(08-28-2016 10:30 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(08-28-2016 10:06 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  

(08-28-2016 10:05 PM)Stay Cool Wrote:  

(08-28-2016 10:02 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  this makes zero sense financially and I see little chance that UT or OU would agree to any deal that adds two teams ans keeps the current contract in place and extends it

even if it grows by the same rate of growth of about $1 million per team per year that does nothing to mitigate the $14+ million less dollars per new team that comes with adding new teams

the only thing that extending the current deal out with two new teams does is make the number of years and the amount of money that existing teams lose for adding new members that much greater unless those new members are willing to take substantially less money for the entire time

if this was true it would be probably one of the worst financial decisions that any major conference has ever made

A TodgeRodge post i DON'T need to sprain my finger scrolling past?!?!?!



Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Todge is sort of a crybaby about all of this.

what exactly makes me a "cry baby" about all of this

because I am intelligent enough to actually understand the financial number

And give novel like responses regarding your intelligence about financial numbers.

What about the best on field performance of them all? The only one from the list that have the most wins for close to 20 years out of the G5 is Boise State. The lowest total losses that they had was 4 losses in a couple of years. The others on the list can't claim that. Not even BYU which had a couple of losing seasons in that time period.

Eh...

Just by the way the B12 has handled this process indicates that NO expansion is likely. If they were really serious about adding schools, they would NEVER have done what they have done. None of the other conferences that have expanded have done anything like what the B12 has done.

And, practically speaking, the whole thing is so toxic, I don't think you could get the required votes for an expansion candidate now nor the TV networks to sign onto it.

This whole thing has been to establish the pretext for OU, in particular, to leave. And it has been successful.

Quote:
by Christopher Lambert

Quote:Industry experts tell me that....

Sources close to the situation, that wish not to be identified because they are not authorized to speak on the matter, tell us that...

Sources with the conference tell me that...

My Industry Sources
by Christopher 'The Dud' Lambert

"Huh huh. Huh huh. He said 'expansion.' Huh huh. Huh huh."

(08-28-2016 09:44 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  

(08-28-2016 09:43 PM)bullet Wrote:  FYI, Christopher Lambert is the Dude of West Virginia.

Is anything that he present as fact is true?

He's the George Costanza of CR...assume the opposite of whatever he says.

(08-28-2016 09:43 PM)bullet Wrote:  FYI, Christopher Lambert is the Dude of West Virginia.

(08-28-2016 10:15 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  ...and Tuxedo Yoda.

And the amazing Criswell.



'Are you ready for . . . conference realignment from outer space?'

(08-28-2016 09:47 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-28-2016 09:44 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  

(08-28-2016 09:43 PM)bullet Wrote:  FYI, Christopher Lambert is the Dude of West Virginia.

Is anything that he present as fact is true?

I don't think he makes up stuff out of thin air. But he presents what he hears as more than just rumor.

I once listened to his radio show (the week after the ACC GOR was announced, where he had to fess up), and he flat out admitted he made things up to fit whatever his agenda may have been, which at that time he said was to "make the ACC uncomfortable). So yes he does make up things out of thin air. That may not always have been the case, but that bird has long since travelled.

(08-28-2016 10:05 PM)Stay Cool Wrote:  

(08-28-2016 10:02 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  this makes zero sense financially and I see little chance that UT or OU would agree to any deal that adds two teams ans keeps the current contract in place and extends it

even if it grows by the same rate of growth of about $1 million per team per year that does nothing to mitigate the $14+ million less dollars per new team that comes with adding new teams

the only thing that extending the current deal out with two new teams does is make the number of years and the amount of money that existing teams lose for adding new members that much greater unless those new members are willing to take substantially less money for the entire time

if this was true it would be probably one of the worst financial decisions that any major conference has ever made

A TodgeRodge post i DON'T need to sprain my finger scrolling past?!?!?!

He has actually gotten much better at beign concise recently. Of course then again, if he used periods to separate sentences instead of paragraph breaks, all of his responses would be half as long.

This guy is saying BYU and UH, but he is speculating that Texas will pull out all the stops for UH. Greg Swaim tweeted this on Saturday:

GREG SWAIM SHOW ‏@GSwaim · Aug 27
#BYU (7) and #UCBearcats (6) very close to required eight vote super majority. No other team has more than two.

Not necessarily inconsistent. Swaim may be right about the current polling. Should be a tense three months for all three schools.

(08-28-2016 11:11 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  What about the best on field performance of them all? The only one from the list that have the most wins for close to 20 years out of the G5 is Boise State. The lowest total losses that they had was 4 losses in a couple of years. The others on the list can't claim that. Not even BYU which had a couple of losing seasons in that time period.

I can't understand why NDSU and Arkansas Tech are not included!!!

Quote:GREG SWAIM SHOW ‏@GSwaim · Aug 27
#BYU (7) and #UCBearcats (6) very close to required eight vote super majority. No other team has more than two.

Swaim and the WV Dud have been pretty chummy ever since the Great Georgia Tech Move of 2012.



November 2012:

Quote:GREG SWAIM SHOW
‏@GSwaim 2012 Nov 30
Word from calls today is that another current #ACC team will announce a move with 7-10 days to the #B1G. This would be a HUGE domino.

‏@peart26 2012 Nov 30
@GSwaim you need to quit listening to theDude from WV. He is making stuff up, and you're buying it. The B1G is not getting GT.

GREG SWAIM SHOW ‏@GSwaim 2012 Nov 30
@peart26 Nice guy, but not a source of mine. The last thing my sources do is tweet.

December 2012:




'Dang, we hate it when that happens!'

Big 12

North: ou, Osu, ku, ksu, isu, wvu
South: Texas, t tech, Houston, Baylor, tcu, byu

Extend the gor to match Lhn contract. I could see Texas wanting to pac 12 with Texas tech and Houston at some point. Or I could see Texas wanting to join the big 10 with Houston and send Texas tech to the pac 12...say the big 10 jumps to 16-18 with Texas, Houston, x,x with the pac 12 going to 14-16 with Texas tech and others. Big 10 would rather have Houston than Texas tech.

(08-28-2016 09:36 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  By Christopher Lambert,

Excerpt:

Quote:Industry experts tell me that the Big 12 and ESPN/Fox have reached an agreement where the conference would add two new members and receive the pro rata amount for each. However, in return, the networks would require an extension of the current TV contract and the grant of rights to 2030 or 2032.

Quote: Sources close to the situation, that wish not to be identified because they are not authorized to speak on the matter, tell us that the Big 12 has narrowed its expansion list to three schools: BYU, Cincinnati and Houston. UCONN and UCF are reportedly no longer under consideration.

Quote: Sources with the conference tell me that BYU has taken proactive steps to alleviate the Big 12’s concerns with the honor code and LGBT issues, and the conference’s only serious reservation at this point is the open Title IX investigation. Yet, according to data compiled by the Chronicle of Higher Education, current Big 12 members Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State and Oklahoma State all have active Title IX investigations underway.

http://landgrantgauntlet.com/2016/08/27/...w-members/

Isn't that the "Dude of West Virginia"?

(08-28-2016 09:36 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  by Christopher Lambert

(08-29-2016 08:47 AM)XLance Wrote:  Isn't that the "Dude of West Virginia"?

You might want to, you know, catch up on the thread a bit.

Scott and Slive have said that schools like in the MWC and AAC would become part of the P5 someday for the ones to keeping up. Where are those teams go when the Big 12 be picked apart? Slive and Scott sees there are money to be made from these schools in the G5 if they are in position to be P5.

(08-28-2016 10:02 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  this makes zero sense financially and I see little chance that UT or OU would agree to any deal that adds two teams ans keeps the current contract in place and extends it

even if it grows by the same rate of growth of about $1 million per team per year that does nothing to mitigate the $14+ million less dollars per new team that comes with adding new teams

the only thing that extending the current deal out with two new teams does is make the number of years and the amount of money that existing teams lose for adding new members that much greater unless those new members are willing to take substantially less money for the entire time

if this was true it would be probably one of the worst financial decisions that any major conference has ever made

It makes sense for Texas if you consider they are under ESPN's control anyway until the LHN deal expires, so it is to their advantage to get everything stabilized until then.

You would think Oklahoma might want to move earlier, but I think they have some landing sports whether they tried to move in 2025 or 2032.

Kansas might be risking their only other natural landing spot (B1G) being filled by 2032. The rest of the schools would obviously be happy with the extension.

The interesting thing to see (if they truly are down to BYU, Cinn and UH) is whether Texas has to give up on UH in order to get OU and KU to agree to the extension they want, or if Texas has so much power that they get an extension AND a BYU/UH expansion.

(08-28-2016 09:36 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  By Christopher Lambert,

Quote: Sources with the conference tell me that BYU has taken proactive steps to alleviate the Big 12’s concerns with the honor code and LGBT issues, and the conference’s only serious reservation at this point is the open Title IX investigation. Yet, according to data compiled by the Chronicle of Higher Education, current Big 12 members Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State and Oklahoma State all have active Title IX investigations underway.

The Dude is back! If the B12 does expand, the odds are it would be with 2 of those three.

BYU changing the honor code and LGBT issues isn't going to happen as long as they are affiliated with the Mormon church.

UConn is still in the running for the B12 -- if for no other reason that it has supporters among some of the B12 college presidents.