*****The Super, Mega, Huge Big 12 Expansion Thread*****

[cyclonedave25]

I disagree. College football (and basketball, too) will always have its traditions, its regionalism, and its location on campus as things that make it unique. Adding a new school can rekindle some of that enthusiasm. WVU fans will be amped up to show the Big 12 what they can do. That means a lot of lively discussion, debate, and fan interest in areas that might have cared less about ISU (or the rest of the conference) before.

Almost none of the Big 10 shared a previous rivalry with Nebraska. But even that old stodgy league seems rejuvenated when they play the Huskers (who aren't the same caliber of team that they were 10-15 years ago).

Student athletes have more tools and support to assist them than ever before. And how many fans make more than one road trip per year? In a conference with few interesting locales, Morgantown will definitely be unique, and worth a trip at some point.

Despite the distance and the academics, WVU was the best move the Big 12 could make right now.

How much less did they care?
I guess what you're really trying to say is that they cared somewhat about ISU and the rest of the conference, right? :swoon:

 

[RayShimley]

Hoops, maybe the most critical reason is this: There is no clear consensus among members on what the Big 12 wants itself to be. The false start on the WVU offer is just another example.

Should the B12 remain a 10-team league? Or go back to 12?

Is the B12 a Midwestern conference? Or is it a better, more expanded version of the SWAC?

Does the B12 expand by finding the best athletic programs it can, no matter where? Or does it seek to grow in its region, looking for schools that can bring new markets and new revenue?

There's room for disagreement, and arguments to be made for each. But these are FUNDAMENTAL components of why a conference exists. The Big 10, Pac 12, and SEC all have clear ideas of what they are, and every major decision they make reinforces that. These are far more important issues that revenue sharing, Tier 3 networks, or bowl slotting. If you can't agree on THESE, how do you move forward?

All conferences have internal conflicts. Usually they're resolved through give-and-take negotiation behind closed doors. Nothing is decided until everyone's on board. Yet how many times have we seen the B12 make a "decision" only to reverse or contradict itself later?

The only thing more surprising than the Big 12's dysfunction is how well its programs have performed IN SPITE of the conference. The Big East is weak, and doesn't have a lot of great teams. Think of how great the Big 12 could have been with better leadership.

Most of what I've read you post is total BS, but I can actually get on board with this. This is the most frustrating thing about the B12.

However, you neglected to mention that Missouri is pretty much a microcosm of all the complaints you just leveled against the B12. Who was the one who first came out claiming they were going to the B10 last year? Whose school signed on for a new 10 year media contract with the B12 less than 1 year ago? Whose Chancellor was chair of the B12 Expansion Committee that was supposedly looking into solidifying the league after TAMU left? What team tried to AGAIN join the Big Ten this year, but when rebuffed then went calling to the SEC? Whose team is STILL in the Big 12 at this very moment and has yet to come out and clearly lay out any definitive statement of their intentions for the 2011 season and beyond?

 

[BBHMagic]

Most of what I've read you post is total BS, but I can actually get on board with this. This is the most frustrating thing about the B12.

However, you neglected to mention that Missouri is pretty much a microcosm of all the complaints you just leveled against the B12. Who was the one who first came out claiming they were going to the B10 last year? Whose school signed on for a new 10 year media contract with the B12 less than 1 year ago? Whose Chancellor was chair of the B12 Expansion Committee that was supposedly looking into solidifying the league after TAMU left? What team tried to AGAIN join the Big Ten this year, but when rebuffed then went calling to the SEC? Whose team is STILL in the Big 12 at this very moment and has yet to come out and clearly lay out any definitive statement of their intentions for the 2011 season and beyond?

OH!!! Pick me! Pick me! I know this one!

 

[Mizzoulander]

Most of what I've read you post is total BS, but I can actually get on board with this. This is the most frustrating thing about the B12.

However, you neglected to mention that Missouri is pretty much a microcosm of all the complaints you just leveled against the B12. Who was the one who first came out claiming they were going to the B10 last year? Whose school signed on for a new 10 year media contract with the B12 less than 1 year ago? Whose Chancellor was chair of the B12 Expansion Committee that was supposedly looking into solidifying the league after TAMU left? What team tried to AGAIN join the Big Ten this year, but when rebuffed then went calling to the SEC? Whose team is STILL in the Big 12 at this very moment and has yet to come out and clearly lay out any definitive statement of their intentions for the 2011 season and beyond?

I'll DEFINITELY stand up and take the heat for MU's contributions to this mess, going back to 1996. As I've said, it's every member's fault for not compromising enough to avoid the current situation.

I'd disagree about a couple points: it's pretty clear that Deaton wanted to stay with the Big 12 while he was chairman, and I don't know of any named admin source that said we wanted the B1G post-2010.

Still, in a few days, MU will be officially gone. And as Hoops and others have said, so will the primary source of the instability. Yet there is STILL widespread disagreement among the remaining members about what the Big 12 should be (let alone the new members, who will have their own ideas). That doesn't get fixed when Mizzou walks out the door.

 

[Gorm]

Deaton says Mizzou is united on plans

 

[sunset]

Hoops, maybe the most critical reason is this: There is no clear consensus among members on what the Big 12 wants itself to be. The false start on the WVU offer is just another example.

Should the B12 remain a 10-team league? Or go back to 12?

Is the B12 a Midwestern conference? Or is it a better, more expanded version of the SWAC?

Does the B12 expand by finding the best athletic programs it can, no matter where? Or does it seek to grow in its region, looking for schools that can bring new markets and new revenue?

There's room for disagreement, and arguments to be made for each. But these are FUNDAMENTAL components of why a conference exists. The Big 10, Pac 12, and SEC all have clear ideas of what they are, and every major decision they make reinforces that. These are far more important issues that revenue sharing, Tier 3 networks, or bowl slotting. If you can't agree on THESE, how do you move forward?

All conferences have internal conflicts. Usually they're resolved through give-and-take negotiation behind closed doors. Nothing is decided until everyone's on board. Yet how many times have we seen the B12 make a "decision" only to reverse or contradict itself later?

The only thing more surprising than the Big 12's dysfunction is how well its programs have performed IN SPITE of the conference. The Big East is weak, and doesn't have a lot of great teams. Think of how great the Big 12 could have been with better leadership.

So the false starts by the SEC and Big10 were perfectly normal but when the Big12 does the same thing it's proof of instability and lack of cohesion? Right........... You look more a fool every time you post.

 

[Wesley]

Hoops, maybe the most critical reason is this: There is no clear consensus among members on what the Big 12 wants itself to be. The false start on the WVU offer is just another example.

Should the B12 remain a 10-team league? Or go back to 12?

Is the B12 a Midwestern conference? Or is it a better, more expanded version of the SWAC?

Does the B12 expand by finding the best athletic programs it can, no matter where? Or does it seek to grow in its region, looking for schools that can bring new markets and new revenue?

There's room for disagreement, and arguments to be made for each. But these are FUNDAMENTAL components of why a conference exists. The Big 10, Pac 12, and SEC all have clear ideas of what they are, and every major decision they make reinforces that. These are far more important issues that revenue sharing, Tier 3 networks, or bowl slotting. If you can't agree on THESE, how do you move forward?

All conferences have internal conflicts. Usually they're resolved through give-and-take negotiation behind closed doors. Nothing is decided until everyone's on board. Yet how many times have we seen the B12 make a "decision" only to reverse or contradict itself later?

The only thing more surprising than the Big 12's dysfunction is how well its programs have performed IN SPITE of the conference. The Big East is weak, and doesn't have a lot of great teams. Think of how great the Big 12 could have been with better leadership.

I think in this case, B12 is just waiting for a final decision from ZOU before any members are invited. If you remember, Denton was getting off the pot earlier this week. Now he may be on it two more weeks reading the sports section. It is clean if they stay and no additional members are needed so the B12 does not crash the BE. However, if ZOU leaves, the BE must crash for the B12 to remain as Ten or more.

I think all the BE talk was based on ZOU making a decision earlier this week. Now the two different sets of books and extrapolations on money must be studies, jimmied, and digested by the slow pokes in the curator room even though Brady has the supposed green light. It takes cuirators a long time to digest reports so here WVU and Louisville sit here and wait. Neinas gets calls from Mitch McConnell and others while Brady is still in the rest room reading the reports trying to figure out where the most dollars can be made.

This is dragging out the plot longer than they did on LOST.

 

[Mizzoulander]

I think in this case, B12 is just waiting for a final decision from ZOU before any members are invited. If you remember, Denton was getting off the pot earlier this week. Now he may be on it two more weeks reading the sports section. It is clean if they stay and no additional members are needed so the B12 does not crash the BE. However, if ZOU leaves, the BE must crash for the B12 to remain as Ten or more.

I think all the BE talk was based on ZOU making a decision earlier this week. Now the two different sets of books and extrapolations on money must be studies, jimmied, and digested by the slow pokes in the curator room even though Brady has the supposed green light. It takes cuirators a long tiume to digest reports so here WVU and Louisville siut here and wait. Neinas gets calls from Mitch McConnell and others while Brady is still in the rest room reading the reports trying to figure out where the most dollars can be made.

This is dragging out the plot longer than they did on LOST.

It's hard to know exactly what's going on behind closed doors. But this doesn't fit with anything that we know about what's going on.

1. There's no doubt MU is gone. Only remaining issues are buyout and timeline. Neither should interfere with expansion. MU has recused itself from participation in that.

2. The Curators no longer have input...only Deaton, the attorneys, and the SEC. And the only reason the Curators took themselves out of the conversation is because the decision is already made.

3. The delay is due to indecision and conflict from within the Big 12. UT and others only want 10 teams for now. That leaves 1 spot open. Both WVU and L-ville want it. There are some in favor of each on the Big 12 board. Nothing moves until at least 8 schools agree on a new member. If MU left today, it would make no difference.

Why they announced a presser in Morgantown, only to cancel it at the last minute, is beyond me. But it's not the first time the B12 has looked like the gang who can't shoot straight.

 

[Cydwinder]

It's hard to know exactly what's going on behind closed doors. But this doesn't fit with anything that we know about what's going on.

1. There's no doubt MU is gone. Only remaining issues are buyout and timeline. Neither should interfere with expansion. MU has recused itself from participation in that.

2. The Curators no longer have input...only Deaton, the attorneys, and the SEC. And the only reason the Curators took themselves out of the conversation is because the decision is already made.

3. The delay is due to indecision and conflict from within the Big 12. UT and others only want 10 teams for now. That leaves 1 spot open. Both WVU and L-ville want it. There are some in favor of each on the Big 12 board. Nothing moves until at least 8 schools agree on a new member. If MU left today, it would make no difference.

Why they announced a presser in Morgantown, only to cancel it at the last minute, is beyond me. But it's not the first time the B12 has looked like the gang who can't shoot straight.

Are you sure this is still accurate? 8 teams out of 9 (assuming TCU gets to vote on the matter) is a very odd number.

 

[ISUAgronomist]

Are you sure this is still accurate? 8 teams out of 9 (assuming TCU gets to vote on the matter) is a very odd number.

A&M still gets a vote as does MU but they can choose to abstain. TCU is not an official member yet so they can't vote but are likely in on the discussions.

75% * 10 = 7.5 rounded to 8.

If they abstain then 75% * 8 = 6 (+ 2 abstaining)

 

[weisr2002]

WVA is fighting back at Mitch McConnell.

Manchin Issues Statement on WVU to Big 12 Situation - WVU Mountaineer Sports: Basketball | Football | News |

 

[ISUAgronomist]

Sen. Jay Rockefeller speaks up as well:

Sen. Jay Rockefeller released the following statement on West Virginia University's potential move to the Big 12, and the controversy surrounding possible roadblocks to the move:

"The Big 12 picked WVU on the strength of its program -- period. Now the media reports that political games may upend that. That's just flat wrong. I am doing and will do whatever it takes to get us back to the merits."

Manchin, Rockefeller weigh in on WVU/Big 12 situation  - State News - Charleston Daily Mail - West Virginia News and Sports -

 

[Mizzoulander]

A&M still gets a vote as does MU but they can choose to abstain. TCU is not an official member yet so they can't vote but are likely in on the discussions.

75% * 10 = 7.5 rounded to 8.

If they abstain then 75% * 8 = 6 (+ 2 abstaining)

I think Agronomist is correct...with 8 voting members, you need 6 votes. Good catch.

 

[Cyclophile1]

I think in this case, B12 is just waiting for a final decision from ZOU before any members are invited. If you remember, Denton was getting off the pot earlier this week. Now he may be on it two more weeks reading the sports section. It is clean if they stay and no additional members are needed so the B12 does not crash the BE. However, if ZOU leaves, the BE must crash for the B12 to remain as Ten or more.

I think all the BE talk was based on ZOU making a decision earlier this week. Now the two different sets of books and extrapolations on money must be studies, jimmied, and digested by the slow pokes in the curator room even though Brady has the supposed green light. It takes cuirators a long time to digest reports so here WVU and Louisville sit here and wait. Neinas gets calls from Mitch McConnell and others while Brady is still in the rest room reading the reports trying to figure out where the most dollars can be made.

This is dragging out the plot longer than they did on LOST.

I have no knowledge that this is true, but is it possible that Deaton and the Curators are intentionally stalling the process as a way of negotiating the exit fees? "If you want us gone so badly, then by all means let us off like CU and Nebby for $8 - $9 million." Basically, they are holding a bunch of other schools and conferences hostage with their stalling. They could conceivably drag it out for the better part of 3 more months and not really affect their buyout based on the sliding scale in the bylaws. It's really dirty pool, but if we assume that they are in fact leaving, they could just be jacking around intentionally while they work out all the details with the SEC including scheduling and contracts.

This whole thing just stinks and I had not been upset by MU much until the last few weeks. They are being jack wagons and I get the feeling they don't really care what the ramifications are for anyone else affected by their actions and process.

 

[aeroclone]

WVA is fighting back at Mitch McConnell.

Manchin Issues Statement on WVU to Big 12 Situation - WVU Mountaineer Sports: Basketball | Football | News |

Wow. :unsure:

 

[Cydwinder]

A&M still gets a vote as does MU but they can choose to abstain. TCU is not an official member yet so they can't vote but are likely in on the discussions.

75% * 10 = 7.5 rounded to 8.

If they abstain then 75% * 8 = 6 (+ 2 abstaining)

This makes much more sense. Thanks for helping to explain it. So what we need to do is compromise inside the conference and have the 4 who want WVU to agree to vote in Louisville as well...and then invite either BYU or Cinci and have 12 members again.

 

[Incyte]

I think Agronomist is correct...with 8 voting members, you need 6 votes. Good catch.

That's not right. Any abstaining vote is the same as a 'no' vote. We still have 10 members so 8 yes votes are needed.

 

[Bestaluckcy]

This makes much more sense. Thanks for helping to explain it. So what we need to do is compromise inside the conference and have the 4 who want WVU to agree to vote in Louisville as well...and then invite either BYU or Cinci and have 12 members again.

Maybe not so fast. If Texas is holding out for 10 members. The Big 12 members could agree compromise to stay at ten if Texas signs away on 13 year revenue waiver pledge to Big 12 instead of current 6 year. That would give the conference more stability than going to 12 in my opinion. If they will not do that we go to 12.

 

[Mizzoulander]

I have no knowledge that this is true, but is it possible that Deaton and the Curators are intentionally stalling the process as a way of negotiating the exit fees? "If you want us gone so badly, then by all means let us off like CU and Nebby for $8 - $9 million." Basically, they are holding a bunch of other schools and conferences hostage with their stalling. They could conceivably drag it out for the better part of 3 more months and not really affect their buyout based on the sliding scale in the bylaws. It's really dirty pool, but if we assume that they are in fact leaving, they could just be jacking around intentionally while they work out all the details with the SEC including scheduling and contracts.

This whole thing just stinks and I had not been upset by MU much until the last few weeks. They are being jack wagons and I get the feeling they don't really care what the ramifications are for anyone else affected by their actions and process.

I don't know if they're intentionally stalling, but like most negotiations, one side may be more time-sensitive than the other. You're absolutely right...MU has 2-3 more months before the sliding scale window jacks up the cost (only 10%). And if the SEC is fine waiting, then MU has no reason to hurry things along (other than to appease its fans). If that time is leverage to lower the buyout, then they'll use it.

Had they conditionally withdrawn last week, that leverage isn't there. Maybe these guys actually KNOW what they're doing!

Eh, probably not.

If that is in fact the case, then is it worth it to the Big 12 to have their attorneys working on this (instead of expansion) for the next couple months just to get an additional $5-$10M from MU?

(I have a feeling this isn't going to be a very popular position...)

 

[simply1]

Mizzou has moved to #1 on my most loathed list, kudos.