What's new
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

What if A&M declines...

Just a hunch, but I really think that UT is doing everything it can to salvage the Big 12 in some form or another. There's no other conference that would allow them to dictate policy and procedure the same way the B12 does. If Missouri gets left out of the B10 expansion (which is seeming likely, for some crazy reason), then the loss of CU and NU can be overcome by adding any two of a combination of BYU, TCU, Memphis, SMU, Houston.
If A&M leaves for the SEC, it really, REALLY screws with UT. And that's a good thing.
 
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20...es/06/10/aggies.options/index.html#?eref=sihp

A&M is reportedly still in talks to go the SEC, where they've always seemed to prefer.

Would A&M go against UT? If so, who would the Pac 10 replace them with (Please God not Baylor)?

What do you guys think?

It is my understanding that UT and aTm are pretty much a package deal. UT wants nothing to do with the SEC, so I don't know where that would leave them. Would the state let them split up? I don't know.
 
I would love it if aTm went to the SEC and PAC picked up Utah to replace them. It would further weaken UT's voting block on conference issues.
 
I would love it if aTm went to the SEC and PAC picked up Utah to replace them. It would further weaken UT's voting block on conference issues.
 
AtM splits with UT, MU gets screwed by the B10, PAC takes the best.

PAC takes: CU (done deal), UT, OU, KU, MU, and Houston

MWC then will merge with the rest of the Big 12 to take the Big 12 BCS standings

MWC/Big 12 is then: KSU, ISU, TT, Air Force, BYU, UU, Baylor, UNM, TCU, UNLV, SDSU, Boise State

SEC takes: Oklahoma State and Texas A&M

Left out in the cold: CSU and Wyoming

PAC-16 is a super conference with the SEC, Big 10 and a Big East/ACC
MWC/Big12 is a tier 2 conference
CSU, welcome to the Big Sky Conference
 
My guessing is that A&M is going to try and see if they can get the SEC to go to 16 and take them and Baylor.
 
I would love it if aTm went to the SEC and PAC picked up Utah to replace them. It would further weaken UT's voting block on conference issues.

I think that the Texas voting block will be stoped with the California voting block. Truthfuly, I think Texas is pretty powerful, but so is California, so they will even eachother out very well.
 
If another spot opens up, then I am sure the Pac10 would go to Utah. They would get another market, and wouldn't really lose much in the process. That would make the 'PacEast' ****ing awesome, and it would whittle away the power of the Texas/OK schools. We can only hope this happens.
 
Nobody wants Baylor. That is/was the problem with Texass wanting to try and force them in any package deal.
 
Can't see why would the SEC want Baylor, and maybe not even the ags. If I was them I'd look East; FSU, Miami, Clemson, and maybe WV, UVA or VT are all geographically closer.
 
Nobody wants Baylor. That is/was the problem with Texass wanting to try and force them in any package deal.

I'm not convinced Texas ever even cared. The only quotes about solidarity were from a windbag lobbyist, Ken Starr, and the state representative from the Waco district, nobody unaffiliated with Baylor ever was quoted that I saw.
 
Can't see why would the SEC want Baylor, and maybe not even the ags. If I was them I'd look East; FSU, Miami, Clemson, and maybe WV, UVA or VT are all geographically closer.

If this whole circus has taught us one thing, it should be that geography is irrelevant. It's about televisions and possible revenues. FSU and Miami, while undoubtedly strong athletically, don't add much more in the way of televisions to the conference because Florida is already there. South Carolina already provides the TVs that Clemson would bring. VT, WVU or UVA, and Maryland would all be good choices, though. However, if the SEC is serious, it will add four teams - two in the East and two in the West. If I were them, it would be VT, WVA, A&M and Oklahoma, with backups of North Carolina, Clemson, Miami, Texass & OKlahoma State.
 
[video=youtube;RTbc98uqofI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTbc98uqofI&[/video]
BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

No, this is not a double post. I just thought it was ****ing funny enough to reply twice in an effort to maximize my emoticons. Christ that's funny!
 
Why, pray tell, would the SEC want ATM? Especially considering that they have their pick of FSU, Miami, Clemson, Va Tech, GT, WV. I'd take any of those schools over TAMU.
 
Why, pray tell, would the SEC want ATM? Especially considering that they have their pick of FSU, Miami, Clemson, Va Tech, GT, WV. I'd take any of those schools over TAMU.
Because the Houston TV market is #10 in the US, and the Dallas market is #5 and eATMe gets them a slice of both. Like it or not, the Texas TV markets are a huge prize.
 
Just a hunch, but I really think that UT is doing everything it can to salvage the Big 12 in some form or another. There's no other conference that would allow them to dictate policy and procedure the same way the B12 does. If Missouri gets left out of the B10 expansion (which is seeming likely, for some crazy reason), then the loss of CU and NU can be overcome by adding any two of a combination of BYU, TCU, Memphis, SMU, Houston.
If A&M leaves for the SEC, it really, REALLY screws with UT. And that's a good thing.

I think your hunch is right. UT wants to keep running the Big XII. The problem with just replacing UNL and CU (if they can keep the rest of the south teams on the reservation) is that Mizzou is still probably on the Big More Than Nine's radar. Even if they only go to 12 right now, they still want ND, and if the administration in South Bend changes to the point they agree to join, I think Mizzou jumps at the chance to be #14. Then the Big XII is scraping even deeper in the barrel. If they're looking at a north division of KU, KjSU, ISU, BYU, BSU and (best case scenario for them) Utah, what kind of league are they really going to have left? They'll have to start adding in Texass, moving OU to the north, and then they've got all kinds of issues with OU and UT needing to play every year.
It is my understanding that UT and aTm are pretty much a package deal. UT wants nothing to do with the SEC, so I don't know where that would leave them. Would the state let them split up? I don't know.

If they both landed in major conferences with big $$$$$$$$, I think the state would probably be ok with that...
 
Why, pray tell, would the SEC want ATM? Especially considering that they have their pick of FSU, Miami, Clemson, Va Tech, GT, WV. I'd take any of those schools over TAMU.

gives you (SEC) recruiting foothold in Houston area. not that they are lacking for talent (SEC) but i've read on Ag boards over the years that they were pretty leary of LSU crossing the border into southeast Texas and stealing blue chips.

you carve out a piece of the Houston and Dallas markets, that's the ultimate conquest.....to colonize the Great State of Texass in football. I guess.
 
I think your hunch is right. UT wants to keep running the Big XII. The problem with just replacing UNL and CU (if they can keep the rest of the south teams on the reservation) is that Mizzou is still probably on the Big More Than Nine's radar. Even if they only go to 12 right now, they still want ND, and if the administration in South Bend changes to the point they agree to join, I think Mizzou jumps at the chance to be #14. Then the Big XII is scraping even deeper in the barrel. If they're looking at a north division of KU, KjSU, ISU, BYU, BSU and (best case scenario for them) Utah, what kind of league are they really going to have left? They'll have to start adding in Texass, moving OU to the north, and then they've got all kinds of issues with OU and UT needing to play every year.


If they both landed in major conferences with big $$$$$$$$, I think the state would probably be ok with that...

One of the more interesting things I heard out of Chipper today was that if the B12 could be salvaged, there was enough hate toward Missouri that there would be enough votes to kick Missouri out of the salvaged B12! :lol:
 
One of the more interesting things I heard out of Chipper today was that if the B12 could be salvaged, there was enough hate toward Missouri that there would be enough votes to kick Missouri out of the salvaged B12! :lol:

That's a very Texas-centric view. One man's terrorist is another's freedom-fighter. I'll bet there's more sympathy for Mizzou's rabble-rousing ways outside of Texas than Chip might imagine.
 
Back
Top