Not surprisingly, all the lawsuit nonsense was just that - nonsense. It's pretty clear conferences always try to maintain good relations with teams, former teams, and other conferences - and no one was going to burn any bridges with a lawsuit. http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1257714 Sources close to Texas A&M tell Orangebloods.com the Aggies will announce they are formally withdrawing from the Big 12 on Tuesday, setting up their application for membership to the Southeastern Conference. The sources said Texas A&M has spent the past few days trying to iron out what the Aggies' exit from the Big 12 will cost. The full exit fee penalty would be between $28 million and $31 million, according to Big 12 sources. But the Big 12 could withhold A&M's revenue for the 2011-12 academic year, which would total roughly $18 million. Texas A&M president R. Bowen Loftin was on a conference call with Big 12 presidents on Saturday to discuss the issue. A&M sources say the Aggies will do whatever they can to help the Big 12 find a replacement to help avoid any damage financially to the conference. Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe sent a letter to Loftin on Monday that basically said the Big 12 has no desire to sue A&M and that if the Aggies don't sue the Big 12, the league would simply withhold A&M's revenue for the rest of the 2011-12, sources said. In a related development, Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick told reporters the Irish are more committed than ever to being an independent in football, quashing any potential of the Irish joining the Big 12 in the immediate future. Big 12 sources say if Notre Dame is off the table, then there's probably no chance of adding Pittsburgh, another school that had been discussed by Big 12 presidents on their conference call Saturday after Loftin got off the teleconference. One Big 12 administrator said there continues to be interest in gauging Arkansas' potential interest in joining the Big 12 - in what would essentially be a trade between the two leagues - and that BYU remains a potential target.
Interesting article from a BYU perspective. No official sources or anything, but at least from someone in the BYU community (TV announcer for BYU): http://www.ksl.com/?nid=498&sid=17009374 Greg Wrubell is the play-by-play "Voice of the Cougars" on KSL Radio and hosts the BYU Football and Basketball coaches' shows for KSL Radio and KSL 5 Television. A BYU alum, Greg has been on KSL’s Cougar broadcast crew since 1992. Email: gwrubell@ksl.com; Twitter: @gregwrubell; Facebook: CougarTracks Last summer, when the first conference realignment tremors were being felt, BYU administrators may have been sitting by their phones. No calls came. Not from the Pac-10, not from the Big 12. "We were never involved," said BYU AD Tom Holmoe recently. ******* The reasons were probably numerous, but in general, you could say the Pac-10 seemingly had a genetic, philosophical aversion to BYU, while the fractured Big 12 had a stated desire to unify and prosper within its Texas/Oklahoma power center. ******* A year later, the Pac-12 is moving ahead as a two-division league, bolstered by a bold new media arrangement and an attendant financial windfall for all of its schools. The Pac-12 may be thinking even bigger, but without some radical change in the mindset of that conference's leaders, it's doubtful any plans would include BYU. ******* The Big 12--well, that's another story altogether. 12 months after the ten remaining conference schools pledged to one another their commitment and affection, all it took was a little Texas power play to blow it all up. Texas' collaboration with ESPN and the creation of the Longhorn Network shifted the balance of power even more toward Austin than ever before, and it was simply too much for Texas A&M to take. The Aggies are on their way out, and they may not be the only ones assessing the availability of lifeboats they can paddle to another conference. A year after the Big 12 became ten, the league faces yet another crisis of identity and stability. It is in this current environment that BYU is suddenly a popular target, or so it would appear. If indeed the Big 12 is now interested in BYU, how interested should the Cougars be in the Big 12? ******* The Big 12, as it is currently composed, is anything but a sure thing. It has years of history, marquee programs, a new mega-bucks media deal, but the league is for the moment on shaky ground—-its coveted BCS status notwithstanding. A year ago, the conference appeared close to dissolution, and had Texas opted for the "Pac-16 Plan," the end of the league would have essentially been a fait accompli. Getting Texas to stay meant giving the Longhorns more of what they wanted, and as the Big 12's bell cow, they got to write their own check. The Longhorns' enhanced status within the league has engendered jealousy and enmity, and while BYU was often the envy of other WAC and MWC schools, it was rarely able to wield the kind of power Texas boasts in the Big 12. Indeed, BYU's relative lack of influence led to its breakaway from the Mountain West Conference. ******* The Big 12 is just this side of desperate. The league members know Texas could afford to go it alone as a football independent, so in that respect, the league needs Texas more than Texas needs the league. The Big 12 is reportedly thinking very big, apparently having added Notre Dame to its expansion wish list, and perhaps schools in the southeast and northeast, in addition to BYU. Would Notre Dame give up its football independence for the Big 12? The Irish already have in place a big-money media contract with a dedicated national TV network, it has favorable BCS access, and annual rivalries that the Irish may value more than trips to places like Waco and Lubbock, Columbia and Ames. Notre Dame's basketball conference home in the hoops-centric Big East puts it in major east coast markets; it doesn't need the Big 12 for competition or visibility. ******* Certainly, Notre Dame would change the vital composition of the Big 12, and exponentially increase its viability. If Notre Dame were somehow persuaded to align with the Big 12, how would that go over in Austin? Is the Big 12 big enough for two nationally-powerful alpha dogs—not to mention another major player, were BYU and its own TV network and set of demands be brought into the mix? And make no mistake, BYU would have demands. For the school to even consider the Big 12 (as a tenth, 11th or 12th team) would mean receiving a series of meaningful guarantees, allowances and even inducements. ******* Just for starters, BYU would require an across-the-board ban on Sunday play in whichever contest or championship involved the Cougars. BYU would require consent for all of BYUtv's current access and distribution plans. BYU would probably require iron-clad assurances that Texas and Oklahoma (and Notre Dame?) were committed to long-term Big 12 membership. BYU would also seek a philosophical fit among increasingly territorial institutions—all without the benefit of historical relationships or geographical proximity. In short, BYU would be looking for the kinds of promises and comforts that are hard to come by in today's fluid collegiate athletics environment. ******* In contrast, BYU's current plan for football independence and West Coast Conference membership is supported by thoughtful vision, infrastructure, fiscal stability, and philosophical fit. BYU did not enter into independence or the WCC lightly, nor did it do so as a cynical bargaining chip, with the end goal of using the last year's leverage to hit some sort of BCS jackpot. BYU's leaders are very pleased with the direction they are currently headed. The school and its sponsoring church's objectives can be achieved through excellence and now-available exposure, without the need for a bigger or supposedly better stage. ******* This is not to say that those leaders' eyes and ears are closed to opportunity. After all, Holmoe did recently say "I think we belong in a BCS conference." At the same time, elements of trust, commitment and integrity are in play—and BYU is mindful of the gravity with which it made key decisions of long-term consequence, just last summer. After a recent stadium scrimmage, just as the Big 12 rumor mill was starting to grind, Holmoe added this: "We're doing some things right now...just what we wanted to do. People don't really understand what's in it for us. We have a plan, and it's a good plan, and we want to unroll that." "We are more concerned about our interests and what we can accomplish and and what we can do, more than we are with other people. We're pretty secure and confident with what we can do. I don't really know what people out there can do." ******* The Big 12 may be appealing on the surface, but its prospects have deeper merit only if the league can present BYU with a plan that encompasses most if not all of the school's needs and wishes, while allowing it to honor certain agreements and relationships. The siren song of the Big 12 is ostensibly replete with dollar signs and status. In other words, it is a typical worldly appeal to pride and greed. Yet, BYU already possesses much of what it desires. It operates with the self-confidence that comes with knowing exactly who it is, what and who it represents, and how best to transmit that message to an ever-expanding audience. Esau sold his birthright to Jacob for a mess of pottage. BYU won't be compromising its decades-old charter simply for BCS access or a few million more dollars. It's not exactly pottage, but right now, the Big 12 is a little bit of a mess. It brings up an interesting question - BYU voluntarily left the MWC, which was on the verge of becoming a BCS conference - to join the WCC (where Gonzaga is). Money doesn't seem to be their primary motivator, especially if they are well funded by the church. From the article, it appears they are more interested in having power/control than anything else. It will be interesting to see how this plays out with the Big12 starting tomorrow, assuming A&M does officially bolt then.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/30/s...xas-am-closer-to-withdrawing-from-big-12.html Texas A&M Closer to Withdrawing From Big 12 By PETE THAMEL Texas A&M’s departure from the Big 12 Conference drew closer to reality on Monday when the university’s president, R. Bowen Loftin, sent a letter to the Big 12 board chairman, the Missouri chancellor Brady Deaton, notifying the league that the Aggies would formally withdraw — very likely on Tuesday — according to two college officials with direct knowledge of the decision. This latest step in the Aggies’ effort to join the Southeastern Conference appears to have two stumbling blocks. The first is Texas A&M’s exit fee from the Big 12, which it has not negotiated. That amount is expected to be close to $15 million. The other is the approval of the S.E.C. presidents. Nine of the 12 would have to vote in favor for Texas A&M to become a member of the conference. It is unlikely that Texas A&M would be this far along in the process without adequate S.E.C. presidential support. Texas A&M hopes to play in the S.E.C. during the 2012 football season, which would appear to leave the conference with a mathematically clunky 13 teams for one year.
all due respect, it wasn't and isn't nonsense. this issue delayed the SEC vote previously and had them scrambling to put the genie back in the bottle on the tortious interference claim; trying to make it clear that it was A&M courting the SEC and not the other way around. i don't know who chip has talked to, but i've talked to 2 different people, one directly involved and another one degree away, and both have talked about this issue exhaustively.
They used to be on par with UT now they have fallen behind, so rather than address those issues they peer over the fence and say, gosh that grass looks greener. Well if they thought they had trouble keeping up with UT, they are about to become the Texas Tech os the SEC. DD
does kaprice know how awesome you think she is? oh wait, you're talking about her work at uh, not what donny was referencing.
I don't think BYU is as big a catch as they think they are - I've read that the Pac 10, basically won't accept them no matter what. That doesn't seem to help their negotating position as it's pretty much the only natural geographic fit for them.
If it was a real concern, it would have done something more than cause 2 weeks of delay. People were saying that the SEC statement wouldn't undo a year of talks if they were really were happening. The argument was that it had the potential to force the SEC to back off and keep A&M stuck in the Big12. Now, all it took was a silly statement by the SEC after that supposed tortious interference to protect themselves? If that's all that it took, then it was a non-factor. The end result is exactly what everyone knew was going happen in the first place: A&M to the SEC. We were told that with so much money involved, the Big12 would do anything and everything to protect themselves, and now it appears that not only have they taken their lawsuit off the table, but they might not even maximize A&M's exit fee. Exit fees were negotiated down for CU and NU too. Like those two, as soon as A&M made clear they were unhappy in the Big12, they were going to be gone one way or another. No way any conference wants an angry member as part of their conference, and it was in everyone's interests to let them go now, rather than try to force them to stay.
Uh, the Ags had a better team last season. Typical UT fan, still running on the fumes of that Rose Bowl victory years ago
i suppose we may be defining "nonsense" differently....the claim itself is not nonsense. and, no, it's not resolved by merely issuing the statement trying to put the genie back in the bottle.
I'm using "nonsense" in the sense that it wasn't going to change the outcome of A&M going to the SEC. There was no chance a lawsuit was ever actually going to be filed, regardless of the actual merits because once A&M made their intentions clear, it was in everyone's interests to let A&M out to keep the peace. The only net effect of it was a 2 week delay, assuming that the SEC was reacting to that as opposed to A&M just jumping the gun and not understanding the process involved.
Or, to be more accurate, I should say it never was going to change the outcome of A&M leaving the Big12 or no one being sued. We never really knew exactly where the SEC stood, so their role in the whole thing was a bit of conjecture.
I was confused, I should have known -- Fuller, being an NFL-caliber "black male" probably doesn't even play for TAMU.
You seem to have little-to-no concept of fan base, brand value, economic impact or college football as a whole. Oklahoma State could be ranked 1st right now and their program would not hold a candle to Penn State's. Did TCU even lose a game last year? Guess what, that crappy Michigan team is a substantially more important football program. No conference would choose TCU over Michigan. Current wins, losses and rankings mean next to nothing in determining the value of a program. This isn't "which team is better in NCAA Football 12". Sucker.
Congrats on the network. Best of luck in the Big 12. Hopefully you guys get your panties out of a bunch and we can actually continue the rivalry.
