(05-03-2013 12:59 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 10:09 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 08:55 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Basically for the Big XII, its really a tale of two teams, UT and OU. If either of them leave (and most likely both would leave together, if they left), then the conference would split apart, GOR or not. Both of them could afford an exit fee (although neither would be able to deal with a loss of GOR).

The biggest threat to the Big XII is a successful and wealthy Texas A&M in the SEC gaining on UT. That plus a Notre Dame thriving in quasi conference membership in the ACC. That might entice Texas to try the Notre Dame model with the PAC 12 or the B1G (the SEC would never go for that).

A&M is irrelevant. Biggest threat to Big 12 would be bad coaching hires by Texas and OU following Brown and Stoops leading to slumps just prior to the TV contract renewal. 2nd biggest threat would be SEC's presence allowing schools like Arkansas and Tennessee stealing recruits from TCU/Tech/Okie St./Baylor/KSU lowering the competitive strength of the Big 12. So far the latter isn't happening. Last year the opposite happened. The rest of the Big 12 did quite well and A&M stole recruits outside Texas that might have gone to an Arkansas or Tennessee.

Only a UT homer can deny that TAMU's move to the SEC raised its profile dramatically. They're putting themselves in position to overtake UT as the big dog in Texas. We'll see how next year works out. Deloss Dodds has some real competition now.

I think Texas will open up to more recruiting from the non-Texas SEC teams. It will take a few years to get the recruiting contacts moving, but the SEC has moved into Texas. Once rivalries get established (and they will - fast) it will accelerate. Texas will still get plenty of recruits. But they're not going to be in as a good place if TAMU runs off a few seasons like last years (next year, TAMU is supposed to be VERY good). Or if the LSU - TAMU rivalry overtakes UT-OU (as it it already has here in Houston, which is effectively a SEC town now).

UT has exactly one high profile conference mate - Oklahoma. That's it. O State and K State occasionally show a flash or two, but they're not really going to compare with TAMU playing LSU and Alabama every year.

Trading Nebraska and Texas A&M for West Virginia and TCU and losing a CCG was a hit to the Big XII-II. Especially if TCU has trouble keeping up and becomes, as I fear, another Baylor (a private school that really isn't much of a player in the conference - two years ago notwithstanding).

The Big XII-II is really built on two teams, UT and OU. It will be very bad for them if one or both of them don't have stellar years for the next couple of years.

A&M is not a threat to UT. Texas will always be the big dog in Texas for many reasons. Johnny Manziel and Kevin Sumlin were vastly more important to A&M than joining the SEC. How A&M does will be based on whether they win or not, like it has ALWAYS been. They actually do pretty well recruiting even when they aren't doing any better than .500. Its rare to have a year when anyone but Texas or OU beats them out in Texas recruiting. You're from SEC country and don't understand state of Texas dynamics.

You probably don't remember that Arkansas was a big dog before they joined the SEC. Moving to the SEC seriously hurt their football program. A&M isn't "moving out of state," like Arkansas, but joining the SEC doesn't guarantee success. If A&M has a streak of consistent strong seasons they can become very successful even if the SEC goes into a slump and drops for a while to the 3rd or 4th best conference. If A&M performs like they did in the Big 12, it doesn't matter if the SEC wins another 7 mncs.

Either way, Texas will continue to do well. There's more than enough talent in Texas.

2019: 50th anniversary of Woodstock. That's where I'll be

(05-03-2013 03:42 PM)esayem Wrote:  2019: 50th anniversary of Woodstock. That's where I'll be

The SEC, Big 10, Texas A&M are not a threat to the Big 12. The only threat to the Big 12
is UT. If they want it to exist, it will exist.

I think the next craze will be to re-regionalize many non-revenue sports. Football and basketball will be unaffected. Women's basketball will also remain with the new affiliations out of fairness, as will softball if baseball doesn't cut back. But costs for the others may drive "minor sports" regional contraction.

(05-03-2013 05:11 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  The SEC, Big 10, Texas A&M are not a threat to the Big 12. The only threat to the Big 12
is UT. If they want it to exist, it will exist.

Pretty much. OU has some sway in UT's decision making to that end. But at the end of the day, it was a conference made by UT for UT. And that way it shall stay. Amen.

P.S. See you guys in 2025.

(05-03-2013 11:22 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 10:01 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 09:20 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 09:06 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 06:56 AM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  May hit around 2019-2020. That is 3-4 years before the B12's GOR expires and before an extension is agreed to. Conferences will be in school's ears about jumping ship after 2023. All it would take is one school to not agree to extend the GOR and it will be Katie bar the door.

The ACC has both a GOR and an exit fee. The B12 only has the GOR. If timed correctly, it would be vulnerable in that time frame. I don't know if they could do it or not, but adding an exit fee would help solidify them going forward.

Of course the landscape of college sports and broadcasting is such that it may not be feasible to expand without diluting members payouts. The B1G Network that is a cash cow now could be dried up if cable companies go to an ala cartel programming. Each expansion brings with it new challenges, so the conferences may decide that expansion beyond 14 isn't worth it.

Sent from my AT100 using Tapatalk HD

I think in part, it may depend on how successful the new college playoff is for certain conferences. Let's assume that the SEC continues dominating. Maybe the PAC 12 decides that the time has come (B12 GOR expires) to seriously upgrade its football strength. It could possible go after Texas, TT, Oklahoma, and OSU. If the B1G hasn't expanded more by then, I'm sure it wouldn't miss the B12 clearance $ell. Depending on how successful WV is, the ACC might do some shopping as well....

Agreed. If rumors are true, OU wanted in to the SEC each time the Big 12 looked like it was doomed, but they always insistend on OSU coming along, which was a dealbreaker for the SEC. It would also be a dealbreaker for the B1G. Politically, UT and TT going together would be smiled upon. UT, TT, OU, and OSU to the PAC making 16 teams makes a lot of sense next time around. Kansas would have a home in the B1G if the ACC stays together. K State and Iowa State would be left out to dry. If the landscape was such that 18 to 20 teams in a power conference made sense, Kansas and K State to the PAC would also work well. Poor Iowa State.

According to the OU Prez and media reports in OKC, OU had an offer (unofficial to those that want to play semantics) to join the SEC but has no interest in joining the SEC, because the OU Administraton wants no part of the SEC culture. Apparently, the same goes for Texas.

I'm sure different regions report different things. Regardless, the SEC would love to have Oklahoma. What is bad about the SEC culture from Oklahoma's perspective? If in the SEC, academics at Oklahoma is average (tied with Tennessee at 8th, actually), Revenue is above average (would have been 6th highest), football would be top third, basketball would be average in SEC, neighbor flagships in Mizzou and Arkansas. We are very happy with TAMU, so Texas is not a big deal. Would love to have Oklahoma and UNC if the future unfolds that way, though.

Different regions may hear different rumors, but this was from the horse's mouth....the local newspaper and the School President on local television reporting.........that is a big difference

(05-03-2013 02:47 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 01:45 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 09:16 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  Any of the GoR's that are synced to a media deal leave much to speculation. Because the unity is backed by a television contract, it's not just what the schools want, but the broadcasters, too. Any "look-in" period for the broadcasters put the GoR at risk, because any alteration to the media deal potentially gives grounds for dispute.

In short, they read as "we'll deal with it when and if we get there."

The symbolism of the Big Ten's GoR, where it's not aligned to any particular media deal; it shows that the schools want to be associated with each other regardless of television. "No matter what."

That isn't exactly accurate. Although the B1G school's GOR isn't tied to a tv deal with a broadcast partner, they were traded for an ownership stake in the B1G Network. It isn't so noble and selfless as you assert.

Nebraska had to buy into the BTN. Whether Maryland and Rutgers have to is another question. I don't remember the details there...

Yeah, the B1G slyly layered these matters, kind of making them independent of each other (membership, GoR, CIC, BTN). Nothing "noble or selfless" implied on that end, other than these schools wanting to be associated with each other.

I don't know how seriously the B1G takes their GoR. When Alvarez spoke about taking UMD and Rutgers as sort of an "appeasement" to PSU, there wasn't hubris over this "legally binding" agreement. He kind of made it quite mortal that it was possible the Big Ten could have lost a member. The degree of probability and practicality is debatable.