I think i understand your points but help fill in the gaps, if i don't, as to why its personal. Is it just that TX/ou left the conference for more money or is it that your school stands to be negatively impacted by the loss of money? Serious question.
You keep stating the first but i think it is more the latter.
If the first, then i would argue that good partners would have treated TX and OU more fairly, as defined by them. In other words not equal revenue sharing which occurred but not to the degree that was needed. More than that Fox refusing to up/renew the contract in May certainly made it glaringly apparent that TX/ou were no longer in the same category as UM/OSU in B10 or Bama/SEC only because of the company they keep, irate 8. So what does one do when your job is to compete at the highest levels?
If the latter than please note that Fox now values the remaining 8 tv deal worth 9million per school. Quck math says 39-9= 30 m *8 240 million. So Texas and OU provided to the other 8 schools like ISU 300 million richer over the last ten years. Also Baylor, TCU etc....
So i ask again. Are you mad that we left you behind for more money or that you no longer participate in what TX/ou afforded you? I think i know the answer. We still have to share equally in the SEC. I think it would have been wise for the 8 to be more pragmatic years agao. It may have helped them, maybe not.