Thoughts On Texas, Texas A&M, and the SEC

Great read. Nearly all of the in-laws are Aggies and there’s only 1 day a year I root against them. I’m pulling for the solution that allows The Universities to stick together, for the Aggies to have success, and for none of it to take place in the SEC… Which means I agree with you — balance the budget and leverage the brand. One has to wonder though, if they weren’t attempting to do these things during their “lost decade”, what were they doing and what do they have to do to get people in place who will?

It’s astounding to me that politicians are willing to — or at least threaten to — wreck the funding of two of the state’s best institutions for higher learning all in the name of football conference affiliation.

I am not quite sure about point 1. It is true that OSU and Tech have had better success with less attendance. I am not sure moving to a conference without OSU and Tech really benefits them and vice versa.

A&M has been better than Tech while in the same conference and better than OSU though in different conferences. That all changed when toward the end of Slocum’s era. There were many factors which caused it but the big reason (caused by the other factors) was because recruiting started to suffer. A&M can out recruit both of those schools with the right coach and the right facilities. And it wouldn’t take them long to do it.

Culturally A&M may not be the greatest fit with the PAC-10 but they have been on a path to greater academic standing for some time now. Being associated with the West Coast schools could help that effort if used effectively. Also, A&M would be able to pull their share of California kids to CS, again with the right coach and the right facilities.

I think the main reason they almost went to the SEC is because of Stallings romantically talked about being in the greatest football conference in America and the idea of sticking it to tu, taking charge, not following the t-sips, etc.

It was all rah-rah fun until reality hit: the political obstacles, the financial obstacles, and the fact that being in the SEC doesn’t really do anything for them.

What Bill Byrne wants means nothing. He is out of the loop. I imagine he is also out of College Station sometime this summer.

Have the ags already forgotten about the cotton bowl?

o-blood, it’s astounding to me that you say you are astounded. look around you. you’re in texas.

Sheep jokes aside, I think everyone can agree that A&M has a large and loyal fan base. And this despite their mediocre football program as of late. One would think A&M administrators could leverage that into a lucrative Aggie network similar to what UT did, if the wanted to put forth the effort. I doubt the Aggies would get as much as UT did, but even an A&M network paying $200 (+/- $25) million over 20 years would be pretty impressive.

Yes. An Ag Network would be a real winner for them. If they got a few million less, it would still be good for the exposure. It’s not the money that makes the big difference.

OSU was given $265 million for athletics a few years ago. That wasn’t a game changer. It made things easier for them, but OU’s competitive position wrt the Pokes stayed the same.

I know A&M going to the SEC is seen as a recruiting issue for us, but is it really that potent of a threat? What stops SEC teams from coming into the state and throwing money around now? Why would that change if A&M were also in that conference? If A&M is in the SEC alone wouldn’t it be easier for us, Tech, and OU to rat on them constantly? The old Big 12 South teams could basically team up with TCU and share costs to have investigators tracking each and every Aggie recruit to make sure nothing shady was going on.

The biggest threat would be if, a big if IMO, A&M became a major player in the SEC and recruits wanted to compete for A&M in that conference. That was the big ‘boon’ that Baylor got in its invite into the Big 12. A&M moving to the SEC could in fact seal their fate if they are non-competitive since kids would be even more eager to win at schools (and play most of their games closer to home) like UT, Tech, OU, and OSU assuming we all still remained in the same conference.

As a UT fan, the last thing I want to do is have A&M going to the SEC. As long as they are in a conference with us and OU, they will always be the #3 power in the state. But if they go to the SEC, they can escape our shadow and go out on their own.

I think a good analogy is in Florida — FSU was able to become a dominant national power despite being the clear #2 program in the state (at best) because they were in the ACC and not directly competing against UF every year.

• I worked in Florida for a summer and I was stunned at how little respect the Seminoles get in that state. **

The Aggies will never have the money or tradition of UT or OU — sometimes the only way for the little brother to make his own name is to leave the nest.

“If A&M is in the SEC alone wouldn’t it be easier for us, Tech, and OU to rat on them constantly?”

Sure, if you like the strategy of ratting on a sister institution that you collaborate with in legislative matters and that you share objectives with in almost every issue besides athletics.

If $ Bill is not trying to leverage an A&M network, he needs to be executed at midfield before the Idaho game.

Thank you for the kind words, TTR. I can assure all of you that the higher powers at A&M continue to work behind the scenes to determine some new conference affiliation for A&M. Do not think that the little uproar about the $20 MM a few months back was an isolated incident.

The A&M Administration believes there is an agreement in principle (and one has to assume this is written down) from the Little 5. If they renege on that deal (and it’ll come to a head this summer), A&M will believe the Big XII to have violated the agreement and hence exit fees can be negotiated.

Now that Fran is off the books and the AD cash flows situation is getting healthier, this summer may end up being very different. The trigger to watch for is a new conference agreement with the guarenteed money.

Another point about “ratting”. Texas did not rat on TAMU in the ’80s. That was SMU that fed the NCAA the info on Murray et. al. Texas and TAMU are not as adversarial as the most strident fans believe they are.

Ag In Tex,
Do you know what A&M gets in actual value by leaving the Big XII? I don’t see the step change improvement in your football program with a move to SEC or elsewhere.

There are a number of factors, but only one that matters – money.

Make no mistake about it – participation in intercollegiate athletics needs to be at least a break even proposition – and you’d like for it to make money. That being said, the long term interest is in finding a conference affiliation that will maximize A&M’s chances of running a profitable athletic department.

And the Big XII just isn’t it. sure, people look at the short term “what about the $20 MM” or “didn’t you watch the Cotton Bowl” arguments. Sure. But those are short term issues.

It seems pretty obvious that there are two D1 conferences that are assured of making it and contuing to be paid at the very higest levels – the big 10 and the SEC. Unlike Texas, A&M has ot be concerned about the possibility of being left out in the cold. Joining the SEC would assure that does not happen.

Boy, will I make a concerted effort to care.

Bill Byrne and his anti-Texas schtick are a big problem here. That boy has a huge case of penis envy and he aint gonna get over it.

They move that idiot out, Texas extends an olive branch to ATM behind the scenes, and we can go back to a brotherly rivalry.

Those guys need to quit the dick measuring and focus on their own business. I understand that is completely antithetical to their culture but it must happen.

Both Texas and ATM are better together. Texas knows it but isnt going to admit it publicly. ATM denies it altogether even though it is obvious to everyone else.

Can haz phone # for Castillian co-ed?

Okay, everyone needs money. I understand that. However, there was a report that ESPN stated they would not renegotiate the SEC TV contract until it is up. I don’t remember when that is but it is was something like 2015 or later. So the ESPN portion of SEC TV money isn’t going to increase to accommodate A&M for quite a while. I haven’t heard anything from CBS, but now that precedent is set with ESPN I would think they would follow suit. Also, not sure when the CBS contract expires.

Assuming the SEC doesn’t stand to make any more TV money until contracts expire in the 2015 time frame or later, I don’t see them admitting any more members.

If money is the real issue, why isn’t making an A&M channel the first priority as opposed to working on potential conference changes? Improve the Aggie brand, make more money, increase exposure. Who knows. You do a better job than UT on the new channel and long term you make more money and conference affiliation is less important.

On a related note, I wonder if all the big guys look into their own channels in the future if the Texas model works out well. Then schools like USC, Alabama, OU, Notre Dame, Florida, UCLA, Florida St start going the independent channel route. Then the Big 10 channel starts to be seen as a dinosaur and maybe even Ohio St and Michigan try to find ways of having their own too.

For those who can do it, it seems like a much better idea than the conference channel. I don’t watch the Big 10 channel, but how much of it is Penn St, Ohio St and Michigan? I would guess Northwestern and Iowa don’t get much air time.

Too much is made of the $16 million loan. We will make enough of a profit this year to cover that. The reason we did not move to the SEC this summer was b/c of political pressure. We do not need to worry about tu trying to block out move to the SEC. We need to worry about the Tech and Baylor alums trying to do that. Right now I think it is just a waiting game between Texas and A&M to see who is going to bust this conference up first. For some reason Texas is terrified of being labeled as the one who blows up this conference.

As for an Aggie Network, it is not going to happen. There is no demand for it. As you guys are going to soon find out, no one really wants to watch the tier 3 stuff which is why it is tier 3.

This conference is doomed and I will be shocked if it lasts 3 years. You guys getting your network was just the first step in the process.

“Too much is made of the $16 million loan.”

I disagree. Not enough is made of it. $16 million loaned in year 0, to be repaid without interest in years 6 thru 15, is not truly a loan. It is a gift of over $5.6 million, assuming TAMU’s interest rate on the bond market is 10%. That is a sophomore finance question, which explains why all the sports media missed it.

TAMU’s AD was so in the red they needed to be bailed out by the university (i.e. the state). It’s one thing for a private school to run athletics in the red. It’s their money to do with as they please. It’s another thing altogether for a state school to do so.

Byrne’s weakness is finance and accounting, and it scared the TAMU leaders.

Monahorns,

Thank you for trying to have an honest dialogue on this. Not many horn fans seem able of it.

The ESPN and the CBS contracts with the SEC contain renegotiate clauses if the footprint of the conference significantly changes. The SEC would have wanted to renegotiate had A&M brought Texas into the SEC footprint. Would ESPN and CBS have been willing to? Only if they wanted to keep their #1 college football property on board for the loing term.

You see – your question is short term thinking. CBS and ESPN want to keep the SEC long term. The long term outlook for the product being sold by the SEC is >>>> than that of the big XII and hence will be worth more.

You ask about the network. I am not convinced that the individual school network can be profitable. Perhaps so, but I’m not sold yet. I know that TTR and i would be keenly tuned in to watch the A&M vs. Texas women’s volleyball match (as all red blooded American males ought to be), but we are a small %age of audience.

And as an aside to some other comments – make no mistake that the SEC is recruiting heavily in Texas right now. A&M would simply provide more exposure, but those schools are already here.

Miketag -

It doesn’t matter that no one watches it. ESPN will support the network, and if you have ESPN in Texas and surrounding states, you’ll have the Longhorn Network too. Every household and sports bar in Texas that has basic cable will be paying a few cents a month to UT through the UT network whether they watch the thing or not. I’m in the same boat with the Big Ten Network right now.

TT, I appreciate the thoughts on ‘ratting’ but I would be shocked if Texas tosses aside its cash cow because it refused to make sure recruiting in-state was ‘fair’ to Texas. They may have been willing to toss away winning to SMU and A&M in 80s and 90s. I am betting the money involved wasn’t anywhere near the same level (even adjusting for inflation). I am just not so sure the school would be willing to sit idly by watching the profits wash away because other teams are buying all the talent in-state.

And excuse my grammer – I’ve been up since 3:30 this morning. FML.

“Only if they wanted to keep their #1 college football property on board for the loing term.”

ESPN is the only company overpaying for college football – for SEC, for ACC, for Texas. No other media company is paying what they’re paying. If ESPN wants the SEC to include A&M/OU, it can happen. I think such a deal would greatly disrupt ESPN’s current arrangements, however, so I think that ship has sailed. For ESPN, the channel is already profitable just as ESPN Deportes is profitable. It’s just another bundle item in their dual-revenue stream business model.

“No other media company is paying what they’re paying.”

Yet

“The reason we did not move to the SEC this summer was b/c of political pressure. "

The political pressure would not have factored if A&M and Texas went to the Pac 16 together with Tech. It also wouldn’t have mattered if the Big 12 wasn’t saved (cocktail napkin deals). At the point when Stallings went public against going to the Pac-16, everyone assumed the Big 12 was history. The weekend came, and Beebe got the proposal to save the Big 12.

The SEC was entertaining the option of adding A&M and possibly OU both as a Plan B, but mostly as a way of nixing the Pac-16 idea. Now that there’s no threat from the Pac-16 (with Texas/OU), there’s no incentive for them to add A&M or anyone. Why would ESPN cut Texas a check for $300m for 1 football game a year, then wait for the SEC to ask for more money to accomodate A&M? They want the Big 12 to stay as is.

The only way Texas & A&M can leave in seperate directions is if the Big 12 disintegrates. With a Big 12 in existence as a BCS conference, you’ll have Baylor, Tech contigent after you. You’ll also get pressure from the UH/TCU crowd.

I believe A&M made a mistake of not following UT’s plan to the Pac 16. First, keep in mind the Division we would have been in – all Southwest schools (Arizona, Arizona St, Colorado, OU, Okie St, Tech, Texas, A&M). You’d only play 2 Pacific schools per year. One could argue that the SEC would have been better for A&M, but that would only be contigent on the disintegration of the Big 12.

At this time, it’s in nobody’s best interest but A&M to join the SEC (even that’s debatable). Unless it’s in ESPN’s business model, it’s not happening.

"No other media company is paying what they’re paying."

“Yet”

ESPN owns the rights of 33 of the 35 bowl games. Doesn’t take a meat judge champion to figure out who’s overpaying for college football games.

Seriously, the adults are trying to have a discussion here. Take the name calling ot www.hornfans.com

“Seriously, the adults are trying to have a discussion here. Take the name calling ot ”http://www.hornfans.com" target="_blank">http://www.hornfans.com"

You do realize this is Barking Carnival, home of Clipper Cooper? If you can’t handle a little “meat judging” humor…..

In any case, ESPN is clearly controlling the marketplace. They are credited by most with saving the Big 12, so it appears to be in their best interest to keep the Big 12 intact and prevent Superconferences. They also paid 4-5times the value for the Longhorn content. I don’t see that A&M has the choice to move to the SEC at this time.

Do you know what A&M gets in actual value by leaving the Big XII? I don’t see the step change improvement in your football program with a move to SEC or elsewhere.

About the only thing that the Ags would have gotten out of it – and don’t forget, the tentative SEC offer that was being discussed at one point would have kicked them in the nuts financially – was self-esteem by proxy. Getting to yell “SEC! SEC! SEC!” after beating up on McNeese State in non-conference can do wonders for the soul, which is what the alums wanted.

I’ll grant Taylor the argument that the Pac 16 was a bad fit for the Ags, but the SEC would have been – and still would be – a disaster in the long run. They were embarrassed twice this year by two teams in the SEC West and for some reason wanted to sign up to make it an annual experience.

The ags make me laugh. I don’t know this to be true but I’ve heard Bragg mention it and he would be one to know but apparently Byrne was approached by Dodds originally to go tandem in the network and Byrne turned him down. If you hate Texas more than you like yourself than you have issues and A&M’s image issues are rooted deep.

Working with the t-sips is an intolerable thought for a true red ass Ag. That’s a shortsighted view. The SWC formation, construction of Kyle Field and Memorial Stadium, PUF creation, and the Big 12 formation were all accomplished with mutual cooperation between the schools. I really don’t believe TAMU can leave for the SEC without UT’s support. In fairness, I believe the same for UT- we can’t leave without the Ags’ support, no matter who the governor is.

I think I’ve seen this one before.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WDZp9vAVHc

“It’s astounding to me that politicians are willing to — or at least threaten to — wreck the funding of two of the state’s best institutions for higher learning all in the name of football conference affiliation”

I’d like to see someone call the politician’s bluff on this one. I just don’t think it would happen. It might not even be legal for it to happen.

“I’d like to see someone call the politician’s bluff on this one. I just don’t think it would happen. It might not even be legal for it to happen.”

Higher education funding in Texas is under the knife and is first in line for budget cuts. Without getting political, legislators are lining up to decrease state funding for them. You get the wrong Baylor, TCU, UH grad on the wrong committee you’re toast. UT’s legislative council must be walking on egg shells these days with the hard feelings from jealous aggies. No one’s going to come out and say, “we made additional cuts, because they left without Baylor,” but that’s what the end result may be.

And, I wouldn’t blame them. If you found out that UT made Barking Carnival and Shaggy ban you, wouldn’t you want some payback?

I would really like to see the Big 9 put their own network together. I am dead serious about that. See, the Texas Network can’t show away games without the other schools’ permission. They are not likely to give it. Therefore, there needs to be another channel so I can watch Texas baseball away games.

It seems to me that if the Ags don’t form their own TV channel, they are extremely short sighted. They have a very large fan base and I would think they could get a damn good deal.

If they want to spread the risk even further, they could approach one or two other Big 12 schools say OU and Missouri , about forming a joint channel (why subsidize half the Big 12 if you don’t half to)? Twice the programing half the risk.

I think the Ags in the SEC might be a big win for them, but it could also be a major disaster if they can’t improve their football program fast enough to start winning right away.

Bill “Tongue in Austin” Byrne wrote:

Surely he knows that OU is well on their way towards forming their own channel, so talking about a 9-team channel being the most likely option sounds like the usual Aggie FOWS (Full of Wishful Shit) talk. Especially since MO is looking into their own channel and Kansas started exploring such a year ago.

Coming soon, the Aggie Shopping Network!

I don’t understand why Ag feels running off to SEC is better than trying to form their own network. They have a strong brand, large & loyal alumni base, & strong tier 3 sports. In the SEC they would be middle to bottom half of the pack. I would rather explore starting my own network, strengthening my brand, and try solidify a spot as a top 3 in the Big 12. Do they doubt the fan base would support something all Ag?

What has caught everyone by surprise with the UT deal is not that they planned to role out a network this fall. Everyone knew UT planned to give it a go. Most thought it was a loosing business proposition. Pipe dream. UT just blew everyone away with the deal the struck. Not only is UT not going to loose money, but they are going to get PAID. They have also partnered with very strong partners who have the incentive & track record to make it a success. There are probably 5-10 programs who are watching this carefully and looking follow suit if UT is successful. I doubt ESPN plans to just have one school on the payroll. Could the Big 12-2 be in a position to add a program who might be blocked by their current conference?

Ag In Tx, appreciate your Aggie opinion on a Horn’s website but I have to disagree with your take on the SEC move, TTR is correct, its doesnt make any sense for A&M to move to the SEC, here is the reason why, you would get mudholed every football season and finish with a .500 conf record at best and throw in a few Non conf patsies and you might win 6-7 games a year which would leave your beloved stadium empty after 4-5 years and then where do you get the money to help fill the coffers.

I can tell you this, OU and UT dont want any part of the SEC, they know there best chance to win conf and NC is in the Big 12 or PAC 16, your correct in that it is about money but believe me the money wont be there if the product on the field sucks and cant be compeitive. Why do you think Mack fired so many coaches, they have to win to keep the money train rolling.

I live in Big 10 country and I can tell you Michigan is alot more worried about winning than money at this point.

Hook em!

Really terrific piece on why things remained the same with the Big 12-2. Thank you for posting it. Some of the loose dots appear better connected.

Without Texas and/or A&M, there is no conference to speak of. You are down to a really water down version of the old Big 8, which has zero value to the television networks.

Three points that need to be raised but were not in this piece.

One, OU is going to create their own network. It will not be for the same money as UT’s nor will it have the same reach in terms of cable systems. However, it will serve its purpose; maintaining OU’s dominance in Oklahoma and improving its recruiting in north Texas. OU’s leadership continues to make a concerted effort to transform OU into a well regarded regional university. They are allocating the resources to achieve this goal. Two years ago, OU crossed the 50% threshold of funding where more than half of OU’s operating budget came from research grants.

OU’s network will end any discussion of a Big 12-2 cable network ala the Big 11’s.

Two, Texas’ state budget presents a big problem for Rick Perry. As the piece notes, Perry runs TAMU. When Perry is done with Austin, I expect he will become president of TAMU or head of the board. However, he and the Republicans need to paper over a $25 billion deficit in the interim.

Perry will not raise taxes. Texas remains a low service state. Expect the remaining services like insurance, education, and prisons to feel the brunt of the budget axe. Heck, Perry already wants to close four junior colleges. A deal with the public universities will be worked out. The state will further reduce its contribution to higher education. In return, Austin will give up almost all control over the state universities including TAMU. Thus, the state legislature will have less clout over conference realignment involving the public universities.

In 2003, when the state faced its last deep budget crisis, Austin ceded control of tuition to each university. Tuition rates increased dramatically. I expect the appropriations oversight to be reduced greatly as a result of this budget crisis.

Third, nothing was resolved in the last conference realignments. Everybody is taking a breather and plotting their next move. No one knows how things will shake out but expect UT and OU, at a minimum, to move to the Pac 12. TAMU will move to the SEC. Everything else remains up in the air. It is no coincidence that OU’s rise in prominence gained traction with the creation of the Big 12. OU’s president, David Boren, convinced the state legislature and the money people that the benchmark was now Texas and not simply Kansas and Nebraska. In 20 years, I could see Oklahoma joining AAU, a collection of high power research universities. OU does not get to that point by following TAMU to the SEC.

In about three years, we will see conference movement again. I have no idea where Texas Tech and Oklahoma State will land. I do feel more confident, though, that TAMU will part company with Texas and OU.

Doesnt every state have a shortfall budget to deal with this year? Its not like this scenario is unique to the state of Texas. Neither is the fact that graduates from rival universities are in the state legislature. I think there is some over thinking here regarding what Texas or A&M can do without “walking on egg shells” or hurting feelings of others. To be honest, the governor of Texas actually has the least power of any gov in the country. You can anaylize that all you want but that is a well known fact.

To be honest, the governor of Texas actually has the least power of any gov in the country. You can anaylize that all you want but that is a well known fact.

The governor’s real power is through appointments — including Board of Regents. He has been in place for longer than any governor, which means he has friends in place all over the state.

Let’s nip this silliness once and for all.

(1) A&M NEVER had an SEC invitation, formally or otherwise. Everyone stop talking about it!! Sure, a few folks flew around on private jets and shared Shiner and chicken fried steaks. But there was NEVER even the smallest hint of an SEC invitation. The ONLY possible window had A&M in a package with Texas or OU. But that was NEVER going to happen. Period. The Pac 16 deal was DONE! A&M had agreed to the terms. But then they started acting like…. well… Aggies by talking silliness about a different wedding that never existed, a wedding with them as the bride but without a groom (read: the SEC).
(2) Texas and OU were joined at the hip. Neither school is stupid, after all.
(3) OU and OSU were joined at the other hip. I can promise you on a stack of hotel bibles that there was no way on God’s green earth that OU would have moved without OSU. Take it to the bank.
(4) A&M’s jacking-off gave the Big XII time to re-negotiate a new TV contract that held things together…. Unfortunately, if only temporarily.
(5) Going forward the dynamics of items 1 – 3 will not change.
(6) The next round of realignment will not be as organized, deliberate or as gentlemanly (let’s call it) as the most recent round. It will be every man, women and child for themselves; change without logic, and without time for serious deliberation. Dogs loving cats. Cats loving mice. It promises to be ugly and a total realignment of all the deck chairs. I thing UT is positioned well for that pending upheaval.

Speculation….

• UT, TT, OSU & OU will (again) have a better chance of landing together than does UT & A&M. And that’s the way it should be. It’s time to cut the coattails. In independent Texas isn’t the answer, in my opinion.
• Should by some bazaar form of origami A&M finds themselves in the SEC they will officially become competitive with Vandy, Ole Miss and MSU. They will be lucky to win 25% of their games against LSU, AL, FL…

Very interesting thread. Good stuff here. aTm needs to look into its soul and decide who it wants to be. It can be a great modern university if it wants to.

milevin, thanks for the thoughts. There are times when I think Boren has OU on track for the AAU. And then there are times when he writes letters to the PAC-10 to complain about officiating…

Those are interesting predictions for the legislature. It’s clear they won’t be giving more money to the schools. It’s a funny thing- the legislature contribution keeps dropping as a percentage, but the schools need that money so badly that the influence is still huge.

There is one more avenue of legislatire control – the PUF. I know, I know, it belongs to the schools, and the state can’t take it away…except that every time the legislature threatens to try, UT and TAMU consent to surrendering some of the money.

In short, I’m not ready to underestimate the legislature’s control over this again.

Ag_In_Texas, you mentioned the Ags are ready to move in response to a shortfall in media payments from the Big 12. What I don’t get is- why would there be a shortfall, especially if the conference knew it needed to make the full payment to avoid a confrontation?

TTR – because the Little 5 are not going to be able to make thier athletic departments work by giving up so much of their conference revenue to A&M. how do you think the taxpayers of Kansas are going to feel about giving up so much revenue to a school in Texas?

Perhaps they’ll find a way to pull it together, but the math just isn’t there to make the “devil’ sdeal” of last summer work out.

And rich – seriously, stop it. I can assure you that a deal for A&M – and A&M alone – to join the SEC was offered last summer. A parallel deal was offered to OU, but neither offer was dependent on the other. And the understanding A&M has with the SEC is that they are only a phone call away and a deal can be struck at any time.

“And rich – seriously, stop it. I can assure you that a deal for A&M – and A&M alone – to join the SEC was offered last summer.”

Then they should have taken it. Ag, respectfully…. I can assure you that there IS no [SEC] deal or agreement, there never WAS a deal or agreement, and that OU has now nor had then any interest whatsoever in an SEC deal with or without A&M. And that, regardless, OU wasn’t going anywhere without TX and/or OSU. Those are just facts, straight from the BOR level. Of course, I’m always open to some factual reference to the contrary (other than something from a Lucci or similar maroon tinted glasses blog). I REALLY appreciate and understand the reasons behind the alternate reality (some) Ags continue to paint on all this but, as you say, “stop it.” Again, produce something…. anything… beyond an internet ‘he said, she said’ blog report and I am more than happy to retract admit I am wrong.

You know, due to sensitivities of my sources, I just have to tell you your source is wrong and is not as well connected to A&M as my source. I’ll just leave it at that.

I should had said:

I can assure you that there IS no [SEC] deal, agreement OR OFFER, there never WAS a deal or agreement OR OFFER [for A&M to join the SEC alone]…

Again, produce something to the contrary and I’m more than happy to be wrong.

Good luck to the Ags. Whatever their future is?

OK. We’re both confortable with our sources and on record. Moving on.

A&M is worried about being the red headed step child of the Big12-2, yet won’t even be that in the SEC. They already lose out on the big recruits they want to Texas and LSU, thats not going to change. They may have a chance at 3rd tier guys in Arkansas & Mississipi but thats about it. If this is solely about money how is it going to be any different then what they have with the new tv deal. On a year to year basis they will be on the same level as Ole Miss and Miss St. and will be on the losing end of a conference record more times than not. If Rick Perry is running this show A&M has even more to be worried about.

i can see the sec being in no position to attach a&m and not that much interest, for that matter. espn is in no way interested in having the big tenwelve damaged at this juncture and would not be the least interested in reworking the sec numbers. what’s in it for them to do that? nothing. it would harm espn interests, and they are not going to do that.

what i do see is an opportunity for the ags, like the sooners, to develop their own channel and have it nicely supported, essentially wiping out the shortfall that has plagued them. a partnership among the remaining programs on a network would be no surprise at all.

moreover, the individualist nature of the big tenwelve will continue to be attractive to programs like nd and byu, and i can envision a thoroughly casual scheduling partnership that promotes contact between those schools and our conference schools. five years from now even the dullest of ags will see that they would be nuts to leave this arrangement. the persons behind this revolution are redefining the business model for college athletics, and other conferences are going to be behind the curve on this.

More from CBS on Byrne being a bit miffed:

http://college-football-blog.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/24156338/27258796

“I can’t speak for the NCAA, but I would imagine the governing body will look into the use of a collegiate television network airing games of prospective student-athletes,” Byrne said in a statement. “I understand networks such as FSN and ESPN airing high school sports, but whether or not employees under contract with a university that may have additional contact would seem to be an issue” …

“There are many questions regarding this new contract that will be discussed at length here at Texas A&M and within the Big 12 Conference, as well as with our television partners.”

@agintx – I know your rather strong feelings on Bill Byrne. He doesn’t seem like a guy who will be there long. Is that the consensus?

It’s interesting, and revealing I think, to look at how the administrations and athletic departments of OU and A&M are approaching the Texas situation.

OU seems to be in effect shrugging, saying “well, that’s a drag”, and then rolling up its sleeves and getting to work on rectifying the situation whether by setting up its own network or quietly making sure it’s keeping its options open as to further realignment down the road. Practical, as ever, from the Sooners.

A&M – in the form of Byrne – seems to have gotten stuck in a whine spiral running around to every- and anyone complaining about how unfair it is, and how they’re going to band up with the other Big 12 schools (whether those potential partners want to do so or not) and making not-too-subtle threats about running off to another conference (whether that conference wants them to or not).

As Ag_in_TX says above, the adults are trying to have a conversation. It would do A&M a world of good to get rid of that petulant teenage girl occupying the AD chair in CS and start facing this issue – in public as well as private – with a hell of a lot more practicality.

It really is time for A&M as an institution to give up this infantile shit that’s rooted in the distant past. In all other areas, they seem to have either done so or are making serious progress in doing so.

And it’s not like they have to give up the on-field hate either. I don’t see a lot of warm and fuzzies between Ohio State and Michigan, or Auburn and Alabama, or Florida and Georgia, or USC and UCLA, or Texas and OU when it comes to athletic competition.

I think you are completely misreading Byrne on the 3rd tier rights situation. He has said all along that he thinks that, collectively, the 3rd tier rights of the conference members provide enough programming to make a cable channel devoted to such programming more than an empty channel on the satellite lineup. He doesn’t want a stand along A&M network because he knows that no school has enough programming to make a stand alone network attractive to cable subscribers on the merits—the only way such networks have any hope of generating good subscriber fees is to get a partner to force them on cable carriers. In contrast, a 9 team channel that had 3rd tier A&M, OU, Tech, OSU, and the rest of the Big XII would actually have a live football game most Saturdays, and a whole lot more live programming to choose from the rest of the year. While Byrne hates UT and Dodds, nothing in the statements that you quoted justified your conclusion as to his motives for wanting to form this cable channel.

This looks like a job for an economist that studies interdependence. Looks like the Ags are willing to lose some of their own money, in order to “burn” that of the Longhorns.

Truthfully, it’s a pretty interesting theory, now backed by some real empirical data.

http://personal.lse.ac.uk/zapal/EC501_2007_2008/Rustichini_background1.pdf

CrazyJoe,

Well played, sir. Liked the glove-slap to the face by reminding that Texas’ big rivalry is with land thief, not farmer. Raider and bear would view farmer as their no. 1 rival if they didn’t hate Texas so much and if farmer were actually more competitive on a consistent basis.

Byrne is that toilet paper stuck to bottom of farmer’s shoe as farmer departs the men’s room.

Texas A&M Bolting to the SEC Is Just a Matter of Time
By Clay Travis

Senior NCAA Writer | Follow on Twitter: @ClayTravisBGID

http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/2011/01/27/texas-aandm-bolting-to-the-sec-is-just-a-matter-of-time/

Clay Travis doesn’t think rationally very well. It’s all emotion and frustration in that piece.

Yeah, that article reads kind of silly. But I still hold by my prediction made here:

http://spenceparksoapbox.fantake.com/2010/08/02/texas-am-to-begin-sec-play-in-2013/

that A&M will announce departure this summer and start play in SEC in 2013.

Ag, that would be a shame.

“Any Ag that says they only want to join the SEC if Texas doesn’t is revealing too clearly their real motivation.”

As an Ag that wants to join the SEC without Texas, I can say my motivation isn’t what I’m assuming you are implying. It has nothing whatsoever to do with sticking it to UT.

It actually has to do with something you stated later in your writeup:

“Second, they need to develop a media strategy that leverages the value of their brand (and it does have value). "

Our brand is seriously devalued by sharing a conference with Texas. tjarks nailed it, we need to establish an identity that is distinct from our relationship with the school in Austin. An identity as the “Texas team in the SEC” would be a very strong, and very marketable identity in my opinion.

But, doesn’t Texas always have the option of joining the SEC, too? If the move works wonders for the Ags, why wouldn’t Texas follow? Because the legislature won’t let us, after letting you? Because you’ll convince the SEC not to?

Because you don’t want to. The UT administration has made that abundantly clear.

Not wanting to join the SEC is like not wanting to leave your house through your bedroom window. You don’t want to, but when circumstances require you to (i.e. house on fire), you absolutely do it, and with relish.

You boys would go indy before joining the villiany and scum of the SEC.

(1) Every Longhorn on here is ethically okay with the idea of Texas holding the conference together for a few years until the logistics of declaring Inependence are fully prepared and ready;

 BUT

(2) they have a problem with A&M going to the SEC.

Move #1 is fatal to the conference; Move #2 is not.

Conflicted reason at best, hypocritical at worst

No one, at least that I’m aware of, on the UT hierarchy has mentioned going indy. Most of the “UT going indy” talk emanates from aggies in justification for seeking a move to the SEC.

UT doesn’t need independence, it has the best of both worlds.