In 2012 when all of this got kicked off again there were only two schools that fit us in every way from the ACC, Florida State and Clemson. Under the market footprint model there were only two from the ACC that made us a lot of money (A Virginia State school and a North Carolina State school). Everybody on this board knows that.
Well in 2012 there were only two schools in the Big 12 that fit us in every way, well almost every way Texas's attitude is not SEC, Texas and Oklahoma. Attendance: Check, Revenue: Check plus, Flagships: Check, Rabid Fans: Check, Contiguous States: Check, A Southern Feel, Check ~.
So folks for all of our threads and everything that has been said if it came down to just two schools it would be Texas and Oklahoma.
The problem is it might not just come down to Texas and Oklahoma. You do realize that Texas-Homa to the SEC is not exactly out of the question. We would give them the most revenue (with their inclusion), they would have the most rivals and former rivals by moving to the SEC, they would have the least travel in a new SEC Western Division, and their minor sports emphasis corresponds to ours. In other words in spite of their attitudes we essentially offer them everything they claim to want.
Just take another look:
Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, L.S.U., South Carolina, Kentucky
Now those look about right to me.
Alabama / Auburn
Tennessee / Kentucky
Texas / Texas A&M
L.S.U. / Arkansas
South Carolina / Missouri
Vanderbilt / Georgia
Florida / Oklahoma
Mississippi State / Oklahoma State
Texas Tech / Mississippi
Could all be annual games. Most rivalries will be self contained within the divisions.
True Tennessee has to give up Florida, but that is a kind of protection of brands as well.
Thoughts?
I don't see a reason it wouldn't work.
I think the rivalry schedule would be a little different. LSU, for example, is probably going to want to play A&M and Ole Miss more than anyone else in the league.
Could do it like this...
West: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Arkansas, Missouri
Central: Texas A&M, LSU, Ole Miss, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky
East: Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina
Play your 5 division mates, 1 permanent from each of the other divisions, and 1 rotating from each of the other divisions.
Rivalry schedule:
West:
Texas: Texas A&M, Alabama
Texas Tech: Kentucky, Mississippi State
Oklahoma: LSU, Georgia
Oklahoma State: Tennessee, South Carolina
Arkansas: Ole Miss, Auburn
Missouri: Vanderbilt, Florida
Central:
Texas A&M: Texas, Auburn
LSU: Oklahoma, Florida
Ole Miss: Arkansas, Mississippi State
Tennessee: Alabama, Oklahoma State
Vanderbilt: Missouri, South Carolina
Kentucky: Texas Tech, Georgia
East:
Mississippi State: Ole Miss, Texas Tech
Alabama: Tennessee, Texas
Auburn: Texas A&M, Arkansas
Florida: LSU, Missouri
Georgia: Kentucky, Oklahoma
South Carolina: Vanderbilt, Oklahoma State
You could play with the rivalry schedule a little bit, but I think that secures pretty much every game that the schools really want to play annually.
While I do not intend to disparage TTech at all, having three teams from Texas even in a 18 team league is alot. Would it be worth it to bring in Texas? Probably, the same way that bringing in OK State to get OK may be worth it. However, Texas certainly looks down on the SEC academically speaking and with A&M already in the fold, I think Texas to the SEC is, while not completely off the table, a last resort option.
So getting OK/Texas on their own is unrealistic, and bringing little brothers on to get the big two negates some of the impact of the big two.
I agree with your assessment though. Our best options are:
1) Fit: Clemson/FSU
2) Market: one school from North Carolina, one school from Virginia (though I might remove your "state" qualifier, as I believe Duke certainly has value).
3) Texas/OK.
Other schools discussed on this board like Iowa State, Kansas, even ECU all have other issues that mean they are not home runs.
However much I would love OK and be excited about OK/State as it would shift Missouri to the west and bring Alabama/Auburn to the east, bringing on OSU would make that not an ideal grab either.
In addition, while Clemson and FSU are great, at least under the current model they do not add new markets (though as has been discussed, this may change).
I know that the SEC may have to compromise - either with TV partners, with other leagues or with schools themselves. However, I think the SEC still finds itself in the same position as last round: no expansion is needed or even beneficial unless the Big 10 expands.
At that point, we will need to carefully define what a win and a loss in expansion mean. For example, if the Big 10 does grab OK and Texas, we have to spin Kansas and ? as a win. Kansas is doable, as we brag about their AAU status and basketball as well as bringing back the Missouri-Kansas rivalry, but then who else is worth it and available? Iowa State with AAU? Houston to double down? Rice/ECU/etc?
(08-22-2016 07:11 AM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ]LSU, for example, is probably going to want to play A&M and Ole Miss more than anyone else in the league.
I don't know if I represent the usual LSU alum or not....
playing Ole Miss is always a hatefest, but beyond that, my favorite LSU games every year are vs. Alabama, Auburn, and Florida....
LSU isn't a "western" school at all...they're southern
I'd want to be in a division with the SEC's "usual suspects"....Alabama, Auburn, Florida, even Georgia
Let Kentucky, Vandy, and whoever be in a division with any new west teams.
I really hope the SEC or any other conference never goes beyond 16 teams. It's just to large. But beyond that. Why would Texas ever want to be in the SEC? They could probably generate more money as an independent. Heck, I don't even understand why they are even in the Big 12! UT has every excuse in the book to walk away from the Big 12. They aren't bound to any other University. Because A&M wasn't bound.
How about this?
The 2019 ACC network plans fall through, leaving several leading ACC schools disgruntled again and looking for new homes. B1G, SEC, and Big 12 make public plays for ACC schools. Behind closed doors, a deal is reached that sees UNC, Duke, UVA, Georgia Tech, and Syracuse to the B1G and Virginia Tech, NC State, Florida St., Clemson...and Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and NEBRASKA to the SEC!
Texas and Oklahoma leadership finally admit that the Big 12 dream is dead and reunite with Nebraska, Missouri, and A&M, along with Kansas to their new SEC home.
The SEC decides that 24 schools is better than 22, to create four 6-school divisions; West Virginia and Pitt round out the new-look conference.
Not to be outdone, the B1G approaches certain PAC schools and Notre Dame about a merger. Hearing (false) reports that Notre Dame has accepted a B1G invite, USC and Stanford commit to the B1G, but UCLA complains about the eastern and northern-heavy B1G lineup. The SEC seizes the opportunity to enter the westward expansion and convinces UCLA leadership that it will have closer cross-division road games and a solid West division lineup.
Seeing the writing on the wall, Notre Dame does commit to the B1G, but only after fierce negotiations through which the Irish gain intra-conference scheduling concessions to allow certain annual matchups, including USC and Stanford and an attractive rotation from among B1G schools on the Eastern Seaboard and in Michigan, Indiana, and Illinois.
SOUTH: Alabama, LSU, Ole Miss, Mississippi St., Arkansas, Vanderbilt
EAST: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Auburn, Tennessee, Kentucky
WEST: Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska, Texas A&M
ATLANTIC: Florida St., Clemson, NC State, Virginia Tech, WVU, Pitt
PACIFIC: UCLA, California, Oregon, Arizona St., BYU, Colorado
EAST: Ohio St., Michigan, Michigan St., Indiana, Purdue
WEST: Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, Northwestern
SOUTH: Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech
ATLANTIC: Notre Dame, Penn St., Rutgers, Syracuse, Boston College
PACIFIC: USC, Stanford, Arizona, Washington, Utah
The 12 schools leftover from the ACC, Big 12 and PAC unite and add certain MWC and AAC schools.
WEST: Washington St., Oregon St., Boise St., San Diego St., UNLV, Colorado St.
NORTH: TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor, Oklahoma St., Kansas St., Iowa St.
EAST: Louisville, Wake Forest, Cincinnati, UConn, Temple, Navy
SOUTH: Miami, UCF, USF, Houston, Memphis, Tulane
Seriously guys, ESPN will want this: Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC.
Texas and Oklahoma will want this: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma & Oklahoma State to the SEC.
ESPN might settle because then they would have:
Texas vs Oklahoma, Texas vs Arkansas, Texas vs Texas A&M, Texas vs Texas Tech, Texas vs Missouri, Oklahoma vs Oklahoma State, Oklahoma vs Arkansas.
These are all huge games in and around the Texas / Oklahoma area.
Then ESPN knows that if Texas is with their major rivals at the end of the year they can do this: Texas (SEC) vs Notre Dame (ACC). Texas knows this too.
And we aren't even talking about Texas and Oklahoma's cross divisional games against Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, L.S.U., Tennessee, Ole Miss, etc., on a rotating basis.
It's a content bonanza for the small price of TTU & OSU.
(08-24-2016 09:37 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]Seriously guys, ESPN will want this: Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC.
Texas and Oklahoma will want this: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma & Oklahoma State to the SEC.
ESPN might settle because then they would have:
Texas vs Oklahoma, Texas vs Arkansas, Texas vs Texas A&M, Texas vs Texas Tech, Texas vs Missouri, Oklahoma vs Oklahoma State, Oklahoma vs Arkansas.
These are all huge games in and around the Texas / Oklahoma area.
Then ESPN knows that if Texas is with their major rivals at the end of the year they can do this: Texas (SEC) vs Notre Dame (ACC). Texas knows this too.
And we aren't even talking about Texas and Oklahoma's cross divisional games against Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, L.S.U., Tennessee, Ole Miss, etc., on a rotating basis.
It's a content bonanza for the small price of TTU & OSU.
Pretty much.
If ESPN wanted to make it all work a little smoother then they could do this...
The ACC grabs West Virginia and UConn
Have the PAC take Kansas, Iowa State, TCU, and Houston
They get 3 new markets for their network. They get 2 more AAU schools and 2 basketball brands in the process. They get access to TX and a couple of solid football programs in the making. Every school except ISU is located near a major metro airport so the travel wouldn't be that bad.
The B1G's baseline may be so large right now that adding anyone outside of OU and UT won't do the trick.
The only schools left out from the current Big 12 are Kansas State and Baylor. BU is a little redundant and KSU doesn't really bring good value.
(08-22-2016 05:43 PM)YNot Wrote: [ -> ]How about this?
The 2019 ACC network plans fall through, leaving several leading ACC schools disgruntled again and looking for new homes. B1G, SEC, and Big 12 make public plays for ACC schools. Behind closed doors, a deal is reached that sees UNC, Duke, UVA, Georgia Tech, and Syracuse to the B1G and Virginia Tech, NC State, Florida St., Clemson...and Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and NEBRASKA to the SEC!
Texas and Oklahoma leadership finally admit that the Big 12 dream is dead and reunite with Nebraska, Missouri, and A&M, along with Kansas to their new SEC home.
The SEC decides that 24 schools is better than 22, to create four 6-school divisions; West Virginia and Pitt round out the new-look conference.
Not to be outdone, the B1G approaches certain PAC schools and Notre Dame about a merger. Hearing (false) reports that Notre Dame has accepted a B1G invite, USC and Stanford commit to the B1G, but UCLA complains about the eastern and northern-heavy B1G lineup. The SEC seizes the opportunity to enter the westward expansion and convinces UCLA leadership that it will have closer cross-division road games and a solid West division lineup.
Seeing the writing on the wall, Notre Dame does commit to the B1G, but only after fierce negotiations through which the Irish gain intra-conference scheduling concessions to allow certain annual matchups, including USC and Stanford and an attractive rotation from among B1G schools on the Eastern Seaboard and in Michigan, Indiana, and Illinois.
SOUTH: Alabama, LSU, Ole Miss, Mississippi St., Arkansas, Vanderbilt
EAST: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Auburn, Tennessee, Kentucky
WEST: Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska, Texas A&M
ATLANTIC: Florida St., Clemson, NC State, Virginia Tech, WVU, Pitt
PACIFIC: UCLA, California, Oregon, Arizona St., BYU, Colorado
EAST: Ohio St., Michigan, Michigan St., Indiana, Purdue
WEST: Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, Northwestern
SOUTH: Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech
ATLANTIC: Notre Dame, Penn St., Rutgers, Syracuse, Boston College
PACIFIC: USC, Stanford, Arizona, Washington, Utah
The 12 schools leftover from the ACC, Big 12 and PAC unite and add certain MWC and AAC schools.
WEST: Washington St., Oregon St., Boise St., San Diego St., UNLV, Colorado St.
NORTH: TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor, Oklahoma St., Kansas St., Iowa St.
EAST: Louisville, Wake Forest, Cincinnati, UConn, Temple, Navy
SOUTH: Miami, UCF, USF, Houston, Memphis, Tulane
This is as likely as a meteor striking Earth by 9/1/16.
I'm surprised Texas hasn't explored independence. I wonder if the Big Ten or SEC would agree to a deal like ND has with the ACC.
(08-29-2016 03:12 PM)Gamecock Wrote: [ -> ]I'm surprised Texas hasn't explored independence. I wonder if the Big Ten or SEC would agree to a deal like ND has with the ACC.
I doubt it. I think the only reason the ACC did it was because they were on the brink at the time. They needed an influx of cash.
(08-29-2016 03:21 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ] (08-29-2016 03:12 PM)Gamecock Wrote: [ -> ]I'm surprised Texas hasn't explored independence. I wonder if the Big Ten or SEC would agree to a deal like ND has with the ACC.
I doubt it. I think the only reason the ACC did it was because they were on the brink at the time. They needed an influx of cash.
There's that. But then there was ESPN's huge desire to have a piece of the Irish.
OR (and I know this is crazy but hear me out)
We DONT invite in Conference Killing Cancer and their worthless tagalong lackeys who add nothing to the bottom line and instead we bring in some real schools that expand our footprint and brand like Virginia Tech and Florida State do in the east where there's this thing called population and markets.
(08-29-2016 05:51 PM)10thMountain Wrote: [ -> ]OR (and I know this is crazy but hear me out)
We DONT invite in Conference Killing Cancer and their worthless tagalong lackeys who add nothing to the bottom line and instead we bring in some real schools that expand our footprint and brand like Virginia Tech and Florida State do in the east where there's this thing called population and markets.
I can't argue with you there.
I would say though that the odds of us getting FSU or VT in the future have dropped dramatically with the inception of the ACC Network. It looks like ESPN has a blood pact with that league so I don't see them allowing it to break apart.
I still think schools like OU, OSU, KU, or ISU would be good adds in the long run. None of them bring large populations though.
When it comes to Eastern expansion, we are probably looking at schools like ECU and Cincinnati to add large markets. I have no idea if the league is willing to do that, but I think we'll be limited to that.
(08-29-2016 05:51 PM)10thMountain Wrote: [ -> ]OR (and I know this is crazy but hear me out)
We DONT invite in Conference Killing Cancer and their worthless tagalong lackeys who add nothing to the bottom line and instead we bring in some real schools that expand our footprint and brand like Virginia Tech and Florida State do in the east where there's this thing called population and markets.
Why don't you suggest something that is doable? Like Ohio State in the North and Oklahoma to the West. I'm sure at some point, especially as we move to content based payout models, that the Buckeyes would like to be with peers in athletics. Who knows maybe Michigan tags along as well.
Personally if we pick on the ACC I still like Florida State & Clemson for content and Virginia Tech and N.C. State for role playing market additions.
(08-29-2016 06:02 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ] (08-29-2016 05:51 PM)10thMountain Wrote: [ -> ]OR (and I know this is crazy but hear me out)
We DONT invite in Conference Killing Cancer and their worthless tagalong lackeys who add nothing to the bottom line and instead we bring in some real schools that expand our footprint and brand like Virginia Tech and Florida State do in the east where there's this thing called population and markets.
I can't argue with you there.
I would say though that the odds of us getting FSU or VT in the future have dropped dramatically with the inception of the ACC Network. It looks like ESPN has a blood pact with that league so I don't see them allowing it to break apart.
I still think schools like OU, OSU, KU, or ISU would be good adds in the long run. None of them bring large populations though.
When it comes to Eastern expansion, we are probably looking at schools like ECU and Cincinnati to add large markets. I have no idea if the league is willing to do that, but I think we'll be limited to that.
We'll see how it all plays out. The SEC doesn't raid competing conferences per policy, but if after some GORs are up a team or 2 contacts us that's a different story.
There will be options to the East and West.
(08-29-2016 06:02 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ] (08-29-2016 05:51 PM)10thMountain Wrote: [ -> ]OR (and I know this is crazy but hear me out)
We DONT invite in Conference Killing Cancer and their worthless tagalong lackeys who add nothing to the bottom line and instead we bring in some real schools that expand our footprint and brand like Virginia Tech and Florida State do in the east where there's this thing called population and markets.
I can't argue with you there.
I would say though that the odds of us getting FSU or VT in the future have dropped dramatically with the inception of the ACC Network. It looks like ESPN has a blood pact with that league so I don't see them allowing it to break apart.
I still think schools like OU, OSU, KU, or ISU would be good adds in the long run. None of them bring large populations though.
When it comes to Eastern expansion, we are probably looking at schools like ECU and Cincinnati to add large markets. I have no idea if the league is willing to do that, but I think we'll be limited to that.
WV will be the best that anyone can do out east for a long time. WV & ECU to the SEC?
(08-30-2016 07:47 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: [ -> ] (08-29-2016 06:02 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ] (08-29-2016 05:51 PM)10thMountain Wrote: [ -> ]OR (and I know this is crazy but hear me out)
We DONT invite in Conference Killing Cancer and their worthless tagalong lackeys who add nothing to the bottom line and instead we bring in some real schools that expand our footprint and brand like Virginia Tech and Florida State do in the east where there's this thing called population and markets.
I can't argue with you there.
I would say though that the odds of us getting FSU or VT in the future have dropped dramatically with the inception of the ACC Network. It looks like ESPN has a blood pact with that league so I don't see them allowing it to break apart.
I still think schools like OU, OSU, KU, or ISU would be good adds in the long run. None of them bring large populations though.
When it comes to Eastern expansion, we are probably looking at schools like ECU and Cincinnati to add large markets. I have no idea if the league is willing to do that, but I think we'll be limited to that.
WV will be the best that anyone can do out east for a long time. WV & ECU to the SEC?
It's really quite simple but those with an agenda don't want to believe it. ESPN will not pay the SEC to take ACC schools. 1. It weakens the conference in which they own 100%. 2. They don't want to have to pay more for that product. 3. They consider the SEC and ACC to be essentially members of the ESPN family. 4. They use us to acquire the properties of which they desire a greater %.
It is pure fan fantasy that we are going to raid the ACC. There was a time when ESPN considered making room for additions to the ACC by utilizing duplicate footprint schools to enhance the value of the SEC, but that was calculated and many thought agreed upon.
The SEC will expand out the West whether posters on this board like it or not. Why? Because we are contiguous, because we have schools their fans desire to play, and because we multiply each other's value.
Notre Dame was lured to an ACC that they likely do not desire to see change. They certainly don't want their new home destabilized.
So for all of the "this ain't never going to happen" talk the only one I'm sure of is that ESPN isn't going to damage the ACC, add to their payout needlessly, or waste slots.
The ACC will add one if N.D. has a prayer of going all in. The SEC will be used to acquire Big 12 properties of interest to ESPN.
But, please go on with whatever thoughts feel the best.
I want F.S.U. and Clemson. It's not happening. Virginia Tech and N.C. State would add markets without devaluing the ACC. It's not happening now, although at one time is was carefully being sold to fulfill a plan. And yes Gamecock there are plans and there is order and these moves are more than just short term acquisitions for short term goals.
In '91 the plan was Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Florida State and Clemson. We got Arkansas and South Carolina replaced Clemson. We got A&M and Missouri took F.S.U.'s spot. That leaves Texas and Oklahoma. 25 years is not short term planning and Missouri gave us a new market. Hello!
I don't want Texas. But, if ESPN wants us to take them and pays us to do so then pucker up and get ready. I like Oklahoma. They add.
We'll see.
(08-30-2016 04:11 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (08-30-2016 07:47 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: [ -> ] (08-29-2016 06:02 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ] (08-29-2016 05:51 PM)10thMountain Wrote: [ -> ]OR (and I know this is crazy but hear me out)
We DONT invite in Conference Killing Cancer and their worthless tagalong lackeys who add nothing to the bottom line and instead we bring in some real schools that expand our footprint and brand like Virginia Tech and Florida State do in the east where there's this thing called population and markets.
I can't argue with you there.
I would say though that the odds of us getting FSU or VT in the future have dropped dramatically with the inception of the ACC Network. It looks like ESPN has a blood pact with that league so I don't see them allowing it to break apart.
I still think schools like OU, OSU, KU, or ISU would be good adds in the long run. None of them bring large populations though.
When it comes to Eastern expansion, we are probably looking at schools like ECU and Cincinnati to add large markets. I have no idea if the league is willing to do that, but I think we'll be limited to that.
WV will be the best that anyone can do out east for a long time. WV & ECU to the SEC?
It's really quite simple but those with an agenda don't want to believe it. ESPN will not pay the SEC to take ACC schools. 1. It weakens the conference in which they own 100%. 2. They don't want to have to pay more for that product. 3. They consider the SEC and ACC to be essentially members of the ESPN family. 4. They use us to acquire the properties of which they desire a greater %.
It is pure fan fantasy that we are going to raid the ACC. There was a time when ESPN considered making room for additions to the ACC by utilizing duplicate footprint schools to enhance the value of the SEC, but that was calculated and many thought agreed upon.
The SEC will expand out the West whether posters on this board like it or not. Why? Because we are contiguous, because we have schools their fans desire to play, and because we multiply each other's value.
Notre Dame was lured to an ACC that they likely do not desire to see change. They certainly don't want their new home destabilized.
So for all of the "this ain't never going to happen" talk the only one I'm sure of is that ESPN isn't going to damage the ACC, add to their payout needlessly, or waste slots.
The ACC will add one if N.D. has a prayer of going all in. The SEC will be used to acquire Big 12 properties of interest to ESPN.
But, please go on with whatever thoughts feel the best.
I want F.S.U. and Clemson. It's not happening. Virginia Tech and N.C. State would add markets without devaluing the ACC. It's not happening now, although at one time is was carefully being sold to fulfill a plan. And yes Gamecock there are plans and there is order and these moves are more than just short term acquisitions for short term goals.
In '91 the plan was Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Florida State and Clemson. We got Arkansas and South Carolina replaced Clemson. We got A&M and Missouri took F.S.U.'s spot. That leaves Texas and Oklahoma. 25 years is not short term planning and Missouri gave us a new market. Hello!
I don't want Texas. But, if ESPN wants us to take them and pays us to do so then pucker up and get ready. I like Oklahoma. They add.
We'll see.
I will say that I would like Texas and Oklahoma as well. Then again no one has ever asked my opinion on these things.
Except neither Texas or OU want the SEC.
They'll roll out all their usual (and ironic if they had any self awareness) BS:
"The SEC is a bunch of cheaters"
"The SEC isn't good enough for our academics"
"The SEC isn't what our fans want!"
Etc
Of course this is all to cover up the real reason they will never join: both schools are beholden to incredibly self entitled fan bases that simply can't handle giving up being the big fish in the small pond for being just another big fish in an ocean of full of fish just as big or bigger than they are.