rock_knutne;385639 wrote:That's not true. TCU had no choice when Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech and Baylor left the SWC for the Big 12 and Arkansas left for the SEC. Winning in a major conference had nothing to do with it, no other major conference was available for them to join.

enigmaax;385665 wrote:You don't think their lack of competitiveness had anything to do with the fact that "no major conference was available"? No major conference wanted them because they brought nothing (either financially OR competitively)......SOOOOO...........they went to a second rate conference.

That situation wasn't entirely different from what is going on right now. A bunch of schools are leaving the Big XII - does any major conference want Iowa State? Why wouldn't they? They bring nothing to the table, thats why. Now if Iowa State goes and wins the WAC in a few years are we going to be talking about how great of a program they are?

enigmaax;385665 wrote:You don't think their lack of competitiveness had anything to do with the fact that "no major conference was available"? No major conference wanted them because they brought nothing (either financially OR competitively)......SOOOOO...........they went to a second rate conference.

That situation wasn't entirely different from what is going on right now. A bunch of schools are leaving the Big XII - does any major conference want Iowa State? Why wouldn't they? They bring nothing to the table, thats why. Now if Iowa State goes and wins the WAC in a few years are we going to be talking about how great of a program they are?

rock_knutne;385697 wrote:Your point is well taken but that's not what you said in your initial post concerning TCU.

What major conference was left for them to join? All I'm saying is they didn't leave the SWC because of a competitive aspect, they left because the conference disbanded, contrary to what you posted.

rock_knutne;385573 wrote:The above post is why people shouldn't smoke crack.

Delusional nut jobs like yourself can take all the shots you want but the FACTS are, the Big 10 was and probably still is, courting ND to join. If your brilliant posts are so true then why does the Big 10 want them?

I'll wait for the usual response of made up information and blind hatred.

enigmaax;385708 wrote:I see what you mean with the way I worded it and while you are right, TCU didn't say, "we suck, we're going to a lower level conference", their relative standing on the landscape (along with some of the other bottom feeders that were weeded out) played directly into the decision for the SWC to disband. Texas and Texas A&M for looking for something better than TCU and Rice, essentially. There's still a cause and effect related to their lack of competitiveness.

sleeper;385716 wrote:Well of course the Big Ten wants them, but it has to do with money and academics not football success.

I mean clearly NOT football success LOL. ND would be at the bottom of the Big Ten year in year out, but they'd bring in a nice chunk of cash, so why not?

Once again, ND fans boast more about their marketability than anything else, which is absolutely hilarious.

rock_knutne;385726 wrote:I see you went and got a fix........you're either stoned, brain dead or both.

rock_knutne;385721 wrote:Not to play devil's avocate but why did Texas, A&M and Tech take Baylor with them? They didn't exactly set the SWC on fire. Another thing that many people forget, the SWC starting going down hill when SMU was handed the death penalty and the conference as a whole had violation after violation handed down to them.

Unfortunately, many schools are going to suffer TCU's SWC fate with this conference expansion, it's a shame.

j_crazy;385753 wrote:so the Pac 16 is formed (probably) and the Big 10 is now the Big 12. Not exaclty what the B10 wanted when this process got started, I'd imagine.

KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- High level sources in multiple conferences have told KCTV5 that Texas and Texas A&M are looking to move to the Big Ten Conference and have petitioned for membership, while the University of Oklahoma is planning on petitioning the Southeastern Conference to become a member of its conference.

KCTV5's sources said that Texas and Texas A&M do not have to include Texas Tech or Baylor in their plans. Sources told KCTV5 that there have already been discussions about the two schools entering the Big Ten and that the agreement could be made as soon as Thursday.

LJ;385588 wrote:They beat #20 Michigan in the 2005 season.

dokken;385830 wrote:http://www.huskers.com/SportSelect.dbml?SPSID=3&SPID=22&DB_OEM_ID=100&Q_SEASON=2005

According to this site, Michigan wasn't ranked. And for those who said they beat #23 so and so an #24 so and so during that time period, I said a top 20 team.

Nonetheless, Nebraska will now beat Top 20 teams consistantly in the near future.......cause they left the Big 12 and joined the Big 10. Smart move by them.

dokken;385849 wrote:Still weren't a number 1-19 team.

dokken;385830 wrote:http://www.huskers.com/SportSelect.dbml?SPSID=3&SPID=22&DB_OEM_ID=100&Q_SEASON=2005

According to this site, Michigan wasn't ranked. And for those who said they beat #23 so and so an #24 so and so during that time period, I said a top 20 team.

Nonetheless, Nebraska will now beat Top 20 teams consistantly in the near future.......cause they left the Big 12 and joined the Big 10. Smart move by them.

enigmaax;385865 wrote:Okay, so you are right, you said top 20....but why? What measurement is that? I could say, well neither team has beaten a top 6 team in the last blah blah years and that means they both suck. You just drew an arbitrary line, whereas the rest of the country pretty much recognizes the Top 25 as at least a point of reference.

It seems as though you are trying to say Nebraska's move to the Big Ten is somehow comparable to TCU's bouncing around from the WAC to CUSA and finally to the MWC. A solid program is moving to a solid conference in Nebraska's case. In TCU's, a crappy program moved on from a once-solid conference to a series of crappy conferences.