If that happens, would anyone be shocked if the Big-12 end up behind the Big Ten, SEC, PAC-12, and perhaps the ACC in TV revenues? If we don't invite BYU, this conference is a complete joke. (The scary thing is BYU just might also turn us down.)
Well, if BYU is looking for stability Mizzou leaving would be the best thing for us... Remember.. Mizzou started all this conference **** and have waivered ever since.
Gosh, Santafe, when Missouri leaves, what television draw is left? I mean, for the most part, Texas, right? Whatever the Horns bring in, plus, to a lesser degree, OU? We can add Louisville, Cincinnati, Tulane, West Virginia all day long and the B2 is going to trail far, far behind the SEC, B1G, and PAC in Tier 1 and 2 revenue streams in the very near future. I do think the B2 will trail the ACC, and I could see the B2 trailing conferences such as the Big East and MWC/CUSA if the B2 continues to insist on "proximity" as its driving force in "rebuilding" the league. TCU is a colossal blunder, and Tulane would be the equivalent, even if TCU is an easy drive and Tulane presents the Big Easy. Can Texas' LHN Tier 3 make up the difference for Texas (but then, only for Texas)? We don't know this answer yet, but if it means rubbing shoulders with the TCU's, Tulane's, and Louisville's of the world, within a conference context, is that worth it? And when you read Bill Powers' comments in his Austin Statesman-American interview, I am absolutely shocked at how clueless and contradictory the man is. We are currently being led by the inept. Very weak, Bill Powers is. Regarding BYU, I hear (Salt Lake Tribune) there are several hangups. First, BYU wants to be able to replay their games less than 72 hours after the game ends, which is a no-no with the networks. Secondly, BYU's religious rule about not playing sports on Sundays has upset the TV moguls, who might want to have basketball, possibly the tournament, on Sunday. Next, BYU wants to be televised "x" number of times per season. Lastly, BYU has turned somewhat "sour" in the negotiations, and, if you can believe it, BYU's "attitude" has become an issue in adding them. I thought Texas was supposed to be the arrogant one. The truth is, Longhorn018, Rex Kramer started all this realignment back in the 1980s. It has only reached a critical mass in the last couple of years.
Big12 has been great for Missouri.. Missouri gets tons of Texas kids that if the go to the sec probably won't go
Texas A&M is in the SEC now. Missouri's State of Texas recruiting ought to be just fine if they go to the SEC. I suspect Missouri would prefer to be in the aggy's division, sure, but the SEC now = State of Texas. We better get that through our head. The SEC in Texas is a huge paradigm shift in conference realignment. And yet we here at Texas sit around, in our provincial arrogance, mumbling, "no big deal." The SEC in Texas is a very big deal, mark it down, and it will affect The University of Texas in a myriad of negative ways if we continue to respond as we are today. The "answer" to the SEC in Texas, for example, is not TCU, for goodness sakes. Talk about putting a band-aide on a severed arm. Yet Bill Powers is completely passive, disinterested, and clueless. I mean, the guy actually says the "trend" is to smaller conferences, when right before his very eyes the SEC is at 13, going to 14, and the ACC has gone to 14. We hear rumblings from the Big East and rumors of a merger between the MWC and CUSA. But the "trend" is to smaller conferences? What is Bill Powers thinking, for crying out loud? There's some very flawed thinking going on in Bellmont Hall right now.
I'm sure Texas will do what Texas has to do to make a buck, but unless some of that money is going into my bank account, or lowers ticket prices I'm not losing any sleep over who comes, or goes.
I suspect you will lose sleep over things like national championships, won-loss records, recruiting, and facilities, Third Coast, because all those things, not just money, are also impacted by conference realignment. This does not even include a move to a broader playoff system, which you may say you could care less about, but which you will care a helluva lot about if Texas' conference made that much more difficult on Texas to participate in.
The only positive from Mizzou leaving is it probably forces the return of the Big 12 Championship game. The big drawback is that Cincy as that 3rd addition sounds awful. I can live with Louisville and West Virginia..
Xover, you are right, except for Texas (and OU), this conference doesn't offer much. If BYU will not become a Big-12 member and we are forced to offer Louisville and West Virginia. We are in trouble. But I'm thinking West Virginia probably wouldn't join because of the long road trips they would have to make. It's going to funny when the Big-12 has to renegotiate a new TV contract. I'd love to see our conference last behind the Big Ten, SEC, PAC-12, ACC, and the Big East (though falling behind the Big East would be a stretch). Hopefully, this will force Texas to see the light and jump to the Big Ten or PAC-12. I can't see Texas being happy with the reduced Big-12 TV money, bowl money, and TV ratings that will ensue after losing Nebraska, Colorado, A&M, and Missouri and adding TCU and Louisville and/or West Virginia.
Is the LHN worth staying in a crappy conference? A fool and his money are soon parted, or something like that.
Santafe: I think West Virginia is a big unknown. I could see them passing on the B2 (because they are an eastern school at heart), or I could see them coming to the B2 (out of fear of being left out of the SEC, ACC, and B1G). After BYU, WV is the best school out there, but amazingly, the B2 have more interest in the TCUs and Tulanes of the world. The B2 is determined to build a conference out of "proximity", apparently. Yea, winding up with a worse TV deal than the Big East (and probably the ACC) may be a bit of a stretch, but when MU leaves, the B2 contract will definitely be behind those of the SEC, B1G, and PAC. With only the State of Texas, I can't see it winding up any other way. Because of the desire to await results of the LHN, I don't see Texas making any move in the next few months if they don't have to. Realignment may be reaching a new equilibrium after the SEC reaches 14, and the Big East, MWC, and CUSA settle down in the wake of the SEC & ACC movement to 14. This equilibrium could last for a few months or several years, depending on changes in various factors, such as: * Texas becomes disappointed in Tier 1, 2, or 3 revenues from the B2 or the LHN in the future. * OU gets frustrated again, and is able to move to the PAC or SEC, with or without OSU (or Texas). * Notre Dame abandons independence, and joins a conference, probably due to insufficient TV revenues (if its ratings continue to slump). * The B2 realizes it really does need a conference playoff, thus igniting movement all over again. * The SEC combines with one or more conferences to leave the NCAA in a push to establish a rudimentary playoff system. * Other unforeseen issues that impact money. TexasTower: I would love it if you would harmonize Bill Powers' comments as reported in the Austin Statesman-American. The guy says "geographic proximity is huge", yet he admits Texas was having "discussions" with the ACC and PAC - two conferences that are the antithesis of "geographic proximity" (but no discussions with the SEC, which is now inside and a part of the State of Texas). The man claims we "aren't going to megaconferences", yet the ACC just added two to get to 14, the SEC is at 13 going to 14, the B2 is about to lose Missouri, and the MWC and CUSA are talking about a merger. In addition, there's exactly zero Division 1 conferences out there that have concluded "holding at 10" is a good idea, with the sole exception of Bill Powers' B2 conference. If it's ignorant to wonder if Bill Powers is weak with obviously contradictory comments and analysis such as this, then I don't know what to tell you.
FWIW, Missouri removed all Big 12 signs and insignia from their field and other stadium locations prior to Saturday's game with ISU. Them Tiger boys are basically gone.
I negotiate in a very serious way virtually everyday, TexasTower. It's part of my job. I have taken several "classes" that impinge on negotiation, as well as listened to some excellent lectures specifically about negotiation. Let's see: there's splitting the difference (then splitting that difference), good guy-bad guy, resort to higher authority (and it's comeback), "feel, felt, found", etc. All in hopes of achieving, if you're a good negotiator, a win-win outcome. Allow me to demonstrate one technique on you TexasTower: I know how you feel when I say Bill Powers is weak. I have felt that way myself when others have criticized Bill Powers. But I have found Bill Powers' comments in his latest interview to be contradictory, suggesting he is weak on matters relevant to conference realignment. Back to the topic at hand: I have never, however, heard any expert in negotiation say "be contradictory," or "act like you don't know what's going on," or "say something that flies in the face of observable, objective data." That's not part of my instruction in negotiation, TexasTower. With all this said, there is never any end to the art of negotiation, and I understand that. Therefore, instead of throwing gross conclusions at me -- "It's ignorant to think Bill Powers is weak" -- why don't you try explaining to me (and others) where the negotiating upside is to Bill Powers' contradictory statements? Upthread I've quoted some of the contradictory statements (in one interview, no less) the man has made. It is my view that when Texas' position is presented in such a contradictory fashion -- "proximity is good, therefore we've had discussions with the PAC and ACC", etc. (see upthread) -- that isn't good communication, it isn't good PR, and therefore it isn't good "negotiation." It is good to you, though, and I would simply like to know why. Until then, two things: (1) Texas is being led by a very weak Bill Powers, and (2) we must agree to disagree (another negotiation "technique", by the way).
No one knows what is going on since none of us are a party to the negotiations. Powers looks no less inept than aggy's Barney Fife. However I would be shocked if Deloss was not doing all of the negotiations.
Be shocked, ViperHorn. Last month the Texas' BOR specifically empowered Bill Powers, not DeLoss Dodds, to make decisions with respect to conference affiliation. Given Powers recent comments, I am extremely happy the BOR also required Powers to report back to them any final conclusions, as the BOR retained final authority to act for The University of Texas, not Bill Powers. In defense of your comment, I harbor no illusions that DeLoss Dodds is part of Powers' decision-making team, as is, apparently, Mack Brown. I personally think it was Brown's September comment about "kid's families want to play locally" that caused Texas (according to Neinas) to change its mind about TCU coming into the conference. The Oklahoma schools apparently also wanted to replace aggy with another Texas team (probably for recruiting purposes), and possibly TCU was presented as a way to (1) make Mack Brown happy, (2) make the Oklahoma schools happy, and (3) lessen the perception of Texas being a "conference bully". No doubt there was much backroom negotiation (as you suggest, ViperHorn) that went into TCU being selected for B2 membership over any other school. Still, in the end, the TCU decision will, I think, prove to be a colossal blunder that will manifest itself in a very short period of time. In the end, all TCU will bring is a short drive from Austin, Waco, and Norman, and a manageable drive from Lubbock and Stillwater. Other than proximity, TCU is a big, fat zero, including win-loss record, as will be revealed in the next couple of years as TCU reoccupies its traditional spot as a bottom dweller when a member of a conference that includes Texas. TCU is another Baylor, period, end of story. If you like Baylor, you're going to love TCU. Let me defend Bill Powers and his dismal ASA interview for a second. First, Bill Powers has a lot more on his mind than conference affiliation. Maybe Powers had other things on his mind. Or maybe Powers was insufficiently briefed prior to the interview. Maybe Powers didn't sufficiently study realignment issues on his own before the interview. Maybe Powers was taken out of context. Maybe Powers just misspoke. There's lots of possibilities. But the reality is that Powers came across as contradictory and apparently in the dark (confused?) as to what other major conferences are in the process of doing. The SEC, B1G, PAC, ACC, Big East, MWC/CUSA are simply not looking to become "moderately sized" conferences, meaning, as Powers seems to infer, 10-team conferences. They are also not looking to become "regional" in the sense of adding teams from within their existing footprint, as the B2 did by adding TCU. Not one major conference this year (or last year, or in '92, or '90) has added a team within its existing footprint, with the sole exception of the B2 this year. Powers is simply wrong with respect to various critical analytical statements that he made in his ASA interview. I find this to be a sign of serious weakness on the topic of conference realignment, yes I do. And if the argument is: Powers can't tell us everything because of the need for privacy for on-going negotiations, fine. Just say so, Bill. Just say something like, "there are some things going on that really excite me for The University of Texas, but which I cannot fully discuss at this point in time, due to the sensitive nature of the situation." There's nothing wrong with that. Instead, Powers says "proximity; therefore, PAC and ACC"?, which sounds to me to be, at best, clever, or worse, misinformed. The man sounds very, very weak to me, especially as the SEC has just planted its flag in the State of Texas, a very significant development. And the B2's answer to the SEC invading Texas is ... TCU? The SEC is laughing at the TCU addition all the way to the bank. Be honest with yourself: How many times have you watched a TCU game from beginning to end since TCU has been "good" (about 12 years now)? How many of you even watched TCU's Rose Bowl victory over Wisconsin? Outside of the B2, nobody is going to watch TCU in the future because TCU is a helluva lot more irrelevant than is Texas A&M, Missouri, Nebraska, or even Colorado, regardless of TCU's recent won-loss record, because those other teams have significant fanbases that actually watch their teams on TV (and in the stands). Won-loss records are irrelevant if no one's actually watching your games. In truth and fact, Tulane would have been a better add for the B2 than TCU, since Tulane is located in SEC country, given that the SEC is now in Texas, and assuming "proximity" is now the primary driver in B2 rebuilding. But I digress. It's fine not scheduling A&M, I'm down with that, but please don't lose sight of the fact that the SEC has become a huge player in the State of Texas, and if Texas doesn't make sound decisions right now, our conference, if not The University of Texas, will be left behind sucking wind. Some are okay with that occurring so long as Texas plays some warm-bodied team each Saturday during football season. I'm not. And in the face of these challenges, yes, I am concerned that Bill Powers' syntax is all over the place, making it sound like he doesn't know what he's talking about. That is bothersome.
And Texas inches close to independence. Its absolutely disgusting how the Big-12 has just stood by and watched the SEC poach two of its teams, and done nothing to shore up the conference. And no, adding TCU is not shoring up the conference. Serioulsy the Big-12 needs to play real hard ball with both A&m and Mizzou on exit fees, make it as expensive as possible, making the Nebraska and CU fees look like a pittance.
nothing yet, but Slive is looking to creating a SEC Network that would bring in some major cash. Don’t count your chickens before they are hatched. Setting up an SEC network will probably not be as easy you think and hope it is. Firstly, this is not the PAC of the B1G we are talking about. This is cutthroat SEC. Convincing the likes of Florida/Alabama/LSU to give up their valuable third tier rights for the benefit of the likes of Mississippi State may not be as easy as convincing USC to give up third tier right for the benefit of WSU! If Florida third tier rights are work $10 million a year, then MSU third tier rights are probably worth $1 million for an average of $5.5 million. I don’t see how an SEC network will pay Florida more than $10 million per year. So what is Florida’s motivation for giving up its third tier rights to the SEC? Both MSU and Florida will get $5.5 million each. Florida loses $4.5 million a year! Even allowing for a 20% premium because it will be a conference network, means both schools get abut $6.7 million each per year. So how is an SEC network going to benefit Florida? Try convincing the Florida AD or the BOR that joining an SEC network be good for the university. Also, SEC network rights belong to ESPN, Florida third tier right belong to Fox for the next several years. How do you propose setting up an SEC network that will bring in tons of money, when rights are owned by two competitors? A true SEC network may happen eventually, when contracts come up for renewal, but that might take a few years to happen. I don’t think it will happen overnight.
aggy cracks me up with all their LHN talk. You do realize you are going to a conference where tier-3 money is controlled by each university? Obviously not. Florida has the Sunshine Network and is raking $10m per year. Obviously the SEC would allow the LHN. btw, the SEC has cupcakes on everyone's schedule too : Miss St., Vanderbilt, Old Miss, ... and now Texas A&M.
All schools in the big 12 and the sec have the right to maximize tier 3 rights. The LHN and the gator deal are the result of that truth. Corn had 3 tier 3 ppv events in a sinlge year before they left the big 12. Texas will not be the last school to have their own network and there will be a lot of backpeddling on this issue over the next 5 years or so by a lot of the schools complaining right now.
