Discussion in 'Colorado Football Message Board' started by Hugegroove, May 16, 2010.
Boren is the UT President's (can't remember his name) and UT's lapdog. He'll do/say anything to make sure that the Sooner Schooner remains firmly towed behind the LongWhorn gravy train.
Who knows how everything is going to wash out in the end, all we have heard and read so far is rampant speculation without any real evidence other than "I heard from an unknown source that he heard, blah, blah."
This all stated, it is obvious that if there was not at the minimum some legitimate interest in making changes from the standpoint of certain conferences and some schools that this would have died and gone away just like it has so often before. The fact that it keeps on popping up, the new presence of the non-denial denials, the timing of the the TV contracts, all lead to the prospects being better than any time in recent history. All it takes is one conference (Big X probably) and one school (Mizzou, ND, ?) to take the first step and then all the others decide to jump rather than get left behind.
OU more than anyone else has a vested interest in the BigX staying put. In terms of finances, fan support, and publicity they are clearly the number two in the conference after UT and thus in a solid position. They get the advantage of being in a conference that consistently contends for national championships and is constantly in the Media without having to vie for those benefits against any other schools that have major advantages over them other than UT. If the conference breaks up and UT leaves OU loses. If UT leaves, chances are aTm goes with them leaving a conference without its major names and draws assuming this was all prompted by Mizzou and kNU starting the process. OU ends up in what becomes essentially a mid-major conference with the remnants of the Big XII and new lower profile replacements. If OU goes SEC with UT as some have speculated the enter a world of schools that are willing to outspend them, outfacility them, (and outcheat them,) to get their share of publicity and the high profile. In the Big XII OU's program is higher budget and priority than all except UT and maybe aTm and kNU. In the SEC they line up behind Florida, Tennessee, Bama, UGA, LSU, and of course the added Texas. Even the lower teams in the SEC like Auburn, Ole Miss, South Carolina are willing to throw resouces at football that OU is not used to contending against.
From what he knows right now Boren may be right but his statements also carry a tone of wishfull thinking on his part.
If the Big 12 is going to stay intact, then UT, A&M, OU, and Braska need to take the lead and propose equal revenue sharing for TV revenues.
Then immediately after that issue is settled, partner with Fox to create a Big 12 network of their own that will replace the sorry-ass FSN deal that expires in 2012.
-In that process I would seek to leverage new sports that the Big 12 is in prime position to "own" for future broadcasting, with Rodeo being #1. The Big 12 footprint basically owns the geographic footprint to make this a viable NCAA sport and it would be a great ratings help for the non-football/non-basketball season.
Once that is on its way to being completed and making everyone invested-owners in a conference network, then start the process of creating a research consortium that pools academic resources and helps increase the profile of the members.
I don't see how that can all be accomplished unless the Big Ten ignores the Big 12 members in their expansion, or limits it to only Missouri.
CU still seems like a fish-out-of-water in the Big 12, and even with all of the above not sure they still wouldn't choose to join the Pac-10 if the Pac can put together a suitable TV deal.
Come on, Dave Boren. Let's see you make your case. How, exactly, would Colorado be better off in the B12 than another BCS conference? Why would Mizzou regret moving to the B10 or CU to the Pac?
OU is in the epicenter of the B12. David is in the geographic middle of the conference, so it's no surprise he likes his position. Nine of the B12 opponents are within an easy and relatively short interstate drive. OU is also conveniently located to the CCG, whereever it's played. When you are in the middle, it's hard to imagine what it's like living on the fringe.
Don't forget, in his previous life, Boren was a pretty big time politico....a profession in which the English language is certainly tending towards the malleable, the equivocal, and slippery.
Exactly. The cat is smooooooth when it comes to that. Don't doubt this guy for a second -- he knows what he's doing.
And this story above is a smokescreen. The fact is, both OSU and OU have been talked to privately about a move to the SEC if the conference falls apart and both schools would jump at the chance.
I realize UT and A&M might be privately pushing for a Pac-10 bid, but I still think those two and the OK schools are headed to the SEC. And if the Texas schools go west, look for OU and OSU to go to the SEC along with some combo of Clemson, Miami, FSU or Georgia Tech.
well count me in as one that doesn't see the advantage of CU joining the Pac 10.. I don't see any higher revenues projections or a bigger attendance at CU games because Arizona State and Cal are coming to play in Folsom instead of Iowa State and Kansas State..
How does CU leaving for the Pac 10 get us away from the "fringe"?
It doesn't. Nor does it bring OU any closer to the fringe.
We've already established, though, that Cali has more CU alumni that what you find anywhere in B12 country. And we know that many CU alum turn their noses up at many of the B12 locals, unlike their sooner counterparts.
A move to the PAC also aligns the college sports market with the rest of the sports teams in the state. Think about it, if we're such a natural fit for the Big 12 why does every single one of our professional sports teams play in the West Coast divisions instead of lumping in with say the Texas teams...and yes I know that is a stretch when you have a division like the NFC East.
because there's less west teams than eastern teams?
The key point for me is that OU's AD David Boren fell woefully short of explaining why Mizzou or Colorado has any incentive to stick around.
If he mentioned something about of OU believes in revenue sharing, or that the B12 is as only as strong as it's weakest program, then my ears would have perked up. But he didn't.
If Mr. Boren made a case that the B12 states are growing ever more important from the perspective of television markets, or that the B12 schools aren't suffering from the same crippling deficits that are impacted other conferences, that might have been interesting. But he didn't, probably because he couldn't. He didn't even allude to a B12 television contract that would meet or surpass what the SEC and B10 have negotiated.
He didn't give anything concrete about why CU (or MIZZOU) ought to stick around.
Separate names with a comma.