clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

K-State Slate: 9.21.11




Whew. Big day yesterday. Sorry about the Slate post yesterday, my Internet connection wasn't working yesterday morning. Also, big thanks to BracketCat and Anon for sending me links for today.

Questions over Bryce Brown's health apparently have been resolved, and he is at full speed this week as K-State preps for Miami.

K-State's weekly press conference was yesterday. Quotes are here.

The controversy surrounding the EMAW/EPAW debate continues. I may put my thoughts on this issue into a post later this week.

OK, now...

Yesterday afternoon, NewsOK published a report that Oklahoma was interested in staying in a reformed Big 12, with strict limitations on TLN and a new commissioner to replace Dan Beebe. That was the bombshell that made the salvation of the Big 12 seem possible.

Of course, only a few hours later, the Pac-12 announced it was no longer considering expansion, which raises the question of which came first: OU's demands, or the Pac-12's decision (see below)?. In any event, Texas isn't exactly negotiating from a position of strength, either, because part of the reason the Pac-12 decided not to expand was the inability to reach an acceptable agreement with UT regarding revenue sharing and TLN. Texas' options for acceptable conference affiliation appear to be severely limited at this point.

Of course, that begs the question of where we go from here. The previously discussed merger between the Big 12 and Big East is dead from lack of mutual interest. The Big East has claimed solidarity and is looking at adding service academies and East Carolina, while it's possible BYU will join the Big 12 sooner rather than later.

I don't know much about this site, but apparently it's a lawyer who started a blog during this realignment process to write about the possible Baylor litigation. He takes a look at the Big 12 Handbook, which includes the conference bylaws and rules, and notes several problems he sees. After checking with a fellow blogger who checked with the Big 12, apparently there is no other agreement among the institutions. I would find that at least mildly surprising, and tend to think there may be a little more to the story than what's available in the Big 12 Handbook.

Boone Pickens thinks Texas A&M may yet come back into the fold after "sobering up." Texas A&M replied "nope, we're still completely wasted." While this isn't a new development, Texas A&M isn't going to do a lot for the SEC financially, and it's almost a guarantee the Aggies will get less money in the SEC than they would have received in the Big 12.

Dr. Saturday has a look back at the realignment process, but comes to a much different conclusion than I have. He believes Oklahoma ended up with egg on its face after the Pac-12 decided it didn't want the Sooners. I think it's as likely as not that Oklahoma was using the Pac-12 as leverage against Texas the entire time, and when it made its demands to the Big 12 known yesterday, the Pac-12 realized it was being played and tried to save face (a classic "no, I dumped her, she didn't dump me" situation). Obviously, the timing is paramount. Did the Pac-12 tell Oklahoma "we're good" before Oklahoma made its demands? Given that OU's demands were reported before the Pac-12 came out and said it did not plan to expand, I assumed that my scenario was correct, but I'm open to other interpretations.