Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
and the THIRD nail in the coffin comes from..... TEXAS A&M.
Watch the burrial of the Big IX.
Nebraska I can see...but Colorado? Giant who cares on that one.
As the weekend concluded and we entered into Monday, however, the TV networks stepped up and indicated they would invest significantly in the 10 remaining members of the Big 12. And the Big 12 made a significant financial commitment to keep Texas A&M, Oklahoma and Texas in the conference. At the end of the day, we kept our word, which as an Aggie, is extremely important." - R. Bowen Loftin - June 16, 2010
[quote=stan4;20788248]Nebraska I can see...but Colorado? Giant who cares on that one.
Denver isn't anything to scoff at.
Colorado is a bigger fish than Kansas St., Iowa St., Baylor, Oklahoma St. and Texas Tech. About equal with Kansas(bigger football smaller basketball) and smaller than only Missouri, OU, A&M and UT.
Location: Visitation between Wal-Mart & Home Depot
8,309 posts, read 38,789,849 times
Reputation: 7185
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncopus99
TV exposure is given based on the teams with success or tradition in the sport or a favorable matchup. If you haven't noticed, Kentucky and Ole Miss games aren't really televised on the major channels in football i.e. CBS, ESPN 1/2. Texas A&M falls in line with Kentucky. Your TV exposure will still be dominanted by the Alabamas, LSUs, Floridas of the conference... not a program that will barely survive.
As for recruiting... moving conferences you still will be trying to recuit in-state. Those same schools they compete against will still have the advantage. Conferences ties have little to no impact on where a recruit goes. Recruits go for tradition, coaches, teams they grew up liking, facilities, and playing time; not because the conference of the school might play better competition in one sport.
All A&M gets is more money and more losses in football. Plain and simple.
I disagree. A&M, even as second-class citizen to OU and UT, is a far larger market than Kentucky. They don't go to the head of the class in the SEC, but they do jump ahead of Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt, Kentucky and South Carolina. I'd say they are more realistically falling in line with Tennessee, Georgia and Arkansas. I definitely agree that they are going to be on the wrong end of the switch with LSU, Alabama and Florida for at least three years, however.
I also disagree that conference doesn't have a dramatic impact on recruit decision making, but I'll address that in the morning...
I disagree. A&M, even as second-class citizen to OU and UT, is a far larger market than Kentucky. They don't go to the head of the class in the SEC, but they do jump ahead of Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt, Kentucky and South Carolina.
With the way Miss St (Dan "I Created the Best QB ever" Mullen) and South Carolina (Steve "I run up ball games and have now recruiting top notch" Spurrior) have been taking their programs, neither of these two teams are dropping off anytime soon. Miss St is a guaranteed loss for A&M. If they ever play SC, it would be the same.
My comparison to Kentucky was in terms of TV exposure. Yes, Texas has more people. Realistically if I went down the street anywhere in Texas and asked what team they follow, I guarantee they point to either Texas or Oklahoma. In Kentucky, the state only really follows basketball. In which case they have a bigger outlook then their rival Louisville, i.e. the only school in the area they compete against. A&M, on the other hand competes against at least 7 schools (Texas, Oklahoma, Tech, Houston, Baylor, Tulsa, Oklahoma St).
Quote:
I also disagree that conference doesn't have a dramatic impact on recruit decision making, but I'll address that in the morning...
With the way Miss St (Dan "I Created the Best QB ever" Mullen) and South Carolina (Steve "I run up ball games and have now recruiting top notch" Spurrior) have been taking their programs, neither of these two teams are dropping off anytime soon. Miss St is a guaranteed loss for A&M. If they ever play SC, it would be the same.
My comparison to Kentucky was in terms of TV exposure. Yes, Texas has more people. Realistically if I went down the street anywhere in Texas and asked what team they follow, I guarantee they point to either Texas or Oklahoma. In Kentucky, the state only really follows basketball. In which case they have a bigger outlook then their rival Louisville, i.e. the only school in the area they compete against. A&M, on the other hand competes against at least 7 schools (Texas, Oklahoma, Tech, Houston, Baylor, Tulsa, Oklahoma St).
Can't wait to see how you deduct that...
>>>>>
Realistically if I went down the street anywhere in Texas and asked what team they follow, I guarantee they point to either Texas or Oklahoma.
<<<<<
Have you ever been to Texas? You have no idea what you're talking about.
It's about 60% Shorthorn, 30% Aggie, 5% Tech, 5%Sooner/TCU/SMU etc.
In Oklahoma on the other hand it's 80% Sooner, 20% Cowboy, and -.001 Shorthorn.
Anyways, does Baylor even really have a case here?
They didn't mind leaving TCU, Rice and SMU out in the cold in 94 either so.....
Yes, they do. A&M broke a lucrative contract with Baylor that will cost the Bears millions in TV revenue in the next few years.
Too bad the aggys don't have their own law school, 'cause I wouldn't want Ken Starr on my butt.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.