And even if they did, their GOR might be an issue. (Of course, their deal does end in a couple of years, so not sure how long their GOR is.)
***Official B12 Expansion/Implosion Thread 3.0???***
- Thread starter acgclone
- Start date
And even if they did, their GOR might be an issue. (Of course, their deal does end in a couple of years, so not sure how long their GOR is.)
I believe the Vegas folks made TCU a 7 pt favorite over all playoff teams except Bama.
Even if Nebraska does want to come back (wouldn't stun me after Osborne is out of the picture) the Big 10 has a GOR. Nebraska is there for awhile, period.
Tom Osborne is actively working with the B1G front office on some partnerships with his Teammates Program. He is very much connected with Delaney and Delaney has his ear. That is what matters.
Snyder and Osborne are very close personal friends. Oddly, Mack Brown and Snyder are as well. And as calculating as they are, particularly Bill, I wouldn't be surprised at all if they've talked about it, i.e. Nubs return.
Many rights most certainly can terminate for cause. Your driving rights gets pulled for DUI. Your house can be lost to the government through eminent domain.
And the GOR's contract is not the same as the league Bylaws, the latter having a two year termination clause, the former having none. I'm not sure why you keep melding them together, when they are separate documents, with different parties, serving different purposes.
The B12 might have been disadvantaged in 2014 without a CCG so Boren is full of crap like everyone else who states that the B12 must add a CCG in response to a unique set of circumstances that occurred in 2014.
In the vast majority of years with an undefeated or one loss team, the B12 will be at an advantage without a CCG.
Guys like coach Snyder disagree with you. So do I. You can't take a measurement variable away and say you have the same measurements as others being considered who play CCG's.
Last edited:
Just wishful thinking on your part. Conference championship games are always worth more credit. Sorry. This will happen again.
Bylaws references the GOR many times and the termination clause in the bylaws references how to handle the GOR in that situation. So the are not completely separate documents. They are related documents that are tied together.
I agree that many rights can be terminated for cause. That would be the defense in any legal battle. But why is there a need to put a termination clause in the actual grant of rights? The withdrawing member has to show that there is cause for the league's rights to be taken away. The league would have had to act in some illegal manner. If a team just simply withdrew, it would be very, very difficult to show any cause similar to a DUI. And what government authority is going to take over the rights? And if they do, will they actually favor the withdrawing team?
There is no termination clause in the GOR, HoopsT. WTH are you arguing now? Earlier you wrote that people who said there was no termination clause were lying. Have you now changed? I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20150723/GZ02/150729694
It seems the Big 12 does have an expansion committee and Boren is on it.
It seems the Big 12 does have an expansion committee and Boren is on it.
Assuming that there is even minute interest by the NU administration in coming back to the Big 12...returning to the Big 12 after being gone such a short time is basically an admission by the NU administration that the move to the Big Ten was a monumental clusterfudge. Millions of dollars of TV revenue were/would be lost due to partial payouts. Do you think Osborne and the others at NU could put their egos aside long enough to make such an admission?
I honestly think an ACC/Big 12 megaconference as a measure to fend off BigTen/SEC is more likely than Neb leaving the Big Ten for the Big 12 at this point. I think there was an inkling of it back when the Pac and B12 could have created a 20 or 22 team league that turned into Pac poaching attempt that died. It really is in mutual interest of B12 and ACC, still pie in the sky, but less so than any team intentionally leaving the B12, SEC or Pac at this point for the B12 or ACC.
Not sure how you can say might when the week before the CCGs were played the Big 12 was in and the day after the CGGs were played they were out...
Regardless, if the Big 12 gets left out again this season it's adding however many teams it takes to have a CCG.
I'd be happier if the committee would just come out and say they weight the end of the season much more than the season as a whole. College football has always been about a run for perfection. The first iteration of the committee says it doesn't care about a run toward perfection and is trashing that tradition.
TCU and OSU were very close in so many ways. After OSU got the game against Wisc their SOS was nearly identical. TCU's one loss was to a top team on the road by an eyelash. Ohio State's was at home to an average team and they got spanked. By any account TCU was much closer to being that traditional unblemished goal of college football. Also the previous year computer average was 1/3 of the equation and in that metric TCU was 4th, being 2nd-4th in almost every computer poll that was used.
I'm not meaning this as a slam on OSU, but to drop TCU from 3rd to 6th for a blowout win when they were so close to unbeaten, it really is a big break with college football tradition. They played a tougher schedule than FSU and were much more dominant in their wins than FSU, even after the playoff in some ways they have the least blemished resume of any college football team last year and were ranked 6th by the committee.
Next year the selection criteria need to be who are the conference champs playing the best at the end of the year ignoring the early season. Anything else is highly inconsistent with dropping TCU 3 spots the last week for a blowout win. If they come up with an inconsistent criteria this year, they need to cement it that it won't keep changing every year.
“That said, though, we in the Big 12, in terms of football and basketball, are competitive from top to bottom." See more at: http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20150723/GZ02/150729694#sthash.EZycSAMD.dpuf
Here is what I don't want to happen:
Boren convinces the committee to expand regionally with Houston and Memphis. Boren and Oklahoma AD then decide a couple years later that the B12 isn't attractive anymore because the opponents aren't big enough (because they have to play opponents like Houston and Memphis more) and revenues aren't enough (because Houston and Memphis dilute the money pool). Oklahoma uses expansion as their excuse to leave.
This would remind me too much of Missouri and Nebraska- Missouri left because there was too much instability when they started the instability with their Governor's comments. Nebraska left because they wanted to be in a conference with equal members even though they wanted revenue to be split unevenly.
They're so full of ****.
Look at Barry Alvarez; the man has never been associated with football other than B1G football, NU, UI, Wisc...OF COURSE anyone who destroys his Badgers are going to get his vote because to him Wisconsin is already more legitimate than BU or TCU.
Or Osborne; how the **** can anyone say he's objective when it comes to the Big 12?
All leagues have wallflowers: Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, Vandy, Washington State, CU, Wake, BC, Syracuse, on and on. Basketball is even worse.
Last edited:
