Mondays In The Humidor With The Big Cigar

Thanks JS for the info

Who do the players seem to be backing at QB at this point? I would assume Shipley backing McCoy makes sense, but even he has to know Ash appears to be the future..

Great write up JS, thanks! In terms of realignment (I know, I know) and OU being led around by the nose. Is it possible, now that the Texas Bigs have gone North to ask (beg) OU to stay, That Sooners brass will back off the PAC move a bit? Maybe they feel they’re in charge now and they’re saving the Big 12, that they’re no longer UT’s whores because we came crawling back to them. Maybe they just wanted attention all along….

Now I can go to sleep, good night everyone. Why is it so bright outside….YOU THERE! What time is it?

Whoa! Woke up and saw the headline, thought I was late for my Monday class. ha!

Here’s what I know: boners are predicted.

Cotton Bowl? Personally, I’d give us one chance in three. More tea anyone?

All this realignment uncertainty get more discouraging by the day. Lets just play football.

Cliques behind QBs are bad; hopefully the schism there had more to do with a desire to see more of Ash/McCoy and less of Gilbert, rather than an Ash vs. McCoy schism. That could be devastating.

Frankly, having certain players assigned to packages with certain QBs is more or less guaranteed to cause those kind of problems. Coaches should be able to predict as much. That is a weak excuse for Bergeron not playing, in my opinion. That kind of thing rankles.

Otherwise, interesting. OU may outplay us here. Independence is not a very good option, IMO. ACC is even worse.

I’m not a huge fan of rotating QB but here it may be a necessity for a while to see Ash/McCoy just like we did in the 2nd half against BYU. I went from going WTF?!?!!? To thinking it flowed pretty well. The team is really good at making 4-5 subs per play and it definitely keeps the D on their heals.

JS,
By form a new conference, does BC mean adding to the existing Big 12 or picking parts of the Big 12 (OU, OSU, Tech, KU, ?), maybe a few parts elsewhere, and then trying to add ND and BYU?

I had to stop myself from laughing out loud on this one.

     JS: Kind of like Cortez burning his ships?

     BC: I don’t know what that even means.

Different cliques supporting different QBs in the locker room? Sounds like the end of season 1 of Game of Thrones.

thank goodness it didn’t cost us a game.

This.

My greatest fear for the team has been just such an occurrence. A one-point win is as close as you can get. Like many of you, I really have a soft spot for Gilbert, but that spot is in my heart, not in my head. I think we went way too far with him against BYU, and I don’t want to see any more of that.

On the other hand, there’s no good reason we can’t have a Kerberos monster out there.

Here’s a question – other than the injury possibility, does Garrett have the same sort of physical abilities as Griffin? That is, can he play a little TE/HB? Yeah, it sounds stupid, given that we have 37 TE on scholly already, but if he can catch and do a little blocking (at least obstruction, anyhow) it opens things up a little more, with regard to confusing the fuck out of the D…. Hey, waitaminnit! McCoy and Brown back, with Gilbert and Bergeron up, looking like That Damn ‘Cat? WTF? Don’t tell me Gilbert’s going to run a route? Take a pitch and run? Take a pitch and pass? Holy hell, what we gone do now, Coach?

One other thing: Realignment is stupid, stupid, stupid. I like the idea of having a nine-game “regular” schedule and a four-round regional playoff, times eight, followed by a three-round playoff for champions of the eight regions. Keep the conferences, no problem. Keep (most of) the Bowl games, no problem.

Perhaps the player cliques regarding the QB situation was before McCoy & Ash were promoted over Gilbert. In other words, anybody but Gilbert?

George, they wanted to pick parts and add ND and BYU in some capacity. That’s probably not going to happen now.

As for the QB politicking, I can’t really get into specifics but I think it’s a moot point for now.

In the post-game Shipley talked about what a leader McCoy was and how he just came in and took control of the huddle. Makes me nervous to see the roommate saying this to the media. Seems like Shipley is already pushing for his best bud to be the starter.

“Kind of like Cortez burning his ships?”

I think it means Navy is not under consideration for Big 12 expansion.

Thanks, JS and BC. Great stuff.

I agree that any QB schism/divide is probably a moot point, and anything like that probably comes from the defensive side. Same thing seemed to happen last year, not that we had a QB alternative in 2010.

Offensive leadership is a major problem. We have two O-linemen who are seniors, and a couple of part-time TEs as well as Cody and Fozzy. Really young group - all our QBs and WRs (except Goodwin) are first or second-year players and our most used (best?) linemen are a freshman and two sophomores. Gonna be hard to rally around THE quarterback when we have at least two in the mix.

I saw an interview with Shipley where he said he “loved all three QBS” and would state no preference. Plus, he is also an effective passing duo with Ash; they’re one for one on a huge play.

“That is a weak excuse for Bergeron not playing, in my opinion. That kind of thing rankles.”

Going back and looking at the flow of the game, I’m not sure where he snaps were supposed to come from. Fozzy only had 4 carries and you can’t argue that he should have taken snaps from Brown or DJ. I think the bigger issue in this game was that we had so many poor possessions (3 and outs and INT’s), especially in the first half. Without the slow start we probably have

close to twice the number of plays in the game.

Not sure why this cut off.

Wouldn’t shock me to see young Shipley pick up the reigns and lead the offense. He’s vocal and energetic. Plays hard too. I get that he is young but so is everyone good.

You arrogant ass. You’ve killed us.

No offense to your guy but not sure he can see the numbers from his suites. Pretty sure it was Whaley (96) not Daniels pressuring the QB on that 2nd to last drive.

Wild guess that Case is the one politicking, since Ash is a freshman and has no leverage to do so. I raised an eyebrow at Shipley’s post-game interview on the field; it was in the heat of the moment and he said something to the effect of Case leading the team to victory. Seemed like a stretch to me – even though Case piloted the game winning drive, the defense won this game, and offensively, it was a team effort.

Shipley supporting Case, in public and behind the scenes, makes sense, and he’s got some pull as the best receiver on the team, and as a natural leader.

My guess is it was more about McCoy v. Gilbert than McCoy v. Ash anyway, and with the different packages Harsin will use for each, I don’ t think this comes to a head this year. NEXT year could be a different story.

I can tell you exactly what the QB cliques were:

Ash/McCoy: Everyone but one guy.

Gilbert: Mike Davis

great report. much appreciated.

i think we are going to see a lot of qbs running this offense from now on. that looks like a harsin m.o. to me. if so, there’s no reason for anybody to get his or her nose out of alignment (there’s that word). there will be something for everybody, and everybody will get his opportunity to shine. one of the really nice things about how the harsinwhite offense is going to operate.

Thanks, JS.

“But stranger things have happened and they’d be open to the LHN. The PAC 12 will never happen until they change their stance on our network.”

It may not be a popular attitude around here, but to hell with the LHN in its current form, and to special accommodations being sought from the PAC or the B1G before joining. A Pac move is in our best interests, academically and culturally, and I think it’s a safe assumption that such a choice would be popular with the student body.

"Kind of like Cortez burning his ships?"

Clearly, The Big Cigar was not a Plan II major.

I have a feeling that Ash has a LOT of support among the players. Did you notice that immediately prior to the pass from Shipley, that he was noticeably limping back to the huddle? VY, Colt, Ship, Quan, all kept busting ass even though they were banged up. Players respond to that.

BYU has serious NFL talent on their defense?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Made me laugh. The only talent they have on that side would be for Madden NFL 12 by Electronic Arts.

Shipley’s been very effusive in his praise of McCoy after the game. I think he needs to rachet it down a bit…it sounds more like politicing than praise.

Philly: Rosters on NFL video games mirror the rosters of NFL teams. But it’s cute watching you try to think.

So, Philly Frog, you don’t buy the whole “best front 7 they’ve had in 20 years” line that all their fans kept spouting before the game?

Hope the ACC smoke has some fire to it. If it happened, I’d get to drive to games from my VA home. Those of you visiting could see some beautiful country, but skip the shitty BBQ. Oh, Lord, let this take place!

I have checked and checked my cable channel line-up, and I can’t find this LHN thing… And it is on this basis that we’re making realignment decisions? The ACC might be seriously considered just because they’d let us keep a network nobody can see?!? Do the money math people. PAC 16 would be worth WAAAAAAY more than ACC+LHN money.

I’m really hoping this is just an attempt to leverage the PAC into something, because talk of going anywhere other than PAC or B1G is just lunacy.

On cliques: Kids form groups. This is not news. A stronger position from the coaches coming out of the spring might have nipped it in the bud, but probably not. I give the coaches all the credit in the world for being patient the past two games to see what they really had at QB. Gilbert showed his true colors, McCoy and Ash seem well on their way to earning their stripes.

JS, a truly great report, keep up the great work. I think we should just go ahead and rename them Tuesdays in the Humidor though…

I thought the same thing as others about Shipley, but also all the “I told the team to rally around me” quotes from McCoy. I did like them tagging eachother in and out of the game, that seemed cool.

i’m racking what’s still functional in my brain, but i don’t remember a coach cortez. why did he play so many true freshmen, anyway?

[no, i’m not serious.]

I dont worry about any cliques right now. I think HarsinWhite will be patient and see what kind of team leadership develops and then step in if necessary.

I wouldnt be at all surprised to see us stall out a bit as the Ash/McCoy deal gets fully scouted by defenses and wouldnt be all that surprised to see Gilbert come off the bench and have a little success.

Each of the QBs has real limitations at this point and that isnt going to get resolved fully this season.

Is there a defensive end named Alex Okafor on the Longhorns? I could have sworn he was in practices…

That was an intelligent rant, bullzak

Regarding conference realignment, I thought I remembered reading that Dodds had figured out all the scenarios and that we’d land somewhere desirable . . . but now it seems the confluence of decisions by A&M, Baylor and OU are limiting our options. Up until now, I thought there was some mind-blowing master strategy that would surpass my wildest dreams and fill rivals with envy.

However, now the future is starting to smell like “independence” and a network. If that’s the case, any chance we get the same BCS deal Notre Dame has? Finish in the top 8 = automatic BCS berth?

I’m pretty sure the Cotez was that Exxon boat or whatever that they had to light on fire so the gas didn’t get all over Alaska.

Good stuff, Jesus.

I could give two rats about TLN if there is nothing worth watching because we are playing crappy competition in a worthless conference, have lost all of our historic rivalries and/or are an independent in nowhere land. I would rather have a respectable conference affiliation than TLN

FatherRuss, with UT struggling so bad with donations and all, it will be worth the money. A $145 million budget won’t go very far with more quantitative easing.

Dodds is scheduled to be here next week.

Rumblings about QB is not a big negative. It probably is, as said, moot at this point. The fact is we are getting better every week and faster than expected. So far this season is better than expected. Two things I love about football are winning and watching a system being built so I’m loving this team.

I do have a question. It seems the freshmen listen to the coaches and execute — no questions asked. The disappointing plays seem to be made by the better players of last year. Did playing last year screw them up that much? What’s going on?

I think it’s time to start rethinking the LHN. At least publicly it doesn’t look like UT has any leverage at all. And Independence would be absolutely stupid. What would there be to play for? National Championships? Sure but is that really a reasonable goal every year? BCS games? I don’t think winning a bowl game can equate to a Conference Championship. Dodds needs to realize not everything should be decided based on money. Being in a conference gives you at least a sporting chance of a championship every year. At least that is a reasonably attainable goal most years if not every year for a team like Texas.

I am still a proponent of the LHN. I think Dodds should maximize its profitability and exposure for Texas but ultimately that might mean folding into something else and coming out with a 80/20 or 70/30 split.

“As for the coaches, they’re standing by their promise to play the best players regardless of seniority or status.”

It is great to hear that the coaches are not making biased decisions and are getting the best guys out there. Has taken a rather tortuous and unconventional path, but we are getting there. In my opinion, special treatment has been one thing that has held this team back through the Mack Brown era. Looks like we are finally beyond that obstacle. You’ve got to be excited about this team.

Jesus et al.,

Regarding the QB cliques, is this exclusively a McCoy/ Ash split or is there some faction of the team who continues to support Gilbert in spite of his poor performance?

I thought that Shipley’s comments, and his quotes of what McCoy said, sounded like preprogrammed campaigning before I even read this report. Rather awkward and heavy handed campaigning, at that, and I cannot help but think about the presence that Dad McCoy has had in this program ever since Colt was here. Obviously, I don’t know anything for certain, but those statements really did sound like partisan press releases, beyond what would be expected of one player praising another.

Regarding the LHN: I am another Texas Ex who feels that cranking up this particular money machine has worked against the best interests of Texas Longhorn football. Most people can’t even see it on their televisions, it’s shattering the conference no matter how much we tell ourselves it isn’t our fault, and it’s beginning to look like Texas might not have much of a conference left to play in. Unfortunately, Texas is coming to personify selfishness and greed to every one else around the country. Please spare me the rebuttals about We’re Texas and everyone else is just jealous, and we’re looking out for our own interests, etc. Making money isn’t the only justification for doing things, and you can make money without wrecking everything around you. Mine may not be the majority view, but at his point the LHN network looks to me like it may be a golden anchor tied to our ankles as we plunge into the deep water of realignment.

On a brighter note, Harsin is exactly the kind of crazy genius we need, and Diaz may be, too. I look for Harsin to make some exciting and effective adjustments/expansions to the role of both young quarterbacks, starting with the next game. My prediction: They start working with Ash to pass more, including longer balls downfield. Look for it against UCLA.

Ganchalos Cuernos.

Let not your hearts be troubled. Texas has always and will always rise above the rabble and come out glistening like the diamond she is. The Big 12 is salvageable. If Austin wants it, it will succeed. If not, another conference will be blessed. Wherever we cast our orange glow, hearts and pocketbooks will be enlarged, and frowns will crinkle into silly grins.

I will definitely resent the LHN if it means we play as an independent or in the ACC. Not everything has to be about money. What worries me is I am not entirely sure the people making this decision have any other motivation other than to maximize revenue.

If they use it as leverage and want to protect it as much as possible, fine. But it better not mean we lose the affiliation with OU or play in some half ass conference. To me that will not be an acceptable outcome. Especially considering hardly anyone can even watch this channel right now.

I’m still trying to figure out what’s wrong with independence. All we need to do is ramp up our schedule just enough for it to be equal to what it would be in 2012 without Aggy which, though it might take until 2013, doesn’t seem too hard. I have little doubt we’d still play Tech and OU and ND’s rep would essntially wash out Missouri, which leaves only OSU to deal with, and they might still want to play us for recruiting reasons. And yes, we might still play Baylor, as much as I’d hate to just based on personal dislike for all things Baylor.

As far as the BCS, Boise and TCU have been in BCS bowls as much as we have lately and both were in the MNC picture with cream puff schedules when they weren’t in BCS conferences. Does anyone have any doubt that an undefeated Texas team would be out of the picture with or without a ND type of deal? Even a one loss Texas team would be in there with a couple of schedule add-ons.

Would we rather be in a conference—-I strongly suspect we would. But I don’t think we’d settle for something like ACC unless they drastically alter their their current make-up in some way. I believe we would survive independence while waiting for the super conference era to manifest itself in a couple or three more years.

Jake – I think that as far as football goes, we could almost certainly make a go of it as an independent. It is the rest of our athletic programs that get screwed. I know none of them bring in the revenue of football, but they will all suffer and the overall quality of our athletic programs will decline. To me that is the reason that independence is a bad option.

I don’t see that the LHN should be such a damn barrier. If it gets dropped, when the PAC’s regional networks open up, we’ll end up with most of the money we’re getting from the network frickin’ anyway. Other than being a mouthpiece for the university, it’s not necessary.

I still have little doubt that we will find a way to make the LHN work in the conference of our choosing. There may have to be tweaks to the contract, but I think it will get done.

Maybe I am guilty of having too much faith in Powers and Dodds, but I can’t imagine they are going to park us in the ACC or a watered down Big 12. UT used Chip last go around to spread disinformation around like confetti to help leverage its position, and I have to think the ACC stuff is either out right speculation from people not in the know, or deliberate misinformation to serve a purpose.

Monahorns and radicaldrops, exactly. I’m tired of the “Dodds has a master strategy” talk that presupposes that every other program/conference in the country is falling all over themselves to give Texas what they want. It’s a fallacy that needs to be dissipated quickly.

Let me be clear, I’m not saying Dodds has done anything wrong up to this point, and using the ACC to possibly leverage PAC to give us a livable deal on LHN is probably genius. The problem is, other players keep getting handed power they didn’t have before:

1). SEC hands Baylor the stick they need to beat A&M, at least temporarily. We could have an entirely different and interesting discussion about WHY the SEC chose to go that route, but they did.
2). PAC figured out that the best way to get Texas was destroy the Big XII, so they let OU/OSU know that their “offer” is NOT contingent on Texas coming too.

In the super conference expansion game, there are 4 valuable “free agent” properties out there (if you assume Big XII is no more). Texas, Notre Dame, OU, and BYU. Now, of the big player conferences, the SEC is in the best position. Even without expanding, they have arguably the best top-to-bottom conference in football. The B1G probably holds second, because if the rush comes, they’ll get ND. ND doesn’t go anywhere else. And if B1G gets ND, they don’t NEED Texas. They might want them, or think they do, but don’t need them.

This leaves the PAC, Big East, and ACC scrambling. OU doesn’t look to have interest in going anywhere but PAC. If Texas for some reason doesn’t, and PAC needs to get to 16, which I’m not 100% sure they do, they can look at BYU and some other school to do it.. So arguably, they don’t NEED Texas either.

So in this scenario, 3 of the 4 free agents are spoken for, and Texas gets left with its least attractive options, either the ACC or independence. And again, all of this in the name of LHN. Doesn’t the value of LHN decline in a weaker Big XII? That leaves independence as the vehicle to maximize value of the LHN, with all of the problems that come with independence. Note: this makes realignment ENTIRELY about economics, and doesn’t have ANYTHING to do with rivalries, tradition, the student-athlete experience, or any other lame justification anybody talks about.

So I’m left with this. As a fan, I don’t want to see Texas playing some jerkwater schedule against a weak sister Big XII-2-1-2+who cares. Same goes for the ACC. And if independence is the final answer, remember that in the 16 team superconference model, other programs (read OU, ND, etc) WILL have less scheduling freedom for OOC games. That means Texas will have to scramble HARD to maintain any existing rivalries and to get enough games that matter into the schedule to even be relevant. True, this might not come into play for a few years after already-scheduled series have been played, but those things are subject to change.

So let’s hitch up our pants, and go west. Do we have to swallow a small amount of pride on LHN? I can deal with that. Especially since I haven’t seen ONE DAMN MINUTE of coverage on the friggin network to date.

WTF does Plonsky add to the conversation?

lhn is not just about money. it is about ‘branding’. and it is a tool that will reform the landscape of college football when it hits stride. it will also be responsible for the athletic program being a benefit to the academic mainstream of the university.

don’t be so short-sighted, folks. we are changing the world of college football.

Some of you are being really shortsighted about realignment. I’d like to hear from someone who has the LHN and would like to see that disappear. I’m putting odds at 80% that Texas joins neither the ACC, PAC-12, or B1G. The geographic region (time zone) for travel purposes will remain in tact and Texas most likely keeps it that way whether they add some lower tier teams like BYU and Houston or snag someone bigger (doubtful). My perspective only, obviously. Also, the student body doesn’t really care what conference we go to. We like playing OU every year and acting like idiots at the State Fair and the night before in Dallas.

Thanks for the great report, as always JS

I like the idea of the PAC 16 and roadtrips to Cali, Oregon and Washington. I also agree with the sentiment above that independence in football is fine, but we may see issues with other sports. additionally, I really like the idea of the LHN. the programming I’ve been able to pirate seems pretty nice.

question: does the PAC 12 definitively want the two OK schools if no one from Texas shows up?

it will be curious to see whether the PAC12 will cave on the LHN.

I’m not being short sighted. It’s just that personally I think Independence and revamped Big12 are all bad options that could devalue the LHN long term. The LHN is cool because it is about the Texas Longhorns. The Texas Longhorns are cool for lots of reasons but some important ones are the rivalries we have and how that ties into conference identifty/affiliation/championships. Maybe Independence would be fun for all. I just don’t see it right now. The real important thing is to find the option that the greatest number of your fans are excited about. The fans were excited about the PACXX last summer. Fans would be excited about the Big10 or B1G whatever that means. Fans could be excited about some super-conference which retains some kind of regional flavor. I don’t think Independence or ACC is going to excite anyone. When that happens, the LHN isn’t as bright and shiny as it seems right now.

I see it as a tool, just like you. It needs to be wielded to the greatest overall benefit to the University, “overall benefit” I think is the key.

yeh-

That bull shit spin about changing the landscape is true. Instead of being the King of our conference with clear paths to the BCS and long standing rivalries we run the risk of being in a oncference with Rice and SMU just to keep a network that no one gives to shits about already. including Texas fans.

Patience is a virtue, folks.

“don’t be so short-sighted, folks.”

Exactly…it’s like a portion of our fanbase has the patience of a three year old and the small-picture view of a teenager. It’s like Apple shareholders bitching that the iPhone didn’t turn a profit on its first day.

Like it or not, this is where big-time college football is headed. We can continue to be a front-runner or wait for everyone else to catch up.

I think your best current option is to copy Notre Dame, but that begs the question of where to park your Olympics.

And by the way, the combined results of TCU’s last three meetings with BYU (2 home, one away) were Frogs 101, Cougars 17.

Yeah, they be real tough.

It wasn’t pretty at all, but on both sides of the ball this Texas team whipped a really physical BYU team and made them raise the white flag. When was the last time you could say that about the Longhorns?

OK, I guess I missed something, not being a football guy. I watched the game, mostly sober due to bad scheduling, and I thought the game was a near-run thing until the end.

Aside from the hounddog look on the BYU QB’s face on the sideline, what concrete examples of “raising the white flag” were there?

All of you who are horrified with an independent/ACC option aren’t seeing history very clearly. There are two recent dynasties that exceed anything that has come out of the SEC or the Big10. Those dynasties are the 90s FSU and the 00s USC. Aside from USCs creative recruiting, the primary contributing factors to their success were a weak conference, one or two marquis matchups each year, and dominance in a fertile recruiting bed.

Texas can mirror that success. And if somehow OU and Texas separate, there is the distinct possibility the state border gets locked down and OU suffers from lack of DFW talent. That stands to primarily benefit UT and secondarily benefit ATM/TT/TCU. That is a scenario made in heaven.

Look at Florida’s short stretch of success. They needed FSU and UM to stumble and tread water AT THE SAME TIME in order to have a limited run — a run where their best season ever included a loss to Ole Miss at home and no clearcut advantage over a Texas, a Utah, and really an Alabama.

LSUs dominance was always vulnerable to chewing gum and bailing wire fixes that fantastically never came undone.

tOSU had a great run of contention but never domination.

Big conferences with lots of giants are not good for dynasties. Texas has all the requirements for dynasty and it has nothing to do with conference affiliation.

Monahorns, you’re right. I’m just saying that I don’t like the ACC or any other conference that requires crazy travel or playing Washington and ASU at 915pm Sat night. I’m still trusting Bill Powers and Deloss Dodds in that they will figure out a way to do what’s best and make it work. Maybe that won’t happen

No doubt on the patience front. One of the main benefits we have in this mess is an AD who has been to this dance multiple times. Dodds was here last year and during the Big 8/SWC merger, he knows how the game is played.

I agree that the whole notion that what is going on is all part of the Deloss master strategy is absurd and needs to stop. But, nothing has even happened yet. The fanbase is clamoring for us to make a move, but I think our move for now is to wait and see what others do. There is no benefit in us making a pre-emptive move to another conference. Texas is one of the only schools in this whole realingment chaos that has the luxury of patience. Why waste the strategic benefit of patience?

Great info… thanks JS!

Spider,

7 yards of total offense in the 4th quarter was one sign of the white flag.

Texas is trying to leverage the Pac12 vs the B1G vs the ACC to get the best deal.

Texas leaking info about ND friendship is all about playing the ND/Tex package deal so that both can have their networks in the B1G. I could see Texas revenue sharing from the LHN in order to keep the brand and satisfy the others B1G schools. Value of Texas/ND conference road games is huge to the B1G and BTN. B1G needs more channels for additional content from adding ND/Tex anyway.

It is too bad that this realignment stuff is intruding on football season. Realignment is a fine topic for the off season but once the season started it is just a distraction. Maybe next time it might be a good idea to split out the realignment discussion to a separate thread rather than mingling it in a thread that is discussing real football.

Texas is not going to be able to go it alone at all.

ND can do it because they get an exception to the usual AQ bid in the BCS. Texas aint gonna get that deal as an independent and top 25 teams will be reluctant to play you as long as one loss can knock you out of the MNC game.

If we go PAC, we need OU as a partner or we come in as an outsider to the original Pac 8 and the whole California allure of the deal is an illusion. We get stuck in the desert division and go to Seattle every 8 years.

In the Big 10, we come in as an outsider/junior member at least initially. We need ND/Mizzou to come along.

No matter what happens, I dont think the LHN survives in its current incarnation. There will be a revenue split at a minimum.

And I have confidence in Dodds so far as he can control the situation. But the fuse has been lit and this shit is going down on an accelerated schedule. The fact that we flew our guys to Norman to kiss ass yesterday should tell you plenty about how much we control our desired outcomes. Answer: not all that much.

For all of those fretting that Texas will miss the boat on joining the PAC by waiting, can you name 4 other teams that would make sense for them to add? Geographically I just don’t see any other combinations of schools (besides OU/OSU/Texas/Tech) that would make sense.

Also, the report on ESPN this morning is that OU will wait to make a decision after Texas decides it’s next move. I think the open communication between the 2 schools is a positive sign.

Agree with Kafka on keeping the threads seperate.

Unlike last year’s team, this year’s team looks like it has a plan, and most importantly, seems to be improving. Don’t think this team is yet ready to beat OU, OSU, or A&M, but thankfully we’re playing a weak UCLA team this weekend (wait, I think I said that last year too). I think a victory over UCLA could provide an extra boost of confidence to this team be exorcising some demons from last year.

As far as realignment goes, I think the UT brass has always wanted the Big IIXII (however configured) to survive. It allows them a clear path to the BCS, maintenance of traditional/regional rivalries, minimized travel, scheduling convenience, plenty of revenue, and the ability to maximize and protect the value of UT IP. UT does not want to join another conference, not just because it might have to surrender the LHN (more below), but because of the travel issues (especially for everything other than football), the loss of regional/traditional rivalries, and an inability to exploit their own IP.

I’m convinced UT is fine with A&M going to the SEC. I don’t think it will impact the Big 12’s TV contracts (there’s a persuasive argument over at Outkick the Coverage), In fact, if the writer is accurate, the Big 12 remains viable (at least until the end of the current TV deal) even if OU & UT leave.

As far as the PAC-12 (16?) goes, it’s not just the LHN that’s at issue, but the PAC-XX’s proposed divisional format (E-W). If you assume a 7-2 schedule, you’d play in Cali every other year, but you’d only play any of the old Pac-8 schools H-H once every 8 years. Not very appealing to the E division teams, especially the Arizona schools, and probaly not the mountain schools who recruit mostly from Cali. Now if the PAC-XX would consider quadrants (Southwest, Mountain, Pacific, and Northwest), and assume a 3-2-2, every non-Cali team plays in Cali EVERY year, and every team plays every other team H-H every 4 years. That would be more palatable. Leaves 3 non-conf games: Rice and/or BU every year until we start playing A&M again, a buy game, and one slot for an appealing opponent. Still doesn’t solve the travel problem for every other sport.

ACC might work if we just affiliate for non-football – solves scheduling issues, and provides lots of east cost media exposure. We could agree to play 4 ACC games every year, plus OU, TT, BU & Rice, a buy game, 2 midlevel games (start A&M again after a few years), and then a big name game. Kind of depends on what the ACC wants? Would they consider this a right of first refusal on UT in a 16 team scenario?

Big 10 doesn’t seem like a cultural fit, and UT would always be the odd man out in executive board (unless we came joined at the hip with ND).

Also, I’m not sure what 16 teams gives you that 12 doesn’t, unless the big schools truly want a play-off and think that’s the only way to get there. I guess it also increases inventory for TV. However, it’s hard to keep a sense of unity if you aren’t regularly competing against the other schools. Maybe the UT brass is convinced that while we’re going to several 16 team leagues, it won’t last, so suffer (sort of) as an independent for a few years and then be in good position for the next reshuffle.

As far as the LHN being the cause of the Big IIXII break-up – malarkey. A&M has wanted to go to the SEC since the break-up of the SWC. They were bribed to stay then (state approval for Reed Arena), and they were bribed to stay last year (taking a big extra helping of the CU/NU exit fees). They were offered to be a part of a statewide network, and refused. UT spent years and plenty of $$ to get their own network off the ground (primarily to televise non-football), and told everyone they were doing it. Last year when UT started shopping around, A&M’s AD publicly poo-poo’d it (there’s a youtube clip of some Aggie club event). Then when they saw the $$, they decided they would like to be a part of the deal. Poor Aggies. CU wanted to join the PAC-XX back when the SWC/Big 8 merger happened. Most of their athletes come from there, and a significant chunk of their alums work there. They were afraid BU might politic their way into their spot, and so jumped. NU didn’t like being 2nd fiddle, wanted the academic prestige of the Big 10. It had nothing to do with revenue sharing (they voted against equal shares), and nothing to do with the LHN (they left before the deal was announced). OU is just flexing their muscles, but let’s hope they listen to reason.

“ND can do it because they get an exception to the usual AQ bid in the BCS. Texas aint gonna get that deal as an independent "

This is a pretty big assumption. I think you are dead wrong on this.

Tremendous content guys, thanks.

On the Cortez reference, this means intentionally eliminating your options in order to commit 100% to the course. We can’t sail back now, so conquer or die. This isn’t really the case with the QB situation.

My main suggestion for you guys is to re-architect this site. It’s the slowest damn thing on the internet. Maybe it has to do with all the images, eg, the “320 images downloading” on my bottom message bar. Even when I’m on a T1 at work, it can take 30 seconds to load or crashes my browser. And since most of my access is on my iphone, hamstrung by AT&T, it typically takes several minutes to load any page. Very frustrating. Good thing your content is so damn good!

JS – Would Texas agree to partial qualifiers if OU and the other Big 12 schools agreed not to block the broadcast of high school games on LHN?
 
Allowing partial qualifiers would help other schools in the Big 12 stay competitive at the expense of ATM and the $EC.
 
Even a temporary agreement could stabilize the conference and LHN.

How is UT not a cultural fit in the Big X? Just curious as to your opinion – having gone to UT and lived in Chicago for a long stretch, I actually think UT fits better culturally in the Big X than maybe any other conference except perhaps the PAC.

The Big X is composed nearly entirely of state flagships with a major emphasis on academics. The conference has strong admittance standards for athletes, which as I understand it is our major drawback with the SEC. Also, as far as the executive committee, worse things could happen to UT than have a conference composed of other heavyweights that balance each other out, imo.

In the 16 conference format, I really like the quads better. That would work well with the PAC.

Per Big Ern. "How is UT not a cultural fit in the Big X? Just curious as to your opinion – having gone to UT and lived in Chicago for a long stretch, I actually think UT fits better culturally in the Big X than maybe any other conference except perhaps the PAC.

The Big X is composed nearly entirely of state flagships with a major emphasis on academics. The conference has strong admittance standards for athletes, which as I understand it is our major drawback with the SEC. Also, as far as the executive committee, worse things could happen to UT than have a conference composed of other heavyweights that balance each other out, imo."

+1. I’ve been in Chicago since 1995, and feel the same way. Yeah, we might be a little cowboy for most of the BiG, but we can pass that off as eccentricity. Outside of that, there are a lot of similarities.

3-2-2 should be 3-2-2-2

Is it just me, or is Hicks all over the field and has future All-American look to him? His closing speed is really impressive.

“Dodds needs to realize not everything should be decided based on money.”

This is exactly as likely as him speaking fluent Martian.

The reason the move from Bill Bradley to James Street worked even though there was division on the team was the attitude Bill Bradley took.
First practice after the change he took off down the practice field letting his pants fall to his ankles. Laughter followed and the team knew it was okay. The only side they needed to be on was Texas.

Put me in the camp of not being sure the LHN is worth the hassle.

Yes, it is a fantastic financial deal for the University of Texas. But is it necessarily a good thing for the athletic programs, fans, etc. outside of the financial aspects?

Is the opportunity cost of what it could prevent Texas from doing, and the collateral damage it has already caused, really greater than the guaranteed money?

Is being tied at the hip, and in some ways beholden to, ESPN really a good thing?

I am all for monetizing the Longhorn brand for the benefit of the athletic department and university, but I am just not sure that the LHN deal is the optimal way to do it.

I’d love to see Texas in the Big Ten and OU in the PAC East Division. Let them play Arizona, Colorado and Utah at midnight while we play in the Big House and Horseshoe.

Texas recruits will not be interested in going to our Big Ten rivals up in the snow, and OU will someone fade from their view. Our recruiting position will be stronger and the Big Ten (plus Texas and ND) will be untouchable in terms of TVs, media coverage, and prestige.

Let’s see Bob Stoops start flapping his gums about not needing the RRS in that scenario.

Re: the cultural fit. Yes, UT is very similar institutionally, but I think the composition of our student body/alums is much closer culturally to California, Virginia, and North Carolina than any of the midwest states. But maybe the demographic similarities overcome dissimilar mores.

As far as being the odd man out in the executive committee, ask Nebraska how much they liked being on the short end of so many conference votes. And I’m not so sure it would be balanced out, but the old guard keeping the new guy down.

My preference is to salvage the Big IIXII (keep OU, add BYU). Of the various conference scenarios, probably a PAC-16 (with quads), especially because I want to keep the OU game (and also the TT game – I have lots of family that attended).

kafka, i agree, but they don’t seem to want to do that.

great story, 30 and oh. he’s always been one of my faves. hope and expect to add garrett.

yeh,

I get what you’re saying about branding, and changing the landscape. But tell me what we’re changing it into. We’re already the most profitable athletic program running, so what exactly does this network get us that we didn’t have before? Access for other sports would be the main thing I guess, but this assumes you ever have wide distribution of the broadcast, which looks shaky at this stage.

Texas Renaissance: Your theory works perfectly… in a NON-superconference world. When superconferences happen, there won’t be conferences with 14 creampuffs and 2 teams consistently relevant. They will all start to look like the SEC, i.e., 4-6 teams consistently in the conversation. In other words, there’s no conference other than some incarnation of the MWC or CUSA that would provide the model you’re talking about.

On patience: Agreed folks, patience is a virtue, and for the moment, we can do that. And as I said, I DO trust Powers and Dodds to put UT in a powerful position. But looking at the landscape, I see two possible outcomes that excite me: PAC or B1G. Anything else looks like some silly consolation prize, and I can’t be mollified by 24/7 network coverage I CAN’T SEE.

Cortez burned his ships to remove any chance for his grumbling men to go back to Spain and abandon him. I have a velvet painting of Cortez on my office wall staring down at me right now. I too fail to see how Gilbert’s situation is analogous. Maybe I’m a dunce. Other than that, thanks, great stuff as always.

The executive committee issue will be no different in the PAC. The original PAC 8 schools are the ones pushing the divisional alignment that would most benefit them to the detriment of the new kids on the block. Everyone wants as many games in California as possible.

Unless the Big 12 is salvaged, we will have to take our lumps as being the new kid in any conference we go to. Does that mean that every decision won’t go our way? Probably. I say deal with it. Our other option is getting to throw our considerable weight around over Baylor, K-State, Univ of Houston, etc.

To me that is why the Big 10 is the most desirable option. I think most of the conference’s goals are already aligned with UT’s interests. The Big 10 is at the forefront of trying to push its brand (and by correlation its members’ brands) onto the national stage, and it is by far and away the leader at aligning its members (combined with the University of Chicago) into shared grant and research funding.

To me the LHN’s potential has nothing to do with football. But football is a big driver in our ability to bring this project to fruition.

The LHN will be a huge boon to our non-revenue sports and even to basketball. It is not greed or selfishness that drives the network, it could be an innovative tool to help the university in its broader mission. I believe the plan was to also have academic content and I am sure the network would help increase the stature of our communications department. The football aspect is really a secondary, but necessary vehicle to get the network on a solid footing. No cable company is going to pick up the LHN if we are only promising volleyball and baseball. There are many of us fans who would like to be able to watch those events (heck, I would watch lectures and academic stuff!), but I am sure the cable bean counters don’t see it that way though they force us to pay pennies every month for dozens of televangelist channels that no one watches.

The rest of the university world is ganging up on us and calling us greedy and too many on here seem to be buying into that frame of thought. The money is important both for our athletics department (not football) and the university as a whole and other schools can’t and don’t have access to this sort of additional funding. This is a media smear campaign by the rest of the schools in the country who are envious of this unique situation. To let go of it to appease Washington State or Indiana is ludicrous.

Chip Brown with a story supposedly outilning UT’s options and the UT admins stance on each What’s next for Texas

In summary, if this is to be believed….
1) if A&M, OU, and OSU leave then Texas is not interested in keeping Big12 together. Forget the scenarios for bringing in this school or that to salvage it.
2) We are seriously interested in ACC because of ESPN connection, especially if we can convince OU, OSU, TT to come as well. OU/OSU though is not interested and we don’t want to be on a geographic island, so probably won’t happen. (side note: How sad is it that decisions like conference affiliation are now potentially being decided on the basis of what TV network has your rights. It’s like free agents picking their team based on who has their shoe contract.)
3) Big Ten really wants us and Notre Dame, but it will require huge concessions on their part to attract both of us.
4) PAC might be our worst option with regard to affecting LHN, however Powers apparently loves the idea of being in this conference. Divisions and scheduling are also a big impediment.
5) According to Chip’s sources no one favors independence and this option is a non-starter. Continued discussion of this option seems pointless.

Chip points other options may pop up, but as of now that looks like that’s it. Based on all that, it appears PAC seems most likely, though with considerable loss of power, concessions with LHN, and undesirable scheduling. This could get really interesting as far as UT internal dissent if Powers wants the PAC, but Dodds wants something else to protect his baby (LHN). ACC and Big Ten seem much more distant next options.

Texas can’t give up the LHN to follow Okie to the Pac-12. That would be an admission that everything about the past 12 months, all driven by Texas, was a huge mistake. And yes, that sort of thing really does have a huge impact on the people making these decisions. To end up with an equitable revenue sharing model in a Pacific Coast conference, when they could have had that in the Big 12 all along, consigns someone (or someone-s) to instant and eternal ridicule.

They can’t follow AM to the SEC. Again — too much human nature involved, no matter how much money or common sense the move might make.

Big 10-Nebraska. Ditto.

So it’s the ACC, which keeps the LHN intact, allows Texas to do its own thing, and allows Texas basketball to rub elbows with royalty, all with a collection of public Ivies. Plus, it’s not as if ACC football scares anyone in Austin.

people judging the success of a 20 year venture with ESPN based on the first two months is incredibly short sighted. everyone that has seen it claims it is a COMPLETE game changer. in dodds i trust.

TTS – From my understanding the LHN for the most part has been Dodd’s baby. Sure Powers loves it in general, but he may not love it more than the idea of being in the PAC. From his perspective he may be willing to bend a fair amount on the LHN (not necessarily dump it) if it gets us in the PAC. Dodds may be the one that wants to keep the LHN at all costs since it was his doing.

In fact the conflicting things we hear may be due to the differing views of these two main parties in the UT admin. Dodds may be floating things like the ACC concept or pulling ND along for negotiations with the BIG TEN as desperate ideas he can push to keep the LHN intact, while Powers is more focused on the PAC. Ultimately Powers and the board will be making the decision though, not Dodds. I have to wonder if there’s some dissension between the two that we haven’t heard abourt because of this.

I have had the LHN for 24 hours and it is going to be fantastic. If you are in Austin and can get access to Grande and haven’t done it yet, what are you waiting for?

Football season is one thing, but basketball and baseball season is when this thing is really going to light up, I think. Hopefully, the momentum will snowball into where ever we end up next year, because this thing is not going away.

As Dagga Roosta suggested, everyone go back and read spider’s post from last week: http://barkingcarnival.fantake.com/2011/09/08/conference-realignment-what-we-think-we-know/#comment-226519

We got somebody to show some games nobody else was going to show, that’s really it. What business is it of anybody else who that deal was with and what else it will program? Everyone will have their own network/portal soon enough and the whole issue will be moot. Other university’s are using this big bad Texas argument to further their own agendas and nobody seems to be calling them on their hypocrisy. It’s all about ESPN and rank jealousy. Seems to me we’ve been up front and honorable all the way. It also seems that doesn’t amount to much these days.

Yeah, I think that was Whaley rather than Daniels. Easy to confuse the numbers – 95 and 96.

Wish the Cigar hadn’t made the little conference comment. Love football, hate business. I know they’re tied together but wow, can’t believe I waited 9 months to talk about this crap when there’s football going on. Bummer.

Just as I predicted. Every conference wants you but no conference worth a crap wants you with BuckleVision in tow.

Well run conferences do not make special accomodations. Perpare to fall in line with the Wazzus or Northwesterns of the world or schedule that rivalry game with Duke and Wake Forest. I guess you could go indy and become Notre Dame, Jr. Sweet.

Such appealing options. Perhaps making friends with Aggie or Husker look a bit more appealing now?

Final prediction: Follow Sooner to PAC with Tech and BuckleVision gets shitcanned.

According to the Statesman, the ACC (read: ESPN) is selling Texas on a 16 team league with four 4-team pods. That would allow for a pretty easy 9 game schedule.

Curious how the football championship game would work — do you create a semifinal? Something cool about that.

Regardless, I am sure the ACC is a stalking horse more than anything else at this point. The PAC 12 may say it will take OU and OSU without Texas, and I believe it. But I bet they blink before Texas makes anything but minor concessions on LHN.

Such appealing options. Perhaps making friends with Aggie or Husker look a bit more appealing now?

Seeing as how that would involve associating with dickheads like you, it actually doesn’t.

Well I had asked you what your big kahuna thought of any QB controversy in another thread. You never responded to my post, but what I feared may be true if this guy is legit. You could see it a mile away, guys picking sides, hi-fiving some players but not others. And you could see it in the play, with a QB that was hell bent on keeping it himself on the zone read plays, and even a rb or two keeping on the wildcat, even though there was at least one defender 2 or three yards from him. And it’s very scary that some of these guys are already getting the big head and cocky over two mediocre wins.

I have faith our coaches will do a better job this time around of keeping them grounded but I fear one unexpected loss and especially a blow out and this team crumbles again, because again, we have no one QB to rally around. We better start pounding MB hard and make him the defacto leader stat.

A-Tex – I don’t think the NCAA allows anything more than a conference championship game. The way it would probably work is that two pods make up a division. Schedule wise you play every team in your pod and two in each of the other 3 pods for a 9 game conference slate. As a result you don’t play everyone in your division every year (two teams in the other pod).

None of that though would resolve the issue of Texas being on a geographic island unless the other 3 teams involve someone like OU, and they seem to have no interest in the ACC.

Just out of curiosity, is there anyone who’s excited about a move to the ACC? ACC looks primed for pickoffs if the SEC and B1G go super, and doesn’t look a lot different than an OU-less Big XII to me, but I’d like to know what others think.

tied_to_a_wjheel—

Do you know what “assuming facts not in evidence” means?

TexanNick:

I think playing at College Park and/or Chestnut Hill in November sound like can’t miss road-trips. Then there is potential of a really nasty conference rivalry with NC State or maybe Wake Forest. We’d also have the denizens of Blacksburg to fill the role of our old pals from Bryan-College Station.

Personally, I think a move to the ACC would be scintillating.

(barf)

ACC looks primed for pickoffs if the SEC and B1G go super, and doesn’t look a lot different than an OU-less Big XII to me

The ACC as it stands now is a good bit better than an OU-less Big12 when you consider Florida State, Miami, and Virginia Tech. However, I don’t disagree with you that the idea of Texas in the ACC doesn’t do much for me unless we bring some other schools that give it a more regional appeal to us. Also, I understand that this is about football, but Texas in the ACC for basketball would really take things up a notch.

nunna, have i mentioned that i like you?

Re: Jaxon’s comments praising Case

Personally, though the comments may seem “over-the-top”, I felt Jaxson was being positive because Case was not allowed to be interviewed.

What really strikes me about all the conference realignment talk is how much information is NOT coming from this site. There are little bits – like the info to watch for OU starting to talk – but nothing really hard-hitting like we’re used to seeing from JS.

That, combined with the fact that Orangebloods keep posting stuff about Texas’ options makes me think something is up. I think JS and the Big Cigar know more than what they have put out there, but aren’t allowed to share it publicly. Either it will burn the Big Cigar, or it will change the direction that the Texas administrators are trying to go right now.

Anyways, thanks for the info about the QB situation and such, JS. Appreciate it!

Sasha, I think it’s up to Bill Powers. While he has consulted with Dodds and Plonsky and probably regents and whoever else he may choose, because it’s up to him, it’s not out there.

That, and the Big Ten apparently has imposed a gag order.

Can we somehow separate football and the conference alignment discussions? This is somewhat like working for a major auto manufacturer and having a discussion about the new model we are bringing out along with the design of the company stationery.

We don’t have a QB controversy. We have a QB decision and the coaches have made that. There isn’t any dissension on the team (contrary to what you aggies and sooners would have us believe). We are playing 18 freshmen and they are damned good and we are getting better every week. We also have the best coaching staff I can remember. The LHN will bring in good money and provide a showcase for all UT sports and as soon as I can get it in my location I’m telling TWC to get the hell out. And no matter what happens in the future we will be fine because we are Texas.

To those who say “be patient” suggesting we are leading the charge of the changing landscape….

Newsflash: Texas is scrambling right now. That network, the one that no one even has has, for right or wrong forced the pieces to move before we were ready.

The realignment stuff going on right now is NOT GOOD FOR TEXAS. We wanted the network to either be nothing or a fixture in every major cable provider’s package when we went through this.

Instead we are going to be left with a less than optimal solution that will benefit OU and A&M more. That is my problem.

nunna, have i mentioned that i like you?
Same here….in a very non-gay way of course. Seriously though I always make sure to read your comments, and seem to always shake my head in agreement with them.

That, and the Big Ten apparently has imposed a gag order.

Bob – Interesting. Where did you see that? And if so how do interpret that? Doesn’t seem like you’d have a gag order unless discussions had gotten pretty serious.

Like many others, I ridiculed Texas going to the ACC when I first heard of it. Then I clicked over to the conference website and took a close look at which schools comprise that conference. There is not a single Iowa State or K-State on that list. Every school brings something to the table, be it football, basketball, academics, etc.

Also, the ACC is one of the top BCS conferences in academics in the country. I don’t know if they get the research money that a Big Ten gets, but there’s definitely a prestige factor there.

Lobo89 – Agree completely about the positives of the ACC. It’s just that for me, and I think most others, outside of a Texas/FSU or Texas/Miami matchup most of the other teams just don’t do much for me with regard to football. It’s not necessarily how bad they are as much as lack of familiarity and thus apathy toward them.

Lobo89 – BTW, any chance you’re from Longview?

You want to give the Ags a recruiting edge? Try ACC vs SEC.

Nunna – I agree for the most part on the football matchups, though I could probably warm up to some of the other schools like Clemson, NC or VT. I just don’t think it would necessarily be the worst case scenario that I first thought.

Also, yes, I grew in Longview. You from East Texas as well?

Lobo89 – Didn’t grow up here but I’ve lived in Longview the last few years. I’m more a central Texas kid, but you go where the job is.

Nunna – I’m in the same boat. Would live there if I could but job is in Dallas.

The ACC would be a complete disaster. Other than money, which is apparently all we care about now, there are NO positives from that move.

You want to give the Ags a recruiting edge? Try ACC vs SEC.

You’re right. Florida State recruiting against Florida lately has just been abysmal! Oh wait…

Look at this map. Where does Texas fit in? Should they also add Alaska and Hawaii?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ACC-USA-states_(1).PNG

nunna, i appreciate that. same to you.

non-gay? why the hell do we have to say that? can’t it be assumed? i bet i think of ‘gay’ 150 times a week and every time it is on one of these boards where somebody says something like that or the ubiquitous ‘no homo’ . why don’t we just assume it’s not unless somebody wants to say it is. : )

“You want to give the Ags a recruiting edge? Try ACC vs SEC.”

That sure seems to be killing Florida State in recruiting recently…

Nunna: Regarding the gag order: Just my impression.

If you read the stuff on the Northwestern Rivals site, Purple Book Cat outlines some serious thinking and contacts between the BT and Texas and ND. But there’s been almost no speculation regarding the Big Ten from either Notre Dame or Texas sources.

I don’t recall seeing even one quote - or even an attribution! (as in, sources say…) - from anyone connected with Texas that mentions the words “Big Ten.” Given that people are talking freely about the ACC, for God’s sake, that can’t be an accident.

that is interesting. certainly noticeable that no speculation is coming from the major sources. not even to say it isn’t a good option. nothing.

pretty different from the ags and the sec, huh?

RedmondLonghorn -

“Do you know what "assuming facts not in evidence" means?”

This isn’t about throwing shit on a wall and see what sticks or what kind of controversy I might be trying to stir. Watching the game I could see things that I personally didn’t like. Doesn’t mean my theories are accurate, but I posited a concern based on what I saw on another BC post, and the asset more or less said the same things I had been concerned about and expressed, based on what was written above. I hope to God they aren’t true, but I could see them happening, and that’s where my concern is.

BYU looked really slow on both sides of the ball and they had no real quality RB. DiLuigi was okay in a Sam McGuffie sort of way but he was not a very hard runner and did seem to shy from contact before the half. They just did not have many weapons. I do not think we learned much this week.

Nunna: Great point. From a basketball standpoint, it makes absolute upgrade. And it’s not that there are NO appealing match ups, there are. Guess we’ll see, but I’m thinking ACC is a smokescreen, because we could easily find ourselves in the same conversation if B1G, Big East, or SEC, come shopping.

In a return to on the field issues, there’s a lot to like about the future of this team. That said, I don’t think there’s been a real test compared to what’s coming up. I’ll leave UCLA for the moment, but I can’t ever remember a prior season where I thought we’d have to play our best game to beat the likes of Baylor and Iowa State…

Guess we’ll see, but I’m thinking ACC is a smokescreen

I certainly hope it is.

My concern now is what I mentioned earlier that maybe everyone in our admin is not on the same page. Powers may be focused on the PAC and BIG, but maybe Dodds really is willing to go ACC, or any place else, as long as his LHN is untouched. Of course Dodds doesn’t have ultimate say, but who knows if he could eventually convince Powers to go with his plan.

I know that it is of popular belief that we belong in Pac academically and culturally. But why? We maintain academic ties with many schools across conferance borders already. College football out west is an afterthought to most of the 34+ million in California. It is mainstream in the south. It’s my understanding that the LHN is compatible with the Sec. Why not head that direction and give the more intelligent athletes in the area a little more of a choice other than Vandy and Florida. Could you imagine the look on aggies face?

Why don’t y’all go back and check the track record on this alignment info.

“Notre dame is seriously interested”… Until they publicly stated a few days later there was no way.

“OU is with us in lockstep”… Oh wait they are on the same page as A&m and want nothing to do with Texas.

Texas has either been incredibly wrong, or just been leaking things to quell public uproar over the realities.

Texas admin knows exactly what needed to be done to avert this situation 6 months ago. They chose to call bluff on Ags and sooners.

A&m and OU’s public story hasn’t changed one time in past month. Meanwhile Texas has had to change their story weekly.

It is pretty easy to connect the dots, at this point.

I second or third or whatever the motion to keep news about realignment separate from news or opinions about actual football. I know I won’t have any say in how the alignment goes, and I get tired of the endless speculation. Not condemning those that do like to speculate, I just prefer to speculate about other things. Other things like how the team is developing or what’s going on with the team.

I humbly suggest that future Big Cigar commentary on realignment be posted as a separate thread. Don’t bother separating them in the emails because we can’t respond publicly to those anyway. Also, doubling the emails would double the free bbq coupons we get which may not be what the sponsors want you to do.

Not sure how you can compare Florida/FSU and UT/A&M recruiting. The Florida schools are in the middle of ACC/SEC country. The SEC is the marquee conference in the country. Most kids could not tell you three schools in the ACC. The Aggies can offer Alabama, Florida, LSU, etc. ACC offers VT, Clemson, Miami etc. Like I said, I would rather offer up the SEC and I’m guessing so would the Ags.

The B1G offers Texas the best opportunity for “branding” that is out there. Part of “branding” is getting people to look at your brand. That is, people need to watch Texas’ games. But not just Texas’ games, also the games of the other members of Texas’ conference. Which league best accomplishes that? The B1G? Or the PAC?

I note today that Bohls writes that Texas has 3 main criteria regarding expansion: (1) Time zones, (2) Economics, and (3) traditional rivalries.

Criteria number 1 is the kids, and avoiding additional stress on their study habits by travel made more difficult by crossing multiple time zone differences. There’s a difference between going to ULCA for a game this year, and being a member of a conference with multiple time zones, not just in the conference, but in divisions as well. Texas officials have correctly factored time zones into their thinking, IMO.

I know PAC aficionados absolutely disagree with this one, but time zones are, in fact, important with respect to the games themselves. The most influential press starts in 2 places: New York City and Washington D.C. While the B1G does not yet completely saturate those markets like it undoubtedly will in the future, due to further realignment, the B1G is already very close by, plus it has half the conference in the ETZ and half in the CTZ. If it joined the B1G, Texas would be with the schools in the CTZ.

How many of you stayed up this past weekend to scout Missouri on Friday, and UCLA on Saturday? Both of those games went past midnight — MO (a great game) ended past 1 am Texas time, 2 am eastern time. The PAC is simply located in stinker time zones. I mean, it just is.

No big surprise, but the East Coast doesn’t stay up till 1 and 2 in the morning watching the PAC clubs play in the “Midnight League.” I concede that arrangements will be made for Texas, and Texas will get few mighnight games. But the PAC is still the “Midnight League”. That will never change, as attested to by the games this past Friday and Saturday night. Check your listings next Saturday night and you will find one or two midnight games in the “Midnight League.” Ditto the next Saturay. And the Saturday after that. Ad infinitum. That kind of conference game time-slotting will not help Texas branding. And if it doesn’t help, it hurts.

Also, according to Bohls, Texas has also figured out that in the PAC, Texas really doesn’t want to get stuck in the “desert division + CU” for the next millenia. Texas (correctly) wants to be a part of a division containing either or both of UCLA and USC (which was the main allure of the PAC way back in the early ‘90s when I supported the PAC move before we got blocked by BU and TT). The “desert division” does absolutely nothing for Texas — nothing — and apparently more thorough minds at Texas have figured this out during this year’s imminent realignment. Thank god.

A “pod arrangement,” you say? A “pod arrangement” will solve the “desert division”? Ok, Scott, start talking pods. He ain’t. He ain’t because the old PAC 8 schools want to recreate the, well … old PAC8 conference, except call it a “division”. Look, the PAC12 is comfortable where it is. I’m not stunned if they turn down OU/OSU. I think the PAC takes them, but I’m not stunned if they don’t. And then, to the delight of many, we’re stuck forever in the B12, glory hallelujah!

Secondly, unlike the PAC12, the B1G is reportedly already willing to give Texas and Notre Dame their Tier 3 television revenues. The B1G is willing to set up a new paradigm. The same deal will be offered to all B1G schools. The PAC is recalcitrant. The PAC is recalcitrant because the PAC is suddenly comfortable. Maybe they bend on this in the end, but we know the B1G is there already on the economic issues.

Finally, traditional rivalries. My guess is that in the PAC, we could keep aggy if we wanted to. OU would already be with us in the PAC so the RRR would go on. But in the B1G, we could also keep the aggy and the RRR, as well, because in the B1G, we would only have to play 8 conference games.

To recap, items one (time zones) and two (economics) go to the B1G. Item three (rivalries) is a wash. I was a PAC guy for many years, but when thinking about all the pro’s and con’s — athletics, academics, and financies — the B1G is by far the superior conference for Texas. Remember: The decision on conference affiliation is going to affect Texas for maybe a hundred years.

I don’t want to watch football past midnight on Saturday night every single Saturday night for the rest of my life. Try it for yourself this weekend. Stay up. Be a pretend PAC conference man. See if you really like midnight games in the Midnight League. Project that out until you die.

I hope B1G.

Not sure how you can compare Florida/FSU and UT/A&M recruiting.

Not sure what point you’re trying to make here. Is the SEC the better conference? Of course. Does it make a huge difference in recruiting? No, as the FSU example shows.

It is pretty easy to connect the dots, at this point.

It’s even easier to just make shit up, like you do.

non-gay? why the hell do we have to say that?

Sorry yeh. I thought it would be funny to get a rise out of someone. Guess I did. ;)

Fuck me sideways – move this realignment bullshit to its own place and get it the fuck outta football tawk. We got a place for recruitment, right? Make one for that conference musical chairs stuff and move it, move it, move it…

I know that it is of popular belief that we belong in Pac academically and culturally. But why? We maintain academic ties with many schools across conferance borders already. College football out west is an afterthought to most of the 34+ million in California. It is mainstream in the south. It’s my understanding that the LHN is compatible with the Sec. Why not head that direction and give the more intelligent athletes in the area a little more of a choice other than Vandy and Florida. Could you imagine the look on aggies face?

I actually have to wonder myself why the SEC is such an absolute non-starter with our admin. Yeah, the academic rep of most schools isn’t great, but associating with those schools doesn’t hurt the academic rep of Vandy.

Damn, I’d love to jaunt a few minutes down the road and watch Texas take over Byrd Stadium against the Terps, or a little further to see them slug it out against VT or UVA.

Does it make a huge difference in recruiting?
Yeah, but obviously you can’t grasp it.

A&m and OU’s public story hasn’t changed one time in past month.

Yeah that’s right.

Like A&M has a standing invite to the SEC. Well, maybe not you actually have to withdraw from your conference first, then apply, then get voted on.

Like A&M’s invite is an open one. Well, maybe not…there are a few strings attached like you have to get your daddy’s and your mommy’s and your big brother’s and your sister’s permission.

Like A&M will be in the SEC by the first week of September. Well, maybe not since unexpected legal issues occurred.

But wait you say those weren’t official statements from A&M that’s just what supposedly connected people were claiming to know. Which is exactly the same as the Texas related items you mentioned.

The fact is everything in both cases may have been right, it’s just that things change.

And as for calling A&M’s bluff, it’s only calling your bluff if we don’t really want you to leave. In fact, we do. Go. Please. OU we would like to stay, but if them leaving and all the subsequent outfall is what it takes to get you moronic farmers to obsess over us from a distance then it’s well worth it.

XOVERX – A lot of great points. One question though. You said…

Secondly, unlike the PAC12, the B1G is reportedly already willing to give Texas and Notre Dame their Tier 3 television revenues. The B1G is willing to set up a new paradigm. The same deal will be offered to all B1G schools.

Not doubting you, but just wondering where you saw this. If you have a link I’d like to check it out.

aggies will compete for 4th place in sec west – compete. Sell that to recruits. Wherever Texas aligns, they can beat that sales pitch.

Why are academic affiliations important? For the simple reason that the university administrators who make these decisions would rather think of themselves as peers to the leaders in Palo Alto, Berkeley, Ann Arbor, or Chapel Hill than Gainesville or Starkville. What this has to do with compelling competition on the field or revenues, I have no idea. But it’s roughly the same psychology that pushes people to pay $120 for a pair of shorts from Nordstrom’s rather than buying the same thing with a different tag for $12 at Marshall’s. They want to feel exclusive.

Sad to see such massive organizations making such long-term decisions based on this crap.

My bet is the SEC schools, especially Florida, would not like to see Texas playing games in Florida every year.

Wouldn’t mind games against Florida State, VA Tech, Clemson, North Carolina. How about a trip to South Beach, nice.

Nunna,

You mentioned earlier that:

 “Of course Dodds doesn’t have ultimate say, but who knows if he could eventually convince Powers to go with his plan.”

I think the ultimate say come from Big Cigars $$$ and alumni that want the best for UT academically and athletics, thus for most part that eliminates SEC. I would be surprised if Powers was still president after 08/31/2014. That is the date the current capital campaign is scheduled to end. With donations so far at just over 50% of the goal, the money expected from LHN would help although not fulfill the $3bil goal.

Dodds on the other hand, may still be here past that date since his tenure has surpassed many UT presidents. What I am saying is that Powers may not have the final say, but Dodds and the Big Cigars/alumni will be the final say. I am confident that everything will work out in the end wherever we go.

Thanks for your comments that you have posted today and in the past.

Now back to football…I hope and expect that we win on Saturday to remove the bad taste of last year and the games from the 90s.

H&I – I’d agree that a lot of the motivations of administrators, regents, etc. don’t matter to the average fan. In particular, the money and social reputation of the players involved. We as fans don’t need more of either; these are just big playas wanting to boost their legacy and reputation. The behavior of A&M can be seen in the exact same light.

Also, the B1G also spreads out research grants through the CIC (yes the CIC is a separate institution but it’s not a coincidence that membership is basically the Big 10 + UChicago), so at least in that case there are legit and compelling academic reasons to join the B1G. CIC membership would be a huge boost to UT’s engineering, comp-sci and medical schools. If Powers explained a B1G move in those terms – or a Pac 16 move with the intent of forming a similar consortium with Berkley, UCLA, etc. – I’m down.

indeed you did, nunna. : )

hey, i just got a chill, if you mind a word about football.

read manny’s comments, and he said There’s still an entire ‘nother level. There’s another gear that this deal can go in, and that’s what we’re working on this week.

I’m sick of wading through supposed football posts reading everyone’s and their dog’s opinion about how and why they think the whole realignment scenario should go. Jesus Christ, It’s going to go the way it’s going to go and we have no control over any of it. Let’s just enjoy the season. We’ve waited long enough for it and now we’re screwing it up with this nonsense!

If OU leaves for the Pac 12, Texas should publicly offer to join the SEC provided Baylor and Texas Tech can also join. If the SEC says yes, Texas keeps LHN and the aggies gets no recruiting bump from joining the SEC.

Sad to see such massive organizations making such long-term decisions based on this crap.

Sick that an institution of higher education would cater to the prejudices of its educators. What is this world coming too? Next thing you know, University of Chicago will drop the cash cow that is football from its curriculum.

The season is also going to go how it’s going to go and we have no control over any of it. In that case, I’ll continue thinking about conference realignment, as well as the season. We’re Texas.

^What Chapalahorn said.

Though, I would LOVE to see a post by one of the older – er, I mean wiser! – bloggers about how, exactly, Texas has “bullied” the Big 12. I know revenue sharing has been thrown around (but Nebraska apparently never voted for equal sharing, so there goes that excuse). But it seems to me like everything else is weak excuses – PQs, academic standards, etc. are actually good for the conference, and everyone knew for years that the LHN was coming (so, in my view, they should have raised objections much earlier). Anyways, I’d like to see a historical timeline of the Big 12 with specific instances where Texas has used their influence (Big 12 voting records? stories of Texas meeting with other schools?) – for good or evil – and an analysis of all of that.

I’ve tried to look for some info, but I can’t really find anything. All I find is a bunch of unsubstantiated rhetoric on “Texas bullying” everyone. And everyone keeps picking up on all of this and just passing it on. So, I’d really like to know what the entire backstory is. Indulge a young(ish) girl, here.

yes, sasha. what a breath of fresh air. someone who actually understands his place in all this.

Now back to football…I hope and expect that we win on Saturday to remove the bad taste of last year and the games from the 90s.

Yes, it would be nice to erase the memory of one of my worst birthdays….Rout 66.

.Colby,
You missed the point and what the f does we’re Texas have to do with it. My point is that we should be enjoying the season we’re having so far and , if you want to speculate, why aren’t we speculating about something having to do with the actual football. Also, I would like to agree with those of you who have suggested that all realignment posts be moved to a dedicated area so we don’t have to be subjected to it if we don’t want.

read manny’s comments, and he said There’s still an entire ‘nother level. There’s another gear that this deal can go in, and that’s what we’re working on this week.

I can believe this actually…on both sides of the ball. Right now everybody is still trying to get the new system down. Everyone is still having to think about everything they do rather than having it come instinctually. As they continue to do it and it becomes second nature they’ll be able to act without thinking or hesitation and step everything up a level. Everything will speed up and increase intensity.

I don’t want to watch football past midnight on Saturday night every single Saturday night for the rest of my life. Try it for yourself this weekend. Stay up. Be a pretend PAC conference man. See if you really like midnight games in the Midnight League. Project that out until you die.
I did try to watch Missouri-Arizona State last Friday. I hung in until 12 minutes to go and 12:15 a.m.

No, that would not be fun. And it was an entertaining game.

Am I the only one nervous that eson looked into UT and saw us as a suitable partner worth investing 300 mill with no risk to the school? At some point, this relationship will haunt UT. I love everything burnt orange and I’m sick of the saturation from espn. Do we really want to be the Miami Heat? Watching the Rice game was groundhog day hell. As for the talk that no matter what happens, UT will be okay. Anyone can get iced out. Longhorn arrogance is an accepted perception and we are seeing what can happen if just 2 teams take a stand. Two teams that have willingly deferred to Texas for 100 years are now ready to sever the relationship. Its all just curious to me. When money becomes the only driver in a decision…

Chapalahorn and others: We ARE talking about football. Football for the next 25, 50, 100 years maybe. Nobody’s forcing you to read the comments, so you can skip anything you like. I don’t demand that you think realignment is important, but I do ask you to respect the fact that I, and others, do.

yes, nunya, and then there will be wrinkles and waves of wrinkles once every is bought in and up to speed. we are in the foothills and it looks grand here. wait’ll we get into the andes.

both sides of the ball. stoops is smart to get while the gettin’s good.

everyONE

Was home visiting the folks and saw LHN and trust me, if you like the horns, you want it. And I saw some academic stuff that was well done.

They have the cameras there and they’re using them, and it’s exclusive content with a partner that happens to be the lone giant in sports broadcasting. Everybody needs to realize this thing is good and if it’s offensive to other institutions it’s simply their envy dressed up with phony things like “they are ruining college football!” BS. It’s the future and it’s an upgrade and everyone will make it sooner rather than later.

Appreciate the pathfinders, for they lead you to water.

Nunna, one interesting issue in the category of dogs that HAVEN’T barked: Where are the networks in all of this? Last year they raced in to save the Big XII (thanks so much fellas), and this year, not one peep? An issue of timing, not ready for a super conference world last year, more ready this year? Practicality, there’s nothing left to save?

Just seems odd to me that they’ve essentially stayed outta this round… Thoughts?

I have never understood why so many UT alum/fans are so gung-ho for the PAC and dismiss the B1G which is actually a better fit. Not only does it have far greater academic benefits for every member, but they’re willing to let us keep the LHN.
Granted the California schools are “primo-dude” and Washington is decent but the rest of the conference (the half we would be saddled with) is an joke. Does anyone really believe conference with Texas, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Notre Dame and Nebraska doesn’t trump the PAC?
I know you all have Cali-fever, but I assure you, the novelty will wear off and we’ll be stuck in the Dust Bowl conference without our Network, -or as ESPN’s ACC puppet wondering why the obvious choice wasn’t seriously considered.

Orange Bro: It ain’t over ‘til it’s over.

TexanNick,

Respectfully, no you’re not talking about football. What you’re talking about is conference affiliation as it concerns football, baseball, and a shitload of other minor sports. Let’s get real. What this is really all about is a little brother with a complex is leaving to get out of our shadow and a basically equal thumping their chest so they won’t appear to be following our lead. The former will end up being relegated to bitch status in the SEC, while the latter will learn that very few recruits in Texas will be very receptive to a visit from the school that they see as trying to screw TT, Texas. and Baylor.

Agree with OrangeBro, the Big 10+ is a much better conference for UT than the Pac-12+. The overall research/academic reputations of the Big 10 schools are better than the Pac, and the football Big 10 rivalries are more storied, especially if ND is added along with Texas. The Big 10+ also offers the best time zone compatibility with Texas/UT.

If UT and ND join the Big 10+, then the 5 winningest football programs will be together in the same conference…
1. Michigan: 877-304-38
2. Texas: 845-321-34
3. Notre Dame: 837-291-42
4. Nebraska: 827-341-41
5. Ohio State: 819-308-53
…
6. Alabama: 813-316-43
7. Penn State 812-351-43
8. Oklahoma: 796-305-53
9. Tennessee: 783-333-55
10. USC: 774-307-54

Sasha – not sure if I’m quite old or wise enough to qualify…well, I’m probably old enough. In any case I’ve been looking for an excuse to look more deeply into that exact issue. I’ll dig around some. If I can summarize it in a pithy way I’ll submit an article about it.

But I can give you the basic story without looking up a thing. Texas has solid football culture, the largest student base in the nation and top-20-caliber law and business schools that churn out wealthy alumni. Thus, with competent management our athletic department can sell tickets, attract donations and sell its brand more successfully than any other school in the country. Those three financial advantages absolutely dwarf any extra money we make from TV, even with the LHN. The law of diminishing returns kicks in well below our revenue grade and we’ve already got every advantage that money can buy. To wit: last year’s athletic revenue was in the 150 mil range; football expenses, 25 mil. Our shit is pimped out to the max.

So money isn’t really the issue – or if it is, everyone should be equally pissed at Ohio State, Florida, UCLA and Alabama because they have similarly outsized revenues and the exact same accompanying advantages. Except a cable network branded with their logo…though you can bet that if Texas brings in a fistful of cash via LHN, other bigtime schools will find a way to follow the leader.

I think the resentment sprouts from two main things: first, UT used its leverage to shape the initial competitive playing field in the Big 12, tightening rules on partial qualifiers and whatnot when the conference was made. NU and CU were kinda pissed by that, and as it happens, both programs fell off a cliff after UT arrived. Meanwhile over the same period A&M went from BCS contender to division also-ran. Texas had something to do with that (we beat those teams A LOT) but no one forced A&M to lose repeatedly to Baylor or Nebraska to Iowa State. Schools are projecting their failures onto us, as if walking disasters like Callahan, Franchione and Hawkins had nothing to do with it.

Second, if you’re a big admin type and you want to jump to another conference on its own merits – stability, academics, prestige, a permanent seat on the Board of Regents, or any number of reasons that have nothing to do with UT – demonizing Texas has its benefits. If you’re NU brass and giving up an emotional ninety-year rivalry with OU, you want to give the fans a tangibly emotional reason to want out of the Big 12. Same with A&M or OU.

And while UT’s been the big dog in the conference and made sure its rules comported to UT’s will, I don’t think UT’s pressed its advantage so hard in any area outside the LHN that one can classify it as “unfair” unless one believes that anything short of absolute parity is unfair. We’re the biggest school with the most paying fans. And if we don’t think it’s cool to give kids schollies who can’t pass a basic English literacy class or crack a 650 on the SAT, maybe our opinion should count for more than Nebraska’s. And if we think we should be paid 21 mil for TV rights while Iowa State only gets 17 mil, well, look at the TV ratings and tell me who’s paying the opportunity cost in that exchange.

The LHN – with its one-school branding and its potential use as a recruiting tool – could be seen as “unfair” under a much more common notion of fairness in college sports: that financial advantages should only translate into things like nice stadiums and other doodads that you can put donor’s names on, but in terms of visibility schools within the same conference should have roughly the same rules to abide by, to “promote healthy competition”. So that’s something. Or at least it sounds like something, even if in real life it’s complete horseshit. The effect of TV arrangements pales in comparison to the inherent differences in brand appeal in CFB. If it didn’t, Notre Dame would have its pick of national recruits and wouldn’t boast a roster half-full of Boston-area townies every year.

And for A&M, the problem of branding advantage doesn’t magically go away when they’re in the SEC; we’re still both recruiting Texas kids with the same amount of LHN access, and Florida already sells its third-tier rights to its regional Fox affiliate. And NU and CU split the Big 12 long before the LHN deal was reached.

So none of those schools bailed due to UT’s unfair financial or competitive advantages. Those advantages exist, but nearly-identical financial and competitive imbalances await them at their destinations. They just resent the fact that UT’s the lone big dog in the Big 12 (the other conferences all have at least two or three, giving smaller schools room to triangulate) and for political reasons they all want to press the message that UT forced them into the move.

Why are academic affiliations important? For the simple reason that the university administrators who make these decisions would rather think of themselves as peers to the leaders in Palo Alto, Berkeley, Ann Arbor, or Chapel Hill than Gainesville or Starkville. What this has to do with compelling competition on the field or revenues, I have no idea.

It has to do with money - money that dwarfs the 20 year$300 million LHN.

Here are a few of the Universities in the Top 30 in Research and Development Dollars

3. Stanford
6. Duke
8. Cal Berkeley
9. UCLA
10. Michigan
11. Washington
12. Wisconsin
14. Minnesota
15. TEXAS
16. USC
17. North Carolina
22. Northwestern
24. Ohio State
29. Penn State
30 Texas A&M

Hundreds of millions of dollars are at stake for tier 1 Universities. As far as the Tower is concerned, it isn’t just athletic affiliation that will mean a bright financial future for wherever we land.

Chapalahorn said: September 13th, 2011 at 8:10 pm
Colby,
You missed the point and what the f does we’re Texas have to do with it. My point is that we should be enjoying the season we’re having so far and , if you want to speculate, why aren’t we speculating about something having to do with the actual football. Also, I would like to agree with those of you who have suggested that all realignment posts be moved to a dedicated area so we don’t have to be subjected to it if we don’t want.
-
Calm down. I get your point that the discussion is going around in circles, that football is the most important thing on this website and usually the primary reason most of us post here is not under question.
’We’re Texas’ was a fun way to overstate that we alumni can talk think about more than one concept per day (I know…far out, right?). That 2/3rds of the posts here relate to conference realignment means that, literally, most people want to talk about…you guessed it. So if you feel subjected to the horrific torture of reading posts discussing a huge topic that will affect us and our University for decades to come, much less our football program, well, no one’s holding a gun to your head and making you google Barking Carnival.

The PST time zone stuff is nonsense, no matter how many times it’s repeated.
 
More than half of our games will be played at home. Of our road games, half will be day games. And you may want to check the time zones on Colorado and Utah. Networks aren’t scheduling Texas – USC for a 8:00 PST kick.
 
If a 8pm CST kickoff a year is a deal breaker for a conference affiliation because you can’t keep your eyes open ‘til 11:00 pm, then you need to put some caffeine in your Metamucil.
 
As for compromising national exposure, we’re not an upstart program looking to make a mark. I wish I could have found some USC coverage between 2003-2009. It was just nowhere to be found.
 
I’m fine with any number of conference options, but let’s at least discuss them as if we’ve traveled outside of the I-35 corridor.

Thanks, Dagga.

All of that is kinda what I was thinking, just based on what I’ve learned from this site over the years. Thanks for putting it all down in one place. Still being in law school, I was searching for things like past news articles, the original Big 12 agreement, voting records, etc. If I were to write an article, I would have footnotes and crap. But I’m a dork. :-)

I’m just at my breaking point with some of my Ag “friends” and their incessant posting about how evil Texas is and everything is our fault. I understand the negative recruiting/PR angle. But there are literally no substantiated reports on how Texas has exercised their nefarious plans on the rest of the conference, which is what is frustrating to me. I do think Texas has used its influence, but as you pointed out, not to the extent that it is being made out to be.

Thanks again! If you ever come across anything more on the subject, I’d love to hear more about it, no matter if it is good or bad for Texas.

Sasha – there may be more but if so, I’m unaware of it. I’ve got some ideas churning so don’t be surprised to see a post on the subject (with footnotes and crap) by the end of the week, time permitting.

Sasha and Dagga -

In 2005, San Antonio Express News ran an article called “Power brokers: How tagalong Baylor, Tech crashed the revolt”.
 
According to this article, in early 1994 A&M and Texas made a secret agreement to break up the Southwest Conference by joining the Big Eight and excluding Baylor, Tech and the other Southwest Conference schools from the move. Days before the agreement was to be signed, someone leaked the information to David Sibley (a high-ranking state senator and an alumnus of Baylor). Sibley took the information to Bob Bullock (Lieutenant Governor of Texas and alumnus of both Baylor and Texas Tech). Bullock put the squeeze on A&M and Texas to include Baylor and Tech in a move to the Big Eight. A&M tried to sneak into the SEC at the last moment. Bob Bullock told the aggies, “No… You need to come with us to the Big Eight.”
 
A&M never wanted to be a member of the Big 12, and Nebraska never wanted Baylor and Tech in the Big 12. The original merger agreement – that excluded Tech and Baylor – would have allowed each team to play nine round-robin conference games. Nebraska would have kept its annual game with OU and added annual games with Texas and A&M. Instead, Nebraska lost its annual game with OU and was allowed to play A&M, Texas, OU, and Okie State just twice every four years. In effect, Nebraska was exiled in the Big 12 North, and the cornhuskers were at a severe recruiting disadvantage versus most of the schools in the Big 12 South. Why would Nebraska agree to such a deal? It was a shotgun marriage. The Big Eight needed A&M and Texas to close a $100 million TV contract with ABC. Baylor and Tech were sprung on Nebraska at the last minute. The Big Eight couldn’t say no without losing the $100 million TV contract.
 
Nebraska lost almost every battle. The cornhuskers wanted the Big 12 to keep the Big Eight’s old headquarters in St. Louis, but they were out-voted and the conference offices were moved to Dallas. The cornhuskers wanted the Big Eight commissioner to be the commissioner of the Big 12, but they were out-voted and the new commissioner of the Big 12 was the old commissioner of the Southwest Conference. The cornhuskers didn’t want a conference championship game, but they were out-voted. The cornhuskers wanted to continue using partial qualifiers, but they were out-voted. Nebraska won national championships in 1994, 1995, and 1997. The cornhuskers would have played for another national championship in 1996, but 20 point underdog Texas upset the huskers in a conference championship game that Nebraska had voted against. John Mackovic had been sandbagging all year, holding back Priest Holmes as a secret weapon to use against Nebraska. Mackovic got a six figure bonus for winning that game – a lot of money for a college coach in 1996. Nebraska played Texas 10 times in conference play and lost 9 of those games with Texas costing Nebraska another chance to play for the national championship in 1999. Texas may have cost Nebraska 2 national championships in the first 4 seasons of the Big 12.
 
Texas A&M didn’t benefit from joining the Big 12 as much as Texas and Texas Tech did. Austin and Lubbock are large cities with big airports. College Station is a backwater. That didn’t matter in the Southwest Conference when most of the transportation was by bus. But in the Big 12, air transportation was a necessity for most games. A&M lost recruits to Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State because of transportation issues. Also A&M was caught cheating in 1994 for the second time in five years and apparently was forced to stop paying their players. After beating Texas 10 out of 11 games from 1984-1994, A&M lost to Texas in 9 out of the next 11 games played. Since 2006, the aggies have won 3 of the last 5 games. This begs the question, “Have the aggies started paying players again?”
 
The big question that remains is: Who leaked news of the Big Eight merger to David Sibley? Baylor and Texas Tech undoubtedly benefitted from the leak, but how would their alumni have had access to the knowledge that the Big Eight merger was about to happen. In 1994 Nebraska and A&M appeared to be formidable rivals with A&M apparently on the verge of joining the SEC. Each of those teams gradually weakened after being hamstrung by a conference structure that benefitted… guess who?

Why is the Ivy League left out of these discussions? The academic credentials and research opportunities are beyond question, and athletically… we should be undefeated (or nearly so – Princeton manages a 40-38 basketball victory every so often) in every sport for the foreseeable future. Regionally, there is of course a travel problem of sorts, but only for hoi polloi. Multiple large airports in the Philly-NYC-Bahsten corridor mean easy air travel for meaningful fans. True, the Ivy natives do not care for most things Texas, but at least they don’t have to fly over it on their way to California or Florida… or Paris, London or Tel Aviv for that matter, and they do worship money to perhaps and even greater extent than we do. Burnt orange Jimmy Choos, imo.

Or, wait – are we worried about opening up the fertile fields of Texas Football to raiders of the Bailouts? Mmmmaybe?

Texas may have cost Nebraska 2 national championships in the first 4 seasons of the Big 12.

Oooh! Ooooh! Football! So, let me see if I understand this: Nebraska would have been the best team in the nation, if only they hadn’t had to play Texas in a game prior to the Swimsuit Contest? Or is it because Texas bought the daring little diamond-crusted one-piece the ’Huskers had their eyes on?

Maroon: I was in high school when that went down, so hopefully you can help me understand something. WHY did Nebraska lose those votes? I mean, they were bringing in 8 teams from their prior conference to only 4 for Texas. So was Nebraska taking positions against the majority of their own prior conference? How was Texas so instrumental in flipping the votes of schools that didn’t have a long history with UT?

“As far as the Tower is concerned, it isn’t just athletic affiliation that will mean a bright financial future for wherever we land.”

I understand your point, and I agree to an extent. However…

If Duke drops out of the ACC tomorrow, how far down that list do they plummet? If they join the SEC, do they fall out of the Top 30? How about North Carolina? If Stanford dropped all sports to club level, burned all their Sears/Presidents Cups, and hung Larry Scott in effigy, exactly how much R&D business do they lose?

I am not saying these things are unrelated — but in a list of the 100 things that matter on the R&D/academic reputation front, sports conference affiliation ranks in the bottom 10. It may the starting point for us in the ways we categorize and rank universities, but Berkeley and Stanford achieved their academic status and infrastructures – and hence their research dollars – independently of their annual waxing by Sam “Bam” Cunningham, Lew Alcindor, et al.

The regional factors that drove the formation of the CIC and the research infrastructures at B1G universities simply mirror similar factors that drove the formation of the B1G. The B1G geographic footprint retains the momentum of being one of the world’s economic powerhouse regions for a 100 years. As for The Future, however, if you start a drive in Cleveland and work your way south of Jacksonville, you’re going to see quite clearly The Future taking shape. I really have no issue with the Pac-12 or ACC as far as it goes, but the B1G currently has 3 states in economic and political crisis, with more to follow if the trends in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota hold. Those forces will have a profound impact on the academic flagships. Michigan’s cutting costs left and right. Alabama’s throwing money at the best students across the South to recruit them across state lines (insert requisite football recruiting joke here). I doubt Tuscaloosa will ever approach Ann Arbor in academic/research prowess – historical momentum counts for something – but the variance declines daily. Even ivory-tower types leave for greener pastures.

Maroon:

Not sure about the other votes, but as I understand it the partial qualifier vote was 11-1 against. Nebraska seemed to be the school taking the outlier position, yet Texas took the blame.

I see the ACC as a more attractive option if the conference implodes. There are more eyeballs and dollars on the East coast. If playing a night game on East Coast we still pickup viewers nationally (and West Coast) There is also great basketball tradition and academics with the ACC.

Great interview and the hard work is appreciated.

Hierarchies and Identification: I too have questions about joining with a Rust Belt/Midwest footprint, and I think your point about economics and demographics is strong. That said, a move to B1G does not appreciably shift our recruiting footprint. So can you explain how a hypothetical budget cut for say, Michigan or Wisconsin, effects Texas in your example? I’m thinking that a few years ago A&M had budget problems, and didn’t cause a problem for Texas. So if you can clarify that for me, I’d appreciate it.

The whole financial argument against the Big 10 schools is somewhat misleading – and agree with TexanNick in not really seeing the correlation.

Most of the big flagship, land-grant universities you are talking about (Michigan, Wisconsin, etc.) are getting hit with state cuts. This is no different from UT and UCal. Acting as if only the Big 10 schools are facing a tough budget environment right now would be wrong-headed. Besides, what all of these schools share – UT and UCal included – is that over the years their reliance on their state governments has diminished sharply. All of these institutions have strong student demand given their reputations and draw from far wider areas than just their own state – so the demographic factor is less of a concern.

Nick: Nebraska faced some of the same dissatisfaction from other Big 8 members at that time that NU ultimately claimed about Texas. So that was part of it.

But IIRC, Texas did issue a bit of an ultimatum in regard to PQs, that allowing them would be a deal-breaker. That was an 11-1 vote. I had heard that the location of the conference office was 7-5, with Colorado coming over. Nebraska may have been the only dissenter on the other issues it lost.

I suppose I’d liken it to standing with the guy that stood up to the school bully.

JS,

Curious if you have heard from the Asset/Cigar who the leaders are on the offensive side of the ball? Seems like the D has had a few people step up and take leadership roles, but I haven’t really heard about anyone on the Offense doing similar except for Mason Walters.

Seems like a strong leader – be it Fozzy/Irby or one of the other upperclassmen – could nip some the QB clique stuff in the bud pretty quickly.

It does feel like the realignment picture has got away from Texas in the last week or two.

Speaking of getting away, did anyone see that Eric Davis de-committed from the Aggies. If only they already were in the SEC this wouldn’t have happened…RIGHT?

I blame Baylor!

Bob and Big Ern: Thanks! Bob, I think you’re right on.

TDL: I think what you’re saying is exactly right. Whatever realignment is, it feels like we’re not in control of our own destiny, which marks a stunning reversal from last year. Is LHN so earth shattering and world-redefining that it has to push us in a direction we wouldn’t otherwise go?

I mean, if you take LHN out of the equation, is there one person on here who can come up with an arguable case that Texas would even consider the ACC? Anything at all, seriously?

And if the only thing that pushes you to the ACC is a network nobody can see yet… I don’t know, it just feels like LHN has severed some relationships we value, and those severed relationships put us behind the 8 ball with regard to conference affiliation.

Nick, as hard-headed as Texas seems to be regarding the LHN, everyone they’re dealing with wants to kill it. There is some fear and jealousy there, IMO.

Bob, I get that, and it is (to date) the strongest evidence I’ve seen that LHN is something to be proud of and protect. I’m not saying LHN is bad.

What I AM saying is that if LHN is the deciding factor in the decision about where UT plays football for the next 25-50 years, I think that’s ALL kinds of messed up.

TN – The economics and demographics simply represent uncomfortable data for those who argue (A) that B1G inclusion somehow elevates Texas as a research institution and (B) that it will continue to do so for the next 50-100 years. Frankly I don’t get the 50-to-100 years thing on any level, but it’s out there for some reason.

Sports conference affiliation means something, but make that decision based on the competitive and financial merits. Joining the B1G won’t accomplish much of anything for Nebraska academically. The state’s still just corn fields and Omaha. Maybe CIC throws it a few bones, and perhaps rubbing elbows with Champagne-Urbana and Ann Arbor will rub off on Lincoln. Then again, hanging out with Austin didn’t do much for Lincoln. Purdue’s still Purdue, even as a charter B1G member. Same thing with the Arizona and Oregon schools, despite their affiliation with California’s Big 4. Any State U as an academic and research institution stands on the shoulders of its state’s economy and alumni financial base and not much else. Universities grow and erode accordingly.

Which brings us around to the B1G as an athletic environment for Texas sports. Either we’re going to lift their game or regress to their mean across all sports. THAT’S the one area I think people badly underestimate, because sports boils down to competitive standards. I don’t see B1G schools setting those standards, and as a result, I don’t see them at the forefront of any college sports that matter to me.

Austin, TX is the largest city in the U.S. without a pro sports franchise. This means UT has a media base of approx 1.3mil that, when it comes to sports entertainment dollars, it shares with no pro team and no other significant college team. The OKC marketplace is approx 1.1mil, but that is shared (at least) with OU, Okie Light and NBA franchise. USC is in a primary market of over 10 million but its football program only generates gross revenues of $29mil. UT generates well over $90mil from its football program alone. The bottom line is that UT has a very unique natural advantage when it comes to the value of its media rights. No other college or pro team shares the same advantage. For UT not to try to exploit this financial advantage for the benefit of the school and the taxpayers would be negligent. Its no different that ND exploiting its advantage of being the only national university.

What gets lost here is that while the Tier 3 rights of most schools is not significant (The Bryan-College Station media market is only approx 198,000, Waco is approx 192,000 Lubbock is approx 245,000) those schools that have value in their Tier 3 rights should be free to either pool their rights and share revenues or to sell those rights to broadcasters. At the moment the schools selling their local media rights (as of Mid 2010) ware:

1-Georgia $92.8 million over 8 years for $11.6 per year—ISP sports
2-Ohio State – $110 million over 10 years for $11.0 per year—IMG
3- Florida $100 million over 10 years for $10.0 per year—sun sports
4-Alabama $85 million over 9 years for 9.44 per year.—ISP/learfield
5-Texas $94 million over 10 years for $9.4 per year—IMG
6-Nebraska $112.5 million over 13 years for $8.65 per year—IMG
7-Tennessee $83.4 million over 10 years for $8.34 per year—IMG
8-UConn $80 million over 10 years for $8.0 per year—IMG
8t-Kentucky $80 million over 10 years for $8.0 per year—IMG
10-North Carolina $97.5 million over 13 years for$ 7.5 per year—learfield
11-LSU $7.45 per year
12-Arkansas $7.3/yr
13-Michigan $7.16/yr
14-Arizona $6.7/yr
15-Oklahoma $ 6.33/ yr

All that LHN has done is redefined the value of local media rights by packaging them into a different format. Since UT has done so, OU has signed a branded network deal and other schools are looking at LHN as a model for how the local/ Tier 3 rights can best be marketed. a&m’s problem is they they have a primary market of less than 200,000 which limits the way their rights can be marketed.

LHN hasn’t severed any relationships. Rather, it has put the natural advantage UT has in its unshared primary media market into the spotlight.

I think the only thing that seems to have gotten out of Texas’s control is that the relationship with OU has finally been pushed to a tipping point. Last year the LHN wasn’t as much of a bargaining chip and if we had jumped then it would likely be some SEC team or ND getting the big bucks and the branding opportunities from their own network. A lot of us would be left wondering what could have been when we are left sharing the scraps of a PAC-controlled regional network with Tech while A&M gets a $7M/yr deal for its 3rd tier rights with Fox because they are in the SEC.

Last year we didn’t have any more or less control than we do this year. The only difference is that we were seemingly on the exact same page as OU. Now that OU isn’t so certain about the situation, we now have to make some unilateral decisions on our own. Do we go to the Pac which seemingly means a reset to last year with regards to the LHN or do we wait it out and see what happens even if it means some chaos or even a weak conference or seemingly imperfect fit in the ACC until the final cards are dealt?

We have options and even going to the Pac isn’t quite the surrender that it would be made out to be considering the time frame and the fledgling nature of the LHN. But it is a move that probably hems us in over the long term and we may watch others take advantage of our groundwork and set their athletics department, and even more importantly, their overall academic stability on firmer ground by having their own network, something that we will have negotiated away for the sake of keeping OU, OSU, and Tech on the schedule.

Hierarchies and ID: I agree with you. If it’s purely about athletic environment, it’s the SEC, and then everyone else. And I’ve never really understood the argument that going to the SEC would somehow hurt UT academically. But it seems to be clearly settled conventional wisdom. I’m assuming that’s based on some knowledge I simply don’t have, but maybe someone can be helpful and spell it out for me.

Is B1G a leader? I don’t know, but I see an environment where they could be. Problem is that in the last 5-10 years, B1G simply hasn’t been recruiting the kind of athletes that SEC has. I don’t know that it HAS to be that way, but that’s been the trend. So does a Texas/ND/?/? addition help change that? With ND in the equation (with their higher admissions standards), arguably not.

Ricky and Big Al: I like your analysis, and agree with you on most points. So here’s my question re: OU… If OU really wants the exact same thing that Texas wants, why are they operating unilaterally? If OU/Texas presented a united front to the PAC, they’d have a must stronger bargaining position re: maintaining their own 3rd tier network rights. Because PAC WANTS UT/OU. I don’t get that same sense from B1G or anyone else, who seem to feel they might NEED us in a superconference world, but don’t really WANT to do it. OU and Texas could basically present PAC with a fait accompli with regard to these networks and say, “Hey, take us and live with it, or go try to find someone else that gets you to a 14 or 16 team footprint that MATTERS.”

Nick -

Don’t forget that the Big 10 already turned down OU and OSU because of academics. The PAC would have to be willing to sacrifice some of its pride to take those two school’s after they have been dubbed inferior goods by the best academic conference in the nation (leaving the Ivy League out of the conversation because of their ban on post regular season games). OU may be trying to gain leverage because of an ego clash between Boren and the powers that be at UT, but OU leaving is HIGHLY uncertain at this time. OU also has their $75mil over $10 yr deal with Learfield they would have to give up if they went to the PAC. Texas doesn’t have the academic baggage OU and OSU do, so OU may have to do a package deal with UT to get accepted into any conference other than the SEC or Big East.

UT has its options open. In a world of reduced academic budgets, the innovative marketing of local/ Tier 3 rights may be a lot more accepted in a year or two than it is today. Don’t be surprised to see OU stay attached to UT for the next year or two (at least) and the Big 12 to survive.

I agree with what Big Al says but would add that OU may be using leaving for the Pac as leverage to get a better deal on their 3rd tier rights. They maybe negotiating with ESPN behind the scenes for their own network and are using the supposed Pac move as a bargaining chip. They seemed to have backed off a bit from making a quick decision and there are rumblings they are now deferring to us again with regards to first steps. I think OU sees the advantage of maintaining control of their 3rd tier rights rather than ceding it to the Pac and then sharing the channel with their little brother.

This is all Kabuki theater and is completely fascinating to read about and discuss while we wait for the live action this weekend!

Big Al, I agree with your assessment 100%. So my question becomes, if you assume that in 2-3 years, these networks are an accepted part of the college fb landscape, where do UT and OU WANT to end up, and how do they best go about getting there?

I think the signs are pretty clear that OU, or at least Boren, REALLY wants to go PAC. And they’d probably rather do it sooner than later. So, if you could get EVERYTHING you want, by simply teaming up with Texas, why don’t you? I guess my question is, if LHN isn’t the root of the discord between Texas and OU (which I can accept since OU has its own in the works), then what is? If it’s ego, what got that so out of whack?

They seemed to have backed off a bit from making a quick decision and there are rumblings they are now deferring to us again with regards to first steps.

Just wondering where you’ve heard or seen these rumblings?

OU has a deal signed with Learfield for $75 over 10 years. The Network has alrwady filed its trademark apps and is ready to go (Called “Oklahoma Network” – ONE). It doesn’t need to leverage anything with ESPN. Don’t bet the stuff that is getting out into the press is accurate. Just sit tight and enjoy the UCLA game. OU has given itself a deadline of the end of the month. OU and OSU heading to the PAC would mean a realignment into east/ west divisions and I don’t see the PAC members wanting to do that just to include a couple of academically inferior orphans. My personal guess is that OU and OSU stay and we get at least one new member (BYU?) and become attractive to other schools that find their local/ Tier3 rights have some value in the new world pioneered by LHN. ESPN playing hardball on LHN fees is going to reset the bar for other schools in valuing their local/ Tier3 rights. When states are cutting back on education budgets and the economy makes raising tuition difficult, the ability to sell local/ Tier 3 rights may make inclusion in a Big 12 very attractive to certain programs. Remember, USC, a marquee program in the media capital of the country only generates $29mil/yr in gross revenue. UCLA generates even less. Can you see OU doing markedly better if they joined the PAC?

Is the Big 12 salvageable without A&M, OU, and Okie State? Let’s play devil’s advocate.
 
What if Texas and the other remaining members of the Big 12 decided to stay in the Big 12 and add replacement teams to keep the BCS AQ status? We can expect that the Big 12 members’ TV revenues would be greatly diminished.
 
A&M may not have signed the TV contract, but they agreed to the contract in principle and a deal was made with the networks based upon the aggies’ promise that they would stay in the Big 12. Lawsuits have been won on flimsier grounds. The fact that the SEC is seeking waivers from all of the Big 12 schools indicates that there was enticement and tortious interference on the part of the SEC. One of the Aggy trolls (I think it was Ag_in_TX) bragged on these message boards that he had seen the numbers and a projected TV contract with the SEC would increase aggie revenues substantially. Assuming this Aggy troll is legit, how would he have known what the projected revenue figures would be if the SEC had not shared those numbers with A&M? Would that not qualify as tortious interference?
 
Assume that A&M and the SEC get lucky and beat the lawsuit. Have OU and Okie State signed the TV contract? Could OU and Okie State assume full liability for the lost TV revenues? Either way, the Big 12 members could sue and recover enough damages to replace most, if not all, of the lost TV revenues.
 
With OU, A&M, and Okie State out of the conference, Big 12 recruiting could fall off a cliff… unless the Big 12 changes its recruiting rules. Let’s assume Texas shifts its position and agrees to allow the other Big 12 schools to recruit partial qualifiers for 10 years in exchange for the rest of the conference allowing Texas carte blanche with LHN to show high school games and conference games if necessary.
 
Assume that The Big 12 is unable to recruit Notre Dame or a marquee team from the Big 10, SEC, Pac 12, or ACC. The Big 12 invites teams from Conference USA and the Big East. Central Florida and South Florida would add a Florida recruiting base to the Big 12. Pittsburgh, Rutgers, or Syracuse would add a northeastern recruiting base to the Big 12. Big 12 schools would now have recruiting bases in Texas, Florida, and the northeast, and the Big 12 schools would be able to recruit partial qualifiers who are unlikely to be recruited by the Big 10 or the ACC.
 
Within five years, the new Big 12 could be a formidable conference – second only to the SEC. Any recruiting gains that A&M achieves from the SEC would be neutralized by Texas Tech and Baylor’s gains from partial qualifiers. LSU, Arkansas, and Oklahoma State would also lose recruits to Baylor and Texas Tech because of partial qualifiers. SEC schools recruiting the state of Florida would face stronger competition from a Central Florida and a South Florida that now benefit from a stronger conference affiliation.
 
Of course, I hope that A&M, OU, and Okie State come to their senses. If these teams stay in conference, the Big 12 could be a more successful conference with 10 members instead of 12. The Big 12 conference had become too unbalanced with the South teams dominating the North teams, and there was no chance of the North fielding competitive teams unless they were allowed partial qualifiers. Schools like Missouri and Kansas can now recruit better in Texas knowing that they will play two games in Texas every year. Attendance has increased rapidly at schools like Texas Tech and Okie State. Given the lack of professional sports in these areas, it’s not far-fetched to project that these schools could draw SEC sized crowds in the next 20 years. There is nothing wrong with the Big 12 except the perception that the conference is unstable.

I mean, if you take LHN out of the equation, is there one person on here who can come up with an arguable case that Texas would even consider the ACC? Anything at all, seriously?

TV Sets

The ACC has depth in terms of Top 100 TV markets, especially compared to the Big 12. Adding the Texas markets would certainly add to the value of the ACC in terms of market potential.

It was also be a real boon to the LHN. ESPN could then start to negotiate for a spot on the basic digital cable systems in the ACC markets, which would mean more potential subscribers, because unlike our current partners, who foam at the mouth at the idea of paying for the LHN on their basic cable bill, the ACC followers might like the idea of catching their teams in the olympic sports playing Texas on the LHN>

ACC

1. Boston
2. Washington D.C. (Maryland — they have beat writers from both the Post and Times)
3. Miami
4. Raleigh-Durham
5. Charlotte
6. Greenville-Spartenburg, SC (Clemson)
7. Norfolk-Portsmouth (Va. Tech)
8. Greensboro NC
9. Richmond (Virginia)

Again it should be noted that both Boston and Miami are heavy pro towns Boston College is not much of a draw — Miami can produce solid TV numbers in that market when they are good, and of course they haven’t been in a while.

Other secondary markets where the ACC is an attractive collegiate pull (although not as dominant as the pros)

1. Tampa
2. Orlando-Daytona
3. West Palm Beach
4. Ft. Myers-Naples
5. Roanoke-Lynchburg

That’s a strong base to build on.

Big 12

1. DFW
2. Houston
   (Texas, Texas A&M and OU — in that order — are all solid draws in these markets, but nothing compared to the pros).
3. San Antonio
4. Oklahoma City
5. Austin

“Just wondering where you’ve heard or seen these rumblings?”

I read this numerous times on ESPN yesterday and Monday. It was also on the scroll bar most of both days. Also heard it on the radio here in San Antonio.

To add to the discussion above about Texas “pushing the rest of the conference around”, I’ve also heard that Texas wanted to establish the conference football championship and the conference hoops tournament in Dallas. Neither of which happened.

The rumors on OU right now are all over the place – which shouldn’t be a surprise in this process.

ESPN started the reporting that they were tapping the brakes, and their source is saying that OU is nowhere close to a decision.

However, OU sites are still reporting that the BOR may vote on Monday to allow Boren to submit an application to join the PAC.

I wouldn’t put too much faith in either report.

Big 12 also currently brings St Louis and KC — both probably 30ish TV markets if not better. Not saying that changes the dynamics of ACC vs. Big 12, but the Big 12 does reach other big markets outside of TX and OK.

Big Ern: The only collegiate football draw for those markets is Missouri (and it isn’t that strong). Kansas brings nothing (basketball of course but again football is driving this realignment).

The comparable markets in the ACC are much more “collegiate friendly.”

Maroon Carrots,

ISU, the Kansas schools, and Missouri have been recruiting in Texas since the formation of the Big XII and only Missouri has made much hay.

KSU made a huge mistake bringing Snyder back, jury is out on Gill, no one notices ISU as the cable annex channels in Austin have a bigger market share than the state of Iowa, and Missouri really hasn’t done much to truly elevate their program in football or basketball.

Additionally, they all had Prop 48’s prior to the Big XII and only KSU with their regular influx of jucos, the weakest schedule in college football, and a down OU in the conference made a mark.

In regards to your expansion plan why in the world would Pitt, Syracuse, and Rutgers want to leave the Big East and its lucrative basketball contract to be flying halfway across the country for a weaker basketball conference and a football conference in which one school is allowed to set the rules?

horncasting: They did establish the football championship in Dallas in exchange for the basketball tournament being in KC.

I never heard that Texas wanted both. They got a rotation on both events for a while, but to demand both would be selfish and stupid. I don’t think that ever happened.

srr50, I like where you’re going, but you seem to assume that Texas is taking OU/OSU with it to the ACC, which I don’t think is happening.

I understand Texas can survive and thrive in the ACC. My question really was, do any of those numbers stack up against L.A., San Francisco, Phoenix? You’ve set up a good argument that ACC would be better than B1G TV viewer wise, but what about in relation to the PAC?

I have to say one thing I’m really enjoying about all the speculation, uncertainty, constantly changing plans, and indecisiveness is the way it just leaves A&M slowly twisting in the wind.

Actually, I am assuming that OU does not go to the ACC. I only threw in the OKC just to show how dependent on Texas and OU the Big 12 is and that all it takes to kill the league is for one to leave.

I understand Texas can survive and thrive in the ACC. My question really was, do any of those numbers stack up against L.A., San Francisco, Phoenix? You’ve set up a good argument that ACC would be better than B1G TV viewer wise, but what about in relation to the PAC?

San Francisco and Phoenix are pro towns — big time. LA doesn’t have an NFL team, but as Scipio points out in his UCLA preview, there are a lot of things to do besides sit at home and watch a college football game on TV.

The ACC markets care more about college football (and basketball) than the Pac 10 markets. The Pac 12 is much better positioned to take advantage of their media opportunities now than before, and I’m not saying that the ACC is a better alternative for Texas (far from it), I am saying that the ACC is attractive enough that combined with the freedom it allows the LHN that it no doubt is being carefully considered as an alternative.

Davey O’ Brien – It doesn’t really matter if Pittsburgh, Rutgers, or Syracuse turned a Big 12 invitation down, but they would be turning down a more lucrative conference affiliation for football and a stronger recruiting base in Texas (plus a recruiting base in Florida if we add UCF or USF). Even if every school in the Big East turned us down, we can always invite BYU and/or Colorado State to join instead. Kansas, Missouri, Kansas State, and Iowa State will see a recruiting benefit by playing the Big 12 South schools every year instead of just twice every four years.

The name Davey O’ Brien sounds familiar. Didn’t you play football like 150 years ago?

Nunna, tried to find what I remembered being an article about OU waiting on Texas on to decide it’s next move on ESPN but can’t find it there or any place I usually read stuff. Might be I am now just taking in fan speculation as reported news (Is there really much difference in the quality of the information on this stuff?!?)…though it seems Horncasting has seen similar stuff so perhaps the report was made and then cast into the memory hole when it was found to be false.

The ACC has a similar footprint to the SEC in the South with North Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland replacing the western SEC states. That is all big time football country and is why the SEC is looking to mostly expand its TV footprint more than expanding the level of competition or intensity of the potential rivalries. The SEC would be better off taking Clemson and FSU or Miami than it would A&M, WVU, or VT if they were looking to improve competition or provide more intense rivalries, and ultimately better football in the conference. The SEC has shown its hand and it is the grabbing one not the football one. A&M is the only one talking about improved competition which, as we have all agreed, is odd coming from a team who has consistently failed to punch at their competitive weight in our ‘weak’ conference.

I think OU’s gambit recently, at least in part, has been to make Texas actually think about a world with no Big 12 and no OU game. Say this about CFB powerhouse programs — they tend to come in pairs. They have an annual game which most casual fans know before the season even starts they will be watching, even if they don’t know the specific day and time. That’s what makes the SEC so damned strong. For awhile, it was Alabama-Tennessee. Then Alabama cratered, and it became Tennessee-Florida. Then Florida-LSU. Then Alabama-LSU-Florida. It’s always someone over there.

Losing the OU game hurt Nebraska much more than anyone ever thought it would. It left them a marquee program without a single date on the calendar anyone really wanted to watch them play. Result: the only time anyone paid any attention, regular season, was when they lost or struggled. Boy, that helps branding.

Wherever Texas lands, they need an annual sparring partner in their own class. See: Duke-NC in basketball. Those programs push each other, and you can hardly think of one without thinking of the other. Now that’s branding with benefits.

A Pac-16 without Texas-USC as the marquee annual game would be a dream come true for Larry Scott and Pat Haden – all reward with very little risk. From Texas’ perspective, it would be more Hotel California.

Great point and counter point discussions here. However, I believe that no matter how this realignment scenario turns out, it will include Notre Dame.

You do realize the basketball contract for the Big East dwarfs that of the Big XII, you are asking schools to give up multiple times in prime time on ESPN, to be part of a crap conference if OU, OSU, and A&M leave for other conferences.

As far as recruiting, the Big East already recruits Florida as well as the fertile areas of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and the Mid-Atlantic. The only person your scenario helps is the leftovers of the Big XII and keeps Texas from having to go independent in all sports.

As far as CSU and BYU unless you work for the Texans I don’t understand the possible explanation for the idea that the ever growing Ft. Collins media market and a decaying CSU program could somehow offset the loss of OU, OSU, or A&M.

Finally, as I pointed out before, those schools you mentioned have had access to Texas, have recruited Texas, and aren’t even a pimple on the ass of the college landscape. They are in small markets, have little history, and if Missouri is the highest profile of the four you aren’t exactly talking about a big group of swinging dicks to attract media attention.

The only chance for the Big XII to survive is to keep OU and OSU in the fold. If that doesn’t happen this thing unravels fast. There just aren’t enough schools that are going to join an unstable conference been run by one school to make the thing viable.

Davey, you’re missing the point. We don’t need a Big East team to save the Big 12. Really the Big 12 can plug in just about any good-sized school with the possible exception of TCU -they just suck.

You truly believe that if OU, OSU, and A&M walk the Big 12 will continue as business as usual?

The conference would need to come up with three quality teams to make this thing work and they just aren’t out there. OU and OSU walk and this thing is dead. ND isn’t coming to the Big XII, BYU brings some recognition, and after that it is major step back. Truth be told with the conference you have described to to bottom the Big East would be a better conference than KU, KSU, ISU, Missouri, Tech, Baylor. UT, and three schools off the street corner near the bodega by Klein High which is about what you would have to pick from in your scenario.

Davey,
A weakened version of the Big 12 survives for a short period until the rest of the realignment picture becomes clearer. Texas and the Big 12 invites teams that want a shot at the BCS and big TV money for the next 2 or 3 years and if things go right they might even get a slot in the next generation power structure depending on how that shakes out. If not then they too might have some additional leverage when it comes to moving back down in the to the nether world of FBS football.

Texas wants the status quo for a few more years to see what happens with ND and other teams who don’t want to be stuck relying on the conference to get their school’s message out. If the LHN is one of several existing school-based networks Texas will have greater bargaining power. Even if the LHN is still unique in that time frame we get to see if the LHN has legs or not. If it doesn’t then it will be easy to negotiate it our of existence to join a conference, if it does take off then it brings additional value even if Texas has to pay kick backs to those suckling at their conference’s teat.

I don’t think anyone looks at the Big 12 surviving for much longer either with or without OU in the near term.

Davey – I didn’t mean to disrespect the Big East. The Big East is a great basketball conference, but it’s not a great football conference. Even so, the Big East has held onto its BCS AQ without having any big name teams for the last seven seasons. If the Big East can survive, the Big 12 can certainly survive.

Last year after 15 years of winning football, TCU averaged 42,000 fans at home games. Last year after 15 years of futility, Baylor averaged 40,000 fans at home games. In a watered down Big 12, schools like Baylor and Texas Tech will post better records, and their attendance figures will increase with more wins.

2010 average attendance figures for Big 12-2-1-2 football games : Texas – 101,000 (in a losing season); Missouri – 62,000; Texas Tech 57,000; Kansas State – 50,000; Iowa State -45,000; Kansas – 45,000; Baylor – 40,000. BYU’s average 2010 attendance was 61,000.

2010 average attendance figures for Big East football games, plus TCU: West Virginia – 56,000; Pittsburgh – 52,000; Louisville – 51,000; Rutgers – 46,000; TCU – 42,000; South Florida – 41,000; Syracuse – 40,000; Connecticut – 38,000; Cincinnati – 35,000.

You truly believe that Fox will pay the money they promised when the conference loses three of its five big name schools and does have comparable schools lined up? I have not see the contracts and if I did it wouldn’t matter as most likely I wouldn’t understand what I was reading. What I do know though is they are damn stupid if they agree to pay a Cadillac price to show games for a Hugo conference and that is the conference you are describing. Best pieces got taken and the only real jewel out there is Boise and they bring no media footprint at all. ND has a great deal with their current situation, schools from the PAC aren’t coming the Big XII and the same is true for schools in the SEC or Big 10. The only schools that job are those whose nose is pressed to the glass as it is and they do nothing for the media exposure for the conference, diminish the status of the conference, and in that scenario I do think Texas loses ground in the recruiting wars.

Son you can play in Aimes, Manhattan, Columbia, Waco, Lubbock, or Fort Collins in front of 30-40,000 or you can go to fill in any of the SEC schools.

As I said before I will say it again and that is if OU jumps OSU follows and what is left is a pile of crap that will akin to Boise and the MWC.

Davey – Why are you so angry? This isn’t a Big East vs Big 12 struggle. Both conferences can survive. The Big East has proven that over the last 7 years. The Big East has survived by adding scabs like TCU and Cincinnati. Basically the Big East survived by being the shittiest conference that was still BCS AQ. Maybe the TV revenues won’t be as high for the Big 12 at first, but Texas has the LHN which adds revenues. And OU, Okie State, A&M, the SEC, and the Pac 12 will shell out tens of millions to settle lawsuits related to breaking the TV agreement. So there’s that. And if the money well runs dry, then Texas picks which conference we want to join. What is so hard to understand about that?

Didn’t part of that watered down conference just beat TCU?

Don’t forget that OU and OSU don’t bring many TV sets, BYU does.

I think the PAC 12 tells the Okie schools to wait in hopes of keeping the Texas possibility open. The aggies are either held hostage for a year or they try to add BYU for a couple years with the thought they go with Texas to the endgame.

Texas won’t lose ground in recruiting wars if they win conference championships and produce NFL talent, period. I believe I read a post earlier today about how many players from Texas were in the NFL. That poster seemed to be in a better mood at the time.

IMO, TCU benefits from OU and OSU going west. OU will try to woo some socal hotties and slow play the players they compete with TCU for on a regular basis. OSU will lose exposure it badly needs.

Maroon, I think what Davey is getting at, whether right or wrong, is that Texas risks irrelevance in a weakened Big XII. He’s surveyed the landscape of available free agents, and realized that there isn’t a quality program that would be willing to sign on to this pirate ship of a conference, and on that point, he’s 100% correct. And even if it’s only for a few years, Texas remaining in a crappy conference risks being left out of the one game that matters, MNC. Don’t tell me about Fiesta Bowls or contractual AQ status. It’s pretty popular on this board to say “Wait till you see this team in 2012-2013”. What I don’t want to see is an undefeated and unchallenged 2013 Texas team getting left out in favor of an OU/Alabama MNC.

In college football, you’re defined by who you play. Don’t believe me? Ask 2004 Auburn, or Utah, or three or four Boise and TCU teams. Now I hear what you’re saying… “Boise, Utah, hell, even Auburn aren’t the same as Texas.” You’re right, for now. But a few years of playing a WAC schedule, and it won’t matter how long or hard we beat our chest screaming “We’re Texas!” Because that only means something if we play a schedule worthy of Texas.

We had power last year because we were perceived as being ready and perhaps willing to WIELD power. But a funny thing happened on the way to 5 and 7. A&M and OU realized that the power we had over them was power they’d GIVEN to us, and now they’re taking it back. That doesn’t bother me if we’re sitting back planning our next world domination move. But right now others are driving the bus, and they may be driving us to limited options. I mean, did you ever imagine a scenario last year involving the ACC?!?

Maroon: Survive? That seems a meager goal, even as a temporary one, for a program that last summer was the darling of CFB. I see two major assumptions in your argument, both of which seem dubious to me.

First, no one’s joining a conference with Texas if Texas is just waiting to see which country club is willing to let it park the motor-home out front when the dust settles. Second, the Big East is the lone BCS conference whose primary financial focus remains basketball, so I don’t think the stripped-down Big 12 comparison works.

Finally, if Texas wants to headline a conference of schools with common litigation interests against the biggest conferences with the best programs, good luck with scheduling, NCAA tournament selection committees, academic collaboration, and negotiating a soft landing in one of the biggest conferences with the best programs.

I am not saying your scenario isn’t logistically feasible. It is. It’s also long-term suicide with no short-term upside.

Who is angry? Just bemused by the fact that somehow the belief that the function of the Big XII is a conduit for Texas football. It wasn’t that long ago Texas wasn’t the flavor of the month and things run in cycles. People worry about life after Mack, but it is life after Dodds they should worry about. I can’t think of any other school that has won fewer conference titles, in the last ten years and carries the clout. That is solely through his efforts and I agree they should not give up the network. That will mean though losing a few battles to win the war.

Yes we did get beat by Baylor. We replaced over half the starting offense and defense, took their best shot and lost by 2. No problems, we will win 9-10 this year, move to the Big East and be alright. I forgot though that Texas is back this year and there should be no concerns winning in Waco. It will be interesting to see what happens when Texas actually plays an offense that has some speed and how the quarterback situation progresses.

Headed “back” in the right direction with some young players and innovative coaching, but not delusional. If RGIII hasn’t run his legs off by December it will be a long day.

Davey, I can see a scenario where the Big 12 is truly a conduit for Texas football. I don’t see it as an ideal but, if the media and fanbases of every other school in the country are to be believed, the Big 12 has already been functioning as a conduit for Texas football since its inception so this doesn’t seem to me to be too far-fetched.

The biggest reason this is not really optimal or even likely is that other conferences are going to be proactive and each year the Big 12 would be under threat of being poached. Baylor would drop Texas in flash if the Big East came calling, but the reality is that KU and Missouri are good enough properties to have options and they would have to jump on an offer from another conference. Being independent would be easier for Texas than trying to maintain a revolving door of MWC or Conference USA teams to fill in as the remaining original Big 12 members find other landing spots.

I can think of one other team that carries the same or more clout than Texas and hasn’t won jack shit in decade…Notre Dame. Some conference is going to grab their ankles and get Catholic to get a school that hasn’t won anything in a long time.

Bob – didn’t realize the basketball tournament was permanent. But I thought that the football championship was just a temporary 3-5 year agreement to play in new shiny Jerryworld and after that it would rotate again.

As far as whether asking for both is selfish….maybe, but Dallas is fairly central for at least 6 of the (formerly) big 12 teams and has a major airport making travel from all of the others very easy. I’m not sure there is another location in the Big 12 geography that offers the same advantages.

“You don’t have to be good to succeed. You just gotta be the least shitty option. Example: We’re eating at The Olive Garden.” – Shit my dad says

Texas doesn’t need the rest of the college football world to love us. Most schools are jealous of Notre Dame, but there isn’t a conference in the country that wouldn’t accept Notre Dame in a heartbeat. It’s the same with Texas. Even after Texas stunk up the Southwest Conference from 1984-1993, the Big Eight and the SEC both wanted Texas as a member.

There is no valid comparison between Texas and Boise State or TCU getting left out of the national championship. Auburn was frozen out because of a freak occurence when three BCS conference schools went undefeated, and OU and USC were hyped by the media as the two best teams of all time. Auburn was frozen out that year despite playing in the SEC. If an SEC team can be frozen out, it really doesn’t matter what BCS conference we join. Are we really so desperate that we would throw away LHN over some hypothetical bullshit that will most likely never happen?

Texas doesn’t have to worry about strength of schedule. OU will be on our schedule every year (lawsuit or no lawsuit) because the sooners can’t afford not to play us. USC, Notre Dame, and BYU are also on future schedules. Schools will continue to want to play Texas because its a big pay day for them. How many stadiums in the country pack in 101,000 fans in a 7 loss season?

People need to understand that conference realignment is a poker game. It’s a game of nerves and bluffing. Other schools and conferences are trying to bluff UT into giving up LHN. All I’m saying is, “call their bluff”. If we need to rough it for awhile, we can survive and prosper in the Big 12 as long as necessary. As far as schools and conferences getting their feelings hurt because they are being sued for breaking up contracts – If they don’t break the contracts, they won’t be sued. If they get sued, they have nobody to blame but themselves. This is business; it’s not personal. If some conferences or schools lose sight of that, Texas can always find new conferences and schools to play against who appreciate what Texas has to offer.

I love that line: “It’s just business, nothing personal.” Why? Because anyone who ever utters it has never done any serious business. There’s nothing more personal than business, because it’s all about money and livelihood. And nothing pisses people off more than a lawsuit, no matter how much they deserved it. In fact, the more they deserved it, they more pissed they get. It’s called human nature. I’ve seen plenty of media executives make decisions that cost their companies money, simply so they could watch someone’s career float down the river. The bigger the stakes and the more money involved, the more personal and subjective – and hence petty – it gets. See: Washington.

I am not saying Texas has to play nice and appease anyone. LHN is reality, and people will simply have to get used to it. But this notion that Texas can thrive associating merely with the schools that are thrilled to be in the same room with Texas or the ones willing to hold their noses to pump up rights fees seems far-fetched to me. Every school needs partners, and the quality of your partners in turn plays a role in defining your program.

Perfectly put, CS. OU in the PAC may not have the freedom to keep scheduling us, even if the desire is there. Why would they? They can get to MNC without playing us, and if you’re consistently getting there, you probably don’t need to play Texas to recruit Texas.

Ricky,

The one thing Texas has had going for it in the Big XII were opposing schools that had the perception of being quality programs even if they had down times. Pull Nebraska, OU, OSU, and A&M from the mix and you have a weakened conference on the level of the Big East.

It will be interesting to see how many of those 101,000 actually would show up for a Conference game with Colorado State of UH.

Carrots,

In regard to strength of schedule the only true quality program there is OU, USC should return but is anyone sure that Kiffin won’t just add gas to the fire started by Pete?

Funny you use ND as an example of a school that would add a little timbre to the Texas schedule. Someone cynical might say it is the perfect match-up and BYU as a quality opponent? Please, they haven’t been a contender in the MWC for a few years.

See, some of us don’t eat a Olive Garden because we can do better at home, pay less, and not deal with the shit at all. Someone will always play Texas just like someone will always indeed play ND, but for a school that is so set on going great things to protect its brand maybe it should be a bit more weary of becoming that beautiful girl in high school who is “dating” the college guy and ends up not going to prom because every guy in the school gets tired of her shit.

If OU leaves the Big 12 it is not salvageable — period.

Anyone who thinks our TV partners will pay the sums due right now if we lose OU, Oklahoma State (and maybe Missouri) and add a couple of tomato cans are smoking some strong stuff.

Notre Dame isn’t coming to the Big 12 and neither is BYU. This league is totally dependent on Texas and OU and if either one bails it is done.

Screamin’: Good point, but what that phrase means is that in business, you don’t care about the other person after you win.

srr: First Nebraska, then A&M, now OU being misleading about why they want what they want. If OU really wants stability in the Big 12, all it has to do is keep quiet. But no, David Boren is the Leeroy Jenkins of the Big 12 (warning: some language NSFW).

That means they really don’t want what they say they want. What they want, is out. They do see stability in the Pac, but they also see about $10 mil more per year, and more if Texas joins with them.

Cynically speaking, it’s good that UT is pushing to keep the B12 — it does make a lot of sense in a lot of ways — but it’s a lot easier to be concerned about the league when you’ve already got yours. If they didn’t have the LHN, they’d be looking around, too, and we know this because they already have, last year.

I guess posters can’t link. Oh well. Should have figured that out a long time ago.

bob, you can link, but i don’t know if you can substitute text like that. if it’s possible i wish someone would explain how.

bob, you can link, but i don’t know if you can substitute text like that. if it’s possible i wish someone would explain how.

I do it on here using the following code and it always seems to work. (note: delete the two * just inside the first and last bracket. I had to put them in so it wouldn’t actually use the code here.) Where it says “text” in the code just substitute what you want to appear as in the example that follows.

text

Scipio is a funny dude

Damn, that didn’t work. I’ll try again so that it doesn’t actually use the code.

OK, hopefully this came out. This time delete the four * just inside all four brackets.

Link text

Scipio is a funny dude

OK f__ it. That didn’t work.

Vasherized offers a course on BC codes, Sundays from 8-5 at the Red Lion off 290. E-mail him for details.

OK, pretty sure this should work. Just substitue for each ( and ) respectively.

(a href=“url”)text(/a)

(a href=“http://barkingcarnival.fantake.com/2011/09/14/why-ucla-bothers-me/”)Scipio is a funny dude(/a)

Apparently it won’t let you display a “less than” or “greater than” symbol, but that’s what you substitute in for ( and ).

Hello there, just become aware of your blog thru Google, and located that it is really informative. I’m going to watch out for brussels. I will be grateful in the event you continue this in future. Many other folks shall be benefited out of your writing. Cheers!

Thank you a lot for sharing this with all folks you really recognise what you’re speaking about! Bookmarked. Kindly also talk over with my web site =). We will have a hyperlink trade agreement among us

Unquestionably consider that that you said. Your favourite justification appeared to be on the web the simplest thing to be mindful of. I say to you, I definitely get irked even as other people think about issues that they plainly do not recognize about. You managed to hit the nail upon the top and also outlined out the entire thing without having side effect , people can take a signal. Will likely be again to get more. Thank you

Thanks for any other excellent post. The place else could anyone get that kind of info in such an ideal way of writing? I have a presentation subsequent week, and I’m on the look for such info.

hello!,I love your writing so much! proportion we keep in touch extra approximately your article on AOL? I require an expert on this space to solve my problem. Maybe that’s you! Looking forward to see you.

Simply wish to say your article is as astounding. The clearness to your submit is simply excellent and i could assume you’re a professional on this subject. Well along with your permission allow me to grasp your RSS feed to stay up to date with impending post. Thank you a million and please keep up the gratifying work.

I’m really inspired along with your writing talents as well as with the layout to your blog. Is this a paid theme or did you customize it your self? Either way stay up the nice high quality writing, it?s uncommon to look a great weblog like this one nowadays..

Hello my family member! I want to say that this article is awesome, great written and come with approximately all important infos. I’d like to see more posts like this .

Heya i am for the first time here. I found this board and I find It truly helpful & it helped me out a lot. I hope to give something again and aid others like you aided me.

Unquestionably consider that which you stated. Your favourite justification seemed to be at the net the easiest thing to be aware of. I say to you, I definitely get irked while other folks consider worries that they plainly do not know about. You managed to hit the nail upon the highest and also outlined out the entire thing without having side-effects , folks can take a signal. Will probably be again to get more. Thank you

I do not even understand how I ended up here, but I thought this publish used to be good. I do not recognize who you might be but certainly you are going to a famous blogger when you are not already. Cheers!