“Dear Texas A&M: Don’t complain about being inconvenienced by Baylor. Blowing up all of college sports is inconvenient for about 100 schools.” — Dan Wolken of The Daily
“The only thing funnier than Texas A&M completely altering the landscape of college sports is Baylor halting it.” — David Ubben of ESPN.com
“Tradition is gone. Perspective is gone. Any sense of tradition, doing what’s right or maintaining semblance of the fabric of what has made college athletics so great and unique has been obliterated by the potential of the next TV deal. There is no common good in college football, any more than there is in boxing.” — Jeff Schultz of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Blowing up all of college sports? Texas A&M completely altering the landscape of college sports? There is no common good in college football?
What the hell’s the matter with everyone?
Why do I continue to read “change is bad” pieces without ever stumbling upon a “change is inevitable” column? Much less — dare I say it? — a “change can be good” opinion?
Yeah, I get it, sports is all about tradition. Because the world couldn’t go on without Oklahoma and Nebraska meeting on the gridiron every year. Whoops. Wait.
And free agency — why the very idea — would ruin all of sports forever. Oh. Nevermind.
Overtime, two-point conversions, league mergers, the Brooklyn Dodgers leaving Flatbush, the Florida Marlins being born and, and, and… sports goes right on along regardless.
So why’s that train kept a rollin’ for all these years? Because sports are a pastime that we need for entertainment and distraction’s sake. With the exception of strikes and lockouts we the fans never go anywhere. When teams move, we keep watching games. When conferences rise and fall, we keep watching games. When leather helmets become plastic and then become whatever the heck that was Maryland wore the other night… we keep watching games.
If Oklahoma picks up stakes and heads to the Pac-12, sports will survive. A million screaming Sooner fans will go along for the ride. They’ll pull for the Crimson and Cream when they play Oregon State just as they would if they were playing Iowa State.
Sports will survive because it’s a business. And it’s been a big business since the advent of television. Televised games meant money for pro teams and money for schools. In the case of college football, it was a landmark 1984 lawsuit set things in motion for what we’re seeing today.
“There is no common good in college football.” Oh, please. When has there been? When Alabama and Auburn refused to play each other between 1907 and 1948? When the Southern Conference splintered in 1932? Or when it splintered again in 1953?
Conference expansion and conference realignment isn’t evil, it’s evolution. For proof, let’s look back over the past six decades. To keep things simple, we’ll only look at the major football conferences over that span of time: the SEC, the ACC, the Big Ten, the Pac-12, the SWC, the Big 8, the Big 12 and the Big East.
Let’s see just how steady and traditional and filled with brotherly love and loyalty the conferences and schools have been throughout the modern age, shall we?
ACC —
* Founded in 1953 with Clemson, Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, NC State, Wake Forest and South Carolina as its 7 original members.
* In 1971, South Carolina left.
* In 1978, Georgia Tech entered.
* In 1991, Florida State entered.
* In 2004, Miami and Virginia Tech entered.
* In 2005, Boston College entered.
Total: 5 schools in and 1 school out (6 moves) since 1953.
SEC —
* In 1940, the SEC consisted of 13 schools: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Kentucky, LSU, Mississippi State, Ole Miss, Sewanee, Tennessee, Tulane and Vanderbilt.
* In 1940, Sewanee left.
* In 1964, Georgia Tech left.
* In 1966, Tulane left.
* In 1992, Arkansas and South Carolina entered.
* In 2012 (we think), Texas A&M will enter.
Total: 3 schools in and 3 schools out (6 moves) since 1940
Big Ten —
* In 1940, the Big Ten consisted of 10 schools: The University of Chicago, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio State, Purdue, and Wisconsin.
* In 1946, Chicago left.
* In 1950, Michigan State entered.
* In 1990, Penn State entered.
* In 2011, Nebraska entered.
Total: 3 schools in and 1 school out (4 moves) since 1940
Pac-12 –
* In 1940, the Pac-12 consisted of 10 schools: California, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Oregon State, Southern Cal, Stanford, UCLA, Washington and Washington State.
* In 1950, Montana left.
* In 1959, Idaho, Oregon, Oregon State, and Washington State left.
* In 1962, Washington State returned.
* In 1964, Oregon and Oregon State returned.
* In 1978, Arizona and Arizona State entered.
* In 2011, Colorado and Utah entered.
Total: 7 schools in and 5 schools out (12 moves) since 1940
SWC –
* In 1940, the SWC consisted of 7 schools: Arkansas, Baylor, Rice, SMU, Texas, Texas A&M and TCU.
* In 1956, Texas Tech entered.
* In 1971, Houston entered.
* In 1992, Arkansas left.
* In 1996, Baylor, Texas, Texas A&M and Texas Tech left to form the Big 12 and the other 4 schools went to smaller conferences as the league ceased to exist
Total: 2 schools in and 9 schools out (11 moves) since 1940.
Big 8 —
* In 1940, the Big 8 consisted of 6 schools: Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Nebraska and Oklahoma.
* In 1947, Colorado entered.
* In 1958, Oklahoma State entered.
* In 1996, Colorado, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State left and merged with 4 old SWC schools to form the Big 12 as the Big 8 ceased to exist.
Total: 2 in and 8 out (10 moves) since 1940.
Big 12 –
* Founded in 1996 with Baylor, Colorado, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas A&M and Texas Tech as its 12 original members.
* In 2011, Nebraska and Colorado left.
* In 2012 (we think), Texas A&M will leave.
Total: 0 in and 3 out (3 moves) since 1996.
Big East –
* Founded in 1991 with Boston College, Miami, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, Temple, Virginia Tech and West Virginia as its 8 original members.
* In 2004, Miami, Temple and Virginia Tech left.
* In 2004, UConn entered.
* In 2005, Boston College left.
* In 2005, Cincinnati, Louisville and South Florida entered.
* In 2012, TCU will enter.
Total: 5 in and 4 out (9 moves) since 1991.
That’s 61 moves since 1940. On average that’s one major conference change every year for six decades. Over that time three major conferences were formed, two went bye-bye and another is currently positioned squarely on the brink of oblivion.
Yep, until now things have been quite solid indeed. Solid as a Jell-O.
The activity of the past 16 months isn’t the beginning of the end of college football. It’s the end cycle of an evolutionary wave that began in 1984 with the US Supreme Court’s ruling on NCAA v. Board of Regents of University of Oklahoma.
In that case the court ruled that the NCAA’s control over college football television scheduling and revenue violated the Sherman Antitrust Act. Not only did the ruling give the schools and leagues the power to cut their own TV deals, it took nearly all power away from the NCAA in terms of college football. The NCAA can wag a finger and shout from a soapbox, but in the end, the schools and the leagues have the power to do whatever it they want to do. Is it any wonder then that conferences began expanding soon after the Supreme Court’s ruling? The bigger the league, the more money it could print.
Look at this timeline:
1984 — Supreme Court ruling
1990 — Penn State joins Big Ten
1991 — Notre Dame cuts its own television deal with NBC
1991 — Florida State joins ACC
1991 — Big East Conference is founded
1992 — Arkansas and South Carolina join SEC to form first 12-team league
1992 — This basically marks the end of the age of college football “independents”
1992 — SEC stages first major college conference championship game
1996 — SWC folds and Big 8 merges with 4 SWC teams to form Big 12
2004 — ACC raids Big East for Boston College, Miami and Virginia Tech
2005 — Big East raids Conference USA for Cincinnati, Louisville and South Florida
2008 — SEC signs landmark contracts with CBS and ESPN worth $3 billion over 15 years.
2010 — Big Ten explores expanding to 16 teams
2010 — Pac-12 tries to raid Big 12 for 6 schools (Colorado, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas A&M and Texas Tech) in an attempt to reach 16 teams
2011 — New Pac-12 television contracts and family of regional networks trump three-year old SEC television deals
What we’re witnessing today in college football isn’t shocking. It’s the obvious next step.
Some fans look at conference realignment and bemoan the loss of tradition. But a look at the history books shows that all of the major conferences have been adding and subtracting schools for years. For every Penn State-Pittsburgh series that dies, there’s a Florida-Tennessee rivalry to emerge.
Some media members weep that “the spirit of college athletics” is falling by the wayside. But those with any business sense understand that money has been changing the sporting landscape for the last 60 years and especially the last 35.
Texas A&M isn’t destroying college athletics. Geez. Overreact much?
A&M is simply trying to do what dozens of schools and conferences have done for decades — realign itself with new schools in order to increase its long-term financial security.
Despite the doom and gloom being tossed about by columnists taking aim on extremely low-hanging fruit, evolution isn’t always a bad thing.
Personally, I kind of like having opposable thumbs. I enjoy using them to drive my horseless carriage. And I feel good knowing that I likely won’t ever trip over an anvil.
It’s called progress.
Now, if you’re against expansion and realignment, super. That’s fine. I’m not totally gung-ho on the idea of 16-team super-conferences, either. Much less the 20-team leagues that will someday follow. But let’s not claim that expanding conferences are evil and that schools on the move are “blowing up all of college sports.” That’s a preposterous oversell.
I’m pretty sure, after all, that if the Big 12 replaced Texas A&M with Houston or Louisville or BYU, it’s train would keep right on a rollin’. As has been the case for all of sports — even the mostsacred college sports — since television dollars began to rule the world.
It’s not evil. It’s evolution.
(PS — Feel perfectly free to point out in the comment section why the move of Whassamatta U. from Conference X to Conference Y shouldn’t count as a real move or that Leghorn Tech moved in 1943, not 1944 as we might have typo’d. But please realize that doing so only proves that you’re spending far too much time looking at the trees and not enough time studying the forest.)
I forgot to mention, I'm a UNC fan, but follow ECU everytime they are on TV - pretty much like everyone else in NC. We all root for these guys, they are the underdogs that deliver big upsets. Put these guys in a conference where they can recruit top level talent and the sky is the limit. On a side note, Playboy Magazine has regularly ranked ECU as the top party school in the nation since the 1990s.
Will someone please mention East Carolina University as a quality SEC expansion candidate. They are expanding their stadium to 60,000 over the next 2 years. The town has a population of 75,000 and have an attendance average of 50,000 (that's the current capacity). They travel well and are SEC passionate about sports. This would deliver the Raleigh market, some Charlotte market, and some Norfolk, VA market. Raleigh is the 25th largest market. If the SEC is looking to break into North Carolina, this is a football first school, unlike the ACC schools. How realistic would an ECU addition be for the SEC?
Michael Phelps gets to compete in the Olympics and stil do endorsements.The Olympics woke up to the 21st century in the 1990's.Still waiting for the NCAA to do the same. If they dont someday they wont be residing over college football. The largest and best backed 60 teams will break off and do their own thing. Some lawyers will figure out a loop hole or a different way to designate or spin off the football teams to get around having to pay the school's girls volleyball team. I say let the fans "donate" or gift the players individually on their own and the girls volley ball cant get in between a private transaction anyway. Let the big schools get together get rid of the NCAA and their hypocrisy and play ball.
The NCAA gastapo tactics on certain coaches and certain schools,playing favorites,and makeit up arbitrarily as they go. poor kids suffer that cant buy a shirt or take their girlfriend out while the coach and players make millions. DONT give me " they get their school paid as compensation" crap.They dont have time for a job either between classes,practice,meetings, and road trips that have an NFL iteneriary with hotels and 1am plane rides. Besides if you get job you get accused of violations just like the "job" Brian Bosworth had watching an oil rig for thousands a month(check out his book). Let's get real. Get rid of the Ncaa.
One of the top 2 articles, and arguably the best, I have read on the TAMU/SEC issue, great job. I have this sight bookmarked now as my GoTo sight for SEC Expansion news and TAMU joing the SEC.
Qustion: now that things have slowed down a bit with the Baylor Kamakazie manuever, what now? Any timetable projections? At the very least, is there any certainty left that TAMU will definitely be joining the SEC, just a matter of time?
Gig 'Em
Fightin Texas Aggie Class of 1989
Whoop!
Nice article. Its good to get a better perspective on realignment. But with that said, it does seem to gloss over the negatives of change. Sure college football survived without OU and NU playing every year. But I think the sport is a bit worse off as a result. Losing a classic matchup that came about from two teams competing for conference championships (with national implications) for decades is something that can't be replaced with Nebraska - Colorado or a Penn State - Michigan State 'rivalry'.
The point is that sometimes what is gained can't replace what was lost. It doesn't mean the end to the sport, but little by little it might chip away at what makes the sport so important to its fans.
I'm a current student at A&M. I appreciate y'all's patience with this whole fiasco, and I can't wait to drive out to LSU or Bama to see a great game.
Thanks, and Gig 'Em.
:)
Dude, the Aggies whine about their treatment in Lubbock, what the heck do you think will happen in Baton Rouge? The Tech fans manage to get rowdy in a DRY COUNTY! I don't think there's such a thing in the whole state of Louisiana. Good Luck Aggie.
It would make more sense for the Big 12 remnants (probably Iowa State, Kansas State, Kansas and Baylor; possibly Missouri as well) to invite the Big East football members to join their league, creating a 14-member all-sports conference under the Big 12 banner (perhaps bringing in Brigham Young as member #14 if Missouri goes elsewhere). BCS officials would probably prefer this to having Big 12 members go to the Big East -- they want the Big East out of the football business so the basketball schools can't tag along in case the BCS conferences someday decide to split from the NCAA.
Ultimately, the SEC, Big Ten and Pac will be the three top conferences, with 16 members each. The ACC and Big 12 will survive as second-tier leagues in reconstituted form, and Notre Dame will remain an independent. For political purposes, no current BCS member will be kicked out of the coalitiion.
My Post was too long! Here 's the remainder.
The ONE good thing that could happen in this is…… the Super conferences COULD organize a NEW ruling body to replace the NCAA. This would eliminate the ’favorites’ that the NCAA has. That’s not enough though….. The Presidents of the FBS schools could do that NOW!
Why stop at 14 or 16 teams, just go ahead and have 32 teams. Name them ACFL and NCFL. The American College Football League and the National College Football league. College players can get an agent and negotiate contracts, colleges can trade students, and they can unionize and demand certain rules and conditions.
There are limits, and college football is going beyond one of the limits if they expand to 14 or 16 teams.. Either the teams within a conference will NOT play each other, or the number of games will have to be increased to accommodate the increase in the number of teams. The SEC has to rotate (2) teams every year just to play all the teams in the ’other’ division every (3) or (4) years. College players ARE STUDENT ATHELETES! They are NOT PROS. There are OTHER sports that college students play that are being crowded out now. A GOOD change would be to divide the 120 FBS (DIV-1A) teams into (10) 12 teams conferences and then devise a playoff that the fans were clamoring for earlier this year. This would be a good change That would give the BOWLS games to put on each year.
Ahh no that is the latest false information. A&m never signed any ten year deal. Please show me the copy. Dr Loftin made it very clear that he was committed to the Big XII 'as in it's present state" and there were on going concerns about Beebe's ability to fulfill their commitment to A&M. a commitment that was based on a different deal other then the Fox deal. That deal has still not come in to being. In any case there is no contract. Please show me a copy of it, LINK? Just regurgitating the company line doesn't make it the truth!
hangtime79.
Please explain why Texas A&M is responsible for Baylor at all. Baylor has been feasting at the table of the A&M's, OU's and UT's and to a lesser degree, Tech and OSU for the entire existence in the Big XII that was forced by the Baylor alum Gov. Ann Richardson.
Secondly why threaten A&M? In reality A&M has nothing to do with conference instability and Baylor knows it as does the rest of the Big 12. It is the reason that everyone did originally sign off on A&Ms withdrawl from the Big XII and it's soliciting of the SEC. It wasn't until Baylor heard rumblings from OU and others about 'checking out options' that Baylor launhed it's attack and threat and at who. OU?, UT? KNOW A&M?!??!??! Really.
Thirdly, the TV contract is with the Big XII and the only reason it even happened is because A&M stepped up and said they did not want to go to the PAC. Thus giving the BIg XII a chance to renegotiate a contract with Fox. Furthermore do you really think contract would of been anywhere near what it is if A&M was not there? So Baylor once again is attempting to hold A&M hostage to continue to feed them when they have brought nothing to that table themselves. Even then there is no signed contract of commitment for this new Big 12-2. Dr. Loftin made it very clear that his commitment to the conference was bracketed with this very important statement, "as in it's present condition".. So when UT started pushing the envelope what did Baylor do? Nothing, nothing at all, nor did anyone else in the Big XII.
4. Finally it has been publicly stated that A&M's removal from the conference would not lead to it's dissolution. So now Baylor threatens to sue the SEC and A&M for that very thing? Really? What Baylor has done here is not only legally weak it is wicked. They have attacked the one party in this who not only held the conference together last year but has done everything above board and in the light all the way through. Why don't they threaten to sue tu, OU or the Pac if they go. What does A&M have anything to do with this at all!
Expanding on above, the ACC (unlike the SEC now) actually did attempt to kill off the Big East, or at least do so as an AQ league. The ACC publicly, unapologetically announced their intentions. They put out press releases on how they were going to add 3 of the Big East's strongest programs, and then go to the BCS leaders and TV networks with the case that the Big East no longer merited an automatic bid. That would increase the number of automatic bids, and according to their calculations, result in the ACC getting two BCS bids almost every year. The increased revenue to the ACC from the at-large bids would be used to help pay for the cost of expansion. The ACC even predicted how many BCS bids they were going to get (based, of course on their belief that Miami and FSU would remain powerhouses)! When Mike Tranghese announced his attention to sue the ACC, he got hammered in the press over it, but it had its desired effect: the ACC backed off their intention of pressuring the BCS to revoke the Big East's automatic bid. (The Big East was still able to win a $5 million verdict against the ACC even though they never lost their AQ status and TV contracts merely because the ACC tried to do it. Had the Big East actually lost their AQ status, the verdict would have been much larger).
Thanks to the Big East's successful "struggle for life", their being willing to exist as a platypus (an "east coast"conference with teams in Illinois, Indiana, Ohio and Texas) rather than gracefully accept being a dodo (as the national media "encouraged" them to do) they are going to outlive the Big 12. Which means that no matter what happens to the Big 12, Kansas basketball will have an AQ conference to go to. That is a good thing and not a bad thing, right?
Well, the full title of Darwin's book is "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life."
The Big East survived the struggle for life, no?
SEC has been relatively stable
10 of the 12 schools were founding members!! Thats actually not much change at all considering its been 75+ years
very interesting article
Great article - one of the best I've read on the subject. One small quibble, though. Most of these changes are double-counted. For example, Boston College's switch in 2005 is counted against both the Big East and the ACC. But the basic premise is sound - the only constant is change.
Sparty_Cyclone...
No problem. Wouldn't expect to write anything without someone quibbling.
We stated that these were major conference moves. When one conference loses a team, another conference gains a team. But let's cut the number in half -- even though that's not completely accurate. That would still mean one team would move every 2 years (on average)... rather than every year.
Our point was that teams have been coming and going and traditions changing for years.
Thanks for reading the site,
John
not so much the SEC though
teams out: Tulane, Sewanee, G Tech
teams in: Arkansas, South Carolina
So you could argue that the SEC teams that matter, the ones that make the SEC what it is have all been there since the beginning of the conference, That core of teams has been there since the beginning. Cant say that about a lot of other conferences
I think thats why there is more SEC pride than there is for other conferences, because for the most part its been the same 10 teams for 75 years, which is why the traditions and rivalries here are unlike anywhere else in college football
Pardon me, but Baylor teaches evolution (among other things). Baylor is a Baptist school, but not a fundamentalist or evangelical one. In any event, this is a sports issue, not a religious one. If you want to make it into a religious issue, then go criticize the Pac-10 for their "absolutely no religious schools" (no matter the denomination or religion) stance, which is why they have rejected longtime aspirant BYU so many times, and ultimately wound up taking Utah instead (despite BYU having more tradition and a much larger regional and national following).
tradeassociation...
Since you're going to defend Baylor under every post on this site, you might want to buy a sense of humor. That way you can do your spinning on the serious stuff and not on the funny stuff like the post above.
And for the record, I grew up the son of a Baptist minister.
John
I also posted this at Houston Chronicle today: It's not about athletics its about enrollment
BTW, if Boren doesn’t shoot his mouth off last Friday about leaving for the Pac-12 – Baylor probably signs off. Once TAMU’s leaving starts the dominoes, Baylor is going to stop you in anyway it can.
So this about two things – athletic dollars and enrollment AQ vs non-AQ. The athletic dollars we know call it about $10MM. The real money though is in enrollment.
The key is the assumption of how much AQ vs non-AQ enrollment loss is for Baylor. My source tells me the scenarios used were between 15% and 33% for Baylor going to a non-AQ. Type in whatever you want but quite a few young people choose their school based partially on athletic conference.
Now the math:
Best Case Scenario
Baylor loses 5% of their new undergraduate population going forward 12,500 x 5% = 625.
Current tuition and fees are $38,279, assume Baylor students pay ~40% of that $16,000.
Enrollment Loss: -625 x $16000 = -$10,000,000
Athletics Loss: -$10,000,000
= -$20,000,000
Now let’s do worst case scenario:
Both Baylor grad and undergrad lost 25% of 15,000 = 15000 x 25% = 3750
Assume Baylor students pay ~50% of that $20,000.
Enrollment Loss: -3750 x $20000 = -$75,000,000
Athletics Loss: -$10,000,000
= -$85,000,000
This does not take into account future loss of alumni donations, research grants, rising price of tuition, etc., etc. Throw in your own numbers but that’s the equation Baylor is facing and the reason Baylor will not let TAMU go and are more then happy to take 100 years worth of Aggie hate.
Also, those numbers are probably what the SEC is most afraid of in terms of a lawsuit. Baylor may only have 5% chance of winning the lawsuit, but that lawsuit is going to start at roughly 1 billion. =PV(.10,100,100,000,000) x .05
Expected Value = -$50,000,000
Thus I come back too, if TAMU wants Baylor’s sign-off on its move to the SEC then its in A&Ms best interest to help find Baylor find a spot otherwise we are going to all be here for awhile.
So for the above revenue losses to be accurate, you have to assume the enrollment assumptions are valid. IF SMU, TCU, Rice and UH lost 30% of its student body when they left the SWC, then I might agree but I don't believe that is the case. Another huge hole in this argument is the state of Texas' population growth. This "analysis" assumes that Baylor cannot get any additional students from the state of Texas' growing population.
The math adds up if you accept the basic premise however, the starting assumptions are completely bogus making the premise dubious at best.
It's a shame that TCU etal did not feel the say way Baylor feels. Instead, when Baylor made sure they used political clout to force their way, and kicked TCU etal to the ground, TCU etal regrouped and figured out a way to make their schools more marketable and survived. Good luck Baylor, the Aggies are gone in 2012, whether Baylor likes it or not. Perhaps texas u will pony up some of their record breaking contract with espn. Will that make you happy or will you continue to present yourself as a Christian based university, like you're doing now?
UH had problems with the NCAA, SMU was/is still trying to recover from the death penatly, TCU and Baylor you would have called it a toss-up if you were looking at it from football perspective so Baylor used its political connections to freeze out TCU. If it had been a TCU alum as governor maybe we're having the reverse conversation today. Baylor wasn't the one who killed the SWC, yes Baylor did jump over and push TCU to get out, but make no mistake UT and TAMU put the bullet in the SWC. At that point, it was killed or be killed.
Also, as to those who say there was room for three. The Big 12 wasn't going to be the Big 14 - that would have meant one of the three northern schools, KSU, KU, or Mizzou, becoming a Big 12 south school and that was not going to happen as all three consider the others deep rivals like Texas and OU. The Big 12 worked because OU and Texas wanted to play each other every year and OU wanted to be in Texas as much as possible for recruiting purposes (sound familiar as to one of the reasons the SEC wants to be there).
Yes, as I stated the Aggies are gone from Big 12 that much is abundantly clear. The Aggies are just crazy enough to make all of their other sports sit out a year; they are that far down the line. However, this not about the Aggies - its about millions of dollars in revenue per year for Baylor, ISU, KU, and KSU and what OU wants. Once OU and UT get this figured out - the Big 12 will survive and hopefully will never have to talk about realignment ever again.
Agreed. A&M will be either independent for a year then go to the SEC (nullifies any possible damages claim by Baylor and ISU) or more likely Mom and Dad (OU and UT) sit down at the table and work this out. As long as they both want a conference there will be a Big 12 conference. Once that is done, TAMU will run into the SEC's arms unencumbered and we will put the last two summers of realignment, hopefully behind us.
John this about money and ensuring that the have nots within the Big 12 have a landing spot. I can't take credit for the idea, Jeff over at FrankTheTank put it forward, but it probably solves everything. Short version: a bucket of money from the haves in the Big 12 and the four have nots go to the Big East. Big East gets the money and a new deal with a bump, cable channel and expanded territory. All Big 12 schools get an AQ conference. TAMU and the SEC then run into each others arms. Otherwise, if SEC brings in TAMU and starts the dominoes there will be suits flying and the SEC may likely win them, but all the dirty laundry for the last five years will get aired out and I don't think anybody wants that.
From Jeff at FrankTheTank:
A Brokered Deal
I think all of this might lead to a brokered deal. The Iowa State’s and Baylor’s of the conference have no place to go. But they also realize the Big 12 is going to blow up. If I were them, I would work on a negotiated termination of the Big 12 Conference that lands all the leftovers in the Big East. It probably isn’t exactly what the Big East wants but they would probably take the bad with the good. In an ideal situation, the Big East ends up with KS, KS St. Mizzou, Iowa State & Baylor. That leaves them with 14 schools. It probably isn’t everything the BE wants but they might go for it given that their tv contract is up in November of 2012. Texas A&M, Texas, Tex Tech, OK, & OKie State might all have to pitch in and send a big check to the Big East, but that is probably the best outcome for everybody.
hangtime79...
I appreciate you reading, but that wasn't the topic of the above piece. We're talking about the incredible overreaction to the process. Baylor's lawsuit wasn't really mentioned.
John
I believe the nay-sayers in the sports media are likely affiliated with the bottom feeders who have no safety net to fall into to, or their ilk.
Their alma mater's should be checked into.
As an aside I will second the notion/motion that no matter how everything shapes up I wish that Baylor isquickly and irreversibly vanquished to the long dark and lonley road athletic perdition.
Home | Recruiting | Over Time | Blue Chip Stories | MrSEC Shop | RSS Feeds | About Us & Contact Us
Team Pages: Alabama | Arkansas | Auburn | Florida | Georgia | Kentucky | LSU | Mississippi State | Missouri | Ole Miss | South Carolina | Tennessee | Texas A&M | Vanderbilt
Copyright (c)2013 Malt Shovel Media | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties. From:
[...] Square.” Uh, yeah. That’s a fair comparison. (Anyone need further proof that the anti-expansion crowd can’t make their argument without wildly exaggerating?)9. Gary Parish of CBSSports.com says Baylor is both desperate and right at the same time.10. [...]
[...] 1. Conference Realignment Isn’t Evil…It’s Evolution [...]
[...] are driving the current college football expansion push. As we noted a couple of weeks ago, conference realignment isn’t evil, it’s evolution. And we seem to finally be arriving at the final stage of a move that began way back in 1984.Below [...]
Conference Calls…
[...]Alabama | MrSEC.com[...]…
Interesting. My very best site. – online igi…
[...]Alabama | MrSEC.com[...]…
kitchen tv…
[...]Alabama | MrSEC.com[...]…
[...] hissy fits regarding Texas A&M’s move to the SEC — we penned a little piece called: “Conference Realignment Isn’t Evil… It’s Evolution.” In it we showed that the current twists and turns and shifts and moves were really nothing new. [...]