Big 8 May Return! Now ATM & OU Threaten SEC Move

[CalallenStang]

Can A&M politically go to the SEC? There is precedent for the State Legislature involving themselves in these moves. When the SWC broke up the Texas Legislature made the Big X-II take Baylor or the State Schools couldn't go.

Does A&M have the political pull to be able to walk away from UT? Would the State legislature force them to stay to protect UT, Baylor, and Tech? Moving to the SEC sounds like a great way to stick it to the whorens, but can it realistically be done?

UT might threaten to cut the Aggies out of the PUF, but the PUF now makes up less than 10% of the A&M - College Station budget, so that's more of an empty threat (Aggies will replace that money with increased alumni donations).

Further, Perry is still governor, and the legislative session has broken until 2013 (meaning that if a move takes place this year or next, the legislature can't do anything without being called into special session by Perry). Even if somehow the legislature did do something, what they do can be vetoed by the governor when the legislature isn't in session, which would kill the bill (bills cannot be revived if vetoed after the session ends).

[Topper]

[

quote="Pony_Law"]If OU and A&M move to the SEC they will both suffer severly. look at how Arkansas has done in the SEC. They have done worse in all other sports and they can't crack the nut in football, playing as a big underdog in the chamiionship game is nothing.

the same would happen to OU. First they would not be able to recruite texas like they have. Sure their are plenty of OU connections to this state but without competeing against the teams in Tx it loses a big part of the draw.

OU recruited Texas pretty darn well for decades before they ever heard of the Big 12. But bottom line is that I think any move would be based on $$$$. Arkansas gained no competitve advantage by going to the SEC, but the money has been huge.

[LVPony]

I'm with East Coast Mustang on this one. It is not if but when the XII-II implodes. Texas can prolong the conference for awhile but eventually their ego will get in the way and the LHN will happen thus ensuring the jump of ATM and OU. Will what's left jump to another confernce or invite others in is the big question. I don't think KU, KSU, ISU, MU and OSU will have a choice but to invite other schools in, which may open a door for SMU. It should be a couple of interesting years.

[RGV Pony]

- Horns ain't goin' indy causa the money and they don't want to share Texas with the SEC.

- Texas A&M hates UT but is most likely stuck with 'em.

Better?

Much.

Agree.

For now

[Pony_Law]

So I've been thinking about it and no matter what happens I don't think UT has to be too concerned with other schools recruiting in texas. First they already do when it comes to top players. Second at the end of the day they get to say play for texas. I mean Texans are Texans and love this state and rarely leave. Point is i think UT gets to select rather than recruit basically forever so long as they don't have some act of god that destroys the program

[EastStang]

The question is whether UT bolts (after an Aggie/OU defection) and leaves KU and friends, in the lerch. If that happens, a deal could be struck with SMU,UH, Memphis and perhaps Tulsa and the other six teams in the Big XII to create a conference that features good hoops and adequate football like the BE model. Certainly KU, MO, OSU, Memphis, UH and Tulsa all have had great hoops success, historically. Baylor, SMU,and Tech not so much, and SMU and UH would give the conference entre into Texas major markets along with Baylor and Tech. Heck, they might even let UT stay for hoops and all sports. That would give the conference teams in Dallas, Houston and that draw in KC and St.L. The real question would be whether TCU would come running to such a deal and try and squeeze SMU out.

[East Coast Mustang]

I don't think KU, KSU, ISU, MU and OSU will have a choice but to invite other schools in, which may open a door for SMU. It should be a couple of interesting years.

Mizzou and to a lesser extent KU might have a shot at the Big 10 if they expand again in response to SEC going to 14 or 16. KSU and ISU are on the outside looking in. My question is this- is there the same animosity b/t OU and OSU as there is with Texas and A&M? Politically, could OU ditch OSU for the SEC and leave them in a bind?

[westexSMU]

One other thing could happen that a lot of people haven't thought of. If UT sees aTm & OU are going to bolt to the SEC, UT might just beat them to the punch and make an SEC deal of their own. I think the SEC would rather have UT by themselves than aTm & OU. This situation would leave aTm and OU with a big 9....The problem with this idea is that UT doesn't come without it's network and I don't think the SEC would want UT with its longhorn network either.. but who knows....I'm just saying it might happen.

[East Coast Mustang]

One other thing could happen that a lot of people haven't thought of. If UT sees aTm & OU are going to bolt to the SEC, UT might just beat them to the punch and make an SEC deal of their own. I think the SEC would rather have UT by themselves than aTm & OU. This situation would leave aTm and OU with a big 9....The problem with this idea is that UT doesn't come without it's network and I don't think the SEC would want UT with its longhorn network either.. but who knows....I'm just saying it might happen.

Would Texas be willing to share top dog status with the likes of Bama, Florida, LSU, Tennessee, etc? Isn't that why they agreed to Beebe's last ditch plan to save the Big 12-2 instead of the Pac 16 last time- because they wanted to be the top dog in an albeit smaller conference rather than share that role with USC, Cal, UCLA, etc? I would think Texas is far more likely to join the Pac 12 than the SEC in a future realignment cycle- better institutional fit, and they would be far more competitive in the sport that truly matters (although that could all change over time)

[Mexmustang]

I don't believe any conference could vote Texas in. They have shown their colors and too many of the weaker members would not accept them. They have become a leper to the bottom half of any conference. The treatment of the old SWC members, Rice, SMU, TCU, Houston, the treatment of TTU, A&M, OU, OSU, KU, MO, KSU, Baylor, these universities have good relationships with other schools, whose experience with the horns has been terrible--and they would talk.

If they joined the SEC, they would begin by tryng to bring their television contract in, then they would attempt to dump Kentucy, Vanderbilt, Miss St. Ole Miss, to get their revenues increased and inevitably they would attempt to get a larger piece of the pie from the other schools--the states of AK, TN, MS, Al and Ken. combined, don't have the television audiance that they have, etc. They just don't act like partners and believe they are entitled to special treatment.

[Mexmustang]

I think it is time the state legislature does a study of the impact of UT's actions has had and will have on the economy of the state. No, question that the horns make more money, but I believe (no basis, but gut feeling) that a study will prove that on the whole the state has and will lose more.

Excluding, Houston, Rice, SMU, TCU and UofH has taken a number of games from the state and pushed them into others states and of course reduced the revenue to these schools.

Excluding OU, A&M, then abandoning, TTU. Baylor, pushes even more revenue into other states, and is compounded by the reactions of A&M and Baylor to move more of their games out of state and OU to move all their remaining games in Texas. Then of course we have to consider the direct loss of revenues to other state schools, U of H and TTU.