WhitUp
Well-Known Member
I got a feeling Texas doesn't want the big ten, cause they think it may be a bigger help to our schools then it is to them. Which makes sense they allready have more money then anyone else. So a 10 to 15 million dollar bumb prolly makes no difference to them. My buddy is a former Texas baseball player and he says baseball and there other non revenue sports want no part of the big ten(texas baseball is a big deal to texas and big ten baseball sucks) and playing in cold weather + no rivals. Which also makes sense, but if the big ten really does want to move south(which I assume the reasoning is to pickup some southern recruiting talent and getting the big 10 network in Texas). Then why not just offer Texas A&M, the texas blog article says that A&M is resistant to the pac 10 move and is looking at the SEC. A&M are an AAU member and a decent academic school(so I'd think they'd rather join a great academic conf rather then the cest pool that is the SEC). So if we want to get the big ten network in Texas and open up that recruiting base, if texas won't play ball, Why wouldn't we just go after Texas #2????? Also If A&M is in a more powerful conference then UT, then this may make Texas nervous over a power struggle for elite team in Texas. Or at worst make A&M on the same level. Could make UT cave to the big ten like the big east crumble might make ND cave. Plus wouldn't A&M be better then rutgers or Mizz even tv wise???? Just a thought.
Last edited: