Seriously?
Why would OU and A&M chose those schools over the regional rivalries that would be created by joining the SEC?
Texas needs to go
- Thread starter keokuk1
- Start date
Seriously?
Why would OU and A&M chose those schools over the regional rivalries that would be created by joining the SEC?
Well boys look at it this way
Without the Texas Horns ISU will be relegated to a non bcs conference and make
Very little money while still losing football games.
Hey chump from keokuk by way of des moines
NO TEXAS NO BIG 12.....ITS REALLY THAT SIMPLE.....
Without the Texas Horns ISU will be relegated to a non bcs conference and make
Very little money while still losing football games.
Hey chump from keokuk by way of des moines
NO TEXAS NO BIG 12.....ITS REALLY THAT SIMPLE.....
I would agree with you on everything you have said ,but with one exception. It was Texas and 3 other schools that were the first considering moving. Now if you can believe the NU Press that is what forced NU's hand. In any event it would appear the Big 12 was doomed from the start.
That was an extremely bold and out of character statement from Erik. That speaks volumes about the level of stupidity that hawk fans vomit all over this board. For as long as I have been on this board tm3308 and rdubbs have been the only two hawk fans that actually contribute and are capable of having rational thoughts about ISU.
Really this isn't true though. The only way ISU could get money because of Texas is due to revenue sharing. A few months ago someone, I believe it was Mred, attached a doc showing that Texas isn't even #1 on the revenue list in the conference last year. I don't think they were even #2 .
Fair enough. I was only 6 years old when the Big 12 was formed, so I wasn't aware of the intra-conference relations from the Big 8 days. I just know a little about the SWC blowup because that was a pretty big event in college football history, so the storyline of Texas pushing Nebraska and Colorado out the door made some sense.
I don't get where your coming from on this, they would have more regional games adding said schools then they would going to the SEC. The only school not im they're region would be BYU and they would be as close as most of the SEC schools would be.
Actually, you'd be incorrect there as well. I don't remember the article from last summer that explicitly explained how Nebraska to B1G went down, but IIRC Nebraska and the B1G commissioner had been working on it quietly behind the scenes for the better part of a year. Texas taking Big 12 schools to the Pac 10 with them didn't happen until it came to light that Nebraska and not Missouri was likely to get the invite to join the Big 10.
Yes.... yes it was. Nebraska wanted no part of the Texas schools coming on board. Nebraska wanted no part of equal revenue sharing in the Big XII. Nebraska wanted no part of the rule put in place that partial qualifiers would no longer be accepted in the transition from the Big 8 to the Big XII. Nebraska wanted no part in being DOMINATED by Texas.
Nebraska was never going to stick around in the Big XII. They tried as hard as they could to hold on to being the Big Dog of the conference. They stacked the deck in favor of the top 4 schools hoping that they would come out on top of those 4 and be in the ultimate position of power. Their arrogance clouded their vision of what was actually in their best interest and in the best interests of their old Big 8 partners. They failed and thus immediately tucked their tail between their legs and bailed at their first opportunity.
That was true last year but I really don't think that would continue. If Texas went independent I fully believe the Big 12 would survive; however we would have to add a few teams. If Texas leaves for another conference the Big 12 may very well be toast. I'm on the fence with this debate because I believe the Big 12 could survive without Texas, but I don't think the remaining schools are attached enough to each other to care about keeping the Big 12 together. If the Big 12 fails it will not be because of Texas but because of the other 9 schools.
yeah, i don't post too much but i enjoy seeing other perspectives and Erik normally is pretty nice....i get it though and believe me all fanbases have their stupid people as im sure you understand.....
My first year at ISU, Fall 1997, IIRC was either the first or second season of Big 12 football. So yes, I am familiar with Big 8 politics, which is why I (along wih the rest of us that remember the Big 8) recognize that Nebraska is no victim, they're simply jealous because Texas is what they used to be, and instead of trying to solve problems on the playground they decided to snatch the ball and go to the next playground.
Not true and I don't think he's talking about revenue sharing, per se. I think he's referring to the TV dollars that everyone is sharing in that would not exist were it not for Texas being in the league. This is Texas "giving" to the league.
That may be correct your not going to see me defending NU I hate them with a passion, and I do feel that they were one of the biggest reasons the Big 12 had so many problems. With that said though I feel Texas played a big part in all of it as well.
I do. As long as you don't act like a **** most ISU fans will be more then happy to return the favor.
But the Big Ten wasn't going to let Texas come in and have everyone else be their ***** either.
If Texas would have come to the Big Ten they would have played under the same rules as Indiana, NW, Minnesota, etc....and Texas didn't want that therefore they aren't in the Big Ten.
yeah that's usually the case with most fanbases that I have interacted with, with the exception of Florida fans and Nebraska fans...they have been the worst in my experiences
