PonyFans.com

First article I've read that gets to the net, net of the matter in the pending implosion of the B12.

http://sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/s ... acceptance

Sorry for the previous bad link.

I fear that there are more hippie socialists in these Red States than previously thought. Apparently, free market competition is feared.

What happens to Texas (UT) if it has no traditional rivals? If its biggest instate competitor is not playing them and even in a better conference? Does UT maintain is brand if it hasn’t got the traditional rivals to support that brand? Will the state still flock to UT with vastly varied alternatives to other large universities?

Welcome to the new age of college football. Where winning games comes second to making money. Rivalries? What is that again? The game I grew up loving is being destroyed piece by piece.

Stallion wrote:I fear that there are more hippie socialists in these Red States than previously thought. Apparently, free market competition is feared.

UT exercised it free market option and I don't blame them. I also don't blame OU and aTm for looking for a better market deal. My point is UT should not be crying about everyone looking into what is the best market option for them. New rivalries will begin. Should be interesting to watch.

FYI - June 30th is national punch a hippie day. I will be a man then.

You know there are those that say when you're a greedy SOB, you'll die a rich lonely SOB.

Ponyte, agree with you as to where I think you are going. UT may make good money in the short run, but if loses its rivalries, ie. ATM, OU, etc. what will their brand name be worth several years down the road. The closest comparison I can allude to is Notre Dame. Notre Dame, who has been mediocre at best for the past 5 or more years, have maintained their brand name, because they not only have continued to be "the national catholic football team", but also have retained their rivalries with USC, Michigan, Michigan State, Navy, etc. While my two favorite college teams are SMU and anybody who is playing ND, I still respect them and will watch them because of their brand/rivalry quality. Looking at UT, I feel they are burning too many bridges for me to say the same thing about them.

UT is the puppet master. They will go pac12 with OU. They wanted this all along, they just didn't want aTm to bolt as fast as they did. UT was hoping for another year to get LHN more established.

Source: Erin Andrews

I've just got a feeling that there is something going down that may happen in the near future that is even bigger than what we think. The UT people have to have played out all the scenarios based on different alignments. Something like a UT, ND and maybe anywhere from 20-40 teams forming their own national alignment with their individual tv rights and their own bowl alignment and own national champion with their own rules such as paying their players. Will the ncaa let their football programs leave the ncaa but other sports continue? Monopoly lawsuits if the ncaa tries to stop them!

smuuth wrote:I've just got a feeling that there is something going down that may happen in the near future that is even bigger than what we think. The UT people have to have played out all the scenarios based on different alignments. Something like a UT, ND and maybe anywhere from 20-40 teams forming their own national alignment with their individual tv rights and their own bowl alignment and own national champion with their own rules such as paying their players. Will the ncaa let their football programs leave the ncaa but other sports continue? Monopoly lawsuits if the ncaa tries to stop them!

If a second college league is formed, it would start with TX, ND, BYU, Navy and Army as charter members. The next wave of candidates could include TCU, SMU, and Air Force. Beyond TX and ND, you need to add some quality, such as Oklahoma, OSU, Missouri, Virginia Tech, Miami and FSU. Remaining choices could be KS and KSU. Now you have exhausted options, unless you look for academic types such as Vanderbilt. It is unlikely that Northwestern, Duke or Stanford would leave their conferennce due to regional value and rivalries. In summary, it doesn't look that appealing once you lay it out.

ponyte wrote:What happens to Texas (UT) if it has no traditional rivals? If its biggest instate competitor is not playing them and even in a better conference? Does UT maintain is brand if it hasn’t got the traditional rivals to support that brand? Will the state still flock to UT with vastly varied alternatives to other large universities?

I think it is unlikely that UT's traditional rivalries will end if OU goes to the PAC 12. For starters, OU needs that UT rivalry because they cannot buy hype or publicity like that in Texas any other way.

As for A&M, their entire identity is built on being the anti-UT. Even if they or UT wanted to end the rivalry I don't think the lege would allow it. Ohio State's schedule is heavily influenced by their lawmakers because they refused to play in-state schools, and I don't think UT would want that.

ut should move to california.

No thanks. Texas can keep ut. lol

Go Ponies!