http://www.lubbockonline.com/news/201810...2-look-now

An interesting take.

"When that happens, I wonder if university presidents and athletic directors at Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri and Texas A&M will want back in. Each of the four universities left the Big 12 after 2011 or 2012. Besides their finances perhaps, none have been better off in their new conferences."

"Getting any of the above to admit that publicly is a different story. I imagine the diehards at Texas A&M, in particular, will point to their revenue distribution from the SEC as justification. But is that how we keep score in college football now? By comparing athletic budgets?"

"Feel free to speculate on how much more Big 12 TV contracts would yield with four more state universities in different states. Yes, those four."

"Come the 2020s, two or more could still correct course and ask back in. Bet they’d be welcome and bet fans in places such as Lincoln and Columbia, maybe a silent majority in College Station, would approve. Of course, those phone calls would need to be made by university presidents, influenced by their boosters and politicians, and their track record is one of egos trumping common sense."

(10-06-2018 11:28 AM)TerpsNPhoenix Wrote:  http://www.lubbockonline.com/news/201810...2-look-now

An interesting take.

"When that happens, I wonder if university presidents and athletic directors at Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri and Texas A&M will want back in. Each of the four universities left the Big 12 after 2011 or 2012. Besides their finances perhaps, none have been better off in their new conferences."

"Getting any of the above to admit that publicly is a different story. I imagine the diehards at Texas A&M, in particular, will point to their revenue distribution from the SEC as justification. But is that how we keep score in college football now? By comparing athletic budgets?"

"Feel free to speculate on how much more Big 12 TV contracts would yield with four more state universities in different states. Yes, those four."

"Come the 2020s, two or more could still correct course and ask back in. Bet they’d be welcome and bet fans in places such as Lincoln and Columbia, maybe a silent majority in College Station, would approve. Of course, those phone calls would need to be made by university presidents, influenced by their boosters and politicians, and their track record is one of egos trumping common sense."

That's an odd point of view coming from an Maryland alum who justified their move by the money.

The underlying issues that created the evacuation of the Big 12 remain. The footprint is to small to monetize effectively their T3 rights. Texas has a dramatic advantage in revenue. Oklahoma and Texas still lack schedules that appeal to the nation. And the strength of the conference may yet prove to be much weaker than the present round robin makes it appear. Their OOC record is not that great. Should OU drop a game to Texas today that your Terps beat, what does that do the conference's power ranking? It seems to me it would make justifying OU's entrance into the CFP to be very difficult to pull off.

That dude is smoking something, or dropping tabs of something, that isn't legal in Lubbock.

Maybe the same substance used by those random message board posters who think Arkansas desperately wants to leave the SEC and join the Big 12.

Okay first off, it just has to be said:




So now that that’s out of the way and we’ve had a good laugh I’ll try to answer this.

First off: This is clearly written to appeal bitter, A&M obsessed Tech fans in the Lubbock paper who desperately want the game with us back (for those unfamiliar, Texas Tech is nobody’s main rival so they decided A&M was their main Super Bowl rivalry game....we don’t get it either) but are too proud to say it and instead need backhanded writing like this to make them feel good with a fantasy of A&M coming to its senses, realizing how superior the Big 12 is to the SEC and crawling back to them, begging for forgiveness and reconciliation.

Never gonna happen there Tekkies. Maybe start an official rivalry with UH, they’d welcome it like they did a couple weeks ago.

Now let’s overlook the biased source and address it’s “content”

What exactly is the appeal of the B12 that we’re supposed to be missing here? It’s certainly not the money, or the recruiting. It’s definitely not the exposure. All of that is infinitely better in the SEC.

The teams in the Big 12?

First off let’s quit acting like the B12 is some historic institution of college football like the SEC and B1G are that deserves that kind of reverence. It was and continues to be nothing but a marriage of convenience that tried to save two REAL conferences that were failing due to their geography and demographics in the world of televised sports.

Which brings us to the individual members here. They bravely pretend to care about the teams from the other former conference but outside OU and UT who played annually even when apart, they don’t and never will.

It was the same for A&M. Our schedule was divided 3 ways

1) Big 8 teams we mostly couldn’t care less about

2) The Texas tagalong little brothers we simply didn’t want to lose to

3) The UT thanksgiving game

So it was basically a one game a year schedule most years.

I’m not saying we didn’t show up for ranked Oklahoma or Nebraska teams but there was no passion or excitement for those games beyond the week they were played

So this idea that we’d love to give up playing in the biggest, most exciting. CFB league in America to go back to playing 11 am games against Baylor and Iowa State on PPV again?

Thanks but no thanks

Of course, the Baylor-A&M battle of the Brazos did get pretty fierce. But A&M is doing just the same as before-a consistent 3rd-4th place finisher. And they can do it with more fans in the stands.

CU likes being closer to their well-heeled west coast alumni.

Missouri and Nebraska might start having 2nd thoughts. Although Nebraska is finally this year starting to rake in full Big 10 money. They are about $50 million behind where they would have been if they had stayed in the Big 12. They need to start recovering that.

(10-06-2018 04:55 PM)bullet Wrote:  Of course, the Baylor-A&M battle of the Brazos did get pretty fierce. But A&M is doing just the same as before-a consistent 3rd-4th place finisher. And they can do it with more fans in the stands.

CU likes being closer to their well-heeled west coast alumni.

Missouri and Nebraska might start having 2nd thoughts. Although Nebraska is finally this year starting to rake in full Big 10 money. They are about $50 million behind where they would have been if they had stayed in the Big 12. They need to start recovering that.

The only thing Nebraska should have second thoughts about is the poor job their chancellor did in negotiating with the Big Ten. Maryland got themselves a much better deal.

Nebraska didn't really want to leave the Big 12 in the first place. They basically were afraid that the Big 12 would collapse and Missouri would take the conference's Big 10 spot. With that being said, Nebraska does not regret leaving at this point.

(10-06-2018 07:26 PM)Poster Wrote:  Nebraska didn't really want to leave the Big 12 in the first place. They basically were afraid that the Big 12 would collapse and Missouri would take the conference's Big 10 spot. With that being said, Nebraska does not regret leaving at this point.

How do you know what Nebraska thinks?

article made a lot of sence
Nebraska, out of thier element, however thier not coming back
Colo, took paycut, they were expecting more B-12 schools to join them, thier not coming back
Missouri lost thier midwest roots, that proabbly hurting them, thier not coming back
TexA&M is wash, thier not coming back

(10-06-2018 07:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-06-2018 07:26 PM)Poster Wrote:  Nebraska didn't really want to leave the Big 12 in the first place. They basically were afraid that the Big 12 would collapse and Missouri would take the conference's Big 10 spot. With that being said, Nebraska does not regret leaving at this point.

How do you know what Nebraska thinks?

That was the tone of that retrospective from Perlman and Osborn. Colorado was out, Missouri's work was outed, and nobody believed Texas, who pretty much had everyone in a fit. Nebraska felt like there was no certain future for the conference, so it had to do something before it was left out.

How it resonates as being at least partially true is just how bad of a deal they got from the Big Ten. As in, if you had talks with other conferences, I'm sure you would have been able to get more up front, which they didn't. The result sounds about as rushed and incomplete for that held belief.

I think UNL is more like FSU in that the decision was controlled, and alternatives weren't fully vetted deliberately. Efforts were purposefully focused on the preference of that one conference, and not the others.

This might provide a little insight into the possibility of not all of the Big 12 teams having a landing spot in the next round. I would imagine we will see more of this type of article coming out of areas to could be left behind.
There are valid points, such as Missouri's cultural fit, but the article does not justify why the band would have a reason to get back together.

We get it.

Our crazy exes are feeling a little insecure. They miss us and want us back.

But like any good crazy ex they can’t admit we’re in way better and healthier relationships now and have no reason to go back to them. So instead they dream up these elaborate fantasies about how we’ll realize how good we had it with them and come crawling back begging forgiveness.

It’s cute but it’s not happening

You NEVER go back to the crazy ex

(10-07-2018 08:09 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  We get it.

Our crazy exes are feeling a little insecure. They miss us and want us back.

But like any good crazy ex they can’t admit we’re in way better and healthier relationships now and have no reason to go back to them. So instead they dream up these elaborate fantasies about how we’ll realize how good we had it with them and come crawling back begging forgiveness.

It’s cute but it’s not happening

You NEVER go back to the crazy ex

The Big 12 fans generally feel like A&M was the crazy ex. Missouri was the satanic ex. CU was the stoned ex. Nebraska is the one we would want back.

Of course the administrators would take both Nebraska and A&M back without a second thought. They would try to figure out a way to make Colorado work. They would not take back Missouri-lot of bad blood in the way they left. A&M's Loftin lied to the Big 12 too (and seemed proud of it), but A&M was just doing what they had really wanted to do for a while so there really weren't any hard feelings at the administrator level.

(10-07-2018 08:59 AM)bullet Wrote:  Of course the administrators would take both Nebraska and A&M back without a second thought. They would try to figure out a way to make Colorado work. They would not take back Missouri-lot of bad blood in the way they left. A&M's Loftin lied to the Big 12 too (and seemed proud of it), but A&M was just doing what they had really wanted to do for a while so there really weren't any hard feelings at the administrator level.

I've heard this elsewhere but have to ask why they don't get a break but the others, especially TAMU and Nebraska would. Or how there isn't animosity toward OU and OSU for their walkabout with the PAC.

Over time, it just seems like the anger over Missouri is like getting mad at a 5 for flirting, and getting somewhere with a 10, while other 5's, 6's, and 7's are watching on about to have a rage stroke. How Nebraska is so desired but Missou can pound sand is just one I don't understand. Missouri's the bigger school, in the bigger state, with better markets, has AAU...getting mad at them for realizing their potential elsewhere or for others seeing that value is just petty or sad.

If that's the case, Missouri should get some advice from Colorado in the ways of DGAF.

Ok, let me get this straight: the Big XII, with Texas basically running the show and no conference network, really is stable, and the defectors should return. Uhhh, no.
At one time, the Big XII had enough draw power to be a legitimate landing spot for Clemson & FSU, should they ever chose to leave the ACC. Other than the ACC GOR being a possible cause, you don’t hear anything about Clemson & FSU wanting to join the Big XII anymore. And even before the GOR with the ACC was signed, both institutions had a chance to leave the ACC for the Big XII, but they didn’t. Why???
Why was it when the Big XII finally looked at expansion, its choices were only G5 teams and a BYU team that was easily derailed in the expansion talks by a small LBGT movement??

I would imagine that Nebraska does have some buyer’s remorse, but I’m sure any NU trustee could tell you that the Big XII would absolutely have to have certain things in place for the Huskers ever to come back, one of those being a conference network, I’m sure.

Missouri, to their credit, did their homework before leaving the conference. But the long and the short of it was, the Big XII was in serious trouble!! There was no getting around it. So Mizzou did like any other reasonable institution would have done, and started looking at their options. Yes, originally Mizzou did want the Big Ten, but the problem was that the Big Ten didn’t want them. So, Mizzou decided to go with an interesting second choice: the SEC. Were the first years in the SEC tough for Mizzou?? Yes, but persevered in spite of it and made a few trips to the SEC championship game, definitely not an easy task for any team. Mizzou was looked at as an odd fit for the SEC by even many of its own fans and yet, the SEC gradually grew to accept Mizzou as one of its own. As I have tried to tell several on this board & others, very few teams have ever left the SEC, and those have, with one very old exception, have come to regret their decision. The lone exception was the University of the South who felt like they were way over their heads in the SEC, and left the conference. Sewanee, as the University of the South is known today is now with its peers in D3.
Georgia Tech as well as Tulane, both have serious regrets about leaving the SEC. Mizzou wanted to go where it was wanted & appreciated, and it found that in the SEC. Also, Mizzou has come out on numerous occasions in the past and said that they wanted an OOC rivalry with the Jayhawks, which the SEC would have definitely accommodated. Kansas said no, but Mizzou continues to leave that door open, again, to their credit.

Colorado definitely does not regret being in the Big XII.
Texas A&M??? ROFL!!!

(10-07-2018 08:55 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-07-2018 08:09 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  We get it.

Our crazy exes are feeling a little insecure. They miss us and want us back.

But like any good crazy ex they can’t admit we’re in way better and healthier relationships now and have no reason to go back to them. So instead they dream up these elaborate fantasies about how we’ll realize how good we had it with them and come crawling back begging forgiveness.

It’s cute but it’s not happening

You NEVER go back to the crazy ex

The Big 12 fans generally feel like A&M was the crazy ex. Missouri was the satanic ex. CU was the stoned ex. Nebraska is the one we would want back.

We’re not the ones publishing love letters to the Big 12 asking them to reconsider and take us back.

That’s what the crazy ex does

She swears she’s changed and that this time will be different and you’ll be much happier if you dump your way better new relationship and come home to her.

You just laugh, delete her number and block her on SM

Fact #1: Missouri and Nebraska reached a #1 ranking in the BXII era. Colorado reached a #3 ranking after the regular season. All 3 were close to winning a national title in the BXII.

Fact #2: Missouri, Colorado, Nebraska have all been relegated to plainjanes in their new leagues with their glory days long behind them. If they miraculously ever become nationally relevant again, Alabama and Ohio St stand in the way to dash dreams.

Pretty simple. Sounds like the article was right.

If you measure programs by money, the moves fulfilled the goals.
If you measure programs by national relevance and success, the moves flopped.

(10-07-2018 11:43 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  If you measure programs by money, the moves fulfilled the goals.
If you measure programs by national relevance and success, the moves flopped.

Universities will measure these things by increases in applications, improvement to the overall enrollment profile, improved attraction and retention of faculty (and subsequent increases in research dollar intake), increasing donations, and increases in sustained donations (more people giving money annually, and more people increasing their annual donations). Then comes the affiliation money. They'll then benchmark all of that against their peers.

Program prominence is relative at best. A Rutgers could never win a conference game again, but if the money and other institutional metrics deliver, "no regrets."

Nebraska I can understand if people think there's potential for lasting acrimony. Colorado...people must be as high as tokers in the Rockies to think they'd want to come back to the Big XII. Colorado was almost in the PAC before the Big XII even formed; it was probably better for the rest of the soon-to-be conference to tell them to shove off then. The relationship was always strained. I doubt even getting another western school in the Big XII at its formation, like a Utah, New Mexico, or BYU would have kept them there to this day. Colorado is a west coast school. The only way they come back east is if the PAC expands that direction, or it finally achieves B1G-PAC.

(10-07-2018 11:43 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Fact #1: Missouri and Nebraska reached a #1 ranking in the BXII era. Colorado reached a #3 ranking after the regular season. All 3 were close to winning a national title in the BXII.

Fact #2: Missouri, Colorado, Nebraska have all been relegated to plainjanes in their new leagues with their glory days long behind them. If they miraculously ever become nationally relevant again, Alabama and Ohio St stand in the way to dash dreams.

Pretty simple. Sounds like the article was right.

If you measure programs by money, the moves fulfilled the goals.
If you measure programs by national relevance and success, the moves flopped.

Since Nebraska left first it's hard to know their true motives, but I'm willing to bet their motive was the fear that Texas might do something to implode the conference. So I attribute their move to best one they could make for self preservation.

When Colorado jumped it was because they had been looking West anyway and decided not to hinge their decision to Texas's ambivalence. So desire was there at least for Colorado.

When A&M and Missouri left the motives were slightly different again. A&M had long eyed the SEC and was sick of UT negotiating for them in their absence and Missouri after being snubbed by the Big 10 was a bit more desperate for a home.

So in the discussion of all of this the one common factor that can not be overlooked is that most didn't move for money. They didn't move to be competitive somewhere else. They moved out of fear over a future that was being plotted in Austin with no clear indications of intent.

In fact the only major move that was obviously for the money was Maryland's.

So to say now that they should have stayed because the Big 12 looks healthier and they were more successful there is a hypocritical revision of reality. Had they felt safe and had their future seemed secure in the Big 12 then likely they would have remained. But just because the Andrea Doria has stayed afloat for a long time after its collision with the Stockholm doesn't mean that that ship is any the more seaworthy. It just means that most of its first class passengers managed to get off of her before the waves of time finally make her founder.

And more pertinently, should the ship be salvaged, is it really fair to judge those who rowed away from it while it was in peril? Might any of us done the same if we found our futures in such jeopardy?