Some Questions Regarding A&M vs UT and Realignment

I miss the old rivalry we had with aggy, but those days are gone. Any renewed rivalry really wouldn't be the same to be honest. If we scheduled Sul Ross on thanksgiving day it would hold the same excitement as playing aggy

The thrill is gone, as the song goes. And I do mean GONE
 
LonghornDave said:
I understand the political and monetary objections but I am unmoved. Both programs will not benefit from a loss to the other but dang it from a football standpoint that is not why you play the game. Neither team has a viable alternative for Thanksgiving day. AND Aggie has always been and probably always be "goofy" and cultish. Thank God that is the SECs problem now. Funny that some of those Sec teams that thanked Aggie for the Texas exposure are now wondering if the goofiness is worth it....
Click to expand...
We should play them because I like kicking their ***. And rubbing my son-in- law's nose in it is much missed perk.
 
There is zero benefit to playing them. At least before they left there were conference implications to the game. Now what would it mean? It means 3 out of every 10 years I would have to listen to aggy brag for 12 straight months which I don't have to do now.
 
My personal favorite is the Midget reference. Thank you Htown 77! For UT that game is a lose lose situation. It may be a win win for Aggie but not for us!
 
I vote to never play the jackbooted, booger eaters ever again. No upside.
No horse poop flingers, no shaved head humpers, no moral victories and no more run out of time baloney.
We have happy cheerleaders, aggy has angry yell leaders.
NO THANK YOU!

Unfortunately, I am like the plebeian representatives sitting outside the door of the Senate chamber in Ancient Rome. I can only yell VETO to show my displeasure when something is being decided in the Senate, but have no say on the decision.

To the UT President and Athletic Director: VETO!
 
Making a decision on what is going to happen in the future is hard otherwise everyone would win in Vegas and in the stock market.

Both would be out of business without the losers.

Today I look back and see the payout for B12 + LHN (for third tier media rights) and am extremely happy that Texas chose the B12 over the P12 and any other option.

Texas signed a deal with the B12 and TAM signed a different deal with SEC.

There is no reason to try and reduce either deal to include a Nov game when it hurts both conferences. Especially when you are dealing a 3 OOC B12 schedule and a 4 OOC SEC schedule. Simple math.

Texas is fine, TAM is fine.

We can both win a lot games and meet in the post season.
 
Saw a Instagram where ATM has taken a major presence in Austin airport publicity - d***, but guess if they pay they play.
 
So here's my take on this stuff:

The reason A&M left the Big12 -

Short answer: self-determination, stability, and money.

Long answer:

Self-Determination: In 2010 UT worked with the PAC to set up a 16-team super-conference. A&M was never included in those discussions. A&M heard rumors but when they asked Bill Powers about it he said he couldn't discuss it. Imagine if A&M had gone to the SEC Commissioner and done the same thing... UT admins and fans would have been outraged! "Who the hell are you to negotiate in our name?"

A&M realized next time UT might not include A&M in its group of schools should it pine for greener pastures. Further, with the announcement of the LHN, it appeared going independent might be feasible for UT. No UT, no conference. The Big 12 would be pretty much worthless given the previous loss of Nebraska and Colorado. So the question became, "Do we want to wait for that day and hope we end up somewhere good? Or... do we want to make sure we end up in a situation that is best for A&M?"

The A&M brass were torn, though. The Big 12 had survived. Everyone was going to get more money. Wouldn't it be best just to sit tight? That's the way it would have stayed except for the changes proposed to the LHN. Once UT began increasing the scope of the network (1 game to 2, non-conference to conference, adding high school games) A&M brass became galvanized. So A&M reached out to the SEC in 2011 and the rest is history.

Stability: The SEC is rock-solid. In fact, the conference has no exit fees because no one would want to leave.

Money: That's what today's college football is all about. A&M knew the SEC was working toward setting up a conference network ala the B1G. Given the subscription structure, joining the SEC would almost double the premium subscriber footprint. Both A&M and the SEC immediately recognized the value in that proposition.

A&M didn't leave the Big 12 to destabilize the conference or screw over UT. UT is too big of a player for that to happen. If the conference collapsed UT would have its pick of destinations. Further, A&M's actions were actually beneficial to the conference. Since A&M's refusal to go to the PAC, the Big 12 schools' revenue have increased dramatically. Additionally, the Big 12 even modified its distribution model to improve its stability. A&M left because it was in its best interests, and because it could.
 
I think our non conference scheduling should factor in recruiting grounds. We already play in Texas around 8 times per year. Our other frequently tapped recruiting grounds include California, Arizona, Louisiana, and Florida. Schedule non conference games largely with: (1) teams from those states, or (2) major national powers. Both categories are good for recruiting. A&M is in neither category.

Any cream puffs on the schedule should be from one of the aforementioned states, or perhaps Rice for more Houston exposure. A&M is neither from Houston nor any of the above listed non-Texas states. Hence, they should also be SOL on getting scheduled under the cream puff category.
 
Last edited:
Mr. Irrelevant said:
In 2010 UT worked with the PAC to set up a 16-team super-conference. A&M was never included in those discussions. A&M heard rumors but when they asked Bill Powers about it he said he couldn't discuss it.
Click to expand...
While this may be true, I’m skeptical and it’s counter intuitive. What I understood at the time was that Texas & TAM would move together, as would OU and OSU.

I still believe that the PAC16 is the answer, as I have written many times on this board. Four pods, Southwest, Mountain/AZ, CA, PacNW. Play each team in your pod every year, and two of the four in the remaining pods in a home & home, rotatng. Nine games. Perfect.

I still believe that Texas, OU, OSU and one other school should go to the PAC.
 
Smart move by aggy to advertise in the Austin airport. That way they can recruit new honor students from the Texas fail outs who are flying home.

- Mike
 
dukesteer said:
While this may be true, I’m skeptical and it’s counter intuitive. What I understood at the time was that Texas & TAM would move together, as would OU and OSU.

I still believe that the PAC16 is the answer, as I have written many times on this board. Four pods, Southwest, Mountain/AZ, CA, PacNW. Play each team in your pod every year, and two of the four in the remaining pods in a home & home, rotatng. Nine games. Perfect.

I still believe that Texas, OU, OSU and one other school should go to the PAC.
Click to expand...
How is it counter intuitive? The group also included Tech and Colorado. Were they just afterthoughts? Heck, A&M was even given a 72-hour ultimatum... "make a decision or we leave without you." That doesn't sound like a package deal to me.

Then, during that 72-hour period, Beebe was able to wrangle up some money from the media partners, the remaining Big 12 members agreed to forfeit their shares of the NU/CU exit fees, and ESPN floated the $300 million LHN offer. Dodds & Co. realized that they would be getting the same money but only have to win the watered down Big 12 to get to the BCS championship game. So at this point, Dodds has nothing to lose. He meets with Larry Scott and says they have to keep their Tier-3 rights. If he can get both PAC16 money AND the LHN, that would be huge.

Here's a quote from the Denver Post:

“In the 11th hour, after months of telling us they understand the TV rights, they’re trying to pull a fast one on the verge of sealing the deal in the regents meeting,” the source said. “They want a better revenue sharing deal and their own network. Those were points of principle. (The Pac-10) wants to treat everyone fairly. It’s been that way for months of discussions.”

So this deal had been in the works for months. Then, in mid-June, the other schools are made aware and have just a couple of days to decide. Tech had no leverage and quickly came to heel. Oklahoma's roster (and OSU's for that matter) is at least a plurality of Texas kids. It can't afford to alienate it's recruiting grounds. The OK schools were quickly on board. Colorado was so on board they requested to be the first school offered so they could make sure Baylor didn't rat-**** them. And Lord knows they're good at it.

That left Texas A&M. If A&M had jumped with everyone else, we'd all be staying up until midnight to watch away games in Corvallis and Pullman. I, for one, am glad not to have to put up with that.
 
Mr. Irrelevant said:
That left Texas A&M. If A&M had jumped with everyone else, we'd all be staying up until midnight to watch away games in Corvallis and Pullman. I, for one, am glad not to have to put up with that.
Click to expand...
I guess finishing 3rd to 6th in the $EC West is better than finishing 3rd to 6th a PAC 14 East.
 
Mr. Irrelevant said:
That left Texas A&M. If A&M had jumped with everyone else, we'd all be staying up until midnight to watch away games in Corvallis and Pullman. I, for one, am glad not to have to put up with that.
Click to expand...
This issue has been brought up more than once. I wonder. For Texas, I’m not sure that Oregon State or WSU wouldn’t be willing to start the game at 5:00 Pacific, particularly if there was a national audience. And for Texas, there probably would be. So the PacNW school would get much coveted exposure. And even if that were not to happen, we would be talking about probably one game a year, max.
 
Last edited:
Mr. Irrelevant said:
How is it counter intuitive? The group also included Tech and Colorado. Were they just afterthoughts? Heck, A&M was even given a 72-hour ultimatum... "make a decision or we leave without you." That doesn't sound like a package deal to me.

Then, during that 72-hour period, Beebe was able to wrangle up some money from the media partners, the remaining Big 12 members agreed to forfeit their shares of the NU/CU exit fees, and ESPN floated the $300 million LHN offer. Dodds & Co. realized that they would be getting the same money but only have to win the watered down Big 12 to get to the BCS championship game. So at this point, Dodds has nothing to lose. He meets with Larry Scott and says they have to keep their Tier-3 rights. If he can get both PAC16 money AND the LHN, that would be huge.

Here's a quote from the Denver Post:

“In the 11th hour, after months of telling us they understand the TV rights, they’re trying to pull a fast one on the verge of sealing the deal in the regents meeting,” the source said. “They want a better revenue sharing deal and their own network. Those were points of principle. (The Pac-10) wants to treat everyone fairly. It’s been that way for months of discussions.”

So this deal had been in the works for months. Then, in mid-June, the other schools are made aware and have just a couple of days to decide. Tech had no leverage and quickly came to heel. Oklahoma's roster (and OSU's for that matter) is at least a plurality of Texas kids. It can't afford to alienate it's recruiting grounds. The OK schools were quickly on board. Colorado was so on board they requested to be the first school offered so they could make sure Baylor didn't rat-**** them. And Lord knows they're good at it.

That left Texas A&M. If A&M had jumped with everyone else, we'd all be staying up until midnight to watch away games in Corvallis and Pullman. I, for one, am glad not to have to put up with that.
Click to expand...

Good Lord, who cares?
Aggy left. Game over.
They were never as big a rival as OU.
Don't miss them at all.
 
arky for a T-Day or Friday after T-Day game? Guess we are running out of decent options....

Re: arky, I suppose I could hold my nose for the sake of bringing back a traditional type game for the program. But their fans are nearly as insufferable and disgusting as aggy.

Doesn't arky play Ole Miss T-Day weekend now?
 
WorsterMan said:
arky for a T-Day or Friday after T-Day game? Guess we are running out of decent options....

Re: arky, I suppose I could hold my nose for the sake of bringing back a traditional type game for the program. But their fans are nearly as insufferable and disgusting as aggy.

Doesn't arky play Ole Miss T-Day weekend now?
Click to expand...
Pretty sure it's Missouri. The egg bowl is thanksgiving.
 
moondog_LFZ said:
Aggy took their ball and left.
Good riddance.
I don't miss that game at all.
We are scheduling the likes of LSU, USC, Bama....we don't need no stinking aggys.
Click to expand...

BS, they took more than their ball.

They took money from other conference members, who were trying desperately to keep the conference together. They were the only school to take that money and they still left. I don't know how much lower someone can get than that.

I think that has factored into a lot of the animosity that exists between Big 12 schools and the aggsy.

I know the aggsy want to say that the SEC offers some advantages that Texas can't match, however, Texas holds some advantages the aggsy can't match. Like winning, challenging for conference titles, and going to the playoffs. I would take my chances with playing SEC schools in major bowl games and in the playoffs vs the road the aggsy took.
 
Mr. Irrelevant said:
So here's my take on this stuff:

The reason A&M left the Big12 -

Short answer: self-determination, stability, and money.

Long answer:

Self-Determination: In 2010 UT worked with the PAC to set up a 16-team super-conference. A&M was never included in those discussions. A&M heard rumors but when they asked Bill Powers about it he said he couldn't discuss it. Imagine if A&M had gone to the SEC Commissioner and done the same thing... UT admins and fans would have been outraged! "Who the hell are you to negotiate in our name?"

A&M realized next time UT might not include A&M in its group of schools should it pine for greener pastures. Further, with the announcement of the LHN, it appeared going independent might be feasible for UT. No UT, no conference. The Big 12 would be pretty much worthless given the previous loss of Nebraska and Colorado. So the question became, "Do we want to wait for that day and hope we end up somewhere good? Or... do we want to make sure we end up in a situation that is best for A&M?"

The A&M brass were torn, though. The Big 12 had survived. Everyone was going to get more money. Wouldn't it be best just to sit tight? That's the way it would have stayed except for the changes proposed to the LHN. Once UT began increasing the scope of the network (1 game to 2, non-conference to conference, adding high school games) A&M brass became galvanized. So A&M reached out to the SEC in 2011 and the rest is history.

Stability: The SEC is rock-solid. In fact, the conference has no exit fees because no one would want to leave.

Money: That's what today's college football is all about. A&M knew the SEC was working toward setting up a conference network ala the B1G. Given the subscription structure, joining the SEC would almost double the premium subscriber footprint. Both A&M and the SEC immediately recognized the value in that proposition.

A&M didn't leave the Big 12 to destabilize the conference or screw over UT. UT is too big of a player for that to happen. If the conference collapsed UT would have its pick of destinations. Further, A&M's actions were actually beneficial to the conference. Since A&M's refusal to go to the PAC, the Big 12 schools' revenue have increased dramatically. Additionally, the Big 12 even modified its distribution model to improve its stability. A&M left because it was in its best interests, and because it could.
Click to expand...

Wow

I have never seen so much BS in my life.

Let me help you out here. Nebraska left the Big 12 before the LHN was even announced, that destabilized the conference. The SEC has wanted into Texas since the 1980's, however it wasn't until the realization that the Big 12 south might go to the Pac did they approach the aggsy with the idea of going to the SEC.

Truthfully, the aggsy didn't want to go to the PAC and wanted to find a better landing spot, they were pissed about the LHN and the money Texas would get and frankly they were jealous. The SEC was their chance to get back at Texas and show them they didn't need the Longhorns.

Texas tried to talk them out of it, but the aggsy didn't care, so Deloss Dodds told them if they do this it was over. Frankly, it's best. The aggsy are now stuck in their own real life Kobayashi Maru. Just like Arkansas, who have been in that conference for 25 years without winning it once.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top