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

Why is the Big 12 breaking up or in trouble?

Ranger Tom said:
Translation: "Please, PLEASE don't make us play in Conference USA." That's not to say I don't have any sympathy for Baylor, mind you. This really sucks for them.
Click to expand...

It's not so much "Please don't make us play in C-USA"; it's more "Please don't take our Big-XII money away from us".
 
I still think its a crime how school officials are destroying a conference and ending traditions that have been around for almost a decade. Mostly for what I consider their own personal gain.
 
Hoth-Boy said:
It's not so much "Please don't make us play in C-USA"; it's more "Please don't take out Big-XII money away from us".
Click to expand...

That's it a nutshell. The free ride and subsequent gravy train of money Baylor has been enjoying the past 15 years could very well be snuffed out.

Tradition my ass. No one at Baylor gave a rat's ass about tradition when the SWC broke up.

Ken Starr will have to save them this time, if not, Baylor will have to break out the Ouija boards and summon the spirit of Ann Richards.
 
Super Mario said:
I still think its a crime how school officials are destroying a conference and ending traditions that have been around for almost a decade. Mostly for what I consider their own personal gain.
Click to expand...

This arguement died with the SWC, since then all of the schools in the state have become mecenary.

And can traditions really be formed in a decade?
 
Super Mario said:
http://www.baylor.edu/nation/texasfootball.htm
Click to expand...

2l5174.gif
 
Hoth-Boy said:
This arguement died with the SWC, since then all of the schools in the state have become mecenary.

And can traditions really be formed in a decade?
Click to expand...

My bad. I meant century and was refering more to Texas & aTm, and SWC schools.
 
Can anyone really blame baylor? They were just assured of a 13 year multi-million dollar deal that someone else is ripping up for them. Everything from their coach's salary to the athletic facility is riding on this. Not only will they be stuck in conference usa, but the whole school will have to be restructured. If they can keep A&M here an extra season it could buy time to keep Oklahoma and get BYU/TCU in. I can see Baylor pulling every legal stop they can not to end up like UH.
 
****ing baylor..

http://outkickthecoverage.com/why-baylors-claims-against-the-sec-have-no-merit.php

Why Baylor's Claims Against the SEC Have No Merit

Baylor University is threatening to sue the Southeastern Conference and Mike Slive personally over Texas A&M's move to the SEC. Last night the SEC formally accepted A&M's bids contingent on the release of outstanding legal claims. The Big 12 has waived all rights to sue the SEC over Texas A&M's addition and so had all member institutions. Until Baylor reversed course and now says it may sue. Why has Baylor's tune changed so quickly? For the same reason it trotted out the, "Don't Mess With Texas Football" campaign.

Naked self interest.

See, a week ago, when the Big 12's letter was written to the SEC, Baylor believed the Big 12 was going to survive. That was before Oklahoma's public flirtations with the Pac 12 became known. Now, suddenly, Baylor is aware that if Oklahoma and its crew bolt -- potentially including Oklahoma State, Texas, and Texas Tech -- then the Big 12 is no more. That means Baylor would fall all the way down to Conference USA. And that's unacceptable to Baylor and Ken Starr.
Click to expand...


edit: to be honest, I don't blame baylor for doing this, I would expect a&m to put up a fight if the tables were flipped.. but the way the leadership of baylor has bitched and moaned about centuries old rivalries and the sanctimony of texas football, all the while trying to wage some retarded guerrilla warfare by having starr send out emails to the president of UGA and others, it's just ****ing sad and annoying.
 
Eh, everybody is in it for themselves right now. The difference being that for some reason Baylor has a stick up its ass over A&M leaving. The Big East has had 8 schools for some time now, and they kept their AQ and even have their own network now. It's not like the conference will fall apart when A&M leaves, it will fall apart when OU or UT leave. A&M should pay quite a bit of exit fees for breaching the TV deal contract, but I'm not sure it's enough to warrant staying in the Big 12. I've heard it could be as high as $40 million, but probably closer to 20.

In any case, Baylor is again pulling out all the stops to make sure it gets that conference money, cause they don't want to be orphaned. Conference USA isn't going to scoop them up as I would expect SMU, Rice and UoH to do their best to block them from joining. Baylor probably ends up in the Big East, WAC or MWC.
 
Baylor should have been in C-USA to start off with. UH should have been in the Big XII IMO.

That being said I don't blame them one bit for what they are doing because they are screwed once the Big XII dissolves. A&M leaving is only going to speed up that process. Of course OU talking about leaving really spooked Baylor.

Personally as a UT fan I want the whole thing to blow up. I have never liked the Big XII because there are too many boring teams on the schedule (practically the whole north division).

This season's home schedule is pretty boring and bad. Next season's is outright pathetic. If I were a season ticket holder I would be fed up with the lame scheduling.

All that being said is why I always have been and always will be more of a NFL fan.
 
If they would have known things were going to blow up and these 16 team leagues would be the norm they should have just combined the Big 8 and SWC back in 94 and this mess could have been avoided.
 
Why is Baylor so bent on trying to either stay or get into a AQ conference? They do know that they have to actually win more than 7 games in a season right?

(please don't sue me for that Baylor)
 
XI CMURDER IX said:
Why is Baylor so bent on trying to either stay or get into a AQ conference? They do know that they have to actually win more than 7 games in a season right?

(please don't sue me for that Baylor)
Click to expand...

It's 6 games, and they will this year, barring injury to RG3. Don't be bitter that your team lost to them.
 
Justice goes off on Ken Starr

If I’m Ken Starr, I’m screaming and threatening and doing anything I could to defend my school. Why can’t he just be honest? Why talk about traditions and all that stuff? This is about money and status. Not UH’s status. Not SMU’s status. It’s about Baylor’s status. Just tell the truth, Ken. How many people do you think you’re fooling?

When Ken Starr talks about the fabric of the state being changed, about a hundred years of rivalries being lost, about the whole thing not being as interesting or as good as it once was, he’s absolutely right. But he’s off by 16 years, and when we think back to the really important day, his school saved itself and threw TCU, UH, Rice and SMU onto the side of the road. Does Ken Starr not know the history of what happened when the Southwest Conference broke up?

Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech and Baylor joined the Big 8. SMU, TCU, UH and Rice were tossed aside. Texas, Texas A&M and Texas Tech were easy picks. As for the other, there was no easy choice. Baylor was chosen because it had more friends in high places.

Plenty of history and tradition were lost when that happened, but because Baylor survived the cut, Baylor was fine with throwing away plenty of history and tradition. Now there’s another wave of consolidation coming, and Baylor is in a bad place.

Has no one mentioned this to Ken Starr? Doesn’t he see the hypocrisy of pleading for something his school was part of helping tear apart? Why doesn’t he just admit it’s all about his school and its money, and he doesn’t give a damn about history or rivalries or any of that? That would be the truth.

So, Ken Starr, sit down and let’s have a big boy talk. The truth is, Ken, your little school is going to be thrown off the bus because it hasn’t grown its own product. That’s on you and yours, buddy boy. You’ve been last in the Big 12 in football attendance every single year. You’ve won 18 conference games in 15 seasons. Your stadium is a dump.
Click to expand...

Plenty more at the link

Not a Justice fan normally, but enjoyed this read.
 
Consider costs of ending Big 12 - Ken Starr

The eagerly anticipated college football season opened two weekends ago. Millions of Americans flocked to stadiums or gathered around television sets with family and friends to cheer on their favorite teams. A win over a nationally ranked TCU team at our own Baylor University brought scores of fans racing onto the field. But the excitement of a weekend that saw Big 12 teams go 10-0 - the best record of any conference nationally - was tempered by reports of the supposed imminent demise of the conference.

According to our friends in the sports media, the football programs of our beloved Texas institutions are about to become exported commodities, competing in different national athletic conferences. If this proves to be true, we will be tearing something very special from the celebrated fabric of our Texas history.

The nation knows that there is something unique about Texas football. It's the stuff of song and cinema. Historic, annual rivalries among our Texas institutions date back more than 100 years.
Click to expand...

The bolded represents their entire fan base.
 
Super Mario said:
Now I know you are a delusional aTm homer. Enjoying a Justice article because he is backing you?

When Justice is backing you, you need to rethink your stance.
Click to expand...

I know, I know. LOL. I just pulled out some old photoshops I did of Justice to remind myself.

turtlecopy-1.jpg


But, for a Longhorn homer, he has been pretty reasonable over the Big 12-2-1 breakup.
 
Here is a blast from the past


Baylor regents give OK to Big Eight move

WACO -- Baylor University's 34-member Board of Regents voted unanimously Wednesday to join the Big Eight conference, showing their excitement about the move while also expressing sorrow over the expected demise of the Southwest Conference.
Before the vote, a regent gave Baylor president Herbert Reynolds a T-shirt that said, "If you are going to run with the big dogs, you have to get off the porch."
School officials said they think the Bears can be one of the big dogs in NCAA Division I athletics, thanks to the expected move of four SWC schools to the Big Eight in the fall of 1996.
"We are proud and pleased to be offered an invitation to join the Big Eight conference," said Thomas R. Powers of Houston, chairman of the Board of Regents and chief executive officer of TransAmerica Fund Management Co. "We feel it will offer us an opportunity to increase exposure on a national basis and provide our alumni and students an opportunity to be a part of one of the major national conferences.
"We will endeavor to take every action we need to take to be competitive, and we will be competitive."
Reynolds said the national exposure will increase Baylor's prestige and help in its calling as a Baptist school.
"We'd be very surprised if our applicant pool did not go up for enrollment," Reynolds said. "If we can compete against the very large, secular institutions in a very meaningful and satisfactory way, from our standpoint, that is a great witness to our church-relatedness."
Texas, Texas A&M and Texas Tech are expected to join Baylor in the proposed 12-member Big Eight, leaving behind SWC members Rice, Houston, TCU and SMU.
Baylor was the first school whose regents voted on the matter. Regents at A&M, Tech and Texas will discuss the issue today or Friday.
"We are certainly saddened by the demise of the Southwest Conference," Powers said. "I think it was something that was going to happen sooner or later.
"We certainly wish those who did not receive an invitation well. I feel sure they are fine institutions and they will find a place in some other program that will be appropriate for them."
Click to expand...
 
I'm a Longhorn backer

But UT's greed is the answer.

Not that there's anything wrong with that. LOL
 
gwallaia said:
That's it a nutshell. The free ride and subsequent gravy train of money Baylor has been enjoying the past 15 years could very well be snuffed out.

Tradition my ass. No one at Baylor gave a rat's ass about tradition when the SWC broke up.
Ken Starr will have to save them this time, if not, Baylor will have to break out the Ouija boards and summon the spirit of Ann Richards.
Click to expand...
Yep.

Hoth-Boy said:
This arguement died with the SWC, since then all of the schools in the state have become mecenary.

And can traditions really be formed in a decade?
Click to expand...
Ask Texans fans. :hides:

All kidding aside, Baylor is plaing both sides of the street here (albeit a few years apart).
 
I have no problem with what Baylor is trying to do. They stand to lose a lot if the conference goes down.

But the way they are going about it makes them look stupid.
 
I despise Baylor and have since the SWC broke up. I think that whatever happens to them as a result of this they have it coming.

Couldn't happen to a more appropriate pack of hypocrites. I particularly enjoy the thought that after Briles bailed out on his kids here the way he did for a chance to coach in a BCS conference he's now in danger of landing right back in C-USA where Kevin Sumlin and the Cougars can kick the crap out of him yearly.
 
bah007 said:
I have no problem with what Baylor is trying to do. They stand to lose a lot if the conference goes down.

But the way they are going about it makes them look stupid.
Click to expand...

It doesn't make them look stupid, it makes them look toxic. What Conference will want a school that goes about their business in that manner?
 
Hervoyel said:
I despise Baylor and have since the SWC broke up. I think that whatever happens to them as a result of this they have it coming.

Couldn't happen to a more appropriate pack of hypocrites. I particularly enjoy the thought that after Briles bailed out on his kids here the way he did for a chance to coach in a BCS conference he's now in danger of landing right back in C-USA where Kevin Sumlin and the Cougars can kick the crap out of him yearly.
Click to expand...

Yeppers. UH has lots of reasons to dislike Baylor.
 
I wasn't paying all that close attention back then, so I've got an honest question....

What did Baylor do to screw over UH, TCU, SMU, and Rice when the SWC broke up?
 
Mr. White said:
I wasn't paying all that close attention back then, so I've got an honest question....

What did Baylor do to screw over UH, TCU, SMU, and Rice when the SWC broke up?
Click to expand...

I posted this article earlier

http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1774343&postcount=77http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1774343&postcount=77

It discusses what happened back then. Baylor was the least well suited to go to the new Big 12 out of TCU, SMU, UH and Rice. It had some serious political pull and got in anyway.
 
I found this quote very fitting:
"We certainly wish those who did not receive an invitation well. I feel sure they are fine institutions and they will find a place in some other program that will be appropriate for them."
Click to expand...

I hope Bill Byrne says something to this effect when A&M is finally allowed to go to the SEC. 'We're excited about our move to the SEC. We certainly wish Baylor the best. I feel sure thay are a fine institution and they will find a place in some other program that will be appropriate for them.'
 
Actually, I dont see how Baylor joining the big 8 and leaving the other teams behind is the same as Texas aTm agreeing to stay & save the big 12, then less than a year later jumping ship.

If you can provide any historical data that suggests Baylor did the same BS move then show us.
 
http://president.tamu.edu/2010/06/14/texas-am-will-remain-in-the-big-12-conference/

Texas A&M will remain in the Big 12 Conference134 comments
June 14, 2010

To The Aggie Family:

The past two weeks have been a whirlwind of speculation as Texas A&M University and several other institutions in the Big 12 Conference evaluated our athletic affiliations. At the end of the day, 10 of the 12 schools in the Big 12 – including Texas A&M – have determined that the conference was definitely worth saving due to our collective strengths in academics, national competitiveness, geographic fit and overall financial value.

Throughout the conference evaluation process, I was encouraged by something that I already knew –Texas A&M is incredibly strong and the passion of our current and former students, as well as our faculty and staff, is unmatched anywhere. As evidence, I have been overwhelmed by thousands of emails, phone calls and Facebook posts from Aggies in support of any of the three options we were considering – remaining in the Big 12, or joining the Southeastern Conference or Pac-10 Conference.

Let me be clear: This decision was made in the best interests of Texas A&M and was not made in haste. As I mentioned to the Faculty Senate Monday afternoon, our top consideration was the demands placed on our student-athletes, in terms of academics, time away from the classroom, and the overall level of competition. There were also many other factors considered, including maintaining Texas A&M’s strong foothold in the State of Texas and preserving our natural athletic rivalries, many of which date back more than 100 years. And, ultimately, by remaining a member of the Big 12, we were able to more than double our financial return to the levels being offered by other conferences.

I understand that some Aggies are disappointed, but I am confident this decision will serve Texas A&M well in the years to come. As Athletic Director Bill Byrne and I stated numerous times throughout this process, our hope and desire was for the Big 12 to continue. And we both agree that this is an exciting, new day for our league.

I appreciate all of your feedback and thoughts on this important issue. As Aggies, I know that you will rally around our Texas A&M student-athletes as they train over the summer and begin Big 12 competition this fall.

Thanks again, and Gig ’Em!

Dr. R. Bowen Loftin ’71
President
Click to expand...

You cant argue with facts. They negotiate a bigger pay rate for themselves to stay in the conference, shake everyone's hand, stare the other presidents in the eye and straight up lie.
 
Super Mario said:
Actually, I dont see how Baylor joining the big 8 and leaving the other teams behind is the same as Texas aTm agreeing to stay & save the big 12, then less than a year later jumping ship.

If you can provide any historical data that suggests Baylor did the same BS move then show us.
Click to expand...

I actually need to get some work done today (hard to believe, I know) so I really can't get into that whole can of worms right now. I am not claiming that Baylor left after one year, I am claiming that Baylor was very happy to throw TCU, SMU, UH and Rice under the bus on the way out of the SWC. So they appear fairly hypocritical by trying to sue other universities into staying in the Big 12-2-1.

A&M is doing what they feel is in their best interests by leaving and joining the SEC. I understand that some do not like it or understand why A&M feels the need to leave. And that is what I just don't have the time to debate right now.
 
Super Mario said:
Actually, I dont see how Baylor joining the big 8 and leaving the other teams behind is the same as Texas aTm agreeing to stay & save the big 12, then less than a year later jumping ship.

If you can provide any historical data that suggests Baylor did the same BS move then show us.
Click to expand...
I don't think it is the same. Texas and Texas A&M were the big programs that helped form the Big 8/12 into a legitimate conference. Baylor piggy backed their way in through political ways, not because they were going to make that conference better... but because they didn't want to be left out like UH, TCU, Rice, etc. A&M knows the Big 12 is done and they've been wanting to join the SEC for a while. They're joining a superior conference because of a mutual decision between their univesity and the southeastern conference.

I think most people realized last year that it was just a matter of time for the Big 12 to completely unravel. Nebraska and Colorado said peace out. A&M stayed in but I don't really think it was to "save" the Big 12... I think they got a little more money than they otherwise would have and they knew they'd just be trying to go to the SEC sometime in the next 1,2,3 years.
 
GlassHalfFull said:
I actually need to get some work done today (hard to believe, I know) so I really can't get into that whole can of worms right now. I am not claiming that Baylor left after one year, I am claiming that Baylor was very happy to throw TCU, SMU, UH and Rice under the bus on the way out of the SWC. So they appear fairly hypocritical by trying to sue other universities into staying in the Big 12-2-1.

A&M is doing what they feel is in their best interests by leaving and joining the SEC. I understand that some do not like it or understand why A&M feels the need to leave. And that is what I just don't have the time to debate right now.
Click to expand...

You are still missing my argument that the difference is that aTm just agreed to stay and save the Big 12. aTm just agreed to a new television payout deal which all members agreed to. That is why Baylor and others are mad. They dont like being lied to. Also they have other money deals depending on the current Big12 members.

Why doesnt aTm man up and just leave? Call Baylor's bluff and GTFO.
 
Old story from San Antonio Express News. Sorry I do not have a working link.

Power brokers: How tag along Baylor, Tech crashed the revolt

Mark Wangrin
Express-News Staff Writer

It's hard to keep a secret around the state Capitol, especially when legislative talk turns from taxes to football.

So, in early 1994, when the buzz began that Texas and Texas A&M were preparing to leave the Southwest Conference, David Sibley went straight to a man he knew wouldn't deceive him.

Sibley, then a Republican state senator from Waco, buttonholed William Cunningham, the University of Texas chancellor, at a reception. He asked him point blank if the rumors that the Longhorns and Aggies were planning to desert the SWC were true.

Cunningham asked Sibley where he had heard that. He questioned the sources of the rumors. He tried to change the subject.

What he didn't do was deny it.

To Sibley, that was proof enough that something was up - something that wasn't going to sit well with state politicos with allegiances to either the six soon-to-be snubbed SWC universities or the communities served by those schools. Or, as was the case with Baylor graduate Sibley, to both.

It was time, as one state politician with a vested interest in the matter later recalled, "to turn loose the dogs of war."

The pack included Dobermans, a veritable who's who of Baylor and Texas Tech alumni. Ann Richards, then governor, and Bob Bullock, then lieutenant governor, were Baylor grads. Sibley held a high-ranking position on the powerful Senate Finance Committee.

Tech unleashed its own influential alums: John Montford, president pro tempore of the Senate; Robert Junell, destined to become chairman of the House Appropriations Committee; and Speaker of the House Pete Laney.

Sibley threatened a cut in funding for UT and A&M if they bolted on their own. Junell collared UT president Robert Berdahl and spelled out what was at stake.

"As I recall, it wasn't a very veiled threat to cut budgets if Tech was left behind," Berdahl recalls.

Laney doesn't recall any hints of reprisal.

"We'd be a whole lot easier to get along with if our teams were in there, but I don't think there were any threats," Laney said. "We (the legislators) are temporary. We'll be replaced sooner or later."

Bullock, who died in 1999, took the lead in galvanizing the Tech and Baylor factions. He called Bernard Rappaport, a Waco businessman then serving on the UT Board of Regents. Rappaport confirmed that UT's absorption into the Big Eight was imminent.

Bullock went to work.

It was Monday, Feb. 20, 1994 - Presidents' Day, a state holiday. Bullock began rounding up his troops. He called Cunningham and requested an immediate meeting. William Mobley, A&M's chancellor, and Dean Gage, A&M's interim president, were in Temple on a facilities tour when Bullock reached them by phone. Bullock wanted to talk - now. Mobley and Gage replied that they couldn't fit it into their schedules.

Bullock bristled.

"I would think that if the Lieutenant Governor requested a meeting you would show him the courtesy," Bullock said angrily. Then he slammed down the phone. Minutes later, the phone rang.

Mobley and Gage had suddenly found time to talk.

(continued on next page)
 
The plot revealed
The group convened in Bullock's office in a state building next to the Capitol. On hand were Bullock, Cunningham, Sibley, Montford, Mobley, Gage and Bill Clayton, a former house speaker who now sat on A&M's board of regents.

Cunningham told Bullock that, indeed, UT was on the verge of joining the Big Eight. By then, Bullock and the others were prepared to act — prepared to wield the monolithic clout that stems from rural politics and lengthy tenure — to buy Baylor and Tech passage out of the doomed SWC.

The four other SWC schools — SMU, TCU, Rice and Houston, all based in metropolitan communities — found few advocates for their interests.

The fate of the three private schools in the group — SMU, TCU and Rice — was of little concern to the decision-makers in Austin.

Even among the four breakaway schools, unity was difficult to attain. One sticking point for a four-way exodus from the SWC was A&M, which still clung to aspirations of joining recently departed SWC member Arkansas in the Southeastern Conference.

According to witnesses — and also Clayton's testimony in the 1996 misappropriation of funds trial of former A&M regents chairman Ross Margraves — Clayton balked at the idea of the Aggies joining the Big Eight.

"No, you're wrong about that" Bullock told him. "You need to come with us to the Big Eight."

It so happened that A&M needed two votes from the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, which governs construction projects at state colleges, to proceed with the construction of its $33.4 million basketball and convocation facility, which became Reed Arena.

"Don't worry about it," Bullock told Clayton. "I'll get them for you tomorrow."

On Feb. 24 — just four days after Bullock's round of emergency phone calls — the Big Eight officially absorbed UT, A&M, Baylor and Tech, and a new league was formed, using a name the Big Eight had curiously trademarked years earlier: The Big 12.

That Capitol intrigue ended a revolt that had been in the works since the late 1980s, when UT and A&M officials first considered leaving the SWC.

First, the Longhorns looked west, to the Pac-10. Berdahl found it appealing that seven of the 10 schools in the Pac-10 were members of the American Association of Universities, a group comprised of the nation's top 62 research universities.

Distance was the main drawback. The University of Arizona, located in Tucson, was the nearest Pac-10 school to Austin — and still 788 miles away. Eight of the 10 schools were in the Pacific Time Zone, meaning a two-hour time gap with most of Texas.

"Texas wanted desperately the academic patina that the Pac 10 yielded," recalls Berdahl, who went on to serve as chancellor at Pac-10 member California-Berkeley. "To be associated with UCLA, Stanford and Cal in academics was very desirable."

Still, expansion in the Pac-10 depended on unanimous approval of the member schools. And Stanford, which had long battled UT in athletics as well as academics, objected. For UT, the way west never materialized.

Course correction
The Longhorns next turned to the Big Ten.

Having added Penn State in 1990, the Big Ten was now made of universities that, in the view of UT officials, matched UT's profile — large state schools with strong academic reputations. Berdahl liked the fact that 10 conference members belonged to the American Association of Universities.

Yet, distance remained a disadvantage. Iowa, the closest Big Ten school to Austin, was 856 miles away — but the appeal of having 10 of 12 schools in the same time zone was seen as a plus.

But after adding Penn State in 1990, Big Ten officials had put a four-year moratorium on expansion. Although admitting interest, Big Ten bosses ultimately rejected UT's overtures.

That left the SEC as a possible relocation target for the Longhorns — until Berdahl let it be known that UT wasn't interested because of the league's undistinguished academic profile. Only two of 12 schools in the SEC were American Association of Universities members and UT officials saw admissions standards to SEC schools as too lenient.

"We were quite interested in raising academic standards," Berdahl says. "And the Southeastern Conference had absolutely no interest in that."

A&M, meanwhile, had no qualms about flirting with the SEC. From the late 1980s on, administrators from A&M and LSU had several informal conversations about the Aggies joining the SEC. After talks with Miami broke down in 1990, the SEC's courtship with A&M grew more serious.

LSU athletic director Joe Dean telephoned his A&M counterpart John David Crow to discuss A&M's candidacy.

"Joe was going to sponsor us, do what was needed to be done," Crow said. "They would have liked to have had us."

At the NCAA Convention in Dallas in January 1993, Dean reportedly met with Dodds and Crow to discuss a possible two-school move. Dean later told reporters that he believed UT was "headed north" — to the Big Eight or Big Ten — while A&M was the "most logical addition to the SEC."

In response to reports of the meeting, a representative of A&M president William Mobley told reporters there had been no offer and "Dr. Mobley is firmly committed to the Southwest Conference."

But in August 1993, A&M regents chairman Margraves flew to LSU for his son's graduation, taking time to meet with LSU chancellor William Davis to discuss the possible migration of A&M — and Houston — into the SEC. Margraves later said he came away from the trip favoring a move.

The right fit
Despite the repeated wooing from both sides, however, the relationship was never consummated. A&M administrators, apparently fearful of a backlash if the school made the first move solo, held back. UT wasn't interested and a suitable partner from the SWC couldn't be found. The SEC, meanwhile, backed off on expansion.

"I don't think the powers that be wanted us to move alone, leave the Southwest Conference and its tradition," Crow said.

Mobley, now a professor of management at the China Europe International Business School in Shanghai, says A&M's actions resulted from a strategic analysis of the SWC's future commissioned by the league's presidents after Arkansas departed.

"It was a complex decision, a matrix of academic, economic and political factors for all schools and conferences," Mobley said.

He added that those factors included academics and compliance, television money, scheduling and travel, existing natural rivalries and "support and political implications among various stakeholders including the Board of Regents, the Texas Legislature, Former Students, the Athletic Department, faculty, students, media, etc."

Almost by default the attentions of UT and A&M turned to the one major football conference that was geographically nearest and competitively dearest — the Big Eight.

It helped that UT athletic director DeLoss Dodds and Oklahoma athletic director Donnie Duncan were old friends. Dodds had once served as AD at Kansas State. And, of course, the Longhorns and Sooners were longtime rivals from annual October football showdowns in Dallas.

Acutely aware of how the fast-moving world of television negotiations was changing the face of conference affiliations, Dodds and Duncan had, since the late 1980s, chatted informally about the possibility of UT joining the Big Eight.

For a multitude of reasons, that move made the most sense. All of the Big Eight schools were in the Central Time Zone. The most distant school from Austin was Iowa State, 840 miles away. Like the SWC, the Big Eight was looking to improve revenues and in need of additional markets to increase its bargaining power for TV rights.

Still, the Big Eight wanted to expand to 10 teams, not nine, so each school could play a round-robin schedule in football and still have two non-conference games. UT needed an expansion partner and the obvious choice was A&M.

Both schools offered large alumni bases, rich tradition and solid academic reputations. Both excelled in a variety of sports other than football and basketball.

Within a week of the meeting of political heavyweights, the expansion twins became quadruplets with the forced acceptance of Baylor and Tech into what amounted to a merger deal. Almost immediately, the deal paid off.

On March 10, the Big 12 signed a five-year, $100 million deal with ABC and Liberty Sports to carry the league's football games.

Denial, then denied
Even as the fortunate four were cashing in, the forgotten four were reaching for their wallets — and having that chill-bump sensation of finding nothing.

"It was a bomb," then TCU AD Frank Windegger said, "dropped square on top of us."

Even when the administrators at TCU, SMU, Rice and Houston received advance confirmation from those involved, some still refused to believe it.

In February 1994, days before the league dissolved, SMU AD Forrest Gregg privately asked Dodds if the move was imminent. Dodds said yes.

Gregg told SMU president A. Kenneth Pye of the conversation. Pye responded that it couldn't be happening, because the other league presidents hadn't said anything about it. Two days later, it came true.

"We were in Dallas, with a long and illustrious tradition, and we thought that would work," Gregg said.

SMU wasn't alone in discovering that what it offered in positives was set off by what it promised in negatives.

SMU, TCU and Rice were private schools, and big conferences desire schools backed by state coffers. Houston, TCU and SMU still bore the stain of NCAA probation.

All thought they could deliver big television markets to a league in search of the same, but the Big 12 members felt that UT and A&M could deliver Dallas and Houston.

There were brief discussions about keeping the Southwest Conference alive, but nobody could agree on whom to invite. And the TV money was quickly drying up.

"There was a lot of indecision," said Steve Hatchell, who served as the last SWC commissioner then assumed the same duties with the Big 12. "Those four were not in the habit of looking around to find a place for themselves. The picture changed totally."

SMU, TCU and Rice headed to the Western Athletic Conference, a geographically widespread league that boasted one football national champion (BYU, in 1984) but modest accomplishments elsewhere.

Houston, believing its future was to the east — the school had once coveted an invitation to the SEC — cast its lot with a new league formed from the nucleus of the old Metro Conference, called Conference USA.

Baylor and Tech — one a private school, one a school that had to pull out the stops just to be admitted into the SWC 26 years earlier and neither in major television markets — were simply happy to be included in the Big 12.

"As luck and fate would have it, Texas Tech had some very powerful members of the legislature," said former Tech AD Bob Bockrath. "Candidly, if not for the influence, it'd be the Big 10 — that's taken, so some other name. I don't think Texas and A&M saw Tech and Baylor as equal partners."

Former Baylor AD Dick Ellis said: "It was a battle of the haves and have-nots. Baylor, we kind of snuck in. I'm sure there's resentment from SMU, TCU and Rice."

Short honeymoon
While the forgotten four stewed about being jilted, the honeymoon that followed the marriage of the fortunate four and the Big Eight was short.

Officials of the new league were quickly saddled with two contentious issues: initial eligibility for athletes and arrangements for a football championship game.

The SWC expatriates wanted entrance requirements that were stiffer than those mandated by the NCAA. Nebraska, sustained through the years by more lenient standards, objected.

Suddenly, the process of forming the Big 12 became a clash of priorities and a dispute over how priorities shape integrity.

Cornhuskers fans howled about UT arrogance. UT supporters saw Nebraska's reluctance as a cynical, self-serving way to keep the Cornhuskers on top.

"Nebraska and Texas were jockeying for position," said Bill Byrne, the A&M AD who then held that position at Nebraska. "Nebraska was the 800-pound gorilla in the Big Eight. Texas was the 800-pound gorilla in the Southwest Conference."

In December of 1995, 10 months before the first Big 12 football game, the league's school presidents agreed to allow each Big 12 school to admit two male and two female partial qualifiers each season. Still, Nebraska officials wanted to delay implementation. League presidents voted 11-1 to put the rules into immediate effect.

That was the second major defeat for Nebraska.

The Cornhuskers had dominated Big Eight football — they won back-to-back national titles in that league's final two seasons — and they opposed the idea of a title game, fearing one upset could ruin a season.

In the summer of 1995, league presidents, warmed by the prospect of a title game providing another $10 million in revenue, voted 11-1 to put in a championship game.

Nebraska officials also blamed UT for the league's choice of Dallas as the site for league headquarters, a decision that dislodged the conference from its old Big Eight base in Kansas City. Adding to the early acrimony was the league's choice of Hatchell as the Big 12's first commissioner, another decision driven by Texas schools, Nebraska officials charged.

It was fitting that the first Big 12 championship game, held in St. Louis on Dec. 7, 1996, matched No. 3 Nebraska against 20-point underdog UT.

Even the ticket offices got into it.

In a conference call to set up the will-call ticket windows, a Big 12 official asked Nebraska's representatives what they needed. "Two tables and three chairs," came the reply.

He posed the same question to UT officials.

"Two tables and four chairs," said UT's ticket manager, earning a round of high-fives from his staff.

The underdog Longhorns, using a bold pass play on fourth and inches at their own 28-yard line in the final minutes, had the final say on the field, too, winning 37-27.

Nearly a decade later, Berdahl, an academician not normally given to moods of vengeance, can't contain himself when he recalls those early growing pains of the Big 12.
 
You are going to make me work late today!!!

Let me try this article Link

But A&M President R. Bowen Loftin disputed that argument Monday during a meeting of the A&M Faculty Senate. In response to a question from a professor who said that leaving the Big 12 would require A&M to break a contract it signed just last year, Loftin stressed that the Aggies have no contracts binding them to the Big 12.

"There is no contract provision that requires us to be a member of the conference," he said in the firmest public explanation he had given to date.

The only contract relevant to the situation, he said, are the Big 12's TV contracts, but those were signed by the conference, not A&M.

"There is no contract provision that requires us to be a member of the conference," Loftin said.

A&M is tied to the Big 12 by bylaws written in the 1990s, he said. Those, however, provide specific provisions for how the Aggies can leave. Loftin has indicated that A&M is trying to follow those as it tries to join the SEC.

Loftin did acknowledge that he publicly expressed his commitment to the Big 12 in June 2010 with the following statement: "Texas A&M University is committed to the Big 12 Conference as it is today."

On Monday, Loftin stressed the importance of the phrase "as it is today."

"At that day, [the Big 12] had 12 members," he said. "It does not have 12 members today."

Neither Slive nor Loftin explained what needs to happen to make the move official. Many have speculated that both sides are waiting to see whether Big 12 member Oklahoma leaves for the Pac-12.

But both sides made it very clear Monday that the move will happen.

"Texas A&M is an outstanding academic institution with an exceptional athletic program, passionate fans and wonderful traditions," Slive said. "While the SEC wasn't thinking about expansion, it was impossible not to be interested in Texas A&M."
Click to expand...

And I grant you that A&M talked the good talk last summer about staying. I do think the LHN and the reality of what the conference was looking like without Nebraska and Colorado changed A&M's minds over the last year.
 
Super Mario said:
http://president.tamu.edu/2010/06/14/texas-am-will-remain-in-the-big-12-conference/



You cant argue with facts. They negotiate a bigger pay rate for themselves to stay in the conference, shake everyone's hand, stare the other presidents in the eye and straight up lie.
Click to expand...

They lied? Really? You know they had no intention of staying at the time?

I think you do not know that.

Are we all agreed that College football is "business"? Does anyone here in this discussion think for a moment that any of this centers around anything other than dollars and cents? I didn't think so.

In a business arrangement things change. Business doesn't always work out the way we want it to. Sometimes you look at a deal and think "That's simply not in my best interest. I've got to do something about that" and you do something about it.

Did A&M change their minds and decide to do what's best for them? Of course. Is OU in the process of doing the very same thing right now? Is OSU hanging on for dear life and prepared to follow OU anywhere they go? Of course they are. Texas has done what's best for them and Baylor & Tech did what was in their best interest when they shoehorned themselves into a bed of roses following the breakup of the SWC. Nobody likes landing in a bucket of ****. Even I get that.

UH did in fact land in said bucket and at times it looked like they were never going to get out. When they finally started to get respectable again along came their old SWC pal Baylor looking for a head coach. Just business.

I think A&M would have already "manned up" if the SEC hadn't been spooked by Ken Starr's attempt at avoiding the inevitable. If the SEC stops dead in their tracks and tells A&M that they don't want to risk any legal problems from this BUT... OU and OSU decide to go ahead and bolt anyway will Starr and Baylor sue them? Will they try and pull some strings again? I don't think the people in charge in Oklahoma give a fancy frickasseed flying fart who went to Baylor or what they think. The simple fact is Baylor's bag of tricks is empty and I'm going to enjoy the show.

I've got nothing against A&M so I don't care if they head for the SEC. I think that's where UH should eventually go. Keep winning, build your stadium, build your brand, and eventually they'll call. Baylor can go to hell though. They need to get their butts down to playing Sam Houston St. & Stephen F. Austin. You know, in a fine conference that suits them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top