MIZZOUEXPANSIONAPALOOZA 2010™: Another Lazy Sunday
by Bill C. on Jun 6, 2010 1:43 PM CDT
in MIZZOUEXPANSIONAPALOOZA 2010™
Email
PrintSo the word is that it was not the Big 12, but the Big 12 presidents who gave Mizzou and Nebraska. I may have initially misinterpreted what I read. If this is true, this makes a lot more sense to me. I thought this was insane if coming from Beebe's offices, but I can see why the presidents would want to force the hands of the Tigers and Huskers. The message is basically, "We'd like to stay in this conference, but only with the same roster it is now. If you don't commit, then whichever six schools get offers from the Pac-10 will have to think hard about jumping ... and exactly how confident are you in the Big Ten comin' a-knocking?"
In this regard, I would want my school to be forcing the issue a bit, especially from the schools that appear to be geographically screwed in the current expansion scenarios (i.e. Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, probably Baylor). Here's the problem, though: this ultimatum would carry a lot more weight if jumping from a Big 12 (with diminished chances for a "Big 12 / Pac-10 Network" on the horizon, for obvious burnt-bridge reasons) to a Pac-16 were a parallel move. But a Pac-16 that encompasses half the country geographically, and roughly 40% of the nation's top TV markets, is extremely tantalizing. And what exactly would stop Texas, after a "pledge" from Nebraska and Missouri, from saying "You know, this is actually too much of an upgrade to pass up, especially since it would keep most of our historical rivalries in place"? It's not like there will be any sort of blood oath commitment from anybody to stay in the Big 12, and it would be counter-productive to commit to a conference that presents a lesser option for your school, both athletically, financially and academically.
If the Pac-16 does indeed extend invites, which could apparently happen soon, it would be stupid of the offered Big 12 teams to turn it down in unison if it would result in better revenue, exposure, etc. While historical rivalries are clearly worth something in college sports, and I appreciate that a school like OU would hesitate to abandon century-old rivalries, you must act in your entire school's best interests. Like Mizzou to the Big Ten, if a school like OU or Texas Tech or any of the six teams offered (even Texas) were to be offered a chance to make infinitely more money and share a conference with institutions like Stanford, they would be silly to pass it up just because Mizzou or Nebraska "committed" to the conference. I understand why certain programs want to force Mizzou's and Nebraska's hands (if anything, I appreciate the thought that Mizzou is actually important to the conference after a month or two of "You're nothing. Go. See if anybody cares" sentiment), but an aggressive expansion attempt by the Pac-10 completely changes the game. And for the same reason Mizzou and Nebraska would be intrigued by the thought of joining the Big Ten, half the conference might be about to have a very tough decision to make. This is no longer about MU or NU.
110 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think the plan
Is for the pledge to come in a contract form with a large penalty for backing out. Anything lese and nothing stops MU and Nebraska from committing and then still leaving.
I would have to think
that any agreement Mizzou and Nebraska would make to pledge to stay would be reciprocated by all 12 schools. It’d be insane for MU or NU to consider such an agreement otherwise
"I'm a genius, but I'm a misunderstood genius."
"What's misunderstood about you?"
"Nobody thinks I'm a genius."
by Transmogrified Tiger on Jun 6, 2010 1:48 PM CDT reply actions
This has been years in the making
Weak leadership and a lack of forward thinking have left the Big XII in a weakened state. I’ve certainly done my share of blame laying, but the simple fact is that the Big XII is becoming the worst of all possible options. The promise of a massive media deal doesn’t mean much when your supposed partner is poaching your best teams.
Which is why my original sentiment still stands
and I think that this ultimatum is still bullshit.
It might not be about Missouri and Nebraska, but they are damn well sure making it seem like if we don’t commit, and the conference falls apart, it’s on our schools heads.
Don’t call it an ultimatum, and make sure you get buy in from all of the schools that are rumored.
At the very least, again, why isn’t Texas being called on the carpet here as well. Let’s find out where they stand for sure. It this is about fealty, make them sign on for this as well. Let’s find out where they stand by Friday or the Friday after that or whenever the deadline is.
Pigskin Punditry
Follow me on Twitter
I reject your reality and substitute my own." ~ Adam Savage, Mythbusters
Because Texas wants to stay, as they've stated repeatedly.
Texas is willing to sign as long as everyone else does.
Mizzou and Nebraska seem to be the only ones who might not want to stay in the Big XII assuming it stays the same.
I don't think anyone is feeling sorry for Texas (perhaps Iowa State and the Kansas schools).
All I was sayin is that Texas is willing to agree to stay, as long as the conference keeps its current membership. The reason no one is giving Texas an ultimatum is because they already made it clear they are in as long as everyone else is.
We’re just waiting on Mizzou and Nebraska to decide if their in.
Out of curiosity:
What if Texas was approached with an ultimatum preventing them from ever creating a Longhorn Sports Network that could hamper the viability of any future Big 12 Network? Is that a sacrifice Delo$$ is going to be willing to make?
by RPT on Jun 6, 2010 2:48 PM CDT up reply actions
Who knows what Texas is willing to concede in this.
If it is important to Mizzou, they can require Texas to agree to a Big 12 network in exchange for staying. That is certainly a card Mizzou can play in response to the ultimatum.
And what leads you to believe that Mizzou has that leverage?
Texas isn’t willing to budge on $3 million in appearance fees. Why would they ever let Mizzou dictate to them regarding a Texas network? When has Texas ever been willing to concede on anything?
Well I can't really blame Texas for wanting to look out for it's interests
I do think in order for the entire league to remain relevant we will need a Big 12 network of some kind, or something to help bridge the revenue gap between us and the other BCS leagues.
When Texas' interests involve...
…setting up an independent network so that they don’t have to share with the conference, you can’t call them honest brokers. These ultimatums will not fix the fundamental problems in the conference, the primary one being that none of the members trust each other or are willing to work together to make the conference as a whole stronger.
The Big XII voted against a conference network a couple of years ago.
Texas invested the money in their own network because they saw the possibilities.
They want to reep the revenue that they are producing. I don’t see it as any different from Mizzou adding more club seats which only benefits them. They don’t share that money with Iowa State.
I don't blame Texas for maximizing its revenue.
The other university presidents just need to quit the facade of the “We’re all in this together!” mentality.
by RPT on Jun 6, 2010 3:18 PM CDT up reply actions
Agreed. All conferences exist for the sake of the individual member institutions.
The idea is that some things are more cost effective if done in bulk, like scheduling. Some things are easier if done separately, like ticket sales.
Are you honestly saying
That Mizzou adding seats at its own stadium is the same as Texas setting up an independent television network to undermine the rest of the conference? Seriously?
Pardon me for speaking for Wahoo...
… but like he said, the conference as a whole said no to a TV network before. That’s why Kevin Weiberg stormed out. It’s not undermining unless Texas opts to do it now.
by RPT on Jun 6, 2010 3:21 PM CDT up reply actions
It's not equivalent.
It’s a spectrum. The question is which revenue should be split and how should it be split. Generally ticket revenues and donations are allocated all to the school that earns them, TV money is split partially, and bowl money is split entirely.
You obviously think that TV money should be split entirely, and Texas obviously disagrees. But Iowa State might think that ticket revenues should be split entirely. Just because you have a different idea about how the money should be divided doesn’t mean that another way is wrong for the conference.
Texas Wahoo
Do you think Texas will turn down a Pac 10 invite if Mizzou and Nebraska agree to stay in Big 12?
by MUSteelersRoyalsFan on Jun 6, 2010 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions
Yes, I truly believe that.
They’ve said as much (and I don’t hink they’re lying). Texas wants to stay in the Big XII, but only if it remains as is. We don’t want to add CSU and New Mexico and keep it as is.
If texas has the power to create a tv network for itself
why wouldn’t it? If it makes them $$$ then they should do it. And why should the other 11 teams get money that texas earned? especially since texas earned it by doing something that isn’t controlled by the big 12
Great Odin's Raven I love Mike "The Predator" Dixon!
Why did the Big 12 vote down a network?
If it was fear of it not working, can’t they just re-visit this now that the Big 10 network has given everyone a working model?
by MUSteelersRoyalsFan on Jun 6, 2010 3:42 PM CDT up reply actions
Fear of the unknown
Exact same reason everyone laughed at the Big Ten when their network was originally approved. It’s easy to look at history in hindsight and say it was stupid, but at the time, almost NO ONE outside the Big Ten thought this would work.
by RPT on Jun 6, 2010 3:43 PM CDT up reply actions
So, why don't they re-visit it now?
by MUSteelersRoyalsFan on Jun 6, 2010 3:44 PM CDT up reply actions
If I were beebe i would focus on keeping the conference together
before working on a tv network
Great Odin's Raven I love Mike "The Predator" Dixon!
$64,000 question
Technically, the $20 million question.
by RPT on Jun 6, 2010 3:46 PM CDT up reply actions
But the only reason they are able to do this is because Nebraska, A&M, and OU always vote against a change.
Mizzou has the leverage if everyone else wants a Big XII network. You just have to get Nebraska to agree with you.
If Texas doesn't agree, then they will have to leave the conference.
You will be putting the onus back on them to decide.
Do we have any idea...
Of what the repercussions would be if we broke this sort of contract? It sounds cheap, but say we didn’t get informal confirmation from the Big 10 before the deadline, couldn’t we just agree to the contract then back out and pay the “fee” if a warm invitation is extended later?
"I'm pretty sure there's more to life than being really, really, ridiculously good looking. And I plan on finding out what that is."
If the Big 10 truly wants NU and MU
They need to hurry up. They may have their own little timetable, but I can’t fathom how Nebraska and Mizzou could possibly have the stones to give UT the middle finger without some assurances from the Big 10. That sort of move would be flat out reckless.
"My hardest job is to convince the people of Nebraska that 10-1 is not a losing season." - Tom Osborne
So the other question is
What happens if one commits and the other doesn’t. Will Texas still walk if say just Nebraska refuses to commit?
I'm thinking
Or maybe hoping, that the ultimatum/contract in question is not binding until all 12 schools sign on. Otherwise, MU and NU are placing their trust in Texas to not stick them with the “Big 6” the moment the PAC 10 comes calling and starts flashing their millions. Do we honestly trust Texas to not do that? As far as I’m concerned uh $#%@ NO!
"My hardest job is to convince the people of Nebraska that 10-1 is not a losing season." - Tom Osborne
Bingo.
Osborne and Alden need to divide up this list and start making some calls:
Stanley Ikenberry
Michael McRobbie
Sally Mason
Mary Sue Coleman
Lou Anna Simon
Robert Bruininks
Morton Schapiro
Gordon Gee
Graham Spanier
France Córdova
Kevin Reilly
Obviously they can’t say anything official, but a straw poll of university presidents at MU and NU’s disposal couldn’t be a bad thing, right?
by RPT on Jun 6, 2010 2:53 PM CDT up reply actions
I bet they have already started doing that
Im sure the Big 10 meetings are fun right now.
Great moments are born from great opportunity.
Follow me on Twitter @muwxman
man the tension at these meetings....
"I'm pretty sure there's more to life than being really, really, ridiculously good looking. And I plan on finding out what that is."
by CEW on Jun 6, 2010 3:14 PM CDT up reply actions
Well, in the end, every school must look out for itself first....
That said, Mizzou and Nebraska have kinda been thrust into each others arms a little bit by the Big 12’s fuming at them.
"My hardest job is to convince the people of Nebraska that 10-1 is not a losing season." - Tom Osborne
Not crazy about how this is shaping up.
We need these other entities more than they need us. Pretty much across the board. As a Kansas Citian I have been through the process of getting excited about something only to be a pawn for someone else to improve their situation via the Pittsburgh Penguins moving shenanigans.
by ZachIsHere on Jun 6, 2010 3:18 PM CDT reply actions 4 recs
"We need these other entities more than they need us."
If I could Rec this multiple times, I would do so.
by RPT on Jun 6, 2010 3:20 PM CDT up reply actions
Simplifying all of this...
I look at how all these things are connected and the leverage everyone has or doesn’t have over each other. We are just not in a power position. Who knows…maybe this will turn out for the best. I sure as hell hope so. But what I am seeing right now is this for Mizzou fans.
Let's see if this makes any difference
From the AP on Pac 10 meetings:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hnzIhFaatwkq64GmeoMWPwy9xbcwD9G604SG2
by MUSteelersRoyalsFan on Jun 6, 2010 3:28 PM CDT reply actions
and now let the fireworks begin
Great moments are born from great opportunity.
Follow me on Twitter @muwxman
I dont know if this link has been posted:
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/12969/nebraska-e-mails-osborne-tressel-met-in-april
Maybe Alden met with Jo Pa
Great moments are born from great opportunity.
Follow me on Twitter @muwxman
So, what happens to us if...
Nebraska leaves for Big 10 and six leave for Pac 10?
by MUSteelersRoyalsFan on Jun 6, 2010 3:38 PM CDT reply actions
we're screwed?
hopefully MU, ku, K state, iowa state, and baylor can join together and grab some non automatic bcs qualifier teams (TCU houston memphis Boise Utah BYU) and make a whole new conference. thats what I would like to see.
Great Odin's Raven I love Mike "The Predator" Dixon!
IF Mizzou is stuck...
Time to look at rallying the remaining members of the Big 12 and start looking at teams that would fit…
Starting with Tulsa, Memphis, TCU, Colorado State, Houston, Louisville (YUK!),
There is a God and I'm not it, after that EVERYTHING is subjective. Be careful for what you wish for, you just might GET IT!
Thats the worst case scenario
I guess we would still be in the same conference as KU at least. But would MU still be a BCS team? Now it seems we have lost a lot of leverage if any of these PAC-10 rumors are true. Another question I have is if Mizzou states it will be back w/ the Big 12 but the PAC-10 offer is too good to pass up, wouldn’t Mizzou be in the same spot as it is now and the negative financial threats by signing this “new contract” for leaving the conference be moot at that point? Like a good Mizzou fan, I feel like no matter what happens over the next few weeks and months we are going to be screwed.
At some point, you have to have faith in people's word
Texas’ best bet is to stay with the Big 12, as long as it’s not weaker that it currently is. Why? Because they have the most money and the most athletic prestige and is the best academic school in the conference (I’m pretty sure, maybe Baylor or A&M are better, but it’s close).
If Texas doesn’t leave, I don’t see OU or any of the Texas schools leaving. If OU doesn’t leave, OSU stays put.
While Texas may get a little more money out of going to the Pac-16, they’re not the biggest boy at the party anymore, and will not be able to drive conference policy when they’re up against USC, UCLA and Cal as well as they can in the B12. Same in the Big 10 for them. They can’t run the show when tOSU and Michigan are also in the room. If the status quo is held up, they’re in better shape than they are if it gets broken up.
So to summarize
Not only are the Big XII members not on the plane, half of them are at a different airport and the other half are running madly around the tarmac hoping not to get run over.
by Gaknar on Jun 6, 2010 3:49 PM CDT reply actions 2 recs
Via Twitter stream of Teddy Greenstein (Chicago Trib)
Jim Delany: “The timeline could be affected.” In other words, it will be affected.
Seriously...
Some group/school step up to the plate and make a formal invitation. The press has taken control of this whole thing.
by MUSteelersRoyalsFan on Jun 6, 2010 4:14 PM CDT reply actions
I can't believe . . .
. . . the Big 10 will let the PAC go to 16 teams without going to at least 14 themselves. They should still leave Mizzou in play for that conference. If not, it will mean the Big East will be decimated, which will send shock waves all the way down the eastern seaboard to Miami. The SEC and ACC would definitely also expand, offering even more opportunities to quality universities. No doubt somewhere we would get an invite ahead of Kansas or KState, though we might have to travel farther than before – though travelling to Texas has been quite a trip. Congress might definitely get involved if four super-conferences grab control of NCAA sports; so even a decent – though not overwhelming – conference in the middle of the country should still get its share of bowl and tournament invites.
You know they're going to butt in . . .
. . . and try to “fix” anything that they think will get to big – history says so.
Oh I know you're right
I’m just trying to frolic around singing with hands over my ears at the thought of an eventual Congressional shitshow.
Your first sentence is an important one
when considering the “ultimatum”. As is the case with many of these scenarios, it comes down to Mizzou being an invited school with the Big 10 going to 14 or 16. Given all that’s been said on the topic, I have to think there are pretty good odds there.
"I'm a genius, but I'm a misunderstood genius."
"What's misunderstood about you?"
"Nobody thinks I'm a genius."
by Transmogrified Tiger on Jun 6, 2010 4:40 PM CDT up reply actions
"I have to think there are pretty good odds there."
Why is that? You left about a billion possible scenarios out…a lot of them bad for Mizzou.
I would agree that none of the other conferences would want to be upstaged by the pac 10
so that opens up a lot of new openings from other conferences that mizzou can be considered for.
Great Odin's Raven I love Mike "The Predator" Dixon!
The odds of the Big 12 dying and the Big 10 not expanding or only going to 12
are very small, would you agree? So that means that either the Big 12 lives and Mizzou is fine, or the Big 10 adds 3-5 teams, and Mizzou stands a pretty good chance of being in that group. This is not to say “stop worrying, there’s no chance Mizzou gets left behind”, but considering that there’s going to be a chain reaction regardless of which conference goes first, it should be a little reassuring on a day of hearing “PICK A SIDE!” from the Big 12.
"I'm a genius, but I'm a misunderstood genius."
"What's misunderstood about you?"
"Nobody thinks I'm a genius."
by Transmogrified Tiger on Jun 6, 2010 4:59 PM CDT up reply actions
why wouldn't the B10 stop at 12 teams?
if we’re to believe Delaney’s previous statements, they’re currently researching which option is best, and if their research shows that adding just one team is a better move than adding three or five, I could absolutely see them adding one team and calling it a day, regardless what the Pac 10 or SEC does.
I think the Big 10 is going to do what it believes is best for the Big 10 and its current members, and isn’t as concerned with matching the other conferences. The Big 10 has resisted until this year adding a 12th team, despite seeing how having a 12th team benefited the Big 12, SEC and ACC. If the Big 10 finds that expanding beyond 12 teams isn’t a good idea, they could certainly go to 12 and watch other conferences take on the added risks and costs of creating a super conference.
Follow me on twitter.com/SteveCusumano
Not saying they would
but, if the Big 10 gets them, they will stop at 12 teams. Unless they get them AND Notre Dame, then they’ll add one more team and stop at 14.
thats 20 milliom dollars
just saved you guys alot of math
Great Odin's Raven I love Mike "The Predator" Dixon!
Regarding Big Ten
The conventional wisdom is that Jim Delany is sitting back wiggling his fingers and saying “Eeeeeeeeeeexcellent”, but I’m starting to wonder if the Big Ten has lost control of the narrative. If the conjecture is true that the Big Ten’s maneuverings were designed to get Notre Dame, is the Big Ten really ready to blow up college football for that? What started off as posturing by the SEC and Big XII has turned into brinksmanship. The Big XII is ripping itself apart, the Pac-10 and MWC are circling the corpse, the SEC is eying the ACC, and the Big East seems to be hiding in a bunker somewhere. I have a hard time believing that Delany planned all of this.
Maybe this is poorly thought...
but if Beebe is so keen on the continuation of the Big 12, wouldn’t it behoove him to try and expand the Big 12? Why not turn the tables, and invite teams to the Big 12? Or am I missing something?
"I'm pretty sure there's more to life than being really, really, ridiculously good looking. And I plan on finding out what that is."
Hard to imagine who the Big 12 could get that would make the conference stronger
TCU doesn’t add TV sets; Utah isn’t a bad choice but they’re pretty far-flung; Boise is even more far-flung and academically they make Okie State look like Michigan; Arkansas won’t bolt the SEC; Memphis isn’t a terrible idea in basketball but there’s not much of a football history and this is all about football; maybe Louisville or Cinci would leave the Big East, but also maybe not. I’m just not sure who the Big 12 could pick up that makes it stronger.
by Professor Chaos on Jun 6, 2010 5:02 PM CDT up reply actions
It's too late for that
The Big XII looks weak and no serious candidate is going to want to join a conference that looks like it’s going to blow itself apart.
I somewhat disagree.
IF the Big 12 emerges from this with 12 “committed” teams and hope for at least an improved TV contract, I think teams that the conference would offer (assuming we’re talking about MWC or CUSA teams) would accept. But … who?
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
Ignoring lingering resentments
I would say Memphis, TCU, New Mexico and Utah, but that assumes that Big XII is strong enough to muscle MWC (no guarantee right now) and that Pac-10 doesn’t swoop in first.
even if beebe offered I dont think anyone would accept
Great Odin's Raven I love Mike "The Predator" Dixon!
Who would you invite?
No one would want to leave the SEC, Big Ten, or PAC-10 for the Big 12. I don’t think there is a team in the MWC that could improve the Big 12 from a money standpoint either. Sure Boise State or Utah might be good additions for football but that increases travel without bringing any additional money for tv.
Well I think that's going to happen regardless, especially once the first invitation is extended.
"I'm pretty sure there's more to life than being really, really, ridiculously good looking. And I plan on finding out what that is."
by CEW on Jun 6, 2010 4:59 PM CDT up reply actions
So it is probably a good idea that...
The Big 12 not just go crazy and start inviting any school who fields a team. Either make the conference better or have it fail fast. Adding mediocre teams does nothing to help anyone in this situation.
I've been wondering about this....
But even if the Tejas and OK teams left for the Pac10 wouldn’t the BXII technically still exist as a BCS AQ conference with the remaining schools? And from here grab some of the better MWC teams to get back up to 12 and voila (pro: voy-la) you are once again the BXII with a makeover. Maybe not as prestigious as when you had TX and OK but i wouldn’t think they could take away the BCS Automatic Qualifier tag.
Just something i haven’t seen brought up at all. As a B11 honk i hope we get both Mizzou and Neb but who the hell knows what’s gonna happen.
I just wanted to say ‘Good Luck. We’re all counting on you.’
You're counting on us??
Yall will be fine. We’re counting on you.
For what it’s worth, the qualifications for the BCS have been released. If the sole purpose of Big Remainder expansion is to maintain its AQ status and not worry about media markets, those are the requirements that’ll have to be filled.
by RPT on Jun 6, 2010 6:46 PM CDT up reply actions
If I'm not mistaken...
…that might have been a reference to a line from Airplane.
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
Yep.
Dan Beebe picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.
Chicago White Sox Examiner — IT'S A JEEP THING YOU WOULDN'T UNDERSTAND
by UribeAuction on Jun 6, 2010 11:08 PM CDT up reply actions
USC, etc. are not going to let UT dictate their take
this is being ignored. UT floated this idea out to the Pac10. The Pac10 folks are dolts. They thought, “sure, sounds cool and people are talking about us, even cooler.” But, once the number crunching really happens, the Pac10 members are going to revolt at the UT and perhaps OU, A&M demands
ND AD at Big 10 Meetings
http://www.collegefantasyfootballinsider.com/pages/content/news-item.aspx?q=16692
Whoever said, 'It's not whether you win or lose that counts,' probably lost.
Martina Navratilova
by tigers and chiefs fan on Jun 6, 2010 8:44 PM CDT reply actions
So...
Does that mean ND has an official invitation? Why else would they be invited to a Big 10 president’s meeting?
by MUSteelersRoyalsFan on Jun 6, 2010 9:42 PM CDT up reply actions
....or he wasn't
http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/06/06/irishs-swarbrick-at-big-ten-meetings-today——not/
"I'm a genius, but I'm a misunderstood genius."
"What's misunderstood about you?"
"Nobody thinks I'm a genius."
by Transmogrified Tiger on Jun 6, 2010 9:47 PM CDT up reply actions
Wow, this whole thing is out of control
The schools really need to do something because the media is really steering this process it seems. It is so hard to tell fact from fiction right now. The school’s need to stop all the “no comments” and start setting the record straight.
by MUSteelersRoyalsFan on Jun 6, 2010 9:59 PM CDT up reply actions
The evidently incorrect story about the ND AD being at big 10 meetings
is spreading like wild fire. I have seen it in many blogs and at least one newspaper report. Crazy!
by MUSteelersRoyalsFan on Jun 6, 2010 10:58 PM CDT up reply actions
the ghosts of Woody Hays, Bo Schembeckler and Joe Paterno
are all there too.
The sleeper has awoken. . .awakened. . .he woke up.
by SleepyFloyd7 on Jun 6, 2010 11:14 PM CDT up reply actions
So
The ND AD both was and was not at the Big Ten meeting? Someone collapse his wave function so we can get this silliness over with.
by Gaknar on Jun 6, 2010 9:58 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
he apparently kinda stood halfway in the door...it looked pretty wierd so no one knew what to make of it.
Great Odin's Raven I love Mike "The Predator" Dixon!
Aren't there a few contracts involved here
that make an ‘ultimatum’ a bit tricky? What is the point of all the legal bindings of the conference, specifically previously agreed upon rules for penalties for leaving the conference? And if those can somehow be voided overnight, wouldn’t it take a 9-3 vote- and that 9 would have to include several teams that will be screwed in the process (left in the dust as UT and pals ride off to the west)?
And how the hell would this thing work going forward with two members who had been threatened into staying? The league staying intact, with UT unequivically, absoultely making every decision, and undoubtedly incapable of not rubbing it in at every opportunity, sounds like a freaking nightmare. ’We’ll finish it’ – what a bunch of jackasses.
On a happier note, I really do think MU will be fine. I think it likely we get a Big Ten invite, either we already have one, or we get one when UT takes their ball and goes west. We still are an attractive media market, and are athletically and academically solid enough to be wanted. And if we get stuck in some kind of left over amalgamation conf. with some old Big 8 schools, so be it.
It is a question of risk
If MU doesn’t have an official invite by Friday, then I don’t know that they can risk refusing to sign on. I think the nine schools not looking to leave (MU, Neb, and Colorado) would all vote for the rule change, unless A&M really wants to go to the SEC.
One thing you have not considered is Texas football is about passion.There is no passion playing Washington State.The Texas fan base is generally opposed to the Pac 10
Texas Fan Base
is never going to stop going to Texas football, unfortunately that point is pretty much useless (no offense). I’m sure at one point Texas had no desire to play kU in football either.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
