(12-29-2013 08:31 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 08:03 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  It isn't a troll thread and the number of self proclaimed fans has nothing to do with stadium size.

I'd say this really has most to do with the amount of perceived success each team etc has. Texas has fallen on harder times and has slipped while A&M has done much better and created excitement. The same can be said for Baylor and Houston relative to Tech.

If their so popular, where the heck are they on game day?

2013 2,012 2,011 2,010 Avg
Texas 98,976 100,884 100,524 100,654 100,260
A&M 87,125 87,014 87,183 82,477 85,950
Tech 57,933 57,209 55,347 57,108 56,899
Baylor 45,948 41,494 41,368 40,043 42,213
TCU 43,598 46,047 33,686 42,466 41,449
UTSA 29,214 29,214
Houston 24,256 27,247 31,731 31,728 28,741
UTEP 28,375 29,374 26,498 29,350 28,399
SMU 18,725 21,292 20,894 26,515 21,857
Rice 18,785 20,325 17,329 25,571 20,503
N. Texas21,030 18,927 18,864 17,718 19,135
Tx State 18,062 18,062

Point on. People in Texas know UH athletic program football, basketball etc ., are far more successful and storied than Tech's. Just a simple fact.

They are slowly realizing that Texans only watched the Big 12 because they had no alternatives.

Now that they have a stake in SEC football, the numbers will only grow.

Texas is big enough for both schools

(12-29-2013 09:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:19 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:11 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 08:57 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  Top 50 TV games according to the Houston Chronicle since 2008. Texas and Texas Tech will be fine especially when both of us get back to our 08 & 09 levels. The poll is a joke especially when you look at attendance and TV ratings.

09.17.2013 Bama-A&M CBS 17.3
2008 UT-Tech ABC 16.2
2009 UT-Neb ABC 15.7
2012-13 A&M-OU FOX 14.9 Cotton
2009 UT-A&M ESPN 13.8
2009 Flor-Ala CBS 12.3
2008 Tech-OU ABC 11.6
2008 UT-OU ABC 10.9
2009 Tech-UT ABC 10.9
2009 UT-OU ABC 10.8
2011 UH-USM ABC 10.6
2008 OSU-UT ABC 10.2
2012 A&M-Alabama CBS 9.6
2011 OU-UT ABC 9.5
2008 OSU-Tech ABC 9.4
2008 OU-OSU ABC 9.3
2008 Flor-Ala CBS 9.1
2009 KU-UT ABC 9
2009 UT-OSU ABC 8.9
2011 OSU-A&M ABC 8.4
2011 UT-Bay ABC 8.2
2012 Ala-Geor CBS 7.93
2011 UT-A&M ESPN 7.9
2009 Tech-Hou ESPN2 7.9
2009 UT-Mizz ABC 7.7
2011 OSU-UT ABC 7.7
2008 Mizz-OU ABC 7.6
11.09.2013 Miss St-Tx A&M CBS 7.5
11.09.2013 LSU-Alabama CBS 7.5
2011 LSU-GA CBS 7.4
2011 UT-UCLA ABC 7.3
2011 Okla-Flor St ABC 7.3
2012 Flo-A&M ESPN 7.1
10.14.2013 Texas-OU ABC 7.1
2012 UT-Oreg St ESPN 6.8 Alamo
2009 Flor-LSU CBS 6.8
2009 Tech-Neb ABC 6.7
2012 Ala-LSU CBS 6.7
2012 A&M-LSU ESPN 6.7
10.14.2013 A&M-Ole Miss ESPN 6.7
2011 OU-OSU ABC 6.6
2009 Col-UT ESPN 6.6
2009 LSU-Ala CBS 6.3
2012 Tex-Okla ABC 6.2
2012 Tex-Okla St Fox 6.2
2012 UT-K-State ABC 6.11
2008 Ala-LSU CBS 6.1
2013 K-State-Texas ABC 6.1
2012 ND-USC ABC 6
2011 Ore-LSU ABC 5.8

Your data is wrong. It's missing this years Auburn Alabama game which was about a 9.2, the Auburn Texas A&M game which was solidly in the 8 range, and the Auburn Georgia game.

The fact that you chose to go back to 08 and 09 shows the utter decline of the Big 12 since losing 4 key schools.

Times have changed forever for the Big 12. 2008&9 stats are now irrelevant.

Not according to the Houston Chronicle. The Bama-Auburn game drew a 6.6 in Houston. If you look at those ratings, Texas, Texas and Oklahoma still play in the Big 12. Nebraska, Colorado and Mizzou never had high TV ratings in Houston. In fact, until the 2010 season, A&M rarely high TV ratings unless they were playing Texas.

Bama Auburn, Auburn A&M should both be on that list and they are not, even in Houston, which by the way has the largest contingent of Auburn Alumni outside of Alabama besides Atlanta.

I'll fix the Bama-Auburn game but the A&M-Auburn game was not published in the online edition of the Houston Chronicle. For whatever reason, the Chronicle didn't publish TV ratings each week.

(12-29-2013 09:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:07 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  This year's ratings

Quote:
UT-BYU ............. 0.8 ..... 1,290,000
UT-Ole Miss ........ 0.1 ..... 130,000 (LHN)
UT-ISU ............. 1.5 ..... 2,400,000
UT-OU .............. 3.0, .... 4,710,000
UT-TCU ... ……..0.4, .... 676,000
UT-KU .............. 0.1 ..... 130,000 (LHN)
UT-WVU ............. 1.5 ..... 2,650,000
UT-OSU ............. 1.4 ..... 2,190,000
UT-Tech ............ 0.7 ..... 1,050,000

A&M-Rice ........... 2.7 ..... 4,200,000
A&M-'Bama .......... 8.5 ... 13,590,000
A&M-SMU ............ 0.5 ..... 809,000
A&M-Arky ........... 1.7 ..... 2,760,000
A&M-Ole Miss ....... 3.2 ..... 5,110,000
A&M-Auburn ......... 4.2 ..... 6,730,000
A&M-UTEP ........... 0.7 ..... 1,120,000
A&M-MSU ............ 2.9 ..... 4,530,000
A&M-LSU ............ 4.8 ..... 8,140,000
A&M-Mizzou ......... 3.6 ..... 5,730,000

Average share:

A&M ...... 3.28
UT ...... 1.06

Total viewers:

A&M ...... 52,719,000
UT ...... 15,181,000

Excellent post 10th! If nothing else it proves that the Big 12 spin doctors have a long way to go to put a Texas load of kittie litter on the data gathered by the pollsters and by your data listed above. If I could give you any more rep points I would.

JR, the Big 12 sucks and I sincerely hate the less fortunate begging for a chance at the big boy table. I hate the Big 12 and hope it dies. I hope Texas and Texas Tech leave for the PAC 12. That being said, a&m caught lightning in a bottle with the move to the SEC and autograph winning the Heisman.

(12-29-2013 09:40 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  Point on. People in Texas know UH athletic program football, basketball etc ., are far more successful and storied than Tech's. Just a simple fact.

Yet because of your low attendance numbers, you will always remain 5th fiddle in your own hometown. Enjoy the aac.

(12-29-2013 09:50 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:40 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  Point on. People in Texas know UH athletic program football, basketball etc ., are far more successful and storied than Tech's. Just a simple fact.

Yet because of your low attendance numbers, you will always remain 5th fiddle in your own hometown. Enjoy the aac.

How's your Bob Knight team?

(12-29-2013 09:47 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:07 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  This year's ratings

Quote:
UT-BYU ............. 0.8 ..... 1,290,000
UT-Ole Miss ........ 0.1 ..... 130,000 (LHN)
UT-ISU ............. 1.5 ..... 2,400,000
UT-OU .............. 3.0, .... 4,710,000
UT-TCU ... ……..0.4, .... 676,000
UT-KU .............. 0.1 ..... 130,000 (LHN)
UT-WVU ............. 1.5 ..... 2,650,000
UT-OSU ............. 1.4 ..... 2,190,000
UT-Tech ............ 0.7 ..... 1,050,000

A&M-Rice ........... 2.7 ..... 4,200,000
A&M-'Bama .......... 8.5 ... 13,590,000
A&M-SMU ............ 0.5 ..... 809,000
A&M-Arky ........... 1.7 ..... 2,760,000
A&M-Ole Miss ....... 3.2 ..... 5,110,000
A&M-Auburn ......... 4.2 ..... 6,730,000
A&M-UTEP ........... 0.7 ..... 1,120,000
A&M-MSU ............ 2.9 ..... 4,530,000
A&M-LSU ............ 4.8 ..... 8,140,000
A&M-Mizzou ......... 3.6 ..... 5,730,000

Average share:

A&M ...... 3.28
UT ...... 1.06

Total viewers:

A&M ...... 52,719,000
UT ...... 15,181,000

Excellent post 10th! If nothing else it proves that the Big 12 spin doctors have a long way to go to put a Texas load of kittie litter on the data gathered by the pollsters and by your data listed above. If I could give you any more rep points I would.

JR, the Big 12 sucks and I sincerely hate the less fortunate begging for a chance at the big boy table. I hate the Big 12 and hope it dies. I hope Texas and Texas Tech leave for the PAC 12. That being said, a&m caught lightning in a bottle with the move to the SEC and autograph winning the Heisman.

JML, I've got nothing against you or Tech. I wish you well. I think the PAC would be a good home for you guys, but, it may very well not be your only option. Depending on how things go down, which conference might have teams bow out of the obligation of moving to an upper tier with stipends, minimum endowment requirements, minimum numbers of required sports, etc, there might very well be other options available to the Red Raiders before this is over with in either a few years or a decade.

Really all Tech has to do is stay competitive and I think your present coach will handle that, improve your academics and I understand their is a plan in progress to that end, and you will be fine. You don't have to beat out anyone to make the upper tier, just stay ahead of those behind you. I'm confident that will happen.

Updated to add the Bama-Auburn game.
09.17.2013 Bama-A&M CBS 17.3
2008 UT-Tech ABC 16.2
2009 UT-Neb ABC 15.7
2012-13 A&M-OU FOX 14.9 Cotton
2009 UT-A&M ESPN 13.8
2009 Flor-Ala CBS 12.3
2008 Tech-OU ABC 11.6
2008 UT-OU ABC 10.9
2009 Tech-UT ABC 10.9
2009 UT-OU ABC 10.8
2011 UH-USM ABC 10.6
2008 OSU-UT ABC 10.2
2012 A&M-Alabama CBS 9.6
2011 OU-UT ABC 9.5
2008 OSU-Tech ABC 9.4
2008 OU-OSU ABC 9.3
2008 Flor-Ala CBS 9.1
2009 KU-UT ABC 9
2009 UT-OSU ABC 8.9
2011 OSU-A&M ABC 8.4
2011 UT-Bay ABC 8.2
2012 Ala-Geor CBS 7.93
2011 UT-A&M ESPN 7.9
2009 Tech-Hou ESPN2 7.9
2009 UT-Mizz ABC 7.7
2011 OSU-UT ABC 7.7
2008 Mizz-OU ABC 7.6
11.09.2013 Miss St-Tx A&M CBS 7.5
11.09.2013 LSU-Alabama CBS 7.5
2011 LSU-GA CBS 7.4
2011 UT-UCLA ABC 7.3
2011 Okla-Flor St ABC 7.3
2012 Flo-A&M ESPN 7.1
10.14.2013 Texas-OU ABC 7.1
2012 UT-Oreg St ESPN 6.8 Alamo
2009 Flor-LSU CBS 6.8
2009 Tech-Neb ABC 6.7
2012 Ala-LSU CBS 6.7
2012 A&M-LSU ESPN 6.7
10.14.2013 A&M-Ole Miss ESPN 6.7
2011 OU-OSU ABC 6.6
2009 Col-UT ESPN 6.6
11.30.2013 Alabama-Aub CBS 6.6
2009 LSU-Ala CBS 6.3
2012 Tex-Okla ABC 6.2
2012 Tex-Okla St Fox 6.2
2012 UT-K-State ABC 6.11
2008 Ala-LSU CBS 6.1
2013 K-State-Texas ABC 6.1
2012 ND-USC ABC 6
11.30.2013 A&M-Mizzou ESPN 6

(12-29-2013 09:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:07 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  This year's ratings

Quote:
UT-BYU ............. 0.8 ..... 1,290,000
UT-Ole Miss ........ 0.1 ..... 130,000 (LHN)
UT-ISU ............. 1.5 ..... 2,400,000
UT-OU .............. 3.0, .... 4,710,000
UT-TCU ... ……..0.4, .... 676,000
UT-KU .............. 0.1 ..... 130,000 (LHN)
UT-WVU ............. 1.5 ..... 2,650,000
UT-OSU ............. 1.4 ..... 2,190,000
UT-Tech ............ 0.7 ..... 1,050,000

A&M-Rice ........... 2.7 ..... 4,200,000
A&M-'Bama .......... 8.5 ... 13,590,000
A&M-SMU ............ 0.5 ..... 809,000
A&M-Arky ........... 1.7 ..... 2,760,000
A&M-Ole Miss ....... 3.2 ..... 5,110,000
A&M-Auburn ......... 4.2 ..... 6,730,000
A&M-UTEP ........... 0.7 ..... 1,120,000
A&M-MSU ............ 2.9 ..... 4,530,000
A&M-LSU ............ 4.8 ..... 8,140,000
A&M-Mizzou ......... 3.6 ..... 5,730,000

Average share:

A&M ...... 3.28
UT ...... 1.06

Total viewers:

A&M ...... 52,719,000
UT ...... 15,181,000

Excellent post 10th! If nothing else it proves that the Big 12 spin doctors have a long way to go to put a Texas load of kittie litter on the data gathered by the pollsters and by your data listed above. If I could give you any more rep points I would.

1- The Texas data is pretty skewed by 3 things on tv ratings:
a- Texas in a down year vs A&M's most anticipated year in decades
b- LHN dropping numbers down for 3 UT games including the best noncon home game
c- FSN, FS1, FOX vs ESPN. Newer and lesser networks don't do as well as ESPN even when simply comparing the Big 12 and Pac12 against itself on each network.
d- A HUGE matchup before A&M's season slipped off against Bama that was hyped all offseason due to Bama's 3 national titles in 4 years.

A&M had a better year and more eyeballs this year, but the reality of it is much much less than these numbers imply despite how much the aggy and anti-b12 crowd wish it were different.

(12-29-2013 09:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  JML, I've got nothing against you or Tech. I wish you well. I think the PAC would be a good home for you guys, but, it may very well not be your only option. Depending on how things go down, which conference might have teams bow out of the obligation of moving to an upper tier with stipends, minimum endowment requirements, minimum numbers of required sports, etc, there might very well be other options available to the Red Raiders before this is over with in either a few years or a decade.

Really all Tech has to do is stay competitive and I think your present coach will handle that, improve your academics and I understand their is a plan in progress to that end, and you will be fine. You don't have to beat out anyone to make the upper tier, just stay ahead of those behind you. I'm confident that will happen.

Thanks for the kind words. I'm not sure what you are getting at in terms of the PAC not being our only option. Aggy will never vote to add Tech or Texas and the ACC is bad fit for Tech. I realize I make your job as a mod tough but I know Tech will end up in a good spot and I will stand up for Tech when others bash us.

(12-29-2013 10:01 PM)S11 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:07 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  This year's ratings

Quote:
UT-BYU ............. 0.8 ..... 1,290,000
UT-Ole Miss ........ 0.1 ..... 130,000 (LHN)
UT-ISU ............. 1.5 ..... 2,400,000
UT-OU .............. 3.0, .... 4,710,000
UT-TCU ... ……..0.4, .... 676,000
UT-KU .............. 0.1 ..... 130,000 (LHN)
UT-WVU ............. 1.5 ..... 2,650,000
UT-OSU ............. 1.4 ..... 2,190,000
UT-Tech ............ 0.7 ..... 1,050,000

A&M-Rice ........... 2.7 ..... 4,200,000
A&M-'Bama .......... 8.5 ... 13,590,000
A&M-SMU ............ 0.5 ..... 809,000
A&M-Arky ........... 1.7 ..... 2,760,000
A&M-Ole Miss ....... 3.2 ..... 5,110,000
A&M-Auburn ......... 4.2 ..... 6,730,000
A&M-UTEP ........... 0.7 ..... 1,120,000
A&M-MSU ............ 2.9 ..... 4,530,000
A&M-LSU ............ 4.8 ..... 8,140,000
A&M-Mizzou ......... 3.6 ..... 5,730,000

Average share:

A&M ...... 3.28
UT ...... 1.06

Total viewers:

A&M ...... 52,719,000
UT ...... 15,181,000

Excellent post 10th! If nothing else it proves that the Big 12 spin doctors have a long way to go to put a Texas load of kittie litter on the data gathered by the pollsters and by your data listed above. If I could give you any more rep points I would.

1- The Texas data is pretty skewed by 3 things on tv ratings:
a- Texas in a down year vs A&M's most anticipated year in decades
b- LHN dropping numbers down for 3 UT games including the best noncon home game
c- FSN, FS1, FOX vs ESPN. Newer and lesser networks don't do as well as ESPN even when simply comparing the Big 12 and Pac12 against itself on each network.
d- A HUGE matchup before A&M's season slipped off against Bama that was hyped all offseason due to Bama's 3 national titles in 4 years.

A&M had a better year and more eyeballs this year, but the reality of it is much much less than these numbers imply despite how much the aggy and anti-b12 crowd wish it were different.

Let me get this straight S11. We are not to believe the actual raw data, but we are to believe what the Big 12 apologists tell us to believe? "Pay no attention to the man (Bear) behind the curtain." "I am the great and powerful Wizard of Oz (apologist for a failing Texas)! It is what it is, and at the time that is most current. Nothing more, nothing less.

If it makes you feel better, you aren't special. We'll vote no for all Texas AND Oklahoma teams.

And I certainly can't wait for the TV numbers to keep coming in.

It's not your fault though, the Big 12 was a bad idea from day one because it ignored the truth: there aren't enough fans in middle America to support a true power conference. Texas and A&M saw that at the breaking of the SWC that the real solution was to ally with the coasts and go to the PAC and SEC. Politics got in the way of that but it's slowly starting to right itself.

(12-29-2013 09:50 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:40 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  Point on. People in Texas know UH athletic program football, basketball etc ., are far more successful and storied than Tech's. Just a simple fact.

Yet because of your low attendance numbers, you will always remain 5th fiddle in your own hometown. Enjoy the aac.

Better keep hoping they keep us out of the B12, if they don't that will make Tech athletics even more insignificant.

(12-29-2013 10:12 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:50 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:40 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  Point on. People in Texas know UH athletic program football, basketball etc ., are far more successful and storied than Tech's. Just a simple fact.

Yet because of your low attendance numbers, you will always remain 5th fiddle in your own hometown. Enjoy the aac.

Better keep hoping they keep us out of the B12, if they don't that will make Tech athletics even more insignificant.

Would be fun to see Cinnci light up Tech

(12-29-2013 10:03 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  JML, I've got nothing against you or Tech. I wish you well. I think the PAC would be a good home for you guys, but, it may very well not be your only option. Depending on how things go down, which conference might have teams bow out of the obligation of moving to an upper tier with stipends, minimum endowment requirements, minimum numbers of required sports, etc, there might very well be other options available to the Red Raiders before this is over with in either a few years or a decade.

Really all Tech has to do is stay competitive and I think your present coach will handle that, improve your academics and I understand their is a plan in progress to that end, and you will be fine. You don't have to beat out anyone to make the upper tier, just stay ahead of those behind you. I'm confident that will happen.

Thanks for the kind words. I'm not sure what you are getting at in terms of the PAC not being our only option. Aggy will never vote to add Tech or Texas and the ACC is bad fit for Tech. I realize I make your job as a mod tough but I know Tech will end up in a good spot and I will stand up for Tech when others bash us.

1. You only make my job as a Mod tough when you post taunts while inebriated following a celebration. Not over any of this stuff.

2. The next decade may very well see this whole process pared down to a P3 consisting of at least 60 schools. In that kind of world the networks will determine placement and those they are willing to pay will have a home somewhere. And that's if Texas doesn't insist on you guys as a partner in a move.

3. Even in the SEC profit trumps the individual wishes of single schools and in a 20 team conference all of these teams will want their in state rivals in the mix because scheduling them otherwise might not be possible.

4. There was no "gentlemen's agreement" in the SEC beyond the last two additions. Two new markets were the requirement for renegotiating our ESPN contract. No such provision is in the new one. Slive asked for the agreement not to nominate other in state schools until the renegotiation clause was activated. The rest is chat room B.S. In 1992 Florida nominated F.S.U. for membership. Two years ago South Carolina officials (including Spurrier) stated that they had no opposition to the consideration of Clemson. Nobody cares what Kentucky thinks about a football add and Louisville wasn't on the menu. Georgia would prefer not to add Tech or Clemson, or F.S.U. but they are alone in that. The SEC will vote to do what earns each of them the most.

So yeah, anything is possible up to a Texahoma to the SEC. But until other targets are eliminated either by addition or refusal it is down the list on priorities.

(12-29-2013 10:17 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 10:12 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:50 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:40 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  Point on. People in Texas know UH athletic program football, basketball etc ., are far more successful and storied than Tech's. Just a simple fact.

Yet because of your low attendance numbers, you will always remain 5th fiddle in your own hometown. Enjoy the aac.

Better keep hoping they keep us out of the B12, if they don't that will make Tech athletics even more insignificant.

Would be fun to see Cinnci light up Tech

Pony, you and I are buds and I know you're trolling for the sake of trolling. Congrats. The river fraud has no desire playing Big 12 opponents, we all saw how he fared coaching in the Big 12. That being said, Kliff and most of the tech fan base would love a shot at Cincy but they are skeered. Instead, we will play Arkansas and Arizona St in the future.

(12-29-2013 07:52 PM)S11 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 07:35 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  Aggies edge past Longhorns in Texas popularity contest.

A recent survey by Public Policy Polling found 22 percent of Texas voters identified themselves as Aggies sports fans, compared with 20 percent who declared their loyalty for the Longhorns.

http://dallas.culturemap.com/news/sports...ge-sports/

For pete's sake people, its a survey of 500 voters. Not exactly the best methodology.

Better one to compare UT vs A&M- Facebook pre-season top 25 county leaders:
http://mashable.com/2013/08/30/college-f...ebook-map/



That tells a much more statistically sound story than 500 random schmucks.

This map is worthless, too. By making each county "winner take all", it is extremely misleading - for example, does anyone really think that there are NO Michigan State fans in Michigan? or no FSU fans in Florida outside of Tallahassee itself?

"There are 3 kinds of lies..." - Mark Twain (aka Samuel Clemens - liar!)

(12-29-2013 10:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 10:03 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 09:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  JML, I've got nothing against you or Tech. I wish you well. I think the PAC would be a good home for you guys, but, it may very well not be your only option. Depending on how things go down, which conference might have teams bow out of the obligation of moving to an upper tier with stipends, minimum endowment requirements, minimum numbers of required sports, etc, there might very well be other options available to the Red Raiders before this is over with in either a few years or a decade.

Really all Tech has to do is stay competitive and I think your present coach will handle that, improve your academics and I understand their is a plan in progress to that end, and you will be fine. You don't have to beat out anyone to make the upper tier, just stay ahead of those behind you. I'm confident that will happen.

Thanks for the kind words. I'm not sure what you are getting at in terms of the PAC not being our only option. Aggy will never vote to add Tech or Texas and the ACC is bad fit for Tech. I realize I make your job as a mod tough but I know Tech will end up in a good spot and I will stand up for Tech when others bash us.

1. You only make my job as a Mod tough when you post taunts while inebriated following a celebration. Not over any of this stuff.

2. The next decade may very well see this whole process pared down to a P3 consisting of at least 60 schools. In that kind of world the networks will determine placement and those they are willing to pay will have a home somewhere. And that's if Texas doesn't insist on you guys as a partner in a move.

3. Even in the SEC profit trumps the individual wishes of single schools and in a 20 team conference all of these teams will want their in state rivals in the mix because scheduling them otherwise might not be possible.

4. There was no "gentlemen's agreement" in the SEC beyond the last two additions. Two new markets were the requirement for renegotiating our ESPN contract. No such provision is in the new one. Slive asked for the agreement not to nominate other in state schools until the renegotiation clause was activated. The rest is chat room B.S. In 1992 Florida nominated F.S.U. for membership. Two years ago South Carolina officials (including Spurrier) stated that they had no opposition to the consideration of Clemson. Nobody cares what Kentucky thinks about a football add and Louisville wasn't on the menu. Georgia would prefer not to add Tech or Clemson, or F.S.U. but they are alone in that. The SEC will vote to do what earns each of them the most.

So yeah, anything is possible up to a Texahoma to the SEC. But until other targets are eliminated either by addition or refusal it is down the list on priorities.

1. Guilty as charged. I do love to drink beer and tend to get a bit more mouthy once I have consumed 15 or so beers.

2. I have no clue how this turns out but I think it will be 64 schools. No one from the Big 10, SEC or PAC 12 will be left behind. Texas Tech will be fine regardless of what Texas does because I think the PAC wants a Texas school and outside of Texas, who brings more to the table than Tech?( Fans, TV Sets, facilities, growing academics).

3. I understand what you are saying but honestly, Tech is bad fit for the SEC. I would love to play LSU, Arkansas, Bama and Auburn but would they enjoy playing us in conference?

4. Adding the Texoma4 to the SEC would piss aggy off but the SEC would cement itself as the #1 conference in Texas with those 4 additions. Aggy has done well but just think how much more money the SEC network would make adding the 4 of the 5 largest fan bases in Texas & Oklahoma.

(12-29-2013 10:33 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 07:52 PM)S11 Wrote:  

(12-29-2013 07:35 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  Aggies edge past Longhorns in Texas popularity contest.

A recent survey by Public Policy Polling found 22 percent of Texas voters identified themselves as Aggies sports fans, compared with 20 percent who declared their loyalty for the Longhorns.

http://dallas.culturemap.com/news/sports...ge-sports/

For pete's sake people, its a survey of 500 voters. Not exactly the best methodology.

Better one to compare UT vs A&M- Facebook pre-season top 25 county leaders:
http://mashable.com/2013/08/30/college-f...ebook-map/



That tells a much more statistically sound story than 500 random schmucks.

This map is worthless, too. By making each county "winner take all", it is extremely misleading - for example, does anyone really think that there are NO Michigan State fans in Michigan? or no FSU fans in Florida outside of Tallahassee itself?

"There are 3 kinds of lies..." - Mark Twain (aka Samuel Clemens - liar!)

Thank you! You are exactly right about the data on the map. There are more living Auburn alumni than Alabama alumni in the State of Alabama yet the entire map is crimson. I have no doubt that counting the fair weather fans that most years Alabama has more fans in the state, but the map couldn't even be right county by county. There are regions of the state where there are more Auburn alumni and fans than those of Alabama, yet all 67 counties including Lee county (home to Auburn U) are colored crimson. Ridiculous!

I think the words "Facebook" and "Preseason" tell you all you need to know.