Texas with an Icarus-esque fall. Thought they could bulldoze through their conference with their own network only to come crawling to the SEC. That, or the smooth-brains in the AD planned this from the beginning to shatter the Big XII and join the SEC.
It's hard to say whether this is a step backward or forward for Texas. There's an argument for both. I lean toward forward. Them running the Big 12 and the LHN had its benefits, but I think overall it made them soft and complacent. The SEC is going to boot them into a new era of competency and if things keep going the way it is going, Texas just secured one of the last seats at the table for version 3.0 of college football that will eventually lead us to a league that has far fewer teams and is practically pro/autonomous. I think it's a temporary embarrassment (following A&M, shuttering the LHN, taking the blame for another conference implosion, and whatever teeth-kicking the SEC will give them in the early years) for a long term gain.
It shouldn't impact recruiting that much, UT scores in the top 5 nearly every year and does nothing with it. It will force coaching to take a step up or get left in the dust. They can either pull an Aggie or an Auburn and rise to the occasion and transform from punching bag to a perennial top 12-ish team or go the Mizzou and Nebraska route and become a punching bag. I worry for OU though (lol), Their situation resembles Mizzou and Nebraska more than A&M. Entirely reliant on talent from Texas, with little recruiting across the deep south.
A 30 second glance at their roster renders this post laughable. Another 30 seconds and I'm still counting the states.
I'm not sure it's possible that moving to the SEC puts more pressure on the program than they already feel from the fanbase now. Practically speaking, I just don't see what will be different.
Looks like thanks to the heroics of UT, 10 different schools are moving up in the world. That will mean more money for the schools, more attention for the players and better games for the fans. you’re welcome.
Big 12 administrators are hoping to answer a key question for 2023 and beyond in early May at their spring meetings in Phoenix. The athletic directors of incoming members BYU, Cincinnati, Houston and UCF will attend the three-day session, meeting with commissioner Bob Bowlsby and their new peers in-person for just the second time since the Big 12 expanded last September. Together, they’ll try to figure this issue out: What’s the plan for divisions? During their last round of meetings at the Big 12 basketball tournaments in Kansas City earlier in March, the ADs of the current membership were presented with three models for divisional play from the conference’s working group and had high-level discussions but, according to sources, reached no consensus on which plan is best. The topic itself is a bit more complex than one might expect. For starters, Oklahoma and Texas still have not given notice for an early SEC exit, so the Big 12 continues to operate under the assumption this will be a 14-team conference in 2023 and 2024. Their continued presence is perhaps the most interesting issue in devising these division models. Should the Sooners and Longhorns be placed in the same division or not? There are multiple ways of looking at that. From a convenience standpoint, putting them in separate divisions makes it easier to move forward whenever they exit, avoiding a need to redo this process down the road. From a competitive standpoint, putting them in the same division — as they were in the old Big 12 South — would mean only one could reach the Big 12 title game. Can these ADs set pettiness aside in making that choice? Both schools do have representation on the working group that is building the division models. If the preferred plan is putting Oklahoma and Texas in separate divisions, then the actual divisional setup becomes more important because it could end up being the plan the Big 12 sticks with for 2025 and beyond. The conference is expected to maintain its nine-game league schedule in football, sources said, which in a 14-team league would mean six divisional games and three crossover games. This is a conference with rivalries dating back to the Southwest Conference and Big Eight era that should be protected. The alignment of the Red River rivals is important, but so is the matter of Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and whether it’s best they be paired or placed in different divisions next year. It’s fair to hit pause on this whole conversation, though, and ask: Should the Big 12 even have divisions in the future? It’s possible other Power 5 conferences move away from divisions in the years ahead, and the Big 12’s No. 1 vs. No. 2 setup of its conference title game over the past five years can certainly be defended as the best setup for improving its champ’s College Football Playoff hopes. “We have planted a banner that we’re gonna put the two best teams from our league in the championship game and that’s going to help us with Playoff attention and opportunity,” one source said. “Why would we change that?” The working group’s divisional models have been described by one AD as “somewhat regional” as expected, and certainly it will matter to some extent how the final alignment can be branded as North-South or East-West (or maybe Legends and Leaders?), but even those decisions are subjective and debatable. There are some natural groupings, like keeping the trio of Kansas, Kansas State and Iowa State together. There are obvious bad ideas, like West Virginia and BYU as division-mates. But there doesn’t seem to be one obviously perfect way to divide up the conference’s new map. There’s interest among ADs in ensuring every Big 12 member gets to play games in Texas and Florida, given its importance to recruiting. That aim would make a North-South setup a little less appealing. Would it mean it makes sense to, for example, put TCU and Texas Tech in one division with Baylor and Houston in the other? One AD did also note that, from a scheduling standpoint, there’s some interest in ensuring the remaining members still get home games against Oklahoma and Texas before they go. For some, though, it’s hard to shake the feeling that all the 14-team talk still seems a little silly, even as that day is fast approaching. As one source skeptically put it: Does anyone honestly expect Oklahoma and Texas to still be in the Big 12 in 2023 and 2024? The news this week of Conference USA resolving its separation with Old Dominion, Marshall and Southern Miss and letting them exit this summer does raise that question, which few can answer as the silent game of chicken drags on between the leadership of Oklahoma and Texas and Bowlsby, who has the ironclad grant of rights and no reason to budge. “In the back of my mind I think, ‘We’re wasting a lot of time here. They’re not going to be here when these new schools come into our league,’” the source said. “But everybody is being so careful right now and not wanting to put their cards on the table.” So the planning must continue. Can a divisional plan — or a decision on whether the Big 12 should even have divisions — get finalized during their May 2-4 meetings? Some sources view that as more of an optimistic aim, given the limited amount of discussion that has occurred so far and how many details need to be addressed. The Phoenix meetings will also be the first time all of the Big 12’s current and future football coaches will be in a room together, and surely they’ll have feedback to offer. Those meetings will offer their first chance to really reckon with this unusual experience of moving forward as a hopefully tight-knit 12-member family living with two exes who still haven’t moved out. This 14-team league is happening, and it’s time to start making decisions about how this is actually going to work.
Hmm. Figures. Nobody is willing to speak up or put effort into devising a plan because no one thinks UT and OU are staying beyond this year. I would hope that, if divisions are created, they form them to where they don't need to be remade after 2024.
