In the thread regarding the upcoming Big 12 Meeting, there seems to be a fair amount of chatter with regards to the long-term future of the Big 12 Conference.
Apparently there is still A&M sentiment towards the Southeastern Conference.
I had also heard rumblings that the teams in the South did not have to sign the so-called 10-year pledge to stay in the conference so I did some checking regarding the issue. I found this from the Moderator of AllBuffs.com, a University of Colorado website, which I found to be very interesting. It corroberates what I have been hearing that not a single school from the South signed any such agreement:
"Earlier this week, Texas president Bill Powers suggested that the continuing loyalty to the Big 12 would be sort of on the honor system, with each school pledging a long-term commitment.
Then Kansas athletic director Lew Perkins suggested a binding 10-year agreement in a story on AOL FanHouse.
OK, here's the explanation. Just got off the phone with Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe for a column that will run Sunday. In the process, I asked him about the apparent discrepancy.
Here's what Beebe said: As part of their plans for continuing the Big 12 with impending defections, Kansas, Kansas State, Baylor, Iowa State and Missouri agreed to 10-year commitments as a sign to other schools that might have considered joining or remaining in the league. The 10-year commitment now only applies to those five and may not be even applicable given the change in circumstances.
That said, Beebe acknowledged that the league might revisit its by-laws to strengthen its membership commitment."
I am not sure who you can believe regading these commitments, but I have been hearing rumblings to this effect for the past week.
I also found a portion of an article on CBS Sports' website (by Dennis Dodd) quite interesting:
"We already see reports of Texas, Texas A&M and Oklahoma sharing the Colorado and Nebraska buyout money. Why not? That's the price the likes of Missouri pay for being able to play in a BCS league at this point. Don't forget that Missouri's public stance got us to this place. In the end, it had nowhere to go. Missouri chancellor Brady Deaton should be flying to Austin right now to polish the Mercedes of Texas' president Bill Powers.
If true, this is alll very interesting and certainly doesn't bode well with regards to the long-term survival of the Big 12. There seems to be every indication that the four remaining schools in the North are being railroaded by Texas and their willing accomplises in the South. At some point, in spite of the supposed security they received when the Big 12 announced it would remain a player, these schools most likely will say enough is enough.
Apparently there is still A&M sentiment towards the Southeastern Conference.
I had also heard rumblings that the teams in the South did not have to sign the so-called 10-year pledge to stay in the conference so I did some checking regarding the issue. I found this from the Moderator of AllBuffs.com, a University of Colorado website, which I found to be very interesting. It corroberates what I have been hearing that not a single school from the South signed any such agreement:
"Earlier this week, Texas president Bill Powers suggested that the continuing loyalty to the Big 12 would be sort of on the honor system, with each school pledging a long-term commitment.
Then Kansas athletic director Lew Perkins suggested a binding 10-year agreement in a story on AOL FanHouse.
OK, here's the explanation. Just got off the phone with Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe for a column that will run Sunday. In the process, I asked him about the apparent discrepancy.
Here's what Beebe said: As part of their plans for continuing the Big 12 with impending defections, Kansas, Kansas State, Baylor, Iowa State and Missouri agreed to 10-year commitments as a sign to other schools that might have considered joining or remaining in the league. The 10-year commitment now only applies to those five and may not be even applicable given the change in circumstances.
That said, Beebe acknowledged that the league might revisit its by-laws to strengthen its membership commitment."
I am not sure who you can believe regading these commitments, but I have been hearing rumblings to this effect for the past week.
I also found a portion of an article on CBS Sports' website (by Dennis Dodd) quite interesting:
"We already see reports of Texas, Texas A&M and Oklahoma sharing the Colorado and Nebraska buyout money. Why not? That's the price the likes of Missouri pay for being able to play in a BCS league at this point. Don't forget that Missouri's public stance got us to this place. In the end, it had nowhere to go. Missouri chancellor Brady Deaton should be flying to Austin right now to polish the Mercedes of Texas' president Bill Powers.
If true, this is alll very interesting and certainly doesn't bode well with regards to the long-term survival of the Big 12. There seems to be every indication that the four remaining schools in the North are being railroaded by Texas and their willing accomplises in the South. At some point, in spite of the supposed security they received when the Big 12 announced it would remain a player, these schools most likely will say enough is enough.
Last edited: