Is all of this Mizzou's Fault?

[QBUMizzou]

I hope it's okay to paste this post from BaylorFans message board. If it's not, feel free to remove it. I just find the logic behind the post fascinating. It's from a poster with the username Sammy11.

I will post some commentary shortly.

This is HOW the Big 12 was destabilized from 2009 to now

Everyone has their own conspiracy theory blaming one school or the other and frankly I feel they all usually miss the mark. I don't feel that ANY single school with options deep down wanted to blow up the league after they departed despite the short-term savings of exit fees. Usually the conspiracy theories make less sense than people simply looking out for their own skin, and I feel people simply looked out for #1 and things led here.

HOW IT HAPPENED:

A- The Big 12 was formed because the Big 8 and SWC did not have the television footprint to keep up with television contracts as previously constituted in the eyes of both the Big 8 and UT/ATM. Baylor and Tech found out days before it happened and snuck in politically. So the league was doing well in all areas until 2007 saw one horribly timed move... the Fox tier 2 contract extension.

Shortly after we extended the Fox deal until this upcoming year there was a major shift... the Big Ten network became a HUGE success. This reset the market for lower rights well above what we had signed for as a league would not sell those rights away for less than a league network could project to pay. Now the previously competitively paid Big 12 was WAY behind. This led to people casting jealous eyes to both the Big Ten and SEC who also signed a deal after the Big Ten network reset the marketplace.

B- Things seemed calm and then Dec. 15, 2009, when the Big Ten conference released a statement calling for a "thorough evaluation of options."

At first this should not concern our league... but then somebody puts their foot in their mouth.

Later that month Missouri Governor Jay Nixon says the following:
"I'm not going to say anything bad about the Big 12, but when you compare Oklahoma State to Northwestern, when you compare Texas Tech to Wisconsin, I mean, you begin looking at educational possibilities that are worth looking at."

Mizzou not shutting their big yapper is Domino #1.

C- So what most fans passed off as something to make fun of OSU and Taco Tech with... CU took differently. The first domino just hit domino #2 as ESPN after the fact reported that the Missouri governor's comments pushed them to reach out to a league they had narrowly decided against joining in 1994.

CU Athletic Director stated the following:
"The governor's remarks got me going. We had to do something, and fast."

D- They reach out to the Pac10 and then the Pac 10 reaches out to CU's rumored partner in the 90s almost-expansion... Texas. Domino #3.

E- Texas feared that a Big 12 without Mizzou and Colorado would not command a decent deal and felt without that present, other options needed to be pursued. They wanted their friends to come if they moved west and Larry Scott was willing to make it happen and the original idea of the P16 with ATM included was born. Domino #4.

F- In January a friend of NU Chancellor Harvey Perlman notified him that 7 schools were in talks about leaving. That made previously content to stay NU active in approaching the Big Ten. He called Jim Delany to set up a talk that very day. Domino #5.

G- Chip Brown breaks the story in late May. All hades breaks loose.

H- OU, OSU, Tech, and ATM were supposed to be on board but those making the deal had been talking to Bill Byrne, who mistakenly spoke for the BOR who were strongly opposed to going west. They reach out to the SEC that pauses things long enough for Beebe and the networks to bring enough money to preserve the 10 teams left after NU and CU bolt. This money fixed the main issue behind UT looking around in the first place, the tv deal. Trust would have to be regained and it isn't easy to get back.

Fast forward one year...

I - The Longhorn Network is done, and while initial issues with HS games and extra league games were technically dealt with... everyone underestimates the anger that Aggies have over the way things had been handled and the absolute groundswell of sentiment towards an SEC move that had been there since last summer. Members of the A&M board of regents and big cigar donors push the Aggies into moving east. SEC comically invites them conditionally as BU and others threaten litigation. We and others refuse to waive all rights to litigation (as any intelligent entity with a potential 9 figure case would do) and A&M is stuck until either the Big 12 stabilizes, blows up, or the SEC relents on the waiver. Domino #6

J- Nobody knows what OU will do although there is heavy rumor that the OU President and Regents are fighting to go west. The rumors speculate that the Big 12 without NU, CU, AND ATM is dead in their eyes. If true, that is domino #7.

This is where we are. I will finish this when it is done but simple A leads to B leads to C... etc has destabilized one of the strongest leagues in the entire nation. The ONLY possible conspiracy I see room for is if either A&M and OU or UT + those 2 are coordinating their moves right now. I still highly doubt it though.

We will see what happens but hopefully OU remains here and we expand to 14. The next few weeks will be interesting.​

 

[QBUMizzou]

B- Things seemed calm and then Dec. 15, 2009, when the Big Ten conference released a statement calling for a "thorough evaluation of options."

At first this should not concern our league... but then somebody puts their foot in their mouth.

Later that month Missouri Governor Jay Nixon says the following:
"I'm not going to say anything bad about the Big 12, but when you compare Oklahoma State to Northwestern, when you compare Texas Tech to Wisconsin, I mean, you begin looking at educational possibilities that are worth looking at."

Mizzou not shutting their big yapper is Domino #1.

In my opinion, this is hilarious. It involves an enormous stretch in logic. The idea that Jay Nixon spoke as an agent of the University of Missouri is absolutely laughable.

I mean, really? The governor of Missouri is to blame for all of this?

Over the past year and a half I half been angry and amused at all of the writers, message board posters and media nitwits who have used Nixon's comments to excoriate Mizzou. The most common insult is that Mizzou "lifted its skirt" for the B1G. Well if Nixon's comment is construed as "lifting one's skirt" a lot of schools have taken things a bit further. They've removed their panties for any and all potential suitors.

On the whole, Nixon's comments ring true. Unfortunately, he showed a complete lack of decorum by speaking so publicly.

So, do you folks think all of the conference expansion crud is Mizzou's fault?

 

[digZ]

I wouldn't say it's their fault persay. They did kind of "stir the pot" so to speak. The teams that moved, wanted to move before hand, and used the governer's statements as a scapegoat. Without his statements, this whole thing is a PR nightmare for the schools leaving and ditching everyone. But with the governor of Missouri making such public ovations on behalf of Missour(whether or not he is an agent of the University), gave Nebraska the political cover they needed to take their ball and leave Texas. CU is a different story. They left because they were worried about being left out in an expansion frenzy. So without the governer, this stuff probably doesn't unfold in the way that it did, but that's not to say the schools who left(or want to leave now) didn't have these intentions before Mizzou started talking.

So is Missouri at fault? No, there are a lot of parties at fault and it really is a huge mess with no one party as clearly guilty of starting it. But to say they are completely innocent is probably false too. They have been very tight lipped this time around, along with all the other North schools, which is very professional and good business on their part.

 

[justcynn]

YEP....NM







ok maybe not, but Missouri proved what not to do in realignment, talk. Iowa State fans are frustrated with the lack of info including myself, but if we end up ok in the end it will have been worth it.

The answer to your question is Texas, Nebraska, OU and A&M - they voted against long term stability at every turn.

 

[cyman05]

In my opinion, this is hilarious. It involves an enormous stretch in logic. The idea that Jay Nixon spoke as an agent of the University of Missouri is absolutely laughable.

I mean, really? The governor of Missouri is to blame for all of this?

Over the past year and a half I half been angry and amused at all of the writers, message board posters and media nitwits who have used Nixon's comments to excoriate Mizzou. The most common insult is that Mizzou "lifted its skirt" for the B1G. Well if Nixon's comment is construed as "lifting one's skirt" a lot of schools have taken things a bit further. They've removed their panties for any and all potential suitors.

On the whole, Nixon's comments ring true. Unfortunately, he showed a complete lack of decorum by speaking so publicly.

So, do you folks think all of the conference expansion crud is Mizzou's fault?

Let's examine what event immediately preceded Gov. Nixon's comment in Dec 2009...Mizzou had gotten passed over not too long before in the bowl pecking order by other teams that travel better, then in Dec 2009 they got passed over in favor of Iowa State for the Insight.com bowl. That just enraged Mizzou enough to cause the governor to chime in about his frustrations with the Big 12.

So really I guess all the instability in the Big 12 started with all the other Big 12 schools being jealous of Iowa State's fan base and support. But what can we say, don't hate me because I'm beautiful.

 

[everyyard]

At some level...yep. Also to blame: Texa$, Tammy, OU, nebbie, and any others that wouldn't agree to revenue sharing but now are running to it.

 

[besserheimerphat]

So, do you folks think all of the conference expansion crud is Mizzou's fault?

My first thought was no, but you made a pretty convincing arguement :twitcy:

 

[QBUMizzou]

My first thought was no, but you made a pretty convincing arguement :twitcy:

Love it!:yes:

 

[CycloneErik]

Not all Mizzou's fault, but they sure didn't help. It made it easier for Nebraska to quietly go about doing what they wanted to do anyway.

 

[QBUMizzou]

Let's examine what event immediately preceded Gov. Nixon's comment in Dec 2009...Mizzou had gotten passed over not too long before in the bowl pecking order by other teams that travel better, then in Dec 2009 they got passed over in favor of Iowa State for the Insight.com bowl. That just enraged Mizzou enough to cause the governor to chime in about his frustrations with the Big 12.

So really I guess all the instability in the Big 12 started with all the other Big 12 schools being jealous of Iowa State's fan base and support. But what can we say, don't hate me because I'm beautiful.

You are absolutely right about that. Still pisses me off just thinking about it. One caveat, however. It's not all about who travels better. Mizzou and Arkansas sold out the Cotton Bowl a few years ago, but last year, even though Mizzou had a better record than A&M, and had crushed the snot out of them in College Station, the Cotton Bowl chose A&M over them.

That really, really sucks. And it gets old.

 

[SCNCY]

I think it all started with the Big 10, not by saying they were expanding, but that they could expand to 14 or 16 teams. One team would not have been a big deal (and for the most part it wasn't). But the 14 to 16 team got everyone worried and started to look out for themselves before thinking. 5 teams moving in to one conference would have been a big chain reaction for all of college football.

 

[GoSTATE71]

You are absolutely right about that. Still pisses me off just thinking about it. One caveat, however. It's not all about who travels better. Mizzou and Arkansas sold out the Cotton Bowl a few years ago, but last year, even though Mizzou had a better record than A&M, and had crushed the snot out of them in College Station, the Cotton Bowl chose A&M over them.

That really, really sucks. And it gets old.

Okay and you think that doesn't happen in other conferences? I can think of northwestern being snubbed a few times despite having a better record than Iowa, but lets face it Iowa's fan base travels just as good as anyone in the country, would northwestern travel that well? No, its about money. I think the only reason Iowa state was picked over you guys a couple years ago was because we had a football team that hadn't seen a bowl game in awhile and the committees knew that Iowa state fans would flock regardless of where they went. Would missouri fans really wanna play minnesota in the insight bowl? How many fans would of really went to that game. I know missouri fans are extremely supportive but i also don't think missouri fans bother to much for small time games as your program has had high levels of success and is more of a big time program wanting big time bowl games

 

[Tank]

I blame Texas!

 

[QBUMizzou]

Okay and you think that doesn't happen in other conferences? I can think of northwestern being snubbed a few times despite having a better record than Iowa, but lets face it Iowa's fan base travels just as good as anyone in the country, would northwestern travel that well? No, its about money. I think the only reason Iowa state was picked over you guys a couple years ago was because we had a football team that hadn't seen a bowl game in awhile and the committees knew that Iowa state fans would flock regardless of where they went. Would missouri fans really wanna play minnesota in the insight bowl? How many fans would of really went to that game. I know missouri fans are extremely supportive but i also don't think missouri fans bother to much for small time games as your program has had high levels of success and is more of a big time program wanting big time bowl games

Hard to argue with you. Still sucks if you're a die-hard Mizzou fan.

 

[Farnsworth]

I'm so fed up with this money grubbing ****. Don't come taunt us because you have 2 huge tv markets to fill your spot in a major conference while you know we are already ****ed.

 

[QBUMizzou]

I'm so fed up with this money grubbing ****. Don't come taunt us because you have 2 huge tv markets to fill your spot in a major conference while you know we are already ****ed.

Huh?

 

[Farnsworth]

Okay and you think that doesn't happen in other conferences? I can think of northwestern being snubbed a few times despite having a better record than Iowa, but lets face it Iowa's fan base travels just as good as anyone in the country, would northwestern travel that well? No, its about money. I think the only reason Iowa state was picked over you guys a couple years ago was because we had a football team that hadn't seen a bowl game in awhile and the committees knew that Iowa state fans would flock regardless of where they went. Would missouri fans really wanna play minnesota in the insight bowl? How many fans would of really went to that game. I know missouri fans are extremely supportive but i also don't think missouri fans bother to much for small time games as your program has had high levels of success and is more of a big time program wanting big time bowl games

I like how you lie to not gain hate from the OP. Truth is, we travel VERY well, Mizzou has little supporters in their big cities (KC for example, they claim that market, but they are all ksu or ku fans). However they can push cable companies tv sets just because they are in the general area, even though most in the MO landscapes are pro team fans, for either KC or STL. But it doesn't matter, cause they force the market.

 

[Farnsworth]

Huh?

you can say it isn't right, and I'm not blaming mizzou for anything, but you guys will come out ok no matter what due to tv sets, and you should realize the fans of this board are getting ****ed over big time due to this single fact.

 

[edr247]

you can say it isn't right, and I'm not blaming mizzou for anything, but you guys will come out ok no matter what due to tv sets, and you should realize the fans of this board are getting ****ed over big time due to this single fact.

Huh?

Basically, he doesn't want you to pretend that you're a friend to ISU, as your school is likely going to be fine, while his is facing potential athletic oblivion. Could be wrong though. /interpretation and summary

As for who's fault this is? Well, I think this has been brewing for some time now. Whether it was the Big Ten foolishly sticking at 11 members after picking up PSU back in the early 90s, or the Big Ten declaring it might expand to as many as 16 members a few years ago... or the Big 12's completely lopsided merger and power structure that led to grumblings amongst members... or the Pac-12's desire to match the Big Ten and SEC in revenue...

Or perhaps it is just plain, old-fashioned American greed. We're talking about college sports becoming less about amateur athletics and more about the money. When conferences went from being about institution wide cooperation among universities in a geographic region, to being about how many TV sets were available. Is it Mizzou's fault? Perhaps. But probably they're as much as fault as every other school that let things get as bad as they are now. We all created a monster in the BCS, and now it's threatening to quite literally rip the concept of college football apart.

 

[el tornado]

I think it all started with the Big 10, not by saying they were expanding, but that they could expand to 14 or 16 teams. One team would not have been a big deal (and for the most part it wasn't). But the 14 to 16 team got everyone worried and started to look out for themselves before thinking. 5 teams moving in to one conference would have been a big chain reaction for all of college football.

Agree, Big10 started everyone wanting the greener grass on the other side of the fence.
Someday schools will lament being in a superconference and yearn for the 8 to 10 team geographical setup with true rivals.