Well, you've got one thing going for you. This is as about as accurate as a fan measurement as that study that was based on google searches.

NATIONAL PRESENCE!!!111

Tell me which conference shares Tier 3.

Technically the B1G does, no?

My understanding is that they not allowed to negotiate their Tier III rights outside of the B1G Network.

The SEC is contemplating a similar setup.

But ultimately the Tier III rights are somewhat irrelevant. They're a drop in the bucket for most schools and when it gets right down to it, the only schools that make a lot in tier III revenue have virtually limitless revenue streams anyway (i.e. Texas). Tier III rights aren't worth detonating anything over.

The LHN could possibly be much ado about nothing. But then again, so was Poland in 1939, so there's that.

I just don't know what kind of 'concessions' could be granted to satisfy me here. The XII is just too top-heavy and too dependent on 2 teams that have shown a willingness to burn everyone if its in their own best interests.

But the fact that we know UT and OU have a bit of a wandering eye at this point and the entire XII will collapse if they leave is enough for me to want out.

All right, I'll refrain from commenting any further until the resolution comes forth. I'll just say in leaving that my position has been grossly distorted. It started out with my position that Texas would never give up their LHN and 3rd Tier rights and that the LHN itself, with the NCAA restrictions in play, does not represent an unfair recruiting advantage. It got turned into that I somehow said the Big XII is just as good as the SEC and Mizzou would be crazy for leaving it.

I did say that I thought Mizzou would be better off in the Big XII and that the stability reasoning won't seem as comforting once they are actually there and the conference can use Missouri's TV markets to make everyone richer, sans sacrificing traditional rivalries, a less taxing competition schedule and lower conference academic profile, but that the stability and increased payout may in your minds offset that for Missouri fans.

I have also said that I want MU to stay but I would understand if they left and it wasn't until after much tooth pulling that most of the people decided a general "stability" answer was the reason they were wanting to leave and that the LHN was the cause of the instability. Apparently pointing out that all the member institutions had agreed to this structure in the past didn't prepare them for the shock of what Texas could realize in the venture and now they want to go back on it. As we all know, UT had even originally invited A&M which refused them. So, if the LHN is the cause of all the instability, it is only because everyone else said "yes" to this plan originally.

My position has and will continue to be that the obsession with Texas (whether from the UT perspective or others complaining about it) is the real problem. A lack of leadership from Texas for the conference and a lack of vision by other institutions that comprise it are what cause the "instability".

What I think the real issue is, if I may be so bold, is that from the Mizzou perspective, they don't believe Texas will ever adopt the position of the conference leader because it ignores it to favor the "do what is best for Texas". To me, that is the problem. The LHN is just the physical embodiment of that sentiment. Can and will Texas take more of a conference leadership role even with the LHN in place? If MU answers that question in the negative, and they actually have a spot in the SEC, then they will go.

But, that is a two way street. Can the other conference members accept any future action by Texas as being a leader in the conference if the LHN is still up and running? In other words, everyone voted for this type of structure, Texas is the one that really ran with it. If Texas claims they will do what is best for the conference after the fact it is in place, will anyone believe them? Stability is born of trust and cooperation, but that has to be a two way street and the focus must be put there.

Mizzou's Homegaming game against ISU will be televised, well, nowhere. Gotta love this conference.

Incidentally, this is the 100th Homecoming by the school that invented Homecoming.

Interesting response back from a Mizzou Curator this morning.

@BlairKerkhoff
Blair Kerkhoff
MU Chancellor Brady Deaton recused himself from part of Big12prez teleconf on Sunday on advice from MU counsel.

http://twitter.com/#!/BlairKerkhoff/...02475258667008

@BlairKerkhoff
Blair Kerkhoff
Big 12 still doesn't know if it wants to stand at 9, 10 or 12 members, Neinas said. Neinas said that is unresolved.

Are you sure it won't be televised on FOXSports?
OSU@ Texas is in the 3:30 ABC slot
Baylor @ A&M is also scheduled for 3:30
KSU @ Tech and OU @ KU are the other games that week. I'm not saying it WILL, but none of the three have a kickoff time set yet that I can see.

You didn't invent Homecoming. Several schools lay claim to this earlier than MU's claim, including Illinois and Baylor.

AAAAAND WE'RE BACK!

http://www.umsystem.edu/ums/news/pub..._public_notice

4:00pm Executive Session will be where the conference realignment discussion takes place.

And now the long wait begins.

KSU/Tech got the 6:00 FSN timeslot. OU@KU got ESPN2. Baylor/A&M gets FX.

Mizzou/ISU not televised. (maybe on PPV)