Realignment talk not going away

[TKthunder2 4981]

6 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

If what I read from some posters here we have a lot of leverage with the vote and them needing 8/10 votes. We tell them we would be no votes unless they let us out of the GOR for a majorly reduced cost or the 18 month by law removed so we can leave earlier. 
 

we Oklahoma and us vote no then all it would take would be one id the big 12 schools outside of tech TCU and Baylor to vote no as well. 
 

 

Bowlsby definitely outplayed his hand here IMO. 

According to the reports out of Houston, UH was (or will be) unanimously voted into the conference, so…

[BurntOrange&White 39694]

Just now, TKthunder2 said:

According to the reports out of Houston, UH was (or will be) unanimously voted into the conference, so…

I guess we will wait and see how many votes are. But then again not getting any more technical but doesn’t just inviting other schools kind of fuck with the GOR?

[TKthunder2 4981]

1 minute ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I guess we will wait and see how many votes are. But then again not getting any more technical but doesn’t just inviting other schools kind of fuck with the GOR?

That’s exactly where my thoughts were going, but I think the AAC has a two year notification requirement so who knows.

Edited September 3, 2021 by TKthunder2

[TaxMaster 6]

I think the big 12 needs to either commit to maximizing their returns in the short run or focus on growing the big 12 in a way that in the medium/long-run can simultaneously make the conference stronger and weaken the B10 and SEC. If half the B12 is just looking to make as much money as they can until they can jump ship when the B10 and PAC have to expand, then BYU, Boise State, UCF, and then Cincy would probably be the mix to get you the most added viewers for nationally televised games. Most people aren’t going to watch those teams play a conference game at 2:30 on a Saturday- but they’ll be able to get prime time, nationally televised games if they schedule decent OOC teams. On the other hand if the B12 wants the expansion teams to be able to be serious competitors in the long run and make other conferences weaker, I’d think they’d be better off expanding with Cincy, UH, Memphis, and UCF. Adding Cincy would allow you to steal some good recruits from the B10, UCF gives you a chance to steal recruits from SEC East territory, Memphis can steal recruits from some SEC West teams, and Houston will help keep talent in Texas. There is absolutely a ceiling on how good BYU and Boise State can be. Kids don’t want to go to Idaho and definitely don’t want to be Mormon. UCF,  Cincy, UH, and Memphis could absolutely improve and build themselves into better teams with better talent (and ultimately pull more viewers) if they were in a P5.

[LTtxfan 49003]

3 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Didn’t they just bring it back in 2020 when they played here?   Covid revenue casualty?

Had to cut it July 2020...

Boise State announced July 2 it was cutting its baseball and swimming and diving programs, and despite the fundraising efforts, university president Dr. Marlene Tromp reiterated in a statement on July 14 that the teams will not return.

“Unfortunately, the university had to act quickly to address current budget challenges — which have been acutely compounded by COVID-19 — and to create a sustainable budget for the future,” she said. “A decision of this magnitude required serious and sustained in-depth analysis in athletics and with senior leaders at the university and was not reached in haste or made lightly.” 

https://www.idahostatesman.com/sports/college/mountain-west/boise-state-university/article244169362.html

[LTtxfan 49003]

3 hours ago, Macklemore said:

Sorry Cougar High is joining the XII. 
The Coogs are expected to make the leap and move on from the American Athletic Conference, a person with knowledge of the talks said. A vote could come as early as next week. The Dallas Morning News reported the expansion timetable “remains very fluid,” with one source saying “it can move as fast as everyone wants it to.”

 

 

[bullet 1596]

3 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

I'll agree with a caveat. The UT System, outside of UT - Austin, needs to get better. UTSA and UTA have a very long way to go. Both should be excellent schools, and they aren't. 

Agree also.

UTA is working on it.  Think UTSA (and UTEP) is just too much of a local commuter option.  UTA has a good chance to qualify for the Texas National Research University Fund when they review in the Spring.  They made one year of qualifications this year.  They need to repeat.  UTD made it a couple years ago.  Houston and Tech made it several years ago.  UTSA & UTEP are a long ways away.  Texas St. and North Texas are eligible, but don't appear like they will ever make it.

[bullet 1596]

2 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

They have both made really strong improvements over the last decade.  UTA just got approval for NRUF funding (that only Tech, UH, and UTD had previously) and if UTSA merges with UTHSCSA then they’ll be in a good spot too.

Did they?  I thought they just made the first year of two?

[bullet 1596]

2 hours ago, Hornbeliever said:

OK, repeating since I have same question.   What does adding these folks mean for us?  What triggers a definitive plan for a move so that our recruiting is only hindered by one thing and not two.

Nothing directly for us.  But it means they at least have a plan after the divorce.  Means settlement talks can begin in earnest.

[kopp0e 1135]

1 hour ago, TaxMaster said:

I think the big 12 needs to either commit to maximizing their returns in the short run 

That didn't work in 2010/ 2011/ 2016 & likely won't work in 2021...

[SimonBolivar 10947]

Hell yeah good for Houston.

 

We were always going to be a tier below P4 when OUUT announced they were moving out so getting a hate division of Baylor, UH, oSu, TCU, Tech, +1 (hopefully BYU) is the best case scenario for BU. Now if only we could make ISU our permanent cross division rival. 

Edited September 3, 2021 by SimonBolivar

[Macklemore 2870]

5 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

We were always going to be a tier below P4 when OUUT announced they were moving out so getting a hate division of Baylor, UH oSu, TCU, Tech, +1 (hopefully BYU) is the best case scenario for BU. Now if only we could make ISU our permanent cross division rival. 

The XII without UT and OU but with those 4 new teams has 8 teams in the top 40 in the AP poll including “others receiving votes”. ISU and Cinci are ranked higher than any PAC 12 schools. Take out Clemson and NC, the rest of the ACC compared to the XII without Cinci or ISU pretty similar. The “middle class” of the new XII is better than that of the PAC 12. Obviously, the PAC 12 has better and more recognizable schools but for actual on the field measurables the XII is better. 

Edited September 3, 2021 by Macklemore

[SimonBolivar 10947]

3 minutes ago, Macklemore said:

The XII without UT and OU but with those 4 new teams has 8 teams in the top 40 in the AP poll including “others receiving votes”. ISU and Cinci are ranked higher than any PAC 12 schools. Take out Clemson and NC, the rest of the ACC compared to the XII without Cinci or ISU pretty similar. The “middle class” of the new XII is better than that of the PAC 12. Obviously, the PAC 12 has better and more recognizable schools but for actual on the field measurables the XII is better. 

Oh yeah, that will be a stout football conference, but I meant more from a perception point of view with 0 blue bloods.

[BurntOrange&White 39694]

1 minute ago, SimonBolivar said:

Oh yeah, that will be a stout football conference, but I meant more from a perception point of view with 0 blue bloods.

Should be pretty good in basketball as well.

[Napoleon 8615]

15 hours ago, Mittens said:

…Boise is absolute shit everywhere other than the football W/L column… In 40+ years of D1 play, hoops has only been to the Tournament 7 times, with zero wins, and they have been in the play in round the last 2 times…

QUESTION:

Did Shaka Smart’s dad coach basketball at Boise State for like 40+ years?

🤔

[TKthunder2 4981]

7 hours ago, bullet said:

Did they?  I thought they just made the first year of two?

You’re probably right I likely just read the headline.

 

7 hours ago, bullet said:

Agree also.

UTA is working on it.  Think UTSA (and UTEP) is just too much of a local commuter option.  UTA has a good chance to qualify for the Texas National Research University Fund when they review in the Spring.  They made one year of qualifications this year.  They need to repeat.  UTD made it a couple years ago.  Houston and Tech made it several years ago.  UTSA & UTEP are a long ways away.  Texas St. and North Texas are eligible, but don't appear like they will ever make it.

IIRC program was essentially designed to get money to tech and uh so nothing to brag on them for specifically.  I read the report a year or two ago and UTSA was the next closest, so I wouldn’t put them in the same category as UTEP, TX St, or UNT.

[SimonBolivar 10947]

 

[BurntOrange&White 39694]

3 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

 

LMAO that aint happening....no way Oklahoma/Texas would take less revenue.

[TKthunder2 4981]

5 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

LMAO that aint happening....no way Oklahoma/Texas would take less revenue.

If we do it bumps down our exit fee which is two years of revenue.  I know we’re not staying but this likely works in our favor.

[BurntOrange&White 39694]

1 minute ago, TKthunder2 said:

If we do it bumps down our exit fee which is two years of revenue.  I know we’re not staying but this likely works in our favor.

Yup

[billfromlaketravis 11364]

13 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

 

We need to get the f*** out in 2022. I don't want to play BYU again. Straight nightmare fuel. 

[utee94 15746]

It doesn't work in our favor enough to make it worthwhile.  Regardless it doesn't matter, we'll be playing in the SEC for 2022/2023.

 

 

[Pato del Muerto 52354]

So how does this big12 expansion help us?  Those teams need to leave and join.do they have financial obligations to break?  Will they be content to wait in theory until 2025?  Or is the common goal of everything happening in time for next academic/athletic year and working towards that end?

I can’t imagine those 4 would want to join a big 14 with Texas and ou for 3 years and then rearrange everything again. 

[Thiefery 4969]

seems to me that if they announce this soon, it's because the newly added schools will be playing in the Big12 in 2022... while UT/ou move to play in the SEC..  UT and ou are going to break them off with a nice exit fee to leave, and with the expansion, I'm guessing they are hoping ESPN/Fox throw them some nickels in accommodating the Big 2 leaving 

[TrashMaster G 17395]

1 hour ago, SimonBolivar said:

 

Fuck that.  I don't want to play a single game in the B12 with UH as a conference mate.  Get us out.

And I would donate big $$$ to see UT register a no vote on UH, just as a middle finger to Fertitta.

[closetohumping 17408]

1 hour ago, SimonBolivar said:

 

This would effectively be a change in revenue share.  Would give us a legal reason to bolt.  Not a lawyer.

[closetohumping 17408]

1 hour ago, Pato del Muerto said:

So how does this big12 expansion help us?  Those teams need to leave and join.do they have financial obligations to break?  Will they be content to wait in theory until 2025?  Or is the common goal of everything happening in time for next academic/athletic year and working towards that end?

I can’t imagine those 4 would want to join a big 14 with Texas and ou for 3 years and then rearrange everything again. 

IMO.

1. Our cut of the pie gets smaller

2. We still have two votes I think?  Want us to play ball, let us leave.  

['stache 21778]

1 hour ago, closetohumping said:

IMO.

1. Our cut of the pie gets smaller

2. We still have two votes I think?  Want us to play ball, let us leave.  

If that were an issue we'd just not expand "at this time." Why would we do it now if it helped you leave earlier and without the buyout? I don't think the issues are related at all unless its part of a pre-arranged agreement on buyouts, etc.

[closetohumping 17408]

1 minute ago, 'stache said:

If that were an issue we'd just not expand "at this time." Why would we do it now if it helped you leave earlier and without the buyout? I don't think the issues are related at all unless its part of a pre-arranged agreement on buyouts, etc.

K, so you would extend offers that will be activated in 2025.  So we all ride the status quo chain until then?  At some point, you leftovers will need to play nice with ESPN.  Everything is up for negotiations.

['stache 21778]

8 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

K, so you would extend offers that will be activated in 2025.  So we all ride the status quo chain until then?  At some point, you leftovers will need to play nice with ESPN.  Everything is up for negotiations.

Of course it is, nobody believes that it'll be like this until 2025, but what incentive is there for us to just say "okay" unless ESPN is helping us land in a real conference? What can ESPN realistically threaten us with when the status quo would leave us in the AAC+ with shitty payouts. We're already living the worst case scenario. 

Edited September 3, 2021 by 'stache

[Tex-19 2869]

7 minutes ago, 'stache said:

If that were an issue we'd just not expand "at this time." Why would we do it now if it helped you leave earlier and without the buyout? I don't think the issues are related at all unless its part of a pre-arranged agreement on buyouts, etc.

Not disagreeing with your overall point, but the threat of waiting is that the landscape changes again and the B12 loses the chance to add these guys. Ex: if this gets blocked now, maybe in 1-2 years the ACC decides to expand and add UCF or Cincy. Maybe the PAC decides they want UH. And so on. 

Idk the bylaws and stuff, but IF Texas/OU have any power to block this, that is definitely some leverage for them to use in negotiations. Idk the specifics on ESPN either but would imagine they are a factor in all this somehow

['stache 21778]

7 minutes ago, Tex-19 said:

Not disagreeing with your overall point, but the threat of waiting is that the landscape changes again and the B12 loses the chance to add these guys. Ex: if this gets blocked now, maybe in 1-2 years the ACC decides to expand and add UCF or Cincy. Maybe the PAC decides they want UH. And so on. 

Idk the bylaws and stuff, but IF Texas/OU have any power to block this, that is definitely some leverage for them to use in negotiations. Idk the specifics on ESPN either but would imagine they are a factor in all this somehow

That’s about the least convincing argument possible. Those teams aren’t going anywhere, and if they go to ACC or PAC over us, we were fucked anyway and should probably just dissolve the football program.

[closetohumping 17408]

17 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Of course it is, nobody believes that it'll be like this until 2025, but what incentive is there for us to just say "okay" unless ESPN is helping us land in a real conference? What can ESPN realistically threaten us with when the status quo would leave us in the AAC+ with shitty payouts. We're already living the worst case scenario. 

Incentive is ESPN could up your payouts if you add the Fab four contingent on you letting Texas and ou leave early with a reduced buyout.  160 mil/8 is only 20 million.  Look long term not just in the moment.

[Tex-19 2869]

4 minutes ago, 'stache said:

That’s about the least convincing argument possible. Those teams aren’t going anywhere, and if they go to ACC or PAC over us, we were fucked anyway and should probably just dissolve the football program.

I think Bob Bowlsby and other people whose jobs depend on this stuff would find it quite convincing. Not so easy for them to just say fuck it and slink off to the G5

[Shaggybevo 353]

11 hours ago, bullet said:

Agree also.

UTA is working on it.  Think UTSA (and UTEP) is just too much of a local commuter option.  UTA has a good chance to qualify for the Texas National Research University Fund when they review in the Spring.  They made one year of qualifications this year.  They need to repeat.  UTD made it a couple years ago.  Houston and Tech made it several years ago.  UTSA & UTEP are a long ways away.  Texas St. and North Texas are eligible, but don't appear like they will ever make it.

 

UTA recently achieved NRUF classification.  

UTSA is expected to achieve NRUF classification in 2022.

https://www.texastribune.org/2021/08/19/ut-arlington-tier-one/

 

Quote

UT-Arlington becomes latest emerging research university to reach “Texas Tier One” status

UT-Arlington is the fourth public university in the state to earn this distinction, out of eight schools aiming for the title, which allows the school to tap into an additional $6.2 million in funding.

by Kate McGee Aug. 19, 202112 PM Central

The University of Texas at Arlington has become the fourth university in the state to be considered a Texas Tier One university, a designation awarded to emerging research universities as part of the state’s effort to help them achieve national recognition as major research centers.

The designation will allow UT-Arlington to tap into an additional $6.2 million in state funding, a modest amount compared to the $125 million the university spent on research overall in 2020.

But university officials say the designation highlights the investment UT-Arlington is making in its research operations, which range from studies in aviation technology and Texas’ transportation infrastructure to natural disaster planning and health disparities.

“This is a game changer for UTA that has been nearly 12 years in the making,” said Teik C. Lim, interim president of UT-Arlington, in a press release. “Texas Tier One designation is a public invitation to take a fresh look at UTA’s academic and research excellence and the impact this special University is making on the region, the state of Texas and beyond.”

It also means Texas is making progress in state leaders’ goal of increasing the number of “tier one” universities in the state.

Universities reach this status under Texas’ National Research University Fund when they spend more than $45 million on restricted research two years in a row and meet four of six optional requirements two years in a row, including awarding more than 200 doctorates every year and enrolling a “freshman class with high academic achievement.”

UT-Arlington joins Texas Tech University and the University of Houston, which qualified in 2012, and the University of Texas at Dallas, which qualified in 2018.

The Texas Legislature created the NRUF in 2009 to help funnel research dollars toward eight emerging research schools since that type of funding is often provided to flagship universities, like the University of Texas at Austin and Texas A&M University.

According to a March report by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, the University of Texas at San Antonio is the next closest to reaching this designation, and could be officially approved as early as 2022. In 2020, it met three of the four required criteria and spent $56 million on research.

The University of Texas at El Paso spent more than $45 million on research in 2019 and 2020, but met just one of the other four necessary criteria to qualify. It does not have the potential to reach those criteria in 2021. Texas State University and the University of North Texas did not meet the research spending threshold in 2020, and neither are on track to reach it in 2021 either, the report stated.

In an email to the UT-Arlington campus community, Lim said that achieving the Texas Tier One status was one of his four goals during his tenure as interim president. He took the helm after the previous president, Vistasp Karbhari, stepped down last March after the university system began investigating potential wrongdoing in recruiting and enrollment practices at the university. The UT System recently announced it’s resuming a search for a new permanent president after pausing due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

UT-Arlington, Texas Tech, the University of North Texas and UT-Dallas were designated as Carnegie Tier One universities in 2016, when the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education listed the universities among 115 schools nationwide ranked highest for research activity.

UT-Austin, Texas A&M, Rice University, UT-El Paso and the University of Houston are also considered Carnegie Tier One universities.

 

 

 

['stache 21778]

3 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

Incentive is ESPN could up your payouts if you add the Fab four contingent on you letting Texas and ou leave early with a reduced buyout.  160 mil/8 is only 20 million.  Look long term not just in the moment.

Works for me if the numbers are right amd as long as we’re not asked to sign a grant of rights. That’s good faith negotiation with incentives. Someone mentioned threatening to veto expansion as leverage. That’s bad faith negotiating and not real leverage at all.

[billfromlaketravis 11364]

I think Texas/OU's real leverage is in OOC scheduling. Refusing to schedule the Irate 8 would be just as bad as getting left out of The Alliance. Both sides would be wise to make this divorce as amicable as possible. 

Before @'stache chokes on his dip, yes I realize OU has "promised" to continue to play Oklahoma State in all sports. 

[Lidig8r 1860]

Gentlemen, when aggy and Missery left the Big 12, they paid less than 1/2 of the exit fees.

https://alcalde.texasexes.org/2012/02/texas-am-missouri-to-pay-less-than-half-of-big-12-exit-fees/

So, a precedent has been set. If the Irate8, or 6 of the 8 agreed to this figure in 2012, the remaining Big 12 members (less WVU and TCU), are now in the position of having to explain why this less than 50% figure was acceptable in 2012 and not now.

Also, as with any breach of contract, the Irate8 has the duty to attempt to mitigate its damages. Perhaps explaining a bit why they are scrambling so much to look at new members to the conference.

[closetohumping 17408]

9 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

I think Texas/OU's real leverage is in OOC scheduling. Refusing to schedule the Irate 8 would be just as bad as getting left out of The Alliance. Both sides would be wise to make this divorce as amicable as possible. 

Before @'stache chokes on his dip, yes I realize OU has "promised" to continue to play Oklahoma State in all sports. 

Which is what I'm saying.  Yes, it sucks for them that we're leaving.  Yes, we want the 160 million to stick it to them, but divided by 8 schools, how much is that really worth in the long run.  Reduce the payout, let us leave early and maybe ESPN plays ball.  I highly doubt you'll be able to hold Texas/ou hostage, take away their votes and reduce their payouts. 

['stache 21778]

18 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

I think Texas/OU's real leverage is in OOC scheduling. Refusing to schedule the Irate 8 would be just as bad as getting left out of The Alliance. Both sides would be wise to make this divorce as amicable as possible. 

Before @'stache chokes on his dip, yes I realize OU has "promised" to continue to play Oklahoma State in all sports. 

I agree it should be amicable on both sides. Threatening to veto expansion or to not schedule isn't amicable and isn't leverage. Who gives a shit who we play non-conference. If we're in a conference with fucking Houston and UCF we're already irrelevant.

 

[closetohumping 17408]

2 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I agree it should be amicable on both sides. Threatening to veto expansion or to not schedule isn't amicable and isn't leverage. Who gives a shit who we play non-conference. If we're in a conference with fucking Houston and UCF we're already irrelevant.

 

There's nothing you can do at this point to make you relevant right?  Even the alleged desperate PAC didn't want to pursue you.  Playing ou/Texas will help financially right?

[El Squared 1793]

4 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

We need to get the f*** out in 2022. I don't want to play BYU again. Straight nightmare fuel. 

PTSD yes, nightmare no.

Now that we have a coach that secretes testosterone rather than mainly estrogen, we would be fine.

[ABSR 5289]

5 hours ago, SimonBolivar said:

 

I'm sure the AAC will come out with statements like "The events of recent days have verified that the schools have been contemplating and planning for the transition for months and this formal application is the culmination of those processes. "  Followed by strongly worded letters to be sent and discussion of predatory behavior.

Bowlsby will of course have to agree, right?

['stache 21778]

Just now, closetohumping said:

There's nothing you can do at this point to make you relevant right?  Even the alleged desperate PAC didn't want to pursue you.  Playing ou/Texas will help financially right?

By how much, lol? It's not going to make a damn bit of difference when we're making a third of the P4 schools. And you're right "nothing can make us relevant at this point" so why would we give a shit if you come to the table threatening to not schedule us anymore? Someone said it should be amicable on both sides. That's not amicable. What's not amicable about enforcing a contract buyout? That's the starting point. It'll be negotiated, sure, but you guys seem to be thinking that if you make these stupid threats we'll just roll over and say "okay" while accepting relegated status. Come the the table with something that both sides can accept.

[billfromlaketravis 11364]

I think OOC games can be meaningful. You better believe Florida State wants to beat Florida every year. Despite playing in the mighty SEC, Clemson is South Carolina's biggest game of the year. 

And let's not forget that Texas and OU was an OOC game for generations. 

[closetohumping 17408]

2 minutes ago, 'stache said:

By how much, lol? It's not going to make a damn bit of difference when we're making a third of the P4 schools. And you're right "nothing can make us relevant at this point" so why would we give a shit if you come to the table threatening to not schedule us anymore? Someone said it should be amicable on both sides. That's not amicable. What's not amicable about enforcing a contract buyout? That's the starting point. It'll be negotiated, sure, but you guys seem to be thinking that if you make these stupid threats we'll just roll over and say "okay" while accepting relegated status. Come the the table with something that both sides can accept.

Then what's amicable to you guys?  What do you think the Ir8 will find acceptable?  Obviously there are a lot of details and a lot to negotiate and there will be a compromise of some sort.  We're just fans, the lawyers will lawyers.  However, if you think you can just add four schools and cut into our revenue and that won't represent a breach of some sort, you're mistaken.  Also, ESPN will have to approve the additions.  Now, if the four schools are willing to come in and not get a lick of revenue then, yes, advantage Ir8.

Edited September 3, 2021 by closetohumping

[billfromlaketravis 11364]

21 minutes ago, Lidig8r said:

Gentlemen, when aggy and Missery left the Big 12, they paid less than 1/2 of the exit fees.

https://alcalde.texasexes.org/2012/02/texas-am-missouri-to-pay-less-than-half-of-big-12-exit-fees/

So, a precedent has been set. If the Irate8, or 6 of the 8 agreed to this figure in 2012, the remaining Big 12 members (less WVU and TCU), are now in the position of having to explain why this less than 50% figure was acceptable in 2012 and not now.

Also, as with any breach of contract, the Irate8 has the duty to attempt to mitigate its damages. Perhaps explaining a bit why they are scrambling so much to look at new members to the conference.

Good post. Let's pay half and get the f*** out of here. 

['stache 21778]

4 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

Then what's amicable to you guys?  What do you think the Ir8 will find acceptable?  Obviously there are a lot of details and a lot to negotiate and there will be a compromise of some sort.  We're just fans, the lawyers will lawyers.  However, if you think you can just add four schools and cut into our revenue and that won't represent a breach of some sort, you're mistaken.  Also, ESPN will have to approve the additions.  Now, if the four schools are willing to come in and not get a lick of revenue then, yes, advantage Ir8.

Someone already proposed an amicable result. Extra per year with the new schools long term and the buyouts are reduced. If adding schools is a breach that gives you an out, we won't expand right now. There's no need to do that without some incentive, which I expect is in the works. I suspect that if the invites are out and accepted in the next few weeks, it'll also say it'll be effective as of 2025. There's no breach there. Same reason you guys are saying it'll be 2025. No breach, no buyout, but we all know there is horse trading going on to speed up that timetable.

[closetohumping 17408]

3 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Someone already proposed an amicable result. Extra per year with the new schools long term and the buyouts are reduced. If adding schools is a breach that gives you an out, we won't expand right now. There's no need to do that without some incentive, which I expect is in the works. I suspect that if the invites are out and accepted in the next few weeks, it'll also say it'll be effective as of 2025. There's no breach there. Same reason you guys are saying it'll be 2025. No breach, no buyout, but we all know there is horse trading going on to speed up that timetable.

I like the direction this is going.  But does UT/ou essentially not have a vote now in future expansions? This is all moot if it's 2025 and all parties want to keep the status quo till 2025.

['stache 21778]

2 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

I like the direction this is going.  But does UT/ou essentially not have a vote now in future expansions? This is all moot if it's 2025 and all parties want to keep the status quo till 2025.

I saw something that withdrawn schools don't have voting rights but that you technically haven't withdrawn because on paper your move is still 2025 and the by-laws require 2 years notice so you don't need to formally withdraw yet. Who fucking knows. I just hope we land in the PAC eventually and if not the new AAC+ is at least still pretty relevant in basketball.