Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: NCAA Tournament Bubble Watch

How Big Ten Expansion Could Force the Texas Longhorns to Join the SEC

I’ve generally stayed out of the conference expansion conversation except for saying that I want Clemson in the SEC East (both to renew the rivalry and, with any luck, to boost future book sales), but the discussion is just getting good now that the openness of Colorado, Missouri, and Nebraska to outside overtures makes it quite possible that the toppling dominoes of conference expansion in the 2010s could do to the Big 12 what the toppling dominoes of conference expansion in the 1990s did to the Southwest Conference; viz., bring about its demise.

This makes things more interesting because, frankly, the SEC is even less affected by the Pac-10 moving another state or two inland or by the Big Ten raiding the Big East than the SEC was by, well, the ACC raiding the Big East. The addition of Boston College, Miami, and Virginia Tech to the league with which our conference partially shares a geographic footprint affected our draw in the 2006 Chick-fil-A Bowl, but, otherwise, the impact on the league the Bulldogs call home has been minimal.

The breakup of the Big 12, however, would be a horse of a different color. The prize program in all of this, of course, is not Notre Dame (which the Big Ten alone covets; even the Big East is prepared to toss the Irish overboard in order to keep Pitt, Rutgers, and Syracuse in the fold), but Texas. I tend to trust Peter Bean’s flat declaration of the Longhorns’ disinterest in the SEC more than I trust the self-serving statements of a retired athletics administrator (particularly when those comments are quoted by league gadfly Paul Finebaum), but the simple reality is that, academic compatibility aside, distance makes membership in the Big Ten virtually impossible for Texas and the ‘Horns ain’t going noplace without the Aggies.

With all due respect to the institution whose football team lost to the ‘Dawgs in last year’s Independence Bowl, the Big Ten’s interest in adding Texas A&M to its membership isn’t slim to none, it’s nil to negative. I mean no offense by that assertion; in fact, I’m fairly certain a Big Ten fan’s reaction to the prospect of extending an offer of admission to the Aggies would be to turn his nose even farther up in the air, sniff theatrically, and say, "Texas A&M is like an SEC school." In other words, Aggie fans, I’m not insulting y’all; I’m saying they look down on us.

Yes, Texas A&M is a member of the hoity-toity Association of American Universities, but the Aggies were admitted in 2001. That makes them strictly nouveau riche in the eyes of the likes of Illinois (admitted 1908), Indiana (1909), Iowa (1909), Michigan (1900), Michigan State (1964), Minnesota (1908), Northwestern (1917), Ohio State (1916), Penn State (1958), Purdue (1958), Wisconsin (1900), and, by the Big Ten’s covetous and self-aggrandizing lights, Texas (1929). Personally, I don’t think they have any business being so high and mighty; there is, after all, a reason why this parody was set in Indiana. Even so, though, they can’t get Texas without Texas A&M, they don’t want Texas A&M, and, therefore, they ain’t getting Texas. Fair or unfair, that’s the way it is.

If the Big Ten bulks up to more than twelve teams, though, Mike Slive has made it clear that the SEC will remain at the forefront of college football in response. That probably means keeping up with the Joneses, which may or may not be a good idea; the league may need its mother to ask it, "If the Big Ten jumped off of the Empire State Building . . . ?" Nevertheless, a 16-team Big Ten likely will lead to a 16-team SEC, and a 16-team SEC contains room for the Aggies and the Longhorns in the West while accommodating the Seminoles and the Tigers (of the Palmetto State variety) in the East. (Don’t give me any of that Miami nonsense; Coral Gables is way the heck on down there, there’s nothing remotely culturally Southern about the institution or its location, the ‘Canes likely are a spent volcano, and "The U" is the last thing the conference needs for its image.)

Personally, I don’t know that I buy any of this; I’m not convinced that the Big Ten is really looking to do anything more radical than admit Notre Dame as its twelfth team, and I’m entirely convinced that the Big 12, the Pac-10, and the SEC will stand pat unless the Big Ten starts the line of dominoes toppling. I’d say Boise State jumping from the WAC to the Mountain West is far and away the most likely conference expansion scenario, and that move wouldn’t light the fuse for the rest of college football. If the Big Ten truly intends to initiate the era of the superconference, though, it isn’t hard to see how the Big 12 (itself a hybrid league cobbled together from the Big Eight and the pieces of the Southwest Conference) could be ripped apart and cannibalized for spare parts.

If that happens, the Lone Star State power brokers’ maternalistic insistence that the crown jewel of the republic’s higher education system take its little brother with it when it goes out to play may leave the Longhorns without a place to fall in either of their preferred destinations. Left without an inroad into one of the two conferences with automatic Rose Bowl bids, Texas could be compelled to do what it does not want to do.

Given the choice, the University of Texas would rather be affiliated with the Big Ten, the Big 12, or the Pac-10 than the SEC. The day may be approaching when all three of those options are unavailable, and, if that day arrives, there’s no question which will prove to be the most attractive alternative. Membership in the ACC, the Big East, or a conference currently lacking an automatic BCS bid would be financially, geographically, and practically untenable, and choosing to chart a course through the waters of athletic independence in the 21st century would be fraught with peril, particularly if Notre Dame enters the Big Ten and leaves Texas without a chair when the music stops.

At that point, the only option left would be to hook the ‘Horns to the Southeastern Conference; the lure of lucre would be too great after the sweetheart deal of the Big 12’s unbalanced revenue-sharing model evaporated and the Aggies’ obligatory inclusion proved to be a dealbreaker for the Big Ten. Texas may not want to join the SEC, and the SEC may not want Texas A&M to join, but you can’t always get what you want, and all concerned just might find they’re getting what they need. You should be surprised, but you should not be shocked, if Will Muschamp winds up becoming an SEC head coach without having to change ZIP codes.

Go ‘Dawgs!

Comment 22 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Maybe this has already been considered and dismissed by people more knowledgeable than me, but is there any possibility that Texas just sits tight, waits for the smoke to clear, and then says “Screw it” and goes independent? They’d have to work out a good TV deal, but if any school in the country could conceivably survive as an independent, it would be Texas. I mean, the reason everybody’s pining over them is because they’re already swimming in money, right?

It’s probably not going to happen, but I hadn’t seen it suggested anywhere before. I suppose conferences really are where the money is if you don’t have a traditional tie to independence (like that one school in Indiana that everyone keeps telling me was good at football once).

Leaving insightful football commentary and analysis to other people since 2006.

by wwcmrd? on May 1, 2010 4:38 PM EDT reply actions  

You're right on both counts . . .

. . . if anyone could do it, Texas could, but the fact that Notre Dame is the last major independent left (and the Irish’s “major” status is more a function of name recognition and the NBC contract than actual achievement at this point) indicates how hard it is to survive in today’s college football world without a league affiliation. Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Penn State, Pitt, South Carolina, et al., all eschewed independence when push came to shove, and the Longhorns do not have a history of athletic independence upon which to draw. Texas’s tradition and experience of independence are as a republic, not as a sports program.

To point out just one difficulty, how many teams outside of College Station or Norman would agree to schedule an annual out-of-conference contest against Texas? Lots of teams would do home-and-homes, but scheduling would be a challenge, and there’s only so much money out there to provide college football television contracts, without which even Texas couldn’t survive as an independent. After all, if NBC suddenly decided to get out of the college football business at sunrise on Tuesday, Notre Dame would be a member of the Big Ten by sundown on Thursday at the latest.

Go 'Dawgs!

by T Kyle King on May 1, 2010 5:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

Texas A&M is NO problem for the Big Ten

As someone that has been following the Big Ten expansion issues closely, A&M is 110% not going to be the issue for the Big Ten or Pac-10, for that matter. In terms of academic standards, A&M is markedly better than Nebraska and Missouri, both of whom are looking very likely as future Big Ten schools. A&M has a huge fan base that’s in the top 20 in the country in athletic department revenue. If Texas tells the Big Ten that it will join only if Texas A&M comes along, then the Big Ten will send over the papers to sign immediately.

The REAL problem is Texas Tech. That’s a school that neither the Big Ten or Pac-10 would touch with a million foot pole and is going to be the real recipient of political protection in the state of Texas. A&M’s fan base means that it will land in a nice BCS conference no matter what happens to the Big XII. Texas Tech, though, is a much different story. They could easily be left out of the BCS carousel if Texas and Texas A&M leave the Big XII and that’s going to be unacceptable for the large number of political supporters that Tech has in the state legislature.

So, the question for any conference that wants Texas is NOT about whether they’d be willing to take A&M (which all of them would). It’s whether they’d be willing to take Texas, Texas A&M AND Texas Tech.

by Frank the Tank on May 1, 2010 4:59 PM EDT reply actions  

Maybe . . .

. . . but, the last time this came up, the SEC clearly wanted no part of Texas A&M. Texas might not have joined, anyway, but the Aggies were the dealbreaker from the SEC’s point of view, and I have yet to see any Big Ten expansion scenario in which Texas A&M was considered as a serious contender.

I think you’re underestimating the intellectual arrogance of Jim Delany and his coevals. I agree that Texas A&M’s academics are in line with the Big Ten’s; A&M ranks 22nd among national public universities, tied with Minnesota and Purdue (and one notch behind Georgia), but the perception of the Aggies as a rural Southern agricultural college among the urban Midwestern liberal arts institutions of the Big Ten would make A&M every bit as much of a cultural incongruity as BYU in the Pac-10. I agree that the Big Ten shouldn’t be so full of itself, but I believe it’s more than a bit naive to think it isn’t.

Go 'Dawgs!

by T Kyle King on May 1, 2010 5:10 PM EDT up reply actions  

But what about OU?

I don’t think Texas Tech really has that many supporters in the Texas legislature. The Aggies do currently hold the governorship, but since we don’t have a law school we also actually have very little support in the legislature. As a side note, that is one reason the t-sips(Aggie term for the horns) have come to such power and money.
Another question is, in your scenario what happens to OU and OSU?

I think the Big 12 south can just shove off most or all of the North and form it’s own conference. We keep the OK schools and take in TCU and UH. They are stand outs at their level and with better conference prestige and help could grow their programs. The question would be if they prefer to be big fish in a little pond or little to medium fish in a big pond.

And on a personal note, thanks for defending us Kyle. I think most other schools look down at us Aggies, but we’re use to it. It might have been the whole cloning sheep thing that didn’t help our farmer image.

by AggieGirl on May 1, 2010 6:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

Why FSU and Clemson?...

financially, shouldn’t we go after a different revenue stream for a TV deal? Why not Charlotte, snagging North Carolina and Duke (Vandy needs a friend).

by Mr. Sanchez on May 2, 2010 10:37 AM EDT reply actions  

You're probably right . . .

. . . assuming it comes to pass, of course.

Actually, it would disadvantage Georgia to bring in Florida State and Clemson, because then Florida’s and South Carolina’s in-state rivals would be conference games, leaving us as the only SEC school with a legitimate in-state non-conference rival. (No, I’m not counting Louisville, Memphis, or Tulane!)

Go 'Dawgs!

by T Kyle King on May 2, 2010 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

Memphis and Tulane I can see not counting

But Louisville is another matter. Actually in a BCS conference, and, you know, actually wins a non-trivial percentage of games in the rivalry in major sports and has actual fans.

Maybe it’s just a Big East guy talking, but I think if Big Ten super-sized expansion blows up the Big East, you guys should grab WVU & Louisville, which fit better in the SEC than they would in the ACC anyway.

by drothgery on May 2, 2010 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions  

You guys all realize, of course...

… that the fact that you’re not even mentioning Georgia Tech as a possible SEC expansion candidate just proves how incredibly obsessed you are with them.

by vineyarddawg on May 2, 2010 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

Or our complete understanding of the situation...

such as Georgia Tech is dissimilar from the mostly large, liberal arts style, state school of the SEC, adds 0 TV since we already own the Atlanta TV market anyway with the current crop of schools, and the bad blood over their leaving the conference last time.

by Mr. Sanchez on May 3, 2010 8:07 AM EDT up reply actions  

The NC schools and Notre Dame

are the only cases where I can see schools maintaining a financially insane conference affiliation (or lack thereof, in ND’s case) despite a better offer. UNC, Duke, NC State, and Wake are going to stay in the ACC as long as there is an ACC, I think. Probably the Virginia schools, too, for all that VT is a relative newbie to the ACC.

by drothgery on May 2, 2010 2:09 PM EDT up reply actions  

Well Put

You put this very well. Wake, Duke, UNC, NC State and UVA are not going anywhere unless they all go. VT is another story but the way the Virginia politico fought to get VT into the ACC I could see them being loyal too although I wouldn’t expect it.

http://inthebleachers.net

by InTheBleachers on May 3, 2010 6:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

Expand Big 12 or Texas & OK can form their own conference...

No need to run to SEC or any big 10 country…

The Big 12 can add SMU & TCU…

This would have the potential to get 2 Red River Shootouts each season !!!

With one of them being the equivalent of a national championship each season.

by webexek on May 3, 2010 2:31 PM EDT reply actions  

A&M

Not an Aggie fan, but if I were starting a brand new conference from scratch, I’d take TAM before I’d take Arkansas, Ole Miss, MSU, Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Auburn,South Carolina from the SEC Conference. I’m not sure the people over in our brother states to the east of us realize what a really good University TAM is…it has a very good academic rating, a huge/loyal/vociferous alumni/fan base, a big University (48,000 Plus students), a huge endowment (over $6 billion),a 75000 Plus seat stadium they fill up even though the football team is a little on the down side, a large athletic department budget,close to several large tv markets (Houston, Dallas/Ft Worth,Austin,San Antonio),membership in the AAU, ranked #61 in the US News&World (#179 in the World University Ranking),competitive in several sports……put that all together and that seems pretty impressive to me. Impressive enough that only Florida actually could match them…Although GA,Alabama,LSu have had better football teams in recent years, TAM has a hot bed of football in their back yard and only need the right coach, a determination to improve to be right up there with the big boys.

This really does make me sound like an Aggie fan, but I most definitely am not. Matter of fact, I kinda detest them, but facts are facts and I believe TAM is almost as good a catch is Texas.

by Ken Mills on May 3, 2010 3:26 PM EDT reply actions  

aTm football is "a little on the down side?"

That’s kind of like saying Georgia athletics teams have had “a little bit of bad luck” over the past couple of years.

Even so, I agree with your point, Ken.

by vineyarddawg on May 3, 2010 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

I agree with your overall point, Ken . . .

. . . but I’m not sure why you compared Texas A&M to members of the SEC when defending a team I defended from the Big Ten; a more apt comparison would be to rate the Aggies against their Midwestern brethren.

Go 'Dawgs!

by T Kyle King on May 3, 2010 7:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

Texas

Anyone that believes Texas could not leave the Big 12 without TAM and Tech better change their brand of sniffing glue. Texas legislature can not really tell Texas whether or not they can change conferences…all they can do is threaten to cut off funding…but, that would be political suicide for those politicians that threatened that and actually tried to do it. Texas alumnus is the 800 pound gorilla…..there might be some politicians in key positions that are alumni of TAM and TT, but overall Texas alumni have much more clout. And, a determined Texas would be able to go anywhere they wanted. So, I believe if it ever comes down to the Big 12 dissolving and Texas is threatened to be without a home and needed to go to the BIG 10 without TAM or TT, they’d just go without a pretty please or thank you. And, you’d see lynchings and tar/feathering for any politician that tried to do harm to the Longhorns.

by Ken Mills on May 3, 2010 3:59 PM EDT reply actions  

No need to come all the way to Georgia to tell us to change our brand of sniffing glue

The Austin American-Statesman’s Kirk Bohls agrees with me:

Texas will never leave for a destination without Texas A&M, and should more than two schools leave the Big 12 for other conferences, I’m convinced the Longhorns and Aggies would work toward joining the SEC or perhaps try a far-flung, Pac-10 arrangement of 16 teams.

Go 'Dawgs!

by T Kyle King on May 3, 2010 7:34 PM EDT up reply actions  

Kirk Bohls

You agree with Kirk Bohls?…that proves my case. Most casual followers of sports know more about sports than Kirk Bohls…he is one of my least liked and respected sports columnist anywhere…I certainly wouldn’t quote him on any topic.

And, if you will reread my comment, I did not say that Texas is just going to run off, get wild, and arbitrarily leave TAM and TT behind. I said that if it appears that Texas is going to be without a home and the only way that the B10 will take them, then TAM and TT are history….Texas screwed TCU, SMU, RICE, UH when the Big 12 was formed, and they’d do it again if they had to and it was in their interest…I am a Texas fan, but I know what they did…I saw what they did…And, the schools that they had been associated with for 80 years and were friends, family, and neighbors with was thrown under the bus so that the Big 12 could be formed and to a large part none of them has fully recovered from the dissolution of the SWC and being left behind…so, please don’t try to tell me that Texas WILL NEVER leave TAM or TT behind cause I know that’s not so….and, if you believe that it is, then like I said ,you need to change your brand of sniffing glue.

by Ken Mills on May 3, 2010 7:49 PM EDT reply actions  

Expansion

I’ll unload my bias up front as a Tech fan, and I am under no illusions….Tech must tie themselves to Texas and hope UT wants to go to the Pac 10. ATM will go whichever way Texas goes, but I don’t think UT is interested in getting into the SEC at all. That said, no one university has enough political clout to do anything alone, but you can bet there are plenty of back-room discussions going on right now. With the push toward more Tier 1 U’s in Texas, i believe UT and ATM have interest in bringing Tech along, and Tech has plenty of teeth politically. A UT grad said it best , and I’m paraphrasing, but Kent Hance will set the state on fire before he lets UT and ATM roll off alone.

by jdubmed on May 5, 2010 9:41 PM EDT reply actions  

OU and OSU

I know you like FSU and Clemson but alot of people are pointing to UT, A&M, OU and OSU. OU has a national following and OSU has new facilities and a revived budget thanks to TBP.

How will this size of conferences affect scheduling? Hopefully more conference games which, of course, means more meaningful games… Go Pokes!

by Monty Brant on May 9, 2010 8:25 PM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation community devoted to the Georgia Bulldogs.

Managers

Beard_47_series_wins_and_42_points_in_2007_small T Kyle King

017oa_small MaconDawg

Editors

Redstage_small DavetheDawg

Whistling_past_small NCT

434477_small vineyarddawg

Layfield_logo_small RedCrake

Hey-why-so-serious_small tankertoad

Podunkdawg_as_a_child_small podunkdawg

Dawggone_small Ludakit

Authors

28488_443996218101_804558101_5903592_3665419_n_small Spears

Small hailtogeorgia

Killface_small Mr. Sanchez

50questions-accountant_small The Quincy Carter of Accountants