Big 12 BOD Chair and Oklahoma President David Boren yesterday said conference expansion was "not a given,” according to Ryan Aber of the OKLAHOMAN. Boren at the OU Board of Regents meeting said, "I'm not saying there won't be expansion. But I'm not saying it can be automatically assumed that there will be expansion.” He added that fan input "would play a factor in his decision at least." Aber notes Boren "at one point was the conference's strongest voice in favor of expansion, saying the conference was 'psychologically disadvantaged' in its current structure." Boren yesterday said that while the "traditional network model was unlikely to happen," he "wanted the conference to be on the forefront of digital rights and digital distribution" (OKLAHOMAN, 9/15). In Tulsa, Eric Bailey notes Boren "commended the job the [expansion] candidates did in displaying their strengths." Boren: "The question is at the end of the day is, ‘Do we have certain decisions or can we say with certainty that expansion would add strength to the conference?’" Bailey notes the discussion process will "likely expand past the Oct. 17" Big 12 BOD meeting. Boren also said that "consideration for TV partners must be strongly considered" (TULSA WORLD, 9/15).
READING BETWEEN THE LINES: In Dallas, Chuck Carlton writes Boren's comments are "pretty much open to whatever interpretation you want." The "immediate social media summation was Boren illustrating again why no conference knows dysfunction quite like the Big 12." But Boren could also have been "simply stating a fact." Even with "interesting contenders like Cincinnati, Houston and BYU, no one yet seems to have the eight member votes necessary." Boren "might have been extending an olive branch to broadcast partners ESPN and Fox, who have indicated they are against expansion and the pro rata payments to the Big 12 that would accompany it." Or he "could have been sending a message that the road to expansion goes through Oklahoma in the board room." Carlton: "There's probably no wrong answer. And it's a good bet that nothing has really changed with where the Big 12 stands on expansion" (DALLAS MORNING NEWS, 9/15).
SHORT-TERM SOLUTION? In Dallas, Kevin Sherrington writes after "spending a lot of [Big 12 Commissioner] Bob Bowlsby's time, hundreds of thousands of dollars on consultants and not a little of the Big 12's remaining credibility, it'd be a first-rate political disaster if the league decided next month it wouldn't expand after all." But the "lucky couple will be Houston and Cincinnati, essentially for two reasons." Those schools are the "easiest and most logical candidates for the short term" and there remains "no long term for the Big 12." The conference's TV deals "run out" in '24-25, and "at that time, if not sooner, it'll be like flipping on the lights and watching the teenagers scatter." The reason it "won't last is because Texas and Oklahoma aren't in it for the long haul." UT "has long wished to move on from its roots and partner up with other big universities with similar academic and athletic deals." Sherrington: "Once upon a times, it was the Pac-10. Now the Big Ten seems a more likely destination" (DALLAS MORNING NEWS, 9/15).
