****The official NEW new conference realignment thread.****

[Saul Good]

the second thread has been pronounced dead.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Bambi

Texas vetoed Louisville's invitation to the Big 12? Do you have a link for that?

Did I say they vetoed it, or did I say they got their way. There's a reason you have to change what I say in order to argue.

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by warpaint*

I'm not saying or will say the league's going to be irrelevant or anything like that, just that realignment hurt it. That's all. They still have anchor schools in one of the big 3 states for talent (CA/Tx/Fla) which is critical. As long as they have OU/Tx they will be fine in that sense. But when one or both are down it will hurt the league's perception more than it would have previously.

Neb was hiring bad coaches and failed to capitalize on Tx talent. We can agree to disagree about them.

So you believe they'll be more like OU and Texas long term, rather than Wisconsin?

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by warpaint*

I'm not saying or will say the league's going to be irrelevant or anything like that, just that realignment hurt it. That's all. They still have anchor schools in one of the big 3 states for talent (CA/Tx/Fla) which is critical. As long as they have OU/Tx they will be fine in that sense. But when one or both are down it will hurt the league's perception more than it would have previously.

Neb was hiring bad coaches and failed to capitalize on Tx talent. We can agree to disagree about them.

I'll say it. The league is irrelevant. The Texas vs Oklahoma game was the worst case scenario for the conference.

If Texas hires Briles, I'm going to laugh until I shit myself.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

So you believe they'll be more like OU and Texas long term, rather than Wisconsin?

What are Texas and OU in the long term? They are both declining programs.

[warpaint*]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

So you believe they'll be more like OU and Texas long term, rather than Wisconsin?

Who? Neb? Wisconsin but that's b/c of the league they play in, the whole lot of them are irrelevant. If they were still in the Big 12 and had their blue blood history to go w/ a coach that knew what he was doing w/ access to Tx players they'd be capable of winning a National Championship along w/ CC's. That's a huge loss for the Big 12.

[Saul Good]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoot...tcukansas-game

[warpaint*]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

What are Texas and OU in the long term? They are both declining programs.

Mack is well past his prime. Stoops might be but I suspect he just needs to shake up his staff and get some fresh blood in there.

You are kidding yourself if you don't think Saban would be raking at Tx.

Their issues have more to do w/ that than anything else.

[warpaint*]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

I'll say it. The league is irrelevant. The Texas vs Oklahoma game was the worst case scenario for the conference.

If Texas hires Briles, I'm going to laugh until I shit myself.

If Tx hires Briles and hires a DC who knows what he's doing they will be just fine.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by warpaint*

Mack is well past his prime. Stoops might be but I suspect he just needs to shake up his staff and get some fresh blood in there.

You are kidding yourself if you don't think Saban would be raking at Tx.

Their issues have more to do w/ that than anything else.

Nick Saban is not walking through that door. Texas is suffering from a crippling lack of self-awareness.

They should hire Art Briles, but I don't know if they will.

[warpaint*]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Nick Saban is not walking through that door. Texas is suffering from a crippling lack of self-awareness.

They should hire Art Briles, but I don't know if they will.

Of course not. That's not the point. The point is merely that their issues are coaching related, not realignment related.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by warpaint*

Of course not. That's not the point. The point is merely that their issues are coaching related, not realignment related.

Of course not. Texas is bigger than the conference. Texas doesn't suffer from being in a shitty conference...but the shitty conference suffers from a shitty Texas.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Did I say they vetoed it, or did I say they got their way. There's a reason you have to change what I say in order to argue.

OK. They got their way. Who didn't get their way? Which school wanted Louisville in that Texas "got their way over"?

Or are you making some random fans desires/opinions carry the same weight as the University of Texas?

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Of course not. Texas is bigger than the conference. Texas doesn't suffer from being in a shitty conference...but the shitty conference suffers from a shitty Texas.

Again, how is the conference suffering from having a down year in football? Each school is making more money than ever before thanks to TV deals struck based on a 10 team league.

Kansas, which sits at the bottom of the football side of things is poised to have one of the greatest money making seasons in the history of college basketball.

Where is all this suffering?

[warpaint*]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Of course not. Texas is bigger than the conference. Texas doesn't suffer from being in a shitty conference...but the shitty conference suffers from a shitty Texas.

It's down at the moment but the league is not irrelevant as long as OU and Tx are in it.

[Saul Good]

Since Bitch wouldn't answer my question about "bottom feeders", I did a little research onmy own. In the 20 years since the SEC expanded to add Arkansas, there have been 14 instances of an SEC team going winless in conference. No team has ever gone more than 2 seasons without a win in conference.