PartyBear said:
The SWC was originally Baylor, Texas, TCU, A&M, OU, OSU (called Oklahoma A&M backe then), Phillips (a school in Northwestern OK not sure if still exists) Arkansas, Southwestern (in Georgetown has not had athletics in decades I think) and Rice. I thought SMU was a charter member but they joined a year or two after the SWC was established to replace Southwestern who dropped out.
Apparently the idea of the conference came from the AD at UT back then. He asked several Texas schools and schools in neighboring states if they wanted to start a conference. The above listed said yes. Interestingly LSU and Ole Miss were asked as well but they declined.
Big12Bear said:
I disagree on the angle that it was shocking that Houston didn't get an invite to the Big 12 simply because they were a public school and deserved to be there for that sole reason. They were bottom of the barrel in football the last few years of the SWC, along with their attendance, which was abysmal even when they were fielding exciting winning teams in '89-'90.
Very good post.TellMeYouLoveMe said:
Yeah, the idea that Baylor politicked it's way in is just sour economic grapes.
The metric of ANY network is eyeballs on the TV set. Having just three teams in a state with 30 million people isn't enough. Texas should have had 5 teams at least, maybe 6.
Kansas has two teams with a population of 2 mllion and Oklahoma has two teams with a population of 3.5 mil. Colorado is the star of no conference, and their university is a joke. Their recent football success at the time of the conference saved them. But really, Colorado folded it's way into irrelevance.
The management of the SWC ran it in the ground and the management of the Big 8 was sort of in a position like an acquiring corporation. Now the economics have swung against the original Big 8.
A lot of Big 8 schools are flatlining economically. They can't spend on facilities, coaches contracts are almost under the table and the SEC is outearning everyone. The entire reason that was floated for Kansas was basketball and now the open secret about paying players is well known, even if unpunished by the NCAA.
It will always be a political issue, because we're fundamentally still talking about amateur athletes and government resources. The problem is now the question is, "Who wants to be in a conference with the University of Texas?"
A lot of AD's will tell you no.
The reason it happened has retired, but there was no benefit to the conference in losing Mizzou, Nebraska, Arkansas and A&M.
Chamberman said:Big12Bear said:
I disagree on the angle that it was shocking that Houston didn't get an invite to the Big 12 simply because they were a public school and deserved to be there for that sole reason. They were bottom of the barrel in football the last few years of the SWC, along with their attendance, which was abysmal even when they were fielding exciting winning teams in '89-'90.
While it was political that Baylor got the invite to the Big XII along with UT, A&M and TT, many people assume it was because Anne Richards, Texas governor at the time and Baylor alum.
Two things are missing right now in college football.TeamPlayer said:
Very good post.
Pac 12 schools sailed past the flatlining stage years ago. I personally enjoy watching Pac 12 games and wish the TV contract revenue was shared equally across the Power 5 conferences. Long term, it's not healthy for college football to have such huge financial advantages in the SEC and Big 10. I wonder if further decreasing scholarship limits to 75 would help spread equal talent across the nation as well. Something needs to be done. The SEC has too much talent and resources for anyone to compete with them.
Quote:
Switzer: There were too damn many Little Sisters of the Poor. Private schools, church schools, small schools.
Quote:
Carr: What amazed me was that three public institutions left the fourth one behind. Houston was just not acceptable to A&M and Texas, bottom line. They had emotion and more negativity than the [University of] Texas tea-sippers. Theirs was a social disdain. The tea-sippers weren't emotional, they were sophisticated and snobbish. They looked at the University of Houston as unworthy: "We won't give them the time of day."
Quote:
Dodds: I think Nebraska felt they belonged in the Big 12, but I think Tom [Osborne] talked so much about Texas running the Big 12 that he fired up the fans up there that nobody liked Texas. Texas this, Texas that. On A&M, I think that was a call made by maybe a past coach there, people that had SEC ties. I don't think it was about television. I just think it was an opportunity that they could leave.
The story I remember is that Bullock told UT and A&M: "You sons of *****es can go anywhere you want, but you're taking Baylor and Tech with you,"Chamberman said:Big12Bear said:
I disagree on the angle that it was shocking that Houston didn't get an invite to the Big 12 simply because they were a public school and deserved to be there for that sole reason. They were bottom of the barrel in football the last few years of the SWC, along with their attendance, which was abysmal even when they were fielding exciting winning teams in '89-'90.
While it was political that Baylor got the invite to the Big XII along with UT, A&M and TT, many people assume it was because Anne Richards, Texas governor at the time and Baylor alum. But, no, it was because of the Lt. Governor, Bob Bullock, a TT undergrad alum, and Baylor Law school alum.
The Big 8 had invited UT and A&M, but they needed Texas state legislature approval. Bullock negotiated the deal to include TT and Baylor. As Texasjeremy indicates, we deserved to be in on our record alone.
The rest is history.
I believe it was in Sports Illustrated in 1963.notbubbleboy said:
Years ago I read this amazing article, probably written in the late 60's, about three couples hitting up 3 SWC games over the course of a weekend, including Baylor. I think it was Dan Jenkins or Bud Shrake or someone like that. I've been trying to find it but struck out. Really great nostalgic article for anyone who can find it.
George Truett said:
Thanks for posting.
I miss the old SWC. But it did itself in.
Arkansas griped constantly about unfair treatment because it was the only out of state school.
But they've yet to achieve the heights they achieved in the SWC.
That may be true 50 years from now.Johnny Bear said:George Truett said:
Thanks for posting.
I miss the old SWC. But it did itself in.
Arkansas griped constantly about unfair treatment because it was the only out of state school.
But they've yet to achieve the heights they achieved in the SWC.
Arky was still in the SWC the last time they won a conference title.
One can hope.Robert Wilson said:That may be true 50 years from now.Johnny Bear said:George Truett said:
Thanks for posting.
I miss the old SWC. But it did itself in.
Arkansas griped constantly about unfair treatment because it was the only out of state school.
But they've yet to achieve the heights they achieved in the SWC.
Arky was still in the SWC the last time they won a conference title.