This was originally posted on AggieYell.com and linked on tidefans.com. It was authored by a UF grad. I haven't seen it on here but I thought you guys would be interested. As a Bama fan 1st and SEC fan second, if any of this is true then there could be no better outcome than A&M joining the SEC.
I am a Florida alum and Gator fan who’s become very interested in the realignment of college football which has begun to take shape. Have tried to follow events as closely as possible. As last week progressed I began to see some things nobody has talked about but lead me to some conclusions which startle me, especially considering that I am not by nature a conspiracy nut.
I believe that the Big Ten and Pac-10 conferences have jointly planned a major upheaval in college athletics, primarily over football and are working very closely together in order to bring it about. Although uncertain, I believe that it’s likely being done with the active complicity of the University of Texas. The goals are simple: both the Big Ten and Pac-10 seek to significantly enlarge their power and influence over college athletics and do so in a way that isolates the Southeastern Conference, in recent years the best athletic conference in the America. The Big Ten/Pac-10 have, in my view, consciously decided and have engaged in a course of conduct to destroy the Big 12 Conference, largely because it’s in the way. Thus far only there is only one thing which has prevented this plan from being successfully executed.
Texas A&M University.
A&M’s current indecision over whether to join UT in the Pac-10 or join the SEC, assuming the Big 12 can’t be saved, has forced both conferences to make changes in the original plan. There’s tremendous pressure being put on A&M to join the Pac-10 because the entire Big Ten/Pac-10 plan will fail to achieve its full goal if it doesn’t join the Pac-10: increased power to both conferences while at the same time isolating and minimizing the SEC.
When the Big 10 first announced expansion plans months ago interest focused on Notre Dame which rather quickly stated its desire to remain a football independent. Beyond that the initial media coverage focused on one (1) Big 12 school, the University of Missouri and several schools in the Big East. The interest in the latter was, ostensibly, to gain the Big Ten access to the New York City TV market. It all made sense. It was all a farce. The Big 12 school targeted by the Big Ten was Nebraska. The Pac 10 was also initiating expansion plans, though far more quietly. Its goal: expand to sixteen (16) teams all from the Big 12. The goal of both conferences was to destroy the Big 12 and gain power as a result. They are very close to succeeding.
As things moved on there was almost simultaneous disclosure of the Big Ten’s interest in Nebraska and the Pac-10’s interest in Colorado, schools in Texas and Oklahoma. During Big 12’s recent administrative meetings two significant (2) things occurred: First, the “rest” of the Big 12 imposed a deadline on Colorado, Missouri and Nebraska by which time each was required to state whether it intended to remain a Big 12 member (the deadline was originally thought to be Friday, June 11th, though some suggested it could be as late as Tuesday, June 15th; Second, word started spreading that while the Big 12 could survive the loss of Colorado or Missouri or both, it could not survive if Nebraska decided to go elsewhere.
Both the deadline and the “we must keep Nebraska or we die” ideas were lead by one (1) school: Texas.
1. Why Nebraska? Yes, it has a rich tradition, especially in football, but if the Big 12 could survive Colorado or Missouri or both, why couldn’t it survive if just Nebraska left? ANSWER: Because it creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you’re going to publicly destroy something like the Big 12, it helps if you can justify it in advance. It also helps to create the illusion that Texas wanted to keep the Big 12 alive.
When Nebraska’s Chancellor addressed the university’s Board of Regents meeting on Friday, June 11th, he related a discussion he’d had at the Big 12 meeting in which he essentially asked three (3) questions: What happens if Missouri leaves? Big 12 schools thought the conference would survive. What happens if Colorado leaves? The Big 12 survives. What happens if Nebraska leaves? Oh, that’s different, if Nebraska leaves the Big 12 collapses.
At the same Board of Regents meeting Athletic Director (and former football coach) Tom Osborne stated that when Nebraska officials grilled other Big 12 schools some admitted (I’d be shocked if Texas wasn’t one of them) talking to as many as three (3) other conferences while Nebraska had only talked to one (1), the Big Ten. As a result Nebraska officials thought they had no choice but to find a new place to land. That is exactly what one (1) of those schools wanted Nebraska to think, so the Huskers’ leaving the Big 12 would cover the tracks of other schools when they deserted the Big 12. That school is Texas. If you’re going to destroy something in which you belong, it helps if you can blame someone else.
2. When Texas and Texas A&M officials met on Monday, June 8th, to discuss saving the Big 12, was that the real goal of the meeting? ANSWER: No, the real goal, at least from UT’s view, was to convince Texas A&M to join UT, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Colorado in the new mega-conference Pac-10. Problems arose because A&M officials weren’t sold on the idea and wanted to look at other options.
Texas (the Big Ten & Pac-10) assumed that A&M officials could be cajoled into following UT’s lead because in many matters A&M has done so in the past. Of course by now the cat is out of the bag on the Pac-10’s plans with other Big 12 schools. Baylor University is going to be left out (because the Pac 10 doesn’t want Baylor) and efforts begin in Austin to see if Baylor can be substituted for Colorado in the new Pac-10 mega-conference.
3. Why does it matter to UT if Texas A&M joins the Pac-10? There’s the historical relationship of the two schools, as institutions of higher learning in Texas and the athletic rivalry. However, neither has anything to do with it. ANSWER: Texas needs to get Texas A&M on board to prevent the SEC from gaining any foothold in Texas. The Big Ten/Pac-10 plan calls for the Big Ten to extend is domination from the Midwest into major TV markets of the East while the Pac-10 becomes the preeminent conference west of the Mississippi River. To accomplish that, the Pac-10 must add the entire state of Texas to prevent the SEC from expanding its territory and its influence.
Saving Baylor University actually played into the Big Ten/Pac-10 cover story which became even more important when Texas A&M insisted on looking at alternatives to Pac-10 membership.
4. Why was Colorado, surprisingly invited to the Pac-10 earlier than expected and prior to Nebraska? Why was Colorado taken out of turn? ANSWER: To put pressure on Texas A&M. Although never conceded as such, almost everybody in the media and elsewhere assumed the Pac-10’s invitation to Colorado last Thursday was to stop any pro-Baylor efforts in Texas, AND any pressure on UT to make a Pac-10 invitation to Baylor a condition of its willingness to go to the Pac-10. It was the perfect cover story.
The Pac-10 doesn’t want Baylor and never has, but adding Colorado just prior to the Big Ten-Nebraska engagement did two things: First, if anybody tried to blame either the Big Ten or the Pac-10, each can claim that initially they took only one (1) Big 12 team; Second, when Nebraska did leave the following day, Texas can say that, despite its best efforts, the Big 12’s days are over and that Texas A&M better get on board with its fellow flagship university partner and join the Pac-10. Why? To stop the SEC from entering Texas by adding a major school from Texas to its conference lineup. The Pac-10 and Big Ten don’t want the SEC in Texas. One of their common goals is to reduce the SEC’s power by denying it expansion that helps the SEC grow.
5. Why, after wooing Missouri for months, did the Big Ten’s Commissioner tell his Big 12 counterpart after confirming Nebraska’s invitation to join his conference that the Big Ten didn’t anticipate adding any other Big 12 schools to his conference? ANSWER: Because Texas A&M’s interest in options beside the Pac-10 has created instability the Big Ten/Pac-10 can’t control. Adding to that instability only creates more chances that it gets worse. And, remember, because of Texas A&M, things aren’t going according to the original plan.
Nebraska’s exit from the Big 12 confirms UT’s self-fulfilling prophecy that the Big 12 is dead. It’s not that the Big Ten isn’t still interested in Missouri. However, because of Texas A&M’s position, it now makes more sense for the Big Ten & Pac 10 to split any responsibility for the Big 12’s demise; allow Texas to lead Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State to the Pac-10 under the ruse that the Big 12 is no longer viable; then when the Big 12 collapses the Big Ten can still invite Missouri which, technically won’t be a Big 12 school because the Big 12 is either already gone or officially on the road to self-extinction.
6. Why has ABC-TV been so quiet in all of this? The network has television rights to the Big 12 and stands to lose a lot, correct? ANSWER: Wrong, it does not because it’s also the primary TV partner of both the Pac-10 and Big Ten. If this goes according to plan, money that would have gone to the Big 12 for distribution will now mostly go to the Pac-10 with some to the Big Ten. Chances are ABC (and its subsidiary, ESPN) will lose little or nothing in this massive upheaval. Instead ABC will just be shuffling off roughly the same amount of money into different conferences. There is also a major gain for ABC in that it’s prior relationships with both the Big Ten and Pac-10 are more significant because both conferences become far more powerful.
ESPN puts major investigative reporters on Barry Bonds and other significant sports issues. College football is undergoing the most massive change in its history and ESPN is doing nothing but covering the basics of who’s going where. Why? Because any serious outside investigation of the realignment of college athletics might expose the possibility that ESPN’s parent company, ABC, is involved in this plan. The Big Ten/Pac-10 want to beat back the SEC. ABC wants to beat back CBS which is the SEC’s television partner.
7. Why has the Pac-10 imposed a 72-hour deadline on Texas A&M while its commissioner personally hands out invitations this weekend to Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State? ANSWER: Because time is of the essence regarding the overall plan, but especially the Big Ten’s portion of the plan.
In order for the Big Ten to pressure Notre Dame into accepting a Big Ten invitation, the conference must destabilize ND’s comfort zone. To do that it must seek new members from the Big East conference which houses most of Notre Dame’s non-football athletic teams. Pittsburgh, Syracuse and Rutgers are the schools most often mentioned by the media. However, if that happens, the Big East becomes unstable and, likely seeks some sort of merger with the Atlantic Coast Conference. Two (2) Texas newspapers, citing SEC sources, indicated that the SEC’s dream expansion scenario involves Texas, Texas A&M, North Carolina-Chapel Hill and Duke. Media reports confirm that the SEC has talked with UNC and that it didn’t say “no.” Neither has it said yes.
8. Why is the SEC’s dream scenario important in all this? ANSWER: Because a major goal of the Big Ten/Pac-10 plan is to prevent any significant SEC expansion into any non-SEC states.
Because of Texas A&M’s unwillingness to blindly follow UT’s lead in the western portion of the Big Ten/Pac-10 plan, everything has bogged down. That must be controlled in a way that forces A&M to follow UT into the Pac-10. If not, the SEC makes inroads into Texas and Texas TV markets. Destabilizing the Big East by the Big Ten could lead ACC schools to do what Nebraska did and seek other options. If SEC adds Texas A&M as a conference school, that is bad for both the Big Ten and Pac-10. However, if the SEC adds A&M, North Carolina and Duke (a 4th school would need to be added as well), a major goal of the plan is a total failure. Adding those three (3) schools to the SEC not only makes it the best football conference in the U.S., but also the best men’s basketball conference. Further, Notre Dame probably correctly reads the long term consequences of such events and, again, decides to stay an independent, thus ruining another basic goal of the Big Ten portion of the plan. There are six (6) major college athletic conferences in the United States: the Big East, Atlantic Coast, Southeastern, Big Ten, Big 12 and Pac-10. The plan by the Big Ten/Pac-10 calls for one (1) of those conferences (Big 12) to be destroyed, two (2) others (Big East and ACC) to be destabilized towards a merger, and one (1) more (SEC) to be isolated so it can’t adequately respond to the two (2) new power conferences in America (the Big Ten and Pac-10). Hell, it’s almost like the old days when the Rose Bowl was the premier New Year’s Day game and was controlled by the same two (2) conferences.
9. Is there any more pressure that can be put on Texas A&M to join the Pac-10? ANSWER: Yes and it’s already happening. Without saying so publically (who knows what’s been said behind the scenes directly to Texas A&M), Texas is threatening to end its rivalry with the Aggies. Major newspapers in both Dallas and Houston, Sunday, are reporting that and other consequences if A&M doesn’t play ball. One paper suggests other Texas schools will blackball A&M if it doesn’t join the Pac-10. In other words play ball with us or pay.
Once again, Texas is setting up another self-fulfilling prophecy. 1: If Nebraska goes to the Big Ten, the Big 12 is dead and its Nebraska’s fault. 2: We did everything we could to save the Big 12, but now that it’s gone, we have no choice but to join the Pac-10. 3: We really want to maintain our rivalry with Texas A&M. However, if the Aggies don’t follow us to the Pac-10, the rivalry is no longer viable and it’s Texas A&M’s fault.
10. What’s going to happen next? ANSWER: I don’t know unless Texas A&M bows to UT’s pressure. If that happens, the second phase of the plan will begin to destabilize the Big East in order to force Notre Dame to join the Big Ten. At that point every other conference in America will be directly threatened by the Big Ten/Pac-10 reconfiguration of college athletics.
My purpose here isn’t to influence any Texas A&M decision. To me A&M going to the Pac-10 makes little sense and -at best- is the worst of three (3) options. The other two are joining the SEC or making a real effort to save the Big 12 in a reconfigured form by attacking and exposing UT’s apparent complicity in the Big Ten/Pac-10 plan.
In conclusion, let me reiterate that I’m not a conspiracy freak. However, in this instance too many things have happened too quickly not to believe they are being orchestrated by someone or some group of people. I know the Big 12’s money distribution system of revenues was flawed. It contributed both to internal conference strife and to its apparent demise. However, the Big 12 could be salvaged and re-configured if people so wanted. I believe Texas A&M sincerely has tried to do so. I also believe the University of Texas has been complicit in the Big 12’s destruction in order to advance its own interests and that of two (2) athletic conferences. One of those goals is the continued subjugation of Texas A&M.
Texas A&M must find the best long term answer to the situation it now faces. It should understand fully the circumstances in which it finds itself and how they came about. I sincerely wish A&M the best because whatever decision A&M makes will likely change for decades the makeup of college athletics. It ought to know why it is presently under siege and who is responsible for doing so. And it should realize that by simply doing what is every American’s right … the right to question and seek alternatives, Texas A&M finds itself in its current position at the very center of the future of college athletics and under the watchful, threatening eyes of others who care nothing about the university, but only what it can do for them.
Good luck and God speed.
I am a Florida alum and Gator fan who’s become very interested in the realignment of college football which has begun to take shape. Have tried to follow events as closely as possible. As last week progressed I began to see some things nobody has talked about but lead me to some conclusions which startle me, especially considering that I am not by nature a conspiracy nut.
I believe that the Big Ten and Pac-10 conferences have jointly planned a major upheaval in college athletics, primarily over football and are working very closely together in order to bring it about. Although uncertain, I believe that it’s likely being done with the active complicity of the University of Texas. The goals are simple: both the Big Ten and Pac-10 seek to significantly enlarge their power and influence over college athletics and do so in a way that isolates the Southeastern Conference, in recent years the best athletic conference in the America. The Big Ten/Pac-10 have, in my view, consciously decided and have engaged in a course of conduct to destroy the Big 12 Conference, largely because it’s in the way. Thus far only there is only one thing which has prevented this plan from being successfully executed.
Texas A&M University.
A&M’s current indecision over whether to join UT in the Pac-10 or join the SEC, assuming the Big 12 can’t be saved, has forced both conferences to make changes in the original plan. There’s tremendous pressure being put on A&M to join the Pac-10 because the entire Big Ten/Pac-10 plan will fail to achieve its full goal if it doesn’t join the Pac-10: increased power to both conferences while at the same time isolating and minimizing the SEC.
When the Big 10 first announced expansion plans months ago interest focused on Notre Dame which rather quickly stated its desire to remain a football independent. Beyond that the initial media coverage focused on one (1) Big 12 school, the University of Missouri and several schools in the Big East. The interest in the latter was, ostensibly, to gain the Big Ten access to the New York City TV market. It all made sense. It was all a farce. The Big 12 school targeted by the Big Ten was Nebraska. The Pac 10 was also initiating expansion plans, though far more quietly. Its goal: expand to sixteen (16) teams all from the Big 12. The goal of both conferences was to destroy the Big 12 and gain power as a result. They are very close to succeeding.
As things moved on there was almost simultaneous disclosure of the Big Ten’s interest in Nebraska and the Pac-10’s interest in Colorado, schools in Texas and Oklahoma. During Big 12’s recent administrative meetings two significant (2) things occurred: First, the “rest” of the Big 12 imposed a deadline on Colorado, Missouri and Nebraska by which time each was required to state whether it intended to remain a Big 12 member (the deadline was originally thought to be Friday, June 11th, though some suggested it could be as late as Tuesday, June 15th; Second, word started spreading that while the Big 12 could survive the loss of Colorado or Missouri or both, it could not survive if Nebraska decided to go elsewhere.
Both the deadline and the “we must keep Nebraska or we die” ideas were lead by one (1) school: Texas.
1. Why Nebraska? Yes, it has a rich tradition, especially in football, but if the Big 12 could survive Colorado or Missouri or both, why couldn’t it survive if just Nebraska left? ANSWER: Because it creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you’re going to publicly destroy something like the Big 12, it helps if you can justify it in advance. It also helps to create the illusion that Texas wanted to keep the Big 12 alive.
When Nebraska’s Chancellor addressed the university’s Board of Regents meeting on Friday, June 11th, he related a discussion he’d had at the Big 12 meeting in which he essentially asked three (3) questions: What happens if Missouri leaves? Big 12 schools thought the conference would survive. What happens if Colorado leaves? The Big 12 survives. What happens if Nebraska leaves? Oh, that’s different, if Nebraska leaves the Big 12 collapses.
At the same Board of Regents meeting Athletic Director (and former football coach) Tom Osborne stated that when Nebraska officials grilled other Big 12 schools some admitted (I’d be shocked if Texas wasn’t one of them) talking to as many as three (3) other conferences while Nebraska had only talked to one (1), the Big Ten. As a result Nebraska officials thought they had no choice but to find a new place to land. That is exactly what one (1) of those schools wanted Nebraska to think, so the Huskers’ leaving the Big 12 would cover the tracks of other schools when they deserted the Big 12. That school is Texas. If you’re going to destroy something in which you belong, it helps if you can blame someone else.
2. When Texas and Texas A&M officials met on Monday, June 8th, to discuss saving the Big 12, was that the real goal of the meeting? ANSWER: No, the real goal, at least from UT’s view, was to convince Texas A&M to join UT, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Colorado in the new mega-conference Pac-10. Problems arose because A&M officials weren’t sold on the idea and wanted to look at other options.
Texas (the Big Ten & Pac-10) assumed that A&M officials could be cajoled into following UT’s lead because in many matters A&M has done so in the past. Of course by now the cat is out of the bag on the Pac-10’s plans with other Big 12 schools. Baylor University is going to be left out (because the Pac 10 doesn’t want Baylor) and efforts begin in Austin to see if Baylor can be substituted for Colorado in the new Pac-10 mega-conference.
3. Why does it matter to UT if Texas A&M joins the Pac-10? There’s the historical relationship of the two schools, as institutions of higher learning in Texas and the athletic rivalry. However, neither has anything to do with it. ANSWER: Texas needs to get Texas A&M on board to prevent the SEC from gaining any foothold in Texas. The Big Ten/Pac-10 plan calls for the Big Ten to extend is domination from the Midwest into major TV markets of the East while the Pac-10 becomes the preeminent conference west of the Mississippi River. To accomplish that, the Pac-10 must add the entire state of Texas to prevent the SEC from expanding its territory and its influence.
Saving Baylor University actually played into the Big Ten/Pac-10 cover story which became even more important when Texas A&M insisted on looking at alternatives to Pac-10 membership.
4. Why was Colorado, surprisingly invited to the Pac-10 earlier than expected and prior to Nebraska? Why was Colorado taken out of turn? ANSWER: To put pressure on Texas A&M. Although never conceded as such, almost everybody in the media and elsewhere assumed the Pac-10’s invitation to Colorado last Thursday was to stop any pro-Baylor efforts in Texas, AND any pressure on UT to make a Pac-10 invitation to Baylor a condition of its willingness to go to the Pac-10. It was the perfect cover story.
The Pac-10 doesn’t want Baylor and never has, but adding Colorado just prior to the Big Ten-Nebraska engagement did two things: First, if anybody tried to blame either the Big Ten or the Pac-10, each can claim that initially they took only one (1) Big 12 team; Second, when Nebraska did leave the following day, Texas can say that, despite its best efforts, the Big 12’s days are over and that Texas A&M better get on board with its fellow flagship university partner and join the Pac-10. Why? To stop the SEC from entering Texas by adding a major school from Texas to its conference lineup. The Pac-10 and Big Ten don’t want the SEC in Texas. One of their common goals is to reduce the SEC’s power by denying it expansion that helps the SEC grow.
5. Why, after wooing Missouri for months, did the Big Ten’s Commissioner tell his Big 12 counterpart after confirming Nebraska’s invitation to join his conference that the Big Ten didn’t anticipate adding any other Big 12 schools to his conference? ANSWER: Because Texas A&M’s interest in options beside the Pac-10 has created instability the Big Ten/Pac-10 can’t control. Adding to that instability only creates more chances that it gets worse. And, remember, because of Texas A&M, things aren’t going according to the original plan.
Nebraska’s exit from the Big 12 confirms UT’s self-fulfilling prophecy that the Big 12 is dead. It’s not that the Big Ten isn’t still interested in Missouri. However, because of Texas A&M’s position, it now makes more sense for the Big Ten & Pac 10 to split any responsibility for the Big 12’s demise; allow Texas to lead Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State to the Pac-10 under the ruse that the Big 12 is no longer viable; then when the Big 12 collapses the Big Ten can still invite Missouri which, technically won’t be a Big 12 school because the Big 12 is either already gone or officially on the road to self-extinction.
6. Why has ABC-TV been so quiet in all of this? The network has television rights to the Big 12 and stands to lose a lot, correct? ANSWER: Wrong, it does not because it’s also the primary TV partner of both the Pac-10 and Big Ten. If this goes according to plan, money that would have gone to the Big 12 for distribution will now mostly go to the Pac-10 with some to the Big Ten. Chances are ABC (and its subsidiary, ESPN) will lose little or nothing in this massive upheaval. Instead ABC will just be shuffling off roughly the same amount of money into different conferences. There is also a major gain for ABC in that it’s prior relationships with both the Big Ten and Pac-10 are more significant because both conferences become far more powerful.
ESPN puts major investigative reporters on Barry Bonds and other significant sports issues. College football is undergoing the most massive change in its history and ESPN is doing nothing but covering the basics of who’s going where. Why? Because any serious outside investigation of the realignment of college athletics might expose the possibility that ESPN’s parent company, ABC, is involved in this plan. The Big Ten/Pac-10 want to beat back the SEC. ABC wants to beat back CBS which is the SEC’s television partner.
7. Why has the Pac-10 imposed a 72-hour deadline on Texas A&M while its commissioner personally hands out invitations this weekend to Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State? ANSWER: Because time is of the essence regarding the overall plan, but especially the Big Ten’s portion of the plan.
In order for the Big Ten to pressure Notre Dame into accepting a Big Ten invitation, the conference must destabilize ND’s comfort zone. To do that it must seek new members from the Big East conference which houses most of Notre Dame’s non-football athletic teams. Pittsburgh, Syracuse and Rutgers are the schools most often mentioned by the media. However, if that happens, the Big East becomes unstable and, likely seeks some sort of merger with the Atlantic Coast Conference. Two (2) Texas newspapers, citing SEC sources, indicated that the SEC’s dream expansion scenario involves Texas, Texas A&M, North Carolina-Chapel Hill and Duke. Media reports confirm that the SEC has talked with UNC and that it didn’t say “no.” Neither has it said yes.
8. Why is the SEC’s dream scenario important in all this? ANSWER: Because a major goal of the Big Ten/Pac-10 plan is to prevent any significant SEC expansion into any non-SEC states.
Because of Texas A&M’s unwillingness to blindly follow UT’s lead in the western portion of the Big Ten/Pac-10 plan, everything has bogged down. That must be controlled in a way that forces A&M to follow UT into the Pac-10. If not, the SEC makes inroads into Texas and Texas TV markets. Destabilizing the Big East by the Big Ten could lead ACC schools to do what Nebraska did and seek other options. If SEC adds Texas A&M as a conference school, that is bad for both the Big Ten and Pac-10. However, if the SEC adds A&M, North Carolina and Duke (a 4th school would need to be added as well), a major goal of the plan is a total failure. Adding those three (3) schools to the SEC not only makes it the best football conference in the U.S., but also the best men’s basketball conference. Further, Notre Dame probably correctly reads the long term consequences of such events and, again, decides to stay an independent, thus ruining another basic goal of the Big Ten portion of the plan. There are six (6) major college athletic conferences in the United States: the Big East, Atlantic Coast, Southeastern, Big Ten, Big 12 and Pac-10. The plan by the Big Ten/Pac-10 calls for one (1) of those conferences (Big 12) to be destroyed, two (2) others (Big East and ACC) to be destabilized towards a merger, and one (1) more (SEC) to be isolated so it can’t adequately respond to the two (2) new power conferences in America (the Big Ten and Pac-10). Hell, it’s almost like the old days when the Rose Bowl was the premier New Year’s Day game and was controlled by the same two (2) conferences.
9. Is there any more pressure that can be put on Texas A&M to join the Pac-10? ANSWER: Yes and it’s already happening. Without saying so publically (who knows what’s been said behind the scenes directly to Texas A&M), Texas is threatening to end its rivalry with the Aggies. Major newspapers in both Dallas and Houston, Sunday, are reporting that and other consequences if A&M doesn’t play ball. One paper suggests other Texas schools will blackball A&M if it doesn’t join the Pac-10. In other words play ball with us or pay.
Once again, Texas is setting up another self-fulfilling prophecy. 1: If Nebraska goes to the Big Ten, the Big 12 is dead and its Nebraska’s fault. 2: We did everything we could to save the Big 12, but now that it’s gone, we have no choice but to join the Pac-10. 3: We really want to maintain our rivalry with Texas A&M. However, if the Aggies don’t follow us to the Pac-10, the rivalry is no longer viable and it’s Texas A&M’s fault.
10. What’s going to happen next? ANSWER: I don’t know unless Texas A&M bows to UT’s pressure. If that happens, the second phase of the plan will begin to destabilize the Big East in order to force Notre Dame to join the Big Ten. At that point every other conference in America will be directly threatened by the Big Ten/Pac-10 reconfiguration of college athletics.
My purpose here isn’t to influence any Texas A&M decision. To me A&M going to the Pac-10 makes little sense and -at best- is the worst of three (3) options. The other two are joining the SEC or making a real effort to save the Big 12 in a reconfigured form by attacking and exposing UT’s apparent complicity in the Big Ten/Pac-10 plan.
In conclusion, let me reiterate that I’m not a conspiracy freak. However, in this instance too many things have happened too quickly not to believe they are being orchestrated by someone or some group of people. I know the Big 12’s money distribution system of revenues was flawed. It contributed both to internal conference strife and to its apparent demise. However, the Big 12 could be salvaged and re-configured if people so wanted. I believe Texas A&M sincerely has tried to do so. I also believe the University of Texas has been complicit in the Big 12’s destruction in order to advance its own interests and that of two (2) athletic conferences. One of those goals is the continued subjugation of Texas A&M.
Texas A&M must find the best long term answer to the situation it now faces. It should understand fully the circumstances in which it finds itself and how they came about. I sincerely wish A&M the best because whatever decision A&M makes will likely change for decades the makeup of college athletics. It ought to know why it is presently under siege and who is responsible for doing so. And it should realize that by simply doing what is every American’s right … the right to question and seek alternatives, Texas A&M finds itself in its current position at the very center of the future of college athletics and under the watchful, threatening eyes of others who care nothing about the university, but only what it can do for them.
Good luck and God speed.