
08-31-2011, 08:50 PM
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 472
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISUKappa
The Aggies could have their own damn network if they wanted. Every school in the Big 12 can have their own freaking network; OU is purportedly working on one as well. Texas was just the first to do it because they have the resources and national brand to make it happen.
I don't know if aTm will be competitive in the SEC. They might and they might not. They certainly haven't done well against the SEC teams they've played recently. They weren't competitive in the Big 12 until about 3 years ago, and that's including when NU, CU, OSU, and even Texas were having down years. Iowa State has a better bowl record than aTm as members of the Big 12. aTm wants to be out of Texas' shadow, yet still play them every Thanksgiving weekend because it's "tradition." A tradition they may have to have the Texas legislature create a law to keep because, according to DeLoss, Texas has no desire to play the aggies if/when they move to the SEC. We may be seeing a Texas/ND Thanksgiving game instead.
|
No, every team in the Big XII could not get a $300 million television contract for their own football network through ESPN. To get a contract with a major tv network to run a network that exclusively shows your games, which is what Texas has, a team has to show they have the alum and fan base to make that commercially profitable. When you say Texas did it first because they have the resources and the national brand – that’s the ONLY reason they could do it – because they have the resources and the national brand. If you don’t then you can’t get an exclusive tv contract with ESPN or any other major network. This is why tv contracts are worked out with conferences, so that schools without those resource or national brand can still get some games on tv and things are reasonably fair. Schools that pull in big tv money split that with smaller schools that don’t pull in much. Oklahoma can look into it because they also have resources and a national brand. Who doesn’t have those kind of resources and a national brand is every other school in the Big XII (now that Nebraska is gone). Well, Oklahoma State probably has the resources, but not the brand…yet. If Oklahoma goes that route then guess who will get left out in the cold with a lousy tv conference deal – you, Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, and Texas A &M.
Texas A&M wants in the SEC which has a lucrative tv deal for the conference as a whole. Texas did what was best for them. Oklahoma may do the same thing – why wouldn’t Texas A&M do what’s best for themselves when they’re clearly in an every man for himself conference. You’re on the Titanic, and they’re grabbing a life boat.
Texas A&M’s record against SEC schools (all-time) is .426. An okay (not great, but okay record) and that doesn’t take into account that for most of that history they were an all-male military institution and only recently became a university (1988 I believe) which put them at a disadvantage. Do I think they will come in and do great against the SEC? No. But .426 is just slightly below their overall winning percentage in the Big XII, so as you said, there’s no way to tell and based on that and their current ranking – no reason to think they will do worse over the long run. Short term they’ll probably do worse. They’ve only played 3 SEC schools in the last 10 years (excluding bowl games) at any rate, so it would be hard to draw a conclusion about how they will do in that conference from past experience.
Using their 3 year record against Big XII schools is a little misleading. For two of those years they had coaching distractions to say the least. They have winning records against four current Big XII schools overall. Last year they went 6-2 in the Big XII.
Their bowl game record isn't going to get any worse if they go to the SEC, so I’m not sure why that would figure into the argument. I don’t know that bowl games say a lot about the quality of the team in the regular season anyway. You’re right – your bowl game record in the last 10 years is better; on the other hand they’ve beaten you 9 out of 10 times in roughly that same time period. Not trying to offend – just pointing out that bowl game records aren’t particularly reliable methods for judging a team’s ability level.
Last edited by AXOmom; 08-31-2011 at 09:01 PM.
|