(02-06-2014 01:49 PM)SeaBlue Wrote: (02-06-2014 08:51 AM)JRsec Wrote: And as an aside for those who think Texas will choose the PAC or Big 10 over either the SEC or ACC I would say this. If Texas alienates ESPN to move to either the PAC or Big 10 they are through ever competing for national attention again.
How long is "ever"?
You've heard of "Michigan State" of the Big Ten right? They're from the Rust Belt, they're a little sister, and they were quite bad for a long time.
If they can do it, Texas can do it times ten.
Now, Michigan State aside let's address the Texas issue more fully. I lived in Texas when the Houston Space Flight Center was just coming into being as a known entity. It wasn't that long after WWII and it was long before San Antonio had a river walk. Texas is unique among American states. It is a Republic, and in the 50's most Texans we knew thought of themselves more as being Texan first and American second and that was after WWII when I think more Texans began to see themselves as American first and Texan second. They weren't against the U.S. in anyway, but before television really took hold all most Texans knew was Texas. Texas politics affected their lives, not so much national politics. A culture extending back literally to the Alamo and extending through the second World War instilled in them a state pride so fierce that the last thing on the television at night before you went to bed and the test pattern appeared on the screen was "The Yellow Rose of Texas" and "The National Anthem".
The University of Texas is an extension of that culture, not the author of it. Texas A&M has tremendous support in Texas from average fans of many of their schools. Not because they love A&M but because A&M represents Texas boys going up against what is perceived as the best football conference in America (rightly or wrongly). While A&M's star is on the rise, they shouldn't confuse Texans rooting for Texas boys with actual fans of A&M. Fortunately for television purposes it doesn't matter why the Texans are watching, as much as it matters that they simply watch.
If Texas leaves for the PAC or Big 10 the interest will not be the same. Texans want the University of Texas to be about the State and more importantly they want them to play as locally as possible. The University of Texas has ties to the PAC in research, but that won't matter to the average Texan. The University of Texas has much in common with the Big 10 academically, but that won't matter to the average Texan. Texas has already raised the ire of its people. The older ones were mad when they lost Arkansas as an annual game. Many more than they let on are mad that they now have lost A&M as an annual game. There would be outright revolt if they lost Oklahoma (more on that in a bit). What most Texans want is to see the Horns play Arkansas, Oklahoma, Baylor, Texas Tech and A&M. Whether they play Houston, S.M.U., T.C.U., or Rice is not as important although they like those games sprinkled in as well. If Texas goes to the PAC they take two opponents that Texans will care about with them (Texas Tech and Oklahoma being the most important). It will be more difficult for Texas to schedule Baylor, or T.C.U., or A&M (if resumed). Almost half of their games will be played outside of Texas and 2/3rds of those at great distance. If they go to the Big 10 and take Oklahoma with them only 1 game will be played annually where they can go to watch it. The thought of Texas in the Big 10 is abhorrent to the average Texan. A&M would become the team in Texas by default and the others would benefit as well. If Texas went to the Big 10 with Kansas and not with Oklahoma the anger would be even more intense. Texans are interested in all things pertaining to their state. They might, since the moon shot, now see themselves as Americans first, Texans second, but many still see themselves as Southern somewhere after the first two. Austin and De Loss Dodds know this. That is why they finally rejected the PAC.
Oklahoma is a horse of a different color. Oklahoma was just a territory during the Civil War and while many see themselves as Southern I would say most see themselves as Midwestern if not Western. The Dust Bowl cemented families in California and Oklahoma together. Oklahoma has to be the most successful college football program ever from a small state and they are nudging that title outright. They could easily do well in the PAC, unlike their rivals in Texas. But, Oklahoma knows that as a program they are a parasite and I mean that in a great way. As a top national brand they recruit heavily outside of Oklahoma. They are as viable as any program in Dallas and do very well in California. It's just that they are so tied to Dallas I just don't see them cutting the cord with Texas now that they are in the same conference. If they did I would see them in the PAC before they would go to the Big 10. Oklahomans like Texans still see themselves as more Southern than Northern and they like playing most of their schedule near home. In the end I just don't think Colorado does it for them like Texas and Nebraska, while it would be great, is just not enough to attract them North contrary to the wishes of most of their fan base. They would fear having Oklahoma State move to the SEC or PAC and draw better in one of those conferences than the Sooners could sustain while playing in the Big 10. And while I can see the appeal for most Big 10 folks to go annually to Florida for a game against the Seminoles and make a vacation out of it, I doubt that the Big 10 outside of Iowa, Nebraska and/or Kansas would travel well to Norman.
Understand that none of this even considers ESPN's wishes. Where would Texas do them the most good? If it attracted N.D. to ever join the ACC in full then they are more valuable there than in the Big 10 or PAC especially since ESPN owns much less of the rights to either of those entities. If the ACC needs a reason for economic parity then Texas again is more valuable in the ACC, along with close partners to give them a home flavor to their schedule and to appease the Texans back home. If ESPN is just looking for helmet games to max out the content then Texas is far more valuable in the SEC. I think there are many compelling reasons to place Texas in the ACC, but only two to place them in the SEC. In the SEC Texas can be reunited with Texas A&M, Arkansas, Missouri (not that big), and bring Oklahoma with them, and perhaps some more. The second reason is the content.
So SeaBlue I'm not ragging on the Big 10 (which I grew up with), I'm simply stating the truth about the situation.
ADDENDUM: For those who don't think that ESPN can hold Texas think about this. ESPN owes Texas 15 million dollars a year until the end of June 2031. I just don't see Texas, or any school were they to be in Texas's shoes, bypassing that for a move that would be risky at best, and unpopular no matter what.
/
Realignment From an "It's Just Business" Perspective
