Jump to content

Realignment talk not going away


The Tower

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Al_4_ISU said:

And the Big 8 and the Pac 10 and a 10 team Big 10 and put Pedo in a conference with Pitt, Cuse, WVU, BC, etc.

Just go back to the 80's and make some minor tweaks.

Yeah that would realistically be the best thing.. Until someone else comes along and thinks, you know what we need? TV numbers from CFB haven NYC!!!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

And the Big 8 and the Pac 10 and a 10 team Big 10 and put Pedo in a conference with Pitt, Cuse, WVU, BC, etc.

Just go back to the 80's and make some minor tweaks.

10 team SEC.

But you can't go home again. Obviously I loved those days but it just wouldn't be the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bingo. Texas fans lose sight of the fact that as exciting as it is for West Virginia to come down here every other year and kick our asses and do the Horns down, they'd rather be playing Pitt. Iowa State would be better off playing the Big 8 (maybe minus Colorado) plus Iowa. Etc, etc. 
Geography matters. Our sport is trying to be post-geographic. It's fucking retarded and it's ruining the game.

Agreed. The silver lining is that the ubiquitous nature of streaming has changed the game. TV footprints mean far less than they did a decade ago and will mean even less when companies like Amazon throw their hat in the ring for content without being tied to cable at all.

What will get the most eyes on the sport is matchups between top programs and the regional rivalries that differentiate the sport from pro football. A move to eight team playoff allows for the majors to play each other OOC and generate those $$$ while getting fans more engaged with the undercard, both in terms of attendance and ratings, by playing more games between regional schools with deep ties.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, gmr548 said:


It'll never happen, but the old SWC, plus LSU and the Oklahomas would be so fun.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 

Add LSU, but keep the Oklahomas in the Big 8.  If you keep the conferences small enough, you have lots of room for OOC against schools that are nearby, but part of a different league/division/conference/whatever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Add LSU, but keep the Oklahomas in the Big 8.  If you keep the conferences small enough, you have lots of room for OOC against schools that are nearby, but part of a different league/division/conference/whatever.

This is correct. OU doesn't need to be a conference game for us for it to have meaning, and I'd prefer almost any solution that avoided a fucking rematch with them in December. That completely undermines the idea of bragging rights. 

And Oklahoma State doesn't need to be on our schedule ever for any reason. A home-and-home every fifty years would be plenty. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/23/2019 at 4:12 PM, Doc Sam Beckett said:

Remember when the Big 10 took Rutgers and Maryland and everyone laughed at them? That's kind of like being excited about the Arizona schools. 

Eh.  Arizona and ASU are middle of the pack football schools that occasionally play above that level.  Maryland football might fit that description but Rutgers doesn't.  I don't know if you get excited about those two Arizona schools but they aren't as bad as the Big 10's recent adds.

From a purely athletics standpoint, maybe that would be like someone else adding Oklahoma State and Texas Tech. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/23/2019 at 5:54 PM, SwanderedTalent said:

Everybody would actually prefer that, they just don't realize it yet.

 it always will be-- Texas versus Kansas State will never be inherently meaningful, even if we play it every year for 50 years. 

 

 

Sure it will.  It won't morph into UT-A&M but it can be an appreciated oatmeal rivalry.   But it has to be every year, not the divisional cross-over where a team won't visit again for many years.  ND-Stanford was an eyesore until it was played annually for an entire generation.  Eventually LSJU found their Snyder and the game has overtaken Michigan State on our hierarchy of hate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, notre dame joe said:

Sure it will.  It won't morph into UT-A&M but it can be an appreciated oatmeal rivalry.   But it has to be every year, not the divisional cross-over where a team won't visit again for many years.  ND-Stanford was an eyesore until it was played annually for an entire generation.  Eventually LSJU found their Snyder and the game has overtaken Michigan State on our hierarchy of hate. 

I don't think Notre Dame make a particularly good comparison for us, or really anybody else on this level of college football. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the Florida State/Clemson to the Big 12 talk was going on, the Big 12 didn't jump in to grab schools.   Instead they worked with the ACC to show them how to set up a GoR to stabilize talks.

I have a feeling they won't be aggressive with the Arizona schools either.   I'm also not sure if they'll make more money if they move.   There wasn't a lot of new money created with expansion, everyone basically paid for themselves.  The biggest batch of new money was with the Big Ten, but it was due to moving to 9 conference games, not expansion.  

The biggest coup of the expansion years was the Big 12 locking up the Sugar Bowl with the SEC.   I'm not sure what other big nuggets are out there, but I'm pretty sure the Arizona schools aren't one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

When the Florida State/Clemson to the Big 12 talk was going on, the Big 12 didn't jump in to grab schools. 

The big 12 has no leadership, no vision, no plans for the future, no conference channel, no decent conference web-site, no nothing. It just exists like a wart.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

okay I'll play along.  Who is?

Let me turn that back around on you. Do you not think Notre Dame is pretty unique as a I-A program?

Who make a good comparison for a gigantic state school / traditional football powerhouse, in terms of its optimal conference alignment? The problem answering that is that I don't think anyone has an optimal conference alignment. My point remains: geography/proximity makes the non-essential regular season games meaningful. That makes Texas-Baylor a different animal than Texas-Kansas State and while UT fans might like to joke about Prestige Worldwide and not needing to play the smaller, weaker, rapier Texas schools, games against those schools (even, gasp, the University of Houston) are more meaningful than a handful of games against modestly strong programs with whom we have nothing in common.

I want to be clear that my argument is that we as fans would enjoy the impact logical geographic alignment would have on our regular season schedules (and, as a side argument, that this makes organizing the post-season easier). I am not arguing athletic directors/departments or television execs would or should like the approach. This whole sport started over bragging rights, and you were out to get bragging rights over the other schools in your area. You want to know why college football was such a do-or-die emotional attachment from the earliest days, there you go. 

And that's why I say Notre Dame doesn't make a lot of sense as a comparison for the University of Texas-- the barnstorming tradition. Notre Dame resigned itself long ago to having to find its rivals where it could. Thus 90 years later, Southern Cal and Navy are still two of your big games, and you still treat rivalries as malleable (the Stanford/MSU example). I personally think that malleability has its limits. Thirty years of not playing Arkansas has made them an afterthought where they were once a hated rival. I don't really see a yearly game with Oklahoma State as an improvement on that rivalry, nor do I think playing West Virginia feels like as much is at stake as when we play Fucking Baylor. 

Edited by SwanderedTalent
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, SwanderedTalent said:

Let me turn that back around on you. Do you not think Notre Dame is pretty unique as a I-A program?

Who make a good comparison for a gigantic state school / traditional football powerhouse, in terms of its optimal conference alignment? The problem answering that is that I don't think anyone has an optimal conference alignment. My point remains: geography/proximity makes the non-essential regular season games meaningful. That makes Texas-Baylor a different animal than Texas-Kansas State and while UT fans might like to joke about Prestige Worldwide and not needing to play the smaller, weaker, rapier Texas schools, games against those schools (even, gasp, the University of Houston) are more meaningful than a handful of games against modestly strong programs with whom we have nothing in common.

I want to be clear that my argument is that we as fans would enjoy the impact logical geographic alignment would have on our regular season schedules (and, as a side argument, that this makes organizing the post-season easier). I am not arguing athletic directors/departments or television execs would or should like the approach. This whole sport started over bragging rights, and you were out to get bragging rights over the other schools in your area. You want to know why college football was such a do-or-die emotional attachment from the earliest days, there you go. 

And that's why I say Notre Dame doesn't make a lot of sense as a comparison for the University of Texas-- the barnstorming tradition. Notre Dame resigned itself long ago to having to find its rivals where it could. Thus 90 years later, Southern Cal and Navy are still two of your big games, and you still treat rivalries as malleable (the Stanford/MSU example). I personally think that malleability has its limits. Thirty years of not playing Arkansas has made them an afterthought where they were once a hated rival. I don't really see a yearly game with Oklahoma State as an improvement on that rivalry, nor do I think playing West Virginia feels like as much is at stake as when we play Fucking Baylor. 

I think there's an element of diminishing returns on your proximate rivals.  Having already played TTech, Baylor, North Texas etc. do you really want to play UH for even more Texas?  I don't think the SWC is viable in a more interconnected era.  Everyone would be negging you for playing just about everything in one state.  So your going to form relationships with other rivals, and I don't see very many schools in the world that look like UT Austin.

 

FYI ND went barnstorming for rivals because Michigan led a boycott of our program and bullied the then "Western Conference" members not to play us.  It's our heritage and a great boon, but it was originally forced upon us.  Successfully, that knowyourrivals poll confirmed what we already knew, ND fans value the SC game way more than Michigan and the rest.  Boston Cousin Oliver College rates ND far above anyone in their region. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, notre dame joe said:

I think there's an element of diminishing returns on your proximate rivals.  Having already played TTech, Baylor, North Texas etc. do you really want to play UH for even more Texas?  I don't think the SWC is viable in a more interconnected era.  Everyone would be negging you for playing just about everything in one state.  So your going to form relationships with other rivals, and I don't see very many schools in the world that look like UT Austin.

North Texas is not part of this equation. You are getting way out in left field here. I am saying that in an ideal and not necessarily realistically achievable world, all of major college football (P5) would morph into small, regionally coherent conferences because those would be preferable to the average fan attending the games compared to the SEC/Big 10@14 style megaconferences. It wouldn't just be Texas playing a lot of regional opponents to decide its conference title, it would be everyone. Ohio State wouldn't play Maryland as a conference game. Alabama wouldn't play South Carolina. 

I am not suggesting Texas should unilaterally leave the Big 12 and establish some kind of Lone Star Conference with any fucking program you can name in the state. I mentioned Houston because, as much as I hate Cougar High, playing them was and would be more interesting than playing Iowa State.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SwanderedTalent said:

North Texas is not part of this equation. You are getting way out in left field here. I am saying that in an ideal and not necessarily realistically achievable world, all of major college football (P5) would morph into small, regionally coherent conferences because those would be preferable to the average fan attending the games compared to the SEC/Big 10@14 style megaconferences. It wouldn't just be Texas playing a lot of regional opponents to decide its conference title, it would be everyone. Ohio State wouldn't play Maryland as a conference game. Alabama wouldn't play South Carolina. 

I am not suggesting Texas should unilaterally leave the Big 12 and establish some kind of Lone Star Conference with any fucking program you can name in the state. I mentioned Houston because, as much as I hate Cougar High, playing them was and would be more interesting than playing Iowa State.

That has us a rivalry with Indiana State and Western Michigan.  Regional coherence is one aspect of a schedule.  Aspirational peers is another as is public perception.  If UT desires to be thought of like UCLA then they should  be playing them more often than Houston.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 10/24/2019 at 11:23 AM, gmr548 said:


Agreed. The silver lining is that the ubiquitous nature of streaming has changed the game. TV footprints mean far less than they did a decade ago and will mean even less when companies like Amazon throw their hat in the ring for content without being tied to cable at all.

What will get the most eyes on the sport is matchups between top programs and the regional rivalries that differentiate the sport from pro football. A move to eight team playoff allows for the majors to play each other OOC and generate those $$$ while getting fans more engaged with the undercard, both in terms of attendance and ratings, by playing more games between regional schools with deep ties.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 

I completely disagree streaming doesn't have an effect whatsoever on whether regional rivalries.  Streaming is simply the delivery method.   Amazon may have money to throw at content but that doesn't determine which rivalries and what games are important to the general public.   

Actually, I think there is a lot of argument that there may be sports revenue peak from a tv standpoint coming if not in 2025 or at least the next tv contract that may allow for consideration of going back to a more regionalized setup.  That may be within a P4 league but they would be smart to put those games back in place.  

I think the sport overall would be better off if we get a P4 of 64-72 teams that negotiates their tv contract as one entity.  A competition of who makes more between the B1G or SEC is not going to be the best overall situation for the sport of CFB.  

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Since this is the catch all media thread and speaking of Amazon, they are eyeballing more sports streaming to increase customers:

Amazon Eyes Right to Stream Premiere League

Quote

Amazon saw a record number of new subscriptions in the United Kingdom on Dec. 3-4 after it live-streamed 10 top-flight Premier League matches on its Prime Video service, The Guardian reports.

Why it matters: Amazon said the two days set records for most new sign-ups since the company launched its Prime service in the U.K. in 2007. If the company decides to bid on the rights to livestream more matches, it could prove to be a serious challenge to digital platforms Sky and BT, The Guardian notes. Amazon has the resources to challenge and outbid both companies for Premier League rights.

Details: Amazon spent about $118 million on a three-year package of rights to see if streaming the matches will continue to bring in new subscribers before going all-in.

The package gives Amazon rights to stream nine matches on Dec. 26 and one match on Dec. 27, The Guardian explains.

The big picture: Amazon has been trying to expand its presence in the U.K. by investing in streaming more sporting events, such as the U.S. Open, The Guardian notes.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hello ESPN?  This is College Football, just calling to say "You win."

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/cbs-will-stop-broadcasting-the-secs-top-football-game-of-the-week-after-2023/ar-BBYdglM?ocid=spartanntp

 

Quote

The network’s current $50+ million a year deal was up for renewal after that season and CBS was outbid. According to SBJ, ESPN and ABC look like the likely home for the conference’s top game of the week starting in 2024.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/26/2019 at 6:49 AM, SwanderedTalent said:

That makes Texas-Baylor a different animal than Texas-Kansas State and while UT fans might like to joke about Prestige Worldwide and not needing to play the smaller, weaker, rapier Texas schools, games against those schools (even, gasp, the University of Houston) are more meaningful than a handful of games against modestly strong programs with whom we have nothing in common.

I agree.

I'd much rather have UH in the Big 12 than WVU. But, maybe that's because Houston is my hometown and I know so many alumni. Dana Holgorsen obviously agees UH > WVU, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

It makes one wonder how the Big 12 will be able to compete.   The increased value of the CBS package will add $18M per year per team. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Houtexjhawk said:

It makes one wonder how the Big 12 will be able to compete.   The increased value of the CBS package will add $18M per year per team. 

we're not really competing now

we have one program that generates playoff-caliber teams year-in and year-out in Oklahoma, and that program can't actually win any of the playoff games it plays in

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Texas A&M generating more revenue than us without accounting shenanigans and/or counting non-recurring inputs as "revenue" should be enough to push another major realignment, unless ESPN wants to step in again and placate us with another "You're Texas" bonus.

Edited by SwanderedTalent
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/26/2019 at 4:49 AM, SwanderedTalent said:

Let me turn that back around on you. Do you not think Notre Dame is pretty unique as a I-A program?

Who make a good comparison for a gigantic state school / traditional football powerhouse, in terms of its optimal conference alignment? The problem answering that is that I don't think anyone has an optimal conference alignment. My point remains: geography/proximity makes the non-essential regular season games meaningful. That makes Texas-Baylor a different animal than Texas-Kansas State and while UT fans might like to joke about Prestige Worldwide and not needing to play the smaller, weaker, rapier Texas schools, games against those schools (even, gasp, the University of Houston) are more meaningful than a handful of games against modestly strong programs with whom we have nothing in common.

I want to be clear that my argument is that we as fans would enjoy the impact logical geographic alignment would have on our regular season schedules (and, as a side argument, that this makes organizing the post-season easier). I am not arguing athletic directors/departments or television execs would or should like the approach. This whole sport started over bragging rights, and you were out to get bragging rights over the other schools in your area. You want to know why college football was such a do-or-die emotional attachment from the earliest days, there you go. 

And that's why I say Notre Dame doesn't make a lot of sense as a comparison for the University of Texas-- the barnstorming tradition. Notre Dame resigned itself long ago to having to find its rivals where it could. Thus 90 years later, Southern Cal and Navy are still two of your big games, and you still treat rivalries as malleable (the Stanford/MSU example). I personally think that malleability has its limits. Thirty years of not playing Arkansas has made them an afterthought where they were once a hated rival. I don't really see a yearly game with Oklahoma State as an improvement on that rivalry, nor do I think playing West Virginia feels like as much is at stake as when we play Fucking Baylor. 

I don’t know. I’d rather play a line up of bama, Auburn, LSU, Florida, Tennessee vs tcu, Baylor and cigar high 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, Houtexjhawk said:

It makes one wonder how the Big 12 will be able to compete.   The increased value of the CBS package will add $18M per year per team. 

The Big 12 will compete just like it, and its predecessors, and every other conference has always done - on their own merits.  Some of you kids don't remember decades ago when the payouts were not even close to 2019, and yet somehow, conferences were doing what they always did.

No kid is going to turn us down because of what another conference is making every year, they are going to turn us down because we have a shit program headed by a shit coach.

2 hours ago, SwanderedTalent said:

Texas A&M generating more revenue than us without accounting shenanigans and/or counting non-recurring inputs as "revenue" should be enough to push another major realignment, unless ESPN wants to step in again and placate us with another "You're Texas" bonus.

So that's the fucking answer?  Run away?   Aggy and Nebraska, those are teams that run away.  We're Texas, we don't do that kind of shit.

And because we are Texas, we know that aggy, as always, is benefitting from their big brothers and riding their coattails - Alabama, LSU, Georgia, Auburn, etc. are the reasons the SEC is getting paid more.  

Aggy coulnd't even win their fucking division with their greatest QB of all time, let alone compete for a conference title.  Nobody gives a fuck about a team that hasn't won a national title since Hitler was in power.   If Alabama, LSU, Auburn, and Georgia bailed on the SEC tomorrow, nobody is going to be like "Why good sirs of Texas Agricultural and Mechanical Institution, we would like to give you all the moneys for your Southeastern Conference of Athletics, because we believe your team is why the SEC is the SEC".

33 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

This might force everyone’s hand into a PAC 16 type set up.

Fuck that and fuck that shitty conference.

We will get paid just fine if we do well - Amazon and Apple have entered the chat, and have a shit-ton of money to throw around on sports, and that's a part of why CBS/Viacom are shedding some deals.  Amazon and Apple are sitting on a shit-ton more money than the Redstone family can even comprehend, and they know it's one of the few ways that they can compete with Disney+/Hulu/ESPN, and AT&T/Time Warner/HBO/whatever.

But if we don't get paid, it's because we are fielding a shit program led by a shit coach, and that is 100% on us.  Unlike aggy who blames everybody else for their problems, and blames their conference and runs away from their conference, our problems have nothing to do with our conference at all, and everything to do with the shit-show we've been running since our MNC run-in with Alabama.

Everybody needs to stop with this bullshit "aggy gonna get paid more and I'm scared" bullshit, because they are sucking on Daddy Saban's teat.  Aggy ain't making more because they went 6-2 in the SEC back in 2012, or because they won a MNC back in the 1930s.

We will get paid just fine as long as we get our house in order.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Aqua Buddha said:

This might force everyone’s hand into a PAC 16 type set up.

If remaining as projected -

Beginning in 2023, it seems that -

Disney has 1st tier contracts with P5 leagues:

ACC(all)
SEC (all)
B1G (half)
XII (half)
PAC (half)

Disney has 2nd tier contracts with P5 leagues:

ACC (all)
SEC (all)
B1G (half)
XII (half)
PAC (half)

Disney has 3rd tier contracts with P5 leagues:

ACC (all)
SEC (all)
XII (9/10ths)

[*who's missing from 3rd tier..? - B1G/ 3rd tier with FOX, - & PAC/ 3rd tier independent]...
One of those two are still very much poachable while earning about $31 million per year from 1st/ 2nd & 3rd tier combined...

As shown before, ESPN has used this exact same model to raid "best of" BigEast, to add within ACC/ same is possible of XII & PAC with ESPN...
 

Quote

Big East Turns Down ESPN Proposal That Would Have Paid ...

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com › Daily › Issues › 2011/05/26 › Media
May 26, 2011 - The Big East Conference this week "turned down an offer" from ESPN that "would have paid Big East schools in the neighborhood of" $11M ...


*[later followed by]: BigEast prime brands being added to ACC, then starting a league-wide conference-specific network...

This could be quite similar to the seemingly parallel narrative of ESPN wanting the last independent 3rd tier network holdout in some form (talks in 2019)...

Quote

Pac-12 reportedly turned down an offer from ESPN to ...

https://awfulannouncing.com › local-networks › pac-12-reportedly-turned-...
Mar 25, 2019 - According to SBJ's John Ourand and Michael Smith, the Pac-12 turned down an offer from ESPN to distribute the Pac-12 Networks.


*[later followed by]: Only time will tell, but at this point, the league in the direst situation sits west of the continental divide...

rdvcHhd.png

Hmm...

(south)
#1-Oklahoma
#2-Oklahoma State
#3-TCU^
#4-Texas
#5-Texas Tech
#6-Arizona
#7-Arizona State
#8-USC
#9-UCLA

(north)
#1-Iowa State
#2-Kansas
#3-Kansas State^
#4-Colorado
#5-Utah
#6-California
#7-Stanford
#8-Oregon
#9-Washington

Divisions would be reminiscent of old XII south division years... ^[not included in 16 team model]...

What simultaneously increases revenues for the best of XII brands along with elite PAC schools + give ESPN coast to coast domination... wiggle :wiggle:

Edited by kopp0e
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

So that's the fucking answer?  Run away?   Aggy and Nebraska, those are teams that run away.  We're Texas, we don't do that kind of shit.

One, where do you see me advocating we "run away" from anything?

Two, yeah, "we're Texas". That attitude has served us so well the past forty years. Maybe we can hang another Revenue Champions banner. Or, heaven forfend, maybe not.

Edited by SwanderedTalent
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

 

The Big 12 will compete just like it, and its predecessors, and every other conference has always done - on their own merits.  Some of you kids don't remember decades ago when the payouts were not even close to 2019, and yet somehow, conferences were doing what they always did.

No kid is going to turn us down because of what another conference is making every year, they are going to turn us down because we have a shit program headed by a shit coach.

So that's the fucking answer?  Run away?   Aggy and Nebraska, those are teams that run away.  We're Texas, we don't do that kind of shit.

And because we are Texas, we know that aggy, as always, is benefitting from their big brothers and riding their coattails - Alabama, LSU, Georgia, Auburn, etc. are the reasons the SEC is getting paid more.  

Aggy coulnd't even win their fucking division with their greatest QB of all time, let alone compete for a conference title.  Nobody gives a fuck about a team that hasn't won a national title since Hitler was in power.   If Alabama, LSU, Auburn, and Georgia bailed on the SEC tomorrow, nobody is going to be like "Why good sirs of Texas Agricultural and Mechanical Institution, we would like to give you all the moneys for your Southeastern Conference of Athletics, because we believe your team is why the SEC is the SEC".

Fuck that and fuck that shitty conference.

We will get paid just fine if we do well - Amazon and Apple have entered the chat, and have a shit-ton of money to throw around on sports, and that's a part of why CBS/Viacom are shedding some deals.  Amazon and Apple are sitting on a shit-ton more money than the Redstone family can even comprehend, and they know it's one of the few ways that they can compete with Disney+/Hulu/ESPN, and AT&T/Time Warner/HBO/whatever.

But if we don't get paid, it's because we are fielding a shit program led by a shit coach, and that is 100% on us.  Unlike aggy who blames everybody else for their problems, and blames their conference and runs away from their conference, our problems have nothing to do with our conference at all, and everything to do with the shit-show we've been running since our MNC run-in with Alabama.

Everybody needs to stop with this bullshit "aggy gonna get paid more and I'm scared" bullshit, because they are sucking on Daddy Saban's teat.  Aggy ain't making more because they went 6-2 in the SEC back in 2012, or because they won a MNC back in the 1930s.

We will get paid just fine as long as we get our house in order.

almost tl:dr, but in summary...

fuck aggy

Edited by DFW Horn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/21/2019 at 10:52 AM, SwanderedTalent said:

we're not really competing now

we have one program that generates playoff-caliber teams year-in and year-out in Oklahoma, and that program can't actually win any of the playoff games it plays in

I was talking financially. Specifically, the schools in the Big 12 that are not UT.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Comfort Hire said:

It may be time to let go of the academic snobbery and jump ship.  We can take ou in tow.  Texas has been backing itself into a corner for decades.  Our athletic department is a pos and the money is really all we have left.  Eventually we will win it all again in Volleyball, what's not to like?

Jump ship to where?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SwanderedTalent said:

One, where do you see me advocating we "run away" from anything?

Two, yeah, "we're Texas". That attitude has served us so well the past forty years. Maybe we can hang another Revenue Champions banner. Or, heaven forfend, maybe not.

We're Texas was a slogan dreamed up by an advertising firm, nothing else. Deloss Dodds' leadership and the following interregnum got us to where we are. I am willing to give the new guy a chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

Jump ship to where?

The Big Ten, our academic peers.

And no, we don't, and shouldn't, bring along the sleazebag Sooners.  We can play them out of conference, the same way that worked just fine for 80% of our history with them.  Let them rot in the the dirty SEC or the Pac12+X.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...