re: Why is it taking Texas so long to make a hire?

quote:

---

This is where brand comes into play.

---

Wait a minute, I thought we weren't talking about brands?

If we are talking brands the Big 12 has the worst brand of the Big 5. That is clear.

And I think it has the perceived worst football quality when you consider that a one loss Stanford was ranked ahead of a undefeated Baylor. Stanford isn't some traditional powerhouse ala OU, Texas, tOSU, etc. But there they were ahead of the Big 12's best team with a loss to Utah. So based on perception of the quality of football, the Big 12 is 5th. And perception is all that matters in college football.

quote:

---

Had that undefeated eventual Big 12 champ been either Oklahoma or Texas, they would have been ranked higher. In a similar manner, how long would take an undefeated Maryland team to rise to the top five? The perception is that the Big 12 is down because the perennial powers are down, when in reality the bottom tier of that conference has gotten much better recently.

---

What do you mean by the bolded part? Texas was a half-time away from outright winning the Big 12 (which they have only done twice) and OU is in a BCS game. Sure Texas is looking for a new coach, but OU has always been the most successful Big 12 team and they are ranked with double digit wins right now.

What your statement basically implies is: "the Big 12 perception-wise is down because Texas is merely average instead of excellent."

To which I will respond that any conference that is dependent on one team's fortunes to determine its worth is not a great conference no matter if that team is doing good or not.