Started By
Message
re: sCar/Ark fans, tell me about your move to the SEC in the early 90's
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:00 am to BigBro
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:00 am to BigBro
I don't think Texas has ever wanted to be part of a conference. You definitely don't behave like a conference member. "I know: we'll start our own network that will benefit us and basically demote the rest of our conference members to serf status."
Texas is out for Texas.
I think you would like to be independent, but how can Texas load up on all those swimming conference championships, if they're not in a conference?
Texas is out for Texas.
I think you would like to be independent, but how can Texas load up on all those swimming conference championships, if they're not in a conference?
1
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:00 am to Faurot fodder
quote:
I'm not a pig apologist by any means, but Texas is the common denominator when it comes to conference destruction. Care to explain the connection?
Blaming Texas for “destroying conferences” is not just a shallow take, it’s also dripping with hypocrisy from other Big 12 schools. Texas gets painted as the greedy villain for chasing SEC money, but let’s not forget that the Big 12’s own members, including those now crying foul, voted for unequal revenue sharing in the conference’s early days. Schools like Oklahoma, Nebraska, and Texas A&M happily backed a model that favored the big dogs when it suited them, creating a tiered system that gave Texas and a few others a bigger slice of the pie. This wasn’t Texas strong-arming anyone. It was a collective choice by conference members chasing short-term gains.
Fast forward, and those same schools, or their fans at least, point fingers at Texas for destabilizing the Big 12, conveniently ignoring their own complicity in setting the stage. Nebraska bolted to the Big Ten in 2011, Texas A&M and Missouri ran to the SEC in 2012, and yet Texas is the scapegoat. The hypocrisy is glaring: these schools didn’t mind unequal revenue when they were cashing checks, but when Texas and Oklahoma leveraged their clout for a better deal elsewhere, suddenly it’s betrayal. Every Big 12 school was complicit in a system that prioritized cash over loyalty, and acting shocked when Texas played the same game is laughably inconsistent. The real issue isn’t one school. it’s a system where everyone’s chasing the same dollar signs, then pointing fingers when it backfires.
Not that I don't enjoy playing the role of villain. I do. More than I probably should so please keep up the selective outrage. It's entertaining.
This post was edited on 5/27/25 at 11:04 am
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:07 am to Faurot fodder
quote:
I think you would like to be independent, but how can Texas load up on all those swimming conference championships, if they're not in a conference?
I was going to respond to the 1st part, but then you wrote this, so I'll pass..
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:14 am to HorninHouston
Explain the role of the longhorn network and conference realignment. Was that an endeavor to strengthen the Big XII? Oh wait, it had the opposite effect and further distanced fellow conference members. That's right. But Texas was all about their conference. LOL
Just follow suit with the rest of your fans and live in that world where its all Texas, all the time, sort of like that bastion of success known as the LHN.
Just follow suit with the rest of your fans and live in that world where its all Texas, all the time, sort of like that bastion of success known as the LHN.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:15 am to BigBro
Probably a smart move
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:19 am to Faurot fodder
quote:
Explain the role of the longhorn network and conference realignment. Was that an endeavor to strengthen the Big XII? Oh wait, it had the opposite effect and further distanced fellow conference members. That's right. But Texas was all about their conference. LOL
Just follow suit with the rest of your fans and live in that world where its all Texas, all the time, sort of like that bastion of success known as the LHN.
My post addressed that you dipshit. It was all part of the rules voted on by the members. Any other school in the conference would have accepted that espn offer of a network and you're a fricking liar if you say otherwise. When did I say it was "about the conference". My post made it clear it was about a bigger share for the bigger schools...all voted on by those same schools. Do you have reading comprehension issues? Again, selective outrage.
I notice that any time I bring up the revenue model voting by the other schools they always want to change the narrative and not address it. Wonder why?
This post was edited on 5/27/25 at 11:25 am
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:22 am to SPAGHETTI PLATE
Why would you want to know about this now?
Better question is to ask Texas and OU fans how they're feeling after the move? They have one full conference season under their belts in the Big 3 men's sports. Obviously Texas was up to the challenge.
Better question is to ask Texas and OU fans how they're feeling after the move? They have one full conference season under their belts in the Big 3 men's sports. Obviously Texas was up to the challenge.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:26 am to Maytheporkbewithyou
quote:
Better question is to ask Texas and OU fans how they're feeling after the move? They have one full conference season under their belts in the Big 3 men's sports. Obviously Texas was up to the challenge.
Love it. Every road trip is a bucket list trip. Sure couldn't say that about the Big 12.
Not a single thing I don't love about this conference.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:27 am to HorninHouston
Look, I just don't appreciate your dildo culture. It's nothing personal, dildo.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:28 am to Faurot fodder
quote:
Look, I just don't appreciate your dildo culture. It's nothing personal, dildo.
At least you're being honest now. I can respect that.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:36 am to HorninHouston
No, I think Texas' role in destroying conferences is a well-accepted reality that every person here can see, (that's not looking through diaper-shite tinted glasses.) Find someone from ANY other school who thinks like Texas does on the topic of conference realignment, I challenge you.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:38 am to Faurot fodder
quote:
No, I think Texas' role in destroying conferences is a well-accepted reality that every person here can see, (that's not looking through diaper-shite tinted glasses.) Find someone from ANY other school who thinks like Texas does on the topic of conference realignment, I challenge you.
again...you didn't address my comment. Why did other schools vote in favor of unequal revenue sharing if they were going to then cry about unequal revenue sharing? Why won't you answer? I know the reason. I just want to see if you're honest enough to answer.
Let me demonstrate how this works by responding to your comment. I never once claimed Texas cared about the health of the conference. Texas wanted the biggest piece of the pie. That comes with unequal revenue sharing. It's a model that rewards the bigger and more powerful schools and screws everyone else. It's why it's a terrible model. It's why I'm glad we're in a conference that shares equally now. I was never in favor of that model and hated deloss dodds. He was an arrogant prick. Wasn't much I could do about that.
Now your turn. Why vote in favor of it then cry about it? Were those other schools' leadership just too stupid to understand what it was?
This post was edited on 5/27/25 at 11:44 am
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:41 am to HorninHouston
Did Missouri agree to it? If so, maybe because at the time there was no alternative? Can you tell me why other schools would be put into a position of unequal revenue sharing, to begin with?
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:44 am to HorninHouston
Now, can you find a non-dildo around here that buys into Texas NOT being the major reason for the destruction of not one, but two historic conferences?
There's a self-awareness factor, or lack thereof, that comes into play when discussing this topic with Texas fans.
There's a self-awareness factor, or lack thereof, that comes into play when discussing this topic with Texas fans.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:47 am to Faurot fodder
quote:
Did Missouri agree to it? If so, maybe because at the time there was no alternative? Can you tell me why other schools would be put into a position of unequal revenue sharing, to begin with?
Read my comment above for clarity but to your question. The only schools I know openly pushed for it were A&M, Nebraska (nebraska was initially for equal revenue sharing but I think changed to appease Texas), and Oklahoma. I don't know how any of the other schools felt about it. I'd bet Missouri was against it.
I never tried to claim it was fair. It wasn't. It heavily favored a few schools and I have no issue with fans of Missouri, baylor, etc being pissed about it. My only issue is with fans of schools who supported it but then cried about it when they didn't get the biggest piece of the pie.
it was a terrible arrangement that was doomed from the beginning.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:54 am to HorninHouston
Again, being part of a conference just seems to go against what Texas is all about: Texas.
You just admitted the nubs appeassed Texas. frick that shite. Appeasing fellow conference members should not be a requirement for being in a conference. I really don't think Texas wants to be a PART of anything.
You just admitted the nubs appeassed Texas. frick that shite. Appeasing fellow conference members should not be a requirement for being in a conference. I really don't think Texas wants to be a PART of anything.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:58 am to Faurot fodder
quote:
You just admitted the nubs appeassed Texas. frick that shite. Appeasing fellow conference members should not be a requirement for being in a conference. I really don't think Texas wants to be a PART of anything.
Except we joined a conference that has equal revenue sharing, which blows your fantasy out of the water. That's unfortunate for you I guess.
but don't let me throw a wrench in your meltdown. Carry on.
Like I said I think it's funny.
As for your other comment. I agree. I never said we cared about the other conference members. Texas, Oklahoma, and A&M made it clear they wanted more. I'm just pointing out that we weren't the sole reason for the conference imploding. It's not the narrative you want to push I know. I can't help that.
I'm done arguing with you. I deal with enough progressives in my daily life to know how sensitive you can be. You want to scream into an echo chamber and melt when you are met with facts that refute your narrative. At this point I feel like I'm contributing to mental illness. I'm going to move on. Don't let me stop you though. Melt away.
This post was edited on 5/27/25 at 12:02 pm
Posted on 5/27/25 at 12:02 pm to HorninHouston
Because Texas already sucked the life out of the Big XII. You would have been stupid to not join one of the 2 big conferences. Is this really your argument?
Posted on 5/27/25 at 12:07 pm to HorninHouston
The fact you think I'm a prog just further illustrates your lack of awareness around here.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 12:14 pm to Larry Seinfeld
This is the correct answer. Im 58 and remember how excited I was to finally be playing teams like Bama and LSU in football and Kentucky in basketball. I wasn't a baseball fan back then, that came much later in life. South Carolina will always feel like a brother to me as they are our entry buddies and we have had some good games since then.
Page 2 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News