Conference Realignment..?

[pdub]

"Both have larger revenue sources like fundraising, ticket sales, and licensing..."

My argument ( and i think CnB's ) regarding the risk for jumping ship is, without medium success in the SEC, this larger revenue source could ( would ) suffer. It will be tougher to win football games in the SEC.

The other side of the coin - if you do win in the SEC - you're golden.

[Deleted User 863]

So they should have stayed in the big12 because it's easier to remain mediocre here? I disagree. If you're going to be mediocre do it in the best conference against the best competition.

Fwiw, i don't think they'll be in the bottom 3rd of the SEC most years. I think this move could actually help them produce better on field results even with the massive increase in quality of competition.

[Deleted User 89]

"Both have larger revenue sources like fundraising, ticket sales, and licensing..."

My argument ( and i think CnB's ) regarding the risk for jumping ship is, without medium success in the SEC, this larger revenue source could ( would ) suffer. It will be tougher to win football games in the SEC.

The other side of the coin - if you do win in the SEC - you're golden.

right

but ut wasn’t winning in the Big12, even with all their resources

[Deleted User 89]

So they should have stayed in the big12 because it's easier to remain mediocre here? I disagree. If you're going to be mediocre do it in the best conference against the best competition.

Fwiw, i don't think they'll be in the bottom 3rd of the SEC most years. I think this move could actually help them produce better on field results even with the massive increase in quality of competition.

honest question...how?

[CrimsonNBlue]

a few months old, but some good points made

https://slate.com/culture/2021/07/texas ... money.html

...The result will be a lesser experience for scores of people well beyond Norman and Austin—though the athletes and fans in those places might find that they are not any better off in the SEC than in the Big 12, either...

...There’s no particular virtue in money-driven decisions in an industry where the labor goes unpaid, but the last wave of realignment at least made sense as a necessity on financial grounds. Maryland is no longer cutting a bunch of varsity programs, as it was doing before it boarded the Big Ten lifeboat. Big Ten schools now make more than $50 million per year in media money...

...What sets this exodus apart from the early-2010s realignment is that UT and OU clearly don’t need to chase a few million extra dollars per year. Texas’ athletic department is the most lucrative in college sports at well over $200 million in annual revenue, and Oklahoma is typically in the top 10. Go through both schools’ recent financial reports with the NCAA, and you’ll find that conference TV money isn’t even an essential line item for these schools. Both have larger revenue sources like fundraising, ticket sales, and licensing, and both would be among the richest athletic departments in America even if they never made a cent from their conferences. Both have enough to do whatever they want, whether that’s UT coming up with $25 million to fire its football coaching staff or OU throwing nine figures into facility upgrades. Money isn’t either team’s problem. Texas’ issues are internal politics and self-sabotage. Oklahoma’s is that winning national championships requires playing a little bit of defense. Pursuing more money is their right, but nobody has to cheer it or pretend it will meaningfully improve anything...

Yes, fundraising and licensing is kind of where I was going with brand.

UT is different in the sense that it is one of the biggest and best institutions in the entire country with an enormous alumni and employee network all over the world.

That's what UT gives the SEC, but what can the SEC give UT football other than perennial 6-6 records?

[Deleted User 863]

So they should have stayed in the big12 because it's easier to remain mediocre here? I disagree. If you're going to be mediocre do it in the best conference against the best competition.

Fwiw, i don't think they'll be in the bottom 3rd of the SEC most years. I think this move could actually help them produce better on field results even with the massive increase in quality of competition.

honest question...how?

Well 1 reason that comes to mind is the same reason our basketball team schedules a lot of good teams instead a lot of shitty ones. Playing against better competition helps teams improve and develop. Not just players, but coaches too.

The SEC is the premier football conference in college athletics. If you are a football school that's a good place to be.

[pdub]

"Both have larger revenue sources like fundraising, ticket sales, and licensing..."

My argument ( and i think CnB's ) regarding the risk for jumping ship is, without medium success in the SEC, this larger revenue source could ( would ) suffer. It will be tougher to win football games in the SEC.

The other side of the coin - if you do win in the SEC - you're golden.

right

but ut wasn’t winning in the Big12, even with all their resources

133-69 conference record in the Big 12.

[Deleted User 863]

That's what UT gives the SEC, but what can the SEC give UT football other than perennial 6-6 records?

Money?

If they wanted an easy conference they can dominate more easily they could have switched to the AAC or Mountain West.

[CrimsonNBlue]

So they should have stayed in the big12 because it's easier to remain mediocre here? I disagree. If you're going to be mediocre do it in the best conference against the best competition.

Fwiw, i don't think they'll be in the bottom 3rd of the SEC most years. I think this move could actually help them produce better on field results even with the massive increase in quality of competition.

honest question...how?

Well 1 reason that comes to mind is the same reason our basketball team schedules a lot of good teams instead a lot of shitty ones. Playing against better competition helps teams improve and develop. Not just players, but coaches too.

The SEC is the premier football conference in college athletics. If you are a football school that's a good place to be.

It's apples and coconuts. The way that cfb is stupidly set up, you can't take your lesson game lumps early to make the team better and expect to waltz into the big games.

But, moving to the SEC could actually hurt UT's 2nd biggest resource behind its money: it is the default #1 destination for Texas HS football recruits.

[Deleted User 863]

"Both have larger revenue sources like fundraising, ticket sales, and licensing..."

My argument ( and i think CnB's ) regarding the risk for jumping ship is, without medium success in the SEC, this larger revenue source could ( would ) suffer. It will be tougher to win football games in the SEC.

The other side of the coin - if you do win in the SEC - you're golden.

right

but ut wasn’t winning in the Big12, even with all their resources

133-69 conference record in the Big 12.

And still tons of fan support and national relevance and money as the top revenue producer in college football. Despite winning only 66% of their conference games.

[Sparko]

The unspoken part of this is that the two programs had the audacity to imply the conference they ran was hurting them competitively. Um yeah. The real issue was the Big 12 was a tough gauntlet run with a few exceptions. The season is probably too wearing in reality. Injuries and scouting vulnerabilities is a factor in a long and difficult conference schedule. And those programs were against adding teams that could have taken us back to a manageable divisional situation like before the last run off.

[Deleted User 89]

So they should have stayed in the big12 because it's easier to remain mediocre here? I disagree. If you're going to be mediocre do it in the best conference against the best competition.

Fwiw, i don't think they'll be in the bottom 3rd of the SEC most years. I think this move could actually help them produce better on field results even with the massive increase in quality of competition.

honest question...how?

Well 1 reason that comes to mind is the same reason our basketball team schedules a lot of good teams instead a lot of shitty ones. Playing against better competition helps teams improve and develop. Not just players, but coaches too.

The SEC is the premier football conference in college athletics. If you are a football school that's a good place to be.

that seems rather pie-in-the-sky hopes

if they couldn’t at least be one of the top couple teams in the Big12 annually, it seems more likely that they’ll get hammered in the SEC

how’s tcu doing on the hardwood? when was wvu’s last conference title in hoops?

[pdub]

right

but ut wasn’t winning in the Big12, even with all their resources

133-69 conference record in the Big 12.

And still tons of fan support and national relevance and money as the top revenue producer in college football. Despite winning only 66% of their conference games.

Sigh.
My god dude.

[Deleted User 89]

"Both have larger revenue sources like fundraising, ticket sales, and licensing..."

My argument ( and i think CnB's ) regarding the risk for jumping ship is, without medium success in the SEC, this larger revenue source could ( would ) suffer. It will be tougher to win football games in the SEC.

The other side of the coin - if you do win in the SEC - you're golden.

right

but ut wasn’t winning in the Big12, even with all their resources

133-69 conference record in the Big 12.

when was their last conference title?

what has their record been over the last decade?

i know they are an historically good program...so is nebraska

[pdub]

They've had a winning record in conference in the last decade.
My original argument in this thread was this:

"Even the best of programs can take a hit financially if the product suffers.
If Texas shows up and averages 5 win seasons in the SEC, they'll take a hit."

That's a loosing record.
If Texas wins 41% and not 55% or 66% of their conference games over the next 10 years, which is a greater risk of doing so in the SEC, I think the program will take a hit financially ( and obviously simply competitively ).

[Deleted User 89]

“But, moving to the SEC could actually hurt UT's 2nd biggest resource behind its money: it is the default #1 destination for Texas HS football recruits.”

word

[Deleted User 89]

They've had a winning record in conference in the last decade.
My original argument in this thread was this:

"Even the best of programs can take a hit financially if the product suffers.
If Texas shows up and averages 5 win seasons in the SEC, they'll take a hit."

That's a loosing record.
If Texas wins 41% and not 55% or 66% of their conference games over the next 10 years, which is a greater risk of doing so in the SEC, I think the program will take a hit financially ( and obviously simply competitively ).

and i agree with all of that

i just don’t think a winning record equates to the kind of success they’d like. i know ut and their fans are a bit delusional, but imo they should have been dominating the Big12 (on par with ou) if there is to be any validity in the thought that they’d be anything more than mediocre in the SEC

[pdub]

They've had a winning record in conference in the last decade.
My original argument in this thread was this:

"Even the best of programs can take a hit financially if the product suffers.
If Texas shows up and averages 5 win seasons in the SEC, they'll take a hit."

That's a loosing record.
If Texas wins 41% and not 55% or 66% of their conference games over the next 10 years, which is a greater risk of doing so in the SEC, I think the program will take a hit financially ( and obviously simply competitively ).

and i agree with all of that

i just don’t think a winning record equates to the kind of success they’d like. i know ut and their fans are a bit delusional, but imo they should have been dominating the Big12 (on par with ou) if there is to be any validity in the thought that they’d be anything more than mediocre in the SEC

If they maintain this barely over .500 thing they have going in the Big 12 in the SEC, I think they made the right move. If they get worse, and pile up loosing seasons, then I'm not so sure. That's my argument.

[Sparko]

What will make them more relevant is tacking on four or five more losses. /s

[Deleted User 863]

I understand the emotions and hoping they do poorly because of feeling like they wronged KU.

Just don't think it's realistically possible for this to be the wrong move if the only alternative was staying in the big12.