Unless the Pac-16 can get something like the CIC among its members, academic reasons is pretty overrated.
Not that I don't understand they want and ultimately will get a better deal... but just pointing out this logic doesn't make complete sense. The Brewers can win the next 10 World Series, but there's still no way they'll ever have a richer tv deal than the Yankees. Winning plays into it, but it's more about population and overall team brand. Which is why ultimately, even if Texas has overplayed its hand to the extent it might lead to the fall of the Big 12, one would think Texas would still be the big prize. The Pac 10 has such a great tv deal because the fan base is so populous. It doesn't matter how many national championships LSU or Alabama win, they will never have the same fan base, size wise and media market wise, as USC. Texas will always have a bigger fan base and media market than the Aggies. Or OU. It's not a dig, just a fact. Texas might be able to legitimately pull off being an independent. If they weren't afraid of playing legit competition, as a fan, it could be awesome. But ultimately, either the Big 12 stays together or they join the Pac16. And it doesn't matter how many more championships the SEC wins, the Pac16 will have a much bigger media pull, then.
i get what you're saying but we are still talking college sports. does the pac 10 automatically get the LA tv market? i mean, what's the big east tv contract, do they have a larger contract than the pac 10?
Yeah, if you want to take a anti UT spin. I don't see how points 3-5 are anything more than conjecture. Where is the support that UT lied to anyone about the network? I think it's fair to say no one expected it to get the $$ from ESPN and once that happened UT tried to push the envelope as far as possible, even via bullying others. But I don't see any deception. So eliminate 3 and 4. As far as #5, I haven't seen UT make any threats. The only threats to come A&M's way revolve around them paying an exit fee to leave, which is quite reasonable. Now if other schools are going to lose their payday and are bringing pressure....that's those schools, not UT.
Meanwhile: Baylor is ranked 20 in the new AP poll and the Big XII and SEC are tied with most teams in the top 25 of any conference at 6. :grin:
the back nine of tier one is a long way from stanford, ucla, etc....with good reason. Hell if I were the Pac 10 and I had to add 2 texas schools, I'd take Texas and Houston (Rice's athletic support is too anemic) before I'd go for Tech...Houston is in a better location and is on the same par with or arguably superior to Tech.
I was gonna post something like this. Then I read your post. If I'm the Pac-whatever, I'm definitely going UH over Tech or Baylor. The only positive thing Tech has going for it is an a-list football coach. Houston has all kinds of untapped potential across the board. Also... Kansas. They're a solid institution. Would like to see them in the Pac-16.
So our football program is ranked...the men's basketball team is a preseason top 10 while the women's team is the preseason #1. Nice. Sic em!
I feel bad for Kansas, having one of the 4-5 most storied & strongest college basketball programs in history but unable to get a seat at the table shows how much football (and Kansas poor demographics, though they're better than Nebraska..) drives this train.
I'm sorry, but that reads like major posturing to me. Particularly the whole scare of, "well we might not play in Dallas against the Horns every year anymore...sorry." Yeah, right. No way in the world OU stops playing that game. They benefit from that Texas rivalry big time; hell half their football roster is from TX. That game is a huge event that neither UT nor OU is interested in giving up on.
I agree - it's posturing and no way it happens. But it does make very clear that OU and TX are no longer working in concert here. I think we pretty much knew that from all the behind the scenes sources, but this is the first blatant sign of it - that statement is clearly aimed at Texas as opposed to anything else.
Coming from a coach, I doubt it is posturing. Those guys don't do a whole hell of a lot of politicking when it comes to this stuff. Sounds to me like he was just giving a flat, honest answer. Oklahoma has been through a similar situation like this before, losing rivalries/affiliations, so it's not like they think that nothing can change. Just acknowledging the fact that s**t happens, basically.
