B12 May Be Heading To Implosion

[Steven43]

I thought the Texas recruiting advantage was being Texas.

You’re right, Texas has massive built-in recruiting advantages. But there is no doubt that being in the SEC will magnify those advantages significantly.

[tommy]

Texas has not been in the SEC before; they’ve never had that type of recruiting advantage. A&M has been enjoying said advantage for the past nine seasons (since they left the Big 12) by siphoning off recruits that previously would have gone to Texas. The SEC just has such a strong allure for high school football players.

There is a clear connection between A&M leaving the Big 12 and the relative decline of Longhorns football. Let’s give it a few years and see the way Texas is trending now that they’ll be in the SEC. The sun is shining and the future is bright in Austin, TX. 😎

You may not be wrong, but your position doesn't seem to be clearly supported by the recruiting rankings since A&M went to the SEC. Since 2012, here are the rankings of each school's classes as evaluated by 247:

2012: Texas 2 Texas A&M 16
2013: Texas 17 Texas A&M 9
2014: Texas 17 Texas A&M 5
2015: Texas 10 Texas A&M 11
2016: Texas 7 Texas A&M 18
2017: Texas 25 Texas A&M 13
2018: Texas 3 Texas A&M 17
2019: Texas 3 Texas A&M 4
2020: Texas 8 Texas A&M 6
2021: Texas 15 Texas A&M 8

Looks pretty even to me. Each has had the advantage over the other about half the time, with the years where there was a significant gap also split pretty evenly. So you could say "yes but Texas would have done even better had A&M not taken some recruits away by virtue of their being in the SEC" but that would be pretty hard to prove. Bottom line is Texas and A&M have fought it out pretty evenly in recruiting over the last 10 years, and in my mind at least, both have regularly underperformed on the field relative to their recruiting.

[lotusland]

It is being reported by various sources that the BIG-12 and PAC-10 have started to have discussions about a possible merger.

Interesting. There’s not much overlap so I guess they could split up the divisions without much inter-divisional play and carry on much like they have. Seems like the PAC would be getting the better of the BIG but the devil is in the details.

A potential SEC/ACC merger would have much more overlap so likely much le$$ appealing to the SEC. Wouldn't a BIG/PAC merger kill any possibility for ACC/BIG merger?

[Steven43]

So you could say "yes but Texas would have done even better had A&M not taken some recruits away by virtue of their being in the SEC".

Yes sir, this is precisely what I’m saying.

[uh_no]

Interesting. There’s not much overlap so I guess they could split up the divisions without much inter-divisional play and carry on much like they have. Seems like the PAC would be getting the better of the BIG but the devil is in the details.

A potential SEC/ACC merger would have much more overlap so likely much le$$ appealing to the SEC. Wouldn't a BIG/PAC merger kill any possibility for ACC/BIG merger?

Mergers only really make sense when the conferences are making roughly equivalent amounts per school. There is no world where the SEC wants to divvy up money with a conference that is making some 30% less per school (and likely a larger gap once the deal is renegotiated with texas and oklahoma).

From that perspective, big/pac12 are a great match. The ACC and SEC are not. Far more likely would be the SEC and B10 would be the match. The SEC wants nothing to with the anchor that would be the lower teir ACC teams.

That being the case, does the ACC look towards the AAC? Screwing Uconn over again?

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

That being the case, does the ACC look towards the AAC? Screwing Uconn over again?

The ACC needs to be proactive to avoid either irrelevance or destruction. Same with Duke athletics. Those interests may or may not be aligned.

[Kedsy]

Mergers only really make sense when the conferences are making roughly equivalent amounts per school. There is no world where the SEC wants to divvy up money with a conference that is making some 30% less per school (and likely a larger gap once the deal is renegotiated with texas and oklahoma).

The calculus will change once the Big 10/Pac12 and the SEC/whoever-they-decide-to-poach secede from the NCAA and form their own "super-association." Then they can make up whatever divvying rules they feel like.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

The calculus will change once the Big 10/Pac12 and the SEC/whoever-they-decide-to-poach secede from the NCAA and form their own "super-association." Then they can make up whatever divvying rules they feel like.

I think the SuperAss is a great name for it.

[DukeTrinity11]

Apparently you didn’t read the part where I said since 2009, when Texas was only a devastating first-quarter injury to Colt McCoy’s shoulder from winning another national championship, it was simply the last few years of the dying Mack Brown regime, then they picked a poor coach (for five long years) in Charlie Strong, and then Tom Herman did pretty well, but not great. Prior to that Texas had been in the elite level or close to it for much, but admittedly not all, of the past 50 years.

Now that Texas is going to be in the SEC they will once again dominate recruiting in the state of Texas, especially since A&M won’t be able to say they (A&M) are the only Texas team in the SEC.

Unless Steve Sarkisian turns out to be a terrible coach — and I find that highly doubtful considering he was recently under the tutelage of the best coach in football, Nick Saban, and he (Sark) brought Alabama’s offense to heights it had never before achieved — Texas will be back among the elite.

Texas is going to have top-five recruiting classes every year. They have everything in place to win. Why wouldn’t they be able to win? What’s your reasoning? Im confident it’s only a matter of time.

And now I’m going to try to stop commenting on this subject for a couple of days because I don’t want to draw the wrath of Bob Green. Please people, stop goading me on this Texas Longhorns stuff! 😉

Why isn't Michigan winning with Harbaugh given its even greater tradition, bigger stadium, equally rowdy fanbase, similarily impressive financial resources, etc.?

You need the right coach who can kill it on the recruiting trail but also create a culture of excellence that the administration is on board with.

I don't know why you're this high on Sarkisian. "Seven Win Steve" was mediocre at UDub, had an uninspiring 43-33 record at USC and then was a failure as the OC of the Atlanta Falcons.

He was solid as the OC for the Crimson Tide the last few years but given their recruiting dominance and having Saban as the coach, its not that impressive.

I expect the mediocrity to continue for the Longhorns just like I do for the Wolverines unless I see evidence to the contrary.

[CameronBornAndBred]

The calculus will change once the Big 10/Pac12 and the SEC/whoever-they-decide-to-poach secede from the NCAA and form their own "super-association." Then they can make up whatever divvying rules they feel like.

It's not every day that one reads "calculus" and "SEC" in the same sentence.

[Steven43]

Why isn't Michigan winning with Harbaugh given its even greater tradition, bigger stadium, equally rowdy fanbase, similarily impressive financial resources, etc.?

You need the right coach who can kill it on the recruiting trail but also create a culture of excellence that the administration is on board with.

I don't know why you're this high on Sarkisian. "Seven Win Steve" was mediocre at UDub, had an uninspiring 43-33 record at USC and then was a failure as the OC of the Atlanta Falcons.

He was solid as the OC for the Crimson Tide the last few years but given their recruiting dominance and having Saban as the coach, its not that impressive.

I expect the mediocrity to continue for the Longhorns just like I do for the Wolverines unless I see evidence to the contrary.

Maybe you’ll be proven right about Sarkisian, maybe not. But I’ll put my money on the massive positives that Texas has going for them — which just got even bigger with the move to the SEC.

Let’s see how this plays out over the next 3-4 years at least. I’m in this for the long haul.

[uh_no]

The calculus will change once the Big 10/Pac12 and the SEC/whoever-they-decide-to-poach secede from the NCAA and form their own "super-association." Then they can make up whatever divvying rules they feel like.

At that point, Duke isn't benefitting by being part regardless. Duke is not adding value to any football conference, unfortunately. Neither are most ACC schools.

[tommy]

Yes sir, this is precisely what I’m saying.

Well A&M’s recruiting certainly did improve after the move to the SEC. But it would be pretty hard to prove that such improvement was at the expense of Texas in particular.

[Steven43]

Well A&M’s recruiting certainly did improve after the move to the SEC. But it would be pretty hard to prove that such improvement was at the expense of Texas in particular.

Duly and dully noted, sir! 👍🏻

[brevity]

It's not every day that one reads "calculus" and "SEC" in the same sentence.

That's simply not true. A number of SEC schools offer degrees in dentistry.

[Kedsy]

At that point, Duke isn't benefitting by being part regardless. Duke is not adding value to any football conference, unfortunately. Neither are most ACC schools.

You appear to be assuming that football will be separated from the other sports when it comes to secession.

[uh_no]

You appear to be assuming that football will be separated from the other sports when it comes to secession.

I'm assuming that football is pretty much the only thing that matters, so whether basketball is separated or not is mostly irrelevant. None of this is basketball driven, and never has been, and as far as I can tell, won't be. If that's the case, you would have expected the B10 to maybe care slightly about kansas wanting in...and yet, they didn't.

Basketball is the little brother your mom forces you take to the party with you.

[brlftz]

I remember the desire to be large enough to have an NCAA-approved football championship game was one of the factors that led conferences to expand a while back. What incentive is there for growing beyond that? How would the Pac-whatever and the B1G benefit from merging? Is it more bargaining power for TV rights? A bigger market for your league's channel?

[chrishoke]

I remember the desire to be large enough to have an NCAA-approved football championship game was one of the factors that led conferences to expand a while back. What incentive is there for growing beyond that? How would the Pac-whatever and the B1G benefit from merging? Is it more bargaining power for TV rights? A bigger market for your league's channel?

I agree with this. The real incentive is to add money making teams like Texas and jettison money losers like Vanderbilt.

[DangerDevil]

I agree with this. The real incentive is to add money making teams like Texas and jettison money losers like Vanderbilt.

Agreed, I don’t think getting bigger/expanding is necessarily more financially lucrative. If you are adding a team they need to bring in more money either through their brand/following or untapping a new region/market that your conference didn’t already own.