Baylor and TT -- nobody cares. Maybe in basketball with BCG in Lubbock and Baylor being good. TAMU/UT > OU/Neb -- those games just seemed bigger because the teams were good during that stretch. At its roots -- TAMU/UT is a bigger deal.
UT won't be hurting for big name OOC dance partners if they decide to kill the A&M game. It would be a PR nightmare, but quite a cash windfall for them. (that refrain is starting to repeat itself all too often in regards to UT football)
But TAMU will... with that cupcake schedule they are about to have. Yet for some reason we will still play? Do you think we will need the revenue? Yea I am sure LSU and TAMU won't draw much revenue, neither will Bama/TAMU, or ARK/TAMU. Bottom line is UT is scared but nobody will say it. Just like they are scared of UH in their conference. UT exemplifies the big 12 ballerina football at its finest.
A&M/UT is a bigger deal within the state (which is what Donny was saying), but I think you'd be surprised at how much national appeal the game actually has. The OU/Neb might have seemed bigger because the teams were good during that stretch, but what that say about the past decade when A&M was struggling to be ranked year after year? My statement on TT/Baylor was regarding Donny's post about Dodds being the "worst thing to happen to college football in Texas." If you're talking about preserving college football/rivalries within the state, don't think you can blame everything on Dodds when the 2nd largest university in the state is leaving a conference which has 3 of the larger Texas universities for a conference that boasts zero.
Well we already have a home/away series with Notre Dame coming up but with the relationship Dodds has with ND, I'm hoping for a UT/ND Thanksgiving game.
Since we now know that UT suggested sharing the ABC revenue equally and was already for sharing the Fox revenue equally then why are we still calling them selfish? Because they won't share Tier 3 rights, which are based off their brand alone (after they did offer to share them with A&M)?
And as others have also pointed out, UT doesn't benefit as much as A&M will from that game, so what is UT's incentive to play it? I won't relist the reasons that were previously mentioned. I agree that UT can play the game if they want. But the other poster is correct that A&M is the one leaving the conference and walking away from tradition and rivalries, not UT. Sometimes you can't have your cake and eat it too. I would love to keep seeing the game, but I completely get why UT may not care about playing it.
So don't play A&M then. But own up to the decision to not play the game. If you want go down the list of reasons, fine, but at the end of the day, it's their choice. Conference affiliation is not a valid excuse. A&M will be waiting at the door like a lost puppy when UT decides it wants to play again.
http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1268816 But some have said Beebe made some critical missteps in trying to hold the Big 12 together this time around, including holding a conference call with the league's presidents on Sept. 2 without Texas and Oklahoma, sources told Orangebloods.com. During that conference call, Beebe told the presidents to "work on Texas," because Beebe believed the Pac-12 wouldn't invite Oklahoma without Texas, sources said. In the end, Beebe was right. But Oklahoma sources resented Beebe for that, and OU sources told The Oklahoman the Sooners wanted Beebe removed as commissioner going forward.
I agree it's their choice. But it's their choice to not wanna play after being jilted. They are not the ones walking out, which some seem to imply. A&M left and tossed tradition aside (ironic just because of what A&M is based on). UT is saying well since you are gone and history/tradition obviously isn't your priority then it won't be ours either. You are going for yours so don't knock us for going for ours. That's all I'm saying. Assign blame correctly.
The Big 12's "history" is what... 15 years? 15 whopping years of tradition? C'mon... TAMU is free to leave. They want to play Texas, Texas doesn't want to play them. Simple as that. Its on UT, regardless of its in their best interest or not. Its on UT.
Still do not agree on WVU going to the SEC. SEC presidents will give in and allow schools within the SEC states, i.e. Florida St., before bringing in West Virginia. 1. A&M & Texas never were or are a "married couple". They are siblings who fight, have fun, compete, hate, and respect each other. Siblings can go away and still meet up during the year. The whole "girlfriend/wife analogy" is incorrect because the relationship between the schools was never, ever that. 2. How many major intrastate FBS public unversities holding the standing of a Texas A&M & Texas do NOT play every year?
Because Texas has better options than to commit to playing an out of conference game with the same opponent every year. ATM does not bring any national attention. The way it stands now, Texas only has 3 out of conference games. One is going to be a cupcake game like Rice. If Texas commits to ATM, they really only one game/date that we can offer teams like Ohio State, UCLA, Notre Dame, or another SEC school.
Cry me a river. Make your choice and own up to it. Tired of all these excuses. Either you want to play A&M or you don't. If money or spite means more to you than playing A&M, fine. I have no problem with that, just admit it and stop acting like you have no choice in the matter. The decision is 100% on UT. A&M will play you anytime, anywhere, and everyone knows it. In fact, every move A&M has made up to this point has been made with consideration for maintaining the ability to play UT on Thanksgiving. If conference affiliation was the only flimsy, silly excuse you guys had for this rivalry, then maybe it is better off dead anyway. But you know that's a load of crap. *edit: I'd say the same thing to Aggies who blame UT for them going to the SEC. Own up to it.
