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.
At the time the conference was formed, North/South was what provided the most balance, with the two major players being Texas and Nebraska and Texas A&M/K-State forming the second tier. The Oklahoma teams were cellar dwellers in those first few years.
I think it's good to try and keep the conference membership at 10, you avoid the whole issue of divisional balance.
At the time the conference was formed, North/South was what provided the most balance, with the two major players being Texas and Nebraska and Texas A&M/K-State forming the second tier. The Oklahoma teams were cellar dwellers in those first few years.
I think it's good to try and keep the conference membership at 10, you avoid the whole issue of divisional balance.
>>>>>
The Oklahoma teams were cellar dwellers in those first few years.
<<<<<
Which, in regards to the University of Oklahoma (as I'm sure you're aware) in particular, was an anomaly.
I still think it should have been an East/West....splitting up Oklahoma and Texas schools. The whole North/South divisional alignment conjured up an "us" (South teams) vs. "them" (North teams). The best example of this (other than Nebraska's outright hatred for everything Texas) is when Bill Callahan and the Huskers came to play in Norman. After losing the game, Callahan was classless and called the Sooner fans "a bunch of f'n hillbillies."
The divisional distance (egged on by differences in culture and most importantly the growing disparity of dominance of the South teams) caused the teams in the South division to unify within themselves with less respect for the conference as a whole (for example, the SEC does not have this problem.) The Big 12 South especially looked at itself as its own entity irregardless of "those northern teams." It created a lack of cohesiveness and no team felt shunned more from the teams in the South division than Nebraska. Losing Nebraska should have never happened. Should have given the CornFeeders everything they wanted and more. But Beebe didn't have the foresight to stop the exodus from the conference before it was too late.
At the time the conference was formed, North/South was what provided the most balance, with the two major players being Texas and Nebraska and Texas A&M/K-State forming the second tier. The Oklahoma teams were cellar dwellers in those first few years.
I think it's good to try and keep the conference membership at 10, you avoid the whole issue of divisional balance.
Excuse me, but when the Big12 was founded Texas football was sucking hind tit in the John Mackovic era....and had sucked since 1984. OU was about the same level of suckage.
Nebraska & A&M enthusiastically voted for unequal revenue sharing because they were the big dawgs then. UT didn't start climbing out of that hole until 10 years ago.
As their fortunes tanked, then they started whining....especially after Texas beat the Huskers 9 years out of 10. A&M's glory years (the same time UT was sucking) was built on that dirtbag Sherrill's cheating ways (see his other 2 programs he left on NCAA probation). Dr Tom started hating Texas from the getgo when UT persuaded the Big 12 to tighten up on the partial qualifiers - and I think that county scholarship program of theirs was called into question.
But yes, I like the 10 team Big 12.
Never did understand why the Big 12 broke up such a longstanding rivalries like OU/Huskers though.
I agree, that was a major bonehead move, I don't know why they couldn't have taken a lesson from the SEC, they seemed able to build divisions without busting up any of the rivalries [as far as I know, I'm not familiar with every single SEC rivalry.]
I agree, that was a major bonehead move, I don't know why they couldn't have taken a lesson from the SEC, they seemed able to build divisions without busting up any of the rivalries [as far as I know, I'm not familiar with every single SEC rivalry.]
Texas at least won the first Big 12 title.
That 1996 title was just a freak win by a mediocre Longhorn team - the Huskers took it for granted and weren't prepared.
The same could be said when Colorado beat Texas for the championship a few years later (after UT had rolled the Buffs 45-7 in the regular season).
No, it said "I'd rather shower at Penn St. then support Alabama." Grammar can make a world of difference at times- even in dissing a conference rival. However, based on my experience with LSU fans at Cowboy Stadium, 99% wouldn't notice.
Yes, their inappropriate jab at Bama fans fell short because of their lack of knowledge. Oh well, RTR!
That's just a fact of life for the delusional aggys
I don't think they are delusional. For them, it is a win-win situation, IMHO. They are moving to (what is currently) the best conference in college football, I think over time their recruiting will pick up due to the move, and they compete quite well with Arkansas, whom they play on a regular basis. Arkansas is no slouch; they have a good team.
They will get more $$$ as well. And the A&M mindset is not one to back down from a fight. The culture at A&M is more suited to the SEC as well. A&M and LSU used to play regularly as well, and it was quite a rivalry.
Just my 2 cents. I'm not an Aggie, but I do like their football program and wish them luck in the SEC.
No, it said "I'd rather shower at Penn St. then support Alabama." Grammar can make a world of difference at times- even in dissing a conference rival. However, based on my experience with LSU fans at Cowboy Stadium, 99% wouldn't notice.
Ba ha ha ha ha!!!
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.
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.
