(05-13-2013 10:57 PM)Cougar Hippy Wrote:  

(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.

Since the MWC and AACK! earn about $20 million a year TV money for the entire conference, its hard to see anyone adding enough value to the Big 12 which makes that much per school, let alone a 5th school in the same state.

(05-13-2013 08:17 PM)Cougar Hippy Wrote:  

(05-13-2013 07:49 PM)bullet Wrote:  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.

Yet Dodds met with Khator and Rhodes not too long ago PLUS allowed your beloved whorns to play us in basketball and baseball on back to back days. I think it's safe to say that everybody at least somewhat moved on from that.

Rice and Houston were going to be rotated in 2 for 1 series. That ended. Rice is still periodically on the schedule.

(05-14-2013 09:43 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-13-2013 10:57 PM)Cougar Hippy Wrote:  

(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.

Since the MWC and AACK! earn about $20 million a year TV money for the entire conference, its hard to see anyone adding enough value to the Big 12 which makes that much per school, let alone a 5th school in the same state.

You are correct that Houston does not increase the payout per team for the Big 12. However, Houston would undoubtedly accept a fraction of a full share to gain access (4 million, which is only 15% of a full share, would double their revenue). It should also be noted that no other non-GOR candidate increases the Big 12 payout per school. As for having 5 schools in Texas, that was covered here.

(05-14-2013 12:24 AM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(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.

I don't think adding them to the athletic conference is necessary to get them on your side in the state capital. A&M does seem to be afraid to fight Perry. Following what he requested already earned them a warning letter from the AAU. He basically wants to turn all the schools into community colleges. Since he was a C student at A&M back when it wasn't nearly as good as it is now, he doesn't see any value in having elite universities.

(05-14-2013 09:09 AM)DonnyMost Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 09:02 AM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  If you would have told someone in 1982 that in 2013, SMU and Houston would effectively (and perhaps permanently) be kicked to the curb of college football, but that TTU and Baylor would be sitting pretty, they would have assumed you were a heroin addict.

Your logic and rational thinking are not wanted here!

BOO!! GET OUT!!

According to several reports – UH has the second-most number of alumni serving on the Texas State Legislature. UT needs that support to effectively fight Perry.

(05-14-2013 09:40 AM)bullet Wrote:  The City inspector condemned them.

Cite? That's not how I remember it. Our AD left for Navy a month before the game, and the UH president Art Smith made a command decision to dismantle the bleachers after visiting the site.

PS it was 4000 seats, not 10,000.

(05-14-2013 09:40 AM)bullet 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.

The City inspector condemned them.

Longhorn Bob claimed he was the one pushing the city to inspect them, but then he was always a big talker.

The fact that somebody at Houston allowed such a flimsy structure to be constructed on such a poor foundation showed stupidity of the most extreme kind. Any building inspector worth his salt would have immediately condemned the structure and demanded it be torn apart prior to allowing anyone near it. The entire stadium should have been placed off limits to everyone but the men tearing that structure down before allowing people in the stadium...

What idiot allowed that scaffolding to be built on such a makeshift foundation in the first place? Whoever it was should have been fired on the spot, and so should the contractor that built it. I'd have stopped payment on any checks sent to those morons...

(05-14-2013 07:20 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 07:15 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  Lot if delusion and wishful thinking here.

Despite what happened with realignment, the A&M/UT academic alliance is just fine. Nobody cancelled this years Maroon & Orange Day at the capital and nobody has walked out on any of the dozens of collaborative programs we have.

Coogs, we get that you are desperate to get into the B12 but cut the crap about how the B12 doesn't have and will never have the Houston market without you, nobody is buying it.

Yes, Big 12 interest in Houston is very high, and the U. of Houston has never delivered the Houston market to anyone anyway.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/sportsmoney/...f-houston/

(05-14-2013 09:30 AM)Underdog Wrote:  Houston would be better served to approach the SEC with this on its resume:

Population of Houston, TX

City-2,145,146

Urban-4,944,332

Metro-6,086,538

The SEC already addressed penetrating the East Texas market by signing Texas A&M, a far more attractive school than Houston.

(05-14-2013 09:43 AM)bullet Wrote:  Since the MWC and AACK! earn about $20 million a year TV money for the entire conference, its hard to see anyone adding enough value to the Big 12 which makes that much per school, let alone a 5th school in the same state.

Truth is, there are no schools outside of the P5, with the slim possible exception of BYU, that could add net value to Big 12 football. And since raiding another P5 has been taken off the table, there will be no more P5 expansion for the forseeable future.

(05-14-2013 10:14 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 09:30 AM)Underdog Wrote:  Houston would be better served to approach the SEC with this on its resume:

Population of Houston, TX

City-2,145,146

Urban-4,944,332

Metro-6,086,538

The SEC already addressed penetrating the East Texas market by signing Texas A&M, a far more attractive school than Houston.

A&M is a far more attractive school as a football juggernaut to half the schools in the SEC and 95% of the entire nation. Continuing to sling dookie at Houston just shows where your self gratification of being a sensationalist continues. Smells douchie.

Your argument fails to address the dilemma with the demographics of the lines of Houston Sports fans. Football is king and fans here would line up to see any type of success.

Did you know that many Aggies were keen to go see Keenum when he was here when A&M was down? In fact, many Tech/A&M/UT fans paid much attention to Houston the previous 4 years. Why is that? How about the fact that the Houston Texans went from being nothing 10 years ago to a now top 10 franchise in the world? "Why is that relevant to the conversation" it's real simple: put competitive football here in the city & you have a massive following. "You already have that with LSU/UT/A&M" but there is still room for market growth here and the city swings yearly depending on who the big story is. See article above. The nostagia of the SWC still exists. Many UT/A&M/Tech alums have links not just to UofH but all SWC schools. Now with the Big12 being deciphered and rivals destroyed, why wouldn't they invite UofH? West Virginia is an excellent addition but it fails to address any big time old SWC rivalries that have evaporated with the elimation of A&M playing UT, Tech especially, Baylor, etc. Why was Houston a power in the 70s 80s few early years 90s before rejecting a SEC invite only to be muscled out by the select 4 when the Big12 was formed? Because they are 2nd rate like you continue to suggest? Put Houston in a power Conference and you won't see instant results. But the ceiling would be very high in this fast growing energy hub football mecca.

Did you ever bother to read the entire leaked emails from the OU/OSU admins in Tulsa World? It's no secret Oklahoma wants to dip back into the Houston market as the SEC moves in. Now we have political problems in Austin contrary to what 10th Mountain above as stated. Houston, with leadership for once, has political clout.

Do I think Houston will ever join the Big12? No.

However, they do hold cards if other Conferences want to dip into the Houston market. Especially with the rate the city is growing.

Again. Respond to that Forbes article above.

And you are wrong about Bleachergate (FFS we are still talking about this crap). How come outside engineers came by afterwards and said the bleachers were fine? How come they worked perfectly well on the side of a F'n mountain???

Everything you say about Houston in general is incorrect.

Edit: Texans are now 13th in the world.

(05-14-2013 10:13 AM)ShockerBob Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 07:20 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 07:15 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  Lot if delusion and wishful thinking here.

Despite what happened with realignment, the A&M/UT academic alliance is just fine. Nobody cancelled this years Maroon & Orange Day at the capital and nobody has walked out on any of the dozens of collaborative programs we have.

Coogs, we get that you are desperate to get into the B12 but cut the crap about how the B12 doesn't have and will never have the Houston market without you, nobody is buying it.

Yes, Big 12 interest in Houston is very high, and the U. of Houston has never delivered the Houston market to anyone anyway.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/sportsmoney/...f-houston/

The challenge comes from doing that when Keenum and an undefeated season turn into Coach Levine and 5-7. Despite the product on the field or the opponent, fans still have to purchase tickets and watch on TV for anyone to notice.

"Houston would be better served to approach the SEC with this on its resume:

Population of Houston, TX

City-2,145,146

Urban-4,944,332

Metro-6,086,538"

Attendance from this multitude of people = 27,000 per game.

(05-13-2013 04:17 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  http://www.sportstalkflorida.com/db-onli...ljgQdf2.01

An Orlando radio host with a connection to the UH athletic dept. talking about how Houston is talking to the XII. No confirmation whatsoever that there is any reciprocal interest, but the source within Houston said they were looking to bolt the AAC either after this upcoming season or within the next couple of years.

I think the Big 12 adds Memphis and Cincinnati,

(05-14-2013 11:23 AM)ShockerBob Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 10:14 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 09:30 AM)Underdog Wrote:  Houston would be better served to approach the SEC with this on its resume:

Population of Houston, TX

City-2,145,146

Urban-4,944,332

Metro-6,086,538

The SEC already addressed penetrating the East Texas market by signing Texas A&M, a far more attractive school than Houston.

A&M is a far more attractive school as a football juggernaut to half the schools in the SEC and 95% of the entire nation. Continuing to sling dookie at Houston just shows where your self gratification of being a sensationalist continues. Smells douchie.

Your argument fails to address the dilemma with the demographics of the lines of Houston Sports fans. Football is king and fans here would line up to see any type of success.

Dude, where is Texas A&M? It is in East Texas. So is Houston. So does Texas A&M address the issue of the SEC penetrating that market? Yes it does. Therefore, do they need UH to penetrate that market? No they do not.

I compared UH to Texas A&M only because the comparison was relevant. If TAMU was a small-time program with limited appeal, then one could argue that adding TAMU meant that the SEC was not really penetrating that Houston/East Texas market. But because TAMU is, as you concede, a football behemoth, well then they have no need to add a small-fry like Houston.

(05-14-2013 07:45 AM)DonnyMost Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 07:15 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  You don't increase monetary value of the conference

Cash is king, but as we've seen in the past, there are other considerations involved in conference realignment. And to be fair, nobody else not under a GOR increases the monetary value of the conference either.

byu would

(05-14-2013 10:00 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 09:40 AM)bullet Wrote:  The City inspector condemned them.

Cite? That's not how I remember it. Our AD left for Navy a month before the game, and the UH president Art Smith made a command decision to dismantle the bleachers after visiting the site.

PS it was 4000 seats, not 10,000.

Where's your citation? I remember seeing it in the Chronicle in addition to BOFZ and Hornfans, but their archives aren't on-line without a subscription. Now its possible Smith accompanied the inspector and bowed to the inevitable, but it was city pressure just days before the game. UH was saying it was safe up until it got shut down. And I'm not sure similar structures were used in the Olympics. I seem to recall it being used once in Toronto who haven't had any Olympics lately. More likely something like Cirque de Soliel.

(05-14-2013 12:27 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 10:00 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 09:40 AM)bullet Wrote:  The City inspector condemned them.

Cite? That's not how I remember it. Our AD left for Navy a month before the game, and the UH president Art Smith made a command decision to dismantle the bleachers after visiting the site.

PS it was 4000 seats, not 10,000.

Where's your citation? I remember seeing it in the Chronicle in addition to BOFZ and Hornfans, but their archives aren't on-line without a subscription. Now its possible Smith accompanied the inspector and bowed to the inevitable, but it was city pressure just days before the game. UH was saying it was safe up until it got shut down. And I'm not sure similar structures were used in the Olympics. I seem to recall it being used once in Toronto who haven't had any Olympics lately. More likely something like Cirque de Soliel.

I saw the pics and that was an accident waiting to happen. They wouldn't even build a playground and screw the swing sets down to boards and bricks...

(05-14-2013 12:27 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 10:00 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(05-14-2013 09:40 AM)bullet Wrote:  The City inspector condemned them.

Cite? That's not how I remember it. Our AD left for Navy a month before the game, and the UH president Art Smith made a command decision to dismantle the bleachers after visiting the site.

PS it was 4000 seats, not 10,000.

Where's your citation? I remember seeing it in the Chronicle in addition to BOFZ and Hornfans, but their archives aren't on-line without a subscription. Now its possible Smith accompanied the inspector and bowed to the inevitable, but it was city pressure just days before the game. UH was saying it was safe up until it got shut down. And I'm not sure similar structures were used in the Olympics. I seem to recall it being used once in Toronto who haven't had any Olympics lately. More likely something like Cirque de Soliel.

Here's my citation.

I know for a fact that several groups of engineers inspected the stands, and most said they were safe. One suggested modifications.

I know for a fact that we used an accredited temporary bleacher company to build the stands - a group with lots of experience.

You are the first person I have ever read suggest that: 1) any engineers "condemned" the bleachers, or 2) the condemnation forced the bleachers down, as opposed to UH President Art Smith voluntarily making the decision.

So again, where's your citation?