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.

Anyway, I didn’t really have anything in particular to blog about, so I thought I’d throw a bunch of random things into one big post and let you pick out the stuff you’re mildly interested in.

First off, college football. I normally post a lot of college football stuff every year, but I haven’t written anything all season (which is now almost over). So what did I miss? A horrendous year for the Texas Longhorns but another undefeated season for the TCU Horned Frogs for starters. The Horns will bounce back, but not easily. They’ll (hopefully) fire a few coaches (Greg Davis, please?) and be a lot stronger next year. Of course, so will most of the other Big 12 South schools. Tech will be better, OSU and A&M are getting stronger, and OU is always a threat. The days of Mack Brown just showing up and being handed an automatic victory are over, at least for the foreseeable future. They won’t have another crappy season next year, but they won’t be undefeated either. I would say 9-3 is probably realistic. Not that that will appease the powers that be, but whatever. Parity in college football is long overdue.

As for TCU, the big news as of this morning is that the Frogs are jumping over to the Big East as of 2012. I’m not really fond of their decision. Yes, it puts them in a (weak) BCS AQ conference and gives them more national exposure, but that doesn’t make it the right thing to do. It seems like a short-term solution to a long-term problem. A stronger Mountain West conference, bolstered by Boise State, would likely be in contention for an AQ bid within a couple of years, but now TCU will be stuck a conference that sucks in football but dominates in basketball. Of course, the MWC — even with AQ certification — still wouldn’t have the big TV contracts that the Big East does. So perhaps the choice is really between Versus and ESPN. And really, there’s no contest there.

A big plus for TCU bailing on the Mountain West, though: We won’t have to see the Frogs play at Boise State. The Broncos come to Fort Worth in 2011, and then the Frogs will be in the Big East the next year. I’m sorry, but I just can’t watch Boise State games; that horrendous blue turf makes my eyes bleed.

I’m not about to complain if TCU doesn’t make it to the National Championship this year. Playing in the Rose Bowl against a very good Wisconsin team is not a bad consolation prize at all.

This past Sunday was my first week back in the Children’s ministry at church. I had sat out my last six-week rotation due to my leg injury. It was really good to be back. I genuinely love serving there, and I had missed being a part of it. Not sure yet what this rotation will be like. Last year we did a very big and involved Christmas pageant, but thankfully I don’t think we’re doing that again.

Speaking of my leg, it’s doing a lot better. The fracture is healed, and I’m gradually gaining my strength and stability back. Now I just have to pay off the rest of my medical bills.

I mentioned back in August that I had volunteered to coach my daughter’s soccer team. We wrapped up the season at the end of October with a record of 2-5-1. I learned a ton along the way, and I think I’d be much better the next time around. What surprised me most was how emotionally invested I got, and that wasn’t always a good thing. I let my frustration with the players and parents get to me too much, and I had to learn to let it go and just have fun. I think that’s where experience helps.

Also in October, I started a year-long commitment with the rest of my church to read through the Bible in a year. I’m happy to report that I’ve kept up. So far, I’ve read Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers in the Old Testament and John, Romans, Hebrews, and Acts in the New Testament. It’s been very interesting. One of the cool things is how the Old and New Testaments parallel each other. You have the story of Creation in Genesis and then another “In the beginning” in John. The introduction of the Mosaic Law in Exodus and then a contrast between the Law and grace in Romans. A detailed list of sacrifices in Leviticus, and Jesus as the ultimate sacrifice in Hebrews. The beginning of Israel’s disobedience in Numbers, and the beginning of the apostles’ obedience in Acts.

As interesting as it is, though, my faith has definitely been challenged. The more I read, the more questions I have. And the more questions I ask, the more questions that branch off from there. I can definitely understand why someone would read the Bible and walk away an atheist; much of it makes no sense whatsoever by modern standards. I guess that’s where faith comes in. I don’t have to understand everything or have all the answers in order to accept it. And that’s actually a pretty liberating realization.

My wife has asked several times what I want for Christmas. I can think of a lot of stuff that we can’t afford but not a lot of things that we can. When I was growing up, I always had a Christmas list that was ten pages long; nowadays I have a hard time coming up with ten things total. I guess that means I’m getting old.

By the way, get off my lawn!

While I’m on the subject of Christmas, can someone please explain why we as Christians put more emphasis on Christmas than on Easter? We have this huge month-long celebration for the birth of Christ, but His death and resurrection are a much bigger deal if you ask me. So I vote for moving all the pomp and circumstance of Christmas to Easter. Who’s with me?

Previously:
Thoughts on Genesis
I signed up for WHAT?!
August, you suck too
Wait, that was it?!

But really, I’m not superstitious. Even though I listened to the same mix tape before each football game in high school. (I don’t remember what songs were on there, but I’m sure “Eye of the Tiger” was one of them.) And even though I ditched my Texas Rangers Claw and Antlers t-shirt last night halfway through Game 1 of the World Series when the Rangers were down 8-2. (And changed my Twitter avatar, which I had replaced with the Claw after the Rangers won the ALCS.)

But I’m not superstitious, I promise. Even though our high school football team went undefeated in the regular season all three years I was there, even making it to the state championship my junior year. Even though after banning Longhorn shirts following 5 straight losses to OU, Texas has beaten the Sooners in the last 4 out of 6 games and has gone to the BCS National Championship twice (winning in 2005). Even though TCU was undefeated in the regular season last year, played in its first BCS bowl, and is undefeated and ranked No. 4 in the BCS so far this year.

But did I have anything to do with that? Not at all. I don’t really believe that the shirt I’m wearing or the mug I’m drinking out of could influence a football or baseball game any more than a butterfly flapping its wings in the Amazon rain forest could cause a tornado in West Texas.

That’s just silly. Just as silly as avoiding black cats, believing a broken mirror could cause seven years of bad luck, or hotels not building a 13th floor. They’re all myths, urban legends, old wives tales. Nonsense.

But if you ask me what I’m wearing for the rest of the World Series, I can tell you it won’t be my Claw and Antlers shirt.

According to figures from the U.S. Department of Education’s Equity in Athletics, UT’s football program isn’t just the largest grossing team in the country (at $87.5 million), it’s also the most profitable (at $65 million). To put that in perspective, that’s $20 million more in gross earnings than the No. 2 entry on the list, Ohio State ($68.19 million gross), and the No. 2 most profitable school, the University of Georgia ($45.38 million net).

The next most profitable Big 12 school was Nebraska at No. 8 ($37.29 million), which of course won’t be a Big 12 school much longer. Texas A&M comes in at No. 14 netting only a third of what their intrastate rival does ($22.29 million), OU at No. 15 ($21.84 million), and Texas Tech at a wimpy No. 33 ($9.62 million).

Just something to keep in mind the next time the UT Board of Regents wants to raise tuition.

Previously:
Longhorns Inc.

In what can only be explained as a miracle (by football-loving Baptists, at least), the Big 12 has been saved from destruction, with the ten remaining members swearing allegiance to Dan Beebe and the unnamed sports network (*cough*FoxSports*cough*) that bribed them to stay.

Who would’ve guessed that at the end of the day all of this realignment mess was really just about money? Huh.

So for now, there are no 16-team superconferences. No realignmentpocalypse. No ripping of the very fabric of the time-space continuum. Heck, not even a single punch thrown (unless you count Vince Young’s pummeling of an irate OU fan outside a Dallas strip club). In fact, Big 12 ADs would be singing “Kum Ba Yah” right now if it weren’t for the fact that they were too busy counting their enormous stacks of cash.

Where, then, does that leave us?

Big 12.

Appreciate the irony for a moment that the Big Ten now has 12 teams while the Big 12 now has ten. I wonder if they’ll trade names. Probably not, but anyway…

The biggest winner by far out of this whole deal is the University of Texas. UT, OU, and A&M get more money than the other seven teams, plus UT gets the opportunity to create their own network, which has been their end-game all along. And now that the Big 12 Championship game is no longer, UT benefits even more. Other winners include Baylor and what’s left of the Big 12 North, who would’ve been kicked to the street if the Big 12 had imploded.

But the losers? Us, the fans. Seriously, if you’re a UT fan, how can you be happy that an already weak Big 12 has become exponentially weaker. I mean, how many times can you watch UT or OU beat the crap out of Kansas and Iowa State before you change the channel? At least with the Pac-16 arrangement, there was the possibility of Texas playing some tougher teams. Now, Texas and OU are virtually guaranteed at least 10 wins every season, even with mediocre players.

Pac-10.

The only Big 12 team that the Pac-10 managed to snag was Colorado, an accomplishment that commissioner Larry Scott should probably leave off his résumé. Sure, they get the Denver TV market, but what they don’t realize is that people in Denver care way more about the Broncos and shoveling their driveways than they do about college sports. (Meanwhile, for their jumping the gun and bolting to the Pac-10, Colorado will have to pay between $6 and $8 million to the Big 12, money that they don’t have to spend right now.) There’s also the possibility that the Pac-10 could get Utah away from the Mountain West. If they do, good for them. But with USC crippled by NCAA penalties, it’s gonna take more than a decent Utah team to salvage this mess of a conference.

Mountain West.

The Mountain West picked up Boise State, but if Utah heads to the Pac-10, they’re back to square one. Still, that’s not a bad place to be. Even without Utah, the MWC is on a path to BCS automatic qualification and is certainly gaining national recognition. They’ll be fine, regardless of what happens with the Utes.

Big Ten.

All this expansion nonsense started with the Big Ten, but after all the dust settles, their only net gain will be Nebraska. They now have enough teams to have a conference championship game, but little else changes. Oh, except now the other members have to share TV revenue with one more team. Boy, for a conference that prides themselves on academics, they sure don’t understand math very well.

SEC.

There was a lot of talk that the SEC would invite Texas A&M, but nobody could ever explain what the Aggies brought to the table. Instead, they’ll stick with the teams they have now, which is the smartest decision to come out of this entire process. The SEC is the most dominant conference in the nation, both in athletic success and TV deals. They don’t need to expand, and they knew that all along.

So there you have it. After months of rumors and speculation, theories about how the entire face of college sports was about to change overnight, the end result was a total of only 3 or 4 teams changing hands. That’s not to say there won’t be more changes next year, but for now, the status quo has largely been maintained.

Only with more money.

Previously:
Speculating on conference expansion rumors
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?

Forget the National Championship. If the Horns want to win the Big 12 South, they have to win all three of those games [Tech, OU, and OSU]. 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. …

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.”

Well, thanks to the Brigham Young defense, which took Sam Bradford out of commission in Game 1, OU was never a huge threat to overtake the Horns in the polls. And who would’ve guessed the most difficult regular season game would come against the Aggies, a team which barely squeaked into bowl eligibility with a whopping six wins all year? Unbelievable.

But Texas did win. Against OU, against A&M, and miraculously against Nebraska to claim the Big 12 Championship. Now we’ll see if they can win a National Championship against Alabama, a team which is certainly as dangerous as the Horns and at least as inconsistent.

Of course, Colt McCoy and the Longhorns weren’t the only success story this year. The TCU Horned Frogs also ended the season undefeated and will be facing off against Boise State in their very first BCS bowl.

As a fan of both Texas and TCU, this has been the most exciting college football season I can remember. In fact, I think for most of the season I was more excited for the Frogs than I was for the Horns.

I know a lot of TCU fans aren’t happy with the outcome, though. They’ve hoped for a shot at the National Championship all season, and thanks to Nebraska’s Ndamukong Suh and Texas’ poor clock management in the final minute of the Big 12 game, they almost got their wish. Nevertheless, many have said TCU should face off against Florida, Cincinnati, or another BCS team instead of Boise State in order to prove they can run with the big dogs. I don’t think they have anything to prove.

TCU is a 12-0 team who beat a lot of really good opponents (many on the road) and finished the season ranked 3rd in the polls and 4th in the BCS. And they’re one of only eight teams playing in a BCS bowl game. They’ve proved themselves enough as far as I’m concerned.

Besides, Boise State (who is also undefeated) isn’t an easy team to beat. Just ask OU, who lost to them in the Fiesta Bowl two years ago. The Broncos will also be looking for payback since losing to the Frogs last year in the Poinsettia Bowl (and seriously, when was the last time the Poinsettia Bowl came up during a discussion of the BCS?).

The regular season is over, and the good guys won. Now, bring on the bowl games!

Hook ‘Em Horns and Go Frogs!

Previously:
For Longhorns, 2009 is all or nothing

Religion – except for the “Hail Mary” pass – has no place in sports.

In Tebow’s case, he should play football and forget about us sinners for 31/2 hours every Saturday.

Somehow, we’ll survive without him displaying a “John 3:16″ Bible verse under his eyes. We separate church and state. Why not church and sports?

Actually, I think we need more athletes like Tebow and Texas quarterback Colt McCoy and OU quarterback Sam Bradford: men and women who not only live out their faith off the field and out of the spotlight but who display it in the public eye as well.

Listen, I’m not a big Florida fan, and the Tebow hype is beyond ridiculous. But greatly I admire him for standing up for what he believes, even if it’s not always the popular thing to do.

Previously:
What number are you?