Texas A&M Leaves Big 12

[MeanGreenHoops]

Ags just officially announced they are gone.

I find it funny that we bemoan the fact we don't have any natural rival in the Sun Belt, meanwhile A&M just left the conference with the best rival they will ever have by far.

[VideoEagle]

Without question, IMO, the worst decision we ever made was allowing ourselves to drop down to i-aa.

I will point out again there was nothing at all that could have been done to stop the drop to 1AA once the NCAA enacted the changes in 1981 - after the season ended - effective for the 1982 season.

There was no magic form to fill out.

The rules effective for the 1982 season to be 1A were:

1. Average home attendance of 17,000 a year each year from 1978 through 1981. We didn't do that.

2. Or average 17,000 in ONE year from 1978 through 1981 if you had a 30,000 seat home stadium. The "home stadium" was one where you played all but 2 of your home games. If you played more than two in any year at Fouts while calling those "home games," we could not call Texas Stadium the home field.

3. AND in both cases play at least 60% of your games against 1A schools. We did comply with this, but not the first two.

There were three exceptions:

1. Average 20,000 home and away attendance each year from 1978 through 1981. We didn't do that either.

2. Average 20,000 home and away attendance in one year from 1978 through 1981 IF you had a 30,000 seat stadium. We didn't do that.

3. Be a member of a conference where more than half of the members met the 1A requirements. We were an independent at the time.

Yes, dropping to 1AA in 1982 continues to hurt our program there was nothing anyone could have done to stop it from happening in 1982.

They COULD immediately started expanding Fouts to 30K and once that was done work to have a single year of attendance of 17K. And the fact they didn't even try IS terrible. But, for the 1982 season, there is nothing they could have done.

[yyz28]

I find it funny that we bemoan the fact we don't have any natural rival in the Sun Belt, meanwhile A&M just left the conference with the best rival they will ever have by far.

The mighty dollar always trumps all.

It will be interesting to see what moves are made.

TCU is the most natural replacement, but I can't imagine they can back out of the Big East now...

SMU just isn't going to happen.

Houston doesn't seem likely, though demographically they fit.

We are like Houston without the recent success, so I just can't imagine a scenario where we're a real play.

...so, that almost makes me think they have to go outside of Texas - BYU is thrown around a lot - it would expand the footprint of the Big 12. ...BYU is sort of an odd demographic fit for the Big 12.

[UNT90]

Without question, IMO, the worst decision we ever made was allowing ourselves to drop down to i-aa. There is a very strong chance that we will never recover from that decision, even with the new found commitment to athletics and facilities. The lack of respect and the injection of even more apathy that this created still haunts us today. If these super conferences get created and it effectively locks us into a new 1-aa again, we are really going to hear it from the haters at UNT for spending so much on a new stadium, especially during these difficult economic times. If we get dropped down again and we are still in the SBC, it isnt hard to imagine 10 years from now having crowds that were very similar from our Fouts/SLC days. A game with Louisiana-Monroe in 2020 will look a lot like it did when they were Northeast Louisiana and they came to Fouts in 1990 if we are back at the equivalent of 1-aa.

Upgrading from Fouts saved our football program, but our prolonged lack of support for athletics may very well get us a place back at the kids table. If it happens, we really have no one to blame but ourselves. I just wouldn't want to be the guy who gets grilled by the "old nestor-types" about the costs of the new stadium if we do get dropped back.

This is why I think the Dodge hire is just as bad, if not worse than the drop to D1AA. At least with the drop to D1AA, there was the chance to recover, which we eventually did, although it took 30 years for UNT to get serious about athletics again (hiring Dodge proved we still were not serious in 2006).

I hope it isn't, but all that has been done may be too little, too late. We need to win, win now, and beat someone of national importance (say, Alabama). The chances of that happening (especially the Alabama part) are very very very very far fetched.

So, yes, I think the Dodge hire was worse than the move down to D1AA

Edited August 31, 2011 by UNT90

[untjim1995]

This is why I think the Dodge hire is just as bad, if not worse than the drop to D1AA. At least with the drop to D1AA, there was the chance to recover, which we eventually did, although it took 30 years for UNT to get serious about athletics again (hiring Dodge proved we still were not serious in 2006).

I hope it isn't, but all that has been done may be too little, too late. We need to win, win now, and beat someone of national importance (say, Alabama). The chances of that happening (especially the Alabama part) are very very very very far fetched.

So, yes, I think the Dodge hire was worse than the move down to D1AA

But the Dodge hire is directly related to the fact that our university couldn't afford to pay more than they did for a head coach because we had so little support from both the administration and the alumni for so long. There may not have been anything we could have done in 1982 to avoid i-aa, but my point is what we did prior to 1982 and after 1982 were the killers here. We have more connected alumni from the 70s for athletics than we have combined from the 80s and 90s--I think we all know why. We basically ran the university--spirit wise--as a giant community college for so long that the reamifications are still huge. Sure, winning would change it, but it won't be winning 6 games in the Sunbelt that changes it.

For our university to realistically have a shot at moving upward in the next 2 years, it will take the following:

1.) Go 8-4 or better this year with wins over Houston and Indiana in a packed house, competitive losses to Alabama (less than 3 TDs) and Tulsa (less than a TD) and winning the SBC.

2.) Have Johnny Jones team go tot he NCAA Tournament again and actually win a game or come very close (loss by a bucket).

3.) Have the Big XII-III stay together. Get BYU in as a 10th member just to buy time--for their conference and for our university.

4.) Have openings in either the MWC or CUSA that would fit our needs and CANNOT be blocked by anyone else--so prolly MWC.

I will say this until I am green in the face, but the MWC is our chance to copy TCU. They got away from Texas schools and beat those teams out west, all while raising their reputation in recruiting. It can be done--the Frogs proved it. I just want us to beat Baylor, SMU, UH, and to a lesser degree, Tech, to the punch. Because if any of those schools are the only Texas schools in the MWC, they are gonna do very well. Beating a top ten Boise State and a top 20 ranked AFA and Fresno State will get you lots of pub--CUSA doesn't offer this potential depth and probably never will in football. You want snub your nose back at SMU--follow what their biggest rival did and leave them in the dust.

[untjim1995]

Lawsuits are certain, and that may slow down the train wreck and let people think a little more sensibly.

When Miami, BC, and Va Tech left for the ACC, the remining Big East schools sued them for leaving, since they were the bellcows of the league. Guess what happened? The Big East settled with those schools because it was going to take years for them to fight over a proper exit fee and they needed to move forward, which is what happened when the BE raided CUSA. Sensibility in college athletics = money and TV, nothing more, nothing less.

[Eagle1855]

...that would fit our needs and CANNOT be blocked by anyone else...

Why does this keep coming up? If A&M only needs 9 out of 12 schools to get into the SEC, surely CUSA doesn't require a 100% agreement on membership..._{do they?}

[ColoradoEagle]

Here I thought SMU fans were delusional (and they are), but UH fans are certifiable. They are absolutely convinced that: they are equivalent to almost any Big 12 school in athletics/academics, they're soon to be the dominant Texas research university, their stadium is going to be worlds better than Apogee, they have recent history of being dominant in college football, they command huge TV numbers, and they have unlimited potential vs. UNT never going anywhere. Oh, and of course, they're absolutely positive that UH is the logical choice to replace A&M.

I know there are some sensible UH fans out there, but there are some real nut cases in that fanbase.

Edited August 31, 2011 by ColoradoEagle

[scrappyman1]

I feel with coach Mac we would be accepted in the MWC or the C USA when we asked. It is

a very mobile situation with A & M leaving the Big 12 and I beleive there will be much

moving and shaking going on the next few months. With the President we have and the contacts

we have made recently there is no end to what we could do that might surprise everyone.

We might be in for a pleasant surprise before this is all over.

GO MEAN GREEN --- GO NORTH TEXAS

SCRAPPYMAN 1

[LongJim]

But the Dodge hire is directly related to the fact that our university couldn't afford to pay more than they did for a head coach because we had so little support from both the administration and the alumni for so long. There may not have been anything we could have done in 1982 to avoid i-aa, but my point is what we did prior to 1982 and after 1982 were the killers here. We have more connected alumni from the 70s for athletics than we have combined from the 80s and 90s--I think we all know why. We basically ran the university--spirit wise--as a giant community college for so long that the reamifications are still huge. Sure, winning would change it, but it won't be winning 6 games in the Sunbelt that changes it.

Great post. 100% agree.

For our university to realistically have a shot at moving upward in the next 2 years, it will take the following:

1.) Go 8-4 or better this year with wins over Houston and Indiana in a packed house, competitive losses to Alabama (less than 3 TDs) and Tulsa (less than a TD) and winning the SBC.

2.) Have Johnny Jones team go tot he NCAA Tournament again and actually win a game or come very close (loss by a bucket).

Agree with above, too. WIN the SBC. Dominate it consistently.

I will say this until I am green in the face, but the MWC is our chance to copy TCU. They got away from Texas schools and beat those teams out west, all while raising their reputation in recruiting. It can be done--the Frogs proved it. I just want us to beat Baylor, SMU, UH, and to a lesser degree, Tech, to the punch. Because if any of those schools are the only Texas schools in the MWC, they are gonna do very well. Beating a top ten Boise State and a top 20 ranked AFA and Fresno State will get you lots of pub--CUSA doesn't offer this potential depth and probably never will in football. You want snub your nose back at SMU--follow what their biggest rival did and leave them in the dust.

I'm not 100% sold on MWC, (don't think the department is solvent enough at this point) but if UNT gets in a position to take the invite, I think it's a no-brainer. I would also consider Tech out of the equation. I would love to see a travel partner from Texas with UNT in the MWC, should they get an invite.

[NM Green]

I think a UNT travel partner would be smart for an MWC invite but I am happy to go alone. Nothing would be smarter than jumping to the strongest non bcs league if afforded the opportunity. That would leave SMU, Tulsa and Houston in the dust and we would be able to compete on a national stage with Boise State, Air Force San Diego State, UNLV, Nevada, Fresno State and Hawaii (combo of basketball and football). We would be in unchartered territory and immediately raise out lot over the ponies. I personally feel a decent season and upward trend gets us a call from the Mountain West, only they better act fast because I believe our lot and options are going to grow in the right direction. We have a history with almost half the league and we give them access to a recruiting hotbed - aka SECede and Texas A&M. We gain by exposure and national profile raise, while the MWC gains from exposure in a recruiting pipeline. This is exactly what is happening at Texas A&M on the grander scale.

If we do lobby for a partner I say go for Houston, La Tech or (gulp) UTSA. Get the San Antonio and Dallas markets (North Texas and South Texas presence) and develop a second bowl game in San Antonio between the MWC and Big 12 (Big 12 adds BYU). The MWC with bowl games in San Antonio (Maybe move the Human Bowl from Boise to SAT), Las Vegas, San Francisco and New Mexico could be an appealing setup.

Is it gametime yet!

GMG

[LongJim]

Statement from Baylor AD:

"We regret that Texas A&M has elected to withdraw from the Big 12 Conference. Moreover, we are disappointed that our 108-year football rivalry with the Aggies will be coming to an end for the foreseeable future. The extent of future competition in other sports with the Aggies is uncertain at this time."

Baylor's Pissed

[NM Green]

That is a bizarre statement. Oh no! No more games against Sic Em. Aggie fans have new rivalries to build with Ole Miss, Miss State, Arkansas, LSU, Alabama and Auburn. Baylor is upset because of the instability but get over it. I can't wait to see the next version of the holy war between the baptists and mormons. Bring it!

GMG

[Legend500]

But we aren't going public about it like SMU. If we did, at least people would be talking about it.

Bad idea. One of the best things that has happened for UNT out of the latest movements is SMU making it clear that it is willing to sleep with -any- BCS conference to get out of the CUSA That may be true for any school there, but come time they try to use any power they have in the CUSA - the other schools will definately remember that.

On the whole from top to bottom I think the MWC is the best option and have the best rep. It is all about perception and the MWC has a lot more of that than CUSA in my opinion.

Ultimately, both are not BCSAQ conferences, but one is MUCH closer to that than the other. Even though the bottoms of the conferences are similar, the overall competitive layout is much better in the MWC. For UNT, though, the CUSA will remain the natural home as long as the Texas teams are there. As far as some schools not wanting UNT, there are some instances where that perception is simply false (Houston) or where it is titanically overblown (SMU). What matters far more is institutional and alumni committment, for which August of 2011 has been the best year in the history of UNT.

It is a very mobile situation with A & M leaving the Big 12 and I beleive there will be much moving and shaking going on the next few months. With the President we have and the contacts we have made recently there is no end to what we could do that might surprise everyone. We might be in for a pleasant surprise before this is all over.

1,000 times this. Any movement in all of this is good for UNT. The worse that can happen is FCS, but that would happen only with a mass exodus back to FCS - there are at least 10 schools, probably plenty more - who would go back before us. In the FBS, we're in the Sun Belt, and the situation could only be worse for us if we had left the Sun Belt for a conference with a stronger history and stronger regional rivals. Fortunately we've already avoided that fate, unlike Idaho, Utah State and NMSU.

[Rudy]

The best things for NT this season are:

1. Win. Although it will be hard, a winning record in such a quick turnaround will have to get noticed.

2. aTm needs to have a losing year. If they can do bad enough, the SEC may have second thoughts about inviting them so quickly.

3. Houston needs to do poorly. Obvious reasons

4. SMU needs to suck. In addition to it always being a good thing, a bad year for them will help us move up in perception when compared to SMUt and Houston.

5. A lawsuit that prevents any defection or formation of superconferences for the time being, allowing NT time to build it's reputation and make itself an attractive candidate for MWC or Big 12-2.

NT needs to do what it can to land a Big 12/Whatever or a MWC bid. Either scenario allows the SBC to focus on being a more eastern conference and positions them to combine forces with CUSa, should it be raided.

Amist all of this, what happens to the WACKy?

[Mean Green 93-98]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/big12/story/2011-08-31/Big-12-faces-decisions-in-wake-of-AM-move/50209388/1

Byrne also said that Texas A&M was not offered the chance to join the Longhorns in the venture.

Ah, it comes out.

[GrayEagle]

That is roughly the Big West all over again and poses the same issues as joining the WAC.

Only two of those universities were in the Big West when we were and they're much higher caliber now. Boise State has been a Top 10 team for a couple of years and will likely be again this year. Nevada was in the higher teens this past year. That's nothing similar to the old Big West where attendance of 8-10,000 was the norm and no one was rated.

Even with the loss of their Big 3 Mountain West attendance should range from 20,000 at the low end to 50,000 at the top when Fresno State, Hawaii and Nevada enter the conference.

The WAC won't exist as a viable football conference in two years although they would if we joined. Based on prior years they won't have anyone capable of drawing a 20,000 average except possibly Louisiana Tech. That's quite a difference.

Edited September 1, 2011 by GrayEagle

[mgfan]

"The Big 12 could take further hits in coming weeks. If the dominoes continue to fall, four super conferences of 16 teams each might be the eventual end game."

I'm afraid this is where everything is headed and we will be left out.

Edited September 1, 2011 by mgfan

[mgfan]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/big12/story/2011-08-31/Big-12-faces-decisions-in-wake-of-AM-move/50209388/1

[LongJim]

Ah, it comes out.

This is what Bill said yesterday in his "Wednesday's With Bill" newsletter:

"Some of you have asked me, “Isn’t it true you had a chance to join Texas in the ESPN venture and would have had a joint channel?”

Three or four years ago we talked about doing a joint flagship channel. I liked the idea, but our fans should know me better than to think I would pass on a $150 million deal for Texas A&M. That never happened."

This is a disingenuous non-answer to the question, because at the time it was originally posed, there was apparently no firm $ offer from ESPN to either Texas or aTm, but the offer was made--allegedly in a meeting with Deloss Dodds himself--though Dodds will not say this publicly. The question was exploratory.

Bill actually gave what probably amounts to the answer last year in the same forum (which has now been deleted from the website, but available by Googling) saying aTm did not feel a network like the one being proposed was "viable", and blathered on about government funding, public television and other nonsense, and aTm declined. Here's part of what he posted originally:

“If you think about it, a separate school network does not work unless it's public television, and they need all kinds of institutional and federal government funding. Last time I checked, the college athletic departments are not eligible" “(Texas) could have had their own network for the last 14 years of the Big 12 and so could we or any member of the conference. Our friends have been bringing their Longhorn Sports Network television mic flags around for years. Their stand alone network has still not happened yet.” “Even ESPN does not have enough live programming to fill its' schedule each day.”

Texas went it alone, and the Ags are pissed about it. It's no coincidence that Bill has been muzzled and put in the closet in the last few weeks, because he's on record as not supporting the move to the SEC. I would not be surprised if he's not the AD at aTm in a year or so.

Edited September 1, 2011 by LongJim