Non-Key Tweets | Page 689 | The Boneyard

Non-Key Tweets

nelsonmuntz said:
The Land Thieves post is the prototype of a made up "insider" post. Start with something verifiable as the premise, and then slowly proceed into wilder and wilder speculative fantasies. OU and OSU were turned down by the Pac 12 even though it looked like they were going to join. That is verifiable. The rest of the post lives in a world where OU has never signed a GOR and every conference wants them, and he closes with an idea that he thinks might be cool.
Expand ...

Oh, I agree. In a thread where Dude and M H ver3 tweets are posted, I thought this fit right in.
 
From my brief encounter with lanthieves the consensus seemed to oppose the B1G
as they feared it was the road to become irrelevant. Their. belief is the move has been a disaster for their old rival Nebraska money not withstanding.
Texas ( the state) is very important for them to remain relevant so a move with UT has to be a precondition for any B1G move. That's a love hate or codependent relationship if ever there was one.
Otherwise the SEC with A&M would be much preferable as it's also culturally a much better fit than the B1G.
Make a list of B1G teams with OU and ask yourself which one of these is not like the others. Ironically UT is culturally more of a B1G team than OU.
I think if there was a way to preserve and strengthen the B12 OU would love that idea best of all unfortunately that ship seems to be departing.
 
Read from bottom to top:

  1. Greg Flugaur ‏@flugempire 38m38 minutes ago
  2. Me: But today, if you choose to believe our OU Contacts, the door on a UC/UH package is shut...at least from OU perspective. Door slam.
  3. 2 retweets 2 likes
  1. Flugaur ‏@flugempire 40m40 minutes ago
  2. Me: What we didn't get from OU Contacts today is what 2 school package are they supporting now if any. In Winter it was UC/UConn..
  3. 2 retweets 1 like
  1. Me: From what I know of these guys.. Same guys who broke B12 wrestling expansion...IMO take this serious. OU & UT still far apart on vision
  2. 1 retweet 3 likes
  1. Greg Flugaur ‏@flugempire 51m51 minutes ago
  1. BTM:OU Contacts "Expect Oklahoma to vote against UC/UH package. Expect Oklahoma to walk away from any 2016 resolution."
  2. 7 retweets 7 likes


  2. Greg Flugaur ‏@flugempire 55m55 minutes ago
  3. BTM:OU Contact "Texas is pushing Expansion Package which does not elevate value of B12 Conference toward a possible new Network"
  4. 4 retweets 3 likes
 
mavblues said:
Read from bottom to top:

  1. Greg Flugaur ‏@flugempire 38m38 minutes ago
  2. Me: But today, if you choose to believe our OU Contacts, the door on a UC/UH package is shut...at least from OU perspective. Door slam.
  3. 2 retweets 2 likes
  1. Flugaur ‏@flugempire 40m40 minutes ago
  2. Me: What we didn't get from OU Contacts today is what 2 school package are they supporting now if any. In Winter it was UC/UConn..
  3. 2 retweets 1 like
  1. Me: From what I know of these guys.. Same guys who broke B12 wrestling expansion...IMO take this serious. OU & UT still far apart on vision
  2. 1 retweet 3 likes
  1. Greg Flugaur ‏@flugempire 51m51 minutes ago
  1. BTM:OU Contacts "Expect Oklahoma to vote against UC/UH package. Expect Oklahoma to walk away from any 2016 resolution."
  2. 7 retweets 7 likes

  2. Greg Flugaur ‏@flugempire 55m55 minutes ago
  3. BTM:OU Contact "Texas is pushing Expansion Package which does not elevate value of B12 Conference toward a possible new Network"
  4. 4 retweets 3 likes
Expand ...
Not the best news, but for those of thirsting for even a NKT, it's like a long cool drink of water.
 
CL82 said:
Not the best news, but for those of thirsting for even a NKT, it's like a long cool drink of water.
Expand ...

I mean if the only package being voted on is UC/HOU that's not gonna move the needle. No chance that group has 8 votes at all.
 
NYUConn said:
That seems to jive with what Bohls said the other day if memory serves.

Welp, just need to keep winning. Beat Cuse then upset Houston again, that'll get UT's attention.
Expand ...

No, that won't get UT's attention. UT isn't supporting Houston's candidacy, if it is doing so, because Houston is playing good football. UT is pushing them, again if it is doing so, because they are under orders to do so from the Texas Governor's office and they are trying to score political points in Austin.

How you think us beating Houston changes that is beyond me.
 
businesslawyer said:
No, that won't get UT's attention. UT isn't supporting Houston's candidacy, if it is doing so, because Houston is playing good football. UT is pushing them, again if it is doing so, because they are under orders to do so from the Texas Governor's office and they are trying to score political points in Austin.

How you think us beating Houston changes that is beyond me.
Expand ...

Because Optimism.
 
Texas is simply sabotaging the process by backing a candidate that is unacceptable as #12 to over half the membership of the Big 12. Nothing more interesting than that.

It looks like expansion is close to dead now.
 
UT's goal is:

1. Retain the status quo by killing expansion...a poison pill of 2 teams with UH as one probably does that...

2. Since UT was forced to publically agree to expansion due to Texas politics then only agree to expansion which allows UT to maintain control of the B12 with a larger % Texas voting block. That means increasing only by 2 with UH as one of the teams.

UT wants the Big12 to continue but only on its current terms. Those terms include UT having a special deal (LHN) and the rest of the B12 being indentured to UT. A 14 team Big12 with an expanded national footprint only hurts UT's power ..why would UT agree to expansion teams which allow the other Big12 programs more stability in the future? UT rules by fear...a stable, revenue sharing, nationwide B12 doesn't increase the fear.

If the above Flug tweet is true it is actually ok news for UConn. Sure, a big win would be getting into the Big12 but a much, much bigger loss would be UH/UC leaving with UConn staying in the AAC. We may hate the AAC but an AAC without UC/UH is not sustainable and would require drastic actions. The kind of drastic actions which might hurt UConn's P5 opportunities in the future.

No B12 expansion only means there is a monster shake up coming before 2024 because the B12 is a dead conference walking. At this point a "push" may actually be good news for UConn. There is no reason to think the PAC, SEC, BIG and ACC will all not try to pluck programs from the B12 and UConn is a nice partner school.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Texas is simply sabotaging the process by backing a candidate that is unacceptable as #12 to over half the membership of the Big 12. Nothing more interesting than that.

It looks like expansion is close to dead now.
Expand ...

Yes, it looks like UT doesn't want the Big 12 to need it less. It's like a dealer trying to keep its addicted customers from going clean. They don't support adding members that would allow a network...because that threatens the LHN and puts pressure on the B12 to collectively sell T3 rights, and UT doesn't want that. So it wants members to get to a 12 team CCG, but those members can't actually help toward a network (UH not UConn).

You can imagine it in 2025 right. The 12 team Big 12, with UC and UConn, votes to establish a B12N, and give up T3 rights. UT then has two options, give up the LHN or go independent. It is working to keep the B12 as the one P5 league it can be in with the LHN. It probably loved BYU because they would also support keeping T3 rights indefinitely.
 
HuskyHawk said:
Yes, it looks like UT doesn't want the Big 12 to need it less. It's like a dealer trying to keep its addicted customers from going clean. They don't support adding members that would allow a network...because that threatens the LHN and puts pressure on the B12 to collectively sell T3 rights, and UT doesn't want that. So it wants members to get to a 12 team CCG, but those members can't actually help toward a network (UH not UConn).

You can imagine it in 2025 right. The 12 team Big 12, with UC and UConn, votes to establish a B12N, and give up T3 rights. UT then has two options, give up the LHN or go independent. It is working to keep the B12 as the one P5 league it can be in with the LHN. It probably loved BYU because they would also support keeping T3 rights indefinitely.
Expand ...

There is a 0% chance that the Big 12 would kick UT out if they refused to give up their T3 rights.
 
Not that I expect this to happen, but if the Big 12 doesn't want to look too foolish by going through all this and then not expanding at all, a 2-team UConn/Houston package would seem to be a fairly reasonable compromise. UConn, more than any other candidate, furthers OU's goal of opening up new markets for a potential Big 12 Network, and UT still gets the Texas school it wants in. Assuming, of course, that both sides are actually interested in reaching a compromise, which seems a doubtful prospect at best.
 
This process should have been over 2 weeks ago.

I get the sense that the whole song-and-dance was the B12 biding their time to see if they could resolve things. Disagreements behind the scenes lead to stalling tactics.

The whole thing was sordid.
 
CallMeBruce said:
There is a 0% chance that the Big 12 would kick UT out if they refused to give up their T3 rights.
Expand ...

It isn't a "kick out" situation. It's a question of the league wanting a network and voting for one, and UT being forced into a difficult decision. They can't keep LHN in any other league, and likely don't want to give the B12 leverage against them later.
 
I still don't see how they turn down $50-$100m a year for the next 8 years. Especially after going through this very ridiculous, very public process.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Texas is simply sabotaging the process by backing a candidate that is unacceptable as #12 to over half the membership of the Big 12. Nothing more interesting than that.

It looks like expansion is close to dead now.
Expand ...
It's a little more interesting than that because they are doing it in a way that scores points with the Texas legislature and causes Houston not to oppose their Houston campus.

Well played by them.
 
HuskyHawk said:
It isn't a "kick out" situation. It's a question of the league wanting a network and voting for one, and UT being forced into a difficult decision. They can't keep LHN in any other league, and likely don't want to give the B12 leverage against them later.
Expand ...

They also can't be forced to give up their T3 rights. There's no voting on that. If Texas says they're not giving up T3 rights, then it doesn't matter what the rest of the league wants.
 
Even Flug has written off UConn so no expansion is probably our best outcome.
If AAC stays intact a raid on the MW is very plausible..
 
dwalks93 said:
UT's goal is:

1. Retain the status quo by killing expansion...a poison pill of 2 teams with UH as one probably does that...

2. Since UT was forced to publically agree to expansion due to Texas politics then only agree to expansion which allows UT to maintain control of the B12 with a larger % Texas voting block. That means increasing only by 2 with UH as one of the teams.

UT wants the Big12 to continue but only on its current terms. Those terms include UT having a special deal (LHN) and the rest of the B12 being indentured to UT. A 14 team Big12 with an expanded national footprint only hurts UT's power ..why would UT agree to expansion teams which allow the other Big12 programs more stability in the future? UT rules by fear...a stable, revenue sharing, nationwide B12 doesn't increase the fear.

If the above Flug tweet is true it is actually ok news for UConn. Sure, a big win would be getting into the Big12 but a much, much bigger loss would be UH/UC leaving with UConn staying in the AAC. We may hate the AAC but an AAC without UC/UH is not sustainable and would require drastic actions. The kind of drastic actions which might hurt UConn's P5 opportunities in the future.

No B12 expansion only means there is a monster shake up coming before 2024 because the B12 is a dead conference walking. At this point a "push" may actually be good news for UConn. There is no reason to think the PAC, SEC, BIG and ACC will all not try to pluck programs from the B12 and UConn is a nice partner school.
Expand ...
Here is the crazy thing. Schools not named Texas are going to walk from $150M over the next 8 years for the promise of nothing in return?

That makes zero sense.

Something else has to be going on.
 
CL82 said:
Not the best news, but for those of thirsting for even a NKT, it's like a long cool drink of water.
Expand ...

Actually not bad news as far as I'm concerned. Assuming it's true, it takes our worst case scenario (UC/UH) off the table.

It may result in no expansion at all, but at this point I'm kinda OK with that.
 

Online statistics

Members online
146
Guests online
2,373
Total visitors
2,519
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
164,264
Messages
4,389,693
Members
10,197
Latest member
Whizzlerr


.
..
Top Bottom