Texas Conference

[spurs1990]

With the addition of UTSA and Texas State to the WAC conference in 2013 as full-time members, the state of Texas will have 12 teams playing FBS football.

How would you feel about a conference comprising all of them. I believe the teams would be strong enough to garner the "BCS" bid that every team seems to be clamoring for.

Here's the divisional setup:

WEST
Texas
Texas Tech
UTEP
UTSA
Texas State
Baylor

EAST
North Texas
SMU
TCU
Texas A&M
Houston
Rice

Each division has 3 teams who have had either really good records (TCU/UH/Baylor) in recent years or are already established (UT/A&M/Tech). UTEP and SMU field respectable squads every now and then, and the last four are potential up-and-comers. Ok Rice may be a stretch, but they are an academic stalwart.

You would have an in-state team playing in a BCS every single year. I suppose the setup would appeal to expatriates more than Texas residents, but it's interesting to dwell on, seeing how the numbers add up.

[coyotes_geek]

It's like the southwest conference, only not as good.........

[Blake]

Rofl

Had me for a second.

[Sisk]

sorry no aggy allowed

[spurs1990]

Um. Ok let me stir some actual discussion here. Let's downgrade the total teams to 10 to match what the Big 12 will be working with. Take out Rice and UNT.

Look at the Big 12 as it hopes to be constructed circa 2012/13:

Texas
Baylor
Tech
TCU
OU
Ok St
Iowa St
Kansas
KSU
WVU

If you were to rank the 10 teams in terms of prestige/production in football, how would it go? The four Texas teams could arguably be in the top 5 with OU. I mean Baylor just won the Heisman. They automatically get a huge bump.

How would matchups go between the bottom 5 versus other Texas teams?

WVU v UH ---> UH has made a bowl game 7 out of the last 9 seasons. They are on the verge. WVU gets the edge simply bc of its BCS pedigree. That would be neutralized going forward.

OSU v SMU ---> 3 straight bowl appearances for the Mustangs. Again the money factor from BCS has played a role in its deficiency. They have history, were dominant in the 80's. OSU has had a great 10 years but still aren't nationally dominant. BCS money and the Dallas school gets on track.

There would be loads of potential for TSU and UTSA to develop into solid programs, certainly along the lines of the Kansas/KSU/Iowa St level. The pipeline would be there, recruits would be able to play against UT/A&M every year. UTEP is good enough to win against KU/ISU at least 50 percent of the time as currently cons uted.

Now how would that not be a conference that could garner national attention yearly. Any conference with UT and A&M alone would be relevant. Forget what you heard about SWC 20 years ago. This thing would work.

[blkroadrunners]

I doubt it will work out. This "Texas" conference would be like the Big East: once they get established enough, the conference will add a high value, non-named related school from somewhere like from Louisiana or Oklahoma.

[Blake]

even if it sounded good, which it doesn't, there's nothing to discuss as it'll never happen

[DesignatedT]

[coyotes_geek]

Now how would that not be a conference that could garner national attention yearly. Any conference with UT and A&M alone would be relevant. Forget what you heard about SWC 20 years ago. This thing would work.

What we heard about the SWC 20 years ago is exactly why "this thing" wouldn't work.

[leemajors]

sounds like an impossible nationwide TV sell and fail.

[Obstructed_View]

It'd be good for the state of Texas, but wouldn't bring in money anywhere else. The teams would need to schedule nightmarishly hard non-conference games and would then not get a chance to go undefeated, which is the only way to compete for a national le. If there were a playoff system, it would be a great idea.