Page 72 of 101 FirstFirst ... 2262707172737482 ... LastLast
Results 1,421 to 1,440 of 2016
  1. #1421
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by Newton_14 View Post
    Good post OPK. As for who started this, if my memory is correct it was the Big 10 commish (Delaney?) that had the vision of the mega-conferences and started pushing the landscape in this direction. I could be wrong, and would appreciate anyone weighing in who knows more on the subject. I just recall reading an article a couple of years ago discussing Delaney and his "vision". When A-Tex started a thread on this last year I thought he was nuts and this would never come to fruition, but I read the article which backed up what A-Tex was putting out there in his thread.

    So did Texas really start this, was it Delaney, or a combination of several parties?
    Here is the best bias free timeline I can provide. May be some minor cogs forgotten, and may be off by a month or two in some spots, others are actions that overlap a bit, but I think most of the below is fairly straight forward.

    2009-2010:
    - Dec 2009 - Delaney talks about expanding, mentions subelt, etc.
    - Shortly after that, MIzzou's governor made public statements about wanting to be in the Big 10
    - May/June 2010 Big Ten starts courting Nebraska as 12th team
    - Texas (and other Big XII schools) start talking to Big Ten abd Pac 10
    - Six Big XII schools come within a day of going to PAC 10
    - Texas A&M balks at Pac 10 move and potentially has an SEC offer it prefers.
    - Texas, Texas A&M, OU, etc. agree to save the Big XII with a promise of a new TV contract, which gets hammered out some time later.
    - Colorado (and eventually Utah) go to Pac 10.
    - New Big XII TV deal reached. Schools share second tier rights under Fox contract, but first tier rights under ESPN contracts are 75% shared and 25% based on appearances --- hence, unequal revenue sharing.

    2011:
    - Jan/Feb - Texas signs contract with ESPN and IMG for Longhorn Network. A deal that will guarantee Texas $12MM over 20 years for its third tier rights (games and events not taken under the Fox and ESPN contracts).
    - June - Big XII Athletic Directors agree to have equal revenue sharing across first and second tiers, but deal must be approved by the presidents. (this is eventually fully approved in October)
    - June/July - ESPN announces (1) that it plans to air Texas high school games and (2) that it will put two UT games on LHN, including a Big XII game. The second game was something that rest of Big XII had not anticipated, and the airing of high school games caused the obvious concerns.
    - Late July - Discussions of A&M to SEC began to foment.
    - August - ESPN, at UT's request, agrees not to air high school games pending NCAA ruling. NCAA winds up saying it's not allowed. ESPN announces plans to show highlights of high school games on LHN. NCAA rules that is not allowed as well.
    - Late August/September - A&M and SEC agree that A&M would go to SEC. I won't get into all the delays and stuff that dragged this out a few weeks. Once the invite and acceptance happened, it was an inevitability - regardless of how many, including me, liked to pretend it wasn't at the time.
    - September - ACC invites Pitt and Syracuse
    - September - OU's president talks to press about seeking alternative to Big XII, seeks invite from Pac 12. UT involved in negotiations with Pac XII, but at no time sought official invite to Pac 12.
    - September - Pac 12 declines to invite OU and OSU. Conventional wisdom is that UT wouldn't budge on network, and Pac 12 didn't want OU/OSU without UT. But most simply put, Pac 12 decided it didn't want to invite anyone at this time.
    - October - Mizzou explores options -- specifically SEC, and gets an invite to SEC.
    - Ocotber - Big XII invites TCU and WVU to replace A&M and Mizzou.

    I am sure there are many motiviations, angles, etc. that can be debated/disagreed in each of these steps, but I believe this fairly sets out what happened over the course of the last 2 years, with as little guess at motivation as possible. Each school is looking out for its best interest, that's obvious. When words like "treachery" are thrown about, though, I giggle a little bit, because the people involved here are generally all good, really smart people (yes, even the Aggie administrators) trying to do what is best for their schools . There were no perfect actors here, and while I personally believed A&M took an unneeded scorched earth policy in leaving the conference, that certainly is just my opinion, although I believe it is a fairly informed one.

  2. #1422
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    New York, NY
    Quote Originally Posted by Des Esseintes View Post
    See, this is where I get lost. What does it mean that Texas pushed its own agenda? Let's try an exercise here.

    "While I agree that villains can be tough to distinguish, I do not believe it's difficult to see that A&M decided to push their[sic] own agenda, and continued to push that agenda in the face of stiff resistance, no matter what the consequences."

    Or how about:

    "While I agree that villains can be tough to distinguish, I do not believe it's difficult to see that Nebraska decided to push their[sic] own agenda, and continued to push that agenda in the face of stiff resistance, no matter what the consequences."

    Is either of these statements any more or less defensible than your original one? Maybe! I don't see how it's so obvious, though. What schools in this fiasco lacked agendas? What schools failed to pursue those agendas? I'm more than willing to hear an argument for why one school is a diablo and another one is not. I like reading those posts. But I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for some details.
    I have followed this thread more or less for the past six months or maybe more. Mostly because I find the whole conference realignment thing to be extremely interesting from a strategic perspective.

    I agree with Des Esseintes here and am confused about the pointed posts against UT and, to a lesser degree, A-Tex. I have found A-Tex to be generally informative and relatively unbiased in his reporting of conference realignment especially from a Big XII moves and motives perspective (at least as unbiased as one could ask a fan with a vested interest to be). I just don't see the dramatically offensive error in Texas' ways. And I'll even admit, I have this preconception that people from Texas think their state is the center of the universe. Be it right or wrong, I do have that preconception.

    And I still fail to see how Texas was offensively wrong in this. Aside from the initial LHN stuff, which it seems has generally come down to very reasonable terms at this point, did they really do much wrong? Maybe I have missed or forgotten some key points over the months I have followed this. If so, I apologize. But UT is a football power player, so should they not use that power? Would we not want Duke to throw around it's weight if this realignment driver was basketball? Again, I ask: if basketball was the driver should Duke agree to try to save a troubled conference to its own detriment? Similarly, is it Notre Dame's responsibility to try to save the Big East by joining as a football member?

    At least that's how I see this thing. If Duke had a sports network mainly devoted to basketball that schools like BC, Miami, or Clemson (for example) didn't have the power or national fanbase to match, would we not be heralding Duke as innovative, forward-thinking, and smart? If other schools in our conference put up a fight, would we not as a collective fanbase say that it's unfair for them to butt into our business and that we are just looking out for ourselves? And that years of hard work and building a program up has given us this ability?

    Getting away from the network concept, what else did UT do wrong? I just don't see it. They looked around at other (stronger) conferences because they could? I mean, fine. Anyone can find fault with this if they choose and I wouldn't really say/post a word. But the direct shots at A-Tex and downright hatred toward Texas seems unwarranted and over the top to me, at least without some facts or some background color so we can understand and forward the discussion.

    Shake your head, fine. Wish for the old days, sure. Express strong disagreement and disapproval...completely understandable from some viewpoints. But I'm not seeing the vehement disgust being thrown at UT, nor their appalling and offensive behavior.

    - Chillin

  3. #1423
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by ChillinDuke View Post
    Similarly, is it Notre Dame's responsibility to try to save the Big East by joining as a football member?
    Geno Ariemma would say "yes" to that. Although I disagree.

    Excellent post, Chillin'. As I said above, I wish Texas had not flexed its financial muscle. But it did, and it has the right to do so. Don't hate the playa', hate the game I guess.

    I appreciate A-Tex's posts because (s)he follows this much more closely than I do and the comments posted are very informative. They are certainly from a pro-UT perspective and (like all of us) that perspective needs to be considered when weighting the opinions (as opposed to facts) stated.

    Now, the whole Mack Brown thing, I'm just gonna have to agree to disagree with the Longhorn faithful. But, given the same filter I referenced above, I would hope any discerning UT fan would understand. Tar Heel taint doesn't wash out.

    Good luck to both schools, and Go to Hell Carolina!!!

    -- OPK

  4. #1424

    Have to agree

    Have to agree with ChillinDuke here. When this first started I felt Texas was to blame. But if you read it they were simply one of the players. A-Tex has been very informative and quite objective considering his obvious affinity for Texas.

    I do have to question the comment about Swofford saving the conference by being proactive. He was proactive because he thought all of the conferences would move to 16 teams, which none have. When it happened it seemed like a strong move, but as of right now we are one of only 2 conferences with 14 teams...I just think we've grown so big we're ripe for the picking down the road. But I guess we'll take it one turn at a time. Definitely better than the Big East!

    Were I in charge conferences would be limited to 8 teams, perhaps a certain geographic distance (with obvious concessions for schools such as Hawaii), and a playoff system would be instituted. How's that for a utopian idea, lol.

  5. #1425
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    California
    The Big East is adding Boise St. (football only), San Diego State (football only), UCF (all sports), Houston (all sports), and SMU (all sports).

    http://espn.go.com/college-sports/st...ing-conference

    Navy will supposedly join too (football only) upon the resolution of some "loose ends."

  6. #1426
    Quote Originally Posted by El_Diablo View Post
    The Big East is adding Boise St. (football only), San Diego State (football only), UCF (all sports), Houston (all sports), and SMU (all sports).
    "The Big East. Hey, everyone's still east of Reno."

  7. #1427
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by El_Diablo View Post
    The Big East is adding Boise St. (football only), San Diego State (football only), UCF (all sports), Houston (all sports), and SMU (all sports).

    http://espn.go.com/college-sports/st...ing-conference

    Navy will supposedly join too (football only) upon the resolution of some "loose ends."
    Seems odd from from the Big East perspective, but I guess they had to add SOMEbody to remain a conference. I do have to wonder if Boise State will be enough to keep their automatic BCS bid intact.

  8. #1428
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by hurleyfor3 View Post
    "The Big East. Hey, everyone's still east of Reno."
    They should just change their name to "Big Country"

  9. #1429
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    They should just change their name to "Big Country"
    I'm guessing not many San Diego State students make the 48 hour drive to watch their football team play at UConn.

  10. #1430
    Quote Originally Posted by DallasDevil View Post
    I'm guessing not many San Diego State students make the 48 hour drive to watch their football team play at UConn.
    Although there is a certain elegance to having Steve Fisher and Jim Calhoun in the same conference.

  11. #1431
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by hurleyfor3 View Post
    Although there is a certain elegance to having Steve Fisher and Jim Calhoun in the same conference.
    Though to be fair, only San Diego State football will be in the Big East. It looks like San Diego State basketball may be headed to the Big West.

  12. #1432
    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    Though to be fair, only San Diego State football will be in the Big East. It looks like San Diego State basketball may be headed to the Big West.
    They should go after OK State and call the conference Big Country.

  13. #1433
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    Quote Originally Posted by El_Diablo View Post
    The Big East is adding Boise St. (football only), San Diego State (football only), UCF (all sports), Houston (all sports), and SMU (all sports).

    http://espn.go.com/college-sports/st...ing-conference

    Navy will supposedly join too (football only) upon the resolution of some "loose ends."
    There's your new conference name: "Loose Ends."

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  14. #1434
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by throatybeard View Post
    There's your new conference name: "Loose Ends."
    LOL. Maybe "Every Which Way But Loose." Or "Screws Loose."




    "Big Diaspora?"



    "Curse You, Horace Greeley?"


    "You still don't deserve a BCS bid?"

  15. #1435
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    "Big Diaspora?"
    Hysterical!!!

    Big Diaspora and Loose Ends are my favorite new names. I think I want to go with Big diaspora because it keeps the "Big" part of the name to make it somewhat recognizable.

    -Jason
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  16. #1436
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    My favorite line from one of the articles referenced on the front page.
    Essentially, the Big East has just swapped out Jim Boeheim for Donnie Jones. Bob Huggins for Matt Doherty. Jamie Dixon for James Dickey! No slight on the men of Conference USA, but that's a serious, serious downgrade in coach and program.
    http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/e...83066/33730466
    Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."

  17. #1437
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC area
    Some reports of Memphis to the Big East.

    -jk

  18. #1438
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Northern VA
    Quote Originally Posted by -jk View Post
    Some reports of Memphis to the Big East.

    -jk
    Hey great - Duke gets to beat a Big East football school next year!!
    (That's a pretty quick migration, by 2013.)


  19. #1439
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by -jk View Post
    Some reports of Memphis to the Big East.

    -jk
    Press conferences tomorrow.

    That *was* fast.

  20. #1440
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    The BE is so ridiculous that I now feel that the ACC should take UConn and Rutgers out of pity. I know that, financially speaking, the ACC should wait until it is time to renegotiate the next TV contract, but really, they don't deserve this.

Similar Threads

  1. Baseball Realignment
    By SoCalDukeFan in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 07-06-2011, 11:36 PM
  2. Big East Realignment
    By johnb in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 04-23-2011, 09:29 PM
  3. The Kyrie Irving Toe Vigil
    By diveonthefloor in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 1507
    Last Post: 02-05-2011, 06:25 PM
  4. NCAA Conference Realignment
    By A-Tex Devil in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 03-04-2010, 05:16 PM
  5. Sentinel: 5 Years After Realignment: Are Schools Better Off?
    By gotham devil in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-04-2008, 11:28 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •