(02-01-2011 11:17 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  The Big 12 is not going anywhere and noone from the Big 12 is going to the SEC. Their is a strong chance the Arkansas switches to the Big 12. Before anyone starts saying the the SEC is the richest and Blah Blah Blah. The Big 12 is going to get paid in its upcoming media contract. The Big 12 needs a championship game and if you think that the Big 12,Jerry Jones,and ESPN aren't going to do everything possible to make this happen. Well your mistaken.

I see where you're going with this, but I just don't see the Razorbacks leaving such a green pasture, for the potential of another equally green pasture, possibly even a little less green.

As an Okie alum/transplant, I can tell you I'd love to see Arkansas in the Big12, but I don't think it's gonna happen. But those would be some great games.

(02-01-2011 11:17 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  The Big 12 is not going anywhere and noone from the Big 12 is going to the SEC. Their is a strong chance the Arkansas switches to the Big 12. Before anyone starts saying the the SEC is the richest and Blah Blah Blah. The Big 12 is going to get paid in its upcoming media contract. The Big 12 needs a championship game and if you think that the Big 12,Jerry Jones,and ESPN aren't going to do everything possible to make this happen. Well your mistaken.

I agree with your first statement that the Big 12 isn't going anywhere and they may very well get paid in line with Dan Beebe's numbers (because UT and OU are 2 of the biggest football brands out there).

However, I still have no idea why you, as an Arkansas backer, would want your school to leave the SEC. I know that there's a vocal minority of Arkansas alums that long wistfully for the SWC days - I kind of get that from a nostalgia standpoint. It's kind of like how people romanticize about the times growing up in hard-scrabble places like Detroit and Gary. ("They used to be such beautiful places back in the day and there's soooo much character compared to this cookie-cutter suburb I live in now. If there were actually jobs there and I could avoid getting shot in my own driveway, I'd move back there in a second.") However, Arkansas actually leaving the SEC would be the single most idiotic move in the history of sports (college or pro). I'm not being hyperbolic about that. I don't care how much money Jerry Jones has - that doesn't mean he can do anything he wants. Case in point: the Cotton Bowl in his billion dollar palace still gets outspent by a wide margin by the crappy aging Citrus Bowl venue for the top non-BCS bowl game.

If it's the old "we don't have any rivals in the SEC" argument, well, that's completely overrated and fan-based. The university leadership wants stability and the SEC is as stable as they come. Arkansas should be thanking their lucky stars every single day that they got into the SEC when they did in the 1990s. If it were today's world where everything is about TV markets and recruiting areas, Arkansas would've been left for dead this past summer with Baylor and Iowa State and the SEC wouldn't have wanted anything to do with them. There's no UT or OU out there that's going to protect Arkansas. At best, Arkansas is in the same position as Missouri and Kansas (only with smaller markets to offer than either of them).

(02-01-2011 09:07 PM)usffan Wrote:  Based on this article about BCS football expenses:

http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/2010/06...ucks-eyes/

and this article about BCS net football income:

http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/2010/06...-of-trees/

that both use the U.S. Department of Education's Equity in Athletics report for the 2008-09 school year for their data and doing the math, here's what you find for total football income:

SEC

Fl*rida $66.15MM
Georgia $65.21MM
Alabama $64.60MM
LSU $61.86MM
Auburn $58.61MM
USC $57.11MM
Tenn. $42.80MM
Ark. $38.63MM
Ky. $26.14MM
MSU $18.73MM
Miss. $18.68MM
Vandy $18.56MM

USFFan

Complete side point, but with their home attendance, what is Tenn doing wrong to only fall in there with their football revenue?

(02-01-2011 08:29 PM)superdeluxe Wrote:  

(02-01-2011 06:58 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Actually if you look at it the PacTen would take OU,OSU and Texas tech if Texas came with them. They were all set to do that this summer.
The SEC is willing to take Texas AM, so the question is would the SEC be willing to bring in Baylor to get Texas AM? If the answer is yes then the Texas legislature is placated.

So the BIG question becomes would the SEC take Baylor? and Im not sure that answer is a clear cut NO, with AM in the fold.

You would think it would be no, but if it opened Texas up to SEC recruiting..maybe? Then everyone is happy..except maybe Texas (they don't the SEC in their backyard), but then they are placated with the longhorn network, getting their olympic athletes on ESPN (And the side benefit of getting many pac-xx athletes also on ESPN).

The SEC isn't exactly struggling getting a foothold in TX as it is. LSU has no such issue, Arky at least gets a game with Aggy once in a while, and I doubt they're sweating this issue with Florida as their back yard and, well, being the SEC.

So, if Texas doesn't want the SEC in their yard, well, that's been a non-issue since the SWC started to crumble.

(02-01-2011 09:25 PM)bluesox Wrote:  I could see baylor and or byu make it into an alliance with the pac 10 if texas jammed them through. Of course, i think the pac 16 concept is dead to be replaced by a pac 20 concept like:

pac 20

pacific division: wash, wsu, oreg, osu, cal, stanford, usc, ucla, ariz, asu

central division: texas, tex A&M, tex tech, baylor, ou, osu, ku, col, byu, utah

play a 9-1 rotating football schedule with champ game. All other sports stick to divisions with maybe one cross over series. Yet, you could drop baylor and or byu in favor of ksu, new mexico, boise or missouri so it could be a moot point.

Either this or "Arky to Big Twen" as post of thread made after biggest pipe hit.

New Mex to Pac-anything. That's a good one.

(02-01-2011 09:20 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  *Exception: If Notre Dame says they want to join the Pac-10, then they're in.

ND would hit the pac-xx presidents over the head with $$$$$

(02-01-2011 09:25 PM)bluesox Wrote:  I could see baylor and or byu make it into an alliance with the pac 10 if texas jammed them through. Of course, i think the pac 16 concept is dead to be replaced by a pac 20 concept like:

pac 20

pacific division: wash, wsu, oreg, osu, cal, stanford, usc, ucla, ariz, asu

central division: texas, tex A&M, tex tech, baylor, ou, osu, ku, col, byu, utah

play a 9-1 rotating football schedule with champ game. All other sports stick to divisions with maybe one cross over series. Yet, you could drop baylor and or byu in favor of ksu, new mexico, boise or missouri so it could be a moot point.

Sort of looked like what was being talked about in May..2 conferences under a joint umbrella for championship games/tv network/games cross conference on said network.

I agree frank. Ark is never leaving the SEC. They are driving a Rolls Royce, why trade that in on an Buick.

SEC>B12

Yeah, i don't see arkie ever leaving the sec for the big 12. The only scenario's where it might make some sense would be if ND also joined the big 12 with football along with them or throw in LSU + arkansas to the big 12. Yet, i can't believe those moves happen. Now i'm sure the sec would trade arkansas to the big 12 straight up for texas a&M or invite the aggies if arkansas ever left as their replacement. Than when texas bolts the big 12 along with texas tech, ou and osu to the pac 16, arkansas in the big east? I guess if the pac 20 ever happened, that could possibly interest arkansas. Let's say the pac 10 threw out invites to texas, texas A&M, Texas tech, OU, OSU, ark, missouri and kansas but leaving the sec still doesn't add up.

(02-01-2011 09:22 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(02-01-2011 07:05 PM)usffan Wrote:  

(02-01-2011 06:42 PM)Sammy11 Wrote:  Target states:
Texas
North Carolina
Virginia
West Va/ Missouri

I guess the root of this is that I don't agree with your list of target states. I think the SEC would much rather create a stranglehold on Florida by bringing in FSU instead of worrying about Virginia or West Virginia.

Perhaps. But if the SEC were thinking of reaching for a bigger piece of the pie, FSU ain't going to give it to them. Inviting WVU would destabilize The BEast far more than the ACC raid did. WVU has finished no worse than 2nd in The BEast since 2002. Removing the Mountaineers from The BEast would seriously weaken the conference's strength. More so than the removal of VT and Miami. Frankly, BC is no great loss, except as a close regional rival...

Hey, Bit, I like your posts, but come one. . .

The big East would easily survive such a loss. Just as they did when Miami, VT, & BC did. Miami was 2 years off a NC & 1 year off a NC game loss. But they were less valuable than WV??? Regardless you're claiming that the loss of one member is more devestating than the cumulative impact of a loss of 3 members? No way. Homerism at it's finest.

As for WV never finishing lower than 2nd, you do realize that all those years in which WV tied with multiple teams for 1st or 2nd, they were also tied for 3rd or 4th, don't you? As Mark Twain famously said: "Lies, damn lies, and statistics."

Yes, Bill. I said it - and it's true. WVU is The BEast's barometer. Without the Mountaineers, The BEast is greatly diminished...

I didn't say The BEast wouldn't survive. TV values BEast markets - minus WVU. TV executives dismiss WVU out of hand, due to the small population of the State of West Virginia, totally disregarding the fact that many of The BEast's highest rated football games involved WVU. But losing WVU to the SEC would end The BEast's ONLY premier rivalry (the Brawl), and it's 2nd oldest rivalry (SU-WVU) as well. Those are The BEast's highest profile games when all teams are playing well. Without those games, The BEast has no history what so ever...

But Bit everybody is replaceable, there is always somebody to step up and take your place. Never look back are you will see whi is fixing to pass you.

Wilkie, there is one thing that can't be replaced, and that's history. Without the Backyard Brawl, The BEast has NO high profile rivalry. That loss would be felt. Trust me...

(02-01-2011 09:25 PM)bluesox Wrote:  I could see baylor and or byu make it into an alliance with the pac 10 if texas jammed them through. Of course, i think the pac 16 concept is dead to be replaced by a pac 20 concept like:

pac 20

pacific division: wash, wsu, oreg, osu, cal, stanford, usc, ucla, ariz, asu

central division: texas, tex A&M, tex tech, baylor, ou, osu, ku, col, byu, utah

play a 9-1 rotating football schedule with champ game. All other sports stick to divisions with maybe one cross over series. Yet, you could drop baylor and or byu in favor of ksu, new mexico, boise or missouri so it could be a moot point.

I think what you meant to say was

Alliance

Pac-10: same as original

Big 12: Minus Mizzou, Kansas state, and Iowa state. plus byu and utah.

play a 9 game round robin and one OOC game against the other league. Host a championship game between old Pac-10 and new Big XII. All other sports stick to their leagues like they do now with maybe one OOC game against the other league.

ARE YOU SERIOUS? Look how stupid that sounds when you put it in words of how it actually looks. It makes zero sense. There is no need for a 20 team league when you can just have two 10 team leagues that occasionally play OOC games against each other.

Yeah, that's what i was saying and no i don't think its stupid since they would have a championship game between the leagues, probably in dallas, unlike two separate ten team leagues. Further, the context of all this was super conferences developed and football has a final four championship or plus one. Thus, the 4 super conferences, pac 10, big 10, sec, and acc/big east merger all send their champion to this final four playoff. Heck those 4 leagues could break away from the ncaa entirely and form a separate league but i don't think they would do that just pretty much lock off access to the football final four to anybody else....the words of pac 10 commish larry scott on future expansion:

“Certainly within 10 years, we’ll see another round,” he said.


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/08/sports....html?_r=1

(02-01-2011 09:22 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Removing the Mountaineers from The BEast would seriously weaken the conference's strength. More so than the removal of VT and Miami. Frankly, BC is no great loss, except as a close regional rival...

There's no doubt that losing WVU would weaken the conference's strength, but not more than the loss of Miami and VT. I think the Big East would trade WVU and any other BE school to the ACC for Miami and VT, in a split second.

The so-called "Texoma 4" are actually the Texoma 5 (Baylor is included). The SEC would have to go to 16, not 14 members (You're looking at TAMU, Baylor, FSU/WVU, wild card #4 team, Clemson maybe?) to get TAMU and someone else halfway decent (see FSU/WVU). The other 2 could be garbage for all the SEC cares, IMO.

(02-02-2011 02:49 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  The so-called "Texoma 4" are actually the Texoma 5 (Baylor is included). The SEC would have to go to 16, not 14 members (You're looking at TAMU, Baylor, FSU/WVU, wild card #4 team, Clemson maybe?) to get TAMU and someone else halfway decent (see FSU/WVU). The other 2 could be garbage for all the SEC cares, IMO.

Baylor simply does not have that kind of political clout any more. If they are included, it will be on merit, not political pressure. TAMU will not have to base its decision on the fate of Baylor.

(02-02-2011 02:45 PM)Goldenbuc Wrote:  

(02-01-2011 09:22 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Removing the Mountaineers from The BEast would seriously weaken the conference's strength. More so than the removal of VT and Miami. Frankly, BC is no great loss, except as a close regional rival...

There's no doubt that losing WVU would weaken the conference's strength, but not more than the loss of Miami and VT. I think the Big East would trade WVU and any other BE school to the ACC for Miami and VT, in a split second.

Miami is a has been. They've done absolutely nothing in the ACC. VT is a media creation. If The BEast would gladly trade WVU to the ACC for those 2 schools, the ACC would be the winner...

WVU has had one great run (2005-2007) in recent memory. VT has been a consistent winning program for 15 years. Maybe Holgorsen will bring WVU back to the high levels they had earlier in the decade but that still remains to be seen.