![]() |
![]() |
ESPN reported last night that Texas was considering going independent, but didn't really believe they would do it.
USC could too
Unlike Notre Dame, the University of Texas (at Austin)....is a STATE University. Meaning State Funded. Meaning accountable to the Legislature.
They will not do anything without the concurrence of the Texas State Legislature or they risk losing HUGE HUGE HUGE annual funding. This is exactly why they joined the Big12 in 1995 instead of heading off to the PAC10 with A&M heading off to the SEC. Those deals were done in prinicipal, but the legislature put the brakes on because at the time there were some powerful Baylor and Tech alums in office.
Therefore, I have trouble seeing the Longhorns going independent.
No, I do not think they will either. I just meant that they probably have the resources (fan base, markets, $$$$) to do so if the legislature allowed them to. Same with the others. USC...maybe. I read something not too long ago that made me think they were not as well off as a lot of us thought they were.
I'm sure they'd love to.
They'd rake in a significant TV deal and would probably do well in marketing too. Plus no sharing of Bowl Revenues.
They'd also probably schedule home games against the Sister Mary School for the blind.
The Big 12 commish may push for member loyality pledges before the start of the football season:
http://www.huskerextra.com/articles/...0956166083.txt
Not sure that would really mean anything though.
Interesting article.
I don't think the Nebraska folks have ever been comfortable playing second fiddle to Texas and Oklahoma....which is how things work in the Big12.
It will be interesting to see the penalties USC receives this Friday from the NCAA in football and basketball.
I think the reason USC is so strong in the south California is the lack of a NFL team for the past 20 years. USC has probably always been popular but since the Rams and Raiders left for St. Louis and Oakland, USC become the adopted NFL team for L.A.