Mr. Buddy Garrity

Super Conference time??

Recommended Posts

1

Yes sir!!!!!! I love it...Just wonder How it would work

 

While I do wish the SEC would brake off to form two powerhouse divisions im all for OU and Tex going to the SEC...

 

If you want Drop Vandy (ACC) and Mizzo (Big 10) and add TEX and OU.. Move Alabama and Auburn to the East ..I would say Kentucky but their overall athletic program is rising and whats more Southern then Kentucky...Vandy on the other hand, while Academics in the conference overall would take a hit, Texas while not on Vandys level is a great institution in its own academically. 

I mean you lose a few rivalrys  Tex-TTU, OU-OKST, Tex- Bay but I mean you replace them with others Tex vs A&M and Tex vs Ark and OU could just keep OKST as an Non-Con

 

But that goes back to my question how would it work. No way Oklahoma is going to let OU leave without OKST and I think the same could be said for Texas leaving Tech and maybe even Baylor

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TexazBall said:

Yes sir!!!!!! I love it...Just wonder How it would work

 

While I do wish the SEC would brake off to form two powerhouse divisions im all for OU and Tex going to the SEC...

 

If you want Drop Vandy (ACC) and Mizzo (Big 10) and add TEX and OU.. Move Alabama and Auburn to the East ..I would say Kentucky but their overall athletic program is rising and whats more Southern then Kentucky...Vandy on the other hand, while Academics in the conference overall would take a hit, Texas while not on Vandys level is a great institution in its own academically. 

I mean you lose a few rivalrys  Tex-TTU, OU-OKST, Tex- Bay but I mean you replace them with others Tex vs A&M and Tex vs Ark and OU could just keep OKST as an Non-Con

 

But that goes back to my question how would it work. No way Oklahoma is going to let OU leave without OKST and I think the same could be said for Texas leaving Tech and maybe even Baylor

Saw this on another site:

 

West

 

OU

Arkansas

Miss State

LSU

UT

Ole Miss

Mizzou

A&M

 

 

East

 

 

Bama

Auburn

Vandy

Florida

UK

UGA

Tennessee

South Carolina

Link to post
Share on other sites

Boy!  I am seeing all over twitter about how A&M fans are supposedly so opposed to Texas and Oklahoma moving to the SEC.  Which begs a couple of questions:

1.  Is A&M's opposition to the move by Texas and Oklahoma as real as social media makes it out to be? And if the answer to #1 is "yes:"

2.  Can someone explain to me the reasoning behind A&M's opposition?

Serious question so only serious answers requested.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's A&M fans who are opposed to the idea of them joining, it's the A&M brass who want nothing to do with UT (im not sure about OU). Most A&M fans I know don't care either way since A&M is enjoying more money, better facilities and better recruiting. I just find it funny that it's out there that SEC brass kept A&M out the loop for months on this potential move by UT & OU. 

 

Coincidence??: anyone noticed when this news broke Jaylon Guilbeau of Port Arthur Memorial decommitted from UT? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr. Buddy Garrity said:

I don't think it's A&M fans who are opposed to the idea of them joining, it's the A&M brass who want nothing to do with UT (im not sure about OU). Most A&M fans I know don't care either way since A&M is enjoying more money, better facilities and better recruiting. I just find it funny that it's out there that SEC brass kept A&M out the loop for months on this potential move by UT & OU. 

 

Coincidence??: anyone noticed when this news broke Jaylon Guilbeau of Port Arthur Memorial decommitted from UT? 

A&M fans are DEFINITELY against Texas joining, at least as far as the overwhelming amount of social media indicates (friends, etc).  The reason why, I am assuming, is the biggest recruiting pitch disappears.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, WOSgrad said:

Boy!  I am seeing all over twitter about how A&M fans are supposedly so opposed to Texas and Oklahoma moving to the SEC.  Which begs a couple of questions:

1.  Is A&M's opposition to the move by Texas and Oklahoma as real as social media makes it out to be? And if the answer to #1 is "yes:"

2.  Can someone explain to me the reasoning behind A&M's opposition?

Serious question so only serious answers requested.

A&M chiefly has concerns about recruiting. There's some consternation over UT joining the SEC's ranks after spending so many decades dragging the SEC and A&M through the mud (remember 'the SEC's academic standards are too low for UT'?), but it's roughly offset by the delicious irony of UT coming to the SEC on its knees now, at least among the A&M fans I run with. On the other hand, being the only Texas school in the SEC has been a big piece of their recruiting pitch over the last few seasons, and that pitch has paid dividends for them. I personally don't think taking that away dooms their recruiting prospects by any means, but it makes it a harder sale, and that's a much more pressing concern in an era when A&M fell just an inch short of a playoff it really should have been in last season. Which brings me to this:

33 minutes ago, TxHoops said:

Alabama apparently wants this move.  End of story. 

Yes, Alabama wants it. No, that's not the end of the story. You know I like and respect you, but this is exactly the kind of thing that leaves me (and other SEC alums with a lot more say in these kinds of things than I have, for that matter) with reservations about adding UT. The SEC is not like the Big XII or the Big 10. It might be dominated by one or a handful of blue chip programs on the football field, but SEC politics is very balanced between the schools. Vanderbilt has as much say in the inner workings of the conference as Alabama does. Don't believe me? Ask Roy Kramer.

UT fans have gotten very accustomed to their school being the favored son of their conference. There are no favored sons in the SEC. I can think of several specific instances where Alabama wanted something out of the conference they didn't get because other member schools objected. I don't think UT's ever been told no by their conference leadership regardless of what their fellow members have wanted, or at least not in my lifetime. If UT fans think they're going to come into the SEC and dominate either their division or the conference altogether in a manner even remotely as preferential as what they've experienced in the Big XII, or even if they think there's a pecking order where they only fall behind the likes of Alabama, LSU, Georgia and Florida, they should either disabuse themselves of that notion now, or get ready for a rude awakening. If UT really wants to be a part of this conference, they need to get comfortable with the idea of having equal say in conference conversations as the likes of Kentucky, Tennessee and, yes, even the dreaded Aggies. Mal Moore, God rest his soul, would tell you the same thing.

Welcome to the confederacy of college football. I look forward to the first Alabama pep rally at the Texas State Capitol.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, PN-G bamatex said:

A&M chiefly has concerns about recruiting. There's some consternation over UT joining the SEC's ranks after spending so many decades dragging the SEC and A&M through the mud (remember 'the SEC's academic standards are too low for UT'?), but it's roughly offset by the delicious irony of UT coming to the SEC on its knees now, at least among the A&M fans I run with. On the other hand, being the only Texas school in the SEC has been a big piece of their recruiting pitch over the last few seasons, and that pitch has paid dividends for them. I personally don't think taking that away dooms their recruiting prospects by any means, but it makes it a harder sale, and that's a much more pressing concern in an era when A&M fell just an inch short of a playoff it really should have been in last season. Which brings me to this:

Yes, Alabama wants it. No, that's not the end of the story. You know I like and respect you, but this is exactly the kind of thing that leaves me (and other SEC alums with a lot more say in these kinds of things than I have, for that matter) with reservations about adding UT. The SEC is not like the Big XII or the Big 10. It might be dominated by one or a handful of blue chip programs on the football field, but SEC politics is very balanced between the schools. Vanderbilt has as much say in the inner workings of the conference as Alabama does. Don't believe me? Ask Roy Kramer.

UT fans have gotten very accustomed to their school being the favored son of their conference. There are no favored sons in the SEC. I can think of several specific instances where Alabama wanted something out of the conference they didn't get because other member schools objected. I don't think UT's ever been told no by their conference leadership regardless of what their fellow members have wanted, or at least not in my lifetime. If UT fans think they're going to come into the SEC and dominate either their division or the conference altogether in a manner even remotely as preferential as what they've experienced in the Big XII, or even if they think there's a pecking order where they only fall behind the likes of Alabama, LSU, Georgia and Florida, they should either disabuse themselves of that notion now, or get ready for a rude awakening. If UT really wants to be a part of this conference, they need to get comfortable with the idea of having equal say in conference conversations as the likes of Kentucky, Tennessee and, yes, even the dreaded Aggies. Mal Moore, God rest his soul, would tell you the same thing.

Welcome to the confederacy of college football. I look forward to the first Alabama pep rally at the Texas State Capitol.

I like and respect you too.  But if you think Vanderbilt wields as much power as Bama, I have some things to sell you.  Yes they both a vote that counts the same.  But that’s where it ends.  All of the above sounds great and, frankly, a bit utopian.  But that’s not how college athletics (or life) works.  Probably would be better if it did.  But it always boils down to who needs who more and who brings the most to the table.  And the power brokers (from the sec side) are exactly who you might expect them to be. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, TxHoops said:

I like and respect you too.  But if you think Vanderbilt wields as much power as Bama, I have some things to sell you.  Yes they both a vote that counts the same.  But that’s where it ends.  All of the above sounds great and, frankly, a bit utopian.  But that’s not how college athletics (or life) works.  Probably would be better if it did.  But it always boils down to who needs who more and who brings the most to the table.  And the power brokers (from the sec side) are exactly who you might expect them to be. 

You need to take a look at some SEC history. Vanderbilt has literally run the SEC before. When the SEC wanted to become the first conference in the country to institute a championship game, Gene Stallings was against it and Steve Spurrier's people had mixed feelings about it. Roy Kramer convinced the rest of the conference to go for it and did it anyway. In doing so, he very nearly cost Alabama a national championship. Every single time playoff expansion has been discussed, Nick Saban has verbally and adamantly objected and his boosters have followed suit, but the SEC staff have gone for it without exception because it would guarantee multiple SEC teams competing for a national championship every season. Yet Alabama has never once floated the idea of bolting from the conference. Alabama's still a proud member of the SEC, and most of the fanbase would literally riot at the prospect of Alabama leaving the SEC.

I get what you're saying. You've perfectly described how the Big XII is run - and coincidentally, why it's falling apart. The SEC's been around several times as long as the Big XII, and it's because the SEC is designed from the ground up to ensure consensus or near consensus among the conference members before any major decision gets made. I'm not naive enough to tell you that's because of some altruistic commitment to compromise. Rather, it's because the individual SEC members find security in a conference that's built around keeping their collective buy-in, and that's what keeps schools around for a literal century. The SEC was learning the hard lessons of realignment, and reforming itself to account for those lessons, thirty years before the Big XII even existed. Those adaptations are why the SEC is such a durable conference.

Culture is very important to Southerners. The SEC has become synonymous with Southern regional identity, and Southern states sticking together is a cornerstone of that identity. The whole, as they say, is greater than the sum of its parts, and that's almost implicitly understood in the South. For its part, Texas A&M understands that, which is why A&M will accept Texas's entry into the SEC when the votes are taken and the required two thirds or more of the conference agrees to it. If Texas really wants to be part of the SEC, it's going to have to make that adjustment. This is not going to be the burnt orange show.

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, PN-G bamatex said:

You need to take a look at some SEC history. Vanderbilt has literally run the SEC before. When the SEC wanted to become the first conference in the country to institute a championship game, Gene Stallings was against it and Steve Spurrier's people had mixed feelings about it. Roy Kramer convinced the rest of the conference to go for it and did it anyway. In doing so, he very nearly cost Alabama a national championship. Every single time playoff expansion has been discussed, Nick Saban has verbally and adamantly objected and his boosters have followed suit, but the SEC staff have gone for it without exception because it would guarantee multiple SEC teams competing for a national championship every season. Yet Alabama has never once floated the idea of bolting from the conference. Alabama's still a proud member of the SEC, and most of the fanbase would literally riot at the prospect of Alabama leaving the SEC.

I get what you're saying. You've perfectly described how the Big XII is run - and coincidentally, why it's falling apart. The SEC's been around several times as long as the Big XII, and it's because the SEC is designed from the ground up to ensure consensus or near consensus among the conference members before any major decision gets made. I'm not naive enough to tell you that's because of some altruistic commitment to compromise. Rather, it's because the individual SEC members find security in a conference that's built around keeping their collective buy-in, and that's what keeps schools around for a literal century. The SEC was learning the hard lessons of realignment, and reforming itself to account for those lessons, thirty years before the Big XII even existed. Those adaptations are why the SEC is such a durable conference.

Culture is very important to Southerners. The SEC has become synonymous with Southern regional identity, and Southern states sticking together is a cornerstone of that identity. The whole, as they say, is greater than the sum of its parts, and that's almost implicitly understood in the South. For its part, Texas A&M understands that, which is why A&M will accept Texas's entry into the SEC when the votes are taken and the required two thirds or more of the conference agrees to it. If Texas really wants to be part of the SEC, it's going to have to make that adjustment. This is not going to be the burnt orange show.

That is all understood.  But if you think Texas and OU came to the SEC with hat in hand, on their proverbial knees (as your first post alluded), and that A&M had been a part of the discussions in the Southernly, democratic SEC….  
 

But whatever narrative makes everyone feel better about themselves, cool.   This is nothing more than the SEC being proactive and blowing the Big 10 out of the money waters.   Some people just have to eat Lima beans to make that happen.  This is about capitalism, not democracy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, TxHoops said:

That is all understood.  But if you think Texas and OU came to the SEC with hat in hand, on their proverbial knees (as your first post alluded), and that A&M had been a part of the discussions in the Southernly, democratic SEC….  
 

But whatever narrative makes everyone feel better about themselves, cool.   This is nothing more than the SEC being proactive and blowing the Big 10 out of the money waters.   Some people just have to eat Lima beans to make that happen.  This is about capitalism, not democracy. 

I never meant to say UT came to the SEC with hat in hand. It's hard to have anything else in your hands when they're holding the Longhorn Network out as the first concession.

Money and prestige are definitely the drivers for the decision, no doubt about it. And that's the exact reason at least twelve of the fourteen SEC presidents are going to vote to accept Texas and OU when the Southernly democratic process takes place.

And to be clear, A&M was included in the discussion. Ross Bjork wasn't.

https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/tamu-football/paul-finebaum-takes-stern-tone-about-idea-that-texas-am-was-blindsided-in-realignment-talks/

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Mr. Buddy Garrity said:

Pawwwwl says alot of things with a stern tone, I hope he's right on this. 

I take your point, but I think he is. I've dealt with John Sharp at the Capitol a few times. He's not the type who would take this lying down if he was blindsided by it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ironic that the Drysdales (UT) are joining the Clampetts (SEC).  OU fits-in fine with the Clampetts.  UT?  The jury is still out.  As my longtime friend, and the proudest UT alum that I know, told me, "We will hold our nose all the way to the bank and cash those SEC checks."

Four super-conferences, sixteen teams per conference, and the top four teams in each conference make the playoffs.  Win four games in the playoffs and grab the undisputed national championship.  March Madness finally comes to college football.  Adios, NCAA...welcome the College Football Alliance (four super-conferences).  TV rights divied up to pay the players in the super-conference.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 1989NDN said:

Ironic that the Drysdales (UT) are joining the Clampetts (SEC).  OU fits-in fine with the Clampetts.  UT?  The jury is still out.  As my longtime friend, and the proudest UT alum that I know, told me, "We will hold our nose all the way to the bank and cash those SEC checks."

Four super-conferences, sixteen teams per conference, and the top four teams in each conference make the playoffs.  Win four games in the playoffs and grab the undisputed national championship.  March Madness finally comes to college football.  Adios, NCAA...welcome the College Football Alliance (four super-conferences).  TV rights divied up to pay the players in the super-conference.

I agree with your assessment.  Not crazy about this move at all.  But college athletics, like much in life, is about the money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forget the money, I want to see the rivalries of old renewed. It's insane that UT-A&M and UT-Arky don't play every year. It's crazy that aggy and ou don't play every year. This is a massive disservice to the institutions, players and us as fans. I miss the real trash talk and bragging rights. I want this to happen.  But I'm a selfish a-hole so what do I know. I did talk to a few Bama and lsu buddies today and they're pissed for obvious reasons. They know if this happens, the recruiting advantage is diminished pretty quick like. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that many of you look at this from the money perspective, and then the football perspective and it is exciting.  I could care less about UT or OU and those angles do not interest me.  However when you look at the baseball POV - man I get excited.  There will be some top-notch baseball being played in the SEC.  Could we possibly see an all-SEC CWS one day soon?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Chester86 said:

I understand that many of you look at this from the money perspective, and then the football perspective and it is exciting.  I could care less about UT or OU and those angles do not interest me.  However when you look at the baseball POV - man I get excited.  There will be some top-notch baseball being played in the SEC.  Could we possibly see an all-SEC CWS one day soon?

It’s almost there, it’s good to be the Clampetts. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Member Statistics

    42,664
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    Big Chief100
    Newest Member
    Big Chief100
    Joined


×
  • Create New...