Texas, the Big Ten, and the future

SteveDeace

Well-Known Member
Note: this was originally written for a Michigan blog site

Mark it down: either Texas will join the Big Ten or join Notre Dame as an independent in 2015 when the new BCS contract expires.

I’ve covered the Big 12 since 2000, and the league is a joke. It’s essentially become the Texas-Oklahoma all-sports conference. All other schools, especially given Nebraska football’s lost luster in the last decade, are simply feeding fodder for the Sooners and – especially – the Longhorns.

For goodness sakes, you’re talking about a conference that in 2007 lost its commissioner to the Big Ten Network. Not the Big Ten, the Big Ten Network. He’s now the deputy commissioner of the Pac-10. The current Big 12 commissioner was promoted from within after a “national search.†Let’s face it, most of the time when you promote from within after a “national search†it’s because you couldn’t get anyone else you really wanted to take the job.

That’s why you’re seeing Missouri and Nebraska publicly campaign to join the Big Ten, and the Big Ten’s expansion plans could be over tomorrow if they called those two schools and somebody from the Big East (Syracuse, Rutgers, or Pittsburgh).

So why hasn’t the Big Ten made the call?

Because at this point it has bigger fish to fry and nothing’s bigger than Texas. The Big 12 as we’ve known it is about to collapse. It’s already lost numerous wrestling and baseball programs, and hockey isn’t a revenue sport in the region like it is at several schools in the Big Ten. It doesn’t have the media demographics to generate a new revenue stream like the Big Ten has with its own network, and the major markets it does have outside of the Lone Star State – like Denver and the I-70 corridor – are tired of watching the old SWC schools getting first dibs on what spoils it does have.

Now that the Big Ten is expanding, the Pac-10 will as well, for sure with Colorado and its 12th team is likely to be Utah, BYU, or TCU. The Buffaloes will say yes the minute the Pac-10 makes the call—guaranteed. The Big 12 isn’t a family like the Big Ten is, with real revenue sharing, for example. It’s more like a marriage of convenience and a family reunion of in-laws you don’t like. As soon as you can get out of it with a better offer you will.

And the better offers are coming.

The reason Texas will look much more seriously at the Big Ten than you might think is because the Big 12 as we’ve known it is about to go away, and since Texas has the most to gain from the Big 12’s current construction it therefore has the most to lose from its future deconstruction. By allowing Colorado, Nebraska, and Missouri to bolt the conference Texas will be left in a largely regional league and lose its national identity over the long-term. This is exactly what happened to Texas in the old SWC. It’s just that most folks on message boards are too young to remember the Fred Akers, David McWilliams, and John Mackovic eras in Austin.

This is why Texas is currently exploring its own statewide television network, which the current Big 12 television contract doesn’t look too kindly at but you know they’ll make an exception for Texas anyway. This is also why Texas will join the Big Ten on its own terms before Missouri and/or Nebraska do, or will take its ball and completely go home by joining Notre Dame as an independent.

If Texas was ever going to make that kind of bold move now would be the time. Its name cache and logo have never been more popular nationally, and it has the built-in recruiting base combined with population centers to make it happen. In fact, it’s probably the only publicly-funded state university in America at the moment that does. Texas is unlike anything we have in the Big Ten from a revenue-donor standpoint, Michigan and Ohio State included.

For example, a few years ago Iowa State’s sports information director told me that Texas had a booster come to them offering a $2 million donation to the football program. Problem was the football program didn’t need it. That’s right, they didn’t need it. So he offered it to the basketball programs, but they didn’t need it, either. By the time they worked their way down the list the track-and-field programs at Texas ended up with a $2 million facilities upgrade.

Considering how slow the process has been for Michigan to raise the money for men’s basketball upgrades the past few years that speaks volumes about where things currently stand at both schools.

Texas will not risk not having a place to sit down when the NCAA’s latest round of conference alignment musical chairs begins. It will move before it is moved and if it doesn’t think it can go it alone as an independent it will join the Big Ten for hundreds of millions of reasons, as laid out in this must read blog (along with the accompanying links on the side): http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2010/01/04/big-ten-expansion-index-follow-up-1-superconferences-conference-tv-revenue-and-more-reasons-why-texas-to-the-big-ten-makes-sense/


In short, Northwestern with its small campus population and the fact it ranks fourth behind Notre Dame, Illinois, and Michigan in popularity in the Chicagoland area, makes almost twice as much a year in television revenue as the entire Big East conference and even more than Texas does.

The Big Ten already has more inherent advantages than any other conference does. Now imagine what happens if Texas added. That means television markets #5, #10, #37, and #49 would be added to the conference’s primary media footprint, which would give the Big Ten primary access to 10 of the top 50 television markets in the country—including five of the top 15. Think of how that would enhance the Big Ten Network’s ability to generate revenue for its member conferences? Especially given the interest in Texas in sports like baseball and softball, which outside of a few schools in the Big Ten there’s not much commercial inventory interest for within the conference’s network.

That does quite a bit for Texas’ media access and revenue, too. There’s no other way the Longhorns could create such a media and revenue giant. It’s just a matter of how important its regional traditions are to its fans and alumni.

If they’re more important than money, then Texas will become an independent by 2015 or try to barter with the Big Ten by seeing if it can bring Texas A&M and Oklahoma with it. That arrangement would give the Longhorns the best of both possible worlds: access to the Big Ten’s money printing press while maintaining its regional traditions at the exact same time.

And I believe the Big Ten would say yes to that counter-proposal.

I also believe the only way the Big Ten is going to settle for expanding to 12 is by adding either Notre Dame or Texas. Since the Irish are not an option, that leaves Texas. The last time the Big Ten started conference realignment by adding Penn State in 1990 it was eventually trumped by the formation of 12-team super conferences and their championship games. This go around Jim Delaney is going to learn his lesson. He will not simply react to what everyone else is doing. He’ll try to get a step ahead of the curve this time, especially since this is likely his last big move as the league’s commissioner before he retires. This will be his lasting legacy.

So it’s Texas by itself, Texas in a super conference, or a super conference without Texas that includes at least one other team from the current configuration of the Big 12.

College football in 2015 could look a lot different:

Pac-12 North
California
Oregon
Oregon State
Stanford
Washington
Washington State
Pac-12 South
Arizona
Arizona State
Colorado
UCLA
USC
TCU

Big 12 West
Baylor
Boise State
BYU
Houston
Utah
Texas Tech
Big 12 East
Iowa State
Kansas
Kansas State
Nebraska
Missouri
Oklahoma State

Big Ten North
Michigan
Michigan State
Minnesota
Ohio State
Penn State
Wisconsin
Northwestern
Big Ten South
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Oklahoma
Purdue
Texas
Texas A&M
 
Interesting take:

couple of things I would like you to expand on or defend:

you state "Notre Dame is not an option"
how can you know this for certain? I agree they are more likely to stay independent for football, but you are completely ready to write them off

you put TCU in the PAC 12?
-if you read Frank the Tank's blog, you know that the PAC10 requires unanimous votes--you think the Cal/Stanford/Oregon/UCLA liberals would go for that type of school? I think they would look at Utah first.

you think the B10 would let Oklahoma in when they don't make the cut academically?
I could definitely see a UT/ aTm combo coming onboard, but then I think it's much more likely they look to add a more eastern school than Oklahoma.

The idea of Texas as an independant is interesting. It just seems to me that you would be really stretched to come up with a viable network of your own. Think about how much crappy programming there is on the BTN, and they have 11 teams they can cover.
 
If that happens.. SEC what???? Big Ten will be best conference by far.

I wonder if they would make the mother of all plays to pry FSU and Miami away from the ACC.
They would also probably be fine with an Oklahoma/ OKIE state combo if Oklahoma didn't go to the B10.
 
I am pretty sure that Okalahoma will not get invited into the Big 10 due to academic reasons. A&M yes - but not OK. Texas would have to settle for going back to an OOC game against OK.

Also - any Big 10 divisional alignment that breaks up Iowa/Wisconsin/Minnesota or Ohio State/Michigan/Michigan State is wrong.
 
Let Texas come and bring along lil bro A&M. Texas can play Oklahoma OOC as another poster said. Then, hopefully, ND joins for a 14 team super-conference.
 
Texas just doesn't "fit" into the Big 10. It would be a huge mistake to add them, IMO.

The only schools that really make sense to me are (in this order): Notre Dame, Nebraska, and Missouri.
 
Living here in Texas, the T.V. coverage of the instate teams is terrible. The A&M vs. Tech football game this past season wasn't even on TV! Not even for Texas folks. I couldn't believe it! It's a huge rivalry game and they didn't even put it on TV.

On a side note. Sorry Deace, but Texas will never join the Big 10. Neither will A&M. Hell will freeze over before that happens.
 
on another side note with ignoring what I said above.... I wouldn't mind at all if A&M and Texas joined the Big Ten. I would get to see my beloved Hawks play at least once a year down here. Also, my wife graduated from A&M and is a huge fan. Their would be a battle in my household, that's for sure!
 
Texas just doesn't "fit" into the Big 10. It would be a huge mistake to add them, IMO.

The only schools that really make sense to me are (in this order): Notre Dame, Nebraska, and Missouri.

So you think two borderline top 100 academic schools will fit into the big 10? Not likely!
 
I don't know that I would want to be in the same division as texas and Oklahoma each year given their lax admission standards
 
sorry, dumb question alert...

so it is safe to assume the b10 gets one or more schools added to the conference in the near future. does the b10 change it's name or just put the number of schools in the logo again?
 
I don't know that I would want to be in the same division as texas and Oklahoma each year given their lax admission standards

Can you elaborate on this? Exactly how rigorous are admission standards at the University of Iowa? Not graduation... admission. In my experience, not very.

- From Iowa? "Admitted."
- From Illinois/Chicagoland, Wisconsin, Minnesota or Missouri? "Sure, if you can pay up."
- From the coast? "Absolutely!"
- International? "Definitely!"

I'm not sure admissions at OU or UT could be much more lax.



...Unless that was sarcasm, in which case I regret wasting the 90 seconds it took me to spit this out. ;) It's always a little difficult to tell on the internet.
 
Interesting take:

couple of things I would like you to expand on or defend: (my answers below in italics)

you state "Notre Dame is not an option"
how can you know this for certain? I agree they are more likely to stay independent for football, but you are completely ready to write them off

I'm not an insider, but reading the tea leaves I would say the chances of landing Notre Dame are less than 10%. But I could be wrong. I've been wrong before.

you put TCU in the PAC 12?
-if you read Frank the Tank's blog, you know that the PAC10 requires unanimous votes--you think the Cal/Stanford/Oregon/UCLA liberals would go for that type of school? I think they would look at Utah first.

Understandable...but adding TCU opens up recruiting in the state of Texas, and introduces the Pac-10 to what is right now a top fove television market in the country.

you think the B10 would let Oklahoma in when they don't make the cut academically?
I could definitely see a UT/ aTm combo coming onboard, but then I think it's much more likely they look to add a more eastern school than Oklahoma.

You could be correct about that. I could also see the Big Ten coming back with a counter-counter proposal that says yes to Texas A&M and no to Oklahoma, while adding a Syracuse or Rutgers from the Big East to open up the Eastern Seaboard to the Big Ten Network as well. Texas and Oklahoma could then go back to playing their game as a non-conference rivalry, as it was for almost a century before the Big 12 began in 1996.

The idea of Texas as an independant is interesting. It just seems to me that you would be really stretched to come up with a viable network of your own. Think about how much crappy programming there is on the BTN, and they have 11 teams they can cover.

As the league generates more revenue, its original programming will obviously improve. You'll see more of the specialty shows and on-air talent you'd like to see. Just as ESPN is better now than it was in 1979 when it debuted. Adding Texas to the formula will greatly accelerrate that process.

Overall, good questions.
 
Living here in Texas, the T.V. coverage of the instate teams is terrible. The A&M vs. Tech football game this past season wasn't even on TV! Not even for Texas folks. I couldn't believe it! It's a huge rivalry game and they didn't even put it on TV.

On a side note. Sorry Deace, but Texas will never join the Big 10. Neither will A&M. Hell will freeze over before that happens.


You actually just made a pretty practical case for Texas joining the Big Ten.:)
 
It's going to be fun watching the Texas/tOSU title game each year if that is the way the conferences will line up. Look for Iowa to be relegated back to mediocre bowls. Give me Nebby, Mizzou, and Rutgers any day of the week over Texas, A&M, and Okie.
 
Think about this Iowa fans....if the B10 goes to "14 TEAM SUPER CONFERENCE" We would go 6 years without playing OSU, PSU, Michigan, Wisky, Minny......or the rest of the conference. It would destroy the B10....not worth it.
 
Look at the last 2 conferences they have been involved with. They were broken up or will be soon. Does the B10 really want to take that risk?
 
I'm really getting tired of hearing this line of conjecture. "No, no, no, I don't wanna!" is not a legitimate reason to not consider adding someone to a conference.


To me, the Big 10 is a conference of midwestern, blue collar, lunchpail types of teams (for the most part). I don't view Texas as that type of team. I also don't consider Texas to be in "Big 10 Country".

*THAT* is why I don't think they fit...and *THAT* is why I believe Notre Dame, Nebraska and Missouri would be better choices.

Satisfied?
 
Texas's athletic department right now can print money......Top 10 in terms of endowments.......Texas can pretty much do whatever it wants to do. I guess it will be up to whatever boosters and prominent alumni want.
 

Latest posts

Top