If Houston joins Big 12..Herman will stay
- Thread starter ketelmeister
- Start date
http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/the-20-most-profitable-college-football-teams-122215. We are talking $$ right? I don't see Houston on the list. The gap between #1 (Texas) and #20 is HUGE! FYI, the list is for PROFIT. Our revenue is higher ($152 million per year).
Houston has done terrific this season, no question. And last season. Hats off to them for that. And Texas is in the midst of a string of bad seasons. But there's a significant difference between having good seasons and having an ongoing power program. It takes a lot to make that jump. It's not impossible, but there are plenty of programs who have had a couple of good seasons and then things come back to earth. It's the far more likely outcome, whether it ends up happening at Houston ultimately or not.
Personally, I think it would be a stroke of genius on the part of Houston if they were to look at the options for "travel partners" and appeal to the Pac 12 about potential membership. It might not got anywhere, but membership in the Big 12 is bad for too many Big 12 schools (and puzzling to me if Texas is truly in favor of their membership). But making a splashy move to a power conference, while simultaneously cutting off one of Texas' escape routes from the Big 12 would be a huge boost for them, and well worth a try, even if it ends in rejection. And who knows? The Pac 12 would love to get into markets in the state of Texas and is almost equally limited in their realistic and attractive expansion options as the Big 12. The most obvious targets are Big 12 teams and, if the aren't moving for now, what could it hurt to try? It seems more mutually beneficial for the conference and for Houston than the Big 12 adding them.
Side note, though, I hope they don't do that. I want Texas to have as many options as possible as far as Big 12 exits if and when that comes up.
Texas doesn't and knows there isn't 8 votes for UH(Big 12 rules require a super majority to add a team which with 10 teams is 8 votes). This allows Texas to play the political game, to sooth things over the UT Houston campus, and endorse UH for the Big 12 while knowing they will never get in.
Last edited:
Texas certainly has options to move.
-Big 10: would get to play in the West with Nebby and play northern school in late fall, something they have resisted in the Big 12. Ohio .State and Michigan run the conference, so Texas would join Nebby in the back seat.
-PAC 12: enter oblivion with games in the middle of the night and very little media attention on the West coast. Culture is left wing, embrace it.
-ACC: hard to see that as a move up...lose all rivals and play weaker schools than in the Big 12
-SEC: join Aggy and admit they made the right choice. Other than Johnnie Football, they are finding what life is like in .Alabamas conference, AND Aggy might veto move...they would control .Texas destiny,
Big 12 is the best option.
-Big 10: would get to play in the West with Nebby and play northern school in late fall, something they have resisted in the Big 12. Ohio .State and Michigan run the conference, so Texas would join Nebby in the back seat.
-PAC 12: enter oblivion with games in the middle of the night and very little media attention on the West coast. Culture is left wing, embrace it.
-ACC: hard to see that as a move up...lose all rivals and play weaker schools than in the Big 12
-SEC: join Aggy and admit they made the right choice. Other than Johnnie Football, they are finding what life is like in .Alabamas conference, AND Aggy might veto move...they would control .Texas destiny,
Big 12 is the best option.
Last edited:
Just an opinion, but I don't see Houston making a move anywhere anytime soon. I think they sit tight till something with a power 5 conf opens up, my feeling is that is when the GOF expire for the Big 12. Then I think UT and OU leave the Big 12 and everything opens up. Interesting question is how the legislators in TX and OU react. Assholes
Just a simple opinion.
Just a simple opinion.
Both Texas and OU already had options to leave the conference and didn't...what has changed?
Texas and ou will ALWAYS have options.... you wouldnt understand that being a Houston fan
http://houston.cbslocal.com/2016/08/24/tom-herman-should-leave-uofh-for-these-9-programs/ From CBS Houston, before the 2016 season started..."We need to have a hard conversation with Houston Cougar fans. Tom Herman is leaving the University of Houston...Their school is a stepping stone for coaches to get better jobs."
Nothing. But nothing changing is part of the problem and part of why I wonder if Texas will end up sticking around long-term. I have always thought that the-powers-that-be at Texas decided to sit tight with the Big 12 as a "wait and see" thing. Now, it was kind of a conservative move for my taste, but it's been a position of strength and it doesn't burn any of the possible future bridges (even though some of them could eventually burn from the other end if conferences expand in other ways). If we stuck around and everything went great, then cool. But there's clearly still quite a bit of unrest with the conference, and signs point to the fact that its days may be numbered and that most of the expansion candidates have issues, whether short-term or long-term.
So yeah, I think that there's a strong possibility that around 2025, if nothing shakes the conference apart sooner, Texas will take 3 other schools and head west (being part of a division that is all Central and Mountain to avoid most of the late night games for football... while other sports may or may not shift later, but Texas has never shied away from playing west coast teams OOC in baseball, softball, volleyball, or basketball anyway)... or they'll be in touch with the Big 10 (who doesn't seem all that hung up on having 16 teams as a ceiling, so I'd imagine there'd be a play for Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas and... someone. Maybe Notre Dame. Maybe Rice to have a second Texas school that fits their AAU-focused profile). Texas and OU to the SEC is an interesting thought, but not my favorite situation.
... and you don't strike me as a poster who just comes over here to say nice things about UT. I'd tend to agree with both of those things. The bigger question to me is what moves UT's powers-that-be might decide they want to make in both situations.
As I said above, the idea of joining the SEC isn't the most appealing to me (and no, not because I worry that we wouldn't be able to compete given time or whatever)... but I will admit, there's something appealing to the idea of having annual games against OU, our old rivals at Arkansas, the Aggies (as a conference foe... I'm a little indifferent about scheduling them OOC if it's a question of playing A&M or... Michigan... Ohio State... Notre Dame... LSU... USC...I like having a variety of marquee games in the future schedules), plus a rivalry with our neighbors to the east in LSU. If it were just us and OU who made the switch (assuming that's even possible and that the state legislatures wouldn't get involved as far as trying to say OU is tied to OSU or Texas is tied to Tech or whoever), I wonder how the divisions would work out. I could kind of see OU being part of the east (and renewing a rivalry with Missouri) and that just being our permanent rival. Seems less complicated than adjusting scheduling so that Alabama gets to play both Auburn and Tennessee if you move Auburn over.
Still, I think that the Big 10 or the Pac 12 would be more likely and personally I'd be in favor of either situation.
The best situation still would have been raiding the ACC back when they looked vulnerable, but that ship seems to have sailed so...
What do you think of the SEC going to 18 teams with 3 six team divisions and a two round playoff for the SEC title with 4 teams getting in. 3 division winners and a at large team.
SEC would be a league unto itself.
Nobody opposes expansion per se. When expansion occurs Houston is not on the table because they add absolutely nothing to the conference.
IT's not happening, Houston and the Big 12 are not happening. They can't get 8 votes.
I'm not sure what direction Wasatch was going with all of this, but I've always thought that if the Big 12 had been smart and went after the ACC teams they wanted hard back before the ACC got their new TV deals and the Notre Dame deal... that if the SEC were to expand more and it wouldn't include Big 12 teams, that they should go for UNC and Duke. I know that they're in the same state. I know that Duke isn't a huge school or a football power. But my logic on this was, the SEC... image-wise at least (I don't want to get into a battle over whether it's warranted or not in this particular post) doesn't have any issues with football... at all. That said, the state of North Carolina would be a nice additional market for any conference, and adding the Yankees/Red Sox of college basketball would be pretty huge. Because, Kentucky aside, SEC basketball DOES have a little bit of an image problem. So that would still be an option in Wasatch's proposal I guess?
Or maybe he's speculating that OU couldn't get away from Oklahoma State...?
Houston isn't keeping Herman if Texas wants him. No chance. USC could make things interesting, he wasn't offered that job last year otherwise he'd be there already, he turned down USCE. I think everyone needs to go ahead and accept that if Texas makes a move and wants Herman then it will be Herman.
1. Wouldn't U of H bring in more of the Houston market for Big 12 TV? That's currently owned by the SEC (LSU and A&M). Seems that U of H in Big 12 conference match-ups would bring viewership.
2. Based on the position repeatedly taken by the Oklahoma legislature, OU isn't going anywhere without Oklahoma State. Perhaps that changes when Boone Pickens is no longer a factor.
2. Based on the position repeatedly taken by the Oklahoma legislature, OU isn't going anywhere without Oklahoma State. Perhaps that changes when Boone Pickens is no longer a factor.
Last edited:
UH doesn't own the Houston market. Before UH moved their games to a smaller stadium, UT had more fans in the stands than UH. It was really a home game for UT. Bottom line, other than a currently good football team, UH doesnt add annything to the Big12. Esp academics. Only plus in this is to elevate UH to a higher level at the expense of the rest of the league. UT and AtM own the Houston market.
You're looking at this wrong. As far as the TV deals go (at least as long as the cable bundle package type thing holds out and doesn't go more a la carte), the question is... do enough people in Houston want to watch some of the teams in the Big 12 enough that local cable providers will want to have those networks' channels (all the ESPNs, all the Foxes, etc) in their most popular TV packages. If the answer is yes... and it is in this case... then they already have that market regardless of how many eyeballs are on the game.
Now, I think that this model will change, but if and when that happens, it blows up the entire model of what cable networks are looking for as far as programming. Rutgers and Maryland were attractive to the Big 10 because of the current model. They wouldn't necessarily be in a more a la carte model. But that's not where things are right now.
But I didn't say UH owned the Houston market. I said that UH, in Big 12 matchups, might might add to the Big 12's share of that market. Just because people don't go to the games doesn't mean they won't watch the team against Texas, Baylor, TCU or Oklahoma.
There is an article out today that says if the Big 12 expands, they still won't extend the GOR. In particular, it mentions that Texas and Oklahoma both agree with this. That's a pretty big hint that both schools might have roving eyes, in which case it might affect Herman's decision to stay at Houston, expansion or not.
The big 12 share of Houston vs the SEC share of Houston probably sitting at 65 to 35 and the only reason why the SEC would have that much of a percentage is due to many families moved to Houston because of Hurricane Katrina. There are a lot of folks that live there now but still doesn't outweigh the whole Big12. Even with aggys in the SEC. UH doesn't bring jack to the conference and as one have stated earlier. It will only help UH and not the conference. Baseball is not good. Basketball is not good. Football is good now but we all know how they were and can easily go back with the lose of their coach. I hope my old timers will be around to see UT move during the GOR
What some people have been thinking is that if Houston got into the Big 12, Herman wouldn't leave Houston, since at that point it would be a P5 job. If Houston did get in, but the Big 12 didn't extent the GOR, Herman might take that as a sign Texas/Oklahoma were planning to leave the Big 12, in which Houston would no longer be a P5 job.
Looking at it from a non biased perspective, if a coach is offered the choice to be head football coach at Houston, LSU, or Texas, do you think he stays at Houston?
Houston is not LSU or Texas, regardless of which conference you put Houston in. The money and prestige of the jobs are bigger and better at LSU and Texas.
These coaches are driven by ego, a coach is not going to stay at a shadow program even if it is winning BCS games.
I don't think he would stay either, but a lot of the talking heads have theorized that Herman would stay at Houston if it was a P5 job.
Similar threads
