When did the title game become so important? Did people really feel like USC wasn't great because they didn't play a title game? Teams are leaving for sure...CO and NE were pissed at UT for years. They weren't poached so much as looking to get out. A&M seems to fall in that same category. The entire conference being "anchored" by a single team is overstated...and completely irrelevant to the product on the field, which is what we really all care about, right? I only care about what the suits are doing to the extent it has implications for the product I'm buying. We'll see what happens in expansion.
Specifics, please. The Aggies I've seen throw out vague lines like these in an attempt to take heat off themselves, but never back it up with substance on what they were actually denied. What we do know is that A&M's biggest disagreement with the Big 12 is related to the LHN and the overall power that UT wields. And that's exactly what schools like A&M and Missouri agreed to 14 months ago. Seeing what would happen? It was pretty clear what would happen. The single biggest reason UT opted to keep the Big 12 together, rather than leave for the Pac 16, was the TV network issue. This was extremely well documented. Beebe's willingness to allow them to do that, combined with the new TV contract and revenue distribution model, was the foundation for the "new" Big 12. It wasn't a wait and see situation. All of the issues discussed now were abundantly clear in June 2010, and yet A&M signed the agreement and committed to the league. All that said, can A&M change its mind? Of course, they're allowed to do whatever they want. If they think this is best for TAMU, I wish them well. The problem I have is that the majority of Aggies that I either talk to or read online are acting as if they're the victims. They're wanting people to feel sorry for them, and throwing UT and the Big 12 under the bus in the process. Personally, I find that ridiculous. If you're an Aggie and you want the SEC, be happy. But don't put all the blame on UT/Big 12 for a situation that you very much helped to create.
The product sucks. UT gets to play ISU, Baylor, KU, KSU, Rice, Tulane, Florda International? I'd rather sleep in than watch those games.
Its not about disagreements with the Big 12 or anything UT has done. This has to do with what the SEC can offer TAMU. I get the typical Aggie fans don't see that. Screw em'.
Objection: Relevance. I can't do much about UT's out of conference schedule with respect to an argument about whether their conference's product is compelling. You can sleep in all you want...but last year UT lost to Baylor, ISU, and KSU. I noticed you conveniently left OU, OSU and TTU off your list as well.
Yeah I left the good teams off. But the SEC and Big 10 are anchored by powerhouse programs, big-name brands. The Big 12 is anchored by a single team. The Big 12 is small potatoes compared to those conferences. The matchups in the Big 12 are weaker and less exciting by comparison.
ziggy's gonna be pissed when college football goes through a cycle and he starts complaining about having to sleep through games against such powerhouses as ole miss, mississippi state, kentucky, and south carolina. and he may be rip van****ingwinkle during basketball season.
Tennesse LSU Florida Georgia Alabama Arkansas Auburn All powerhouse brands. Up or down, doesn't matter, they're big names. The Big 12 has 3 now that Nebraska is gone. Soon to be 2. If LSU comes to Kyle Field 0-7, it doesn't matter, its going to be an exciting day in College Station. Big 10 Iowa OSU Michigan Penn State Nebraska Wisconsin
Not a whole lot changes for the Big XII given A&M's departure. - Most likely BYU will be brought in as the 10th team to replace A&M - Texas will replace the A&M game with an annual game with Notre Dame around Thanksgiving - The conference championship cost Texas a chance at the title in '01 and OU in '03. Both teams are happy to be rid of it. - Texas will continue to receive millions of $ from ESPN A&M will play in a division with Auburn, Bama, LSU, and Arkansas. They can join the other SEC mouth breathers in the "SEC! SEC! SEC!" chants.
how do you feel about basketball though? there's florida and uk in the sec and that's about it. i know football is king, but that was my favorite part about last summer's events. i'd rather see ut v. ku or a&m v. ku twice a year than watch either team play colorado or nebraska.
I see it going down like this. UT won't (shouldn't) let a Texas school get placed by a non-Texas school in the Big 12. Worst case scenario, UH and BYU both come in, and they grab one more school to be the 12th member. Who that is... well, that's anyone's guess. I see that becoming a likely scenario if the current member schools cannot agree on a 10 member league.
Basketball will be bad. I was sad to see Colorado leave basketball-wise... But now TAMU might get more of the spotlight. It will be sad to lose 2-3 UT/TAMU basketball games. The Baylor ones too. Hopefully they keep those (I doubt it). In all honesty though, when it comes to tourney time, you can transcend your conference affiliation in basketball. Like Memphis in CUSA. TAMU will maintain a good non-conference schedule. In the end, I'm not too worried about it. Again, I always wanted the Pac 16 though. + Academics + Basketball + Big 12 gets to squash the west coast bias
"fault" is such a nebulous concept in this situation. UT is one of the reasons, but in the end, it's A&M decision to make. You can't blame UT for doing what is best for UT anymore than you can blame A&M for doing what is best for A&M. Everybody wins, woot?
I don't think you'll find the schedule to be anything less than compelling if you find a way to beat OU this season and look to run the table towards a BCS game.
I don't get how the Big 12 is being anchored by "a single team" when OU is also in the conference with Texas.
