Realignment talk not going away

[Hurtlocker 2213]

13 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Avowed junkie here. I’ll watch every Big 12 and SEC game I can lay my eyes on. 

Many Big Ten games are a beating. Every Iowa game for instance. 

Same, I'd rather watch the Sunbelt than the Big Ten West.

[Mitch Cumsteen 18592]

11 hours ago, ztejas said:

Mitch you post in the fucking NBA thread. 

That thread is the Algonquin roundtable compared to the lemmings that post in here. 

[royiv 9374]

3 hours ago, Laxtonto said:

All are looking at a scenario in which they are in a setting where they no longer look down the schedule and see which historically was an automatic 2 losses to Texas and OU

To be fair, Texas hasn't been an automatic loss for any Big 12 team in a dozen years.

[CustersDoctor 584]

I live in Lubbock and am extremely Pro-Tech. In my view the Surly consensus is very supportive of the B12/16. Lots of parity, good match ups. Ya'll generally think things couldn't have worked out better for the remaining Eight. You generally think very little of UH and consider them the BIG12 bottom feeder, which of course is true. Your opinion of BY was extremely high, but diminished somewhat with his recent comments about the Tech UT game.

BTW Holgorsen just said to UT & A&M "Screw them"

[oSuJeff97 3435]

4 hours ago, Josef Pwag said:

You are implying that aggie & mizzou going to the SEC is the same thing as Texas & OU going to the SEC?!? They aren't the same.

With the Pac teams joining the B1G and Texas & OU joining the SEC, everything changes. There are only 2 power conferences next year. That may be upsetting to you, but it is the truth.

For years, CFB fans have been saying, "It would be great if we could have relegation like soccer in the UK." Well, we do. Iowa State, Okie Lite, Baylor, etc.......they have all been relegated. You can bitch & moan about the fairness of one garbage team surviving over another, but no one that matters cares.

 

(A) I'm implying that making sweeping statements about the quality of teams based on conference affiliation is soft-brained Aggy shit. Texas fans on this very site and its predecessor literally made fun of Aggy for doing this the second they announced they were going to SEC.

(B) The fuck this is "relegation" like soccer in the UK. Relegation over there involves being promoted or demoted based on your results ON THE FIELD, not the size of your fan base. If this was truely a promotion/relegation issue, OSU or TCU or Kansas State would be going to the SEC with OU, not Texas. 

[oSuJeff97 3435]

3 hours ago, Laxtonto said:

There should be nothing but optimism for the leftover B12 and new additions. All are looking at a scenario in which they are in a setting where they no longer look down the schedule and see which historically was an automatic 2 losses to Texas and OU or USC and Oregon. It is wide-open and so they can all sit there and go "Why not me?" and squint their eyes and see themselves ascend into a dominant position in the new Big 12.  I am not sure that is actually true for all the members, but without Texas and OU, parity will reign supreme.

Did you post this from 2009?

Because that was the last time you could make the statement that "Texas was an automatic loss" for anyone in this conference with a straight face.

Just as a quick reminder, OSU, Baylor, TCU and Kansas State have all won the Big 12 title more recently than Texas has.

 

[EuroHorn 3271]

.....

 

Edited August 30, 2023 by EuroHorn

[camel at sea 589]

The way that I expect the Big 12's TV numbers to sort out:  1) Big 12 games will lose some UT/OU casuals from the audience, more and more as time goes on, but 2) a bunch of Big 12 teams will play games in better timeslots than they have been in, historically, which will improve the TV viewership for those games.  In addition, some Big 12 schools are going to start winning more hardware than they've won historically, with the OU roadblock out of the way.  CFP trips will accompany that, too.  That will help with team branding, casual interest, etc.

Ultimately the new Big 12 will be in good shape.    

[bullet 1599]

14 hours ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

Do you also believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy? 

For about the 100th time, I'm so fucking done with this thread. I should know better than to venture into the football board. But I really should know better than to come onto the realignment thread. But whatever, congrats to all the Sand Aggies and other left behinds, you win. You now have me convinced and the transfer portal is going to be a net push for the Big 12 and not an advantage to the SEC. The Big 12 will get multiple teams into the playoff. And the Big 12 is just as well or better off now that Texas and OU have gone. Adios motherfuckers. You guys have definitely been watching a different sport than I have the last 35 years.

Did some sand aggie piss in your beer?

Nobody knows how the transfer portal will work out.  But big programs are losing a lot of quality depth.  And bringing in some good players.  Ohio St. did lose Joe Burrow--to LSU.  We could have used some of the QBs were have lost over the years.  Georgia has lost a bunch of players-including one of our starting WRs.  Of course they also lost a really talented backup TE to Nebraska who just got arrested for robbing a vape store.  UGA picked up JT Daniel from USC.  Lost him to WVU who lost him to Rice.  We will now be playing JT for the 3rd time-once with USC, once with WVU and now with Rice.

[bullet 1599]

5 hours ago, Magus Ossis said:

I think one question (to which we obviously can't have an answer until at least 2024) is to what degree the audience that has interest in Texas and OU has a secondary viewing interest in teams that are in a league with them. Does, e.g., a tOSU fan have more interest in watching Northwestern than he would Georgia Tech? The numbers for the B12 contract are based on, among other factors, viewership to date of the remnants. They do not account for the potential decline in secondary interest after the departures. This is one reason why some say that the next contract will be the one that establishes how the 12 can do longer term without Texas and OU.

Its a fair question, but they are still Texas schools playing.  And KSU/TCU and Baylor/OSU ccgs annihilated the ACC and Pac 12 ccgs the last two years, last year equaling the other two combined and in 2021 beating them combined.  In 2021 the AAC Cincinnati/Houston ccg even beat the ACC ccg.  Last year they weren't even far behind the SEC and Big 10 audiences.

[bullet 1599]

2 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Avowed junkie here. I’ll watch every Big 12 and SEC game I can lay my eyes on. 

Many Big Ten games are a beating. Every Iowa game for instance. 

That's not fair.  Iowa did get into the 20s in 5 games last year and even scored 33 vs. Northwestern.  It was only 6 games they scored 14 or less!  They were only #123 in points per game.  They scored more than UMass or NMSU!

[bullet 1599]

1 hour ago, CustersDoctor said:

I live in Lubbock and am extremely Pro-Tech. In my view the Surly consensus is very supportive of the B12/16. Lots of parity, good match ups. Ya'll generally think things couldn't have worked out better for the remaining Eight. You generally think very little of UH and consider them the BIG12 bottom feeder, which of course is true. Your opinion of BY was extremely high, but diminished somewhat with his recent comments about the Tech UT game.

BTW Holgorsen just said to UT & A&M "Screw them"

That's ok for coaches.  They are supposed to be partisans.

[Mitch Cumsteen 18592]

2 minutes ago, bullet said:

Did some sand aggie piss in your beer?

Nobody knows how the transfer portal will work out.  But big programs are losing a lot of quality depth.  And bringing in some good players.  Ohio St. did lose Joe Burrow--to LSU.  We could have used some of the QBs were have lost over the years.  Georgia has lost a bunch of players-including one of our starting WRs.  Of course they also lost a really talented backup TE to Nebraska who just got arrested for robbing a vape store.  UGA picked up JT Daniel from USC.  Lost him to WVU who lost him to Rice.  We will now be playing JT for the 3rd time-once with USC, once with WVU and now with Rice.

The fuck we don't know how the transfer portal will work out. Other than a few outliers that the dipshits in this thread will continue to point out as the exception that proves the rule, the rich will overwhelmingly continue to get richer.

Even the dumbass examples you give support what I'm saying. Burrow transferred because he got hurt and couldn't beat out a first round pick at QB. And went to fucking LSU... not Oklahoma State or Texas Tech. We couldn't get a decent QB for damn near a decade, but if we were in the portal era it would have been a million times easier to money whip one to Austin instead of trotting out Tyrone Swoops and Jerod Heard and whatever brain cells David Ash had left. Poor Georgia's depth has been so depleted by the portal they've only won back to back championships while putting 8000 dudes into the league and are the preseason number 1 again. Nobody "lost" JT Daniel. He got processed the fuck out because he sucks -- USC to UGA to WV to Rice. You think Rice is getting over on Georgia in the transfer portal? You really think JT Daniel chose to be playing QB for Rice instead of Georgia? Let's hope the poor Bulldogs can recover in time from his loss to field a team against the rest of the SEC.

Got dammit I swore I wasn't going to wade in this cesspool of dumbassery, but here I am again. Fuck me.

[Uncle Nate 2097]

17 minutes ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

The fuck we don't know how the transfer portal will work out. Other than a few outliers that the dipshits in this thread will continue to point out as the exception that proves the rule, the rich will overwhelmingly continue to get richer.

Even the dumbass examples you give support what I'm saying. Burrow transferred because he got hurt and couldn't beat out a first round pick at QB. And went to fucking LSU... not Oklahoma State or Texas Tech. We couldn't get a decent QB for damn near a decade, but if we were in the portal era it would have been a million times easier to money whip one to Austin instead of trotting out Tyrone Swoops and Jerod Heard and whatever brain cells David Ash had left. Poor Georgia's depth has been so depleted by the portal they've only won back to back championships while putting 8000 dudes into the league and are the preseason number 1 again. Nobody "lost" JT Daniel. He got processed the fuck out because he sucks -- USC to UGA to WV to Rice. You think Rice is getting over on Georgia in the transfer portal? You really think JT Daniel chose to be playing QB for Rice instead of Georgia? Let's hope the poor Bulldogs can recover in time from his loss to field a team against the rest of the SEC.

Got dammit I swore I wasn't going to wade in this cesspool of dumbassery, but here I am again. Fuck me.

I should also mention that one of Tech's starting DB's this year was UT's very own Tyler Owens who ended up transferring to Tech.  He's the NE Patriots #1 target on their draft board for special teams specialist.

But yeah, just another outlier.  What is the magic number before we can say they are no longer outliers and you admit that the transfer portal has good players going to these "tier 2" schools from "tier 1" as well?

Quick summary:

1. Tyree Wilson - transferred from A&M to Tech, drafted in 1st round.

2. Tyler Shough - transferred from Oregon to Tech, has a lot of NFL scout interest.

3. Tyler Owens - transferred to Tech from UT, top target for NE Patriots' special teams draft board.

4. New WR who transferred from Austin Peay - one of the fastest players on the field when they played Alabama last year, accumulating nearly 100 yds receiving against the Crimson Tide.

5. New DB from Fresno St. - tons of speed.

6. New Center from WKU - also has NFL potential.

7. New DE from Syracuse - being scouted by multiple NFL teams

But yeah, the transfer portal is only going to help the SEC and BIG and it's going to hurt the rest of us.  🙄

Edited August 30, 2023 by Uncle Nate

[Sbbruin 21897]

23 minutes ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

Got dammit I swore I wasn't going to wade in this cesspool of dumbassery, but here I am again. Fuck me.

[BurntOrange&White 40044]

Fuck Tech, Fuck Okie State, and Fuck the Big 12.

[Mitch Cumsteen 18592]

51 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

I should also mention that one of Tech's starting DB's this year was UT's very own Tyler Owens who ended up transferring to Tech.  He's the NE Patriots #1 target on their draft board for special teams specialist.

But yeah, just another outlier.  What is the magic number before we can say they are no longer outliers and you admit that the transfer portal has good players going to these "tier 2" schools from "tier 1" as well?

We portalled in an all american safety from Arkansas. You are starting a guy who couldn't crack the two deep here. Advantage: Tech. 

Edited August 30, 2023 by Mitch Cumsteen

[BachelorTrek 3062]

11 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Fuck Tech, Fuck Okie State, and Fuck the Big 12.

[LTbear 4171]

6 hours ago, Laxtonto said:

they no longer look down the schedule and see which historically was an automatic 2 losses to Texas and OU 

61 - 54

2010 2–6

2011  4–5

2012 5–4

2013 7–2

2014 5–4

2015 4–5

2016 3–6

2017 5–4

2018 7–2

2019 5–4

2020 5–3

2021 3–6

2022 6–3

[BachelorTrek 3062]

26 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

[Josef Pwag 1741]

2 hours ago, oSuJeff97 said:

If this was truely a promotion/relegation issue, OSU or TCU or Kansas State would be going to the SEC with OU, not Texas. 

In your lifetime, how many football national tiles have you seen Okie St, TCU and KSU win? 

[oSuJeff97 3435]

8 minutes ago, Josef Pwag said:

In your lifetime, how many football national tiles have you seen Okie St, TCU and KSU win? 

LOL you were the one who brought up relegation. Do you understand how it works?

National titles from nearly 20 years ago are pretty irrelevant if we are picking the programs that are CURRENTLY the best performing programs. Hell Colorado and Georgia Tech have won national titles. Should they get invited to the SEC?

All three of those programs I named have out-performed Texas on the field over the past decade-plus.

I'm not trying to be a dick about it, but it's just a plain fact.

Again - relegation/promotion isn't about the size of your fan base or accomplishments from 20 or 30 or 40 years ago - it's about how you are performing on the field NOW.

Edited August 30, 2023 by oSuJeff97

[Frank Drebin 5654]

48 minutes ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

We portalled in an all american safety from Arkansas. You are starting a guy who couldn't crack the two deep here. Advantage: Tech. 

No one gets to the wrong place faster than Owens.

32 tackles in 4 years.

[notre dame joe 196]

4 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

Same, I'd rather watch the Sunbelt than the Big Ten West.

heathens...

[TKthunder2 4997]

8 minutes ago, oSuJeff97 said:

All three of those programs I named have out-performed Texas on the field over the past decade-plus.

You might want to check your match on K State, but yes congrats to TCU and OSU for their wins while UT was wondering in the desert that began when Colt got hurt in the Rose Bowl against Bama.

[oSuJeff97 3435]

5 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

You might want to check your match on K State, but yes congrats to TCU and OSU for their wins while UT was wondering in the desert that began when Colt got hurt in the Rose Bowl against Bama.

Yeah good point on K-State... but they do have a conference title.

And thank you for the congrats. Again I'm not trying to be a dick - it's just a fact. It's not like that Colt game was 2 years ago. Texas has had plenty of time to get their shit together - it's been 13 years. 

But facts are facts and they just haven't, which was the whole point of the "relegation" comment, which I didn't bring up, by the way.

[CustersDoctor 584]

If Cal & Stanford go ACC is Football & MBB & maybe WBB, doesn't that violate Title IX rights of girls soccer & softball ect.?

['stache 21887]

Speaking of non-con scheduling, this one is still shocking to me.

[Uncle Nate 2097]

7 minutes ago, CustersDoctor said:

If Cal & Stanford go ACC is Football & MBB & maybe WBB, doesn't that violate Title IX rights of girls soccer & softball ect.?

I don't think so.  Title IX just says you have to have the same number of intercollegiate opportunities for women that you have for men.  As long as they are still intercollegiate sports, conference affiliation doesn't matter.

[Frank Drebin 5654]

19 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Speaking of non-con scheduling, this one is still shocking to me.

When you play FSU noncon every year, LSU is your permanent cross-division opponent, and you frequently played Miami out of conference every year, I am not surprised.

['stache 21887]

That makes sense, but 32 years is still crazy, you'd think at least once or twice they'd have played out of state noncon.

[bullet 1599]

1 hour ago, oSuJeff97 said:

LOL you were the one who brought up relegation. Do you understand how it works?

National titles from nearly 20 years ago are pretty irrelevant if we are picking the programs that are CURRENTLY the best performing programs. Hell Colorado and Georgia Tech have won national titles. Should they get invited to the SEC?

All three of those programs I named have out-performed Texas on the field over the past decade-plus.

I'm not trying to be a dick about it, but it's just a plain fact.

Again - relegation/promotion isn't about the size of your fan base or accomplishments from 20 or 30 or 40 years ago - it's about how you are performing on the field NOW.

Yeah.  You are being a dick about it.  Oklahoma St. has a better conference record than Texas since the TCU/WVU additions.  The 120 years of college football before the last 12 years do matter.

[gatormarc 915]

4 hours ago, 'stache said:

Speaking of non-con scheduling, this one is still shocking to me.

It's not really shocking when you consider that we played FSU every year, and Miami a handful of times.

Those road games don't count since they are in-state. And neither do neutral site games like vs Michigan in Dallas in 2017.

Edit: see that this was already stated.

 

Edited August 31, 2023 by gatormarc

[gatormarc 915]

3 hours ago, 'stache said:

That makes sense, but 32 years is still crazy, you'd think at least once or twice they'd have played out of state noncon.

We played Michigan in Dallas in 2017.

That's why the trivia bit was reworded to "road game" so that one wouldn't count.

[LTbear 4171]

5 hours ago, oSuJeff97 said:

Yeah good point on K-State... but they do have a conference title.

Two conference titles since UT's last. And Baylor has three in that span... tying UT's total number of Big XII titles. Which I find hilarious. 

[TKthunder2 4997]

5 hours ago, oSuJeff97 said:

Yeah good point on K-State... but they do have a conference title.

And thank you for the congrats. Again I'm not trying to be a dick - it's just a fact. It's not like that Colt game was 2 years ago. Texas has had plenty of time to get their shit together - it's been 13 years. 

But facts are facts and they just haven't, which was the whole point of the "relegation" comment, which I didn't bring up, by the way.

We all know Texas has underachieved. Brown’s final years followed by Charlie Strong really set us back. Herman was basically average and just not ready for a big job.

Not taking anything away from TCU/OSU but having a solid coach in place while Texas was down was great timing for them. But like bullet said, the last 12 years also don’t erase the last 120 years.

I’m curious to see if TCU after Patterson’s players or OSU after Gundy will sustain their success or revert to the mean.

TCU/OSU/Texas all won a single Big 12 title in the past 10-15 years, played for  another and lost in the last 5 years (TCU played for 2, you could argue Texas played for a 2nd in 2013). Yes, they both have recent head to head over Texas but let’s not act like their success has been very different outside of TCU’s playoff win last year. These will go down as some of the best years EVER for TCU/OSU while these are the worst for Texas and they aren’t all that significantly different.

Edited August 31, 2023 by TKthunder2

[statsman 5486]

37 minutes ago, LTbear said:

Two conference titles since UT's last. And Baylor has three in that span... tying UT's total number of Big XII titles. Which I find hilarious. 

That’s almost as funny as Baylor’s greatest teams ever initiating freshman players by having them gang rape coeds that they roofied. 

Edited August 31, 2023 by statsman

[statsman 5486]

Stassen.com will tell you which programs were most successfull over certain spans. Here is the story of UT football-

From 1893-1922, Texas was 183-50-8, the seventh best record in football. 
 
from 1923-1938, Texas was 84-55-12, 67th best in the nation. 
 
From 1939-1954, Texas was 119-40-4, fifth best. 
 
From 1955-1956, Texas was 6-14, 112th. 
 
From 1957-1985, Texas was 248-72-7, fourth in the nation. 
 
From 1986-1997, Texas went 77-60-3, 39th. 
 
From 1998-2009, Texas went 128-27, second best. 
 
From 2010-2021, Texas went 83-67, 56th. 
 
What’s the point? I guess, through the years, there have been several times when pissant conference mates thought they had the Texas problem solved. Fact is, Texas, when it gets its shit together, has one of the highest program ceilings there are. 

[LTbear 4171]

13 minutes ago, statsman said:

That’s almost as funny as Baylor’s greatest teams ever initiating freshman players by having them gang rape coeds that they roofied. 

You find that funny? Might want to seek help my friend. 

[LTbear 4171]

Just now, statsman said:

Stassen.com will tell you which programs were most successfull over certain spans. Here is the story of UT football-

From 1893-1922, Texas was 183-50-8, the seventh best record in football. 
 
from 1923-1938, Texas was 84-55-12, 67th best in the nation. 
 
From 1939-1954, Texas was 119-40-4, fifth best. 
 
From 1955-1956, Texas was 6-14, 112th. 
 
From 1957-1985, Texas was 248-72-7, fourth in the nation. 
 
From 1986-1997, Texas went 77-60-3, 39th. 
 
From 1998-2009, Texas went 128-27, second best. 
 
From 2010-2021, Texas went 83-67, 56th. 
 
What’s the point? I guess, through the years, there have been several times when pissant conference mates thought they had the Texas problem solved. Fact is, Texas, when it gets its shit together, has one of the highest program ceilings there are. 

Ya but that's kinda the issue, isn't it? Outside of the Royal years Texas is generally massively underperforming relative to its resources. No way Oklahoma should be so dramatically more successful than UT over the course of history. (Texas of course doesn't underperform as badly as Aggy, which absolutely takes the cake in that regard).

[Satchel 6949]

2 minutes ago, LTbear said:

Ya but that's kinda the issue, isn't it? Outside of the Royal years Texas is generally massively underperforming relative to its resources. No way Oklahoma should be so dramatically more successful than UT over the course of history. (Texas of course doesn't underperform as badly as Aggy, which absolutely takes the cake in that regard).

OU rode the wave of being more open to the black athlete and it has paid big dividends for them. Plus they were/are massive cheaters.

[LTbear 4171]

1 minute ago, Satchel said:

OU rode the wave of being more open to the black athlete and it has paid big dividends for them. Plus they were/are massive cheaters.

So... Texas was just more racist?

[Texas Wahoo 3420]

3 minutes ago, LTbear said:

So... Texas was just more racist?

I mean … yeah. Did you not take US History?

[LTbear 4171]

7 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

I mean … yeah. Did you not take US History?

I'm asking about the UT football program in direct comparison to OU's. Can you not read?

[Huckleberry 33109]

19 minutes ago, LTbear said:

Ya but that's kinda the issue, isn't it? Outside of the Royal years Texas is generally massively underperforming relative to its resources. No way Oklahoma should be so dramatically more successful than UT over the course of history. (Texas of course doesn't underperform as badly as Aggy, which absolutely takes the cake in that regard).

I mean he literally just posted three eras that don't have anything to do with Royal where Texas was one of the winningest programs in the nation.

[Satchel 6949]

4 minutes ago, LTbear said:

So... Texas was just more racist?

Well, let’s just say there was a time in the South where racism was all the rage. OU’s conscious attempt to recruit above this circumstance served them well.

[LTbear 4171]

15 minutes ago, Satchel said:

OU rode the wave of being more open to the black athlete and it has paid big dividends for them. Plus they were/are massive cheaters.

Also, just to recognize that I wasn't overlooking this part of the sorry: fair. 

[Texas Wahoo 3420]

Just now, LTbear said:

I'm asking about the UT football program in direct comparison to OU's. Can you not read?

UT is a branch of the Texas government and thus if the state is racist (which it certainly was), you can bet that the university and football program will be racist as well, whether they want to be or not. 

[LTbear 4171]

2 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

I mean he literally just posted three eras that don't have anything to do with Royal where Texas was one of the winningest programs in the nation.

One such era in my lifetime. And I'm not meaning to diminish the Brown years, but only two conference titles? However I'll happily admit that 2005 UT was one of the better teams I've seen in my entire lifetime, and that title game was probably the best of my lifetime (hard to beat not only because of the game itself, but because of the season-long buildup when it was so clear who the top two teams were).

[LTbear 4171]

3 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

UT is a branch of the Texas government and thus if the state is racist (which it certainly was), you can bet that the university and football program will be racist as well, whether they want to be or not. 

Fair enough. I'd just never heard "Oklahoma was less racist" as an answer to anything.