Ballboy534
Resident Rehabilitator
Yes, the SEC wants them.
That's why they're doing this.
West Virginia may be shit out of luck.
Nobody wants WVU anyway; Mizzou should just stay put.
Yes, the SEC wants them.
That's why they're doing this.
West Virginia may be shit out of luck.
I'm sure it is. But right now, they will make more money where they are. And stability is not an issue with the contract that the Big 12 has signed for Tier 1 and 2 rights.
This is a chancellor that just a few weeks ago was pledging loyalty and solidarity, and all but BEGGING OU and Texas not to go. And let's not forget the crying they did when they got shitted on by the Big 10 last year.
I'm just so tired of ALL this crap. Mizzou needs to decide WHO they are.....know their role and shut up.
SEC and ACC already declined WVU's applications. Who else is there to make a 14th other than Mizzou?
People "in the know" about WVU were very optimistic that they were about to be accepted by the SEC.
It appears this may have all been an attempt to force Mizzou to act now.
I honestly wasnt aware of this. Voted on yesterday or something right? I assume Mizzou didnt agree to this? and your right that makes the BIG12 pretty stable (for now). Im still betting Mizzou to the SEC and the BIG12 to come east.
RIP Missouri football.
Not really. The PAC have all but told them they are not wanted WITHOUT Texas. OU and OSU won't be going to the PAC.
Tier 1 and 2 rights being owned by the conference is the ultimate in stability.....because even if you leave, you don't have any tier 1 or 2 rights......so you make no TV revenue. NO conference is taking you without that situation being resolved.
Mizzou has wanted out for years. But stability and money are not the issues on the table.
No, weeks ago. Yesterday the vote was to extend it from 6 years to 13.
Not true
The conference's agreement would last for at least six years, Big 12 interim commissioner Chuck Neinas said Monday. It would be a symbolic indication that the embattled conference will persevere despite losing three members in the past 15 months.
But it is not considered a done deal.
“Each institution has its own protocol and policy,” Neinas said. “And each will have to go through its institutional procedure to get the grant-of-rights approved.”
Read more: Big 12 revenue-sharing deal sent to schools - San Antonio Express-News
As I said before the Presidents as the board of directors for the B12 approved it but each individual school must approve it to make it official.
WHERE have I stated it's a done deal?
It's on the table....and they've discussed making it 13 years instead of 6. OF COURSE every member institution has to AGREE to it, that's why we're waiting on Mizzou.
Do you argue just for the sake of arguing???
I'm sure it is. But right now, they will make more money where they are. And stability is not an issue with the contract that the Big 12 has signed for Tier 1 and 2 rights.
This is a chancellor that just a few weeks ago was pledging loyalty and solidarity, and all but BEGGING OU and Texas not to go. And let's not forget the crying they did when they got shitted on by the Big 10 last year.
I'm just so tired of ALL this crap. Mizzou needs to decide WHO they are.....know their role and shut up.
Not really. The PAC have all but told them they are not wanted WITHOUT Texas. OU and OSU won't be going to the PAC.
Tier 1 and 2 rights being owned by the conference is the ultimate in stability.....because even if you leave, you don't have any tier 1 or 2 rights......so you make no TV revenue. NO conference is taking you without that situation being resolved.
Mizzou has wanted out for years. But stability and money are not the issues on the table.
I honestly wasnt aware of this. Voted on yesterday or something right? I assume Mizzou didnt agree to this? and your right that makes the BIG12 pretty stable (for now). Im still betting Mizzou to the SEC and the BIG12 to come east.
No, weeks ago. Yesterday the vote was to extend it from 6 years to 13.
I don't argue for the sake of arguing. Like I said before I don't like you because you post false information and when called on it you back off for a while but a week or two later post the same false information again.
Then why are yuo arguing nobody wants a team with no Tier 1 or 2 rights. Why when hunzworth asked when this happened you said a few weeks ago but the vote yesterday was to increase it from 6 to 13 years.
Why would you argue there is stability when it hasn't been approved by the schools?
It might be like talking to a brick wall to you, but it's like talking to a back pedaling Texas fan to me.
*sigh* lets see if you can figure this out.
This is on the table because it's expected that EVERY school in this conference WILL agree, or find a new conference. It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when. It's all but a done deal. Mizzou has decided they aren't sure they want to sign up for that long.......they're still pining away for the Big 10.
It's not TECHNICALLY done, but we all know that schools that do not agree will not be a part of this conference.
Geez, it CAN'T be this hard for you to figure out. There would be no point in extending the timetable if this were not all but accepted as going to happen.
You're a smart guy, I shouldn't have to connect all the dots for you. It's simply that you CHOOSE to argue over points not in contention to begin with. Good luck with that, mr neg repper.....