About the Pac-16: Nevermind

Shit

So the Pac is standing pat at 12, yet Boren (OU) still insists Texas will have to agree to restrictions on the LHN. Looks like Boren has been using his old Democratic Senator skills to play football politics with Texas. What is Texas’ best move now?

Jesus… Conference realignment reminds me of a girl I dated in high school, who would repeatedly announce that she was “ready”, only to back away at the last moment. Does anybody think this conversation won’t be happening again somewhere between 6-18 months from now?

Questions going forward:
1. Does this change the informal agreement between SEC and Mizzou? SEC still needs to get to 14, and who else is there?

2. What school in their right mind would jump on board the Big Algebra train? I’m assuming 8-9 team league is not sustainable, but maybe someone can convince me I’m wrong?

3. Reforms to the Big XII? OU looks pretty stupid right now, which makes me chuckle, but it’s not like they don’t have a point. At minimum Beebe needs to go. Fire him for incompetence, and you can get out of the extended contract I think.

yeh.

i read the explanation over on one of the sooner boards. turns out the game with florida state spooked the pac schools. now they realize they should have let florida state win.

If the Big12-2-1 doesn’t implode this year that seems to pretty well take the wind out of Baylor’s sails.

that thought be the sooners is quite moronic ….as are the Sooners. In addition, Boren is full of shit

Is OU really that scared of the LHN? I thought they were looking into their own network.

And this whole thing is just getting ridiculous. Can we just let the kids play football now?

Tje sound you just heard was OU’s leverage going poof.

Somebody shouldmkickmthe crap out of the aggies for starting this entire thing.

More evidence that expansion for it’s own sake to 16 team conferences isnt desirable by any major conference at present ( especially if they can’t get the main prizes). It’s a version of chicken, no one wants to cause super conferences, no one really wants to be part of a superconference, but no one wants to get stuck with the left overs either.

The reluctant PAC12 members are thinking - heck - we only care about UT, really. And if we don’t like their terms now, they’ll still be there in X months. Maybe the terms from UT will be better then. Maybe not, but all we put at risk is OU which from a TV perspective doesn’t mean much.

Wouldn’t it be interesting if Baylor forced a couple of more years of the Big12-x.

SRR50 - A few questions. How much juice does Baylor have with their lawsuit threats? What can Aggy and/or UT would provide to Baylor to make them less litigious?
- Straight cash
- help from big brothers (and ESPN on behalf of UT) to get slotted in an AQ / super conference when the Big12 breaks up
- commitment to a dance-free zone in central Texas
-?

Boren’s statement in response:

“We were not surprised by the Pac 12’s decision to not expand at this time. Even though we had decided not to apply for membership this year, we have developed a positive relationship with the leadership of the conference and we have kept them informed of the progress we’ve been making to gain agreement from the Big 12 for changes which will make the conference more stable in the future. Conference stability has been our first goal and we look forward to achieving that goal through continued membership in the Big 12 Conference.”

What a dumbass. Better no statement than one where you moronically claim you’d already decided you weren’t interested anyway. Transparent ass-hattery.

I believe that’s the “she must be a lesbian” defense when getting shot down by a hot chick at a bar.

Mr. Orange nails it.

g00ners have egg on their face

sasha, the sooners were happy partners in this until they tested the waters for a sooner network. i gather they had no inkling that there isn’t much demand for one. so, they reset the range finders to shoot down our network. i think they felt certain that their going west would make us go also, and that the pac would pull the wires out of lhn. that would accomplish the task for the sooners.

this has blown up badly for them and for larry scott. i’d like to see a network deal for the sooners, but they wouldn’t be happy unless it was $1 better than ours.

My sentiments exactly

turns out there’s more to the story, i’m learning from that sooner site.

earlier today, the speculation holds, texas capitulated to boren’s demands since we know the jig is up for us. with our total humiliation, the sooners no longer feel the need to leave, so they notified the pac that they wouldn’t be coming. scott asked if it was all right for him to make his announcement to save face. boren and his staff smiled and nodded.

The two telling moments for me yesterday were the Board of Regents keeping the power to switch conferences and Beebe’s statement afterward.

So it’s BYU and what two teams? Does Baylor let aggie go?

Good stuff yeh, good stuff.

Some sooner reporter tweeted we had pissed off one of the most powerful men in the country (Boren), again.

Meanwhile, 325 miles to the South, a college president in a maroon tie slowly shook his head and smiled wistfully as he ran one more possible scenario through his Popeil Modeling, Analysis and Simulation Program.

I made an agreement with Bob that he’d drop 100 on your asses this year instead.

So if I understand the situation correctly, the Pac 12 did not want the Sooners without Texas and Texas did not want the Pac 12 without the LHN. So now the Sooners think that we are going to significantly change the LHN because they aren’t going anywhere?

Damn, this logic thing is harder than I thought.

And someone please tell me again why the President of the University of Oklahoma is one of the most powerful men in the country? Or did they mean “one of the most powerful men in indian country?”

Roach, That was “one of the most powerful men in the county.”

The Cleveland County court clerk is incredibly offended.

Texas needs to begin secret talks with the SEC before OU does. Texas to the SEC could be Deloss Dodds’ Nixon goes to China moment. It’s a great opportunity for Texas to show the pretenders who the alpha dog really is. Forgive OU. Punish A&M mercilessly until the Bowtie Killer and Big Red Byrne have packed up their little maroon wagon and ridden off to Brokeback Mountain.

“The most powerful man in the county” is already on the chuck wagon phone.

From this point forward, the adult at OU, Castiglione, may take over OU’s negotiations.

David Boren learned a truth this week. Without Texas, the presidents in the Pac 12 do not care about his institution. Without changes in the LHN, the presidents in the Pac 12 do not want Texas. Ergo, Boren needs Texas to make changes in the LHN so Texas becomes palatable to the Pac 12 who would then take OU along with Texas.

Too bad Boren has not accepted the idea that Texas really wants to be in the Big 11. If Boren were smart, he would try to excise Oklahoma State (Pac 12 cannot get their heads around the Cow College in Stillwater), roll up Kansas and possibly MIzzou to beg, plead, and cajole an ACC invitation.

For an invitation to a better, richer conference, OU needs Texas. Boren now knows what Castiglione knows. Truth is a difficult lesson to learn.

Although better than some, I don’t think the PAC-12 television strategy is the best long-term. I’m glad Texas stood their ground on LHN. There are ways to broadcast both a conference network and individual school networks in concert. I’m still hopeful that either the Big XII or the next conference Texas is courted by will be clever enough to realize that possibility and see it through, though I don’t know if anyone has floated such an idea in private. Maybe it never happens, but I believe it would be a wildly successful format.

They had a photo in the AAS of William Powers in the Regents meeting monday. He looked like they had taken his toys away, the regents gave him a smackdown.Mack Brown makes a strong statement about staying in the big 12 and tradition, a thumbs up. Dodds has been silent,another smackdown. Not unexpectedly the pack 12 is not expanding. Beebe will get fired, Texas will make some concessions, the big 12 will stay together, Stability and Unity will come before the TX/OK game in Dallas. I would not count out A&M staying in the Big 12. Political power is at work here. There will be some additions to the conference. Seems everyone dicounted the fox network in this deal, Did anybody think the Fox network would stand around and let ESPN take away their marbles?

The Pac-12 doesn’t want to deal with the drama that OU and UT seem to conjure up effortlessly. Surprise, surprise.

News Corp will not be upstaged by ESPN, ESPN was raiding Fox’s hen house. News Corp didn’t like it. Texas got message. The Pack 12 got the message. My guess is the Aggies will get the message soon, considering a Aggie is running for President. Take these observation’s with a grain of humor :)

Translated, that Pac 12 statements really means: We spent some time around the smarmy David Boren and his oily toupee, and frankly, we can’t begin to think about having that ass in our conference."

Regardless of the egg on OU’s face, we should make minor concessions in good faith and rebuild the Big XII to last.

1. Equal sharing of tier 1 and 2 rights.
2. If a conference game is added to the LHN slate, in addition to the one non-conference match-up, then the revenue from that game should be shared.
3. Absolutely no high school sports whatsoever on the network.

4. Try to woo some/all of the following schools: BYU, TCU, ND, WV
5. 40 million dollar exit fee for all schools going forward.

ND will never join any conference as long as the Big East is a viable home for Olympic sports and basketball.

this reminds me of an old adage a really cynical friend of mine used to say.

“a successful marriage is based on a mutual inability to upgrade”

The early talk from some was that OU’s bluster was a concerted effort on their part and ours to try and break up the Big 12 once and for all. If that were true then OU has to be disappointed in being made to look the fool in this. Now if OU made this move, as others speculated, in a moment of pique with Boren telling Castiglione to sit on the sidelines while he made the decisions, then maybe there is hope that Castiglione will be put back in charge of things and we can get back to seeing things as a common cause.

I hope for our sakes its the latter, because this move killed what any unlikely future the Big 12 had of surviving. If OU and we are no longer on the same page and its every man for himself then we lose some leverage by not negotiating as a unit. Plus if the OU and Texas ADs weren’t calling BOR meetings and trying to make OSU and TT palatable to the Pac, we could have been poaching Pitt and courting BYU while perhaps getting ND to park their non-football sports in the Big 12. I suppose we still have a slim chance of getting BYU and maybe ND will continue to explore options for a regular series with us, but we have all but acknowledged that the Big 12 won’t be salvaged and we just lost one of our better pieces of leverage in the process.

Seems like we would be well served by making a run a the football centric schools in the ACC. Let Aggy and the Tigers go SEC. Try to add FSU, VTech, GTech, and Clemson. ACC probably picks up rest of Big East football.

Yes, this scenario is very unlikely. However, the Big Whatever needs to get aggressive for a change.

If we don’t learn from History Channel, we’re doomed to repeat History Channel.

Yes, but still, according to Lou Holtz the departures & conference turmoil are still our fault. Oh, and you got it, he incoherently but fanatically babbled about that on the air the other day when they were talking about the a&m move. Mark May laughed at him though.

First Super Conference, anyone? Roll in the fleeing Big Easters, 9+5, BYU and ND or Air Force, 9+5+2 = 16. The Big XVI. No, the Super 16. OK, the Domers will never go for that. The Big East could even stay the Big East… Division of the Super XVI. You’d have to throw in KU, KSU, and ISU. And the rest could be the Kick-Ass Division. Oh, and move TCU to the Kick-Ass Division.

We’ll see what precipitated all of these events as the LHN moves forward and Beebe’s replacement does or does not iron out some of the perceived (notice the modifier, please) inequities that pushed Colorado, Nebraska, and perhaps AM out the door. If everything remains essentially the same, then Boren’s gambit failed. If Texas and the new Commish, out of the goodness of their hearts, restructure things for the Good of the Big 12 and the Good of College Football in general as we move forward, then we know who blinked.

Mack’s statement pretty much telegraphed for me which of those two scenarios played out, but I could be wrong. Hope I am.

“1. Equal sharing of tier 1 and 2 rights.”

I keep seeing this, or some version of this perplexing idea, and I have no idea how this solution is supposed to placate the two members with the most public demonstrations of wanderlust over the last few weeks. A&M and OU had no problem eating with us at the big boy table, tossing scraps down to the tornado-dodging faction of our conference. How will making all of us eat off the floor in unity quench their desire for toothless banjodom or California dreaming?

And moose is a non sequitur machine.

In other words he didn’t have the nine firm votes he needed, basically because some University Presidents didn’t like the idea of expanding before they play even one season as a 12-team league, they didn’t like the speed with which things seemed to be unfolding, and they didn’t like the unwillingness of Texas to compromise on the LHN.

If you’re listing reasons the PAC wasn’t interested (especially if it was just an OU/OSU deal) I as big a reason as any others was academics. Several of the PAC schools were not at all happy about the prospects of taking on OU/OSU academics, especially if they weren’t getting Texas as part of the deal.

Not too long ago the forgotten 5 were trying to throw money at OU, Texas and A&M. Do we want equal revenue sharing? Hell no. We want to guarantee you $20 million. Which school accepted that generous offer (and threw a hissy fit when the Big 12 tried to pull back)? Texas A&M.

If the Big12-2-1 doesn’t implode this year that seems to pretty well take the wind out of Baylor’s sails.

They have no wind in their sails because there is no lawsuit. What they have is a refusal to promise that there will be no lawsuit if A&Ms departure causes damages, and I still don’t see them giving that up. Releasing someone from all legal liability with no knowledge of what may happen is just stupid.

For example, with A&M the SEC may still decide they need a 14th team, and Mizzou has been rumored to be the one. Obviously the SEC is trying to be careful about that now, but ultimately this could all play out with Mizzou leaving the Big12 just like you did to pursue an SEC invite which might affect TV contracts or cause Big12 instability.

In short, if I’m Baylor I don’t just sign away a release from liability to A&M when there’s nothing in it for me and the chance I might have something to lose. Ultimately you may have to get the SEC to drop their unheard of requirements to let you in. If they don’t then maybe that tells you how much they really want you.

“If we don’t learn from History Channel, we’re doomed to repeat History Channel.”

LOL

I’d really hoped to make a move somewhere, but this may be ok in the medium-term. I think one of DD’s main goals was to bide time and prove/disprove the potential of LHN. If it works, then when we do realign, it becomes an untoucable asset. If it doesn’t, then we’ll be willing to dump it or restructure it in a way that is palatable to other conferences.

In terms of OU’s LHN objections, the only thing I’ve seen that’s specific was (a) we stop broadcasting highlights of high school football, and (b) we “share some of the revenue to show our good faith”. To point a, done, provided that no one else is allowed to do similar on either TV or internet (they’re blurring together). To point b, STFU dumb ass.

A key thing to watch will be what we agree to on the stated 5 year commitment and the exit fees. I hope we do not agree to a 5 year lock. There’s a scenario out there about Tex and ND to the BiG in 2014 (BiG is my first choice), and the 5 year lock would prevent that from happening. A key signal for this scenario is whether ND joins a BiG affiliated hockey conference, a decision for which is past due. So look for that.

I look for us to try to add BYU to replace aggie, and explore TCU. Although the non-event of the Pac expansion may stablize the Big East at this point.

I think aggie wins from this. Baylor’s lawsuit gets the wind knocked out of it. But now aggie is now clearly on the hook for the exit fees.

So now just sit back and wait. Perfect. Let the chips fall. these universities are making moves like crackheads and it’s like they don’t even realize that a lot of marbles are on the table for a long time once these conferences take hold.

Wethorn — is the LHN showing high school football highlights? I have it and haven’t seen any. The Texas Women’s Swim Team hot yoga session was nice, though.

Nunna — I agree with this:
“They have no wind in their sails because there is no lawsuit. What they have is a refusal to promise that there will be no lawsuit if A&Ms departure causes damages, and I still don’t see them giving that up. Releasing someone from all legal liability with no knowledge of what may happen is just stupid.”

If Baylor signs a release, as a lawyer, I’ll be disappointed. SEC needs to nut up and close the deal. Or pay Baylor, Iowa St., et al some significant consideration if they want a release

Now that A&M is leaving, OU is the New Aggy.

Pooooooorrrrrr okies.

Accepting a deal where OU gets to police what we show on the LHN, while also taking money from it, seems pretty far-fetched.

Larry Scott slept they Sooners.

“The Texas Women’s Swim Team hot yoga session was nice, though.”

Damn it! Sounds like another call to DISH network to demand the LHN is in order. I cooled off after the Rice game, but didn’t know what I was missing.

Larry Scott slept they Sooners.

UTLawgrad FTW.

I’d like to see the conference make an actual, aggressive move here. Other than BYU, and maybe TCU, I think that move needs to be to the East. Grab a few schools from the Big East and force ND to act. They don’t need to join the Big XII - and probably won’t - but our conference would give them the best bet for retaining their NBC deal or other 3rd tier rights.

So now all eyes shift once again the Texas A&M and the SEC — and the Baylor lawyers.

And I was beginning to wonder what I was going to do with all this popcorn.

I’m only posting this because the headline picture he found is perfect for this situation, and I don’t know how to just get the picture over here.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/The-Pac-12-takes-a-pass-A-new-realignment-FAQ-?urn=ncaaf-wp6661#remaining-content

turns out ol peter bean nailed it. his realignment post from a couple days ago laid out that tryig to slow it all down was our endgame. deserves a hat tip fo sho.

I think the Big XII should add Arkansas State.

http://www.commoncensus.org/sports_hotspot.php?sport=5

ps. I am not a crackpot

From a Sooner fan, yes, OU looks dumb here. It was being telegraphed yesterday when the “Boren wants changes in the Big 12 structure” stance was revealed. Boren made a huge miscalculation going public without having everything, everything lined up with the Pac 12.

One wonders if OU is now willing/able to ditch OSU and go back the SEC. That would be not be to the obvious advantage of OU. I’ve never understood the SEC’s reluctance to take Missouri and still think that the Tigers have the greatest benefit/cost ratio with joining (2nd tier now, 2nd tier in SEC, much more stable and, longterm, more financially beneficial situation).

OU vs. Missouri this weekend is a nice distraction from this distraction.

Austin Ex:

I didn’t think anyone bought a car for the sticker price, I’m guessing you offer the dealer more than the sticker price just so he likes you a bit more.

I wonder what the SEC gains by adding Oklahoma. It was pretty obvious what they gained by adding ATM: middling to good football school with excellent recruiting ground and lots of TV sets.

OU on the other hand is the exact opposite: excellent football school with no recruiting ground to speak of and few TV sets.

In other words, OU makes the conference tougher but if you’re in the SEC do you really want a tougher schedule?

An absolutely outstanding commentary by Wetzel on this whole business.

Wetzel on Big12

He gives the most unbiased perspective on this I’ve seen. Basically “Texas and the LHN are a big reason for other schools unhappines, but should we really be expected to throw LHN under the bus when we had the foresight and business acumen to create this cutting edge deal”.

The worst feeling in the world if finding out a girl is only dating you to get to your better looking, richer, smarter friend.

Right OU?

Here’s the deal- the SEC already has enough quality games every week to keep all their TV providors happy- they are maximizing TV dollars on the basis of quality of play on the field.

If they add OU their inventory gets a little better I suppose, but what good does it really do them to add an OU v Bama game and at the same time relegate Arky v SC to third tier when the secon tier is happy to pay them for that game. They don’t really make any more money b/c they already have enough quality games to fill make their network partners happy.

Now, they could make games more valuable by adding a better geographic footprint, but adding OU doesn’t do that. Every single bowl game they have played in the last 10 years had worse than average ratings. They are adding quality (but the SEC already has enough of that) and not adding eyeballs to make any deal more lucrative. And, they do all that by being another mouth to feed in revenue reallocation while also making current member institutions less likely to do things like win conference and national titles, which 5 or 6 of their schools really, really, reaaaaaaaaally care about.

For those interested in what went on behind the scenes in the PAC 12’s decision, Wilner at the SJ Merc News has sources he has been speaking to throughout this process. Blames Texas rev demands. As someone above said, will be interesting to see if there are any concessions to OU for staying in conference. If so we know UT blinked, which is in line with the “slow things down” strategy for UT espoused by Peter Bean.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2011/09/20/pac-12-conference-no-expansion/

Also worth a read.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/21/sports/ncaafootball/oklahoma-may-agree-to-remain-in-big-12.html?_r=2&ref=sports

All this leaves me wondering about the SEC’s next move. I still don’t think they’re going to be happy at 13 teams. Huge scheduling problems and divisional inequities. Problem is I think their plans for a 14th team have gotten sidetracked.

I believe the SEC’s main targets for a 14th team were one of the ACC schools outside current SEC territory (maybe VaTech, UVA, or North Carolina school) or West Virginia from the Big East. Problem is I think they wanted to wait until A&M was a done deal to make that move. With the legal hangup regarding A&M dragging things out, the ACC struck first. They greatly strengthened the committment of member schools with both the increased exit fee and the addition of Pitt and Syracuse.

This had the two-fold affect on the SEC of eliminating ACC teams as expansion targets and now taking West Virginia off the board. With the ACC raid the Big East is so precarious that if the SEC were to take West Virginia the league is likely dead (from a football standpoint). This would entail all kinds of legal liabilities just like making a move that would kill the Big12.

So with no Eastern targets for the SEC their only choice is West. Seemingly Mizzou was going to be the 14th team once the Big12 fell apart with the departure of OU. The SEC could then snag MU as a lose part after the Big12 blew up. Funny happened to that plan though….the Big12 didn’t blowup. Now the SEC faces the same problem with inviting Mizzou at this point of risking legal liabilities if Mizzou’s departure starts a new chain reaction that kills the Big12. Thus Mizzou (or any top Big12) program seems off the table for the SEC.

So where do they go for team 14? I don’t see a viable option for them. What do they do then? Commit to dealing with the problems of 13 teams for the long term? Maybe but that could create huge internal strife with percieved inequalities of divisional strengths and scheduling. Does the SEC back off of their A&M invite? Maybe, but A&M actually seems more attainable now than at any time in the last 3 weeks.

I really don’t know what direction the SEC goes, but it will be interesting to see.

Blames Texas rev demands. As someone above said, will be interesting to see if there are any concessions to OU for staying in conference. If so we know UT blinked, which is in line with the "slow things down" strategy for UT espoused by Peter Bean.

I may not be interpreting what you say correctly, but the PAC refusing to meet UT revenue demands (i.e. the LHN) doesn’t constitute UT blinking. Quite the opposite. To me UT’s position was to look at the PAC only as a last resort to not keeping the Big12. We felt in a position of strength that we could make the demands on the PAC and if they refused we were confident they would be refusing OU without us. This would leave OU with no choice but to work things out in the Big12.

I would expect us to make SOME concessions (not necessarily everything) in the interest of trying to reestablish some goodwill in the Big12, but because of the above I again don’t think this constitutes UT “blinking”.

Nunna, you’ve gotten right to the heart of the matter. Conferences know that last night’s announcement notwithstanding, the momentum is still in favor of super conferences, whether that’s actually a good thing or not.

If I had to guess, power brokers in SEC and Big XII should get together, and figure out how to divvy up what’s left. Mizzou still makes the most sense for SEC, and to avoid liabilities, they could assist Big XII in recruiting some replacement teams from Big East. They can’t stay at 13 long term, so unless they’re willing to back off earlier pledges to not go after teams in states where they already have a footprint (and incur potential liabilities along the way), they’re going to have to get creative here.

We’ll see what happens, but I would bet that the only concessions UT will be willing to make are to fire Beebe (we didn’t want him in the first place, although OU did) and possibly agree not to show high school games on the LHN for the time being.

Maybe that will allow OU to save a little face, but I don’t really see where OU has any leverage at all right now.

nunna, we will no doubt make some noisy concessions that the sooners can thump their chest over. we’ll all know it for what it is.

does the sec back off the ag invitation? they don’t need to. in fact that would be bad for sec face. they don’t need to do anything. the requirement for big12 schools to sign waivers prevents anything from happening. this thing will sit and simmer until everybody forgets about it, and it will become just one more aggie joke.

I’m curious Monty, as to where you saw any smackdown of Dodds and/or Powers in this? They are the ones who worked hard to create the LHN and who hold it as dear as any BOR member if not more so. Why didn’t we go to the Pac 12? They wouldn’t take us (which we already knew)unless we basically gave it up which we had no intention of doing. So we are still in the same conference as before, albeit one about a stable as a bottle of nitro on the back of a dirt bike, but with our baby still alive and functioning. While both Doods and Powers may have liked the concept of going West, neither of them wanted to do so without the LHN intact. It’s clear now that the only reason the BOR meeting was held to begin with was to enable Powers to openly join the negotiations with Scott and officially tell him “hell no we won’t go” without LHN. Smack down? Yes to OU but not to Powers or Dodds.

We are right where we have said we wanted to be all along and whether OU or OSU likes it or not, we held the Big 12 together. Why? Because it gives us the time (who knows how long) to let our baby grow, awaiting the next round of craziness in which, as proven here, we will be a major player.

As for Aggy, while there will likely be no lawsuit, I see no incentive why either Baylor or the other two will sign away their rights if for no other reason than to force the SEC to show how much they want Aggy (can you say cash) and/or possibly leave Aggy twisting in the wind. Anyone who doesn’t think Baylor wouldn’t enjoy the latter scenario more hasn’t been paying attention.

The only thing left to debate now is who and how many teams will be brought into the Big 12. I’m sure we’d love to have BYU if for no othe reason than we then wouldn’t be the only school with its own network and by all accounts they are still interested. Louisville and some other Big East school (WVU?) could be possibilities to get is back to 12 if that’s the way all the schools want it.

Finally, Missouri again shits the bed. Apparently they don’t watch the History Channel.

roach, we can’t ‘agree not to show hs games’. we aren’t in control of what the network shows. we can agree to recommend, but that’s all.

I meant to link this first week of the season, but got too busy. Nice looking TCU girl expresses what many of us are thinking about this conference fubar.

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

One more thing, the PAC 12 just negotiated a large TV deal, I’m not sure that adding Oklahoma and really any combination short of UT would have dramatically increased the value of that deal, so unlike the SEC who will get to renegotiate a more valuable deal with the addition of ATM, the PAC has no incentive to expand right now.

After the SEC deal is in place, and assuming it’s a much larger deal than what the SEC currently has, the PAC 12 may decide that it’s worth expansion to be able to renegotiate.

“Nunna Yo Bizness said: September 21st, 2011 at 9:47 am

Blames Texas rev demands. As someone above said, will be interesting to see if there are any concessions to OU for staying in conference. If so we know UT blinked, which is in line with the "slow things down" strategy for UT espoused by Peter Bean.

I may not be interpreting what you say correctly, but the PAC refusing to meet UT revenue demands (i.e. the LHN) doesn’t constitute UT blinking. Quite the opposite. To me UT’s position was to look at the PAC only as a last resort to not keeping the Big12. We felt in a position of strength that we could make the demands on the PAC and if they refused we were confident they would be refusing OU without us. This would leave OU with no choice but to work things out in the Big12.

I would expect us to make SOME concessions (not necessarily everything) in the interest of trying to reestablish some goodwill in the Big12, but because of the above I again don’t think this constitutes UT "blinking"."

Nunna hits it out of the park.

yeh:

I suppose you’re right from a technical standpoint, but the recommendation carries a hell of a lot of weight.

“yeh said: September 21st, 2011 at 10:01 am

roach, we can’t ‘agree not to show hs games‘. we aren’t in control of what the network shows. we can agree to recommend, but that’s all."

The NCAA will be the ultimate arbiter of this matter. If they say it’s not “legal” then it goes away. If not, then we won’t be in control in form, but we will be in substance. I can’t see any reason why ESPN would do it if we strenuously objected. I have no more clue than anyone else whether we would or not.

So will the SEC drop their conditions or will A&M have to go indy for a year? And if A&M goes indy does that even protect the SEC from future lawsuits by Big 12 members? TI is TI even if the precipitating action is more than a single step process, right?

Does anyone remember when the SEC said “We’ve decided not to expand at this time”? And then a week later A&M announced that they were moving?!

Could this be a smoke screen while we look into possible legal roadblocks?

jinx said: September 21st, 2011 at 7:42 am
"The Texas Women’s Swim Team hot yoga session was nice, though."

Damn it! Sounds like another call to DISH network to demand the LHN is in order. I cooled off after the Rice game, but didn’t know what I was missing.

Your day, jinx, I make it.

David Boren said: September 20th, 2011 at 10:54 pm

I made an agreement with Bob that he’d drop 100 on your asses this year instead

I almost pissed my chair on this one. Now that’s good trolling.

i’m just saying that is not a concession that we can make. we don’t have that authority.

does that even protect the SEC from future lawsuits by Big 12 members? i strongly suspect the year of independence thing is just another aggie wish-fact. i’ve seen it stated that there is a two-year statute of limitations on t.i., so the sec may need to start a big egg timer on the last moment they worry they could be guilty of that. which may not have happened yet.

and that’s assuming the sec is most worried about losing a t.i. case. they may be most worried about the subpoena process allowing outsiders to take a look at their business practices, and there is no statute of limitations on that worry.

I’m hearing that Baylor has hired the Provost-Umphrey law firm in Beaumont to represent them in Big XII matters. Walter Umphrey is a Baylor grad and major donor to their law school. The firm scored billions in asbestos, breast implant and tobacco tort cases. It appears Baylor has the juice to make Aggy twist in the wind some if they want to.

so, well, well. where do we find ourselves? we’ve gone through another hubbub, it appears, and maybe once again nothing has happened. or has it?

one thing for sure happened. the sooners had one un-struck match left in their knapsack: the threat to go west, which after last year’s debacle left it thoroughly unclear whether the sooners and cowpokes had the ability to head west on their own. they’ve struck that match and turns out the sulphur was too weak to start a fire.

if we wanted that threat out of the way, that has been accomplished. they sooners may be a lot more amenable than they were even yesterday morning.

take this with a grain of salt

tech is saying that SEC is wanting to invite KU, Mizz, and tt.

We’ll see what happens, but I would bet that the only concessions UT will be willing to make are to fire Beebe (we didn’t want him in the first place, although OU did) and possibly agree not to show high school games on the LHN for the time being.

Powers has already gone public today (been all over sports radio) that Texas would be willing to make some revenue sharing concessions.

t tornado, i think baylor can make that whole scenario go away. we’ve seen enough already from the sec to know they are worried. bringing in the ags’ tv sets, etc, was worth it if it was easy to do. i think we’ve seen they aren’t going to be easy to nab.

my hope is that the ags go independent and play a heavy sec sched the next ten years with only the stipend that bottom-feeders usually get for offering themselves up, and under a debt to the big 12 they will never have the wherewithal to settle. no conference in its right mind would take on a debt-ridden program.

I’m going to post this again for people to read. It isn’t necessarily on point, but it dovetails nicely with the Dan Wetzel article linked above. In fact if you take this blog post and the article together, you see why it is foolish for other schools to demand that Texas give up the network, and why it is foolish of them to blame Texas for everything. Some things, yes. Everything, no.

http://longhornnetworkanddelusion.tumblr.com/

does the sec back off the ag invitation? they don’t need to. in fact that would be bad for sec face. they don’t need to do anything. the requirement for big12 schools to sign waivers prevents anything from happening. this thing will sit and simmer until everybody forgets about it, and it will become just one more aggie joke.

yeh - That’s true. What I could envision is the SEC going to A&M and saying “you should probably go patch things up with the Big12, because that’s gonna be a lot less embaressing than us having to withdraw the invite.”

Cue the aggy trolls in 3, 2, 1…

I’m hearing that Baylor has hired the Provost-Umphrey law firm in Beaumont to represent them in Big XII matters. Walter Umphrey is a Baylor grad and major donor to their law school. The firm scored billions in asbestos, breast implant and tobacco tort cases. It appears Baylor has the juice to make Aggy twist in the wind some if they want to.

“It’s beautiful, man. Beautiful.”

Bruce, that makes no sense! If they haven’t yet given Aggy clearance for takeoff in the absence of Baylor, ISU and KSU not relinquishing the right to sue, then why would they invite these three weak sisters and pretty much guarantee not only a failure to sign away rights, but a surefire legal action by not only Baylor but potentally others.

What they want and what they are willing to do to get it are not necessarily the same things, as they have publicly proven to date. I would however like to know who at Tech is saying it? If it’s some internet poster or reporter, then that’s not “Tech” saying it. If it’s Kent Hance, then that’s another matter indeed! Even then, it would seem like posturing. That worked out well for OU, right?

By the way, grain of salt noted, i.e., none of that was directed at you personally, but at whoever came up with the scenario to begin with.

agree, nunna, that the sec may quietly give the ags some good advice. you and i will never hear a word about it, though, unless the ags who can’t seem to keep their traps shut say something about it.

by the way, i’m betting that tendency for the ags to make lots of noise is one very big reason the sec has taken a second look at having them in their conference. the sec has a longstanding history of omerta that the ags have already violated.

i’m just saying the sec doesn’t have to do anything, and if they are worried the ags won’t go quietly, they may simply do nothing until the problem goes away.

Conferences do not choose Texas A&M. Texas A&M chooses conferences. Whopp!

Nunna posts - “Powers has already gone public today (been all over sports radio) that Texas would be willing to make some revenue sharing concessions.”

You can bet that whatever concessions are made, they will have no negative impact on LHN as a financial vehicle and, more importantly, a branding vehicle, which is what it was mostly intended to be from the get-go and why everyone envies, er, hates, it.

Mental illness does choose aggies.

agree, jake. the concessions we make will be for the sooners to save face. we want them to save face, you know. they’re a better partner that way, and we want that partnership.

by the way, i agree with whoever said the adults are in control in norman today.

regarding the sec giving advice to the ags, i bet it will be in the form of ‘you ought to talk to them’ with no mention of pulling the offer. they won’t need to say that, and it would be incendiary. something the sec would wisely choose to avoid.

hj, go back to your unfinished poor traits of a lay (di).

Jake, yeh - Exactly as you’ve been saying we’re willing to do revenue sharing on the 1st and 2nd tier TV money (we’ve been willing to for some time) but not the LHN revenue.

Texas Revenue Share

Accepting a deal where OU gets to police what we show on the LHN, while also taking money from it, seems pretty far-fetched.

See, I would give every non-academic dollar of the thing to keep it the way it is. They don’t need to do that, but the wise srr points out that OU’s goal is to destroy it. I keep it for nothing if I have to.

A&M is going to enjoy two years of independence.

So far it looks like we’re willing to make the following concessions.

1) No high school games, which the NCAA has already mandated.
2) Equal sharing of 1st and 2nd tier revenue which we’ve been advocating for some time.

I’m guessing we’ll also concede getting rid of Beebe, and some sort of compromise on showing conference games on LHN (maybe sharing some revenue from them).

That certainly doesn’t look like we were the ones backed into a corner, yet it gives OU some things they can claim we gave into them on.

Damn this stuff has been entertaining the last few weeks. It’s like sports crack.

Nunna and Yeh, thanks—-and to those points, here is an excerpt form ESPN’s latest. Your particular attention to Powers’ comments about a new TV deal and Deloss’ comments about the LHN. Also, he openly admits we had already agreed months ago and the Big 12 AD’s (but not the presidents—-hmmmmm) agreed that we’d equally share the 1st and 2nd tier rights which proves Aggy are a bunch of lying tools since (deliciously) this is exactly the structure the SEC has, i.e., first and second equally; third—-you’re own your own. Also looks like Castiglione has been released from protective custody by OU, which is a good thing, IMO. Here it is:

“Texas president William Powers told reporters in Austin, Texas, on Wednesday that staying in the Big 12 was the top priority and was open to a new revenue-sharing plan. Powers said that reworking media contracts was a way to create stability.

“There are methods of doing that, including the way media deals are structured and we’ll be working with our partners in the Big 12 and our media partners to structure something that has stability,” Powers said.

But Texas athletic director DeLoss Dodds says Texas doesn’t want to share the money from its Longhorn Network, a 20-year, $300 million deal with ESPN.

Dodds said Big 12 athletic directors months ago approved Texas’ offer to equally share other media revenue around the league. He says the plan has not been voted on by league presidents.

Oklahoma athletic director Joe Castiglione said in a statement that he supported his school’s decision to stay in the Big 12. Sooners football coach Bob Stoops also expressed his desire to stay in the conference.

“I’m very pleased that we’re staying in the Big 12 Conference and appreciate the opportunity to work very closely with president (David) Boren throughout the decision-making process.”

Expansion also will be on the table for the presidents, the source said, with the three likely candidates BYU (Independent in football/West Coast Conference in other sports) and Big East schools Louisville and West Virginia. Those were three of the five schools that the Big 12 athletic directors were charged to call when Texas A&M announced it was leaving.

Pittsburgh and Arkansas were the other two but the Panthers are joining the ACC and Arkansas isn’t leaving the SEC.

But the source said the league wouldn’t ever rule out current Big East member Rutgers, either. The Scarlet Knights may not have a natural home if the ACC decides not to expand beyond 14. Multiple sources said the ACC would want Notre Dame and then Connecticut first if it were to expand beyond 14. The Fighting Irish have maintained that they want their independence in football and at this juncture they don’t have to join a conference.

The Kansas Board of Regents on Wednesday moved up the time of a scheduled executive session to discuss the future of the Big 12 Conference, and how any changes would affect Kansas and Kansas State.

Regent chairman Ed McKechnie said the board would meet Wednesday afternoon instead of Thursday because of the pace of discussions taking place throughout the conference at various levels

“Our priority is to have Kansas and Kansas State be together in the Big 12,” McKechnie said. "It appears that we are making great progress toward that.

“I think the Big 12 is the best place for KU and K-State to be, and I hope that we are on the cusp of that happening.”

The source also said the presidents may at least inquire to see if Texas A&M would be willing to stay under new conditions. That would seem like a reach, based on the Aggies’ public desire to join the SEC and the SEC’s vote to accept the Aggies as a 13th member.

Something similar is occurring in the Mountain West where the league is at least seeing if TCU would be willing to stay if the Big East doesn’t remain together as a football conference."

WTF! Where is Jesus with his reports?

you know, the funny thing about this equal-revenue stuff supposedly making conferences stable is that the schools we’ve lost and been threatened to lose, by and large, were schools making more than the average in this conference. you would think it would be the schools being hurt that would be looking to leave.

that leaves me with the idea that the upper schools here that complain about equal sharing don’t want to share equally with the little guys, they just want equal sharing with us.

A&M is going to the SEC. This speculation about going Indy or crawling back to the B12-2-1 is hilarious. Baylor can sue, but they have no case. This should all be resolved shortly.

magana, i think jesus may be cross with us.

should all be resolved . . .

Bob, your point is well made, but makes me wonder whynwe weren’t interested in working something out with PAC. If it’s about revenue, stay in the Big XII. If it’s about branding, was it an absolute deal breaker to share the revenue but keep the logo?

" I keep it for nothing if I have to."

Agree, Bob. The beauty is that we don’t have to, right?. What will be even sweeter is getting a second school, BYU, in the league that also has its own network, which looks immenintly doable.

I wonder how Beebee’s firing (or removal from life support, to be technically correct) will be blamed on us? You know someone will find a way, right?

Ah, West Virginia. The school that was able to get Noel Devine enrolled.

that was a good article, jake. thanks for sharing.

i agree with bob. the thing is more valuable than the money it brings in. that said, i agree with deloss. we’re keeping the money, too.

Just saw Scipio and Jesus’s faces on a milk carton. Has anyone checked the hospitals?

Nick, the fact that we are only agreeing to share first and second tier revenue, and some amount from big 12 football games if they’re on LHN, which we are already doing with KU and which only makes sense or why would the other team agree to it, is your answer. Conversely, in the Pac they are sharing all revenues equally from their new TV deal for for first and second tier and from the regional networks for third tier games as well. We were willing to do it for tiers 1 and 2, but not for the LHN, which represents third tier rights only. And it’s clear that we aren’t about to do it in the Big 12. Keep in mind that all revenue from the LHN is third tier unless a Big 12 team agrees to put a football game on it and the other members approve it. Also by definiton, all sports other than football and men’s basketball are third tier by definition as I’m sure you know.

Tell A&M that if they will pay the exit money we will let them back in the Big 12. Tell OU to pay their exit money and we will give them a license to recruit in Texas (after we have all our commitments in) but they have to leave.

Conferences do not choose Texas A&M. Texas A&M chooses conferences. Whopp! [emphasis added]

This is the best thing since, “You are an idoit.”

2) Equal sharing of 1st and 2nd tier revenue which we’ve been advocating for some time.

Ha, methinks this “compromise” hurts OU worse than Texas.

After all, we have the 300 million from the LHN. And they still have to share their revenue equally with K-State, and ISU.

On the good side, people can quit bitching about how greedy we are.

This is the second time we have essentially held the Big 12 together.

Is it coincidence that Mack Brown urged keeping the Big 12 one day and shortly thereafter we read: “A Big 12 source confirmed the report and said that after a few days in which it seemed as if the conference would break up, optimism about holding it together had returned.”? I think not.

Speaking of Jesus it’s certainly been interesting how quiet Castiglione has been the last three weeks as Boren was trying to push OU out the door, and Stoops was talking up going on without Texas. Now that OU to the PAC is dead suddenly Castiglione is talking again.

Anyone remember about 3 weeks ago when Jesus mentioned Castiglione wanting to work with Texas but Boren (and to some extent Stoops) being at odds with that approach and maybe pushing JC aside in favor of their agenda. Several Sooners came on this board and said that was ludicrous, that all three were great together and on the same page. Hmmm…maybe they weren’t, and maybe Jesus once again knew of what it is he talks about.

“The source also said the presidents may at least inquire to see if Texas A&M would be willing to stay under new conditions. That would seem like a reach, based on the Aggies’ public desire to join the SEC and the SEC’s vote to accept the Aggies as a 13th member.

Something similar is occurring in the Mountain West where the league is at least seeing if TCU would be willing to stay if the Big East doesn’t remain together as a football conference."

Damn, I completely overlooked the Aggy paragraph on my first read of the article. So all of the Big 12 schools can possibly “inquire” whether Aggy will accept a revenue sharing deal that is exactly like the SEC model to stay? Gotta love that! It at least removes the “lipstick on a pig” excuse they gave for leaving and puts it squarely where it belongs—-jealously and money, pure and simple.

As far as the last paragraph, I hope the Frogs have a soft landing. They are playing excellent football and I’ve never had any trouble talking football with any of their fans in person. In fact, I’m attanding an investment meeting Thursday sponsored by a guy who is a good friend of mine that played some pretty good DB there back in the day.

A&M will get into the SEC — and we won’t play them for quite a while.

roach, we can’t ‘agree not to show hs games‘. we aren’t in control of what the network shows. we can agree to recommend, but that’s all.

Trust me, we have veto power over subjects that could incur the wrath of the NCAA.

Bob, your point is well made, but makes me wonder whynwe weren’t interested in working something out with PAC. If it’s about revenue, stay in the Big XII. If it’s about branding, was it an absolute deal breaker to share the revenue but keep the logo?

The Pac was going to get its way. The Pac wasn’t going to permit the LHN brand to continue. It was going to change the name and add Pac (read: Tech) content. It was going to be assimilated. The carrot of “You can keep the extra money” was going to be worthless because a Texas/Tech channel wasn’t going to be special — the money wouldn’t be there. And even if it were, the brand was what made the thing special.

A&M is going to the SEC. This speculation about going Indy or crawling back to the B12-2-1 is hilarious. Baylor can sue, but they have no case. This should all be resolved shortly.

Problem is the SEC didn’t say we’ll take you as long as there are no strong legal cases against you. They said only if there are NO legal issues. Just the continued threat of a lawsuit, whether you think they have a case or not, meets that criteria.

As you say, maybe it will be resolved shortly, but the only short term resolution I see is for the SEC to back off of their requirements. My guess is that’s what will happen. Maybe you can pay off Baylor and the others somehow, but ultimately the only thing that shows how bad the SEC really wants you is whether they will drop the stipulations and accept you with whatever potential liabilities that might bring.

first i’ve heard that we have veto power. i had heard we could remove a personality from the show who clashed with us, but i wasn’t aware of veto power over content. that said, i’m certain the espn people would do handstands to avoid ncaa trouble and maybe to keep us happy, but my suspicion was that we could only suggest content.

witness dd saying we wanted to show high school games that were of interest to the general public in texas, not games that might specifically benefit us. then the espn dud(e) said what he said.

another thing. i was reading over on the shag and something was said that made me wonder if the sec might have been more amenable to offering the two okie schools had they not been burned last year by colorado. they clearly took colorado to head off any talk of baylor taking colorado’s place in the big move, and then when it didn’t happen, they were stuck with the buffs. had that not happened, i wonder if they might have been more adventurous with the okie schools.

the old ‘fool me once’ thing.

Hey, has anyome heard from Gay lately? Sorry, but I couldn’t resist.

Also, the usually thoughtful, non-troll Sooners like Nate have been pretty quiet and I’d sincerely like to get their thoughts on all of this. Maybe it was the server issues keeping them away although quigley has weighed in above on this thread.

srr, I agree with you that Aggy will leave, but how do you see it playing out? It doesn’t make much sense for Baylor to sign away its legal rights, even if they have no intention at this point to sue without some “consideration”. For one thing, the other schools in the Big 12 can’t legally force them to. Also, it would seem to establish a precedent that Starr wouldn’t care for. And not to be overlooked is the mutual hatred between the two. Is it your opinion that the SEC will finally just say, “damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead”, have Aggy pay them off, or what?

" The Pac was going to get its way. The Pac wasn’t going to permit the LHN brand to continue. It was going to change the name and add Pac (read: Tech) content. It was going to be assimilated. The carrot of "You can keep the extra money" was going to be worthless because a Texas/Tech channel wasn’t going to be special — the money wouldn’t be there. And even if it were, the brand was what made the thing special. "

That’s it. Also, UT is only interested in the PAC as a fall back plan right now. Joining the PAC was not their first best option.

Dang, Jake — Rutgers? We’re talkin’ Rutgers?!

Exposure to the NYC/NJ market would be nice if viewers actually tuned in Rutgers football. Exposure to recruits in that region would be a nominal benefit, IMO.

At this point, the first criteria for adding schools to the mortally-wounded Big XII should not be whether a program brings market; we need some Strength-Of-Schedule insurance for departures of MO and farmer.

Louisville’s football program would likely improve in a BCS conference; they also would be an asset for basketball, and the location isn’t horrible. Louisville I understand.

WestVa = suitable replacement in terms of SOS for MO and homo, and road games to Morgantown would seem familiar (stadium crowds missing full sets of teeth). WV would initially be a boost for basketball, but would that program fall off if no longer in the Big East?

BYU brings market and a nice SOS replacement.

But Rutgers? Gimme TCU or Boise St. before Rutgers.

what baylor might do.

i can’t envision baylor or the others signing a waiver. that would be stupid. but they might informally promise not to sue unless something a lot more damaging were to become known. maybe that would be enough for the sec. also maybe promise not to sue slive regardless.

I think Baylor will back off because we (the Big 12) ask them to. A&M is gone, let them go and move on. We have bigger fish to fry at this point, and Baylor is still taken care of for the near future.

Yeh, I don’t see it as a contractual or legal thing as much as a practical business thing. You never want to be in a contract with someone that you believe will be broken, and you don’t want to force something down a partner’s throat that would make them less marketable just because you have the contractal right to do so, the NCAA notwithstanding.
Whether we have the legal power to veto it or not, it makes no sense for ESPN to put UT into a position that potentially damages the realtionship if we have good and valid business and reputation-based reasons to “recommend” that they not do it.

Not a lawyer, just my $.02.

By the way, I don’t believe the ESPN guy who stirred up that shitstrom has been heard from for a while, but I may have missed it.

I think Baylor will back off because we (the Big 12) ask them to. A&M is gone, let them go and move on. We have bigger fish to fry at this point, and Baylor is still taken care of for the near future.

Sorry, but if I’m Baylor I’m thinking “promises, promises”. They’ve heard promises before just a year ago about commitments to the conference. They still have no assurance that things won’t fall apart again the day after they sign that waiver. They can give assurances that they won’t sue if nothing happens over the next 18 months or some such, but that doesn’t technically meet the SEC requirements. Baylor would be insane though to flat out sign a waiver given the recent history of backpeddling and changing minds in this league.

By the way, I don’t believe the ESPN guy who stirred up that shitstrom has been heard from for a while, but I may have missed it.

I think he’s been transferred to the University of Alaska ESPN network.

As long as the BCS structure remains, we would do better to stay at 10. If we do expand back to 12, only four teams would be attractive. TCU, BYU, Utah, and Boise.

With 5 teams in the top 25 right now, a Big 12 conference disbanding would be a horrifically stupid move. The Aggies should realize this and get over it…..They need to leave their GI Joe’s and Hot Wheels here instead of throwing them all in a laundry basket and hauling them over to the SEC just to show us they are too big boys….huhruhmf.

As for us, we’d better cherry pick the Mountain West and WAC soon if we are going to do it. Otherwise the Big East is already on it…..and we’ll be grovelling to Houston and SMU with some nostalgic pitch about getting the SWC band back together.

btw-Has anyone phoned Arkansas or Georgia to see how they are feeling about their “super” conference? Why is the SEC so untouchable? Why are they getting a pass in this? I’m a strong believer in “excuse me? f*ck me? no, no, no, f*ck you”

…….I’m ready for the Big 16….haters can hate.

See, I would give every non-academic dollar of the thing to keep it the way it is.

That wouldn’t be a prudent business decision.

Texas won on the (Red) River card. OU is left w/ only a few chips, while UT has a big stack.

If I were one of TPTB at UT, the only way I’d be willing to share money from the LHN is if the rest of the conference agrees to allowing the LHN televise more Big 12 FB games (only those involving Texas, of course). Otherwise, what’s in it for UT???

By allowing more FB games on the LHN, then maybe we’ll finally solve this distribution problem.

btw-Has anyone phoned Arkansas or Georgia to see how they are feeling about their "super" conference?

As to the former, that’s already been done. They aren’t interested, especially now that A&M has opened the door into TX for them.

As to the latter, are you kidding?

Abe with all due respect, wtf? Where did I mention Rutgers? It was in the article I cut and pasted, which I did for pretty much everything in it except that part of the piece and I never referenced agreeing with that piece in any way. As for a 10th member, I’ve put BYU at the head of any lists I’ve ever talked about. I hope that clears it up for you.

Besides, I’m also not sure we’ll go to 12 unless and until we get our house completely in order. But if we do, I think Louisville is a good option, just as you do. The 12th option, as you pointed out, is murkier and , just to make sure you understand, Rutgers would be a bad choice, IMO, but not as bad as TCU, who brings nothing to the table financially that we don’t already have, even though I like them otherwise. We already control the DFW market and, as well as they’re playing, they can barely sell out their very small stadium. I’d be intrigued with the Boise thing, but again, where’s the money?
???

btw-Has anyone phoned Arkansas or Georgia to see how they are feeling about their "super" conference? Why is the SEC so untouchable? Why are they getting a pass in this? I’m a strong believer in "excuse me? f*ck me? no, no, no, f*ck you"

Actually those kind of calls have been made. I believe it was the Arky AD who went on record saying he had been contacted by the Big12 about coming over before Boren started all the OU to the PAC furor. Arky politely declined.

Saltshaker, the day Texas or the Big 12 grovels to Cougar High or SMU will be the day Satan starts lacing up his ice skates.

Thanks for the link Spider. I will view that in my “spare time”

Thanks also to srr for starting this post. I was trying to keep up on the Shag, but with all of the monkeys flinging shit, it was hard to keep up.

While there is intelligent hypotheses and analysis on Shaggy, it is much more condensed here, and I don’t have to wade through the bullshit.

I’m happy with the status quo and can’t wait to see what happens to the Aggies.

OU get their spin machine cranking …..

http://newsok.com/article/3606281

Sorry, but if I’m Baylor I’m thinking "promises, promises". They’ve heard promises before just a year ago about commitments to the conference.

They will be made an offer they can’t refuse.

Baylor has no real position of strength — except to cause a PR firestorm. I have yet to talk to a lawyer who truly believes they could win any such suit — but they could create a helluva nuisance for A&M and the SEC.

They have nowhere to go. The Big East? It is falling apart and will eventually drift out of BCS contention. The Big 12 is their one real hope of staying relevant. They will understand that they need to play along to get along.

Peace, Jake — I directed my post to you to get your thoughts, as I knew you had pasted excerpts from the article but did not provide your own commentary. I know you weren’t encouraging the pursuit of the Scarlet Knights.

My overriding point is that “bringing TV market” can no longer be the one-size-fits-all #1 filter for the Big XII in terms of evaluating future candidates, especially if BYU is likely to come on and bring the Utah/Mormon eyeballs. The equally important concern — assuming we definitely lose Tiger and Aggie nations — should be making sure we buttress the strength of teams on the field as much as on the tube.

In that regard, TCU should be a candidate if we aim for 12 teams. If we only add two, me likey BYU and Louisville — they provide better-than-average market (size of alumni and fan base in attractive markets) and SOS quality.

Nunna: I may be proven wrong, but I don’t expect waivers to be signed. But if the SEC goes ahead, nothing will happen.

It’s up to the SEC to let the Aggies in, IMO.

I’m coming around on TCU. I still think they’re purple Baylor, but if that’s what they need to get to 12 and that’s what they want to do, do it.

Nunna - I think Baylor’s made their point. They reserve their right to sue unless they sign a waiver. They can freely sign A&M’s and feel they’ve made it clear to others that they may not sign waivers in the future.

And incidentally? This serves no purpose other than self-aggrandization but…

Called it.

yeh said:
i’m just saying the sec doesn’t have to do anything, and if they are worried the ags won’t go quietly, they may simply do nothing until the problem goes away.

“We fixed the glitch.”

Thanks anyway NYB, I’m sure they’ve already tried all types of scenarios. Jake, I’d hate to see that day.

srr - I can certainly see Baylor being convinced to give assurances they won’t sue if nothing happens in the foreseeable future. But if I’m associated with Baylor I would consider it flat out negligent for the President to actually sign a waiver with no absolute guarantees of what might unfold and the poor bargaining position Baylor is in if the league falls apart. Furthermore, if the Big12 coerced me to sign a waiver and “shit happened” it seems like Baylor could instead sue us for coercion.

bigger fish to fry at this point

we certainly do, but it may be tough to get baylor to feel that way. after all, we had them talked into it at one point. and i’ve yet to see an attorney on any of the boards i haunt who would advice signing such a thing. best thing is to convince the skittish sec that nobody is going to be going through their drawers.

practical business thing

oh, i agree, jake, but i was questioning whether this was something we could negotiate. you can’t offer what you don’t have.

varsity, i think ou invented spinning.

Jake you were curious about my comment saying Power’s got a smackdown from the Board of Regents, He did, they gave him no power in this matter other than approval to stay in the Big 12. I believe the photo in the AAS article is very telling. If he had been given the power Oklahoma’s head man had we would be gone right now to a Pac 16. I believe Powers wanted the move that bad. He aches to rub elbows out west. Mack Browns comments about staying in the Big 12 is very telling also. Brown is a by the books Longhorn, he does not say anything out of line. I knew the deal was dead after his press conference. I believe Mack was speaking the Regents viewpoints, and they did not mesh with Power’s or Dodd’s view of a PAC 16. As far as the Pac16 turning us down it was because we were not going in the first place, i believe the Regents made that clear to Powers, Powers told Mr. Scott. This is just my opinion on how things went down. I think Texas will compromise on the LHN. Something along the lines of giving the Big12 20% of the LHN in return of the other schools sharing 20% of their extra network revenues with the League.. We may see something like that. The Aggies may not be leaving, Boone Pickens saying the Aggies are about to sober up, may be a sign of things to come.

yes, nunna. nobody who claims to be an attorney has said in his or her wildest imagination that (s)he might ever recommend a client sign something like that. that’s nuts to ask for that. the sec just has to take their chances and hope that baylor is a happy camper.

Please dear God…tell me aggy is STILL going to leave. Please. I’ll never do anything bad again!

“I’m coming around on TCU. I still think they’re purple Baylor, but if that’s what they need to get to 12 and that’s what they want to do, do it.”

Me too, if only because of the other available options. But at this point I’d rather just add BYU and stop there.

monty, i’m hoping that’s wrong. we all need the ags to be someone else’s problem.

nice, s-ghost.

We don’t want the Big 12 to expand to 12 teams. We like 10 just fine — a full round-robin, and no conference championship game — which should tell you all you need to know as to how we really feel about the long-term viabilty of this league.

Boise State coming to the Big 12. Don’t think so. Chris Peterson could be our next head coach.

Someone above mentioned the need to bolster the SOS for the conference, and that is the main reason I could see adding TCU. Their current status is strong and should stay that way for a while. I agree with BiH that they are a purple Baylor (in attendence I assume) but they could bolster the perception of the league.

Besides, adding them in would increase their attendance for games with OU and Texas and likely Tech and OSU.

Not sure of any past transgressions that would keep them out like SMU or Houston, but I seem to remember that they were fond of paying their players during the final days of the SWC. I also remember building a healthy hatred for them as they ran laps around our basketball court after a win in 95 or 96, but that’s OK.

You would have to think they would jump at the offer.

oops. advise earlier.

I believe Mack was speaking the Regents viewpoints, and they did not mesh with Power’s or Dodd’s view of a PAC 16.

The LHN is a very important part of Dodd’s legacy, he would never be on board with any kind of move that would have castrated the channel.

srr, the thing i don’t like about ten is we have no buffer. somebody else goes aggie on us and we have a problem. otherwise i absolutely agree.

agree about dodds, too. he’d never compromise the network.

We don’t want the Big 12 to expand to 12 teams. We like 10 just fine — a full round-robin, and no conference championship game — which should tell you all you need to know as to how we really feel about the long-term viabilty of this league.

I think it’s less about the long-term viability of the Big 12 & more about wanting an easier road to a BCS bowl, especially the BCS title game.

The fact that Mack was batting .500 in the Big championship game is a factor.

I would see taking TCU or Boise as a SOS move rather than a market share move…sort of like taking OU in a major conference. If you want to increase your SOS you invite them, if you want to increase your bottom line it probably isn’t worth it because they really increase your SOS! That said, I don’t think we have an SOS problem.

The Big 12’s problem is that outside of OU and Texas it doesn’t have traditional powers anymore. It doesn’t matter if OSU, Tech, or Baylor goes 10-2 and beats either OU or Texas they still aren’t as ‘strong’ as a 5-7 Georgia team who only beats Vandy and Ole Miss in conference. Nebraska was weak for most of the Big 12’s existence but people respected the name even when they couldn’t make a bowl game. The conference is plenty strong competitively as the rankings show.

boo

Another issue with TCU or Boise, is what happens when they play a full BCS schedule year after year? Both teams have made a name for themselves by winning a couple of big games each year and then playing 10 or 11 mediocre to pathetic teams. Baylor, ISU, Kansas and A&M maybe weak in most years, but they still provide a beating on your players that New Mexico State and Idaho don’t provide. What happens if after a couple of years those teams you brought in to increase your SOS actually turn out to be 5- to 7-win teams that just suck up revenue and no longer provide any punch? There are also no guarantees either Coach P hangs around just because their school gets called up to the big leagues.

Jake, I know you keep asking where is the money on these other teams getting invites to the Big 12, TCU/Boise what do they bring to the table? They bring good football, good football brings money. Put a good product out, networks will pay. People all over the nation watch Boise, because they are a giant killer. If you want the Big 12 as a viable money making league you have to put a good product out. whats in it for the Longhorns? More than playing in half empty Rose Bowl stadiums in the USC conference.

srr, the thing i don’t like about ten is we have no buffer. somebody else goes aggie on us and we have a problem. otherwise i absolutely agree.

This is exactly what bothers me about it as well. In this era where every healthy conference is expanding, going to divisions, and so on, standing pat at 10 leaves a feeling and perception that the conference isn’t healthy and is just waiting for the next shoe to drop.

Well said, Monty. Was having trouble articulating that point.

Ricky — to counter the risk that Boise might fall flat in a “real” conference, don’t forget that they’d also boost their recruiting in a BCS conference, likely negating a tougher SOS.

standing pat at 10 leaves a feeling and perception that the conference isn’t healthy and is just waiting for the next shoe to drop.

The truth sometimes hurts.

srr, yeh, Nunna - I’ll third the call for more schools than 10. If anything, the legal threat by Baylor et al. if we should move gets much more manageable if we’re leaving a viable conference in our wake.

I say, bring on the Big East in football and add BYU, and it’s 16 teams. Don’t pod it; make it divisional, so we’re mostly playing teams in our neighborhood. That should withstand a couple of posible near-term defections from UCONN or Rutgers to the ACC or Big Ten, and still leave us with room to leave at a later date. And the basketball would be exquisite. Barnes is a Big East coach at heart.

If someone else were to bolt, (someone not named Texas or OU) we’d just add a TCU/Air Force-caliber school to get back to 10. This isn’t long term anyway.

Monty, you aren’t saying anything substantially different than what I’m saying other than that you are spinning it, for some reason, as the UT BOR slapping Powers, its very visible and respected President, and Deloss dodds, its equally visible and respected AD, in the face. Why?

Unless Scott, the media, the BOR, Powers and Dodds are all lying, your contention that we simply turned down the Pac doesn’t have any basis in fact at all. We didn’t need a BOR meeting to do simply turn them down. Powers obviously went to the Pac 12 with the LHN as a poison pill. Had they accepted such pill, which would have been a miracle, there may have been a different outcome, but the chances of that were somewhere between slim and none, and Dodds, Powers and the BOR knew it. I simply don’t get the obvious disrespect for Powers (and Dodds) that you are harboring, nor do I believe the BOR would have done that to him. Again, why would they? They could have just publicly told the Big 12 no without doing it, Capice? You are right about Mack’s statements, but again, why would the BOR “smack down” someone of Powers reputation and position at our University when they only had to issue a staement saying that we were staying put?

We called OU’s bluff and they lost. We knew the chances of Scott’s members taking them or T. Boone U without us were thin at best so we put a proposition to them that would have given us everything we wanted if successful that had minimal risk of failure. Mack’s comments were icing on a cake we knew wasn’t going to get baked.

As for Aggy “sobering up”, they’ve already responded to T.Boone Pickens who hasn’t been right about a damned thing since this whole mess started. They are leaving. We aren’t going to give up anything like what you are specualting from LHN because we already agreed to an even split of first and second tier revenues, which is in all the media coverage of this today. In fact, we agreed to it moths ago and the Big 12 AD’s agreed. Will we split revs with a the big 12 for sny Big 12 games shown, yes, but that’s not anything we aren’t already doing.

Scipio Tex has to do a parody of the Oklahoma State Board of Regents meeting that was scheduled for TODAY.

We’re cool, Abe and peace to you as well. I hope you can see how I misunderstood, but apologies just the same. And I appreciate your solicitinging my thoughts, which don’t appear to differ much from yours.

I just hope Dodds legacy someday says he made the right moves. I know the LHN is his baby, if it works out, Dodds will have something big named after him at UT. But It could be the Trojan horse that destroys a hundred years of Texas tradition, in that case it would be a failure from this fans perspective. A mans good name is not determined by dollars.

That article out of Oklahoma about how OU/OSU wanted to keep the Big 12 together all along is absolute horseshit! If that were the case don’t you think OU would have provided a list of demands days before the PAC announcement rather than hours?!

They overplayed their hand, plain and simple, and it’s funny to see them try and talk their way out of it.

Abe, ask Baylor how the call up to the big time worked out for them. There are no guarantees that Boise or TCU continues their run, especially the minute their current coach leaves. It took Kansas and Missouri a while to get their Texas pipelines going and for Kansas the success seems to have been eaten by Mangino on his way out. I am not sure Boise is going to be a preferred destination for recruits. TCU would have the better chance due to location and the fact they are already successfully getting great players out of their backyard.

That said, I still think the Big 12’s problems have nothing to do with quality of competition, unfortunately I don’t think the teams that are poachable bring enough to the table to overcome the better long term potential that the other big conferences can offer to us and OU.

Pounds, I agree. OU’s little tantrum cost us any hope of perhaps getting Pitt into the fold. While getting Pitt wouldn’t have been a real knock out move, it would have put the Big 12 on firmer footing and all of that is now compromised by this attempted flight which we seemed to have at least abetted to some degree.

Fellas, unfortunately It is all about money and football product comes along for the ride if it’s there, but it isn’t necessary. Conference expansion is all about increasing your media footprint into bigger TV markets and recruiting areas that you don’t already have. The SEC taking Aggy is Exhibit A-Z. They now have, at a minimum, Houston TV’s, a stronger East Texas recruiting potential with little competitive risk. Win-win for them and stupid move by Aggy. Houston is bigger than any TV market in the SEC except for Atlanta. Think the SEC wants Aggy for any other reason? I have my doubts. Also, if it was about football product over money, OU and Okie Lite would be packing their bags for the Left Coast (or possibly for the SEC) as we speak.

Do I like that? Hell no! Would I like to have TCU in a conference with us? Hell, yes! As I said, I like and respect them and their fanbase. But I don’t see it happening unless we have nowhere else to turn. Remember, there are still a lot of schools in the Big 12 who don’t reminisce about the good old SWC days. Why would OU let TCU in? The Metroplex is and has been a primary recruiting stronghold in Texas, and they’d be surrendering a conference affiliation to a school that can’t fill up a 45,000 seat stadium smack dab in the middle of that if TCU came in.

Boise State. Like’em. Respect ‘em. Ain’t happening!

monty, you want to talk about a real rivalry, don’t talk us and the ags. talk us and arkansas.

when i was a pup we had two big games every year and both were barn-burners. switzer held forth (not to mention holding his assts’ wives) in okieland and broyles was a legend in fayetteville. now, those were rivalries. the lukewarm, tinkertoy thing with the ags has never approached that kind of significance, even when jackie fedex was blowing their whistles.

when arkansas left, we cut ties with them, and in no time it was ‘sooey, who?’ we won’t miss the ags.

OU/OSU wanted to keep the Big 12 together all along

that may be bogus balonius, but i hope the sooner faithful embrace it.

This thing is not over. OU has one more play. They can go groveling to the SEC. IThey wanted the invite to the PAC-12 bad as they didn’t want to be in a conference with the longhorn network. If the don’t get the concessions that they want they could always threaten an OU move. Culturally OU is closer to an SEC school than a PAC-x school. I expect to see them do this bu nit go through

For those of you who don’t think that Baylor has any kind of a chance in a lawsuit, I would suggest that you go and look up the Pennzoil / Texaco case which dealt with a tortious interference case. Texaco sued Pennzoil for tortious interference in Texaco’s attempt to buy Getty Oil. Everyone pretty much said that Texaco didn’t have a case, but in a Texas court of law, they won. Part of that was based upon Joe Jamail (UT Alum) talking about what exactly is the value of a handshake.

All I’m saying, is that you never know how these things are going to shake out. Strange things happen when they get into a court of law.

Reality is a bitch ain’t she? From Ghost of BIG Roy at BON:

DeLoss Dodds: Continuing Texas-Texas A&M Rivalry “Problematic”
 by GhostofBigRoy on Sep 21, 2025 11:55 AM PDT in Conference Realignment

In a meeting with a select group of reporters on Wednesday, Texas athletic director DeLoss Dodds held forth on a variety of topics only hours after the Big 12 managed to avoid dissolution for the second year in a row, including the Longhorn Network, revenue sharing in a league held together by duct tape and elbow grease, and the possible continuation of the historic Texas-Texas A&M rivalry.

Of greatest concern to most Texas fans is whether or not the Longhorns will continue to play the Aggies on Thanksgiving if/when A&M makes the move to the SEC conference. Though the league will likely make last-ditch efforts to keep A&M in the Big 12, Dodds sounded resigned to the possibility of losing the Aggies:

“In my mind, they’re in the SEC (already). People feel OK with that. A lot of people wish they were still here, but they’ve moved on.”

The comment grabbing the most headlines around the country concerned the continuation of the rivalry:

“I think it will be hard to schedule that game.”

When news of the Aggies potentially leaving the conference first broke, there were rumors of the SEC allowing A&M to keep that Thanksgiving date open to continue playing Texas. In the end, this is more about Dodds making it extremely clear to the Aggies that if A&M wants to get away from Texas so badly, there will likely be consequences. Threatening the existence of a league that, despite some considerable problems, still makes the most sense for each member institution doesn’t come without costs and it looks like at least the short-term existence of the rivalry is in jeopardy as a result. This is the consequence of pledging solidarity and then trying to leave a year later.

Dodds also pointed out that the athletic directors approved equal revenue sharing for the conference’s Tier 1 and Tier 2 rights last spring, but the presidents never took action. Expect that to happen soon. Regarding the Longhorn Network, Dodds still sounded willing to make some compromises, which may have to include promises not to televise high school games or highlights.

The best comment of the day from Dodds could rival his famous “We are the Joneses” brilliance:

“We are who we are. People say what they say. The outcome is the outcome. We’re proud of ourselves.”

Haters gonna hate, but excuse us, we have to get back to counting our money

BTW, I think I screwed that up, I think Pennzoil sued Texaco, got them reversed. Oh well, it’s only been 26 years ago.

Jake, you are right ,smackdown is strong language, and i hope your not offended but i think from my view its accurate. Going into the BOR meeting , i think Powers fully expected to get the greenlight on applying to the Pac12, as his Oklahoma Equivalent received from the Oklahoma BOR. They politely informed Powers he had full approval to stay in the Big12, He could listen to other conference offers,but no approval to act . per the AAS news post. I don’t dislike Power’s, but i think his fascination with the Pac 12 had more to do with rubbing elbows than sports. I may have been wrong to lump Dodds in with Powers. Macks view may also have been Dodds view. If so, Powers was on a island with Oklahoma. I agree Dodds would not negotiate away the LHN. I have seen the Aggie response to Boone, Boone may know something they dont. Im going to miss the Aggies.

Boone likes to hear himself talk. His view of himself is amazingly bigger than the actuality, and he is no doubt a significant individual. That said, I don’t take anything that he says very seriously. Kind of like Donald Trump.

This could have been avoided with leadership at the wheel of the B12. Get Beebeee’s ass out of that plush office and get somebody with big, brass huevos, and let’s get some good teams with media market appeal to jine up with us. It is not time to pull into our shell and hope all is well. Let’s get more teams, and make it a po$itive move to join the B12. If we have to use some LHN $ to build up the conference around us, that is just business investment.

Ok. Here I am. i can own it. David Boren is deloss’s bitch. The Sooners are the Longhorn’s dog. I just couldn’t see it before. I just hope we develope a case of the rabies.

Well, I once had the mumps and I missed them when I got well, but not in a good way. That’s pretty much how I feel about Aggy, but each to his own.

None of the things you admittedly speculate on about the meeting or who was told what square with what Scott or Texas or anyone in the media is saying has, yet you continue. So be it, but even the most remote chance that our BOR would do something to deliberately humiliate a man of Bill Powers’ stature strains intellectual credibility. That’s what “smacked down” means! If that’s accurate from your view, then I’d suggest you immediately get a chair with a clearer view or drop whatever personal agenda is driving that view. While I or any other UT fan would be justified in being offended by it, I am more just completely freakin’ amazed! And you very clearly included Dodds in your original post. It doesn’t seem to have been by accident, either.

Please enlighten me on exactly what is it that you think T. Boone Pickens knows that Aggy doesn’t or are you just randomly speculating again? I’ll remind you that Pickens, for all his mouthing off, hasn’t gotten anything right since any of this began.

This thing is not over. OU has one more play. They can go groveling to the SEC. IThey wanted the invite to the PAC-12 bad as they didn’t want to be in a conference with the longhorn network. If the don’t get the concessions that they want they could always threaten an OU move. Culturally OU is closer to an SEC school than a PAC-x school. I expect to see them do this bu nit go through

I don’t think so. The SEC is already making A&M jump through hoops out of fear of liability. The SEC knows well that taking OU puts us right back to killing the Big12 and all the legal issues that would entail. Plus, as has been pointed out above, expansion is about adding TVs and recruiting territory, not strength of schedule. The PAC-12 already proved that point by rejecting OU without Texas. The SEC would not be interested in OU at this time, and OU threatening to go there would only add more embaressment to them when it becomes clear the SEC rejects them also.

I believe OU will take the concessions that Texas has already indicated they’re willing to give and we’ll let them publicly declare that as a victory for themselves so we can move on. The Big12 will then focus on getting back to 10 or more teams.

@BobinHouston - “It’s up to the SEC to let the Aggies in, IMO.”

Really? I thought the B1G would decide that one. Hollleeee Sheeeiiiiit. What a brainiac

Well, so far they haven’t let ‘em in and nothing’s changed. Not intended for you, BIH.

BigFunny - His point was that he doesn’t think Baylor and the others are going to sign the waiver that the aggies need, so the only way they’re going to actually get to accept that invitation is for the SEC to drop their unprecedented requirements.

monty lives in fantasy land. pretty sure powers knew going in what the plan was. he’s not a dope.

bugfanny doesn’t thrive when juvenile reading skills aren’t sufficient. not a good place to hang around, fanny.

agree with your take on ‘this thing is not over’, nunna. good response.

When a conference team plays Texas on the LHN, does that team get paid for it?

‘Casting, I know that they (and the Big 12, I think) have to approve the game being moved there whether or not it would otherwise be televised, so I’m sure, in the case of one that would be on another newtwork, they wouldn’t do it unless they were paid. As for the ones that woudn’t be, I’m not certain. Rice is not a conference game, but was going to be televised someplace else (an ESPN, I presume), but I don’t know about Kansas.

Boren miscalculated. He should’ve stuck with allowing Joe C. to run with things. Clean up on aisle # 13 in the OU Sucks category. OU had been working a very good angle right up until Boren insisted on taking over and stepped on everybody’s dicks. I say we start a slow clap for the Boren-ster.

Alas, OU is still our P.I.C. with making this conference more than stick together. It is ours to build and we better get along well behind the scenes if the BiG XII ever has aspirations of battling for a super-conference pole position.

I can’t wait for the aggys to GTFO but I am enjoying watching them being held hostage like the scared bitch that they are until the very last minute. But seriously aggys… GTFO!

Larry Scott re Boren’s ass-covering statements about not really wanting to move: “I don’t want to contradict anything that they feel they need to say as part of the process they are in.”

Have you ever heard a more diplomatic way of stating that someone is completely full of shit.

This just in! Dan Beebee about to be taken off life support by Big 12 Board. Texas blamed for it all for insisiting on a "do not rescucitate" clause in his 2009 contract extension.

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7002818/dan-beebe-working-leave-job-big-12-conference-commissioner-report-says

So OU gets 1 of its wishes fulfilled.

Let’s see if they can get the other.

I hope not. Texas should not budge on the LHN unless the rest of the Big 12 at least agrees to allow more FB games to be televised there.

SRR50, Why isn’t Texas extracting any concessions from the SEC to facilitate the aggies departure? The most obvious concession would be for the SEC to take Baylor as the SEC’s 14th team in exchange for waivers from the rest of the Big 12.

The fact that the SEC isn’t willing to take A&M without waivers seems to indicate that they know that there was enticement and tortious interference. Ag_in_Texas claims to be an insider. He bragged on this website that the SEC had promised A&M more TV money. Isn’t that enticement?

Dagga,

I’m giving this blockquote thing a whirl per your instructions on another post. Hope it works out.

Monty:

"I think Texas will compromise on the LHN. Something along the lines of giving the Big12 20% of the LHN in return of the other schools sharing 20% of their extra network revenues with the League.. We may see something like that."

I wouldn’t be opposed to each school agreeing to give up as much as 10% to the conference itself for use in putting together the type of television package I’ve been hoping for. I’m not sure Texas would make that deal though, and I haven’t seen anyone suggest the conference is even trying to create such a package.

Yeh:

"srr, the thing i don’t like about ten is we have no buffer. somebody else goes aggie on us and we have a problem. otherwise i absolutely agree."

Nunna:

"This is exactly what bothers me about it as well. In this era where every healthy conference is expanding, going to divisions, and so on, standing pat at 10 leaves a feeling and perception that the conference isn’t healthy and is just waiting for the next shoe to drop."

I also want the Big XII to change strategies and start building back up despite Dodds’ reluctance. Can anyone say it’s going to end up the best conference top to bottom? I doubt it, but I think it can be among the last conferences standing. First things first, I want to get TAMU out the door. After that, I’d like to add two to the north replacing Nebraska and Colorado and one to make six in the south. If Texas gets incentives to justify leaving in the future, so be it. However, there’s nothing wrong with working to make the Big XII a viable option in which to remain if that ends up being the best option.

Xover started a thread called "Rebuilding the Big 12 Conference" on Hornfans about this sort of maneuvering. While I dislike his top targets (I favor a broad contiguous alliance that would include some of his "other" schools), he seems to be of the same basic belief that the Big XII can rebuild itself to do more than merely survive in the short term. I’d be thrilled if the next conference meeting of the minds got everyone on this page.

The Big 12’s instability is caused by having three schools that aren’t on anyone’s super-conference wish list: Baylor, Kansas State, and Iowa State. If we could have kicked two of these teams out of the conference, Nebraska, A&M, and Colorado would still be in the Big 12. The key to saving the conference is removing dead weight and not expanding unless a new member will contribute TV sets and/or recruiting bases.

Purple Book Cat just reported that Texas and BiG have signed some sort of an LOI.

http://northwestern.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=57&tid=163241898&mid=163241898&sid=901&style=2

Haven’t digested this yet, but it’s consistent with the longstanding rumor of Texas and ND to BiG in 2014.

Nunna, Dagga, Saul:

See, this is what upset me starting last summer. If you’re Texas, and you’re going to stay in the Big XII, why not build the conference up to compete? Every other conference was looking to expand or upgrade, and the Big XII was the only one espousing a model of addition by subtraction. If the B1G and PAC see a value to having equal divisions and a conference championship game, why don’t we? To me, that created the instability, and it gave more power to A&M and Mizzou, and to a much lesser extent (we now know) OU/OSU, because more defections puts everyone in a jam. In this arena, you’re either doing the shopping, or you’re the groceries. Big XII, if it’s to remain viable, needs to take the “For Sale” sign off the lawn, and start bringing in some players.

We’ll see what happens in the next few months, but it still looks to me like the SEC is in a jam where the 14th member is concerned. Could they tell A&M “thanks, but no thanks”? I guess it’s possible, but that would be a lot of egg on some seriously prestigious faces, and unless they think they’ll NEVER approach A&M again, I don’t see them burning the bridge like that. Especially with Slive making such a public statement about Aggy joining. On the other hand, they reportedly turned down WVU, and are now taking a second look at them.

My money is still on Mizzou, and if I had to guess, Mizzou would be willing, depending on how this Big XII stability conference plays out. Because if Big XII stays at 9, all you’ve really done is hold the vultures off for another year or two. Texas absorbs more power (thanks for that Mr. Boren), and the gap between the haves and the have-nots only gets wider. At some point, Big East probably looks over and sees Kansas, KState, Baylor sitting all alone with nothing to do, and asks them on a date. It would at least strengthen the basketball side of things, and the football wouldn’t be any worse than the Navy/Air Force combo they’re thinking about.

So here’s hoping our new commissioner (and Dodds too) figure out that no matter how much TV money we’re spreading around, staying at 9-10 doesn’t do anything to add any long term stability.

The Big 12′s instability is caused by having three schools that aren’t on anyone’s super-conference wish list: Baylor, Kansas State, and Iowa State. If we could have kicked two of these teams out of the conference, Nebraska, A&M, and Colorado would still be in the Big 12. The key to saving the conference is removing dead weight and not expanding unless a new member will contribute TV sets and/or recruiting bases.

maroon - I have to disagree to some extent on this. I don’t think Vandy, OleMiss, or MissSt are on anyone’s wish list but the SEC is good. WASU and OregonSt wouldn’t be coveted but the PAC is fine. Same with Northwestern, Minnesota, and the BIG.

The fact is, by definition every conference will have dead weight. Someone has to lose the conference games that another team is winning, and in most every conference you have certain teams that do most of the losing. If you have nothing but top tier teams in a conference then some of those teams will start losing games and won’t still be top tier.

This is actually one of the main reasons I don’t like the idea of building a superconference from scratch with nothing but top tier teams. Some of them (who knows, maybe us) will have to start losing on a regular basis, and that won’t go over well at those programs when they’ve always been used to winning. Next thing you know they’ll start bitching about whatever inequalities create that situation (just see Nebraska in the Big12 as an example).

Nunna, I think there is some natural process of stratification within any conference, and if there isn’t you need those tomato cans anyway

We’ll see what happens in the next few months, but it still looks to me like the SEC is in a jam where the 14th member is concerned.

Nick I agree they’re in a jam for team 14, but I’m not sure I see a viable fix for them anytime soon. I believe West Virginia (or a Virginia ACC school) was their primary target, but while they waited for A&M to clear, the ACC killed those deals. The ACC strengthened and took their schools off the market and left the BigEast on death’s doorstep. Now if the SEC invites WVU they risk the same legal liabilities of killing a conference that they faced with us. I believe that’s why they actually turned down WVU.

I think at that point they focused on Mizzou as the replacement once the Big12 disintegrated with OU’s departure. Problem is that didn’t happen. Now if the SEC recruits Mizzou (or any other quality Big12 school) they risk bringing down the conference and legal liabilities. Case in point, the public denials by the SEC that they were inviting Mizzou.

I don’t see a good solution for them anytime soon on a 14th team, and I don’t see 13 teams working at all. Just try and figure a schedule with 13 teams involving 2 divisions that doesn’t require some teams to play different numbers of conference games. I’m sure that would go over well with the West division that Florida plays one less conference game and gets to pad their schedule and bank account with another OOC game.

Nunna, I think there is some natural process of stratification within any conference, and if there isn’t you need those tomato cans anyway

TDL - Exactly. One way or another, by definition a conference will have dead weight.

This conference will NEVER work while we have conference mates akin to the back-stabbing liars in OK. Too much dirty laundry aired, too many PR snafus, too much cheating and whining.

Please, give up on this dead zombie of a conference and let us forge new, healthier rivalries
without A$M and UO. This is a losing proposition with the mix of larger and smaller institutions
in the membership.

We need to group with large, similar universities…not ex-SWC or ex-Big 8 cockroaches.

They will always resent the hand that feeds them!

I was listening to the Mack Brown IMG radio show last night and Mack was making the point (one that I feel strongly about) that a regional conference is much more desirable for the athletes, for the athletes families, and for the fans. Flying out to the west coast every other weekend isn’t a great idea for recruiting or for ticket sales.

We’d be flying out to the west coast about as often as we’re flying to Iowa or Missouri or Kansas now.

The Big 12 gained a conference championship game by expanding to 12 members, but here’s what the conference lost by not staying at 10 members:

Texas vs Nebraska, Colorado, and Missouri every year
Oklahoma vs Nebraska, Colorado, and Missouri every year
Texas A&M vs Nebraska, Colorado, and Missouri every year

Nebraska and Colorado were the elite Big 8 teams throughout the 1990s.

If Mississippi and Mississippi State were in the Big 12 last year, they would have ranked 7th and 8th in average attendance.

Ten members of the Pac 12 would benefit if Washington State and Oregon State could be kicked out. Adding Colorado and Utah was a net loss for the original Pac 10 schools.

Every conference needs some losers. The Big 12’s problem is that the league is unbalanced. There are too many losers and not enough winners to support them.

The Big 12 would be a stronger, more profitable league with less dead weight.

Iowa State, Baylor, these are not the Big XII’s problems at all. As Nunna and others explain, somebody has to lose if others in the conference are going to win, and I think its unfair to rag on these programs. They are far and away better than nearly all non-BCS schools, and they are often better than other BCS-conferences’ bottom tier teams (e.g., Indiana, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, half of the Big East, a number of ACC schools). So let’s not act like they are the problem, and it certainly isn’t them that cause Nebraska and Colorado and Aggie to leave.

The Big XII’s problems lie with the discontents themselves. Nebraska and Aggie were/are whiny, whiny bitches. I’m sorry to say it, but it is true. There really is no other cause than they just couldn’t handle being seen as second-tier to the Texas/Oklahoma first-tier.

How can you say that the Big XII’s problems are too many losers and not enough winners when they have more teams ranked in the top 25 right now than any other conference?

I wrote much of this in response to carrots prior to seeing your new responses Nick and Nunna, so I apologize for the sections that repeat yours. I am glad to see that some others have reached the same conclusion as I have after quietly watching these ping-ponging realignment discussions though.

I doubt those three universities caused much instability. I guessing Washington State, Oregon State, Arizona State, Northwestern, Purdue, North Carolina State, Vanderbilt, and Mississippi aren’t being evicted from their conferences anytime soon either. I don’t really consider them football powers at the moment.

I agree on new members needing to expand the conference footprint. If there’s ever a conference network, these old SWC members people mention from time to time bring zero value in terms of additional TV markets. I also don’t think it’s worth it to hear even more political rhetoric in state. Sorry assorted programs with lesser known hand signals, but it’s true.

I’m also in agreement about expanding in good recruiting bases or TV markets, but I wouldn’t rule out taking on one or more smaller schools (w/ positive demographic trends) nearby current/future members and giving them a chance to grow in a larger conference. Of course, a powerhouse would be preferred, but there are only so many of those to go around. Right now, I can only think of about 4 of those the Big XII might be able to attract. If you think big picture out to 16 teams, odds are you’re going to have to take chances on a few additions somewhere along the line and have faith they’ll make the hires to compete.

In terms of just returning to twelve members, I can already think of two large schools not named Notre Dame that would fit nicely in place of Nebraska and Colorado in the north. Replacing TAMU and maintaining the current schools in the former divisions is a little trickier, but I wouldn’t mind going with one of those aforementioned smaller schools here to do just that. The south division is strong in football w/o TAMU, so you don’t have to even focus on a football school really. Still, ideally I’d like a school that would be at least somewhere on the Baylor to Texas Tech skill level in football for the position.

Basically, I think with the right moves the Big XII can be somewhere in vicinity of the Pac-12 in football and the Big 10 in basketball strength, but with a few smaller schools involved. Honestly though, only the top teams in a conference make the BCS or NCAA Tournament anyway, so I’m good with having 3-5 schools per division regularly battling it out for those spots and the others being competitive while trying to reach that level. If you look at it that way, the Big XII can still be one of the alleged super conferences, and be all those syrupy sweet things Mack described about conferences of yesteryear. All the members have to put aside the petty jealousies and start trying though.

Purple Book Cat just reported that Texas and BiG have signed some sort of an LOI.

http://northwestern.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=57&tid=163241898&mid=163241898&sid=901&style=2

Haven’t digested this yet, but it’s consistent with the longstanding rumor of Texas and ND to BiG in 2014.

Wethorn - Just read this. If true then that’s huge, but who knows if it’s true.

The Southwest Conference collapsed because:

1) Rice, UH, TCU, and SMU were averaging attendance of 20,000 per game.
2) Rice, UH, TCU, and SMU weren’t contributing to TV revenues.

The best SWC schools (Arkansas, A&M, and Texas) headed for the exits while the loser programs wanted to keep the conference together. The same thing is happening with the Big 12. The schools that can get better offers are taking them, leaving Texas and OU with the burden of supporting the weak programs.

The Big 12 has 5 teams ranked at the moment, but A&M is leaving, OU and Okie State want to leave, and this is Baylor’s first ranked team in almost 20 years.

If we can keep A&M in the conference, we should. If they insist on going, they should take Baylor with them. That would help ensure the long-term stability of the Big 12.

To those people who want the Big 12 to get back to 12 teams -

How excited are you about these potential Big 12 championship game opponents?

BYU, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri or Louisville

The Big 12 championship game hasn’t been competitive for 10 years. The South dominated the North except for 2 fluke occurences in 2001 and 2003. The conference championship game is a joke because there is no competitive balance between the north and south divisions. If the Big 12 is to survive, it will survive better as a round-robin league without a championship game.

maroon - You make a valid point about divisional strength with 12 teams versus a round robin at 10 team. I guess my take on that was a realignment of divisions (maybe East/West, or more random like the ACC) to distribute the power and probably put Texas and OU in different divisions. You could use a system like the PAC uses now with the Cali schools were you have a couple of opponents in the other division that you play every single year to ensure that Texas and OU play annually. That’s not necessarily ideal though either.

Nunna - You placed your finger on the problem. To have an exciting championship game, Texas and OU would have to be in separate divisions. But how special will Texas-OU be when everyone knows that these two teams will be facing off again in the championship game 2 months later?

Nunna: I’m with you in thinking that SEC is now stuck between two or three less-than-ideal options.

1). Scuttle expansion altogether for now. You look like chumps for teasing A&M, and you’ve probably got some liability from A&M too. Slive would look bad, but can probably weather the storm I guess. I think you only do this if you think you’re NEVER taking Aggy, now or in the future, and you’re convinced that super conferences are farther off then the next few years. Because Aggy will be PISSED if they’re forced to stay in the Big XII.

2). Take Aggy and deal with the uneven conference for the short term, hoping to get a 14th somewhere in the near future. You can deal with 13 for one or two years. The problem is that the market for other quality additions to the conference is shrinking. ACC has played a weak hand VERY strongly. Do you reconsider WVU? Do you take a look at a Georgia Tech despite previous pledges not to go where you’ve already got a conference footprint? All less than ideal.

3). Be content with 13 beyond 2 years? You explained the reasons this isn’t palatable pretty well, and I think they’re convincing. Do they get really creative and force somebody out? Kentucky or Vandy or someone like that? Can’t really imagine that as workable, because if you’re worried about liabilities, that’d be huge.

Spaceghost, I’m sympathetic to your point. From my viewpoint, this conference sucks ass. I can forgive the posturing that’s gone on from OU’s viewpoint, and merely delight in their embarrassment, but the fact that we’re still stuck here does not make me happy. Quite frankly, I have trouble understanding where most Longhorn fans are coming from with wanting to stay in the Big XII (if that’s truly the sentiment, it’s kind of hard to tell). I don’t get excited about games against Baylor and Iowa State (particularly in anamalous years like this one where we might actually lose), and the road trips other than Dallas are terrible. And dammit, we’re Texas! We should be playing in a worthy conference, not an also-ran. I think we should be partnered with more similarly situated universities, because it would automatically create some stability and equality, not to mention better games.

From my perspective, LHN to this point has been a bit of boondoggle. NOT because it’s a bad idea, or we didn’t have a right to do what we did, but simply because the PR was mismanaged. The high school content situation was a disaster, and we should have talked with conference partners before scheduling a conference game. Bad PR, and it looks like ESPN has a little too much control if we’re getting boxed in like this. And I’m not even going to start on the distribution.

Is this the kind of situation that could be avoided with real conference partners, not weak sister also-rans? I don’t know, but I think I could make a convincing argument.

Maroon, I can make a pretty strong case for an OU/Tex rematch. I was on campus from 98-2006 (undergrad and law), and how many years were there from about 2000-2004 where we wouldn’t have KILLED for one more shot at OU? Or maybe 2008? Yup, I’d have no problem bringing back the championship games if you just take the 2 best teams. And I don’t think it takes anything away from the State Fair in Dallas, because that’s just a special event. It’s not like it’d be a rematch EVERY year, so once inawhile? Pretty cool.

TexanNick wrote:

“1). Scuttle expansion altogether for now. You look like chumps for teasing A&M, and you’ve probably got some liability from A&M too. Slive would look bad, but can probably weather the storm I guess. I think you only do this if you think you’re NEVER taking Aggy, now or in the future, and you’re convinced that super conferences are farther off then the next few years. Because Aggy will be PISSED if they’re forced to stay in the Big XII.”

If it comes to pass that the SEC doesn’t take A&M, then yes, the aggies will be pissed. But I’m not sure that means that they don’t quietly accept an SEC bid if it were to come in some future year. What other options do they have outside of UT, A&M, OU, OSU to the Pac, which I think has been shown the past two years isn’t likely. They do hold an attractive card in providing conference access to Texas, but that may not be enough. They still want to be in the SEC. They’ll rationalize a future SEC invitation in whatever bizarre ways aggies do, then accept it.

Nick - Texas and OU would face off in a rematch at least 7 times every 10 years. Nebraska and A&M were the only Big 12 schools that came close to recruiting as well as Texas and OU.

Wethorn is right. A&M has no self-respect. Aggies are like the annoying neighbor kid. The SEC could tie A&M up, piss on them, and light them on fire. The next day A&M would be at the door asking if the SEC can come out and play.

How excited are you about these potential Big 12 championship game opponents?

BYU, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri or Louisville

Zipper the conference.

The South dominated the North except for 2 fluke occurences in 2001 and 2003.

That 2009 championship game result seemed pretty flukey too. The victor was lucky that day.

PS: How would you assign your teams in a zipper?

Phenomenal Smith - I forgot Nebraska played us tough that year. Touche.

Modified: Only three of the last ten Big 12 championship games were decided by fewer than 14 points.

Right now our focus should be on actually getting back to 10 so we don’t have contractual issues with TV carriers’ contracts and extracting flesh from Aggy via exit fees. Forcing Aggy, a proven disgruntled and untrustwothy defector (Aggy) back in, so let’s just fine them and find someone athleticall and academically worthy, offer them and get it done ASAP.

As for further expansion, I’m not sure it follows that adding two more teams automatically adds more stability. It really depends on who those teams are and whether their addition would entice our current TV carriers to offer up the requisite amount of money to make up the difference. And by better I mean not only competitely but also in terms of new media footprint and potential new recruiting territory. If we aren’t making the conference better and more financially viable, and I emphasize that we should care about both, by expanding to 12, then why should we do it?

Having a conference championship game isn’t the thing that ends all things and should not, IMO, be a sole reason for expanding. Reasons for that have been eloquently stated above by others so I won’t repeat them. Taking care of current business, i.e., getting the new Commish and getting back to 10 teams, should be the only priority right now. Realignment mania seems to be under control except for the ACC possibly continuing its quest to dissolve the Big East and the SEC getting a 14th team, which isn’t coming from our inventory (I’m looking at you, Missouri). There is ample time to discuss potential expansion to 12—-no rush needed.

As for the “LOI”, it reeks of bullshit to me; however, such a document would be a public record so a simple TORA request by any media outlet will quickly determine if it exists.

Jake - I’m not a lawyer so I don’t know, but a couple of posters under the LOI story claimed that an LOI isn’t legally binding but merely a show of good faith, and as such wouldn’t be a public record under TORA. Seems like you’re legally oriented. Your comments on that aspect?

I agree that getting to more than 10 teams would increase Big Algebra stability, but I don’t know that that is the only way to achieve this. Witness the ACC act of increasing the exit fees. Perhaps stability could be achieved by adding 1 team and increasing the exit fees. That way you don’t need a title game. Although my preference on exit fees would be that they are void if a more than a certain number of teams choose to waive them and effectively disband the conference. That way, we protect against the 1sy-2sy defections, but in the next wave of major realignment, the have-nots can’t hold the haves hostage.

Not a lawyer, but the LOI thing seems like absolute absurdity to me. The Wildcat Report is trending towards fantasy land, imho. If they are correct, I will absolutely eat crow - but this latest report would seem equally believable if it said that Delany and Powers were twins separated at birth, and are now going to join forces and use the Big X to fight crime.

Secondly, just my two cents… but the reason that the Big Algebra is doomed is that OU and Mizzou still have wondering eyes. Bohls tweeted today that his sources say OU has been courting the PAC from the moment the ink was dry on the deal last year to preserve the Big XII. Say what you will about Bohls being a turd, I happen to believe this is true (both him being a turd and OU courting the PAC). OU wants to go to the PAC, that is evident, and it was apparently the case even before Aggy and LHN.

Maybe the PAC didn’t spread its legs now, but OU will wear down their resistance with promises of free mexi-melts and enamel based paint.

BuckleVision is radioactive to every conference, including the Big 12. No conference will allow UT in with BuckleVision. Period. Unfortunately, the other members were sleeping while Beebe allowed the ridiculousness to set in.

As the Big 10 network proved, a conference network for tier 3 programming can be very lucrative, but getting distribution can be a real challenge. Now how the fuck are you supposed to overcome the distribution challenge associated with a conference tier 3 network when the most valuable brand in the league is excluded from the conference network? BuckleVision is having huge challenges gaining distribution. The remaining 8 schools from the Big Dysfunction conference could theoretically band together to create a BIg Dysfuction without Texas Network, but the distribution challenges would exceed those of the Big 10 Network.

If UT would subside the ego a bit, they would realize the only way you have a stable conference is a PAC/Big 10 media rights policy. That’s why nobody will welcome UT to another conference. They don’t want the radioactive BuckleVision introduced to their stable leagues and be act 3 of the SWC, Big Dysfunction implosions.

Secondly, the overall conference, including UT, would see faster distribution of the channel than BuckleVision. You have a handful of crappy providers showing BuckleVision now. The Kansas game will come and go, and you will still have the same problem. After a couple years of fighting it out, you’ll get distribution into most homes in Texas. National distribution is a pipe dream without more interesting content that 8 other schools can provide.

The Big 12 should vote 8-1 that the new revenue sharing plan be as follows:
 (Tier 1 conference rights fees + Tier 2 conference rights fees)/9 - Tier 3 institution rights fees. I see nothing that would prevent this. This would effectively box UT in. Go somewhere else if you want. Nobody will take you with BuckleVision. The existance of BuckleVision keeps the rest of the league from establishing a bona fide conference tier 3 network and takes money out of everybody else’s pocket. The tier 3 rights of OSU, KSU, etc are worth something but there’s only 2 distribution options:
- cable network. won’t work for one school. barely works for UT
- internet broadcast. still questionable quality for most. no good way to collect large fees that rival a cable network fees

So the existence of BuckleVision robs the rest of the conference from their ability to capture the value of Tier 3 rights. Everybody with options will leave. Mizzou may go, if the SEC grows a pair and ignores the threat of litigation. OU will eventually find a way out of the Bevo Prison.

BuckleVision has fucked up this conference big time.

The big weakness of the Big 12-3 is going to be the lack of a compelling championship race. Texas and OU are the only two elite programs, and the Texas-OU game is at the beginning of October.

Michigan-Ohio State, USC-UCLA, and all of the conference championship games occur in the last 2 games of every season. The entire regular season is a build-up to these last 2 weekends. The Big 12’s most exciting weekend is usually the 5th weekend in a 13 week season. If the Big 12 conference championship is settled in early October, every game after that is anti-climactic. TV viewership will peak at Texas-OU and could fall off a cliff immediately after. It’s hard to imagine BYU competing at the same level as Texas or OU, and everyone concedes that BYU is the best available team.

If Mack Brown’s views reflect the views of the board of regents and Texas is serious about maintaining regional rivalries, then Texas really only has 2 choices: try to keep A&M in the Big 12 or attempt to carry as many rivals as we can to the SEC. Either option is bound to piss off aggy.

Of course, if we force the SEC to take Baylor with A&M, the conference only has to split revenues 8 ways instead of 9, and 5 out of conference games leaves a lot of room for a scheduling alliance with Notre Dame, BYU, and the Big East. The reformed conference can be called…. the Big 8.

People are giving Mack’s comments way more credit than they deserve… its not like he turned the tide here. He voiced the same concerns that everyone at UT has said consistently.

Dodds/Powers and all other UT reps have said all along that they preferred the Big 12, and I don’t think for a minute that Dodds or Powers were ready to compromise heavily on the LHN for entrance into the PAC. This all played out how Dodds/Powers and the BOR would have preferred - for now at least.

If Mack sent a message, it was on behalf of Dodds and Powers, not to them.

Agreed BiH… the thought on this thread from a few that Powers was sent a message is ridiculous. While Powers is from the west coast and I think does appreciate the academic quality of Cal and some of the other PAC schools, he showed last year that he is more than happy to turn down the PAC if it is in UT’s best interests.

Not sure why some people need to see some sort of animosity between Powers and Dodds and the BOR — the BOR’s vote to give Powers less authority that Boren was a message to the public that our first choice was to stay in the Big 12. Nothing more, nothing less.

Nunna, I’m not an attorney and would bow to anyone’s knowledge of the Texas Open Records Act who has both legal expertise and practical experience with it. I have the experience factor in spades, having on several occasions and with assistance from General Counsel, written TORA requests for Firms I worked for. There are various exceptions to it. For example, you certainly can’t ask for a competitor’s proposal during an open competition. Also, any trade secrets (technologies, unique methodoligies, etc.) are off limits and are redacted from the proposal after the contract is signed and it and the proposal become fair game. I’m not aware that of an exception that exists solely because a document is not a legal document, particularly when a public official writes/signs it. That would seem backward to me since legal settlement offers (which are considered drafts under the Act) are exempt, but contracts are not and I know that for a fact. The exception to draft documents typically applies to documents that have not been released yet to a Government entity or by one other than settlement offers, as I mentioned. I’ve probably confused the issue more with this response, but it’s what I know from experience—-doesn’t mean there’s not an exception based on something here that I haven’t dealt with before.

All that stated, if the media believes the document might actually exist, they have a right to request it under TORA, which I believe they almost certainly would. Any response, which must come from the A.G.’s office, will have to explain why it is not subject to TORA if the request is denied. Such an explanation would, IMO, at least require confirming or denying its existence, so there is that.

Sorry for the lengthy response.

C’mon Ern, BiH. This decision was Mack’s. He told the BOR to motherfuck (or “smackdown”) our Prez and AD and promptly went out and saved the conference. which was his job and his call all the way as Head Coach! Those other two guys are just pencil-necked geeks with no input or authority over conference affiliations, academics, mutil-million dollar networks and shit like that. What are you guys smokin’?

(Insert sarcasm emoticon here, please.)

Could someone please explain “Bucklevision” to me?

Charley, the equal distribution of first and second tier rights with each to his own for third thier rights is precisely the model your retarded Aggy friends are migrating to in the SEC and is exactly the one Texas proposed to the Big 12 AD’s a few months ago, which they approved.

Oh, and I have a big picture of us being forced out of the Big 12 and taking the lion’s share of the viewers in its largest TV market with us. Oh yeah!

nordberg, If Charley is any indicator, it’s something that gay men get from staring too long at in the general area where a real cowboy wears his belt buckle.

Serious Question:

The Leach lawsuit was dismissed by the Texas Supreme Court essentially on the grounds that state institutions could not be sued. I forget the legal term, but essentially the TSC granted Texas Tech the same legal standing formerly enjoyed by the United States Federal Government and monarchs, which, by extension, accords the same legal standing to other manifestations of the Texas state government. A remarkable precedent if it stands, and I have no idea if Leach’s legal team is contesting the decision or what the US-SC position on the decision might be.

Do I have that right? And if I do, how might that impact Baylor-AM’s legal wrangling?

It’s called sovriegn immunity. The Leach lawsuit(s) is ongoing and that’s all I’ve got to say about that.

Baylor’s suit, if it were ever filed, would be against the SEC for totious interference. The SEC, like the Big 12, is not a governmental entity and does not have sovriegn immunity.

‘sovereign’ immunity

(Sorry, Jake, love your take on things, just wanted to correct that one term.)

Charley, this conference already voted down a 3rd tier network. Stupid, IMO, but it’s over. Deal with it.

Ok. Here i am ready to confess it. David Boren is Deloss’s bitch. Available for skull-fucking at a moments notice. The Sooners are Longhorn dogs, kicked and forced to like it. I can only hope for a bad case of rabies before October 9.

Es Bueno, Ricky!

What? No, you can’t sue me. Why? Because it’s my Court and I’ll fucking well do whatever I want to do. Don’t believe me? Ask the Supremes… they work for me, too. Now fuck off. Oh, by the way - are you one of those dimbulbs taking a couple of grams of Vitamin C every day? Enjoy it while you can, I’m going to make you pay the same amount for 60mg that you pay for 1000mg right now… hell, you won’t even be able to buy the 1000’s any more, and if my boys catch you with any of those things, you’re in deep shit. Go on back to Key West and enjoy hurricane season.

Wonderful items from you, man. I have take note your stuff prior to and you’re just extremely fantastic. I really like what you’ve acquired here, certainly like what you are stating and the best way during which you say it. You make it enjoyable and you continue to care for to keep it wise. I can’t wait to learn far more from you. That is really a tremendous site.

Unquestionably imagine that which you said. Your favorite reason appeared to be at the net the easiest thing to bear in mind of. I say to you, I certainly get annoyed at the same time as folks think about worries that they just do not know about. You controlled to hit the nail upon the top as well as outlined out the entire thing without having side effect , other folks could take a signal. Will probably be back to get more. Thanks