to make it as an independent. Our all around sports are as good as anyone in the country and our income should soar without having to share income with schools with lesser incomes. We could keep OU/Texas game going annually if we chose to. What do you think?
I think OU has what it takes
- Thread starter OUFB90
- Start date
A very interesting scenario, sort of like having a "Notre Dame" of the southwest.
OU could retain its Texas and OSU rivalries and cherry pick all over the country.
No doubt this scenario has its pros and cons....I want to read what the "cons" are.
I've got a few:
TV contract? Currently with FSW. That would be gone.
Where do the non revenue programs play? Disaster in scheduling. ND teams up with the ACC to solve this problem, but who's to say the Big12 or any other conference would allow OU the same
.
Again, who's to say Texas or OSU just wouldn't drop the series? Texas did the A&M rivalry.
That's a few...........
TV contract? Currently with FSW. That would be gone.
Where do the non revenue programs play? Disaster in scheduling. ND teams up with the ACC to solve this problem, but who's to say the Big12 or any other conference would allow OU the same
.
Again, who's to say Texas or OSU just wouldn't drop the series? Texas did the A&M rivalry.
That's a few...........
Not being part of a conference, Conference Champions are one thing the committee looked at when determining the playoffs
I think it's worthy of exploring.
As far as scheduling, as long as we satisfy the relatively new requirement to play all FBS schools except one, we'd be golden.
Also, if Texas, (and everything for the glorification of their massive ego) doesn't want to continue with the RRS after the current contract with the Cotton Bowl expires, screw them.
Right now, they need us way more than we need them.
I think it would distinguish OU as the really big dog that we are.
Next time Boren, Castiglione and I dine I'm broaching the topic aggressively.
As far as scheduling, as long as we satisfy the relatively new requirement to play all FBS schools except one, we'd be golden.
Also, if Texas, (and everything for the glorification of their massive ego) doesn't want to continue with the RRS after the current contract with the Cotton Bowl expires, screw them.
Right now, they need us way more than we need them.
I think it would distinguish OU as the really big dog that we are.
Next time Boren, Castiglione and I dine I'm broaching the topic aggressively.
One other thing. If it's so great to be an independent, why are there only three? ND, BYU, Army.
Valid point there too.
Had Notre Dame had one more game to showcase their talent, who knows?
One of the three, ND, hasn't done too bad historically.
Army is no longer about football, given its higher-than-Navy and Air Force requirements.
BYU is geographically a bit more isolated than most teams (ie. Boise State) to have great sustainable success.
OU would not have the same issues as BYU and Army.
Very hard to schedule games during the conference season in any sport. Takes away options to make any NCAA tournament in a sport where a conference tournament gets an auto invite.
Remember when the ultimate bachelor, Warren Beatty decided to get married because of all the risks of not?
It's kind of the same thing with college athletics. Even Notre Dame, the ultimate independent, has formed an alliance with a conference out of their geographic area, because there are more options when you're in a conference. I'd love for Texas to go independent, because it's a very very hard thing to do. Navy was an independent for a long time. Now they're in a conference.
And I believe it would hurt recruiting. Parents of many recruits want some idea of where road games are going to be. That goes away when you go independent.
THe grass on the other side that is greener is usually a spray paint job.
Remember when the ultimate bachelor, Warren Beatty decided to get married because of all the risks of not?
It's kind of the same thing with college athletics. Even Notre Dame, the ultimate independent, has formed an alliance with a conference out of their geographic area, because there are more options when you're in a conference. I'd love for Texas to go independent, because it's a very very hard thing to do. Navy was an independent for a long time. Now they're in a conference.
And I believe it would hurt recruiting. Parents of many recruits want some idea of where road games are going to be. That goes away when you go independent.
THe grass on the other side that is greener is usually a spray paint job.
IMO, the worst thing any major football power could do right now is go independent. Perfect example is ND.
Right or wrong, CF is set up as a conference structure with the lone major exception being ND. All of the other major football powers have to share their bowl/television monies with conference members whereas ND basically wants to keep everything to themselves. That's their choice - fine. But when it comes time for the playoff selection committee to select the final 4, many of their alumni/fans expected the committee - made up of mostly P5 members or affiliates - to select them if they had the same record as a P5 conference champion who is forced to share with other conference members. Fortunately, Stanford beat them but I would have loved to hear the screaming out of South Bend if they finished with 1 loss and were by-passed for a P5 member/conference champ with one loss. If that's not arrogance, please define the word to us. "I don't want to play by everyone else's rules but I want you to make an exception for my greed."
Keep in mind, there are 5 conference champions vying for 4 spots AND holy ND. The only way an independent gets in is if they go undefeated and even then who knows?
In the Big 12, you are defended by nine fellow members. Go Independent, and you will be hated by everyone else - including those nine.
Notre Dame needs to give Barry royalties, had he said yes back in the day. OU would have been independent for 40 years now.