1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Big 12 (10): 10-year Commitment Only Applies to 5 Schools

Discussion in 'Colorado Football Message Board' started by Buffnik, Jun 18, 2010.

  1. Buffnik

    Buffnik Real name isn't Nik Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    80,742
    Likes Received:
    16,445
    Earlier this week, Texas president Bill Powers suggested that the continuing loyalty to the Big 12 would be sort of on the honor system, with each school pledging a long-term commitment.

    Then Kansas athletic director Lew Perkins suggested a binding 10-year agreement in a story on AOL FanHouse.

    OK, here's the explanation. Just got off the phone with Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe for a column that will run Sunday. In the process, I asked him about the apparent discrepancy.

    Here's what Beebe said: As part of their plans for continuing the Big 12 with impending defections, Kansas, Kansas State, Baylor, Iowa State and Missouri agreed to 10-year commitments as a sign to other schools that might have considered joining or remaining in the league. The 10-year commitment now only applies to those five and may not be even applicable given the change in circumstances.

    That said, Beebe acknowledged that the league might revisit its by-laws to strengthen its membership commitment.

    ***********

    I originally saw this on the Rivals board, but it's also all over free sites including: http://collegesportsblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/06/about-that-10-year-big-12-commitment.html

    Have I said, "Thank all things holy and unholy that we escaped the Big 12!!!" yet today?
     
  2. sackman

    sackman Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    48,531
    Likes Received:
    4,519
    What's left of the B12 is a giant sucking clusterfudge. We are stronger - by far - to be rid of them. They can claim to be stronger for our departure all they want. The fact remains that their conference is a house of cards that can (and will) fall very easily.
     
  3. Darth Snow

    Darth Snow Hawaiian Buffalo Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2008
    Messages:
    56,966
    Likes Received:
    4,976
    A conference whose foundation is made up of injustice, inequality, and naked greed will not stand. It is a house of cards.
     
  4. CUBUFF80

    CUBUFF80 No Stinkin' Title Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    11,889
    Likes Received:
    834
    A 10 year pledge to suck Bevo's dick - step right up weak sisters.
     
  5. Timbuff10

    Timbuff10 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,779
    Likes Received:
    73
    Sounds like a Texas problem to me. I just hope when it implodes they don't come running to the PAC. The best thing for us is that they add Houston/ARK/TCU/SMU or whoever and get some sort of solid foundation so that we dont have to deal with this crap in a few days/weeks/years.
     
  6. sackman

    sackman Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    48,531
    Likes Received:
    4,519
    I think what you're going to see happen is that UT is going to try to go independent. MU will literally get on their knees and beg for an invite to the Big 10, and will probably get it. OU and A&M will go to the SEC. The remaining teams - ISU, KSU, KU, OSU, Tech and Baylor, will reconstruct a non-BCS conference and add teams from some combination of Houston, Rice, SMU, Tulsa, UTEP, NMSU. I don't see TCU in this picture for two reasons; 1) Baylor and TCU don't get along - at all - and 2) the MWC will actually be a more attractive conference than whatever crap these goofs put together. The big loser in all this is Kansas, who will slowly die on the vine, unfortunately.
     
  7. AlferdJasper

    AlferdJasper Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2008
    Messages:
    8,534
    Likes Received:
    679
    Yes. Every day I am more thrilled that we somehow escaped. Seriously, escaped is the only word I can think of. Most of the remaining teams are completely powerless.
    Will be glad for some of them when this version of the "Big 12" implodes, as it must eventually.

    [video=youtube;SY5NVkGtZ0Y]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SY5NVkGtZ0Y&feature=related[/video]
     
  8. AlferdJasper

    AlferdJasper Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2008
    Messages:
    8,534
    Likes Received:
    679

    It might be wishful thinking, but I believe Tex*****'s embarrassing behavior during all the conference realignment will have made the 12-PAC's teams very wary of involving them in the future.
    There was nothing gentlemanly or dignified about their "negotiating" with fellow teammembers. They acted like a bully and I don't think the PAC is going to embrace that.
     
  9. MiamiBuffs

    MiamiBuffs Wᴉɐɯᴉ qnɟɟs Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2005
    Messages:
    36,156
    Likes Received:
    2,028
    From a TV standpoint the rest of the conference is not that compelling.
    From a fairness perspective there is no CCG which will make it easier on the have nots become champions.
    From a revenue perspective less teams mean more money but no CCG means less revenue.
    Based on what's left they will still be without a doubt a BCS conference.
     
  10. SBG

    SBG Formerly known as EFNMB Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    6,828
    Likes Received:
    505
    Look how Oregon St had made some serious runs in the Pac10 for the past few years and had a solid chance to win it, but failed to beat UO in their last game. Parity comes more by having 10 teams than 12, imo. UT and OU will still be the top dogs, but I expect someone to pull the conference out of their ass. The main thing helping the Pac10 was that only USC was the power school. In the Big 12 there's 2 kings of the hill (football-wise).
     
  11. Timbuff10

    Timbuff10 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,779
    Likes Received:
    73
    @ Alfred and Sack

    I hope you guys are right about Texas. I could easily see Sack's thoughts happening as the next step for the whorns is to try the indie thing. One thing that is sure though, is winning like that comes in cycles. They had a good 10 year run and I imagine it will be slowing down here pretty soon.
     
  12. Hugegroove

    Hugegroove Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    2,727
    Likes Received:
    121
    IMO, I don't see UT and aTM backing off of the accelorator for one second. Its business as usual for them and they will continue to create more brain damage for all of the other schools in the Big Tex conferance. They rule the roost, and they know it! To apply a 10 year plan to just the "other" schools like what Perkins/Beebe is proposing, is insane. If they buy into that plan, they will get exactly what they deserve. The Perkins/Beebe 10 year plan and the possibility of revisiting the by-laws is just lip service that will only delay the enevitable collapse of the B-Tex. Hopefully over time Larry Scott will keep an eye on how things are working out in the new Big Tex conferance and be glad that it's the P-12 instead of the P-16.
     
  13. sackman

    sackman Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    48,531
    Likes Received:
    4,519
    I think that the Pac still wants to go to 16 teams at some point. I still think UT is at the top of their list for when they do expand. But, like the B10 and ND, the Pac has now been spurned twice by the whorns. There may not be a third time. The B12 is on life-support, but it might stick around long enough for a school like OU or KU to get it's academic house in order to the point where the Pac would consider adding them without the UT appendage.
     

Share This Page