Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu
I don't think the Big 8 could have survived (as a top-tier or near-top-tier conference) this long without embracing the Texas schools. Maybe there was a better way to absorb Texas and aTm without shifting the center of gravity to Dallas and making the northern teams afterthoughts, but the Big 8 needed Texas to survive, IMO.
|
Being associated with Texas (the most powerful brand in college sport) has done wonders for all of the Big 12 teams. The dollars being brought in and success that pretty much all Big 12 schools have experienced has been enhanced by merging with the Texas schools.
UT is probably the 3-4th best football program in the conference right now and the 2-3rd strongest in basketball. This speaks to how the level of play has been raised for the other schools.
With 10 teams now each school gets to showcase their own brand as opposed to living under the banner of "the conference". The SEC has cornered the market on conference recognition but what this has done lessened the impact of individual universities. Oklahoma defeating the flagship football program of the SEC carries some success for the conference sure...but more for Oklahoma. Which is exactly how the Big 12 prefers to operate.
Teams like Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, and now Baylor have seen their athletic programs boom while being members of the Big 12 when in the Big 8 they were known simply as regional schools that competed in sports.
It's strange to me that other schools would want to give up so much of their own identity to play in a conference that has a hard time distinguishing schools from one another...
Want proof?
What team do you think of when someone says "Tigers"?