It's pretty funny that you (mistakenly) blast sammy for making a definitive statement, then turn around with one of your own, claiming there wasn't even the slightest chance of it happening. By the way, Cart McCoy? I really hope you're about 12 years old or younger with that. Celebrating a pair of viciously dirty hits to knock out a freshman with a pre-existing neck injury is about as low as it gets.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/co...s-big-12-deserves-to-know-am_s-intentions.ece Deadline coming? Dan Beebe: Big 12 deserves to know A&M's plans When Texas A&M president R. Bowen Loftin asked Aggies for patience Monday, maybe he should have included the Big 12 in his request. The ongoing courtship between A&M and the Southeastern Conference cannot continue for much longer without resolution, Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe made clear Tuesday. “I think the members deserve to know what Texas A&M’s intentions are going forward regarding the conference,” Beebe said. He said the idea of the saga extending for months simply isn’t a possibility for the Big 12. “I would suggest that would be an untenable position,” Beebe said. “We can’t operate with an institution waiting to decide if it wants to remain in the conference. There has to be a very short time for an institution to commit.” At some point soon, Beebe said he could approach the Big 12’s board of directors about setting a date for A&M to make a commitment. He raised the idea that the Big 12 could pursue a stronger contractual pledge “because the one last summer wasn’t binding enough.” In addition to the current rules specifying withdrawal penalties, Beebe suggested that the extended commitment would involve damages for any school that would leave. While Beebe didn’t offer a time period, the remaining 10 schools made a 10-year pledge last season. Beebe said the conference had “already suffered damages to its name, brand, and reputation.” A $1 million rebranding campaign by Austin-based GSD&M Idea City called “This Is How We Play” has been essentially rendered unusable. Additionally, Beebe wondered about Loftin’s comments regarding confusing Big 12 bylaws regarding departure payments. The commissioner noted that A&M backed the conference’s stance and accepted the exit fees from Nebraska and Colorado a year ago. Texas A&M declined to comment through spokesman Jason Cook, who pointed to Loftin’s comments Monday after the regents gave him the power to deal with conference alignment. “What we do, if anything, will be in the best interest of Texas A&M and the state of Texas,” Loftin said. “We’re also very concerned about the members of the Big 12. We don’t want the Big 12 to go away. We have no intention of doing anything that might precipitate that.” While the SEC discussed expansion Sunday, the conference decided to remain at 12 teams for now. Sources indicated that talks between the SEC and A&M remain alive and ongoing. But NCAA president Mark Emmert also became involved, suggesting a summit on conference alignment and calling Beebe and several SEC presidents. Beebe emphasized that the Big 12’s first option was to retain A&M, which has longstanding conference rivalries. The Big 12 board of directors has conveyed the same sentiment in a statement Saturday. “Ultimately, our strong main desire is to keep A&M and address whatever needs to be done to keep them as happy, fulfilled members of the conference,” Beebe said. The Longhorn Network had provided the spark for A&M’s decision to look at the SEC. Since then, Big 12 and the NCAA have neutralized concerns about high school games appearing on Texas’ new startup venture with ESPN. Loftin said A&M was motivated by a desire for national visibility and financial resources. Dallas tycoon and Oklahoma State überbooster T. Boone Pickens said the Aggies should stay put. “That’s a big mistake for Texas A&M to move out,” Pickens told The Oklahoman. “They’re moving out of Texas when they do that, and I don’t think that’s a smart deal.” Beebe said he was not issuing an ultimatum to A&M. “I don’t think any of this is unreasonable or nasty,” Beebe said. “It makes sense especially with scheduling and other long-term concerns.”
http://collegesportsblog.dallasnews...texas-tech-president-guy-bailey-no-pac-1.html Texas Tech president Guy Bailey: No Pac-12 invite this time for Texas schools Texas Tech president Guy Bailey said Texas Tech's best option in the pending conference realignment situation is to remain a part of the Big 12 Monday during an interview with Fox Talk in the Morning on KJTV 950 AM in Lubbock. Part of the reason, but not the primary reason, is the fact the Pac-12 probably won't come for the Texas schools in this round of conference realignment. "Here's the deal, what the Pac-12 offered last year, and I think they would be open to this year, is a package deal," Bailey told the radio show. "You'd have to have four schools and Texas is the cornerstone to that. Remember, the issue last year came down to the Longhorn Network. The University of Texas wanted its own network for tertiary rights and the Pac-12 doesn't allow that. We can cut that out right there. I don't foresee that happening." Bailey also said he expects Texas A&M to ultimately leave for the Southeastern Conference and the best option for the remaining nine Big 12 teams is to add at least one more member. "If A&M leaves, we're going to use this opportunity to build one of the strongest conferences in the United States," Bailey said. "What we'll do, we're going to be very aggressive in recruiting schools and I don't know how many we're eventually going to recruit, we'll need to work with FOX and our other media partners in doing this. "In the past we've sort of been reactive, I think the nine remaining members of the Big 12 have decided that the reactive behavior - it's time to get rid of that. It's time to be proactive and I think you'll see a very proactive approach... I think you ought to think of conference realignment with the Big 12 being one of the cornerstones."
I think he means you need to stop having your school president say he's not sure where they're going. At some point, you crap or get off the pot. The rest of the Big 12 can't afford to let that happen. Have to know one way or the other.
http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/45014/john-marinatto-reaches-out-to-big-12-acc Much has been made of what will happen to the college football landscape when the next wave of expansion hits and where that could potentially leave the Big East. But could there be a way to stave off the cannibalization of conferences? Big East commissioner John Marinatto has reached out to Dan Beebe of the Big 12 and John Swofford of the ACC in an attempt to discuss conference realignment, and also has phoned NCAA president Mark Emmert. It is no coincidence that those three leagues face the biggest challenges to their survival should expansion get moving again. Marinatto told the Associated Press: "We can and must be mindful of everyone's best interests and be constructive and not destructive," Marinatto said. "But we all realize we are competitive and we have different constituencies to serve." Emmert has reached out to conference commissioners to discuss future expansion, according to a report in The New York Times. To be clear, Emmert has no real power when it comes to conference realignment. There is no one really in charge of college football. So what can Emmert and Marinatto hope to do? It never hurts to discuss ideas about the future of college sports, especially in light of the recent NCAA retreat, where reform was a main topic of conversation. There needs to be a serious discussion with all parties about whether a future with four 16-team superconferences is in the best interest of college football itself, and whether it is a sustainable model moving forward.
I'm pretty sure everything I've seen from A&M officials isn't really ambiguous on the matter. They're trying for the SEC, which will be a long, drawn-out legal process, and if it fails, they're stayin' put. That's what I've got from it.
The comments directly from the university president could not have been more ambiguous and open-ended.
To me it sounds like people want this thing over with yesterday, and that's just not realistic, given the circumstances. If you've read the statements, it's clear the only conference they are considering moving to is the SEC and the only things holding them back from putting in a bid are the Texas Legislature's ultimate involvement and the Big 12's legal tripwires. So, to issue a statement pressuring them to "get off the fence", when they're clearly not on it is silly. It's not a matter of "hurry up and decide what you want to do", it's a matter of "hurry up and figure it out how to do it". If Dan Beebe thinks A&M doesn't know what they want to do yet, then he's even more incompetent than I thought.
Never thought of Tech going to the Pac-12. That would be great for them, and for the Pac-12. I'd love to see that magically happen. The big 12 being pulled from 3 directions, just dissolve already.
To be fair, I think he is trying to apply public pressure on them "to decide" in an effort to make it harder on them to leave. If everyone sits idly by and lets them work out the kinks in due time they are definitely gone. The Big 12 isn't going to keep A&M because they decide they want to stay. Perhaps he is trying to force their hand to agree to stay by bringing enough pressure that they don't get the time they need to get around the tripwire.
Was last year. His point was the Pac-12 didn't want a team like Texas Tech or A&M independently. They only wanted the Texas block as a whole, and the driver in that was Texas. Without Texas (and Texas can't go now because of LHN) the Pac-12 has 0 interest in schools like Tech.
We're long past that point. If they stay as a member of the Big12, it will be because they were forced into it by whatever outside influences (the Legislature, threats, the SEC rejecting them, etc). There's no way that they will be *happy* members of the conference at this point. Good to see the discussion return to A&M and the SEC instead of a bunch of people fighting over Colt McCoy.
Something else: In 2005, A&M's athletic dept. had to borrowin $16 million from the university's general fund....the general fund is YOUR tax dollars. They didn't being to even make payments on that loan until 2009. The exit fees to the Big 12 are around $30 million. The athletic dept. is broke (in the red, actually) so they would need more funds frmo the general fund to make the jump. That's why this may end up being something the Legislature has more say in than I thought previously. Endowment funds are usually too restricted to be used for something like this.
These exit fees seem to be negotiable. Both NU and CU's exit fees were $20MM each and they ended up paying something like $7MM each in the end, though I don't know the particular reasons for any of that. That's actually part of A&M's grievance - they were going to get a chunk of those exit fees which never materialized.
Certainly - but I'm pretty sure the basis for the exit fee didn't change. It's something like one year's full conference revenues and then something like half the following year. The amount went up because the revenues went up, but I don't think that part of the agreement changed. We have no idea whether the new agreement is stronger or weaker than the previous one. Beebe said that they didn't form any kind of strong agreement last year or require any type of additional commitment from members, which is something they will look to change going forward - so it's unclear that the current setup is any tougher than the previous one.
