*****The Super, Mega, Huge Big 12 Expansion Thread*****
- Thread starter CloneFan4
- Start date
- Status
I would hope the new conf commish would encourage and asst in setting up a BigXII network with all the other schools. Even if I was a UT fan and I had a choice of what network to pay for I would probably pick the BigXII network.
I could see more UT games on that network than I could on the LHN. All those conf games that fall to tier 3 that are away games anyway (that probably wouldn't travel to - ISU, KU, KSU, WVA, UL etc...) I could watch on the BigXII network where I could only see one or two on the LHN.
Ya think you can take college administrators at their word? No way. I don't know why we trusted everybody at their word after last summer.
I liked this article..
Stop superconferences, start a football playoff - College Football - Rivals.com
If you have a money problem, stop destroying conferences, tradition, and rivalries, and start going to a playoff. There's a quote somewhere in there about a playoff bringing in about a billion dollars a year. Even if you divided that among 100 schools, that's another 10 million a year for every school.
Stop superconferences, start a football playoff - College Football - Rivals.com
If you have a money problem, stop destroying conferences, tradition, and rivalries, and start going to a playoff. There's a quote somewhere in there about a playoff bringing in about a billion dollars a year. Even if you divided that among 100 schools, that's another 10 million a year for every school.
Good point. A conference network is more likely without LHN. The early statements from UT are that they might negotiate even split on tier one, which will cost them millions, but they are digging in on LHN which is all theirs. Perhaps it is an opening gambit and there may yet be a middle ground - e.g. a way to weight viewers on a conference network.
Pac-12 slows the college football expansion train for now - latimes.com
"To be clear: Commissioner Larry Scott did meet with Texas and Oklahoma. A deal could have been done if not for some audacious other-end behavior.
The message, as one Bowl Championship Series executive familiar with the situation relayed it this week, was "Texas cannot be trusted." The Pac-12 was willing to consider expansion again, but not on anyone else's terms.
The audacious part was Oklahoma and Texas acting as if it was their decisions to join the Pac-12, not the other way around."
Good stuff.
"To be clear: Commissioner Larry Scott did meet with Texas and Oklahoma. A deal could have been done if not for some audacious other-end behavior.
The message, as one Bowl Championship Series executive familiar with the situation relayed it this week, was "Texas cannot be trusted." The Pac-12 was willing to consider expansion again, but not on anyone else's terms.
The audacious part was Oklahoma and Texas acting as if it was their decisions to join the Pac-12, not the other way around."
Good stuff.
Why... that question should probably be addressed by the soon to be former Big XII commissioner Dan "What is the is this conference realignment jazz everyone keeps talking about" Beebe.
The problem is, this whole thing isn't about money - it's about power. The BCS leagues refuse to let the mid majors get a spot at the big boy table - going to a playoff allows them a spot - keeping the BCS keeps them out. That is why the BCS won't die.
Back to the expansion topic, PBC over at the NW board posted this today:
Tonight, the University of Texas president Bill Powers co-authored a letter of intent with the Big Ten conference.
The key terms include:
- the University of Texas will in good faith conduct discussions with the Big Ten conference and no other conference related to its post-2012 conference affiliation
- the Big Ten will not invite any other institution to join the conference without the prior approval of Texas
- before joining the Big Ten, Texas will have assurances that it can schedule four non-Big Ten conference football games per season
- the requirement that any final arrangement be designed to increased revenues among all Big Ten conference schools, with no discrepancies in distributions unrelated to television network distributions among conference institutions
- Texas will become a full CIC member
- Texas and the Big Ten will jointly approve any third party media arrangements related to Texas athletics moving forward
- the goal that Texas participates as a full member of the conference beginning in the fall of 2014
Texas' intentions with regard to the Big Ten will remain without official announcements until a specific group of universities, including the current Texas' Big XII schools, solidify their own conference affiliation status. Neither the Big Ten nor Texas wishes to be seen as the primary driving force in conference realignment.
The decision of Syracuse and Pittsburg to join the ACC came unexpectedly to the Big Ten. Certain leaders of the conference remained uncertain that a similar unexpected action could take place on the heels of the meeting of the Texas Board of Regents, particularly given the lack of uniform communications between Texas stakeholders and the conference. These individuals no longer have such uncertainties.
This post was edited on 9/22 3:09 AM by PURPLE Book Cat
WildcatReport.com - Message Boards
This guy, while outlandish at times, has hit on some things that no one could hit on unless they had insider info. He was the first to break the UNL to the Big Ten story (while everyone else was still reporting Mizzou) & he leaked some info about ESPN last year that made ESPiN's lawyers contact rivals about removing the content from the message board.
Honestly, I hope he is dead wrong about this....I don't want Texas in the Big 10. Not now. Not ever. They are a cancer and would be sure to rip apart a tradition rich conference that already makes enough money to keep everyone happy.
The Big 10 is just asking for problems if the bolded is true...I just can't see Mr. Ego Jim Delany letting Texas boss his conference around.
Ya while I think there have been some conversations between Texas and the Big 10, I call this whole thing BS as this would almost be a binding contract. Their efforts to keep the Big 12 together suggest they rule the Big 12 and are going nowhere.
Wouldn't this entire contract, if it actually existed, be the exact definition of tortious interference? I can't see anyway in Hell any conference, especially the Big Ten, would agree to anything like this IN PRINT.
I'm calling bigtime BS on this.
Worth visiting the link and reading all the comments, and you will find many consistent with your conclusion.
Also probably don't want to wait long as it says Rivals has deleted his posts in the past.
Texas won't share the LHN $$ with anyone. An equal split would cost them boatloads. If that stuff was true, it means UT is already running the Big ten.
Ya this would be "insider" information, no way the Big 10 would let this leak, that would destroy the Big 10, so hopefully its true :twitcy:
True, or as you also say false "insider" information, intended for public consumption.
Either way hard to believe they would want it out there.
Last edited:
The UT to the Big 10 thing is not happening. And we have our under educated Red Raider friends to thank. What did the board of regents actually give DeLoss Dodds the power to do after their meeting? Stay in the Big 12. All new conference affiliation decisions were to be made by the Board of Regents. Why was this? Simple. Staying in the Big 12 protects TTU. Moving may not if TTU is unwelcome. TTU is most definitely unwelcome in the Big 10. UT will never get the approval to move to the Big 10 because of this. Considering the new information about an iron-clad contract and very high buyouts being brought to the table by Dodds this NW rumor is a joke. I realize NW fans have nothing else to talk about during football season(except for the win possibility against Iowa), but they need to stop.
No matter what it really is, I hope it's being forwarded to everyone in Nebraska.
- Status
