Skip to content

Additions spark celebrations for Big 12, SEC

Gary Patterson AP

Boise State wasn’t the only program making conference realignment news last night. They were, however, the only ones doing so in the 11th hour.

The other officially official moves at 12 a.m.? TCU and West Virginia became the ninth and 10th members of the Big 12 while former Big 12 occupants Missouri and Texas A&M joined the SEC as the league’s 13th and 14th members.

There’s plenty of work for all four programs to do once football season rolls around — there’s work on our end too as we’ll now be bugging the WordPress folks to, once again, shuffle the contents of our Categories block — but this weekend was about celebrating. Here’s how it all went down:

Permalink 15 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Big 12 Conference, Missouri Tigers, Rumor Mill, Southeastern Conference, TCU Horned Frogs, Texas A&M Aggies, Top Posts, West Virginia Mountaineers
15 Responses to “Additions spark celebrations for Big 12, SEC”
  1. weswelkerspornstash says: Jul 1, 2012 10:20 AM

    Is this the kind of thing they burn coaches for in Morgantown?

  2. buckeye94 says: Jul 1, 2012 10:24 AM

    Like TCU move but the rest are crappy. A&M moving hurts rivalries. Can WVU and Mizzou be good in there new conferences?

  3. tigersgeaux says: Jul 1, 2012 10:38 AM

    Wasn’t it just a couple of seasons ago that A&M beat both Texas and Oklahoma in the same season?

    ….then get blown out by LSU in the Cotton B

  4. rcbn says: Jul 1, 2012 11:54 AM

    Texas vs Texas A&M was one of the best football rivalries around! Sad to see it gone for now because I do not see either one having or developing the established hate vs hate relationship in their conferences. Especially Texas A&M but time will tell but I for one will miss their annual Donnybrook!!

  5. gtizzo says: Jul 1, 2012 12:22 PM

    While I fight to keep my eyes open…Big 10 still biggest winner in conference realignment with Nebraska. The next big move will either be ND joining a conference or a big exit from the ACC. Texas going independent could also spark big news.

  6. coolhorn says: Jul 1, 2012 3:49 PM

    UT isn’t going anywhere. The Horns are quite happy in the rejiggered Big XII, and with some moves yet to be made, the conference’s future is going to be set for a long time.

    I seriously doubt Notre Dame goes all-in with any conference…they don’t have to with the way the four team playoff is set up so far. They may do an alliance that gets their olympic sports out of the Big (L)east, but they’ll hold on to their football independence for several more years.

    Reference the UT/agricultural game, it was beyond time for it to end for at least two or three decades. What used to be a rivalry turned nasty beyond belief, and frankly, TAMU’s move to the SEC was a good one, if for no other reason, to give UT and the ags the legal separation they need. It may turn into a full-blown divorce, or they might match up again a few decades down the road, but each school is better doing its’ own thing right now.

  7. gorilladunk says: Jul 1, 2012 3:50 PM

    @rcbn..,..”I don’t see either one having or developing the established hate vs hate relationship in their conferences.”
    You’ve obviously never seen or attended an OU-Texas game.

  8. gtizzo says: Jul 1, 2012 4:19 PM

    I wouldn’t say Texas isn’t going anywhere and going independent benefits them. Here are a few reasons why:

    1) Recruiting: Texas already pulls top notch talent out of the state of Texas. So they have there recruiting base an exit from the Big 12 doesn’t change that.

    2)Schedule: Texas already has Oklahoma on the schedule and they could keep that game. Makes sense it makes money for both schools…plus it is great rivalry. They add ND to there schedule in 2015 which puts them on national TV. Plus Texas and Texas A&M would be televised because of the SEC thing. Once independent they would need to add another big name to the list. Maybe Ohio State or USC, someone with a big fan base. That would draw people to the longhorn network, and help with there current lack of programming.

    3) Who they know: Texas AD and ND AD Jack Swarbrick are good friends. Texas could keep its current power as an independent because Swarbrick is (to some degree) conference commissioner so they would vote via proxy. Plus ND is also on the oversight committee that gave us a playoff. Texas would have a big ally in ND.

    4) Texas has money: Texas has one of the most profitable athletic departments in the country money is no issue. Texas maybe number one, but I’m sure there top five.

  9. coolhorn says: Jul 1, 2012 9:06 PM

    People have been saying ever since conference realignment started (with Mizzou flirting with the Big 10, by the way.) that UT could and might would go independent. Deloss Dodds noted two years ago that UT COULD do that, but not once has UT considered that. They explored PAC membership once, two years ago, but otherwise, the message from UT has been consistent that the Horns WANT membership in a stable Big XII. Deloss Dodds, the UT athletic director, has said that. So has UT President William Powers, and both more than once. Last year, when OU and OSU explored a move to the PAC by themselves, UT sent a delegation to Norman to talk with OU’s administrators about staying in the Big XII. UT has agreed to an equal share of tiers one and two TV rights, and UT backed off of the most controversial feature of the Longhorn Network, the televising of Texas high school football games.

    I’m not sure what else UT can or should do to convince anyone that they’re NOT pursuing, or likely to pursue, either independence or a move to another conference. IF UT wanted to move, they could make some minor concessions with the Longhorn Network and move tomorrow…but they’re not. Eventually, Notre Dame may HAVE to give up their football independence if they want to have a part in the playoffs, and they’re the ONLY independent that doesn’t have trouble putting a viable schedule together every year. Why on earth would UT want to put themselves in that position?

    I’m very comfortable in saying the University of Texas is, and will be for a long time, a member of the Big XII.

  10. justified38 says: Jul 2, 2012 12:06 AM

    I don’t think Texas will depart the Big 12. Texas and OU are now a power pair that will remain connected for the foreseeable future. These two schools have one of the fiercest rivalries in all of college sports, but the schools are deeply committed to keeping their conference alive and thriving. OSU, Texas Tech, Baylor, KU, KSU, and Iowa State have backed the conference with everything they’ve got. Now that TCU and West Virginia are in the fold, the Big 12 has a strength that they haven’t had in a long time. If they are smart, any future members will have a similar commitment. In the next couple of years, Florida State, Louisille, and Clemson may get invited in, but their commitment will have to be 110%.

    As for Mizzou and A&M’s departure, they won’t be missed. Both school’s were trouble makers and have many problems, especially by blaming other instituions for thier own failures. It looks like both schools will be roadkill in the SEC in the coming years. Sometimes it’s best that you don’t get what you wish for. They’ll be singing the blues in Columbia and College Station for the foreseeable future.

  11. Deb says: Jul 2, 2012 1:05 AM

    @justified38 …

    Both schools were troublemakers? What did Mizzou and A&M do? Get drunk and miss curfew?

  12. coolhorn says: Jul 2, 2012 9:18 AM

    Mizzou started all of this realignment business by openly flirting with the Big 10 while supposedly being a solid member of the Big XII. They’ll offer up all kinds of arguments about wanting stability, but they’ll be no happier in the SEC, and given a chance, will jump to the B1G if they can.

    TAMU? Let’s just say the SEC is about to get a crash course in dealing with a cult. Come back and see me on this one in three or four years and you won’t have to ask any questions about TAMU. Just remember, there are NO give-backs…

  13. foreverlsu says: Jul 2, 2012 10:03 AM

    @coolhorn

    Sure let’s go with that and maybe someone will believe that Missouri started all of this. However, the fact of the matter is that Texas started all of this with the Longhorn network and the unequal revenue sharing; you know it, I know it, and every other reasonable person knows it. The Big 12 came soooooooooooo close to folding and it all would have been on UT’s shoulders.

    I wished it would have worked out for Texas to join the Pac-12 because I would have thoroughly enjoyed seeing Texas send its women’s volleyball team up to Pullman, Washington for a Wednesday night match. What a joke and waste of money all caused by UT’s greed and arrogance.

    Nebraska was easily the big winner in all of this and I can guarantee that they are thrilled to be as far away from Texas as possible. Congrats to the Huskers!

  14. quizguy66 says: Jul 2, 2012 10:57 AM

    Agree with foreverlsu, the B1G came out good as well as Nebraska is a great fit for the conference. Texas would’ve been a headache that may not have been worth the potential extra $.

    -QG

  15. mu9296 says: Jul 2, 2012 12:27 PM

    Missouri did NOT start conference realignment. The record show that to be blatantly false. The Big 10 started conference realignment by announcing on Dec. 15th, 2009 that they were intending to expand. All Missouri did was say, “We would be interested.” Making Mizzou out to be the scapegoat is a cheap shot.

    http://www.columbiatribune.com/weblogs/behind-the-stripes/2012/jun/30/looking-back-on-missouris-journey-to-the-sec/

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!