(07-26-2016 01:24 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Well no offense to WV, but they were thrown a life preserver by the B12. Relative to they SWC and the Big 8, they're outsiders. Both figuratively and literally.

So, what they want should have the least importance for the conference. What are they going to do about it, leave??

It would provide an advantage to other B12 members for WVU to have one or more travel partners. Travel costs for Olympic sports in particular would be reduced if two games could be fit into one trip.

How much advantage did it grant the B12 members to have to start sending non-revenue teams out to WV in the first place?? They did it, and will continue doing it.

(07-24-2016 01:02 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-24-2016 12:55 AM)KUGR Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 11:41 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 09:39 PM)KUGR Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 01:40 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Looks like the dominoes are falling the right way for the Coogs. First UT, and now Tech.

I think you are reading way too much into these tweets that say they are open to "CONSIDERATION" of UH. There are a couple sources that indicated this last move by UH has been out of desperation. Bowlsby and several of the B12 presidents don't want to add another Texas school and UH has been told as much. UH knew there wasn't much time left in this process so they solicited the help of the governor and other high profile people in Texas for help (this is was also why the meaningless meeting with the Pac commissioner came out from UH sources on Monday). In reality, the governor has zero influence on 8 of the 10 B12 schools (6 schools out of Texas and the 2 privates in Texas....BU and TCU). He can't even force TT and UT.....but only threaten funding, etc.

The UT and TT tweets were nothing more than to protect themselves down the road from backlash in the state from high profile UH supporters. When UH doesn't get it in they can point back to their public statements and say "It wasn't our fault because we tried". I don't think UT and TT wouldblock UH....but I will also say support for is lukewarm, at best. If they really thought UH was getting into the B12 they would have no need to cover their butts. The process would take care of itself and they would come out smelling like roses to the UH high profile supporters. And let's be honest. The B12 has dang good idea on who they will add. They've been talking about it for nearly 2 years....or maybe longer. This process now is just a formality.

If it's a 2 school add it will be UC and BYU. If 4 schools then UH has shot (the state of Texas influence is watered down in a 14 school league so some presidents who may be concerned by it may give it a pass). But UCONN, CSU, and UCF would have chances in that scenario, too. Memphis would be a longshot because of academics.

You have a lot to say and probably get good grades at BYU....BUT MAYBE, I'm just a little more familiar with how politics and college athletics work in the state of Texas than you are young man. We shall see.
Cheers!

That's the thing. This will be largely decided by those OUTSIDE of Texas. If you think University presidents outside of Texas are going to be strong-armed by the Texas governor or other politicians you are going to be one disappointed guy. Baylor and TCU can't even be strong-armed by him because they are private institutions.

I will ask you these questions....First, why the power play by government officials if UH is getting in? They were asked by UH officials to do it because UH knows what is happening. It's pulling out ALL the stops. It's why the meaningless Pac rumor came out....and it's why politicians are doing what they are doing now. It's complete desperation.

Second, why make statements of support for "consideration" if you were UT or TT if you knew UH already was coming in? No need to do it. They would be coming in and life would be great. UT and TT are ok with it.....but by no means are going to force the issue because they can't. It's to save face for an eventuality that appears very likely and they know it. The B12 knows the schools they want. This is a formality now.

My source indicated he would be "shocked" if UH was involved in a 2 team expansion model. Four teams could change the dynamic and may make it more "palatable" to several schools that are staunchly against another Texas school (ISU president wasn't making a joke when he said "several presidents" were against Texas expansion). The thing is the power player by Texas' governor will likely only increase the resolve of those schools to say "no" in a 2 team model because "this is exactly what we are talking about" with regard to the state of Texas and it's heavy influence on the B12.

UH will NOT be involved in a 2 team expansion model. You will see in time.

Here is what you don't get. Texas controls 4 votes. Texas can shut down expansion with those 4 votes. You are correct when you say the governor of Texas can't get UH into the Big12---but he CAN use his leverage to stop anyone else from getting into the Big12. Thus, my guess is that some kind of deal will be made. You let my pick in and I'll let your pick in. Maybe it takes 4 getting in to satisfy enough parties to make the deal work. We will just have to wait and see how it plays out.

Missing from this analysis is knowledge about what all ten members want to happen. It could well be that enough schools either don't want expansion or are sufficiently indifferent to it that they would be OK if it didn't happen. Other than a short term infusion of cash, assuming they can get teams to agree to join for a fraction of what current members receive, it's not clear that expansion significantly benefits anybody (especially those at the bottom of the B12 food chain) in the long run.

So if Texas politicians appear to be using "strong-arm tactics" that give non-Texas school presidents an excuse to "just say no" to expansion for political reasons of their own, then UT may get what they have wanted from the beginning.

Sorry but, Occam's Razor.

If Texas/B12 wasn't (for some reason) now in favor of expansion, there wouldn't have been any point for the public announcements in favor of Houston.

(07-26-2016 12:43 PM)orangefan Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 11:21 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  ECU is the most P5 like public left.

Not even close. There is only one state with 3 public schools in the P5 -- Texas, with Texas, TAMU and TTU. The following publics are far more P5-like than ECU:

- UConn - State Flagship (largest state without a P5 school)
- UNM - State Flagship (state population larger than Nebraska or West Virginia)
- Cincinnati - Number 2 Public Research University in a state with only one other P5 school (similar in profile in this manner to Pittsburgh, Arizona St., Louisville)
- Colorado St. - Morrill Act Land Grant (similar in profile to Kansas St., Iowa St., Oklahoma St., etc.)
- Nevada - State Flagship and Morrill Act Land Grant (state population larger than Nebraska or West Virginia)
- UNLV - Number 2 Public Research University in its state
- Memphis - Number 2 Public Research University in its state (hurt by presence of private P5 -- Vanderbilt)
- Utah St. - Morrill Act Land Grant (hurt by presence of BYU)

If you ever came to ECU and walked around you would never write such a thing.

(07-26-2016 01:08 PM)KUGR Wrote:  Now Gordon Gee gets in the act and he seems to be less than enthused about adding another Texas school:

Clarifying Fenves' remarks: "I think what [Fenves] indicated, though, is he wouldn’t be opposed.”

“I think we certainly should have a national base, absolutely,” said the WVU president. “But we also have to recognize there are some wonderful institutions in Texas. We have four now in the conference and I think we will consider that as part of the overall package we are putting together.”


http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/201.../160729695

That is two non-Texas presidents that have thrown a wet blanket on the UH love now.

WVU wouldn't be in the B12 if it weren't for Texas, so I'd be surprised if they go against what Texas wants. Louisville was the front runner for B12 expansion back in 2011 while WVU was trying to get an invite from the SEC and ACC. Oklahoma wanted Louisville but Texas threw their weight around and backed WVU. The rest is history (in a nutshell - a lot more went on behind the scenes).

(07-26-2016 02:26 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 01:08 PM)KUGR Wrote:  Now Gordon Gee gets in the act and he seems to be less than enthused about adding another Texas school:

Clarifying Fenves' remarks: "I think what [Fenves] indicated, though, is he wouldn’t be opposed.”

“I think we certainly should have a national base, absolutely,” said the WVU president. “But we also have to recognize there are some wonderful institutions in Texas. We have four now in the conference and I think we will consider that as part of the overall package we are putting together.”


http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/201.../160729695

That is two non-Texas presidents that have thrown a wet blanket on the UH love now.

WVU wouldn't be in the B12 if it weren't for Texas, so I'd be surprised if they go against what Texas wants. Louisville was the front runner for B12 expansion back in 2011 while WVU was trying to get an invite from the SEC and ACC. Oklahoma wanted Louisville but Texas threw their weight around and backed WVU. The rest is history (in a nutshell - a lot more went on behind the scenes).

No. Everybody wanted WVU. OU wanted UL also. Texas didn't find any of the potential #12s appealing (and still doesn't).

(07-26-2016 01:17 PM)orangefan Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 01:08 PM)KUGR Wrote:  Now Gordon Gee gets in the act and he seems to be less than enthused about adding another Texas school:

Clarifying Fenves' remarks: "I think what [Fenves] indicated, though, is he wouldn’t be opposed.”

“I think we certainly should have a national base, absolutely,” said the WVU president. “But we also have to recognize there are some wonderful institutions in Texas. We have four now in the conference and I think we will consider that as part of the overall package we are putting together.”


http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/201.../160729695

That is two non-Texas presidents that have thrown a wet blanket on the UH love now.

It may be posturing to give him some leverage to get his top picks as part of the package. He sure as heck doesn't want an expansion that doesn't include Cincinnati and hopefully one more in WVU's neighborhood. Adding BYU and UH only would be tough to take.

None of the presidents have drawn any red lines for or against anyone.

(07-26-2016 03:29 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 02:26 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 01:08 PM)KUGR Wrote:  Now Gordon Gee gets in the act and he seems to be less than enthused about adding another Texas school:

Clarifying Fenves' remarks: "I think what [Fenves] indicated, though, is he wouldn’t be opposed.”

“I think we certainly should have a national base, absolutely,” said the WVU president. “But we also have to recognize there are some wonderful institutions in Texas. We have four now in the conference and I think we will consider that as part of the overall package we are putting together.”


http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/201.../160729695

That is two non-Texas presidents that have thrown a wet blanket on the UH love now.

WVU wouldn't be in the B12 if it weren't for Texas, so I'd be surprised if they go against what Texas wants. Louisville was the front runner for B12 expansion back in 2011 while WVU was trying to get an invite from the SEC and ACC. Oklahoma wanted Louisville but Texas threw their weight around and backed WVU. The rest is history (in a nutshell - a lot more went on behind the scenes).

No. Everybody wanted WVU. OU wanted UL also. Texas didn't find any of the potential #12s appealing (and still doesn't).

Wrong. WVU was lobbying to get into the SEC, then later the ACC, while Louisville was positioning for a B12 invite. It wasn't until WVU was turned down by the other conferences that they entered the B12 picture. That was when they became the favorite by B12 members, then some senators got involved and but ultimately Texas wanted WVU, so that's who got in. It's very well documented that OU wanted Louisville, but not Texas. Texas gets what they want.

(07-24-2016 01:02 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Here is what you don't get. Texas controls 4 votes. Texas can shut down expansion with those 4 votes. You are correct when you say the governor of Texas can't get UH into the Big12---but he CAN use his leverage to stop anyone else from getting into the Big12. Thus, my guess is that some kind of deal will be made. You let my pick in and I'll let your pick in. Maybe it takes 4 getting in to satisfy enough parties to make the deal work. We will just have to wait and see how it plays out.

Right. If UT is using its leverage for Houston, then UT can do the same thing that UVa did when the ACC expanded with Miami and VT. They can force the conference to choose between an expansion that includes Houston, or no expansion at all.

(07-26-2016 04:39 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-24-2016 01:02 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Here is what you don't get. Texas controls 4 votes. Texas can shut down expansion with those 4 votes. You are correct when you say the governor of Texas can't get UH into the Big12---but he CAN use his leverage to stop anyone else from getting into the Big12. Thus, my guess is that some kind of deal will be made. You let my pick in and I'll let your pick in. Maybe it takes 4 getting in to satisfy enough parties to make the deal work. We will just have to wait and see how it plays out.

Right. If UT is using its leverage for Houston, then UT can do the same thing that UVa did when the ACC expanded with Miami and VT. They can force the conference to choose between an expansion that includes Houston, or no expansion at all.

Exactly. Once UVA joined Duke and UNC as a no vote, the only choices were to not expand or add VPI to the mix.

(07-26-2016 04:25 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 03:29 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 02:26 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 01:08 PM)KUGR Wrote:  Now Gordon Gee gets in the act and he seems to be less than enthused about adding another Texas school:

Clarifying Fenves' remarks: "I think what [Fenves] indicated, though, is he wouldn’t be opposed.”

“I think we certainly should have a national base, absolutely,” said the WVU president. “But we also have to recognize there are some wonderful institutions in Texas. We have four now in the conference and I think we will consider that as part of the overall package we are putting together.”


http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/201.../160729695

That is two non-Texas presidents that have thrown a wet blanket on the UH love now.

WVU wouldn't be in the B12 if it weren't for Texas, so I'd be surprised if they go against what Texas wants. Louisville was the front runner for B12 expansion back in 2011 while WVU was trying to get an invite from the SEC and ACC. Oklahoma wanted Louisville but Texas threw their weight around and backed WVU. The rest is history (in a nutshell - a lot more went on behind the scenes).

No. Everybody wanted WVU. OU wanted UL also. Texas didn't find any of the potential #12s appealing (and still doesn't).

Wrong. WVU was lobbying to get into the SEC, then later the ACC, while Louisville was positioning for a B12 invite. It wasn't until WVU was turned down by the other conferences that they entered the B12 picture. That was when they became the favorite by B12 members, then some senators got involved and but ultimately Texas wanted WVU, so that's who got in. It's very well documented that OU wanted Louisville, but not Texas. Texas gets what they want.

Its well documented that OU wanted Louisville ALSO. Its also well documented that WVU was the clear #10. The Big 12's first effort at a #10 was pursuing Pitt, who then got admitted to the ACC, so they turned to WVU.

(07-24-2016 11:53 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-24-2016 11:15 AM)UTArlingtonMaverick Wrote:  

(07-24-2016 11:11 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-24-2016 08:45 AM)westwolf Wrote:  

(07-24-2016 08:02 AM)TripleA Wrote:  BTW, I agree with the Houston fans that, although there may be enough non-Texas votes to block them, Texas can gather enough votes to block everybody. But I also say b/c of all the infighting on this, it's not a slam dunk, either way.

What I think is up is that UM and UC are in, BYU is in as FB only, and the 4th spot is up for grabs between Boise as FB only, or Houston as all sports. JMO.

I doubt Memphis will make it. Poor academics.

That is way overplayed, and our academics are fairly easily defended, at least to the point of justifying an invitation. WVU got in. Louisville got in. Our academics are in that range.

TCU got in. Very good undergraduate program, but weak research and Ph.D. production.

The undergraduate offsets the weak research. Like with Notre Dame. Noone would say Notre Dame is a weak institution, but if you look at ratings that emphasize research and graduate programs, they are way down the list.

Memphis is "in that range," but below that range. They would be the only P5 not in USNWR top 200. If Memphis was as far ahead of everyone as BYU is compared to the other options, that would be overcome. But when everybody is comparable, its a killer.

That is always the main knock on us, often overstated, but I don't think it is a deal breaker.

(07-26-2016 05:00 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 04:25 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 03:29 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 02:26 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 01:08 PM)KUGR Wrote:  Now Gordon Gee gets in the act and he seems to be less than enthused about adding another Texas school:

Clarifying Fenves' remarks: "I think what [Fenves] indicated, though, is he wouldn’t be opposed.”

“I think we certainly should have a national base, absolutely,” said the WVU president. “But we also have to recognize there are some wonderful institutions in Texas. We have four now in the conference and I think we will consider that as part of the overall package we are putting together.”


http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/201.../160729695

That is two non-Texas presidents that have thrown a wet blanket on the UH love now.

WVU wouldn't be in the B12 if it weren't for Texas, so I'd be surprised if they go against what Texas wants. Louisville was the front runner for B12 expansion back in 2011 while WVU was trying to get an invite from the SEC and ACC. Oklahoma wanted Louisville but Texas threw their weight around and backed WVU. The rest is history (in a nutshell - a lot more went on behind the scenes).

No. Everybody wanted WVU. OU wanted UL also. Texas didn't find any of the potential #12s appealing (and still doesn't).

Wrong. WVU was lobbying to get into the SEC, then later the ACC, while Louisville was positioning for a B12 invite. It wasn't until WVU was turned down by the other conferences that they entered the B12 picture. That was when they became the favorite by B12 members, then some senators got involved and but ultimately Texas wanted WVU, so that's who got in. It's very well documented that OU wanted Louisville, but not Texas. Texas gets what they want.

Its well documented that OU wanted Louisville ALSO. Its also well documented that WVU was the clear #10. The Big 12's first effort at a #10 was pursuing Pitt, who then got admitted to the ACC, so they turned to WVU.

I think you have it right. That's the way I recall it, too.

(07-26-2016 05:00 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 04:25 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 03:29 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 02:26 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 01:08 PM)KUGR Wrote:  Now Gordon Gee gets in the act and he seems to be less than enthused about adding another Texas school:

Clarifying Fenves' remarks: "I think what [Fenves] indicated, though, is he wouldn’t be opposed.”

“I think we certainly should have a national base, absolutely,” said the WVU president. “But we also have to recognize there are some wonderful institutions in Texas. We have four now in the conference and I think we will consider that as part of the overall package we are putting together.”


http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/201.../160729695

That is two non-Texas presidents that have thrown a wet blanket on the UH love now.

WVU wouldn't be in the B12 if it weren't for Texas, so I'd be surprised if they go against what Texas wants. Louisville was the front runner for B12 expansion back in 2011 while WVU was trying to get an invite from the SEC and ACC. Oklahoma wanted Louisville but Texas threw their weight around and backed WVU. The rest is history (in a nutshell - a lot more went on behind the scenes).

No. Everybody wanted WVU. OU wanted UL also. Texas didn't find any of the potential #12s appealing (and still doesn't).

Wrong. WVU was lobbying to get into the SEC, then later the ACC, while Louisville was positioning for a B12 invite. It wasn't until WVU was turned down by the other conferences that they entered the B12 picture. That was when they became the favorite by B12 members, then some senators got involved and but ultimately Texas wanted WVU, so that's who got in. It's very well documented that OU wanted Louisville, but not Texas. Texas gets what they want.

Its well documented that OU wanted Louisville ALSO. Its also well documented that WVU was the clear #10. The Big 12's first effort at a #10 was pursuing Pitt, who then got admitted to the ACC, so they turned to WVU.

Yes, once WVU was denied invites to the SEC and ACC in October 2011 (reported by Brett McMurphy), they pushed for the Big12 and quickly became the front runner over Louisville. However Louisville was in discussions with the Big12 starting in September 2011 with TCU. TCU was able to quickly accept since they hadn't yet stated Big East play, but Louisville was a little more difficult due to wanting to stay loyal to the Big East's 27 month notice rule while the B12 needed two teams immediately to keep their TV contract. West Virginia made their push and said they were willing to leave immediately, pulling ahead of Louisville, which got them in over us.

It wasn't a "Louisville didn't get in because there wasn't a viable 12th team" thing. It was TCU plus either WVU or Louisville. Texas wanted WVU, Oklahoma wanted Louisville. When it was clear WVU had pulled ahead of Louisville, Senator Mitch McConnell got involved making a late push for Louisville, but ultimately, West Virginia was chosen.

(07-26-2016 09:04 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 05:00 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 04:25 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 03:29 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 02:26 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  WVU wouldn't be in the B12 if it weren't for Texas, so I'd be surprised if they go against what Texas wants. Louisville was the front runner for B12 expansion back in 2011 while WVU was trying to get an invite from the SEC and ACC. Oklahoma wanted Louisville but Texas threw their weight around and backed WVU. The rest is history (in a nutshell - a lot more went on behind the scenes).

No. Everybody wanted WVU. OU wanted UL also. Texas didn't find any of the potential #12s appealing (and still doesn't).

Wrong. WVU was lobbying to get into the SEC, then later the ACC, while Louisville was positioning for a B12 invite. It wasn't until WVU was turned down by the other conferences that they entered the B12 picture. That was when they became the favorite by B12 members, then some senators got involved and but ultimately Texas wanted WVU, so that's who got in. It's very well documented that OU wanted Louisville, but not Texas. Texas gets what they want.

Its well documented that OU wanted Louisville ALSO. Its also well documented that WVU was the clear #10. The Big 12's first effort at a #10 was pursuing Pitt, who then got admitted to the ACC, so they turned to WVU.

Yes, once WVU was denied invites to the SEC and ACC in October 2011 (reported by Brett McMurphy), they pushed for the Big12 and quickly became the front runner over Louisville. However Louisville was in discussions with the Big12 starting in September 2011 with TCU. TCU was able to quickly accept since they hadn't yet stated Big East play, but Louisville was a little more difficult due to wanting to stay loyal to the Big East's 27 month notice rule while the B12 needed two teams immediately to keep their TV contract. West Virginia made their push and said they were willing to leave immediately, pulling ahead of Louisville, which got them in over us.

It wasn't a "Louisville didn't get in because there wasn't a viable 12th team" thing. It was TCU plus either WVU or Louisville. Texas wanted WVU, Oklahoma wanted Louisville. When it was clear WVU had pulled ahead of Louisville, Senator Mitch McConnell got involved making a late push for Louisville, but ultimately, West Virginia was chosen.

What I heard was that ESPN told the Big 12 that WVU was a better TV draw than UL in football, and that tipped the scales. Not positive about that, but definitely what I heard.

And then UL won a national title and a BCS bowl, and the valuation changed overnight. ESPN didn't care about Big 12 Bball. The ACC winter Bball packages are much more lucrative. Big 12 football with WVU and TCU was almost an upgrade on the gridiron. Just didn't do much for the conference in the bigger picture.

You are kind of locked into UC to maximize the WVU addition. Any other additions are cutting the nose to spite the face. Swallow Houston with the nose closed and call it a day.

(07-26-2016 09:34 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 09:04 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 05:00 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 04:25 PM)TopperCard Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 03:29 PM)bullet Wrote:  No. Everybody wanted WVU. OU wanted UL also. Texas didn't find any of the potential #12s appealing (and still doesn't).

Wrong. WVU was lobbying to get into the SEC, then later the ACC, while Louisville was positioning for a B12 invite. It wasn't until WVU was turned down by the other conferences that they entered the B12 picture. That was when they became the favorite by B12 members, then some senators got involved and but ultimately Texas wanted WVU, so that's who got in. It's very well documented that OU wanted Louisville, but not Texas. Texas gets what they want.

Its well documented that OU wanted Louisville ALSO. Its also well documented that WVU was the clear #10. The Big 12's first effort at a #10 was pursuing Pitt, who then got admitted to the ACC, so they turned to WVU.

Yes, once WVU was denied invites to the SEC and ACC in October 2011 (reported by Brett McMurphy), they pushed for the Big12 and quickly became the front runner over Louisville. However Louisville was in discussions with the Big12 starting in September 2011 with TCU. TCU was able to quickly accept since they hadn't yet stated Big East play, but Louisville was a little more difficult due to wanting to stay loyal to the Big East's 27 month notice rule while the B12 needed two teams immediately to keep their TV contract. West Virginia made their push and said they were willing to leave immediately, pulling ahead of Louisville, which got them in over us.

It wasn't a "Louisville didn't get in because there wasn't a viable 12th team" thing. It was TCU plus either WVU or Louisville. Texas wanted WVU, Oklahoma wanted Louisville. When it was clear WVU had pulled ahead of Louisville, Senator Mitch McConnell got involved making a late push for Louisville, but ultimately, West Virginia was chosen.

What I heard was that ESPN told the Big 12 that WVU was a better TV draw than UL in football, and that tipped the scales. Not positive about that, but definitely what I heard.

Yes WVU had the better tv ratings as well. There were other factors too, like Louisville coming off of 3 straight losing seasons in 2007-2009, WVU being a state flagship school, having s bigger stadium, etc.

I wonder what the Texas Tech president would do if the PAC invited both them and Houston to join. Does he like Houston that much?

Expands the market for the PAC Network. Very neat zipper division alignment, if you like that sort of thing.

Quick - somebody with a Twitter account needs to get this out there to make it official.