You talking about the 4 dissenter rule?Not if the agreement holds when Texas A&M joined! Could be a great chance to add them to the B1G in the West and slide Purdue to the East in Football! Second option would be to pick up two from what’s left. Iowa St and Oklahoma State could jump!
Why do you think adding more elite programs to our schedule is a good thing?Not if the agreement holds when Texas A&M joined! Could be a great chance to add them to the B1G in the West and slide Purdue to the East in Football! Second option would be to pick up two from what’s left. Iowa St and Oklahoma State could jump!
Why does the SEC need either Oklahoma or Texas? Adding them is far more beneficial to Oklahoma and Texas than to the SEC. The Big 12 is fairly irrelevant at this point, and, Texas has not been truly relevant in years...thus the desperation on the part of Oklahoma and Texas, but, in light of it, I don't get why the SEC would want to do them the favor(s) of allowing them to join and perhaps making one, if not both, a national power once again...at the expense of some of their own programs potentially.Why do you think adding more elite programs to our schedule is a good thing?
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$Why does the SEC need either Oklahoma or Texas? Adding them is far more beneficial to Oklahoma and Texas than to the SEC. The Big 12 is fairly irrelevant at this point, and, Texas has not been truly relevant in years...thus the desperation on the part of Oklahoma and Texas, but, in light of it, I don't get why the SEC would want to do them the favor(s) of allowing them to join and perhaps making one, if not both, a national power once again...at the expense of some of their own programs potentially.
No it was an agreement that A&M could veto any school from Texas entering the SEC!You talking about the 4 dissenter rule?
$$$$$$Why do you think adding more elite programs to our schedule is a good thing?
Money where it becomes harder and harder for Purdue to even sniff the middle of the conference?$$$$$$
Texas won't give up the Longhorn network. If they don't, why would a conference want to add them?$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Will Texas make more than $60 million per year by keeping the Longhorn network as opposed to joining the SEC? Past reports have alluded to the Longhorn Network struggling but I haven't really read anything about it recently. I just think there will be plenty of allure to joining the SEC from an economic standpoint. As far as ideology, the two don't seem to be a match.Texas won't give up the Longhorn network. If they don't, why would a conference want to add them?
Reports are that they WILL give up the Longhorn network.Texas won't give up the Longhorn network. If they don't, why would a conference want to add them?
Numbers have already been crunched. Texas makes $60 million/year with current TV contracts including Longhorn Network. But an expanded SEC would be paying each school in the conference $80 million/yr.Will Texas make more than $60 million per year by keeping the Longhorn network as opposed to joining the SEC? Past reports have alluded to the Longhorn Network struggling but I haven't really read anything about it recently. I just think there will be plenty of allure to joining the SEC from an economic standpoint. As far as ideology, the two don't seem to be a match.
Wonder how much the big10 would have to pay to get the big12 to take nilbraska back, and the acc to take maryland back, and anyone to take the ruts back?I hate seeing these old conferences dissolve. Now the BIG 10 will have to play catch up and add more to the league. Cross out another unique non conference game.
That was a gentleman's agreement. No teeth to it.No it was an agreement that A&M could veto any school from Texas entering the SEC!
No one wants UT because UT runs over everything in sight. Ask anyone from A&M or Nebraska. The ‘Horns should be avoided at all costs.Not if the agreement holds when Texas A&M joined! Could be a great chance to add them to the B1G in the West and slide Purdue to the East in Football! Second option would be to pick up two from what’s left. Iowa St and Oklahoma State could jump!
The courts will ultimately decide it and if tapes or emails exist of the agreement, that would be their Avenue to uphold it!That was a gentleman's agreement. No teeth to it.
College presidents will take the money & be happy being 4th in a 16 team conference, IMO. And some schools don't really care about football, particularly if it brings in the big bucks. Kentucky comes to mind. They get a piece of the SEC football pie & dominate basketball for a lifetime.At what point does this ever-expanding conference model break down and lose support from the schools without powerhouse football programs? In a 16 team conference with multiple perennial powers can you ever see schools like Ole Miss or Arkansas competing for a conference title? Are the 'also rans' of these super conferences going to be satisfied with being glorified speed bumps as long as the money is coming in?
The state legislature in Oklahoma is likely to intervene so that Oklahoma State isn’t left as an orphan.The courts will ultimately decide it and if tapes or emails exist of the agreement, they would be their Avenue to uphold it!
Unfortunately, I think you are right. But can you imagine your schedule comes out and you get to play Alabama, LSU, Georgia, Oklahoma, Texas, ATM, and Florida? Coaching jobs like Kentucky are going to be a perpetual turnstile because, although you say they don't care, their fans and donors care enough that expectations will remain to make bowl games and sometimes compete for a conference title. They fired their OC one (covid) year removed from 10-3 and 8-5 seasons.College presidents will take the money & be happy being 4th in a 16 team conference, IMO. And some schools don't really care about football, particularly if it brings in the big bucks. Kentucky comes to mind. They get a piece of the SEC football pie & dominate basketball for a lifetime.
That was a gentleman's agreement. No teeth to it.
Nebraska told everyone in the BiG that no one partners with Texas, they get run over by them.Texas is tired of getting beat by Baylor, TCU, and Texas Tech in state. Now they want to play Alabama, LSU, and Georgia, LOL. It will get worse before it gets better for them. They are being out recruited by the SEC teams for players from Texas so this will help them there I think. Surprised the B1G didn’t initiate this. Asleep at the wheel? Now we are scrambling for the leftovers.
The courts will ultimately decide it and if tapes or emails exist of the agreement, they would be their Avenue to uphold it!
Barker, where have you been? Filling in for Tubin at the New Yorker?
24/7? I assumed you were a partner with a chain-gang of non-partner workbots at your command, while you sit with your feet up in a corner office sipping G&Ts or whatever lawyers prefer. (What do they drink?)Hahaha, no, I have been lurking around but have had to resign my role as the guy who writes novellas around here as the day job is back to 24/7 as the world has turned back on. Oddly enough, one of my partners was in his section at HLS, and said it could not have happened to a nicer person.
Are you saying an oral contract is not worth the paper it is not written on?While possible to have an oral contract, you have to have a meeting of the minds of all members to such contract. The probability that you can establish that is going to be close to zero; especially, as A&M has already said it was just a gentleman's agreement. Plus, the conference's contract, will have a merger clause, which prohibits evidence of contemporaneous oral agreements to supplement or modify the written contract (i.e. this agreement constitutes the sole and exclusive agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof . . . ). Lastly, depending on the choice of law in the underlying agreement and the language of the relevant state's statute of frauds, this agreement would likely be required to be in writing because it cannot be completed in a year.
Colorado and Mizzou are our best option. UC is fed up with the PAC-12 and Mizzou has nothing but loathing for Texas.After reading through the national boards it’s sounding like ou and ut to the sec is all but finalized. Supposedly the b1g has been talking to Kansas now from what I have been reading, possibly Iowa state too. No idea if any of this is 100% true regarding ku and isu. Personally I’d much rather we raid the acc and take unc and FSU if we’re going to be adding more programs.
No thanks to both.Colorado and Mizzou are our best option. UC is fed up with the PAC-12 and Mizzou has nothing but loathing for Texas.
And Carolina, in particular, is much stronger academically than Kansas and Iowa State (despite Ol’ Roy’s scandal). That used to be a consideration though I do not know if it still is.After reading through the national boards it’s sounding like ou and ut to the sec is all but finalized. Supposedly the b1g has been talking to Kansas now from what I have been reading, possibly Iowa state too. No idea if any of this is 100% true regarding ku and isu. Personally I’d much rather we raid the acc and take unc and FSU if we’re going to be adding more programs.
Yeah I really have no idea if the ku or isu talk has much legs to it, all just message board talk for now. I do think the big ten needs to be extremely selective with the schools it does choose to let in. No more Maryland/rutger level mistakes. Sec is essentially now a football super conference. That’s why I’d really like to see us add a southern football power in FSU and an all around athletic powerhouse in unc. Both also have enormous fan bases. Schools like Colorado, mizzou, Iowa state, etc. literally bring nothing to the table. Let’s just hope warren doesn’t screw this up.And Carolina, in particular, is much stronger academically than Kansas and Iowa State (despite Ol’ Roy’s scandal). That used to be a consideration though I do not know if it still is.
Handshakes don’t hold up in courtThe courts will ultimately decide it and if tapes or emails exist of the agreement, that would be their Avenue to uphold it!