That's what she said. Spoiler sucker Spoiler JK, just going a little delirious from all of this at this point.
In my mind it's a fairer request then you make it out to be. Saw it happenly recently in my own work place where a client requested a statement in writing from the corporate lawyers saying they could perform an action that the existing contracts clearly stated they could. It saves headaches down the road. That said, I do understand the other schools laughing at the request.
There's progress towards keeping the Big 12 together. No guarantees, but I'm told that may be complete within the next 72 hours...with balanced revenue sharing. Look for releases granted then with condition that SEC never poach a Big 12 school again. As of the time I went to bed last night, not one school in the Big XII had signed the release nor expressed that they planned to.
How is this positive? Clearly people want out. If they stay together we can kick up this thread again next year and the year after that if we must. Big 12 is a dead man walking.
cool, i dig it. i'm very much against super conferences, so anything to stop those is a plus in my book. if the tv deal isn't voided and those schools have another $20 million a year to split, plus more equal sharing on top of that, no one's going to want to be leaving any time soon. add in the guarantee that sec wouldn't poach another school, then i think that provides a lot of stability to the conference. add byu, pitt and louisville and while not the sec, it's definitely up there with the rest of the conferences.
I don't think this solves the Big12's long-term problems. The unequal revenue sharing was a problem, but that was probably $1-$2MM / yr. If going from $8MM to $18MM or whatever they did last year didn't fix the problem, I don't think an extra $1-$2MM is going to do it. The real problem is Texas dictating policy of the league. All that happens with the money is that the Big12 schools make as much as the SEC schools (who negotiated their TV deal 5 years ago) and the Big10 schools, who will renegotiate their TV deal up eventually, etc. If you're Mizzou and the Big10 invites you, you still have real incentive to go. Still not sure I understand how this appeases OU - they'd be losing money by agreeing to equal revenue share. If they want to keep the conference together, they could just say they are staying, and everything is solved - they get to keep their money, plus they leave their options open for the future. Or if they wanted to do a power play, they could demand a bigger share to stay. Regardless, this is the endgame I feared with Beebe pulling off a "miracle". A&M will get to play 4-6 ranked games a year, while Texas plays OU, OSU, and a bunch of scrubs. I'm not sure how anyone can argue Texas football will be more exciting going forward than it was 2 years ago - we lose Nebraska and A&M, as well as a potential title game against a top 20 type team, and gain ... nothing.
Exactly the same thing I fear. And add to that the BU's and ISU's get to keep gravy training on the UT and OU coattails all the while keeping the status quo of not elevating their programs.
So, the SEC can't poach another school from the Big 12 but it's OK for the Big 12 to go poach multiple schools from other conferences?
Hard to argue with Loftin's stance. He asked for, and received, a letter indicating that A&M was basically free to go. Now the conference is backtracking. I smell a much in the way of lawsuits.
WTF are you talking about concerning program elevation? Better facilities? Baylor has massively upgraded their athletic facilities since joining the Big 12. Recruiting? Short of cheating the system, smaller universities are always going to struggle against larger schools in the same geographic area. Win-loss record? Baylor's baseball and basketball teams are more than formidable vs. the rest of the conference. The football team has clawed it's way out of the basement the past couple of years. Stop spewing crap unless you're willing to define the metrics you're using.
They got a letter from the Big 12 that the Big 12 wouldn't sue. However, they never got confirmation from the individual schools. Blame the Aggies for putting themselves in this situation. The should have figured out what the SEC wanted and gotten it before they told everyone that they were leaving. I have a suspicion that the SEC did poach, and are covering their asses.
The SEC wanted guarantees that they wouldn't get sued. A&M got a letter authorized by the Big12 stating that they and their members had agreed not to sue. Then hours before the vote, the Big12 sent another letter that essentially said "uhhh, never mind. we take that back." I'm not sure where A&M or the SEC could have done anything more. The SEC didn't need individual waivers when they had a letter stating the individual members of the Big12 wouldn't sue. It's not the media - we have copies of the exact letter. It states, very uneqivocally, that the member institutions agree not to sue. That's why the Big12 sent the 2nd "nevermind" letter.
It's all over the news dude, and in various written statements from numerous folks. Beebe himself admits it. Whatever, ya'll are nuts. I suspect A&M has grounds to sue but IANAL.
No - and that's the underly problem. Either the Big12 schools changed their mind or the Big12 didn't have the authority to send that letter. But either way, that's not the fault of A&M or the SEC. A&M asked what they needed to do to leave and the Big12 told them their terms - then the conference or its members changed those terms at the last second. Not sure what else A&M or the SEC could have done.
