- 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
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
| Favorite team: | |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 99 |
| Registered on: | 8/14/2011 |
| Online Status: |
Recent Posts
Message
SEC Spineless?
Posted by Clydep on 9/8/11 at 12:00 pm
quote:
But a weak player has emerged in the mess, and it comes from the most unlikely of ports. The Southeastern Conference.
The mighty SEC looks awfully spineless in this crazy story. The lords of college football are letting the president of Baylor hold up their expansion plans. We haven’t seen anything like this since Tiananmen Square. Kenneth Starr has led a Big 12 revolt — the league and its members have backtracked on the letter sent by Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe last week, saying the league and its members would not sue Texas A&M or the SEC, should the Aggies bolt for that conference.
Article Link
Consider the agenda from the Oklahoma writer.
quote:
Not sure how that'd look. What was DKR like last year?
:crickets:
re: Slive removes the gloves?
Posted by Clydep on 9/7/11 at 3:49 pm to hoginthesw
quote:
that is what i dont understand. why can the big 12 approach us, but we can't approach aTm?
I'm sure that comment by your president wasn't just chance. I'm impressed with the way the SEC plays the game.
re: Slive removes the gloves?
Posted by Clydep on 9/7/11 at 3:33 pm to LSUisjustOK
quote:
I'm surprised it took Iowa St this long to get involved. Look for Kansas and Kansas St to jump into the mix at any time as well.
quote:
Get ya popcorn ready! MT @1053thefan: BREAKING NEWS: @richiewhitt reporting KS and K-State are joining BU in legal actions against A&M.
re: Slive removes the gloves?
Posted by Clydep on 9/7/11 at 3:27 pm to 225rumpshaker
They just issued a statement saying they weren't waving any right to legal action either.
Slive removes the gloves?
Posted by Clydep on 9/7/11 at 3:24 pm
Now that Iowa St. is mouthing off rumor is that SEC is strongly considering waving the lawsuit condition.
quote:
As you can see, the 60's and 2000's were not very kind to us.
I think the 60s were the peak of issues trying to recruit young men to come to an all-male all-military school in a very "free" era.
There was no excuse for the 2000s, it was years of our administration making one bad decision after another. Refusal to upgrade facilities, poor coaches, extended contracts for those poor coaches, etc.
re: Texas A&M has not finished in the top 5 since the 1950s
Posted by Clydep on 9/7/11 at 1:46 pm to jackson123
quote:
They beat Texas and OU 1 year and totally forget the dominance of the prior 10.
OU I'll give you, but Texas I won't. Texas had their run in the early 2000s, but any other chunk you take since 1975 we have the advantage over them.
The typical demographic that is of boasting age has experienced a winning record vs. Texas since they've been alive, they have every reason to stick their chest out when it comes to Texas.
re: Texas A&M has not finished in the top 5 since the 1950s
Posted by Clydep on 9/7/11 at 1:39 pm to H-Town Tiger
A&M AP finishes
A&M
'39 - 1
'40 - 6
'41 - 9
'55 - 17
'56 - 5
'57 - 9
'75 - 11
'74 - 16
'76 - 7
'78 - 19
'85 - 6
'86 - 13
'87 - 10
'89 - 20
'90 - 15
'91 - 12
'92 - 7
'93 - 9
'94 - 8
'95 - 15
'98 - 11
'99 - 23
'10 - 19
A&M
'39 - 1
'40 - 6
'41 - 9
'55 - 17
'56 - 5
'57 - 9
'75 - 11
'74 - 16
'76 - 7
'78 - 19
'85 - 6
'86 - 13
'87 - 10
'89 - 20
'90 - 15
'91 - 12
'92 - 7
'93 - 9
'94 - 8
'95 - 15
'98 - 11
'99 - 23
'10 - 19
Sao, keep them coming. I'll frame them next to our SEC acceptance letter.
:rotflmao:
Sao 0
A&M to the SEC 1
Sao 0
A&M to the SEC 1
:doublebird:
You're kind of like Baylor Sao, just bitter that there is nothing you can do about the inevitable except spew on TD.
You're kind of like Baylor Sao, just bitter that there is nothing you can do about the inevitable except spew on TD.
That is Baylor's record in Big 12 play. It would take them 9 years of undefeated conference play to reach .500.
Every conference game for them is the equivalent of Lamar playing payday games to build their program.
Every conference game for them is the equivalent of Lamar playing payday games to build their program.
quote:
The only people reporting this potential legislative interference are Fat Ketch and his little buddy Chip, at orangebloods. Every other media mentions are using OB as the source.
+1
If anyone can find me a source on this that's not the UT mouthpiece of Orangebloods I'll consider it.
re: If Texas really wanted to screw TAMU...
Posted by Clydep on 9/5/11 at 7:34 am to Dr Drunkenstein
We'd be convinced that titles would flow through College Station, not at all?
You might need to check with Clark Griswold on the location of the Mighty Miss, the Old Maid.
You might need to check with Clark Griswold on the location of the Mighty Miss, the Old Maid.
Bob, I'd tap the breaks on that just a bit. Our first year in the SEC we lose Tannehill, Gray and Fuller with no proven backup at QB to take Tannehill's place. Unless he gets hurt this year we're going to have either a freshman or sophomore starting at QB that's never started a college game.
At RB we'll have Michael (if he doesn't bolt early) then who else? You need two PROVEN backs to take the pounding every week.
Still don't have a proven TE either.
We will have an OL that is equipped to compete but question marks everywhere else.
The Fran years are STILL rearing their ugly head as far as recruiting goes. One or two more classes and we'll be OK, but next year could be ugly.
Shoulda, coulda, but it would have been very nice to leave last year and have this be our first year in the SEC. We'd still be playing Arkansas, but wouldn't be playing OU in Norman.
This is a senior laden team that I think would have done well in this year's SEC.
At RB we'll have Michael (if he doesn't bolt early) then who else? You need two PROVEN backs to take the pounding every week.
Still don't have a proven TE either.
We will have an OL that is equipped to compete but question marks everywhere else.
The Fran years are STILL rearing their ugly head as far as recruiting goes. One or two more classes and we'll be OK, but next year could be ugly.
Shoulda, coulda, but it would have been very nice to leave last year and have this be our first year in the SEC. We'd still be playing Arkansas, but wouldn't be playing OU in Norman.
This is a senior laden team that I think would have done well in this year's SEC.
re: What the aggie posters said wouldn't happen, is happening
Posted by Clydep on 9/4/11 at 5:42 pm to Ralph_Wiggum
Posting on another board said Dan Branch, the legislator who called the initial meeting then canceled, was just spotted sitting with Dr. Loftin.
His home district contains SMU, so it makes sense why he would be there.
His home district contains SMU, so it makes sense why he would be there.
re: What the aggie posters said wouldn't happen, is happening
Posted by Clydep on 9/4/11 at 3:31 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
Please explain what exactly the legislature can do. Cut PUF? How would they even convene? They aren't in session again until 2013.
re: What the aggie posters said wouldn't happen, is happening
Posted by Clydep on 9/4/11 at 2:56 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
Let me guess, this is the handiwork of Chip Brown?
There are other reports that say this is patently false.
Your title asks as if this is fact, not opinion or rumor.
There are other reports that say this is patently false.
Your title asks as if this is fact, not opinion or rumor.
re: OU's Boren makes strong statements about OU's options
Posted by Clydep on 9/2/11 at 6:24 pm to CassiusClay
Excuse me Caesar. Every over title is about the Big 12 collapsing. Should have made it more clear.
OU's Boren makes strong statements about OU's options
Posted by Clydep on 9/2/11 at 6:21 pm
quote:
CAMPUS CORNER — S “It’s too early yet to know exactly what the outcome will be. Our main responsibility will be protecting the interest of the University of Oklahoma, do what’s in the best long-term interest of the university and our athletics department and the fans. That’s what we’ll attempt to do to. Beyond that, while we haven’t been saying much publicly – frankly, on purpose, because we’re at the sensitive point of discussions among schools. Too much said in public reduces success of our goals rather than enhances it.
“We have to study the best options for ourselves and not lock ourselves into a course of action until we know what’s best for the university. We’re heavily involved. I don’t know how long it will be before clarity comes to us. My experience is that, in these kinds of things, it might be a matter of 72 hours, it might be a matter of two weeks. I don’t really think this is something that’s going to linger on beyond two or three weeks, from the outside.
This has been consuming my life the last few days. It’s a fascinating challenge. We’re just in the search for what’s best for the university. (what’s goal that cannot be compromised?) “If I start discussing too much detail, I’d compromise. We obviously want stability in our conference relationships. We want partners that are above outstanding, both athletically and academically.
A conference that’s strong is not only stable, but it’s one in which there are multiple relationships, along with sports, between university members. We have some great partners in the existing Big 12. We have interest from other conferences and other universities. It’s really attributed to the strength of the programs at the University of Oklahoma that there is so much interest in us.
We have to carefully evaluate the various comments being made to us and various possibilities before we decide what’s best for the University of Oklahoma. (disappointed this has happened again?) “I hoped we had stability. I guess I’m just disappointed that the original Big 12 is not the same Big 12. I was extremely disappointed when Nebraska departed. I was disappointed when Colorado departed.
Obviously, as you’ve tracked my plane flying here or there, you know that I would be disappointed that Texas A&M left. I was personally involved in trying to see if there was some way that that would not happen. So, it is a disappointed that those schools have left and that we face the challenge that we do today.”
Does the Big 12 have to have 10 teams to be viable.
“I don’t think anything has to be, at all. Everything doesn’t have to be done today. There’s nothing that says the conference will collapse at nine. We have a full season to play and all that to go through before … “Obviously, I think eventually – that doesn’t mean one year, maybe it’s going to take two or three years … if we were eventually to get back to 12, I would feel better about it. On the other hand, we don’t know what’s going to happen. Some things are trends beyond the control of any one university. Is there going to be a continued trend toward consolidation? Or are we going to see conferences that are now 12 (teams) – and there are three of them, I guess – move to 16. Is that going to happen? Maybe that’s not going to happen.
We’ve seen both. We’ve seen tendency toward consolidation and then you’ve seen some pushback in the very largest conferences that say it’s gotten too big. We’re trying to sort all that out. “At this point in time, I’ll be very honest with you in saying I do not know with certainty, or perhaps even can’t hazard a totally intelligent guess as to what our final decision will be. But we are carefully looking over all the options.
We are … there’s no school more active in the Big 12 more active than we are right now. Of course, Joe Castiglione’s a wonderful partner with me in being active in this process. Our regents are a very cohesive, supportive group in working with us. … I think that gives us a good leg up on anybody. Nobody has more unity in their university, of being ready to go in which direction is in our best interest and helps us. (ball’s in OU’s court?) “I’ll just put it this way: I think we’ve been ever since we became a member of this conference, we’re a very influential member of the conference. I think we remain a very influential member of the conference. I’ll just put it that way. Influential not only in this conference, but influential in athletics across the country. It’s a tribute to the strength of this program. I’ll put it this way: I don’t think there’s any chance OU’s going to end up being a wallflower.”
Link to article
Popular
5










