CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big XII => Topic started by: Temp430 on July 26, 2021, 07:36:50 AM
-
Should Texas and or Oklahoma leave for the SEC what happens to the Big XII?
I can see the Big XII adding a couple teams such as Houston and SMU. Might they add a few others such as Rice, BYU, Colorado State, New Mexico?
-
UH, SMU no. They’re football program has mostly been in shambles for decades. They don’t need another small private Christian school with no fan base.
North Texas may have better potential but I don’t see it. Best they can do is convince a few AAC teams and go on name recognition. But in reality they’ll probably simply fold up and cease to exist just like the SWC and Big East.
-
won't be a P5 conference
will only be 4 power conferences
a couple programs may be lucky enuff to get an invite and jump to the Big or PAC, maybe not
-
No, it won’t be power 5 but it will still be a quasi power 5 group. I’m fairly certain that no team has ever been demoted from power 5 to g5 unless you count the old big East teams.
So you’re going to have some teams that are major state university’s that have much more to offer than your typical G5 teams. We’ve already seen that there are lots of G5 teams that can compete on a very high level. oSu for instance would compare very well to the lower tier P5 schools like MSU and Vanderbilt. Perhaps IU from the B10 and Northwestern.
I think if the B12 is smart they will try to pickup 4 of the best remaining G5 teams and schedule smartly.
-
Something else that will be uncomfortable is the scheduling. It will be a hard pill to swallow if one of the former P5 Big 12 teams have to agree to a two for one when scheduling P5 teams. I'm not sure if they will have to do that or not, but it's pretty standard practice to have two games played at the P5 hosts stadium and one at the G5 stadium or sometimes even a neutral site. I guess they will have to work those issues out and maybe they can have a little bit better negotiating tactics than the smaller schools.
-
all negotiations will be uncomfortable because the remaining Big 12 teams will have no more leverage than SMU or Houston, and not just scheduling
it's sad, but reality of small markets and the power of money
-
While augmenting the Big 12 is possible, the larger probability is that several more schools will find homes in other conferences. There's value in several other ADs that could be added to other conferences trying to, while not exactly counter, at least keep pace with the SEC's move.
The Big 8, the SWC, and later the Big 12 made sense in an era of regionalism where kids would go to universities near them, and Saturday would feature a football game or two. Since 1988 is now a disturbingly long time ago, advertisers aren't looking for a league that retreads the same eyeballs with different teams.
-
No, it won’t be power 5 but it will still be a quasi power 5 group. I’m fairly certain that no team has ever been demoted from power 5 to g5 unless you count the old big East teams.
So you’re going to have some teams that are major state university’s that have much more to offer than your typical G5 teams. We’ve already seen that there are lots of G5 teams that can compete on a very high level. oSu for instance would compare very well to the lower tier P5 schools like MSU and Vanderbilt. Perhaps IU from the B10 and Northwestern.
I think if the B12 is smart they will try to pickup 4 of the best remaining G5 teams and schedule smartly.
I think that's what it should do. But "smart" and "Big 12" haven't gone together like soup and sandwich.
If the Big 12 had been smart, it would still consist of the original 12 teams. But it wasn't, so it doesn't.
-
if the original Big 12 teams would have just resigned themselves to the fact they had TV markets that couldn't compete with the Big and the SEC, they could have taken a few fewer millions annually and preserved a solid athletically competitive conference
but, greed wouldn't allow this
-
if the original Big 12 teams would have just resigned themselves to the fact they had TV markets that couldn't compete with the Big and the SEC, they could have taken a few fewer millions annually and preserved a solid athletically competitive conference
but, greed wouldn't allow this
I'll probably go to my grave believing that unequal revenue-sharing was a big part of the cancer that killed the original Big 12. And, yes, Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, and Nebraska all supported it and benefitted from it.
The difference between how the Big 12 handled revenue-sharing and how the SEC handles it are part of why nobody wants to leave the SEC and why teams did want to leave the Big 12 when they got the chance. It wasn't just the money. It was the screw-your-neighbor mentality that the money represented.
The SEC wasn't the monster that it is now in the early '00s. There were several very good conferences and the Big 12 was one of them, maybe the best, with national championships in '97, '00, and '05, and appearances in the NC game in '01, '03, '04, and '09. But the Big 12 wasn't built for the long haul.
I'll bet that if the Big 12 gets new members and survives as an almost-P4 conference it will maintain unequal revenue sharing, setting the stage for further breakups down the road.
As for the complaints from oSu and Tech about the probable OU/UT departure, they have no grounds for complaint. Both of those schools were ready to go to the Pac back in 2010-ish, leaving the other Big 12 schools in the lurch.
-
I think to survive they might add "city teams", Memphis, Houston, Cincinnati, and .... someone else to get to 12.
They would often have the highest ranked champion aisde from the main four.
-
Cincinnati might not be interested
-
I don't see them surviving as a conference. The current TV contract allows ESPN/Fox to lower the payout if members depart. Looking at the AAC as the best G5 contact, it pays less than $7mil per school compared to about $20mil for the Big 12. $7 mil per year won't pay for the coaching staffs at most, if not all, Big 12 programs. So it looks grim for filling the Big 12 ranks with G5 schools.
-
I don't see them surviving as a conference. The current TV contract allows ESPN/Fox to lower the payout if members depart. Looking at the AAC as the best G5 contact, it pays less than $7mil per school compared to about $20mil for the Big 12. $7 mil per year won't pay for the coaching staffs at most, if not all, Big 12 programs. So it looks grim for filling the Big 12 ranks with G5 schools.
It might come down to who can raid whom--the rump Big 12 or the AAC.
-
I think to survive they might add "city teams", Memphis, Houston, Cincinnati, and .... someone else to get to 12.
They would often have the highest ranked champion aisde from the main four.
The Big 12 could have had Louisville and Cincinnati a decade ago. They would have been reasonably close neighbors for WVU. I bring that up because I advocated it at the time.
Cincinnati might not be interested
It might come down to who wins the war to raid the other, the Big 12 or the AAC.
Given the Big 12's history of screwing it up, my money would be on the AAC.
-
I think about OSU. Even with the stability of Gundy as coach, good teams in the last decade, and pretty nice facilities they can't fill a 60,000 seat stadium. Their biggest draw was the OU game and they tied it to season tickets only. That is on them.
-
Completely agree on the revenue sharing and the fact that A&M was one of the benefactor. Was this a carry-over from the Big 8 or something that was pushed when the Big 12 started in 1996?
I always thought the Big 12 as it was originally formed was a great conference.
-
great member programs - poor leadership
-
the okst prez made me lol today, it’s as if she hasn’t been paying attn
they will be okay though tboone left them well as well positioned as they could possibly be
guessing matt campbell is ready to bounce now.
-
Formal request for invitations sent and rec'd
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10008816-texas-oklahoma-request-to-join-sec-in-2025-sec-reportedly-to-discuss-thursday
-
With the news of Oklahoma and Texas each informing the Big 12 Conference of their departure on Monday, the future of the league is in serious jeopardy. It seems as if the remaining eight teams will disperse, though the possibility of adding teams remains. Those teams, according to ESPN's Heather Dinich, could be BYU, Cincinnati and Houston.
-
With the news of Oklahoma and Texas each informing the Big 12 Conference of their departure on Monday, the future of the league is in serious jeopardy. It seems as if the remaining eight teams will disperse, though the possibility of adding teams remains. Those teams, according to ESPN's Heather Dinich, could be BYU, Cincinnati and Houston.
Put me in the group that thinks there is every possibility the Big 12 will survive
They can add at least 2 teams fairly easily
The key is the TV deal they are able to reach
Yes there will be less money available but it would be better then just disbursing
-
if no programs are poached, they will still have it better than the G5 conferences
-
if no programs are poached, they will still have it better than the G5 conferences
There may be a team poached but unless 3 or 4 are poached they stand a chance of surviving
-
BYU, Cincy, Houston and Memphis. Seems pretty obvious.
Not sure who else would even be in contention. UCF? Boise? Probably too far.
South
- Texas Tech
- Baylor
- TCU
- Houston
- OSU2
- Memphis
North
- Kansas
- Kansas St
- Iowa St
- BYU
- Cincinnati
- W Virginia
-
BYU wont happen but Houston has a good chance
-
UCF has potential but they need to ditch the directional name. Lots of students, recent success, and it’s in Orlando. Who doesn’t want to go to Orlando ?
-
BYU wont happen but Houston has a good chance
I'd be surprised if the Big 12 'big timed' BYU this time around, given their current situation, but they have done it before. So it's certainly possible.
If so, then they'd almost have to add UCF as the twelfth team, directional or not.
-
Thinking in terms of how attractive this league would be to TV. In conference matchups have proven to draw about 800,000 viewers, not quite on a par with the AAC which averages around 1 million. Out of conference is a much different scenario. If the OU-OSU game continues, it has proven to draw 3.5 million, If ISU continues with Iowa, that could be a big one. When TCU played Ohio State, that was around 3 million.
Just spitballin' but what if they stay at 8 teams so they can schedule more OOC matchups? ESPN is going to owe Fox some compensation for the SEC poaching OU & Texas so they might help with some marquee scheduling?
If they stay at the original 8, they should also be able to claim maximum damages from OU & Texas for leaving.
-
I have to say that I don't like the trend toward mega-conferences stacked with giants, with the little teams kicked to the curb.
There's no charm in them. There are no rags-to-riches stories. There's no Bill Snyder making K-State into a winner. There's no Matt Campbell at Iowa State beating OU twice in four years. There's no Pat Fitzgerald making woebegone Northwestern into a dangerous program in the B1G West. Those programs would all be relegated to lower divisions. There's no Dabo Swinney turning mediocre Clemson into a monster. Clemson too would have been banished to a lesser league.
And there will be fewer brilliant seasons. No OU's 2000 season out of the blue. Nothing but a slog through an impossible schedule, maybe winning the conference with an 8-4 record, and staggering into the playoffs held together with first-aid tape and ace bandages. And far fewer showdowns of undefeated teams late in the season or in the post-season.
More like the NFL, in other words.
And I do not watch the NFL.
-
I have to say that I don't like the trend toward mega-conferences stacked with giants, with the little teams kicked to the curb.
There's no charm in them. There are no rags-to-riches stories. There's no Bill Snyder making K-State into a winner. There's no Matt Campbell at Iowa State beating OU twice in four years. There's no Pat Fitzgerald making woebegone Northwestern into a dangerous program in the B1G West. Those programs would all be relegated to lower divisions. There's no Dabo Swinney turning mediocre Clemson into a monster. Clemson too would have been banished to a lesser league.
And there will be fewer brilliant seasons. No OU's 2000 season out of the blue. Nothing but a slog through an impossible schedule, maybe winning the conference with an 8-4 record, and staggering into the playoffs held together with first-aid tape and ace bandages. And far fewer showdowns of undefeated teams late in the season or in the post-season.
More like the NFL, in other words.
And I do not watch the NFL.
I think you know I echo these sentiments, almost 100%.
So I really only see a few choices for myself.
1) Get angrier and more bitter as the days go by
2) Stop caring about the sport completely
3) Decide just to enjoy the games for what they are. Watch what happens inside the white lines, for 60 minutes, on a lovely Saturday afternoon in the Fall, without worrying about the national implications of every little thing. Enjoy the games as entertainment, which is all they were ever supposed to be, anyway.
I can tell you I've done a lot of choices 1 and 2 over the past couple of decades.
But doesn't #3 sound a lot more pleasant and enjoyable? I don't know if I'll be able to practice what I'm preaching here, but I think I've decided to try.
And there's some urgency here, because honestly, with all of the CTE and other health and liability issues mounting against the sport, I honestly don't think we have more than a couple decades of it left, anyway. Possibly a lot less time than that. So I'm going to try to make the choice, to enjoy what little time we have left.
-
Yeah, #3 has to be the desired course of action.
I don't know how much younger you are than I am (I sense 15-20 years), but, as I just posted to Mr. Nubzz on the Big Ten board, I'll probably retire from teaching (my second retirement counting the Army 22 years ago).
So it's too easy to get maudlin and see my twilight years as coinciding with the twilight years of college football. And it's hard to know how I would see all of this if I were in my 30s instead of my 60s. Maybe it would all seem wonderful.
Don't want to go down the road where all I see is things either falling apart or consolidating in destructive ways.
"Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?"
(It would be Mickey Mantle for me.)
-
I will be hitting the half-century mark on my birthday this year. A little ways behind you.
I sometimes wish I'd been born earlier so I could have enjoyed more it, but I feel like I at least got to see the end of the Golden Era of college football. I was aware of it during the 70s, and fully engaged in it during the 80s.
I feel like the tail end of the 80s is when things started changing so dramatically. The money got so much bigger, the scandals got bigger. Then in the late 80s/early 90s, ESPN assaulted us simultaneously with the 24/7 sports news cycle, and the intentional nationalization of the sport, so that they could more easily homogenize it and package it for mass consumption.
Then the money continued to get even bigger, television-revenue-focused B1G expansion and SEC expansion forced the demise of the SWC and the creation of the B12, and ever since then we've been in an endless cycle of further nationalization and increased homogenization of the sport.
Someday I think I might write a book about it all. But I'd only do it if I could force myself to present it as a celebration of the greatest sport the world has ever known. I
-
I have to say that I don't like the trend toward mega-conferences stacked with giants, with the little teams kicked to the curb.
There's no charm in them. There are no rags-to-riches stories. There's no Bill Snyder making K-State into a winner. There's no Matt Campbell at Iowa State beating OU twice in four years. There's no Pat Fitzgerald making woebegone Northwestern into a dangerous program in the B1G West. Those programs would all be relegated to lower divisions. There's no Dabo Swinney turning mediocre Clemson into a monster. Clemson too would have been banished to a lesser league.
And there will be fewer brilliant seasons. No OU's 2000 season out of the blue. Nothing but a slog through an impossible schedule, maybe winning the conference with an 8-4 record, and staggering into the playoffs held together with first-aid tape and ace bandages. And far fewer showdowns of undefeated teams late in the season or in the post-season.
More like the NFL, in other words.
And I do not watch the NFL.
I feel so much the same way. I often speak fondly of the original Big 12 because it's the only football conference I ever knew. I started in the fall of '96, went to the first A&M Big 12 game vs CU. We had some pretty good games there during my time and some developing interstate rivalries. KSU and A&M had a pretty good one, A&M and oSu, even had some good ones vs NU through the years. Not to mention the memorable A&M UT games. I just wish we could have been more competitive during the 00's, especially vs OU. OU was the dragon we never could slay, and even when we did we somehow found ourselves on the wrong end of the stick like in 2010 when we whipped them on the field and tied them in the conference but they received the nod to the CCG. I can only imagine how Texas felt having been in the same position many times.
Now at only 10 years in the SEC I feel like we are just now getting our feet under us, maybe even challenge Bama this year, having a good start to an interstate rivalry revival with LSU winning 2/3 (wasn't '19 a game for the ages!). Now the conference changes again, different divisions/schedules. Much is the same now as it was in the Big 12 with Ole Miss and MSU being our stand in for oSu and KSU. Bama will probably not be on the schedule any more every year, and possibly we won't play them but twice a decade.
-
I'm sure there was skullduggery going on in the 60's and 70's but no one cared. If you earned a degree from your University, you were all but assured to out earn a professional football player. Colleges were wanting to be selected for "the football game" singular on TV every week.
Clearly, things have changed.
I know "the portal" kind of altered this, but the kids still really to care about their team. That's what differentiates it from the NFL to me (I just can't get past the idea that these are contractors working under their present assignment). That illusion will likely become harder and harder to project, but I'll try to enjoy it while it lasts.
-
I'm sure there was skullduggery going on in the 60's and 70's but no one cared. If you earned a degree from your University, you were all but assured to out earn a professional football player. Colleges were wanting to be selected for "the football game" singular on TV every week.
Clearly, things have changed.
I know "the portal" kind of altered this, but the kids still really to care about their team. That's what differentiates it from the NFL to me (I just can't get past the idea that these are contractors working under their present assignment). That illusion will likely become harder and harder to project, but I'll try to enjoy it while it lasts.
Indeed, all true I'd say.
Good to see you droog. Burny and I were just texting how we think Jon would have enjoyed lampooning all of the current goings-on in college football.
-
Apparently on some of the B12 message boards, the leftover schools are now being referred to as the "Irate Eight."
Or, IR8 for short.
That's kinda funny.
-
Anyway, there's a thread on surlyhorns where posters are trying to determine the value of some of the Irate 8 to other conferences, based on viewership numbers. I found this kind of interesting.
The top rated B12 games last year in viewership, that didn't involve Texas or OU, were the following:
ISU-OkState: 2.81M
KSU-TCU: 2.36M
TT-OkState: 2.12M
ISU-KSU: 1.98M
OkState-KSU: 1.92M
TT-ISU: 1.38M
Those would have ranked 3rd, 5th, 7th, 8th,9th, and 10th in the PAC, last year.
Only Oregon-USC (3.85M) and USC-UCLA (3.24M) came in above ISU-OkState.
So, I'm not so sure that the PAC can't still find some value there. Several B12 teams are outdrawing all but the very top of the PAC for TV ratings.
-
Anyway, there's a thread on surlyhorns where posters are trying to determine the value of some of the Irate 8 to other conferences, based on viewership numbers. I found this kind of interesting.
The top rated B12 games last year in viewership, that didn't involve Texas or OU, were the following:
ISU-OkState: 2.81M
KSU-TCU: 2.36M
TT-OkState: 2.12M
ISU-KSU: 1.98M
OkState-KSU: 1.92M
TT-ISU: 1.38M
Those would have ranked 3rd, 5th, 7th, 8th,9th, and 10th in the PAC, last year.
Only Oregon-USC (3.85M) and USC-UCLA (3.24M) came in above ISU-OkState.
So, I'm not so sure that the PAC can't still find some value there. Several B12 teams are outdrawing all but the very top of the PAC for TV ratings.
Holy Crap! That's stunning.
-
That is a good list, utee. Glaring omissions are Baylor & Kansas but they are also top BB schools.
-
That is a good list, utee. Glaring omissions are Baylor & Kansas but they are also top BB schools.
The Kansas viewership numbers were shockingly low. Like, I knew they'd be at the bottom, and even I was surprised how bad they were. There's a table out there on surlyhorns with all of the games' viewership numbers (also what network and timeslot they were in). I'll see if I can copy and re-post over here.
Ah just found it.
(https://i.imgur.com/jR6qmbX.png)
-
I was about to point out how low TCU viewership was but TTU is just as bad.
I wonder how TTU would do if they were winning like during the Leach era.
-
Goddamn it’s like days of our lives around here.
https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-football/report-big-12-sent-cease-and-desist-letter-to-espn/amp/
-
Goddamn it’s like days of our lives around here.
https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-football/report-big-12-sent-cease-and-desist-letter-to-espn/amp/
This isn't the only thing, Bowlsby is in tell-all mode with the media and is going scorched-earth. I have no doubt that everything he says is true, but going public with it, is a pretty odd decision. For so many reasons.
That's the kind of information you hold close and use strategically behind the scenes.
Going public, accusing your primary TV partner of all of this, not only will harm your current members in their inevitable future contract negotiation, but will also repel potential replacement schools. Who the heck wants to go to a conference with THIS kind of leadership?
-
This isn't the only thing, Bowlsby is in tell-all mode with the media and is going scorched-earth. I have no doubt that everything he says is true, but going public with it, is a pretty odd decision. For so many reasons.
That's the kind of information you hold close and use strategically behind the scenes.
Going public, accusing your primary TV partner of all of this, not only will harm your current members in their inevitable future contract negotiation, but will also repel potential replacement schools. Who the heck wants to go to a conference with THIS kind of leadership?
Somewhat like Beebe in the first Big 12 crisis.
But the Big 12, like the old Big 8, has a weak commissioner by design.
-
Somewhat like Beebe in the first Big 12 crisis.
But the Big 12, like the old Big 8, has a weak commissioner by design.
I'm certain that at times Texas has relished filling the power void in B12 leadership.
But I'll say that this is one of the areas where I'm really looking forward to Texas joining the SEC-- a large, well-established league with solid, powerful member institutions and good Leadership. So that Texas won't HAVE to ever step in and fill a power void.
It's a pretty huge relief, honestly. I didn't think I'd feel that, if/when Texas ever left the B12. But it's a pretty overwhelming sense of relief I'm experiencing right now.
-
I'm certain that at times Texas has relished filling the power void in B12 leadership.
But I'll say that this is one of the areas where I'm really looking forward to Texas joining the SEC-- a large, well-established league with solid, powerful member institutions and good Leadership. So that Texas won't HAVE to ever step in and fill a power void.
It's a pretty huge relief, honestly. I didn't think I'd feel that, if/when Texas ever left the B12. But it's a pretty overwhelming sense of relief I'm experiencing right now.
I'd guess that the SWC had a weak commissioner too, at the behest of Texas and Texas A&M.
And, as I said, the old Big 8 definitely had the same, and I'm sure that that was with the blessings of OU and Nebraska.
-
I'm certain that at times Texas has relished filling the power void in B12 leadership.
But I'll say that this is one of the areas where I'm really looking forward to Texas joining the SEC-- a large, well-established league with solid, powerful member institutions and good Leadership. So that Texas won't HAVE to ever step in and fill a power void.
It's a pretty huge relief, honestly. I didn't think I'd feel that, if/when Texas ever left the B12. But it's a pretty overwhelming sense of relief I'm experiencing right now.
yep I hate it when I have to fill a power void
but then my wife wakes up and that need goes away
-
I'd guess that the SWC had a weak commissioner too, at the behest of Texas and Texas A&M.
And, as I said, the old Big 8 definitely had the same, and I'm sure that that was with the blessings of OU and Nebraska.
Honestly, I don't think the relative strength of a commissioner mattered all that much, until the 90s came around, and the TV deals went into the scores of millions of dollars.
Before that, all the commissioner really had to do was maybe referee squabbles among the member institutions over some pretty minor issues, compared to what we see nowadays.
-
Sometimes I wonder what would happen if a league ditched Disney and all the other sports networks and skipped most of the middle men and created their own streaming network. With the advancement of technology I think each venue could have their own production booth and crew, sideline reporters, etc. The league could have a main broad cast crew to handle the big games and a couple of 2nd teamers to handle the lesser games. For the least desirable games let each school handle the broadcast duties with in-house resources. A&M did something similar vs Tx State during the Franchione days when we shifted a game to mid-week due to a hurricane threat.
Get the network it’s own App, make it available to all the major platforms such as Roku and Firestick. Be smart about the competing times and games. Set up the advertising, which would probably be the biggest hurdle, and go. You could even try to get somebody like Netflix or Amazon to bid some games a la TNF. Heck for that matter cut some deals with non network tv partners and put the game over air channels.
It could maybe work if someone took the risk and initiative and pioneered it. You’d cut out the middleman, be in charge of all the aspects of broadcasting both times and schedules and not have to compete with other conferences for the best spots.
Worth a shot.
-
OK. In this article from CBS (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/big-12-commissioner-alleges-espn-conspired-with-sec-american-to-lure-teams-from-conference/), ESPN is accused of telling the AAC they would get future TV proceedes if they added 3-5 Big 12 members. Pretty strong accusation.
-
OK. In this article from CBS (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/big-12-commissioner-alleges-espn-conspired-with-sec-american-to-lure-teams-from-conference/), ESPN is accused of telling the AAC they would get future TV proceedes if they added 3-5 Big 12 members. Pretty strong accusation.
I have no doubt something like this happened.
I also have no doubt that it's going to be difficult to prove.
I also have no doubt that if Bowlsby continues this, then he'll absolutely kill the B12 because he'll only get to deal with one potential media partner, which means he will have sacrificed any shred of leverage or bargaining power he might have had.
In short, I think he's gone off the deep end, and the B12 member institutions would be wise to fire him immediately, before he can do any further damage.
-
Sometimes I wonder what would happen if a league ditched Disney and all the other sports networks and skipped most of the middle men and created their own streaming network. With the advancement of technology I think each venue could have their own production booth and crew, sideline reporters, etc. The league could have a main broad cast crew to handle the big games and a couple of 2nd teamers to handle the lesser games. For the least desirable games let each school handle the broadcast duties with in-house resources. A&M did something similar vs Tx State during the Franchione days when we shifted a game to mid-week due to a hurricane threat.
Get the network it’s own App, make it available to all the major platforms such as Roku and Firestick. Be smart about the competing times and games. Set up the advertising, which would probably be the biggest hurdle, and go. You could even try to get somebody like Netflix or Amazon to bid some games a la TNF. Heck for that matter cut some deals with non network tv partners and put the game over air channels.
It could maybe work if someone took the risk and initiative and pioneered it. You’d cut out the middleman, be in charge of all the aspects of broadcasting both times and schedules and not have to compete with other conferences for the best spots.
Worth a shot.
I think there are still so many old folks that rely on the ease and simplicity of cable, that the timing still isn't quite right for something like this. Probably still ten years out at the earliest. I think of my parents in their 80s, and they're pretty technologically savvy but I just don't think they could navigate the streaming options. Nor would they want to. They have money and they value simplicity. Also, the streaming is still pretty buggy and glitchy compared to cable, and I don't think they'd be willing to tolerate that.
In another decade though, sure.
-
I get what you’re saying which is why I suggested letting some of the independent type broadcast networks or any one of a number of struggling cable networks carry it. I get that they need to get paid so you’d have to give up some revenue from advertisers etc but in turn you’d reach that final OASIW ( old and set in ways ) population.
Streaming is great in my little town of 3,000 where the Aggie owned communications company put in fiber a few years ago. I’ve been exclusively streaming YouTube tv for about 3 years.
-
Covid 19 put a lot of people in touch with streaming. My church has all its meetings over Zoom. The Lutheran Church on the corner by my house live streams over Facebook. My HOA was suing a resident and the court hearings were over Zoom. A lot of old people have had to learn stuff so it isn't too difficult. Still, putting out a streaming network for a nationwide sport will be tough but if megaconferences start ruling they could do it.
One of my favorite sports is disc golf. It was streaming only and free. Then just recently, they cut a deal to have it on ESPN+.
To get ESPN, you still have to get a cable like bundle but at least there are no contracts. I've tried nearly all the services and YouTube tv suited me best. We don't watch much TV outside of football season so I turn it off 6-7 months per year. I'm going to try Vidgo next month to see how it is. It is only $50 / mo but it has no DVR which I don't use anyway.
-
I will be hitting the half-century mark on my birthday this year. A little ways behind you.
I sometimes wish I'd been born earlier so I could have enjoyed more it, but I feel like I at least got to see the end of the Golden Era of college football. I was aware of it during the 70s, and fully engaged in it during the 80s.
I feel like the tail end of the 80s is when things started changing so dramatically. The money got so much bigger, the scandals got bigger. Then in the late 80s/early 90s, ESPN assaulted us simultaneously with the 24/7 sports news cycle, and the intentional nationalization of the sport, so that they could more easily homogenize it and package it for mass consumption.
Then the money continued to get even bigger, television-revenue-focused B1G expansion and SEC expansion forced the demise of the SWC and the creation of the B12, and ever since then we've been in an endless cycle of further nationalization and increased homogenization of the sport.
Someday I think I might write a book about it all. But I'd only do it if I could force myself to present it as a celebration of the greatest sport the world has ever known. I
I'll hit 67 on my next, so, yeah, 15-20 years ahead of you was a good guess.
-
It would be a statement you keep close to the vest for future use - if you thought you had a future.
This is pounding on the podium. It makes it look like you're doing something when there's nothing to be done. The Big 12 didn't necessarily want to have all its buying power tied up in one customer, but that's the way it worked out. When needs changed, that customer moved on. Happens every day.
There's only a small difference between ESPN telling the AAC that adding some teams would likely increase their take by $<x> dollars, and the AAC asking ESPN for that information. Right now, every conference commissioner is doing those exact same calculations. It's not even worth mentioning that these discussions are private between all parties.
I wish it weren't this way, as has been discussed. However, it's irrefutable that the top players regard the SEC as the league most closely aligned with the NFL. Texas could live without the extra cash, but they have to do something about the talent exodus. Even if Texas goes back to winning double digit games, those kids will still favor SEC programs because that's where draft day gets their names.
-
He went to CBS with the scoop. I wonder if he's trying to cut a deal with them now that ESPN has bought their SEC rights?
-
CBS is not renewing with the SEC, I'm not sure they want to be a player in college football broadcasting, going forward. And NBC is clearly fine just having ND.
I think the only games in town, are now Fox and Disney.
Or rather, if you're the B12 and you've just effectively accused your boss of collusion and tortious interference and threatened to sue him, well then the only game in town is Fox.
-
Bowlsby has lost his mind. Now doubling down with DMN
https://twitter.com/ChuckCarltonDMN/status/ (https://twitter.com/ChuckCarltonDMN/status/1420514316869111815)
“There were incentives discussed for that conference to go and take those members. So that’s as clear a tortious interference with our business as you can possibly have." (more) (https://twitter.com/ChuckCarltonDMN/status/1420514316869111815)
Also accusing OU and Texas of violations
More Bowlsby on Texas-OU to the SEC: "They’ve certainly violated our by-laws in other ways by not notifying us that they were having conversations with other conferences. They’ve done everything as deceptive as they possibly could.”
-
The only way these discussions ever happen, is through back-channels and in secret.
Texas and OU will respond "Our athletic department never discussed anything with the SEC. We let you know officially, as soon as we officially decided to apply for admittance into the SEC. All bylaws were followed."
And the attorneys that worked the back-channels on behalf of Texas and OU, are bound by attorney-client priveledge.
-
"Tortious Interference" is something that gets claimed when someone does something you wish they didn't do. The claims that get litigated are few. The ones that succeed are rarer still.
The contract spells out a remedy for not sticking around in the conference. Texas and OU would be willing to honor that if need be. The greater likelihood is that the contract will simply lose one of its parties (the Big 12) and be unenforceable. The even greater likelihood is, rather than risk that, the Big 12 will accept some smaller settlement as its members make their way elsewhere.
It isn't devious or underhanded. When you don't control your own destiny, you have to work with what's available. The Big 12 was never going to be a respected football conference no matter how many UH's or UCF's were enticed to join. Storied, yes. Exciting, sometimes. But never respected.
-
Yeah, it is just blowing off steam but in a way too public manner. He has no end game here. As others have said, if he was seriously taking legal action, he wouldn't be mouthing off. Instead he is doing real harm to the conference and to his credibility.
Droog is right, the Big 12 was never going to be respected and there was never going to be any advantageous expansion. I was content with that. We had a decent contract, member schools were getting better coaching and facilities, we were getting good bowls, the Sooners were having success so I was happy to just enjoy the football and go along for the ride.
-
Yeah, it is just blowing off steam but in a way too public manner. He has no end game here. As others have said, if he was seriously taking legal action, he wouldn't be mouthing off. Instead he is doing real harm to the conference and to his credibility.
Droog is right, the Big 12 was never going to be respected and there was never going to be any advantageous expansion. I was content with that. We had a decent contract, member schools were getting better coaching and facilities, we were getting good bowls, the Sooners were having success so I was happy to just enjoy the football and go along for the ride.
It seems clear now that whenever the next round of realignment came up--and it was going to come up--the Big 12 was not going to do well. It was going to be the poachee rather than the poacher.
It has just happened 2-3 years earlier than expected.
As has been noted, the Big 12 has produced some exciting football and some great players. It has several good programs. But it only has two helmet programs. And, except for Texas, it has low-population states that don't add all that many TV viewers.
It has fewer face cards and fewer chips than the big-spenders at the poker table.
Totally off topic, but the poker analogy reminds me of this magazine cover from 1909, during the naval arms race that preceded World War I.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/Naval-race-1909.jpg)
-
(https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2021/07/29/sec-votes-admit-texas-and-oklahoma-expand-16-teams/5414746001/)
SEC votes to admit OU and Texas. (https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2021/07/29/sec-votes-admit-texas-and-oklahoma-expand-16-teams/5414746001/)
-
I guess it's official.
What a brave new world...
-
Yep. Portal, NIL, new conference. Next should be expanded scholarship limits. All the extra games will require more bodies.
-
They did a good job keeping this under wraps, and then finalizing it in a hurry, though the deal was obviously done a few weeks back. July 1, 2025.
We have a few seasons before it happens. The game is changing. In another decade they could be playing flag football.
-
whether you love the Horns and OU or you hate them if you are a SEC fan and this doesnt get you excited nothing will
-
the only upshot is that once the super leagues are fully formed scheduling will get better
but it'll be more like the pros w/ a bloated playoff
more homogenous, less charm.
blech.
w/ a relative dearth of pay games in the future a bunch of these 1aa programs that have no biz in d1 will probably close shop or move back down once the dust settles.
-
They did a good job keeping this under wraps, and then finalizing it in a hurry, though the deal was obviously done a few weeks back. July 1, 2025.
We have a few seasons before it happens. The game is changing. In another decade they could be playing flag football.
It'll be much sooner than 2025. They just have to say that to keep the lawyers off their backs.
I'll be surprised if it's not Fall 2022. Every day spent as a lame duck is a day more of risk that you don't want to have to manage.
-
Just watched the OU BOR meeting (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qq3KA-3ugM8). It took 2hr and 20 minutes :34:. They accepted the invitation unanimously in the last 10 minutes or so. I haven't seen President Harroz speak before and I have to say he is a very impressive speaker. He laid out a timeline with all the changes to CFB, explained why & when decided to move, why Texas not OSU, etc.
He did say OU intended to keep the Bedlam rivalry in all sports. Throughout the meeting everyone was careful to say OU was leaving in 2025. ;)
-
Just watched the OU BOR meeting (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qq3KA-3ugM8). It took 2hr and 20 minutes :34:. They accepted the invitation unanimously in the last 10 minutes or so. I haven't seen President Harroz speak before and I have to say he is a very impressive speaker. He laid out a timeline with all the changes to CFB, explained why & when decided to move, why Texas not OSU, etc.
He did say OU intended to keep the Bedlam rivalry in all sports. Throughout the meeting everyone was careful to say OU was leaving in 2025. ;)
Yup. They'll keep saying that... until they don't. :)
It's been fascinating over the past week, watching how things unfolded so quickly, and knowing all of the massive amount of work and time that's been put into this over the past year or more, to get to this point. This was an executive-level quick-strike carried about by teams of seasoned pros. It's shocking that nothing leaked until just last week.
-
Yeah, both Joe H & Joe C said they didn't intend for the announcement to come so soon and that they "would have made calls" to the commissioner and other ADs if it hadn't been leaked. (we really need an eye roll emoji)
One point they made was that the Big 12 was last in line when new media contracts were made and that was significant because prime TV slots were taken by other conferences and teams.
-
Yeah, both Joe H & Joe C said they didn't intend for the announcement to come so soon and that they "would have made calls" to the commissioner and other ADs if it hadn't been leaked. (we really need an eye roll emoji)
One point they made was that the Big 12 was last in line when new media contracts were made and that was significant because prime TV slots were taken by other conferences and teams.
I still think all of the hubbub over the 11 AM timeslots is sort of weird.
I mean, I disllike early kickoffs as much as the next guy, but that's the NATIONAL timeslot for both ABC and Fox, and it's been that way for the past two decades. The B12 wasn't intentionally trying to screw over OU, it's just that the Sooners have been the best team in the league for the past decade, so they're the natural pick for the networks' premier broadcasting timeslot.
-
the hubbub was a smoke screen to kickoff the move to the SEC SEC SEC
wondering if I'll hear the SEC SEC SEC chant in Norman around 1pm central in Norman on Sept. 18th
-
OK I dont care who you are this is funny
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcU3_Cok3CI
-
Well, I'm not so sure it's funny to ag fans...
-
Well, I'm not so sure it's funny to ag fans...
which makes it even funnier
-
The Big12 conference leadership has until 2025 to add some teams. Yes, it could happen faster if Texas and Oklahoma end up buying their way out. What is the buyout? $74 million each? That would be quite the cash windfall for the remaining Big12. The Big12 will remain a Power 5 so I'm not seeing too much of a downside either way.
-
The Big12 conference leadership has until 2025 to add some teams. Yes, it could happen faster if Texas and Oklahoma end up buying their way out. What is the buyout? $74 million each? That would be quite the cash windfall for the remaining Big12. The Big12 will remain a Power 5 so I'm not seeing too much of a downside either way.
There's pretty much zero chance that Texas and OU will stay in the B12 until 2025 and there's also pretty much zero chance Texas and OU will pay anywhere close to the full buyout.
-
OU and Texas will pay $30.6 million each to leave the Big 12 early.
You heard it here first!
-
$1
Price is right rules.
-
Ha!
-
So I really only see a few choices for myself.
1) Get angrier and more bitter as the days go by
2) Stop caring about the sport completely
3) Decide just to enjoy the games for what they are. Watch what happens inside the white lines, for 60 minutes, on a lovely Saturday afternoon in the Fall, without worrying about the national implications of every little thing. Enjoy the games as entertainment, which is all they were ever supposed to be, anyway.
I can tell you I've done a lot of choices 1 and 2 over the past couple of decades.
But doesn't #3 sound a lot more pleasant and enjoyable?
I really wanna encourage you not to undersell #1 and #2.
But, my dad says I was an old fart starting in the crib, so take that into account.
-
I have to say that I don't like the trend toward mega-conferences stacked with giants, with the little teams kicked to the curb.
There's no charm in them. There are no rags-to-riches stories. There's no Bill Snyder making K-State into a winner. There's no Matt Campbell at Iowa State beating OU twice in four years. There's no Pat Fitzgerald making woebegone Northwestern into a dangerous program in the B1G West. Those programs would all be relegated to lower divisions. There's no Dabo Swinney turning mediocre Clemson into a monster. Clemson too would have been banished to a lesser league.
And there will be fewer brilliant seasons. No OU's 2000 season out of the blue. Nothing but a slog through an impossible schedule, maybe winning the conference with an 8-4 record, and staggering into the playoffs held together with first-aid tape and ace bandages. And far fewer showdowns of undefeated teams late in the season or in the post-season.
More like the NFL, in other words.
And I do not watch the NFL.
I'm with you, but I haven't been as attached to the sport as I used to be in several years now, so that makes it a little easier to roll with.
I've never liked the NFL-ization of the sport, although it's been inevitable for a while now. I don't object to the idea of a super-league, per se. Adding UT and OU will be neat, in a way, and there's no shortage of our own fanbase who've always thought LSU and Texas should be playing all the time. (I have no idea why. They've can never offer an explanation other than "neighbors.") What I don't like is most of the realignment scenarios I've seen kick Alabama and Auburn away from us on an annual basis, and that I do mind. I'm not not-interested in watching my favorite team play UT and OU. But not at the expense of some of our oldest foes and participants in many of our best games.
Honestly, as much glorious history as the Mississippi schools might be lacking and whatever their outlook for the future is, I don't want to lose those annual games either. In some scenarios I've seen we wouldn't have to. But there's a lot of options where that would happen, not to mention that UT and OU are just the first rumbling of an earthquake that's going to leave the landscape drastically altered. I don't even want to lose Florida, and that only became a thing in the '92 expansion. But, I was only 13 then, so that's the majority of my football awareness, and even though the schools themselves don't seem to care about the contrived rivalry, there are a ton of fans on both sides who love that game, myself included.
I hope somebody finds a way to preserve the games people care about. I saw some really good models for the SEC when A&M and Missouri came that preserved all rivalries, made sure the schools all played each other far more often than we see cross-division teams now, but didn't have divisions. Obviously something that made so much sense was doomed. I suspect we'll wind up in pods and teams like LSU and UGA will be conference-mates in name only. We pretty much already are now anyway.
Meh.
-
I'm with you, but I haven't been as attached to the sport as I used to be in several years now, so that makes it a little easier to roll with.
I've never liked the NFL-ization of the sport, although it's been inevitable for a while now. I don't object to the idea of a super-league, per se. Adding UT and OU will be neat, in a way, and there's no shortage of our own fanbase who've always thought LSU and Texas should be playing all the time. (I have no idea why. They've can never offer an explanation other than "neighbors.") What I don't like is most of the realignment scenarios I've seen kick Alabama and Auburn away from us on an annual basis, and that I do mind. I'm not not-interested in watching my favorite team play UT and OU. But not at the expense of some of our oldest foes and participants in many of our best games.
Honestly, as much glorious history as the Mississippi schools might be lacking and whatever their outlook for the future is, I don't want to lose those annual games either. In some scenarios I've seen we wouldn't have to. But there's a lot of options where that would happen, not to mention that UT and OU are just the first rumbling of an earthquake that's going to leave the landscape drastically altered. I don't even want to lose Florida, and that only became a thing in the '92 expansion. But, I was only 13 then, so that's the majority of my football awareness, and even though the schools themselves don't seem to care about the contrived rivalry, there are a ton of fans on both sides who love that game, myself included.
I hope somebody finds a way to preserve the games people care about. I saw some really good models for the SEC when A&M and Missouri came that preserved all rivalries, made sure the schools all played each other far more often than we see cross-division teams now, but didn't have divisions. Obviously something that made so much sense was doomed. I suspect we'll wind up in pods and teams like LSU and UGA will be conference-mates in name only. We pretty much already are now anyway.
Meh.
Hey MDT!
I hear ya, but for decades before the 90s the SEC was really just a loose confederation anyway. As I recall, it was common for your LSU Tigers only to play 5 or 6 SEC opponents in a season, even when the conference had 10 teams.
But still, I totally get it why you'd want to continue playing Alabama, Florida, Auburn, and the Miss schools. I honestly don't see ANY schedule where you can play ALL of them every single year, and that's a genuine shame.
-
Hey, MDT! I was hoping you would show up. My handle used to be SoonerGaloot or CrimsonGaloot, I couldn't remember. Anyhow, when you get to be a REALLY old fart, the angry stuff is more trouble than it is worth. These days I'm just happy to have football games and I hope COVID doesn't mess up this season.
I liked OU being in the Big 12, I like OU going to the SEC, I would have been cool with OU going to the B1G. Really didn't matter that much, there will be some great games.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/AxB0ukg.png)
-
Hey, MDT! I was hoping you would show up. My handle used to be SoonerGaloot or CrimsonGaloot, I couldn't remember. Anyhow, when you get to be a REALLY old fart, the angry stuff is more trouble than it is worth. These days I'm just happy to have football games and I hope COVID doesn't mess up this season.
I liked OU being in the Big 12, I like OU going to the SEC, I would have been cool with OU going to the B1G. Really didn't matter that much, there will be some great games.
No wonder I've liked your posts!
Why did you change your moniker?
-
Hey MDT!
I hear ya, but for decades before the 90s the SEC was really just a loose confederation anyway. As I recall, it was common for your LSU Tigers only to play 5 or 6 SEC opponents in a season, even when the conference had 10 teams.
But still, I totally get it why you'd want to continue playing Alabama, Florida, Auburn, and the Miss schools. I honestly don't see ANY schedule where you can play ALL of them every single year, and that's a genuine shame.
You are correct, and some of this falls under the header of "you can't please everybody." There's also the age/timeframe factor, which is a subset of the above, that affects, what people care about.
To that end, stuff like this trips me up for a couple reasons. I don't have a lot of memories of when the conference was the loose confederation. It's true that LSU played A&M in those days far more than what became the SEC East and there are many fans who always lamented the loss of that rivalry. I don't really remember those days. By the time I really got into football, the LSU/A&M game was on its last legs, we sucked really bad, and losing to A&M every year didn't mean much more to me than losing to everybody else every year. Also in the loose affiliation, what I do remember from earlier childhood was preserved anyway, because the half dozen teams we did play were consistently teams that wound up in the SEC West with us. I can't speak for other schools, but in LSU's case, the schools we avoided back then were teams that wound up in the east. There's a ~20 year period somewhere that LSU and Tennessee didn't ever play, while still claiming to be in a conference together. But we most always had the Alabama and Mississippi schools. And A&M for a long time, of course.
Hey CG, good to see you. I'm trying to remember, are you the guy I used to bother when I first set up Linux on my PC several years ago? All you Sooners look alike to me.
-
I'm with you, but I haven't been as attached to the sport as I used to be in several years now, so that makes it a little easier to roll with.
I've never liked the NFL-ization of the sport, although it's been inevitable for a while now. I don't object to the idea of a super-league, per se. Adding UT and OU will be neat, in a way, and there's no shortage of our own fanbase who've always thought LSU and Texas should be playing all the time. (I have no idea why. They've can never offer an explanation other than "neighbors.") What I don't like is most of the realignment scenarios I've seen kick Alabama and Auburn away from us on an annual basis, and that I do mind. I'm not not-interested in watching my favorite team play UT and OU. But not at the expense of some of our oldest foes and participants in many of our best games.
Honestly, as much glorious history as the Mississippi schools might be lacking and whatever their outlook for the future is, I don't want to lose those annual games either. In some scenarios I've seen we wouldn't have to. But there's a lot of options where that would happen, not to mention that UT and OU are just the first rumbling of an earthquake that's going to leave the landscape drastically altered. I don't even want to lose Florida, and that only became a thing in the '92 expansion. But, I was only 13 then, so that's the majority of my football awareness, and even though the schools themselves don't seem to care about the contrived rivalry, there are a ton of fans on both sides who love that game, myself included.
I hope somebody finds a way to preserve the games people care about. I saw some really good models for the SEC when A&M and Missouri came that preserved all rivalries, made sure the schools all played each other far more often than we see cross-division teams now, but didn't have divisions. Obviously something that made so much sense was doomed. I suspect we'll wind up in pods and teams like LSU and UGA will be conference-mates in name only. We pretty much already are now anyway.
Meh.
MDT:
I wasn't paying attention when the Big 12 was forming, other than to know that OU was really bad at the time. But when I got out of the Army in 1999 and realized that OU and Nebraska were not playing an annual game anymore, I was downhearted.
Back on the old CFN board, I had many "discussions" with Utee about whether OU should have insisted on maintaining that annual rivalry, and on why it might not have done so, how other programs in the conference might have responded, whether there should have been designated rivalries for all the other teams, etc. I think that it was one of many factors that caused Nebraska to look for a new home.
All that said, I hope that the SEC teams will not insist on maintaining every single annual rivalry (it seems like Bama has about 13 of them) to the point where the scheduling is all buggered up. A 9-game schedule with 3 against your podmates, then two each from each of the other three pods would be cleanest and provide the most "conference" feel with home-and-homes against every team in the other pods over the course of four years. But it won't maintain annual traditional rivalries.
Alas, we don't get to eat our cake and have it too.
-
MDT:
I wasn't paying attention when the Big 12 was forming, other than to know that OU was really bad at the time. But when I got out of the Army in 1999 and realized that OU and Nebraska were not playing an annual game anymore, I was downhearted.
Back on the old CFN board, I had many "discussions" with Utee about whether OU should have insisted on maintaining that annual rivalry, and on why it might not have done so, how other programs in the conference might have responded, whether there should have been designated rivalries for all the other teams, etc. I think that it was one of many factors that caused Nebraska to look for a new home.
All that said, I hope that the SEC teams will not insist on maintaining every single annual rivalry (it seems like Bama has about 13 of them) to the point where the scheduling is all buggered up. A 9-game schedule with 3 against your podmates, then two each from each of the other three pods would be cleanest and provide the most "conference" feel with home-and-homes against every team in the other pods over the course of four years. But it won't maintain annual traditional rivalries.
Alas, we don't get to eat our cake and have it too.
Hey, for what it's worth on those particular "discussions" I actually always believed that the B12 should have done everything it could to preserve that as an annual rivalry. If it meant setting up some sort of weird, faux X-div perma-rivals for everyone else, so be it. At the time, it was suggested that Colorado would have been a logical X-div perma-rival for Texas, and I would have been fine with that, if it meant saving NU-OU as an annual game.
One of you Sooners, either you or Cousin Fred or maybe someone we've lost to time, seemed to suggest that OU was partly to blame for that, by not really wanting to play that juggernaut mid 90s Husker team every year, and seeing the divisions as a way out of that. I have no idea whether or not there was ever any truth to that. But I did always like the NU-OU game, watched it whenever I could (back in those days TV wasn't as easily guaranteed), and was sorry to see it go, regardless of how or why it happened.
-
DeTiger sighting
still got that SEC speed or, too old?
-
C-Dubb and I now have SEC speed too, don't ya know?
-
MDT & CW, when I signed back in I couldn't remember what my old handle was. I knew it was something Galoot. I don't do much woodworking anymore since we downsized and was into dual sport motorcycles (a single cylinder is a "thumper") when I set up a new account.
MDT, are you still using Linux? I am, sorta. I use chromebooks now that they can run Linux and android apps. Now that I'm retired I don't have to run any Windows centric software. My wife is still clinging to Win10 but is ready for a chromebook or chromebox for her next one.
Utee, it was my understanding that OU didn't want to continue the NU rivalry as it would make their schedule the hardest in the conference every year and they really couldn't handle it back then.
-
Lots of people don’t realize or know that A&M and LSU have had a rivalry that goes way back before our SEC days. In fact it seems like it’s one of the few where it’s not heavily slanted against us. LSU still leads but by like 10 games despite the fact that a ridiculous amount of games were played in BR. Apparently we played them in BR like 10 straight years. I have no idea why.
Many Aggies were upset that we lost the annual game in the mid-90’s as a result of the SEC expanding. There was also the matter that our AD claims they owed us money from those cancelled games. We were kicking their butt at the time and most people felt they wanted to end the series based on that.
We haven’t won a lot during our sec days but there were some great games with some controversial endings. 2 out of the last 3 and were in business. Looking forward to making it 3 out of 4.
-
I went to the TAMU-LSU game in College Station in 1989. I was dating an aggie girl and she invited me up for the weekend. Ags won and we had a very good time that night. The night before, too...
-
Hey, for what it's worth on those particular "discussions" I actually always believed that the B12 should have done everything it could to preserve that as an annual rivalry. If it meant setting up some sort of weird, faux X-div perma-rivals for everyone else, so be it. At the time, it was suggested that Colorado would have been a logical X-div perma-rival for Texas, and I would have been fine with that, if it meant saving NU-OU as an annual game.
One of you Sooners, either you or Cousin Fred or maybe someone we've lost to time, seemed to suggest that OU was partly to blame for that, by not really wanting to play that juggernaut mid 90s Husker team every year, and seeing the divisions as a way out of that. I have no idea whether or not there was ever any truth to that. But I did always like the NU-OU game, watched it whenever I could (back in those days TV wasn't as easily guaranteed), and was sorry to see it go, regardless of how or why it happened.
You know what? It was Hooky (may he rest in peace) who was always skeptical about that. Somehow I confused you guys.
I'll channel MDT: All you Horns look alike to me.
It was I who said that OU didn't press for the annual game because the Sooners were getting their asses kicked by Nebraska at the time. "Short-sighted" is the best spin I can put on that. But OU's athletic department at the time was in disarray, as the successive hires of Howard Schnellenberger and John Blake soon demonstrated.
-
Yeah, Slick was really annoyed by the idea of faux x-division perm-rivals. To me, it was an acceptable solution if it helped preserve some college football tradition.
-
And, I think there were some other old B8ers that didn't love the idea of the faux x-div perma-rivals either. Maybe the K-State guys like Skicat and Wildcats4Ever. They didn't think it fair that someone in the North would get paired up with UT or A&M, and somebody would get paired up with Baylor (who was REALLY terrible at the time, of course).
-
why you have smaller conferences and play a round robin
for fairness
unfortunately, the TV networks don't give a damn
-
And, I think there were some other old B8ers that didn't love the idea of the faux x-div perma-rivals either. Maybe the K-State guys like Skicat and Wildcats4Ever. They didn't think it fair that someone in the North would get paired up with UT or A&M, and somebody would get paired up with Baylor (who was REALLY terrible at the time, of course).
We had some good games with KSU over the years. I think we had a winning record against them overall, or close to it.
At any rate we played all the XII teams twice every four years. Not quite a rivalry but often enough to generate some hate.
-
We had some good games with KSU over the years. I think we had a winning record against them overall, or close to it.
At any rate we played all the XII teams twice every four years. Not quite a rivalry but often enough to generate some hate.
Yeah, and I guess if we'd gone ahead with the x-div perma-rival, the math comes out to playing everyone in the other div at least twice in 6 years rather than 4. You'd have played everyone exactly 4 times in 10 years.
-
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/s640x640/225241362_3132563617028625_3856831216296144283_n.jpg?_nc_cat=111&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=2c4854&_nc_ohc=8UOi9z2ocCQAX8v_bHC&tn=DQyWguGePQvwhrSC&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=7a5c1780f26eab4d7cd21a9c35ee81dd&oe=612EF813)
-
I dont think the Big 12 was too much of a cake walk for aggie
or for that matter the old SWC
-
Texas A&M Conference Win% in SEC: 58%
Texas A&M Conference Win% in B12: 53%
-
Texas A&M Conference Win% in SEC: 58%
Texas A&M Conference Win% in B12: 53%
pretty much what I thought
-
little Johnny wasn't a math whiz
-
DeTiger sighting
still got that SEC speed or, too old?
Only SEC Speed I ever had was the quickness with which I could get a Texas girl to go out with me. Then I got married and I really don't have any use for it, so my SEC speed these days is concentrated on how fast I can make it to the bed after I doze off in my recliner at night.
-
Apparently we played them in BR like 10 straight years. I have no idea why.
It's because the food is way better.
-
It's because the food is way better.
word
-
I went to the TAMU-LSU game in College Station in 1989. I was dating an aggie girl and she invited me up for the weekend. Ags won and we had a very good time that night. The night before, too...
Would that be the Aggie you married, or you just got a thing for Aggies? No judgment, I worked in College Station for a year in my mid-20's and I made the most of my time with the fem-aggs that I could. I punched above my weight class but that was just because they were so starved for a real man with his own bottle of Tony Chacherie's.
Their cheerleaders were kinda hairy though.
-
Hot take:
I know you get your Swamp Card revoked for this kind of thing, but the truth is Tony Chacherie's is overrated and Slap Ya Mama is almost universally better except in a few cases.
-
Would that be the Aggie you married, or you just got a thing for Aggies? No judgment, I worked in College Station for a year in my mid-20's and I made the most of my time with the fem-aggs that I could. I punched above my weight class but that was just because they were so starved for a real man with his own bottle of Tony Chacherie's.
Their cheerleaders were kinda hairy though.
Different aggie girl. I also dated a couple of Tech girls, and one that went to TWU.
And of course several Longhorns mixed in the bunch.
When it comes to cute girls, I don't discriminate based on educational institution.
-
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/s640x640/225241362_3132563617028625_3856831216296144283_n.jpg?_nc_cat=111&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=2c4854&_nc_ohc=8UOi9z2ocCQAX8v_bHC&tn=DQyWguGePQvwhrSC&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=7a5c1780f26eab4d7cd21a9c35ee81dd&oe=612EF813)
Good old reliable JFF. Talking erroneous smack.
-
Johnny Football was fun to watch, for sure. Just not particularly good at math. Or talking smack.
-
Only SEC Speed I ever had was the quickness with which I could get a Texas girl to go out with me. Then I got married and I really don't have any use for it, so my SEC speed these days is concentrated on how fast I can make it to the bed after I doze off in my recliner at night.
I saw it with my own eyes in Madison one night long ago when my eyes were younger
-
Texas A&M Conference Win% in SEC: 58%
Texas A&M Conference Win% in B12: 53%
My god we were really awful the last ~10 years in the Big 12. About as awful as the 'horn's have been for the last ~10 years.
Piss poor coaching, mismanagement of talent, and a myriad of other factors got us to that point.
-
My god we were really awful the last ~10 years in the Big 12. About as awful as the 'horn's have been for the last ~10 years.
Piss poor coaching, mismanagement of talent, and a myriad of other factors got us to that point.
Not really. Horns are at 56% the last 10 years, so Texas is actually closer to your "improved" performance in the SEC, than we are to your suckitude in the B12.
But the real key takeaway here, is that no Longhorn fan thinks the past ten years have been anything other than complete garbage. While apparently, Johnny Football is proud of the ags' legacy in the B12. So proud he seeks to denigrate the conference that regularly kicked the shit out of his school's team.
However, I'll certainly agree with your final sentence. It's hard for me to imagine a worse stretch of coaching and talent development/management, than what we've seen at Texas, ever since Mack Brown decided to mail it in after the 2009 season. Just disgusting.
-
Not really. Horns are at 56% the last 10 years, so Texas is actually closer to your "improved" performance in the SEC, than we are to your suckitude in the B12.
But the real key takeaway here, is that no Longhorn fan thinks the past ten years have been anything other than complete garbage. While apparently, Johnny Football is proud of the ags' legacy in the B12. So proud he seeks to denigrate the conference that regularly kicked the shit out of his school's team.
However, I'll certainly agree with your final sentence. It's hard for me to imagine a worse stretch of coaching and talent development/management, than what we've seen at Texas, ever since Mack Brown decided to mail it in after the 2009 season. Just disgusting.
Big difference between the Ags last ten years in the B12 and UT's last 10 and you know it even if you refuse to admit it. The B12 has been so watered down it's a complete joke and look no further than UT/OU's unceremonious exit. No Nebraska, no CU, no Mizzou, and Tech has not been the same since they canned Leach but hey they added a very mediocre WV and schizophrenic TCU. Meanwhile UT is regularly losing to KU and TCU while suffering through losing seasons.
As for JFF he never played in the Big 12 (he was on the team in 2011 but did not play). There is no question our record has improved from our B12 days to our SEC days but it's not apples to oranges.
56%, 53%, meh whatever. Nothing to be proud about, just splitting hairs at this point anyways and arguing about who's the tallest midget.
-
nothing to be proud of Son
-
. . . It's hard for me to imagine a worse stretch of coaching and talent development/management, than what we've seen at Texas, ever since Mack Brown decided to mail it in after the 2009 season. Just disgusting.
Do you think Mack consciously mailed it in, or just got a little tired, just tired enough to be functioning at about 10% less effectiveness?
After losing the BCS NCG to Florida after the 2008 season, Bob Stoops went through a run of 8-5, 12-2, 10-3, 10-3, 11-2, 8-5. Only twice did he have fewer than 3 losses. Some fans started playing the "pencil in the 3 losses" game.
The first 8-5 season he didn't have a place-kicker good enough to make chip-shot FGs. Bad oversight that directly contributed to 4 of the losses. He had some unsuccessful assistants, like--sad to say--Josh Heupel as OC.
Be fired 2-3 assistants, hired Lincoln Riley, re-emphasized recruiting, more or less righted the ship (with the exception of keeping Mikey as DC), and handed it over to Riley in good shape.
I say all that because I wonder if Mack might have done likewise at Texas had he not been forced out.
FWW, the standard Sooner view is that the problem at the end of Mack's tenure was the same UT old problem--BMDs butting into the management of the football program.
And the Austin Malaise, of course.
-
Big difference between the Ags last ten years in the B12 and UT's last 10 and you know it even if you refuse to admit it. The B12 has been so watered down it's a complete joke and look no further than UT/OU's unceremonious exit. No Nebraska, no CU, no Mizzou, and Tech has not been the same since they canned Leach but hey they added a very mediocre WV and schizophrenic TCU. Meanwhile UT is regularly losing to KU and TCU while suffering through losing seasons.
As for JFF he never played in the Big 12 (he was on the team in 2011 but did not play). There is no question our record has improved from our B12 days to our SEC days but it's not apples to oranges.
56%, 53%, meh whatever. Nothing to be proud about, just splitting hairs at this point anyways and arguing about who's the tallest midget.
Lulz. Regular losses to the Mississippi schools counter any argument you can make about the ags' SEC "success."
Splitting hairs, sure.
But no Longhorn is crowing over the past ten years, while Johnny Football is disparaging a conference his team sucked in. It's just a really bad look. But I guess aggies are used to that.
(See how fun it's going to be, being back in the same conference??? :) )
-
Do you think Mack consciously mailed it in, or just got a little tired, just tired enough to be functioning at about 10% less effectiveness?
After losing the BCS NCG to Florida after the 2008 season, Bob Stoops went through a run of 8-5, 12-2, 10-3, 10-3, 11-2, 8-5. Only twice did he have fewer than 3 losses. Some fans started playing the "pencil in the 3 losses" game.
The first 8-5 season he didn't have a place-kicker good enough to make chip-shot FGs. Bad oversight that directly contributed to 4 of the losses. He had some unsuccessful assistants, like--sad to say--Josh Heupel as OC.
Be fired 2-3 assistants, hired Lincoln Riley, re-emphasized recruiting, more or less righted the ship (with the exception of keeping Mikey as DC), and handed it over to Riley in good shape.
I say all that because I wonder if Mack might have done likewise at Texas had he not been forced out.
FWW, the standard Sooner view is that the problem at the end of Mack's tenure was the same UT old problem--BMDs butting into the management of the football program.
And the Austin Malaise, of course.
Mack clearly lost his edge. He was content to let his staff do more of the work. He disengaged and spent a lot more time on the golf course-- that's all corroborated by multiple insiders. And his records after 2009 really can't be compared to Stoops' records after 2008. One losing season and not a 10-win season to be found.
5-7
8-5
9-4
8-5
Firing Mack was the right thing to do, but Charlie Strong was a terrible hire, for sure. And Tom Herman wasn't a good hire either.
I have my doubts about Sarkisian but since nobody asked me for my input, this is where we're at. He won't be any worse than Strong. Hopefully he'll be better than Herman.
-
Lulz. Regular losses to the Mississippi schools counter any argument you can make about the ags' SEC "success."
Splitting hairs, sure.
But no Longhorn is crowing over the past ten years, while Johnny Football is disparaging a conference his team sucked in. It's just a really bad look. But I guess aggies are used to that.
(See how fun it's going to be, being back in the same conference??? :) )
Just for reference here is the full quote, not near as much smack talking as was being portrayed.
“Lucky for A&M, we have a 9-, almost 10-year head start on both of those teams being in the SEC,” he said. “The rivalry has been gone for a while, but now it looks like it’s coming back. It’s time to just sack up and go play the game. We’re in a good position. We have a good coach. We have a good team. If they want to come to the SEC and see what it’s all about then we’ll welcome them with open arms. But it is no cake walk and it is not the Big 12, so it should be interesting to see how things play out.”
And yes, it's going to be fun. I fully expect Texas at some point to be an elite program again, I am under no impression that they won't. In fact, I've often mused that maybe Texas' timing will be just right. After a ~15 year run of incredible success maybe Bama will fall off that pedestal. LSU seems to have already tripped up a little. I think A&M is in really good shape, wouldn't it be cool for the Texas Twins to start winning the SEC?
-
I like the abbreviated quote better. Makes him sound more a-hole-y. :)
-
After going from conference board to conference board, one thing is clear. The SEC did a pre-emptive nuclear strike on all the other conferences. There is no magical realignment that is going to make things equal for any of the other conferences.
In the Big 12, the best remaining school in terms of value is OSU and they look better than any school the conference could poach (Cincy, Houston, Memphis, et. al). It looks to me that their best course is to stand pat and schedule tough non cons to get more attention. Looking at the TV chart someone here provided, I would estimate they could get something like $12-$15 mil per school. That would be much better than the AAC. They would be desirable for non-con games for the major conferences.
-
After going from conference board to conference board, one thing is clear. The SEC did a pre-emptive nuclear strike on all the other conferences. There is no magical realignment that is going to make things equal for any of the other conferences.
In the Big 12, the best remaining school in terms of value is OSU and they look better than any school the conference could poach (Cincy, Houston, Memphis, et. al). It looks to me that their best course is to stand pat and schedule tough non cons to get more attention. Looking at the TV chart someone here provided, I would estimate they could get something like $12-$15 mil per school. That would be much better than the AAC. They would be desirable for non-con games for the major conferences.
I think the B12 can make it as a conference, but they're going to have to get up to 10 teams if they want to retain their CCG (And the money that goes along with it).
There are some decent options to add, though, that we've already discussed on this thread.
-
I had forgotten about the CCG. It would be a matter if that revenue could offset splitting 10 ways instead of 8. Anyhow, it'll resolve itself eventually.
-
Seriously would anybody watch a Kansas State Baylor Big 12 CCG? I probably would not.
There is just not much interest in the XII without OU/Texas really.
On that note and since I'm too lazy to look it up when was the last XII championship game without OU or Texas playing (or both?)? I realize the game was discontinued for 6-8 years. Was it A&M/KSU? My memory tells me it was this:
96 NU/Tx Tx shocks NU
97 NU/A&M NU blows A&M out and everybody else for that matter
98 A&M/KSU A&M shocks #1 KSU kills their chance at MNC
99 Tex/NU NU's 1 defeat of Tx as a conference member (game was a rematch)
00 OU/ (cannot remember the opponent but OU won the MNC that year) I think this game was rematch
01 Tex/CU CU stuns Tx after Tx beat them earlier
02 OU/ ?
03 OU/KSU (KSU shocked OU in this one)
04 OU / ?
05 TX/CU (Tx didn't let the earlier game repeat!)
06 OU/?
07 OU/?
08 OU/?
09 TX/NEB (the famous 1 second left)
10 OU/? (I remember this because A&M beat OU but tied for 1st in Big XII South).
11 Did we play CCG this year? NU/CU were already gone.
I really don't know much about the CCG after we left the conference other than it was skipped for awhile until the "one true champion debacle". I know OU/Tx played each other in one, and I think ISU played OU last year. Seems like Mizzou was in there a time or two as well but I can't recall the year. Maybe it was one of the OU/? ones I forgot?
What teams never played in the CCG? KU, oSu (they won the conference when CCG was halted), TT, Baylor, TCU,
-
1996: Texas 37, Nebraska 27 - Kept Nebraska from having the opportunity to win its 3rd-straight MNC.
1997: Nebraska 54, Texas A&M 15 - Set up Nebraska's 3rd MNC in 4 years.
1998: Texas A&M 36, Kansas State 33 - Kept K-State from playing for the MNC.
1999: Nebraska 22, Texas 6
2000: Oklahoma 27, Kansas State 24 - Set up OU's BSC championship victory over FSU.
2001: Colorado 39, Texas 37 - Did this keep the previously #3 Horns from playing for the BCS championship?
2002: Oklahoma 29, Colorado 7
2003: Kansas State 35, Oklahoma 7 - OU still got selected to play LSU for the BCS championship, losing 21-14.
2004: Oklahoma 42, Colorado 3 - OU cruised through this, only to get obliterated by USC in the Orange Bowl.
2005: Texas 70, Colorado 3 - Set up Texas' BCS championship victory over USC.
2006: Oklahoma 21, Nebraska 7 - With wins in 6 of the last 7 CCGs, the South Division had established its dominance.
2007: Oklahoma 38, Missouri 17
2008: Oklahoma 62, Missouri 21 - Controversial tie-breaker put OU in the CCG, to go on to play Florida in the BCS NCG, losing 24-14.
2009: Texas 13, Nebraska 12 - Controversial game where 1 second was put back on the game clock, enabling the GW field goal.
2010: Oklahoma 23, Nebraska 20 - Seems like Nebraska led this one about 17-0 at one point.
2017: Oklahoma 41, TCU 17
2018: Oklahoma 39, Texas 27
2019: Oklahoma 30, Baylor 23
2020: Oklahoma 27, Iowa State 23
Teams that have never played in the Big 12 CCG: Kansas, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech.
-
Was that all from memory or did you look it up? I am astounded I remembered most of the first ten years pretty accurately.
You left off oSu from the list of teams that never played for the CCG.
-
Now I will try to remember which games were rematches, correct me if I'm wrong:
1999
2000
2001
2005
2007 (least sure about this one)
That's all I can remember. Obviously all the new CCG's were rematches due to the round robin :)
-
Not from memory.
I fixed the omission.
Certainly don't want to forget oSu.
-
2007 was a rematch.
-
Not from memory.
I fixed the omission.
Certainly don't want to forget oSu.
It's a god damn shame they missed that FG in 2011 which kept them from playing for the MNC. That was a fine team indeed, I think Big Matt was still around and mighty proud.
To me that is the only real difference between a helmet school and a non-helmet school. The helmet school is allowed one or maybe even two uh-oh's a year and can still get in like OU did in 2003 and Alabama has done more than once. KSU, oSu, one uh oh or even almost uh oh and it's all over.
-
Almost certainly correct.
LBM was still around for that. I believe that's the last season he was here for, and it was a doozy, the regular season culminating in a beatdown of OU that you don't see much. By the 2012 season he was gone.
-
I've had some time to reflect on what the XII should do and I really think they would be better served in staying together and trying to get the best of the rest to join and keep the XII a viable conference.
My reasoning is this: What good does the money do? Join another conference if your lucky, maybe the B1G or PAC, but after all these years nothing has changed for ISU or TT or most of the others. Sure, Baylor I think won a conference championship, I think TCU did. Maybe they won one at the same time (one true champion right?). But it was not when OU was strong, Texas was definitely not strong. Once OU got their groove back it's the same ol same ol. 6 straight Big 12 champs. And I'm not even sure it was that close looking at the CCG scores.
Get the giants out, figure out what you can draw in revenue, and make the best of it. Then maybe you can get lucky like TCU did and find yourself in position to win a Rose Bowl or maybe even another big bowl game where the opponents starters opted out like UF in '20. I'd much rather be winning in a little or less presitigious conference than losing in a big one. Heck you can still schedule some good out of conference games with the big boys and still have something to play for.
-
I've had some time to reflect on what the XII should do and I really think they would be better served in staying together and trying to get the best of the rest to join and keep the XII a viable conference.
My reasoning is this: What good does the money do? Join another conference if your lucky, maybe the B1G or PAC, but after all these years nothing has changed for ISU or TT or most of the others. Sure, Baylor I think won a conference championship, I think TCU did. Maybe they won one at the same time (one true champion right?). But it was not when OU was strong, Texas was definitely not strong. Once OU got their groove back it's the same ol same ol. 6 straight Big 12 champs. And I'm not even sure it was that close looking at the CCG scores.
Get the giants out, figure out what you can draw in revenue, and make the best of it. Then maybe you can get lucky like TCU did and find yourself in position to win a Rose Bowl or maybe even another big bowl game where the opponents starters opted out like UF in '20. I'd much rather be winning in a little or less presitigious conference than losing in a big one. Heck you can still schedule some good out of conference games with the big boys and still have something to play for.
Also just like UNC in 2020. :)
-
Whatever gets you the win ;) .
But seriously I remember a RB and a WR opting out, maybe one or two others but I'm not aware of any other team opting out en masse like UF did in '20.
-
Whatever gets you the win ;) .
But seriously I remember a RB and a WR opting out, maybe one or two others but I'm not aware of any other team opting out en masse like UF did in '20.
UNC had several out with COVID as well. They were severely depleted.
I think the ags still probably win that game if the tar heels were at full strength, but not by much, and it's also possibly a loss.
-
It's just all part of the game now like injuries and suspensions. Now it's opt outs and covid. We had a bunch of players, and by that I mean starters and serious contributors opt out before the season started as I'm sure most programs had. We had a starting WR, starting LB, and starting DB opt out before the season as I recall.
Come to think of it I didn't notice if any of those guys got drafted. I know one transferred to UF and will possibly start there this year.
-
https://twitter.com/UnnecRoughness/status/1430556082271920133
-
So much for Dave Wandstadt saying OSU and KSU to the PAC 12
(https://i.imgur.com/1jS6BX8.png)
-
big 12 still alive
-
(https://i.imgur.com/qU8geHp.png)
-
So what was the massive unpleasantness with the UH board chairman last time around?
-
So what was the massive unpleasantness with the UH board chairman last time around?
I'm really not sure. I vaguely recall rumors that he was ruffling feathers and that's one reason the B12 didn't consider admission for UH, but I don't remember any specifics.
-
Big 12 plans to invite BYU, Cincinnati, Houston, and UCF to join. (https://www.si.com/college/2021/09/02/big-12-expansion-plan-adding-four-schools-to-conference)
Looks like the best plan at this point. This would make a pretty strong conference
-
I'd watch a lot of those games.
-
Still trying to figure out why those teams would leave their current set ups to play in the Big 12. The next media deal is going to be AAC level - with or without those teams.
-
Still trying to figure out why those teams would leave their current set ups to play in the Big 12. The next media deal is going to be AAC level - with or without those teams.
When you look at the TV numbers, OkState, KState, ISU, and Tech all pull good ratings. Better than pretty much every school in the PAC not named USC or Oregon.
They won't get current B12 money, and probably not even current PAC money, but they'll be by far the best of the rest.
-
Still trying to figure out why those teams would leave their current set ups to play in the Big 12. The next media deal is going to be AAC level - with or without those teams.
According to Wikipedia UCF has an enrollment over 70,000. So their alumni roll may be low, now, but they are accumulating alumni.
Based on enrollment, going forward, UCF will have larger fanbase than either of the two schools leaving the Big 12. And darn near the equivalent of both.
-
I suspect B12 TV monies will be >> AAC just because of name recognition and history, as well as having better programs. And as the AAC is raided, their appeal will drop also. I'm curious why unpleasantness in 2016 would be a factor in a year or so, or now.
-
The problem is relevance. As of today, the Big 12's members are a Matt Campbell promotion away from being irrelevant to the national picture.
They play good, fun football. That's not the problem. Even alumni and fans aren't really the problem. Contracts are awarded on how much advertising you can sell. The advertisers don't care how good a game oSu/Tech is if no one's watching. If this were Texas Tech of 2008, then they're poised to kick a team out of the CFP if they win. Else, maybe another team gets in. It's interesting. Even if you don't care anything about these teams in a normal, unconnected sense, the fact that they could alter the national picture with their battle means you're showing it during a prime viewing slot.
The Big 12 doesn't have those teams. They won't unless they schedule outside ranked teams and beat them. The teams they're bringing in don't change that calculus very much - maybe BYU could. Even with Texas and OU, the Big 12 was rebuffed from contract negotiations with already established media partners.
In a world where 4 million viewers is your target, I don't see many of these games hitting 2 million.
-
The problem is relevance. As of today, the Big 12's members are a Matt Campbell promotion away from being irrelevant to the national picture.
They play good, fun football. That's not the problem. Even alumni and fans aren't really the problem. Contracts are awarded on how much advertising you can sell. The advertisers don't care how good a game oSu/Tech is if no one's watching. If this were Texas Tech of 2008, then they're poised to kick a team out of the CFP if they win. Else, maybe another team gets in. It's interesting. Even if you don't care anything about these teams in a normal, unconnected sense, the fact that they could alter the national picture with their battle means you're showing it during a prime viewing slot.
The Big 12 doesn't have those teams. They won't unless they schedule outside ranked teams and beat them. The teams they're bringing in don't change that calculus very much - maybe BYU could. Even with Texas and OU, the Big 12 was rebuffed from contract negotiations with already established media partners.
In a world where 4 million viewers is your target, I don't see many of these games hitting 2 million.
I think it's quite obvious now, that ESPN had no interest in attempting to negotiate with the B12 during the EARLY negotiation window, because they already knew Texas and OU were headed to the SEC. And if ESPN isn't insistent on negotiating during the EARLY negotiation window, then Fox has no incentive to do so. And it's important to understand that we're talking about an EARLY negotiation window. There's no doubt that the new contracts would have been negotiated up, in the normal contract window, if Texas and OU were still present. That's nothing more than a market reality.
On the second point, 4M is only the "target" for marquee matchups. In the B1G, only Ohio State and Michigan are hitting those numbers. In the SEC, only Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and LSU are hitting those numbers. In the ACC(ish), only Notre Dame is hitting those numbers. Clemson isn't, despite all of their recent success.
And probably most importantly for the sake of comparison to reasonably similar conference viewership, in the PAC-- NOBODY is hitting 4M. Not even USC or Oregon.
-
As Texas fell short of national contention year after year, the Big 12 still had OU to brag about. If a Big 12 team played OU, there was still a chance for viewership. The Pac 12 has a USC problem right now. They're the only brand that can be nationally relevant, and they're earning a track record of consistent failure.
TV partners make their hay off those games you mentioned. The advertising bill gets run up on them that the resulting payoff makes the rest of the games gravy. The SEC has some "these games are gonna get paid" properties. The Big 10 has "it'll probably happen" ones. The ACC has several "it could happen".
Since the tenor changed from "live sports keep our carriage deals alive" to "what's a carriage deal?", I'm not sure how much a network would offer just to keep their hand in. With so few sure things, what's the appetite for bidding on a "not gonna happen" property? Maybe those networks facing being left out will tolerate the risk?
-
This K-State fan/media-ite John Kurz discusses Pete Thamel's plan for the Big 12.
https://youtu.be/TVhvJRQyYCI (https://youtu.be/TVhvJRQyYCI)
Go to 16 teams, play on weeknights, market itself as something different/untraditional.
BYU, Boise State, Colorado State, San Diego State, Houston, UCF, USF, Cincinnati, and maybe Memphis and Tulane.
Thamel's article: https://sports.yahoo.com/think-big-here-is-one-way-to-save-the-big-12-203016120.html (https://sports.yahoo.com/think-big-here-is-one-way-to-save-the-big-12-203016120.html).
-
When you look at the TV numbers, OkState, KState, ISU, and Tech all pull good ratings. Better than pretty much every school in the PAC not named USC or Oregon.
They won't get current B12 money, and probably not even current PAC money, but they'll be by far the best of the rest.
when they play UT and OU
-
when they play UT and OU
No, no at all. The analysis I've seen looks specifically at what each school pulls on its own. Ratings for games among Tech, ISU, KSU, and oSu, were good. Better than any and every game in the PAC except for a couple that involved USC.
-
Big 12 plans to invite BYU, Cincinnati, Houston, and UCF to join. (https://www.si.com/college/2021/09/02/big-12-expansion-plan-adding-four-schools-to-conference)
Looks like the best plan at this point. This would make a pretty strong conference
So they "bridge the gap" to WV with Cincy, while simultaneously creating an even larger gap to UCF?
Brilliant!
-
So they "bridge the gap" to WV with Cincy, while simultaneously creating an even larger gap to UCF?
Brilliant!
When it works, that's what it's called. Or "thinking outside the box."
When it doesn't, it gets the sarcasm emoji that you forgot to post.
-
I looked at a bunch of numbers awhile back just to see how each school kind of stacks up with the others in the Big 12. Not just in athletics, but in student enrollment, endowment, and other things. The one thing that immediately jumped out at me is that even without TX/OU the remaining Big 12 schools are still mostly large state schools. KU, KSU, ISU, TT, and oSu each have endowments in the billions, enrollment of 20-30,000, and are well represented academically. Baylor and TCU are large private schools and prestigious in their own right. Heck, BU just won the NCAA championship and neither A&M or UT have ever done that.
UH compares very well with the other schools IMO. Enrollment of 30K+, endowment over $1 billion.
Cincinnati compares very well. Enrollment of 40K+, endowment over $1 billion.
UCF does not compare favorably. The enrollment is high, 70K+, but the endowment is weak IMO. It may just be because it's still a "new" school in that it was formed in the 60's. Most other schools were formed in the late 1800's, so understandable. I'm not sure if they actually have that large of a student body or if maybe they have a lot of on-line students or satellite campuses. It's obvious they are up-and-coming. It might not be a bad idea, Florida has plenty of growth left, and with 70K students it obviously has a lot of potential fan-base.
BYU is really a jewel. About 30K+ students, fans all over the world. Almost $2 billion endowment. They won a MNC in the 80's and have had some really good history with Heisman winners and such.
All the other schools that were being tossed around don't even come close to these 4 if you look at these factors that I think are often over-looked.
-
A problem with Cincy is stadium size, and it's a bit hemmed in by buildings. They could expand it at some expense, but I'm not sure how, and their attendance as yet doesn't really suggest they should. They have had good bball teams.
I think UCF is akin to Georgia State, large enrollment, but many commuter/part time students.
-
The estimates I've seen show the media rights to the B12 - Texas and OU to be between $12-$15 mil per school. That is far and above the payout for the AAC which has a sliding scale and UCF gets around $7 mil.
Those schools should be interested in joining.
It isn't ideal but it looks like the best way forward.
-
A problem with Cincy is stadium size, and it's a bit hemmed in by buildings. They could expand it at some expense, but I'm not sure how, and their attendance as yet doesn't really suggest they should. They have had good bball teams.
I think UCF is akin to Georgia State, large enrollment, but many commuter/part time students.
There is an NFL stadium just over the rhine.
(https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/newsrecord.org/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/2/41/241535b7-7d40-56e1-91cf-c9d22ddf7287/503e3ec0b9845.image.jpg)
-
The estimates I've seen show the media rights to the B12 - Texas and OU to be between $12-$15 mil per school. That is far and above the payout for the AAC which has a sliding scale and UCF gets around $7 mil.
Those schools should be interested in joining.
It isn't ideal but it looks like the best way forward.
that would put all of them at about $8 mil
-
Well two of the three that I wanted to see elevated are among the four that are rumored to be front runners. So that's not half bad.
-
Well, it is happening. All 4 schools are expected to join by Sept 10 (https://www.si.com/college/2021/09/03/big-12-expansion-byu-houston-ucf-cincinnati). The Irate 8 has all the votes they need to approve the expansion whether or not OU and Texas approve.
ESPN just signed a media contract with the AAC so that will have to be redone. Interesting to see how this affects the departure of OU/UT.
-
Most importantly, what will the divisions look like?
-
A problem with Cincy is stadium size, and it's a bit hemmed in by buildings. They could expand it at some expense, but I'm not sure how, and their attendance as yet doesn't really suggest they should. They have had good bball teams.
I think UCF is akin to Georgia State, large enrollment, but many commuter/part time students.
I suspected as much. First thing they should do is dump the directional name. The name is everything. Obviously University of Florida is taken as is Florida State. Maybe Florida Tech? Orlando University? Or University of Orlando? I don’t have a better suggestion but it needs to be changed.
-
Ironically I just looked it up. UCF was originally Florida Tech. It was changed in the late 70’s.
-
Well, it is happening. All 4 schools are expected to join by Sept 10 (https://www.si.com/college/2021/09/03/big-12-expansion-byu-houston-ucf-cincinnati). The Irate 8 has all the votes they need to approve the expansion whether or not OU and Texas approve.
ESPN just signed a media contract with the AAC so that will have to be redone. Interesting to see how this affects the departure of OU/UT.
It doesn't affect the departure date of TX-OU at all, it was always going to be 2022. It might affect the buyout, but that was never going to be more than about 40% either, so I don't think it really affects that very much.
From a personal standpoint, I have a lot of friends that went to Tech, TCU, and even Baylor, and there are several fans of oSu and KSU that I've met over the years, and I think this is the best possible outcome for them, so I'm happy on their behalf.
-
Most importantly, what will the divisions look like?
(https://www.cfb51.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.kinja-img.com%2Fgawker-media%2Fimage%2Fupload%2Fs--vyyWRkow--%2F1401537538732057519.gif&hash=7124403df0a87271b6a5b3e9974a0b3e)
-
It doesn't affect the departure date of TX-OU at all, it was always going to be 2022. It might affect the buyout, but that was never going to be more than about 40% either, so I don't think it really affects that very much.
From a personal standpoint, I have a lot of friends that went to Tech, TCU, and even Baylor, and there are several fans of oSu and KSU that I've met over the years, and I think this is the best possible outcome for them, so I'm happy on their behalf.
I was thinking about the buyout and how ESPN/Fox views this expansion. The 3 AAC schools have a GOR and reports are saying they will start playing in the B12 in 2023. I have to think they will work a buyout as well and everyone will be in their new conferences in 2022 but new media agreements could get very weird.
-
Ironically I just looked it up. UCF was originally Florida Tech. It was changed in the late 70’s.
They should change it back.
Anything with "Central" in it sounds G5/FCS-ish.
And maybe the Big 12 should change its name too. It's sort of a tarnished brand. Might be better to start over.
-
It would be cool if they could change it to University of Florida - Orlando or UFO.
-
I was thinking about the buyout and how ESPN/Fox views this expansion. The 3 AAC schools have a GOR and reports are saying they will start playing in the B12 in 2023. I have to think they will work a buyout as well and everyone will be in their new conferences in 2022 but new media agreements could get very weird.
Yup. Right now everyone's legal team is making them say certain things to avoid unnecessary troubles.
But OU and Texas will be playing in the SEC in 2022/2023, and the newcomers to the B12 will be following suit.
-
They should change it back.
Anything with "Central" in it sounds G5/FCS-ish.
And maybe the Big 12 should change its name too. It's sort of a tarnished brand. Might be better to start over.
The B12 is still a better brand than AAC, CUSA, MWC, MAC, or whatever else is out there.
Also, the B12 is the conference that has the tie-ins to the Cotton Bowl, Sugar Bowl, CFP, and other NYD bowls trough the post-season contracts. If they abandon the name, they'll likely abandon the legal attachments that go along with it, which would be bad for them.
-
I think the bowl tie-ins are the most important part of keeping the Big 12. The CCG and Sugar Bowl games alone were a big revenue generator for the conference. I would also think the new Big 12 would be all for the 12 team playoff as they could get an automatic bid if those are given to conference champions.
I really wish the best for our old conference mates and I hope they are successful.
-
How would you rank the 12 teams in the new Big 12, by the metric of "helmetiness"?
-
For football, I would probably have Oklahoma State tops for helmetosity.
But, they are all about the same really.
-
BYU is up there too, maybe a little above the Pokes?
-
For football, I would probably have Oklahoma State tops for helmetosity.
But, they are all about the same really.
gee, that's a low bar
-
At a cursory glance it appears as though BYU is the only one that has ever won a NC.
Kansas St and W Virginia maybe have a little something to them that isn't there with the others.
UCF is probably bringing up the rear. They moved up to FBS in the late 90s, and once went winless in the MAC.
Houston and Cincy once played for last place in CUSA on the final week of the 1998 season. Houston lost.
Kansas and Iowa St are also pretty far down the totem pole.
The good news is that the majority are a lot better now than they were historically, I suppose.
-
If the new Big 12 was smart they would schedule smart as well. Avoid playing teams like Alabama and Ohio State and schedule games vs. schools that have name recognition but maybe not a lot of recent success. Arkansas and maybe Auburn from the SEC, Minnesota from the B1G, USC or UCLA from the PAC type programs. Let the conference schedule the games with input from the schools even. They should court wins vs name games, because the perception will be that the Big 12 is weak, but winning vs any SEC team or B1G/PAC team will help some of that. Cincy should play Kentucky and UCF should play USCe.
Have one or two marquee games per season, the best of the B12 vs maybe the 2nd tier SEC or B1G teams. Might be hard to do with games schedule almost 10 years into the future but there is no real need to schedule those games that far in advance. Everybody needs games, keep that schedule tight into the short future.
-
I think the bowl tie-ins are the most important part of keeping the Big 12. The CCG and Sugar Bowl games alone were a big revenue generator for the conference. I would also think the new Big 12 would be all for the 12 team playoff as they could get an automatic bid if those are given to conference champions.
I really wish the best for our old conference mates and I hope they are successful.
Same here, Thumper.
-
How would you rank the 12 teams in the new Big 12, by the metric of "helmetiness"?
Something like this.
BYU
Oklahoma State
West Virginia
TCU
Kansas State
Texas Tech
UCF
Cincinnati
Iowa State
Baylor
Houston
Kansas
-
If the new Big 12 was smart they would schedule smart as well. Avoid playing teams like Alabama and Ohio State and schedule games vs. schools that have name recognition but maybe not a lot of recent success. Arkansas and maybe Auburn from the SEC, Minnesota from the B1G, USC or UCLA from the PAC type programs. Let the conference schedule the games with input from the schools even. They should court wins vs name games, because the perception will be that the Big 12 is weak, but winning vs any SEC team or B1G/PAC team will help some of that. Cincy should play Kentucky and UCF should play USCe.
Have one or two marquee games per season, the best of the B12 vs maybe the 2nd tier SEC or B1G teams. Might be hard to do with games schedule almost 10 years into the future but there is no real need to schedule those games that far in advance. Everybody needs games, keep that schedule tight into the short future.
easier said than done
-
That's my concern. The bad news is, the Big 12 is a nothing. The good news is, now there's more of it.
The Big 12 always played passionate football between themselves. Even with Texas and OU gone, there's still plenty of history and rivalry. The problem is, no one else cares. To turn on TVs, there's has to be national relevance. Iowa State is doing its level best, but Matt Campbell is a phone call away from regression to the mean.
I just don't see how any serious dollars could be thrown at it. Advertisers won't get the money back.
-
That's my concern. The bad news is, the Big 12 is a nothing. The good news is, now there's more of it.
The Big 12 always played passionate football between themselves. Even with Texas and OU gone, there's still plenty of history and rivalry. The problem is, no one else cares. To turn on TVs, there's has to be national relevance. Iowa State is doing its level best, but Matt Campbell is a phone call away from regression to the mean.
I just don't see how any serious dollars could be thrown at it. Advertisers won't get the money back.
The reality of that is why I think Pete Thamel's out-of-the-box suggestions make sense. Play on days and and at times when nobody else will play, for example.
He also recommended going to a 16-team conference to decapitate all the lower conferences.
-
trying to stay ahead of the MAC
desperation
-
Who they are trying to stay ahead of is the AAC, and they have widened the gap considerably by poaching their top teams.
-
The reality of that is why I think Pete Thamel's out-of-the-box suggestions make sense. Play on days and and at times when nobody else will play, for example.
He also recommended going to a 16-team conference to decapitate all the lower conferences.
It's not awful, but this basically describes the MWC.
If I had to plan, I'd hope that last season nationally placed a renewed emphasis on decent scheduling. The oSu's and TCU's of the conference could seize on that and schedule some nationally relevant games. Not one, but 2 or 3 per year against credible P5 conference contenders.
The Big 12 has been OU and "when will Texas stop sucking" for a decade. While internally they play great ball, there's no reason for the nation to care about them. The nation won't until they start affecting the national races. Otherwise, a Big 12 champion that survived 9 dogfights to go 7-2 in conference is easily dismissed.
-
Ed Zachery
-
The only real WTF addition was UCF. Directional school with no history, way out in a coastal state, just a total "flash in the pan" program.
I know that the geography is a little spread out, but at least exclude the coastal states. Now the door is open for San Diego St, Hawaii, E Carolina... they are going to have to add Air Force in order to fly all these teams around.
-
https://twitter.com/TimShep_/status/1435675131024642054
-
Boise would please me quite a bit, now that I am a resident of the MTZ. Right now we only have four P5s, and they are all in the Pac South with USC and UCLA. So if BYU and Boise both get into the Big 12, then it increases the number of MTZ P5s by 50%; along with doubling the number that they had up through 2010.
- Colorado was the first to join a major Conference when it joined the Big 6 in 1947.
- Arizona and Arizona State joined the Pac 8 in 1978.
- Utah joined the Pac 10 in 2011, along with Colorado from the Big 12.
That's it. Four teams. All in a division with the LA twins. So two more P5 teams would really spice things up a bit. Boise and BYU are the only ones that have any business being anywhere near the P5 stratosphere, and the Pac 12 doesn't want anything to do with either of them because of their academics. So the Big 12 is their only realistic P5 option.
That said, with regards to Boise I will believe it when I see it.
-
Yeah I think it's a reach but I suppose ya never know.
-
just imagine the TV numbers Boise would bring
-
At 1 million people with rapid growth, they'd slot in behind the noobs, and ahead of the rubes.
-
I for one am kinda proud of the Big 12
They arent just rolling over and going away
They are doing what it takes to survive
I say go for it
-
good for them
it will probably be a healthier league internally but obv not financially or competitively nationally
the playoff going to 12, they can get a team in that
they'll take another recruiting hit though
-
There is an interesting article on Sicem365 (https://sicem365.com/s/10447/the-new-big-12s-revenue-potential-six-additions-instead-of-four) on projected revenue for the expanded Big 12. The projected media rights are not as much as current but way above the AAC and even above the PAC12. This is somewhat corroborated by CBS Sports:
"For the four schools invited to the Big 12, the move would be a giant step revenue-wise. American schools currently average $7 million in media rights revenue annually. Big 12 schools currently average $37 million annually.
Industry sources tell CBS Sports that the Big 12 lost at least 40% of its value with the departure of Texas and Oklahoma. However, the reconfigured Big 12 with four additions could earn $20 million-$25 million per season, softening the financial blow."
The Sicem365 article also mentions the expansion could include Boise and Memphis and says the B12 would retain it's P5 status and bowl tie-ins.
If these numbers are true, the Big 12 would be secure if not quite as rich.
-
https://big12sports.com/news/2021/9/10/conference-big-12-extends-membership-invitations.aspx
Big 12 Extends Membership Invitations
he Big 12 Conference Board of Directors this morning voted to extend membership invitations to Brigham Young University, the University of Central Florida, the University of Cincinnati, and the University of Houston to join the Conference.
Today’s actions were in accordance with Big 12 Conference Bylaw 1.5.2.b.3 requiring an affirmative vote of a supermajority of Directors, and was approved unanimously by the eight continuing members.
As necessary, institutional Boards will be in session today to act on Big 12 Conference membership. Videoconference announcements with Big 12 Board of Directors Chairman and Texas Tech University President Lawrence Schovanec, Big 12 Commissioner Bob Bowlsby, and campus representatives are scheduled today at the following times:
Houston – 11:00 a.m. CT
BYU – 11:30 a.m. CT
UCF – 2:45 p.m. CT
Cincinnati – 3:30 p.m. CT
-
I'm interested in following the timeline on this. It could be telling as far as how long UT and OU actually intend to stay in the B12. I don't necessarily think we'll see them in the SEC next season, but I'm even more skeptical they're going to finish out the next several years of their current commitment to the B12.
More importantly, are all these lame music and beer threads and the fascinating discussions of helicopters going to be in the SEC forum now? Ugh.
-
I'm interested in following the timeline on this. It could be telling as far as how long UT and OU actually intend to stay in the B12. I don't necessarily think we'll see them in the SEC next season, but I'm even more skeptical they're going to finish out the next several years of their current commitment to the B12.
More importantly, are all these lame music and beer threads and the fascinating discussions of helicopters going to be in the SEC forum now? Ugh.
count on it
Mike sometimes this Texan feels like youre all hat and no cattle
-
I'm interested in following the timeline on this. It could be telling as far as how long UT and OU actually intend to stay in the B12. I don't necessarily think we'll see them in the SEC next season, but I'm even more skeptical they're going to finish out the next several years of their current commitment to the B12.
More importantly, are all these lame music and beer threads and the fascinating discussions of helicopters going to be in the SEC forum now? Ugh.
I completely expect Texas and OU to be playing football in the SEC in the Fall of 2022.
No other team that's left this conference in the past 11 years, has hung around for a second lame duck year.
And there are some very obvious reasons why even one lame duck season can cause damage to your athletic programs. Nobody is going to be willing to expose their athletic programs to TWO years of that.
-
it's only money
exit fee money
-
it's only money
exit fee money
Yup. Which invariably gets negotiated down to around 40% of the contractual obligation.
Right now Texas and OU aren't negotiating the timeline, they're negotiating the $$$.
-
I predict that the Y will get to kick Texas in the seat of the pants one last time on their way out the door.
-
If we played them they probably would.
But we'll be out of the conference when they start playing in the B12.
-
OU will want to go ahead and get this last CC under their belt. They won't be winning 9 of 11 anytime soon after this.
-
Yup. Which invariably gets negotiated down to around 40% of the contractual obligation.
Right now Texas and OU aren't negotiating the timeline, they're negotiating the $$$.
I wonder how that's done. What leverage do the exiting schools have to entice the enforcers of the contract not to extract every penny they're owed?
-
I wonder how that's done. What leverage do the exiting schools have to entice the enforcers of the contract not to extract every penny they're owed?
For the exit penalties, the problem is that the conference is trying to prove liquidated damages. That's a really squirrely concept and is prone to all sorts of interpretations. So it always gets negotiated down.
And it's going to be even more difficult for the B12 to prove since it is known they're adding 4 new teams.
And finally, public universities enjoy the benefits of sovereign immunity and really can't be sued. So they actually have all the power. Played out to an extreme end, a university like Texas or OU could just leave without any negotiations at all, and then the B12 would have to sue to try and recover some of the damages, and the university could claim sovereign immunity which prevents any kind of legal activity against the university, leaving the B12 with nothing.
In reality it would never come to that, but it does severely limit the upside potential for the conference, in negotiations with a state entity.
-
It will be next fall as Marcus stated. OU/Tex will pay their exit money, which some will go to the new members to pay their exit money from the AAC.
The remainder of the Big 12 schools of course will make less money in the coming years but they really have no choice.
-
For the exit penalties, the problem is that the conference is trying to prove liquidated damages. That's a really squirrely concept and is prone to all sorts of interpretations. So it always gets negotiated down.
And it's going to be even more difficult for the B12 to prove since it is known they're adding 4 new teams.
And finally, public universities enjoy the benefits of sovereign immunity and really can't be sued. So they actually have all the power. Played out to an extreme end, a university like Texas or OU could just leave without any negotiations at all, and then the B12 would have to sue to try and recover some of the damages, and the university could claim sovereign immunity which prevents any kind of legal activity against the university, leaving the B12 with nothing.
In reality it would never come to that, but it does severely limit the upside potential for the conference, in negotiations with a state entity.
Also in play is precedence. None of the former members of the Big 12 had to pay the full amount of exit fees, they paid about 40%.
-
Big 12 voted to add the 4 schools. (https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/32182361/big-12-votes-accept-adding-byu-cincinnati-houston-ucf-conference)
-
I think those four make sense and the B12 will survive, but with an asterisk a bit like what the Big East was like.
But no real football power on the list. Still, should garner a decent TV contract.
-
Texas might want to drag it out a few more seasons than they have to, after getting beaten into the ground by the Razorbacks.
Not exactly one of the Powerhouse programs in the SEC, but they looked like Bama when they went up against the Horns.
-
Yeah, Texas needs to find something before going into the SEC West, it could get very ugly.
I'm guessing Bama/Auburn shift East.
-
Texas might want to drag it out a few more seasons than they have to, after getting beaten into the ground by the Razorbacks.
Not exactly one of the Powerhouse programs in the SEC, but they looked like Bama when they went up against the Horns.
Classy BB
Ive been saying to all who will listen that UT would not be that good this year
1st year coach and freshman QB
but dont worry well be back
I guess you can say you guys are lucky you dont have any more Pac 12 games scheduled
man getting owned in your own house must sting
-
I mean, with Alabama and Auburn going to the East, how scared is Texas supposed to be? LSU is a trainwreck, a helmet with no teeth. The Mississippi schools are the Mississippi schools. Arkansas is known to occasionally put a nice season together, but they've never proven they can sustain anything. A&M is who is left, and when have the Horns ever been scared of the Aggies?
I'm not saying Texas doesn't need to do a ton of work, but sans the Alabama schools, the rest of the west is pretty meh.
-
You’re forgetting that we will probably play rotating conference games. Might even have a permanent rival. Nobody really knows yet if the Alabama schools go east. Anyway you slice it the SEC middle schools are probably better than the middle XII schools. I’m talking about TCU, Iowa st, Kansas state.
-
I mean, with Alabama and Auburn going to the East, how scared is Texas supposed to be? LSU is a trainwreck, a helmet with no teeth. The Mississippi schools are the Mississippi schools. Arkansas is known to occasionally put a nice season together, but they've never proven they can sustain anything. A&M is who is left, and when have the Horns ever been scared of the Aggies?
I'm not saying Texas doesn't need to do a ton of work, but sans the Alabama schools, the rest of the west is pretty meh.
If the SEC goes to two 8-team divisions, the strength will definitely be in the East, at least considering how programs are right now.
I'm still hoping for four 4-team subdivisions (pods). That arrangement would let everyone play everyone else in the conference in at least one home-and-home series with a 9-game conference schedule. At the expense of some rivalries, some of them very real and some, eh, not exactly dating back to the 1869 game between Princeton and Rutgers.
-
the SEC isn't going to 9-game conference schedule, they know better
I sure hope pods is never a thing anywhere
-
Classy BB
Ive been saying to all who will listen that UT would not be that good this year
1st year coach and freshman QB
but dont worry well be back
I guess you can say you guys are lucky you dont have any more Pac 12 games scheduled
man getting owned in your own house must sting
Aw, you get used to it after a while. O0
Not ideal of course, but there are a lot worse things than losing by one score to a great team.
Could have been boat raced by the Hawgs, for example...
-
the SEC isn't going to 9-game conference schedule, they know better
Nick Saban says otherwise.
-
It might come down to who can raid whom--the rump Big 12 or the AAC.
Guess this question has been answered.
-
A decade back, the powers in the SEC were somewhat different, we all know this thing changes over time to some extent. Arky was 11-2 and USCe was 11-2, UGA was 10-4 and ranked in the teens. Florida was unranked. Bama beat LSU for the BCS thingee.