(09-18-2015 01:11 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(09-18-2015 12:11 AM)JRsec Wrote:  The announcement of the new interim AD at Texas signals a change of directions. A coolness toward the PAC has now set in, and an intentional warming to Oklahoma position is now beginning. Together the two might be able to work for dissolution.

It will be interesting to watch developments going forward.

From another board, not me.

ESPN and the ACC have made tremendous progress on the structure and contract regarding an ACC Network. Would not be surprised if you see a press conference involving the ACC Network in and around the ACC Championship game. Notre Dame has been actively involved in the ACC Network negotiations, so also would not be surprised to see a renegotiation of the ACC-ESPN television contract.

A few notes on the Longhorn Network, which explains why Texas will NEVER join the PAC 12, SEC, or BIG Ten;
ESPN pays Texas 11 million per year beginning in 2011, with a 3% increase each season until ESPN makes its investment back. Then Texas receives 50% of all revenue.
Longhorn Network Contract prevent Texas from being a part of any other network until 2031.

The only option for Texas in realignment is joining the ACC under a similar agreement as Notre Dame currently has in place. Texas sees itself and can justify itself as a Notre Dame on the National stage. Texas is far more like Notre Dame than they are Ohio State or USC or Alabama, and that is how they feel. So point here is any shake up in the Big 12 will result in Texas going independent in football and moving Olympic Sports to the ACC, and the ACC will welcome them with open arms! On that note Oklahoma is not happy, and unless the Big 12 expands and adds its own network, Oklahoma will leave, and the GOR will not stop Oklahoma. Which is why their is enormous pressure on the Big 12 Expansion Committee to design an expansion solution that has long term benefits for Oklahoma and others within the Big 12. This is why I believe in the end that expansion design will be two phased with (4) schools over 5 years, and the Big 12 will eventually be the Big 14. Should expansion not occur, then the Big 12 dissolves and a new conference will form (as Coach Tubs has mentioned in the past). A new conference will include Big leftovers, who did not join other P5 conferences, along with AAC and MWC members.

My personal opinion, is that the Big 12 will dissolve, too many differences to unify them for expansion. Texas will join the ACC in Olympic Sports and be independent in Football, as is Notre Dame. Kansas and Oklahoma will move to the Big Ten. While the PAC 12 in collusion with the Big 10 moves to add (2) schools from TCU, Baylor, and Texas TECH, as well as Oklahoma State, and Kansas St. This collusion effort helps both conferences in cross-alignment. The SEC has no interest in remaining Big 12 members, nor does the ACC, as there is no financial benefit to either. I believe the remaining Big 12 schools, some ACC members, MWC members, and BYU form a new national conference, and yes this conference will be a P5 Conference. At this point the FBS splits, and you see the NCAA reorganize as follows;
FBS
FBS-IA
FCS - Several FCS schools move up to FBS-IA, which leads to new conferences, and new revenue for broadcasters.

I've read all of that before and it has been posted on more than one board. Here is why I do not believe a word of it.

1. Texas is beholden to ESPN. However, ESPN has conditions that permit it buy out the LHN early. Should Texas move to the ACC I seriously doubt it would be for a hybrid deal. And the most assuredly would want traveling companions from closer to home. Why on both counts?

ESPN might morph the LHN into another network but they aren't going to pay Texas what will eventually be closer to 15 million a year for what they are getting out of it now. By morphing it into another network the new profits could simply be withheld at say $1 million a year per school from what would be an already major boost in revenue until the LHN is paid for. As an independent Texas would want to keep the LHN revenue stream and get paid by the new conference for the 5 or whatever number of games was agreed upon. That's not going to be well received by the F.S.U. & Clemson's of the world and it's not going to happen.

Secondly Texas is going to have to have some games closer to home before they agree to anything. Baylor or T.C.U. at a minimum along with one or two more at a minimum would be required. Required not only to make Texas feel at home but required to obtain the 8 votes to dissolve, otherwise it's 5 or 6 years before change can happen.

So the whole thing is a non starter.

Then there is the obvious Big 10 homer flavor of this. There is no way Oklahoma moves to the Big 10 without Texas. Their fans know it, their faculty knows it, and their big money donors sure as hell know it. Texas is the minimum requirement for the Sooners to head North, not Kansas. Then there is a little brother issue. If Texas takes the Pokes along with them it creates problems in scheduling if the Sooners want to play both annually. There is no way the Big 10 is taking OSU and there sure as hell isn't anyway the SEC helps the Big 10 do that by taking OSU alone.

The only way this happens is if some version of Texahoma to the ACC happens and Texas and Notre Dame go all in for the ACCN. Then they have something worth having.

And then my friends N.C. State and Virginia Tech move to the SEC to make it happen.

I could see Texas and Baylor and Oklahoma and Oklahoma State forming their own 4 school Western Division of the ACC. Or your can pick the two that would travel with them if you like, but it will be something like that if it is to ever happen.

Kansas may well go to the Big 10 but it won't be with Oklahoma.

Now what I've laid out I laid out 3 years ago when it was seriously on the table for the SEC and ACC. But somebody will have to pay the PAC to take Texas Tech, T.C.U., Kansas State and Iowa State to make it happen. And that I don't see. Neither do I see the GOR being challenged by fewer than eight as it would be tremendously expensive if it were upheld otherwise.