Page 1 of 1

WSJ: At Least the Longhorns are Happy

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 7:27 am
by Water Pony
Today's Wall Street Journal outlines A&M decision and the views of many, both pro and con. (Note: John David Crow, Dan Jenkins, Mike Leach and Grant Teaff).

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 82742.html

Re: WSJ: At Least the Longhorns are Happy

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:01 am
by ponyte
Not so sure this makes UT happy. IF A$M and OU leave, then Teas will need to join a conference like the Pac X+II. The problem for UT is they will now need a big AQ conference and conferences will know it. UT losses some of its powerhouse bargaining power. Bad for UT but probably best for college football.

Thus, I don’t' think this is entirely a welcomed move for UT. The Big XII-II-I is really a must for UT at the moment. And if OU leaves, then even UT's star power can't hold the Big XII-II-I together.

Re: WSJ: At Least the Longhorns are Happy

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:05 am
by NavyCrimson
Thus, I don’t' think this is entirely a welcomed move for UT. The Big X-II-I is really a must for UT at the moment. And if OU leaves, then even UT's star power can't hold the Big X-II-I together.


This whole thing is bizarre but wouldn't it be a real kicker if at that point, TU realizd that they had to be the one promoting us for 'their' conference to keep it together? LOL!!!

Re: WSJ: At Least the Longhorns are Happy

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:19 am
by EastStang
Leave it to Froggie, Dan Jenkins to have the best quote at the end. The Big XII won't be missed, it was a TV deal. That's what the new Big XII will be, a TV deal. The ESPN suits are going to tell the Big XII who they can admit. Find out what ESPN and ABC want and there's your conference. I was watching Fox News this morning and noticed that the daughter of Steve Doocey is a freshman at SMU. Fox as you recall has rights to CUSA football. I think its time for Fox to perhaps to start throwing around some dollars to try and lure some disaffected Big XII members to a conference that its pitching.

Re: WSJ: At Least the Longhorns are Happy

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:25 am
by NavyCrimson
Very good point - East!!!

Re: WSJ: At Least the Longhorns are Happy

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 10:45 am
by birddogger
I'm not criticizing UT's decision to brand its own network. After all, its $300MM.

But:

Is the Longhorn Network a potential stumbling block to UT's entry into an existing conference, such as the Pac? In other words, have the Horns left themselves with only two options: Independence or having to rebuild the Big 12?

I'll hang up and drink....

Re: WSJ: At Least the Longhorns are Happy

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 11:03 am
by HB Pony Dad
ponyte wrote:Not so sure this makes UT happy. IF A$M and OU leave, then Teas will need to join a conference like the Pac X+II.


The Pac 12 really did change their name to reflect the correct number of teams in their conference, not like a couple of unnamed conferences whose academic credentials do not include mathematics!

Therefore in the future please refrain from the inappropriate and inaccurate references to the Pac X+II.

The term is offensive to the Conference of my alma mater which holds itself to High Moral and Ethical Standards of sportsmanship and fair play! :mrgreen:

Re: WSJ: At Least the Longhorns are Happy

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 11:25 am
by redpony
HB Pony Dad wrote:The term is offensive to the Conference of my alma mater which holds itself to High Moral and Ethical Standards of sportsmanship and fair play!:


Ahh yes, high moral standard and ethical standards ala USC and Reggie Bush- right?
Sorry, HBPD- just couldn't resist the jab. :P

GO PONIES!!!

Re: WSJ: At Least the Longhorns are Happy

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 11:29 am
by ponyte
HB Pony Dad wrote:
ponyte wrote:Not so sure this makes UT happy. IF A$M and OU leave, then Teas will need to join a conference like the Pac X+II.


The Pac 12 really did change their name to reflect the correct number of teams in their conference, not like a couple of unnamed conferences whose academic credentials do not include mathematics!

Therefore in the future please refrain from the inappropriate and inaccurate references to the Pac X+II.

The term is offensive to the Conference of my alma mater which holds itself to High Moral and Ethical Standards of sportsmanship and fair play! :mrgreen:


Oh great! Now I am being asked to respect honor between cheaters. Ok, From now on I will be correct and call it the Former PAC X+II now XII If conference realignment continues we are going have to start using differential derivatives to describe the conference.

Re: WSJ: At Least the Longhorns are Happy

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 11:30 am
by HB Pony Dad
redpony wrote:
HB Pony Dad wrote:The term is offensive to the Conference of my alma mater which holds itself to High Moral and Ethical Standards of sportsmanship and fair play!:


Ahh yes, high moral standard and ethical standards ala USC and Reggie Bush- right?
Sorry, HBPD- just couldn't resist the jab. :P

GO PONIES!!!


Posted with a firmly planted

Image

:lol:

Re: WSJ: At Least the Longhorns are Happy

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 11:49 am
by PK
HB Pony Dad wrote:
redpony wrote:
HB Pony Dad wrote:The term is offensive to the Conference of my alma mater which holds itself to High Moral and Ethical Standards of sportsmanship and fair play!:


Ahh yes, high moral standard and ethical standards ala USC and Reggie Bush- right?
Sorry, HBPD- just couldn't resist the jab. :P

GO PONIES!!!


Posted with a firmly planted

Image

:lol:
That should have been obvious to anyone, but thanks for the much appreciated visual reinforcement. :D

Re: WSJ: At Least the Longhorns are Happy

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 11:53 am
by redpony
HBPD- and on which cheek did you plant your tongue? :lol: :lol:

GO PONIES!!!

PS- of course we know you were being cynical.