The two schools were accepted in fall 2011. The custom for football typically was for schools announcing they were leaving a conference between July 1 and June 30 of what I'll call "Year 1," they agreed to play out the remainder of Year 1 in the conference they're leaving, play all of Year 2 in the conference they're leaving, and join the new conference the next July 1 (start of Year 3).

This is what Syracuse and Pitt did. It's what Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah did. It's what Maryland, Rugers, and Louisville did. They all joined in "Year 3."

But either or both of the SEC's and the joining schools' insistence on joining the very next school year seemed unnecessary, and caused a cascade of not so pretty events. It forced the Big 12 to scramble to get TCU and WVU to join right away. It led to an ugly court battle between WVU and the Big East. It forced the Big East to rush in Temple to play football in fall 2012, not making the invitation until early 2012.

All these transactions could have occurred more amicably and smoothly if A&M and Missouri had postponed joining the SEC until 2013.

I may be wrong but at the time the Big 12 was expected to break apart. Wasn't the bulk of the remaining schools invited to the PAC 10? A&M and Missouri also probably wanted to lock down there spots before a better option came around. The SEC probably would have preferred Texas over A&M.

(07-22-2020 01:23 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  The two schools were accepted in fall 2011. The custom for football typically was for schools announcing they were leaving a conference between July 1 and June 30 of what I'll call "Year 1," they agreed to play out the remainder of Year 1 in the conference they're leaving, play all of Year 2 in the conference they're leaving, and join the new conference the next July 1 (start of Year 3).

This is what Syracuse and Pitt did. It's what Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah did. It's what Maryland, Rugers, and Louisville did. They all joined in "Year 3."

But either or both of the SEC's and the joining schools' insistence on joining the very next school year seemed unnecessary, and caused a cascade of not so pretty events. It forced the Big 12 to scramble to get TCU and WVU to join right away. It led to an ugly court battle between WVU and the Big East. It forced the Big East to rush in Temple to play football in fall 2012, not making the invitation until early 2012.
[/url]
All these transactions could have occurred more amicably and smoothly if A&M and Missouri had postponed joining the SEC until 2013.

It seems to have been driven by Texas A&M. A&M wanted to get the hell out of the Big 12 and get the hell away from Bevo.

From google:
August 11. SEC declines to invite Texas A&M

August 29. Texas A&M notifies Big 12 of withdrawal

Sept 7. SEC invites A&M, provided there are no legal hurdles

Keep scrolling down, you'll find in this article the bit that the invitation was for the 2012-13 school year

I think it took the SEC a couple of weeks after that to 100% confirm that a 13-member conference wasn't workable, even for one year, because of the CCG rules. So the SEC had to take #14 which was Missouri, and the Big 12 had to have TCU (easy) and WVU (not so easy) for 2012-13.

Why Texas A&M was on fire to be out of the Big 12 in 12 months and not 24 months? That I can't answer so much.

(07-22-2020 02:27 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-22-2020 01:23 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  The two schools were accepted in fall 2011. The custom for football typically was for schools announcing they were leaving a conference between July 1 and June 30 of what I'll call "Year 1," they agreed to play out the remainder of Year 1 in the conference they're leaving, play all of Year 2 in the conference they're leaving, and join the new conference the next July 1 (start of Year 3).

This is what Syracuse and Pitt did. It's what Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah did. It's what Maryland, Rugers, and Louisville did. They all joined in "Year 3."

But either or both of the SEC's and the joining schools' insistence on joining the very next school year seemed unnecessary, and caused a cascade of not so pretty events. It forced the Big 12 to scramble to get TCU and WVU to join right away. It led to an ugly court battle between WVU and the Big East. It forced the Big East to rush in Temple to play football in fall 2012, not making the invitation until early 2012.
[/url]
All these transactions could have occurred more amicably and smoothly if A&M and Missouri had postponed joining the SEC until 2013.

It seems to have been driven by Texas A&M. A&M wanted to get the hell out of the Big 12 and get the hell away from Bevo.

From google:
August 11. SEC declines to invite Texas A&M

August 29. Texas A&M notifies Big 12 of withdrawal

Sept 7. SEC invites A&M, provided there are no legal hurdles

Keep scrolling down, you'll find in this article the bit that the invitation was for the 2012-13 school year

I think it took the SEC a couple of weeks after that to 100% confirm that a 13-member conference wasn't workable, even for one year, because of the CCG rules. So the SEC had to take #14 which was Missouri, and the Big 12 had to have TCU (easy) and WVU (not so easy) for 2012-13.

Why Texas A&M was on fire to be out of the Big 12 in 12 months and not 24 months? That I can't answer so much.

You are all way overthinking this. The Aggies knew as did the Tigers that a GOR would be forthcoming in the wake of the departures of Colorado and Nebraska and that exit fees would go up. The rule of thumb for exist fees then (and still is) was 1 year's full conference media revenue. So you give notice and finish that fiscal year, and then begin playing in the next conference leaving one full year's media revenue behind as an exit fee.

You have GOR come about and two things become problematic. 1. If you don't agree to the GOR which has to be unanimous you keep the schools wanting it from getting it. 2. If you do sign it it's going to cost you a helluva lot more to get out of it. So by departing as they did the Aggies and Missouri got out for 1 year's media revenue left behind to the Big 12 and their departure then permitted the remaining schools to get a GOR signed and in force so they could save their conference home.

The two years that were given were for mostly independent schools like Florida State, South Carolina, Georgia Tech, and others who used the two years to make scheduling changes in a timely enough manner as not to lose revenue from buying out games after deadlines for making changes had passed.

Maryland didn't stick around for 2 years either.

(07-22-2020 02:27 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-22-2020 01:23 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  The two schools were accepted in fall 2011. The custom for football typically was for schools announcing they were leaving a conference between July 1 and June 30 of what I'll call "Year 1," they agreed to play out the remainder of Year 1 in the conference they're leaving, play all of Year 2 in the conference they're leaving, and join the new conference the next July 1 (start of Year 3).

This is what Syracuse and Pitt did. It's what Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah did. It's what Maryland, Rugers, and Louisville did. They all joined in "Year 3."

But either or both of the SEC's and the joining schools' insistence on joining the very next school year seemed unnecessary, and caused a cascade of not so pretty events. It forced the Big 12 to scramble to get TCU and WVU to join right away. It led to an ugly court battle between WVU and the Big East. It forced the Big East to rush in Temple to play football in fall 2012, not making the invitation until early 2012.
[/url]
All these transactions could have occurred more amicably and smoothly if A&M and Missouri had postponed joining the SEC until 2013.

It seems to have been driven by Texas A&M. A&M wanted to get the hell out of the Big 12 and get the hell away from Bevo.

From google:
August 11. SEC declines to invite Texas A&M

August 29. Texas A&M notifies Big 12 of withdrawal

Sept 7. SEC invites A&M, provided there are no legal hurdles

Keep scrolling down, you'll find in this article the bit that the invitation was for the 2012-13 school year

I think it took the SEC a couple of weeks after that to 100% confirm that a 13-member conference wasn't workable, even for one year, because of the CCG rules. So the SEC had to take #14 which was Missouri, and the Big 12 had to have TCU (easy) and WVU (not so easy) for 2012-13.

Why Texas A&M was on fire to be out of the Big 12 in 12 months and not 24 months? That I can't answer so much.

TAMU supporters - not all, but most - had been itching to get out from under Bevo's shadow for years, it was a longstanding thing, much as at Maryland, there was longstanding dissatisfaction based on a belief that the ACC was run for the benefit of the North Carolina schools. But as is usually the case, these things tend to just simmer without effect, unless a triggering event occurs.

The triggering event of course was Nebraska and Colorado bolting the year before, combined with the PAC attempted raid on the Big 12 earlier that year. Both created a massive sense of instability in the conference. On the other hand, the neighboring SEC - always TAMU's desired move-to location based on geography, culture, and historical ties with SEC members Arkansas and LSU - was at its peak of power and stability, dominating football and bringing in the most money.

So when you're in X and have wanted to move to Y for a while, and suddenly X seems to be failing while Y is stronger than ever, then you take action to make it happen.

And the SEC was equally eager to pick up a perceived gem in TAMU, it only declined to invite them in August so as to avoid a charge of tampering. But surely TAMU got the message that the door was wide open if they took the initiative to leave the Big 12.

And more generally, let's face it - once a school takes a bid to leave, neither they nor their jilted conference really want them to hang around for the full 24 months or 27 months or whatever the exit procedures call for. Both would rather get it over with quickly, so usually negotiations are initiated to expedite the departure.

It's kind of like at an employer where by contract you are required to give a month's notice - you give the notice and the next day the boss gives you your check for that month and tells you to clear out your desk and turn in your keys.

(07-22-2020 03:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-22-2020 02:27 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-22-2020 01:23 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  The two schools were accepted in fall 2011. The custom for football typically was for schools announcing they were leaving a conference between July 1 and June 30 of what I'll call "Year 1," they agreed to play out the remainder of Year 1 in the conference they're leaving, play all of Year 2 in the conference they're leaving, and join the new conference the next July 1 (start of Year 3).

This is what Syracuse and Pitt did. It's what Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah did. It's what Maryland, Rugers, and Louisville did. They all joined in "Year 3."

But either or both of the SEC's and the joining schools' insistence on joining the very next school year seemed unnecessary, and caused a cascade of not so pretty events. It forced the Big 12 to scramble to get TCU and WVU to join right away. It led to an ugly court battle between WVU and the Big East. It forced the Big East to rush in Temple to play football in fall 2012, not making the invitation until early 2012.
[/url]
All these transactions could have occurred more amicably and smoothly if A&M and Missouri had postponed joining the SEC until 2013.

It seems to have been driven by Texas A&M. A&M wanted to get the hell out of the Big 12 and get the hell away from Bevo.

From google:
August 11. SEC declines to invite Texas A&M

August 29. Texas A&M notifies Big 12 of withdrawal

Sept 7. SEC invites A&M, provided there are no legal hurdles

Keep scrolling down, you'll find in this article the bit that the invitation was for the 2012-13 school year

I think it took the SEC a couple of weeks after that to 100% confirm that a 13-member conference wasn't workable, even for one year, because of the CCG rules. So the SEC had to take #14 which was Missouri, and the Big 12 had to have TCU (easy) and WVU (not so easy) for 2012-13.

Why Texas A&M was on fire to be out of the Big 12 in 12 months and not 24 months? That I can't answer so much.

You are all way overthinking this. The Aggies knew as did the Tigers that a GOR would be forthcoming in the wake of the departures of Colorado and Nebraska and that exit fees would go up. The rule of thumb for exist fees then (and still is) was 1 year's full conference media revenue. So you give notice and finish that fiscal year, and then begin playing in the next conference leaving one full year's media revenue behind as an exit fee.

You have GOR come about and two things become problematic. 1. If you don't agree to the GOR which has to be unanimous you keep the schools wanting it from getting it. 2. If you do sign it it's going to cost you a helluva lot more to get out of it. So by departing as they did the Aggies and Missouri got out for 1 year's media revenue left behind to the Big 12 and their departure then permitted the remaining schools to get a GOR signed and in force so they could save their conference home.

The two years that were given were for mostly independent schools like Florida State, South Carolina, Georgia Tech, and others who used the two years to make scheduling changes in a timely enough manner as not to lose revenue from buying out games after deadlines for making changes had passed.

Maryland didn't stick around for 2 years either.

Maryland announced they were leaving in late 2012. They didn't join the Big Ten until July 1, 2014, more than a year and a half later. Whereas A&M announced they were leaving in September 2011 and joined the SEC on July 1, 2012, less than a year later.

(07-22-2020 03:30 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  

(07-22-2020 03:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-22-2020 02:27 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-22-2020 01:23 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  The two schools were accepted in fall 2011. The custom for football typically was for schools announcing they were leaving a conference between July 1 and June 30 of what I'll call "Year 1," they agreed to play out the remainder of Year 1 in the conference they're leaving, play all of Year 2 in the conference they're leaving, and join the new conference the next July 1 (start of Year 3).

This is what Syracuse and Pitt did. It's what Colorado, Nebraska, and Utah did. It's what Maryland, Rugers, and Louisville did. They all joined in "Year 3."

But either or both of the SEC's and the joining schools' insistence on joining the very next school year seemed unnecessary, and caused a cascade of not so pretty events. It forced the Big 12 to scramble to get TCU and WVU to join right away. It led to an ugly court battle between WVU and the Big East. It forced the Big East to rush in Temple to play football in fall 2012, not making the invitation until early 2012.
[/url]
All these transactions could have occurred more amicably and smoothly if A&M and Missouri had postponed joining the SEC until 2013.

It seems to have been driven by Texas A&M. A&M wanted to get the hell out of the Big 12 and get the hell away from Bevo.

From google:
August 11. SEC declines to invite Texas A&M

August 29. Texas A&M notifies Big 12 of withdrawal

Sept 7. SEC invites A&M, provided there are no legal hurdles

Keep scrolling down, you'll find in this article the bit that the invitation was for the 2012-13 school year

I think it took the SEC a couple of weeks after that to 100% confirm that a 13-member conference wasn't workable, even for one year, because of the CCG rules. So the SEC had to take #14 which was Missouri, and the Big 12 had to have TCU (easy) and WVU (not so easy) for 2012-13.

Why Texas A&M was on fire to be out of the Big 12 in 12 months and not 24 months? That I can't answer so much.

You are all way overthinking this. The Aggies knew as did the Tigers that a GOR would be forthcoming in the wake of the departures of Colorado and Nebraska and that exit fees would go up. The rule of thumb for exist fees then (and still is) was 1 year's full conference media revenue. So you give notice and finish that fiscal year, and then begin playing in the next conference leaving one full year's media revenue behind as an exit fee.

You have GOR come about and two things become problematic. 1. If you don't agree to the GOR which has to be unanimous you keep the schools wanting it from getting it. 2. If you do sign it it's going to cost you a helluva lot more to get out of it. So by departing as they did the Aggies and Missouri got out for 1 year's media revenue left behind to the Big 12 and their departure then permitted the remaining schools to get a GOR signed and in force so they could save their conference home.

The two years that were given were for mostly independent schools like Florida State, South Carolina, Georgia Tech, and others who used the two years to make scheduling changes in a timely enough manner as not to lose revenue from buying out games after deadlines for making changes had passed.

Maryland didn't stick around for 2 years either.

Maryland announced they were leaving in late 2012. They didn't join the Big Ten until July 1, 2014, more than a year and a half later. Whereas A&M announced they were leaving in September 2011 and joined the SEC on July 1, 2012, less than a year later.

They both finished 1 full fiscal sports season, which generally ends after the completion of baseball. End of story.

(07-22-2020 03:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  You are all way overthinking this. The Aggies knew as did the Tigers that a GOR would be forthcoming in the wake of the departures of Colorado and Nebraska and that exit fees would go up.

I don't think that's well supported. Maybe a GOR was a possibility. On the other hand, PAC-16 or B16 was also a possibility. I don't think the answer to "why did A&M insist on being out on July 1, 2012" is "because the Grant-of-Rights was a-comin'."

Quote:You have GOR come about and two things become problematic. 1. If you don't agree to the GOR which has to be unanimous you keep the schools wanting it from getting it.

That's their problem, not yours? The Big 12 grant-of-rights was signed finally in September 2012, after being announced in MArch. Missouri and A&M were still Big 12 members (on their way out, but still members). They just--didn't sign it.

Quote:The two years that were given were for mostly independent schools like Florida State, South Carolina, Georgia Tech, and others who used the two years to make scheduling changes in a timely enough manner as not to lose revenue from buying out games after deadlines for making changes had passed.

Maryland didn't stick around for 2 years either.

Nope. Maryland announced their Big 10 move in November 2012, played in the ACC for 2012-13 AND 2013-14. Same with Rutgers from Big East to Big 10, same with Syracuse and Pitt to the ACC, (announced Sept 2011, effective July 2013), UCF, SMU, Houston, Memphis from CUSA to the Big EAst (announced 2011-12, effective July 2013).

It's the schools that move with less than 12 months notice that are the exceptions. A&M and Missouri to the SEC, West Virginia to the Big 12, Nebraska to the Big 10, Colorado to the Big 12.

Most conferences have a 12-month waiting period to leave, which means that if you leave, it takes your replacement 12 months to arrive.

(07-22-2020 03:47 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-22-2020 03:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  You are all way overthinking this. The Aggies knew as did the Tigers that a GOR would be forthcoming in the wake of the departures of Colorado and Nebraska and that exit fees would go up.

I don't think that's well supported. Maybe a GOR was a possibility. On the other hand, PAC-16 or B16 was also a possibility. I don't think the answer to "why did A&M insist on being out on July 1, 2012" is "because the Grant-of-Rights was a-comin'."

Quote:You have GOR come about and two things become problematic. 1. If you don't agree to the GOR which has to be unanimous you keep the schools wanting it from getting it.

That's their problem, not yours? The Big 12 grant-of-rights was signed finally in September 2012, after being announced in MArch. Missouri and A&M were still Big 12 members (on their way out, but still members). They just--didn't sign it.

Quote:The two years that were given were for mostly independent schools like Florida State, South Carolina, Georgia Tech, and others who used the two years to make scheduling changes in a timely enough manner as not to lose revenue from buying out games after deadlines for making changes had passed.

Maryland didn't stick around for 2 years either.

Nope. Maryland announced their Big 10 move in November 2012, played in the ACC for 2012-13 AND 2013-14. Same with Rutgers from Big East to Big 10, same with Syracuse and Pitt to the ACC, (announced Sept 2011, effective July 2013), UCF, SMU, Houston, Memphis from CUSA to the Big EAst (announced 2011-12, effective July 2013).

It's the schools that move with less than 12 months notice that are the exceptions. A&M and Missouri to the SEC, West Virginia to the Big 12, Nebraska to the Big 10, Colorado to the Big 12.

Most conferences have a 12-month waiting period to leave, which means that if you leave, it takes your replacement 12 months to arrive.

1. You can't say they didn't have the GOR as a factor when they knew about it clearly and left before signing it. And if I'm not mistaken Missouri's president was chairing the committee responsible for trying to work things out in the Big 12 so I believe he was definitely in position to know when they had to leave to avoid anymore fees or litigation. And Missouri and A&M were likely conversing. To avoid some issues the president at Missouri was in backchannel discussions with his buddy Machen at Florida.

2. You have to give 1 full fiscal sports year's notification in most leagues. Football season starts the sports year and baseball ends it. Maryland didn't give a full sports year's notice in their first year, but rather at the end of the regular football season, and they gave it then because they were good and pissed about another matter. They still gave one full sports year's notification.

The reason that Texas A&M gave their notice to the Big 12 on August 29, 2011 is that this allowed them under the Big 12 conference by laws to join the SEC for the 2012 football season. It's not clear that Missouri gave the same notice. That would be a good question.

After the 2003 situation between the ACC and Big East, the Big East implemented a much longer notice requirement. When Syracuse and Pittsburgh were invited by the ACC in September, 2011, the planned entry date was the 2014 season. I believe the Big East had a 27 month notice requirement. They later negotiated a 2013 exit for an additional payment to the Big East.

When WVU accepted an invitation from the Big 12, it committed to challenging the Big East notice requirement. Its willingness to "shoot its way out of the Big East" is likely the reason it received an invitation ahead of Louisville, which was also under consideration at the time.

By the way, great information is being shared here. Thanks for all the responses. This is where message boards are at their best.

(07-22-2020 04:15 PM)orangefan Wrote:  The reason that Texas A&M gave their notice to the Big 12 on August 29, 2011 is that this allowed them under the Big 12 conference by laws to join the SEC for the 2012 football season. It's not clear that Missouri gave the same notice. That would be a good question.

After the 2003 situation between the ACC and Big East, the Big East implemented a much longer notice requirement. When Syracuse and Pittsburgh were invited by the ACC in September, 2011, the planned entry date was the 2014 season. I believe the Big East had a 27 month notice requirement. They later negotiated a 2013 exit for an additional payment to the Big East.

When WVU accepted an invitation from the Big 12, it committed to challenging the Big East notice requirement. Its willingness to "shoot its way out of the Big East" is likely the reason it received an invitation ahead of Louisville, which was also under consideration at the time.

There wasn't any effort to get A&M to stay for one more year, so they must have met some deadline.

The Big 12 wanted Missouri to stay for one more year. The SEC was fine with Missouri staying for one more year and going with 13. The Big 12 offered Missouri reduced exit fees. Missouri refused and screwed the Big 12, West Virginia, the Big East, even Florida St. who WVU had to cancel on. Everyone was unhappy with Missouri. Not the least of which was that the Missouri president was director of the Big 12 presidents all the while trying to get out.

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/ncaa-foo...t-missouri

"...Then, thereâ€s Missouri. According to Neinas, the Big 12 members, including Missouri, agreed to not make any moves until 2012-2013. Neinas told the Gazette that the SEC was willing to have a 13-team league – including Texas A&M – for one year, while it waited for Missouri.

But when it was obvious Missouri wasnâ€t going to wait, Neinas said the Big 12 invited West Virginia to ensure the league would have 10 teams.

“The one thing that gets lost is weâ€re in this predicament because the SEC invited Missouri,” Neinas told the Gazette. “But the SEC was willing to play with 13 (rather than 14) next season. We made an offer to Missouri that was financially beneficial to stay for another year. Missouri made the decision not to accept.

“We had a teleconference call with those in the SEC, Big East, ACC, Mountain West and Conference USA. We all agreed we could save money and avoid litigation if all held serve for 2012-2013. But Missouri made a very selfish decision,” Neinas said. “Itâ€s been very disruptive. Missouri gave us notice in November, and itâ€s pretty difficult to move forward then.”..."

(07-22-2020 04:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-22-2020 03:47 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-22-2020 03:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  You are all way overthinking this. The Aggies knew as did the Tigers that a GOR would be forthcoming in the wake of the departures of Colorado and Nebraska and that exit fees would go up.

I don't think that's well supported. Maybe a GOR was a possibility. On the other hand, PAC-16 or B16 was also a possibility. I don't think the answer to "why did A&M insist on being out on July 1, 2012" is "because the Grant-of-Rights was a-comin'."

Quote:You have GOR come about and two things become problematic. 1. If you don't agree to the GOR which has to be unanimous you keep the schools wanting it from getting it.

That's their problem, not yours? The Big 12 grant-of-rights was signed finally in September 2012, after being announced in MArch. Missouri and A&M were still Big 12 members (on their way out, but still members). They just--didn't sign it.

Quote:The two years that were given were for mostly independent schools like Florida State, South Carolina, Georgia Tech, and others who used the two years to make scheduling changes in a timely enough manner as not to lose revenue from buying out games after deadlines for making changes had passed.

Maryland didn't stick around for 2 years either.

Nope. Maryland announced their Big 10 move in November 2012, played in the ACC for 2012-13 AND 2013-14. Same with Rutgers from Big East to Big 10, same with Syracuse and Pitt to the ACC, (announced Sept 2011, effective July 2013), UCF, SMU, Houston, Memphis from CUSA to the Big EAst (announced 2011-12, effective July 2013).

It's the schools that move with less than 12 months notice that are the exceptions. A&M and Missouri to the SEC, West Virginia to the Big 12, Nebraska to the Big 10, Colorado to the Big 12.

Most conferences have a 12-month waiting period to leave, which means that if you leave, it takes your replacement 12 months to arrive.

1. You can't say they didn't have the GOR as a factor when they knew about it clearly and left before signing it.

That's what's not supported. And even if the Big 12 leadership was kicking around a GOR in the spring of 2011, there's a simple solution--don't sign it.

Quote:2. You have to give 1 full fiscal sports year's notification in most leagues. Football season starts the sports year and baseball ends it. Maryland didn't give a full sports year's notice in their first year, but rather at the end of the regular football season, and they gave it then because they were good and pissed about another matter. They still gave one full sports year's notification.

Most leagues go by the NCAA year, July 1 to June 30. I think the Big 12 is an exception there. That would explain why A&M gave the Big 12 notice to withdraw on Aug 31, (five days before their first football game), without having an SEC invite in hand for 2012. (Aug 31 is the date on the ESPN article, it may have been a day or two sooner)

(07-22-2020 04:46 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-22-2020 04:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-22-2020 03:47 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-22-2020 03:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  You are all way overthinking this. The Aggies knew as did the Tigers that a GOR would be forthcoming in the wake of the departures of Colorado and Nebraska and that exit fees would go up.

I don't think that's well supported. Maybe a GOR was a possibility. On the other hand, PAC-16 or B16 was also a possibility. I don't think the answer to "why did A&M insist on being out on July 1, 2012" is "because the Grant-of-Rights was a-comin'."

Quote:You have GOR come about and two things become problematic. 1. If you don't agree to the GOR which has to be unanimous you keep the schools wanting it from getting it.

That's their problem, not yours? The Big 12 grant-of-rights was signed finally in September 2012, after being announced in MArch. Missouri and A&M were still Big 12 members (on their way out, but still members). They just--didn't sign it.

Quote:The two years that were given were for mostly independent schools like Florida State, South Carolina, Georgia Tech, and others who used the two years to make scheduling changes in a timely enough manner as not to lose revenue from buying out games after deadlines for making changes had passed.

Maryland didn't stick around for 2 years either.

Nope. Maryland announced their Big 10 move in November 2012, played in the ACC for 2012-13 AND 2013-14. Same with Rutgers from Big East to Big 10, same with Syracuse and Pitt to the ACC, (announced Sept 2011, effective July 2013), UCF, SMU, Houston, Memphis from CUSA to the Big EAst (announced 2011-12, effective July 2013).

It's the schools that move with less than 12 months notice that are the exceptions. A&M and Missouri to the SEC, West Virginia to the Big 12, Nebraska to the Big 10, Colorado to the Big 12.

Most conferences have a 12-month waiting period to leave, which means that if you leave, it takes your replacement 12 months to arrive.

1. You can't say they didn't have the GOR as a factor when they knew about it clearly and left before signing it.

That's what's not supported. And even if the Big 12 leadership was kicking around a GOR in the spring of 2011, there's a simple solution--don't sign it.

Quote:2. You have to give 1 full fiscal sports year's notification in most leagues. Football season starts the sports year and baseball ends it. Maryland didn't give a full sports year's notice in their first year, but rather at the end of the regular football season, and they gave it then because they were good and pissed about another matter. They still gave one full sports year's notification.

Most leagues go by the NCAA year, July 1 to June 30. I think the Big 12 is an exception there. That would explain why A&M gave the Big 12 notice to withdraw on Aug 31, (five days before their first football game), without having an SEC invite in hand for 2012. (Aug 31 is the date on the ESPN article, it may have been a day or two sooner)

There are oodles of things in realignment which are true but unsupported because of potential litigation. There are oodles of things on message boards that are unsupported because they aren't true. Skepticism is always good, but sometimes networks which want moves to happen know more than we do and might impart that knowledge to key people they trust, but when that knowledge is acted upon nobody admits to knowing it. Plausible deniability is required for elected officials. Just a flat denial is all you really need in business unless it involves a Federal law like insider trading.

Now think about what happened and who covered. Missouri gets out early, but so too does WVU. Who might have known the intricacies of the contractual details to know where the least costly workaround would be? Diverting T.C.U. was easy. Extracting West Virginia cost a little bit. 10 was needed to hold the TV contract enforceable. And somebody's bigger plan going bust which helped lead to the Maryland departure was a catalyst, and what Dodds and Slive had been promised fell flat. All of this was a huge mea culpa.

(07-22-2020 04:44 PM)bullet Wrote:  There wasn't any effort to get A&M to stay for one more year, so they must have met some deadline.

More important than meeting any legal deadlines, the Big 12 was easily able to replace A&M on the 2012 schedules with TCU--TCU had already given notice to the MWC, and just had to break their entry agreement with the Big East.

TCU filled the Aggie-sized hole in the Big 12 schedule, including and especially the ESPN and Fox Sports TV contracts. (A 9 team league wouldn't have as many games to fill windows with).

Quote:https://www.sportingnews.com/us/ncaa-foo...t-missouri

I wonder how much of that was Neinas using Missouri as a scapegoat.

I wonder if anyone at the time thought about bringing in BYU just for 2012? They would have jumped at the opportunity to get 4 Big 12 schools at home and 5 On the road during year 2 of independence over the WAC heavy schedule they had.

(07-22-2020 04:55 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Now think about what happened and who covered. Missouri gets out early, but so too does WVU. Who might have known the intricacies of the contractual details to know where the least costly workaround would be? Diverting T.C.U. was easy. Extracting West Virginia cost a little bit. 10 was needed to hold the TV contract enforceable. And somebody's bigger plan going bust which helped lead to the Maryland departure was a catalyst, and what Dodds and Slive had been promised fell flat. All of this was a huge mea culpa.

I recall that there were reports at the time that the Big 12 would not be able to meet the minimum number of games guaranteed under their TV contract. However, ESPN stepped up in 2010 to maintain rights fees at existing levels despite the loss of two schools. Fox bought Tier 2 rights starting in 2011 to give the conference a large boost in rights fees. ESPN agreed to an extension with another increase in 2012. The networks were clearly committed to the conference. I have no doubt that they would have incurred a penalty, but I doubt very much that the networks would have tried to declare a breach for having 9 schools for a single season.

Having said that, I'm sure the Big 12 preferred to fill the vacancy as soon as possible and WVU was willing to shoot its way out of the Big East to join in 2012. Again, my theory is that WVU was willing to do so to get an edge over Louisville. This makes WVU, along with Missouri, the bad guys for leaving their conferences and scheduled opponents in the lurch.