quote:

---

Also, why did you pick the SEC or B1G? They're going to the Big 12, the one you Aggies are always saying is the worst of the big 5 (laughable since you couldn't do anything in it, but you guys parrot it nonstop).

---

A good post, mostly, Neighborhood, but this last point is just wrong. Belittling the Big 12 in retaliation for being belittled by Big 12 institutions such as yours is NOT the same thing as saying it's the worst of the Top 5. In TV viewership per game, the Big 12 was 4th last year, and the Pac 12 was 5th. (And that was with us in the Big 12!) I expect the Big 12 to go down relative to the SEC in viewership per game (according to the Nielsen Ratings), but we'll have to see.

Also, you post does not mention "coaching" as a reason for some teams to be better than others. When you had Darrell Royal, you're coaching was better and ours, and you kicked our ass. Jackie and RC, our coaching was better than Akers, McWilliams and Mackovic, and we kicked your ass. Mack Brown was better than RC, and you kicked our ass. I believe Sherman was about equal to Mack if not better, and got us a lot more competitive against you without getting recruiting up.

Sumlin might be great - clearly we're hoping he is - but how we do will be a result of his Head Coaching ability, just like yours with Mack. (Great recruiter, pretty darn good coach.)

quote:

---

Edit: Whoops, I glossed over KSU and OSU and assumed he was talking about the four that left. The argument about BCS victories still stands as we would lose a BCS win. So, no, the conference would not be stronger if that happened.

---

Okay, I think I understand you better, now. Looks like you're judging a program's future potential on how many BCS wins they have. I actually think that's a good way of looking at the past accomplishments of a team, but is not the way I'd look at a team's future: Athletic Budget Revenue, Marketing, Exposure, Recruiting.

A&M and Mizzou look better than West Virginia and TCU in these regards. Therefore, I feel that the Big 12 lost more than they gained, and the SEC gained a lot.

quote:

---

So then, is it that much of a stretch to think that, given the recent successes of the programs we have brought in to replace the defectors, the Big 12 is stronger (short-term for sure, long-term, maybe not), while, simultaneously A&M will not be able to compete in a league that is tougher than the one they couldn't find success in (and are leaving)?

---

I like this point. The Big 12 looks to me to be stronger in the short term for this switch. I do not, however, see that as being likely in the long term, per my post above. Likewise, it also makes sense that A&M might have a harder time in the SEC than in the Big 12, in the short term. However, in the long term, I do not see that as likely, again, for the reasons posted above.

Bill, agreed.

I'd like to think that BCS wins are the culmination of all the things you listed. It signifies that not only are you the best in your conference, but you can beat the best of other conferences as well. But as a Longhorn I can tell you that even when you have:
Exposure/marketing:
- LHN (don't worry, I see the irony in listing this under exposure)
- #1 in merchandise sales
Revenue: #1 in the nation
Recruiting: as you know we usually do very well

You can still see your program go into the ****ter (Texas 2010-2011). I agree w/ you that it is about coaching, and Mack took a break after 2009. When you get a great coach, all those extra things can help greatly, but without the coach, none of it matters.

Man, now this is what I like. Neighborhood, as you might guess, most of the Longhorns who come on TexAgs are basically talking trash, and I always want to have this kind of discussion. I appreciate your posts.

quote:

---

But as a Longhorn I can tell you that even when you have:
Exposure/marketing:
- LHN (don't worry, I see the irony in listing this under exposure)

---

Okay, I get your point, but having the LHN is better for exposure than not having the LHN. And there's still a possibility that it could stick. However, I also think Texas could benefit greatly financially and in exposure from participating in a conference network, and I think that's an option going forward if this single-university network is not sustainable/viable at an avg. of $15 mil/yr.

quote:

---

- #1 in merchandise sales
Revenue: #1 in the nation
Recruiting: as you know we usually do very well

You can still see your program go into the ****ter (Texas 2010-2011). I agree w/ you that it is about coaching, and Mack took a break after 2009. When you get a great coach, all those extra things can help greatly, but without the coach, none of it matters.

---

Basically, just totally agree with this.