A legitimate question I have is when will conferences be "complete" - meaning when will expansion be done? Is 14 teams the perfect model or is 16?

If conferences go to 16 teams - than will a school play all 7 schools in their division or will divisions be different? Maybe there will be 2 divisions like:

SEC West - 8 schools and SEC East - 8 schools

within the divisions there could be 2 subdivisions:

SEC West.A and SEC West.B
This would mean there would be 4 teams in each group - 3 games that a team plays every year. A group could rotate playing 2 teams from the different groups. This would mean the team in consideration would be up to 9 games.

In this model, a schools travel coast would be hedged by playing their group - closest neighbors - every year, while still playing teams across the conference.

So, if the SEC was to go to 16 teams, this is how I think it would happen:

* Mizzou would leave to go to the Big10 whenever they decide to expand - the home they have truly desired for many years now. This would take the conference down to 13 teams, meaning they need to add 3 more teams.

1. The SEC finally takes the plunge and adds Florida State. This move would take the conference to 2 locations within the State.

2. I believe the conference would also like to enter the NC market. Options here are UNC, NCSU, Duke, and WF. I think the SEC would take the best option at the time, but I dont see WF getting an invite since their sports are mediocre at best. Duke's bball is good, but probably not enough considering their bad football. I see it going to most likely UNC.

3. I see the conference also wanting to work from the other end - the west side. I think the Big12 will be a strong conference - and if they add schools to mitigate the expanding SEC territory, it would be hard to steal from them. However, it is still a possibility to take a big12 school. I think SMU would be the best choice in this area. If the Mustangs are able to pull off some 'BCS' level wins and have conference dominance in the BigEast, SMU would be an easy choice. The school would boost the academic stature of the conference, lockdown the Dallas market, and fit in perfectly in a cultural sense. I dont see UT going anywhere (unless it goes independent) or texas tech / Baylor because of their small town locations.

The breakdown of the subdivisions / groups could look like this:

west: aTm, LSU, SMU, Arkansas
south: Ole Miss, Miss St, Alabama, Auburn
east: Florida, Florida St, Georgia, South Carolina
north: Tennessee, Kentucky, Vandy, UNC

SMU in the SEC is hilarious to say the least. That will never happen. Nobody is leaving the SEC so there are 2 spots. SMU is probably not top 30 on their list of who they would want in those spots.

(07-18-2012 03:18 PM)Ragu Wrote:  SMU in the SEC is hilarious to say the least. That will never happen. Nobody is leaving the SEC so there are 2 spots. SMU is probably not top 30 on their list of who they would want in those spots.

I disagree with you. I think Missouri would leave if given the chance.

Dude....and this is coming from someone who likes SMU and has considered them one of my teams since the SWC...the Ponys are NEVER going to be in the SEC.

For all practical purposes (politics, desirability, availability, passion to join etc) there is not going to be any further western expansion. The only candidates the SEC is really interested in are in VA and NC. The only school outside those states that will get a look at is FSU as a compliment.

Lets say that VT has for whatever reason, decided to come in. The SEC will take them in a heartbeat. But lets also say that UNC/Duke/NCstate have no interest in moving so NC is out of play. You need a good solid school that will instantly say yes to finish the move. That school is FSU.

(07-18-2012 03:25 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Dude....and this is coming from someone who likes SMU and has considered them one of my teams since the SWC...the Ponys are NEVER going to be in the SEC.

For all practical purposes (politics, desirability, availability, passion to join etc) there is not going to be any further western expansion. The only candidates the SEC is really interested in are in VA and NC. The only school outside those states that will get a look at is FSU as a compliment.

Lets say that VT has for whatever reason, decided to come in. The SEC will take them in a heartbeat. But lets also say that UNC/Duke/NCstate have no interest in moving so NC is out of play. You need a good solid school that will instantly say yes to finish the move. That school is FSU.

I guess we will see as time moves on. I do know one thing. SMU to the big12 is far less likely than SMU to SEC

You'd probably be wrong.

If LHN fails then the Big 12 loses the only thing keeping UT in the conference to begin with and the whorns proceed with a "third time's the charm" defection to the PAC and take the Okies and Tech with them, I can guarantee SMU will end up in the Big 12, along with UH. That will be what UT and Tech tell the politicians to satisfy them that Baylor and TCU aren't being totally left behind. They'll say 'See! You still have a Big 12 conference to play in with other Texas schools!" They won't be happy of course, but it will be enough to keep the politicians in Austin satisfied.

(07-18-2012 03:32 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  You'd probably be wrong.

If LHN fails then the Big 12 loses the only thing keeping UT in the conference to begin with and the whorns proceed with a "third time's the charm" defection to the PAC and take the Okies and Tech with them, I can guarantee SMU will end up in the Big 12, along with UH. That will be what UT and Tech tell the politicians to satisfy them that Baylor and TCU aren't being totally left behind. They'll say 'See! You still have a Big 12 conference to play in with other Texas schools!" They won't be happy of course, but it will be enough to keep the politicians in Austin satisfied.

I think it is only a matter of time before UT bails. They will ride out the current GoR but after that it is anyone's guess where they end up.

UT is the main reason the rest of the B12 is wanting to expand. They don't want to be left homeless like they almost were last go around.

I don't think the Pac 16 will happen. A few have said that they would be in a division with utah, colorado and the arizona schools so whats the point really?

The point is an easier to win conference and a fat TV contract slanted in their favor under ideal conditions...but if they can only have an easier to win conference and a fat TV contract equally slanted in their favor, they will take that.

Missouri is not leaving the SEC for the Big Ten. That ship has sailed.

The thing that makes me think that the PAC-16 could occur is that right now, the PAC-12 has a lot of emphasis on everyone getting into southern California and California in general for recruiting purposes and games vs. those schools. Adding Texas and Tech creates a second major pool of recruits for the conference.

I could see SMU in the SEC, provided they go on a tear and several top 10 finishes/ BCS bowl appearances. Remember, it would have been preposterous 10 years ago to suggest that TCU would be in the Big 12. Winning can change perception pretty quick.

Beyond that, here are the plusses for SMU-
- provide another Texas school to pair with A&M
- huge TV market
- They have a fairly big student population from the deep South; much more than any of the other Texas schools.
- Very deep pockets

I don't think it is that preposterous, provided they go on a tear and change perception ala TCU.

(07-18-2012 04:26 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  I could see SMU in the SEC, provided they go on a tear and several top 10 finishes/ BCS bowl appearances. Remember, it would have been preposterous 10 years ago to suggest that TCU would be in the Big 12. Winning can change perception pretty quick.

Beyond that, here are the plusses for SMU-
- provide another Texas school to pair with A&M
- huge TV market
- They have a fairly big student population from the deep South; much more than any of the other Texas schools.
- Very deep pockets

I don't think it is that preposterous, provided they go on a tear and change perception ala TCU.

Pretty much, SMU would have to pull a TCU/Boise State type of run for 10 years and show just as much promise in basketball (which is far more likely than the former requirement). SMU can put themselves in this discussion, but it's not within 5 years, and possibly only within 10 years if everything goes right during that time frame. I'd rather spend that energy as an SMU fan worrying about today. If we can't win CUSA titles, why the **** are we dreaming about SEC?

So let me get this right -- the OP created another SEC expansion thread to promote the idea of SMU to the SEC?

Let me ask this:

Given the fact the SEC didn't really want to expand last season, and only did so because Texas A&M called to express interest in joining, would the SEC expand simply because an SMU president calls to express interest?

(07-18-2012 04:54 PM)Comet Wrote:  

(07-18-2012 04:26 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  I could see SMU in the SEC, provided they go on a tear and several top 10 finishes/ BCS bowl appearances. Remember, it would have been preposterous 10 years ago to suggest that TCU would be in the Big 12. Winning can change perception pretty quick.

Beyond that, here are the plusses for SMU-
- provide another Texas school to pair with A&M
- huge TV market
- They have a fairly big student population from the deep South; much more than any of the other Texas schools.
- Very deep pockets

I don't think it is that preposterous, provided they go on a tear and change perception ala TCU.

Pretty much, SMU would have to pull a TCU/Boise State type of run for 10 years and show just as much promise in basketball (which is far more likely than the former requirement). SMU can put themselves in this discussion, but it's not within 5 years, and possibly only within 10 years if everything goes right during that time frame. I'd rather spend that energy as an SMU fan worrying about today. If we can't win CUSA titles, why the **** are we dreaming about SEC?

You are right. SMU to the SEC is NOT a near future event. But with time, and with wins, SMU could fit in.

Who knows what happens with conferences now adays. The big12 wouldnt add another Texas school without good reason. We will see. SMU victories and prominence will open up options for the university.

1) The SEC would take ECU before it took SMU.
2) As others have suggested, I believe the SEC wants the VA and NC markets... probably VT and NCSU.

(07-18-2012 05:24 PM)army56mike Wrote:  1) The SEC would take ECU before it took SMU.
2) As others have suggested, I believe the SEC wants the VA and NC markets... probably VT and NCSU.

I think it would be hilarious if the SEC took ECU instead of NC State or UNC. Truth be told they are the most 'SEC-like' school in NC. Will it ever happen? Probably not but it would be hilarious if it did.

I don't see the SEC expanding in the foreseeable future (next 20 years). The only scenario in which they would expand is if all hell breaks loose and a conference dissolves, or if a top target comes to them and begs entrance a la Texas A&M.

Teams the SEC would be willing to expand for:

-Oklahoma
-Texas
-Notre Dame
-UNC
-Va Tech

Teams the SEC would be willing to add if they needed a number 16:

-Any of the above teams
-NC State
-UVA
-West Virginia if academics get in order
-Florida St if UF is okay with it
-Anyone else is kind of preposterous at the moment and could only even be on the radar if they go on a monster run and win several conference titles and/or BCS games.

Of the 5 that the SEC would even entertain the idea of expansion for, Va Tech is the only school I could see approaching the SEC for membership. It would cause a massive shift in the landscape of college sports for OK, TX, ND or UNC to consider the idea.

tl;dr the SEC isn't expanding unless Va Tech wants in or if another major conference begins to break up

(07-18-2012 03:32 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  You'd probably be wrong.

If LHN fails then the Big 12 loses the only thing keeping UT in the conference to begin with and the whorns proceed with a "third time's the charm" defection to the PAC and take the Okies and Tech with them, I can guarantee SMU will end up in the Big 12, along with UH. That will be what UT and Tech tell the politicians to satisfy them that Baylor and TCU aren't being totally left behind. They'll say 'See! You still have a Big 12 conference to play in with other Texas schools!" They won't be happy of course, but it will be enough to keep the politicians in Austin satisfied.

If Texas AND Oklahoma leave the Big 12 then joining the Big 12 becomes a lateral move for Houston and SMU. I could see them biting but the releative strength of the league without it's strongest programs would be slightly better than the nBE at best.

(07-18-2012 03:32 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  You'd probably be wrong.

If LHN fails then the Big 12 loses the only thing keeping UT in the conference to begin with and the whorns proceed with a "third time's the charm" defection to the PAC and take the Okies and Tech with them, I can guarantee SMU will end up in the Big 12, along with UH. That will be what UT and Tech tell the politicians to satisfy them that Baylor and TCU aren't being totally left behind. They'll say 'See! You still have a Big 12 conference to play in with other Texas schools!" They won't be happy of course, but it will be enough to keep the politicians in Austin satisfied.

I would be OK with that scenario.