Texas refuses to leave for Pac 10-new deal in works


Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

oldgymlgnd said:
the SEC is inferior academically.

The NCAA last week released its latest APR numbers, which measure how well student-athletes progress toward a degree.

Consider the following facts for the four-year rolling averages from 2005-06 through 2008-09:

Alabama's football program scored a 957 for that period.

That score was higher than 10 of the 12 Big 12 schools before Nebraska announced it was leaving for the Big Ten and Colorado said it was leaving for the Pac-10.

Alabama's score of 957 was higher than the Texas score of 947.

Among Big 12 schools, only Oklahoma (962) and Missouri (958) scored higher than Alabama, but just barely.

Four SEC schools -- Vanderbilt (975), Georgia (973), Florida (971) and LSU (965) -- scored higher than Oklahoma, the highest-scoring Big 12 school.

How many times did we read during the last few weeks that Texas wouldn't consider moving to the SEC because it considers itself academically superior to SEC schools?



http://blog.al.com/kevin-scarbinsky/2010/06/alabamas_a_lot_smarter_than_th.html
Click to expand...

Doubt that.
Forget athlete's that are trying to get to the pro's, give me the numbers on the general student population before people start that academically inferior crap.

When the BIG 12 was formed and took in the BIG 8, Texas was a school looking for a home and now all of a sudden, they are so above everybody in everything.
 



Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

mighty hornet said:
I agree 100%. All this talk about how a particular team does not "academically" fit within a conference is a bunch of BS!
Click to expand...

As I understand it, the concern was not whether athletes at Texas are more academically inclined than athletes at SEC schools; I think the discussion was in regards to the academic standing of the University of Texas as compared to the universities in the SEC. There, Texas does have a point; the academic reputation of the Big Ten schools (Michigan, Ohio State, etc.) and Pac-10 schools (Stanford, Cal, UCLA, USC) far exceeds most, if not all, of the SEC schools. Those Big 10 and Pac-10 schools get more more research money, have more and better relationships with major corporations to get more research money, have consistently (over a long period of time) spent more money to build up research and academic staffs, and belong to the exclusive association of research universities. The SEC schools are in a part of the country where education was not as highly regarded by a large segment of the population, and where it is easier to raise money for athletics than education. I think Texas wants its name to be more associated with the prestigious research universities rather than with football factories. Of course, Texas wants both but believes it can only get both from the Big 10 or PAC-10.
 
Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

jstate83 said:
When the BIG 12 was formed and took in the BIG 8, Texas was a school looking for a home and now all of a sudden, they are so above everybody in everything.
Click to expand...

I don’t know about that. What is Mack Brown's record against OU and Bob Stoops? OU use to put that foot in their azz on the regular until recently. Hell they hung a 70 spot on them one year. Also, I think both OU's Men's and Women's basketball teams have been consistently been better then UT's.
 
Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

SAME OLD G said:
They were?
Click to expand...

Yep.
The South West Conference was ripped apart and disbanded. At that time, the BIG 8, (think old school Nebraska/Oklahoma battles), ruled without question. The BIG 8 invited Texas and the others in back in the mid 1990's and formed the Big 12 conference.

Before the Big 12 was formed, in the SWC, SMU was kicking TEXAS to sleep. Texas had a good record but nobody feared them at all and they were not on the tip of anyones tongue, outside of tradition, as one of the top football programs in the country. The only time I ever remember seeing TEXAS or hearing about TEXAS during the Fall back them was when they played their rival Texas A@M. That would be the only game that they knew would be on National TV. :lol:
 
Last edited:
Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

Oracle said:
As I understand it, the concern was not whether athletes at Texas are more academically inclined than athletes at SEC schools; I think the discussion was in regards to the academic standing of the University of Texas as compared to the universities in the SEC.
Click to expand...
I don't buy it. (even though thats exactly what some would try to sell) . It's about $$$$. And these are ATHLETIC conferences, first and foremost. And football is where the $$$$ are. Not academic debates among the conference schools or scientific retreats.
 
Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

Styles said:
I don’t know about that. What is Mack Brown's record against OU and Bob Stoops? OU use to put that foot in their azz on the regular until recently. Hell they hung a 70 spot on them one year. Also, I think both OU's Men's and Women's basketball teams have been consistently been better then UT's.
Click to expand...

I'm telling you..............think back to the 1970's and 1980's.
Did you ever hear of anyone except Nebraska or Oklahoma battling it out for the top spot in that region back then?

AHHH..................NO!!:lol:
 
Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

jstate83 said:
Yep.
The South West Conference was ripped apart and disbanded. At that time, the BIG 8, (think old school Nebraska/Oklahoma battles), ruled without question. The BIG 8 invited Texas and the others in back in the mid 1990's and formed the Big 12 conference.

Before the Big 12 was formed, in the SWC, SMU was kicking TEXAS to sleep. Texas had a good record but nobody feared them at all and they were not on the tip of anyones tongue, outside of tradition, as one of the top football programs in the country. The only time I ever remember seeing TEXAS or hearing about TEXAS during the Fall back them was when they played their rival Texas A@M. That would be the only game that they knew would be on National TV. :lol:
Click to expand...

Uhhh....I know the history. But if the Texas was INVITED to join what would eventually become the Big 12 how are they a school as you put it "looking for a home"?

See some of you are so focused on the superficial stuff like who dominated who on the gridiron, which is completely irrelevant in this case, you forget what the true purpose for conference realignment is all about.
 
Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

mighty hornet said:
I don't buy it. (even though thats exactly what some would try to sell) . It's about $$$$. And these are ATHLETIC conferences, first and foremost. And football is where the $$$$ are. Not academic debates among the conference schools or scientific retreats.
Click to expand...

Spoken like like a true follower of the SEC. This is exactly the SEC mind set. Thus, to say you don't buy it isn't surprising.
 
Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

SAME OLD G said:
Uhhh....I know the history. But if the Texas was INVITED to join what would eventually become the Big 12 how are they a school as you put it "looking for a home"?

See some of you are so focused on the superficial stuff like who dominated who on the gridiron, which is completely irrelevant in this case, you forget what the true purpose for conference realignment is all about.
Click to expand...

:smh:

Stop man cause you know exactly what I'm talking about when I say looking for a home back then. The SWC was not shat and you know it. You may as well call them the CON-USA of yesterday.

Looking for a home that meant something nationally..........BETTER? Who was looking at TEXAS as a national power back then playing BAYLOR, TCU, RICE, and Houston. :lol:
 
Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

SAME OLD G said:
Uhhh....I know the history. But if the Texas was INVITED to join what would eventually become the Big 12 how are they a school as you put it "looking for a home"?

See some of you are so focused on the superficial stuff like who dominated who on the gridiron, which is completely irrelevant in this case, you forget what the true purpose for conference realignment is all about.
Click to expand...

$$$$$ The Pac10 wanted to get into the Texas TV markets. They saw an opening/weakness in the Big 12 with the rumored defection of Nebraska and Missourri to the Big 10. That's when they made the offer to Colorado (which is a good Pac 10 fit) as it would make the Big 12 weaker and possibly hasten the departure of Texas (who they really coveted) and Oklahoma (who would cinch the deal with Texas). The others (Okie State, TTech, TxAM) were just numbers to make it work...
 
Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

jstate83 said:
Who was looking at TEXAS as a national power back then playing BAYLOR, TCU, RICE, and Houston. :lol:
Click to expand...

You mean like Nebraska and OU were playing the likes of Iowa State, Kansas, K-State and Colorado?

Like I said...once you get past the superficial arguments. You just might see the light.
 
Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

MikeBigg said:
$$$$$ The Pac10 wanted to get into the Texas TV markets. They saw an opening/weakness in the Big 12 with the rumored defection of Nebraska and Missourri to the Big 10. That's when they made the offer to Colorado (which is a good Pac 10 fit) as it would make the Big 12 weaker and possibly hasten the departure of Texas (who they really coveted) and Oklahoma (who would cinch the deal with Texas). The others (Okie State, TTech, TxAM) were just numbers to make it work...
Click to expand...

Exactly!
 
Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

SAME OLD G said:
You mean like Nebraska and OU were playing the likes of Iowa State, Kansas, K-State and Colorado?

Like I said...once you get past the superficial arguments. You just might see the light.
Click to expand...

Whatever dude.
We all in the dark and your the top of the information and understanding ladder.
You win since you wanna act all brand new as usual. :lecture:

Act like you remember TEXAS ever being considered equal to Nebraska or Oklahoma back then during the days of the Big 8 and SWC.:lol:
Again.............You win...........Peace. :shame:
 
Last edited:



Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

mighty hornet said:
:smh::smh:

Money drove that issue. If you think an "academic fit" did, then ummm, ok.
Click to expand...

MH, I agree it is about the money. But notice you NEVER heard of any reports talking about Texas joining the SEC. In fact, the reports indicated that the SEC wasn't an option for Texas. It was either join the Pac-10 or stay in the Big 12.

It is what it is.
 
Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

mighty hornet said:
:smh::smh:

Money drove that issue. If you think an "academic fit" did, then ummm, ok.
Click to expand...

Say it again MH. Academics didn't have a damm thing to do with it. Texas just saw they would still be getting the lions share and could still impose their ways on just about anyone in the BIG 12 that is left. They didn't go to the SEC or Pac 10 because they knew they could not run a one school decision making show in those conferences like they do in the Big 12.

In the BIG 12, if TEXAS say squat and take a crap, all 11 other schools would drop their pants and let the crap fly. I would love to see TEXAS try to impose their will over schools like USC, UCLA, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, Florida, LSU, etc. :lol:
 
Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

jstate83 said:
I would love to see TEXAS try to impose their will over schools like USC, UCLA, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, Florida, LSU, etc. :lol:
Click to expand...

Again...the SEC was NEVER an option for Texas. And because Texas played the "academic card" against the SEC, you SEC followers and lovers are pissed about it. That is what this is really about.

And again...it was about money. Nobody denies that. But in Texas' case, the money was going to be made in either the Pac-xx or the Big 12. The SEC was never an option.

The SEC is what it is...deal with it.
 
Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

SAME OLD G said:
Again...the SEC was NEVER an option for Texas. And because Texas played the "academic card" against the SEC, you SEC followers and lovers are pissed about it. That is what this is really about.

And again...it was about money. Nobody denies that. But in Texas' case, the money was going to be made in either the Pac-xx or the Big 12. The SEC was never an option.

The SEC is what it is...deal with it.
Click to expand...

You the only one here acting like you got a personal stake invested in TEXAS. Guess the Pac 10 was not an option also. You act like TEXAS is the only school in the Nation that people look at. :lol:

When did I say the SEC was an option and why should I care. I just said I would love to see TEXAS try to impose their will over those school's I listed and if you had actually read the statement, the last time I looked, USC and UCLA was not a part of the SEC so since I have to break stuff down so you can understand, I was talking in general terms.......(like explaining gonna make a difference). :smh:


Texas ain't pulled nothing and I really don't think the SEC GAS anyway when it's all said and done. Besides..................WHEN DID THE SEC EVER MENTION THEY WERE ACTUALLY GOING TO ADD ANYBODY?:noidea:
Please post the news link out there where the SEC, not sportswriters, said anything publically about adding TEXAS or anyone else. I'll save you the trouble. During this entire episode, the SEC leadership didn't say shat about anyone or anything that was going on.

TEXAS A@M and OKLAHOMA at one point said they may petition the SEC for membership. The SEC didn't extend any invitation to anyone...............written or verbal. :lol:
 
Last edited:
Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

SAME OLD G said:
Again...the SEC was NEVER an option for Texas. And because Texas played the "academic card" against the SEC, you SEC followers and lovers are pissed about it. That is what this is really about.

And again...it was about money. Nobody denies that. But in Texas' case, the money was going to be made in either the Pac-xx or the Big 12. The SEC was never an option.

The SEC is what it is...deal with it.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

The SEC really only wanted Texas and Oklahoma. They were willing to take Texas A&M if it came down to it. But Texas never wanted to go there.

I keep telling folks that other folks across the country look down on those SEC schools academically except for Florida and Vandy. We know it is all about money. But for the Texas powers that be....they want to make sure they don't lose any academic value either. Meaning those Presidents still are academic minded. They want their cake(money) and eat it too (academic association with like schools). So it was no way UT was ever going over to the SEC. If it was left up to the fans, ADs and coaches then maybe Texas would have joined the SEC. But those bow tie wearing Presidents still run their campuses along with their Boards.

I don't know why it is a shock. Texas is arrogant anyway. You know they have a superiority complex. :lol:
 
Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

SAME OLD G said:
Again...the SEC was NEVER an option for Texas. And because Texas played the "academic card" against the SEC, you SEC followers and lovers are pissed about it. That is what this is really about.
Click to expand...
you're buying the BS that folks are selling. If Texas thought they could make more money in the SEC and control it like they do the Big 12, you better believe Texas would be interested in the SEC and would never have "played the academic card". Sad that you could be so blinded that you can't see that. As flimsy as it is.

The SEC is what it is...deal with it.
Click to expand...
SEC - The conference of the last 4 national champions!!!!!!! Deal with it!!!!

but hey, if it makes you feel better, Texas is "academically" better :scared:

:lol::lol:
 
Re: So, Texas didn't want to go to the SEC because

jstate83 said:
You the only one here acting like you got a personal stake invested in TEXAS. Guess the Pac 10 was not an option also. You act like TEXAS is the only school in the Nation that people look at. :lol:

The Pac-10 was indeed an option. And Texas SERIOUSLY considered the option because of the money that could be made along with those high profile academic institutions.

Texas ain't pulled nothing and I really don't think the SEC GAS anyway when it's all said and done. Besides..................WHEN DID THE SEC EVER MENTION THEY WERE ACTUALLY GOING TO ADD ANYBODY?:noidea:

Good question, but yet you keep posting SEC schools to make YOUR argument.

Please post the news link out there where the SEC, not sportswriters, said anything publically about adding TEXAS or anyone else. I'll save you the trouble. During this entire episode, the SEC leadership didn't say shat about anyone or anything that was going on.

I agree...And yet, you keep posting SEC school to make YOUR argument.

TEXAS A@M and OKLAHOMA at one point said they may petition the SEC for membership. The SEC didn't extend any invitation to anyone. :lol:

I thought this subject was about Texas. But this simply proves my point once again that the SEC was NEVER an option for TEXAS.
Click to expand...

I thought you were done.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top