Texas House Bill HB412

Texas 2019 - 86th Regular

Caption

Relating to an annual football game between The University of Texas at Austin and Texas A&M University.

Impact

An additional stipulation in the bill is that if either university fails to participate in the mandated game, it will face significant penalties. Specifically, the university that opts out will be prohibited from awarding any state-funded athletic scholarships or similar financial assistance to students for the following academic year. This aspect of the legislation aims not only to incentivize participation but also ensures that the football game's importance is recognized at the institutional level, as it ties financial rewards to the universities' commitment to the rivalry.

Summary

House Bill 412 mandates that the intercollegiate football teams of The University of Texas at Austin and Texas A&M University play an annual nonconference game against each other every November. This provision aims to establish a consistent and traditional matchup between the two prominent Texas universities, reinforcing their long-standing sports rivalry. The proposed legislation specifies that this game should occur on the fourth Thursday, Friday, or Saturday of November, thereby providing a stable schedule for the institutions involved and their fans. The intent behind this annual game is to bolster attendance and fan engagement, fostering a cultural event that could enhance community and alumni relations.

Conclusion

Overall, House Bill 412 seeks to institutionalize a cherished sporting tradition within Texas while also asserting legislative influence over university athletic programs. The balance of tradition and institutional compliance will likely drive discussions as the bill moves forward in the legislative process.

Contention

While the bill has been generally well-received due to the historical significance of the football rivalry, there are concerns about the implications of enforcing a mandated game. Critics might argue that the legislative requirement could place undue pressure on university athletic programs, especially in years when other logistical or competitive factors may complicate scheduling. Moreover, the requirement for financial sanctions could be seen as excessive and detrimental to student athletes' opportunities should a game not occur for reasons beyond the control of the universities.