Big 12 to meet to consider 6 new teams(PAC)

  • 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.
Jul 9, 2011
3,041
1,675
1,743
67
Carlos, TX
Texas will continue to be mediocre, and ou will have nowhere near the success they had in the Big12. I can understand what you’re saying about most of those teams, but Ole Miss, Arkansas, A&M and Florida would probably cause problems for OSU. OSU does not recruit near a few of those programs as well. Just my opinion with no skin in the game.
Arkansas has been pretty salty the last year or so, but they were terrible just a couple of seasons ago. Florida had a losing season last year (6-7), were 2-6 in the SEC and had 4 wins over lesser non-conf opponents. They were 8-4 in 2020, again with 4 of the wins vs non-conf opponents. Having 4 non-conference games allows SEC teams to pad their wins by potentially one more game every year. They play 3 lesser opponents and one competitive game every year. Florida is not that great. We are 6-4 over A&M in Big 12 and one bowl game. They have been a .500 team in the SEC. They have a good recruting class coming in, so we will see if that translates to the field or not.

Over that group of teams as a whole, if that were our schedule, I'd expect to be .500 or better pretty much every year. None of them would scare me.
 
Sep 6, 2014
455
278
613
Over that group of teams as a whole, if that were our schedule, I'd expect to be .500 or better pretty much every year. None of them would scare me.

none of those teams scare me but none of them are pushovers either, even in down years, because their level of talent is 1000x greater than Kansas State, Iowa State, West Virginia, Texas Tech etc who we still lose games to
 

More Cowbell

Territorial Marshal
May 2, 2005
6,392
4,913
1,743
Highland Village, TX
As much as I would like to go to the SEC, I feel like our ceiling there would be 8-4 with the occasional 10-2 every so often with a lot of 7-5 type of years
This is what I think about, too. As a fan, would I get more enjoyment out of being in one of the 2 super conferences or winning more football games?
I want us to compete on a national stage and maybe once a decade have everything come together and challenge for a playoff spot. Or be in a conference a step less prestigious with second tier money with an auto playoff birth and challenge 3-4 times a decade for a playoff spot, knowing we (or anyone in our conference) don't have the "NIL payroll" to really compete at that playoff level and might get embarrassed.
I'm not dead set on either side. I moreso think it stinks for CFB as a whole.
 
Last edited:

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
17,191
17,468
1,743
Tulsa, OK
I think given the right leadership and negotiations we could get at or near 70 million per team as compared to the other 2 netting around 100MM. I think we got lucky with timing and if we capitalize as the next best thing in line for lets say CBS to solidify its NCAA Football standing then we will be 'competitive'
I haven't seen any estimates anywhere close to that figure...it would absolutely be fantastic if we could get that kind of money....and if we're stuck in the Big 12 we would be damn happy to get it.

Having said that, even at that (likely impossible) amount, we would still prefer the SEC. $300,000,000 over a decade is simply too much ground to make up. We might be competitive that first decade, then the gap would start widening, not just in football but in all sports.

i don't think I've seen anyone who is happy about it but reality is that we need and want to be in one of the big 2.
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
17,191
17,468
1,743
Tulsa, OK
As much as I would like to go to the SEC, I feel like our ceiling there would be 8-4 with the occasional 10-2 every so often with a lot of 7-5 type of years
I think we might have a better chance of making the CFP from the Big 12 but a better chance of breaking through and winning it in the SEC. Plus, all of our other sports would have much higher ceilings in the SEC (or BIG) than they will in the new Big 12.
 

Poke4Christ

Federal Marshal
Aug 2, 2005
11,428
1,525
1,743
39
Edmond, OK
I think people seem to be missing the real risk/problem with not being in the B1G or SEC Conference. The risk is that the divide continues to widen. Money, Talent, and Perception will all build on and feed each other. This has a compounding effect with lessening all three for our University. What does averaging 10+ wins a season matter if it gets continually devalued? Meanwhile, that has a compounding impact on the university as a whole too! Like it or not, Football directly affects a University's ability to grow and improve.

Make no mistake here people. There future is VERY uncertain. Not being in the B1G or SEC might end up not mattering very much in 10-20 years. However, that currently seems much less likely. The greater risk could be HUGELY significant. Imagine a future where our annual media revenue is 1/3rd or even 1/4th what the B1G and SEC get (and continuing to get worse). Imagine a future where we go 12-1, but only make an expanded playoff as a 10th seed auto-bid! Imagine a future where the B1G and SEC take almost all the playoff revenue just so others can continue to participate. Imagine a future where the B1G and SEC decide to completely break away from the rest and form their own playoff. All of these are very possible and not being a part of it is a SIGNIFICANT risk. If there is any way to get a seat at the table, OSU should take any action necessary to achieve it.
 
Last edited:
Jun 20, 2013
303
175
593
34
Really? Because in the last 5 years we are 63% against KSU, Baylor, ISU, TT, TCU, and WVU.
Yes. If that was our conference, I would expect us to average 9-3 seasons. Sometimes it would be 8-4 or even 7-5, but those would be limited. I also expect we would catch lightning in a bottle every once in a while and win 10 or 11 games.

Gundy has averaged a 67% win percentage since 2009, and about 65% over the last 10 years. Even if I'm slightly agressive on my numbers, to say that we go .500 is asinine and gives way to much credit to mediocre sec teams.
 
Jun 20, 2013
303
175
593
34
I think people seem to be missing the real risk/problem with not being in the B1G or SEC Conference. The risk is that the divide continues to widen. Money, Talent, and Perception will all build on and feed each other. This has a compounding effect with lessening all three for our University. What does averaging 10+ wins a season matter if it gets continually devalued? Meanwhile, that has a compounding impact on the university as a whole too! Like it or not, Football directly affects a University's ability to grow and improve.

Make no mistake here people. There future is VERY uncertain. Not being in the B1G or SEC might end up not mattering very much in 10-20 years. However, that currently seems much less likely. The greater risk is could be HUGELY significant. Imagine a future where our annual media revenue is 1/3rd or even 1/4th what the B1G and SEC, and continuing to get worse. Imagine a future where we go 12-1, but only make an expanded playoff as a 10th seed auto-bid! Imagine a future where the B1G and SEC take almost all the playoff revenue just so others can continue to participate. Imagine a future where the B1G and SEC decide to completely break away from the rest and form their own playoff. All of these are very possible and not being a part of it is a SIGNIFICANT risk. If there is any way to get a seat at the table, OSU should take any action necessary to achieve it.
I think I agree with this, though there are certainly arguments to made on both sides. I think the poster children for the arguments are Nebraska and Boise State.

Nebraska went to a big conference and fell into complete obscurity. Boise won a ton and was a top tier program, and the minute they quit having undefeated seasons they were irrelevant.

I think at the end of the day, winning 10 games in a lower tier conference isn't good enough. You have to be undefeated year in and year out. That becomes harder and harder to do if you don't have the ability recruit the best talent out there. Money, now more than ever, has become a main factor in recruiting.
 
Aug 2, 2016
134
38
578
36
Oklahoma City
I think people seem to be missing the real risk/problem with not being in the B1G or SEC Conference. The risk is that the divide continues to widen. Money, Talent, and Perception will all build on and feed each other. This has a compounding effect with lessening all three for our University. What does averaging 10+ wins a season matter if it gets continually devalued? Meanwhile, that has a compounding impact on the university as a whole too! Like it or not, Football directly affects a University's ability to grow and improve.

Make no mistake here people. There future is VERY uncertain. Not being in the B1G or SEC might end up not mattering very much in 10-20 years. However, that currently seems much less likely. The greater risk is could be HUGELY significant. Imagine a future where our annual media revenue is 1/3rd or even 1/4th what the B1G and SEC, and continuing to get worse. Imagine a future where we go 12-1, but only make an expanded playoff as a 10th seed auto-bid! Imagine a future where the B1G and SEC take almost all the playoff revenue just so others can continue to participate. Imagine a future where the B1G and SEC decide to completely break away from the rest and form their own playoff. All of these are very possible and not being a part of it is a SIGNIFICANT risk. If there is any way to get a seat at the table, OSU should take any action necessary to achieve it.
i think all of us see this as being very true. I would bet that eventually the Miss St, Vanderbilt's, Rutgers, etc, will all be pushed out of the large conferences due to money that they most likely dont bring in. There may end up being a single superconference where all of the big names are put together. And by big names im talking the schools with the most money, largest fan bases, and largest eyeballs. Mich, tOSU, Texas, ou, texas am, bama, penn st, ND, Florida, etc. If you want to know which schools are considered large, and bring in the most dollars, look at the size of their stadiums. Most of these schools mentioned have 100k capacity because they draw a ton of people. The gap between the haves and have nots will continue to widen, and the TV execs will eventually start pushing more of their own agendas for the money they could make. The larger schools with the biggest donors will continue to succeed with the added money from TV contracts, as well as the money their boosters will be throwing at it. That may be where some of the smaller schools, such as oklahoma state, will be at a disadvantage. OSU had Pickens backing the athletic department, but a lot of those other schools have multiple people throwing that type of money around. One of the texas schools, can't remember if it is Texas or A&m, started a $200mil campaign for athletic facilities, and within the first few days had already secured over $125mil in donations. That is big money, and it is definitely going to be very interesting.
 
Nov 6, 2010
3,644
1,259
1,743
i think all of us see this as being very true. I would bet that eventually the Miss St, Vanderbilt's, Rutgers, etc, will all be pushed out of the large conferences due to money that they most likely dont bring in. There may end up being a single superconference where all of the big names are put together. And by big names im talking the schools with the most money, largest fan bases, and largest eyeballs. Mich, tOSU, Texas, ou, texas am, bama, penn st, ND, Florida, etc. If you want to know which schools are considered large, and bring in the most dollars, look at the size of their stadiums. Most of these schools mentioned have 100k capacity because they draw a ton of people. The gap between the haves and have nots will continue to widen, and the TV execs will eventually start pushing more of their own agendas for the money they could make. The larger schools with the biggest donors will continue to succeed with the added money from TV contracts, as well as the money their boosters will be throwing at it. That may be where some of the smaller schools, such as oklahoma state, will be at a disadvantage. OSU had Pickens backing the athletic department, but a lot of those other schools have multiple people throwing that type of money around. One of the texas schools, can't remember if it is Texas or A&m, started a $200mil campaign for athletic facilities, and within the first few days had already secured over $125mil in donations. That is big money, and it is definitely going to be very interesting.
Maybe, but there seems to be a general recognition among the big money schools that having more schools included is better for the sport overall, and at least some acknowledgement that there is a tipping point somewhere that will end up costing them money and destroying the sport. Besides the money, the big boys don't want an even playing field, they want a bunch of teams to compete against that are at severe disadvantages. The NFL has parity, and that's where really good college coaches go to get fired.
 
Jan 15, 2017
1,281
344
713
36
Enid
I think I agree with this, though there are certainly arguments to made on both sides. I think the poster children for the arguments are Nebraska and Boise State.

Nebraska went to a big conference and fell into complete obscurity. Boise won a ton and was a top tier program, and the minute they quit having undefeated seasons they were irrelevant.

I think at the end of the day, winning 10 games in a lower tier conference isn't good enough. You have to be undefeated year in and year out. That becomes harder and harder to do if you don't have the ability recruit the best talent out there. Money, now more than ever, has become a main factor in recruiting.
Yes this is true however how does TV money solve this problem when recruits are being paid by private corporations and not by the university? As long as NIL is allowed without limits, OSU will always be behind. Call me crazy but I actually want my university to recruit kids that want to go to school, want to work hard, want to compete for their place on the team, and I want my school to play other teams that promote that. I’m not interested in watching minor league football, I barely get interested in watching the NFL playoffs, I have zero interest in watching a team full of kids that want to sit out of practice because their NIL contract isn’t right, or threaten to transfer every time they get offered more money. ZERO interest.
 

NinjaPoke

Deputy
A/V Subscriber
Jul 9, 2016
1,509
734
743
27
Lawton, OK
I believe we need to pull a Clemson. If you compare these last decade between us and Clemson, the difference is very clear…they were able to defeat their conference boogeyman (FSU).

That’s the only difference between us. Had OSU not choked in 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2020, we would’ve had the Big XII titles with a potential CFP birth. However, we could not beat OU.

Now look a Clemson. Their last decade or so gave them 5 playoff births with 2 national championships. They are highly coveted for the SEC even though before 2011, they were a historically mediocre program.

We need to do that exact same thing when we sign the new GOR for the Big XII. We do not belong in the SEC. Our seasons will be a bunch of 7-5 with an occasional 8-4 or maybe a 9-3. I remember the times of 2014 (Dax Garmen) and 2018 (Corndog) where we were consistently losing games.

Stillwater was a ghost town during the fall and the games were half empty. It wasn’t a fun time. I believe that’s how it would be if we join the SEC at our current level.

I believe the next GOR for the Big XII will be 7 to 8 years (par for the course) which should be around the next realignment for when the B1G and SEC will poach the ACC.

If we dominate this new Big XII, consistently playing for Big XII championship and a CFP birth…we’ll get national spotlight which means, better NIL, better recruits, and a seat at the big boy table when the next realignment comes.

That’s what Clemson did. They were in a extremely weak conference with only FSU being a worthy challenger and even then, by the time 2015 came around, FSU was a shadow of their former self. So, Clemson just ran the table in their conference and just kept getting into the playoffs.

We have the potential do that with this new Big XII now that UO is gone. Our only threats would be Baylor, Cincinnati, and possibly Utah if that were to join.
 
Last edited:
Jan 21, 2006
2,226
1,264
1,743
77
Boulder
Yes this is true however how does TV money solve this problem when recruits are being paid by private corporations and not by the university? As long as NIL is allowed without limits, OSU will always be behind. Call me crazy but I actually want my university to recruit kids that want to go to school, want to work hard, want to compete for their place on the team, and I want my school to play other teams that promote that. I’m not interested in watching minor league football, I barely get interested in watching the NFL playoffs, I have zero interest in watching a team full of kids that want to sit out of practice because their NIL contract isn’t right, or threaten to transfer every time they get offered more money. ZERO interest.
I'll call you crazy. I'm an ancient, but you are yearning for a long ago time of free love and nickel beer. It's only a memory, never to be repeated.
 
Aug 2, 2016
134
38
578
36
Oklahoma City
I believe we need to pull a Clemson. If you compare these last decade between us and Clemson, the difference is very clear…they were able to defeat their conference boogeyman (FSU).

That’s the only difference between us. Had OSU not choked in 2013, 2015, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2020, we would’ve had the Big XII titles with a potential CFP birth. However, we could not beat OU.

Now look a Clemson. Their last decade or so gave them 5 playoff births with 2 national championships. They are highly coveted for the SEC even though before 2011, they were a historically mediocre program.

We need to do that exact same thing when we sign the new GOR for the Big XII. We do not belong in the SEC. Our seasons will be a bunch of 7-5 with an occasional 8-4 or maybe a 9-3. I remember the times of 2014 (Dax Garmen) and 2018 (Corndog) where we were consistently losing games.

Stillwater was a ghost town during the fall and the games were half empty. It wasn’t a fun time. I believe that’s how it would be if we join the SEC at our current level.

I believe the next GOR for the Big XII will be 7 to 8 years (par for the course) which should be around the next realignment for when the B1G and SEC will poach the ACC.

If we dominate this new Big XII, consistently playing for Big XII championship and a CFP birth…we’ll get national spotlight which means, better NIL, better recruits, and a seat at the big boy table when the next realignment comes.

That’s what Clemson did. They were in a extremely weak conference with only FSU being a worthy challenger and even then, by the time 2015 came around, FSU was a shadow of their former self. So, Clemson just ran the table in their conference and just kept getting into the playoffs.

We have the potential do that with this new Big XII now that UO is gone. Our only threats would be Baylor, Cincinnati, and possibly Utah if that were to join.
They have 20 ACC championships, which is the most in ACC history.
 
Oct 6, 2012
600
617
1,643
52
i think all of us see this as being very true. I would bet that eventually the Miss St, Vanderbilt's, Rutgers, etc, will all be pushed out of the large conferences due to money that they most likely dont bring in. There may end up being a single superconference where all of the big names are put together. And by big names im talking the schools with the most money, largest fan bases, and largest eyeballs. Mich, tOSU, Texas, ou, texas am, bama, penn st, ND, Florida, etc. If you want to know which schools are considered large, and bring in the most dollars, look at the size of their stadiums. Most of these schools mentioned have 100k capacity because they draw a ton of people. The gap between the haves and have nots will continue to widen, and the TV execs will eventually start pushing more of their own agendas for the money they could make. The larger schools with the biggest donors will continue to succeed with the added money from TV contracts, as well as the money their boosters will be throwing at it. That may be where some of the smaller schools, such as oklahoma state, will be at a disadvantage. OSU had Pickens backing the athletic department, but a lot of those other schools have multiple people throwing that type of money around. One of the texas schools, can't remember if it is Texas or A&m, started a $200mil campaign for athletic facilities, and within the first few days had already secured over $125mil in donations. That is big money, and it is definitely going to be very interesting.
I can't say that I disagree with this, but this is where/when college football becomes less (much less?) appealing to the masses. Remember, there was a time when baseball was the most dominant sport. Everyone was a baseball fan. It was as important to our society as apple pies and cars made in America. However, It only takes a couple of knuckleheads to ruin a good thing. When ESPN (they've already started ruining it) pulls something like this off they will lose the eyeballs of the "have nots". What they won't consider is that there are a lot more "have nots" than there are "haves". Sure, some of the "have nots" will become fans of "haves" but most will decide enough is enough.

Will this happen in our lifetimes? IDK, but if I were a betting man I would put a little on the under. It's already happening. I never thought ESPN would talk ou out of Bedlam, but they sure did. They are gonna talk themselves out of their cash cow if they aren't careful.
 
Jan 15, 2017
1,281
344
713
36
Enid
I'll call you crazy. I'm an ancient, but you are yearning for a long ago time of free love and nickel beer. It's only a memory, never to be repeated.
I’m talking about the team and kids we have right now, it’s ok that some of them are getting money, I didn’t say that they shouldn’t be paid at all, I said there should be limits. Offering $9 or 10 million to a kid that’s in high school and hasn’t played a down of college football is ridiculous and OSU will most likely never be able able to offer that.