[Darth Irish]

Off the top of my head:

QB Needs: Bills, Browns, Jags, Raiders, Redskins, Panthers, Rams, Broncos, Seahawks

Possible QB Issues: San Francisco, Tennessee, Cincinatti

Tebow wouldn't be drafted to start for an NFL team in 2010. The best gauge of how he would do would be Meyer's other QB, Alex Smith who took 3-4 seasons to get adjusted to the NFL. Granted, he's gone through 3-4 offensive coordinators, but as good a measure as anything else.

[ulTIMate Gator]

Darth Irish, on 21 January 2010 - 01:43 AM, said:

Tebow wouldn't be drafted to start for an NFL team in 2010. The best gauge of how he would do would be Meyer's other QB, Alex Smith who took 3-4 seasons to get adjusted to the NFL. Granted, he's gone through 3-4 offensive coordinators, but as good a measure as anything else.

Yeah, its looking more and more like he's not going to be a starter. I don't agree with it, but the way that these so-called "draft analysts" are talking about it, it seems like Timmy is going to warm a bench for AT LEAST 1 season. He might even turn into another Rex Grossman. I hear that back-up QB is not a bad job to have though, pays well too.

But come on!! ...Tebow is a 2 time National Championship winning QB, not to mention a Sophomore Heisman trophy winner, and anyone who has ever turned on a college football game in the last 3 years has heard the announcers talk about this kid. He has a stacked resume, great leadership skills, and a highly competitive reputation. I say give him a chance. But obviously the NFL isn't all about giving chances....

Chris Leak was a National Championship winning QB too, and the Bears kicked him out before the regular season even started. Now he plays back-up QB in the CFL. In Aug of 09, the starting QB from the Montreal Alouettes was taken out early with an injury, and they put Leak in the game. On his first snap, in his first game, he throws a TD pass. He's probably the best QB in the league, and they still won't start him. I've read its because of height issues.

Regardless, I just hope that Tebow doesn't have a similar fate. Only time will tell.

[Rock]

ulTIMate Gator, on 20 January 2010 - 09:24 PM, said:

Historically, Gator QBs don't do too well in the NFL - its kind of a curse... I don't know why???

Rex Grossman brought Da Bears to the SuperBowl, the same as Dan Marino. Just sayin.

[ulTIMate Gator]

Rock, on 21 January 2010 - 09:40 AM, said:

ulTIMate Gator, on 20 January 2010 - 09:24 PM, said:

Historically, Gator QBs don't do too well in the NFL - its kind of a curse... I don't know why???

Rex Grossman brought Da Bears to the SuperBowl, the same as Dan Marino. Just sayin.

Yes, he did, but for some reason he received nothing by criticism when he played for Chicago. I don't know if it was playing style?, or maybe the way he looked in the jersey?, or... I have really no idea.... But remember in 2008 when Kyle Orton twisted his foot or something, and Grossman had to fill in, the fans did nothing but boo him. And I'm pretty sure they won that game. I like Rex Grossman, I don't think the NFL realizes what a good player they have.

[Destiny Skywalker]

Because for some reason whenever a QB shows up in Chicago, the only players he can throw to are on the other team.

[Otanku]

ouch!

On the QB front, I really hope that Colt not only gets drafted well, but gets a chance to start. If Colt starts, he'd be the 3rd Longhorn under Mack Brown that became an NFL starting QB (Young, Simms). For all the flack that ignorant UT and non-UT fans talk about our offensive coordinator "not coaching up offensive players" it's amazing to me that Texas would have more offensive starters in the league from the past 10 drafts than any other school does.

[Rock]

btw, Congrats again, otanku!

[Otanku]

Rock - wtf is up with Myer? How do you go from having such major health worries that you feel you need to retire, to going on leave of absence, to being in the office working longass hours and being front and center to finalize recruiting?? Was he lying to just get some sort of attention, or an angle in recruiting? He may have had a health scare, but I gotta say his mannerisms just appear manipulative for those of us not part of Gator nation...

[Metropolis]

No offense Otanku. I'll give you Vince young, but Chris Simms sucked as a starting QB. I And I rooted for him every step of the way. He just never got better. Gruden didn't really care for him, though gruden didn't really care for any of the qbs he had here save Bruce Gradkowski.

[Otanku]

You're a Bucs fan, that's fair, but in defense of Simms he was a legitimate starter that 1 season and was taken out because of his spleen injury, not performance. That put him out of commission for an internal injury that put his overall health at risk, yet I felt that Gruden unfairly punished him because he thought he "wasn't tough" in the subsequent seasons. Never let him try to earn his job back, and even worse, refused to shop him out at a time when team needs for QB were high and who knows if he would have been successful somewhere else??

[Rock]

Otanku, on 24 January 2010 - 02:56 PM, said:

Rock - wtf is up with Myer? How do you go from having such major health worries that you feel you need to retire, to going on leave of absence, to being in the office working longass hours and being front and center to finalize recruiting?? Was he lying to just get some sort of attention, or an angle in recruiting? He may have had a health scare, but I gotta say his mannerisms just appear manipulative for those of us not part of Gator nation...

My take: When Urban collapsed the night of the SEC championship, they did a bunch of tests. Ya know, 'cause he's rich and white. He said it was dehydration, and it prolly was, but I think they found something when the results came back. Bad. What would your gut reaction be? Quit. F*ck everything else. That's why he resigned. Foley and the UF administation freaked out. They begged him to stay on and just be head coach in name while he took care of the health issue.

My guess is that treatment has gone better than expected or the diagnosis was more severe than the actual condition. He's a good man, he doesn't do anything for attention and there was no manipulation involved. What woudl eb the reason? We actyually lost a top recruit to FSU, who blamed Meyer's sudden retirement on his decision to cancel his UF commitment and go to FSU instead.

[Metropolis]

I'll give you Gruden never liked him, but the team was 0-2 going into that Carolina game where he got hurt and the offense hadn't moved the ball worth a lick. Simms had real mechanical issues. He constantly had passes knocked down at the line of scrimmage. That's baffling for a QB that's 6'4". That playoff game against the Redskins in '05 was a prime example. He has 4-5 passes batted down and 3 of them occured on 3rd down.

[Metropolis]

Rock, on 24 January 2010 - 03:11 PM, said:

Otanku, on 24 January 2010 - 02:56 PM, said:

Rock - wtf is up with Myer? How do you go from having such major health worries that you feel you need to retire, to going on leave of absence, to being in the office working longass hours and being front and center to finalize recruiting?? Was he lying to just get some sort of attention, or an angle in recruiting? He may have had a health scare, but I gotta say his mannerisms just appear manipulative for those of us not part of Gator nation...

My take: When Urban collapsed the night of the SEC championship, they did a bunch of tests. Ya know, 'cause he's rich and white. He said it was dehydration, and it prolly was, but I think they found something when the results came back. Bad. What would your gut reaction be? Quit. F*ck everything else. That's why he resigned. Foley and the UF administation freaked out. They begged him to stay on and just be head coach in name while he took care of the health issue.

My guess is that treatment has gone better than expected or the diagnosis was more severe than the actual condition. He's a good man, he doesn't do anything for attention and there was no manipulation involved. What woudl eb the reason? We actyually lost a top recruit to FSU, who blamed Meyer's sudden retirement on his decision to cancel his UF commitment and go to FSU instead.

Meyer admitted the dehydration thing was to not alarm people especially his kids. They had his wife's 911 call on ESPN. He got out of bed that night and collapsed because of chest pains.

A lot of people "In the know" say that they'd be surprised if Meyer is on the sideline at the beginning of the season. Seeing as he's telling recruits that "he dreamt he died on the side line coaching them", you really have to wonder if his job is so important to him that he's ignoring his health.

[ulTIMate Gator]

Metropolis, on 24 January 2010 - 03:24 PM, said:

Seeing as he's telling recruits that "he dreamt he died on the side line coaching them", you really have to wonder if his job is so important to him that he's ignoring his health.

That's hearsay...I don't know if it was ever really confirmed. That's like the rumors going around that Meyer told Jevin Snead (starting QB @ Ol' Miss) that Tebow would never take snaps as a QB. It's stupid.

Urban has a health condition, something heart related that is aggravated by stress, but it's like Rock said, it was a sudden health scare that made him think worst case scenario. Here's the lastest.

Rock is also right in the sense that Florida has lost recruits. There was the kid we really wanted that went to FSU, but there were a couple defensive players who skipped over to Georgia and one that I know of that took a scholarship with the 'Canes. On the flip side, Lane Kiffin's old verbal commitments have been flocking to Florida, Georgia, FSU and others. If there has been a coach in the SEC who has really screwed things up post-season, its Kiffen.

Urban has never been about the drama. Being a football coach is this guy's dream job, and he's good at it. Now that the health scare is over and he understands what's going on with his body, its no surprise that he is going to continue to do what he loves. Obviously he's going to make some important adjustments to his lifestyle and his responsibilities. The Gators hired D.J. Durkin from Stanford as an assistant coach and special teams coach, although it's still unknown if Meyer is going to completely give up that job. I personally expect that he will. USA Today Article

I'm just sick of people saying that the Gators' coaching staff, and SEC coaches in general, have no regard for their personal health or their families. I think that's a very general statement to make. It's like saying all black people eat collard greens. I read a commentary from a Big 12 fan who responded to an article written about Meyer's leave of absence, and he said something like, "I'm glad that here in the Big 12 we hire coaches with integrity and strong family values". I laughed out loud when I read that.

All coaches, in whatever sport, are still just people when it all boils down. They have to make their own decisions about their own lives. It's impossible to know how each coach prioritizes his job with his personal life, and frankly I don't think it's our responsibility to judge. Let Meyer do what Meyer wants to do. If he can coach up a couple of good football players and bank a couple of "W"s for Florida in the mean time, GREAT! But the Florida Gators will be OK without him if he needs to take some time. This is the Gator Nation baby!

GO GATORS!!

[Otanku]

Looks like Myer's leave of absence was only going to last a day and half:

http://sportsillustr....html?eref=sihp

[Metropolis]

ulTIMate Gator, on 24 January 2010 - 04:08 PM, said:

I'm just sick of people saying that the Gators' coaching staff, and SEC coaches in general, have no regard for their personal health or their families. I think that's a very general statement to make. It's like saying all black people eat collard greens. I read a commentary from a Big 12 fan who responded to an article written about Meyer's leave of absence, and he said something like, "I'm glad that here in the Big 12 we hire coaches with integrity and strong family values". I laughed out loud when I read that.

How did you come up with that analogy?

People's problem with this whole thing is that if Meyer's health problems were so serious to announce his steeping down, then how has is gotten to a point to where he isn't even taking his "leave of abscence"?

[ulTIMate Gator]

Metropolis, on 24 January 2010 - 05:26 PM, said:

ulTIMate Gator, on 24 January 2010 - 04:08 PM, said:

I'm just sick of people saying that the Gators' coaching staff, and SEC coaches in general, have no regard for their personal health or their families. I think that's a very general statement to make. It's like saying all black people eat collard greens. I read a commentary from a Big 12 fan who responded to an article written about Meyer's leave of absence, and he said something like, "I'm glad that here in the Big 12 we hire coaches with integrity and strong family values". I laughed out loud when I read that.

How did you come up with that analogy?

People's problem with this whole thing is that if Meyer's health problems were so serious to announce his steeping down, then how has is gotten to a point to where he isn't even taking his "leave of absence"?

Sorry Met, I was just looking for a horrible and obvious stereotype.

I really don't think there is a definitive answer. I think it's a question that may never get answered. Meyer is being extremely closed lipped about the whole situation. I mean, we don't even know what the final diagnosis was/is... all we know is that it's heart related and that they are continuing to run tests to make sure that "it" isn't aggravated again. I just really dislike the rumors and bad press that this whole thing has spawned...but hey, that's the name of the game right? Take the good with the bad? It's the kind of look under the microscope that you get from the media when you win... a lot

So what came first? The chicken or the egg?
What's the purpose of life?
Does Bigfoot really exist?
How many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Roll Pop?
If Urban Meyer's health problems were so serious, why didn't he take a full leave of absence?

The world may never know...

[Otanku]

So I dunno if any of you have been listening to some of the college football chatter over the last week or so. Basically, the Big 10 and the Pac 10 have both brought up the "expansion" talks in terms of looking into expanding to a 12 team conference. The crazy thing locally is that after both conferences merely stated that they were going to look into it, all of a sudden Texas is rumored to be courted for both conferences.

Quite honestly, I wouldn't really want Texas to leave the conference. Don't get me wrong, I think there's overall more exciting games by switching to say the Big 10 as an example (Texas v OSU, Penn St and Michigan every year = coolness), but geographically it just doesn't make much sense. Travel would be a bitch for fans who aren't rich ass boosters. Smack talk also changes substantially. It's always way more fun to point to a Red Raider fan and do a Nelson "ha ha" cuz they are here in Texas, but there's not a whole lot of Michigan fans here, so there's no real gloat or pride factor IMO.

The reality of the rumor though, is that basically what could potentially happen is that the Big 10 would court Missouri and the Pac 10 would court Colorado (thus earning St Louis and Denver markets, respectively) and the Big 12 having to go shopping for 2 replacement teams would force them to end up taking a "small school" team and thus watering down the conference. With the Big 12 at the back of the line in renegotiating TV contracts, you don't want a watered down conference. As much as pulling in a Boise St as an example would look sexier football wise if they had to go shopping, the fact of the matter is that there's no market share for that team, so there's no leverage for expanding the TV deal.

As a Texas fan, if the Big 12 did get poached and it forced another re-alignment, I'd actually prefer Texas declared itself an independent and seek it's own tv deal. As much as the luster has fallen off of ND, you don't think Texas, the richest school in D1 couldn't easily go to NBC and say "hey you want all our TV games, m i rite? Pay us one billion dollars" /austinpowers

And they would! Texas as an independent also would easily be able to get itself the "Notre Dame" BCS rule as well.

I could see a Texas independent schedule look like this:

OU
A&M
Tech
Nebraska
Baylor
Notre Dame
Navy
Rice
(8 core game schedule every year)
and then they could freely schedule 4 games just like they do every year.

[The Choc]

Otanku, on 13 February 2010 - 04:43 PM, said:

So I dunno if any of you have been listening to some of the college football chatter over the last week or so. Basically, the Big 10 and the Pac 10 have both brought up the "expansion" talks in terms of looking into expanding to a 12 team conference. The crazy thing locally is that after both conferences merely stated that they were going to look into it, all of a sudden Texas is rumored to be courted for both conferences.

Quite honestly, I wouldn't really want Texas to leave the conference. Don't get me wrong, I think there's overall more exciting games by switching to say the Big 10 as an example (Texas v OSU, Penn St and Michigan every year = coolness), but geographically it just doesn't make much sense. Travel would be a bitch for fans who aren't rich ass boosters. Smack talk also changes substantially. It's always way more fun to point to a Red Raider fan and do a Nelson "ha ha" cuz they are here in Texas, but there's not a whole lot of Michigan fans here, so there's no real gloat or pride factor IMO.

The reality of the rumor though, is that basically what could potentially happen is that the Big 10 would court Missouri and the Pac 10 would court Colorado (thus earning St Louis and Denver markets, respectively) and the Big 12 having to go shopping for 2 replacement teams would force them to end up taking a "small school" team and thus watering down the conference. With the Big 12 at the back of the line in renegotiating TV contracts, you don't want a watered down conference. As much as pulling in a Boise St as an example would look sexier football wise if they had to go shopping, the fact of the matter is that there's no market share for that team, so there's no leverage for expanding the TV deal.

As a Texas fan, if the Big 12 did get poached and it forced another re-alignment, I'd actually prefer Texas declared itself an independent and seek it's own tv deal. As much as the luster has fallen off of ND, you don't think Texas, the richest school in D1 couldn't easily go to NBC and say "hey you want all our TV games, m i rite? Pay us one billion dollars" /austinpowers

And they would! Texas as an independent also would easily be able to get itself the "Notre Dame" BCS rule as well.

I could see a Texas independent schedule look like this:

OU
A&M
Tech
Nebraska
Baylor
Notre Dame
Navy
Rice
(8 core game schedule every year)
and then they could freely schedule 4 games just like they do every year.

Texas with its own national tv deal wouldnt work. The reason ND works so well is because they have huge fanbases in the northeast heavily Catholic cities of New York, Boston and Philadelphia. I live in NY and Texas isnt one of the 10 most popular teams in this area. Its not a knock on Texas but no team could pull ratings in those 3 cities which are traditionally pro sports cities that dont care much about college football normally like the Irish can. There are alot of subway alums.

[Otanku]

you might think that but you'd be dead wrong. I went to a trip to Baltimore/DC this past summer, and I was surprised how many dang Longhorn jerseys I saw people wearing. I was wearing my own gear and people were flashing me the hook 'em sign. Granted that's not NYC, but it's still the east coast so that's a fairly good litmus test to show the team carries national interest. Texas makes more revenue in apparel merchandising than any other university in the nation. You can't do that by simply dominating ONE state. Texas IS a national brand.

You're right that ND appeals to certain markets because of tradition, or the catholic angle, or to cities that might not necessarily be college town markets, but if you think Texas can't carry a national audience, you're very much mistaken. Texas as awarded the most prime time Saturday games last season, and ABC/ESPN wouldn't do that if they couldn't get the viewership #s they target for that game.

[Destiny Skywalker]

And if Texas is down like Notre Dame is now, everyone will forget them until they're big again. Texas is hot right now, I won't deny that. But I think being independent would actually hurt their schedule. Right now no one will book Boise State for their non-conference games because they don't want to get shown up. The same would happen to Texas. Texas will keep the competition better by staying in a conference. Notre Dame isn't getting much competition themselves right now because they don't have the steady schedule that a conference would allow, and their normal rivals are down as well right now. Quite honestly, I think there's a few Big 12 teams who wouldn't mind losing Texas off of their schedule so that they could gain another W, and that's a testament to how well you guys are playing now, but schedules are made so far in advance that teams wouldn't be willing to take the chance that Texas is still hot. But if Texas isn't getting tough Big 12 competition every season, most of their bites are going to be from smaller schools who just want the exposure, not the big teams who want to maintain their bowl eligibility. And like it or not, Choc does have a point about how Notre Dame has ties that go beyond geography. And even then, I would argue that deal isn't working out that great for them anymore, so why would I expect Texas to do better, especially if they have a down year. Aren't you guys losing a few big players?

Pac-10 should try to snag Boise State, and the Big 10 and Notre Dame need to get over themselves and finally seal the deal.

[The Choc]

Texas is obviously one of the dozen or so biggest programs in the nation, no one would deny that. But liek destiny pointed out, Texas is really good now. Notre Dame sucks and yet ND is still extremely popular. I cant speak for DC but I can speak for NY, Philly (where I lived for 2 years) and Boston where i spend time and Texas isnt anywhere near as popular as the Irish or Michigan or USC. Especially ND and Michigan. In Philly the Irish are more popular than Penn State Id say. In fact I dont know even one Texas fan and Texas is great right now.

[The Choc]

Also you have to think about the sports program as a whole. Do you want Texas in every sport to be independent? Because thats not really viable in sports other than football. ND competes in teh Big East in basketball. Do you think the Big 12 would be like "cool Texas take your big money making sport out of our league but we'll let the others stay'? Dont seem likely. What conference would the basketball team play in? I dont think the Big 10 would add them in basketball but not football, the SEC wouldnt either. What would they do?

[Destiny Skywalker]

That's definitely the other thing to consider. It's more than just football. I would agree that Texas has more to gain by going to the Big 10 for basketball... but what's their biggest money maker? I'd guess it's football. I think staying Big 12 is the smart decision. While I think the Big 12's weak teams are weaker than the Big 10's weak teams, I think Big 12 strong and middle teams are stronger than the equivalent Big 12 teams. But I'm also a Big 12 fan, so I might be biased. But I grew up in Big 10 country, too, and the upper tier teams are primarily Michigan, Penn State, and Ohio State... and Michigan is down right now. I'd put Wisconsin and Purdue in the middle tier and the rest of the teams all sort of jockey for some level of mediocrity. In the Big 12 you've got Texas, Nebraska, Oklahoma as the big dogs, and lately OK State and Texas Tech have been hot, too. A&M has had good years, as well as Mizzou and Kansas. Poor Baylor is just in over their head. Pac-10 is definitely doing better but I still think the Big 12 is the stronger football conference.

[Otanku]

Destiny Skywalker, on 13 February 2010 - 02:15 PM, said:

And if Texas is down like Notre Dame is now, everyone will forget them until they're big again. Texas is hot right now, I won't deny that. But I think being independent would actually hurt their schedule. Right now no one will book Boise State for their non-conference games because they don't want to get shown up.

I dunno that either of those statements are fair. If Texas truly became independent, the time spent there would build their brand further as an independent, so in theory if they had "down years", say a decade from now, well their time spent being a national brand would keep a lot of that fan base, it's how ND has been able to survive. All you need is time. Hell, look at the Dallas Cowboys, they've technically been "down" for a decade, but yet they are still extremely popular. Some teams can just simply survive it, and I think Texas is definitely on that short list. As to Boise St, they are still scheduling strong teams, I think the argument that teams are "avoiding them" is nonsense. Some schools won't schedule them sure, but I seriously doubt BSU has asked everyone and been told no. I guarantee you if they asked Texas, Texas would book it. So would FSU. So would your Huskers.

Quote

Notre Dame isn't getting much competition themselves right now because they don't have the steady schedule that a conference would allow, and their normal rivals are down as well right now.

ND's core schedule is just as strong as any conference: Stanford, Purdue, Michigan, MSU, USC, Navy, Washington, BC. I offered what would be Texas' core schedule, and that too would be pretty darn impressive. Add you're usual 3 game cream puffs and then another "brand" team and that's your schedule. Texas isn't having any problems today scheduling big teams: UCLA, Cal, an they're in negotiations with USC currently. And that's as a Big 12 school where they don't need a big game out of conference game. Their ability to schedule as an independent I think would be easier, not harder.

Quote

And like it or not, Choc does have a point about how Notre Dame has ties that go beyond geography. And even then, I would argue that deal isn't working out that great for them anymore, so why would I expect Texas to do better, especially if they have a down year. Aren't you guys losing a few big players?

Money wise, ND's deal is still enviable. An exclusive TV deal with NBC, and if they get a BCS game, they don't split there share of the money with ANYONE. Texas has to revenue share with all Big 12 schools for TV money AND bowl revenue. So I'd say being independent has nothing to do with on field success and more about money. Texas just had the #2 recruiting class, and they are almost always top 10 nationally every year. Losing key players doesn't mean much when you have blue chippers on the bench.

As to the basketball comment, they would obviously play that sport in a conference. Remember, my argument is based on the possible poaching of the Big 12 and the conference as a whole being re-evaluated. If the Big 12 is diluted from the poaching, then it's security to exist as a conference at all would be in jeopardy, so it would be Texas who has negotiating power not vice versa. It's possible the conference could end and a slightly different 'super conference' exists, at which point Texas hoops could join that. Or whatever, but no, their hoops and non-revenue sports could not survive as independents, they'd have to play under a conference banner in all other sports. Just like ND does.

[The Choc]

Otanku, on 14 February 2010 - 07:18 PM, said:

Destiny Skywalker, on 13 February 2010 - 02:15 PM, said:

And if Texas is down like Notre Dame is now, everyone will forget them until they're big again. Texas is hot right now, I won't deny that. But I think being independent would actually hurt their schedule. Right now no one will book Boise State for their non-conference games because they don't want to get shown up.

I dunno that either of those statements are fair. If Texas truly became independent, the time spent there would build their brand further as an independent, so in theory if they had "down years", say a decade from now, well their time spent being a national brand would keep a lot of that fan base, it's how ND has been able to survive. All you need is time. Hell, look at the Dallas Cowboys, they've technically been "down" for a decade, but yet they are still extremely popular. Some teams can just simply survive it, and I think Texas is definitely on that short list. As to Boise St, they are still scheduling strong teams, I think the argument that teams are "avoiding them" is nonsense. Some schools won't schedule them sure, but I seriously doubt BSU has asked everyone and been told no. I guarantee you if they asked Texas, Texas would book it. So would FSU. So would your Huskers.

Quote

Notre Dame isn't getting much competition themselves right now because they don't have the steady schedule that a conference would allow, and their normal rivals are down as well right now.

ND's core schedule is just as strong as any conference: Stanford, Purdue, Michigan, MSU, USC, Navy, Washington, BC. I offered what would be Texas' core schedule, and that too would be pretty darn impressive. Add you're usual 3 game cream puffs and then another "brand" team and that's your schedule. Texas isn't having any problems today scheduling big teams: UCLA, Cal, an they're in negotiations with USC currently. And that's as a Big 12 school where they don't need a big game out of conference game. Their ability to schedule as an independent I think would be easier, not harder.

Quote

And like it or not, Choc does have a point about how Notre Dame has ties that go beyond geography. And even then, I would argue that deal isn't working out that great for them anymore, so why would I expect Texas to do better, especially if they have a down year. Aren't you guys losing a few big players?

Money wise, ND's deal is still enviable. An exclusive TV deal with NBC, and if they get a BCS game, they don't split there share of the money with ANYONE. Texas has to revenue share with all Big 12 schools for TV money AND bowl revenue. So I'd say being independent has nothing to do with on field success and more about money. Texas just had the #2 recruiting class, and they are almost always top 10 nationally every year. Losing key players doesn't mean much when you have blue chippers on the bench.

As to the basketball comment, they would obviously play that sport in a conference. Remember, my argument is based on the possible poaching of the Big 12 and the conference as a whole being re-evaluated. If the Big 12 is diluted from the poaching, then it's security to exist as a conference at all would be in jeopardy, so it would be Texas who has negotiating power not vice versa. It's possible the conference could end and a slightly different 'super conference' exists, at which point Texas hoops could join that. Or whatever, but no, their hoops and non-revenue sports could not survive as independents, they'd have to play under a conference banner in all other sports. Just like ND does.

But you are talking about Colorado and Missou leaving, those wouldnt kill the Big 12. Say you lost one of them and added TCU? That would actually strengthen the football.

I just dont think Texas would be best served as an independant in the long run. Notre Dame is a unique school with a unique fan base. That doesnt mean its better or anything. Its just completely different than how nearly every other school draws fans. Like I said earlier, the Irish are extremely popular in so many of the eastern media markets that networks crave. New York, Boston, Philly, Chicago, Notre Dame is the most popular team in all those markets. Those represent the 1st, 3rd, 5th and 10th largest markets in the country. Also whats unique about ND football is that most ND football fans really dont care about the other sports. For instance you are a Texas fan, you root for them in football and basketball and probably any other college sport you may follow. This is not the case for ND. Most ND fans do not follow the basketball team. So while Texas may overall sell more merchandise than ND does right now, when you factor in that nearly all of NDs merchandise sales are from football it makes their #2 ranking more impressive. Here is the thing, if Texas has a game on NBC vs Rice or Baylor no one outside of Texas is watching that game.

[Otanku]

The Big 12 would not pursue schools like TCU or Houston, because it's not about the on field product. It's about revenue. TCU brings nothing to the Big 12 because a. they exist in a market that Texas and OU already bring (DFW); and b. they have such a small stadium the fan base cannot be accomodated appropriately as a visiting team. Houston also has the exact same 2 problems in that Houston is already a market brought in by Texas and A&M, and Houston also plays in a small stadium, so the away games are not appealing.

The Big 12 would be losing a Denver and a St Louis market in Colorado and Mizzou, and that's why it would hurt BIG TIME if they left the Big 12. It's not about football competitiveness, it's about market share. That's precisely why Missouri and/or Colorado would be appealing in the first place. And why it would make no sense to lose markets like Denver, and attempt to replace it with... a redundant market by taking TCU? Or an extremely small market by looking into a Boise St?? The Big 12 could only stay respectable and powerful enough in the eyes of TV and marketing by ensuring large market teams. If you lose Denver then you have to go for some place like Phoenix as an example (by going after ASU). If you lose St Louis, then pursue Cincinnati and you gain a great city market.

Conference alignment from the BCS conferences will never be about the on-field product. COnferences like MWC pursue it from that angle because they need the product to improve for them to get to play with the big boys (e.g. by demonstrating on-field performance to move into the automatic qualifier category and bump an existing BCS conference out). Automatic qualifying conferences not in jeopardy of being bumped from that scenario (e.g. Pac 10, Big 10, Big 12), are looking to strengthen their TV deals in order to compete with the ridiculous SEC deal that just went into effect. YOu can only ask ESPN for more money if you have schools that bring in a large fan base. You don't need a "power" program, you just need a large fan base that will watch regardless of how well your football team does.