Baylor over Texas

[WoVeU]

The landscape of College Football just seems to continually get tighter.

[Eric]

I think it's Art Briles and Robert Griffin. Griffin is a special athlete and Briles has the offensive knowledge to put him in positions to succeed. He really has upgraded the athleticism in Waco for sure. They don't look like a great team, but they're certainly a decent one. If they can manage to stun Oklahoma (in Waco), they could win the Big 12 South

[Brian Roastbeef]

Furthermore, heading into this game, many of us here had Baylor ranked but not Texas. Should any of us be surprised that Baylor won...

Is this another nail in the coffin of the Big XII though? That is, with a team like Baylor showing some strength, how long will they be willing to play third banana in money and TV time to a Texas team that they defeated or even an Oklahoma team who will be favored to win, but with whom they stand a fair chance. We all said at the time that the Big XII compromise that ended the offseason conference shuffling would not be a lasting deal. I think this should remind us of that fact.

[Spence]

Not many - two. Don't make my mistake look worse then it was.

[billybud]

Baylor needs to show staying power....beating a non vintage Texas team one time in the last thirteen attempts, does not make you equal to Texas. And Baylor hasn't beaten Oklahoma in sixty years (well, actually never).

If Baylor can stay at a competitive level for a few years, they will gain some respect...

[Eric]

Baylor needs to show staying power....beating a non vintage Texas team one time in the last thirteen attempts, does not make you equal to Texas. And Baylor hasn't beaten Oklahoma in sixty years (well, actually never).

If Baylor can stay at a competitive level for a few years, they will gain some respect...

What does that have to do with the 2010 Baylor Bears? Nobody is saying they will become the new Texas. This team just has some athletic talent, a good coach, and a special athlete. Kind of like Cutler at Vanderbilt; once Griffin goes, the program will sink a bit. But while he's here, Baylor looks like a solid team.

[Brian Roastbeef]

Indeed Texas and Oklahoma have the history, but current events shape decisions of conference expansion, moving, and foster irritability if teams aren't performing to the level that their TV and financial contracts would suggest. I'm not saying that Baylor will be the next Texas either, or even that they will defeat Oklahoma in a few weeks. (Though, as I said, Baylor shouldn't really be a crazy underdog.)

The general consensus among fans when this started was that the whole Big XII arrangement from this past summer wouldn't be lasting. I just think that the unexpected growth of a team like Baylor will be what fosters the decline... A reasonable finish to this season, maybe another one like it, and Baylor will look more appealing to other conferences than they did a few months ago. They aren't the whipping boy of the Big XII, so it wouldn't be a surprise if they flex some muscle. Its the similar appeal that Rutgers has to a possibly expanding Big Ten, than nobody would have thought back when they were a regular 2-9 team.

[billybud]

Furthermore, heading into this game, many of us here had Baylor ranked but not Texas. Should any of us be surprised that Baylor won...

Is this another nail in the coffin of the Big XII though? That is, with a team like Baylor showing some strength, how long will they be willing to play third banana in money and TV time to a Texas team that they defeated or even an Oklahoma team who will be favored to win, but with whom they stand a fair chance. We all said at the time that the Big XII compromise that ended the offseason conference shuffling would not be a lasting deal. I think this should remind us of that fact.

Eric...I was responding to this conversation. I am pointing out that being upset at "playing third banana" would probably require more success than Baylor has had.

That's what my comment is doing in this freekin' thread. And it is germane to that thought. Maybe you didn't peruse the thread, or maybe you were concentrated on your thought...

If you have a problem with my thought in this thread...you might ask ole Roastbeef not to think outloud about future happenings in the Big XII.

Anyway, bite me!

[Brian Roastbeef]

Yeah, how dare I speculate about the Big XII. Who needs that sort of crap at a college football forum?

[Spence]

Yeah, how dare I speculate about the Big XII. Who needs that sort of crap at a college football forum?

I don't think Baylor beating Texas is going to elevate them above Texas on the pecking order in the B-12, but I believe you have hit on the very thing that will bring down the B-12. In the B-10 Indiana and Northwestern get as much as Ohio State and Michigan. I think for all schools to live in peace, that is how it has to be. It will surprise me if jealosy on how the money is split doesn't occur when Texas struggles.

[Eric]

Furthermore, heading into this game, many of us here had Baylor ranked but not Texas. Should any of us be surprised that Baylor won...

Is this another nail in the coffin of the Big XII though? That is, with a team like Baylor showing some strength, how long will they be willing to play third banana in money and TV time to a Texas team that they defeated or even an Oklahoma team who will be favored to win, but with whom they stand a fair chance. We all said at the time that the Big XII compromise that ended the offseason conference shuffling would not be a lasting deal. I think this should remind us of that fact.

Eric...I was responding to this conversation. I am pointing out that being upset at "playing third banana" would probably require more success than Baylor has had.

That's what my comment is doing in this freekin' thread. And it is germane to that thought. Maybe you didn't peruse the thread, or maybe you were concentrated on your thought...

If you have a problem with my thought in this thread...you might ask ole Roastbeef not to think outloud about future happenings in the Big XII.

Anyway, bite me!

That's fair, but my question wasn't designed to have any certain kind of tone to it. You took it that way. I was just asking a question because from my perspective, I think Brian's point is relatively true. With Briles, Baylor can become somewhat relevant and be another team that feels that they're being jilted by the Big 12 bending over backwards for Oklahoma and Texas. When I said "2010", I was referring to Baylor going forward as well. But they do need to show some staying power, so I do agree with you