- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: So let me get this straight--TEXAS is the bad guy?
Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:17 pm to Amp4LSU
Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:17 pm to Amp4LSU
quote:Why?
but Florida or Bama having their own network would be destructive to the conference
quote:That's not unfair. Alabama and Florida have earned the money they have; it isn't unfair for one to invest his own money in something that he thinks could benefit him.
not to mention unfair to the rest of the members.
quote:If they did, the other 10 SEC schools are WAY more powerful than Florida and Bama together.
Does that mean that FL/Bama should say 'too bad' to the rest of the SEC teams even though it could lead to the demise of the conference?
Just like the other nine Big 12 members are more powerful together than Texas alone. Still, we're not getting around the fact that Texas is taking advantage of the advantages that the other nine schools have always allowed them to have.
Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:20 pm to pdxlsufan
quote:The four Texas schools had seven votes?
Then in the 90s, the SEC expanded to 12 members as the SWC began to fall apart. The Big 8 was jealous and eager to get a championship game like the SEC. Sounded great on paper but from the get go the Texas schools shifted power in their direction -- starting with the 7-5 vote to move conference HQ from Kansas City to Irving, TX.

Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:20 pm to Derrick
quote:
TEXAS IS SCARED

Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:22 pm to Indiana Tiger
quote:$
quote:
for some reason fear life without Texas unless the SEC, B1G, or P12 is an option.
You have a serious lack of imagination if you can't think of a reason.
It's financially beneficial to a lot of these teams to be associated with Texas. But Texas is the bad guy. Can't argue with that logic.

Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:22 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:They aren't.
quote:
Just because they're rich doesn't mean they're evil,
Everyone says the LHN is just Texas looking out for what's best for UT. So how are Nebraska/CU and A&M looking to change conferences any different?
NU, CU, and A&M are just as evil as Texas; they just couldn't win with Texas, so they're running away (A&M can't even do that right

This post was edited on 8/15/11 at 4:26 pm
Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:28 pm to xiv
quote:
The four Texas schools had seven votes?
Meh. Let's just say Colorado and the Oklahoma schools may have been trying to give the finger to Nebraska by siding with the Texans.
Politics makes for strange bedfellows.
Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:30 pm to pdxlsufan
quote:My point exactly. They're all just as evil as the next. Texas isn't the bad guy; they're a bad guy. So is A&M, OU, NU, etc...
Meh. Let's just say Colorado and the Oklahoma schools may have been trying to give the finger to Nebraska by siding with the Texans.
Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:31 pm to LSUisjustOK
Everyone is saying that Tx A&M probably won't be able to compete in the SEC. That might turnout to be true. But at least they have got the balls to join the SEC. Can't say that for Texas. They know that they could never run the conference like they do in the Big 12 and that road to a BCS game might even be a little tougher for them in the SEC.
Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:36 pm to xiv
It's financially beneficial to those teams, because most of them would never get invited to another AQ conference.
The big 12 was set up to starve the poor and fatten the rich, because, teams like ISU, or Kansas State didn't have the support of a Texas, OU, or Nebraska. Fine, they'd accepted their place as conference filler that once in awhile jumps up and bites people on the field in exchange for the added money that an AQ conference generates. Make no mistake about it though, it's a league that is only held together by lack of options and isn't financially viable if Texas isn't there.
They know that, so they are forced as a conference to do whatever Texas tells them Texas is going to do.
It's like someone beating a bunch of hookers but still paying them. They benefit financially, but that doesn't make the dude doing the beating not a complete jerk-off in anyone's world but yours.
The big 12 was set up to starve the poor and fatten the rich, because, teams like ISU, or Kansas State didn't have the support of a Texas, OU, or Nebraska. Fine, they'd accepted their place as conference filler that once in awhile jumps up and bites people on the field in exchange for the added money that an AQ conference generates. Make no mistake about it though, it's a league that is only held together by lack of options and isn't financially viable if Texas isn't there.
They know that, so they are forced as a conference to do whatever Texas tells them Texas is going to do.
It's like someone beating a bunch of hookers but still paying them. They benefit financially, but that doesn't make the dude doing the beating not a complete jerk-off in anyone's world but yours.
Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:43 pm to huskers9
quote:Well, maybe Big East, but you're pretty much right.
It's financially beneficial to those teams, because most of them would never get invited to another AQ conference.
quote:And they should accept this status because they're extremely lucky to be where they are. Baylor, Texas Tech, Iowa State, and Kansas State (and pre-$$$ Oklahoma State) are worthless.
The big 12 was set up to starve the poor and fatten the rich, because, teams like ISU, or Kansas State didn't have the support of a Texas, OU, or Nebraska. Fine, they'd accepted their place as conference filler that once in awhile jumps up and bites people on the field in exchange for the added money that an AQ conference generates.
quote:Interesting point. I would ask, then, If those schools aren't financially viable as a conference without Texas, who the hell are they to call Texas a bully? Shouldn't they be thanking Texas every day for making them financially viable?
Make no mistake about it though, it's a league that is only held together by lack of options and isn't financially viable if Texas isn't there.
quote:Great analogy. You're right--the pimp is an a-hole. But if the ho can't leave him and go get a job somewhere else and take care of herself, that's ultimately her problem and not the pimp's. Texas is the pimp because ISU, KSU, BU, TT, etc agreed to be the hoes.
It's like someone beating a bunch of hookers but still paying them. They benefit financially, but that doesn't make the dude doing the beating not a complete jerk-off in anyone's world but yours.
And this is the problem that I have with A&M's fan base. They're playing the part of the battered ho, when the fact is that they've ALWAYS been one of the pimps--they're just tired of getting out-pimped by Texas.
This post was edited on 8/15/11 at 4:44 pm
Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:43 pm to AU86
quote:
but Florida or Bama having their own network would be destructive to the conference
Why?
look at what the LHN is/has done to the Big 12, and it hasn't even started yet. why didn't UT help get the Big 12 Network started if they're so interested in keeping the B12 together?
quote:
not to mention unfair to the rest of the members.
That's not unfair. Alabama and Florida have earned the money they have; it isn't unfair for one to invest his own money in something that he thinks could benefit him.
If all the schools used this mentality, in 10 years, there would only be 20 schools competing and all would have their own network. the other 10 schools in the SEC have contributed in helping them make their money.
quote:
Does that mean that FL/Bama should say 'too bad' to the rest of the SEC teams even though it could lead to the demise of the conference?
If they did, the other 10 SEC schools are WAY more powerful than Florida and Bama together.
But the SEC is so much more powerful with all 12 schools together. not as individuals.
Just like the other nine Big 12 members are more powerful together than Texas alone. Still, we're not getting around the fact that Texas is taking advantage of the advantages that the other nine schools have always allowed them to have.
i disagree that the other 9 schools are more powerful than UT. The fact that UT is 'taking advantage where they've been allowed to' is coming to an end one way or the other. UT is going to soon realize that they were stronger as a group of 12 or 10, than by themselves.
but Florida or Bama having their own network would be destructive to the conference
Why?
look at what the LHN is/has done to the Big 12, and it hasn't even started yet. why didn't UT help get the Big 12 Network started if they're so interested in keeping the B12 together?
quote:
not to mention unfair to the rest of the members.
That's not unfair. Alabama and Florida have earned the money they have; it isn't unfair for one to invest his own money in something that he thinks could benefit him.
If all the schools used this mentality, in 10 years, there would only be 20 schools competing and all would have their own network. the other 10 schools in the SEC have contributed in helping them make their money.
quote:
Does that mean that FL/Bama should say 'too bad' to the rest of the SEC teams even though it could lead to the demise of the conference?
If they did, the other 10 SEC schools are WAY more powerful than Florida and Bama together.
But the SEC is so much more powerful with all 12 schools together. not as individuals.
Just like the other nine Big 12 members are more powerful together than Texas alone. Still, we're not getting around the fact that Texas is taking advantage of the advantages that the other nine schools have always allowed them to have.
i disagree that the other 9 schools are more powerful than UT. The fact that UT is 'taking advantage where they've been allowed to' is coming to an end one way or the other. UT is going to soon realize that they were stronger as a group of 12 or 10, than by themselves.
This post was edited on 8/15/11 at 4:49 pm
Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:43 pm to xiv
quote:
My point exactly. They're all just as evil as the next. Texas isn't the bad guy; they're a bad guy. So is A&M, OU, NU, etc...
I don't think you have made any points. Most of what you have said simply doesn't make sense to most of us on here - do you not get that? A&M, CU, NEB etc are not the bad apples here.
Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:50 pm to Amp4LSU
quote:I don't think that their job is to babysit the Big 12. Their job is to look out for themselves--same as everyone else.
look at what the LHN is/has done to the Big 12, and it hasn't even started yet. why didn't UT help get the Big 12 Network started if they're so interested in keeping the B12 together?
quote:Yes! That's why those 10 are always powerful enough and rise up and say "no" to anything they think is bullshite. If they don't like the Crimson Tide network, they're powerful enough to prevent Bama from doing just about anything but leaving the SEC.
the other 10 schools in the SEC have contributed in helping them make their money.
And that's why I keep bringing up the nine other Big 12 schools. Either:
a) Unite and stand up to Texas if you're that tired of them
or...
b) STFU because you're too worthless to band together as nine schools and stand up to Texas.
Either these nine schools are big enough to stand up to the "bully," or they aren't. And if they aren't, they're pathetic and worthless and deserve no one's sympathy.
quote:That's pretty much why I don't think the Big 12 is doomed.
i disagree that the other 9 schools are more powerful than UT. The fact that UT is 'taking advantage where they've been allowed to' is coming to an end one way or the other. UT is going to soon realize that they were stronger as a group of 12 or 10, than by themselves.
Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:52 pm to Dice
quote:You're wrong. CU left. NU left. A&M has tried to leave.
A&M, CU, NEB etc are not the bad apples here.
But Texas--the team that has stayed, is somehow the cause of instability in the Big 12. Riiiiiiiiiight...
For A&M, CU, and NU to cast a bad light on Texas as the bully and the villain is like KMart, Target, and Safeway calling Wal-Mart a big, evil corporation.
This post was edited on 8/15/11 at 4:56 pm
Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:54 pm to xiv
quote:
I don't think that their job is to babysit the Big 12. Their job is to look out for themselves--same as everyone else.
That is UT's mentality (and obviously yours as well) which everyone finds to be wrong. That is not how you develop a partnership/ conference - thus UT will be independent very soon. Which with that mind set is probably what they want in the first place. However, if 4 conferences go to 16 teams and the Super Confernces are born - UT will be left in the cold. Their arrogance will keep them left out of that party.
Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:56 pm to xiv
quote:
But Texas--the team that has stayed, is somehow the cause of instability in the Big 12. Riiiiiiiiiight...
yes, you are not that smart are you?
Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:56 pm to Dice
quote:Riiiiiiight...
UT will be left in the cold

Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:58 pm to xiv
look at what the LHN is/has done to the Big 12, and it hasn't even started yet. why didn't UT help get the Big 12 Network started if they're so interested in keeping the B12 together?
I don't think that their job is to babysit the Big 12. Their job is to look out for themselves--same as everyone else.
'babysit', 'same as everyone else'...? i hope you're referring only to the Big12 and not lumping the SEC in there. that is simply not true for the SEC.
all the teams in the SEC attempt first, to do what will help the conference the most. because they understand that whatever makes the conference stronger, makes the individual teams stronger as well.
UT's interest SHOULD have been to make the Big 12 the best it can be, that only helps UT. instead, Texas is taking the approach of me-me-me, which in the long-term, is going to leave them with no conference, or traveling to the West Coast for every away game, with no true rivalry's, and will slip into the category with the Pac12 of no one caring what goes on over there.
it's really sad. the Big 12 (with 12 teams) was my 2nd fav conference after the SEC. i can only help but think that Colorado and Nebraska saw that things were only going to get worse and got out while they could, now aTm is attempting to do the same.
I don't think that their job is to babysit the Big 12. Their job is to look out for themselves--same as everyone else.
'babysit', 'same as everyone else'...? i hope you're referring only to the Big12 and not lumping the SEC in there. that is simply not true for the SEC.
all the teams in the SEC attempt first, to do what will help the conference the most. because they understand that whatever makes the conference stronger, makes the individual teams stronger as well.
UT's interest SHOULD have been to make the Big 12 the best it can be, that only helps UT. instead, Texas is taking the approach of me-me-me, which in the long-term, is going to leave them with no conference, or traveling to the West Coast for every away game, with no true rivalry's, and will slip into the category with the Pac12 of no one caring what goes on over there.
it's really sad. the Big 12 (with 12 teams) was my 2nd fav conference after the SEC. i can only help but think that Colorado and Nebraska saw that things were only going to get worse and got out while they could, now aTm is attempting to do the same.
Posted on 8/15/11 at 4:59 pm to xiv
Some schools in the SEC do make more money off of their marketability, just haven't gone the route of having their own network. A number of schools have sold rights to 3rd tier networks. Florida has a deal with SunSports that brings in $10 mil/year on top of SEC TV money that we don't share.
Popular
Back to top
