(03-18-2019 06:07 AM)OdinFrigg Wrote: (03-17-2019 10:14 PM)JRsec Wrote: (03-17-2019 09:56 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote: (03-17-2019 11:06 AM)P5PACSEC Wrote: (03-17-2019 07:17 AM)OdinFrigg Wrote: Texas has hemmed themselves in per preferred options. While some here express it is near a slam dunk that UT will be heading to the SEC or the BIG, I am not convinced such will be the result. Bringing TTU along, narrows these options to the point of near elimination. I don't believe UT feels that obligated to TTU.
You act like Texas Tech is bottom of the barrel. Reality says something different. We do a lot more with a lot less in state funding. Heck some schools need $55 million so they can try to keep up with UT. Talk about a parasite
In Texas, all schools are political parasites and beg the legislature for money to make themselves elite. Texas Tech doesn't get those $$$'s and have to perform with less. For a school our age and size, I think Texas Tech has done very well considering what our friends in Austin and college station get.
I did not say or imply TTU is the bottom of the barrel. They have their value and attributes. Obviously, they don't have the same levels of attraction rendered by the University of Texas, the school being the prime focus of the expansion discussion.
One drawback for Texas Tech is "location" in terms of having extended expansion options. I don't mean the quality of the city of Lubbock, but rather its outlier characteristics being located in west Texas.
If the PAC12 wants to penetrate Texas, even solo, I believe TTU would be a plausible choice.
There are advocates here that TTU would/could be an acceptable addition to the SEC, as insisted by a committed Texas, and thus, the SEC lays claim to dominance to all regions of a massive state. I need to see more evidence as to what is really on the table, and who will be going for what and where. I cringe to even think all the re-assignments will be driven by the network provider, ESPN who in itself, can make a mess of things. And some college Presidents have not been so clever with their expansion decisions.
My perception it is still all premature in specifics vs concepts. But as this thread title presents, maybe "secret deals" are in the works.
My view, if the B12 has a flurry of departures, TTU's better option would be the PAC12, if the conference is receptive. There are some odd ducks out there; and I don't just mean Oregon. They can be baffling with decisions.
As to Texas A&M, you've made it clear you immensely dislike them. They left the B12 and are not going back. It's water over the damn and the partisan arguments won't reverse that. If Texas and company (as institutions) still hold intense animosity toward Texas A&M, in part evident by refusing to play them (recognizing feelings can be mutual), I don't see why they would want to bond in the SEC without sufficient reconciliation beforehand.
Yes, I have criticized Texas "attitudinal" stances toward the SEC, and some of their past initiatives as it relates to conference mates, but that doesn't diminish their lofty standings when it comes to athletics, revenue value, academic research, national fan interest, etc.
Where do you see TTU fitting-in 4 to 6 years from now?
Come on. Texas will maintain their stance right up until they don't. There's not going to be any kiss and make up until they have committed and then they will act as if nothing ever happened. It is a business and that's what rivals do until they merge.
Clearly there is an order as to what would appeal to the SEC.
1. Texas and Oklahoma
2. Texas and Kansas
3. Oklahoma and Kansas
4. Texas and Texas Tech
And that thumbnail sketch is roughly in line with valuation, not preference.
Tech would be a good addition for the PAC. But they have nowhere else to go other than the PAC if they aren't part of a UT move. Is the Texas state legislature going to risk that?
The only wild card out there would be a 4 team move by the SEC (Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma, plus one). I don't see how the value could be as great as #1. But maybe it exceeds #2, #3, and #4.
Would we be two conferences within 1? Yes. But if the divisions were grouped to keep rivals together it might well work for both of us. Perhaps our CCG could become the Sugar Bowl.
I was asking for P5PACSEC's point of view since he addressed me. I thought I was rather cordial, and wanted to know what he is advocating for TTU rather than dwelling on contention with Texas A&M. That's not clear.
I will pass on bothering with this anymore.
You were very cordial. Unfortunately the contention with A&M, more so with 10th, seems to be baked in. And there's no need to pass on any of it other than your desire.
If I seemed to be dialed in on this topic it is merely because since 1989 not much has changed in this dynamic. ESPN has been a heavy hand in realignment IMO, and probably will continue to be so. Therefore as much as I would like to have seen us grow more in the Southeast, it has been apparent, especially since 2010, that this would not happen and our encroachment on the Southwest has been the only direction permitted us for growth, and the revenue perks for doing so the only incentive. When conferences want to monetize additions their TV revenue is the chief way of accomplishing it. When the network you are contracted with offers less for those to the east and maximizes the potential of those to the West, and does so to protect their own investment in the East, what do you do? The conferences are not all powerful, none of them. The networks are clearly the most powerful as long as we use their services and take their money.
I am, and continue to be, realistic as to what our options are. When I speak of this there should be the caveat that the most likely thing to happen is nothing. But with the financial gap widening and with no legitimate targets on the horizon for the Big 12 that seem likely to consider their overtures it is not unreasonable to assume that if there is future movement it will happen out of the Big 12 since they have little with which to enhance their situation.
The rest is simple math. There are only two schools from that grouping that potentially could add to what is soon to be a 60 million dollar payout for TV rights in the SEC. The same will be true for the Big 10's 51 million dollar payout which is likely to hit the 56-57 million range in 2024.
Limiting the Big 10's interests are their academic requirements. Obviously there are 3 Big 12 schools they would consider: Texas, Kansas, & Oklahoma which is roughly a peer of Nebraska academically but not AAU. Iowa State can't add to the Big 10 revenue base. And the rest are non starters academically. Complicating things for the Big 10 is the ACC's GOR until 2037. When they whiffed on an ACC traveling companion for Maryland their window for expanding eastward closed until that timeline.
So the SEC financially has Texas and Oklahoma to consider and if only one heads our way they will most likely cover another financially. Ditto for the Big 10. The permutations that might be considered out of that limited group have been hashed out ad nauseam.
That said if there is an offending post, or offending behavior, by a poster then reporting the post enables action. Posters have histories with other posters and sometimes both seem to enjoy the ya ya. When one gets particularly offensive moderation steps in.
Lost in all of this is that yesterday Florida and Arkansas won national championships in indoor track. Auburn Equestrian remains unbeaten in what so far has been a dominating performance for the season. The SEC placed 7 in the Big Dance and Auburn won its first tournament championship since '85.
Our baseball teams dominated the top 25 and softball is off to a very strong showing across the conference.
It looks like we are going to have a very interesting Spring and Summer.
And for those of you haven't noticed already, I'm posting much less on the realignment topic on this board and the other one. The reason is one we are all suffering from, fatigue. There isn't much left to say at this point that hasn't been said. Had Alston actually made changes we would have plenty to talk about but it was a fairly status quo decision. That puts us all back to our pet theories and views and we all know where each other stands. So there isn't much to say. I post more on the CS/CR board where some of the premises and assumptions are just plain wrong.
We have baseball, softball, and other spring sports to talk about and until the NCAA Attendance numbers are out for 2018-9 we won't even have any hard data to discuss. That report was out on February 9th last year. It's mid March and they haven't released them. Just like the valuation for the BTN which was always out by April has not been released for 2017 let alone 2018.
Conferences and the NCAA are sitting on numbers they don't want to explain or confront. Thanks to EDA or we wouldn't even have revenue numbers.
/
Super secret meeting between Texas and Texas A&M
