Texas Leaving the Big XII
- Thread starter Iceman
- Start date
- Status
This belongs in the classics. You can't let the greatest Rick Roll ever disappear into oblivion!
For the record although I was 90% sure this was a fake (I read the following posts before fully reading this article) I actually thought a lot of the pro-Texas writing was exactly how a reporter from si.com or espn.com or in this case cbssportsline.com would write it. Their object is to get views. We you say things that are obviously inflammatory it generates more views.
This is a classic thread Ice well done. It truly is sad you couldn't work in an add with that thread. You would have clearly gotten plenty of publicity.
Finally someone said this is on snopes. I looked and couldn't find it. Can anyone post the link to snopes?
This is a classic thread Ice well done. It truly is sad you couldn't work in an add with that thread. You would have clearly gotten plenty of publicity.
Finally someone said this is on snopes. I looked and couldn't find it. Can anyone post the link to snopes?
Just yesterday, had a coworker ask if Texas was bluffing on its move to the ACC out here in California...nice work Iceman.
In all seriousness, where did you get this story? A buddy of mine sent it to me a few days ago, saying he heard from Ernie Coy (sp?) that is was a done deal... and he was being completely serious. Is this bogus or not?
Love the article. Like most, I knew it wasn't real from the very beginning (would have been several threads pinned to the top), but I thought the writing was very believable.
To your intended point: not only does the ACC make sense, it makes the most sense of any reasonable option for exactly the reasons you list. The only better fit would be a collision with the PAC X which won't happen but which would leave three divisions:
UT, aTm, TCU, Rice
Colorado, CSU, Arizona, ASU
USC, UCLA, Stanford, Cal
...with the top two seated teams playing in the championship game. In terms of travel (airports), $$$, TVs, recruiting, and interest that conference would be awesome.
To your intended point: not only does the ACC make sense, it makes the most sense of any reasonable option for exactly the reasons you list. The only better fit would be a collision with the PAC X which won't happen but which would leave three divisions:
UT, aTm, TCU, Rice
Colorado, CSU, Arizona, ASU
USC, UCLA, Stanford, Cal
...with the top two seated teams playing in the championship game. In terms of travel (airports), $$$, TVs, recruiting, and interest that conference would be awesome.
I don't understand the point of the 3 divisions. Why not 2? Also, I don't think CSU, Rice or TCU would add much to the conference. Rice & TCU aren't needed to get the Dallas or Houston tv markets (I wouldn't think) and CSU is not much of a draw in Colorado. It'd make more sense to add Utah, UNLV and New Mexico if you're looking for tv dollars and trying to stay geographical to the west coast.
The point of three divisions is to have more games against nearby teams (one all California Division, one all Texas Division, one half Colorado half Arizona division). If the championship is between the two best teams, why would it be important to have two divisions?
TCU and Rice help much more than you realize: one brings the metroplex, while the other brings Houston. Even if Texas is the most popular team in the state, this helps tremendously as it allows Texas to play in their cities, usually at the expense of some other team that might want to recruit the area. There is a reason we always schedule Rice or UH, and it's not the competition. Also, both schools, and especially Rice, bring academics (important if you want to entice Stanford and Cal).
CSU helps because it locks up the state of Colorado (which is a nice TV and recruiting state) and because it makes for a low-travel division.
Utah is a good team right now but I'd rather lock up Colorado than add Utah. Still, they could potentially replace CSU. UNLV and New Mexico bring nothing.
For the ideal conference, you want tradition, TVs, big cities, populous states, and nice airports.
TCU and Rice help much more than you realize: one brings the metroplex, while the other brings Houston. Even if Texas is the most popular team in the state, this helps tremendously as it allows Texas to play in their cities, usually at the expense of some other team that might want to recruit the area. There is a reason we always schedule Rice or UH, and it's not the competition. Also, both schools, and especially Rice, bring academics (important if you want to entice Stanford and Cal).
CSU helps because it locks up the state of Colorado (which is a nice TV and recruiting state) and because it makes for a low-travel division.
Utah is a good team right now but I'd rather lock up Colorado than add Utah. Still, they could potentially replace CSU. UNLV and New Mexico bring nothing.
For the ideal conference, you want tradition, TVs, big cities, populous states, and nice airports.
Ah, I see your point now. I'd probably still ditch CSU in favor of Utah, purely for drawing power and to add a new TV market. I would think that CU would lock up the state of Colorado w/o CSU.....but then again, I'm not an expert in TV markets. I think your idea certainly holds merit. How would you crown the conference champ?
Originally posted by = Ice Man =:
How is this thread still alive? What's the requirement for enshrinement in the Classics?
well since it made the rounds through many Longhorn fans circles it prolly deserves the nod.
- Status
