(07-03-2013 08:21 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(07-02-2013 05:28 PM)exflash Wrote:  

(07-02-2013 08:00 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  There are better Big XII targets available. Cincinnati, BYU, USF, SMU, UH, Nevada, and New Mexico are likely ALL ahead of you in the picking order.

Here are a few big problems:

1. Your market is too small.
2. The NO Bowl isn't a top tier bowl - most fans don't have any clue that you're on the way up.
3. Your brand is still fairly weak. Being called UL-Lafayette instead of just Univ. of Louisiana is highly problematic in this regard.
4. You still haven't proven you're a tier of UL-Monroe (there are a few ways to do this). Most casual fans consider you to be equal to them.

WOW a Tulane guy talking attendance---We had more in one game at your home field than you had all year----By the way the 2 Louisiana schools you played had 104 points scored on the WAVE in 2 games!!! lafayette is a very Rich area and the growth we have made is unreal which is about 25 years behind thanks to an over the hill president!!!

Please let me know where I said that UL-Lafayette doesn't have the attendance to make the Big XII? I mentioned TV market and relative brand strength as my two primary reasons for why it won't work.

Furthermore, I didn't say a word about Tulane being better. I'm well aware that UL-Monroe and UL-Lafayette beat us this past season.

Tulane still leads the all-time series with UL-Lafayette by a count of 21-5 (based on your pre-game presser from last season).

---Yea I guess my deceased mom, an alumna of Newcombe would be mad as she took me to stomp my feet in the old Tulane stadium---But the market is growing and will expand with I-49 completion and the growth of the Lake Charles lafayette area---the Louisiana sans Lafayette is catching on more and more-----45K would probably been more for the Sugar Bowl---Anyway my son-in-law's dad and brother played for the Wave but I was a UL player and that wins out---sorry mom!!!

Tulane has it issues but if it came down to the P5 "having" to take another Louisiana school (makes no sense but I digress) there is one argument that needs to be made and one only.

ULL Endowment: 69,626,515
Tulane Endowment: 1,004,738,000

And the mic drops.....

They have the financial means to make what needs to be made happen if they gets their ducks in a row.

(07-03-2013 12:43 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  Tulane has it issues but if it came down to the P5 "having" to take another Louisiana school (makes no sense but I digress) there is one argument that needs to be made and one only.

ULL Endowment: 69,626,515
Tulane Endowment: 1,004,738,000

And the mic drops.....

They have the financial means to make what needs to be made happen if they gets their ducks in a row.

-----Are you a betting chap???---I don't dispute the Tulane figure at all---the UL I will bet you a thousand dollars against every grand you are too low in the UL endowment---What ya say??? BTW it wasn't too long ago that the liberals that control the Tulane endowment almost voted to end Tulane athletics!!!

It's admirable that you support your program as much as you have in this thread, but lets put down the rose colored glasses and be honest. ULL is not going to the BIG12. I like your program, and I'm not disrespecting it, I'm just being honest with my opinion.

It would be nice to see you guys dominate CUSA and then move up the ranks to AAC, etc. But a direct jump to the BIG12 is not going to happen.

Does this thread even need to be responded to. Sorry will never happen. Hope for an opening in CUSA instead.

(07-03-2013 01:10 PM)exflash Wrote:  Are you a betting chap???---I don't dispute the Tulane figure at all---the UL I will bet you a thousand dollars against every grand you are too low in the UL endowment---What ya say??? BTW it wasn't too long ago that the liberals that control the Tulane endowment almost voted to end Tulane athletics!!!

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreview...yette-2031

We all know US News isn't perfect but give or take say 10 mil that figure is accurate.

Say it was 100 mil off you are still nearly a Billion, with a B, off their total.

And what does liberal have anything to do with this discussion. Don't even bother going there.

The Big XII won't be making any moves unless another conference swipes one of the current members, or a "name brand" school comes on the market.

It appears the ACC is now "locked down" with their new additions, particularly ND, and a huge exit fee.

Texas and Oklahoma could potentially bolt together for the PAC-12 (or whatever they're calling it). But again, it's doubtful anyone's going to pay Texas what they think they're worth.

They missed their chance to grab Louisville...that was their "best of the rest" option.

(07-03-2013 02:01 PM)ecu92 Wrote:  The Big XII won't be making any moves unless another conference swipes one of the current members, or a "name brand" school comes on the market.

It appears the ACC is now "locked down" with their new additions, particularly ND, and a huge exit fee.

Texas and Oklahoma could potentially bolt together for the PAC-12 (or whatever they're calling it). But again, it's doubtful anyone's going to pay Texas what they think they're worth.

They missed their chance to grab Louisville...that was their "best of the rest" option.

This in my opinion is right and you have been kind in your remarks.

In the beginning after Missouri and A&M left Texas was not sure what it needed to do. Do we go to the PAC, do we entertain the ACC or Big 10, or do we salvage the Big 12?

I believe they had thoughts of hoping to lure Notre Dame into some kind of arrangement with them so they waited to see who they needed to pursue as future members that might be acceptable to the Irish. Notre Dame wasn't interested. The Big 10 snatches Maryland and the ACC responds decisively by taking Louisville and coming to terms with Notre Dame.

Now the tardiness of response by Texas and Oklahoma have allowed one of their best options profitably and geographically in connection with West Virginia to be taken off the market.

Kudos to John Swofford for breaking the ACC's academic norms and hamstringing his competition. The move meant that now the most profitable team out there for the Big 12 to expand with would be Westward and not to the Northeast.

If there had been any quality (in terms of adding cash value) teams out there interested in the Big 12 they would already have them.

B.Y.U. has potential but by themselves can't provide enough umpf to make it worth Texas and Oklahoma passing on better options.

The highly touted GOR now becomes a shackles for the top 4 to 6 programs of the Big 12. While the ACC's GOR yields the perception of strength they had hoped it would be.

So either 8 teams find new homes, or everyone in the Big 12 sweats out the next ever how many years of their bondage. The Big 12 has 2 top 10 teams in earning potential and then a fairly wide gulf until it gets to Kansas and West Virginia. It's that economic gap that exists between the top, the middle, and the bottom that along with their market footprint limits the upside of the conference.

I doubt that B.Y.U. and either Cincinnati, or one of the 4th or 5th Florida schools will add enough to solidify that conference.

That's why we will have 1 of 3 potential outcomes here:
1. 8 or more teams will be brokered to new homes with compromise by all conferences participating in the move.

2. We wait 8 to 10 years and see a bolting of the top 6 schools to other conferences.

3. They add B.Y.U. and Cincinnati, or one of the Florida Schools and just decide to make less.

Which of those three solutions do you think will be the most palatable?

They won't opt for less money while their competition is earning more.

They will have many hard feelings and some political entanglements by waiting and leaving potentially 4 schools in the lurch.

They could free themselves and broker an amicable solution for the majority.

Folks may think I'm crazy but I think it will be the latter. Less pain, more gain!

(07-03-2013 03:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  The highly touted GOR now becomes a shackles for the top 4 to 6 programs of the Big 12. While the ACC's GOR yields the perception of strength they had hoped it would be.

So a GOR for the ACC is a desire to stay together for their schools and not for us? Come on...

(07-03-2013 12:43 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  Tulane has it issues but if it came down to the P5 "having" to take another Louisiana school (makes no sense but I digress) there is one argument that needs to be made and one only.

ULL Endowment: 69,626,515
Tulane Endowment: 1,004,738,000

And the mic drops.....

They have the financial means to make what needs to be made happen if they gets their ducks in a row.

Actually not $1 of an edowment can be spent on any sports program.
So in some ways it is not that big of a deal. Not that I am taking sides in this debate.

(07-03-2013 03:23 PM)S11 Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 03:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  The highly touted GOR now becomes a shackles for the top 4 to 6 programs of the Big 12. While the ACC's GOR yields the perception of strength they had hoped it would be.

So a GOR for the ACC is a desire to stay together for their schools and not for us? Come on...

It is and has been about "perception". The question is how does your GOR perform? Does it shield you against poaching? Or does it prevent schools from leaving? Or as in the Big 10 and PAC is it pro forma for your television contract or network. Since the perception right now is that the additions of Syracuse, Pitt, Notre Dame partially, and Louisville in the near future have solidified the ACC then their GOR "looks" pretty good. An odd court decision could alter that. Outside of that the analysis of the Big 12 is accurate. I said there were three options and that is how I see it. I know there is a great deal of ambivalence about the prospects of expansion and the direction of the conference even among Big 12 fans. That much is clear from the diversity of opinions expressed in their posts on the subject. It is definitely a "we'll see" kind of situation.

(07-03-2013 03:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 02:01 PM)ecu92 Wrote:  The Big XII won't be making any moves unless another conference swipes one of the current members, or a "name brand" school comes on the market.

It appears the ACC is now "locked down" with their new additions, particularly ND, and a huge exit fee.

Texas and Oklahoma could potentially bolt together for the PAC-12 (or whatever they're calling it). But again, it's doubtful anyone's going to pay Texas what they think they're worth.

They missed their chance to grab Louisville...that was their "best of the rest" option.

This in my opinion is right and you have been kind in your remarks.

In the beginning after Missouri and A&M left Texas was not sure what it needed to do. Do we go to the PAC, do we entertain the ACC or Big 10, or do we salvage the Big 12?

I believe they had thoughts of hoping to lure Notre Dame into some kind of arrangement with them so they waited to see who they needed to pursue as future members that might be acceptable to the Irish. Notre Dame wasn't interested. The Big 10 snatches Maryland and the ACC responds decisively by taking Louisville and coming to terms with Notre Dame.

Now the tardiness of response by Texas and Oklahoma have allowed one of their best options profitably and geographically in connection with West Virginia to be taken off the market.

Kudos to John Swofford for breaking the ACC's academic norms and hamstringing his competition. The move meant that now the most profitable team out there for the Big 12 to expand with would be Westward and not to the Northeast.

If there had been any quality (in terms of adding cash value) teams out there interested in the Big 12 they would already have them.

B.Y.U. has potential but by themselves can't provide enough umpf to make it worth Texas and Oklahoma passing on better options.

The highly touted GOR now becomes a shackles for the top 4 to 6 programs of the Big 12. While the ACC's GOR yields the perception of strength they had hoped it would be.

So either 8 teams find new homes, or everyone in the Big 12 sweats out the next ever how many years of their bondage. The Big 12 has 2 top 10 teams in earning potential and then a fairly wide gulf until it gets to Kansas and West Virginia. It's that economic gap that exists between the top, the middle, and the bottom that along with their market footprint limits the upside of the conference.

I doubt that B.Y.U. and either Cincinnati, or one of the 4th or 5th Florida schools will add enough to solidify that conference.

That's why we will have 1 of 3 potential outcomes here:
1. 8 or more teams will be brokered to new homes with compromise by all conferences participating in the move.

2. We wait 8 to 10 years and see a bolting of the top 6 schools to other conferences.

3. They add B.Y.U. and Cincinnati, or one of the Florida Schools and just decide to make less.

Which of those three solutions do you think will be the most palatable?

They won't opt for less money while their competition is earning more.

They will have many hard feelings and some political entanglements by waiting and leaving potentially 4 schools in the lurch.

They could free themselves and broker an amicable solution for the majority.

Folks may think I'm crazy but I think it will be the latter. Less pain, more gain!

Until someone posts the entire Grant of Rights contracts for the Big 12 and ACC, complete with all addendums and exhibits, including the primary media contracts and the Bylaws and Articles of Incorporations, both as amended since inception, and all conference corporate resolutions regarding voting, termination of conference, exit fees, grant of rights, etc., all of this reverence over the idea of a grant of rights is nothing more than foolishness.

(07-03-2013 03:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 02:01 PM)ecu92 Wrote:  The Big XII won't be making any moves unless another conference swipes one of the current members, or a "name brand" school comes on the market.

It appears the ACC is now "locked down" with their new additions, particularly ND, and a huge exit fee.

Texas and Oklahoma could potentially bolt together for the PAC-12 (or whatever they're calling it). But again, it's doubtful anyone's going to pay Texas what they think they're worth.

They missed their chance to grab Louisville...that was their "best of the rest" option.

This in my opinion is right and you have been kind in your remarks.

In the beginning after Missouri and A&M left Texas was not sure what it needed to do. Do we go to the PAC, do we entertain the ACC or Big 10, or do we salvage the Big 12?

I believe they had thoughts of hoping to lure Notre Dame into some kind of arrangement with them so they waited to see who they needed to pursue as future members that might be acceptable to the Irish. Notre Dame wasn't interested. The Big 10 snatches Maryland and the ACC responds decisively by taking Louisville and coming to terms with Notre Dame.

Now the tardiness of response by Texas and Oklahoma have allowed one of their best options profitably and geographically in connection with West Virginia to be taken off the market.

Kudos to John Swofford for breaking the ACC's academic norms and hamstringing his competition. The move meant that now the most profitable team out there for the Big 12 to expand with would be Westward and not to the Northeast.

If there had been any quality (in terms of adding cash value) teams out there interested in the Big 12 they would already have them.

B.Y.U. has potential but by themselves can't provide enough umpf to make it worth Texas and Oklahoma passing on better options.

The highly touted GOR now becomes a shackles for the top 4 to 6 programs of the Big 12. While the ACC's GOR yields the perception of strength they had hoped it would be.

So either 8 teams find new homes, or everyone in the Big 12 sweats out the next ever how many years of their bondage. The Big 12 has 2 top 10 teams in earning potential and then a fairly wide gulf until it gets to Kansas and West Virginia. It's that economic gap that exists between the top, the middle, and the bottom that along with their market footprint limits the upside of the conference.

I doubt that B.Y.U. and either Cincinnati, or one of the 4th or 5th Florida schools will add enough to solidify that conference.

That's why we will have 1 of 3 potential outcomes here:
1. 8 or more teams will be brokered to new homes with compromise by all conferences participating in the move.

2. We wait 8 to 10 years and see a bolting of the top 6 schools to other conferences.

3. They add B.Y.U. and Cincinnati, or one of the Florida Schools and just decide to make less.

Which of those three solutions do you think will be the most palatable?

They won't opt for less money while their competition is earning more.

They will have many hard feelings and some political entanglements by waiting and leaving potentially 4 schools in the lurch.

They could free themselves and broker an amicable solution for the majority.

Folks may think I'm crazy but I think it will be the latter. Less pain, more gain!

JR once again, with all due respect and no offense intended, your posts on the Big12 seem to be getting worse. The part about the GOR being a shackles to the Big12, but the ACC GOR is a show of strength is sheer hypocrisy.

Then you list three options, none of which considers the Big12 staying happily at 10 members.

You are corrrect about one thing though....... some folks may think you are crazy

(07-03-2013 04:29 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 03:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 02:01 PM)ecu92 Wrote:  The Big XII won't be making any moves unless another conference swipes one of the current members, or a "name brand" school comes on the market.

It appears the ACC is now "locked down" with their new additions, particularly ND, and a huge exit fee.

Texas and Oklahoma could potentially bolt together for the PAC-12 (or whatever they're calling it). But again, it's doubtful anyone's going to pay Texas what they think they're worth.

They missed their chance to grab Louisville...that was their "best of the rest" option.

This in my opinion is right and you have been kind in your remarks.

In the beginning after Missouri and A&M left Texas was not sure what it needed to do. Do we go to the PAC, do we entertain the ACC or Big 10, or do we salvage the Big 12?

I believe they had thoughts of hoping to lure Notre Dame into some kind of arrangement with them so they waited to see who they needed to pursue as future members that might be acceptable to the Irish. Notre Dame wasn't interested. The Big 10 snatches Maryland and the ACC responds decisively by taking Louisville and coming to terms with Notre Dame.

Now the tardiness of response by Texas and Oklahoma have allowed one of their best options profitably and geographically in connection with West Virginia to be taken off the market.

Kudos to John Swofford for breaking the ACC's academic norms and hamstringing his competition. The move meant that now the most profitable team out there for the Big 12 to expand with would be Westward and not to the Northeast.

If there had been any quality (in terms of adding cash value) teams out there interested in the Big 12 they would already have them.

B.Y.U. has potential but by themselves can't provide enough umpf to make it worth Texas and Oklahoma passing on better options.

The highly touted GOR now becomes a shackles for the top 4 to 6 programs of the Big 12. While the ACC's GOR yields the perception of strength they had hoped it would be.

So either 8 teams find new homes, or everyone in the Big 12 sweats out the next ever how many years of their bondage. The Big 12 has 2 top 10 teams in earning potential and then a fairly wide gulf until it gets to Kansas and West Virginia. It's that economic gap that exists between the top, the middle, and the bottom that along with their market footprint limits the upside of the conference.

I doubt that B.Y.U. and either Cincinnati, or one of the 4th or 5th Florida schools will add enough to solidify that conference.

That's why we will have 1 of 3 potential outcomes here:
1. 8 or more teams will be brokered to new homes with compromise by all conferences participating in the move.

2. We wait 8 to 10 years and see a bolting of the top 6 schools to other conferences.

3. They add B.Y.U. and Cincinnati, or one of the Florida Schools and just decide to make less.

Which of those three solutions do you think will be the most palatable?

They won't opt for less money while their competition is earning more.

They will have many hard feelings and some political entanglements by waiting and leaving potentially 4 schools in the lurch.

They could free themselves and broker an amicable solution for the majority.

Folks may think I'm crazy but I think it will be the latter. Less pain, more gain!

Until someone posts the entire Grant of Rights contracts for the Big 12 and ACC, complete with all addendums and exhibits, including the primary media contracts and the Bylaws and Articles of Incorporations, both as amended since inception, and all conference corporate resolutions regarding voting, termination of conference, exit fees, grant of rights, etc., all of this reverence over the idea of a grant of rights is nothing more than foolishness.

It sure would make for a lively discussion if someone could ascertain those things and publish them. But, GOR's aside, realignment has been about accommodating the networks in the pursuit of additional revenue. For that reason alone I don't think it is over. It is also why I believe the ultimate form will follow what best suits commercial interests and that's not going to be 5 power conferences. This thing will play out gradually until those in control of the purse strings have what they think will optimize the profits and streamline the product offering.

(07-03-2013 04:32 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 03:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 02:01 PM)ecu92 Wrote:  The Big XII won't be making any moves unless another conference swipes one of the current members, or a "name brand" school comes on the market.

It appears the ACC is now "locked down" with their new additions, particularly ND, and a huge exit fee.

Texas and Oklahoma could potentially bolt together for the PAC-12 (or whatever they're calling it). But again, it's doubtful anyone's going to pay Texas what they think they're worth.

They missed their chance to grab Louisville...that was their "best of the rest" option.

This in my opinion is right and you have been kind in your remarks.

In the beginning after Missouri and A&M left Texas was not sure what it needed to do. Do we go to the PAC, do we entertain the ACC or Big 10, or do we salvage the Big 12?

I believe they had thoughts of hoping to lure Notre Dame into some kind of arrangement with them so they waited to see who they needed to pursue as future members that might be acceptable to the Irish. Notre Dame wasn't interested. The Big 10 snatches Maryland and the ACC responds decisively by taking Louisville and coming to terms with Notre Dame.

Now the tardiness of response by Texas and Oklahoma have allowed one of their best options profitably and geographically in connection with West Virginia to be taken off the market.

Kudos to John Swofford for breaking the ACC's academic norms and hamstringing his competition. The move meant that now the most profitable team out there for the Big 12 to expand with would be Westward and not to the Northeast.

If there had been any quality (in terms of adding cash value) teams out there interested in the Big 12 they would already have them.

B.Y.U. has potential but by themselves can't provide enough umpf to make it worth Texas and Oklahoma passing on better options.

The highly touted GOR now becomes a shackles for the top 4 to 6 programs of the Big 12. While the ACC's GOR yields the perception of strength they had hoped it would be.

So either 8 teams find new homes, or everyone in the Big 12 sweats out the next ever how many years of their bondage. The Big 12 has 2 top 10 teams in earning potential and then a fairly wide gulf until it gets to Kansas and West Virginia. It's that economic gap that exists between the top, the middle, and the bottom that along with their market footprint limits the upside of the conference.

I doubt that B.Y.U. and either Cincinnati, or one of the 4th or 5th Florida schools will add enough to solidify that conference.

That's why we will have 1 of 3 potential outcomes here:
1. 8 or more teams will be brokered to new homes with compromise by all conferences participating in the move.

2. We wait 8 to 10 years and see a bolting of the top 6 schools to other conferences.

3. They add B.Y.U. and Cincinnati, or one of the Florida Schools and just decide to make less.

Which of those three solutions do you think will be the most palatable?

They won't opt for less money while their competition is earning more.

They will have many hard feelings and some political entanglements by waiting and leaving potentially 4 schools in the lurch.

They could free themselves and broker an amicable solution for the majority.

Folks may think I'm crazy but I think it will be the latter. Less pain, more gain!

JR once again, with all due respect and no offense intended, your posts on the Big12 seem to be getting worse. The part about the GOR being a shackles to the Big12, but the ACC GOR is a show of strength is sheer hypocrisy.

Then you list three options, none of which considers the Big12 staying happily at 10 members.

You are corrrect about one thing though....... some folks may think you are crazy

1. I thought you weren't going to bother addressing me again.

2. What are you thoughts on the direction of that conference? This is a realignment board and it is full of speculation. (Especially in the absence of real news.) Put your thoughts on the line. Everyone is entitled to them.

I've heard speculation about Missouri, Arkansas, L.S.U. and even Auburn leaving the SEC for another conference and have not responded to any of it because if someone wants to think that (even if I 100% believe them to be in error) then that is their right. Contrary to what the thought police of any conference represented here may wish to suppress, they are not going to be able to change whatever it is that will happen.

3. Every time you say "with all due respect" since it is followed by some kind of backhanded insult that is "hypocrisy".

4. The distinctions about how the GOR's are perceived is a factor.

5. Whether or not I'm wrong will at least be born out by what does or doesn't transpire and I'll live with that because it is just sports and not geopolitical matters, health, a family crisis, or something else imminently more important and consequential.

6. A little bit of friendly debate and difference of opinion is what makes a talk board fun. It sure helps tally the number of posts when things are dry as a bone, like right now.

7. If a number of folks think I'm crazy for holding an opinion that usually makes me happy and a bit more certain of my position. In life the herd is usually traveling together for one reason, to go to the slaughter house. I am not a follower of the herd mentality. Travelling alone, even in opinion, is usually the safer and better option. It works in investing too.

8. I always find those who get angry at the opinions of others to be those who are really just displacing their anger because they can't address the things in life that truly bother them. So, they pick a target and vent. And folks are angry about a lot of different things these days that they can't do anything about. So the level of personal discourse and hostility is up.

9. I have nothing against you or your posts, or ideas, when you bother to express them.

10. Other than my ideas what is it that makes you seek me out to post your criticisms instead of engaging in constructive conversation?

My prediction on the future Big 12, it won't exist in 15 years...should have added Cincy and Ville.

(07-03-2013 05:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 04:32 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 03:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 02:01 PM)ecu92 Wrote:  The Big XII won't be making any moves unless another conference swipes one of the current members, or a "name brand" school comes on the market.

It appears the ACC is now "locked down" with their new additions, particularly ND, and a huge exit fee.

Texas and Oklahoma could potentially bolt together for the PAC-12 (or whatever they're calling it). But again, it's doubtful anyone's going to pay Texas what they think they're worth.

They missed their chance to grab Louisville...that was their "best of the rest" option.

This in my opinion is right and you have been kind in your remarks.

In the beginning after Missouri and A&M left Texas was not sure what it needed to do. Do we go to the PAC, do we entertain the ACC or Big 10, or do we salvage the Big 12?

I believe they had thoughts of hoping to lure Notre Dame into some kind of arrangement with them so they waited to see who they needed to pursue as future members that might be acceptable to the Irish. Notre Dame wasn't interested. The Big 10 snatches Maryland and the ACC responds decisively by taking Louisville and coming to terms with Notre Dame.

Now the tardiness of response by Texas and Oklahoma have allowed one of their best options profitably and geographically in connection with West Virginia to be taken off the market.

Kudos to John Swofford for breaking the ACC's academic norms and hamstringing his competition. The move meant that now the most profitable team out there for the Big 12 to expand with would be Westward and not to the Northeast.

If there had been any quality (in terms of adding cash value) teams out there interested in the Big 12 they would already have them.

B.Y.U. has potential but by themselves can't provide enough umpf to make it worth Texas and Oklahoma passing on better options.

The highly touted GOR now becomes a shackles for the top 4 to 6 programs of the Big 12. While the ACC's GOR yields the perception of strength they had hoped it would be.

So either 8 teams find new homes, or everyone in the Big 12 sweats out the next ever how many years of their bondage. The Big 12 has 2 top 10 teams in earning potential and then a fairly wide gulf until it gets to Kansas and West Virginia. It's that economic gap that exists between the top, the middle, and the bottom that along with their market footprint limits the upside of the conference.

I doubt that B.Y.U. and either Cincinnati, or one of the 4th or 5th Florida schools will add enough to solidify that conference.

That's why we will have 1 of 3 potential outcomes here:
1. 8 or more teams will be brokered to new homes with compromise by all conferences participating in the move.

2. We wait 8 to 10 years and see a bolting of the top 6 schools to other conferences.

3. They add B.Y.U. and Cincinnati, or one of the Florida Schools and just decide to make less.

Which of those three solutions do you think will be the most palatable?

They won't opt for less money while their competition is earning more.

They will have many hard feelings and some political entanglements by waiting and leaving potentially 4 schools in the lurch.

They could free themselves and broker an amicable solution for the majority.

Folks may think I'm crazy but I think it will be the latter. Less pain, more gain!

JR once again, with all due respect and no offense intended, your posts on the Big12 seem to be getting worse. The part about the GOR being a shackles to the Big12, but the ACC GOR is a show of strength is sheer hypocrisy.

Then you list three options, none of which considers the Big12 staying happily at 10 members.

You are corrrect about one thing though....... some folks may think you are crazy

1. I thought you weren't going to bother addressing me again.

2. What are you thoughts on the direction of that conference? This is a realignment board and it is full of speculation. (Especially in the absence of real news.) Put your thoughts on the line. Everyone is entitled to them.

I've heard speculation about Missouri, Arkansas, L.S.U. and even Auburn leaving the SEC for another conference and have not responded to any of it because if someone wants to think that (even if I 100% believe them to be in error) then that is their right. Contrary to what the thought police of any conference represented here may wish to suppress, they are not going to be able to change whatever it is that will happen.

3. Every time you say "with all due respect" since it is followed by some kind of backhanded insult that is "hypocrisy".

4. The distinctions about how the GOR's are perceived is a factor.

5. Whether or not I'm wrong will at least be born out by what does or doesn't transpire and I'll live with that because it is just sports and not geopolitical matters, health, a family crisis, or something else imminently more important and consequential.

6. A little bit of friendly debate and difference of opinion is what makes a talk board fun. It sure helps tally the number of posts when things are dry as a bone, like right now.

7. If a number of folks think I'm crazy for holding an opinion that usually makes me happy and a bit more certain of my position. In life the herd is usually traveling together for one reason, to go to the slaughter house. I am not a follower of the herd mentality. Travelling alone, even in opinion, is usually the safer and better option. It works in investing too.

8. I always find those who get angry at the opinions of others to be those who are really just displacing their anger because they can't address the things in life that truly bother them. So, they pick a target and vent. And folks are angry about a lot of different things these days that they can't do anything about. So the level of personal discourse and hostility is up.

9. I have nothing against you or your posts, or ideas, when you bother to express them.

10. Other than my ideas what is it that makes you seek me out to post your criticisms instead of engaging in constructive conversation?

Hey, I want my $5 footlong toasted, chop chop!

(07-03-2013 05:18 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 05:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 04:32 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 03:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 02:01 PM)ecu92 Wrote:  The Big XII won't be making any moves unless another conference swipes one of the current members, or a "name brand" school comes on the market.

It appears the ACC is now "locked down" with their new additions, particularly ND, and a huge exit fee.

Texas and Oklahoma could potentially bolt together for the PAC-12 (or whatever they're calling it). But again, it's doubtful anyone's going to pay Texas what they think they're worth.

They missed their chance to grab Louisville...that was their "best of the rest" option.

This in my opinion is right and you have been kind in your remarks.

In the beginning after Missouri and A&M left Texas was not sure what it needed to do. Do we go to the PAC, do we entertain the ACC or Big 10, or do we salvage the Big 12?

I believe they had thoughts of hoping to lure Notre Dame into some kind of arrangement with them so they waited to see who they needed to pursue as future members that might be acceptable to the Irish. Notre Dame wasn't interested. The Big 10 snatches Maryland and the ACC responds decisively by taking Louisville and coming to terms with Notre Dame.

Now the tardiness of response by Texas and Oklahoma have allowed one of their best options profitably and geographically in connection with West Virginia to be taken off the market.

Kudos to John Swofford for breaking the ACC's academic norms and hamstringing his competition. The move meant that now the most profitable team out there for the Big 12 to expand with would be Westward and not to the Northeast.

If there had been any quality (in terms of adding cash value) teams out there interested in the Big 12 they would already have them.

B.Y.U. has potential but by themselves can't provide enough umpf to make it worth Texas and Oklahoma passing on better options.

The highly touted GOR now becomes a shackles for the top 4 to 6 programs of the Big 12. While the ACC's GOR yields the perception of strength they had hoped it would be.

So either 8 teams find new homes, or everyone in the Big 12 sweats out the next ever how many years of their bondage. The Big 12 has 2 top 10 teams in earning potential and then a fairly wide gulf until it gets to Kansas and West Virginia. It's that economic gap that exists between the top, the middle, and the bottom that along with their market footprint limits the upside of the conference.

I doubt that B.Y.U. and either Cincinnati, or one of the 4th or 5th Florida schools will add enough to solidify that conference.

That's why we will have 1 of 3 potential outcomes here:
1. 8 or more teams will be brokered to new homes with compromise by all conferences participating in the move.

2. We wait 8 to 10 years and see a bolting of the top 6 schools to other conferences.

3. They add B.Y.U. and Cincinnati, or one of the Florida Schools and just decide to make less.

Which of those three solutions do you think will be the most palatable?

They won't opt for less money while their competition is earning more.

They will have many hard feelings and some political entanglements by waiting and leaving potentially 4 schools in the lurch.

They could free themselves and broker an amicable solution for the majority.

Folks may think I'm crazy but I think it will be the latter. Less pain, more gain!

JR once again, with all due respect and no offense intended, your posts on the Big12 seem to be getting worse. The part about the GOR being a shackles to the Big12, but the ACC GOR is a show of strength is sheer hypocrisy.

Then you list three options, none of which considers the Big12 staying happily at 10 members.

You are corrrect about one thing though....... some folks may think you are crazy

1. I thought you weren't going to bother addressing me again.

2. What are you thoughts on the direction of that conference? This is a realignment board and it is full of speculation. (Especially in the absence of real news.) Put your thoughts on the line. Everyone is entitled to them.

I've heard speculation about Missouri, Arkansas, L.S.U. and even Auburn leaving the SEC for another conference and have not responded to any of it because if someone wants to think that (even if I 100% believe them to be in error) then that is their right. Contrary to what the thought police of any conference represented here may wish to suppress, they are not going to be able to change whatever it is that will happen.

3. Every time you say "with all due respect" since it is followed by some kind of backhanded insult that is "hypocrisy".

4. The distinctions about how the GOR's are perceived is a factor.

5. Whether or not I'm wrong will at least be born out by what does or doesn't transpire and I'll live with that because it is just sports and not geopolitical matters, health, a family crisis, or something else imminently more important and consequential.

6. A little bit of friendly debate and difference of opinion is what makes a talk board fun. It sure helps tally the number of posts when things are dry as a bone, like right now.

7. If a number of folks think I'm crazy for holding an opinion that usually makes me happy and a bit more certain of my position. In life the herd is usually traveling together for one reason, to go to the slaughter house. I am not a follower of the herd mentality. Travelling alone, even in opinion, is usually the safer and better option. It works in investing too.

8. I always find those who get angry at the opinions of others to be those who are really just displacing their anger because they can't address the things in life that truly bother them. So, they pick a target and vent. And folks are angry about a lot of different things these days that they can't do anything about. So the level of personal discourse and hostility is up.

9. I have nothing against you or your posts, or ideas, when you bother to express them.

10. Other than my ideas what is it that makes you seek me out to post your criticisms instead of engaging in constructive conversation?

Hey, I want my $5 footlong toasted, chop chop!

With or without spit in it? Of course I can't vouch for what you'll get if you opt for no spit.

(07-03-2013 05:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 05:18 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 05:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 04:32 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 03:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  This in my opinion is right and you have been kind in your remarks.

In the beginning after Missouri and A&M left Texas was not sure what it needed to do. Do we go to the PAC, do we entertain the ACC or Big 10, or do we salvage the Big 12?

I believe they had thoughts of hoping to lure Notre Dame into some kind of arrangement with them so they waited to see who they needed to pursue as future members that might be acceptable to the Irish. Notre Dame wasn't interested. The Big 10 snatches Maryland and the ACC responds decisively by taking Louisville and coming to terms with Notre Dame.

Now the tardiness of response by Texas and Oklahoma have allowed one of their best options profitably and geographically in connection with West Virginia to be taken off the market.

Kudos to John Swofford for breaking the ACC's academic norms and hamstringing his competition. The move meant that now the most profitable team out there for the Big 12 to expand with would be Westward and not to the Northeast.

If there had been any quality (in terms of adding cash value) teams out there interested in the Big 12 they would already have them.

B.Y.U. has potential but by themselves can't provide enough umpf to make it worth Texas and Oklahoma passing on better options.

The highly touted GOR now becomes a shackles for the top 4 to 6 programs of the Big 12. While the ACC's GOR yields the perception of strength they had hoped it would be.

So either 8 teams find new homes, or everyone in the Big 12 sweats out the next ever how many years of their bondage. The Big 12 has 2 top 10 teams in earning potential and then a fairly wide gulf until it gets to Kansas and West Virginia. It's that economic gap that exists between the top, the middle, and the bottom that along with their market footprint limits the upside of the conference.

I doubt that B.Y.U. and either Cincinnati, or one of the 4th or 5th Florida schools will add enough to solidify that conference.

That's why we will have 1 of 3 potential outcomes here:
1. 8 or more teams will be brokered to new homes with compromise by all conferences participating in the move.

2. We wait 8 to 10 years and see a bolting of the top 6 schools to other conferences.

3. They add B.Y.U. and Cincinnati, or one of the Florida Schools and just decide to make less.

Which of those three solutions do you think will be the most palatable?

They won't opt for less money while their competition is earning more.

They will have many hard feelings and some political entanglements by waiting and leaving potentially 4 schools in the lurch.

They could free themselves and broker an amicable solution for the majority.

Folks may think I'm crazy but I think it will be the latter. Less pain, more gain!

JR once again, with all due respect and no offense intended, your posts on the Big12 seem to be getting worse. The part about the GOR being a shackles to the Big12, but the ACC GOR is a show of strength is sheer hypocrisy.

Then you list three options, none of which considers the Big12 staying happily at 10 members.

You are corrrect about one thing though....... some folks may think you are crazy

1. I thought you weren't going to bother addressing me again.

2. What are you thoughts on the direction of that conference? This is a realignment board and it is full of speculation. (Especially in the absence of real news.) Put your thoughts on the line. Everyone is entitled to them.

I've heard speculation about Missouri, Arkansas, L.S.U. and even Auburn leaving the SEC for another conference and have not responded to any of it because if someone wants to think that (even if I 100% believe them to be in error) then that is their right. Contrary to what the thought police of any conference represented here may wish to suppress, they are not going to be able to change whatever it is that will happen.

3. Every time you say "with all due respect" since it is followed by some kind of backhanded insult that is "hypocrisy".

4. The distinctions about how the GOR's are perceived is a factor.

5. Whether or not I'm wrong will at least be born out by what does or doesn't transpire and I'll live with that because it is just sports and not geopolitical matters, health, a family crisis, or something else imminently more important and consequential.

6. A little bit of friendly debate and difference of opinion is what makes a talk board fun. It sure helps tally the number of posts when things are dry as a bone, like right now.

7. If a number of folks think I'm crazy for holding an opinion that usually makes me happy and a bit more certain of my position. In life the herd is usually traveling together for one reason, to go to the slaughter house. I am not a follower of the herd mentality. Travelling alone, even in opinion, is usually the safer and better option. It works in investing too.

8. I always find those who get angry at the opinions of others to be those who are really just displacing their anger because they can't address the things in life that truly bother them. So, they pick a target and vent. And folks are angry about a lot of different things these days that they can't do anything about. So the level of personal discourse and hostility is up.

9. I have nothing against you or your posts, or ideas, when you bother to express them.

10. Other than my ideas what is it that makes you seek me out to post your criticisms instead of engaging in constructive conversation?

Hey, I want my $5 footlong toasted, chop chop!

With or without spit in it? Of course I can't vouch for what you'll get if you opt for no spit.

LOL. You've got moxie, and a sense of humor. Well played. Oh and definitely no spit, or anything else.

(07-03-2013 05:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 04:32 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 03:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-03-2013 02:01 PM)ecu92 Wrote:  The Big XII won't be making any moves unless another conference swipes one of the current members, or a "name brand" school comes on the market.

It appears the ACC is now "locked down" with their new additions, particularly ND, and a huge exit fee.

Texas and Oklahoma could potentially bolt together for the PAC-12 (or whatever they're calling it). But again, it's doubtful anyone's going to pay Texas what they think they're worth.

They missed their chance to grab Louisville...that was their "best of the rest" option.

This in my opinion is right and you have been kind in your remarks.

In the beginning after Missouri and A&M left Texas was not sure what it needed to do. Do we go to the PAC, do we entertain the ACC or Big 10, or do we salvage the Big 12?

I believe they had thoughts of hoping to lure Notre Dame into some kind of arrangement with them so they waited to see who they needed to pursue as future members that might be acceptable to the Irish. Notre Dame wasn't interested. The Big 10 snatches Maryland and the ACC responds decisively by taking Louisville and coming to terms with Notre Dame.

Now the tardiness of response by Texas and Oklahoma have allowed one of their best options profitably and geographically in connection with West Virginia to be taken off the market.

Kudos to John Swofford for breaking the ACC's academic norms and hamstringing his competition. The move meant that now the most profitable team out there for the Big 12 to expand with would be Westward and not to the Northeast.

If there had been any quality (in terms of adding cash value) teams out there interested in the Big 12 they would already have them.

B.Y.U. has potential but by themselves can't provide enough umpf to make it worth Texas and Oklahoma passing on better options.

The highly touted GOR now becomes a shackles for the top 4 to 6 programs of the Big 12. While the ACC's GOR yields the perception of strength they had hoped it would be.

So either 8 teams find new homes, or everyone in the Big 12 sweats out the next ever how many years of their bondage. The Big 12 has 2 top 10 teams in earning potential and then a fairly wide gulf until it gets to Kansas and West Virginia. It's that economic gap that exists between the top, the middle, and the bottom that along with their market footprint limits the upside of the conference.

I doubt that B.Y.U. and either Cincinnati, or one of the 4th or 5th Florida schools will add enough to solidify that conference.

That's why we will have 1 of 3 potential outcomes here:
1. 8 or more teams will be brokered to new homes with compromise by all conferences participating in the move.

2. We wait 8 to 10 years and see a bolting of the top 6 schools to other conferences.

3. They add B.Y.U. and Cincinnati, or one of the Florida Schools and just decide to make less.

Which of those three solutions do you think will be the most palatable?

They won't opt for less money while their competition is earning more.

They will have many hard feelings and some political entanglements by waiting and leaving potentially 4 schools in the lurch.

They could free themselves and broker an amicable solution for the majority.

Folks may think I'm crazy but I think it will be the latter. Less pain, more gain!

JR once again, with all due respect and no offense intended, your posts on the Big12 seem to be getting worse. The part about the GOR being a shackles to the Big12, but the ACC GOR is a show of strength is sheer hypocrisy.

Then you list three options, none of which considers the Big12 staying happily at 10 members.

You are corrrect about one thing though....... some folks may think you are crazy

1. I thought you weren't going to bother addressing me again.

2. What are you thoughts on the direction of that conference? This is a realignment board and it is full of speculation. (Especially in the absence of real news.) Put your thoughts on the line. Everyone is entitled to them.

I've heard speculation about Missouri, Arkansas, L.S.U. and even Auburn leaving the SEC for another conference and have not responded to any of it because if someone wants to think that (even if I 100% believe them to be in error) then that is their right. Contrary to what the thought police of any conference represented here may wish to suppress, they are not going to be able to change whatever it is that will happen.

3. Every time you say "with all due respect" since it is followed by some kind of backhanded insult that is "hypocrisy".

4. The distinctions about how the GOR's are perceived is a factor.

5. Whether or not I'm wrong will at least be born out by what does or doesn't transpire and I'll live with that because it is just sports and not geopolitical matters, health, a family crisis, or something else imminently more important and consequential.

6. A little bit of friendly debate and difference of opinion is what makes a talk board fun. It sure helps tally the number of posts when things are dry as a bone, like right now.

7. If a number of folks think I'm crazy for holding an opinion that usually makes me happy and a bit more certain of my position. In life the herd is usually traveling together for one reason, to go to the slaughter house. I am not a follower of the herd mentality. Travelling alone, even in opinion, is usually the safer and better option. It works in investing too.

8. I always find those who get angry at the opinions of others to be those who are really just displacing their anger because they can't address the things in life that truly bother them. So, they pick a target and vent. And folks are angry about a lot of different things these days that they can't do anything about. So the level of personal discourse and hostility is up.

9. I have nothing against you or your posts, or ideas, when you bother to express them.

10. Other than my ideas what is it that makes you seek me out to post your criticisms instead of engaging in constructive conversation?

I meant I was not going to reply to any more of your posts on that particular thread.

AS I have repeatedly said, my thoughts on the direction of the Big12, is it will stay at 10.

When I say with all due respect,I am truly trying not to be rude or disrespectful or indicate any anger or hostility, but keep a civil conversation.. I do not know how else to say it. I am certainly not angry at you are anything you post. Most of this stuff is meaningless anyway.

I do not seek out your posts, in fact I ignore a lot of them because frankly, they so are too long and wordy for me. However, you do have a lot of interesting thoughts.

One reason I respond to some of your posts, is it seems to me instead of stating.... this is my opinion are what I believe, you are tellling us "this is how it is" as though it was facts not opinions. Anyway that is how I read it. . So when I feel they are incorrect I try to help clear the air with information that I am aware of. Where I live, I am saturated with Big12 information and I simply try to pass it along. You seem to very knowledgeable about sports on this board and I do not have enough information to respond on many of your thoughts, but like I say, I am flooded with Big12 info.

I am sorry if I have offended you in any way and I wish you would not take any of it personal.

Remember in the Department Store of Life.......Sports is the toy department.