What Should Texas Do?

[mudloggerone]

I still don't believe he is serious Bodey, I mean really, he can't possibly be serious.

 

[Sgt John]

:xpopcorn:

 

[Kingdome]

The SEC has a lot tougher in conference SOS than the Pac-10

This is a few years old, but I bet the #s have not changed much:

Toughest schedules over 10 year period (ending 2005 or 2006 I think)

1). Stanford 12.78
2). USC 13.22
3). UCLA 14.56
4). Florida State 14.78
5). Washington 15.56
6). Notre Dame 16.44
7). Colorado 17.44
8). Michigan 19.67
9). North Carolina 20.22
10). California 21.89
11). Iowa 23.56
12). Ohio State 23.67
13). Penn State 25.11
14). Florida 25.56
15). Texas A&M 25.67
16). Arizona 26.56
17). Alabama 26.78
18). Arizona State 27.78
19). Tennessee 28.56
20). Northwestern 29.11
21). South Carolina 29.33
22). LSU 29.67
22). Virginia 29.78
24). Auburn 29.78
25). Washington State 30.33
26). Oklahoma 30.56
27). Duke 30.67
28). Michigan State 30.89
29). Purdue 32.11
30). Oregon 32.33
31). Indiana 32.33
32). Oregon State 32.78
33). Nebraska 33.78
34). Georgia 33.78
35). Georgia Tech 34.78
36). Illinois 35.33
37). Texas 35.89
38). Iowa State 35.89
39). Miami 36.67
40). Baylor 36.78
41). Clemson 37.67
42). Kentucky 38.11
43). Arkansas 38.67
44). Wake Forest 39.33
45). Oklahoma State 39.44
46). NC State 39.44
47). Missouri 40.56
38). Wisconsin 40.78
49). Vanderbilt 41.89
50). Syracuse 41.89
51). Kansas 42.11
52). Mississippi State 42.56
53). Maryland 44.11
54). Minnesota 46.11
55). Kansas State 46.56
56). Texas Tech 47.22
57). West Virginia 49.11
58). Virginia Tech 50.11
59). Mississippi 54.11
60). Boston College 55.00
61). Rutgers 59.33




Pac-10 22.78
Big Ten 30.79
SEC 34.19
Big XII 36.67
ACC 36.05
Big East 50.11

and they play just as many good teams out of conference as the Pac-10 does.

Washington, USC, & UCLA have never played a D1-AA school. How many has the avg. SEC school (sans Tennessee) played? With the exception of Tennessee, the SEC likes to feast on the weak.

Major non-conference opponents last 10 years:

Washington - Oklahoma (x2), Miami (x2), Michigan (x2), Ohio State (x2), LSU, Colorado, Notre Dame (x4)
Washington State - Ohio State, Notre Dame, Colorado, Auburn, Wisconsin, Oklahoma State, Baylor (x2)
Oregon State - LSU, Louisville, Cincinnati (x2)
Oregon - Wisconsin (x2), Mississippi State (x2), Michigan (x2), Oklahoma (x2), Purdue (x2)
California - Illinois (x3), Kansas State, Tennessee (x2), Minnesota (x2), Maryland (2), Michigan State
Stanford - Notre Dame (x10), Texas, Boston College (x2), Wake Forest
UCLA - Alabama (x2), Michigan, Kansas, Ohio State, Oklahoma State (x2), Colorado (x2), Oklahoma (x2), Illinois (x2), Notre Dame (x2), Tenneseee (x2), Kansas State
USC - Notre Dame (x10), Penn State, Colorado (x2), Kansas State (x2), Auburn (x2), Virginia Tech, Arkansas (x2), Nebraska (x2), Virginia, Ohio State (x2)
Arizona State - Nebraska, Iowa (x2), Northwestern (x2), LSU, Colorado, Georgia (x2)
Arizona - Ohio State, Wisconsin (x2), LSU (x2), Purdue (x2), Iowa


Tennessee - Notre Dame (x3), Rutgers, Miami (x2), California (x2), UCLA (x2)
Vanderbilt - Wake Forest (x2), Georgia Tech (x2), Rutgers, Michigan
Kentucky - Louisville (x10)
South Carolina - Clemson (x10), Virginia (x2), NC State (x2)
Georgia - Georgia Tech (x10), Clemson (x2), Colorado, Oklahoma State (x2), Arizona State (x2)
Florida - Florida State (x10), Miami (x3)
Auburn - USC (x2), Georgia Tech (x2, Washington State, Kansas State, West Virginia
Alabama - UCLA (x2), Oklahoma (x2), Florida State, Clemson, Virginia Tech
Mississippi - Texas Tech (x2), Missouri (x2), Wake Forest (x2)
Mississippi State - Oregon (x2), West Virginia (x2), Georgia Tech (x2)
LSU - Arizona (x2), Oregon State, Arizona State, Virginia Tech, Washington
Arkansas - USC (x2), Texas, Texas A&M


D1-AA schools played last 10 years:

Washington - none
Washington State - (4) Montana State (x2), Grambling St., Portland State
Oregon State - (8) Eastern Washington (x2), Northern Arizona, Eastern Kentucky, Sacramento State, Portland State (x2), Idaho State
Oregon - (3) Portland State (x2), Montana
California - (3) Sacramento State, Portland State, Eastern Washington
Stanford - (1) UC Davis
UCLA - none
USC - none
Arizona State - (5) Eastern Washington, Northern Arizona (x3), Idaho State
Arizona - (6) Northern Arizona (x5), Stephen F. Austin

Tennessee - none
Vanderbilt - (8) Richmond (x3), Furman, UT Chattanooga, Eastern Kentucky, Tennessee State, Western Carolina
Kentucky - (6) Murray State, Idaho State, Texas State, Eastern Kentucky (x2), Norfolk State
South Carolina - (5) Wofford (x3), South Carolina State (x2)
Georgia - (6) Georgia Southern (x3), Northwestern State, Western Carolina, Tennessee Tech
Florida - (4) Florida A&M, Western Carolina, Citadel, Charleston Southern
Auburn - (4) Western Carolina, Citadel, Furman, Tennessee-Martin
Alabama - (3) Western Carolina (x2), UT-Chattanooga
Mississippi - (5) Citadel, Northwestern State (x2), Samford, Northern Arizona
Mississippi State - (6) Jacksonville State (x2), Maine, Murray State, Gardner-Webb, Jackson St.
LSU - (6) Western Carolina, Citadel, Western Illinois (x2), Appalachian State (x2)
Arkansas - (6) Missouri State (x3), Weber State, SE Missouri State, TN-Chattanooga

Don't you think its going to be tougher for the bottom teams in the SEC to win games when there playing the top half of the SEC?

They only play 8 SEC games. That means they likely miss playing one of the good teams in the other division, if not more. Then with the remaining 4 games, they play a weaker schedule.

Heres a couple stats for you:

1. The SEC is 63-40-6 against the Pac-10

Pac-10 is 11-9 since 2000. Still, the SEC is a better football conference, just not as good at the bottom.

2. If the Pac-10 had the deepest conference shouldn't they do well in bowl games?

2nd most BCS bowl wins behind the SEC.

 

[Miller]

And yet out of your completely slanted list only these matter:

Football: Pac-10 1, Big Ten 1
M. Basketball: Big Ten 1, Pac-10 0
W. Basketball: Pac-10 0, Big Ten 0
Baseball: Pac-10 2, Big Ten 0

And I'm being generous on Baseball. If you whole point is the Pac-10 wins NC's in completely meaningless to everyone but friends and family fringe sports and due to that we are great....OK. you are right......

Where it matters, you just are not so great, the rest of the Nation sees it, you stuck in the great isolated North West...does not....

As far as your "look at all the great complex's that Texas has for those sports argument", and who in the hell do you think paid for them? The Men's rowing team??? It's FOOTBALL money!! Ohio State has fantastic athletic complexes as well, same can be said for a lot of schools.....but it's the FOOTBALL revenues that have paid for them. That can happen when your schools get 22 million a year from TV revenue alone.

But the fact that the focus fo your argument has gone in the direction of water polo, rowing and women's softball is enough to tell me you're simply trolling for a reaction to bullshit ideas you don't even believe.

 

[bodey24]

2nd most BCS bowl wins behind the SEC.

Exactly my point. If the SEC has more total bowl wins, a better winning percentage in bowl games, and a 63-40 record against the Pac-10 how can you continue to sit there and argue that the Pac-10 is deeper?

Since you forgot to answer my question. If the Pac-10 is the deeper conference how can they go 2-5 in bowl games this past year? Wouldn't these so called good teams at the middle of your conference beat the middle of the road teams they are playing from another conference in a bowl game?

 

[bodey24]

I still don't believe he is serious Bodey, I mean really, he can't possibly be serious.

LOL, That's exactly how I feel about it.

 

[maverick824]

The Daily Texan - Athletics revenue benefits University

If you guys have a few minutes, here, read this, chock full of facts from someone who I'm guessing knows far more about it than the people who don't seem to be getting through.....I'll even highlight a few concepts from the article that may be difficult to grasp given the conversation (albeit hilarious and entertaining)........the man being quoted is DeLoss Dodds, the head Athletic Director of the University of Texas, also, William Powers, University of Texas President.........

“We’re totally self-funded,” Dodds said. “We generate all our own money for the budget. We build our own budget, and the University approves it.”

- Ok, this means that there's no neat little loophole to exploit. The University does NOT take academic monies and help out the little guys, every sports team that is put on the field is doing so from a completely athletic program budget........keep this fact in mind

The football program alone generates a nation-high $59 million in profit. Men’s basketball is second with a little over $5 million. The department loses about $10 million of profit for all other sports, except for baseball, which breaks even.

- Hmmmm....seems to me that I tried explaining earlier how football makes ridiculous amounts of money for the school compared to the rest of the programs, but was rebuked with the "it cares about every team" analysis....alright, we've just established that two programs of 20 are in the black with profit, and a third, baseball, is a national power program in the sport, and it breaks even. Keep in mind, EVERY other sport loses money in some form or fashion........

Dodds said having the football profits helps fund the rest of the University’s 20 sports programs.

- And there's the exact fact that I've been trying to get across.....the football program is the lifeblood of the Texas athletic program. You can crow at the top of your lungs about how "other programs" need to be thought about.....but considering they are using the money that the football program brings in to feed those 1st class athletic facilities for the other sports, football will be the reason they move (or stay)....

Powers said an important factor in budget management is not having more sports than are fiscally manageable. Some NCAA official sports UT does not fund include men’s soccer, volleyball and rowing, as well as lacrosse, hockey and gymnastics for either men or women.

- I peed myself a little when I read this. Their teams RAISE THEIR OWN MONEY to compete! So if they're not even funding those teams, pretty certain they're not going to be bothered if a move to "cold country" is going to harm a team that they're not even funding.


"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."

haha, ok, you may now try to punch holes in things that were said from two of the most influential men at the University of Texas....I bid you godspeed and good luck sir, you just got seriously served!

 

[bodey24]

Look at NFL production if you won't take my word for it. The bottom teams in the Pac-10 have had better seasons & produce more NFL players than the bottom of the SEC. The reason the SEC is the best conference isn't because of the bottom, it is because of the 6 great programs at the top.

The Southeastern Conference has consistently had the most NFL players. In the 2007 season, the SEC had 263 players on NFL rosters. The ACC had 238 players, Big Ten 234 players, Pac-10 183 players, Big 12 176 players and Big East 84 players.

You wanted stats there you go. The SEC has more NFL players, more wins against the pac-10, and more bowl wins than any other conference. I'm not quite sure how your going to twist all of the facts I have just given you but I am sure you will find away to keep telling yourself that the Pac-10 is the deepest conference in the land.

 

[Miller]

Big Ten 234 players, Pac-10 183 players

hmmm, another list that the Big 10 comes out on top of the Pac-10 on.....

 

[Miller]

Another angle on this "deep" conference. If you are a "deep" conference, you have to start with being great at the top. If you are not, the rest is irrelevant and word mediocre should be used and not deep. Found this sidebar on at large BCS bids. This was done before this past season and covers a 5 yr span from 04-08. I would think that deep conferences would be able to land an at large bid on a consistent basis. Here is what you have:
2004 Big 10, Big 12
2005 Big 12 (Utah)
2006 Big 10 (ND)
2007 Big 10, SEC (Boise St., ND)
2008 Big 10, SEC, Big 12 (Hawaii)

So that is 4 at-large BCS bids for the Big 10, 3 for the Big 12, and 2 for the SEC. The rest never received an At-Large.

This past year the at large teams were TCU, Boise St, Iowa, and Florida.

So you can make it 5 for the the Big 10 and 3 for the SEC in the last 6 years. And NONE for this supposedly "deep" Pac-10.....

So...deep?? or Mediocre??

 

[Kingdome]

And yet out of your completely slanted list only these matter:

USC has two championships. Why be such a pecker about this? This isn't like Ohio State trying to claim 1998 as a title, this a regarded by an overwhelming number of people as a championship.

And I'm being generous on Baseball.

Take off your Big Ten glasses. Baseball is big in unfrozen pond country. Softball is big too. They don't show hockey on ESPN, but they show college baseball & softball. The NCAA considers baseball a revenue sports. Check out a game at Texas, LSU, Arizona State, Oregon State, Oregon, etc. to see for yourself.

If you whole point is the Pac-10 wins NC's in completely meaningless to everyone but friends and family fringe sports and due to that we are great....OK. you are right......

Then why don't they dump those sports like they dumped fencing? Why do they have those awesome facilities if they don't give a damn? Do you honestly think they will sacrifice these sports in a move to another conference?

Where it matters, you just are not so great,

What the heck are you talking about? Pac-10 is the 2nd best football conference, 4th best basketball conference (ahead of the SEC & Big 12), the best baseball conference, the best volleyball conference, best softball conference, 2nd best track conference, best tennis conference, best swimming conference.

And that 4th in basketball is not a distant 4th (well maybe this year).

the rest of the Nation sees it, you stuck in the great isolated North West...does not....

Isolated NW, lol! The whole world is watching us. The Pac-10: Conference of Champions. Its the truth & the official motto.

Championships in the sports Texas competes in since 2000:

Pac-10 62
Big Ten 10
Texas 8

Big Ten is so weak that Texas by itself almost matches them. Why is the Big Ten so weak outside of basketball? Shouldn't they be able to buy better baseball programs?

As far as your "look at all the great complex's that Texas has for those sports argument", and who in the hell do you think paid for them?

Private donations. The more a team wins, the more donations they tend reap.

The Men's rowing team???

Only at Washington.

It's FOOTBALL money!!

No, the football $ pays the bills, not finances the palaces.

Ohio State has fantastic athletic complexes as well, same can be said for a lot of schools.....but it's the FOOTBALL revenues that have paid for them.

So football revenues paid for your facilities more so that private donations?

Scout.com: OSU Institutes Pay Forward Society For Donors

Tom Hof, associate athletics director for development and marketing at Ohio State, described the donations made by the original members of the Pay Forward Society as gifts that bring life to proposed athletics projects.

“We view these donations as transformational gifts, which is a gift at such a significant level that it literally transforms a program or project,” Hof said. “Without gifts of that level we would not be able to do the golf course restoration. They allowed us to build the Jerome Schottenstein Center. Similarly, we had gifts for the Ohio Stadium project.

“These gifts enable us to begin new projects and/or enhance programs that would not be possible without them. These gifts help make dreams become a reality.

But the fact that the focus fo your argument has gone in the direction of water polo, rowing and women's softball is enough to tell me you're simply trolling for a reaction to bullshit ideas you don't even believe.

Sports that Texas participates in:

Title last 10 years: Pac-10 62, Big Ten 10

That's reality. Facts aren't bullshit ideas meant to piss you off. I am sorry reality does not agree with your fantasy world. You don't have be petty and toss out lame insults. This was fun, but I like facts & info, not lame rationalizations.

 

[Kingdome]

Exactly my point. If the SEC has more total bowl wins, a better winning percentage in bowl games, and a 63-40 record against the Pac-10 how can you continue to sit there and argue that the Pac-10 is deeper?

Two different arguments! I agree the SEC is the best conference! There is no dispute about that. My argument is that the Pac-10 is deeper.

How BCS bowl games have the bottom 6 in the SEC played in?

Since you forgot to answer my question. If the Pac-10 is the deeper conference how can they go 2-5 in bowl games this past year?

They won the ESPN bowl challenge the year before.

 

[Kingdome]

The Southeastern Conference has consistently had the most NFL players. In the 2007 season, the SEC had 263 players on NFL rosters. The ACC had 238 players, Big Ten 234 players, Pac-10 183 players, Big 12 176 players and Big East 84 players.

You wanted stats there you go. The SEC has more NFL players, more wins against the pac-10, and more bowl wins than any other conference. I'm not quite sure how your going to twist all of the facts I have just given you but I am sure you will find away to keep telling yourself that the Pac-10 is the deepest conference in the land.

Dude, the SEC is the best conference, that isn't the argument. We are talking depth. Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, Auburn, & LSU are not what we are debating here, so stop throwing out their #s to defend Vandy, Kentucky etc.

Show me how many NFL players Kentucky has, Vandy has, etc. Then compare that to the Pac-10's lesser programs. The lower SEC programs are weaker than the lower Pac-10 programs. That is the argument here. You can't include the stats from the elite 6 to make your case for the sisters of the poor.

 

[Miller]

USC has two championships. Why be such a pecker about this? This isn't like Ohio State trying to claim 1998 as a title, this a regarded by an overwhelming number of people as a championship.

B/c there is only ONE champion....ONE! They play a game now days you know this right? LSU played and won.....just the facts. We are in the BCS era, live with it.

 

[Miller]

I like facts & info, not lame rationalizations.

Then why don't you quit making them.....

Texas made money in 2 sports: Football & Basketball....Baseball broke even....did not make the school a dime.

Outside of that, the schools do not matter when your talking making this decision. That is the point, you think all of this matter....if doesn't. You think it does....fine.....the rest of us know they don't.

And if your not having fun.....you can quit responding, it is your choice....

 

[bodey24]

Two different arguments! I agree the SEC is the best conference! There is no dispute about that. My argument is that the Pac-10 is deeper.

How BCS bowl games have the bottom 6 in the SEC played in?



They won the ESPN bowl challenge the year before.

They actually play in quite a bit. Most seasons atleast 9 of the 12 SEC schools make a bowl. This past season 10 of the 12 did. The year the Pac-10 won the challenge only 5 of the 10 teams made a bowl. If they are deep wouldn't more than half of the teams make it? I'm not real sure how your still arguing this you have come up with 0 good facts that show the Pac-10 is deeper.

 

[bodey24]

Dude, the SEC is the best conference, that isn't the argument. We are talking depth. Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, Auburn, & LSU are not what we are debating here, so stop throwing out their #s to defend Vandy, Kentucky etc.

Show me how many NFL players Kentucky has, Vandy has, etc. Then compare that to the Pac-10's lesser programs. The lower SEC programs are weaker than the lower Pac-10 programs. That is the argument here. You can't include the stats from the elite 6 to make your case for the sisters of the poor.

The SEC has almost 100 more players in the NFL. I guarantee there lesser programs have just as many if not more NFL players than the Pac-10. You just need to take off your homer glasses and realize that 3 people are throwing facts at you to prove your wrong and somehow you still believe the Pac-10 is the deepest.

 

[Kingdome]

Another angle on this "deep" conference. If you are a "deep" conference, you have to start with being great at the top. If you are not, the rest is irrelevant and word mediocre should be used and not deep. Found this sidebar on at large BCS bids. This was done before this past season and covers a 5 yr span from 04-08. I would think that deep conferences would be able to land an at large bid on a consistent basis.

Again, 9 conference games, toughest non-conference schedule. It is also kind of funny the #s you use follow a stretch where the Pac-10 had multiple teams in BCS bowls. No wonder you cut the list off short, LOL.

Some teams have an easy road to the BCS at-large:

BCS at-large Iowa 2002 (didn't play Ohio State): schedule rank: #46 Loss: #36 Best wins: #10, #16, #32, #38, #46, #79

Some don't:

BCS at-large USC 2002: schedule rank: #1 Losses: @ #5, @ #12 Best wins: #15, #17, #19, #24, #30, #31, #36, #37



Here is an example of a Pac-10 team losing just one game, on the road to the #1 team in the country, and missing the BCS:

BCS snub California 2004: Schedule rank: #14 Loss: @ #1 Best wins: #13, #17, #34, #46, #51, #53

BCS at-large Texas 2004: Schedule rank: #28 Loss: neutral #3 Best wins: #14, #23, #28, #32, #44, #57

BCS at-large Utah 2004: Schedule rank: #67 Best wins: #23, #35, #41, #43, #49, #76

 

[Kingdome]

B/c there is only ONE champion....ONE!

Not that year. #1 USC never played LSU. The system does not always work. People acknowledge two championships that year. Why are you stuck on something so small & so petty? Oh yeah, this is why:


Natl. Championships since 1990:

Football: Pac-10 3, Big Ten 2
Basketball: Pac-10 2, Big Ten 1
W. Basketball: Pac-10 2, Big Ten 1
Baseball: Pac-10 3, Big Ten 0
Softball: Pac-10 17, Big Ten 1
Volleyball: Pac-10 11, Big Ten 4

 

[Remote Controller]

Texas should seceed! :grin: