situation just unique because Texas and OU have so much money and there isn't that much time left on the contract. Someone should be able to address those two distinctions.

That simple, theoretical question should be able to answered with a decent amount of probability by any competent legal professional. Clearly we don't have the specific details of the case.

My guess is that Texas felt a bit bullied into keeping the B12 together originally. They wanted the Longhorn network and have some bitterness about the lack of its success and the backlash they received for floating it. They also saw how much A&M was benefitting from being in the SEC. If so. my guess is that they starting realizing that defect/jump was their best move a few years ago. As the B12 contract's time shrunk, they figured they would could possibly jump early and that even with the penalty, it would be a breakeven situation or better. Plus the combination of the expanded playoff was frowned upon by the SEC and ESPN, so they all sort of moved in concert to jump a bit sooner than planned. I think the playoff expansion was a catalyst in speeding this up.

The Texas administrators saw the writing on the wall a few years back and made the obvious conclusion. Perhaps covid and/or the playoff situation sped things up. Sort of the opposite of how our administrators whiffed at going to the SEC in 2012.

If I'm correct, then the ACC can hold together for several years. The ACC situation is probably quite distinct from the B12 situation. I still think not going to the SEC in 2012 was a huge mistake.

[Post edited by TDVick at 08/07/2021 3:30PM]