Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › 2009 College Football Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2009 College Football Thread - Page 74

post #1096 of 1108

As a Sun Devil fan I'm pretty bummed about the conference changes. Now that Masoli is gone and USC is going to probably suck for about 5 years, maybe longer with Kiffin there, the window is WIIIIIIDE open. Who gets all the USC talent now? UCLA? Academic requirements are too high at Stanford and Cal for them to score a lot of those kids who would land in USC.

 

I guess the one positive for ASU is there's more incentive for home-grown talent to stay home since visits from the Pac-West teams will be much less frequent. Too many of our top kids ended up at USC, hopefully they stay home now!

 

Another interesting thing is that since USC has the bowl ban slapped on them, their juniors and seniors are allowed to transfer and play immediately.

post #1097 of 1108

From a recruiting standpoint, one positive for ASU and UA, would be the Texas tap would open up. I know AzStoops has already had guys working Texas hard for years. The Pac 16 could claim two of the countries largest recruiting beds. For OU, I love the move and it would easily be my choice.

 

However, around here there is still a lot of noise out here about UT and aTm to the Big Ten, OU to the SEC, UT to Big Ten, aTm and OU to the SEC. The Aggies have become more of key player, after so many have assumed they would simply follow Texas. I still believe that will be the case in the end however.

 

Where the Texas schools are concerned, none of this is a done deal yet.

 

post #1098 of 1108
Thread Starter 

Totally agree - I don't think the whole picture is clear yet.  But it's going to be WILD!

post #1099 of 1108

I would much rather see Texas and OU in the SEC.  I think it would be a lot better fit for both of them.  IMO 16 teams is way to much for a conference.  It would make a lot more sense geographically.  Potential for some awsome games.

post #1100 of 1108
Quote:
Originally Posted by ronnielee54 View Post

I would much rather see Texas and OU in the SEC.  I think it would be a lot better fit for both of them.  IMO 16 teams is way to much for a conference.  It would make a lot more sense geographically.  Potential for some awsome games.


I agree here.

post #1101 of 1108
Thread Starter 

Well, Nebraska is in the Big Ten.  Yippee.  I can't wait for the first time we beat them.  No idea how long that will take, but it will finally provide some revenge for the 2000 Alamo Bowl.

post #1102 of 1108

That writing has been on the wall for over a week now. I'm glad it's official, and they can get going now.

 

Yesterday was a bit sad for fans that go back to the old Big 8, heck ones that go back to the old Big 7, old Big 6, heck Missouri Valley if they're old enough. Nebraska cut ties, and Dr. Tom delivered the message no less. That is a lot of tradition out the door.

 

One can give extremely viable reasons for the move, which have been well documented, often with an elitist attitude. It's smart for NU. But in the end, I think it's as simple as power. Over the years Dr. Tom, has been outspoken about Big 12 say shifting south towards Texas. Nebraska has been the lone dissenting vote on several key measures, such as the move of the CCG to Jerry's World in Dallas. The sore has been festering. The light didn't feel as bright as it was a little over a decade ago, when NU was in its last juggernaut faze.

 

Still in my naivete, I never thought it would be Nebraska. Colorado was no surprise. They're liberal up there and never related to their red state neighbors. The same goes for Missouri. They have always been the malcontent child who overvalued their worth. But Nebraska? Really? See you on down the line Big Red, maybe in the Rose Bowl or something.


Edited by virometal - 6/12/10 at 4:39am
post #1103 of 1108
Thread Starter 

Yeah, I have to admit, I really didn't think it would be Nebraska, either.  I was sure it would be Mizzou, but I guess that wasn't seen as enough of a new TV draw versus Nebraska, and Nebraska is of course far more prestigious athletically, and while they won't be challenging Northwestern, or even Michigan, in any academic contests any time soon, it's apparently a better school academically than Mizzou, from what I've been hearing/reading in the time leading up.  I don't know if that's "elitist" (we are talking about Universities here), but there is no doubt academics did play a role in the Big Ten's decisions.

 

And of course, what the Big Ten wants most, Notre Dame, still remains annoyingly elusive.

 

I actually don't like it.  I hate to see the Big 12 dissolve (if that's what happens), and I like tradition.  But it is what it is.


Edited by Skylab - 6/12/10 at 6:34am
post #1104 of 1108

It made me nostalgic, but I'm not that worried about it. OU will find a home, and I love the Pac idea, which looks more and more like the reality. Now I think it really sucks for schools like Kansas, Baylor, Iowa State, They're really twisting and never shopped around.

post #1105 of 1108
Thread Starter 

Exactly. I'm not sure K-State and Iowa State are fired up to be in the
Mountain West conference - or CUSA - but that's what we're looking at, I
think.

post #1106 of 1108

Here is a funny MS paint thread off a homer board, concerning the Big 12 from an obvious Longhorn perspective.

 

NSFW

post #1107 of 1108
Thread Starter 

OMG that was the funniest thing I have seen in a VERY long time.

post #1108 of 1108
Thread Starter 

Looks like maybe the demise of the Big 12 might have been premature:  http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5285680

 

Why wouldn't the Big 12 suck in Houston and Memphis to make 12 teams again, though?  They're strong programs in both football and basketball, big schools, and geographically harmonious.  And CUSA isn't a BCS conference...

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › 2009 College Football Thread