I don't really see Texas moving to the Big Ten. The article talks a lot about the financial benefits of moving to the Big Ten: while that may be incredibly enticing for a school like Missouri, Texas is one of the nation's leaders in athletic revenue, so I don't think DeLoss Dodds would miss any additional Big Ten revenue all that much. Furthermore, location-wise, Texas just isn't in Big Ten country. The nearest Big Ten school is too far away to make regular Texas vs. Big Ten matchups feasible.
I think that it'd be exciting. But I think that the UT political system would be way too complicated for a switch like that.
Isn't the Big 12 TV contract up for renewal very soon? Isn't it going to go up by a lot when it does, assuming the conference doesn't break up before then. If so, you have to take that into bigtime consideration. Texas could get that $10 Million jump in revenue, or at least the majority of it, by staying put as well. Even if Missouri leaves, we grab someone from the Salt Lake City area (Utah or BYU), and we get back probably 75% of what Missouri brought to the table, IMO. Either way, I think Dodds will listen. But I don't see it happening because... 1) Texas is rich, very rich. $10 Million/year is not chump change, but for a program bringing in what, $90 MIllion+/year? It's not an earth shattering amount of money when compared to the intangible costs of weakening or losing rivalries with OU, A&M, and Tech, and the weirdness of the whole deal to the state of Texas football fans, some of which would maybe boycott us enmass, etc. Hell, the Aggies may just march the Corp. on Austin and burn the whole city to the ground. It would be seen by the people in the state of Texas as a major betrayal to all that is Texas and all that is college football in the South. 2) The Legislature would not let it happen. No ******* way. We're talking about a predominantly Republican Legislature, a bunch of conservative old farts who probably think skipping a day of shaving is equivalent to a Communist Revolution. This idea is just way too radical, and leaving A&M, which is probably almost as powerful in the Legislature as Texas, plus Baylor and Tech, out in the cold.... it would never happen. No way in hell. Not for a mere $10 Million/year.
I expect some serious conversations to go on between Big 10 big wigs and officials at Belmont Hall in the next several months. Texas moving to the Big 10 isn't any kind of slam dunk right now, but it's more feasible than some might think. Texas moving somewhere and leaving the Big XII behind is going to become a necessity sooner rather than later. If we don't make the jump to the Big 10, Mizzou and, to a slightly lesser degree, Nebraska are waiting with baited breath. Any way you slice it, this conference is going to lose one or more major tv markets in the next few years, and there is no market in the Mountain West, or elsewhere to replace St. Louis, or possibly Denver if Colorado pulls out for the PAC 10. Deloss Dodds didn't come to town on a turnip wagon. If I know a move is going to become necessary, you can bet he's known it a lot longer. I posted in a previous post that UT's in the catbird seat right now because we're the prom queen for any conference looking to expand. The only way UT hurts itself is if heads are stuck in the sand and UT stubbornly refuses to consider moving. Last but not least, there are issues to be dealt with. What happens with aggy? What happens to our rivalry games with aggy and zero-u? Can and would the legislature block us leaving the Big XII? Those are all viable concerns, but there is not one of those things that could not be dealt with with a little planning and arm-twisting...and UT has some of the most effective arm twisters out there. We don't have any particular emotional ties to the Big XII...it's served us well for several years, but now, it does not serve our purpose to continue hanging around in this neighborhood. UT is ready for bigger and better things, and that is exactly what the Big 10 offers us. We bring a lot to the table for them as well...it may not be a marriage made in heaven, but it's a lot more than just a jazzy weekend!
#21 St. Louis... 1,249.450 households #31 Salt Lake City... 944,060 households Salt Lake City is 75.6% of the TV market of St. Louis. I think people are making too much of a big deal about the loss of Missouri and its impact on the Big 12's future TV revenue. Sure, it's a small step down, but it's not like we're replacing them with nothing. And BYU or Utah would probably say yes to joining the Big 12 in about 2 seconds. Plus they even make perfect geographic sense. That's my prediction. Texas listens to the Big 10. It's a significant amount of money, so Dodds has to listen. But in the end we'll say no, because of the reasons I posted above. And if Missouri leaves, we get BYU or Utah to replace them.... sign a bigger TV deal in the next few years, including a Big 12 Network (or even a Texas Longhorns Network), and everyone's just fine.
How much would we raise if we went Pac 10? It has to be close. The academics in the Pac 10 shred that of the Big 10 and the destinations are so much better for road trips and flights. To have to hit the **** hole that is Columbus and deal with those knuckle dragging types is not appealing. Games when it is cold sucks too. Northwestern would be a great destination. It is the only one that rivals anything in the Pac 10. Even the more rural Oregon locations are awesome. If something happens and we are forced with making a choice I personally want us to go to either the Pac 10 or Independent.
What is left out of this thread is the anger at the idiotic Big 12 tiebreaker rule that screwed us out of the MNC game last year, and was not changed between the 08 and 09 seasons. I saw DeLoss right after the tiebreaker and when I asked him when we were pulling out of the Big 12, he answered "we're working on it". Just saying.......
FtT makes a great point in this installment and earlier ones: Think about this possible move as a school president, not an athletic director. Because that's the level on which this will get decided, at least on UT's part. As he and others have pointed out, us joining the Big 10 would go way beyond mere athletic partnership. If anything, the academic alliances - and the attendant increase in funding for the school - would be the thing that puts it over the top. And that's something the Legislature would be extremely interested in. It's unfathomable to me in these times someone saying "That's a lot more money, but we'll stick with what we have, thanks." Subbing in a BYU or Utah - that's presuming either would or could make the move - would not make up for the missed opportunity to increase our exposure and prominence in the country. Hell, in the world. I'm not exaggerating on that front. If it does get serious with the Big 10, I cannot imagine anyone at any level of the UT hierarchy putting up much of a fuss. What would be really intriguing is if they could work something out so that the Big 10 expands to take Mizzou, Texas and Texas A&M. If that could be arranged, the deal would get done in a month.
Maybe a benefit for football but how about all of the other sports? Can you imagine having to fly the women's field hocky team to all of the conference games? How about the women's rowing team. Fly the boats or drive them across the country? I assume we would compete in all big ten sports.
Belmont will most certainly wait to see what the next B12 TV deal is like. If it's not significantly better, then they might begin to consider a move like this. To outsiders like Shark I can understand it might look like a slam dunk, but you just don't understand the power of Texas politics and how it will inevitably affect any and every decision that UT makes regarding conference affiliation. Ultimately, this really is NOT going to be the head coach's choice, or the AD's choice, or the university president's choice, or chancellor's choice. The politicians are going to make the call, and it's not likely they're going to allow Texas to bail on A&M, Tech, and Baylor.
Who was..flask? that scoffed at $10million per year? How many non-revenue producing sports would $10m a year support? Then, factor in added income from increased gate revenue (to be negotiated) by going to places like.. 106,000 seat Columbus... or 110,000 seat Meatchicken.. or 108,000 Penn State. As mentioned, the academic alliances with the Big 10 schools would be huge! And.. could all this be tied to the upcoming Governors race? If Kay Bailey smites the Milk Man, would she be able and willing to use her office as a bully pulpit to pressure the legislature into acquiesence? Would the "wooden haired milk man" do this? Finally, what pressure would the Big Cigars apply to make this happen? If I'm CEO of a corporation that is a big time UT supporter, I push hard for this to open up more advertising and opportunity in markets that will have a greater impact on my bottom line.. the Chicagos.. Phillys.. Great Lakes areas... intead of... Ames, Ioway.. or Manhattan KS.. or Stoolwater... Financially.. it makes sense. Academically it makes sense... athletically.. it make sense.
I would love for us to go to the Big Ten and with the extra 10 Mil that will more than cover travel expenses and still leave a tidy profit. The academics work, the mega match ups of traditional powers every year would be a network's dream. Unfortunately there is just no way the legislature lets that happen. Too many Bears and Red Raiders who would threaten the PUF and that is a loss the University cant take. If Mizzou bolts then I agree the Big XII looks to BYU/Utah. The problem there is it might have to be a package deal as I imagine there are political considerations for those schools too. That means looking for a third school like TCU perhaps or ic CU goes to Pac 10 having Utah/BYU slide into the two North slots.
The thought of the Big 10 makes me sick. The thought of the big 12 makes me sick, but I'll stick with the devil I know than the one I don't.
From a President's/AD perspecitive, here is how I would hope DeLoss approaches the deal: 1. For sure the "Big 5" sports would participate.(Men's Fball, Bball, Baseball, Women's Basketball, Volleyball), I am including what I think are the five most visible sports-most likely to end up on ESPN if the teams go far enough, to me that's how Volleyball made it onto the list. For the minor sports, such as rowing, Track and Field, Golf etc. - I want them independent. Independent status would give another conference closer to home a chance to invite them to be a part of their conference. Travel could be cut way down, to even less money than is spent now, IMO. Speaking of travel, what school would turn down the invitation to come to Austin? It's a great place to visit. The minor sports could have as many home events as they want. The only conference that makes sense right off the bat would be the Sun Belt, but it doesn't make a difference to us. It might actually help a weak conference like Sun Belt to have a chance to visit Austin as part of a schedule, but who really cares? 2. Here is the more important part. I would want a guarantee of the Big Ten championship game/tournament in Texas at least once every four years. I picked four years because of length of academic career-give students at least one chance to see the teams in person at a championship level without having to fly. The Big Ten could make it more often-they might see the advantage in being able to visit -example Big Ten championship basketball tourney- in Dallas = chance for Dallas HS Bball kids to see teams play. I really don't see a downside in this combination. I wonder if the Big Ten would balk at having only the five sports participate? I guess DeLoss could give in on any one of the minor sports, wouldn't matter, but I wouldn't give on more than one. So, ten million more $$$ a year, + a chance to actually reduce travel expenses for the minor sports = a net profit of probably -a guess- at least 9 million. The last time we discussed this, some of you guys assured me the legislature wouldn't stop this. Assuming this is true, here is what I would do to the football schedule: 1. A & M would be the first game of the year- get it out of the way- and I would only guarantee Aggy the game for four years, after that I would want to take another look at it. - gradual elimination of Aggy, maybe play them every other year. 2. Keep the Texas-OU game at the Cotton Bowl, same as is now. Would be great to go back to non-conference. Because once you're done with the game, you don't have to think about them anymore, they go back out of my mind for another year.
For me I do not see the difference in the so called "Power House Matchups"... Ohio State = OU - Obviously this would be our prime match up every season. It would equal the hype to the Texas-OU game every year. Michigan = Nebraska - Michigan has the long history that UN has. They are good at random moments, and suck the rest of the time. Sounds familiar. Penn St = Okie Lite - Penn St. always seems to hang around in the top 25 much like Okie Lite does. They are probably the 2nd best team out of this list.. but they always lose a game they shouldnt. Iowa = Kansas - Everyone knows Iowa isnt that good. They benefit from a weak schedule and end up losing late due to playing all the better teams in conference at the end. Michigan St = Aggy - MSU can be good. Occasionally can beat Michigan or atleast give them a run for their money. But they never make it over that hump and usually always end up where they left off from previous years. Wisconsin = K-State - This is only comparison I have trouble making. Wisconsin seems to always hang around in the top 25 all year regardless of who they play or what they look like. KSU seems to be good, but always loses to the better ranked team. They can occasionally pull off the upset, but only to lose a few weeks later and ruin their season. To me - I do not want to goto the Big 10. Playing in the the early morning games and having Pam Ward do commentary will make me want to punch myself in the forehead repeatedly. Id rather have someone from the Big 10 in exchange for someone on our side.
Jack... Membership in the Big 10/11 means membership in the Committee for Institutional Cooperation... which means... seed grants, research facilities being made available to UT... go to cic.net. It's certainly not the "be all end all" but with additional resources made available, it will continue to bolster the academic excellence of our school.
This is about where college athletics is going to be in a decade. If you think a college football playoff with a super conference of 50 or so teams is coming, you dont make the move because you are already in. If Mizzou leaves and/or ND joins the Big 10, Texas could be the odd man out. Being the biggest fish in a small pond only has so much going for it. I would love to see the Big XII stay intact but that just looks less and less likely. Our TV deal is ******* garbage and given the economic climate that might continue.
