Do You Want Oklahoma And Texas To Join The SEC?

[CrimsonNagus]

Yes!

The beginning of the end of the NCAA, bring it on!

 

[Krymsonman]

Undecided at the moment, mainly because Texas doesn't know how to get along with others. Oh, nevermind, make me a NO.

 

[OSUTideFan]

Negative ghostrider, the conference is full.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

aTm vs Texas is one of the worst rivalries in the P5. It’s incredibly one sided. But maybe the break makes it a little interesting. Maybe our Texan Bama fans (@selmaborntidefan and @TexasBama) can point to a time where it was competitive. I briefly lived in Texas and in Big XII country when Nebraska was in it. And I can honestly say the rivalries everyone really talked about were OU-Texas, OU-Nebraska, and Kansas-Mizzou.

More or less it was slightly better than OU-Oklahoma St.

Well......this is a different animal.

You have to remember that Texas absolutely pwned ATM prior to 1975. That's about the time they went coed BUT ALSO that's very close to the time of the 1976 scholarship limitations that were designed to balance things out. Remember - Texas had a COLOSSAL advantage over the Aggies when there were no restrictions because who wanted to go to an all-male campus?

Things also changed when Jackie Sherrill became the Aggies coach in 1982. He took over, well, not a train wreck but a high speed interstate collision. Remember - Texas finished #2 in the AP poll at the end of the 1981 season, right behind Clemson. Sherrill's team - Pitt - finished #2 in the UPI poll. He then got this mammoth offer to come revive the Aggies - and he did, too.

In 1984, Texas was #1 in the country in October. Sherrill's Aggies beat them the next six years, five with Sherrill as the coach.

It was an excellent rivalry in the Sherill years:

Scores starting in 1986
Aggies, 16-3
Aggies, 20-13
Aggies, 28-24
Aggies, 21-10,
Longhorns, 28-27

then it devolved into blowouts.

Here's your parallel:

Texas' REAL rival is Oklahoma just like Alabama's REAL rival was/is/will be Tennessee.
ATM kinda jumped in there sorta like Auburn did when the teams had to play, though I'd rank Auburn well ahead of ATM in competitiveness most years they lose, scintillating moments, and championships.

Since leaving the SWC, the Aggies have ONE conference championship - and that was an absolute fluke when Kansas St was the better team but failed to seal the deal. They lost that game more than ATM won it.

You're Okie State analogy is pretty much dead on.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I'm not a fan of any kind of conference expansion, but I accept its inevitability.

Based on that evolutionary notion, it's better to have those two teams than NOT have them.

 

[TideEngineer08]

The thing about the A&M/Texas rivalry is that it was always a huge game because of the two entities involved, and they hate one another.

No, it's not OU/Texas, but on that note there is always something different about the timing.... The Iron Bowl wouldn't be half the game it is were not for it's timing on the schedule. Put it in October and it's still a huge game but not nearly as apocalyptic as it usually is. Part of that is because when it's the last game, there is finality to it and no way to make up ground if you lose.

Since A&M left the SEC, they've been able to do something with that final weekend by having the LSU game at that time, but it has not come nearly close enough to their old rivals. One time the game goes into 15 overtimes, but other than that, there has been nothing memorable about it. And on the flip side, Texas has had nothing to go on that weekend. I mean... TCU? Texas Tech? Kansas???? It's been a giant dud for them.

So while it's true that Oklahoma is historically more competitive than A&M ever was, and it's true that Texas owned A&M until 1975, you simply cannot replace the end of season drama that is having an instate rivalry.

And on that note here is something to think about. I was looking through the football schedules last night, trying to get a feel for when certain games might be scheduled. Assuming Oklahoma and OK State stop playing one another, and they did not always play on that final weekend anyway, if Texas and Texas A&M start playing that weekend again and all other rivalry games stay where they are, you would have Oklahoma playing LSU the weekend after Thanksgiving. Not too bad. Of course, they could resume playing the LSU/Arkansas game that weekend and then have OU play Missouri. But I prefer it the other way.

 

[Tideflyer]

That guy was terrific in that role. Christoph Waltz. Won two Oscars, two Golden Globes, other accolades. I`d say he`s pretty good1

 

[Padreruf]

The thing about the A&M/Texas rivalry is that it was always a huge game because of the two entities involved, and they hate one another.

No, it's not OU/Texas, but on that note there is always something different about the timing.... The Iron Bowl wouldn't be half the game it is were not for it's timing on the schedule. Put it in October and it's still a huge game but not nearly as apocalyptic as it usually is. Part of that is because when it's the last game, there is finality to it and no way to make up ground if you lose.

Since A&M left the SEC, they've been able to do something with that final weekend by having the LSU game at that time, but it has not come nearly close enough to their old rivals. One time the game goes into 15 overtimes, but other than that, there has been nothing memorable about it. And on the flip side, Texas has had nothing to go on that weekend. I mean... TCU? Texas Tech? Kansas???? It's been a giant dud for them.

So while it's true that Oklahoma is historically more competitive than A&M ever was, and it's true that Texas owned A&M until 1975, you simply cannot replace the end of season drama that is having an instate rivalry.

And on that note here is something to think about. I was looking through the football schedules last night, trying to get a feel for when certain games might be scheduled. Assuming Oklahoma and OK State stop playing one another, and they did not always play on that final weekend anyway, if Texas and Texas A&M start playing that weekend again and all other rivalry games stay where they are, you would have Oklahoma playing LSU the weekend after Thanksgiving. Not too bad. Of course, they could resume playing the LSU/Arkansas game that weekend and then have OU play Missouri. But I prefer it the other way.

The win by A&M with Manziel @ Tuscaloosa meant that they would be a viable rivalry for us going forward. We're on a good winning streak...but they remain a tough out for us. That makes for a good rivalry...

 

[TideEngineer08]

The win by A&M with Manziel @ Tuscaloosa meant that they would be a viable rivalry for us going forward. We're on a good winning streak...but they remain a tough out for us. That makes for a good rivalry...

That would seem to be going away now, with expanded divisions and us likely migrating to the East.

 

[Padreruf]

That would seem to be going away now, with expanded divisions and us likely migrating to the East.

I know...but I still thought it was going to surpass LSU as they continue to fall.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

The thing about the A&M/Texas rivalry is that it was always a huge game because of the two entities involved, and they hate one another.

The other thing there, though, is that ATM DID get it put into the whole system that any conference that took Texas HAS to take ATM (but not the other way). That's being so cognizant of your inferiority as to make someone blush.

No, it's not OU/Texas, but on that note there is always something different about the timing.... The Iron Bowl wouldn't be half the game it is were not for it's timing on the schedule. Put it in October and it's still a huge game but not nearly as apocalyptic as it usually is. Part of that is because when it's the last game, there is finality to it and no way to make up ground if you lose.

This is a fair and accurate point that when the game got competitive changes things, yes.

On the other hand, this game was always the bridesmaid game to Oklahoma-Nebraska in the golden age of TV, too. I think that's more 81's point.

Since A&M left the SEC, they've been able to do something with that final weekend by having the LSU game at that time, but it has not come nearly close enough to their old rivals. One time the game goes into 15 overtimes, but other than that, there has been nothing memorable about it. And on the flip side, Texas has had nothing to go on that weekend. I mean... TCU? Texas Tech? Kansas???? It's been a giant dud for them.

Largely because they've been awful, but I see your point, too.

So while it's true that Oklahoma is historically more competitive than A&M ever was, and it's true that Texas owned A&M until 1975, you simply cannot replace the end of season drama that is having an instate rivalry.

Again, this is the most solid point about this. That and perpetual Texas arrogance on BOTH SIDES of the ball.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

What has always concerned me is the Texas attitude. It's sort of like UGA multiplied 1000x. Those of us who were reading here or on the UT boards in 2009 know what I'm talking about. The following is a conversation, I presume on Finebaum's show, forwarded to me by a new Aggie member. I didn't hear it, so I can't vouch for it, but it rings true...

Will from Austin...

"I'm here in Austin. We get a lot of transplants. They're reaching out and saying things like this isn't going to be Texas running the show. Texas is just going to be one, one of many. They won't be the alpha dog. And I still think Texas is going to have, maybe don't get multiple seats at the table, but I still think they sit at the head of the table in the SEC. I think the SEC runs through Austin now. And we'll see if there's now an SEC championship game in Dallas.This is a program that just won the Athletic Director's Cup, first program not named Stanford to win it in more than a decade, this is a program that runs things... "

Paul : "Hey Will, thank you very much. I'm going to let that one marinate for a minute. The SEC now runs through Austin, Texas. Hey, thank you the call and your humility.... and that's what we have to look forward to here on the SEC network for the next 50 to 100 years."

 

[selmaborntidefan]

What has always concerned me is the Texas attitude. It's sort of like UGA multiplied 1000x. Those of us who were reading here or on the UT boards in 2009 know what I'm talking about. The following is a conversation, I presume on Finebaum's show, forwarded to me by a new Aggie member. I didn't hear it, so I can't vouch for it, but it rings true...

This is 99.9% of the Texas fans on the planet. Although my Longhorn bud tends to be more sober than most (he has never to my knowledge used the Colt excuse, and he even said prior to that game that if it wasn't his own team, he'd bet on us to cover and win).

But there is an absolute "we are the masters of the universe" mentality that, pardon the redundancy, is universal with these people. A huge number of the Aggies have it, too. If you saw "The Junction Boys" film, I can't vouch for the accuracy, but I have zero doubt that Coach Bryant would have been exactly as Tom Berenger was in that movie towards the locals trying to run his program plus that whole "we're millionaire donors and my kid should be playing."

That whole mentality - plus a complete lack of any grounding in reality - is why they absolutely knew that we had no chance at keeping Saban "because we can pay him more than you can."

What's Texas gonna do? Come in and say, "If we don't get our way, we're leaving?"

They might ought to remember that that whole mentality they have of "you ain't the boss of us" is pretty universal among Southerners, not just them. It's just Southerners who aren't wealthy don't try to act like miniature JR Ewings.

"The SEC runs through Austin?" More like the SEC runs right over Austin and put up exit ramps one mile apart.

 

[BamaMoon]

I'm still uncertain how Texas will run the SEC. Some people in Texas (Aggie fans) already think Bama "runs the SEC." Auburn folks think that...probably lots of folks from every SEC fanbase.

Why would they think that? Because we win more than anybody else? Because the SEC headquarters are in B'ham? Because of CNS?

In what way would Texas suddenly "run the SEC" if they become a member? Sure, there's more money in Texas than most industrialized nations around the world, but unless Sanky is going to be bought by Texas Billionaires, how is this going to happen?

I guess the real question is "Do we trust Sanky?"

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I'll start to worry when we sacrifice that ref advantage if they move the SEC offices to Austin.

 

[CoolBreeze]

I'm still uncertain how Texas will run the SEC. Some people in Texas (Aggie fans) already think Bama "runs the SEC." Auburn folks think that...probably lots of folks from every SEC fanbase.

Why would they think that? Because we win more than anybody else? Because the SEC headquarters are in B'ham? Because of CNS?

In what way would Texas suddenly "run the SEC" if they become a member? Sure, there's more money in Texas than most industrialized nations around the world, but unless Sanky is going to be bought by Texas Billionaires, how is this going to happen?

I guess the real question is "Do we trust Sanky?"

The answer is obvious. Because WE (BAMA) are everyone's rival because we are the top dog. We are talking rivalries in this thread but BAMA against EVERYONE is a rivalry game. We are everyone's biggest game of the year and that now includes OU and Texas when it is their turn for a beat down.

 

[TideEngineer08]

I think we need to really take a deeper look at what exactly happened in the SWC/Big 12 with Texas.

All of these issues were voted on. The field held the power - not Texas. All they had to do was vote together, but they never would. The issue of the conference network in the Big 12... Texas A&M, Nebraska, and Oklahoma all voted against it. Why did A&M and Nebraska do that? I'll tell you why. Because just like Texas, they were full of themselves, and also wanted full rights to their 3rd tier properties. The difference between them and Texas was that Texas had the guts and wherewithal to go ahead and start its own network. Nothing in the bylaws prevented Nebraska and A&M from doing this as well.

Nebraska was always outvoted on issues whenever the Big 12 first formed. Texas was the beneficiary of that. But why did that happen? Could it be because the other old Big 8 teams hated Nebraska because it always seemed to get its way in the old Big 8?

I don't feel a bit of sympathy for these programs that have whined so hard over Texas. They were in the predicaments they were because the allowed it. This is also why I'm not concerned over Texas "running" the SEC. It's not going to happen. Oh, their fans are blustering on Finebaum and their message boards? Have any of you heard some of the nonsense coming from Georgia fans on Finebaum? And yet what happens on the field? Yeah... I'm not worried.

 

[BamaMoon]

I think we need to really take a deeper look at what exactly happened in the SWC/Big 12 with Texas.

All of these issues were voted on. The field held the power - not Texas. All they had to do was vote together, but they never would. The issue of the conference network in the Big 12... Texas A&M, Nebraska, and Oklahoma all voted against it. Why did A&M and Nebraska do that? I'll tell you why. Because just like Texas, they were full of themselves, and also wanted full rights to their 3rd tier properties. The difference between them and Texas was that Texas had the guts and wherewithal to go ahead and start its own network. Nothing in the bylaws prevented Nebraska and A&M from doing this as well.

Nebraska was always outvoted on issues whenever the Big 12 first formed. Texas was the beneficiary of that. But why did that happen? Could it be because the other old Big 8 teams hated Nebraska because it always seemed to get its way in the old Big 8?

I don't feel a bit of sympathy for these programs that have whined so hard over Texas. They were in the predicaments they were because the allowed it. This is also why I'm not concerned over Texas "running" the SEC. It's not going to happen. Oh, their fans are blustering on Finebaum and their message boards? Have any of you heard some of the nonsense coming from Georgia fans on Finebaum? And yet what happens on the field? Yeah... I'm not worried.

Precisely, a Texas millionaire and a Texas minion all think the same way about "Texas," but if you are a "member" of the SEC you are just one school of 14 or 16 or whatever it'll be.

And yes, talk is cheap. But the competition is settled on the field.

 

[TideEngineer08]

Precisely, a Texas millionaire and a Texas minion all think the same way about "Texas," but if you are a "member" of the SEC you are just one school of 14 or 16 or whatever it'll be.

And yes, talk is cheap. But the competition is settled on the field.

The problem in the old Big 8, the SWC, and then the Big 12 was that there was never any sort of parity. The SEC, from its creation, has always been an ultra-competitive league. A brotherhood of sorts formed from that. We hate one another, yes, but almost always without fail we will vote together on the issues. When there is contention, debate is held, and one side yields and we move on with life.

Texas, Nebraska, and Oklahoma could always run roughshod over their leagues because there was never anyone capable of standing up and saying, wait just a second, the rest of us don't like that. They all cowered down in fear. They didn't have to do this, but perception is reality. If Texas some day threatens to leave the SEC because its not getting its way over something, do any of you think any of the other programs will care? Hell, the Big Ten as much as told Nebraska last year to not let the door hit them on the way out of the league if they wanted to buck against the tide.

 

[BamaMoon]

The problem in the old Big 8, the SWC, and then the Big 12 was that there was never any sort of parity. The SEC, from its creation, has always been an ultra-competitive league. A brotherhood of sorts formed from that. We hate one another, yes, but almost always without fail we will vote together on the issues. When there is contention, debate is held, and one side yields and we move on with life.

Texas, Nebraska, and Oklahoma could always run roughshod over their leagues because there was never anyone capable of standing up and saying, wait just a second, the rest of us don't like that. They all cowered down in fear. They didn't have to do this, but perception is reality. If Texas some day threatens to leave the SEC because its not getting its way over something, do any of you think any of the other programs will care? Hell, the Big Ten as much as told Nebraska last year to not let the door hit them on the way out of the league if they wanted to buck against the tide.

Yep that same door that opens to let you in, swings the other way to let you out.