The Texas Situation From a Texas Alum-Great Rivals Read

Texas alum here. Born and raised in Austin, went to UT, spent three terrific years in Chicago, and am now on the east coast. This is a very long post, so please bear with me.

Summary:

There are only two ways that Texas could join the Big Ten:
1) Texas + OU: this is the most likely scenario that takes UT to the Big Ten, even though the Big Ten schools will have to stomach OU’s academic reputation (which shouldn’t really be a big deal, since OU and Nebraska offer similar value propositions).
2) Texas + A&M: still possible, but highly unlikely. A&M does not want to join the Big Ten; their leadership wants to avoid any scenario that involves them even *appearing* to kowtow to “t.u.” (i.e. Texas), and they genuinely believe the SEC is the best fit with their culture. Not clear whether A&M’s intransigence has removed the political barriers that have thus far prevented Texas from joining the Big Ten.
3) UT will not go to the Big Ten alone - we have to take either A&M or OU with us. Even if Texas Tech were admitted to the Big Ten, Tech alone would not be enough. Our need for at least a modicum of conference control and our desire to maintain recruiting dominance in the state of Texas both imply that UT joins the Big Ten if and only if we can bring A&M or OU with us. Texas will not join the Big Ten on our own, even if Notre Dame joins and the money is enormously large.

Details:

Most of the Texas students, faculty, and alums that I’ve spoken with are actually in favor of joining the Big Ten. We are located in the South geographically, but our culture, politics, and academic reputation align almost perfectly with the schools in the Big Ten. Having lived in both Chicago and Austin, I can tell you that UT has a lot more in common with the Big Ten than it does with any other school in the Big XII, including Texas A&M. UT is extremely excited about the CIC and ecstatic about the possibility of joining a group of schools that take academics AND athletics very seriously.

The Pac-10 is also attractive to UT, but it not nearly as attractive as the Big 10. Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA, USC, and UW are definitely peer institutions, but we are not at all thrilled about any of the other schools in the Pac-10. We simply view the Pac-10 as a compromise that addresses most of the key concerns of the University and its many stakeholders, including the Texas Legislature.

In a nutshell, there are two issues that are preventing UT from joining the Big Ten: academics and political considerations. The Big Ten has made it clear that they have no interest in admitting Texas Tech, primarily due to concerns about Tech’s academic credentials. This wouldn’t be an issue if Texas and/or Texas A&M could simply say “bye, Tech!”, but political considerations make this an untenable option. Tech’s current chancellor is a former politician who is very good friends with Governor Perry, and there are other political considerations which I will address in due course.

In addition, Texas would like to take along a few other teams from our neck of the woods to ensure that we are not isolated geographically and to maintain some semblance of power within our new conference. We also question the Big Ten’s commitment to spring sports such as baseball (which is really, really important to Texas). Finally, if Texas were to go to the Big Ten without A&M or OU, we would potentially be forfeiting our dominant recruiting position in the state of Texas.

The Pac-10 offers a compromise that addresses all of these concerns:
1. The Pac-10, though not as attractive as the Big Ten, would still be an academic upgrade for Texas.
2. By agreeing to take A&M, Tech, OU, and OSU, the Pac-10 has addressed the political considerations that currently prevent Texas from joining the Big Ten.
3. By agreeing to take most of the Big XII South, the Pac-10 ensures that Texas will be able to wield sufficient power in the new conference, even if we could earn more money in the Big Ten.
4. By splitting the conference into two divisions, one of which is essentially the old Big XII South, Texas will be able to maintain our dominant position in recruiting and a relatively easy road to the BCS.
5. Current Pac-10 teams are strong in non-football sports that Texas cares about, such as baseball and swimming & diving.

This is why Texas made the decision last week to head west.

However, recent events have changed the calculus considerably. Texas and OU have little interest in joining the SEC; we have virtually nothing to gain and nearly everything to lose. However, our friends at Texas A&M have inexplicably decided that the value gained by thumbing their nose at Texas and joining the SEC may outweigh the costs of (1) moving a mediocre football team into football’s most difficult conference; (2) reducing the academic reputation of Texas A&M; (3) opening up Texas’ fertile recruiting grounds to the sharks and paymasters of the SEC; (4) starting a ratings war in every Texas media market that will ultimately reduce the amount of money paid to both A&M and UT; and (5) dropping one of the most storied and financially lucrative intrastate rivalries in all of sports. Their logic is highly questionable, but it now appears likely that A&M will join the SEC.

In my view, there are currently five realistic scenarios:
1. A&M comes to their senses, and the whole group heads west.
2. A&M joins the SEC, and the remaining Big XII South teams (minus Baylor) head west.
3. A&M joins the SEC, Texas and OU join the Big Ten, and Tech joins the remnants of the Big XII in a new league.
4. Texas and Texas A&M both join the Big Ten.
5. Texas and Texas A&M both join the SEC.

I will not discuss the first scenario, as it has been discussed endlessly already. The second scenario is far less appealing to Texas since it will reduce our payout from the Pac-10 and will allow the SEC to begin aggressively recruiting in our backyard.

In contrast, the third scenario is extremely appealing to Texas. First, and most importantly, we join our preferred conference: the Big Ten. Second, we keep our traditional rivalry with OU, which means a lot more to Texas fans than our rivalries with A&M or Tech. Third, the combination of Texas AND OU will be enough to allow us to collectively maintain our recruiting dominance in Texas, even if A&M goes to the SEC. Fourth, the addition of Texas and OU will give us enough power within the Big Ten to not be rendered an afterthought in conference decisions. Fifth, the addition of OU would at least partially address our concerns about geography and spring sports. In a nutshell, UT will not join the Big Ten unless we can take at least one other team with us, and the most likely candidate at this point is OU.

Three obvious questions emerge. First, would the Big Ten be able to hold its nose and accept OU as a member? Second, how would this alleviate the political considerations that are currently preventing Texas from joining the Big Ten? Third, how would this resonate politically in Oklahoma?

The first question boils down to the following: does the academic benefit of adding Texas outweigh the costs associated with admitting OU? To address this question, it is important to first understand the strength of UT’s academic prestige. UT is arguably the most prestigious public university within a 750-mile radius of Austin, a fact that isn’t incorporated into published academic rankings (most of which are frankly useless and can be easily gamed). The correct way to rank colleges is by examining students’ actual preferences, and a relatively recent paper (downloadable at the link below) does exactly that. According to the authors’ rankings, UT is the sixth most prestigious public university in the country. In fact, UT is ranked higher than all of the current Big Ten schools with the exception of Northwestern. In short, UT would add a tremendous amount of academic value to the Big Ten.

OU does not appear within the authors’ top 110 schools (nor does Texas A&M or Texas Tech). OU is also not an AAU member. However, OU is undoubtedly far less “smelly” than Texas Tech from an academic standpoint (sorry, LondonRedRaider). In fact, OU has a cost/benefit profile that is eerily similar to Nebraska’s: an excellent athletic program with a national following, but academics that are only "so-so". When combined with UT’s athletic and academic prowess, however, I think the combination of Texas and OU is one that would be easily digestible by the Big Ten. This scenario would also be favorable to OU...they get to maintain their historic rivalries with UT and Nebraska, and they also get to upgrade their academic reputation significantly. My opinion is that OU would much rather join the Big Ten than the SEC or Pac-10.

The answer to the second question (Texas politics) contains two components. First, by joining the SEC, Texas A&M would provide UT with enough political leverage so that we could leave Texas Tech behind and join the Big Ten. The second answer is that Texas WANTS to get rid of Texas Tech for reasons that have nothing to do with football or politics.

Although Texas is the second most populous state in the US, the state of Texas has only two tier-one public universities (Texas and Texas A&M). In addition, UT and A&M are maxed out from an enrollment standpoint. As a result, there is a significant “brain drain” in Texas that, if left unchecked, will eventually result in steep and lasting economic losses for the state. The Texas Legislature understands this problem and has designated seven public institutions (Texas Tech, the University of Houston, the University of North Texas, UT Arlington, UT Dallas, UTEP, and UT San Antonio) as “potential” tier-one candidates. Importantly, four of these institutions are part of the University of Texas System. At stake are literally hundreds of millions of dollars in state aid, an amount that dwarfs any minor differences in conference payouts. Were Tech to join UT (and to a lesser degree A&M) in one of the “major” conferences with other tier-one universities, Tech would be a lock for tier-one status, making the process significantly more difficult for the other UT schools. In contrast, if Tech were to be “left behind”, UT could significantly increase the probability that one of its member institutions would attain tier-one status.

I do not have a good answer to the third question (Oklahoma politics). I strongly suspect that OK legislators would prefer that OU and OSU remain in the same conference. However, were UT and OU to join the Big Ten, the remnants of the Big XII (Baylor, Kansas, KSU, Missouri, OSU, and Tech) would still be very strong, and OU and OSU could still play a rivalry game each season. Thus, I suspect that splitting up OU and OSU would not be a deal-breaker for OU.

In short, the ideal outcome for Texas would be for A&M to join the SEC and for Texas and OU to join the Big Ten.

The fourth scenario (UT and A&M to the Big Ten) would be even more ideal, but (1) A&M is not very interested in the Big Ten, and (2) we've still got to address the ‘Tech’ problem. Texas A&M has shown that it is willing to misbehave, which may give UT a window in which to (1) convince A&M that a far better option would be to join the Big Ten and (2) convince the politicians in Texas that both schools are going to look out for their own interests and don’t care what happens to Texas Tech. Hopefully this is how everything will play out. However, A&M appears to have its heart set on joining the SEC.

Finally, the fifth scenario (UT and A&M to the SEC) is by far the worst outcome for Texas. However, this is unfortunately not an impossibility despite the fact that many UT fans hate the idea of joining the SEC. Were Governor Perry to issue an ultimatum to UT ("join the SEC or lose the $450 million annual payout offered by the Available University Fund"), we really wouldn’t have much of a choice. Since Perry is an A&M alum, this outcome is unfortunately not beyond the realm of possibility, particularly since he has appointed ALL of the regents at both UT and A&M. The SEC is also currently attempting to woo Oklahoma. Were Oklahoma AND Texas A&M to join the SEC, Texas would really have no choice but to join the SEC. As such, Texas joining the SEC is unfortunately a potential outcome of this wild and disorganized realignment.

This post was edited on 6/13 10:14 AM by daddylew