too.
 

sc5mu93

WeaselMonkey
A/V Subscriber
Oct 18, 2006
9,485
7,808
1,743
Spring, TX
#13
Yeah, I'm in Boulder now, so Mountain time zone, & the games are still late as hell-at least the ones I can actually watch on DirecTV.
Frankly, Mountain time zone is the BEST time zone for the college football viewer. By the time you wake up, pregame shows are starting. And its not so late as to catch the later pacific time zone games. My saturdays in CO were some of the best college football watchin days I have experienced.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
#15
Yeah, the only one that moves any needle at all is BYU.

4 time zones is a terrible idea, too.
I disagree with both of your statements. It's actually a great idea, keeps the Conference in front of the media all freaking day long, brings both the CA and the FL hot-bed recruiting to our doorsteps, and brings in the CA market (especially San Diego), and the Florida markets.

Everyone one of those points is absolutely huge.
 
Jul 25, 2018
2,250
592
243
48
Boulder, CO
#16
I disagree with both of your statements. It's actually a great idea, keeps the Conference in front of the media all freaking day long, brings both the CA and the FL hot-bed recruiting to our doorsteps, and brings in the CA market (especially San Diego), and the Florida markets.

Everyone one of those points is absolutely huge.
Now that I think about it, you're right. Bringing in UCF & San Diego State would absolutely be "huge" television draws. ESPN would probably just keep GameDay in the Big 12 all season!

It's about as accurate as saying Colorado State would make a real splash in the Denver market, which is patently false.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
#20
Now that I think about it, you're right. Bringing in UCF & San Diego State would absolutely be "huge" television draws. ESPN would probably just keep GameDay in the Big 12 all season!

It's about as accurate as saying Colorado State would make a real splash in the Denver market, which is patently false.
Colorado State has nothing to do with the conversation. It's not the same. San Diego has no college or Pro team, and is a big TV market. Central Florida playing against OU or UT would be a huge draw, especially in the Orlando area and Tampa area.

Game Day has nothing to do with the discussion.