Actually, if you read through the old thread and others, I've complained quite a bit. It's embarrassing the greed my school has and watching Dodds throw his weight around is making me cringe. Sick of it all.
Overall TCU is a good addition. It's no doubt a better program competitively than A&M but doesn't have the support and alums that A&M has. That's a lot of seats in Kyle field to lose. It at least helps the image of the league in terms of competition. It's going to really suck losing Mizzou as well. Word on twitter is that SEC is not crazy about 13 team schedule which would help the eager Mizzou. They would much rather have virginia tech. http://twitter.com/#!/wilnerhotline Who knows how much these guys actually know. Every time something happens Chip Brown reposts an article that they had previously written to show how accurate they are. You can do that when you literally report on every possible scenario.
It's not the driving force but it helps. If you are comparing 2 schools for admission and a lot of the benefits are equal, winning % becomes a bigger factor. An undefeated season and 1 loss seasons. That's a team people will agree is better than A&M. It's not more valuable overall but it's a better team which helps the perception of the conference. Where are you getting this information? The chron posted an article and said they are still waiting for more money to come in. They want 120 million but they can settle for 90 million but they have only raised 30 million. http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Big-12-invites-TCU-not-Houston-or-Rice-2206766.php If it makes economic sense, why hasn't the school cited it as an option? Why are they trying to raise money for a new stadium? They are going to get screwed out of a ton of money in concession and ticket sales. You're right though, I was way off on the concert schedule. I was looking at the schedule for all of Reliant Park. Rice, SMU and UH need to do what TCU did. Win and win big and for a long period of time. Get people to go to games and watch on TV. And if necessary build a stadium. If any of these become valuable programs then good conferences will want them. There is a reason they aren't wanted. I get that all you guys really really support the team. There needs to be 50,000 more of you.
I'm not really sure that TCU's football pedigree will be perceived as better than A&M until they start wrecking shop in the Big 12. Those undefeated season and 1 loss seasons were drawing 31K at Amon, that would scare me as a Big 12 businessman. Hopefully they get a significant boost with this news. From your own link.... With a $10 million donation several weeks ago from former UH football player Ron Yokubaitis and his wife, Carolyn, the school has raised about $60 million - roughly three-quarters of the $80 million to $85 million that athletic director Mack Rhoades has said is needed to begin construction. We're 20 million away (the naming rights) from beginning construction, just like I said. 1) They have cited it as an option, and we've used it as a site to play host to larger teams before. 2) Because a new stadium is our 1st preference. More money for us, games on campus, etc. I think you're being a little naive with the "just win" philosophy as it relates to this whole conference tango thing. Yes, winning is a catalyst for the rest of it, but there's a lot of other factors involved. My main point is that I can give you a viable list of reasons why UH makes as much sense as an addition to the Big 12 as TCU does. Not that I'm not happy for them and don't think they deserve it.
It's not unheard of for naming rights to be the last large financial commitment secured before a stadium is built, as it is usually the biggest piece of financing. UCF's stadium, for example, got their $15 million dollar deal with Bright House Networks before they broke ground. The plans are finalized, supposedly our AD is haggling with some energy company for the naming rights. As long as it's not Gallery Furniture.Com Save U Money 2Day Stadium, I'll be fine with t.
Pretty sure this whole thing is being decided by football. So good for them but I doubt those non-football titles are playing into anyone's decision calculus.
I'm sure Boise State's BCS streak is indicative of their worth as a football program. Which is why so many conferences are clamoring to have them join.
I don't get why people are always so down on KU. They average between 40-50K, even in bad years. Yeah, they're not super competitive or anything, but it's a good school overall and a program with a respectable following. Their basketball program throws enough weight around to make up for any deficiencies in football, IMO.
Nice work going to the equestrian / women's golf / track & field card. Go Aggies (except in sports that anyone cares about)!
yep..and they were literally without a home...looking at the Big East. one of the schools that refused to release potential claims against SEC.
No the biggest factor isn't on field performance, its things like attendance, revenues, television markets etc.. A&M didn't get invited because of its incredible performance on the football field. They got invited because they'll contribute enough to the SEC to put in more than they take out. The SEC (or any conference) doesn't want to add deadweight programs that become leeches. Boise State is a nice story but it has no tv market or fan base outside of Boise. It's alumni base is minimal. Yes they win a lot but they contribute little in terms of revenue. Certainly no conference wants to invite a perennial loser but a team like A&M that has been mediocre can still get an invite because of its size, tv market and potential revenue contributions. But you made the silly point that A&M's conference championships in other sports mean anything. Football is the only sport where performance matters and even then its a relatively small factor.
I'm just comparing it to TCU brother. It was a response. To try and compare TCU to TAMU an anything other than recent football (and even then, c'mon) is a joke. BYU would be fair. But TCU? Joke.
