A couple Key takeaways from that book...

1. These conferences do their homework, months, years in advance.

When the PAC was selling the P16 concept to A&M, Larry Scott gave a tremendous presentation on what the PAC offered, answered all of A&M's questions and even had sample schedules for all members in all revenue and Olympic sports projected out 6 years or so. A&M was really impressed with Scott and the PAC 10, but felt A&M needed to do its own diligence in the matter and not just "trust" Texas to move pieces wiat an expedited pace just to avoid Texas political pressure.

Loften got Slives' cell phone number from either the Arizona or ASU AD at the time. He called Slive on Monday and that weekend was in an airport conference room meeting with Slive, Sankey and the TV consultant. A&M was given an iPad full of all the numbers and charts and data from the presentation, but more importantly Loftin admired the way Slive and the SEC worked and operated.

This one week due diligence delay put the breaks on the PAC16 train. Even though Nebraska and Colorado hopped off, the conference was still alive; Ken Starr even sent Loftin flowers for that.

2. A&M wants to be the only Texas school to don the SEC patch.

I would expect Current A&M decision makers to join UF, UGa, USC, UK to keep out other instate rivals as Loftin specifically calls this out in the book

3. A&M's green light to the SEC wasn't cleared until it was proven that the B12 would survive.

Once OU and OSU couldn't join the PAC and recommitted to the B12, the Baylor lawsuit still had teeth. Now damages were minimal or without merit.

4. Moves take time usually.

A&M took 20 years from when talks first occurred. Then restarted in 2010. Then in 2011 when Texas was shoving the LHN down the B12's throat. The 2010 due diligence laid all the track work down for the 2011 move.

Side Note: would be interesting to read Missouri 'a account of 2011 as they were clearly deep in talks with the SEC as Mizzou was given legal advice to not pledge allegiance to the B12 after OU and OSU stopped their wallflower campaign.

(06-06-2017 12:04 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  Side Note: would be interesting to read Missouri 'a account of 2011 as they were clearly deep in talks with the SEC as Mizzou was given legal advice to not pledge allegiance to the B12 after OU and OSU stopped their wallflower campaign.

Here is a really good longish read of the Missouri move. Basically, they lost all trust in Big 12 leadership.

https://missouri.rivals.com/news/zero-tr...conference

(06-06-2017 12:04 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  2. A&M wants to be the only Texas school to don the SEC patch.

I would expect Current A&M decision makers to join UF, UGa, USC, UK to keep out other instate rivals as Loftin specifically calls this out in the book

I'm fine with A&M being the only TX school in the league. If we can nail down the OK schools then maybe we're done.

(06-06-2017 12:04 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  A couple Key takeaways from that book...

1. These conferences do their homework, months, years in advance.

When the PAC was selling the P16 concept to A&M, Larry Scott gave a tremendous presentation on what the PAC offered, answered all of A&M's questions and even had sample schedules for all members in all revenue and Olympic sports projected out 6 years or so. A&M was really impressed with Scott and the PAC 10, but felt A&M needed to do its own diligence in the matter and not just "trust" Texas to move pieces wiat an expedited pace just to avoid Texas political pressure.

Loften got Slives' cell phone number from either the Arizona or ASU AD at the time. He called Slive on Monday and that weekend was in an airport conference room meeting with Slive, Sankey and the TV consultant. A&M was given an iPad full of all the numbers and charts and data from the presentation, but more importantly Loftin admired the way Slive and the SEC worked and operated.

This one week due diligence delay put the breaks on the PAC16 train. Even though Nebraska and Colorado hopped off, the conference was still alive; Ken Starr even sent Loftin flowers for that.

2. A&M wants to be the only Texas school to don the SEC patch.

I would expect Current A&M decision makers to join UF, UGa, USC, UK to keep out other instate rivals as Loftin specifically calls this out in the book

3. A&M's green light to the SEC wasn't cleared until it was proven that the B12 would survive.

Once OU and OSU couldn't join the PAC and recommitted to the B12, the Baylor lawsuit still had teeth. Now damages were minimal or without merit.

4. Moves take time usually.

A&M took 20 years from when talks first occurred. Then restarted in 2010. Then in 2011 when Texas was shoving the LHN down the B12's throat. The 2010 due diligence laid all the track work down for the 2011 move.

Side Note: would be interesting to read Missouri 'a account of 2011 as they were clearly deep in talks with the SEC as Mizzou was given legal advice to not pledge allegiance to the B12 after OU and OSU stopped their wallflower campaign.

And who did Loftin write the book for? Aggies. And what do Aggies want to hear? The usual bull about A&M being the only Texas school. In the market model that trajectory was a possibility. In the content driven model the SEC will add whichever school earns us the most.

Florida's president, South Carolina's president, and Georgia's president will not be voting against Texas if they want to join. But since the internet has perpetuated this fiction it was an easy sell to the Aggies to continue it.

Now it might very well play out that Texas winds up somewhere else, perhaps even the ACC although that's a long shot. I do think that OU and Kansas would be a helluva move for the SEC. And since that would be the most agreeable to all concerned (except possibly Kansas) then I'd be fine with it. But if Texas wanted into the SEC and the Big 10 was their only other option we would be deuce stupid to let the Big 10 into Texas if we had a chance to close that door. Even Loftin knows that!