Texas just screwed the B12

huKSer said:
walksalone said:
husker_99 said:
shyndy said:
the main difference though is that Notre Dame is independent, whereas Texas just acts like they are even though they are in a major conference bleeding it dry.
Click to expand...
Texas doesn't have the prestige like Notre Dame to be an independent and still expect an AQ. Won't ever happen.
Click to expand...
Doesn't mean their necessarily not dumb arrogant enough to try..
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
texas is like a nation within the USA and their national religion is football. in terms of profitability (surprised that is a real word), texas is way more valuable than ND. ND is fading and it seems as if texas is only growing stronger. i got to say, texas can do pretty much whatever it wants. it sold its third tiered programming for 300 million over the next 20 years. no one else could have down that; and now their high schools teams are going to be on tv. kids will grow up playing on that channel and it is sure nice for a program to say to a kid, "stay home and every one of your games will be televised, just like they were on the longhorn network." it is insane. texas does not have the prestige, but it has the money, the support, the prowess, and the arrogance to do whatever it wants and succeed. personally, i think they should just worry about keeping coaches and getting to a bowl game.

that is also crazy, muschamp was half responsible for a team that could not get to a bowl game after a title run and he gets the head spot at florida.

 
http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/01/24/am-to-sec-rumors-surface-yet-again/

Buoyed by the creation of the Longhorn Network, the speculation surrounding Texas A&M taking their athletic programs to the SEC refuses to die a merciful death.

In a column Monday morning, Kirk Bohls of the Austin American-Statesman writes that Texas’ deal with ESPN, announced last week, could create “a spike in Texas A&M’s interest in joining the SEC.” During the mini-expansion apocalypse way back in June, there were many reports connecting the Aggies to the SEC, including one that had the school’s board of regents giving the thumbs-up for the move.

That talk came in the midst of Texas’ discussions with the Pac-10, but both schools ultimately opted for conference “solidarity” and remained in the Big 12.

The new UT network, however, has caused the talk to surface once again, with the Aggies apparently none too pleased with a development that stuffs even more money into their in-state rival’s already bloated coffers.

“I certainly think it’s going to create some reaction from some Aggies who will say, ‘(The heck with) Texas. Let’s do our own deal,’” a prominent, unnamed Aggie told Bohls. “I don’t think Texas is winning friends and influencing people among their Big 12 brethren. As for the SEC, it may be a lot of noise, but I don’t sense a lot of groundswell from the president or athletic director’s office.”

Bohls went on to suggest that A&M and Oklahoma, which is exploring the creation of its own TV network, could “unite at some point to shift to the SEC, which I think would scoop them up in a second.” The Sooners had been mentioned back in June as potentially having an interest in making their way to the SEC.

Bohls was also told that “A&M AD Bill Byrne may rally the other eight non-Longhorn schools to try to pool their third-tier rights together and package them under the Big 12 name.”

So, yeah, this whole Big 12 alliance thing is rock solid. Nothing to worry about here, commissioner Dan Beebe. Nothing at all.

 
Looks like a little fall out from Texas's Bevo TV. I think KU and possibly K St to Big East to battle football with TCU. I could see Oklahoma join A & M to the SEC. Its heating up again with A&M and KU leading the charge. One school who found out BBall isn't worth crap and the other who reluctantly agreed to stay as long as big brother took care of it.

I think many of the rest of the schools will fall into the WAC and MAC which would kill them finacially. Even at the hind tit end of the big 12 they're getting + or -10 million. See how they like the 1.5-2 million from the split in those baby conferences.

 
If the SEC expands to 14 teams, that's just going to further the arms race. The PAC-10/12 will have to do something to keep up, and you've got independent BYU sitting out there making geographic sense. Boise St. could maybe possibly be influenced to join, and/or Texas Tech.

The Big XII will dissolve. If OU and A&M leave, Texas won't hold onto Missouri, who will get snatched up by the Big East or Big 10. Kansas will likely head to the Big East where they won't have to compete on such an uneven field with Texas, and once those two remaining marquee North teams are gone, there's not much for Texas to care about holding onto. They either go PAC-10/12 or go independent.

I don't see this as being over by a long shot. 2010 was just the beginning of the avalanche.

 
A few points about the Bohl's article (from the heart of Vermin Country, no less):

1) OU won't tag along with A&M to the SEC: OU mistakenly revealed that they're hitching their wagons to Texas last summer. And frankly, while the SEC publicly said they want Texas and OU, they really don't--OU has little to offer the SEC other than a football program that can beat the other 12 SEC teams. Texas is too big of a primadonna for the SEC to put up with, and Texas wants nothing to do with the SEC--Texas is using the "College Football Cheating for Dummies" book as written by the SEC en masse.

A&M does two things--it adds an opponent to the SEC schedule that is tough, yet consistently beatable, it opens the fertile recruiting grounds of Texas to the SEC, and it adds a major media market (Houston) to the SEC footprint--something which will help the SEC when CBS' SEC broadcast rights end in two years (read: even more money).

As for the other school, it likely won't be a Big XII member--the SEC will have an open door to Texas and a middle-of-the-road program to use and abuse. The SEC has no use for any of the other schools--they're the biggest conference on the block, Oklahoma takes more than it adds, and no other school (save for Texas) would benefit the SEC. Look for an ACC or Big East school to jump ship for a large payday that isn't necessarily amenable to the Big 10 footprint and has geographical relevance to the SEC (read: North Carolina, FSU, Georgia Tech).

2) If the SEC goes to 14, I fully expect the Big 10 to offer Notre Dame again. Yes, Notre Dame will spurn them again.

3) When the Big 10 gets rejected by the 'Domers, I can see either a (Syracuse/Rutgers) offer to get to 13 purely for the big bump in footprint (to counter the SEC adding south Texas to their footprint). However, when the (Syracuse/Rutgers) offer happens...

4) An offer to Syracuse or Rutgers may trigger Conference Armageddon 2, as it signals open season on poaching the best of the Big East. The ACC will look to offer 2 or 3 (depending on where the SEC goes). So while chaos ensues in the Big East...

5) The Big 10 will offer Notre Dame again, and the 'Domers will accept. No Big East--no home for Olympic teams, and Notre Dame will finally read what has been written on the walls for some time.

6) This leaves Kansas/Missouri stuck in the Big Tex unless someone wants to go to 16 (not likely).

If Syracuse or Rutgers reject a Big 10 offer (highly unlikely), then look for both Kansas and Missouri (if Kansas hasn't already signed with the Big East) to be onboarded to the Big 10, and that would make Nebraska fans happy (two more close opponents, some history added back, etc.)

Anyway, just some thoughts. Feel free to beat the living **** out of them via comments and criticism.

 
If OU, A&M, and the rest of the Big 12 besides Texas were smart they would join the WAC or MWC conference. With the addition of former Big 12 schools i bet the WAC or MWC would finally get what they wanted an AQ bid. I think Iowa St, Baylor would succeed in the WAC. Plus they would join a weak conference and be able to run it. If was either of those conference commissioners i would be reaching out to them.

 
@husker_99 - The problem with ISU and Baylor in the WAC is travel costs would kill their budgets. Without the dream of BCS money trickling into their laps, they can't afford those kinds of journeys, especially in their Olympic sports.

 
knapplc said:
@husker_99 - The problem with ISU and Baylor in the WAC is travel costs would kill their budgets. Without the dream of BCS money trickling into their laps, they can't afford those kinds of journeys, especially in their Olympic sports.
Click to expand...
Except you are forgetting after 2012, Hawaii, Fresno St, Nevada are leaving for the MWC. The farthest they would have to travel is Idaho. Plus they would more than likely win the WAC and get a bowl bid. For Baylor and ISU going to a bowl every year would offset the travel costs or any other. Plus get better recruits.

 
Lower-tier bowls like you go to for winning the WAC don't pay a lot. Maybe it would work for them, but I think ISU makes more sense in Conference USA or the Big East, especially if the Big East gets poached by the ACC. I could see ISU and KState in the Big East.

 
knapplc said:
Lower-tier bowls like you go to for winning the WAC don't pay a lot. Maybe it would work for them, but I think ISU makes more sense in Conference USA or the Big East, especially if the Big East gets poached by the ACC. I could see ISU and KState in the Big East.
Click to expand...
Yes they might not pay millions but a bottom feeder like Iowa St won't go anywhere unless they have a perception of a better program. K State is a better program than Iowa St and can afford to go to the Big East or a better conference than Iowa St.

 
The issue for an Iowa State or someone going to a WAC or MAC is that their budgets wouldn't just decrease they would be destroyed. They'd have to revamp everything. Sure they aren't going to have to keep up with the big dogs in years to come with new arenas and stadiums but they're going to have to adjust big time. I was at a charity hunt with an alumn from Western Kentucky this past fall. He thanked me for Neb playing them because the payout covered such a large part of their budget. Imagine going from say an athletic budget of say $35-40 million a year (and Iowa State is a joke being that low in the Big 12) to something around $15-20 Million best case. You'd have to cut 1/2 your programs or more.

 
matthew_m_g said:
A few points about the Bohl's article (from the heart of Vermin Country, no less):

1) OU won't tag along with A&M to the SEC: OU mistakenly revealed that they're hitching their wagons to Texas last summer. And frankly, while the SEC publicly said they want Texas and OU, they really don't--OU has little to offer the SEC other than a football program that can beat the other 12 SEC teams. Texas is too big of a primadonna for the SEC to put up with, and Texas wants nothing to do with the SEC--Texas is using the "College Football Cheating for Dummies" book as written by the SEC en masse.

A&M does two things--it adds an opponent to the SEC schedule that is tough, yet consistently beatable, it opens the fertile recruiting grounds of Texas to the SEC, and it adds a major media market (Houston) to the SEC footprint--something which will help the SEC when CBS' SEC broadcast rights end in two years (read: even more money).

As for the other school, it likely won't be a Big XII member--the SEC will have an open door to Texas and a middle-of-the-road program to use and abuse. The SEC has no use for any of the other schools--they're the biggest conference on the block, Oklahoma takes more than it adds, and no other school (save for Texas) would benefit the SEC. Look for an ACC or Big East school to jump ship for a large payday that isn't necessarily amenable to the Big 10 footprint and has geographical relevance to the SEC (read: North Carolina, FSU, Georgia Tech).

2) If the SEC goes to 14, I fully expect the Big 10 to offer Notre Dame again. Yes, Notre Dame will spurn them again.

3) When the Big 10 gets rejected by the 'Domers, I can see either a (Syracuse/Rutgers) offer to get to 13 purely for the big bump in footprint (to counter the SEC adding south Texas to their footprint). However, when the (Syracuse/Rutgers) offer happens...

4) An offer to Syracuse or Rutgers may trigger Conference Armageddon 2, as it signals open season on poaching the best of the Big East. The ACC will look to offer 2 or 3 (depending on where the SEC goes). So while chaos ensues in the Big East...

5) The Big 10 will offer Notre Dame again, and the 'Domers will accept. No Big East--no home for Olympic teams, and Notre Dame will finally read what has been written on the walls for some time.

6) This leaves Kansas/Missouri stuck in the Big Tex unless someone wants to go to 16 (not likely).

If Syracuse or Rutgers reject a Big 10 offer (highly unlikely), then look for both Kansas and Missouri (if Kansas hasn't already signed with the Big East) to be onboarded to the Big 10, and that would make Nebraska fans happy (two more close opponents, some history added back, etc.)

Anyway, just some thoughts. Feel free to beat the living **** out of them via comments and criticism.
Click to expand...
I agree with a lot of the above.

BUT... I don't think Dame will get a unrequested offer this time. They will have to ask for it... To many other teams to choose from this time around. I truly think Mizzu and KU would be the logical choice. Big East schools sounded good but in reality I don't think they bring to much to the table. Far fewer fans... And KU you adds a huge Bball team tourney bound year-in year-out.

 
da skers said:
The issue for an Iowa State or someone going to a WAC or MAC is that their budgets wouldn't just decrease they would be destroyed. They'd have to revamp everything. Sure they aren't going to have to keep up with the big dogs in years to come with new arenas and stadiums but they're going to have to adjust big time. I was at a charity hunt with an alumn from Western Kentucky this past fall. He thanked me for Neb playing them because the payout covered such a large part of their budget. Imagine going from say an athletic budget of say $35-40 million a year (and Iowa State is a joke being that low in the Big 12) to something around $15-20 Million best case. You'd have to cut 1/2 your programs or more.
Click to expand...
This same point could be made regarding the rumors of Kansas to the Big East. KU gets about 9 million currently from the Big12 versus 3.5 per Big East member.

 
One advantage for the Big 10 over the SEC is TV markets. Chicago, Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Cleveland, Cincy, Columbus, Indy, Pittsburgh, Detroit, Philly not to mention many middle markets in Big 10 states. Add in national alumni from great academic universities.

I think the Big 10 will continue to look at TV market size as a strong factor in adding new teams with football presence second then Bball. You can narrow down the 2 or 4 teams that could be added. My biggest question is if the Big 10 will look to more "southern" teams as the population shifts to those states. If so, that would be real outside the box thinking for the Big 10.

1. ND - national following

2. Maryland - DC market; decent in FB and BB; border rival with PSU

3. Kansas - big add for BBall but are there enough TV sets to justify?

4. Missouri - St. Louis market, decent FB and BB.

5. Southern teams - clemson, Va Tech, Ga Tech - heck I have even seen mention of Arkansas but I thought they had a really bad academic rating.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top