- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
Texas to the Big Ten would almost assuredly mean more losses...
Posted on 9/8/11 at 1:10 pm
Posted on 9/8/11 at 1:10 pm
especially in the two biggest sports: football and basketball.
So, you have more losses and you are playing teams that are so far removed from you geographically...
Sounds like a winner to me!
So, you have more losses and you are playing teams that are so far removed from you geographically...
Sounds like a winner to me!
2
Posted on 9/8/11 at 1:15 pm to Chicken
Chicken,
Texas will have a lot of losses this season because Gilbert sucks but if Texas gets back to how things were during most of Mack's tenure, I think Texas would have similar results in the Big 10. I honestly haven't thought much about basketball in all of this.
As for geography, Texas has more than enough $ to cover travel costs and there really aren't that many sports which travel.
Texas will have a lot of losses this season because Gilbert sucks but if Texas gets back to how things were during most of Mack's tenure, I think Texas would have similar results in the Big 10. I honestly haven't thought much about basketball in all of this.
As for geography, Texas has more than enough $ to cover travel costs and there really aren't that many sports which travel.
Posted on 9/8/11 at 1:19 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
Texas v. Ohio St.
A battle of inflated egos.
A battle of inflated egos.
Posted on 9/8/11 at 1:22 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:
As for geography, Texas has more than enough $ to cover travel costs and there really aren't that many sports which travel.
But your fans are poor
Posted on 9/8/11 at 1:24 pm to AUCE05
i'd be concerned about that proud baseball program having to go play in an absolute garbage baseball league.
Posted on 9/8/11 at 1:27 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:welcome to life without exceptional QBing
season because Gilbert sucks but if Texas gets back to how things were during most of Mack's tenure
Posted on 9/8/11 at 1:29 pm to 1999
quote:they would fit in with the garbage turf on their baseball field
i'd be concerned about that proud baseball program having to go play in an absolute garbage baseball league.
Posted on 9/8/11 at 1:29 pm to 1999
On the plus side, Bevo would get to make some longer cattle drives.
Posted on 9/8/11 at 1:31 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:
As for geography, Texas has more than enough $ to cover travel costs and there really aren't that many sports which travel.
What about the other teams traveling to UT. And especially women's sports?
Posted on 9/8/11 at 1:32 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
Drunk, Mack's tenure has benefited from a generally weak conference. I would have to guess that your path to just conference titles will be considerably tougher that you are used to.
You had great success in a weak SWC...much less success in the Big 12...and I foresee even less success in the Big Ten, due to its strength from top to bottom as compared to the Big 12.
You had great success in a weak SWC...much less success in the Big 12...and I foresee even less success in the Big Ten, due to its strength from top to bottom as compared to the Big 12.
Posted on 9/8/11 at 1:41 pm to Chicken
quote:
Drunk, Mack's tenure has benefited from a generally weak conference.
A strong argument can be made that the Big 12 was the toughest conference for the first half of the 2000s and has been the 2nd toughest during the SECs current run of titles. Far from weak.....
However, as we move to 14 & 16 team conferences, everyone's path gets tougher.
Posted on 9/8/11 at 1:44 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
Texas has made clear that it would never join the SEC and the Big Ten invovles only the Central and Eastern time zone so travel would not be as bad as going to the West Coast and for TV it works out better to have the Eastern and Central Time zones.
I think if Texas joins another conference it'll be the Big Ten though I always thought it would be with a partner like A&M.
I think if Texas joins another conference it'll be the Big Ten though I always thought it would be with a partner like A&M.
This post was edited on 9/8/11 at 1:45 pm
Posted on 9/8/11 at 1:48 pm to AUCE05
quote:
But your fans are poor
Is this a serious statement?
Are you an Auburn fan?
Posted on 9/8/11 at 1:49 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
It's not just Gilbert as much as it is both lines - they simply can't stop a run play up the middle. In a run intesive BIG 10 that will just get worse unless fixed soon. Was bad last year will be bad this year.
Big12's BCS bowl record not good at 8-10. So yes they were a weaker conference as Chicken pointed out with UT coming in at maybe 5th best this year.
Big12's BCS bowl record not good at 8-10. So yes they were a weaker conference as Chicken pointed out with UT coming in at maybe 5th best this year.
Posted on 9/8/11 at 1:49 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:
and has been the 2nd toughest during the SECs current run of titles.
Posted on 9/8/11 at 1:51 pm to Dice
quote:
Was bad last year will be bad this year
Remains to be seen. A completely different coaching staff will likely help. I'm not all that worried about the competition in the Big 10, Texas routinely has a better draft class than anyone in that conference.
Posted on 9/8/11 at 2:05 pm to LSUTIGER in TEXAS
and the garbage white batting helmets
Posted on 9/8/11 at 5:19 pm to Chicken
quote:
You had great success in a weak SWC
I respectfully disagree about "weak."
The Southwest Conference from the 1930's to mid-1980's was a top-flight football conference. The small privates such as Baylor and SMU (and even Rice in the 50's) had good teams. Arkansas was in its heyday.
You are obviously focused on the late stages of the SWC (85-95), when A&M dominated a weakened, dying conference, which coincided with one of Texas' rare down periods (and Arkansas' exit).
This post was edited on 9/8/11 at 5:20 pm
Posted on 9/8/11 at 5:39 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:
A strong argument can be made that the Big 12 was the toughest conference for the first half of the 2000s and has been the 2nd toughest during the SECs current run of titles. Far from weak.....
Probably why OU dominated all the titles
Posted on 9/8/11 at 5:50 pm to The Easter Bunny
Texas did not win as many conference titles as maybe they should have in the 2000's because they are in the same division as OU, who was at worst the #4 program of the decade (Behind USC, LSU and Florida). If they were in separate division even, UT may have won more titles, they beat OU twice in years OU won the Big 12 (07 and of course 08).
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News