PDA

View Full Version : Funny Stuff New Conference re-alignment thread


Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

eazyb81
09-27-2011, 02:34 PM
I'm just laughing at you acting like a vagina. I honestly don't care what MU does. I'm happy if you stay and I'm happy if you leave.

Yeah, you clearly don't care what Mizzou does, considering you've posted incessantly in the last two threads over the past month or so even though there have been absolutely zero credible rumors of anyone wanting ku. Clearly.

LMAO

Raiderhader
09-27-2011, 02:36 PM
I'm sorry - were you in a coma all last summer or something?


Why, did I miss something? :)

Frazod
09-27-2011, 02:36 PM
I'm just laughing at you acting like a vagina. I honestly don't care what MU does. I'm happy if you stay and I'm happy if you leave.

Please. There's so much estrogen oozing out of Kansas right that we're ankle deep in the run-off.

But I'm happy you're happy. I see many more 6 touchdown losses in your future. Have a ball.

HemiEd
09-27-2011, 02:41 PM
I'm just laughing at you acting like a vagina. I honestly don't care what MU does. I'm happy if you stay and I'm happy if you leave.

Yeah, pretty much. Pull up a chair and set down, or don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

Pants
09-27-2011, 02:41 PM
Yeah, you clearly don't care what Mizzou does, considering you've posted incessantly in the last two threads over the past month or so even though there have been absolutely zero credible rumors of anyone wanting ku. Clearly.

LMAO

So because I care about what happens to KU, I care about what happens to MU? Are our fates somehow intertwined? As far as MU goes, I have been an interested observer, that's about it. Sure, I worried about what Texas and OU were planning, but that's because their decisions would affect KU.

You can go back and read me saying that you guys should go to the SEC at one point. Later on you can see me talking how if there's equal revenue sharing and stability is forced, it would probably be better for you guys to stay.

You acting like an asshurt communist pussy has been hilarious, though, so I'm grateful for that.

Pants
09-27-2011, 02:42 PM
Please. There's so much estrogen oozing out of Kansas right that we're ankle deep in the run-off.

But I'm happy you're happy. I see many more 6 touchdown losses in your future. Have a ball.

Hey, man, I have stayed out of all the shit talking on schools in this thread. You're barking at the wrong tree.

Frazod
09-27-2011, 02:49 PM
Hey, man, I have stayed out of all the shit talking on schools in this thread. You're barking at the wrong tree.

Yeah, you're renowned for your ability to stay above the fray. LMAO

DJ's left nut
09-27-2011, 02:52 PM
You acting like an asshurt communist pussy has been hilarious, though, so I'm grateful for that.

Not sure why that would be amusing, you can't swing a cat in Lawrence without hitting at least 2 asshurt communists pussies. I'd assume you'd have grown bored with them by now.

At least he doesn't wear socks with sandals or anything.

(Christ I hope he doesn't wear socks with sandals...)

|Zach|
09-27-2011, 02:53 PM
At least he doesn't wear socks with sandals or anything.



LMAO

eazyb81
09-27-2011, 02:54 PM
So because I care about what happens to KU, I care about what happens to MU? Are our fates somehow intertwined? As far as MU goes, I have been an interested observer, that's about it. Sure, I worried about what Texas and OU were planning, but that's because their decisions would affect KU.

LMAO, interested observer? You have been reduced to hoping and praying Mizzou doesn't go so you can lead the cheer squad. That's all you have - no one even entertains the thought of trying to bring your shit school anywhere. You can try and act coy and innocent all you want, but your true colors will eventually shine.

You acting like an asshurt communist pussy has been hilarious, though, so I'm grateful for that.Damn that is some tough talk. Do you suck bevo's cock with that mouth? ku bending over and spreading their cheeks doesn't help Mizzou negotiate to improve financial equality for all conference schools, but I guess Stockholm Syndrome has fully kicked in now and you have prepared to pledge full loyalty to your Belt Buckle overlords. :thumb:

Saul Good
09-27-2011, 02:54 PM
:spock: Didn't say Mizzou was important to the over all viability of the conference. I said they set into motion the departures that have taken place by trying to do the same (and botching it badly I might add).

I don't know why the school thought they were getting ass raped, Texas didn't have this huge deal until last year. I still think it boils down to jealousy. If you can't beat 'em, leave 'em I guess.....

After finding out that their husbands are leading a double life and have married other women in another state, Mizzou fan decides to get a divorce, and KU fan decides to become a Mormon and let him keep his other wife out of fear of being alone.

Superturtle
09-27-2011, 02:56 PM
LMAO, interested observer? You have been reduced to hoping and praying Mizzou doesn't go so you can lead the cheer squad. That's all you have - no one even entertains the thought of trying to bring your shit school anywhere. You can try and act coy and innocent all you want, but your true colors will eventually shine.

Damn that is some tough talk. Do you suck bevo's cock with that mouth? ku bending over and spreading their cheeks doesn't help Mizzou negotiate to improve financial equality for all conference schools, but I guess Stockholm Syndrome has fully kicked in now and you have prepared to pledge full loyalty to your Belt Buckle overlords. :thumb:
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/qdFLPn30dvQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

alnorth
09-27-2011, 03:01 PM
My problem with the interim commissioner is that he's someone with the appearance of being completely out of the loop. He literally did his interview on Game Day from a golf course, by all appearances, and it seems obvious that he was just enjoying retirement.

Cool. No problem.

The problem occurs when he's now being asked to go 0-60 to salvage a complete ****ing mess.

This right here is my biggest concern with Neinas. Not UT corruption, but this ultra-casual happy sense of ignorance he projects.

Maybe some people take it as refreshing honesty or something, but when a commissioner flat-out says "I'm not sure, I get the impression they want to do suchandsuch but I need to talk with them", that doesn't inspire confidence. If you don't know, either say no comment or give a confident strong political non-answer.

HemiEd
09-27-2011, 03:02 PM
Well Tim, in an effort to be fair, I had to do some reading (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missouri_Tigers) in order to understand why Missouri is such a powerhouse, and highly desired by these big conferences. Wow, they have been around a long time, holy crap they must have had a lot of success and tradition.

I really can't see where they have done anything except softball and soccer since the inception of the big12. They did win a Big 12 BB tournament in 2009, but you guys don't care about that. (94-171?)

They did seem to have a lot of success in the Missouri Valley though, maybe that is what is really going on? Could an in state rivalry with Missouri State in the same conference be on the horizon? :D

Braincase
09-27-2011, 03:07 PM
So, let me see if I have this straight. Nebraska goes to the Big 10, they're a bunch of assholes. Colorado goes to the PAC, they're a bunch of assholes. Texas A&M takes off to the SEC, they're a bunch of assholes. Mizzou goes to some other conference, they had to because everybody else was just a bunch of big ol' meanies.

Trevo_410
09-27-2011, 03:09 PM
Well Tim, in an effort to be fair, I had to do some reading (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missouri_Tigers) in order to understand why Missouri is such a powerhouse, and highly desired by these big conferences. Wow, they have been around a long time, holy crap they must have had a lot of success and tradition.

I really can't see where they have done anything except softball and soccer since the inception of the big12. They did win a Big 12 BB tournament in 2009, but you guys don't care about that. (94-171?)

They did seem to have a lot of success in the Missouri Valley though, maybe that is what is really going on? Could an in state rivalry with Missouri State in the same conference be on the horizon? :D

I don't think us Mizzou fans needs to explain ourselves for the thousandth times on this thread and the other thread... negreppedson has asked the same question over and over, go look at those responses

Pants
09-27-2011, 03:10 PM
LMAO, interested observer? You have been reduced to hoping and praying Mizzou doesn't go so you can lead the cheer squad. That's all you have - no one even entertains the thought of trying to bring your shit school anywhere. You can try and act coy and innocent all you want, but your true colors will eventually shine.

Yeah, because I talked so much shit last time. You must be confused, dawg. I will talk all the shit in the world about your toothless meth producing/smoking fans or your lack of any significant achievements as far as your teams go, but I did not talk shit about you getting screwed by the Big10 nor would I talk shit or "lead the cheersquad" should it ever come out that you never had an SEC invite. At least you were in the discussion, that's more than I can say about my school.

Damn that is some tough talk. Do you suck bevo's cock with that mouth? ku bending over and spreading their cheeks doesn't help Mizzou negotiate to improve financial equality for all conference schools, but I guess Stockholm Syndrome has fully kicked in now and you have prepared to pledge full loyalty to your Belt Buckle overlords. :thumb:

It's not tough talk. I'm just aware of the fact that Texas is by far the richest public school AD in the country. Why should it not have a bigger cut of the TV money than my school when they're the reason the conference is getting these massive TV contracts in the first place? My school splits an incredibly low-population state with another BCS school and has a shitty football program. I know KU's place and I take my joys in KU's success where I can get them (you know, the BCS win and the Final Fours). I'm a proud Jayhawk, but I'm not going to sit here and lament about my school getting a couple million less a year than juggernauts like UT and OU. That's how capitalism works.

ChiefsCountry
09-27-2011, 03:10 PM
They did seem to have a lot of success in the Missouri Valley though, maybe that is what is really going on? Could an in state rivalry with Missouri State in the same conference be on the horizon? :D

KU would struggle in the Valley. See UNI and Bradley in basketball and NDSU in football. ;)

DJ's left nut
09-27-2011, 03:18 PM
So, let me see if I have this straight. Nebraska goes to the Big 10, they're a bunch of assholes. Colorado goes to the PAC, they're a bunch of assholes. Texas A&M takes off to the SEC, they're a bunch of assholes. Mizzou goes to some other conference, they had to because everybody else was just a bunch of big ol' meanies.

No, Nebraska fans are a bunch of assholes because...well they just are. They were assholes before they went to the B1G. Their behavior since they left has only confirmed it. Nubs fans suck donkey dicks, they always have, they always will and it doesn't matter what conference they're in. Tom Osborne is a big asshole because he went out there and absolutely blistered MU with no discernable cause on his way out the door.

Colorado - they're cool; UT and Nebraska tend to hate them. I hold Colorado in no ill-regard whatsoever. Good for them. They got a hell of a life raft and are going to be far FAR happier where they are then where they were.

A&M is a bunch of assholes if for no other reason than the fact that they're crying foul over revenue sharing when they were one of only 4 teams in the Conference that already got an unequal cut of it. UT, OU, NEB and A&M created the system and benefited most from it and suddenly A&M is losing its shit. Oh, and the other 3 schools have won not only bowl games, but national championships since the inception of the XII. In essence, A&M is less a pack of assholes and more a staggering example of hypocrisy, pride and jealousy in action.

And I'm sure every alumni of Nebraska and A&M would argue otherwise and every scared shitless Beaker, Wildcat or Cyclone that sees their major conference affiliation hanging in the balance will marshall a similar argument against Mizzou. Its truly hilarous how transparent guys like Rustshack are when they act all indignant over MU's 'indecision' or 'entitlement' when its really just the fact that he knows that Iowa State is up shits creek if the XII detonates.

Like I said - I really don't give a rip what the Beakers think, or the Nubs, or Eco-Kat and her fuzzy little buddies. I care about Mizzou and them alone. I know they'll screw this up and probably end up in worse shape than Baylor when all is said and done, but it doesn't keep me from knowing what I want to see from them.

patteeu
09-27-2011, 03:35 PM
Would you not agree that even the potential appearance of impropriety is a poor sign given the current Big 12 mess and the common theory that the prior Big 12 Commissioner was a UT puppet?

I don't think the news is a conviction of Neinas, but I do think the timing is terrible for this to make the public rounds.

I don't think there's an appearance of impropriety here. I think there is a misleading news story. What if someone wrote an article about how Neinas helped Joe Castiglione, Mike Alden, and Gary Pinkle get their jobs (which is true, as I understand it). Would that damn him because of the appearance that he was in bed with OU and MU? The truth is that Neinas was selected (and approved by non-Texas schools) because he's connected to all of these programs and none of them see him as a puppet of any one program.

Edit: I also suspect that he was selected because he's not likely to want to do this job long term and he's more likely to be unbiased as to his successor than a guy who wants the job permanently.

patteeu
09-27-2011, 03:40 PM
But the original concern many had about Neinas was that he was another Deloss Dodds' puppet. Less than a week after he is announced as the new Big 12 Commissioner, he announces a joint venture with - wait for it - Deloss Dodds. Maybe there really is nothing substantive about it, but perception is reality.

He announced it? A joint venture? I don't think that's accurate.

HemiEd
09-27-2011, 03:51 PM
I don't think us Mizzou fans needs to explain ourselves for the thousandth times on this thread and the other thread... negreppedson has asked the same question over and over, go look at those responses

Is your name Tim, n00b? STFU

KU would struggle in the Valley. See UNI and Bradley in basketball and NDSU in football. ;)

Yeah, how many National Championships in BB does Bradley have again? UNI? Mid Majors have had a nice run lately, hopefully it will continue.

Honestly, the BB competition might be better in the valley. In looking at football records, Mizzou has been on a very nice run since 2005 without a doubt. The Sooners have really had their number though, damn.

WilliamTheIrish
09-27-2011, 06:21 PM
:deevee:

You guys need to have a pow-wow and make up your minds. Do you want to smart and keep us, or do you want to act tough and say you don't need us?

JFC, can we just get you in the stirrups and bring the UT gyno and an icy speculum to give you a nice sensitive dusting and cleaning?

Fuck it all, just call Deaton and tell him you demand to go the SEC.

DeezNutz
09-27-2011, 06:28 PM
JFC, can we just get you in the stirrups and bring the UT gyno and an icy speculum to give you a nice sensitive dusting and cleaning?

**** it all, just call Deaton and tell him you demand to go the SEC.

This post had to pass through Pac-10 smelling interwebz connections, so expect numerous incoming reps and PMs from your Kansas betters (read: crimson).

Chocolate Hog
09-27-2011, 06:38 PM
No, Nebraska fans are a bunch of assholes because...well they just are. They were assholes before they went to the B1G. Their behavior since they left has only confirmed it. Nubs fans suck donkey dicks, they always have, they always will and it doesn't matter what conference they're in. Tom Osborne is a big asshole because he went out there and absolutely blistered MU with no discernable cause on his way out the door.

Colorado - they're cool; UT and Nebraska tend to hate them. I hold Colorado in no ill-regard whatsoever. Good for them. They got a hell of a life raft and are going to be far FAR happier where they are then where they were.

A&M is a bunch of assholes if for no other reason than the fact that they're crying foul over revenue sharing when they were one of only 4 teams in the Conference that already got an unequal cut of it. UT, OU, NEB and A&M created the system and benefited most from it and suddenly A&M is losing its shit. Oh, and the other 3 schools have won not only bowl games, but national championships since the inception of the XII. In essence, A&M is less a pack of assholes and more a staggering example of hypocrisy, pride and jealousy in action.

And I'm sure every alumni of Nebraska and A&M would argue otherwise and every scared shitless Beaker, Wildcat or Cyclone that sees their major conference affiliation hanging in the balance will marshall a similar argument against Mizzou. Its truly hilarous how transparent guys like Rustshack are when they act all indignant over MU's 'indecision' or 'entitlement' when its really just the fact that he knows that Iowa State is up shits creek if the XII detonates.

Like I said - I really don't give a rip what the Beakers think, or the Nubs, or Eco-Kat and her fuzzy little buddies. I care about Mizzou and them alone. I know they'll screw this up and probably end up in worse shape than Baylor when all is said and done, but it doesn't keep me from knowing what I want to see from them.

:deevee:

WilliamTheIrish
09-27-2011, 06:40 PM
This post had to pass through Pac-10 smelling interwebz connections, so expect numerous incoming reps and PMs from your Kansas betters (read: crimson).

LMAO

easy, I take all that back. My fucking irritability meter is pegged in the red over this shit. I'm tired of the whole fucking mess.

My apologies.

mnchiefsguy
09-27-2011, 07:01 PM
Apparently T. Boone Pickens is concerned:

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7027773/oklahoma-state-cowboys-booster-t-boone-pickens-says-big-12-got-problem-missouri-leaves

They are also a couple of tweets floating around that Mizzou has not committed to the Big XII, even though they are all currently meeting in Dallas. More interesting stuff to come, I am sure.

mnchiefsguy
09-27-2011, 07:02 PM
And apparently the University of Kentucky is in Mizzou's corner as well:

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/blog/_/name/katz_andy/id/7026556/sec-coaches-john-calipari-kevin-stallings-weigh-expansion-college-basketball

DeezNutz
09-27-2011, 07:33 PM
I'm tired of the whole ****ing mess.


Quoted and followed up with unnecessary prose in order to show my complete agreement with the post.

Saul Good
09-27-2011, 07:57 PM
Apparently T. Boone Pickens is concerned:

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7027773/oklahoma-state-cowboys-booster-t-boone-pickens-says-big-12-got-problem-missouri-leaves

They are also a couple of tweets floating around that Mizzou has not committed to the Big XII, even though they are all currently meeting in Dallas. More interesting stuff to come, I am sure.Is that the same T. Boone Pickens who was singing this tune last June?


"I don't know what Missouri's going to do," he told the Austin American Statesman. "You can't tell about them. I don't have to have 'em."



"I have a strong streak of loyalty and that's the way I feel about Kansas, Iowa State and Kansas State. I don't wanna go off and leave them. I don't care about Missouri."



He can chug a nice cool glass of shut the fuck up with an antifreeze chaser.

Spott
09-27-2011, 08:04 PM
Damn, I wish this shit would just end already.

RustShack
09-27-2011, 08:18 PM
wilnerhotline Jon Wilner
Hearing from sources that Big 12 pursuit of Louisville heating up, Air Force and Navy have offers from Big East.

Guru
09-27-2011, 08:21 PM
Jesus, at this point I hope we stay in the Big XII just so we get to keep stomping the shit out of the Kansas teams. :rolleyes:

I would miss the rivalry game if the Tiger left.

Spott
09-27-2011, 08:23 PM
wilnerhotline Jon Wilner
Hearing from sources that Big 12 pursuit of Louisville heating up, Air Force and Navy have offers from Big East.

I think there's no way the the Big East will be considered a BCS conference if they lose any more teams.

Braincase
09-27-2011, 08:30 PM
Quoted and followed up with unnecessary prose in order to show my complete agreement with the post.

Infu**ingdeed.

Saul Good
09-27-2011, 08:34 PM
I think there's no way the the Big East will be considered a BCS conference if they lose any more teams.

I think there's no way the Big East will be considered a BCS conference as soon as SYR and Pitt are gone.

RustShack
09-27-2011, 09:40 PM
Sounds like the Big12 is talking a lot about being a 9, 10, 12, or 16 team league.

Wouldn't 9 be better than 10? I personally still prefer the 12... but that's one less mouth to feed so each school is getting a little more money from the current TV deals. We can go back to playing 4 non-conference games, then go back to 16 conference games in BBall.

Braincase
09-27-2011, 09:55 PM
Sounds like the Big12 is talking a lot about being a 9, 10, 12, or 16 team league.

Wouldn't 9 be better than 10? I personally still prefer the 12... but that's one less mouth to feed so each school is getting a little more money from the current TV deals. We can go back to playing 4 non-conference games, then go back to 16 conference games in BBall.

I would like to get enough teams so there could be a conference championship game. That way Mizzou could live with the illusion they're an elite program for an extra week before Oklahoma or Texas spanks them by three touchdowns and then blame Kansas for their shortcomings.

Spott
09-27-2011, 09:57 PM
I would like to get enough teams so there could be a conference championship game. That way Mizzou could live with the illusion they're an elite program for an extra week before Oklahoma or Texas spanks them by three touchdowns and then blame Kansas for their shortcomings.

Or maybe Kansas could get there if their football program wasn't total dogshit.

Saul Good
09-27-2011, 10:01 PM
Or maybe Kansas could get there if their football program wasn't total dogshit.

There's been a lot of completely unrealistic scenarios bandied about in this thread, but yours might be the worst offender.

eazyb81
09-27-2011, 10:12 PM
wilnerhotline: B12 bracing for Mizzou to leave, considering a plan to add 4 schools: BYU, Boise, WVU and Ville. Many steps btwn here and there, of course

Bambi
09-27-2011, 10:18 PM
KU and Louisville in bball coupled with OU and UT in football.

That's premier.

Saul Good
09-27-2011, 10:24 PM
KU and Louisville in bball coupled with OU and UT in football.

That's premier.

Compared to what? Florida and Kentucky in basketball and an entire conference of football teams?

Bambi
09-27-2011, 10:39 PM
I never knew that aTm has no chick cheerleaders.

Weird.

http://vmedia.rivals.com/uploads/1144/1147568.jpg

kchero
09-27-2011, 11:10 PM
KU and Louisville in bball coupled with OU and UT in football.

That's premier.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/QsogswrH6ck" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

RustShack
09-27-2011, 11:17 PM
KU and Louisville in bball coupled with OU and UT in football.

That's premier.

I don't wanna be that guy, but Iowa State will be ranked in BBall this year, and fighting for the top of the Big12 which I've heard people saying this year is going to be the best basketball conference.

|Zach|
09-27-2011, 11:22 PM
I don't wanna be that guy, but Iowa State will be ranked in BBall this year, and fighting for the top of the Big12 which I've heard people saying this year is going to be the best basketball conference.

I like you but lets be honest...you are that guy every year.

|Zach|
09-27-2011, 11:25 PM
Interesting read from Tramel at the Oklahoman.

Just because the Bedlam plot of the Big 12 soap opera has ended — we're staying right here, in this vampire of a conference — doesn't mean the story is over.

Your turn, Missouri.

Your turn to decide whether this Dark Shadows league that can't be killed is the best place for you.
I don't know if the SEC wants Missouri, and I don't know if Missouri wants to go. But this I know. The SEC should want Mizzou, and Mizzou should want the SEC.

The Big 12 will survive without Missouri. I said something off hand 18 months ago, not sure even if I really believed it, but danged if it hasn't come to pass.
As long as you've got OU and Texas, you've got a league. As long as you've got the Sooners and the Longhorns, which means you've got OSU and Texas Tech, too, you've got a conference. Even if it's a ghastly shell of what it once was.

So Missouri doesn't hold the Big 12's fate in its hands. Sure would be nice if the Tigers stayed, because don't look now, but good football programs suddenly are in short supply.

But the Big 12 will endure. Nothing short of a stake through Bevo's heart will end the Big 12. OU, OSU and Tech aren't going to the Pac, Texas has everything it wants and Iowa State, Kansas, Baylor and K-State are just happy to have a place to hang their hat.

Do the math. That's eight schools. Heck, don't expand at all and you still could have a league. It's been done before.

So Missouri, do whatever you want. Don't worry about putting Iowa State out of business or getting sued by Kenny Starr. Misery loves company, so we'd love for you to stay, but whether Missouri loves company or Missouri loves misery, well, that's up to you.

But the SEC would be nuts not to take a crack at Mizzou. If the ACC has closed the door to raiders — imagine that, a conference with the vision and leadership to proactively safeguard its house — then the SEC's options are limited.

The powerhouse league can't stay at 13 schools. That's just goofy. Got to get to 14, which means if OU isn't interested (and the Sooners most definitely are not), then Missouri and West Virginia are the viable candidates.
Mizzou brings much better markets for television contracts, thanks to Kansas City and St. Louis; much better academic reputation, which could start to appeal to the SEC with the addition of another stellar school in Texas A&M; and, don't forget, good football.

Maybe you could argue West Virginia trumps Missouri on the gridiron. But I would argue otherwise, that if you put Mizzou in the Big East the last several years, the BCS bowls would have rolled into Columbia.

So why should Missouri go? I know, everyone says the same about Mizzou they said about A&M, that the Aggies will be squashed in the SEC.

I don't believe it for either the Tigers or Aggies. They won't contend regularly in the current SEC West landscape, but they won't be doormats.

And it's not like Missouri or A&M has been tearing up the Big 12. Missouri has made two Big 12 title games, 2007 and 2008, winning neither. A&M has made two Big 12 title games, 1997 and 1998, winning the latter. In a huge upset.
That's the success rate at stake in the Aggies' move and the Tigers' decision? Two division titles in 15 years? One major bowl berth (the '98 Aggies in the Sugar) between them in 15 years?

That's what Missouri is gambling with? Mizzou could make a lot more money, find conference stability and leave the Longhorns behind. And the Tigers should forego all that because they might win two North Divisions in 15 years?

Missouri's frustration with Texas is only now bubbling. Nebraska's feelings were well-documented. Then A&M's. Finally, OU's.

Now, Mizzou football coach Gary Pinkel carries the banner. His disgust with the Longhorn Network no longer is hidden.

Why would Missouri leave? Why in the world would Missouri stay?

If the SEC is interested, there's only one thing that should keep the Tigers in the Big 12.

The Big Ten. Missouri sort of started this mess 18 months ago, with its glee at Big Ten expansion. Turns out the Big Ten wasn't interested.

But Mizzou still would love to be in the Big Ten, both for academics and athletics. If Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany gives Missouri any reason for hope that his conference could expand in the future and Mizzou would be a prime candidate, that would prompt Missouri to, just like the Sooners did, swallow its pride and hold its nose and put on a happy face.

Otherwise, Missouri has little reason to turn down the SEC, which has many reasons to offer.

Not that it will make much difference back here in the shadows of darkness.


Read more: http://newsok.com/missouri-should-follow-its-heart-in-conference-realignment/article/3608229#ixzz1ZDZTv9q2

KcMizzou
09-27-2011, 11:26 PM
Heh, this is pretty cool...

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/AILu2jr59Es" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Raiderhader
09-28-2011, 12:30 AM
The Big Ten. Missouri sort of started this mess 18 months ago, with its glee at Big Ten expansion. Turns out the Big Ten wasn't interested.


No wait! I was informed by Mizzou fans just earlier today this was not the case! This reporter is spreading lies! Nuthooks!

|Zach|
09-28-2011, 12:40 AM
No wait! I was informed by Mizzou fans just earlier today this was not the case! This reporter is spreading lies! Nuthooks!

I think the idea that Missouri looking around could cause all of this is somewhat silly.

Like the mere casual look from MU is some big swinging dick that can fracture a conference.

Me thinks it isn't so simple.

Raiderhader
09-28-2011, 12:57 AM
I think the idea that Missouri looking around could cause all of this is somewhat silly.

Like the mere casual look from MU is some big swinging dick that can fracture a conference.

Me thinks it isn't so simple.


There is a difference between looking around and actively seeking.

Just saying....

Pants
09-28-2011, 01:21 AM
Interesting read from Tramel at the Oklahoman.

Just because the Bedlam plot of the Big 12 soap opera has ended — we're staying right here, in this vampire of a conference — doesn't mean the story is over.

Your turn, Missouri.

Your turn to decide whether this Dark Shadows league that can't be killed is the best place for you.
I don't know if the SEC wants Missouri, and I don't know if Missouri wants to go. But this I know. The SEC should want Mizzou, and Mizzou should want the SEC.

The Big 12 will survive without Missouri. I said something off hand 18 months ago, not sure even if I really believed it, but danged if it hasn't come to pass.
As long as you've got OU and Texas, you've got a league. As long as you've got the Sooners and the Longhorns, which means you've got OSU and Texas Tech, too, you've got a conference. Even if it's a ghastly shell of what it once was.

So Missouri doesn't hold the Big 12's fate in its hands. Sure would be nice if the Tigers stayed, because don't look now, but good football programs suddenly are in short supply.

But the Big 12 will endure. Nothing short of a stake through Bevo's heart will end the Big 12. OU, OSU and Tech aren't going to the Pac, Texas has everything it wants and Iowa State, Kansas, Baylor and K-State are just happy to have a place to hang their hat.

Do the math. That's eight schools. Heck, don't expand at all and you still could have a league. It's been done before.

So Missouri, do whatever you want. Don't worry about putting Iowa State out of business or getting sued by Kenny Starr. Misery loves company, so we'd love for you to stay, but whether Missouri loves company or Missouri loves misery, well, that's up to you.

But the SEC would be nuts not to take a crack at Mizzou. If the ACC has closed the door to raiders — imagine that, a conference with the vision and leadership to proactively safeguard its house — then the SEC's options are limited.

The powerhouse league can't stay at 13 schools. That's just goofy. Got to get to 14, which means if OU isn't interested (and the Sooners most definitely are not), then Missouri and West Virginia are the viable candidates.
Mizzou brings much better markets for television contracts, thanks to Kansas City and St. Louis; much better academic reputation, which could start to appeal to the SEC with the addition of another stellar school in Texas A&M; and, don't forget, good football.

Maybe you could argue West Virginia trumps Missouri on the gridiron. But I would argue otherwise, that if you put Mizzou in the Big East the last several years, the BCS bowls would have rolled into Columbia.

So why should Missouri go? I know, everyone says the same about Mizzou they said about A&M, that the Aggies will be squashed in the SEC.

I don't believe it for either the Tigers or Aggies. They won't contend regularly in the current SEC West landscape, but they won't be doormats.

And it's not like Missouri or A&M has been tearing up the Big 12. Missouri has made two Big 12 title games, 2007 and 2008, winning neither. A&M has made two Big 12 title games, 1997 and 1998, winning the latter. In a huge upset.
That's the success rate at stake in the Aggies' move and the Tigers' decision? Two division titles in 15 years? One major bowl berth (the '98 Aggies in the Sugar) between them in 15 years?

That's what Missouri is gambling with? Mizzou could make a lot more money, find conference stability and leave the Longhorns behind. And the Tigers should forego all that because they might win two North Divisions in 15 years?

Missouri's frustration with Texas is only now bubbling. Nebraska's feelings were well-documented. Then A&M's. Finally, OU's.

Now, Mizzou football coach Gary Pinkel carries the banner. His disgust with the Longhorn Network no longer is hidden.

Why would Missouri leave? Why in the world would Missouri stay?

If the SEC is interested, there's only one thing that should keep the Tigers in the Big 12.

The Big Ten. Missouri sort of started this mess 18 months ago, with its glee at Big Ten expansion. Turns out the Big Ten wasn't interested.

But Mizzou still would love to be in the Big Ten, both for academics and athletics. If Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany gives Missouri any reason for hope that his conference could expand in the future and Mizzou would be a prime candidate, that would prompt Missouri to, just like the Sooners did, swallow its pride and hold its nose and put on a happy face.

Otherwise, Missouri has little reason to turn down the SEC, which has many reasons to offer.

Not that it will make much difference back here in the shadows of darkness.


Read more: http://newsok.com/missouri-should-follow-its-heart-in-conference-realignment/article/3608229#ixzz1ZDZTv9q2

Pretty much what I have been saying the whole time.

|Zach|
09-28-2011, 01:27 AM
There is a difference between looking around and actively seeking.

Just saying....

Sounds like a naive and narrow view of the situation.

Raiderhader
09-28-2011, 01:31 AM
Sounds like a naive and narrow view of the situation.


Heh, I bet it does. :)


We have what is reported in the media and what the Mizzou faithful are saying.... Oh what to believe!?

|Zach|
09-28-2011, 01:35 AM
Heh, I bet it does. :)


We have what is reported in the media and what the Mizzou faithful are saying.... Oh what to believe!?
Media reports of what has caused discord in the Big 12 don't have shit to do with Missouri.

http://www.atlantathriftynickel.com/_Media/texas-map-300x300_med.jpeg

|Zach|
09-28-2011, 01:39 AM
You can think you want...your version is more ridiculous. The simple wandering eye of Missouri caused the Big 12 to fracture sending 3 teams out the door.

Missouri. The home of mother fucking bad asses who shift college football with the smallest of glances.

http://johnschreiber.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/mizzou_furman_blog_02.jpg

mnchiefsguy
09-28-2011, 11:46 AM
You can think you want...your version is more ridiculous. The simple wandering eye of Missouri caused the Big 12 to fracture sending 3 teams out the door.

Missouri. The home of mother fucking bad asses who shift college football with the smallest of glances.

http://johnschreiber.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/mizzou_furman_blog_02.jpg

If only Mizzou could be that important. If this was the case, then you know there would be some serious hardware in the Tiger trophy case. I would love to see Mizzou grow as a program to the point that they are considered a powerful member of whatever conference they are in, and I think they are moving in that direction, but to imply that Mizzou looked at the Big 10 and caused conference armageddon is simply laughable.

Saulbadguy
09-28-2011, 11:53 AM
You can think you want...your version is more ridiculous. The simple wandering eye of Missouri caused the Big 12 to fracture sending 3 teams out the door.

Missouri. The home of mother fucking bad asses who shift college football with the smallest of glances.

http://johnschreiber.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/mizzou_furman_blog_02.jpg

Adding a photo to the end of a post doesn't make Mizzou football more badass.

Sorry bro-ski.

|Zach|
09-28-2011, 11:54 AM
Adding a photo to the end of a post doesn't make Mizzou football more badass.

Sorry bro-ski.

No no. But the implication that they smiled across the room and sent all these teams for the doors by raiderhader absolutely does.

mnchiefsguy
09-28-2011, 01:54 PM
Apparently a plane went from Columbia MO to Birmingham AL yesterday. NBC Sports says Mizzou to the SEC is still an option:

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/09/28/mizzou-to-sec-chatter-continues-to-grow/

DJ's left nut
09-28-2011, 02:05 PM
I'm hearing some weird shit around Columbia about a couple of BoC members being canned and a couple others that may not be approved in time to get a vote in in their stead.

Nobody seems to have a really good idea what's going on, but the gist is that outright politics (not even football related) could stall the legislative session and keep these new appointments from being made. If so, the BoC either A) lacks the votes or B) can't actually meet to approve a move to the SEC.

I'm sure more details will emerge, but it seems like a move may have hit another snag even as the 'smoke' gets a little thicker.

mnchiefsguy
09-28-2011, 02:16 PM
I'm hearing some weird shit around Columbia about a couple of BoC members being canned and a couple others that may not be approved in time to get a vote in in their stead.

Nobody seems to have a really good idea what's going on, but the gist is that outright politics (not even football related) could stall the legislative session and keep these new appointments from being made. If so, the BoC either A) lacks the votes or B) can't actually meet to approve a move to the SEC.

I'm sure more details will emerge, but it seems like a move may have hit another snag even as the 'smoke' gets a little thicker.

I did see one twitter about Jay Nixon appointing new curators that would support a conference move, but it did not appear to be a legitimate source, and sounded pretty far fetched, so I did not post it.

beer bacon
09-28-2011, 02:16 PM
I'm hearing some weird shit around Columbia about a couple of BoC members being canned and a couple others that may not be approved in time to get a vote in in their stead.

Nobody seems to have a really good idea what's going on, but the gist is that outright politics (not even football related) could stall the legislative session and keep these new appointments from being made. If so, the BoC either A) lacks the votes or B) can't actually meet to approve a move to the SEC.

I'm sure more details will emerge, but it seems like a move may have hit another snag even as the 'smoke' gets a little thicker.

There are only five curators needed for a quorum. If two of the seven were canned, that is still five. Only a simple majority of that five would be needed to pass anything.

Setsuna
09-28-2011, 02:31 PM
Welcome to the SEC TAMU!

eazyb81
09-28-2011, 02:33 PM
I'm hearing some weird shit around Columbia about a couple of BoC members being canned and a couple others that may not be approved in time to get a vote in in their stead.

Nobody seems to have a really good idea what's going on, but the gist is that outright politics (not even football related) could stall the legislative session and keep these new appointments from being made. If so, the BoC either A) lacks the votes or B) can't actually meet to approve a move to the SEC.

I'm sure more details will emerge, but it seems like a move may have hit another snag even as the 'smoke' gets a little thicker.

It is more that we want to make 100% sure the votes are in place before an actual vote is taken, rather than not having the votes right now. The two appointments in limbo are pro-SEC, which is why we have delayed the BoC meeting until Tuesday (and potentially could be delayed beyond that if needed).

Just taking extra precaution to avoid any egg on face, which this Mizzou fan definitely appreciates. Have patience.

DJ's left nut
09-28-2011, 02:39 PM
I did see one twitter about Jay Nixon appointing new curators that would support a conference move, but it did not appear to be a legitimate source, and sounded pretty far fetched, so I did not post it.

I don't understand it well enough to 'report' it, but I figured maybe someone around here knew it better than I did so I could get a little more detail on it.

Eh, to hell with it, back to waiting for a result. I'm really tired of this already.

mnchiefsguy
09-28-2011, 02:45 PM
I don't understand it well enough to 'report' it, but I figured maybe someone around here knew it better than I did so I could get a little more detail on it.

Eh, to hell with it, back to waiting for a result. I'm really tired of this already.

I think once it is in the hands of the curators, it because less of an athletic issue and more of a political one.

beer bacon
09-28-2011, 03:18 PM
It is more that we want to make 100% sure the votes are in place before an actual vote is taken, rather than not having the votes right now. The two appointments in limbo are pro-SEC, which is why we have delayed the BoC meeting until Tuesday (and potentially could be delayed beyond that if needed).

Just taking extra precaution to avoid any egg on face, which this Mizzou fan definitely appreciates. Have patience.

On that note, this guy, who covers Texas A&M, says our university leadership met with SEC Commish Slive yesterday. He also that SEC had set a "deadline" for this Friday, but since we can't get the curators together until next Tuesday, the "deadline" has been pushed to next Wednesday.

http://twitter.com/#!/HopWebsider

Bowser
09-28-2011, 03:19 PM
On that note, this guy, who covers Texas A&M, says our university leadership met with SEC Commish Slive yesterday. He also that SEC had set a "deadline" for this Friday, but since we can't get the curators together until next Tuesday, the "deadline" has been pushed to next Wednesday.

http://twitter.com/#!/HopWebsider

:hmmm:

No way Mizzou leaves, right? Right?

Frazod
09-28-2011, 03:22 PM
Starting to smell like the Forces of Darkness are sabotaging this from within.

beer bacon
09-28-2011, 03:23 PM
Starting to smell like the Forces of Darkness are sabotaging this from within.

Sounds like the exact opposite to me. It sounds like the university has already made their decision, and next Tuesday/Wednesday it will be official.

Bowser
09-28-2011, 03:24 PM
Sounds like the exact opposite to me. It sounds like the university has already made their decision, and next Tuesday/Wednesday it will be official.

In your opinion, are they staying or going?

beer bacon
09-28-2011, 03:25 PM
In your opinion, are they staying or going?

Going.

purple cameltoe
09-28-2011, 03:27 PM
The old one has AIDS.

Your mom, bitch.

Frazod
09-28-2011, 03:28 PM
Sounds like the exact opposite to me. It sounds like the university has already made their decision, and next Tuesday/Wednesday it will be official.

I hope you're right - I'm just sort of naturally jaded about shit like this.

beer bacon
09-28-2011, 03:29 PM
I hope you're right - I'm just sort of naturally jaded about shit like this.

It is the nature of us Mizzou fans. When I don't hear anything, I get pessimistic. All the smoke right now is very positive for Mizzou to the SEC.

HemiEd
09-28-2011, 03:36 PM
Apparently a plane went from Columbia MO to Birmingham AL yesterday. NBC Sports says Mizzou to the SEC is still an option:

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/09/28/mizzou-to-sec-chatter-continues-to-grow/

Ok, so it is Wednesday, an even numbered day, and Mizzou is gone?

Bowser
09-28-2011, 03:37 PM
It is the nature of us Mizzou fans. When I don't hear anything, I get pessimistic. On the smoke right now is very positive for Mizzou to the SEC.

I hope you're right. I'd love to see Mizzou in the SEC. Haters be damned.

Bambi
09-28-2011, 03:46 PM
lol @ KK

Bowser
09-28-2011, 03:52 PM
lol @ KK

Well, what did he say?

Dayze
09-28-2011, 03:53 PM
KK is scared poop-less that K-State is going to be left in the wind.

MU needs to go to the SEC (assuming they're invited etc).

Bowser
09-28-2011, 03:54 PM
KK is scared poop-less that K-State is going to be left in the wind.

MU needs to go to the SEC (assuming they're invited etc).

Mountain West. They'd own that conference.

KcMizzou
09-28-2011, 03:55 PM
Pretty good read from Gabe DeArmond.



For 16 months, we've dealt with realignment here in the heartland. And for nearly 16 months, I've consistently thought a stable and secure Big 12 is the best place for Missouri to play its sports.

That still may very well be the case. But there's a problem: A stable and secure Big 12 only exists in the world of those who see double rainbows (if you don't know what I'm talking about click here).

I grew up with the Big Eight. Kansas City was kind of the heart of that conference. You had the basketball tournament there every year. Four of the eight schools in the league were within a three hour drive. Only Colorado took a trip of more than about six hours. I loved the Big Eight. Great, great basketball players and teams. Oklahoma, Nebraska and the six dwarves for the most part in football, at least while I was growing up. It was an awesome conference.

I can't say I ever really felt the same about the Big XII. It probably has as much to do with me growing up as anything. But it was also a league that ushered in the era of college sports maneuvering based on financial gain and television contracts and the like. It was a league that seemed more like a forced marriage or a wedding of convenience than destiny or love at first sight.

From the beginning, Nebraska and Texas didn't get along. Baylor was in the league due to politicians, not due to desire from the other members. The Longhorns came in from the disbanded Southwest Conference and started to throw their weight around and bully the schools from the league I'd grown up loving. Over time, Oklahoma, formerly a loyal Big Eight member and my second favorite team as a kid, began to look a whole lot more like Texas than it did Iowa State or Kansas.

Eventually, it was all going to boil over. It happened last summer when Nebraska and Colorado left for the Big Ten and PAC-10 respectively. Texas A&M took a year to gather up the intestinal fortitude, but eventually the Aggies bolted from big brother's shadow as well.

Twice in 15 months, Oklahoma and Texas have walked to the edge of the cliff, nearly dragging tag-alongs Oklahoma State and Texas Tech with them out of the league. Both times they have come back. Neither time have they done it with any thoughts of what is right for Tech or OSU or Mizzou or Baylor or anyone else. They've come back either because they never truly wanted to leave (both of them last year and UT this year) or it was the only option they had left (Oklahoma this fall).

And that all leads us to today. Eight of the nine teams left in the Big 12 are here to stay?at least for a while. And little Ol' Mizzou finds itself in a position of power.

It's an unusual position. Missouri is more prominent in the national landscape than Iowa State or Baylor. But it's not-and never will be-Oklahoma or Texas. This is the first time the Tigers have had much of a stick to swing in this whole process. It also will very likely be the last. And that's why, today, finally, I've reached the conclusion that the Tigers have to abandon this poor semblance of a league.

I won't proclaim to understand all the political moves or the financial implications or the legal possibilities of what could happen if the Tigers leave. That's for other people to figure out. I'm just telling you all those things don't much matter to me. The door is open and it's time for the Tigers to emphatically take those steps and walk through before it shuts.

Let's say Missouri stays in the Big XII. Let's say they sign the agreement to fork over first and second tier television rights for the next six seasons. Let's say the league adds some combination of BYU, Cincinnati, Louisville, Memphis, TCU, Houston, West Virginia, Boise State or Air Force to get back to ten or 12 teams.

That's all well and good. But what happens in six years? Heck, what happens in six months if a more attractive option suddenly becomes available to Oklahoma or Texas? Those schools always have power. They'll always have options. They've proven they'll look out for themselves (and I'm not even saying they're wrong to do so?everyone has to look out for themselves first and foremost). But if the Big 12 proves to be as dysfunctional as it appears, Oklahoma and Texas are going to be fine. They'll have suitors lined up on every corner between Norman and Austin.

But Missouri? Maybe not. If the Tigers pass on a chance to bolt for the Southeastern Conference now, that's it. They're not going to get another one. Perhaps they would land in the Big Ten if the Big XII does indeed blow up at some point. I'm pretty sure Mizzou would be safe and land somewhere inside a major conference. But it wouldn't have choices. It wouldn't be the aggressor. It wouldn't hold its fate in its own hands.

Right now, Missouri controls its own future. I understand that it would be harder to compete in football and baseball and softball and gymnastics in the SEC (though I would counter that by asking how many Big XII championship trophies are floating around campus). I understand rivalries with Oklahoma and Kansas and K-State might go away forever (but ask Nebraska fans if they'll be pining away to play Mizzou when they're sitting in Madison this weekend). I understand that people fear change.

But change, at times, is necessary. This league doesn't work. I've seen it called the Vampire League, the Zombie League, the league that just won't die. How long can you stay in that league?

If Mizzou does stay, we'll never officially know whether it had an option to leave. We'll hear that the goal was to keep the Big XII together and Missouri is happy and proud to have played a role in doing that. We'll hear about how the Big XII is the best place for Missouri. And we'll keep making road trips to Ames and Lubbock and Stillwater and the rest and we'll cover Missouri as thoroughly as we always have and you'll cheer for them as passionately as you always have.

And maybe all that will actually be true. But if they do it, they lose not only any leverage they may have forever, but also the right to complain about the inequities. Don't like the Longhorn Network showing high school games? Should have done something about it when you had the chance. Don't like that Oklahoma starts its own network with a national partner? Shouldn't be here. If Missouri stays, the Tigers don't get to complain anymore. They don't have a voice. Scream all you want, but nobody will listen. Nor should they.

This month, this fall, is a singular moment for the University of Missouri. It has options. It has leverage. It has power. It has a decision to make. From where I sit, it's not a very tough one.


http://missouri.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1271720

eazyb81
09-28-2011, 04:00 PM
Amazing op-ed from Clay Travis on the financial upside from Mizzou and A&M in the SEC.

I'm not sure how anyone could read this and come away with the opinion that Mizzou should stay put in the Big 12 if any of this comes to fruition.

http://outkickthecoverage.com/sec-expansion-to-14-goal-its-own-network.php

SEC Expansion to 14 Goal: Its Own Network
Published on: September 28, 2011 | Written by: Clay Travis

The SEC has always protected its local multimedia rights packages. That's why comparing television revenue was always comparing apples and oranges. The SEC sold its tier one and tier two television rights to CBS and ESPN, but all the schools retained their tier three -- or local multimedia rights -- packages. That means that every year when you see the announced television revenue comparisons between the SEC and the Big Ten, for instance, what you're seeing is an uneven comparison. Because unlike the Big Ten and the Pac 12 -- which specifically give over all rights to the league -- every SEC school has retained the rights to sell its local multimedia packages.

So has every Big 12 school. Indeed, that's the hang-up with Texas, the Longhorn Network is a third tier rights package paid for by ESPN. While the $15 million a year has gotten a lot of attention, Texas's deal isn't astronomical relative to other SEC schools. For instance, the Florida Gators receive somewhere in the neighborhood of $10 million a year from the Sunshine Network for their local multimedia packages. The issue with the Longhorn Network was what it did -- take the local multimedia rights and make them national. See, no one had really thought that the value existed for games like these prior to Texas's deal with ESPN.

The money for the Longhorn Network was why Texas didn't fit in the Pac 12.

Those local multimedia packages have different values but the Big Ten and the Pac 12 distribute all monies evenly. While the SEC distributes all of its tier one and tier two -- CBS and ESPN -- money evenly, the tier three rights are left up to the individual schools.

Now the tier three football games are not spectacular games in the SEC. Lots of times, in fact, those games are sold on pay-per-view by the individual schools. Often, as anyone who watched UT-Montana realizes -- those games are of awful production quality. The business model doesn't even make sense -- charge a pay-per-view inside the state's borders, but if you live outside the state you can watch for free as part of the ESPN Gameplan model. The SEC has a Rolls-Royce tier one and tier two rights package and a horse and carriage when it comes to tier three rights.

Lost amid the expansion debate has been this question -- why does going to 14 teams make blockbuster financial sense for the SEC? (I've already written that 16 teams is the ultimate destination and explained why that makes sense (http://outkickthecoverage.com/the-secs-final-four-of-football.php)).

Most have pointed to the renegotiation that will occur in the CBS and ESPN contracts. Indeed, there will be an increased rights fee paid for Texas A&M and the 14th team's addition to the league. And that increase may well be substantial. But that's not the only motivation behind expansion.

I talked with SEC commissioner Mike Slive in detail at the SEC spring meetings in Destin and again at SEC media days. He told me then that he had a couple of revenue producing ideas that he'd formulated. I asked him if he'd be willing to share those plans then and he wasn't.

But I think I know one of them -- Slive is going to pool the local multimedia rights for SEC schools and create an actual SEC Network when he gets the chance to reopen the CBS and ESPN contracts.
Let me talk about why.

1. The individual SEC schools retain the rights to at least 14 football games.

I'm saying 14 because this SEC expansion wave is going to take us to 14 teams and each team retains at least one game. That is, every SEC football game is available on national television except one. (I believe Missouri will still be the 14th team and I'll tell you why later this week. That is, if word hasn't already leaked out by then). Let's return to the Longhorn Network. One of the things I've made fun of about the Longhorn Network is how crappy the programming is.

There are 8,760 hours of programming.

But how many of those hours are going to be must-see? Only football, really. (Men's basketball would be the second most desirable, but ratings for regular season men's basketball games are minimal). This explains why there hasn't been a groundswell of indignation in Texas over the vast majority of cable providers not yet carrying the Longhorn Network. Even Texas fans aren't missing much.

But let's return to the SEC local multimedia package -- there are 14 football games dangling out there.

And if Texas is worth $15 million a year for one -- and potentially two -- football games, what are 14 SEC football games in eleven different states worth? You can make an argument that every school, at minimum, would be worth $12 million a year. (If I was the SEC I'd make the argument that it's actually worth much more than this). But $12 million per school would bring in an additional $168 million a year just off the tier three rights.

2. This is why the Texas and Missouri markets matter and make sense.

There has been lots of media talk about markets and television footprints, but this makes less sense right now for the SEC. Why? Because the games are already nationally distributed on CBS and ESPN. Ratings may well increase now that a team from Texas -- and potentially Missouri -- is in the SEC, but the actual market availability doesn't change. If you wanted to watch the SEC game of the week in St. Louis, you already had CBS. Same with the night game on ESPN in Texas. Now you may watch more if teams from your states are in the conference, but the markets and television footprint argument makes more sense in the cable subscription context. Why? Because when you add a new market you get to increase the amount of subscription fee that you can charge cable operators to carry your network in those states.

The more states you have teams in, the more money you make. As an example, the Big Ten Network makes around .90 cents per subscriber in the eight states where its teams are located (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10143/1060185-142.stm). What does it make per subscriber in the other 42 states? Try .05 cents.

Given that most of the SEC states view college sports as the primary sporting focus -- unlike the Big Ten where pro sports still dominate -- the SEC per subscriber carriage fees would be higher.

So expanding into Texas and Missouri makes tens of millions -- if not hundreds of millions in the case of Texas -- of dollars and sense using the network model.

The SEC would be able to charge premium carriage rates in eleven states: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri, and Texas.

Adding Missouri and Texas -- a combined population of 31 million -- would move the SEC's population footprint in its states from 50 million to 81 million.

3. The SEC has learned from the Big Ten.

Mike Slive and other high-ranking SEC employees told me that the reason the league partnered with CBS and ESPN was because they believed it was less risky than starting their own network. In particular, Slive worried about the battles that might ensue to get cable carriers in the SEC footprint to carry the network. If those cable carriers were particularly difficult, he believed that SEC fans would be furious over not being able to watch their teams play and that fans would blame the SEC for being greedy.

But the Big Ten network has been a tremendous success and its battles, after a fractious start, have been muted.

How much of a success is the Big Ten Network? Each school received $7.9 million in distributions last year. That might not sound like a ton, but it represents a 21% increase over the previous year. Already the Big Ten Network is poised to distribute more money to Big Ten teams than ESPN. How much better could it get?

"Estimates by SNL Kagan suggest the network will continue to be a boon for the Big Ten. By 2015, the BTN is projected to generate $333 million." (http://huskerextra.com/sports/football/article_1ba16b11-7b08-5e67-8fd6-c9b9ff167366.html.)

That's an insane growth rate.

Put simply, the Big Ten Network is kicking ass. And many of the issues that the SEC worried about materializing, haven't. So the Big Ten, which owns 51% of its network with Fox retaining 49%, has blazed the network trail. Mike Slive has told me that he hopes by the time the SEC's television contract comes up for rebid in 12 years that the SEC's own digital network is a competitor with ESPN, CBS, Fox, Comcast/NBC, and which ever other bidders are out there. But what if the SEC created its own actual network too? Wouldn't that strengthen the network's competitive hand even more?

Keep in mind that the SEC retains the copyright to all the archival footage created of its games. Can you imagine how popular an SEC Network would be in the South? Especially the on-demand function? Want to watch any game featuring your favorite team over the past several decades? Pick up the remote. Want to watch an SEC-centric pregame show that doesn't spend time on other conference games? Pick up the remote.

The sky is truly the limit with the SEC Network. (Right now ESPN uses the name SEC Network, but the league is just syndicating programming. There is no actual SEC Network. Indeed, there have been reports that the SEC doesn't have the right to create its own tier three national network under existing contracts. If true expect for that to be revised in renegotiations).

4. The SEC is expanding the number of conference basketball games it plays.

I just want to toss this in there because men's basketball is the second most valuable property for a network to have. Right now the SEC plays 16 games, but the league will be playing 18, 20, or 22 in the future. That means there are more games that it can get on its own network.

5. There are more bidders for SEC rights now.

In our spring meeting interview Mike Slive remarked that the Pac 12 had a much more robust bidding environment for rights fees than the SEC did. In particular he focused on the three bidders that the Pac 12 enjoyed: Fox, ESPN, and Comcast/NBC.

Don't underestimate Comcast/NBC/Versus as a competitor. Fox and ESPN were so worried about Comcast that they put in a combined bid to ensure that Comcast didn't walk away with the Pac 12 rights. Other conference commissioners took note of the Comcast impact on rights fees.

In fact, if I was at Versus, I'd have Mike Slive on the phone right now trying to get him to put together a package of tier 3 games that I could bid on.

If you're ESPN and you're nervous about your competitors and you're also nervous that the SEC might make the same move as the Big Ten and partner with Fox to create its own network, might you be willing to make a pitch to create a partnership with the SEC on an actual cable network? Especially if, as I've written before, you're terrified that your business model is in trouble because if the leagues all create their own networks they don't need you any longer.

A rights fee increase is important, but I think the SEC is looking much beyond an increase in the CBS and ESPN television deals, this is about the future, not reworking the past.

ESPN, CBS, Fox, and Comcast/NBC would all compete to partner with the SEC on a network. The benefit to doing a deal with ESPN would be the same as for the Longhorn Network. ESPN could move more of its current SEC rights to the SEC's new network. That would drive demand and ratings for the SEC Network even higher.

6. Selling the tier three rights as a group forestalls a Texas problem in the SEC.

Mike Slive cares deeply about the SEC's legacy. One of the reasons the SEC has been so successful is because of the equal revenue distribution model. But that model only exists for tier one and tier two rights. What if down the road a Florida or Alabama decided to create its own tier three national network like Texas has done? What if Florida had an individual deal with ESPN and wanted to show state of Florida high school highlights on its network?

You think that wouldn't piss off the rest of the SEC schools?

Slive has told me that the biggest threat to the SEC's future doesn't come from outside the conference, it comes from inside.

The Longhorn Network provided a scary future scenario for the SEC -- what if every big state team in the SEC did what Texas did with its tier three rights, sold their egalitarian soul for the most money it could?

The unique fabric of the SEC would be threatened.

The SEC can make sure a Texas problem never emerges in the league by selling tier three rights. Yep, in essence the SEC can protect itself by making more money.

7. What I want you to keep in mind as these contracts are reopened is this: the SEC is incentivized to carve out space for its tier three rights.

Most media covers commissioner Mike Slive by remarking upon what he's saying or doing. That's far too late for someone as smart as he is. By the time Slive lets the media in, the narrative arc has already advanced anew. You can't cover Mike Slive or the SEC by thinking about what they've done, you have to think about where Mike Slive is looking next.

My bet is that his focus will not be on how much more money the SEC gets from ESPN and CBS. He already knows that. I think he's already looking ahead to the reopening of the existing contracts -- will the SEC fight to create its own tier three network that could grow to include tier two game as well in 12 years?

It sure as hell will.

Bottom line: The addition of Texas A&M and probably Missouri is all about future contracts, not the currently existing ones.

Bambi
09-28-2011, 04:07 PM
Well, what did he say?

He just ranted about how some guy called up and barely accused KK of saying something about Dearmound.

Then he went off on message boards, twitter, etc.

He ended by saying MU should just try and go at this point because they don't have anything to do with the survival of the league.

Jack Harry was just sitting there being like "calm down dude".

KcMizzou
09-28-2011, 04:14 PM
Jack Harry was just sitting there being like "calm down dude".Holy hell... when Jack Harry (of all people) is trying to calm you down...

Bowser
09-28-2011, 04:19 PM
Holy hell... when Jack Harry (of all people) is trying to calm you down...

Lol, no shit. Dayze is right - Keitz sees the coming disaster if Mizzou bolts and the Big XII (possibly) disintegrates.

I hope like hell that Mizzou's BoC have some nuts and leave, if they really do have that option. Staying to be UT's and OU's bitch just isn't all that appealing. I say that realizing who Mizzou would have to face in the SEC, that's how stale the thought of staying in the Big XII has become.

Reerun_KC
09-28-2011, 04:21 PM
If MU leaves it would be nice to see KU grow a pair and GTFO as well.

DJ's left nut
09-28-2011, 04:21 PM
Here's what's going to happen:

Alden will get the approval to apply to join the SEC. As he puts the envelope in the mail, he'll get a text from Jim Delaney telling him that he should apply for the B1G (wink, wink). So Alden will immediately fire off an application to the B1G as well. Slive will get wind of it and the schools of the SEC will align against a wishy/washy Mizzou.

Delaney will then send Alden another text that says "Psyche! Goddamn! I can't believe you fell for that twice!"

And somehow we'll end up in the Mountain West while KU ends up in the PAC and ISU ends up in the B1G.

I look forward to our "natural rivalry" with K-State.

Pants
09-28-2011, 04:22 PM
If MU leaves it would be nice to see KU grow a pair and GTFO as well.

Do we have an offer from a conference?

Reerun_KC
09-28-2011, 04:24 PM
Do we have an offer from a conference?
Probably not... When your only concern is sucking the tits of Texas.. I doubt you put yourself in position to be in a BCS conference when this one folds...

Pants
09-28-2011, 04:25 PM
Probably not... When your only concern is sucking the tits of Texas.. I doubt you put yourself in position to be in a BCS conference when this one folds...

It would be nice to see you grow a pair and take that leading role in The Dark Knight Rises.

Bowser
09-28-2011, 04:26 PM
Here's what's going to happen:

Alden will get the approval to apply to join the SEC. As he puts the envelope in the mail, he'll get a text from Jim Delaney telling him that he should apply for the B1G (wink, wink). So Alden will immediately fire off an application to the B1G as well. Slive will get wind of it and the schools of the SEC will align against a wishy/washy Mizzou.

Delaney will then send Alden another text that says "Psyche! Goddamn! I can't believe you fell for that twice!"

And somehow we'll end up in the Mountain West while KU ends up in the PAC and ISU ends up in the B1G.

I look forward to our "natural rivalry" with K-State.

Damn you.

DeezNutz
09-28-2011, 04:27 PM
Probably not... When your only concern is sucking the tits of Texas.. I doubt you put yourself in position to be in a BCS conference when this one folds...

That's not a tit, big boy.

Reerun_KC
09-29-2011, 08:15 AM
That's not a tit, big boy.

Unfortantly youre right....

I give MU props for trying at least to get out of this Cesspool of a conference.

ROYC75
09-29-2011, 08:33 AM
Here's what's going to happen:

Alden will get the approval to apply to join the SEC. As he puts the envelope in the mail, he'll get a text from Jim Delaney telling him that he should apply for the B1G (wink, wink). So Alden will immediately fire off an application to the B1G as well. Slive will get wind of it and the schools of the SEC will align against a wishy/washy Mizzou.

Delaney will then send Alden another text that says "Psyche! Goddamn! I can't believe you fell for that twice!"

And somehow we'll end up in the Mountain West while KU ends up in the PAC and ISU ends up in the B1G.

I look forward to our "natural rivalry" with K-State.

LMAO Props!:clap:

RustShack
09-29-2011, 01:19 PM
Lockedonsports David Locke



A Cincinnati paid site is reporting #BYU, #TCU, #Louisville, #Cincinnati, West Virginia to join Big 12 -- if Missouri stays that makes 14

Saul Good
09-29-2011, 01:23 PM
Morgantown to Provo is going to be a hell of a commute. Nothing like a 4,000 mile round trip for the field hockey team to make a conference seem cozy.

Maybe the real fans will make a road trip of it. It's only 60 hours by car to get there and back if you don't stop.

vailpass
09-29-2011, 01:24 PM
Lockedonsports David Locke



A Cincinnati paid site is reporting #BYU, #TCU, #Louisville, #Cincinnati, West Virginia to join Big 12 -- if Missouri stays that makes 14

Worst. Idea. Ever.

RustShack
09-29-2011, 01:26 PM
Worst. Idea. Ever.

I'd prefer 12. But with the ACC at 14 and the SEC at 13, I could see why they do this(if they do).

vailpass
09-29-2011, 01:28 PM
I'd prefer 12. But with the ACC at 14 and the SEC at 13, I could see why they do this(if they do).

With those teams?

eazyb81
09-29-2011, 01:31 PM
Supposedly a reputable BYU blog is tweeting that the BYU has accepted an offer for the Big 12.


http://twitter.com/#!/theupsetblog (http://twitter.com/#%21/theupsetblog)

That would be a good get for the Big 12. Definitely the best available option.

Saul Good
09-29-2011, 01:36 PM
http://i1176.photobucket.com/albums/x336/hshaebr/Untitled.jpg

Saulbadguy
09-29-2011, 01:55 PM
Lockedonsports David Locke



A Cincinnati paid site is reporting #BYU, #TCU, #Louisville, #Cincinnati, West Virginia to join Big 12 -- if Missouri stays that makes 14

Like anyone could know all that.

HolyHandgernade
09-29-2011, 01:57 PM
Nobody cares about long commutes in the non con, but when its a conference game: OH MY GOODNESS!

Big XVI

Northeast Quad:

Iowa St
Cincinnati
Missouri
West Virginia

Northwest Quad:

Air Force
Kansas
Kansas St
BYU

Southwest Quad:

Texas
Texas Tech
Baylor
TCU

Southeast Quad:

Oklahoma
Oklahoma St
South Florida
Louisville

Football would have a "rotating divisional" format:

Year 1 West/East Alignment:

Northwest/Southwest vs Northeast/Southeast

Year 2 North/South Alignment

Northwest/Northeast vs Southwest/Southeast

Year 3 Cross-compass Alignment

Northwest/Southeast vs Northeast/Southwest

Teams play all teams in their alignment = 7 conference games
Teams play one permanent rivalry or rotated inter-alignment game = 8 games
Optional rotated inter-alignment game depending on how many non conference games the conference wants = 9 games

Champions from each "division" play each other in championship game.

Basketball could follow the same format, home and away "in division" for 14 games; and half home half away against opposite division for a total of 22 conference games. Could hold the first two rounds at separate sites on Tue/Wed, a travel day Thr, and the Final Four in KC on Fri/Sat.

mnchiefsguy
09-29-2011, 02:20 PM
There have been a couple of tweets today saying Deaton has resigned as president of the Big 12, but Gabe DeArmond just answered a tweet about it saying he has not heard anything about it.

Bambi
09-29-2011, 02:23 PM
http://i1176.photobucket.com/albums/x336/hshaebr/Untitled.jpg

At least its a nice straight line.

DJ's left nut
09-29-2011, 02:23 PM
Matter just weighed in and he's my guy on this stuff (I trust him more than the rest).

He says that the XII has stated that he hasn't resigned as the Chairman only because he never was the chairman, rather just 1 of 5 guys on the committee.

Folks - that's significant. That's the XII playing a semantics game in response to a pretty damn straightforward inquiry. Does the man had the title he have yesterday or not? Because he had a title when he had that presser a week ago.

I refuse to get my hopes up, absolutely refuse.

Mr. Laz
09-29-2011, 02:28 PM
Do we have an offer from a conference?
nobody wants a worthless pile of shit like us ... we should just join the Rocky Mountain Athletic Conference and get it over with

HemiEd
09-29-2011, 02:29 PM
I wouldn't get my hopes up

mnchiefsguy
09-29-2011, 02:30 PM
Matter just weighed in and he's my guy on this stuff (I trust him more than the rest).

He says that the XII has stated that he hasn't resigned as the Chairman only because he never was the chairman, rather just 1 of 5 guys on the committee.

Folks - that's significant. That's the XII playing a semantics game in response to a pretty damn straightforward inquiry. Does the man had the title he have yesterday or not? Because he had a title when he had that presser a week ago.

I refuse to get my hopes up, absolutely refuse.

That is an interesting game of semantics, to be sure. If the Big XII was 100% sure Mizzou was staying they would squash this story pretty quick, but by giving the answer they have given, they have left the door open to speculation. I think Mizzou's future in the Big XII is certainly in question at this point. Doesn't mean that by the time the curators meet on Tuesday, we will be staying or going, but I think it can go either way at this point.

mnchiefsguy
09-29-2011, 02:31 PM
And apparently twitter is all abuzz now because the Mizzou Lacrosse coach was fired. I have to admit, I don't recall knowing that Mizzou had a Lacrosse team.

DJ's left nut
09-29-2011, 02:33 PM
I wouldn't get my hopes up

They aren't.

There are way WAY too many things that would have to fall into place, most of which are very much opposite of the character of the parties involved, for me to believe this will actually happen.

But if it does, I'm convinced it's because Gary Pinkel's open frustration has the fanbase riled up and the BOC has taken notice. Like I said when I first heard him say it a month or so ago - Gary Pinkel is not one to launch shots across the bow. If he's saying this, he's very VERY angry about it.

And Pinkel holds a hell of a lot of sway right now.

OnTheWarpath58
09-29-2011, 02:36 PM
They aren't.

There are way WAY too many things that would have to fall into place, most of which are very much opposite of the character of the parties involved, for me to believe this will actually happen.

But if it does, I'm convinced it's because Gary Pinkel's open frustration has the fanbase riled up and the BOC has taken notice. Like I said when I first heard him say it a month or so ago - Gary Pinkel is not one to launch shots across the bow. If he's saying this, he's very VERY angry about it.

And Pinkel holds a hell of a lot of sway right now.

I missed something.

What did Pinkel say?

mnchiefsguy
09-29-2011, 02:37 PM
They aren't.

There are way WAY too many things that would have to fall into place, most of which are very much opposite of the character of the parties involved, for me to believe this will actually happen.

But if it does, I'm convinced it's because Gary Pinkel's open frustration has the fanbase riled up and the BOC has taken notice. Like I said when I first heard him say it a month or so ago - Gary Pinkel is not one to launch shots across the bow. If he's saying this, he's very VERY angry about it.

And Pinkel holds a hell of a lot of sway right now.

This. Pinkel tends to keep his anger and frustration behind closed doors, so when it starts to creep into his public comments, I thinks folks definitely sat up and listened.

DJ's left nut
09-29-2011, 02:38 PM
I missed something.

What did Pinkel say?

He said the shape the conference is in is 'embarrassing'. He's said several times something like we have "a great league but there are serious problems with it and everyone knows where those problems are coming from". He's bemoaned the fact that the conference doesn't appear likely to address said 'problems' and commented that it will never stabilize if it doesn't.

Pinkel's flat out calling out Texas and saying that the conference is doomed to instability. His tone of voice in these interviews is that of outward irritation. He's doing everything but say "Fix it or GTFO".

It's been really surprising to hear.

Frazod
09-29-2011, 02:52 PM
He said the shape the conference is in is 'embarrassing'. He's said several times something like we have "a great league but there are serious problems with it and everyone knows where those problems are coming from". He's bemoaned the fact that the conference doesn't appear likely to address said 'problems' and commented that it will never stabilize if it doesn't.

Pinkel's flat out calling out Texas and saying that the conference is doomed to instability. His tone of voice in these interviews is that of outward irritation. He's doing everything but say "Fix it or GTFO".

It's been really surprising to hear.

I've been fairly impressed by his candor on this matter. Definitely a step in the right direction.

Hell, next thing you know he might actually start making half time adjustments!

Stewie
09-29-2011, 03:03 PM
http://i1176.photobucket.com/albums/x336/hshaebr/Untitled.jpg

This travel stuff cracks me up.

If there are 12 teams in two divisions BYU and WVU would make the trip once every four years since they'd be in different divisions.

And sitting in a plane an extra hour is not a deal breaker.

patteeu
09-29-2011, 03:07 PM
This travel stuff cracks me up.

If there are 12 teams in two divisions BYU and WVU would make the trip once every four years since they'd be in different divisions.

And sitting in a plane an extra hour is not a deal breaker.

I agree that it's not a deal breaker and not nearly as big a deal as some would make out of it, but to be fair, football isn't the only sport that would be affected by the travel issues.

DJ's left nut
09-29-2011, 03:08 PM
This travel stuff cracks me up.

If there are 12 teams in two divisions BYU and WVU would make the trip once every four years since they'd be in different divisions.

And sitting in a plane an extra hour is not a deal breaker.

No kidding.

We're talking an hour, maybe 2, in additional travel time on any given weekend.

The travel tripe means nothing.

HemiEd
09-29-2011, 03:13 PM
They aren't.

There are way WAY too many things that would have to fall into place, most of which are very much opposite of the character of the parties involved, for me to believe this will actually happen.

But if it does, I'm convinced it's because Gary Pinkel's open frustration has the fanbase riled up and the BOC has taken notice. Like I said when I first heard him say it a month or so ago - Gary Pinkel is not one to launch shots across the bow. If he's saying this, he's very VERY angry about it.

And Pinkel holds a hell of a lot of sway right now.

As he should, he has delivered, and improved that program dramatically. If he could just figure out how to beat the Sooners, there would be no stopping them.

|Zach|
09-29-2011, 03:19 PM
As he should, he has delivered, and improved that program dramatically. If he could just figure out how to beat the Sooners, there would be no stopping them.

Did it last year.

They just have to keep improving and putting themselves in cyclical positions to be contenders.

HemiEd
09-29-2011, 03:22 PM
And apparently twitter is all abuzz now because the Mizzou Lacrosse coach was fired. I have to admit, I don't recall knowing that Mizzou had a Lacrosse team.

ROFL

vailpass
09-29-2011, 03:23 PM
This travel stuff cracks me up.

If there are 12 teams in two divisions BYU and WVU would make the trip once every four years since they'd be in different divisions.

And sitting in a plane an extra hour is not a deal breaker.

Say what you will but geographic proximity makes for stronger ties and fiercer rivalries in college ball.

An extra hour on the plane you say? What about the swim teams and lacrosse teams and all the other teams that don't have that kind of air travel budget?

HemiEd
09-29-2011, 03:26 PM
Did it last year.

They just have to keep improving and putting themselves in cyclical positions to be contenders.

I missed that, kudos to him. Then he lost to the Huskers and TT on the road, but a very good season.

Stewie
09-29-2011, 03:27 PM
Say what you will but geographic proximity makes for stronger ties and fiercer rivalries in college ball.

An extra hour on the plane you say? What about the swim teams and lacrosse teams and all the other teams that don't have that kind of air travel budget?

It's no longer about rivalries. It's about going somewhere that seems stable.

As for the other sports travel, they already travel 1000s of miles. I'm not an expert, but I'd imagine that Iowa State women's softball flies to Lubbock every once in a while and vice versa.

vailpass
09-29-2011, 03:48 PM
It's no longer about rivalries. It's about going somewhere that seems stable.

As for the other sports travel, they already travel 1000s of miles. I'm not an expert, but I'd imagine that Iowa State women's softball flies to Lubbock every once in a while and vice versa.

So glad I'm B10 where we don't have to say shit like that.
SEC might not agree with it either.

Stewie
09-29-2011, 04:09 PM
So glad I'm B10 where we don't have to say shit like that.
SEC might not agree with it either.

The old rivalries die, but Nebraska moving to the Big 10 and aTm to the SEC doesn't create any great rivalry interest. Colorado to the PAC is really boring. It's money for money's sake.

I was listening to an interesting point on the radio today that said this isn't over. The small guys in the big conferences will feel the heat. That is, why would Northwestern or Miss. State remain parts of those conferences? Tradition is no longer an issue. It's TV contracts that's the end game.

vailpass
09-29-2011, 04:12 PM
The old rivalries die, but Nebraska moving to the Big 10 and aTm to the SEC doesn't create any great rivalry interest. Colorado to the PAC is really boring. It's money for money's sake.

I was listening to an interesting point on the radio today that said this isn't over. The small guys in the big conferences will feel the heat. That is, why would Northwestern or Miss. State remain parts of those conferences? Tradition is no longer an issue. It's TV contracts that's the end game.

You mean the old Big8 rivalries die and I think that sucks. The rest of the country still has their tradition.
Why wouldn't Northwestern remain B10? Whoever asked that is a dumbass.

mnchiefsguy
09-29-2011, 04:16 PM
The old rivalries die, but Nebraska moving to the Big 10 and aTm to the SEC doesn't create any great rivalry interest. Colorado to the PAC is really boring. It's money for money's sake.

I was listening to an interesting point on the radio today that said this isn't over. The small guys in the big conferences will feel the heat. That is, why would Northwestern or Miss. State remain parts of those conferences? Tradition is no longer an issue. It's TV contracts that's the end game.

Where is Northwestern or Miss. State going to go to get a better TV deal than what they have now?

Stewie
09-29-2011, 04:19 PM
You mean the old Big8 rivalries die and I think that sucks. The rest of the country still has their tradition.
Why wouldn't Northwestern remain B10? Whoever asked that is a dumbass.

It was strictly a financial question about small schools in big conferences that aren't successful in athletics, but are protected by being a part of the conference. Would the Big 10 dump Northwestern if they could get Notre Dame? Would the SEC dump Miss. State if they could get Texas?

The point being made was if it's all about TV, why would these conferences bat an eye at dumping irrelevant programs?

Saulbadguy
09-29-2011, 04:21 PM
The University of Chicago has a standing invite to the Big 10.

Chocolate Hog
09-29-2011, 04:22 PM
The old rivalries die, but Nebraska moving to the Big 10 and aTm to the SEC doesn't create any great rivalry interest. Colorado to the PAC is really boring. It's money for money's sake.

I was listening to an interesting point on the radio today that said this isn't over. The small guys in the big conferences will feel the heat. That is, why would Northwestern or Miss. State remain parts of those conferences? Tradition is no longer an issue. It's TV contracts that's the end game.

You don't think Nebraska/Iowa, Nebraska/OSU could be good?

vailpass
09-29-2011, 04:23 PM
It was strictly a financial question about small schools in big conferences that aren't successful in athletics, but are protected by being a part of the conference. Would the Big 10 dump Northwestern if they could get Notre Dame? Would the SEC dump Miss. State if they could get Texas?

The point being made was if it's all about TV, why would these conferences bat an eye at dumping irrelevant programs?

Oh, I see what you meant. Thanks for clarifying.
I think academics also come into play in B10. Nwestern is a jewel in that regard.

Stewie
09-29-2011, 04:24 PM
You don't think Nebraska/Iowa, Nebraska/OSU could be good?

There's no history in those games that matter.

ChiefsCountry
09-29-2011, 04:25 PM
Nobody cares about long commutes in the non con, but when its a conference game: OH MY GOODNESS!

Big XVI

Northeast Quad:

Iowa St
Cincinnati
Missouri
West Virginia

Northwest Quad:

Air Force
Kansas
Kansas St
BYU

Southwest Quad:

Texas
Texas Tech
Baylor
TCU

Southeast Quad:

Oklahoma
Oklahoma St
South Florida
Louisville

Football would have a "rotating divisional" format:

Year 1 West/East Alignment:

Northwest/Southwest vs Northeast/Southeast

Year 2 North/South Alignment

Northwest/Northeast vs Southwest/Southeast

Year 3 Cross-compass Alignment

Northwest/Southeast vs Northeast/Southwest

Teams play all teams in their alignment = 7 conference games
Teams play one permanent rivalry or rotated inter-alignment game = 8 games
Optional rotated inter-alignment game depending on how many non conference games the conference wants = 9 games

Champions from each "division" play each other in championship game.

Basketball could follow the same format, home and away "in division" for 14 games; and half home half away against opposite division for a total of 22 conference games. Could hold the first two rounds at separate sites on Tue/Wed, a travel day Thr, and the Final Four in KC on Fri/Sat.

If you are doing all of those quads here is the smarter one:

East
Cincinnati
Louisville
USF
West Virginia

North
Iowa State
Kansas
Kansas State
Missouri

West
Air Force
BYU
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State

South
Baylor
Texas
TCU
Texas Tech

vailpass
09-29-2011, 04:25 PM
The University of Chicago has a standing invite to the Big 10.

:D Our gpa would go up a little. Doesn't UC have only around 4000 students or so?

Stewie
09-29-2011, 04:25 PM
Academics also come into play in B10. Nwestern is a jewel in that regard.

If I hear one more time about academics in all of this, I'm going to take a hostage!

vailpass
09-29-2011, 04:27 PM
There's no history in those games that matter.

Yeah it will take a generation or so before it becomes real. I still con't consider Penn State to be a bona fide B10 school; not by consciuos decision but because that's how it feels.

vailpass
09-29-2011, 04:28 PM
If I hear one more time about academics in all of this, I'm going to take a hostage!

That may not be the case in your conference but it is a factor for others. B10 is one of them. It isn't the only factor but it is a factor.

Chocolate Hog
09-29-2011, 04:28 PM
There's no history in those games that matter.

Nebraska/Iowa will be a rivarly because of the border and both schools field pretty good teams. Nebraska/OSU, Nebraska/Pen State, Nebraska/Michigan all could become potential rivalries 1. because of history 2. potential success.

Stewie
09-29-2011, 04:29 PM
That may not be the case in your conference but it is a factor for others. B10 is one of them. It isn't the only factor but it is a factor.

You admitted Nebraska! Fucking Nebraska!

Saulbadguy
09-29-2011, 04:35 PM
You don't think Nebraska/Iowa, Nebraska/OSU could be good?

LOL, as much as Iowa/Illinois sends ripples across the college football landscape.

Pants
09-29-2011, 04:36 PM
I think academics also come into play in B10. Nwestern is a jewel in that regard.

LMAO

vailpass
09-29-2011, 04:36 PM
You admitted Nebraska! ****ing Nebraska!

All B10 are AAU, NU was AAU at the time of admission. Pisses me off they lost it. Interesting how it happened....

After endorsing the University of Nebraska-Lincoln's entrance into the Big Ten Conference -- in part because of its academic strength -- leaders at the universities of Wisconsin and Michigan apparently helped oust UNL from an elite academic group, according to documents reviewed by the Journal Star.

Nebraska failed to garner the 21 votes it needed last April to remain in the Association of American Universities, a confederation of more than 60 top research institutions that collectively nets more than half of all federal research funds and awards more than half of the doctoral degrees in the nation. It was confirmed that UNL fell three votes short.

Emails and letters obtained by the Journal Star after a series of open-records requests indicate that Wisconsin and Michigan did not support UNL during its turbulent and unsuccessful AAU membership review earlier this year....

Read more: http://journalstar.com/news/local/education/article_19188dda-afe7-57c8-aa2c-c1939ec5acb4.html#ixzz1ZNbkAJ8I

RustShack
09-29-2011, 04:40 PM
Iowa/Nebraska is a match made in heaven.

Stewie
09-29-2011, 04:41 PM
All B10 are AAU, NU was AAU at the time of admission. Pisses me off they lost it. Interesting how it happened....

After endorsing the University of Nebraska-Lincoln's entrance into the Big Ten Conference -- in part because of its academic strength -- leaders at the universities of Wisconsin and Michigan apparently helped oust UNL from an elite academic group, according to documents reviewed by the Journal Star.

Nebraska failed to garner the 21 votes it needed last April to remain in the Association of American Universities, a confederation of more than 60 top research institutions that collectively nets more than half of all federal research funds and awards more than half of the doctoral degrees in the nation. It was confirmed that UNL fell three votes short.

Emails and letters obtained by the Journal Star after a series of open-records requests indicate that Wisconsin and Michigan did not support UNL during its turbulent and unsuccessful AAU membership review earlier this year....

Read more: http://journalstar.com/news/local/education/article_19188dda-afe7-57c8-aa2c-c1939ec5acb4.html#ixzz1ZNbkAJ8I

That's all fine, but it takes really poor performance to be booted from the AAU if you're a standing member. Nebraska knew this was coming. If it was about academics Missouri would be in the Big 10 now. It wasn't about academics at all.

vailpass
09-29-2011, 04:46 PM
LMAO

Do you disagree that academics are a factor in the B10s membership decision process, or do you disagree that Nwestern is a jewel in that regard?

Pants
09-29-2011, 04:54 PM
Do you disagree that academics are a factor in the B10s membership decision process, or do you disagree that Nwestern is a jewel in that regard?

Northwestern is a great school. Claiming academics playing a part in this seems rather silly after you guys sought out Nebraska. AAU or not, that school has always been garbage academically.

vailpass
09-29-2011, 04:57 PM
Northwestern is a great school. Claiming academics playing a part in this seems rather silly after you guys sought out Nebraska. AAU or not, that school has always been garbage academically.

If it is your position that academics play no part in the B10 school's decision on who to admit the you are either ill-informed or being intentionally obtuse. It makes no difference to me.

If you like you can read some of this story and decide whether academics is a factor in B10.

http://journalstar.com/news/local/ed...#ixzz1ZNbkAJ8I

Chocolate Hog
09-29-2011, 04:59 PM
Northwestern is a great school. Claiming academics playing a part in this seems rather silly after you guys sought out Nebraska. AAU or not, that school has always been garbage academically.

Garbage?

http://www.arwu.org/Country2009Main.jsp?param=United%20States

It's certainly no Harvard but I don't think it's an awful school.

vailpass
09-29-2011, 05:02 PM
Garbage?

http://www.arwu.org/Country2009Main.jsp?param=United%20States

It's certainly no Harvard but I don't think it's an awful school.

Mizzou would have been a better fit but no, Nebraska is no Boise State when it comes to academics.

Pants
09-29-2011, 05:10 PM
If it is your position that academics play no part in the B10 school's decision on who to admit the you are either ill-informed or being intentionally obtuse. It makes no difference to me.

If you like you can read some of this story and decide whether academics is a factor in B10.

http://journalstar.com/news/local/ed...#ixzz1ZNbkAJ8I

Your link doesn't work. In either case, Big 10 just invited and accepted Nebraska which is ranked #101 by the US News.

vailpass
09-29-2011, 05:12 PM
Your link doesn't work. In either case, Big 10 just invited and accepted Nebraska which is ranked #101 by the US News.

Sorry, the link worked a minute ago. If you want to persist in your folly go right ahead, I'll certainly not stop you.

Pants
09-29-2011, 05:14 PM
Sorry, the link worked a minute ago. If you want to persist in your folly go right ahead, I'll certainly not stop you.

What folly is that? Did Big 10 not accept Nebraska?

Old Dog
09-29-2011, 05:32 PM
Lockedonsports David Locke



A Cincinnati paid site is reporting #BYU, #TCU, #Louisville, #Cincinnati, West Virginia to join Big 12 -- if Missouri stays that makes 14

Maybe Missouri is going to the SEC and they're going to kick Iowa State out to make it 12.

|Zach|
09-29-2011, 05:35 PM
Maybe Missouri is going to the SEC and they're going to kick Iowa State out to make it 12.

:D

LiveSteam
09-29-2011, 05:37 PM
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/z8rYotiiFP8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Stewie
09-29-2011, 05:37 PM
MU people are sure smug.

mnchiefsguy
09-29-2011, 05:38 PM
MU people are sure smug.

I don't think that is the case. MU people are tired of the crap, and are excited that the university may finally have its fate in its own hands. Let's just hope they do the right thing.

Stewie
09-29-2011, 05:42 PM
I don't think that is the case. MU people are tired of the crap, and are excited that the university may finally have its fate in its own hands. Let's just hope they do the right thing.

The tone is, "We're leaving!"

Well good for you. Does Alabama or Georgia or Florida care? Hell no! More money for my existing SEC team? Hell yeah. Who is this Missouri team you talk about? Do they play football?

|Zach|
09-29-2011, 05:44 PM
The tone is, "We're leaving!"

Well good for you. Does Alabama or Georgia or Florida care? Hell no! More money for my existing SEC team? Hell yeah. Who is this Missouri team you talk about? Do they play football?

And not a single shit was given.

|Zach|
09-29-2011, 05:45 PM
MU people are sure smug.

Kansas people are adoreable.

Get back out there and practice some free throws kid *tussling Stewie's hair*

Stewie
09-29-2011, 05:49 PM
Kansas people are adoreable.

Get back out there and practice some free throws kid *tussling Stewie's hair*

At least I can spell adorable. The debate today was, "What has MU ever won and why would the SEC want them?" Oh, stupid money from stupid people.

|Zach|
09-29-2011, 05:53 PM
At least I can spell adorable. The debate today was, "What has MU ever won and why would the SEC want them?" Oh, stupid money from stupid people.

I am just trying to give you encouragement. You always come in here looking to be jilted. But I can't stop someone from being butthurt.

*squeezes your cute little cheeks*

How about I give you a participation ribbon for being in this thread. Would that turn your frown upside down?

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/100/280937966_04ebd59e0a_m.jpg

|Zach|
09-29-2011, 05:54 PM
This is a thread about conference realignment. So if you have any that pertains to Kansas feel free to post it.

Fesco is usually dreaming some Jayhawk stuff up he may have something.

eazyb81
09-29-2011, 05:56 PM
This is a thread about conference realignment. So if you have any that pertains to Kansas feel free to post it.

Fesco is usually dreaming some Jayhawk stuff up he may have something.

I think his latest is ku to ACC if Mizzou goes SEC.

|Zach|
09-29-2011, 05:57 PM
I think his latest is ku to ACC if Mizzou goes SEC.

Uh oh. Georgia Tech running game.

mnchiefsguy
09-29-2011, 05:57 PM
The tone is, "We're leaving!"

Well good for you. Does Alabama or Georgia or Florida care? Hell no! More money for my existing SEC team? Hell yeah. Who is this Missouri team you talk about? Do they play football?

MU people don't care about whether Alabama or Georgia, or Kansas for that matter think. MU people want MU to do what is best for MU for once. I love how if KU does something in the self-interest, they are doing what is best, but if MU does.....they are being smug.

Why should MU stay if the SEC is a better deal for them?

kstater
09-29-2011, 05:58 PM
Any word on Mizzou's impending Big 10 invitation?

eazyb81
09-29-2011, 05:58 PM
Heh, this was funny.

http://infiniteturbo.com/2011/09/28/six-reasons-why-mizzou-should-head-east/

Now that Texas A&M has left the Big XII, the SEC is looking for it’s next expansion candidate. Would Mizzou be a good fit?


Of course. Huge TV market, good overall AD, great fan base, etc. The only real knock on Missouri has been it’s public affinity for the Big Ten.


Why Mizzou should want to join the SEC rather than continue shamelessly flirting with the Big Ten hoping for an invite:


1. The SEC is a better league. Seems like this should be obvious, but it needs to be said. The Big Ten is certainly a good conference, but they also consistently get their ass kicked when they face the SEC in bowl games. If you have an opportunity to be a part of the best conference in the country, you take it.


2. Academics don’t actually matter in an athletic conference. Missouri, only Texas really uses this excuse, and it is because they are afraid of the competition of the SEC. Don’t give me that AAU shit. Nobody actually cares about f*cking research while they watch an 11 AM football game. A&M is an AAU member, too. So is Florida, so is Vanderbilt. You don’t automatically get dumber by hanging out with Texas Tech, do you? It isn’t contagious.


3. The Big Ten kinda f*cked you over last time. They really did. Made you look really bad. This would be like being cheated on and then dating the way hotter friend. It’s actually kind of shocking that they convinced you that they were attractive in the first place.


4. The Big Ten loves morning games. Wanna wake up at 8 AM, choke down some bloody marys and watch about 16 pass attempts in 40 degree weather? I sure as shit don’t.


5. I had to google your rivalries. Time for some new ones. Don’t get all worked up at me, I’m on your team here. But, seriously.


6. The Big XII sucks. C’mon. Don’t flip-flop. It sucks. You thought it sucked last year, you know it sucks now.

Stewie
09-29-2011, 06:00 PM
We'll see how this all turns out in about a week. MU being Oklahoma's bitch for a couple of weeks will tell the tale.

|Zach|
09-29-2011, 06:02 PM
We'll see how this all turns out in about a week. MU being Oklahoma's bitch for a couple of weeks will tell the tale.

Oklahoma looked really strong last week...

Oklahoma: All of the Big 12 has agreed to give its media rights to the conference.

Missouri: lol wut?

mnchiefsguy
09-29-2011, 06:03 PM
We'll see how this all turns out in about a week. MU being Oklahoma's bitch for a couple of weeks will tell the tale.

MU may stay, they may go, who knows? If the best deal is to stay in the Big XII, then by all means, Mizzou should stay. If the SEC is a better situation, then Mizzou should go. The Big XII appears to be making a push to keep Mizzou, so we will see how it turns out.

And how is Mizzou OU's bitch? Seems the folks in Norman are UT's bitch, considering the Pac quickly did not want them without the Longhorns.

|Zach|
09-29-2011, 06:04 PM
MU may stay, they may go, who knows? If the best deal is to stay in the Big XII, then by all means, Mizzou should stay. If the SEC is a better situation, then Mizzou should go. The Big XII appears to be making a push to keep Mizzou, so we will see how it turns out.

And how is Mizzou OU's bitch? Seems the folks in Norman are UT's bitch, considering the Pac quickly did not want them without the Longhorns.

Let Stewie do his thing. You can't stop someone who is going out of their way to be offended.

|Zach|
09-29-2011, 06:05 PM
MU may stay, they may go, who knows?

Exactly...who knows how it shakes out. But we will take our sweet time and figure out the fine print.

Why? Because fuck you that is why.

Pitt Gorilla
09-29-2011, 09:20 PM
Let's be perfectly honest; MU could still screw this up. The BOC, Deaton, etc. all still have the opportunity to screw this up. It's getting more and more difficult, but they could still do it.

mnchiefsguy
09-29-2011, 09:32 PM
Let's be perfectly honest; MU could still screw this up. The BOC, Deaton, etc. all still have the opportunity to screw this up. It's getting more and more difficult, but they could still do it.

True, but each passing moment that we don't hear "We are a faithful member of the Big XII conference" or some such drivel is a moment closer we are to leaving.

Pitt Gorilla
09-29-2011, 10:21 PM
True, but each passing moment that we don't hear "We are a faithful member of the Big XII conference" or some such drivel is a moment closer we are to leaving.Oh, I think we are as good as gone. BUT, somebody could still **** it up.

Dr. Gigglepants
09-29-2011, 10:34 PM
Oh, I think we are as good as gone. BUT, somebody could still **** it up.

Is the consensus that we will make an announcement middle of next week still? I'm starting to feel like MU is finally taking control of the wheel of their car, but the week delay makes me nervous. Are we going to take to the streets lighting things on fire if we wait all this time, and on Wednesday of next week come out with the flowery language about how much we love and are dedicated to the Big XII?

beer bacon
09-29-2011, 10:38 PM
Is the consensus that we will make an announcement middle of next week still? I'm starting to feel like MU is finally taking control of the wheel of their car, but the week delay makes me nervous. Are we going to take to the streets lighting things on fire if we wait all this time, and on Wednesday of next week come out with the flowery language about how much we love and are dedicated to the Big XII?

Curators vote to give Deaton authority to explore conference realignment/expansion on Tuesday. They probably won't announce we're going to the SEC at at that time, but that is what it will mean.

mrbiggz
09-29-2011, 10:53 PM
It sounds to me that Deaton put the Big12 on notice when he said at the press conference last week that his primary responsibility before anything is to MU. Then almost simultaneously the big12 announces publicly that the schools are requesting first and second tier rights to games while the UT's network is totally off negotiating table.

I'd be very surprised if we don't make an announcement to make a move to the SEC over the next few weeks.

eazyb81
09-30-2011, 08:36 AM
LMAO, I doubt this article by Mellinger will be popular on here, but he's right.

http://www.kansascity.com/2011/09/29/3176218/this-is-the-time-to-get-behind.html


This is the time to get behind Missouri, Pinkel

SAM MELLINGER COMMENTARY


Maybe you don’t like Missouri. Maybe you root for the Jayhawks or went to Kansas State or some other school. Maybe you’re like a particularly intense friend of mine who considers the idea of cheering for the Tigers against anyone other than proven terrorists repulsive.

Maybe you should reconsider.

The Big 12’s best future — not its survival, but its best future — depends on how Mizzou’s showdown with Texas ends. Missouri’s beefs are all of our beefs. In other words, you should root for the Tigers.

No matter what the Southeastern Conference says officially or publicly, the league is very clearly holding a spot open for MU, and that leverage is the best hope for K-State since Bill Snyder’s return and for KU since Mario Chalmers’ jump shot.

We are a parochial city and a region divided by our rooting interests and backgrounds, but to paraphrase a line, right now we are all Mizzou fans.
And Gary Pinkel is our leader.

MU’s football coach calls the Big 12 infighting “sad” and “embarrassing,” points out that everyone knows the problems but nobody fixes them, and every word is true until he claims to be out of the loop.

Pinkel, whether intentionally or otherwise, has made himself the loop. With Texas A&M (and Nebraska) out, Missouri is third in the league’s power hierarchy. And after taking MU from the mess of Larry Smith to six consecutive bowl games, Pinkel is the school’s most important employee and recognized voice.

There is no whining in this, no stepping out of place. Pinkel is only telling people — publicly and otherwise — how he feels. You could say Pinkel is spending capital he’s built up from his success, except he’s actually building even more capital. Here’s a guy who answers questions honestly, using his influence to fight for his school.

Pinkel is uniquely positioned to speak on this, to put pressure on Texas to come closer to the middle on revenue sharing and the other contention points. Bill Self coaches the wrong sport, and Bill Snyder would sound too self-serving.

But Pinkel’s perspective is also KU’s and K-State’s, so in that way, he is the most public advocate for our region.

The league will survive with or without the Tigers, but the context of previous departures and premature statements of unity from others would position MU’s dropping out as the lowest moment yet.

Last summer’s departure of Nebraska and Colorado brought all the league’s problems to daylight. Texas A&M’s illustrated the scale. Missouri leaving would show that things will never change.

Mizzou is the Big 12’s last hope for positive change.

MU will and should do what’s best for the school. Pinkel appears convinced that means leaving for the SEC, and the Tigers are in a terrific position, but if everyone involved can remove emotion and ego they’ll see that the Big 12 can still be the best spot for all.

There would be no better path to the national championship than through a nine- or 10-school Big 12 without a league title game.

Missouri has won 40 games in four seasons in this conference, and it’s able to make a legitimate claim to being one of the nation’s top 20 programs without having to run the SEC gantlet.

Missouri could compete in the SEC, but it would have better access to the BCS and other major bowl games through the Big 12.

The conference’s year and a half of bickering in both backrooms and in public has to end. The buildup and the Pac-12’s thanks-but-no-thanks to Texas and Oklahoma puts everyone back at the table. We’ve seen this happen before, but never with the power brokers publicly rejected and without better options to hang over the heads of other schools.
This time it’s Missouri with the option, and it’s a good one.

People in Columbia are much less concerned about Texas making money from the Longhorn Network than taking a perceived recruiting advantage by showing high school games or highlights on it. Missouri cares less about Texas and Oklahoma making the rules than it does about knowing everyone will be around in 10 years.

Missouri can help ensure that, with real leverage that could convince Texas to agree to more equality throughout the league.

This is the best hope for Kansas City to maintain its best sports world. MU’s fight is Kansas City’s fight.

Besides, if you’re a KU or K-State fan and this saga doesn’t play out the way you hope, then those old feelings about Mizzou will come back quick enough.

kchero
09-30-2011, 09:15 AM
LMAO, I doubt this article by Mellinger will be popular on here, but he's right.

http://www.kansascity.com/2011/09/29/3176218/this-is-the-time-to-get-behind.html

As a Mizzou fan, I would prefer to stay in the B12, but if these issues are not addressed then Mizzou (and everyone else) will have this problem in the B12 down the road and be in the same position that we all have been in for the past two years. Hopefully this appearance of defection to the SEC takes some notice in Dallas.

HolyHandgernade
09-30-2011, 09:15 AM
LMAO, I doubt this article by Mellinger will be popular on here, but he's right.

http://www.kansascity.com/2011/09/29/3176218/this-is-the-time-to-get-behind.html

Here's what I don't get about the article: he says we should be Tiger fans because MU is standing up for us, but doesn't list any of the issues that they are supposedly standing up for. What good fight are the Tigers fighting here? Maybe there are some, but all it looks like to me is that MU thinks it can get a better deal elsewhere, and as a KU, KSU or ISU fan, I'm supposed to say "you go boy!"? "Please leave so the conference takes another value hit so that we can potentially earn less in it."

Does that make sense to anyone?

Look, if MU wants to leave, more power to them. I just don't understand why I'm a fan of it. I haven't seen MU fans and their list of demands to "fix" the conference being opposed by Texas. All I see out of MU fans is a desire to get away from Texas. I can understand that, I just don't get why I'm a fan of that.

Pants
09-30-2011, 09:19 AM
Here's what I don't get about the article: he says we should be Tiger fans because MU is standing up for us, but doesn't list any of the issues that they are supposedly standing up for. What good fight are the Tigers fighting here? Maybe there are some, but all it looks like to me is that MU thinks it can get a better deal elsewhere, and as a KU, KSU or ISU fan, I'm supposed to say "you go boy!"? "Please leave so the conference takes another value hit so that we can potentially earn less in it."

Does that make sense to anyone?

Look, if MU wants to leave, more power to them. I just don't understand why I'm a fan of it. I haven't seen MU fans and their list of demands to "fix" the conference being opposed by Texas. All I see out of MU fans is a desire to get away from Texas. I can understand that, I just don't get why I'm a fan of that.

Dude, it's well documented that Mellinger is a complete dumbass. I don't think he's written a good article in his whole professional life.

patteeu
09-30-2011, 09:31 AM
Here's what I don't get about the article: he says we should be Tiger fans because MU is standing up for us, but doesn't list any of the issues that they are supposedly standing up for. What good fight are the Tigers fighting here? Maybe there are some, but all it looks like to me is that MU thinks it can get a better deal elsewhere, and as a KU, KSU or ISU fan, I'm supposed to say "you go boy!"? "Please leave so the conference takes another value hit so that we can potentially earn less in it."

Does that make sense to anyone?

Look, if MU wants to leave, more power to them. I just don't understand why I'm a fan of it. I haven't seen MU fans and their list of demands to "fix" the conference being opposed by Texas. All I see out of MU fans is a desire to get away from Texas. I can understand that, I just don't get why I'm a fan of that.

I don't think you're reading the article right. Mellinger isn't telling you to root for MU to get the best deal they can by leaving the conference. He's telling you to root for them to get whatever concessions they think are necessary from Texas to convince them that staying is the better option. The assumption is clearly that whatever those concessions are (and you're right that he's not very specific about them), they're the same things that KU, KSU, and ISU want but don't have the leverage to demand.

I'm OK with going to another conference, but I'd much rather see Big 12 reform that makes staying put the better option. For example, if Texas agreed to transform the Longhorn Network into a Big12 network with all revenue shared equally (admittedly an unlikely prospect), that would be a huge incentive for Mizzou to re-commit to the Big 12 and an enormously stabilizing development, IMO.

Pants
09-30-2011, 09:34 AM
I don't think you're reading the article right. Mellinger isn't telling you to root for MU to get the best deal they can by leaving the conference. He's telling you to root for them to get whatever concessions they think are necessary from Texas to convince them that staying is the better option. The assumption is clearly that whatever those concessions are (and you're right that he's not very specific about them), they're the same things that KU, KSU, and ISU want but don't have the leverage to demand.

I'm OK with going to another conference, but I'd much rather see Big 12 reform that makes staying put the better option. For example, if Texas agreed to transform the Longhorn Network into a Big12 network with all revenue shared equally (admittedly an unlikely prospect), that would be a huge incentive for Mizzou to re-commit to the Big 12 and an enormously stabilizing development, IMO.

I think HH just wants Mellinger to maybe tell us what those concessions are instead of pulling some random general statement out of his ass. Mellinger has no idea what Missouri is really thinking nor what they're trying to achieve.

Dr. Gigglepants
09-30-2011, 09:35 AM
Dude, it's well documented that Mellinger is a complete dumbass. I don't think he's written a good article in his whole professional life.

I agree to an extent. He had a point, just didn't convey it in a clear convincing matter. Or is this just a couple KU fans not wanting to admit that he is right, despite the poorly written article.

beer bacon
09-30-2011, 09:36 AM
Why would Texas make any concessions? The conference isn't going to die if Mizzou leaves, and the rest of the schools are just happy to be here. Bevo just needs the Big 12 for another five or six years while they build the LHN.

OnTheWarpath58
09-30-2011, 09:38 AM
Question for Mizzou fans:

Why in God's name do those of you that would "prefer to stay in the B12" feel that way?

patteeu
09-30-2011, 09:38 AM
I think HH just wants Mellinger to maybe tell us what those concessions are instead of pulling some random general statement out of his ass. Mellinger has no idea what Missouri is really thinking nor what they're trying to achieve.

I don't think you have to know what the specific concessions are to believe that they'd be good for the little sisters of the league. It would be nice to know them, but I think it's highly unlikely that Mizzou is trying to cut a deal that only benefits Mizzou and leaves the conference just as unstable as before.

patteeu
09-30-2011, 09:42 AM
Question for Mizzou fans:

Why in God's name do those of you that would "prefer to stay in the B12" feel that way?

"Prefer to stay in the B12" comes with a caveat. I'd only prefer to stay in the B12 if the reformed B12 is the better deal. Why in God's name would a Mizzou fan rather go to another conference if staying in the B12 is the better deal and how can they rationalize that?

The reason I would like to see the reformed B12 end up being the better deal is that I live in Kansas City and the city benefits from being in the heart of a conference that contains all the local major schools rather than on the edge of two different conferences and also because of the traditional rivalries.

Pants
09-30-2011, 09:43 AM
I don't think you have to know what the specific concessions are to believe that they'd be good for the little sisters of the league. It would be nice to know them, but I think it's highly unlikely that Mizzou is trying to cut a deal that only benefits Mizzou and leaves the conference just as unstable as before.

Well, I don't know that Missouri is negotiating with Texas at all. Are they?

Dr. Gigglepants
09-30-2011, 09:46 AM
Question for Mizzou fans:

Why in God's name do those of you that would "prefer to stay in the B12" feel that way?

Probably because they feel we would disappear in the SEC, as opposed to the whopping 2 Big XII title games we've been to in the past 15 years (and how did each of those go?). Seriously, now that there is no Big XII title game, we have literally zero chance of ever winning a title. What are the odds that OU AND UT both have a down year, AND we don't shit the bed against a team we should have beaten at least once?

I don't see any difference between the conferences ad far as our performance. We're an average team in the Big XII and the SEC, and if anything I see Mizzou building a 50 foot wall around the State of Missouri as far as recruiting goes if we do make the move.

The only real difference between the conferences is one plays fair with all its members, one doesn't.

patteeu
09-30-2011, 09:47 AM
Well, I don't know that Missouri is negotiating with Texas at all. Are they?

That's the premise of Mellinger's article. I don't have personal knowledge of the negotiations, but you'd think Mizzou would be exploring all options, including the option of improving the B12 enough to make it worth sticking around.

DJ's left nut
09-30-2011, 09:48 AM
Sorry, but Mellenger clearly still doesn't get it.

He was on the right track until he spun right off the rails with a line straight out of the Kevin Keitzmann handbook:

There would be no better path to the national championship than through a nine- or 10-school Big 12 without a league title game.

Missouri has won 40 games in four seasons in this conference, and it’s able to make a legitimate claim to being one of the nation’s top 20 programs without having to run the SEC gantlet.

Missouri could compete in the SEC, but it would have better access to the BCS and other major bowl games through the Big 12.

Repeat after me: A 10 team XII is nothing more than a dead conference walking. Pledge media rights all you want - this conference will come apart the day after that 6 year period expires (if not before; UT and OU could pretty much deal with any penalty clause they wanted to if it came right down to it).

In the current landscape, you're growing or you're dying. There isn't stability in this conference, IMO. There won't be stability in this conference unless some serious pride is swallowed and leadership wakes the !@#$ up (I don't anticipate either).

If they scrap the entire set of by-laws and conference regulations, take the B1Gs and adopt them, add at least 3 more teams (at least one of which is BYU and only one of which is a city college) and sign long-term contracts (i.e. ten years) with completely cost-prohibitive poison pills, then maybe the conference can stay together, stablize and become a viable long-term home.

But I really don't see any of that happening. There is too much wounded pride in Norman and way too much ego in Austin.

And even if it did - I still think I'd want to jet. There's something to be said for running with the big dogs every week.

OnTheWarpath58
09-30-2011, 09:49 AM
"Prefer to stay in the B12" comes with a caveat. I'd only prefer to stay in the B12 if the reformed B12 is the better deal. Why in God's name would a Mizzou fan rather go to another conference if staying in the B12 is the better deal and how can they rationalize that?

The reason I would like to see the reformed B12 end up being the better deal is that I live in Kansas City and the city benefits from being in the heart of a conference that contains all the local major schools rather than on the edge of two different conferences and also because of the traditional rivalries.

Thanks for your response.

But with all that said, do you (personally) think there's any chance that a reformed B12 is even likely?

Again, from the outside looking in, as long as the B12 exists, it's going to be X amount of teams being Texas' bitch. I don't see Texas giving a shit if Missouri leaves, they'll just invite some other suckers to take a shit deal and join the B12.

As I don't have a dog in the fight, I don't understand the loyalty to "rivalries." If one of my teams (Chiefs/Cardinals/Blues) were moved to a different division/conference, I really wouldn't give a shit.

patteeu
09-30-2011, 09:50 AM
Probably because they feel we would disappear in the SEC, as opposed to the whopping 2 Big XII title games we've been to in the past 15 years (and how did each of those go?). Seriously, now that there is no Big XII title game, we have literally zero chance of ever winning a title. What are the odds that OU AND UT both have a down year, AND we don't shit the bed against a team we should have beaten at least once?

I don't see any difference between the conferences ad far as our performance. We're an average team in the Big XII and the SEC, and if anything I see Mizzou building a 50 foot wall around the State of Missouri as far as recruiting goes if we do make the move.

The only real difference between the conferences is one plays fair with all its members, one doesn't.

Since you don't see any other real differences, which conference would you want to see Mizzou in if both conferences played fair with all of their members and why?

Mr. Plow
09-30-2011, 09:50 AM
Probably because they feel we would disappear in the SEC, as opposed to the whopping 2 Big XII title games we've been to in the past 15 years (and how did each of those go?). Seriously, now that there is no Big XII title game, we have literally zero chance of ever winning a title. What are the odds that OU AND UT both have a down year, AND we don't shit the bed against a team we should have beaten at least once?

I don't see any difference between the conferences ad far as our performance. We're an average team in the Big XII and the SEC, and if anything I see Mizzou building a 50 foot wall around the State of Missouri as far as recruiting goes if we do make the move.

The only real difference between the conferences is one plays fair with all its members, one doesn't.

Yeah, but assuming that they are going to try to get back to 12 - MU would dominate the "North" in football giving a Big 12 title game & possible BCS bowl game nearly every year.

You won't get that in the SEC.

dirk digler
09-30-2011, 09:50 AM
I don't think you're reading the article right. Mellinger isn't telling you to root for MU to get the best deal they can by leaving the conference. He's telling you to root for them to get whatever concessions they think are necessary from Texas to convince them that staying is the better option. The assumption is clearly that whatever those concessions are (and you're right that he's not very specific about them), they're the same things that KU, KSU, and ISU want but don't have the leverage to demand.

I'm OK with going to another conference, but I'd much rather see Big 12 reform that makes staying put the better option. For example, if Texas agreed to transform the Longhorn Network into a Big12 network with all revenue shared equally (admittedly an unlikely prospect), that would be a huge incentive for Mizzou to re-commit to the Big 12 and an enormously stabilizing development, IMO.

You are spot on about Mellinger's article and I agree if everything was equal I think MU should stay in the Big 12. But we know that is not the case and I don't believe it ever will be with Texas running the show.

KChiefs1
09-30-2011, 09:51 AM
Mizzou has to get out while they can! The Big 12 is doomed & who wants to bend over for Bevo all the time?

patteeu
09-30-2011, 09:53 AM
Thanks for your response.

But with all that said, do you (personally) think there's any chance that a reformed B12 is even likely?

Again, from the outside looking in, as long as the B12 exists, it's going to be X amount of teams being Texas' bitch. I don't see Texas giving a shit if Missouri leaves, they'll just invite some other suckers to take a shit deal and join the B12.

As I don't have a dog in the fight, I don't understand the loyalty to "rivalries." If one of my teams (Chiefs/Cardinals/Blues) were moved to a different division/conference, I really wouldn't give a shit.

I'd say that the odds are against the B12 reforming to the extent I'd like to see. I think it's possible that it will reform far enough that Mizzou decides to stay, either out of inertia and a sense of tradition or based on hopes of eventually getting into the B1G. But I think the most likely outcome is that it doesn't reform enough to keep Mizzou and Mizzou goes to the SEC.

dirk digler
09-30-2011, 09:53 AM
Probably because they feel we would disappear in the SEC, as opposed to the whopping 2 Big XII title games we've been to in the past 15 years (and how did each of those go?). Seriously, now that there is no Big XII title game, we have literally zero chance of ever winning a title. What are the odds that OU AND UT both have a down year, AND we don't shit the bed against a team we should have beaten at least once?

I don't see any difference between the conferences ad far as our performance. We're an average team in the Big XII and the SEC, and if anything I see Mizzou building a 50 foot wall around the State of Missouri as far as recruiting goes if we do make the move.

The only real difference between the conferences is one plays fair with all its members, one doesn't.

I think you are forgetting though that MU would have been in the 2007 NC game if it wasn't for the Big 12 title game.

DJ's left nut
09-30-2011, 09:55 AM
As I don't have a dog in the fight, I don't understand the loyalty to "rivalries." If one of my teams (Chiefs/Cardinals/Blues) were moved to a different division/conference, I really wouldn't give a shit.

Really?

I'd be bummed if the Chiefs left the Raiders and Broncos, especially if it were a lateral move.

And I'd be pissed if the Cardinals ended up in that glorified shithole of a softball league - the AL.

If all things are equal, I understand the 'rivalry' aspect of it. However, A) All things aren't equal and B) The rivalry element will never be dispositive. In college football, moving to the SEC w/ the history and tradition of the conference trumps the XII rivalries w/ Kansas and...well really only Kansas.

KChiefs1
09-30-2011, 09:56 AM
Again, from the outside looking in, as long as the B12 exists, it's going to be X amount of teams being Texas' bitch. I don't see Texas giving a shit if Missouri leaves, they'll just invite some other suckers to take a shit deal and join the B12.

Stated perfectly!

90% of MU fans see it the same way. Why doesn't everyone??????

Pants
09-30-2011, 09:58 AM
Again, from the outside looking in, as long as the B12 exists, it's going to be X amount of teams being Texas' bitch. I don't see Texas giving a shit if Missouri leaves, they'll just invite some other suckers to take a shit deal and join the B12.


Can you please describe this shit deal and tell us how it compares to the SEC deal MU would get by moving?

Dr. Gigglepants
09-30-2011, 09:58 AM
Since you don't see any other real differences, which conference would you want to see Mizzou in if both conferences played fair with all of their members and why?

SEC

I understand the negative impact the move would have on Kansas City, I don't really buy that it would impact any local rivalries. Just agree to play KU every year as part of the non conf. schedule in both football and basketball and call it a day. I'd rather have only 1 loss to KU in bball every year anyway. Plus, you could make it towards the final week of non conf play, maybe during the New Year time period, maybe even have it neutral site every now and then. That sounds more fun than getting pounded twice a year in the conference schedule to me.

I would rather see teams like LSU, Bama, Tenn, FL, etc. come to Columbia and play football. That would be fun if you ask me. Plus the money and exposure for the school and program should be better. I don't actually know that last point after all the TV contracts get renegotiated and what not, but it seems highly likely.

OnTheWarpath58
09-30-2011, 09:59 AM
Really?

I'd be bummed if the Chiefs left the Raiders and Broncos, especially if it were a lateral move.

And I'd be pissed if the Cardinals ended up in that glorified shithole of a softball league - the AL.

If all things are equal, I understand the 'rivalry' aspect of it. However, A) All things aren't equal and B) The rivalry element will never be dispositive. In college football, moving to the SEC w/ the history and tradition of the conference trumps the XII rivalries w/ Kansas and...well really only Kansas.

See, I don't give a shit. Never really have. Teams move, and build new rivalries. Personally, I think the concept of rivalries is a bit overrated.

We completely agree on Mizzou/SEC however. I know a lot of guys give DaKCManAP shit when he says the SEC is the best conference going, but he's 100% correct.

Unfortunately for you Tiggers, you'll probably fuck this up and stay in a dying B12.

mikeyis4dcats.
09-30-2011, 10:01 AM
There have been a couple of tweets today saying Deaton has resigned as president of the Big 12, but Gabe DeArmond just answered a tweet about it saying he has not heard anything about it.

the issue isn'treally football and basketball, it's all the non-revenue sports - baseball, lacrosse, soccer, volleyball, wbb, etc that would be costly to travel great distances.

Dr. Gigglepants
09-30-2011, 10:01 AM
I think you are forgetting though that MU would have been in the 2007 NC game if it wasn't for the Big 12 title game.

And how would we get to the NC game with a regular season loss to OU, in a Big XII without a title game? If I'm interpreting your post correctly that is.

KChiefs1
09-30-2011, 10:01 AM
MU would have to expand their stadium if they joined the SEC.

OnTheWarpath58
09-30-2011, 10:04 AM
MU would have to expand their stadium if they joined the SEC.

Why?

They currently seat 71K, IIRC.

That's more than 4 current SEC schools.

dirk digler
09-30-2011, 10:04 AM
And how would we get to the NC game with a regular season loss to OU, in a Big XII without a title game? If I'm interpreting your post correctly that is.

They were ranked #1 in the BCS prior to the Title Game.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_BCS_computer_rankings

KChiefs1
09-30-2011, 10:05 AM
Why?

They currently seat 71K, IIRC.

That's more than 4 current SEC schools.

Demand for tickets would skyrocket.

KChiefs1
09-30-2011, 10:05 AM
Per Twitter: DaveSittler Source: Neinas "working hard at re-recruiting Mizzou and talking them down off the ledge" and away from jumping to SEC.

DaKCMan AP
09-30-2011, 10:06 AM
Yeah, but assuming that they are going to try to get back to 12 - MU would dominate the "North" in football giving a Big 12 title game & possible BCS bowl game nearly every year.

You won't get that in the SEC.

I wouldn't eliminate the possibility that if the Big XII does expand back to 12 teams that they don't pull a Big X and put OU in the North and UT in the South creating the possibility of those two meeting in the Big XII Championship Game.

eazyb81
09-30-2011, 10:07 AM
Question for Mizzou fans:

Why in God's name do those of you that would "prefer to stay in the B12" feel that way?

Major Kansas City bias towards the small minority of Mizzou fans that want to stay. KC is the center of the Big 12 and would be on the outskirts of the SEC's footprint. It is unlikely the SEC bball tourney would ever come to KC (as hilariously minor as that is in the grand scheme of things).

The Curators have reportedly said over 90% of Mizzou fans appear to be in favor of leaving.

ChiefsCountry
09-30-2011, 10:07 AM
Demand for tickets would skyrocket.

Then you charge more.

ChiefsCountry
09-30-2011, 10:08 AM
I wouldn't eliminate the possibility that if the Big XII does expand back to 12 teams that they don't pull a Big X and put OU in the North and UT in the South creating the possibility of those two meeting in the Big XII Championship Game.

OU and UT only want to play each other once though. They really don't want a rematch in the Big 12 championship game.

OnTheWarpath58
09-30-2011, 10:08 AM
Demand for tickets would skyrocket.

Which means you raise ticket prices. No need to expand the stadium, IMO.

Hell, I'm not even that big of a CFB fan, but if Mizzou moved to the SEC and had the likes of Alabama, Auburn, Ole Miss, etc on their home schedule, you bet your ass I'm making the trip to Columbia a few times.

I'm not wasting my time/money to see ISU/KSU/KS, etc.

Dr. Gigglepants
09-30-2011, 10:09 AM
They were ranked #1 in the BCS prior to the Title Game.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_BCS_computer_rankings

I was at the game, I'm aware of their ranking at the time and the implications of the loss. I'm saying we lost to OU in the regular season in 2007. If that happens now, with no title game, what are the chances we are ranked #1, are in a position to win a Big XII title and go to the NC game? How do you win a 9 or 10 team league with a conference loss? If all the stars do align and you win the Big XII "title" with a conference loss, what are the odds you're #1 in the country and get a NC game bid?

Frazod
09-30-2011, 10:09 AM
I wouldn't eliminate the possibility that if the Big XII does expand back to 12 teams that they don't pull a Big X and put OU in the North and UT in the South creating the possibility of those two meeting in the Big XII Championship Game.

Sounds great. Perhaps they could take a page from the B1G and name the divisions Lackeys and Losers.

DJ's left nut
09-30-2011, 10:10 AM
MU would have to expand their stadium if they joined the SEC.

Faurot was built in 1925, IIRC.

It's been updated a couple of times, but there's no question that the bones of the stadium are closing in on a century old at this point.

They have an 'SEC caliber' pressbox and suite setup, but the rest of it just doesn't look up to par. It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world for them to go to the donors and ask for some capital improvement money.

Unfortunately the Laurie door may have slammed shut with the Paige Sports Arena debacle, but perhaps the Kroenke's have some spare change in their couch cushions.

I will say this, however - when Faurot is really rocking and the stakes are high, it can stand with most stadiums in the country:

http://missourisportsblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/faurot-field-arial-shot-Copy.jpg

It isn't a terrible stadium, but it could use an upgrade. That wide bowl look just seems dated; I'd like to see them go to a 2-tier stadium with steeper angles, but that's just me.

patteeu
09-30-2011, 10:11 AM
And how would we get to the NC game with a regular season loss to OU, in a Big XII without a title game? If I'm interpreting your post correctly that is.

I don't think there's any reason to believe that Mizzou will always lose to OU. Mizzou is competitive now and everything could change dramatically the next time the two schools change coaches or one of them whiffs on a QB. Texas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska all went through several down years at one point in the not so distant past. I was at Texas during the Mackovic years in the early 90s when they were in the middle of a 15 or 20 year slump. Oklahoma wasn't any good during the 90s either. And Nebraska struggled for several years after Tom Osbourne left.

I think Mizzou can be competitive in the SEC too.

dirk digler
09-30-2011, 10:15 AM
I was at the game, I'm aware of their ranking at the time and the implications of the loss. I'm saying we lost to OU in the regular season in 2007. If that happens now, with no title game, what are the chances we are ranked #1, are in a position to win a Big XII title and go to the NC game? How do you win a 9 or 10 team league with a conference loss? If all the stars do align and you win the Big XII "title" with a conference loss, what are the odds you're #1 in the country and get a NC game bid?

As always it will probably come down to who you lost to, when and where you lost to and if any of the other teams have 1 loss.

Just remember that year Ohio State went to the Championship game with 1-loss in conference the next to last week of the season at home against an unranked Illinois team with no Big 10 title game.

OnTheWarpath58
09-30-2011, 10:15 AM
Faurot was built in 1925, IIRC.

It's been updated a couple of times, but there's no question that the bones of the stadium are closing in on a century old at this point.

They have an 'SEC caliber' pressbox and suite setup, but the rest of it just doesn't look up to par. It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world for them to go to the donors and ask for some capital improvement money.

Unfortunately the Laurie door may have slammed shut with the Paige Sports Arena debacle, but perhaps the Kroenke's have some spare change in their couch cushions.

I will say this, however - when Faurot is really rocking and the stakes are high, it can stand with most stadiums in the country:

http://missourisportsblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/faurot-field-arial-shot-Copy.jpg

It isn't a terrible stadium, but it could use an upgrade. That wide bowl look just seems dated; I'd like to see them go to a 2-tier stadium with steeper angles, but that's just me.

It could absolutely use an upgrade, but it's not absolutely necessary to be part of the SEC, as implied.

Dr. Gigglepants
09-30-2011, 10:17 AM
As always it will probably come down to who you lost to, when and where you lost to and if any of the other teams have 1 loss.

Just remember that year Ohio State went to the Championship game with 1-loss in conference the next to last week of the season at home against an unranked Illinois team with no Big 10 title game.

I guess all the stars can align, I just don't really see a clear path to the NC game in either a 9 or 10 team Big XII, or the SEC. Also that was TOSU, Mizzou got passed over for the orange bowl that year for fucking KU. That should tell you all you need to know about where Mizzou will rank if there is another team to consider in the mix.

Dr. Gigglepants
09-30-2011, 10:19 AM
I don't think there's any reason to believe that Mizzou will always lose to OU. Mizzou is competitive now and everything could change dramatically the next time the two schools change coaches or one of them whiffs on a QB. Texas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska all went through several down years at one point in the not so distant past. I was at Texas during the Mackovic years in the early 90s when they were in the middle of a 15 or 20 year slump. Oklahoma wasn't any good during the 90s either. And Nebraska struggled for several years after Tom Osbourne left.

I think Mizzou can be competitive in the SEC too.

Not saying you're wrong, but with the UT and OU of the past decade is hard to imagine ever having another 15-20 year slump. I agree, MU will be just as competitive in the SEC. Perennial 8 maybe 9 win team, then once every 4 or 5 years a dark horse favorite with a shot to make it to an SEC title game.

OnTheWarpath58
09-30-2011, 10:19 AM
Potentially stupid question because I don't follow CFB that closely, but since I've seen a few people talking about BCS bids and the like:

Assuming Mizzou goes to the SEC - wouldn't it be possible that they could be say, 9-3 and be ranked higher in the BCS rankings because they play a much tougher schedule in the SEC than if they were say 10-2 in the B12 playing the weak sisters of KSU/KU/ISU?

duncan_idaho
09-30-2011, 10:20 AM
I was at the game, I'm aware of their ranking at the time and the implications of the loss. I'm saying we lost to OU in the regular season in 2007. If that happens now, with no title game, what are the chances we are ranked #1, are in a position to win a Big XII title and go to the NC game? How do you win a 9 or 10 team league with a conference loss? If all the stars do align and you win the Big XII "title" with a conference loss, what are the odds you're #1 in the country and get a NC game bid?

The chances are pretty slim that a one-loss Big 12-whatever team would rise back to No. 1 in the rankings, but it is possible.

Recipe:

The one loss must come in the first half of the season
Must be fairly highly rated at the time of the loss
The loss must be to a team/in a fashion that doesn't crush your rankings
There must be no more than one undefeated team in the country
If the undefeated team isn't from the SEC, all SEC teams must have at least two losses
Teams ahead of you after the loss will have to lose

Basically, exactly what happened in 2007. Missouri fell from 11 to 14 or so after the loss in Norman. Then Oklahoma lost once more, to give the Sooners two regular season losses. And everyone in front of Mizzou lost at least once before the end of the regular season.

LSU lost twice, and the SEC had no other team in that range.

I mean, in 2007, substitute Missouri's win vs. Texas A&M for a win versus Texas and the win against Colorado for a win against oSu. At the end of the season, Missouri would have been 11-1, having just defeated the number 2 team in the country the same week that No. 1, No. 2 and No. 3 all lost (remember: West Virginia and Ohio State both choked in the closing weeks).

They would have been a shoe-in to the title game at that point. Only the loss to OU knocked 'em out.

DJ's left nut
09-30-2011, 10:22 AM
Per Twitter: DaveSittler Source: Neinas "working hard at re-recruiting Mizzou and talking them down off the ledge" and away from jumping to SEC.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/picture.php?albumid=106&pictureid=982

duncan_idaho
09-30-2011, 10:25 AM
http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/picture.php?albumid=106&pictureid=982

From what I hear, Mizzou's demands are very unlikely to all be met, and it's unlikely they stay unless all demands are met.

I'm sure Neinas will make a pitch, but unless that includes neutering the LHN (No buying/selling of Big 12 games, no high school games, no high school highlights, etc) and adding some really high-quality members (BYU is that level, but Lousiville/Cincy are just awful), there's not much to sell to Mizzou at this point.

Dr. Gigglepants
09-30-2011, 10:29 AM
The chances are pretty slim that a one-loss Big 12-whatever team would rise back to No. 1 in the rankings, but it is possible.

Recipe:
...

They would have been a shoe-in to the title game at that point. Only the loss to OU knocked 'em out.

What are the implications of not having aTm or NU on our schedule? Will our SOS be high enough to get us to #1? Even if we beat OU and UT and win the "title," what if there is an undefeated PAC and and undefeated SEC team? If we beat OU and UT, it's pretty likely at least 1 of them didn't finish the season ranked. Would we even stand a chance at getting the NC game under the BCS system?

I realize that in today's CFB, your scenario where everything aligns perfectly is probably more likely than an undefeated school from 3 conferences.

DaKCMan AP
09-30-2011, 10:36 AM
Potentially stupid question because I don't follow CFB that closely, but since I've seen a few people talking about BCS bids and the like:

Assuming Mizzou goes to the SEC - wouldn't it be possible that they could be say, 9-3 and be ranked higher in the BCS rankings because they play a much tougher schedule in the SEC than if they were say 10-2 in the B12 playing the weak sisters of KSU/KU/ISU?

Higher ranked - yes. But currently only 2 teams from each conference can go to a BCS bowl. With expansion they are looking to petition that so that, say, 3 SEC teams could go to BCS Bowls.

duncan_idaho
09-30-2011, 10:40 AM
What are the implications of not having aTm or NU on our schedule? Will our SOS be high enough to get us to #1? Even if we beat OU and UT and win the "title," what if there is an undefeated PAC and and undefeated SEC team? If we beat OU and UT, it's pretty likely at least 1 of them didn't finish the season ranked. Would we even stand a chance at getting the NC game under the BCS system?

I realize that in today's CFB, your scenario where everything aligns perfectly is probably more likely than an undefeated school from 3 conferences.

At that point, honestly, it would probably depend on which teams were ranked higher at the start of the season. I'd assume the SEC team gets one spot. The PAC spot would depend on who it was (and honestly, the 12-team PAC really is no better than the current Big 12-3).

Look at this season. UT and OU are both ranked (OU really highly and UT at a middle level). Oklahoma State is highly regarded. Going undefeated through that gauntlet would be more impressive than anything a PAC team could do.

Really would depend on the year, though. I don't think the additions of Utah and Colorado exactly turn the PAC into a monster.

USC is down (and will be for a while, thanks to the hits)
UCLA is even more disappointing as a program than Mizzou
Stanford is probably due for another spell of mediocrity after Luck goes No. 1 (to the Chiefs!)
Oregon is really good but also facing sanctions.

The rest of that league is not very impressive right now.

Dr. Gigglepants
09-30-2011, 10:43 AM
At that point, honestly, it would probably depend on which teams were ranked higher at the start of the season. I'd assume the SEC team gets one spot. The PAC spot would depend on who it was (and honestly, the 12-team PAC really is no better than the current Big 12-3).

...

The rest of that league is not very impressive right now.

So who ya got? Big ?? or SEC and why?

DaKCMan AP
09-30-2011, 10:57 AM
At that point, honestly, it would probably depend on which teams were ranked higher at the start of the season. I'd assume the SEC team gets one spot. The PAC spot would depend on who it was (and honestly, the 12-team PAC really is no better than the current Big 12-3).

Look at this season. UT and OU are both ranked (OU really highly and UT at a middle level). Oklahoma State is highly regarded. Going undefeated through that gauntlet would be more impressive than anything a PAC team could do.

Really would depend on the year, though. I don't think the additions of Utah and Colorado exactly turn the PAC into a monster.

USC is down (and will be for a while, thanks to the hits)
UCLA is even more disappointing as a program than Mizzou
Stanford is probably due for another spell of mediocrity after Luck goes No. 1 (to the Chiefs!)
Oregon is really good but also facing sanctions.

The rest of that league is not very impressive right now.

The biggest problem for the Big XII is not having a conference champ. game.

All else being equal a SEC, ACC, Big X or Pac-12 team would get the nod.

duncan_idaho
09-30-2011, 11:00 AM
If Missouri HAS to move now, the only thing really on the table is the SEC. I would prefer the BiG over the long haul, but I'm not sure they make a move now.

I would not be crushed if Missouri waited for a few years if they were certain the SEC would be on the table at a later date. This looks like a possibility IF the ACC holds together and the SEC truly doesn't want to add anyone from inside its current footprint. UNC/Va. Tech/Virginia/Maryland aren't happening. That leaves Missouri in pretty good shape as it regards to SEC expansion (unless the SEC looks ready to settle for West Virginia).

I have some real misgivings about the move to the SEC. It would not be as rosy as many Mizzou fans assume. I think the presence and importance of aTm in Texas is severely overstated by Aggies and pro-SEC movers alike. If the Big 12 still exists, aTm/SEC is still the second-best show in state. And the SEC still has to recruit through the Big 12 bubble that has held schools like Arkansas out - or at least limited their imprint.

I think moving to the SEC with the Big 12 still in place would be damaging to Missouri's Texas recruiting efforts. It MIGHT help in-state. It MIGHT help in Louisiana and Florida.

I've seen some Mizzou fans claim it would be an easy sell to Midwest border states (come play in the best conference in America!), but the only state that has significant talent is Illinois (Chicago), and those kids are Big Ten all the way.

It would probably be a strong move for hoops and good for the overall athletic department. But football would take some hits on the recruiting trail until it sunk better contacts in LA and FL and GA.

duncan_idaho
09-30-2011, 11:05 AM
The biggest problem for the Big XII is not having a conference champ. game.

All else being equal a SEC, ACC, Big X or Pac-12 team would get the nod.

I'll buy SEC and BiG.

Not so much on ACC or PAC.

The ACC is an unimpressive football conference unless/until Florida State and Miami get rolling again.

The PAC generally has one really good team, a top 25 team, and a bunch of crap. Unless Stanford sustains its run sans Luck and Harbaugh (unlikely), it's USC and Oregon (which doesn't carry the weight of Oklahoma and Texas).

The Big 12's top 4 most years will compare favorably with the top 4 in the ACC/PAC. Big 12 schools could also help themselves by playing a serious out-of-conference opponent every year (something OU already does).

DaKCMan AP
09-30-2011, 11:07 AM
I'll buy SEC and BiG.

Not so much on ACC or PAC.

The ACC is an unimpressive football conference unless/until Florida State and Miami get rolling again.

The PAC generally has one really good team, a top 25 team, and a bunch of crap. Unless Stanford sustains its run sans Luck and Harbaugh (unlikely), it's USC and Oregon (which doesn't carry the weight of Oklahoma and Texas).

The Big 12's top 4 most years will compare favorably with the top 4 in the ACC/PAC. Big 12 schools could also help themselves by playing a serious out-of-conference opponent every year (something OU already does).

I said all things being equal. If you have undefeated Oregon/Stanford or an undefeated Va Tech/FSU/Miami and they win another quality game in a conf. champ. while the Big XII team sits idle, the Big XII team will get jumped in the rankings.

Pitt Gorilla
09-30-2011, 11:17 AM
If Missouri HAS to move now, the only thing really on the table is the SEC. I would prefer the BiG over the long haul, but I'm not sure they make a move now.

I would not be crushed if Missouri waited for a few years if they were certain the SEC would be on the table at a later date. This looks like a possibility IF the ACC holds together and the SEC truly doesn't want to add anyone from inside its current footprint. UNC/Va. Tech/Virginia/Maryland aren't happening. That leaves Missouri in pretty good shape as it regards to SEC expansion (unless the SEC looks ready to settle for West Virginia).

I have some real misgivings about the move to the SEC. It would not be as rosy as many Mizzou fans assume. I think the presence and importance of aTm in Texas is severely overstated by Aggies and pro-SEC movers alike. If the Big 12 still exists, aTm/SEC is still the second-best show in state. And the SEC still has to recruit through the Big 12 bubble that has held schools like Arkansas out - or at least limited their imprint.

I think moving to the SEC with the Big 12 still in place would be damaging to Missouri's Texas recruiting efforts. It MIGHT help in-state. It MIGHT help in Louisiana and Florida.

I've seen some Mizzou fans claim it would be an easy sell to Midwest border states (come play in the best conference in America!), but the only state that has significant talent is Illinois (Chicago), and those kids are Big Ten all the way.

It would probably be a strong move for hoops and good for the overall athletic department. But football would take some hits on the recruiting trail until it sunk better contacts in LA and FL and GA.I appreciate your take on this. I would note, however, that LSU has little trouble recruiting Texas, even without an A&M.

duncan_idaho
09-30-2011, 11:21 AM
I said all things being equal. If you have undefeated Oregon/Stanford or an undefeated Va Tech/FSU/Miami and they win another quality game in a conf. champ. while the Big XII team sits idle, the Big XII team will get jumped in the rankings.

Fair enough. Of course, it would depend on the situation each year.

I'm just thinking of all the times the ACC championship game has been a stinker (one good, top 10 team vs a fringe top 30 team). I thnk the PAC game is going to be like that most years.

WilliamTheIrish
09-30-2011, 11:29 AM
That was one of the great National Lampoon covers of all time.

eazyb81
09-30-2011, 11:31 AM
Damn, Clay Travis at Outkick The Coverage has just been killing it on the SEC expansion storyline. If any Mizzou fan isn't reading him by now you should be.

http://outkickthecoverage.com/reality-there-are-no-barriers-to-missouri-in-sec.php


Reality: There Are No Barriers To Missouri in SEC

Published on: September 30, 2011 | Written by: Clay Travis


Trust me, Missouri fans, your fan campaign to push the Missouri Tigers in to the SEC has been a complete and total success. Now you've got to keep up the SEC fight for just a couple of more weeks. I told you earlier this week I'd give you an update based on what I'm hearing so here it is: You're still the front-runner to be the SEC's 14th. Even more so than you were a week ago. Indeed, your board of curator meeting on Tuesday just happens to be the day before the SEC athletic directors will be meeting on Wednesday. Coincidence? Maybe. But I doubt it.

Let's dive in and consider the situation that Missouri faces so you guys have better information to combat those who would argue that Missouri's fate is hemmed in by the buyout that would be owed under the Big 12 bylaws, by lawsuit threats, or by other nonexistent issues. Missouri factions that don't want to leave are saying the cost would be $40 million and that a lawsuit would ensue that could cost even more. Please. That's not the case. The actual cost to Missouri for jumping to the SEC would be in the neighborhood of $12 million. And if the school really fought it could end up being nothing at all.

Let's discuss these details so you're armed with actual facts as opposed to propaganda from those who don't want the Tigers to leave.

The Big 12 bylaws are complicated and weak (http://outkickthecoverage.com/big-12-bylaws-on-leaving-.php).

OKTC broke down the bylaws for a proposed Texas A&M move to the SEc over a month ago (http://outkickthecoverage.com/big-12-bylaws-on-leaving-.php), but now we're going to do the same for Missouri. Here is the relevant portion of the Big 12 bylaws when it comes to a member leaving:

3.1 Membership.
Each Member Institution shall remain a member of the Conference until July 1, 2006 (the “Current Term”) and during any Additional Term (as defined below). Unless a Member Institution gives written notice that it will withdraw from the Conference at the end of the Current Term or the then-current Additional Term to all other Member Institutions and the Conference (a “Notice”) not less than two (2) years before the end of the Current Term or the then-current Additional Term, as the case may be, each Member Institution shall remain a member of the Conference for an additional five-year period after the end of the Current Term or the then-current Additional Term, as the case may be (each, an “Additional Term”) unless such member is a Breaching Member. Each Member Institution agrees that in the event such Member desires to withdraw from the Conference, that it will in good faith give Notice not less than two (2) years before the end of the Current Term or any Additional Term, as the case may be. No Member Institution shall be entitled to distribution of the then-current revenues from the Conference after the effective date of its withdrawal, resignation, or the cessation of its participation in the Conference (the “Effective Date”).

3.2 Effect of Giving Notice.
If a Member Institution gives proper Notice pursuant to Section 3.1 (a “Withdrawing Member”), then the Members agree that such withdrawal would cause financial hardship to the remaining Member Institutions of the Conference, and that the financial consequences cannot be measured or estimated with certainty at this time. Therefore, in recognition of the obligations and responsibilities of each Member Institution to all other Member Institutions of the Conference, each Member Institution agrees that the amount of revenue that would have been otherwise distributable to a Withdrawing Member pursuant to Section 2 herein for the final two (2) years of the Current Term or the then current Additional Term, as the case may be, shall be reduced by fifty percent (50%), with the remainder to be distributed to the other Member Institutions who are not Withdrawing Members or Breaching Members (as defined below) as additional Conference revenues in accordance with Section 2 herein. The Member Institutions agree that such reduction in the amount of revenues distributed to a Withdrawing Member is reasonable and shall be in the form of liquidated damages and not be construed as a penalty.

3.3 Effect of Withdrawal From Conference Other Than by Giving Proper Notice.
If, other than by giving a proper Notice pursuant to Section 3.1, a Member Institution (a “Breaching Member”) withdraws, resigns, or otherwise ceases to participate as a full Member Institution in full compliance with these Rules, or gives notice or otherwise states its intent to so withdraw, resign, or cease to participate in the future (a “Breach”), then the Member Institutions agree that such Breach would cause financial hardship to the remaining Member Institutions of the Conference, and that the financial consequences cannot be measured or estimated with certainty at this time. Therefore, in recognition of the obligations and responsibilities of each Member Institution to all other Member Institutions of the Conference, each Member Institution agrees that after such Breach, the amount of Conference revenue that would otherwise have been distributed or distributable to the Breaching Member during the two (2) years prior to the end of the Current Term or the then-current Additional Term, as the case may be, shall be reduced by an amount that equals the sum of the aggregate of such revenues times the following percentages (such sum being the “Aggregate Reduction”); if Notice is received less than two years but on or before eighteen months prior to the Effective Date, 70%; if Notice is received less than eighteen months but on or before twelve months prior to the Effective Date, 80%; if Notice is received less than twelve months but on or before six months prior to the Effective Date, 90%; or if Notice is received less than six months prior to the Effective Date, 100%.

After such Breach, none of the revenues that otherwise would be distributable to a Breaching Member shall be paid to the Breaching Member until the aggregate amount so withheld (the “Withheld Amounts”) equals the Aggregate Reduction; thereafter, all revenues that would otherwise have been distributable to the Breaching Member shall be so distributed. If the Withheld Amounts are less than the Aggregate Reduction, then the Member Institutions acknowledge and agree that the Conference shall assess such Breaching Member an amount that equals the difference of the Aggregate Reduction less the Withheld Amounts, and the Breaching Member agrees that on or prior to the Effective Date it shall repay to the Conference such amount from revenue that previously had been distributed to such Breaching Member. The Withheld Amounts and any such repayment of the difference of the Aggregate Reduction less the Withheld Amounts shall be distributed to the other Member Institutions who are not Withdrawing Members or Breaching Members as additional Conference revenues in accordance with Section 2 herein. The Member Institutions agree that such reduction in the distribution of revenues to a Breaching Member is reasonable.
...
1. The relevant portions of the Big 12 bylaws that will now be discussed are in bold. Let's start with the liquidated damages provision for leaving early.

The worst case scenario for Missouri is damages in the neighborhood of $26.1 million. How do I arrive at this number? This year the Big 12 distributed $145 million to its member institutions (http://www.stltoday.com/sports/college/mizzou/article_893a9d8d-a238-53e6-8225-61d9d3ba4d99.html). That's around $14.5 million per school. So the way I'm reading this contract the most the Big 12 could withhold from a member institution is around $14.5 million a year. (This number will grow over the next several years, but not excessively).
That's because Missouri would fall into this portion of the Big 12 bylaws: "if Notice is received less than twelve months but on or before six months prior to the Effective Date, 90%." The rough total that would be owed if the full buyout was to be paid? $26.1 million.

This, by the way, is the same provision of the bylaws that Texas A&M's depature is governed by. So the Aggies have decided that this amount of money is no barrier to departure. So long as Missouri notifies the Big 12 of its departure prior to December 1, 2011, it will fall under the same provision of the bylaws as Texas A&M. That's important because A&M and Missouri would be treated the same.

2. But Missouri and A&M will probably pay much less than $26.1 million. Why? The precedent already set by Nebraska and Colorado.
Recall that Nebraska and Colorado left the Big 12 last season. Reports were that the two schools would face substantial buyouts. Indeed the Big 12 initially demanded $19.4 million from Nebraska and over $14 million from Colorado. But then Nebraska paid a settlement of $9.25 million and Colorado paid a settlement of $6.86 million.

What happened?

The Big 12 bylaws came into play.

Look back at the liquidated damages provision of the bylaw for the true ticking time bomb: "each Member Institution agrees that the amount of revenue that would have been otherwise distributable to a Withdrawing Member pursuant to Section 2 herein for the final two (2) years of the Current Term or the then current Additional Term, as the case may be, shall be reduced by fifty percent (50%)."
Okay, that means the payment amount is actually going to come from 2015 and 2016, the final two years of the "Additional Term."
Only, you guessed it, A&M and Missouri would be gone by then so neither school will receive a dime of revenue from the Big 12 in 2015 or 2016.
So if you apply the above language, 90% x 0 = 0.

Uh oh.

Now, I don't think the legal argument would win -- most judges would probably apply the intended liquidated damages clause holding that the purpose of a liquidated damages clause is actually to have a liquidated damages clause -- but it's definitely yet another flaw in a tremendously flawed Big 12. And could a judge be unwilling to give the benefit of the doubt to a huge entity like the Big 12 that made this drafting mistake? Of course.

This is a flaw that's so gigantic the Big 12 might not want to sue under the contract for fear of losing and providing notice to all members that the exit fee for the next couple of years is $0.

Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman said lat year he believed he had a strong argument against giving up any money (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5601182).

'I'm also cognizant of the risks associated with litigation," Perlman said last year. "What I think is the law may not turn out to be the law. I'm disappointed, as an academic, that my curiosity about the legal claims won't be resolved. But when you look at everything, I think it made sense in this setting to get this behind us and avoid the risks of litigation.'"

Certainly the Big 12 believes this is a litigation risk as well, it's why the league ultimately settled with Nebraska for $9.25 million and with Colorado for $6.86 million (http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory?id=11693234).

That settlement represented 47.6% of the payout that both schools would have owed under the bylaws. If A&M and Missouri did the same with its projected $26.1 million that would come to $12.4 million.

That, my friends, is no penalty at all.

3. The Big 12 lawsuit risk is dead.
The SEC admitted Texas A&M without receiving waivers from the remaining Big 12 schools that are still holding out.

That's an important detail because it confirms what I told you guys a few weeks back: Baylor had no legitimate grounds to file a lawsuit against the SEC (http://outkickthecoverage.com/why-baylors-claims-against-the-sec-have-no-merit.php). Effectively, the SEC called Baylor's bluff by admitting A&M.

Any potential lawsuit is even more undercut now for two reasons: a. the Big 12 is going to raid another conference to add a member. The conference, therefore, has unclean hands in any lawsuit. How can any member of the Big 12 argue against taking a team from another conference when it is doing the same? and b. Interim commissioner Chuck Neinas made a blockbuster comment that hasn't received much attention. Asked whether the Big 12 would survive without Missouri Neinas said (http://www2.kusports.com/news/2011/sep/24/interim-big-12-commish-chuck-neinas-delivers-stron/):

“Yes, I think it could be viable because there’s a lot of strength in the conference."

So if the conference is still viable without Missouri, how could there be any damages other than those included in the Big 12 bylaws if a member leaves?

Put simply, Ken Starr's threat of a lawsuit is dead.

4. Missouri's revenue opportunities in the SEC are massive.
That's because an SEC Network in partnership with ESPN is coming. (http://outkickthecoverage.com/sec-network-in-partnership-with-espn-is-likely.php)
Texas A&M and Missouri are a big part of the SEC's plans for that network. So are Virginia Tech and N.C. State. But that's in the future. For now, Missouri and Texas are important footprints and markets for the network (http://outkickthecoverage.com/sec-expansion-to-14-goal-its-own-network.php).

5. So what needs to happen for Missouri to join the SEC?
Just follow Texas A&M's roadmap.

Give your leaders the authority to explore conference options, then divorce from the Big 12, then accept the SEC's offer.

It's as simple as one, two, three. Do that Mizzou, and welcome to the SEC.
SEC presidents are thrilled with your academics, you'll fit in well athletically, and the SEC Network is about to make it rain down money.

If Missouri wants to join the SEC, it's barriers to entry are minimal. OKTC told y'all nearly a month ago that Missouri was the SEC's 14th. Now I'm telling you this, it's close to fruition if the Mizzou fans keep up the push to go South.

duncan_idaho
09-30-2011, 11:32 AM
I appreciate your rake on this. I would note, however, that LSU has little trouble recruiting Texas, even without an A&M.

LSU has 14 Texas kids on its roster, and its national imprint is a lot higher than Mizzou's. Baton Rouge is also closer to Dallas/Houston than Columbia, MO.

They're still only averaging somewhere between 2 and 3 Texas kids a year. Not that impressive, IMO. I know their main focus is on LA kids, but still...

Missouri will have to do much better in Texas than either Arkansas or LSU currently do to keep its program at the current level.

beer bacon
09-30-2011, 12:07 PM
Potentially stupid question because I don't follow CFB that closely, but since I've seen a few people talking about BCS bids and the like:

Assuming Mizzou goes to the SEC - wouldn't it be possible that they could be say, 9-3 and be ranked higher in the BCS rankings because they play a much tougher schedule in the SEC than if they were say 10-2 in the B12 playing the weak sisters of KSU/KU/ISU?

Very possible. Off the top of my head Mississippi State was ranked 4 or 5 spots ahead of MU at the end of last season, and they had one less win.

Saulbadguy
09-30-2011, 01:54 PM
Pete Sampson

Post #19376
South Bend, IN
MyFanPage
Add Buddy
Ignore
Re: ND to Big 12? Reply

________________________________________
I have heard this, although a slightly different version.

What I've heard on this front is that the Big 12 would add BYU, TCU, West Virginia, Louisville and Cincinnati, thereby killing the Big East in its current version as a football conference. The Big 12 would then invite Notre Dame into the league for its applicable olympic sports but football would remain independent. The Big 12 would then be at 14 schools and Notre Dame would agree to a situation similar to what Kevin White agreed to with the Big East in football, basically that Notre Dame play three Big 12 teams per year. Don't be surprised if Notre Dame changes up its Thanksgiving week routine and Texas becomes an annual series there, replacing the Longhorns game with Texas A&M. That's the hope from Texas at least.

With Notre Dame a partial member of the Big 12 at 14 schools, Notre Dame would have the first right of refusal to join in full with football should the next conference realignment step force Notre Dame into a football conference, i.e. suddenly there are four 16-team super conferences and break away from the NCAA. That doesn't mean Notre Dame would be locked into the Big 12, but they'd at least have a foot in the door there.

Pete Sampson
Editor - Irish Illustrated
psampson@rivals.com

HemiEd
09-30-2011, 01:55 PM
So is Mizzou in or out today? :D