Albama Arkansas Auburn Florida Georgia Kentucky LSU Mississippi State Missouri Ole-Miss USC Tennessee Texas A&M Vanderbilt
Latest News

Big 12 Interim Commish Says Mizzou Won’t Go Anywhere Before 2013

Big 12 interim commissioner Chuck Neinas said today during a conference call with the media that his league will give Missouri all the time it needs to decide whether to stay or go from the league it’s called home since 1995.  But the school won’t be going anywhere before 2013.

According to Brett McMurphy of CBSSports.com, Neinas said “there’s no timetable,” but he also added Missouri could take up until the end of the current academic year (which seems pretty much like a timetable, though a lengthy one).

Neinas said his league will feature both Missouri and TCU next season.  “If Missouri is going to change horses, it won’t be for 2012 anyway.”

Other notes:

* Neinas said that he’s told SEC commish Mike Slive, “if you’re going to extend an invitation to Missouri please let me know.”  (Neinas let the Big East know about TCU after he’d called the school to gauge its interest in his conference.)

* Neinas said the Big 12′s plan to reach 10 or 12 teams.  “It won’t be 16.”

* Neinas also said the numbers in an AP report last night are incorrect.  The report stated that a 45-page research document prepared by MU stated that the Tigers could make up to $12 million per year more in the SEC which would require an awfully big jump in the SEC’s current television contracts.  “(A 14-teams SEC) would have to increase their television revenue by $168 million.”

Whether or not Missouri could actually escape in time for the SEC to field a 14-team league next season is anybody’s guess at this point.

The Kansas City Star has a bit more on today’s teleconference right here.

 


46 comments
btlh2oguy
btlh2oguy

Who can definately say Missouri has an offer to move to the SEC? If they consistantly "research" applying to the SEC, they are going to end up lingering in a conference with Boise State, UCF, Connecticut and Appalachian St.

moreno
moreno

Add WVU and get it over with.

michael
michael

Hey SEC--please know that 95%++ of MU fans want to go to the SEC and are so sick of all these curiously timed leaks from unnamed university sources. Yes we flirted with the Big10 last year but every MU fan I know wants to be in the best athletic conference in the country! Alot of SEC fans might not know a whole lot about MU, so here goes: AAU school, enrollment 32k, broke ESPN Gameday record for attendance last year right before beating #1 BCS OU, was ranked #1 in the BCS polls a few short years ago, sent 40,000+ fans to Cotton Bowl vs. Arky despte getting outflanked for the Orange Bowl but was within one win of playing for BCS National Championship, been to 2 Elite 8's in hoops past decade (not fantastic and as KU fans will tell you, we havent gotten over the hump in terms of Final 4 appearances, but we will bring a strong BB program and great facilities), our FB stadium is not huge but is in-line with SEC average at about 72k max, we have sent more players to NFL past 5 years than UT has so we know how to recruit (our game-day coaching is a little suspect, though) and our academic rating overall is pretty decent. MO does have pro sports as does GA, FLA, TN but Columbia MO is a great little college town and I think you'd enjoy your trips there. MU gets a bad rap because they dont have the hardware (national titles) but neither does A&M and they were a huge get for the SEC. Most MU Fans want to this all to be over and hope that our leaders our drafting the application required to enter the SEC. We can compete in FB but obviuosly wont be an imediate power. I think we're 3-0 vs. A&M most recently, beat NU 3 straight recently, beat #1 OU last year, was 5-0 vs. K-State (until that ugly loss) havent had good results vs. Tx but MU will be competitive in all sports. Wrestling, baseball, softball are all generally top 20 type programs, and hoops is generally top 25 or so. Hope to see you guys soon! Sincerely, a real Mizzou Fan.

MU24
MU24

Keep in mind that 16 days elapsed from the time that Texas A&M announced it was empowering it's Chancellor to explore conference options to when an announcement came. We're all aware of how desperately they wanted to be in the SEC, as I believe MU does. The difference is in the details. And to be honest, I'm not sure I believe anyone doing any reporting or talking right now. Keep in mind that everyone, including Chuck Neinas has an agenda. So I'm waiting patiently until Dr. Brady Deaton, MU's Chancellor comes forth and says either, "We're proud members of the Big 12 (God help him in his quest for a new job shortly after the announcement) or, "MU has requested from the Big 12 a letter which will outline the actions necessary to withdraw from the conference." Until one of those two things happens, take everything with a grain of salt.

Jfw
Jfw

If your so ecstatic about the SEC, what is taking you so long?

MIZSEC
MIZSEC

We don't know anything until we know something. Neinas is like a spin doctor after a political speech. He's just spinning to try and undo the possibility of losing another great school. Missouri brings a giant swath of TV's along with A&M. There are a lot of factors but money is a big one. The more TV's, the more money, the greater the future cut for schools in the SEC. And as for people who keep bantering about the Big 10, they too are just spin doctors trying to corrupt people's view of Missouri. I grew up in the heart of Big 10 county and the thought of joining that conference makes me want to hurl. Missouri has way more in common with the south. A little research on "Little Dixie," quickly reveals Missouri's strong connection to the south. Don't be fooled by the Big 10 talk. Missouri fans are ecstatic about the SEC and will be a plus for the best conference in football. The Alumni at Mizzou are all over this situation. The leadership has to know that a wrong decision or slow move will lead to major alumni backlash. MIZ-SEC!!!

Red Thompson
Red Thompson

An Excellent Article, Tigers are a great fit the Big 12 from a Culture standpoint or the Big 10. The SEC plays second fiddle to no one and should bring in someone who really wants to be there. Come on SEC, say thanks but no thanks to the Tigers and Bring on the Mountaineers!!!

JRUGA
JRUGA

It was reported that the ACTUAL vote of the SEC presidents to accept Texas A&M as a member until after it had received the letter from the Big 12 waiving all legal grievence from the Big 12 and its members. On the eve of the vote by the SEC presidents, there as notification to the SEC that there were some unversities that backtracked on their waiver of legal grievence. The SEC voted regardless, but only gave the conditional acceptance of Texas A&M as new member. None of the steps required by Slive and the SEC for potential membership has happened with regards to Missouri. I disagree that there is not enough votes. There have been unsubstantiated reports that there are not enough votes, but these reports cannot be proven and the SEC has not closed any doors. Actually, I have to wonder how Mizzou happened to have the 45 page document that literally shared the $ blueprint of the SEC. The only possible explanation is that the SEC provided said document to Missouri. I also find it hard to believe that Missouri would take the steps they have taken without assurances from the SEC that it was indeed interested in Missouri for membership.

Jamie Thornton
Jamie Thornton

It's quite obvious the SEC doesn't have the votes yet for Mizzou. WIll that happen? I'm not sure. We know once the SEC knew they were going to have the votes, Slive sent in the letter to the Big 12. He let Beebe know that Texas A&M came to the sec for application. He also made it clear that they're not going to raid the Big 12. He also asked for a letter saying that none of the schools would take legal action against the SEC. Today the new Big 12 commish said he talked with Slive. He asked him to let him know if there was going to be the same process(application) with Mizzou. Since the SEC let the Big 12 know about Texas A&M, why would Slive keep Mizzou a secret? I think that article last week from the Birmingham paper was dead on. I really don't think all the presidents are on board with Mizzou. I can see the SEC taking it's time with number 14.

Aggiefaithful
Aggiefaithful

Mizzou has got to put a stop to all these leaks. Come on man! Get the rat(s) out of the house, and get something done. I don't understand what the hold up is; if they want to go to the SEC (and who wouldn't?), then get it done guys. Neinas shouldn't be underestimated; guy is like an old monk ninja living in the mts. that came down to fix a mess nobody else could, or wanted to deal with.

MIZ_SEC
MIZ_SEC

A week or two ago Neinas was on every radio station he could get on to say Mizzou isn't going anywhere. Now his story has changed to if Mizzou goes, they have to stay until next year. I think it is clear that Mizzou is trying to negotiate the exit fee down, potentially by using the strategy Colorado took by saying they will stay an extra year (hoping the Big 12 will say no thanks so they can move on). Big 12 is more desperate this year than last though and seems willing to hold out to keep Mizzou another year.

tradeassociation
tradeassociation

This is the best evidence that Missouri is gone. From the Kansas City link above:

"The Big 12 wants Missouri to stay, and the conference has agreed to a grant of rights for at least six years. Missouri wanted a minimum of 10 years."

To which Neinas replied: “We’ve discussed a longer grant of rights,” Neinas said."

They can DISCUSS longer than 6 years if they want. But everyone, including Missouri, knows that 6 years from now, A) the Big 10's TV contract with ESPN/ABC runs out and B) the Big 10 has publicly announced that they are going to a 9 game conference schedule at that time. Add those two together ... at the very least, it can be said that Texas and Oklahoma want to see what the landscape looks like 6 years from now and then make their decision. So, their commitment level to the Big 12 is at best conditional, which makes the Big 12 longterm (or even beyond 6 years term) survival conditional, which makes Missouri's being a major athletics program conditional UNLESS they accept an offer from the SEC while it is on the table.

According to ESPN, the exit fee is $25.9 million if they leave within 6 months, but could drop to as low as $10.4 million if they leave later. If the Big 12 wants to hold onto Mizzou for its own purposes, they'll insist on the higher exit fee. If they want longer to try to change Mizzou's mind, they'll THREATEN the higher exit fee. But keep in mind: there is no point to Mizzou leaving now unless the SEC informs them that they can get them on the 2012 schedule. If they can, then calling Neinas on his power play is worthwhile. If not, then just go through their last year in the Big 12 like A&M, Colorado, Nebraska etc. did or are doing.

Mizzougunner
Mizzougunner

Last year, Colorado’s athletic department was broke. To lower their exit fees, they gave two full years notice to the Big 12, planning on leaving in 2012. The Big 12, wanting to move on as a 10 team league, told Colorado they could go ahead and leave in 2011. I believe this is why Colorado paid a smaller exit fee than Nebraska.

My guess is that Missouri would like to do the same, and Neinas is attempting to call MU’s bluff by saying the Big 12 would hold them to the longer notice time. Would they actually do it? It may depend on the Big East, and whether they hold Louisville hostage like they are threatening to do to Pitt and Syracuse. If the Big 12 has to wait on Louisville to get back to 10, they try to force MU to stick around longer or pay the larger exit fee.

GUEST
GUEST

Someone should commission a 45 page report on how badly Missouri blows.

WDE>Bammer
WDE>Bammer

Missouri needs to stay in the Big 12 for 2012 because they need more time to work on their Conference USA application.

roman
roman

who cares. you are talking about missouri. MISSOURI. it's a joke that the sec is even considering them. the sec should add city college of new york if television sets are so important. they would bring the same quality of football. mizzou depreciates the value of the league. slive needs to stay at 13 for a year and come back when he has real options.

and what happens when they unbundle television packages. you have just took away bargaining power for larger television dollars because mizzou is an inferior product.

this joke needs to end.

MrMM
MrMM

He knows that Missouri is gone. Do not see how he is trying to pull the 2013 versus 2012 thing since they did not do this to the Aggies. He also knows that he has to stay at 10 until 2014 because the Big East is going to try and hold Louisville, Cincy and WV to the 27 month waiting period. If the Big East is able to get enough teams to join their league without those 3 teams, they will let them go by 2013 which is why he is trying to hold Missouri until that time where he can go from 10 to 12 at one time.

tradeassociation
tradeassociation

With TCU ... even if the individual dates may change (for instance, I doubt that Texas is going to play TCU on Thanksgiving weekend) bringing them into the Big 12 is just a matter of replacing team (A&M) with another (TCU). Nothing else major has to change. But Mizzou coming into the SEC, going from 12 to 14, that is totally different. Divisions have to be decided, rivalries have to be protected, perhaps even going from 8 conference games to 9 with the cross-division rival thing going from 1 a year back to 2 has to be discussed, and who knows what else. It isn't the same as patching A&M in, because the 13 team thing is designed to be temporary. But when time to add #14 comes, there is going to have to be an attempt to come up with permanent scheduling and things like that.

frank
frank

Is it true that missouri is now looking at the ACC because of the SEC hold up if true they would fit better in the ACC can you check on this and post in mr sec thank you .

statesman
statesman

Neinas also said when he took over that he thought it was possible to get A&M to stay. He shoots from the hip and hopes something sticks. The reality is that Deloss Dodss(Texas) is making the important decisions in the Big12.

As a Mizzou alum I understand the strategic leaks. The sports department & BOC are on board w/ the move, while the professors wanting more research dollars are against the move. This will soon be settled and hopefully the team can focus on the field.

UofA72
UofA72

The UM board of curators gave Deaton full authority to review confernence alignment and related contracts, and to do what would best serve the interests of the University of Missouri. Nothing i've read or heard shows any advantage whatsoever for Missouri to chose the B12 over SEC. Reasonable law suits are out the window with TCU's addition. SEC money is better. The opportunity for building athletics is better. Academics is even, at worst.

Why 2013 over 2012? If they don't move in time for 2012, there won't be an option in 2013, for the SEC anyway. If you don't want us enough for 2012, the message received is you don't want us! That said, Deaton isn't that naive. If it's not 2012, it's because SEC doesn't want Missouri.

skillet
skillet

Could the B12 be any more apathetic about what happens with Missouri? Kind of the total opposite from the situation with A&M which seemed to evoke very strong feelings. It may be telling in what the B12 thinks they are really ‘losing’ with each program.

The 2013 comment seems like a they are gaining leverage to try to extract the maximum exit fee possible out of MU on the way out of the door. By most accounts, Missouri would be replaced by Louisville about 15 seconds after they left.

JEH
JEH

Question for all:
Why would Mizzou be locked into the B12 for 2012? There's nothing binding them that we know of. Most reports are that Mizzou's buy-out is the same from now until Dec 1st of this year. I just don't get the B12's commish's comments today?
He took TCU yesterday but today Mizzou's locked in for 2012, something smells here...

HoustonVol
HoustonVol

Mizzou is gone. I doubt that they will risk another season in the B12, but might. I also think the B12 ends back up at 12. L'ville and WVU will be at the top of the pecking order. The 12 school will be interesting. There are many schools that could fit into that void. It just depends on what the B12 values the most.

Mizzou fan in Texas
Mizzou fan in Texas

If this is true, as a life long Missouri fan and alumnus, I don't think I can continue being supportive. How is it that they could bungle this up....oh I'm sorry, they have bungled up everything!

dave
dave

didn't he also say that mizzou was on board with the big 12 the day before they announced they gave their chancellor permission to explore other options?

MIZSEC
MIZSEC

Spot on. Deaton will face the wrath of countless alumni if he doesn't make the easiest decision ever.

MIZSEC
MIZSEC

Pretty simple. I'm not in charge. But as an alumni you can be certain I've done everything humanly possible.

JRUGA
JRUGA

Actually, Slive did not send the letter to the Big 12 until #1, Texas A&M had formally made its intentions known in writing that it was leaving the conference and #2, A&M had sent in its application for SEC membership. Missouri has done neither of these 2 steps that it needs to do before the SEC will have any formal (actual) vote in regards to Missouri becoming an SEC member.

MIZ_SEC
MIZ_SEC

I don't think you even know what the word "depreciates" even mean.

Kirk
Kirk

Great point MM. Should Mizzou decide to leave then they would likely be replaced by a BE team. By trying to get Mizzou to stay through 2013 he minimizes the 27 month waiting period to keep the league at 10 teams. Otherwise the league drops to 9 for a while and then back up to 10 which makes home and away scheduling just a royal pain in the rear for all involved.

StevenBrew
StevenBrew

Good point statesman. 1 of my questions is when Nienes is out does another puppet take over. Just another reason to get out of the BIG12 if you ask me. Also are you referring to the large amount of funds they could get from the BIG10 if they were to do that? Cringe:(

Kirk
Kirk

Skillet you are hilarious (and know nothing). Obviously the B12 is trying to keep Missouri and is trying to play it as such. If they did not care, they would show Mizzou the door and simply replace them. From an B12 head office, the interim commission spends a good percentage of his time on the subject (look at the topics of his releases and read the transcripts from the press conferences), tells Mizzou to take as much time as they need (versus make up you mind or else because we don't care and will simply replace you) which does not allow the conference to stabilize, has at least tried to find some middle ground on Missouri's positions, etc.

From a B12 fan base point of view; the volume of blogs, conversations, articles, etc. around KC makes it worse the election time with politicians. If no one cared, why would all of this be taking place?

UofA72
UofA72

I don't believe that's the B12 message to Missouri at all. The biggest problem B12 has right now is the pereception that they are dead. The only way that changes is when they can stabilize, and they can't do that until all the teams that are leaving are gone. Missouri is the only team making noise about leaving. Once they are gone, or sign on long term, then Neinas knows what he is dealing with for rebuilding.

If I had an employee who couln't make up their mind about going or staying, they wouldn't have that choice. Neinas doesn't have that option.

Brad
Brad

Mizzou probably wants to go in 2012 but realizes it could save $10 mil plus in exit fees if it waits and gives 2 years notice.

MIZ_SEC
MIZ_SEC

Mizzou could leave the conference tomorrow if they want to. His comments don't mean anything.

billybib
billybib

I know what the word means. One example is adding a football program that is 2-3 in a conference half the equal of the SEC.

skillet
skillet

Why would the B12 be interseted in keeping Missouri? For two years Missouri officials have made it clear they want to leave. Fans have whipped themselves into a frenzy about leaving for the SEC. If you are tyring to stabalize, why try to keep a school that doesn't want to be there.

(BTW, full disclosure - I don't think it's a good move for them. The B12 is a better fit culturally, geographically, from a rival perspective, etc. I understand they want to leave for a more stable situation. A stable Big 12 - if that's even possible - is a much better fit than the SEC.)

You are correct that there is a lot of interest around KC on this issue. I live in Dallas and it seems like from a UT/OU/OSU/Tech/Baylor perspective, it's a non-story.

tradeassociation
tradeassociation

"The biggest problem B12 has right now is the pereception that they are dead."

The perception that they are dead exists for a reason: because Oklahoma and Texas refuse to make an enforceable commitment to the Big 12 past 2017, which is when the primary ESPN/ABC contract with the Big 10 runs out. (Meaning that it is less perception than reality.)

"The only way that changes is when they can stabilize, and they can't do that until all the teams that are leaving are gone. "

The only way that they can stabilize it is by making a legitimate commitment to the Big 12 past 2017, which Missouri specifically made as a demand of their remaining in the Big 12, and which Texas and Oklahoma refused.

"Missouri is the only team making noise about leaving."

Because no one else either wants to go (Oklahoma and Texas) or has a better destination than the Big East should they go (Kansas, Kansas State, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Baylor, Iowa State).

Look, for all the hue and cry, we don't even know if the SEC wants Mizzou in 2012, or if they are able to accommodate them before then. While patching A&M on in a hurry is one thing, bringing on Mizzou would represent an attempt to make things permanent, or at least until 2017 when this madness starts up all over again.

And if the Big 12 would rather have Missouri for 2012 than Louisville ... do you blame them?

skillet
skillet

Great points, but I wonder if we are talking about two different issues.

The key issue for the B12 now is saving the conference. Now matter how much you want things to be equal, in that setting you have to be pragmatic. The simple fact is some schools are more valued than others. Losing OU or Texas would make it more difficult to sustain a conference than losing Iowa State or KSU. That doesn't mean when the conference is conducting business those schools shouldn't have an equal say. But in the DEFCON 1 world of trying to save a conference, the programs have different impacts.

Equal say in governing is not saying equal value. The Jacksonville Jaguar franchise has as much say as the New England Patriots, but is it fair to say the loss of one has the same impact. (bad example I know because the NFL can absorb just about anything.)

The hard part for the B12 will be establishing a culture of equality after years of Texas and OU driving the conference agenda. (though I'd argue more Texas with OU being complicit) But UT realized this is the only way their LHN is going to work. OU realized their is no other option. As the saying goes, 'fear does the work of reason.' There seems a lot more willingness to compromise than before. But compromise means give and get. I think MU's approach was if they didn't get everything they demanded, they were out. And even then, I think they would never be content if they thought there was a better option.

Kirk
Kirk

I agree Skillet it is a different case which is precisely the point and I would hope/think you would realize this and not fault Missouri for it -- because precisely as you have said it IS different for them.

But that is not what you said...."If you are tyring to stabalize, why try to keep a school that doesn't want to be there." So instead I take it you mean "If you are tyring to stabalize, why try to keep any school other than Texas or Oklahoma that doesn't want to be there." You only support the argument of why Missouri wants to leave -- OU and TU are only out for themselves and not it in for the greater good (surprise we all know -- but let's not be coy about it either). I don't see Michigan throwingtheir weight around Purdue or Florida over Vandy. It takes place all the time in the B12.

If OU were so content they would also be good with, and pressing for, a granting of rights beyond 6 years as has been brought up at the B12 meetings and show down by TU and OU. Not the case, they want to keep their own options open in case the landscape changes and the PAC opens up. Either of them can buy out pretty easy of a 6/5/4/3/2/1 year TV rights contract (whatever remains of the 6 years). Other schools where this is a much larger percentage of their athletic dept revenues cannot. In the meantime, the do not want the SEC and there is not a ton of other options for them so plain and simple this is what makes sense for them and they are driving for to happen.

skillet
skillet

Two major differences....

First OU wanted to leave, but when they couldn't they were content to go stay with the B12h changes. (There really isn't another option out there they are interested in.) If OU was still actively looking to change conferences, it *might* be the same situation.

Secondly is the difference in programs. OU is a cornerstone program of the conference. They a perennial national power, has multiple conference championships is an elite brand within college football. A conference can't lose arguably their top football program without signficantly damaging their products. It would be like taking a USC, Michigan, Alabama or FSU out of their conference compared to a Oregon St, Michigan St, South Carolina or Clemson.

That's why I say it *might* be the same situation. The B12 can survive as a major conference without Missouri. It is very questionable if it could be a major conference losing a school like OU.

Kirk
Kirk

Skillet let's use your same argument on other schools. The easiest would be Oklahoma. Oklahoma did the same thing (an actual university official in Boren ...versus anonymous sources at MU... was VERY vocal here). The only reason OU is not in the PAC is they got snubbed by the PAC. MU asked for a minimum 10 year grant of rights and they said no, keep it at 6 (which makes no sense unless you are only trying to do this for a short term until your options might open back up). Do you really think OU is interested in being there? Heck they have done as much as anyone to destabilize the conference yet you seem OK to keep them. Why would the B12 be interseted in keeping......OU........if you are tyring to stabalize, why try to keep a school that doesn't want to be there. ?

UofA72
UofA72

I totally agree. It's just hard to determine why. Is it because Missouri doesn't make the impact that A&M did, or if B12 wants it all settled as soon as possible? I believe it to be the latter.

Another option is that Texas controls everything B12, and A&M had the "gall" to stand up and leave. Thus all the Texas negative press. The Texas relationship with Missouri was far shorter than with A&M. The original Big 8 teams (OU a possible exception) mean nothing to Texas beyond what can be squeezed out of them

Missouri's situation today is nothing more than a foundation for a greater program. SEC money, if spent accordingly, should build a great program over time.
.

skillet
skillet

Apathetic was a poor choice of words. The difference between the situation with A&M is that losing Missouri doesn't seem to nearly the threat to the B12 that losing A&M was. The A&M defection created a lot of of emotion. Not just because it destabalized the conference, but that losing a large Texas school with the potential to be a top 10 program was a deep cut. I would compare it to their reaction when Nebraska left the B12.

Missouri doesn't seem to evoke that emotion. The feeling seems to be 'if they aren't happy, let them go...it's not like they were bringing much to the table.' It seems like finding the optimal timeline to replace them and negotiating an exit fee is more pressing than concern they were leaving. It is similar to how the B12 reacted when Colorado left.

The B12 seemed like they really wanted a way to keep A&M. But seem like they are fine letting Missouri walk and moving on.

UofA72
UofA72

My reply was to skillett's statement that the B12 was apathetic to Missouri's leaving. Apathy is not their frame of mind. Stabilization of the conference is. Making the assumption that the B12 thinks losing Mizzou is of no concern because Neinas wants closure to the defections is a real stretch. Skilletts post was about what we could read into the Neinas comments. Nothing else.

How is it that you can write very lengthy posts and the rest of us are forced into trying to make a coherent point in just a limited number of words? Are you one of the MrSEC staff?

Trackbacks

  1. rijschool haarlem…

    [...]Alabama | MrSEC.com[...]…

  2. Trackback says:

    Great

    What is the best way to search for blogs you are interested in?

  3. Trackback says:

    wow thats great

    I have a wordpress blog with a lot of pictures hosted on third party websites. I want all the pictures to be hosted in my wordpress blogs. I don’t want to manually download all pictures and replace them in the posts, i need something to do that automa…



Follow Us On:
Mobile MrSEC