re: SEC Expansion: How it happened in 1990

Look, I'm not mad, because the SEC obviously eventually wanted us anyway.

But three things:

1) Do you really think the SEC would have turned down UTx because the HAD to take A&M, too?

2) Even if the SEC didn't initially want A&M, but DID want UTx/Ark/SCar, would they still turn down A&M as the 4th piece after getting rejected by the other candidates?

3) I simply can't credit anyone who says that UTx was ready to enter the SEC, when everything else I've read and everyone I've talked to says the SEC is the LAST conference they'd be willing to join. I think it's far more likely Dodds was blowing smoke up Shiller's and the SEC's skirt while working on getting the B12 formed.

quote:

---

The first expansion was solely about the title game and the money generated from it, Kramer found the rule and wanted to exploit it for monetary purposes.

---

Actually the first realignment was about the same reason as the 2010 one. Both started because the B1G were greedy folks and wanted to gobble up more teams. To be more specific, they wanted a specific team in their footprint based in South Bend.

In 1988 - 1989 they wanted Notre Dame and another team to get to 12. They got Penn State then got hung at 11 because the Irish kept saying no. Why else would they hold out at 11 when everybody else was getting to 12.

In this last go round they wanted the Irish again but got Nebraska instead as the Children of the Corn had already tried several times to join the B1G since the 1900's. At least they got to 12 and a CCG about 20 years too late. After the Irish got half pregnant in the ACC the B1G turned to Maryland and Rutgers as the consolation prizes.

If the B1G had not fired the first shot by going after Notre Dame both times SEC may still be at 10 and 12 respectively. Sure Kramer exploited the rule, but he was being reactive to the B1G not proactive to the SEC.

quote:

---

Well you'll get different answers from different people, but the former SEC commissioner Schiller told PAWWWWL that the SEC didnt't want A&M back then.

---

I asked RC about that and he told me that the SEC expressed some interest to him, but the politicians shut it all down quickly and no real talks got off the ground.

Soon as they got wind the politicians contacted TAMU and Texas and told them what they had to do.

No link, just what I was told firsthand by our HOF coach.

quote:

---

I simply can't credit anyone who says that UTx was ready to enter the SEC, when everything else I've read and everyone I've talked to says the SEC is the LAST conference they'd be willing to join.

---

Yet both times t.u. has talked about going to the PAC (which appears to be their goal), they've never made it happen. And both times, A&M has been a factor because it hasn't wanted to go there.

The first time (1990) it probably doesn't happen even if A&M was willing due to the Baylor/Tech politics.

But the second time (2010) they had actually worked out a deal whereby Tech would be a part. Yet when A&M once again said no thanks, instead of finding a replacement (Utah was available, and ultimately joined the PAC) they once again chickened out.

The good thing about the "unanswered prayers" of 1990 is that A&M would have been stuck with t.u. In 2011 that's no longer the case. A&M obtained a "brand differentiation" that no other school in Texas could offer--the opportunity to stay in state and play in what is essentially the de facto NFL Development League. And so far, from a recruiting standpoint, it has made all the difference.

quote:

---

Missouri is as foreign to us as they are to anybody.

---

Interesting point. I assumed there was some history there.

quote:

---

Under the proposed division alignment, Florida State would face Florida, Auburn and Alabama every year, which raised objections from FSU Athletic Director Bob Goin.

---

I very seriously doubt some dumbass told FSU that they would be in a division with UF, Bama, & AU. First off, how would that even be possible? The SEC already had Arky coming in from the west, so how were they planning on dividing the divisions with those four being in one division?

And secondly if they really wanted FSU, and they knew that they weren't certain yet as to how they would divide the divisions (which they obviously weren't since UF didn't end up in the same division as Bama and AU), and if FSU told them that they didn't like that division lineup, why on earth did they tell them that was going to be the division?

I think Bowden is FOS on that. I think they were scared of the SEC no matter how the divisions were going to be laid out.

quote:

---

Missouri is as foreign to us as they are to anybody.

---

quote:

---

Interesting point. I assumed there was some history there.

---

Arkansas and Missouri have played football 5 times dating back to 1906. Two of those meetings were bowl games. Ole Miss has more history with Mizzou than we do.

The only former Big 8 team we really have significant history with is Oklahoma State, and that was all pre-1980.

We've only played OU like 12 times, and maybe 3 times since the 1960s.

Why haven't y'all played OU more?

I always wondered why A&M had not played the Oklahoma schools more than they had (Both were charter members of the ol' SWC - both didn't stay very long though).

That's very interesting how some people thought a texas/SEC move was imminent in 1990. Everything we have ever read in the Texas media is how UT would never join the SEC because it was full of rednecks and cheaters and that the PAC-10 had a much more compatible profile for their "brand". I'm also surprised A&M had enough pull in the Lege to keep UT from bolting to the SEC without them. A&M has not had that kind of mojo politically until very recently.

The more you know...

quote:

---

That's very interesting how some people thought a texas/SEC move was imminent in 1990. Everything we have ever read in the Texas media is how UT would never join the SEC because it was full of rednecks and cheaters and that the PAC-10 had a much more compatible profile for their "brand". I'm also surprised A&M had enough pull in the Lege to keep UT from bolting to the SEC without them. A&M has not had that kind of mojo politically until very recently.

The more you know...

---

I'm sure you are aware of how Texas prefers to portray themselves publicly, but how contradictory their actions can be behind the scenes.

The way the story goes, Arkansas was going, Texas was leaning towards it, but then it was "you can't go with out aTm", meanwhile FSU and Miami were trying to be lured in as well. Obviously, those three got cold feet and Carolina was asked to join to make an even 12.

As far as the divisions, one proposed scenario was a north/south type set up instead of east/west.