(11-12-2013 12:22 PM)TomThumb Wrote:  

(11-12-2013 09:49 AM)Underdog Wrote:  Some people don’t understand the logic in the PAC 12 making such a bold move, so I’ll attempt to present it from a different perspective:

The schools that could add substantial value to the PAC 12 are in the B12—the PAC 12 really has no other options. UT and OU are the most valuable B12 assets. OSU (with OU), KU, and K St also have value because they give the PAC 12 total control over those markets. Baylor, TCU, and TT also have value because the B12 can’t be dissolved without them. This is why the PAC 12 made a terrible mistake in turning away OU and OSU (Baylor and TCU are now needed to kill the conference). Moreover, Dodds admitted that the B12 would have died without OU; thus UT would have been forced to either leave TT behind (along with Baylor) or take it to the PAC 12 (without Baylor). Because of the PAC 12’s mistake, it now must either wait until the B12 GOR expires or invite 8 schools before the expiration date. If the PAC 12 waits until the B12 GOR expires, it will be third in line at the B12 Buffet behind the SEC and B10. The schools that are left probably won’t appeal to the PAC 12, but they are better than what the MWC has to offer. Consequently, the only chance the PAC 12 has at getting UT and OU (especially after sending it and little bro away) is cutting in front of the B12 Buffet line with eight invites and hope all eight are accepted….

Forcing Texas to join your conference against their will would be an absolute disaster. Conferences are voluntary associations. You want schools that actually want to be in your conference.

Especially for a school like Texas that has a reputation as a conference killer.

Forum posters who want to play armchair commissioner might not care about conference stability and cohesiveness, but I guarantee you that college presidents do.

Pie in the sky scenarios about how to force Texas to join a conference sound like all those ideas about how to force ND to join the B1G. Trying to force them to join just makes them more stubborn about not joining.

lol. It was really a no lose for the Pac-12. Worst case scenario, they get Oklahoma and Oklahoma St. If Texas goes elsewhere, then a Big-12 with no Texas OR Oklahoma, or Oklahoma St is easy for the Pac-12 to raid. They can still pick up Texas Tech and another Texas school (Baylor, Houston, SMU, TCU are all options). Houston/Texas Tch/Oklahoma/Okie St games will all do quite well in Texas.

Pac-12 West
Arizona
Arizona St
Utah
Colorado
Oklahoma
Oklahoma St
Texas Tech
TCU/Baylor/SMU/Houston (pick one)

That's not a bad Pac-12 west division and that's the WORST case scenario.

(11-12-2013 01:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Pac-12 West
Arizona
Arizona St
Utah
Colorado
Oklahoma
Oklahoma St
Texas Tech
TCU/Baylor/SMU/Houston (pick one)

That's not a bad Pac-12 west division and that's the WORST case scenario.

And that's a pretty crappy outcome for Arizona/ASU/Utah/Colorado so it wouldn't be a surprise if they had voted no if it had come up for a vote. It also hand delivers Texas to the B1G or SEC.

(11-12-2013 01:24 PM)TomThumb Wrote:  

(11-12-2013 01:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Pac-12 West
Arizona
Arizona St
Utah
Colorado
Oklahoma
Oklahoma St
Texas Tech
TCU/Baylor/SMU/Houston (pick one)

That's not a bad Pac-12 west division and that's the WORST case scenario.

And that's a pretty crappy outcome for Arizona/ASU/Utah/Colorado so it wouldn't be a surprise if they had voted no if it had come up for a vote. It also hand delivers Texas to the B1G or SEC.

Those are also the schools contributing the least to the conference. The key was to get a bell cow in the west. Oklahoma fills that role. Oklahoma might just be the best program in the entire Pac-12 over the long run. Its not like these "king" programs grow on trees. At this point in the game you are foolish if you ever turn down the opportunity to grab a "king".

The worst case scenario is you add one "king" program and another very solid program (Okie St)---and that was at the very worst. The Pac-12 still would have had a very good chance of landing Texas within a year of two because there is no way Texas signs a GOR without Oklahoma being in the Big-12.

(11-12-2013 07:59 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Those are also the schools contributing the least to the conference. The key was to get a bell cow in the west. Oklahoma fills that role. Oklahoma might just be the best program in the entire Pac-12 over the long run. Its not like these "king" programs grow on trees. At this point in the game you are foolish if you ever turn down the opportunity to grab a "king".

The worst case scenario is you add one "king" program and another very solid program (Okie St)---and that was at the very worst. The Pac-12 still would have had a very good chance of landing Texas within a year of two because there is no way Texas signs a GOR without Oklahoma being in the Big-12.

People treat realignment like the commish makes the decision and everyone else just goes along even though they hate it. Maybe that's the way it works in other conferences, but it won't ever work that way in the PAC. Telling schools in your conference that they don't contribute and they should just suck it up makes for unstable conferences with undermined stability.

How did the PAC, with one of the weakest fan bases, lowest ratings, worst television contracts, and fewest "kings" of the BCS conferences become one of the big-3 power conferences? Conference stability and cohesion had a lot to do with it.

I was a big fan of the OU/OSU add to the PAC, but it's obvious the end game for the conference is still Texas. They're not going to do anything that might jeopardize that.

edit: Tell me again exactly why the PAC even needs to activate the worst case scenario? The conference is doing fine. In fact, its reputation has risen significantly since the original failed raid on the B12. The money's coming in. There's no worry at all about missing a seat at the table. So why do something that pisses conference members off and might forever kill the chances of getting the one school you really want?

(11-08-2013 11:43 AM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  If they decide to expand, Texas will be there eastern most expansion and no further, it gives them the fix for having games in a good time zone other than the Pacific and the Mountain. In the 2nd most populous state in the union. I sure they love to have UT, but it will not happen. So they will have to look at the bridesmaids if they want a presence in Texas UH, SMU,Texas Tech, Rice. UH DMA 10th. possible good fit large urban city like UCLA and USC are in, PAC is familiar with the challenges and possible upside if you can address those challenges. Rice, if they could get a consistent 30k a game are willing to pump money into ther program UH-RICE/UCLA-USC . SMU, large DMA 5th, some PAC members may have a problem with the religious affiliation thing, same challenges as UH/Rice. TT is a viable option, small DMA 143 up and coming brand, good visuals for tv sold out stadiums, can the brand be a sold as a total statewide brand (Like a Texas and TAMU) where the entire state would tune in to their games? By the way Rice just hired Stanfords assist AD as their new AD, may mean something may mean nothing, who knows.

I admit it's a small sample but last Saturday's ratings suggest Texas Tech is already a state-wide brand and consistent top 1-3 Big 12 ratings winner.

HOUSTON DMA:
LSU-Alabama, Ch. 11, 7.5
Mississippi State-Texas A&M, Ch. 11, 7.5
Texas-West Virginia, Ch. 26, 3.2
Kansas State-Texas Tech, Ch. 13, 2.5
Auburn-Tennessee, ESPN, 1.4;
Nebraska-Michigan, Ch. 13, 1.0
Notre Dame-Pittsburgh, Ch. 13, 0.7
Houston-Central Florida, ESPN2, 0.9
USC-California, Ch. 26, 0.4
BYU-Wisconsin, ESPN, 0.7
Virginia Tech-Miami, ESPN, 0.2
UCLA-Arizona, ESPN, 0.2
Penn State-Minnesota, ESPN2, 0.3
Fresno State-Wyoming, ESPN2, 0.2
Kansas-Oklahoma State, FS1, 0.3
Tulsa-East Carolina, FSSW, 0.03
TCU-Iowa State, FSSW, 0.04

NATIONAL, SATURDAY:
LSU-Alabama, CBS, 6.9
Mississippi State-Texas A&M, CBS, 3.1
Nebraska-Michigan, ABC, 3.0
Auburn-Tennessee, ESPN, 2.0
Notre Dame-Pittsburgh, ABC, 1.9
Kansas State-Texas Tech, ABC, 1.8
Florida State-Wake Forest, ABC, 1.8
Texas-West Virginia, Fox, 1.6
BYU-Wisconsin, ESPN, 1.2
Virginia Tech-Miami, ESPN, 1.2
UCLA-Arizona, ESPN, 1.0
Penn State-Minnesota, ESPN2, 1.0
USC-California, Fox, 0.9
Houston-Central Florida, ESPN2, 0.3
Fresno State-Wyoming, ESPN2, 0.3
Kansas-Oklahoma State, FS1, 0.2

CHRONICLE WEEKEND CFB RATINGS

The above is pretty consistent from week to week for Texas Tech. Note that Tech-KSU ratings smoked the PAC games.

State-wide for Big 12 teams (incl. A&M's final 3 years):
Tech had #3 ratings in Houston and San Antonio behind A&M and UT. Tech had #2 ratings behind only UT in every other Texas DMA.

3-YEAR LOOKIE-LOO

This for those who think Texas Tech is the 3rd most popular school in Texas, a recent newspaper article printed thsi about a survey showing the most pouplar college teams in Texas
Here is the url as well: http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/...cmpid=hpfc

Survey shows more Texans are fans of Aggies than of Longhorns
By Carol Christian | November 14, 2013 | Updated: November 14, 2013 12:29pm E-mail Print 86 Page 1 of 1


In a Public Policy Polling survey, 22 percent of the 500 respondents identified themselves as A&M fans.
In a Public Policy Polling survey, 22 percent of the 500 respondents identified themselves as A&M fans. Chronicle Here's some news that should rattle Longhorns everywhere: Texas A&M University in College Station now claims more fans among the state's residents than does the University of Texas at Austin.

In a telephone survey Nov. 1-4, 22 percent of the 500 respondents identified themselves as A&M fans, while UT mustered support from just 20 percent of those surveyed.

It's the first time that A&M has ranked ahead of UT in the survey conducted by Public Policy Polling in Raleigh, N.C., spokesman Tom Jensen said by email. The question has been asked just twice - in 2011 and this year - since the company began polling in Texas in 2008, he said.

As often seems to be the case, the clear winner of the collegiate fan-base question was "Another school/not a fan," which claimed 26 percent.

The also-rans included the University of Houston, 10 percent; Baylor University, Waco, 8 percent; Texas Tech University, Lubbock, 5 percent; Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, 4 percent; University of Texas at El Paso, 3 percent; Southern Methodist University, Dallas, 2 percent.

Why is this thread still alive? Texas Tech and/or Okie State are not going to the PAC without Texas and Oklahoma. All this bickering of value without those 2 is pointless...

The thing is. Does Texas really even want to go to the PAC. Truly, what advantage do they get?

I don't think it will ever happen, but thats my opinion.

(11-14-2013 06:42 PM)SMUfrat Wrote:  The thing is. Does Texas really even want to go to the PAC. Truly, what advantage do they get?

I don't think it will ever happen, but thats my opinion.

I don't think Texas wants the Pac-12. They have had at least 3 chances to join since 1993 and have said declined each time. If the PAC wants a presence in Texas it may end up having opt for a school other than UT.

(11-14-2013 05:13 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  This for those who think Texas Tech is the 3rd most popular school in Texas, a recent newspaper article printed thsi about a survey showing the most pouplar college teams in Texas
Here is the url as well: http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/...cmpid=hpfc

Survey shows more Texans are fans of Aggies than of Longhorns
By Carol Christian | November 14, 2013 | Updated: November 14, 2013 12:29pm E-mail Print 86 Page 1 of 1


In a Public Policy Polling survey, 22 percent of the 500 respondents identified themselves as A&M fans.
In a Public Policy Polling survey, 22 percent of the 500 respondents identified themselves as A&M fans. Chronicle Here's some news that should rattle Longhorns everywhere: Texas A&M University in College Station now claims more fans among the state's residents than does the University of Texas at Austin.

In a telephone survey Nov. 1-4, 22 percent of the 500 respondents identified themselves as A&M fans, while UT mustered support from just 20 percent of those surveyed.

It's the first time that A&M has ranked ahead of UT in the survey conducted by Public Policy Polling in Raleigh, N.C., spokesman Tom Jensen said by email. The question has been asked just twice - in 2011 and this year - since the company began polling in Texas in 2008, he said.

As often seems to be the case, the clear winner of the collegiate fan-base question was "Another school/not a fan," which claimed 26 percent.

The also-rans included the University of Houston, 10 percent; Baylor University, Waco, 8 percent; Texas Tech University, Lubbock, 5 percent; Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, 4 percent; University of Texas at El Paso, 3 percent; Southern Methodist University, Dallas, 2 percent.

Wow, the Chronicle found 500 people to poll. Sounds like the poll in the early 2000's where they said UH was the dominant team in Houston.

I honestly don't care to get into a debate about what conference owns Houston but one thing I am damn certain about, neither conference could care 2 iotas about the public school residing in that city.

So continue your little joyful hope that the SEC, Big 12 or PAC 2 give a crap about a school that can't put 35K in the stands.

(11-14-2013 05:34 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  Why is this thread still alive? Texas Tech and/or Okie State are not going to the PAC without Texas and Oklahoma. All this bickering of value without those 2 is pointless...

I'm sorry but you have no idea. The PAC was ready to accept OU and Oklahoma St but Texas and ESPN killed the deal.

In the next 10 years, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma St will head west. The only question is who goes with them?

(11-14-2013 11:24 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 05:34 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  Why is this thread still alive? Texas Tech and/or Okie State are not going to the PAC without Texas and Oklahoma. All this bickering of value without those 2 is pointless...

I'm sorry but you have no idea. The PAC was ready to accept OU and Oklahoma St but Texas and ESPN killed the deal.

In the next 10 years, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma St will head west. The only question is who goes with them?

Not Tech

(11-14-2013 05:34 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  Why is this thread still alive? Texas Tech and/or Okie State are not going to the PAC without Texas and Oklahoma. All this bickering of value without those 2 is pointless...

Lol! LSU fan has nawledge!

(11-14-2013 11:36 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 11:24 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 05:34 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  Why is this thread still alive? Texas Tech and/or Okie State are not going to the PAC without Texas and Oklahoma. All this bickering of value without those 2 is pointless...

I'm sorry but you have no idea. The PAC was ready to accept OU and Oklahoma St but Texas and ESPN killed the deal.

In the next 10 years, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma St will head west. The only question is who goes with them?

Not Tech

Sorry dude. Tech has the 2nd best ratings in the Big 12 behind only UT (over the past 5 or 10 years...your choice) and the PAC knows it. Tech/KSU smoked the PAC game ratings last week...and that's note unique.

(11-14-2013 11:36 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 11:24 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 05:34 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  Why is this thread still alive? Texas Tech and/or Okie State are not going to the PAC without Texas and Oklahoma. All this bickering of value without those 2 is pointless...

I'm sorry but you have no idea. The PAC was ready to accept OU and Oklahoma St but Texas and ESPN killed the deal.

In the next 10 years, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma St will head west. The only question is who goes with them?

Not Tech

Pony, you and I are buds and I respect you. Tech will get an invite to the PAC 12. Where will SMU end up?

(11-14-2013 11:19 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 05:13 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  This for those who think Texas Tech is the 3rd most popular school in Texas, a recent newspaper article printed thsi about a survey showing the most pouplar college teams in Texas
Here is the url as well: http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/...cmpid=hpfc

Survey shows more Texans are fans of Aggies than of Longhorns
By Carol Christian | November 14, 2013 | Updated: November 14, 2013 12:29pm E-mail Print 86 Page 1 of 1


In a Public Policy Polling survey, 22 percent of the 500 respondents identified themselves as A&M fans.
In a Public Policy Polling survey, 22 percent of the 500 respondents identified themselves as A&M fans. Chronicle Here's some news that should rattle Longhorns everywhere: Texas A&M University in College Station now claims more fans among the state's residents than does the University of Texas at Austin.

In a telephone survey Nov. 1-4, 22 percent of the 500 respondents identified themselves as A&M fans, while UT mustered support from just 20 percent of those surveyed.

It's the first time that A&M has ranked ahead of UT in the survey conducted by Public Policy Polling in Raleigh, N.C., spokesman Tom Jensen said by email. The question has been asked just twice - in 2011 and this year - since the company began polling in Texas in 2008, he said.

As often seems to be the case, the clear winner of the collegiate fan-base question was "Another school/not a fan," which claimed 26 percent.

The also-rans included the University of Houston, 10 percent; Baylor University, Waco, 8 percent; Texas Tech University, Lubbock, 5 percent; Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, 4 percent; University of Texas at El Paso, 3 percent; Southern Methodist University, Dallas, 2 percent.

Wow, the Chronicle found 500 people to poll. Sounds like the poll in the early 2000's where they said UH was the dominant team in Houston.

I honestly don't care to get into a debate about what conference owns Houston but one thing I am damn certain about, neither conference could care 2 iotas about the public school residing in that city.

So continue your little joyful hope that the SEC, Big 12 or PAC 2 give a crap about a school that can't put 35K in the stands.

The Wall Street Journal found the similar numbers last year.


http://online.wsj.com/news/interactive/C...1578171860

(11-15-2013 12:55 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 11:19 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 05:13 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  This for those who think Texas Tech is the 3rd most popular school in Texas, a recent newspaper article printed thsi about a survey showing the most pouplar college teams in Texas
Here is the url as well: http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/...cmpid=hpfc

Survey shows more Texans are fans of Aggies than of Longhorns
By Carol Christian | November 14, 2013 | Updated: November 14, 2013 12:29pm E-mail Print 86 Page 1 of 1


In a Public Policy Polling survey, 22 percent of the 500 respondents identified themselves as A&M fans.
In a Public Policy Polling survey, 22 percent of the 500 respondents identified themselves as A&M fans. Chronicle Here's some news that should rattle Longhorns everywhere: Texas A&M University in College Station now claims more fans among the state's residents than does the University of Texas at Austin.

In a telephone survey Nov. 1-4, 22 percent of the 500 respondents identified themselves as A&M fans, while UT mustered support from just 20 percent of those surveyed.

It's the first time that A&M has ranked ahead of UT in the survey conducted by Public Policy Polling in Raleigh, N.C., spokesman Tom Jensen said by email. The question has been asked just twice - in 2011 and this year - since the company began polling in Texas in 2008, he said.

As often seems to be the case, the clear winner of the collegiate fan-base question was "Another school/not a fan," which claimed 26 percent.

The also-rans included the University of Houston, 10 percent; Baylor University, Waco, 8 percent; Texas Tech University, Lubbock, 5 percent; Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, 4 percent; University of Texas at El Paso, 3 percent; Southern Methodist University, Dallas, 2 percent.

Wow, the Chronicle found 500 people to poll. Sounds like the poll in the early 2000's where they said UH was the dominant team in Houston.

I honestly don't care to get into a debate about what conference owns Houston but one thing I am damn certain about, neither conference could care 2 iotas about the public school residing in that city.

So continue your little joyful hope that the SEC, Big 12 or PAC 2 give a crap about a school that can't put 35K in the stands.

The Wall Street Journal found the similar numbers last year.


http://online.wsj.com/news/interactive/C...1578171860

If true, where the hell are houston fans on game day? 200K alumni in Houston, 40K students in Houston and can't get 35K against BYU at Reliant Stadium.

Coog fans have screamed for years they needed better opponents and a bigger facility. You had both this year and failed again.

I realize in my somewhat drunken state that this is pot kettle but give up. Houston has no shot at the big time because of their fans. aac fans can dog Lubbock til they are blue in the face, but at lease we show up.

If attendance didn't matter, coogfans wouldn't have a weekly thread on it.

(11-14-2013 11:24 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 05:34 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  Why is this thread still alive? Texas Tech and/or Okie State are not going to the PAC without Texas and Oklahoma. All this bickering of value without those 2 is pointless...

I'm sorry but you have no idea. The PAC was ready to accept OU and Oklahoma St but Texas and ESPN killed the deal.

In the next 10 years, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma St will head west. The only question is who goes with them?

You are absolutely delusional if you think Tech is going anywhere without Texas. Tech would never, ever ever be taken as a stand alone expansion candidate to ANY other conference. They would only be taken if Texas requests the Red Raiders are a part of the deal.

How did the Big 10 commissioner explain that leech of a program in Lubbock? Oh yeah, the "Tech problem."

(11-15-2013 02:36 AM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(11-15-2013 12:55 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 11:19 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 05:13 PM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  This for those who think Texas Tech is the 3rd most popular school in Texas, a recent newspaper article printed thsi about a survey showing the most pouplar college teams in Texas
Here is the url as well: http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/...cmpid=hpfc

Survey shows more Texans are fans of Aggies than of Longhorns
By Carol Christian | November 14, 2013 | Updated: November 14, 2013 12:29pm E-mail Print 86 Page 1 of 1


In a Public Policy Polling survey, 22 percent of the 500 respondents identified themselves as A&M fans.
In a Public Policy Polling survey, 22 percent of the 500 respondents identified themselves as A&M fans. Chronicle Here's some news that should rattle Longhorns everywhere: Texas A&M University in College Station now claims more fans among the state's residents than does the University of Texas at Austin.

In a telephone survey Nov. 1-4, 22 percent of the 500 respondents identified themselves as A&M fans, while UT mustered support from just 20 percent of those surveyed.

It's the first time that A&M has ranked ahead of UT in the survey conducted by Public Policy Polling in Raleigh, N.C., spokesman Tom Jensen said by email. The question has been asked just twice - in 2011 and this year - since the company began polling in Texas in 2008, he said.

As often seems to be the case, the clear winner of the collegiate fan-base question was "Another school/not a fan," which claimed 26 percent.

The also-rans included the University of Houston, 10 percent; Baylor University, Waco, 8 percent; Texas Tech University, Lubbock, 5 percent; Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, 4 percent; University of Texas at El Paso, 3 percent; Southern Methodist University, Dallas, 2 percent.

Wow, the Chronicle found 500 people to poll. Sounds like the poll in the early 2000's where they said UH was the dominant team in Houston.

I honestly don't care to get into a debate about what conference owns Houston but one thing I am damn certain about, neither conference could care 2 iotas about the public school residing in that city.

So continue your little joyful hope that the SEC, Big 12 or PAC 2 give a crap about a school that can't put 35K in the stands.

The Wall Street Journal found the similar numbers last year.


http://online.wsj.com/news/interactive/C...1578171860

If true, where the hell are houston fans on game day? 200K alumni in Houston, 40K students in Houston and can't get 35K against BYU at Reliant Stadium.

Coog fans have screamed for years they needed better opponents and a bigger facility. You had both this year and failed again.

I realize in my somewhat drunken state that this is pot kettle but give up. Houston has no shot at the big time because of their fans. aac fans can dog Lubbock til they are blue in the face, but at lease we show up.

If attendance didn't matter, coogfans wouldn't have a weekly thread on it.

We knew this year would be spotty due to the multiple venues. The 11:00AM starts don't appeal to Houstonians either. We'll get a nice bump up next year with the new on campus stadium opening. We should be able to build from there. Its my belief that the large numbers of kids living on campus will eventually translate into a quickly growing season ticket base---but it will take some time.

Right now, we continue to pay the price for the fans we lost in the 1992-2002 period (our lost decade). The leadership was bad, the team was terrible, and the kids on campus didn't give a crap about the CUSA opponents we played (they wanted our old SWC foes). It was tough time to be a Coog fan. There didn't seem to be a light at the end of the tunnel.

Now, the school is growing, building dorms, making improvements (new stadiums, remodeled and expanded student center, new educational buildings, etc), improving academics, and rebuilding the athletic programs infrastructure. There's lots to be hopeful about now. The new TV contract should make the Coogs easier to follow and more accessible to the more casual fan. Its much easier to be optimistic about the school these days. Great leadership has made all the difference.

Finally Houston is doing many of the things that have been needed to capitalize on the schools potential. I hope that once the stadium is up we will see some smart marketing to build the season ticket base and capitalize on that major expenditure.

(11-14-2013 11:36 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 11:24 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 05:34 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  Why is this thread still alive? Texas Tech and/or Okie State are not going to the PAC without Texas and Oklahoma. All this bickering of value without those 2 is pointless...

I'm sorry but you have no idea. The PAC was ready to accept OU and Oklahoma St but Texas and ESPN killed the deal.

In the next 10 years, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma St will head west. The only question is who goes with them?

Not Tech

If the PAC 12 doesn't want to wait until the B12's GOR expires, it will need Tech (and 7 others) to kill the conference. This could happen because the PAC 12 is third in line at the B12 Buffet: SECond to none football conference is first and B1Greed is second. Moreover, if UT decides to go to the ACC, the PAC 12 is last and will be left with scraps....