re: This is the reason why OU and Texas are coming to sec

quote:

---

This isn’t about money as it’s it about future revenue

---

I'm at the point where I don't really care, they can do whatever the hell they want but revenue is money guy. So yes, it is about money

Guys I’m going to drop this article here from a Baylor beat writer, he goes into great detail, most informative piece ive read so I’m dropping it here. It’s pretty long but I dropped at least one section below.

LINK


Regarding to votes:

Will the SEC take the pair?

“The remaining question is whether two other schools will oppose the move. Some have theorized that Texas A&M has an alliance with Georgia and Florida to stop expansion. The rationale is that each school has an alliance to stop any other institutions from those states joining the league. Georgia, Florida and Texas A&M want to be the only SEC teems in their states. And maybe some of the other SEC schools will balk at elevating two more programs.”


Regarding grant rights:

“Can’t the Big 12 force Oklahoma and Texas to stay in the Big 12 because of the Grant of Rights?

The Big 12’s Grant of Rights is codified in Big 12 Bylaw 3.1, which provides, “The Grant of Rights Agreement which will remain in full force and effect as to such Withdrawing Member and the Withdrawing Member shall continue to be fully bound under the Grant of Rights Agreement after Withdrawal for the remainder of the term...”

That basically means that Oklahoma and Texas would not be able to claim Tier 1 or Tier 2 (the top television) rights in the SEC until after 2025. The two would also have to pay a buyout fee, which is equal to the revenue that each would earn in its final two yeas in the league.

Some have written that Oklahoma and Texas can deal with this by paying a fee. I don’t think that’s how they deal with it.

The real reason that the Grant of Rights doesn’t matter is because the rest of the league will collapse too. If Texas and Oklahoma leave, then the other conferences will want to expand. Texas Tech would be insane to wait around hoping to legally bind Texas and Oklahoma into the league, and then think that Texas and Oklahoma are staying. Instead, Texas Tech should leap at going to the PAC-12. KU wouldn’t wait around if the Big 10 came calling. The PAC-12 would likely add four teams, the Big 10 would add two and the ACC would add two. While that doesn’t guarantee eight remaining Big 12 members find homes—the leagues could add an AAC team or Notre Dame. Or one of the leagues could decide that it doesn’t want to be a 16 team conference.

If the Big 12 is down to just one or two schools left, then the league could simply dissolves or amend its bylaws. This gets fairly nerdy and legally debatable.

Theoretically dissolving the league or changing the bylaws requires eight votes or 75% of members to change them.

A majority of the conference can vote to settle litigation. Bylaw 1.5.2(a)(6). Dissolution requires 75% (8 votes). See 1.5.2(b). That means six Big 12 schools (a majority) could leave the conference, sue, say “We owe nothing and the league is dissolved.” Then those six members could say, “We agree with the lawsuit filed by those six, and therefore, we concede the lawsuit.” So really I think you’re looking at six votes being sufficient to stop the Grant of Rights payments, not eight.

Now, if Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State and West Virginia are left homeless, those schools will argue that the departing schools are no longer members of the league because those schools are obligated to provide notice of withdraw. You then get into a very complicated legal debate about Big 12 Bylaw 3.2, which is here.

Basically you’d be left debating when someone withdrew, then who could vote? If Bruce Feldman reports that Oklahoma State is heading to the PAC-12, but Oklahoma State says its had conversations but is not 100%, can it still vote? Given every school is likely to be flirting with other conferences, it’d be dangerous to start telling other members, “Hey, you’re now withdrawn.” That’s also deadly because it means the schools that might get left out would not have the chance to reconstitute a smaller Big 12.”

quote:

---

Perhaps you remember the topic I started..
Why wouldn’t a Texas fan want that? The academic folks want the PAC or B1G.. but that’s not me.

---

I respect your school and traditions but don’t want anything to do with your leadership, boosters, the culture I see currently on your campus or your historical inability to treat other schools as equals or even with the respect that’s required to engender long term conference stability.

Texas is worthless to the SEC.

quote:

---

I understand why Texas and OU want to come to the SEC but there is no good reason why the SEC should want OU and Texas.

---

Dallas, SanAntonio, West Texas, the entire state of Oklahoma, Kansas City, MO, and the buying power those markets bring. Adding those 2 schools would put an average of 8 top 15 schools in the running for nearly every major sport. Women’s sports would also receive a major boost.

It’s a no brainer.

Texas had those games every year. Arkansas, A&M, Oklahoma. Killed them.

Learn English.

quote:

---

quote:
This isn’t about money as it’s it about future revenue imo.
So much wrong with this statement.

---

I'm STILL trying to figure out what that means!

I would say Bama is 100% guilty of some of that but Texas takes it to a whole new level