Nebraska & Missouri face ultimatum from Big 12

Donate To GopherHole

interesting that Beebe gives the ultimatum to Mizzou & Nebraska, but not to TX. There could be a couple of reasons for that:

1.He knows how advanced the negotiations are with the first two schools, and the rumors of TX going anywhere is just smoke.

2.Note that he isn't giving ultimatums to the schools that the Pac10 are rumored to be after. That might also show the relative weight of those rumors

3.When it comes to TX, it may fall under the "Don't ask a question you might not like the answer to" category.

The B12 is hosed, and Beebe knows it. He's probably been spending most of his time lately on Monster.com trying to line up his next gig. Good luck selling a cable package next year when the crown jewel of your conference is Baylor. The most telling stat in that article was the relative TV income between the B12 and the B10. 22 is a bigger number than 7.
 

What would this ultimatum really accomplish? Unless he's having them sign an agreement that contains penalties if they leave, there's nothing legally binding if they come out and say "Sure, we plan on staying in the conference" and then change their mind later.
 

2727Gopher said:
What would this ultimatum really accomplish? Unless he's having them sign an agreement that contains penalties if they leave, there's nothing legally binding if they come out and say "Sure, we plan on staying in the conference" and then change their mind later.
Click to expand...

IIRC, there are already penalties in place if you leave the Big 12. Of course, if the Big 12 completely implodes, does that mean the left-behinds (Baylor, ISU, KSU, and Kansas?) get to split the penalties, along with a nice golden parachute for Beebe?
 

Too Long in the Wasteland said:
interesting that Beebe gives the ultimatum to Mizzou & Nebraska, but not to TX. There could be a couple of reasons for that:

1.He knows how advanced the negotiations are with the first two schools, and the rumors of TX going anywhere is just smoke.

2.Note that he isn't giving ultimatums to the schools that the Pac10 are rumored to be after. That might also show the relative weight of those rumors

3.When it comes to TX, it may fall under the "Don't ask a question you might not like the answer to" category.

The B12 is hosed, and Beebe knows it. He's probably been spending most of his time lately on Monster.com trying to line up his next gig. Good luck selling a cable package next year when the crown jewel of your conference is Baylor. The most telling stat in that article was the relative TV income between the B12 and the B10. 22 is a bigger number than 7.
Click to expand...

Much ado about nothing.

1) Artificial deadlines have nothing to do with "advanced negotiations". A Texas to Big Ten or SEC is far more likely than these two. This is bluster and false bravado.

2) Both Missouri and Nebraska, due to their geographic location, could go anywhere. Sure, so could Texas. However, Texas can be picky about where they go, as they fit the academic bill to go anywhere--and anyone would take them. The other two don't fit the bill.

3) Your own #3 refutes everything you just said and agrees with my statements. Thanks.

I think that the Big Ten doesn't expand without Notre Dame or Texas. Anything else is stupid.
 


Another explanation for this ultimatum is that they already know the conference is facing a few key departures (and Nebraska and Missouri are not among those leaving). In this case, the Big XII administration would be concerned about holding things together when the MWC and new Big XII are competing for each other's members.
 

Pure and simple Texas does not want to leave the Big 12 because they stand to make more there than by joining either the Big 10 or the Pac 10. If you believe what some of the Texas writers are saying, they believe Texas could make up to 30 million a year with a Texas only TV network. The Big 10 or the Pac 10 are not going to allow them to have their own network if they were to join those conferences as the Big 12 appears willing to do. Texas however realizes that if they lose a program like Nebraska that it would be hard to replace in the conference and would severely hurt the sustainability of the conference and thus their own TV network. They are in turn trying to pressure Nebraska and see if they are bluffing or if they truly have a Big 10 offer or not. Texas also has the legislative pressure of being tied to the other schools in the state which limits some of their options, adding in the fact that many of the Aggie faithful would rather go to the SEC than the Pac-10. For Texas' own objectives they want the Big 12 to stay just as it is.
 

GopherGod said:
Pure and simple Texas does not want to leave the Big 12 because they stand to make more there than by joining either the Big 10 or the Pac 10. If you believe what some of the Texas writers are saying, they believe Texas could make up to 30 million a year with a Texas only TV network. The Big 10 or the Pac 10 are not going to allow them to have their own network if they were to join those conferences as the Big 12 appears willing to do. Texas however realizes that if they lose a program like Nebraska that it would be hard to replace in the conference and would severely hurt the sustainability of the conference and thus their own TV network. They are in turn trying to pressure Nebraska and see if they are bluffing or if they truly have a Big 10 offer or not. Texas also has the legislative pressure of being tied to the other schools in the state which limits some of their options, adding in the fact that many of the Aggie faithful would rather go to the SEC than the Pac-10. For Texas' own objectives they want the Big 12 to stay just as it is.
Click to expand...

This may be true. But if the Big XII is going to allow Texas to continue to hoard the TV revenue for itself, it would be foolish of Missouri and Nebraska not to take the Big 10's offer and run, and even for Oklahoma to say yest to the Pac 10. Once that happens, Texas's great TV network won't look so good in comparison.
 

howeda7 said:
This may be true. But if the Big XII is going to allow Texas to continue to hoard the TV revenue for itself, it would be foolish of Missouri and Nebraska not to take the Big 10's offer and run, and even for Oklahoma to say yest to the Pac 10. Once that happens, Texas's great TV network won't look so good in comparison.
Click to expand...

I agree 100% and that is why Texas knows that it cannot lose Nebraska, some feel that they could replace Mizzou. That is why the ultimatum was put on those two schools and not Texas because Texas has all but said if they don't leave then Texas will not as well. Nebraska and Mizzou are upset because Texas is not willing to make any concessions and the Big XII is more than willing to allow this so they feel like what is in it for them to stay, other than to watch Texas get richer and richer. I don't think that the Pac-10 would take Oklahoma without Texas and it would still be far from a slam dunk if they would get in even with Texas due to academics. I just don't see Stanford signing off on that.
 



GopherGod said:
I agree 100% and that is why Texas knows that it cannot lose Nebraska, some feel that they could replace Mizzou. That is why the ultimatum was put on those two schools and not Texas because Texas has all but said if they don't leave then Texas will not as well. Nebraska and Mizzou are upset because Texas is not willing to make any concessions and the Big XII is more than willing to allow this so they feel like what is in it for them to stay, other than to watch Texas get richer and richer. I don't think that the Pac-10 would take Oklahoma without Texas and it would still be far from a slam dunk if they would get in even with Texas due to academics. I just don't see Stanford signing off on that.
Click to expand...

Stanford notwithstanding, I think the PAC 10 will still seek to expand, Texas or not. Perhaps only to 14, but an expansion around Oklahoma, Colorado and BYU or Utah would still make a Pac 10 network much more viable.
 

howeda7 said:
Stanford notwithstanding, I think the PAC 10 will still seek to expand, Texas or not. Perhaps only to 14, but an expansion around Oklahoma, Colorado and BYU or Utah would still make a Pac 10 network much more viable.
Click to expand...

I agree that they will look to expand but I do not see Stanford bending alot on the academics side of things and all the member schools have to vote yes. Stanford is the one that vetoed Texas joining the Pac-10 in the early '90's.
 

That was then, this is now

I agree on the athletics, but there's a lot more money at stake now than there was 15-20 years ago. You get enough zeroes after the $ sign, and a lot of rules and principles suddenly become guidelines.

Still, I could see a scenario where they admit Texas, TAMU, and maybe one or two others, but tell the more marginal (academically) schools to take a hike.
 

Too Long in the Wasteland said:
I agree on the athletics, but there's a lot more money at stake now than there was 15-20 years ago. You get enough zeroes after the $ sign, and a lot of rules and principles suddenly become guidelines.

Still, I could see a scenario where they admit Texas, TAMU, and maybe one or two others, but tell the more marginal (academically) schools to take a hike.
Click to expand...


I could see them expanding possibly taking a Texas and Texas A&M. However, I do not see them ever taking a Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, and to a lesser extent Oklahoma. The problem is that the Texas legislature wants to tie in all the Texas schools together which limits the University of Texas in what they can do somewhat. By staying in a current Big 12 configuration they don't have to deal with the legislative hassles as well as they can make more money with their own TV network, that is why this is their preferred choice but Nebraska and Mizzou may force them to have to go down a road they do not want to if they leave.
 



If the Pac 10 doesn't get all 6, would they still go after Colorado? Is the Big XII ok with losing them? Seems like they want to get to 12 teams.
 



BleedGopher said:
Scuttle on 'Cuse and ND:

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/6270202/22395511?tag=headlines;other

Go Gophers!!
Click to expand...

At the end of that article, he asks........ "If all of the above comes to pass, we'd be looking at two 16-team leagues (Pac-10, Big Ten), the collapse of the Big 12 and Big East and a whole lot of chaos. Does the SEC react?"

If 16 teams becomes a reality for two conferences, you can be sure it will be the norm (or at least the goal) across the country.

If the pac10 and big10 become the pac16 and the Big16 respectively, you can count on the SEC adding four and possibly the ACC following suit. Effectively eliminating the big12 and big east, and making 4 super-conferences.

This leaves some schools in the middle of the country: Kansas, KSU, IowaSt., and some MWC and WAC schools to form a fifth major conference.

Who would the SEC look at? Louisville? West Virginia? S.Fla? I think it would be more difficult to lure a school away from the ACC, but I wouldn't rule that out either.... FSU? Miami? Clemson? GaTech?
 

GopherGod said:
Pure and simple Texas does not want to leave the Big 12 because they stand to make more there than by joining either the Big 10 or the Pac 10. If you believe what some of the Texas writers are saying, they believe Texas could make up to 30 million a year with a Texas only TV network. The Big 10 or the Pac 10 are not going to allow them to have their own network if they were to join those conferences as the Big 12 appears willing to do. Texas however realizes that if they lose a program like Nebraska that it would be hard to replace in the conference and would severely hurt the sustainability of the conference and thus their own TV network. They are in turn trying to pressure Nebraska and see if they are bluffing or if they truly have a Big 10 offer or not. Texas also has the legislative pressure of being tied to the other schools in the state which limits some of their options, adding in the fact that many of the Aggie faithful would rather go to the SEC than the Pac-10. For Texas' own objectives they want the Big 12 to stay just as it is.
Click to expand...

I'll bet the faculty of UT would think they had died and gone to heaven if they could join the Big 10 or, to a lesser extent, the PAC 10. However, it sounds like the state legislature and the alumns may have more clout than the academic side of the university - another reason why UT may not be a good cultural fit for the Big 10.
 

If Delany pulled off that coup (nd, Pitt, Syracuse, Nebraska, Missouri), he'd be telling the Pac 10 "Who's your daddy" even if they do land half the B12. OTOH, if all we do is add the Huskers and Mizzou he's gonna look like a chump, especially if the Pac10 does expand to 16. And puhlease, leave Rutgers out of this.

One thing that hasn't been discussed on this board is how does expansion affect our bowl possibilities. Obviously:

1.With more teams, there's more competition to get to Pasadena

2.If the B12 implodes, their bowl bids are up for grabs, and there would be more bowl tie ins for the BT.

But looking at that list of schools, if we're in our perennial spot of grovelling for a mid to low level bowl invitation, you can bet we're going to get the smelly end of the stick vs. most of the expansion candidates. It'll either be

A.They travel better (Nebraska)

B.East coast exposure (Pitt/Syracuse)

C."Its our one chance to invite a school with such a rich tradition. Better luck next year, Minnesota" (nd)

I can see another two decades of getting jobbed by the Alamo bowl if the new B10 lands them as a tie-in again. And if Rutgers ever got picked over us it would be a new low.
 

MrGopher said:
At the end of that article, he asks........ "If all of the above comes to pass, we'd be looking at two 16-team leagues (Pac-10, Big Ten), the collapse of the Big 12 and Big East and a whole lot of chaos. Does the SEC react?"

If 16 teams becomes a reality for two conferences, you can be sure it will be the norm (or at least the goal) across the country.

If the pac10 and big10 become the pac16 and the Big16 respectively, you can count on the SEC adding four and possibly the ACC following suit. Effectively eliminating the big12 and big east, and making 4 super-conferences.

This leaves some schools in the middle of the country: Kansas, KSU, IowaSt., and some MWC and WAC schools to form a fifth major conference.

Who would the SEC look at? Louisville? West Virginia? S.Fla? I think it would be more difficult to lure a school away from the ACC, but I wouldn't rule that out either.... FSU? Miami? Clemson? GaTech?
Click to expand...

The SEC will almost certainly 'react' and go to 16, but they have far less to gain by expansion then the PAC 10 or Big 10. Thier new deal with ESPN pretty much precludes forming an 'SEC Network' anytime soon, and most of the expansion candidates don't add anything to the existing pot. What eyeballs does FSU, Miami, Clemson or GT bring that Florida, SC or Georgia don't already have? None. And so you see the SEC's problem.

Texas and/or Texas A&M would be a huge get. But most scenerios have them raiding the ACC. The problem is all of the logical candidates are states where the SEC already is. The only probable exception to this is Virginia Tech. They would add the state of VA and to a lesser extent, the DC metro. They're also more of a fit for the SEC then they ever have been for the ACC. That said, the VA legislature would have a cow if VT tries to leave. They bent over backwards to get them into the ACC by 'ordering' UVA to withhold it's vote if VT wasn't the 12th team. They would probably try for Carolina and/or Maryland, but I dont' see either going to the SEC for academic reasons. An SEC expansion would probably end up including FSU, Miami, GT and VT. That would certainly keep them a football superpower, but it would make thier basketball even more pathetic and the additional money they would gain would not offset splitting the pot 16 ways instead of 12.

In the end, the SEC wants this all to go away. They'll react with force. But they don't want to. The ACC would then have to add teams just to get back to 12. I don't know if they would try to go to 16 as well, but a quasi-merger of whoever is left of the Big East would be a lock.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom