Is Texas A&M Ready To March to the SEC?
by Husker Mike on Jul 18, 2011 10:35 PM CDT
in Conference Realignment
Email
PrintReports last week emerged that Texas A&M was rethinking their commitment to the Big XII Conference in the aftermath of ESPN's plan to shift an ABC telecast away from broadcast television in order to broadcast a second game on the Longhorn Network. The SEC remains interested in A&M and potentially Clemson to trigger the next round of conference realignment.
Why is the SEC still interested in A&M and Clemson? First of all, A&M opens the doors into the lucrative Texas television market. Granted, that didn't necessarily mean much when Nebraska jumped to the Big Ten, but that didn't invalidate the proposal either. More importantly, conference expansion would trigger a renegotiation of the SEC's arrangements with CBS and ESPN. The money that the Big 12 and Pac 12 recently received raised eyebrows in the SEC, and they now feel that there's still money on the table.
Interesting to note that the A&M Board of Regents is scheduled to meet on Thursday, and on the agenda is an "executive sesson" at 10:30 a.m. regarding "Consultation with System Attorneys Regarding Legal Matters or Pending and/or Contemplated Litigation or Settlement Offers" with the Big XII Conference. (See page 2). Over at SB Nation's "I am the 12th Man", Beergut seems to think that A&M is already leaning out of the Big XII, with the main question being whether Oklahoma will stay or go. Would Oklahoma be willing to jump to the SEC? Even Sooner fans see the writing on the wall from Austin.
In any event, the Big XII is safe for the next two seasons. The deadline for schools to leave after this upcoming season was July 1st, so 2013 is the soonest anybody would likely leave. But one thing is clear, despite what some people want you to believe, the Big XII is no more solid than it was last spring.
39 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Oh yeah, they're solid as a rock.
Kansas, Kansas St., Missouri and Iowa St. would like to add that they stand behind Texas the Big XII 110% and for the love of God, please don’t leave us, we’ll keep repeating this is all Nebraska’s fault we’ll play on TV for free OH GOD TEXAS DON’T GO the Fox deal is fair & equitable. We are confident that the leadership of Deloss Dodds Dan Beebe has seen us through our darkest hours.
Screw you naysayers, the Big XII is here to stay. Do you think the Mountain West has more openings?
by Andy Ketterson on Jul 18, 2011 11:54 PM CDT reply actions 3 recs
Thing is...
…the Big XII could actually stabilize as the new Big Eight. Texas isn’t going anywhere; nobody really wants them at their price. So it comes down to Tech and Okie State…and do those schools want to be part of the Big Eight or the Pac-14? I think they’d lean towards staying, but that’s a guess on my part..
That Pac-10 would have accepted Okie State as the price of doing business to get OU, A&M, and Texas.
Oklahoma’s publicly stated that wither Texas goeth, they shall goeth, and no one’s interested in picking up the rest of the scraps. None of those schools, save possibly the Aggies to the SEC, makes anyone’s piece of the pie so much bigger that it’s worth getting a smaller piece.
by Albino Tornado on Jul 19, 2011 9:00 AM CDT up reply actions
I seriously doubt
that the Pac12 would offer TTEch and Okie light by themselves. But you’re spot on about Tejas, as was shown in what was allegedly leaked about the negotiations b/t UT and the Pac10 last year.
Sorry for jumping in on your site, but someon on the CU SBNation site linked to this article as it had to do w/ the Pac12.
by BuffulanceMan on Jul 19, 2011 10:17 AM CDT up reply actions
Along those lines
The Pac10 tried to trade out Texas Tech late in the process for Kansas. Just pointing out how little desire there would be for a TT/Ok St deal to a Pac14 or Pac16. Clearly they would take those two in order to land Oklahoma and Texas, that’s already proven, but by themselves, no deal.
Hadn't heard that
about KU for TTech, though I do think that would have been a smart trade. Maybe in a few years.
by BuffulanceMan on Jul 19, 2011 12:56 PM CDT up reply actions
I doubt things will change much before 2016
But after that (or maybe it’s announced before that, taking effect that year), I truly don’t expect the Big 12 to exist. This lovey-dovey stuff and bigger contracts…they all owe fealty to Texas and Texas only. At least aTm may have the balls to tell Austin to shove it, Oklahoma has already said they’ll follow Texas wherever they go (which is really sad).
by Wolvie on Jul 18, 2011 11:59 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Husker fans have to feel really good about being an uninvolved group incidentally...
looking at this stuff from a real distance now—Buffs’ fans also.
"Fast Eddie: No bar?
Cashier: No bar, no pinball machines, no bowling alleys, just pool... nothing else. This is Ames, mister."
From the movie--The Hustler
GET TO THE RIM HEAT (and SKY)! ATTACK THE PAINT!
Oh, They'll Find A Way
To blame it on the Huskers. It. can’t beTexas’ fault – no way. So, it must be Nebraska’s fault, right?
"What everybody echoes or in silence passes by as true today may turn out to be falsehood tomorrow, mere smoke of opinion." Thoreau
by UltimaRatioRegum on Jul 19, 2011 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions
I think this would be interesting to see
but I think TX politics will prevent TAMU from breaking free. Too bad for them.
no so sure about that
From what I’ve seen – TX politics tends to protect Baylor and Tech, not so much A&M, mostly because I’m not so sure A&M needs protecting. If their power brokers determine it’s time to go, they just might get it done. If those who favor UT make too much noise, the A&M people will just start making fun of them for “needing” A&M to stick around.
Go Big Red Nebraska!
Our Cobs Are Bigger Than Yours!
Corn Nation!
Twitter!
cornnation@gmail.com
by Jon Johnston on Jul 19, 2011 9:49 AM CDT up reply actions
I absolutely agree
I think the TX legislature protects Baylor and Tech because neither has the cache that aTm does. The powers that be that are alumni as well as those who just outright have power seem to be convinced they can (and will) do whatever they feel like doing. The infighting from last time was not because of aTm not getting a good deal, it was because the two ‘lost’ schools needed some love. I’d love to see the SEC add aTm and Clemson (terrible idea), but that will trigger the PAC growing to 14 and probably the B1G considering 14 as well… which means Mizzou will be back on the radar. I don’t like that.
by KennardHusker on Jul 19, 2011 10:40 AM CDT up reply actions
One important point
The “Protect Baylor and Tech” faction is very real, but it only comes up in one crucial situation: when they are potentially homeless as schools.
A&M leaving the Big XII is not a conference-killer, so there may be a chance for the Ags. There’s a difference between lobbying for survival and just lobbying against an opponent and self-determination of conference affiliation. Survival, obviously, brings out the heat and fireworks.
Maybe it doesn't mean anything, maybe it does.
There was a lot of talk when we left how Nebraska (particularly Tom Osborne) wasn’t completely in favor of the Big 12 when it was formed (or how it was formed…semantics?). The AD at the time? Bill Byrne, who’s now in that position at A&M.
Sorry guys
As an SEC guy now, believe me, we would LOVE to have A&M. Clemson, not so much. Either way, there is no way the Texas legislature is going to let A&M leave Texas. No freaking way. Do you not remember all the infighting that went on last time this was discussed? I think A&M would be a great fit in the flag waving, god fearing, mama loving south. Great fit. They’re just not going to get the chance.
I don't understand why A&M would even entertain this idea.
I mean, as they have it now, they have two (maybe three, if we count Mizzou, but we don’t) obstacles for the Big XII Championship in football. If they move, they’ll have three just in their division. They won’t be any less victimized by the bedding of UT and ESPN than they are in the Big XII, as they’re still stuck in the same state and will suffer the same recruiting troubles of a high school kid watching himself on TV with Longhorn logos everywhere. And this will just open up the state of Texas to SEC West recruiting more than they had in the past, screwing A&M out of more recruits who want to play in the SEC while visiting the state of Texas who want to win. Not to mention the, ahem, academic and reputational implications of becoming rednecks cheaters an SEC institution.
Bottom line, this would probably take any potential 8-4 to 11-1 years in the Big XII and turn them into 4-8 to 7-5 years in the SEC. But if getting out of Big Brother’s shadow is that important, then I guess more power to ’em.
It's not about the championships, it's about the money
That may seem cynical and all, but I really don’t think anyone cares about championships anymore. While there is a premise that winning fuels the machine, the majority of the SEC is getting high on the hog by proxy (I believe you call that leeching).
Honestly, the same argument could have been made for Nebraska leaving the Big XII as aTm leaving. We left the Big XII North for the B1G… talk about going from easy to difficult. This comes down to money, and the SEC offers more than the Texas XII.
by KennardHusker on Jul 19, 2011 2:58 PM CDT up reply actions
Not for their fans it's not
And it seems like the brass are being swayed by public opinion. They feel victimized by Texas and its network, and I hate to agree with the people over a burnt orange nation, but it seems like a lot of it would just be an attempt to get out of UT’s shadow.
Sure, the SEC has some renegotiating heft in the coming years, but is there any guarantee that A&M will be seeing a huge financial windfall with a move like that? They’re already getting $20+ million in the Big XII, Longhorn Network or not, and there’s no guarantee that with 13 schools to split up the money in the SEC, they’d be getting much more than that when CBS/ESPN come to re-up in a couple of years.
Plus, though TV rights might give a lot of money to the athletic department, A&M isn’t consistently selling out Kyle Field right now. Throw in some more Franchione-like years of getting rattled by the likes of LSU and Alabama, and you’d better believe that they’ll have more trouble filling it up than they do now.
It seems to me that their best option would be to stay put, hope that their end-of-season upswing from last year continues, win some championships, reinvigorate the fanbase, and start their own network. The precedent’s been set, so why not follow it. By then it’s just the little 7 that will get screwed.
Well, now you're thinking all logical like
and that’s not always how this game plays. Again, I’m using our scenario as a parallel. We didn’t like Texas pushing us around (same as aTm right now), and we leveraged it into an opportunity to move. Still, the money wasn’t guaranteed to be better (remember, we were in line to start the Huskers sports network), and the competition would certainly be more difficult (quick, what’s easier? The B1G sched we have now or a Big XII we would have had? Which gave us the better chance of a National Title?). Byrne has a big decision on his hands, and while your points are exactly right, it’s not all about doing what is the logical thing. The SEC offers sustainable existence (remember that argument… we tend to tout it), and I have a feeling the vibe the SEC is giving out is that the next CBS/ESPN deal is going to be crazy.
by KennardHusker on Jul 19, 2011 4:20 PM CDT up reply actions
The thing is
the SEC needs aTm and a Clemson/whoever else in order to break its contract with ESPN. Right now, they are locked into a contract that, at the time of signing, looked very generous but has been shown by recent events to be undervalued. Problem is, for the SEC, short of a major re-ordering, there is no way to renegotiate the contract and they’re locked in for the long-term (until 2025 I believe), meaning that they can’t get more any time soon.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
by HoyaGoon on Jul 20, 2011 12:15 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
But if you look at all the conference realignment recently
then every single team gained something, either in the short term or the long term. Nebraska’s is a long term gain, being in a more prestigious academic conference while getting back to a similar culture as their own that they presumably felt was lost when the Big XII was formed. Same deal for Colorado. Utah (and TCU next year) gain the obvious short term advantages of being in AQ conferences and having a (seemingly) easier path to the BCS and possible inclusion in the National Championship game, even though the Mountain West likely would have received AQ status if they had been patient. Boise State (and Hawaii, Nevada, and Fresno State to a lesser extent) move one step closer to their desire of forming a conference with an automatic BCS berth, though these chances were hindered by BYU and Utah’s departures after the fact.
So the question is, what does Texas A&M gain from a move to the SEC? There’s no guarantee for better money, they’re no more like-minded with SEC schools (nor do they what to be) than they are with the Big XII South schools, and they’re already in a good situation in their current conference.
I realize that the Longhorn network is a problem for the Big XII, but the honest truth is that it’s a problem for college football with the things they’re being allowed to do (broadcasting high school games isn’t a recruiting advantage at all? Really Deloss Dodds?). A&M’s meeting on Thursday is to discuss possibilities regarding the LHN, but that’s something they’re not going to escape just by going to the SEC. Making a decision like that has to be about something more than just giving the finger to big brother.
I will, however
cede to your point on stability. The SEC’s not going anywhere anytime soon. The LHN is threatening to tear the Big XII apart. I feel for the KSUs and the ISUs of the world when that happens. They deserve better than the MAC.
It's about pride
Unlike the longhorns who don’t seem to have a problem with an easy path to the NC game,the Aggies are willing to earn it thru a conference. They don’t want to be just the “other” team in texas anymore is my guess. Myself,i think it would be awesome if they went to the SEC
I myself think it would be fantastic if TA&M went to the SEC. Of course texas responded with the whole “there is no reason,your getting money,the teams would be harder to win against,you wouldn’t get a shot at the NC game” etc. But what are they really worried about? I think Beergut hit it perfectly when he said it’s about the recruiting. Say you have a bright young texas talent that really wishes he played in the SEC,but wants to stick close to home. Until now there wasn’t a lot of choices,and Texas is the prettier bauble. Now,say same youngster said "hey,i can play in the sec! T A&M is the ticket! So of course texas would be upset,they would actually lose some star recruits to A&M. And who knows…The Wrecking Crew may just reappear,which i think would be awesome for them
+1
The Longhorn network abuse is good cover, but I too think the recruiting angle is the lever moving them out of the Big12.
"What everybody echoes or in silence passes by as true today may turn out to be falsehood tomorrow, mere smoke of opinion." Thoreau
by UltimaRatioRegum on Jul 20, 2011 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions
Some head scratchers
TA&M would be a lucrative pick-up for the SEC, but I am not certain the SEC would be a lucrative change for TA&M.
With the unequal revenue sharing of the B12, TA&M would earn little more (perhaps less) in the SEC than they can expect to earn as the 3rd or 4th largest fan following in the B12.
I am less convinced by the rationale. ESPN selling a Texas game to the Horns network doesn’t seem to be a big issue for another Texas team.
Moving to the SEC would be lucrative for Clemson, but I am not certain it would be lucrative for the SEC to add Clemson.
Is the fan interest in Clemson much more than the average SEC program?
Not certain Clemson would make sense for ESPN
ESPN already owns the rights thru the ACC.
I am all for programs increasing revenue for their athletic departments but I am not convinced an additional $1 to 2 Million is enough to prompt such a change.
This sounds more like the saber rattling we heard from perts of the B12 last year than a viable change.
See my comment above
the move makes sense to the SEC because it would (presumably) allow them to renegotiate their ESPN contract that, as of now, looks undervalued given the amounts going to the Big XII, Pac-12 and ACC.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
This is a big assumption
I would not expect ESPN to have signed a clause forcing them o renegotiate just because the SEC added a team or 2. Just because they reserve the right to cancel the contract if the conference composition changes (they passed on this when Nebraska left) doesn’t mean they are obligated to increase it.
It is more likely ESPN negotiated for all SEC conference games. You would expect ESPN to be willing to renegotiate to add an even share for an added value (TA&M) but not for a product they already own (Clemson).
You have those things you wished you had noted at the time but held back… criticizing the SECs contract is one of mine (didn’t want to seem like I was raining on their parade).
In searching for an impressive round number, Silve sold too much for too long for too little. If you evaluated the contract factoring in inflation and the growing NCAA audience, it was undervalued before looking at what the PAC, B12, and ACC signed for.
Lulz
I’m just gonna sit back and enjoy.
Why, Johnny Ringo, you look like someone just walked over your grave.
This is kinda crazy to talk about
Especially considering that they haven’t played one game in the new Big XII. If they go, then best of luck to them.
Like someone said earlier, this kinda supports the idea that Texas is a BIG part of the problem. Kinda surprising the animosity is coming up this early.
It took all of us working together to fail
The animosity is there now because of one thing:
the structural advantage that the LHN provides Texas in $$$, exposure, recruiting, etc.
For years A&M and Texas have scraped and battled—with Texas really pulling away during A&M’s last years as an all male, all military school. But since the 70’s, A&M and UT are virtually 50/50 in games
But this Longhorn network, and uneven revenue sharing, is a game changer. For the first time in their respective history, Texas has a structural advantage that A&M can’t out-hustle, can’t out-compete, etc. The rules and situation is now different for the ’Horns.
A&M can either accept being at a structural disadvantage in this conference for perpetuity, or it can strike out on its own, with nothing guaranteed.
I know what I would do, but I have no say.
Depending on your situation, you might.
A small one, but a say nonetheless.
Are you a donor? You have a say.
Are you a voter? You have a say.
Are you a consumer (do you buy Aggie merch/gear)? You have a say.
Looks like Texas Blinked
Interesting article over at Crimson & Cream Machine. Oh,and btw,the folks over at BON seem to be piping hot angry. Read and enjoy it,not sure how to link the article,maybe someone more proficient can link it.
I wonder if UT blinked
because of the possible infractions vs. OU and A&M saber rattling.
Like some of the comments above, I just doubt that A&M really can leave. If they can leave with Tech and Baylor in OK positions, then fine. But no way the Texas state government allows A&M to leave Baylor and Tech wisting in the wind.
A&M, you stuck in the Big XII forever.
Google's homepage celebrates too much shit.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Corn Nation
Related FanShots on Corn Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SHOP THE CORN NATION STORE
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
