Originally Posted by tredadda
Reread my post. I guess I should have used simpler English. I will make note of that next time I respond to you. UT did not go because of the LHN, which no one wanted and they refused to drop.
Mmm, needs to insult in order to make his argument appear stronger, OK....
Your ASSUMPTION is that is the reason UT didn't go. And, if one simply wants to make a simplistic argument not taking into account the entirety of the dynamics at play at that time, then that might seem like the only argument.
So, let me refresh the situation at that time. A&M was openly flirting with the idea of going to the SEC. UT did not want this to happen. OU, sensing the conference may be coming apart, made their "wallflower" declaration, and began to court the PAC. UT was now in a situation of which rivalry they wanted to preserve the most. OU was the important rivalry and they knew(or at least strongly suspected), the PAC would not take OU and OSU without UT in the package. So they cut bait with A&M and played a game with OU and the PAC. OU needed to see their value was much less without UT, so UT made the LHN this intractable issue they knew the PAC wouldn't accommodate. So, UT pulls out, the PAC decides they don't want OSU (a polite way of telling OU their worth wasn't as great without UT), and the conference begins to start over until Missouri decides they don't want to be there any longer despite all their concerns being addressed.
UT doesn't want to travel to the west coast to play its games, and if you want to believe something different, then everyone is entitled to their distorted view of reality.