Blast from the past (realignment)

Gladius&Pilum

100+ Posts
Interesting to go back and read predictions and projections regarding realignment.

The Big Ten Expansion Index: A Different Shade of Orange

TEXAS
Academics: 25
TV Value: 25
Football Brand Value: 30
Basketball Brand Value: 10
Historic Rivalries/Cultural Fit: 3
Mutual Interest: 3
Total: 96
Overview
: You’re not seeing a misprint – the University of Texas-Austin is the single best possible addition for the Big Ten and the Longhorns are a whole lot more open to it than what the public seems to realize. The average sports fan that has been raised to view college conferences in a regional geographic context probably believes the notion of Texas going to the Big Ten is weird, crazy, upsetting and will never happen. However, as I stated under the Notre Dame overview, the college sports landscape has completely changed from a decade ago where national TV contracts and cable channel distribution now rule the day.

Putting aside any geographic concerns for the moment, Texas is a perfect fit in almost every possible way from the Big Ten’s perspective. The academics are top notch where Texas is one of the nation’s top 15 public universities in the latest U.S. News rankings and its graduate programs are right alongside Michigan, Illinois and Wisconsin as among the elite for public flagships. The football program in Austin was just ranked as the most valuable in all of college football by Forbes magazine (#2 is… Notre Dame) and, unlike Nebraska, the Texas basketball program is playing at an elite level, as well. As I’m writing this blog post, both the Texas football and basketball teams are ranked #2 in the country. At the non-revenue sport level, Texas would completely put Big Ten baseball back on the map. Finally, the value of the Big Ten’s traditional TV deals and Big Ten Network revenue would skyrocket with the addition of the #5 (Dallas-Fort Worth) and #10 (Houston) TV markets in the nation plus the entire state of Texas (the country’s 2nd most populous after California). While it’s questionable whether Syracuse or Rutgers could really break the Big Ten into the New York area, there’s absolutely no doubt that Texas would deliver the Big Ten Network to every single cable household in the Lone Star State. The market impact is incredible – the Big Ten, which already has the largest population base of any conference, would further increase such base by over 1/3 with Texas to over 90 million people. When you start thinking about Texas as a possible Big Ten candidate, the thought of inviting Missouri, Syracuse or Rutgers feels like a inconsequential move.

It’s clear why the Big Ten would want Texas. So, why on Earth would Texas want to join the Big Ten? Well, the financial implications are massive. As I stated earlier, the Big Ten receives $242 million per year in TV revenue to split evenly among its 11 members, which comes out to $22 million per year for every single school. In contrast, the Big 12 receives $78 million per year in TV revenue that is split unevenly among its 12 members based on national TV appearances. That comes out to $6.5 million per year for the average Big 12 school. Even Texas, which is a beneficiary of the Big 12’s unequal revenue distribution model since it receives a large number of TV appearances, received only about $12 million in TV revenue last season according the interview with Missouri’s AD that I linked to earlier. In other words, every single Big Ten school makes $10 million per year more than Texas does on TV revenue whether such school is on ABC 12 times or the Big Ten Network 12 times. Remember that the $10 million difference is more than what Notre Dame receives from its vaunted NBC contract. If Texas were to simply bring enough to the Big Ten to maintain the status quo of per school revenue, that would be an 83% jump in TV revenue for the Longhorns immediately off the bat. Considering that the addition of Lone Star households to the Big Ten Network’s distribution would yield an even greater increase in revenue, Texas would easily see in excess of a two-fold increase and maybe even close to a three-fold increase in TV revenue whether it wins or loses.

The average sports fan will look at those numbers and retort, “It’s not all about the money. It’s about rivalries and the passion.” That’s a fair enough point. However, consider that Texas has only been in the Big 12 for 15 years, compared to the original Big 8 members like Nebraska and Oklahoma that have been together for nearly a century. Texas cares about playing Oklahoma (which was a non-conference rivalry for decades up until the formation of the Big 12 in 1994) and Texas A&M. After those two schools, the general consensus among Texas fans is that they could care less about Texas Tech, Baylor and virtually everyone from the Big 12 North (who are all old Big 8 members). Similar to how most of the schools in the East (particularly Big East schools) consider Penn State to be a rival yet the Nittany Lions don’t reciprocate that feeling, all of the Southwestern schools think of Texas as their main rival while the Longhorns simply don’t care about them. Also note that outside of the states of Texas and Colorado, the Big 12 is a decidedly Midwestern conference, only those Midwestern states pale in population size compared to the Big Ten’s Midwestern base. What this means is that the Texas ties to the Big 12 are fairly loose and not ironclad at all in terms of history while the geographic factor really isn’t that important considering how many Big 12 schools are in the Midwest. If Texas maintains its rivalries with Oklahoma and Texas A&M in the non-conference schedule, the Longhorns keep their two most important regional rivalries alive while opening themselves up to the entire nation during the conference schedule.

Speaking in terms that the average sports fan in Texas ought to understand, think of the Dallas Cowboys. When the NFL realigned its divisions in the 1990s, it strongly considered moving the Cowboys to the NFC West. It made geographic sense and, at the time, the Cowboys were in the middle of its run of great games against the San Francisco 49ers, so there was some emotional juice that could’ve been taken to a higher level with those teams in the same division. However, Jerry Jones completely insisted that the Cowboys stay in the geographically-challenged NFC East. Why? Because the Cowboys wouldn’t be able to continue being “America’s Team” by playing teams in the South and West Coast. In order to obtain a national fan base, you need to play in the major markets in the East. If Texas were to move to the Big Ten, it would break out from being a school with a strong regional fan base into one that could be the equivalent of the NFL Cowboys with a national fan base by playing in a disproportionate share of the largest markets in the country located East of the Mississippi River.

Academics are also an extremely important selling point for Texas. The issue with the academic standards in the Big 12 is that there are no academic standards in the Big 12. Texas is the highest ranked Big 12 school in the U.S. News rankings tied at #47 (the Big Ten schools ahead or tied are #12 Northwestern, #27 Michigan, #39 Illinois, #39 Wisconsin and #47 Penn State) while every single other school in the Big 12 except for #61 Texas A&M is ranked lower than every other Big Ten school (the lowest ranked are Indiana, Michigan State and Iowa tied at #71). No one else in the Big 12 comes even close to the academic research abilities of Texas. The potential entry of Texas into the Big Ten would include membership in the CIC, which opens up a whole new level of academic research opportunities for the school that simply doesn’t exist in the Big 12. The first general rule that I mentioned about discussing Big Ten expansion was that people need to think like a university president as opposed to a sports fan. If moving to another conference would (1) make more money for the athletic department AND (2) improve the academic standing of the university, you’ve made quite a powerful argument to the Texas university president.

Finally, there’s a CYA aspect to all of this for Texas. Please take a look at this discussion about expansion options on Barking Carnival, which is my favorite Texas blog. I was shocked to find very few “BIG TEN FOOTBALL SUX”-type comments and instead saw a whole lot of consternation about the long-term viability of the Big 12 overall. Here’s something that I didn’t think about before: if Missouri were to hypothetically leave the Big 12 for the Big Ten, then the Big 12 could end up imploding (i.e. Colorado would bolt for the Pac-10) or at least be severely weakened. The reason is the subpar Big 12 TV contract that I mentioned earlier. St. Louis and Kansas City are decent markets and Missouri is a decent state for a conference like the Big Ten, but none of them have much of an impact when the conference already has Chicago, Philadelphia, Minneapolis and the entire states of Ohio and Michigan. In contrast, St. Louis and Kansas City are respectively the 4th and 5th largest markets for the Big 12 (and more importantly, respectively the 2nd and 3rd largest markets outside of Texas) and Missouri is by far the largest state in the conference other than Texas. Therefore, the loss of Missouri would cause the currently bad Big 12 TV contract to get even worse since no possible replacement school from, say, the Mountain West (i.e. BYU, Utah, etc.) would come close to replacing those markets and households. In turn, all of the Big 12 schools might be sent scrambling for new homes. While that might be a doomsday scenario, Mizzou leaving for the Big Ten would severely damage the Big 12 at the very least.

So, if all of the Big 12 schools could be theoretically up for grabs, why the heck would the Big Ten go after a minnow (Missouri) when it could get a whale (Texas) instead? Why the heck would the Big Ten take Missouri or even Nebraska and let Texas possibly walk off to the much less financially powerful Pac-10? Why the heck would Texas just let a middle tier school like Missouri leaving for another conference put its future in limbo? Simply put, if a decent-but-not-great school like Missouri leaving could have that much of a potential impact on the Big 12, then that’s clearly evidence that the conference is unstable and maybe a powerhouse school like Texas will understand that it needs to start evaluating more stable options (if it hasn’t already). This presents a monster opportunity for the Big Ten to swoop in and solidify its place as the nation’s most powerful sports conference.

Sports-wise, the Big Ten has a reputation of being staid and conservative. In terms of overall conference management, however, the Big Ten is quite forward looking and thinks outside of the box. It’s easy to say that the Big Ten Network is an obvious cash cow for the conference as of today, but at the time of its formation, it was a massive risk considering that it could’ve easily taken a massive traditional rights deal from ESPN in the same manner as the SEC without the pain of a year of fighting for basic cable distribution in the Midwest and Pennsylvania. It now looks like the Big Ten is going to benefit from that risk. Similarly, I’m convinced that the Big Ten isn’t going to make a “meh” move simply to get to the 12 teams needed to stage a football conference championship game. The new school has to be strong enough where if Notre Dame all of the sudden decides that it wants to join a conference in 10 or 20 years, the Big Ten can comfortably say “No” and not have buyer’s remorse about the 12th member that it added. I don’t think that Missouri, Syracuse or Rutgers would come close to meeting that standard, but Texas hits the mark and even more. Therefore, there’s one task for the Big Ten over the next year or so:

Hook ’em.
 
The only thing the BigTen had to offer worth a damn was Jim Delany, whom had he been Big XII Commissioner instead of Bowlesby being led around by his nose by Chuckie NeinASS, we'd be rolling in cash with Clemson, GT, & FSU as members, and ND as an affiliate.
 
What would be your list of preferred conferences?
For me it’s a PAC 16, with 4 pods of four teams each…as I have written many times. Texas, OU, OSU and Team # 4 would be in the “Southwest Pod.”

Southwest Pod
Mountain Pod
California Pod
PacNW Pod

Won’t happen, but that’s my ideal scenario.
 
Look Texas hasn't won the B12 in football in over a decade, and has only won 3 titles in going on 25 years in the league. I think Baylor has an many titles as Texas does (!).

Before Texas gets all big in the britches about how the B12 isn't good enough and how it needs to be in another league, it should win the conference at a higher frequency that once every other leap year.

The B12 is a fine league for Texas. Traditional rivals in Baylor, TT, OU, and OSU. Similar geographic area as the other teams. Good TV contract, and if Texas ever does get its act together in football, needing only to beat OU, win the conference, and have no more than 1 loss to have an excellent shot at going into the playoffs.
 
His predictions in 2011 didn't quite pan out...
The Jump to Conclusions Game: Why Angry Aggies Aren’t Enough to Move Texas A&M to the SEC

UT needs A&M in the same conference together – Many UT alums likely won’t admit it, but as I’ve stated before, Texas A&M is an extremely valuable school. That’s why UT simply isn’t going to let them walk away, and if it means making some financial concessions or telling ESPN to not show high school games on the LHN to keep the peace (along with applying their own political pressure plus the support of Tech and Baylor), then they’ll do it. There were a number of factors that went into play in the Pac-16 deal collapsing last year, but the threat of A&M heading to the SEC at that time was extremely high on the list. It’s instructive that the Pac-16 deal could’ve easily moved forward if UT was fine with only moving with Tech (and maybe having Utah or Kansas replace A&M in the Pac proposal) while A&M went to the SEC, yet it didn’t happen. I’ll always remember one of the first comments from a connected UT alum on this blog when the Big Ten first announced that it was exploring expansion almost 2 years ago and how he described that UT, in no uncertain terms, would not let A&M head off to the SEC as the Longhorns knew that opening up the state of Texas to that conference for TV and recruiting purposes would be a killer for their own program.

At the same time, count me in as someone that will always believe that the prospect of UT going independent is an empty threat. Money is important, but many commentators are ignoring how important institutional culture is in making decisions, too. Ultimately, UT needs an entourage like a Hollywood starlet. The school’s actions time and time again have shown that having power over others is how it gets it rocks off. It wants to have schools like Texas Tech and Baylor dependent upon it and it certainly doesn’t want A&M be in a separate higher profile league. UT doesn’t just want to make the most money – it wants to control college football in the state of Texas completely, and that requires A&M to be in the fold. Notre Dame is a J.D. Salinger-type recluse that doesn’t want any attachments to anyone, which is why they have chosen to be independent as an institution (even though they’d actually make substantially more television money in the Big Ten). UT simply isn’t like that – it has always positioned itself as the proverbial sun for a bunch of other schools.

UT and A&M have come very close to separating two times before over the last two decades, yet the leaders of both schools have never been able to pull the trigger (even if some their respective fans would love to use a machine gun on the relationship). A combination of politics, institutional culture and uniquely shared endowment money that makes football TV revenue look like pocket change (see the Permanent University Fund) has always kept them together.

Could Texas A&M end up in the SEC? I guess anything is possible, but let’s be clear that just because Aggies are angry doesn’t mean that they’ll move to the SEC. Any rational analysis needs to address (1) why the SEC would expand when it has no leverage to renegotiate its current TV contracts (meaning that the current SEC schools would be subsidizing any expansion until 2024), (2) why ESPN would help out the SEC on that front when it has direct interests in keeping the Big 12 alive, (3) how a court challenge to any restrictions on showing high school games on the Longhorn Network would turn out, (4) why Texas politicians would suddenly be wallflowers on conference realignment when history clearly indicates that they are not only not wallflowers, but completely interventionist and (5) why UT would just roll over and let A&M walk away. I would love to entertain arguments that address all of those massive roadblocks. “Aggies are steaming mad”, however, isn’t a valid argument.
 
UT needs A&M in the same conference together – Many UT alums likely won’t admit it, but as I’ve stated before, Texas A&M is an extremely valuable school....

Yeah. And I wish I still had that abscessed tooth the Dent removed. And why-oh-why did I ditch my beloved collapsed artery?

sad01.gif
 
We’ve entered the meat of the off-season, where conference realignment always comes up.

I’m actually ok with staying in the Big 12. If we have to do something, I’d say add Arizona and Arizona State. Maybe even add one of CSU, Air Force, or BYU, and ditch West Virginia.
 
I’m actually ok with staying in the Big 12. If we have to do something, I’d say add Arizona and Arizona State. Maybe even add one of CSU, Air Force, or BYU, and ditch West Virginia.

We have argued this for years, but I stand in opposition to the Arizona schools, as they add nothing - no following, don't travel, no national appeal.

As for Granola Tech, the AFA, or the Mormons, none of these move the needle; might as well take Tulsa, Southern Miss, Rice, Tulane.

Before the Big XII has serious discussions about expansion, the conference has to have a commissioner who (1) is respected, (2) has at least one braincell, (3) has the balls to do the job. We are also on hold to see if Dr Boren's replacement is the clueless ******* we expect or if OU can get someone who is a real leader like Dr Boren, who thankfully led the conference in the absence of any leadership in Austin.

After that, it will be time to make runs at USC, Clemson, FSU, & GT. With Swofford (somewhat) out of the way, the ACC may take WVU. Fact is, if the ACC does not jettison the dead weight & basketball schools, the three football schools in the ACC will AGAIN be looking for a new home. Make no mistake about it, Delany long had his eye on UNC, but did not want Duke, and Swofford didn't want to lose his power base.
 
His predictions in 2011 didn't quite pan out...
The Jump to Conclusions Game: Why Angry Aggies Aren’t Enough to Move Texas A&M to the SEC

UT needs A&M in the same conference together – Many UT alums likely won’t admit it, but as I’ve stated before, Texas A&M is an extremely valuable school. That’s why UT simply isn’t going to let them walk away, and if it means making some financial concessions or telling ESPN to not show high school games on the LHN to keep the peace (along with applying their own political pressure plus the support of Tech and Baylor), then they’ll do it. There were a number of factors that went into play in the Pac-16 deal collapsing last year, but the threat of A&M heading to the SEC at that time was extremely high on the list. It’s instructive that the Pac-16 deal could’ve easily moved forward if UT was fine with only moving with Tech (and maybe having Utah or Kansas replace A&M in the Pac proposal) while A&M went to the SEC, yet it didn’t happen. I’ll always remember one of the first comments from a connected UT alum on this blog when the Big Ten first announced that it was exploring expansion almost 2 years ago and how he described that UT, in no uncertain terms, would not let A&M head off to the SEC as the Longhorns knew that opening up the state of Texas to that conference for TV and recruiting purposes would be a killer for their own program.

At the same time, count me in as someone that will always believe that the prospect of UT going independent is an empty threat. Money is important, but many commentators are ignoring how important institutional culture is in making decisions, too. Ultimately, UT needs an entourage like a Hollywood starlet. The school’s actions time and time again have shown that having power over others is how it gets it rocks off. It wants to have schools like Texas Tech and Baylor dependent upon it and it certainly doesn’t want A&M be in a separate higher profile league. UT doesn’t just want to make the most money – it wants to control college football in the state of Texas completely, and that requires A&M to be in the fold. Notre Dame is a J.D. Salinger-type recluse that doesn’t want any attachments to anyone, which is why they have chosen to be independent as an institution (even though they’d actually make substantially more television money in the Big Ten). UT simply isn’t like that – it has always positioned itself as the proverbial sun for a bunch of other schools.

UT and A&M have come very close to separating two times before over the last two decades, yet the leaders of both schools have never been able to pull the trigger (even if some their respective fans would love to use a machine gun on the relationship). A combination of politics, institutional culture and uniquely shared endowment money that makes football TV revenue look like pocket change (see the Permanent University Fund) has always kept them together.

Could Texas A&M end up in the SEC? I guess anything is possible, but let’s be clear that just because Aggies are angry doesn’t mean that they’ll move to the SEC. Any rational analysis needs to address (1) why the SEC would expand when it has no leverage to renegotiate its current TV contracts (meaning that the current SEC schools would be subsidizing any expansion until 2024), (2) why ESPN would help out the SEC on that front when it has direct interests in keeping the Big 12 alive, (3) how a court challenge to any restrictions on showing high school games on the Longhorn Network would turn out, (4) why Texas politicians would suddenly be wallflowers on conference realignment when history clearly indicates that they are not only not wallflowers, but completely interventionist and (5) why UT would just roll over and let A&M walk away. I would love to entertain arguments that address all of those massive roadblocks. “Aggies are steaming mad”, however, isn’t a valid argument.
They need us. We don’t need them. We’ll be just fine—with or without them.
 
A&M has found lots of new friends that NEEED them to pad their stats - Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Georgia, Florida. et al. Can't wait for the return of Mike Leach to Brazos County. Hope we are on the road or off that week because that could be a fun watch.
 
We have argued this for years, but I stand in opposition to the Arizona schools, as they add nothing - no following, don't travel, no national appeal.

As for Granola Tech, the AFA, or the Mormons, none of these move the needle; might as well take Tulsa, Southern Miss, Rice, Tulane.

Before the Big XII has serious discussions about expansion, the conference has to have a commissioner who (1) is respected, (2) has at least one braincell, (3) has the balls to do the job. We are also on hold to see if Dr Boren's replacement is the clueless ******* we expect or if OU can get someone who is a real leader like Dr Boren, who thankfully led the conference in the absence of any leadership in Austin.

After that, it will be time to make runs at USC, Clemson, FSU, & GT. With Swofford (somewhat) out of the way, the ACC may take WVU. Fact is, if the ACC does not jettison the dead weight & basketball schools, the three football schools in the ACC will AGAIN be looking for a new home. Make no mistake about it, Delany long had his eye on UNC, but did not want Duke, and Swofford didn't want to lose his power base.
I’d love to trade those couch burning WVU folk- for ARK or Nebraska.
I’d love USC and Sabre both AZ schools to fill in a couple of wins like the SEC uses with Vandy, S Carolina , Kentucky, miss st, Tennessee and Mizzou…all the while bragging on how tough the conference is.
 
NR,

The fans in XNA would love to come back, as would the coaches for recruiting purposes. The administration not so much because of the dollars.

Nebraska's only hope of relevance is return to the Big XII. For decades, their recruiting was Texas & SoCal, both of which they abandoned when Delany dangled the money, which they really needed. Their administration makes the Aggies look brilliant, so now they have their check, but no recruiting, no respect, no future. They are a Berzerzerkley, Oregon State, Vandy, ND Lite, just showing up on Saturday to get a paycheck. That's a great fanbase, and they deserve better.
 
A&M has found lots of new friends that NEEED them to pad their stats - Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Georgia, Florida. et al. Can't wait for the return of Mike Leach to Brazos County. Hope we are on the road or off that week because that could be a fun watch.

When Aggie joined the SEC, I feel the SEC schools told them to go get their Shine Box.
I bet they desist them as much as we did by now.
 
Alabama appreciates and supports the Aggies; after all, the Ags took Franchione off their hands.

LSU wonders when they are going to get their old schedule with A&M renewed; you know the one that had the Aggies travel to Baton Rouge TEN YEARS in a row.

OLE Miss is grateful that there is no where in Oxford for the Aggies to stay; same with Auburn.

They are the Hogs excuse to go to Jerry World once a year - no way they get there otherwise.
 
Alabama appreciates and supports the Aggies; after all, the Ags took Franchione off their hands.

LSU wonders when they are going to get their old schedule with A&M renewed; you know the one that had the Aggies travel to Baton Rouge TEN YEARS in a row.

OLE Miss is grateful that there is no where in Oxford for the Aggies to stay; same with Auburn.

They are the Hogs excuse to go to Jerry World once a year - no way they get there otherwise.
Absolute Gold
 
His predictions in 2011 didn't quite pan out...
The Jump to Conclusions Game: Why Angry Aggies Aren’t Enough to Move Texas A&M to the SEC

UT needs A&M in the same conference together – Many UT alums likely won’t admit it, but as I’ve stated before, Texas A&M is an extremely valuable school. That’s why UT simply isn’t going to let them walk away, and if it means making some financial concessions or telling ESPN to not show high school games on the LHN to keep the peace (along with applying their own political pressure plus the support of Tech and Baylor), then they’ll do it. There were a number of factors that went into play in the Pac-16 deal collapsing last year, but the threat of A&M heading to the SEC at that time was extremely high on the list. It’s instructive that the Pac-16 deal could’ve easily moved forward if UT was fine with only moving with Tech (and maybe having Utah or Kansas replace A&M in the Pac proposal) while A&M went to the SEC, yet it didn’t happen. I’ll always remember one of the first comments from a connected UT alum on this blog when the Big Ten first announced that it was exploring expansion almost 2 years ago and how he described that UT, in no uncertain terms, would not let A&M head off to the SEC as the Longhorns knew that opening up the state of Texas to that conference for TV and recruiting purposes would be a killer for their own program.

At the same time, count me in as someone that will always believe that the prospect of UT going independent is an empty threat. Money is important, but many commentators are ignoring how important institutional culture is in making decisions, too. Ultimately, UT needs an entourage like a Hollywood starlet. The school’s actions time and time again have shown that having power over others is how it gets it rocks off. It wants to have schools like Texas Tech and Baylor dependent upon it and it certainly doesn’t want A&M be in a separate higher profile league. UT doesn’t just want to make the most money – it wants to control college football in the state of Texas completely, and that requires A&M to be in the fold. Notre Dame is a J.D. Salinger-type recluse that doesn’t want any attachments to anyone, which is why they have chosen to be independent as an institution (even though they’d actually make substantially more television money in the Big Ten). UT simply isn’t like that – it has always positioned itself as the proverbial sun for a bunch of other schools.

UT and A&M have come very close to separating two times before over the last two decades, yet the leaders of both schools have never been able to pull the trigger (even if some their respective fans would love to use a machine gun on the relationship). A combination of politics, institutional culture and uniquely shared endowment money that makes football TV revenue look like pocket change (see the Permanent University Fund) has always kept them together.

Could Texas A&M end up in the SEC? I guess anything is possible, but let’s be clear that just because Aggies are angry doesn’t mean that they’ll move to the SEC. Any rational analysis needs to address (1) why the SEC would expand when it has no leverage to renegotiate its current TV contracts (meaning that the current SEC schools would be subsidizing any expansion until 2024), (2) why ESPN would help out the SEC on that front when it has direct interests in keeping the Big 12 alive, (3) how a court challenge to any restrictions on showing high school games on the Longhorn Network would turn out, (4) why Texas politicians would suddenly be wallflowers on conference realignment when history clearly indicates that they are not only not wallflowers, but completely interventionist and (5) why UT would just roll over and let A&M walk away. I would love to entertain arguments that address all of those massive roadblocks. “Aggies are steaming mad”, however, isn’t a valid argument.
I honestly miss Aggie as much as I miss acne.
Before you judge me- lemme splain.
My extended family are all Aggies.
Texas wins, they complain about bias.
Texas loses to Aggie- it’s all fing year. Stupid childish memes that are so disrespectful that I will not give examples here.
One day, I promise , Aggie beat UT in a volleyball game and I received texts.
Every time Texas would lose in football against anyone, I would get phone calls.
I did none of this. Not once, ever and these insecure pricks were relentless to the point I refused to stay for Thanksgiving dinner back in the day.
It’s good bye to Texas A&M. Thank you Case McCoy, thank you Justin Tucker. You ended it perfectly.
I hope UT never plays them again.
 
With regard to conferences, if we can’t move the needle, what’s the point?

Arkansas doesn’t.
NU doesn’t.
BYU doesn’t.
Air Force doesn’t.
Most don’t.

In fact, to me only USC, Clemson, maybe FSU, Stanford, maybe UCLA, Oregon and of course ND would.

Joining the PAC adds four of those schools. A conference with TX, OU, USC, Stanford, Oregon & UCLA would rival and probably exceed anything out there today.
 
None of the PAC schools will entertain anything with us as long as The Big XII doesn't have a commissioner, and/or there is an inkling that anyone in Las Colinas has Chuckie NeinASS phone number in their address book.

If someone get the ball rolling, I volunteer to organize and supervise an armed posse to "ride fence" around the offices in Las Colinas. Gators tell no lies!
 
Television sets. That’s the most important factor in realignment.

I opposed adding TCU and WVU for that reason. TCU doesn’t come close to dominating their market. Texas and OU dominate the DFW. And WVU … how many TVs are in that hillbilly state, anyway.
 
If we have to do something, I’d say add Arizona and Arizona State.

I'd be fine with that. The U of A stadium is walking distance from where I live and ASU is about an hour and a half up the road. But recently, the PAC seems to be very weak overall and that would be a consideration.
 
Here are a few thoughts on the conference realignment or us leaving for greener pastures:

1. Let Sark get settled in to the HC job and we'll see if he can get us back to a legit top 5 program.
2. Beat ou consistently and win the conference more than once.
3. By then, some but most likely not all of the B12 teams may be ripe to join another conference so there are 16 teams in four conferences.
4. The weaker teams, those that are annually posting losing seasons and can't come close to filling their stadiums can be shown the door.
5. We haven't won the Big 12 championship since 2009, and the last 7 seasons have been lackluster except for the Sugar Bowl win.
6 Get the current trend and situation turned around, and when realignment comes around, we should be able to join any conference we want.

The football programs that have a shot in our conference are Texas, OU, otherOSU, Iowa St., and TCU or Baylor. Tech might be left out as well as KSU which is trending downward, Kansas is a perennial crap hut, WVU might jump to the BIG but the ACC would make more sense however that conference already has 16 teams IIRC.
 
I'd be fine with that. The U of A stadium is walking distance from where I live and ASU is about an hour and a half up the road. But recently, the PAC seems to be very weak overall and that would be a consideration.
Also, with the addition of U of Ariz, it would be the top basketball conference in the country most years.

I don’t see a good reason to bolt from the Big 12. This just seems like the usual off-season stuff… I do think West Virginia is an odd geographic outlier that doesn’t seem to belong.
 
Last edited:
For me it’s a PAC 16, with 4 pods of four teams each…as I have written many times. Texas, OU, OSU and Team # 4 would be in the “Southwest Pod.”

Southwest Pod
Mountain Pod
California Pod
PacNW Pod

Won’t happen, but that’s my ideal scenario.

If we're joining the Pac 12, I'd like to take more than 3 teams with us. Make it the Pac-20 so we can bring along UT, TTU, TCU, OU, OSU, KU, KSU, ISU. Let WVU go to the ACC and BU to the dumpster.
 

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums
Back
Top