Per FoxNews, its official: Texas and OK to SEC starting 2025
- Thread starter Woodsa
- Start date
Amazing how when this broke 2 weeks ago, A&M was loudly against letting in TX, wanting to remain the only SEC school in the state. That was a major reason why they joined the SEC in the first place, to get away from TX. Seemingly they also had support from UK, UGA, FLA and South Carolina, all schools who are their state’s only SEC entrant.
While A&M may have grudgingly voted in favor to maximize the short-term $$$$, one has to believe they aren’t happy and will be seeking new pastures when they can. Certainly the BT should consider them first if expanding.
While A&M may have grudgingly voted in favor to maximize the short-term $$$$, one has to believe they aren’t happy and will be seeking new pastures when they can. Certainly the BT should consider them first if expanding.
My guess now is that the B1G will add two AAU schools from the Big 12 after a final token run at ND! Texas A&M regents voted 8-1 to approve move to the SEC despite reports they had four votes to stop the move. It is ALL about money and power and with the NIL move the landscape of college amateur sports and the NCAA are a thing of the past! We have already read high school players reportedly signing deals and leaving state sanctioned and regulated schools to move to academy schools or on to college for the love of money!
Last edited:
good thought. It is bad enough being associated with the likes of Michigan State and Penn State, and Fl State and UNC would make it even worse.
Is it too much to hope the btn will seek schools that don't bring the shame of scandal and corruption?
Yes, it probably is.
Why would we want to add more teams to the B1G that suck? Always build a stronger conference.
Because we suck!! What don’t you get!?!! Let’s presume that Purdue’s stature in the conference as a program year in and year out is above Rutgers, Maryland and Illinois.. that would make us 11th.. you could argue 9-10 on a great day .. probably not.
okay, so you want to add 2-4 teams that drop use immediately to 13-15? Why???!? So we all get more money but WE SUCK EVEN WORSE? I’ll never understand this if it takes me a million years.
it would be like asking the 96 Sonics “hey, anyone you’d like to add to your division this season?” “The bulls.” What?
but then again, when we suck, I’m dealing with a fair number of people who think we SHOULD be playing notre dame and a pac 12 school just so we can get brownie points for showing how we can make things unnecessarily harder on ourselves
We don't suck in basketball. I don't want another Rutgers added to the B1G. The stronger the conference, the better for all of the schools. Would you rather the B1G turn into the MAC?
Sorry you have to 'deal' with people, whatever that means.
Purdue and ND should play every year because it was a long tradition to do so. Those traditions, vanishing as they are, are still part of the charm of cfb to some of us - more important then where we finish in the btn (the media empire formerly know as the big ten conference) and the corporate bowl games that have now been displaced by the playoff.
Re realignment, Oklahoma had a chance to act honorably and tell the SEC that, no, it won't abandon its in-state partner institution and long-time partners in the B12 to make more money. It is supposed to be a university first, not a pro football team with an attached university. Nebraska should have stood up and done the same thing for its long-time B12 partners.
Was there any chance they would do the honorable thing? Sadly, no. They are all in it for the money, and nothing else.
I don’t dispute what you say at all..
1) wanna play notre dame? Instead of Oregon state play Kent state
2) yes, they are killing the goose that laid the golden egg.. it’s capitalism. If you don’t like capitalism that’s fine. If you do, it always leads to more and more consolidations of money and power.. this is the system doing what it is designed to do.
they no longer need you in the seat to make money. That leads to schools like Purdue getting a windfall of tv dollars in the short term. Long term I don’t think I wanna know what it leads to
1) basketball doesn’t matter .. football drives your revenue, drives everything. Joe tiller told the administration this and that therefore they better pony up THEN not now. They chose to wish things other than what JT was telling them.
2) I will never understand this.. we have Michigan, Ohio state, penn state, Wisconsin, Michigan state, Iowa.. lower tier big ten teams of today recruit way better and would smoke Indiana or northwestern of a decade ago.
it doesn’t need to get any harder man… the Mac? I don’t want to play Ohio state, Michigan, Florida state and penn state in one season so that we can keep getting to 6-6.. I want the Mac?
Jeff brohm is struggling in 2021 to do much better than Danny hope in 2009… sorry if I don’t want to play the schedule from this year minus Illinois, plus Florida state lol
How bad has it been for Vanderbilt to be a part of the SEC? They're getting millions of $$$ a year because they're part of a strong conference. Do you really believe Vanderbilt would have any kind of meaningful program if they were part of a lower conference?
How about Northwestern? They were the laughing stock of the B1G in football for decades. The past couple of years they were one of the top teams in the B1G. Where would they be if they were outside the B1G?
1, agree, I see no reason why teams should fly 2000 miles for a game when there are plenty of teams nearby. Yes, play ND - and Ball State, Indiana State, and the like. Those two are our in-state partners.
2, I strongly favor capitalism, but regulation of public utilities and monopolies has proven to be necessary. That applies to Ok, the SEC and all the rest - even private universities that take gov funds and tax breaks.
3, of course they don't need us in the seats, but see 2.
Yeah if someone wants to step in and stop it from becoming unbearable that’s fine .. but with the way our campaign system is set up. I wouldn’t be surprised if those who would Have the power to regulate start getting fat campaign contributions from those who don’t want them to.
I would like to see things stay relatively similar to where they are now. Minor consolidation and I favor a NIL that would at least attempt to distribute funds equally amongst at least football players of the same conference … I don’t think I’m going to get my way.
college football may be something I don’t recognize and don’t care to watch within a couple years
How does that have anything to do with what I said.
answer the question … do you want us to go down to 15th on stature in a 18 team conference …?
Vanderbilt sucking in the Mac and another similar program getting results because an alum coach comes back and does everything right for 15 years doesn’t address any of this.
you also didn’t tell me how not adding FSU makes us the Mac
For quite some time, there's been an element of survival, as well as being able to control your own destiny as a school, as a program.
Schools like Nebraska and Oklahoma (et al) owe the conference nothing. Ditto, Purdue, Illinois, etc.
No doubt, conference changes have accelerated over the years, but expansion and contraction is nothing new to athletics conferences.
Yes, money has accelerated that process. University leaders recognize you need to have money to remain competitive, but it's an oversimplification to say it's about the money and nothing else.
And that’s what worries me. The rest of the big ten benefits us, not the other way around. When the Michigan podcast guys were talking about loyalty to low revenue programs they said “does Washington state bring any money to the pac 12? What about Purdue? Is Purdue generating any money for the big ten.”
when some who post are like “hey wouldn’t it be neat if we added these mega teams,” I fear it ends with Purdue on the outside looking in
One, I wouldn't worry about it. Find something you can control and put your energy toward that.
Two, these things go in cycles.
Three, Purdue isn't likely to be on the outside of anything looking in.
If arrogant Michigan fans think programs like Purdue add nothing to the B1G, they're idiots and unworthy of wasting breath, keystrokes or bandwidth on them.
Right, but I didn't say they owe the conferences anything. Instead, they owe their long-time partners in tradition respect and honor. Right now, Ok and Ok State is the most egregious example of dishonor.
Are you saying univ leaders recognize they have to have money to remain competitive in sports ? If so, you are saying that being competitive in sports, in games, is more important to universities than honor.
You claim you said they didn't own the conferences anything, then listed what they owe the "long time partners".
("Partners")
Money is the mothers milk of everything; politics, business, education, etc. It's an oversimplification to say it's all about money.
I've never made the claim (or held a position) that "being competitive in sports, in games, is more important to universities than honor". You know that, yet tried to attribute that to my position anyway.
You're overplaying the "honor" card. Neither you nor I know what kind of conversations have gone on behind the scenes.
1). You said football drives revenues. What really drives revenues is television deals. Attendance at football games is great. But basketball and football on TV is what drives revenue. That's why I said what I said about Northwestern and Vanderbilt. If you aren't part of a big conference, you're not going to get that revenue. Would you rather be a football program that sucks in the Big Ten but makes a ton of revenue, or a very good program in the MAC that doesn't make near the money to pay for the other programs, like basketball?
2) By not adding competitive teams, the strength of the conference gets lower. At this point, it will be about survival vs the SEC and other conferences. You think Ohio St, Mich, and Penn St will want to hang around if the SEC makes themselves more competitive by adding strong teams and declares their winner the National Champ? The B1G will be the next Big 12. Same for the ACC and PAC 12.
Financially, athletic programs like Purdue and several other of our Big 10 brethren take more out of the kitty than they put in. That’s not debatable.
And that’s what these guys were getting at in my example .. they explicitly stated that they want things to stay the same and they ripped Texas, the sec, Oklahoma and espn .. but when they talked about how things COULD go, they were trying to get in the head of the big money making programs
The part where you argued that Mizzou was rejected by the Big 10 because of academics. Glad to see that you’ve given up on that ridiculous notion.
good grief, you're a d*ck.
Mizzou wasn't admitted because of their academics. You cannot refute that, so you try to play the "gotcha" games.
You are creating a false dichotomy. There is a lot of room between the MAC and a “superconferenced” Big Ten with 2 more powerhouse programs added. Personally, I would rather be last in the Big10 than first in the MAC, but I’d rather be in an “average” SOS P5 conference where Purdue has a chance to compete for a title than a speed bump in a mega conference.
This is where the allegiance to the football vs. basketball programs really comes in. Purdue football-first fans see these expansion moves in terms of impact on the success of the football team. Basketball-first fans are ok with whoring out the football team and more losses if it means a few extra bucks.
It would not bother me to see schools like OSU and UM sail away for the SEC or some minor league structure and let the remaing Big10 settle into a more competitively balanced situation with peer schools on the level with Big12 and ACC (not MAC). The money TV would probably dip, but not having to finance ongoing (and ill fated) attempts to keep up with OSU would balance that out.
Last edited:
Football gets those deals not basketball … f-ing please dude
we have Ohio state, Michigan, penn state, Michigan state, Iowa and Wisconsin.. the conference is the second toughest in the nation and won’t be overtaken by the ACC or pac 12. You’re being a masochist.
the better outcome is for Purdue’s stature to be higher in the second toughest conference in America
My scenario with pat wasnt “well say MICHIGAN AND OHIO STATE LEAVE, we shouldn’t add Florida state.”
my scenario was .. If they stay it’s beyond moronic to add FSU if you ever want to see Purdue compete for shit
Back when the NFL was working on their long term TV strategy, their was a debate among the owners as to whether to let each team do its own deal, or do one league-wide contract and split the revenue equally.
Many of the big market owners wanted to do their own TV deals, but Giants owner Wellington Mara believed that the NFL product would benefit from equally sharing TV revenue among all teams. Obviously, he has proven to be correct.
I’m not sure college football has such a visionary.
How do you know it will be the 2nd toughest conference in the long run? And BTW, Mich St sucks and Wisconsin literally used to be the conference doormat prior to Alvarez. Even Nebraska, who used to be a perennial powerhouse has shit the bed for nearly a decade. Things change, even though you don't seem to want to accept that. Ohio St, Penn St, and Michigan are the only real football brands in the B1G. Lose one or more of them, and it's over. No one pays anything for what's left. Adding shit programs just dilutes that even further.
You’re way off base. Michigan state has way too much talent in the area to stay down for long. I can’t believe there are people like you who are like “yeah, I want the 2021 schedule, but instead of Illinois I want to play Florida state so that 5-7 will be a really good year. But hey.. at least more money for the conference.”
