Destroying the league. Winning against them isn't enough. We need admins who can stand up and not take it on the chain repeatedly.
Tired of A&M being "nice".
Tired of A&M being "nice".
WorkTogetherAgs said:
Problem is, sips have influence over the refs
WorkTogetherAgs said:
Problem is, sips have influence over the refs
VOLvo said:WorkTogetherAgs said:
Problem is, sips have influence over the refs
As an old SEC guy, have you seen ANY evidence the SEC tolerates that kind of crap? There were rumors, likely true, in the late 70s to mid 80s but that kind of thing is obvious on the big stage and destroys a conference.
I don't think the SEC will tolerate it. I don't think reviews make it easy either.
Obviously, I can't predict the future but I can't see Texas getting anything but fined by the conference if they approach SEC referees.
Wait a minute. You're telling me you haven't seen PI's, holding and no-calls (all of which are not reviewable) go prefernetially for SEC programs that are in the NC/playoff picture since the 1980's? Surely you jest. That shouldn't be up for much debate. It happens. The OP concern is that tu might be able to work similar preferential treatment even when they're not in the NC picture (like they've done at every conference they've been in sine the 1800's). If you don't believe they'll try, then you're extremely naive. That also shouldn't be a question. The question is how successful will the be at it?VOLvo said:WorkTogetherAgs said:
Problem is, sips have influence over the refs
As an old SEC guy, have you seen ANY evidence the SEC tolerates that kind of crap? There were rumors, likely true, in the late 70s to mid 80s but that kind of thing is obvious on the big stage and destroys a conference.
I don't think the SEC will tolerate it. I don't think reviews make it easy either.
Obviously, I can't predict the future but I can't see Texas getting anything but fined by the conference if they approach SEC referees.
You think Texas has a secret deal with Big 12 refs to get special treatment? LOL. Could have used a few calls going our way in the Okie State game in 2017.Win At Life said:
Wait a minute. You're telling me you haven't seen PI's, holding and no-calls (all of which are not reviewable) go prefernetially for SEC programs that are in the NC/playoff picture since the 1980's? Surely you jest. That shouldn't be up for much debate. It happens. The OP concern is that tu might be able to work similar preferential treatment even when they're not in the NC picture (like they've done at every conference they've been in sine the 1800's). If you don't believe they'll try, then you're extremely naive. That also shouldn't be a question. The question is how successful will the be at it?
Win At Life said:Wait a minute. You're telling me you haven't seen PI's, holding and no-calls (all of which are not reviewable) go prefernetially for SEC programs that are in the NC/playoff picture since the 1980's? Surely you jest. That shouldn't be up for much debate. It happens. The OP concern is that tu might be able to work similar preferential treatment even when they're not in the NC picture (like they've done at every conference they've been in sine the 1800's). If you don't believe they'll try, then you're extremely naive. That also shouldn't be a question. The question is how successful will the be at it?VOLvo said:WorkTogetherAgs said:
Problem is, sips have influence over the refs
As an old SEC guy, have you seen ANY evidence the SEC tolerates that kind of crap? There were rumors, likely true, in the late 70s to mid 80s but that kind of thing is obvious on the big stage and destroys a conference.
I don't think the SEC will tolerate it. I don't think reviews make it easy either.
Obviously, I can't predict the future but I can't see Texas getting anything but fined by the conference if they approach SEC referees.
How about the fact that this whole agreement was done by cloak and dagger and they had Snakey and the SEC office leave us out of the conversation. This played exactly towards texas' MO. If their entrance was exactly on texas' terms and methods why do you think "it will be different in the SEC?"VOLvo said:WorkTogetherAgs said:
Problem is, sips have influence over the refs
As an old SEC guy, have you seen ANY evidence the SEC tolerates that kind of crap? There were rumors, likely true, in the late 70s to mid 80s but that kind of thing is obvious on the big stage and destroys a conference.
I don't think the SEC will tolerate it. I don't think reviews make it easy either.
Obviously, I can't predict the future but I can't see Texas getting anything but fined by the conference if they approach SEC referees.
hunter2012 said:How about the fact that this whole agreement was done by cloak and dagger and they had Snakey and the SEC office leave us out of the conversation. This played exactly towards texas' MO. If their entrance was exactly on texas' terms and methods why do you think "it will be different in the SEC?"VOLvo said:WorkTogetherAgs said:
Problem is, sips have influence over the refs
As an old SEC guy, have you seen ANY evidence the SEC tolerates that kind of crap? There were rumors, likely true, in the late 70s to mid 80s but that kind of thing is obvious on the big stage and destroys a conference.
I don't think the SEC will tolerate it. I don't think reviews make it easy either.
Obviously, I can't predict the future but I can't see Texas getting anything but fined by the conference if they approach SEC referees.
hunter2012 said:How about the fact that this whole agreement was done by cloak and dagger and they had Snakey and the SEC office leave us out of the conversation. This played exactly towards texas' MO. If their entrance was exactly on texas' terms and methods why do you think "it will be different in the SEC?"VOLvo said:WorkTogetherAgs said:
Problem is, sips have influence over the refs
As an old SEC guy, have you seen ANY evidence the SEC tolerates that kind of crap? There were rumors, likely true, in the late 70s to mid 80s but that kind of thing is obvious on the big stage and destroys a conference.
I don't think the SEC will tolerate it. I don't think reviews make it easy either.
Obviously, I can't predict the future but I can't see Texas getting anything but fined by the conference if they approach SEC referees.
85AustinAg said:
Referees are the least of our worries.
Its the behind the back dealing, back stabbing, and always looking out for #1 with their money and pedigree that they will throw around that is the bigger concern. Pod or division creation, scheduling, bowl assignments, tournament locations, championship guidelines - this is the stuff to be concerned with because it was this kind of one sidedness that drove Nebraska, Colorado, Missouri and A&M out of the Big 12. They'll come in trying to throw their weight around. How that is tolerated by the Alabamas, Floridas, and LSU's will be interesting to watch. Hell if the sips can convince enough of the other SEC members that their way is the best way (whatever that might be) the sips may jump right into the "power" echelon of SEC Athletics. We really have no idea what the SEC brass is thinking and how they may be influenced going forward.
That's the frickin' concern.
You must be young. Too young to remember the SWC nor the formation of the Big XII.OK_Sip said:
So let me see if I've unpacked all this correctly: Texas is a narcissistic bully that only looks out for itself and destroys anything that disagrees with it, i.e., the SWC and the Big 12. They also cheat to ensure success.
- however -
Even though Texas is the big bad jerk bully with the refs in its pocket and bagmen galore out buying recruits, the team is only 78-60 in the last 11 seasons and 52-45 in a conference considered so bad y'all refer to it is the big dumpster fire. In fact, since 1971 Texas has been average to bad in 33 of 50 seasons.
How does a school that average with that little success - only one national championship and 12 conference championships in 50 year - get to run anything?
OK_Sip said:
So let me see if I've unpacked all this correctly: Texas is a narcissistic bully that only looks out for itself and destroys anything that disagrees with it, i.e., the SWC and the Big 12. They also cheat to ensure success.
- however -
Even though Texas is the big bad jerk bully with the refs in its pocket and bagmen galore out buying recruits, the team is only 78-60 in the last 11 seasons and 52-45 in a conference considered so bad y'all refer to it is the big dumpster fire. In fact, since 1971 Texas has been average to bad in 33 of 50 seasons.
How does a school that average with that little success - only one national championship and 12 conference championships in 50 year - get to run anything?
OK_Sip said:
So let me see if I've unpacked all this correctly: Texas is a narcissistic bully that only looks out for itself and destroys anything that disagrees with it, i.e., the SWC and the Big 12. They also cheat to ensure success.
- however -
Even though Texas is the big bad jerk bully with the refs in its pocket and bagmen galore out buying recruits, the team is only 78-60 in the last 11 seasons and 52-45 in a conference considered so bad y'all refer to it is the big dumpster fire. In fact, since 1971 Texas has been average to bad in 33 of 50 seasons.
How does a school that average with that little success - only one national championship and 12 conference championships in 50 year - get to run anything?
OK_Sip said:
Actually I'm 50 and I've been paying attention. I've seen Texas throw its weight around, but I never understood why the other schools let it happen. Arkansas, Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri and Texas A&M all left their respective conferences for greener pastures and blamed Texas on the way out. Yet for most of that time - except for Mack's run from 2001-2009 - Texas was just another middling program.
Yet I keep reading here that Texas was this lying cheating 900 lb gorilla that had unlimited funds and unlimited power. If that's the case, why do they lose so much? Y'all could've stayed in the Big 12, and judging by the posts on this site, played for the conference championship for the last 10 years in a row. Win half of them and you would've been in the BCSNCG or the CFP five times.
Yet somehow and average program with an annoyingly big ego chased you off to the SEC. How?
Charles Alan Wright. He protected tu from the NCAA while siccing them instead on their SWC mates. Beat Texas badly, get put on probation by the NCAA.OK_Sip said:
Actually I'm 50 and I've been paying attention. I've seen Texas throw its weight around, but I never understood why the other schools let it happen. Arkansas, Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri and Texas A&M all left their respective conferences for greener pastures and blamed Texas on the way out. Yet for most of that time - except for Mack's run from 2001-2009 - Texas was just another middling program.
Yet I keep reading here that Texas was this lying cheating 900 lb gorilla that had unlimited funds and unlimited power. If that's the case, why do they lose so much? Y'all could've stayed in the Big 12, and judging by the posts on this site, played for the conference championship for the last 10 years in a row. Win half of them and you would've been in the BCSNCG or the CFP five times.
Yet somehow and average program with an annoyingly big ego chased you off to the SEC. How?