Pac-10 might ask Texas and five other Big 12 schools to join

[MojoMan]

School bolts to a different conference to prove that they aren't the little brother of the big state school? Yeah put me down for bad blood and hard feelings there.

I graduated from Texas, and I can assure you that A&M takes the rivalry between the two schools much more seriously than Texas does. Texas does not own or control Texas A&M, nor is Texas dependent on Texas A&M. The two schools are still free to schedule games every year if they want to. After all these years, watching these two schools joining different conferences is really not that big of deal. The rivalry is not really all it used to be anyway.

I do not expect anyone to lose much sleep about this, assuming it does actually come to pass, either in Austin or College Station.

 

[awtysst]

I graduated from Texas, and I can assure you that A&M takes the rivalry between the two schools much more seriously than Texas does. Texas does not own or control Texas A&M, nor is Texas dependent on Texas A&M. The two schools are still free to schedule games every year if they want to. After all these years, watching these two schools joining different conferences is really not that big of deal. The rivalry is not really all it used to be anyway.

I do not expect anyone to lose much sleep about this, assuming it does actually come to pass, either in Austin or College Station.

Aint that the truth. The UT-Oklahoma game is much more of a rivalry game than the UT-A&M game these days.
All time UT is 75-36-5 against A&M.
All time UT is 59–40–5 against OU.

 

[TexansSeminole]

School bolts to a different conference to prove that they aren't the little brother of the big state school? Yeah put me down for bad blood and hard feelings there.

I don't think so. Even if there were bad blood there is too much money to be made in an annual game between UT and A&M. They will play each other every year IMO regardless of the conference the two end up in.

 

[Goldensilence]

I don't think so. Even if there were bad blood there is too much money to be made in an annual game between UT and A&M. They will play each other every year IMO regardless of the conference the two end up in.

Not to mention Alumni on both sides raising hell.

 

[FirstTexansFan]

Well, if A&M bolts from the other schools and joins the SEC, I don't think it will turn out to be a fairytale ending. In my opinion, the SEC is the top conference in college football. Arkansas made this mistake many years ago, and they've had little success over there. As an Aggie, I have a bad feeling about this one.

 

[Second Honeymoon]

if you thought A&M was irrelevant now, just wait till they join the SEC and no longer have a annual matchup with the Longhorns.

to me this seems like ego stroking by A&M so they don't look like they are following Texas as their little brother. at the end of the day I think cooler heads prevail and A&M goes to Pac10 with the rest of the Big12 South sans Baylor.

either way, I am good with it. Texas will join a super conference that matches their well rounded athletic program and keep their true rivalry game with OU intact. if A&M is upset that they are struggling, they shouldn't blame Texas or the Big12 structure. They just need to work harder and if they think going to the SEC is going to be easier.....well, that is just ignorant.

I love the SEC but Texas gains nothing by going there. Pac10 helps the entire UT athletic program and gives them an opportunity to mine a fertile west coast for recruits. going to the SEC only opens up Texas to the kill or be killed flotsam of SEC recruiting in Texas.

 

[b0ng]

1) A&M in the S E C means that Saban and Meyers now can recuit extremely heavily in Texas. Prepare to see other schools in the state suffer because of this. (This would include UT)

2) Or since it's "Not much of a rivalry" and UT is in a tougher conference than it once was it might just want to keep it's OOC games to cupcakes and patsies only. My estimate is that UT would only schedule an OU game OOC if it came down to it. A&M not so much.

 

[mr. peebs]

Yes, A&M to SEC might open up Texas to out of state schools getting at Texas recruits, but when UT and OU were playing for years before the Big 12 there never was much stink about UT opening Texas up to Oklahoma, was there? And to think the Big 12 schools going to Pac 10 will only give them more recruiting options out west and not have west schools coming to Texas is just short-sighted.

Also, if reports are true and UT was the SECs first choice to expand, which isn't hard to believe, what does it say about UT not jumping at the chance to play in the SEC? It could be about academics, but it also can be seen as being scared to not be the big fish in a little pond by pulling the strings in the conference like it will be able to with it's allies from Big 12 South in the new Pac 10, or just scared to play SEC football week in and week out.

Finally, if A&M goes east and others go west and UT doesn't schedule A&M for Thanksgiving it's going to be a PR nightmare for them. A&M will of course want to schedule the game, but if UT is mad about A&M going east and blackballs A&M like some have reported or posted, the public backlash against that would be high. UT fans will say the A&M game and rivalry doesn't mean so much to them or isn't much of a rivalry, but all that aside, that game is the most important game for football in the state of Texas and has been for years. Throwing away 100+ years of tradition because UT is butt-hurt that A&M is in the SEC would be ridiculous and would paint UT as a bunch of yella-backed cowards.

 

[Dan B.]

Yes, A&M to SEC might open up Texas to out of state schools getting at Texas recruits, but when UT and OU were playing for years before the Big 12 there never was much stink about UT opening Texas up to Oklahoma, was there? And to think the Big 12 schools going to Pac 10 will only give them more recruiting options out west and not have west schools coming to Texas is just short-sighted.

Also, if reports are true and UT was the SECs first choice to expand, which isn't hard to believe, what does it say about UT not jumping at the chance to play in the SEC? It could be about academics, but it also can be seen as being scared to not be the big fish in a little pond by pulling the strings in the conference like it will be able to with it's allies from Big 12 South in the new Pac 10, or just scared to play SEC football week in and week out.

Finally, if A&M goes east and others go west and UT doesn't schedule A&M for Thanksgiving it's going to be a PR nightmare for them. A&M will of course want to schedule the game, but if UT is mad about A&M going east and blackballs A&M like some have reported or posted, the public backlash against that would be high. UT fans will say the A&M game and rivalry doesn't mean so much to them or isn't much of a rivalry, but all that aside, that game is the most important game for football in the state of Texas and has been for years. Throwing away 100+ years of tradition because UT is butt-hurt that A&M is in the SEC would be ridiculous and would paint UT as a bunch of yella-backed cowards.

That's funny. You do of course realize that if A&M goes its own way they would be the ones throwing away 100 years of tradition -- not Texas, right? The 5 Big 12 south schools apparently agreed to stick together -- until A&M broke their word and bailed on every team they've partnered with for the last century because the SEC came a callin. It's not just UT that is rumored to be blackballing them either. It's OU and Tech too. I don't think OU is terrified of the Aggie powerhouse that manages to stumble to a 5-6 record every year.

UT doesn't need to schedule A&M. Why should they? When UTEP comes up begging for a series with UT and the Horns blow them off, it's not because the Horns are yellow bellied. It's because there's no incentive for them to play. Christ if I ask Meghan Fox for a date and she turns me down, that doesn't automatically mean she's scared of me.

 

[mr. peebs]

if you thought A&M was irrelevant now, just wait till they join the SEC and no longer have a annual matchup with the Longhorns.

if A&M is upset that they are struggling, they shouldn't blame Texas or the Big12 structure. They just need to work harder and if they think going to the SEC is going to be easier.....well, that is just ignorant.

Bolded: Yeah, because CBS afternoon or ESPN Saturday night games against LSU, Bama, Ole Miss, Arkansas, UF, UGA, Auburn is sure to not get any coverage..

Italicized: What A&M fans blame UT or the Big 12 for our struggles? I blame our cheating that was eventually sanctioned by the NCAA and then the disaster known as Coach Fran.

 

[GP]

Have I missed out on exactly why this is even happening?

Is there a huge rift among the schools and the Big 12 officials?

I see three scenarios:

1. Texas decides to stay in the Big 12, therefore causing TTU, OU, OSU, and A&M to stay in the Big 12. This is the "sentimental" ending where the schools decide they need to remain where they are.

2. The schools all go to the Pac-10 where they can largely remain "together" even though they are now facing conference foes from the far west.

3. Schools got to Pac-10 and A&M decides to go elsewhere. I think The Big 12 is going to somehow remain a conference, and I wouldn't be surprised if A&M stays there. I don't see how they can possibly compete in the SEC. They might choose to stay in The Big 12 because the remaining conference teams are weaker and might make A&M a top dog.

 

[Dan B.]

Bolded: Yeah, because CBS afternoon or ESPN Saturday night games against LSU, Bama, Ole Miss, Arkansas, UF, UGA, Auburn is sure to not get any coverage..

Italicized: What A&M fans blame UT or the Big 12 for our struggles? I blame our cheating that was eventually sanctioned by the NCAA and then the disaster known as Coach Fran.

Oh it'll get coverage. Just not positive coverage for A&M. They haven't beaten an SEC team in 15 years. In the 21st century they have been waxed by every SEC team they faced (Arky 47-19, UGa 44-20, Tennessee 38-7).

 

[GP]

Oh it'll get coverage. Just not positive coverage for A&M. They haven't beaten an SEC team in 15 years. In the 21st century they have been waxed by every SEC team they faced (Arky 47-19, UGa 44-20, Tennessee 38-7).

You're not going to convince him.

 

[mr. peebs]

That's funny. You do of course realize that if A&M goes its own way they would be the ones throwing away 100 years of tradition -- not Texas, right?

Good point. But we (speaking as an A&M fan and not anyway related to actual athletic department) still want to keep the rivalry games in all sports because it's just a good thing. If they stop, it might be because we go to SEC, but we are pro towards keeping the games in place. It's up to UT to accept or decline.

The 5 Big 12 south schools apparently agreed to stick together -- until A&M broke their word and bailed on every team they've partnered with for the last century because the SEC came a callin. It's not just UT that is rumored to be blackballing them either. It's OU and Tech too. I don't think OU is terrified of the Aggie powerhouse that manages to stumble to a 5-6 record every year.

SEC and our AD have been talking for the past couple of months, ever since expansion became a hot topic. I tried finding an article to cite this but can't find with all the random A&M/SEC rumor articles now out there, but since Feb/March they've been in contact. Also, we only really had strong ties to OU and Okie Lite since the Big 12 was formed. Yes we played them before then, but it wasn't a huge deal before.

UT doesn't need to schedule A&M. Why should they? When UTEP comes up begging for a series with UT and the Horns blow them off, it's not because the Horns are yellow bellied. It's because there's no incentive for them to play. Christ if I ask Meghan Fox for a date and she turns me down, that doesn't automatically mean she's scared of me.

A&M's not comparable to UTEP. Don't try and pull that. The alumni backlash is reason enough to schedule the game.

 

[mr. peebs]

Oh it'll get coverage. Just not positive coverage for A&M. They haven't beaten an SEC team in 15 years. In the 21st century they have been waxed by every SEC team they faced (Arky 47-19, UGa 44-20, Tennessee 38-7).

You're not going to convince him.

Nope, you're not .

To be fair, if you watched last year's Independence Bowl, A&M should not have lost that game. Outplayed UGA except for those pesky special teams, which gift-wrapped three touchdowns for them.

Also, we haven't beaten an SEC team since we joined the Big 12 and were handed a NCAA sanction for recruiting violations. Seem to be at least a little bit related.

 

[GP]

Nope, you're not .

To be fair, if you watched last year's Independence Bowl, A&M should not have lost that game. Outplayed UGA except for those pesky special teams, which gift-wrapped three touchdowns for them.

Also, we haven't beaten an SEC team since we joined the Big 12 and were handed a NCAA sanction for recruiting violations. Seem to be at least a little bit related.

So it's that pesky Big 12, just like that pesky special teams choke job vs. UGA, that is holding you guys down? LOL. Okie-dokie.

My theory is that the really good football talent would rather play in Florida, or in California, rather than College Station where white guys in crew cuts run around yelling cheers all day and all night. And if they can't play in Florida or California, they'll head to UT or OU. But not A&M.

This is A&M's fault (it's weak football program) and nobody else's. Heck, even TTU found a way to re-make itself into a relevant team among the elite OU and UT teams.

 

[mr. peebs]

This is A&M's fault (it's weak football program) and nobody else's.

Yeah, I know, I said that in this post already.

I'm not trying to blame outside sources for our struggles. I pointed out the coincidence that roughly 15 years ago we were sanctioned by the NCAA for recruiting violations, joined the Big 12, and haven't beaten an SEC team since.

 

[Dan B.]

Nope, you're not .

To be fair, if you watched last year's Independence Bowl, A&M should not have lost that game. Outplayed UGA except for those pesky special teams, which gift-wrapped three touchdowns for them.

Also, we haven't beaten an SEC team since we joined the Big 12 and were handed a NCAA sanction for recruiting violations. Seem to be at least a little bit related.

Nope, you're not .

To be fair, if you watched last year's Independence Bowl, A&M should not have lost that game. Outplayed UGA except for those pesky special teams, which gift-wrapped three touchdowns for them.

Also, we haven't beaten an SEC team since we joined the Big 12 and were handed a NCAA sanction for recruiting violations. Seem to be at least a little bit related.

I hate the coulda/woulda moral victory crowd (And that goes for UT fans making excuses for last year's NC game too). A&M lost to UGa because UGa outplayed them.

And A&M isn't losing to Tennessee by 30 points in 2007 due to NCAA sanctions from the 1990's. They are losing because they have poor coaches and poor recruiting. The SEC has very good coaches, and stellar recruiting. That's why Jackie Sherrill got his butt handed to him when he tried to make a go of it there.

Good point. But we (speaking as an A&M fan and not anyway related to actual athletic department) still want to keep the rivalry games in all sports because it's just a good thing. If they stop, it might be because we go to SEC, but we are pro towards keeping the games in place. It's up to UT to accept or decline.

But you can't. You are leaving all of your rivals behind if you jump ship. You can't schedule OU, TTU, and UT every year for your OOC schedule.

SEC and our AD have been talking for the past couple of months, ever since expansion became a hot topic. I tried finding an article to cite this but can't find with all the random A&M/SEC rumor articles now out there, but since Feb/March they've been in contact. Also, we only really had strong ties to OU and Okie Lite since the Big 12 was formed. Yes we played them before then, but it wasn't a huge deal before.

I have no doubt they've been talking. But the 5 Big 12 schools apparently had an agreement to move together wherever they went. That's why UT turned down the Big 10 -- they had "a Tech problem" (meaning UT wouldn't ditch their oldest rivals for a sexy new conference). OU has been very vocal about going wherever Texas goes. I know A&M loves to think they are sticking it to Texas by going at it alone. But they are the ones that will be stuck on an island, not UT. Former Big 12 schools will still make up around 1/3 of the Pac16 -- whether A&M goes or not -- meaning that they may have to flip a couple of votes in AZ, OR or wherever, but it is doable. A&M on the other hand will have no brothers; no partners in their new conference.

A&M's not comparable to UTEP. Don't try and pull that. The alumni backlash is reason enough to schedule the game.

I am not so certain that UT alumni really care that much. Most of the ones I know (admittedly not the high donors) consider OU a much bigger rival.

 

[Dan B.]

GP are you a Raider fan? I think that they are most likely to benefit from this if A&M turns tail and runs away.

 

[mr. peebs]

Here's article referencing A&M/SEC talks.

Is there any concrete evidence that the Big 12S teams to Pac 10 had an agreement in place? As far as I know it's all conjecture from fans/reporters at this point, as is much of what is being reported.

And "turns tail and runs away"? Come on man, that's just ridiculous. We're looking out for what's best for us and exploring all options. We might end up still in the Big 12, might end up in the Pac 10, or might end up in the SEC, we won't know until it happens. But to say we're turning tail and running away is just wrong.

 

[Stemp]

Here's article referencing A&M/SEC talks.

Is there any concrete evidence that the Big 12S teams to Pac 10 had an agreement in place? As far as I know it's all conjecture from fans/reporters at this point, as is much of what is being reported.

And "turns tail and runs away"? Come on man, that's just ridiculous. We're looking out for what's best for us and exploring all options. We might end up still in the Big 12, might end up in the Pac 10, or might end up in the SEC, we won't know until it happens. But to say we're turning tail and running away is just wrong.

Turning and running tail means entering into the hardest football conference in the country? Oh gimmee a break. Texas will continue to schedule their creampuffs and play one or two difficult games a year (OU plus maybe USC or Cal) but they are looking down at the SEC because they want to be a part of the West Coast elitist club, hobnobbing with the likes of Stanford and Cal.

And anyone who thinks the PAC 10 is going to make a ton of money from TV doesn't realize that West Coasters don't much care for watching College Football like those of us in the South or on the East Coat. The PAC 10's current TV deal is HORRIBLE, even compared to the Big XII. Plus, they lost Nebraska and likely will lose Mizzou (St. Louis and KC markets). The PAC 16 will have three big names schools (Texas USC and Cal but the TV contract won't be all that once the networks don't get the eyes they expect. Texas better hope they can get their Longhorn Network up and running in the PAC 16 because the huge TV money they are expecting is likely to be a fantasy.

 

[Dan B.]

Turning and running tail means entering into the hardest football conference in the country? Oh gimmee a break. Texas will continue to schedule their creampuffs and play one or two difficult games a year (OU plus maybe USC or Cal) but they are looking down at the SEC because they want to be a part of the West Coast elitist club, hobnobbing with like likes of Standford and Cal.

elitist = actual Universities with books and such. There are benefits to hobnobbing with Stanford, UCLA, Cal, and USC* grads you know. Universities are more than just football factories. They produce people with degrees that then hire graduates of other universities perceived to be if a quality stature. Academic funding dwarfs athletic funding (that's why A&M had to borrow money from the school to pay the athletic team's bills), and both UT and OU stand to benefit greatly from a jump to either conference. TBH I'd prefer the Big 10 for academic reasons -- the CiC would provide access to funding that obliterates TV revenue deals.

*: Every one of these schools is ranked in the USNWR top 26 schools. The only SEC schools that sniff the top 50 are Vandy and Florida.

And anyone who thinks the PAC 10 is going to make a ton of money from TV doesn't realize that West Coasters don't much care for watching College Football like those of us in the South or on the East Coat. The PAC 10's current TV deal is HORRIBLE, even compared to the Big XII. Plus, they lost Nebraska and likely will lose Mizzou (St. Louis and KC markets). The PAC 16 will have three big names schools (Texas USC and Cal but the TV contract won't be all that once the networks don't get the eyes they expect. Texas better hope they can get their Longhorn Network up and running in the PAC 16 because the huge TV money they are expecting is likely to be a fantasy.

You forgot OU and if A&M bolts than KU is a frequently mentioned possibility to replace them. They sit on the border of Kansas City, MO. The conference would basically own the US west of Iowa and Nebraska.

Any deal the hypothetical Pac 16 gets would at least equal to the SEC's in terms of direct revenue to the school. You can fit the population of every SEC state into TX and California with room to spare. The markets are so massive that a smaller percentage of the viewers are necessary than in Alabama and Mississippi. In addition, they are growing states and their market share will presumably continue to rise. Right now the population of the hypothetical PAC 16 states is 20 million more (and growing) than the Big 10, which in turn dwarfs the SEC by a similar amount.

The SEC just signed their deal and the amount schools receive is going to be static for a long time to come, while the Pac's is up for renewal. The Pac 10 is also discussing starting their own TV network on basic cable (a la the Big 10), which is completely different than what the SEC does. Such a network would provide revenue to UT from every house in Texas or California (or the Big 10 states) with basic cable and the sports package. Then they can start the Longhorn channel on premium TV and reap even more revenue from UT grads nationwide subscribing.

 

[mr. peebs]

elitist = actual Universities with books and such. There are benefits to hobnobbing with Stanford, UCLA, Cal, and USC* grads you know.

All Californian schools that look down on others. Texas is a great university, that is no question, but those schools will look down their noses at you, much like how UT grads and students do to other schools in the Big 12. Also, in a debt-ridden state like California, there are talks of the public schools cutting costs to certain programs.

see link

The SEC just signed their deal and the amount schools receive is going to be static for a long time to come, while the Pac's is up for renewal. The Pac 10 is also discussing starting their own TV network on basic cable (a la the Big 10), which is completely different than what the SEC does. Such a network would provide revenue to UT from every house in Texas or California (or the Big 10 states) with basic cable and the sports package. Then they can start the Longhorn channel on premium TV and reap even more revenue from UT grads nationwide subscribing.

If SEC expands by adding A&M and another school, the TV contracts the conference signed will be allowed to be renegotiated.

see link



Also, something not alot of people are talking about; but realistically, how long do you see the Pac Teen lasting? Big 12 was much more regionalized and the Pac Teen will have uneven revenue like the Big 12 as well. There are many differences between the proposed member institutions.

I just don't see it lasting for a long time.

 

[Dan B.]

All Californian schools that look down on others. Texas is a great university, that is no question, but those schools will look down their noses at you, much like how UT grads and students do to other schools in the Big 12. Also, in a debt-ridden state like California, there are talks of the public schools cutting costs to certain programs.

see link

I couldn't care less whether they act smug. They are smart enough to add research endowment revenues together, and UT brings a ton of it. Even if the California leg cuts funding the amount Cali schools get will be absurdly larger than most SEC schools .

If SEC expands by adding A&M and another school, the TV contracts the conference signed will be allowed to be renegotiated.

see link

Good point, but that doesn't address my main point -- which is that a conference owning their own TV network is more lucrative than a straight broadcasting deal. I also think you are overestimating A&M's TV drawing power. How many games went untelevised last year for A&M? I know the Tech game wasn't on TV. Why would ESPN and CBS pay more than the 17 million per school amount that they currently are (which would require renegotiation)? The SEC does allow individual schools to negotiate their own coaches shows/historical games, etc -- and this is a huge boon for schools like Florida (and would be for Texas as well) -- but A&M is not a big ratings grabber. The SEC games that would have been picked up are already on in Texas. I have a hard time believing that they would preempt Florida vs Alabama to show A&M vs Arkansas.

 

[awtysst]

Basically if the Big XII south schools (sans Baylor) head to the Pac Supersize, what really changes?

Similarities:
1) They would be grouped together and play each other every year, as usual.

2)They would get 2 of the other Pac Supersize teams each year. This would be like getting a couple of Big XII North teams.

3) They would still get the opportunity to schedule in 3 cupcake/out of conference games.

Differences:
1) They would face Colorado, Arizona and Arizona State ever year.

2) Big $$$

To me the big change is those two games against the other side of the Pac Supersize. So instead of getting a couple of games against Mizzou, Nebraska, KU, KSU, or ISU the Big XII south gets a couple from USC, UCLA, Stanford, Cal, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, and Washington State. No big deal.

 

[dc_txtech]

GP are you a Raider fan? I think that they are most likely to benefit from this if A&M turns tail and runs away.

Don't mean to answer for GP, but all my Raider friends and on the Tech boards everybody is excited. No matter how this goes down, Texas Tech is going to be golden. Only thing left to do is see how the dust settles.

 

[awtysst]

In my mind, this is a bad sign for the Big XII. When you are trying to convince a team to stay, you know you are in trouble.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5282178

 

[GP]

GP are you a Raider fan? I think that they are most likely to benefit from this if A&M turns tail and runs away.

Yeah, I'm a TTU fan.

But I don't think TTU would stay in the Big 12 if UT, OU, and OSU go to the Pac-10.

I think TTU knows where it's bread is buttered, and that's by riding the UT-OU wagon train. OSU also has the same line of reasoning. Wherever UT and OU are, so is the TV money.

I don't think A&M wants to admit that. IMO, that's the story here. There's four teams ready to bail, and one team posturing...and Tuesday will be the day either A&M "gets their mind right" (Cool Hand Luke movie reference) or stays in the shed for several years.

 

[JCTexan]

So basically for A&M it's remain UT's little brother and follow them to the PAC, or go to the SEC West and face LSU, Alabama, Auburn & Ole Miss every year.

Finally, if A&M goes east and others go west and UT doesn't schedule A&M for Thanksgiving it's going to be a PR nightmare for them. A&M will of course want to schedule the game, but if UT is mad about A&M going east and blackballs A&M like some have reported or posted, the public backlash against that would be high. UT fans will say the A&M game and rivalry doesn't mean so much to them or isn't much of a rivalry, but all that aside, that game is the most important game for football in the state of Texas and has been for years. Throwing away 100+ years of tradition because UT is butt-hurt that A&M is in the SEC would be ridiculous and would paint UT as a bunch of yella-backed cowards.

If Texas A&M wants to bolt for the SEC and face Texas every year they are nuts. They would have Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Ole Miss, Arkansas & Texas every year, and that's not counting the teams in the SEC East they will face, namely Florida, Georgia & Tennessee. I doubt Texas will have a problem beating Texas A&M every year, but if A&M goes to the SEC do they really want to face another tough opponent like Texas when Alabama, LSU & Florida could be on their schedule?

 

[mr. peebs]

If A&M goes to the SEC do they really want to face another tough opponent like Texas when Alabama, LSU & Florida could be on their schedule?

Hellll yeah! Bring 'em all on. We're gonna get taken to the woodshed at first, but playing the best brings out your best and will only go to further strengthen our team. A couple years down the road, A&M will be used to playing the toughest conference schedule and will be a much more complete team because of it.

Also, if we do go to the SEC, a great selling point for potential recruits is that they will play at and against a number of the best programs in the country, while also staying in state and playing in the biggest game in the state of Texas on Thanksgiving.

 

[ATXtexanfan]

The only reason that UH doesn't control a majority of this market is because our football/basketball teams have basically stunk for awhile and are coming back up. Remember the interest that was sparked when UH beat up SMU and TTU? Yeah. The city would root for UH if it were able to compete. UH would be able to recruit if it was able to get on national TV all the time playing <insert conference with BCS auto-bid>. Recruits would come to UH over other colleges if they were going to get national exposure playing <insert conference with BCS auto bid>.

UH can bring plenty to the table, and the fact that people watch UT and TAMU more than UH is because UH football has been dookie up until recently. Trust me, there are plenty of conferences that would look at UH with an interesting eye.

And no, I'm not an alumni. Thanks for the condescending tone though, must feel nice.

dude i wasn't trying to be a jerk, just noticed you pushing UH. i just dont see it with with UH. small school with no tradition. the interest sparked locally was up but not nationally. this is all about big boy football.

 

[ATXtexanfan]

i think it would be sweet if a&m were in the sec

 

[awtysst]

Hellll yeah! Bring 'em all on. We're gonna get taken to the woodshed at first, but playing the best brings out your best and will only go to further strengthen our team. A couple years down the road, A&M will be used to playing the toughest conference schedule and will be a much more complete team because of it.

Also, if we do go to the SEC, a great selling point for potential recruits is that they will play at and against a number of the best programs in the country, while also staying in state and playing in the biggest game in the state of Texas on Thanksgiving.

I have to respectfully disagree. Going to the SEC and continuing to play Texas is a brutal schedule. A schedule of LSU, Alabama, Texas, Mississippi, and Arkansas is brutal. In a down year Auburn STILL went 8-5. Then it is likely you face at least one of the following: Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee. Brutal.

In college football wins=recruits. It will be easier to rebuild in a Pac 10 than SEC in my opinion. Look at Arkansas. Since joining the SEC they have never really gotten back to being a top dog.

I fear if A&M takes this route they will be not recover recruit wise.

 

[mr. peebs]

Interesting take on expansion by a Florida fan.. a bit conspiracy minded, but he makes good points on the questions he brings up.

http://tamu.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=15&tid=144013790&mid=144013790&sid=893&style=2

 

[JCTexan]

Hellll yeah! Bring 'em all on. We're gonna get taken to the woodshed at first, but playing the best brings out your best and will only go to further strengthen our team. A couple years down the road, A&M will be used to playing the toughest conference schedule and will be a much more complete team because of it.

Also, if we do go to the SEC, a great selling point for potential recruits is that they will play at and against a number of the best programs in the country, while also staying in state and playing in the biggest game in the state of Texas on Thanksgiving.

They will be taken to the woodshed for at least five years with that schedule, maybe even longer. They haven't been any good recently in the BigXII so I see no reason why they would be any better against a better SEC conference.

 

[gwallaia]

dude i wasn't trying to be a jerk, just noticed you pushing UH. i just dont see it with with UH. small school with no tradition. the interest sparked locally was up but not nationally. this is all about big boy football.

UH a small school? That's news to me.

Ranking University Location Enrollment
1 The University of Texas at Austin Austin 51,032[1]
2 Texas A&M University College Station 48,787[2]
3 University of Houston Houston 37,006[3]
4 University of North Texas Denton 36,206[4]
5 Texas State University&#8211;San Marcos San Marcos 30,816[5]
6 Texas Tech University Lubbock 30,049[6]
7 The University of Texas at San Antonio San Antonio 29,133[7]
8 The University of Texas at Arlington Arlington 28,084[8]
9 The University of Texas at El Paso El Paso 21,011[9]
10 The University of Texas&#8211;Pan American Edinburg 17,534

 

[Goldensilence]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5282178

Looks like the remaining smaller schools of the Big XII are trying to pitch keeping the conference intact.

I still think this would be the ideal situation for UT who whether people like it or not is the real lynchpin of whether the conference gets torn apart or not. Being able to pursue it's own TV deal will be a big for UT.

I still think they can keep the remaining members of the Big 12 and look at adding Arkansas and maybe UH or TCU.

For the record I still hope they can keep the Big 12 together.

 

[rmartin65]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5282178

Looks like the remaining smaller schools of the Big XII are trying to pitch keeping the conference intact.

I still think this would be the ideal situation for UT who whether people like it or not is the real lynchpin of whether the conference gets torn apart or not. Being able to pursue it's own TV deal will be a big for UT.

I still think they can keep the remaining members of the Big 12 and look at adding Arkansas and maybe UH or TCU.

For the record I still hope they can keep the Big 12 together.

I think that it would be possible to keep the conference together, even if UT, TAMU, TT, OU, and OSU leave.

Remaining are

South: Baylor

North: Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, and Missouri

I dont think they will be able to pull any MWC teams, as they are looking good to get an automatic bid in the near future. The best bet is that they pull teams from the C-USA, Sun Belt, and WAC.

Possible teams (based on geography):

Conference USA
Houston
Rice
SMU
Tulane
Tulsa
UTEP

Sun Belt
Arkansas State
Louisiana Lafayette
Louisiana Monroe
North Texas

Western Athletic Conference
Louisiana Tech
New Mexico State

While not a sterling list, coupled with the teams already in the Big 12, the conference would be better than the CUSA, WAC or Sun Belt.

What I would do:

North:
Iowa State
Kansas
Kansas State
Missouri
Tulsa
North Texas

South:
Baylor
Houston
SMU
UTEP
Louisiana Tech
Rice

I raid heavily from the CUSA, but I guess that keeps some rivalries intact.

 

[JB]

I think that it would be possible to keep the conference together, even if UT, TAMU, TT, OU, and OSU leave.

Remaining are

South: Baylor

North: Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, and Missouri

I dont think they will be able to pull any MWC teams, as they are looking good to get an automatic bid in the near future. The best bet is that they pull teams from the C-USA, Sun Belt, and WAC.

Possible teams (based on geography):

Conference USA
Houston
Rice
SMU
Tulane
Tulsa
UTEP

Sun Belt
Arkansas State
Louisiana Lafayette
Louisiana Monroe
North Texas

Western Athletic Conference
Louisiana Tech
New Mexico State

While not a sterling list, coupled with the teams already in the Big 12, the conference would be better than the CUSA, WAC or Sun Belt.

What I would do:

North:
Iowa State
Kansas
Kansas State
Missouri
Tulsa
North Texas

South:
Baylor
Houston
SMU
UTEP
Louisiana Tech
Rice

I raid heavily from the CUSA, but I guess that keeps some rivalries intact.

They would to rename the conference the "Little XII"

 

[rmartin65]

They would to rename the conference the "Little XII"

Haha, that is probably true.

 

[ATXtexanfan]

UH a small school? That's news to me.

Ranking University Location Enrollment
1 The University of Texas at Austin Austin 51,032[1]
2 Texas A&M University College Station 48,787[2]
3 University of Houston Houston 37,006[3]
4 University of North Texas Denton 36,206[4]
5 Texas State University–San Marcos San Marcos 30,816[5]
6 Texas Tech University Lubbock 30,049[6]
7 The University of Texas at San Antonio San Antonio 29,133[7]
8 The University of Texas at Arlington Arlington 28,084[8]
9 The University of Texas at El Paso El Paso 21,011[9]
10 The University of Texas–Pan American Edinburg 17,534

you know what i was saying, would you bet your house against them in a game vs UT or OU?

 

[J_R]

Sounds like A&M is headed East

 

[steelbtexan]

I'm a Horns fan and I hope A&M goes to the SEC. It would screw up the planned colusion of the Pac 10 and Big 10.

Destroying traditions are the only way the Pac10 and Big 10 can remain relevant in the current BCS system.

Screw'em

 

[Kulluminatii]

I'm a Horns fan and I hope A&M goes to the SEC. It would screw up the planned colusion of the Pac 10 and Big 10.

Destroying traditions are the only way the Pac10 and Big 10 can remain relevant in the current BCS system.

Screw'em

If you want to blame someone, blame Notre Dame...or Nebraska...or Mizzou....

Anywho, I hope this goes through. I would be more than happy to have UT, OU, TT, and OSU in the PAC. UT + OU will dominate for a few years, especially with USC being sanctioned, but it will all pay off in the end and help toughen up the PAC as a whole. If A&M joins, great, if not, best of luck to them in the SEC.

 

[steelbtexan]

I'm a Horn fan who blames the Horns the Pac10 and the Big 10.

This is all about power and $$$$.

 

[Kulluminatii]

This is all about power and $$$$.

Can't argue with you there. Seems like mega conferences is where CFB is headed, not sure yet how to feel about that. Guess I'll get back at you 2 years from now .

 

[b0ng]

Texas legislature to all parties involved. . . not so fast.

"To make a final decision before Wednesday," Branch said, "would not be wise."

Look at that ********* right there.

Chron article stating aggies are deucing to the SEC.

Interesting day.

Chip Brown reporting BigXII making last ditch effort

It might be a long shot. It's probably the last shot. But three different sources at Big 12 South schools being targeted by the Pac-10 told Orangebloods.com Sunday morning Dan Beebe's assurances that a new TV deal can be reached on par with the SEC's $17 million/school for the 10 remaining schools in the Big 12 is in play and being considered by Texas. The sources said they are proceeding cautiously with the new information from Beebe. But the proposal might at least slow down the rocket-like pace of Big 12 schools seeking a new home and possibly draw all the divided parties back to the table.

 

[Goldensilence]

Interesting and though it's still very premature I think this was still going to be the best option for Texas and the remaining members of the Big 12.

http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1094038

 

[mr. peebs]

Hahaha this is awesome from UTs lapdog Chip Brown...

http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1094038

Sources say Texas Will Commit to 10-member Big 12

In a bombshell development that could bring a halt to seismic changes in college realignment, sources tell Orangebloods.com Texas has been convinced by a plan presented by commissioner Dan Beebe to stay in a 10-member Big 12.

-snip-

YOUR MOVE TEXAS A&M

The big question now is if Texas A&M, which, according to Orangebloods.com, has the votes on its nine-member Board of Regents to join the Southeastern Conference, would reconsider a possible move to the SEC and remain in the Big 12 with its long-time, in-state rival.

The stakes for Beebe to somehow rescue the Big 12 seemed to get exponentially higher on Sunday as Pac-10 commissioner Larry Scott and chief operating officer Kevin Weiberg conducted a tour of Texas A&M, Texas Tech and Texas.

So either Texas A&M will consider Beebe's plan to rescue a 10-member Big 12. Or A&M will most likely end 100 years of tradition with rival Texas by heading to the SEC, likely triggering a exodus west of Texas, OU, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech and possibly Kansas. The Aggies can be seen as the final piece of the puzzle to holding the Big 12 together.

So basically what happened is A&M saw through all the BS and smoke being played by UT and now UT is mounting political pressure on A&M to coerce us into acting in accordance to what will benefit UT more than ourselves. I'll admit that I thought we had outplayed them in this whole situation but this move was very well done.

Basically, it's win-win for UT at this point. It's either A&M cowers and stays with the Big 12 while UT forms it's own network. Or A&M nuts up and goes to the SEC, somehow getting blamed for breaking up the Big 12 (which is complete BS) and forges a path on it's own. Then, if A&M does or even doesn't leave, it leaves open the Pac Teen to come for the others or all of us; which they probably had planned along.

I'll give it to Dodds, I thought he had played all his cards but he had an ace in the hole. As for A&M, I hope our Board of Regents and President have enough testicular fortitude to not stand for this BS and move on. Too long has UT and Dodds run things, and they've run two conferences into the ground. How long till they ruin the new Big 12 or Pac Teen?

I don't want to wait to find out.

Edit: If you didn't think Texas was pulling some strings for an all out power ploy, how can you not now? Texas is a great institution but they really are poison to a conference. They bring in truckloads of money, but they end up destroying the organization. They're like a sugar high, great at first but it doesn't last and eventually will rot your teeth.

 

[b0ng]

I don't think UT is behind the whole "Legislature" thing. UT has been burned by those guys once and I don't know if they'd try to open that bag of poo again.

Be interesting to see if the politicos try to wrangle A&M into doing whatever UT does.