So, Austin's athletic budget is in the range in spite of their football record much like A&M's athletic budget would be in that range in spite of our football record.

Are the Horns down right now? For sure... Are we doing much better than them? For sure...
Has it always been that way? Naw....

Yeah, it's funny burn for sure, and I'd bet (a lot) that TCU's athletic budget is nowhere near that amount.

Hawk2007 said:

---

So, Austin's athletic budget is in the range in spite of their football record much like A&M's athletic budget would be in that range in spite of our football record.

Are the Horns down right now? For sure... Are we doing much better than them? For sure...
Has it always been that way? Naw....

Yeah, it's funny burn for sure, and I'd bet (a lot) that TCU's athletic budget is nowhere near that amount.

---

That's the point. TCU does so much better with fewer resources. They are efficient and productive.

Sips? Not so much.

Here's the part I still don't understand about Texas's motives.

Why?

Their athletic department is already first in revenue(allegedly), and they weren't winning conference championships and playoff games.

So why go to the SEC? They'll still be first in revenue, and have a much tougher road in all sports, except probably basketball.

They were not only the biggest fish in the B12, but their revenue was the most in the NCAA. So they still will have the highest revenue, but now they'll be just another fish in the SEC.

And I still don't understand why the rank and file schools in the SEC are going for this either. They are members of the most well funded athletic conference, but now in the rare year those teams have a really solid football team, they have two more major hurdles to climb over. So the Ms States, Kentucky and Auburn get more money, but so does their immediate competition, so they aren't going to improve their relative position with everyone else.

Based on the title I thought this thread would be about a TCU chick with an STD.

Iowaggie said:

---

Here's the part I still don't understand about Texas's motives.

Why?

Their athletic department is already first in revenue(allegedly), and they weren't winning conference championships and playoff games.

So why go to the SEC? They'll still be first in revenue, and have a much tougher road in all sports, except probably basketball.

They were not only the biggest fish in the B12, but their revenue was the most in the NCAA. So they still will have the highest revenue, but now they'll be just another fish in the SEC.

And I still don't understand why the rank and file schools in the SEC are going for this either. They are members of the most well funded athletic conference, but now in the rare year those teams have a really solid football team, they have two more major hurdles to climb over. So the Ms States, Kentucky and Auburn get more money, but so does their immediate competition, so they aren't going to improve their relative position with everyone else.

---

The reason is simple, to change the narrative and stop A&M. We really are close to a national title. And they know this.

Anyone remember the tcu showgirl video a few years ago?

Iowaggie said:

---

Here's the part I still don't understand about Texas's motives.

Why?

Their athletic department is already first in revenue(allegedly), and they weren't winning conference championships and playoff games.

So why go to the SEC? They'll still be first in revenue, and have a much tougher road in all sports, except probably basketball.

They were not only the biggest fish in the B12, but their revenue was the most in the NCAA. So they still will have the highest revenue, but now they'll be just another fish in the SEC.

And I still don't understand why the rank and file schools in the SEC are going for this either. They are members of the most well funded athletic conference, but now in the rare year those teams have a really solid football team, they have two more major hurdles to climb over. So the Ms States, Kentucky and Auburn get more money, but so does their immediate competition, so they aren't going to improve their relative position with everyone else.

---

I listened to the tu president during the hearing. He stated that there were numerous reasons that tu wanted to leave. However, notable answers brought up were:

1. SEC was more stable than BDF.

2. more marquee games.

Iowaggie said:

---

Here's the part I still don't understand about Texas's motives.

Why?

Their athletic department is already first in revenue(allegedly), and they weren't winning conference championships and playoff games.

So why go to the SEC? They'll still be first in revenue, and have a much tougher road in all sports, except probably basketball.

They were not only the biggest fish in the B12, but their revenue was the most in the NCAA. So they still will have the highest revenue, but now they'll be just another fish in the SEC.

And I still don't understand why the rank and file schools in the SEC are going for this either. They are members of the most well funded athletic conference, but now in the rare year those teams have a really solid football team, they have two more major hurdles to climb over. So the Ms States, Kentucky and Auburn get more money, but so does their immediate competition, so they aren't going to improve their relative position with everyone else.

---

Because A&M thriving has been costing them in recruiting.

Or just maybe their expenses are so high they need the extra cash.

Depending on how you count?
WTF does that even mean??? Lol

Texagtrojan said:

---

Iowaggie said:

---

Here's the part I still don't understand about Texas's motives.

Why?

Their athletic department is already first in revenue(allegedly), and they weren't winning conference championships and playoff games.

So why go to the SEC? They'll still be first in revenue, and have a much tougher road in all sports, except probably basketball.

They were not only the biggest fish in the B12, but their revenue was the most in the NCAA. So they still will have the highest revenue, but now they'll be just another fish in the SEC.

And I still don't understand why the rank and file schools in the SEC are going for this either. They are members of the most well funded athletic conference, but now in the rare year those teams have a really solid football team, they have two more major hurdles to climb over. So the Ms States, Kentucky and Auburn get more money, but so does their immediate competition, so they aren't going to improve their relative position with everyone else.

---

Because A&M thriving has been costing them in recruiting.

---

This was everything. It was the only move that could put them on equal ground with A&M and they couldn't deal with us having a huge recruiting advantage over them.

What they didn't know was that we will still have a huge recruiting advantage over them in our head coach.

Awesome!!!!

suburban cowboy said:

---

Her daughter is a smokeshow

---

I know this certainly to be true

suburban cowboy said:

---

Her daughter is a smokeshow

---

This comment is as useless as the user without pics

Must be played at tcu football games, even after 2025.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

suburban cowboy said:

---

Her daughter is a smokeshow

---

This comment is as useless as the user without pics

---

Howdy.

I like her blazer she could take over for flo

Champ Bailey said:

---

Senator Lois Kolkhorst (a TCU alum): "What's your athletic budget?"

UT President Jay Hartzell: "Probably $220-225."

...Kolkhorst: "And that's without a winning football team... 3-7 against the Horned Frogs." pic.twitter.com/rcJawSpr06

— Mike Leslie (@MikeLeslieWFAA) August 3, 2021

---

What the Horned Frog senator did to the t.u. president is what the youngsters (millennials) and the kids (Gen-Zers) nowadays call, "flexing"...

I would vote for her if she ran for Governor... That was awesome

Iowaggie said:

---

Here's the part I still don't understand about Texas's motives.

Why?

Their athletic department is already first in revenue(allegedly), and they weren't winning conference championships and playoff games.

So why go to the SEC? They'll still be first in revenue, and have a much tougher road in all sports, except probably basketball.

They were not only the biggest fish in the B12, but their revenue was the most in the NCAA. So they still will have the highest revenue, but now they'll be just another fish in the SEC.

And I still don't understand why the rank and file schools in the SEC are going for this either. They are members of the most well funded athletic conference, but now in the rare year those teams have a really solid football team, they have two more major hurdles to climb over. So the Ms States, Kentucky and Auburn get more money, but so does their immediate competition, so they aren't going to improve their relative position with everyone else.

---

Schools with lower revenues overall will get much closer to parity in the SEC if everybody gains an extra $20m, at least as a %. Also, this gives them all a leg up on everybody else who is not in the SEC.

Look at it this way:

Ole Miss: 108m + 20m = 128m
Clemson: 133m + nada = 133m
Arkansas 137m +20m = 157m

Ole Miss is still quite a bit behind Arkansas, but they're now at 82% instead of 79% of Arkansas' revenues. Plus, they're now almost equal with Clemson, who has proven that it doesn't take an astronomical revenue stream to win a bunch of titles.

Additionally, we become that much more desirable as a destination for any school that is serious about football and wonders if their conference is the best place to be.

Clemson and Fl State may or may not be sending out feelers. tOSU is very concerned. USC has wandering eyes. Penn State? Notre Dame? Michigan? Any of the b1g schools joining us would be a seismic shift in the college football power structure.

It's possible, perhaps even likely, that the future structure of major college football is 2-4 SuperConferences. However, it's also possible that all the schools that are really serious about fooball join 1 conference for football and remain in a regional conference for everything else. If that were to happen, I'd much rather that 1 conference be the SEC than the b1g.