Big 12 conference won't change name
Not sure how I feel about this. I would think The "X" conference would be better. Now it appears we can't count, just like the Big 10/11,make that 12
about 1 year ago
TNHorn
13 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
I think it's the only reasonable thing to do.
The Big X conference? I’m guessing that we’d have issues with the Big Ten if we did that.
When you consider
some (not all) of the schools that comprise the conference(zeroU and aggy) it seems almost fitting that the name reflects an inability to count.
There is not a situation or individual that cannot be improved by the addition of chocolate.
The name still works. We do the work of three schools.
Visit my new Facebook page and become a fan! . . . . And the Academy Award for Best Flopping In A Lead Role goes to . . . Dwayne Wade! (Yes, I'm still bitter five years later. But soon revenge shall be ours.)
by Hopkins Horn on May 24, 2011 11:05 AM CDT via mobile reply actions
I assumed we would remain the Big XII
Since I also assumed that we are looking at two candidates to join the conference. Not sure if we are or not, but going back to 12 so that we can return to a logical north/south with a championship would be nice. Splitting OU into the north would make it interesting to have the chance to play them twice a year.
run Bevo run lives in the Tower with Mack and Bevo because of his Awesomeness!! If you need a tip on where someone might go in the draft you might check with him because he's not bad at that either.
thought so also
I kind of get the feeling there are two spots open. I think if the Big 12 doesn’t heist a large state school then eventually TCU will claim one of the spots despite their ratings non-appeal. It’s ridiculous that they’re in the Big East. There’s nothing East about Fort Worth.
Not sure about putting land thieves in the north, though. We wouldn’t play them every year in a 12 team conference unless we kept only 1 OOC game. I personally like more variation in the schedule.
We have a 12th man and he's Bryan Harsin
by SpiritOfTheFedora on May 24, 2011 7:21 PM CDT up reply actions
This is likely a marketing move.
The brand name “Big 12” is already well known enough that it would be counterproductive to change it. Plus it would take a long time till most people called it by its new name anyways, and hopefully at some point we will have added two more schools.
Sally, will you meet me at the airport?
by TxHorns247 on May 24, 2011 11:26 AM CDT via mobile reply actions
My suggestion would be to change to a name that
is recognized by geography and not dependent on number of teams. Now if I could just think of a name that fits the region from Iowa and Kansas down to Texas. Tornado Alley Conference (TAC)? Or Big Southwest? Big 8 conference meets Southwest conference.
Do not be distracted by what you see, but be transformed by what you believe.
I agree. Bite the bullet and ditch the # - for future changes. CFB, to me, is all about geography.
This was a huge lack of foresight in ‘95. I had proposed this ’way back when’. The Big 8 always sounded so juvenile & unoriginal and the Southwest Conference had such a regional aura about it. Even though the SWC actually folded, UT & it’s “little brothers” should have demanded a brand-new name reflective of a new beginning, not the “Big 12”, a.k.a. the “new & improved Big 8”. Putting a specific # on it was pretty absurd, since they were going thru a # change then and showed how possible it was to do again. Turns out I was right about the # faux pas. Had they gotten it right then, it wouldn’t sound so silly now to have 10 members. And, seeing so many other “Big __” or “_ #” conferences around the country, they have the opportunity now to pick an original moniker. The “Big Southwest” was my personal pref. back then. They should have also stuck with traditional divisions of “Big 8” & “Southwest” back then w/ the top football powers separated accordingly.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
