I thought it wasn't personal, Josh? Dude we're not getting 4 or 5 star recruits. We just need a 4 star recruit at QB every few years like Griffin since we're building around 3 star recruits. That's not going to change much with a move. Who knows where we'll end up but a quality season could really help our chances in where we land. We could have most of our major teams ranked soon (mens and womens ball and football) Oh and you're definitely being a huge penis.
What exactly can the legislature do to the schools if they leave the conference? Not provide academic funding? Even if that were threatened, I just don't see anyway they could stay in office after passing such legislation. Also, what does Perry really want to do with this? I've heard his stance going back and forth numerous times, and honestly he will only support whatever will get him the most NATIONAL votes. But what would that be?
But OU gets unequal share right now too - I would think OU loses out too if they equalize the revenue shares? OSU, though, would certainly benefit. I do agree that OU has all the leverage here - it will be interesting to see what they are trying to do with it.
There was nothing personal in that post .. All trash talk with a rival school and nothing directed at you .. It was merely the truth .. You took it personal and now turned it personal .. Congrats Oh and RM95, when you make arguments like a lawyer about semantics, saying someone is being a lawyer is not an insult ... Its just a fact of the matter of what lawyers do ... To be honest, I wish I had the arguing skills to be able to do what lawyers do as it is very effective and MadMax is good at that. I honest to God don't mean that as an insult. His agenda is the Baylor agenda, verbatim, which he refuses to admit, and that is what I am pointing out. He does it in a way that appears to be fair and objective, which is exactly what lawyers do. All in semantics
Yeah generally once the schools make comments to the public, and even take a "wait & see" or they say it'll take "months" to develop, they've probably actually made their mind up already.
You guys with the orange colored glasses don't like the truth do you. The Longhorn network is an absolute disaster and the Big 12 and college football in general would be much better off without it. Fact.
i think maybe you should re-read the thread because i'm not sure you grasp his agenda. hence us asking you what agenda you were referring to.
ok, like what? like the defintion of tortious interference? like posting articles? what is my opinion here that you have a problem with? certainly you're capable of telling me what opinion i've expressed that you think is biased and that you disagree with... as i said before, i'm not sure i have an opinion as to the end game of all this....there's so much information and soooo many variables all the way around. i don't know where all this is going, ultimately...for any school, individually, and for college football, generally.
Texas Senate doesn't seem interested in getting involved... http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/05/s...ac-12s-expansion-outlook.html?_r=2&ref=sports With the inner workings of Texas politics in the background, there is always a chance that Texas’ plans could be forced to change. The Web site Orangebloods.com reported Sunday night that the university was being told to slow things down by local lawmakers. But State Senator Judith Zaffirini, the chairwoman of the Senate Higher Education Committee, said in a telephone interview Sunday that the Senate had no plans to get involved in conference expansion. A hearing before the Texas legislature’s House Committee on Higher Education about Texas A&M’s potential move to the SEC was canceled. Zaffirini said she saw no potential political roadblocks for a Texas move to the Pac-12. “I don’t see that happening at all at this point,” she said. “I have absolutely no intent of calling a hearing at this time.” Still have the House to deal with, but it's at least a little bit of a starting point.
Lawmakers may step in if 'Horns choose Pac-12 Read more: http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/09/04/3337160/lawmakers-may-step-in-if-horns.html#ixzz1X4CfnP00 As buzzards begin circling, anticipating the imminent demise of the Big 12, top state lawmakers are reaching out to slow the realignment process. Multiple league sources confirmed Sunday that Texas lawmakers, including Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, are preparing to take a more active role in determining whether Texas A&M should head to the Southeastern Conference and whether Texas should join Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech as part of a four-school move to an expanded Pac-12. One league source said Sunday that the anticipated interest from lawmakers probably "has more to do with Texas" than A&M because a Longhorns move to the Pac-12 -- if finalized -- could kill the Big 12. A&M announced plans Wednesday to withdraw from the Big 12, pending an invitation to the SEC. Dewhurst's office said he is following the situation. "Lt. Gov. Dewhurst's primary focus is to ensure the best possible outcome for all Texas universities," said Dewhurst spokesperson Mike Walz in an e-mail response to questions from the Star-Telegram. Texas Gov. Rick Perry's office said only, "The governor believes these decisions are up to each school," according to spokesperson Lucy Nashed in an e-mail. A&M's action triggered statements over the weekend from school presidents at Oklahoma and Oklahoma State, who announced plans to explore other conference options in concert with one another. In a Friday interview, Oklahoma President David Boren said his school's athletic future could be determined "within 72 hours." A Sunday report in The Oklahoman said OU's "sole focus" is on joining the Pac-12 after passing on the opportunity to do so last summer. OSU President Burns Hargis said Saturday that his school will remain connected to OU because such a move is "in the best interest of our institutions and the state of Oklahoma." A departure by either, or both, schools in Oklahoma could spell the death knell for the Big 12. As one league official said Sunday, "If Oklahoma decides to leave, I don't think it matters what the [Texas] Legislature does. There won't be anything left to save." Before Saturday's Oregon-LSU game at Cowboys Stadium in Arlington, Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott said schools have approached him in the past week regarding expansion and indicated he would not be surprised to see more realignment in the near future. "I feel like further consolidation and more stability would be a healthy thing for college football," Scott said. "Right now, there is obviously some instability that I don't particularly think is a healthy thing in some parts of the country." It is possible that only Oklahoma and Oklahoma State could join the Pac-12, if invited, thereby leaving the Texas-based schools to figure it out for themselves. Although Pac-12 rules prohibit single-school networks, such as Texas' recently launched Longhorn Network, it is possible that the network could be adapted to fit into the existing Pac-12 model if Texas chooses to join that league. A source close to the situation said Saturday night that it would be "difficult but not impossible" for the LHN to be adapted into the existing Pac-12 structure, which includes one league-wide network and six regional networks, each featuring two schools. Under that model, an eventual Pac-16 could include an adapted version of the LHN as a two-team regional network (featuring Texas and Tech), with another regional network featuring OU and OSU. If the Big 12 implodes, there has been speculation about the Big East seeking to bring in the five remaining Big 12 schools (Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri and Iowa State) as part of an expanded football league in 2012. Another scenario could include the Big East going after only Kansas, Kansas State and Missouri. TCU will join the Big East next season. Read more: http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/09/04/3337160/lawmakers-may-step-in-if-horns.html#ixzz1X4CT1fVk
http://www.mrsec.com/2011/09/report-texas-lawmakers-about-to-get-involved-in-sec-expansion/ But while a tortious interference case would likely be hard to prove, that doesn’t mean such a lawsuit still couldn’t gum up the works for Mike Slive and the Aggies. The mere threat of a lawsuit could cause SEC presidents to slow down out of fear that the person hearing such a case really would be a Baylor grad… angry that his Bears are in danger of being left for dead in this round of realignment. (Nevermind the fact that the Bears left TCU, SMU, Houston and Rice for dead when Baylor jumped to the Big 12 without remorse in the mid-90s.) Back in 2003, several Big East schools filed suit against the ACC for a raid that netted the Southern league Boston College, Miami and Virginia Tech. In 2005, the ACC settled that suit for a grand total of $5 million. Pocket change. But television contracts have jumped to another level since 2005 and the Big 12 — whoever’s left of the Big 12 — would likely ask for a cool billion of SEC cash. Well, even if there were just a 1% chance of losing that kind of cash, the SEC would need to do some serious risk/reward analyses. Perhaps the league would decide to stand pat and not offer A&M a landing spot. If that were to happen, would the Big 12 then be forced to re-admit a suddenly homeless Texas A&M? Now that would be a happy, long-lasting marriage, to be sure. Bottom line? This thing isn’t over, folks. In some ways, it may just be getting started. Oh, boy. Great. ’Cause who wants to talk about football?
Mark Cuban's take: http://blogmaverick.com/ So What Should Big 12 Schools Do ? Say No to Super Conferences Sep 4th 2011 10:10PM Here is some unsolicited advice to the Big 12. As you might expect coming from me, it’s going to be contrary to what everyone else thinks they should do. With Texas A&M trying to leave the Big 12 (It doesn’t happen until the SEC accepts them) every remaining school is trying to decide in the immortal lyrics of The Clash “Should I Stay or Should I Go”. The quick answer ? They should stay. Why ? The first reason is that the Super Conferences that are forming or being considered will turn into a huge mistake. No if ands or buts about it. While the concept of a Super Conference sounds incredibly cool , the reality is that the larger than 12 school conferences will only invoke the law of intended consequences and will create the following problems: 1. More schools will NOT mean more TV money. The big college TV networks, Fox, ESPN, CBS pay for quality, not quantity. They need marquee matchups that are “Must Tweet TV”. The number of schools in a conference actually reduce the parity and quality of match-ups in a conference. The networks will not pay up for that. Adding Texas A&M to the SEC is not going to add a single dollar’s worth of value to the owner of the SEC TV contract , regardless of sport. Maybe the SEC has an escalator in their contract that increases the total value of the TV contract, but I’m guessing that it still will result in a reduction in the dollars paid to each school when compared to the amount paid had an additional school not joined the conference. 2. Fans will hate the scheduling impact You know how there is midnight madness in college basketball ? And late night and games scheduled at weird times for basketball ? Get ready for morning madness in college football as well. I’m guessing that the only way to get all those games through a single TV network partner is to start very, very early or to go very very late. OR to move games to online broadcasts. Which is exactly why the big networks are very supportive of the Super Conferences. They know they will be able to force matchups OFF of tv and on to internet based broadcasts. You can pass your own judgement if that’s good or bad. 3. Say Goodbye to Cupcake Football Games As a big college football fan I see this as a positive. But if you talk to any coach with BCS aspirations, they will tell you that this is a huge negative. Sure Utah State can take Auburn to the wire every now and then, but the reality is most BCS title aspiration (not all) schools have 3 or 4 cupcake games on their schedule. With every school added to a conference they are going to have to remove a cupcake to make room on their schedule. Coaches are going to HATE this. Of course the smaller schools are going to lose their pay day as well. 4. Goodbye Geographic Rivalry Games Growing up in Pittsburgh I absolutely loved the Pitt vs Penn State battles . It didn’t matter how bad either team was. I hated the fact that the game disappeared. All those natural rivalries of Texas A&M in and around the state of Texas will be impacted. And as far as new rivalries, it’s a long drive for fans from College Station to Alabama, Florida, South Carolina, etc. (Yes I know Arkansas has survived it but it would be interesting to know what their fans think about only playing A&M as a nearby rival and btw, they already play each other ). I don’t care how good a game OU vs Oregon could hypothetically be, fans from both sides are going to second guess the economics of going to the games. And if it’s an off-year for either team, then what ? 5. Big Dogs Hate Becoming Little Dogs In a huge conference a school that was once a “leader” in its conference will inevitably become an also ran. They will be the school that used to get national games that now is relegated to the internet broadcasts or a small coverage regional game. Think recruits might notice that ? Of course they will. Being on the bottom rung of a 12 team conference is bad enough. Being at or near the bottom of a 16 team conference assures television invisibility. How long will it take before teams that feel like they aren’t getting the coverage they need will withdraw from a super conference ? At which point someone else obviously has to take their place at the bottom. Big dogs hate becoming little dogs. It will be just a matter of time before schools withdraw. So What should the Big 12 teams do ? They should stay in the Big 12 So now let me explain some reasons why I think the Big 12 should stay as is after Texas A&M leaves. 1. The Big12 becomes the AL East of College Football. Every year you know that the Yankees and Red Sox are going to battle it out in a unique rivalry where both sides dislike each other. It is one of the most watched match-ups in MLB. Now some might argue it is because of market size. It’s not. There are plenty of large market rivalries that don’t compare (see Dodgers – Giants). Texas vs OU has the same cachet and regional and national intensity. If either team moves they will have a difficult , if not impossible time replacing the quality of this rivalry. What’s more, the remaining teams because of the quality of the programs can quickly evolve into significant rivalries Going back to my AL East comparison, Tampa Bay has quickly become a rival to both the Yankees and Red Sox. It’s not a rivalry of national interest yet, but it can get there. The Big 12 has quality programs that will only grow in significance because it has fewer schools. More schools in a conference dilutes rivalries if only because in a super conference they may not play each other every year. 2. Money, Money, Money Probably the most important reason to stay in a smaller Big 12 is that fewer schools means more money to the conference. The Big 12 is looking at a new TV deal in just a few years. The bidding between Fox, ESPN, CBS and maybe even NBC that has just rebranded Versus as NBC Sports Network could be intense. Will they get less money having lost 3 schools in the past 3 years….. ABSOLUTELY NOT. They will get just as much money and if they play their cards right, they could get even more ! On a per school basis it could be much, much more. Their TV partners want quality, marquee games with national significance. That happens with the top 2 to 4 teams in every major conference. It doesn’t matter whether your conference has 9. 12. 16 or more members. There are only 20 teams in the Top 20 and 10 in the Top 10. By the 5th game of the season the top teams in the top conferences are getting national attention. Everyone else is just working to become bowl eligible to keep their fans interested. The TV networks pay the big bucks in order to be able to broadcast the best games between the best teams in the conference. They don’t care about the 5th or lower teams playing each other. Those go regional not national. 3. Out of Conference TV Ready Games Fewer teams in the conference means more opportunity for out of conference games. They have more opportunities to schedule VERY TV FRIENDLY MATCHUPS with schools from other non super conferences. Could the Oregon vs LSU game yesterday even have been put together if both conferences had 14 schools ? 16 schools ? It’s would be very tough. Not the case among the non super conference schools. There will alway be compelling matchups available. Which of course the TV networks will love. 4. They Can Pay Players Larger Stipends or Start an NFL Like Development Fund The Big 12 can take the 20mm, 25mm or whatever the amount that would have gone to Texas A&M and do any of the following or whatever else they can think of : a. Do what the NFL does, make it a fund that can be borrowed against to develop or enhance stadiums and practice facilities or for conference wide programs. b. Use it for anything that allows the Big 12 to brand itself as a better quality conference for its athletes, fans and TV partners. c. Use the additional shares to increase the stipends to athletes across all revenue sports. Think this might help the recruiting of all Big 12 schools ?
What? If there are 16 teams in a conference, you get to pick the best of 8 conference games instead of 6 or 5, meaning you have more potential good matchups. Though he's right that there may not be an increase if you just add Iowa State and Kansas, you're almost definitely going to net out higher per school if you add Texas and OU to a conference. Mark needs to do some basic math here. There are still the same number of networks, the same number of schools, and the same number of games. It wouldn't be any harder to televise the games. Sure, there will be more Pac12 games to televise. You'll also have an additional 2 regional networks, and no Big12 games to televise. It's all the same TV partners - FOX and ESPN - so whatever Big12 games were being shown can be replaced by Pac16 games. Except that the networks are the ones opposed to the Superconferences, as far as we we've heard. Mostly because it requires renegotiating TV deals, which means more money for the schools. Coaches will deal with it. If everyone else is in the same boat, they'll learn to adapt. Bob Stoops, maybe the coach that has more influence than anyone else right now with OU flexing its muscle, doesn't seem to mind it at all. Geography lesson: it's no farther to Alabama or Florida than it was to Nebraska or Iowa State. Certainly the Pac12 games would be farther away in some cases, but Texas is already going to UCLA this year - just schedule some non-conference games closer to home (say, A&M?) and you'll have a similar travel schedule. I don't think OU or Oregon would have trouble filling up the stadium for that game. This is an interesting point. I'll be curious to see how the 16 team model affects the competitiveness of these leagues and if it creates more and more bottomfeeders or not. This doesn't even make sense. Everyone else in the AL East hates being there, which is one of the reasons baseball was talking about some goofy realignment scenarios earlier to alieviate that problem. The question is not whether they could get more than now. It's whether they could get more from the Pac16 vs the Big9. Ultimately, if there is no Big12, ESPN can pour that money into their new contracts - and it's shared with less total schools if Baylor and Iowa State don't make it into BCS conferences. I think the SEC would demonstrate otherwise. They have far more marquee games by having more marquee teams in their conference. This again doesn't make any sense. There's no reason it would be more difficult to schedule a fun OOC game just because there are four 16-team conferences instead of six 10-12 team conferences. Umm, if the Big12 gets money, it's going to the schools - not for an investment fund or whatever other crazy idea is out there. This article sounds a lot like starting with a conclusion and fitting the facts to it - none of the stuff regarding TV contracts or scheduling make any sense. I think his point about the competitiveness of the conference, however, does merit some consideration. It's probably harder to recruit when you're a 16th place team and fighting for 12th, as opposed to an 8th place team fighting for 6th.
Interesting - I had no idea about BigEast / ACC lawsuit. That changes my opinion on the potential for a lawsuit here, though I still think it's low. In terms of the $1 billion number, that's still a bit silly. $1 billion was the total value of the TV deal, and that included the share for A&M, Texas, OU, etc. Presumably, Kansas and Mizzou end up on their feet in a major conference, so that really leaves 3 schools filing suit - somewhere south of $300MM at most. That said, that's still a huge number of course. My predictions: 100% chance A&M is not in the Big12 a year from now. 95% they are in the SEC 10% chance of lawsuits (I was 0% before) 60% chance of a Pac16 within a month, led by OU. 40% chance of keeping the Big9, in which case: 0% chance of Notre Dame joining 10% chance of BYU joining 20% chance of BigEast schools joining 70%: MWC, WAC, or C-USA schools joining (AirForce, UH?) 100% chance of implosion again within 3 years
I don't think the issue is whether the lawsuit(s) gets filed...but that it could be filed leading to costly litigation with a big number for damages behind it. That affects behavior, potentially, going in. At the end of the day, if this all goes down, I think it gets filed because I'm not sure what the remaining schools have left. They made budgets for athletic dept. based on those numbers they agreed to last summer....I have a difficult time believing they're going to simply walk away from those claims without something in return. The numbers for those schools are simply too big.
Oh I agree - the threat is where the real power comes from. But A&M is too far gone to turn around at this point - for a university as proud as they are, coming back to the Big12 seems impossible. And I find it hard to believe the SEC, who's presumably given them private assurances that they are welcome, would turn their backs on them at this point and screw them over. Everyone knew the potential of the lawsuit threat a few weeks ago.
i think you're probably right...but i'd love to be a fly on the wall in these conversations...i'd love to know what's being threatened, specifically.
Absolutely. Maybe once Dan Beebe gets fired in a few weeks, he can write a tell-all book for us. I think it would be fascinating - not just this year, but everything last year too.
