Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 7988872)

Unless and until Missouri withdraws from the conference, they are a member in good standing and should be treated as such.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 7988872)

Laugh all you want. Its one thing for rival fans to flip Missouri shit over this speculation. Its another thing for the conference to publicly threaten one of its members when said member has done nothing out of bounds. The conference should be protecting its members, not throwing one to the wolves.

Unless and until Missouri withdraws from the conference, they are a member in good standing and should be treated as such. Keep it up, though. We're preparing for a divorce, and Neinas is leaving threatening voicemails. When the court date comes, the judge is going to get to hear those messages, and I'm sure he will be impressed.

Originally Posted by eazyb81 (Post 7988878)

Anyone else think it is interesting that the Big 12 is making this big public push towards equality, yet is forcing TCU to take a partial share of TV revenue for its first five years?

The Big 12 will never learn.

Originally Posted by mikeyis4dcats. (Post 7988885)

SEC did the same with TAM I believe. B1G did the same with NU.

Originally Posted by Mr. Plow (Post 7988877)

This is true - outside of the good standing part. MU has refused to participate in votes that affect the conference - eventually, they'll either have to vote (commit to the conference) or say "We're leaving" and deal with the exit fees.

Originally Posted by Mr. Plow (Post 7988873)

You can't have it both ways. You can't play the "Missouri can wait as long as the Big 12 does so that it doesn't have to pay exit fees" card & then turn around and play the "Why won't the Big 12 just kick us out - they are being mean" card.

Originally Posted by Mr. Plow (Post 7988877)

This is true - outside of the good standing part. MU has refused to participate in votes that affect the conference - eventually, they'll either have to vote (commit to the conference) or say "We're leaving" and deal with the exit fees.

Originally Posted by patteeu (Post 7988890)

Why? Why would they have to vote or make a new commitment to the conference? There's already an agreement in place.

Originally Posted by Mr. Plow (Post 7988877)

This is true - outside of the good standing part. MU has refused to participate in votes that affect the conference - eventually, they'll either have to vote (commit to the conference) or say "We're leaving" and deal with the exit fees.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 7988896)

These positions are not ad odds with one another. The Big XII can either resolve the dispute amicably and let everyone get on with our lives, or Mizzou can play hardball. The end result is going to be about the same. Only the amount of collateral damage is yet to be determined.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 7988903)

We haven't refused anything. By all accounts, we were active members in the process and then abstained. There is nothing wrong with abstaining.

Originally Posted by Mr. Plow (Post 7988901)

I guess I'm just making an assumption that eventually...at some point....MU will either have to comply with what has been voted on already, and approved, by the rest of the Big 12 - giving up TV rights for 6 years or whatever it was - or move on.

Originally Posted by Pants (Post 7988884)

How is Neinas throwing you to the wolves? By saying that he expects you to pay your exit fees as stipulated by the by-laws or did I miss something?