(02-27-2016 03:49 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(02-27-2016 12:18 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 05:15 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Why would ESPN & Fox dissolve the ACC now? As JR said it takes 12 ACC teams to dissolve the league. That means that 12 teams would have to be bumped up to the SEC/B1G level or to bump those conferences down & that isn't likely. To bump up 12 teams by $10 million each per year wouldn't make sense when the networks are supposed to be cutting their budgets.

I have 2 concerns for the long term viability of the ACC.

1) If they don't get a network then certain schools are going to continue to fall behind financially. Is ESPN willing to make that investment? They seem to be delaying it. It would be cheaper to trade off some schools to the B1G and only have to pay for about half of those rights. FOX will own the other half and they would love to get some more Eastern content. I could see all parties being pleased with that.

2) The SEC would prefer some of the ACC schools as opposed to the Big 12, I think. They'd have to get a raise, but ESPN would also make more money off the content.

That and I'm just spitballing.

Those are legitimate concerns. My point was simply that instead of moving 12 teams now & spend an additional $120 million per year that the networks will wait until after the GOR's & move the pieces that they want to keep & consolidate the rest.

Another possible move would be to combine the top brands of the B12 & the ACC into 1 conference & pay them Big 12 current money. This way the networks get to keep who they want & without paying the premium price. They give them a conference network which gives the schools additional revenue while also creating a new revenue stream for themselves. The SEC & B1G could still possibly take 2 each.

One possible scenario here would be NC, Duke & Virginia going to the SEC. This would possibly put Missouri & Kansas into the B1G. You would then have the best of the B12 & ACC come together.

Another scenario would be for 6 schools to jump from the ACC to the B12. (FSU, Clemson, GT, Miami, Louisville & VT) The remainder of the ACC (NC, Duke, Virginia, NC State, WF, Pittsburgh, Syracuse & BC) would keep ND as a partial & add UCONN to give them 10 with 9 football schools. They then could add Georgetown & Villanova & have a great basketball conference. They may even consider St John's & Seton Hall as well. The ACC would become a tweener conference. Tobacco Road saves the ACC & still has an elite basketball conference that makes good money. ND keeps their football independence. IF NC State could escape from NC control then you could see the SEC &/or B1G pickup 2 each.

You could be right. There might not be a good reason from the networks' perspective to make many moves in the near future.

I do think that either the Big 12 or ACC will go away though. I could see the ACC surviving as a basketball-centric league that happens to play football. I'm not sure the parities are interested in that, but it makes sense to me.

I do think JR is right about the next round of moves depending on what OU does.

I could see OU and OSU heading to the SEC. If that happens then maybe a few more crazy moves happen. I'm not sure.

Maybe?

SEC takes OU and OSU

B1G takes KU and UConn

At this point, I'm assuming that the GOR isn't that big of a roadblock...at least for public schools.

Texas, wanting to rebuild a strong league for themselves, calls up some of the programs not quite as happy in the ACC. They get some interest and ESPN considers it as well since they could use the LHN to form a new conference network.

However, some schools are still more valuable in the SEC or B1G so some sort of compromise is needed.

UNC, Duke, UVA, and GT move to the SEC. The SEC is done at 20.

West: Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Missouri, Arkansas
South: LSU, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn
East: Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina
North: Kentucky, Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech

Virginia Tech, NC State, Syracuse, and Boston College move to the B1G. The B1G is done at 20.

Florida State, Miami, Clemson, Louisville, and Pitt move to the Big 12. They also get an affiliation with Notre Dame. The Big 12 is done at 12 + 1.

West: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Kansas State, Iowa State
East: Miami, Florida State, Clemson, Louisville, West Virginia, Pittsburgh

MHver3 ‏@MHver3 1h1 hour ago
There are rumors of KU and OU having an open invitation to join the B10. I can't speak for KU but I can tell you OU does not

My source is 90% certain KU doesn't either and ESPN contact has told B12 that B10 is actively courting UNC/UVA/Duke for certain.

And B10 also has sights on GT/ND/BC.

@gq2scoops ESPN thinks 20 is their endgame. (B1G)

@gq2scoops late May early June for the first dominos. They will not be huge shockers. The real fun starts later in the summer with B10.

Murr ‏@MurrDCU 1h1 hour ago
@MHver3 @gq2scoops do you think GT and UVA will be the first two ACC schools to move?

MHver3 ‏@MHver3 1h1 hour ago
@MurrDCU @gq2scoops no. It's looking like UVA/UNC with Duke GT next.


Interesting....If UVA and UNC were the first to leave the ACC, I would make a very hard push for Duke to be Carolina school as I would expect VT to walk right over to the SEC to keep up with their instate rival's new pay checks. NC State will still be an option even if Duke did pass although the sexier pick would be FSU as it appears UF is more prone to support their vote than USC would to Clemson's. The match ups FSU would give us would be epic.

(02-28-2016 08:17 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  MHver3 ‏@MHver3 1h1 hour ago
There are rumors of KU and OU having an open invitation to join the B10. I can't speak for KU but I can tell you OU does not

My source is 90% certain KU doesn't either and ESPN contact has told B12 that B10 is actively courting UNC/UVA/Duke for certain.

And B10 also has sights on GT/ND/BC.

@gq2scoops ESPN thinks 20 is their endgame. (B1G)

@gq2scoops late May early June for the first dominos. They will not be huge shockers. The real fun starts later in the summer with B10.

Murr ‏@MurrDCU 1h1 hour ago
@MHver3 @gq2scoops do you think GT and UVA will be the first two ACC schools to move?

MHver3 ‏@MHver3 1h1 hour ago
@MurrDCU @gq2scoops no. It's looking like UVA/UNC with Duke GT next.


Interesting....If UVA and UNC were the first to leave the ACC, I would make a very hard push for Duke to be Carolina school as I would expect VT to walk right over to the SEC to keep up with their instate rival's new pay checks. NC State will still be an option even if Duke did pass although the sexier pick would be FSU as it appears UF is more prone to support their vote than USC would to Clemson's. The match ups FSU would give us would be epic.

1. I don't really believe any of this, but it is fun to speculate about.
2. N.C. State and Duke would give us more of North Carolina. But I don't see Georgia Tech headed to the Big 10. They'll have to take Duke to get Virginia and U.N.C. should that ever happen.
3. I don't care if the Big 10 lands Georgia Tech, because they really don't even capture Atlanta by doing that and Tech's athletic department is about tapped out.
4. I would love for them to land those 6. 1 football school among them...N.D..
5. Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Florida State, Clemson, Oklahoma, and Texas would round out the SEC quite nicely. If no Texas it doesn't matter who is #6. Kansas, West Virginia, Oklahoma State, Baylor....I don't really care.
6. South Carolina supported Clemson's nomination until Slive asked that in state rivals be excluded for positions 13 & 14 which led to the "gentlemen's agreement" internet garbage. Both South Carolina and Florida's AD's fear losing their in state rival much the same as A&M has due to expanding conferences and less room on a crowded slate for a Home and Home with an OOC opponent annually. That's why both the Florida Chancellor and the South Carolina President wanted to nominate that pair in 2010. The reticence for Clemson has to do only with the fact that taking a second school from a small state doesn't make as much sense as owning the two brands in Florida that draw the eyes of 85% of college football fans there when added together. For a state the size of Florida that's a whopping number.

(02-28-2016 08:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-28-2016 08:17 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  MHver3 ‏@MHver3 1h1 hour ago
There are rumors of KU and OU having an open invitation to join the B10. I can't speak for KU but I can tell you OU does not

My source is 90% certain KU doesn't either and ESPN contact has told B12 that B10 is actively courting UNC/UVA/Duke for certain.

And B10 also has sights on GT/ND/BC.

@gq2scoops ESPN thinks 20 is their endgame. (B1G)

@gq2scoops late May early June for the first dominos. They will not be huge shockers. The real fun starts later in the summer with B10.

Murr ‏@MurrDCU 1h1 hour ago
@MHver3 @gq2scoops do you think GT and UVA will be the first two ACC schools to move?

MHver3 ‏@MHver3 1h1 hour ago
@MurrDCU @gq2scoops no. It's looking like UVA/UNC with Duke GT next.


Interesting....If UVA and UNC were the first to leave the ACC, I would make a very hard push for Duke to be Carolina school as I would expect VT to walk right over to the SEC to keep up with their instate rival's new pay checks. NC State will still be an option even if Duke did pass although the sexier pick would be FSU as it appears UF is more prone to support their vote than USC would to Clemson's. The match ups FSU would give us would be epic.

1. I don't really believe any of this, but it is fun to speculate about.
2. N.C. State and Duke would give us more of North Carolina. But I don't see Georgia Tech headed to the Big 10. They'll have to take Duke to get Virginia and U.N.C. should that ever happen.
3. I don't care if the Big 10 lands Georgia Tech, because they really don't even capture Atlanta by doing that and Tech's athletic department is about tapped out.
4. I would love for them to land those 6. 1 football school among them...N.D..
5. Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Florida State, Clemson, Oklahoma, and Texas would round out the SEC quite nicely. If no Texas it doesn't matter who is #6. Kansas, West Virginia, Oklahoma State, Baylor....I don't really care.
6. South Carolina supported Clemson's nomination until Slive asked that in state rivals be excluded for positions 13 & 14 which led to the "gentlemen's agreement" internet garbage. Both South Carolina and Florida's AD's fear losing their in state rival much the same as A&M has due to expanding conferences and less room on a crowded slate for a Home and Home with an OOC opponent annually. That's why both the Florida Chancellor and the South Carolina President wanted to nominate that pair in 2010. The reticence for Clemson has to do only with the fact that taking a second school from a small state doesn't make as much sense as owning the two brands in Florida that draw the eyes of 85% of college football fans there when added together. For a state the size of Florida that's a whopping number.

How about Kentucky and Louisville? I assume it would be in UK's interest to keep them non-conference.


That would be a very nice 20.

So that's how the "gentleman's agreement" played out. It makes sense at new territories/cable boxes were needed to maximize the network money.

(02-28-2016 08:53 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(02-28-2016 08:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-28-2016 08:17 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  MHver3 ‏@MHver3 1h1 hour ago
There are rumors of KU and OU having an open invitation to join the B10. I can't speak for KU but I can tell you OU does not

My source is 90% certain KU doesn't either and ESPN contact has told B12 that B10 is actively courting UNC/UVA/Duke for certain.

And B10 also has sights on GT/ND/BC.

@gq2scoops ESPN thinks 20 is their endgame. (B1G)

@gq2scoops late May early June for the first dominos. They will not be huge shockers. The real fun starts later in the summer with B10.

Murr ‏@MurrDCU 1h1 hour ago
@MHver3 @gq2scoops do you think GT and UVA will be the first two ACC schools to move?

MHver3 ‏@MHver3 1h1 hour ago
@MurrDCU @gq2scoops no. It's looking like UVA/UNC with Duke GT next.


Interesting....If UVA and UNC were the first to leave the ACC, I would make a very hard push for Duke to be Carolina school as I would expect VT to walk right over to the SEC to keep up with their instate rival's new pay checks. NC State will still be an option even if Duke did pass although the sexier pick would be FSU as it appears UF is more prone to support their vote than USC would to Clemson's. The match ups FSU would give us would be epic.

1. I don't really believe any of this, but it is fun to speculate about.
2. N.C. State and Duke would give us more of North Carolina. But I don't see Georgia Tech headed to the Big 10. They'll have to take Duke to get Virginia and U.N.C. should that ever happen.
3. I don't care if the Big 10 lands Georgia Tech, because they really don't even capture Atlanta by doing that and Tech's athletic department is about tapped out.
4. I would love for them to land those 6. 1 football school among them...N.D..
5. Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Florida State, Clemson, Oklahoma, and Texas would round out the SEC quite nicely. If no Texas it doesn't matter who is #6. Kansas, West Virginia, Oklahoma State, Baylor....I don't really care.
6. South Carolina supported Clemson's nomination until Slive asked that in state rivals be excluded for positions 13 & 14 which led to the "gentlemen's agreement" internet garbage. Both South Carolina and Florida's AD's fear losing their in state rival much the same as A&M has due to expanding conferences and less room on a crowded slate for a Home and Home with an OOC opponent annually. That's why both the Florida Chancellor and the South Carolina President wanted to nominate that pair in 2010. The reticence for Clemson has to do only with the fact that taking a second school from a small state doesn't make as much sense as owning the two brands in Florida that draw the eyes of 85% of college football fans there when added together. For a state the size of Florida that's a whopping number.

How about Kentucky and Louisville? I assume it would be in UK's interest to keep them non-conference.


That would be a very nice 20.

So that's how the "gentleman's agreement" played out. It makes sense at new territories/cable boxes were needed to maximize the network money.

BTW Louisville would be fine for #6 as well. But a new market might be better. What if the Big 10 expanded with those 6 and the SEC took Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma, Virginia Tech, N.C. State, and Florida State? Anyway it's a fun assumption to make.

As to the "Gentlemen's Agreement" the reason Slive asked for it (to not nominate in state rivals until two new markets were added) is because the renegotiation clause in our contract called for 2 new markets to be activated. Of course the original plan was for the SEC to move to 16 with Texas, Oklahoma, Virginia Tech and N.C. State. Texas wanted Oklahoma for the foursome moving to the ACC. So Missouri became the 4th for the SEC. The Texas foursome were to be Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and a school to be named later. I found out that 4th school was Notre Dame. That foursome would have landed the ACC a network. North Carolina supposedly pulled out on that one at the last minute due to fear of losing voting control of the ACC. That's why N.D. was quick to convert the failed plan into a partial deal which suited them better. It was why F.S.U. and Clemson officials were livid and why Maryland who was counting on the revenue from an ACCN flew the coop.

It would have been a helluva two conference setup for ESPN and remember it was quite possible, in fact almost done, because there were no GOR's. Now the SEC has half of its intended and ESPN doubled its efforts to get our network in place and carried. The ACC however "screwed the pooch plain and simple." Had that deal gone down they would have easily been the equal of the SEC in payout and would have held top basketball and football brands.

Now they have to pray that streaming won't get monetized soon because if it does they will have the toughest time keeping up with only two real football brands and two faded ones.

http://www.mystatesman.com/news/sports/b...-bi/nqbjk/

Quote:5. Joe Castiglione said there is “no perfect solution” for the Big 12 and looks forward to the May/June meetings that could determine whether the league adopts a conference football title game and chooses to expand. “Some years it could be really good, some years it could not,” the Oklahoma athletic director said. “We know it would have to be a rematch.” Texas’ stance on these issues remain a mystery although it’s safe to assume it doesn’t want to give up its lucrative Longhorn Network. There is one theory that ESPN would like the Big 12 to force its hand and pressure/entice Texas to abandon the LHN in favor of a league-wide network. Castiglione declined to address the idea. “Texas is like us. We’re all examining everything that could strengthen the league.” What troubles OU’s outspoken president, David Boren, is the fact that the league has only three recognizable, strong brands — Oklahoma football, Kansas basketball and Texas football, which at the moment is on the decline — and that doesn’t speak well to ticket sales. TCU, for instance, only sold 2,000 of its ticket allotments for the road football game in Norman last year. That’s a big reason Boren wants OU to join the SEC or the Big Ten.

No link to original article posted:

Quote:From Tramel's Lunch Chat

Question:

Hey Berry. All this talk about adding two G5 teams to the Big 12 can't be serious can it? Do you think Boren actually believes that the conference perception can be fixed by adding Cincinnati or UConn? I mean really? The idea that those two teams or any non-power 5 schools could change the disparity between SEC and the Big 10 and the Big 12 seems ridiculous.

Berry:

You're talking about two different things. The conference perception and changing the disparity between the Big 12 and the SEC? Two different things. The difference between Big Ten and SEC is big. Going to 12 teams and having a title game would bridge some of the perception gap. Are Cincy and UConn the answers? I personally think BYU would be a major perception addition to the Big 12. But no matter what the Big 12 does, it's not getting close to the SEC in image. The Big Ten isn't getting close to the SEC, either.


-______

Question:

Berry What do you believe is the brass tax acceptable outcome to David Boren when the Big 12 meetings occur? How would David Boren react if that brass tax oucome didn't occur?

Berry:
I think the elimination of the Longhorn Network is the line of demarcation. The other stuff could be discussed. I think OU will look elsewhere, eventually, if Bevo TV endures.

(03-02-2016 07:08 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  http://www.mystatesman.com/news/sports/b...-bi/nqbjk/

Quote:5. Joe Castiglione said there is “no perfect solution” for the Big 12 and looks forward to the May/June meetings that could determine whether the league adopts a conference football title game and chooses to expand. “Some years it could be really good, some years it could not,” the Oklahoma athletic director said. “We know it would have to be a rematch.” Texas’ stance on these issues remain a mystery although it’s safe to assume it doesn’t want to give up its lucrative Longhorn Network. There is one theory that ESPN would like the Big 12 to force its hand and pressure/entice Texas to abandon the LHN in favor of a league-wide network. Castiglione declined to address the idea. “Texas is like us. We’re all examining everything that could strengthen the league.” What troubles OU’s outspoken president, David Boren, is the fact that the league has only three recognizable, strong brands — Oklahoma football, Kansas basketball and Texas football, which at the moment is on the decline — and that doesn’t speak well to ticket sales. TCU, for instance, only sold 2,000 of its ticket allotments for the road football game in Norman last year. That’s a big reason Boren wants OU to join the SEC or the Big Ten.

No link to original article posted:

Quote:From Tramel's Lunch Chat

Question:

Hey Berry. All this talk about adding two G5 teams to the Big 12 can't be serious can it? Do you think Boren actually believes that the conference perception can be fixed by adding Cincinnati or UConn? I mean really? The idea that those two teams or any non-power 5 schools could change the disparity between SEC and the Big 10 and the Big 12 seems ridiculous.

Berry:

You're talking about two different things. The conference perception and changing the disparity between the Big 12 and the SEC? Two different things. The difference between Big Ten and SEC is big. Going to 12 teams and having a title game would bridge some of the perception gap. Are Cincy and UConn the answers? I personally think BYU would be a major perception addition to the Big 12. But no matter what the Big 12 does, it's not getting close to the SEC in image. The Big Ten isn't getting close to the SEC, either.


-______

Question:

Berry What do you believe is the brass tax acceptable outcome to David Boren when the Big 12 meetings occur? How would David Boren react if that brass tax oucome didn't occur?

Berry:
I think the elimination of the Longhorn Network is the line of demarcation. The other stuff could be discussed. I think OU will look elsewhere, eventually, if Bevo TV endures.

It's just hard to say what if anything comes of this.

(03-02-2016 09:02 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 07:08 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  http://www.mystatesman.com/news/sports/b...-bi/nqbjk/

Quote:5. Joe Castiglione said there is “no perfect solution” for the Big 12 and looks forward to the May/June meetings that could determine whether the league adopts a conference football title game and chooses to expand. “Some years it could be really good, some years it could not,” the Oklahoma athletic director said. “We know it would have to be a rematch.” Texas’ stance on these issues remain a mystery although it’s safe to assume it doesn’t want to give up its lucrative Longhorn Network. There is one theory that ESPN would like the Big 12 to force its hand and pressure/entice Texas to abandon the LHN in favor of a league-wide network. Castiglione declined to address the idea. “Texas is like us. We’re all examining everything that could strengthen the league.” What troubles OU’s outspoken president, David Boren, is the fact that the league has only three recognizable, strong brands — Oklahoma football, Kansas basketball and Texas football, which at the moment is on the decline — and that doesn’t speak well to ticket sales. TCU, for instance, only sold 2,000 of its ticket allotments for the road football game in Norman last year. That’s a big reason Boren wants OU to join the SEC or the Big Ten.

No link to original article posted:

Quote:From Tramel's Lunch Chat

Question:

Hey Berry. All this talk about adding two G5 teams to the Big 12 can't be serious can it? Do you think Boren actually believes that the conference perception can be fixed by adding Cincinnati or UConn? I mean really? The idea that those two teams or any non-power 5 schools could change the disparity between SEC and the Big 10 and the Big 12 seems ridiculous.

Berry:

You're talking about two different things. The conference perception and changing the disparity between the Big 12 and the SEC? Two different things. The difference between Big Ten and SEC is big. Going to 12 teams and having a title game would bridge some of the perception gap. Are Cincy and UConn the answers? I personally think BYU would be a major perception addition to the Big 12. But no matter what the Big 12 does, it's not getting close to the SEC in image. The Big Ten isn't getting close to the SEC, either.


-______

Question:

Berry What do you believe is the brass tax acceptable outcome to David Boren when the Big 12 meetings occur? How would David Boren react if that brass tax oucome didn't occur?

Berry:
I think the elimination of the Longhorn Network is the line of demarcation. The other stuff could be discussed. I think OU will look elsewhere, eventually, if Bevo TV endures.

It's just hard to say what if anything comes of this.

We've talked about Texas and Oklahoma coming as a pair or possibly the Texahoma 4, but is it reasonable at this point to assume UT and OU are pretty far apart in their relationship?

If UT isn't willing to give up the LHN for the sake of the Big 12, would they really be willing to give it up to join the SEC? If UT and OU are not in a mood to cooperate with each other then I don't see them planning an exit strategy for one league. I've believed for a while that they would end up in the same place, but I'm rethinking that now.

Is it possible that the Big 12 could limp on after OU and probably OSU and KU leave?

OU and OSU to the SEC

KU and UConn to the B1G

Perhaps then Texas tries to rebuild the league?

Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Houston, Kansas State, Iowa State, BYU, Cincinnati, West Virginia ???

Texas keeps the LHN and in fact plays a few more conference foes on the network. They keep playing OU out of conference.

How far will their ego take them?

Barring a compelling economic reason, it does seem that a ground swell of fan displeasure is necessary for a school to leave the home they are comfortable with for something else. I don't really see that from the UT faithful, but I could be wrong.

(03-03-2016 04:17 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 09:02 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 07:08 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  http://www.mystatesman.com/news/sports/b...-bi/nqbjk/

Quote:5. Joe Castiglione said there is “no perfect solution” for the Big 12 and looks forward to the May/June meetings that could determine whether the league adopts a conference football title game and chooses to expand. “Some years it could be really good, some years it could not,” the Oklahoma athletic director said. “We know it would have to be a rematch.” Texas’ stance on these issues remain a mystery although it’s safe to assume it doesn’t want to give up its lucrative Longhorn Network. There is one theory that ESPN would like the Big 12 to force its hand and pressure/entice Texas to abandon the LHN in favor of a league-wide network. Castiglione declined to address the idea. “Texas is like us. We’re all examining everything that could strengthen the league.” What troubles OU’s outspoken president, David Boren, is the fact that the league has only three recognizable, strong brands — Oklahoma football, Kansas basketball and Texas football, which at the moment is on the decline — and that doesn’t speak well to ticket sales. TCU, for instance, only sold 2,000 of its ticket allotments for the road football game in Norman last year. That’s a big reason Boren wants OU to join the SEC or the Big Ten.

No link to original article posted:

Quote:From Tramel's Lunch Chat

Question:

Hey Berry. All this talk about adding two G5 teams to the Big 12 can't be serious can it? Do you think Boren actually believes that the conference perception can be fixed by adding Cincinnati or UConn? I mean really? The idea that those two teams or any non-power 5 schools could change the disparity between SEC and the Big 10 and the Big 12 seems ridiculous.

Berry:

You're talking about two different things. The conference perception and changing the disparity between the Big 12 and the SEC? Two different things. The difference between Big Ten and SEC is big. Going to 12 teams and having a title game would bridge some of the perception gap. Are Cincy and UConn the answers? I personally think BYU would be a major perception addition to the Big 12. But no matter what the Big 12 does, it's not getting close to the SEC in image. The Big Ten isn't getting close to the SEC, either.


-______

Question:

Berry What do you believe is the brass tax acceptable outcome to David Boren when the Big 12 meetings occur? How would David Boren react if that brass tax oucome didn't occur?

Berry:
I think the elimination of the Longhorn Network is the line of demarcation. The other stuff could be discussed. I think OU will look elsewhere, eventually, if Bevo TV endures.

It's just hard to say what if anything comes of this.

We've talked about Texas and Oklahoma coming as a pair or possibly the Texahoma 4, but is it reasonable at this point to assume UT and OU are pretty far apart in their relationship?

If UT isn't willing to give up the LHN for the sake of the Big 12, would they really be willing to give it up to join the SEC? If UT and OU are not in a mood to cooperate with each other then I don't see them planning an exit strategy for one league. I've believed for a while that they would end up in the same place, but I'm rethinking that now.

Is it possible that the Big 12 could limp on after OU and probably OSU and KU leave?

If OU does leave, I think things will play out just as they did when A&M left. The remaining B12 teams will reevaluate their situations, try and protect themselves (Baylor) and if greener pastures are found they'll move on (Missouri). More than likely, I could see the B12 losing OU, calling FSU to see if they want in. If FSU says they also want Clemson, then B12 could let another member leave to keep the numbers at 10. I think the process will play out slow and the dominos will fall one at at time in the B12. Only the B1G grabbing 2-4 ACC members at one time makes sense if the GOR did exprire due to now network being in place; why would they sign another GOR for only $2M/yr more?

(03-03-2016 07:53 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 04:17 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 09:02 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 07:08 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  http://www.mystatesman.com/news/sports/b...-bi/nqbjk/

Quote:5. Joe Castiglione said there is “no perfect solution” for the Big 12 and looks forward to the May/June meetings that could determine whether the league adopts a conference football title game and chooses to expand. “Some years it could be really good, some years it could not,” the Oklahoma athletic director said. “We know it would have to be a rematch.” Texas’ stance on these issues remain a mystery although it’s safe to assume it doesn’t want to give up its lucrative Longhorn Network. There is one theory that ESPN would like the Big 12 to force its hand and pressure/entice Texas to abandon the LHN in favor of a league-wide network. Castiglione declined to address the idea. “Texas is like us. We’re all examining everything that could strengthen the league.” What troubles OU’s outspoken president, David Boren, is the fact that the league has only three recognizable, strong brands — Oklahoma football, Kansas basketball and Texas football, which at the moment is on the decline — and that doesn’t speak well to ticket sales. TCU, for instance, only sold 2,000 of its ticket allotments for the road football game in Norman last year. That’s a big reason Boren wants OU to join the SEC or the Big Ten.

No link to original article posted:

Quote:From Tramel's Lunch Chat

Question:

Hey Berry. All this talk about adding two G5 teams to the Big 12 can't be serious can it? Do you think Boren actually believes that the conference perception can be fixed by adding Cincinnati or UConn? I mean really? The idea that those two teams or any non-power 5 schools could change the disparity between SEC and the Big 10 and the Big 12 seems ridiculous.

Berry:

You're talking about two different things. The conference perception and changing the disparity between the Big 12 and the SEC? Two different things. The difference between Big Ten and SEC is big. Going to 12 teams and having a title game would bridge some of the perception gap. Are Cincy and UConn the answers? I personally think BYU would be a major perception addition to the Big 12. But no matter what the Big 12 does, it's not getting close to the SEC in image. The Big Ten isn't getting close to the SEC, either.


-______

Question:

Berry What do you believe is the brass tax acceptable outcome to David Boren when the Big 12 meetings occur? How would David Boren react if that brass tax oucome didn't occur?

Berry:
I think the elimination of the Longhorn Network is the line of demarcation. The other stuff could be discussed. I think OU will look elsewhere, eventually, if Bevo TV endures.

It's just hard to say what if anything comes of this.

We've talked about Texas and Oklahoma coming as a pair or possibly the Texahoma 4, but is it reasonable at this point to assume UT and OU are pretty far apart in their relationship?

If UT isn't willing to give up the LHN for the sake of the Big 12, would they really be willing to give it up to join the SEC? If UT and OU are not in a mood to cooperate with each other then I don't see them planning an exit strategy for one league. I've believed for a while that they would end up in the same place, but I'm rethinking that now.

Is it possible that the Big 12 could limp on after OU and probably OSU and KU leave?

If OU does leave, I think things will play out just as they did when A&M left. The remaining B12 teams will reevaluate their situations, try and protect themselves (Baylor) and if greener pastures are found they'll move on (Missouri). More than likely, I could see the B12 losing OU, calling FSU to see if they want in. If FSU says they also want Clemson, then B12 could let another member leave to keep the numbers at 10. I think the process will play out slow and the dominos will fall one at at time in the B12. Only the B1G grabbing 2-4 ACC members at one time makes sense if the GOR did exprire due to now network being in place; why would they sign another GOR for only $2M/yr more?

What if OU left for the SEC and F.S.U. was called, but by the SEC. In many ways I think this is the optimum outcome of an OU move to the SEC by themselves. If we wanted a North Carolina and Virginia school then taking F.S.U. insures greater economic disparity for the ACC. ESPN wants to hold onto those brands. So, if UVA, Duke, and UNC wanted to come to the SEC Clemson becomes the 4th, or maybe even Texas.

So what I'm saying is OU and FSU as a combo for the SEC keeps everything else we would consider expanding for in play.

(03-03-2016 08:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 07:53 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 04:17 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 09:02 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 07:08 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  http://www.mystatesman.com/news/sports/b...-bi/nqbjk/


No link to original article posted:

It's just hard to say what if anything comes of this.

We've talked about Texas and Oklahoma coming as a pair or possibly the Texahoma 4, but is it reasonable at this point to assume UT and OU are pretty far apart in their relationship?

If UT isn't willing to give up the LHN for the sake of the Big 12, would they really be willing to give it up to join the SEC? If UT and OU are not in a mood to cooperate with each other then I don't see them planning an exit strategy for one league. I've believed for a while that they would end up in the same place, but I'm rethinking that now.

Is it possible that the Big 12 could limp on after OU and probably OSU and KU leave?

If OU does leave, I think things will play out just as they did when A&M left. The remaining B12 teams will reevaluate their situations, try and protect themselves (Baylor) and if greener pastures are found they'll move on (Missouri). More than likely, I could see the B12 losing OU, calling FSU to see if they want in. If FSU says they also want Clemson, then B12 could let another member leave to keep the numbers at 10. I think the process will play out slow and the dominos will fall one at at time in the B12. Only the B1G grabbing 2-4 ACC members at one time makes sense if the GOR did exprire due to now network being in place; why would they sign another GOR for only $2M/yr more?

What if OU left for the SEC and F.S.U. was called, but by the SEC. In many ways I think this is the optimum outcome of an OU move to the SEC by themselves. If we wanted a North Carolina and Virginia school then taking F.S.U. insures greater economic disparity for the ACC. ESPN wants to hold onto those brands. So, if UVA, Duke, and UNC wanted to come to the SEC Clemson becomes the 4th, or maybe even Texas.

So what I'm saying is OU and FSU as a combo for the SEC keeps everything else we would consider expanding for in play.

If the SEC ever went to 20, grabbing an unhappy OU at 15 is a grand slam. Grabbing FSU at 16 devalues the ACC and gets that realignment party started. Rounding off with those 4 would keep the old ACC core out of the B1G while the other pieces could find homes in the rebuilt B12.

So an SEC w/ OU, FSU, UNC, UVA, Duke, Clemson
B12-14 with VT, Louisville, NC State, GT, Miami, (minus OU)
B12 could just go to 12 if no network is in play with VT, L'ville and NCSt.

(03-03-2016 10:17 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 08:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 07:53 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 04:17 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 09:02 PM)JRsec Wrote:  It's just hard to say what if anything comes of this.

We've talked about Texas and Oklahoma coming as a pair or possibly the Texahoma 4, but is it reasonable at this point to assume UT and OU are pretty far apart in their relationship?

If UT isn't willing to give up the LHN for the sake of the Big 12, would they really be willing to give it up to join the SEC? If UT and OU are not in a mood to cooperate with each other then I don't see them planning an exit strategy for one league. I've believed for a while that they would end up in the same place, but I'm rethinking that now.

Is it possible that the Big 12 could limp on after OU and probably OSU and KU leave?

If OU does leave, I think things will play out just as they did when A&M left. The remaining B12 teams will reevaluate their situations, try and protect themselves (Baylor) and if greener pastures are found they'll move on (Missouri). More than likely, I could see the B12 losing OU, calling FSU to see if they want in. If FSU says they also want Clemson, then B12 could let another member leave to keep the numbers at 10. I think the process will play out slow and the dominos will fall one at at time in the B12. Only the B1G grabbing 2-4 ACC members at one time makes sense if the GOR did exprire due to now network being in place; why would they sign another GOR for only $2M/yr more?

What if OU left for the SEC and F.S.U. was called, but by the SEC. In many ways I think this is the optimum outcome of an OU move to the SEC by themselves. If we wanted a North Carolina and Virginia school then taking F.S.U. insures greater economic disparity for the ACC. ESPN wants to hold onto those brands. So, if UVA, Duke, and UNC wanted to come to the SEC Clemson becomes the 4th, or maybe even Texas.

So what I'm saying is OU and FSU as a combo for the SEC keeps everything else we would consider expanding for in play.

If the SEC ever went to 20, grabbing an unhappy OU at 15 is a grand slam. Grabbing FSU at 16 devalues the ACC and gets that realignment party started. Rounding off with those 4 would keep the old ACC core out of the B1G while the other pieces could find homes in the rebuilt B12.

So an SEC w/ OU, FSU, UNC, UVA, Duke, Clemson
B12-14 with VT, Louisville, NC State, GT, Miami, (minus OU)
B12 could just go to 12 if no network is in play with VT, L'ville and NCSt.

lol...I just did four five team division with at SEC group...Check it out:
Southwest Division
Florida State, OU, Mizz, aTm, Ark

Southeastern Divison
UF, UGa, Tenn, USC, Aub

Dixie Division
Bama, LSU, Clem, Ole Miss, MSU

SEC Network Division (only place you'll find these football games)
UK, Vandy, UNC, Duke, UVA

SEC conference playoffs lead into SEC CG.
TV will be happy as they'll have plenty of good match ups

(03-03-2016 10:17 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 08:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 07:53 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 04:17 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 09:02 PM)JRsec Wrote:  It's just hard to say what if anything comes of this.

We've talked about Texas and Oklahoma coming as a pair or possibly the Texahoma 4, but is it reasonable at this point to assume UT and OU are pretty far apart in their relationship?

If UT isn't willing to give up the LHN for the sake of the Big 12, would they really be willing to give it up to join the SEC? If UT and OU are not in a mood to cooperate with each other then I don't see them planning an exit strategy for one league. I've believed for a while that they would end up in the same place, but I'm rethinking that now.

Is it possible that the Big 12 could limp on after OU and probably OSU and KU leave?

If OU does leave, I think things will play out just as they did when A&M left. The remaining B12 teams will reevaluate their situations, try and protect themselves (Baylor) and if greener pastures are found they'll move on (Missouri). More than likely, I could see the B12 losing OU, calling FSU to see if they want in. If FSU says they also want Clemson, then B12 could let another member leave to keep the numbers at 10. I think the process will play out slow and the dominos will fall one at at time in the B12. Only the B1G grabbing 2-4 ACC members at one time makes sense if the GOR did exprire due to now network being in place; why would they sign another GOR for only $2M/yr more?

What if OU left for the SEC and F.S.U. was called, but by the SEC. In many ways I think this is the optimum outcome of an OU move to the SEC by themselves. If we wanted a North Carolina and Virginia school then taking F.S.U. insures greater economic disparity for the ACC. ESPN wants to hold onto those brands. So, if UVA, Duke, and UNC wanted to come to the SEC Clemson becomes the 4th, or maybe even Texas.

So what I'm saying is OU and FSU as a combo for the SEC keeps everything else we would consider expanding for in play.

If the SEC ever went to 20, grabbing an unhappy OU at 15 is a grand slam. Grabbing FSU at 16 devalues the ACC and gets that realignment party started. Rounding off with those 4 would keep the old ACC core out of the B1G while the other pieces could find homes in the rebuilt B12.

So an SEC w/ OU, FSU, UNC, UVA, Duke, Clemson
B12-14 with VT, Louisville, NC State, GT, Miami, (minus OU)
B12 could just go to 12 if no network is in play with VT, L'ville and NCSt.

Get OU and FSU out of the way and Texas will remain king of their own conference and the LHN would become the Big 12N because nobody else could threaten the Texas dominance of it.

Big 12 (reformed)
Connecticut, Louisville, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State
Georgia Tech, Miami, N.C. State, Virginia Tech
Baylor, T.C.U., Texas, Texas Tech

The Big 10 goes to 18: Kansas, Syracuse, Boston College, Notre Dame

Boston College, Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Rutgers, Syracuse
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, Ohio State
Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

And of course the SEC:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas A&M
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina
Clemson, Duke, Florida State, North Carolina, Virginia

I would love OU and FSU. I'm not sure we're lucky enough to land both in one fell swoop, but...

I do think it's more likely we will need to take OSU to get OU. If we take both of those then we would certainly have room for several ACC schools.

If we got UVA, UNC, Duke, and GT then we could stop at 20.

Perhaps then UT will be willing to convert the LHN to a conference network. Using Texas as an anchor, ESPN can rebuild the league into something that could last for the long haul.

West: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Kansas State, Iowa State
East: Florida State, Miami, Clemson, Louisville, West Virginia, Pittsburgh

If ESPN can own both the SEC and Big 12 with a slice of the Big Ten then that should make them happy.

The B1G can take Kansas, Virginia Tech, NC State, and Syracuse

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nca.../83853258/


Looks like Boren might be right about his requests to reform the conference given the results from the expansion study he commissioned months ago.

Quote:Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby said Monday that data compiled by consultants — up to 40,000 simulations from Navigate Research — indicated the best model for placing a team in the College Football Playoff is a 12-team conference playing eight league games plus a championship game.

Bowlsby reiterated something he’s said before, too. For its financial stability, the Big 12 needs to act. The Big Ten’s recent reported $250 million deal for a portion of its media rights only highlighted the issue.

“If we do nothing, we’ll fall behind with the SEC and Big Ten,” Bowlsby said. “We may still be just as competitive as we are today, but we’ll fall behind financially.”

Interesting, all data can be scrapped if UT is not on board apparently:

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/2.../83720444/

Quote:Majority not enough

It's believed seven of the 10 schools favor expansion. But Big 12 bylaws call for a super majority vote of 75 percent (so at least eight schools) to make a major change. Texas is believed to be influencing Texas Tech's and Texas Christian's decisions to also be reluctant to expansion.

Texas Tech has long fallen in line with Texas. Both are public universities that have been in the same league together since 1956, when they were in the Southwest Conference. Texas and Texas Tech were founding members of the Big 12 in 1996.

TCU is believed to be following Texas' lead because the conference's power broker reportedly helped the Horned Frogs get into the Big 12 four years ago.

(05-02-2016 10:27 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  Interesting, all data can be scrapped if UT is not on board apparently:

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/2.../83720444/

Quote:Majority not enough

It's believed seven of the 10 schools favor expansion. But Big 12 bylaws call for a super majority vote of 75 percent (so at least eight schools) to make a major change. Texas is believed to be influencing Texas Tech's and Texas Christian's decisions to also be reluctant to expansion.

Texas Tech has long fallen in line with Texas. Both are public universities that have been in the same league together since 1956, when they were in the Southwest Conference. Texas and Texas Tech were founding members of the Big 12 in 1996.

TCU is believed to be following Texas' lead because the conference's power broker reportedly helped the Horned Frogs get into the Big 12 four years ago.

Question is...

Is that Texas saying they really don't want to commit to this conference long term or Texas saying they don't want to risk losing anymore control of the conference long term?