(11-30-2014 01:27 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(11-30-2014 12:10 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-27-2014 10:57 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  

(11-27-2014 09:44 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(11-27-2014 11:43 AM)mtmedlin Wrote:  They wont take SMU. Overlapping market. Why have 2 teams in basically the same city.

No the point being made was that there might be more voices in Big 12 realignment than merely Texas'. (See the post quoted where I first responded with this)

Yes, but Texas is the most important. Simply put, if Texas decides to leave the Big 12 is done and the rest of the conference knows it.

Pickens can say anything he wants (I am actually VERY distantly related to him...my grandfather is a Pickens) but it really doesnt matter. If Texas had said we dont want TCU or were out, then it wouldnt have happened. From what sources within Orangebloods had said was Texas was against the idea until the majority of the conference went with it and the TV partners said it was a good idea.

This is why I have said adding 2-4 teams asap is a good idea. Ultimately you can overrule Texas but they can always leave which will screw the conference. By building the other rivalries now, it will help out if/when Texas makes their next move. Texas is a wildcard and will always do what is best for them. In the end, I bet the Longwhore Network becomes a Big 12 network of some form.... and additional teams will be added then.

The b12 without Texas, Texas tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma state would still consist of Baylor, TCU, and Kansas state, currently ranked #5, #6, and #11 in the country. They would still be the third best conference behind the sec and PAC. And those 4 schools have signed their rights over to the b12, so they ain't going anywhere anytime soon. This is why Texas is no longer the threat they were.

Why is it so hard for many of you to comprehend

Doesn't matter what anyone says... UT is everyone's daddy in that conference, nothing gets done with out UT's approval... Or let me put it this way... Texas leaves, Oklahoma follows, if those two are gone, so is the contract $$$ and the B12 dies.

That was basically my point with the exception that the conference wont die... just reconfigure.
If you have Baylor, TCU and Kansas St, then its a solid core. Add in WVU is usually a pretty salty team and then you have Kansas and ISU. Thats 6 teams with solid history. Then take Cinci, Memphis, ECU, USF, UCF and Houston/Uconn. The conference stays together and has some pretty competitive games and even has teams that make the top 25.... but attendance goes way down for the old Big 12 teams. Prestige goes down also and ESPN/Fox will "renegotiate" the value of that contract.

Overall, It will still pay more then what were making but I dont see those teams still collecting a $25 million paycheck in the future.

(11-30-2014 01:27 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(11-30-2014 12:10 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-27-2014 10:57 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  

(11-27-2014 09:44 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(11-27-2014 11:43 AM)mtmedlin Wrote:  They wont take SMU. Overlapping market. Why have 2 teams in basically the same city.

No the point being made was that there might be more voices in Big 12 realignment than merely Texas'. (See the post quoted where I first responded with this)

Yes, but Texas is the most important. Simply put, if Texas decides to leave the Big 12 is done and the rest of the conference knows it.

Pickens can say anything he wants (I am actually VERY distantly related to him...my grandfather is a Pickens) but it really doesnt matter. If Texas had said we dont want TCU or were out, then it wouldnt have happened. From what sources within Orangebloods had said was Texas was against the idea until the majority of the conference went with it and the TV partners said it was a good idea.

This is why I have said adding 2-4 teams asap is a good idea. Ultimately you can overrule Texas but they can always leave which will screw the conference. By building the other rivalries now, it will help out if/when Texas makes their next move. Texas is a wildcard and will always do what is best for them. In the end, I bet the Longwhore Network becomes a Big 12 network of some form.... and additional teams will be added then.

The b12 without Texas, Texas tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma state would still consist of Baylor, TCU, and Kansas state, currently ranked #5, #6, and #11 in the country. They would still be the third best conference behind the sec and PAC. And those 4 schools have signed their rights over to the b12, so they ain't going anywhere anytime soon. This is why Texas is no longer the threat they were.

Why is it so hard for many of you to comprehend

Doesn't matter what anyone says... UT is everyone's daddy in that conference, nothing gets done with out UT's approval... Or let me put it this way... Texas leaves, Oklahoma follows, if those two are gone, so is the contract $$$ and the B12 dies.

Because what you said IS NOT TRUE AT THIS POINT, on two fronts:



This is not the b12 from 3years ago. Texas can not go anywhere for years. They have signed away their tv rights.

You said if Texas and Oklahoma are gone, so is the contract and the b12 dies. Also not true, as I pointed out the b12 would still be one of the stronger football conferences.

This is why Texas is getting outvoted. They no longer call the shots, and can't go anywhere at the moment. Whoever the other members of the b12 want in the conference, they will get, no matter what Texas thinks. Which is why TCU is currently in the conference.

And as long as Texas wants to keep the long horn network, they won't be going anywhere even after the gor expires.

Since TCU is probably in the playoffs I doubt it matters right now.

Given the Oklahoma ADs recent comments I am not sure Oklahoma wants to stick with tx. If either leave they go to conferences without the same amount of power and less advantages with regard to regional ties. The only one worth it for tx would be the b1g

(11-30-2014 10:40 AM)Knightbengal Wrote:  Given the Oklahoma ADs recent comments I am not sure Oklahoma wants to stick with tx. If either leave they go to conferences without the same amount of power and less advantages with regard to regional ties. The only one worth it for tx would be the b1g

Theres actually a few scenarios. The B1G would take Texas since they are a member of the AAU and I highly suspect that they would also take Kansas to go with them since thats the only other AAU intstitution in the Big10 that they dont already have in their market.

The other option is to turn the failing Longwhore Network into a Pac12 regional channel. They would gladly take just Texas and Tech if Ok decided not to go.

If Texas leaves, Oklahoma would more then likely go to the Pac12 but if they decide to split, then I can definitely see the SEC taking in the Oklahoma schools... yes, they dont really want to add two teams from the same state, but if you know the legal issues in Oklahoma, you know that its pretty much a package deal.

Either way, Texas would make about the same or a bit more in the Pac12, especially if they gave them some cash for producing the regional channel... all the equipment is on their campus and as you said, the Big10 would definitely be an increase.

(11-30-2014 09:47 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-30-2014 01:27 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(11-30-2014 12:10 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-27-2014 10:57 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  

(11-27-2014 09:44 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  No the point being made was that there might be more voices in Big 12 realignment than merely Texas'. (See the post quoted where I first responded with this)

Yes, but Texas is the most important. Simply put, if Texas decides to leave the Big 12 is done and the rest of the conference knows it.

Pickens can say anything he wants (I am actually VERY distantly related to him...my grandfather is a Pickens) but it really doesnt matter. If Texas had said we dont want TCU or were out, then it wouldnt have happened. From what sources within Orangebloods had said was Texas was against the idea until the majority of the conference went with it and the TV partners said it was a good idea.

This is why I have said adding 2-4 teams asap is a good idea. Ultimately you can overrule Texas but they can always leave which will screw the conference. By building the other rivalries now, it will help out if/when Texas makes their next move. Texas is a wildcard and will always do what is best for them. In the end, I bet the Longwhore Network becomes a Big 12 network of some form.... and additional teams will be added then.

The b12 without Texas, Texas tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma state would still consist of Baylor, TCU, and Kansas state, currently ranked #5, #6, and #11 in the country. They would still be the third best conference behind the sec and PAC. And those 4 schools have signed their rights over to the b12, so they ain't going anywhere anytime soon. This is why Texas is no longer the threat they were.

Why is it so hard for many of you to comprehend

Doesn't matter what anyone says... UT is everyone's daddy in that conference, nothing gets done with out UT's approval... Or let me put it this way... Texas leaves, Oklahoma follows, if those two are gone, so is the contract $$$ and the B12 dies.

Because what you said IS NOT TRUE AT THIS POINT, on two fronts:



This is not the b12 from 3years ago. Texas can not go anywhere for years. They have signed away their tv rights.

You said if Texas and Oklahoma are gone, so is the contract and the b12 dies. Also not true, as I pointed out the b12 would still be one of the stronger football conferences.

This is why Texas is getting outvoted. They no longer call the shots, and can't go anywhere at the moment. Whoever the other members of the b12 want in the conference, they will get, no matter what Texas thinks. Which is why TCU is currently in the conference.

And as long as Texas wants to keep the long horn network, they won't be going anywhere even after the gor expires.

All contracts can be gotten out of and for a reduced cost. Maryland should have had to pay $50 million plus loss of television revenue but instead they walked for about $35 million total. If Texas decides its in their best interest to leave, they will. Money isnt an object. They can raise $100 million in under 50 calls...or less.

Do I think they do it...Nope. But give them 10 years and It may become a reality... plus there are rumored performance escape clauses. Not certain I believe them though.


HERES whats important... The Grant of Rights doesnt specify damages. If a team decides to leave and you want to sue, you have to prove damages... thats REALLY hard to do If ESPN does not lower the tv contract.

So heres the scenario. 6-10 years has gone by and the longwhore network is losing cash and not gaining traction. Texas isnt happy and the Pac 12 is making money hand over fist (which is already happening). Texas decides to leave. The GOR says they have to leave their TV rights with the league, or be sued. Texas says, sue us! Now the Big 12 has to prove damages... well ESPN and Fox are the tv partner for both. Within that time frame the value of tv contracts will have gone up. The big 10 in 2016 is gonna set a new record... I am guessing over $30 million a team.

So ESPN says, hey well just add 6 AAC teams to the Big 12 and keep the contract as is. No reduction in payout... Now how do the 6 teams left behind prove damages? There arent really. Maybe decreased attendance at home games, but those damages will be covered in an exit fee. So texas pays $30 or $40 million, which they will recoup in under 4 years in the Pac12 and its a done deal.

Ive said all along that I think ESPN wants Texas, Tech, OK and State in the PAC12 and then the leftover teams were supposed to go to the Big East. We didnt play ball and got destroyed for it. Now the move will be made later, and of course ESPN will extend their contract to lock up those teams... and will move 6 AAC teams into the Big 12 and extend their contract. ESPN is the puppet master and they have time to slowly playout the game as they see fit. They will get their 4 power conferences and then one other.... they will eventually get to a large playoff and they will end up breaking away from the NCAA. It just takes time.

Heres a really good read... scroll down to the section about the Big 12 GOR


http://frankthetank.me/2013/08/08/summer...agreement/

(11-30-2014 04:23 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  

(11-30-2014 09:47 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-30-2014 01:27 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(11-30-2014 12:10 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-27-2014 10:57 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  Yes, but Texas is the most important. Simply put, if Texas decides to leave the Big 12 is done and the rest of the conference knows it.

Pickens can say anything he wants (I am actually VERY distantly related to him...my grandfather is a Pickens) but it really doesnt matter. If Texas had said we dont want TCU or were out, then it wouldnt have happened. From what sources within Orangebloods had said was Texas was against the idea until the majority of the conference went with it and the TV partners said it was a good idea.

This is why I have said adding 2-4 teams asap is a good idea. Ultimately you can overrule Texas but they can always leave which will screw the conference. By building the other rivalries now, it will help out if/when Texas makes their next move. Texas is a wildcard and will always do what is best for them. In the end, I bet the Longwhore Network becomes a Big 12 network of some form.... and additional teams will be added then.

The b12 without Texas, Texas tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma state would still consist of Baylor, TCU, and Kansas state, currently ranked #5, #6, and #11 in the country. They would still be the third best conference behind the sec and PAC. And those 4 schools have signed their rights over to the b12, so they ain't going anywhere anytime soon. This is why Texas is no longer the threat they were.

Why is it so hard for many of you to comprehend

Doesn't matter what anyone says... UT is everyone's daddy in that conference, nothing gets done with out UT's approval... Or let me put it this way... Texas leaves, Oklahoma follows, if those two are gone, so is the contract $$$ and the B12 dies.

Because what you said IS NOT TRUE AT THIS POINT, on two fronts:



This is not the b12 from 3years ago. Texas can not go anywhere for years. They have signed away their tv rights.

You said if Texas and Oklahoma are gone, so is the contract and the b12 dies. Also not true, as I pointed out the b12 would still be one of the stronger football conferences.

This is why Texas is getting outvoted. They no longer call the shots, and can't go anywhere at the moment. Whoever the other members of the b12 want in the conference, they will get, no matter what Texas thinks. Which is why TCU is currently in the conference.

And as long as Texas wants to keep the long horn network, they won't be going anywhere even after the gor expires.

All contracts can be gotten out of and for a reduced cost. Maryland should have had to pay $50 million plus loss of television revenue but instead they walked for about $35 million total. If Texas decides its in their best interest to leave, they will. Money isnt an object. They can raise $100 million in under 50 calls...or less.

Do I think they do it...Nope. But give them 10 years and It may become a reality... plus there are rumored performance escape clauses. Not certain I believe them though.


HERES whats important... The Grant of Rights doesnt specify damages. If a team decides to leave and you want to sue, you have to prove damages... thats REALLY hard to do If ESPN does not lower the tv contract.

So heres the scenario. 6-10 years has gone by and the longwhore network is losing cash and not gaining traction. Texas isnt happy and the Pac 12 is making money hand over fist (which is already happening). Texas decides to leave. The GOR says they have to leave their TV rights with the league, or be sued. Texas says, sue us! Now the Big 12 has to prove damages... well ESPN and Fox are the tv partner for both. Within that time frame the value of tv contracts will have gone up. The big 10 in 2016 is gonna set a new record... I am guessing over $30 million a team.

So ESPN says, hey well just add 6 AAC teams to the Big 12 and keep the contract as is. No reduction in payout... Now how do the 6 teams left behind prove damages? There arent really. Maybe decreased attendance at home games, but those damages will be covered in an exit fee. So texas pays $30 or $40 million, which they will recoup in under 4 years in the Pac12 and its a done deal.

Ive said all along that I think ESPN wants Texas, Tech, OK and State in the PAC12 and then the leftover teams were supposed to go to the Big East. We didnt play ball and got destroyed for it. Now the move will be made later, and of course ESPN will extend their contract to lock up those teams... and will move 6 AAC teams into the Big 12 and extend their contract. ESPN is the puppet master and they have time to slowly playout the game as they see fit. They will get their 4 power conferences and then one other.... they will eventually get to a large playoff and they will end up breaking away from the NCAA. It just takes time.

But if espn doesn't lower the contract if Texas leaves, then the b12 doesn't just survive, it thrives.

(11-30-2014 04:40 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-30-2014 04:23 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  

(11-30-2014 09:47 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-30-2014 01:27 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(11-30-2014 12:10 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  The b12 without Texas, Texas tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma state would still consist of Baylor, TCU, and Kansas state, currently ranked #5, #6, and #11 in the country. They would still be the third best conference behind the sec and PAC. And those 4 schools have signed their rights over to the b12, so they ain't going anywhere anytime soon. This is why Texas is no longer the threat they were.

Why is it so hard for many of you to comprehend

Doesn't matter what anyone says... UT is everyone's daddy in that conference, nothing gets done with out UT's approval... Or let me put it this way... Texas leaves, Oklahoma follows, if those two are gone, so is the contract $$$ and the B12 dies.

Because what you said IS NOT TRUE AT THIS POINT, on two fronts:



This is not the b12 from 3years ago. Texas can not go anywhere for years. They have signed away their tv rights.

You said if Texas and Oklahoma are gone, so is the contract and the b12 dies. Also not true, as I pointed out the b12 would still be one of the stronger football conferences.

This is why Texas is getting outvoted. They no longer call the shots, and can't go anywhere at the moment. Whoever the other members of the b12 want in the conference, they will get, no matter what Texas thinks. Which is why TCU is currently in the conference.

And as long as Texas wants to keep the long horn network, they won't be going anywhere even after the gor expires.

All contracts can be gotten out of and for a reduced cost. Maryland should have had to pay $50 million plus loss of television revenue but instead they walked for about $35 million total. If Texas decides its in their best interest to leave, they will. Money isnt an object. They can raise $100 million in under 50 calls...or less.

Do I think they do it...Nope. But give them 10 years and It may become a reality... plus there are rumored performance escape clauses. Not certain I believe them though.


HERES whats important... The Grant of Rights doesnt specify damages. If a team decides to leave and you want to sue, you have to prove damages... thats REALLY hard to do If ESPN does not lower the tv contract.

So heres the scenario. 6-10 years has gone by and the longwhore network is losing cash and not gaining traction. Texas isnt happy and the Pac 12 is making money hand over fist (which is already happening). Texas decides to leave. The GOR says they have to leave their TV rights with the league, or be sued. Texas says, sue us! Now the Big 12 has to prove damages... well ESPN and Fox are the tv partner for both. Within that time frame the value of tv contracts will have gone up. The big 10 in 2016 is gonna set a new record... I am guessing over $30 million a team.

So ESPN says, hey well just add 6 AAC teams to the Big 12 and keep the contract as is. No reduction in payout... Now how do the 6 teams left behind prove damages? There arent really. Maybe decreased attendance at home games, but those damages will be covered in an exit fee. So texas pays $30 or $40 million, which they will recoup in under 4 years in the Pac12 and its a done deal.

Ive said all along that I think ESPN wants Texas, Tech, OK and State in the PAC12 and then the leftover teams were supposed to go to the Big East. We didnt play ball and got destroyed for it. Now the move will be made later, and of course ESPN will extend their contract to lock up those teams... and will move 6 AAC teams into the Big 12 and extend their contract. ESPN is the puppet master and they have time to slowly playout the game as they see fit. They will get their 4 power conferences and then one other.... they will eventually get to a large playoff and they will end up breaking away from the NCAA. It just takes time.

But if espn doesn't lower the contract if Texas leaves, then the b12 doesn't just survive, it thrives.

The tv gods $$$ will always follow UT... The little guys/towns bears/Waco and tech/Lubbock to name a few, heavily rely off Texas.

Again, Texas leaves Oklahoma and Kansas will sure follow... Leaving the not so B12 programs anymore but now small town (lol) programs for the first time to defend for themselves. Yikes, no way I would want Houston in that cluster f*** of a conference.

Now, if Texas leaves but Oklahoma and Kansas stay, than yes, the B12 still remains a good respectable conference. One I wouldn't mind Houston to be a part of.

That said, and for selfish reasons, I would much rather have Houston in the PAC if that ever occur.

(11-25-2014 11:18 PM)NavyKnight Wrote:  Looks great nice job. From a geographical stand point definitely makes sense for UC and UM to big 12. Both have a strong basketball history and UC has a solid football resume. Not sure with Memphis and football. Out of all the hopefuls in the AAC to big 12 conversation these two seem to make the most sense. Living in OKC these poeple don't have a clue who USF and UCF are and when they were forced to talk about UCF last year it wasn't flattering. These fans want recognizable names not up starts. This all coming from sports radio. Basically at least in OKC talking heads both C Florida and S Florida are directional schools that bring nothing to their league.

I agree. My Dad lives in okc and follows sooners. I guess compared to us fanatics, my dads not as into college football as much as us but hes not a nominal college football fan by any means. He follows the sooners and big 12 and P5 and goes to a few sooner games a season. When Baylor was matched with UCF in the fiesta bowl last year my dad actually asked me who UCF was and what it stands for. I told him and he admitted that he had never heard of the team or the college. Sometimes those of us who follow a Non-cartel school forget how little the average fan knows about life outside the cartel.

True, but people know who Cincy and Memphis are because of basketball in our case. Cincy because of both. With that said, we are known as basketball school.