(08-10-2016 08:55 PM)texasorange Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 03:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  First there was the rush to respond to the ACC GOR extension. Okay this is typical Big 12 reactionary stuff.

Then there were the multiple G5 schools rumored to be in contention. Okay the more they talk about the better they appear to be, sort of.

Then there was the B.Y.U. is the only school that is hands down able to add value on their own. Okay everybody knew this already, so the focus shifts to who and how many tag along.

Then there was the Networks Push Back releases that seemed to indicate that the networks would only agree if it was limited to 2 schools and one of them was B.Y.U. Okay they want to limit the damage of the pro rata loophole.

Then there was the Press Release about the LGBT issues with B.Y.U. Why? And why now? Shouldn't those kinds of issues have been fully explored prior to declaring them to be the only school that could add value on their own?

Then there was the behind the scenes stuff between ESPN and FOX with FOX wanting Southeastern additions and ESPN not. ESPN seems to have won this round. Why?

Because now the candidates are narrowed to seemingly Cincinnati and Houston. The only problem here is that Houston is unacceptable to many non Texas Big 12 members. Texas seems to want them. Impasse? Could be.

So now we have silence. Is it silence due to agreement? Hardly. Is it silence due to furious negotiation? Doesn't seem to be. Is it silence due to no concept of what to do now? That looks highly likely.

Fishy? Sure seems that way to me. ESPN trumpets B.Y.U. as the only viable addition. ESPN doesn't favor Southeastern schools. ESPN doesn't favor 4 schools (FOX either). Two is settled upon B.Y.U. and Cincinnati or Houston? Suddenly ESPN releases a story about LGBT issues with the Cougars. B.Y.U. seems to be out of the mix again. Houston and Cincinnati are now the controversial duo.

Could it be that ESPN orchestrated this dance from B.Y.U. being the only sure thing, to Houston being the impasse, to Cincinnati being the compromise, to B.Y.U. suddenly has warts, to impasse because ESPN wants no Big 12 expansion? Holy Mackerel! That smells like a fish to me!

I have to admit JR, it does sound like a carefully staged scenario. It seems all too seamless. Like a line of dominoes it is falling into place, but where exactly is it going?

After watching the old SWC disintegrate, and then watching the Big 12 deteriorate; I feel as though the conclusion must be that any conference that includes the University of Texas will be unstable.

Whether the Big 12 is about to implode by design or coincidence, I'd say that your assessment about UT is appropriate in either case.

(08-10-2016 08:55 PM)texasorange Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 03:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  First there was the rush to respond to the ACC GOR extension. Okay this is typical Big 12 reactionary stuff.

Then there were the multiple G5 schools rumored to be in contention. Okay the more they talk about the better they appear to be, sort of.

Then there was the B.Y.U. is the only school that is hands down able to add value on their own. Okay everybody knew this already, so the focus shifts to who and how many tag along.

Then there was the Networks Push Back releases that seemed to indicate that the networks would only agree if it was limited to 2 schools and one of them was B.Y.U. Okay they want to limit the damage of the pro rata loophole.

Then there was the Press Release about the LGBT issues with B.Y.U. Why? And why now? Shouldn't those kinds of issues have been fully explored prior to declaring them to be the only school that could add value on their own?

Then there was the behind the scenes stuff between ESPN and FOX with FOX wanting Southeastern additions and ESPN not. ESPN seems to have won this round. Why?

Because now the candidates are narrowed to seemingly Cincinnati and Houston. The only problem here is that Houston is unacceptable to many non Texas Big 12 members. Texas seems to want them. Impasse? Could be.

So now we have silence. Is it silence due to agreement? Hardly. Is it silence due to furious negotiation? Doesn't seem to be. Is it silence due to no concept of what to do now? That looks highly likely.

Fishy? Sure seems that way to me. ESPN trumpets B.Y.U. as the only viable addition. ESPN doesn't favor Southeastern schools. ESPN doesn't favor 4 schools (FOX either). Two is settled upon B.Y.U. and Cincinnati or Houston? Suddenly ESPN releases a story about LGBT issues with the Cougars. B.Y.U. seems to be out of the mix again. Houston and Cincinnati are now the controversial duo.

Could it be that ESPN orchestrated this dance from B.Y.U. being the only sure thing, to Houston being the impasse, to Cincinnati being the compromise, to B.Y.U. suddenly has warts, to impasse because ESPN wants no Big 12 expansion? Holy Mackerel! That smells like a fish to me!

I have to admit JR, it does sound like a carefully staged scenario. It seems all too seamless. Like a line of dominoes it is falling into place, but where exactly is it going?

After watching the old SWC disintegrate, and then watching the Big 12 deteriorate; I feel as though the conclusion must be that any conference that includes the University of Texas will be unstable.

Texas is conference poison.

That's just speaking the plain truth right there.

+1

(08-10-2016 09:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-10-2016 08:55 PM)texasorange Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 03:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  First there was the rush to respond to the ACC GOR extension. Okay this is typical Big 12 reactionary stuff.

Then there were the multiple G5 schools rumored to be in contention. Okay the more they talk about the better they appear to be, sort of.

Then there was the B.Y.U. is the only school that is hands down able to add value on their own. Okay everybody knew this already, so the focus shifts to who and how many tag along.

Then there was the Networks Push Back releases that seemed to indicate that the networks would only agree if it was limited to 2 schools and one of them was B.Y.U. Okay they want to limit the damage of the pro rata loophole.

Then there was the Press Release about the LGBT issues with B.Y.U. Why? And why now? Shouldn't those kinds of issues have been fully explored prior to declaring them to be the only school that could add value on their own?

Then there was the behind the scenes stuff between ESPN and FOX with FOX wanting Southeastern additions and ESPN not. ESPN seems to have won this round. Why?

Because now the candidates are narrowed to seemingly Cincinnati and Houston. The only problem here is that Houston is unacceptable to many non Texas Big 12 members. Texas seems to want them. Impasse? Could be.

So now we have silence. Is it silence due to agreement? Hardly. Is it silence due to furious negotiation? Doesn't seem to be. Is it silence due to no concept of what to do now? That looks highly likely.

Fishy? Sure seems that way to me. ESPN trumpets B.Y.U. as the only viable addition. ESPN doesn't favor Southeastern schools. ESPN doesn't favor 4 schools (FOX either). Two is settled upon B.Y.U. and Cincinnati or Houston? Suddenly ESPN releases a story about LGBT issues with the Cougars. B.Y.U. seems to be out of the mix again. Houston and Cincinnati are now the controversial duo.

Could it be that ESPN orchestrated this dance from B.Y.U. being the only sure thing, to Houston being the impasse, to Cincinnati being the compromise, to B.Y.U. suddenly has warts, to impasse because ESPN wants no Big 12 expansion? Holy Mackerel! That smells like a fish to me!

I have to admit JR, it does sound like a carefully staged scenario. It seems all too seamless. Like a line of dominoes it is falling into place, but where exactly is it going?

After watching the old SWC disintegrate, and then watching the Big 12 deteriorate; I feel as though the conclusion must be that any conference that includes the University of Texas will be unstable.

Whether the Big 12 is about to implode by design or coincidence, I'd say that your assessment about UT is appropriate in either case.

The deterioration began with the departure of Nebraska long ago, followed by three other schools. 1/3rd of the conference gone and it can be directly tied to the University of Texas. They just do not play well with others. I feel the best hope for the Big XII, and all the P5 conferences for that matter, is for Texas to leave and go Indy.

(08-11-2016 01:00 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-10-2016 09:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-10-2016 08:55 PM)texasorange Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 03:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  First there was the rush to respond to the ACC GOR extension. Okay this is typical Big 12 reactionary stuff.

Then there were the multiple G5 schools rumored to be in contention. Okay the more they talk about the better they appear to be, sort of.

Then there was the B.Y.U. is the only school that is hands down able to add value on their own. Okay everybody knew this already, so the focus shifts to who and how many tag along.

Then there was the Networks Push Back releases that seemed to indicate that the networks would only agree if it was limited to 2 schools and one of them was B.Y.U. Okay they want to limit the damage of the pro rata loophole.

Then there was the Press Release about the LGBT issues with B.Y.U. Why? And why now? Shouldn't those kinds of issues have been fully explored prior to declaring them to be the only school that could add value on their own?

Then there was the behind the scenes stuff between ESPN and FOX with FOX wanting Southeastern additions and ESPN not. ESPN seems to have won this round. Why?

Because now the candidates are narrowed to seemingly Cincinnati and Houston. The only problem here is that Houston is unacceptable to many non Texas Big 12 members. Texas seems to want them. Impasse? Could be.

So now we have silence. Is it silence due to agreement? Hardly. Is it silence due to furious negotiation? Doesn't seem to be. Is it silence due to no concept of what to do now? That looks highly likely.

Fishy? Sure seems that way to me. ESPN trumpets B.Y.U. as the only viable addition. ESPN doesn't favor Southeastern schools. ESPN doesn't favor 4 schools (FOX either). Two is settled upon B.Y.U. and Cincinnati or Houston? Suddenly ESPN releases a story about LGBT issues with the Cougars. B.Y.U. seems to be out of the mix again. Houston and Cincinnati are now the controversial duo.

Could it be that ESPN orchestrated this dance from B.Y.U. being the only sure thing, to Houston being the impasse, to Cincinnati being the compromise, to B.Y.U. suddenly has warts, to impasse because ESPN wants no Big 12 expansion? Holy Mackerel! That smells like a fish to me!

I have to admit JR, it does sound like a carefully staged scenario. It seems all too seamless. Like a line of dominoes it is falling into place, but where exactly is it going?

After watching the old SWC disintegrate, and then watching the Big 12 deteriorate; I feel as though the conclusion must be that any conference that includes the University of Texas will be unstable.

Whether the Big 12 is about to implode by design or coincidence, I'd say that your assessment about UT is appropriate in either case.

The deterioration began with the departure of Nebraska long ago, followed by three other schools. 1/3rd of the conference gone and it can be directly tied to the University of Texas. They just do not play well with others. I feel the best hope for the Big XII, and all the P5 conferences for that matter, is for Texas to leave and go Indy.

I think that a lot of that had to do with Deloss Dodds. That man was constantly scheming. You may be right about Texas going Indy.

(08-11-2016 01:00 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-10-2016 09:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-10-2016 08:55 PM)texasorange Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 03:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  First there was the rush to respond to the ACC GOR extension. Okay this is typical Big 12 reactionary stuff.

Then there were the multiple G5 schools rumored to be in contention. Okay the more they talk about the better they appear to be, sort of.

Then there was the B.Y.U. is the only school that is hands down able to add value on their own. Okay everybody knew this already, so the focus shifts to who and how many tag along.

Then there was the Networks Push Back releases that seemed to indicate that the networks would only agree if it was limited to 2 schools and one of them was B.Y.U. Okay they want to limit the damage of the pro rata loophole.

Then there was the Press Release about the LGBT issues with B.Y.U. Why? And why now? Shouldn't those kinds of issues have been fully explored prior to declaring them to be the only school that could add value on their own?

Then there was the behind the scenes stuff between ESPN and FOX with FOX wanting Southeastern additions and ESPN not. ESPN seems to have won this round. Why?

Because now the candidates are narrowed to seemingly Cincinnati and Houston. The only problem here is that Houston is unacceptable to many non Texas Big 12 members. Texas seems to want them. Impasse? Could be.

So now we have silence. Is it silence due to agreement? Hardly. Is it silence due to furious negotiation? Doesn't seem to be. Is it silence due to no concept of what to do now? That looks highly likely.

Fishy? Sure seems that way to me. ESPN trumpets B.Y.U. as the only viable addition. ESPN doesn't favor Southeastern schools. ESPN doesn't favor 4 schools (FOX either). Two is settled upon B.Y.U. and Cincinnati or Houston? Suddenly ESPN releases a story about LGBT issues with the Cougars. B.Y.U. seems to be out of the mix again. Houston and Cincinnati are now the controversial duo.

Could it be that ESPN orchestrated this dance from B.Y.U. being the only sure thing, to Houston being the impasse, to Cincinnati being the compromise, to B.Y.U. suddenly has warts, to impasse because ESPN wants no Big 12 expansion? Holy Mackerel! That smells like a fish to me!

I have to admit JR, it does sound like a carefully staged scenario. It seems all too seamless. Like a line of dominoes it is falling into place, but where exactly is it going?

After watching the old SWC disintegrate, and then watching the Big 12 deteriorate; I feel as though the conclusion must be that any conference that includes the University of Texas will be unstable.

Whether the Big 12 is about to implode by design or coincidence, I'd say that your assessment about UT is appropriate in either case.

The deterioration began with the departure of Nebraska long ago, followed by three other schools. 1/3rd of the conference gone and it can be directly tied to the University of Texas. They just do not play well with others. I feel the best hope for the Big XII, and all the P5 conferences for that matter, is for Texas to leave and go Indy.

Texas tried to bring academics into play when the 4 schools joined the Big 8 to form the Big 12.
The elimination of partial qualifiers is what destroyed Nebraska's football program. Of course that was done at Texas' suggestion. But, isn't the SEC trying to upgrade their academic standing? These are the kind of moves that are necessary to upgrade.
The Big 8 was comfortable with their lax and mediocre academic standing. Texas (as an institution) wanted their conference to be more. This is why Dodds was shopping the Texahoma 4. Originally it was Texas, A&M, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. When he approached the ACC, Oklahoma State was immediately rejected. He came back with Kansas as a substitute for OSU, but Oklahoma wouldn't pass muster.
Texas is seeking academic integrity. It's obvious that most of the problems regarding Texas stem from differing goals from the rest of their Big 12 conference mates.

(08-11-2016 07:34 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-11-2016 01:00 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-10-2016 09:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-10-2016 08:55 PM)texasorange Wrote:  

(08-09-2016 03:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  First there was the rush to respond to the ACC GOR extension. Okay this is typical Big 12 reactionary stuff.

Then there were the multiple G5 schools rumored to be in contention. Okay the more they talk about the better they appear to be, sort of.

Then there was the B.Y.U. is the only school that is hands down able to add value on their own. Okay everybody knew this already, so the focus shifts to who and how many tag along.

Then there was the Networks Push Back releases that seemed to indicate that the networks would only agree if it was limited to 2 schools and one of them was B.Y.U. Okay they want to limit the damage of the pro rata loophole.

Then there was the Press Release about the LGBT issues with B.Y.U. Why? And why now? Shouldn't those kinds of issues have been fully explored prior to declaring them to be the only school that could add value on their own?

Then there was the behind the scenes stuff between ESPN and FOX with FOX wanting Southeastern additions and ESPN not. ESPN seems to have won this round. Why?

Because now the candidates are narrowed to seemingly Cincinnati and Houston. The only problem here is that Houston is unacceptable to many non Texas Big 12 members. Texas seems to want them. Impasse? Could be.

So now we have silence. Is it silence due to agreement? Hardly. Is it silence due to furious negotiation? Doesn't seem to be. Is it silence due to no concept of what to do now? That looks highly likely.

Fishy? Sure seems that way to me. ESPN trumpets B.Y.U. as the only viable addition. ESPN doesn't favor Southeastern schools. ESPN doesn't favor 4 schools (FOX either). Two is settled upon B.Y.U. and Cincinnati or Houston? Suddenly ESPN releases a story about LGBT issues with the Cougars. B.Y.U. seems to be out of the mix again. Houston and Cincinnati are now the controversial duo.

Could it be that ESPN orchestrated this dance from B.Y.U. being the only sure thing, to Houston being the impasse, to Cincinnati being the compromise, to B.Y.U. suddenly has warts, to impasse because ESPN wants no Big 12 expansion? Holy Mackerel! That smells like a fish to me!

I have to admit JR, it does sound like a carefully staged scenario. It seems all too seamless. Like a line of dominoes it is falling into place, but where exactly is it going?

After watching the old SWC disintegrate, and then watching the Big 12 deteriorate; I feel as though the conclusion must be that any conference that includes the University of Texas will be unstable.

Whether the Big 12 is about to implode by design or coincidence, I'd say that your assessment about UT is appropriate in either case.

The deterioration began with the departure of Nebraska long ago, followed by three other schools. 1/3rd of the conference gone and it can be directly tied to the University of Texas. They just do not play well with others. I feel the best hope for the Big XII, and all the P5 conferences for that matter, is for Texas to leave and go Indy.

Texas tried to bring academics into play when the 4 schools joined the Big 8 to form the Big 12.
The elimination of partial qualifiers is what destroyed Nebraska's football program. Of course that was done at Texas' suggestion. But, isn't the SEC trying to upgrade their academic standing? These are the kind of moves that are necessary to upgrade.
The Big 8 was comfortable with their lax and mediocre academic standing. Texas (as an institution) wanted their conference to be more. This is why Dodds was shopping the Texahoma 4. Originally it was Texas, A&M, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. When he approached the ACC, Oklahoma State was immediately rejected. He came back with Kansas as a substitute for OSU, but Oklahoma wouldn't pass muster.
Texas is seeking academic integrity. It's obvious that most of the problems regarding Texas stem from differing goals from the rest of their Big 12 conference mates.

That goal being administrative dominance, nothing more and nothing less.

1: The Big 12 wants more money. The current TV contract allows the members of the conference to make more money by expansion.

2: Expanding by two or four once again comes down to money.

3: They voted for a conference title game. Easier to have divisions with 6 schools in a division. Thus, expansion.

4: With no expansion the conference would get poached sooner than people realize.

5: They may try to get a new TV deal with a new GOR.

6: Without a new GOR but with expansion, it allows schools to have a home if a school or two decides to leave in the future.

No expansion with no new GOR doesn't guarantee a school leaves the Big 12 when the GOR is done, it just allows for the opportunity to leave.

Big 12 reps were on the UCF campus earlier this week. So they are still busy vetting schools and will eventually do a formal vote on various schools. The next president's meeting is next month or in October.

(08-11-2016 04:26 PM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  1: The Big 12 wants more money. The current TV contract allows the members of the conference to make more money by expansion.

2: Expanding by two or four once again comes down to money.

3: They voted for a conference title game. Easier to have divisions with 6 schools in a division. Thus, expansion.

4: With no expansion the conference would get poached sooner than people realize.

5: They may try to get a new TV deal with a new GOR.

6: Without a new GOR but with expansion, it allows schools to have a home if a school or two decides to leave in the future.

No expansion with no new GOR doesn't guarantee a school leaves the Big 12 when the GOR is done, it just allows for the opportunity to leave.

Big 12 reps were on the UCF campus earlier this week. So they are still busy vetting schools and will eventually do a formal vote on various schools. The next president's meeting is next month or in October.

It still only requires one vote to the contrary for a GOR extension and it's all over. The networks don't want this. I'll bet on them. And BTW I believe the high dollar firm that was hired has already done all of the vetting of candidates.

I can see the networks charging fans a package charge and/or "On-Demand" charge for each conferences' games in the future, much like NFL Sunday Ticket. If the networks keeping pushing contracts higher and higher they will have to. There will be a point where commercials alone will not meet profit margins. That is when the average fan will have a say in this issue of ridiculous contracts.

(08-11-2016 09:02 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I can see the networks charging fans a package charge and/or "On-Demand" charge for each conferences' games in the future, much like NFL Sunday Ticket. If the networks keeping pushing contracts higher and higher they will have to. There will be a point where commercials alone will not meet profit margins. That is when the average fan will have a say in this issue of ridiculous contracts.

It is definitely a bubble. The question is how much more can it expand before it pops? I think we may just about be there.

Well after this debacle I don't think the networks want to deal with B12 anymore. The question I have is because of the current media structure, FOX and ESPN already have the most valuable parts in their wheelhouse. What if when the GOR expires Murdoch and Disney simply elect not to bid on a new TV deal?

(08-11-2016 07:34 AM)XLance Wrote:  Texas tried to bring academics into play when the 4 schools joined the Big 8 to form the Big 12.
The elimination of partial qualifiers is what destroyed Nebraska's football program. Of course that was done at Texas' suggestion. But, isn't the SEC trying to upgrade their academic standing? These are the kind of moves that are necessary to upgrade.

I might be wrong but I felt Texas essentially strong-armed the conference into eliminating the PQ's rather quickly. While the SEC is trying to upgrade its academic rep, its a gradual thing that was agreed upon in Destin or Hoover many moons ago. That is a major difference IMO.

Quote:The Big 8 was comfortable with their lax and mediocre academic standing. Texas (as an institution) wanted their conference to be more. This is why Dodds was shopping the Texahoma 4. Originally it was Texas, A&M, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. When he approached the ACC, Oklahoma State was immediately rejected. He came back with Kansas as a substitute for OSU, but Oklahoma wouldn't pass muster.
Texas is seeking academic integrity. It's obvious that most of the problems regarding Texas stem from differing goals from the rest of their Big 12 conference mates.

I forget which poster said it but it was something to the effect of the old Big 8 schools felt that they were rescuing the old SWC schools while Texas felt the B12 was a brand new conference of which they were in charge of. The latter vision has proven to be the correct one. As HoD stated, academic integrity is simply a cover for the control the Longhorns truly covet.

UT has never had differing goals from their conference mates, that's delusional.

Their only goal has been domination. And, while at first glance it sound ugly it really isn't. Who wouldn't want to dominate their own conference? You can strip away all of the chatter and rambling and you come to one core fact, Texas wants to be THE Big12--always have. And, that's a noble enough goal in itself. The problem is that they are dangerously close and that's why Nebraska, Mizzou, A&M, and Colorado all peaced out.

I mean, really, Colorado was so upset by the fact that Texas was an 'academic school' that they were so ashamed they walked away? Give me a ******* break.

The rest is chaff in the wind.

Texas has never sit down with the rest of the conference and told them they were too stupid to be seen in public with. But, they have said they were too poor to be seen in public with.

(08-14-2016 01:45 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  UT has never had differing goals from their conference mates, that's delusional.

Their only goal has been domination. And, while at first glance it sound ugly it really isn't. Who wouldn't want to dominate their own conference? You can strip away all of the chatter and rambling and you come to one core fact, Texas wants to be THE Big12--always have. And, that's a noble enough goal in itself. The problem is that they are dangerously close and that's why Nebraska, Mizzou, A&M, and Colorado all peaced out.

I mean, really, Colorado was so upset by the fact that Texas was an 'academic school' that they were so ashamed they walked away? Give me a ******* break.

The rest is chaff in the wind.

Texas has never sit down with the rest of the conference and told them they were too stupid to be seen in public with. But, they have said they were too poor to be seen in public with.

The Big 8 had several great academic schools. Kansas, Missouri, Iowa State, etc. Texas was not saving the Big 8. They imploded the SWC and now they are doing the same thing again. Apparently Colorado was academic enough to be accepted by the PAC 12.

I get where you are all coming from and all of you made good points, but in my opinion Texas and their "mentality/goals" would be a problem for any conference.

They do not play well with others.

(08-14-2016 03:28 PM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  I get where you are all coming from and all of you made good points, but in my opinion Texas and their "mentality/goals" would be a problem for any conference.

They do not play well with others.

We all agree on that. The problem is that ESPN wants them so badly they've paid them 15 million a year to keep them from moving on. So we are likely to be stuck with them.

(08-14-2016 03:28 PM)AubTiger16 Wrote:  I get where you are all coming from and all of you made good points, but in my opinion Texas and their "mentality/goals" would be a problem for any conference.

They do not play well with others.

Yup...

Conference poison

(08-14-2016 02:37 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-14-2016 01:45 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  UT has never had differing goals from their conference mates, that's delusional.

Their only goal has been domination. And, while at first glance it sound ugly it really isn't. Who wouldn't want to dominate their own conference? You can strip away all of the chatter and rambling and you come to one core fact, Texas wants to be THE Big12--always have. And, that's a noble enough goal in itself. The problem is that they are dangerously close and that's why Nebraska, Mizzou, A&M, and Colorado all peaced out.

I mean, really, Colorado was so upset by the fact that Texas was an 'academic school' that they were so ashamed they walked away? Give me a ******* break.

The rest is chaff in the wind.

Texas has never sit down with the rest of the conference and told them they were too stupid to be seen in public with. But, they have said they were too poor to be seen in public with.

The Big 8 had several great academic schools. Kansas, Missouri, Iowa State, etc. Texas was not saving the Big 8. They imploded the SWC and now they are doing the same thing again. Apparently Colorado was academic enough to be accepted by the PAC 12.

I think what is often times lost in these discussions is the fact that nearly every P5 member is a good school in the grand scheme of things--scratch that EVERY one.

We are talking the best ~100 schools in the nation.

When the various Presidents meet one another they aren't cowering in fear and envy when the Texas/North Carolina/Michigan folks walk through the door.

That's worth keeping in mind when we talk about this. They've all got something they can throw at somebody at any given time and claim to be better or as good.

And, none of them are looking at a ranking system and making decisions on who is great and who isn't.

(08-14-2016 04:34 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(08-14-2016 02:37 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-14-2016 01:45 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  UT has never had differing goals from their conference mates, that's delusional.

Their only goal has been domination. And, while at first glance it sound ugly it really isn't. Who wouldn't want to dominate their own conference? You can strip away all of the chatter and rambling and you come to one core fact, Texas wants to be THE Big12--always have. And, that's a noble enough goal in itself. The problem is that they are dangerously close and that's why Nebraska, Mizzou, A&M, and Colorado all peaced out.

I mean, really, Colorado was so upset by the fact that Texas was an 'academic school' that they were so ashamed they walked away? Give me a ******* break.

The rest is chaff in the wind.

Texas has never sit down with the rest of the conference and told them they were too stupid to be seen in public with. But, they have said they were too poor to be seen in public with.

The Big 8 had several great academic schools. Kansas, Missouri, Iowa State, etc. Texas was not saving the Big 8. They imploded the SWC and now they are doing the same thing again. Apparently Colorado was academic enough to be accepted by the PAC 12.

I think what is often times lost in these discussions is the fact that nearly every P5 member is a good school in the grand scheme of things--scratch that EVERY one.

We are talking the best ~100 schools in the nation.

When the various Presidents meet one another they aren't cowering in fear and envy when the Texas/North Carolina/Michigan folks walk through the door.

That's worth keeping in mind when we talk about this. They've all got something they can throw at somebody at any given time and claim to be better or as good.

And, none of them are looking at a ranking system and making decisions on who is great and who isn't.

Like I said in an earlier post, when I grew up there were the Ivy's, the Service Academies, and then state schools above some and below some privates. Marketing and new ratings schemes to spur interest are the only thing that have changed in the past 50 years of higher ed. The naive public today believes the hype and thinks it will make a huge difference in little Johnny or Susie's life.

Really the best thing these ignorant parents could do is spend time finding out what little Johnny and Susie have aptitude for, and the interest in it to succeed. Then they can find the school that does that one thing the best and send them there.

It's just lazier and more trendy in a copy cat world to trust USN&WR or AAU (which is for graduate work), or ARWU. Then they have an acronym to brag about if they can't brag about their kids. Oh, and they have large debt numbers to report to impress their indebted friends.

Our whole society has losts its mind! God help us!

(08-14-2016 04:41 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-14-2016 04:34 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(08-14-2016 02:37 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-14-2016 01:45 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  UT has never had differing goals from their conference mates, that's delusional.

Their only goal has been domination. And, while at first glance it sound ugly it really isn't. Who wouldn't want to dominate their own conference? You can strip away all of the chatter and rambling and you come to one core fact, Texas wants to be THE Big12--always have. And, that's a noble enough goal in itself. The problem is that they are dangerously close and that's why Nebraska, Mizzou, A&M, and Colorado all peaced out.

I mean, really, Colorado was so upset by the fact that Texas was an 'academic school' that they were so ashamed they walked away? Give me a ******* break.

The rest is chaff in the wind.

Texas has never sit down with the rest of the conference and told them they were too stupid to be seen in public with. But, they have said they were too poor to be seen in public with.

The Big 8 had several great academic schools. Kansas, Missouri, Iowa State, etc. Texas was not saving the Big 8. They imploded the SWC and now they are doing the same thing again. Apparently Colorado was academic enough to be accepted by the PAC 12.

I think what is often times lost in these discussions is the fact that nearly every P5 member is a good school in the grand scheme of things--scratch that EVERY one.

We are talking the best ~100 schools in the nation.

When the various Presidents meet one another they aren't cowering in fear and envy when the Texas/North Carolina/Michigan folks walk through the door.

That's worth keeping in mind when we talk about this. They've all got something they can throw at somebody at any given time and claim to be better or as good.

And, none of them are looking at a ranking system and making decisions on who is great and who isn't.

Like I said in an earlier post, when I grew up there were the Ivy's, the Service Academies, and then state schools above some and below some privates. Marketing and new ratings schemes to spur interest are the only thing that have changed in the past 50 years of higher ed. The naive public today believes the hype and thinks it will make a huge difference in little Johnny or Susie's life.

Really the best thing these ignorant parents could do is spend time finding out what little Johnny and Susie have aptitude for, and the interest in it to succeed. Then they can find the school that does that one thing the best and send them there.

It's just lazier and more trendy in a copy cat world to trust USN&WR or AAU (which is for graduate work), or ARWU. Then they have an acronym to brag about if they can't brag about their kids. Oh, and they have large debt numbers to report to impress their indebted friends.

Our whole society has losts its mind! God help us!

It's all about the Benjamins!

I don't care what BS happens outside of the SEC. I personally hope the Big 12 crashes and burns though after all of this crap. They are doing what they do best. Forcing the networks hands for more money (that they don't deserve) by adding teams who aren't worth the money they'd be getting out of it. Typical Texas lead behavior.

As far as Texas goes. I hope we never invite them. Let them go ruin someone else's conference.

I feel bad for the Big 12 teams and the 17 programs that are running through the ringer who are just trying to survive to be honest. Some will be thrown a lifeline in 10 years while others will probably be on the outside looking in.