The Big 12 is a joke

[castlebravo1]

It sounds to me like @collegefootballcrazy is "whining" about UT because we declined to join the Pac-12.  Let's see...less money, more travel, inconvenient late games on their Pac-12 Network...(I don't get that channel on VerizonFiOS)

What's not to love about that?   :huh:

We should join the SEC but arrogant UT administrators and boosters don't want us to have to share the spotlight with the likes of Alabama, Florida, and LSU.  They would rather us be the big fish in a small pond...

And if the BigXII is so great why have 4 schools left the Big XII for Big 5 conferences while zero schools from Big 5 conferences have joined the Big XII.  The numbers don't lie.

 

[J.B. TexasEx]

We should join the SEC but arrogant UT administrators and boosters don't want us to have to share the spotlight with the likes of Alabama, Florida, and LSU.  They would rather us be the big fish in a small pond...

And if the BigXII is so great why have 4 schools left the Big XII for Big 5 conferences while zero schools from Big 5 conferences have joined the Big XII.  The numbers don't lie.

There's obviously some truth in your point about "arrogant" UT administrators.  They also don't want to be affiliated with SEC academic lightweights - not that it has much to do with collegiate athletics.  The only school that derives academic benefit from their conference is Nebraska with the CIC.

Maybe the other schools from Big 5 conferences have more loyalty and value their traditional rivalries, unlike aggie, Mizzery, Cornholers, and the burner Buffs?  Just a thought.  These schools also don't have the cachet of UT nor confidence that they can market and profit from their T3 broadcast rights.  Easier to hitch their train to the conference network model.  

The numbers are what they are.  Our strength of schedule is good because of our 9-game Big12 slate.  IMHO, the Sagarin Ratings do the best, most objective analysis with this.  UT's 2013 schedule was ranked #11 nationally last year.  http://sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm

 

[Randolph Duke]

We should join the SEC but arrogant UT administrators and boosters don't want us to have to share the spotlight with the likes of Alabama, Florida, and LSU.  They would rather us be the big fish in a small pond...

And if the BigXII is so great why have 4 schools left the Big XII for Big 5 conferences while zero schools from Big 5 conferences have joined the Big XII.  The numbers don't lie.

The cultural divide between the SEC and schools such as UT goes back to the post civil war era when not many families in the south had the money to send their boys to college and those that did didn't want to send them to "northern yankee colleges." For over 100 years, UT has been compared to public universities such as Michigan, Cal, Virginia. It isn't "arrogance" that prevents Texas from abandoning its academic focus to suddenly sidle up to the redneck Old South. 

And for the record, Nebraska hated the Big 12 from day one after Texas insisted on restrictions on partial qualifiers the the Cornhuskers relied on (haven't you ever wondered why Nebraska went down hill after the Big 12 was formed?). Colorado had more alumni in California than in all the non-Big12 footprint and their alumni wanted the Pac move so their games could be seen on West Coast television. Mizzou b!tched about unequal distribution of revenues, but they didn't have a reason to move to the SEC until Slive needed them to make the a&m move possible (scheduling). As for aggy, the Big 12, I don't hear too many fans complaining about the ags leaving the conference. In the BCS era, Kansas accomplished more than the ags. The ags are mouthy and obnoxious, but they are certainly no college football powerhouse. 

Texas will never join the SEC. Anyone who thinks the University as a whole would be better off in the SEC doesn't understand much about academics. 

 

[J.B. TexasEx]

And for the record, Nebraska hated the Big 12 from day one after Texas insisted on restrictions on partial qualifiers the the Cornhuskers relied on (haven't you ever wondered why Nebraska went down hill after the Big 12 was formed?). Colorado had more alumni in California than in all the non-Big12 footprint and their alumni wanted the Pac move so their games could be seen on West Coast television. Mizzou b!tched about unequal distribution of revenues, but they didn't have a reason to move to the SEC until Slive needed them to make the a&m move possible (scheduling). As for aggy, the Big 12, I don't hear too many fans complaining about the ags leaving the conference. In the BCS era, Kansas accomplished more than the ags. The ags are mouthy and obnoxious, but they are certainly no college football powerhouse. 

Excellent point about partial qualifiers, Duke.

I'd almost forgotten how NU became a football power in the first place.  Kinda ironic that they'd leave the Big12 for "greener pastures" when the B1G's academic requirements are possibly even more restrictive. 

The Cornholers also resented the money and influence moving south when the Big12 offices relocated to Irving, TX.  You see, NU liked being the big fish in the Big 8's little pond.  Combine that with getting your asses handed to you 9 outta 10 times leads to resentment.

 

[Tulsahorn]

You can call the Big 12 what you want, but outside of Texas and OU, it is not "big time" football.  To me, big time football is defined by how many butts in the seats the home teams have for games, the number of championships those teams have won over the years, how rabid their fan base is, and national recognition/following.  The teams outside of Texas and OU have none of that.  Sure the Big 12 kicks ass when Texas and OU are up, but who picks up the slack when they are down?  In the SEC, if Alabama and LSU are down, Auburn, Tennessee are up.  When those teams are down, Florida and Arkansas are up.  Same with the Big10 and Pac12.  I would put the ACC in the same boat as the Big12.

Average attendance per home game 2012 (I think a good benchmark for defining "big time football"): 

ACC 48,519

Big 10: 70,387

Big 12:  58,712

Pac12:  53,586

SEC:  75,216

Striving to be in a conference the equal of the PAC12 and ACC is great if you're Baylor or Kansas, but it doesn't cut it if you are Texas with a 102,000 seat stadium.

Good God - this thread starts based on one friggin' year of NFL drafts. 

Get a friggin' grip.  Football is cyclical in nature, years, sometimes a decade. Unfortunatly boards are dominated by guys not old enough to vote.

SEC has had a remarkable run, no doubt.  But you mention PAC 12? Outside of USC, name a tradition power with NC skins on the wall.  Stanford has had a few good years recently, and a few with Elway, but nothing else. Cal has never been good, the AZ teams a decent 8-2 every decade or so. UCLA hasn't been a contender in decades.  Washington State never, and UW a few years with James. How many rabid fan bases in Pac12?  You can count on one hand and have plently of fingers lieft to pick both nostrils. Who sells out?  Oregon does, with what 55k seats?  Big deal.

B10 essentially is tOSU and Michigan, and Michigan sucks.  Iowa, M State a few good years here and there. Northwestern a few good years in the last 30, but they were so bad in the 70's people talked about kicking them out of the conference. Indian sucks and so does Illinois. tOSU and Michigan sell out, name any other B10 school that is noted as a feared place to go.

SEC has the most rabid fan base, much better than Texas, even when we were winning.

But, all this whining is, well, just whining.

Knee meet jerk reactions.

 

[J.B. TexasEx]

tOSU and Michigan sell out, name any other B10 school that is noted as a feared place to go?

In fairness, Wisconsin and Penn State have HUGE stadiums with good fan support.  Michigan St isn't too bad either.  Nothing for UT to be envious of, though.

 

[doc longhorn]

We should join the SEC but arrogant UT administrators and boosters don't want us to have to share the spotlight with the likes of Alabama, Florida, and LSU.  They would rather us be the big fish in a small pond...

And if the BigXII is so great why have 4 schools left the Big XII for Big 5 conferences while zero schools from Big 5 conferences have joined the Big XII.  The numbers don't lie.

It never fails to amaze me why posters don't understand the reason why UT doesn't "join" other conferences.  Here is the answer once again -   MONEY!

The University of Texas is the number one revenue generating school in the country.  We are positioned, in the Big 12, to remain the #1 $$ generating school in the country.

Everyone needs to get this through their heads.  They also need to understand that THE ADMINISTRATION  DOES NOT GIVE A DAMN ABOUT THE FANS INTERESTS.

There is simply no incentive to bolt from a platform that provides this kind of revenue along with the ability to provide a ticket to the 4 team playoff.  

Texas will entertain bolting, realignment or expanding only if it is in their best interests - and its interests are money, money, money and, once again, money.  And, actually, this applies to the entire conference as well.

It is no more complicated then this.

Look, here is another little factoid to consider, when talking realignment.  Where ever Texas (and expecially if OU is included) decided to bolt, would automatically make that conference 100% viable.  Even if it was the AAC or the Mountain West. The Texas brand is so strong that we would be the big dog in any conference we joined - just like Notre Dame would be.  And, yes, I'm including the SEC, B1G and the PAC.

And, IMO, Patterson is going to help make our school as much as a global name as the Dallas Cowboys are.

 

[java]

It never fails to amaze me why posters don't understand the reason why UT doesn't "join" other conferences. Here is the answer once again - MONEY!

The University of Texas is the number one revenue generating school in the country. We are positioned, in the Big 12, to remain the #1 $$ generating school in the country.

Everyone needs to get this through their heads. They also need to understand that THE ADMINISTRATION DOES NOT GIVE A DAMN ABOUT THE FANS INTERESTS.

There is simply no incentive to bolt from a platform that provides this kind of revenue along with the ability to provide a ticket to the 4 team playoff.

Texas will entertain bolting, realignment or expanding only if it is in their best interests - and its interests are money, money, money and, once again, money. And, actually, this applies to the entire conference as well.

It is no more complicated then this.

Look, here is another little factoid to consider, when talking realignment. Where ever Texas (and expecially if OU is included) decided to bolt, would automatically make that conference 100% viable. Even if it was the AAC or the Mountain West. The Texas brand is so strong that we would be the big dog in any conference we joined - just like Notre Dame would be. And, yes, I'm including the SEC, B1G and the PAC.

And, IMO, Patterson is going to help make our school as much as a global name as the Dallas Cowboys are.

My dream is to have UT, OU, and ND in the same conference.

Hello!

 

[J.B. TexasEx]

My dream is to have UT, OU, and ND in the same conference.

Hello!

ND was DeLoss' & Castiglione's dream, too.

The Irish chose a sweetheart deal with the ACC instead; full-time membership for all sports but football.  Makes more sense for them because more of their alumni live in the ACC footprint.  They needed a home for sports like lacrosse, too.

I don't know if the Big12 insisted on full membership or not.  Water under the bridge.

 

[java]

Yep! Football is the sport that would really strengthen the conference, I believe.

Hook 'em!

 

[doc longhorn]

ND was DeLoss' & Castiglione's dream, too.

The Irish chose a sweetheart deal with the ACC instead; full-time membership for all sports but football.  Makes more sense for them because more of their alumni live in the ACC footprint.  They needed a home for sports like lacrosse, too.

I don't know if the Big12 insisted on full membership or not.  Water under the bridge.

I wouldn't trust the brothers of Notre Dame as far as I could throw Kennedy Estelle.  They are notorious for reneging on agreed upon deals.