2010/2011 NCAA Football Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
It’s amazing how Texas is absolutely in charge of the Big 12.

Hell they already play 10 games a year in the state of Texas! How lopsided is it going to be in the future?
 
So much for the Who's the Better Conference - SEC vs. Big 12 argument. The Big 12 is going to be taking a step back in terms of overall quality unless they go out and get some good programs to fill the void.
 
It makes me wonder if there will be future unforeseen repercussions for the Big 12 pretty much selling the farm to keep Texas in it and caving in to them so much.
 
It makes me wonder if there will be future unforeseen repercussions for the Big 12 pretty much selling the farm to keep Texas in it and caving in to them so much.

I don't know what their conference standards are but the Big XII could pull a coup by inviting Utah and Boise St. haha...Not sure if it would make sense for them but it certainly would be something IMO.
 
the pac-10 can't get to that money because lack of big tv markets in thier area of coverage the pac-10 has 1 L.A. And as long as Texas stay the big 12 of some kind would stay.

red001

Wut? Have you ever looked at an actual Top 50 U.S. TV market list before? LA, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle, SacTown, Portland, Denver, Las Vegas...all big tv markets. San Fran is the 4th market. Dallas is 7th :dunno:

The real question is how will a smaller Big 12 Conference deliver all the tv money that they're claiming to get. :dunno:


It’s amazing how Texas is absolutely in charge of the Big 12.

Hell they already play 10 games a year in the state of Texas! How lopsided is it going to be in the future?

It's pretty sad to see so many other fairly big-named Universities absolutely bend over for Texas :eek:

I don't know what their conference standards are but the Big XII could pull a coup by inviting Utah and Boise St. haha...Not sure if it would make sense for them but it certainly would be something IMO.

Boise State has the football program worthy to get into the Big 12, but no other sport...other than Women's soccer and maybe their tennis programs. Boise's stadium is only 39K too. It needs to be demo'd and rebuilt.

Utah would be interesting for the Big 12. But I think they would approach Utah if Colorado was still in the conference. Now that Colorado is gone, Utah probably isn't an option.

TCU is a realistic option for the MWC, but TCU doesn't bring any new tv markets with them. They just bring a high level of competition in football, bball and (as Texas found out this weekend) baseball :)thefinger)

I don't see how the Pac 10 network COULDN'T deliver $20mil to each school...:dunno:
 
It's pretty sad to see so many other fairly big-named Universities absolutely bend over for Texas :eek:

Well, according to Forbes, Texas is the most valued team in college football.
http://www.forbes.com/2009/12/22/mo...business-sports-college-football_slide_2.html

It's really no surprise why so many teams want Texas in their conference. That state is HUGE, and could bring so much more money to other universities. Just ask Texas A&M and Oklahoma. They get 20 million a year now because of them.
 
Well, according to Forbes, Texas is the most valued team in college football.
http://www.forbes.com/2009/12/22/mo...business-sports-college-football_slide_2.html

It's really no surprise why so many teams want Texas in their conference. That state is HUGE, and could bring so much more money to other universities. Just ask Texas A&M and Oklahoma. They get 20 million a year now because of them.

Not really. The Big Ten rejected Texas' bid to join their conference in the '90s and quite possibly this time around too before accepting Nebraska.

I'd have to imagine it was between Texas and Nebraska for the Big Ten's ability to expand their tv networks reach. Apparently Nebraska represented a sufficient enough foothold in Big XII country for their network.
 
Not really. The Big Ten rejected Texas' bid to join their conference in the '90s and quite possibly this time around too before accepting Nebraska.

I'd have to imagine it was between Texas and Nebraska for the Big Ten's ability to expand their tv networks reach. Apparently Nebraska represented a sufficient enough foothold in Big XII country for their network.

Really!? Because I heard the Big Ten was basically on their knees trying to get Texas into their conference. The reason why the deal didn't get done was because Texas didn't feel comfortable with the mid west/north east appeal. Texas didn't want to lose their core fan base or rivalries in the south. It just wasn't their identity.
 
Really!? Because I heard the Big Ten was basically on their knees trying to get Texas into their conference. The reason why the deal didn't get done was because Texas didn't feel comfortable with the mid west/north east appeal. Texas didn't want to lose their core fan base or rivalries in the south. It just wasn't their identity.

What you heard is either wrong or a mischaracterization of the facts.

The University of Texas also approached and entered into discussions with the Big Ten in the 1990s. After approaching the PAC-10, UT next approached the Big Ten. Having added Penn State in 1990, the Big Ten was now made of universities that, in the view of UT officials, matched UT's profile — large state schools with strong academic reputations. Robert M. Berdahl, President of the University of Texas from 1993 to 1997, liked the fact that all 11 conference members belonged to the American Association of Universities.

Yet, distance remained a disadvantage. Iowa, the closest Big Ten school to Austin, was 856 miles away.

But after adding Penn State in 1990, Big Ten officials had put a four-year moratorium on expansion. Although admitting interest, Big Ten bosses ultimately rejected UT's overtures.

Around 1993, it was also explored by the league to add Kansas, Missouri, and Rutgers, or other potential schools to create a 14-team league with two divisions. These talks died when the Big 8 Conference merged with former Southwest Conference members to create the Big 12. Always considered for expansion speculation, Missouri has shown interest in Big Ten membership since Penn State joined in the early 1990s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Ten_Conference

I would say Texas' merchandising prowess is not really a factor.
 

maildude

Postal Paranoiac
Can't the Big12 add Wyoming State and Colorado Technical Know-How School For The Mentally Challenged to the conference?
 
dude that was in the 90's, I'm talking about now... 2010!

Not really. The Big Ten rejected Texas' bid to join their conference in the '90s and quite possibly this time around too before accepting Nebraska.

I'd have to imagine it was between Texas and Nebraska for the Big Ten's ability to expand their tv networks reach. Apparently Nebraska represented a sufficient enough foothold in Big XII country for their network.

Obviously Texas was looking to make a move even now and the the same problems the Big Ten had then are still so now. The anecdotal evidence would suggest the B10 chose not to go with Texas again ..and in favor of Nebraska.

It's not a swipe at Texas....it's just logistics apparently.
 

Lust

Lost at Birth
so i followed the forbes link and holy mackerel the SEC has 8 teams in there and 7 of them come before one of my pac 10 teams:

15. Southern California Trojans
Team Value: $68 million

Profit: $33 million

Head Coach: Pete Carroll

Conference: Pacific-10

Previous Value Rank: 14

Los Angeles County, Calif., Population: 9,862,049

The Trojans, the only Pac-10 team to make our list, are 62% more valuable than any other team in its conference.

i'm afraid to even ask where my beloved cardinal ranks in there. oh well, at least at Stanford we have the best pocket protectors. beat that bitches!!!!
 
Obviously Texas was looking to make a move even now and the the same problems the Big Ten had then are still so now. The anecdotal evidence would suggest the B10 chose not to go with Texas again ..and in favor of Nebraska.

It's not a swipe at Texas....it's just logistics apparently.

Maybe in the 90s Texas wanted to move, but Texas was always comfortable being in the Big 12... until the Big Ten decided to expand. Losing a team like Nebraska meant the conference was starting to become unstable, so Texas started to look elsewhere for stability.

Texas to the Big Ten wouldn't be a good fit, not only because of location, but because Texas doesn't want to share. Staying in the Big 12 means more money for them. It doesn't make sense why Texas would want to go to the Big Ten.
 
Maybe in the 90s Texas wanted to move, but Texas was always comfortable being in the Big 12... until the Big Ten decided to expand. Losing a team like Nebraska meant the conference was starting to become unstable, so Texas started to look elsewhere for stability.
Well, that's one reading of the circumstances.
Texas to the Big Ten wouldn't be a good fit, not only because of location, but because Texas doesn't want to share. Staying in the Big 12 means more money for them. It doesn't make sense why Texas would want to go to the Big Ten.

Agreed, they're not a good fit because of location. That's what the Big Ten has decided before and most likely is the case now. What's changed???
 
Well, that's one reading of the circumstances.


Agreed, they're not a good fit because of location. That's what the Big Ten has decided before and most likely is the case now. What's changed???

But why wouldn't the #1 grossing conference(Big Ten) want the #1 grossing collegiate team and top market?

Trust me, it wasn't because of location. Texas just wasn't interested.

Nebraska was the Big 10's 3rd choice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top