THE BRILLIANT MADNESS OF INDEPENDENCE
by Spencer Hall on May 24, 2010 11:39 AM EDT
Email
Print
Consider the insane for a moment: what if Texas, in some parallel universe where people did unconventional and interesting things, what if Texas decided not only to leave the Big 12, but to go independent completely?
Reader Mark writes in with the insane but brilliantly obvious:
As a lifelong Notre Dame fan and recent grad, I value Notre Dame's independence greatly. With that being said, I firmly believe in the next 10 years we will join the Big Ten. Notre Dame loves football, but the one thing they love more than football is money. Unless Brian Kelly becomes Ara Parseghian, the financials will be too much to ignore.
One school I think who would benefit tremendously from independence is Texas. I live in the heart of Big 12 country in Kansas City, and there seems to be no love lost between the rest of the schools and the Burnt Orange. In fact, Notre Dame has sucked so much in the past 20 years that my friends all hate Texas WAY more than Notre Dame. I'm no business major (engineering actually with law school in the future), but it doesn't seem like Texas really benefits from playing in the Big 12 (ignore any sport besides football, like Texas is gonna beat Kansas, The Good Reverend Bill Self will not allow that). They already make millions more than any other school in nation and they appear on tv whenever they want. So in the spirit of all these damn conference expansion rumors, what do you think?
Dismiss the obvious negatives for an instant: the lack of a set schedule, no guaranteed conference money, the logistical difficulties of running a one-stop shop for all things Texan. Leave those for the postgame discussion. Going independent isn't as insane as it sounds, and not just because Texans could embrace their internalized Alamo-fixation, pull up the ladders, and hold out in the fortress until the bullets/viewers ran out and the glorious end arrived.
Texas would first be able to brand individually. With zero obligations to the Big 12, the revenue stream flows like a delicious cash-flavored soft-serve ice cream spout directly into its mouth. Considering Texas' already palatial facilities and ample cash, consider the Croesus-wad Texas would pull maintaining its existing rivalries while negotiating cash deals for its network, its out-of-conference appearances, and its merchandising. Greed on this scale is almost a form of nobility.
Texas risks little it doesn't manage itself: as a long-established national power, it could write its own checks without cutting a margin-decreasing dividend to anyone. The Big Ten Network may look like the move of the future, but for the mad thinkers of the future, the new independent may be the way to go for large programs capable of serving as their own solar systems--which, in some respect, is what many of the conferences function as already. (Additionally, we're still high on the notion of the Texas Network, if only to sate our unending thirst for Dallas reruns and the Pom Squad House reality show.)
And yes: disadvantages a-plenty, especially the notion of risk for teams going it alone. But look at how well Notre Dame does financially a decade and a half into their avant-garde theater exercise in Division One Football Greatness, and tell us a program with consistent wins and championships wouldn't rake in dollars. College football remains a largely anarchic environment, with no real central authority. Rather than some assumed drift towards cohesion, increased fracturing of the whole may be the smart move down the road.
64 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
On NDnation
The admittedly overcaffeinated Notre Dame board, this has been talking point for a while- mostly because of rumored meetings between ND and UT on some sort of home, away, and neutral site games.
"But look at how well Notre Dame does financially a decade and a half into their avant-garde theater exercise in Division One Football Greatness"
I’m glad someone recognizes the true genius of Charlie Weis’s edgy and provocative Cirque du Screen Pass.
I must respectfully disagree with Mark. The Powers at Notre Dame do love football, and they do love money more, but what they love the most is being in control of money. They can do whatever they want with the (very large) revenue from football, and I don’t think they’re in a hurry to go on Integer welfare. I guess we’ll see.
Finally, a message TO Texas FROM Notre Dame:
Brian Kelly says no hat ceremonies.
by Ancient Chinese Secret on May 24, 2010 11:52 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I would say
ND’s recent run is more along the lines of experimental theatre than CIrque- think Ras babi Abdalla Babiker. ND: challenging the very definition of success in a post modern world.
by Londonjoe on May 24, 2010 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
What is the sound of a draw play crying?
One of our most challenging pieces was the Dance of the Sprinklers in a 4-OT loss to Pittsburgh.
You know, we’re kind of like a bad prog rock band. Maybe we should start doing snap counts in 9/8 time.
Brian Kelly says no hat ceremonies.
by Ancient Chinese Secret on May 24, 2010 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Would this hypo include Texas going whole-hog into independence...
Or just football, a la Notre Dame (Big East in everything else)? Someone’s got to pay for the women’s curling team and I’m pretty sure conference revenue is the bribe incentive to stay.
/doesn’t have any idea what the Big XII’s revenue sharing agreement looks like
I’m no business major (engineering actually with law school in the future),
Haven’t you suffered enough already?
I'm afraid I have no choice but to sell you all for scientific experiments.
by boddagettaflyer on May 24, 2010 11:56 AM EDT reply actions
Apparently you haven't
I just finished my first year and I’ll be damned if I hear “hypo” anytime in the next 3 months
/mutters and returns to law review write-on
Welcome to the rest of your career...
"Hush now, let it go now. I know it's time to go. Time to let this fall from my hands" VNV Nation, "From My Hands"
by Stuck in the Plains on May 24, 2010 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions
I wonder if there would be any backlash at UT going independent.
Notre Dame being independent is the status quo, i.e., they’ve always been independent.
But, Texas (or anyone) leaving a conference to become independent is a different situation. It’s one thing to spurn invitations to join a conference, a la ND. It’s something else entirely to pull the “screw you, guys” and leave a conference when you’re usually the best team in said conference. It seems plausible to me that the remnants of the Big XII could do something crazy like blackball the Horns. Texas could also possibly lose some respect (in the national perception dept.) if they ditch a Big XII schedule and start loading up on military academies and ND (sorry, ND fans, but it’s true, for now). Just thinking out loud.
Sweet, this fight again.
ND’s schedule is not appreciably better or worse than that of the vast majority of conference schools. The military academies on ND’s schedule = the 1-AA and CUSA and Iowa States on everyone else’s schedule. Except that Navy’s arguably better than any of those schools in any given year. If UT, like ND, averaged a schedule in the 25th-35th strongest SOS, they shouldn’t lose any national respect.
Way back machine...
Remember when there were only 8-10 teams in the SEC? 7 conference games and 1-2 real non-conference opponents? Now there is zilch reason to go out of conference. SEC teams get conference sched plus 4 patsies who will take one-two year rotation at Giant SEC Stadium / Largest city in state for one day per week so every conference team gets gate from 7 home games each year. That’s alot of $.
These economics can be extended to any strong conference. Now consider the potential incestuousness of the Big Twhatever (feel free to concatenate to Big Twhat). Where’s the incentive to playing ND? Schedule strength be damned. Purity of competition—nevermind. Nostalgia? Go talk to your grandaddy. The opportunity cost of playing ND will be too high. How much of ND’s schedule (Mich, Mich St., Purdue, etc.) will line up for pennies when staring down the barrel of an eight game conference schedule.
On the flip side, ND hasn’t been relevant to the national championship in 20 years. Anything that sustains that trend is goodness. You stay classy, Notre Dame!
by Duck Notre Fame on May 24, 2010 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions
I'd like to point out that nearly all SEC teams...
Still play at least 1 “real” non-con game, every year (and I’m not talking about bowl games). Admittedly, finding a team to play 2 legit non-cons is a more difficult, but it happens. Sometimes you’ll even find an overachiever like Georgia who spends 3 of their 4 non-con games playing Arizona St. and ranked Okie State and GA Tech teams.
I've been looking for the proper forum to discuss this
And this probably isn’t it, but you gave me enough of a window that I’m going to take it. My problem with the general SEC out-of-conference schedule isn’t that they schedule cupcakes, it’s when those cupcakes appear on the schedule. Look, every team likes to feast on the delicous, sugary goodness that is a MAC/Sun Belt conference team to boost its record. And, to an extent, its necessary. Since there’s no college football preseason, teams need to work out their kinks against teams that, realistically, can’t be expected to provide much more than a super scrimmage. Besides, we all need a game early in the season to burn through our disciplinary infraction suspensions before it might, you know, impact the team. So go ahead, schedule your Ball States, New Mexicos and Furmans.
No, my problem is when SEC teams load up the MIDDLE of their schedule with these tasty non-entities, in effect giving themselves an extra bye week during the heart of the in-conference season, when injuries begin to take their toll and the extra rest is even more beneficial. There is no excuse for scheduling teams like Georgia State, Idaho State, Citadel and the like in late October/early November. I say, after you’ve played two in-conference games, you aren’t allowed to play any cupcake OOC games until your conference schedule is over (not including conference championship games, obviously). Once the calendar flips to October, you should really be playing the teams that matter.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
Fine with me.
I have no problem with the practice, but I can see where others might.
I will say that you’ve mischaracterized it, though. I didn’t look through all 12 SEC schedules, so there may be some exceptions, but I can say that a majority of SEC teams start the season with 2 non-con games, and have at least 3 out of 4 non-con games played by week 5. I would hardly call playing 1 cupcake in October or November “loading up”, but I get your point.
I’ll also say that some other non-SEC teams have done the same thing recently, including Texas, Indiana, KSU, Texas Tech… and ND (playing Tulsa on Oct. 30). More can be added to that list, depending on whether or not you want to call Fresno State or Syracuse “scrubs”. I’m not saying that this makes what the SEC does “okay”, and I fully realize that this practice is prevalent in the SEC, but it’s not exclusive to the SEC.
No it certainly isn't exclusive to the SEC
A lot of teams do it, and I find it awful whoever they are, even if it’s my own team. And yes, this isn’t something all SEC members are guilty of; but, most damningly, it is something the TOP teams of the SEC are much more likely to be guilty of than the middle/bottom. Look, if you’re a Florida, Alabama, Georgia or an LSU (or an Ohio State/USC/Texas), than you know that year in and year out, you will be in the SEC title picture if not the national title discussion (or at least that’s what these teams aspire to be). If that’s the case, the justification for these late season gimmie games is pretty thin. Whenever a team does it, regardless of conference, it looks bad. And should be discouraged.
There is another long post to be made about how these late-season cupcakes are especially nefarious given the usual lopsided score and how they impact late-season polls, but that is a discussion for another day…
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
HoyaGoon
The SEC spreads its conference games from Week One at the end of August through the Saturday after Thanksgiving. The reason? TV. If a SEC team has a schedule dictated to them leaving an open date in November, are they supposed to only play 11 games? The NCAA won’t let them start any earlier to play a rent-a-win the 3rd week of August. Last fall, by the end of October, Florida had already played 6 of its 8 conference games. Most other teams had played 5 of their conference games by the end of October.
The days of playing 4 straight non-conference games followed by 8 conference games is a thing of the past for conferences maximizing their TV revenue. It has NOTHING to do with anything else.
I understand
how it happens, my argument is that it ought not be set up that way. And I’m not arguing that it has to be 4 OOC games followed by the conference slate, or even that you shouldn’t have in-conference games the first week. I just think that, in the absence of a preseason, that conferences should schedule with the idea of letting teams grow into who they are before they get to the meat of the conference schedule. The first few weeks, and especially the first two, of the college football season are always a bit chaotic and rife with “upsets” as teams get acclimated and reality imposes itself on the up-to-then speculation. I don’t think a team should find itself effectively out of conference title consideration three weeks into the season just because the schedule gods gave them a bunch of conference games before they got settled as a team.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
Playing conference games right out of the gate...
…has been the norm in the SEC since the early 90’s. I understand what you are saying, but it’s not going to happen. Once CBS finishes showing the US Open, they want marquee matchups every week. ESPN/ABC also wants attractive matchups from week one forward as well. This scheduling strategy has not only made the conference very rich, but also made the SEC the most watched conference per SI. It’s a trade off much like having to play at 11am on Saturdays to accommodate the SEC Network and meet CBS requirements of their SEC game being the only SEC game played in the 2:30 central time slot.
It's not a fight. Unless you want it to be.
You make some good points about the military academies being equivalent to 1-AA and CUSA. Of course, then you also play actual CUSA teams, like Tulsa. Props on playing USC, though.
I’m not sure where your getting your data from, but since 2005, ND’s SoS has ranked between 35 and 85, with an average 50. That’s a far cry from your claim of 25-35. Maybe if you go back to the 90s…
Not sure where you're getting your data from
ND’s final strength of schedule rankings for the last five years according to Sagarin:
2009 – 37
2008 – 50
2007 – 24
2006 – 18
2005 – 14
The average for the last five years is 28.6, pretty much right in the middle of the original poster’s estimate of 25-35. (And if you want to look at the last 10 years, ND’s SoS improves to 20.1, again, according to Sagarin)
by Footballstat on May 24, 2010 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions
He's making it up as he goes.
Critics are going to be referencing that one time ND played Tulsa (and Western Michigan) for the next 30 years, strength-of-schedule rankings be damned.
You can't expect fans not to criticize...
…when ND only has to win 9 games to earn a BCS berth when you get to control 100% of who, when and where you play. With only needing 9 wins, ND should be required to play a Top 20 SOS every season to level the BCS playing field.
I used Warren Nolan.
I apologize for not mentioning that in my previous post.
I’m sure that someone will say Sagarin is more reputable, and he may well be.
I’ll up the ante, though, and post the “official” NCAA stats:
2009 – 50
2008 – 89
2007 – 30
2006 – 34
2005 – 52
That’s an average of 51, straight from the NCAA itself.
If you consider the past 10 years, it does get better, all the way up to 34, on the tail end of original estimate. But, if you have to go back to 2000 to actually get your average SoS below 50, that says something about the recent schedules.
The ironic thing about this is I never said that ND played a weak schedule. All I said was that ND was a weak opponent, but I’m sure that’s another can of worms itself.
All right, everyone, light and graceful now.
Aaaaand onetwothree onetwothree very good onetwothree HOLDING NUMBER 72 PAUL DUNCAN 10 YARDS AND REPEAT THIRD DOWN.
Brian Kelly says no hat ceremonies.
by Ancient Chinese Secret on May 24, 2010 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Since we're talking "money"
It should be in 7/8, like [much of] the song.
by An 'eer with a beer on May 24, 2010 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Ack!
I meant 7/4.
Where’s the edit key on this thing…?
by An 'eer with a beer on May 24, 2010 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Money breakdown/Potential Loss?
Assuming that since the Big12’s revenue sharing isn’t as lucrative as the Big10/SEC plans – Texas probably get’s most of their money and clout from characters like this:
Having said that – do the potential gain from going solo, outweight pissing off legions of fans and alums who prefer the current conference situation and yearn for the days of Big 8 matchups.
If UT goes solo...
…how will they earn their coveted asterisks?
Screw them and the drugged up cow they rode in on.
by Billy Sims' Fro on May 24, 2010 12:49 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I would TOTALLY watch the FUCK out of a Bevo show
The artist formerly known as TCOAN
by Lady Commenter on May 24, 2010 12:50 PM EDT reply actions
GET ME DELOSS DODDS RIGHT FUCKING NOW!
Also, am I the only guy who reads “Pom” and sees “Porn?”
"...when the devil says to you: do not drink, answer him: I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to."
— Martin Luther
No.
Also, am I the only guy who reads "Pom" and sees "Porn?"
I'm afraid I have no choice but to sell you all for scientific experiments.
by boddagettaflyer on May 24, 2010 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions
This is a scary scenario
if only because of the lemming programs that would try to emulate the leap to independence. The question now is which program has the cajones to uproot at the peak of success only to fall on their faces when their winning percentage and viewership declines?
My money is on USC. Another Paul Hackett could come along at any time. (derp)
GT did it in the mid 60s
Screw the SEC we are a football power and the NFL will never put a team in Atlanta!
Are you smoking dope? Going out of conference means no Rose Bowl. Just because the university has all these fancy-pants undergraduates now who value book-larnin’ and such pretensions doesn’t mean that the alumni would tolerate putting the team permanently out of contention to host a Big 10 opponent.
"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea"
Take this to the extreme, and you have 120 independent teams
Each with their own network.
I, for one, think that the Florida International Network (FIN) would rock hardcore.
Another negative
On one that gets lost in the general conversation about expansion: what happens when, in a few years, Texas is on a down-swing? The inherent mistake of Texas-as-independent partisans, as well as all the resident SEC-triumphalists, is to assume that the current status quo in football is set and THUS WILL EVER BE! Texas is on top of the world right now, but what happens if the coach that replaces Mack Brown is another Mackovic? Or if Texas gets hit with NCAA sanctions (hahaha, like the NCAA ever actually punishes anyone)? A decade from now, who knows what team will be the dominant power. Ten years ago, the two most consistently successful teams were FSU and Nebraska (and had been for 20 or 30 years, in Nebraska’s case), and there was no reason to expect either program to fall so far, so fast. LIkewise, USC and Texas were mired in relative mediocrity owing to late 80s/early 90s downturns.
There are a lot of benefits to Texas if were to go independent, in the amount of money available would, at present, be overwhelming. But almost all that benefit accrues to one sport, football, to the detriment to its other sports. And if the football team were to go through a 5 year or so slump, then all of a sudden this “brilliant madness” looks a lot less like the former than the latter.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
conferences
Are far more fungible in other sports than in football. Non-revenue sports change conferences fairly frequently, far more often than their revenue generating cousins. Texas basketball and baseball will be fine, if that’s what you’re wondering. Texas baseball would probably benefit from being able to play more of the Texas teams than they can currently (I assume they play Rice at least once, but I bet they’d love to play a couple of the west Texas teams more often).
The problem for other sports is
You can’t survive outside of a conference structure. That’s why Notre Dame is in the Big East for everything but football. Not sure how Texas’ other sports would survive, long-run, as an independent. I say that because I don’t think any conference will ever again make a deal like the Notre Dame-Big East arrangement because it is so one-sided and no real benefit accrues to the league.
In the end, the problem with most of the expansion/Texas independence talk is that it is myopic, fixated solely by football. While football is probably issue #1 and 1A of expansion, especially for the Big Ten, it is only one issue. What gets lost is all the non-revenue sports, and even more importantly, the academics. And the academics matter much more than is acknowledged. While the Big Ten, because of its network, has a huge pie of revenue to give out slices to new members as an incentive, it pales in comparison to the BILLIONS of dollars in research grants the academic arm of the Big Ten, the CIC (Big Ten schools plus U. of Chicago) controls and is able to distribute/designate to its member institutions. It is the Big Ten/CIC’s staggering lead in that front that makes membership very attractive potential expansion candidates. It’s also something that no independent school can hope to match, especially a large, public research-oriented institution like Texas.
Football clearly drives the sports dicussion and decision-making of expansion. But it won’t be ADs who make the decision, it will the college presidents/chancellors and/or board of regents. And that’s also why Texas going-it-alone, is just so much hot air being spouted by the Texas AD, in the end, it ain’t his call to make.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
Agreed.
When the Big XII formed (when UT was bad), the word was that UT fans were the definition of casual. Get there with 5 minutes left in the 1st quarter, leave with 8 minutes left to beat traffic, and talk amongst yourselves. Sure, now they are great, passionate fans everywhere. If they do start going 6-6 or 5-7 (big if, granted) for a stretch, fully expect 1/2 full stadiums and moderate interest.
They always turn out for baseball
And they are crazy about it. Possibly the best fans in college baseball, and some of the most knowledgeable. Rice-Texas was like a border war for the kids I know from Texas. Funnily enough, people from both sides take that one pretty seriously (the only other parallel I can think of is Vandy- theotherUT, and theotherUT tends to ignore Vandy). Could Texas fans really go back to being apathetic about football?
I resembled that remark
Fact is, we didn’t get as pumped up for the annual Baylor or SMU slaughter at the end of the SWC, but the only time you’d see a 1/2 full stadium was for the first 20 minutes of an 11am start when the wind-chill was hovering around 20. I’ll never forget going stark raving mad with 80k of my closest friends for a close game against Virginia (?) in the mid-90’s. Texas fans get disgruntled but don’t stop showing up.
Your Man In the Balkans
When Texas (the state, not the U) secedes from the Union......
……they will be out of the NCAA totally. The ultimate independence!
Dood...ur stealin' my thunderz.
/grumbles something about slow-ass internet
I'm afraid I have no choice but to sell you all for scientific experiments.
by boddagettaflyer on May 24, 2010 4:30 PM EDT up reply actions
...outside of Sakerlina.
Damn Palmetto tree is everywhere.
I'm afraid I have no choice but to sell you all for scientific experiments.
by boddagettaflyer on May 24, 2010 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Gotta say...yes, I think even more than Sakerlina.
Sakerlinians embrace that palmetto on everything, but Texans actually FLY THE FLAG…EVERYWHERE! And in large multiples at car dealerships, etc.
And everything is named Lonestar.
Here in Kentucky
All the sorostitutes have pink palmetto tree stickers on their vehicles. I assume this pisses off real Sakerlinians (sp?), as “I went to Folly Beach for formal one time and the tree is soooo cute” doesn’t seem adequate grounds for associating yourself with that flag.
The Texas flag bores me. Seems like it should bore everyone. It’s not “distinctive.” In fact it looks like every other damn flag in its colors and design (and vague reference to the original CSA flag). And it takes more than being well-known to make something good— it’s not well known because it’s cool or different or badass. It’s well-known because Texans never stop shoving the goddamn thing in your face. And there’s a lot of Texans out there.
Merchandising!
When your state population is only around four million and tourism is worth $16.4 billion a year plus (some calculations take it to $18B) then hell yes you are going to put your logo on anythng that’ll hold still long enough.
by PalmettoTiger on May 25, 2010 12:46 AM EDT up reply actions
Furiously off topic
Other than to piss me off, why would this post be tagged “syracuse orange”?
Spartan is right... Secession!!
Texas will secede, but only in order to make winning a national title that much easier for the Horns! It will be us v. TCU (sorry Ags – y’all get to play San Angelo state for the runner up trophy) every year in the Alamodome… Aw hell, play it right in the actual Alamo. Now that would be awesome.
by StoopsIsTaliban on May 24, 2010 7:37 PM EDT reply actions
There is only one fact in this entire post.
Texas will never beat Kansas in basketball when it matters.
Ever.
You can never have too much talent.
by KennyGregoryRockThaCradle on May 24, 2010 11:56 PM EDT reply actions
Except....
2006, when Texas whipped KU 80-55 to secure the #1 seed.
Oh, and again in 2008 (72-69 to secure #1 seed).
But whatever, I mean that was only twice in he last four years. Could KU football say the same? Unlikely.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
