B12 Presidents have voted to invite TCU. Good move, while TCU doesn't add TV sets but they are a solid football program and should be a good B12 team. I don't expect that they will be an elite B12 team, but they will be in that second cut with Tech and Ok State.
Makes a lot more sense than TCU going to the Big East. I wonder if there has been any kind of financial transaction (good faith deposit, etc.) between TCU and the BE that will have to be undone. TCU will be more at home in the B12 with its mediocre basketball team. :twisted: :lol:
I have heard that TCU will have to pay the Big East 5 million to leave. TCU, outside of basketball, has some good sports. They have a good baseball program, good golf, tennis. Probably not a real deep sports program though.
Way to go tu. Drive away A&M in order to invite another lower-tier team to add to your orbit. Joking aside, TCU is a good pickup for the B12 in their continuing effort to stay relevant in football. I think BYU will be receiving an invite shortly as well.
hmmmm let's see I wonder who's played in more BCS bowl games in the last 10 years? I wonder who's won more BCS bowl games in the last 10 years. I wonder who's record is better over the last 10 years. The real down side though is TCU's fan base is dwarfed by the A&M fan base. That's really what hurts, not the quality of the football, we've upgraded in that respect. As far as BYU, they'd be another excellent addition.
OUCH! :roll: I'm actually intrigued to see some of these big-fish, little-pond "powerhouse" programs get into a real conference to see, really, where they fit into the ranking of quality programs. TCU is a good program, along with Utah and Boise St. But really, showing it once/twice a year isn't the same as getting beat up week in/week out, as Utah has already seen in the P12 this year. In the MWC and WAC, there were always gimmes where they could scheme for their next real showcase opponent. In the P12, B12, B10, SEC, there are no gimmes so you must game plan for your next opponent every week. If TCU wins the B12 on a consistent basis, I will yield to your foresight, but I doubt very much the conference has upgraded the level of competition in this move. Trading Colorado for TCU you might have something there.
I look for TCU to be a notch behind OU/Texas and right there with OSU and Texas Tech, A&M was traditionally a notch below that. I also think that if TCU is serious and will commit the resources to being good, which will be more costly than being good in the Mtn West. Then they will hurt A&M in recruiting. I have a feeling that the expected surge of top players A&M is hoping to get by being a SEC team will never materialize, instead they will lose players to TCU.
BTW Glad to see you back Scott, I was afraid that after last week and the impending doom up on the plains this Sat night that you'd decided to stay in the wilderness of Colorado! Nice pictures on your facebook page! :wink:
Rumors of my demise have been greatly exagerated... Wow... that's a snapshot statement! I suppose I could say the same thing about Texas in the 90's and it would be about as relevant. TCU has hurt us in recruiting about as much as Baylor... I doubt joining the BEVO 9 will change that much.
Not really a snapshot...I mean we have 15 years of B12 history here and only 2 times in that 15 years have you guys finished above 4th. Granted you were better during the Jackie Sherrill/RC early years.
Terry, shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh... Don't make Scott angry. He has youth and exuberance on his side. :wink:
That chart is a little misleading since it shows us as 5th last year... Hard to figure that since we were in the tie for the south champ. Of course it also leaves out 90-95... which is great for you since that's when texas was really sucking...
Code: Year TCU A&M tu 1986 3-8 9-3 5-6 1987 5-6 10-2 7-5 1988 4-7 7-5 4-7 1989 4-7 8-4 5-6 1990 5-6 9-3 10-2 24-42 43-17 31-26 1991 7-4 10-2 5-6 1992 2-8 12-1 6-5 1993 4-7 10-2 5-5 1994 7-5 10-0 8-4 1995 6-5 9-3 10-2 26-29 51-8 34-22 1996 4-7 6-6 8-5 1997 1-10 9-4 4-7 1998 7-5 11-3 9-3 1999 8-4 8-4 9-5 2000 10-2 7-5 9-3 30-28 41-22 39-23 2001 6-6 8-4 11-2 2002 10-2 6-6 11-2 2003 11-2 4-8 10-3 2004 5-6 7-5 11-1 2005 11-1 5-6 13-0 43-17 30-29 55-10 2006 11-2 9-4 10-3 2007 8-5 7-6 10-3 2008 11-2 4-8 12-1 2009 12-1 6-7 13-1 2010 13-0 9-4 5-7 55-10 35-29 50-15 Traditionally? Really? When it was head-to-head in any five-year span, it was A&M, tu, then TCU 1-2-3 in win totals until 2000, about the time of the B12 starting. 2001-2005 tu had some really good years, but taking your statement at face value, TCU would be a step up from tu as well, with TCU having a better record over the last five years. Of course, that might have SOMETHING to do with the quality of opponents, which I think the WAC and MWC, in general, are not as strong as those in the B12. So which is it, is TCU better than tu and A&M both?? Or is TCU a product of their conference when related to A&M and tu? Sounds like sour grapes, and you can continue to parrot the school's party line, but I don't know of many that are buying into it that don't have school affiliation or network dollars on the line.
OK maybe I was a little over the top. But right now tcu is a good edition from football stand point they don't have the same depth of athletic program as A&M or the big fanbase. Remember I wanted TAMU to stay and actually root for them except Texas and ND
TCU is a PERFECT add from the perspective of the Horns and Sooners. They LOOK like a great program that should add strength, but in reality they are a prettier version of Baylor. They have greatly benefited from only playing one or two tough games a year - something the Bears missed. Can TCU sustain their current levels in a real conference? They couldn't in the old SWC, so I see no reason to think different now. They are dressing up their stadium but it still only holds 40K. The rest of their sports aren't very good... we'll see how their baseball does now that they will have to play with some big boys again. Good luck Frogs... hope you know what you are getting into.