(05-13-2013 09:28 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-13-2013 09:02 PM)FormerShasta Wrote:  

(05-13-2013 07:49 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-13-2013 07:39 PM)nsmith6 Wrote:  

(05-13-2013 07:29 PM)bullet Wrote:  And Bill Powers. And everyone working in the UT AD who remembers Bleachergate the last time Texas played Houston.

I always chuckle when I hear this argument. Is the administration at Texas really that childish? UH's entire administration, both for the UH System and in the Athletic department, has completely changed since bleachergate in 2001.

Is this REALLY still an issue, or are you guys just super extra vengeful up there in Austin?

Add to that, I simply don't believe that business decisions of this magnitude are made on the basis of spite, disregarding all else. I think this argument is just something that UT forum posters can hang over the heads of UH forum posters.

Houston risked the life of 10,000 Texas fans on those flimsy bleachers. Had they not been condemned it might have been a disaster. Its not doing business with someone who has a reckless disregard for the safety of fans.

The exact opposite of what you posted is true. Those stands were built by the same firm who built them for the Olympics. The UH officials inspected the stands and called off the extra seating, thereby having complete regard for Longhorn lives. I wouldn't have been so charitable.

That's a sicko thing to say.

Of course it was. No apologies.

I saw the bleachers right after they went up, and I remember thinking that they were gonna collapse on television and we would go down in infamy. I was actually surprised they called the seating off, as we lost a ton of money and forever gave the Horns a "reason" to never play us again.

(05-13-2013 10:24 PM)Cougar Hippy Wrote:  

(05-13-2013 10:14 PM)UNLVFan90 Wrote:  I wish other Houston fans had a functioning brain like yourself.

Why would we want to be in a conference with schools that are in a different timezone, smaller fanbases, smaller endowments and smaller athletic budgets? UNLV doesn't do jackshit in football and playing them would be a bore due to their lack of competitiveness.


UNLESS the AAC goes belly up and ALL of the P5 say no, we'll never be in the MWC. When you invited us last time, you wouldn't give us a Boise-type deal, so we told you to **** off.


TO be truly honest, UNLV is nothing but trash in our eyes.

TCU. They did all of that, now look at them. They are making 20 times more money than you are. Plus when you come over you'll be in the east and we'll be in the west so you don't have to worry about our football program.

(05-13-2013 10:33 PM)UNLVFan90 Wrote:  

(05-13-2013 10:24 PM)Cougar Hippy Wrote:  

(05-13-2013 10:14 PM)UNLVFan90 Wrote:  I wish other Houston fans had a functioning brain like yourself.

Why would we want to be in a conference with schools that are in a different timezone, smaller fanbases, smaller endowments and smaller athletic budgets? UNLV doesn't do jackshit in football and playing them would be a bore due to their lack of competitiveness.


UNLESS the AAC goes belly up and ALL of the P5 say no, we'll never be in the MWC. When you invited us last time, you wouldn't give us a Boise-type deal, so we told you to **** off.


TO be truly honest, UNLV is nothing but trash in our eyes.

TCU. They did all of that, now look at them. They are making 20 times more money than you are. Plus when you come over you'll be in the east and we'll be in the west so you don't have to worry about our football program.

The MWC is a far cry from its TCU, Boise, BYU, Utah days.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

UH and SMU would be in the MWC if you guys hadn't blown your load too early and invited SJSU and Utah State the moment Boise bailed.

(05-13-2013 04:24 PM)AirRaid Wrote:  God hope this happens, so I can laugh in JML's face

Good luck.

(05-13-2013 06:13 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  The Big 12 showed a lot more interest in talking to us after the Pac 12 came down for a tour/visit.

You have a link that shows Larry Scott was in Houston visiting with UH officials?

I think it should be mentioned that Deloss isn't the only person in the Big 12 with a no vote that doesn't want UH. I'm sure TCU and Baylor would vote no as well as Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma St.

(05-13-2013 10:52 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  You have a link that shows Larry Scott was in Houston visiting with UH officials?

I think it should be mentioned that Deloss isn't the only person in the Big 12 with a no vote that doesn't want UH. I'm sure TCU and Baylor would vote no as well as Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma St.

It is a pretty well known fact that Pac 12 officials were at Robertson during the Tulane game.

Regarding Baylor, here's what their president said in leaked emails

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/college...loftin.ece


Almost everybody is actually on board with us coming. I can't wait to see you cry and moan if this all comes to pass.

(05-13-2013 10:52 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(05-13-2013 06:13 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  The Big 12 showed a lot more interest in talking to us after the Pac 12 came down for a tour/visit.

You have a link that shows Larry Scott was in Houston visiting with UH officials?

I think it should be mentioned that Deloss isn't the only person in the Big 12 with a no vote that doesn't want UH. I'm sure TCU and Baylor would vote no as well as Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma St.

You have a link for that?

(05-13-2013 10:52 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(05-13-2013 06:13 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  The Big 12 showed a lot more interest in talking to us after the Pac 12 came down for a tour/visit.

You have a link that shows Larry Scott was in Houston visiting with UH officials?

It was Kevin Weiberg, and I didn't read about it online.

Coog fans, I honestly hope it happens. In fact, I think the Big 12 should invite UH, SMU, Rice, UTEP, Tx. State and UTSA. We can invite our friends in Oklahoma, Kansas and West Virginia to the party. I bet they can't wait for that.

(05-13-2013 04:27 PM)bearcat29 Wrote:  My guess is it will work about as well as UC's Christmas cards to the ACC.

that really happened?

i just figured itwas a myth/joke/exaggeration

(05-13-2013 11:11 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  Coog fans, I honestly hope it happens. In fact, I think the Big 12 should invite UH, SMU, Rice, UTEP, Tx. State and UTSA. We can invite our friends in Oklahoma, Kansas and West Virginia to the party. I bet they can't wait for that.

Don't forget Stephen F. Austin College and Abilene Christian...

(05-13-2013 11:28 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-13-2013 11:11 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  Coog fans, I honestly hope it happens. In fact, I think the Big 12 should invite UH, SMU, Rice, UTEP, Tx. State and UTSA. We can invite our friends in Oklahoma, Kansas and West Virginia to the party. I bet they can't wait for that.

Don't forget Stephen F. Austin College and Abilene Christian...

I can hear the laughter in College Station and Columbia, MO all the way here in North Ft. Worth.

I bet TV networks will be offering Big 12 schools 50Million plus with this line up.

"South"
UT
OU
Tech
Okla St
Baylor
West Virginia

"North"
Kansas
K-State
Iowa State
TCU
Houston
Cincy ( why not? If we add Houston, we obviously won't need the Florida schools and it gives West Virginia the bridge they were looking for).

(05-13-2013 11:11 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  Coog fans, I honestly hope it happens. In fact, I think the Big 12 should invite UH, SMU, Rice, UTEP, Tx. State and UTSA. We can invite our friends in Oklahoma, Kansas and West Virginia to the party. I bet they can't wait for that.

If it happens, it's as much about politics as it is football. As explained by one Longhorn poster:

"If the Big12 is serious (about talking to UH) it means UT Prez Bill Powers just declared war on Gov. Rick Perry.

It is distinctly possible that Texas has heard that politically it cannot go anywhere. If that is true, then UH is not just an okay pick up, but a necessary one. If Texas is stuck in the Big 12 we have to have consolidate power in Austin in this conference. This move does that.

#12 can be Cincy or whatever. But adding UH means three of the largest schools in this state are in the Big 12. That is a big deal academically, especially with what Perry is trying to do to higher education funding.

For a long time Texas and A&M were partners in higher education no matter what happened on the field. If it is true that Texas is talking to UH, then A&M has damaged the relationship with Texas possibly irreparably. The two most likely reasons:

First, A&M personalized the departure to the SEC. They didn't just leave. They were incredibly disrespectful to Texas and its administration on the way out.

Second, A&M has let Powers take all the heat for battling education 'reforms' that Perry (an Aggy) is trying to push through. The reforms aren't good for A&M or Texas, but Texas is the school left fighting them.

If these conversations are happening, then this has been taken to the next level. A&M said it was making a 100-year decision. I'm not sure at the time they contemplated what higher education in Texas would look like 50 years out with three of the five largest schools in the state voting in a bloc on things...."

(05-14-2013 12:12 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(05-13-2013 11:11 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  Coog fans, I honestly hope it happens. In fact, I think the Big 12 should invite UH, SMU, Rice, UTEP, Tx. State and UTSA. We can invite our friends in Oklahoma, Kansas and West Virginia to the party. I bet they can't wait for that.

If it happens, it's as much about politics as it is football. As explained by one Longhorn poster:

"If the Big12 is serious (about talking to UH) it means UT Prez Bill Powers just declared war on Gov. Rick Perry.

It is distinctly possible that Texas has heard that politically it cannot go anywhere. If that is true, then UH is not just an okay pick up, but a necessary one. If Texas is stuck in the Big 12 we have to have consolidate power in Austin in this conference. This move does that.

#12 can be Cincy or whatever. But adding UH means three of the largest schools in this state are in the Big 12. That is a big deal academically, especially with what Perry is trying to do to higher education funding.

For a long time Texas and A&M were partners in higher education no matter what happened on the field. If it is true that Texas is talking to UH, then A&M has damaged the relationship with Texas possibly irreparably. The two most likely reasons:

First, A&M personalized the departure to the SEC. They didn't just leave. They were incredibly disrespectful to Texas and its administration on the way out.

Second, A&M has let Powers take all the heat for battling education 'reforms' that Perry (an Aggy) is trying to push through. The reforms aren't good for A&M or Texas, but Texas is the school left fighting them.

If these conversations are happening, then this has been taken to the next level. A&M said it was making a 100-year decision. I'm not sure at the time they contemplated what higher education in Texas would look like 50 years out with three of the five largest schools in the state voting in a bloc on things...."

I read the quote in red from CaliHornia on the WVU board. He is a West Coast Horn who hates Deloss and wants Texas in the Big 12. If what he states is true, then Texas is about to open up war on A&M and Texas Gov Rick Perry. It's no secret that the UT Pres is fighting a war with Perry in regards to higher education in Texas. Adding UH helps UT and Tech fight off Perry.

(05-14-2013 12:04 AM)jml2010 Wrote:  "South"
UT
OU
Tech
Okla St
Baylor
West Virginia

"North"
Kansas
K-State
Iowa State
TCU
Houston
Cincy ( why not? If we add Houston, we obviously won't need the Florida schools and it gives West Virginia the bridge they were looking for).

I can't see UT and OU playing in the same division. If there's going to be a Big 12 title game, then it has to have UT-OU as a possible match up. Here's one possible line up with permanent cross-division rivals:

UT-OU
Tech-OK St
Baylor-TCU
Kansas St-Kansas
West Va-Cincy
Iowa St-Houston

The Oklahoma schools get at least 3 games against Texas schools every year, which is at most 1 less than they get now. However you divide it, UT & Tech would anchor one division, and OU & Ok St would anchor the other.

Note with this zipper division style, it would be easy to add USF and UCF to get to 14 if so desired. Just make them permanant cross division rivals.

(05-14-2013 12:28 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 12:04 AM)jml2010 Wrote:  "South"
UT
OU
Tech
Okla St
Baylor
West Virginia

"North"
Kansas
K-State
Iowa State
TCU
Houston
Cincy ( why not? If we add Houston, we obviously won't need the Florida schools and it gives West Virginia the bridge they were looking for).

I can't see UT and OU playing in the same division. If there's going to be a Big 12 title game, then it has to have UT-OU as a possible match up. Here's one possible line up with permanent cross-division rivals:

UT-OU
Tech-OK St
Baylor-TCU
Kansas St-Kansas
West Va-Cincy
Iowa St-Houston

The Oklahoma schools get at least 3 games against Texas schools every year, which is at most 1 less than they get now. However you divide it, UT & Tech would anchor one division, and OU & Ok St would anchor the other.

UT, OU, Tech and Okla St have played in the same division for 17 years and got along fine. If these rumors are true, the real fight will come from the charter "northern" schools. If the Big 12 expands, there is no possible way to make the old Big 12 "south" minus A&M happy.

I just don't see UT, OU, Tech and Oklahoma St splitting into separate divisions.

I just want to remind you what UH "might" be getting themselves into. UT "might" need UH & Tech to help them fight A&M but I doubt they allow their regional rivals to be placed in a separate division. We saw how excited UT fans were when they played TCU on Turkey day last year.

You may be right. But play it out in your head. In the divisions outlined above, UT would play Tech, OU, Baylor and 1 of Ok St or TCU every year. That's not a radical change. A small price to pay for the potential for an OU/UT title game.

(05-14-2013 12:53 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  You may be right. But play it out in your head. In the divisions outlined above, UT would play Tech, OU, Baylor and 1 of Ok St or TCU every year. That's not a radical change. A small price to pay for the potential for an OU/UT title game.

Damn, I bet Bit is turning blue right now. A Coog and Red Raider having a cordial, thoughtful discussion.

IMHO, the Big 12 is better served having OU and UT in the same division. While a Big 12 CCG between the 2 would be epic, it will never replace the RRSO. The RRSO splits the old "Cotton Bowl Stadium" down the middle at the 50 yard line. How do you get the same atmosphere in Jerryworld?

I'm not discounting your idea, I just think RRSO means more to those 2 schools than a CCG.

Like I mentioned previously, it will be hard to separate the Texoma 4 plus Baylor.

(05-14-2013 01:02 AM)jml2010 Wrote:  IMHO, the Big 12 is better served having OU and UT in the same division. While a Big 12 CCG between the 2 would be epic, it will never replace the RRSO. The RRSO splits the old "Cotton Bowl Stadium" down the middle at the 50 yard line. How do you get the same atmosphere in Jerryworld?

I'm not discounting your idea, I just think RRSO means more to those 2 schools than a CCG.

Why not the Red River Shootout AND the possibility of a title game? I am proposing a permanent annual rivalry game between Texas & OU (ie the RRSO) even though they are in different divisions. SEC-Style (LSU plays Florida every year; Bama plays Tennessee every year etc).

Ok St would be Tech's permanent cross division game. Play them every year. Baylor and TCU would play every year despite being in different divisions, etc.

Hey, it may work at all. And all this divisional talk is way premature to begin with.