Thought this might be of interest.
On the 12 team playoff:
“The presidents stayed engaged and really said they were going to stay engaged after the outcome in January. I’m not going to over predict because I’ve been through the last year plus of this experience. We’ll see. I still think we designed and presented an effective plan for a future format. Not everyone agreed. We’ll see if there’s a point at which people agree.”
On playoff expansions and UT and OU joining the league:
“Really not (related). When we made the decision and announced July 2025, that entry date is based on their contractual agreement with the Big 12 and we were in the middle of do we expand the playoff? I’ve said, hey we go to 16, if you guys want to stay at four, I’m fine with that. When we’re at 14, we’re getting half the field twice in eight years, so I’m not threatened or concerned at somehow diminished access. I think we increase access. I do take a step back though because I think separate from Texas and Oklahoma, we’re looking at the health of college football across the country. Before the changes from this summer or the changes from last summer, I thought this expansion was the right direction and I’m one that still feels that way. There’s a lot of work to do to green light it, but I think it can bring the nation into the championship.”
How do Big 12 TV negotiations impact OU and UT?
“We’ll be attentive to what’s taking place. I’m not unaware, but the ability to alter an entry date is primarily between Oklahoma and the Big 12, Texas and the Big 12 and then we’d have to alter our invitation. But the cart being behind the horse, that’s really between those entities.”
Can you squash any speculation that there would be schools in the conference that would be worried about being kicked out
“The absurdity of that conversation knows no boundaries. I don’t know if that squashes it. Never been a conversation and shouldn’t be a conversation. There’s history with ten of our members that dates back to 1932, two of our members to the early 90s and we’re a full decade, turning the page to the second decade here. You kind of forget, by comparison, the Big 12 participation was about, what, 15, 16 years for Texas A&M and Missouri. We’re over half that distance and just going, I think, gangbusters forward. And we bring back rivalries that existed, believe it or not, the Southeastern Conference will have 25% of the Big Eight membership with Missouri and Oklahoma and there’s great history there…Then you bring back Texas, Arkansas, which has legendary games back in the 60s and obviously the Texas Texas A&M rivalry. That’s the focus. Been asked a couple times. It’s not even on our radar screen.
“When I moved to Dallas in the early 90s, Arkansas was a member, Texas A&M was a member and obviously Texas. I think it was a bit advantageous in the learning process, both the transition of Arkansas out and then the change to create the Big 12 and four of those members of the Southwest Conference ended up in the WAC. I worked two floors below Steve Hatchell’s temporary offices in the Big 12…I personally have benefitted from knowing a bit more history than maybe you normally would.”
On two super conference
“I don’t think there’s a yes or no in there. I answer by going back to decisions made over time. Some good, some bad. The growth in our region and of our campuses, student enrollment, facilities, the expansions show the creativity of a way to go to 12 to create a championship game, go to 14, create a network, going to 16 hopefully we’ll have a few other things…I think that’s positioned us really well, we have a philosophy, a shared culture and a desire to succeed, a desire for excellence. I think that positions us. I think that differentiates us. But there are outcomes, right? People want to affiliate. People want to be a part of that. Whether it’s student athletes, coaches, we’ve seen that with universities. I don’t think it reduces itself to two automatically. My mindset isn’t, we just go to that. We look at CFP expansion. We could stay at four and let the two figure it out between us, right? But to my earlier comments about national participation through that expansion, having value for everyone. We certainly don’t need it. I don’t know if the Big Ten really needs it. But I think there are benefits to both of us, but the benefits go beyond us.
“There are decisions that create outcome that create momentum that create success and achievement that bring people in and that is a distinguishing characteristic. But I still think others can be successful. And if I don’t think that way, then we become complacent and the last thing that I want us to be is complacent as a group.”
On eight game vs nine game schedule and protecting rivalries
“We can’t keep them all every year, but we can improve the frequency with which our teams travel through our campuses. Missouri’s in the East so Arkansas’ every year and then you take the COVID year out, it’s once every 12 years (everywhere else). The point of distinction is every year for as many as possible or the primaries as we call them and secondary rivalries or will more of those be every other year? We’re right now in the middle of the conversation. So when we were at this point last year had you asked me this question, I would have predicted when we get to Destin, athletics directors have asked us for a finish line there. When we went to Destin this year, we laid out all of the information but then we looked forward and our crystal ball was clear, but in retrospect fuzzy. So what we said was there’s going to be continuing discussion about CFP format, we let that play out, we gather again in August. When we gathered again in August there was momentum that we are seeing speculated about (for a nine game schedule). We knew the Big Ten media deal was likely to be resolved this summer. What we didn’t know was that there would be a membership transition. So we have now more points of information that I think can help us make a better decision. We’re watching other scheduling decision making, but also understanding how to do this for our own position. We could move this fall, by the end of the calendar year. I think we’ve benefited our thinking process. We’ve actually dug more into tiebreakers, had a conversation with an AD looking at injury patterns that actually suggested we play more conference games. There’s a lot of thought going into it. It’s actually pretty cool. When you think about Missouri joined in November of 2011, that was the announcement, they actually joined in January. Here, I think we’ve used the time wisely and we will continue to do so.”
On the 12 team playoff:
“The presidents stayed engaged and really said they were going to stay engaged after the outcome in January. I’m not going to over predict because I’ve been through the last year plus of this experience. We’ll see. I still think we designed and presented an effective plan for a future format. Not everyone agreed. We’ll see if there’s a point at which people agree.”
On playoff expansions and UT and OU joining the league:
“Really not (related). When we made the decision and announced July 2025, that entry date is based on their contractual agreement with the Big 12 and we were in the middle of do we expand the playoff? I’ve said, hey we go to 16, if you guys want to stay at four, I’m fine with that. When we’re at 14, we’re getting half the field twice in eight years, so I’m not threatened or concerned at somehow diminished access. I think we increase access. I do take a step back though because I think separate from Texas and Oklahoma, we’re looking at the health of college football across the country. Before the changes from this summer or the changes from last summer, I thought this expansion was the right direction and I’m one that still feels that way. There’s a lot of work to do to green light it, but I think it can bring the nation into the championship.”
How do Big 12 TV negotiations impact OU and UT?
“We’ll be attentive to what’s taking place. I’m not unaware, but the ability to alter an entry date is primarily between Oklahoma and the Big 12, Texas and the Big 12 and then we’d have to alter our invitation. But the cart being behind the horse, that’s really between those entities.”
Can you squash any speculation that there would be schools in the conference that would be worried about being kicked out
“The absurdity of that conversation knows no boundaries. I don’t know if that squashes it. Never been a conversation and shouldn’t be a conversation. There’s history with ten of our members that dates back to 1932, two of our members to the early 90s and we’re a full decade, turning the page to the second decade here. You kind of forget, by comparison, the Big 12 participation was about, what, 15, 16 years for Texas A&M and Missouri. We’re over half that distance and just going, I think, gangbusters forward. And we bring back rivalries that existed, believe it or not, the Southeastern Conference will have 25% of the Big Eight membership with Missouri and Oklahoma and there’s great history there…Then you bring back Texas, Arkansas, which has legendary games back in the 60s and obviously the Texas Texas A&M rivalry. That’s the focus. Been asked a couple times. It’s not even on our radar screen.
“When I moved to Dallas in the early 90s, Arkansas was a member, Texas A&M was a member and obviously Texas. I think it was a bit advantageous in the learning process, both the transition of Arkansas out and then the change to create the Big 12 and four of those members of the Southwest Conference ended up in the WAC. I worked two floors below Steve Hatchell’s temporary offices in the Big 12…I personally have benefitted from knowing a bit more history than maybe you normally would.”
On two super conference
“I don’t think there’s a yes or no in there. I answer by going back to decisions made over time. Some good, some bad. The growth in our region and of our campuses, student enrollment, facilities, the expansions show the creativity of a way to go to 12 to create a championship game, go to 14, create a network, going to 16 hopefully we’ll have a few other things…I think that’s positioned us really well, we have a philosophy, a shared culture and a desire to succeed, a desire for excellence. I think that positions us. I think that differentiates us. But there are outcomes, right? People want to affiliate. People want to be a part of that. Whether it’s student athletes, coaches, we’ve seen that with universities. I don’t think it reduces itself to two automatically. My mindset isn’t, we just go to that. We look at CFP expansion. We could stay at four and let the two figure it out between us, right? But to my earlier comments about national participation through that expansion, having value for everyone. We certainly don’t need it. I don’t know if the Big Ten really needs it. But I think there are benefits to both of us, but the benefits go beyond us.
“There are decisions that create outcome that create momentum that create success and achievement that bring people in and that is a distinguishing characteristic. But I still think others can be successful. And if I don’t think that way, then we become complacent and the last thing that I want us to be is complacent as a group.”
On eight game vs nine game schedule and protecting rivalries
“We can’t keep them all every year, but we can improve the frequency with which our teams travel through our campuses. Missouri’s in the East so Arkansas’ every year and then you take the COVID year out, it’s once every 12 years (everywhere else). The point of distinction is every year for as many as possible or the primaries as we call them and secondary rivalries or will more of those be every other year? We’re right now in the middle of the conversation. So when we were at this point last year had you asked me this question, I would have predicted when we get to Destin, athletics directors have asked us for a finish line there. When we went to Destin this year, we laid out all of the information but then we looked forward and our crystal ball was clear, but in retrospect fuzzy. So what we said was there’s going to be continuing discussion about CFP format, we let that play out, we gather again in August. When we gathered again in August there was momentum that we are seeing speculated about (for a nine game schedule). We knew the Big Ten media deal was likely to be resolved this summer. What we didn’t know was that there would be a membership transition. So we have now more points of information that I think can help us make a better decision. We’re watching other scheduling decision making, but also understanding how to do this for our own position. We could move this fall, by the end of the calendar year. I think we’ve benefited our thinking process. We’ve actually dug more into tiebreakers, had a conversation with an AD looking at injury patterns that actually suggested we play more conference games. There’s a lot of thought going into it. It’s actually pretty cool. When you think about Missouri joined in November of 2011, that was the announcement, they actually joined in January. Here, I think we’ve used the time wisely and we will continue to do so.”
Last edited:
