Left Behind: A Quick Dose Of Post Big 12 Reality

[Johnny Sack 8397]

16 minutes ago, Deej said:

Texas has only chosen to stop subsidizing your school and the other seven. We will still be subsidizing other schools of lesser value than ours. 

[Al_4_ISU 12469]

23 minutes ago, Scholz said:

Right.  Not evil but selfish.  Not malevolent but also not benevolent.  I got it.  I think.

Sorry we're so easily manipulated by the media.  Look, we made a decision that benefits our school, nothing more nothing less.

Agreed.

We'll never agree on the "nothing more, nothing less" part.

[Satchel 6938]

3 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

I care a great deal about it because as I've said before Texas badly needs another top flight university. I care about where most schools in the Big 12 end up, actually, but especially about Tech for that reason.

The ones I genuinely don't care about at all are Baylor and TCU. And West Virginia just because whatever, they're way over there. And I guess Kansas State because come on, is that even really a university?

But still, that means I care about 6 of the 10 teams, so that's most.

I agree that Texas needs more top flight universities. I don’t see why creating more should be tied to membership in an athletic conference. California-Santa Cruz was established in 1965, is a AAU member and has more National Academy of Sciences faculty than any four year degree granting school in Texas.

Texas’ higher ed reputation suffers because as a state we don’t value higher ed all that much. In the last legislative session, Texas gave  16 billion to the state’s six university systems California’s last appropriation was 48 billion. Texas seems satisfied to have just two public schools rated among the top 50 in any given year, while California continues to win the day in providing top notch schools to its citizens.

[Valmy77 13245]

34 minutes ago, nineliveslost said:

Can Big 12 haz more than 4 ?

Sometimes quantity has a quality all its own. Just ask the Big 10.

[Scholz 11944]

2 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Agreed.

We'll never agree on the "nothing more, nothing less" part.

Fair enough.  You're still welcome for the last 10 years btw.

[Huckleberry 33002]

Just now, Satchel said:

I agree that Texas needs more top flight universities. I don’t see why creating more should be tied to membership in an athletic conference. California-Santa Cruz was established in 1965, is a AAU member and has more National Academy of Sciences faculty than any four year degree granting school in Texas.

Texas’ higher ed reputation suffers because as a state we don’t value higher ed all that much. In the last legislative session, Texas gave  16 billion to the state’s six university systems California’s last appropriation was 48 billion. Texas seems satisfied to have just two public schools rated among the top 50 in any given year, while California continues to win the day in providing top notch schools to its citizens.

You just proved my point.

It's well known that athletic success increases and improves the applicant pool. This improves a school academically. Regardless of any CR type discussion, there is zero downside and only upside to keeping a Texas public university in the top tier of intercollegiate athletics. And when Texas public universities may not be getting much assistance in other forms that just makes the athletic aspect more important.

[DFW Horn 6124]

25 minutes ago, Scholz said:

Look, we made a decision that benefits our school, nothing more nothing less.

This is what every school has done in realignment. For more money, exposure, and/or prestige. No need to over-complicate why. It's not you, it's us.

[Valmy77 13245]

Yeah the state wants massive amounts of power to control the public schools while giving them very little money to sustain themselves.

But, you know, no CR here.

Athletics can, should, and is a source of revenue for the academic mission of UT. 

Edited September 9, 2021 by Valmy77

[Al_4_ISU 12469]

22 minutes ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

Look man, I don't even know if this was Texas's actual position. I was just responding to your ask:

You wanted a concrete, real life example of what a competent leader could have done. I gave you one. Apparently, the answer was that the real life competent leader was supposed to be told by Texas that the other conference schools needed to stop being huge, gaping, gravy training, record padding, pussies. Is that a better answer for you?

Nah, my point was that short of bringing in some other blue bloods, this was going to happen regardless of whether you had Bob Bowlsby or Jim Delaney in that office.

If the Big 12 had tried to pound their chest and point out the stupid narratives, you guys would bitch about how whiny the conference looked and how it was embarrassing.

If the conference had scheduled more big time OOC games, it would inevitably lose some, and then the teams would have worse records and get less respect from ESPN and you'd say the exact same shit you're saying now.

It didn't take long for ESPN to decided they wanted you guys and OU in the SEC, and once that decision was made, there wasn't anything any suit in an office could do.  Bowlsby's a fucking vegetable, but he's a symptom more than he's a cause.

[Huckleberry 33002]

5 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Agreed.

We'll never agree on the "nothing more, nothing less" part.

Elaborate. Your entire position is that Texas's move is out of selfishness. Which is fine, it certainly is.

So what do you mean by this implication that there's more to it than that?

[Huckleberry 33002]

Just now, Al_4_ISU said:

Nah, my point was that short of bringing in some other blue bloods, this was going to happen regardless of whether you had Bob Bowlsby or Jim Delaney in that office.

If the Big 12 had tried to pound their chest and point out the stupid narratives, you guys would bitch about how whiny the conference looked and how it was embarrassing.

If the conference had scheduled more big time OOC games, it would inevitably lose some, and then the teams would have worse records and get less respect from ESPN and you'd say the exact same shit you're saying now.

It didn't take long for ESPN to decided they wanted you guys and OU in the SEC, and once that decision was made, there wasn't anything any suit in an office could do.  Bowlsby's a fucking vegetable, but he's a symptom more than he's a cause.

Well Bowlsby is definitely a clown but you're right that he was basically too late. The time for good leadership to set the conference on the right path was in the 2000s before he took over.

You're wrong about the second thing, this board has been begging for decades and through 3 different domain names for the Big 12 to do just that.

[Randolph Duke 4034]

4 minutes ago, Satchel said:

I agree that Texas needs more top flight universities. I don’t see why creating more should be tied to membership in an athletic conference. California-Santa Cruz was established in 1965, is a AAU member and has more National Academy of Sciences faculty than any four year degree granting school in Texas.

Texas’ higher ed reputation suffers because as a state we don’t value higher ed all that much. In the last legislative session, Texas gave  16 billion to the state’s six university systems California’s last appropriation was 48 billion. Texas seems satisfied to have just two public schools rated among the top 50 in any given year, while California continues to win the day in providing top notch schools to its citizens.

California also has an economy that dwarfs that of Texas as well as state revenues that dwarf that of Texas. That being said, Texas does fund its post-secondary institutions rather meagerly.

[Al_4_ISU 12469]

Just now, Huckleberry said:

Elaborate. Your entire position is that Texas's move is out of selfishness. Which is fine, it certainly is.

So what do you mean by this implication that there's more to it than that?

This really is a luxury for a Texas that will have direct negative impact to 8 other institutions. You don't need this.  It does benefit you, but you already have more than everyone.  Hence the "selfish" accusation.  Texas ain't fighting for it's life here.

Again, you have every right to pursue this luxury.  It's capitalism and the American way.  We're just raw because the other schools in your position don't treat the blablablah I'm fucking repeating myself.  I think you get my point.  You don't have to agree with it.

 

[Huckleberry 33002]

I agree with that, but it doesn't change the fact that the poster was absolutely correct about the nothing more, nothing less part. Texas is doing this to help Texas. It's not being done out of spite or specifically to hurt other schools. Now, it certainly will hurt other schools but that's not the reason it's happening. That's what he meant by Texas made the move to benefit Texas, nothing more and nothing less.

[Valmy77 13245]

5 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

I agree with that, but it doesn't change the fact that the poster was absolutely correct about the nothing more, nothing less part. Texas is doing this to help Texas. It's not being done out of spite or specifically to hurt other schools. Now, it certainly will hurt other schools but that's not the reason it's happening. That's what he meant by Texas made the move to benefit Texas, nothing more and nothing less.

Also if OU was leaving we really had no choice in the matter. We are married to them for better or worse. The marriage from hell.

[JFKFC 4890]

11 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

This really is a luxury for a Texas that will have direct negative impact to 8 other institutions. You don't need this.  It does benefit you, but you already have more than everyone.  Hence the "selfish" accusation. 

ISU should say nothing to Texas and OU but thank you. You guys have been getting money that you didn't earn for a quarter century. If ISU had won a national title as a Big 12 member, you would certainly be taken care of in realignment. You'd be in the Big 10. You had 25 years to do something that mattered in college football, and you failed. Texas is not financially responsible for your failures. 

[Horn Dogg 3911]

4 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

I've specifically stated as "Big 12 sources" to the media. They do it anonymously, so I'm not going to have names for Al.

And I said I believe you @Al_4_ISU that you don't see much of it but that is based on location and reading choices. I mean all you have to do is google Texas Longhorns greedy and there will be plenty of results that claim to have sources from the Big 12. Hell, not the same thing, but there's a recent story from Missouri still trying to blame Texas's greed for why Missouri left for the SEC in 2011. That bullshit wasn't called out then and never has been by our conference partners, they just let everyone run with that story because they liked the evil Texas narrative. And, for the record, Missouri deserves a lot more of your scorn than they're getting. I still hope ISU ends up in the Big Ten somehow so you can laugh at Mizzou.

Missouri and A&M leave for the SEC - narrative is "It's because Texas is greedy!!!"

Texas and Oklahoma leave for the SEC - narrative is "It's because Texas is greedy!!!"

I think Missouri started the whole thing by reaching out to the big 10 didn’t they?  I once saw someone describe Missouri as the fat girl that can’t get laid, that’s a perfect description.  

The other schools can bitch and moan about Texas all they want, our official response should be “fuck them.”

[Deej 76831]

14 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

This really is a luxury for a Texas that will have direct negative impact to 8 other institutions. You don't need this.  It does benefit you, but you already have more than everyone.  Hence the "selfish" accusation.  Texas ain't fighting for it's life here.

Again, you have every right to pursue this luxury.  It's capitalism and the American way.  We're just raw because the other schools in your position don't treat the blablablah I'm fucking repeating myself.  I think you get my point.  You don't have to agree with it.

 

Sounds to me your being selfish thinking that Texas needs to keep printing money for your school. 

[Satchel 6938]

19 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

I agree with that, but it doesn't change the fact that the poster was absolutely correct about the nothing more, nothing less part. Texas is doing this to help Texas. It's not being done out of spite or specifically to hurt other schools. Now, it certainly will hurt other schools but that's not the reason it's happening. That's what he meant by Texas made the move to benefit Texas, nothing more and nothing less.

I agree with you. Texas has been clear about its obligation and intention to act in the best interest of the university. Ironically, schools not named UT and A&M are using that same reasoning to challenge UT’s and A&M’s exclusive right to the PUF, without which, both systems would be as underwhelming as the other similarly situated systems in Texas, given how little we appropriate to higher ed.

Edited September 9, 2021 by Satchel

[Jasper_Jester 356]

7 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Nah, my point was that short of bringing in some other blue bloods, this was going to happen regardless of whether you had Bob Bowlsby or Jim Delaney in that office.

If the Big 12 had tried to pound their chest and point out the stupid narratives, you guys would bitch about how whiny the conference looked and how it was embarrassing.

If the conference had scheduled more big time OOC games, it would inevitably lose some, and then the teams would have worse records and get less respect from ESPN and you'd say the exact same shit you're saying now.

It didn't take long for ESPN to decided they wanted you guys and OU in the SEC, and once that decision was made, there wasn't anything any suit in an office could do.  Bowlsby's a fucking vegetable, but he's a symptom more than he's a cause.

Feels like you are just making grievances up now. 

I don't know that anyone is saying Iowa State should have scheduled Notre Dame and Alabama (Texas does, but that is neither here not there), I think people are saying everyone should have stopped scheduling FCS schools. That certainly would have helped the prestige of the conference.

And, We are Texas, we like bragging, if the conference bragged, we would have gone right along.

But, I'm not going to lie, this thing was broken from the jump and got worse when people bailed. But, Texas did commit to sticking it out when they could have bailed long ago. So, whatever transpired since, 10 years ago Texas was committed to making this work and it is going to cost a lot of money to get out of the commitment so this isn't happening lightly.

[Satchel 6938]

35 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

You just proved my point.

It's well known that athletic success increases and improves the applicant pool. This improves a school academically. Regardless of any CR type discussion, there is zero downside and only upside to keeping a Texas public university in the top tier of intercollegiate athletics. And when Texas public universities may not be getting much assistance in other forms that just makes the athletic aspect more important.

Is this a point that is mostly true in schools located in the football hotbed of the South? It certainly does not apply to all of the AAU schools in California.

Edited September 9, 2021 by Satchel

[oldhorn2 431]

24 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

This really is a luxury for a Texas that will have direct negative impact to 8 other institutions. You don't need this.  It does benefit you, but you already have more than everyone.  Hence the "selfish" accusation.  Texas ain't fighting for it's life here.

Again, you have every right to pursue this luxury.  It's capitalism and the American way.  We're just raw because the other schools in your position don't treat the blablablah I'm fucking repeating myself.  I think you get my point.  You don't have to agree with it.

 

I was wondering why this sounded familiar....My ex wife told me the same shit during our divorce proceeding......really...the same old shit. I needed to keep supporting her because I could afford it......better yet....she wanted me to stay in misery because it made her life better.

[Al_4_ISU 12469]

We'll always be kinda mad about this.  You'll always feel like we should be grateful you graced us with your presence and all this back and forth isn't changing a single mind.

Every Irate 8 school knows it wasn't personal.  We're mad because we're the only schools in our position that actually get treated like this.

We aren't mad that Texas is joining the SEC.  We're mad that Oregon State isn't sweating shit.

Edited September 9, 2021 by Al_4_ISU

['stache 21820]

Here's a deal for you guys. Since you're the big swinging dick here, tell ESPN to keep the payments the same for the New Big XII for, say, 7-10 years. That'll resolve your GOR damages claim. We'll also agree to reduce the buyout. Then, we fire Bowsby, hire someone competent, and do everything we can in these "preview years" to show that we are equally or more valuable than the fucking PAC and ACC. 

[Valmy77 13245]

8 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

We'll always be kinda mad about this.  You'll always feel like we should be grateful you graced us with your presence and all this back and forth isn't changing a single mind.

Every Irate 8 school knows it wasn't personal.  We're mad because we're the only schools in our position that actually get treated like this.

We aren't mad that Texas is joining the SEC.  We're mad that Oregon State isn't sweating shit.

I don't blame you. This whole situation sucks. I felt bad for TCU because they got fucked over the first time. Well now the same shit gets to happen to them twice and they totally don't deserve it. But deserving has nothing to do with it.

It's not personal Sonny froggy it's strictly business.

[Huckleberry 33002]

Just now, Valmy77 said:

I don't blame you. This whole situation sucks. I felt bad for TCU because they got fucked over the first time. Well now the same shit gets to happen to them twice and they totally don't deserve it. But deserving has nothing to do with it.

It's not personal Sonny froggy it's strictly business.

Eh, fuck that. Gary Patterson talks more shit about Texas than anyone on the planet, including Bob fucking Stoops. He can go rot in the Sun Belt for all I care.

[Valmy77 13245]

Just now, Huckleberry said:

Eh, fuck that. Gary Patterson talks more shit about Texas than anyone on the planet, including Bob fucking Stoops. He can go rot in the Sun Belt for all I care.

Well ok maybe it is personal for some of us. But Patterson wasn't there in 1996.

Besides can we really punish a whole school for having a coach who negatively recruits? What are they supposed to do? Fire him for that?

[Jasper_Jester 356]

5 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

We'll always be kinda mad about this.  You'll always feel like we should be grateful you graced us with your presence and all this back and forth isn't changing a single mind.

Every Irate 8 school knows it wasn't personal.  We're mad because we're the only schools in our position that actually get treated like this.

We aren't mad that Texas is joining the SEC.  We're mad that Oregon State isn't sweating shit.

I personally don't think ISU should be grateful. But they should have been prepared.

 

Oregon State isn't sweating (right now) because there is more tradition in the Pac 12. But they should be nervous.

[Valmy77 13245]

Just now, Jasper_Jester said:

Oregon State isn't sweating (right now) because there is more tradition in the Pac 12. But they should be nervous.

Yeah frankly everybody who isn't a blue blood, and especially non-SEC not bluebloods, has reason to be paranoid.

[Jasper_Jester 356]

1 minute ago, Valmy77 said:

Well ok maybe it is personal for some of us. But Patterson wasn't there in 1996.

Besides can we really punish a whole school for having a coach who negatively recruits? What are they supposed to do? Fire him for that?

I still have a beef with some of these Big 12 schools who screwed us in Coaches polls hurting our chances for better bowl games. And other than Gundy all of those coaches are long gone now. In my mind you can hold on to these petty things for as long as you like.

[Huckleberry 33002]

Just now, Valmy77 said:

Well ok maybe it is personal for some of us. But Patterson wasn't there in 1996.

Besides can we really punish a whole school for having a coach who negatively recruits? What are they supposed to do? Fire him for that?

Well we're not punishing anyone, but the other reason I don't care about TCU is there aren't enough fans to care about. I mean I guess it's kind of sad for their 500 devoted fans but that doesn't really concern me as much as programs with orders of magnitude higher numbers of faithful and devoted fans.

I don't expect the school to do anything about it, other than consider that possibly their coach should spend more time building up his own program versus tearing down another. He definitely beat the shit out of our crappy teams under crappy coaches, but where has that left them during that time? Their program stagnated, then got worse, and now they're hoping to survive.

The reason I care about Oklahoma State and Iowa State is that they have expended energy improving themselves. The only problem I have with either of them is Iowa State's lack of a baseball program.

[camel at sea 589]

5 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Like Nebraska last fall?

I would like to see this examples of the Big 12 also rans bitching about the hand that feeds them.  I've provided a few examples of my Big 12 also ran being very publicly grateful towards OU and UT (especially).  Again, if it's Tech and Baylor I wouldn't see that.  But you keep alluding to it and haven't really shown me where they're doing it.

From my perspective, we've always been pretty aware of our place and pretty thankful that OU and UT stuck around.

1) The Big 12 North's old schools did NOT want expansion.  Their admins were pissed that OU kept bringing it up and trashed Boren - by name and childish insult - to the KC media.  None of these types of stories were coming out of the Texas media at the time despite UT being (allegedly) on the other side of the argument.  And in case anyone has forgotten, OU also wanted to invite Louisville a few years earlier.  The Big 12 North schools said no then, too.  I am not even completely certain that UT opposed expansion in 2015.  At least publicly, UT openly campaigned for Houston.  I think UT was willing to expand in exchange for a UT-H campus.  I know for certain though that the KC area school admins did not want to expand under any circumstances even if the fanbases of those schools did.  Boren was openly lobbying for Cincinnati to get an invite.

 

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/big-12-changes-its-mind-and-reverses-walk-on-rule-helping-baker-mayfield/

2) Remember the "Baker Mayfield Rule" vote?  Tech and Texas both voted for the rule change.  Which three school admins do you think voted against it?  I bet at least two of them were in Kansas and Iowa.

3) OU has been bitching about the 11 a.m. kickoff times for years.  They've had more of them than anyone else in the league and it impacts the ability to host recruits from the west coast.  Bowlsby and the rest of the league has pretty much done nothing except to say "you signed the contract, suck it up."  


  

[Al_4_ISU 12469]

6 minutes ago, Jasper_Jester said:

I personally don't think ISU should be grateful. But they should have been prepared.

 

Oregon State isn't sweating (right now) because there is more tradition in the Pac 12. But they should be nervous.

WE JUST WON THE FUCKING FIESTA BOWL AND HAVE A 61,500 SEAT STADIUM THAT WE ACTUALLY FILL.

The only reason we're "sweating" is because this dumbass sport cares more about what happened 50 years ago than today.

ISU spent the last 10 years wildly upgrading our facilities and hiring a crazy good coach and turning around a historic shitbag into a tough fucking out.  We did what we were told we had to do.   We exceeded that.  But that's not good enough because some suit in Bristol says so.

I'm not really yelling at you, I'm just saying that a lot of these schools have done exactly what we were supposed to do.

Edited September 9, 2021 by Al_4_ISU

[F250 28783]

4 hours ago, Liquor and Poker said:

This thread is a perfect micro-example of why the Big 12 2.0 doesn't work.

This thread is like couples therapy 6 months into a separation.

[TexasEd 8067]

1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

This really is a luxury for a Texas that will have direct negative impact to 8 other institutions. You don't need this.  It does benefit you, but you already have more than everyone.  Hence the "selfish" accusation.  Texas ain't fighting for it's life here.

Again, you have every right to pursue this luxury.  It's capitalism and the American way.  We're just raw because the other schools in your position don't treat the blablablah I'm fucking repeating myself.  I think you get my point.  You don't have to agree with it.

 

Nebraska, Colorado, aggy, Missouri

Notre Dame is like a playboy getting the milk for free

Rutgers, Maryland, Louisville, Syracuse, West Virginia (Backfire?), TCU, Utah

[Satchel 6938]

2 hours ago, nineliveslost said:

Can Big 12 haz more than 4 ?

 

 

Yeah. Distributing 10 million each to 16 schools (which includes the likes of Memphis and Boise State) should make conference members hearts sing.

Edited September 9, 2021 by Satchel

[Nivek 16945]

They really shot themselves in the foot with that move, though. They got all the downsides of being in the B1G without the biggest benefit.
And they did it all for spite. Just couldn't stand to lose to us again...

Their mouths say it is about Texas. But I think it was Mizzou passing them and Texas Tech’s ass kicking that broke them.

[Francisco 2.0 32395]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

Here's a deal for you guys. Since you're the big swinging dick here, tell ESPN to keep the payments the same for the New Big XII for, say, 7-10 years. That'll resolve your GOR damages claim. We'll also agree to reduce the buyout. Then, we fire Bowsby, hire someone competent, and do everything we can in these "preview years" to show that we are equally or more valuable than the fucking PAC and ACC. 

 

So you want Texas to run Big 12 in absentia?

 

 

 

 

 

[Jasper_Jester 356]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

Here's a deal for you guys. Since you're the big swinging dick here, tell ESPN to keep the payments the same for the New Big XII for, say, 7-10 years. That'll resolve your GOR damages claim. We'll also agree to reduce the buyout. Then, we fire Bowsby, hire someone competent, and do everything we can in these "preview years" to show that we are equally or more valuable than the fucking PAC and ACC. 

Tell us you aren't ready to be the man of the house without telling us you aren't ready to be the man of the house.

 

Just take our buyout and let us be free!

[El Diablo 4232]

While I'm glad that the conference isn't going to disintegrate without UT and OU, I am sad that I'm not going to be able to photoshop this pic into the demise of the conference. 

[South Austin 52519]

11 hours ago, slorch said:

Texas left.  Not the other way around.

Comment just comes across weird.  Maybe I need more caffeine this morning...

Did the coffee ever kick in?

Riddance is to rid yourself of something, whether you or the other one is leaving.  I don't mean to kick you in the nuts, but I have little sympathy for the other schools after the bitchfest about Texas.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, South Austin said:

Did the coffee ever kick in?

Riddance is to rid yourself of something, whether you or the other one is leaving.  I don't mean to kick you in the nuts, but I have little sympathy for the other schools after the bitchfest about Texas.

Fuck Texas too.  We're in agreement.  Plenty of bitchassedness to go around.

and fuck no, I'm never gonna be the one to defend my own school's decisions regarding administration of athletics.

Regardless, UT will have a new set of problems.  Remains to be seen if y'all can turn the corner with your programs or just be a better class of loser like aggy.  It's fine to say good riddance, I guess;  but y'all have baggage of your own too.

 

Edited September 9, 2021 by slorch

[South Austin 52519]

5 minutes ago, slorch said:

Fuck Texas too.  We're in agreement.  Plenty of bitchassedness to go around.

and fuck no, I'm never gonna be the one to defend my own school's decisions regarding administration of athletics.

Regardless, UT will have a new set of problems.  Remains to be seen if y'all can turn the corner with your programs or just be a better class of loser like aggy.  It's fine to say good riddance, I guess;  but y'all have baggage of your own too.

 

[CHIEF 5094]

1 hour ago, Valmy77 said:

Yeah frankly everybody who isn't a blue blood, and especially non-SEC not bluebloods, has reason to be paranoid.

This is so true. ESPN has been beating the "SEC is the best" drum for a little over a decade. Even the SEC bottom feeders get more respect than all but the top 2-3 teams in every other conference. This is about recruiting. You either join due to the brainwashing of the best recruits, or you get left behind. This move really has nothing to do about money, Texas and OU were fine. It is about falling farther behind and becoming irrelevant. Donors and administrators want skins on the wall. Alumni aren't boasting about the money it is about bragging rights on the field. 

Our last two recruits Tapp, and Finkley picked Texas because of the SEC move. Arguably our next two most important to become competitive (Harris, and Stewart) have interest because of the SEC move. The big fish next year (Manning) it helps as well. This isn't about money, or even time slots, its about survival and staying relevant. It's nothing personal to the Irate 8, it's all about perception, and keeping eyes on your program. When no one wants to bid up your conference contract, the writing is on the wall how they feel about your conference. I truly believe that if ISU and Okie State went to the SEC, they would be firmly above Mizzu, Arky, Miss St., Vandy, and Usc. But unfortunately they will never get to prove it, and most people wouldn't give them the benefit of the doubt. Hell, most of the SEC thinks Arky is going to mop the floor with Texas this weekend. ESPN and the SEC have been sniffing their own farts too long.

To be honest, I would much have the original Big XII over the SEC, for familiarity, and for the benefit of the original members. It wasn't the Big XII that forced this hand, it was the SEC.

CHIEF

[tx ind 7013]

2 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

Eh, fuck that. Gary Patterson talks more shit about Texas than anyone on the planet, including Bob fucking Stoops. He can go rot in the Sun Belt for all I care.

To be fair he backs it up (ducks)

[Godzillatron 292]

Baylor and TCU are the main backstabbing ingrates right now, hence their position front and center in my list of schools I don't care about when it comes to landing spots. Oklahoma State occasionally from what I understand (which is obviously at least second hand info because I'm not a journalist) which I assumed was because they historically thought OU would protect them. But the Cowboys not as recently. 
I've always just considered Kansas as that guy in the corner covering his face by looking down when Texas's third tier rights "greed" is discussed. Those rascally Jayhawks.
Ironically to most people, another school I've never heard about leaking greedy Texas stories to the press is OU. I've only heard about those assholes grinning and saying no comment. I assume the grinning part was metaphorical but who knows with those shitheads. 
You are indeed correct a lot of it was historical, but the conference died a decade ago, it was just a slow death. By the time the smarter remaining schools figured out that shitting on Texas all the time wasn't going to work out for them long term, especially after the other 4 left them nowhere to go, it was too late. I won't deny that Texas has been at least contemplating more stable ground continuously since the SWC died. But that's just fiduciary duty when the Big 12 was unstable from the beginning, and Texas was not the sole or even majority reason for that instability, just a contributing one. 
What I am arguing and will continue to argue is that the Big 12 could have been that stable home if it hadn't taken the wrong turn at nearly every major decision point. Texas certainly helped steer the wrong way sometimes (see what I did there?) but not nearly every time. And that's exactly why some of us are saying better conference leadership from the beginning would have helped. You can say the conference network thing was a long time ago but consider how much different the world looks right now if the Big 12 Network had been the first successful conference third tier creation. 

This is on point. And honestly it’s not even the i8’s fault that Texas is leaving. There’s an alternate history where Texas beats ‘Bama in the title game, stays a national power over the next decade, doesn’t hire shitty AD’s and coaches, and puts the conference on their back and carries the B12 to the front of the pack.

Didn’t happen.

In this reality, Texas wasn’t staying in the B12 past 2025 once ESPN chose not to reopen the TV contract last year. Add too many recruiting losses head to head with SEC teams, sprinkle NIL on top and… it was just time.

[Satchel 6938]

10 minutes ago, Godzillatron said:

This is on point. And honestly it’s not even the i8’s fault that Texas is leaving. There’s an alternate history where Texas beats ‘Bama in the title game, stays a national power over the next decade, doesn’t hire shitty AD’s and coaches, and puts the conference on their back and carries the B12 to the front of the pack.

Didn’t happen.

In this reality, Texas wasn’t staying in the B12 past 2025 once ESPN chose not to reopen the TV contract last year. Add too many recruiting losses head to head with SEC teams, sprinkle NIL on top and… it was just time.

Is it ever time for the state’s flagship to rub shoulders with schools whose fans scream “fuck Biden” during football games?

[Godzillatron 292]

I can't feel badly for you. 
 

I have degrees from both schools. I typically attend this game and sit on my hands. At this particular game I couldn’t speak for three days after screaming at the GD refs.

[Deej 76831]

1 minute ago, Godzillatron said:

I have degrees from both schools. I typically attend this game and sit on my hands. At this particular game I couldn’t speak for three days after screaming at the GD refs.

It was the most insane display of officiating I've ever seen. If Gundy was a real man, he would have apologized after the game and forfeited. I hope T. Boone is rotting in hell. 

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1291]

10 hours ago, SEC said:

So I guess the new Big 12 "big brand" is BYU? They have the largest stadium at 63k, and are a "national" school due to their mormon following. Should the Big 12 actually rally around them, make them into their Face-of-the-Conference team?

Who is the new "big" rivalry for the Big 12? Kansas vs KState is historically a crap game. Baylor vs TCU has been kind of fun lately. UH vs TCU could try to coat tails "Houston" vs "Dallas" mentality. Any chance Tech and Okie State try to make their thing into a deal?

Of the Texas schools remaining, which one will become the "top dog"? I would guess either Tech or TCU would probably historically be the best remaining, but I'm not actually sure.

I saw it estimated that the Big 12's post Texas-OU value will be around $20-$25 million per team. That's a step down from the $37 million per team with Texas and OU currently, but a huge step up for the G5 3 + BYU coming in. BYU reportedly gets about $6-$10 million for their TV contract, and the rest are in the $5-$10 million range as well. Will that translate into stadium expansions for these schools?

It's kind of fascinating to watch a league full of major also-rans and losers.

The biggest football rivalry in the new Big 12 is easily Farmageddon, the game that Kansas State always wins due to some hilarious Iowa State fuckup, other than last year when Iowa State won by about 60 points.