(03-31-2017 03:37 PM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 02:33 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 12:06 PM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote:  

(03-30-2017 11:39 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-30-2017 08:05 PM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote:  I don't like using the word "NEVER", but ... Texas will never join the SEC. They've always had the academic snob factor over the SEC. So that is strike 1, but maybe a bigger strike would be Texas A & M in the SEC.

So ... it's really only a 3 conference "race" ... and I think "going west" won't be something Texas want's to do .. so ... it's REALLY only ...

.... Big Ten versus ACC.

Or football independence. Which honestly plays to the ACC's advantage. As they can do the "Notre Dame deal".


Time will tell.

And yet they have been in talks with the SEC three times since just prior to the '92 expansion. What folks say and what they will do are often two different things separated only by a justification. And in the years that are ahead of us money may be all the justification they need. And if not that they could always say they joined the conference that would give their brother state school Texas Tech a home as well.

Suffice it to say that in politics, business, and conference realignment there are no gestalts.

But ... A & M Is in the SEC now. And the A & M - Longhorn rivalry is VERY real. Texas AIN'T going to the SEC ... EVER.

Also -- at the end of the day, Texas won't sacrifice itself, to save Texas Tech. Or any other school in the state of Texas. They look out for themselves first, period.

This is Exactly why you can't rule anything out!

The SEC can be ruled out, because Texas A&M would block a Texas invite quicker than you can say "gig em aggies".

Obviously you have no clue as to how the SEC presidents work, and they are the ones with the votes. No school can blackball another. The "gentlemen's agreement" as a coalition of Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina along with Texas A&M and / or Kentucky to keep fellow member schools from the same state out of the SEC is pure internet hooey! Always has been, and always will be! In 1992 Georgia was willing to sponsor Georgia Tech and Florida did nominate Florida State. Florida's president expressed a willingness to do the same again in 2011. That prompted Mike Slive to ask for a "Gentlemen's Agreement" not to nominate schools already within the footprint (now pay close attention here) until the requirement that was in the contract that said we could renegotiate our contract with the addition of two new markets was met. After that Slive said there would be no stipulations against nominating fellow in state schools and that they would be considered as everyone else would be which is based upon their worth to the conference.

Florida and South Carolina both wanted their in state rivals in the conference in 2011. The reason is a simple one. The more conferences expand the harder it is to hold a slot for your rival on the schedule. If they are in the conference the games are guaranteed in spite of realignment. Furthermore both South Carolina and Florida predicate their athletic donations on prioritizing who gets tickets to the Clemson and Florida State games. How do I know their presidents were concerned about this? I had family in the room at the time of the discussions.

Texas A&M would not block a Texas application. Their president might abstain from voting to save face with their T-shirt fans, but 4 votes would have to be against Texas before that could happen. There aren't 4 university presidents in the SEC who would vote against Texas because they all would covet the academic associations with the University of Texas. There aren't 4 athletic directors (and they don't vote) who decline them either because they would all love to have Texas on the schedule.

Texas was in heavy discussion with the SEC from 1989 through '91. They were in discussions again in 2010-1, and have been since.

Now I'm not saying that Texas won't consider the ACC, Big 10, or PAC because they can do anything they like, but what actually transpires between Texas and other conferences, including the SEC, clearly indicates that all options are on the table. They are merely seeking the best possible terms with as many perks as they can get if a move needs to happen.

But you can drop this Aggie will block them crap because it simply isn't so, and never was. Now the average mentality of a poster at SEC Rant might believe that, but that's not how the conference office, its bylaws on membership, or the actual process works. Texas is AAU, prestigious, and adds a lot of value, and if Bevo wanted in nobody at that presidents quorum would vote against them unless Texas was asking for something nobody else in the conference could have. We don't do special deals. Everyone is the same in privileges or they aren't part of us.