Has the state of Texas ever been dominated like that?
- Thread starter q1w2e3
- Start date
Can you imagine how much "fun" those aggys would have during their elephant walk if they did win an NC in football? Scary and weird.
That is not exactly what I'm saying. I'm saying the Texas and OU are a brand name that sells tickets whether or not they are good. Oregon had a great run, but they haven't been so great lately. I wouldn't go pay to see a bad Oregon team play A&M. I would go see a down USC, Ohio St, Michigan, etc. team play A&M. I'm saying that teams like TCU, while they are having a good run the past several years, aren't going to be a national draw anytime soon. They can't even sell out their own stadium for a big game.
Vanderbilt, Kentucky, and Missouri I will give you. The others I would disagree with you. Mississippi State has been what Baylor, Iowa St, K-State, Kansas, and Tech has been. All I'm saying is that Texas needs greener pastures because there is more money to be made and better draws out there for you. You can't tell me you enjoy games outside of OU on your schedule. I would think you would rather be independent to schedule who you want, or join PAC 12. You guys joined with OU would instantly make that conference better and teams like UCLA would then recruit better and Oregon would get better because you guys joined. I'm not bashing you guys, but I do think the pastures are greener elsewhere. It's going to happen, so we can see what happens then.
When the move comes...and it will, we can talk then to see how happy you guys will be. You are defending what you are in, like one would defend family, but there aren't many of you that get excited to play anyone else rather than TCU and your one big non conference game each year. You know how I know you aren't happier with TCU? You guys don't spend time talking about them. You see, the hate is what makes it fun to play each other. Texas doesn't sell out for TCU, they always would for A&M.
Blah blah blah the heart of my reply is TCU is better than you football and especially baseball or have you forgotten that they beat you not just once but twice in head to head competition. That's right Little ol TCU.
And lots of people on here talk about TCU.
You have no idea how the powers that be at Texas think.
And for the umpteenth time something you aggies will never be able to accept is that whatever you do in sports it has no bearing on the University of Texas.
Period
You may be right, but I wouldn't be so sure. If UT blew up the conference because of money and the LHN as many outsiders constantly rant, then why in the world would UT go to the PAC 12? Ain't no money out there.
The most recent average payout for each Power 5 league:
SEC: $40.9 million
- Big Ten: $34.8 million for teams getting full shares
- Big 12: also right about $34.8 million
- Pac-12: about $29 million
- ACC: something like $27 million
Factor in the $20 million annual LHN payout, and UT is crushing everyone else -- during its worst stretch in history. If we had a commissioner worth 2 cents (and we don't) - he would call Arizona and Arizona St., some of the ACC (FSU, Clemson and Miami aren't going to stay at the top for long if they are making 33% less than the SEC schools) and Nebraska (they can't be happy since their move). Don't need them all, just a few and then you have the top conference in all sports.
I have a sincere question for you followed by a factual statement.
Do you realize that going all the way back to the 80s that the SEC made overtures to Texas about joining the SEC? It's true. They couldn' get us, so they settled for arky. Now, while arky is certainly making more money, they have nothing to show for it. Again in the 90s the SEC asked Texas to join. We declined because of the formation of the big 12. The sec asked yet again in the early 2000s and were rebuffed again. See the pattern?
Why did we say "No thanks"? It wasn't the money. It was because we didn't want the SEC to get their hooks into the recruiting base in Texas. It wasn't a non zero sum game, for us. Fast forward to atm being upset about the Longhorn network- among other grievances, and the SEC was able to get atm to make a decision based on emotion.
Now, to join the SEC, you simply needed an invite by one school, and at least 5 more schools to vote you in. This happened for you guys. Now, did you know the SEC can also kick you to the curb when they Want? Yup. It's true. They only need 8 votes to bounce you. That's it. 8. You don't get a vote, but errbody else does.
The only way Texas leaves the big 12 for the SEC is as follows:
Texas would ask the SEC to hold a vote and would only come there if the SEC voted atm out FIRST, and then invited Texas in after.
Now, I know what you're thinking-- "They would never vote us out!" You sure about that? You sure if we didn't agree to share our LHN revenue or rework our tv deal with the caveat that they bounce you guys in favor for us that they wouldn't seriously consider it?
They would. And from a business side and revenue side, it would be in their best interest. So just remind ags that the 8 vote sword of Damocles is always there-- hanging over your head.
clob, I agree with everything that you said. However, and correct me if I'm wrong, wasn't another factor why Texas decided against joining the $EC was because overall, the conference doesn't meet UT's academic standards?
That was one of the "headline" reasons UT used but as anyone will tell you with regard to conference affiliation, outside of the ivy league, each conference has it's academia and it's diploma factory schools. Most people don't realize that Miami is a private, very highly reputable, research school. It just so happened that they sold their souls to be more than that.
Our academics would fair just fine in the SEC..... if anything, we'd help raise the standards.
No, the nation does not care about Mississippi, Mississippi St, Arkansas, Tennessee, Texas A&M, or South Carolina either.
We will have to agree to disagree. When Texas DOES move on from the Big 12 you will be elated.
I'm not sure you understand that Texas may be king in the Big 12, but they aren't in the SEC. Alabama will tell you when and where to piss. There already is an alpha in the SEC. Do you honestly at this point think that the SEC really wants Texas? The SEC has what they want...the state of Texas. They want other markets and no, it isn't about Texas going to the SEC and demanding what they want. It is about the SEC going out into other markets and bringing out other territories.
Texas was simply late to the party when conferences started expanding. They will join another or go independent. It is a dying conference. OU and OSU will bolt soon, so if I'm Texas I might want to start being proactive.
i think you can argue for tennessee. when fulmer was there, they were a legit national brand. fulmer, however, hasn't been there for a very long time.
what cracked me up about crowing about the sec west is that people (ags) acted like ole miss and miss state were national powers of long standing. truthfully, they put together a few good years. but, in pure secsec style, ole miss's were not at all shockingly found to be dirty. miss state, to be fair, was built on the talent of dan mullen, who is now off to florida. they may have one more decent year in them because of nick fitzgerald, but after that they're back to being 5-7 eternally.
i think georgia found the right coach. and i think mullen will help at florida. but the mississippis (because they're mississippis), arkansas (not sure how that gets turned around in a big way), and lsu (they hired an oaf for a coach) are going to be fair-to-middling programs for a while. there is an opportunity for ag. auburn is always up-and-down, so all they really need to do is clear that biggest of hurdles. i mean, they won't. but the opportunity IS there.
I see what you're saying and where you're going with this but let's be intellectually honest for a moment---
"All hail Bama" seems to be what you're eluding to. Bama controls the sec because of their dominance over the last 9 years. I don't disagree with that. Bama is having a consistent run much like nebraska did from the late 80s into early 2000s. Always in the hunt. In point of fact, when we joined the big 12 in 1996, nebraska was gunning for its 3rd natty in a row. Something no other team has done. As you recall, we foiled that little plan, and then some years later, nebraska ran for cover in the big 10 because we were able to impose our will at the negotiations table, as well as on the field.
Now with regard to the sec "having" texas, this is a bit disingenuous. Consistently since atm has joined the sec, year in and year out, the ratings in the states top markets, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio and Austin, shows that Texas viewers ship is almost double that of atm viewership (roughly 78% higher give or take). Granted, that depends on the specfic weekend and the match ups, but historically, this is what has played out since the departure of atm. I will grant you, under the manziel years, atm had a huge uptick, but it has plummeted by comparison since then.
The sec has but one goal, to increase viewership and revenue. The facts show they could do that by adding texas, and if they jettisoned atm.
Now, will this happen? Probably not. But if push came to shove, the sec will ALWAYS side with the money and the eyeballs-- both of which texas has more of.
I think it would put the Big 12 on par with the SEC, but not better by just adding Arizona and Arizona St. If you added Florida St and Clemson then that would be a big get, but again, don't be late. The SEC will be moving soon to add more teams, and Virginia Tech, Clemson, Florida St, OU, etc have all been discussed.
There is no rush. We are part of a conference, not just a lone gun. When the change takes place, I'm sure we will act with our friends within the conference. Likely this splits on state lines, politics and all.... The Big 12 is at a disadvantage geographically and demographically at least in the north. Unless agriculture and the commodity universe goes to the moon and the midwest gets an influx of tv sets, the Big 12 may be in trouble. Fact is that we did not bail on our friends. Texas A&M went begging to the SEC and showed no loyalty. Pretty sad IMO.
We’re not going anywhere. We make our own conference. We don’t have to rely on good teams in our conference to feel good about ourselves like some lessers.
This is correct Scholz and that is what another poster pointed out. Three conference championships isn’t being the alpha dog. Now if OU had been in another conference, Texas would look good. You guys are playing my daddy can whip your daddy. I call a draw on obsession with the aggies and horns.
Only on message boards though. I don’t care who anyone’s a fan of. Idiots pick their friends and judge character that way. That is some shallow thinking.
I didn't see anyone involve ou. Granted our big 12 resume in football is not as good as ou's but our bottom line is much better as well as our overall resume in conference championships. What I think Sholz is saying is that we are the crown jewel of the conference as far as dollars go, and all of cfb for that matter. With that being said, there's more to conference alignment than just football. Research is huge as well and we are a leader in this category. Fact is that we could be running the SEC like we do the big 12 if we wanted to but we did not choose that because we actually have friends and UT fans have friends at the water cooler and that's more important than looking the best as aggie tries to do with the sec,sec, nonsense.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Big_12_Conference_champions
Last edited:
Don't know if y'all care or not but, I'm taking a glorious top 10ish deuce right now. Perfect consistency.
Didn't say we were the Alpha Dog of the conference. OU has definitely handled their business in conference. Although UT does have the more recent national title.
What I'm saying to the aggy is that we don't have to run off to another conference to feel good about ourselves. That seems to be their only sales pitch. "We lose to good teams in big stadiums!"
