In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 228
Online now 204 Record: 7224 (2/22/2012)
The place to talk about the Texas Longhorns
The place for off topic discussion on Hookem
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Enjoyed your posts, FW Tide....thanks for the viewpoint.
Thanks. It's a fun discussion to have. It certainly makes the offseason much more interesting than in the past.
DeLoss seems to be part of the problem. He's hurting Texas and he's hurting the Big 12.
TAMU has already penetrated quite deeply into DFW and Greater Houston. Texas just cannot hope to provide any sort of similar penetration that A&M did. That reeks of TCU type TV sets added compared to the depth now(hyperbole but the analogy still fits).
The point with Austin is that during the TAMU/BAMA game Austin watched the game with much higher ratings than either Dallas or Houston. With that type of viewership already in place for SEC games, the question is that who isn't already watching the SEC on TV.
And your statement was that the SEC wants Texas. Texas needs the SEC to increase their national brand. The SEC does not need Texas to increase their national brand. North Carolina and Virginia penetrate much deeper than Texas could ever hope to nationally by adding to the SEC overall viewership.
Interested to hear more about why you think the SEC wants Texas. I just don't see the SEC passing up the opportunity cost of adding an unrepresented state outweighing the nominal addition with the much smaller uptick in adding Texas. Also, I see that Texas is politically hamstrung by all equal members in the SEC never approving the move.
Appreciate your response earlier. Cheers.
You're preaching to the choir friend. I agree with you 100%. I'm just relaying the one of the many challenges UT would face it if left for the SEC.
I love the SEC. I love the passion of the fans and pageantry on a week to week basis. I had a blast in Oxford for the Ole Miss/Texas game and wish I could go back this year just to root for Ole Miss against tamu. Everyone was extremely nice and ensured we had a good time.
I've dated girls from LSU and been to Baton Rouge a number of times. Believe me, I buy what the SEC is selling. Yes, cheating is common but like you said, everyone does to some extent.
At the end of the day, the Big 12 is the only conference that will have us on "our terms". Anyone else is going to make us play by their rules and we don't want that.
We sell the most merchandise in the whole country. We have the highest profit margins in the whole country. We have one of the strongest traveling fanbases to bowl games. We played in the highest rated championship game of all time.
I understand wanting to dive into a new market, but none of the new markets on the block offer even close to what Texas does in terms of revenue, prestige, and fan support.
It's not like we are talking about adding Southern Mississippi here when you already have Mississippi locked down.
This post was edited by Chuckie Finster 15 months ago
Sorry if my post sounded like it was directed at you. I understood that you were just relaying what other people believe. My response was not really directed at anyone on this board (because no one here has really expressed those feelings). To your other point, it is a shame that Texas won't "play by their rules" as you say. Not just from an SEC perspective. I think the PAC12 would've been great as well. Something has to give eventually, because I agree with Bobby. I just can't see the Big 12 being extremely attractive in the long run.
It will be interesting to see what happens when Texas becomes good again. I tell people around Tuscaloosa all the time to enjoy it while it lasts, because there will come a time when we go 7-6 again. We had our struggles in the period leading up to Saban's hire and even if we hire a great successor, college football is cyclical and we will struggle again at some point. Texas is at a crossroads, not just with conference affiliation, but with its identity as a football program. I think that just as CFB is better when Alabama is good, it's better when Texas is good. If I were a Texas fan, I'd be hoping for change across the board.
This post was edited by FortWorthTide 15 months ago
No but you are only talking about adding a small sliver over what is already taken hold in Texas by the SEC. The state of Texas is already locked down.
You and I have different definition of locked down.
Is there a presence? Of course. Does the SEC own the state? Not hardly. Would it if Texas joined A&M? Without question.
The SEC already has Austin television sets on lockdown. Why buy the cow if you are Slive?
Are you saying that you believe that adding University of Texas to the already waves of viewership in Texas outweighs new markets in populous states which are unrepresented?
Edit: It is what is best for the SEC not for Texas. Bobby's premise is that the SEC wants Texas. That just doesn't add up.
Edit:: Change milk to cow. jumbled idiom.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by Guardian Angel 15 months ago
Yes, that is what I am saying. Football is king in Texas. A split Texas can bring impressive viewership numbers. A united Texas can bring unprecedented viewership numbers.
You say the SEC already owns Texas. The SEC is the king of college football. I'm sure if you looked at TV numbers from North Carolina or Virginia or whatever other markets the SEC could tap into, it would show that they had good numbers for the big SEC games this year too. It's not the folks in North Carolina have never heard of the SEC and the only hope to get them to turn on CBS is to add UNC.
Not to mention, having both A&M and Texas in the SEC will virtually guarantee that most of the talented football prospects in the state of Texas will grow up wanting to play in the conference. That's got to be worth something.
What is a conference? What does it do? It creates a group contracting force where the group contract for the whole is better than the sum of its parts. It creates schedule simplification for ADs, particularly in the minor sports. It creates rivalries due to repeated annual games.
Now think outside of the box. Think the Big ACC - nothing would exist with that name, but as for as scheduling goes and as far as a championship game goes - probably only in football - it would resemble what people consider a "conference" today. However, it would remain two independent conferences for all other purposes.
Imagine a world where the winner of the Big XII (the Big ACC West) plays the winner of the ACC (the Big ACC East) in an annual championship. During the season there is a set schedule of cross competition that creates the repetitiveness that resembles exactly what the SEC East and SEC West are doing. The only difference is that for group contracting purposes and lesser sports, the two conferences remain separate.
Now imagine a playoff where the four finalists are the winner of the Pac 12, the winner of the Big 10, the winner of the SEC and the Winner of the Big-ACC. You would then have an effective 8 team playoff. I believe this is what is in the works.
This post was edited by Hornoflatulence 15 months ago
Yes he can.
1) Scheduling across the country will get better out of conference once we get rid of the BCS and implement at least an 8 team playoff.
2) Big 12 only needs to expand if it is the right teams with the national appeal. It's one thing to add West Virginia or TCU. It's another to add Utah State, San Diego St., SMU, etc. With that said, it would be nice to bring in Florida State and Clemson to get to 12 and have a national title game.
3) IMO the conference can improve substantially nationally with the improvement of Kansas and Iowa State in football. If Iowa State could emerge as the team to beat in the state of Iowa and Kansas could help steal some of the Kansas City market away from Missouri, I think it would help the conference considerably on a national stage.
I don't understand why people on this board keep making this comment. To much of the country, especially the coasts, Texas and Alabama are one in the same. Texas is considered a southern state and has all the same stereotypes as AL,GA,MS the Carolinas, etc. So what is the big deal about joining the SEC. It can't be academic as most SEC universities rank ahead of those in the Big XII.
it seems you vastly underestimate the value of Texas and the money it would bring to that conference.
If DeLoss called Slive and said we're in they'd be a member faster than aggy was voted in. You're seriously kidding yourself if you believe what you are saying.
The SEC would jump at the chance to add Texas? Why? Because it increases the quality of the tier 1 and 2 tv inventories. Adding UT to the already compelling matchups would be a HUGE boon for the SEC. TX vs Bama? TX vs LSU? TX vs Arky? TX vs ANM? TX vs Auburn?
The tv ratings on those would be sky high. Not to mention the fact if UT got a good draw from the East. UGA vs TX? UF vs TX? TX vs Tenn?
You're just adding at least 8 or nine games to the big time SEC time slots on CBS and ESPN with Texas being the true national draw.
One thing tamu people have a hard time understanding is Texas is a national University. tamu is regional. There's empirical proof all over the place.
Would be amazing.
Texas is being brought down by the Big 12, but Dodds and Brown have added to that as well. While they have schedule some big name out of conference games. It seems to me they try to schedule soft teams so not to lose, compared to building a strong team that can compete with anyone.
Just not true. Nobody in NYC confuses Texas with Bama. They may believe all Texans have horses and guns, but they do not associate Texas with the Deep South. I lived in NY a longtime. You are just not accurate on this post.
The SEC taint is strong with this one.
Brand value. Something Mike Slive clearly understands. You? Not so much.
I think a&m did the right thing for themselves by moving to the SEC. And they deserved all the credit they received this year. But, they are not a nationally known brand and Texas is. You hardly see a&m apparel outside of Texas. I average 200 nights a year away from home, all of which is out of state and country and the amount of Texas clothing is significantly more than most others. Unless you count the local teams in that area.
I lived in New Jersey and would also agree with and support your argument...Texans are not associated with the deep south.
As for Texas and the SEC, I do not think Bobby is breaking a story by saying the SEC wants Texas. Texas leads the nation in revenue. One of the top 10 most recognizable programs in the country. Texas also has an Excellent academic reputation. Outside of ND, it is the biggest prize not in a stable conference. It is pretty obvious why any conference would want Texas. SEC has no network yet. They do not share 3rd tier rights equally, that is a fact. It will likely change, but it has not happened yet. SEC is used to bullies. They have dealt with Bama for a long time, so Texas would not be an issue. I would prefer the PAC anyway. Western states are now growing faster than the southeast. That will mean western recruiting grounds are likely to much more important over the next decade. Linking markets of LA, Seattle, Denver, Phoenix, Dallas, Houston and Austin. Will garner more money than the Southeastern markets. Texas and friends (OU, OSU, and TTU) would put the PAC on a new level. One of the PACs biggest issues is inventory, more specifically day games. That would be instantly solved.
This post was edited by Codaxx 15 months ago
$34 million per school is a nice chunk of change, but that includes Tier 3 money. If you include Tier 3, Texas will earn the same from its TV contracts this year. If you add the extra money per school in the Big 12, then Texas is above the SEC schools. Texas is not afraid of the SEC, but it has learned from its SWC experience that it is best not to associate with schools that bend the rules. Eventually they get caught.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports