why in the **** is this thing still on the front page. can we give it it's own forum off of the front page already!?!?!?!?
why in the **** is this thing still on the front page. can we give it it's own forum off of the front page already!?!?!?!?
I hear you Cyman. I do think Dodds still carries a lot of weight in the conference though. The good news as far as I am concerned is that the article seems to indicate that Texas is now open to 12 teams. I would love to see the Big 12 take it even further and grab Louisville, Cincinnati, Rutgers, and UCONN to go to 14. That would collapse the Big East and perhaps just force ND's hand. Would be nice to be the aggressor for once.
Finally, did you see the article about Vandy's Associate AD saying that the SEC is not finished expanding. Really hope the target this time is the ACC and not UT for instance.
WOW- I didn't catch that one. Looks like the article was published a week ago. I think we all knew they'd go to 16 at some point, but I can't believe they came out an admitted it publicly. I think if they go to 16 they'll almost assuredly expand east. I would expect some combination of Florida State, Clemson, Georgia Tech, or West Virginia with the 1st two being the most likely. Then they can move Missouri back West where it makes some geographical sense. I supposed they'd consider an OU/OSU combo, but whatever they do they'll have to break the "no expanding in an already existing SEC state" rule.
If you assume they take 2 ACC teams, it'd be interesting to see if they ACC is happy going back down to 12 or if they take UConn and Rutgers to finish off the Big East.
Here's the link for anybody interested
Vandy vice chancellor hints SEC not done expanding | CollegeFootballTalk
Saw something today that said VA Tech would be a target. Geographically that move would make total sense. If that would happen, then I think that the ACC would look at Rutgers and/or UCONN to fill the gap. Since the Big 12 has already gone east with WVU, I think we should go ahead and expand with the teams mentioned earlier and create a East / West Big 12. Given Dodds comments along with Neinas saying expansion is done for 2012, got to believe that something is in the hopper for '13 or whenever the TV rights are up. PS. With Boren's comments about Rutgers, I have to believe that there is more to this than just idle speculation. Many of the Big East boards were buzzing about it over the weekend.
Byrne has lied in the past.Anybody see this posted today? More evidence that A&M is delusional and they used false reports about the Longhorn Network as a smoke screen to bolt...Delusional...sounds like of like Missouri...only difference is A&M will be middle of the pack SEC and Mizzou will be bottom of the pack SEC in a few years after they lose their Texas recruits
Texas Tech spokesman: ESPN did not threaten Tech | Lubbock Online | Lubbock Avalanche-Journal
Texas Tech spokesperson Blayne Beal said Monday that ESPN never threatened the university to air its Big 12 Conference football game against Texas on the Longhorn Network.
In a July 21 email from Texas A&M athletic director Bill Byrne that was published by the Dallas Morning News on Nov. 18, Byrne claimed ESPN "Threatened Tech."
"The first year of cable system is the critical startup time," Byrne wrote. "So far no cable systems have signed up. According to (Texas AD) Deloss (Dodds), tu contract calls for one game with best efforts for a 2nd game. ESPN pushing hard to get clearances and inventory. Threatened Tech. Deloss acknowledges ESPN rep did that but he stopped them from doing that anymore. Privately says he can control ESPN, publicly says he can't."
Beal said Monday that Byrne's claim of ESPN threatening Tech is "unequivocally not true."
"ESPN presented a plan," Beal said. "We reviewed it and decided against it."
The email, which contains a series of concerns regarding ESPN and the Longhorn Network, does not list a recipient. In the email, Byrne also notes that A&M needs "...a backup plan. SEC? Pac-12? Bigger-10?"
I think it's unlikely that Missouri would make a major decision with long-term ramifications for the entire university off of a "false report." Does anybody here believe MU didn't take ENOUGH time to make its decision?
Neinas doesn't specify what information he believes to be "false." Missouri's under no obligation to share anything with him. This isn't a court case...if the financial report dealt with future revenue strategy for the SEC, then there's good reason NOT to share it.
From reading this, it seems like Neinas got his Depends in a wad over the fact that he wasn't allowed to "make his case" to the MU administration. The Big 12 had YEARS to prove that it was committed to all of its members. Yet none of the proposed changes were approved until after NU, CU and TAMU left, and when MU had one foot out the door.
Does SEC membership generate an extra $12M per year for Mizzou? We will find out. But if not, then that's MU's problem. Not Chuck Neinas's.
Interesting to hear Rutgers name thrown out. I think that Kirk Bohls speculation himself and nothing else.
As much as A&M/Mizzou fans would like you to think otherwise, I don't think DeLoss Dodds is the commish of the B12 anymore. The last couple years have given Texas a lot of negative pub and more defections by disgruntled members would either force Texas' hand to a move they don't want to make and give Texas more negative pub.
Your mizzou curator **** sticks couldn't even schedule a conference call without it being rick-rolled and having 4 different people introduce themselves as Dan Beebe to the gal running the call. If they can't get something like a conference call right, it's not that far fetched to think they would **** this up too.
Well, that's a great point. In Missouri, the A/V technicians that set up the conference calls for the Curators and made the access number accessible to the public rather than only credentialed media, are the SAME people that review legal documents and analyze financial reports for the University.
We find it's more cost-effective that way.
(not even going to bother with a pirate...)
I think it's unlikely that Missouri would make a major decision with long-term ramifications for the entire university off of a "false report." Does anybody here believe MU didn't take ENOUGH time to make its decision?
Neinas doesn't specify what information he believes to be "false." Missouri's under no obligation to share anything with him. This isn't a court case...if the financial report dealt with future revenue strategy for the SEC, then there's good reason NOT to share it.
From reading this, it seems like Neinas got his Depends in a wad over the fact that he wasn't allowed to "make his case" to the MU administration. The Big 12 had YEARS to prove that it was committed to all of its members. Yet none of the proposed changes were approved until after NU, CU and TAMU left, and when MU had one foot out the door.
Does SEC membership generate an extra $12M per year for Mizzou? We will find out. But if not, then that's MU's problem. Not Chuck Neinas's.
To be champions, Texas needs to start winning basic games. I am beginning to think the management of their football team needs an upgrade. I would think their bulletin boards would be howling by now like they are in Lincoln.I think you've got this backwards. The defection of 4 of the 5 teams that had/have options to move (OU being the exception, along it sounds as if the Pac 12 presidents had approved, they'd be gone too) has strengthened Dodds' hand. The only teams with leverage are gone. The remaining teams are either tied to UT or OU, or have no other options in a solidly-AQ league.
Texas does not care about negative publicity. They want the easiest, most lucrative path to championship games. And the moment that the Big 12 does not provide that, they're gone.
But for right now, why would they leave? They have veto power over the number of teams in conference (who else wants to stay at 10?) They have de facto control over not only their own Tier 3 games, but (from Byrne's email) they are working to gain control over others as well.
If you trust Texas to act in the interests of long term Big 12 success, that's OK. I just don't see it taking place.
(BTW, **** Vitale said tonight that Missouri belongs in the Big 12. Chalk up one MORE good reason to leave...) :smile:
He's on mine. But really people, quit quoting himIt's hard to ignore Mizzoulander's posts when people keep quoting him. Everyone should put him on their ignore list and he would go away (even if he doesn't ACTUALLY go away).
He's on mine. But really people, quit quoting him