http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...tom-herman
Quote:"It's disappointing that the University of Texas -- who wants to open a campus in Houston and said they would never do anything to harm the University of Houston, with all the football coaches in America, who said that they would stand up for us to get into the Big 12 and then didn't even vote for us when they met with the commissioner and all the schools -- had to come take our little football coach," Fertitta told Berry. "But that's business and it's a great opportunity for Tom and I wish him the best. I hope they all do well, but I just hope we do better."
Quote:"You know when I knew we were in trouble?" Fertitta said. "There were three [university] presidents who were on the [Big 12 expansion] committee and when we went to the interview, they weren't even part of the interview process. I walked out of that meeting and said 'Wow, this is a sham. There's no intention of doing anything.'
"It was one of the great shams in college football, and college athletics, and just college period. ... It was a total sham and I sit here today and I laugh at the Big 12 and their leadership."
Maybe they go back to the well, and grab a Big Ten coordinator?
Wow, harsh words. In another context I'd just call it whining, but after the absolute circus that the Big 12 put on stringing so many programs along for months, it's entirely warranted. Don't get me wrong, there should never be an expectation that a conference HAS to add teams or that a team HAS to join a certain conference, but to announce intentions so publically and then to stage a reality-tv-like elimination process, only to conclude that there is going to be no expansion is beyond ridiculous.
(11-30-2016 03:19 PM)3BNole Wrote: [ -> ]Wow, harsh words. In another context I'd just call it whining, but after the absolute circus that the Big 12 put on stringing so many programs along for months, it's entirely warranted. Don't get me wrong, there should never be an expectation that a conference HAS to add teams or that a team HAS to join a certain conference, but to announce intentions so publically and then to stage a reality-tv-like elimination process, only to conclude that there is going to be no expansion is beyond ridiculous.
they did not announce intentions to expand they announced intentions to explore expansion
ignorant people just took that to mean they would absolutely expand
That second quote...I'm glad that's out there from someone who went through it. People should be aware of what this conference did. But, he's wrong about this being "business." This was a sham and I don't want to know what schools paid with possible taxpayer money to get themselves involved with this farce.
(11-30-2016 03:19 PM)3BNole Wrote: [ -> ]Wow, harsh words. In another context I'd just call it whining, but after the absolute circus that the Big 12 put on stringing so many programs along for months, it's entirely warranted. Don't get me wrong, there should never be an expectation that a conference HAS to add teams or that a team HAS to join a certain conference, but to announce intentions so publically and then to stage a reality-tv-like elimination process, only to conclude that there is going to be no expansion is beyond ridiculous.
While I agree that the big 12 could have handled it better. The big 12 never said it was 100% going to expand. There is many reasons why they went public but I doubt we will figure out all the reasons. My guess it was to show pro expansion schools that the candidates out there weren't desirable and maybe the off chance a school like Missouri said they wanted back in. I know I was in favor of expansion but I'm not mad we didn't expand.
Fertitta just comes off as Sour Grapes. Tom Herman turned UH into the #1 G5 job. I would bet your ass that conference realignment will happen again in the 2020s for a lot of reasons. I think conferences will get smaller because people don't like how schools can miss out of top dogs like Minnesota this year, and Iowa last year, attendance is dropping and I think regional conferences can help boost it back up, cord cutting, and etc.
UH just needs to sit tight and I know that is hard but If they keep improving they will find themselves in a better conference, just not the Big 12 in its current form.
(11-30-2016 03:53 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote: [ -> ] (11-30-2016 03:19 PM)3BNole Wrote: [ -> ]Wow, harsh words. In another context I'd just call it whining, but after the absolute circus that the Big 12 put on stringing so many programs along for months, it's entirely warranted. Don't get me wrong, there should never be an expectation that a conference HAS to add teams or that a team HAS to join a certain conference, but to announce intentions so publically and then to stage a reality-tv-like elimination process, only to conclude that there is going to be no expansion is beyond ridiculous.
they did not announce intentions to expand they announced intentions to explore expansion
ignorant people just took that to mean they would absolutely expand
The sham is that they put all the schools through that when the decision to expand or not had NOTHING to do with anything that anyone could have presented.
That's why it's a scam. They didn't say they intended to expand...but by virtue of holding the circus, they they strongly signaled that they were expanding.
Otherwise, why do it? It's like saying "Who wants to go to dinner with me tonight?" and then saying "I never said I was going to dinner."
The decision to expand or not was an important one, with good arguments in either direction. There is absolutely NO justification, reasonable or even unreasonable, to commission all the presentations before deciding if they were going to expand. None.
Absolute clown show, and I don't blame any of the schools for being pissed about it.
(11-30-2016 04:04 PM)CyclonePower Wrote: [ -> ]UH just needs to sit tight and I know that is hard but If they keep improving they will find themselves in a better conference, just not the Big 12 in its current form.
Sweet nothings.
I'm not a Houston fan, but, give me a break. This is the kind of line people were tossing at ECU throughout the 90's and 00's about the Big East, while other, less-deserving programs marched right in ahead. In a place where this is about merit, you can say something like this confidently. In higher ed...please.
Fertitta has good intentions, and there's no doubt about the results of the Big 12 expansion process being a circus, but - in this form and using this description - desperately comes off as whining. The funny thing is that Houston has nothing to be worried about.
1. Houston is a better job than some P5 ones.
2. Houston has spent money, and is willing to spend even more.
3. There is a new indoor football facility on the way.
4. Houston has developed a solid collection of coaches that have gone on to strong P5 jobs (Briles, Sumlin, Herman)
Frankly, Houston is in much better position than some current P5 programs. They will be just fine.
(11-30-2016 03:11 PM)MplsBison Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...tom-herman
Quote:"It's disappointing that the University of Texas -- who wants to open a campus in Houston and said they would never do anything to harm the University of Houston, with all the football coaches in America, who said that they would stand up for us to get into the Big 12 and then didn't even vote for us when they met with the commissioner and all the schools -- had to come take our little football coach," Fertitta told Berry. "But that's business and it's a great opportunity for Tom and I wish him the best. I hope they all do well, but I just hope we do better."
Quote:"You know when I knew we were in trouble?" Fertitta said. "There were three [university] presidents who were on the [Big 12 expansion] committee and when we went to the interview, they weren't even part of the interview process. I walked out of that meeting and said 'Wow, this is a sham. There's no intention of doing anything.'
"It was one of the great shams in college football, and college athletics, and just college period. ... It was a total sham and I sit here today and I laugh at the Big 12 and their leadership."
I wonder if any Presidents were present during any of the interviews? I understand being an advocate, however, to demean the most transparent expansion process in the history of conference expansion rings hollow to me. The Big 12 has been about as open as they possibly could about their circumstances. To get dinged after the fact is simply not fair to the Big 12
(11-30-2016 03:53 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote: [ -> ] (11-30-2016 03:19 PM)3BNole Wrote: [ -> ]Wow, harsh words. In another context I'd just call it whining, but after the absolute circus that the Big 12 put on stringing so many programs along for months, it's entirely warranted. Don't get me wrong, there should never be an expectation that a conference HAS to add teams or that a team HAS to join a certain conference, but to announce intentions so publically and then to stage a reality-tv-like elimination process, only to conclude that there is going to be no expansion is beyond ridiculous.
they did not announce intentions to expand they announced intentions to explore expansion
ignorant people just took that to mean they would absolutely expand
Yeah, those schools invited to come and interview were just ignorant to think that the members of the Big XII expansion committee would actually be there. Just how Big XII fans are ignorant when they said "One true champion!" or "We think having a CCG with ten teams will really help our chances of getting into the CFP!".
(11-30-2016 04:11 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote: [ -> ]Fertitta has good intentions, and there's no doubt about the results of the Big 12 expansion process being a circus, but - in this form and using this description - desperately comes off as whining. The funny thing is that Houston has nothing to be worried about.
1. Houston is a better job than some P5 ones.
2. Houston has spent money, and is willing to spend even more.
3. There is a new indoor football facility on the way.
4. Houston has developed a solid collection of coaches that have gone on to strong P5 jobs (Briles, Sumlin, Herman)
Frankly, Houston is in much better position than some current P5 programs. They will be just fine.
This is a fair point.
One might even argue that it's "easier" to make the NY6 via winning the AAC, than it is for some P5 be one of the top couple teams in their conferences.
Don't believe everything this guy says. His word is not always true.
(11-30-2016 04:04 PM)CyclonePower Wrote: [ -> ] (11-30-2016 03:19 PM)3BNole Wrote: [ -> ]Wow, harsh words. In another context I'd just call it whining, but after the absolute circus that the Big 12 put on stringing so many programs along for months, it's entirely warranted. Don't get me wrong, there should never be an expectation that a conference HAS to add teams or that a team HAS to join a certain conference, but to announce intentions so publically and then to stage a reality-tv-like elimination process, only to conclude that there is going to be no expansion is beyond ridiculous.
While I agree that the big 12 could have handled it better. The big 12 never said it was 100% going to expand. There is many reasons why they went public but I doubt we will figure out all the reasons. My guess it was to show pro expansion schools that the candidates out there weren't desirable and maybe the off chance a school like Missouri said they wanted back in. I know I was in favor of expansion but I'm not mad we didn't expand.
Fertitta just comes off as Sour Grapes. Tom Herman turned UH into the #1 G5 job. I would bet your ass that conference realignment will happen again in the 2020s for a lot of reasons. I think conferences will get smaller because people don't like how schools can miss out of top dogs like Minnesota this year, and Iowa last year, attendance is dropping and I think regional conferences can help boost it back up, cord cutting, and etc.
UH just needs to sit tight and I know that is hard but If they keep improving they will find themselves in a better conference, just not the Big 12 in its current form.
I believe the bolded words were what drove this. Not so much about demonstrating that G5 candidates didn't add as much as they subtracted, but rather that the league wanted to show schools like Missouri and Nebraska that the door was open for their return. They had to know those two were longshots, but if you don't ask you may never know.
If the G5 candidates didn't realize that their only shot was if one of those two schools said yes, then maybe their own hubris (or desperation) played a part in how this ultimately shook out.
(11-30-2016 04:50 PM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ] (11-30-2016 04:04 PM)CyclonePower Wrote: [ -> ] (11-30-2016 03:19 PM)3BNole Wrote: [ -> ]Wow, harsh words. In another context I'd just call it whining, but after the absolute circus that the Big 12 put on stringing so many programs along for months, it's entirely warranted. Don't get me wrong, there should never be an expectation that a conference HAS to add teams or that a team HAS to join a certain conference, but to announce intentions so publically and then to stage a reality-tv-like elimination process, only to conclude that there is going to be no expansion is beyond ridiculous.
While I agree that the big 12 could have handled it better. The big 12 never said it was 100% going to expand. There is many reasons why they went public but I doubt we will figure out all the reasons. My guess it was to show pro expansion schools that the candidates out there weren't desirable and maybe the off chance a school like Missouri said they wanted back in. I know I was in favor of expansion but I'm not mad we didn't expand.
Fertitta just comes off as Sour Grapes. Tom Herman turned UH into the #1 G5 job. I would bet your ass that conference realignment will happen again in the 2020s for a lot of reasons. I think conferences will get smaller because people don't like how schools can miss out of top dogs like Minnesota this year, and Iowa last year, attendance is dropping and I think regional conferences can help boost it back up, cord cutting, and etc.
UH just needs to sit tight and I know that is hard but If they keep improving they will find themselves in a better conference, just not the Big 12 in its current form.
I believe the bolded words were what drove this. Not so much about demonstrating that G5 candidates didn't add as much as they subtracted, but rather that the league wanted to show schools like Missouri and Nebraska that the door was open for their return. They had to know those two were longshots, but if you don't ask you may never know.
If the G5 candidates didn't realize that their only shot was if one of those two schools said yes, then maybe their own hubris (or desperation) played a part in how this ultimately shook out.
I don't know. I couldn't make that jump unless I knew Air Force wasn't a part of this. Because, if they were, how do you go from "we want Pitt, Arkansas, and Air Force" five years or less ago to now saying "Air who? Never heard of them." Holding out for certain schools would be one thing...cat's out of the bag a bit that Air Force was desired, to now even they being told to go shove off.
All of this gets in the way of the bigger issues of the impact on the GoR and bylaws if a new media deal forced a pause or rewrite on the other two components. Those schools who got suckered into this got right in between the Big XII conference and its network partners. The Big XII couldn't get more without giving even just a little more (like extending the GoR). So, rather than go through that whole thing again (sitting on the GoR until the media contract came through), the conference took the extra pennies it was offered from the networks instead. See you in court in a couple of years to break up this whole thing before 2020, and that sort of thing.
(11-30-2016 04:08 PM)Lou_C Wrote: [ -> ] (11-30-2016 03:53 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote: [ -> ] (11-30-2016 03:19 PM)3BNole Wrote: [ -> ]Wow, harsh words. In another context I'd just call it whining, but after the absolute circus that the Big 12 put on stringing so many programs along for months, it's entirely warranted. Don't get me wrong, there should never be an expectation that a conference HAS to add teams or that a team HAS to join a certain conference, but to announce intentions so publically and then to stage a reality-tv-like elimination process, only to conclude that there is going to be no expansion is beyond ridiculous.
they did not announce intentions to expand they announced intentions to explore expansion
ignorant people just took that to mean they would absolutely expand
The sham is that they put all the schools through that when the decision to expand or not had NOTHING to do with anything that anyone could have presented.
That's why it's a scam. They didn't say they intended to expand...but by virtue of holding the circus, they they strongly signaled that they were expanding.
Otherwise, why do it? It's like saying "Who wants to go to dinner with me tonight?" and then saying "I never said I was going to dinner."
The decision to expand or not was an important one, with good arguments in either direction. There is absolutely NO justification, reasonable or even unreasonable, to commission all the presentations before deciding if they were going to expand. None.
Absolute clown show, and I don't blame any of the schools for being pissed about it.
the sham is that schools that would have done everything they possibly could have done to let anyone and everyone know that they were trying to get in the Big 12 are now crying that they went through a public application process to get in the Big 12
even back before the Big 12 stated they were going to EXPLORE expansion there were multiple schools sending in reports and info and calling Big 12 presidents and chancellors to talk all about their school and why their school should be in the Big 12
hell even when boren said they were going to have a CCG and that was not based on expansion a reporter ask him about if people should be polishing their university resume for expansion and boren laughed and said he already had enough emails, voice mails from people he had not talked to in years and info packets and they did not need to send more
and your analogy is a very poor one
a better analogy would be a guy saying he was thinking about getting married and who wants to go to dinner and get to know each other and a bunch of girls that dressed in their best whore cloths and went to dinner with him getting mad because he did not end up and get married
the vast majority of the universities that applied had no business doing so and they made the CHOICE to get their name out there as a MARKETING TOOL FOR THEMSELVES and so they have no reason to be upset
the few that believe they "deserve it" can just be butt hurt that the Big 12 and their media partners and their consultants believed otherwise
(11-30-2016 04:08 PM)Lou_C Wrote: [ -> ]The decision to expand or not was an important one, with good arguments in either direction. There is absolutely NO justification, reasonable or even unreasonable, to commission all the presentations before deciding if they were going to expand. None.
Absolute clown show, and I don't blame any of the schools for being pissed about it.
That makes no sense whatsoever, because the decision to expand or not expand is itself dependent on who is available for expansion. That information is a critical input to the basic decision about whether to expand or not. Because the Big 12 wasn't making a decision to "expand" in some abstract or general sense, they would be deciding to expand specifically via the addition of particular schools. So they would need to know about the schools first.
I mean, imagine if we asked Delany whether the B1G wants to expand or not. If I tell him that Texas and Notre Dame are willing, then his answer may be "yes, we want to expand". If Eastern Michigan and Northern Illinois are the only schools available, the answer might be "No, we don't want to expand".
So it was entirely reasonable for the Big 12 to have schools - including my USF - make presentations indicating what they had to offer to the Big 12 before deciding whether to expand or not.
It was always very clear to every school that presented that (a) you might be chosen, (b) someone else might be chosen instead of you, or © nobody might be chosen. There was no deception.
The allied power conferences need to separate from ESPN and the axis power conferences...
(11-30-2016 05:18 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ] (11-30-2016 04:08 PM)Lou_C Wrote: [ -> ]The decision to expand or not was an important one, with good arguments in either direction. There is absolutely NO justification, reasonable or even unreasonable, to commission all the presentations before deciding if they were going to expand. None.
Absolute clown show, and I don't blame any of the schools for being pissed about it.
That makes no sense whatsoever, because the decision to expand or not expand is itself dependent on who is available for expansion. That information is a critical input to the basic decision about whether to expand or not. Because the Big 12 wasn't making a decision to "expand" in some abstract or general sense, they would be deciding to expand specifically via the addition of particular schools. So they would need to know about the schools first.
I mean, imagine if we asked Delany whether the B1G wants to expand or not. If I tell him that Texas and Notre Dame are willing, then his answer may be "yes, we want to expand". If Eastern Michigan and Northern Illinois are the only schools available, the answer might be "No, we don't want to expand".
So it was entirely reasonable for the Big 12 to have schools - including my USF - make presentations indicating what they had to offer to the Big 12 before deciding whether to expand or not.
It was always very clear to every school that presented that (a) you might be chosen, (b) someone else might be chosen instead of you, or © nobody might be chosen. There was no deception.
So using your example, if b10 wanted to expand and only EMU and NIU were options - would Delany had asked them to come in and do presentations? And if Texas, N Dame, NI and EMU are present would Delany ask any of the four to present?
Similarly if SEC is exploring to expand and the two schools interested are Texas A&M and Memphis. Would SEC invite Memphis to present?
B12 knew exactly who the candidates were and what they offered. If they were interested in any, they should not have needed to have a presentation from the schools.
