So I know this will be beat to death in the coming years, but where is the ne B12 compared to the old in you opinion?

Everyone talks about Texas as being down. How much of this might be contributable to them losing some of the traditional match ups with TA&M and Nebraska etc.. The SEC will be tougher but it will be more prestigious which may lure more recruits.

OU has been up but I think they will struggle more than UT in the SEC.

Clearly the two biggest "names" have been removed. My opinion is that the B12 will be less than the SEC and the B10 in terms of overall talent. However there is some real question about where the next level of conference will fall. I think it is up for grabs. I think both FSU and Miami are suffering from a similar fate to UT. The ACC is not a good conference top to bottom. I think their prestige has faltered some because not only are they struggling, but they are struggling against mediocre programs.

The first few years of the new B12 will be critical. Everyone will need to step up. The loss of the named programs is going to instantly shave some cred from the top. If even a few new Big 12 teams can step in and have a great season I think the B12 could step into #3 spot

First of all, the new schools need to continue winning football games. TCU & West Virginia were peaking at the time they were added and the transition was seamless. The league continued to thrive despite the losses of A&M and Mizzou.

Second, they need to win some of the head-to-head matchups with Texas & OU (assuming they happen).

Third, we need to wait on adding fringe candidates like Boise State, SMU, Tulane, Memphis, San Diego State, etc. Once it is established the Big 12 can compete, deserves a lucrative television deal, and is here to stay, we can consider further expansion.

(01-24-2022 11:02 AM)CYOWA Wrote:  First of all, the new schools need to continue winning football games. TCU & West Virginia were peaking at the time they were added and the transition was seamless. The league continued to thrive despite the losses of A&M and Mizzou.

Second, they need to win some of the head-to-head matchups with Texas & OU (assuming they happen).

Third, we need to wait on adding fringe candidates like Boise State, SMU, Tulane, Memphis, San Diego State, etc. Once it is established the Big 12 can compete, deserves a lucrative television deal, and is here to stay, we can consider further expansion.

This is all exactly right. All four new teams need to come in and play well, and most importantly, they need to win their OOC games. Even this coming season, that will be important for the narrative. UCF needs to pummel Louisville and Ga Tech this season for instance.

The Big 12 is more watered down than the SEC and B1G, but less watered down than the Pac and ACC, same as it was with OUT. There is really no change in hierarchy across the country.

So still #3 in Football and #1 in Basketball, no change.

I like SMU. I just wish they were in a different state. It feels like we have the Dallas market pretty well covered between Baylor & TCU.

(01-24-2022 11:15 AM)hiphopfroggy Wrote:  The Big 12 is more watered down than the SEC and B1G, but less watered down than the Pac and ACC, same as it was with OUT. There is really no change in hierarchy across the country.

So still #3 in Football and #1 in Basketball, no change.

These align with my thoughts as well. The new Big 12 won't ever be as strong and/or prestigious as the Big 10 or SEC; however, you compare program for program against either the ACC or the PAC 12 and the Big 12 holds up well.

The major difference between the Big 12 and the ACC or PAC 12 is the lack of a blue blood program. Despite their recent struggles, USC is still a blue blood...but the leash is getting a little short on that. We will see if Riley can turn it around.

In the ACC, the brand power of Florida State and Miami and what they were to the college football world as TV/media started to take over the game prop up the league a bit combined with Clemson's national title caliber teams recently.

If the Big 12 can come in and take home a national title sometime in the next 5 years I think that would be massive in terms of our perception. It is a really really tall order, especially since the vast majority of the football programs nationally never compete for national titles. But I do think that is the unfair perception that the media is going to hold against us.

(01-24-2022 12:42 PM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  

(01-24-2022 11:15 AM)hiphopfroggy Wrote:  The Big 12 is more watered down than the SEC and B1G, but less watered down than the Pac and ACC, same as it was with OUT. There is really no change in hierarchy across the country.

So still #3 in Football and #1 in Basketball, no change.

These align with my thoughts as well. The new Big 12 won't ever be as strong and/or prestigious as the Big 10 or SEC; however, you compare program for program against either the ACC or the PAC 12 and the Big 12 holds up well.

The major difference between the Big 12 and the ACC or PAC 12 is the lack of a blue blood program. Despite their recent struggles, USC is still a blue blood...but the leash is getting a little short on that. We will see if Riley can turn it around.

In the ACC, the brand power of Florida State and Miami and what they were to the college football world as TV/media started to take over the game prop up the league a bit combined with Clemson's national title caliber teams recently.

If the Big 12 can come in and take home a national title sometime in the next 5 years I think that would be massive in terms of our perception. It is a really really tall order, especially since the vast majority of the football programs nationally never compete for national titles. But I do think that is the unfair perception that the media is going to hold against us.

Great post. The new XII could be really strong.

If the new schools handle the transition well and KU gets competitive, we'll be as strong as anyone when you consider the middle to bottom teams. And we'll consistently have several ranked teams. But, its the top teams that carry a conference's perception. We need a National Championship soon. Even a semi-final win would help a little.

As far as basketball goes, we couldn't be much stronger. Solid from middle to bottom. Really good top teams. KU gives us the big name, blue blood school. I was a little concerned with the Championship drought, but Baylor came through for us last season.

On the field, the Big 12 is every bit as good as the ACC and PAC 12. Those 2 have some stronger brand names.

(01-24-2022 12:42 PM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  

(01-24-2022 11:15 AM)hiphopfroggy Wrote:  The Big 12 is more watered down than the SEC and B1G, but less watered down than the Pac and ACC, same as it was with OUT. There is really no change in hierarchy across the country.

So still #3 in Football and #1 in Basketball, no change.

These align with my thoughts as well. The new Big 12 won't ever be as strong and/or prestigious as the Big 10 or SEC; however, you compare program for program against either the ACC or the PAC 12 and the Big 12 holds up well.

The major difference between the Big 12 and the ACC or PAC 12 is the lack of a blue blood program. Despite their recent struggles, USC is still a blue blood...but the leash is getting a little short on that. We will see if Riley can turn it around.

In the ACC, the brand power of Florida State and Miami and what they were to the college football world as TV/media started to take over the game prop up the league a bit combined with Clemson's national title caliber teams recently.

If the Big 12 can come in and take home a national title sometime in the next 5 years I think that would be massive in terms of our perception. It is a really really tall order, especially since the vast majority of the football programs nationally never compete for national titles. But I do think that is the unfair perception that the media is going to hold against us.

100% agree. Assuming all new members join for the 2023 season we'll have a year in when the Pac 12 tv deal expires in '24. It will be interesting to see how the new tv deals look for the Big 12 and the Pac 12. And if there's any Pac 12 defections. As you said USC is still a blue blood and they've publicly expressed being upset with the conference.
https://kslsports.com/429689/usc-ad-hint...needs-usc/

Maybe some of the Cinci posters can give some insight on Mike Bohn.

(01-24-2022 07:18 PM)DCbadCat Wrote:  

(01-24-2022 12:42 PM)tcufrog86 Wrote:  

(01-24-2022 11:15 AM)hiphopfroggy Wrote:  The Big 12 is more watered down than the SEC and B1G, but less watered down than the Pac and ACC, same as it was with OUT. There is really no change in hierarchy across the country.

So still #3 in Football and #1 in Basketball, no change.

These align with my thoughts as well. The new Big 12 won't ever be as strong and/or prestigious as the Big 10 or SEC; however, you compare program for program against either the ACC or the PAC 12 and the Big 12 holds up well.

The major difference between the Big 12 and the ACC or PAC 12 is the lack of a blue blood program. Despite their recent struggles, USC is still a blue blood...but the leash is getting a little short on that. We will see if Riley can turn it around.

In the ACC, the brand power of Florida State and Miami and what they were to the college football world as TV/media started to take over the game prop up the league a bit combined with Clemson's national title caliber teams recently.

If the Big 12 can come in and take home a national title sometime in the next 5 years I think that would be massive in terms of our perception. It is a really really tall order, especially since the vast majority of the football programs nationally never compete for national titles. But I do think that is the unfair perception that the media is going to hold against us.

Great post. The new XII could be really strong.

If the new schools handle the transition well and KU gets competitive, we'll be as strong as anyone when you consider the middle to bottom teams. And we'll consistently have several ranked teams. But, its the top teams that carry a conference's perception. We need a National Championship soon. Even a semi-final win would help a little.

As far as basketball goes, we couldn't be much stronger. Solid from middle to bottom. Really good top teams. KU gives us the big name, blue blood school. I was a little concerned with the Championship drought, but Baylor came through for us last season.

Nailed it. We need a team to come in and smack some people around in the post season. I don't think we miss a beat competitive wise, it will be interesting who becomes the face of the conference now.

New Big 12 final AP:
Cinci 4
Baylor 5
Oklahoma St 7
Houston 17
BYU 19

5 out of 12 teams with 1 in the CFP is not bad at all. For comparison here's the other conferences:
The new SEC had 6 of 16 ranked with 2 in the CFP
Big 10 had 4 of 14 ranked with 1 in the CFP
ACC had 4 of 14 ranked
Pac 12 had 2 of 12 ranked

In football, Houston UCF Cincinnati and BYU are already a pretty well oil machine in basketball however the only program from these bunch that needs help in getting their basketball house in check is UCF.

I don’t see the new Big12 as being water down in fact I like to believe is going to be just as competitive as they’ve always been.

(01-24-2022 09:49 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  On the field, the Big 12 is every bit as good as the ACC and PAC 12. Those 2 have some stronger brand names.

On the field and on TV, the 2 places it matters.

(01-24-2022 10:30 AM)Noise Penalty Wrote:  So I know this will be beat to death in the coming years, but where is the ne B12 compared to the old in you opinion?

Everyone talks about Texas as being down. How much of this might be contributable to them losing some of the traditional match ups with TA&M and Nebraska etc..

Huh?

Texas is down...because most years they end up with quite a few losses and zero conf titles.

That has nothing to do with their short-term history of playing Nebraska. (Heck, they only played Nebraska 7 times during Big 12 Regular Season play).

Since 2010...Texas has just 1 season where they accumulated just 10 wins and includes 4 LOSING seasons.

Since 2006...Texas has just ONE Conf Championship to their name.

Finally, Texas is always under the microscope since they have the most REVENUE in college athletics (over $220 Million plus per year).

Hope these facts helps you understand why most others know WHY Texas is viewed as being "down".

(01-25-2022 06:30 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(01-24-2022 10:30 AM)Noise Penalty Wrote:  So I know this will be beat to death in the coming years, but where is the ne B12 compared to the old in you opinion?

Everyone talks about Texas as being down. How much of this might be contributable to them losing some of the traditional match ups with TA&M and Nebraska etc..

Huh?

Texas is down...because most years they end up with quite a few losses and zero conf titles.

That has nothing to do with their short-term history of playing Nebraska. (Heck, they only played Nebraska 7 times during Big 12 Regular Season play).

Since 2010...Texas has just 1 season where they accumulated just 10 wins and includes 4 LOSING seasons.

Since 2006...Texas has just ONE Conf Championship to their name.

Finally, Texas is always under the microscope since they have the most REVENUE in college athletics (over $220 Million plus per year).

Hope these facts helps you understand why most others know WHY Texas is viewed as being "down".

I think that it is possible that Texas' recruiting may have diminished somewhat in comparison with its traditional rivals that left the conference. Then, the failure snowballed as the years went by. Like it or not the view of the B12 took a hit when A&M and Nebraska left. UT was viewed as an island (something they created) within the B12 with all the $$ and the Longhorn networks etc. Their prestige as a program took a hit despite them controlling the money. Meanwhile A&M was struggling but playing much higher profile games in the SEC.

Seems to me that in joining the SEC Texas is looking to rebuild some of that blue blood prestige. It is why it is a good time for the B12 to let Texas go because currently with them being down it is less of a hit. Overall the B12 is still a pretty strong conference, but we will need one or two programs to break out and make noise on a national level to to maintain our position

(01-25-2022 10:04 AM)Noise Penalty Wrote:  

(01-25-2022 06:30 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(01-24-2022 10:30 AM)Noise Penalty Wrote:  So I know this will be beat to death in the coming years, but where is the ne B12 compared to the old in you opinion?

Everyone talks about Texas as being down. How much of this might be contributable to them losing some of the traditional match ups with TA&M and Nebraska etc..

Huh?

Texas is down...because most years they end up with quite a few losses and zero conf titles.

That has nothing to do with their short-term history of playing Nebraska. (Heck, they only played Nebraska 7 times during Big 12 Regular Season play).

Since 2010...Texas has just 1 season where they accumulated just 10 wins and includes 4 LOSING seasons.

Since 2006...Texas has just ONE Conf Championship to their name.

Finally, Texas is always under the microscope since they have the most REVENUE in college athletics (over $220 Million plus per year).

Hope these facts helps you understand why most others know WHY Texas is viewed as being "down".

I think that it is possible that Texas' recruiting may have diminished somewhat in comparison with its traditional rivals that left the conference. Then, the failure snowballed as the years went by. Like it or not the view of the B12 took a hit when A&M and Nebraska left. UT was viewed as an island (something they created) within the B12 with all the $$ and the Longhorn networks etc. Their prestige as a program took a hit despite them controlling the money. Meanwhile A&M was struggling but playing much higher profile games in the SEC.

Seems to me that in joining the SEC Texas is looking to rebuild some of that blue blood prestige. It is why it is a good time for the B12 to let Texas go because currently with them being down it is less of a hit. Overall the B12 is still a pretty strong conference, but we will need one or two programs to break out and make noise on a national level to to maintain our position

Texas still recruits top 10-15 classes every season. Their issue isn't talent. It's a culture of entitlement that causes them to point fingers and fold at the first sign of adversity.

Both their football and men's basketball teams are filled with Charmin soft frontrunners, and you see that almost every time they find themselves in a four-quarter battle with one of the many Big 12 programs doing more with less.

There was a time a decade and a half ago when the Longhorns truly were the Joneses. Taking advantage of the many natural advantages they had over their conference peers, they were the bullies on the block under Mack Brown. But everyone else slowly caught up with them, particularly in terms of commitment level and facilities, and they never adjusted to a new reality in which there's nothing particularly special about them.

They still spout and buy into their "We're Texas" nonsense without doing any of the things that set those teams of the past apart. And if you ask their fans about that culture problem, they'll deny it exists and blame the coaches and players at the time -- ignoring the fact that these issues have now spanned numerous coaches and more than a decade of objectively talented players.

Oklahoma will be vastly superior to Texas in the SEC. While their fans have started sounding more and more like UT fans since the decision to bolt was leaked, their programs' priorities are in much better order to compete at a high level on the football field.

(01-25-2022 02:49 PM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(01-25-2022 10:04 AM)Noise Penalty Wrote:  

(01-25-2022 06:30 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(01-24-2022 10:30 AM)Noise Penalty Wrote:  So I know this will be beat to death in the coming years, but where is the ne B12 compared to the old in you opinion?

Everyone talks about Texas as being down. How much of this might be contributable to them losing some of the traditional match ups with TA&M and Nebraska etc..

Huh?

Texas is down...because most years they end up with quite a few losses and zero conf titles.

That has nothing to do with their short-term history of playing Nebraska. (Heck, they only played Nebraska 7 times during Big 12 Regular Season play).

Since 2010...Texas has just 1 season where they accumulated just 10 wins and includes 4 LOSING seasons.

Since 2006...Texas has just ONE Conf Championship to their name.

Finally, Texas is always under the microscope since they have the most REVENUE in college athletics (over $220 Million plus per year).

Hope these facts helps you understand why most others know WHY Texas is viewed as being "down".

I think that it is possible that Texas' recruiting may have diminished somewhat in comparison with its traditional rivals that left the conference. Then, the failure snowballed as the years went by. Like it or not the view of the B12 took a hit when A&M and Nebraska left. UT was viewed as an island (something they created) within the B12 with all the $$ and the Longhorn networks etc. Their prestige as a program took a hit despite them controlling the money. Meanwhile A&M was struggling but playing much higher profile games in the SEC.

Seems to me that in joining the SEC Texas is looking to rebuild some of that blue blood prestige. It is why it is a good time for the B12 to let Texas go because currently with them being down it is less of a hit. Overall the B12 is still a pretty strong conference, but we will need one or two programs to break out and make noise on a national level to to maintain our position

Texas still recruits top 10-15 classes every season. Their issue isn't talent. It's a culture of entitlement that causes them to point fingers and fold at the first sign of adversity.

Both their football and men's basketball teams are filled with Charmin soft frontrunners, and you see that almost every time they find themselves in a four-quarter battle with one of the many Big 12 programs doing more with less.

There was a time a decade and a half ago when the Longhorns truly were the Joneses. Taking advantage of the many natural advantages they had over their conference peers, they were the bullies on the block under Mack Brown. But everyone else slowly caught up with them, particularly in terms of commitment level and facilities, and they never adjusted to a new reality in which there's nothing particularly special about them.

They still spout and buy into their "We're Texas" nonsense without doing any of the things that set those teams of the past apart. And if you ask their fans about that culture problem, they'll deny it exists and blame the coaches and players at the time -- ignoring the fact that these issues have now spanned numerous coaches and more than a decade of objectively talented players.

Oklahoma will be vastly superior to Texas in the SEC. While their fans have started sounding more and more like UT fans since the decision to bolt was leaked, their programs' priorities are in much better order to compete at a high level on the football field.

This was true right up until a few months ago when the NIL bidding wars began out in the open. Now UT and aTm will buy top 5 recruiting classes every year and honestly their coaching staffs will have to be extremely incompetent not to succeed.

NIL age Elite

Bama
Ohio St
Georgia
aTm
UT



It will be interesting to see how deep the USC pockets go in this new age.

Ole Miss seems to be just below this elite level of player payments currently and I assume we all know the history of Ole Miss paying players under Freeze. Perhaps LSU and Florida belong in this 2nd tier too, not sure.

It will be interesting to see if any of the Big12 schools are able to start $$$ whipping the rest of the Big 12 for recruits. I wonder what BYU's NIL $$$$ will look like once it is up and running at full speed.

(01-25-2022 03:02 PM)hiphopfroggy Wrote:  

(01-25-2022 02:49 PM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(01-25-2022 10:04 AM)Noise Penalty Wrote:  

(01-25-2022 06:30 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(01-24-2022 10:30 AM)Noise Penalty Wrote:  So I know this will be beat to death in the coming years, but where is the ne B12 compared to the old in you opinion?

Everyone talks about Texas as being down. How much of this might be contributable to them losing some of the traditional match ups with TA&M and Nebraska etc..

Huh?

Texas is down...because most years they end up with quite a few losses and zero conf titles.

That has nothing to do with their short-term history of playing Nebraska. (Heck, they only played Nebraska 7 times during Big 12 Regular Season play).

Since 2010...Texas has just 1 season where they accumulated just 10 wins and includes 4 LOSING seasons.

Since 2006...Texas has just ONE Conf Championship to their name.

Finally, Texas is always under the microscope since they have the most REVENUE in college athletics (over $220 Million plus per year).

Hope these facts helps you understand why most others know WHY Texas is viewed as being "down".

I think that it is possible that Texas' recruiting may have diminished somewhat in comparison with its traditional rivals that left the conference. Then, the failure snowballed as the years went by. Like it or not the view of the B12 took a hit when A&M and Nebraska left. UT was viewed as an island (something they created) within the B12 with all the $$ and the Longhorn networks etc. Their prestige as a program took a hit despite them controlling the money. Meanwhile A&M was struggling but playing much higher profile games in the SEC.

Seems to me that in joining the SEC Texas is looking to rebuild some of that blue blood prestige. It is why it is a good time for the B12 to let Texas go because currently with them being down it is less of a hit. Overall the B12 is still a pretty strong conference, but we will need one or two programs to break out and make noise on a national level to to maintain our position

Texas still recruits top 10-15 classes every season. Their issue isn't talent. It's a culture of entitlement that causes them to point fingers and fold at the first sign of adversity.

Both their football and men's basketball teams are filled with Charmin soft frontrunners, and you see that almost every time they find themselves in a four-quarter battle with one of the many Big 12 programs doing more with less.

There was a time a decade and a half ago when the Longhorns truly were the Joneses. Taking advantage of the many natural advantages they had over their conference peers, they were the bullies on the block under Mack Brown. But everyone else slowly caught up with them, particularly in terms of commitment level and facilities, and they never adjusted to a new reality in which there's nothing particularly special about them.

They still spout and buy into their "We're Texas" nonsense without doing any of the things that set those teams of the past apart. And if you ask their fans about that culture problem, they'll deny it exists and blame the coaches and players at the time -- ignoring the fact that these issues have now spanned numerous coaches and more than a decade of objectively talented players.

Oklahoma will be vastly superior to Texas in the SEC. While their fans have started sounding more and more like UT fans since the decision to bolt was leaked, their programs' priorities are in much better order to compete at a high level on the football field.

This was true right up until a few months ago when the NIL bidding wars began out in the open. Now UT and aTm will buy top 5 recruiting classes every year and honestly their coaching staffs will have to be extremely incompetent not to succeed.

NIL age Elite

Bama
Ohio St
Georgia
aTm
UT



It will be interesting to see how deep the USC pockets go in this new age.

Ole Miss seems to be just below this elite level of player payments currently and I assume we all know the history of Ole Miss paying players under Freeze. Perhaps LSU and Florida belong in this 2nd tier too, not sure.

It will be interesting to see if any of the Big12 schools are able to start $$$ whipping the rest of the Big 12 for recruits. I wonder what BYU's NIL $$$$ will look like once it is up and running at full speed.

I'm prepared to be totally wrong about this, but I don't think NIL will have the seismic impact that many do.

I think those that have traditionally done more with more will continue to do so.
I think those that have traditionally done less with more will continue to do so.
And I think those that have traditionally done more with less will continue to do so.

As long as scholarship limits remain in place, I see the same teams that have always outrecruited everyone else maintaining that edge. So for those of us who have been winning with leftovers -- of which there are ample quality options in Texas -- I don't see all that much changing.

We'll see, though. It's definitely a new world. I think it will take a while for all the dust to settle and to figure out exactly what it is we're looking at.

I don't think the league is watered down right now, which is why I tend to like staying at 12 for a while. I also hope next TV deal is fairly short if it comes in below 20 mil. Maybe 5 years.

(01-25-2022 06:05 PM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(01-25-2022 03:02 PM)hiphopfroggy Wrote:  

(01-25-2022 02:49 PM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(01-25-2022 10:04 AM)Noise Penalty Wrote:  

(01-25-2022 06:30 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  Huh?

Texas is down...because most years they end up with quite a few losses and zero conf titles.

That has nothing to do with their short-term history of playing Nebraska. (Heck, they only played Nebraska 7 times during Big 12 Regular Season play).

Since 2010...Texas has just 1 season where they accumulated just 10 wins and includes 4 LOSING seasons.

Since 2006...Texas has just ONE Conf Championship to their name.

Finally, Texas is always under the microscope since they have the most REVENUE in college athletics (over $220 Million plus per year).

Hope these facts helps you understand why most others know WHY Texas is viewed as being "down".

I think that it is possible that Texas' recruiting may have diminished somewhat in comparison with its traditional rivals that left the conference. Then, the failure snowballed as the years went by. Like it or not the view of the B12 took a hit when A&M and Nebraska left. UT was viewed as an island (something they created) within the B12 with all the $$ and the Longhorn networks etc. Their prestige as a program took a hit despite them controlling the money. Meanwhile A&M was struggling but playing much higher profile games in the SEC.

Seems to me that in joining the SEC Texas is looking to rebuild some of that blue blood prestige. It is why it is a good time for the B12 to let Texas go because currently with them being down it is less of a hit. Overall the B12 is still a pretty strong conference, but we will need one or two programs to break out and make noise on a national level to to maintain our position

Texas still recruits top 10-15 classes every season. Their issue isn't talent. It's a culture of entitlement that causes them to point fingers and fold at the first sign of adversity.

Both their football and men's basketball teams are filled with Charmin soft frontrunners, and you see that almost every time they find themselves in a four-quarter battle with one of the many Big 12 programs doing more with less.

There was a time a decade and a half ago when the Longhorns truly were the Joneses. Taking advantage of the many natural advantages they had over their conference peers, they were the bullies on the block under Mack Brown. But everyone else slowly caught up with them, particularly in terms of commitment level and facilities, and they never adjusted to a new reality in which there's nothing particularly special about them.

They still spout and buy into their "We're Texas" nonsense without doing any of the things that set those teams of the past apart. And if you ask their fans about that culture problem, they'll deny it exists and blame the coaches and players at the time -- ignoring the fact that these issues have now spanned numerous coaches and more than a decade of objectively talented players.

Oklahoma will be vastly superior to Texas in the SEC. While their fans have started sounding more and more like UT fans since the decision to bolt was leaked, their programs' priorities are in much better order to compete at a high level on the football field.

This was true right up until a few months ago when the NIL bidding wars began out in the open. Now UT and aTm will buy top 5 recruiting classes every year and honestly their coaching staffs will have to be extremely incompetent not to succeed.

NIL age Elite

Bama
Ohio St
Georgia
aTm
UT



It will be interesting to see how deep the USC pockets go in this new age.

Ole Miss seems to be just below this elite level of player payments currently and I assume we all know the history of Ole Miss paying players under Freeze. Perhaps LSU and Florida belong in this 2nd tier too, not sure.

It will be interesting to see if any of the Big12 schools are able to start $$$ whipping the rest of the Big 12 for recruits. I wonder what BYU's NIL $$$$ will look like once it is up and running at full speed.

I'm prepared to be totally wrong about this, but I don't think NIL will have the seismic impact that many do.

I think those that have traditionally done more with more will continue to do so.
I think those that have traditionally done less with more will continue to do so.
And I think those that have traditionally done more with less will continue to do so.

As long as scholarship limits remain in place, I see the same teams that have always outrecruited everyone else maintaining that edge. So for those of us who have been winning with leftovers -- of which there are ample quality options in Texas -- I don't see all that much changing.

We'll see, though. It's definitely a new world. I think it will take a while for all the dust to settle and to figure out exactly what it is we're looking at.

You don't think this year has been a bit different in regards to recruiting, the new transfer portal and new NIL rules? I've never seen anything like it and aTm just landed the highest rated recruiting class since they have been keeping track. Again, Texas AM just landed the highest rated recruiting class ever. The aggies.
It's a pretty seismic shift already and clearly many of the SEC teams got the jump as they had these back channels set up already as they have already been doing it illegally and were probably given a heads up of what was about to happen regarding NIL. The change in rules this recruiting cycle definitely caught some programs off guard and flat footed.

(01-26-2022 12:43 PM)hiphopfroggy Wrote:  

(01-25-2022 06:05 PM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(01-25-2022 03:02 PM)hiphopfroggy Wrote:  

(01-25-2022 02:49 PM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(01-25-2022 10:04 AM)Noise Penalty Wrote:  I think that it is possible that Texas' recruiting may have diminished somewhat in comparison with its traditional rivals that left the conference. Then, the failure snowballed as the years went by. Like it or not the view of the B12 took a hit when A&M and Nebraska left. UT was viewed as an island (something they created) within the B12 with all the $$ and the Longhorn networks etc. Their prestige as a program took a hit despite them controlling the money. Meanwhile A&M was struggling but playing much higher profile games in the SEC.

Seems to me that in joining the SEC Texas is looking to rebuild some of that blue blood prestige. It is why it is a good time for the B12 to let Texas go because currently with them being down it is less of a hit. Overall the B12 is still a pretty strong conference, but we will need one or two programs to break out and make noise on a national level to to maintain our position

Texas still recruits top 10-15 classes every season. Their issue isn't talent. It's a culture of entitlement that causes them to point fingers and fold at the first sign of adversity.

Both their football and men's basketball teams are filled with Charmin soft frontrunners, and you see that almost every time they find themselves in a four-quarter battle with one of the many Big 12 programs doing more with less.

There was a time a decade and a half ago when the Longhorns truly were the Joneses. Taking advantage of the many natural advantages they had over their conference peers, they were the bullies on the block under Mack Brown. But everyone else slowly caught up with them, particularly in terms of commitment level and facilities, and they never adjusted to a new reality in which there's nothing particularly special about them.

They still spout and buy into their "We're Texas" nonsense without doing any of the things that set those teams of the past apart. And if you ask their fans about that culture problem, they'll deny it exists and blame the coaches and players at the time -- ignoring the fact that these issues have now spanned numerous coaches and more than a decade of objectively talented players.

Oklahoma will be vastly superior to Texas in the SEC. While their fans have started sounding more and more like UT fans since the decision to bolt was leaked, their programs' priorities are in much better order to compete at a high level on the football field.

This was true right up until a few months ago when the NIL bidding wars began out in the open. Now UT and aTm will buy top 5 recruiting classes every year and honestly their coaching staffs will have to be extremely incompetent not to succeed.

NIL age Elite

Bama
Ohio St
Georgia
aTm
UT



It will be interesting to see how deep the USC pockets go in this new age.

Ole Miss seems to be just below this elite level of player payments currently and I assume we all know the history of Ole Miss paying players under Freeze. Perhaps LSU and Florida belong in this 2nd tier too, not sure.

It will be interesting to see if any of the Big12 schools are able to start $$$ whipping the rest of the Big 12 for recruits. I wonder what BYU's NIL $$$$ will look like once it is up and running at full speed.

I'm prepared to be totally wrong about this, but I don't think NIL will have the seismic impact that many do.

I think those that have traditionally done more with more will continue to do so.
I think those that have traditionally done less with more will continue to do so.
And I think those that have traditionally done more with less will continue to do so.

As long as scholarship limits remain in place, I see the same teams that have always outrecruited everyone else maintaining that edge. So for those of us who have been winning with leftovers -- of which there are ample quality options in Texas -- I don't see all that much changing.

We'll see, though. It's definitely a new world. I think it will take a while for all the dust to settle and to figure out exactly what it is we're looking at.

You don't think this year has been a bit different in regards to recruiting, the new transfer portal and new NIL rules? I've never seen anything like it and aTm just landed the highest rated recruiting class since they have been keeping track. Again, Texas AM just landed the highest rated recruiting class ever. The aggies.
It's a pretty seismic shift already and clearly many of the SEC teams got the jump as they had these back channels set up already as they have already been doing it illegally and were probably given a heads up of what was about to happen regarding NIL. The change in rules this recruiting cycle definitely caught some programs off guard and flat footed.

Like everything else that's happening in college sports (and most other aspects of life currently), change is coming so fast that no one really knows how to handle it right now. So things are super volatile at the moment.

I'm talking more about a few years down the road once the dust has settled and everyone has a better idea of what we're dealing with.

I think ultimately the same programs that have won the majority of their recruiting battles and dominated the rankings list will continue to do so, and the same teams that have been competing at a high level with leftovers and underrated overachievers will continue to do so.

I also think that the transfer portal will be a great equalizer. I think you'll see a lot o situations where guys who get big NIL deals out of high school transfer from their original destinations to schools that won't have to pay the same premium for their services. As that happens more and more, I think boosters will ultimately realize that a lot of these NIL deals are terrible investments (Quinn Ewers), and you'll less insane money thrown around over time.

But we'll see. Like I said, I'm prepared to be wrong about this. I just think scholarship limits will continue to be the playing field leveler they've always been. Only so many guys can get big-money NIL deals. And there are a lot of really good players that won't.