(04-23-2013 04:57 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  On the other hand, the PAC would take the Texoma 4 combo in a heartbeat.

I wish that would happen. No reason for UT/OU to move though. They have a seat at the table, make great money and have limited mouths to feed.

Which is a great relief to TCU, Baylor, Iowa State, K-State. Not sure anyone could stand another "we believe in traditions" campaign by Baylor's president. That was total crap.

(04-23-2013 04:57 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I don't think its just us, I think that most of the Western schools & Mizzou have no desire for more Western neighbors. Right or wrong and whether it is enough or not, our vote will always be "no" to any Big 12 South schools

Besides, the main problem there (as others have pointed out) is both OU and UT have political tag-alongs who have to be taken care of and I can't see the SEC expanding that large to accommodate all of them.

On the other hand, the PAC would take the Texoma 4 combo in a heartbeat.

Texoma doesn't have the votes in the PAC because nobody wants to give up playing the California schools for recruiting purposes.

(04-23-2013 03:10 PM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...oma-others

From the article:

After citing sources "from conference offices and major-college athletic departments" skeptical that the grant of rights would actually be enough to keep schools committed to jumping from one conference to another in place, Barfknecht casually drops the following tidbit:

As a sidenote, two sources have told The World-Herald that the Big Ten has done prior “homework” on Oklahoma, Kansas and Vanderbilt among other schools who might some day be expansion targets. The Big 12 grant-of-rights deal didn't stop a look-see for OU and KU.

First of all: Vanderbilt? Maybe the Big Ten really is serious about its academic standing. (And major metropolitan markets, of course.)

There is a 0% chance that the B1G lands Vandy for so many reasons. Cultural and historic reasons aside, Vandy is the only truely elite school in the SEC, so if you're interested in seeing SEC sports, you want to get an elite education, and you don't know what you want to major in, then you go to Vandy 100% of the time. Vandy isn't about to lose that.

That's not even factoring in getting to play Alabama, LSU, Tennesse, Florida, and ect. on a regular basis.

It also isn't factoring the 90 years of history, cultural fit,* and in-state rivals.

*AKA being "southern"

EDIT:

OU and Kansas I can see, though.

I think writers are going to suffer withdrawal pains from a lack of realignment activity to write about. This story is the first example of that. I guess a Nebraska writer would like KU & OU to be in Nebraska's conference again, but this isn't going to happen.

There is no way Oklahoma is going to go to the Big Ten without Texas. I could see them leave with OSU, but no way are they going to cut off their #1 recruiting grounds.

Also, if the Big Ten needs to add teams to increase their conference population area, Kansas is way down the list. Oklahoma would also be down that list, other than their national following/reputation (see Nebraska). Vanderbilt would not increase the TV $$, either.

I don't see any way the Big Ten adds any of these schools in the next decade, unless many other moves happen first.

(04-23-2013 04:05 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  This is not entirely about the Big10 but more about the Northeast and the challenges long term the Big10 faces if it doesn't expand outside of its current geographical footpring.

Assuming the information is accurate:



Some people in the Northeast just don’t get it or refuse to even entertain the thought that (1) Football drives the bus, BB is a distant second and not even in the ball park in terms of value (2) the Northeast is dominated by pro sports and nothing is going to change that not now not ever (3) college FB simply doesn’t have the traction in the Northeast (4) people are leaving the Rust belt and Northeastern states in droves for various reasons that are to numerous to even begin to get into.

College FB is dominated by the Southern, Midwest, Texas regions and to a lesser extent Southern California. Heck College FB is more important to fans in the Rocky Mountain region that to the fans of the Northeast.
Now I hear this and that about the Big 5 conferences and whatever but what seems to go unnoticed is that while some of the smaller conferences certainly don’t have the status of the BIG BOY conferences it sure helps to be in the same states as some….Some of these BIG BOY programs can anchor an entire state of multiple Division 1 teams, they don’t have to be High Major. So if a small state or smaller state has several D1 programs, regardless of conference level, that should tell anybody with a functioning brain that college football is probably a big deal in some of the states…I mean come on now even the most horrible teams can do 22 to 25 K a game at home, that would be same as or more than lets say Kentucky Basketball, the same UK with the most rabid BB fan base in the entire country. Keep in mind no matter how good or how powerful the BB brand is the certainly ceiling is very low when compared to FB. Some people just absolutely refuse to believe it but it’s just the way it is like it or not. I think some people either totally dismiss it or simply don’t understand fandom, these lower conference teams fan bases are also part of the Flagship state teams fan base and you would be shocked at how many Flagship fan bases follow the in state brethren lower conference teams…for example that’s why states like Louisana/Alabama each have five D1 programs even though neither is a really big state population wise…..they each have five D1 teams because that’s what the fans of each state demand.


Just a quick comparison of the SEC and Big10, nothing more than states each conference has a foot print in. The SEC footprint states has an astounding 48 D1 programs total, 14 more than the Big10 even though the Big10 has 13 more million population….Midwest transplants that have moved South over the last 20/30 years almost to a person will tell you FB is the South is a different animal than the Big10. I know lots of these people and most all are from Ohio and Buckeyes fans. I can also tell you that these transplants children also end up going to colleges in the South and not the Midwest so you have these generational shift in allegiance over years and years.
As you can clearly see the additions of Rutgers and Maryland were most likely done out of necessity and probably a must, whether they could get NC Tar heels/Virginia or not. The Big10 states have been hemorrhaging for years. Florida and Georgia together had larger population shifts on the plus side than the ENTIRE Big10 footprint combined. The big enchilada still out there for both the SEC ad Big10 is without question the state of North Carolina which may or may not happen, especially in light of the GOR agreement if one believes it has any really teeth to it which no one knows unless they have ACTUALLY read the agreement in its entirety.

The difference in the growth rates is just absolutely mind boggling and the trends are predicted to continue.

The SEC footprint 90,130,601
The Big10 footprint 103,244,112

The SEC footprint added 11,337,550 between 2000 and 2010
The Big10 footprint added 3,563,662 between 2000 and 2010

The SEC footprint growth rate 15.8% between 2000 and 2010
The Big10 footprint grow rate 4.5% between 2000 and 2010

GROWTH RATES

Texas 20.6
Georgia 18.3
Florida 17.6
South Carolina 15.3
Tennessee 11.5
Arkansas 9.1
Alabama 7.5
Kentucky 7.4
Missouri 7.0
Mississippi 4.3
Louisana 1.4

Maryland 9.0
Minnesota 7.8
Nebraska 6.7
Indiana 6.6
Wisconsin 6.0
New Jersey 4.5
Iowa 4.1
Pennsylvania 3.4
Illinois 3.3
New York 2.1
Ohio 1.6
Michigan -0.6 NEGATIVE

Notice the Big states with the big population centers of the Big10 are all at the low end of the growth rate and just the opposite for the ZSEC big states.


I would also note the SEC thus far is the only one of the Big5 that has not dipped down into a far lesser stature league to expand.

Vandy to the Big10 is not ever going to happen either.

I'm not a demographer myself but I have worked with enough on enough projects to know that this is about 10 percent of the discussion - max. Most of the pop loss that ravaged the Rust Belt happened due to loss of industry in those states in the late 70s through the early 90s. Most of the Mid-Atlantic and New England states have avoided what has happened in the Midwest.

Some people leave the North for the South or West for weather related reasons but the vast majority leave for financial reasons. Jobs are what chase those people from home and for a long time the South and West were more industry friendly than their Midwestern counterparts (read unions).

However, as time has advanced, that equation has become considerably murkier and many of those Northern states have turned themselves around or are in the process of doing so. Also, some of the Southern/Western tax abatements that induced companies to flea the North have not proven as fruitful as the businesses had hoped they'd be.

Those are just two of 10,000 reasons why the Northern exodus has slowed greatly as compared with what those numbers were a decade or so ago.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with some of the assertions made in the above post - particularly about pro sports dominating the marketplace. That's absolutely true and it always will be. However, it's overly simplistic to break into a North/South thing. For example, there aren't too many places in this country where CFB is more popular than it is in Columbus, OH, Ann Arbor, MI or State College, PA.

Also, no matter how many college football teams there are in Alabama for example, it is still a poor state with limited upside to the television advertisers who increasingly own the game. That's how a pair of private schools like Boston College and Syracuse can compete in a relative sense at the the same level as Auburn and Alabama whereas Troy and UAB cannot. The citizens in those Northern states tend to have SO much more money than their counterparts in Alabama - and frankly, most other Southern states - it's not even funny. That's why the pro sports teams went there in the first place. It's also why most of the pro sports expansion in the past 25 years has been to Southern and Western states.

I hate when I agree with Yinzer.

Arkansas has finally got what it always wanted. 1st,to be in the SEC,2nd, a team from Texas in the SEC,and 3rd, Mizzou in the SEC. Realignment has benefitted us more than any other programs. We now can recruit the state of Texas with an advantage and a rival in the same conference. Plus, we now have an actual advantage over Kansas,Kansas state,and Nebraska in the state of Missouri.

(04-23-2013 04:57 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I don't think its just us, I think that most of the Western schools & Mizzou have no desire for more Western neighbors. Right or wrong and whether it is enough or not, our vote will always be "no" to any Big 12 South schools

Besides, the main problem there (as others have pointed out) is both OU and UT have political tag-alongs who have to be taken care of and I can't see the SEC expanding that large to accommodate all of them.

On the other hand, the PAC would take the Texoma 4 combo in a heartbeat.

Yep. It's basically their only serious option now. How bad did they already screw that up?

(04-23-2013 04:05 PM)moron Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 03:49 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 03:29 PM)PlayBall! Wrote:  I could see the B1G going after us (KU), and likely MU in ten years or so. Whether we'd be interested, I don't know.

The most interesting scenerio for the Big 12 is an outright merger with another conference. I could see with the PAC, SEC, or B1G. In the past, the ACC, but their star has faded.

I don't think the SEC would ever take all of the Big 12 schools but would love Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas. Missouri and Arkansas would be ecstatic, and TAMU could learn to live with UT if it meant getting back Oklahoma.

Vandy to the BIG made a lot of sense if Duke was also part of the equation. Being in conference with Northwestern and Duke would be a huge temptation for Vandy. Despite being in state, UT really doesn't care about playing Vandy (Bama, Georgia, Florida, are definitely bigger), and neither does UK except in Bball. Ole Miss is really their biggest football rival. The BIG could do worse than adding Vandy. Top 20 school in a top 30 media market, plus we (I live in Nashville) have a ton of residents from Big 10 country. I don't want to see it, but it would work.

That would be interesting. SEC would need to take a private school to fill their spot.

Lol why? Would be a pipe dream for the SEC, that way we get to get rid of them without looking like the bad guys. Just about anyone we add would be an upgrade in almost every way but academics

(04-23-2013 04:12 PM)eagleriffic Wrote:  Politics in Oklahoma will keep OU & Ok state together. I dont see them being split up. Kansas & Vandy yes they could jump ship & not look back.

If the SEC took OU from the Big XII, Texas would instantly look for a new conference home. OU is a Big XII anchor school. Texas cannot and will not live without them in their present conference. Who knows...the SEC might take OSU as well. Could be a Mr Slive surprise.

There's a rather large gap between evaluating an option and giving any serious consideration to said option. There's yet another gap to actually executing on such an option. So I doubt there's anything to see here...

That said, I don't think the Grant of Rights would necessarily stop a school like Kansas from leaving. First, let's be honest and state no one outside of Texas really likes the Big 12. Sure, every school in it loves the money and the fact they aren't in C-USA, AAC, or whatever else. But schools like Nebraska, Missouri, Colorado, and A&M left for a reason. I think Frank the Tank said it best on the difference between the Big 12 and the ACC: Big 12 aren't in love with the conference, but love the money. The ACC schools love the conference, just not the money. So a Big 12 school would love a better option. It's just few, if any, really have one.

But in Kansas' case, if the Big 10 wanted them then it could work financially. Kansas leaves the Big 12. It also leaves behind its Tier 1 and 2 rights. Kansas can still sell its Tier 3 to the Big 10. The Big 10 can monetize the school by selling BTN subscriptions in Kansas. Despite lacking the best home games, the BTN can sell show road Kansas games and Tier 3 stuff. Although the Big 10 has never paid a full share to a new member, they could get creative and pay Kansas a fairly large amount and still make out just fine.

This would be more of a long term investment. And its still quite unlikely to happen. But its not as far-fetched as one might initially believe.

(04-23-2013 04:17 PM)BullsFanatic Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 03:18 PM)bluesox Wrote:  Don't get how the big 10 could pick up OU but pass on FSU. Vandy? maybe nice for a study but not realistic. I'm waiting for the RICE and U Buffalo to the big 10 rumors.

While the "contiguous state" rule is not an official requirement for expansion, it is as close to official as it can get. I think the only school that could get around that rule is Texas.

I'm also not sure that they weren't looking at Florida State. The article says they were looking at numerous schools, a list which included Kansas, Oklahoma, and Vanderbilt.

The Big 10 would overlook the contiguous states rule for FSU and or Miami.
The majority of Miami's student body is from the Midwest/Northeast. Being a private university, money is always a concern so expect the Hurricanes to be a Big 10 target and open and receptive to a Big 10 offer of membership

(04-23-2013 11:27 PM)Poliicious Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 04:17 PM)BullsFanatic Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 03:18 PM)bluesox Wrote:  Don't get how the big 10 could pick up OU but pass on FSU. Vandy? maybe nice for a study but not realistic. I'm waiting for the RICE and U Buffalo to the big 10 rumors.

While the "contiguous state" rule is not an official requirement for expansion, it is as close to official as it can get. I think the only school that could get around that rule is Texas.

I'm also not sure that they weren't looking at Florida State. The article says they were looking at numerous schools, a list which included Kansas, Oklahoma, and Vanderbilt.

The Big 10 would overlook the contiguous states rule for FSU and or Miami.
The majority of Miami's student body is from the Midwest/Northeast. Being a private university, money is always a concern so expect the Hurricanes to be a Big 10 target and open and receptive to a Big 10 offer of membership

Well I guess they should have refused to sign the GoR.

(04-23-2013 03:49 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  How long is the distance between the Tennessee and Illinois borders at the closest point? 50 miles?

It's actually less than that. The southern tip of Illinois reaches the 37th parallel. the northern border of Tennessee changes from 36.6 Degrees north at the Tennessee/North Carolina border to 36.5 degrees north about the middle of the state. Even still 1/2 of one degree of latitude is 35 miles, 4/10 of a degree of latitude is only 28 miles.

I'm kind of surprised why a school like Kentucky, Vanderbilt, or Missouri wouldn't want to be part of the B1G. They would actually have a chance to compete in football, play in a much better basketball conference, make more money, and get the chance to be aligned with academically superior institutions. The SEC is great, don't get me wrong...but the B1G is the creme of the crop in terms of conference alignment.

Also, as a Cincinnati fan, I would like to see sh!t hit the fan conference realignment wise because the cards couldn't be dealt worst for the Bearcats right now.

(04-23-2013 04:05 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  This is not entirely about the Big10 but more about the Northeast and the challenges long term the Big10 faces if it doesn't expand outside of its current geographical footpring.

Assuming the information is accurate:









The SEC footprint 90,130,601
The Big10 footprint 103,244,112

The SEC footprint added 11,337,550 between 2000 and 2010
The Big10 footprint added 3,563,662 between 2000 and 2010

The SEC footprint growth rate 15.8% between 2000 and 2010
The Big10 footprint grow rate 4.5% between 2000 and 2010

GROWTH RATES

Texas 20.6
Georgia 18.3
Florida 17.6
South Carolina 15.3
Tennessee 11.5
Arkansas 9.1
Alabama 7.5
Kentucky 7.4
Missouri 7.0
Mississippi 4.3
Louisana 1.4

Maryland 9.0
Minnesota 7.8
Nebraska 6.7
Indiana 6.6
Wisconsin 6.0
New Jersey 4.5
Iowa 4.1
Pennsylvania 3.4
Illinois 3.3
New York 2.1
Ohio 1.6
Michigan -0.6 NEGATIVE

Notice the Big states with the big population centers of the Big10 are all at the low end of the growth rate and just the opposite for the ZSEC big states.

There are significant flaws in your comparison. Of the states in the Big 10 footprint, the only ones shared with another AQ conference are Indiana(ND), PA(which PSU dominates over Pitt) and NY(what college football fans there are in NY state; PSU & Rutgers have the majority of them over Syracuse) and Iowa(although Iowa's attendance and fanbase far outpace Iowa State).

The largest states in the SEC footprint are divided with 1 other AQ conference:

Texas: while A&M gives the SEC a foothold in Texas; that state will always be Big 12 dominated with UT,, Tech, TCU &Baylor unless those teams leave for another conference and that conference will become the most popular college football conference in Texas.

Florida: with FSU & Miami the ACC has a strong presence in Florida.

Georgia: while Georgia has a dominant presence in the state, GT has a sizeable fanbase also.

South Carolina: Clemson's fanbase is almost equal to South Carolina's, their attendances are almost a wash.

Kentucky: with their Sugar bowl victory over Florida, Men's hoops national championship and women's hoops runner up; Lville if it is not already will soon become UK's equal in fanbase withing Kentucky.

Those 5 "divided" states make up the majority of the population of the 11 in the SEC footprint.

While the Big 10 is the only AQ conference in 8 of the 12 states within it's footprint and the only state in those 12 where another conference has an equal number of majority of the college football fanbase is Indiana.

(04-24-2013 12:21 AM)UCbball21 Wrote:  I'm kind of surprised why a school like Kentucky, Vanderbilt, or Missouri wouldn't want to be part of the B1G. They would actually have a chance to compete in football, play in a much better basketball conference, make more money, and get the chance to be aligned with academically superior institutions. The SEC is great, don't get me wrong...but the B1G is the creme of the crop in terms of conference alignment.

Also, as a Cincinnati fan, I would like to see sh!t hit the fan conference realignment wise because the cards couldn't be dealt worst for the Bearcats right now.

Because the SEC is not a back seat to the B1G. Population is moving South, and business/ industry is moving South. We are dedicated and do not need a GoR or an exit fee in the SEC. Wonder why? We will gladly pay more for the SECN than a B1G fan will pay for the BTN. In the end, we will make the most money too.

Here is why the Big 10 is so desperate to expand. The Big 13 is the proud owner of:

1) The Rust Belt
2) Freezing cold winters
3) An economy that is dying, over burden by its Union Labor
4) A decaying infrastructure
5) The whole region is a "brown field" area
6) One of the highest taxed regions in America
7) Has a population that wants to move South

Yes, the Big is losing TV viewers and is slowly falling apart!

(04-24-2013 12:25 AM)Poliicious Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 04:05 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  This is not entirely about the Big10 but more about the Northeast and the challenges long term the Big10 faces if it doesn't expand outside of its current geographical footpring.

Assuming the information is accurate:









The SEC footprint 90,130,601
The Big10 footprint 103,244,112

The SEC footprint added 11,337,550 between 2000 and 2010
The Big10 footprint added 3,563,662 between 2000 and 2010

The SEC footprint growth rate 15.8% between 2000 and 2010
The Big10 footprint grow rate 4.5% between 2000 and 2010

GROWTH RATES

Texas 20.6
Georgia 18.3
Florida 17.6
South Carolina 15.3
Tennessee 11.5
Arkansas 9.1
Alabama 7.5
Kentucky 7.4
Missouri 7.0
Mississippi 4.3
Louisana 1.4

Maryland 9.0
Minnesota 7.8
Nebraska 6.7
Indiana 6.6
Wisconsin 6.0
New Jersey 4.5
Iowa 4.1
Pennsylvania 3.4
Illinois 3.3
New York 2.1
Ohio 1.6
Michigan -0.6 NEGATIVE

Notice the Big states with the big population centers of the Big10 are all at the low end of the growth rate and just the opposite for the ZSEC big states.

There are significant flaws in your comparison. Of the states in the Big 10 footprint, the only ones shared with another AQ conference are Indiana(ND), PA(which PSU dominates over Pitt) and NY(what college football fans there are in NY state; PSU & Rutgers have the majority of them over Syracuse)

You are correct in most of your post, but you are way off on your comments about Rutgers (LOL) and Penn State being more popular in NYS than Syracuse. Syracuse is far and away the most popular fb school in Upstate NY with its 7 million plus population. That is not even up for debate. Regarding Rutgers being more popular in NYS, maybe in NYC, possibly. I'm sure even the most staunch Rutgers fan would tell you that their fan base is in NJ with very few New Yorkers. NYC is a hodgepodge of different schools with ND and Penn State coming ahead, with a mixture of Rutgers and SU. But when you add up rooting interests in the whole state, Syracuse comes out ahead. I live in Upstate NY and I will tell you that there is not much Penn State in Upstate. Rutgers is far, far less. And honestly, no one cares about Rutgers in Upstate NY.

(04-24-2013 12:08 AM)Poliicious Wrote:  

(04-23-2013 03:49 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  How long is the distance between the Tennessee and Illinois borders at the closest point? 50 miles?

It's actually less than that. The southern tip of Illinois reaches the 37th parallel. the northern border of Tennessee changes from 36.6 Degrees north at the Tennessee/North Carolina border to 36.5 degrees north about the middle of the state. Even still 1/2 of one degree of latitude is 35 miles, 4/10 of a degree of latitude is only 28 miles.

1) thank you
2) Nerd!