Big 12 Breaking up??

Of course Tech is the weak link, nothing asinine about facts:

..but unlike Texas and A&M, Tech is not a member of the Association of American Universities, leaving them short of the academic requirements the Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany is searching for in potential members. According to an email obtained through a public records request the Columbia Post-Dispatch, Ohio State University president E. Gordon Gee to Delany, the Red Raiders are the only thing holding Texas back from making the jump to the Big Ten.

"I did speak with Bill Powers at Texas, who would welcome a call to say they have a 'Tech' problem."

The "Tech problem" would hinder the Texas from joining the Big Ten, but not the Pac-10, which would explain the west coast giant's new found interest in the Horns.

As far as unequal revenue, don't like then don't agree to it and go somewhere else. These teams agreed to it voluntarily, now take some of that money and out it into your facilities like UT and OU have done. Then maybe when it's time to renegotiate you have some more to bring to the table.

Originally posted by dobophile:
As a fan, I wouldn't mind ridding the Big 12 of Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, and Iowa State. Add TCU, Houston, and Arkansas.

Texas
A&M
Tech
OU
OSU
TCU
Houston
Arkansas
Baylor

Makes less sense, money-wise, but it's more Texas-centric. Basically reconstitute the old SWC. Minus SMU and Rice, plus OU and OSU.

There is a reason why the SWC didn't work out.

Arkansas isn't leaving the SEC especially for a league without equal revenue sharing.

TCU brings nothing to the table as far as TV sets or alumni. Sure their football program is playing well but ultimately TV revenue is what drives the train. The same for Houston. UT AM TTU carry the houston market the same as they do the DFW market. Houston and TCU can't even sell out their stadiums on a regular basis and draw less than half of the fans that the big 3 public universities bring.

Losing Kansas and Mizzou is losing the valuable St Louis/KC market without bringing anything new to the table.

SWC failed because it didn't have the TV sets and geographic footprint it needed to survive. To reconstruct it especially under the unequal revenue sharing guise is just a doomed failure.

Originally posted by TX9R:
Of course Tech is the weak link, nothing asinine about facts:

..but unlike Texas and A&M, Tech is not a member of the Association of American Universities, leaving them short of the academic requirements the Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany is searching for in potential members. According to an email obtained through a public records request the Columbia Post-Dispatch, Ohio State University president E. Gordon Gee to Delany, the Red Raiders are the only thing holding Texas back from making the jump to the Big Ten.

"I did speak with Bill Powers at Texas, who would welcome a call to say they have a 'Tech' problem."

The "Tech problem" would hinder the Texas from joining the Big Ten, but not the Pac-10, which would explain the west coast giant's new found interest in the Horns.

As far as unequal revenue, don't like then don't agree to it and go somewhere else. These teams agreed to it voluntarily, now take some of that money and out it into your facilities like UT and OU have done. Then maybe when it's time to renegotiate you have some more to bring to the table.

Tech is also a hundred years younger than Tech and A&M. The Tech problem email was floated around by a big 10 official. Bottom line I don't think Texas had any legit interest just like they didn't have any legit interest in the SEC.

We haven't agreed to the deal yet and I honestly hope we don't.

Texas destroyed the PAC16 deal because even after months of negotiations about equal revenue sharing they wanted 11th hour bonus revenue.

The big12-2 is held together by duct tape, and UT greed. The sooner we get out of this situation the better for TTU. Obviously UT will only do whats best for UT no matter what so why even agree to be their second or third fiddle. The only reason the forgotten five are even apart of this deal is just because UT needs some teams to play.

Texas and Oklahoma just won big time. Now don't have to play any real tough road games at all. Nebraska was there only real credible conference opponent. Then Texas and OU play each other at a neutral site thus neither ever have to go on the road and win a tough game. so the winner of that game every year will have a very easy path to the BCS title game. Texas just pimped the Pac 10. Adding Utah and Colorado does nothing. USC doesn't have to face TX and OU makes them a big time winner also.

Originally posted by dobophile:
As a fan, I wouldn't mind ridding the Big 12 of Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, and Iowa State. Add TCU, Houston, and Arkansas.

Texas
A&M
Tech
OU
OSU
TCU
Houston
Arkansas
Baylor

Makes less sense, money-wise, but it's more Texas-centric. Basically reconstitute the old SWC. Minus SMU and Rice, plus OU and OSU.

I wouldn't rid of Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, and Iowa State....however moving OU and OSU to the North and adding TCU and Houston to the South would be interesting and bring the conference back to 12.

So is the pac 10 staying with 11 or will they go after a new team to even things out? Utah was mentioned before, I would like that

Multi million dollar TV contracts are hardly duct tape. Having the conference at 10 consentrates the money in an area that is seeing the most population growth and that already had the most recruit rich territory to begin with. Did you ever think maybe the trickle down effect is that these traditionally weaker schools now get to have less competition for high prized Texas recruits. UT only has so many scholarships, I'd wager many of these kids would pick one of the 2nd tier schools in the big12 thanks to the TV deal now. The addition by subtraction also strenghtens the basketball side. I don't know how TTU would be upset that they just got a huge raise and get to keep their "rivalries". Without UT they would not have had this opportunity in any other conference. Again from a fan perspective I'd rather have 1 conference with the 16 best teams every year and have a top 25 matchup weekly, but that would destroy the other 300 schools. This at least keeps the status quo and gives chances to teams like Boise and TCU to compete. Texas would have been the domino that killed those type of schools.

Originally posted by teeohh:
So is the pac 10 staying with 11 or will they go after a new team to even things out? Utah was mentioned before, I would like that

they most likely will round it out at 12, so they can have a conference championship game and make more $$$! It's all about money

Originally posted by maximill15:

Originally posted by teeohh:
So is the pac 10 staying with 11 or will they go after a new team to even things out? Utah was mentioned before, I would like that

they most likely will round it out at 12, so they can have a conference championship game and make more $$$! It's all about money

but I keep hearing that the PAC doesn't believe in conference championship games

This multimillion dollar tv deal is a joke to any school not OU AM or UT.

Sure we get a raise but then again so does everyone and now the gap between the haves and have nots is just that much wider.

18 years? Tier systems? Not to mention the finacially crippling penalties of ever trying to leave.

No matter the spin you can't honestly say this is a good deal for TTU or OSU especially compared to the pac 16 offer that was available 24 hours ago.

I wonder how you would feel if UT was the one getting 15 million and other teams were getting 25.

its not all about football

Originally posted by joey82:
This multimillion dollar tv deal is a joke to any school not OU AM or UT.

Sure we get a raise but then again so does everyone and now the gap between the haves and have nots is just that much wider.

18 years? Tier systems? Not to mention the finacially crippling penalties of ever trying to leave.

No matter the spin you can't honestly say this is a good deal for TTU or OSU especially compared to the pac 16 offer that was available 24 hours ago.

I wonder how you would feel if UT was the one getting 15 million and other teams were getting 25.

Dude, you keep conveniently forgetting that NOBODY WANTED THOSE SCHOOLS W/O UT. The only reason that deal was available to you was because that's how bad everyone wanted UT. This is the best deal you could get.

Originally posted by TX9R:

Originally posted by joey82:
This multimillion dollar tv deal is a joke to any school not OU AM or UT.

Sure we get a raise but then again so does everyone and now the gap between the haves and have nots is just that much wider.

18 years? Tier systems? Not to mention the finacially crippling penalties of ever trying to leave.

No matter the spin you can't honestly say this is a good deal for TTU or OSU especially compared to the pac 16 offer that was available 24 hours ago.

I wonder how you would feel if UT was the one getting 15 million and other teams were getting 25.

Dude, you keep conveniently forgetting that NOBODY WANTED THOSE SCHOOLS W/O UT. The only reason that deal was available to you was because that's how bad everyone wanted UT. This is the best deal you could get.

Fair enough... Why would I want to be in a conference where UT could go 0-12 and TTU could go 12-0 and UT would make more TV revenue than TTU?

OSU calling a press conference at 2:00 seems they may be tired of your crap also.

Presser supposed to be available here @ 2 :

http://all-access.cbssports.com/player.html?code=okst&media=182513

1) I'm disappointed a super conference didn't happen. It seemed like a great way to move CFB to 4 super conferences and then have a +1 format.

2) Its pretty clear in the aftermath, UT has no interest in being in any way an equal among lesser financial schools. UT has the power and clearly wants as much of a financial share as they can grab.

3) The rest of the Big 12 are the losers in this deal IMO. I have a hard time seeing each school getting the $20 million from a TV deal when UT, the biggest money maker, will have its own TV deal. They also lost several more million with the loss of a conference championship game. In the future, things will only get more financially unequal for the rest of the schools.

4) Texas A&M is retarded. Why would they not join the SEC? I can't even believe the SEC wanted them. Its their only chance to get out from under UT's shadow

5) I think the PAC-11 will add Utah. Which after all makes more sense geographically (PAC 10 + Colorado and Utah market). Probably add a few million in revenue to each school, and it won't change the reputation of the PAC

6) Its good for my Sun Devils...I think there was a very good chance our football program would have tanked in the new conference because So.Cal is so key to our recruiting and we need as much visibility there as possible.