Texas AD DeLoss Dodds To the Haters: "We're Not A Bully"
by Wescott Eberts (GoBR) on Nov 3, 2011 3:03 PM CDT
in Conference Realignment
Email
PrintDid you know that the University of Texas is responsible for global warming? For breaking up Kim Kardashian's marriage? For hunger and poverty in the third world?
If you didn't know that, you haven't been paying attention to one of the most prevalent memes in college sports since the beginning of the realignment mess -- Texas as the big bully, the evil empire, the cause of everything that is wrong anywhere and everywhere.
In a Pundit Roundup a few weeks ago, txtwstr broke down the fallacies of that basic premise and blaming everything wrong with the Big 12 on the Longhorn Network in an excellent piece, while Texas athletic director DeLoss Dodds spoke with the Missourian on Tuesday to once again tell his own side of the story as Missouri prepares to take off for the SEC.
The argument from Dodds was once again that Texas was simply looking out for the best interests of the school, exactly as Texas A&M and Missouri have been doing.
Dodds reiterated that the preference of Texas was never to leave the Big 12 and only pursued other options as realignment looked more and more imminent:
We have stuck our neck out to save the Big 12, and we're not a bully. We didn't cause it. Our goal has been, and continues to be, to keep something together for the Big 12 and that's what we're going to do, good Lord willing.
For those who actually pay attention, that's not exactly a revelation from Dodds. For those same people, the comments from Dodds about the creation of the Longhorn Network broke no new ground either, so one author decided that Dodds was somehow "blaming" ESPN for everything when he related the LHN creation story:
Nobody was interested in it until Fox came up and said, 'We'll give you $3 million a year to do it.' And we were elated with that. We thought, 'Crap, they're going to pay for it. They're going to pay us, the kids get on TV, this is great. Then ESPN walked in and said we'll give you an average of $15 million a year. And then it became a problem.
Interesting, but not surprising, that the author fails to build on his headline of Dodds "blaming" ESPN, but that's most likely because there's little in Dodds' comment to back up that assertion.
While it's easy to also blame Texas for the lack of revenue sharing, Dan Beebe revealed after his ouster that Nebraska was the most outspoken opponent of an equal division of revenue, with Oklahoma and Texas also opposed, though it's almost always Texas singularly vilified for the discrepancy. And when it came down to it, both schools relented when it became absolutely apparent that it was in the best interests of the league to do so, even though both schools are primarily responsible for creating that revenue in the first place.
In any case, Dodds called the previous differences in revenue "miniscule," while noting that the change came about in part because the new television deal would create a much larger inequality:
With the dollars getting so big in the last Fox thing, the numbers - had we kept the same formula - would have been, I don't know the right word, but grotesque is a word I've used before. We made the motions to equal sharing both in the Fox and ABC/ESPN package.
While some not might believe that's much of a concession considering the increased revenue generated by the Longhorn Network, it still takes some logistical gymnastics to cast any more blame upon Texas.
With all that blame being heaped upon the school, Dodds finished the interview quite vehemently:
So are we being a bully? No, we feel like we're probably being good guys. Does somebody think we're being a bully? Well that's up to them to think we're a bully. We want to keep the conference together, we want equal sharing, we want our own network for our kids, we'll give half of it to the university. If somebody can poke a hole in that, poke a hole in it.
...
I've talked to people like you until I'm blue in the face, and said the same thing, which is true, and out of it we get people in Kansas City writing that we're absolute bullies, and people writing somewhere else that it's our fault A&M's leaving. We just are easy to blame, I guess.
That ease allows for a lot of lazy journalism, but at least Tom Fornelli of CBSSports.com was willing to take a measured look at the situation:
I don't see Texas as being a bully. I just see Texas as a school that's doing the exact same thing schools like Missouri and Texas A&M are doing, that Pitt, Syracuse and West Virginia are doing, and that Nebraska and Colorado did before them.
It's looking out for its own self-interest. That's it.
In the end, it's pretty simple, but perhaps Dodds summed it up best when he said that personally, "I don't give a flip what you think about me."
Perhaps if Texas fans could take that more completely to heart, it would be easier to ignore the accusations of being the big ol' bully, although Dodds still takes umbrage at assaults on his university. Too bad it's just not fun to be vilified on the basis of what are, at best, shaky grounds.
131 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
What remains to be seen
Is if Missouri and A&M are actually “looking out for their own self-interest.” It doesn’t look like that to me. They are sure not looking out for the interests of their athletes or fans.
.
by Longhorn in Canada on Nov 3, 2011 3:24 PM CDT reply actions
Come on
Seriously, I don’t see how anyone could make that claim anymore than someone could claim that UT was doing anything other than looking out for its own self interest when it formed the LHN, flirted with the Pac twice, and held the Big 12 together.
I think what LIC is trying to say
is that while Missouri and Texas A&M believe that they are looking out for their own self-interest, whether or not the move to the SEC actually reaps the benefits both schools believe it will remains to be seen. I haven’t had a chance to read it yet, but Barking Carnival took an in-depth look at the financial situation of Texas A&M in the SEC and my understanding of the post is that the move does not benefit in the short-term.
Follow me on Twitter: @GhostofBigRoy
Burnt Orange Nation
by Wescott Eberts (GoBR) on Nov 3, 2011 4:46 PM CDT up reply actions
Exactly
The decisions seem to be based primarily on the financial benefits of moving. With the buyout to leavethe Big XII, plus the increased travel costs, those benefits may take quite awhile to show up.
As Taylor TRoom says in the article you link, success on the field drives contributions. For Missouri, I expect the recruiting pipeline to the state of Texas will dry up pretty soon. It will likely take longer for new pipelines to the SEC states to begin showing results. That seems like a forecast for some lean years.
I don’t have a crystal ball, so as I said above, it remains to be seen.
.
by Longhorn in Canada on Nov 3, 2011 5:18 PM CDT up reply actions
I think the Aggies and Tigers came to the same place by different paths
And they have different ideas of what the SEC can do for them.
The Ags, with their characteristic delusion, believe they can compete for championships, conference and BCS, in the SEC. And they think this will enable them to overtake Texas in recruiting. Oh also they wanted to piss off big brother.
I don’t believe Mizzou has any illusions that they will become a dominant team in the toughest league in the country. They like the revenues and exposure they’ll get in the SEC, and they believe that the Big 12’s permissive policy toward third-tier rights (i.e. whatever you can negotiate for, you keep) gives them a competitive disadvantage they’ll never be able to overcome.
I agree with your sentiment but disagree with two of your contentions. 1) That Mizzou’s Texas pipeline will dry up. (It’s too soon to tell.) 2) That any of these decisions are made in the best interests of the student-athletes or the fans. (It’s all about the Benjamins.)
Simplicity is always the secret, to a profound truth, to doing things, to writing, to painting. Life is profound in its simplicity. - Charles Bukowski
by windycityhorn on Nov 3, 2011 8:45 PM CDT up reply actions
About the SEC and third tier rights..........
The SEC appears to be no less permissive than the Big 12 when it comes to 3rd tier rights.
The only difference in the Big 12 now is the LHN which is a first of its kind. Most SEC schools simply sold their third tier rights to various bidders rather than create their own network.
Good point
Perhaps when Mizzou set this in motion — years ago, let’s remember — they thought they’d found a willing suitor in the Big 10. When that didn’t happen, they had to go somewhere.
At the end of the day I’m not sure many of us will miss the Tigers. And I for one look forward to WVU instead.
Simplicity is always the secret, to a profound truth, to doing things, to writing, to painting. Life is profound in its simplicity. - Charles Bukowski
by windycityhorn on Nov 3, 2011 9:29 PM CDT up reply actions
The difference is that when Aggies "look out for their own self-interest"...
they inevitably end up shooting themselves in the foot.
Remember the A&M athletic department asking the University for a $16 Million dollar loan a few years back? It managed to force the resignation of one school President, and they’re still trying to pay it off.
In fairness
the two presidents before Loftin should never have been hired in the first place. I’m still not convinced that Loftin is the right man to lead the University either. What A&M really needs is a Robert Gates type leader and visionary with a clear view of where he wants the university to be and the ability to get it there. It’s really a shame Mr. Gates had to leave, he was really taking the University in the right direction.
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 10:11 AM CDT up reply actions
Rational self-interest
is really just an irrational lack of concern for others.
"Hey, don't y'all think that's beautiful right there? That crystal is SO beautiful. And it's coming home to Texas." - Vince Young
Yep.
"Hey, don't y'all think that's beautiful right there? That crystal is SO beautiful. And it's coming home to Texas." - Vince Young
Not always.
Not to get philosophical, but a certain amount of consideration for others is a part of rational self interest.
Greg Davis haikus; a lot like his offenses; always go sideways.
by pleaseplaykindle on Nov 3, 2011 7:34 PM CDT up reply actions
Not to get philosophical?
This is all about philosophy. Leaving things undiscussed supports the standing belief that “rational self-interest” is a good thing, despite Ayn Rand generally being considered a fucktard.
How about this instead? A certain amount of consideration for yourself is a part of rational others-interest. A strong big 12 benefits you as a program. It’s weaker than it was when it had 12 teams. Maybe aggy and Mizzou’s replacements are better, but we’re missing Nebraska and a championship game.
It’s amazing how people have rebranded selfishness and act like there’s nothing wrong with it. I hope one day we end the BcS and convert to a more uniform system wherein teams are not autonomous and can’t unilaterally do things that benefit only them to the detriment of all others.
"Hey, don't y'all think that's beautiful right there? That crystal is SO beautiful. And it's coming home to Texas." - Vince Young
Totally agree
NOT
a more uniform system wherein teams are not autonomous
Yes, we should have one global emperor to decide all issues regarding sports. Freedom is NOT acceptable.
Freedom within certain limits.
Like NFL teams.
"Hey, don't y'all think that's beautiful right there? That crystal is SO beautiful. And it's coming home to Texas." - Vince Young
Tell us the truth - you're a flaming, liberal, socialist, right?
I hope one day we end the BcS and convert to a more uniform system wherein teams are not autonomous and can’t unilaterally do things that benefit only them to the detriment of all others.
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
Way Beyond Liberal, Even Socialism to the Right
Liberals and even most socialists I know have a great deal of respect for Ayn Rand and will refer to several of her writings to support their views. She transcends ideologies because her insights are cogent, understandable and is an expression of natural human nature. Both sides of the aisle will use her to support their beliefs because they are intelligent and have stood the test of time – even though they end up proposing vastly different solutions to the same problem. And whether more people on the right agree with her than the left or not the left (up to and including most far-left socialists) and most everyone respects her brilliance – even if they disagree with her.
The ONLY people I know who would call her a “fucktard” are off the charts radicals, haters extraordinaire and pure idiots, the dumbest losers at the bottom of the barrel of life. They live in worlds detached from reality, consumed by hate for all life units around them because they themselves have been thoroughly rejected by society as an imbecile. Padded rooms are typically the last ones they live in for their final days.
Actually, I wasn't trying to get political on a football blog
It just irks me to hear all of these people wanting “equal” considerations when they are not making “equal” contributions. Ayn Rand was way ahead of her time and despised collectivism.
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
I wasn't getting politcal either.
Putting aside the content of her ideology, Ayn Rand was simply a mediocre intellect and an undisciplined logician.
There is a heroic argument to made regarding the benefits of the free market, and the very human incentives that navigate it, but Rand struck me as being particularly ill-equipped to make that argument, because, hmmm, how to put this…Adam Smith she was not. Hell she wasn’t even Friedrich Hayek, Luwig von Mises, or Milton Friedman. At no point in reading her treatments of capitalism did I consider that I was consuming the work of an astute economic authority.
And aware though I may be of her continued influence on our culture, I’m also keenly aware that I am not alone in this assessment, which is why I found RMHorn’s comment somewhat laughable, as the educated class in this society is populated by a great many who don’t take Ayn Rand the least bit seriously.
by BrooklynHorn on Nov 4, 2011 12:43 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Sigh! Another pseudo-intellectual elitest.
as the educated class in this society is populated by a great many who don’t take Ayn Rand the least bit seriously.
Whatever! So you read a lot and are more into bashing the messenger rather than the idea.
Ms. Rosenbaum has her supporters as well – me being one of the “uneducated class” that does.
She was an Objectivist that defined capitalism as the only social system compatible with freedom and reason as man’s sole means of survival. I happen to believe this as well.
How in God’s name does this apply to football? It relates to the constant whining that schools like UT AND OU must share everything equally with schools like Kansas and Iowa State.
I know it is unrealistic for every school in the conference to competively equal but how about basketball? Is KU, KSU or, now WVU willing to share their revenues equally? How about the wrestling and soccer schools? UT doesn’t have either so should we share equally?
And I haven’t even brought up Meat Judging.
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
The uneducated class is exactly who she appealed to.
It related to football insofar as DeLoss Dodds is acting like a Randian Objectivist and it disgusts a lot of us.
"Hey, don't y'all think that's beautiful right there? That crystal is SO beautiful. And it's coming home to Texas." - Vince Young
You really went off the deep end this this comment.
Ayn Rand was off the charts radical. She’s always been way out of the mainstream.
the dumbest losers at the bottom of the barrel of life.
What is this barrel you speak of? I didn’t realize that all life was put inside a barrel and that some people are at the very bottom. It’s so typical that you would see life this way, given you’re such a big Ayn Rand fan. Everything is just social Darwinism to you, isn’t it? Some people are worth less than others, right? Some lives are just garbage and should just be murdered because they’re so worthless. Isn’t that right?
Ayn Rand was a dumb loser. She wrote cracker-jack, Wal-mart variety fiction infused with a pop-philosophy written to appeal to misogynists and suits. Her philosophy was that of a serial killer. To her, a mass murderer was the ultimate hero.
I’m not saying none of her ideas had merit — I’m an atheist, like her — but she was really confused and wrong about most things.
It’s hilarious that you use such hyperbole in regards to people who disagree with you. Do they have green, scaly skin and horns and sharp teeth, too? What a joke.
"Hey, don't y'all think that's beautiful right there? That crystal is SO beautiful. And it's coming home to Texas." - Vince Young
Actually, I sorta quit reading your post when you resorted to calling her names and hyperbole yourself.
Ayn Rand was a dumb loser. She wrote cracker-jack, Wal-mart variety fiction infused with a pop-philosophy written to appeal to misogynists and suits
Pot meet kettle
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
Actually.....
There are many people, in a fit of hyperbole, who might use that term for her. Even Michael Shermer, who was once a devoted follower, exposed the cult-like following she had in one of his pieces for Skeptic. Shermer is about as libertarian as they come, and he realized the problems in her approach.
Shermer would never call her a fucktard and neither would I; but I find it hard to admire her.
Of course I am.
And proud of it.
"Hey, don't y'all think that's beautiful right there? That crystal is SO beautiful. And it's coming home to Texas." - Vince Young
I think the question we need to answer is whether a strong Big 12 is worth $300 million dollars.
Greg Davis haikus; a lot like his offenses; always go sideways.
by pleaseplaykindle on Nov 3, 2011 11:29 PM CDT up reply actions
And by the way, you and I are saying rhetorically different but substantively identical things:
A certain amount of consideration for yourself is a part of rational others-interest.
So perhaps its not worth it to get too worked up over this :)
Greg Davis haikus; a lot like his offenses; always go sideways.
by pleaseplaykindle on Nov 3, 2011 11:30 PM CDT up reply actions
do you practice what you preach?
Are your home, car, and any other possession open to anyone who wants them?
lolwut
"Hey, don't y'all think that's beautiful right there? That crystal is SO beautiful. And it's coming home to Texas." - Vince Young
This topic should just die and never be discussed again.
Even if Dodds had Jesus sitting next to him confirming everything he says, the haters are still going to discount everything he says. So why try?
Hook Em Horns!
Yeah,
we just have to accept that now we are the Yankees/Lakers/Cowboys/Notre Dame and will be both loved or hated, but respected no matter the facts.
The only way to change that now is to go so long being pathetic that nobody cares enough to hate you anymore (Notre Dame is getting close) and that doesn’t sound like a good option to me.
While it not make that much difference
part of Dodds’ job as AD is to manage his brand’s image as much as possible and right now that’s taking a hit, so I think it serves the school well to occasionally give these types of interviews to re-focus the discourse and force the media to present the Texas side of the story.
Follow me on Twitter: @GhostofBigRoy
Burnt Orange Nation
by Wescott Eberts (GoBR) on Nov 3, 2011 4:48 PM CDT up reply actions
Unfortunately if Deloss doesn't tell our side of the story,
quite a few Horn fans end up listening to, and believing, the BS from the other side. I really don’t care if we’re hated by every other college football fan and get blamed for everything from global warming to the extinction of the dinosaurs: but when it starts to divide all of us who bleed burnt orange…that’s when it needs to stop.
haters gonna hate
I’m sorry I should have said “aggies gonna hate” its inevitable that success and wealth breed envy. Any aggie or husker that tries to claim some moral high ground is either acting like a moron or is a full fledged moron
formerly "Horns102591"
by horns1025 on Nov 3, 2011 4:21 PM CDT via mobile reply actions
imagination
99% of the people who say that don’t have any examples and probably don’t understand why they say Texas is a bully other than someone else has.
The other 1% mention false information like Texas taking a disproportionate share of the exit fees or chasing Colorado or Nebraska off. They even blame the LHN when A&M had already made up their mind to leave.
Someone explain to me, without emotion or bias, how A&M will benefit by this move?
Here is my opinion, for what it’s worth:
1. There WILL be a recruiting spike for them once some of the elite SEC teams start playing in College Station.
2. Better players will enhance their wins
3. They will have conference stability
4. That’s it – I can’t think of a thing else tht would benefit them.
We all know how we think the SEC will be detrimental – a big part of this is may be wishful thinking, however. (an aggie trait). Put yourself in aggys place and see where you might get excited – my God, some us were even excited about playing in LALA land and that was ridiculous from the get go.
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
Biggest
reason for A&M to switch conferences is straight up stability. Everything else you hear is window dressing. I wanted to go PAC, we didn’t, so be it, but we had to go.
There was too much uncertainty about the Big 12, as everyone thinks texas will go indy or the the PAC, and if we wait until texas eventually does make its decision (depending on LHN revenue) than there is no guarantee A&M would have ended up in a conference like the SEC. If Big 12 falls, college football moves to a 4 team superconference set up, and there are only so many seats at that table. A&M had to get one while we had the chance. Same reason Texas Tech leaves tomorrow to the PAC if they can, and the same reason that OU tried to go PAC, same reason Pitt and Syracuse left for the ACC, etc etc.
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 3, 2011 5:50 PM CDT up reply actions
your inability to capitalize “Texas” makes it impossible to bother reading the rest of your post
"I was nice and didn’t go for a full cock shot" - LonghornEm
Good for you
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 10:32 AM CDT up reply actions
Actually, it makes YOU look stupid.
Use proper grammar – then people may start to respect your input.
If
you dismiss peoples writing because of intentional stylizing choices, does that mean you dismiss the work of people like e.e. cummings? Cormac McCarthy? I’m not nearly as proficient a writer / poet as either of them, but neither of them started out as well known as they are today.
Grammar errors are only errors when they are made accidentally. If it is a conscious choice to write a certain way, it is not an error. So don’t try to belittle me with your inane concept of how everyone should write in ways that you consider to be grammatically correct. This is not a fifth grade English class.
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 4:42 PM CDT up reply actions
Cool story.
You are soooo immensely cool when you type Texas with a little t. And then you try and defend it. You are some kind of dumb.
by 40A on Nov 4, 2011 4:49 PM CDT up reply actions
Wow.
I like how you didn’t actually respond to me, but instead reverted to personal attacks. Very nice. And the use of such a simple insult like “dumb” was very classic. Old school.
Is there a reason you get so worked up about that t in texas?
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 5:02 PM CDT up reply actions
I would say
anybody who brings up e.e. cummings, Cormac McCarthy, and fifth grade English is FAR more worked up.
Sorry my insults don’t match your “literary mind” but I select my insults based upon what I have to work with.
by 40A on Nov 4, 2011 5:54 PM CDT up reply actions
Wow.
“Grammar errors are only errors when they are made accidentally. If it is a conscious choice to write a certain way, it is not an error.”
Well, this is just incorrect, no matter how you slice it. It is common practice & correct grammar for citizens of the United States to capitalize the names of states. Really, anyone in the world does this with ANY state, province, country, etc… What makes it really sad and very “inane” is that you choose to not capitalize YOUR VERY OWN HOME STATE – especially, a state that has a much pride, history, and honor as Texas. If you want to say “t.u.”, at least write it “T.u.” Until then, you just sound stupid.
Blah blah blah
please don’t act like it’s something it’s not. It had to do with your little brother, inferiority complex. Enjoy your “stability” at the bottom of the league.
by 40A on Nov 3, 2011 9:18 PM CDT up reply actions
You
can say that all you like, but I have no feeling at all that A&M is the little brother, and neither do most of the aggies that I know. The school is just as good as texas and better in some areas. Our athletics are just as good or better in almost every sport (swimming and football being the only exceptions). This “little brother” complex you guys talk about is only felt by idiots. The counterpart to that is, of course, that the “Big Brother” complex you have is just as obviously not based on reality. You’re better in football and historically in basketball. Congratulations! You beat a military school for over 70 years! You can feel superior to Aggies all you want but that doesn’t make it true.
You can hang your hat on austin being way better than CS though, so you have that. Bully for you!
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 10:31 AM CDT up reply actions
You know what? This answer from this little aggie lady has some merit.
If we are honest, do we really have a “big brother” air? I think probably so – justified or not. I can see where this might get a little old – especially if you are already somewhat paranoid.
This rivalry has gone on for so many years, that I can see both sides having intractable and biased opinions that we now feel are “truths”.
We think the aggies are dumb shits, which of course they are. They think we are arrogant – and we’re not, we’re just superior to them.
The problem has been TAMU’s history of inept leadership and the bad decisions they are famous for. The latest being the absolute doozy of all time for them.
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
I see what you did there
We think the aggies are dumb shits, which of course they are. They think we are arrogant – and we’re not, we’re just superior to them.
Smooth.
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 10:59 AM CDT up reply actions
As long as
he was being tongue in cheek, I appreciate it for being clever.
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 11:05 AM CDT up reply actions
It was tongue-in-cheek - some of us on here take ourselves way too serious.
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
I definitely don't take myself too seriously.
I’m just tired of aggy fans trying to rationalize a poor decision. The poster is basically ignoring everything in this article, only they are using backdoor reasoning and logic.
Backdoor
reasoning and logic? I suggest you reread my comments and their context. If you still think that, than please elaborate as to my back door logic and rationalizing.
I have legitimate fears and concerns as to the future of the Big 12, and the actions of texas specifically affect the future. If texas leaves the Big 12, it’s done. OU can leave, and other schools have left, and it could still be / is held together by texas choosing to stay. Having one school hold your schools conference affiliation in its hands indefinitely is a very disconcerting thing when universities are constantly talking about, looking to, and actually shifting conference alignment.
I have quite a few comments on how texas is being perceived. This entire article is about Deloss Dodds and his attempts to address those perceptions, so my comments are directly related to explaining those initial perceptions and why people feel that way, something the article doesn’t do. If you would like to address the logic etc in those comments, perhaps you should reply to them.
I have a few comments about why I think A&M had to switch conferences. That directly relates to the portion of the article dealing with texas pushing A&M out. I elaborate why texas’ looking at the PAC and the LHN’s ability to let them go independent if it is successful could create additional instability for the Big 12 in the future. Even if A&M doesn’t leave EVERYONE in this conference would have been looking (and is looking) to see what texas does, just like they are now. They’re the driver for if this conference exists, with a hat tip to OU for kinda sorta keeping it together while obviously wanting out. I think this is the real reason A&M left, and I think anything else said by the administration is PR crap. I’ll continue to think so until I see actual transcripts or emails of the decision making process for this move.
The part that I think could be seen as rationalizing is the idea that texas could go independent in a few years. People from the texas administration have made comments about looking at going indy in the past, and there is no reason to think that they won’t look at it as a possibility (a la Notre Dame) in the future. You can disagree about it being a possibility, but I wouldn’t call using it as a possible future rationalizing.
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 1:23 PM CDT up reply actions
It's spelled, "Texas".
Get it right. You look stupid for continuing to do this.
See my
response to your other post.
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 4:43 PM CDT up reply actions
Thes are your problems:
“…so my comments are directly related to explaining those initial perceptions and why people ‘feel that way’”.
Dodds is addressing the perceptions with truth. You come on here and throw out all these theories that we started the whole PAC 10 expansion stuff and the independent stuff etc etc I could go on. You just don’t want to look yourselves in the mirror so you pretend the “perception” that you have of the situation is true, and you continue to argue that perception.
“I think this is the real reason A&M left, and I think anything else said by the administration is PR crap.”
These are the kind of comments that make people not take you seriously at all. Again, your backdoor logic is at full use here as you would ignore your own administration for what YOU think happened.
Again, take a look in the mirror. You guys didn’t want to be in our shadow anymore, as evidenced by denying the Lonestar Network, and making ridiculous claims about “being committed to the Big 12 AS IT STANDS now” while the whole time looking for greener pastures. Your administration, and you by extension, exemplify the little brother inferiority. Sports are irrelevant right now. I’m talking about your school as a whole. I hope it clicks for you soon.
by 40A on Nov 4, 2011 4:48 PM CDT up reply actions
To respond
1) I stated the perceptions that were out there, and then I stated why people feel that way. I did not lie in what I said. I did not address what Dodds said on PURPOSE, because I was giving BACKGROUND information about WHY he was saying what he was saying. Now, for some truth: Dodds has already stated that they have looked at independence : http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/college-sports/texas-longhorns/20100526-Texas-Longhorns-as-football-independent-3209.ece .
When he says they didn’t look at it seriously, I would be shocked if what he meant was they had not considered it seriously based on extremely thorough research about current viability. To not have done thorough research on it would have been not doing his job. He never states that it is off the table. I would be shocked if they didn’t look at it again if the LHN starts bringing in 20 million / year or something similar.
As to the PAC, there are multiple conflicting accounts about who approached who first. They’ve been discussed ad nauseam on this blog and others. You can feel free to believe whichever side you want, but you can’t claim one side is right and the other is wrong. I think the evidence that texas approached first is strong, but I am open to the idea that they did not approach first.
2) I do think it’s the real reason they left. They talked constantly about instability in the conference, while not mentioning texas specifically. There were a few things here and there from the admin implying other reasons, but nothing definite. My utter crap was directly in regards to these side comments about the LHN or TV deals etc also being problems. I think the admin was just throwing things out there so it looked like it was more directly related to texas’ actions in those areas than it actually was.
3)The administration does not represent my opinion or any other aggies. The same goes for the texas admin and you. I’ve openly disagreed with many things they have done. Don’t pretend that someone else speaks for me.
4) I DIRECTLY stated what my opinion was, so go read that instead of saying that I believe what the perception is.
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 5:22 PM CDT up reply actions
You did not address what Dodds said on purpose.
Exactly. You did not address the truth. By all means continue to live in perceptionville.
by 40A on Nov 4, 2011 5:56 PM CDT up reply actions
Does it really matter ultimately?
If Texas first approached the PAC or the PAC approached Texas with this last go-round, what difference does it make to what happened?
I doubt Texas first approached the PAC last year, though it is certainly possible. Scott wanted to expand. Delany had already announced publicly that the B1G was going to expand. That set off fear in everyone else because the Big 12 was considered ripe for the picking (I blame Missouri). That appears to be the prime mover last year for Nebraska’s departure, and it was clearly the reason why Colorado left. They knew they would be left in the cold in case of an implosion and they wanted to protect their interests (we all know they were trying to beat Baylor to the punch, and once set in motion they just went with it).
No one is perfectly clean in all of this, but there are certain facts that are out there. A&M wanted to go to the SEC. That is one of their motivations. They wanted to move there last year; they wanted to move there when the SWC was imploding. And the SEC appears stable currently. I don’t blame them for wanting that stability. They are guilty of plenty of other things.
So, whether or not UT started off the latest round, who cares? Delany started the whole process; Scott pushed it; Beebe was powerless to stop it.
I'm not defending Beebe, but what could he have done?
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
Nothing
At the time when all this happened there was nothing he could have done with one exception — in retrospect he probably shouldn’t have given Nebraska the ultimatum. The Big 12 would be better off with Nebraska. Don’t care about Colorado and really don’t care about Missouri.
He could, however, have guided with a stronger hand so that no one would have had to worry so much about Texas leaving. Let’s face it, for better or worse, we are a very powerful institution.
But all of this is looking back in hindsight. I don’t see how Beebe could have foreseen Delany’s move.
Nonesense
Do you really think A&M would get left out?
by Texas Wahoo on Nov 3, 2011 11:52 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
If
the ACC had been the league to fall because the SEC poached UVA, Va Tech, UNC/Duke or FSU/Clemson (which was their dream possibility), and the Big Least had been the league to survive, there was a distinct possibility that A&M would have ended up in the Big Least. That, to me, would have been a bad outcome. Especially since the Big 10 would have poached some combination of Syracuse/Rutgers/ND/UNC/Duke/Pitt/FSU/Clemson from remnants of the Big East and ACC. If texas chooses to go PAC, and they take OU, OSU, and a fourth Big 12 school that wasn’t A&M (unlikely but possible because our administration is idiotic and didn’t choose the PAC the first time around), than we are suddenly in a weekend and crappy Big East along with the bad remnants of it and the ACC.
So yes, I think it’s possible that we would have been left without a seat at a real conference. If A&M had stayed in the Big 12 and the ACC had picked up Pitt and Syracuse, and THEN you asked me this question, I would have a different answer for you. Believing we end up in a real conference requires faith in the A&M administration, which I have very little of.
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 10:22 AM CDT up reply actions
I respect your opinion
But, ironically, you are selling A&M way too short. Never thought I’d argue that point, haha.
Follow me on Twitter @GoHornsGo90
I would buy this argument if it weren't for the timing
LHN starts gaining steam this summer and suddenly A&M starts looking at the SEC again.
If true, then it begs the question, why? Is it a red herring to point the Aggie attention away from the fact the A&M AD pissed away a golden opportunity to be a part of the network? Was is the final nail in the coffin that is A&M’s hopes of catching up with UT?
There is no monetary benefit for A&M moving to the SEC...
Barking Carnival has a great piece that goes into detail on why it doesn’t work financially UNLESS Aggies start winning a lot more games, which I don’t see being possible. And I really don’t buy the argument that 4 and 5 star recruits will want to go to A&M because of the SEC connection – Mom and Dad will not be able to see anything but home games unless they really like putting miles on the Suburban.
My thought, as well
It’s one thing to be able to see your son on TV, but today that covers most schools. The ability to drive a reasonable distance and see your kid play live is a benefit the Aggies have just given up. We’ll see how much the perceived benefit of playing in the SEC! SEC! SEC! actually helps them.
Considering that the same recruits could go to LSU and actually have a chance to win something, I have my doubts about the benefit to the Aggies.
.
by Longhorn in Canada on Nov 3, 2011 7:08 PM CDT up reply actions
The reason
people see texas as a bully is because they are one of the two schools the big 12 had to have to stay a major conference (OU being the other) and because they tried to use that power to get HS recruits and conference football games onto the LHN. Argue if that is or isn’t the case, that’s the perception.
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
I think you accurately nail that perception.
And I think that if ESPN is to blame here, it’s for pushing the high school stuff so hard and really without NCAA approval in what appears to be a search for content as much as anything. About the conference games, I don’t really buy the argument that it’s so terrible, especially since Texas was pretty willing to make quick concessions for the good of the conference there in terms of paying other teams and making sure that they are on board for those appearances.
But back to the high school games/highlights. It’s hard to say how much of that is on Texas, but my sense of the situation is that it was something that ESPN was pushing heavily and in doing so it seems like there was a miscalculation about the uproar that it would cause. But once again, instead of attempting further “bullying,” Texas made concessions.
To me, that’s one of the keys here is that whatever you might say about Texas wielding power in the league, when it came down to making decisions that would keep the league together, each and every time the Longhorns have made concessions.
Follow me on Twitter: @GhostofBigRoy
Burnt Orange Nation
by Wescott Eberts (GoBR) on Nov 3, 2011 5:49 PM CDT up reply actions
Yes, to the concessions
but no one ever remembers those. They just remember what was tried. They also view texas backing down not as voluntary but as forced by the NCAA and, really, OU and A&M (as they were still in Big 12 at the time). No one thinks texas stopped because Kansas said something. That’s part of the bully perception, that texas only listens to the other big schools in the Big 12 and ignores the smaller ones. Whether or not that is true, I have no idea. I would think it isn’t, but I don’t participate in Big 12 negotiations.
As to conference games on the LHN, on my way home, but I’ll try to respond later. I think it’s a big deal, but I can see how not everyone would.
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 3, 2011 5:58 PM CDT up reply actions
And I am greatly amused by your lack of capitalization of Texas
And yet you take the effort to properly capitalize everything else. Either it’s so ingrain in your little Aggy head that Texas must never, EVER be capitalize and now you can do it without thinking (which is kinda sad) or that you probably spend a lot of time going over your posts to uncapitalize Texas (which is even sadder).
Because we're Texas and we're evil. DUH.
by iamjackburton on Nov 3, 2011 6:56 PM CDT up reply actions
OK
I can certainly understand that is your and others’ perception of the situation, but I think you have to ask yourself how accurate your perception might be. First, you refer to what was ‘tried’. Do you think, honestly, that the administration of UT, the football team, the coach, or the AD were involved in the decision to put high school football games on LHN? Or do you think this was an ESPN decision?
Why would you view UT as backing down to the NCAA, OU and A&M and not listening to the ‘little schools’? Is that really the only option available? That seems, at least to me, a partisan perception. The NCAA ruled that high school games could not be aired on such a network, plain and simple. ESPN tried to overcome that ruling by proposing high school clips be played. ESPN knows that high school football in Texas is an untapped market; they were trying to make their new business venture a financial success.
Again, I understand your point of view; but I think you are demonstrating why we must always be wary of simple perception. We are all prone to biases in our thinking; the truth tends to show itself best in conversation.
Ah, now
you are asking me for my point of view. What I think is pretty different from the common perception. I felt I did a good job pointing out that I was stating what the common prevailing perception was, and not what my opinion was.
I think the texas athletic guys were not involved in the initial idea, and that ESPN was the driver for HS games. I think ESPN had that in mind from the moment they told texas about the LHN deal they wanted. I think that Deloss and the athletic coaches were told before the deal was signed that ESPN wanted to put HS games on the LHN. I think that all the texas people immediately realized what a boon it would be to recruiting (especially in the non-revenue sports, and who wouldn’t realize that?) and were for it, but that after people started making a big deal about it they were more than ready to drop it without a fight, except Deloss, who seems like a stubborn SOB. I think what was most important for texas was getting TV coverage for all of their sporting events. I think ESPN was what kept pushing to have the HS games and highlights on the network long after the texas folk stopped wanting to.
I have a very strong feeling that ESPN was planning on some serious cash coming from airing HS football and basketball regular season games, and the state playoffs in a variety of sports, and that that is why they pushed so hard for it.
As too whether or not the schools listen to the other schools in the conference, I honestly have no idea. I have a vague feeling that texas, A&M, and OU+OSU (who work like one entity most of the time) don’t really want to treat the other schools in the Big 12 the same as they are treated, but I’m not in the meetings so I don’t know for sure.
I never said it was the only option. It was asked what perceptions were, and that’s what it is. Of course there are other options.
I think the only reason the NCAA ruled the way they did was because ESPN made the stupid decision to wait until AFTER deciding to air HS games and telling the world about it to get NCAA approval. I think the NCAA is a horrifically corrupt organization that is entirely beholden to the big money teams in college sports and would readily have let ESPN air HS sports on the LHN if they had asked before it became a sh*tstorm moment.
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 10:57 AM CDT up reply actions
This sounds reasonable (I can't believe I am agreeing with an Aggie)
I would add that Deloss Dodds was simply doing his job and that is tring to do what is best for UT. Dodds is a brilliant man but doesn’t appear to be too schooled in people skills. This has hurt us in the PR dept.
By-the-way, this flies in the face of your argument that aggies don’t think they are the little brother. If that were the case then they would have stood toe to toe with us – instead they accepted their “lesser” position and retreated in the face of fire.
There is simply no way around this and all the lame excuses won’t cover up this salient point.
Another simple and obvious factoid – The schools that have and are bolting from their conference are the ones causing conference instability – not the schools that are staying.
But, I like you melody – I think you are really a closet Longhorn but just can’t admit it. :-)
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
Could you
elaborate on what you mean by accepting a lesser position? I’m not quite sure which position you mean : ).
If I had gone to an in-state school instead of Tulane, than I would be. I think A&M is a great school, and it was absolutely the right place for me as a grad student, but I would not have enjoyed it as an undergrad. Definitely needed that city atmosphere and all that comes with it (including a campus that doesn’t look like it was designed by someone who loves only beige and square brick buildings)
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions
Ok, you have derailed me with the Tulane bit.
From Tulane to collieville? That is dysfunctional.
This is why I put “lesser” in italics. Your own argument refutes this position, yet, you are tucking tail and running because mean old Texas has de-stabiltzed the conference and tAMU is not on and equal basis enough to offset it. And, they brought in this LHN, and high school games, and real games and, and, and……we can’t compete and, and….. just can’t take it anymore.
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
Ahh,
I see what you’re saying. I guess if A&M really left because texas got the LHN and the programming + $ that went with it, I would agree, I just don’t think that is the reason. I think it’s because of how the conference was at the mercy of texas, with regards to it’s existence. I don’t think acknowledging that your school is at the mercy of another school when it comes to a specific conference affiliation is acknowledging that or acting like you are it’s little brother.
OU trying to move to the PAC is a great example of this. No one thinks or views OU as texas’ little brother, but they tried to move to the PAC. They did this because the Big 12 survival basically hinges on texas choosing to stay in the conference, and while they love playing texas every year (and they do), that doesn’t mean they want texas in control of their schools future. It isn’t running away or retreating to leave a situation you don’t like or aren’t comfortable with.
If you’re in a business partnership where one partner out of 10 could leave and it dissolves, and you switch to a different one where 3 or even 4 partners could leave and it wouldn’t dissolve, you aren’t retreating or running away. You’re putting yourself on sounder footing. It’s the same thing with A&M. We aren’t retreating or running away. We would love to continue playing texas in every sport each year. We’re just moving to sounder footing.
It doesn’t have the same “little brother” feeling if you look at it that way, which is what I think the way to look at it is. As I said above, if you think the reason A&M left was the LHN and HS games etc, than you’d probably be right, I just don’t think that’s why.
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 2:26 PM CDT up reply actions
Melody, you keep affirming my contention
First of all, your argument and the perception that if UT leaves and the conference dissolves is admitting that UT WAS/IS, in fact,considered the Big Brother.
Conversely, if the nebbies, aggy and Mizzou (CU is meaningless either way) had stayed and UT had been the school to leave, do you still believe the conference would have dissolved?
Remember, you can’t have it both ways.
Dealing with perceptions – how about the perception that UT may go indy in 6 years (I still don’t know who threw up THAT red herring)?
OK, let’s assume that is true – UT goes indy and then joins with ND, BYU and….are you ready for this? – Alabama, LSU, Ohio State, USC, Penn State, OU and Florida State to form a super conference whereby all schools can sell their 3rd tier rights?
Think this couldn’t happen? Would you have thought, 2 years ago, that TCU and WVU would be in the Big XII?
When the networks start throwing around obscene amounts of money, you’ll see how loyal schools are to their conferences – including in the SEC, SEC, SEC!
If this happens, where will the aggies land then?
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
If
nebraska is still a big 12 member, probably not. After nebraska left, yes. I think it would have dissolved.
It depends on what you use as you’re criteria. If a superconference were to be made than do you use total # of fans, or do you use AD revenue.
If you use fans, the superconference would definitely be: Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Notre Dame, Texas, Texas A&M, Auburn, Alabama, Florida, Clemson, Georgia Tech, and some combo of Wisconsin, OU, and LSU and two others for teams 12-16
If you use AD revenue (including donations, as I don’t want to take the time to subtract them out) than it would be Alabama, Texas, Ohio State, Florida, Tennessee, Michigan, Oklahoma State (I know right? But T. Boone and his donations helped them get 54 million in donations! Crazy!), Wisconsin, Penn State, Texas A&M, Auburn and Georgia.
http://espn.go.com/ncaa/revenue/_/year/2008 (latest year it’s available)
But yeah, realistically, if that happens A&M is on the outside looking in, forced to join a conference with the next tier of football schools. And no way on earth FSU or BYU make that conference.
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 3:44 PM CDT up reply actions
I basically agree with you
One caveat to the above, but it’s not much of a caveat……
Let me preface this, though, by saying that I’m glad to see that you are not swayed by the common perceptions.
Everyone that left the Big 12 did so for sounder footing, and that includes Nebraska. The story behind how and why Nebraska left is quite interesting, and it appears to be the same reason that A&M left but with a few differences. A&M left not only for stability but also because there was internal pressure from several boosters to make the move to the SEC. They wanted to move there in 90 and they really wanted to move there last year.
Nebraska’s presence in the Big 12 might have stabilized things, but I’m not so sure. Certainly Nebraska didn’t think so themselves since the inciting cause for them leaving was fear of being left out in the cold with conference realignment looming. Perlman apparently knew that UT and five other schools were already discussing a possible jump to the Pac 8 because Bill Powers had told him about it. Others had warned that Nebraska should be proactive, and they certainly were. It was probably Dan Beebe’s ultimatum to Nebraska to commit to the Big 12 that drove them away at least in quick fashion. Who knows what might have happened with a stronger leader in charge of the Big 12 and more time.
Everything else in this fiasco has been rationalization and throwing up smoke screens.
I don’t blame A&M for reaching for stability. I do think they are culpable, however, for committing to the Big 12, asking to get the extra money from Colorado and Nebraska’s departure that the smaller schools offered, and then turning the tables and running.
But UT is also culpable for their flirtations with the Pac8 and then the Pac10 which largely set off other folks moves.
Ultimately I think if any blame should fall, it falls on the shoulders of Dan Beebe for being a weak leader and Delany and Scott for poaching other conferences.
Yes
Sorry, left him out of it. But I have the feeling that A&M was the aggressor and not the SEC. Same with Missouri. I still don’t understand what Missouri is after; that move looks stupid to me.
I am firmly in your corner regarding Missouri
They are STILL a problem for the Big XII.
Look, go back in history, since the SWC implosion, and tell me the top three schools that have consistantly whined since the Big XII was formed?
Doesn’t this explain everything in a nutshell?
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
And yeah
Tulane to A&M was a jump, but I went to A&M for a katrina semester and liked it okay. They made it really easy for us Tulane kids to show up and sign in for classes etc, and made space in one’s that were full. Was just treated really well overall. Combine that with knowing that I would have to actually study for grad school (which I did have to), and knowing that I would not have studied as much if I was in Austin (too many distractions for me), it was the right choice.
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions
Well, you sound like a very smart lady making sound decisions
Admirable in this day and time.
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
Also
not a woman : /
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 3:21 PM CDT up reply actions
NO? OMG, I would like to be right once in this damned thread!
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
Talk about perceptions - whew!
I have no idea why I thought you were, my bad.
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
Lol
no worries. Happens all the time on the net. I would have corrected you earlier when you said aggy lady, but I thought you were making fun of aggies in general so didn’t say anything.
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 3:48 PM CDT up reply actions
Actually, the top ten reasons A&M is moving to the SEC, below:
10. It’s all Texas’ fault.
9. See number 10.
8. More sheep per capita than in the Big XII.
7. We get to yell SEC! SEC! at football games.
6. A&M will bask in the glory of a national title in football when LSU, Alabama, or Florida wins one again.
5. Our all-male cheerleaders, I mean "yell leaders", will feel right at home when we visit Arkansas. It’s like "Deliverance", but it’s real.
4. A&m will be competitive in the SEC. At least we can beat Missouri… Crap! Well, at least we can beat Vanderbilt!
3.(Moving to the SEC) was a hundred year decision that took us a few months to make and we probably won’t regret for at least a couple weeks.
2. Deloss Dodds is our daddy.
1. At least someone will appreciate our national title in "Meat Judging"
by bevosteve67 on Nov 3, 2011 5:58 PM CDT reply actions 2 recs
Nice.
Follow me on Twitter: @GhostofBigRoy
Burnt Orange Nation
by Wescott Eberts (GoBR) on Nov 3, 2011 6:00 PM CDT up reply actions
And one more reason ...
#11. Since the SEC & the ‘Ol’ South’ will be our new true home & allegiance, we no longer have to feel guilty about not capitalizing the sacred name of the home state in which we grew up in, live in, and raise our kids in, TEXAS.
I keep hearing about UT going indy after 6 years
I find this excuse to be exactly what it is – a lame excuse. IHTM – you are an aggy with this perception. Please tell me the link or give me a place whereby I can find documentation on this illusion? While you are at it, and try to keep emotion out of it, explain the logic of it to me. Because, to me, logic dictates that, if UT indeed is the power of the conference, it would be detrimental to the school to leave this “cat birds seat” for unknown grounds like being indy. It would simply not be prudent.
The irony of all this “instability” of conferences is that it is acturally being caused by teams, like A&M, bolting their conferences. You can blame UT because of your perception, but the reality is that YOU are the problem and those of your ilk!
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
Right on the button
Missouri and A&M have no one to blame but themselves for this mess.
.
by Longhorn in Canada on Nov 3, 2011 6:11 PM CDT up reply actions
The situation right now seems to be
the Big XII will stay together as long as Texas wants it to, and not one day longer.
When OU and OSU tried to bail to the PAC 12 earlier this year, they were informed that without UT, they weren’t wanted.
A&M and Missouri both thought that by leaving, they could destroy the Big XII and thus not have to pay any exit fees. How did that work out for you, fellas?
So, does that make UT a bully? Only if that means not letting the smaller bullies in your neighborhood beat up the little kids.
I can see where other schools (like Colorado or even Missouri) could think that they had to bail before Texas did, in order to ensure that they landed in a BCS conference. As far as the Aggies or Nebraska, that excuse doesn’t fly.
.
by Longhorn in Canada on Nov 3, 2011 6:06 PM CDT reply actions
It is becoming very apparant
That bowtie and a few of his admins got their panties in a wad and are acting out of emotion.
How many times have we seen tAMU exhibit this over the years?
Aggies think bowtie has led them down the primrose trail when it, sadly, appears he has effectively condemned them to 100 years of mediocrity.
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
Why are we as Longhorns...
….always on the defensive? Why should we apologize for anything? What rule did we break? Show me anywhere? Look at the other programs, they break rules left, right and center. We broke no rules, we never tried to hurt anyone, and hence we dont owe an apology for anything to anyone.
We look out for ourselves and ANYONE would do that.
Dodds should just tell everyone to F off because the University of Texas is only answerable to its fans and not anyone else!
by vanterminatorhorn on Nov 3, 2011 6:14 PM CDT reply actions
Because my fellow Longhorns fail to embrace the evil
It’s like the Yankees whining about being the Yankees. Who cares? No one cares. You’re the Yankees. It’s awesome being the Yankees. Just as it’s awesome being a Longhorn.
EMBRACE THE HATE, BON!
Because we're Texas and we're evil. DUH.
by iamjackburton on Nov 3, 2011 6:58 PM CDT up reply actions
Y'all really need to stop comparing yourselves to the Yankees or Lakers
Both of those franchises have a hell of a lot more championships than you do, and I don’t reme,ber the last time either had a losing season.
Dodds saying that and texas fans repeating it is just wishful thinking.
by Beergut on Nov 4, 2011 10:53 AM CDT via mobile reply actions
You might be right
Comparable to tAMU saying they can compete in the SEC.
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
This needs to be green.
Greg Davis haikus; a lot like his offenses; always go sideways.
by pleaseplaykindle on Nov 4, 2011 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions
I'd say the year that Kobe made public
his intention to leave the Lakers was the rough equivalent of what Texas is going through now, because LA was downright mediocre that season.
And I keep telling you, nobody has done less with more than the Yankees. In fact, the last time I made this argument to you was well before the Yankees crashed out of the playoffs…again. To a team with a fraction of their payroll…again.
Spend an entire baseball season in New York, consume as much unbearably, obnoxiously repetitive sports media as you can, and see if you still contend that the Yankees make the most of their advantages.
One of the
few joy’s of pro baseball is watching the Yankees flame out.
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 1:40 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't care if they do less with more
They’ve won 27 world championships.
texas has won 4.
There is no comparison, just wishful thinking on your part.
by Beergut on Nov 4, 2011 4:15 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Yeah!
They also play baseball! Not football!
LOUD NOISES.
Greg Davis haikus; a lot like his offenses; always go sideways.
by pleaseplaykindle on Nov 4, 2011 4:40 PM CDT up reply actions
Your athletic director and fanbase are the ones making ridiculous cross-sports comparisons
Blame them.
I would argue y’all are very close to being the Boston Red Sox of college baseball. Lots of trips to Omaha, few titles to show for it.
by Beergut on Nov 4, 2011 6:05 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Hey man, still waiting on your source for Texas' athletic department debt service.
I took a look online and all of it was facilities related, which I don’t think is the same thing as the debt related to normal operating expenses. Or is that what you were referencing?
As far as the analogies go, I think it’s all very subjective and not worth arguing about. In any case, I think he was referencing the Yankees with respect to their available resources, not their success on the field. Like I said though, totally up to interpretation so let’s just drop it.
I got one for you: over/under on 400 yards rushing from A&M this weekend? I would say for you guys to win you need 400+ on the ground (i.e. someone needs to tell Sherman to run the damn ball!)
Greg Davis haikus; a lot like his offenses; always go sideways.
by pleaseplaykindle on Nov 4, 2011 6:46 PM CDT up reply actions
Keep waiting
I’ve been waiting on his source for the revenue split of 60/40 or 70/30 (whatever the current fad is) for the lonestar network to be revealed beyond “texags.”
pleaseplaykindle - you might remember better than me. When was the last time UT had a second half melt down after leading by double digits?
And, how many have we had in ONE YEAR?
Proud of your offense? Manny badger don't give a shit!
kind of like we've won 4 Titles and you've won 1 in the late 30s
so when it comes to Texas vs A&M there’s no comparison
formerly "Horns102591"
I actually had to look up
texas having only 4 titles. Kind of shocked, I thought ya’ll had more. Also shocked that Alabama has 12. And that Michigan has 11 (only one post 1950).
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 4, 2011 5:30 PM CDT up reply actions
It is odd that we're so high on the wins list with only 4 titles to show for it.
But national championships for a long time (and sort of still today) are determined to a great degree by subjective opinions.
Greg Davis haikus; a lot like his offenses; always go sideways.
by pleaseplaykindle on Nov 4, 2011 6:51 PM CDT up reply actions
there were several years when we fell just short.
1977 for example we lost in the Bowl game. and 2009 of course. we really should have more just gotten a few unlucky breaks at the worst times
formerly "Horns102591"
Your school won 4 national titles?
Where are you going to college again?
by Beergut on Nov 4, 2011 6:06 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
ohhhhh cause you cant be a fan of a team unless you went to the school eh?
typical aggie distraction. as my aggie friend would say about your t-shirt fan argument (he’s a member of your 1989 graduating class at A&M) “Some people are just stupid enough to say anything”
formerly "Horns102591"
Dodds Beats Up Straw Men
Dodds always focuses on the money and the fact that the LHN exists, but he dances around the bigger issues. If he didn’t know that the issues with putting a conference game on the LHN and the high school coverage would cause problems with the rest of the conference, Dodds isn’t nearly as savvy as he has been portrayed. The fact that ESPN and Texas continued to push the issue after it blew up was either a major miscalculation or an example of blatant disregard for the will of the rest of the conference.
Texas shouldn’t have to give up anything just to be nice. Stuff like this is more a matter of keeping the peace within the conference.
by Blatant Homerism on Nov 4, 2011 11:55 AM CDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Burnt Orange Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
