***Conference Apocalypse Part IV: The NeverEnding Story

[S11-Baylor]

The Big 12 is being smart. The Big Ten or SEC is likely to take another ACC team... AFTER the Maryland crap gets sorted out. I still think we end up with 2 or more ACC teams after that happens. ACC is witholding revenue NOW from MD which is against their bylaws. At minimum I would expect another departing team to wait for the courts to set them straight on that before moving so they won't be without any league revenue for the short term.

[TeLeFaWx]

The Big 12 is being smart. The Big Ten or SEC is likely to take another ACC team... AFTER the Maryland crap gets sorted out. I still think we end up with 2 or more ACC teams after that happens. ACC is witholding revenue NOW from MD which is against their bylaws. At minimum I would expect another departing team to wait for the courts to set them straight on that before moving so they won't be without any league revenue for the short term.

Meh. Once the 4 team playoff contract runs out, and it moves to an 8 team playoff, the Big 12 Champ will receive an auto-bid to the playoff. They will get wrecked by whatever SEC team they face, and probably score no more than 14(Oklahoma hasn't scored more than 14 against the SEC in the post season in over a decade), but at least they will get there. Same goes for the ACC. It would be stupid to expand at this point.

Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*

[Camel at Sea]

Problem is if your on the wrong side of too many in state match-ups (big bro- little bro, not who wins in a given year) you become a little sister conference. Like MR pibb to DR pepper

UL-Kentucky
Tulune-LSU
GT-UGA

Certainly UCF or USF

Im ok with GT and probably Louisville but keep out Tulane, UCF, USF etc...

I agree with this sentiment. But I think looking at the potential rivalry games between the leagues, historically, it would shake out pretty evenly with that lineup:

KU = Mizzou
UL = UK
WVU = VT
Clemson > South Carolina (CU leads series by 20+ games and dominated in the pre-Spurrier era.)
Georgia Tech < Georgia (Georgia leads series 61-39-5 with eleven out of last twelve, but GT has the more recent MNC and more recent BCS appearance. Could be competitive with better GT coach.)
FSU = Florida (pretty much even series since the late 70's)
Texas > Texas A&M
Tulane < LSU

Big 12 - 2
SEC - 2
4 ties

Maybe we don't want to give away that last spot to Tulane, but there aren't many schools with their combination of market size, academic clout, proximity, and recruiting base. I think if they built an all-star team from the current rosters at ULL, ULM, LaTech, and USM, they'd be pretty salty.

[lauderdaleOU]

Meh. Once the 4 team playoff contract runs out, and it moves to an 8 team playoff, the Big 12 Champ will receive an auto-bid to the playoff. They will get wrecked by whatever SEC team they face, and probably score no more than 14(Oklahoma hasn't scored more than 14 against the SEC in the post season in over a decade), but at least they will get there. Same goes for the ACC. It would be stupid to expand at this point.

Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*

Man, go troll somewhere else. A&M won't sniff the playoffs. You'll be third or fourth best in the SEC West... just like you were always third or fourth best in the Big 12 South

[T-town Sooner]

UT-aTm is much closer than Tulane-LSU for example,

also your plan also includes keeping Iowa State

The conference would have too much dead weight.

ISU, Baylor, TCU, Tulane, KSU, KU

that too many small schools for OU, UT and FSU to carry

SEC is so powerful because they have so many Bama, UGA, UF LSU's etc... and so few Vanderbilt's

hence my plan to merge the Big 12 and ACC and cut the fat from each forming 1 14-16 team conference

[Camel at Sea]

UT-aTm is much closer than Tulane-LSU for example,

also your plan also includes keeping Iowa State

The conference would have too much dead weight.

ISU, Baylor, TCU, Tulane, KSU, KU

that too many small schools for OU, UT and FSU to carry

SEC is so powerful because they have so many Bama, UGA, UF LSU's etc... and so few Vanderbilt's

hence my plan to merge the Big 12 and ACC and cut the fat from each forming 1 14-16 team conference

OU/Bama
Texas/Florida
FSU/LSU
Miami/Tennessee
Clemson/Georgia
West Virginia/Auburn
Georgia Tech / Texas A&M
OSU / Arkansas
TCU/South Carolina
KSU/VaTech
TTU/Missouri
Louisville/Miss St.
Baylor/Ole Miss
Kansas/Kentucky
Iowa St./NC State
Tulane/Vandy

Maybe it's just me, but I see that as relatively even.

[T-town Sooner]

OU/Bama
Texas/Florida
FSU/LSU
Miami/Tennessee
Clemson/Georgia
West Virginia/Auburn
Georgia Tech / Texas A&M
OSU / Arkansas
TCU/South Carolina
KSU/VaTech
TTU/Missouri
Louisville/Miss St.
Baylor/Ole Miss
Kansas/Kentucky
Iowa St./NC State
Tulane/Vandy

Maybe it's just me, but I see that as relatively even.

I like your plan, I really do, Id just like the details to be a little different.

And no i dont see it that way

GT lags aTm is revenue by a long shot
similar for

TCU-USC
OSU Arkansas
WVU-Auburn
Miami-Tenn


also NCST and VT are on the wrong side

Once you fix that
ISU and KSU are just extra mouths to feed

[x97]

ACC is witholding revenue NOW from MD which is against their bylaws. At minimum I would expect another departing team to wait for the courts to set them straight on that before moving so they won't be without any league revenue for the short term.

But it is also against the conference bylaws to say you are leaving and not pay an exit fee. It goes both ways.

[Camel at Sea]

I like your plan, I really do, Id just like the details to be a little different.

And no i dont see it that way

GT lags aTm is revenue by a long shot
similar for

TCU-USC
OSU Arkansas
WVU-Auburn
Miami-Tenn


also NCST and VT are on the wrong side

Once you fix that
ISU and KSU are just extra mouths to feed

I was just listing teams out based on their relative place in the college football world. But if you want to compare the two leagues with respect to revenue, they're in a different order, but still relatively even. The SEC is top heavier, but that should be expected given the run they are on in football. That will even out over a longer span of time.

http://businessofcollegesports.com/2...ment-revenues/

[OU812]

We need a filter to ban the a&m douchebags for the next 2-3 months, at least.

[OU48A]

UT-aTm is much closer than Tulane-LSU for example,

also your plan also includes keeping Iowa State

The conference would have too much dead weight.

ISU, Baylor, TCU, Tulane, KSU, KU

that too many small schools for OU, UT and FSU to carry

SEC is so powerful because they have so many Bama, UGA, UF LSU's etc... and so few Vanderbilt's

hence my plan to merge the Big 12 and ACC and cut the fat from each forming 1 14-16 team conference

I could be wrong, but historically speaking I have got to believe that KU brings more to the conference table than OSU.

[S11-Baylor]

But it is also against the conference bylaws to say you are leaving and not pay an exit fee. It goes both ways.

1- They will be going to court to settle both matters.

1-b Maryland has a VERY good case that the fee they didn't vote for is punitive and the timeline and lack of procedural adherence by the acc bolsters their case.

1-c Maryland isn't threatening to not pay an exit fee, they just feel they should have to pay the old 20mm fee and shouldn't have to pay for a punitive fee they didn't vote for.

2- You are a BYU fan who from all appearances is frantic at the idea BYU could be closed off because the Big 12 could potentially expand east. I like BYU but honestly even if the ACC holds together I don't see them joining now due to the revenue split.

[Camel at Sea]

I could be wrong, but historically speaking I have got to believe that KU brings more to the conference table than OSU.

They do, overall. OSU has been stronger in football over the last 30 years, and especially over the last 5. It's also interesting to me, to refer to the Rose Bowl champ from two years ago and last year's Big 12 champion as "dead weight." Baylor and TCU just privately financed new stadiums that will lead to a significant revenue increase for each school. Baylor has had one of the best all around athletic departments in the country for the last couple of years and appears willing to spend money to stay that way. KSU has one of the most profitable athletic departments in the country. They're spending money wisely in both football and hoops.

Fifteen years ago, Oregon was "dead weight," too.

[OU48A]

They do, overall. OSU has been stronger in football over the last 30 years, and especially over the last 5. It's also interesting to me, to refer to the Rose Bowl champ from two years ago and last year's Big 12 champion as "dead weight." Baylor and TCU just privately financed new stadiums that will lead to a significant revenue increase for each school. Baylor has had one of the best all around athletic departments in the country for the last couple of years and appears willing to spend money to stay that way. KSU has one of the most profitable athletic departments in the country. They're spending money wisely in both football and hoops.

Fifteen years ago, Oregon was "dead weight," too.

KU is getting ready for a major overhaul of it's football stadium.
KU is also a member of the AAU

[x97]

1- They will be going to court to settle both matters.

1-b Maryland has a VERY good case that the fee they didn't vote for is punitive and the timeline and lack of procedural adherence by the acc bolsters their case.

1-c Maryland isn't threatening to not pay an exit fee, they just feel they should have to pay the old 20mm fee and shouldn't have to pay for a punitive fee they didn't vote for.

2- You are a BYU fan who from all appearances is frantic at the idea BYU could be closed off because the Big 12 could potentially expand east. I like BYU but honestly even if the ACC holds together I don't see them joining now due to the revenue split.

1. Maryland is going to have a very difficult time getting an ****ction to stop the ACC from withholding. It's going to be even more difficult to get back any of these funds. You can't cite bylaws when you yourself have just shown blatant disregard for the same bylaws. "Some bylaws are mean to me...but others that are nice I agree with"? LOL. The ACC's stance is that Maryland has said they aren't paying and it's basically their only recourse to ensure they get the money Maryland owes. Had Maryland agreed to pay off the ACC the money wouldn't be getting withheld right now.

2. I've never seen anywhere that Maryland has agreed to a lower buyout....or pushed for one. Here's a recent article from ESPN where the Maryland attorney general is saying the exit fee is "unenforceable and invalid": http://espn.go.com/college-sports/st...files-suit-acc
No where does it state that Maryland should only pay $20 million.

All this being said, I don't think Maryland ends up paying the full amount. But to suggest that Maryland is going to get an ****ction preventing the ACC from witholding funds and citing bylaws is pretty laughable. It is not happening. It will probably be two full years of withheld funds and that will be all.

3. My fandom has nothing to do with this. If anything, it allows me to look at it impartially. Look, I use sources and cite facts. Maryland ain't getting the money the ACC is withholding and there is going to be no ****ction to stop the ACC from doing so. I can admit Maryland will probably get off lighter than $53 million. It is going to be steep, however. Maryland's program is going to starve for a couple years. Anyone that suggest otherwise is biased or clueless.

[atownsooner]

They do, overall. OSU has been stronger in football over the last 30 years, and especially over the last 5. It's also interesting to me, to refer to the Rose Bowl champ from two years ago and last year's Big 12 champion as "dead weight." Baylor and TCU just privately financed new stadiums that will lead to a significant revenue increase for each school. Baylor has had one of the best all around athletic departments in the country for the last couple of years and appears willing to spend money to stay that way. KSU has one of the most profitable athletic departments in the country. They're spending money wisely in both football and hoops.

Fifteen years ago, Oregon was "dead weight," too.

when did osu win the rose bowl?

[Camel at Sea]

when did osu win the rose bowl?

I was responding to the other part of T-town sooner's post wherein he included TCU among the Big 12's dead weight.

also your plan also includes keeping Iowa State

The conference would have too much dead weight.

ISU, Baylor, TCU, Tulane, KSU, KU

that too many small schools for OU, UT and FSU to carry

[TeLeFaWx]

KU is getting ready for a major overhaul of it's football stadium.
KU is also a member of the AAU

KU is a very valuable program. They are a blue blood in basketball. They are a take regardless of their football ineptitude. If the B1G expands again they are an obvious target. I haven't ever spent any time in Kansas, and I don't know if KSU is tied to them, but who knows.

Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*

[Master Pandemonium]

KU is the 3rd most valuable conference member. That says a lot about the degradation of the Big 12. They used to be the 7th most valuable program in the Big 12 until four other members left.

1) UT
2) OU
3) KU (AAU, 30 minutes from KC, one of the few basketball powers)
4) WVU (semi-relevant in football, unique footprint no other school brings)
5) TCU (only DFW school)
6-10) redundant and replaceable

[S11-Baylor]

1. Maryland is going to have a very difficult time getting an ****ction to stop the ACC from withholding. It's going to be even more difficult to get back any of these funds. You can't cite bylaws when you yourself have just shown blatant disregard for the same bylaws. "Some bylaws are mean to me...but others that are nice I agree with"? LOL. The ACC's stance is that Maryland has said they aren't paying and it's basically their only recourse to ensure they get the money Maryland owes. Had Maryland agreed to pay off the ACC the money wouldn't be getting withheld right now.

2. I've never seen anywhere that Maryland has agreed to a lower buyout....or pushed for one. Here's a recent article from ESPN where the Maryland attorney general is saying the exit fee is "unenforceable and invalid": http://espn.go.com/college-sports/st...files-suit-acc
No where does it state that Maryland should only pay $20 million.

1- I don't think the 50+ fee will hold up as there is a strong case that it is punitive and the ACC didn't follow their own rules in doing it. The lower exit fee (20mm) will easily be able to be held back from their 2013-14 distribution as they distributed over 20mm in league revenues so if the 53mm goes down the ACC has ZERO cause to withold right now as UMD leaves summer 2014.

2- Per the actual lawsuit by Maryland, the ACC claims the exit fee constitutes "liquidated damages" and proving that those damages are 3x the annual operating budget is going to be a tall order.

2b- The part they are calling "null and void" is the AMENDMENT that raised it from 20mm to 53mm. Pretty clear according to this quote taken from the lawsuit itself:

The ACC claims that the Withdrawal Penalty constitutes “liquidated damages.” ln fact, the Withdrawal Penalty bears no relation to actual damages (if any) to the ACC from Maryland’s withdrawal. To the contrary, the ACC nearly tripled the penalty for leaving the conference, without basis, analysis or justification, in September 2012 (shortly before Maryland’s announcement) through a purported amendment to the ACC Constitution. In addition to lacking any legitimate economic justification, that amendment, which Maryland and one other ACC member institution opposed, failed to comply with the notice and procedural requirements of the ACC Constitution and is therefore null and void.

So nowhere do I see the payment of AN exit fee being challenged, just the hike in the exit fee that is being contested as punitive.

2c- Also even if the new penalty were valid it was not to take effect until this summer. So your "Some bylaws are mean to me...but others that are nice I agree with?" is completely irrelevant and childish. The rule Maryland isn't following isn't even supposed to apply yet.

All this being said, I don't think Maryland ends up paying the full amount. But to suggest that Maryland is going to get an ****ction preventing the ACC from witholding funds and citing bylaws is pretty laughable. It is not happening. It will probably be two full years of withheld funds and that will be all.

Unless the ACC can prove damages despite the TV deal not being slashed I don't see it holding up.

3. My fandom has nothing to do with this. If anything, it allows me to look at it impartially. Look, I use sources and cite facts. Maryland ain't getting the money the ACC is withholding and there is going to be no ****ction to stop the ACC from doing so. I can admit Maryland will probably get off lighter than $53 million. It is going to be steep, however. Maryland's program is going to starve for a couple years. Anyone that suggest otherwise is biased or clueless.

3a- Your fandom does influence you. You know the Big 12 is the MOST likely step up for BYU if the ACC expansion fails and at minimum it prevents you from being impartial.
3b- Unless they can prove damages I think an ****ction is likely based on the wording in the ACC's bylaws and constitution which was quoted in the lawsuit. That said I am not a lawyer and crazier things have happened in courtrooms.


For reference here is the actual lawsuit:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_pW...AyY3VtdHM/edit

[S11-Baylor]

KU is the 3rd most valuable conference member. That says a lot about the degradation of the Big 12. They used to be the 7th most valuable program in the Big 12 until four other members left.

1) UT
2) OU
3) KU (AAU, 30 minutes from KC, one of the few basketball powers)
4) WVU (semi-relevant in football, unique footprint no other school brings)
5) TCU (only DFW school)
6-10) redundant and replaceable

5th. My take:

1- Texas
2- OU
3- Nebraska
4- A&M
5- Kansas
6- Colorado
7- MU
- the rest

[orey22]

KU is a very valuable program. They are a blue blood in basketball. They are a take regardless of their football ineptitude. If the B1G expands again they are an obvious target. I haven't ever spent any time in Kansas, and I don't know if KSU is tied to them, but who knows.

Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*

Being from the area, I can tell you that KU has one priority on it's mind, and that's basketball. Back in 2010 it was stated that KU was in no way linked to KSU in regards to conferences, and I ****ume that's still the case. For KU it's all about B-Ball, and if KU suffers in recruiting from having to be in a 10 team league, then they will use everything in thier power to get to the Big 10.

Unfortunately for OU, they could learn alot by watching KU. OU football should be priority one, and as it declines via recruiting and having to sell a home schedule of Big 12 teams they should realize that something has to be done. Either blow this conference up, or add National Title calibar teams, and clearly it appaears neither is going to happen, so OU suffers.

[DarrellS011]

Here is a list of Big 12 national championships. Oklahoma State is 4th in the nation behind UCLA (108), Stanford (103) and Cal (96).

RK Team............ NC
01 Oklahoma State.. 51
02 Texas........... 50
03 Oklahoma........ 26
04 West Virginia... 15
05 Kansas.......... 12
06 Iowa State...... 09
07 TCU............. 06
08 Baylor.......... 04
09 Texas Tech...... 01
10 Kansas State.... 00

[TeLeFaWx]

Being from the area, I can tell you that KU has one priority on it's mind, and that's basketball. Back in 2010 it was stated that KU was in no way linked to KSU in regards to conferences, and I ****ume that's still the case. For KU it's all about B-Ball, and if KU suffers in recruiting from having to be in a 10 team league, then they will use everything in thier power to get to the Big 10.

Unfortunately for OU, they could learn alot by watching KU. OU football should be priority one, and as it declines via recruiting and having to sell a home schedule of Big 12 teams they should realize that something has to be done. Either blow this conference up, or add National Title calibar teams, and clearly it appaears neither is going to happen, so OU suffers.

The first step is acknowledging the landscape has changed and OU was not one of the teams that benefited from it. Oklahoma is then going to have to admit that it needs to give something up in order to stay as consistently relevant and in the conversation. I think that means home games. Nebraska needs to be an annual game starting immediately. Oklahoma probably does one of the best jobs in the country as is, as far as premiere OOC games goes, and they definitely can't be knocked for what is coming up, but they shouldn't be scared of putting Nebraska as an annual game.

Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*

[T-town Sooner]

The first step is acknowledging the landscape has changed and OU was not one of the teams that benefited from it. Oklahoma is then going to have to admit that it needs to give something up in order to stay as consistently relevant and in the conversation. I think that means home games. Nebraska needs to be an annual game starting immediately. Oklahoma probably does one of the best jobs in the country as is, as far as premiere OOC games goes, and they definitely can't be knocked for what is coming up, but they shouldn't be scared of putting Nebraska as an annual game.

Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*

We already do that. We only have 6 home games a year due to Texas game and have a non-conference road game every year.

[Hamilton]

Here is a list of Big 12 national championships. Oklahoma State is 4th in the nation behind UCLA (108), Stanford (103) and Cal (96).

Sorry Darrell, those aren't relevant stats to this conversation.
OSU is not coveted, at all, by the SEC, B1G, ACC and PAC-12.
I mean, OU would likely be in the Pac-12 if it weren't for OSU. And so OSU having an ****load of championships means...what? to this conversation?

I am not talking smack against OSU. And I don't know what you were specifically meaning to say by posting those stats. Although that statistic was inserted after the Kansas discussion, so I can only ****ume that is the context. This ain't about championships. Maybe part of it is, but mostly it's about money and POTENTIAL for money and programs/universities that can bring in more of it. If you want to cite a statistic, revenues would be more appropriate.

Anyway, if Larry Scott could 'draft' 4 teams from the Big 12 to get to the Pac-16, (in other words, if he could dodge poison political pills like OSU and Tech) he'd take Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas, in that order, with his top 3 picks. Period. From there, there is a discussion to be had for #4. Kansas is far and away the 3rd best ****et in the Big 12.

[Hamilton]

5th. My take:

1- Texas
2- OU
3- Nebraska
4- A&M
5- Kansas
6- Colorado
7- MU
- the rest

I would agree with that and also agree that 8-12 are all close enough that there is an argument to be made in several directions. Very objective view from a Baylor fan. I try to be as objective as I can be as a Sooner fan, because objectivity is much closer to truth than blind allegiance. And truth is paramount.

[TeLeFaWx]

We already do that. We only have 6 home games a year due to Texas game and have a non-conference road game every year.

Well if you had an annual game with Nebraska, that number would decrease even further. That's a tough thing to do, but I think it would be good for Oklahoma.

Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*

[S11-Baylor]

I would agree with that and also agree that 8-12 are all close enough that there is an argument to be made in several directions. Very objective view from a Baylor fan. I try to be as objective as I can be as a Sooner fan, because objectivity is much closer to truth than blind allegiance. And truth is paramount.

Yeah #'s 8-12 are tough and usually fluctuates with who has been good recently.

[OSULadyCowboy]

Sorry Darrell, those aren't relevant stats to this conversation.
OSU is not coveted, at all, by the SEC, B1G, ACC and PAC-12.
I mean, OU would likely be in the Pac-12 if it weren't for OSU. And so OSU having an ****load of championships means...what? to this conversation?

I am not talking smack against OSU. And I don't know what you were specifically meaning to say by posting those stats. Although that statistic was inserted after the Kansas discussion, so I can only ****ume that is the context. This ain't about championships. Maybe part of it is, but mostly it's about money and POTENTIAL for money and programs/universities that can bring in more of it. If you want to cite a statistic, revenues would be more appropriate.

Anyway, if Larry Scott could 'draft' 4 teams from the Big 12 to get to the Pac-16, (in other words, if he could dodge poison political pills like OSU and Tech) he'd take Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas, in that order, with his top 3 picks. Period. From there, there is a discussion to be had for #4. Kansas is far and away the 3rd best ****et in the Big 12.

IMO, the stats were posted because of Championships we do have and thats all.

For the most part I agree with what you are saying. I can see KU being better academic wise and they are AAU. If we want to break it down sports wise the biggest advantage KU has over us is Basketball. They have an awesome basketball history. The rest of the sports are up for debate. We (OSU) has fallen in basketball and baseball (which is heart breaking). With Holliday as our new Coach we will be back.

IMO, I think Scott would have taken us with OU. We do have the Golf and Baseball program that I think would be attractive to the PAC...I could be wrong.

Conf realignment is a crazy thing. School with a name and money will be first pick and as I have said before we (OSU) isn't there yet and we need OU (like it or not). Also, I totally understand why most if not all Sooner fans want us dropped.

[S11-Baylor]

Sorry Darrell, those aren't relevant stats to this conversation.
OSU is not coveted, at all, by the SEC, B1G, ACC and PAC-12.
I mean, OU would likely be in the Pac-12 if it weren't for OSU. And so OSU having an ****load of championships means...what? to this conversation?

I am not talking smack against OSU. And I don't know what you were specifically meaning to say by posting those stats. Although that statistic was inserted after the Kansas discussion, so I can only ****ume that is the context. This ain't about championships. Maybe part of it is, but mostly it's about money and POTENTIAL for money and programs/universities that can bring in more of it. If you want to cite a statistic, revenues would be more appropriate.

Anyway, if Larry Scott could 'draft' 4 teams from the Big 12 to get to the Pac-16, (in other words, if he could dodge poison political pills like OSU and Tech) he'd take Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas, in that order, with his top 3 picks. Period. From there, there is a discussion to be had for #4. Kansas is far and away the 3rd best ****et in the Big 12.

Honestly if Scott could have made six picks to maximize revenue in 2010 and not had to deal with politics or any other hang ups he probably would have chosen these teams out of the MWC or B12:

Texas
OU
Colorado
KU
Nebraska

and whoever tv execs say makes the most sense out of:

-BYU (bigger tv draw than the utes)
-A&M
-Mizzou

[TeLeFaWx]

Honestly if Scott could have made six picks to maximize revenue in 2010 and not had to deal with politics or any other hang ups he probably would have chosen these teams out of the MWC or B12:

Texas
OU
Colorado
KU
Nebraska

and whoever tv execs say makes the most sense out of:

-BYU (bigger tv draw than the utes)
-A&M
-Mizzou

The fact that you put KU over Texas A&M is silly.

Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*

[MadMex]

The fact that you put KU over Texas A&M is silly.

Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*

The fact that you post on an OU board is silly.

[S11-Baylor]

The fact that you put KU over Texas A&M is silly.

Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*

In a vacuum yes, but when they have a league network with UT already on board no.

[Camel at Sea]

Big 12 also talking alliance with the SEC:

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2..._flyout_sports

[DarrellS011]

Sorry Darrell, those aren't relevant stats to this conversation.
OSU is not coveted, at all, by the SEC, B1G, ACC and PAC-12.
I mean, OU would likely be in the Pac-12 if it weren't for OSU. And so OSU having an ****load of championships means...what? to this conversation?

I am not talking smack against OSU. And I don't know what you were specifically meaning to say by posting those stats. Although that statistic was inserted after the Kansas discussion, so I can only ****ume that is the context. This ain't about championships. Maybe part of it is, but mostly it's about money and POTENTIAL for money and programs/universities that can bring in more of it. If you want to cite a statistic, revenues would be more appropriate.

Anyway, if Larry Scott could 'draft' 4 teams from the Big 12 to get to the Pac-16, (in other words, if he could dodge poison political pills like OSU and Tech) he'd take Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas, in that order, with his top 3 picks. Period. From there, there is a discussion to be had for #4. Kansas is far and away the 3rd best ****et in the Big 12.

If money is all that matters (the money that OU makes is all that matters to us) then we need to stay right where we're at. Texas and Oklahoma are strong enough to hold this conference together and there is nobody out there that we can realistically get to increase our TV money. Contrary to what everyone in this thread that has been dying for three years to kill off the Big 12 and see us go to the SEC, B1G or Pac 12 thinks, Bob Bowlsby and the Big 12 members are correct. It makes no sense to go after schools that would do nothing to increase our payout per school just to get to 12 or 14 or 16 or 20 teams and the only thing that does make some kind of sense is to form an alliance with the ACC without expanding either conference to kill off this runaway freight train that the B1G, Pac 12 and SEC is engineering.

If Kansas is more important than oSu then why was the Pac 10 willing to take oSu over Kansas when they were trying to raid the Big 12? Kansas was praying that the Big 12 teams that the Pac 10 wanted would turn down the offer and agree to keep this conference alive so that they wouldn‘t be forced to join the Big East. The Pac 12 is kicking themselves now for expanding. They tried to get the Big 12's best and instead, ended up taking two teams that they had refused to take for years. Everyone thinks that Scott is some great commissioner but so far, he's failed to do what he wanted to do and has gone against everything that the Pac 10 had stood for for years.

This conference alignment is about FOOTBALL and the big bucks that ESPN and FOX are willing to pay for it. The networks could care less how smart the students are that go to a certain school. All they care about is the product on the field and what it can do to their ratings and make them money from the sponsors and cable and satellite providers.

Looking at the last five years, the Big 12 has six teams in the top 25 in win percentage and seven in the top 41. Kansas State is one spot higher than Notre Dame. Baylor, Kansas and Iowa State are the bottom feeders of the conference. Baylor is ranked 72nd. A little higher than UCLA from the Pac 12, Kentucky and Mississippi of the SEC and Purdue from the B1G.

[S11-Baylor]

If Kansas is more important than oSu then why was the Pac 10 willing to take oSu over Kansas when they were trying to raid the Big 12? Kansas was praying that the Big 12 teams that the Pac 10 wanted would turn down the offer and agree to keep this conference alive so that they wouldn‘t be forced to join the Big East.

The PAC probably feels:

KU is a better target than OSU

OU won't come without OSU and TX won't come without OU.

Getting OU and UT is worth enough to justify taking OSU over KU.

[DarrellS011]

Big 12 also talking alliance with the SEC:

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2..._flyout_sports

The Sec is more interested in trying to kill off the Big 12, their closest competition than form some kind of alliance. The Pac 12 cannot be trusted to form an alliance since they were the conference that tried to kill off the Big 12. Had they wanted to form an alliance then instead of trying to raid the conference then it would be a good choice. but the ACC seems to be the only conference that can be trusted. They're the only conference that hasn't tried to kill off the second best conference in college football. The Pac 12 already has a strong allegiance with the B1G. The SEC has an allegance to no-one but this past year showed that they would join forces with anyone to get total control of the football landscape.

[DarrellS011]

The PAC probably feels:

KU is a better target than OSU

OU won't come without OSU and TX won't come without OU.

Getting OU and UT is worth enough to justify taking OSU over KU.

Of coarse they are. OU and Texas are as strong a 1 - 2 punch as anyone else in the country and why OU and Texas will always have a big say in the college football world, no matter how the conferences shape up. Neither team needs a conference at all. The conference needs OU and Texas. We could drop ISU and any other team not in the top 50 and still be one of the two best conferences in college football (if not the best) with eight members. Being able to choose a true champion without a CCG and still be able to schedule anyone we wanted. Either scheduling big name schools or choosing the SEC model (usually) by scheduling FCS teams and FBS bottom feeders.

[TeLeFaWx]

Of coarse they are. OU and Texas are as strong a 1 - 2 punch as anyone else in the country and why OU and Texas will always have a big say in the college football world, no matter how the conferences shape up. Neither team needs a conference at all. The conference needs OU and Texas. We could drop ISU and any other team not in the top 50 and still be one of the two best conferences in college football (if not the best) with eight members. Being able to choose a true champion without a CCG and still be able to schedule anyone we wanted. Either scheduling big name schools or choosing the SEC model (usually) by scheduling FCS teams and FBS bottom feeders.

Don't kid yourselves. You need a conference. No conference outside what would be a mid major without your presence needs you. You aren't so other worldly that you could ever possibly be the best conference if you shed a couple teams. You will never compete with the SEC given you only have two elite programs when the SEC has 7 or 8. And this "true champion" is just nonsense. Who was the 2012 true champion? Bob Stoops says Oklahoma. The BCS said Kansas State.

Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*

[usaosooner]

Anything interesting happen? Cliffnotes

[Spade1000]

Aggie fan claiming six or seven hahahahah "Elite" teams in the SEC . Nothing New or noteworthy

[Spade1000]

and the "One True Champion" crap is a total load of marketed bull****

[TeLeFaWx]

Aggie fan claiming six or seven hahahahah "Elite" teams in the SEC . Nothing New or noteworthy

Since OU last won a natty, 4 different SEC teams have won one, 3 of those teams more than once. Another, Tennessee, was only two years prior to OU's last one. I don't see how it is ludicrous to claim that. But that is just me.

Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*

[Spade1000]

Since OU last won a natty, 4 different SEC teams have won one, 3 of those teams more than once. Another, Tennessee, was only two years prior to OU's last one. I don't see how it is ludicrous to claim that. But that is just me.

Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*

Sir, your maths are lacking.

[Spade1000]

And to help you out : Florida, Bama, LSU are indeed Elite teams. Georgia not so much, but an argument can be made for them somewhat. Aubarn was a one hit wonder, with Cam. Elite means MNC contention and staying relevant in the MNC hunt , consistently. Try again, sir.

[DelMarSooner]

Since OU last won a natty, 4 different SEC teams have won one, 3 of those teams more than once. Another, Tennessee, was only two years prior to OU's last one. I don't see how it is ludicrous to claim that. But that is just me.

Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*

Since Texas A&M last won a natty, Hitler died and jet air travel was invented.

[x97]

1- I don't think the 50+ fee will hold up as there is a strong case that it is punitive and the ACC didn't follow their own rules in doing it. The lower exit fee (20mm) will easily be able to be held back from their 2013-14 distribution as they distributed over 20mm in league revenues so if the 53mm goes down the ACC has ZERO cause to withold right now as UMD leaves summer 2014.

2- Per the actual lawsuit by Maryland, the ACC claims the exit fee constitutes "liquidated damages" and proving that those damages are 3x the annual operating budget is going to be a tall order.

2b- The part they are calling "null and void" is the AMENDMENT that raised it from 20mm to 53mm. Pretty clear according to this quote taken from the lawsuit itself:


So nowhere do I see the payment of AN exit fee being challenged, just the hike in the exit fee that is being contested as punitive.

2c- Also even if the new penalty were valid it was not to take effect until this summer. So your "Some bylaws are mean to me...but others that are nice I agree with?" is completely irrelevant and childish. The rule Maryland isn't following isn't even supposed to apply yet.



Unless the ACC can prove damages despite the TV deal not being slashed I don't see it holding up.



3a- Your fandom does influence you. You know the Big 12 is the MOST likely step up for BYU if the ACC expansion fails and at minimum it prevents you from being impartial.
3b- Unless they can prove damages I think an ****ction is likely based on the wording in the ACC's bylaws and constitution which was quoted in the lawsuit. That said I am not a lawyer and crazier things have happened in courtrooms.


For reference here is the actual lawsuit:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_pW...AyY3VtdHM/edit

Sammy,

We'll just have to agree to disagree. Maryland's only hope is to get a court with jurisdiction over the ACC to grant ****ctive relief. To get an ****ction Maryland will have to prove their case to a very high degree in a hearing. ****ctions are extraordinary remedies that are not often employed in cases unless they are pretty clear cut. I think it is unlikely. We will see.

Secondly, stop with my fandom. It has nothing to do with this case. Your fandom is skewed by the fact you want Maryland to win....and therefore hope that it somehow leads to other ACC schools leaving. Sitting at 10 puts Baylor at risk to the whims of OU and UT....and you know it. I've stated over and over that Maryland won't pay $53 million....but will pay a large sum. I think we know this.....even if you won't admit it. I've also stated that Maryland's request for ****ctive relief is an act of desperation and unlikely to be enforced because this case is not cut and dry.....for either side. I think that's pretty impartial.

[TeLeFaWx]

And to help you out : Florida, Bama, LSU are indeed Elite teams. Georgia not so much, but an argument can be made for them somewhat. Aubarn was a one hit wonder, with Cam. Elite means MNC contention and staying relevant in the MNC hunt , consistently. Try again, sir.

Bama wasn't relevant in the hunt for 20 years. In the SEC there is an increased level of parity among the elite teams. 6 teams have won the conference over the last 50 years, with no team dominating over that period.

Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*

[TeLeFaWx]

Since Texas A&M last won a natty, Hitler died and jet air travel was invented.

And Oklahoma has won what... 7 National Championships? Oklahoma is a blue blood. Texas A&M isn't. I am well aware.

Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*