From: kevin@traffic.den.mmc.com (Kevin Rodgers)
Subject: Big 8-SWC merger not likely soon (was: Re: A&M - OU in '93)
Organization: Buffalo Stampede
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:43:29 GMT

In article <1993Jan12.154307.20581@ods.com> scott@ods.com (Scott Harper) writes:

>OU released its schedule yesterday, and it includes a game vs.
>A&M on September 11 in Norman.  It will be OU's second game,
>but their home opener.  I believe it will be A&M's second game
>as well.
>
>OU also plays TCU, Tulsa, and Texas as non-conference opponents.
>Sure appears that they like those SWC teams!

Colorado plays Texas and Baylor in '93, Texas in '94, then A&M in '95
and '98.

>Are we headed 
>toward a merger???

Yes, but not any time soon:

[Reprinted from the Denver Post without permission.  Comments in
brackets are mine.]

			 Courtship of the Big 8
		     SWC comes calling at convention

By John Henderson

   If athletic director John David Crow had his way, this week's NCAA
Convention would end Wednesday in Dallas with Colorado a member of the
Northern Division and his Texas A&M Aggies members of the Southern
Division.  He knows of a grand proposal he hopes the presidents of the
Big Eight and Southwest conferences would consider when they meet.  It
won't happen this week.  It may not happen for a while.

   When Southwest Conference presidents begin their ballyhooed courtship
of the Big Eight, nothing more may come of it than a few home-and-home
football games.  "I'd be astonished if we moved very quickly to combine
the two conferences," Colorado president Judith Albino said.  "But I
think we've gone a little bit beyond conversations that began two or
three years ago about more scheduling of the two conferences.  It's to
the point of asking what ways can the two conferences work together to
enhance contracts and TV positioning."

   If you picture a potential SWC-Big Eight merger as a marriage, then
Wednesday's meeting would be a first date.  With the Southeastern
Conference expanded to 12 teams and the Big Ten (plus one) whispering
about adding a 12th, the Big Eight and SWC are at least taking some
early steps toward a possible merger.

   "The time is not right now," Texas Christian athletic director Frank
Windegger said, "but I think it's around the corner."

   Presidents and athletic directors of both conferences agree that the
first order of business is to increase scheduling for a more attractive
TV package.  The CFA's TV contract runs out in 1995.  "The Southwest
Conference has 7 percent of the sets and the Big Eight has 7 percent,"
said Southern Methodist president A. Kenneth Pye, chairman of the
Southwest Conference presidents committee.  "If we bargain with 14
percent, we're in better position to deal with Raycom and others.  We
can go into CFA negotiations with 16 teams and in better position to
deal as a larger conference than if we were separate."

   Crow says they should go one step further and play league games
against each other.  "I don't know what good we're going to do," Crow
said.  "let's get together and play each other for some reason."

   Crow has an idea.  Two years ago an outside consultant attended a
Southwest Conference meeting and presented a scheduling proposal.  It
would work something like this: Each Southwest Conference school would
play five games within its conference and two crossover games against
Big Eight teams.  Those would count in the standings.  The crossover
opponents would be determined by a power rating over, say, the last five
years.  So a Kansas, which placed third in the Big Eight this year,
could possibly play a Texas.  [Kansas' finish this year was noticeably
better than their average over the past five years, while Texas' was
worse.  I think it more likely that the top three matchups would be
Nebraska-A&M, Colorado-Texas, and Oklahoma-Baylor/Houston.]

   The two league (or possibly division) winners would meet for a title
similar to the SEC's inaugural game in December.  That game produced
$500,000 for each of the 12 schools.  [Does anyone believe a Big 8-SWC
bowl would bring as much money as the SEC championship game?  Neither of
these conferences has matched the SEC in conference strength ratings
lately.  And do the schools realize that less money divided by more
teams means they'd get less than that magic half-million?]

   "We need to have opponents that push buttons on all our former
students to come down here and see the game," Crow said.  "It will push
the button if the games meant something toward a championship."  [Read:
SWC fans are apathetic, whether it's a top SWC team playing a top Big 8
team or a middle-of-the pack SWC team playing a middle-of-the-pack Big 8
team.  Didn't the ACC-Big East basketball challenge maintain its
popularity until it was cancelled?]

   In basketball, each team would play four "league" games against the
other conference.  the nonrevenue sports would play only within its
league but play the winner of the other league in a championship match.
[During the summer, the Big Eight basketball coaches voted 8-0 against a
possible merger.  Oklahoma State coach Eddie Sutton cited poor SWC
attendance.]

   "I'd see that as the only true way of getting a schedule alliance,"
Crow said.  "That to me is the most plausible solution to the two
conferences."

   This is just one of the many proposals that could fly across the
table.  It also may be one of the many that fly right off.  Some aren't
too crazy about having an SEC-style championship game, regardless of the
revenue.  "When you've got the Big Eight's lock on the Orange Bowl and
the Southwest Conference's lock on the Cotton Bowl, a merger could mean
a playoff to see who goes to each bowl," said Baylor AD Grant Teaff, who
recently retired as football coach.  "The bowls won't be happy taking
the losing team.  None of that fits."

   But steps must be taken soon if the college football puzzle continues
changing parts.  "You know and I know the Big Ten is going after either
Missouri or Nebraska," Windegger said.  "They've got to expand.  If more
dominoes fall, hypothetically [metaphorically?], at least we'll be
prepared to do something instead of waiting."

   Officials in the Big Eight agree.  They just don't see it happening
so soon they have to jump into bed with each other in a merger.  "The
Big Ten won't expand or even talk about expanding for two to three
years," said Kansas State president Jon Wefald, chairman of the big
Eight presidents committee.  "Some other CEOs told me that they've
talked to the Big Ten and, if they added a 12th, it would be likely in
the East: Syracuse, Rutgers, Pitt.  If you're driving to Penn State, why
not get a school not far away?"  [Because college teams don't go on road
trips, they travel once a week.]

   Talks of Texas going to the Pac-10 and Texas A&M going to the SEC,
which helped launch moves toward an alliance with the Big Eight, have
cooled.  Also, the Southwest Conference is interviewing commissioner
candidates and the leading candidate is reportedly Orange Bowl executive
director Steve Hatchell.  He not only works with the Big Eight every
year, but he's a graduate of Colorado.  That's a pretty strong
cross-conference tie.

   "For Texas and Texas A&M to go, it would take a move from the state
legislature," Windegger said.  [Really?  I thought that was just an
r.s.f.c rumor.]  "And there are a lot of lawyers in the legislature who
are graduates of Texas Tech, Baylor and SMU."

   So if Texas and Texas A&M can hold onto their cowboy hats and the Big
Ten just concentrates on working an "11" into its logo, the Big Eight
and Southwest can get started on what could be a beautiful relationship.
It just may take a while to get to know each other.  The formal
courtship begins Wednesday.

   "I can't see anything bad coming from it," Teaff said.  "The only
thing could be good."
-- 
Kevin Rodgers				kevin@traffic.den.mmc.com
Martin Marietta MS A16401		(303) 790-3971
116 Inverness Dr. East
Englewood CO 80112 USA			GO BUFFS!
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college