Chuck Neinas on Gameday

[Boomhauer]

But you've got to love Dan Wetzel - he uses the comment to keep pushing the SEC to sweep in and gobble TCU up. That rumor alone might get the B12's attention, even if it doesn't have lots of basis. Keep it up Dan!!

I still think that is the only way TCU gets an invite from the Big 12. I know TCU fans would love nothing more than to tell the Big 12 to FO and head to the SEC. Think UT would love having the SEC in DFW on a weekly basis? Oh the joy.

 

[PurpleDaze]

I didn't re-watch it, so I'll take your word.

Fowler's reaction was astonishment and bewilderment

 

[desmith03]

The good news is TV markets and TV contracts isn't being publicly discussed.

Fixed it for you... :unsure:

 

[TAINTed frog]

Some girl was named fan of the week. She was in little shorts, boots, and a little top. A couple black guys were behind her cheering and whatnot...then a hand comes out from behind her and slaps her square on lefty. By the look and sound of it they're fake. I got a video of it and posted on fb (hello omniscient frog). Once I figure out my You Tube pw I'll upload and share with the rest of the class.

Oh man, that is awesome. I appreciate the nice description. That was a good laugh.

 

[gohornedfrogs]

-OU and OSU have come out and publicly stated we are obvious solution.

-Yesterday Neinas spoke w/ Orangebloods: And when asked him if he thought the Big 12 needed to expand outside its current geographic footprint as has been expressed by the Big 12 in the past, Neinas talked in favor of conferences that have schools in close geographic proximity because the schools have more in common
-Today Chuck said:
1. quality football program (Louisville is out)
2. location (WVU and Boise are out)

-2009 tcu 38 byu-7 (we go to Fiesta bowl)
-2010 tcu 31 byu-3 (we win the Rose bowl)


So...i think its either us or BYU. Not saying we are in but if you read between the lines we are looking good. Worst case they take BYU imo and we are ok w/ the big east because wvu and louisville will be there. Sure hoping for b12 though!

Good post. I said in another thread that this is a litmus test. If the balance of power has shifted to the extent that the others will not be swayed by Dodds, then we will be getting an invitation -- to a conference more stable than it previously was.

I don't think the North schools will assume we'll vote with UT very often. Therefore, it's likely they won't object to us being in the conference as much as they objected to aTm. We're not a fourth "Texas" vote.

 

[Gehörnter Frosch]

Bruce Feldman just tweeted:

"Big 12 commish Chuck Neinas on espn this AM: "There appears to be some resistance to adding a team from Texas." Doesn't sound good for TCU."

Like I said last night. But yeah, I don't know anything.

Also, all of you who doubt what I said about the SEC, note that I clarified last night that the SEC talks weren't specific to blocking TCU; rather, they were to block the SEC from taking any other Texas teams. Low and behold, Neinas emerges today and says the exact same thing...whereas previously he was saying that it was important to have closer teams. See? Before being in talks with UT, et al....he wanted close teams. After being in talks....no Texas teams.

Let me make it as simple as possible.

Led by UT, the other three BCS teams in Texas (looking at YOU Texas Tech, A&M, and Baylor) are hell-bent on preventing any other team in Texas from ever being part of the BCS or a super-conference model. They do not want to split the big pie (money and recruiting) any further. They have various plans and strategies to ensure that this happens. Everything from trying to block Texas schools (other than TAMU) to the SEC, to killing the Big East by taking it's remaining top tier teams (sans TCU).

The biggest loser in this is of course TCU, which is the only school in Texas that is a real immediate threat. It would take other schools (UTEP, University of North Texas, Rice, Houston, SMU, UTSA, or TXST) many years to have a chance of emerging as a threat in a solid BCS/Super-conference.

One week ago, the situation was 180 degrees opposite. The fractured nature of the Big 12 combined with the Pac talks and the ACC having only 12 teams, it was just a matter of sequence and timing that TCU was going to move into either the Pac, Big 12, ACC or SEC. But almost overnight, the ACC poached the Big East, the Pac snubbed OU and gave UT the finger, and the Big 12 rallied to stay together.

The minute they decided to try and make the 12 work, the first step was to figure out a way to keep A&M and/or prevent other Texas teams from moving into BCS conferences. Are they powerful and influential enough to make it happen? By themselves, I don't know. But.....with the shills and lackeys at ESPN doing their bidding, I believe that they are.

Whatever UT wants, UT gets.

 

[**His Purple Majesty**]

If that is indeed the case, and I hate to take a page from stupid [Craig James] baylor, but that is law suit worthy. No idea how you could prove it, but that is ridiculous.

 

[rifram09]

Like I said last night. But yeah, I don't know anything.

Also, all of you who doubt what I said about the SEC, note that I clarified last night that the SEC talks weren't specific to blocking TCU; rather, they were to block the SEC from taking any other Texas teams. Low and behold, Neinas emerges today and says the exact same thing...whereas previously he was saying that it was important to have closer teams. See? Before being in talks with UT, et al....he wanted close teams. After being in talks....no Texas teams.

Let me make it as simple as possible.

Led by UT, the other three BCS teams in Texas (looking at YOU Texas Tech, A&M, and Baylor) are hell-bent on preventing any other team in Texas from ever being part of the BCS or a super-conference model. They do not want to split the big pie (money and recruiting) any further. They have various plans and strategies to ensure that this happens. Everything from trying to block Texas schools (other than TAMU) to the SEC, to killing the Big East by taking it's remaining top tier teams (sans TCU).

The biggest loser in this is of course TCU, which is the only school in Texas that is a real immediate threat. It would take other schools (UTEP, University of North Texas, Rice, Houston, SMU, UTSA, or TXST) many years to have a chance of emerging as a threat in a solid BCS/Super-conference.

One week ago, the situation was 180 degrees opposite. The fractured nature of the Big 12 combined with the Pac talks and the ACC having only 12 teams, it was just a matter of sequence and timing that TCU was going to move into either the Pac, Big 12, ACC or SEC. But almost overnight, the ACC poached the Big East, the Pac snubbed OU and gave UT the finger, and the Big 12 rallied to stay together.

The minute they decided to try and make the 12 work, the first step was to figure out a way to keep A&M and/or prevent other Texas teams from moving into BCS conferences. Are they powerful and influential enough to make it happen? By themselves, I don't know. But.....with the shills and lackeys at ESPN doing their bidding, I believe that they are.

Whatever UT wants, UT gets.

Again, if this has any truth to it, then you REALLY REALLY need to get some PROOF and freaking go public - ASAP! If you know this to be true, TCU has to do something before its too late. If it's not true, then quit saying it. :angry:

 

[Gehörnter Frosch]

If that is indeed the case, and I hate to take a page from stupid [Craig James] baylor, but that is law suit worthy. No idea how you could prove it, but that is ridiculous.

People keep saying this, but the whole conference-model creates and perpetuates these types of deals and alliances. Backroom deals, winks and nods, disparate impact, and even disparate treatment have been common since the beginning. The public has cried for years about the anti-trust nature of the BCS itself, and that hasn't gotten anywhere.

From the way the SWC split to the MWC founders sneaking away from the WAC, this stuff happens all the time. It seems inherently unfair and potentially illegal, but it's not.

It happens in business all the time, too. Conferences are private entities; they are not publicly traded companies. Anybody can attempt a lawsuit for anything. It doesn't mean it will make it past the first legal step, though.

 

[rifram09]

People keep saying this, but the whole conference-model creates and perpetuates these types of deals and alliances. Backroom deals, winks and nods, disparate impact, and even disparate treatment have been common since the beginning. The public has cried for years about the anti-trust nature of the BCS itself, and that hasn't gotten anywhere.

From the way the SWC split to the MWC founders sneaking away from the WAC, this stuff happens all the time. It seems inherently unfair and potentially illegal, but it's not.

It happens in business all the time, too. Conferences are private entities; they are not publicly traded companies. Anybody can attempt a lawsuit for anything. It doesn't mean it will make it past the first legal step, though.

I'm not talking about a lawsuit, I'm talking about getting proof of this in the media so that the nation knows why we are being left out. If the B12 passes on taking us, the SEC/PAC/B1G will be even less inclined to take us because they won't want the nation thinking they are taking B12 leftovers. Even if that last statement isn't true, I don't want to hear that we are B12 leftovers from the media if the truth is that we are a threat to the B12 and they are colluding to exclude us from competing.

Basically, if we are being hosed by backroom deals and we know about it, then we need to shine some light on it and fight back with whatever we can fight with. If it is leaking stuff to the media then let's do it. It can't hurt!

 

[HUT-Frog]

Like this should come as any surprise. Said this would happen long ago.

 

[Gehörnter Frosch]

Edit: RifRam09, I typed this before seeing your last post. I'm with you 100%, I would just go about it a different way...as outlined below.

Ya know, just thinking about it...and this is only my opinion/perspective...

The court of public opinion can be a powerful arbiter. It can drive policy. It can influence business decisions. It can ultimately indict, try and convict politicians, companies and even criminals (figuratively speaking). Next to the Big East, the Big 12 is the most vulnerable conference out there. If they are going to "hold it together" for three years, they need to work on their image.

That said, if I were in a decision-making position at TCU, I would formally and publicly "make application" to the Big 12. I would force them to formally and officially say "No". Directly. In the open. And then I would put on the pressure through the media by having the coaches, AD, and Chancellor ask "why not?" Then, every ridiculous excuse they pitch, swat it down with facts (e.g., lack of TV interest).

If nothing else, this will engender more nationwide support and will further bolster TCU's image as the little guy who is more than deserving, but can't get a fair chance.

Some would say that this could burn out bridge to the Big East. Guess what? There isn't going to be a Big East. It won't matter.

Maybe in a few years, whenever so-called Armageddon does happen and the conferences go to 16, TCU will be positioned to fill one of the spots in the ACC, SEC or Pac.

And there's always the possibility that this gambit could cause the Big 12 to reconsider and say "Yes".

 

[FROGDADDY]

Like I said last night. But yeah, I don't know anything.

Also, all of you who doubt what I said about the SEC, note that I clarified last night that the SEC talks weren't specific to blocking TCU; rather, they were to block the SEC from taking any other Texas teams. Low and behold, Neinas emerges today and says the exact same thing...whereas previously he was saying that it was important to have closer teams. See? Before being in talks with UT, et al....he wanted close teams. After being in talks....no Texas teams.

Let me make it as simple as possible.

Led by UT, the other three BCS teams in Texas (looking at YOU Texas Tech, A&M, and Baylor) are hell-bent on preventing any other team in Texas from ever being part of the BCS or a super-conference model. They do not want to split the big pie (money and recruiting) any further. They have various plans and strategies to ensure that this happens. Everything from trying to block Texas schools (other than TAMU) to the SEC, to killing the Big East by taking it's remaining top tier teams (sans TCU).

The biggest loser in this is of course TCU, which is the only school in Texas that is a real immediate threat. It would take other schools (UTEP, University of North Texas, Rice, Houston, SMU, UTSA, or TXST) many years to have a chance of emerging as a threat in a solid BCS/Super-conference.

One week ago, the situation was 180 degrees opposite. The fractured nature of the Big 12 combined with the Pac talks and the ACC having only 12 teams, it was just a matter of sequence and timing that TCU was going to move into either the Pac, Big 12, ACC or SEC. But almost overnight, the ACC poached the Big East, the Pac snubbed OU and gave UT the finger, and the Big 12 rallied to stay together.

The minute they decided to try and make the 12 work, the first step was to figure out a way to keep A&M and/or prevent other Texas teams from moving into BCS conferences. Are they powerful and influential enough to make it happen? By themselves, I don't know. But.....with the shills and lackeys at ESPN doing their bidding, I believe that they are.

Whatever UT wants, UT gets.

So in essence what you're saying is that UT (mostly) and the other three BCS Texas teams control the ENTIRETY of college football??? I'll buy that they can keep us out of the Big 12, but I'm not buying anything beyond that. The SEC story you threw out the other day continues to be ridiculous. If the SEC wanted us (or UH, SMU, etc...) then all they would have to do is fake agreeing to not invite us and then invite us as soon as A&M is in. If the SEC (the SEC for crying out loud) doesn't invite TCU it's because they don't want to, not because UT told them not to. I mean seriously, if I'm the SEC and UT asks me NOT to do something my immediate reaction is how quickly can I do the thing that UT doesn't want me to do. A weaker UT is a plus for the SEC powers. Either way, it does seem sometimes as if we're never gonna catch a break.

 

[FROGDADDY]

It happens in business all the time, too. Conferences are private entities; they are not publicly traded companies. Anybody can attempt a lawsuit for anything. It doesn't mean it will make it past the first legal step, though.

One business conspiring against another? Sure. Two business conspiring against another? Maybe. Every business conspiring against one business? Probably not.

 

[Gehörnter Frosch]

So in essence what you're saying is that UT (mostly) and the other three BCS Texas teams control the ENTIRETY of college football??? I'll buy that they can keep us out of the Big 12, but I'm not buying anything beyond that. The SEC story you threw out the other day continues to be ridiculous. If the SEC wanted us (or UH, SMU, etc...) then all they would have to do is fake agreeing to not invite us and then invite us as soon as A&M is in. If the SEC (the SEC for crying out loud) doesn't invite TCU it's because they don't want to, not because UT told them not to. I mean seriously, if I'm the SEC and UT asks me NOT to do something my immediate reaction is how quickly can I do the thing that UT doesn't want me to do. A weaker UT is a plus for the SEC powers. Either way, it does seem sometimes as if we're never gonna catch a break.

"If you agree to not pursue any other Texas teams, we will collectively agree to release A&M."

That's all there was to it.

I never said that the SEC was actively and aggressively pursuing TCU (last year, however, is a totally different story). TCU has been vetted by the SEC, and would be an acceptable option in a push to 16. The Texas schools don't want that to happen...by any BCS/Super-conference.

All of my other posts on this topic presume a 4x16 model, whether that happens in a coordinated way, or as a result of individual conferences making individual decisions. You have to zoom out and look at the bigger, longer-term picture. We're immersed here in the daily shifting winds of the "right now". I am trying to offer perspective on the overall parameters...the framework...within which all of the winds are blowing.

 

[HUT-Frog]

Since it is looking like we're still going to be in the Big East, have to make that conference as viable as possible.

I have been one of the few -- if not the only -- proponents of adding Temple. Final: Temple 38, at Maryland 7.

 

[FROGDADDY]

"If you agree to not pursue any other Texas teams, we will collectively agree to release A&M."

That's all there was to it.

Which does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to stop the SEC from ultimately taking a Texas team if they want to. Unless you're implying that the Big 12 could sue the SEC for breach of shady backroom handshake deal.

 

[ms19]

No one knows what is gonna happen. Obviously that includes GF based on the past few days.

 

[wes]

He might be putting that out there to put pressure on Texas. He might be trying to say "we want the Frogs, but a couple of people are putting up a fight". Texas needs to repair their image, if it is out there that they are trying to keep us out, it would look very bad.

Don't over analyze his comments, We know where the resistance is coming from. Of course his good friend is DeLoss so I don't expect anything but butt kissing from Nienas.

That league got into the shape that it's in because none of those teams or the commissioner ever told UT no. IF they are going to let them dominate the process once again then their wounds will never be healed.

 

[Vlade Divac]

The Oklahoma and North schools need to band together on this. Threaten to break off and extend invites to the rest of the BE and best non-AQ (WV, Lville, Cincy, USF, Boise, AF). Force UT to decide, independence or play nice.

That's the only way I see any votes switching in Texas.