Big 12 rivaling BE for ineptitude: Mizzou might bolt to SEC

[Rumrunner]

http://www.kansascity.com/2011/09/22/3161027/sec-still-in-sights-for-missouri.html

SEC still in sights for Missouri as Big 12 tries to unify

-----
So much for unity. WVU must be sweating. If mizzou takes the 14th, how long willthe wait be for the SEC to get to 15 or 16. It also opens up another slot in Big 12. Louisviile, cincy, tcu?

 

[ctchamps]

http://www.kansascity.com/2011/09/22/3161027/sec-still-in-sights-for-missouri.html

SEC still in sights for Missouri as Big 12 tries to unify

-----
So much for unity. WVU must be sweating. If mizzou takes the 14th, how long willthe wait be for the SEC to get to 15 or 16. It also opens up another slot in Big 12. Louisviile, cincy, tcu?

This is what I expected from Mizzou when they announced the presser although I was hoping (and declared it when I created the poll) they would have given an outright committment to the SEC. They will only stay if Texas relinquishes control of the LHN to the B12 and thats not happening.

So they are definitely going to the SEC and are hoping the B12 implodes before making the commitment. Same with TA&M. If the B12 implodes first than Baylor or any other B12 school left out in the cold will have a more difficult job of making a case against A&M and Mizzou or whatever school leaves. OU and OSU are playing the same game only with the PAC who are planning to accept those two schools but would prefer the conference to break up first as well. No one wants to be the first out. And everyone wants Texas to be the villain. These four schools will claim Texas put their schools at a disadvantage (which it does), they offered Texas an opportunity to change (which Texas won't) and therefore they were forced to make a move (which they will). This was the process that both the SEC and PAC felt was necessary to protect those schools and their conferences.

The B12 will be fragmented in a week or so.

 

[Rumrunner]

Pac doesn't want ou & ok st. Culture change at udub, cal. Az schools want to look west.

 

[ctchamps]

Pac doesn't want ou & ok st. Culture change at udub, cal. Az schools want to look west.

An article I read quoting the PAC commissioner regarding OU and OSU was very open ended. The PAC did not reject OU and OSU in his statement. The statement was the PAC was content with 12 for now but they would be willing to reexamine requests in the future.

 

[Rumrunner]

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/

Guy's sources are usually pac commish and cal chancellor

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

but ou was using the pac to leverage the big 12 into being more stable!!!

 

[ctchamps]

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/

Guy's sources are usually pac commish and cal chancellor

Thanks for the link. First time I heard of Wilner. And this from a link from that article and the same author.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/colleg...ment-update-the-pac-12-doesnt-want-to-expand/

The CEOs believe the Pac-12 is the best-positioned conference in the country. They don’t want 16 teams, and they don’t want the SEC and Big Ten going to 16 teams, either.

But …
*** If Texas A&M becomes the SEC’s 13th team, that sets the superconferences in motion.
“The SEC won’t stop at 13, or even 14. And if the SEC is at 14 or 16, the Big Ten will do it,” a source said. ”At that point, (the Pac-12) would be crazy not to entertain the idea of expansion.”
(Multiple sources said the SEC’s 14th team would most likely be Missouri. Combine untapped TV dollars with geography, and the schools that make the most sense for the SEC are Texas A&M, Missouri and Virginia Tech.)
Only if the SEC goes to 13 would the Pac-12 evaluate its options.
It won’t take Oklahoma unless A&M leaves first, despite the accelerated timeline laid out last week by Oklahoma President David Boren.
*** And yes, in all likelihood the Pac-12 would take Oklahoma and Oklahoma State even if Texas were off the table, multiple sources said.


It pretty much echoes my previous position. I still maintain this OU and Mizzou posturing are attempts by the SEC and the PAC to put the onus for the defections on Texas. The non immediate acceptance of OU/OSU by the PAC and Mizzou in the SEC is only because they need this step of getting Texas to not agree to changes.

 

[Dann]

good read^ so then lets say this.
pac+ok/okst
sec+atm/mizzu/vt/fsu

so do you want to join the acc now? besides playing clemson and gt i don't see it. u want to play md also and u think it makes sense geography wise? thats fine we already have games with them on tap. the cuse and pitt move is just so insane at this point in the game....we built fball not for school ratings, the acc at that point would be a mess.

 

[tzznandrew]

good read^ so then lets say this.
pac+ok/okst
sec+atm/mizzu/vt/fsu

so do you want to join the acc now? besides playing clemson and gt i don't see it. u want to play md also and u think it makes sense geography wise? thats fine we already have games with them on tap. the cuse and pitt move is just so insane at this point in the game....we built fball not for school ratings, the acc at that point would be a mess.

Even in that scenario, the ACC is a much better option. I just don't think you are fully understanding that. ECU, Houston, UCF, Memphis, etc.--they may compete a year or two with some ACC teams, but the universities are no match in really any way with Syracuse, BC, Duke, GT, Maryland, NCState, UNC, etc. It's not even close. And in your scenario, Rutgers is our only football rival.

I know you're trying to think on the bright side. But its ACC/B1G no matter what.

 

[SAMCRO]

I start this post by saying i would prefer we get out of the BE.

But, I'd argue that if you put an ECU in a BCS conference, they'd be on par w/ VT in no time at all. Not just 1 time/year, but as a program. They're already the best team in NC.

If, big if, we stay BE long term, and we manage to hang on to WVU and TCU, by bringing in ECU, UCF, and Houston, we are a better FB conference than we are today. of course we will never bring these teams in because PC doesn't want them (which I get from their perspective).

 

[jdubct]

Missouri wanted to join the Big10 along with Nebraska. Given their discontent with the Big12, it is not really surprising they would want to join the SEC.

What available schools do you think the Big12 might most want to add to increase membership to 12 schools?

 

[SAMCRO]

Missouri wanted to join the Big10 along with Nebraska. Given their discontent with the Big12, it is not really surprising they would want to join the SEC.

What available schools do you think the Big12 might most want to add to increase membership to 12 schools?

In order of the B12 preference (IMO): BYU, TCU, UL, WVU, Houston, Boise, Cinci, USF, Rutgers and UConn (last 2 only in an act of desperation to get to a certain #, and only as a package deal).

 

[RS9999X]

It will take another week for the B12 to establish it's Tier 3 network policy.

The tentative deal this week was to 100% evenly split the ABC money instead of a 50% even split and 50% appearances bonus. The battle now is to give regional networks a 50/50 deal similar to the old ABC deal.

The new commitee is looking into these scenarios:

Teams keep 50% of their regional network for costs and incentives to improve the product.

The Longhorn would be required to put up the other 50% into the sharing pool. Here's the catch: teams that don't have a network or don't meet a regional network revenue minimum would not get part of the 50% Tier 3 pool--possibly. Then there's the question of pro rating the money to be split.

Scenario:

Oklahoma and OSU have a regional network that meets the minimum revenue for revenue sharing. Is that one share or two?
Missouri does the same. That is 1 share.
None of the others meet the revenue minimums.

Does eveyone share equally? Or just those meeting the minimums?

Does Texas put 50% into the pool to be split 10 ways or is it split 4 ways or 3 ways"

Or is it better defined as 5% per team that qualifies? In that 5% scenario Texas is liable to put up 50% if all B12 teams qualify but only 5% per team that meets revenue minimums. If OU, SU and Missouri are the only regional networks that qualify that means 15% of LHN revenues go into the pool along with 15% of the OU /OSU and Missouri networks and they split the proceeds 3 ways until the other regional networks are added in.

Anyway you get the jist. No money for the slacker networks or everyone shares in regional network money and how does the 50% pro-ration work?. As a fixed 50% amount or a 5% per team basis (assuming 10 teams)?

Supposedly they agreed in principle and now need to finesse it and write it up.

 

[Vowelguy]

But, I'd argue that if you put an ECU in a BCS conference, they'd be on par w/ VT in no time at all. Not just 1 time/year, but as a program. They're already the best team in NC.

Oh boy!
Isn't that like being the thinnest person on the Biggest Loser?

 

[HuskyHawk]

The Big 12 isn't going anywhere. I'm not even convinced the Mizzou is gone or that A&M can't be enticed to stay. If those two bolt, BYU and TCU would likely take their place, or perhaps Louisville over TCU. It never made any sense for OU to leave, or UT, except for the LHN issue. But that issue will persist in any conference.

 

[ctchamps]

The Big 12 isn't going anywhere. I'm not even convinced the Mizzou is gone or that A&M can't be enticed to stay. If those two bolt, BYU and TCU would likely take their place, or perhaps Louisville over TCU. It never made any sense for OU to leave, or UT, except for the LHN issue. But that issue will persist in any conference.

If A&M and Mizzou head to the SEC the odds are very small the SEC stays at 14 and the PAC stays at 12. Both conferences will be aggressive at going to 16. And outside of FSU from the ACC both will go hard at the B12. I still think that conference is history.

 

[mattp]

now that it looks like mizzou is staying, i guess we have to hope the SEC goes after VTech and the ACC pulls us in to replace them. obviously the bowl deals and $ are better in the ACC, but i'm really not crazy about the idea of going there.

 

[Rumrunner]

aTm is gone. No way they come back. 0.0% chance.

The Big 12 isn't going anywhere. I'm not even convinced the Mizzou is gone or that A&M can't be enticed to stay. If those two bolt, BYU and TCU would likely take their place, or perhaps Louisville over TCU. It never made any sense for OU to leave, or UT, except for the LHN issue. But that issue will persist in any conference.

 

[ctchamps]

aTm is gone. No way they come back. 0.0% chance.

Yep. and we will soon find out if OU and Mizzou are staying or just playing games.

 

[Rumrunner]

OU and Boren are really starting to look ugly. Boren got slapped down by the pac 12 as a paired entry with ok st, then claims he was kidding, steps on mizzou's toes at the press conference, and the claims everyone's agreed to the grant of rights. Oops.

http://m.newsok.com/s?a=3606804&p=1&s=16

 

[ctchamps]

The PAC wants nothing to do with Texas and the LHN.
The PAC doesn't want OU and OSU because they don't want a 14 team model. They will get two other schools not named Texas and Texas Tech once it is certain the SEC accepts A&M and Mizzou.

 

[Vowelguy]

If A&M and Mizzou head to the SEC the odds are very small the SEC stays at 14 and the PAC stays at 12. Both conferences will be aggressive at going to 16.

... and you say this because ... ?

 

[ctchamps]

... and you say this because ... ?

This:

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/colleg...ment-update-the-pac-12-doesnt-want-to-expand/

 

[jpm25]

Pac doesn't want ou & ok st. Culture change at udub, cal. Az schools want to look west.

not true

 

[jpm25]

The PAC wants nothing to do with Texas and the LHN.
The PAC doesn't want OU and OSU because they don't want a 14 team model. They will get two other schools not named Texas and Texas Tech once it is certain the SEC accepts A&M and Mizzou.

this