Big 12 in 2016

[Lobot]

At this point, what good is expansion if you have to take a reduced cut and the league will fold before you earn an equal share? After the Big 12 has embarrassed itself with all this, the only way to salvage anything is to extend the GOR at the same time new teams are added. If they don't do that, is it worth it to even join?

Need to get to P5 regardless for the next round of this junk. Take it if it's there but we should be looking at the next round and at the ACC going to 16 as soon as the GoR expires in 2024 with the Big 12 if we ever get there.

[longtimefan]

At this point, what good is expansion if you have to take a reduced cut and the league will fold before you earn an equal share? After the Big 12 has embarrassed itself with all this, the only way to salvage anything is to extend the GOR at the same time new teams are added. If they don't do that, is it worth it to even join?

[Lobot]

This makes sense of Boren's comments that expansion is not a given. I also see that as a sign that both Florida schools aren't really in the picture either. I also see this as support that Greg's OU contacts can be trusted. It all hinges on BYU being the centerpiece...On a positive, if BYU satisfies the Big 12 on Honor Code, this process could get back on track?

Yes, but they better get their *** in gear. I've heard from some BYU boosters that the changes are on the table. The real question is will BYU move fast enough and make a progressive decision at all or soon enough to satisfy the Big 12. My intuition tells me no.

This would be done if not for the Honor Code issue.

[longtimefan]

I as so freaking tired of this. All these expansion candidates being crapped on by the worst house on campus. I guess we'll take an invite if offered, but if UC put out a public statement tomorrow saying they are withdrawing their candidacy it wouldn't bother me at all. Enough is enough.

[CincyBearcat95]

With all the drama and media attention they have driven from this I think there are only two possible conclusions because they have backed themselves into a corner on a national level. 1. They will stay in that room until they settle on 2 or 4 because they have set expectations with the entire country that they want to expand or 2. They will not come to a conclusion - will be trashed in the media, NCAA and all the other schools and heads will roll. These guys are at heart political creatures - albeit inept ones. I just can't imagine them leaving the room and stating publicly that the schools cannot come to agreement without them taking a ton of very public and very messy backlash.

[red_n_black_attack]

Also,
BTM:OU Contacts "No public change in Honor Code has eroded support. Which has greatly eroded data argument for 14"



BTM:OU Contacts "UH & UC is D.O.A" UH & UConn is D.O.A" "UC & UConn is D.O.A"



Paraphrase: Expansion will be tabled unless BYU gets it's ***** together.

This makes sense of Boren's comments that expansion is not a given. I also see that as a sign that both Florida schools aren't really in the picture either. I also see this as support that Greg's OU contacts can be trusted. It all hinges on BYU being the centerpiece...On a positive, if BYU satisfies the Big 12 on Honor Code, this process could get back on track?

[bearcatjd]

Very discouraging. This conference is a mess.

[Lobot]

Also,
BTM:OU Contacts "No public change in Honor Code has eroded support. Which has greatly eroded data argument for 14"



BTM:OU Contacts "UH & UC is D.O.A" UH & UConn is D.O.A" "UC & UConn is D.O.A"



Paraphrase: Expansion will be tabled unless BYU gets it's **** together.

[Lobot]

Flugaur just tweeted that they can't get a consensus on 2 and can't get to 4 without a public statement from BYU that protects the conference. So right now it's at 0.

[red_n_black_attack]

Why did Nebraska, Texas A&M, Colorado, and Missouri leave the Big12 ?

The LHN was a tipping point because Texas is a bully and everything that goes along with Texas politics. Each had their own reasons (all involving higher revenue and hurt feelings due to Texas politics and bullying). The Big 12 had the opportunity to form a Big 12 network and turned it down, then ESPN came to Texas to form LHN. Once the money started rolling into Austin, TA&M and MO felt they were at a significant competitive disadvantage and jumped at the opportunity for a significant pay raise in the SEC, I don't know if they favored conference network or not at initial offering, but it's their own fault (and those of fellow conference members) that there wasn't a mechanism to require sharing of tier 3 rights and pooled revenue. Nebraska was highly pissed that Texas pushed through a limit on using Prop 48 players and setting a higher bar for academics. The limit was something like 6 or 8 and Nebraska had around 45 Prop 48 players on their roster. When the courtship with the B!G began, it was pretty simple after that for Nebraska to see the chaos they were leaving, and funds to be received in the B!G. As to Colorado, I think they jumped to the Pac believing the Big 12 would fall apart, largely due to Texas.

You are correct, Texas is a menacing pariah as a conference mate on equal footing and they cannot keep 100% of the LHN revenue if they jump ship. Texas will have to weigh if they can afford to share the revenue of LHN if asked to join a conference with pooled tier 3 rights. The other conferences will have to take a long hard look at the other baggage Texas carries and sharing LHN revenue is only a beginning.

[blackattack]

Is the LHN that big of a sticking point?I'm playing devil's advocate here, but hear me out. All schools have some sort of contract for tier 3 rights which is what the LHN covers. The LHN also brings exposure to other Olympic sports as many of those games are available. As a Bearcat fan, I'd love to tune into a Bearcat only network for special events, like signing days, open practices or scrimmages, and coaches/pre-game shows. Why should other schools complain that they are so well known (or believed in by the network) to have their own channel for this content. It would not prevent tier 1 or tier 2 rights holders from selecting Texas. They get more money, waaa stop crying! It's Texas, they were going to get that money from big oil donors anyway, so it's not really something others can complain about. If we think of the LHN as tier 3 rights, then why wouldn't another conference want that? Oh wait, can someone help me out here, I believe the other conferences pool their tier 3 rights and that's what makes a conference network plausible for SEC/B!G and now the ACC. Is that true?

I grant all points about Texas politics and bullying to get their way, etc... on the other hand, many of the issues they advocate are in line with the way SEC and B!G conferences operate. The ACC would love to have Texas and ND would likely sign off on a recurring home and home with Texas. The worst part of Texas joining another conference is that there are limited slots and the offer would be Texas only, not Texas plus TT or Texas plus TCU, etc...

Why did Nebraska, Texas A&M, Colorado, and Missouri leave the Big12 ?

[red_n_black_attack]

My sentiments exactly. When Texas launched the LHN in 2011 and refused to share the revenue, that was the last straw for Nebraska, Missouri, Colorado, and Texas A&M. All of these articles (like the one above) proclaiming that Texas can leave anytime they want and join any conference they want are just click bait. The LHN contract with ESPN runs through 2031......which puts Texas in an untenable position when the Big12 GOR expires in 2024. Does anyone really believe that the university presidents in the other P5 conferences are going to welcome a school that has it's own network, keeps all the money, and is a bully when it comes to getting it's own way?
When the Big12 GOR is up, I could see Oklahoma and Kansas leaving for the B1G. Unless Texas is willing to bend on the LHN, they will probably be forced to add some G5 schools again to try to keep the Big12 viable..........remains to be seen if that will work....I don't think it will. Hopefully Texas ends up as an Independent where they struggle to schedule and struggle to remain financially viable after the LHN is done.

Is the LHN that big of a sticking point?I'm playing devil's advocate here, but hear me out. All schools have some sort of contract for tier 3 rights which is what the LHN covers. The LHN also brings exposure to other Olympic sports as many of those games are available. As a Bearcat fan, I'd love to tune into a Bearcat only network for special events, like signing days, open practices or scrimmages, and coaches/pre-game shows. Why should other schools complain that they are so well known (or believed in by the network) to have their own channel for this content. It would not prevent tier 1 or tier 2 rights holders from selecting Texas. They get more money, waaa stop crying! It's Texas, they were going to get that money from big oil donors anyway, so it's not really something others can complain about. If we think of the LHN as tier 3 rights, then why wouldn't another conference want that? Oh wait, can someone help me out here, I believe the other conferences pool their tier 3 rights and that's what makes a conference network plausible for SEC/B!G and now the ACC. Is that true?

I grant all points about Texas politics and bullying to get their way, etc... on the other hand, many of the issues they advocate are in line with the way SEC and B!G conferences operate. The ACC would love to have Texas and ND would likely sign off on a recurring home and home with Texas. The worst part of Texas joining another conference is that there are limited slots and the offer would be Texas only, not Texas plus TT or Texas plus TCU, etc...

[Lobot]

The statement by Boren that expansion is not a given isn't quite the whole story. He basically stated that they don't expect a vote on the Oct. 17 Board meeting timetable that everyone expected. To be fair, the media assumed it would happen at that time. They may in fact drag this out to December. I just searched for the next scheduled meeting after Oct. 17 and it doesn't appear they have that info posted anywhere. They may set that date at the Oct. 17 meeting.

Here's the whole article that McMurphy cited.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/ousportsextra/david-boren-cautions-not-to-take-big-conference-expansion-as/article_d364db36-648c-5513-9bbe-c3ce69432e90.html

[blackattack]

I think Ut and OU are using this exercise to look for a nicer home.
OU will find one, because they're nice folks
UT will not, because they're bullies.

Texas politics only work in Texas. Nowhere else

My sentiments exactly. When Texas launched the LHN in 2011 and refused to share the revenue, that was the last straw for Nebraska, Missouri, Colorado, and Texas A&M. All of these articles (like the one above) proclaiming that Texas can leave anytime they want and join any conference they want are just click bait. The LHN contract with ESPN runs through 2031......which puts Texas in an untenable position when the Big12 GOR expires in 2024. Does anyone really believe that the university presidents in the other P5 conferences are going to welcome a school that has it's own network, keeps all the money, and is a bully when it comes to getting it's own way?
When the Big12 GOR is up, I could see Oklahoma and Kansas leaving for the B1G. Unless Texas is willing to bend on the LHN, they will probably be forced to add some G5 schools again to try to keep the Big12 viable..........remains to be seen if that will work....I don't think it will. Hopefully Texas ends up as an Independent where they struggle to schedule and struggle to remain financially viable after the LHN is done.

[red_n_black_attack]

Expansion is not guaranteed and Boren is ok to say it. This doesn't say Boren is against it or he doesn't think expansion is going to happen. This statement isn't news.