Smoke your cigars and enjoy the band while you can....

[Dr Rick Daris]

don't know what to make of this?    

http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1091406

Fallout from the Orangebloods.com report that the Pac-10 is planning to extend invitations to Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Colorado has been immediate.
 
DeLoss Dodds and Texas are working feverishly to hold the Big 12 together.
Already, the political forces in Texas are preparing to make demands that if six schools from the Big 12 are going to be invited to the Pac-10, Baylor should replace Colorado on that list, according to two sources close to the situation.

"If you're going to have an exported commodity involved in this, do you think we're going to allow a school from outside the state of Texas to replace one of our schools in the Big 12 South? I don't think so. We're already at work on this," said a high-ranking member of the Texas Legislature who asked not to be identified.

The source said there is a block of 15 legislators who will work to make sure Baylor - not Colorado - is invited to the Pac-10.

"If the Pac-10 wants Texas, and we know they do, they may have to take all of our Texas schools," the source said, adding that Texas Tech has also benefited from political inclusion on the invite list.

That influence may already have been felt during Saturday's Pac-10 meetings in San Francisco (more on that in a minute).

The Texas legislators taking up for Baylor are pointing to the political and economic importance of keeping the Texas members of the Big 12 South together as well as Colorado's recent athletic struggles and lack of sports such as baseball, softball and men's tennis.

(The CU football team is 16-33 the past four years, and the hoops team has made the NCAA Tournament twice in the last 41 years. Baylor's football isn't much better at 15-33, but the Bears' hoops program is on the rise.)

"Denver as a television market doesn't really support Colorado," the source said. "And the weather can also be an adventure."


THE PAC-10 PROPOSALS

Pac-10 commissioner Larry Scott laid out several possible expansion scenarios to his league's athletic directors during conference meetings in San Francisco on Saturday.

According to a source with knowledge of the Pac-10 meetings, Scott made cases to: stay at its current 10-school membership; merge with the entire Big 12; invite six schools from the Big 12, as long as it includes Texas; or invite Colorado and Utah.

The source said there is not much enthusiasm for a full-blown merger or for the league to go to 12 schools by adding Colorado and Utah.

Multiple sources said the plan Scott favors is adding six teams from the Big 12 (as long as it includes Texas) and creating two, eight-team divisions. The Big 12 schools would compete in a division with Arizona and Arizona State, while the remaining Pac-10 schools - USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington and Washington State - would compete in the other division.

Scott also apparently laid out two plans that would involve the six-team invitation to schools in the Big 12. One that included Colorado and one that replaced Colorado with Baylor along with the other members of the Big 12 South.

Scott did not immediately return a message left for him by Orangebloods.com.


PAC-10 COMMITTED TO A CONFERENCE NETWORK

Scott, who took over as Pac-10 commissioner in 2009 and earns $1.7 million annually after running the Women's Tennis Association for six years, appears ready to show he's worth every penny by making a splash. He will recommend to the presidents and chancellors on Sunday that they invite six Big 12 teams and move forward with a 16-team conference network that projects to pay out $20 million per school.

The network would most likely be run by Fox Cable Networks (a subsidiary of News Corporation), which serves as the chief operating partner of the Big Ten Network.
The Pac-10 would want an answer from any invited schools by the end of the year because its television package with Fox is up for renewal in 2011.

Former Big 12 commissioner Kevin Weiberg, who took over as the chief operating officer of the Pac-10 in April, has experience in launching a conference network after helping the Big Ten do it.

Weiberg resigned from the Big 12 and went to the Big Ten to work on its network after Big 12 members went against his recommendation to start a conference network in 2007.

The Pac-10's plans to have a conference network is a major stumbling block for Texas.

UT officials have partnered with IMG in exploring their own television network and would have to abandon those plans if it was to move to the Pac-10. Scott told Orangebloods.com in May that a conference network would require "an all rights in" commitment from member schools.

That's one of the biggest reasons Texas is working feverishly to hold the Big 12 together.

Mike Slive, commissioner of the Southeastern Conference, which would love to have Texas, said this week schools can explore their own networks in the SEC. It was almost an open-armed invitation to Texas, which has so far seen the SEC as poor cultural fit.

Despite overtures from the Big Ten, Texas has balked at the logistics of being the southern boundary of that league and doesn't appear interested.

Multiple sources close to the situation say Missouri, Colorado and Nebraska are the three schools holding up the Big 12 from moving forward as a conference. The league wrapped up meetings in Kansas City on Friday without a vow of solidarity from all its schools.

Two sources said Missouri is eagerly hoping for an invitation from the Big Ten, while Nebraska appears to be moving back to the table with the nine schools who are determined to keep the Big 12 alive.

Colorado appears to be hoping for a Pac-10 invitation, but now the Buffaloes could be left out of that mix thanks to Baylor and Texas politics.

Just another day in the swirl that is possible college realignment.

agree that it looks pretty good for us. lol at colorado.

[Trim]

It means that unless Currie can pull an SEC invite out of his ass that we are headed either for a patched together Big 12 or the MWC or worse.

No, it means 10 out of 12 want the Big 12 to stay as it is, with the 2 troublemakers being Missouri and Colorado.  The Pac-10 doesn't want Colorado (or really anybody) without Texas, so Colorado can STFU.  Missouri has always appeared at best to be a supporing player in the Big Ten's plans, and Missouri isn't really a lynchpin to the Big 12's success, so they can STFU or be replaced too.  

So, if everything in that article is accurate, primarily the Texas stuff regarding their own network, than we're in the clear.

[Trim]

I should add that the truly optimal solution* given these parameters, provided geography/divisions can be worked out, would be for UNLV to replace Mizzou.

*for me.

[DQ12]

I should add that the truly optimal solution* given these parameters, provided geography/divisions can be worked out, would be for UNLV to replace Mizzou.

*for me.

And SDSU can replace Colorado too.

:sunbathinginNovember:

[wetwillie]

Doesn't this just mean that the six teams being taken from the Big 12 could be shifted to the Big 12 South and kick colorado to the curb?

[chum1]

I love how there are so many crazy, unpredictable factors coming into play.  WTF is sticking up for Baylor?

[Dr Rick Daris]

I love how there are so many crazy, unpredictable factors coming into play.  WTF is sticking up for Baylor?

the same people/type of people that helped baylor get into the big12 to begin w/?

agree on the hilariousness of this all. also, does deloss own orangebloods or what exactly is going on over there?

[Trim]

Doesn't this just mean that the six teams being taken from the Big 12 could be shifted to the Big 12 South and kick colorado to the curb?

Texas doesn't want to go to the Pac-10 (because they want to start their own network).  Everything else in that article is Texas politicians posturing that they're f'n Texas (the state) and all Texas schools will get cool crap before Colorado does.  But it doesn't matter because Texas doesn't want the Pac-10's cool crap.  And the Pac-10 doesn't want any SouTards if they don't get Texas. 

Alright?

I should add that the truly optimal solution* given these parameters, provided geography/divisions can be worked out, would be for UNLV to replace Mizzou.

*for me.

And SDSU can replace Colorado too.

:sunbathinginNovember:

That seems a little tougher geographically, but yeah, that'd be fantastic.

[Trim]

Trademark on the "SouTards".

[DQ12]

Trademark on the "SouTards".

Trademark on Aztards

[Huskerpride]

Actually Tejas did start this by unfairly changing the rules of the big 8 and by not sharing revenue equally. The Big 8 members took in the pathetic SWC where Tejas was a very minor player in CFB. The old Big 8 members were tired of being beaten yearly by OU & NU and thought that adding the SWC would be like a big FU to the league bullies.
The only dissenting vote for Big 12 expansion was Osborne. He stated that in years to come everything would start to have a Tejas flavor and that Tejas would hold all the cards. BINGO we have a winner. The Big 10 is the countries leader in research, every team in the Big 10 is AAU accredited. Sure, it's about football money but it's also about the grants and billions in research monies that  brings as well.
Nu is a big research university and the prestige (academically) associated with the Big 10 would be great. Only the SEC is lower than the Big 12 academically. Nu would do just fine football wise in the Big 10. Posters here are right by saying that the path to championships would be easier in the Big 12.....But who want's the easy road

[yoga-like_abana]

Offer them nascar tix.

[Trim]

Actually Tejas did start this by unfairly changing the rules of the big 8 and by not sharing revenue equally.

What's Larry the Cable Guy's position on all this?

[Huskerpride]

Actually Tejas did start this by unfairly changing the rules of the big 8 and by not sharing revenue equally.

What's Larry the Cable Guy's position on all this?

Why do I bother?

[Trim]

Actually Tejas did start this by unfairly changing the rules of the big 8 and by not sharing revenue equally.

What's Larry the Cable Guy's position on all this?

Why do I bother?

Alright, tell me how Texas "unfairly changed the rules of the big 8".

[Panjandrum]

Actually Tejas did start this by unfairly changing the rules of the big 8 and by not sharing revenue equally. The Big 8 members took in the pathetic SWC where Tejas was a very minor player in CFB. The old Big 8 members were tired of being beaten yearly by OU & NU and thought that adding the SWC would be like a big FU to the league bullies.
The only dissenting vote for Big 12 expansion was Osborne. He stated that in years to come everything would start to have a Tejas flavor and that Tejas would hold all the cards. BINGO we have a winner. The Big 10 is the countries leader in research, every team in the Big 10 is AAU accredited. Sure, it's about football money but it's also about the grants and billions in research monies that  brings as well.
Nu is a big research university and the prestige (academically) associated with the Big 10 would be great. Only the SEC is lower than the Big 12 academically. Nu would do just fine football wise in the Big 10. Posters here are right by saying that the path to championships would be easier in the Big 12.....But who want's the easy road

Uhhhh....Nebraska was and is a part of the voting block that is AGAINST equal revenue sharing with Oklahoma, Texas, and A&M.

I think it's hilarious that Nebraska fans have started this asinine talking point that they're for revenue sharing and Texas is a villain.  Nebraska is worse because they're acting like they were for revenue sharing since the beginning, and that's absolutely untrue.

It takes nine votes to change policy in this conference.  Do you know why it's nine?  Because there's a four team voting block consisting of NU, UT, A&M, and OU.  If they don't want it, it doesn't happen.  And they didn't want revenue sharing.

And Nebraska would undoubtedly do worse in the Big Ten.  Jesus, Kansas State and Colorado have BOTH won the Big 12 since you did eleven years ago.  You really think you stand a chance against Ohio State and Penn State?  Iowa?  Wisconsin?

Nebraska football is NOT going to become what it once was.  If your fans want to experience the BCS again, you better hope you get lucky in the Big 12 CCG, because you aren't going through the Big Ten gauntlet and getting there any time in the near future.

[Trim]

Actually Tejas did start this by unfairly changing the rules of the big 8 and by not sharing revenue equally. The Big 8 members took in the pathetic SWC where Tejas was a very minor player in CFB. The old Big 8 members were tired of being beaten yearly by OU & NU and thought that adding the SWC would be like a big FU to the league bullies.
The only dissenting vote for Big 12 expansion was Osborne. He stated that in years to come everything would start to have a Tejas flavor and that Tejas would hold all the cards. BINGO we have a winner. The Big 10 is the countries leader in research, every team in the Big 10 is AAU accredited. Sure, it's about football money but it's also about the grants and billions in research monies that  brings as well.
Nu is a big research university and the prestige (academically) associated with the Big 10 would be great. Only the SEC is lower than the Big 12 academically. Nu would do just fine football wise in the Big 10. Posters here are right by saying that the path to championships would be easier in the Big 12.....But who want's the easy road

Uhhhh....Nebraska was and is a part of the voting block that is AGAINST equal revenue sharing with Oklahoma, Texas, and A&M.

I think it's hilarious that Nebraska fans have started this asinine talking point that they're for revenue sharing and Texas is a villain.  Nebraska is worse because they're acting like they were for revenue sharing since the beginning, and that's absolutely untrue.

It takes nine votes to change policy in this conference.  Do you know why it's nine?  Because there's a four team voting block consisting of NU, UT, A&M, and OU.  If they don't want it, it doesn't happen.  And they didn't want revenue sharing.

And Nebraska would undoubtedly do worse in the Big Ten.  Jesus, Kansas State and Colorado have BOTH won the Big 12 since you did eleven years ago.  You really think you stand a chance against Ohio State and Penn State?  Iowa?  Wisconsin?

Nebraska football is NOT going to become what it once was.  If your fans want to experience the BCS again, you better hope you get lucky in the Big 12 CCG, because you aren't going through the Big Ten gauntlet and getting there any time in the near future.

 

GIT 'R DUN!!!

[catzacker]

Doesn't this just mean that the six teams being taken from the Big 12 could be shifted to the Big 12 South and kick colorado to the curb?

Texas doesn't want to go to the Pac-10 (because they want to start their own network).  Everything else in that article is Texas politicians posturing that they're f'n Texas (the state) and all Texas schools will get cool crap before Colorado does.  But it doesn't matter because Texas doesn't want the Pac-10's cool crap.  And the Pac-10 doesn't want any SouTards if they don't get Texas. 

this is what I'm hoping/thinking as well.  would be interesting to see what happens if the Pac-10 caves and allows UT the ability to have their own network as part of their invitation...would A&M and OU still go?  or would those two shop themselves to the SEC? 

[Huskerpride]

Actually Tejas did start this by unfairly changing the rules of the big 8 and by not sharing revenue equally.

What's Larry the Cable Guy's position on all this?

Why do I bother?

Alright, tell me how Texas "unfairly changed the rules of the big 8".

Obviously Pajandrum has alot of anger inside. I'll wait until he's sobered up.
Texas didn't want prop 48. Nu had made a living out of recruiting non-qualifiers and sitting them until they did qualify. Texas wanted the Big 12 to use the CC route for qualification. Alot of the old Big 8 schools thought that NU had an unfair advantage. In reality anyone could of copied what NU was doing. They just chose not to.
to ansawer Pajandrum, I do think NU would fare quite well in the Big 10. I believe our current record vs the Big 10 is 47-3 or something there abouts. Don't quote me on that one.
By stating that NU would do worse in the Big 10 (Pajandrum) you are saying what YOU think.

[Panjandrum]

Actually Tejas did start this by unfairly changing the rules of the big 8 and by not sharing revenue equally.

What's Larry the Cable Guy's position on all this?

Why do I bother?

Alright, tell me how Texas "unfairly changed the rules of the big 8".

Obviously Pajandrum has alot of anger inside. I'll wait until he's sobered up.
Texas didn't want prop 48. Nu had made a living out of recruiting non-qualifiers and sitting them until they did qualify. Texas wanted the Big 12 to use the CC route for qualification. Alot of the old Big 8 schools thought that NU had an unfair advantage. In reality anyone could of copied what NU was doing. They just chose not to.
to ansawer Pajandrum, I do think NU would fare quite well in the Big 10. I believe our current record vs the Big 10 is 47-3 or something there abouts. Don't quote me on that one.
By stating that NU would do worse in the Big 10 (Pajandrum) you are saying what YOU think.

I'm not angry, nor have I had anything to drink in over a week.

And, yes, I do honestly believe you won't fare as well as you did in the past, but I'm not going to take the time to write it all out.  It has a lot to do with today's recruiting landscape, the fact that you've been irrelevant for way too long, and the fact that there are too many programs in this part of the country who have invested in football, and it's chipped away at your recruiting and support bases.

I could draw you some graphs and stuff, but I honestly don't care enough.  When it's all said and done, you'll stay in the Big 12 with the rest of us, so it's a moot point.

[Trim]

Texas didn't want prop 48. Nu had made a living out of recruiting non-qualifiers and sitting them until they did qualify. Texas wanted the Big 12 to use the CC route for qualification. Alot of the old Big 8 schools thought that NU had an unfair advantage. In reality anyone could of copied what NU was doing. They just chose not to.

How is that "unfairly changing the rules of the big 8"?

And yeah, you're eventually gonna have to explain the current bitching about Texas as it pertains to revenue sharing.

our current record vs the Big 10 is 47-3 or something there abouts. Don't quote me on that one.

Quoted.

[Panjandrum]

It means that unless Currie can pull an SEC invite out of his ass that we are headed either for a patched together Big 12 or the MWC or worse.

No, it means 10 out of 12 want the Big 12 to stay as it is, with the 2 troublemakers being Missouri and Colorado.  The Pac-10 doesn't want Colorado (or really anybody) without Texas, so Colorado can STFU.  Missouri has always appeared at best to be a supporing player in the Big Ten's plans, and Missouri isn't really a lynchpin to the Big 12's success, so they can STFU or be replaced too.  

So, if everything in that article is accurate, primarily the Texas stuff regarding their own network, than we're in the clear.

If this is true, you're right, the only school still looking to move (with a realistic shot) is Missouri, and I think they're somewhere down the pecking order after Notre Dame and however many schools the Big Ten would need to steal from the Big East to get Notre Dame.

My guess is that if this holds true, we're looking at having the same twelve members for a really long time.

[sonofdaxjones]

Moo has always been the willing waiting whore for the Big 10 . . . they've been face down ass up for the Big 10 for 30 years.

[Panjandrum]

Moo has always been the willing waiting whore for the Big 10 . . . they've been face down ass up for the Big 10 for 30 years.

And that's why it was stupid for Beebe to go into these meetings talking about having a goal of solidarity.

Missouri will sit outside of Delany's office with a freaking boombox over their head like John Cusack in "Say Anything".

[Huskerpride]

Actually Tejas did start this by unfairly changing the rules of the big 8 and by not sharing revenue equally.

What's Larry the Cable Guy's position on all this?

Why do I bother?

Alright, tell me how Texas "unfairly changed the rules of the big 8".

Obviously Pajandrum has alot of anger inside. I'll wait until he's sobered up.
Texas didn't want prop 48. Nu had made a living out of recruiting non-qualifiers and sitting them until they did qualify. Texas wanted the Big 12 to use the CC route for qualification. Alot of the old Big 8 schools thought that NU had an unfair advantage. In reality anyone could of copied what NU was doing. They just chose not to.
to ansawer Pajandrum, I do think NU would fare quite well in the Big 10. I believe our current record vs the Big 10 is 47-3 or something there abouts. Don't quote me on that one.
By stating that NU would do worse in the Big 10 (Pajandrum) you are saying what YOU think.

I'm not angry, nor have I had anything to drink in over a week.

And, yes, I do honestly believe you won't fare as well as you did in the past, but I'm not going to take the time to write it all out.  It has a lot to do with today's recruiting landscape, the fact that you've been irrelevant for way too long, and the fact that there are too many programs in this part of the country who have invested in football, and it's chipped away at your recruiting and support bases.

I could draw you some graphs and stuff, but I honestly don't care enough.  When it's all said and done, you'll stay in the Big 12 with the rest of us, so it's a moot point.

Sorry about the drinking comment. I'm with you on the chance of NU going to the Big 10. I'd rather NU stay where they are. But the Board of Regents are the ones who set the revenue distribution back when the league formed. There is revenue sharing now. NU knew that Texas would eventually sway revenue trends in their direction. Texas leads the league  in that respect. Let's not forget that everything has slowly gravitated to the advantage of Texas.