Although I'm not Randy Galloway, he steals thoughts from me...

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/09/07/3345246/sooners-finally-lower-the-boom.html

Here. He says it right here. What I've been saying all along. Texas has lost its power in this shuffling to OU. They overplayed their hand, and now OU has the beans to feed the birds.

I don't even know why I'm not Mean Green Pope yet. Maybe you guys can't find the funny hat and whatnot. But, it is what it is.

[LongJim]

That's great and all, but Larry Scott is on record as saying the PAC12 will not expand unless the SEC moves first. The SEC ain't gonna move without a waiver, and OU won't move unless aTm does.

Good ol' Grandpa Urine.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

It will all happen. The lawsuit is bunk. The only people hoping there's a court in Texas as confused about the law as California courts are Longhorn fans.

Well, probably not their fans. The Longhorn fans, from the tone of Hornfans.com seem pretty resigned to the fact that LHN and the idiot woman they put in charge of it didn't think it through. They're posted some enlightening e-mail between themselves and her.

Anyway, the brass at Texas are the one pipedreaming at this point. But, that all it is. You've got to have standing and damages to sue. Baylor has neither. And, so when the 2012 football season kicks off Baylor, OU, and A&M will all be in separate conference.

Texas might be with OU, they might not. OU has already dropped the "we don't give a crap about our rivalry anymore" bombshell. Frankly, OU survived having its Nebraska rivalry ended; so, it can survive not playing Texas as well. That happens when you have some sort of football history people around the country can grasp.

So, Randy and I are correct, OU now calls the tune, and Texas now dances to it. Again, Texas badly overestimated how much their conference mates outside of Waco and Ames really gave a crap about them.

[MeanGreenTexan]

It will all happen. The lawsuit is bunk. The only people hoping there's a court in Texas as confused about the law as California courts are Longhorn fans.

Well, probably not their fans. The Longhorn fans, from the tone of Hornfans.com seem pretty resigned to the fact that LHN and the idiot woman they put in charge of it didn't think it through. They're posted some enlightening e-mail between themselves and her.

Anyway, the brass at Texas are the one pipedreaming at this point. But, that all it is. You've got to have standing and damages to sue. Baylor has neither. And, so when the 2012 football season kicks off Baylor, OU, and A&M will all be in separate conference.

Texas might be with OU, they might not. OU has already dropped the "we don't give a crap about our rivalry anymore" bombshell. Frankly, OU survived having its Nebraska rivalry ended; so, it can survive not playing Texas as well. That happens when you have some sort of football history people around the country can grasp.

So, Randy and I are correct, OU now calls the tune, and Texas now dances to it. Again, Texas badly overestimated how much their conference mates outside of Waco and Ames really gave a crap about them.

Baylor is not suing anyone... YET. All they are doing is leaving that option open by refusing to sign a waiver. I would do the same thing if I were Baylor. If A&M decides to go through with it and the SEC lets them, then the rest of the Big 12 crumbles and Baylor/IASt. and any other school relegated to a lower paying conference will THEN have the legs to stand on to sue. If they sign a waiver now, they forefit that right later. This is not hard to understand. If it were baseless as you're accusing, then why does A&M feel they're being "held hostage" and the SEC is putting the brakes on it?

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

They don't have a leg to stand on, legally. No court will force Texas A&M to look after the interests of Baylor. If Texas A&M has followed the procedures to leave the Big 12, and apparently they have because the Big 12 commish gave them his blessing to go, Baylor is just pissing in the wind...again.

They have this dreamland wish that the Texas courts are like the California courts and don't understand the law (or, that they understand it, but flaunt it in the name of "equality). At law, there will be nothing holding A&M back. It's a fantasy pushed by a desperate bunch of college administrators whose football program is traditionally weak.

No court will make Texas A&M protect Baylor's interests. Baylor will be told it need to put on their big boy pants and look out for itself like everyone else has done.

[Mean Green 93-98]

They don't have a leg to stand on, legally. No court will force Texas A&M to look after the interests of Baylor. If Texas A&M has followed the procedures to leave the Big 12, and apparently they have because the Big 12 commish gave them his blessing to go, Baylor is just pissing in the wind...again.

They have this dreamland wish that the Texas courts are like the California courts and don't understand the law (or, that they understand it, but flaunt it in the name of "equality). At law, there will be nothing holding A&M back. It's a fantasy pushed by a desperate bunch of college administrators whose football program is traditionally weak.

No court will make Texas A&M protect Baylor's interests. Baylor will be told it need to put on their big boy pants and look out for itself like everyone else has done.

So why would Baylor sign the waiver? How does that serve their interests?

[Eagle1855]

sigh.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

So why would Baylor sign the waiver? How does that serve their interests?

Their interests are bunk. When you read cases involving amateur athletics (even professional athletics) and the law (contracts and antitrust, mainly), everything comes down to marketplace and shares.

Antitrust law does not protect the actors, it protect consumers. In an antitrust action, Baylor must prove that the consuming public is harmed by A&M leaving the Big 12 and going to the SEC.

The consuming public is not harmed by it. In fact, the football consuming public is likely improved because the SEC gains another highly marketable member.

Also, conference are free to pick and choose whomever they want in their membership. There is nothing in contract, antitrust, or association law that says a member of one organization must protect the interests of the members of their former organization.

Legally, the simple fact of the matter is that Baylor is part of a marketplace and must compete in it like everyone else. It is no more entitled to equal protection within it than any other member.

That Baylor has weak marketability is not the Big 12's fault, nor is it Texas A&M's fault. Baylor is just screwed, and so they are buttsore. Fine. Be buttsore. But, don't waste everyone's time being buttsore.

TCU has a message for Baylor - Shut up and fend for yourselves. That works, too.

Edited September 8, 2011 by The Fake Lonnie Finch

[Mean Green 93-98]

Their interests are bunk. When you read cases involving amateur athletics (even professional athletics) and the law (contracts and antitrust, mainly), everything comes down to marketplace and shares.

Antitrust law does not protect the actors, it protect consumers. In an antitrust action, Baylor must prove that the consuming public is harmed by A&M leaving the Big 12 and going to the SEC.

The consuming public is not harmed by it. In fact, the football consuming public is likely improved because the SEC gains another highly marketable member.

Also, conference are free to pick and choose whomever they want in their membership. There is nothing in contract, antitrust, or association law that says a member of one organization must protect the interests of the members of their former organization.

Legally, the simple fact of the matter is that Baylor is part of a marketplace and must compete in it like everyone else. It is no more entitled to equal protection within it than any other member.

That Baylor has weak marketability is not the Big 12's fault, nor is it Texas A&M's fault. Baylor is just screwed, and so they are buttsore. Fine. Be buttsore. But, don't waste everyone's time being buttsore.

TCU has a message for Baylor - Shut up and fend for yourselves. That works, too.

Okay, the merits of a potential lawsuit aside . . . why would Baylor sign the waiver? As far as I and they can see, they gain nothing by doing so. If you are Baylor's attorney, what reasons do you give them to sign the waiver?

[Baby Arm!]

Meh, it's all semantics and politics at this point. No matter who appears to be driving the bus, OU and Texas are joined at the hip. If either one leaves for the Pac 12 the Big12 is done and the other will go too.

OU wasn't fond of the impression given last summer that they were following in Texas' wake on realingment. It didn't help that impression when their AD said wherever Texas went, OU was sticking with them. This time around Texas is getting enough blame and bad press I think they are more than content to let OU take the lead on this one.