JR and I were on a general board thread where the conversation led to an interesting scenario. Without getting into the details, JR proposed a scenario where the southern ACC schools might actually be willing to merge with the SEC schools after the existing GoR is done. As SEC fans (or ACC fans poking around here), would you be accepting of this agreement? I tweaked and added some of this, by the way, so scream at me, not JR!

1) The 10 longstanding southern ACC schools (not counting Louisville) agree to join the 14 SEC schools to form one conference of 24 teams. It will be equal revenue distribution.

2) They want to change the name, perhaps back to "Southern" or just "Atlantic" conference.


Under such a circumstance, the vast majority of all sports' regular season schedules will be conference games. It would likely be broken up into pods, so the most important rivalries will likely remain annual in football, but you will lose some of the secondary ones.

Additionally, such a move may prompt the southern Big 12 schools to peak their interest. Would you be willing to go to 30 or 32? TAMU, Arkansas, and Mizzou, if the eastern schools showed they were willing to accept their intrastate rival schools into the fold, would you be willing to do the same with your western counterparts in the Big 12 if they wanted in?

No doubt the B1G would do something similar if this occurred in the south. Adding the northern ACC schools, partnering with the PAC, and taking some of the northern Big 12 schools would also get them to the 30-36 team range. You then have a legitimate two conference league that will create clear rooting interests. The current conference names could be kept for academic affiliations, but they would no longer be relevant for athletics.

What this all comes down to is a willingness to drop some secondary annual football games in exchange for facing more foes on a rotating basis, being willing to drop the SEC name in exchange for one that has no baggage for any members, and share revenue equally.

What are your thoughts? Pros/Cons? Are there too many cultural/academic/backroom/old wound issues for this to even get off the ground?

(06-07-2013 02:42 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  JR and I were on a general board thread where the conversation led to an interesting scenario. Without getting into the details, JR proposed a scenario where the southern ACC schools might actually be willing to merge with the SEC schools after the existing GoR is done. As SEC fans (or ACC fans poking around here), would you be accepting of this agreement? I tweaked and added some of this, by the way, so scream at me, not JR!

1) The 10 longstanding southern ACC schools (not counting Louisville) agree to join the 14 SEC schools to form one conference of 24 teams. It will be equal revenue distribution.

2) They want to change the name, perhaps back to "Southern" or just "Atlantic" conference.


Under such a circumstance, the vast majority of all sports' regular season schedules will be conference games. It would likely be broken up into pods, so the most important rivalries will likely remain annual in football, but you will lose some of the secondary ones.

Additionally, such a move may prompt the southern Big 12 schools to peak their interest. Would you be willing to go to 30 or 32? TAMU, Arkansas, and Mizzou, if the eastern schools showed they were willing to accept their intrastate rival schools into the fold, would you be willing to do the same with your western counterparts in the Big 12 if they wanted in?

No doubt the B1G would do something similar if this occurred in the south. Adding the northern ACC schools, partnering with the PAC, and taking some of the northern Big 12 schools would also get them to the 30-36 team range. You then have a legitimate two conference league that will create clear rooting interests. The current conference names could be kept for academic affiliations, but they would no longer be relevant for athletics.

What this all comes down to is a willingness to drop some secondary annual football games in exchange for facing more foes on a rotating basis, being willing to drop the SEC name in exchange for one that has no baggage for any members, and share revenue equally.

What are your thoughts? Pros/Cons? Are there too many cultural/academic/backroom/old wound issues for this to even get off the ground?

I just think that is way too big of a change. It wouldn't be a conference anymore. It would a league. I do not want to go this far. Sixteen schools and a nine game conference schedule is fine.

I agree that it would get too big.

I think 16 should be the max for a conference and you go beyond that you essentially become two leagues with a scheduling alliance.

And regarding any western teams.... sorry, but A&M will never vote yes on any former Big 12 South school, especially the "we shall be treated like the king and everyone else like our serf" mentality in Austin.

I'm not at the point mentally where I can grasp this situation in any form of reality or possibility. It is a very interesting scenario but I think it more likely that one of the GoR's is dismantled and three to four conference bite off chunks of the weak link.

As it stands, the Big 12 has been and continues to be the conference that could suit the needs of four other major conferences where as the ACC really only suits the needs of three. The Big 12 also requires less votes to dissolve the conference and is more likely to have all, or atleast enough of its members to have that vote, placed in another major conference to their liking.

(06-07-2013 06:10 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I agree that it would get too big.

I think 16 should be the max for a conference and you go beyond that you essentially become two leagues with a scheduling alliance.

And regarding any western teams.... sorry, but A&M will never vote yes on any former Big 12 South school, especially the "we shall be treated like the king and everyone else like our serf" mentality in Austin.

How about TCU?

(06-07-2013 07:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-07-2013 06:10 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I agree that it would get too big.

I think 16 should be the max for a conference and you go beyond that you essentially become two leagues with a scheduling alliance.

And regarding any western teams.... sorry, but A&M will never vote yes on any former Big 12 South school, especially the "we shall be treated like the king and everyone else like our serf" mentality in Austin.

How about TCU?

I think we have our first and last Texas school in the SEC...

(06-07-2013 10:54 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(06-07-2013 07:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-07-2013 06:10 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I agree that it would get too big.

I think 16 should be the max for a conference and you go beyond that you essentially become two leagues with a scheduling alliance.

And regarding any western teams.... sorry, but A&M will never vote yes on any former Big 12 South school, especially the "we shall be treated like the king and everyone else like our serf" mentality in Austin.

How about TCU?

I think we have our first and last Texas school in the SEC...

I think you are not seeing the bigger possibility that I am alluding to with the question. Although you have most certainly seen it before.

(06-07-2013 07:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-07-2013 06:10 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I agree that it would get too big.

I think 16 should be the max for a conference and you go beyond that you essentially become two leagues with a scheduling alliance.

And regarding any western teams.... sorry, but A&M will never vote yes on any former Big 12 South school, especially the "we shall be treated like the king and everyone else like our serf" mentality in Austin.

How about TCU?

I won't flat out say no to TCU but it would depend on the situation being "there is literally no other choice and the SEC must have another Texas team.

Even then, I think the strategic choice would be SMU.

That would force the Big 12 to keep TCU who, in my opinion, was a BIG mistake from a revenue POV and will haunt them in the future as their sports get worse and worse from trying to keep up with schools far bigger than they are

SMU is a project but I think they are worth it because it would bring the SEC to Dallas and give the city a REASON to support the Mustangs again. Having teams like A&M, Arky, LSU, Auburn, and Bama in Dallas every year would give the SEC strong claims to both Houston and Dallas while still forcing the Big 12 to keep its current arrangement of having way too many of its eggs in one basket. It might even force them into another terrible expansion choice like UH.

(06-08-2013 01:21 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-07-2013 10:54 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(06-07-2013 07:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-07-2013 06:10 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I agree that it would get too big.

I think 16 should be the max for a conference and you go beyond that you essentially become two leagues with a scheduling alliance.

And regarding any western teams.... sorry, but A&M will never vote yes on any former Big 12 South school, especially the "we shall be treated like the king and everyone else like our serf" mentality in Austin.

How about TCU?

I think we have our first and last Texas school in the SEC...

I think you are not seeing the bigger possibility that I am alluding to with the question. Although you have most certainly seen it before.

I certainly see the big Dallas/Ft Worth market as a plus, and I doubt that TCU has the baggage that other Big XII teams may be carrying. They have not been a part of the Big XII that A&M and Missouri lived in. Hypothetically there maybe a possibility, but practically I doubt the SEC makes that move. If they ever do, you can be sure it was greased by A&M and maybe a couple other SEC schools who might have a problem with it. The SEC is pretty big on unanimous voting. Missouri easily had a majority vote in the SEC but until the SEC settled their division issues with Alabama it never happened.

(06-08-2013 01:32 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(06-08-2013 01:21 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-07-2013 10:54 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(06-07-2013 07:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-07-2013 06:10 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I agree that it would get too big.

I think 16 should be the max for a conference and you go beyond that you essentially become two leagues with a scheduling alliance.

And regarding any western teams.... sorry, but A&M will never vote yes on any former Big 12 South school, especially the "we shall be treated like the king and everyone else like our serf" mentality in Austin.

How about TCU?

I think we have our first and last Texas school in the SEC...

I think you are not seeing the bigger possibility that I am alluding to with the question. Although you have most certainly seen it before.

I certainly see the big Dallas/Ft Worth market as a plus, and I doubt that TCU has the baggage that other Big XII teams may be carrying. They have not been a part of the Big XII that A&M and Missouri lived in. Hypothetically there maybe a possibility, but practically I doubt the SEC makes that move. If they ever do, you can be sure it was greased by A&M and maybe a couple other SEC schools who might have a problem with it. The SEC is pretty big on unanimous voting. Missouri easily had a majority vote in the SEC but until the SEC settled their division issues with Alabama it never happened.

One could argue that they have the most competitive overall football program in the Big 12 from the State of Texas right now. Their defensive organization is absolutely the top in the State and they seem to have a Head Coach that is not looking to leave anytime soon for bigger money. The program seems like a safe one to invest in for the future in terms of inviting them to a new conference.

They have the location, they have the program and with an A&M/TCU anchor in the State, the SEC would be extremely strong there. For a program like Missouri that has so much history with the State, I would think Missouri would support it.

(06-08-2013 04:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-08-2013 01:32 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(06-08-2013 01:21 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-07-2013 10:54 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(06-07-2013 07:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  How about TCU?

I think we have our first and last Texas school in the SEC...

I think you are not seeing the bigger possibility that I am alluding to with the question. Although you have most certainly seen it before.

I certainly see the big Dallas/Ft Worth market as a plus, and I doubt that TCU has the baggage that other Big XII teams may be carrying. They have not been a part of the Big XII that A&M and Missouri lived in. Hypothetically there maybe a possibility, but practically I doubt the SEC makes that move. If they ever do, you can be sure it was greased by A&M and maybe a couple other SEC schools who might have a problem with it. The SEC is pretty big on unanimous voting. Missouri easily had a majority vote in the SEC but until the SEC settled their division issues with Alabama it never happened.

One could argue that they have the most competitive overall football program in the Big 12 from the State of Texas right now. Their defensive organization is absolutely the top in the State and they seem to have a Head Coach that is not looking to leave anytime soon for bigger money. The program seems like a safe one to invest in for the future in terms of inviting them to a new conference.

They have the location, they have the program and with an A&M/TCU anchor in the State, the SEC would be extremely strong there. For a program like Missouri that has so much history with the State, I would think Missouri would support it.

If another Big XII school, other than OU, ever got into the SEC, I think it would be TCU. Aren't they a Baptist University? If so that would work out very well in the South...lol

TCU is not Baptist, they are affiliated with Disciples of Christ...but don't let the name fool you. Texas Christian is about as religous as Southern California (affiliated with the Methodist Church) is.

And as I said, forcing the Big 12 to keep them and the wasted slot they prevent a new market from occupying is the better strategic move.

SMU is a better academic school and its roots in the old money families of Dallas go deep. They just need something to get excited about to open up the checkbook.

(06-08-2013 11:11 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(06-08-2013 04:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-08-2013 01:32 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(06-08-2013 01:21 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-07-2013 10:54 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I think we have our first and last Texas school in the SEC...

I think you are not seeing the bigger possibility that I am alluding to with the question. Although you have most certainly seen it before.

I certainly see the big Dallas/Ft Worth market as a plus, and I doubt that TCU has the baggage that other Big XII teams may be carrying. They have not been a part of the Big XII that A&M and Missouri lived in. Hypothetically there maybe a possibility, but practically I doubt the SEC makes that move. If they ever do, you can be sure it was greased by A&M and maybe a couple other SEC schools who might have a problem with it. The SEC is pretty big on unanimous voting. Missouri easily had a majority vote in the SEC but until the SEC settled their division issues with Alabama it never happened.

One could argue that they have the most competitive overall football program in the Big 12 from the State of Texas right now. Their defensive organization is absolutely the top in the State and they seem to have a Head Coach that is not looking to leave anytime soon for bigger money. The program seems like a safe one to invest in for the future in terms of inviting them to a new conference.

They have the location, they have the program and with an A&M/TCU anchor in the State, the SEC would be extremely strong there. For a program like Missouri that has so much history with the State, I would think Missouri would support it.

If another Big XII school, other than OU, ever got into the SEC, I think it would be TCU. Aren't they a Baptist University? If so that would work out very well in the South...lol

If any B12 school goes to the SEC, it will most likely be WVU. We've just missed out on an SEC invite twice. The SEC took USC over WVU for their #12 school, and Mizzou over the Mountaineers for #14. WVU would fit SEC culture, geography, and mentality...

I think that if in 2026 (or wherein thereabout) the B12 GOR expires and the Texoma 4 (UT/TT & OU/OSU) were to bolt for the PAC 16 then I think WVU would get a fair shot at one of the two remaining slots if the SEC decides to go to 16 (obviously with the SEC making one last play for a VA and NC school). WVU would really work well if the SEC wanted to make a play for 18 with 3 subdivisions of 6:

SEC West

A&M
Arkansas
LSU
Ole Miss
Miss State
Missouri

SEC Central

Tennessee
Vandy
Alabama
Auburn
West Virginia
Virginia Tech

SEC East

Florida
Florida State
Georgia
South Carolina
North Carolina State
Kentucky

Swap Kentucky and Virginia Tech and you've got it geographically correct...

That was done more for balance than geography

Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, and WVU is very strong in football. Adding Virginia Tech only makes the central stronger than the other divisions in football, while swapping them for Kentucky for basketball balances things better...

True but by the same token, Florida, Florida State, Georgia and South Carolina is extremely strong too. One of you gets Vandy, one gets Kentucky as the breather game.

Vandy isn't a breather any longer. Just ask Missouri fans. Vandy was 5-3 in conference play last season...

Both UK and Vandy occasionally have semi decent seasons and are both usually good for an upset a year but neither are ever good for very long. Besides it just makes sense to keep Vandy and Tennessee together