47 replies to this topic

[mse1892sip]

Big Ten making overtures to … Texas

* Email
* Comments (4)
* Print
* Facebook
* Digg
* Delicious

By Tom Keegan

February 11, 2010

Advertisement

A source with ties to the Big Ten said that while most people’s attention has been trained on the conference stealing Missouri, the Big Ten has engaged in “preliminary exchanges” with a much bigger fish from the Big 12.

“There have been preliminary exchanges between the Big Ten and Texas,” the source told the Journal-World on Wednesday. “People will deny that, but it’s accurate.”

Missouri and Pittsburgh have been the most talked-about candidates to fill the 12th spot, which would enable the conference to have the postseason football conference title game it lacks. In December of 2009, the Big Ten issued a statement that the timetable for expansion was in the 12-to-18-month range.

Travel costs, in terms of money and fatigue, make Texas seem on the surface like a stretch, but TV revenue would more than make up for the fatigue factor.

Getting TV sets in the massive state of Texas tuned to the Big Ten Network would qualify as a home run for the Big Ten.

Texas already receives the most TV money in the Big 12 because of its frequent national network appearances, but the source said Texas still thinks it can get a better deal for itself and is considering forming its own state-wide TV network.

Geographic concerns don’t carry the weight they once did because TV revenues have grown so much, and this wouldn’t be the first time Texas has considered such an odd geographic match. Before joining the Big Eight with three other schools from Texas, the Longhorns looked into joining the Pac-10.

Veteran basketball columnist Mike DeCourcey, writing for The Sporting News on Dec. 16, wondered why nobody other than him was talking about Texas as the most logical school for Big Ten expansion.

“No one seems to recognize the genius of this suggestion, which may be evidence of its genius,” DeCourcey wrote. “Everyone else seems to be thinking small and boring, but as I suggested not long after the Big Ten Network was conceived, Texas is the one program that could dramatically expand the money-making power of the league's cable operation.”

Much later than DeCourcey offered the suggestion, the two parties finally have inched toward each other with “preliminary exchanges.”

While from a travel issue, not necessarily with football, but with basketball, baseball, and womens sports would be a nightmare. The money would be a lot more for Texas and money seems to be the determinent for most decisions, I guess this could happen.

[Thethreeyardout]

Academics - step up

Athletics, specifically travel - obvious step down.

Texas should throw more of their weight around to make the Big 12 better...particularly in the television coverage contracts.

Use a possible move as a negotiating tactic.

[mse1892sip]

Academics - step up

Athletics, specifically travel - obvious step down.

Texas should throw more of their weight around to make the Big 12 better...particularly in the television coverage contracts.

Use a possible move as a negotiating tactic.

It actually may be a negotiating ploy because the Big 12 TV contract blows.

[Thethreeyardout]

Is it a good deal for Texas to move? don't know

Is it a good deal for the Big 10 for Texas to move? yes

"Texas should be the one that is independent and Notre Dame needs a conference"...Collin Cowherd.

I know, Collin Cowherd, but perception becomes reality.

[Thethreeyardout]

dp

[Tex Pete]

It actually may be a negotiating ploy because the Big 12 TV contract blows.

That's what I've thought from the start. I would be beyond pissed if we actually went to the Big Televen, but I think this is about leveraging TV networks for a better deal for the conference.

[dag]

big 10 football will suffer for a long time. kids don't wanna play in that cold anymore, and with all the tv exposure in college football, playing close to home is more of a non-issue. more kids from the north are jumping ship for southern schools, and kids down south don't wanna live up north. osu will be good, but i expect penn st. to decline when paterno leaves, and michigan is digging a hole faster than the aggies

[mse1892sip]

I honestly don't think it matters much anymore what conference you play in as long as its a major conference. So with that thought Texas moving to the Big 10 would not hurt their recruiting and in the short run may help their recruiting. The selling point being that every other year you play at the Big House and Horeshoe, I mean outside of Kyle Field where is the allure for these kids and playing at other Big 12 schools.

[Tex Pete]

I honestly don't think it matters much anymore what conference you play in as long as its a major conference. So with that thought Texas moving to the Big 10 would not hurt their recruiting and in the short run may help their recruiting. The selling point being that every other year you play at the Big House and Horeshoe, I mean outside of Kyle Field where is the allure for these kids and playing at other Big 12 schools.

But travel would be a bitch for the team, and especially for the fans. It would also hurt baseball and track a bit, I think.

[dag]

tu to the big 10, lsu to the big 12, clemson to the sec, south florida to the acc

[mse1892sip]

But travel would be a bitch for the team, and especially for the fans. It would also hurt baseball and track a bit, I think.

Yeah, but I am strictly speaking football and travel wouldn't be any worse than flying to Aimes or Lincoln. I think you have to look where your dollars are coming from, it is football and basketball and with this deal you see a major uptick in those revenues. I am not sold on the move, but I think the dollars will do the talking in this deal, not hurting track or anything other non-revenue generating sport. Honestly I think this possible move may be more of looking way in to the future of Texas becoming independent. Texas has the cache with their branding and with their alumni base could hold it own in a Notre Dame kind of way.

[Thethreeyardout]

There is apparently a huge ammount of money shared by the members of the Big 10 as an academic grant.

Most of the money brought to the Big 12 is brought by Texas, in the Big 10 that would not be true.

We would lose one of TAMU/OU as an OOC game (maybe we could rotate years)

Every other game would more than make up for it.

TX/Mich, TX/tOSU, TX/MSU/ TX/Penn St. are more than anything the Big 12 has to offer Texas.

[HeyMoe]

No smack here, seriously.

I think Texas would be making a huge error by getting into bed with the Big 10. More money, yes, but less clout. Remember when the Big 12 was being put together; Texas was able to get things like the league headquarters, partial qualifiers situation and whether or not to have a title game the way they wanted because the other Texas schools (referred to on ShaggyBevo and other sites as "our little brothers") and the two Okie schools backed them up. In the Big 10, Texas would be The New K i d in Town; they would have almost no pull at all. I can easily see situation after situation where Texas would be told to go get their fuckin shine box if they tried to demand something be done their way. There's the natural anti-Texas bias (the state not the school) that would factor in as well.

I also believe an unintended casualty of a move to the Big 10 would be the Oklahoma game. There's no way the Texas Legislature would tolerate Texas and A&M not playing every year and no Longhorn coach is going to want to have to play both the Ags and Sooners in non-conference every year. So the OU game would have to go. And that would suck. Not only that but neither A&M or Texas is gonna want to play that game at the end of the season, which probably means they play it early.....yuck. BTW, A&M probably gets out of that series with Arkie too, for the same reason.

Another consequence of the move might be to strengthen A&M. I think (and hope) that if Texas took off for the Big 10 that A&M would do all it could to join the SEC. And that would be a big recruiting advantage for A&M over Texas; then SEC is a better, more electric, more exciting conference than the Big 10 (the only time the Big 10 supplants the SEC in the country's consciousness is the day the Rose Bowl is played).

IMHO, a better match for the Big 10 would be Nebraska; they're closer geographically and Nebraska might relish the thought of moving to a more financially lucrative conference while telling Texas to suck it.

I don't completely understand the appeal of the Big 10 anyway. The money, yes. But it seems to me the only other appeal is the opportunity to play in the Rose Bowl. Penn State moved to the Big 10 over a decade ago and has been to the Rose Bowl only once. The two Arizona schools that moved to the Pac 10 had similar visions of Rose Bowls and have only been there once between the two of them.


Let me say I'm in favor of just about anything that busts up the Big 12 and gets A&M into the SEC where we belong. C'mon Texas you know you wanna come with us; I know you look down your nose academically at some of the SEC schools but think about it; how much better would a home conference schedule look with schools like Bama, Arkie, Tennessee and LSU coming to town instead of KState, Iowa State and Colorado ? That's what I think, too.

[dag]

i hope OU and A&M pull out of their rivalry with tu if they split

[mse1892sip]

There is apparently a huge ammount of money shared by the members of the Big 10 as an academic grant.

Most of the money brought to the Big 12 is brought by Texas, in the Big 10 that would not be true.

We would lose one of TAMU/OU as an OOC game (maybe we could rotate years)

Every other game would more than make up for it.

TX/Mich, TX/tOSU, TX/MSU/ TX/Penn St. are more than anything the Big 12 has to offer Texas.

I doubt Texas would lose OU and A&M. Texas would not slit their throats on those deals.

[mse1892sip]

i hope OU and A&M pull out of their rivalry with tu if they split

OU and A&M would be dumb to do this due to the amount of revenue OU and A&M would lose with those games.

[Thethreeyardout]

No smack here, seriously.

I think Texas would be making a huge error by getting into bed with the Big 10. More money, yes, but less clout. Remember when the Big 12 was being put together; Texas was able to get things like the league headquarters, partial qualifiers situation and whether or not to have a title game the way they wanted because the other Texas schools (referred to on ShaggyBevo and other sites as "our little brothers") and the two Okie schools backed them up. In the Big 10, Texas would be The New K i d in Town; they would have almost no pull at all. I can easily see situation after situation where Texas would be told to go get their fuckin shine box if they tried to demand something be done their way. There's the natural anti-Texas bias (the state not the school) that would factor in as well.

I also believe an unintended casualty of a move to the Big 10 would be the Oklahoma game. There's no way the Texas Legislature would tolerate Texas and A&M not playing every year and no Longhorn coach is going to want to have to play both the Ags and Sooners in non-conference every year. So the OU game would have to go. And that would suck. Not only that but neither A&M or Texas is gonna want to play that game at the end of the season, which probably means they play it early.....yuck. BTW, A&M probably gets out of that series with Arkie too, for the same reason.

Another consequence of the move might be to strengthen A&M. I think (and hope) that if Texas took off for the Big 10 that A&M would do all it could to join the SEC. And that would be a big recruiting advantage for A&M over Texas; then SEC is a better, more electric, more exciting conference than the Big 10 (the only time the Big 10 supplants the SEC in the country's consciousness is the day the Rose Bowl is played).

IMHO, a better match for the Big 10 would be Nebraska; they're closer geographically and Nebraska might relish the thought of moving to a more financially lucrative conference while telling Texas to suck it.

I don't completely understand the appeal of the Big 10 anyway. The money, yes. But it seems to me the only other appeal is the opportunity to play in the Rose Bowl. Penn State moved to the Big 10 over a decade ago and has been to the Rose Bowl only once. The two Arizona schools that moved to the Pac 10 had similar visions of Rose Bowls and have only been there once between the two of them.


Let me say I'm in favor of just about anything that busts up the Big 12 and gets A&M into the SEC where we belong. C'mon Texas you know you wanna come with us; I know you look down your nose academically at some of the SEC schools but think about it; how much better would a home conference schedule look with schools like Bama, Arkie, Tennessee and LSU coming to town instead of KState, Iowa State and Colorado ? That's what I think, too.

I agree with just about everybit of this.

Ultimately, I would like to see Texas trade on its immense popularity and profit right now to improve the conference that it is in.

Nobody wants to lose the TAMU or the OU game.

Texas has a large academic lobby already pissed at Mack's compensation package, and the academic funds apparently available in the Big 10 would quiet a lot of that.

I don't think TAMU belongs in the SEC.

I have a feeling the entire conference structure is going to fall apart in the next 20 years anyway, so, it is going to be about what it is always about...how much money can you get the fastest.

[Tex Pete]

I agree with just about everybit of this.

Me, too.

I have a feeling the entire conference structure is going to fall apart in the next 20 years anyway

Same here.

[surf]

what would be funny as shit would be if they said 'fuck you all' and joined conference usa or the mountain west. the fallout from the carnage would be fucking epic

[BohunkAg]

That's what I've thought from the start. I would be beyond pissed if we actually went to the Big Televen, but I think this is about leveraging TV networks for a better deal for the conference.

I think they are trying to leverage the rest of the Big XII to get a better deal for themselves personally.

[Tex Pete]

I think they are trying to leverage the rest of the Big XII to get a better deal for themselves personally.

I don't. We kick the shit out of everyone in merchandise and overall department revenue. We don't need the money per se, but some conference schools do.

All we have to gain is to elevate the visibility and competetiveness of the conference as a whole. Make the Big XII part of the discussion so that no one can ever claim they have played a tougher conference schedule than a Big XII team.

[mse1892sip]

I don't. We kick the shit out of everyone in merchandise and overall department revenue. We don't need the money per se, but some conference schools do.

All we have to gain is to elevate the visibility and competetiveness of the conference as a whole. Make the Big XII part of the discussion so that no one can ever claim they have played a tougher conference schedule than a Big XII team.

You're right from that stand point, however Texas and any other school will always look for a way to make more money.

[BohunkAg]

I don't. We kick the shit out of everyone in merchandise and overall department revenue. We don't need the money per se, but some conference schools do.

All we have to gain is to elevate the visibility and competetiveness of the conference as a whole. Make the Big XII part of the discussion so that no one can ever claim they have played a tougher conference schedule than a Big XII team.

Since when has ANY school in Texas (and Oklahoma for that matter...and I'm talking about A&M, Texas, OU anybody) thought about that? Hell, that's one of the reasons we don't have the SWC any more.....it was every man for himself. The Big XII is becoming the new SWC.

[surf]

Make the Big XII part of the discussion so that no one can ever claim they have played a tougher conference schedule than a Big XII team.

the big 12 is already starting to get a rep in the media for being a 'finesse' conference and soft where no one plays defense. if it wasn't for Ohio State's failures in those 2 national championship games (the 2nd they shouldn't have been there in the first place and georgia should have played them instead of lsu to begin with), the media would be more on harping about this than they are now. notice how quiet the media is on big 10 bashing since they won all those big bowl games games this year? take this quote right here for example on colt (not bashing him at all on my part):

However, McCoy played in a Texas Tech-style spread offense that called for roughly 70% of UT's passing plays to fall within the 5-10 yard vicinity. McCoy was a statistically accurate thrower in UT's spread but Kliff Kingsbury and Graham Harrell were too in similar systems.

oklahoma has been a whipping boy for it's bowl failures lately too. the big 12 gets a lot of pub for it's gaudy offensive numbers, but it also gets a lot of negative pub for it's defenses getting shredded against each other and against good opponents


as for texas to the big 10, that makes about as much sense as 2 monkeys trying to fuck a football. 2 entirely different parts of the country with 2 totally different cultures. that'd be like the pac 10 trying to get miami to join them imo. the 'new lamb on the block' references would be right too. they wouldn't have a lot of say in anything (remember, the big ten commish is the guy who keeps killing the playoff talks). plus it'd open more in roads for Ohio State in the inbreds to the northwest to Texas recruiting. you sure you want that along with ou and lsu raiding already?

[Thethreeyardout]

This doesn't have anything to do with on the field perfomance at this level.

It has to do with television sets, appeasing academics, and ROI.

Right now (hasn't always been and won't always be) Texas is in THE Bell Cow product in college athletics and can write its own rules.

A couple of you on here know the people that I have ancillary ties with, and I will tell you that this news didn't break the day after the Muschamp NCAA ruling coincidentally.

It is ALL about leverage.

Texas could afford 9 home games and its own TV network and go totally independent like Notre Dame in the '90s if it so chose.

Texas makes that much money and that many people want part of it.

They are sick and tired of the SEC hype on every channel

They are sick and tired of some having to go to conference championship games and some not.

They are sick and tired of an uneven playing field as it pertains to enterance requirements.

Right now they have the biggest dick and, with this blind side ruling from the NCAA, they are going to swing it a little.

They have VERY good lawyers on staff.

Ultimately, it is a positioning play and Texas goes no where, but the Big 12 might actually be on NBC in HD before Deloss retires.

[HeyMoe]

the big 12 is already starting to get a rep in the media for being a 'finesse' conference and soft where no one plays defense.

Which is one of the things I hate about it. Perhaps with Tubbs taking over at tech and Sherman continuing to use the West Coast offense at A&M things might finally start to balance out a little around here. Nothing wrong with throwing the ball but 50-60 times a game is bullshit.

[HeyMoe]

This doesn't have anything to do with on the field perfomance at this level.

It has to do with television sets, appeasing academics, and ROI.

Right now (hasn't always been and won't always be) Texas is in THE Bell Cow product in college athletics and can write its own rules.

A couple of you on here know the people that I have ancillary ties with, and I will tell you that this news didn't break the day after the Muschamp NCAA ruling coincidentally.

It is ALL about leverage.

Texas could afford 9 home games and its own TV network and go totally independent like Notre Dame in the '90s if it so chose.

Texas makes that much money and that many people want part of it.

They are sick and tired of the SEC hype on every channel

They are sick and tired of some having to go to conference championship games and some not.

They are sick and tired of an uneven playing field as it pertains to enterance requirements.

Right now they have the biggest dick and, with this blind side ruling from the NCAA, they are going to swing it a little.

They have VERY good lawyers on staff.

Ultimately, it is a positioning play and Texas goes no where, but the Big 12 might actually be on NBC in HD before Deloss retires.

If Texas can swing it's dick and make the Big 12 stronger, then go for it. But if they tried to go the independent route that'd be the biggest disaster since the captain of the Titanic decided to floor it thru the ice fields. Notre Dame has a national following, texas does not. UT sells a lot of merchandise but I bet most of it is sold in the Southwest, don't imagine there's much call for it in the Northeast or Florida....

[surf]

Texas could afford 9 home games and its own TV network and go totally independent like Notre Dame in the '90s if it so chose.

and ratings would fall just like it has on nbc. i guarantee you that over half of notre dame's tv ratings lately have come either in games that are sure losses or after the outcome has been decided and everyone switches over to watch them lose again. notre dame is too big for their fucking britches and you see what is happening to them now. claim their academic entrance standards or whatever, but the reason they have fell off is because no one want to go there anymore. the sec is king (fuck them) and the big ten is probably second (almost 1/3 of the country's pop is in their market). the big east is right behind with a partial share of the same market plus the entire north east. outside of the big 12 area, texas isn't as 'national' as you think they are. the only way they could pull off the independent deal along with their own network would be to have a big game scheduled just about every week. the average joe around the country isn't going to tune in to watch them play ucf when you have a tenn-georgia/ lsu-fla on cbs every week. look at how poor nbc's ratings are when they are struggling against the sister's of the poor and such - no one wants to watch a lame ass matchup.

that's what the big 12 should do: take a page from them and set up a killer tv networ ala bg ten but have great matchups every week that will draw in everyone from around the country. the big ten is smart enough to do their games at non when hardly anyone is playing a decent team so more people tune in for a mid afternoon nap (what i end up doing when i'm watching their games). abc steals all the big games and runs them primetime so it works out great. it also helps when you have Ohio State, the inbreds and penn st all together where their mega huge alumni and fanbases - which are spread all over the country - are more than willing to watch just about anything you put on there too.

[Thethreeyardout]

Moe, you would be surprised what Notre Dame paid for that exclusivity on NBC juxtapositioned for inflation and against Texas' Athletic budget surplus.

In the end, no one watched Notre Dame anyway, but nobody that was getting paid cared.

I am not saying that Texas will do that, but finacially, the certainly could.

And the Big 10 knows it.

Again, I believe all of this to be negotiatiing posturing and getting the requisite 30 votes to allow Muschamp to recruit.

If that doesn't pass, they will simply "demote" Muschamp to defensive co-ordinator (and probably give him another raise).

This news today is all a PR deal by Texas to sound the war trumpet, or what ever that metaphor is.





Like I said, 20 years from now there will be no conference alignments as we know them now and the money grabbing on both sides while the gettting is good is paramount.

[surf]

but texas should hint at it just to start a media pile on with notre dame and how fucking stupid they were