Baylor Tries To Slam Exit Door on AM

ESPN is reporting every Big XII school except OU has refused to waive, at least for now. I’d say both OU and Tex have signaled their intentions.

247 has been all over the map this evening. They still have a headline saying “Deal Reached: A&M to SEC”…. they are saying that their sources claim all Big 12 schools have reached a gentleman’s agreement to not suit A&M or the SEC, but they will not formally waive their rights. So they are saying the ball is now in the SEC’s court as to whether or not they will accept this.

Crazy day. Just when you think the realignment stuff can’t get any stranger, Ken Starr pops in to say hello.

I’m hearing if OU recommits, everybody puts down their guns. Anybody hearing similar?

SEC! SEC! SEC! SEC!

Ha ha ha ha!

From a variety of sources, this R. Bowen Loftin quote: “Essentially, we’re being told that you must stay here against your will and we think that really flies in the face of what makes us Americans for example and makes us free people.”

The mind boggles.

Poor Aggy.

Here is another great quote from the RBL:

“As the weekend concluded and we entered into Monday, however, the TV networks stepped up and indicated they would invest significantly in the 10 remaining members of the Big 12. And the Big 12 made a significant financial commitment to keep Texas A&M, Oklahoma and Texas in the conference. At the end of the day, we kept our word, which as an Aggie, is extremely important.” – R. Bowen Loftin – June 16, 2010

From a variety of sources, this R. Bowen Loftin quote: "Essentially, we’re being told that you must stay here against your will and we think that really flies in the face of what makes us Americans for example and makes us free people."

I assume then we can count on President Loftin to carry the sign Free The LHN! at the next Big 12 Board Meeting.

How could someone in such a position be so stupid? If you sign a deal and do not honor it your freedom will not be restricted but your pocket book may be. It’s called contract law. Sort of American, too, I’d say.

I am sure Gay can enlighten us as to when this is a done deal. His sources have been spot on thus far.

All the current B12-2 schools met on Sep 2nd and agreed to not sue. Since then OU’s sabre rattling scared Baylor and their litigator in Chief Ken Starr – so they think this will somehow bring A&M back into the fold. Hell, I have no idea what they think this will do. Who knows or cares any longer. They didn’t sue Neb & Col last year. We did the same thing they did. I think we worded our letter to the B12 office exactly the same as the Corn did. I think Texas needs to go to the Big10+2 to cause Pelini’s head to explode. And by the way, Fuck Baylor!

Ok, I change my mind, I do not want to lose Aggy. Where will our entertainment come from?

This is the last act of a desperate program — and it won’t work.

But it does add some entertainment value to the clusterfuck that is college football realignment.

Screwing with aggy is fun. Even Baptists can get in on the fun

I think waiving the right to suit could possibly weaken the leverage in determining the early exit penalty for A&M.

I also agree with Baylor’s stance. Why not do everything within your power to stay in a real conference? I don’t see it as any more pathetic than they way they got into the Big 12 to begin with.

They didn’t sue Neb & Col last year. We did the same thing they did.

Maybe you could refresh my memory on where NU and CU pledged their long term committment to the conference and then bailed so they could go to a conference that treats everyone equally by allowing individual teams to negotiate their own 3rd tier rights.

Any chance OU started bringing up the PAC stuff, in order to bluff the Baylor’s of the conference into such a last ditch effort?

Dear Texas A&M,

This letter is to inform you that your application to join the SOUTHEASTERN CONFERENCE has been CONDITIONALLY APPROVED, provided you obtain the consent of your parent(s) or guardian(s), elder siblings, half-brothers in Lubbock, some random dust bowl meth-heads, random folks from Ames, wherever the hell that is, and of course, pissed-off nutty baptist cousins who you are about to abandon in the bleak wilderness of danceless ennui. Good luck!

Sincerely,

ESS EE SEE ESS EE SEE ESS EE SEE

This is all about Baylor trying to remain in a BCS conference and keep UT and OU in the fold. Who knew Ken Starr could be so litigious?

The best part of this Baylor thing is seeing all the aggie arrogance dissolve off of my Facebook thread, replaced by the current wailing and gnashing of teeth. It is highly amusing. If this doesn’t get sorted out by this weekend, I fully expect to see my aggie friends wearing sackcloth and ashes to church on Sunday

I can’t wait until they start analyzing Slive’s dried spooge stains on Loftin’s suit.

“Fuck Baylor! "

Kilgore Trout,
You should change that to Fuck Texas, Fuck Tech, and Fuck Baylor.

What don’t you try a new breakup technique- “It’s not you, it’s me.” A&M’s pathetic attempt to blame everyone but themselves on the way out has grown old. One good thing out of this is that every other school in Texas will work together to bad-mouth you to all the recruits. You can take us against them to a whole new level.

I believe that you have officially pissed in the chilli.

And by the way, Fuck Baylor!

I realize you guys have been consumed by blame shifting, but your anger needs to be directed to your new BFFs and the ridiculous contingency they put on your admission. What is Baylor getting out of your departure that would cause them to give up something of value – namely the right to sue you? In legal terms, what consideration changed hands? My guess is, that contingency was required to get the nine votes needed, since two voted against you. You need to blame your new BFFs, who obviously don’t love you as much as you love yourself. Because if they did, they’d take you no matter what those mean old Bears threatened.

This is so entertaining. It reminds me of a day back in mid-August when sportswriters were saying the farmers had a done deal to head to the SEC and all would formally be announced on Monday (that Monday being the day after the SEC schools voted to slow the whole thing down). This game looks to be far from over.

Pretty sure the SEC vote was unanimous.

This is hilarious! Aggies truly are the gift that keeps on giving. I was expecting to have to wait a year, so that I could watch them get stump-broke in the SEC like they do the goats over College Station way, but I gave them too much credit for being able to exit the conference quietly with dignity.

Is it just me or did Starr and Slive possibly pull off the GREATEST AGGIE JOKE OF ALL TIME?

The whole 9-2 thing came out of Chip. There are quotes today from the SEC Presidents saying it was a unanimous vote.

Still bet this gets done, maybe by tomorrow. Real question out there right now is what OU is thinking.

How do you define irony?

The Aggies telling Baylor knock it off or we will never play you again.

Hilarious.

This is the last act of a desperate program — and it won’t work.

It might work, it just might. The question is, Is the new SEC TV deal worth the amount the SEC is going to have to pay Baylor to make this go away? (It probably is worth way more).

Public stances aside, once discovery starts, I have a feeling the SEC and ATM will have a hard time claiming that ATM’s “ask” out of the Big 12, was not contingent on an SEC invite. In other words, I’ll bet that they’re are plenty of E-mails, between ATM, and various SEC presidents that will prove the SEC interfered with the Big 12.

Baylor won’t be easy to pay off either.

But regardless, Baylor has to protect their spot in a BCS conference, I’m surprised they even thought about letting ATM out without a law suit.

Fewer chesty ags here at the moment.

All the SEC has to pay Baylor is an invite to the SEC.

If A&M brings so much to the SEC then why do they have to jump through so many hoops to get in? That invitation is pretty tepid given that A&M basically needs the approval of the remaining B12 members to leave.

“All the SEC has to pay Baylor is an invite to the SEC”

Yeah, so essentially 20 million + in perpetuity.

NOT GONNA HAPPEN

Big Ern – There seems to be some confusion about what owning means.

@Gerry247sports

Things kind of got a little crazy once Boren took the lead for OU from Castiglione.

Are all B12 schools refusing to waive the rights to sue out of conference unity? Wow. The Ags leaving might bring the togetherness and camraderie this conference has always needed.

Effectively a standing still offer, eh?

So hoping this drags out through the season, the mocking “S-E-C” chants will be delicious. I love making Jan Brady cry.

They didn’t sue Neb & Col last year. We did the same thing they did.

The difference is that even if the Big Ten or Pac interfered last year — I have no idea whether they did — the remaining members weren’t damaged. The rest of the conference stayed together, ESPN and Fox agreed to pay the full value of the TV deals.

A&M leaving started out the same way. Baylor was going to leave it alone when they were told the B12 would go forward. Then David Boren shot off his mouth. It’s always been clear that if OU left, the league was toast. Baylor realized that and threw a wrench into the plans. Then others came to BU’s aid. It wasn’t designed to trip up A&M, but rather, to get OU back in line.

The league may break up, but if OU comes back, it’ll happen on time, if the new TV contracts don’t measure up.

Given a 12 month window, what is the over/under for administrators who, because of their handling of this matter, will have a new address in September, 2012? I predict four. Early candidates are: Beebee, Big 12; Loftin, Boren, A&M AD, Oklahoma AD. This whole fiasco has been conducted in such a manner that Big $$$$’s are really torqued on more than one campus.

This is good stuff.

Every party involved is acting relatively rationally and in its own best interest. The SEC would like to have TAMU but doesn’t want any legal exposure. Baylor is hosed if the Big XII dissolves, so they are pulling out the stops to prevent it. OU doesn’t want to be tied down, so it’s not going to make any promises. UT has options, so it’s munching popcorn watching this all play out. And the rest of the Big XII schools gain nothing by waiving their rights to go after TAMU, so none of them are going to do that without something in return.

So we have a very real logjam that’s not going to bust until someone takes on some added risk or gives up something for nothing. Ironically, TAMU is the only party involved that has no say over what’s going to happen to TAMU. It doesn’t control its fate anymore. The SEC can solve this problem by accepting some legal exposure; OU can solve it by recommitting; UT can solve it by blowing the thing up or convincing the others to stay; Baylor and the others can solve it by waiving their rights. But TAMU has no moves left.

For once, Beebe’s actions (mistakes) are actually protecting the Big XII. By sending that awkward, misleading letter on 9/2, he unwittingly walked TAMU and the SEC out into the sunlight and caused them to make their intentions clear, then pulled the rug out from under them.

Confused,

I would agree that “owning” is just a touch strong, considering they have sheepishly backed away and qualified much of their original report. They are catching some grief from it on their board.

Agreed that several people are going to be looking for new jobs. It would be appalling if Beebe is not gone shortly, and I get the sense that his letter to the SEC that claimed all schools had agreed to waive their right to suit will be the grounds.

Is Baylor threatening to sue or just not signing the release? There is a big difference. Why on earth would they, or any school, ever sign a release? I think it’s funny that the SEC is requiring it. Either Baylor has a case or they don’t, but assume the risk and move forward. It worked for the ACC. But Baylor owes nothing to the SEC and vilifying them or not signing a release or for disclaiming the Big XXII release from 9/2 is wrong and naive. Now if they actually file a suit? I hope it’s worth the time and has merit. If it doesn’t, it will be embarrassing for Baylor.

I do agree though that Beebe’s letter is grounds for finally firing him.

The only question is whether or not this has all been orchestrated or not. Boren suddenly looking West was both convenient and timely. I think if you make the assumption that everyone is acting independently or everyone is acting in total collusion you would be wrong either way.

Suppose the end game is merely to delay this adventure for a year or so. I feel like the endgame and the goals are far more sophisticated than the basics we are hearing.

I would agree that "owning" is just a touch strong, considering they have sheepishly backed away and qualified much of their original report. They are catching some grief from it on their board.

Hi!

A&M is so aggie when they claim they are being held hostage. By what? a piece of paper? They are free to leave, but they will have to pay all the schools that for the loss of revenue they will experience if the media deals change. Texas is probably not hurt, and OU may prefer other sites like Pac 12….But, rest assured, Iowa State, the Kansas schools and Baylor are going to suffer a huge loss. It is actually a bit arrogant and outrageous for A&M to ask them to suffer the losses, while A&M causes the damages and wanders off trying to make more money for themselves. The audacity of Baylor to not want to get hosed.

A&M has done this whole thing like a ship of fools.

Farmer Ted, truly well-thought analysis. An absolute clusterf*** for Boren and Beebe. And Loftin just sounds stupid. Ooh, my microwave is beeping, must be my popcorn!

Baylor, Ken Star, Lawsuit. It will happen if Baylor gets hosed.

A&M— the hero the Big 12 deserves, but not the one it needs right now

OMG is this thread the funniest thing ever? I’m filing the link away so when things look dismal I can come back here and laugh some more. It’s in there with:

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

Aggies are shitting their pants thanks to Baylor. Texas remains above the fray. Hilarious!

An absolute clusterf*** for Boren and Beebe.

Beebe definitely, but not sure I agree about Boren. I still think his comments Friday were an orchestrated and timed message for somebody. My inital thought was to the SEC (and I’m still not certain it wasn’t), but if not them, it was meant for someone. Whether it was wise or not, we’ll see depending on what OU ends up with out of this deal.

I know aggy is eventually gone to the SEC and that will be a glorious day, but for now these last few days have been so damn entertaining I don’t even want to go to bed.

I know this is giving the Sooners way more credit than justified, but perhaps OU came out with this preemptive move in order to delay Aggie to the SEC.

OU is just now getting underway on their own network, they need time to build that thing before realignment. UT already has a 300 million dollar deal in place, so one way or another the LHN is staying. OU with a network has more bargaining power, even if its just to give up the network for some other concessions.

Next Aggie move is to withdraw from Big 12 but NOT got to the SEC. Then SEC could not be sued. Of course then the Aggies would have to play with themselves but that wouldn’t be such a big change.

R. Bowen Loftin: The Dork Knight

Aggie to SEC

Hey can you help me with this. . .

Let them go, file the suit, and move on! All this drama reminds me of some 1980’s type music.

SHOULD I STAY OR SHOULD I GO – The Clash

Oh yeeeeeaaaaah

Whoop!

Darling you got to let me know
Should I stay or should I go?
If you say that you are mine
I’ll be here ’til the end of time
So you got to let me know
Should I stay or should I go?

Always tease tease tease
You’re happy when I’m on my knees
One day is fine, next day is black
So if you want me off your back
Well come on and let me know
Should I stay or should I go?

Should I stay or should I go now?
Should I stay or should I go now?
If I go there will be trouble
An’ if I stay it will be double
So come on and let me know!

This indecision’s bugging me
Esta indecision me molesta
If you don’t want me, set me free
Si no me quieres, librame
Exactly whom I’m supposed to be
Dime que tengo que ser
Don’t you know which clothes even fit me?
¿sabes que ropas me quedan?
Come on and let me know
Me tienes que decir
Should I cool it or should I blow?
¿me debo ir o quedarme?

Split!
Yo me enfrio o lo sufro

Should I stay or should I go now?
yo me enfrio o lo sufro
Should I stay or should I go now?
yo me enfrio o lo sufro
If I go there will be trouble
Si me voy – va a haber peligro
And if I stay it will be double
Si me quedo es doble
So you gotta let me know
Pero me tienes que decir
Should I cool it or should I go?
yo me enfrio o lo sufro

Should I stay or should I go now?
yo me enfrio o lo sufro
If I go there will be trouble
Si me voy – va a haber peligro
And if I stay it will be double
Si me quedo es doble
So you gotta let me know
Pero me tienes que decir
Should I stay or should I go?

Who’s got a report from the BU, KU, KSU, ISU, MU boards? Are they crawling with whining aggies? What about the aggie boards – is the foam running over the edges yet?

Nunna, completely agree. But Sooner has to take notice, cause they’re in essentially the same legal position as Aggy.

Man, I sure hope this lasts at least until the ATM v. Baylor game. If that happens someone is going to get stabbed with a saber.

Perhaps ATM should pacify the SEC by placing its first 5 years of SEC tv money in a legal defense fund to defend the lawsuits and play for free in the best conference ever known to man.

I also noticed the ATM v. Idaho game next week hasn’t been picked up by tv yet, perhaps we should offer to show it on the Longhorn Network provided all Aggies promise to call their cable providers and demand they carry the network.

“We are being held hostage right now,” Loftin said of being forced to stay in the Big 12. “Essentially, we’re being told that you must stay here against your will and we think that really flies in the face of what makes us Americans for example and makes us free people.”

Wow, so the the Fightin’ Texas Aggies have to call off their march to the SEC due to the threat of litigation, and are now being held hostage by the tee totaling Baptists from Waco? The whine emanating from College Station is hilarious, looks like Coach Sherman needs to get some cheese shipped down from Green Bay, stat.

To me it seems that the more schools Baylor enlists to their cause then the stronger their case is against the SEC. If it was Baylor alone I would easily dismiss it as a problem that could be easily solved by backchannel Texas politics. However, as soon as Iowa State and the other 2 unnamed schools jumped on board, the plot thickened.

I obviously don’t know all the facts, but I imagine there’s a lot of e-mails that have been exchanged between A&M and Slive the SEC doesn’t want to come out in discovery in the event a lawsuit is actually filed.

Kilgore writes -

“They didn’t sue Neb & Col last year. We did the same thing they did.”

Let’s not be obtuse, Warden. Nebraska and Colorado left last year and paid money to do. A&M glommed onto that money like a fat kid to cake – or an aggie to a sheep, pick your metaphor – and promised to stay in the conference, only to breach that promise when it became convenient to do so.

One thing is not like the other, and no amount of squeezing is going to make it otherwise. Time to rewrite Bowen Loftin’s quote:

“As the weekend concluded and we entered into Monday, however, the TV networks stepped up and indicated they would invest significantly in the 10 remaining members of the Big 12. And the Big 12 made a significant financial commitment to keep Texas A&M, Oklahoma and Texas in the conference. At the end of the day, we kept our word, which as an Aggie, is extremely important – unless, of course, we want to do something else later, you know, later.”

Been busy consoling the Ags over at Beergut’s blog tonight so I’m late to the party, sorry.

At first, I thought this was just a Fatal Attraction thing by Baylor and today Aggy woke up to the smell of boiled bunny. But I’ve been thinking about it awhile and I’m convinced that Average Fan has it right. The Aggy misery tonight is something to behold but at the end of the day I think this ain’t about Aggy at all. It’s about OU and their loudmouth President.

Tortious interference claims against the SEC for taking A&M are kind of specious and I doubt BU would ever pursue them. TI claims against the Pac 12 for taking OU/OSU would be dead serious though, because that move would predictably cause direct and enormous and irreparable losses to BU and the other conference leftovers. And lawsuits mean subpoenas, and Ken Starr knows a li’l something about the usefulness of subpoenas. It’s a very serious threat. Just not to A&M or the SEC.

Plus – the Waco Herald-Tribune is reporting that if OU commits to the Big 12-3, the holdout crew will all sign the SEC waivers. Think about that. It’s just one unconfirmed tidbit of news but look where it’s coming from: Waco. That’s Starr saying, “One school leaves, no problem. Two schools leave and I go ballistic.” That’s an obvious sign that this whole rigamarole is just an ICBM-over-the-bow directed at the Pac 12.

Eventually OU will come to terms with its fate and slink back home, at which point A&M will get its waivers. And the Big 12-3 sticks around for awhile. In which case: well played, Mr. Starr.

Of course, if OU turns around and demands A&M stay if they stay, then I’m reading this wrong. Indeed, it could possibly be a conference-wide conspiracy designed to keep Aggy tethered, all wrought out in the most kabuki-like fashion. But really, that’s silly. I dunno why OU would volunteer to put themselves in the bad guy role just to keep Aggy around.

I prefer to think Dave Boren is just another loudmouth alpha dog who overplayed his cards. I mean, his name has a striking resemblance to Dave Brown, right? It’s all interconnected. Numerology, man.

Many a lawyer posts on here.

Assuming Texas law and courts – assuming this is considered a breach of contract, what is the position on consequential loss for breach of contract?

Surely Baylor’s losses from any future breakdown are too remote / not an actionable claim until they crystalise. In any event, the remaining schools have a duty to mitigate – the Big whatever isn’t going to lose a penny in TV revenue because A+M leave and new schools may even add TV sets.

“Big Ern said: September 7th, 2011 at 7:11 pm

I am sure Gay can enlighten us as to when this is a done deal. His sources have been spot on thus far."

Thanks, Ern. I needed that.

OBTW, Gayboy can’t come to the keyboard right now. My dick’s in his mouth and he has trouble multi-tasking. We had a bet and I lost. It was supposed to be his sister.

EnglishAg – not a lawyer but I interpret it for a living, sort of, so there’s that. I don’t think breach of contract – that is, anyone suing a departing school directly – is a real issue. The Big 12 has buyout clauses and whatnot.

The real legal issue is conference liability for tortious interference, i.e., the (SEC or Pac 12’s) encouragement of a party (i.e., A&M or OU) to break their contract with a third party (i.e., BU via the Big 12) in a way that causes damage to the third party. I read up a bit on TI law in Texas tonight and the elements of a TI claim in Texas are really basic. Per FindLaw:

• There is a contract
• The defendant intentionally interfered with the contract
• The defendant’s interfering actions caused the injury
• The defendant’s interfering actions caused damages
   
  Simple as pie. The fuzzy part is in whether the defendant’s actions are “privileged”. Actions are privileged if they’re within the scope of the defendant’s legal rights, or if the defendant believes those actions are within the scope of their legal rights even if they are not. This is why Mike Slive has been bending over backward to prevent the appearance of enticement – just the act of saying “let’s do this the right way” is a legal defense against TI.

Problem is, if put to the test the SEC (and presumably, Pac 12) defense is kind of a Kevorkian defense. If the SEC provides A&M with detailed instructions on how to cut its own umbilical cord, isn’t that substantially the same thing as the SEC cutting the cord itself? And isn’t the SEC’s over-the-top effort to avoid public enticement in fact a confession that it knows damn well that it’s plowing though uncertain legal ground?

The SEC should be fine, though. Losing A&M hurts the Big 12-3 but it’s not the end of the conference. In the Pac 12’s case, where bringing OU and OSU on board would immediately immolate the remaining Big 12, those kinds of Slive-esque PR efforts may not be seen as a plausible reason to avoid accountability for serious damages.

This is an area where a subpoena of internal memos or emails could totally undermine the conference’s legal position, if someone gets a little too sloppy in correspondence. Ken Starr knows this better than anyone. That’s why I bet no one dares challenge Starr on it, not even the SEC.

If OU comes back to the fold, A&M is SEC bound and all is well. As long as OU explores leaving, A&M sits in limbo while Starr turns his guns toward preventing a Pac 12 OU invite. And he’ll probably succeed, sooner rather than later. So y’all have little to fret about.

Dagga Roosta – I think you nailed it. Baylor + Ken Starr = litigious pit bull. THey get a stay of execution if the B12 stays together. But I just can’t see them getting a spot at the table when realignment happens — assuming it’s delayed a few years.

The only way Baylor stays in superconference is if there are 5 and the new BYU + ND + UT + OU + others includes them. I don’t think that conference is likely. UT would like it, but I don’t think ND bites on it. Of course living in Portland, OR, I hope UT joins the PAC12. I’d get to see games more often.

If I’m KU, KSU, ISU – why not sue – get some $$$ while U can. Hope the UT / OU can maintain a semblance of a conference that includes you.

Whether you are ISU, BU or TU – I don’t think that A+M leaving causes financial hardship. There are a number of teams out there that would probably increase conference revenue through new markets – people in Houston and B/CS wont stop watching Fox sports but people in New Mexico, Lousiana, Idaho or wherever might start doing so.

In any event, the Fox sports tv contract probably has some pro-rating depending upon whether teams come or go.

If it was an English law issue, the remaining members would be under a duty to mitigate their loss – i.e. get other teams in – not just rely on suing people / damages claims.

A Big XII team may be able to prove that the SEC induced A+M to leave the Big XII – that devil is in the detail, but unless those teams are hurt financially, they wont get any money. The SEC will no doubt have an indemnity from A+M so any award against them will be picked up by A+M.

If the Big XII disolves, there will be intervening events – e.g. OU leaving. That alone should mean that A+M and the SEC aren’t liable for the death of the Big XII.

I haven’t heard “English Law Issue” since law school. Congrats on the magna carta.

The damages would be particularized to the Universities so any issue of mitigation would have to be that that “individual university” failed or was unable to mitigate its damages as opposed to the conference as a whole. In the event of conference failure the lawsuit would almost entirely have to set up as an alternative claim wherein the SEC is sued for TI, they respond that OU and the PAC 12 (or whatever follow on defection occurred) was really responsible for the damages, and those parties fight it out somewhat amongst themselves. The issue would of course be whether or not OU leaving the conference was the proximate result of the Aggies leaving. Message board posts and self serving statements likely will not be accepted as evidence on this point.

As for the damages issues, yes each university would be required to do everything in their power to mitigate damages, the damages at the outset would likely consist of any expenditures of investments made in reliance on representations of long term commitments as well as the loss of revenue for that time period. This may well not be linked solely to the length of the Big 12s contract or even TV contracts as Texas has a separate cause of action entitled Interference with “Prospective” Contractual Relationships. It’s more difficult to prove but if you can show that but for the interference you would have had a contract covering these issues over this time period then the proof rather than the contract term controls. Exhibit A in that type of claim would be making a public mutual 10 year conference commitment.

Exhibit A on how not to leave a football conference.

They should have left last year, IMO and not signed on for another 5 years to the Big 12.

I’m sure Baylor and Ken Starr will back down once they read about all the bloggers and blog commentators that are guaranteeing they will see the same TV dollars.

I really hope the Texas lege decides to get involved too. It would be like opening the insane asylum to the insane asylum. The crazier this gets the more fun it is. I still think and hope A&M goes, but I would love to see them have to give up a horrid toll for their treason.

Baylor has a history of thorwing a hissy fit until it gets its way. Remember how they lucked into the Big 12. They have the most to lose by its dissolution, so this makes sense to me.

A&M isn’t situated like NU and CU, because it took a big extra piece of the pie from the leavings of those schools and I haven’t seen any public offers to give it back.

Tortious Interference with a contract doesn’t require much — just awareness of another contract and a legal act (taken with an improper motive) designed to induce a third-party to breach the known contract. SEC knows about A&M’s contract, as it has publicly acknoweldged. So yeah, there’s exposure there.

Do not underestimate the Baptists on this kind of thing. They can make things very interesting.

As for OU, well, if Dodds’ Spruce Goose of a women’s swimming network runs off both of our rivals then I, for one, think we need to seriously question the quality of our leadership on athletic doings. That is an unpopular opinion here, but I don’t really care. Not all of the blame falls on us, but certainly some of it does.

What ho What ho What ho !

So Dodds is now supposed to also be omniscient? Everyone knew about the LHN. It wasn’t something that just came out of the blue. Dodds offered to share with the Aggies they said no. Dodds offered the idea of a conference network and everyone said no. But now that the network is up and running everyone else can now throw a hissy fit and run away and Dodds has to share the blame? Huh? This is akin to us leaving the conference after the 2001 season because we didn’t realize that by hiring Stoops OU was going to whip us for 6 years and win an MNC. I just don’t understand why people think that the rest of the conference is entitled to act like whiny bitches because they failed to realize the potential of a cable network that has been openly in the works for 5 years.

Dodd offered to share before the $ was good. He puilled the offer when he found out how good the $ was, at least as I hear it.

http://therightsideofaustin.wordpress.com/2010/06/08/buddy-jones-heads-powerful-baylor-university-lobby-team/

To wit — Baylor is lobbying hard.

By the way — this is last year — but I hear the same kind of thing is going on right now.

The way I heard it was that Byrne was offered the opportunity to share in a network with UT about 4 years ago. He said no. Dodds moved ahead and invested a lot of our time and resources to put together the LHN and about 6 months ago he got a $300M offer from ESPN after supposedly having a much, much smaller offer from Fox probably about the same time. When Byrne heard about the money involved he came back to try get in on the deal. This isn’t being a partner this is looking for a handout. I would be curious to see some evidence that it went down differently, since this has been basically the timeline of events that both Dodds and Byrne have pretty much agreed happened in their public statements.

EnglishAg,
A&M leaving isn’t the straw that could break the camel’s back, but it is the straw just before that. OU’s proclamation could be the last straw in the Big 12’s back.

As mentioned above, BU is playing the part of the sheep dog, trying to herd the stray flock back into the corral. I’m guessing BU’s hope is that a new stadium and some resurgent performance by a RGIII led team could propel BU football into a loftier negotiating position a year from now.

As for OU, well, if Dodds’ Spruce Goose of a women’s swimming network runs off both of our rivals then I, for one, think we need to seriously question the quality of our leadership on athletic doings. That is an unpopular opinion here, but I don’t really care. Not all of the blame falls on us, but certainly some of it does.

I completely disagree.

There was no objection to the LHN when the other schools thought it was an actual financial Spruce Goose. There objections came after it turned into a financial Golden Goose and they ‘learned’ (Really? they are surprised we want to put football games on it) that Texas would use it as a recruiting Diamond Goose.

Frankly, I think the Sooner’s and Aggie’s objections are Goose Shit.

Yes, A&M and OU are not happy about the apparent rock-deep foundation of the LHN and doing all they can to damage it before it gets going, or get one of their own.

TI for breach of a prospective contractual relationship? I’ve worked as a lawyer in three different jurisdictions and this is the widest application of TI I have heard of. $ will escalate quickly without any limitation for remoteness. As I see it the burden will be on SEC/A+M to show that the TI didn’t cause the damage.

TV – I am not sure that A+M ever actually received the money from the NU/CU fallout?

Best of luck to Baylor – this must make them less attractive to future conferences.

The whole idea that this makes Baylor looks less attractive to other conferences thing is laughable.

So now because of this, the PAC, ACC, SEC and the Big X are not going to be burning a path to Waco? But right before all this lawsuit business, Baylor was right there in the discussions?

Give me a break. Baylor knows that if the Big 12 collapses, their options are Conference USA and the ilk, and this course of action is not going to threaten that. Those conferences are filled with schools that would be doing the same thing Baylor is… and last I heard, Iowa State and KU were still mulling their options for a lawsuit.

Been a really long time since I had to know any of this but why wouldnt all tortious interference claims be wiped out by the sovereign immunity of state universities?

Is TI grounded in tort or contract?

Either way I think this is a speed bump for ATM. If it preserves the Big Whatever in any form I may have to fly to Waco and shoot Starr myself. Its cruel to let such a mortally wounded animal suffer.

Why is OU reaffirming its commitment to the conference any more assuring than A&M’s last year?

Regarding the network, at some point UT had to stop being hindered by the lack of vision and financial acumen of the other members of this conference and move forward on its own.

If it preserves the Big Whatever in any form I may have to fly to Waco and shoot Starr myself. Its cruel to let such a mortally wounded animal suffer.

That is the purpose. At least in the short term, it’s still the best thing for Texas and OU.

Englis-HAG — Practicing law in old blighty might be slightly different from what happens in jolly new America

El Generalissimo,

Respectfully disagree only to this extent: I don’t give two shits about LHN. I do not know the details of the negotiations, but I believe that you’re probably right and they probably wanted back in when it turned out profitable. I just do not know that the LHN really does much for a football fan. I get enough basketball games and I already had the football games on TV. So what do I get out of LHN? I doubt they’ll be cutting ticket prices. And if I lose watching some the games I care most about it because it puts sand in the vaginas of other schools then the LHN is a net loss.

Let me be honest here: I will never watch non-revenue sports because they bore me. So that rebuttal does not work for me. And people arguing it are as sad as Aggies talking about the Commissioner’s Cup or whatever the hell that crap is they keep talking about that apparently only involves winning in sports NO ONE cares about.

English Ag,

I think it would be a tortious interference with an existing contract, which does exist in the UK. Texas nominally has a cause of action for tortious interference with a prospective contract/business relationship but I have never found any reported case in which the theory prevailed. It probably exists de jure, but not de facto.

Conferences do not have sovereign immunity… Wouldn’t the TI claim be against the SEC, while ATM would be open to other grounds, but not a TI claim?

Either way, we are in week 2 of the season, and this is the non-sense we are discussing. However this turns out (and I would definitely agree that this seems more of a speed bump than a road block), Aggy has f-ed this up. They treated the whole process cavalierly and have shat on themselves at every step of the process, before other parties took their hand and set them back on the right path.

All of this stuff should have been ironed out behind closed doors weeks ago.

you all see this Big 10 rumors going on. apparently Texas and ND talking to them is the latest rumor

Tortious interference claims against the SEC for taking A&M are kind of specious and I doubt BU would ever pursue them. TI claims against the Pac 12 for taking OU/OSU would be dead serious though, because that move would predictably cause direct and enormous and irreparable losses to BU and the other conference leftovers. And lawsuits mean subpoenas, and Ken Starr knows a li’l something about the usefulness of subpoenas. It’s a very serious threat. Just not to A&M or the SEC.

This is something I don’t quite understand either. It would seem that OU would be the cause of the breakup of the Big 12 far more than A&M would be. Besides, just a week or two ago weren’t we told by the Big 12/Texas that we were easily replaceable?

There was no objection to the LHN when the other schools thought it was an actual financial Spruce Goose. There objections came after it turned into a financial Golden Goose and they ‘learned’ (Really? they are surprised we want to put football games on it) that Texas would use it as a recruiting Diamond Goose.

Personally, I didn’t have a problem with the network in concept until it became a close partnership with ESPN. I find it a pretty big conflict of interest in what should be a reasonably neutral broadcaster to have a massive interest in promoting one team over all others (as evidenced by the constant “call to request the LHN”, special halftime reports on the Texas QB battle, and “breaking news: Gilbert will start at QB” type stuff on ESPN).

Do I think it’s an unfair advantage in recruiting? Probably, but as long as there aren’t high school games being broadcast and specific high school players highlighted I can’t argue too much. The network itself is a fantastic idea in concept although I question it’s price point and promotion so far.

The Big 10 rumors are all started by some jackass Northwestern grad with a blog who decides every few months to write something about UT joining the Big 10. He is never right. Yet, people always run with his post.

Its the threat of a lawsuit that is the card being played. I imagine Baylor knows winning the suit is unlikely, but if the threat keeps the status quo for another year or two they have bought themselves time. Baylor’s hope ride upon the superconference idea dying for whatever reason or on the Big 12 becoming a superconference itself. Are these slim hopes? Yes. Are they impossible? No.

What I can’t figure out is why would any conference want A&M after this? If anyone looks completely and utterly stupid in all this its the Aggies. I suppose when you have 12 other members it can cover up the stupidity of one or two, but how can you let an Aggie in a room where confidential and critical issues are being discussed without the fear that they’ll go out afterwards and manage to screw the whole thing up?

English – the elements of a case for PROSPECTIVE contractual breach are considerably more daunting that plain ol’ messin’ within existing contracts. I seriously doubt that’s what Starr et al. are threatening. As it currently stands, if the Big 12 TV deal gets totally blown up and BU goes to Conference USA, they can sue for 120 mil (15mil/yr x 8 yrs) just for the amount of money they’d lose off the existing TV contracts, so no prospective TI case should be necessary to make the threat real.

It does seem like whatever happens, the Big 12 is definitely sinking. It’s just a matter of figuring out who gets in which lifeboat at this point.

I don’t really want ND or BYU in the conference either. I don’t see the allure there.

If OU recommits, the conference shows Beebe the door, adds a commish with some foresight, and they add BYU to get to 10…. then it will be interesting to see how things play out for the next couple of years. The Big 12 could stabilize in relatively short order. Lot of ifs there.

“Personally, I didn’t have a problem with the network in concept until it became a close partnership with ESPN.”

This is why you draft contracts and have lawyers and all. Since no one else in the conference could fathom this easily foreseeable turn of events (meaning the ESPN connection not the money involved) would happen, it is rather disingenuous to complain after the fact when it did happen. The conference could have voted to limit how third-tier rights and university-centric media entities can function, but they all agreed to the rules that Texas has abided by in creating the LHN.

“I just do not know that the LHN really does much for a football fan.”

It basically ensures that every game will be on tv (and not just PPV). Not a huge issue for Texas recently (although the opening game a couple years ago was only on PPV, and the PPV got fucked up in a number of areas around the state), but there is still the risk.

Wonder if A&M fans would have gladly handed over $5 a year the last few years as opposed to no being able to watch their team on tv at all.

I also think it is going to be cool to watch some of the historical games from time to time. As someone in his 30’s, I’ve never seen more than just highlights of Earl, Nobis, Street, etc.

I can’t believe Beebe and Dodds haven’t had Toadvine on speed dial all these years. Catering to his specific likes and dislikes would have kept all of this from happening.

ag96 – I think your instinct is dead-on. Baylor’s gambit isn’t about A&M. You’re being used as a example to get the Pac 12 to back down from dealing with OU, and hopefully to extract a multi-year commitment to keep the Big 12-3 together once you’re gone. When OU comes back – and they will, the Pac 12 would be stupid at this point to blow up the Big 12 – Starr’s newspaper says the SEC waivers will be signed and you can reschedule your celebration.

Good point Ricky. Those rat bastards.

After reading some of the posts, it has become clear to me that the LHN has not only been smart in terms of cash flow but also wise in terms of asset protection. We can afford to sit this one out and have financial options as well as conference options. The conference re-alignment thing has been an obvious freight train in the tunnel.

ag96_

If you think UT or ESPN care about “conflicts of interest” you are sadly misguided. The relationship between UT and ESPN is a business relationship. The design of the relationship is for each party to pursue interests, although aligned, that are purely self serving. UT will pursue interests that may or may not also be in the interests of a&m, just as ESPN/ Disney will pursue interests that may or may not also be in the interests of a&m. Disney owes no duty to any individual university (other than UT) so no conflict of interest can in fact exist. The only duties ESPN/ Disney owes any conference or university would be contractual. Their primary duty is their fiduciary duty to their shareholders. ESPN has no duty to be impartial (they are in the entertainment business, they are not journalists). By promoting the LHN, they are attempting to maximize the return to the shareholders on the investment in LHN. In doing so, they are following their primary duty. If this adversely affects any other school, who cares?

As far as any unfair advantage is concerned, the real advantage UT will have is that the Horns, and the Horns alone, can assure a recruit that by going to UT, he will maximize his opportunity to be showcased on the primary TV carrier of college football games, ESPN. You can bet your bottom dollar ESPN will do whatever they can to promote LHN and maximize the return on that investment. Go to UT and ESPN will put any prospect in the best time slots in front of the most viewers. Go to a&m and you spend the next four years of your life attending a small market farm school that mostly plays other farm market schools. Once that point is made, all that remains is to show the prospect the direct flights into Austin/ Bergstrom Airport and then show the direct flights into College Station International Airport. Do you want mama to be flying first class to see you play on weekends, or do you want her riding 8 hours on a Greyhound bus?

Toadvine,

I can’t argue with your reasons for not caring for the LHN. They are sound.

I don’t think anyone that is a proponent of the network wants it to exist so they can watch more games. In the recent past, all of Texas games have been accessible with no more than one game on a ppv basis. This was not always the case, but we have no expectation that it won’t be the case for the foreseeable future.

But, by merely coming to this website we can infer that you require more Texas Longhorn football coverage than the standard fan. In fact, if you are sick and addicted fucker like me, you pay for at least one service, frequent several blogs, and generally reduce your work product to pathetic levels during the football season, recruiting, and any slightly newsworthy occurence.

A television channel dedicated only to people in burnt orange and white playing sports is of infinite interest to me. I would watch our kickers practice for 30 minutes without commentary, just let the cameras run. I would watch Mack choose which bagel he wants from Panera in the morning on the way to Bellmont.

I will not make the argument that you should be interested in non-revenue sports. But, I would defnitely watch woman’s volleyball, swimming, or soccer for reasons best left to the imagination. I do not think I am alone in Longhorn fandom in this.

Also, all of this enjoyment would weigh little on the balance sheet against the loss of both A&M and OU rivalries in football. I do not believe we will lose either permanently or both at all. Whatever happens, we will be playing one or both by 2017. Both rivalries have had periods before with no games. There is no reason to think this will be a permanent parting of the ways.

I will never watch non-revenue sports because they bore me. So that rebuttal does not work for me.

And yet you are a big soccer fan.

(It’s a joke, and yes, I understand soccer actually makes money in most of the world.)

Continuing w/ the theme from last year (especially propagated by Neb), Beebe is the du jour punching bag, but be aware of the fact that Beebe’s bosses are the presidents/chancellors of the member universities of the Big 12. He can’t do anything w/o their approval. I seriously doubt he allowed the conference to waive its legal rights against the SEC w/o checking w/ his bosses first.

As far as failing to be proactive, what is he to do? Other than BYU, there aren’t any attractive & available potential candidates for expansion. The Big 12 is hemmed in by stronger conferences. Plus, again, he would need the approval of his bosses to extend invitations to any other schools.

I don’t envy Beebe’s job one bit. He doesn’t have any real power (it’s basically UT & OU calling the shots), but is made out by the media as a laughing stock.

Everything The General said, plus baseball.

I have to admit, Toadvine, I am actually rather appalled that they haven’t once tried to call me and ask me what I would like to see happen. I just figured they were probably washing their hair or maybe taking out the trash or something.

So far all I can tell is that Baylor hasnt really DONE anything. They have just refused to sign a waiver.

The next step will be offering them something for the trouble, but they arent going to sign their death warrant.

Keeping ATM in the fold at gunpoint has a pretty limited utility. The atmosphere is fatally toxic and the longer you breathe the fumes the closer you get to death. Yes, even Texas.

We gotta get outta this place if its the last thing we ever do…

I get that the Presidents are his bosses, but it is his job to sell a vision of the conference and sell those bosses on why they had better sign on to said vision. This conference has sat on its hands while it is picked apart. That benefits nobody.

I am sure that Beebe cleared the letter with his bosses – or at least thought he had. Either way, sounds like this whole kerflap will cost him his job if the Baylor sources are to be trusted. And if there are two groups of people that I know do not lie, they are aggies and Baptists. Both have stringent honor codes.

I think the media makes him out as a laughingstock and OU/UT as puppet-masters. I have no idea if that is actually true. Maybe it is, maybe it isn’t. I would argue that if you had a strong and pro-active commissioner he would have been able to get the rest of the conference to tell deloss and castiglione when to shut up and get in line if it benefited the conference – and all would have been done behind closed doors so nobody lost face.

bullzak,

and i thought reports were than nobody else in the conference (besides potentially OU) was willing to sign the waivers either? the speculation at least seems to be that baylor called the SEC just prior to its meeting and notified them that there stance was different than what was portrayed in Beebe’s letter.

i agree – doesn’t seem like they have actually DONE anything that everybody else in the conference didn’t do as well.

Baylor, like any good Baptist, is just trying to apply the Bible to life.

“Or what woman, having ten silver coins, if she loses one coin, does not light a lamp, sweep the house, and search carefully until she finds it? And when she has found it, she calls her friends and neighbors together saying, ‘Rejoice with me, for I have found the piece which I lost!’ Likewise, I say to you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents”
                                                 Luke 15:8-10

just a question. maybe someone here has some insight. I find the conditions of the offer quite odd. I can not remember another case where conference offered and invitation and made the leaving school gather waivers. Luckily, in life this is not the case, because nobody would ever leave their current job. Has this ever happened before? If no, doesnt this speak volumes about the SEC’s commitent?

Beebe said that this is the first time such conditions have been asked for.

http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10410&ATCLID=205268058

Personally, I didn’t have a problem with the network in concept until it became a close partnership with ESPN. I find it a pretty big conflict of interest in what should be a reasonably neutral broadcaster to have a massive interest in promoting one team over all others (as evidenced by the constant "call to request the LHN", special halftime reports on the Texas QB battle, and "breaking news: Gilbert will start at QB" type stuff on ESPN).

So how does the Aggies going to SEC change any of that? More directly to my point, obviously this can’t be a rational reason for leaving. I think Dagga has made the point most succinctly when he said the aggies aren’t leaving because of LHN or revenue, they are leaving because they like their destination. Everything else is just garbage to make the fans/aggies feel good about the move.

codaxx – it’s because the SEC doesn’t want to be held liable if the Big 12 implodes. Conferences have come and gone over the years but never has one threatened to implode with such a huge TV contract on the books. If a school like BU loses its Big 12 TV money and ends up with CUSA money, that’s 15 mil/yr for 8 yrs = 120 mil in damages, more or less, just in TV money. For one school. And there’d be at least two schools in that situation, maybe more, if the conference implodes. When the potential liability reaches into the mid-nine-digits, it’s best to take precautions.

To follow up on Dagga’s point, the problem is that schools like Baylor, ISU, etc. issued debt to update or build new facilities using the Big 12 TV revenues as the intended repayment stream. If the conference implodes and the TV revenues go away, those schools realize that the school’s general fund will be eating a big chunk of that debt along with likely subsidizing other athletics to a degree they do not currently.

I think Bob in Houston said something to this effect earlier, but Baylor is really pointing a gun at Aggy’s head in order to get OU to recommit to the Big 12. This isn’t about Aggy – I don’t think Baylor thinks that the threats could get them to come back. It is about using this as leverage to get OU and UT to stop any potential movement out of the conference.

Aggy is out of the Big 12 one way or another.

"Personally, I didn’t have a problem with the network in concept until it became a close partnership with ESPN."

But when it was a partnership with Fox it was ok? Why is that? Seems like you could make the case that by partnering with Fox that Texas would get these same great assumed preferences across the entire News Corp media empire. The would be talking up the LHN on Fox News and Fx, in their movies, in newspapers across the planet, et. al.

In fact, if you want to get upset, the fact Texas would have had a media alliance with a large number of voters in the AP poll, seems like a bigger reason to be upset than worrying that commentators on SportsCenter may be inclinde to say nicer things about Texas because of the LHN. Also, since Sportscenter brings on guys with obvious alliances and favoritism to their alma mater or prior coaching positions, they are clearly not an unbiased source of information nor do they pretend to be.

Jeff, when it was Fox and $3-5 mil, that was somewhat expected. When ESPN got behind it for 3-5 times that value, it became unfair. That’s what it amounts to.

Scipio Tex and the other Longhorns in the know, what is the deal with these random reports about Texas and Notre Dame discussing entry into the Big Ten by 2014 with Texas keeping the LHN but forgoing BTN$?

They seem to me to be mostly rumors, but there seems to be a source in the Big Ten office leaking this.

Is this a way to put pressure on the Pac-12? Or what? It seems like our best options are football independence or the Pac-16. Why would we want to go to the Big Ten?

LH55 – this was addressed earlier in the thread somewhere. It is all coming from one source, a Northwestern blog. The guy has been posting stuff about UT to the Big 10 since last year. A few months ago, he posted that the Big 10 talked with OU, A&M and UT about all coming on board. I have no idea how credible his sources are, but I would take it worth a grain of salt. Everyone is copying his post and running with it. And as I said, this is far from the first time that he has started the UT to the Big 10 stuff.

http://northwestern.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=57&tid=162506546&mid=162506546&sid=901&style=2

I am still at a loss as to why any Big XII school would sign a release at all not really knowing all the potential claims that might be out there at this point), and am somewhat shocked that the SEC would even expect them to.

Failing to give a release is a far cry from actually suing or even threatening to sue. Baylor, and others, would be stupid to sign a release, and Beebe should be fired for his 9/2 letter.

If I am a minority stockholder in a company, and I get washed out or I don’t like the direction the company’s going, when the new investors come to me and sign a release, I’ll respond “buy back my shares at a premium, and I’ll sign it.” Of course they’ll say no, but I sure as hell am not signing a release, because I have no idea what kind of interested party/D&O type shenanigans have been going on in the board room. And if said shenanigans do lead to a cause of action which can help me recoup my investment/losses, I am going to enforce them to the fullest extent I can.

The SEC needs to assume the risk and let us be done with it so we can talk about football. I’m as much a realignment geek as anyone, but this is getting stupid.

If this were a film, it would be directed by John Woo. Everyone has a 9mm in each hand pointed at someone else and is waiting to see who squeezes the trigger first.

i’ve been reading around a lot of places.

you know when you come across some lines and it doesn’t mean much, and then you come upon some more and they don’t mean much either? but when you back off and look at a bunch of lines you realize there’s a pattern, and they’re all pointing somewhere? that’s what’s happening to me.

i’ve been suspicious that the sec has been trying to extricate themselves from this whole mess, but their position isn’t strong. they’ve pursued the ags and they know it. with the blowup, they aren’t interested any more, but, given their illegal behavior, they’ve got to be careful how they back away. i think two big dogs have agreed to leave the rag be, and this ridiculous insistence on waivers they know will never come is the vehicle for one of the dogs to get away.

R. Bowen Loftin quote: "Essentially, we’re being told that you must stay here against your will and we think that really flies in the face of what makes us Americans for example and makes us free people."

we are capitalist. You are asking people to give up their rights, that cost money. Personally, I cant believe any member signed the waiver for free. We can argue on what this particular “right to sue” is worth, but given TAMU is stuck right now, it isnt worth 0.

We want it because it is a Cameo-size codpiece to walk around with…

another thing.

most people around the country don’t know much about a&m. over on the shag there is a monster thread and people from various parts of the country have signed up and chimed in. numerous expressions of astonishment at the behavior of the ags pepper the thread.

i’m highly suspicious that the sec schools know a lot more about texas a&m right now than they did even a few weeks ago. i have very severe doubt they care to have that bunch of nutcases involved in their gentile little social club. i’m betting the ags never hear from them again.

the ags remind me so much of willie lyles. lyles wanted to believe that he was popular because of his scouting acumen and that his greasing the slopes was secondary. the ags want to believe that the sec is in love with them, and that tvs and recruiting advantage is secondary. willie couldn’t believe it when oregon wouldn’t take his calls once he was exposed, and he turned on them. well, the ags have been exposed. i don’t think the sec is going to take their calls once this is over.

By the way, nobody is keeping Aggies in Big 12. People have simply retained their right to sue. SEC has insisted on that provision. TAMU can leave and be independent in 2013, they just cant go to the SEC unless the SEC steps down from their demands on the waivers. So currently, it is the SEC that is holding A&M hostage.

LH55, as a negotiating point, I love it. If it’s a choice between Big 10 and Pac, I’ll take the Pac, because they’ve got a growing footprint, whereas the North/Northeast is experiencing population decline outside the major markets. More population equals more recruits, equals more TV eyeballs. West Coast/Southwest are growing, Rust Belt is stagnant. Go with growth.

Bob, that’s pretty chickensh** reasoning. The deal is only unfair because it’s ESPN and the money is too big?!? What kind of crap is that? So Fox at 3-5 Mil is fine? What EXACTLY is the distinction?

If Aggy or any other member had wanted to restrict Texas’s right to do their own network (restrict who they could align with, how much it would be worth, etc.), they had YEARS to do so. Or, they could have ponied up and bought in, either individually or as a conference. Texas made a good faith effort to get others on board, and they collectively screwed the pooch on that one. That’s on Beebe, Loftin, Boren, and anyone else pissed off about LHN.

As far as Baylor/Aggy lawsuit goes, this needs repeating from earlier:

"As the weekend concluded and we entered into Monday, however, the TV networks stepped up and indicated they would invest significantly in the 10 remaining members of the Big 12. And the Big 12 MADE A SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL COMMITMENT (caps added) to keep Texas A&M, Oklahoma and Texas in the conference. At the end of the day, we kept our word, which as an Aggie, is extremely important." – R. Bowen Loftin – June 16, 2010
 
“I’d like to mark this as Petitioner’s Exhibit 1.” — Ken Starr

yeh,

could be right. i still think Aggy to SEC is a done deal in the near future. i think this says more about two things: 1) slive is a lawyer and is not going to expose the conference to any risk he doesn’t have to, and he is perfectly content to let Aggy fight this battle on its own; 2) i think the SEC presidents were legitimately surprised by Baylor’s actions.

something needs to break the logjam, and my bet is that within the week OU announces it is either staying in the Big 12 or will go to the PAC. logjam broken.

I think everyone can infer that there has been contact between the SEC and A&M, probably every since the B12 kumbaya moment happen in June 2010. This is why IMO the SEC is asking for waivers, and it hands the smaller B12 a lot of power, power they didn’t have before. What’s interesting for me is that OU and UT have been pretty quiet regarding this, nonwithstanding Boren’s comments on Friday. I think they both would like to leave but wanted to wait until they had their TV networks fully up and running. For now they’re willing to watch Baylor and A&M fight it out before deciding.

This is probably showing my ignorance, but on the contention that A&M can’t be sued because of sovereign immunity, my question is why would any entity ever enter into a contract with a government institution if the contract can’t be enforced if breached?

This just went up on ESPN. Makes it sound like everyone is waiting on OU to make up its mind.

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6939017/texas-aggies-accepted-sec-legal-threat-delays-move

Take this with a grain of salt, but I’m hearing that the Baylor threat is a real threat, and is based in part on new stadium plans coming, I suspect, from major conference TV money. I don’t think they want to let A&M go, because I reckon they know that if A&M leaves the rest of the conference crumbles in the next few years.

Second thing I heard today: the PAC-16 is where we end up when the Big 12 dies, along with the Oklahoma schools and Tech. So basically last year’s deal. I have no idea what this means for LHN, but apparently we’re good on this. I’ll grant you this doesn’t jibe with the OU whinging, but apparently a lot of people are trying to save face by not looking like mere coattail riders.

Grain of salt stuff.

Good for Baylor. FUCK a bunch of aggy.

ern, what you say is correct, but the one really odd thing here is the insistence on the waivers. that is unheard of, and attorneys all over the place are saying they would advise a client to not do that. the sec cannot really believe those waivers would be given.

only if the waivers were signed and another roadblock erected or acceptance even without the waivers could we be for sure, but we aren’t going to have that opportunity i feel pretty certain.

Here’s another reason why Baylor’s (or anyone else’s) tortious interference claim is weak: if aggy leaves the conference and pays the exit penalties as set forth in the Big 12 contract, there has been no breach. Aggy’s decision to exercise a right given to it in the Big 12 contract (whether induced to do so by the SEC or not) does not provide grounds for a tortious interference claim against the SEC. Without having induced a breach, the SEC is not liable for tortious interference. There is simply no claim for inducing a party to exercise an explicit contractual right. The same goes for OU and the PAC 12.

The fact that Baylor went out and committed a bunch of money to stadium expansion means nothing. They may be able to get out of those contracts under some avoidance theory, but those are disputes with the contractors, not with the SEC (or the PAC 12).

Assuming that any school leaving the conference complies with the exit procedures, the most Baylor (or anyone else) can hope for is its share of the exit fees. I have no doubt that Baylor (or KSU or whoever) can rattle enough sabers to create apprehension, but the merits of a tortious interference claim strike me as very weak.

This all assumes that the information in the public domain constitutes the universe of relevant information (obviously a ridiculous assumption, but it’s all I have).

55, baylor is already screwing the ags. what t’vine is saying is baylor is arming to go after the sec. starr wouldn’t go after somebody that big, would he?

: )

doesnt matter if the claim is weak. Doesnt even matter if Baylor sues. What matters is the SEC will not except them if they dont get the waivers. So regardless of the case, Baylor has leverage. Everything else is BS. Like I said if SEC didnt treat A&M like a step-child and gave them a full invite like Ark and South Carolina recieved than Baylor and the rest would not have this leverage.

From Inside Counsel (which sees fit to report on the impending litigation):

“The novelty of the situation doesn’t seem to be lost on Big 12 Conference Commissioner Dan Beebe, who provided his take on the Big 12 website.

"This is the first time to my knowledge that a conference has been requested to waive any legal claims toward another conference for any damages suffered with a membership change," Beebe wrote. "The Big 12 Conference was asked by Texas A&M University and the Southeastern Conference to waive any such claim to help facilitate Texas A&M’s departure from the Conference without any consideration to the Big 12. Although they were not obligated to do so, the Big 12 Board of Directors decided to accommodate that request as it relates to The Big 12 Conference, Inc., which is reflected in the September 2 letter sent to SEC commissioner Mike Slive.

"However, the waiver did not and could not bind the individual member institutions’ governing boards to waive institutional rights," he continued. "If the departure of Texas A&M results in significant changes in the Big 12 membership, several institutions may be severely affected after counting on revenue streams from contracts that were approved unanimously by our members, including Texas A&M. In some cases, members reasonably relied on such approval to embark on obligations that will cost millions of dollars.""

http://www.insidecounsel.com/2011/09/08/football-fiasco-possibly-on-texas-horizon?utm_source=ic&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=icscoopenews

I agree. The SEC is either (a) overly cautious; or (b) doesn’t REALLY want A+M that badly. Or both.

Whatever the merits of its potential claims (and I think they are zero or close to it), Baylor has been effective in getting what it wants. Kudos to them for that. And kudos for the entertainment value.

At the end of the day, these are negotiations. The SEC is trying to get A&M with no legal strings attached. Why not try to get all the schools to sign waivers? There were easier ways for them to back out of this if they wanted without losing face.

I think the SEC is being overly cautious — the novelty of the situation is not lost on them either. They know that they can slow play this whole ordeal and let Aggy do the heavy lifting. There is absolutely no cost to them in not acting until they are certain of the legal environment.

I love the entertainment value of this, but I think UT fans are being pretty silly thinking the SEC doesn’t want Aggy or that A&M is somehow not a huge catch for them. I still think this is a great move for both A&M and the SEC, imo. I also think this is a smart move for Baylor.

ern, the sec is like that guy at the filling station that has been bird-dogging a lady customer. just as she’s about ready to hit the sack with him he realizes how bat-shit (literally) crazy she is and that her husband is a cop.

he’s got to be really careful how he gets away from her.

even if i don’t agree, i did just laugh. good stuff.

To add some levity, Spencer Hall kills it again:

Oral history of the Big XII: http://www.everydayshouldbesaturday.com/2011/9/8/2412677/when-the-band-broke-up-the-oral-history-of-the-big-12

Cleary there is mutual interest between A&M and the SEC. A&M gets a conference upgrade and better cultural fit (even though the financial part is a wash), and the SEC gets to expand their footprint into Texas. But I can’t remember a conference invite coming with such a precondition as getting a waiver from your former conference mates. Did Arkansas need one to get into the SEC? This is like joining a country club but needing 20 personal references first.

An aspect that I think has been overlooked is that while the SEC might like to expand they don’t absolutely have to. They don’t have an impending TV deal like the Pac-12 did to drive expansion. Sure, if A&M is willing to jump into their laps then why not take them, but how long do they wait for A&M to get it together before calling it off? I bet this has to get done this week or not at all.

ATM will sign some sort of indemnity for the SEC and this deal will get done.

I dont think this potential tortious interference claim is all that but I am not especially versed in it.

In the big boy world people look at litigation as a hurdle to get over. They arent as scared of it as laymen are.

I havent read any of the agreements but would expect the liquidated damages cited therein are the upper range of what will actually change hands at the end of the day.

bullzak, this stuff has nothing to do with my field of endeavor, but i’ll pass on something i read earlier.

the ags cannot effectively offer indemnity because they are a state school. if the sec takes them in under that circumstance and baylor, say, successfully sues, the sec must pay the claim and then dun the ags. that’s where sovereign immunity for a&m kicks in. sec would be crazy to go for that.

i think this is going because the SEC wants A&M, but they know they can get them at any time. They can look for another team. They are in a good spot. I dont think they want to rush this. why would they? Time is on their side. OU leaves and now they have a free-pass to rape and pillage conferences. If that doesnt happen, “Hey, we are #1”. In this whole situation the only people that want a quick resolution is TAMU.

200 million dollar settlements are not hurdles. and even if they were, how much is a&m worth to the sec?

sec has made it patently clear all along that only if the ags cost them essentially nothing are they interested. i think it’s gone way past that.

Spencer’s take might have been the funniest thing I have read in a long time. Colorado was my favorite band member.

Baylor’s punch only needs to be as strong as the SEC decides it wants its chin to be weak.

Maybe the SEC is listening to Marcellus Wallace.

ESPN is scrolling that TEXAS has stated that they will release collies from the conference. Makes you wonder what TEXAS and OU have planned next. Maybe they have something to gain by the collies leaving.

It was announced earlier today that UT would not suit. I believe as early as last evening an official from UT told the Statesman that we had absolutely no intention of suiting either the SEC or A&M and would grant the waiver request. So not sure that this is new information at all.

If you think UT or ESPN care about "conflicts of interest" you are sadly misguided. The relationship between UT and ESPN is a business relationship. The design of the relationship is for each party to pursue interests, although aligned, that are purely self serving. UT will pursue interests that may or may not also be in the interests of a&m, just as ESPN/ Disney will pursue interests that may or may not also be in the interests of a&m. Disney owes no duty to any individual university (other than UT) so no conflict of interest can in fact exist. The only duties ESPN/ Disney owes any conference or university would be contractual. Their primary duty is their fiduciary duty to their shareholders. ESPN has no duty to be impartial (they are in the entertainment business, they are not journalists). By promoting the LHN, they are attempting to maximize the return to the shareholders on the investment in LHN. In doing so, they are following their primary duty. If this adversely affects any other school, who cares?

As far as any unfair advantage is concerned, the real advantage UT will have is that the Horns, and the Horns alone, can assure a recruit that by going to UT, he will maximize his opportunity to be showcased on the primary TV carrier of college football games, ESPN. You can bet your bottom dollar ESPN will do whatever they can to promote LHN and maximize the return on that investment. Go to UT and ESPN will put any prospect in the best time slots in front of the most viewers. Go to a&m and you spend the next four years of your life attending a small market farm school that mostly plays other farm market schools. Once that point is made, all that remains is to show the prospect the direct flights into Austin/ Bergstrom Airport and then show the direct flights into College Station International Airport. Do you want mama to be flying first class to see you play on weekends, or do you want her riding 8 hours on a Greyhound bus?

Somewhat valid, I do agree that ESPN isn’t a truly journalistic entity (though I find it interesting that they like to play both sides of that coin when convenient). I don’t think they’re concerned about affecting other schools though I do think that could hurt their public perception. I’ve already heard “why do they keep playing these LHN ads?” from people who aren’t diehard sports fans and people who closely follow college football are already tired about seeing “bonus” Texas coverage.

I don’t, however, think A&M is going to have much issue with being in a small market playing farm schools in the SEC. They’re a big draw in a big media market (Houston) and will get plenty of national air time as an SEC school. And at this point the LHN certainly hasn’t helped people actually watch Texas games :-)

So how does the Aggies going to SEC change any of that? More directly to my point, obviously this can’t be a rational reason for leaving. I think Dagga has made the point most succinctly when he said the aggies aren’t leaving because of LHN or revenue, they are leaving because they like their destination. Everything else is just garbage to make the fans/aggies feel good about the move.

I agree, I don’t think it’s a direct reason (although I do think it added to the stress of being in the Big 12). I think the simplest reason is that the Big 12 has no long term future while the SEC is a stable conference with even revenue sharing (albeit a bit shady).

That being said, if I had to guess I’d say A&M’s reasoning over backing out from the network commitment is that the LHN ended up as a far more lucrative deal than was initially assumed (not to mention the ESPN influence). This created a far less level playing field than already existed and it appears obvious that the LHN is going to continue to try push the boundaries. I don’t know if it’s necessarily a valid reason, but I’ve heard it mentioned.

That’s just us continuing, publicly at least, to stay above the fray. It also proactively washes any potential stain of past acts off of us should we decide to go elsewhere. It’s the smart move. Baylor is doing all the heavy lifting. I agree with everyone who says “it don’t make a shit” whether Baylor could win the lawsuit or not. What does matter is that they have thrown a monkey wrench into the deal although they’d relent in a heartbeat if OU pledges ironclad alliegance and the Big 12 stays together which really, is best for us for the next few years anyway.

Meanwhile, Aggy is a homeless guy which, even if sort-lived, is fun to watch. As I stated in another thread, I’m grateful to them for providing us, OU, et al, a “here’s all the shit you need to avoid” template if we ever decide to goelsewhere. Aggy could truly fuck up a one car funeral.

I wish I knew which ESPN channel is giving all of this attention to TEXAS. I am not seeing it. I went to the game and then turned my TV on as soon as I got home. I did not see a mention of the game or the score. I was concerned that they are not covering us so people will be more inclined to order LHN or beat up their cable provider to carry it.

I still don’t understand why it is okay for ags to get more money than Baylor but it is not okay for TEXAS to have something ags don’t (LHN). Loftin was quoted in the Houston Chronicle during an interview about how the discussion between TEXAS and ags establishing a network unfolded and he said people that know me know I wouldn’t have passed up 150 million dollars. This proves that he would have jumped as fast as we did and now they are going back on an agreement made less than a year ago. I have aggie friends and most of them are old school and believe that your word is your word. Loftin apparently does not operate that way and he is not representing ags very well.

Last thought, why was it okay for ESPN to follow the collies during their fall camp several years ago much like they are doing for OU this year? That was special coverage for one school exclusively. Does anybody remember how upset TEXAS administration reacted? No because we didn’t react like our whiny little step brother from college station.

I mean, at this point, blame-shifting as they are, doesn’t Aggie have to point the finger at SEC for creating a contingency no other conference has required when bringing in new programs?

That’s the person to be angry with at this point. All the Big 12 schools are saying is we won’t release claims. It’s the SEC’s move.

ag96, can you explain why the equal sharing of first tier rights is so appealing to you? Basically, you could join tomorrow (fingers crossed!) and the next day Florida could get a $500M deal with ESPN for their network as could Bama or Georgia, or all three. In the Big 12 you at least could have gotten more money on your first and second tier money by being a big dog and playing on TV more. I know that being a big dog in the Big 12 didn’t quite work out the way you planned, but you were still earning a bigger piece of the pie than most teams even though you were rarely playing for any big stakes. Is the move to the SEC just a way to relieve your financial pressures and pressures to perform on the field? The Big 12 contract expected teams to carry their weight to get the biggest payoffs, was that a concern that factored in to you all wanting to leave to a conference where a slice of the pie is guaranteed no matter how mediocre your product is?

Nick: I don’t think there’s a difference. But I don’t think that A&M or anyone else affected got a sense of what was happening until ESPN got behind it like it did.

Big Ern: The Northwestern poster apparently has unquestioned Big Ten sources. But they don’t go any further. I believe he’s telling the truth as the BT sees it.

the revenue sharing is nonsense. If Aggies cared about that they wouldnt have taken the 20mm guarantee. If they believed in equality they wouldnt have stolen that money from the starving children of Iowa State and Baylor. Even the most dilusional Aggie can realize the hypocrisy of claiming they are leaving for equal revenue, right?

Bob,

I think the guy gets credit for calling Nebraska to the Big 10 before anyone else and he has been riding on those laurels ever since. I have no idea if he actually has good sources inside the Big 10 or not, but I think it is worth taking his views as speculation at best.

This is at least his third round of saying UT and the Big 10 are deep in discussions. Last year he said UT to the Big X was nearly a done deal, and a few months ago he predicted UT, A&M and OU all to the Big X.

One question I have. If we really want to let A&M go but also really want to keep the Big12 together for a few more years but not the long term, how do we get out at point? We’re clearly seeing that with A&M gone the league will be at a point where either OU or us leaving blows it up. So with the threat that the have-nots will always have of suing the school and conference that causes the breakup, how do we ever get out.

Is it a matter of waiting a few years until the TV contracts have a lot less time on them and thus the other schools have less damages to sue for?

Last year he said UT to the Big X was nearly a done deal, and a few months ago he predicted UT, A&M and OU all to the Big X.

Last year nearly every reliable source also said we were gone to the PAC and it didn’t happen. We know for a fact that the sources were correct and it was very close to being a done deal. Just because it didn’t happen didn’t mean that the information indicating it was likely was wrong. Maybe the same thing with this guy. He may be aware of real and substantive talks, but as we saw with the PAC it’s never a done deal until it’s done.

ag96- Jerome Solomon had an interesting article in today’s Houston Chronicle (chron.com) about the numbers behind the ags in the SEC. He says the SEC already outdraws the aggie games in the Texas markets, so any argument that college fans in Texas haven’t ever heard of SEC football and will suddenly start tuning in to SEC broadcasts once Brazos Valley State College makes their move seems a bit far fetched. The ags playing Kentucky, Miss St, Vandy, etc, aren’t going to dominate the Houston market and the ags losing by 30 to Bama, Fla, LSU, won’t be any better. Look at last year’s ag/LSU bowl ratings. Not impressive.

Bob, I’m trying to get it, but having trouble. The other schools didn’t know? How about being proactive with THEIR 3rd tier rights? Can you articulate one additional thing UT should have done?

Also, the discussion with the Big Ten maybe real but primarily serving as leverage to get more favorable terms with the PAC. If we are talking to the Big Ten I suspect Larry Scott knows, and if he thinks he might lose Texas to the Big Ten he might be more willing to adapt to the LHN.

Nunna -

I think the idea would be that enough teams would leave together, and such an exodus would be initiated by the teams, that their wouldn’t be a quorum left to receive the exit fees (probably what A&M was hoping for here), and that any move would be proactive on the part of the schools so a conference doesn’t get implicated.

That’s one of the reasons the lawsuit threat is on A&M and not OU. That first domino is who you’d need to go after.

A&M just completely screwed up the fine print and the PR war, and Beebe has somehow Clouseau’d/Magoo’d his way into probably saving the Big XII for a few more years by sending that letter.

I’ll add - if there was a suit by Baylor against the SEC, would the SEC have a suit against Beebe and the Big XII due to their reliance on the 9/2 letter? I imagine not as that release letter probably wouldn’t be actual or even apparent authority of the Big XII on behalf of the schools. And if that is the case SEC jumped the gun here a bit too if they wanted actual releases from the schools.

Again — nothing is stopping the SEC from finalizing the invite other than their own conservatism.

Nunna, you simply leave out the clause that says schools must give up their legal rights to sue and then have the Pac 12 tell Baylor to go fuck themselves. The SEC wasn’t willing to do that and that’s why Poor Aggy is in the position they’re in.

A-Tex Devil’s last sentence knocks it out of the park!

Despite what it seems like to the agriculturally-inclined, none of this is about keeping them in the Big 12-2-1. It’s designed as someone said earlier to bring the okies back in line for a while.

I doubt anybody thinks the Big 12-2-1 has legs enough to last beyond the next two or three years, but IF the conference can be saved, there are some steps that HAVE to be taken.

1.) No more defections after agricultural.
2. Add 1 school by next season (BYU?) and two more by the next season, to get the conference back to twelve, with two divisions, and a conference championship game.
3.) REPLACE DAN BEEBE!!! The Big 12-2-1 needs to find another Larry Scott out there, someone with vision beyond the next ten minutes, who’s proactive, not reactive, and most importantly, the new commissioner MUST HAVE ABSOLUTE POWER TO RUN THE CONFERENCE!
4.) I’m no socialist, but there must be an even split of league-wide tv revenues…no sacred cows, even no sacred bulls like Bevo. It might not hurt UT to put some “seed money” from the LHN back into the conference, to go to the other members, as a measure of good will and assurance that the network is NOT the Death Star. Keep the policy that each school is allowed to have it’s own third tier network, and UT should be willing to work with any school that wants a network to help get it up and running.
5.) Make it financially painful to leave the league. I’d suggest each conference member must sign a binding agreement that it will cost a team 100 million dollars to pull out of the Big 12, NO exceptions, and NO deals.

I don’t expect any of these things to happen, but if the Big 12 is to be saved, at minimum ALL of these things need to happen in the next two years.

Thoughts?

ag96 – Just wanted to say thanks for your reasonableness. Not much of that going on in exchanges between Aggies and Longhorns these days.

And FWIW, I don’t think the LHN is being used SOLELY as an excuse by A&M to move – I just think it’s a tertiary reason at best. It does increase UT athletics’ overall financial advantage over A&M from 50 mil to 65 mil per year. But both programs are making enough money to fund their teams and facilities; expenses between the two football programs are very comparable, and UT’s extra largesse simply goes back to the University or into a bank vault for a rainy day. For you and I, the fans, it makes no difference at all. The only people who should care about the money stuff are those folks in the top admin positions who care about their legacy and reputation among fellow regents and such.

Now, the unfair advantage issues are different, but the solutions to those issues have nothing to do with the SEC. I have no problem seeing why A&M fans got pissed about the high school games and such. But the solution to that is already done – get the NCAA to rule against it, which y’all successfully did. And the branding inequity would have been best addressed by seeing if the LHN model floats, and if it did, replicating it. A&M could easily host their own network. It might make less money, but again for you and I, that shouldn’t matter. The visibility would have been equal.

In any case moving to the SEC isn’t a solution for inequity between the schools. You’ll make only a couple mil more in TV money. We still share the same recruiting grounds and compete for the same fanbase. And if anything, moving out of UT’s conference reduces the leverage A&M has on UT’s actions. The real reason for moving to the SEC is that it’s a great place to be for the foreseeable future if you want to play in good football games. And for that, I say: great f*cking move. Kudos. I just wish some of your fellow fans weren’t so bent on making everything about UT. If they really want total equity between the schools, the solution is simple: add another 15,000 students and a Top 15 caliber law school, then wait twenty years. Anything short of that will be disappointing.

PBC just posted on the Northwestern board that OU called the Big Ten and was told they would not be invited.

Nick: What are you getting at? I was trying to say that A&M (which left Dodge over it) and others (including OU) were caught off guard by what the LHN has the potential to do for Texas. The money and the influence of ESPN behind it just emphasized that for people who didn’t know what to think.

Hey, the LHN could turn into what a lot of the dot coms did — nothing. But ESPN is not betting that way. People noticed, and now they are fearful.

Could someone provide a link to the Northwestern blogger or a name. I’ve seen his stuff before but don’t have it bookmarked and don’t recall the name.

coolhorn – agreed. Point by point:

1) Sure looks like Kenny Starr will make sure there are no more defections for at least a couple of years.

2) If we’re stuck here for a couple more years, might as well. I really like Mormons.

3) Dan Beebe just got castrated by Ken Starr. The whole “my letter doesn’t mean what it says” thing is an incredible admission of weakness. I doubt he lasts much longer. If he does, he shouldn’t.

4) I’m down. It’s only a couple mil per year and the unequal revenue thing has been used as a convenient excuse for three teams to leave the conference. If we are stuck with the Big 9 until the LHN matures and the TV contracts near expiration, then we’ll want to avoid giving schools an easy time-tested excuse to leave.

5) 100 mil is a bit steep. It’s probably unnecessary too. Right now, the most obvious consequence of a conference accepting another Big 9 team is having Ken Starr subpoenaing their correspondence looking for justifications to sue. I suspect that’ll keep the wolves at bay until the outstanding TV money on our contracts goes down and potential liability becomes an affordable risk.

PBC just posted on the Northwestern board that OU called the Big Ten and was told they would not be invited.

Presumably a function of the academic differences between OU and Texas, but I’m still surprised. After opening their door to Nebraska I wouldn’t think OU would be much different. And I would think agreeing to take OU would make it of more interest to the UT admin. Brings the Big Ten geographically closer to us and gives us an automatic rival.

Nunna: It could mean that the BiG is reasonably confident that they’ll close the deal on Texas and ND. And if they don’t, they don’t want OU as a consolation prize.

Dagga —
3) Totally agree. I believe Beebe should negotiate a departure package, because his employers wouldn’t give him authority to do his job.

4) Agree again. I’ve been telling people that the difference between the average take and the worst (or best) is about one year’s salary for a winning football coach. The problem was the overall size of the checks, rather than the difference between them.

Not sure the OU thing passes the smell test to me… here is the link to the Northwestern page

http://northwestern.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?SID=901&fid=57&style=2&tid=162506546&Page=3

4.) I’m no socialist, but there must be an even split of league-wide tv revenues…no sacred cows, even no sacred bulls like Bevo.

Yes, actually you sound exactly like a socialist.

The revenue sharing policy had nothing to do with the departure of UNL or the imminent departure of ATM. (They both voted in favor of the split and benefited from it). So quit pretending that this was the reason they wanted out.

the new commissioner MUST HAVE ABSOLUTE POWER TO RUN THE CONFERENCE!

You think either UT or OU would agree to give any commish absolute power? Seriously???

It’s like the United Nations. People who complain about how the UN is powerless also refuse to give up their nation’s sovereignty. The head of an organization or the organization itself only has as much power as the membership gives them.

NO ONE can control this motley crew that is the Big 12-2-1. Everyone outside of Baylor, ISU, & the KS schools wants to leave, thinking there are greener pastures someplace else. Everyone has their own agenda, especially the Big Fishes. When the Big Fishes’ agendas don’t include staying in the conference, there’s nothing he can do.

ESPN’s OU reporter is saying don’t expect any commitment from OU anytime soon. I still don’t buy the guys sources, but it would be pretty amusing if we up and went to the Big 10 while OU is dragging its feet and A&M is being Ken Starr’d.

http://twitter.com/Jake_Trotter

Texas won’t do anything to leave unless OU decides to go. Texas still wants the B12 to operate for at least two more years.

Presumably a function of the academic differences between OU and Texas, but I’m still surprised. After opening their door to Nebraska I wouldn’t think OU would be much different.

The difference is, NU was a member of the AAU when it was invited. OU, OTOH, isn’t.

What the invite to NU does illustrate is that population base doesn’t necessarily matter all that much. Those who think the Pac-12 wouldn’t take OU w/o UT (& the State of TX) are missing the point – it’s about what expansion does for FB. OU, like NU, is a traditional power. The OU brand, as much as I hate to say it, has a lot of value.

The people who are downplaying Boren’s recent statements about rethinking its membership in the Big 12-2-1 as a stupid move are mistaken. I think his end game is to weaken the LHN, if not kill it off completely. He knows that UT wants at least a few more years in the Big 12 to strengthen the LHN. But if OU leaves soon, UT won’t want to stay in a severely weakened Big 12 & UT’s bargaining position w/ the Pac-12 is weakened. The Pac-12 won’t be so accommodating to fold the LHN into its regional networks structure. Therefore, OU can try (we can debate whether or not they’ll be successful) in forcing UT’s hand re: LHN & the Pac-12.

joetx – good points. But like Dave Boren, you seem to underestimate the small schools’ ability to muck up any attempt OU has to move right now. There’s no keeping Ken Starr from doing to the Pac 12 what he’s doing to the SEC. And if the Pac 12’s trying to take both OU and OSU, Starr’s gambit would have lots more teeth b/c allowing the move would be the end of the Big Whatever and in that case the potential liability for the Pac 12 would be much, much bigger than it ever could be for the SEC. BU alone would lose north of a hundred mil in TV bucks over the next eight years.

When you consider all of that, yeah, Boren seems kinda stupid. If he’d have simply shut his mouth until after A&M left, the whole Baylor brouhaha would have never happened and he’d be in much better position today.

I am not sure about that. Baylor isn’t really doing anything. They are simply retaining their right to sue. Given the conditional offer the SEC gave Baylor some leverage . The lawsuit is probably weak, but SEC isn’t about to call their bluff. I would assume Texas or OU would insist on big boy invite, not the mickey mouse nonsense SEC pulled on TAMU. Secondly, I don’t see how the Pac would have more liability. I believe the TV contract holds an out if conference membership drops below 9. TAMU’s move is what violates the contract. So I think OU could argue that once TAMU breached the contract, they needed to replace the revenue.

“Baylor isn’t really doing anything. They are simply retaining their right to sue.”

This is important, and Aggies are glossing over this because Beebe is an idiot savant and spoke for all of the schools, leading Aggie and SEC to erroneously believe they were in the clear.

SEC’s and Aggie’s lawyers messed up by not confirming that Big XII letter had actual authority to speak for schools. It would have been a very easy research assignment for a first year assoicate.

Dagga, i respectfully disagree. I think you’re exactly right about Boren’s goals, but that doesn’t make it smart. OU/Tex are legally situated identically to A&M, in that both publicly pledged to BIG XII and took disproportionate shares of exit fees. Now, if Aggy had been allowed to leave quietly, Baylor loses a bargaining chip, because codaxx is right about OU having a defense.

Baylor has two different levels of influence. With regard to Aggie, Baylor has a stronger case as a POTENTIAL plaintiff, rather than an actual one, because Aggy has legal defenses: Big XII initially granted them permission, various assurances that TV contracts would be honored, Big XII expected to survive, etc. All of Baylor’s power comes from asserting they HAVE the right to sue. The minute they walk into court, they’re toast.

On the other hand, if OU leaves and blows up BIG XII, then actual damages start tallying. Against OU, Baylor has more power as an ACTUAL plaintiff, rather than a potential one. (Yes, OU has defenses too, but as a whole Baylor’s case is stronger).

This is why I say that Aggy is essentially NOT Baylor’s target here. PAC 12 and OU are.

Sorry, meant joetx, not Dagga.

“OU/Tex are legally situated identically to A&M, in that both publicly pledged to BIG XII and took disproportionate shares of exit fees.”

OU and Texas both declined to take a disproportionate share. A&M was the only school that accepted it.

Wahoo, where’d you get that. If I’m wrong, I’m wrong, but I think all 3 took the money.

Baylor isn’t really doing anything. They are simply retaining their right to sue.

yes and no. right now there is nothing obvious going on. they just won’t waive their rights. that doesn’t mean that nothing is going on. in fact, there have been communications of some sort. perhaps just notifying the sec and ags to not destroy communications. story is baylor is gearing up to sue the sec and slive personally. that put a lot of starch in that man’s underwear.

a big difference between a&m and the sec vs okla and pac may be how the conferences behaved. if the conference has documentation throughout the process showing clearly that the school made contact and the conference made no overt attempts to persuade the school to make a change, then there is no harm. it is just the school investigating its options, whether they make the decision to move or not. the problem with the sec is that they obviously suspect that plenty is out there to hang them by the gonads. and ti penalties can be extremely severe.

answer for us in the future is to handle our business above board and to only deal with conferences that do likewise. potential for litigation is pretty much nonexistent.

nick, texas and ou refused the disproportionate share they were entitled to. i think they tried to get the ags to do likewise and were rebuffed.

an example of why ti penalties can be severe is that the harmed party can total up any way they were harmed. for example, if baylor has to go cusa and enrollment takes a big hit, that is an enormous amount of money. it has been shown that membership in a major conference has a big effect on the attractiveness of a school, and baylor could probably claim a hefty percentage of that loss on top on tv money, etc.

slive personally would mark that settlement as the end of his economic life.

now do you see why they want waivers or forget it? all they had to do was act right and it wouldn’t be a problem, but we are talking sec here, right?

Fair enough. Might change the analysis slightly.

codaxx – of course Baylor’s not suing anyone yet, and this is all about waivers. But refusing to sign the waiver is in essence a threat to sue, and the seriousness of the threat should be measured by the merits of a potential lawsuit. While the ruckus with the SEC is probably a bluff, like you say, there’s a huuuuge difference between the SEC-to-A&M situation and one where the Pac 12 takes OU/OSU.

First there’s the issue of damages. Losing A&M won’t cost much because even with no further action, the conference still has UT, OU and an AQ spot. As long as the TV partners pro-rate A&M’s share out of the deal – which they seem likely to do (that’s what they told Loftin) – it’d be hard to demonstrate any damages worth a lawsuit. So toward the SEC, Starr’s just saber-rattling.

However, if on the heels of losing A&M we then lose OU and OSU, it’d be impossible to honestly project that the conference would remain viable as-is. It wouldn’t be hard to make a case that the Pac 12 would be dealing a death blow to the Big 12 by taking OU and OSU.

And BU would lose truckloads of cash if the conference dissolves. Remember, we just signed a new TV contract guaranteeing all these small schools 15+ mil per year for a decade. If BU gets tossed into a CUSA situation, that’s easily a nine-digit loss in total TV money. If the Pac 12 commits TI in the process of getting OU, and the conference dissolves as a direct result of losing OU, Baylor can take back every penny of the loss plus tort by suing the Pac 12.

In the SEC’s case, Starr is clearly saber-rattling and if it came to a lawsuit the damages would at worst be very affordable. Yet Mike Slive won’t cross him. Why? Because you don’t want Kenneth Starr subpoenaing your internal records. I’d imagine Larry Scott would feel the same way.

Throw on the fact that a BU lawsuit would DEFINITELY be coming if the Big 12 dissolves upon OU’s departure, and that the potential liability would be nine figures, and that’s not a happy risk profile for Scott to consider. Even if the risk of losing such a lawsuit is low, the amount of cash at stake is too enormous to ignore. So I’m betting Scott tells Boren to go home and wait awhile.

If the Pac 12 commits TI in the process of getting OU

dagga, that’s the key. if there was misbehavior, then the pac would be in a world of hurt. if, however, they have a paper trail showing good faith, there is no basis for the suit. sec’s behavior makes it plain that there is reason for worry on their part.

Dagga:

First of all, you’re implicitly assuming any case against OU/OSU or the Pac 12 will be under Texas law or in a Texas court. Best case scenario, it’s removed to federal court. For this kind of case, federal court is the last place Baylor wants to be.

Second, you way overestimate the small schools’ ability to muck up OU’s ability to move. You’re doing exactly what I’d expect a UT fan to do: you’re looking at everything through a state of Texas shaped lens. The Pac12 won’t be subject to Texas jurisdiction. Also, OU has no contract with Baylor. They have a contract with the Big 12. Should OU/OSU leave, the conference is almost certainly dead, the contract is void, and Baylor has no standing.

Last, you seem to infer OU’s endgame is to get out. Consider the possibility that OU’s endgame with this move is to keep A&M standing pat. OU isn’t going to budge. As long as they don’t, they can force either A&M to stay or the SEC to make their move with threat of litigation. The latter seems highly unlikely, doesn’t it?

Nate,

The federal district must apply state law in a civil action. For a number of reasons, a federal court in Texas would apply Texas law to Baylor’s claims for tortious interference. The Big 12 Bylaws and contract may have a choice of law provision which would govern the law applicable to Baylor’s breach of contract claims.

A key difference between the federal and Texas courts is that in the federal district court Baylor must achieve a unanimous verdict to recover. 10 of 12 will suffice in a Texas court.

With all the posts on here, I think I might be able to pass a section or two of the bar exam. Or at least be a paralegal.

Would treble damages apply if Baylor was to win a tortuous interference case? It seems like a longshot that Baylor could win, but Pennzoil vs Texaco looked like a longshot too. Ask Texaco how that one turned out.

“I know what you’re thinking. ‘Did he fire six shots or only five?’ Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself. But being as this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and would blow your head clean off, you’ve got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?” – Dirty Harry

Maroon,

Pennzoil recovered punitive damages. I do not believe a treble damage award based on a statute would apply to a tortious interference claim. One can be assured that BU will have fine legal team. Among the BU law school grads are lead counsel for some of the plaintiffs who prevailed in the tobacco industry cases.

Somewhat valid, I do agree that ESPN isn’t a truly journalistic entity (though I find it interesting that they like to play both sides of that coin when convenient)

So they are basically Jon Stewart