Portland ESPN affiliate reporting Texas and Big 10 in talks
February 12th, 2010 at 12:42 AM ^
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2010/feb/11/big-ten-making-overtures-texas…
I looked back several pages on the board and the diaries, and didn't see it posted.
February 12th, 2010 at 12:44 AM ^
Before the onslaught ensues, I just figured I'd mention that Brian covered this in one of his front page posts yesterday. I, for one, do appreciate you posting it though.
February 12th, 2010 at 1:48 AM ^
I love lamp
February 12th, 2010 at 12:47 AM ^
I haven't been tuned in the last few days. My sincere apologies.
Let the flogging begin.
February 12th, 2010 at 1:17 AM ^
No flogging, this is newsworthy. Though this would be 10/10 awesome, the chance of it not happening is higher than 10/10. If that makes any sense.
February 12th, 2010 at 1:28 AM ^
meh. i'm not sold on it being awesome. i would honestly feel bad for texas IF (it will never happen) they moved to the big ten because they would lose so much of their history and programs identity. i wouldn't like Texas in the big ten. it would just feel weird. plus long distance relationships never work out.
February 12th, 2010 at 1:58 AM ^
You mean the fifteen years they were in the Big 12? Texas was historically an SWC program. They have more connection to TCU, SMU and Arkansas than anyone in the Big 12 outside of A&M/Oklahoma.
February 12th, 2010 at 2:40 AM ^
The weird feelings you'd get could become distant memories when you'd sit on the gold plated toilets we could afford to put in the big house.
February 12th, 2010 at 2:58 AM ^
feels like...victory...
February 12th, 2010 at 8:01 AM ^
Those gold toilets will become passé if Texas is running roughshod over the rest of the conference, which is a non-trivial possibility. This would be great for the conference but not so great for Michigan.
At the end of the day, Texas won't have the stones to leave the Big 12, though.
February 12th, 2010 at 9:16 AM ^
You're not excited about the prospect of playing (and potentially, beating) Texas on a semi-regular basis?
February 12th, 2010 at 11:17 AM ^
Realistically, I don't like our chances against Texas in general. They would field a more talented lineup than us virtually every season. We arguably face that problem against OSU as it is; against UT the problem would be magnified. As much of a homer as I am, I couldn't see us beating them on anywhere near a semi-regular basis.
February 12th, 2010 at 9:24 AM ^
if Texas is running roughshod over the rest of the conference, which is a non-trivial possibilityWasn't the exact same thing said when Penn St. joined the conference? That turned out ok.
February 12th, 2010 at 10:44 AM ^
Nobody was really worried about PSU dominating the Big Ten when they were admitted. PSU wasn't really beating the best teams out there before they joined. Texas has a lot better competition in the Big 12 than PSU did as an independent.
I would love it for the recruiting aspect, but it would make it a tougher road to the MNC game. As of now, the Big Ten is probably the easiest road to the MNC game. Most years, only UM, PSU, and OSU are true elite-level teams, meaning that "getting there" currently involves taking care of business against the rest of the conference and having to beat two elite teams to remain undefeated, or split against them during a year when one loss can get you in.
Adding Texas would definitely place a major roadblock in the process. Adding a championship game would also make it so that instead of two major victories to get to the MNC game, it would consequently take four.
So, for UM, the question is whether or not the recruiting advantages would outweigh the landmines on the way to the MNC game.
February 12th, 2010 at 11:18 AM ^
The state of Texas has twice the population of Pennsylvania, and an even more football-crazy local culture. And UT gets the pick of the litter every year. There is no historical precedent for something like this in the conference.
February 12th, 2010 at 7:42 AM ^
But I'd start planning a road trip for Michigan's first away game to Austin.
February 12th, 2010 at 1:26 AM ^
There might be a higher chance that Fielding Yost coaches the team in 2011 than Texas joining the B10
The article mentions the writer from Sporting News and how 'smart' he is for thinking that Texas is the most logical decision. Really? It probably is the least logical choice out of any of the discussed teams.
February 12th, 2010 at 2:31 AM ^
It's the most logical mutual choice in the most important category: Money.
Texas probably sees their TV contract to triple to something like 30 million. BTN has suddenly increased its footprint by 40 million people, and also has better non rev content. Think of all the Texas games that can now be on the "Big Ten's Greatest Games"
February 12th, 2010 at 8:31 AM ^
Texas is far and away the best academic school in the Big12, they would love getting a bit more respect in this area, which would happen in the Big Ten. They actually match up pretty good and adding another 10mil a year...no brainer.
February 12th, 2010 at 2:46 AM ^
without the blessing of the Texas state politicos, as we've already seen; see 1993:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/stories/083006dnspobayl….
February 12th, 2010 at 3:49 AM ^
That is an interesting article. Plus one for you sir.
February 12th, 2010 at 7:20 AM ^
It's a good fit academically and financially. So long a Texas can maintain OU and A&M rivalries, there is no historical reason for them not to do it. I can't see them wanting to travel so much in every sport, which could be an imposition on a lot of " them there" college kids.
Also, if Mizzou were to take the chance to jump to the Big Ten, then Texas' revenues will go down (losing the Kanas City and St Louis tv markets). The likely replacements in the Big 12 (TCU, Boise State, BYU) don't add much in the way of TV markets. Texas might as well be the school in the Big 12 to take advantage of the Big 12's potential decline and write it's own ticket. The conference just does not have the many good TV markets outside of Texas and UT is academically way ahead of most of the other schools.
The politics may be the biggest obstacle but I don't see the TX legislature being all that thrilled when Mizzou leaves to go rolling around in piles of Big Ten money and Texas is left with its financially stunted Big 12 revenue.
I would look forward to the better recruiting opportunities we'd see in Texas once we are on TV there every week in the same conference as UT.
February 12th, 2010 at 8:01 AM ^
The distance (driving-wise) to Colorado is about 17 hours. The drive to Penn State is 24.
February 12th, 2010 at 8:22 AM ^
The difference there is that ALL Big Ten cities require plane travel from Austin, whereas several Big 12 schools are within driving distance.
February 12th, 2010 at 12:04 PM ^
You make a very good point. It does appear that Missouri is the logical next choice after Texas. The folks in Austin have to know this, and if they feel that the Big XII is about to crumble, why not start it with their own exit from the conference.
February 12th, 2010 at 8:31 AM ^
Is there anything at all to this story besides one little newspaper from Kansas reporting completely unsubstantiated rumors from secret sources?
February 12th, 2010 at 8:33 AM ^
I think it would be a great addition, but I don't see it happening unfortunately.
February 12th, 2010 at 8:43 AM ^
Their cheerleaders are hot!
February 12th, 2010 at 8:55 AM ^
So, we'd have to do some wrangling to make the travel schedules smooth, but wouldn't it be sweet if we added in Texas? We could bring in Oklahoma, Texas A&M, and Colorado as well, so that Texas could play a few of its more traditional rivals. Missouri and Kansas make good sense geographically, so they're in; Kansas's hoops programs adds panache to the league. We'll invite Rice as well, to keep academic standards high and provide a yearly walk-over for the football team, even in re-building years.
While we're on the western part of the continent, we might as well add USC; they will certainly add some punch to how the football world views the strength of the Big Ten. UCLA and Cal will come along to maintain rivalries, add to the hoops scene (most years), and keep academic standards above average.
This gets the Big Ten up to 21, which makes splitting into divisions necessary but messy, so we've got to add a few more schools to even things out. We'll raid the ACC for Duke (hoops, academics, walk-over), UNC (h, a) Boston College (why not; they've shown a willingness to move in the past), VA Tech (strength of conference - football), and UVA (academics).
On our way back to the midwest we'll add in Pitt, WVU, Cincinnati, and 'Cuse. Some nice rivalries, some good schools, good football and hoops, shorter bus rides - all kinds of great reasons.
Finally, we'll adopt Miami OH and Akron. The program where Bo and so many others cut their teeth belongs in the Big Ten, and having the Zips around allows us to continually find ourselves clever when we use the phrase 'A to Z'.
The two biggest issues I see are creating a Big Ten logo with the number 32 showing in the negative space and dealing with a slightly larger travel budget. Given the intelligence of the folks working on expansion, I have no doubts that these issues can be efficiently handled. And while we won't have time for a pre-conference schedule, with in-conference matchups like these we wouldn't need one!
Let's get to work!
February 12th, 2010 at 9:09 AM ^
I have been on that campus and all I can say is everyone in AA or Mich will want to make that road trip. The ladies in Austin are HOT!
February 12th, 2010 at 9:17 AM ^
Where would this fall in the recruiting world? I think by adding another marquee team it would shift recruiting attention to the Big Ten. I think it would definitely help Michigan to have Texas recruits watching our games on BTN all year long. All that exposure would lead to a greater following in a top 2 recruiting state. For those top Texas recruits that don't land at UT, maybe Michigan might be their next option. Granted this works for the other B10 schools as well, but overall would help to improve conference strength and post season wins.