From: zcjm0f@wwnv42.uucp (CJohn Mace)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: Hmmm Texas to Big 10!!!
Keywords: n
Date: 14 Sep 92 15:19:26 GMT
Organization: Amoco Production

In article <92258.084432U32431@uicvm.uic.edu> <U32431@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
>As a Big 10er twice (Michigan and Illinois), I vote to take Texas, driving
>distance nonwithstanding.  Texas is a better fit than the other possibilities,
>possibly with the exception of Pitt.  Pitt is not comparable to Big Ten schools
>in size, save Northwestern.  But it is fairly well respected academically; Pitt
>is a major research institution.  But at the moment, Pitt would likely be a
>door mat to Michigan, Penn State, Iowa, OSU, MSU, Illinois, and IU in football,
> and to  everyone in basketball, save Northwestern.  Who are the other
>contenders?  Notre Dame says it will never conference, but word on the street
>and in South Bend is that ND knows its got to do something for team sports
>other than football.  Problem with ND... apart from its geo proximity within
>the Big 10, it is not a good fit otherwise. It is not a major research in-
>stitution in the tradition of the Big 10 schools; apart from its law school
>(which certainly is not on par with those at Michigan, Illinois, Northwestern,
>and Iowa), it doesn't have much to offer.  University of Chicago is actually a
>better fit in some ways (bring UC back to the Big 10).  So, x ND.  That leaves
>Missouri.  Don't know much about MO - enough said.  Besides, the Big 10 already
>has the original Block M.  Texas is comparable in size to Big 10 schools, its
>public, has a healthy endowment, and is a major research institution.  Yes for
>Texas.

Texas would fit in better than the others.  It would be healthy for Texas, as
they support a lot of other athletic programs..  The question becomes, who
gets A&M.  A&M has a very healty endowment (7th in nation), is a larger 
research institution (7th in nation, not necessarily good for the teaching
environment), 40,000+ students, the graduate program is not as strong as
Texas, but A&M competes well with Texas for undergrads, lots of National
Merit Scholars, year in, year out...  A&M has folded some athletic programs
in the past, hockey (yes, we had an upstart hockey team that played its
home games in the Summit in Houston), my roomie who still needs to actually
post to this group  :-P, mentioned a soccer team that folded after finishing
#2 in the country, also a women's field hockey team that folded.  I don't
know where A&M should go.  Currently, we have an awesome women's softball
team that has no conference, because no other SWC school has one.. :-(

Athletically, A&M would probably fit in the best with the SEC.  If we go
the Big 8/Big 10 way, we would have to start wresting and gymnastics programs,
come to think of it, I do remember a male Gymnastics team here. (folded of
course).

ramble, ramble

My point is, Texas is in better shape to jump conferences to the Big 10 or
the Pac 10.  However, geographically speaking, it all might work out to
be a merger/split/re-alignment of the Big 8/SWC.  Or maybe call an alliance
and make a championship game and send the winner to alternating Orange/
Cotton Bowls...  yeah, yeah, thats the ticket...

cmuck