As the conference turns, pt. 7

A lot has happened since my last comment on this topic, where I wrapped up by wondering if Texas Athletic Director DeLoss Dodds would resurrect his grand Pac-16 conference realignment plan from 18 months ago, or move heaven and Earth to hang onto his new Longhorn Network. Turns out the correct answer is the former. But first, a quick recap on the goings-on of the past two months:

• Texas A&M announces application to Southeastern Conference
  
• SEC conditionally accepts A&M as 13th member
  
• Baylor threatens to sue A&M, SEC and anyone who points out that Baylor athletics has ridden the coattails of their athletic and academic superiors for 20 years in the Big 12 without doing anything with the opportunities they'd been handed on a silver platter
  
• Oklahoma and Oklahoma State approach Pac-12 for membership
  
• Pac-12 says "Not without Texas"
  
• Texas (ie Dodds) says "Not without the LHN"
  
• Pac-12 says "We're happy with 12 members"
  
• Oklahoma says "$#&%@!"
  
• SEC formally accepts A&M
  
• Big 12 (minus 2, minus 1) invites TCU
  
• TCU says "WHOO HOO!"
  
• Big East says "$#&%@!"
  
• Dodds says "We will never, ever, ever, ever, ever play A&M again. Ever."
  
• A&M says "We'll play you whenever you want. Not Baylor, though."
  
• Baylor says "We will never, ever, ever, ever, ever play A&M again. Ever. But we still might sue you for not playing us."
  
• Missouri looks longingly to the rust belt mecca known as the Big 10 (ie the B1G) and asks maybe, possibly, if the B1G may have reconsidered its position on expansion?
  
• The B1G replies that it still doesn't want Mizzou, but Nebraska is working out nicely
  
• Texas Tech covers A&M team buses, inside and out, with stink bait.
  
• A&M says "Not Tech, either."
  
• Mizzou asks SEC for membership, all the while casting longing glances toward the B1G
  
• SEC slowly, reluctantly, kinda, sorta says, "Yeah, okay Mizzou, you can join. But keep it quiet, because even though you were part of the Confederacy, nobody for a moment thinks you're southern or eastern, and you certainly aren't a Florida State or Virginia Tech."
  
• Mizzou says "whoo hoo" while casting longing glances toward the B1G
  
• Big 12 (minus 2, minus 1) says "$#&%@!"
  
• Big 12 invites West Virginia
  
• West Virginia says "WHOO HOO! LET'S RIOT AN' BURN STUFF IN THE STREETS!"
  
• Big East says "$#&%@!"

That pretty much sums it up. I don't know about anyone else, but I'm tired of the realignment tilt-a-whirl and pretty much ready for it to wind down for a while. What I do find of particular interest is the fact that Texas' (ie Dodds') two biggest objections to the SEC are no longer valid. The first, that the SEC is too geographically sprawling for a team from the state of Texas to join, was always questionable at best, considering Iowa State is a member of the Big 12 and Dodds was gung-ho to create the Pac-16 just 18 months ago with trips to Pullman, Washington and Corvalis, Oregon on the itinerary. But now, with the addition of West Virginia (and this nifty graphic from Mizzou2SEC, we see that "Geographic integrity" means pretty much whatever the folks over at 40 Acres say it means:

But as anyone who has followed this particular story knows, the real kicker is academics. The SEC's academics are abysmal, sniffed Texas, a school which longed to rub shoulders with academic elites on the West Coast. Which is all well and good, except this realignment is about athletic competition not academic competition. With A&M, and now Mizzou joining the SEC, that league has four member who are part of the prestigious Association of American Universities, whereas the Big 12 now has three. And if you compare the two conferences using an average of their academic rankings, the SEC beats the Big 12 handily. And that's before West Virginia is considered. West Virginia? That school is certainly not known as an academic powerhouse. In fact, it's like the anti-powerhouse. Consider that Texas Tech is the lowest-ranking school from either the current Big 12 or the SEC on U.S. News & World Report's most recent ranking of national universities, coming in at no. 160. West Virginia lowers the bar at 164. For comparison's sake, Mississippi State, the lowest-ranking SEC school, checks in at 157. Vanderbilt, the top school in the SEC, is ranked at no. 17, followed by Texas, the top school in the Big 12, at no. 45. A&M and Florida are tied at 58. It's pretty clear that Dodds is very, very angry about A&M leaving for the SEC. That A&M didn't fall in line with what was in the best interest of Texas (ie Dodds), and instead did what was in the best interest of A&M. Dodds has maintained that he only is doing what is "in the best interest of Texas" when controversy over the LHN flared up, but when someone else does the same thing for their own institution, suddenly they're "throwing away tradition" and acting selfishly. Dodds, for maybe the first time in his life, did not get his way and is pitching a fit. Sadly, this means the long and storied rivalry between A&M and Texas will go on hiatus in all sports starting next season. That's sad, because most alumni I know on either side want the games to continue. On the upside, Dodds is getting closer to retirement every day (the man's 72, after all). I'll wager that the Lone Star Showdown resumes before 2020, and everyone can go home happy. As the conference turns, pt. 1 As the conference turns, pt. 2 As the conference turns, pt. 3 As the conference turns, pt. 4 As the conference turns, pt. 5 As the conference turns, pt. 6 Now Playing: Prince The Hits/The B Sides Chicken Ranch Central

As the conference turns, pt. 5

Okay, stop. Just please stop. Folks like Gerry Fraley who purport to "tell A&M what it's in for in the SEC" and then proceed to start talking about Bear Bryant. Just stop.

Texas A&M does not need anyone to tell us about Bear Bryant. The Junction Boys were all Aggies. They shouted "Gig 'Em" not "Roll Tide." Their blood bleeds maroon, not crimson. Coach Bryant won more national titles than the gross national product of Venezuela, but he only coached one Heisman Trophy-winning player in John David Crow. Who, curiously enough, did not play a down at Alabama. When A&M's over-taxed PR staff worried to Bryant that Crow didn't lead the nation (or league) in yardage, or touchdowns, or any of the other flashy statistics that tend to make or break a Heisman candidate, Bryant growled "Well, he sure as hell leads the nation in defenders run over!" And Crow won the Heisman. And don't tell us about Gene Stallings, either. He's a Junction Boy (see above). He coached at A&M first. He invented the legendary "Texas Special" pass play:



Stallings led A&M to the SWC title in 1967 and beat Bryant and the Tide in the Cotton Bowl (you know the picture of the aftermath--that's not Coach Bryant hand-picking his successor after retirement). Stallings was fired just a few years later because, let's face it, it was tough to win at A&M in those days with sub-standard facilities and the legacy of an all-male, all-military culture to overcome. But Aggies far and wide celebrated when Bebes coached the Tide to the national title in 1992, in fact, we were so proud of him that we made him a regent, where he's one of the biggest advocates of an A&M move to the Southeastern Conference.

And then there's Auburn. Texas A&M owns a 2-0 lifetime record against the Tigers. Which doesn't mean boo as far as history and culture and expectations go, but it gives me an opportunity to bring up this:



And don't tell us about Arkansas. They wear those damn stupid pig hats and scream "WHOOOOOO! Pig sooey!" all the time like they just found out their cousin said "Yes" to their marriage proposal. SWC, remember? I assure you, Aggies have forgotten more about Arkansas than the SEC will ever know. F'rinstance, in Stallings' first home game against Arkansas as head coach at A&M, the 12th Man was so loud that the Piggies couldn't hear their audibles and got beat. This is back when A&M had a student body of around 18,000 or so, remember. It was such a mismatch that Stallings felt guilty about having such rabid fan support and at the next yell practice asked the students not to be so loud. True story. And none of you SECers who are lecturing Aggies about Arkansas know it, either.

And then there's LSU. They still owe us money. I am of the firm opinion that a $300,000 payment directly from LSU to Texas A&M should be a condition or our accepting a bid to join the Southeastern Conference. The whole LSU/A&M thing is too convoluted for me to rewrite, so instead I'll post my little TexAgs essay from last year:

New Army is scratching its head over the fervor of playing LSU in the Cotton Bowl. This is understandable, because New Army wasn't even born when Harvey Williams switched his commitment on signing day, or John Roper split his forehead open with a killer hit against Tiger QB Tommy Hodson, or Larry Horton ran the opening kickoff back to open the R.C. Slocum era with a bang. LSU was, for all intents and purposes, our version of OU in a heated interstate, cross-conference rivalry. We played them in the Cotton Bowl during the State Fair. We played them in Galveston, Houston and San Antonio. We first played them in 1899 and kicked the snot out of 'em, 52-0.

Because College Station was small and rural, we had trouble filling Kyle back in the day. From 1921-1975 we played them 30 times, and only one of those games was in College Station. We essentially sold them our home games to boost our athletic department revenues. Playing LSU in Baton Rouge or neutral sites resulted in the Tigers getting the upper hand on us in the series, but even so, the overall record was remarkably competitive, all things considered.

In the 70s things had changed. Bellard had A&M playing big time football, Kyle had expanded and Aggie football was a big draw. We beat 'em back-to-back in '74-'75 in Baton Rouge, and wanted to revert to a regular home-and-home series. LSU refused, and broke off the series.

Fast forward to 1982. Jackie Sherill came in, had little success in the early days, so one of the many things he did to shore up support among Old Ags was revive the LSU series. LSU wanted to improve its Texas recruiting, so they agreed to a home-and-home series. They were quite happy with it from '86-'88, the heyday of the Mike Archer years when they won three in a row, and the contract was extended. But starting with Larry Horton's kickoff in '89, things spiraled downward quickly for the kitties. From '91-'95 A&M reeled off five straight victories, hard-fought contests in Baton Rouge but veritable blowouts in College Station. Leeland McElroy's 200+ yard game in '95 was particularly glorious. LSU was getting their heads handed to them in SEC play as well, and decided no amount of Texas recruiting was worth an annual loss to A&M. So they announced the series would end in '95.

Here's where it gets wonky. Under the terms of the contract, if either team cancels the series there is a $400,00 buyout clause, which can be waived if the departing school secures an "equivalent" substitute opponent. LSU told Wally Groff they had a suitable substitute--Northeast Louisiana University, which had just made the transition to I-A football in 1994 [Note: I've since heard some indications that the "replacement" school was actually Nevada-Reno, which had just moved up to Division I-A in 1992. Either way, LSU offered a weak opponent as a replacement]. Wally said (and I'm paraphrasing here) "Like Hell! You owe us $400K!" LSU said "Good luck collecting" and that was that.

Keep in mind, also, that LSU's baseball team knocked the '89 A&M team out of the playoffs. That Aggie team went 58-7, was ranked no. 1 almost the entire season, and may have been the most dominant team in the history of college baseball. The rivalry with LSU was intense across the board.

LSU fans today will tell you there never was a buyout fee (which is false) or--and this is the most popular revisionist history--that because the SEC expanded to 12 teams, they had to eliminate the non-conference A&M game to make the scheduling work. Which is fine and dandy, except that the SEC expanded in football in 1992 with the addition of Arkansas and South Carolina, meaning LSU continued our series four years into the expanded SEC era.

Around 2000-01 our AD, Wally Groff was asked in his online Q&A if we could re-start the LSU series, after Saban (again, IIRC) commented in the media that he'd like to play A&M. Wally responded that he'd never schedule them again, since they couldn't be trusted to live up to their contracts, and that buyout penalties were obviously worthless since LSU was an extension of the state of Louisiana, and therefore a federal Texas vs. Louisiana civil suit to reclaim the unpaid $400K was impractical.

If you go to the LSU sports message boards, you'll see Tiger fans excited by the addition of the Aggies to the SEC, because now they'll "Finally have a rival!" Seriously. LSU is like the Texas Tech of the SEC, desperate for anyone to get worked up about playing them. A&M and LSU have played each other more times than they have pretty much any other non-conference opponent, and more than some current conference rivals. But who leads the series, you may ask? Why, LSU leads the series, 27-20-3. That's a very interesting series record. We've played 50 times, only 12 games of which were played in College Station. That means A&M home games account for just 24 percent of the series overall. Then consider that LSU has hosted 32 home games, which makes up 65 percent of the series. Holy crap! They have that big of a home field advantage over us, and still only manage to lead the overall series by seven games? Damn, that's got to be embarrassing!

So, yeah. We may not know all the best places to eat in Starkville or have a clue as to where or what Vanderbilt is, but we pretty much know what we're getting into. I don't know an Aggie who doesn't break into cold sweats whenever he hears "Rocky Top" on account of that horrible, horrible Cotton Bowl a few years back. But you know what? We're gonna be okay in the long run. Gig 'em!

TEXAS A&M TO SEEK AFFILIATION WITH ANOTHER ATHLETIC CONFERENCE

NEWS RELEASE - August 31, 2011

COLLEGE STATION, Texas – Texas A&M University today officially notified the Big 12 Conference that the institution will submit an application to join another athletic conference. Should this application be accepted, Texas A&M will end its membership in the Big 12 Conference effective June 30, 2012.

"After much thought and consideration, and pursuant to the action of the (Texas A&M University System) Board of Regents authorizing me to take action related to Texas A&M University's athletic conference alignment, I have determined it is in the best interest of Texas A&M to make application to join another athletic conference," President R. Bowen Loftin wrote to Big 12 Commissioner Dan Beebe in the letter dated August 31, 2011.

"We appreciate the Big 12's willingness to engage in a dialogue to end our relationship through a mutually agreeable settlement," Loftin added. "We, too, desire that this process be as amicable and prompt as possible and result in a resolution of all outstanding issues, including mutual waivers by Texas A&M and the conference on behalf of all the remaining members."

Texas A&M has participated in intercollegiate athletics as a member of the Big 12 since the conference's founding 16 years ago. Last season, the Aggies claimed nine Big 12 championships and four national team titles, both of which were school-bests. Since joining the Big 12 prior to the 1996-97 athletic season, Texas A&M has won 55 conference championships, including 32 in the last five years.

Texas A&M finished eighth in the prestigious Director's Cup all-sport rankings a year ago, tallying its most points ever and leading all Big 12 schools. In the inaugural Capital One Cup, which rates teams' final rankings, the Aggies were the top-ranking university from the Big 12. The Aggie women finished second with five top-10 finishes, while the Aggie men finished tied for third with five top-10 finishes.

"As I have indicated throughout this process, we are seeking to generate greater visibility nationwide for Texas A&M and our championship-caliber student-athletes, as well as secure the necessary and stable financial resources to support our athletic and academic programs," Loftin said. "This is a 100-year decision that we have addressed carefully and methodically. Texas A&M is an extraordinary institution, and we look forward to what the future may hold for Aggies worldwide."

While Loftin did not specify an application timeline in his letter to the Big 12, he previously indicated that he does not intend to prolong the application process for an extended period of time.

Texas A&M at a glance
• Located in College Station, Texas.
  
• Home to more than 49,000 students, ranking as the sixth-largest university in the country, with more than 360,000 former students worldwide.
  
• Holds membership in the prestigious Association of American Universities, one of only 63 institutions with this distinction.
  
• Has an endowment valued at more than $5 billion, which ranks fourth among U.S. public universities and 10th overall.
  
• Conducts research valued at more than $630 million annually, placing it among the top 20 universities nationally and third behind only MIT and the University of California at Berkeley for universities without medical schools.
  
• Recognized as Home of the 12th Man, where students stand during football games to show support for the team – and for fellow Aggies – a personification of the Aggie Spirit.
  
• Corps of Cadets is recognized among the nation's largest uniformed student bodies at more than 2,000 strong. Texas A&M commissions more officers than any other institution outside of the nation's service academies.
  
• Named second in the nation by The Wall Street Journal among all universities, public and private, in a survey of top U.S. corporations, non-profits and government agencies, based on graduates that recruiters prefer to hire.

As the conference turns, pt. 1
As the conference turns, pt. 2
As the conference turns, pt. 3
As the conference turns, pt. 4

Now Playing: various artists Capitol Sings Cole Porter: Anything Goes
Chicken Ranch Central

As the conference turns, pt. 4

Ah, what a difference a week makes. Much of what I'd planned to write is now obsolete, overtaken by reality and fast-moving negotiations. The New York Times reported this morning that Texas A&M has already sent an official notice of withdrawal to the Big 12. Brent Zwerneman, a reporter who is a passing acquaintance, is reporting that A&M denies doing any such thing. And the back-and-forth continues, with rumor and gossip standing in for news and fact. This will continue until Texas A&M finally does depart the SWC Big 12 and joins up with the Southeastern Conference. And don't be fooled--the Aggies are gone. All that's left is to dot the Is and cross the Ts. On Monday, the Big 12 seemed to accept the inevitable, sending A&M a letter outlining the process for withdrawal without provoking any lawsuits from the league. The Big 12 letter came in response to A&M President R. Bowen Loftin's letter to the Big 12 of Aug. 25 stating that A&M intended to explore its options regarding conference affiliation (which itself followed the A&M regents' vote on Aug. 14 to give Loftin the power to change conference affiliation):

"If Texas A&M withdraws from the Conference, we want to do so in a way that complies with the Bylaws and is supportive of your efforts to seek a new member of the Conference," Loftin wrote in the letter. "We would appreciate your conferring with the other member institutions and outlining for us the process to be followed by Texas A&M should it withdraw from the Conference."

So why is this happening? There are lots of reasons, as I've outlined in previous entries. But it all boils down to the Longhorn Network, of more specifically, Texas Athletic Director Deloss Dodds' insistence on seeing how far he can push the other league members to increase the Longhorns' many-fold revenue streams. Even Oklahoma, which has put up with a great deal of burnt orange rah-rah to keep the Big 12 together, is starting to chafe.

Several sources confirmed the A&M situation has developed some serious strains in the OU-Texas marriage. OU, like those who still want to make the Big 12 work, is reportedly fed up with Texas seeing how far it can push the others around with tactics like the Longhorn Network.

"Texas seems to be losing friends in more places than the Big 12 over all this," said a source with deep roots in college football. "Having a network is fine. But it's just the inference that they are trying to play by a somewhat different set of rules than anyone else that creates problems."

When the LHN first became a burning concern last spring, when Dodds used it as an excuse to back out of the proposed Pac-16 deal he'd brokered, all indications are that the scope of such a network were soft-pedaled to the other Big 12 schools. Low-ball estimates of revenue were floated. The Big 12 members agreed that Texas would be allowed one non-conference football game each year, with the remainder of its programming filled with original programming, rebroadcasts of "classic" games and non-revenue sports. Texas agreed to this. Then came the announcement of Dodds' heart-stopping $300,000,000 with ESPN. Suddenly, the game had changed, and Texas started circumventing the rules it had agreed to operate the LHN under. To fill all that airtime and give ESPN a return on that investment, they would broadcast Texas high school football--a move that everyone, except, apparently Texas and ESPN, sees as an unfair recruiting advantage. When the Big 12 athletic directors announced a ban on high school football games on the LHN (a move that was subsequently reaffirmed by the NCAA), Texas (being a "good member" of the Big 12) almost immediately circumvented that ruling by announcing it would show high school highlights. Do we see a pattern developing?

Despite the prohibition on more than one live football game--and no conference games--being broadcast on the LHN, Texas and ESPN announced they would be airing a second game (a conference game no less) right away. It soon came out that they were using strong-arm tactics against league opponents to get their way. Texas Tech was the first to go public, revealing that ESPN had threatened to not carry several of their games during the regular season if they wouldn't play ball with the LHN, so to speak. To their credit, the Red Raiders said "Go to hell." Baylor, Kansas State and Oklahoma State eventually came forward with similar horror stories. To say there is a significant conflict of interest at work here with ESPN is a huge understatement.

And therein lies the crux of the matter. It's not the LHN itself that is the problem, it is the way Dodds is using it as a cudgel to bludgeon the rest of the league into submission. Dodds is fond of saying he's only doing what's best for Texas, and that anyone else would do the same. Well, that's not entirely true. Michigan and Ohio State have pretty big national profiles, but they haven't started their own networks--they are happy participants in the Big 10 Network, which makes a ton of money for all league teams. Southern Cal, likewise, could likely support a lucrative national network, but has thrown its support behind a Pac 12 Network which all can benefit from--something Texas refused to agree to last year, if you'll recall. Texas does do what's best for Texas, but given the choice, will always select the course of action that puts other conference members at the greatest disadvantage. And then dares the other schools to say something about it.

Texas will always get its way. If not right away, then eventually. If complaints go up about overreach, Dodds will back down a little, but rest assured Texas will still be positioned better than before. And they will continue to push. The pressure will be steady until, lo and behold, they're back at their original goal. It's the proverbial camel's nose in the tent. Is there any doubt that ESPN and the LHN will come back to the issue of broadcasting high school athletics over and over again until they get their way? Does anyone really believe the LHN will be satisfied with a single non-conference football game, that they won't keep pushing until they get at least simulcast rights to all of their home games? If not all of their games, period?

For all my hesitation about joining the SEC, A&M is doing the right thing. Texas treats the Big 12 with contempt, behaving as if it is its own personal fiefdom. When A&M departs, expect to see a lot of noise out of 40 Acres about cancelling the traditional Thanksgiving Day football game, and all matchups in all other sports. Don't be fooled--this isn't about punishing A&M (well, it is a little) but rather a threat leveled against Oklahoma. Apart from A&M, the only school in the Big 12 with the clout to stand up to Texas is OU. And OU has let it be known that they've had informal talks with the SEC, and are growing increasingly annoyed with Dodds' heavy-handed tactics. But the Sooners are not following A&M out the door yet for one reason and one reason only: Recruiting. For the Sooners, recruiting in the state of Texas is their lifeblood, and were the annual Red River Rivalry at the State Fair come to an abrupt end, their athletics programs could fall into a swoon they may never recover from. Don't think for a moment Dodds hasn't hinted this. Oklahoma is well aware of what happened to Arkansas once the SWC schools in Texas refused to play them anymore--Texas recruiting dried up and the Razorbacks struggled for more than a decade to become relevant again. This fear is real for Oklahoma, whereas Texas A&M is unencumbered by similar concerns.

If Oklahoma stays (and it will) then the Big 12 will have to expand, as the television contract is void if league membership drops below 10 schools. SMU and the University of Houston are often mentioned as potential replacements--if the Big 12 is desperate. Adding marginal athletic programs with tiny fan bases and non-existent television followings doesn't improve the Big 12 one iota. Likewise, TCU would be a fool to join the dying Big 12 when it can waltz into its new Big East conference and clean up with a BCS bid every year. Other schools mentioned by Dodds (and rest assured, Texas is calling the shots on any future expansion of the Big 12, with the other schools possibly being informed as a courtesy) include Arkansas, BYU, Air Force and Notre Dame. Firstly, Arkansas will not leave the SEC. They're one of the schools lobbying hardest to get A&M to jump ship, after all. Air Force brings national name recognition but nothing else. BYU makes the most sense, has the most to gain, being currently independent without an automatic BCS bid, and they also bring a decent fan base along with a decent national profile. If I were a betting man, I'd expect BYU to be a Big 12 member within a year.

But it's the repeated Notre Dame references that pique my interest, despite the fact that the Irish kind of shot down the idea of joining the Big 12, although not in a terribly forceful way. Two weeks ago, I floated the idea online that Dodds may well have presented an enticing package to Notre Dame: In exchange for joining the Big 12, you get to keep your deal with NBC to televise all your home games. Additionally, you may start your own network to generate even more money. The Big 12 will get your league road games for television contract purposes, which you will have a share of. And you will get guaranteed revenue from bowl appearances, plus better access to Texas recruiting. Guess how long it took for me to be shouted down? Yeah, about that long. But little snippets of information coming out seem to indicate that's pretty darn close to what Notre Dame has been offered to consider joining the Big 12. It is a tremendous amount of money, even by Notre Dame standards. That's $300 million for an Irish network alone, if not more, plus they'd keep their NBC revenues. Think about what that means: Texas is willing to throw the rest of the league out in the cold to ensure special treatment for it's new best friend. Texas is not threatened by Notre Dame in the slightest, 1) because Notre Dame divvies up athletics revenue in such a way that the school's general revenue fund gets the lion's share, which means that no matter how much money the Irish make, their athletics budget will remain only a fraction of Texas'; and 2) Irish football has foundered for the past 15 years, with no indication of turning it around any time soon. Notre Dame, for its part, might be attracted to join a conference as protection against the looming super-conference upheaval, and the truckloads of money Texas is offering is enough to make them at least consider the dysfunctional Big 12 as opposed to their more natural playmates in the Big 10.

But this might not be about the Big 12 at all. Dodds has said in the past that if the Big 12 breaks up, Texas will be just fine--they'll simply join up with Notre Dame and set up their own invitation-only super conference. If that is indeed what Dodds is angling for, then any Big 12 invitation to Notre Dame may well be a bit of mind games, tossing about unimaginable amounts of money in order to establish a more powerful negotiation position for the future. Either way, it is sheer insanity, and Notre Dame would be well advised to stay as far away from Austin as possible, lest they become addicted to the burnt orange teat like Oklahoma.

But either way, Texas A&M is gone. The popular buzz has the Aggies departing within a week, so they might play a full SEC slate in 2012. I don't see that happening, for logistical purposes. Juggling schedules and other practical matters would be possible, but quite difficult. And then there's the matter of a 14th team for a balanced SEC schedule. There hasn't been one identified yet, despite much speculation centering around Virginia Tech and Florida State. To me, it seems much more reasonable that A&M doesn't begin SEC play until 2013: By playing an extra year in the Big 12, A&M reduces the burden of its exit fees; gives the Big 12 an extra year to land a replacement team; and gives the SEC another year to identify and invite a 14th school to that league. When I've pointed this out online, I've been quickly shouted down. I don't know what will ultimately happen, but I do know that by this time next year, college football will be a very different-looking place.

As the conference turns, pt. 1
As the conference turns, pt. 2
As the conference turns, pt. 3

Now Playing: SubVision & Guy Gross Farscape Seasons 1 & 2
Chicken Ranch Central

As the conference turns, pt. 2

After Arkansas left the SWC, it became a dead league walking. With three teams of national prominence and large fan bases in Texas, Arkansas and Texas A&M, the growing problems of the league could be overlooked and glossed over. But with only the two big state schools remaining, the fact that TCU, Rice, Baylor and SMU were small private schools with small alumni bases and almost no television presence was magnified. The fact that the University of Houston played most of its games in a mostly-empty Astrodome despite a Heisman Trophy-winning quarterback in Andre Ware and the excitement of the record-setting run-and-shoot offense didn't help. A&M and Texas were subsidizing the rest of the league's athletic budgets with large and loyal fan bases. SWC commissioner Fred Jacoby, after insisting Arkansas would never leave, began mentioning schools like Louisville, Tulsa or Tulane as potential additions to the league. To try and keep the league viable, A&M made overtures to LSU, which quickly said "Thanks, but no thanks." Likewise, Texas inquired if Oklahoma would consider joining the SWC. Here, things get interesting. Oklahoma was unhappy with revenue sharing in the Big 8 at the time, and felt that too many of the weak sisters--Kansas State, Iowa State, etc.--were padding their athletic budgets with disproportionate shares of money from Oklahoma's television appearances. A "keep what you kill" arrangement similar to what had been put in place in the SWC--in that home schools kept larger portions of home gate revenue, television appearance fees and bowl payouts--appealed to the Sooners' athletic director and president. And they said so. Publicly. Make note of this, because it becomes important. For maybe a week in 1994, it suddenly looked like Oklahoma was thinking about leaving the Big 8 to join the ailing SWC.

Except, that's not what happened, at all. Oklahoma wanted more favorable revenue distribution, but they weren't about to hitch their star to the foundering SWC. A&M and Texas were already looking for a way out. Texas looked westward, wanting to join the academically prestigious Pac 10 and all the member schools there that were part of the American Association of Universities. They also flirted with the Big 10 as well. Sound familiar? Texas A&M, for its part, looked eastward, wanting to follow Arkansas to the SEC and play LSU, Alabama and the rest in that football mad circuit. Texas objected to the SEC because of low academic standards. A&M objected to the Big 10 and Pac 10 because of distance and culture. All of these issue would come into play once again in 2010-2011. In the end, joining the Big 8 was something of a compromise between the two, the only way they'd both be able to get out of the SWC.

Once word got out in Austin that the two flagship institutions were bailing on the SWC, political forces lined up against them. Governor Ann Richards, Lieutenant Governor Bob Bullock and powerful State Senator David Sibley were all Baylor alums, and Texas Tech had State Senate President Pro Tempore John Montford and Speaker of the House Pete Laney in its corner. The message was clear--take Texas Tech and Baylor along with you, or don't go at all. If A&M would give up its aspirations of playing in the SEC, legislative opposition to A&M's long-delayed Reed Arena would magically vanish. And thus, the Big 12 came into being.

By all rights, it should've been the perfect athletic conference. The southern division made up of Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech and Baylor were close to the original lineup of the Southwest Conference from 1914. Many of the regional rivalries stayed in place, and the schools were rewarded with a whopping $100 million, five-year deal (a huge contract for the time). It should've been one big happy family, but it wasn't. Almost immediately, Texas and Nebraska started butting heads. Nebraska viewed the Big 12 as an expansion of the old Big 8, while the new Texas schools viewed the league as an entirely new entity--at worst, it was a merger. Nebraska wanted the Big 12 offices to stay in Kansas City, where the Big 8 had been headquartered. The Texas schools wanted them in Dallas, where the SWC had been headquartered. The Texas schools, led by Texas AD Deloss Dodds and supported by the Oklahoma schools, won out. Nebraska supported one candidate for first Big 12 commissioner (whose name escapes me) whereas the Texas schools supported Steve Hatchell, a former administrator from the University of Colorado who'd joined the SWC front office just prior to the league's dissolution. Again, Texas won out. When the league split into two divisions, north and south, Nebraska protested that its annual rivalry game with Oklahoma would end. Nebraska lost that fight, too. The Big 8's more equitable revenue sharing was abandoned in favor of an unbalanced, SWC-style financial arrangement. The bitterest fight came when Texas moved to impose SWC academic standards limiting the participation of partial qualifiers into the Big 12 rule book. Nebraska, which had built a decades-long championship streak on the muscle of unlimited partial qualifiers in the academically lax Big 8 fought the new standards tooth and nail. And lost again. I believe it is no coincidence that Nebraska's on-field dominance waned quickly from that point on, and head football coach Tom Osborne retired shortly thereafter to enter politics.

The final indignity came in the very first Big 12 championship game, where a John Mackovic-coached Texas team stunned the heavily favored Nebraska Cornhuskers for the first league title. At this point, I have to wonder if this was all clever strategy by Oklahoma to undercut Nebraska by using Texas as a proxy. Certainly, Oklahoma's interests paralleled Texas' in most cases, and the Sooners benefited indirectly from the Longhorns' off-field victories over the Cornhuskers. In any event, the Texas-Nebraska antagonist relationship was cemented, with Texas AD Deloss Dodds outmaneuvering his counterparts at every turn. The rot from within had taken hold, and it would be only a matter of time before it made it to the surface.

As the conference turns, pt. 1

Now Playing: Billy Joel Streetlife Serenade
Chicken Ranch Central

As the conference turns, pt. 1

One year ago, I pegged the Big 12 athletic conference's life at five years, tops. Turns out I was being way too optimistic. With Texas A&M's whirlwind courtship of the Southeastern Conference these past couple of weeks, it's obvious that when things fall apart, they fall apart quickly.

This all began, really, back in 1995 when the old SWC went belly-up. That particular death sentence was put in motion several years earlier when Frank Broyles, the athletic director at Arkansas who ran off several coaches--including Ken Hatfield--because of incessant meddling, decided the Razorbacks would profit immensely by joining the SEC and forming a 12-team super conference with a lucrative championship game. Up until that point, such and animal had never existed at the DI-A level of college football. Yes, the NCAA had a rule provision allowing 12-member leagues to split into divisions and hold and extra championship game, but it was originally written for lower-level competition. Trouble is, the NCAA never actually wrote that intention into the rule. The SEC seized the opportunity and soon became the best football conference in the land. Arkansas crashed and burned. Several things worked against Arkansas in the move: Firstly, Broyles refused to admit that more money was the reason behind the conference switch, instead making the duplicitous claim that the Razorbacks needed "better competition" after winning back-to-back SWC titles. You can imagine the embarrassment when the entire SWC--even post-death penalty SMU--pounded the Piggies in their final two seasons of competition before joining the SEC. Secondly, Arkansas had no existing rivals in the SEC, and suffered through an awkward, new-kid-at-school phase where they didn't know anyone and were picked on mercilessly. Third--and this is the biggest issue--Arkansas stocked its football roster with Texas players via its century-long association with the SWC. With A&M, Baylor, Texas and the rest refusing to schedule them after their departure from the SWC, that recruiting dried up quickly. Arkansas made more money in the SEC than it could in the SWC, yes, but the other setbacks took the Razorbacks a decade to overcome to the point where they're only now, 20 years later, consistently competitive in their new league.

Many people point to Arkansas' experience in the SEC as a cautionary tale for A&M as it looks to jump ship. The fact that A&M has lost two games against Arkansas and one to LSU, both SEC powerhouses, in recent years adds to the perception that a move to the SEC is a bad one for the Aggies. The Arkansas experience isn't necessarily relevant for A&M though. Firstly, the A&M recruiting base in Texas won't evaporate as it did for Arkansas, because the Aggies will always play at least half of their games in College Station--a short drive for mamma and daddy to come see junior play. Some argue it will actually help A&M, that in-state blue chippers who want to play against such legendary SEC teams as Alabama, Tennessee, Florida and Georgia will now have an in-state option. Others argue it will open up Texas recruiting to those same SEC programs and hurt all the Texas schools. That's debatable. I see it as a wash, more or less. A second reason the A&M move wouldn't be like Arkansas' is that A&M already has long-standing relationships with several of the schools they'd be playing. Familiarity with Arkansas exists from the SWC days and the recent renewal of that series at the neutral site of JerryWorld up in DFW. LSU is a long-standing rivalry that stirs the passions on both sides. LSU's abrupt cancellation of a long-term contract in the early 90s after A&M had won five games in a row (coupled with a similar break in the series under similar circumstances back in the 70s) merely adds fuel to the fire. And anyone who knows anything about college football knows A&M's ties to Alabama via Paul "Bear" Bryant and Gene Stallings. Finally, A&M isn't pretending the reasons for this potential move are for anything other than what they are: A chance for more money, more stability, and a chance to get out from under the oppressive thumb of the Texas Longhorns--or, more specifically, Texas Athletic Director Deloss Dodds.

Will the Aggies dominate SEC play and rack up a bunch of national championships right away? Not likely. That's not what this is about. There's a huge shakeup coming in college athletics, and for once, A&M wants to make its own destiny for good or ill, rather than tag along on someone else's coattails.

Next: The birth and untimely death of the Big 12.

Now Playing: Bob Seger & the Silver Bullet Band Nine Tonight
Chicken Ranch Central

Aggies to SECede: As done as a deal can be

Wow, that happened fast. If there was any doubt left that the Texas A&M Board of Regents would vote to move Texas A&M athletics from the Big 12 to the Southeastern Conference during their hastily-scheduled conference call on Monday, this email that popped up in my in-box this morning from the Association of Former Students pretty much laid them to rest. If the university is mobilizing a political phone campaign to counteract protests by Baylor, Tech and anyone else who doesn't want this to happen (University of Houston, aka Cougar High alumni are probably the only people in the state in A&M's corner this time) then you know they're going to the mat on this one. Here's the letter:

August 13, 2011

Howdy, Ags!

Today, as always, Texas A&M University is fortunate to have a University president at our helm who firmly places the best interests of Texas A&M as the top priority in any decisions he makes. In our discussions with Dr. R. Bowen Loftin '71, we often ask him how The Association of Former Students and the Aggie Network can help him and help Texas A&M.

As you may be aware, reports have circulated that Texas A&M is contemplating a change in athletic conferences. This has generated much speculation across the Aggie Network and among alumni of schools that could be impacted by our possible change of conferences. It is our understanding that some of these alumni have begun to exert influence on their elected officials to take interceding action.

While these individuals are certainly entitled to voice their opinions to their elected officials, so too are Aggies. The decision on Texas A&M's conference alignment - or any decision impacting our University's future - is one that should be made by our University leaders. If Aggies, too, will engage their elected officials and ask them to consider Texas A&M's need to do what is right and best for our school and our future, our President and other University leaders can focus solely on the best interests of Texas A&M today and tomorrow.

Opportunities abound for Texas A&M, and our University leaders need the latitude to explore and pursue avenues that will be to our benefit. We should be free to chart our own course without the influence of those who may not have our best interest at heart. If you agree, I hope you will reach out to your elected State of Texas officials and respectfully encourage them to let Texas A&M guide Texas A&M's future.

The Association of Former Students is committed to promoting the interests and welfare of Texas A&M. Earlier this week we shared a video of a recent panel discussion on the future of higher education. Throughout the discussion our panelists expressed the importance of allowing the leadership at Texas A&M to make decisions without outside influence. We believe that to be true in all circumstances.

Thank you for your support of Texas A&M. We ask that you join The Association and our friends at the 12th Man Foundation in supporting Texas A&M President Dr. R. Bowen Loftin ’71 as he determines what is best for our great University.

Respectfully,

Porter S. Garner III '79
President and CEO

Jorge A. Bermudez '73
2011 Chair of the Board
The Association of Former Students

Now Playing: The Kinks Come Dancing
Chicken Ranch Central