Left Behind: A Quick Dose Of Post Big 12 Reality

[TwiceHorn 31681]

11 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

Immunity is waived.  See Tex. Loc. Gov’t Code 271.152.

That statute appears to exclude "institutions of higher education" from its purview.  See sub (3) and Tex. Gov. Code 2260.001.

[Ghost of LL 15604]

9 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

That statute appears to exclude "institutions of higher education" from its purview.  See sub (3) and Tex. Gov. Code 2260.001.

Shit—you’re right. There’s some other similar provision in the Education Code, though.

[TwiceHorn 31681]

Looks to me like chapter 2260 covers this scenario.

And, a lot like the Leach situation, the institution has to agree to an amount of compensation, and the lege either has to have appropriated funds for payment of such claims, or specifically appropriate for payment of this particular claim.

And only the lege can grant permission to file a lawsuit.  Everything else is by negotiation or administrative hearing.

Edited December 15, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[utee94 15878]

2 hours ago, ButtFumble said:

yes all of the above can be litigated, 

This is all that needed to be said.

It will all be litigated, same as every other school that has left a conference before, and will all be settled.  No parties gain any benefit from stretching it out or contesting it in court.

 

[TwiceHorn 31681]

6 minutes ago, utee94 said:

This is all that needed to be said.

It will all be litigated, same as every other school that has left a conference before, and will all be settled.  No parties gain any benefit from stretching it out or contesting it in court.

 

Probably right about that.

But, Texas is a bit stingier with sovereign immunity than a lot of other states.  And the nature of the defense is that it cuts off lawsuits before they even get started.

It could change the negotiating posture significantly.

[Hagbard Celine 10995]

surly barristers: what say thee about the precedent set by aggy?

[utee94 15878]

4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Probably right about that.

But, Texas is a bit stingier with sovereign immunity than a lot of other states.  And the nature of the defense is that it cuts off lawsuits before they even get started.

It could change the negotiating posture significantly.

Indeed.  i don't think SI is even really a threat here.  I don't think it needs to be.  Standard negotiation tactics will ensue, both parties will lose something but it will end as amicably as it can.  

[B00M 6575]

 

Lawyer debate

[Hagbard Celine 10995]

the problem is we have dance partner that can't double down

[utee94 15878]

5 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

the problem is we have dance partner that can't double down

I don't really think they'll need to.  Conference exits have historically been settled down to under half of the original contractual amounts.  And thinking practically, the B12 could retain the 2021/2022 distributions for Texas and OU, but that's all of the money the conference controls.  That should be somewhere in the $35M-$40M range.  Beyond that, logistically, the B12 would have to sue to get more from either school.  And I don't think anyone believes that is going to happen.  It's likely both from an historical perspective, and a practical perspective, that the 2021/2022 distributions will be the anchor point for the negotiations.  It might end up going above that by some small incremental amount, but I doubt it's much more.

[Hagbard Celine 10995]

what scenario requires aggy getting dragged through discovery for their bitchassedness 10 years ago?

that's my fetish

[statsman 5497]

Observation- in 2000, UH pulled the “bleacher gate” stunt and pushed off Bellmont. Texas hasn’t played them yet in football, after being willing to schedule them before. 
 
observation- in 1984, an angry SMU paid PIs to dig up recruiting dirt on SWC rivals, getting mild NCAA penalties on UT for mild violations. Texas hasn’t scheduled SMU in football since the SWC breakup. 
 
There is a chance (and I hope it’s so) that Bellmont, mild mannered, agreeable and polite as it is, has an elephant’s memory and a vindictive streak. These B12 schools that think they’re going to gouge Texas on the way out and then schedule us down the road may be in for a surprise. Of course, the administrations will turn over in a few years, but the fan bases won’t. 

[Al_4_ISU 12528]

Ehh.  Ready for this to be over and done.  This will just stay ugly and awkward.  I think most folks have moved on mentally and would just rather be at the future than awkwardly waiting out the present.

But that said, we aren't going to cut you a deal to leave early for less, and I understand your hesitance to shell out the early exit fees.

I highly doubt any current Big 12 schools expect to schedule either Texas or OU in the future non-conference slate.  Maybe some fans, but they're idiots.

[El Diablo 4232]

42 minutes ago, statsman said:

Observation- in 2000, UH pulled the “bleacher gate” stunt and pushed off Bellmont. Texas hasn’t played them yet in football, after being willing to schedule them before. 
 
observation- in 1984, an angry SMU paid PIs to dig up recruiting dirt on SWC rivals, getting mild NCAA penalties on UT for mild violations. Texas hasn’t scheduled SMU in football since the SWC breakup. 
 
There is a chance (and I hope it’s so) that Bellmont, mild mannered, agreeable and polite as it is, has an elephant’s memory and a vindictive streak. These B12 schools that think they’re going to gouge Texas on the way out and then schedule us down the road may be in for a surprise. Of course, the administrations will turn over in a few years, but the fan bases won’t. 

Nobody has scheduled aggy in football and that would be a nice payday. Other sports? it'll happen for sure.

[Ghost of LL 15604]

10 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Looks to me like chapter 2260 covers this scenario.

And, a lot like the Leach situation, the institution has to agree to an amount of compensation, and the lege either has to have appropriated funds for payment of such claims, or specifically appropriate for payment of this particular claim.

And only the lege can grant permission to file a lawsuit.  Everything else is by negotiation or administrative hearing.

Yeah--looking at it this morning, I agree that this falls under 2260.  So they get a contested case hearing and possible administrative appeal.  But they don't get to file suit straight away.

[oSuJeff97 3435]

2 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I highly doubt any current Big 12 schools expect to schedule either Texas or OU in the future non-conference slate.  Maybe some fans, but they're idiots.

Yeah.

And here in Oklahoma the spin from the OU media/Sports Talk/Social Media echo chamber is that OSU is somehow responsible for ending the Bedlam football series because our AD recently said it would be "logistically difficult" for the Bedlam football series to resume any time soon.

Never mind the fact that:

• OU is the party that effectively ended the series by deciding to leave the conference.
• Both OSU and OU already have multiple home-and-home P5 schools scheduled over the next decade.
• We literally don't even know the exact year when OU will be playing in the SEC nor what their schedule would be.

I personally don't care either way if Bedlam continues in football. My hunch is that it will, but probably not until 2030-35. 

I don't know that we'll play Texas again in football, which is too bad. I definitely want to play both in every other sport though, especially basketball and baseball.

[Al_4_ISU 12528]

10 minutes ago, oSuJeff97 said:

Yeah.

And here in Oklahoma the spin from the OU media/Sports Talk/Social Media echo chamber is that OSU is somehow responsible for ending the Bedlam football series because our AD recently said it would be "logistically difficult" for the Bedlam football series to resume any time soon.

Never mind the fact that:

• OU is the party that effectively ended the series by deciding to leave the conference.
• Both OSU and OU already have multiple home-and-home P5 schools scheduled over the next decade.
• We literally don't even know the exact year when OU will be playing in the SEC nor what their schedule would be.

I personally don't care either way if Bedlam continues in football. My hunch is that it will, but probably not until 2030-35. 

I don't know that we'll play Texas again in football, which is too bad. I definitely want to play both in every other sport though, especially basketball and baseball.

OU 100% ended Bedlam by leaving OSU.  Anyone that expects OSU to play ball with OU in the future is a dumbass.

I know I'm supposed to say something like "OSU should just be grateful for the money generated by OU yada yada yada" but anyone that's looking at this with a modicum of objectivity would come to the conclusion that this ended as a result of OU's actions, not OSU's.  And OSU is under no obligation to renew it for OU's sake.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

25 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

OU 100% ended Bedlam by leaving OSU.  Anyone that expects OSU to play ball with OU in the future is a dumbass.

I know I'm supposed to say something like "OSU should just be grateful for the money generated by OU yada yada yada" but anyone that's looking at this with a modicum of objectivity would come to the conclusion that this ended as a result of OU's actions, not OSU's.  And OSU is under no obligation to renew it for OU's sake.

The game should be played for the sake of both teams' fans.  Just like we should have always played A&M.  Rivalry games are what makes college football fun.

[Al_4_ISU 12528]

4 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

The game should be played for the sake of both teams' fans.  Just like we should have always played A&M.  Rivalry games are what makes college football fun.

The game should be played, and rivalry games ARE what makes college football fun.

But IMO that's more of an argument against realignment than anything.  Once schools start blowing up conferences to consolidate marketing brands, there's no longer an obligation for the damaged institution to keep the series.  If playing OSU was important to OU, they could have stayed.  Just like if Aggy wanted to keep playing UT, they could have stayed.  Aggy and UT will obviously be reunited, but I think the point still stands.

Edited December 15, 2021 by Al_4_ISU

[oSuJeff97 3435]

32 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

The game should be played for the sake of both teams' fans.  Just like we should have always played A&M.  Rivalry games are what makes college football fun.

Agreed.

That's why the greedy fucking assholes that have been fueling completely unnecessary conference realignment for the last decade are fucking shitheads.

There was absolutely nothing wrong with the state of the P5 conferences in 2009-10.  If everything was suddenly re-set that state, guess what - everyone would still be printing money.

But no - we have to have rich assholes squabbling and moving around because they aren't as rich as the other rich assholes and thus destroying the thing that made college athletics great in the first place, which are the in-state and regional rivalries.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

30 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

The game should be played, and rivalry games ARE what makes college football fun.

But IMO that's more of an argument against realignment than anything.  Once schools start blowing up conferences to consolidate marketing brands, there's no longer an obligation for the damaged institution to keep the series.  If playing OSU was important to OU, they could have stayed.  Just like if Aggy wanted to keep playing UT, they could have stayed.  Aggy and UT will obviously be reunited, but I think the point still stands.

I am glad to head to the SEC because currently Texas only plays one of its historical rivals.  In the SEC, we will play all three every year.

OU and Okie State should figure out a way to play every year.  I would offer the game to Okie State first if I was OU.  If they turn them down, I would offer an annual game to Nebraska.

Texas and OU played for a 100 years despite being in different conferences.  Florida and Florida State do the same.  Iowa - ISU.  Notre Dame-USC. Michigan-Notre Dame. Army-Navy. UGA-Ga Tech. Pitt-WVU. KU-MU.

I don't care for realignment either.  My strong preference would have been to have a 10 team Big 12 -- the original 12 minus Baylor and K State -- so all teams played each other once a year and the NU-OU annual rivalry was preserved.  I think it would have been a really good conference.

[Al_4_ISU 12528]

1 minute ago, oSuJeff97 said:

Agreed.

That's why the greedy fucking assholes that have been fueling completely unnecessary conference realignment for the last decade are fucking shitheads.

There was absolutely nothing wrong with the state of the P5 conferences in 2009-10.  If everything was suddenly re-set that state, guess what - everyone would still be printing money.

But no - we have to have rich assholes squabbling and moving around because they aren't as rich as the other rich assholes and thus destroying the thing that made college athletics great in the first place, which are the in-state and regional rivalries.

Slow clap.

If you put the original Big 12 back together, it would be making very similar $ to what the Big 10 and SEC would be making.  

[Al_4_ISU 12528]

4 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I am glad to head to the SEC because currently Texas only plays one of its historical rivals.  In the SEC, we will play all three every year.

OU and Okie State should figure out a way to play every year.  I would offer the game to Okie State first if I was OU.  If they turn them down, I would offer an annual game to Nebraska.

Texas and OU played for a 100 years despite being in different conferences.  Florida and Florida State do the same.  Iowa - ISU.  Notre Dame-USC. Michigan-Notre Dame. Army-Navy. UGA-Ga Tech. Pitt-WVU. KU-MU.

I don't care for realignment either.  My strong preference would have been to have a 10 team Big 12 -- the original 12 minus Baylor and K State -- so all teams played each other once a year and the NU-OU annual rivalry was preserved.  I think it would have been a really good conference.

Keep KSU and have Arky in the mix instead of Baylor.

Obviously I'm aware that you can keep rivalries in different leagues, but it's a different story when the schools in question were never in the same conference.  OU and OSU have been in the same conference for 60+ years.

[SimonBolivar 10961]

42 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

The game should be played for the sake of both teams' fans.  Just like we should have always played A&M.  Rivalry games are what makes college football fun.

I 100% agree, but it seems that college football has been in a large shift against provincialism with the playoffs meaning a lot more than rivalries which wasn't always the case. The playoffs will make the money and get the eyeballs, but nothing beats a rivalry where alumni of two schools that hate each other fill a stadium.

[Dirk X West 772]

2 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Keep KSU and have Arky in the mix instead of Baylor.

Obviously I'm aware that you can keep rivalries in different leagues, but it's a different story when the schools in question were never in the same conference.  OU and OSU have been in the same conference for 60+ years.

UT and Baylor have been in the same conference for a lot longer than that, FWIW.

[Alien Octopus 603]

3 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Ehh.  Ready for this to be over and done.  This will just stay ugly and awkward.  I think most folks have moved on mentally and would just rather be at the future than awkwardly waiting out the present.

But that said, we aren't going to cut you a deal to leave early for less, and I understand your hesitance to shell out the early exit fees.

I highly doubt any current Big 12 schools expect to schedule either Texas or OU in the future non-conference slate.  Maybe some fans, but they're idiots.

Texas will march Bevo out dropping a proverbial load on the BiG XII like it was the OU end zone. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

16 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Keep KSU and have Arky in the mix instead of Baylor.

Obviously I'm aware that you can keep rivalries in different leagues, but it's a different story when the schools in question were never in the same conference.  OU and OSU have been in the same conference for 60+ years.

I would prefer ten teams and getting rid of the two least valuable, which IMO were Baylor and K State.  Payouts would be higher since two less mouths at the trough.  And you get better matchups every year.  Colorado, Texas, Nebraska, OU, A&M play each other every year.  I am a big fan of the ten team conference round robin schedule.

I also would have had stricter rules on nonconference scheduling.  You get one patsy sunbelt type warm up.  That's it.  No FCS.  Rest are P5 or G5.  K State and others basically stole from the conference for years by refusing to schedule decent nonconference games that TV providers would covet.

[Zeus 6465]

4 years of lame duck in the worst conference in CFB wow going to be fun

[statsman 5497]

Know what I think is greedy? Big XII schools wanting and taking an equal share of media rights, even though they refuse to schedule non-conference games to make the media package more valuable (scheduling D-1AA teams for easy wins- that nobody else wants to see- rather than P5 name opponents- with the risk of jeapordizing bowl eligibility or conference schedule readiness). To me, that kind of free riding is greedy. 
 

Or wanting to free ride on Texas’ tier 3 rights. That’s greed, too. 

Edited December 15, 2021 by statsman

[Johnny Sack 8397]

12 minutes ago, statsman said:

Know what I think is greedy? Big XII schools wanting and taking an equal share of media rights, even though they refuse to schedule non-conference games to make the media package more valuable (scheduling D-1AA teams for easy wins- that nobody else wants to see- rather than P5 name opponents- with the risk of jeapordizing bowl eligibility or conference schedule readiness). To me, that kind of free riding is greedy. 
 

Or wanting to free ride on Texas’ tier 3 rights. That’s greed, too. 

Yep.  That shit scheduling hurt the conference.

[statsman 5497]

More precisely, that kind of scheduling didn’t help the conference, although it did help the individual schools doing it. They added wins, ensuring bowl eligibility. They got the exposure from playing Texas and OU, got equal revenue shares, and risked nothing. 
 
In the SEC, the lower profile teams agree to take turns playing week 1 conference games. They understand that they bear a risk of a loss, but add to the value of the SEC media contract. The other Big XII schools don’t go for that. It doesn’t help them, so they don’t do it. (Maybe they will in the future, after the networks explain it to them). 

[Hagbard Celine 10995]

5 hours ago, El Diablo said:

Nobody has scheduled aggy in football and that would be a nice payday. Other sports? it'll happen for sure.

you are suggesting that aggy scheduling an additional P5 home-and-home in lieu the 7th homegame each year, which happens to be an FCS walkover, is something they would ever consider

[Al_4_ISU 12528]

1 hour ago, Zeus said:

4 years of lame duck in the worst conference in CFB wow going to be fun

You're joining the Pac 12 for 4 years?  That's a twist.

[Al_4_ISU 12528]

Repost

Edited December 15, 2021 by Al_4_ISU

[Al_4_ISU 12528]

I fully support getting rid of FCS games and patsy scheduling.  I also think it's funny that some of you are oblivious to the reality that there are lesser value schools benefitting off your presence in the SEC too.  With Texas's brand, there's always going to be suckling pigs unless you had gone independent.

[Go Pokes 979]

2 hours ago, Zeus said:

4 years of lame duck in the worst conference in CFB wow going to be fun

What did I miss?  Are you guys going to the Pac 12 for a few years?  Or the ACC?  

[Vertigo 20365]

19 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I fully support getting rid of FCS games and patsy scheduling.  I also think it's funny that some of you are oblivious to the reality that there are lesser value schools benefitting off your presence in the SEC too.  With Texas's brand, there's always going to be suckling pigs unless you had gone independent.

Nobody is oblivious to that, but the slice of pie that Texas gets for going to the SEC grows regardless of the Vandy's and Kentucky's of the world. Sure, their slice grows too, but if you factor in long term brand impact it could be much more harmful to Texas to stay put. Plus, the recruiting issue was becoming a real problem. We see today how quickly that can start to fix itself. 

[LTtxfan 49405]

Bobby Burton mentioned today on their live YouTube Inside Texas National Signing Day show that he expects UT and blOU will be SEC in 2023...

[Al_4_ISU 12528]

12 minutes ago, Vertigo said:

Nobody is oblivious to that, but the slice of pie that Texas gets for going to the SEC grows regardless of the Vandy's and Kentucky's of the world. Sure, their slice grows too, but if you factor in long term brand impact it could be much more harmful to Texas to stay put. Plus, the recruiting issue was becoming a real problem. We see today how quickly that can start to fix itself. 

Yeah, I'm not looking to argue why Texas moved or if it will work.  Time will answer that question soon enough.  It's more a response to this idea that the Big 12 schools were just leeches, when you're still going to have plenty of leeches in the future, and the only way to have been "leech free" is Independence.

[0xdeadbeef 1653]

24 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I fully support getting rid of FCS games and patsy scheduling. 

Unfortunately, the SEC model of scheduling patsies and weak-P5 teams works pretty damn well.  Mixed that with the ESPN hype machine, you get built in ranking bonus.  To me it feels like there are less and less of the non-conference big time match ups.  OSU-Oregon was great, but that feels like an exception.  

 

Sadly, Alabama scheduling us next year fits that model...we are the weak P5 team...our blood may be blue and we have fat stacks of cash, but we are a weak team. 

 

[BigHornedLurker 1988]

3 minutes ago, LTtxfan said:

Bobby Burton mentioned today on their live YouTube Inside Texas National Signing Day show that he expects UT and blOU will be SEC in 2023...

for legal reasons all communications will continue to state 2025 until reality kicks in and we leave. I'm also optimistic the scheduling and buyout logistics will be settled by then . 

we'll also have the new schools coming in and the big12 trying to figure its own schedules out.

no one wants to do that shit twice, lawyers are just playing chicken at this point.  

[Vertigo 20365]

5 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Yeah, I'm not looking to argue why Texas moved or if it will work.  Time will answer that question soon enough.  It's more a response to this idea that the Big 12 schools were just leeches, when you're still going to have plenty of leeches in the future, and the only way to have been "leech free" is Independence.

I don't think the schools were leeches at all, they just happen to be smaller schools in most cases. I loved iowa state, ok state, and tech being in the same conference. Fun schools with great fans. 

[oSuJeff97 3435]

2 hours ago, statsman said:

Know what I think is greedy? Big XII schools wanting and taking an equal share of media rights, even though they refuse to schedule non-conference games to make the media package more valuable (scheduling D-1AA teams for easy wins- that nobody else wants to see- rather than P5 name opponents- with the risk of jeapordizing bowl eligibility or conference schedule readiness). To me, that kind of free riding is greedy. 
 

Or wanting to free ride on Texas’ tier 3 rights. That’s greed, too. 

Ummm... it's the fucking opposite of greed.  It's realizing that making the whole of the conference more valuable instead of just the few "brands" is better for everyone across the board.

You know who has had equal revenue sharing all along? The B1G and the SEC.  Funny how they are now the two most valuable leagues.

And you're seriously complaining about schools scheduling FCS teams? Go take a peak at the SEC schedule in mid-November and get back to me.

The "non-brands" in this league have more than held up their share of the bargain, in terms of creating value for the league. The same can't be said for the "brands."

[statsman 5497]

The SEC schools schedule patsies. They also take turns taking one for the good of the league media contract, by playing a league game in week 1. 
 
The Big 8 understood that they needed to let OU and NU run the league. The SWC was every man for himself, and only himself. We see which philosophy worked to last and endure. It’s crazy that he Big XII adopted the SWC ethos. 

[oSuJeff97 3435]

10 minutes ago, statsman said:

The SEC schools schedule patsies. They also take turns taking one for the good of the league media contract, by playing a league game in week 1. 
 
The Big 8 understood that they needed to let OU and NU run the league. The SWC was every man for himself, and only himself. We see which philosophy worked to last and endure. It’s crazy that he Big XII adopted the SWC ethos. 

The Big 12 kind of had to because OU, Nebraska, Texas and Texas A&M demanded it.  And now all four have left the league because the league wasn't "good enough."

If those four had been on board with equal revenue sharing from the start it would have worked just fine and the league would still be intact today, and probably the second most valuable league behind the SEC. 

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1292]

The Big 12 only sucks because Texas sucks. If Texas were as good as they were 20 years ago, a lot of people would view the Big 12 as the best league.

[statsman 5497]

Huh? That makes no sense (unless you really believe NU and TAMU when they say they left to seek equal revenue)

[Moose41 0]

The interesting part is that these are long term decisions based on short term realities.
 

in no particular order:

The subsidy problem isn’t going end once you’re in the SEC. It won’t take long for everyone to realize the top 8 are subsidizing the bottom 8. Then what?

NIL going to change a lot of economics.  As less money goes through the athletic department, some interesting issues will pop up.  There will always be money for football, but Tom Izzo just said his athletic director asked him to find local non-con games they could bus to in order to save some jack.  Is flying the tennis team to Gainesville or baseball to South Carolina going to be affordable for all schools? And we’re coming out of a period of historically low oil prices.  

High school football is dying. West coast, Midwest and east coast participation is shrinking. Participation rate is even down in Texas.  If you aren’t playing in talent fertile grounds, your coaches aren’t watching meaningful high school games in person on Friday night.  The biggest mistake Nebraska and Colorado made was leaving the fertile grounds of Texas.  And they’re never going to recover.   P12 is dead I. The water and they don’t even know it yet. B1G is also facing this problem to a lesser degree. 
 

Remaining B12 definitely going to take a step back but one thing they’ll have is proximity to good high school talent. 4 schools in Texas, OSU, Cincy and UCF will be able to recruit and BYU due to its unique mission will find talent. WVU is really the only one who is just clearly screwed.  If new B12 is smart, they try to balance out divisions among along the lines of 2 TX schools + Cincy and then other 2 TX schools + UCF.  I always felt the real problem with the original B12 was that the north schools were at a clear recruiting disadvantage. Particularly in those weird years where the last 3 games of the season were just round robin among the 4 TX schools. 

[bullet 1605]

1 hour ago, oSuJeff97 said:

The Big 12 kind of had to because OU, Nebraska, Texas and Texas A&M demanded it.  And now all four have left the league because the league wasn't "good enough."

If those four had been on board with equal revenue sharing from the start it would have worked just fine and the league would still be intact today, and probably the second most valuable league behind the SEC. 

Total nonsense.

The schools that were for unequal revenue sharing left.  Colorado, Nebraska, Texas A&M, Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas.  Only Kansas from the 7 "haves" remains.

And the Big 12 had far more equal revenue sharing than the Pac 12 or Big East at the time.

The Big 10 and SEC had equal revenue sharing because most of the schools were pretty equal.

 

['stache 21900]

16 hours ago, bullet said:

Total nonsense.

The schools that were for unequal revenue sharing left.  Colorado, Nebraska, Texas A&M, Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas.  Only Kansas from the 7 "haves" remains.

And the Big 12 had far more equal revenue sharing than the Pac 12 or Big East at the time.

The Big 10 and SEC had equal revenue sharing because most of the schools were pretty equal.

 

Wut? The current Big XII has only one team (Tech) to have never made a BCS or NY6 game. BIG has 4 (Minnesota, NW, Rutgers, Indiana). The SEC also has 4 (Missouri, South Carolina, Vanderbilt, Kentucky). The only Big XII school that has little interest in football is Kansas and even they won an Orange Bowl and had fans show up for a while. 

We all know we're heading towards Prestige Worldwide, so this bickering is pointless. UT and OU will make a ton more money.  When the SEC and BIG excise the "leeches" in a few years and combine, with Oregon, USC, and Clemson, they'll double their stash. That's where this will ultimately end up. Full doomsday will be if and when the teams become only tangentially related to the school where academics are optional.

Edited December 16, 2021 by 'stache