Skip to content

Superconference not the direction Pac-12 wants to go

PAC-12 (edit 2)_1

At least not yet. Reportedly.

Even if Bob Stoops thinks that superconferences are the direction toward which the college football world is heading, the Pac-12 appears to be content staying at 12 members barring a major shift in conference realignment, in which case Larry Scott may be more reactive than proactive.

Sources have told Jon Wilner of the San Jose Mercury News that the preference for Pac-12 presidents and chancellors is a a continuation in the conference membership status quo — in other words, for A&M to stay in the Big 12 and for the SEC to remain at 12 members.

That’s likely not going to happen barring some magnificent trip up in the legal process now that A&M is officially looking to withdraw from the conference. Still, that’s for what Pac-12 officials are reportedly keeping their fingers crossed.

From the Mercury News:

“The conference has stability… it has a football championship game … it has the richest TV deal in college sports history … and it has a wholly-owned network(s) to serve its fans, provide unprecedented exposure for its athletes, promote the league’s academic mission — and generate millions of dollars per school annually once it attains maximum distribution.”

But, in the event that the SEC and Big Ten begin plucking schools, expect the Pac-12 to follow with an invite to — at least — Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. The Sooners have expressed an accelerated interest in their long-term conference security over the past week that may or may  not necessarily be tied to Texas’ interests.

“Their bond has frayed,” a source said. “Texas overplayed its hand.”

“The SEC won’t stop at 13, or even 14. And if the SEC is at 14 or 16, the Big Ten will do it,” another source told the Mercury News. ”At that point, (the Pac-12) would be crazy not to entertain the idea of expansion.”

But that doesn’t mean that Texas couldn’t join the Pac-whatever. Now, I know what you’re thinking — “What about the Longhorn Network?” As BusinessofCollegeSports.com explains, Texas’ LHN could morph into one of the of the Pac-12′s regional networks, and seeing how Texas and Texas Tech would likely be a package deal (unless the Pac-whatever wants another school), that means Texas would have to share revenue with the Red Raiders.

Make no mistake, though: any conference would want Texas as part of their conference. That doesn’t mean they’ll cater to Texas’ every desire, but you can bet there would be some compromise.

Unless the Longhorns go independent in football. At which point, congratulations on joining Conference USA (or the ACC as some have speculated?) in all Olympic sports.

Permalink 17 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Big 12 Conference, Oklahoma Sooners, Pac-12 Conference, Rumor Mill, Southeastern Conference, Texas A&M Aggies, Top Posts
17 Responses to “Superconference not the direction Pac-12 wants to go”
  1. yeti47 says: Sep 6, 2011 11:58 AM

    Love the Misdirection plays by the Big 3 conferences…SEC, B1G, and Pac 12

  2. southernpatriots says: Sep 6, 2011 12:07 PM

    These Big 3 apparently want to be careful and may resist the growth as long as they can until 1 of them jumps and adds 2 or 4 schools/teams quickly and then you will see a race for the remaining conferences to fill their dance cards before all the best teams are taken (as has been stated many times by southernpatriots, whom we miss and want to hurry back!)

  3. drummerhoff says: Sep 6, 2011 12:27 PM

    There’s no rushing these monkeys.

  4. southernpatriots says: Sep 6, 2011 12:32 PM

    Thanks to alligatorsnapper for the posting for us above ….

    ….and also many thanks to tigersgeaux for the great tailgating, transportation, and most especially—–the cleanup which enabled us to see the game in its entirety!!! A good game, which suprised us in many ways and a wonderful time with so many wonderful Duck fans and LSU fans.

    SEC sources tell us that they are not delaying adding to the SEC but are wanting to proceed carefully at the “appropriate time.” We think the “appropriate time” will be next spring/summer.

  5. rlr79 says: Sep 6, 2011 12:34 PM

    I don’t buy it. This is all a political cover for the Pac and the SEC to say “We tried to stop it, we did everything in our power, but these institutions were bent on leaving their conference and if they didn’t land with us, they would have went somewhere else” Its just a PR ploy, a shell game, and at the end of the day you will see the big three conferences at 16 teams and what’s left over forming a forth.

  6. boomerdt says: Sep 6, 2011 12:42 PM

    I do appreciate each conference not trying to trip over their own or their counter parts “member” . We may be seeing conference realization that “more teams does not equal more money” …. so now the conferences are civilly fighting over the remaining elite schools.

    Just a thought – couldn’t a “super conference” be a bunch of amazing schools in one conference? Kick out the worst and add the best? I don’t know if conference rules would allow that… so feel free to beat me up on the idea.

  7. sportsdrenched.com says: Sep 6, 2011 2:31 PM

    If Texas is such a homewrecker, why would the other members of any conference want them around? After if the Big 12 folds, that’s 2 conferences they’ve imploded.

  8. bodarville says: Sep 6, 2011 2:34 PM

    Boomer may be on to something. What’s stopping Ohio State from realizing they can keep more money if they don’t have to share it with Purdue? A national super conference featuring Texas, Notre Dame, and the all you can print money could have some appeal.

  9. bender4700 says: Sep 6, 2011 2:37 PM

    It seems like either the Pac-12 is trying to avoid the same thing the SEC avoided in Texas A&M, exit fees.

    If the Pac-12 effectively pulls the big 4 from the Big XII they are on the hook for their exit fees. Possibly more since the Big XII would basically close.

    or

    Pac-12 doesn’t want Texas.

    As great of a program as Texas has going, there’s a lot of concern and red flags for any future conference partners.

    SWC = dead
    BIG XII = on life support with the plug falling out.

    Not sure the Pac-12 is fully comfortable in the idea of Texas moving to their 3rd conference with the first 2 folding.

    But the Pac 12 left the door for OU and OSU. Odd.

  10. bender4700 says: Sep 6, 2011 2:47 PM

    bodarville says:
    Sep 6, 2011 2:34 PM
    Boomer may be on to something. What’s stopping Ohio State from realizing they can keep more money if they don’t have to share it with Purdue? A national super conference featuring Texas, Notre Dame, and the all you can print money could have some appeal.

    They made more money last year than ND made.

    So no, Ohio State going independant would not be smart. There was a lot of talk about how Indiana made more from Tv than Notre Dame. Swarbrick came out and said that they are not IND for the money but for the status. They are Notre Dame. They don’t need any conference partners. They get a BCS auto bid alone.

  11. bender4700 says: Sep 6, 2011 2:54 PM

    Texas would go IND to have their network, and for the status.

    Not money.

  12. wordonthequad says: Sep 6, 2011 3:26 PM

    (crickets chirping)

  13. bender4700 says: Sep 6, 2011 3:32 PM

    No offense, someone’s blog isn’t a reference or source of information.

    The fact it’s being talked about as “salvagable” means it’s dead.

    If OU/OSU and UT/TT go to the Pac-12 (16), the only hope is if the Big XII gets BYU and Notre Dame to join, bringing with them TCU and Boise.

    Not happening.

  14. centexhorn says: Sep 6, 2011 3:46 PM

    Make no mistake, the Big Ten and the SEC are culpable in this. Picking off members of the Big 12 was sure to bring this about. Especially the SEC by adding a 13th member. They basically ushered in this brave new era.

    Some of you posters are incredibly unintellectual and oversimplistic. The SWC dissolved and the Big 12 dissolved and Texas was a member of both so surely Texas must be responsible for both, right? Wrong. Texas didn’t kill the SWC. Arkansas left to the SEC largely because they were the only school not from Texas in the conference and also largely because of the SMU scandal. They were a big blow to the conference’s strength, so it was in the best interests of all the members who left to leave and pair with the Big 8.

    Texas had no special role in Arkansas leaving the conference. The conference just wasn’t national enough. It was a conference of Texas teams and that has less appeal to a national audience.

    The Big 12, I’ll give you that. But without the Longhorn Network and with true equal revenue sharing, it’s hard to see how Texas could be any kind of disruption. There’s no reason to think we will be anything other than an ideal conference member. We’ll add a shit-load of revenue to the pot. DeLoss Dodds isn’t going to be around much longer as athletic director anyway.

  15. bender4700 says: Sep 6, 2011 3:58 PM

    “Some of you posters are incredibly unintellectual and oversimplistic”

    Any examples to back such a claim? Or does simply claiming it make it real?

    Did anyone DIRECTLY blame Texas for the 2 previous conferences collapsing?

    If Texas leaves, they will be responsible for 1 closing. According to the Big XII commissioner THEY are the main team that has to stay. The Big XII said it, so if Texas leaves and the Big XII dissolves, yes, they are to blame. (but does that make them bad? NO). They left the SWC, along with Tech, A&M, and Baylor. They are 1/4th the blame for the SWC collasping. Again, are they BAD for making a decision? NO.

    Texas fan needs to get their head out of their butt and stop thinking EVERYONE is hating on Texas for simply talking about reality.

    Believe it or not, not everyone thinks a school doing what’s best for them makes them evil, but truth is truth.

    The Big Ten didn’t pick anyone off. Nebraska went to them. The SEC is simply answering the phone as well. Nebraska and Colorado left, A&M is leaving. Relax, just because circumstances heavily controlled by Texas resulted in this, doesn’t mean that everyone hates Texas, for those reasons. The reason people hate Texas is largely because of people like you.

    Other people are smart and know what’s up. Other programs have won, and are prestigious. Many Texas fans seem to think the opposite.

    I have little to no issue with the actual program of Texas, their fans are what bother me.

    Is it possible for Texas fan to discussion fact and theories without resulting to being an insulting jerk? Get over yourself. ONE title in 30 years. Whoa, watch out.

  16. bender4700 says: Sep 6, 2011 4:04 PM

    I just don’t understand why every time someone talks about Texas, if it ain’t praise, it’s hate and stupidity.

    It must suck being that smart and that hated. Just back off the ego guy.

  17. mithrilsoul says: Sep 6, 2011 4:09 PM

    Anyone else notice that the conference that was right in the middle of all of this expansion talk last year–the Big 10–has been absolutely, completely, stunningly silent about everything this time around?

    If you ask me, it’s like one of those thriller movies where the protagonist is walking through some woods and says, “It’s quiet…TOO quiet”–just moments before a bunch of giant mutant aliens jump out of the bushes and attack.

    If you ask me, the Big 10 has been *too* quiet through all of this. Methinks they are up to something and when everything begins to splinter, they are going to be the conference with all of their ducks in a row.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!