H'mm a fly in the ointment?

[karlchilders.sixpack]

<p id="storydate">September 7, 2011</p>

<span> <embed height="60" name="rvflash" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version" width="620" src="http://vmedia.rivals.com/flash/contentheadlines.swf?h1=A%26M+acceptance+to+SEC+contingent+on+waiver+of+litigation+&h2=&lwidth=620&lheight=60&lshadow" quality="best" wmode="transparent" allowScriptAccess="never" ></embed> </span><p class="byline">Chip Brown
Orangebloods.com Columnist</p>

<div style="font-size: 9pt;" id="contentcontainer"><div id="relatedcontainer"><div id="related" class="horizfade"><p class="headlinetop">Talk about it in <font color="#cf6f2f">Inside the 40 Acres</font></p></div></div>Hold
everything folks.

The Southeastern Conference presidents met Tuesday
night and voted to admit Texas A&M. But the vote came with a stipulation
that still must be worked out.

The SEC presidents voted to admit Texas
A&M as the 13th member of that league so long as each individual member of
the Big 12 waives its right to litigation against the SEC.

And it was
unclear Tuesday night if all nine remaining members of the Big 12 would waive
that right, sources said. The Big 12 schools were expected to discuss the matter
on Wednesday, sources said. That's the same day Texas A&M has planned a
celebration in College Station to announce its admission into the SEC, sources
said.

If even one of the Big 12 schools refuse to waive their right to
sue the SEC over its courtship of Texas A&M, the SEC could withdraw its vote
to admit A&M, sources said.

After letters were exchanged by SEC
commissioner Mike Slive and Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe Tuesday, Beebe told
Slive the Big 12 conference office had waived its right to litigate against
Texas A&M or the SEC but that the Big 12's waiver was not binding on the
individual members of the Big 12, sources said.

The SEC indicated it
would admit Texas A&M only upon condition that each individual member of the
Big 12 waive its right to sue the SEC, sources said.

And that condition
was in doubt Tuesday night, sources said.

Stay tuned.
------------------------

Seems to me that Colorado and Nebraska have already set a precedent on this. While aTm can indemnify the SEC, the SEC will still?have to deal with it.
Might cause some problems.
</div>

 

[missouridawg]

I think they're digging themselves into a hole... aTm is coming and they can't stop it. And when all the **** settles out, Baylor is going to look like a crybaby and nobody wants a crybaby.

 

[FlabLoser]

I'm in over my head on this, but it sure sounds like BS. Colorado & Nebraska bolting set precedent alright. And Texas' destructive influence on the Big XII is well documented as well.

 

[RebelBruiser]

If you'll recall, the Big 12 didn't want Baylor the first time around, but they had enough political clout, maybe even the governor at the time, to force the other Texas schools to require Baylor to be a part of the conference.

Baylor is destined for CUSA designation. It's just a matter of time, but you are right, they're going to put up a fight, and I don't blame them.

 

[MaroonedNdaRock]

I'm sure I am in the minority on this......but I hope Baylor still has that political clout and throws a huge snag in all of this. I don't see the point in adding A&M alone. At least not at this point in time.

The only reasons to add A&M at this point, is if theSEC feels confident Texas will follow, thenOU, andOSU.All four together would be a great a fit for the SEC with their traditions, rivalries,geography, and etc. However,if it is not a package deal and Texas wants to go to the Pac12......let them andpass on A&M for now.If we loseA&M to the Pac12 by waiting on Texas........so what. There are plenty of otherschoolsthat bringtheTV viewers thatA&M could bring to the conference.

</p>

 

[Incognegro]

you don't really understand the situation... The SEC does not want 2 schools from the same state, so there is no reason for them to take both OU and OSU. Since those two seem to be a package deal, trying to persuade one over the other does not seem like it's going to work. Also, why would we want to take UT? They killed 2 conferences so far and I don't think to many people in the conference wants the drama they bring. If you can, please name at least 3 teams that could bring a following that aTm can bring that's not only a geographical fit, but also a logical possibility.

 

[DAWG61]

but you are in the minority. Careful not to offend all the TAMU lovers on this board.

 

[MaroonedNdaRock]

You want Texas because....They have strong athletic programs that compete for NCs. That makes for interesting games on a national levelvs any current member of the SEC. That is what ESPN wants to televise.......Alabama vs Texas.....Texas vs. Florida.....Oklahoma vsTennesee andetc. The conference would welcomeanother school that competes for NCs.

As for not wanting two teams from the same state........I assume that has to do with TV viewers, markets and so on. If this is all about TV markets, then again forget A&M, bring in Notre Dame....bring in Syracuse (NYC).

Bringing in the TV bucks is about making the games interesting to watch. The matchups above, the Red River, A&M vs Texas, Bedlem.....they would be interestingnot only in their respective state but across the nation. This is not about bringing in TV sets in Oklahoma City....it is about interesting TV for the entire country.

Like I said in another thread,it is not NECESSARY to expand with marginal schools right now. We are strong enoughand demand enough TV money with 12. There is no requirement now or on the horizon that requires 16 teams to earn BCS bids or a playoff spot. So, what is the point? Also, the WVUs, A&Ms, and so on will always be willing to jump on board IF........IF......and when it becomes NECESSARY to become a 16 team conference. </p>

 

[Rebels7]

They've had more than one chance to join. The reason they won't come is simply because they won't get to run the conference, and they know that. They ran the SWC, they run the Big 12, and they don't want to actually share conference revenue.<div>
</div><div>Texas will go to the PAC (whatever) or go independent. </div>

 

[AssEndDawg]

OU and OSU are a possibility, but we won't take the University of Texas. Personally, I would prefer to stay at 12 teams but I understand why we can't turn down that chance to get A&M. I also don't like the timing, the idea of rolling with 13 teams sounds like a bad idea. If Baylor stalls long enough for us to setup a 14th team that would actually be really nice.

 

[AssEndDawg]

the problem isn't about wanting or not wanting Texas A&M, the problem is you are a prick. We don't like YOU because you are an ***. Not wanting A&M is not an issue, it's your asinine reasons why and your attitude. Take this current post as an example....

 

[TBonewannabe]

Texas is like that hot girl that puts out a lot. However she also constantly bitches and spends all your money. The SEC just knows ahead of time all the **** you have to put up with and I don't think they are worth it. We get the Texas tv market with TA&M so UT doesn't look as good.

 

[Incognegro]

The only real positive that I see from going to 16 is that it allows the SEC to reshuffle their contract with ESPN as it's not really in our favor right now. Although it's a decent contract, it's no where near as good as it should be and the only out is to go to 16.<div>
</div><div>Add to that that the Pac-12 and the B1G expressed interest in going to 16. As the premier conference in NCAA, the SEC would be foolish to not jump on the opportunity before them. They have to be proactive and usher in a new wave of college football.</div><div>
</div><div>Lastly, don't underestimate the market that aTm is able to bring, because as far as the state of Texas is concerned, they hold their own against UT. I could go out of my way to repeatverbatimall of the positives that people have told you directly, but why should I? It's not like you haven't read it before.</div><div>
</div><div>I really don't care if you want expansion to happen or not because it's going to happen regardless what anybody else wants. Despite what you may think, it'll be harder to find anyone on this board that actually wants expansion to happen as I'm sure an extreme majority wants to stay at 12, but that's not going to happen.</div><div>
</div><div>If you seriously can't understand this, don't bother responding because I'm tired of explaining the same **** over and over to you guys... It's not that hard to get...</div>

 

[Maroon Eagle]

[No message]

 

[Rebels7]

I can't help but feel like the PAC should be a little leery of Texas as well. And your metaphor is spot on.

 

[TBonewannabe]

I don't think the SEC wants UT because of all the crap they bring so TAM it is. The SEC is taking the initiative because it is going to happen so why not get the teams you really want instead of the teams you just have to take for the sake of tv markets. Get TAM instead of UT or Tex Tech because they are a better fit anyway.

 

[DAWG61]

the problem isn't about wanting or not wanting Texas A&M, the problem is you are a prick. We don't like YOU because you are an ***. Not wanting A&M is not an issue, it's your asinine reasons why and your attitude. Take this current post as an example....

Thanks for actively seeking out my posts to respond to, I'm not a fan of stalkers though so I kindly reject your friend request. Don't worry though you will have 40,000+ new friends to talk everything TAMU till your blue in the face. I love Mississippi State so I'll just keep being a Bulldog fan.

 

[Hump4Hoops]

You guys need to get that through your heads. They made that abundantly clear. They would even rather be independent.

We want aTm because of the TV market, and because they're the best fit in the SEC. OU/OSU are also bigtime longshots, they want to go the the Pac.

 

[missouridawg]

how little people know about the following aTm has. You guys will understand this after they play a few years in the SEC.

You'll also figure out that they take ALL sports seriously there too. I know nobody gives a 17 about women's sports and golf and ****... but they compete in EVERYTHING that they do. They're going to be a great, great fit for the SEC.