Texas joining SEC

S

SEC fan

< 25 Posts
Hello Texas fans. I would like your opinions about Texas joining the SEC.

1. Texas joins by itself after another school leaves.
2. Texas joins with the western division while say Florida St. joins the eastern.

Thanks
 
Don't see it happening. From a selfish standpoint I'd like the perks from the SEC TV deal, but it makes no sense for any other reason. People for some reason are in love with making one super-conference, but I don't really understand that. As much as I hear the SEC complaining about being cannibalized in the MNC race, I would think they wouldn't want this either.
 
If Texas were going to join another conference, I'd prefer we look at the Pac-10 or Big 10 -- conferences that have a better academic reputation than the Big 12 or, no offense, the SEC.

The problem, of course, is geography. Who wants a road trip to Pullman, Washington, or (God forbid) Columbus, Ohio.
 
wtf.gif


Seriously?!?!?!
 
There are probably a couple of schools in the B12 that would benefit from joining the SEC. Texas isn't one of them.

Texas already has one of the top 2 or 3 athletic budgets in the country, and Texas already recruits in extremely fertile grounds.

But I could see it as potentially a good move for some other schools in the conference.
 
The last thing the SEC needs is another strong school.

A conference with names like Tuberville, Miles, Petrino, Saban, Fulmer, Meyer, Nutt, and Richt doesn't need to add Brown to the list.

Texas can't even win its own division as it is. Why would they want to make it more difficult? (Just stirring the pot. Calm down)

Honestly, why not just add USC-West and OSU to the SEC while we are at it? Then the NC game can be between Cincinnati and Baylor.
 
It's bad enough being in a conference with a school that cheats, why should we go to a conference where everyone cheats
 
That was discussed in the early 1990's during the dying days of the SWC. The entire reason the SEC took Arkansas was to entice Texas to join. Texas declined for a number of reasons, chief among them being the fact that the faculty threatened open rebellion because of the SEC's academic standards.

Eventually we joined the Big 12 only after adopting the SWC's academic standards (much to Nebraska's everlasting disappointment and anger). We were able to do that because the Big 8 was in a pretty weak negotiating position--if the SWC was a dead conference, the Big 8 was a terminally ill one. The SEC, in constrast, doesn't have to agree to our diktats on academics or anything else.
 
I would also say no to both questions for two reasons.

1) Texas doesn't need the SEC to be a contender for the National Championship, money, or other most obvious factors for "upgraging" conferences. The reasons we joined the newly formed Big 12 don't exist in the scenario of joining the SEC.

2) Texas does perceive itself to have higher academic standards for athletes than the SEC. That is not a slam on the SEC, but I do believe that it is supportable and what most Longhorn alumni want to continue. One such example is that Texas holds higher standard for entrance on JC players and other transfers than schools like OU and K-State. We wouldn't want that to have to decrease like it might if we were competing in the SEC.

Hook'em

cow_rose.gif
 
Texas doesn't fit in the SEC because of the SEC's low academic standards.

Only Vandy in the SEC is ranked higher than Texas in US News. 8 of the 12 schools in the Big 12 are ranked in the Top 100 schools.

Here's the SEC:

Vanderbilt 18
Florida 49
Georgia 58
Alabama 83
Auburn 96
South Carolina 108
Tennessee 108
Kentucky 116
Arkansas 125
LSU 130
Mississippi Tier 3
Mississippi State Tier 3
 
Thanks for everybody answers, but as far as academic standards go the league sets a minimum but schools are free to have tougher standards if they choose and no offense but Vanderbilt would still have higher academic standard for athletes than Texas. I appreciate everybody who took time to reply and good luck in the Big 12 this Year.
 
Texas may join the PAC10, which was the original plan (circa 1984) and send A&M to the SEC. That got killed by Stanford.
 
Why did Stanford kill the deal?

What I heard was that, when the SWC was folding, UT and A&M were shopped around as a package deal and one of the PAC-10 schools (was it Stanford?) balked at A&M because of its history of infractions and cheating. Don't know, just what I heard.
 
Take aggy...that way, their little game up at Jerry World with arky can be an SEC affair. (...and while you're at it, make sure to keep arky.)

Short answer to your question? No
Long answer? Hell no
 
If anything, I would love Texas to align itself with other schools of equal academic and athletic success. Imagine a conference with Michigan, UCLA, Texas, UNC, UVA, etc... the "Public Ivies'.... screw the SEC... they are all backwards folks with no regard to education....
 
There's a better chance of Arkansas joining the Big 12 than UT jumping to the SEC.

Look at the current rankings, along with last year's final ones. Why would we join a conference that's rated lower than the one we're in now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top