Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Buckaineer" data-source="post: 129595135" data-attributes="member: 1428007">It doesn't matter which consultants gave the information--that doesn't make the information invalid.A clue to who the consultants were is the tv partners of the BIG 12 who Boren recently commented told the BIG 12 that in order to have a conference network they would require the league to have 12 to 14 members, not ten.I don't believe you understand how things work in the BIG 12.&nbsp; Boren you see was on the composition committee along with WVUs president and Baylor's.&nbsp; They researched candidates, expansion and issues such as a network for over a year.&nbsp; They were tasked with acquiring information and were to present the information they gained to the full membership at some point.&nbsp; That point was the May/June meetings and the meetings prior.&nbsp; In the earlier meetings people had more questions and the league hired additional consultants because as Boren noted, the conference needed to base decisions on detailed analysis and not emotions which were still&nbsp; being used by some after the initial meetings obviously.&nbsp; So when you say &quot;if they already knew the information&quot; what you don't understand is:&nbsp; Boren, Gee and Starr knew the information.&nbsp; The entire conference membership did not.&nbsp; That's what the purpose of the May/June meetings was--to disseminate ALL the information that had been collected to the rest of the membership.Prior to the release of the additional info in May/June, Texas declared that the LHN wasn't going to be part of a conference network--they saw no reason for that or expansion.&nbsp; Without expansion?&nbsp; No possibility of a network.&nbsp; Without a network?&nbsp; OU and UT saw no reason to expand.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Buckaineer, post: 129595135, member: 1428007"] It doesn't matter which consultants gave the information--that doesn't make the information invalid. A clue to who the consultants were is the tv partners of the BIG 12 who Boren recently commented told the BIG 12 that in order to have a conference network they would require the league to have 12 to 14 members, not ten. I don't believe you understand how things work in the BIG 12. Boren you see was on the composition committee along with WVUs president and Baylor's. They researched candidates, expansion and issues such as a network for over a year. They were tasked with acquiring information and were to present the information they gained to the full membership at some point. That point was the May/June meetings and the meetings prior. In the earlier meetings people had more questions and the league hired additional consultants because as Boren noted, the conference needed to base decisions on detailed analysis and not emotions which were still being used by some after the initial meetings obviously. So when you say "if they already knew the information" what you don't understand is: Boren, Gee and Starr knew the information. The entire conference membership did not. That's what the purpose of the May/June meetings was--to disseminate ALL the information that had been collected to the rest of the membership. Prior to the release of the additional info in May/June, Texas declared that the LHN wasn't going to be part of a conference network--they saw no reason for that or expansion. Without expansion? No possibility of a network. Without a network? OU and UT saw no reason to expand. [/QUOTE]

Name