And I am pretty sure Cryami isn't getting a travel stipend for all their long travels.
Texas governor trying to force in Houston
- Thread starter Buckaineer
- Start date
And I am pretty sure Cryami isn't getting a travel stipend for all their long travels.
Nor is Notre Dame. How about Washington to UCLA? 1,136 miles. Texas A &M to Florida or South Carolina? Never mind, you get the point. College players get used to flying.
What's the distance from Miami to FSU? Miami to Clemson? Miami to Georgia Tech?
or
Rutgers to Maryland, Rutgers to PSU, Rutgers to Ohio State.
They have closer schools as well as ones far away--everyone WVU has in conference is far away and its why they also need some schools closer to play every other year.
or
Rutgers to Maryland, Rutgers to PSU, Rutgers to Ohio State.
They have closer schools as well as ones far away--everyone WVU has in conference is far away and its why they also need some schools closer to play every other year.
Who cares?
No one put a gun to our head and made us join the B12. It was an educated decision. WVU is making more money now than ever. While you've dedicated your whole life to posting on message boards, actual professionals have already addressed this issue by going to work everyday and used their brains to solve problems (you should try it sometime).
I'm sure the BIG 12 cares. Certain WVU cares. Change is constant.
As to message boards, hilarious as you make your 1156081st post you have the audacity to say anything to anyone else about posting.
You're the only one complaining. WVU is located in West Virginia. The B12 membership is comprised of schools from Texas, Kansas and Iowa. Trust me, WVU administrators looked at a map before we joined the B12.
WVU knew what it was getting into and your nagging doesn't help either side. You've obsessed over this expansion issue for years and it's no secret you've went off the deep end over it.
WVU joined the Big 12-2=10 because they needed two schools just to survive and WVU needed a landing spot 'cause the ACC, Big 10, and SEC didn't want us. We were willing to deal and they looked at the football program (at that time) as a credible addition. Good thing but Buck has made some good points through this expansion circus. I sense the hip thing is to trash him. I don't usually agree with him 100% but he does care...and has some valid arguments.
Each year half of the conference schools come to them. I agree two more eastern schools would be awesome, but whether it's two or four, one will be Houston.
I don't disagree, Houston is in if UT and the Texas governor are pushing them--because UT will make that threat that if they don't get what they want, they'll leave.
The conference has to end that threat by forcing a gor extension
Its odd. You PRETEND to be a WVU fan, yet fight against each and every single thing good for WVU. Then you attack WVU fans for having relevant discussion on message boards while you alone have 1156132 trolling or anti WVU posts.
Go look yourself in the mirror. I'm not interested in your pitiful attempts to attack me because you are afraid of what I'm saying.
WVU's PRESIDENT wants schools closer to WVU--why are you trying to argue against that? Its in WVUs BEST interest.
WVU was/is in no position to be picky. They ACC & SEC passed during the last expansion, and you know the B1G wasn't ever going to consider WVU. WVU, would have joined the PAC, if it was the only option to remain a power program.
I have to ask again, would you rather be in the BIG12 making P5 money with a few extra million in travel cost, or the AAC?
That is true, I have not been to a conference road game since we joined the BIG12, and I used to go all the time.
You assume you know what's best for WVU and put it out there as fact. No one is fighting anything good for WVU. We are fighting YOU because you've gone totally off the deep end the last couple years over this issue and imo, you're simply annoying and unlikeable.
Earlier in this thread or another, I said WVU needs to fight for what's best for them and the outcome will show where we stand in the conference.
If you want to pretend to speak for the University step up and put your name on it.
Why would anyone fear what you're saying? It's college football talk on a message board. More proof you've lost your mind and shouldn't be taken very seriously - you have a serious complex developing. You're totally unstable, Buck - I wish you luck but you've dedicated your whole life to this topic and now you're unhinged.
Has it ever occurred to you that some schools, WVU included, may not want an extended GOR for their own best interests?
I'm sure WVU officials would like a conference mate nearby, but thankfully our leadership seems to be rational and reasonable folks. What you don't seem to understand is WVU doesn't have much leverage to demand much of anything, unfortunately.
And now I ask...what could those best interests be other than what the extended GOR does (solidifies an expanded conference for the long haul) be? We are all waiting and eager to know?
Still waiting....
Just my Rambling questions/thoughts to your post above
Why would WVU not want to extend the GOR? Do you think there is an invite waiting in the wings to join the SEC or ACC if the BIG12 Implodes? WVU does not have a guaranteed spot in a power conference like Texas or OU and future success is tied directly to the BIG112
The BIG12 is the only conference that has their power programS looking out for their own short term interest rather than the long term interest and stability of the conference.
Even with a Chit conference and competing directly in the same market space as the B1G and the SEC, the ACC just pulled a rabbit out of the hat, because the programs are willing to work on what is best for the ACC, which in the long run could be best for the programs.
Well I don't know many organization that enjoy signing over the rights to their main revenue stream, and in both circumstances these GOR's were not welcomed.
No organization wants to be restricted from doing business, or acting in the best interest of their entity for 10+ years.
A GOR does not solidify a conference. It may possibly bind it, but that's not the same thing. We've already had a GOR for years and as you can see, this conference is not solidified.
Basically, if you're stuck treading water, don't add weights to your feet.
Once again, still waiting for the who, what and where...hell, maybe even the when! You are good for comic relief however. lol
Unfortunately, you're not in a position to critique my opinions and as we all know, I'm not answerable to you.
If the new teams are only BYU and Houston, then WVU would be insane to extend the GOR...and frankly no one can make us. We would have 10 years to improve our profile on and off the field.
Texas would have what they want, which is essentially control over the votes for 5/12 of the conference (at worst) with Texas being likely the single largest benefactor financially of the post-BCS landscape. I'm not sure WVU would be on board for that set-up if other options were available. Stuck until 2036? Not exactly a great position to negotiate from.
Yeah, that's what I've been trying to point out. A GOR doesn't solidify or unite parties. It just binds them, much like kids in a bad marriage.
I don't know if there's an invitation or not. I think we'd definitely be candidates and have a strong shot at either.
It could be a couple of things. For Texas and Oklahoma, it could be that they want to keep the possibility of joining another conference in play when the original GOR expires. It could also be that the conference wants wait and use the possibility of an extended GOR as leverage for a new TV deal when the contract is up. That's purely theoretical, but those are some possibilities.
I respectfully disagree with most of your points. Some based on facts some just my opinion
- Fact: If no organization wants to be restricted from doing business, 4 of the power 5 conference would not have a GOR in place
- Fact: If no organization wants to be restricted from doing business, the ACC would not have extended their GOR for another 10 years.
- Opinion: The GOR does solidify the conference but only as long organization as it is in place or almost ready to expire.
- Opinion:No other conference, except the SEC (which is the only conference without a GOR), wants to challenge the validity of the conference.
- Opinion: No other conference wants another conference to own multiple years of T1 and T2 rights for the program in question.
So your argument is that the existence of a GOR represents proof of universities wanting GOR's?
I'm not so sure about that. GOR's were probably pushed on to the conferences by their media partners to avoid paying on a long contract without the proper inventory to fulfill it.
I think the ACC extended their GOR in part to get their network. Again, it's a situation where they were probably pushed into it. IMO, it doesn't display any affection for the agreement by any individual university.
I suppose a GOR provides the illusion of solidarity, but it doesn't address any fractures within the conference, in fact, it probably worsens them because neither side get leverage from outside options.
The media partners can't push GORs on the conferences. Most of the GOR actually were signed after the TV contracts were in place, meaning the media partners wouldn't have any leverage to force a GOR, since the contracts were already signed. The ACC's grant of rights was signed in 2013, well before the network, and well after the TV contract was signed in 2010. The ACC's GOR was signed because of one reason, Maryland leaving.
But it was just extended to 2036 almost simultaneously with the announcement of a conference network. It was not for 23 years when signed in 2013. It now matches the length of the Network contract for a reason.
Why couldn't a media partner push a GOR?
Wasn't it BC's President who said the media partners "told" them who to select during expansion?
IMO, the media partners probably direct more than is put out.
I think at the very least, they are a good bargaining chip.
No one really knows their validity, and we probably never will. At this point I don't see any schools departing their conferences, but not because of the GOR.
That's true, and it's also true what I said. The ACC signed the GOR way before the network ever happened, and also well after the TV contract was signed. You think Florida ST would have signed the GOR extension if they weren't getting a network in return?
He also supposedly said the blocked UConn (which ESPN supposedly wanted), so I'll let you figure out who is calling the shots in that situation.
Simply put, no the media partners are forcing the GORs. You think ESPN had to "force" the ACC to extend the GOR? Of course not. The ACC was getting a network, so they were probably tripping over themselves to extend the GOR. The Big 12 didn't even have a GOR until after their TV contract was signed. Explain to me how the media partners forced the Big 12 to do that?
The GOR won't be extended unless the TV contract is extended the same amount of time.
It is not a matter of forcing anything, either party to any negotiation is free to walk away. As Donald Trump would put it, it is simply the art of the deal. If ESPN said, "OK, we will announce the launching of the ACC Network tomorrow if you extend the GOR to match it." Is that anything more than negotiation?
I think the original GOR was 6 years, and I dont recall when that was signed. When the B12 signed their deal with ESPN/Fox, it was extended for 13 years, the length of the TV deal.
It seems there's a correlation between getting your TV deal, and having a GOR.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8346345/big-12-announces-media-deal-abc-espn-fox
Correct. Therefore, the money/yr can change and the GOR's length can stay where it is....which would be a harbinger of the B12's doom.
If I were WVU, that is exactly what I would push for if the add-ons were BYU and UH, because that would tell us exactly where we stand in the B12.
I have a theory on what's going on but I will keep it to myself for now, because if I'm right, I don't want to spill the beans.
It will be interesting to see what moves get made, and when.
Can I guess?
If will be BYU and UH and the B12 is trying to work a deal where WVU will be let out of it's GOR commitment to join the SEC or ACC....realizing that that move would otherwise erode any long-term relationship between WVU and the rest of the B12.
Obviously ND is tied to the ACC now for 20 years. If WVU is added there, then ND going all in would make it even conference set up. They obviously have softened their disdain for WVU when they offered WVU an ACC spot (after it was too late) in 2012.
That's my point. They can use the leverage of extending the GOR to get the networks to give a longer deal, bigger deal, etc.
I'm not arguing that. The other poster ways saying media partners are forcing conferences to sign GORs.
The Big 12 signed the contract with Fox first, back in April of 2011. It runs for 13 years. There wasn't even a GOR then. (We know that because A&M vote to leave in August of 2011.) So, the contract with Fox was signed without a GOR period, let alone one for 6 years.
