TCU vs Texas

[utee94]

On shaggy (surly) the proper response would be, "I faked it with your mom last night."

But nobody here is nearly so uncouth.  Right?

My "secondary" teams are Stanford, Michigan, and Air Force, for various reasons.  I enjoy watching them play and always root for them to win, but their losses don't affect me one way or the other.  The Longhorns, on the other hand...

[Gigem]

Slightly back on topic but does anybody ever wonder about TCU's long-term benefit for the Big 12?  I mean right now they are a great addition to the conference and their football team has been nails for 20+ years and their baseball team is tops but you have to wonder when Gary Patterson leaves/retires/gets fired how well is TCU going to be able to keep it's football program up?  Right now they take a lot of talent that most major schools don't want and either turn 3* players into 4 and 5* performers or get a nice transfer like Kenny Hill once in awhile.  Once, when I was bored, I looked up TCU's SWC history and was shocked at how bad they were when the Big 12 was formed.  It was no wonder why they didn't get the invite to the XII and probably a good thing for them too since they were able to establish themselves outside of some very tough competition.  I do admit they have played much better in the XII than what I thought they would.  It's got to really stick in their craw that freakin' Baylor of all people would keep them out of the playoff.  

From my understanding although they have a very nice stadium it's small and they don't even fill it up.  I'm not sure how well they draw on TV but I know I'll watch them if they're playing somebody good (like UT or OU) or a bowl game but outside of that I don't pay much attention.  I always imagine that if we had hired Gary Patterson instead of Fran how much different the last 20 years would look (and yes I know we stole Fran from 'Bama not TCU).  

[BrownCounty]

Slightly back on topic but does anybody ever wonder about TCU's long-term benefit for the Big 12?

TCU has come darn close to obtaining helmet value in the last 10-15 years.  It sounds crazy to say.  Nationally they are known.  I credit Gary Patterson but I'm hoping Chris Del Conte had something to do with that as well.

As of now, TCU deserves P5 membership.  I mean, think about it, Wake Forest is P5.  Just being in the State of Texas allows schools like Baylor and TCU to be somewhat competitive.  If TCU was in Iowa it would have no chance.

I do believe that TCU/Baylor can still remain competitive for the longer haul, even if/when Texas rebounds.  It's a big state.  Granted, the SEC gets what it wants from Texas, and not just talking about A&M.  But it's a deep well.

Moderate CFB fans in Texas enjoy the matchups between Texas schools, so TCU helps out in that regard.  I know hardcore Aggies act disinterested but I know many Aggie girls that would enjoy playing Baylor and TCU, etc.  They're not caught up in the "screw you" drama, they just want something fun.  It's a solid point.

A&M is doing fine now as an SEC member, and I predict Jimbo will deliver.  However, an A&M vs. Miss State matchup doesn't hold a candle to A&M vs. Texas Tech.  I can enjoy A&M vs LSU, and A&M vs. Arkansas, but once it starts stretching beyond that, I don't care much.

Regional football is more passionate, and more fun.  We'll see what happens when this current Big XII contract plays out, I'll bet Del Conte pulls off something awesome.

[utee94]

Agree with you BC.

When Gigem says he'll watch TCU play OU or Texas, but not any lesser team, I get that, and that's fine.  

But the flipside is that all of the fans of other schools in Texas feel the same way about A&M.  They might watch A&M play Alabama or LSU, but none of them give a rat's ass about A&M playing Ole Miss or Miss State or Arkansas or Kentucky.

So generally, fans watch big games, and they don't watch non-big-games, unless it's their own team.  

Not sure about long term, but over the past 7 years since A&M left the B12 and TCU joined it,  TCU has been better than A&M at football and baseball, and has had some success in basketball as well.

Personally I like the UT-TAMU rivalry and I wish the Ags hadn't left, but nationally, the  B12 has actually been more competitive and better off with the Frogs, rather than the Aggies.

If the Aggies are happy in the SEC, good for them, I guess it worked out ok for all parties.

[CousinFreddie]

From a Sooner perspective, playing TCU is as tough as any other school in Texas, including A&M, in the years of the XII.  They’ve always played OU tough, going way back before the XII, although Texas is still by far the game you want to win and the most talented team from the state.  Generally speaking.  But TCU has always been tough.  Outside the region they may be seen otherwise, and certainly aren’t a known helmet, but I respect the hell out of them.  The little School that could.

[MikeDeTiger]

So generally, fans watch big games, and they don't watch non-big-games, unless it's their own team.  

Almost, for me.  I'll watch nearly every SEC west game I can, no matter how small.  We play all of them, so that sort of makes them interesting, and also I value my personal projections, and as I've endeavored to learn more X's and O's the past few years, I can anticipate the matchups and how teams will try to attack/defend us, and often times have a pretty good read on what will happen.  
When nothing else is on, I'm happy to watch another game featuring non-big teams from somewhere else.  But usually a big game from ooc is on or else some SEC action is happening, and I just can't skip that for Kansas vs. Iowa State.  

[Gigem]

I get what you're saying about TCU but what I am trying to say is that right now TCU is in the best period of their entire history.  Yes, TCU is a much better football member of the Big 12 than A&M when we were there*.  

They entered the Big 12 just as Texas was beginning a dip, Tech is no longer the program they were under Leach, Neb, A&M, CU, and Mizzou are gone.  They are competitive with every team in the conference and also do very well nationally but what about in say 10 years when Patterson is no longer there?  

Every fan on here knows, even with all the money in the world, great facilities, and great fan support just how hard it is to stay at the top.  ECFG's will strike, and probably sooner than later.  

Baylor being mentioned as competitive exactly makes my point.  For about the first 20 years of the conference they were terrible, simply atrocious.  Remember the game where they were winning and went for a garbage time score to "demonstrate toughness" and fumbled the ball, other team recovered and went 99 yards for the score and the win?  

Wake Forest may be Power 5, but they don't deserve it and yes I know we lost to them last year.  It took Baylor 20 years and a coach that pretty much sold his soul to the devil to start winning and even this was while the Big 12 was fairly down.  

Oh, and I'm glad you liked watching A&M vs. Tech, it was usually a good match-up, but there were many years the game didn't make it on TV (but Iowa St/Kansas did).  A&M vs. Miss St always makes it on TV.  Tell me there wasn't something wrong with that.  

What does TCU bring to the conference once they suck at football?  Heck, they don't even have T-Shirt fans when they're winning.  

[utee94]

Almost, for me.  I'll watch nearly every SEC west game I can, no matter how small.  We play all of them, so that sort of makes them interesting, and also I value my personal projections, and as I've endeavored to learn more X's and O's the past few years, I can anticipate the matchups and how teams will try to attack/defend us, and often times have a pretty good read on what will happen.  
When nothing else is on, I'm happy to watch another game featuring non-big teams from somewhere else.  But usually a big game from ooc is on or else some SEC action is happening, and I just can't skip that for Kansas vs. Iowa State.  

Sure.  And because we play both Kansas and Iowa State, I'm far more likely to watch that game than Ole Miss vs. Miss State.
You're basically saying the same thing.  Fans tend to pay attention to 1) their own team 2) teams that they play regularly 3) big games not involving their own team or teams they play regularly.  

[utee94]

I get what you're saying about TCU but what I am trying to say is that right now TCU is in the best period of their entire history.  Yes, TCU is a much better football member of the Big 12 than A&M when we were there*.  

They entered the Big 12 just as Texas was beginning a dip, Tech is no longer the program they were under Leach, Neb, A&M, CU, and Mizzou are gone.  They are competitive with every team in the conference and also do very well nationally but what about in say 10 years when Patterson is no longer there?  

Every fan on here knows, even with all the money in the world, great facilities, and great fan support just how hard it is to stay at the top.  ECFG's will strike, and probably sooner than later.  

Baylor being mentioned as competitive exactly makes my point.  For about the first 20 years of the conference they were terrible, simply atrocious.  Remember the game where they were winning and went for a garbage time score to "demonstrate toughness" and fumbled the ball, other team recovered and went 99 yards for the score and the win?  

Wake Forest may be Power 5, but they don't deserve it and yes I know we lost to them last year.  It took Baylor 20 years and a coach that pretty much sold his soul to the devil to start winning and even this was while the Big 12 was fairly down.  

Oh, and I'm glad you liked watching A&M vs. Tech, it was usually a good match-up, but there were many years the game didn't make it on TV (but Iowa St/Kansas did).  A&M vs. Miss St always makes it on TV.  Tell me there wasn't something wrong with that.  

What does TCU bring to the conference once they suck at football?  Heck, they don't even have T-Shirt fans when they're winning.  

You're not really acknowledging that there are cycles to football.  Baylor was actually pretty good in the SWC long before the B12 existed.  And TCU's last national championship in football was just one year before A&M's national championship in football.
So I guess my answer is, if/when TCU regresses to the mean, they will bring no less than the Aggies did through 100 years of SWC football and 15 years of B12 football.
And in the meantime, they've brought a lot more than the Aggies ever did to the B12.
We get it-- you're bagging on the B12.  It seems to be an Aggie pass-time so no surprises there. You're delighted to play the Mississippi schools in the SEC.  That's cool.  Outside of Aggies, nobody in Texas gives a crap about Mississippi schools, but if you want to watch them play, then that's cool for you.

[FearlessF]

no one outside the SEC cares about the Mississippi schools

[CharleyHorse46]

The university I attended has a football team now but since they didn’t when I was there, it’s hard to connect.

As an Austinite, Texas has always been my favorite local “pro” baseball, football & basketball team.

(Do like the ‘Stros and Spurs. Try to like the Cowboys).

Rice is my pet team.

I’m anxiously awaiting my assigned team as my son entertains Div 2 offers/opportunities.

[Gigem]

You're not really acknowledging that there are cycles to football.  Baylor was actually pretty good in the SWC long before the B12 existed.  And TCU's last national championship in football was just one year before A&M's national championship in football.
So I guess my answer is, if/when TCU regresses to the mean, they will bring no less than the Aggies did through 100 years of SWC football and 15 years of B12 football.
And in the meantime, they've brought a lot more than the Aggies ever did to the B12.
We get it-- you're bagging on the B12.  It seems to be an Aggie pass-time so no surprises there. You're delighted to play the Mississippi schools in the SEC.  That's cool.  Outside of Aggies, nobody in Texas gives a crap about Mississippi schools, but if you want to watch them play, then that's cool for you.

Ah, but I am acknowledging cycles to football, and when the inevitable happens what does TCU bring to the conference?  And when you say they will bring "no less than the Aggies did through 100 years of SWC football and 15 years of B12 football" I couldn't disagree with you more.  

I guess it is shame that TCU didn't get the nod over Baylor in the mid-90's but looking at their record for the 20 or so years before that it's easy to see why.  

I'd like to think I'm not bagging the B12 at all, rather I'm bagging TCU.  You won't see me make this argument about WVU even though they're not nearly as strong of a program over the last few years as TCU.  I thought then as I do now that WVU brings a lot to the B12 even if they're football team isn't the best.  

I'm ambivalent at best about the Mississippi schools.  To me they are the equivalent of Ok St or Iowa St.  

[MikeDeTiger]

Sometimes even that prescribed order changes for me.  Don't tell anybody, but if we have a scrub game I have occasionally recorded it and watched a big game elsewhere instead.  In week two we played SELA which didn't interest me as much as Clemson/A&M.  Now I know you're probably thinking "A&M is in your division," but the same would have held true for TCU/Ohio State.  Way more interesting.

As fot what TCU brings, I recall utee making comments on the old board about how the Big 12 should have zero interest in adding them because they add no market and no interest.  So it's hard to reconcile this new position that they are a big positive contributor.  Tons more Aggies turning on TVs and spending $$....but maybe we're talking about on-field performance?  Which, honestly is not the first thing to cross my mind when considering what a team brings.  Texas has been bad this entire decade and it'd still be exciting to have them in our conference, and the SEC would buy a free round of drinks and hookers for everyone if UT would join it.  And they they wouldn't have to get a lick better, or bring more to the league on the field. 

[utee94]

Sometimes even that prescribed order changes for me.  Don't tell anybody, but if we have a scrub game I have occasionally recorded it and watched a big game elsewhere instead.  In week two we played SELA which didn't interest me as much as Clemson/A&M.  Now I know you're probably thinking "A&M is in your division," but the same would have held true for TCU/Ohio State.  Way more interesting.

As fot what TCU brings, I recall utee making comments on the old board about how the Big 12 should have zero interest in adding them because they add no market and no interest.  So it's hard to reconcile this new position that they are a big positive contributor.  Tons more Aggies turning on TVs and spending $$....but maybe we're talking about on-field performance?  Which, honestly is not the first thing to cross my mind when considering what a team brings.  Texas has been bad this entire decade and it'd still be exciting to have them in our conference, and the SEC would buy a free round of drinks and hookers for everyone if UT would join it.  And they they wouldn't have to get a lick better, or bring more to the league on the field.

You must be thinking of someone else?  I never said those things about TCU.  I don't love TCU by any means, they were cockroaches 50 years ago and they're cockroaches now.  And it's true that they didn't bring any new television sets to the conference then, or now.  But, nobody else that the B12 could realistically add would bring more TV sets either, so that was not a consideration at the time they were brought in. They weren't brought in to increase television ratings, they were brought in with the sole intent to plug the gap left behind by the departing Aggies.
So to be completely clear-- My position in 2010/2011,  when the Aggies decided to leave the B12, was that the B12 needed to offset the loss of that Texas school, by adding another Texas school.  For better or worse, a large part of the identity of the B12 is its "Texas-ness."  Not every high school recruit in the state is going to get recruited by helmet teams like Texas or Oklahoma or Alabama, in fact the vast majority of them will not.  A ton of those next-tier kids are going to end up at Baylor or TCU or Texas Tech or Oklahoma State (which is effectively a Texas school via proximity and its B12 affiliation).  So maintaining mindshare within the state of Texas-- maintaining a focus among those kids on football within the state of Texas, and offering them another B12 option within the state-- was of paramount importance to the conference.
TCU just happened to be the best available Texas school at that time. They had built a solid program and had won some big games.  They were really the only choice to replace A&M, given that we knew NOBODY we could realistically convince to join the conference was going to help with TV eyeballs.
People argued with me ad infinitum about my position on the importance of retaining the "Texas-ness" of the conference, and it's certainly possible I'm incorrect about that,  but I absolutely DID argue in favor of bringing in TCU, after the Aggies departed.