Its not though. KU, KSt, Baylor, and ISU wouldn't be in a league right now with TT, OK St, Col, Utah, and 2 Arizona if they didnt concede to Texas. The association with those 6 schools makes their future infinitely more stable than had the B12 died that day and they joined the Big East or if they backfilled the B12 with MWC and CUSA schools.
Going to potentially see the actual ACC contract Aug 1.
- Thread starter ratking17
- Start date
Its not though. KU, KSt, Baylor, and ISU wouldn't be in a league right now with TT, OK St, Col, Utah, and 2 Arizona if they didnt concede to Texas. The association with those 6 schools makes their future infinitely more stable than had the B12 died that day and they joined the Big East or if they backfilled the B12 with MWC and CUSA schools.
If the league still exists now, after Texas left, why wouldn't have existed before, after Texas left? I mean, they backfilled with Big East and G5 schools anyway. You don't have a point. Move on.
Did you not read any of my posts? The B12 was down to 4 schools: KU, KSt, Iowa St, Baylor and they were probably going to the Big East. But lets pretend the Big 12 survived. Who would they have added? Or would they have remained a 4 team league?
"probably going to the Big East..."
They weren't going anywhere, because the PAC 12 chose not to add the Texas and Oklahoma schools. And in the end, Texas and Oklahoma left anyway.
This is nothing more than another of your arguments against some hypothetical situation that you created. Don't you ever get tired of making things up to argue for?
What? The Pac 12 absolutely was going to add Texas, TT, OU, and OK St but at the last minute, the B12 irrelevants caved and gave Texas what they wanted. So Texas told the P12 they arent coming. Also OU decided to stay because they thought they could make money on that 1 3rd tier game, which they ended up putting on Pay-Per-View. OU didnt really want to leave the B12 but felt that if Texas was going, it basically had to.
We are getting very deep into this thread and nobody has made a valid point to counter what I am saying. We can't even agree on the facts. Its like I'm telling you tomorrow is Wednesday and you say "No, I like pizza." What you guys are saying makes absolutely no sense. The B12 was dead. It wouldn't have lasted until the weekend with the Big East coming in to take some combination of KU & Co.
The only argument you can make is that those 4 schools could have rebuilt the B12 with a league of
Iowa St
KU
KSt
Baylor
SMU
Houston
Memphis
Colorado St
Boise St
San Diego St
And then when Pitt and Syr left, the B12 adds Rut, Lou, WVU, TCU, USF, UConn, and Cincy instead of those 7 BE schools adding some B12 schools. That's your only argument. The B12 kills off the Big East instead of the Big East gobbling up KU, KSt, ISU, and Baylor after Texas, TT, OU, and OK St left.
Check your history. It wasn't those 4; it was 5 headed to the Big East. Missouri was the 5th. Missouri wasn't even talked about to the SEC until a year later. It was A&M, Okie State, OU, Texas, Texas Tech, and Colorado headed to the Pac-10. But Texas backed out of it. Pac-10 invited Colorado and Utah. That decision allowed Utah to be in a power league and doomed the Big East.
Those 5 did not concede to Texas anything more. They had nothing else to concede. A&M, Texas, Nebraska, and OU already were getting more in unequal revenue. The Longhorn Network (LHN) wasn't in the picture yet, no pun intended. ESPN started talking to Texas about its own network after the Pac failure to get Texas in 2010. About 9-12 months later, the LHN got leaked. This lead to A&M bolting first (then Missouri). Equal revenue sharing then happened. Of course, it was unequal due to the 3rd Tier rights which was the LHN for Texas.
No. Here is the timeline:
Summer 2010
Colorado announces move to P10 then Nebraska announces move to B10 shortly after
Late Summer 2011
Texas A&M to SEC is announced pending Texas Regents approval
September 2011
SEC needs a 14th with Missouri rumored to be the target and eventually they get the invite
October 2011
Pac 10 invites Texas, TT, OU, OK St but Texas pulls out at the last minute when the B12 leftovers decide to let them keep 3rd Tier revenue, which allows them to start LHN. The P12 would not allow this.
Pac 10 still needs another team to make 12 so invites the next best option, Utah.
It would have been Kansas, Kansas St, Iowa St, and Baylor going to the Big East. Well, Kansas, I know but I dont remember the quote exactly if the others were going with them but probably.
Or maybe those 4 teams turn down the Big East and add Memphis, SMU, Houston, Colorado St, Boise St, SDSU, etc but that was never rumored back then.
So, again, the B12 exists to this day because those 4 allowed Texas to have what it wants and now those 4 are in a stable league of leftovers. BC, Wake, Syr, Pitt, Lou, GT, and Duke should learn a thing or 2 from this.
This is so insane reasoning .
Why didn’t the B12 create a grant of rights , if they did things correctly and the acc did not ?!?
Guess which conference has had more stability . Literally only broke ass Maryland left .
Meanwhile the B12 has lost - Nebraska , Texas am , Colorado (eventually returned to a weaker league) , Texas and Oklahoma .
They have added big east left overs, conference USA teams , and mwc teams to replace them .
The only reason the B12 exists at all despite capitulating to Texas - is because the B10 and ACC destroyed the pac10.
Last edited:
But the Pac10 would not have been in that position had it gotten Texas and Oklahoma. Which it would have gotten if the Big 12 wasn’t paying them what was essentially extortion money.
You saying, “the only reason the Big 12 exists today is because of X” is his very point. We dont know what tomorrow will bring. So survive to live to see tomorrow.
The Big 12 bought off Texas for a while. Which allowed it to survive the attempted Pac12 fleecing. Which allowed it to be around when the Pac12 collapsed on itself and the other conferences came and picked it apart. And today it still stands, able to see what tomorrow might bring.
The B12 did do a GOR after Colorado, Neb, Mizzou, and A&M left when their new deal started.
I dont even understand how this is even a a debate. The B12 only exists today because the 4 Big 12 irrelevant schools caved to Texas and bought themselves time. People say "so what, Texas left anyway." Yes, they did but the buying of time let those 4 irrelevant schools to greatly benefit from a major landscape change (ie the death of the P12). Because they saved the B12, the B12 was left standing when the P12 was destroyed and had a locked-in TV deal good enough to entice Az, ASU, Col, and Utah to join rather than remaining 8 P12 schools adding some B12s.
The ACC needs to learn from this. Yes, FSU is going to leave eventually but if you shut them up until 2036, you may get lucky and be able to take advantage of a landscape shift by then like the B12 did. Specifically, maybe it buys you time to be able to get the most valuable B12 schools.
You are clearly SMF with another handle. We know what 'tomorrow' will bring. The BIG/SEC, guided by their media partners, are going to take what they want from the ACC and leave the rest. The remaining parts will either coalesce around the Big 12 or an 'academic' ACC (likely a little of both). The Big 12 tried buying off TX because they didn't recognize the forces pulling the strings. Why oh why would you give FSU/UNC/Clem more money (out of Pitt's pocket no less) when they are GONE GONE GONE. The only details are what year and how many zeroes are on the check.
If you were getting a divorce, you might pay for your soon-to-be ex's bus ticket out of town. You sure as hell wouldn't pay for her first class airline ticket.
You pay them to stay because it gives you 11 years, and that's a LONG time, to hope for another landscape shift. The ACC needs to kick the can down the road as long as possible and hope something changes. Delay, delay, delay.
The Big East was already on its death bed so I don't know why you think anyone was joining it. Pitt, ND, and Syracuse were all announced to be playing in the ACC by the time Nebraska and Colorado left the Big12. TCU was in the Big East for ten minutes and realized it was in shambles and took the Big12 invite along with WVU. If Texas leaves, nobody, and I mean nobody from that bunch would have wanted to be in the Big East when the Big12 was already adding schools. Better chance that Cincy and Louisville join back then rather than anyone leaving.
Lets play this game. If, indeed, the 4 B12 irrelevants didnt concede to Texas and then Texas, TT, OU, OK St joined Colorado in the B12, what would the B12 have looked like with just KU, KSt, Iowa St, and Baylor? Nebraska was gone. Mizzou and A&M announced they were leaving. There would have been 4 schools left. Please explain how that version of the Big 12 would have been better than the Texas/OU version?
Yet - Oklahoma and Texas left because only 1 year was left , so they paid the $100mil to exit a year early rather than resign and extension
Whoops
It ended up the same as it is now -
Bunch of conference USA teams and MWC teams , plus two Arizona schools
Plus TT, OK St, and Colorado back.
Also, would the no-Texas/OU B12 gotten as good of a TV deal as the Texas/OU Big 12?
That's the part you're not getting. It's the same net result because they're still getting a reduced share of revenue. You get less with Texas and OU and you get less without them. You get a weaker conference at the end either way.
Answer me this, had Texas, TT, OU, and OK St gone to the Pac 12, would Kansas, KSt, Baylor, and Iowa State be in a league with Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Colorado, OK St, and TT today?
There was no PAC 10 invite for the teams you mentioned. In fact, their presidents ended up voting against further expansion.
You're creating scenarios to argue against using made up situation. It's what you do, we get it.
If Santa Claus got Jack Frost to form an alliance, could they take down the Easter Bunny, a Leprechaun, and Smokey the Bear in hand-to-hand combat in the middle of nowhere in West Texas during the afternoon before a solar eclipse?
There is no such thing as an invitation until teams agree to go. Conferences dont just mail out invitations to random teams. The Pac 10 was absolutely going to add Texas, TT, OU, OK St until Texas told them that they were staying in the Big 12. At that point, the Pac 10 decided not to expand. So, sure, there may have not been an official invitation but the invitation is just the after the fact formality.
As I figured, you wont answer.....because you know I'm right so we'll leave it at that. Another W for me.
So they never reached an agreement, and there was no invite. Which means those teams were never going anywhere. Got it.
What if Alabama wanted to leave the SEC with Auburn and go to the Big East? Does Texas still want to join the pan-Pacific league in Japan or does Arkansas block them, using the secret Southern Conference bylaws that are still in effect?
No, no. There was an agreement in principle but Temple was going to block Texas from joining the WAC so the Big East could take Kansas and Baylor. Of course, it's only a hypothetical because it was all behind closed doors but there's a good chance that Penn State ends up in the Patriot League if all that happens.
Or....or....just hear me out. We can use an actual real-life example. Colorado, Nebraska, Mizzou, and A&M either left or announced they were leaving. The P10 invited (informally Gunga) Texas, TT, OU, and OK St and they were all set to go until the B12 also-rans decided to let Texas monetize their 3rd tier rights. It was very very close to happenning. So much so that ESPN reported it as a done deal. So I'm asking if that happened, like it almost did, do you think Kansas, KSt, ISU, and Baylor would be in a conference with OK St, TT, Colorado, Arizona, ASU, and Utah today. Obviously, you feel that that answer is yes because you say KU, KSt, ISU, and Baylor are no better off today for conceding to Texas. So, you must believe that either the P10 would have eventually added KU, KSt, ISU, and Baylor or those 4 schools would have pulled TT, OK St, Colorado, Arizona, ASU, and Utah from the P10.
Oh yeah, there was a gigantic third tier rights package that ESPN and the Tooth Fairy had the deal brokered but the Dude realized that it would leave WVU in the MAC so he worked diligently with Rutgers Al to torpedo the deal by convincing the Pac12 to vote against it because that pipeline to the Big East was wide open. Kansas just had to waltz through it but decided that letting Texas treat them like a redheaded step child for another decade was, by far, in their best interest, right?
The B12 also-rans agreed to keep ownership of 1 home game and 5 basketball games in-house and not sell those games as a group conference TV package. This is what made Texas stay in the B12. People refer to this as "3rd tier revenue." Texas used that 1 football game and 5 basketball games to sign a $15 million/year deal with LHN. OU put some games on PPV. The rest of the schools made close to $0. So, yes, Kansas allowing Texas to so this solidified their future as they are in a league with TT, OK St, Colarado, the Arizonas, and Utah. They wouldn't have been in any of those teams' league had they let Texas go to the P10.
You, or anyone else, have no idea what would have happened. This is the part you don't seem to get.
Maybe Kansas ends up in the same conference, maybe they end up in the B10, maybe the ACC or SEC, maybe the Big East, WAC or AAC, maybe go Indy. Nobody can answer this question.
Sort of irrelevant on all this discussion but mentioning it.
The Big East option was for the 5 in 2010, no Big East real talks in 2011. Texas was not serious about leaving in 2011 and was disinterested. It was Oklahoma spearheading the whole thing and doing the blustering. Likely, the Big East would have been the conference for the leftover 4 if Texas, Tech, Oklahoma, and Okie State did leave in 2011. But just pointing out the Big East talk was all in 2010 for 5 teams, not 2011 with 4 teams. In fact, Baylor was not a given going to the Big East. Kansas was talking to a conference (we don't know who but was assumed it was the Big East) with at least Iowa State in on it. Baylor was kept in the dark.
Funny coincidence is that Okie State and Texas Tech were sure they were going to the Pac on 2011. Their fans trashed on the Big 12 seemingly heading out the door. Nope.
I am saying Kansas would not have ended up in a conference with TT, OK St, Colorado, Az, ASU, and Utah if Tx, OU, TT, and OK St went to the P10. Pittdan thinks they would have been in a conference with those teams or better teams if they didnt concede to Texas. He gives no explanation for this opinion. He just says it. I offer a very very likely scenario. He offers nothing of the sort.
If UT, TT, OU, and OK St went to the P10, where do you think the 4 leftovers end up?
Why do you think it was a package deal
The pac 10 only wanted Texas and Oklahoma .
But they’d be in the same leftovers conference they are in now .
