Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
Author Message
Stugray2 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,175
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 679
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #121
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
The SEC supposedly will take a little brother - not as first choice. The B1G will not. But if Texas and OU both went to the B1G that would be the beginning and end of expansion. I just see zero chance Texas goes to the SEC for reasons beyond the playing field.

I do think OU will move first, and wherever they choose Texas will be approached to go with them. If Texas doesn't and OU chooses the B1G then KU will be tapped, and if they choose the SEC oSu will be tapped; although I can see KU also be tapped (the SEC doesn't really need another football school, but could would love to have KU make their MBB).

The P12 is the only one that would let Texas bring a little brother along, but not OU unless they came with Texas also (original P16 plan, figuring Utah replaces A&M anyway). But I just can't see OU choosing the P12 when the SEC and B1G options are sitting there.
11-17-2017 03:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
templefootballfan Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,614
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation: 162
I Root For: TU & BGSU & TEX
Location: CLAYMONT DE Temple T
Post: #122
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
(11-17-2017 02:36 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 08:46 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  Okla loses it Tex recurits in B-10, now thier another Nebraska


uh...no. Oklahoma's best recruiting days in Texas were when they were in a different conference and only played one Texas team each year

40 is still recuriting tex
11-17-2017 03:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #123
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
(11-17-2017 01:21 PM)Underdog Wrote:  I've combined posts 1 and 2 into this response:

1) I disagree with your opinion that the AAC will get “dismantled regardless of what happens to WV… [and] It's more desirable for the Big 12 to expand east than west.” If WV is not left behind in the B12 when it implodes, the remaining B12 schools would have to be absolutely asinine to expand eastward into the footprints of the ACC, B1G, and SEC with the unrealistic expectation of competing for viewers in those three markets. In fact, if WV is left behind, the remaining B12 schools would be better off cutting ties with it and absorbing most of the MWC. They would control certain markets like New Mexico and Nevada while only competing with the PAC 12 for most of their remaining markets.

2) I will expound more on point #1 to illustrate a realistic realignment scenario which would dissolve the MWC: UT, OU, TT, and OSU go to the PAC 12. The ACC decides to take WV; this leaves Baylor, ISU, KU, KSU, and TCU. Except for TCU, the aforementioned B12 schools were going to absorb the Big East in 2011 after possibly losing UT, OU, TT, and OSU:

“The sources said that if Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State were to leave the Big 12 and the five remaining schools do not have an opportunity to join the ACC, SEC or Big Ten, the Big 12 would move to absorb remaining Big East schools -- not the other way around.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...ources-say

The only thing that prevented this from happening was UT refusing to give up control of the LHN to the PAC 12:

“But it appears the ‘deal’ fell through before either president could take any sort of action, as Scott and Texas reportedly could not come to an agreement on how to pursue the Longhorn Network.”

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com...c-12-snub/

My point: In 2011, an almost decimated B12 still had the power to absorb/raid the Big East—which was considered a power conference lower in status to the B12. Consequently, if the B12 implodes in the future and WV escapes, it’s a strong possibility that the same schools (along with TCU) will look to absorb and dissolve the entire MWC. If BYU decides to join them, I think Hawaii and San Jose St are left out of the new B16….

I said the AAC is likely to be dismantled, not that it was certain. It's certainly possible that the MWC is targeted more. But I would think it's in the Big 12's interest to expand in the central and eastern US, where most of the population lives. The mountain states are big but outside of a few metro areas don't really contain all that many people. Also, the fact that the Big 12 was already willing to expand east a few years ago if the Texoma 4 left doesn't really support the idea that they'll go west this time.
11-17-2017 04:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SMUmustangs Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,186
Joined: Jul 2004
Reputation: 71
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #124
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
(11-15-2017 10:37 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(11-15-2017 09:14 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  
(11-15-2017 12:57 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(11-15-2017 12:28 AM)ColKurtz Wrote:  Texas is not going to get a ND-type deal from the ACC. 3 football games 1 year and 2 the next is not going to move the needle enough to overcome the burden of housing their non-revs and the ACC having to send all of them on another long flight. No B12 moves will happen until long after the ACC network is in place, so there won't be that much pressure from espn to accept .

The ACC would likely hold out, knowing UT is in a bad spot (assuming OU and either KU or OkSt leave for B1G or SEC) for full membership, thinking this would put some sort of pressure on ND for full membership as well -- pipe dream or not. Or, the ACC would demand more games.

The ACC would jumo at that chance. Frankly, with the LHN, UT is one of the few teams uniquely suited to go Indy and be successful. The ACC would have zero leverage.

Texas is no ND. If Texas wanted full membership into the ACC then the ACC would likely be interested. But Im sure the ACC is not interested in granting football independence to a team who has never had it. Anyone who thinks the ACC would do so doesnt know much about the ACC.

Anyone who thinks that Texas would give away the store to join the ACC doesn’t know the Longhorns. You either take their deal or they move on to the highest bidder. The ACC just has no “leverage” with UT simply because they wont be UT's first choice. Additionally, with their own national TV network (LHN), the Longhorns would be just fine as being fully independent. Given UT’s inability to play well with others, it might actually be their best fit.

Frankly, I don’t think they leave the Big12. They have 9 teams that pretty much give them whatever they want while getting a good geographical fit (plus they get to keep thier own network). Other than being Indy—there likely isn’t a better conference fit for the Horns. I agree with you that the ACC would never be as compliant as the Big12 membership—which is why I don’t think they would ever get the Longhorns.

(11-15-2017 09:44 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Oklahoma will ultimately guide the next round of realignment. If they still want out when the GOR is near its end and either the SEC and/or Big Ten are interested they are gone. Either of those moves would be more profitable than a Pac 16 deal.

How peeved would Texas be if the Sooners started playing the Aggies at the Texas State Fair in the Cotton Bowl?

Another point I'd like to make is that Kansas is not going to the Big Ten unless a true college football blueblood comes with them. Basketball maybe makes up 20% of a conference's tv value--Delaney is not interested in a school that does nothing for the other 80%.

Regarding Texas, I see obstacles to them joining any of the Other major conferences if Oklahoma leaves. If Oklahoma goes to the SEC with Kansas/Okla St the SEC house is going to be pretty full at 16. Squeezing in Texas would require a total paradigm shift to what a conference is. The Big Ten is an academic fit put not a cultural one. The Pac 12 is a similar situation but one where the money wouldn't be as good. For the Pac 12 to land Texas I think Texas would have to bring no fewer than 3 schools of their choosing and Washington and the California 4 are not going to like any of them. The ACC is an even harder sell--bad cultural fit and bad geography. Truthfully Texas would be happiest in a post-Oklahoma Big 12 where Houston and a tenth school are brought in as replacements. I'm not sure who the leading candidate would be for #10 but there about a dozen possibilities.

(11-17-2017 03:53 PM)templefootballfan Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 02:36 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 08:46 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  Okla loses it Tex recurits in B-10, now thier another Nebraska


uh...no. Oklahoma's best recruiting days in Texas were when they were in a different conference and only played one Texas team each year

40 is still recuriting tex

Huh?
11-17-2017 05:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Underdog Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,747
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation: 124
I Root For: The American
Location: Cloud Nine
Post: #125
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
(11-17-2017 04:21 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 01:21 PM)Underdog Wrote:  I've combined posts 1 and 2 into this response:

1) I disagree with your opinion that the AAC will get “dismantled regardless of what happens to WV… [and] It's more desirable for the Big 12 to expand east than west.” If WV is not left behind in the B12 when it implodes, the remaining B12 schools would have to be absolutely asinine to expand eastward into the footprints of the ACC, B1G, and SEC with the unrealistic expectation of competing for viewers in those three markets. In fact, if WV is left behind, the remaining B12 schools would be better off cutting ties with it and absorbing most of the MWC. They would control certain markets like New Mexico and Nevada while only competing with the PAC 12 for most of their remaining markets.

2) I will expound more on point #1 to illustrate a realistic realignment scenario which would dissolve the MWC: UT, OU, TT, and OSU go to the PAC 12. The ACC decides to take WV; this leaves Baylor, ISU, KU, KSU, and TCU. Except for TCU, the aforementioned B12 schools were going to absorb the Big East in 2011 after possibly losing UT, OU, TT, and OSU:

“The sources said that if Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State were to leave the Big 12 and the five remaining schools do not have an opportunity to join the ACC, SEC or Big Ten, the Big 12 would move to absorb remaining Big East schools -- not the other way around.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...ources-say

The only thing that prevented this from happening was UT refusing to give up control of the LHN to the PAC 12:

“But it appears the ‘deal’ fell through before either president could take any sort of action, as Scott and Texas reportedly could not come to an agreement on how to pursue the Longhorn Network.”

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com...c-12-snub/

My point: In 2011, an almost decimated B12 still had the power to absorb/raid the Big East—which was considered a power conference lower in status to the B12. Consequently, if the B12 implodes in the future and WV escapes, it’s a strong possibility that the same schools (along with TCU) will look to absorb and dissolve the entire MWC. If BYU decides to join them, I think Hawaii and San Jose St are left out of the new B16….

I said the AAC is likely to be dismantled, not that it was certain. It's certainly possible that the MWC is targeted more. But I would think it's in the Big 12's interest to expand in the central and eastern US, where most of the population lives. The mountain states are big but outside of a few metro areas don't really contain all that many people. 2) Also, the fact that the Big 12 was already willing to expand east a few years ago if the Texoma 4 left doesn't really support the idea that they'll go west this time.

2) This response was directed at goodknightfl because he posted, “The answer is still no, The AAC and MWC will raid from below.” I simply gave him an actual example of a conference—the Big East—that almost got absorbed and dissolved by the remaining B12 schools. My example also addressed the purpose of this thread which is stated in post #1, “I’m of the opinion the BIG 12 will cease to exist close to or when the existing contract expires which is not really that far out.” Once again, if the remaining B12 schools almost absorbed/dissolved the Big East back in 2011, they would have just as many options to remain viable in the future: Raid the AAC/Big East Football, MWC, or both….

For those who know Todge, he posted enlightening information along with the B12 bylaws on "The American Board" to illustrate the possible “collusion” it would take to dissolve the B12—which I never considered. He also pointed out in the B12 bylaws that once schools announce their departure, they also lose their voting rights. This is very important because the remaining schools can invite new members without the departing members impeding the process. Therefore, if UT, OU, TT, and OSU announce that they are going to the PAC 12, the remaining B12 schools can invite other schools to replace them before they actually leave the conference. Furthermore, it would be very difficult to dissolve the B12 even if one school is left behind because of the possible “collusion” involved in moving the departing schools to other conferences. If Todge wants to expound more on the dissolution of the B12, I welcome his comments... which can get lengthy 03-wink
(This post was last modified: 11-17-2017 06:11 PM by Underdog.)
11-17-2017 05:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,886
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #126
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
(11-17-2017 05:49 PM)Underdog Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 04:21 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 01:21 PM)Underdog Wrote:  I've combined posts 1 and 2 into this response:

1) I disagree with your opinion that the AAC will get “dismantled regardless of what happens to WV… [and] It's more desirable for the Big 12 to expand east than west.” If WV is not left behind in the B12 when it implodes, the remaining B12 schools would have to be absolutely asinine to expand eastward into the footprints of the ACC, B1G, and SEC with the unrealistic expectation of competing for viewers in those three markets. In fact, if WV is left behind, the remaining B12 schools would be better off cutting ties with it and absorbing most of the MWC. They would control certain markets like New Mexico and Nevada while only competing with the PAC 12 for most of their remaining markets.

2) I will expound more on point #1 to illustrate a realistic realignment scenario which would dissolve the MWC: UT, OU, TT, and OSU go to the PAC 12. The ACC decides to take WV; this leaves Baylor, ISU, KU, KSU, and TCU. Except for TCU, the aforementioned B12 schools were going to absorb the Big East in 2011 after possibly losing UT, OU, TT, and OSU:

“The sources said that if Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State were to leave the Big 12 and the five remaining schools do not have an opportunity to join the ACC, SEC or Big Ten, the Big 12 would move to absorb remaining Big East schools -- not the other way around.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...ources-say

The only thing that prevented this from happening was UT refusing to give up control of the LHN to the PAC 12:

“But it appears the ‘deal’ fell through before either president could take any sort of action, as Scott and Texas reportedly could not come to an agreement on how to pursue the Longhorn Network.”

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com...c-12-snub/

My point: In 2011, an almost decimated B12 still had the power to absorb/raid the Big East—which was considered a power conference lower in status to the B12. Consequently, if the B12 implodes in the future and WV escapes, it’s a strong possibility that the same schools (along with TCU) will look to absorb and dissolve the entire MWC. If BYU decides to join them, I think Hawaii and San Jose St are left out of the new B16….

I said the AAC is likely to be dismantled, not that it was certain. It's certainly possible that the MWC is targeted more. But I would think it's in the Big 12's interest to expand in the central and eastern US, where most of the population lives. The mountain states are big but outside of a few metro areas don't really contain all that many people. 2) Also, the fact that the Big 12 was already willing to expand east a few years ago if the Texoma 4 left doesn't really support the idea that they'll go west this time.

2) This response was directed at goodknightfl because he posted, “The answer is still no, The AAC and MWC will raid from below.” I simply gave him an actual example of a conference—the Big East—that almost got absorbed and dissolved by the remaining B12 schools. My example also addressed the purpose of this thread which is stated in post #1, “I’m of the opinion the BIG 12 will cease to exist close to or when the existing contract expires which is not really that far out.” Once again, if the remaining B12 schools almost absorbed/dissolved the Big East back in 2011, it would have even more options to remain viable in the future: Raid the AAC, MWC, or both….

For those who know Todge, he posted enlightening information along with the B12 bylaws on "The American Board" to illustrate the possible “collusion” it would take to dissolve the B12—which I never considered. He also pointed out in the B12 bylaws that once schools announce their departure, they also lose their voting rights. This is very important because the remaining schools can invite new members without the departing members impeding the process. Therefore, if UT, OU, TT, and OSU announce that they are going to the PAC 12, the remaining B12 schools can invite other schools to replace them before they actually leave the conference. Furthermore, it would be very difficult to dissolve the B12 even if one school is left behind because of the possible “collusion” involved in moving the departing schools to other conferences. If Todge wants to expound more on the dissolution of the B12, I welcome his comments... which can get lengthy 03-wink

An announcement in 2023 for movement in 2025 doesn't require a vote and meets Big 12 guidelines. Even an announcement in 2021 for departure in 2023 doesn't leave a penalty too large for the departing to pay. And that kind of movement can happen with any number of schools.

Then it must be considered whether two years out the remaining schools want to go through the legal process, or settle. Settling is in everyone's interest as opposed to paying lawyers. Why settle? They may wish to have some scheduling agreements moving forward with the departed. Most of those are fairly close for travel purposes and the SWC/Big8 schools have plenty of history they don't want to just abandon.

And as far as voting goes. A motion for dissolution only requires 8 votes to pass. Then announcements can be made. It's danged hard to prove collusion. But then this scenario only plays out if things are brokered by the networks.

I've read Todge and he is long on rules and regs and short on settlement and practical business agreements. All contracts have rules, and yet most contracts can be broken for the right settlement. You have to remember that these schools can shackle Texas and OU until about 2023 if they want to, but at what cost? Never being scheduled again? Having to fight it out in court with better financed schools? Taking on popular state flagships when the lawsuit would tick off the majority of the electorate?

What will happen to Kansas State and Baylor will happen to them anyway come 2025. I seriously doubt they put up a major resistance to be left totally out in the cold in 2025, when they can play nice and get concessions that last longer than the buyouts and exit fees.

Personally I think 5 of them could make a P conference if Texas and OU use some leverage it could be as many as 7 depending upon which conferences are involved.

So arguing these points on message boards might make for good fan debate material, but if Texas and OU get ready to leave, particularly if they are taking little brother with them and Kansas and W.V.U. have landing spots then this thing gets done whenever they decide to do it. I doubt KState, Baylor, and T.C.U. want ill will with their money game opponents.
11-17-2017 06:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Online
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,790
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #127
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
Does anyone know how many votes it takes to renew the GOR?

Can a school legally be held to respecting the terms of a renewed GOR if they vote no?

For any school who wants out they could simply vote no and hope that enough others do likewise. If they don't get the supporting no votes their legal argument is sound--they are being wrongly bound to terms they opposed.
11-17-2017 10:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CintiFan Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 386
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Ohio St./ Cinti
Location:
Post: #128
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
(11-17-2017 03:00 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  
(11-14-2017 12:44 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  I think Texas and Oklahoma already have a handshake deal to leave the Big 12 as the GOR expires. I have no inside info, but the reason is the way Boren changed his tune during the recent weird expansion attempt.

Boren said the Big 12 was disfunctional and basically worthless, and that was a direct swipe at Texas and its history of looking out for itself not others. He made no secret out of his desire for Oklahoma to leave the Big 12. His criticism continued as they went through the expansion beauty show, but all of a sudden it changed and Oklahoma was happy being in the Big 12 as is, with a conference championship game. That 180 turn in attitude was bizarre. You know there were back office channel discussions with Texas during that time, and with the turnover in Texas leadership it makes sense that those discussions gave Boren the assurance he wanted. A deal to work together and go as a pair to the conference of their choice would explain why Boren suddenly changed his tune.

Oklahoma and Texas are two powerhouse programs that any conference would want. The SEC and B1G would take them both, but it's clear they would not take any little brothers along with them. I think that's OK, though because the groundwork has already been laid. Boren tried to move with OSU in tow to the PAC but got rejected. It's clear neither the SEC nor B1G wants little brothers either, and I can't see any politician in Oklahoma or Texas blocking a move that would benefit their flagship schools.

Adding Oklahoma and Texas would bring the SEC or B1G to 16 and that might be the stopping point for either. I think it's possible that the B1G would also take Kansas, but only if a partner school is available and none of the potential candidates (e.g. Virginia, UNC or in a wild scenario, A&M or Missouri) would seem willing to make the move.

So what happens to the rest of the Big 12 - I think WVU goes to the AAC and the rest work out what ever deal they can get to 'merge' with the Mountain west. That's not a great result for them but that could be their lot in life.


You make some good points. However, the top talking head in the SEC has said if the SEC expands they will go after OU and OSU. The top talking head at OSU says OU and OSU have a standing offer from the SEC. If you know anything about Texas you know they will not be going to the SEC. Texas pride will not follow little brother anywhere.

The key question is what will Texas do if Oklahoma says it's leaving (and I think that's what Oklahoma said in connection with the failed expansion try). Texas could try to keep the conference together, but without Oklahoma it might be so weak that Texas could never get a playoff bid. If Oklahoma left, that would force Texas' hand.

As a B1G fan, I hope they come to the B1G. I've heard that Texas won't go to the SEC and I hope that's right. I think the real reason they may favor the B1G is that the road to a conference championship game may be easier.

Most of the historically tough teams are in the B1G East. The path to a conference championship game is easier in the B1G West with Wisconsin, Iowa and Nebraska (assuming as I do that it will regain prominence with a better coach) as the competition.

The SEC has too many perennially strong teams and, as Arkansas and A&M discovered, it's difficult consistently to win. The SEC needs to add a couple schools that could be cannon fodder for the likes of Florida, LSU, Georgia and Auburn. That's why I think schools that have significant fan bases and good programs, like Texas Tech and OSU, would be a good fit for the SEC.

I could certainly see Oklahoma going to the SEC but I don't know why the SEC would also take OSU and double up in a small state. Oklahoma and almost any other Big 12 team makes more sense. I can't believe Oklahoma would toss invites from both the B1G and SEC if neither wanted OSU.
11-18-2017 12:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CintiFan Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 386
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Ohio St./ Cinti
Location:
Post: #129
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
(11-17-2017 10:49 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Does anyone know how many votes it takes to renew the GOR?

Can a school legally be held to respecting the terms of a renewed GOR if they vote no?

For any school who wants out they could simply vote no and hope that enough others do likewise. If they don't get the supporting no votes their legal argument is sound--they are being wrongly bound to terms they opposed.

The GOR is a contract in which the schools give up their media rights to home games to the extent the conference needs them to fulfill the Big 12's media deals with Fox/ESPN. The GOR ends by its own terms when the media deal ends, so there really is no 'renewal' nor is a vote needed. The GOR just expires because its term ends.

When a new media deal is signed by the Big 12 a new GOR will be needed and each school will decide whether to sign it. Neither the Big 12 conference nor any Big 12 school can force another school to sign the new GOR. If a school doesn't sign it, they will not be bound by it (but Fox/ESPN may not want to sign the new media deal with the Big 12 as a result).
11-18-2017 12:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CintiFan Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 386
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Ohio St./ Cinti
Location:
Post: #130
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
(11-17-2017 10:49 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Does anyone know how many votes it takes to renew the GOR?

Can a school legally be held to respecting the terms of a renewed GOR if they vote no?

For any school who wants out they could simply vote no and hope that enough others do likewise. If they don't get the supporting no votes their legal argument is sound--they are being wrongly bound to terms they opposed.

Here's the Big 12 GOR in case you want to read it (assuming I figured out how to attach the pdf. [attachment=9203]
11-18-2017 12:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CintiFan Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 386
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Ohio St./ Cinti
Location:
Post: #131
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
(11-18-2017 12:22 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 10:49 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Does anyone know how many votes it takes to renew the GOR?

Can a school legally be held to respecting the terms of a renewed GOR if they vote no?

For any school who wants out they could simply vote no and hope that enough others do likewise. If they don't get the supporting no votes their legal argument is sound--they are being wrongly bound to terms they opposed.

Here's the Big 12 GOR in case you want to read it (assuming I figured out how to attach the pdf.

I'll try one more time.


Attached File(s)
.pdf  Big 12 Grant of Rights Agreement.pdf (Size: 62.62 KB / Downloads: 2)
11-18-2017 12:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,930
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #132
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
(11-17-2017 06:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 05:49 PM)Underdog Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 04:21 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 01:21 PM)Underdog Wrote:  I've combined posts 1 and 2 into this response:

1) I disagree with your opinion that the AAC will get “dismantled regardless of what happens to WV… [and] It's more desirable for the Big 12 to expand east than west.” If WV is not left behind in the B12 when it implodes, the remaining B12 schools would have to be absolutely asinine to expand eastward into the footprints of the ACC, B1G, and SEC with the unrealistic expectation of competing for viewers in those three markets. In fact, if WV is left behind, the remaining B12 schools would be better off cutting ties with it and absorbing most of the MWC. They would control certain markets like New Mexico and Nevada while only competing with the PAC 12 for most of their remaining markets.

2) I will expound more on point #1 to illustrate a realistic realignment scenario which would dissolve the MWC: UT, OU, TT, and OSU go to the PAC 12. The ACC decides to take WV; this leaves Baylor, ISU, KU, KSU, and TCU. Except for TCU, the aforementioned B12 schools were going to absorb the Big East in 2011 after possibly losing UT, OU, TT, and OSU:

“The sources said that if Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State were to leave the Big 12 and the five remaining schools do not have an opportunity to join the ACC, SEC or Big Ten, the Big 12 would move to absorb remaining Big East schools -- not the other way around.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...ources-say

The only thing that prevented this from happening was UT refusing to give up control of the LHN to the PAC 12:

“But it appears the ‘deal’ fell through before either president could take any sort of action, as Scott and Texas reportedly could not come to an agreement on how to pursue the Longhorn Network.”

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com...c-12-snub/

My point: In 2011, an almost decimated B12 still had the power to absorb/raid the Big East—which was considered a power conference lower in status to the B12. Consequently, if the B12 implodes in the future and WV escapes, it’s a strong possibility that the same schools (along with TCU) will look to absorb and dissolve the entire MWC. If BYU decides to join them, I think Hawaii and San Jose St are left out of the new B16….

I said the AAC is likely to be dismantled, not that it was certain. It's certainly possible that the MWC is targeted more. But I would think it's in the Big 12's interest to expand in the central and eastern US, where most of the population lives. The mountain states are big but outside of a few metro areas don't really contain all that many people. 2) Also, the fact that the Big 12 was already willing to expand east a few years ago if the Texoma 4 left doesn't really support the idea that they'll go west this time.

2) This response was directed at goodknightfl because he posted, “The answer is still no, The AAC and MWC will raid from below.” I simply gave him an actual example of a conference—the Big East—that almost got absorbed and dissolved by the remaining B12 schools. My example also addressed the purpose of this thread which is stated in post #1, “I’m of the opinion the BIG 12 will cease to exist close to or when the existing contract expires which is not really that far out.” Once again, if the remaining B12 schools almost absorbed/dissolved the Big East back in 2011, it would have even more options to remain viable in the future: Raid the AAC, MWC, or both….

For those who know Todge, he posted enlightening information along with the B12 bylaws on "The American Board" to illustrate the possible “collusion” it would take to dissolve the B12—which I never considered. He also pointed out in the B12 bylaws that once schools announce their departure, they also lose their voting rights. This is very important because the remaining schools can invite new members without the departing members impeding the process. Therefore, if UT, OU, TT, and OSU announce that they are going to the PAC 12, the remaining B12 schools can invite other schools to replace them before they actually leave the conference. Furthermore, it would be very difficult to dissolve the B12 even if one school is left behind because of the possible “collusion” involved in moving the departing schools to other conferences. If Todge wants to expound more on the dissolution of the B12, I welcome his comments... which can get lengthy 03-wink

An announcement in 2023 for movement in 2025 doesn't require a vote and meets Big 12 guidelines. Even an announcement in 2021 for departure in 2023 doesn't leave a penalty too large for the departing to pay. And that kind of movement can happen with any number of schools.

Then it must be considered whether two years out the remaining schools want to go through the legal process, or settle. Settling is in everyone's interest as opposed to paying lawyers. Why settle? They may wish to have some scheduling agreements moving forward with the departed. Most of those are fairly close for travel purposes and the SWC/Big8 schools have plenty of history they don't want to just abandon.

And as far as voting goes. A motion for dissolution only requires 8 votes to pass. Then announcements can be made. It's danged hard to prove collusion. But then this scenario only plays out if things are brokered by the networks.

I've read Todge and he is long on rules and regs and short on settlement and practical business agreements. All contracts have rules, and yet most contracts can be broken for the right settlement. You have to remember that these schools can shackle Texas and OU until about 2023 if they want to, but at what cost? Never being scheduled again? Having to fight it out in court with better financed schools? Taking on popular state flagships when the lawsuit would tick off the majority of the electorate?

What will happen to Kansas State and Baylor will happen to them anyway come 2025. I seriously doubt they put up a major resistance to be left totally out in the cold in 2025, when they can play nice and get concessions that last longer than the buyouts and exit fees.

Personally I think 5 of them could make a P conference if Texas and OU use some leverage it could be as many as 7 depending upon which conferences are involved.

So arguing these points on message boards might make for good fan debate material, but if Texas and OU get ready to leave, particularly if they are taking little brother with them and Kansas and W.V.U. have landing spots then this thing gets done whenever they decide to do it. I doubt KState, Baylor, and T.C.U. want ill will with their money game opponents.


the part in bold is 100% incorrect

the Big 12 has two contracts they have the GOR that ends at the same time the Big 12 TV contract ends and that has NO PROVISIONS FOR LEAVING THE CONFERENCE

the GOR has no notification requirement and it has no penalties and it has no option for giving advanced notification and or paying any amount of money to leave with media rights before te end of the contract and that is 100% by design

the Big 12 ALSO has a contract for conference membership that is 99 years in length from 2012 and that contract for conference membership DOES have a notification requirement and it has a penalty for leaving the conference, BUT it makes clear that giving that notification and paying that penalty does not exempt one from the GOR and it does not invalidate the GOR

and more importantly that Big 12 contract for conference membership requires that any member that is contacts OR IS CONTACTED by another party about leaving the conference is required to notify the conference of that contact within 12 days AND to formally submit a declining letter to that offer and failing to do so puts that member in violation of the contract for conference membership

so the REALITY is there is ZERO chance that 8 members of the Big 12 are all going to get together, all agree to go out and make contact with other conferences AND gain a guarantee to be admitted to those other conferences all within 12 days time

there will be SEVERAL of those members that will not be confident in the fact that they will get an offer from another conference that will be close to what they have in the Big 12 and they are not going to agree to COLLUDE to try and collapse the conference especially if they only LEGALLY have 12 days to do so before they MUST notify the conference or be subjected to legal recourse

and even IF it was possible that 8 of those members would agree to that it would still be next to impossible that they could all find a conference to admit them, get things squared away with that conference and the media partners AND do so within 12 days

and as soon as that 12 days passes and they do not make notification to the 2 members they are attempting to screw and leave behind they WILL absolutely be guilty of collusion and they will be restricted at that point on what votes and actions they can take dealing with the Big 12 and more importantly when it comes to the collusion when they get to court and it is proven that 8 members colluded to kill the conference and did so in violation of the rules calling for 12 days to notify the conference about ANY contact to switch conferences AND to LEGALLY DECLINE that offer well the ones that colluded will be subjected to treble damages

the Big 12 contract for conference membership calls for a forfeiture of the last two years of conference payouts for any member that is leaving which at the time of the final years of the GOR will be about $45 million per year or about $90 million per member leaving

even IF that could be negotiated down as it has been in the past the FACT is that if 8 teams get together and violate the 12 day rules of notification in the contract there is ZERO chance that the two remaining members are going to be looking to negotiate anything down and more importantly as soon as it is proven that the 12 day notification and DECLINE rule was violated AND that there was collusion on the part of 8 other members there would be ZERO reason for those members to negotiate anything down because with the collusion would come a near automatic treble damages or $270 million due per member that colluded to leave the conference and violated the 12 day notification and DECLINE requirement in the contract

there is a ZERO chance that you are going to have 8 conference members, several conferences and a couple of networks get together in 12 days work everything out and keep it a secret and after it goes past 12 days there is NO CHANCE that all involved are going to risk felony perjury to go to court and have all those people from all those organizations one after the other perjure themselves in court to say that "no we did not get together to collude to kill the conference and yes we did all that in fewer than 12 days"

so one can PRETEND that 8 teams in the Big 12 would agree to work together to either switch conferences in 12 days or less and one can pretend that they would actually make that happen in 12 days or less if those 8 teams agreed to that, but that is simply not going to happen

and one can pretend that when it takes longer than 12 days that several dozens of people will all get together and go to court and agree to testify that they got it all done in 12 days when they did not, but that will not happen either

and lastly one would be void of reality if they believed that two members of the Big 12 that were looking at getting $90 million in exit fees from the Big 12 and that have now proven collusion and are due 3X damages would work to negotiate that down "just because things like that happen"

no two members of the Big 12 that get screwed by 8 others in a collusion case that would be EASY to prove would have any reason to take less than the full $270 million PER OTHER MEMBER that colluded against them

and it is highly highly unlikely that any court would look at that easily proven case of collusion and the CLEAR contract language and reduce those 3X damages because there are not courts out there anywhere that view collusion fondly or as "something to negotiate away"

so again it is VERY CLEAR in the 99 year Big 12 contract for conference membership that any team that is contracted or makes contact to ANYONE about leaving the Big 12 has 12 days to notify the conference AND to decline that overture

and failure to do so puts them in violation of that contract and subjected to penalties and limited conference participation in conference business

no one that is sane would believe that 8 members of the Big 12 would think they could ALL gain a SOLID LEGAL new conference membership in 12 days or that they would want to, believe they could or that they actually would get away with colluding to violate that 12 day notification AND DECLINE requirement

the fact is there would be a ton of $35,000 to $45,000 a year people involved in that from multiple organizations and many of them are going to be smart enough to know that annual pay is not worth getting a felony perjury charge and then how would it be possible to make contracts with conferences and TV partners and falsify the dates on those contracts so it appears everything was done in 12 days or less

and when you have publicly traded TV partners well there are even more laws with the SEC (Securities Exchange not the SEC SEC SEC) and general business laws that would but a lot of people in serious legal jeopardy if they were trying to falsify the dates that legal contracts were signed so that when those contracts were brought to court it appeared as though they were all completed in a 12 day window even though they were actually finalized weeks or months later

one needs their head examined if they think that university presidents and inside and outside legal counsel are going to look at a 12 day notice tell the Big 12 about ANY contact to switch conferences AND TO DECLINE THAT CONTACT LEGALLY and they will think "yea lets get with 7 other Big 12 members and several conferences and some TV partners and just ignore that 12 day rule as a group of 8 while we leave two other members screwed and yea we can just negotiate away that $90 million in exit fees and the triple damages for collusion and skate by on all the perjury charges as well I think we can pull that off in secret the risk is well worth it"

all the more so when at least 4 of those members would be thinking they have little chance of finding a new home that is worth a damn and at least a couple of them would have to think they were being set up to be screwed as well
11-18-2017 12:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,886
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #133
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
(11-18-2017 12:53 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 06:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 05:49 PM)Underdog Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 04:21 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 01:21 PM)Underdog Wrote:  I've combined posts 1 and 2 into this response:

1) I disagree with your opinion that the AAC will get “dismantled regardless of what happens to WV… [and] It's more desirable for the Big 12 to expand east than west.” If WV is not left behind in the B12 when it implodes, the remaining B12 schools would have to be absolutely asinine to expand eastward into the footprints of the ACC, B1G, and SEC with the unrealistic expectation of competing for viewers in those three markets. In fact, if WV is left behind, the remaining B12 schools would be better off cutting ties with it and absorbing most of the MWC. They would control certain markets like New Mexico and Nevada while only competing with the PAC 12 for most of their remaining markets.

2) I will expound more on point #1 to illustrate a realistic realignment scenario which would dissolve the MWC: UT, OU, TT, and OSU go to the PAC 12. The ACC decides to take WV; this leaves Baylor, ISU, KU, KSU, and TCU. Except for TCU, the aforementioned B12 schools were going to absorb the Big East in 2011 after possibly losing UT, OU, TT, and OSU:

“The sources said that if Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State were to leave the Big 12 and the five remaining schools do not have an opportunity to join the ACC, SEC or Big Ten, the Big 12 would move to absorb remaining Big East schools -- not the other way around.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...ources-say

The only thing that prevented this from happening was UT refusing to give up control of the LHN to the PAC 12:

“But it appears the ‘deal’ fell through before either president could take any sort of action, as Scott and Texas reportedly could not come to an agreement on how to pursue the Longhorn Network.”

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com...c-12-snub/

My point: In 2011, an almost decimated B12 still had the power to absorb/raid the Big East—which was considered a power conference lower in status to the B12. Consequently, if the B12 implodes in the future and WV escapes, it’s a strong possibility that the same schools (along with TCU) will look to absorb and dissolve the entire MWC. If BYU decides to join them, I think Hawaii and San Jose St are left out of the new B16….

I said the AAC is likely to be dismantled, not that it was certain. It's certainly possible that the MWC is targeted more. But I would think it's in the Big 12's interest to expand in the central and eastern US, where most of the population lives. The mountain states are big but outside of a few metro areas don't really contain all that many people. 2) Also, the fact that the Big 12 was already willing to expand east a few years ago if the Texoma 4 left doesn't really support the idea that they'll go west this time.

2) This response was directed at goodknightfl because he posted, “The answer is still no, The AAC and MWC will raid from below.” I simply gave him an actual example of a conference—the Big East—that almost got absorbed and dissolved by the remaining B12 schools. My example also addressed the purpose of this thread which is stated in post #1, “I’m of the opinion the BIG 12 will cease to exist close to or when the existing contract expires which is not really that far out.” Once again, if the remaining B12 schools almost absorbed/dissolved the Big East back in 2011, it would have even more options to remain viable in the future: Raid the AAC, MWC, or both….

For those who know Todge, he posted enlightening information along with the B12 bylaws on "The American Board" to illustrate the possible “collusion” it would take to dissolve the B12—which I never considered. He also pointed out in the B12 bylaws that once schools announce their departure, they also lose their voting rights. This is very important because the remaining schools can invite new members without the departing members impeding the process. Therefore, if UT, OU, TT, and OSU announce that they are going to the PAC 12, the remaining B12 schools can invite other schools to replace them before they actually leave the conference. Furthermore, it would be very difficult to dissolve the B12 even if one school is left behind because of the possible “collusion” involved in moving the departing schools to other conferences. If Todge wants to expound more on the dissolution of the B12, I welcome his comments... which can get lengthy 03-wink

An announcement in 2023 for movement in 2025 doesn't require a vote and meets Big 12 guidelines. Even an announcement in 2021 for departure in 2023 doesn't leave a penalty too large for the departing to pay. And that kind of movement can happen with any number of schools.

Then it must be considered whether two years out the remaining schools want to go through the legal process, or settle. Settling is in everyone's interest as opposed to paying lawyers. Why settle? They may wish to have some scheduling agreements moving forward with the departed. Most of those are fairly close for travel purposes and the SWC/Big8 schools have plenty of history they don't want to just abandon.

And as far as voting goes. A motion for dissolution only requires 8 votes to pass. Then announcements can be made. It's danged hard to prove collusion. But then this scenario only plays out if things are brokered by the networks.

I've read Todge and he is long on rules and regs and short on settlement and practical business agreements. All contracts have rules, and yet most contracts can be broken for the right settlement. You have to remember that these schools can shackle Texas and OU until about 2023 if they want to, but at what cost? Never being scheduled again? Having to fight it out in court with better financed schools? Taking on popular state flagships when the lawsuit would tick off the majority of the electorate?

What will happen to Kansas State and Baylor will happen to them anyway come 2025. I seriously doubt they put up a major resistance to be left totally out in the cold in 2025, when they can play nice and get concessions that last longer than the buyouts and exit fees.

Personally I think 5 of them could make a P conference if Texas and OU use some leverage it could be as many as 7 depending upon which conferences are involved.

So arguing these points on message boards might make for good fan debate material, but if Texas and OU get ready to leave, particularly if they are taking little brother with them and Kansas and W.V.U. have landing spots then this thing gets done whenever they decide to do it. I doubt KState, Baylor, and T.C.U. want ill will with their money game opponents.


the part in bold is 100% incorrect

the Big 12 has two contracts they have the GOR that ends at the same time the Big 12 TV contract ends and that has NO PROVISIONS FOR LEAVING THE CONFERENCE

the GOR has no notification requirement and it has no penalties and it has no option for giving advanced notification and or paying any amount of money to leave with media rights before te end of the contract and that is 100% by design

the Big 12 ALSO has a contract for conference membership that is 99 years in length from 2012 and that contract for conference membership DOES have a notification requirement and it has a penalty for leaving the conference, BUT it makes clear that giving that notification and paying that penalty does not exempt one from the GOR and it does not invalidate the GOR

and more importantly that Big 12 contract for conference membership requires that any member that is contacts OR IS CONTACTED by another party about leaving the conference is required to notify the conference of that contact within 12 days AND to formally submit a declining letter to that offer and failing to do so puts that member in violation of the contract for conference membership

so the REALITY is there is ZERO chance that 8 members of the Big 12 are all going to get together, all agree to go out and make contact with other conferences AND gain a guarantee to be admitted to those other conferences all within 12 days time

there will be SEVERAL of those members that will not be confident in the fact that they will get an offer from another conference that will be close to what they have in the Big 12 and they are not going to agree to COLLUDE to try and collapse the conference especially if they only LEGALLY have 12 days to do so before they MUST notify the conference or be subjected to legal recourse

and even IF it was possible that 8 of those members would agree to that it would still be next to impossible that they could all find a conference to admit them, get things squared away with that conference and the media partners AND do so within 12 days

and as soon as that 12 days passes and they do not make notification to the 2 members they are attempting to screw and leave behind they WILL absolutely be guilty of collusion and they will be restricted at that point on what votes and actions they can take dealing with the Big 12 and more importantly when it comes to the collusion when they get to court and it is proven that 8 members colluded to kill the conference and did so in violation of the rules calling for 12 days to notify the conference about ANY contact to switch conferences AND to LEGALLY DECLINE that offer well the ones that colluded will be subjected to treble damages

the Big 12 contract for conference membership calls for a forfeiture of the last two years of conference payouts for any member that is leaving which at the time of the final years of the GOR will be about $45 million per year or about $90 million per member leaving

even IF that could be negotiated down as it has been in the past the FACT is that if 8 teams get together and violate the 12 day rules of notification in the contract there is ZERO chance that the two remaining members are going to be looking to negotiate anything down and more importantly as soon as it is proven that the 12 day notification and DECLINE rule was violated AND that there was collusion on the part of 8 other members there would be ZERO reason for those members to negotiate anything down because with the collusion would come a near automatic treble damages or $270 million due per member that colluded to leave the conference and violated the 12 day notification and DECLINE requirement in the contract

there is a ZERO chance that you are going to have 8 conference members, several conferences and a couple of networks get together in 12 days work everything out and keep it a secret and after it goes past 12 days there is NO CHANCE that all involved are going to risk felony perjury to go to court and have all those people from all those organizations one after the other perjure themselves in court to say that "no we did not get together to collude to kill the conference and yes we did all that in fewer than 12 days"

so one can PRETEND that 8 teams in the Big 12 would agree to work together to either switch conferences in 12 days or less and one can pretend that they would actually make that happen in 12 days or less if those 8 teams agreed to that, but that is simply not going to happen

and one can pretend that when it takes longer than 12 days that several dozens of people will all get together and go to court and agree to testify that they got it all done in 12 days when they did not, but that will not happen either

and lastly one would be void of reality if they believed that two members of the Big 12 that were looking at getting $90 million in exit fees from the Big 12 and that have now proven collusion and are due 3X damages would work to negotiate that down "just because things like that happen"

no two members of the Big 12 that get screwed by 8 others in a collusion case that would be EASY to prove would have any reason to take less than the full $270 million PER OTHER MEMBER that colluded against them

and it is highly highly unlikely that any court would look at that easily proven case of collusion and the CLEAR contract language and reduce those 3X damages because there are not courts out there anywhere that view collusion fondly or as "something to negotiate away"

so again it is VERY CLEAR in the 99 year Big 12 contract for conference membership that any team that is contracted or makes contact to ANYONE about leaving the Big 12 has 12 days to notify the conference AND to decline that overture

and failure to do so puts them in violation of that contract and subjected to penalties and limited conference participation in conference business

no one that is sane would believe that 8 members of the Big 12 would think they could ALL gain a SOLID LEGAL new conference membership in 12 days or that they would want to, believe they could or that they actually would get away with colluding to violate that 12 day notification AND DECLINE requirement

the fact is there would be a ton of $35,000 to $45,000 a year people involved in that from multiple organizations and many of them are going to be smart enough to know that annual pay is not worth getting a felony perjury charge and then how would it be possible to make contracts with conferences and TV partners and falsify the dates on those contracts so it appears everything was done in 12 days or less

and when you have publicly traded TV partners well there are even more laws with the SEC (Securities Exchange not the SEC SEC SEC) and general business laws that would but a lot of people in serious legal jeopardy if they were trying to falsify the dates that legal contracts were signed so that when those contracts were brought to court it appeared as though they were all completed in a 12 day window even though they were actually finalized weeks or months later

one needs their head examined if they think that university presidents and inside and outside legal counsel are going to look at a 12 day notice tell the Big 12 about ANY contact to switch conferences AND TO DECLINE THAT CONTACT LEGALLY and they will think "yea lets get with 7 other Big 12 members and several conferences and some TV partners and just ignore that 12 day rule as a group of 8 while we leave two other members screwed and yea we can just negotiate away that $90 million in exit fees and the triple damages for collusion and skate by on all the perjury charges as well I think we can pull that off in secret the risk is well worth it"

all the more so when at least 4 of those members would be thinking they have little chance of finding a new home that is worth a damn and at least a couple of them would have to think they were being set up to be screwed as well

And none of that amount to a hill of beans until a court actually says it does, and in the history of GOR's settlement is the norm. That's true in the recording industry where this type of contract is frequently utilized, and it is untested against state schools subject to appropriations supplied by taxpayers. One might even argue that the only thing preventing a challenge of the GOR is fear of the unknown. So Todge, none of it may be binding or all of it could be binding, but in the history of GOR's settlement is the norm.

And there may be some wiggle room between the ambiguity of the conference contract and that of the GOR. It might be determined that it is unreasonable to constrain a schools ability to withdraw by from one by a 12 day notification and to require a two year notification under the other contract.

Suffice it to say I would love to see it tested. I have some profound doubts about it's supposed air tight nature. And since the ACC GOR is predicated upon the Big 12's it might have a larger reach than the Big 12 if challenged.
11-18-2017 02:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
templefootballfan Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,614
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation: 162
I Root For: TU & BGSU & TEX
Location: CLAYMONT DE Temple T
Post: #134
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
Who gonna vote to dissolve
Tex is 2 in revenue, Okla 10, other schools are maxed out
11-18-2017 04:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,930
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #135
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
(11-18-2017 02:33 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-18-2017 12:53 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 06:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 05:49 PM)Underdog Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 04:21 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  I said the AAC is likely to be dismantled, not that it was certain. It's certainly possible that the MWC is targeted more. But I would think it's in the Big 12's interest to expand in the central and eastern US, where most of the population lives. The mountain states are big but outside of a few metro areas don't really contain all that many people. 2) Also, the fact that the Big 12 was already willing to expand east a few years ago if the Texoma 4 left doesn't really support the idea that they'll go west this time.

2) This response was directed at goodknightfl because he posted, “The answer is still no, The AAC and MWC will raid from below.” I simply gave him an actual example of a conference—the Big East—that almost got absorbed and dissolved by the remaining B12 schools. My example also addressed the purpose of this thread which is stated in post #1, “I’m of the opinion the BIG 12 will cease to exist close to or when the existing contract expires which is not really that far out.” Once again, if the remaining B12 schools almost absorbed/dissolved the Big East back in 2011, it would have even more options to remain viable in the future: Raid the AAC, MWC, or both….

For those who know Todge, he posted enlightening information along with the B12 bylaws on "The American Board" to illustrate the possible “collusion” it would take to dissolve the B12—which I never considered. He also pointed out in the B12 bylaws that once schools announce their departure, they also lose their voting rights. This is very important because the remaining schools can invite new members without the departing members impeding the process. Therefore, if UT, OU, TT, and OSU announce that they are going to the PAC 12, the remaining B12 schools can invite other schools to replace them before they actually leave the conference. Furthermore, it would be very difficult to dissolve the B12 even if one school is left behind because of the possible “collusion” involved in moving the departing schools to other conferences. If Todge wants to expound more on the dissolution of the B12, I welcome his comments... which can get lengthy 03-wink

An announcement in 2023 for movement in 2025 doesn't require a vote and meets Big 12 guidelines. Even an announcement in 2021 for departure in 2023 doesn't leave a penalty too large for the departing to pay. And that kind of movement can happen with any number of schools.

Then it must be considered whether two years out the remaining schools want to go through the legal process, or settle. Settling is in everyone's interest as opposed to paying lawyers. Why settle? They may wish to have some scheduling agreements moving forward with the departed. Most of those are fairly close for travel purposes and the SWC/Big8 schools have plenty of history they don't want to just abandon.

And as far as voting goes. A motion for dissolution only requires 8 votes to pass. Then announcements can be made. It's danged hard to prove collusion. But then this scenario only plays out if things are brokered by the networks.

I've read Todge and he is long on rules and regs and short on settlement and practical business agreements. All contracts have rules, and yet most contracts can be broken for the right settlement. You have to remember that these schools can shackle Texas and OU until about 2023 if they want to, but at what cost? Never being scheduled again? Having to fight it out in court with better financed schools? Taking on popular state flagships when the lawsuit would tick off the majority of the electorate?

What will happen to Kansas State and Baylor will happen to them anyway come 2025. I seriously doubt they put up a major resistance to be left totally out in the cold in 2025, when they can play nice and get concessions that last longer than the buyouts and exit fees.

Personally I think 5 of them could make a P conference if Texas and OU use some leverage it could be as many as 7 depending upon which conferences are involved.

So arguing these points on message boards might make for good fan debate material, but if Texas and OU get ready to leave, particularly if they are taking little brother with them and Kansas and W.V.U. have landing spots then this thing gets done whenever they decide to do it. I doubt KState, Baylor, and T.C.U. want ill will with their money game opponents.


the part in bold is 100% incorrect

the Big 12 has two contracts they have the GOR that ends at the same time the Big 12 TV contract ends and that has NO PROVISIONS FOR LEAVING THE CONFERENCE

the GOR has no notification requirement and it has no penalties and it has no option for giving advanced notification and or paying any amount of money to leave with media rights before te end of the contract and that is 100% by design

the Big 12 ALSO has a contract for conference membership that is 99 years in length from 2012 and that contract for conference membership DOES have a notification requirement and it has a penalty for leaving the conference, BUT it makes clear that giving that notification and paying that penalty does not exempt one from the GOR and it does not invalidate the GOR

and more importantly that Big 12 contract for conference membership requires that any member that is contacts OR IS CONTACTED by another party about leaving the conference is required to notify the conference of that contact within 12 days AND to formally submit a declining letter to that offer and failing to do so puts that member in violation of the contract for conference membership

so the REALITY is there is ZERO chance that 8 members of the Big 12 are all going to get together, all agree to go out and make contact with other conferences AND gain a guarantee to be admitted to those other conferences all within 12 days time

there will be SEVERAL of those members that will not be confident in the fact that they will get an offer from another conference that will be close to what they have in the Big 12 and they are not going to agree to COLLUDE to try and collapse the conference especially if they only LEGALLY have 12 days to do so before they MUST notify the conference or be subjected to legal recourse

and even IF it was possible that 8 of those members would agree to that it would still be next to impossible that they could all find a conference to admit them, get things squared away with that conference and the media partners AND do so within 12 days

and as soon as that 12 days passes and they do not make notification to the 2 members they are attempting to screw and leave behind they WILL absolutely be guilty of collusion and they will be restricted at that point on what votes and actions they can take dealing with the Big 12 and more importantly when it comes to the collusion when they get to court and it is proven that 8 members colluded to kill the conference and did so in violation of the rules calling for 12 days to notify the conference about ANY contact to switch conferences AND to LEGALLY DECLINE that offer well the ones that colluded will be subjected to treble damages

the Big 12 contract for conference membership calls for a forfeiture of the last two years of conference payouts for any member that is leaving which at the time of the final years of the GOR will be about $45 million per year or about $90 million per member leaving

even IF that could be negotiated down as it has been in the past the FACT is that if 8 teams get together and violate the 12 day rules of notification in the contract there is ZERO chance that the two remaining members are going to be looking to negotiate anything down and more importantly as soon as it is proven that the 12 day notification and DECLINE rule was violated AND that there was collusion on the part of 8 other members there would be ZERO reason for those members to negotiate anything down because with the collusion would come a near automatic treble damages or $270 million due per member that colluded to leave the conference and violated the 12 day notification and DECLINE requirement in the contract

there is a ZERO chance that you are going to have 8 conference members, several conferences and a couple of networks get together in 12 days work everything out and keep it a secret and after it goes past 12 days there is NO CHANCE that all involved are going to risk felony perjury to go to court and have all those people from all those organizations one after the other perjure themselves in court to say that "no we did not get together to collude to kill the conference and yes we did all that in fewer than 12 days"

so one can PRETEND that 8 teams in the Big 12 would agree to work together to either switch conferences in 12 days or less and one can pretend that they would actually make that happen in 12 days or less if those 8 teams agreed to that, but that is simply not going to happen

and one can pretend that when it takes longer than 12 days that several dozens of people will all get together and go to court and agree to testify that they got it all done in 12 days when they did not, but that will not happen either

and lastly one would be void of reality if they believed that two members of the Big 12 that were looking at getting $90 million in exit fees from the Big 12 and that have now proven collusion and are due 3X damages would work to negotiate that down "just because things like that happen"

no two members of the Big 12 that get screwed by 8 others in a collusion case that would be EASY to prove would have any reason to take less than the full $270 million PER OTHER MEMBER that colluded against them

and it is highly highly unlikely that any court would look at that easily proven case of collusion and the CLEAR contract language and reduce those 3X damages because there are not courts out there anywhere that view collusion fondly or as "something to negotiate away"

so again it is VERY CLEAR in the 99 year Big 12 contract for conference membership that any team that is contracted or makes contact to ANYONE about leaving the Big 12 has 12 days to notify the conference AND to decline that overture

and failure to do so puts them in violation of that contract and subjected to penalties and limited conference participation in conference business

no one that is sane would believe that 8 members of the Big 12 would think they could ALL gain a SOLID LEGAL new conference membership in 12 days or that they would want to, believe they could or that they actually would get away with colluding to violate that 12 day notification AND DECLINE requirement

the fact is there would be a ton of $35,000 to $45,000 a year people involved in that from multiple organizations and many of them are going to be smart enough to know that annual pay is not worth getting a felony perjury charge and then how would it be possible to make contracts with conferences and TV partners and falsify the dates on those contracts so it appears everything was done in 12 days or less

and when you have publicly traded TV partners well there are even more laws with the SEC (Securities Exchange not the SEC SEC SEC) and general business laws that would but a lot of people in serious legal jeopardy if they were trying to falsify the dates that legal contracts were signed so that when those contracts were brought to court it appeared as though they were all completed in a 12 day window even though they were actually finalized weeks or months later

one needs their head examined if they think that university presidents and inside and outside legal counsel are going to look at a 12 day notice tell the Big 12 about ANY contact to switch conferences AND TO DECLINE THAT CONTACT LEGALLY and they will think "yea lets get with 7 other Big 12 members and several conferences and some TV partners and just ignore that 12 day rule as a group of 8 while we leave two other members screwed and yea we can just negotiate away that $90 million in exit fees and the triple damages for collusion and skate by on all the perjury charges as well I think we can pull that off in secret the risk is well worth it"

all the more so when at least 4 of those members would be thinking they have little chance of finding a new home that is worth a damn and at least a couple of them would have to think they were being set up to be screwed as well

And none of that amount to a hill of beans until a court actually says it does, and in the history of GOR's settlement is the norm. That's true in the recording industry where this type of contract is frequently utilized, and it is untested against state schools subject to appropriations supplied by taxpayers. One might even argue that the only thing preventing a challenge of the GOR is fear of the unknown. So Todge, none of it may be binding or all of it could be binding, but in the history of GOR's settlement is the norm.

And there may be some wiggle room between the ambiguity of the conference contract and that of the GOR. It might be determined that it is unreasonable to constrain a schools ability to withdraw by from one by a 12 day notification and to require a two year notification under the other contract.

Suffice it to say I would love to see it tested. I have some profound doubts about it's supposed air tight nature. And since the ACC GOR is predicated upon the Big 12's it might have a larger reach than the Big 12 if challenged.

not surprisingly what you are saying does not even make sense and reads like nonsense

1. we are not dealing with the recording industry so who cares

2. there are two members of the Big 12 that are not state supported schools and what does being state supported have to do with being a party to a legal contract especially since each state will have different rules and laws about how a state entity is treated in a lawsuit and since multiple states are involved it could easily be a federal case

3. there is no "history of GOR settlements that says anything is the norm" and thus that means teams have no idea how the SEPARATE GOR contract would be handled and they certainly are not going to look at the recording industry to make a decision to challenge it

4. you seem to not understand that the conference contract for membership is 99 years in length and is COMPLETELY SEPARATE from the GOR and "the norm" for those in the past when they have been upheld time and again including the Big 12 two times with 8 of the current members a party to ENFORCING IT and COLLECTING MONEY FOR THAT ENFORCEMENT is that the teams leaving pay about half of what the contract called for

5. the most important part that you want to gloss over is there is no "two year requirement" anywhere in the GOR nor is there in the contract for conference membership

the GOR has no notification requirement because it purposefully has no provisions in place for breaking it

and the contract for conference membership has a 12 day requirement for NOTIFICATION OF CONTRACT about switching conferences AND a requirement to legally decline to do so and failure to decline or to notify places one in a position to no longer be a party to making conference decisions

6. and the way ALL contracts of ALL type work is that you do not decide you are not happy with a part of that contract and thus you break it and thne AFTER you break it you tell the court you broke it because you felt it was not fair

instead what you do is you go to court BEFORE you try and break it and you get that part tossed out (if possible) and THEN you do your other business

7. and of course YOU are moistening the most relevant part as it pertains to this discussion and that is you wil NEVER get 8 members of the Big 12 together to all agree in secret to all go find a new conference home and to secure new conference membership either in 12 days and or to all agree to just ignore the 12 day reporting requirement

because when groups that are a party to a contract get together and all agree in secret to violate a contract to the detriment of other parties to that contract it is known as COLLUSION and you do not get out from under COLLUSION with the argument that 'well we felt that part of the contract was unfair so we all agreed to break it in secret and not tell the other parties" because again that IS COLLUSION

what you would have to do to NOT be in COLLUSION is either follow the contract or get the part you disagree with invalidated so that you can then conduct your business

you do not get to COLLUDE to break a contract and then plead that you were not colluding to break a contract simply because you felt a part of it was not fair

all the more so when your reason for colluding to break th e contract was so that you can aviod the specified damages in the contract that YOU AGREED TO and that have been upheld to some degree time and again especially in the case of the Big 12

so what you cannot seem to understand is that it does not matter what happens with the GOR in the case of schools getting together and agreeing to form a group to all agree to disband the Big 12 while leaving 2 members out in the cold because an DIFFERENT CONTRACT for conference membership that is 99 years in length is also in effect and those have been upheld time and again including with the Big 12 two times and that contract requires 12 days notification AND a legal denial of intention to switch conferences OR the member that fails to do so is not longer a party to conference business

so IF (and it is pretty much an impossibility) there were 8 members of the Big 12 looking to leave they would have to do so in 12 days and get everything in place OR if they did not folow the 12 day notification they would br in violation of the contract AND ineligible to be a party to conference business AND guilty of collusion that comes with treble damages

you MIGHT get 8 members that could agree to challenge that 12 day notification in court PRIOR to seeking a new conference, but again that is HIGHLY UNLIKELY since you would be hard pressed to find more than 4 members that would be confident they could find a new home and that means 4 others would go from having that contract in place to being in a position where any members or set of members could simply agree to a new conference and then spring it on everyone and leave the next day (after paying damages that have time and again been upheld)

and there is not a chance in hell that 4 or more members of the Big 12 would allow themselves to be in a position to get blind sided like that


so what others are saying that 8 members of the Big 12 could get together and agree to all find a new conference and then vote to dissolve the Big 12 and thus avoid any damages (that have time and again been upheld) from the 99 year contract for conference membership has ZERO chance of happening

because that would not happen in 12 days and if it did not happen in 12 days they would be a text book example of collusion and you do not beat collusion with "well we were not happy with the contract so we went ahead and colluded to break it instead of going to court to challenge it
BEFORE colluding"

and you are not going to get 8 members of the Big 12 that would agree to legally challenge the 12 day requirement and thus leave themselves opened to being blind sided with a few or as many as 8 members all working as long as it takes to leave and possibly leaving with no damages paid IF all 8 found a home

and even more so even if that rule was changed there is still a chance (better than average) that 8 members getting together without notification to the other two to agree to vote to kill the conference and thus avoid penalties would STILL be collusion

but with the 12 day notification in place there is ZERO chance that collusion would not be proven because you do not avoid the damages from working together to break a contract and damaging others that are a party to that contract by FIRST colluding to break that contract and THEN arguing it was OK that you did so because you disagreed with a part of the contract you willingly signed

you would POSSIBLY avoid that by FIRST challenging that part of the contract and having it removed.....but of course there is ZERO chance that 8 members of the Big 12 would be interested in doing that and leaving themselves open to being blind sided in the future
(This post was last modified: 11-18-2017 08:14 AM by TodgeRodge.)
11-18-2017 08:09 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Underdog Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,747
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation: 124
I Root For: The American
Location: Cloud Nine
Post: #136
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
(11-18-2017 08:09 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(11-18-2017 02:33 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-18-2017 12:53 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 06:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 05:49 PM)Underdog Wrote:  2) This response was directed at goodknightfl because he posted, “The answer is still no, The AAC and MWC will raid from below.” I simply gave him an actual example of a conference—the Big East—that almost got absorbed and dissolved by the remaining B12 schools. My example also addressed the purpose of this thread which is stated in post #1, “I’m of the opinion the BIG 12 will cease to exist close to or when the existing contract expires which is not really that far out.” Once again, if the remaining B12 schools almost absorbed/dissolved the Big East back in 2011, it would have even more options to remain viable in the future: Raid the AAC, MWC, or both….

For those who know Todge, he posted enlightening information along with the B12 bylaws on "The American Board" to illustrate the possible “collusion” it would take to dissolve the B12—which I never considered. He also pointed out in the B12 bylaws that once schools announce their departure, they also lose their voting rights. This is very important because the remaining schools can invite new members without the departing members impeding the process. Therefore, if UT, OU, TT, and OSU announce that they are going to the PAC 12, the remaining B12 schools can invite other schools to replace them before they actually leave the conference. Furthermore, it would be very difficult to dissolve the B12 even if one school is left behind because of the possible “collusion” involved in moving the departing schools to other conferences. If Todge wants to expound more on the dissolution of the B12, I welcome his comments... which can get lengthy 03-wink

An announcement in 2023 for movement in 2025 doesn't require a vote and meets Big 12 guidelines. Even an announcement in 2021 for departure in 2023 doesn't leave a penalty too large for the departing to pay. And that kind of movement can happen with any number of schools.

Then it must be considered whether two years out the remaining schools want to go through the legal process, or settle. Settling is in everyone's interest as opposed to paying lawyers. Why settle? They may wish to have some scheduling agreements moving forward with the departed. Most of those are fairly close for travel purposes and the SWC/Big8 schools have plenty of history they don't want to just abandon.

And as far as voting goes. A motion for dissolution only requires 8 votes to pass. Then announcements can be made. It's danged hard to prove collusion. But then this scenario only plays out if things are brokered by the networks.

I've read Todge and he is long on rules and regs and short on settlement and practical business agreements. All contracts have rules, and yet most contracts can be broken for the right settlement. You have to remember that these schools can shackle Texas and OU until about 2023 if they want to, but at what cost? Never being scheduled again? Having to fight it out in court with better financed schools? Taking on popular state flagships when the lawsuit would tick off the majority of the electorate?

What will happen to Kansas State and Baylor will happen to them anyway come 2025. I seriously doubt they put up a major resistance to be left totally out in the cold in 2025, when they can play nice and get concessions that last longer than the buyouts and exit fees.

Personally I think 5 of them could make a P conference if Texas and OU use some leverage it could be as many as 7 depending upon which conferences are involved.

So arguing these points on message boards might make for good fan debate material, but if Texas and OU get ready to leave, particularly if they are taking little brother with them and Kansas and W.V.U. have landing spots then this thing gets done whenever they decide to do it. I doubt KState, Baylor, and T.C.U. want ill will with their money game opponents.


the part in bold is 100% incorrect

the Big 12 has two contracts they have the GOR that ends at the same time the Big 12 TV contract ends and that has NO PROVISIONS FOR LEAVING THE CONFERENCE

the GOR has no notification requirement and it has no penalties and it has no option for giving advanced notification and or paying any amount of money to leave with media rights before te end of the contract and that is 100% by design

the Big 12 ALSO has a contract for conference membership that is 99 years in length from 2012 and that contract for conference membership DOES have a notification requirement and it has a penalty for leaving the conference, BUT it makes clear that giving that notification and paying that penalty does not exempt one from the GOR and it does not invalidate the GOR

and more importantly that Big 12 contract for conference membership requires that any member that is contacts OR IS CONTACTED by another party about leaving the conference is required to notify the conference of that contact within 12 days AND to formally submit a declining letter to that offer and failing to do so puts that member in violation of the contract for conference membership

so the REALITY is there is ZERO chance that 8 members of the Big 12 are all going to get together, all agree to go out and make contact with other conferences AND gain a guarantee to be admitted to those other conferences all within 12 days time

there will be SEVERAL of those members that will not be confident in the fact that they will get an offer from another conference that will be close to what they have in the Big 12 and they are not going to agree to COLLUDE to try and collapse the conference especially if they only LEGALLY have 12 days to do so before they MUST notify the conference or be subjected to legal recourse

and even IF it was possible that 8 of those members would agree to that it would still be next to impossible that they could all find a conference to admit them, get things squared away with that conference and the media partners AND do so within 12 days

and as soon as that 12 days passes and they do not make notification to the 2 members they are attempting to screw and leave behind they WILL absolutely be guilty of collusion and they will be restricted at that point on what votes and actions they can take dealing with the Big 12 and more importantly when it comes to the collusion when they get to court and it is proven that 8 members colluded to kill the conference and did so in violation of the rules calling for 12 days to notify the conference about ANY contact to switch conferences AND to LEGALLY DECLINE that offer well the ones that colluded will be subjected to treble damages

the Big 12 contract for conference membership calls for a forfeiture of the last two years of conference payouts for any member that is leaving which at the time of the final years of the GOR will be about $45 million per year or about $90 million per member leaving

even IF that could be negotiated down as it has been in the past the FACT is that if 8 teams get together and violate the 12 day rules of notification in the contract there is ZERO chance that the two remaining members are going to be looking to negotiate anything down and more importantly as soon as it is proven that the 12 day notification and DECLINE rule was violated AND that there was collusion on the part of 8 other members there would be ZERO reason for those members to negotiate anything down because with the collusion would come a near automatic treble damages or $270 million due per member that colluded to leave the conference and violated the 12 day notification and DECLINE requirement in the contract

there is a ZERO chance that you are going to have 8 conference members, several conferences and a couple of networks get together in 12 days work everything out and keep it a secret and after it goes past 12 days there is NO CHANCE that all involved are going to risk felony perjury to go to court and have all those people from all those organizations one after the other perjure themselves in court to say that "no we did not get together to collude to kill the conference and yes we did all that in fewer than 12 days"

so one can PRETEND that 8 teams in the Big 12 would agree to work together to either switch conferences in 12 days or less and one can pretend that they would actually make that happen in 12 days or less if those 8 teams agreed to that, but that is simply not going to happen

and one can pretend that when it takes longer than 12 days that several dozens of people will all get together and go to court and agree to testify that they got it all done in 12 days when they did not, but that will not happen either

and lastly one would be void of reality if they believed that two members of the Big 12 that were looking at getting $90 million in exit fees from the Big 12 and that have now proven collusion and are due 3X damages would work to negotiate that down "just because things like that happen"

no two members of the Big 12 that get screwed by 8 others in a collusion case that would be EASY to prove would have any reason to take less than the full $270 million PER OTHER MEMBER that colluded against them

and it is highly highly unlikely that any court would look at that easily proven case of collusion and the CLEAR contract language and reduce those 3X damages because there are not courts out there anywhere that view collusion fondly or as "something to negotiate away"

so again it is VERY CLEAR in the 99 year Big 12 contract for conference membership that any team that is contracted or makes contact to ANYONE about leaving the Big 12 has 12 days to notify the conference AND to decline that overture

and failure to do so puts them in violation of that contract and subjected to penalties and limited conference participation in conference business

no one that is sane would believe that 8 members of the Big 12 would think they could ALL gain a SOLID LEGAL new conference membership in 12 days or that they would want to, believe they could or that they actually would get away with colluding to violate that 12 day notification AND DECLINE requirement

the fact is there would be a ton of $35,000 to $45,000 a year people involved in that from multiple organizations and many of them are going to be smart enough to know that annual pay is not worth getting a felony perjury charge and then how would it be possible to make contracts with conferences and TV partners and falsify the dates on those contracts so it appears everything was done in 12 days or less

and when you have publicly traded TV partners well there are even more laws with the SEC (Securities Exchange not the SEC SEC SEC) and general business laws that would but a lot of people in serious legal jeopardy if they were trying to falsify the dates that legal contracts were signed so that when those contracts were brought to court it appeared as though they were all completed in a 12 day window even though they were actually finalized weeks or months later

one needs their head examined if they think that university presidents and inside and outside legal counsel are going to look at a 12 day notice tell the Big 12 about ANY contact to switch conferences AND TO DECLINE THAT CONTACT LEGALLY and they will think "yea lets get with 7 other Big 12 members and several conferences and some TV partners and just ignore that 12 day rule as a group of 8 while we leave two other members screwed and yea we can just negotiate away that $90 million in exit fees and the triple damages for collusion and skate by on all the perjury charges as well I think we can pull that off in secret the risk is well worth it"

all the more so when at least 4 of those members would be thinking they have little chance of finding a new home that is worth a damn and at least a couple of them would have to think they were being set up to be screwed as well

And none of that amount to a hill of beans until a court actually says it does, and in the history of GOR's settlement is the norm. That's true in the recording industry where this type of contract is frequently utilized, and it is untested against state schools subject to appropriations supplied by taxpayers. One might even argue that the only thing preventing a challenge of the GOR is fear of the unknown. So Todge, none of it may be binding or all of it could be binding, but in the history of GOR's settlement is the norm.

And there may be some wiggle room between the ambiguity of the conference contract and that of the GOR. It might be determined that it is unreasonable to constrain a schools ability to withdraw by from one by a 12 day notification and to require a two year notification under the other contract.

Suffice it to say I would love to see it tested. I have some profound doubts about it's supposed air tight nature. And since the ACC GOR is predicated upon the Big 12's it might have a larger reach than the Big 12 if challenged.

not surprisingly what you are saying does not even make sense and reads like nonsense

1. we are not dealing with the recording industry so who cares

2. there are two members of the Big 12 that are not state supported schools and what does being state supported have to do with being a party to a legal contract especially since each state will have different rules and laws about how a state entity is treated in a lawsuit and since multiple states are involved it could easily be a federal case

3. there is no "history of GOR settlements that says anything is the norm" and thus that means teams have no idea how the SEPARATE GOR contract would be handled and they certainly are not going to look at the recording industry to make a decision to challenge it

4. you seem to not understand that the conference contract for membership is 99 years in length and is COMPLETELY SEPARATE from the GOR and "the norm" for those in the past when they have been upheld time and again including the Big 12 two times with 8 of the current members a party to ENFORCING IT and COLLECTING MONEY FOR THAT ENFORCEMENT is that the teams leaving pay about half of what the contract called for

5. the most important part that you want to gloss over is there is no "two year requirement" anywhere in the GOR nor is there in the contract for conference membership

the GOR has no notification requirement because it purposefully has no provisions in place for breaking it

and the contract for conference membership has a 12 day requirement for NOTIFICATION OF CONTRACT about switching conferences AND a requirement to legally decline to do so and failure to decline or to notify places one in a position to no longer be a party to making conference decisions

6. and the way ALL contracts of ALL type work is that you do not decide you are not happy with a part of that contract and thus you break it and thne AFTER you break it you tell the court you broke it because you felt it was not fair

instead what you do is you go to court BEFORE you try and break it and you get that part tossed out (if possible) and THEN you do your other business

7. and of course YOU are moistening the most relevant part as it pertains to this discussion and that is you wil NEVER get 8 members of the Big 12 together to all agree in secret to all go find a new conference home and to secure new conference membership either in 12 days and or to all agree to just ignore the 12 day reporting requirement

because when groups that are a party to a contract get together and all agree in secret to violate a contract to the detriment of other parties to that contract it is known as COLLUSION and you do not get out from under COLLUSION with the argument that 'well we felt that part of the contract was unfair so we all agreed to break it in secret and not tell the other parties" because again that IS COLLUSION

what you would have to do to NOT be in COLLUSION is either follow the contract or get the part you disagree with invalidated so that you can then conduct your business

you do not get to COLLUDE to break a contract and then plead that you were not colluding to break a contract simply because you felt a part of it was not fair

all the more so when your reason for colluding to break th e contract was so that you can aviod the specified damages in the contract that YOU AGREED TO and that have been upheld to some degree time and again especially in the case of the Big 12

so what you cannot seem to understand is that it does not matter what happens with the GOR in the case of schools getting together and agreeing to form a group to all agree to disband the Big 12 while leaving 2 members out in the cold because an DIFFERENT CONTRACT for conference membership that is 99 years in length is also in effect and those have been upheld time and again including with the Big 12 two times and that contract requires 12 days notification AND a legal denial of intention to switch conferences OR the member that fails to do so is not longer a party to conference business

so IF (and it is pretty much an impossibility) there were 8 members of the Big 12 looking to leave they would have to do so in 12 days and get everything in place OR if they did not folow the 12 day notification they would br in violation of the contract AND ineligible to be a party to conference business AND guilty of collusion that comes with treble damages

you MIGHT get 8 members that could agree to challenge that 12 day notification in court PRIOR to seeking a new conference, but again that is HIGHLY UNLIKELY since you would be hard pressed to find more than 4 members that would be confident they could find a new home and that means 4 others would go from having that contract in place to being in a position where any members or set of members could simply agree to a new conference and then spring it on everyone and leave the next day (after paying damages that have time and again been upheld)

and there is not a chance in hell that 4 or more members of the Big 12 would allow themselves to be in a position to get blind sided like that


so what others are saying that 8 members of the Big 12 could get together and agree to all find a new conference and then vote to dissolve the Big 12 and thus avoid any damages (that have time and again been upheld) from the 99 year contract for conference membership has ZERO chance of happening

because that would not happen in 12 days and if it did not happen in 12 days they would be a text book example of collusion and you do not beat collusion with "well we were not happy with the contract so we went ahead and colluded to break it instead of going to court to challenge it
BEFORE colluding"

and you are not going to get 8 members of the Big 12 that would agree to legally challenge the 12 day requirement and thus leave themselves opened to being blind sided with a few or as many as 8 members all working as long as it takes to leave and possibly leaving with no damages paid IF all 8 found a home

and even more so even if that rule was changed there is still a chance (better than average) that 8 members getting together without notification to the other two to agree to vote to kill the conference and thus avoid penalties would STILL be collusion

but with the 12 day notification in place there is ZERO chance that collusion would not be proven because you do not avoid the damages from working together to break a contract and damaging others that are a party to that contract by FIRST colluding to break that contract and THEN arguing it was OK that you did so because you disagreed with a part of the contract you willingly signed

you would POSSIBLY avoid that by FIRST challenging that part of the contract and having it removed.....but of course there is ZERO chance that 8 members of the Big 12 would be interested in doing that and leaving themselves open to being blind sided in the future

I agree with you that it would be nearly impossible to dissolve the B12 without some form of collusion involved....
(This post was last modified: 11-18-2017 02:39 PM by Underdog.)
11-18-2017 12:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,886
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #137
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
(11-18-2017 08:09 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(11-18-2017 02:33 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-18-2017 12:53 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 06:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 05:49 PM)Underdog Wrote:  2) This response was directed at goodknightfl because he posted, “The answer is still no, The AAC and MWC will raid from below.” I simply gave him an actual example of a conference—the Big East—that almost got absorbed and dissolved by the remaining B12 schools. My example also addressed the purpose of this thread which is stated in post #1, “I’m of the opinion the BIG 12 will cease to exist close to or when the existing contract expires which is not really that far out.” Once again, if the remaining B12 schools almost absorbed/dissolved the Big East back in 2011, it would have even more options to remain viable in the future: Raid the AAC, MWC, or both….

For those who know Todge, he posted enlightening information along with the B12 bylaws on "The American Board" to illustrate the possible “collusion” it would take to dissolve the B12—which I never considered. He also pointed out in the B12 bylaws that once schools announce their departure, they also lose their voting rights. This is very important because the remaining schools can invite new members without the departing members impeding the process. Therefore, if UT, OU, TT, and OSU announce that they are going to the PAC 12, the remaining B12 schools can invite other schools to replace them before they actually leave the conference. Furthermore, it would be very difficult to dissolve the B12 even if one school is left behind because of the possible “collusion” involved in moving the departing schools to other conferences. If Todge wants to expound more on the dissolution of the B12, I welcome his comments... which can get lengthy 03-wink

An announcement in 2023 for movement in 2025 doesn't require a vote and meets Big 12 guidelines. Even an announcement in 2021 for departure in 2023 doesn't leave a penalty too large for the departing to pay. And that kind of movement can happen with any number of schools.

Then it must be considered whether two years out the remaining schools want to go through the legal process, or settle. Settling is in everyone's interest as opposed to paying lawyers. Why settle? They may wish to have some scheduling agreements moving forward with the departed. Most of those are fairly close for travel purposes and the SWC/Big8 schools have plenty of history they don't want to just abandon.

And as far as voting goes. A motion for dissolution only requires 8 votes to pass. Then announcements can be made. It's danged hard to prove collusion. But then this scenario only plays out if things are brokered by the networks.

I've read Todge and he is long on rules and regs and short on settlement and practical business agreements. All contracts have rules, and yet most contracts can be broken for the right settlement. You have to remember that these schools can shackle Texas and OU until about 2023 if they want to, but at what cost? Never being scheduled again? Having to fight it out in court with better financed schools? Taking on popular state flagships when the lawsuit would tick off the majority of the electorate?

What will happen to Kansas State and Baylor will happen to them anyway come 2025. I seriously doubt they put up a major resistance to be left totally out in the cold in 2025, when they can play nice and get concessions that last longer than the buyouts and exit fees.

Personally I think 5 of them could make a P conference if Texas and OU use some leverage it could be as many as 7 depending upon which conferences are involved.

So arguing these points on message boards might make for good fan debate material, but if Texas and OU get ready to leave, particularly if they are taking little brother with them and Kansas and W.V.U. have landing spots then this thing gets done whenever they decide to do it. I doubt KState, Baylor, and T.C.U. want ill will with their money game opponents.


the part in bold is 100% incorrect

the Big 12 has two contracts they have the GOR that ends at the same time the Big 12 TV contract ends and that has NO PROVISIONS FOR LEAVING THE CONFERENCE

the GOR has no notification requirement and it has no penalties and it has no option for giving advanced notification and or paying any amount of money to leave with media rights before te end of the contract and that is 100% by design

the Big 12 ALSO has a contract for conference membership that is 99 years in length from 2012 and that contract for conference membership DOES have a notification requirement and it has a penalty for leaving the conference, BUT it makes clear that giving that notification and paying that penalty does not exempt one from the GOR and it does not invalidate the GOR

and more importantly that Big 12 contract for conference membership requires that any member that is contacts OR IS CONTACTED by another party about leaving the conference is required to notify the conference of that contact within 12 days AND to formally submit a declining letter to that offer and failing to do so puts that member in violation of the contract for conference membership

so the REALITY is there is ZERO chance that 8 members of the Big 12 are all going to get together, all agree to go out and make contact with other conferences AND gain a guarantee to be admitted to those other conferences all within 12 days time

there will be SEVERAL of those members that will not be confident in the fact that they will get an offer from another conference that will be close to what they have in the Big 12 and they are not going to agree to COLLUDE to try and collapse the conference especially if they only LEGALLY have 12 days to do so before they MUST notify the conference or be subjected to legal recourse

and even IF it was possible that 8 of those members would agree to that it would still be next to impossible that they could all find a conference to admit them, get things squared away with that conference and the media partners AND do so within 12 days

and as soon as that 12 days passes and they do not make notification to the 2 members they are attempting to screw and leave behind they WILL absolutely be guilty of collusion and they will be restricted at that point on what votes and actions they can take dealing with the Big 12 and more importantly when it comes to the collusion when they get to court and it is proven that 8 members colluded to kill the conference and did so in violation of the rules calling for 12 days to notify the conference about ANY contact to switch conferences AND to LEGALLY DECLINE that offer well the ones that colluded will be subjected to treble damages

the Big 12 contract for conference membership calls for a forfeiture of the last two years of conference payouts for any member that is leaving which at the time of the final years of the GOR will be about $45 million per year or about $90 million per member leaving

even IF that could be negotiated down as it has been in the past the FACT is that if 8 teams get together and violate the 12 day rules of notification in the contract there is ZERO chance that the two remaining members are going to be looking to negotiate anything down and more importantly as soon as it is proven that the 12 day notification and DECLINE rule was violated AND that there was collusion on the part of 8 other members there would be ZERO reason for those members to negotiate anything down because with the collusion would come a near automatic treble damages or $270 million due per member that colluded to leave the conference and violated the 12 day notification and DECLINE requirement in the contract

there is a ZERO chance that you are going to have 8 conference members, several conferences and a couple of networks get together in 12 days work everything out and keep it a secret and after it goes past 12 days there is NO CHANCE that all involved are going to risk felony perjury to go to court and have all those people from all those organizations one after the other perjure themselves in court to say that "no we did not get together to collude to kill the conference and yes we did all that in fewer than 12 days"

so one can PRETEND that 8 teams in the Big 12 would agree to work together to either switch conferences in 12 days or less and one can pretend that they would actually make that happen in 12 days or less if those 8 teams agreed to that, but that is simply not going to happen

and one can pretend that when it takes longer than 12 days that several dozens of people will all get together and go to court and agree to testify that they got it all done in 12 days when they did not, but that will not happen either

and lastly one would be void of reality if they believed that two members of the Big 12 that were looking at getting $90 million in exit fees from the Big 12 and that have now proven collusion and are due 3X damages would work to negotiate that down "just because things like that happen"

no two members of the Big 12 that get screwed by 8 others in a collusion case that would be EASY to prove would have any reason to take less than the full $270 million PER OTHER MEMBER that colluded against them

and it is highly highly unlikely that any court would look at that easily proven case of collusion and the CLEAR contract language and reduce those 3X damages because there are not courts out there anywhere that view collusion fondly or as "something to negotiate away"

so again it is VERY CLEAR in the 99 year Big 12 contract for conference membership that any team that is contracted or makes contact to ANYONE about leaving the Big 12 has 12 days to notify the conference AND to decline that overture

and failure to do so puts them in violation of that contract and subjected to penalties and limited conference participation in conference business

no one that is sane would believe that 8 members of the Big 12 would think they could ALL gain a SOLID LEGAL new conference membership in 12 days or that they would want to, believe they could or that they actually would get away with colluding to violate that 12 day notification AND DECLINE requirement

the fact is there would be a ton of $35,000 to $45,000 a year people involved in that from multiple organizations and many of them are going to be smart enough to know that annual pay is not worth getting a felony perjury charge and then how would it be possible to make contracts with conferences and TV partners and falsify the dates on those contracts so it appears everything was done in 12 days or less

and when you have publicly traded TV partners well there are even more laws with the SEC (Securities Exchange not the SEC SEC SEC) and general business laws that would but a lot of people in serious legal jeopardy if they were trying to falsify the dates that legal contracts were signed so that when those contracts were brought to court it appeared as though they were all completed in a 12 day window even though they were actually finalized weeks or months later

one needs their head examined if they think that university presidents and inside and outside legal counsel are going to look at a 12 day notice tell the Big 12 about ANY contact to switch conferences AND TO DECLINE THAT CONTACT LEGALLY and they will think "yea lets get with 7 other Big 12 members and several conferences and some TV partners and just ignore that 12 day rule as a group of 8 while we leave two other members screwed and yea we can just negotiate away that $90 million in exit fees and the triple damages for collusion and skate by on all the perjury charges as well I think we can pull that off in secret the risk is well worth it"

all the more so when at least 4 of those members would be thinking they have little chance of finding a new home that is worth a damn and at least a couple of them would have to think they were being set up to be screwed as well

And none of that amount to a hill of beans until a court actually says it does, and in the history of GOR's settlement is the norm. That's true in the recording industry where this type of contract is frequently utilized, and it is untested against state schools subject to appropriations supplied by taxpayers. One might even argue that the only thing preventing a challenge of the GOR is fear of the unknown. So Todge, none of it may be binding or all of it could be binding, but in the history of GOR's settlement is the norm.

And there may be some wiggle room between the ambiguity of the conference contract and that of the GOR. It might be determined that it is unreasonable to constrain a schools ability to withdraw by from one by a 12 day notification and to require a two year notification under the other contract.

Suffice it to say I would love to see it tested. I have some profound doubts about it's supposed air tight nature. And since the ACC GOR is predicated upon the Big 12's it might have a larger reach than the Big 12 if challenged.

not surprisingly what you are saying does not even make sense and reads like nonsense

1. we are not dealing with the recording industry so who cares

2. there are two members of the Big 12 that are not state supported schools and what does being state supported have to do with being a party to a legal contract especially since each state will have different rules and laws about how a state entity is treated in a lawsuit and since multiple states are involved it could easily be a federal case

3. there is no "history of GOR settlements that says anything is the norm" and thus that means teams have no idea how the SEPARATE GOR contract would be handled and they certainly are not going to look at the recording industry to make a decision to challenge it

4. you seem to not understand that the conference contract for membership is 99 years in length and is COMPLETELY SEPARATE from the GOR and "the norm" for those in the past when they have been upheld time and again including the Big 12 two times with 8 of the current members a party to ENFORCING IT and COLLECTING MONEY FOR THAT ENFORCEMENT is that the teams leaving pay about half of what the contract called for

5. the most important part that you want to gloss over is there is no "two year requirement" anywhere in the GOR nor is there in the contract for conference membership

the GOR has no notification requirement because it purposefully has no provisions in place for breaking it

and the contract for conference membership has a 12 day requirement for NOTIFICATION OF CONTRACT about switching conferences AND a requirement to legally decline to do so and failure to decline or to notify places one in a position to no longer be a party to making conference decisions

6. and the way ALL contracts of ALL type work is that you do not decide you are not happy with a part of that contract and thus you break it and thne AFTER you break it you tell the court you broke it because you felt it was not fair

instead what you do is you go to court BEFORE you try and break it and you get that part tossed out (if possible) and THEN you do your other business

7. and of course YOU are moistening the most relevant part as it pertains to this discussion and that is you wil NEVER get 8 members of the Big 12 together to all agree in secret to all go find a new conference home and to secure new conference membership either in 12 days and or to all agree to just ignore the 12 day reporting requirement

because when groups that are a party to a contract get together and all agree in secret to violate a contract to the detriment of other parties to that contract it is known as COLLUSION and you do not get out from under COLLUSION with the argument that 'well we felt that part of the contract was unfair so we all agreed to break it in secret and not tell the other parties" because again that IS COLLUSION

what you would have to do to NOT be in COLLUSION is either follow the contract or get the part you disagree with invalidated so that you can then conduct your business

you do not get to COLLUDE to break a contract and then plead that you were not colluding to break a contract simply because you felt a part of it was not fair

all the more so when your reason for colluding to break th e contract was so that you can aviod the specified damages in the contract that YOU AGREED TO and that have been upheld to some degree time and again especially in the case of the Big 12

so what you cannot seem to understand is that it does not matter what happens with the GOR in the case of schools getting together and agreeing to form a group to all agree to disband the Big 12 while leaving 2 members out in the cold because an DIFFERENT CONTRACT for conference membership that is 99 years in length is also in effect and those have been upheld time and again including with the Big 12 two times and that contract requires 12 days notification AND a legal denial of intention to switch conferences OR the member that fails to do so is not longer a party to conference business

so IF (and it is pretty much an impossibility) there were 8 members of the Big 12 looking to leave they would have to do so in 12 days and get everything in place OR if they did not folow the 12 day notification they would br in violation of the contract AND ineligible to be a party to conference business AND guilty of collusion that comes with treble damages

you MIGHT get 8 members that could agree to challenge that 12 day notification in court PRIOR to seeking a new conference, but again that is HIGHLY UNLIKELY since you would be hard pressed to find more than 4 members that would be confident they could find a new home and that means 4 others would go from having that contract in place to being in a position where any members or set of members could simply agree to a new conference and then spring it on everyone and leave the next day (after paying damages that have time and again been upheld)

and there is not a chance in hell that 4 or more members of the Big 12 would allow themselves to be in a position to get blind sided like that


so what others are saying that 8 members of the Big 12 could get together and agree to all find a new conference and then vote to dissolve the Big 12 and thus avoid any damages (that have time and again been upheld) from the 99 year contract for conference membership has ZERO chance of happening

because that would not happen in 12 days and if it did not happen in 12 days they would be a text book example of collusion and you do not beat collusion with "well we were not happy with the contract so we went ahead and colluded to break it instead of going to court to challenge it
BEFORE colluding"

and you are not going to get 8 members of the Big 12 that would agree to legally challenge the 12 day requirement and thus leave themselves opened to being blind sided with a few or as many as 8 members all working as long as it takes to leave and possibly leaving with no damages paid IF all 8 found a home

and even more so even if that rule was changed there is still a chance (better than average) that 8 members getting together without notification to the other two to agree to vote to kill the conference and thus avoid penalties would STILL be collusion

but with the 12 day notification in place there is ZERO chance that collusion would not be proven because you do not avoid the damages from working together to break a contract and damaging others that are a party to that contract by FIRST colluding to break that contract and THEN arguing it was OK that you did so because you disagreed with a part of the contract you willingly signed

you would POSSIBLY avoid that by FIRST challenging that part of the contract and having it removed.....but of course there is ZERO chance that 8 members of the Big 12 would be interested in doing that and leaving themselves open to being blind sided in the future

Well that would be because you have tunnel vision when it comes to asserting that the obvious isn't true. The Big 12 is the most vulnerable. I don't see how it can remain intact moving past 2025. So you spend all your time posting to the contrary with extremely long, poorly punctuated, un-capitalized sentences proclaiming only what you wish to be so. Therefore of course any opinion to the contrary doesn't make any sense. The "Fact" that the Big 12 refused to vote to extend the present GOR is also indicative of their vulnerability moving forward.

In 2023 the remaining value of the GOR will be low enough to permit schools to leave. Those left behind next time are going to have a greatly diminished value. They can fight that and waste money, or they can negotiate and keep some money games. That's just reality. As for the GOR's they are only as strong as the courts desire to uphold them. But for that to happen they have to be reasonably written, remuneration must be given for product used, meaning you can't withhold a payout for product that you exercise control over even if a school leaves. So these schools cannot by law lose their revenue for TV rights the Big 12 exercises.

There are so many myths about GOR's out there and you spread your share of them.

Like all contracts they have to equitable to be enforced and are subject to legal interpretation.


Now as to your explanations and accusations I suggest you consult a contract lawyer. And yes when it comes to commerce between states it is subject to federal interpretation and that is yet another place where these GOR's have not been tested legally. Does a Board of Regents or Trustees have a right to restrain the trade of a taxpayer supported institution?

The 99 year contract of the Big 12 is probably not going to be considered reasonable.

But like I said ask a contract attorney. And the reason the music industry is important is that it establishes the only precedents legally tested for GOR's.

So I'm sure that's nonsense to you for no other reason than it is contrary to what you spew. And like Herr Goebbels said if you say it often enough and with fierce conviction the vast majority of the ignorant will believe you. That's your audience so stick to it. But if your going to jaw about this then look up the legal aspects and quit spouting the partial documents that are not completely available to be read.
(This post was last modified: 11-18-2017 08:05 PM by JRsec.)
11-18-2017 07:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,930
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #138
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
1. I consider what you wrote to be nonsense mainly because it is coming from you that pretends like all you have to do when you are not happy with a contract is go to court and start litigation and walk out better than you would have been under the contract

2. I have never stated that the Big 12 absolutely would not lose teams the Big 12 may well lose teams in the future

3. what I have stated is that the teams that leave the Big 12 are not going to walk away paying a small amount of money of little consequence to the decision to stay or leave

the last time a contract for conference membership was tested was the ACC and Maryland and the ACc had just recently changed their penalty to leave from $25 to $50 million and Maryland was against that and Maryland still paid $32.5 million to leave which was an amount over and above the conference distribution their last year in the ACC

and the Big 12 contract will have been in force for a much longer period of time by the time any team MIGHT look to leave so they will not have the claim that "this penalty was put in place specifically to stop us attempting to leave even though it was clear teams were already looking around"

it was not as hard for Maryland to make the claim the ACC contract was punitive when it was raised specifically because teams were looking around and talking about leaving

the Big 12 contract signed in 2012 was put in place with ALL the teams that are a party to it not looking to leave

4. more importantly the Big 12 is not going to have 8 members get together and collude to leave the conference AND get that done within 12 days and they are not going to get 8 teams to agree to collude to ignore that 12 day requirement

so no matter what happens with the GOR the Big 12 is not going to have 8 teams find a way to vote to dissolve the conference especially if the goal is to leave two teams out in the cold AND pay them nothing under the contract for conference membership

5. businesses and all types of legal entities sign 99 year contracts all the time that is a very standard number of years for a long term contract there is nothing unreasonable about it especially when it spells out a CLEAR method to leave the conference AND the associated cost to do so

what is unreasonable is that one would think they can just go around signing very clear contracts when it is convenient for them and then when they decide it is no longer convenient they can just walk away from it and call it unreasonable and try and claim they should pay a great deal less than the contracts states they should

6. even if the Big 12 loses teams those teams are going to pay a significant amount of money to do so and that amount of money and the left over NCAA credits are going to be high enough that any team or teams leaving will have to look at the long term consequences of that cost when they make the decision.....AND if they choose to leave before the SEPARATE GOR is over they will have to consider the cost of trying to claim they should not be held to that contract and the associated cost of being held to that contract if it is enforced

but that would not change the fact that contracts for conference membership like the one the big 12 has for 99 years are consistently enforced with ever increasing cost to the teams that leave a conference and the big 12 specifically and 8 of the 10 members of the Big 12 have been a party to enforcing and collecting damages under such a contract and TCU and WVU have been a party to paying under such a contract so there is no reasonable argument for them to make that suddenly any of them should no longer have to follow that type of contract

and again there is ZERO chance that 8 members will get together and agree to violate that contract in an attempt to collapse the contract and avoid those exit fees and there is zero chance they will get enough members to vote to agree to chance the 12 notification and DECLINE policy in that contract

and there is no reasonable person that would think that requiring notification of the intent to break a contract or to exit a contract is unreasonable nor would any reasonable person think that a party to a contract that has informed other parties of their intent to leave the contract should then still be allowed to have a decision on matters related to that contract

so no one of logic or reason would think that somehow members that want to leave the Big 12 should still be allowed to vote on conference membership and especially membership contract changes because if you let people that are intent on exiting a contract continue to have a decision in the language of that contract then that contract is essentially worthless

so no reasoned person would think that the members that might want to leave the Big 12 are going to do so without paying significant money to do so all the more so there are not going to be 8 members that get together to collapse the conference to specifically avoid those cost

and as of now the ACC and PAC 12 pay less than the Big 12 does especially in relation to Texas and even OU and the FACTS are the Big 10 has NEVER show interest in OU no matter what boren or any similar idiot wants to pretend and in fact it was made pretty clear in the past that the Big 10 was specifically NOT interested in OU and a great deal of that probably had to do with the fact that boren can't shut up and can't keep from airing conference business in public to try and feel important

and the facts are Texas has ZERO interest in going to the PAC 12 and all that comes with that while A&M resides in an eastern based conference and Texas has stated very publicly they do not want to be in the SEC SEC SEC

so what that means is the Big 10 is highly unlikely to take OU and OU is highly unlikely to go to the PAC 12 because Texas is not wanting to go there and views that as a next to last resort especially for less money

and the ACC is less money as well and Texas does not want in the SEC SEC SEC.....so that leaves OU and one other going to the SEC SEC SEC and I think it is highly unlikely OU will want that for a number of reasons
11-18-2017 09:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,886
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #139
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
(11-18-2017 09:00 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  1. I consider what you wrote to be nonsense mainly because it is coming from you that pretends like all you have to do when you are not happy with a contract is go to court and start litigation and walk out better than you would have been under the contract

My point being that a GOR is untested with regards to sports conferences. It is.

2. I have never stated that the Big 12 absolutely would not lose teams the Big 12 may well lose teams in the future

Okay.

3. what I have stated is that the teams that leave the Big 12 are not going to walk away paying a small amount of money of little consequence to the decision to stay or leave

I haven't claimed that either. But, in 2025 they get to leave without paying anything, period. Is it not wiser for those remaining to negotiate an earlier departure time in exchange for not only some money but other concessions?

the last time a contract for conference membership was tested was the ACC and Maryland and the ACc had just recently changed their penalty to leave from $25 to $50 million and Maryland was against that and Maryland still paid $32.5 million to leave which was an amount over and above the conference distribution their last year in the ACC

Maryland didn't pay anything. The ACC withheld all they could and that was 32.5 million. It would have been money lost for Maryland to sue for the 7.5 million more than the previous fee happened to be.

and the Big 12 contract will have been in force for a much longer period of time by the time any team MIGHT look to leave so they will not have the claim that "this penalty was put in place specifically to stop us attempting to leave even though it was clear teams were already looking around"

it was not as hard for Maryland to make the claim the ACC contract was punitive when it was raised specifically because teams were looking around and talking about leaving

the Big 12 contract signed in 2012 was put in place with ALL the teams that are a party to it not looking to leave
And when the GOR has expired departing teams will only be subject to 2 years prior notification and the exit fee. And the notification can be made to be effective concurrent with the expiration of the GOR.

4. more importantly the Big 12 is not going to have 8 members get together and collude to leave the conference AND get that done within 12 days and they are not going to get 8 teams to agree to collude to ignore that 12 day requirement

so no matter what happens with the GOR the Big 12 is not going to have 8 teams find a way to vote to dissolve the conference especially if the goal is to leave two teams out in the cold AND pay them nothing under the contract for conference membership

That statement is likely, but not certain.

5. businesses and all types of legal entities sign 99 year contracts all the time that is a very standard number of years for a long term contract there is nothing unreasonable about it especially when it spells out a CLEAR method to leave the conference AND the associated cost to do so

what is unreasonable is that one would think they can just go around signing very clear contracts when it is convenient for them and then when they decide it is no longer convenient they can just walk away from it and call it unreasonable and try and claim they should pay a great deal less than the contracts states they should
This remains to be seen, but if the provision for leaving is spelled out then the duration doesn't matter as long as the terms for leaving are reasonable.
6. even if the Big 12 loses teams those teams are going to pay a significant amount of money to do so and that amount of money and the left over NCAA credits are going to be high enough that any team or teams leaving will have to look at the long term consequences of that cost when they make the decision.....AND if they choose to leave before the SEPARATE GOR is over they will have to consider the cost of trying to claim they should not be held to that contract and the associated cost of being held to that contract if it is enforced

but that would not change the fact that contracts for conference membership like the one the big 12 has for 99 years are consistently enforced with ever increasing cost to the teams that leave a conference and the big 12 specifically and 8 of the 10 members of the Big 12 have been a party to enforcing and collecting damages under such a contract and TCU and WVU have been a party to paying under such a contract so there is no reasonable argument for them to make that suddenly any of them should no longer have to follow that type of contract

and again there is ZERO chance that 8 members will get together and agree to violate that contract in an attempt to collapse the contract and avoid those exit fees and there is zero chance they will get enough members to vote to agree to chance the 12 notification and DECLINE policy in that contract

and there is no reasonable person that would think that requiring notification of the intent to break a contract or to exit a contract is unreasonable nor would any reasonable person think that a party to a contract that has informed other parties of their intent to leave the contract should then still be allowed to have a decision on matters related to that contract

so no one of logic or reason would think that somehow members that want to leave the Big 12 should still be allowed to vote on conference membership and especially membership contract changes because if you let people that are intent on exiting a contract continue to have a decision in the language of that contract then that contract is essentially worthless

so no reasoned person would think that the members that might want to leave the Big 12 are going to do so without paying significant money to do so all the more so there are not going to be 8 members that get together to collapse the conference to specifically avoid those cost

and as of now the ACC and PAC 12 pay less than the Big 12 does especially in relation to Texas and even OU and the FACTS are the Big 10 has NEVER show interest in OU no matter what boren or any similar idiot wants to pretend and in fact it was made pretty clear in the past that the Big 10 was specifically NOT interested in OU and a great deal of that probably had to do with the fact that boren can't shut up and can't keep from airing conference business in public to try and feel important

and the facts are Texas has ZERO interest in going to the PAC 12 and all that comes with that while A&M resides in an eastern based conference and Texas has stated very publicly they do not want to be in the SEC SEC SEC

so what that means is the Big 10 is highly unlikely to take OU and OU is highly unlikely to go to the PAC 12 because Texas is not wanting to go there and views that as a next to last resort especially for less money

and the ACC is less money as well and Texas does not want in the SEC SEC SEC.....so that leaves OU and one other going to the SEC SEC SEC and I think it is highly unlikely OU will want that for a number of reasons

And this part is where you just say the same things over and over again using your opinion as the basis for the argument and then the proof of it. That's a fallacy in logic. It's is unnecessary, redundant, and makes your posts way too long.

Clean that up and your posts will be more effective. All that matters is that there is a procedure for departure. Once the GOR expires the riskiest of the potential legal matters is over and the cost of leaving is more definable. The rest is merely your opinion and obviously mine differs.
(This post was last modified: 11-18-2017 09:47 PM by JRsec.)
11-18-2017 09:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,930
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #140
RE: Will the BIG12 eventually dissolve
my post are long because there are thick people out there that cannot deal with reality and that say ignorant things like "after 2025 teams get to leave the Big 12 with no penalty"

you see there are people out there that are so thick they cannot understand that the GOR is not the only contract that teams have with the Big 12

and they are also so thick they still cannot understand that the GOR has no penalty associated with it

nor can they understand that the Big 12 has a 99 year contract for conference membership which DOES have an exit fee associated with it and that contract and other similar to it are routinely enforced with exit fees that have increased as time has gone on

so thinking that teams get to leave after 2025 with no penalty is just being ignorant of REALITY the REALITY that the Big 12 has a 99 year contract for membership that HAS EXIT FEES

so again unless one is thick they would understand that the end of the GOR does not mean that teams are free to leave the Big 12 with no cost associated with that

and also there is no TWO YEAR NOTIFICATION TO LEAVE WITH NO PENALTY this is just you making up nonsense and being void of reality and not knowing what you are talking about

the Big 12 99 year contract for conference membership has NO TIME PERIOD OF NOTIFICATION THAT ALLOWS A TEAM TO LEAVE WITHOUT PAYING DAMAGES

thinking that is does is just being clueless and not knowing what you are talking about

and only someone with limited intelligence would try and say that forfeiting $32.5 million in conference distributions equates to "not paying anything to leave".......NOT GETTING MONEY IS THE SAME AS PAYING THAT MONEY

so the expiration of the GOR does not have anything to do with the contract for conference membership, there is no two year notification that allows a team to leave without paying a penalty and giving up conference distributions to the tune of $32.5 million IS PAYING TO LEAVE
11-18-2017 10:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.