I wish we could dominate the AAC.
We can’t even beat SMU and we are going to dominate the PAC?
Its all about players…Once we are in P5, you will see enormous improvement in talent…so YES, we will be very good in any P5, including PAC 12…Scott has let the league down as far as revenue and profile are concerned. He is also a huge money waster who spends millions per year on league offices that SEC, for example spends maybe 250, 000 on…seems to be roundly disliked…Presdents will decide on expansion and invitations, NOT the commisioner. I do think PAC might make a change before their GOR expires so they have better person looking after PACs interest in critical time…
To answer above question, the Houston college football TV market was rated No. 2 nationally as of the last botched Big12 “realignment”…I forget whether these #s were ESPN, Nielsen, whom ever, but it was talked about and quoted everywhere as true (?)…
As for A&M, I was on the Athletic Advisory Board from 87-94. A year BEFORE the Big 12 was created (91) UH and A&M were officially invited to join the SEC. Board voted yes Friday afternoon, A&M crawfished the deal Sunday night (before the 10am Monday News Conference), and the SEC wanted both of us or none.
This happened. Ask Rudy Davalos.
So sure, we share the market, but WE share the market.
And to further clarify, it has always been my opinion (and all those involved) that the Big 12 was formed that Sunday night…and they took a year to screw us.
Houston has never been a number two tv market either in total viewership nor in college viewership.
Houston is actually around number 7 in total and number 37, as of several years ago, in college viewership.
This was from 2012 and I’m too lazy to look up the figures that were used during the big 12 realignment farce but we did not move up 35 spots in just 3-4 years.
So then is it fair to say that A&M also stabbed us in the back? Why did they pick going to the Big 12 with UT, TT, BU, rather than going with UH to the SEC?
Because of the comfort of being with 3 other SwC schools in the new Big 12 along with the fact that the Big12 would have 6 AAU members that would greatly increase the odds of A&M one day being an AAU member. Which A&M finally accomplished in 2001. The SEC at the time only had 2 AAU members, Florida and Vanderbilt.
So it was not just UT that dumped all over us, A&M did too. Both had their reasons, which were different of course, but clearly neither felt it was in their best interests to be associated with us. I don’t think that fact has changed.
And sorry to rain on everyone’s parade, the Pac is a non-starter for us. At least for the foreseeable future. The time to add UH would have been before AT&T dropped their network. If they really felt that adding UH would open the entire Texas market to their network, they would have added us years ago.
I have made the comment before, that, the one thing that UT and A&M have in common, they both hate Uh. This was per a high political figure in the Columbus area.
Because Bob Bullock and the Texas Government threatened to pull funding from A&M if they didn’t go to the Big12.
To be clear, the SEC move to acquire UH and A&M sparked action by Texas and A&M…Texas made all sorts of promises to A&M to stay in the fold while Big 12 was being formed. And as much as they hated us, they REALLY hated Rice and SMU dragging everyone down…
And then we were the last team, the odd man out with Baylor winning the coin flip (Bullock/Richards)…we all know how that went.
So you are saying UT wanted UH in the B12 but the governor, playing politics, made the B12 take Baylor instead.
I see it as the exact opposite. AT&T dropping them may give them the wake up call they need. They are losing ground in regions that they have no teams and out of desperation, they may make a move. Of all the G5 options available to them…we are the BEST.
Here’s our competition:
BYU- religious headaches and plus they already have a team in Utah
New Mexico- smaller market, smaller state but a NEW state
UNLV- new market/metro but not as much upside as UH’
Boise State- I get the feeling the PAC looks down on their academic record but they are a competitive program in a new market/state
SMU- Religious, next
Rice- they’d have to take a GIANT leap of faith on this one. Great academic university but zero investment in athletics. This add would not be another Stanford.
Tulane- Similar to Rice but they would gain access in the Louisiana/New Orleans market .
Colorado State- Possible but they already have a program in Colorado.
San Diego State- They face the same hurdles we do with the Big 12…not another team in California line.
All of the other AAC possibilities are too far EAST.
Then there is …
Houston- Gets them into the state of Texas. Gets them in the Houston market (7 million within a 50 mile radius). Gets them into the #2 most populous state with the cable TV profits associated. Gets them into new time zones with a chance to put heir product on TV at new times. Gets them access to the Houston/Texas recruiting. True, they get Texas kids now but with a UH they would be accelerate the raid into the state …they can now play in or for a team in their backyard. Large diverse public school that fits in nicely with the other large city schools in the conference. Houston-Los Angeles are pretty strong book ends. Gets them a University that makes academic strides each year and one that is only approaching its 100th birthday…imagine UH at 150 or 200!
So, if they add UH plus one of the other NEW MARKET universities, it would start to open up new markets for them. That would put them at 14 and IF/WHEN the Big 12 dissolves (assuming UT, OU & KU land elsewhere) …they could grab 2 more (Texas Tech? and Oklahoma State?) This would entirely add a southwest/central feel to the conference
I recall reading somewhere that ESPN and Big 8 wanted a full merger between the 2 conferences, but UT supported only 4 SWC schools to be in the new conference. So there is that, however whether UT would have taken UH over BU or TT if the governor and lt. Gov and speaker hadn’t intervened, I can’t say.
It makes so much sense for the PAC to add UH but they will not do it.
BU a private school should have never been pass over a public school like UH.
Neither should have TCU. I get the quality on the field but private institutions are a minority in the big 12 so public good should have been a priority.
Any idea what his objection to UH is? Does he think that we are the same school now that it was in 1990? Would like to have him come to UH and see exactly who and what we are.
The Big 12 should have been the Big 8 schools + the 4 Texas public schools. If the Big 12 needed to be form without UH and instead a private school, it should have been Rice. Rice had the academics and was located in a market that UT and A&M fan bases would have benefited from. BU got in because of political pull.