Search
Log in
Register
Teams
Teams
Fan Sites
Forums
Shows
College
College Football News
College Football Player Rankings
College Football Rankings
College Football Playoff
Field of 68
College Basketball News
Women's Sports
NIL
NIL News
NIL Valuation
NIL Deals
NIL Deal Tracker
Sports Business
Transfer Portal
Transfer Portal News
NCAA Transfer Portal
Transfer Portal Rankings
Transfer Portal Team Rankings
Recruiting
Football Recruiting
Basketball Recruiting
Database
Team Rankings
Player Rankings
Industry Comparison
Commitments
Recruiting Prediction Machine
High School
High School News
Schools
Rankings
Scores
Draft
NFL Draft
NFL Draft News
Draft By Stars
College Draft History
College Draft Totals
NBA Draft
NBA Draft News
Pro
NFL
NASCAR
NBA
Culture
Sports Betting
About
About
On3 App
Advertise
Press
FAQ
Contact
Get a profile. Be recruited.
New posts
Menu
Install the app
Install
MegaBoard
Trending
Michigan Hot Board
Hot
All-America Team
Field of 68
Message Boards
Where Michigan, QB Bryce Underwood stand following Sherrone Moore firing
Skeptics cast doubt on College Sports Commission's participation agreement
College Football Playoff predictions: J.D. PicKell reveals his picks for entire bracket
Michigan Head Coach Hot Board: Top candidates to replace Sherrone Moore
College Football Playoff: Predicting who will win the national title?
Reply to thread
Forums
West Virginia
Mountaineer Message Board
Expansion
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Charleston Mountie" data-source="post: 129493310" data-attributes="member: 1427666"><p>You are 100% on target here. Going into the meeting it has to be reported that there is no vote planned. If they admit that they will vote and then nothing comes of it, that causes damage to the conference, even if the vote is narrowly defeated for passage. Politically, it must be no vote is planned, they go into the meeting, knock heads and swish drinks, smile and pretend to be open minded on the issue and give the appearance that they are each debating the topic from the point of neutrality.</p><p></p><p>Most schools will not vote positively for a hypothetical expansion to 12. They will need to know who the candidates are - those 6-7 viable institutions - and then they can vote. If it fails, they will discuss why and may hold a second vote after the votes form around a smaller number of candidates. All of these guys are already prepped for this meeting, knowing who those 6-7 are and have they stance already thought out.</p><p></p><p>If the informal is close they will haggle, if not we come back in a year and do it again. I suspect it is sitting at 5 for, 2 against and three in the middle. Texas and TCU are against. Baylor, Kansas and Texas Tech undecided. Everyone else is for it. Just my read.</p><p></p><p>I suspect that we hear that they have decided to expand and they will leave the issue of the network on the table for now. The 2017 year will see the new schools on the schedule and a CCG put into place. That will likely be a compromise Texas can live with and frankly, one that is better for WVU. WVU likely gets more from the current Tier 3 than it would in a pro rata network pay schedule.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Charleston Mountie, post: 129493310, member: 1427666"] You are 100% on target here. Going into the meeting it has to be reported that there is no vote planned. If they admit that they will vote and then nothing comes of it, that causes damage to the conference, even if the vote is narrowly defeated for passage. Politically, it must be no vote is planned, they go into the meeting, knock heads and swish drinks, smile and pretend to be open minded on the issue and give the appearance that they are each debating the topic from the point of neutrality. Most schools will not vote positively for a hypothetical expansion to 12. They will need to know who the candidates are - those 6-7 viable institutions - and then they can vote. If it fails, they will discuss why and may hold a second vote after the votes form around a smaller number of candidates. All of these guys are already prepped for this meeting, knowing who those 6-7 are and have they stance already thought out. If the informal is close they will haggle, if not we come back in a year and do it again. I suspect it is sitting at 5 for, 2 against and three in the middle. Texas and TCU are against. Baylor, Kansas and Texas Tech undecided. Everyone else is for it. Just my read. I suspect that we hear that they have decided to expand and they will leave the issue of the network on the table for now. The 2017 year will see the new schools on the schedule and a CCG put into place. That will likely be a compromise Texas can live with and frankly, one that is better for WVU. WVU likely gets more from the current Tier 3 than it would in a pro rata network pay schedule. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Name
Post reply
Forums
West Virginia
Mountaineer Message Board
Expansion
Top
Bottom