Conference Realignment: Would Texas go the Independent Route?
by Paragon SC on Sep 9, 2011 8:07 PM PDT
in NCAA Conference Realignment
Email
Print
While everything seems to be in hold mode for the time being, Kirk Bohls penned this great piece about UT and the option of going independent.
It's true they don't want to be an independent, even if every action they take seems as if they do. Certainly Texas acts like an independent. If it smells like an independent, talks like an independent, acts like an independent, I'm guessing deep down it's an independent.
I'm hoping I'm wrong on this, because I think going independent would be a colossal mistake as we rocket toward super conferences. Texas, though, may be painting itself into that corner without any other option, because the Big 12 appears too fractured to survive.
If so, the Pac-12 would be the Longhorns' best bet.
At this point, independence is looking like the end result. Why?
Ego and power.
Texas over played their hand but they still very valuable. Where ever they end up their parners will enjoy the statyre that is UT. But the indy route is not as easy as it sounds. USC had they fought tooth and nail during the negotiations of the Pac-10/12 media deals they would have been in the same boat as UT.
UT has some fence mending to do...the question is how humble are they willing to be? Texas A&M is gone no matter what, there isn't anything UT could do at this point could fix that. So, what can UT do to make things right with the rest of the Big 12?
I have no problem if with how the University of Texas runs their program. They should be able to call the shots because they are the big dog on the block just like USC is in the Pac-12.
So, if UT does all they can to keep the Big 12 together then that is great. If they go Indy that's fine too, regardless of the issues associated with independence...but no matter what, it is their call.
I am pretty ambivalent on expansion. Larry Scott has proven his mettle to cobble together deals so if we expand he can make it work, if not then I am pretty sure no one will complain.
At this point it is becoming anti-climatic...
4 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The more I read and talk about PAC expansion
The less I am jazzed about it. At first it seemed like a no brainer, but the longer it drags out the more issues I see. In the end, I only want schools who fit and WANT to come West, not just because they feel they have to. Otherwise why risk poisoning what we’ve got?
by SenorChuy on Sep 9, 2011 9:12 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
It's a question of future options
If we end up with four 16 team super conferences, you don’t want to be picking from Nevada and SDSU. The PAC doesn’t have a lot of options, you have to land either Texas or Oklahoma to headline the last four teams (having both would be great but not needed). You only get so many bites of the apple type thing. Honestly this really isn’t taking that long, just seems that way in the Internet age.
by ev on Sep 9, 2011 9:42 PM PDT up reply actions
But are Okie and/or Texas longterm options?
I don’t deny that either would be bigtime pickups. I am more concerned about longterm viability of member schools who are nowhere near the Pacific, may not fit culturally, and whose fanbases aren’t buying into the PAC.
by SenorChuy on Sep 9, 2011 10:18 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
If you have four 16 team conferences
They will all cover a lot of ground. If you don’t take them, who fills out the other four spots? Anyone else is going to be a small program, a so called taker. As for a fit, well the AZ schools learned how to fit in pretty well, it can be done.
by ev on Sep 9, 2011 11:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Conquest Chronicles
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
