Can This Marriage Be Saved?

Great read. I agree with your third point on conference unity. The SEC is the most functional dysfunctional family on earth. They bleed hate for each other. They police one another to degrees of utter paranoia. Yet, at the end of the day, they join arms for the ever almighty ESSEECEE (read: bowl season).

I am one who encourages a divorce in this case. I prefer the super conference scenarios and would be happy to be in the B10 or the P10. I would not like the SEC for a lot a reasons, the foremost being academic standing.

I would hate to see the Big 12 break apart. Despite compelling reasons for joining other conferences I’ve read on other posts (federal grant money, academic prestige, etc), I think there are a lot of intangibles that would be swept aside. For instance, regional rivalries would change drastically. Is a Texas v. Northwestern game as watchable as a Texas v. Baylor game? Both are blowouts, but I know a lot of people who went to Baylor which makes it more interesting. I know maybe 1 person who went to Northwestern, zero people who went to Indiana, 5 people who went to michigan, zero people who went to michigan state, 3 people who went to ohio state…you get the point.

I also question whether or not we could possibly achieve the kind of unity the SEC has by creating a vastly more diverse conference. At the end of the day, the SEC is full of a bunch of southern schools who share more similarities than differences. That promotes unity. Could we really feel solidarity with a bunch of yankees from michigan and ohio? The first time I go to a road game and hear the word “hoser” I am going to want to shoot myself. I don’t own a snowshovel, I don’t have a basement, and I don’t want to learn how to ice fish. The same can be said for most people in the Big 12 (south at least) and I like it that way.

Texastopac10.fantake.com!

Nice work. Some thoughts in the context of your analogy…

For the Texas schools, the Big 12 is a second marriage, and right or wrong, they already have the experience of dumping lifelong partners for something prettier. I think I read somewhere that the divorce rate of second marriages is higher than first marriages. So we’re not breaking new moral ground here.

The Big 10 (academics), SEC (old south?) and PAC 10 (west coast) seem to have identities that transcend athletics and TV contracts. I think they will be together forever and, if/when they expand, will try to do so on their cultural terms. They will enter into a new marriage, but with a solid prenup that stipulates where they will go to church and which parents they will visit for the holidays.

The K-State president is not going to have success convincing the Texas or Texas A&M presidents to do anything. As universities, there is a huge cultural divide, principally over the size and perceived qualities of the R&D enterprises. They are cordial, but they are not exactly collaborative.

In fact, there was/is a rivalry that is R&D related between the UT System (specifically UTSA and UTHSC) and K-State over the recently awarded National Bio-Agri Defense Facility (NBAF) that Kansas won and the state of Texas (for a site in San Antonio) has appealed. Texas has filed suit citing “serious irregularities in the decision-making process, improper political influence, and disregard for public safety when DHS selected tornado-prone Kansas.”

http://www.nbafsanantonio.org/index.html

Since there are no children involved, and there are already legal proceedings, I’m not sure this marriage can be saved.

Ultimately, the Big 10 can use Mizzou as a domino. No amount of Big 12 compromising is going to keep Mizzou in the Big 12 if the Big 10 offers them a spot. Once Mizzou is gone, the Big 12 is likely no longer viable for Texas or A&M and they will also leave.

I’m still trying to wrap my head around Missouri or Colorado leaving a conference they have been members of for decades. As Horninexile says, Texas and the other SWC survivors are already divorcees, damaged goods. To think that Colorado and Missouri would willingly leave rivalries they haeld for 100 years? Wow. If that happens, well, the Big 6/8/12 just must not have been all that.

The Big 12 will have to strongarm cable suppliers into carrying the network as part of the base package, much like the Big 10 did.

The Big 12 doesn’t have the alumni base throughout the nation to use the same tactic that the Big 10 had. I think a Big 12 Network is just a band-aid on a head wound that won’t stop bleeding.

How much revenue does the Big 12 need to be viable for its members? Texas doesn’t have to have the $22 million/year the Big 10 and SEC schools get, although it would like it. Would $15 million/year be enough? $15 million would be enough for OSU, TT, BU, ISU, and KSU, as it’s more than they get now, and would be much better than they would get in a Texas-less Big 12.

If Missouri would jump for just a few million more than they would get from the Big 12, there really is no saving this conference.

I’ve always wondered if the TV market for football in Texas might be able to support two different conferences, so long as they weren’t competing in the same timeslot. The old Big 8 teams plus Tech, Baylor, TCU and Houston would play on Thursday night and the 11:00 a.m. or 8:00 p.m. slot on Saturday. UT and A&M could play at 2:30 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. in the Pac-10, I suppose. I would imagine a UT or A&M guy would rather watch Tech vs. OU than Ohio State vs. Purdue or whatever elese is on at that time. As Tech or OU TV sets would be tuned to whoever UT and A&M were playing over most likely SEC football. The state of Florida fields competitive teams in a lot of conferences. It’s not like there is a conference, which possesses a Texas team, and isn’t dominated by it when faced against out-of-state Midwestern pipelines. UT, TCU, Houston. It might level the playing field between the North and South to keep NU & Mizzou happy. Setup a Big 12 network. Share the revenue. Whatever. I would even vote to drop admission standards back to Big 8/SEC levels. I’m guessing UT and A&M would have to increase theirs. Bob Stoops and Bo Pelini will turn Texas into Notre Dame football calling the shots without someone to police them.

This would probably discourage Mizzou and Colorado more than it would UT, because the loss of revenue wouldn’t even put a dent in UT’s deep pockets. Of course as far as we know Mizzou could have given notice two years ago.

SECTION 3
DURATION
3.1 Membership. Each Member Institution shall remain a member of the Conference
until July 1, 2006 (the "Current Term") and during any Additional Term (as defined
below). Unless a Member Institution gives written notice that it will withdraw from
the Conference at the end of the Current Term or the then-current Additional Term to
all other Member Institutions and the Conference (a "Notice") not less than two (2)
years before the end of the Current Term or the then-current Additional Term, as the
case may be, each Member Institution shall remain a member of the Conference for
an additional five-year period after the end of the Current Term or the then-current
Additional Term, as the case may be (each, an "Additional Term") unless such member
is a Breaching Member. Each Member Institution agrees that in the event such Member
desires to withdraw from the Conference, that it will in good faith give Notice not less
than two (2) years before the end of the Current Term or any Additional Term, as the
case may be. No Member Institution shall be entitled to distribution of the then-current
revenues from the Conference after the effective date of its withdrawal, resignation, or
the cessation of its participation in the Conference (the "Effective Date").

3.2 Effect of Giving Notice. If a Member Institution gives proper Notice pursuant to Section
3.1 (a "Withdrawing Member"), then the Members agree that such withdrawal would
cause financial hardship to the remaining Member Institutions of the Conference, and that
the financial consequences cannot be measured or estimated with certainty at this time.
Therefore, in recognition of the obligations and responsibilities of each Member Institution
to all other Member Institutions of the Conference, each Member Institution agrees that the
amount of revenue that would have been otherwise distributable to a Withdrawing Member

pursuant to Section 2 herein for the final two (2) years of the Current Term or the thencurrent
Additional Term, as the case may be, shall be reduced by fifty percent (50%), with
the remainder to be distributed to the other Member Institutions who are not Withdrawing
Members or Breaching Members (as defined below) as additional Conference revenues in
accordance with Section 2 herein. The Member Institutions agree that such reduction in
the amount of revenues distributed to a Withdrawing Member is reasonable and shall be in
the form of liquidated damages and not be construed as a penalty.

3.3 Effect of Withdrawal From Conference Other Than by Giving Proper Notice. If,
other than by giving a proper Notice pursuant to Section 3.1, a Member Institution (a
"Breaching Member") withdraws, resigns, or otherwise ceases to participate as a full
Member Institution in full compliance with these Rules, or gives notice or otherwise
states its intent to so withdraw, resign, or cease to participate in the future (a "Breach"),
then the Member Institutions agree that such Breach would cause financial hardship
to the remaining Member Institutions of the Conference, and that the financial
consequences cannot be measured or estimated with certainty at this time. Therefore,
in recognition of the obligations and responsibilities of each Member Institution to
all other Member Institutions of the Conference, each Member Institution agrees that
after such Breach, the amount of Conference revenue that would otherwise have been
distributed or distributable to the Breaching Member during the two (2) years prior to
the end of the Current Term or the then-current Additional Term, as the case may be,
shall be reduced by an amount that equals the sum of the aggregate of such revenues
times the following percentages (such sum being the "Aggregate Reduction"); if Notice
is received less than two years but on or before eighteen months prior to the Effective
Date, 70%; if Notice is received less than eighteen months but on or before twelve
months prior to the Effective Date, 80%; if Notice is received less than twelve months
but on or before six months prior to the Effective Date, 90%; or if Notice is received
less than six months prior to the Effective Date, 100%.

After such Breach, none of the revenues that otherwise would be distributable to a
Breaching Member shall be paid to the Breaching Member until the aggregate amount
so withheld (the "Withheld Amounts") equals the Aggregate Reduction; thereafter, all
revenues that would otherwise have been distributable to the Breaching Member shall
be so distributed. If the Withheld Amounts are less than the Aggregate Reduction, then
the Member Institutions acknowledge and agree that the Conference shall assess such
Breaching Member an amount that equals the difference of the Aggregate Reduction
less the Withheld Amounts, and the Breaching Member agrees that on or prior to the
Effective Date it shall repay to the Conference such amount from revenue that previously
had been distributed to such Breaching Member. The Withheld Amounts and any such
repayment of the difference of the Aggregate Reduction less the Withheld Amounts
shall be distributed to the other Member Institutions who are not Withdrawing Members
or Breaching Members as additional Conference revenues in accordance with Section
2 herein. The Member Institutions agree that such reduction in the distribution of
revenues to a Breaching Member is reasonable and shall be in the form of liquidated
damages and not be construed as a penalty.

What about a potential Big 12/Pac 10 partnership deal for the new network. That maintains the existing conferences but vastly expands the tv markets to include like 1/3 of the country. If they could make the revenue sharing work this might be the best solution. As a CU alum I know a move to the PAC 10 is being considered for a couple of extra reasons beyond just money, e.g. wins a lot of goodwill for the AD from the academic side of the school who would rather be associated with the PAC 10 schools rather than any of the other Big 12 schools beyond TX and TAMU and also gets us much closer to our largest out of state alumni base. Send CU and Utah to the PAC 10, replace CU with BYU and if MO bails bring in a Louisville of Memphis for a new market and voila…you maintain the bulk of the existing conferences and create a revenue generating super-bloc with the best top to bottom football and basketball, only teams that get screwed are in the MWC, who would end up inviting Boise and Fresno. The network could be enhanced by having a preferred OOC agreement that would make for better games and help maintain some of the old rivalries. But it will never happen, makes too much sense and probably has too many conflicting interests.

Southwest League
Texas, TAMU, AZ, AZ St, USC, Cal, OU

Northwest League
Wash, Oregon, BYU, Neb, CO (Iowa? Minn? Boise?)

Northeast League
Mich, Ohio St, ND, Penn St, Rutgers, BC, W Va (Va Tech?)

Southeast League
LSU, Fla, Bama, Ga, Auburn, Fl St, North Carolina

Each team plays 4 non-conf regional games and 6 league games

Top two in a league play for title followed by interleague playoffs and title game.

Bowl games for the others.

Add provisions for dropping/adding teams to keep the Super Conference competitive and focused on top markets. Voila, yer done.

I think the only way this marriage is saved is if all the other dance partners are taken before they get a chance to get the papers filed.

There is an old saying that a man is only as faithful as his options.

Maybe I’m the minority, but the ability to police other regional powers like OU and Nebraska is what has eventually led to UT’s football dominance over time. They would create financial windfalls for programs like SMU and Houston to play in Jerry World and Reliant. Fill the sidelines up with Pac-10 non-qualifier prospects. I don’t know man. I think UT football is in better shape with OU and Nebraska in its conference.

Why would that be, ded? Texas will still play OU in Dallas, even if we’re not in the same conference.

Back to the post’s theme- would Tech like such an arrangement? A Big 12 where revenue is shared, but Tech can’t schedule D-1AA teams, is encouraged to take on other BCS teams, and the AD keeps a lid on the coach acting out?

While I don’t want to get rid of the Big 12, I would not mind seeing Iowa State and Baylor leave. Baylor is somewhat defensible, but Iowa State adds nothing. Zip. TCU, Houston, or even SMU would make more sense. Heck, we would be better off adding UTSA (#38 TV market) once they get their football team running rather than keeping Iowa State around. I would love if someone could explain to me how the hell they got included in the first place. Unless they have an astounding research branch, I just don’t see it.

Taylor, doesn’t the Pac-10 and Big-10 have higher admission requirements for athletes? Like when the Big 8 would allow 85 Prop 48s on scholarship. Nebraska and Colorado dominated the Compton market. I may be under the wrong impression that this affects the quality of football across the different conferences. Someone told me the SEC was the only BCS conference with the NCAA minimum standards. He was a former AD in the MAC or something. Referenced how Cincinnati & Huggins could kick Ohio State’s ass in backetball as an example. Doesn’t this make their pool of recruits much larger? I think that was his point. He could have lying to me.

On the arrangement, of course they would, if it meant more money. In a heartbeat. I also wouldn’t be scared of our future in a conference as the only state school in Texas member. TCU and Houston football programs sure seem to have benefitted from the demise of the SWC more than Baylor. I imagine Tech would win more games too.

“Taylor, doesn’t the Pac-10 and Big-10 have higher admission requirements for athletes?”

The Pac 10 still has the likes of ASU, Arizona, Oregon State, and Wazzu. No special academic requirements there.

ded, you don’t want to join TCU and Houston. Both fanbases feel they fell from grace when they didn’t make it to the Big 12. Besides, they are never on TV and usually go to crappy bowls. There’s no bragging when they win, because their wins are over teams nobody in Texas cares about.

Yeah, you’re right about admission standards. There are two ways to expand a talent base- geography and academic standards.

“Back to the post’s theme- would Tech like such an arrangement? A Big 12 where revenue is shared, but Tech can’t schedule D-1AA teams, is encouraged to take on other BCS teams, and the AD keeps a lid on the coach acting out?”
-———————-

I can’t see why this would be a problem for Texas Tech, the D-1AA teams was Leach’s idea later in his tenure. Earlier in Leach’s time Tech had scheduled Ohio State and NC State, Leach just decided that it wasn’t necessary given the level of competition in the conference to schedule an Ohio State in non-conference to make it to a championship game, obviously he was right.

Tuberville has already stated that he wants to have at least 1 BCS opponent in his non-conference every year. I think Tuberville would also fulfill your “acting out” clause, as he seems to be a coaches coach, and he comes from the SEC where he knows how to take care of the programs in his conference.

Iowa State was one of the original Big 6, that then became the Big 8.

They also just won a bowl game. Baylor hasn’t even been to a bowl since the formation of the Big 12. Iowa State has had some great Bball teams over the years too.

Definitely not the best track record, but really not much different than K-State or Mizzou.

Let’s cut to the chase – point #1 is the only thing that matters for the Big XII: CONF TV NETWORK (more on that below).

Neither here nor there, but why UT would regard a tiebreaker rule as targeted at UT is absolutely freaking retarded; UT could just as easily end up in OU’s shoes in the event that scenario happened again (unlikely; but again, why would ANY tiebreaker rule favor any school?).

CONF REPLACEMENTS: Assuming we get a TV network to keep this conf viable, my preferred candidates to replace CU and/or MU: AFA and Louisville (the former sort of keeps Denver in the fold and the latter adds a decent sized city, but more importantly both keep the conference’s prospective SOS up to a minimum standard. Adding an additional TX school such as TCU is pointless – all TX TV sets are already secured).

TV CONF NETWORK – the numbers
The MU move to the Big10 is predicated on a certain StL article, as referenced in several Big10 blogs; e.g.:
“The St. Louis Business Journal has presented an analysis that shows that it would make at least $10 million per year more in the Big Ten compared to the Big 12. This is based on the current Mizzou revenue share in the Big 12 of around $8.4 million and the Big Ten’s revenue figures of today (which would assuredly jump with the addition of a conference championship game and additional *Big Ten Network subscribers*).”

Here are the relevant StLBizJournal “findings” (suspect, but let’s hear them out):
“The Big 12 doled out $103 million in revenue during the academic year that ended June 30, 2008, according to the most recent Internal Revenue Service filings available. The conference disburses some of its money based on the number of television appearances each school makes. [I personally am in favor of this approach, which of course favors UT and OU, especially the latter with aggressive non-conf scheduling which leads to bigger TV gigs. Apparently the Big 10 doles it out evenly – something that would hurt UT]

In 2008, Missouri athletics collected $8.4 million, behind the universities of Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska and Texas A&M. Texas led the way with $10.2 million. Some estimates forecast this year’s payout to Missouri will be about $10 million as conference revenue continues to grow.

The Big Ten, by comparison, passed along nearly $207 million to its members in 2008. Each member school received about $18.8 million. Accounting for a 12th school, the disbursements would still top $17 million each. That number is estimated to grow to more than $20 million this year, even accounting for a 12th school, as the Big Ten television revenue continues to increase from various rights agreements abarkingcarnival.fantake.come new Big Ten Network."
*
So the real question is: what exactly is that 51% ownership stake in a conference TV network worth? Would a Big XII Conference TV Network make up the $7 million per school difference between the purported Big XII $10 million per team versus the purported Big 10 $17 million payout? Otherwise things aren’t adding up because the Big XII regularly puts in more teams into BCS games as well as more bowls overall.

Beebe should be having an accounting firm crunch those hypothetical conference network numbers as we speak, unless he wants to apply for commish of the Southland Conf in the near future.

As for Big XII schools – why go scurrying off to play all of your games in another region with insane travel times because of a TV network? It really seems like the financial differences become negligible when you factor that in…there is nothing else special about the Big 10, a region that is bleeding population to the sunbelt. Its almost like they’d like to annex a chunk of the sunbelt by adding UT.

Taylor, I think you over-estimate the sophistication of our fanbase. We’ll be perfectly happy getting drunk and winning Mountain West titles, backdooring our way into BCS games without having to go through UT, A&M or OU. Trust me. They’ll tell you to fuck off. We just want to kick someone’s ass routinely for conference championships even if it’s TCU.

Nothing like a little uncorroborated jab at supposed street agent contacts

Louisville and AFA? I have rooted for AFA for 30 years, but they bring less to the table than Tulsa/Rice/Memphis would. And Louisville won’t help SOS at all. They had their run with Petrino. If Pitino heads to the NBA after this year, they will fall off the map in b-ball as well.

There are only 3 options (with variations):

1. Big XII works out a TV contract and revenue sharing scheme that make Mizzou and CU stick around. Everyone is happy (temporarily).

2. Mizzou goes to Big Ten and/or CU and a Utah school goe to Pac Ten and UT and A&M follow to one or the other.

3. Pac Ten makes a move at being a “super conference” of 14-16 teams and raids the Big XII a la the ACC raiding the Big East earlier in the decade, taking on Texas, A&M, CU and one or 3 other schools. (Similar to one scenario in #2, but happening all at once).

Barring a nationwide reorg of the conferences, or some kind of new set of “football” conferences that are apart from the NCAA, both of which are unlikely, I don’t see any other viable options.

2. Big Ten adds

If a deal happens, it will be because OU, Texas, A&M, and Nebraska create one. There’s no leadership in the Big 12. Dan Beebe is a joke. The “Big 4” in the conference have created a system where they benefit, to the detriment of the small schools and at the cost of conference unity. Not that we should really have much sympathy for the small schools. When you’ve got two Div 1aa schools and two of the worst mid-majors you can find year in and year out on your schedule, and you adamantly refuse to play a BCS opponent, you really can’t complain when you don’t get a good slice of TV revenue. While OU and Texas are playing Alabama, Florida State, and Ohio State, Kansas State and Texas Tech are playing schools for the blind.

The marriage may be doomed. Will the big schools agree to take a pay cut, at least short term? The good news is, the Big 4 are all operating solidly in the black, so we aren’t talking about the difference between making money and losing money. Will Texas decide to stay home, or are they dreaming of greener pastures? Is OU looking to keep the Big 12 alive, or are they unconcerned, believing that they’ve got a home in the SEC?

In my opinion, it is in the best interest of the Big 4 to keep the Big 12 alive. While each of them might make more money in another conference, there’s power in having your own place. Make no mistake that they run things in this conference, and they wouldn’t if they went elsewhere. There’s been a lot of wet dreams on this site lately, with Texas fans dreaming about large kickbacks from the land of the auto unions. But there’s a tradeoff. Is UT willing to give up the control it has right now? UT benefits tremendously, in both financial and non-financial ways, of being the big shot. So do OU, A&M, and Nebraska. So I think it’s in the best interest of the Big 4 to work out some sort of deal.

Will Missouri leave? Personally, I don’t think Missouri gets an offer. They’re basically screaming to the Big 10 “we fuck on the first date” and “I’ll let you put it anywhere you want”. The Governor of Missouri was last seen crawling out from behind a podium and wiping his mouth immediately after Jim Tressel finished giving a speech. Like a somewhat attractive girl trying to nail the quarterback, Mizzou has left the bra and panties at home and is texting pictures of herself deep-throating a banana. It’s totally desperate. The thing is, that usually doesn’t work, especially when the Big 10 keeps looking over its shoulder to make sure Notre Dame is watching.

Colorado will entertain whatever options are available, but they are at least showing some dignity. Never burn your bridges. But I think they can fairly easily be convinced to stay. Colorado has sucked lately in the Big 12 North, but everybody knows its no one’s fault but their own (including Colorado).

The little guys just need to feel like the big guys are going to work with them. Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, Kansas State, Baylor, and all the others are going to agree with whatever the big guys work out. They’ll do it because they know the threat of a raid is for real, and none of them want to wind up in the WAC with Boise State. The Big 4 have places they can go. The small fries do not.

I think expanding to 14 (BYU and Utah maybe) should be examined. I think a Big 12 network, especially in conjuction with a Pac 10 network, would be a lifesaver. A small collaborative academic program would be a good start. You aren’t going to get a system like the Big 10 has immediately, especially with a couple of tier 3 universities in the conference, but hopefully we want the conference to stick around a while. Move the Big 12 Championship Game to KC every year, to throw the northern teams a bone. Lobby to make the Cotton Bowl the Big 12’s BCS bid. Jerry’s World really bumps it up to a competitive level.

But we can forget Dan “Corky” Beebe ever doing any of this. If someone is going to save the conference, it’s got to be the big boys.

MU Alum here with my 2 cents. Our fan base has been discussing a potential move to the Big Ten for literally decades. We’re kind of on the edge of both conferences as it is. Northern & Eastern MO skew more Big Ten, this includes St. Louis which is predominantly an MU town. Western MO including KC (which is unfortunately largely a kU town) side with the Big 12 for the most part. Recent perceived slights from the bowl selection process the past 3 years, plus some stuff from the non-revenue sports that doesn’t get as much pub has made the potential move more acceptable to the majority of fans who would normally be on the fence about this issue.

Add in the additional TV revenue (we’re not talking about “a few million dollars,” we’re talking about 10 – 15 million per year…. and you’ve got a pretty strong argument. And that’s not even touching on the academic side which is a slam dunk in favor of the Big Ten/CIC.

I’ll preface this by saying that I’m 28, and wasn’t a big MU fan during the Big 8 days. The only schools in the conference I personally consider to be rivals are kU (everything) & the nubs (football). I think we would just swap the Illinois yearly out of conference games for kansas and be fine. Iowa could probably replace Nebraska just fine.

This conference is going to burn eventually, I’d rather be the one that lights the match than be left to pick up the pieces.

HoyaSooner, those are some persuasive (although…earthy) points. Thanks for the reply.

The PAC 10 is the obvious answer to me if Missouri bails (and it will if offered). The Big 10 is better for Missouri on many levels – more money, greater academic prestige, existing rivalries with Illinois, and sometimes Iowa, and a desire to change up the dynamics. Missouri has been second fiddle in its own state to Nebraska in football and Kansas in basketball. That could change with a new landscape. If Missouri bolts the Big 12 will become a lesser conference than it is, and that is not in the best interest of The University. Adding Louisville or a TCU does not make up for the loss of a Missouri and is an admission that the Big 12 is not one of the elite conferences. Texas to the Big 10 might make the most sense in terms of shear dollars going in, plus the academic prestige quotient, but the PAC 10 is better for the following reasons:
1. Texas academics would love to be associated with UCLA, Stanford and Cal. No present peers in the Big 12.
2. Notwithstanding the fruits and nuts, we have more in common with Cali than the frozen rust belt. Besides we like to play golf and travel to fun destinations.
3. The Big 11 is going to 16. With Missouri and Notre Dame ultimately added, they have 3 more spots. As they want more exposure in the populous east, Syracuse, Boston College and Rutgers are all possibilities. Us and A&M would be outliers with no real natural rivalries other than each other.
4. The aforementioned Big 11 expansion will force the PAC 10 to expand, which they are studying per a recent press release. Because they would want to also go to 16 we would have the clout to bring ou and A&M preserving our two biggest rivalries to go with keeping Colorado.
5. California is a recruiting hotbed with lukewarm fan bases. We should do much better in recruiting there than presently, for the same reasons ou does well in Texas.
6. There are a lot of TV sets in Cali, and LA does not even have a pro team.
7. Picture this:
Southwest Division
  Texas
  A&M
  Ou
  Colorado
  USC
  UCLA
  AZ
  AZ State

Northwest Division
  Cal
  Stanford
  Oregon
  Oreg St.
  Wash
  Wash St.
  Utah
  BYU

Damn exciting to me. Play everyone in your division plus rotate 2 from the other plus 2-3 nonconference games plus a conference championship in Las Vegas! Perfect.

So the real question is: what exactly is that 51% ownership stake in a conference TV network worth? Would a Big XII Conference TV Network make up the $7 million per school difference between the purported Big XII $10 million per team versus the purported Big 10 $17 million payout? Otherwise things aren’t adding up because the Big XII regularly puts in more teams into BCS games as well as more bowls overall.

The Big 10 Network is currently available to over 73 million homes. A Big 12 Network would not command that kind of base — no way, no how.

Teams in BCS games means little in this fight. And the Big 10 puts as many teams into bowls as the Big 12 year-to-year.

This is the second blog entry I’ve read – well stated. I agree with alincoln above. To use the stated analogy of marriage. I think the Big Ten will date a conference friend (Missouri or Pittsburgh) to divide one of the two families (Big XII or Big East) with an eye towards woo’ing the real prize UT/TAMU or ND.

I used to believe that ND was the real end game in all of this but I liken her to the sexy cheerleader from high school who has not necessarily aged well. At the end of the day ND’s moral standards or hubris will not let her be ‘the trophy wife’. ND has a feminist independence that I believe the Big Ten has probably flirted with and been burned once by.

I would bet (and am hopeful) that the first date occurs in Columbia. I hope Oliver Stone is taking notes - we live in interesting times.

I wrote an article on BR about where Texas might end up. I would interested to see what anyone on this site thinks of it.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/346875-on-the-brink-of-history-texas-choice-of-conference-is-the-key/

what are you, half of an m&m? kind of like ‘chow’ is half of a dog.

interesting article. you certain cover the bases. appear to be scrounging for negs for big ten.

batten the hatches. your comments about tex/a&m to the sec putting texas on a virtual academic/research island will hit the aggie boards in about 28 minutes. 40 minutes later they will figure out what you said, and it won’t be pleasant at your place for a while.

i do disagree with your likeliest scenario. i think texas has found the magnum condoms in the wife’s sock drawer.

i do agree that college football is holding its collective breath right now, waiting to see what the horns do.

In every marriage where one or both participants is at a cross roads, they ask themselves, is this marriage really worth saving? Well, is it? I would say that it’s not. Seriously – if you really value and treasure where Texas makes its conference home – then you’d admit that Texas would be best served in the Big10 or Pac10.
If you value an established TV network and academic credibility, then chose the Big10. If you see the long term value of a larger recruitment base and newer, better rivalries with California schools you then opt for the Pac10. But in no case do you stand pat and try and make the Big12 work. You are spending good money on a lost cause. Texas IS the Big12, with OU a distant 2nd. Look past legacy and regional nostalgia and open your eyes to the reality that confronts Texas – join a competitive conference (TV, academics, etc.) or continue to tread water where you are at.

I will remind everyone of one thing. The 90s. Yes, it pains me to think of them, too. Right now, OU and Texas are doing very well. However, it was not that long ago that the major athletics power in the state of Texas had an ampersand in its name. My point? Things change over time. If UT runs off to another conference, they may make more money. Things may go very well for them for a while. But what happens if A&M starts to become stronger? There’s no guarantee that the Big 10 is going to expand to 14 or 16 members. There may not be any room for the Aggies. Do you want to run off and leave them as the major Big 12 power in the state?

I’m not saying that A&M would supplant Texas. Even if it did happen, it would take time. But remember, there are risks. Your school may analyze those risks and decide that the benefits (i.e., more money) are worth it. What else does Texas stand to gain? The ability to compete for national titles? They’ve got that here. Intense rivalry? They’ve got it here. Academic excellence? As much as it pains me to say it, Texas already has that. So what do they gain? They gain money. A whole lot of money. But UT has money. Do they need more?

Let’s say you have a crystal ball and can see seven or eight years into the future. If you looked ahead and saw Texas making an extra $15 million a year, but was stuck at a perpetual 9-3 record, what would you think? If the 5 star players went to A&M? The question is, would it be worth it?

This sort of topic is fascinating to discuss. There’s not much else going on in the offseason after all. As an OU fan, I’m fairly confident the Sooners will land on their feet, regardless of what happens. The Big 12 contract lasts through 2016, so even if Texas, Nebraska, Missouri, and Colorado leave tomorrow, we’ve still got revenue coming in under the old deal. That gives schools time to consider their options. Not really looking forward to putting up with SEC fans, but part of me just likes to see shit blow up. Go chaos! Let’s stir things up. 100 year old conferences are boring!

Right now Texas is, as the above analogy states, in a marriage. And she appears to be looking for a husband who drives a nicer car, has a better job, and lives in a better neighborhood. Bitch. Don’t trust anything that bleeds for seven days and doesn’t die, boys. Oh… sorry. Point is, Texas is a very high maintenance girl. But will new hubby allow her to get away with the things old hubby does? Will it say “yes dear” with that callow, beaten-down look in its eyes when you bitch about every little thing? Will your “not now, I have a headache” work on him when he wants to talk about dirty, dirty revenue distribution? Sure, Ohio State cleans up nice, but what happens when he comes stumbling in drunk one night and tries to put his dick in your ass? “Oops, it slipped. Huh huh huh.” Pretty soon Texas is wearing turtle necks in the summer and dark sunglasses when she’s inside.

Or maybe not. Maybe things will be the same as they are here. Maybe better. You won’t have to deal with a 7-5 OU going to the Big 12 championship over a one loss Texas because of some obscure tiebreaker. “How did this get in the Big 12 bylaws?” as OU goes slipping out the door with a bottle of whiteout.

I dunno. Give it a shot. I think I’ve tortured this post long enough tonight anyway.

“But UT has money. Do they need more?”

We always need more. We certainly can’t count on the Texas Legislature to provide it to us on a reliable basis. They’re demanding more and more every year out of the university system and putting up less and less in real terms.

That applies to A&M as well.

And we can’t really count on alumni donations or university investments to continue going up and up. Hell, it will be kind of a miracle if we can keep the current levels going.

That applies to … well, the entire country, really.

The thing is, HoyaSooner, we remember the ‘90s, and the ’80s too (which were worse). We remember why they were so bad. We were in a conference that had a bunch of teams that resented our size and success, and were happy to snipe and swipe at us whenever they could. They were happy to give a kid $15k to sign with them, but wouldn’t dream of spending a like amount on uniforms for a women’s sport. They happily recruited negatively against UT, propping up a fiction that UT (the most aggressively liberal campus in the state) was some kind of reactionary institution hostile to minorities. BJ Wright could tell you all about dealing with that. They were sure they could get away with all this, because the SWC was around forever, and would be around forever.

College football is inherently unfair. Some schools have natural advantages (location is the main one) over others. Any conference that supports Lilliputians in tying down Gulliver are unstable. That’s why I emphasized attitude changes in the needed corrections to save the conference.

The overwhelming anxiety of OU fans across the internet regarding Texas leaving the Big 12 is hugely entertaining.

An assumption exists that the SEC would happily bring in OU and OSU if the Big 12 implodes. Why? They just signed up their huge FIFTEEN year contract with the SEC and the SEC member institutions will be in no rush to break up the pie. If it makes economic sense to bring OU in when that deal is up for renewal (and I seriously doubt it would), the SEC could add them then.

The idea of OU to the PAC-10 is even more laughable. Each of the elite academic instituions in the PAC-10 have to sign off on new members and OU is a non-starter for ALL of them. Stanford didn’t want UT . . . you think they are going to agree to associate with OU?

OU would be stuck for at least the next decade in some reconstituted Big 12, likely without UT, A&M, Missouri and Colorado.

alincoln….“Stanford didn’t want UT . . . you think they are going to agree to associate with OU?”
 
Stanford is Stanford and Berkeley is Berkeley, but ASU is still ASU, as is Wazzu, U of A and OSU (the west coast one). There are some elite universities in the PAc 10. There are also the garden variety big state party schools.

if any of this happens, and I think it won’t….the TV network shelling out perhaps a billion dollars to show PACBIG10/12 football will insist on Oklahoma.

You all want or surmise OU to the SEC as an Arkansas scenario in which Texas recruiting is cut off. Nope.

Maintaining ties w/Big 12 = jacking off a dead dog. JMO.

“if any of this happens, and I think it won’t….the TV network shelling out perhaps a billion dollars to show PACBIG10/12 football will insist on Oklahoma. "

Why?

Because it’s a national program that turns TV’s on, even of people that didn’t go there or are from that state.

Because it has more appeal on the tube than any school currently in the Pac-10 does, with the possible exception of USC football.

Because Florida, Ohio State, USC, Alabama, Texas and Oklahoma (not in any particular order) are the premier football programs in the country and anyone putting out that kind of money will want to snare a top six program.

Because the network will want to preserve the OU-TX rivalry, which will almost certainly die if we’re in different conferences, especially if OU is in SEC. We’d just play Arkansas or LSU in Dallas.

And, you’d want us because you’d need another school in the same time zone that keeps a geographical rivalry that means something outside the state of Texas, which your rivalry with A&M does not.

PAC-10 expansion requires unanimous approval of all its member institutions. The elite academic institutions in the PAC-10 aren’t going to approve OU. It’s not a complicated concept.

If Texas, goes to the Big 10, OU is going to be in a shit conference with a shit television contract for at least a decade. Hence, the overwhelming stench of fear emenating from north of the Red River

OU brings limited televisions and a weak academic reputation.

That is a deadly combination for an expansion candidate.

I think you overrate OU’s national appeal. College football is primarily about regional appeal, with very few teams with national appeal-basically Notre Dame in football and UNC in basketball. Texas is not being courted because it can deliver 20k viewers in LA. It’s being courted because it can deliver the top-rated broadcast in DFW, Houston, Austin, San Antonio, and pretty much the ret of Texas.

I get that OU considers North Texas as its territory. It still falls behind Texas and Texas A&M there.

All the arguments you make for OU? They could be made for Nebraska, too, with the exception of the DFW presence. It’s not about winning. It’s about TV sets delivered. Before the Big 12 was formed, the Big 8 was in danger because it could not put together a decent TV package, even with OU and NU.

You think that a network will insist that the SEC take OU if it’s available? The SEC gets about $250 million/year. To add two teams, and keep the shares the same, the two added teams have to add $40+ million to the value of the package, per year. Let’s play a game. Currently, the Big 12 package is worth about $110 million/year. That’s with Texas, TAMU, CU, Mizzou (the rumored candidates for poaching), OU, NU (the big name and tradition schools), KU (basketball), and the rest. They aint all worth $20 million/year, each. OU will have to sell itself to the SEC, and probably try to pimp out the Texas recruits to do so.

I see no reason why Texas/OU can’t continue as a non-conference game. I know that if Texas tries to end it, OU will call up Bill Byrne and schedule the Ags. If OU tries to end it and replace Texas with a different foe in the Cotton Bowl, Texas will schedule Notre Dame every year on the same weekend. Stalemate.

Conclusion- OU really needs for the Big 12 to hold together. Due to geographic fortune, Texas and TAMU will come out of any realignment just fine. OU will have to work much harder to find a good spot. It’s not about on-field success.

….Circling back to my premise that the league will hold together…..

Right now Texas is, as the above analogy states, in a marriage. And she appears to be looking for a husband who drives a nicer car, has a better job, and lives in a better neighborhood. Bitch. Don’t trust anything that bleeds for seven days and doesn’t die, boys.

Someone has to pause and recognize the greatness of this and that someone is me.

The interesting question to me is why would Texas sacrifice its own self interests, economically and academically, to preserve a conference and protect a group of schools that sticks it to Texas at every opportunity?

Hoyasooner for the win, twice. By joining the Big/Pac 10 we would simply be outsmarting ourselves. The grass ain’t always greener.

I say we hit the Big 10 with aggy and mizzou. Fuck the rest of the Big 12.

The level of OU narcissism is strikingly… funny.
When I am in the New York area on business during football season, NO ONE insists that an OU game is tuned in. Nor for that matter, does that happen in Minneapolis, Chicago, or Los Angeles. I do see Texas on those same TV sets in those same pubs, and as anecdotal as that may be, it is telling.
Frankly, OU’s options are quite limited once Texas does decide to leave. Rivalry games still exist despite conference affiliations.
TaylorTRoom and alincoln are both spot-on in the assessments. No one has put forth a credible answer to WHY Texas should stay.

There are reasons to stay- it’s easy to travel to Waco. We have a history with these teams. Time zones, travel- the Big 12 is best for these issues. The Big 12 is a fine option up until the point where it becomes obvious that it will be SWC 2.0.

Back to the marriage analogy. Sure, Texas is a bitch divorcee, but she was willing to make this marriage work. After all, her first husband was a drunk. Unfortunately, hubbie #2 is starting to come home late smelling like booze.

Why doesn’t Notre Dame try for the Big 10 if it is intellectually superior than being alone. Their TV contract is( rumor has it to be 10 million a year) so a change would be benefical. They did try and join as I now re-call sometime ago but were blackballed by Penn State.
          Despite comments that travel and weather don’t wash as a reason not to go Big 10 , does anyone really await the wonderful trip to Madison et al. I think not. Joinings the Big 10 makes no sense intellectually or athletically. On federal grants alone we are second nationally so how can that be improved on? (MIT first )

TTR, I’d add Duke to the list of “national” basketball teams. But these things go in cycles. No one would want Duke in a league that is looking for all the eyeballs it can muster.

OU has a good brand, and if a few more million people lived there, they’d be in the talks. But the SEC will look at that population and think, what’s in it for us?

A couple of points:

TTR – I would suggest that Texas is not acting like a good spouse. We talked about this the other day – counselors will always tell you that if you want to be in a healthy marriage, the first step is for YOU YOURSELF to start acting like a good spouse. The revenue sharing is the big bugger bear where Texas is holding out.

bigacademics – the Holy Cross priests who run Notre Dame really do have a very different mindset to how they run that school and how the athletic program integrates with the fundamental mission of the university. It is very hard for us outsiders to understand it.

The Notre Dame Mission statement: “The University seeks to cultivate in its students not only an appreciation for the great achievements of human beings, but also a disciplined sensibility to the poverty, injustice, and oppression that burden the lives of so many. The aim is to create a sense of human solidarity and concern for the common good that will bear fruit as learning becomes service to justice.”

The Holy Cross priests really believe that their athletic programs feed and sustain that mission statement. They don’t give a fat f*ck about national championships. Sure, they want to win – but not at the expense of what is in quotes above. Sure, they want to make money – but not at the expense of what is in quotes above.

People like HoyaSooner and trkhorn who think this is about a $10-15 million bump in media revenue are missing the point.

Any talk of reorganization and leaving the Big 12 is about long-term security and survival. Standing pat means you are standing still — which means you are losing ground nationally.

There is no way a Big 12 loses a Missouri or Colorado and finds any replacements that would lead to a better TV contract.

As for leaving A&M behind to be a power in the Big 12, I doubt seriously that would happen, but even if it did, so what?

You really think an A&M that was at the top of a watered down Big 12 -a league that would have less national footprint than any league this side of the Big East - would be a threat?

Really?

Take a look at the “Golden Era?” of A&M with Jackie Sherrill dominating the SWC. How many times did they finish in the Top Five?

Never

The fact is that BCS-level College Football is moving away from regionalism and moving towards an NFL template of a limited number of programs (probably 64) who will compete at the elite level.

It is getting far too expensive for programs to sustain a competitive level and ESPN/ABC/CBS/NBC-Comcast are not going to be willing to pay enough media rights dollars to sustain more than that number to begin with.

Let’s not be provincial. Madison is a great city. Significantly more desirable than any Big 12 destination other than Austin and possibly Boulder.

It’s pretty clear that Texas is the belle of the ball and in the driver’s seat now.

I think the original post overestimates the animosity towards Texas from the other schools. Do they dislike the revenue sharing? Yes. Do they feel they get preferential treatment from the commissioner’s office? Yes. Is there a feeling that they get calls on the field? Yes. I think that any Big 12 fan recognizes that having Texas in the league is a good thing.

What you’re seeing now is a few Universities in the North taking advantage of this expansion talk to campaign for better treatment on revenue sharing. It’s a complete bluff. Neither Nebraska nor Missouri has a shot at the Big 10, without them opening up their expansion to 14-16 teams. This isn’t going to happen for a few reasons: Nebraska & Missouri don’t add over $20 mm in television sets apiece and they don’t have the academics. Nebraska has a great following and Mizzou has tv sets, but neither have both. Syracuse has a competitive advantage over both.

The talk with Colorado is a different animal. Right now the Pac-10 doesn’t have the scratch to lure Colorado away. They’re another big tv market, but unlike Mizzou, they have great academics. If that cash ever turns up before we get a new contract, I can see them bolting— especially to a better academic conference like the Pac-10. Again, they’re not in a position right now to bolt, because the Pac-10 doesn’t have that great of a TV deal. You’re not hearing CU personnel crowing right now, because they have nothing to leverage. Kansas, K-State and Iowa State have been smart enough to follow suit.

What Missouri didn’t figure was that Texas would push back. Texas could join the Big 10 and leave the conference to die a slow death. Especially if A&M came with them.

Mizzou stands to gain a lot academically and athletically if by some sort of Jedi-mind-trick they can convince the Big 10 to take them. What Mizzou hasn’t figured out yet is this: having Texas is like having a roommate that is more attractive than you; you get more attention at bars, you get invited to more parties, but if you bring a girl home, don’t be surprised if she’s more interested in him.

So the best thing for all parties to do (outside of Texas) is to wait until the next contract comes up and to keep their mouths shut. Either that, or become pro-active and scoop up a pair of teams like BYU & Utah.

Mizzou needs to agree behind closed doors to play the fall guy for Texas.

In exchange for a Big 10 bid, Mizzou needs to announce first that it is leaving the Big 12. Texas can then legitimately claim that it is concerned about the continued viability of the conference without Missouri TV sets, and potentially Colorado TV sets, and join the Big 10 with A&M as a proactive measure to protect its interests.

CU would then be pushed into the PAC 10, likely with BYU, to provide the PAC 10 with the Denver and SLC markets.

The Big 12 would then have to cobble together a conference with the remainder of the Big 12 and Mountain West.

Only way to save the Big 12 is to kick out three teams and then add BYU (35th market and national LDS following). I’d punt ISU, KSU, and Baylor.

Then you have 10 teams that are all strong to decent. That means pretty much every game is watchable. That means better SOS (from adding one conference game and getting rid of 3 crappy teams). That means better representation OOC and bowl games. We should have a rule prohibiting games against 1-AA teams. And we should start playing conference games the second week of the season. That way, there are decent matchups to sell every week of the season for a network or for our own deal.

This would help a lot IMO. Better tv deal split 10 ways instead of 12. I’d be fine with it being an equal split.

Could keep us in a good conference for the next 10 years until we ultimately have geographic superconferences and a playoff.

We should not bleed waiting for this conference to blow up. Demand that it be fixed and if it is not, get the hell out with A&M and watch the remains turn into the second coming of the MWC.

houston – that would NOT help things. We’d lose the Big 12 championship game, and that brings in a LOT of revenue. Less than 12 teams and no conference championship is not the future. I don’t know if 14 or 16 team conferences are the future either, but less than 12 certainly isn’t.

If we keep this thing together, I think we have to get a functioning Big12 network. We also may need to drop Baylor to pick up a BYU (BU has to be replaced with a private school I think), and maybe try to upgrade ISU by raiding Arizona (would Utah be more attractive than ISU).

Hell, if ISU could just make the people in Iowa care about them enough to watch, that’d work too. Yes, that means they should strive to be the Aggie of Iowa.

srr,

We need to be at the center of our own universe, calling the shots. That certainly won’t be the case if we bolt to the Big/Pac 10, either of which will wind up hating us just as much if not more than the rest of the Big 12 does now. I’m all for a better TV contract, but with us pulling the strings. Bring in BYU/Utah. Partner up w/the Pac 10 or ACC. Become independent. There HAS to be a better alternative than joining the Big/Pac 10. It amazes me that most everyone thinks this is such an automatic move.

trk:

The days of a single program being at the center of its own universe are essentially over. Just ask Notre Dame.

Our being the “First Among Equals” in the Big 12 is exactly why we are hated.

You are right, we would not be “pulling the strings” as a member of the Big 10, and in the coming changes, that is not a bad thing. We would be among like Universities with like goals, on and off the field. There is real unity in the Big 10, despite bitter rivalries in athletics, and we could be assimilated easily into that dynamic, as Penn State was.

Being in a league with few or no petty fights, where jealousy is at a minimum, and where the good of the entire league is paramount is not a bad thing.

Being in a league with few or no petty fights, where jealousy is at a minimum, and where the good of the entire league is paramount is not a bad thing.

Yeah that would be so dreamy! We’re Texas exceptionalists, are we not?

Let Colorado and Missouri leave and add TCU and Houston. It’s time the other Texas schools were given a chance to play with the big boys again and both these teams have shown that they can (Houston’s wins over TT and OSU this past season)

LPcoog, can TCU and UH put 60k in the stands at home games with tickets at $50 each? Can they play each other and have ABC give them the 8PM broadcast? Because that’s what it’s going to take for them to join a BCS conference.

There aren’t many schools that could replace Colorado and Missouri. BYU and Utah could be good candidates. I think Air Force would actually be a better choice than the often-suggested Colorado State, given that it brings in a lot of service members. A Big 12 Network that held the rights to all Air Force broadcasts could be very lucrative, given that there are military bases everywhere.

Then there are suggestions like Memphis or Louisville, which really add for basketball but don’t have large football followings. Then there’s the bold (possibly foolish) move of going down and grabbing a big school out of Div 1aa and hoping they grow into something more. UC Davis has like 27,000 students and brings in California. Fresno State is Div 1a, and would jump at the chance to join a BCS league. How many fans they have is another question.

Missouri and Colorado are replaceable, but they would hurt. Texas leaving would probably cause the league to disintegrate, depending on what else happened.

Personally? I think the Big 10 (if they do expand) goes east. Missouri doesn’t offer them enough reason to expand, and Texas will only accept under its own terms. And that’s if they decide to offer Texas. There’s an assumption on the part of many here that everyone is just happy go lucky and is ready to get on board. You can see it in some of the suggestions. “The Big 10 will just expand to 14, adding UT and A&M (so UT won’t feel lonely) and Missouri or possibly Nebraska.” If Texas comes along, it looks like they want to bring their entire Randy Quaid-looking family. Michigan alumns are white with terror at the thought of Aggies propping up some dead dog so he can see the scoreboard at hallowed Michigan Stadium. “Yee-up. He’s gotta see whut the score is. How else’ll he know to bark er not?” (spits tobacco on the field).

The Pac 10 is going to get the same thing. Who do they take? Colorado is fine, but after that? Not BYU. They… pray. Can you imagine how embarrassing that would be? One of them might talk to them about God or something. Ick. Utah? Just another name for more God talk. Texas? Well, Texas may not go without bringing Aggie along, and then that means no Colorado.

Go ahead and look at your options. I won’t begrudge you that. Just please do it with a little dignity. Missouri was last seen clinging to Jim Delany’s car as he drove away, screaming “Take me with you!!!”

If Mizzou or ISU leaves, we add Rice to the South. In the case of ISU, it would be a large step up.

What does a Sooner know about dignity?

Gopher,

In general, I don’t like to fall back on “stupidity” as the answer when trying to figure out why institutions do certain things, so I think Missouri and Nebraska have a rational plan. If they think at all, they’ll know that (besides ND), Texas is the main target of the Big10. Taking in UT will neccesitate admitting TAMU as well. That makes 13 teams, but the Big10 (while being open to 12, 14, or 16 teams) have closed off the possibility of a 13 team league. That means there’s an extra spot if UT & TAMU join the Big10. Assuming the 14th team isn’t ND (which seems likely, because the Irish would take a major hit in alumni donations if they ever joined a conference), there’s one more team that can be admitted in to the Big10. Both Nebraska and Mizzou are jockeying for that 14th spot (and the competition is incredibly close; Mizzou brings more people, but Nebraska brings a bigger football reputation and die-hard followers around the country; both are subpar in research by Big10 standards (they’re below every single current Big10 member by any way you rank research) but are at least AAU members.

Well written but wrong from first sentence to last.

There are winners and there are losers. Texas is a winner, much as I hate to admit it, so is A&M. Most of the rest of the Big XII are not. Socialism does not work in the real world and it will not work in the Big XII.

What is needed is a group of Super Conferences populated by major players. The lesser lites need to recognize that they are lesser lites and play among themselves.

Great blog.

UT really is holding all the cards in this one. It will be interesting to watch.

Nebraska has no play in this one due to institutional academics.

I am looking forward to having you guys down in October – and will be disappointed if that is last the time.

Nebraska is weak in research compared to all current Big10 members, but ND isn’t even a research university, so if they’re in the discussion, Nebraska has to be as well. Granted, ND has more of a national following than Nebraska, but Nebraska is still more of a national brand name than Mizzou, Rutgers, Pitt, ‘Cuse, & Kansas. If UT & TAMU join the Big10 and ND still refuses to join, I think Nebraska’s the 14th team.

Hey, maybe the Big Te(lev)en will base their expansion options on cool songs (in keeping with the music thread the other day) and pick:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cN4V5XjyR6s

Speaking of, what is the status of this new infotainment blog?

Good article Taylor . srro you are full of it. I cant wait for a singalong with Michigan.

[…] you may like accounting and bookkeeping[…]…

[…] you may like accounting education[…]…

I do not see a fast solution. But I hope there is one!

http://www.priestsforlife.org/blog/index.php/marching-for-life

I bookmarked this web address a while ago because of the good content and I have never been let down. Continue the outstanding work.

don’t stop writing. I really digit.