Ask yourself
- Thread starter rebecacy
- Start date
I think the issue is who are they going to play as an independent? You have to have some decent to good teams on your schedule to try and beat and climb rankings. Who schedules Texas as a non-conference game? And how do they make other sports work? And as far as this big conspiracy theory. Isn't it really just calmer heads (if it shakes out as factual) determining that UT has no option but to come to terms on the major issues in the Big 12? They can't take their LHN anywhere and Boren and Geoffrey and whoever know that. It was a flawed idea that ESPN and Texas thought they could ram down the Big 12's and nations throat. Sounds like Beebe is gone and some Big 12 schools will lay out the terms to Texas going forward. What option do they have? Even the playing field or not have one? Make too many demands and eventually everyone just calls you on it. At this point I think it would be great if we added West Virginia, TCU and Louisville and kicked Texas out.
I don't really think it's as feasible as people keep claiming it to be. They might be a bigger name than BYU is, but they're going to run into the same problems scheduling that BYU has. While they won't have the same problem of quality competition not wanting to play them in Austin, they're still going to have problems scheduling relevant competition once conference schedules kick into full swing. Texas may be big, but they're not Notre Dame, who has had these arrangements in place for decades and the conferences are willing to work with the schools to keep them in place.
WHO DOES NUMBER 2 WORK FOR????
I'm going to go crazy until this realignment stuff is over. The Golden Goose is enjoying the last smoke. The blindfold is on and the Goose is ready for the firing squad.
Here's hoping cooler heads prevail.
Oh for crying out loud. In case you have missed the last couple of years, Twitter has become one of, if not the leading source for news such as this. Is a lot of it crap? Yes, but I am guessing a lot of it is true. Without these sources, your so called "plan" wouldn't even work. Besides that, who's to say that some of these guys don't have more credible sources than people in here?
I don't claim to know what all of this means, though I'm guessing the PAC-12 announcement means one of two things: OU has UT in agreement to staying in Big XII or PAC-12 was tired of being played as a bargaining chip for the second time in two years by Big XII schools looking for a better deal from the Big XII. If the former, then the OP's plan is on point and all of this goes back to picking a 10th team and getting the exit fees straight for aTm. If we don't go to 12 teams, get higher exit fees, and work out the conference revenue division, I fear in two or three years we'll be back in the same position again.
If the latter scenario is true, I have absolutely no idea what will happen in realignment or for the Big XII.
Either way, stability of the Big East is a lot worse than before this started and the superconferences are inching closer and closer...
If the latter scenario is true, I have absolutely no idea what will happen in realignment or for the Big XII.
Either way, stability of the Big East is a lot worse than before this started and the superconferences are inching closer and closer...
I really hope, with Scott being so hellbent on swiping teams from the Big XII, that they were getting played by OU and UT. The PAC's aggression almost deserves it.
Tweets (as much as those are worth) seem to indicate that Pac 12 didn't want OU/OSU without Texas/TT, as 14 wasn't a good number. Texas essentially scuttled that deal with demands related to LHN (big shocker). I think the Pac 12 was serious, OU was playing them and UT, and UT was trying to save LHN revenue stream at all costs.
It's pretty plain to see that OU got played by the PAC 12 and UT. A big slap to them that they aren't desirable without UT.
Could be that 14 would have worked if it was OU and UT without the tag-alongs, too... I don't doubt for a second that these two as a package without the other two would be admitted to PAC-12, B1G and maybe SEC and ACC. LHN would still be the sticking point, but how much more successful would that have been in the Pac 14 network family by pairing those two schools than UT-TT?