+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: SECbbs (/forum-285.html)
+---- Forum: SEC Conference Talk (/forum-246.html)
+---- Thread: So what if we really do land Texahoma? (/thread-806468.html)
So what if we really do land Texahoma? - AllTideUp - 01-24-2017 01:48 AM
What next?
The PAC, the B1G, and even the ACC will have very limited options.
I've thought for a while that there will be winners and losers in the next round of realignment.
Assuming we land the Texahoma schools then what do these other leagues do?
From the B1G's perspective. They could go after Kansas and UConn, but I'm not sure the money is there. Kansas is a good get, but a relatively small market on its own. Iowa State is doubling down in a small state so unless there's political pressure, I don't see it happening. UConn could give them a boost in the Northeast, but their football product will likely never be that strong so do they really add much? They also aren't AAU so academically speaking, is this a school that brings enough athletically to warrant inclusion and the overlooking of the general agenda the B1G has. They are a flagship, I suppose, so there's that. The question remains about the money though.
From the PAC's perspective, they could go after schools like TCU and Houston. They would be the last into the 14 team sphere, but it's worked for everyone else so why not?
From the ACC's perspective, there's very little to be had in the Eastern half of the country. I imagine they could go after schools like Kansas and Iowa State in order to add quality content and markets. The ACC could use dedicated markets unlike what they have in most of their footprint. Perhaps WVU is a compromise pick so that the football schools get some quality in return for adding more basketball schools. Assuming ND goes all in, that's a pretty good combo for them.
That would supply the needed 8 to break the GOR and relinquish everyone from the financial obligations. Is that how everything breaks though?
Perhaps it's more like...
B1G takes Kansas and UConn
PAC takes TCU and Houston
ACC takes Notre Dame, Iowa State, Kansas State, and Cincinnati
Baylor and West Virginia are left out.
Thoughts?
So what if we really do land Texahoma? - JHS55 - 02-14-2017 05:12 PM
If Texas joined the SEC in just the first year you will be wondering how to get rid of them, but go ahead, take em any time you want as far as Iam concerned...
So what if we really do land Texahoma? - Lenvillecards - 02-15-2017 10:13 AM
The SEC won't get Texahoma while there is a GOR, I don't think. There wouldn't be any incentive for any other conference to make a deal for the "little brothers" to make it worth it for them. It could very well happen after the GOR. The B1G might make a play for Kansas & stop at 15. If the PAC were to expand it would probably do so with Texas schools & go to 14-16. For the ACC it would depend on if we have a P4, likely, & then it would depend on what ND does. The ACC would likely stop at 15, like the B1G, & adopt a 3x5. There would be no western expansion. The SEC could settle into a 4x4. Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State & WV are likely left out with possibly some Texas schools.
RE: So what if we really do land Texahoma? - JRsec - 02-15-2017 10:47 AM
(02-15-2017 10:13 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: The SEC won't get Texahoma while there is a GOR, I don't think. There wouldn't be any incentive for any other conference to make a deal for the "little brothers" to make it worth it for them. It could very well happen after the GOR. The B1G might make a play for Kansas & stop at 15. If the PAC were to expand it would probably do so with Texas schools & go to 14-16. For the ACC it would depend on if we have a P4, likely, & then it would depend on what ND does. The ACC would likely stop at 15, like the B1G, & adopt a 3x5. There would be no western expansion. The SEC could settle into a 4x4. Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State & WV are likely left out with possibly some Texas schools.
I agree about waiting for the expiration of the GOR. But if the SEC went to 18 while the Big 10 and ACC moved to 15 at least the structure division wise would be the same. It's just that the SEC would have 6 in a division instead of 5. Texahoma to the SEC would be a deal clincher IMO. The Big 10 can't take OSU or Texas Tech, at least not without some major infighting. The PAC could, but could not pay what the SEC would, nor do they have a cadre of lifetime rivals for them to play.
RE: So what if we really do land Texahoma? - BePcr07 - 02-15-2017 12:20 PM
(02-15-2017 10:47 AM)JRsec Wrote:(02-15-2017 10:13 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: The SEC won't get Texahoma while there is a GOR, I don't think. There wouldn't be any incentive for any other conference to make a deal for the "little brothers" to make it worth it for them. It could very well happen after the GOR. The B1G might make a play for Kansas & stop at 15. If the PAC were to expand it would probably do so with Texas schools & go to 14-16. For the ACC it would depend on if we have a P4, likely, & then it would depend on what ND does. The ACC would likely stop at 15, like the B1G, & adopt a 3x5. There would be no western expansion. The SEC could settle into a 4x4. Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State & WV are likely left out with possibly some Texas schools.
I agree about waiting for the expiration of the GOR. But if the SEC went to 18 while the Big 10 and ACC moved to 15 at least the structure division wise would be the same. It's just that the SEC would have 6 in a division instead of 5. Texahoma to the SEC would be a deal clincher IMO. The Big 10 can't take OSU or Texas Tech, at least not without some major infighting. The PAC could, but could not pay what the SEC would, nor do they have a cadre of lifetime rivals for them to play.
Very much a possibility and not a terrible option, in my opinion. The biggest issue I would see (outside of voting the schools into the SEC) would be creating the divisions. Would Texas A&M want to be grouped with them? Who would be the 5th - Arkansas, LSU, or Missouri? How would selecting the other 2 members of that division domino-effect the rest of the divisions? Would 2 divisions of 9 work having Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Mississippi, and Mississippi St in the West?
Where does the PAC go in this case? Do they sit put or add XII leftovers or Western AAC and MWC up-and-comers? Would the 8 AAU schools (Washington, Oregon, California, Stanford, USC, UCLA, Arizona, Colorado) join up with the B1G along with Kansas and 1 other for a 24-team megaconference?
Does the ACC sit tight or consider West Virginia and AAC programs? When does Notre Dame bite the bullet or do they?
There is a lot still to be determined that may not see resolution (if any) for at least a decade. I think it would benefit conferences to strengthen and clearly define their media deals before bringing anyone else along.
My personal opinion is that we'll eventually see more divisions within conferences, less OOC games (leaving only for other power schools, rivals, or high quality games). For example, the above alignment with the B1G:
West: Washington, Oregon, California, Stanford, USC, UCLA
Central: Arizona, Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois
North: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan St
East: Connecticut, Rutgers, Maryland, Penn St, Ohio St, Michigan
Play the other 5 teams in your division, plus 5 other conference games.
Potential SEC, since I'm on this page. I think 24 would be too much without ACC schools, so I'm going with 20:
North: Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Kansas St, Iowa St, Missouri
West: Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU
South: Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee
East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, Vanderbilt
RE: So what if we really do land Texahoma? - Soobahk40050 - 02-15-2017 02:23 PM
(02-15-2017 12:20 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:(02-15-2017 10:47 AM)JRsec Wrote:(02-15-2017 10:13 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: The SEC won't get Texahoma while there is a GOR, I don't think. There wouldn't be any incentive for any other conference to make a deal for the "little brothers" to make it worth it for them. It could very well happen after the GOR. The B1G might make a play for Kansas & stop at 15. If the PAC were to expand it would probably do so with Texas schools & go to 14-16. For the ACC it would depend on if we have a P4, likely, & then it would depend on what ND does. The ACC would likely stop at 15, like the B1G, & adopt a 3x5. There would be no western expansion. The SEC could settle into a 4x4. Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State & WV are likely left out with possibly some Texas schools.
I agree about waiting for the expiration of the GOR. But if the SEC went to 18 while the Big 10 and ACC moved to 15 at least the structure division wise would be the same. It's just that the SEC would have 6 in a division instead of 5. Texahoma to the SEC would be a deal clincher IMO. The Big 10 can't take OSU or Texas Tech, at least not without some major infighting. The PAC could, but could not pay what the SEC would, nor do they have a cadre of lifetime rivals for them to play.
Very much a possibility and not a terrible option, in my opinion. The biggest issue I would see (outside of voting the schools into the SEC) would be creating the divisions. Would Texas A&M want to be grouped with them? Who would be the 5th - Arkansas, LSU, or Missouri? How would selecting the other 2 members of that division domino-effect the rest of the divisions? Would 2 divisions of 9 work having Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Mississippi, and Mississippi St in the West?
Where does the PAC go in this case? Do they sit put or add XII leftovers or Western AAC and MWC up-and-comers? Would the 8 AAU schools (Washington, Oregon, California, Stanford, USC, UCLA, Arizona, Colorado) join up with the B1G along with Kansas and 1 other for a 24-team megaconference?
Does the ACC sit tight or consider West Virginia and AAC programs? When does Notre Dame bite the bullet or do they?
There is a lot still to be determined that may not see resolution (if any) for at least a decade. I think it would benefit conferences to strengthen and clearly define their media deals before bringing anyone else along.
My personal opinion is that we'll eventually see more divisions within conferences, less OOC games (leaving only for other power schools, rivals, or high quality games). For example, the above alignment with the B1G:
West: Washington, Oregon, California, Stanford, USC, UCLA
Central: Arizona, Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois
North: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan St
East: Connecticut, Rutgers, Maryland, Penn St, Ohio St, Michigan
Play the other 5 teams in your division, plus 5 other conference games.
Potential SEC, since I'm on this page. I think 24 would be too much without ACC schools, so I'm going with 20:
North: Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Kansas St, Iowa St, Missouri
West: Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU
South: Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee
East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, Vanderbilt
"More divisions within conferences/less OOC games."
This is why I am thinking more and more that a move to 13 games will happen, perhaps with a no-FCS requirement (or allowing FCS schools to be the spring game for FBS schools).
So, for instance, as a TN fan, we could play ETSU in a spring game.
Then with 13 games, even a 10 game conference schedule makes sense (and at 16 teams, a 5 permanent schools and 5 playing H/H make sense if we are preserving rivalries like TN-Alabama versus a 3-2-2-2, etc.)
Then TN could still play say MTSU as a warm-up and Memphis as a homecoming game and get its big-matchup game OOC.
Actually,
looking at the NFL schedule (4 preseason, 16 regular season, wild card, division, conference and Super Bowl) of 24 games, I think a 14 or 15 game regular season would not be completely absurd at college level.
Say its 15. So with my spring game plan, conference semis and championship, national semi and championship, that is at most 20 games for 2 teams. 19 games (spring plus 18) for most schools (4 playoff teams + bowl matchups).
Right now, a team can play 13 (with the Hawaii rule), their conference championship, national semi, and championship, for a total of 16, so this only really adds two games overall + the spring game.
For TN, again, 10 game conference schedule, Memphis, and MTSU. But then a couple of OOC regional games (VT, GT, etc), and still room for one "national matchup." Everyone can't play Ohio State every year, obviously, but these would still be big matchups.
RE: So what if we really do land Texahoma? - BePcr07 - 02-15-2017 02:41 PM
(02-15-2017 02:23 PM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:(02-15-2017 12:20 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:(02-15-2017 10:47 AM)JRsec Wrote:(02-15-2017 10:13 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: The SEC won't get Texahoma while there is a GOR, I don't think. There wouldn't be any incentive for any other conference to make a deal for the "little brothers" to make it worth it for them. It could very well happen after the GOR. The B1G might make a play for Kansas & stop at 15. If the PAC were to expand it would probably do so with Texas schools & go to 14-16. For the ACC it would depend on if we have a P4, likely, & then it would depend on what ND does. The ACC would likely stop at 15, like the B1G, & adopt a 3x5. There would be no western expansion. The SEC could settle into a 4x4. Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State & WV are likely left out with possibly some Texas schools.
I agree about waiting for the expiration of the GOR. But if the SEC went to 18 while the Big 10 and ACC moved to 15 at least the structure division wise would be the same. It's just that the SEC would have 6 in a division instead of 5. Texahoma to the SEC would be a deal clincher IMO. The Big 10 can't take OSU or Texas Tech, at least not without some major infighting. The PAC could, but could not pay what the SEC would, nor do they have a cadre of lifetime rivals for them to play.
Very much a possibility and not a terrible option, in my opinion. The biggest issue I would see (outside of voting the schools into the SEC) would be creating the divisions. Would Texas A&M want to be grouped with them? Who would be the 5th - Arkansas, LSU, or Missouri? How would selecting the other 2 members of that division domino-effect the rest of the divisions? Would 2 divisions of 9 work having Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Mississippi, and Mississippi St in the West?
Where does the PAC go in this case? Do they sit put or add XII leftovers or Western AAC and MWC up-and-comers? Would the 8 AAU schools (Washington, Oregon, California, Stanford, USC, UCLA, Arizona, Colorado) join up with the B1G along with Kansas and 1 other for a 24-team megaconference?
Does the ACC sit tight or consider West Virginia and AAC programs? When does Notre Dame bite the bullet or do they?
There is a lot still to be determined that may not see resolution (if any) for at least a decade. I think it would benefit conferences to strengthen and clearly define their media deals before bringing anyone else along.
My personal opinion is that we'll eventually see more divisions within conferences, less OOC games (leaving only for other power schools, rivals, or high quality games). For example, the above alignment with the B1G:
West: Washington, Oregon, California, Stanford, USC, UCLA
Central: Arizona, Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois
North: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan St
East: Connecticut, Rutgers, Maryland, Penn St, Ohio St, Michigan
Play the other 5 teams in your division, plus 5 other conference games.
Potential SEC, since I'm on this page. I think 24 would be too much without ACC schools, so I'm going with 20:
North: Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Kansas St, Iowa St, Missouri
West: Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU
South: Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee
East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, Vanderbilt
"More divisions within conferences/less OOC games."
This is why I am thinking more and more that a move to 13 games will happen, perhaps with a no-FCS requirement (or allowing FCS schools to be the spring game for FBS schools).
So, for instance, as a TN fan, we could play ETSU in a spring game.
Then with 13 games, even a 10 game conference schedule makes sense (and at 16 teams, a 5 permanent schools and 5 playing H/H make sense if we are preserving rivalries like TN-Alabama versus a 3-2-2-2, etc.)
Then TN could still play say MTSU as a warm-up and Memphis as a homecoming game and get its big-matchup game OOC.
Actually,
looking at the NFL schedule (4 preseason, 16 regular season, wild card, division, conference and Super Bowl) of 24 games, I think a 14 or 15 game regular season would not be completely absurd at college level.
Say its 15. So with my spring game plan, conference semis and championship, national semi and championship, that is at most 20 games for 2 teams. 19 games (spring plus 18) for most schools (4 playoff teams + bowl matchups).
Right now, a team can play 13 (with the Hawaii rule), their conference championship, national semi, and championship, for a total of 16, so this only really adds two games overall + the spring game.
For TN, again, 10 game conference schedule, Memphis, and MTSU. But then a couple of OOC regional games (VT, GT, etc), and still room for one "national matchup." Everyone can't play Ohio State every year, obviously, but these would still be big matchups.
I am definitely for the spring game with an FCS school. The game would essentially be the FCS school's first team vs. the FBS 3rd/4th/bench which would probably result in a lot of FCS wins.
Expanding the schedule is likely down the road. Start games in mid-August. Come to think of it, with more teams in a conference they may just do away with divisions altogether - kind of like what you mentioned and others have.
I like the idea of keeping OOC games in-state/region except for maybe 1.