Welcome Guest

That's BULLSH*T revisionist history. It was confirmed at the

Posted on: August 15, 2021 at 01:57:28 CT
zounami MU
Member For:
8.61 yrs
M.O.B. Votes:
time (and widely reported by news outlets) that Larry Scott had approval from ALL the Pac-10 presidents to expand the league to 16 – in particular, by adding Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Colorado.

The presidents had reservations about adding Tech and OSU (for academic reasons) but they understood that it was necessary baggage for landing the holy trinity of Texas, Texas A&M, and Oklahoma (note: necessary because of geographic, political, and conference-network dynamics). Some of the presidents *really* disliked the idea of adding OSU and wanted to invite KU instead (as a third "regional partner" with OU and CU in the future P16N) but that was a non-starter for Oklahoma and its state legislature at the time.

Ultimately, the deal-breaker was the LHN... Texas absolutely insisted on having its own network, in addition to the P16N (and planned on featuring major Texas High School games on it, but those plans were eventually nixed by the NCAA due to the obvious recruiting advantages it would bestow).

BTW, I know all of this because I followed the developments very closely at the time. Scott *confirmed* to the press that he had unconditional consent from the presidents to make a Pac-16 deal happen, but neither side would budge on the LHN.

Another factor was that the TV networks stepped in at the last minute and offered the Big 12 a lucrative deal to save the league, which the networks determined to be in their best financial interests at the time.

Many believe that Texas (unbeknownst to the other 5 schools, including OU) never had actual good-faith intentions of joining the PAC. It was all just a negotiating ploy for bigger TV contracts and leverage over the rest of the Big12.

In the end, UT got exactly what it wanted — the LHN for its tier 3, a massive deal for the Big 12's tier 1 & 2, and a regional conference it could fully control. And now they're headed to the richest & most powerful league in college sports.

The major loser, however, was the Pac-10. They had to settle for adding lowly Utah & Colorado (schools that no one cares about) and consequently their league has become an afterthought — irrelevant in major college sports now.

Edited by zounami at 02:21:14 on 08/15/21
Report Message

Please explain why this message is being reported.




The bellyaching over the SEC is hilarious - Johnny Utah MU - 8/14 11:38:51
     Thanks. Needed this reminder nm - Guinny_Ire MU - 8/16 11:35:30
     Actually Larry Scott was acting as the Lone Ranger. - ScottsdaleTiger MU - 8/14 18:16:29
          That's BULLSH*T revisionist history. It was confirmed at the - zounami MU - 8/15 01:57:28
     EXACTLY (nm) - North co-co champs MU - 8/14 11:58:04
          it definitely hurt their pride (nm) - zounami MU - 8/14 13:19:07
     AMen to these statements!! - Mizzou1990 MU - 8/14 11:40:44
          RE: AMen to these statements!! - Dawg UGA - 8/14 13:00:58
               Yea, before we knew SEC was even an option...nm - bcoop199 KC - 8/14 17:33:07
               None of us with brains wanted the Big. nm - hangman MU - 8/14 13:31:43
                    RE: None of us with brains wanted the Big. nm - Dawg UGA - 8/14 14:11:20
                    I honestly don't know anyone who still prefers the B1G. (nm) - zounami MU - 8/14 13:41:08
               it's hard to believe, but yes, there was a time (nm) - zounami MU - 8/14 13:16:57
               MO has always sided with the south. Mason Dixon state - Nats84 MU - 8/14 13:15:49
                    RE: MO has always sided with the south. Mason Dixon state - Dawg UGA - 8/14 14:16:57
                    It's complicated. Missouri is a melting pot... - zounami MU - 8/14 13:40:33

©2022 Fanboards L.L.C. — Our Privacy Policy   About Tigerboard