[College Football] Big Ten, Texas have initial talks

UH should've just stayed private.

UT has chosen to cast it's lot with Tech in terms of helping another state U (both academically and athletically, UT has publicly expressed its interest in helping Tech become Tier 1, and not UH), and UH will make its way without UT and A&M's help, or with them standing firmly in the way, it matters not. That's pretty much been the story from day one, and that's how it will continue to be. The red headed step child will live on. So suck it, haterz.

 

I have always wanted better things for UH than what they have, but UH to the Big 12 makes no sense at all. The only reason the conference still exists is the promise of big money down the line. UH adds a negligible amount of viewership, and thus would add no money to the TV deal. It would end up splitting the same money among more schools.

Does not make financial sense.

 

Stability lasted all of 6 weeks... Such a healthy conference. That said, there's nothing here that says the B12 is backing out of its commitment, but interesting that A&M is verbally grumbling.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/college/texasam/7129321.html


A&M says Big 12 must fulfill pledge

Legal action, another look at SEC possible if league doesn’t pay $20 million


COLLEGE STATION — The Big 12 Conference promised Texas A&M $20 million annually and the Aggies intend to collect, A&M president R. Bowen Loftin said Wednesday.

“A key part of Texas A&M’s decision to remain in the Big 12 earlier this summer was the commissioner’s commitment that Texas A&M would receive a minimum of $20 million annually in future conference distributions,” Loftin said in a statement. “We remain committed to the conference and fully anticipate that the Big 12 will honor its commitment to Texas A&M.”

And what happens if the Big 12 doesn’t honor its $20 million pledge? A high-ranking A&M official said late Wednesday that every legal avenue would be explored first, with the potential of bolting for the Southeastern Conference coming after.

Loftin issued the pointed proclamation in response to Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe’s explanation on Tuesday to reporters gathered for the league’s media days in Irving how part of the plan to save the besieged conference is set up.

Part of the arrangement in the Big 12 surviving, as ABC/ESPN and Fox Sports stepped up financially (verbally to this point), hinged on league heavyweights Texas, Oklahoma and A&M each receiving $20 million annually in coming years, thanks to upgraded TV deals for the conference.

Nebraska and Colorado announced in June they are leaving the Big 12 for the Big Ten and Pacific 10, respectively, with the Cornhuskers set to leave next year (and Colorado to be determined).

The two schools will have reported exit fees of between $30 million and $40 million combined, and in keeping the league intact, five of the schools that would have been left behind had the conference dissolved — Baylor, Missouri, Iowa State, Kansas and Kansas State — had agreed to give up their parts of the departing schools’ fees to the “big three” to make sure they reached the $20 million.

Beebe said Tuesday that Texas and Oklahoma had declined that offer from the five schools, but that A&M — whose athletic department is in the early stages of paying back a $16 million loan to the university — had not. He added that the issue would be discussed further this fall.

The A&M official said Wednesday it wasn’t the school’s “concern” how the Big 12 got its money together for the revenue distribution — just that it lived up to its promise of $20 million annually, starting in 2012-13. The league’s pledge is oral, and the A&M official said the school’s lawyers are working to get the commitment in writing.

A&M strongly considered joining the SEC when it appeared the Big 12 would dissolve in early June. But UT, stung by the idea of perhaps joining the Pac 10 without its primary in-state rival, renewed its pledge to the beleaguered Big 12, and the nine remaining schools followed suit, in keeping the league together thanks mainly to the promise of an enriched annual payout.

The seven other schools are expected to receive between $14 million and $17 million annually. Big 12 schools have received between $7 million and $12 million annually in recent years.

 

Ha, yeah, those threats are extremely credible now. :thumbsup:

 

Funny this thread popped up...was going to post some random info. Keep hearing Houston brought up (on local sports talk radio shows here in Vegas) as a very real candidate to join the MWC. I know there was some rumblings about a month ago...but it seems like that idea is still a hot topic within MWC discussions. Of course that is just sports talk and nothing official...but it seems like Houston's efforts of progressing its sports programs (and actual geographic location) are making it a more handsome asset to some of the other conferences.


On a side note (relating to the above post)...I don't see how the Big 12 can last. They're already robbing from the "lesser" schools to satisfy the big three. I also can't see the conference being able to produce the money that everyone is demanding (of course I know nothing about the economics of how the Big 12 is run...just seems to me that it will be tough to increase payouts...while having lost two of your schools).

 

that would be very awesome.

it's not robbing if the "lesser" schools agree to it. as indicated during the height of the expansion talks, there's not a lot of market for schools like ku, ksu, bu, and isu. they'd love for the big "xii" to stay together if it means giving up their share of the cu and nu buyouts.

 

It's funny, instead of receiving 20 million they would decide to pay 20 million in lawyer fees to fight about not receiving 20 million.... hmmm.....

 

Baylor will more than double their TV money under the current projections....you won't have to twist their arm to stick around in the big 12.

they were able to keep the same TV deals...now they're splitting them up among fewer teams than they were before...

 

hehe...simple math....didn't think of it that way.

 

I don't care as much as I did last time around. Mostly because Big 12 football is just boring now. Unless they can add a Notre Dame and/or Arkansas then whatever, lets go to the SEC already.

 

Aggies.

They had a great deal from a football, research, and reputation improving standpoint, but Old Army didn't want to deal with Libruls from CA and would rather join the cesspool of recruiting violations that is the SEC because those people are more like Aggies than people who live in LA or Eugene.

Now this. Unbelievable.

No, we don't want to partner with with Stanford and Berkeley and Texas and others to build a research consortium that would be the envy of the world because we'd rather play schools that match our "culture" like Mississippi State and Auburn.

No, we don't want to be part of a future TV contract that includes two of the three largest states in the Union. We'd rather go to Fayetteville.

No, we don't want the rich and relatively untapped recruiting grounds of California opened to us. We'd rather take the leftovers after Texas, Tech, Oklahoma, OK St. and LSU have their picks and then we can compete with Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, and the Florida schools for prime SEC talent.

Aggies.

 

That last statement is backwards completely. Its a risk but the potential recruiting advantage is in the SEC for the Aggies. I agree with the academic point somewhat but you didn't see Texas clamoring to go to the Big 10, they eventually preferred the Big 12. So you can't act like it was just the Aggies who were thinking that way... Texas did everything they could to not look like the bad guys, Aggies are simply embracing it.

 

Depends. If I hold a gun to your head and say "give me your wallet", you might agree to it but it's still robbing you. The big 3 basically did that - they said "give us the money, or we kill you" essentially. In the corporate world, that's not unusual, so it's not quite a perfect analogy, but I think it's easy to see why those schools may be less-than-thrilled with the results. They are better off than they were 2 months ago, but worse off than they were 1 year ago, assuming that whatever the next TV deal the B12 comes up with is worse than it would have been with a 12-team conference w/ Nebraska + championship game.

The splitting between more teams applies for a few years, but is not really a long term solution. That was created by the networks promising not to scrap current agreements. The real question will be when its time to negotiate a new deal, and whether Beebe can deliver on the numbers he projected. That's still completely up in air, and may depend in part on the quality of the conference over the next few years. If he does, then everyone should be happy (unless other conferences get even larger deals, in which case TX/OU/A&M start grumbling again, though probably not enough to blow things up). If he can't deliver those numbers, I think implosion 2.0 will be coming.

 

Not "clamoring" to upgrade their academic standards is not the same as downgrading. With that said, Texas was "clamoring" to go to the Pac 10, which was not only an academic upgrade from the Big 12, but was also a better fit culturally compared to the Big 10. This is obviously a moot point though.

 

Please. There are more Texans playing FBS football than any other state. California's second and FL is a close third. All the other states are way back.

Right now, in their own home state, the Aggies lose recruits to Texas, Oklahoma, Tech, Oklahoma State, LSU, and even TCU, Baylor, and sometimes SMU. Getting routinely shellacked by schools like Ole Miss and Arkansas isn't going to help, even if the games are on TV. In fact, by giving teams like LSU and Alabama exposure in Texas, it's going to drive A&M further down in recruiting unless the school accepts the SEC way of doing things... but they tried that once under Sherrill and while they won, they were also one hair away from the death penalty. Now, you think they are going into Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama to get top flight personnel? You think they are going to out-recruit Florida, Miami, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, and Florida State in Florida when they lose Texans to TCU? And you're going to do this above board in the SEC? Quit it.

Here's a fact: A&M is never going to be a major power in football again without doing one of two things:

1. Cheat like hell.
2. Drop the stupid traditions.

Right now, the few good players they get usually have some tie to the school. Other good players with no ties to the school look at the no cheerleaders, the Corps, the Yell Leaders, and a host of other odd things that only go on at A&M and decide to go elsewhere. Aggies call it tradition, a lot of other folks call it strange.

That's one of the reasons I was hoping for the Pac-10 option. Over time, it would have forced A&M to change, both academically and with regard to tradition. I'd like to see a second ultra-major university in Texas. However, no matter how many grad programs and foreign students and women A&M has, they have a major image problem. Going to the SEC would exacerbate that problem, be bad academically, be bad for football, and will probably get them NCAA sanctions within 5 years because the desire to compete would be too great for Old Army to withstand and they haven't mastered the system like say, Saban or Meyer have.

In fact, if they do make it to the SEC, I would be willing to bet a huge amount of money that within 5 years there will be a major NCAA investigation at A&M and I would win. If you know basic Aggie mentality, it's a sure thing.

Anyway, to sum up, trying to honestly recruit SEC ground would result in A&M competing with the UABs and Valdosta States of the South. It would not be better.

 

I don't know how TAM has done in general against PAC-10 schools but I know the last time they faced CAL they got shellacked 45-10. I figure they would feel better about getting beat regularly by Bama, LSU, Florida than hippies from CAL and Oregon.

 

I disagree. A&M loses those recruits right now because they are in the same league as UT/etc. If you want to play in the B12, why pick A&M over Texas/OU/etc? If you want to play in the SEC, you have to go out of state.

If A&M were in the SEC, it gives them a selling point. Texas kids who want the SEC can stay and try to build a power in the SEC without leaving home. It may not work, but it gives kids an option. Right now, there's just no football reason to pick A&M over UT unless you simply like the school.

 

There is a football reason to pick TAMU, its playing time. TAMU is a consistent top 25 program in recruiting, like I said, moving to the SEC was a risk, but that's the kind of risk they might need to take. I wanted TAMU in the Pac-10 the entire time, go read all the posts, I was all about the academics, I am sick of the "old ways", but right now the Big 12 is a bore and I just don't care anymore. Its not about the Pac-10 anymore, its about the Big 12.

 

Isn't OU out of state the same way LSU and Arkansas are out of state?

Anyway, you're suggesting a Texas kid is going to say to himself, "Gee, I want to play in the SEC, so I will go to A&M." I don't see it. First, the travel is much greater than with the Pac? version of the Big12 South. Second, you'd have fewer away games within driving distance. Once you get beyond Baton Rouge, it's a haul... even Fayetteville is tough to get to compared to OU/OK State. Third, A&M will still be losing. Fourth, I don't see football conferences having the same pull as basketball conferences.... I can see a kid saying he wants to hoop in the Big East or the ACC, but football players traditionally stay close to home and are more influenced by the school rather than the conference.

The choice for a lot of players will be to go to A&M and get beat up in places your family can't see you play or go to OK St. or Tech, play respectable college football, and have most of your games available for your family to attend.

Again, A&M will have to cheat or change if the are going to have success measured as something beyond upsetting UT or OU (or LSU and Alabama).

 

Only second-tier players are concerned about playing time. If you're a 4 or 5 star recruit, you're not afraid of competition. If you're a three star, you might look at the roster. A&M can get lucky and hit on a few 3 stars here and there, but if you're going to really compete in the SEC or with TX/OU, you need a decent number of 4 stars. Those folks don't seem to be flocking to College Station.