If nobody shows any interest, I'll unpin rather quickly.
But for anybody who wants to read everything Harroz said last Friday, here ya go because I thought he really represented himself and OU very well:
Joe Harroz
Thank you for convening this special meeting to deal with the matter of OU's future athletic conference membership. In the 130-year of the University of Oklahoma athletics, this is a significant decision, and this is a matter of true importance, not just for athletics, but for the broader university. I'm thankful for the opportunity to offer context as to why we're making this recommendation.
But before, I think it's important to talk about a couple of things from a person perspective. I have the utmost respect for my colleagues and counterparts in the Big 12. They are, quite simply, remarkable people. I hold each of them in the highest regard and I sincerely value the opportunity I have to work with them, to work alongside them. They've become friends, they've become mentors. I have learned something from each of them. I want to thank Commissioner Bowlsby as well. In particular, I want to recognize our colleagues at Oklahoma State University. Together, we have a longstanding partnership in service to the state and to the citizens of our state. Burns Hargis did an exceptional job and they've made a wise decision, and it's now under the excellent leadership of Dr. Kayse Shrum. I recognize that what brings us together today is inherently difficult. It's difficult to talk about and to do. I want my colleagues to know that we did not embark on this lightly. It's hopefully a very thoughtful and reasoned approach.
Now, as we look at this, context matters. As we think about what led us to this moment, it's important to take a step back and look at the Big 12 Conference. I know many of you know this, but we'll try to go through a few of these just so we're all on the same footing.
So back in 1994, 95, the Big 12 Conference was formed. I had just begun working at the University of Oklahoma then, and was lucky to be a part of that. As you move forward in the history of the Big 12, and you move forward to 2010, two important things happened that year in order. First, we had the media rights agreement, which we'll talk more about in a minute. That took place. After that took place in 2010, the first conference restructuring took place. Nebraska and Colorado left the Big 12 Conference that year, reducing it from 12 to 10. Two years later, in 2012, Texas A&M and Missouri also departed, dropping the number of members of the Big 12 to eight. There were two added, as we all know, that's West Virginia and Texas Christian. Now remember, the current media rights agreement that we're talking about, that expires in 2025, was put in place before those four left and before the two that we discussed were added. In 2012, after those departures, OU took time and thought about whether or not we should make a conference change at that time. There was much discussion and much activity around that in the media. In the end, we decided to stay at that time.
The question is, what's changed? What changed between 2012 and today? And the answer is everything.
I'm gonna walk through that to make sure that's fully explained. When you look at the collegiate athletics landscape, let's go to 2012. In 2012, if you look forward to today, there are four distinct time frames that are important for us to think about as we get to this recommendation we're making today. The first timeframe would be 2012 to 2016. During that time period, everything seemed terrific, and it was. During that time period, as compared to every other broadcast out there, live sports were doing better because during that time, we still had the emergence of the first DVRs. During that time period, every conference was doing better. Every conference was prospering during this time period, because compared to all other available content, live sports, people didn't record it and then just rush through the commercials. So the value of all those contracts continued to go up during that time period and everyone won.
Now, the next time period, the second of these four, is the time period 2016 to 2018. During that time period, things began to change. We see for the first time the emergence of name, image and likeness that comes onto the scene. We see the rise of antitrust lawsuits and this challenge to whether or not the NCAA could limit the amount that goes to a student through initially scholarships, then it rose to cost of attendance, then what came into question was, do you layer on top of that the idea of all education-related expenses and what could those be? We also saw, importantly, the changing media landscape. The media landscape began to change because cord-cutting, as they call it, began to take place. Live streaming became a factor. The third time period is 2018 until May of this year. During that time period, it became clear that the Big 12 was the last in line for media negotiations. Not just among all the Power Five conferences, the autonomous five, but among all of those with the major broadcasters in live sports, be it the NFL, NHL, all of it. Being last in line has consequences. The reality is, in college athletics, a big issue ... there's a lot of conversation about money. But there are also other critical factors. A big factor is which time slots are filled by those that negotiated before you. You've heard conversations with athletic director Castiglione talking about not enjoying 11 a.m. kickoffs. Our fans talk about that. It also matters to student-athletes. And when those go before you in terms of negotiations for 2025 and beyond, if those slots are already taken up, the premiere slots are already taken up, it impacts things in a material way, and it translates to disadvantages in recruiting the top talent, disadvantages for our student-athletes, and a detriment to the fan experience. During this time period, also, the Big 12 network, went to a fully online status, which is not as large in this present climate. We also saw name, image and likeness legislation, not just starting, but moving forward in Congress, moving forward among the states, and conversations about how name, image and likeness is handled at the NCAA level. Further, during this same time period, we see antitrust cases decided in the lower courts against the NCAA, against its ability to regulate the way it always has, over that 115-year history of that organization. We see the importance of conferences growing because of these changes and the ability of the NCAA to continue to regulate the way they had called into fundamental question.
And then there is the COVID impact. The impact to institutions that are large capacity, that get filled by their fans, is much greater than those with smaller attendance and those that don't sell out their stadiums. So a much larger negative impact on institutions like the University of Oklahoma.
The next key time period deserves its own spot on listing those four, and that is what took place in June of this year. It was seismic. The gathering storms over that time period that we laid out finally burst. And what did we see? We saw an immediate awareness that there wasn’t an interest in negotiating early for the Big 12.
We also saw, and this is absolutely tectonic, we see the United States Supreme Court in a 9-0 decision. A unanimous Supreme Court decision comes down in June that finds against the NCAA. On the specifics of the case of the 9th circuit, but also calling into question through antitrust laws the future of the NCAA being able to regulate the way it is. We need to look no further than the comments of the head of the NCAA, Mark Emmert on this topic and what an absolutely fundamental change this is.
We also see Congress that had hearings over NIL, name, image and likeness, not take specific action. And to it’s left to the individual states to make a decision on whether or not there would be name, image and likeness availability in those states. We saw the NCAA’s action finally come down on name, image and likeness, which essentially left it to the states, which is a real patchwork that exists across the country and doesn’t exist in many states at all.
What does all of this tell us? It tells us the importance of the conference you’re in. It being the one that best fits the institution’s abilities and needs in this uncertain landscape are greater than ever.
So what’s changed since 2012? Everything. Everything’s changed.
So if we look at it, we look out and unlike in 2012 where the question was is there an opportunity here for us that we can select with the idea of being opportunistic? That was the question in 2012. The question today is potentially existential.
And so we stepped back and asked what’s important to the University of Oklahoma? And what is of absolute critical importance to OU is that we fulfill our strategic plan. We developed a strategic plan that lays out who we are as an institution. It’s very specific but it all ties up to one thing, which is we change lives. And the role of athletics plays a critical role in the life of a university. It is additive well beyond the playing fields. It is additive to the experiences the students have, to the attachment they feel, to the desire to come, the desire to stay and the ability to feel attached.
It is consequential across the institution. And we look at our aspirations and they’re across the board, across our five pillars, the goal that we will achieve of becoming an AAU-caliber institution... All of these things tie and involve athletics.
And so as we monitored the landscape we had the services of the best athletic director in the country. And if you don’t believe that ask him or check his Twitter feed. And we stepped back and asked the question what is it that matters to us? How do we fulfill our goals and our dreams as an institution? And how does that relate to intercollegiate athletics? And we broke it down into four pieces, two groupings of two. We asked ourselves at the beginning and end of the day, what are the two things that are absolute imperatives for our intercollegiate athletics programs? And there’s two of them.
The first is that we remain a premier national-caliber athletics program. And have to be able to see as we look to visibility towards the future. Even when it’s not crystal clear, we have to ask the question are we putting ourselves a path to be worthy of the legacy we have and to advance it over time. That’s one.
The second key imperative is equally essential and speaks to our larger goals. And that is we are fortunate to be among a very small handful of universities across the county where are athletics budget is not subsidized by student tuition and fee and is not subsidized by the state.
And we look at those things as absolutely critical to us because it impacts so much. Those are the two things we have to make sure we’re doing everything we can in our duties, in these roles while we have them, to advance those for today and tomorrow.
Now, what are preferred priorities we have just underneath that? Not the musts, but what are those two things we care a lot about? The first is that we prefer to be in the same athletic conference with Oklahoma State University. And we prefer to play the University of Texas every year, period. Those are our two preferences.
Regrettably, the landscape that we’re looking at right now, those changes that we talked about, don’t allow for all four of those to occur. That’s our conclusion and our observation and our projection.
A move today isn’t simply for financial reasons. To say that is to miss the point. To say that is to not understand why we care about athletics so deeply and why this recommendation to us is so imperative to navigate the absolute changed waters in front of us. This is a move for stability and preservation and propagation. Again, an existential time, not an opportunistic one.
The timing... The timing as you all in the media know is not of our choosing. This story broke last Wednesday and as it broke the very clear message from our friends in the Big 12 was whatever you’re going to do please do it quickly. We want to honor that. You saw what took place a few days after with the notice that we provided.
Regardless of us not wanting that timing of last week, this needed to happen soon. This needed to happen soon because we always try to carry ourselves not just as fiduciaries of our institution, but also character. We know that the discussions and negotiations and movements towards a new media rights agreement in 2025 are at their beginning stages. To us the right thing to do is to get out ahead of that. Because again, we fully intend to be in the Big 12 through the fulfillment of that agreement. It would be disingenuous not to be in a position where we provided advance notice to allow individuals to work on that.
Let’s also talk about the timing. Would we have preferred to have a lot of conversations in advance? We would've. But that ignores the reality of how conferences work. It ignores the reality that we all know, which is windows open and opportunities can evaporate in a moment.
So the next question is, why not Oklahoma State? Why did you do this and not bring in Oklahoma State University? This is a question we’ve thought about a lot. Dating back to 2012, that was part of our thought process and our conversation. We’ve analyzed this landscape deeply, lots of conversations about how we do this. We’ve looked at solutions for us to move together, but that is simply not the marker that we’re pursuing allows. That was true then, and it’s even more true today in this changed landscape.
We believe this move is not just best for OU, we believe this move is best for our state. I’m someone who’s a lifelong resident, and I love this institution with all my heart. I’m also an Oklahoman, and I care deeply about our state. In our assessment, the opportunity for Oklahoma was with one university only, and if we didn’t seize it, the answer would be none. And we also know this -- we know OSU will continue to grow and flourish. They have exceptional leadership, they’re an excellent program and they will do well.
We’re in a unique position given the size of our program and the scale of the program. This move is good and necessary not just for the institution, but as we think and look at our state. And think about the benefits to Norman and the state. Not just Norman, but for the entire state. Think about the exposure for OU and for our state. In the big 12 right now, there is membership from 4 states. When this comes to pass in the SEC, there’s membership, and therefore games and exposure, in 12 states. We’ve moved from 4 to 12 states in terms of that exposure.
And this has a real impact on the growth of our university, on the academics, on research functions that take place. We’ll have the inflow of SEC fans who know how to travel. We’ll have a new and unique and exciting opportunity for our fans that otherwise wouldn’t be available. And without a doubt, it’s critically important in our ability to recruit student-athletes of the highest caliber and recruit students more broadly, and faculty. And it also drives our ability to act as an engine for the state to help bring new economic opportunity to our state. We will be showcasing the excellence that’s not just OU, but the state of Oklahoma. There’s manifest benefits to this that go well past OU.
And importantly, none of this will impact our commitment to continue working with Oklahoma State to do what’s best for the state of Oklahoma. We have a long record of service and partnership, and that will absolutely continue. I also want to say this, and I’ve communicated this to OSU, and that is we want the Bedlam rivalry to continue well past the expiration of this media rights agreement. Make no mistake - we want the Bedlam rivalry to continue. And make no mistake - even with this change, we want to play Oklahoma State in every sport and every year.
So, why did we partner with Texas? Some of this is manifest, but the reality is it was done jointly because many schools are vying for a limited number of positions in the SEC. Each of us are absolute powerhouses, but there are other powerhouses out there. There is a special amount of power that makes us unique and special, not just by being individual powerhouses, but our rivalry and bringing that to the SEC. That is something special. That is something that is distinguishing and neither of our institutions could do alone, but together brings unique opportunity and value. We’re the only two schools in the Big 12 that have the massive stadiums and fill those stadiums.
And we saw the impact of COVID. The ability to continue to fill those stadiums on that basis is important to the environment and to the opportunity to drive our universities forward, not just in athletics but well beyond to accomplish those two musts that I spoke on earlier.
This recommendation we believe is absolutely necessary for us to continue our legacy and our present athletic excellence and our national championship caliber teams. And to ensure OU athletics remains self sustained. Two musts, again. We have to be exceptional and maintain that, and for as long as possible we’ve got to be in a structure where students, through tuitions and fees, and the state are not subsidizing athletics. This will allow us to continue to attract the top student athletes across the country well into the future. Provide a world class fan experience, secure media exposure and opportunities for our events, our student athletes and our state. And to create better exposure for all of our athletic programs to let us tell the OU story and the Oklahoma story across the country.
We are immensely proud to be part of the Big 12, but these (i missed this) changes will not allow us to do that beyond 2025. The exciting victories and passionate rivalries that have taken place over the past 25 years in the Big 12 and over the next years will always be a part of our heritage and our tradition and we look forward with excitement to the next several years of those continued rivalries and matchups.
And although we value completely, as we look towards our future and our changed world, we believe now is the time to not just honor those past 25 years but look forward to the next 25 years and the years beyond that.
We believe joining the SEC will sustain our national caliber traditions and it will strengthen our university as a whole and our state, and help us fulfill our strategic plan of academic excellence.
I want to end by expressing our deep gratitude to Commissioner Sankey and to the presidents and chancellors of all 14 SEC member institutions that voted unanimously to make the offer to us beginning in 2025. We are immensely grateful for that.
But for anybody who wants to read everything Harroz said last Friday, here ya go because I thought he really represented himself and OU very well:
Joe Harroz
Thank you for convening this special meeting to deal with the matter of OU's future athletic conference membership. In the 130-year of the University of Oklahoma athletics, this is a significant decision, and this is a matter of true importance, not just for athletics, but for the broader university. I'm thankful for the opportunity to offer context as to why we're making this recommendation.
But before, I think it's important to talk about a couple of things from a person perspective. I have the utmost respect for my colleagues and counterparts in the Big 12. They are, quite simply, remarkable people. I hold each of them in the highest regard and I sincerely value the opportunity I have to work with them, to work alongside them. They've become friends, they've become mentors. I have learned something from each of them. I want to thank Commissioner Bowlsby as well. In particular, I want to recognize our colleagues at Oklahoma State University. Together, we have a longstanding partnership in service to the state and to the citizens of our state. Burns Hargis did an exceptional job and they've made a wise decision, and it's now under the excellent leadership of Dr. Kayse Shrum. I recognize that what brings us together today is inherently difficult. It's difficult to talk about and to do. I want my colleagues to know that we did not embark on this lightly. It's hopefully a very thoughtful and reasoned approach.
Now, as we look at this, context matters. As we think about what led us to this moment, it's important to take a step back and look at the Big 12 Conference. I know many of you know this, but we'll try to go through a few of these just so we're all on the same footing.
So back in 1994, 95, the Big 12 Conference was formed. I had just begun working at the University of Oklahoma then, and was lucky to be a part of that. As you move forward in the history of the Big 12, and you move forward to 2010, two important things happened that year in order. First, we had the media rights agreement, which we'll talk more about in a minute. That took place. After that took place in 2010, the first conference restructuring took place. Nebraska and Colorado left the Big 12 Conference that year, reducing it from 12 to 10. Two years later, in 2012, Texas A&M and Missouri also departed, dropping the number of members of the Big 12 to eight. There were two added, as we all know, that's West Virginia and Texas Christian. Now remember, the current media rights agreement that we're talking about, that expires in 2025, was put in place before those four left and before the two that we discussed were added. In 2012, after those departures, OU took time and thought about whether or not we should make a conference change at that time. There was much discussion and much activity around that in the media. In the end, we decided to stay at that time.
The question is, what's changed? What changed between 2012 and today? And the answer is everything.
I'm gonna walk through that to make sure that's fully explained. When you look at the collegiate athletics landscape, let's go to 2012. In 2012, if you look forward to today, there are four distinct time frames that are important for us to think about as we get to this recommendation we're making today. The first timeframe would be 2012 to 2016. During that time period, everything seemed terrific, and it was. During that time period, as compared to every other broadcast out there, live sports were doing better because during that time, we still had the emergence of the first DVRs. During that time period, every conference was doing better. Every conference was prospering during this time period, because compared to all other available content, live sports, people didn't record it and then just rush through the commercials. So the value of all those contracts continued to go up during that time period and everyone won.
Now, the next time period, the second of these four, is the time period 2016 to 2018. During that time period, things began to change. We see for the first time the emergence of name, image and likeness that comes onto the scene. We see the rise of antitrust lawsuits and this challenge to whether or not the NCAA could limit the amount that goes to a student through initially scholarships, then it rose to cost of attendance, then what came into question was, do you layer on top of that the idea of all education-related expenses and what could those be? We also saw, importantly, the changing media landscape. The media landscape began to change because cord-cutting, as they call it, began to take place. Live streaming became a factor. The third time period is 2018 until May of this year. During that time period, it became clear that the Big 12 was the last in line for media negotiations. Not just among all the Power Five conferences, the autonomous five, but among all of those with the major broadcasters in live sports, be it the NFL, NHL, all of it. Being last in line has consequences. The reality is, in college athletics, a big issue ... there's a lot of conversation about money. But there are also other critical factors. A big factor is which time slots are filled by those that negotiated before you. You've heard conversations with athletic director Castiglione talking about not enjoying 11 a.m. kickoffs. Our fans talk about that. It also matters to student-athletes. And when those go before you in terms of negotiations for 2025 and beyond, if those slots are already taken up, the premiere slots are already taken up, it impacts things in a material way, and it translates to disadvantages in recruiting the top talent, disadvantages for our student-athletes, and a detriment to the fan experience. During this time period, also, the Big 12 network, went to a fully online status, which is not as large in this present climate. We also saw name, image and likeness legislation, not just starting, but moving forward in Congress, moving forward among the states, and conversations about how name, image and likeness is handled at the NCAA level. Further, during this same time period, we see antitrust cases decided in the lower courts against the NCAA, against its ability to regulate the way it always has, over that 115-year history of that organization. We see the importance of conferences growing because of these changes and the ability of the NCAA to continue to regulate the way they had called into fundamental question.
And then there is the COVID impact. The impact to institutions that are large capacity, that get filled by their fans, is much greater than those with smaller attendance and those that don't sell out their stadiums. So a much larger negative impact on institutions like the University of Oklahoma.
The next key time period deserves its own spot on listing those four, and that is what took place in June of this year. It was seismic. The gathering storms over that time period that we laid out finally burst. And what did we see? We saw an immediate awareness that there wasn’t an interest in negotiating early for the Big 12.
We also saw, and this is absolutely tectonic, we see the United States Supreme Court in a 9-0 decision. A unanimous Supreme Court decision comes down in June that finds against the NCAA. On the specifics of the case of the 9th circuit, but also calling into question through antitrust laws the future of the NCAA being able to regulate the way it is. We need to look no further than the comments of the head of the NCAA, Mark Emmert on this topic and what an absolutely fundamental change this is.
We also see Congress that had hearings over NIL, name, image and likeness, not take specific action. And to it’s left to the individual states to make a decision on whether or not there would be name, image and likeness availability in those states. We saw the NCAA’s action finally come down on name, image and likeness, which essentially left it to the states, which is a real patchwork that exists across the country and doesn’t exist in many states at all.
What does all of this tell us? It tells us the importance of the conference you’re in. It being the one that best fits the institution’s abilities and needs in this uncertain landscape are greater than ever.
So what’s changed since 2012? Everything. Everything’s changed.
So if we look at it, we look out and unlike in 2012 where the question was is there an opportunity here for us that we can select with the idea of being opportunistic? That was the question in 2012. The question today is potentially existential.
And so we stepped back and asked what’s important to the University of Oklahoma? And what is of absolute critical importance to OU is that we fulfill our strategic plan. We developed a strategic plan that lays out who we are as an institution. It’s very specific but it all ties up to one thing, which is we change lives. And the role of athletics plays a critical role in the life of a university. It is additive well beyond the playing fields. It is additive to the experiences the students have, to the attachment they feel, to the desire to come, the desire to stay and the ability to feel attached.
It is consequential across the institution. And we look at our aspirations and they’re across the board, across our five pillars, the goal that we will achieve of becoming an AAU-caliber institution... All of these things tie and involve athletics.
And so as we monitored the landscape we had the services of the best athletic director in the country. And if you don’t believe that ask him or check his Twitter feed. And we stepped back and asked the question what is it that matters to us? How do we fulfill our goals and our dreams as an institution? And how does that relate to intercollegiate athletics? And we broke it down into four pieces, two groupings of two. We asked ourselves at the beginning and end of the day, what are the two things that are absolute imperatives for our intercollegiate athletics programs? And there’s two of them.
The first is that we remain a premier national-caliber athletics program. And have to be able to see as we look to visibility towards the future. Even when it’s not crystal clear, we have to ask the question are we putting ourselves a path to be worthy of the legacy we have and to advance it over time. That’s one.
The second key imperative is equally essential and speaks to our larger goals. And that is we are fortunate to be among a very small handful of universities across the county where are athletics budget is not subsidized by student tuition and fee and is not subsidized by the state.
And we look at those things as absolutely critical to us because it impacts so much. Those are the two things we have to make sure we’re doing everything we can in our duties, in these roles while we have them, to advance those for today and tomorrow.
Now, what are preferred priorities we have just underneath that? Not the musts, but what are those two things we care a lot about? The first is that we prefer to be in the same athletic conference with Oklahoma State University. And we prefer to play the University of Texas every year, period. Those are our two preferences.
Regrettably, the landscape that we’re looking at right now, those changes that we talked about, don’t allow for all four of those to occur. That’s our conclusion and our observation and our projection.
A move today isn’t simply for financial reasons. To say that is to miss the point. To say that is to not understand why we care about athletics so deeply and why this recommendation to us is so imperative to navigate the absolute changed waters in front of us. This is a move for stability and preservation and propagation. Again, an existential time, not an opportunistic one.
The timing... The timing as you all in the media know is not of our choosing. This story broke last Wednesday and as it broke the very clear message from our friends in the Big 12 was whatever you’re going to do please do it quickly. We want to honor that. You saw what took place a few days after with the notice that we provided.
Regardless of us not wanting that timing of last week, this needed to happen soon. This needed to happen soon because we always try to carry ourselves not just as fiduciaries of our institution, but also character. We know that the discussions and negotiations and movements towards a new media rights agreement in 2025 are at their beginning stages. To us the right thing to do is to get out ahead of that. Because again, we fully intend to be in the Big 12 through the fulfillment of that agreement. It would be disingenuous not to be in a position where we provided advance notice to allow individuals to work on that.
Let’s also talk about the timing. Would we have preferred to have a lot of conversations in advance? We would've. But that ignores the reality of how conferences work. It ignores the reality that we all know, which is windows open and opportunities can evaporate in a moment.
So the next question is, why not Oklahoma State? Why did you do this and not bring in Oklahoma State University? This is a question we’ve thought about a lot. Dating back to 2012, that was part of our thought process and our conversation. We’ve analyzed this landscape deeply, lots of conversations about how we do this. We’ve looked at solutions for us to move together, but that is simply not the marker that we’re pursuing allows. That was true then, and it’s even more true today in this changed landscape.
We believe this move is not just best for OU, we believe this move is best for our state. I’m someone who’s a lifelong resident, and I love this institution with all my heart. I’m also an Oklahoman, and I care deeply about our state. In our assessment, the opportunity for Oklahoma was with one university only, and if we didn’t seize it, the answer would be none. And we also know this -- we know OSU will continue to grow and flourish. They have exceptional leadership, they’re an excellent program and they will do well.
We’re in a unique position given the size of our program and the scale of the program. This move is good and necessary not just for the institution, but as we think and look at our state. And think about the benefits to Norman and the state. Not just Norman, but for the entire state. Think about the exposure for OU and for our state. In the big 12 right now, there is membership from 4 states. When this comes to pass in the SEC, there’s membership, and therefore games and exposure, in 12 states. We’ve moved from 4 to 12 states in terms of that exposure.
And this has a real impact on the growth of our university, on the academics, on research functions that take place. We’ll have the inflow of SEC fans who know how to travel. We’ll have a new and unique and exciting opportunity for our fans that otherwise wouldn’t be available. And without a doubt, it’s critically important in our ability to recruit student-athletes of the highest caliber and recruit students more broadly, and faculty. And it also drives our ability to act as an engine for the state to help bring new economic opportunity to our state. We will be showcasing the excellence that’s not just OU, but the state of Oklahoma. There’s manifest benefits to this that go well past OU.
And importantly, none of this will impact our commitment to continue working with Oklahoma State to do what’s best for the state of Oklahoma. We have a long record of service and partnership, and that will absolutely continue. I also want to say this, and I’ve communicated this to OSU, and that is we want the Bedlam rivalry to continue well past the expiration of this media rights agreement. Make no mistake - we want the Bedlam rivalry to continue. And make no mistake - even with this change, we want to play Oklahoma State in every sport and every year.
So, why did we partner with Texas? Some of this is manifest, but the reality is it was done jointly because many schools are vying for a limited number of positions in the SEC. Each of us are absolute powerhouses, but there are other powerhouses out there. There is a special amount of power that makes us unique and special, not just by being individual powerhouses, but our rivalry and bringing that to the SEC. That is something special. That is something that is distinguishing and neither of our institutions could do alone, but together brings unique opportunity and value. We’re the only two schools in the Big 12 that have the massive stadiums and fill those stadiums.
And we saw the impact of COVID. The ability to continue to fill those stadiums on that basis is important to the environment and to the opportunity to drive our universities forward, not just in athletics but well beyond to accomplish those two musts that I spoke on earlier.
This recommendation we believe is absolutely necessary for us to continue our legacy and our present athletic excellence and our national championship caliber teams. And to ensure OU athletics remains self sustained. Two musts, again. We have to be exceptional and maintain that, and for as long as possible we’ve got to be in a structure where students, through tuitions and fees, and the state are not subsidizing athletics. This will allow us to continue to attract the top student athletes across the country well into the future. Provide a world class fan experience, secure media exposure and opportunities for our events, our student athletes and our state. And to create better exposure for all of our athletic programs to let us tell the OU story and the Oklahoma story across the country.
We are immensely proud to be part of the Big 12, but these (i missed this) changes will not allow us to do that beyond 2025. The exciting victories and passionate rivalries that have taken place over the past 25 years in the Big 12 and over the next years will always be a part of our heritage and our tradition and we look forward with excitement to the next several years of those continued rivalries and matchups.
And although we value completely, as we look towards our future and our changed world, we believe now is the time to not just honor those past 25 years but look forward to the next 25 years and the years beyond that.
We believe joining the SEC will sustain our national caliber traditions and it will strengthen our university as a whole and our state, and help us fulfill our strategic plan of academic excellence.
I want to end by expressing our deep gratitude to Commissioner Sankey and to the presidents and chancellors of all 14 SEC member institutions that voted unanimously to make the offer to us beginning in 2025. We are immensely grateful for that.
