Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

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

Wolf

Wolf

100% Texan
The Big 12 meetings are reaching their climax Thursday and Friday in Kansas City with the presidents and chancellors from the league coming together to discuss pressing issues, including sites for championships. (Look for the Big 12 title game in football to stay at Cowboys Stadium for the next three years.)

But when it comes to possible realignment, the Big 12 meetings may be premature.

Why?

Because it appears the Pac-10, which has its meetings in San Francisco starting this weekend, is prepared to make a bold move and invite Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Colorado to join its league, according to multiple sources close to the situation.



Left out would be Iowa State, Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska and Missouri.

Messages left with Pac-10 officials by Orangebloods.com on Thursday were not immediately returned.
Click to expand...
http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1090747
 
Whoa, that would shake things up. That is a big conference though, I want to know how the divisions shape up (if it happens).
 
This is a preemptive move by the PAC-10 if the Big 10 does expand taking in several Big 12 teams with it.

Honestly I think the idea of 2-3 behemoth conferences bores the hell out of me. IMO college football is pretty good where it is at conference wise. I think the larger conferences are well balanced with each other for the most part and some smaller ones have schools making legitimate title contender cases.

Really I wish schools would focus more on implementing a playoff system instead of expanding.
 
Goldensilence said:
This is a preemptive move by the PAC-10 if the Big 10 does expand taking in several Big 12 teams with it.

Honestly I think the idea of 2-3 behemoth conferences bores the hell out of me. IMO college football is pretty good where it is at conference wise. I think the larger conferences are well balanced with each other for the most part and some smaller ones have schools making legitimate title contender cases.

Really I wish schools would focus more on implementing a playoff system instead of expanding.
Click to expand...

I agree with this for the most part. Let the big conferences stay where they are, but maybe get a few of the smaller conferences to merge.

If you could get maybe 8 conferences, you are pretty close to a playoff system
 
College football is about one thing and one thing only. MONEY.
 
http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_15215560

I know it's Conference USA, but I'm pretty sure it's across the board with every conference.

I know I don't necessarily mind because I enjoy sports and I would like to see good facilities to attract top tier athletes to make the athletic program more sustainable.

I know well though there's many others who would disagree.
 
I went to KC yesterday morning, and President Powers was on my plane. Didn't think much of it at the time. After my lunch appointment I tuned into Sports Radio and they were buzzing about Chip Brown's story and the meeting that was taking place.
 
I think the Big 12 should invite the Pac-10 and Big-10 to join us and create the ULTIMATE BIG 33~!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Goldensilence said:
This is a preemptive move by the PAC-10 if the Big 10 does expand taking in several Big 12 teams with it.

Honestly I think the idea of 2-3 behemoth conferences bores the hell out of me. IMO college football is pretty good where it is at conference wise. I think the larger conferences are well balanced with each other for the most part and some smaller ones have schools making legitimate title contender cases.

Really I wish schools would focus more on implementing a playoff system instead of expanding.
Click to expand...

I think the conferences are looking at things currently in an effort to make that point moot.
 
My preference is to have Missouri and whomever bolt to the Big 11 and the Big 12 bring in my Frogs and another school.
 
Last edited:
UT seems to be content being a "big fish in a little pond", but I really think it would be more interesting if they swam in a bigger pond, and IMO the most likely destination would be the PAC10 if they decided to make a move.
 
IDEXAN said:
UT seems to be content being a "big fish in a little pond", but I really think it would be more interesting if they swam in a bigger pond, and IMO the most likely destination would be the PAC10 if they decided to make a move.
Click to expand...

This is Texas, as big as of a pond it gets for school boy talent in football, basketball and baseball. Opening one's pond to poachers is one of the variables to consider.
 
Kaiser Toro said:
This is Texas, as big as of a pond it gets for school boy talent in football, basketball and baseball. Opening one's pond to poachers is one of the variables to consider.
Click to expand...

I respect the history and tradition of football in Texas, but if I'm not mistaken more California & FLA natives were drafted into the NFL this year than Texas natives ?
Bit if you're really a "Texan" with big ideas, big dreams, and big ambitions,
how could anything in the Big 12 be as big as Texas Vs. USC ?
There are much, much bigger ponds than the Big 12. If you're what you say you are, then think big you big Texan you.
 
IDEXAN said:
I respect the history and tradition of football in Texas, but if I'm not mistaken more California & FLA natives were drafted into the NFL this year than Texas natives ?
Bit if you're really a "Texan" with big ideas, big dreams, and big ambitions,
how could anything in the Big 12 be as big as Texas Vs. USC ?
There are much, much bigger ponds than the Big 12. If you're what you say you are, then think big you big Texan you.
Click to expand...

Not sure what the NFL has to do with this decision or my statement.

UT vs USC is not as big as UT/OU every year for the last fifty years - for the fans and the players.

Everything is bigger in Texas, consequently, everyone wants a piece.
 
Kaiser Toro said:
Not sure what the NFL has to do with this decision or my statement.

UT vs USC is not as big as UT/OU every year for the last fifty years - for the fans and the players.

Everything is bigger in Texas, consequently, everyone wants a piece.
Click to expand...

Absolutely correct! Davy Crockett didn't come here for nothing...
 
the sixteen pac would be sweet. hard to imagine an undefeated school making it through. big time money at stake
 
Kaiser Toro said:
Everything is bigger in Texas, consequently, everyone wants a piece.
Click to expand...
"The Pac-10 is in a position of strength, a vastly undervalued league with tons of upside. It hired Larry Scott as commissioner last year to overturn rocks in search for revenue.
The Pac-10 is not looking to raid the Big 12; it's sort of the other way around. "Our phone is ringing off the hook," Scott said Thursday."
http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-0605-dufresne-pac-10-20100605,0,3151291.column
&&
All of the "Texas is bigger" talk is fine and well, wouldn't expect anything else, but as this writer with the LA Times correctly points out, the Big 12 would need the PAC 10 far worse than vice versa if the Big 10 makes a
move on Mizzou and Nebraska.
 
The only reason that the PAC10 wouldn't take Texas would be because of A&M and Tech. If the PAC10 turned their nose up at UT I could easily see the SEC being fine with Texas even if it means UT would have to up it's game or get beaten a bit by Bama and Florida.

PAC10 would kill to have another flagship to actually compete with USC.
 
Not sure how I feel about this merger, so I'm going to list out positives and negatives for A&M, Big 12, and the state of Texas...

Positives
-Pac 10 research grants and collaborations with Stanford, Cal, Washington, etc...
-Huge TV footprint covering essentially all USA west of Mississippi River
-Increased academic reputation
-Allows conference to negotiate a large TV contract due to premium athletics (Stanford, UCLA, Cal, USC, A&M, UT, OU all in top 25 of Director's Cup standings) and prestigious football programs (USC, UT, and OU with A&M, UCLA, and Cal to a lesser extent)
-Pac 10 hotties

Negatives
-Culturally, Texas and to an even greater extent Oklahoma are nothing like California or the Pacific seaboard at all; seeing the Fighting Texas Aggie Band or the Longhorn Band in their Porter Wagoner uniforms in LA or Seattle would just be... weird. Just the way of life and overall outlook on life over there is much different than it is here.
-Travel/Time differences.. while not a big deal for football as Texas teams would only likely travel to the Pacific Coast once a year, other sports that play each team home and away and have much less revenue will be a problem from the beginning that could lead to schools dropping certain sports. Also, with the Pacific coast two hours behind us a 7:00pm PT home game would likely end around 1:00am here.
-Not much zeal for an A&M vs. Washington State game, though I guess it's about the same as Iowa State now...
-Opens up the state of Texas to recruiting by now conference rivals in Arizona, California, Oregon, and Washington while still having OU, Ok St, and Colorado recruit as well

Just a few of the reasons that stood out to me the most at least and there's just so many different angles to looking at the whole situation that it's tough to choose which direction is best and why I don't envy school presidents/chancellors/ADs at all right now..

As for what I want to happen.. sort of...

Athletic wise, I want A&M to go to the SEC with Texas or OU and create an SEC West of A&M, UT/OU, Arkansas, LSU, MSU, Ole Miss, and Vandy.. if UT doesn't go then keeping the Lone Star Showdown and Red River Rivalry games would give A&M and OU one of the best schedules in football year in and year out.

Academically, if Texas were to join Big 10 and A&M by association was taken along, that would be huge in regards to grant money and research collaboration. The Pac 10 is also a step up from the Big 12 academically and would result in larger research grants for the flagship universities of Texas.

So A&M goes to SEC for athletics and Big 10 for academics and gets the best of both worlds and leaves one shiny, happy Texans fan, just like Vinny.

:spin:
 
Texas already does very well in recruiting Texas highschool players. If Texas goes to the pac 10 and is able to compete and do better than USC and UCLA thy may be able to get a foothold into California recruiting. Texas, California, and Florida are the big three in terms of football recruiting. Going to the Pac 10 gives UT a chance to get at some of the Cali recruits!

Imagine a Texas team filled with the very best of Texas and California recruits!!!
 
In the end, all of this re-alignment stuff is about money, and you'd be foolish to think that Texas doesn't pull down a bunch of bucks with it's football program. If the Big XII does **** itself this offseason (And more and more stories are pointing to this being the case) Texas probably has it's choice of what conference to go to.

Also, I can't imagine OU not being in the same conference just because of the Red River Shootout. I'm sure if somehow they didn't end up in the same conference they could schedule it, but I just see one following the other to a different conference.
 
b0ng said:
In the end, all of this re-alignment stuff is about money, and you'd be foolish to think that Texas doesn't pull down a bunch of bucks with it's football program. If the Big XII does **** itself this offseason (And more and more stories are pointing to this being the case) Texas probably has it's choice of what conference to go to.

Also, I can't imagine OU not being in the same conference just because of the Red River Shootout. I'm sure if somehow they didn't end up in the same conference they could schedule it, but I just see one following the other to a different conference.
Click to expand...

Well hold on there. Remember that a team has 12 games a season. If the pac 10 goes to 16 that means 8 per division. So 7 games right away are against the others in the division. Now, there likely will be 2 games against the other division, so thats 9. The remaining three will be non conference games.

In those Non conference games, would UT really want to schedule OU(if they were not in the same division) or would they prefer the Louisiana-Lafayettes of the world?
 
awtysst said:
Well hold on there. Remember that a team has 12 games a season. If the pac 10 goes to 16 that means 8 per division. So 7 games right away are against the others in the division. Now, there likely will be 2 games against the other division, so thats 9. The remaining three will be non conference games.

In those Non conference games, would UT really want to schedule OU(if they were not in the same division) or would they prefer the Louisiana-Lafayettes of the world?
Click to expand...

You are talking about a 100+ year old tradition. I know UT likes to schedule cupcakes OOC, but I can't imagine alums of either school or the AD's would just give up that quickly.

Isn't the game supposed to be held in Jerry's World coming up?
 
b0ng said:
In the end, all of this re-alignment stuff is about money, and you'd be foolish to think that Texas doesn't pull down a bunch of bucks with it's football program.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone has said in this thread or in general lately that Texas doesn't bank from football; it's a given that they do, so I'm not sure who you're directing this at.

But it doesn't change the fact that athletic revenue compared to research grant money is small potatoes. While the beginnings of the change can mostly be seen as athletically based (ie Big 10 wanting to expand it's TV footprint to get more viewers to Big 10 network) in my opinion it's going to end up concerning academics a lot more than ESPN and other networks will let on.
 
Uhhhhhhhhh, this re-alignment is specifically about football as that is the sport that gets all the funding so that other schools can hold their 3-legged sack race competitions. I don't believe any other reason about all the alignment talks other than the Big10 and now the Pac10 want to increase their football revenue.

There is no way all of these conferences are talking about re-alignment due to academics, no effing way. I also don't know if these research grants can pull in hundreds of millions of dollars like tv contracts can.
 
b0ng said:
You are talking about a 100+ year old tradition. I know UT likes to schedule cupcakes OOC, but I can't imagine alums of either school or the AD's would just give up that quickly.

Isn't the game supposed to be held in Jerry's World coming up?
Click to expand...

Yeah, but what is more important: 100+ year tradition or getting to better bowl games? Scheduling OU when they are in your division is one thing, but choosing to schedule them as a an out of conference is NUTS.

OU is not a pushover and quite frankly with 9 conference games you NEED cup cake games. If UT scheduled OU and lost and that loss prevented them from going to a BCS game whereas a cupcake win would have gotten them there, it would be hard to sell the UT AD on OU. Simple fact of the matter is, its about winning games. Tradition and rivalry be damned.
 
awtysst said:
Yeah, but what is more important: 100+ year tradition or getting to better bowl games? Scheduling OU when they are in your division is one thing, but choosing to schedule them as a an out of conference is NUTS.

OU is not a pushover and quite frankly with 9 conference games you NEED cup cake games. If UT scheduled OU and lost and that loss prevented them from going to a BCS game whereas a cupcake win would have gotten them there, it would be hard to sell the UT AD on OU. Simple fact of the matter is, its about winning games. Tradition and rivalry be damned.
Click to expand...

You know that OU and UT haven't always been in the same conference right? And that both of those teams get bucketloads of cash to have that game broadcast.

Remember, money here is the ultimate motivator, not competition. And how are teams like ASU and Stanford and UCLA not going to be cupcake games? OU/UT is not going to go away because UT is scared of OU and USC in the same schedule.

Any AD for either school would be tarred and feathered if they didn't let the respective alums for each school talk garbage to each other in the Cotton Bowl (or wherever it's going to be held) every year.
 
b0ng said:
You know that OU and UT haven't always been in the same conference right? And that both of those teams get bucketloads of cash to have that game broadcast.

Remember, money here is the ultimate motivator, not competition. And how are teams like ASU and Stanford and UCLA not going to be cupcake games? OU/UT is not going to go away because UT is scared of OU and USC in the same schedule.

Any AD for either school would be tarred and feathered if they didn't let the respective alums for each school talk garbage to each other in the Cotton Bowl (or wherever it's going to be held) every year.
Click to expand...

Stanford has become a solid program. UCLA is under Neuheisel, the same Neuhesiel that made Colorado a relevant and dangerous program. ASU is not a cupcake.

Remember that the money that a school that goes to say the Rose bowl or Fiesta Bowl is MUCH more than going to The Pacific Holiday bowl. College football is a very tough landscape a single loss can drop you from BCS to BS bowl game. And with that loss is lots of $ and potential recruits. Remember Texas already has its rivalry game against A&M. Having an extra rivalrly game may be considered a luxury that UT cannot afford.

The likely scenario is UT and OU go to the Pac 10 with their geographical partners (A&M and Oklahoma State). However if OU for whatever reason does not join Texas I would not be surprised to see the end of the Red River rivalry -save for BCS/bowl games!
 
b0ng said:
I also don't know if these research grants can pull in hundreds of millions of dollars like tv contracts can.
Click to expand...

In 2004, Texas A&M received nearly $570 million in research funding, ranking the school among the top 20 American research institutes.
Click to expand...

Just in 2004 alone, and that's not even what the Stanfords, Duke's, and Northwestern's of the country make.

Courtesy of wikipedia.
 
Even if all of what you were saying was more than an opinion, both teams are locked into a contract for this neutral site game that's going to be extremely expensive to get out of.

Remember, money is the motivator here, not competition.
 
I would much rather see this happen than Texas go to the Big 10. Texas in the Big 10 makes no geographic sense at all.
 
b0ng said:
Remember, money is the motivator here, not competition.
Click to expand...

Yes, this I agree with you on, but in a different way.

The whole realignment situation is starting off as athletic departments wanting more money from TV contracts, but the major moves will be made by the presidents and chancellors of the universities considering bigger factors than only athletic revenue.
 
pbat488 said:
Just in 2004 alone, and that's not even what the Stanfords, Duke's, and Northwestern's of the country make.

Courtesy of wikipedia.
Click to expand...

Source

→Network: ESPN, available in 98 million homes.

→Years: 2011-2014

→Rights: $125 million a year. Fox, which is paying $80 million annually from 2007-10, reportedly bid $405 million for four years.

Read more: http://newsok.com/bcs-television-contract/article/3323198#ixzz0q0jqkbzD
Click to expand...

It's about football bro. Those institutions aren't going to get more research money because of a conference re-alignment.
 
b0ng said:
Source



It's about football bro. Those institutions aren't going to get more research money because of a conference re-alignment.
Click to expand...

Not gonna lie, I'm a little confused. Those are the fees ESPN and Fox paid to broadcast BCS games, not what a school gets for playing in/winning a game.

And still, $500 million over 4 years to broadcast football is chump change compared to $570 million in one year to one school for research.
 
b0ng said:
Even if all of what you were saying was more than an opinion, both teams are locked into a contract for this neutral site game that's going to be extremely expensive to get out of.

Remember, money is the motivator here, not competition.
Click to expand...

True, the teams are signed through 2015, so it seems unlikely they would want to pay their way out as they are given something like 800k each to play. Thats a lot of cabbage.

Like I said, there is a strong likelihood that OU follows UT wherever they go.
 
I don't understand why everyone is thinking the Big XII is breaking up.
 
JB said:
I don't understand why everyone is thinking the Big XII is breaking up.
Click to expand...

Well becuase if Mizzou and Nebraska go to the Big X

And the Pac 10 succeeds in grabbing Texas, A&M, OU, O State, Tech, and COlorado who is left in the Big XII? Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Baylor?
 
awtysst said:
Well becuase if Mizzou and Nebraska go to the Big X

And the Pac 10 succeeds in grabbing Texas, A&M, OU, O State, Tech, and COlorado who is left in the Big XII? Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Baylor?
Click to expand...

Where would those guys go? Split between the SEC, CUSA, WAC and MWC? This should be an interesting summer.
 
Goldensilence said:
IMO smart move by the BIG XII to force the situation.
Click to expand...
Think so ? Where's their leverage because I can't see it ?
Just what do you think UT,er I mean the Big 12, going to do if MU (NU isn't going anyplace independantly, it might tag along after MU if it also gets an invite from the Big 10), doesn't snap up and respond by this deadline ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top