If you are Texas, what looks better to you:

ACC Deal:

1. Notre Dame
2. FSU/Miami/GT
3. Clemson/UNC/Wake
4. NC State/Duke/VT
5. Louisville/UVa/Pitt
6. BC/Syracuse/FSU
7. Oklahoma
8. Texas Tech
9. Baylor
10. P12 Game
11. Chump
12. Chump

P12 Deal

1-9. Pac 12 Games
10. Chump
11. Oklahoma
12. ?

In the ACC deal, Texas will usually have 7 home games, and play in the State of Texas 8 times a year. Over a three year span, they will get to play in Florida, New York, Chicago and points in-between. The real burden of a move will be on their non-revenue sports. However, if still think if Oklahoma stays in the B12, Texas stays in the B12.

(08-20-2013 09:11 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  If you are Texas, what looks better to you:

ACC Deal:

1. Notre Dame
2. FSU/Miami/GT
3. Clemson/UNC/Wake
4. NC State/Duke/VT
5. Louisville/UVa/Pitt
6. BC/Syracuse/FSU
7. Oklahoma
8. Texas Tech
9. Baylor
10. P12 Game
11. Chump
12. Chump

P12 Deal

1-9. Pac 12 Games
10. Chump
11. Oklahoma
12. ?

In the ACC deal, Texas will usually have 7 home games, and play in the State of Texas 8 times a year. Over a three year span, they will get to play in Florida, New York, Chicago and points in-between. The real burden of a move will be on their non-revenue sports. However, if still think if Oklahoma stays in the B12, Texas stays in the B12.

You have to also consider that the Texas to the Big 10 noise is just designed to fear monger the little 7 of the Big 12 into giving them an N.D. deal to remain in the Big 12. In exchange Texas gets the right to remove all but 2 or 3 football games from the GOR and gives their permission for expansion. I seriously doubt they are really interested in the Great White North, but they are probably exploring options with the PAC, with an ACC ND deal, and with their own ND deal in the Big 12. It's only logical. Plus remember it will still be a few years before the new format is up for reconsideration and that puts them much closer to the expiration of the GOR which they could more than endure if they had 7 games on their schedule to play whomever they wished to fill DKR stadium on Saturdays.

And, Chip Brown is the Joseph Goebbels of Texas.

(08-20-2013 09:40 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-20-2013 09:11 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  If you are Texas, what looks better to you:

ACC Deal:

1. Notre Dame
2. FSU/Miami/GT
3. Clemson/UNC/Wake
4. NC State/Duke/VT
5. Louisville/UVa/Pitt
6. BC/Syracuse/FSU
7. Oklahoma
8. Texas Tech
9. Baylor
10. P12 Game
11. Chump
12. Chump

P12 Deal

1-9. Pac 12 Games
10. Chump
11. Oklahoma
12. ?

In the ACC deal, Texas will usually have 7 home games, and play in the State of Texas 8 times a year. Over a three year span, they will get to play in Florida, New York, Chicago and points in-between. The real burden of a move will be on their non-revenue sports. However, if still think if Oklahoma stays in the B12, Texas stays in the B12.

You have to also consider that the Texas to the Big 10 noise is just designed to fear monger the little 7 of the Big 12 into giving them an N.D. deal to remain in the Big 12. In exchange Texas gets the right to remove all but 2 or 3 football games from the GOR and gives their permission for expansion. I seriously doubt they are really interested in the Great White North, but they are probably exploring options with the PAC, with an ACC ND deal, and with their own ND deal in the Big 12. It's only logical. Plus remember it will still be a few years before the new format is up for reconsideration and that puts them much closer to the expiration of the GOR which they could more than endure if they had 7 games on their schedule to play whomever they wished to fill DKR stadium on Saturdays.

And, Chip Brown is the Joseph Goebbels of Texas.

Ditto...and I am glad they scared the Aggies and Tigers right into the SEC.

(08-20-2013 09:01 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(08-20-2013 08:31 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-20-2013 08:27 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I sometimes wonder if Dodds wasn't just trying to throw some Daggers Larry scotts way with his comments about going east after the PAC12 wasn't willing to negotiate over the whole LHN thing. I mean the way that the ACC bent over Backwards for ND would certainly encourage me to talk like that. "Oh you won't accept us because of the LHN, well the ACC will":nutkick:

Well, he said that in February of 2012 and Notre Dame made it's move later on in September.

Because of the way the money is distributed, the ACC did not do that much bending over.

ND is not getting a football distribution of ACC revenue, they get a basketball distribution. ND keeps their football money from NBC, the ACC keeps the money from the half of the 5 annual games that the ACC controls - some years 2, some years 3. ND does not get to play for an ACC title or to get the automatic Orange Bowl bid. ND has to play for a potential playoff spot, then they drop down into the rest of the ACC pool.

I was not trying to make a slight towards the ACC, I actually think that if you could slip Larry Scott some truth serum he would say that they absolutely botched the Texahoma 4 deal and if he could do it over they would be in the PAC12 now. Or i guess it would be PAC16

(08-20-2013 10:53 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(08-20-2013 09:01 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(08-20-2013 08:31 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-20-2013 08:27 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I sometimes wonder if Dodds wasn't just trying to throw some Daggers Larry scotts way with his comments about going east after the PAC12 wasn't willing to negotiate over the whole LHN thing. I mean the way that the ACC bent over Backwards for ND would certainly encourage me to talk like that. "Oh you won't accept us because of the LHN, well the ACC will":nutkick:

Well, he said that in February of 2012 and Notre Dame made it's move later on in September.

Because of the way the money is distributed, the ACC did not do that much bending over.

ND is not getting a football distribution of ACC revenue, they get a basketball distribution. ND keeps their football money from NBC, the ACC keeps the money from the half of the 5 annual games that the ACC controls - some years 2, some years 3. ND does not get to play for an ACC title or to get the automatic Orange Bowl bid. ND has to play for a potential playoff spot, then they drop down into the rest of the ACC pool.

I was not trying to make a slight towards the ACC, I actually think that if you could slip Larry Scott some truth serum he would say that they absolutely botched the Texahoma 4 deal and if he could do it over they would be in the PAC12 now. Or i guess it would be PAC16

The PAC would have a hard time getting to a meaningful 16 without Texas. Even though Scott botched his first effort, it wouldn't surprise me if he hasn't developed scenarios to dangle in front of Texas to get Dodds to reconsider about not going west.
JR is correct in that there are several years before this thing plays out and there are some that are just jockeying for position to get ready for the home stretch.

(08-20-2013 10:53 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(08-20-2013 09:01 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(08-20-2013 08:31 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-20-2013 08:27 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I sometimes wonder if Dodds wasn't just trying to throw some Daggers Larry scotts way with his comments about going east after the PAC12 wasn't willing to negotiate over the whole LHN thing. I mean the way that the ACC bent over Backwards for ND would certainly encourage me to talk like that. "Oh you won't accept us because of the LHN, well the ACC will":nutkick:

Well, he said that in February of 2012 and Notre Dame made it's move later on in September.

Because of the way the money is distributed, the ACC did not do that much bending over.

ND is not getting a football distribution of ACC revenue, they get a basketball distribution. ND keeps their football money from NBC, the ACC keeps the money from the half of the 5 annual games that the ACC controls - some years 2, some years 3. ND does not get to play for an ACC title or to get the automatic Orange Bowl bid. ND has to play for a potential playoff spot, then they drop down into the rest of the ACC pool.

I was not trying to make a slight towards the ACC, I actually think that if you could slip Larry Scott some truth serum he would say that they absolutely botched the Texahoma 4 deal and if he could do it over they would be in the PAC12 now. Or i guess it would be PAC16

Larry Scott could only do what Stanford, Cal, USC and UCLA let him. No those four schools would have accepted the LHN. Scott knew the deal was DOA as soon as the Longhorns requested the exemption.

(08-20-2013 09:40 PM)JRsec Wrote:  You have to also consider that the Texas to the Big 10 noise is just designed to fear monger the little 7 of the Big 12 into giving them an N.D. deal to remain in the Big 12. In exchange Texas gets the right to remove all but 2 or 3 football games from the GOR and gives their permission for expansion.

If this is Texas' game, Kansas is gone.

(08-21-2013 07:34 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(08-20-2013 09:40 PM)JRsec Wrote:  You have to also consider that the Texas to the Big 10 noise is just designed to fear monger the little 7 of the Big 12 into giving them an N.D. deal to remain in the Big 12. In exchange Texas gets the right to remove all but 2 or 3 football games from the GOR and gives their permission for expansion.

If this is Texas' game, Kansas is gone.

And where do you think they will go? PAC, B1G or ACC?

(08-21-2013 10:07 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-21-2013 07:34 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(08-20-2013 09:40 PM)JRsec Wrote:  You have to also consider that the Texas to the Big 10 noise is just designed to fear monger the little 7 of the Big 12 into giving them an N.D. deal to remain in the Big 12. In exchange Texas gets the right to remove all but 2 or 3 football games from the GOR and gives their permission for expansion.

If this is Texas' game, Kansas is gone.

And where do you think they will go? PAC, B1G or ACC?

I think the framework's been there for the B1G. The previous interest, the studies, the supposed support (more than Gee)...

...didn't KU also forgo cashing in Nebraska and Colorado's buyout share, deferring it? If they did, that's a gesture I'm sure UNL and UC won't forget.

(08-21-2013 10:07 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-21-2013 07:34 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(08-20-2013 09:40 PM)JRsec Wrote:  You have to also consider that the Texas to the Big 10 noise is just designed to fear monger the little 7 of the Big 12 into giving them an N.D. deal to remain in the Big 12. In exchange Texas gets the right to remove all but 2 or 3 football games from the GOR and gives their permission for expansion.

If this is Texas' game, Kansas is gone.

And where do you think they will go? PAC, B1G or ACC?

The B1G....thats where they belong.

(08-21-2013 01:44 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-21-2013 10:07 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-21-2013 07:34 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(08-20-2013 09:40 PM)JRsec Wrote:  You have to also consider that the Texas to the Big 10 noise is just designed to fear monger the little 7 of the Big 12 into giving them an N.D. deal to remain in the Big 12. In exchange Texas gets the right to remove all but 2 or 3 football games from the GOR and gives their permission for expansion.

If this is Texas' game, Kansas is gone.

And where do you think they will go? PAC, B1G or ACC?

The B1G....thats where they belong.

If that's the case......who is #16?

(08-22-2013 07:15 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-21-2013 01:44 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-21-2013 10:07 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-21-2013 07:34 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(08-20-2013 09:40 PM)JRsec Wrote:  You have to also consider that the Texas to the Big 10 noise is just designed to fear monger the little 7 of the Big 12 into giving them an N.D. deal to remain in the Big 12. In exchange Texas gets the right to remove all but 2 or 3 football games from the GOR and gives their permission for expansion.

If this is Texas' game, Kansas is gone.

And where do you think they will go? PAC, B1G or ACC?

The B1G....thats where they belong.

If that's the case......who is #16?

Someone who Nebraska and Kansas wouldn't hate from past experience. I think that rules out Oklahoma.

(08-22-2013 04:38 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(08-22-2013 07:15 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-21-2013 01:44 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-21-2013 10:07 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-21-2013 07:34 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  If this is Texas' game, Kansas is gone.

And where do you think they will go? PAC, B1G or ACC?

The B1G....thats where they belong.

If that's the case......who is #16?

Someone who Nebraska and Kansas wouldn't hate from past experience. I think that rules out Oklahoma.

If the Big 12 does disolve and every conference has to take a "stinker"to insure a safe landing spot for 8-9 Big 12 schools, I could imagine the B1G might take Iowa State....at least they are an AAU school.

(08-22-2013 04:38 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  Someone who Nebraska and Kansas wouldn't hate from past experience. I think that rules out Oklahoma.

No it doesn't. We were the core of the Big 8 and get along very well.

(08-22-2013 05:14 PM)PlayBall! Wrote:  

(08-22-2013 04:38 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  Someone who Nebraska and Kansas wouldn't hate from past experience. I think that rules out Oklahoma.

No it doesn't. We were the core of the Big 8 and get along very well.

Yeah, I'm confused on how Nebraska would hate to have a revisited rivalry with Oklahoma after the creation of the Big 12 and them being in two opposing divisions destroyed it. In fact I think Huskers would rejoice about having that rivalry back so that they could stop having us Hawkeyes pushed upon them.

I really don't see how Kansas would have a problem with Oklahoma.

Posted on another thread but it seems more appropriate here:

"Actually the worst travel situation for Texas-based athletes is the B1G. Winter weather combined with distant/tiny airports creates the worst travel issues for Texas athletes. UT President Bill Powers mentioned this at several meetings of UT alumni associations in Texas. Lubbock has a large, modern international airport only 15 minutes from campus that all but a couple B1G schools would kill for. And with the rust-belt facing massive bankruptcy issues there is zero chance that access to B1G campuses will improve during the next millennium. Face it, the B1G will continue to water-down its product until a la carte programming destroys the B1G's economic model. At that point the B1G will go the way of the rust belt and become poor.

Southern and Southwestern politicians are already working to destroy the financial advantage that the CIC affords B1G schools since your states are becoming a financial liability on the American people. The B1G got rich because the Northern-Midwest was the backbone of the U.S. economy for the past 100 years. Now the B1G states are a burden on the country and taxpayers from boom states will expect their dollars to stay local. The "poor south" is about to become the "poor north". Lol!"

Oh, and remember that with every census the B1G states lose representatives in the legislature while southern states add representatives. The CIC is about to be challenged like never before. And with massive oil/oil-shale money flooding Texas, B1G schools should prepare to lose many tenured professors and even entire programs. It's fun to watch the worm turn! Lol!

(08-22-2013 09:28 PM)FreshPrinceOfDarkness Wrote:  Oh, and remember that with every census the B1G states lose representatives in the legislature while southern states add representatives. The CIC is about to be challenged like never before. And with massive oil/oil-shale money flooding Texas, B1G schools should prepare to lose many tenured professors and even entire programs. It's fun to watch the worm turn! Lol!

Oh hey look, you typed Lol at the end of another post. Yeah, and I saw you using the word "savvy" too.

The image of you that comes to mind now is that of a parrot.

I split out a number of Cuse-UConn posts into another thread. You can continue arguing that over there.

When TV goes full a la carte I will not be buying the Big Ten Network.