(10-01-2013 07:10 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(09-30-2013 07:45 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-30-2013 07:41 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(09-30-2013 07:30 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  Look for Texas to pull the plug on the LHN and get the hell out of the BigXII at the absolute soonest.

TX is going to the PAC 12....

THIS. I love all this made up ACC talk...the Texoma 4 is likely to happen folks. Why do you think Dodds is retiring?

Missed out on PAC 16 (overall Big-12 and UT is in position of weakness after realignment).
Dodds ended the A&M series out of pride (A&M wanted to keep playing) and thus lost a Thanksgiving day game people WANTED to watch.
Athletics are underperforming for richest program in the land.

(10-01-2013 09:08 AM)LSUtah Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 07:10 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(09-30-2013 07:45 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-30-2013 07:41 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(09-30-2013 07:30 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  Look for Texas to pull the plug on the LHN and get the hell out of the BigXII at the absolute soonest.

TX is going to the PAC 12....

THIS. I love all this made up ACC talk...the Texoma 4 is likely to happen folks. Why do you think Dodds is retiring?

Missed out on PAC 16 (overall Big-12 and UT is in position of weakness after realignment).
Dodds ended the A&M series out of pride (A&M wanted to keep playing) and thus lost a Thanksgiving day game people WANTED to watch.
Athletics are underperforming for richest program in the land.

Funny. made up ACC talk, now your made up Pac talk. Ever consider he might be retiring because he's almost 75?

You would think though a guy like Dodds would want to go out on a lot higher perch than where Texas is right now.

(10-01-2013 09:08 AM)LSUtah Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 07:10 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(09-30-2013 07:45 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-30-2013 07:41 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(09-30-2013 07:30 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  Look for Texas to pull the plug on the LHN and get the hell out of the BigXII at the absolute soonest.

TX is going to the PAC 12....

THIS. I love all this made up ACC talk... the Texoma 4 is likely to happen folks. Why do you think Dodds is retiring?

1) The ACC will not give TX a ND deal while taking TT as a full member.

2) TX will not follow aTm to the SEC when it considers itself the leader.

3) The B10 will not take OU, OSU, and TT for academic reasons.

4) The PAC 12 was the only conference willing to take all four schools and will gladly take them now as long as TX is included....

(10-01-2013 09:20 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 09:08 AM)LSUtah Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 07:10 AM)Underdog Wrote:  TX is going to the PAC 12....

THIS. I love all this made up ACC talk...the Texoma 4 is likely to happen folks. Why do you think Dodds is retiring?

Missed out on PAC 16 (overall Big-12 and UT is in position of weakness after realignment).
Dodds ended the A&M series out of pride (A&M wanted to keep playing) and thus lost a Thanksgiving day game people WANTED to watch.
Athletics are underperforming for richest program in the land.

Funny. made up ACC talk, now your made up Pac talk. Ever consider he might be retiring because he's almost 75?

Age may have been a small factor. But IMO the biggest factor was all the voices of big money boosters telling him to go before he gets fired...

(10-01-2013 09:56 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 09:20 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 09:08 AM)LSUtah Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 07:10 AM)Underdog Wrote:  TX is going to the PAC 12....

THIS. I love all this made up ACC talk...the Texoma 4 is likely to happen folks. Why do you think Dodds is retiring?

Missed out on PAC 16 (overall Big-12 and UT is in position of weakness after realignment).
Dodds ended the A&M series out of pride (A&M wanted to keep playing) and thus lost a Thanksgiving day game people WANTED to watch.
Athletics are underperforming for richest program in the land.

Funny. made up ACC talk, now your made up Pac talk. Ever consider he might be retiring because he's almost 75?

Age may have been a small factor. But IMO the biggest factor was all the voices of big money boosters telling him to go before he gets fired...

Yes. It's far better to save face than to insist upon trying to save one's posterior.

(10-01-2013 09:55 AM)Underdog Wrote:  1) The ACC will not give TX a ND deal while taking TT as a full member.

2) TX will not follow aTm to the SEC when it considers itself the leader.

3) The B10 will not take OU, OSU, and TT for academic reasons.

4) The PAC 12 was the only conference willing to take all four schools and will gladly take them now as long as TX is included....

Yeah but what would be the time table for the move and how to get past the GoR? And what do the leftovers do to veto this? They can't all join the AAC. Maybe they can poach and form a new AAC.

(10-01-2013 10:38 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 09:55 AM)Underdog Wrote:  1) The ACC will not give TX a ND deal while taking TT as a full member.

2) TX will not follow aTm to the SEC when it considers itself the leader.

3) The B10 will not take OU, OSU, and TT for academic reasons.

4) The PAC 12 was the only conference willing to take all four schools and will gladly take them now as long as TX is included....

Yeah but what would be the time table for the move and how to get past the GoR? And what do the leftovers do to veto this? They can't all join the AAC. Maybe they can poach and form a new AAC.

"IF" the Big 12 dissolves it will not happen with a Texahoma type deal to any conference. It would take a brokered parsing of the Big 12 schools with Texas and Oklahoma's preferences for a new home taken into consideration. Each conference participating would have to find value in the remaining teams. For some that would be in additional markets, for some that would be in new time zones to utilize for increasing time slots and content, and for others if might even be for a bit more security or brand recognition. And both of the cable networks would have to come to agreement as well. That's a lot to ask for, but not impossible.

But you are correct. If the two top properties move to one conference none of the other conferences will be as likely to help with the placement of the required number of schools to make a dissolution possible and with the Grant of Rights, dissolution is the only way around the financial liability of not placing at least 8 schools in better homes.

If something is worked out I believe it will include much more than just distribution of schools. For example the PAC may be willing to take a package of 4 state schools because of their limited West coast prospects, but they are going to want something else in return like guaranteed home and home games with the SEC or Big 10, or an SEC compromise on the 4 team playoff system so that it is shifted to a 4 conference champions model, especially if the conference playoffs are expanded and the model could guarantee each of the remaining P4 conferences access. The regional inclusion would also benefit the networks ultimately. If the playoffs are expanded it might one day be everyone's seeded #2 teams against each other's #1 teams in the first round of an expanded 8 team national playoff, but everyone would be guaranteed two spots at that point. But whether something like that happens or not there are a great many points of negotiation for a brokered conclusion than just team distribution. And then there is the added benefit of increasing all remaining teams revenue by just over 1 million a year by the elimination of the 5th slice of the playoff pie and the additional bowl tie ins that would be available by paring down to a P4 setup rather than a P5.

(10-01-2013 11:00 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 10:38 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 09:55 AM)Underdog Wrote:  1) The ACC will not give TX a ND deal while taking TT as a full member.

2) TX will not follow aTm to the SEC when it considers itself the leader.

3) The B10 will not take OU, OSU, and TT for academic reasons.

4) The PAC 12 was the only conference willing to take all four schools and will gladly take them now as long as TX is included....

Yeah but what would be the time table for the move and how to get past the GoR? And what do the leftovers do to veto this? They can't all join the AAC. Maybe they can poach and form a new AAC.

"IF" the Big 12 dissolves it will not happen with a Texahoma type deal to any conference. It would take a brokered parsing of the Big 12 schools with Texas and Oklahoma's preferences for a new home taken into consideration. Each conference participating would have to find value in the remaining teams. For some that would be in additional markets, for some that would be in new time zones to utilize for increasing time slots and content, and for others if might even be for a bit more security or brand recognition. And both of the cable networks would have to come to agreement as well. That's a lot to ask for, but not impossible.

But you are correct. If the two top properties move to one conference none of the other conferences will be as likely to help with the placement of the required number of schools to make a dissolution possible and with the Grant of Rights, dissolution is the only way around the financial liability of not placing at least 8 schools in better homes.

If something is worked out I believe it will include much more than just distribution of schools. For example the PAC may be willing to take a package of 4 state schools because of their limited West coast prospects, but they are going to want something else in return like guaranteed home and home games with the SEC or Big 10, or an SEC compromise on the 4 team playoff system so that it is shifted to a 4 conference champions model, especially if the conference playoffs are expanded and the model could guarantee each of the remaining P4 conferences access. The regional inclusion would also benefit the networks ultimately. If the playoffs are expanded it might one day be everyone's seeded #2 teams against each other's #1 teams in the first round of an expanded 8 team national playoff, but everyone would be guaranteed two spots at that point. But whether something like that happens or not there are a great many points of negotiation for a brokered conclusion than just team distribution. And then there is the added benefit of increasing all remaining teams revenue by just over 1 million a year by the elimination of the 5th slice of the playoff pie and the additional bowl tie ins that would be available by paring down to a P4 setup rather than a P5.

"If TX is included," I think the PAC 12 would take any three schools from the B12. Scott might be able to convince PAC 12 leadership to take 8 schools and kill the conference just to get TX this time....

If the B12 is split up into bits and pieces WITHOUT teams leaving other conferences, I'll go with the following:

TX, TT, OK, OK State, Kansas and Kansas State to the PAC 18

WVU, TCU, Baylor and Iowa State to the AAC. The ACC will not want those schools nor will the B10. They would be stuck with us. I could see the SEC going after possibly TCU and Baylor... but I doubt it.

Of course, this is fantasy... nothing is going to happen with the B12. LOL

(10-01-2013 12:00 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 11:00 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 10:38 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 09:55 AM)Underdog Wrote:  1) The ACC will not give TX a ND deal while taking TT as a full member.

2) TX will not follow aTm to the SEC when it considers itself the leader.

3) The B10 will not take OU, OSU, and TT for academic reasons.

4) The PAC 12 was the only conference willing to take all four schools and will gladly take them now as long as TX is included....

Yeah but what would be the time table for the move and how to get past the GoR? And what do the leftovers do to veto this? They can't all join the AAC. Maybe they can poach and form a new AAC.

"IF" the Big 12 dissolves it will not happen with a Texahoma type deal to any conference. It would take a brokered parsing of the Big 12 schools with Texas and Oklahoma's preferences for a new home taken into consideration. Each conference participating would have to find value in the remaining teams. For some that would be in additional markets, for some that would be in new time zones to utilize for increasing time slots and content, and for others if might even be for a bit more security or brand recognition. And both of the cable networks would have to come to agreement as well. That's a lot to ask for, but not impossible.

But you are correct. If the two top properties move to one conference none of the other conferences will be as likely to help with the placement of the required number of schools to make a dissolution possible and with the Grant of Rights, dissolution is the only way around the financial liability of not placing at least 8 schools in better homes.

If something is worked out I believe it will include much more than just distribution of schools. For example the PAC may be willing to take a package of 4 state schools because of their limited West coast prospects, but they are going to want something else in return like guaranteed home and home games with the SEC or Big 10, or an SEC compromise on the 4 team playoff system so that it is shifted to a 4 conference champions model, especially if the conference playoffs are expanded and the model could guarantee each of the remaining P4 conferences access. The regional inclusion would also benefit the networks ultimately. If the playoffs are expanded it might one day be everyone's seeded #2 teams against each other's #1 teams in the first round of an expanded 8 team national playoff, but everyone would be guaranteed two spots at that point. But whether something like that happens or not there are a great many points of negotiation for a brokered conclusion than just team distribution. And then there is the added benefit of increasing all remaining teams revenue by just over 1 million a year by the elimination of the 5th slice of the playoff pie and the additional bowl tie ins that would be available by paring down to a P4 setup rather than a P5.

"If TX is included," I think the PAC 12 would take any three schools from the B12. Scott might be able to convince PAC 12 leadership to take 8 schools and kill the conference just to get TX this time....

In my opinion UD taking 8 of the Big 12 schools into the PAC is the only move that will guarantee the outcome that Scott wants. Such a move would lead to some very lively consequences in the East as well.

(10-01-2013 12:33 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  If the B12 is split up into bits and pieces WITHOUT teams leaving other conferences, I'll go with the following:

TX, TT, OK, OK State, Kansas and Kansas State to the PAC 18

WVU, TCU, Baylor and Iowa State to the AAC. The ACC will not want those schools nor will the B10. They would be stuck with us. I could see the SEC going after possibly TCU and Baylor... but I doubt it.

Of course, this is fantasy... nothing is going to happen with the B12. LOL

If the PAC 12 wants only 6, it would have to work with the SEC. The SEC gets OU and WV. The PAC 12 gets TX, TT, OSU, KU, K St, and Iowa St. TCU tells Baylor about how life will be in the MWC....

(10-01-2013 12:49 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 12:33 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  If the B12 is split up into bits and pieces WITHOUT teams leaving other conferences, I'll go with the following:

TX, TT, OK, OK State, Kansas and Kansas State to the PAC 18

WVU, TCU, Baylor and Iowa State to the AAC. The ACC will not want those schools nor will the B10. They would be stuck with us. I could see the SEC going after possibly TCU and Baylor... but I doubt it.

Of course, this is fantasy... nothing is going to happen with the B12. LOL

If the PAC 12 wants only 6, it would have to work with the SEC. The SEC gets OU and WV. The PAC 12 gets TX, TT, OSU, KU, K St, and Iowa St. TCU tells Baylor about how life will be in the MWC....

Kansas can do as they wish under the right circumstances. Any conference would take them right now if it was a baggage free move (i.e. no GoR or little brother issue.)

(10-01-2013 12:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 12:00 PM)Underdog Wrote:  "If TX is included," I think the PAC 12 would take any three schools from the B12. Scott might be able to convince PAC 12 leadership to take 8 schools and kill the conference just to get TX this time....

In my opinion UD taking 8 of the Big 12 schools into the PAC is the only move that will guarantee the outcome that Scott wants. Such a move would lead to some very lively consequences in the East as well.

I agree and get the point.... I know WV is out because of location. However, what other school should be left out: Baylor, Iowa St, K St...

(10-01-2013 01:02 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 12:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 12:00 PM)Underdog Wrote:  "If TX is included," I think the PAC 12 would take any three schools from the B12. Scott might be able to convince PAC 12 leadership to take 8 schools and kill the conference just to get TX this time....

In my opinion UD taking 8 of the Big 12 schools into the PAC is the only move that will guarantee the outcome that Scott wants. Such a move would lead to some very lively consequences in the East as well.

I agree and get the point.... I know WV is out because of location. However, what other school should be left out: Baylor, Iowa St, K St...

If I were Scott I would take everyone but Baylor and West Virginia. If the ACC stands fast the Big 10 would eventually be looking at Connecticut and Buffalo. The SEC wants a DFW area presence which is why they would be hot to get Oklahoma. Oklahoma gives them DFW and the state of Oklahoma for the price of one. Without Oklahoma or Oklahoma State on the available list the SEC might well consider Baylor for the DFW presence they would like. Baylor's academics are a plus for the bottom line in the SEC as well. In that scenario West Virginia would be a nice market addition as well. That way all ten teams are taken care of. The PAC goes to 20, the SEC to 16, the Big 10 to 16 (possibly), and the ACC stays at 14 plus N.D. That's 67 teams.

As long as the GoR is in place, there will be no movement, unless every school in the B12 is assured a place at the big boys table. Without that, I doubt they'll get the votes...

(10-01-2013 01:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 01:02 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 12:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 12:00 PM)Underdog Wrote:  "If TX is included," I think the PAC 12 would take any three schools from the B12. Scott might be able to convince PAC 12 leadership to take 8 schools and kill the conference just to get TX this time....

In my opinion UD taking 8 of the Big 12 schools into the PAC is the only move that will guarantee the outcome that Scott wants. Such a move would lead to some very lively consequences in the East as well.

I agree and get the point.... I know WV is out because of location. However, what other school should be left out: Baylor, Iowa St, K St...

If I were Scott I would take everyone but Baylor and West Virginia. If the ACC stands fast the Big 10 would eventually be looking at Connecticut and Buffalo. The SEC wants a DFW area presence which is why they would be hot to get Oklahoma. Oklahoma gives them DFW and the state of Oklahoma for the price of one. Without Oklahoma or Oklahoma State on the available list the SEC might well consider Baylor for the DFW presence they would like. Baylor's academics are a plus for the bottom line in the SEC as well. In that scenario West Virginia would be a nice market addition as well. That way all ten teams are taken care of. The PAC goes to 20, the SEC to 16, the Big 10 to 16 (possibly), and the ACC stays at 14 plus N.D. That's 67 teams.

Thanks!

69 is devine...

If the PAC wants only 16 with Texoma, the B1G could take KU and maybe UConn to balance the geography. That makes them the premiere Bball conference. ISU, KSU, TCU, Baylor and WVU end up in the American. Otherwise the PAC takes 6, including KU and KSU. TCU/Baylor/WVU go to the American. But if the GoR is so that all Big 12 schools must end up in a P4, there will be no movement. I don't see OU and OSU splitting up or the PAC taking OSU without OU.

(10-01-2013 01:27 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  69 is devine...

WV’s number 69 is "devine..."

He’s 6-4, can you ask for more…..

http://247sports.com/Player/Tony-Matteo-12484