Texas Monthly’s Paul Burka explains the historical and cultural significance of the Texas-A&M dichotomy (subscription required):

Why is this rivalry so intense? It is due partly to the circumstances of the institutions’ births. The state constitution of 1876 required the Legislature, “as soon as practicable,” to establish a “university of the first class . . . for the promotion of literature, and the arts and sciences.” That was UT. No such lofty ambitions were prescribed for A&M. The constitution said only, “The Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas . . . located in the county of Brazos, is hereby made, and constituted a branch of the University of Texas, for instruction in agriculture, the mechanic arts and the natural sciences connected therewith.” From the very start, A&M was the stepchild, the little brother, a status it has never quite shaken. It wasn’t intended as a “university of the first class.”

Conceived thus, over time the two schools have come to perfectly represent the two facets of Texas identity: rural roots and urban sophistication. For most of its history, A&M has been a school for families who lived far from the bright lights of the cities, whose children rode to school in buses that traveled on dusty roads, families who looked eagerly to the sky when dark clouds closed in over their cotton fields. Until the sixties, students, all male, were required to enroll for military training in the Corps of Cadets, fostering a highly disciplined, ascetic attitude that for decades was synonymous with “Aggie.” UT, by contrast, has always been the school for city folk, located smack in the middle of Austin, with its never-ending enticements of music and food and drink and the aura of power emanating from the Capitol, just a few blocks away. UT was the school for matinee idols like Farrah Fawcett. For the crew-cut young men of A&M it could sometimes represent everything in their lives that seemed unattainable. Conversely, for the many UT students who came from small towns, A&M could seem like everything they had wanted to leave behind. When the schools met on the football field, they were playing for more than just bragging rights. They were playing to vindicate their place in the world.

When rumors first started in 2010 that A&M was looking to bolt for the SEC (at a time when Texas, Tech, OU, and Oklahoma State were rumored to be heading to what was still the Pac-10), I have to admit I was adamantly against splitting the two schools apart. Forget money for a second. This is history we’re talking about. The Texas-A&M rivalry is programmed into the very DNA of the Lone Star State. To break them up, I argued, would be a sacrilege.

But I’m over it now.

I understand why A&M made the decision it did although I don’t agree with it for a minute. They hated UT’s $300 million deal with ESPN for the Longhorn Network and continued unequal sharing of TV money in the Big 12. They looked across the Sabine and saw the green grass of the SEC, with its abundance of national championships and equal TV profits, and probably for a moment even deluded themselves into thinking they could possibly be SEC champions one day. And as soon as the SEC would have them — for reasons I’m still unclear on — they were gone, taking Missouri with them shortly thereafter. For all the talk about “tradition” at College Station, when it came down to it, money and childish pride proved to be far more important.

So the Longhorns will head to Kyle Field on Thanksgiving for a final showdown with their arch-enemies in maroon. The emotion will be high on both sides for sure. For A&M, beating Texas one last time will ensure bragging rights for years. For Texas, it’s their last opportunity to humiliate the Aggies on their home turf and add one more victory to an already-lopsided 75-37-5 record.

And then a new reality will begin in the state of Texas, a reality without Texas-A&M, a reality that no Texan alive has ever known. Will each school remove the other from its fight song? Will they stop seeing each other as evil incarnate, the personification of everything that’s wrong in the world? Will the bitterness between the two schools fade with each passing generation until at some point it’s completely forgotten that they were once such hated rivals? It’s doubtful but still possible. But if it does happen, it’ll be no one’s fault but A&M’s.

Previously:
Why I’m a fan
That awkward moment when your daughter says she wants to go to Texas A&M
College football realignment? Done
The future of the Big 12 and how to stop it

You’re welcome.

Actually, to be fair most of the work was already done. TCU is already set to move the Big East next year, Texas A&M is still hoping to go to the SEC, and today the ACC officially announced that Pitt and Syracuse are moving over from the Big East. The rest is just details.

Under my plan, the six BCS automatic qualifying conferences are reduced to five, each with 14 teams. Yes, I know people keep talking about 16-team superconferences, but my plan gives you six extra teams, and if nothing else, I’m all about extra value.

So here goes:

• TCU moves to the Big East.
• Texas A&M and West Virginia move to the SEC.
• OU and Oklahoma State go to the Pac-12.
• Pitt and Syracuse go to the ACC.
• The Big Ten adds Air Force and SMU.
• What’s left of the Big 12 and Big East merge into a single conference, which also adds BYU.

Done.

Yes, you lose the Texas/Texas A&M and Texas/OU rivalries, but those ships have already sailed for the most part. There will also be considerable travel headaches, especially for sports other than football, but again, we’re already past that point as it is. The Big 12/Big East will have the most headaches but can easily divide into East-West regions for easier scheduling.

So what are the benefits?

• Each conference has the same number of teams.
• Each conference will have a conference championship game, giving each the same path to a BCS game.
• With only five AQ conferences, a sixth could be added (Mountain West?), or there could be more room in the BCS for wildcard teams, which I think is a better solution.
• Many of the traditional rivalries are left intact.
• And most importantly, we can stop talking about all this crap and get back to griping about the BCS.

Any questions?

Previously:
The future of the Big 12 and how to stop it
Wait, that was it?!
Speculating on conference expansion rumors
‘Fairness Index’ doesn’t prove the BCS is fair

The Aggies apparently weren’t too keen on their intrastate rival Longhorns getting their own television network, despite the fact that the Longhorn Network will be available to exactly seven households in America, none of which are in Austin. But logic has never been A&M’s strong suit, so they’ve chosen to abandon 100+ years of tradition and possibly as much as $30 million in exit fees in hopes that the SEC will let them in to their exclusive club. Yeah, good luck with that. Let’s see, how many Big 12 football titles has A&M won? How many BCS games have they gone to? How many National Championships have they won since the rise of the BCS? Zero. And yet they really expect to do better against the likes of Auburn, Florida, Alabama, and LSU?

I have a suspicion that winning isn’t really important to the Texas A&M Board of Regents, though. Their decision to leave is strictly fueled by pride, with a healthy dose of TV cash mixed in. Win or lose, A&M stands to make more money in the SEC, where the TV contracts are greater and revenues are shared equally among all its members. The Aggies were never going to make money off the Longhorn Network; Texas was. It’s just that simple.

Was that the right decision to make? I don’t know. And I don’t care, quite frankly. I think it was a tad petty and childish, personally. If the Aggies really wanted respect, all they had to do was go out and win ballgames. No temper tantrums necessary. That’s been the strategy of OU, and it seems to have worked out pretty well for them so far.

But right or wrong, the Aggies have made their decision, and a year after Nebraska and Colorado bolted for the Big Ten and Pac-12, respectively, Dan Beebe’s bunch is left with only nine members. So what now? Does the Big 12 recruit another school to replace A&M, or does this latest departure signal the beginning of the end of the conference? Here’s how I see the different scenarios:

Scenario 1: The Big 12 recruits a new member.

Maybe it’s BYU. Maybe Air Force. Notre Dame has been floated, but I don’t think they’d be interested. The Big 12 is attractive to non-BCS teams such as Air Force due to the conference still being a BCS automatic qualifier. That was what drew TCU to the Big East, after all. But everyone knows that Texas dominates the Big 12 when it comes to money, so any team coming in would have to be willing to do so at a discount. Who would do that? SMU, for one, who’s already publicly begged for the spot. And I’m pretty sure BYU would as well.

Odds of this happening: Very good.

Scenario 2: The Big 12 disbands.

With only nine teams remaining, OU, OSU, and others may decide to get out while they have the chance. OU, OSU, and Tech go to the Pac-12. Missouri goes to the Big Ten. Kansas and K-State go to the Big East. Baylor goes to the Mountain West. And Iowa State goes, um, somewhere. And Texas? They go independent, happy to still be flush with cash on their very own burnt orange island. Would this really happen? Maybe eventually, but I don’t think any time soon. As long as OU keeps winning Big 12 titles, they’ll probably be content to stay, and none of the other conferences have expressed much interest in expanding further. So if the Big 12 eventually breaks up, it probably won’t happen for at least a few more years.

Odds of this happening: Unlikely.

Scenario 3: The Big 12 does nothing.

But what if the Big 12 chooses to stay at nine members? Is that even realistic? Well, the Big East only has eight teams right now, nine if you count TCU, which joins next year. And they’re an AQ conference. And with two of the Big 12 being Texas and OU, I can’t see them losing their AQ status. So in a way, there’s not that much of an incentive to rush to fill the 10th spot. Only when it becomes financially necessary to do so will the Big 12 be forced to expand. Why do you think they chose not to replace Nebraska and Colorado? How sustainable is such a scenario in the long run? Not much. But again, that’s in the long run. In the short run, it’s actually very doable.

Odds of this happening: Possible.

Obviously, nothing in college sports is set in stone. Heck, it’s even possible that A&M could change its mind if the SEC doesn’t give it an invite. All I know is that the college football season kicks off tomorrow with TCU and Baylor. And right now, that’s all that matters.

Previously:
Wait, that was it?!
Speculating on conference expansion rumors
Longhorns Inc., Part 2
Longhorns Inc.

Is this college sports or As The World Turns?

The latest rumors have the Pac-10 asking Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, OU, Oklahoma State, and Colorado to be their new BFFs, thus elevating the Pac-10 to a 16-team superconference and completely decimating the Big 12. That would leave Baylor out in the cold, a result that doesn’t sit well with Waco’s state senator, David Sibley, who is apparently now fighting to have the Bears superglued to the other Texas teams. Meanwhile, the Big Ten, which has been rumored to be courting everyone from Texas to Nebraska to the North Dakota School for the Deaf, is supposedly focusing its efforts on Notre Dame. And Boise State, which was a lock for the Mountain West, is putting its plans on hold to see how everything else shakes out.

And of course, everything in the previous paragraph will be null and void by the time you finish reading this post.

Personally, I’m fine with the UT et. al heading to the Pac-10. I would prefer that to them going to the Big Ten or SEC; I just think it’s a better fit. What I would hate to see is Texas and A&M separated from Tech and OU. Those rivalries are just too good to relegate to non-conference status.

If the Pac-10 does expand to 16 (plus-or-minus Baylor or Colorado), the Big Ten and SEC would almost certainly follow suit, probably gobbling up Nebraska and/or Missouri or other Big East or ACC teams. The result would be three superconferences plus a handful of wannabes. Can you imagine how much griping about the BCS there’d be at that point? Yikes!

As far as Baylor is concerned, though, as I tweeted yesterday, I think they’d be better off in the Mountain West, where they’d face their old Southwest Conference rival TCU every year in addition to Utah and Air Force. Strictly looking at football (which is where all the money is, and let’s face it, that’s what’s driving all of this), the Bears have a much better chance at success in the Mountain West than they do anywhere else. They’ll never win a Big 12 championship, and they would certainly never have a chance in the Pac-16. Which is why I wish Sibley and his buddies in Austin would stay out of it. It was Austin politics that got Baylor into the Big 12 instead of TCU 16 years ago; we don’t need to repeat that same mistake this time around. (And understand, I’m not bashing Baylor. I like Baylor a lot, which is why I want to see them be successful.)

One thing’s for certain, though. Change is coming in college sports. With so much money at stake, it’s undeniable. It may be a complete shake-up, or it could just affect a handful of teams, but something is eventually gonna give. I just hope fans don’t get lost in the process.

Update, June 9:
Orangebloods.com is now reporting that Nebraska has unofficially accepted the invitation to the Big Ten, which pretty much guarantees the Big 12 South teams will bolt to the Pac-10. And yes, that will include Baylor and not Colorado. If UT has any say over the matter — and they absolutely do — there’s no way they would choose the Buffaloes over the Bears. First, Waco is just up the road from Austin (and conveniently directly between Austin and the Red River Rivalry game in Dallas). Second, there is a huge amount of history and tradition between the two SWC schools, something both Mack Brown and Darrell Royal highly value. And third, there’s always the political factor, which shouldn’t be ignored.

Of course, there’s always a chance UT could decide to keep the Big 12 intact, gambling on its attempt to form its own TV network. But I don’t think that’s gonna happen. There’s no loyalty in Texas (both the school and the state) to the Big 12 North, so there’s little incentive in Austin to keep this sinking ship afloat.

So where does that leave the other five Big 12 North teams? The most logical choice for Colorado would be the Mountain West, and probably for Kansas and K-State as well. If the MWC goes through with their plans to add Boise State, that would go a long way toward acceptance as an automatic qualifier for the BCS. Plus, Kansas and K-State both bring a lot to the table in basketball, so that would be a huge win for the MWC.

As for Missouri and Iowa State, they’re probably out of luck, at least in the short run. The Big Ten doesn’t seem interested in Mizzou any more, instead focusing on Notre Dame and then probably looking east to Rutgers and maybe Pitt. I suppose one or both teams could go to the Mountain West or Big East, but that’s probably the best case scenario.

Then that leaves the SEC. So far, they haven’t shown much interest in expanding, and really, they have no reason to from a financial standpoint. But with a 16-team Pac-10 and an expanding Big Ten, I think they’re gonna be forced to keep up whether they want to or not, at which point they’ll probably target teams such as Miami and Virginia Tech in the ACC.

It’ll most likely take a few years for all the dominoes to fall, but the momentum is definitely picking up!

Previously:
More March Madness is, well, madness
Legislating a playoff system isn’t the answer
The BCS: ‘Communistic’ or not?

But I’m trying again this year, a little more educated and a lot more hopeful. OK, so I really don’t know how hopeful I am, but who knows, maybe I’ll get lucky.

Breaking it down by region:

Midwest. aka “The Group of Death.” The Midwest is tricky because there are a lot of wildcards, teams that are probably seeded too high (Ohio State), and others that are probably too low (Tennessee). I think the Buckeyes will make it past Oklahoma State, but the Vols will knock them off to make it to the Elite Eight. No. 1 Kansas should survive, though, and win the region.

East. As a huge Texas fan, I would love to pick the Horns here, but they’ve completely blown it this season. And a result, they have a horrible spot on the bracket. They can probably make it past Wake Forest, but they won’t survive Kentucky. As for most of the rest of the region, there will probably be a few upsets, but it’s still going to come down between the Wildcats and West Virginia. Look for Kentucky to go to the Final Four.

West. The West seems like a weird region to me, chock full of great teams, any of which could be spoilers but none of which strike me as national champions. Pitt let me down last year, and though they should make it to the Elite Eight, I’m not confident they can go any further. I’m calling an upset of No. 1 seed Syracuse by Vanderbilt, who’ll go on to win the region and make it the Final Four.

South. I’m really rooting for Baylor, and I think they can hold their own for a couple of games. But I think Villanova will probably beat them to face Duke in the Elite Eight. But I’m gonna have to play it safe and pick Duke to win the region.

Final Four. Will three of the four top-seeded teams make it to the Final Four? Yeah, that’s me hedging my bets to some degree. Last year, I predicted some bigger upsets and got burned pretty bad. The Jayhawks will beat Vandy, and Kentucky will hold out to beat Duke.

Championship. I’m not really a Kansas fan, but they’ve been one of the most consistent and dominant teams in college basketball all year. And even if I get my other Final Four picks wrong, I still think the Jayhawks can and will win the national title.

Here is my full bracket. Click to enlarge.

Previously:
March Madness: My picks
More March Madness is, well, madness

OK, rant over. Deep breath. Serenity now! Ah, much better.

So last year I tried a season-long experiment in which I played NCAA College Football on the Wii every week, pitting the Longhorns against that week’s opponent to see if the video game score was any indication of the real score. The answer was that, well, no, it wasn’t too accurate. So while I had fun playing video games every week, I won’t be repeating the experiment this year. Sorry to disappoint you.

However, I did want to weigh in with my thoughts about the upcoming season. Basically, it comes down to this: The Horns have to win. Period.

Here’s their schedule:

• 9/5: Louisiana-Monroe
• 9/12: at Wyoming
• 9/19: Texas Tech
• 9/26: UT El Paso
• 10/10: Colorado
• 10/17: OU
• 10/24: at Mizzou
• 10/31: at Oklahoma State
• 11/7: Central Florida
• 11/14: at Baylor
• 11/21: Kansas
• 11/26: at Texas A&M

Of those games, the big three are Tech, OU, and OSU. Forget the National Championship. If the Horns want to win the Big 12 South, they have to win all three of those games. Any misstep there, and the Big 12 tie-breaker rule that bit ‘em in the butt last year could do the same again.

Also, the schedule allows no room for error since the last four games will essentially be givens against weaker non-ranked (or lower-ranked) teams. In other words, if they fall early to OU or get tripped up in Stillwater, a blowout victory against Central Florida isn’t going to help them; there’s nowhere to go but down.

Contrast this with OU’s schedule:

• 9/5: BYU
• 9/12: Idaho State
• 9/19: Tulsa
• 10/3: at Miami
• 10/17: Texas
• 10/24: at Kansas
• 10/31: Kansas State
• 11/7: at Nebraska
• 11/14: Texas A&M
• 11/21: at Texas Tech
• 11/28: Oklahoma State

Not only does OU play tougher non-conference games, they play tough, high-ranked opponents late in the season. So even if OU falls to Texas at the Cotton Bowl, they have a chance to at least partially redeem themselves over time.

The only way Texas can ensure they will end the regular season with a higher BCS ranking than OU is to go undefeated. And even if they do win the Big 12 with one loss, that single loss will probably be enough to keep them out of the National Championship. So it really comes down to winning every game, not just the biggest three. As Yoda says, “Do or do not… there is no try.”

Now the big question: Can they do it? In my opinion, yes. They have all the right ingredients to go all the way, just as they did in 2005.

It should be an exciting year for Longhorn fans. Even if we won’t be able to witness all of it.

Hook ‘Em Horns!

A few of the Wii scores were fairly close to the actual ones (Florida Atlantic, Rice, Texas A&M) while others were way off (Arkansas, Missouri, Baylor), margins of error probably not too different than what you’d get from ESPN and other “expert” prognosticators.

Which brings us to the final Texas game of the season, the Fiesta Bowl. It’s been yet another wacky season thanks to the BCS computers, biased voters, and controversial Big 12 tie-breaking rules. Heck, it even involved competing fleets of airplanes over Austin and Norman as the Red River rivals taunted each other by air.

But while Florida and OU are busy trying to justify why each of their 1-loss teams are more deserving of the National Championship than undefeated Utah, the Longhorns are happy to settle the score with the Ohio State Buckeyes. UT and OSU have met twice before, in 2005 and 2006. The Horns won the first with Vince Young on their way to a National Championship, then lost the second with Colt McCoy — that game only being Colt’s second game of his college career.

A lot has changed since 2006, however. Colt is now a Heisman runner-up, and the Horns are a dropped pass and missed tackle away from a perfect season. Ohio State, meanwhile, has two losses for the season, both to teams who squared off against each other in the Rose Bowl. Texas had one of the toughest schedules in the nation, while the highest ranked opponent beaten by Ohio State was No. 18 Wisconsin, and even that was only a 3-point victory. (It should also be noted that Wisconsin went on to get thumped by Florida State in the Champs Sports Bowl.)

Now some might argue that a team’s regular season schedule isn’t always an indicator of how well they’ll do in the bowl game, and that’s true (just ask Alabama). So how well have Texas and Ohio State fared in recent bowls? Well, the Buckeyes have been to the National Championship game the last two years, but they lost both times. Texas, on the other hand, has won its last four consecutive bowl games, two of which have been against Big 10 teams.

And this year should make it number five, with Texas beating the Buckeyes 20 to 7, according to the Wii.

As always, I’ll update the blog after the game with the real score.

And as always, Hook ‘Em, Horns!

Real Score: 24-21.

Wow, what an incredible game! Frustrating, of course, for most of the game, but the final two minutes made up for it. It was very fitting that the final touchdown was made by Quan Cosby, who, like Vince Young, can say the final play of his college football career was a game-winning touchdown made in the final moments of a BCS game. Coupled with Brian Orakpo’s sack seconds later, you couldn’t have asked for a more fitting ending to the season.

The Longhorns finish the season 12-1, and while they likely won’t end up as national champions, they have nothing to feel bad about. Keep in mind that most people looked at their schedule this year and expected them to finish the regular season 9-3 or 8-4, maybe 10-2 if they were lucky. Yet, they were nearly flawless.

I just want to say I’ve had a lot of fun this season doing these prediction posts. If anything, it’s given me an excuse to play video games once a week. Maybe, I’ll do it again next season just for grins.

Of course, right now that seems like an eternity away.

So here’s where we stand: Texas moved up to No. 2 in the BCS while OU is No. 3 by a razor-thin margin, with Tech dropping to No. 7. Texas has to beat A&M, period. That shouldn’t be hard this year since the Aggies are 4-7 for the year. And Tech will almost certainly beat Baylor. That leaves the OU-OSU game as the wildcard.

If OU wins, they’ll probably leapfrog UT in the BCS and will face Missouri for the Big 12 Championship. A win there would probably put them in the National Championship against the SEC Champion (either Alabama or Florida). Texas still ranks higher than Tech and would probably go to the Fiesta Bowl.

If OSU wins, Tech wins the Big 12 South tiebreaker and heads to Kansas City to play Mizzou for the Big 12 Championship. If the Red Raiders win there, they are guaranteed a BCS bowl, but it wouldn’t be the National Championship. Texas would move back up ahead of OU in the polls, and it’s very possible they could end up in the National Championship game.

So as long as the Horns beat A&M, they should be fine regardless of the outcome of the Bedlam game. But an OSU win would probably be more beneficial. Is it possible? Sure. Is it likely? I think it’s 50/50, but only because they’re playing in Stillwater, so the Cowboys will have the home field advantage.

Of course, all of this is ammunition for the anti-BCS crowd, and I kind of agree. How would it look for the Longhorns to be playing for a National Championship when they didn’t even win their own conference?

I’d like to find out.

Another week, another match between a Top 10 undefeated Texas Longhorns team and a Top 10 undefeated Oklahoma team. To quote the great Yogi Berra, “It’s like déjà vu all over again.”

Well, except for the fact that this week Texas is ranked No. 1 in the nation and is playing at home against the No. 6 Oklahoma State Cowboys. (You know, the same Cowboys that are 0-10 against Mack Brown’s Horns. Right, that one.)

Of course, give the Pokes some credit. On the same day Texas crushed Bob Stoops’ dreams (such a good feeling, isn’t it?), the Cowboys defeated a Missouri team that at the time was undefeated and ranked No. 3 in the nation. And they did it on the road in Columbia.

And yes, this is the same team that has very nearly knocked off the Horns in recent years, requiring massive comebacks and a last-second field goal.

So how will this week’s game end? To answer that question, we throw it over to NCAA Football 09 for the Nintendo Wii. And the Wii says: Texas will win it 27-10.

Right. There you have it. Based on recent games, I’m thinking the actual score might be closer to 57-10, but who knows. As Yogi Berra once said, “In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is.”

Hook ‘Em, Horns!

Real Score: 28-24. Ugh. I hate these Oklahoma State games! Oh, well. Let’s just hope it was a wake-up call for the Texas offense, which had a hard time protecting the quarterback and a harder time establishing the run. And let’s hope the defense will be ready by next week to face Graham Harrell and Michael Crabtree in Lubbock for what promises to be another offensive shootout between the Horns and the Red Raiders. Look out for the tortillas!