Honest question re: WVU and A&M changing conferences

Not at all what I've heard, I also seriously doubt the SEC plan was to add two schools then wait 15 years to renegotiate. I also believe that the two deals are currently just about equivalent? In a quick search the only numbers I can find put per team revenues both around the $20 million per season range.

There's also rumblings of an SEC Network that I imagine would significantly increase potential tv revenues.

I think the situations are a bit different.

West Virginia explored it's options immediately after Pitt and Syracuse announced their decision to leave for the ACC. Their move was a direct result of that.

A&M waited. After CU and Nebraska left, A&M committed to the Big 12. A year later, they decide they didn't mean it. Nothing significant changed in that time (the LHN was a foregone conclusion at that point, and even then, it was something A&M could have been a part of if it wanted to).

I don't think there's anything wrong with moving, and I don't really have an attachment to the Texas schools, so it's no big deal to me that A&M is leaving. I'm more bothered that three of the Big 8 schools left and two more (OU and OSU) were actively exploring leaving. Adding the Texas schools way back to form the Big 12 was probably always going to result in something like this, but it instills far more sadness in me than any other emotion, especially anger.

Shhhhhh....You said you wouldn't even respond after the initial post!

Yeah but I gave myself a minor caveat on the last page. It's hard to resist.

Well everything I've heard is that they agreed to such a deal, and are hoping to talk the networks into opening up their pocketbooks. I'd think if there was going to be any more than simply paying enough so that the schools don't take a hit we'd have heard something by now.

You are right that this year the payouts between the two leagues were probably about equal. Next year when the FOX contract comes in the Big XII will be ahead, and that lead will increase when the Tier 1 rights are done. Once the SEC's current contract is up, then I'm sure they'll get back in the lead for a while.

You said:

But, there is indeed a comparison, since A&M also decided to leave the conference after two other teams left. Moreover, after Nebraska and Colorado left, it was assumed that UT, TT, OU, and OSU would leave to join the Pac 16, leaving A&M in a dilapidated conference with Baylor, Kansas, KSU, ISU, and Mizzou. Aware of this, A&M began making preparations to join the SEC. Although the Pac 16 deal fell through, A&M had already become convinced that the Big 12 was unstable (like WVU did about the Big East) and wanted to join a more stable conference.
The circumstances are remarkably similar between WVU and A&M, and fig96 correctly compares the two. There are many things that occurred to lead up to A&M leaving, but in my opinion, each of the following (list below) gave A&M doubt about the stability of the conference and impulse to make a move.

• Formation of the LHN
• Nebraska leaving to the Big 10
• Colorado leaving to the Pac 12
• Serious discussion of the Pac 16
• Informal (perhaps secret) invitation from the SEC during the Pac 16 rumors
• Prospect of being in a conference with only Baylor, KU, KSU, ISU, and Mizzou

Jesus Christ... this topic again??

For the better part of the last 10 months, we've been discussing damn Aggy and their penis-envying selves and this has been answered many times over. The hatred for Aggy's decision to leave stems from their envy of Bevo. It's to the point where I believe Aggy wishes that they had a Bevo too, just a bigger Bevo than Texas Bevo. Hell, they can't even call themselves what the name of their school actually is (Texas A&M University). They like to refer to themselves as Texas University because, well, I have no damn idea other than they just want to sound similar to the University of Texas. Aggy is running away from Bevo because they can't beat Bevo, or anyone else in the Big XII for that matter, and what makes it all worse is that they are running away with a smug-ass look on their faces. Well, bye Aggy.

Just an FYI, I have no idea where you're pulling that from but it's entirely inaccurate. A lot of Ags do refer to UT as t.u. which may be what you're thinking of.

Excuse me, as I understand things when you reference yourself as the Texas Fighting Aggies or Texas Aggies, you are willingly dropping the "A&M" out of your name making it, the Texas University Aggies.

Umm, I guess.

"Fightin' Texas Aggies" has been around for decades and is intended to reference the state and not be an attempt to call the university something different.

That has been that way for over a century. If you'll recall, there used to be a lot of schools that were called the Aggies. Including one in Oklahoma It was a distinction as to which state we were from. That is a tradition that has not gone away, even though most of those other schools have changed.

You make some good points, but I alway thought early on ATM had a seat at the table before Texas Tech. The idea of the Pac 16 was not not recieved well to the culture of ATM. They decided the SEC was a better fit for them and I tend to agree.

A&M committed to the Big 12 after the 2010 round of instability. Had they left for the SEC in 2010, when Nebraska and CU left, I don't think there would be the backlash.

However, they committed in 2010, and everything seemed fine going forward until they flipped out about something (the LHN) that is essentially a non-issue. They manufactured a reason to leave the conference, which once again nearly blew up the league. They were never actually committed to the Big 12 and were looking for an out behind everyone's back. The administration was dishonest and hypocritical.

WVU, on the other hand, has been very "up front" about their intentions. They clung to an embattled Big East for years, and solely upheld the league's BCS status. When their long time rival left for the ACC, it was obvious the ship was sinking. The league was down to 1 original football member outside of WVU at that point. With Pitt and Syracuse gone, WVU had nothing left in that league, and they filed out in the same wave of realignment.

These are very different situations.

Sorry to mess up your argument, but aTm was part of the PAC 16 deal, the invites were issued to CU individually, and to aTm, UT, OU, OSU, and TT as a package. aTm refused to go, and decided they wanted to go SEC. That killed the PAC 16 deal, and the Texas Legislature stepped in and blocked aTm's move.

Then las spring aTm used some legitimate complaints to get the TL to let them go. Although UT had made every concession aTm asked for. aTm never had any fear of getting left behind. They wanted to go SEC and separate from UT. It took them a year longer to get it done than they had wanted, but they did it.

anm left because they wanted to get away from texas.

WVU left because their conference was/is collapsing.

no comparison.

You didn't mess up anything. Let me explain...
There were two attempts at the Pac 16. The first, in 2010, included A&M, along with Colorado, T-Tech, OU, OSU, and Texas. A&M was prepared to join the Pac 16, but Texas backed out at the last minute. You can read the link below for further information:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/co...ars/20100614-Texas-turns-down-Pac-10-2145.ece

As a consequence of the fickle behavior of Texas, A&M started looking for it's own escape hatch. So, in 2011 when discussion of the Pac 16 was revived, A&M did not want to be included. Instead, T-Tech, OU, OSU, and Texas were looking to join the Pac 12 and A&M was waiting for an SEC invite. The Pac 16 future was killed then by several of the Pac 12 presidents, who were still infuriated at Texas turning them down in 2010. If it hadn't been for this snub by the Pac 12 leadership, the Big 12 would probably no longer be in existence. But, at that time, Texas and OU were no more interested in preserving the Big 12 than A&M was.


As I explained in the previous post, everyone knew that the Big 12 was unstable due to the Pac 16 discussion. By 2011, A&M had three options: Pac 16, SEC, or dilapidated Big 12. Of these three options, A&M preferred the SEC due to geography, TV $$, and conference stability. The revived Big 12 wasn't an option at the time, because no one foresaw the Pac 12 presidents rejecting the Pac 16 expansion.

Yeah, it did mess you up as there were no talks about any move to the PAC in 2011 unitl aTm announced they were going to the SEC. The PAC talks were a result of aTm's actions not the other way around. aTm wanted to run from UT, and they found an issue that got them in the clear with the Texas Legislture to make the move. That resulted in OU and OSU investigating a move to the PAC, which forced UT/TT to look at one as well. And, if it wasn't for UT preferring the Big XII in any shape, and CU, UU, AU, and ASU being terrified of having to face OSU and OU on a yearly basis in football different things could have happened. But, the one thing that didn't happen was aTm going to the SEC because of anyone else trying to leave the Big XII. They were the one to initiate any moves this year.

Really? Your claim is not backed up by the factual timeline.
Sept. 18, 2011: Report: Pac-16 with Texas is close
Sept. 26, 2011: Texas A&M officially joins SEC

A&M announced that they were leaving the Big 12 much earlier than Sept. 26.