Certainly possible. Or, it's possible that he's lying. I'd bet money on my answer before I would yours. They never schedule their cupcake games out more than a couple of years in advance, and schools rarely fill their schedules 8-10 years out. There'd be no reason for Texas to do it, but for your scenario to work, you're assuming they scheduled 3 high profile games in all the out years, or that they are scheduling cupcake games for 2021 already. The real conclusive tests will be if they drop A&M in 2013 and 2014 if BYU joins the conference, or if they continue to make this claim that they can't fit A&M in if the Big12 expands back to 12, giving them an extra free game every season.
A&M left the Big 12 so they could move away from being UT's b****, on to being the b**** of every school in the SEC, and they expect us to help them? lmao
LOL .. Texas "Saving the Big XII twice" and doing it "for the kids" is pure propaganda as I've already stated. Quit reading if you don't understand English. I never said tu or t-sips until I found out it annoys you so you can just take your tu lovin' t-sippin' short horn ass out of the thread if you don't want to hear it.
If you're the Big XII, it's officially time to give a drop-dead date to Mizzou to make a decision. http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2011/10/majority_of_sec_presidents_fav.html Majority of SEC presidents favor Missouri, but not yet enough BIRMINGHAM, Alabama -- Missouri demonstrated it's ready to publicly dance with the SEC. But will enough SEC presidents agree to the overture? Two sources familiar with the SEC's discussions about Missouri told The Birmingham News Wednesday that as of now it appears that a majority of SEC presidents and chancellors would support Missouri's application. But the sources said that majority falls just short of the nine votes required to add a new member. One source said there's a group of presidents that wants to sit tight, believing the SEC can do better than Missouri and that No. 14 should come from the East. According to both sources, Alabama wants to look East and not risk losing its annual game against Tennessee, while Auburn favors adding Missouri and moving to the Eastern Division. The majority that support Missouri like the school's academic profile, getting the SEC into the St. Louis and Kansas City TV markets, and avoiding the awkwardness of an unbalanced 13-team schedule. SEC athletics directors spent about four hours meeting in Birmingham on Wednesday, after which two ADs said only 13-team scheduling concepts were considered, not 14. SEC expansion these days resides on two different tracks: the one trying to line up No. 14 and the one trying to build 13-team schedules. Both are bumpy journeys that will merge at some point, but it's not clear when or who will be aboard. On Tuesday, Missouri Chancellor Brady Deaton received authority from his board to look elsewhere. Deaton also took the necessary -- and long overdue -- step of resigning as chairman of the Big 12 board of directors to avoid a conflict of interest. Those actions make an Associated Press story Wednesday out of Missouri all the more bizarre. The AP quoted an anonymous Missouri official as saying the school hopes to join the SEC but preferred a Big Ten offer that never came. "That's what's left," the Missouri official said, referring to the SEC. Talk about a clumsy PR way to win support from the SEC, whose large ego doesn't like the appearance of accepting leftovers, especially the Big Ten's. Was this simply one Missouri official's opinion, a last-ditch plea to the Big Ten, or an attempt to sabotage moving into the SEC? Either way, it should be troubling to the SEC that Missouri continues to trip over itself when trying to leave the chaotic Big 12. Public flirting with the Big Ten last year left Missouri with egg on its face. At this rate, Missouri would instantly become the most unstable SEC member in a conference fiercely concerned about stability and speaking with one voice. Missouri isn't a good SEC fit. While it would alleviate unbalanced schedules and add cable subscribers for a potential SEC Network, it's a cultural head-scratcher, the SEC's version of Boston College in the ACC. Meanwhile, SEC ADs met Wednesday to consider how to schedule with 13 in all sports with the least amount of disruption and most amount of fairness. Good luck. The "simplest" option in football may be giving Texas A&M four teams from each division and let the dominoes fall from there. Sure, Texas A&M could play an SEC schedule for one year but not be eligible for Atlanta. But that would be a shocking and unnecessary move by the SEC. Once you're a member, you should be a full member. Consider the headaches in men's basketball. Changes will be necessary to the new 18-game model that would have kept two annual games between old division foes. Then there's how to stage an SEC basketball tournament with 13. Leave one team at home? Keep five teams home? Stage a play-in game between the 12th and 13th seeds? Give the regular-season champion, which might have played an easier schedule than others, two byes into the semifinals? Baseball could easily keep eight teams for its tournament in Hoover. But how is it determined who qualifies? Would there be more SEC games, even perhaps jumping from 30 to 36? And how might that affect NCAA Tournament bids? Mississippi State AD Scott Stricklin said a couple of football models, which he wouldn't identify, received more consensus than others and probably affect the fewest number of current schedules. But, he cautioned, "There's a lot of moving parts." None more so than the elephant in the room at the ADs' meeting: Will Missouri be No. 14? There's support, but not yet enough.
http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1275023 According to multiple sources, Texas, after talking to ESPN, has agreed not to air any content involving high school athletics, not even the news-style highlights that had been approved by the NCAA, sources told Orangebloods.com Wednesday night. It's the latest attempt to reach peace in the Big 12 as part of an agreement in principle for schools to grant their Tier 1 and 2 TV rights to the conference for six years. The "compromise" deal was struck Wednesday after Big 12 interim commissioner Chuck Neinas gave Texas a 24-hour deadline to consider the Tier 3 content concessions, which impact Texas the most because of its Longhorn Network, sources said. The question is if this agreement will be enough to keep Missouri in the Big 12. Missouri was more interested in a proposal that would grant rights for the 13 years remaining on the Fox television deal struck with the Big 12 in April, sources said. Missouri and Oklahoma pushed for high school content restrictions on Tier 3 (that would impact the Longhorn Network) as part of the 13-year proposal, sources said. But talks about granting rights for 13 years broke off after negotiations started Sunday night and went into Monday, sources said. The talks broke off, in part, because Texas was hesitant to commit to granting rights for more than a decade while also having to make concessions on content impacting the Longhorn Network. So Texas agreeing to restrict any and all high school content for the next six years, while also granting rights for that length ended up as the compromise, sources said. Although, a key source said late Wednesday it's still possible the agreement could end up being for 13 years once the Big 12 decides on its final number of members. Some schools in the Big 12 were wary of allowing more than one football game, including conference games, to be aired at the Tier 3 level. But that was not part of the compromise. Schools will continue to be allowed to air at least one football game and additional games could include conference games. Big 12 presidents and chancellors are expected to talk early Thursday to formally finalize an agreement. It remains to be seen how Missouri will react. But multiple officials across the Big 12 are hoping Mizzou reacts favorably by joining the agreement and staying put. TCU, BYU and Louisville continue to lead as potential targets of the Big 12. But a key source said West Virginia is not out of the picture, either. Stay tuned.
Sigh. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/14/s...cuss-texas-ams-admission.html?_r=1&ref=sports You don't go to the point that Mizzou has if your decision hasn't been made. They're gone, and it's done - just like it was in August for A&M.
ChipBrownOB Chip Brown Missouri was on the B12 call this morning inviting TCU and formalizing granting of rights but was expected to recuse itself from voting.
I tend to agree with you, but I also don't see how OU got so far and allowed themselves to look like they did when they got rejected by the PAC-XII. I would think Mizzou would have some sort of assurances they will have the vote to go as far as they have. I think the SEC is going out of their way to show that they are not the ones trying to pry Mizzou away because of the Little Blue Dress.
What made it difficult for OU is that their Pac 12 scenario was tied to so many different schools. For example, OSU was their tag-along, no matter what, and their academic profile is iffy. There was also the UT issue, in that clearly certain blocks in the Pac 12 wanted OU/OSU/UT/Tech to come as a foursome, with UT dropping the LHN. There were so many moving pieces that it was always possible it could fall apart. Here, it seems a lot more simple. Mizzou isn't tied to anyone else, and the SEC needs a No. 14. It'd be a catastrophic failure in leadership for Mizzou to take the steps it took the other night and not feel secure in their landing spot, so I'm taking the leap of faith that they know what they're doing. I agree with you that I think it's mostly a PR play from the SEC, though for a slightly different reason. After that stupid anonymous source-based AP report yesterday of Mizzou choosing the SEC because "that's what's left", they don't want to seem desperate. They want Mizzou to be seen as the aggressor. It'll work out, I'm pretty sure.
I'm hearing BYU's demands for Tier 3 rights make the LHN look like nothing....extremely demanding. ChrisLevel Chris Level Big 12 Presidents took BYU off their list last week (not sure why) ... If Missouri leaves it'll be Louisville.
I wish the Big 12 would set a deadline for Mizzou, like Nebraska a year ago. I get the feeling that the notoriously conservative Mizzou administration, while set on the SEC, could drag its feet for fear of litigation. Of course, such litigation is extremely unlikely to happen, since the Big 12 seems poised to remain. Wish someone would just set a deadline and get this over with.
in total agreement. that needs to happen; because the big 12 needs to be able to make its 2012 schedule.
This is the key point here. We were able to get something truly important to fans and networks in exchange for something we never had. Proves again that Dodds is playing chess, everyone else is playing checkers.
this is a line i've heard over and over again throughout this...from guys at UT and BU...and they've said it not just about UT, but about OU, as well.
from what i understand of it all, BU was a pawn, used very carefully by both UT and OU...but especially by UT.
Deloss' victory here is marred by the fact that in order to achieve this, it cost his conference three of its largest member institutions.
