(08-17-2019 02:20 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 11:41 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 11:23 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-15-2019 10:41 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  In regards to the FAANG super conference idea I don’t think it’ll ever happen. What makes more sense is to approach either the SEC or Big Ten and toss money at them to expand by 10 or so members. instead of 5 Power conferences you consolidate into 2 Super Conferences.

The Big Ten could absorb the top of the PAC 12, maybe some old Big 8 schools, and ND and or some NE schools.

The SEC would be looking at Texlahoma and the southern wing of the ACC.

The B1G and SEC dividing up the ACC makes more sense, maybe along Coastal and Atlantic lines, each group having 2 conferences. They might be able to get more value of the ACC schools than the ACC schools can do in their current configuration. That would force the Big 12 and Pac 12 into an alliance.

I agree with you on this point. Much will depend on Oklahoma however. I sincerely believe that a Big 12 / PAC alliance would be better for the Game. It's just that there are many factors lining up against it. The PAC's financial ineptitude is not the least of them. And with the Big 12 GOR up first and the ACC's not until 2037 (a date beyond Boomer influence in which donations, attendance, and viewers of the sport are all likely to be in decline) it might well be that waiting until that time won't be beneficial to the SEC and Big 12. If they enhance, however, from the Big 12 the additions would come at a time when content value is still high.

So the finances of the PAC, the timeline of demographics, and the immediate desires of the largest two suitors don't line up that way.

I believe that if the Big 10 and/or SEC grow out of the Big 12 that the future will be that of two large leagues and not 4 conferences, and that those leagues will consist of no more than 24 schools each. However if the Big 12 and PAC merged into a stronger conference of 20, then the Big 10 and SEC would grow accordingly out of the ACC. Then we would have 3 conferences of ~60 and with it greater competitive and financial balance.

If ESPN (and of course most of the ACC schools) thought there was value in splitting the ACC, it wouldn't have to wait until 2037. It could happen in 2023. The B1G will be a free agent and can add schools. The SEC could bring in the rest of the ACC with agreement with ESPN.

It takes 12 schools to dissolve the ACC GOR. I don't think the moves would be that large.

The best avenue of division would be for the SEC and Big 10 to each take just two. For the Big 10 that would be two of Notre Dame, North Carolina, and Virginia. For the SEC it would be interesting. In 2010 we agreed in theory to taking both North Carolina and Duke if they needed a home. Would they insist on staying together? If so the SEC might look at that pair. If not it's Florida State and Clemson. But if we took those schools we gut the value of the ACC and there aren't enough homes for the others to dissolve the conference.

So you would need the Big 10 and SEC to take 4 each to even make it possible.

So the Big 10 to get UNC would have to take Duke, Notre Dame would need to be somewhere at that point and the money would be in the SEC and Big 10. Projections for revenue for the Big 10 were released by Dodds two days ago. Looking at their books he was projecting 60 million per team by 2025 (1 year past the current contract) and about 70 million by 2029-30. This has led to speculation as to whether the Big 10 has signed a contract extension that hasn't yet been made public. If so the contract would be essentially the same and the escalators would be taking the revenue higher.

The SEC is rumored to have had an offer of 250 million from CBS for T1 to begin immediately in replacing the old contract which expires in 2025. If that also has escalators in it then the SEC's 2022 payout would be around 56 million and by 2025 will also be at 60 million and should project out from there similarly to the Big 10's.

That kind of revenue will be over 200 million (closer to 230 million) higher than that of the ACC when projected over a decade. Keep in mind the ACC contract isn't up until 2037.

So Bullet the money is there to tempt the ACC to perhaps consider the path you suggest. But 12 schools must be accounted for to make it happen. It might work if the SEC and Big 10 each went to 18 with 3 divisions of 6.

So if the Big 10 wanted North Carolina and had to take Duke to get them then I could see them taking Duke, North Carolina, Notre Dame, and Virginia.

Big 10 East: Duke, Maryland, Penn State, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Virginia
Big 10 Central: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Rutgers
Big 10 West: Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

The SEC would go for the markets with Virginia Tech and N.C. State and the content with Clemson and Florida State.

SEC East: Clemson, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Tennessee, Va Tech
SEC South: Auburn, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Mississippi, Vanderbilt
SEC West: Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana St, Mississippi St., Missouri, Texas A&M

The Big 12 could expand East and make it happen: Miami, Georgia Tech, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Louisville, and Boston College. But would that really help you catch up monetarily? No.

If the SEC and Big 10 are to expand profitably from the ACC we really don't need more than 2 each. That way you leave enough behind for ESPN to build another conference from them. So Virginia & Notre Dame to the Big 10 for 16 and North Carolina and Duke / or Clemson and F.S.U. to the SEC but not both. Since North Carolina likes to call their own shots like Texas it will be Clemson and F.S.U.

Then if Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas Tech want to head to the PAC where that would probably be an acceptable package then you have 3 staunch conferences of 16.

With 4 ACC schools gone and only having 15 sort of to start with the ACC can look to adding 5 out of the Big 12.

So West Virginia is added to the East and T.C.U., Oklahoma State, Kansas State and Iowa State are added.

Now you have your 4x16 and Baylor is odd man out.

ACC: Boston College, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia Tech
Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, Wake Forest
Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, T.C.U.

Carolina keeps their fiefdom and there's your P4.

Now do I think any of that is likely? No.

It's far easier, but a less profitable for the SEC and Big 10 to take 6 each from the ACC and for 8 of the present Big 12 to merge with the PAC.

It's just that money is the organizing principle at work. And because of that I think Oklahoma will leave for either the Big 10 or SEC and the dominoes will fall in the Big 12. The ACC will remain intact unless ESPN is complicit in their movement.

And while ESPN and FOX are essentially competitors, the owners of FOX make money when Disney makes money now that they own so many shares. Might ESPN and FOX agree to do what makes both of them more money? Maybe. So maybe they do cover the SEC/Big 10 expansion from the ACC. Now the problem is how do you monetize the PACN so that the proposed Big 12/PAC merger is profitable enough to work. The PAC will have to let FOX or ESPN control it and let ESPN and FOX to continue to split all of their T1 and T2 rights 50/50. I think this part is much more tricky that it sounds and remember Texas isn't doing it unless it at least pays 54 million in total.

So to make it work with the Big 12 taking 8 to the PAC and the Big 10 and SEC expanding out of the ACC the networks are likely going to have to monetize the PAC/Big 12 merger much more than they are paying now. And subsidize at least 2 schools each to Big 10 and SEC pay. And right now I don't see that either.

I think Oklahoma and Kansas will head to the Big 10 and Texas and Texas Tech will reunite with A&M and Arkansas in the SEC. And the reason is Occam's razor. The Big 12 GOR is expiring and all four of those will earn more than they do presently from those moves and Texas regains two old rivals, negates A&M's presumed brand advantage in recruiting and keeps 7 to 8 games in the state of Texas annually.

So for the TLDR crowd:

1. It would cost to much to move enough ACC schools to make it work. And, it would leave too few ACC schools of value if 4 key schools move to build a profitable conference from the remnants.

2. The Big 12 couldn't add enough from the left over ACC if the SEC and Big 10 took 8 combined to make it worth their while.

3. There are too many business angles to work out with the PAC to make it happen and even if you could the PAC is so devalued that the joining Big 12 schools would likely have to take a cut in pay to make it happen.

4. The likeliest thing to happen is for the Sooners to leave for more money and so called security and for Kansas to go with them. Then Texas makes a move that secures their top spot in the state and preserves their business model and takes Tech with them.

(08-17-2019 04:37 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 11:41 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 11:23 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-15-2019 10:41 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  In regards to the FAANG super conference idea I don’t think it’ll ever happen. What makes more sense is to approach either the SEC or Big Ten and toss money at them to expand by 10 or so members. instead of 5 Power conferences you consolidate into 2 Super Conferences.

The Big Ten could absorb the top of the PAC 12, maybe some old Big 8 schools, and ND and or some NE schools.

The SEC would be looking at Texlahoma and the southern wing of the ACC.

The B1G and SEC dividing up the ACC makes more sense, maybe along Coastal and Atlantic lines, each group having 2 conferences. They might be able to get more value of the ACC schools than the ACC schools can do in their current configuration. That would force the Big 12 and Pac 12 into an alliance.

I agree with you on this point. Much will depend on Oklahoma however. I sincerely believe that a Big 12 / PAC alliance would be better for the Game. It's just that there are many factors lining up against it. The PAC's financial ineptitude is not the least of them. And with the Big 12 GOR up first and the ACC's not until 2037 (a date beyond Boomer influence in which donations, attendance, and viewers of the sport are all likely to be in decline) it might well be that waiting until that time won't be beneficial to the SEC and Big 12. If they enhance, however, from the Big 12 the additions would come at a time when content value is still high.

So the finances of the PAC, the timeline of demographics, and the immediate desires of the largest two suitors don't line up tha.
t way.

I believe that if the Big 10 and/or SEC grow out of the Big 12 that the future will be that of two large leagues and not 4 conferences, and that those leagues will consist of no more than 24 schools each. However if the Big 12 and PAC merged into a stronger conference of 20, then the Big 10 and SEC would grow accordingly out of the ACC. Then we would have 3 conferences of ~60 and with it greater competitive and financial balance.

Yep!
The Big 12/PAC combo will work but Missouri (just like ESPN planned) is the key.
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas and Kansas State head west.
Missouri and Iowa State move to the B1G
The SEC with an extra slot takes West Virginia, Baylor and Texas Tech.
T.C.U. moves to the ACC along with Texas (as a partial).

The Big Ten has no reason to take Iowa State, and Missouri is not likely to leave the SEC at this point.
The Pac will not be especially compelled to take KSU and OSU without UT to sweeten the deal.
The SEC has no reason to add Baylor or Texas Tech without UT.
Texas is not going to the ACC.

Internet boards are fun for hypothetical but in the real world, a slot in the SEC or B1G is the most valuable thing in all of college sports

They will not be handed out easily or lightly to make people or politicians feel good.

There are at most 5-6 schools who have the markets, the content and the academics (because yes, university presidents still make these decisions whether you like it or not) to even be considered for one and maybe 2-4 that will actually get an invite which will be take it or leave it, no negotiations.

That’s realignment in the real world

And admittedly it doesn’t make for good message board fodder

(08-17-2019 05:08 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Internet boards are fun for hypothetical but in the real world, a slot in the SEC or B1G is the most valuable thing in all of college sports

They will not be handed out easily or lightly to make people or politicians feel good.

There are at most 5-6 schools who have the markets, the content and the academics (because yes, university presidents still make these decisions whether you like it or not) to even be considered for one and maybe 2-4 that will actually get an invite which will be take it or leave it, no negotiations.

That’s realignment in the real world

And admittedly it doesn’t make for good message board fodder

And outside of Notre Dame which is a somewhat close 3rd there are no two schools that could add more value and brand power than Texas and Oklahoma. Find me 6 others the SEC could consider. Virginia Tech? Nope N.C. State? Nope North Carolina? Yes but not enough value to bring a buddy. Florida State? Barely but not enough to bring a buddy. Clemson? A wash at best.

Nobody is coming from the Big 10 and nobody else from the ACC really adds enough value. Duke and North Carolina as a pair would be a hoops and academic grab and they would be worth it financially "IF" the P5 separated from the NCAA but not before.

If a network was subsidizing moves then yeah we could take F.S.U./Clemson/Va Tech/and N.C. State but any other way? No.

Texas and Oklahoma are the only two schools that when their total value and worth is calculated that you can add that of another school divide by 2 and still exceed the average value and income of the SEC or Big 10.

I don’t disagree

I also don’t believe they’ll ever choose to be in a conference they don’t run and want to be the big fish in a small pond and not big fish in an ocean of big fish

It’s in their DNA

Both established themselves by being the dominant force in regional mid west leagues filled mostly with schools that lacked either the resources or the football culture to consistently challenge them

Maybe Im wrong but we’ll know eventually

(08-17-2019 07:19 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I don’t disagree

I also don’t believe they’ll ever choose to be in a conference they don’t run and want to be the big fish in a small pond and not big fish in an ocean of big fish

It’s in their DNA

Both established themselves by being the dominant force in regional mid west leagues filled mostly with schools that lacked either the resources or the football culture to consistently challenge them

Maybe Im wrong but we’ll know eventually

Which is why if both OU and Texas move together, they will go to the PAC.

(08-17-2019 10:10 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 07:19 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I don’t disagree

I also don’t believe they’ll ever choose to be in a conference they don’t run and want to be the big fish in a small pond and not big fish in an ocean of big fish

It’s in their DNA

Both established themselves by being the dominant force in regional mid west leagues filled mostly with schools that lacked either the resources or the football culture to consistently challenge them

Maybe Im wrong but we’ll know eventually

Which is why if both OU and Texas move together, they will go to the PAC.

I predict the texoma 4 will move to the SEC.

Texas has 3 true flagships. West Texas oil money has provided the other 2 flagships tons of $$'s.

(08-17-2019 06:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 05:08 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Internet boards are fun for hypothetical but in the real world, a slot in the SEC or B1G is the most valuable thing in all of college sports

They will not be handed out easily or lightly to make people or politicians feel good.

There are at most 5-6 schools who have the markets, the content and the academics (because yes, university presidents still make these decisions whether you like it or not) to even be considered for one and maybe 2-4 that will actually get an invite which will be take it or leave it, no negotiations.

That’s realignment in the real world

And admittedly it doesn’t make for good message board fodder

And outside of Notre Dame which is a somewhat close 3rd there are no two schools that could add more value and brand power than Texas and Oklahoma. Find me 6 others the SEC could consider. Virginia Tech? Nope N.C. State? Nope North Carolina? Yes but not enough value to bring a buddy. Florida State? Barely but not enough to bring a buddy. Clemson? A wash at best.

Nobody is coming from the Big 10 and nobody else from the ACC really adds enough value. Duke and North Carolina as a pair would be a hoops and academic grab and they would be worth it financially "IF" the P5 separated from the NCAA but not before.

If a network was subsidizing moves then yeah we could take F.S.U./Clemson/Va Tech/and N.C. State but any other way? No.

Texas and Oklahoma are the only two schools that when their total value and worth is calculated that you can add that of another school divide by 2 and still exceed the average value and income of the SEC or Big 10.

It is quite possible that, if it is determined that superconferences are inevitable, that the networks would prefer to pay the PAC to take in OU, UT and a few others. The question then becomes how much $$$ would they have to part with to avoid having to pay the Big Ten and/or the SEC more money than they are worth in real dollars.

This is why I'm still not completely ruling out the PAC. Yes, it doesn't look good now but long-term marginalizing of at least a third of the country may be worse. It will come down to whether UT is willing to be paid to play games every season in California, Arizona, Washington and Colorado.

The idea of a "flagship" is that there's only one. It's the ship in which the commander of a fleet set up shop and had his flag raised. So if there's a flagship university of the state of Texas, it would have to be UT. There can't be multiple flagships of a given entity.

(08-17-2019 10:49 PM)P5PACSEC Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 10:10 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 07:19 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I don’t disagree

I also don’t believe they’ll ever choose to be in a conference they don’t run and want to be the big fish in a small pond and not big fish in an ocean of big fish

It’s in their DNA

Both established themselves by being the dominant force in regional mid west leagues filled mostly with schools that lacked either the resources or the football culture to consistently challenge them

Maybe Im wrong but we’ll know eventually

Which is why if both OU and Texas move together, they will go to the PAC.

I predict the texoma 4 will move to the SEC.

Texas has 3 true flagships. West Texas oil money has provided the other 2 flagships tons of $$'s.

You and the TCU dude parading as an A&M fan are delusional.

I actually have a masters from A&M. He married into the program and is suddenly their spokesperson.

(08-17-2019 11:09 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  The idea of a "flagship" is that there's only one. It's the ship in which the commander of a fleet set up shop and had his flag raised. So if there's a flagship university of the state of Texas, it would have to be UT. There can't be multiple flagships of a given entity.

1. It's not the navy and the connotation is different.

2. Both are top 5 earners, both are AAU, and both deliver a significant portion of the state's viewers. So I ask you, what difference does it make?

3. Out of 65 P schools both are at least preferable to probably 57 others and maybe even 60 others.

(08-17-2019 11:33 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 11:09 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  The idea of a "flagship" is that there's only one. It's the ship in which the commander of a fleet set up shop and had his flag raised. So if there's a flagship university of the state of Texas, it would have to be UT. There can't be multiple flagships of a given entity.

1. It's not the navy and the connotation is different.

2. Both are top 5 earners, both are AAU, and both deliver a significant portion of the state's viewers. So I ask you, what difference does it make?

3. Out of 65 P schools both are at least preferable to probably 57 others and maybe even 60 others.

I don't care about this issue anywhere close to as much as some here seem to, but my point stands. UT is clearly the flagship school of Texas, not A&M, and certainly not Tech.

(08-17-2019 11:39 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 11:33 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 11:09 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  The idea of a "flagship" is that there's only one. It's the ship in which the commander of a fleet set up shop and had his flag raised. So if there's a flagship university of the state of Texas, it would have to be UT. There can't be multiple flagships of a given entity.

1. It's not the navy and the connotation is different.

2. Both are top 5 earners, both are AAU, and both deliver a significant portion of the state's viewers. So I ask you, what difference does it make?

3. Out of 65 P schools both are at least preferable to probably 57 others and maybe even 60 others.

I don't care about this issue anywhere close to as much as some here seem to, but my point stands. UT is clearly the flagship school of Texas, not A&M, and certainly not Tech.

Well the State Legislature of Texas declared them both to be. Take it up with them. If you don't care about this issue why are you arguing about it? And whether your point stands or not when you are talking about two top 5 schools in revenue generated, donations, with large fan bases in one of the hottest football markets in the nation, and both are academically strong to boot, it's a damned ridiculous argument now isn't it? Which means, for those who can't see the forest for the trees, that whether A&M is co-equal by terms of state declaration or #2 they still would have been welcomed with open arms by any P conference in the nation. So what's the point?

I have noted that you tend to get into many arguments over minutia. It is the off season. So it has been fair game. But starting next week "what if" threads "and where will so and so be when" threads will be verboten. And arguments over trivia and how many angels can dance on the head of pin will receive my derision.

I categorize this one as a silly, needless, and non productive argument. And Nerdlinger my point about this will stand.

(08-17-2019 11:14 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 10:49 PM)P5PACSEC Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 10:10 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 07:19 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I don’t disagree

I also don’t believe they’ll ever choose to be in a conference they don’t run and want to be the big fish in a small pond and not big fish in an ocean of big fish

It’s in their DNA

Both established themselves by being the dominant force in regional mid west leagues filled mostly with schools that lacked either the resources or the football culture to consistently challenge them

Maybe Im wrong but we’ll know eventually

Which is why if both OU and Texas move together, they will go to the PAC.

I predict the texoma 4 will move to the SEC.

Texas has 3 true flagships. West Texas oil money has provided the other 2 flagships tons of $$'s.

You and the TCU dude parading as an A&M fan are delusional.

I actually have a masters from A&M. He married into the program and is suddenly their spokesperson.

I'm not delusional. I believe Texas Tech is the best option for the SEC.
You moderate a board with fans who say the same thing about the SEC, Big 12, ACC etc.

This is not DavidSt make believe. I believe the state of Texas has 3 schools who belong in a power conference.

(08-17-2019 11:09 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  The idea of a "flagship" is that there's only one. It's the ship in which the commander of a fleet set up shop and had his flag raised. So if there's a flagship university of the state of Texas, it would have to be UT. There can't be multiple flagships of a given entity.

I agree.

Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma State to the PAC. (16)

North Carolina and Virginia/Duke to the B1G. (16)

North Carolina State and Virginia Tech to the SEC. (16)

WVU, Temple, Kansas, TCU, Baylor, Cincy to the ACC. (16+ND...no ND will never join a conference outright just stop)

(08-18-2019 06:35 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 11:09 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  The idea of a "flagship" is that there's only one. It's the ship in which the commander of a fleet set up shop and had his flag raised. So if there's a flagship university of the state of Texas, it would have to be UT. There can't be multiple flagships of a given entity.

I agree.

The State of Texas disagrees

Even UT itself disagrees.

The University itself openly recognizes A&M as it’s fellow state Flagship. The two even have a special day each legislative session where they lobby the state as a team for better funding for the Flagships

From UT’s official alumni magazine the Alcalde:

Quote:For just one day every two years, Longhorns and Aggies come together to storm the Texas State Capitol in the name of higher education for Orange & Maroon Legislative Day.

https://alcalde.texasexes.org/2019/02/lo...-day-2019/

This year marks the ninth biennial effort focused on boosting legislative support for the state’s flagship universities. On Feb. 5, alumni, volunteers, and supporters from UT and A&M spent the day visiting with lawmakers and staffers about the universities’ shared legislative priorities

You’ll also notice it’s called Orange and Maroon Day

No other school with delusions of grandeur about themselves has ever been invited to participate

(08-18-2019 06:47 AM)zoocrew Wrote:  Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma State to the PAC. (16)

North Carolina and Virginia/Duke to the B1G. (16)

North Carolina State and Virginia Tech to the SEC. (16)

WVU, Temple, Kansas, TCU, Baylor, Cincy to the ACC. (16+ND...no ND will never join a conference outright just stop)

Nothing happens to the ACC for the time being but it's possible that Disney could arrange for Florida State and Clemson to switch to the SEC and then merge the remnants of the ACC and Big 12 to form a conference of 18 full members (+ND).

West

TCU, Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, Louisville, Iowa State

North

Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt, Miami, West Virginia, Wake Forest

South

UNC, NC State, Virginia Tech, Virginia, Georgia Tech, Duke


The ACC would become the dream conference for ESPN in the winter months, along with the SEC and a re-imagined PAC-16.

(08-18-2019 11:30 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(08-18-2019 06:47 AM)zoocrew Wrote:  Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma State to the PAC. (16)

North Carolina and Virginia/Duke to the B1G. (16)

North Carolina State and Virginia Tech to the SEC. (16)

WVU, Temple, Kansas, TCU, Baylor, Cincy to the ACC. (16+ND...no ND will never join a conference outright just stop)

Nothing happens to the ACC for the time being but it's possible that Disney could arrange for Florida State and Clemson to switch to the SEC and then merge the remnants of the ACC and Big 12 to form a conference of 18 full members (+ND).

West

TCU, Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, Louisville, Iowa State

North

Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt, Miami, West Virginia, Wake Forest

South

UNC, NC State, Virginia Tech, Virginia, Georgia Tech, Duke


The ACC would become the dream conference for ESPN in the winter months, along with the SEC and a re-imagined PAC-16.

Yeah, a bad dream for the schools in it. Where's the value? The PAC / SEC / and Big 10 would all be doing much better financially. The new 18 member ACC would be barely recognizable as a P conference and would truly be a tweener outside of hoops.

Now they could do fine financially if the NCAA was forced out of the basketball skimming business.

(08-18-2019 09:35 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(08-18-2019 06:35 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 11:09 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  The idea of a "flagship" is that there's only one. It's the ship in which the commander of a fleet set up shop and had his flag raised. So if there's a flagship university of the state of Texas, it would have to be UT. There can't be multiple flagships of a given entity.

I agree.

The State of Texas disagrees

Even UT itself disagrees.

The University itself openly recognizes A&M as it’s fellow state Flagship. The two even have a special day each legislative session where they lobby the state as a team for better funding for the Flagships

From UT’s official alumni magazine the Alcalde:

Quote:For just one day every two years, Longhorns and Aggies come together to storm the Texas State Capitol in the name of higher education for Orange & Maroon Legislative Day.

https://alcalde.texasexes.org/2019/02/lo...-day-2019/

This year marks the ninth biennial effort focused on boosting legislative support for the state’s flagship universities. On Feb. 5, alumni, volunteers, and supporters from UT and A&M spent the day visiting with lawmakers and staffers about the universities’ shared legislative priorities

You’ll also notice it’s called Orange and Maroon Day

No other school with delusions of grandeur about themselves has ever been invited to participate

Word misapplication by academic institutions.