Da' Dream Makin' Cold Blooded Sausage

Loading...

Wednesday, June 16, 2010

No PAC-16 and Texas has an easier road than ever

While we are pretty confident that Utah will jump to the PAC-10 before all is said and done this initial round of expansion is over. As it would be with anything else of this nature expansion has left us with some winners and losers so here is how we see it.

WINNERS

1. Nebraska- The Huskers escape the oppressive totalitarian regime of the University of Texas, escape to a conference with much more money, will get a larger share of that money, and should walk in as the most dominant force in football in that conference. The quality of Big 10 football is not very good. The inexplicable voodoo that the Buckeyes posses over the other Big 10 teams should not affect Nebraska and the Cornhuskers should propel themselves into the National Title hunt year in and year out. Geographically, demographically, and culturally the Huskers fit into the Big 10 better than they ever fit into the Big 12. P.S. don't challenge Dr. Thomas William "Tom" Osborne to a penis size contest unless you are prepared to have him whip his out at which point you had better be slinging an anaconda or you will loose.

2. The Big-10- Finally a championship game, and they added a decent football program. The only possible problem is they may have allowed a team in that will dominate the other 11 members.

3. Colorado- They have the money to fire Hawkins and are now in a conference that they can at least compete in, football wise. Plus they can share all their weed and communist propaganda with their sister schools.

4. The SEC- The premium brand in collegiate athletics used the prospect of invading the state of Texas to scare the Longhorns off of a PAC-16 super conference. In addition to a temporary halt of the super-conference the SEC avoided sullying its brand by quickly absorbing any of the low hanging ACC fruit and thus diluting waters of superiority that the SEC enjoys.

5. Texas- They get the same money, the only kid on the play ground that would stand up to them is in the Big 10 now, and they can tell everyone they saved the Big 12.

LOSERS

1. Missouri- Jilted at the proverbial alter, Mizzou must now further endure the indentured servitude of being a yeoman program for their landholder masters in Texas. They will now have to endure the ridicule of their peers as Texas has already posted nasty comments about Mizzou on facebook and Oklahoma has been passing notes in study hall that calls Mizzou a fat slut.

2. The PAC 10- Now they have to add Utah to get a championship game and with no USC for the next few years their conference will be even less relevant.

3. The Big 12- We all know the T.V. contract will never pan-out. They loose their championship game, one historically powerful program, and another program that always had the stickiest of the ickey.

4. Basic Math and Geography Skillz- The Big 10 is now a 12 team conference, the Big 12 is a 10 team conference, the Pac-10 has 11 teams, the ACC has an Atlantic and a Coastal- G.T. is neither on the Atlantic or the coast, and while out west TCU is not located atop any sort of a mountain.

Monday, June 14, 2010

Conference Expansion- What a Waste of Time

So we sat back this weekend, watched the Cocks and Gators go to the College WS and let the ladies out in Texas squabble about who gets to go where. Here is what we know for sure as of right now;

1. The PAC-10 added Colorado and is now an 11 team conference,
2. The Big Tenlevinie is now a 12 team conference with an imminent championship game to come after adding Nebraska,
3. Boise St. could not hold their load and jumped to the Mountain West when the PAC-10 could get jilted and need them; this makes Boise St the Tommy Tuberville of teams (that Tennessee job would have been sweet, eh T-Tubs).

The rumor mill looks like this;

1. The PAC-10 wants to add Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma St. making a 16 team conference, however
2. The remaining 10 Big 12 schools could hold it together and add two teams (TCU, Houston, Arkansas, etc.) but that depends on Texas A&M at this point because,
3. Texas A&M does not want to go to the PAC 10 but would instead prefer to go to the SEC. Should A&M go to the baddest conference in the land Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma St., Oklahoma, and either Utah or Kansas would go to the PAC 10 unless,
4. Oklahoma joins A&M in giving those douches in Austin the finger and the Sooners join the SEC then,
5. Texas may have no choice but to join the SEC for fear of Oklahoma and A&M dominating them in there ever present recruiting wars which would mean,
6. Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, and either Virginia Tech, North Carolina or if all else fails Clempsun goes to the SEC, and Texas Tech, Oklahoma St., Kansas, Kansas St., and Missouri go to the PAC 10 making two 16 team conferences which would in turn mean that,
7. The Big Tenlevine raids the Big East for a three team combo from the choices of Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, and West Virginia in hopes of forcing Notre Dame into a 16 team conference which would promptly be renamed the Big 14 (cause these Yankees ain't too good at math) unless,
8. The Big Tenlevine adds two Big East Schools (Rutgers and Pitt) and Maryland which would only happen if the SEC expands to 16 teams which would mean V.T. or North Carolina (or if absolutely necessary Clempsun) probably jumped ship from the ACC and at that point the ACC would probably try to add West Virginia, Louisville, South Florida, East Carolina, Central Florida, and Syracuse thus,
9. Creating a 16 team PAC 10, Big 10, ACC, and SEC which would result in a four team playoff for the National Title unless,
10. The Mountain West picks up all the pieces and then we have five 16 team conferences which means all this will result in a big pile of nothing.

Sunday, June 6, 2010

The University of Texas- Holding All the Cards and Wearing Pretty Pink Panties

As we sit here trying to figure out why we can't get any of the SEC super-regional games on T.V. our collective football futures are being held hostage by the Texas Longhorns. Texas is undoubtedly thanking their bolo-tie wearing Nolan Ryan headed god because someone other than the SEC is offering them a conference tie-in. Texas is holding all the cards right now because they can choose between the PAC-10 and the SEC as their new home. Since Texas is "all hat and no cowboy" (see what we did there Texas? We took one of your little sayings and used it to mockingly call you vajayjays.) they will naturally choose the PAC-10. Texas will say things like:

"this is a better fit for us",
"the PAC-10 made more sense",

and the media will defend them by saying "They could not pass on the PAC-10 money; they are now in 7 of the top 20 markets".

Let us stop you there. Should the PAC-16 happen the projected pay-out for each team will be roughly $20 million. That is only $3 million more than what each of the 12 SEC schools get right now. Should the SEC add Texas and Oklahoma I am pretty sure the re-negotiated contract will net each school a little more than an additional $3 million. Geographically the SEC makes more sense, demographically the SEC makes more sense, and money wise the SEC makes more sense. So why is the PAC-10 even being considered? That is where the pretty pink panties come into play.

As we used to say on the play ground Texas-- "If you scared say you scared." Trust us Texas is shaking in their pretty pink panties at the prospect of playing in the SEC. Playing in the deep of Dixie will expose Texas. Right now Texas only plays one real team every year, Oklahoma (and they don't always beat the Sooners), going to the PAC-16 would mean they only have to play two real teams, Oklahoma during the regular season and USC in the championship game. Texas will gladly pass on the additional money the SEC could bring in so long as they can continue to live behind the fantasy that they are one of the top two or three programs nationwide. We want them in the SEC because we want them Texas dollar dollar bills, and because nothing is as refreshing to SEC fans as Mack Brown tears.

So what will Slive and the boys in Birmingham do if Texas and Chokelahoma bolt for the PAC-10? Simple, expand into North Carolina, Virginia, and Texas. The SEC will look to land Virginia Tech, North Carolina, TCU, and a chose one of the following: Clempsun, Florida St., Miami, Georgia Tech, Virgina, N.C. State, Louisville, or Duke.

However, another scenario still exists. Oklahoma and Texas A&M could refuse the PAC-10's advances. The feeling that Oklahoma and Texas A&m prefer the SEC is out there. Should Oklahoma and A&M go to the SEC the PAC-10 will probably just offer Utah and Boise or TCU. The PAC-10 will try to avoid this because should Oklahoma and A&M go to the SEC then Texas will fall off in the next few years. You see Oklahoma, A&M, and Texas recruit the same players and when Oklahoma and A&M have SEC exposure, and money they will start to beat Texas out for players a lot more often. Heck, Oklahoma already beats them out 5 out of 10 times.

We are going win this expansion war because we win at everything. I love how Texas does not think that the SEC has the same academic standards that they have. To that we say "apussysayswhat"? You can come to the SEC Texas, you can start to play real competition in baseball, you can be the perennial 3rd best team in the conference in football, you can essentially start printing your own money, and on the off chance that you do win a national championship in football any time in the next 50 years you can know in your hearts that you won it against the best competition in the world. Of course you can also go and be the champion of the hippie, tree-hugging, communist leaning west coast and get it handed to you by an SEC school in the National Title game every year. It matters not to us Texas for we shall be toasting our victories with Mack Brown tears one way or another.

Tuesday, June 1, 2010

Why Texas will say no to the SEC.

If you surf around the web reading all of the expansion rumors you will see Texas and Texas A&M popping-up as SEC candidates. The reason is the idea that the Big 10 will poach Mizzou and Nebraska in their expansion, leaving the Big 12 as a 10 team conference and unable to hold a championship game. Should the Big 10 become the Big 16 the idea (much of which seems to be supported by SEC commish Slive) is that the SEC will follow suit. This would mean the SEC grows to 16 teams and lands the crown jewel of Texas money. However, everyone seems resigned to the idea that Texas wants to come into the SEC. No one has discussed the option of the Big 12 just picking up two more teams. Why wouldn't the Big 12 just add TCU and Houston?No one has discussed the reasons why Texas may say no. Well here are the two biggest reasons why Texas will not wish to jump to the SEC:

1. Texas won't be the top dog in the SEC (they won't even be second)
Right now Texas only has to play one game in the regular season in which they have a realistic chance of loosing. Now, we understand that anything can happen and anyone can be upset, but outside of Oklahoma the Longhorns don't play any other legit team. If Texas and Oklahoma split their series in any given decade then chances are the Longhorns are in a BCS game 5 out of every 10 years. Chances are also good that they could loose to Oklahoma in one of those 5 years and Oklahoma could run the table and get in the National Title game. In that case having only one loss to Oklahoma would put the Longhorns into a BCS game with an at-large bid. So right now the Longhorns are looking at a BCS game 6 out of every 10 years. At least 2 of those 6 BCS games will probably be a National Title game.
In the SEC Texas will be third to Alabama and Florida. In addition the Longhorns will be in a situation where they may have to play LSU, Georgia, Tennessee, Auburn, and Bama or Florida. Also, there will be Arkansas, the Missisyphillus schools, South Carolina, and Kentucky. No more Baylor, Iowa St., Colorado, and the rest of the Big 12 cupcakes. Texas will be exposed and eliminated from National Title contention far more often than they are now.

2. Texas does not need SEC money
I believe that the Texas athletic department pulled in about $120 million last year. Texas does not need SEC money because they make their own money. Now Texas A&M or Clempsun could use the money but Texas dose not. Even if the SEC pulls in more money we are talking about a 14 or 16 way split. Should the Big 12 add TCU and Houston then they are only in a 12 way split. The amount of money that Texas pulls in and the amount of money that the Big 12 pulls in should they replace two teams will stay about the same. Texas will get what they are already getting and that would probably add up to about the same as what they would get in a 16 way split.

Georgia Tech, Clempsun, Florida State, and North Carolina or Miami will probably be the newest additions to the SEC.