Larry Scott: Pac-12 is not done expanding

[Buff_since76]

So as we are discussing this thought I decided to visit some of our old B-12 friends to see their thoughts on the PAC-12 expanding:
Baylor – thinks that the Texas legislator will find a way for them to be added and it will be UT, BU, TTech, and OSU (aTm and OU end up going to the SEC). Others think that they need to be pro-active and try and find a home in the Big East (with KU & KSU) as the PAC-12 will never let them in. The third option they are thinking of is the B-12 and Big east get ripped apart, and they join the MWC and bring it up to 16 with KU, KSU, ISU and others to posture of a 5[SUP]th[/SUP] BCS conference (ACC would expand as well to 16, and you would have the SEC, ACC, B10G, PAC-16, and MWC as the BCS super conferences)

ISU – scared ***less about the prospect. They won’t end up in the PAC-10, B10G, and will most likely have to go to C-USA or MAC. Many feel the Hawkeyes would keep them out of B10G.

KU – Most would like to join the PAC-12. They feel the instability of Big Tex, and would pretty much like to go anywhere that is BCS and will take them. Most did like the idea of going PAC-12, and none wanted to go with UT. They were talking of adding KU, KSU, MU, and OU or OSU. Most did realize that for the deal to work some big name school in Texas would have to come. They want to dump KSU, but don’t think the state will allow it as KSU would have to go to MWC.

KSU – No real conversation on the subject.

MU – still wants into the B10G, and hope this would force them into getting offered in. They want out, and will jump on any other BCS ship that will take them (SEC, B10G, Big East, or PAC-12).

OU – is pretty nonchalant. They know they are wanted and if the B-12 goes they will pick where they want to end up. They feel they will be courted to join either the SEC, PAC-12 , or B10G, and I would agree with them.

OSU – feel that they would be in demand. Very similar thoughts to OU, and they feel they would get into a super conference on their own merit.

UT – is all about joining the PAC-12 with OU/OSU/TTech. There is an overwhelming support from their posters to do this. The majority of their posters seem to want to split from aTm, and start the super conference.

aTm- Is thinking they go to the SEC, leave UT to do whatever they want, and start getting all the good Texas players to play for them since they will be in the #1 college football conference.

TTech – didn’t really look up their fan boards as I don’t really care about them.

 

[superdeluxe]

so I did a little digging and it looks like everything from pac-12.org to pac-18.org is owned by the same registrar, so it is just some hedging by Scott. It is interesting that pac-20.org is owned by a different registrant

Interesting

Pac-16 was registered in May of 2010, while 18 was registered in June.

 

[SuperD]

The Texas Tech free Scout board has had some pretty good discussions. Most of the Tech fans are realistic that their only real shot getting in tied to UT, and they really detest the idea. They seem to overwhelmingly want the PAC rather than delusions of the SEC. They do have a couple of idiot posters including one guy that I've seen claim a couple of times that "CU isn't even the primary school in Colorado most people follow, Air Force is". :wtf:

 

[superdeluxe]

So as we are discussing this thought I decided to visit some of our old B-12 friends to see their thoughts on the PAC-12 expanding:
Baylor – thinks that the Texas legislator will find a way for them to be added and it will be UT, BU, TTech, and OSU (aTm and OU end up going to the SEC). Others think that they need to be pro-active and try and find a home in the Big East (with KU & KSU) as the PAC-12 will never let them in. The third option they are thinking of is the B-12 and Big east get ripped apart, and they join the MWC and bring it up to 16 with KU, KSU, ISU and others to posture of a 5[SUP]th[/SUP] BCS conference (ACC would expand as well to 16, and you would have the SEC, ACC, B10G, PAC-16, and MWC as the BCS super conferences)


ISU – scared ***less about the prospect. They won’t end up in the PAC-10, B10G, and will most likely have to go to C-USA or MAC. Many feel the Hawkeyes would keep them out of B10G.

Many are scared but also pissed off at Larry Scott who they think is the devil because he is what is wrong with College sports.

KU – Most would like to join the PAC-12. They feel the instability of Big Tex, and would pretty much like to go anywhere that is BCS and will take them. Most did like the idea of going PAC-12, and none wanted to go with UT. They were talking of adding KU, KSU, MU, and OU or OSU. Most did realize that for the deal to work some big name school in Texas would have to come. They want to dump KSU, but don’t think the state will allow it as KSU would have to go to MWC.

Pretty spot on, several fans wanted the BE for basketball purposes and better TV time slots.

OU – is pretty nonchalant. They know they are wanted and if the B-12 goes they will pick where they want to end up. They feel they will be courted to join either the SEC, PAC-12 , or B10G, and I would agree with them.

Majority want the pac WITH Texas, some want SEC. Whoever operates Landthieves twitter account is all gung ho about Pac-12 (Might be admin/owner of landthieves forums)

OSU – feel that they would be in demand. Very similar thoughts to OU, and they feel they would get into a super conference on their own merit.

OSU fans just want a plate at the table be it P12 or SEC. They also want to go along with OU.

UT – is all about joining the PAC-12 with OU/OSU/TTech. There is an overwhelming support from their posters to do this. The majority of their posters seem to want to split from aTm, and start the super conference.

Yeah Austin is all about Pac-12 right now with a giant FU to Big 12, Baylor and Aggies and wishing A&M gets curb stomped in the SEC

aTm- Is thinking they go to the SEC, leave UT to do whatever they want, and start getting all the good Texas players to play for them since they will be in the #1 college football conference.

All into SEC

TTech – didn’t really look up their fan boards as I don’t really care about them.

They are all in with the pac-12. I think mainly because they think they are tied with UT

I would also add Baylor, it appears that they are not too concerned about it

 

[sackman]

I would also add Baylor, it appears that they are not too concerned about it

Baylor is more concerned than anybody. They think they're entitled to a spot at the table but are somehow going to get aced out. They can't conceive of the notion that nobody wants them, but are pretty sure that's the case and it scares the daylights out of them.

 

[dply]

The Texas Tech free Scout board has had some pretty good discussions. Most of the Tech fans are realistic that their only real shot getting in tied to UT, and they really detest the idea. They seem to overwhelmingly want the PAC rather than delusions of the SEC. They do have a couple of idiot posters including one guy that I've seen claim a couple of times that "CU isn't even the primary school in Colorado most people follow, Air Force is". :wtf:

They are Tech fans. Intelligence isn't one of their strong suits. Hell what the **** is their strong suit?

 

[Buffsoldier]

They are Tech fans. Intelligence isn't one of their strong suits. Hell what the **** is their strong suit?

Cotton and STD's.

 

[Maxer]

So as we are discussing this thought I decided to visit some of our old B-12 friends to see their thoughts on the PAC-12 expanding:

This is great -- thanks for taking the time and sharing.

Baylor – thinks that the Texas legislator will find a way for them to be added and it will be UT, BU, TTech, and OSU (aTm and OU end up going to the SEC). Others think that they need to be pro-active and try and find a home in the Big East (with KU & KSU) as the PAC-12 will never let them in. The third option they are thinking of is the B-12 and Big east get ripped apart, and they join the MWC and bring it up to 16 with KU, KSU, ISU and others to posture of a 5[SUP]th[/SUP] BCS conference (ACC would expand as well to 16, and you would have the SEC, ACC, B10G, PAC-16, and MWC as the BCS super conferences)

Even when the possibility of Texas joining was on the table last summer, Baylor did not have an invite to the PAC, and they weren't getting one. The presidents were willing to hold their noses and invite TTech, Okla, Okla St, but not Baylor. No chance of them being in the PAC. Zero.

ISU – scared ***less about the prospect. They won’t end up in the PAC-10, B10G, and will most likely have to go to C-USA or MAC. Many feel the Hawkeyes would keep them out of B10G.

They are correct to be scared. More likely the fact that they are ISU will do a better job keeping them out of the Big 10 than Iowa can.

KU – Most would like to join the PAC-12. They feel the instability of Big Tex, and would pretty much like to go anywhere that is BCS and will take them. Most did like the idea of going PAC-12, and none wanted to go with UT. They were talking of adding KU, KSU, MU, and OU or OSU. Most did realize that for the deal to work some big name school in Texas would have to come. They want to dump KSU, but don’t think the state will allow it as KSU would have to go to MWC.

KU isn't coming to the PAC. Not b/c they're so terrible, but mostly because their media market is duplicative of Missouri (who could possibly get an invite) so they don't bring anything to the table for their split. I think it's possible that the Big East would take them since they are such a powerful basketball school and the Big East needs more football programs.

KSU – No real conversation on the subject.

Guess they know there's nothing to say.

MU – still wants into the B10G, and hope this would force them into getting offered in. They want out, and will jump on any other BCS ship that will take them (SEC, B10G, Big East, or PAC-12).

I could see them getting an invite to the Big 10 or the PAC. In order to get an invite to the PAC they'd have to part of a package deal with a powerhouse school I think though. Their media markets are the biggest outside of Texas in the Big 12 (assuming you include both St. Louis and Kansas City, which I think is reasonable).

OU – is pretty nonchalant. They know they are wanted and if the B-12 goes they will pick where they want to end up. They feel they will be courted to join either the SEC, PAC-12 , or B10G, and I would agree with them.

I think that's true, and I don't know nearly as much about OU as I'm sure you guys do. I think OU is borderline academically, and I'm not sure how many Olympic/baseball-type sports they offer (big deal in the PAC).

Also -- would adding OU get the PAC the Dallas (and to a lesser extent Houston) markets? I assume so, and that's why everyone wants them, but maybe you guys can shed some more light.

OSU – feel that they would be in demand. Very similar thoughts to OU, and they feel they would get into a super conference on their own merit.

This is hilarious to me. They have a decent football program thanks to T. Boone Pickens, who is 83 years old. Take him away, and they are a backwater school in the middle of nowhere with decent facilities and no media market. The PAC will take them only if it's part of a package that delivers Texas.

UT – is all about joining the PAC-12 with OU/OSU/TTech. There is an overwhelming support from their posters to do this. The majority of their posters seem to want to split from aTm, and start the super conference.

It's been my impression (based primarily on occasionally visiting Shaggybevo) that they are split between this and going independent. Obviously they can go wherever they want. I think they will have a hard time bullying the PAC like they bullied the Big 12, but I'm sure they will still be a pain in the ass. It would probably be worth it though.

aTm- Is thinking they go to the SEC, leave UT to do whatever they want, and start getting all the good Texas players to play for them since they will be in the #1 college football conference.

I think the first 2 points are probably likely, and the last not even remotely close to reality.

TTech – didn’t really look up their fan boards as I don’t really care about them.

And that's all you need to say about that. They better cozy up nice and tight with UT, since that's the only way they aren't going to be left out in the cold (aka the MWC).

 

[Quattro]

Having UTerus in the Pac would be way more trouble than it's worth. Look at what they did to the SWC and now the Big 12.

 

[Jens1893]

OU probably doesn´t get you the DFW market, there´s still UT, but my rough guess is it gets you a decent sized foot in the door.

 

[CUFan]

Cotton and STD's.

Excellent. Gave out too much rep in the last 24.

 

[superdeluxe]

From several OU friends, they say that majority of OU alums live in DFW, since it is the closest large metro area to Norman. You definitely would be able to get carriage in DFW if OU was in the pac-16

 

[MrFrumpylane]

I really don't understand why UT would want TTU to join along with them? If they could care less about parting with the aggies, why should they even care about the red raiders?

 

[Maxer]

I really don't understand why UT would want TTU to join along with them? If they could care less about parting with the aggies, why should they even care about the red raiders?

Texas State Legislature, is my understanding.

 

[SpacemanSpiff]

I really don't understand why UT would want TTU to join along with them? If they could care less about parting with the aggies, why should they even care about the red raiders?

UT doesn't care. But the powers that be in Texas state politics do. The western portion of Texas is a big reason that Gov Perry is where he is. He would be forced to make sure that Tech was included in a move.

Whoever is tied to Texas will be a function of who is in power in Austin. During the forming of the Big 12, Baylor was heavily represented. Depending on when the next conference realignment happens, will determine who will be tied to Texas.

 

[sackman]

I really don't understand why UT would want TTU to join along with them? If they could care less about parting with the aggies, why should they even care about the red raiders?

It's about having an entourage. Hangers-on that will do your bidding. That's what they got when they invaded the Big 8, and it's probably what they would want to join the Pac. It's about having a built in bloc of votes you can depend on.

I *might* be convinced to take UT - alone, with no hangers on...

No, I wouldn't. UT is a cancer. Best to be avoided completely. Don't even take the chance, Larry. Just say no.

 

[MrFrumpylane]

Texas State Legislature, is my understanding.

I've heard that, but I really think they don't have enough pull or care to control this.. but if that statement was true:

First- Baylor would have actually been a realistic potential addition when realignment talks were happening a year ago, but they never were in the picture according to Scott (while UT, A&M, OU, TTU, OSU did almost merge with the Pac-10).

Second- A&M (a much bigger and integral rival to the longhorns) seems to be facing no resistance with talks of merging with the SEC. Texas Legislature is staying mum.

 

[Maxer]

I've heard that, but I really think they don't have enough pull or care to control this.. but if that statement was true:

First- Baylor would have actually been a realistic potential addition when realignment talks were happening a year ago, but they never were in the picture according to Scott (while UT, A&M, OU, TTU, OSU did almost merged with the Pac-10).

Second- A&M (a much bigger and integral rival to the longhorns) seems to be facing no resistance with talks of merging with the SEC. Texas Legislature is staying mum.

Baylor alums in the Legislature did not stay mum last summer: http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_15245584

 

[MrFrumpylane]

UT doesn't care. But the powers that be in Texas state politics do. The western portion of Texas is a big reason that Gov Perry is where he is. He would be forced to make sure that Tech was included in a move.

Whoever is tied to Texas will be a function of who is in power in Austin. During the forming of the Big 12, Baylor was heavily represented. Depending on when the next conference realignment happens, will determine who will be tied to Texas.

Since you live in Texas, you obviously understand that the A&M-UT rivalry is by far larger than the TTU-UT rivalry. Why would legislature be okay with breaking up a more important rivalry but yet preserve a less meaningful one? Just because of Rick Perry's roots in West Texas? Not exactly convincing.

It's about having an entourage. Hangers-on that will do your bidding. That's what they got when they invaded the Big 8, and it's probably what they would want to join the Pac. It's about having a built in bloc of votes you can depend on.

I *might* be convinced to take UT - alone, with no hangers on...

No, I wouldn't. UT is a cancer. Best to be avoided completely. Don't even take the chance, Larry. Just say no.

I can see some truth to that, but you really think UT is really willing to go out of their way just to keep TTU as their bitches? That sounds a bit far fetched if that is the sole reason.

 

[Maxer]

Since you live in Texas, you obviously understand that the A&M-UT rivalry is by far larger than the TTU-UT rivalry. Why would legislature be okay with breaking up a more important rivalry but yet preserve a less meaningful one? Just because of Rick Perry's roots in West Texas? Not exactly convincing.

I do not live in Texas (but I have many friends from there!) but my understanding is that A&M does not want to be seen as needing UT's help ("we'll take our ball and go to the SEC!") and Tech is wiling to take what it can get.

 

[MrFrumpylane]

Baylor alums in the Legislature did not stay mum last summer: http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_15245584

But.. if the rumors were true, that UT, A&M, and TTU were this >< close to being ushered into the Pac-10 up until the last minute, willing to leave Baylor behind.. something tells me that within the legislative ranks, all Texas schools are not quite as tied together as we originally believed.

 

[CUFan]

Since you live in Texas, you obviously understand that the A&M-UT rivalry is by far larger than the TTU-UT rivalry. Why would legislature be okay with breaking up a more important rivalry but yet preserve a less meaningful one? Just because of Rick Perry's roots in West Texas? Not exactly convincing.

I would imagine part of it would be that Tech may not get another BCS invite on its own and could be left out in the cold with Baylor. A&M would be going to the SEC and would be fine (assuming those rumors are true). Furthermore, they could probably at least force A&M and UT to continue to play OOC. If UT goes independent they would need the game anyway.

 

[Mick Ronson]

UT's biggest rival is whichever of ATM or OU they have the best, most recent W-L against.

if they've been beating ATM and losing to OU: "ATM is the bigger rival because these are the people you see every day at your job, we respect the degree, blah blah blah....OU is cheating to keep up with Texas".

if they've been beating OU and losing to ATM: "OU is the bigger rival because the game has national importance, the road to championships goes through Dallas in October....ATM is the country cousin/little brother that embarrasses you.....ATM has been cheating to keep up with Texas".

seems kind of counter-intuitive, but that's how the horn mind works....preferential memory trends to self-aggrandizement.

 

[SpacemanSpiff]

I would imagine part of it would be that Tech may not get another BCS invite on its own and could be left out in the cold with Baylor. A&M would be going to the SEC and would be fine (assuming those rumors are true). Furthermore, they could probably at least force A&M and UT to continue to play OOC. If UT goes independent they would need the game anyway.

This. It's not about the best rivalry. It's about making sure that they get a soft landing somewhere. If A&M bolts for the SEC, then they have their soft landing. Who gets carried along is dependent on who is in power in Austin.

 

[MrFrumpylane]

I would imagine part of it would be that Tech may not get another BCS invite on its own and could be left out in the cold with Baylor. A&M would be going to the SEC and would be fine (assuming those rumors are true). Furthermore, they could probably at least force A&M and UT to continue to play OOC. If UT goes independent they would need the game anyway.

I'm aware that TTU could very well become BCSless and understand that's their side of the argument. What I don't get is UT's side of the argument in which they would actually give a damn about bringing TTU to the Pac-12 with them (in addition than Sacky's response).

 

[CUFan]

I'm aware that TTU could very well become BCSless and understand that's their side of the argument. What I don't get is UT's side of the argument in which they would actually give a damn about bringing TTU to the Pac-12 with them (in addition than Sacky's response).

My understanding is that UT gets a lot of public money. So if the legislators tell them take TT with you or we are cutting your funding, they are probably going to listen.

 

[dio]

My TTU friend is very nervous and doesn't believe they would get an invite to the Pac

 

[MrFrumpylane]

My understanding is that UT gets a lot of public money. So if the legislators tell them take TT with you or we are cutting your funding, they are probably going to listen.

Then why wasn't that the case with Baylor a year ago?

 

[absinthe]

It's about having an entourage. Hangers-on that will do your bidding. That's what they got when they invaded the Big 8, and it's probably what they would want to join the Pac. It's about having a built in bloc of votes you can depend on.

I *might* be convinced to take UT - alone, with no hangers on...

No, I wouldn't. UT is a cancer. Best to be avoided completely. Don't even take the chance, Larry. Just say no.

Sackman to get way:

Larry Scott: Texas won't join Pac-12

By David Ubben
ESPN.com
Archive

The Pac-12's desire to make its own network -- and in the process prevent the creation of the Longhorn Network -- was a factor that kept Texas in the Big 12.

Big 12 blog


And now, with the Pac-12 set to make an official announcement later Wednesday about its network, Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott told the Austin American-Statesman that it all but eliminates the possibility of future membership for the Longhorns.

http://espn.go.com/college-football...tt-longhorn-network-keep-texas-joining-pac-12
......

 

[CUFan]

Then why wasn't that the case with Baylor a year ago?

I am a little confused at the exact meaning of your question. I thought that was the case a year ago, but the PAC told them Baylor would not becoming under any circumstances.