Conference Realignment: Will Texas A&M Play The Sucker?
by Peter Bean on Jun 10, 2010 3:14 PM CDT
in Conference Realignment
Email
Print
The hottest question of the hour is whether Texas A&M might break ranks with Texas and venture off on its own to the SEC. Over at AOL's Fanhouse, Clay Travis (a diehard Vol fan) lays out the argument for why it's a great idea, and as far as benefiting the SEC is concerned, he's absolutely correct. They'd get Texas TV sets, an inroad to East Texas recruiting, and a football-obsessed university with a respectable enough program.
But would the move be a good one for Texas A&M? Absolutely not, but just as SEC fans should hope the Aggies are dumb enough to take the bait... so should Texas.
You love cheese, don't you Aggie? Here, have a piece.
A&M venturing off on its own to the SEC would be the best thing that could possibly happen to Texas. And one of the worst to A&M. Imagine, for a moment, that the Aggies do just that, and tell Texas that there will be no solidarity pact and they are going to head off to the SEC on their own. What result?
Well, all of the sudden, Texas is free to join the Big 10. The "Tech problem" just disappears overnight, because if the Aggies want to go to the SEC, they have to band with UT and let the Longhorns go to the Big 10. A unified split allows each to go its separate way, and eliminates an opposition coalition standing in the way of Texas venturing to the Big 10.
Only an Aggie (or SEC predator) could think this a good idea. Whatever gains the Aggies enjoyed from SEC TV dollars, would be easily matched--and likely surpassed--by the huge revenues the University of Texas would enjoy in a suddenly monstrous Big Ten Network. Not only that, but as the Aggies left to join a middling conference in terms of academics and R&D dollars, UT immediately upgrades to the nation's premier conference in terms of academics and R&D dollars. Essentially, the Aggies would be taking a giant step sideways, into a football conference they're unlikely to succeed in, while liberating Texas to become even bigger, richer, and stronger than it already is.
They would, in essence, be choosing to open up an enormous gulf between themselves and Texas--one that cannot open up nearly so wide when the schools are tethered together in the same conference.
Surely, though, the Aggies realize this, right? I mean, they're not suicidal, are they?
244 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Hope you guys are having fun with this.
From my angle, this sucks utter balls.
by CrossCyed on Jun 10, 2010 3:18 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
I don't even think they're that stupid
It’s over. The dreams of trips to East Lansing and West Lafayette will have to remain just that: mere dreams.
I don't either
But so long as their fans are begging for it, I’m going to encourage their self-destructive behavior.
You ain't hurt...
As a Lafeyette, IN native
and victim of many “vacations” back there, I will say that there is virtually no appeal to a trip there.
by Wescott Eberts (GoBR) on Jun 10, 2010 4:34 PM CDT up reply actions
You know what's sad though?
It’s heaven compared with South Bend. I drove down there from South Bend and decided that Lafayette is a beautiful, entertaining city.
Wait...
…are you now the Big 10 Guy, and I’m the Pac 10 Guy? I’m confused. Who wants to be Independence Boy?
I've always been fine with the B10
I just didn’t think it realistic.
This, however, makes it a possibility.
You ain't hurt...
Which conference do you prefer PB? I know you went to law school up that way, but...
Would you like to go up there several times a year during football season? I’m sure I’ve read which conference you preferred, but was just curious as I’ve forgotten.
by SneezyBeltran on Jun 10, 2010 4:01 PM CDT up reply actions
Well
Athletically, I rather like the Pac 10 move. My enthusiasm for the Big 10 would relate to joining such a strong, stable, and well-organized academic group.
So it’s a win-win, as far as I’m concerned. I’ll either be happier as a fan of the sports teams, or happier as a fan of the university academics.
You ain't hurt...
Obviously the Big Ten is set up very well in regards to athletics and academics.
Do you see our academic profile being raised by joining the Pac-10 with the likes of Cal, Stanford, UCLA, etc? Or does it not do much for us since the Pac-10 is not set up like the Big Ten in regards to research $$’s?
by SneezyBeltran on Jun 10, 2010 4:08 PM CDT up reply actions
the whole realignment thing sux.
I guess im the only one who wants to stay in the big 12 to:
dominate recruiting
dominate in most sports
dominate in revenue
play most of our games close to our state
have normal game start times
the golden age of UT sports dominance might be coming to an end with this possible move to another conference
"We'll be baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!"
by greenspointexas on Jun 10, 2010 3:19 PM CDT reply actions
I'm enjoying how miserable this is making you.
And looking forward to a long weekend in LA.
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Jun 10, 2010 3:25 PM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
Dominate in revenue?
eh… what?
"A lot of people look for the easy way to do anything, in swimming there is no easy way." - Eddie Reese
Sure, dominant in revenue in Big 12,
But the Big 10 dwarfs the Big 12 in $$$.
The PAC 10 and Big 10 bring in $200 million in TV revenue. The Big 12 brings in $64 million. Why would you want to stay in a puny conference?
I still don’t understand what your athletic conference has to do with academics. And aside from the academic argument, all you’ve said here is that it would be good for UT.
What you're seeing is team spirit. It's like the Holy Spirit, but more powerful.
-Hank Hill
If Texas joins the Big 10
It’s gonna get to join the CIC and all those tasty research dollars the Big 10 schools get. There’s no such benefit over in the SEC. Just better football.
You ain't hurt...
Peter, I think you could grow to love
road trips to Chicago, Madison and MPLS. Cold? Yes, but lots of fun.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Jun 13, 2010 12:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Why would the CIC care which athletic conference you’re in? If you can’t get in now, why would they let you in based on where your football team travels to? Doesn’t make sense to me.
What you're seeing is team spirit. It's like the Holy Spirit, but more powerful.
-Hank Hill
ah. I was looking at the other CIC.
Still, I don’t see how that hurts A&M, except in comparison to UT.
What you're seeing is team spirit. It's like the Holy Spirit, but more powerful.
-Hank Hill
Committee on Institutional Cooperation not the Council of Independent Colleges
What you're seeing is team spirit. It's like the Holy Spirit, but more powerful.
-Hank Hill
That's the point
A&M moves sideways, while liberating Texas to elevate way above it. For a university that lives and breathes only to compare itself to UT, this would be a disaster.
You ain't hurt...
I am obviously out of your loop, but
I thought Texas had no interest in joining the Big Ten. Would the increase in television revenue be greater than the revenue generated by a future “UT Network”?
You raise a great point about the research dollars. I admit to being an SEC enthusiast, but if a move to the Big Ten is on the table, I would have to say that’s the best move for the both the Horns and the Ags.
by AgAstraPerAspera on Jun 10, 2010 4:46 PM CDT up reply actions
Follow-up
Are the Big Ten Network $ and UT Network even mutually exclusive?
by AgAstraPerAspera on Jun 10, 2010 4:47 PM CDT up reply actions
I think you're right
I’m not aware that Texas is trying to head to the Big 10, under the current situation. I’m just saying that if A&M comes to the table and says “We want the SEC,” well… then it’s a different evaluation for Texas. It’s not looking for a home for a bundle of schools; just itself. A&M and UT agree to support one another in their individual ventures, and there’s no one to block anyone’s move. I don’t think Tech alone could block a unified UT and A&M.
You ain't hurt...
Agreed
Tech isn’t putting the breaks on anything. I don’t believe you’ll see A&M out front saying “We’re going SEC,” without weighing other options. I do think we would prefer it to joining Frankenconference out west.
by AgAstraPerAspera on Jun 10, 2010 4:54 PM CDT up reply actions
I think if texas moved to the Big Televen (new Big 12?), and A&M to the SEC
it would marginalize texas in recruiting, and A&M would significantly surpass texas in athletics, especially in football. Would all of those research dollars from the CIC make you feel better if/when you’re getting stomped on the field year after year?
Would your alumni be able to handle that?
by Beergut on Jun 10, 2010 10:04 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Bwah HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!…AHHHHHH HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!…. AHHHHHHHHHH HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA !!!!!!!!!!
by BrooklynHorn on Jun 10, 2010 10:30 PM CDT up reply actions 5 recs
Heh heh heh….
He he. HMMM HMMMM HMMM HMMMM..
BWAH HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!
Sorry.
I think I’m finished.
by BrooklynHorn on Jun 10, 2010 10:32 PM CDT up reply actions 6 recs
I have no dog in this fight
but that’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard.
--Dave
Addicted to Quack, SBN's Oregon Ducks blog
by David Piper on Jun 10, 2010 11:13 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
The Aggies have a dog in this, though
Literally. You do know that the head of the Corps of Cadets is a dog, right? Please tell me that you knew that already. I’m not making it up. A dog.
God, it’s going to be fun to educate ten new schools about the ways of the Aggies after they get bitch-slapped once and for all here in the next couple of days and follow us west.
by Hopkins Horn on Jun 10, 2010 11:24 PM CDT up reply actions
That stupid dog
People have told me if that dog barks in a class, then class is canceled for that day. What kind of idiot school lets a dog dictate class schedule….wait nvm.
beergut
When was the last time you guys beat a SEC team? seriously, how delusional can you be? a&m would be in the same division as Alabama, LSU and Arkansas. Call me crazy, but I don’t see alot of 10 win seasons in your future if you play in any given year, Bama, LSU, Florida, Arkansas, Tennessee and Georgia.
I know its hard for an aggie to comprehend…..but you actually have to WIN games to recruit better….take that bit of advice and run with it.
Until recently, A&M had the proud distincion
of being the last school to have lost to Notre Dame in a bowl game (two times in a row for that matter). So contextually, the Aggies have the same historical significance as Hawaii. Congrats.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Jun 13, 2010 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions
Depends, how much to mow my lawn?
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Jun 11, 2010 12:58 AM CDT up reply actions
That is ridiculous
absolutely ridiculous.
You will be fodder in the SEC. However, we would like to claim your research dollars, so come on down. If you think Arkansas and Georgia did a number on you, wait till the big boys pick your bones clean.
"Hush now, let it go now. I know it's time to go. Time to let this fall from my hands" VNV Nation, "From My Hands"
by Stuck in the Plains on Jun 11, 2010 9:56 AM CDT up reply actions
Not that long ago, I remember people saying that Alabama was doomed to mediocrity and that we would never get back to where we were.
What you're seeing is team spirit. It's like the Holy Spirit, but more powerful.
-Hank Hill
Texas A&M
hasn’t been nationally relevant in a decade…even when they were (in my lifetime of 30+ years), they were still very much a regional threat, and maybe 2-3 times truly elite.
The aggies are (for all recent historical purposes) a 7-9 game winning program. That’s neither good nor ill, just the way it is.
"Hush now, let it go now. I know it's time to go. Time to let this fall from my hands" VNV Nation, "From My Hands"
by Stuck in the Plains on Jun 11, 2010 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions
Okay, here's cliff notes version of how the argument goes
The funding agents in the state tend to associate your school with whomever you compete against athletically. Historically, the Big 10 has used the CIC to frame academic competition and create a funding race amongst the rust belt states. This has led to the Big 10 being a collection of the best funded universities in the country.
The Big 10 schools also allow the universities to collaborate on large research grants across universities, and when the Federal government has the opportunity to spread money across the districts of multiple house reps, they tend to do it. This can be attributed as a prime factor for Big 10 states leading the federal research dollars and resources.
The California system is so large and so well funded, that they have done much the same thing with the aid of USC and Stanford. To keep up in either conference, Texas would have to start funding the flagships like they meant business, as well as Tech.
A&M can have it’s funding cut routinely and lead the research pack in the SEC, and because the state is looking to higher education to fill the impending budget shortfall, that doesn’t like a wise maneuver to make.
And yes, I left out a lot.
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Jun 10, 2010 3:37 PM CDT up reply actions
and conflated the Big 10 and CIC in the second paragraph. I really should just put the case together so I can copy/paste it.
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Jun 10, 2010 3:38 PM CDT up reply actions
You should write it in a Fan Post
And we can bump it to the front page. And then link back to it, repeatedly.
Also, shoot me an email sometime, LH. burntorangenation-at-gmail
You ain't hurt...
I think Texas wanted the status quo
But with an imploding Big 12, I’d think Texas would gladly head to the Big 10 in a situation where Aggie said, “We’re going to the SEC.”
At that point, the Big 10 is actually a pretty easy choice.
You ain't hurt...
A&M Regent Gene Stalling
His Alabama ties are showing a little too brightly. The poor Aggies are so mesmerized and naive……
Stalling is like an SEC spy playing A&M in order to open the Texas recruiting market. Something is very wrong here.
Don't forget A&M's
Jackie Sherrill connection … then there’s the John David Crow once coached college ball in Northeast Louisiana connection.
"Excuse me while I whip this out."
Sure thing
The latter presently, and the former the next few evenings as work/NY bar prep allow.
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Jun 10, 2010 3:42 PM CDT up reply actions
Interesting.
funding agents in the state tend to associate your school with whomever you compete against athletically
Logically, this makes no sense. But I suppose that’s government for ya.
What you're seeing is team spirit. It's like the Holy Spirit, but more powerful.
-Hank Hill
You're right, it doesn't make sense, but that's the way politics works
UT had been trying to get the Legislature to relax the top 10% rule almost since its inception.
They only did so last year, when the President Powers said that it would start to hurt football recruiting during hearings. At that point, concessions were almost immediate.
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Jun 10, 2010 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions
The Cali system is well-funded but the PUF isn’t peanuts. How do the funding from each compare?
by dimecoverage on Jun 10, 2010 4:08 PM CDT up reply actions
We may be talking about different things
California has a fairly simple system, the U of C system comprises the research institutions (read as graduate) and the Cal State system focuses on high quality undergraduate training. This makes investment easier and it makes it easier to stay on mission.
The PUF, which I have derided in a few comments recently because it clearly needs to be overhauled, is a lot of money, spread across a lot of institutions (15), with a lot of limitations (limitations to capital improvements). This means that schools with non research missions (i.e. primarily undergraduate education) share money with schools with a more graduate focus. Efficiencies and best practices are hosed early, to the detriment of schools that get less utility out of capital improvements. The legislature tends to try to add schools to this fund, because that’s easier than changing an 1876 amendment or creating an annual funding bill. Don’t get me wrong, the PUF is one of the best ideas any state has had, but it strongly needs to be updated.
As for the amount of the money, PUF money has to be distributed to the AUF before it can be distributed to the Universities. The quick and dirty number is the less than 5% of 16 million dollars. Say 143 million for UT-Austin, or less than 10% of it’s approximately 2 billion dollar budget
UT System
UT Arlington
UT Austin
UT Dallas
UT El Paso
UT Permian Basin
UT San Antonio
UT Tyler
UT Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas
UT Medical Branch at Galveston
UT Health Science Center at Houston
UT Health Science Center at San Antonio
UT M. D. Anderson Cancer Center
UT Health Science Center at Tyler
Texas A&M System
Prairie View A&M University
Tarleton State University
Texas A&M University
Texas A&M at Galveston
The Texas A&M University Health Science Center
Texas Agricultural Experiment Station
Texas Agricultural Extension Service
Texas Engineering Extension Service
Texas Engineering Experiment Station
Texas Forest Service
Texas Transportation Institute
As for the annual funding differential, I have the data per student handy for 2003-2004, so I’ll quote that and try to find better numbers for that fanpost. In those years, California spent approximately 9k per student in the U of C system and 6.5k on the CSU system. Texas spent 6.4k across all public institutions in the same year…and people complained that was too much.
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Jun 10, 2010 4:36 PM CDT up reply actions
Texas A&M is looking to add Stephen F. Austin to it's system.
I guess Lumberjacks would go well with agriculture.
Sports is man's joke on God, You see, God says to man, 'I've created a universe where it seems like everything matters, where you'll have to grapple with life and death and in the end you'll die anyway, and it won't really matter.' So man says to God, 'Oh, yeah? Within your universe we're going to create a sub-universe called sports, one that absolutely doesn't matter, and we'll follow everything that happens in it as if it were life and death.'" - Sam Kellerman
Yeah, this is the problem I have with the PUF
Create a master plan for eligible universities, put them under the plan, and stick to it. Don’t have a group of special interests trying to make a “fit”.
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Jun 10, 2010 6:55 PM CDT up reply actions
Research Dollars
Hi Texans — I’m a Cal grad just trying to follow the whole roller coaster this week! It’s like totally the most exciting offseason ever, dude.
Question for you about academics/pile of potential research dollars: from what I can find without doing a ton of research, it looks like the CIC collectively pulls in ~$3.5B annually in federal research dollars. I haven’t looked into the entire Pac10 this afternoon, but Cal/Stanfurd/UCLA (only) collectively get about $2.0B, so it would be safe to assume that once the other schools are added the Pac10 actually garners a lot more per school (and a LOT more per research institution, since even the kindest of us would not grant that tag to OSU or ASU) than the CIC.
BUT — and I think this is a huge but — certainly Pac10 membership has nothing to do with federal dollars granted, nor does being a member of the CIC. The CIC is an umbrella that doesn’t actively pursue anything, but just aggregates what the individual schools do. So, I suppose I’m asking, why do you think the Big101 would help you increase your research dollars? Do you really only get $318M in federal funding grants annually now (the Big101 average)?
A few things here
To directly answer your question, depending on the year, 318 is pretty close to right on. About 1/3 of that is allocated to DoD projects specifically (we’re the DoD’s favorite hippies), so I’m not sure what kind of patent/corporate spin off potential those endeavors have.
The Pac 10 is very top heavy, you won’t be as impressed once you get out of Cal, UCLA, Stanford, Washington, and Arizona. If there’s something I envy in the Pac 10, it’s the UC-System itself, which by itself could publish metrics better than the CIC. However, after Penn State’s experience, there is more evidence (yea verily) of the success of the CIC schools being replicated than, say, joining the UC system.
And it’s exactly right the CIC doesn’t grant any money, or directly pursue anything. It does help, a lot, in a few areas. This is good for quick and dirty, I’ve got the links to some white papers if you would like them as well. The story, which I tend to find compelling, is that as research tends toward “big science” type projects and larger grants that overflow one department, it behooves schools to find similarly capable partners to make joint pitches to share the money across schools (and political districts).
To the extent you can get researchers exchanging with other programs, and willing to make those pitches, you’re in good shape.
Also, I think we’re all firmly in favor of trying to find a good example to follow as Texas tries to revamp public higher education. The CIC schools have them, and the California has one. I’ll be writing more about this later.
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Jun 10, 2010 7:11 PM CDT up reply actions
Oregon State U research
Howdy Texans (and that Cal grad) — I’m a Bruin living near Oregon State, so I’ve been able to continue attending Pac-10 athletic events. I’ve also been impressed by OSU’s research efforts, which the Carnegie Foundation rates among its “very high research activity” institutions, along with UCLA, Cal, Texas, and others of that ilk. Oddly, the U of Oregon is not on that list. Most interestingly, OSU is a land grant, sea grant, space grant, and sun grant institution (Cornell is the only other 4-grant U). While its research dollars don’t compare with UCLA or Cal, $260 mil a year is a fair amount of money for an institution this size (~22,000). The relocation of NOAA’s Marine Operations Center to nearby Newport will no doubt increase incoming research dollars to OSU.
by fanoverboard on Jun 10, 2010 8:54 PM CDT up reply actions
That's a KC station
I think they’re grasping at straws now.
by Hopkins Horn on Jun 10, 2010 3:24 PM CDT up reply actions
Don’t worry, Chip’s on the case.
As we all know, anyone named Chip is awesome and trustworthy.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
Well, he did break the whole story.
He’s legit in my book….always done a good job of following and reporting UT sports.
by SneezyBeltran on Jun 10, 2010 4:14 PM CDT up reply actions
So we have TMZ and local TV on it today!
Oklahoma State to the Pac 10 without the Texas schools or OU? Huh?
Remember, we have a Tech problem. No way this happens without the Raiders and the Big Ten does not want Tech.
by dimecoverage on Jun 10, 2010 4:09 PM CDT up reply actions
You think Tech could stop Texas to Big 10?
I don’t think they could stop that ship. Didn’t we say we would welcome that call saying Tech is a problem from the Big 10’s view.
Texas to the Big 10 would only happen if A&M bolted for the SEC. It ain’t happening. The Leg will not let little brother out of the house by himself. He’d get lost or he would get hit by a car crossing the street. You know this. :-)
by dimecoverage on Jun 10, 2010 6:00 PM CDT up reply actions
If you let your little brother out of the house
He’s liable to get run over. Probably by a bus with a Florida logo on it.
But he's got that 12th man following him and he feels ready to shine
The Call Boys will give him and hand and surely he can make it on his own with those backwood rednecks in the SEC
I say Good luck Aggies. Just remember, we will also be right here when you come back beaten like dogs to say we told you so……
Would the legislature even let the Aggies go by themselves?
Even if Texas would happily let A&M do just that, surely most people in the legislature would see it as a bad idea for the Aggies.
by TheElusiveShadow on Jun 10, 2010 3:21 PM CDT reply actions
I think this trumps the legislature
UT’s president and the status of the athletics program — much greater now than in 1994 — are strong enough to overcome the politicos.
I think the schools could have done what they wanted when they joined the Big 12, they just decided not to. Political forces were part of it, but there was also the reality of joining the Big 8 (thus, opposing the Nebraska forces), and having four votes (Tech and Baylor, along with the Aggies) instead of two wasn’t a bad way to go.
Also, 12 teams made possible the Big 12 title game. If just A&M and Texas had joined the Big 8, there’s have been no divisional play and no championship game.
If history is any indication, they cannot make a decision to separate from UT unless it is sanctioned by The Leg. I just don’t see that happening.
by dimecoverage on Jun 10, 2010 4:11 PM CDT up reply actions
I am warming to the Big 10 now
Especially if we can cut aggy loose in the process. I have been a stickler on the geography, but if the Big 10 were to take Nebraska, Missouri and Texas, it would all start making sense to my geo-focused peabrain. Liking this, liking this a lot …
A&M and UT will stick together
But man oh man would it be classic if Aggie insisted on venturing off into the SEC wilderness on its own.
Pretty please? We’ll pack your bags!
You ain't hurt...
Yeah, liking it but scared about recruiting
If A&M goes to SEC, guess who is on the ride with them – OU. And if OU and A&M go to the SEC, every Texas athlete that has grade issues will be right there. All of a sudden recruits start thinking A&M and SEC are easier plays.
+1
My feeling is OU and Aggie remain our major rivals, regardless of conference ties.
Given that, I’d like to have them sitting at the same table, playing by the same rules.
OU to SEC without a Texas tie-in to the SEC
Is not that scary. LSU, Bama, UGA, etc have always enticed some athletes that want the SEC easier academics. But if A&M gives them the Texas tie-in it worries me. All those schools will start really poaching.
What is up with this article?
http://www.kctv5.com/sports/23860558/detail.html
I don’t want to believe it, but it’s hard to believe anything right now!
"Football's so important in Texas. On the West Coast, it's a social. On the East Coast, it's a culture. Here, it's a religion."
-- Major Applewhite
Can somebody post the wording of the tweet?
I can’t access it
by Hook_'em_Horns on Jun 10, 2010 3:42 PM CDT up reply actions
There’s a Kansas City TV report saying Texas and A&M to the Big Ten. That would be news to those schools.
I trust Chip, but Texas to Big 10 makes sense
Texas to Pac 10 doesn’t make as much sense from an academic perspective. Big 10 is where we belong to increase Academics and I think this may have legs. Will have to see.
Why do we want to play in a half conference with ASU, AU and Tech when we could jump to a top academic conference. I’m voting Big 10.
For some reason, I find this one more believable than the link posted 10 minutes ago...
by Texas Wahoo on Jun 10, 2010 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Haha thank you...my bad!!
"Football's so important in Texas. On the West Coast, it's a social. On the East Coast, it's a culture. Here, it's a religion."
-- Major Applewhite
The "Oh My" at the end
high comedy over there.
by the other Andrew on Jun 10, 2010 3:57 PM CDT reply actions
The mouse trap is a great touch
rec’d.
Maize n Brew
Because Football is Better with Beer
by Maize n Brew Dave on Jun 10, 2010 3:59 PM CDT reply actions
Hypothetically speaking
If A&M and OU were to end up in the SEC and we went Big 10, then I’m assuming we’d schedule them as OOC games. That makes our schedule sound pretty tough. 4/5 long trips to the mid west, 4/5 conference home games, the two heated rivalries, Rice and whoever else. Wonder if the computers would like us then.
A&M and OU out of conference
maybe have the A&M series every odd year and OU series every even year as a way to alternate A&M and OU
by Ryan2907 on Jun 10, 2010 4:28 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
I want to go to the SEC. If ur athletic department wanted to split with us, they wouldn’t have threatened to never play us again in any sport if we didn’t go where they went. Research dollars are not dolled out based on which conference u r in.
So much wrong with this.
I want to go to the SEC.
Please, go.
If ur athletic department wanted to split with us, they wouldn’t have threatened to never play us again in any sport if we didn’t go where they went.
[Citation Needed]
Research dollars are not dolled out based on which conference u r in.
False.
Other Receiving Votes: Oklahoma
by pleaseplaykindle on Jun 10, 2010 4:08 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
The only appropriate response is...
Owned.
by Longhorn11 on Jun 10, 2010 4:12 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
r u txting ur replies?
You ain't hurt...
by Peter Bean on Jun 10, 2010 4:08 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Classic Example
Georgia Tech and Georgia
by Ryan2907 on Jun 10, 2010 4:07 PM CDT via mobile reply actions
Not an example. They are an exception
Not an example. They are an exception because Georgia refused to follow Georgia Tech to the ACC
um ...
The concept of UGA following Tech to the ACC requires a strained, ptolemaic perspective. GT left the SEC in 1964 to be independent (part of Bobby Dodd’s plan to be the ND of the South). They remained independent in football and were a charter member of the Metro Conference in the mid-1970s while scheduling SEC schools in football in an attempt to get back into the conference. They quit the Metro in 1978, but reentry into the SEC failed, so they joined the ACC in 1979.
I don’t mean to be picky, and I understand all of this may be nothing more than irrelevant subtlety to someone from another part of the country, but a refusal by Georgia to follow Tech anywhere suggests that following Tech was a viable and reasonable option at any time, and it wasn’t.
Thank you for your kind attention. Carry on.
by NCT on Jun 12, 2010 9:00 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
From an OU fan......
I’m sure many of you can’t stand me, but I am like many of you: I love the Big 12 and absolutely can’t stand seeing it get raped by the Pac-10 and Big 10.
Here’s my opinion:
-UT could have prevented this. If UT said “for the sake of the conference, we’ll share the revenue equally”, then none of this would have happened. But you have Dodds and this “but we’re Texas attitude” that destroyed the conference. Even though OU made a hair less than UT, OU’s voice wasn’t big enough. Schools like Nebraska and Colorado know they’ll never be able to compete with the Big 12 south, let alone Texas. If they stayed in the conference, the revenues would continue to remain unequal and UT would have the beloved horn network (not that I can blame them, I kind of wish Oklahoma had a state of Oklahoma network), thus spreading the gap between UT and the rest of the Big 12.
-I have to blame Dan Beebe for sitting on his ace with this arrogant, you’re with us or not, attitude. If he had a pair or even a brain, he would have put his foot down and changed things for the sake of the conference. But he was an idiot and our beloved Big 12 conference is no more.
-If I were Aggie, I’d say adios UT and join the SEC. Aggie in the SEC would absolutely change thingsin the Lone Star State recruiting wise, plus they’d get more money. Not to mention, Aggie wants to go to the SEC.
-Although I like the sound of it, I hope OU does not land in the Pac-10. Having to stay up late to watch west coast games will suck and all of our other non football teams will suffer, let alone the school by having to travel half way across the continent for a game. It would be a geographical nightmare.
-In my opinion, here’s what will happen: UT/the Texas government will persuade Aggie not to go. The Okie teams, Texas teams, Kansas teams, Mizzou, and Iowa State could survive as a conference if they were to add Tulsa, TCU, Houston, or UTEP. Or, the Texas legislature will give in and tell the SEC that they’ll come but the SEC would have to take all Texas teams with them (I really can see this happening). If this were to happen, its going to suck for OU. Or, OU, UT, Aggie, and Ok State all go to the SEC. However, I can’t see this happening because the Texas schools will stick together. So who knows what will happen……BOOMER!
Who created the second identity to double-post as an OU fan?
It’s brilliant!
by Hopkins Horn on Jun 10, 2010 4:16 PM CDT up reply actions
Lot of good thoughts, Enraged
But your proposed conference flies in the face of the reality of TV dollars. If keeping the Big 12 together was goal No. 1, it would be done. Goal No. 1, however, is drinking deeply from the pool of TV money. A move to the Pac-10, or Big Ten, or SEC, means much more cash. Way of the world.
Well said.
Why would UT have shared revenue equally when they are the strongest brand in the conference, if not the nation? For that matter, why would A&M?
“our beloved Big 12 conference”
No. No. A thousand times no. There is very little incentive to preserve the Big XII for the highest profile institutions. There is absolutely zero incentive to form a new conference with the Big XII survivors and a few random schools when joining a large conference is an option. The Big XII engenders no loyalty.
by AgAstraPerAspera on Jun 10, 2010 5:27 PM CDT up reply actions
Nebraska didn't complain about tv revenue early Big 12
When Nebraska was dominant in the early years of the Big 12, they didn’t complain about the uneven distribution of tv revenue. They really enjoyed themselves.
It's fun to do bad things. -Latarian Milton
by TexasGarcia37 on Jun 10, 2010 9:28 PM CDT up reply actions
Wow, that was deep.
So you blame Deloss Dodds and UT for looking out for themselves? I don’t exactly see what’s wrong with that.
At the end of the day, there are 11 other teams in the Big XII. Can’t they do something for themselves or does UT need to do everything for the whole conference?
by SneezyBeltran on Jun 10, 2010 4:25 PM CDT up reply actions
Stopped reading here:
If UT said "for the sake of the conference, we’ll share the revenue equally"
This is completely retarded on so many fronts. To name a couple:
1) Why would Texas (or any school, for that matter) give up millions to see schools like ISU, KSU, and other tiny market schools rake in cash based on Texas’ name?
2) It is, and always will be, about the money. Don’t wag your finger at Texas saying OU wouldn’t do the same thing. Because you’re a fool if you think they wouldn’t.
Not to mention
If this is all Texas’ fault, why is it NU and MU were the first to be discussed when talking about realignment? Texas never initiated anything in this. We’re just the best university in the country. Why wouldn’t other conferences covet us?
“Why would Texas (or any school, for that matter) give up millions to see schools like ISU, KSU, and other tiny market schools rake in cash based on Texas’ name?”
Well, every school in the Big 10 does this. All bowl income and television income is shared equally (Yes! Even Indiana and Minnesota). This ability to take action for the good of the conference as a whole is what makes the conference stable and has allowed the Big 10 to"become very successful as a conference and a “brand.” I am not sure Texas would be able to check its ego at the door, a necessity in the Big 10.
I base most of my fashion taste on what doesn't itch.
Gilda Radner
um..yeah...
…when the Big 12 has its own lucrative network, then come talk to us.
by vy til i die on Jun 11, 2010 11:13 AM CDT up reply actions
If Texas shared revenue equally?
I thought the thing was written with something about “The team that appears on tv the most gets more money” or something like that? Isn’t that right? It wasn’t that Texas just gets the most money automatically…it was whoever were the better teams, and thus got more tv time, got more beans. Since Texas has been playing well for so many years now and gets so many televised games…they get the lion’s share of the money.
Somebody clarify for me. This seems like what I remember but I’m getting old…
41-38 !!
Right, and the gap is only 3 million between greatest and least.
If we agree to share equally, everyone is still equally poor. It’s like these people are looking to the Cuban Revolution, and saying “great idea”!
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Jun 10, 2010 4:39 PM CDT up reply actions
I really think you are off base here on the revenue sharing and Texas culpability
While I share your disappointment in the demise of the Big XII – the revenue sharing was peanuts, and just couldn’t be the driver. I could not find the post on BON – but it was an excellent post. The biggest difference between Texas and the worst school was like $3 million. Now the reason this is peanuts, is the schools that are at the low end of the spectrum (think KSU and Baylor) are going be the ones screwed in this realingment. If they are upset with the $3 million more Texas got in 2009, wait until they get $20 million less in 2012. So I am sure they didn’t bitch.
What you neglected to say is the real culprit behind the break up is the Huskers. They get very near what OU and Texas get in revenue sharing. IMHO – the value proposition for the Huskers to join the Big X was just too good to pass up, and they made a decsion in their best interest. NU acts like the “spoiled high school football star whose life is in the toilet that continually harkens back to his playing days, while Glory Days plays on the juke box at the local saloon”. But in this case, I think they did what they are supposed to do and make the best decision for the University. BTW – we have Deloss so we sleep well at nite.
Big 12
I like the Big 12 too, i don’t see why Nebraska and CU couldn’t be replaceable in the north division. Make an offer to Arkansas and Iowa. Let the SEC and Big 10 find replacements after that. or Memphis instead of Iowa. CUs athletic department sucks and just lost 6 schlorships (5 in football) for academics and doesn’t have a baseball team. Arkansas doesn’t look much different then NU.
by Ryan2907 on Jun 10, 2010 4:49 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
They would both say no way
Iowa wouldn’t leave the lucrative Big 10 with its outstanding academics to hook up with a sub-par academic school like Arkansas. And Arkansas wouldn’t leave the SEC dollars to be the leader of the Big XII North with the likes of Kansas, KState, Iowa State —there would be no media draw.
The Sooners are not far behind Texas in revenue. The Land Thieves benefit greatly from that disparity. Your AD could have taken a leadership role to change this. I haven’t seen him complain.
by dimecoverage on Jun 10, 2010 6:04 PM CDT up reply actions
Big XII North didn'g hold up their end of the bargain
They all sucked for the last 3 plus years and let everyone down. How Nebraska, CU, and Mizzou could be the ones upset when all they did was put crappy teams on the field is the irony of this whole thing. They had their best chance to make good money with a new Big XII deal and improving their teams. They are all three going down hill from here even faster, so I don’t feel a bit of guilt. Texas tried. OU tried. Those knuckleheads wouldn’t listen or improve their game.
Nebraska is not going to do better in the Big 10, and CU is not going to win more in the Pac 10. Mizzou-who knows, maybe they can win in the MAC. If they go to the Big 10 Indiana and Minnesota will be thrilled to be out of the basement.
Well, hold everything . . .
. . . if Tim Cowlishaw is telling us what we should do, that changes everything.
by Hopkins Horn on Jun 10, 2010 4:31 PM CDT up reply actions
I laughed at that as well.
I had no idea Tim was 14 years old. He has not aged well.
by AgAstraPerAspera on Jun 10, 2010 5:34 PM CDT up reply actions
Whoever posted above about the tv deal is correct. The first half of the tv revenue is split equally. The second half is split up with everyone getting a pro-rated share based on how often they were on tv. Tx got the largest amount b/c they were on tv the most. Why anyone thinks they should share in that money is beyond me.
The guy who asked for an example, needs to go read Chip Brown’stweets. He is the one who quoted the anonymous source in the Tx atletic department that said Tx would take their ball and go home if we didn’t go to the sane conference.
+1
They are selfish (NU) to tink all teams should get equal pot when they don’t pull their wait and perform.
Yout perform better, you’ll be or TV more. Which will translate to better payout. Performance=More Money
by Ryan2907 on Jun 10, 2010 6:02 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Chris Level ...
Is reporting, again, that no matter what UT/A&M take TT wherever they go …
Does that mean no Big 10?
There is no UT or Nebraska in TEAM
It is only about money. It is about value of me versus other 11 schools.
For someone to be a part of a team (conference), they have to have some interests in the other members, even the weak.
That doesn’t gel when someone is waiving an open checkbook in Nebraska and UTs’ faces.
There used to be a lot of intangible factors in conference relationships. Gone.
ATM can’t deliver the TV sets to SEC on their own. UT will decide where their ugly sister ends up, along with other ugly sisters. BTW – Baylor has problems beyond ugly.
Watch OU. They have been silent way too long.
A&M delivers tv sets.
I don’t want to stick up for them but the idea that their rabid fanbase doesn’t bring anything to the table is false. Their enrollment might actually be bigger than ours now. They’ll deliver plenty of Dallas and Houston tvs.
Their alumni base is definitely rabid and they have a huge group. They will watch Aggie football no matter what.
by dimecoverage on Jun 10, 2010 6:41 PM CDT up reply actions
Ask them how many tuned in to their game with TTU last season.
"I live in the tower with Coach Brown." -Bevo
by run Bevo run on Jun 10, 2010 9:21 PM CDT up reply actions
Or K-St...
But they’re probably glad that game wasn’t televised either.
Don’t feel like looking anything up but if I remember correctly their first televised game wasn’t until the Arkansas game in Arlington which was like their 4th game of the season.
Sports is man's joke on God, You see, God says to man, 'I've created a universe where it seems like everything matters, where you'll have to grapple with life and death and in the end you'll die anyway, and it won't really matter.' So man says to God, 'Oh, yeah? Within your universe we're going to create a sub-universe called sports, one that absolutely doesn't matter, and we'll follow everything that happens in it as if it were life and death.'" - Sam Kellerman
Unfortunately for the Aggies, the K-State game was televised on one of the Fox stations or Verses. I watched the whole thing. It was awful.
by dimecoverage on Jun 10, 2010 11:02 PM CDT up reply actions
I was in houston during that game
and that aggie/ktstate game wasn’t on our tv. I had a friend there who is a kstate fan and we had to keep updating the score online. But it was like 35-3 at half so we only had to check a few times.
Whatever comes of this, Texas – whether in its arrogance or not realizes it – it’s best athletic choice is to salvage of the Big 12 or to the SEC. As a life long Longhorn fan and student – successfully cramming 4 years of college into 6 – I’m rooting for A&M to upset the apple cart and go SEC in the hopes that Texas would choose a similiar course.
I’ve lived on the west coast (seattle) and culturally, geographically it’s not a good fit. Sure, I understand the PAC16 East vs. West, but what exactly is the PAC-10 bringing athletically – USC is forfeiting victories and a 2 year bowl ban, Oregon booted their star quarterback.
All the PAC-10 is bringing is TV sets and revenue…. which is probably all it needs to bring in this day and age.
Agree that salvaging the Big 12 works well for us
But couldn’t disagree more on the SEC being beneficial to Texas. Care to elaborate on what makes you think Texas benefits from inviting the foxes into the henhouse?
You ain't hurt...
The only upside to the SEC is lots and lots of money. Other than that, there isn’t a great reason to join. Nothing wrong with money, though.
by dimecoverage on Jun 10, 2010 6:07 PM CDT up reply actions
sec
Joining the sec would make for one amazing regular season.
Honestly, beating up on the kstates and colorados of the world week in and week out gets a bit boring. Just think about how exciting it would be to be going up against the SEC every week. It would be guaranteed ESPN gameday. It might seem like it would hurt natl championship chances, but with Texas the SEC would have to be recognized as * the * dominant superpower conference. Even a 2 loss sec champion would be in the mix for bcs title every year.
If we went with A&M we would completely dominate recruiting in the south.
The SEC already recognizes itself as 'the' dominant superpower conference
along with it’s broadcast partners, so we really don’t need to add to that. All that glitters is not gold.
A nasty little fact is that we’re 2-4 versus Kansas State in the Mack Era. We’ve been beat up from Major Applewhite to Colt McCoy by the lowly Cats. And we go there again in November.
In the Era we’re also 0-2 in the regular season when we visit the PAC: 1998: at UCLA 49-31 and 2000 at Stanfurd, 27-24, although we beat them here the year before, 69-17. So that’s 1-2 versus Pac10 in non-bowl games. Not to mention the horrible 66-3 loss in DKR-Memorial in ‘97 that ushered out Mackovic (which I will never again mention like a certain game in Dallas). We just didn’t schedule them any more after that. We lost two Holiday Bowls to Oregon and Washington State, and it took Major Applewhite’s legendary performance to beat Washington, 47-43. The USC and Arizona St. bowl games are the only latter day tests.
So, while we’re sitting pretty for the moment counting our coin and studying the options, we should recall Jim Morrison: the future is uncertain and the end is always near.
some humor
by horns23 on Jun 10, 2010 5:18 PM CDT reply actions 2 recs
http://videos.utexasclan.com/view.php?id=7217
"I'm young, but I'm old-fashioned." - Will Muschamp
by BMC237 on Jun 10, 2010 6:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Lol
"I'm young, but I'm old-fashioned." - Will Muschamp
by BMC237 on Jun 10, 2010 6:20 PM CDT up reply actions
whoop(s).
Other Receiving Votes: Oklahoma
by pleaseplaykindle on Jun 10, 2010 6:41 PM CDT up reply actions
SEC
According to ESPN article … When the Pac-10-Big-10 situation is settled, SEC will go grab West Virginia from a dissolved Big east and then cherry pick Virginia Tech, Florida State and Georgia Tech from the ACC, which would eat scraps from the Big east — ala UCONN and South Florida. ACC Hoops would be unreal once it adds UCONN, Nova and Georgetown.
"Excuse me while I whip this out."
Mizzou is a loser
Why would SEC want to invite a team that’s been a problem for another conference and has been a whining underperformer? SEC has other robust options such as A&M, Florida State, Va Tech etc.
Indeed
Why would SEC want to invite a team that’s been a problem for another conference and has been a whining underperformer?
That is a good question, aggie.
by LonghornEm on Jun 11, 2010 8:37 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Texas to big 10 helps me watch more games locally.
And I would more likely get to go to away games. I like it.
Why should Texas share the wealth for the sake of the Big 12?
-Well for one, the SEC has become the most dominant conference in college football. Florida, Bammer, LSU, Georgia…..All strong programs that make the exact same money as Vandy and Kentucky……..
-The Big 10 has Ohio State (like it or not Ohio State is elite) along with Michigan and Penn State. However, Northwestern is making more money than 3 lower tier Big 12 schools combined and the same amount of money as Ohio State.
-The Big 10 has been around for awhile, unlike the Big 8, SWC……So has the SEC schools for the most part.
-As to UT being solely to blame, yes Mizzou, Nebraska, and Colorado are to blame, and so could the greedy Big 10 for starting all this crap.
-UT should take all of their money and pride and go independent. OU, Okie State, ATM, and Tech should join the SEC. The Big 10 should take in Mizzou and Iowa State. And the Kansas schools should go to the Mountain West. Baylor should, well I don’t know…..BOOMER!
I know. Don't feed the trolls, but...
The Big 10 has Ohio State (like it or not Ohio State is elite) along with Michigan and Penn State. However, Northwestern is making more money than 3 lower tier Big 12 schools combined and the same amount of money as Ohio State.
Northwestern also made more TV revenue than Texas and OU. How would sharing the wealth change anything?
The Big 10 has been around for awhile, unlike the Big 8, SWC……So has the SEC schools for the most part.
Your argument is about revenue sharing, what does this have to do with anything? Unless…..Are you suggesting we share the wealth to create a community time machine so that we may go back in time to create the Big XII in 1901? ROAD TRIP!
As to UT being solely to blame, yes Mizzou, Nebraska, and Colorado are to blame, and so could the greedy Big 10 for starting all this crap.
The rare valid point. There is plenty of blame to go around.
UT should take all of their money and pride and go independent. OU, Okie State, ATM, and Tech should join the SEC. The Big 10 should take in Mizzou and Iowa State. And the Kansas schools should go to the Mountain West. Baylor should, well I don’t know…..BOOMER!
Your AD disagrees. And Iowa State??? Really?
"Will Rogers never met Barry Switzer."
SEC Option
While the TV $ may be there, SEC will be tougher than B12S. PAC 10-20 is pretty soft and with 2 west teams in the draw every year, all the former B12 teams can compete.
I still don’t see SEC offer to ATM independent of UT.
The easiest and best route for UT is for PAC 10. Culture shock in store for ATM and others.
Culture shock
Is better for the other schools coming with us than SEC. They have a better shot at winning sports in the PAC 16 then they ever will in SEC
I really don't think aggie-to-SEC would slow any momentum of UT-to-Pac-X
If UT-to-Pac-X was already in the works, I doubt an aggie decision would really change that much, if at all.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
by burntorangehorn on Jun 10, 2010 5:37 PM CDT reply actions
Turn the tables on Big Ten and PAC 10
Why can’t the Red River be the dividing line for the Big 12? Move ou and OSU to the north and bring in Houston and TCU. I’m sure Utah might be interested in joining the fray up north if Mizzou decides to bolt. Aggies will do what UT and the legislature tell them to do.
Solidarity in the Big 12!
Wildly overstating
Aren’t we wildly overstating the connection between research dollars and athletic conference membership? I don’t recall that space in any grant or proposal paperwork I’ve ever completed completed. For a bunch of self-described geniuses, I think there’s some confusion over causation here.
Who's describing themselves as a genius?
Rich and powerful, maybe…
But seriously, there’s much more cooperation among these schools than you’re suggesting. And yes, it divides along athletic alliance in the case of the Big 10. And yes, if Texas were to go to the Big 10, I’d assume it would want in on the CIC.
There’s no confusion about causation. This is a simple matter of access. No access to the CIC without the institutions in the Big 10 inviting you in.
You ain't hurt...
Perhaps
Ha! I suppose it was a sort of random comment on our very serious view of ourselves as the Harvard of the SW.
Obviously, CIC is not a BAD thing, it’s significant. And it’s certainly a perk to the Big 10. But there appears to be a sentiment taking hold here that it necessarily means a significant upgrade in R&D for UT. That is, there is too much emphasis on the precondition of UT joining the B10 to be a successful school. Plenty of schools manage just fine without CIC, so it’s a factor, but one of many – UT will be a strong school with or without CIC. The academic argument was also bleeding into discussions of the Pac-10, which has no real equivalent, and I see no evidence that the Pac-10 will have any appreciable effect on UT’s academics.
I just have to disagree with your statement about the cooperation between schools based on athletic conference. That’s another causation confusion, I think. There’s cooperation between comparable institutions that are located close to one another, but their shared athletic conference is just another effect of this proximity and similarity. That is – research labs at UM and OSU cooperate because it makes sense to do so, not because their respective football teams play each other.
That is – research labs at UM and OSU cooperate because it makes sense to do so, not because their respective football teams play each other.
Its both. For better or worse, the CIC is comprised of primarily Big 10 schools (+UChicago).
Other Receiving Votes: Oklahoma
by pleaseplaykindle on Jun 11, 2010 9:42 AM CDT up reply actions
Posted By Chip Brown on Twitter
Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech appear to be in lock step to the Pac-10 but will wait til next week to announce anything.
Why join the Big Ten!?! Come to the Pac 10! Together a lot of money will be made for our universities! Forget the Big Ten, a Pac 16 network would trounce any money you would gain by going that route! Come to the Pac 10!!!
"Practice does not make perfect. Only perfect practice makes perfect."
Vince Lombardi
IMO The Pac 16 would be the strongest Conference in the Country
Baseball
Football
Swimming had to throw that in there
Basketball we could hold our own
Golf
Exactly. And, unlike the Big Ten, we really want the Texas schools! Why go with your hat in your hand to the Big Ten when we will welcome you with open arms? Forget the Big Ten or going to the SEC, come to the Pac 10. Hell, the conference will most likely even change its name to something more accommodating to Texas and OK. This is a win, win!
"Practice does not make perfect. Only perfect practice makes perfect."
Vince Lombardi
Plus you get to play your old border rivals in the AZ schools!
"Practice does not make perfect. Only perfect practice makes perfect."
Vince Lombardi
Come on now. I know that Texas and Arizona had a rivalry in at least one sport, some time ago.
"Practice does not make perfect. Only perfect practice makes perfect."
Vince Lombardi
My point was that Texas and New Mexico share a border
Not Texas and Arizona. It wouldn’t be a border rivalry unelss it has something, somehow to do with Mexico.
The weather is great out here aswell
Don’t need to worry about the Humidity its all dry heat out here
Nebraska
These Conference realignments are necessary because NU has not been able to compete in the Big 12. The South Division bent over backwards to accommodate NU…..case in point, the Divisions should have been realigned years ago. The South sooooo dominated the North……this has been well documented over the years by both the LJS & OWH. NE complained about all the 11-1 votes……WHY? Because NU was being unreasonable; they overestimated their value in the eyes of ALL their fellow conference members. Amazingly, these votes weren’t drawn upon Division lines. NU’s Northern partners couldn’t support NU’s rediculous demands.
Yes, NU tired of getting spanked by the South Division. After years of trying to successfully compete, they decided they couldn’t do anything about the “geography issue”. As a result, they have decided to join a conference made up of geographically handicapped equals. NU should find the Mediocre Big 10 suited more to their liking. A conference that’s 1-8 verse the Big 12 in recent year’s Bowl games…..the Big 10 should help cure what ails NU….quality opponents!
by teem on Jun 10, 2010 7:40 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
tu will follow a&m
As things are turning out, especially after today’s meetings, it is becoming more and more clear that tu has to follow a&m’s lead. Much to the dismay of tu fans, its a&m that is currently calling the shots in Texas politics. Our governor is an a&m alum and our Athletic Director has deep Alabama connections. Unless tu wants abandon its 100 year old rivalry with a&m they will have to follow us wherever we go. SEC is willing to move two teams to the east to accommodate A&M and another team that aggies bring along. The two teams furthest to the east are alabama and auburn. Wish Bama and Auburn moved to the east and since A&M’s resources dwarf the ones that LSU has, it is becoming aptly clear who the big dogs in the SEC west is going to be. TU can join us for the ride if they wish to, or else we will have to pull in Baylor, OU, Tech or someone. Heck we could probably bring TCU along.
seriously, thanks
I needed a good laugh.
That post is absolutely chock-full of delicious delusion. The thing to remember is that whatever conference everyybody ends up in, at the end of the day Texas will still be Texas, and the Aggies will still be Aggies.
For all the reasons Peter mentioned, Texas might just be thrilled to see A&M assert its independence. But if that doesn’t suit its long-term needs, all they have to do to stop the Aggie train in its tracks is say, “well, hope you enjoy your new Thanksgiving games, whoever you end up playing.”
I think I like you.
Like, like-like you.
Other Receiving Votes: Oklahoma
by pleaseplaykindle on Jun 10, 2010 9:03 PM CDT up reply actions
And did i mention
South is closer to our deeper cultural roots than the West? Another rational reason for joining the SEC
You know you left this door WIDE open
but I’ll take the high road and not enter.
Stumpy: It's called the '80s. Ford was president, Nixon was in the White House, and FDR was running this country into the ground. I was bummin' in a hole-in-the-wall town in what is now called "Utah".
rational reason
I don’t think you know how
by vy til i die on Jun 11, 2010 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions
cont.
So while A&M gets to play in the nation’s premier football conference in the football rabid SEC, Texas has to play in the weak Big 10 in a cold and dying part of the country?
This would give A&M a better shot at signing the best players in Texas, no doubt about it. If I were a HS football player without strong ties to either UT or A&M, I’d have to think long and hard about which conference I’d rather play in.
Academically the move benefits Texas. But football-wise the edge here goes to A&M and possibly in a big way.
by jpsantini on Jun 10, 2010 8:33 PM CDT via mobile reply actions
Peter Bean quote:
“If Texas joins the Big 10 It’s gonna get to join the CIC and all those tasty research dollars the Big 10 schools get. There’s no such benefit over in the SEC. Just better football.”
Just better football???
Football’s pretty damn important in Texas.
Football is the reason 90% (at a minimum) of the people who read your blog, read your blog!
I sense that the Texas fan base is losing its edge that led to the decline of Longhorn football back in the dark ages of ‘84-’97.
I knew it would eventually happen again, but I was hoping it wouldn’t be in my lifetime.
by jpsantini on Jun 10, 2010 8:48 PM CDT via mobile reply actions
Agreed absolutely
Joining the Big 10 will be the dumbest move. Big 10’s primary reason to poach a team from Big XII was to break up the conference not some interest in pulling in tu. Big 10 is the worst fit for tu or A&M. tu will be much better off in the Pac-16 or the SEC. The advantage to being in the SEC will be that you will get to keep your rivalry with the aggies alive, while Pac-16 may be more lucrative from the research and tv payout perspective, but being in the SEC is about passion and athletics and being with A&M in my opinion. Ultimately we will probably going to end up in the Pac-16 because money will be the most compelling argument.
by YUMC on Jun 10, 2010 8:53 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I never miss an opportunity...
…for this.
by Hopkins Horn on Jun 10, 2010 9:14 PM CDT up reply actions
I went ahed and rec'd that
I’m pretty sure by the time all this dies down, that’s going to get so much play, it’s going to turn purple.
"I live in the tower with Coach Brown." -Bevo
by run Bevo run on Jun 10, 2010 9:31 PM CDT up reply actions
Aggy should do well in the SEC
They’ve done well against SEC teams over the last decade:
2009 L — Ark 47-19
2009 L — UGA 44-20
2006 L — Tenn 38-7
2000 L — MSU 43-41
Response to 40AS
2009
L against Ark: JJ’s first major game as a QB, this would not have happened if we had played later in the year
L against Georgia: JJ was injured
2006
L vs. Tenn-We had Fran as coach
2000
L vs. MSU: This I agree was a close upset
true response to 40AS...
2009
L against Ark: — wait ’til next year!
L against Georgia: — wait ’til next year!
2006
L vs. Tenn—- wait ’til next year!
2000
L vs. MSU: — wait ’til next year!
by Pflash on Jun 10, 2010 9:09 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Your QB being injured
against Georgia led to them scoring 44 points against you? Did he normally play special teams as well? Because that’s why you lost to Georgia.
I was at that Georgia game. A&M played horribly. The Aggies looked like a pedestrian team, completely unlike the team that showed for the Texas game. Johnson may have been playing with an injury, but that does not explain the defensive and special team miscues.
There is no excuse for that kind of inconsistency from game to game.
by dimecoverage on Jun 11, 2010 9:31 AM CDT up reply actions
Wait. My bad. ASU isn't SEC. Continue as you were.
by Hopkins Horn on Jun 10, 2010 9:16 PM CDT up reply actions
Has anyone considered...
that the best consequence of moving to the Big-10 would be that Nebraska would still be stuck with us. Man would that piss them off.
by BrooklynHorn on Jun 10, 2010 9:42 PM CDT reply actions 3 recs
Yes...and in same division....WE could keep kicking their asses for years. what fun
But Boring…let’s take more of a challenge
All the baas in California.
You just have to be able to turn the aggies attention to something important.
http://sheep101.info/farm.html
2009 U.S. Sheep and Lamb Inventory
State Number of head
Texas 870,000
California 660,000
Wyoming 420,000
Colorado 410,000
S. Dakota 305,000
Utah 290,000
Oregon 220,000
Montana 210,000
Idaho 210,000
Iowa 200,000
Total 5,747,000
There ain’t no sheep in the SEC.
There’s more sheep in Iowa, the Big 10, than the SEC.
That’s 880 k new faces, not counting another 440k in Colorado, 1.3 million overall.
I can hear the zippers popping in College Station as soon as they discover this important factoid. Stallings is just pulling the wool over their eyes.
True love is waiting.
by whills on Jun 11, 2010 12:24 AM CDT reply actions 5 recs
You are an example to us all.
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Jun 11, 2010 1:00 AM CDT up reply actions
We're not worthy!
We’re not worthy!
Stumpy: It's called the '80s. Ford was president, Nixon was in the White House, and FDR was running this country into the ground. I was bummin' in a hole-in-the-wall town in what is now called "Utah".
"That's 880 k new faces"...
Classic!
LOL
by LeftHandedTexan on Jun 11, 2010 3:24 PM CDT up reply actions
Will someone explain to me why we have a "Tech" problem and A&M seems to be able to go wherever they want?
I don’t get it.
A&M cannot go where they want. This is just typical Aggie delusion. Again.
by dimecoverage on Jun 11, 2010 9:32 AM CDT up reply actions
I get what you are saying
But it doesn’t seem to cross their minds that other schools are involved in this. Aggies call us pridefull, and we are, but UT fans and adminstration have been considering the other Texas schools since the outset of this expansion talk. It seems very selfish for them to be so insistent on the SEC when the SEC is likely not going to expand by 5 schools.
"Will Rogers never met Barry Switzer."
No one cares if you’re selfish if they know you’re not going to get your way.
Other Receiving Votes: Oklahoma
by pleaseplaykindle on Jun 11, 2010 9:44 AM CDT up reply actions
Gene Stalling is the man
He is on our board of regents. Turns out he is very powerful and has only 6 more months left in his position. He has deep SEC roots and along with our system chancellor really wants us to go to SEC. These two visionaries see what the longhorn is failing to see. Even though Pac 16 will have more money, SEC will be about pride and college sports is about pride and not money.
Pure comedy,
I hope that’s how you earn a living, because it doesn’t seem like your particular brand of delusion would make you many dollars elsewhere.
WHO WOULD BE OUR NON-CONFERENCE RIVAL: OU or A&M
would we really sacrifice the Cotton Bowl tradition to play the freaking aggies every year in a non-conference game? my vote is to keep OU. little brother will have to learn his lesson.
"you can destroy a man, but you cannot defeat him." - e.h.
The last I heard
The last I heard was that OU would be going wherever A&M is going. So, you can have non conference games with both teams if you are not willing to follow us.
Just a thought...
and I don’t know if anyone has mentioned this before but I get the impression that the remaining 9 schools will stay if Texas does. So why not rename the conference and move OU and OSU to the North Division to fill the vacuum left by Colorado and Nebraska? That way the north division gets a needed strength boost and the Big 12 (or whatever it’ll be called) conference title game will now have national implications. Big 12 north has always been a joke in everything but basketball, let’s shore up our flanks and move on! A Big X conference with OU and OSU up north will add to football and basketball, heck even softball and baseball. It’ll make us a well rounded conference. Plus, we can still enjoy the rivalry games and cities like Dallas won’t lose out on millions by the loss of the Red River Shootout.
Texas would lose alot of recruiting because the glamour of beating TAMU/OU will be lost if we may only meet them once every four years. What kid in Texas has dreams of beating UCLA and Arizona? Booorrrinnnggggg…..they’ll defect to the SEC where at least they can play teams like ’Bama, FSU, and Arkansas.
What have they been smoking in College Station?
If the Ags go to the SEC, can you see the 12th Men a number of times each game singing about and swaying as if sawwing the horns off a team which they play only a couple of times a decade?
So many school traditions are grounded into dissing UT. Can the traditions survive and the hatred continue if the Ags rarely play the ’Horns? What a shame to hate something you would rarely oppose on a playing field.
A solo venture to the SEC is sheer folly for A&M on so many fronts that it is laughable. And it would be a huge laugh if the Ags actually did it.
Yeah that would be great.
I guess they’d have to stop selling those saw em off horns. Oh wait nevermind we already sued them for that.
Sports is man's joke on God, You see, God says to man, 'I've created a universe where it seems like everything matters, where you'll have to grapple with life and death and in the end you'll die anyway, and it won't really matter.' So man says to God, 'Oh, yeah? Within your universe we're going to create a sub-universe called sports, one that absolutely doesn't matter, and we'll follow everything that happens in it as if it were life and death.'" - Sam Kellerman
A matter of perspective
Auburn had an annual “Wreck Tech” parade that was a deeply-ingrained tradition, commemorating the 1896 game when AU students greased the RR tracks and the GT team had to walk miles back to Auburn after the train slid past the station. From 1892 and 1987, Auburn and Tech played 90 games: eight more games than UGA vs. GT, and almost twice as many games as Auburn vs. Bama. (Bama’s fight song, by the way, mentions only two rivals’ mascots: Georgia Bulldogs and Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets.) No one outside this part of the country (and few people here outside diehard Auburn and Tech fans) are aware these days of what a significant rivalry Auburn-GT was: out of sight, out of mind.
So traditions might not survive, and hatred may wane a bit. It wouldn’t be the first time that’s happened in the history of college football.
But as for perspective, if the Aggies leave their current conference to come to the SEC (I’m not advocating anything), how is it that they are the ones who are killing the rivalry? Texas is leaving, too, no? It would mean that A&M doesn’t want to go to the Pac-Whatever, and Texas doesn’t want to go to the SEC, but both would be leaving. Sounds like a mutual decision re the rivalry to me.
Crazy...Crazy I tell you!
There are a lot of rumors floating around Austin and the only one that is true is that the SEC does not want you…wow that must hurt. The SEC wants A and M. Quoting Aggie scores from last decade against the SEC is insane. I especially love the one from 2000 when it was snowing in Shreveport. I mean because I am sure that both teams were expecting that.
Do Texas fans really think that A and M will just join the SEC and stagnate. Just by joining the SEC and playing top tier competition every week will increase their play and recruiting. The SEC is already getting players from Texas on the regular…and the arrogant Texas fan would say that the SEC only gets who the Longhorns don’t want. Really, is that why Texas got beat by Alabama who had Greg McElroy, a Texas quarterback, in the BCS championship game? Let’s see what happens when some of the top Texas talent that wants to play in the SEC has an option to stay close to home.
By the way, if anyone is wondering why I have been referring to Texas instead of UT…it is because there is only one UT and it is in Knoxville, Tennessee.
Thank you for your intelligent observations
"History lesson: Everything bad that has happened to Texas has been due to its association with the South. Everything good that has happened to Texas has been due to its association with the West." -- Paul Burka, Senior Executive Editor of Texas Monthly
by Hopkins Horn on Jun 13, 2010 12:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Burnt Orange Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
