So a report surfaced suggesting that the ACC was a potential player for Texas. The ACC quickly shot it down, however. My first thought about the Texas-to-ACC scenario: ugh. Oh, hey, I think Texas could be great for the conference – if Texas wanted to be a true partner. But the Orangebloods report suggests that the ACC scenario may be attractive to Texas only because Texas thinks they’ll get to keep their own network and maybe get to continue the same practices that have threatened to rip apart the Big 12. I continue to believe that independence is the way to go for the University of Texas, because it seems that what they currently want is a sort of independence without the scheduling headaches.
Remember that the New York Times reported last season that the Big 12 exodus to the Pac-10 last year was called off at the last minute because Texas just couldn’t hold themselves back from demanding to get more than everyone else. And also remember that one of the things that set Texas A&M off was their feeling that they had been deceived about Texas’ intentions with the Longhorn Network and felt that Texas was trying to bully their way into an arrangement that didn’t square with promises that had been made. So even if Texas goes humbly into the Pac-12 or the ACC, how long does anyone think it will be before they start fighting for a sweeter deal for themselves, even if it is to the detriment of their partners? Even before the Longhorn Network, when Nebraska left for the Big 10, which team were they grumbling about? Hint: it wasn’t Oklahoma or Texas A&M. People running these conferences need to look long and hard at why the Big 12 came apart.
I think the ACC should look in another direction.