Big 10 Expansion Thread -Big Ten ready for a playoff .. finally?

[MJ4H]

monsterfacepalm.jpg
this could really fuck everything up royally

ChipBrownOB
Here is the latest bombshell in college realignment: Texas willing to commit to 10-member Big 12

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by MJ4H

monsterfacepalm.jpg
this could really fuck everything up royally

ChipBrownOB
Here is the latest bombshell in college realignment: Texas willing to commit to 10-member Big 12

What that tweet from the Texas Minister of Information does not tell you is the terms that Texas would need to agree to that arrangement. I'm surprised Chip left that out.

If anything, that gives you a clear indication that, much like ND in the Big Ten, A&M is currently holding the ball and not Texas. I'm sure the Aggies are loving that, but things can change quickly as we have seen.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

What that tweet from the Texas Minister of Information does not tell you is the terms that Texas would need to agree to that arrangement. I'm surprised Chip left that out.

If anything, that gives you a clear indication that, much like ND in the Big Ten, A&M is currently holding the ball and not Texas. I'm sure the Aggies are loving that, but things can change quickly as we have seen.

lol

[MJ4H]

Smells like a bluff to me. I think A&M goes anyway. This should be an interesting day.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by MJ4H

Smells like a bluff to me. I think A&M goes anyway. This should be an interesting day.

I agree with that. I don't think A&M will end up being the one to decide where things fall even though they have that opportunity right now.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

Idaho is actually a nice state to visit if you like being outdoors with a lot of space

I was in Boise twice for training. I found it to be a pleasant city

SI

[MJ4H]

Maybe the bluff failed?

From Joe Schad:

The departure of Texas, Texas Tech, OU and OSU to Pac-10 is imminent, four Big 12 sources say

[timmynausea]

I think Texas wants to leave, but I think they also want to be able to blame others for the breakup of the Big 12. With this latest release, they can now say "We tried to save the conference at the 11th hour, but A&M wouldn't go for it."

[molson]

As the board's resident Idahoan, I do feel I should say my peace.

Idaho is very likely better than your state.

We have a liberal, livable, beautiful capital with a very low cost of living; spectacular mountains, lakes, and outdoor whathaveyou; and also superstar A-list celebrity luxury (Hanks, Schwarzenegger, and Bruce Willis, just to name three, spend a ton of time in Sun Valley). It's a great vacation spot if you either like the outdoors, or are silly rich.

[timmynausea]

Here's Joe Schad's article to follow up that tweet. Texas' decision is expected no later than tomorrow.

Sources: Texas' Pac-10 commitment imminent - ESPN

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

Here's Joe Schad's article to follow up that tweet. Texas' decision is expected no later than tomorrow.

Sources: Texas' Pac-10 commitment imminent - ESPN

Yeah I think tomorrow is when they are scheduled to vote. I think things get interesting before that because A&M's vote is today.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

What that tweet from the Texas Minister of Information does not tell you is the terms that Texas would need to agree to that arrangement. I'm surprised Chip left that out.

If anything, that gives you a clear indication that, much like ND in the Big Ten, A&M is currently holding the ball and not Texas. I'm sure the Aggies are loving that, but things can change quickly as we have seen.

You understand there are character limits on tweets and the purpose is to drive you to the Orangebloods website for details, right?

Where you might find the second sub-heading to be, "Your Move Texas A&M."

[Arles]

Texas is just leaving too much cash on the table to say with the big 12. The latest report out here is that they will be bringing in $25-27 million once the new Pac-10 network plus other efforts by Scott start. Then you add in the prestige of being part of UCLA/USC/Stanford/Cal/+ for research/prestige and Texas is gaining a lot by joining.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

I think Texas wants to leave, but I think they also want to be able to blame others for the breakup of the Big 12. With this latest release, they can now say "We tried to save the conference at the 11th hour, but A&M wouldn't go for it."

That's been their intent the whole time. Stewart Mandel over at Sports Illustrated summed it up pretty well......

So to recap, if Big 12 crumbles, it has been/will be Neb/Mizzou/A&M's fault. NOT the school at center of Pac-16 plan. (Eye roll)

[Arles]

Orangebloods.com - Sources say Texas will commit to 10-member Big 12

OK, just so I understand, Texas is going to pass on a plan by Larry Scott that will get them roughly $25-27 million starting in year 1 with the Pac-16, top dog status in football for the Pac (given USC's issues) and association with much better research/academic institution (primarily the Cali Schools) for a package of:

1. $14-17 mil annually.
2. A one time payment of $2 million from Colorado/Nebraska leaving
3. the ability to start their own network - which could net them $3-4 million 3 years down the road.

So, in years 1-4 with the Pac-16, Texas makes $100 million. With the Big 12, they make roughly $70-75 million at best (assuming their network and the Big 12 plan maxes out). The dollars just don't add up. All the while this whole plan could fall apart in the next 2 years if Missouri gets invited to the Big 10 or A&M to the SEC (both would also get bigtime raises in cash).

This smells like Texas feeding information to Chip Brown to make it look like they did their best to stay together and make A&M the bad guy (once they accept the SEC bid today). This way Texas can defend what happens with A&M and Baylor by saying they wanted to stay in the Big 12 but A&M bailed.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by Arles

Texas is just leaving too much cash on the table to say with the big 12. The latest report out here is that they will be bringing in $25-27 million once the new Pac-10 network plus other efforts by Scott start. Then you add in the prestige of being part of UCLA/USC/Stanford/Cal/+ for research/prestige and Texas is gaining a lot by joining.

Absolutely. The new Pac-10(16?) network is going to be huge with that spread of markets. The network is the part of the deal that is the most exciting for me.

[Logan]

Why do schools care about being blamed for the destruction of these conferences? Does anyone really give a shit?

[MrBug708]

Joe Schad vs. Chip Brown! RT @schadjoe The departure of Texas, Texas Tech, OU & OSU to Pac-10 is imminent, four Big 12 sources say
half a minute ago via web

I wonder if Texas would rather get 17 million per year while the rest of the conference would get 12 million per year. The only team with a spine was Nebraska and they are out of the picture.

I think Texas is forcing TAMU to be the bad guy in this group but if they still a conference with ten teams, they won't have a CCG and all Texas needs to do is beat Oklahoma and they are in the NC

[molson]

Originally Posted by Logan

Why do schools care about being blamed for the destruction of these conferences? Does anyone really give a shit?

Really - a conference is just a collection of schools. The conference is 100% absolutely meaningless without the schools.

[timmynausea]

Originally Posted by Logan

Why do schools care about being blamed for the destruction of these conferences? Does anyone really give a shit?

They are worried about potential lawsuits (The Big East sued the ACC and got at least some concessions), and I've also heard people say that the schools know congress is watching and potentially getting involved, so they are conscious of who gets blamed for what. I don't know what congress would do, though, really. They should give a congressional medal of "Sorry, dudes." to Iowa State.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

The only team with a spine was Nebraska and they are out of the picture.

I don't know about that. The only team with a spine is Colorado. They exited without any bitching about how it was everyone's fault and has not given any indication that they will try to avoid any penalties that are triggered by their departure.

Nebraska complained out the door that it was everyone else's fault that they were forced to move and is threatening to go to court to avoid any penalties. They also took some heavy shots at the South and Texas on the way out. Regardless of whether NU was right in some of their accusations, Colorado showed everyone the professional way to move to a different conference.

[MrBug708]

Well, Colorado has always wanted to be in the PAC-10, with or without anyone else.

I wonder if Oklahoma could jump to the PAC-10 (with Ok State)

[MJ4H]

Nice back-pedal by CB. Now Texas is committed....to coming to the table to see if they can make Beebe's plan work.

lol

[MrBug708]

I think that was his intent. He's obviously being told whatever Texas wants him to say and if Texas is "committed" to the Big-10, TAMU leaving would be on them at this point and gives Texas unbelievable leverage (with Kansas IMO) about the dollar amount if they stick together as the Big-10

[Swaggs]

I wish we could flash forward through the Texas is staying in the Big 12/going to the Pac 10 and A&M is staying in the Big 12/going to the SEC that is going to take place for the next 48-hours and get on with the results.

As much as I hate the ACC for the raid on the Big East, at least the ACC and three departing teams were willing to follow through with the plan and admit their intentions.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

They are worried about potential lawsuits (The Big East sued the ACC and got at least some concessions), and I've also heard people say that the schools know congress is watching and potentially getting involved, so they are conscious of who gets blamed for what. I don't know what congress would do, though, really. They should give a congressional medal of "Sorry, dudes." to Iowa State.

There's also the impact of national perception, which is never a 100% absolute slamdunk to predict. That gets into merchandise sales, TV marketability, sponsorships, and other revenue sources.

[MrBug708]

From Hornsfans:

Chip Brown on Tim Brando radio
-Texas trying to see if A&M is gone
-Chip says he will stick to his sources & Texas is staying in the Big 12. He heard Joe Scad but sticks with his sources
- would happen today
-tv network made assurance to Don Beebe that they want Big 12(10). network realized that colorado & nebraska happened so fast they had to move now doesn't want to lose out & will overpay.
-brando thinks schad report is a smokescreen for ESPN for not having to go against Fox pac-16 in a tv deal.
Chip Brown agrees
- Chip thinks Longhorn Network worth 3-5 additional rev.
-puts Texas at 22-25 million total tv revnue if stay in Big 12 & keep Longhorn network.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by Arles

OK, just so I understand, Texas is going to pass on a plan by Larry Scott that will get them roughly $25-27 million starting in year 1 with the Pac-16, top dog status in football for the Pac (given USC's issues) and association with much better research/academic institution (primarily the Cali Schools) for a package of:

1. $14-17 mil annually.
2. A one time payment of $2 million from Colorado/Nebraska leaving
3. the ability to start their own network - which could net them $3-4 million 3 years down the road.

I highlighted year 1 because that's the significant issue year -- Texas wouldn't get $25-27 million in year one. First, the Pac 10's current deal with Fox runs through 2012, so you're not talking about getting money under a new deal until the 2012-2013 school year. Secondly, the Pac 10 network doesn't exist. It would take at least a year before the network could debut, and more likely wouldn't debut until 2012 when the Fox deal ends. Thirdly, any network requires startup costs and it's unlikely a Pac 10 network would be profitable for at least 3 years, maybe more.

So you're really talking about getting those revenues in year four or five, if those numbers hold up. The Pac 10 is basing its assumptions it can get $200-$250 million per year from a network AND start it's own network. That combination is unlikely.

From a financial standpoint, moving to the Pac 10 wouldn't pay dividends for 3-4 years. So why not stand pat, let the other Pac 10 schools deal with getting the network launched and see where you're at then?

Plus, don't forget to subtract the $16 million or so Texas would owe to the Big 12 in penalties for bailing on the league.

[Butter]

Geez if you think the Big Ten network has a dearth of content, just wait until the Longhorn Network premieres. Yuk.

[MrBug708]

Who is Texas going to pay the penalties to?

[Swaggs]

It is my understanding that the Big 12 schools can vote to disband the conference, rather than paying penalties.

Does anyone know the number of schools? Does it just have to be greater than 50% or are there other rules?

[kcchief19]

The conjecture I've seen in a number of places this weekend is that Beebe's pitch to the Big 12 Lite and the south schools is that all you have to do is stand pat and outlast the Big East and you're golden. The theory is that if Notre Dame goes to the Big Ten, the Big East is going down the tubes and that's when the Big 12 can jump and expand to make sure they remain one of the 16-team super conferences.

There was also talk on sports radio in KC this morning that Arkansas may be interesting in leaving the SEC for the Big 12 if the gang sticks together, especially if Big 12 revenues go up. I know from my Arkansas friends and spending some time down there that while they enjoy the money, they feel like they've never been a part of the SEC and are nostalgic for the rivalries of the old SWC days with Texas and OU. Arkansas would be a great fit. Be interesting if A&M leaves if the Big 12 decides to make a hail mary grab for Arkansas.

[timmynausea]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

It is my understanding that the Big 12 schools can vote to disband the conference, rather than paying penalties.

Does anyone know the number of schools? Does it just have to be greater than 50% or are there other rules?

It supposedly would've taken a vote of 9. I'm not sure if/how that changes since a couple of teams have left.

Edit to add: I guess technically they are still in the Big 12 for now, so I assume it would still take a vote of 9.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

It is my understanding that the Big 12 schools can vote to disband the conference, rather than paying penalties.

Does anyone know the number of schools? Does it just have to be greater than 50% or are there other rules?

Unclear. The Big 12 by-laws require a super majority for everything (9 votes). That means that as long as four schools are left out and vote no on disbanding, the league isn't going anywhere. That's where the Big 12 absorbing the MWC enters in to the picture with as many as seven schools paying penalties to the remaing five.

However, there have been some claims that since the Big 12 corporation is based on Delaware, Delaware law allows you to dissolve a corporate with a majority vote. In that case, if seven schools vote to dissolve, there may be no penalties.

Then the lawsuits start.

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

The conjecture I've seen in a number of places this weekend is that Beebe's pitch to the Big 12 Lite and the south schools is that all you have to do is stand pat and outlast the Big East and you're golden. The theory is that if Notre Dame goes to the Big Ten, the Big East is going down the tubes and that's when the Big 12 can jump and expand to make sure they remain one of the 16-team super conferences.

There was also talk on sports radio in KC this morning that Arkansas may be interesting in leaving the SEC for the Big 12 if the gang sticks together, especially if Big 12 revenues go up. I know from my Arkansas friends and spending some time down there that while they enjoy the money, they feel like they've never been a part of the SEC and are nostalgic for the rivalries of the old SWC days with Texas and OU. Arkansas would be a great fit. Be interesting if A&M leaves if the Big 12 decides to make a hail mary grab for Arkansas.

I know the reports you are citing about Arkansas and they were instantly discredited. Basically, the report is that Arkansas "informally inquired" about the new Big 12. All this basically means is we probably called and ask them where the eff they are getting their numbers. It does not in any way indicate interest on either party's part.

The rest is nonsense. No one in Arkansas wants to leave the SEC and it isn't happening.

[MrBug708]

By my estimation;

No - Baylor, Missouri, Kansas, Iowa State, KSU
Yes - Nebraska, Texas, TAMU, TTU, Colorado, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

I guess to save the other members some serious cash, the PAC-10 would offer Kansas

[sterlingice]

Wouldn't that still only add up to 8 of the 9 needed votes?

SI

[panerd]

Been out of town for a week to Yellowstone and the whole world fell apart. First of all after visiting the Wyoming/Montana/Idaho area for the first time I can absolutely see why somebody would want to vacation there. I can't wait to get back. Second (and I don't have the time to read through the past 400 posts to see if any Mizzou fans said this) but Mizzou fans have nothing to bitch about. They could give two shits about ISU, KSU, or even KU when the "greener" pastures of the big 10 were calling. So now we are on the outside looking in? Karma. That said I hope the big 12-2 stays together. We have upgraded basketball termendously and if we could have a schedule where we get to play OU, OSU, and Texas every year I would love it. I see no upside to the Mountain West or the SEC unless we are forced to go there. Nothing against the SEC, it is the elite football conference, I would just rather play traditional rivals than SEC schools.

And to those who don't understand Texas looking out for #1, welcome to reality. To me they are the new Notre Dame of college sports.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Wouldn't that still only add up to 8 of the 9 needed votes?

SI

WEll...Missouri is gonna be in the Big-10, no?

You need 5 members to continue a conference. The Big-12 wouldn't have the required amount to be a viable conference so I dont think that would matter anymore.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

The conjecture I've seen in a number of places this weekend is that Beebe's pitch to the Big 12 Lite and the south schools is that all you have to do is stand pat and outlast the Big East and you're golden. The theory is that if Notre Dame goes to the Big Ten, the Big East is going down the tubes and that's when the Big 12 can jump and expand to make sure they remain one of the 16-team super conferences.

The problem with this theory, again, is that Notre Dame leaving won't cause the Big East to go down the tubes...the Big East going down the tubes would cause Notre Dame to leave. And the BE isn't breaking up until at least two schools get pulled, and that's not going to happen until the ACC comes calling because the SEC came calling for some of those schools. The only way I see that changing is if the Big Ten tried forcing ND's hand by, for example, grabbing Rutgers and Syracuse now and hoping that the BE doesn't reach out to some of the Big 12 schools to replace them quickly. The problem with this is that it eliminates the ability to round out the current 12 team format with both Texas and ND and go no further. It's extremely unlikely to happen, but the Big 10 isn't in the position where they need to make any move now.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

I highlighted year 1 because that's the significant issue year -- Texas wouldn't get $25-27 million in year one. First, the Pac 10's current deal with Fox runs through 2012, so you're not talking about getting money under a new deal until the 2012-2013 school year. Secondly, the Pac 10 network doesn't exist. It would take at least a year before the network could debut, and more likely wouldn't debut until 2012 when the Fox deal ends. Thirdly, any network requires startup costs and it's unlikely a Pac 10 network would be profitable for at least 3 years, maybe more.

So you're really talking about getting those revenues in year four or five, if those numbers hold up. The Pac 10 is basing its assumptions it can get $200-$250 million per year from a network AND start it's own network. That combination is unlikely.

From a financial standpoint, moving to the Pac 10 wouldn't pay dividends for 3-4 years. So why not stand pat, let the other Pac 10 schools deal with getting the network launched and see where you're at then?

Plus, don't forget to subtract the $16 million or so Texas would owe to the Big 12 in penalties for bailing on the league.

I thought these moves wouldn't happen until the 2011 or 2012 season?

That would give the Pac 10 enough time to launch and run the network and you would have just one or two years left on the FOX deal.

[Arles]

If the Big 12 can get Texas 20+ million and allow them their own network, that would pretty much match the Pac-10. I'm curious if OU and OSU would get the same deal?

If not, the Pac 10 could still offer them - thereby forcing Texas to come as well.

[MrBug708]

Geezus, what incentive does Oklahoma have to stay in that conference? Texas Athletes already make a ton of money as it is and they'd be leaving the rest of the conference in the dust further?

I guess it hinges on TAMU at this point

[timmynausea]

I basically see 2 possibilities for what is really happening right now:

1. The Texas mouth piece (Chip Brown) is hard selling the Big 12 staying together story so this can be blamed on A&M when they go to the SEC.

2. Texas is legitimately freaking out at the threat of A&M heading to the SEC and scrambling to keep their minions under control by keeping the Big 12 together.

[Arles]

If the big 12 commish sells his soul to keep Texas, why should OU stay? Both will be making the same in the Pac-10/16 (~$25 mil). So, Texas uses the Pac-10 play to go from $15-17 mil to $24 mil - all the while OU gets nothing.

Larry Scott knows this and I would expect him to start playing the huge windfall that OU/OSU would get in the pac-10 against the big 12. The reality is that if OU/OSU leave, A&M will leave and so (eventually) will Texas.

[MrBug708]

Arles, that's about right. Even if the Big-12 stays together for now, it's just a house of cards

[Swaggs]

It seems pretty clear that the Pac 10's data must be telling them that the money is not there without Texas. Otherwise, they could just invite Oklahoma (and probably have to take OSU) and force Texas' hand.

It occurs to me that Texas must be in a position to let the Pac 10 get its network up and running to see if it sinks or swims, take the Big 12's offer for 4-years or so, and then allow themselves to be courted again by the Big Ten, Pac 10, and SEC in a few more years.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

It seems pretty clear that the Pac 10's data must be telling them that the money is not there without Texas. Otherwise, they could just invite Oklahoma (and probably have to take OSU) and force Texas' hand.

I think that's the plan. The last measure is to invite TTU, Oklahoma, and Ok State. All three of them want in and if all three jump to the PAC-10, Texas won't have much left in conference to stay with.

It occurs to me that Texas must be in a position to let the Pac 10 get its network up and running to see if it sinks or swims, take the Big 12's offer for 4-years or so, and then allow themselves to be courted again by the Big Ten, Pac 10, and SEC in a few more years.

Could also happen. If the Big-12 is going to basically develop the Texas network, why not take that deal?

[Swaggs]

It seems like a tremendous stretch to think that the Pac 10's new deal would be greater (and $25-million is much greater) than the Big Ten's current deal with Texas not involved. You can bring in all the Oklahomas and Coloradoes that you want, but the state of Texas is where the value lies.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

I think that's the plan. The last measure is to invite TTU, Oklahoma, and Ok State. All three of them want in and if all three jump to the PAC-10, Texas won't have much left in conference to stay with.

Wouldn't that send Texas right to the Big 10, who would be happy to take them without Texas Tech?