i don't think you understand how fast things are moving donny. you act like they've had over a year to react to all this (like aggy had as they were reactive to the lhn and ut directing the conference). all of this is going down in a relatively quick amount of time. then add the comments made by ou on friday, they've reacted in one business day.
Eh, I've seen a lot of people (hell, maybe even you) saying that the writing was on the wall for this departure/collapse for a long time (if not a minimum of at least a year). Granted, yes, when s*** goes down, it goes down in a hurry. But it's not like it wasn't expected. You gotta prepare for winter, as they say.
This may be Texas' favorite option, but I just can't see them getting a green light to do it. They'd be bailing on Tech (not that I care), and also putting themselves under tremendous geographical strain. And the possibility of losing OU/A&M in the same fell swoop might make some people's heads explode. I have to think that the Pac-16 is the most realistic scenario still.
i haven't been saying that. when they struck a huge tv deal last summer after nu and cu left, i thought the big xii was more stable than others did. i still think it survives with equal revenue sharing and an assurance from the sec that they stay away from the rest of the big 12, er, Mizzou. and if that's the case, baylor, et al. were smart as hell not to sign any waiver.
I think the 8 conference games + midseason non-conference games is clearly to keep the OU game (and the USC game for ND). And I'm not sure Tech is necessarily as connected to Texas anymore after A&M leaves. That said, there are big red flags in the article that don't make sense. ESPN owns all the rights to TLN. Why would they build all the infrastructure and then let FOX or NBC take it over? And I don't think ESPN can spin the Pac16 stuff like they claim - too much of this has been reported by other sources first, so the idea of some kind of ESPN conspiracy to destroy the Big12 doesn't make any sense at all. I agree with you that Pac16 still feels like the most likely longterm outcome, in large part because UT keeps showing interest there every time the opportunity arises.
They have had 17 years since the inception of the Big XII. In that 17 years they have been to 1 bowl game (2011), 2 NCAA tourneys (2008, 2010), baseball I will give you because they have been pretty good in this stretch. But if the program was more relevant now than it was 17 years ago, we would not be in this spot. Baylor would be looking at a place in another BCS conference. But as it is they are fighting to hold their place at the table, not because they want better programs, but because they want to keep the money they would get and the status of being in a BCS conference.
As a football fan, it's an exciting possibility. UT TTU OSU OU AZ ASU CU Utah That division would make for some really interesting games, and then a conference championship at the Rose Bowl every year vs. the likes of Oregon, USC, and Stanford? Hell yeah. As a Cougar, I hate it though, because that would pretty much end any possibility of UH getting a seat at the table once the Super Conference apocalypse comes. For that to happen, we need the Big 12 to survive. That, or we need Tech to somehow get on UT or the Pac-12's s**t-list.
West coast games are traditionally ignored by East Coast media, I wonder if the schools consider that when thinking realignment, not a lot of folks on the East Coast can watch an evening ball game from the West coast. DD
The good news on that is that a Pac-16 would have the Eastern division with 4 teams in the MTN timezone and 4 in the CST. So the majority of their games would be at a decent hour.
Right, that's why they got Texas A&M to sign on the dotted line legally binding themselves a year ago. Now they want to breach, or effectively be given an excuse to breach with no recourse from Baylor, in exchange for what appears to be no real consideration, that would deny Baylor the benefit of tis bargain. I guess you can call it "reactive" to not want to give up any legal remedies that you explicitly and implicitly obtained a year ago, because it technically is in "reaction" to another party, but I call it "rational".
And I didn't see TLN addressed at all; there is no way UT is going to give a dime of that to anyone else, which completely invalidates any notion of "balanced revenue sharing."
Nor does Texas. They'd trade TT for USC, Stanford, the LA market, or a long-term conference partnership with ND in a heartbeat, right? To me, unless UT is joined at the hip with them, Tech is the school getting royally screwed here. Above-average program with a very good fanbase that has some reach in DFW/Houston that'll likely be on the outside looking in.
Good. They allowed indie-networks in the Big 12, turned it into the wild west. Its everyman for himself now. Ships going down, sink or swim, just don't try to hop on our lifeboats.
Gentlemen's agreement, and I think we can all agree they all stopped acting like gentlemen a long time ago. You guys clinging to the Big 9 or whatever really make me sad.
