(07-20-2012 08:08 AM)stever20 Wrote:  wow a few interesting things looking at the Tuxedo Yoda link that are maybe very important nuggets...

1- CLEMSON, S.C. -- John Swofford is in Clemson tonight at the president's home, and will meet with the Board of Trustees as well, Tiger Illustrated has learned. (Tiger Illustrated is the Clemson rivals site).
1a- Clemson pushing for either:
A. ND as a full member (much easier said than done but this explains why the ACC has made the recent full-court press for ND)
B. Bowl/Playoff $ not to be distributed equally to all conference members but for a disproportionately larger piece to go the team that actually qualified for the bowl/playoff (good luck selling that to North Carolina, Duke & Wake).
2- Brian Ethridge, who runs the Baylor 24/7 board, is a well respected guy. Multiple people I have spoken with, that don't even know each other, have told me they know his sources are legit based on information they know to be true. An SEC contact of his told him that the agreement between the SEC & Big 12 for the Champions Bowl requires the Big 12 to have a conference title game......and that isn't happening without 12 teams per NCAA rules.

Should be very interesting hearing news from the meeting today.

And, very interesting news about the Champions bowl, if true. Of course, note that the Champions Bowl won't be starting until 2014, so might not be immediate moves.

Yes, more interesting BS from "TuxedoYoda".

The news reported:

“It was a very positive and professional exchange,” Barker said. “We let our board ask any questions they wanted to ask. It was a shattering of myths and legends about the ACC and commissioner Swofford.

“I think it did nothing but reinforce our role in the ACC.”

http://www.postandcourier.com/apps/pbcs..../120729928

I'll play.

I pick UVA, VT, UNC, NCSU, Clemson, and FSU for the SEC 20. GT, Maryland, Duke, WVU, Louisville, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Texas, and Kansas would be the next group I'd consider if going to 24.

(07-20-2012 06:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-20-2012 05:41 PM)sufan Wrote:  

(07-20-2012 04:22 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-20-2012 03:54 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(07-20-2012 03:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  You can find the information on Nole's Digest and Tomahawk Nation, Clemson's Tiger Chat has some infor but not as much. You can even use Google search for Clemson to the SEC queries. Your $%# condescension is noted and if you bothered to check out Jackie Sherrill's interview you would know that 20 has been discussed at the highest levels of the SEC in the past. You are the one who is lacking diligence here. The northern bias on this board sometimes is astounding and probably a reason you don't have more Southern posters. All I did what relate what I've heard, what I knew from personal experience last year to be true (I do have a family inside source in a high SEC position), and what I've read. My assumptions and statements stand as they are.

You have and know nothing definitive. You have a viewpoint you are pushing. All I did was try to inform that viewpoint. JR

Sounds like I touched a nerve. I guess you have me all figured out, JR. I'm glad you've got a source. I'm glad you're riding high on a Jackie Sherrill interview as the definitive source for SEC alignment. Someone has to.

You don't know me and I don't know you. I try to give folks the benefit of the doubt, especially when they are just expressing an opinion. I've been involved in attending SEC sporting events for over 40 years. I knew the last commissioner, I don't know Slive. My family relation has been inside the loop down here for over 40 years as well. They don't always know what will be decided ahead of time but they do know what is being discussed. I'm sorry if any plan of more than 16 upsets everyone's scenarios but in the end any conference will act in its own self interest even if that means going to 18 or 20 to get what they want. If they can figure out a way to make money on the deal they will do it. If they can't they won't. I don't think that Jim Delany, Larry Scott, or Bowlsby will be any different.

The issue down here was speculation centered around a Clemson press conference scheduled today. The only announcement out of Clemson was about a new women's basketball coach. Their BOT meets for several days early next week. Swafford wanted to know the state of his conference before he had to address issues publicly at his Media Days. Clemson's plans are naturally his concern. I think I accurately related what the scoop is down here and why it may have some substance. My intention was to inform, not to incite, and it concluded with my opinion based upon possible outcomes. That is hardly unreasonable considering the circumstances. JR

Thanks for sharing: but what did you actually share:


1) someone says FSU to the SEC is a done deal: you say you believe "that is hard to believe."


2) Then you go on to pass on an interpretation of the Swofford meeting with Clemson trustees from the same source you "find hard to believe" where an actual newspaper report of the meeting quoting the Clemson President puts a totally different interpretation on the meeting.

3) The rest of your post is "if".

That's fair enough and a great way to reply. Still what I initially responded to was someone's assessment of a situation. I thought it interesting that the opinion coming out of Florida was different. The radio reports are a fact. That had not been mentioned. It is documented on the sites I listed. The only part of the report I seriously doubted was the part about Swafford thinking it a waste of time to go to Tallahassee as he has done with Clemson. That the SEC has considered the Seminoles twice as a serious candidate is also a fact. First in late 1991 and then again last fall. The desire for Auburn to move to the east is a well documented fact. My assertion was that the desire of the Tigers to move to the East lent credibility to the report in as much as it would fit such a scenario. That this is discussed on both the Clemson and Florida State web sites associated with their Web information sites (not athletic department sites) is also a fact. What they say, other than that the radio broadcasts were indeed real, is conjecture. Since there is some fact swirling around inside the conjecture I offered the information to this board without claiming it to be fact and only commenting on the parts I found plausible. Now sir other than that there is nothing worth getting all worked up about let alone insulting over. I thank you for your civil way of raising points over my post and hope you have a great day. As for the whether Clemson or F.S.U. move only their BOT's know for sure and until they act none of us will know for sure. JR

Thanks for your reply.

And your thoughts about SEC expansion, whether it be 16 teams or more are totally reasonable.

I also agree with your point that long term there are powerful reasons for consolidation, including the ones you cited:

1) leverage in negotiating TV deals
2) expanding footprints for conference TV channel
3) creating strong TV matchups
4) reducing and perhaps eventually eliminating the leverage of the middleman (ESPN and others)

How that happens and the timing is uncertain. There may alternatively be cooperation among the conferences such as the Big 10 and PAC rather than expansion.


Affinity among universities is another important factor that is sometimes overlooked.


All of that is very different than the unending stream of "insiders", often with an agenda, who post about "done deals" and confidential documents and secret meetings that no one can evaluate and the frequent mindless repetition of these claims by partisans of certain schools or conferences.

(07-20-2012 06:50 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  I'll play.

I pick UVA, VT, UNC, NCSU, Clemson, and FSU for the SEC 20. GT, Maryland, Duke, WVU, Louisville, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Texas, and Kansas would be the next group I'd consider if going to 24.

This is fun. How about holding a tournament every 10 years? Teams are divided into 12 team conferences based on how they finish in that tournament. They are stuck in that conference until the next tournament.

(07-20-2012 04:22 PM)JRsec Wrote:  And which radio stations and hosts made those claims? I get hiding direct sources, but if people put information over the air, they should be able to be verified, no?

Besides, didn't you hear Slive's comments about last year's SEC expansion? The window closed when the media days ended.

You can find the information on Nole's Digest and Tomahawk Nation, Clemson's Tiger Chat has some infor but not as much. You can even use Google search for Clemson to the SEC queries. Your $%# condescension is noted and if you bothered to check out Jackie Sherrill's interview you would know that 20 has been discussed at the highest levels of the SEC in the past. You are the one who is lacking diligence here. The northern bias on this board sometimes is astounding and probably a reason you don't have more Southern posters. All I did what relate what I've heard, what I knew from personal experience last year to be true (I do have a family inside source in a high SEC position), and what I've read. My assumptions and statements stand as they are.

You have and know nothing definitive. You have a viewpoint you are pushing. All I did was try to inform that viewpoint. JR
[/quote]

Sounds like I touched a nerve. I guess you have me all figured out, JR. I'm glad you've got a source. I'm glad you're riding high on a Jackie Sherrill interview as the definitive source for SEC alignment. Someone has to.
[/quote]
You don't know me and I don't know you. I try to give folks the benefit of the doubt, especially when they are just expressing an opinion. I've been involved in attending SEC sporting events for over 40 years. I knew the last commissioner, I don't know Slive. My family relation has been inside the loop down here for over 40 years as well. They don't always know what will be decided ahead of time but they do know what is being discussed. I'm sorry if any plan of more than 16 upsets everyone's scenarios but in the end any conference will act in its own self interest even if that means going to 18 or 20 to get what they want. If they can figure out a way to make money on the deal they will do it. If they can't they won't. I don't think that Jim Delany, Larry Scott, or Bowlsby will be any different.

The issue down here was speculation centered around a Clemson press conference scheduled today. The only announcement out of Clemson was about a new women's basketball coach. Their BOT meets for several days early next week. Swafford wanted to know the state of his conference before he had to address issues publicly at his Media Days. Clemson's plans are naturally his concern. I think I accurately related what the scoop is down here and why it may have some substance. My intention was to inform, not to incite, and it concluded with my opinion based upon possible outcomes. That is hardly unreasonable considering the circumstances. JR
[/quote]

JR, I asked for a verification of a report (or two) that many might find outlandish based on previous statements by those in the SEC, and your response is essentially "go look it up" and to claim I'm condescending. Interesting. That's kind of the standard defense of someone who makes things up. You say I have an agenda (on another thread, but I don't. I'm just as much out for the facts as you are, and when outlandish claims are made, I tend not to trust them unless there are some sort of resourced statements that can back those up.

Predominant thought regarding SEC expansion has been that they only are interested in expansion beyond their footprint, meaning schools like FSU and Clemson have a snowball's chance of getting a possible invite. All I asked for (with a little tongue-in-cheek humor) was to be able to verify your statements. I apologize if I came off as condescending.

(07-20-2012 08:43 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(07-20-2012 04:22 PM)JRsec Wrote:  And which radio stations and hosts made those claims? I get hiding direct sources, but if people put information over the air, they should be able to be verified, no?

Besides, didn't you hear Slive's comments about last year's SEC expansion? The window closed when the media days ended.

You can find the information on Nole's Digest and Tomahawk Nation, Clemson's Tiger Chat has some infor but not as much. You can even use Google search for Clemson to the SEC queries. Your $%# condescension is noted and if you bothered to check out Jackie Sherrill's interview you would know that 20 has been discussed at the highest levels of the SEC in the past. You are the one who is lacking diligence here. The northern bias on this board sometimes is astounding and probably a reason you don't have more Southern posters. All I did what relate what I've heard, what I knew from personal experience last year to be true (I do have a family inside source in a high SEC position), and what I've read. My assumptions and statements stand as they are.

You have and know nothing definitive. You have a viewpoint you are pushing. All I did was try to inform that viewpoint. JR

Sounds like I touched a nerve. I guess you have me all figured out, JR. I'm glad you've got a source. I'm glad you're riding high on a Jackie Sherrill interview as the definitive source for SEC alignment. Someone has to.
[/quote]
You don't know me and I don't know you. I try to give folks the benefit of the doubt, especially when they are just expressing an opinion. I've been involved in attending SEC sporting events for over 40 years. I knew the last commissioner, I don't know Slive. My family relation has been inside the loop down here for over 40 years as well. They don't always know what will be decided ahead of time but they do know what is being discussed. I'm sorry if any plan of more than 16 upsets everyone's scenarios but in the end any conference will act in its own self interest even if that means going to 18 or 20 to get what they want. If they can figure out a way to make money on the deal they will do it. If they can't they won't. I don't think that Jim Delany, Larry Scott, or Bowlsby will be any different.

The issue down here was speculation centered around a Clemson press conference scheduled today. The only announcement out of Clemson was about a new women's basketball coach. Their BOT meets for several days early next week. Swafford wanted to know the state of his conference before he had to address issues publicly at his Media Days. Clemson's plans are naturally his concern. I think I accurately related what the scoop is down here and why it may have some substance. My intention was to inform, not to incite, and it concluded with my opinion based upon possible outcomes. That is hardly unreasonable considering the circumstances. JR
[/quote]

JR, I asked for a verification of a report (or two) that many might find outlandish based on previous statements by those in the SEC, and your response is essentially "go look it up" and to claim I'm condescending. Interesting. That's kind of the standard defense of someone who makes things up. You say I have an agenda (on another thread, but I don't. I'm just as much out for the facts as you are, and when outlandish claims are made, I tend not to trust them unless there are some sort of resourced statements that can back those up.

Predominant thought regarding SEC expansion has been that they only are interested in expansion beyond their footprint, meaning schools like FSU and Clemson have a snowball's chance of getting a possible invite. All I asked for (with a little tongue-in-cheek humor) was to be able to verify your statements. I apologize if I came off as condescending.
[/quote]
I accept your apology and appreciate the spirit in which it is given. I will go back and try to find the threads. I read a variety of news, including sports, each day, usually a total of about 3 hours worth. Unless I am particularly struck by something I tend not to copy web addresses or make copies. As of tonight they are two days old so they should still be out there. The posts I referred to were not those of Tuxedo Yoda, but initial reports of the radio transmissions. When I find them I'll add them to one of these posts. The Jackie Sherrill interview is over a month old and I'll see what I can find on that too. Truly my only motive was to add a different angle to the discussion thread and point out why some of these rumors persist.

The talk down here about F.S.U. and Clemson goes well beyond chat rooms. There are representatives at the state level who are concerned about any substantial amounts that could be earned by schools should they make a move. Like everywhere else state budgets are strapped.

The "gentlemen's agreement" was first reported prior to last year's additions. Slive had requested that it be in effect for selections 13 & 14 and said that it would remain a priority but not a mandate for further selections. Since South Carolina and Florida are state institutions, and they draw funds from their legislatures, any blocking of another state schools admission would be met with economic reprisals (threatened if not actual) should their actions result in the potential loss of funding increases that other state universities could garner with such a move. The same political conditions exist in Georgia and Kentucky. Although Ga Tech's interest would be tepid at best and Louisville, while a profitable program is somewhat hampered in consideration by their USN&WR ranking of #164. (I know it sounds silly coming from the SEC but Missouri and A&M were both AAU which is why the SEC would prefer U.N.C. over N.C.State even though even under extreme circumstances for the ACC that wouldn't be likely.) Clemson would enhance the SEC's academic profile, Florida State would not. One of the prevailing arguments for inclusion of Florida State outside of their on the field promise is that such a move by the Noles might shake Virginia Tech loose due to diminished SOS by such a loss. Any other time than in this recession it probably wouldn't be a salient point of concern for politicians, but right now it is. So anything is possible. That said, there is little doubt in my mind that Slive would rather the moves be in North Carolina and Virginia if they are made. But he realizes the importance of political considerations which is why he considered Clemson and F.S.U last year. At that time the concerns of the states were over scheduling difficulties that would arise out of expansion. Both states prize their games between these schools and were stating strongly that they didn't want anything to jeopardize them. Take care.

Commuter Bob, the radio host was Scott McKinney of Southern Sports Tonight. I couldn't find the station number. The broadcast was on either Monday or Tuesday of this week and went out in the Crestview, Pensacola, Panama City area.

The second post on the subject stated that a former Ole Miss athletic department employee had reported more details. While I did not find the original discussion that I read I found the information on http://www.southernpigskin.com/forums/viewthread/8738. This site's discussion found it to be dubious. The first site I read had a lot more detail about the guy and they found him credible. If I find it I will put it up. The other bit of info doesn't relate directly to this discussion but the reports of the Chaps Bowl contract were given by Brian Ethridge of Truth or Bear 247 a Baylor site. I'm sure somebody on here has probably already covered this, but I mention it just the same. JR

This SEC talk is crap. I have real contacts, and more than one, in the SEC office, from my time owning and operating a sports website. They are not, and have never, seriously considered FSU and Clemson to the SEC. Florida and South Carolina oppose, and for now, at least, the SEC has a policy that they will not take any school in a state where they already have a presence.

They also are not planning any expansion. Even with A&M, that fell in their laps, and was not an active move by the SEC. IF others started moving out of the ACC, THEN the SEC would consider expanding. Their two main targets would be schools in the states of North Carolina and Virginia.

Other than my waist line, and the BE #14, expansion is done for now.

the bowl revenue distribution is a key point and could show some movement from acc presidents.
the rest is more blog fodder imo.

(07-21-2012 07:17 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  Other than my waist line, and the BE #14, expansion is done for now.

If our posts had like buttons I would press it for this post.

So what was the major announcement? Swofford meeting Clemson?

(07-22-2012 07:17 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  So what was the major announcement? Swofford meeting Clemson?

Clemson has taken down a statue of Joe Paterno. No word on where it was though.

(07-22-2012 09:32 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(07-22-2012 07:17 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  So what was the major announcement? Swofford meeting Clemson?

Clemson has taken down a statue of Joe Paterno. No word on where it was though.

It was at the State Pen, orange dude...

(07-22-2012 09:32 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(07-22-2012 07:17 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  So what was the major announcement? Swofford meeting Clemson?

Clemson has taken down a statue of Joe Paterno. No word on where it was though.

Goodwill Store

(07-22-2012 07:49 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  

(07-22-2012 09:32 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(07-22-2012 07:17 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  So what was the major announcement? Swofford meeting Clemson?

Clemson has taken down a statue of Joe Paterno. No word on where it was though.

Goodwill Store

$100 says they auction it off at a later date

They switched from coke to pepsi in stadium.

(07-22-2012 08:27 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  They switched from coke to pepsi in stadium.

Naw. Clemson isn't going to the Big East. Changing from Coke to Pepsi in the south sounds like a decision a Big East commissioner would make. Sure way to kill your sales.

(07-22-2012 11:20 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-22-2012 08:27 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  They switched from coke to pepsi in stadium.

Naw. Clemson isn't going to the Big East. Changing from Coke to Pepsi in the south sounds like a decision a Big East commissioner would make. Sure way to kill your sales.

Which is hilarious considering that Pepsi is from North Carolina...