(05-13-2014 02:40 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(05-12-2014 07:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Let's get back to the point. Given all of the data if the SEC expanded from the Big 12 we would be best served to move to 18 with Baylor, Texas, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. I don't care about doubling markets those are the best athletic properties that are within a reasonable distance and have a more or less Southerly culture. I wouldn't call all of them Old South by any means.

If the SEC wants to get to 20 there are really only two programs in the ACC worth having for their merit: Clemson and Florida State.

Face it guys the SEC leads the nation in total revenue as a conference, even more than the mighty Big 10. The SEC leads the nation in viewing audience by 900,000 over the Big 10. We can talk markets until the cows come home but these six are the best football additions we can make to the conference and most of them have multiple sports at which they excel.

There is nothing for the SEC in North Carolina or Virginia other than a big market. Their product would weaken football, total revenue, and attendance (which the SEC also leads by 5,000 per game average), but would improve hoops and at least be on par in baseball.

As a football fan any of those 6 to get us to 16, or 18, but better yet to 20.

Culturally that makes some sense; however, if the SEC can pull FSU and Clemson it would be better off going east and picking up a VA and NC school as well because without Clemson, and especially FSU, the ACC is getting a much smaller payout from ESPN. That would be much better than adding Baylor (who has struggled in FB outside the last few years with Broyles and is going to be Vandy in the SEC) and OSU just to land OU and UT. Three schools in Texas and 2 in OK would be a far cry from Slive's recent expansion outlook. With FSU and Clemson you would duplicate as well, but FL is a large state and the SEC would own it then, SC = OK basically, but the SEC would probably land VT and NCST at least (if not UVA and UNC) when the ACC comes apart with FSU & Clemson departing.

Gaining VA and NC would beat out gaining OK. Then just add 19 and 20 from either the ACC remnants or ask a couple B12 schools. B12 schools not named UT, KU, and OU would probably kill their first born to be in the stable and powerful SEC after the last few tumultuous years of B12 membership and one or 2 of the brand schools might even join with those additions and without little brothers if the money was right.

What you are saying is logical from a particular point of view, that of markets. My point is that while ESPN and FOX might want us to think in terms of markets the truth is the SEC already has the highest average in revenue production, the highest attendance, and the highest average revenue generation of all of the conferences. While having North Carolina and Virginia would be nice market wise the truth is they water down our brand.

I totally agree that the key to the destruction of the ACC is Florida State and Clemson and I stated that over 2 years ago when pointing out that if the SEC wanted to raid the ACC that was the key that unlocked the door. But I also pointed out that ESPN has no desire for the SEC to be anything to the ACC except for an escape hatch should the Big 10's earnings disparity with the ACC come into play. And only then will you see ACC schools leaving for the SEC and at that point ESPN will simply use the opportunity to cull the ACC herd.

Networks drive this realignment. My point in the post was that from the numbers perspective those schools fit the best. They tend to have the best attendance, earn the most, and generate the most interest (Baylor excepted).

Now stop and think about the SEC additions in the last two rounds of realignment. In 1992 the SEC's main objectives fell apart and we took 1 of our primary targets, Arkansas and took South Carolina to keep options for expansion into North Carolina open. We at that time wanted Texas, Oklahoma, Texas A&M and Arkansas from the West. We went after Florida State and initially Clemson in the East. In short Jayhawk we viewed them to be the best fits for us then and we still see them that way now. Who were the last two additions? The sure weren't from the ACC! ESPN won't permit it, as they refuse to pay for it. So the SEC added one of its primary targets from Big 12, Texas A&M, and ESPN encouraged the taking of Missouri which in 1992 prior to the formation of the Big 12 didn't seem like an opportunity as a member of the Big 8. So by taking Arkansas in '92 Missouri becomes an unexpected option in 2012.

In the thread SEC Realignment Just by the Numbers I make it fairly clear that there are very few schools that can add to the totals of the SEC. Texas adds to them all. Oklahoma adds to the average slightly. Florida State is a wash. Clemson is a wash. Everyone else really drags the numbers down.

So why Baylor & Oklahoma State? If that is the price of the last two prizes it is doable. An addition of 4 in the West permits Alabama and Auburn to move East. That reunites the core of the old SEC, gives Texas and Oklahoma what no other conference can: L.S.U., Arkansas, A&M, Missouri, and the two Mississippi schools. That with rivals Oklahoma State, or Baylor/Texas Tech (which although in the state of Texas is a geographical outlier) is as good as they will find anywhere to play. It is certainly a more meaningful schedule to their fan bases than what either the PAC or Big 10 have to offer. And it affords their minor sports relatively easy travel.

Then there is the whole cultural fit thing. Let me ask you, "Who are the cultural fits for millionaires?" Other millionaires, right? The SEC has 6 of the top 10 earners in college athletics. Oklahoma and Texas are also top 10 earners. There are more economic peers and athletic peers of Texas and Oklahoma in the SEC than anywhere else they can go.

So the point here is simple. The SEC will play the angles that better their case to land those two schools. We offer affordable logistics for the fans, old rival favorites for them to play, and athletic and revenue peers. The Big 10 offers academic peers, not logistically close, no real established rivalries, and as an AAU school already Texas would benefit some from CIC projects, but probably not enough to swing the deal. The Big 10 would certainly offer the opportunity to make money on television contracts, but then when it all comes out in the open the SEC will still be close enough on that front as well. The PAC offers what?...........I'm still waiting?......... I'll tell you what they offer. A few competitive athletic programs, a lousy fan base that has other things to do, a travel nightmare, and less money by far than the Big 10 or SEC, and the greatest academic disparity between schools of any of the other conferences except the Big 12. And for all of the academic peer garbage I read on the Big 12 boards Texas is less a peer of the 4 California schools and more a peer of the Big 10. Oklahoma is about on par with Auburn in most demographics and well behind Florida, Georgia, Vanderbilt, Texas A&M, and Alabama. OU for all their talk basically meets the mean of the SEC. And Kansas is in the same shape but does have the distinction of AAU. Texas in the SEC would have 1 superior and 2 peers. Vanderbilt would be their superior, and Florida and Texas A&M their academic peers. Texas would rank #2 academically in the SEC. They would be about 4th or maybe 5th in the Big 10 and would be either 5th or 6th in the PAC, and about 6th in the ACC behind Duke, Wake Forest, Virginia, Boston College, and North Carolina. They are either behind or about the same as Miami so they might even be 7th. So while they are 1st in the Big 12 the truth is right now any conference is an academic improvement for the Horns.

So in conclusion:
1. ESPN will not pay the SEC to raid the ACC. So outside of the ACC making room for more market expansion there is no real target for the SEC in the ACC. That leaves only the Big 12.
2. ESPN will use the SEC to more fully acquire property they want.
3. I'm sure the LHN is proof enough that ESPN would like to lock up the Horns more fully in either of their two conferences.
4. Oklahoma would be a coup and OSU is going to be worth it to get them.
5. The most logical place for their fans, and for familiarity outside of the Big 12 is the SEC.
6. The SEC is very interested in improving its academic standing. Texas helps, Oklahoma meets the mean, BAYLOR enhances the mean (Texas Tech harms it) and Oklahoma State would harm it but nowhere near as much as Texas Tech.
7. So if the SEC had to take two teams to land the last two prizes Oklahoma State might be a must, and Baylor would be the best travel partner for the Horns.
8. If Texas did not insist on a travel companion then Kansas would be fine, but then that makes them the most extreme outlier in the SEC and I doubt seriously they want that distinction even though the SEC I'm sure would be happier to have them.

So JayhawkMVP I totally understand your perspective, but it is one that does not take into consideration the existing contractual obligations or the preferences of the one who writes the checks for the SEC, ACC, and a large portion of the funds for Texas, and a tidy sum for Kansas. Kansas gets out of their contract about the time the Big 12 GOR expires, but Texas is under obligation until 2031. And that's why if anything further happens I expect the SEC to further expand from the Big 12, unless N.C. State and Virginia Tech are given to the SEC to make room for a pod of 4 from the Big 12 for the ACC. But all things considered, the attitudes and desires of Virginia Tech and N.C. State, the travel expenses, and the likelihood that conferences could consolidate further, I suspect that the SEC adds between 4 to 6 Big 12 schools and the ACC adds 1 more (West Virginia or Connecticut). Then if there is further consolidation into 2 Mega conferences the old conference boundaries become the new divisions with a few geographical changes.

In a contract the one who pays controls. The networks are in control. It's much cheaper for the networks to sell one unified cable product than it is to sell three. The law of diminishing returns tells me that this will push networks into having 1 cable offering instead of triplicating them. The law of economy tells me that eliminating duplicated conference bureaucracies will eventually lead schools to seeing the benefit of one bigger umbrella.